Document Anaheim_doc_7ae27cabcf

Brookhurst Street Improvement Project (From State Route 91 to Interstate 5) Orange County, California City of Anaheim, Brookhurst Street ORA112622/ STPL 5055 (163) Environmental Assessment Prepared by the State of California Department of Transportation March 2014 The environmental review, consultation, and any other action required in accordance with applicable Federal laws for this project is being, or has been, carried-out by Caltrans under its assumption of responsibility pursuant to 23 USC 327. ---PAGE BREAK--- General Information about This Document What’s in this document: The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) as assigned by Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), in cooperation with the City of Anaheim, has prepared this Environmental Assessment, which examines the potential environmental impacts of the Build Alternative being considered for the proposed project located in Orange County, California. The City of Anaheim is proposing to use funds from FHWA for this local roadway project. The document describes why the project is being proposed, alternatives for the project, the existing environment that could be affected by the project, the potential impacts from each of the alternatives, and the proposed avoidance, minimization and/or mitigation measures. What you should do: Please read this Environmental Assessment. Additional copies of this document, and the technical studies, are available for review at the Caltrans District 12 Office located at 3347 Michelson Drive, Suite 100, Irvine, California 92612. This document is also available at the following locations: Anaheim Public Works Department City of Anaheim City Clerk’s Office 200 S. Anaheim Boulevard, Suite 276 200 S. Anaheim Boulevard, 2nd Floor Anaheim, CA 92805 Anaheim, CA 92805 Euclid Branch Library Haskett Branch Library 1340 S. Euclid Street 2650 West Broadway Anaheim, CA 92802 Anaheim, CA 92804 Attend the public open house, scheduled on March 26, 2014, at 6:00 PM, located at the Brookhurst Community Center, 2271 West Crescent Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92801. We welcome your comments. If you have any comments regarding the proposed project, please attend the project open house on March 26, 2014 and/or send your written comments to Caltrans District 12 by April 10, 2014. Submit comments via postal mail to: Mr. Charles Baker Caltrans Environmental Planning Branch 3347 Michelson Drive Irvine, California 92612 Submit comments via email to: [EMAIL REDACTED]. Submit comments by the deadline: Thursday, April 10, 2014 ---PAGE BREAK--- What happens next: After comments are received from the public and reviewing agencies, Caltrans, as assigned by FHWA, and in cooperation with the local agency will respond to comments, prepare the final environmental decision document and may: give environmental approval to the proposed project, undertake additional environmental studies, or abandon the project. If the project is given environmental approval and funding is appropriated, part, or all, of the project can be designed and constructed. For individuals with sensory disabilities, this document can be made available in Braille, large print, on audiocassette, or on computer disk. To obtain a copy in one of these alternate formats, please call or write to Mr. Charles Baker at (949) 724-2252, at the address provided above. ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA Highway ID No. 12-ORA-Anaheim STPL 5055 (163) The project proposes to widen the existing Brookhurst Street, located in the city of Anaheim, Orange County, California for an approximate 0.4-mile segment. The project limits begin at State Route 91 and extend to approximately Interstate 5. Once complete the roadway would be a six-lane facility. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Submitted Pursuant to: (Federal) 42 USC 4332(2)(C) THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Department of Transportation Date of Approval Ryan Chamberlain District Director California Department of Transportation The following persons may be contacted for additional information concerning this document: Mr. Charles Baker Caltrans Environmental Planning Branch 3347 Michelson Drive Irvine, California 92612 (949) 724-2252 ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y i Summary The project is subject to federal as well as state environmental review requirements because the City of Anaheim proposes the use of federal funds from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and/or because the project requires an FHWA approval action. Project documentation, therefore, has been prepared in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The City of Anaheim is the project proponent and the lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). FHWA’s responsibility for environmental review, consultation, and any other action required in accordance with applicable federal laws for this project is being, or has been, carried out by Caltrans under its assumption of responsibility pursuant to the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) (23 USC 327). While this project is subject to the requirements of both NEPA and CEQA, separate environmental documents have been prepared: one that complies with NEPA and another that complies with CEQA. This Environmental Assessment (EA) complies with the requirements of NEPA and other federal environmental laws. Compliance with CEQA and state environmental laws is provided in the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for Brookhurst Street Improvement Project from SR-91 to I-5, which was approved for public circulation on December 12, 2012. On January 29, 2013, the City Council approved the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) and selected the Build Alternative as the preferred alternative. Following receipt of comments from the public and reviewing agencies, a final environmental document will be prepared. The lead agency may undertake additional environmental and/or engineering studies to address comments. The final environmental document will include responses to comments received on the Draft EA and will identify the preferred alternative. If the decision is made to approve the project, Caltrans will decide whether to issue a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) or require an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act. A Notice of Availability (NOA) of the FONSI will be sent to the affected units of federal, State, and local government, and the State Clearinghouse in compliance with Executive Order 12372. ---PAGE BREAK--- Summary Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y ii Project Overview The project proposes to widen Brookhurst Street from a four-lane facility to a six-lane facility with raised landscaped median islands and on-street bike lanes between State Route 91 (SR-91) and Interstate 5 The project is located in the city of Anaheim in Orange County, California. The project site spans approximately 0.4 mile and is currently developed as a major arterial roadway. In the vicinity of the project site, Brookhurst Street is a four-lane roadway (two lanes in each direction) from the southern end in the vicinity of La Palma Avenue to the north at the intersection with SR-91. Four intersections are analyzed within the project limits: La Palma Avenue (signalized), West Falmouth Avenue (signalized), Huntington Avenue (unsignalized), and the SR-91 eastbound ramps (signalized). In addition, the LOS at the SR- 91 westbound ramps intersection is provided for context purposes to demonstrate that the project would not result in impacts as a result of project implementation. Land uses in the study area are predominately residential, with a church and some commercial uses located in the southern portion of the study area. Though some of the homes face Brookhurst Street, most of the residences take access from alleys behind the homes. On-site vegetation is limited to ornamental landscaping along the perimeters of the project site and within the residential and commercial areas adjacent to Brookhurst Street. Alternatives Considered This Environmental Assessment evaluates two alternatives: the Build Alternative and the No-Build Alternative. The Build Alternative has been selected by the City of Anaheim as the locally preferred alternative based on the findings of the Initial Study (IS)/MND prepared pursuant to CEQA. Build Alternative (Locally Preferred Alternative) The Build Alternative would widen the segment of Brookhurst Avenue from a four- lane to six-lane roadway. The project proposes to shift the roadway centerline a maximum of 22 feet to the east and to widen the roadway right-of-way in order to accommodate the additional lanes in the northbound and southbound directions and the proposed bikeways, sidewalks, and landscaped areas, as described in more detail below. The project would require 19 full and 12 partial property acquisitions along the street corridor under the City of Anaheim’s jurisdiction. Full property takes would involve demolition of 19 single-family residences to accommodate the ---PAGE BREAK--- Summary Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y iii proposed project actions. The proposed partial property takes would involve non- structural areas of residential and commercial properties along Brookhurst Street. Currently, there are no features in place to address the water quality of the first flush from a rainfall event. With the proposed Brookhurst Street widening improvements, the project will construct storm water quality retention basins on the east side of Brookhurst Street to mitigate this condition. The project would also require encroachment onto Caltrans’ property in order to tie in the proposed roadway improvements to the SR-91eastbound on- and off-ramps. A more detailed project description is provided in Chapter 1. No-Build Alternative With the No-Build Alternative, there would be no improvements to Brookhurst Street. Summary of Potential Impacts Table S.1 provides a summary of the potential impacts associated with the Build Alternative (Locally Preferred Alternative) and the No-Build Alternative. Table S.1 Summary of Potential Impacts Potential Impact Build Alternative (Locally Preferred Alternative) No-Build Alternative Land Use Consistency with the Anaheim General Plan Yes No Consistency with the Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways Yes No Growth No impacts No impacts Community Character and Cohesion No impacts No impacts Relocation/ Property Acquisition Full Acquisition 19 single-family residences No impacts Partial Acquisition 11 single-family residences/1 commercial property No impacts Environmental Justice The Build Alternative would not disproportionately impact any low- income or minority populations. No avoidance, minimization, and/or mitigation measures would be required. No impacts ---PAGE BREAK--- Summary Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y iv Table S.1 Summary of Potential Impacts Potential Impact Build Alternative (Locally Preferred Alternative) No-Build Alternative Utilities/Emergency Services Utilities Utilities would need to be moved, but there would be no noticeable service disruptions. Utilities No impacts Emergency Services There would be a long-term benefit by improving level of service. Short- term traffic delays could occur due to construction activities. Emergency Services There would be no short-term impacts. Over time, response times could get longer because of increasing traffic congestion. Traffic and Transportation/ Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities There would be construction-related traffic delays and bus stop(s) would be temporarily relocated during construction. There would be a long-term benefit related to improved level of service (LOS). The Build Alternative would provide an improved sidewalk and bicycle lane. There would be no short term impacts. Over time, traffic in the area would continue to deteriorate and LOS would decrease Visual/Aesthetics Expands the width of the street but provides visual enhancements through provision of a greenbelt area. No impacts Cultural Resources No impacts No impacts Water Quality and Storm Water Runoff Provides storm drains and treatment of first flush runoff. Mitigates existing flooding. No storm drains would be provided and there would be no water quality treatment for the first flush runoff. Geology/Soils/Seismic/ Topography No impacts No impacts Hazardous Waste/Materials No impact by implementing existing regulations for lead-based paint and asbestos. No impacts Air Quality Temporary impacts during construction, though they would be below thresholds adopted by the South Coast Air Quality Management District. No impacts Noise and Vibration Noise levels at receptors would have minimal increases. Six locations warrant consideration of abatement. Three sound walls were found to be reasonable and feasible and would provide abatement for these locations. Construction of the noise barriers would be a project benefit. Five locations would have noise levels approaching or exceeding the Noise Abatement Criteria but noise barriers would not be provided. ---PAGE BREAK--- Summary Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y v Table S.1 Summary of Potential Impacts Potential Impact Build Alternative (Locally Preferred Alternative) No-Build Alternative Biological Environment No impacts. No impacts. Cumulative Impacts There would be cumulative land use conversion impacts. There would be construction-related delays. There would be improved LOS in the area. There would be improved drainage condition minimizing potential for flooding. No impacts. ---PAGE BREAK--- Summary Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y vi ---PAGE BREAK--- Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y vii Table of Contents Summary i Table of Contents vii Chapter 1. Proposed Project 1 1.1. Introduction 1 1.2. Purpose and Need 1 1.2.1. Purpose 1 1.2.2. Need 2 1.3. Project Description 15 1.3.1. Alternatives 16 1.3.2. Alternatives Considered But Eliminated From Further Discussion 22 1.4. Decision Making Process 22 1.5. Permits and Approvals Needed 23 Chapter 2. Affected Environment; Environmental Consequences; and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures 25 2.1. Human Environment 27 2.1.1. Land Use 27 2.1.1.1. Existing and Future Land Use 27 2.1.1.2. Consistency with State, Regional, and Local 49 2.1.1.3. Parks and Recreational Facilities 59 2.1.2. Growth 60 2.1.3. Community Impacts 64 2.1.3.1. Community Character and Cohesion 64 2.1.3.2. Relocations and Real Property Acquisition 69 2.1.3.3. Environmental 74 2.1.4. Utilities/Emergency Services 77 2.1.5. Traffic and Transportation/Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities 80 2.1.6. Visual/Aesthetics 88 2.1.7. Cultural Resources 92 2.2. Physical Environment 96 2.2.1. Water Quality and Storm Water Runoff 96 2.2.2. Geology/Soils/Seismic/Topography 110 2.2.3. Hazardous Waste/Materials 113 2.2.4. Air Quality 124 2.2.5. Noise 135 2.3. Biological Environment 152 2.3.1. Plant Species 152 2.3.2. Animal Environment 154 2.3.3. Invasive Species 156 2.4. Cumulative Impacts 158 Chapter 3. Comments and Coordination 161 3.1. Agency Consultation and Coordination 161 3.2. Public Outreach 162 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table of Contents Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y viii Chapter 4. List of 167 4.1. Caltrans 167 4.2. City of Anaheim 168 4.3. Consultant Staff 168 Chapter 5. Distribution List 173 Appendix A Resources Evaluated Relative to the Requirements of Section 177 Appendix B Title VI Policy Statement 183 Appendix C Summary of Relocation Benefits 185 Appendix D Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Summary 243 Appendix E List of Acronyms 257 List of Tables Table S.1 Summary of Potential Impacts iii Table 1.1 Existing (2011) and Forecasted Conditions Level of Service Summary 13 Table 1.2 Permits and Approvals 23 Table 2.1 City of Anaheim General Plan Land Uses 33 Table 2.2 Development Trends 47 Table 2.3 Project Consistency with Applicable Plans, Goals, and Policy 56 Table 2.4 Project Study Area, City, and County Population Characteristics 66 Table 2.5 Project Study Area, City, and County Housing Characteristics 67 Table 2.6 Project Study Area Household Tenure 68 Table 2.7 Right-of-Way Requirements (sq feet) 71 Table 2.8 Project Study Area and the City of Anaheim Socioeconomic Characteristics 75 Table 2.9 Environmental Justice Populations 76 Table 2.10 Level of Service Analysis – Existing Year (2011) Conditions 82 Table 2.11 Level of Service Analysis – Year 2015 Conditions 85 Table 2.12 Level of Service Analysis – Year 2035 Conditions 86 Table 2.13 Arterial Segment Volume/Capacity Summary 86 Table 2.15 State and Federal Criteria Air Pollutant Standards, Effects, and Sources 127 Table 2.16 Noise Abatement Criteria 136 Table 2.17 Construction Equipment Noise 143 Table 2.18 Existing and Predicted Traffic Noise Levels 145 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table of Contents Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y ix List of Figures 1 Regional Location 2 Local Vicinity 3A Levels of Service for Multi-Lane Highways 3B Levels of Service for Intersections with Traffic Signals 3C Levels of Service for Unsignalized Intersections 4A Preliminary Alignment Plans 4B Preliminary Alignment Plans 5 Limits of Census Tract 867.01 6 General Plan Designated Land Uses 7 Zoning Classifications 8 Existing Land Uses 9A Study Area Photograph Locations 9B Photographs of the Project Study Area 9C Photographs of the Project Study Area 9D Photographs of the Project Study Area 10 Community Facilities 11 Water Quality Basin Conceptual Locations 12 Noise Levels of Common Activities 13A Receiver and Measurement Locations 13B Receiver and Measurement Locations 14A Proposed Soundwall Locations 14B Proposed Soundwall Locations ---PAGE BREAK--- Table of Contents Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y x ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 1 y Proposed Project Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 1 Chapter 1. Proposed Project 1.1. Introduction The City of Anaheim, in cooperation with the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), is proposing improvements to Brookhurst Street between Interstate 5 and State Route (SR) 91. The project is located in the city of Anaheim in Orange County, California. Figures 1 and 2 depict the Regional Location and Local Vicinity, respectively. Brookhurst Street is a major north/south arterial corridor in Orange County, California, extending from Pacific Coast Highway in the city of Huntington Beach to Commonwealth Avenue in the city of Fullerton. Brookhurst Street is classified as a “Major Arterial” (six-lane divided roadway) in the City of Anaheim General Plan’s Circulation Element and the Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH). This project is included in the Fiscal Year 2013 Federal Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (FSTIP) which was approved by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) on December 14, 2012. Caltrans approved Amendment 13-01 on January 2, 2013, and by the FHWA/FTA on January 24, 2013. 1.2. Purpose and Need 1.2.1. Purpose The purpose of the project is to accomplish the following specific objectives: • Relieve congestion along the roadway and provide continuity in the number of lanes on Brookhurst Street and • Improve drainage along the corridor. A secondary benefit of the project would be enhanced aesthetics. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 1 y Proposed Project Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 2 1.2.2. Need Project Background Brookhurst Street extends for approximately 3.5 miles in the city of Anaheim and carries between 33,000 and 41,000 average daily traffic (ADT). In the study area, the ADT is approximately 41,000 vehicle trips. The City of Anaheim General Plan’s Circulation Element (2004) and the Orange County MPAH designate Brookhurst Street as a major 6-lanes arterial. However, within the project limits, Brookhurst Street is a 4-lanes arterial. In the city of Anaheim, only two segments of the roadway have not been improved to full arterial standards: the study area segment and the portion of Brookhurst Street from Katella Avenue to Ball Road. On this latter segment, property acquisition is complete and construction was initiated in 2013. The segment of Brookhurst Street between La Palma Avenue on the south and SR-91 to the north is currently striped for two lanes in each direction. The reduction in lanes, compared to the rest of Brookhurst Street, results in congestion in the study area. In addition, within the project limits, there are no storm drains or features in place that address the water quality of the first flush from a rainfall event. The project is needed to relieve the existing congestion and to enhance operation of Brookhurst Street to bring it to compliance with its 6-lane designation under the City of Anaheim General Plan’s Circulation Element and the Orange County MPAH. Existing and Forecasted Deficiencies The effectiveness of traffic operations on a transportation facility is measured in terms of “level of service”, (LOS) with LOS A representing the best operating conditions and LOS F representing the worst. The level of service descriptions are shown in Figures 3A–3C. Figure 3A depicts LOS for multi-lane highways; Figure 3B depicts LOS for intersections with traffic signals; and Figure 3C depicts LOS for unsignalized intersections. The City of Anaheim General Plan strives to achieve a LOS D on major arterial highways. Table 1.1 lists the existing and forecasted peak hour intersection capacity utilization (ICU) values for the existing study area intersections together with the LOS designations. Also listed here are the delay-based LOS designations calculated based on the Caltrans’ Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) protocol. As can be seen, for the existing conditions, all intersections except Brookhurst Street and Huntington Avenue, operate at a desirable LOS threshold D or better in AM and PM peak hours. However, in the future years, the number of deficient intersections with the No-Build Alternative increases and in 2035 only the Brookhurst Street/La Palma Avenue intersection operates at an acceptable LOS. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 1 y Proposed Project Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 3 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 1 y Proposed Project Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 4 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 1 y Proposed Project Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 5 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 1 y Proposed Project Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 6 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 1 y Proposed Project Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 7 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 1 y Proposed Project Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 8 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 1 y Proposed Project Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 9 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 1 y Proposed Project Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 10 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 1 y Proposed Project Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 11 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 1 y Proposed Project Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 12 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 1 y Proposed Project Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 13 Table 1.1 Existing (2011) and Forecasted Conditions Level of Service Summary Intersection Existing Conditions (2011) 2015 No Build 2035 No Build AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour V/C or Delay LOS V/C or Delay LOS V/C or Delay LOS V/C or Delay LOS V/C or Delay LOS V/C or Delay LOS Highway Capacity Manual Methodologya Brookhurst St and SR-91 WB Ramps b 27.8 C 46.6 D 30.4 C 56.4 E 55.2 E 64.1 E Brookhurst St and SR-91 EB Ramps 25.8 C 22.5 C 36.1 D 36.8 D 56.1 E 80.8 F Brookhurst St and Huntington Ave c 46.7 c E 66.7 c F 71.3 F 105.5 F >120 F >120 F Intersection Capacity Utilization Methodologyd Brookhurst St and Falmouth Ave 0.682 B 0.642 B 0.734 C 0.690 B 0.943 E 0.817 D Brookhurst St and La Palma Ave 0.614 B 0.669 B 0.671 B 0.719 C 0.782 C 0.841 D V/C: volume to capacity ratio; LOS: level of service; SR: State Route; WB: westbound; EB: eastbound a Value given in seconds of delay b This intersection is not within the project limits and was provided for context purposes to show that the project does not have adverse affects beyond the project limits. c For unsignalized intersections, the LOS is based on HCM methodology of average delay (seconds/vehicle). d ICU presented as volume to capacity ratio. Source: Traffic Study for Brookhurst Street Widening Project (I-5 to SR-91) 2013. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 1 y Proposed Project Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 14 Social Demand and Economic Development According to the Community Impact Assessment (CIA, 2013), Orange County and the city of Anaheim have experienced substantial growth over the past 40 years, with a doubling of population between 1970 and 2010. Based on the Orange County Projections 2010 Modified growth forecasts from the Center for Demographic Research (CDR), population figures are anticipated to continue this positive growth into the foreseeable future. By 2035, the population in the city of Anaheim is projected to be over 405,700 residents, an increase of 18 percent over the 2012 population. The project study area is built out. The proposed widening of Brookhurst Street would not open new areas to unplanned residential or related commercial growth (development) since the surrounding area is highly urbanized. However, it would improve roadway function to accommodate existing and projected 2035 traffic, consistent with the growth assumptions used by the city and in regional long-range planning programs. The proposed project would not affect the location, distribution, density, or projected growth rate of the population. The City of Anaheim General Plan and the Orange County MPAH call for a widening of Brookhurst Street to its designated width of six lanes. The local land use plans within the study area identify residential uses and a mix of commercial, office, and public land uses. The proposed project would convert existing residential land uses to transportation land uses, but is not expected to act as a catalyst to growth and would not contribute to changes in land use patterns. Modal Interrelations and Systems Linkages Brookhurst Street is a major north/south arterial corridor in Orange County that extends from Pacific Coast Highway in the city of Huntington Beach to Commonwealth Avenue in the city of Fullerton. The unimproved segment of Brookhurst Street is located in the city of Anaheim, just south of the city of Fullerton. This segment of Brookhurst Street is located between the interchanges with interregional and local transportation connectors (I-5 on the south and SR-91 on the north). Because of this connection between I-5 and SR-91, Brookhurst Street attracts trips from both of these transportation corridors. The project would provide continuity in the number of lanes on Brookhurst Street and allow it to provide unobstructed traffic flow between I-5 and SR-91. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 1 y Proposed Project Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 15 Independent Utility and Logical Termini Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) regulations (23 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 771.111 require that the action evaluated: 1. Connect logical termini and be of sufficient length to address environmental matters on a broad scope. 2. Have independent utility or independent significance (be usable and be a reasonable expenditure even if no additional transportation improvements in the area are made). 3. Not restrict consideration of alternatives for other reasonably foreseeable transportation improvements. The Brookhurst Street Improvement Project meets these criteria. The project would provide route continuity and addresses final improvements necessary to bring Brookhurst Street up to full arterial standards under the MPAH and City of Anaheim General Plan. No further improvements are needed on Brookhurst Street or adjacent roadways to derive full function of the improvements. Providing a consistent number of lanes on Brookhurst Street would eliminate traffic delays; improve the existing level of service; and provide drainage/water quality enhancements. 1.3. Project Description This section describes the proposed action and the design alternatives that were developed by a multi-disciplinary team to achieve the project purpose and need while avoiding or minimizing environmental impacts. The purpose and need of the project is to relieve congestion and provide continuity along the corridor. A secondary benefit of the project would be enhanced aesthetics. The alternatives are the Build Alternative and the No-Build Alternative. The project is located in the city of Anaheim on Brookhurst Street. The project covers a distance of 0.4 mile. Within the limits of the proposed project, Brookhurst Street is a four-lane arterial. According to the City of Anaheim General Plan’s Circulation Element (May 2004), Brookhurst Street is considered a major arterial, which is defined as a roadway that connects to freeways and that typically has six-lanes including a median; left-turn pockets; parking lanes adjacent to each curb; and a right-of-way width of 120 feet. The project proposes to provide route continuity by providing a consistent number of lanes throughout the city of Anaheim. The project ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 1 y Proposed Project Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 16 proposes to widen the last four-lane segment of Brookhurst Street to its designated width of six lanes with raised landscaped median islands and on-street bike lanes to comply with the City of Anaheim General Plan’s Circulation Element and the Orange County MPAH. 1.3.1. Alternatives Proposed Alternative The City of Anaheim has prepared the engineering concept plans and environmental documentation pursuant to CEQA. After comparing and weighing the benefits and impacts of all feasible alternatives, the City has identified the Build Alternative as the locally preferred alternative. Final identification will occur subsequent to the public review and comment period. Build Alternative (Locally Preferred Alternative) The project would provide route continuity by providing a consistent number of lanes throughout the city of Anaheim. The project proposes to shift the roadway centerline a maximum of 22 feet to the east and to widen the roadway right-of-way in order to accommodate the additional lanes in the northbound and southbound directions; proposed on-street bikeways; water quality treatment opportunities; and ancillary improvements such as sidewalks and landscaped areas, which are described in more detail below. The project would require 19 full and 12 partial property acquisitions totaling 130,976 square feet (sf) along the street corridor. Full property acquisitions would involve demolition of 19 single-family residences to accommodate the proposed project actions. The proposed partial property acquisitions would involve portions of residential and commercial properties that have no existing buildings. Figures 4A–4B depict the preliminary alignment plans for the proposed project. Currently, there are no features in place to address the water quality of the first flush from a rainfall event. With the proposed Brookhurst Street widening improvements, the project would construct storm water quality retention basins on the east side of Brookhurst Street to address this condition. The project includes the construction of new storm drain main line facilities in Brookhurst Street, along with new catch basins and connector pipes in order to improve the city’s existing storm drain system and to meet the city’s drainage requirements identified in the Fullerton Creek Channel Tributary Area’s Master Plan of Storm Drainage (MPSD). ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 1 y Proposed Project Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 17 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 1 y Proposed Project Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 18 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 1 y Proposed Project Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 19 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 1 y Proposed Project Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 20 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 1 y Proposed Project Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 21 The project would also require encroachment onto Caltrans District 12 property in order to tie in the proposed roadway improvements to the SR-91 eastbound on- and off-ramps. Additionally, Huntington Avenue East would be realigned to eliminate the current off-set intersection to create a single intersection with a new traffic signal and to allow for more efficient movement of vehicles across Brookhurst Street. Additional project features include the following: • Six-foot-wide northbound and southbound Class II bikeways would be provided along the length of the roadway segment. These bikeways would be striped and identified by signs. • Parkways, including landscaped areas and sidewalks, would be reconstructed. The landscaped areas would include landscaped bioswales and pervious areas to enhance on-site drainage and bioretention and would include drought-tolerant and low-maintenance plantings. • Raised medians would be installed along the 0.4-mile segment of Brookhurst Street and would allow for 2 intersection breaks at Falmouth Avenue and Huntington Avenue. An additional median break and northbound left-turn pocket would be installed at the Sa-Rang Community Church. Landscaping in the proposed medians would include drought-tolerant and low-maintenance plantings. • In those locations where existing concrete block walls are removed to accommodate construction, replacement walls would be provided. Generally, eight-foot concrete block walls would be constructed, unless an alternative height is required to provide necessary noise abatement, or in areas where a wall would impede vehicular access. In those locations where no walls currently exist, walls or fencing would be provided to separate the residential uses from the arterial highway. Roadway design would require modification to several existing utilities or would require work within their easements. Modification to the following utilities would be required: • Relocation of the City of Anaheim water lines. • Relocation of the City of Anaheim sewer lines. • Relocation of existing City of Anaheim Public Utilities power lines. • Relocation of AT&T fiber optic lines. • Relocation of AT&T telephone and Time Warner Communications cable television lines. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 1 y Proposed Project Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 22 • The estimated cost for the Build Alternative is $17.3 million, which includes about $10.2 million for right-of-way costs and about $7.1 million for construction costs. The project will be funded through a various local, state, and federal funding sources. No-Build Alternative With the No-Build Alternative there would be no improvements to Brookhurst Street. 1.3.2. Alternatives Considered But Eliminated From Further Discussion The City of Anaheim initially considered three build alternatives: a center alignment was considered in which the roadway centerline would remain in place and the roadway right-of-way would be widened to the east and west, thereby requiring the full acquisition of approximately 30 properties; a western alignment was considered in which the roadway centerline would shift up to 22 feet to the west, thereby requiring the full acquisition of 19 properties; and an eastern alignment was considered in which the roadway centerline would shift up to 22 feet to the east, thereby requiring the full acquisition of 19 properties. Upon initial review of the three build alternatives, the center alignment was determined to be “considered but rejected from further evaluation” based on the high number of full property acquisitions required. The western alignment was not carried forward because drainage improvements could not be as easily accommodated because of the direction of storm water flows. Based on preliminary technical analyses, the eastern alignment was selected as the preferred alternative because, from a design perspective, it facilitated drainage improvements without resulting in any greater environmental impacts. The City elected to move forward with the analysis of the eastern alignment as the single build alternative as part of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process. 1.4. Decision Making Process After the public circulation period, all comments will be considered; Caltrans will make final determination of the project’s effect on the environment; and a Preferred Alternative will be selected. If Caltrans determines the action does not significantly impact the environment, Caltrans, as assigned by the FHWA, will issue a FONSI in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 1 y Proposed Project Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 23 1.5. Permits and Approvals Needed Table 1.2 below provides a summary of the permits and/or approvals that are, or may be, required prior to or during construction of the proposed project. Table 1.2 Permits and Approvals Agency Permit/Approval Status FHWA Air Quality Conformity Determination After the public review of this Environmental Assessment and associated air quality analyses, the FHWA will evaluate the project and make a determination on the project’s conformity with the Clean Air Act. Caltrans Encroachment Permit Prior to the initiation of construction, an encroachment permit issued by Caltrans would be required for all construction activities within SR-91 right-of-way. City of Anaheim CEQA compliance document The City completed the MND in January 2013. Certification of right-of-way Demonstration that all right-of-way required for the project has been acquired will be necessary prior to the initiation of construction. A Relocation Plan has been completed and approved by the City Council. Funding for acquisition of right-of-way has been authorized through the Measures M2 program (the local transportation sales tax measure). Acquisition of right-of- way is expected to occur in 2013/2014. Approval of the WQMP A WQMP has been prepared and approved by the City pursuant to the County’s DAMP. FHWA: Federal Highway Administration; Caltrans: California Department of Transportation; SR: State Route; CEQA: California Environmental Quality Act; MND: Mitigated Negative Declaration; WQMP: Water Quality Management Plan; DAMP: Drainage Area Management Plan. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 1 y Proposed Project Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 24 ---PAGE BREAK--- Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 25 Chapter 2. Affected Environment; Environmental Consequences; and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures As part of the scoping and environmental analysis conducted for the project, the following environmental issues were considered but no adverse impacts were identified. Consequently, there is no further discussion regarding these issues in this document. 1. Farmland. There are no agricultural uses or designated farmlands within the project area or immediately adjacent to the project site (CIA 2013). 2. Timberland. There are no timberlands within the project area or immediately adjacent to the project site (CIA 2013). 3. Coastal Zone. The project is not located within a coastal zone and is not within the jurisdiction of the California Coastal Commission (CIA 2013). 4. Wild and Scenic Rivers. There are no rivers designated as wild and scenic rivers located in Orange County; therefore, the project would have no effect on these resources. (CIA 2013) 5. Hydrology and Floodplain. According to Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Q3 Flood Data, this segment of Brookhurst Street is located within the X500 zone, which is defined as an area inundated by 500-year flooding under 1 foot or with drainage areas less than 1 square mile. Thus the study area is located outside the regulatory 100-year floodplain. 6. Paleontological Resources. All ground-disturbing activities are expected to occur at a maximum of ten feet deep, which contains artificial fill soils. The ground-disturbing activities are not likely to encounter older but deeper alluvial sediments with a high degree of paleontological sensitivity. In addition, a paleontological records search conducted on December 28, 2009, at the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County for a previous roadway improvement project along Brookhurst Street, indicates that no paleontological resources have been identified on the site or adjacent to the site. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 26 7. Natural Communities. The project area is heavily urbanized and does not provide meaningful ecological function or contain wildlife corridors. (Natural Environment Study-Minimal Impact [NES-MI] 2013). 8. Wetlands and Other Waters. No jurisdictional resources occur in the study area (NES-MI 2013). Pursuant to the joint U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) Guidance Memorandum, as amended, the project surface drainage features would be considered roadside ditches that drain only upland areas and do not carry relatively permanent flows. Therefore, neither the USACE or the Regional Water Quality Control Board would take jurisdiction over these drainage features. Pursuant to Sections 1600–1616 of the California Fish and Game Code, these man-made drainage features drain exclusively developed upland areas and are not streams or creeks with bed and bank attributes. Therefore, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW)1 would not take jurisdiction over these drainage features. 9. Threatened or Endangered Species. No Threatened or Endangered plant or wildlife species have potential to occur in the study area due to the lack of suitable habitat and the urban setting of the project site (NES-MI 2013). 10. Encroachment on Tribal Land. There are no tribal lands designated in Orange County; therefore, the project could not encroach on these territories. In addition, there are no burial grounds present within the Area of Potential Effect (Historic Property Survey Report [HPSR], 2013). 11. Sole Source Aquifer. The U.S. EPA has not designated any sole source aquifers in Orange County. 12. Section 6(f) Impacts. The proposed project would not affect properties acquired or improved with Land and Water Conservation Fund Act because no Section 6(f) funds have been used in the vicinity of the proposed project. 13. Section 4(f) Impacts. The proposed project would not affect any public and/or recreational properties and thus would not trigger Section 4(f) requirements (CIA 2013). 1 The California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) changed its name to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) effective January 1, 2013. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 27 2.1. Human Environment 2.1.1. Land Use The information in this section is based on the Community Impact Assessment (May 2013) prepared for the project. The project study area has been defined to encompass an area with a reasonable expectation of direct and indirect impacts. Direct impacts would be limited to parcels immediately adjacent to the existing and proposed right-of-way for Brookhurst Street and parcels immediately adjacent to the intersecting roads. To facilitate statistical comparisons and to ensure potential indirect impacts are considered, a larger study area has been defined to include the entire census tract (Census Tract 867.01) in which these parcels are contained. Figure 5 shows the limits of Census Tract 867.01, as well as the project boundary. 2.1.1.1. EXISTING AND FUTURE LAND USE Affected Environment Brookhurst Street between SR-91 and La Palma Avenue is located entirely in the city of Anaheim in Orange County, California. The project study area is located near Census Tract 867.01, which covers the area between SR-91 on the north, I-5 on the south and west, and Euclid Street on the east. This area is a part of the city’s older development core and is largely developed with single-family residential uses. Limited commercial uses exist north of La Palma Avenue on Brookhurst Street and on Euclid Street. The City of Anaheim General Plan land use designations in the study area are shown on Figure 6, General Plan Designated Land Uses, and in Table 2.1. The General Plan land uses on and immediately adjacent to Brookhurst Street include low-density residential, general commercial, and neighborhood center commercial. Table 2.1 lists the General Plan land uses in the project study area. In the project study area, commercial land uses are primarily located on the northern side of the intersection of La Palma Avenue and Brookhurst Street and along the western side of Euclid Street. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 28 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 29 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 30 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 31 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 32 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 33 Table 2.1 City of Anaheim General Plan Land Uses Land Use Category Project Study Area (CT 867.01) (acres) Percent City of Anaheim (acres) Percent Estate Residential – – 1,248 3.88 Low Density Residential 218.6 49.98 10,221 31.82 Hillside Low-Medium Density Residential – – 861 2.68 Low-Medium Density Residential 108.1 24.71 2,058 6.41 Medium Density Residential 23.0 5.26 1,946 6.06 Corridor Residential 12.5 2.86 185 0.58 Mixed Use 14.0 3.20 1,211 3.77 Neighborhood Commercial 10.6 2.42 231 0.72 Regional Commercial – – 230 0.72 General Commercial 14.4 3.29 686 2.14 Commercial Recreation – – 1,077 3.35 Office – Low – – 377 1.17 Office- High 9.0 2.06 37 0.12 Platinum Triangle Office – – 199 0.62 Industrial – – 2,682 8.35 Parks 14.8 3.38 1,448 4.51 Open Space – – 4,944 15.39 Water Uses – – 1,226 3.82 Institutional 7.3 1.67 243 0.76 Schools 5.1 1.17 1,015 3.16 Total 437.4 100.00% 32,125 100.00% CT: Census Tract Source: Community Impact Assessment 2013. Lower density single-family homes are located in the western section of the project study area, with medium density single-family homes in the eastern section. Figure 7, Zoning Classifications, shows the existing City zoning designations in the project study area. The following zoning designations are immediately adjacent to Brookhurst Street: Single Family Residential (RS-2) and General Commercial ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 34 Existing land uses are shown on Figure 8, Existing Land Uses. These uses include single-family residential neighborhoods to the east and west; near the intersection of Brookhurst Street and La Palma Avenue, the Sa-Rang Community Church (also referred to as a “community and religious assembly use”) is located to the west; and commercial, educational, community, and religious assembly and medical office uses are located to the east. Anaheim Shores Mobile Estates is located in the project study area just south of SR-91, as shown on Figure 8. This mobile home park consists of 300 units. Figures 9A–9D provide photographs of the existing land uses in the project study area. As shown on Figures 6 through 8, the existing land uses generally follow the General Plan land use designations and zoning classifications. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 35 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 36 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 37 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 38 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 39 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 40 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 41 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 42 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 43 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 44 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 45 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 46 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 47 Development Trends Recent development trends in the city of Anaheim have been primarily focused within other areas of the city, including the downtown core, the Platinum Triangle, and the Anaheim Resort. Within the immediate study area surroundings, development trends are limited to redevelopment projects. The development trends are listed in Table 2.2 below. Table 2.2 Development Trends Name Jurisdiction Proposed Uses Status Brookhurst Street Widening-Katella Avenue to Ball Road City of Anaheim Widening of Brookhurst Street from 4 to 6 lanes between Ball Road and Katella Avenue. An MND was prepared. NOD filed on June 24, 2010. Project under construction. Westbound SR-91 Lane Extension and Auxiliary Lane Project Caltrans District 12 Roadway improvement, including lane extensions and reconstruction of existing ramps on a portion of SR-91 in the city of Anaheim. NOD filed on August 11, 2011. Honda Center Enhancement Project City of Anaheim Increase in the number of annual events at Honda Center through the addition of another permanent tenant, as well as other permanent improvements. NOD filed on April 26, 2012 Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan City of Anaheim Expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center and update and streamline the documents that govern and regulate development within the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan area. NOD filed on December 26, 2012 Uptown Village City of Anaheim Development of a 2-story, 25,000-sf structure and surface parking lots with a mixed-use residential and retail development on 4.29 acres located at Lincoln Avenue and Anaheim Boulevard. The development would encompass the entire property and include a 4-story multi-family residential complex with 220 residential units and 18,000 sf of commercial/retail space. MND filed on January 28, 2013 SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project Caltrans District 8 Operational, capacity, and safety improvements on SR-91 in and near the cities of Anaheim, Yorba Linda, Norco, and Corona. NOD filed on November 16, 2012 Community School #9 Orange County Department of Education Construction and operation of Community School #9 at Harbor Boulevard and Carl Karcher Way. School would support 150–200 students in up to 14 classrooms, and include administrative and support space, a covered outdoor eating area, a courtyard, a play area, parking (60 stalls), and a drop-off area. School would operate on a staggered schedule with students attending approximately 4 hours per day. The school program does not allow students to drive to school so students arrive by public transportation, bikes, walking, or being dropped-off by parents. The school will be accessed via a shared driveway from Harbor Boulevard. MND filed on May 7, 2012 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 48 Table 2.2 Development Trends Name Jurisdiction Proposed Uses Status Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project City of Anaheim The project includes a General Plan Amendment, amendments to the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan (MLUP) and Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone and Zoning reclassifications to expand the boundaries of the PTMU Overlay Zone and increase permitted residential, office, commercial, and institutional development intensities within the PTMU Overlay Zone. NOD filed on October 27, 2010 Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center (ARTIC) City of Anaheim The City of Anaheim, in partnership with the OCTA, is proposing to enhance the existing Anaheim Metrolink/Amtrak Station that is located south of Katella Avenue and adjacent to the Grove of Anaheim. A larger station with improved transit connectivity and passenger services and amenities will be constructed approximately one quarter (0.25) mile east along the existing OCTA railroad right-of- way. NOD filed on June 15, 2012 Anaheim GardenWalk City of Anaheim Repositioning the retail/restaurant/entertainment portion, resulting in minor tenant improvement construction; Hotel development will occur in the future (buildout sometime between 2017 and 2022) MND approved in 1999; Addendum approved by City Council in May 2013. Springhill Suites City of Anaheim Development of a 5-story, 172-room hotel with approximately 16,000 sf of ground floor retail located on 1.6 acres at Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue. NOD filed with County; did not go to State Clearinghouse (SCH). Hyatt Place City of Anaheim Development of a 5-story, 178-room hotel located on 1.69 acres on Harbor Boulevard, north of Orangewood Avenue. NOD filed with County; did not go to SCH. Ramada Maingate City of Anaheim Renovation of an existing motel located on 3.46 acres at Harbor Boulevard and Disney Way. Project would include demolition of 24 existing motel rooms and construction of 37 new motel rooms for a total of 199 motel rooms, as well as a minor (782 sf) increase in retail space. NOD filed with County; did not go to SCH. MND: Mitigated Negative Declaration; NOD: Notice of Determination; SR: State Route; sf: square foot/feet; MLUP: Master Land Use Plan; PTMU: Platinum Triangle Mixed Use; NBA: National Basketball Association; ARTIC: Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center; OCTA: Orange County Transportation Authority; SCH: State Clearinghouse Source: Community Impact Assessment 2013. As shown in the Table 2.2, Development Trends, a variety of projects are proposed to be constructed in the near future that could occur at the time of construction of the proposed project. However, the majority of the projects are not in close proximity to the project site. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 49 Environmental Consequences Build Alternative (Locally Preferred Alternative) Implementation of the Build Alternative would widen the existing roadway corridor into developed areas, which would result in the direct conversion of some existing land uses to transportation uses. In these areas, project compatibility with existing land uses is low because the expanded facility would require land where there is a variety of existing residential and commercial land uses. Project implementation would require the acquisition of property located within the right-of-way along Brookhurst Street. Most of the acquisitions would be full property acquisitions of residential uses, with some partial acquisitions. However, the acquisitions would also not alter land use patterns along Brookhurst Street and in the project study area. Single-family residential uses would remain on both sides of Brookhurst Street and commercial uses would remain at the northern quadrants of the intersection of Brookhurst Street and La Palma Avenue. The remaining portions of the residential parcels will be converted into a greenbelt. Also, the Anaheim General Plan has assumed the ultimate widening of the roadway. Additional information on required land acquisition for the Build Alternative is provided in Section 2.1.3.2, Relocations and Property Acquisition. No-Build Alternative The No-Build Alternative would not result in any direct land use impacts. No improvements are proposed with this Alternative; therefore, no new right-of-way would need to be acquired. Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures There are no available reasonable mitigation measures that would reduce conversion of land uses. Compensation would be provided for damages associated with right-of- way acquisition. Compliance with the Uniform Relocation Act would further minimize impacts to relocated residents (Refer to Section 2.1.3.2, Relocations and Property Acquisition). 2.1.1.2. CONSISTENCY WITH STATE, REGIONAL, AND LOCAL PLANS Affected Environment The information in this section is based on the Community Impact Assessment (May 2013). ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 50 Regional Transportation Plan The Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) is a long-term (30 years into the future) blueprint of a region’s transportation system. Generally, RTPs are updated every five years and identify and analyze the transportation needs of the metropolitan region and create a framework for project priorities. The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is the agency responsible for adopting the RTP that covers the project study area. Metropolitan Planning Organizations and Transportation Commissions the Orange County Transportation Authority [OCTA]) prepare the project list to be included in the long-term planning effort. SCAG’s most recent 2012–2035 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS): Towards a Sustainable Future was adopted on April 4, 2012. Federal State Transportation Improvement Program The Federal State Transportation Improvement Program (FSTIP) is a capital listing of all transportation projects proposed over a six-year period for the SCAG region. The projects include highway improvements, transit, rail and bus facilities, high occupancy vehicle lanes, signal intersection improvements, and freeway ramps, among others. In the SCAG region, a beneficial FSTIP update is produced on an even-year cycle. The FSTIP is prepared to implement projects and programs listed in the RTP and is developed in compliance with State and federal requirements. Under State law, County Transportation Commissions have the responsibility of proposing County projects, using the current RTP’s policies, programs, and projects as a guide, from among submittals by Cities and local agencies. The locally prioritized lists of projects are forwarded to SCAG for review. From this list, SCAG develops the FSTIP based on consistency with the current RTP, inter-county connectivity, financial constraints, and conformity satisfaction. Air Quality Management Plan (2012) The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) prepared the 2012 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), which is a regional and multi agency effort among the SCAQMD, the California Air Resources Board (CARB), SCAG, and U.S. EPA. The 2012 AQMP incorporates the latest scientific and technical information and planning assumptions, including the 2012 RTP/SCS; updated emission inventory methodologies for various source categories; and SCAG’s latest growth forecasts. The Final 2012 AQMP was adopted by the SCAQMD Governing Board on December 7, 2012. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 51 Master Plan of Arterial Highways The MPAH is a program administered by the OCTA. The MPAH is a critical element of the overall transportation planning in Orange County because it defines a countywide circulation network in response to existing and planned land uses. OCTA, through its management of the MPAH, ensures that the County and the Cities within the County are working cooperatively to achieve an adequate countywide circulation network. The MPAH identifies this segment of Brookhurst Street as a major arterial highway, which is defined as a six-lane divided roadway. However, under existing conditions, Brookhurst Street is a four-lane roadway and does not meet the MPAH designation. The City of Anaheim General Plan The City of Anaheim General Plan guides development in the project study area. The City of Anaheim General Plan is a comprehensive planning document that serves as a long-term plan for the city of Anaheim and addresses a range of issues associated with the city’s development, including physical, social, and economic concerns. By law, the General Plan must address the following seven subject areas or elements: land use, circulation, housing, conservation, open space, noise, and safety. It may also address any other issues or include any other elements that relate to the physical development of a city or county. The City of Anaheim has also elected to include an Economic Development Element, a Growth Management Element, a Public Services and Facilities Element, and a Community Design Element. The City of Anaheim’s General Plan was comprehensively updated in 2004. The Circulation Element describes the existing circulation system and serves as an infrastructure plan that addresses the mobility of people, goods and services, energy, water, sewage, storm drainage, and communications. According to the City of Anaheim General Plan, the purpose of the Circulation Element “is to design and improve a circulation system to meet the current and future needs of all Anaheim residents and visitors”. According to Figure C-1 of the Circulation Element, Brookhurst Street is classified on the City’s Planned Roadway Network as a Major Arterial, which is defined as a roadway that connects to freeways and typically has six lanes; a landscaped median; left-turn pockets; parking adjacent to each curb; and a right-of-way width of 120 feet. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 52 Relevant goals and policies from the General Plan Circulation and Land Use elements that support the purpose and need of the project are the following: General Plan Circulation Element Goal 1.1: Provide a comprehensive transportation system that facilitates current and long-term circulation in and through the city. • Policy 9: Consider aesthetics, including the provision of appropriate landscaping, in the development of arterial highways. Goal 2.1: Maintain efficient traffic operations on City streets and maintain a peak hour level of service not worse than D at street intersections. Policy 1: Make improvements to streets and intersections experiencing conditions worse than the applicable Level of Service standard by providing appropriate improvements, including, but not limited to: • Landscaped median islands to restrict left turns, with median opening spacing occurring minimum of 400 feet apart, and preferably limited to signalized locations. • Adequate driveway spacing of 125 feet (at 30 mph) to 230 feet (at 45 mph) between driveways on arterial highways. Goal 2.2: Provide a safe circulation system. Policy 1: Promote the principle that streets have multiple users and uses, and protect the safety of all users. Policy 6: Implement street design features such as the use of medians, bus turnouts, and consolidated driveways to minimize mid-block traffic congestion. Goal 7.1: Protect and encourage bicycle travel. Policy 1: Provide safe, direct, and continuous bicycle routes for commuter and recreational cyclists. Goal 8.1: Protect and encourage pedestrian travel. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 53 General Plan Land Use Element As discussed in Section 2.1, the Land Use Element serves as the city’s blueprint for future development and identifies specific planning areas or places of unique interest commercial centers, neighborhoods, and redevelopment areas) in the city. The General Plan Land Use Element designates the distribution and location of land uses throughout the city and addresses permitted density and intensity of the various land use designations. Goal 1.1: Preserve and enhance the quality and character of Anaheim’s mosaic of unique neighborhoods. Policy 2: Ensure that new development is designed in a manner that preserves the quality of life in existing neighborhoods. Goal 3.1: Pursue land uses along major corridors that enhance the City’s image and stimulate appropriate development at strategic locations. Policy 4: Continue to pursue additional open space, recreation, and landscaping amenities along major transportation routes. Environmental Consequences Build Alternative (Locally Preferred Alternative) Under the Build Alternative, the proposed modifications to the neighborhood would have minimal changes to the scale and appearance of the community as a result of demolition of residences. The remaining neighborhood would continue to be a single, contiguous neighborhood. Federal State Transportation Improvement Program/ Regional Transportation Plan The project is under the jurisdiction of SCAG as the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). The proposed project is included in SCAG’s RTP/SCS and SCAG’s financially constrained 2013 Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP). The project is listed in the 2013 Federal Transportation Improvement Program Orange County Local Highway, including Amendments 1-10 and 12, on page 1 of 14 as RTPID 2A0704, Project ID ORA112622. The 2013 FSTIP, which includes the SCAG 2013 FTIP, was approved by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) on December 14, 2012. According to the SCAG website, SCAG approved Amendment 13-11 on August 5, ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 54 2013, and Caltrans approved this amendment on August 12, 2013.2 The design concept and scope of the proposed project is consistent with the project description in the RTP/SCS and the 2013 FTIP; it is intended to meet the traffic needs in the area based on local land use plans. Thus, the Build Alternative is consistent with the Regional and Federal Transportation Plans. Air Quality Management Plan The main purpose of an AQMP is to bring an area into compliance with the requirements of federal and State air quality standards. For a project to be consistent with the AQMP, the pollutants emitted from the project should not exceed the SCAQMD CEQA air quality significance thresholds or cause a significant impact on air quality. Pollutant emissions from the proposed project would be less than the SCAQMD thresholds and would not result in a significant impact. As discussed in the Air Quality Report (2013), the air quality modeling calculations for volatile organic compounds (VOC), nitrogen oxides (NOx), carbon monoxide (CO), fine particulate matter with a diameter of 2.5 microns or less (PM2.5), and respirable particulate matter with a diameter of 10 microns or less (PM10) emissions for the project (2015 and 2035) do not exceed the daily SCQAMD thresholds. Further, the proposed project, being the improvement of an existing transportation facility in order to reduce congestion, would not result in development that may not have been anticipated in the AQMP. No conflict with the AQMP would occur with the proposed project. Master Plan of Arterial Highways/The City of Anaheim General Plan The City of Anaheim General Plan’s Circulation Element and the MPAH identify Brookhurst Street to be developed as a full six-lane facility. The widening of Brookhurst Street from La Palma Avenue to SR-91 has been identified as a potential project to address level of service deficiencies. After project implementation, Brookhurst Street would exist as a six-lane roadway with left-turn pockets, thus improving traffic flow. Therefore, the project would not conflict with the City of Anaheim General Plan’s Circulation Element. As shown in Table 2.3, the Build Alternative would be consistent with the Circulation Element’s goals and policies. No-Build Alternative The No-Build Alternative would not result in any direct land use impacts. No improvements are proposed with this alternative; therefore, no new right-of-way would need to be acquired. Although the No-Build Alternative would not have direct 2 Amendment 12 to the 2013 FTIP is administrative and was approved by SCAG on August 22, 2013; no Caltrans or FTA/FHWA approval is required. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 55 land use impacts, it could influence future planned growth. The improvement of the final 4-lane segment of Brookhurst Street has been assumed in local and regional planning programs because the designated six-lane width has been deemed necessary to serve the planned growth in the area. Without the proposed project, closing the gap on Brookhurst Street would not occur. This would result in inconsistent street cross-sections along Brookhurst Street, with the segment between La Palma Avenue and SR-91 serving as a bottleneck to traffic flow with its four-lane configuration. Since there are existing developments along both sides of Brookhurst Street, widening of this roadway is not likely to occur without the City’s initiative, since there would be no mechanism for improving the roadway or providing the needed right-of-way and the redevelopment of existing residences is not likely to occur. Thus, the improvement of Brookhurst Street to its designated width would not be realized and Brookhurst Street would have remained four-lane roadway at this location. The No-Build Alternative would be inconsistent with State, Regional, and local plans such as the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), the RTP, the MPAH, the AQMP, and the City of Anaheim General Plan goals and policies because it would not implement the plan requirements to close the gap on the final unimproved segment of Brookhurst Street. Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures No avoidance, minimization and/or mitigation measures would be required. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 56 Table 2.3 Project Consistency with Applicable Plans, Goals, and Policy Policy/Goal Build Alternative (Locally Preferred Alternative) No-Build Alternative Anaheim General Plan Circulation Element Goal 1.1: Provide a comprehensive transportation system that facilitates current and long-term circulation in and through the City. Policy 9: Consider aesthetics, including the provision of appropriate landscaping, in the development of arterial highways. Consistent. The project would improve an existing transportation facility by adding adequate capacity to accommodate future projected traffic volumes. In 2015 the project would improve intersections levels of service of project area intersections in Year 2015. Additionally, the project would improve intersection levels of service from unacceptable to acceptable conditions for 3 project area intersections in Year 2035. The project roadway segment would also improve the volume to capacity ratio and corresponding LOS from an unacceptable level F to LOS C in 2015 and to LOS D in 2035. As part of the project, a raised median and new parkway areas are proposed. The project includes implementation of a landscape plan along the roadway segment, including landscaped medians; a sidewalk and a landscaped parkway along the northbound and southbound sides of the street; and greenbelt areas with meandering walking paths along the northbound side of the street. In accordance with Section 13.12.060 of the Anaheim Municipal Code, any street tree removed would be replaced as part of the proposed median or greenbelt in accordance with the Official Tree Species List and Tree Master Plan. Additionally, any mature vegetation removed would also be replaced within the proposed landscaped areas. Not Consistent. The No-Build Alternative would not facilitate current and long-term circulation in and throughout the city because it would not relieve congestion or alleviate existing traffic conditions along the final 4-lane segment of Brookhurst Street. Operation of Brookhurst Street would deteriorate over time; thus, the No-Build Alternative would not support current or long-term circulation. In addition, the No-Build Alternative would not provide aesthetic enhancements within the project limits. Goal 2.1: Maintain efficient traffic operations on City streets and maintain a peak hour level of service not worse than D at street intersections. Policy 1: Make improvements to streets and intersections experiencing conditions worse than the applicable Level of Service Consistent. The project would improve an existing transportation facility by adding adequate capacity to accommodate future projected traffic volumes. The project would improve intersection levels of service for 3 project area intersections in Year 2015. Additionally, the project would improve intersection levels of service from unacceptable to acceptable conditions for 2 project area intersections in Year 2035. The project roadway segment would also improve the volume to capacity ratio and corresponding level of service from an Not consistent. The No-Build Alternative would not improve Brookhurst Street, and the traffic operation of the street would continue to deteriorate over time. In 2035, the majority of study area intersections would operate at LOS D, E and F. Thus, the No-Build Alternative would not be consistent with this policy. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 57 Table 2.3 Project Consistency with Applicable Plans, Goals, and Policy Policy/Goal Build Alternative (Locally Preferred Alternative) No-Build Alternative standard by providing appropriate improvements, including, but not limited to: • Landscaped median islands to restrict left turns, with median opening spacing occurring minimum of 400 feet apart, and preferably limited to signalized locations • Adequate driveway spacing of at least 230 feet between driveways on arterial highways. unacceptable level F to LOS C in 2015 and to LOS D in 2035. Additionally, the project would construct landscaped medians along Brookhurst Street, thereby eliminating left-turn access to and from several residential and commercial-serving driveways. These modifications would increase vehicular safety along Brookhurst Street. Goal 2.2: Provide a safe circulation system. Policy 1: Promote the principle that streets have multiple users and users, and protect the safety of all users. Consistent. As part of the project, northbound and southbound bicycle lanes and 8- to 10-foot sidewalks would be constructed, thereby enhancing both pedestrian and bicyclist safety. Further, construction of landscaped medians would eliminate left-turn access to and from several driveways in the project area, thus increasing vehicular safety by eliminating unsignalized cross-traffic movements. Not Consistent. The No-Build Alternative would not remove left-turn movements onto local streets, and would maintain the unsignalized intersections in the study area. In addition, the No-Build Alternative would not provide bike lanes for bicyclist safety. Therefore, the No-Build Alternative would not be consistent with this goal. Policy 6: Implement street design features such as the use of medians, bus turnouts and consolidated driveways to minimize mid-block traffic congestion. Consistent. Construction of landscaped medians would eliminate left-turn access to and from several driveways in the project area, thus minimizing mid-block traffic congestion caused by cross traffic. Additionally, as part of the project, all existing bus pads along the alignment would be reconstructed. Not Consistent. The No-Build Alternative would not construct landscaped medians and would not eliminate left-turn access to and from several driveways in the project area; thus, it would not minimize existing mid- block traffic congestion. Goal 7.1: Protect and encourage bicycle travel. Policy 1: Provide safe, direct, and continuous bicycle routes for commuter and recreational cyclists. Consistent. As part of the project, northbound and southbound bicycle lanes would be constructed, thereby enhancing bicyclist safety. According to the 2004 City of Anaheim Bicycle Master Plan, a portion of Brookhurst Street is developed as a Class II bikeway; however, in the vicinity of the project area, the Class II Bikeway is a proposed facility. Not Consistent. The No-Build Alternative would not protect or encourage bicycle travel because it would not provide any major roadway improvements such as provision of designated bike lanes other than routine maintenance. However, Brookhurst Street provides a continuous sidewalk along the 0.4-mile segment and thus would continue to encourage pedestrian travel. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 58 Table 2.3 Project Consistency with Applicable Plans, Goals, and Policy Policy/Goal Build Alternative (Locally Preferred Alternative) No-Build Alternative Goal 8.1: Protect and encourage pedestrian travel. Consistent. As part of the project, northbound and southbound 8- to 10-foot sidewalks would be constructed, thereby enhancing pedestrian safety. Consistent. Sidewalks are currently provided, which provide for pedestrian safety. City of Anaheim Land Use Element Goal 1.1: Preserve and enhance the quality and character of Anaheim’s mosaic of unique neighborhoods. Policy 2: Ensure that new development is designed in a manner that preserves the quality of life in existing neighborhoods. Consistent. The project would require full acquisition of 19 residential properties. Although these properties would be acquired, the surrounding neighborhood character would be unchanged. Rather, the project would construct privacy walls in an effort to preserve the residential areas and to prevent intrusion related to the vehicular circulation. Consistent. The No-Build Alternative would not change the quality and character of the study area because it does not propose any improvements. Although it would not enhance the quality and character of the community, it would maintain its existing setting. Goal 3.1: Pursue land uses along major corridors that enhance the City’s image and stimulate appropriate development at strategic locations. Policy 4: Continue to pursue additional open space, recreation, and landscaping amenities along major transportation routes. Consistent. As part of the project, landscaping would be installed in the newly constructed roadway median as well as along both sides of the roadway between the reconstructed sidewalk and the proposed privacy walls. Not Consistent. The No-Build Alternative would not pursue lands along Brookhurst Street to enhance the city’s image and stimulate development and thus would not be consistent with the goal. LOS: level of service Source: Community Impact Assessment 2013. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 59 2.1.1.3. PARKS AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES Affected Environment The information in this section is based on the Community Impact Assessment (May 2013). The project study area is largely developed with residential uses; therefore, there are several recreational facilities in the project study area that serve the local residential community. Recreational land uses are shown on Figure 10, Community Facilities. Two city parks are located within the 0.5-mile radius from the Brookhurst Street Improvement Project. These facilities are also discussed in Appendix A, Resources Evaluated Relative to the Requirements of Section 4(f). John Marshall Park is a community park located approximately 1,600 feet east of Brookhurst Street between La Palma and Falmouth Avenues (see Figure 10, Community Facilities). This park covers 15 acres and is developed with softball fields, open play areas, a children’s play area, a picnic shelter, barbecue facilities, a football/soccer area, a basketball court, and restrooms. The John Marshall Elementary School is located adjacent to and west of this park. This school has paved game courts in addition to athletic fields that are available for public use. Another city park located within 0.5 mile from Brookhurst Street is Brookhurst Community Park. Brookhurst Park is a 27-acre community park developed with a skate park, a community center, baseball and softball fields, an open play area, a children’s play area, barbecue facilities, a football/soccer area, a basketball court, and restrooms. It is located 1,300 feet south of the intersection of Brookhurst Street and La Palma Avenue. Trails and Bike Paths No bike lanes, bikeways, or hiking trails exist along Brookhurst Street in the project study area. Environmental Consequences Build Alternative (Locally Preferred Alternative) The proposed project would not require any right-of-way from parks or other recreational facilities; therefore it would not have any direct impacts on recreational uses such as John Marshall Park or Brookhurst Community Park in the project study area. Additionally, due to distance from the recreational resources, the project would not have any indirect impacts. There would be no direct views, alteration of access to ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 60 the facilities, or increase in noise levels that could change the character or use of the existing facilities. The improvement of Brookhurst Street would not generate a demand for increased recreational facilities because it does not propose new development and thus would not result in adverse effects to recreational facilities. Because no bike lanes exist within the project limits, no impacts to these facilities would occur under the Build Alternative. However, Class II Bike lanes are proposed on Brookhurst Street as part of the project. Sidewalks would also be reconstructed to a consistent width. Beneficial effects on bicycle and pedestrian access would occur. No-Build Alternative The No-Build Alternative does not propose any improvements; therefore, it would not impact parks or recreational facilities. At the same time, it would not provide bike lanes on Brookhurst Street and would not implement the City’s Bicycle Master Plan. Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures The project would have no direct or indirect impacts on park and recreational facilities. No avoidance, minimization and/or mitigation measures would be required. 2.1.2. Growth Regulatory Setting The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations, which established the steps necessary to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, requires evaluation of the potential environmental consequences of all proposed federal activities and programs. This provision includes a requirement to examine indirect effects, which may occur in areas beyond the immediate influence of a proposed action and at some time in the future. The CEQ regulations (40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 1508.8) refer to these consequences as indirect impacts. Indirect impacts may include changes in land use, economic vitality, and population density, which are all elements of growth. Affected Environment The information in this section is based on the Community Impact Assessment (May 2013). ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 61 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 62 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 63 The city of Anaheim is essentially built out and the study area is built out with residential, commercial, and public land uses. There are no vacant lands in the study area or just outside the study area. Brookhurst Street is a major arterial that provides access not only to adjacent neighborhoods, but to employment and commercial areas outside the study area and to I-5 and SR-91. As shown in Table 2.2, several development and transportation projects are proposed in the city of Anaheim. The development projects are mostly infill projects, and the transportation projects are roadway and/or freeway improvement projects. Environmental Consequences Build Alternative (Locally Preferred Alternative) By answering the “first cut” growth analysis questions, it was determined that the Build Alternative would not influence the location, type, or rate of future growth and development. Therefore, additional analysis would not be required. The answers to the “first cut” questions are provided below. • Travel and Accessibility: The project is located in a highly urbanized portion of the city of Anaheim. Brookhurst Street is a major arterial highway that provides access not only to adjacent neighborhoods, but to employment and commercial areas outside the study area and to I-5 and SR-91. Since Brookhurst Street is an existing roadway, the proposed widening of the final segments of Brookhurst Street to bring it to compliance with the City General Plan and the MPAH would not be expected to change travel behavior. Access to the regional circulation network and nearby land uses that are attracting the trips the jobs and shops) already exist. The project would not result in excess capacity that would encourage redevelopment beyond the existing levels. Though the improvements would result in improved operation of the roadway, there would not be sufficient time savings to result in changes in the regional traffic. • Effect of Accessibility Changes: Regional growth is projected by SCAG; however, the project study area and the surrounding area are currently built out. The project would not change the access to areas or open up new development areas that would influence growth beyond what is assumed as part of regional and local planning efforts. • Impacts on Resources of Concern: “Resources of concern” would include impacts to the community, to biological resources, to visual resources, or to the physical environment. The analysis of the project has not identified any ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 64 substantial impacts on these resources. Currently, none of the areas surrounding the project are designated for redevelopment. Since the study area is already fully developed and the project would not provide excess capacity, substantial impacts to the community associated with regional growth, visual character, or the physical environment are not anticipated. Since there are limited biological resources in the project study area and surrounding areas, resources of concern are not anticipated to be substantially affected. Based on the above discussion, no further analysis with respect to growth is required for this project. No-Build Alternative The No-Build Alternative would not provide the proposed improvements; however, given the built out nature of the surrounding area and limited length of the project, growth projections for the city of Anaheim and the region would not be affected. Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures The project would have no direct or indirect impacts on growth. No avoidance, minimization and/or mitigation measures would be required. 2.1.3. Community Impacts 2.1.3.1. COMMUNITY CHARACTER AND COHESION Regulatory Setting The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, as amended, established that the federal government use all practicable means to ensure for all Americans safe, healthful, productive, and aesthetically and culturally pleasing surroundings (42 United States Code [USC] 4331[b][2]). The Federal Highway Administration in its implementation of NEPA (23 USC 109[h]) directs that final decisions on projects are to be made in the best overall public interest. This requires taking into account adverse environmental impacts, such as destruction or disruption of human-made resources, community cohesion and the availability of public facilities and services. Affected Environment This section was prepared based on the Community Impact Assessment (May 2013) and Relocation Plan (December 2012). ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 65 Community character refers to the degree to which the human environment is safe, healthful, productive, and aesthetically and culturally pleasing. Community cohesion is the degree to which residents have a sense of belonging to their neighborhood; their commitment to the community; or a strong attachment to neighbors, groups, and institutions, usually as a result of continued association over time. Community cohesion can be perceived by individuals differently but, for the purpose of this analysis, community cohesion indicators generally include racial and ethnic composition, age composition, household size, and residents’ tenure. A highly cohesive community would be characterized by ethnic homogeneity, households with two or more people, long-term residents, and a high percentage of elderly residents. Residential properties in the project study area are comprised of mostly detached single-family units dating from the 1950s, with two properties dating back to 1911 and 1914. The commercial properties in the project area were constructed from 1968 to 1988. According to the Historic Property Survey Report (May 2013) even though the residential properties in the project study area date from the 1950s, they do not form a historically cohesive neighborhood and lack cultural resources. Therefore, the community character of the project area is not considered unique. Demographic information for the project study area was collected from the 2010 Census. Based on the data compiled, the project study area is generally representative of the western section of the city as a whole. The data from the 2010 United States Census (US Census) American Community Survey (ACS) was used to describe the community characteristics. The 2010 Census states that the project study area at the census tract level had a population of 8,876 persons. Table 2.4 shows the population and racial breakdown for the project study area, the city of Anaheim, and the county. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 66 Table 2.4 Project Study Area, City, and County Population Characteristics Population Project Study Area (Census Tract 867.01) City of Anaheim Orange County Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Total Population 8,876 100.00 336,265 100.00 3,010,232* 100.00 Population < 18 Years 2,435 27.43 91,917 27.33 736,659 24.47 Population 18–64 Years 5,454 61.45 213,126 63.38 1,923,896 63.91 Population 65+ Years 987 11.12 31,222 9.28 349,677 11.62 Median Age 33.1 – 32.4 – 36.2 – Race: White 4,424 49.84 177,237 52.71 1,830,758 60.82 Race: African American 209 2.35 9,347 2.78 50,744 1.69 Race: American Indian and Alaska Native 82 0.92 2,648 0.79 18,132 0.60 Race: Asian 1,464 16.49 49,857 14.83 537,804 17.87 Race: Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 40 0.45 1,607 0.48 9,354 0.31 Race: Some other race 2,241 25.25 80,705 24.00 435,641 14.47 Race: Two or more races (of total population) 416 4.69 14,864 4.42 127,799 4.25 Ethnicity: Hispanic or Latino 5,026 56.62 177,467 52.78 1,012,973 33.65 * The US Census data and the California Department of Finance have different population numbers for the County of Orange in 2010. Source: Community Impact Assessment 2013. As shown in Table 2.4 the study area residents are predominantly white at approximately 50 percent, followed by Asian at approximately 17 percent, and African-American at 2.3 percent. Approximately 57 percent of the study area residents were of Hispanic or Latino origin. The study area racial and ethnic composition follows the city racial and ethnic composition with exception of Hispanic and Latino. The study area population has higher number of those who are Hispanic and Latino than the city as a whole. The project study area at the census tract level has a relatively young population with median age of 33 years old, similar to the city of Anaheim reference population at 32 years old. The project study area elderly population is higher than the elderly population of the city. Table 2.5 shows the Project Study Area, City, and County Housing characteristics. The 2010 Census estimates that the project study area (Census Tract 867.01) contains 2,505 units, with 102 vacant units. There were 1,484 owner-occupied housing units and 919 renter-occupied housing units. The average household size was 3.68 persons ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 67 per household. The study area’s homeowner vacancy rate is 1.7 percent and its rental vacancy rate is 5.8 percent. Table 2.5 provides housing characteristics for the project study area, the city of Anaheim, and Orange County. The project study area (at the census tract level) had a total of 2,505 housing units in 2010; of that, 2,403 units were occupied. The housing vacancy rate in the study area was approximately 5 percent and on pair with the city vacancy rate. Within the project study area, there is a higher percent of households in owner-occupied housing than the city as a whole. Table 2.5 Project Study Area, City, and County Housing Characteristics Housing/Socioeconomic Characteristics Project Study Area (Census Tract 867.01) City of Anaheim Orange County Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Total Housing Units 2,505 100.00 104,237 100.00 1,048,907 100.00 Housing: Owner-Occupied 1,484 59.24 47,677 45.74 588,313 56.09 Housing: Renter-Occupied 919 36.69 50,617 48.56 404,468 38.56 Housing: Vacant 102 4.07 5,943 5.57 56,126 5.35 Total Households 2,471 – 98,294 – 992,781 – Average Household size 3.68 – 3.38 – 2.99 – Median Household Income* $57,163 – $57,807 – $74,344 – * 2006–2010 American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year Estimates Source: Community Impact Assessment 2013. Residential Tenure is presented in Table 2.6. The majority of study area residents (58 percent) moved in the last 10 years. Thus it can be concluded that the majority of the residents in the study area have been residing in the community for a relatively short period of time. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 68 Table 2.6 Project Study Area Household Tenure Census Tract 867.01 Household Tenure Moved in 2005 or later 629 25% Moved in 2000 to 2004 813 33% Moved in 1990 to 1999 525 21% Moved in 1980 to 1989 337 14% Moved in 1970 to 1979 135 5% Moved in 1969 or earlier 32 1% Total 2,471 Source: Community Impact Assessment 2013 Other factors such as the location of important community services were also considered when evaluating community cohesion. John Marshall Elementary School is located at 2066 Falmouth Avenue in the project study area. Additionally, South Baylo University, located at 1126 North Brookhurst Street and the Islamic Education School, located at 1136 North Brookhurst Street, are within the project study area. The Sa-Rang Community Church is located at 1111 North Brookhurst Street, at the southern end of the project segment. Overall, the study area does not exhibit a high degree of community cohesion. Based on the mix of racial and ethnic population distribution residing in the area, the study area population is not highly homogeneous. In addition, the community is characterized by young adults with moderate numbers of elderly populations. The study area also exhibits relatively short resident tenure. Based on all these community cohesion indicators, it can be concluded that the study area community is moderately cohesive. Environmental Consequences Build Alternative (Locally Preferred Alternative) The project is an improvement to an existing facility and thus would not create a barrier that divides the neighborhood since the communities were built around Brookhurst Street. Access to and from the communities during construction will be provided at all times because Brookhurst Street would be open to two-way traffic. The project would not affect parking, community facilities, businesses, or transit services as discussed elsewhere in this document. The project would result in residential relocations; however, the total number of acquisitions would not be substantial enough to alter the neighborhood cohesion. The relocations would not result in isolated land uses. The walls/fencing would enhance the physical definition ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 69 of the neighborhood by providing a separation of the existing residential uses from the traffic of the arterial highway. No commercial or public acquisitions would be required. Thus the project would not divide an existing community and would not eliminate any of the community’s basic services or any public facilities such as Sa-Rang Community Church or schools from the study area. Where full parcel acquisitions are needed, the acquisitions would not affect community cohesion because the project would occur on an existing roadway and would not bisect a neighborhood or community; it would not cut off access to existing community services; and it would not necessitate modifications to existing commute patterns or transit routes. Further, the Build Alternative would provide community benefits by improving traffic flow in the project study area; it would also add bike lanes and sidewalks, which would benefit the local community. The project includes implementation of the landscape plan along Brookhurst Street to enhance the aesthetics of the community. This would enhance the pedestrian community experience and would support community interactions. In addition, provision of a signalized intersection would support safe pedestrian movement across the street. No-Build Alternative The No-Build Alternative would not provide any improvements to Brookhurst Street. There would be no impacts to community character or cohesion. However, the improvements, such as the bicycle lane, improved sidewalks, and landscaping, which can serve to enhance community cohesion would not be implemented. Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures No adverse economic impacts on community cohesion or character would occur and no avoidance, minimization, and/or mitigation measures would be required. 2.1.3.2. RELOCATIONS AND REAL PROPERTY ACQUISITION Regulatory Setting The Caltrans Relocation Assistance Program (RAP) is based on the Federal Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (as amended) and Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 24. The purpose of RAP is to ensure that persons displaced as a result of a transportation project are treated fairly, consistently, and equitably so that such persons will not suffer ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 70 disproportionate injuries as a result of projects designed for the benefit of the public as a whole. Please see Appendix C for a summary of the RAP. All relocation services and benefits are administered without regard to race, color, national origin, or sex in compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act (42 United States Code [USC] 2000d, et seq.). Please see Appendix B for a copy of Caltrans’ Title VI Policy Statement. Affected Environment The following analysis was prepared based on the Community Impact Assessment (May 2013) and Relocation Plan (December 2012). A full acquisition of a property is required when all or a substantial portion of a property is needed for right-of-way purposes and the current use can no longer operate on that site. A partial acquisition would occur when a smaller portion of a property is to be acquired, but full use of the property and its structures can remain. Generally, partial acquisitions consist of portions of a back, side, or front yard, landscaping, or parking (but not in numbers sufficient to subvert building code requirements). Another form of a partial acquisition is a temporary construction easement, which is the occupancy of a portion of a property only during project construction (typically needed for construction staging or equipment and materials storage use). Environmental Consequences According to the Relocation Plan the project displacement area is limited to the direct right-of-way impact area where residential displacements are expected to occur. The project replacement area is the city of Anaheim. Build Alternative (Locally Preferred Alternative) Implementation of the Build Alternative would require the acquisition of property and structures located within the proposed right-of-way for Brookhurst Street. The construction of the wider roadway would result in the full acquisition of 19 parcels and an additional 12 partial acquisitions. All of the 19 full takes involve the demolition of existing structures and the displacement of single-family residences and their residents. However, only 18 occupied residential properties will be affected since the Sa-Rang Community Church guest house does not have permanent occupants. Of the 12 partial acquisitions, 1 parcel is developed with a commercial use and the partial acquisition would be limited to the landscaped setback between the property ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 71 fencing and the Brookhurst Street right-of-way. The remaining partial acquisitions would involve land acquisitions, but would not involve any structural modifications, so the main residential structure would remain in place and in use. The parcels requiring acquisition are shown in Table 2.7. In addition, Table 2.7 identifies temporary construction easements. These are generally required to accommodate minor construction activities. Table 2.7 Right-of-Way Requirements (sq feet) Parcel Total Lot Area (square feet) Area to be Acquired TCE Area Type of Acquisition Land Use 072-415-35 797 TCE Commercial 072-415-36 901 TCE Educational 072-415-33 378 TCE Commercial 072-415-30 888 TCE Religious 071-247-21 6,524 6,524 Full SFR 071-246-22 6,499 6,499 Full SFR 072-415-20 6,111 6,111 Full SFR 072-417-09 6,303 6,303 Full SFR 072-417-10 6,146 6,146 Full SFR 072-417-11 6,148 6,148 Full SFR 072-417-12 6,150 6,150 Full SFR 072-417-13 6,151 6,151 Full SFR 072-417-14 6,153 6,153 Full SFR 072-417-15 6,315 6,315 Full SFR 072-291-14 6,306 6,306 Full SFR 072-296-01 8,111 8,111 Full SFR 072-291-01 6,273 6,273 Full SFR 072-291-02 6,267 6,267 Full SFR 072-291-03 6,269 6,269 Full SFR 072-291-04 6,271 6,271 Full SFR 072-291-05 6,273 6,273 Full SFR 072-291-06 6,275 6,275 Full SFR 072-291-07 6,688 6,688 Full SFR 072-417-01 23,730 4,656 529 Partial/TCE SFR 072-284-12 13,201 1,014 327 Partial/TCE SFR 072-284-11 14,399 23 91 Partial/TCE SFR 075-375-01 6,695 64 458 Partial/TCE SFR 071-375-05 673 TCE SFR 071-375-06 483 TCE SFR 071-245-06 306 TCE SFR 071-245-05 305 TCE SFR 071-246-21 6,500 151 540 Partial/TCE SFR 071-245-04 6,825 65 434 Partial/TCE SFR ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 72 Table 2.7 Right-of-Way Requirements (sq feet) Parcel Total Lot Area (square feet) Area to be Acquired TCE Area Type of Acquisition Land Use 071-371-25 9,525 16 86 Partial/TCE SFR 071-371-24 14,400 790 608 Partial/TCE SFR 071-371-10 13,000 2,139 856 Partial/TCE SFR 071-371-09 10,560 459 1,086 Partial/TCE SFR 072-415-21 21,686 151 860 Partial/TCE Commercial 072-294-16 6,600 215 Partial SFR 071-060-99 125 TCE Church 072-295-06 165 TCE SFR 072-296-02 330 TCE SFR 072-296-03 95 TCE SFR 130,976 11,321 SFR: Single family residential; TCE: Temporary construction easement Source: Community Impact Assessment 2013. Most of the impacted parcels are residential lots developed with single-family residences. Based on the average household size of 3.68 persons in the Census Tract, approximately 70 occupants would be relocated. No businesses would be displaced as part of the project. The partial acquisition that involves a commercial parcel is a sliver take of the landscaped setback between the property fencing and the Brookhurst Street right-of-way, and thus would not result in a relocation or other impacts. The Relocation Plan was prepared to identify properties to be displaced and to find replacement properties for the relocated residents. Notices of Availability of a Relocation Plan were sent by the City of Anaheim to those residents that would be displaced by the project. A 30-day public review period was provided from April 1 through April 30, 2013. According to the Relocation Plan, there are adequate replacement resources for the residential occupants. Based on the Relocation Plan replacement property survey results of rental opportunities and the tenants’ current rent, the tenant occupants will likely not have an increase in rent. The inventory for single-family residences for purchase is usually low at this time and, if this trend continues next summer, there may be competition among the displacees for the most desirable properties unless they are willing to look beyond Anaheim. In addition, not all residents would be relocating at the same time. According to the California Department of Finance, as of January 1, 2012, the housing vacancy rate estimate in the city of Anaheim is at 3.52 percent. Therefore, it ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 73 can be reasonably assumed that displaced individuals from the 19 residences proposed for demolition could be accommodated in existing housing and the project would not necessitate the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. Given the Census Tract housing characteristics and sufficient number of replacement properties, the Build Alternative would not result in adverse impacts related to relocations. Relocation assistance and compensation would be provided to displaced households in accordance with the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act and the City of Anaheim’s Relocation Assistance Program. It should be noted that the City of Anaheim prepared and approved an environmental document pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) which addressed property acquisition. The City has elected to rely on the approved CEQA document and is using local money to fund the early acquisition of properties impacted by the project. No-Build Alternative No right-of-way acquisition is needed under the No-Build Alternative. Thus, no impacts related to displacement and relocation would occur. Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Compliance with the Federal Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act, as outlined in the following standard condition would minimize relocation impacts: Standard Condition SC-1 Prior to construction, the City of Anaheim shall obtain all required right- of-way for the roadway and grade separation. Owners of property to be acquired shall be compensated for the fair market value of the property as well as damages, if any, to the remaining portions of their properties in accordance with the Federal Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act. Relocation assistance and counseling will be provided to displaced businesses in accordance with the Federal Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act to ensure adequate relocation for displaced businesses. All eligible displacees will be eligible for moving expenses. All benefits and services will be provided equitably to all relocatees without regard to race, color, religion, age, national origin, or disability, as specified under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 74 2.1.3.3. ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE Regulatory Setting All projects involving a federal action (funding, permit, or land) must comply with Executive Order (EO) 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, signed by President Clinton on February 11, 1994. This EO directs federal agencies to take the appropriate and necessary steps to identify and address disproportionately high and adverse effects of federal projects on the health or environment of minority and low-income populations to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law. Low income is defined based on the Department of Health and Human Services poverty guidelines. For 2010, this was $18,310 for a family of three and $22,050 for a family of four. All considerations under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and related statutes have also been included in this project. Caltrans’ commitment to upholding the mandates of Title VI is evidenced by its Title VI Policy Statement, signed by the Director, which can be found in Appendix B of this document. Affected Environment The information in this section is based on the Community Impact Assessment (May 2013). Demographic information for the project study area is presented in Section 2.1.3.1, Community Character and Cohesion. Table 2.4 provides an overview of the project study area and city of Anaheim population characteristics, including age, race, and household type. Table 2.8 provides additional information on income characteristics. This demographic information was collected at the Census Tract level because this level of data is representative of the project study area that is being evaluated. It also allows a more accurate identification of trends over time. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 75 Table 2.8 Project Study Area and the City of Anaheim Socioeconomic Characteristics Housing/Socioeconomic Characteristics Project Study Area (Census Tract 867.01) City of Anaheim Number Percent Number Percent Total Housing 2,505 100.00 104,237 100.00 Housing: Owner-Occupied 1,484 59.24 47,677 45.74 Housing: Renter-Occupied 919 36.69 50,617 48.56 Housing: Vacant 102 4.07 5,943 5.57 Total Households 2,471 – 98,294 – Average Household size 3.68 – 3.38 – Households with Retirement Income* 505 20.44 12,328 12.54 Households with Social Security Income* 810 32.78 20,238 20.59 Households with Supplemental Security Income* 229 9.27 4,477 4.55 Households with Public Assistance Income* 50 2.02 2,518 2.56 Households with Food Stamp/SNAP benefits* 146 5.91 5,890 5.99 Median Household Income* $57,163 – $57,807 – * 2006–2010 American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year Estimates Source: Community Impact Assessment 2013. The environmental justice population at the census tract level for the project study area is shown in Table 2.9, Environmental Justice Populations. The project study area at the census tract level has similar percentages for minority populations in most ethnic and racial categories that are tracked by the U.S. Census for the city. The median household income for the study area population is lower than the city as a whole. However, although the poverty level is higher than the city, the percentage of households on food stamps is lower (Refer to Table 2.9). Therefore, it can be concluded that some minority and low-income populations exist in the study area; however, the percentages of these populations are not substantially higher than the city reference population. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 76 Table 2.9 Environmental Justice Populations Census Tract 867.01 City of Anaheim Minorities* 20% 19% Hispanics 57% 53% Median Household Income $57,163 $57,807 Poverty level 15% 14% * The “Minority” category includes the following races: African American; American Indian and Alaska Native; Asian; Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander. Source: Community Impact Assessment, 2013. Environmental Consequences Build Alternative (Locally Preferred Alternative) Disruptions to local communities may occur as a result of construction of the Build Alternative in the form of construction crew commutes, construction noise, vibration, and use of construction equipment. Avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures would be implemented in accordance with the results of the Noise Study Report (May 2013) and the Air Quality Technical Report (May 2013) to reduce noise, dust, and air quality pollution during construction of the project. The Build Alternative proposes to construct improvements to an existing roadway; thus, construction impacts would be borne by all adjacent residents and travelers that use Brookhurst Street impacts would not be limited to low-income and/or minority populations). Construction impacts are temporary and would cease upon completion of the project. The project would relieve congestion and alleviate traffic, which would benefit all affected area residents, including low-income and minority populations. The Build Alternative would not be disproportionately limited to the part of the project area located within the census tract that shows a higher percentage of minority populations than in the city as a whole. The acquisitions related to the project would be addressed by complying with the Uniform Relocation Act. As discussed above, while low-income and minority populations are present in the project area, the percentage of low-income and minority populations in the affected census tract is not substantially higher than the percentage of low-income and minority populations in the city as a whole. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 77 In addition, the project would add bike lanes and sidewalks along Brookhurst Street, which would benefit all community residents, including minority and low-income populations. Thus, the Build Alternative would not disproportionately impact any low-income or minority populations. Based on the above discussion and analysis, the Build Alternative(s) will not cause disproportionately high and adverse effects on any minority or low-income populations as per EO 12898 regarding environmental justice. No-Build Alternative The No-Build Alternative would not provide any improvements to Brookhurst Street. As such, this alternative would not disproportionately impact minority or low-income populations. Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Based on the above discussion and analysis, the Brookhurst Street Improvement Project will not cause disproportionately high and adverse effects on any minority or low-income populations as per EO 12898 regarding environmental justice and no thus no avoidance, minimization, and/or mitigation measures would be required. 2.1.4. Utilities/Emergency Services Affected Environment Utilities The following provides an overview of the utility providers and facilities in the project study area. The following service providers either serve or have facilities within the project right-of-way: Water: City of Anaheim Sewer: City of Anaheim Gas: Southern California Gas Company Electric: City of Anaheim Telecommunications: AT&T, Time Warner Communications Brookhurst Street currently has no underground storm drain facilities except for one 54-inch line that terminates just south of the SR-91 eastbound ramps. This existing line drains northerly under SR-91 and outlets into Fullerton Channel north of SR-91. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 78 Storm waters in the project area generally flow from east to west through the existing residential subdivisions on the east side of Brookhurst Street. Once storm flows reach Brookhurst Street, the storm water flows in a northerly direction along Brookhurst Street and enters the aforementioned 54-inch pipe just south of SR-91. Emergency Services The City of Anaheim Fire Department provides fire protection and emergency medical services in the city. The Fire Department operates 11 fire stations located throughout the city. Fire Station #2 is located approximately 0.5 mile southeast of the intersection of La Palma Avenue and Brookhurst Street at 2141 West Crescent Avenue. The City of Anaheim Police Department provides police protection and law enforcement services for the city. The project area is served by the Main Police Station located at 425 South Harbor Boulevard (approximately 2.6 miles to the southeast of the intersection of La Palma Avenue and Brookhurst Street). No police stations are located in the project study area. Care Ambulance, a private company, contracts with the City of Anaheim and provides emergency medical services, including transport, within the project study area. Environmental Consequences Build Alternative (Locally Preferred Alternative) Utilities Under the Build Alternative, relocation/reconstruction of utilities and drainage facilities within the proposed right-of-way would include power lines and poles, telephone lines, underground utilities, and storm drain facilities storm drain lines and catch basins). Utility relocations are expected to be accomplished with minimal interruption. The Build Alternative would necessitate the relocation of utility lines that currently serve the project area to ensure that overhead utilities and storm drains are outside the pavement area. The precise relocation requirements would be evaluated in cooperation with the applicable service provider during preparation of the design phase of the project. However, based on the type of existing facilities along Brookhurst Street, standard engineering practices would allow for utility relocation without interrupting service. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 79 The following utility modifications will be required: • Relocation of City of Anaheim water lines. • Relocation of City of Anaheim sewer lines. • Relocation of City of Anaheim power lines. • Relocation of fiber optic lines. • Relocation of telephone and cable television lines. Currently, there are no features in place to address the water quality of the first flush from a rainfall event. Under the Build Alternative, the project will construct storm water quality retention basins on the east side of Brookhurst Street to mitigate this condition. Storm runoff approaching the project area from the east will be drained in to the proposed water quality basins which will allow for the capture and water quality treatment, via biofiltration, of the first flush runoff from storm events. This project component is needed to satisfy the California State Regional Water Quality Board mandated water quality requirement, which is triggered by the proposed project improvements. The improvement would allow the area to meet the city’s drainage requirements identified in the Master Plan of Storm Drainage (MPSD) for the Fullerton Creek Channel Tributary Area. These improvements would enhance drainage within the project area, thereby reducing the frequency of flooding along Brookhurst Street and connecting residential streets. Emergency Services Brookhurst Street would remain open to two-way traffic at all times during construction. However, the Build Alternative has the potential to result in a negative short-term impact with respect to emergency access during construction associated with travel delays. Recognizing the importance of adequate response times for emergency services, a Traffic Management Plan (TMP) is prepared during the design phase as a standard practice to the framework for proper coordination with emergency service providers. As part of the TMP, the contractor is required to contact the service providers to ensure they are notified of each construction stage and any expected traffic shifts. With implementation of the TMP and the fact that two-way traffic will be maintained at all times, short-term, construction-related impacts to emergency service providers would be minimized. In the long-term, the project would serve to improve circulation along Brookhurst Street, and thus improve emergency response times. The project would not result in any long-term impact on the service providers. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 80 No-Build Alternative No changes in utility demands or emergency services would occur with the No-Build Alternative. The No-Build Alternative would not result in the short-term impacts associated with construction activities. Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Standard conditions that would minimize any potential impact include coordinating with all affected utility providers to ensure avoidance of any notable service disruptions during the extension or relocation of facilities. The City would also require the contactor to follow a Traffic Management Plan (see the Standard Condition at the end of Section 2.1.5) to avoid impacts to emergency service providers. No additional avoidance, minimization, and/or mitigation measures are necessary. Standard Condition SC-2 During project design, the City of Anaheim shall coordinate with utility providers regarding relocation of utilities without interrupting service. 2.1.5. Traffic and Transportation/Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities Regulatory Setting Caltrans, as assigned by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), directs that full consideration should be given to the safe accommodation of pedestrians and bicyclists during the development of federal-aid highway projects (see 23 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 652). It further directs that the special needs of the elderly and the disabled must be considered in all federal-aid projects that include pedestrian facilities. When current or anticipated pedestrian and/or bicycle traffic presents a potential conflict with motor vehicle traffic, every effort must be made to minimize the detrimental effects on all highway users who share the facility. In July 1999, the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) issued an Accessibility Policy Statement pledging a fully accessible multimodal transportation system. Accessibility in federally-assisted programs is governed by the USDOT regulations (49 CFR Part 27) implementing Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act (29 United States Code [USC] 794). FHWA has enacted regulations for the implementation of the 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), including a commitment to build transportation facilities that provide equal access for all persons. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 81 These regulations require application of the ADA requirements to Federal-aid projects, including Transportation Enhancement Activities. Affected Environment Information in this section comes from the Traffic Study for Brookhurst Street Widening Project from I-5 to SR-91, prepared in August 2013. The traffic, pedestrian, and bicycle counts to establish the baseline were conducted on November 15 through November 17, 2011, at all eight intersections within the segment of Brookhurst Street between SR-91 and I-5. The following provides a description of the major streets within the project limits: • Brookhurst Street. Brookhurst Street is a north-south major arterial providing two travel lanes in each direction with striped left-turn lanes. The posted speed limit is 40 miles per hour and on-street parking is not permitted at any time of the day. • La Palma Avenue. La Palma Avenue is an east-west primary arterial roadway providing two travel lanes in each direction. Left-turn pockets are provided at its Brookhurst Street intersection. Parking is generally prohibited along the corridor. The posted speed limit is 40 miles per hour (mph). • Falmouth Avenue. Falmouth Avenue is an east-west local street that provides one lane in each direction with parking permitted in both directions. • Grayson Avenue. Grayson Avenue is an east-west local street similar to Falmouth Avenue that leads to a residential community. • Huntington Avenue. Huntington Avenue is an east-west local street that provides access to the residential neighborhoods. There are seven existing intersections within the project limits. In addition, the Traffic Study provides the LOS at the SR-91 westbound ramps, which is just outside the limits, to demonstrate that the project would not affect the operation of this intersection. Out of the seven intersections within the project limits, Grayson Avenue and the east leg of Falmouth Avenue would be right-turn in and right-turn out only. In addition, the Huntington Avenue intersection would be modified and be a single intersection. Therefore, the traffic analysis focuses on the following intersections: 1. SR-91 Eastbound Ramps (Signalized) ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 82 2. Huntington Avenue 3. Falmouth Avenue – West Leg (Signalized) 4. La Palma Avenue (Signalized) Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) methodology was used to determine the LOS for the following signalized intersections within city right-of-way: Brookhurst Street/Falmouth Avenue and Brookhurst Street/La Palma Avenue. For stop- controlled intersections, levels of service were evaluated using stop-controlled methodologies from the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual. Based on peak hour turning movement counts, Table 2.10 summarizes the LOS of the study area intersections under Existing Year (2011) Conditions. As shown, all intersections within the project limits operate at LOS C or better during peak periods with the exception of the Brookhurst Street and Huntington Avenue intersection. Generally, very light pedestrian and bicycle traffic was observed within the project limits during the period the traffic analysis was conducted. Only the Brookhurst Street/La Palma Avenue Intersection was observed to have moderately high pedestrian and bicycle activity in the AM peak hour (193 total for all approaches). OCTA operates Route 35 bus service in both directions along Brookhurst Street in the project limits. Bus Route 38 only operates in both directions on La Palma Avenue at the southerly project limits. Table 2.10 Level of Service Analysis – Existing Year (2011) Conditions Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour V/C or Delay LOS V/C or Delay LOS Highway Capacity Manual Methodologya Brookhurst St SR-91 WB Ramps b 27.8 C 46.6 D Brookhurst St SR-91 EB Ramps 25.8 C 22.5 C Brookhurst St and Huntington Avec 46.7* E 66.7* F Intersection Capacity Utilization Methodologyd Brookhurst St/Falmouth Ave 0.682 B 0.642 B Brookhurst Street/La Palma Ave 0.614 B 0.669 B V/C: volume-to-capacity ratio; LOS: level of service; SR: State Route; WB: westbound; EB: eastbound a Value given in seconds of delay b This intersection is not within the project limits and was provided for context purposes to show that the project does not adversely affect the intersection. c For unsignalized intersections, the LOS is based on HCM methodology of average delay (seconds/vehicle). d ICU presented as volume to capacity ratio. Source: Traffic Study for Brookhurst Street Widening Project (I-5 to SR-91) 2013. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 83 Environmental Consequences Build Alternative (Locally Preferred Alternative) In addition to providing an additional travel lane in each direction on Brookhurst Street between I-5 and the SR-91 Eastbound ramps, the project would provide raised medians, which will prohibit left-turn movements to and from local side streets and driveways along Brookhurst Street. Left-turn lanes would be provided at the Sa-Rang Community Church’s northern driveway and at the existing Falmouth Avenue signalized intersection. A new signalized intersection connecting the two legs of Huntington Avenue, as shown on the preliminary concept plans (Figure 4B). With the construction of the raised medians, left-turn movements to and from the local side streets and driveways would be eliminated, and vehicles would need to make U-turns at adjacent intersections. There are several intersections within the project limits that could accommodate these U-turns. Given the limited length of the project (0.4 mile), minimal out-of-direction travel would be required. With the Build Alternative, northbound and southbound bicycle lanes would be provided and new ADA-compliant eight- to ten-foot sidewalks along both sides of Brookhurst Street would be provided. Projected traffic conditions have been evaluated for two timeframes: 2015, which is the project’s opening year, and 2035, which is the project’s horizon or design year. With the Build Alternative, the signal timing at the intersection of Brookhurst Street/La Palma Avenue has been optimized with a different cycle length (120 seconds, compared to 100 seconds under the No-Build Alternative) to reflect an increase in traffic volumes. 2015 Conditions Table 2.11 summarizes the LOS for each study intersection under year 2015 conditions. The LOS for the Existing Conditions and the No-Build Alternative have been provided for comparison. As a result of the project improvements, the LOS in opening year 2015, at Brookhurst Street and Falmouth Avenue and Brookhurst Street and Huntington Avenue would improve from an unacceptable LOS E and F in the existing condition to LOS A. In 2015, all intersections within the project limits would operate at an acceptable LOS. In the PM peak, the SR-91 westbound ramps would operate at LOS E. However, this intersection is located outside the project limits and as shown in Table 2.11, the project would not affect the LOS at the SR-91 westbound ramps. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 84 2035 Conditions Table 2.12 summarizes the LOS for each study intersection in year 2035 conditions. The LOS for the Existing Conditions and the No-Build Alternative have been provided for comparison. With the project improvements, all intersections in the project study area would operate at an acceptable LOS in 2035. As shown in the Table 2.12, the project would not affect the LOS at the SR-91 westbound ramps, which would continue to operate at the same LOS E as under No Build conditions. Arterial Segment Analysis The arterial roadway criteria for the City of Anaheim involve the use of Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratios. LOS C (V/C not to exceed 0.80) is the performance standard that has been adopted for the study area circulation system by the City of Anaheim. V/C ratios were calculated using a capacity of 37,500 vehicles per day for 4-lane roadways and 56,300 vehicles per day for 6-lane roadways. If a road segment exceeds this daily threshold, then the peak hours are analyzed for this segment. If the peak hour V/C ratio is greater than 0.90, then a deficiency exists on that segment. Table 2.13 provides a summary of the V/C analysis for Brookhurst Street between SR-91 and La Palma Avenue, under existing conditions and for 2015 and 2035 with the Build Alternative and the No-Build Alternative. The analysis shows that Brookhurst Street would operate at an acceptable LOS D under the Build Alternative. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 85 Table 2.11 Level of Service Analysis – Year 2015 Conditions Intersection Existing Conditions (2011) No-Build Alternative Build Alternative (Locally Preferred Alternative) AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour V/C or Delay LOS V/C or Delay LOS V/C or Delay LOS V/C or Delay LOS V/C or Delay LOS V/C or Delay LOS Highway Capacity Manual Methodologya Brookhurst St and SR-91 WB Rampsb 27.8 C 46.6 D 30.4 C 56.4 E 30.4 C 56.4 E Brookhurst St and SR-91 EB Ramps 25.8 C 22.5 C 36.1 D 36.8 D 29.9 C 32.8 C Brookhurst St and Huntington Avec 46.7 c E 66.7c F 71.3 F 105.5 F .461 A .497 A Intersection Capacity Utilization Methodologyc Brookhurst St and Falmouth Ave 0.682 B 0.642 B 0.734 C 0.690 B 0.575 A 0.537 A Brookhurst St and La Palma Ave 0.614 B 0.669 B 0.671 B 0.719 C 0.674 B 0.717 C V/C: volume to capacity ratio; LOS: level of service; SR: State Route; WB: westbound; EB: eastbound a Value given in seconds of delay b This intersection is not within the project limits and was provided for context purposes to show that the project does not have adverse affects beyond the project limits. c For unsignalized intersections, the LOS is based on HCM methodology of average delay (seconds/vehicle). d ICU presented as volume to capacity ratio. Source: Traffic Study for Brookhurst Street Widening Project (I-5 to SR-91) 2013. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 86 Table 2.12 Level of Service Analysis – Year 2035 Conditions Intersection Existing Conditions (2011) No-Build Alternative Build Alternative (Locally Preferred Alternative) AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour V/C or Delay LOS V/C or Delay LOS V/C or Delay LOS V/C or Delay LOS V/C or Delay LOS V/C or Delay LOS Highway Capacity Manual Methodologya Brookhurst St and SR-91 WB Rampsb 27.8 C 46.6 D 55.2 E 64.1 E 55.2 E 64.1 E Brookhurst St and SR-91 EB Ramps 25.8 C 22.5 C 56.1 E 80.8 F 34.8 C 25.3 C Brookhurst Street and Huntington Ave c 46.7c E 66.7c F >120c F >120c F 0.595 A 0.663 B Intersection Capacity Utilization Methodologyd Brookhurst St and Falmouth Ave 0.682 B 0.642 B 0.943 E 0.817 D 0.705 C 0.694 B Brookhurst St and La Palma Ave 0.614 B 0.669 B 0.782 C 0.841 D 0.788 C 0.839 D V/C: volume to capacity ratio; LOS: level of service; SR: State Route; WB: westbound; EB: eastbound a Value given in seconds of delay b This intersection is not within the project limits and was provided for context purposes to show that the project does not adversely affect the intersection. c For unsignalized intersections, the LOS is based on HCM methodology of average delay (seconds/vehicle). d ICU presented as volume to capacity ratio. Source: Traffic Study for Brookhurst Street Widening Project (I-5 to SR-91) 2013. Table 2.13 Arterial Segment Volume/Capacity Summary Analysis Scenario ADT Volumes V/C ratio LOS Existing 2011 40,500 1.08 F Opening Year 2015 – No-Build Alternative 42,501 1.13 F Opening Year 2015 – Build Alternative 42,501 0.75 C Horizon Year 2035 – No-Build Alternative 48,970 1.31 F Horizon Year 2035 – Build Alternative 48,970 0.87 D ADT: Average Daily Traffic; V/C: volume to capacity; LOS: level of service Source: Information taken from the Traffic Study for Brookhurst Street Widening Project (I-5 to SR-91) 2013. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 87 Construction Impacts Demolition and construction associated with the Build Alternative is expected to occur in 3 phases over a 12-month period. Two-way traffic would be available on Brookhurst Street through all phases of construction. Thus, no detours are expected to be necessary. While the Huntington Avenue intersection is being reconstructed, the segment of Huntington Avenue that would be realigned would be closed. However, access to all adjacent parcels and driveways would be maintained. Traffic would be temporarily directed to use Grayson Avenue or Falmouth Avenue to access the roads running parallel to Brookhurst Street. The existing bus stops along Brookhurst Street would experience short-term, construction-related impacts. This could include potential relocation of bus stops to a different quadrant of the intersection. Additionally, pathways would be identified to allow bus riders to safely cross the construction area. Coordination with OCTA as part of the Traffic Management Plan would be done to ensure the safety of individuals using buses during construction activities. No interruption of bus service is expected. No-Build Alternative As shown in Tables 2.11 through 2.13, with the No-Build Alternative, there would be deficiencies in both the 2015 opening year and the 2035 horizon year. In 2015, the Brookhurst Street would operate at LOS E at PM peak hours and the Brookhurst Street/Huntington Avenue intersections would operate at LOS F in both the AM and PM peak hours. In 2035 with the No-Build Alternative, all the intersections would operate at a deficient LOS in both the AM and PM peak hours, with exception of the Brookhurst Street/La Palma Avenue which would operate at LOS C at the AM peak hour. Similarly, the arterial segment analysis indicates that the section of Brookhurst Street would operate at LOS F under the No-Build Alternative in both 2015 and 2035. Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Implementation of a Traffic Management Plan (see Standard Condition SC-3 below) would minimize impacts associated with the Build Alternative during construction. Standard Condition SC-3 The City of Anaheim shall develop a Traffic Management Plan during the Plans, Specifications, and Estimates Phase to ensure safe and efficient traffic flow throughout the project study area during all phases of construction. The Traffic Management Plan shall optimize roadway ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 88 capacity, signal phasing, and timing during construction. The City of Anaheim shall ensure that emergency service providers are aware of each stage of construction and of any potential service delays. In addition, prior to each construction phase, the City of Anaheim shall coordinate with OCTA to develop appropriate safety provisions during construction. The Traffic Management Plan will include public notification of any modifications to bus stop locations or operational procedures during construction. 2.1.6. Visual/Aesthetics Regulatory Setting The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, as amended, establishes that the federal government use all practicable means to ensure all Americans safe, healthful, productive, and aesthetically (emphasis added) and culturally pleasing surroundings (42 United States Code [USC] 4331[b][2]). To further emphasize this point, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), in its implementation of NEPA (23 USC 109[h]), directs that final decisions regarding projects are to be made in the best overall public interest taking into account adverse environmental impacts, including among others, the destruction or disruption of aesthetic values. Affected Environment The following information is provided to discuss the visual environment and changes resulting from the project. The terminology used in the assessment of the visual environment is comprised of several key terms such as viewshed, viewer groups, and visual resources. The viewshed is defined as all surface area that can be observed from one location. Viewer groups are individuals that have a view of the viewshed or are affected by the viewshed. Visual resources are unique features that define and/or contribute to the visual environment. Changes to the existing viewshed’s quality and/or character may affect viewer groups. Identification of the viewers and the aspects of the visual environment to which they are likely to respond are necessary to understand and predict viewer response to the proposed project. The response to the visual environment determines the viewer exposure and is based on the viewer groups’; the viewer groups’ sensitivity to the visual elements; and the duration of their view. The impacts occurring from the project to the visual environment can be described as follows: ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 89 • Low: Minor adverse change to the existing visual resource with low viewer response to a change in the visual environment. • Moderate: Moderate adverse change to the visual resource with moderate viewer response. • Moderately High: Moderate adverse visual resource change with high viewer response or high adverse visual resource change with moderate viewer response. • High: Excessive adverse visual change to the resource or a high level of viewer response to visual change such that architectural design and landscape treatment cannot mitigate the impacts. Viewer response level is high. The Brookhurst Street study area is relatively flat and includes residential, commercial, public land uses, local roads, and major highways. The primary viewer groups in the Brookhurst Street study area are residents, motorists, pedestrians, and bicyclists. Brookhurst Street is not designated as a scenic roadway on the City of Anaheim General Plan. There are no scenic vistas or aesthetically pleasing visual resources within or adjacent to this roadway segment. The regional landscape establishes the general visual environment. The regional landscape for Brookhurst Street is an urban, built-out environment typical of large cities. The subject segment of Brookhurst Street is a typical example of a roadway in an urban setting. The Brookhurst Street viewshed includes residential areas intermixed with commercial/office uses around La Palma Avenue. The dominant features of the Brookhurst Street viewshed include paved roads, sidewalks, community fences, utility poles, one-story residential units located along the street, and some ornamental landscaping. The SR-91 undercrossing is visible in the background to the north, and the I-5 overcrossing is visible in the background to the south. Residential properties located along Brookhurst Street do not exhibit a unique architectural style or particular visual character and theme. The site does not offer a scenic view or visual resources. As described above, the Brookhurst Street viewshed is not considered unique because it consists of a built-out environment that lacks a particular character and quality. Therefore, the quality of the viewshed is considered moderate to low. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 90 Viewer groups in the Brookhurst Street Improvement Project area include the community residents, Brookhurst Street motorists, and freeway travelers. The first viewer group community residents) has the longest duration of exposure to Brookhurst Street and viewers would be highly sensitive to the visual change occurring on the street. The second viewer group motorists), by nature, would have a short exposure duration to Brookhurst Street. Since this group is transient, the sensitivity to change in the viewshed is usually low to moderate. Figures 9A–9D, presented as part of the existing land use discussion, provide photographs that depict the visual character of the study area. Environmental Consequences Build Alternative (Locally Preferred Alternative) Visual impacts are relative to the visual environment in which they occur. Visual impacts can extend beyond the physical areas that result in disturbance. Specific impacts are determined by defining the visual quality of the landscape units and the project’s viewshed. The project would not result in major landform alteration. The proposed project would not introduce any major new visual elements into the project area; rather it would widen the existing roadway to bring it to compliance with the MPAH. As discussed above, Brookhurst Street is not a scenic highway. Brookhurst Street along its other segments is a six-lane major arterial; however, within the subject segment it is a four-lane arterial. Because the project proposes to add one lane in each direction and a bike lane, it would result in an incremental increase in the paved surfaces associated with the roadway area within the project limits. This would contribute to the overall increase in appearance of hardscape features within this street segment. Under the Build Alternative, paved areas along the street would be larger and more visible. However, the Build Alternative includes implementation of a landscape plan along the roadway segment, including landscaped medians; a sidewalk and a landscaped parkway along the northbound and southbound sides of the street; and greenbelt areas with meandering walking paths along the northbound side of the street. With the proposed landscape and hardscape improvements, the aesthetics of Brookhurst Street along this segment would be enhanced. The project would relocate existing street lighting to accommodate the wider roadway; however, no new lighting elements are proposed. Implementation of ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 91 landscaping, including trees, would create additional shade that would reduce existing levels of glare along the street. With implementation of the project, the character and the quality of this segment of Brookhurst Street is expected to improve because of the addition of landscaping that would act as beautification element in this view. As a result, the aesthetics of Brookhurst Street within the project limits would be enhanced and the project would not result in adverse visual impacts. Response of Viewer Groups The most sensitive viewer group would be residents, specifically, the first row of residential units facing the street after the project construction. There are several homes on the west side of Brookhurst Street between Huntington Avenue and Grayson Avenue that currently face the roadway that would retain this view because the homes take access off Brookhurst Street. At these locations, they would view a wider roadway; however, rather than homes immediately adjacent to the roadway, there would also be the landscaped greenbelt areas with meandering walking paths along the northbound side of the street. The other homes on the west side of the roadway are either oriented facing away from Brookhurst or have block walls that would block their views of the roadway. No adverse visual impacts to the homes on the west side of Brookhurst Street are anticipated. On the east side of the street, most of the first tier of homes would be removed and the residual land (the area left over after the roadway improvements are constructed) would be used for the landscaped greenbelt. As a result, homes that currently are second tier of properties from Brookhurst Street would be the homes closest to the roadway. The orientation of these residential properties is away from Brookhurst Street; therefore, because their views are oriented inward, views from the residential lots would not undergo a substantial change. The addition of landscaping would improve the visual quality of this roadway segment. Because of this, the project would result in a net benefit to this viewer group and is expected to provide a positive response in this viewer group. Due to the project nature, the response of the motorist viewer group would be low. The project would not introduce new structural elements that would substantially change the project viewshed. After the project completion, Brookhurst Street would remain a major arterial in the urban built out environment as it is under existing conditions. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 92 No-Build Alternative No changes to the visual quality of the streetscape along Brookhurst Street in the project area would occur under the No-Build Alternative. No visual impacts would occur as a result of the No-Build Alternative; however, there would also be no landscape enhancements. Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures No aesthetic impacts are anticipated. The following standard condition would be applicable to the project, which would minimize potential aesthetic impacts. Standard Condition SC-4 The City of Anaheim shall ensure that tree removal is conducted in accordance with Section 13.12.060 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. Any tree would be replaced as part of the proposed median or greenbelt in accordance with the Official Tree Species List and Tree Master Plan. 2.1.7. Cultural Resources Regulatory Setting The term “cultural resources” as used in this document refers to all “built environment” resources (structures, bridges, railroads, water conveyance systems, etc.), culturally important resources, and archaeological resources (both prehistoric and historic), regardless of significance. Laws and regulations dealing with cultural resources include: The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA), as amended, sets forth national policy and procedures regarding historic properties, defined as districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects included in or eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. Section 106 of NHPA requires federal agencies to take into account the effects of their undertakings on historic properties and to allow the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation the opportunity to comment on those undertakings, following regulations issued by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (36 Code of Federal Regulations) [CFR] 800)]. On January 1, 2004, a Section 106 Programmatic Agreement (PA) between the Advisory Council, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), and Caltrans went into effect for Caltrans projects, both State and local, with FHWA involvement. The PA implements the Advisory Council’s regulations, 36 CFR 800, streamlining the Section 106 process and delegating certain responsibilities to Caltrans. The ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 93 FHWA’s responsibilities under the PA have been assigned to Caltrans as part of the Surface Transportation Project Delivery Program (23 United States Code [USC] 327). Affected Environment Information in this section comes from the Archaeological Survey Report (ASR) prepared in April 2013; the Historic Resources Evaluation Report (HRER) prepared in April 2013; and the Historic Property Survey Report (HPSR) prepared in May 2013. The HPSR, with the ASR and HRER provided as attachments, was received by the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) for review on June 13, 2013. SHPO concurrence with Caltrans determination that the resources were not eligible has been assumed since there was no response within the required review period. An initial archaeological and historical resources records search of the study area and a surrounding one-mile radius was completed at the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) on April 12, 2012. The following sources were consulted during the records search: • The National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), • The California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), • The California Historic Resources Inventory, • California Historical Landmarks, • California Points of Historical Interest, • Archaeological Determinations of Eligibility, • Archaeological site records, • Historical maps depicting site locations, and • Cultural resource studies and reports within ½ mile of the study area. Seventeen cultural surveys have been conducted within a one-mile radius of the project site, only three of which (OR-814, OR-980, and OR-2741) included a portion of the project Area of Potential Effects (APE). There are seven recorded resources within a one-mile radius of the Study Area alignment. The recorded cultural resources sites consist of existing ranch style residential tract homes on Houston Avenue north of SR-91 and outside of Study Area. There are 64 resources over 45 years of age located in the APE that were evaluated. The majority of the properties are single-family postwar tract houses, while two of the ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 94 properties have buildings dating from 1911 and 1914. Most of the properties have related ancillary structures such as unattached automobile garages. The historic evaluation of the residences located within housing tracts dating from the 1950s (Tracts 2093, 2197, 2659, 3501, and 2201) that are located in or near the study area indicates that properties to be acquired in part or in whole for the proposed project and other properties adjacent to those directly affected by the project do not have the potential to be considered historic properties or to be listed in the NRHP. The 62 properties located in the APE and constructed in the mid-1950s as part of Tracts 2093, 2197, 2659, 3501, and 2201 were evaluated individually and as contributors to a potential historic district. Individually, the properties do not meet the criteria to be determined eligible for listing in the NRHP or the CRHR. Evaluated within their respective tracts, the properties do not present a cohesive collection of buildings with sufficient levels of integrity to convey the architectural significance of post-World War II tract houses. Two of the 64 properties include houses constructed in 1911 and 1914. These properties—located at 1204 North Brookhurst Street and 1313 North Brookhurst Street—are also not eligible for listing individually in the NRHP or CRHR. No cultural resources eligible for listing in the NRHP were found in the APE during the surveys. There are no qualifying historic sites that would trigger the requirements under Section 4(f) protection. If cultural materials are discovered during construction, all earth-moving activity within and around the immediate discovery area will be diverted until a qualified archaeologist can assess the nature and significance of the find. If human remains are discovered, State Health and Safety Code 7050.5 states that further disturbances and activities shall stop in any area or nearby area suspected to overlie remains, and the County Coroner contacted. Pursuant to CA Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 5097.98, if the remains are thought to be Native American, the Coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which will then notify the Most Likely Descendent (MLD). At this time, the person who discovered the remains will contact Principal Engineer so that they may work with the MLD on the respectful treatment and disposition of the remains. Further provisions of PRC 5097.98 are to be followed as applicable. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 95 Environmental Consequences Build Alternative (Locally Preferred Alternative) Under the Build Alternative, improvement of Brookhurst Street will involve demolition, excavation, and grading activities in a previously disturbed environment. Although the project would result in a loss of structures over 50 years in age, none of the structures or properties that would be impacted have the potential to be considered historic properties or to be listed in the NRHP; therefore, impacts would not be adverse. The NAHC was contacted on April 17, 2012, for a Sacred Lands Records Search inquiry. On April 18, 2012, response from the NAHC indicated that no on-site cultural resources were identified within the Study Area. Sixteen Native American tribes were contacted to seek information regarding this area and its potential of bearing Native American resources. Follow-up telephone calls were made on July 12, 2012. The majority of comments received were regarding concerned monitoring of grading for the project. Native American responses indicate concern that prehistoric cultural resources may be encountered as a result of project construction. It should be noted, however, that the excavation activities would occur in the upper layers of the compacted fill and thus the likelihood of finding cultural resources is low. No-Build Alternative Under the No-Build Alternative, no demolition, excavation or grading activities are proposed. Thus, no impacts to cultural resources will occur. Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures The following standard condition and minimization measure would reduce the potential impacts of the Build Alternative on cultural resources: Standard Conditions and Regulations SC-5 If human remains are encountered during any excavation or other ground-disturbing work, Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code states that no further disturbances shall occur until the Orange County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Section 5097.98 of the California Public Resources Code. The City of Anaheim shall notify the Coroner of the find immediately. If the remains are determined to be prehistoric, the Coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which will determine ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 96 and notify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD). With the permission of the landowner or his/her authorized representative, the MLD may inspect the site of the discovery. The MLD shall complete the inspection within 48 hours of being granted access to the site. The MLD may recommend scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of the human remains and items associated with Native American burials. Mitigation Measures The City of Anaheim adopted the following mitigation measure when certifying the CEQA document: MM CR-1 Should any archaeological resources be uncovered during grading or excavation activities, these activities shall be diverted to a part of the site away from the find, and an Orange County-certified Archaeologist shall be contacted by the contractor to ascertain the significance of the resource; establish protocol with the Project Applicant to protect or recover such resources; ascertain the presence of additional resources; and provide additional monitoring of the site, if deemed appropriate. 2.2. Physical Environment 2.2.1. Water Quality and Storm Water Runoff Regulatory Setting Federal Requirements: Clean Water Act In 1972 Congress amended the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, making the addition of pollutants to the waters of the United States from any point source3 unlawful unless the discharge is in compliance with a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The act and its amendments are known today as the Clean Water Act (CWA). Congress has amended the act several times. In the 1987 amendments, Congress directed dischargers of storm water from municipal and industrial/construction point sources to comply with the NPDES permit scheme. The following are important CWA sections are: • Sections 303 and 304 require states to promulgate water quality standards, criteria, and guidelines. 3 A point source is any discrete conveyance such as a pipe or a man-made ditch. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 97 • Section 401 requires an applicant for a federal license or permit to conduct any activity that may result in a discharge to waters of the U.S. to obtain certification from the state that the discharge will comply with other provisions of the act. This is most frequently required in tandem with a Section 404 permit request (see below). • Section 402 establishes the NPDES, a permitting system for the discharges (except for dredge or fill material) of any pollutant into waters of the U.S. Regional Water Quality Control Boards administer this permitting program in California. Section 402(p) requires permits for discharges of storm water from industrial/construction and municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4s). • Section 404 establishes a permit program for the discharge of dredge or fill material into waters of the U.S. This permit program is administered by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). The goal of the CWA is “to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation’s waters.” The USACE issues two types of 404 permits: General and Standard permits. There are two types of General permits, Regional permits and Nationwide permits. Regional permits are issued for a general category of activities when they are similar in nature and cause minimal environmental effect. Nationwide permits are issued to authorize a variety of minor project activities with no more than minimal effects. Ordinarily, projects that do not meet the criteria for a Nationwide Permit may be permitted under one of the USACE’s Standard permits. There are two types of Standard permits: Individual permits and Letters of Permission. For Standard permits, the USACE decision to approve is based on compliance with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) Section 404 Guidelines (U.S. EPA Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 40 Part 230), and whether the permit approval is in the public interest. The Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines (Guidelines) were developed by the U.S. EPA in conjunction with the USACE, and allow the discharge of dredged or fill material into the aquatic system (waters of the U.S.) only if there is no practicable alternative which would have less adverse effects. The Guidelines state that USACE may not issue a permit if there is a least environmentally damaging practicable alternative (LEDPA) to the proposed discharge that would have lesser effects on waters of the U.S. and not have any other significant adverse ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 98 environmental consequences. According to the Guidelines, documentation is needed that a sequence of avoidance, minimization, and compensation measures has been followed, in that order. The Guidelines also restrict permitting activities that violate water quality or toxic effluent4 standards, jeopardize the continued existence of listed species, violate marine sanctuary protections, or cause “significant degradation” to waters of the U.S. In addition, every permit from the USACE, even if not subject to the Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines, must meet general requirements. See 33 CFR 320.4. A discussion of the LEDPA determination, if any, for the document is included in the Wetlands and Other Waters section. State Requirements: Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act California’s Porter-Cologne Act, enacted in 1969, provides the legal basis for water quality regulation within California. This act requires a “Report of Waste Discharge” for any discharge of waste (liquid, solid, or gaseous) to land or surface waters that may impair beneficial uses for surface and/or groundwater of the state. It predates the CWA and regulates discharges to waters of the state. Waters of the state include more than just waters of the U.S., like groundwater and surface waters not considered waters of the U.S. Additionally, it prohibits discharges of “waste” as defined, and this definition is broader than the CWA definition of “pollutant.” Discharges under the Porter-Cologne Act are permitted by Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) and may be required even when the discharge is already permitted or exempt under the CWA. The State Water Resources Control Board and are responsible for establishing the water quality standards (objectives and beneficial uses) required by the CWA, and regulating discharges to ensure compliance with the water quality standards. Details about water quality standards in a project area are included in the applicable Basin Plan. In California, Regional Boards designate beneficial uses for all water body segments in their jurisdictions and then set criteria necessary to protect these uses. As a result, the water quality standards developed for particular water segments are based on the designated use and vary depending on that use. In addition, the identifies waters failing to meet standards for specific pollutants. These waters are then state-listed in accordance with CWA Section 303(d). If a state determines that waters are impaired for one or more constituents and the standards cannot be met through point source controls (NPDES permits or WDRs), the CWA requires the establishment of Total Maximum Daily Loads 4 The U.S. EPA defines “effluent” as “wastewater, treated or untreated, that flows out of a treatment plant, sewer, or industrial outfall.” ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 99 specify allowable pollutant loads from all sources (point, non- point, and natural) for a given watershed. State Water Resources Control Board and Regional Water Quality Control Boards The administers water rights, sets water pollution control policy, and issues water board orders on matters of statewide application, and oversees water quality functions throughout the state by approving Basin Plans, and NPDES permits. are responsible for protecting beneficial uses of water resources within their regional jurisdiction using planning, permitting, and enforcement authorities to meet this responsibility. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Program Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4) Section 402(p) of the CWA requires the issuance of NPDES permits for five categories of storm water discharges, including Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s). An MS4 is defined as “any conveyance or system of conveyances (roads with drainage systems, municipal streets, catch basins, curbs, gutters, ditches, human-made channels, and storm drains) owned or operated by a state, city, town, county, or other public body having jurisdiction over storm water, that is designed or used for collecting or conveying storm water.” The has identified the Department as an owner/operator of an MS4 under federal regulations. The Department’s MS4 permit covers all Department rights-of-way, properties, facilities, and activities in the state. The or the issues NPDES permits for five years, and permit requirements remain active until a new permit has been adopted. The Department’s MS4 Permit (Order No. 2012-0011-DWQ) was adopted on September 19, 2012 and became effective on July 1, 2013. The permit has three basic requirements: 1. The Department must comply with the requirements of the Construction General Permit (see below); 2. The Department must implement a year-round program in all parts of the State to effectively control storm water and non-storm water discharges; and 3. The Department storm water discharges must meet water quality standards through implementation of permanent and temporary (construction) Best Management Practices (BMPs), to the Maximum Extent Practicable, and other ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 100 measures as the determines to be necessary to meet the water quality standards. To comply with the permit, the Department developed the Statewide Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) to address storm water pollution controls related to highway planning, design, construction, and maintenance activities throughout California. The SWMP assigns responsibilities within the Department for implementing storm water management procedures and practices as well as training, public education and participation, monitoring and research, program evaluation, and reporting activities. The SWMP describes the minimum procedures and practices the Department uses to reduce pollutants in storm water and non-storm water discharges. It outlines procedures and responsibilities for protecting water quality, including the selection and implementation of Best Management Practices (BMPs). The proposed project will be programmed to follow the guidelines and procedures outlined in the latest SWMP to address storm water runoff. Construction General Permit Construction General Permit (Order No. 2009-009-DWQ), adopted on September 2, 2009, became effective on July 1, 2010. The permit regulates storm water discharges from construction sites that result in a Disturbed Soil Area (DSA) of one acre or greater, and/or are smaller sites that are part of a larger common plan of development. By law, all storm water discharges associated with construction activity where clearing, grading, and excavation result in soil disturbance of at least one acre must comply with the provisions of the General Construction Permit. Construction activity that results in soil disturbances of less than one acre is subject to this Construction General Permit if there is potential for significant water quality impairment resulting from the activity as determined by the Operators of regulated construction sites are required to develop storm water pollution prevention plans; to implement sediment, erosion, and pollution prevention control measures; and to obtain coverage under the Construction General Permit. The 2009 Construction General Permit separates projects into Risk Levels 1, 2, or 3. Risk levels are determined during the planning and design phases, and are based on potential erosion and transport to receiving waters. Requirements apply according to the Risk Level determined. For example, a Risk Level 3 (highest risk) project would require compulsory storm water runoff pH and turbidity monitoring, and before construction and after construction aquatic biological assessments during specified seasonal windows. For all projects subject to the permit, applicants are required to ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 101 develop and implement an effective Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan In accordance with the Department’s Standard Specifications, a Water Pollution Control Plan (WPCP) is necessary for projects with DSA less than one acre. Local Agency Construction Activity Permitting For local agency transportation projects off the State Highway System (SHS), the local agency (as owner of the land where the construction activity is occurring) is responsible for obtaining the NPDES permit if required and for signing certification statements (when necessary). Local agencies contact the appropriate to determine what permits are required for their construction activity. The local agency is also responsible for ensuring that all permit conditions are included in the construction contract and fully implemented in the field. Section 401 Permitting Under Section 401 of the CWA, any project requiring a federal license or permit that may result in a discharge to a water of the U.S. must obtain a 401 Certification, which certifies that the project will be in compliance with state water quality standards. The most common federal permits triggering 401 Certification are CWA Section 404 permits issued by the USACE. The 401 permit certifications are obtained from the appropriate dependent on the project location, and are required before the USACE issues a 404 permit. In some cases, the may have specific concerns with discharges associated with a project. As a result, the may issue a set of requirements known as Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) under the State Water Code (Porter-Cologne Act) that define activities, such as the inclusion of specific features, effluent limitations, monitoring, and plan submittals that are to be implemented for protecting or benefiting water quality. WDRs can be issued to address both permanent and temporary discharges of a project. Affected Environment Information in this section comes from the Storm Water Data Report (SWDR) prepared in November 2012, Water Quality Technical Memorandum (June 2013), and the water quality planning tool for the Santa Ana Region Basin Plan (1995, as amended through 2008). The city of Anaheim falls within the Jurisdiction of Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board Region The study area is a part of larger San Gabriel River Watershed, Brea Creek – Fullerton Creek subwatershed. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 102 Coyote Creek watershed encompasses 150 square miles, of which 41.3 square miles are in the northwest corner of Orange County. The Coyote Creek Watershed is highly urbanized with residential, commercial, and industrial uses. Coyote Creek, the principal drainage in the watershed, is a concrete-lined trapezoidal channel that flows from Riverside County to the San Gabriel River. The creek has three main tributaries, including North Fork Coyote Creek, Fullerton Creek, and Brea Creek. The project area tributary watershed totals 83 acres and is located just west of Brookhurst Street. It is bound by La Palma Street on the south and SR-91 to the north. Because there are no storm drains, the existing surface runoff from the project area and off-site watershed is collected along the street and flows north where it is intercepted by existing street inlets near SR-91. This storm drain ultimately discharges to the existing Houston Channel, which is operated by the County of Orange. Beneficial Uses Coyote Creek is the receiving water body for this study area and is therefore, a potentially affected water source. The Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board Basin Plan (Basin Plan) provides information regarding all receiving water bodies within the region. The 1995 Basin Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin (Region 8) was updated in February 2008. In compliance with Section 303 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) and the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, the Basin Plan lists the beneficial uses of the water bodies located within the proposed project area. According to the Basin Plan, Coyote Creek has the following categories of beneficial uses: Municipal (MUN), Contact Water Recreation (REC1), Non-Contact Water Recreation (REC2), Warm Freshwater Habitat (WARM), and Wildlife Habitat (WILD). Pollutants of Concern Coyote Creek and San Gabriel River, the receiving water bodies, are listed on the 2010 Section 303(d) list. Specifically, Coyote Creek is listed on the 2010 Section 303(d) list of impaired water bodies due to high concentrations of ammonia, copper, diazinon, bacteria, lead, hydrogen potential (pH), and toxicity. Total Maximum Daily Loads have been established for Coyote Creek for copper and lead. The San Gabriel River is also listed on the 2010 Section 303(d) list due to high concentrations of copper, dioxin, nickel, and dissolved oxygen. A TMDL was established for elevated copper concentrations. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 103 The NPDES Permit and Waste Discharge Requirements (Order No. R8-2009-0030) issued by the Santa Ana regulate discharges of urban runoff from municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4s) in the portion of Orange County within the Santa Ana jurisdiction. The MS4 permit stipulates requirements for new development and significant redevelopment, including specific selection and sizing criteria for treatment-control BMPs. The City of Anaheim is a Permittee under the General MS4 permit and therefore has legal authority for enforcing the terms of the permit in its jurisdiction. To implement the requirements of the NPDES permit, the Co-Permittees developed a 2003 Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP) that includes a New Development and Significant Redevelopment Program. This program provides a framework and a process for following the NPDES permit requirements and incorporates watershed protection/storm water quality management principles into the Co-Permittees’ General Plan process, environmental review process, and development permit approval process. The project is located within the North Basin Groundwater Protection Project area, a program established by the Orange County Water District to clean up volatile Organic Compounds that have been detected in the groundwater basin. Drainage Pattern The existing impervious area based on roadway, residential structures, and driveways was calculated at 78.58 percent within the project’s 7.4-acre disturbance limits. There are no storm drains along the subject segment of Brookhurst Street and thus runoff sheet-flows to the street. This results in flooding during storm conditions since the amount of runoff from the area greatly exceeds the capacity of the street. The City’s Master Drainage Plan indicates a required storm drain extension along this portion of Brookhurst Street. Storm water in the area generally flows from east to west through the residential neighborhoods on the east side of Brookhurst Street. The existing surface runoff from the project area and off-site watershed is collected along the street and flows north where it is intercepted by existing street inlets near SR-91. This storm drain ultimately discharges to the existing Houston Channel. Environmental Consequences Build Alternative (Locally Preferred Alternative) As discussed above, under existing conditions the storm water from the area sheet- flows to Brookhurst Street resulting in flooding. There are no storm drains within the project limits. Under the Build Alternative, widening and improvement of Brookhurst ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 104 Street will include changes to the storm drain system on Brookhurst Street. As part of the project, a new storm drain system (including storm drain lines ranging from 36 to 60 inches in diameter and sized to capture anticipated storm water flows), catch basins, and inlets would be constructed within Brookhurst Street to improve the interception of overland storm flows. As a result of the drainage, velocity of runoff and volume would increase beyond existing conditions; however, the direction of runoff would remain the same as it as it is under existing conditions. After project implementation, runoff would continue to flow to Houston Channel. Storm drain improvements would also result in a decrease in sediment loading. As discussed above, the project’s existing impervious area was calculated at 78.58 percent. The project would add one lane in each direction; demolish residential structures and driveways; and replace them with a greenbelt area and landscaped medians. These areas would function as drainage bioretention basins. The removal of the residential structures and driveways exceeds the addition of the impervious surfaces resulting from the roadway widening. Therefore, after project implementation and due to the incorporation of landscaping and other enhancements the impervious area would decrease by 1.09 percent to an estimated 77.49 percent. Beneficial Uses The project would result in a net benefit to water quality because of the removal of impervious surface, increased infiltration, and reduction in pollutant loading from airborne pollution collected on impervious surfaces. These benefits will occur without implementation of any water quality BMPs. As discussed above, the residential properties will be removed from the site and the remnant parcels would be converted to a linear greenbelt. The drought-tolerant landscaping that would be incorporated would act like drainage bioretention areas. The project would also provide landscaped medians that would include drought-tolerant and low maintenance plantings. After the project implementation, some areas would be converted to BMPs consisting of landscaped bioswales. Figure 11 depicts the conceptual locations for the water quality basins. The water quality basins, or bioswales, would assist in improving the existing urban runoff conditions since the off-site watershed tributary to the project is fully urbanized without any storm water treatment features. The available area for the proposed bioswales has the ability to provide water quality treatment for more area than just the street improvement footprint and thus, the BMPs were sized to treat water from the off-site tributaries as well. Therefore, the project would result in benefit to water quality. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 105 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 106 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 107 There would be no water quality impacts affecting beneficial uses because the project would enhance the drainage and water quality of the runoff from the area. In addition, BMPs would be implemented during the project’s construction and operational phases. These BMPs are discussed below. Due to the project nature and as a result of implementing these BMPs, no adverse impacts to beneficial uses are expected. Pollutants of Concern Runoff quality from roadways is highly variable depending on various factors, including climatic conditions; annual average daily traffic (AADT); roadway and shoulder material and conditions; surrounding land uses; and other factors. The pollutants of concern identified for roadway projects by the County of Orange Local Implementation Plan are: • Heavy metals; • Nutrients; • Pesticides; • Organic compounds, including petroleum hydrocarbons and oil and grease; • Sediment; • Trash and debris; and • Oxygen-demanding substances (pesticides and petroleum hydrocarbons). These pollutants of concern are already present in the project area, and the project would not result in addition of new pollutants to the project site. However, the project may result in incremental addition of these pollutants due to the potential increase in capacity and traffic resulting from widening of the last unimproved segment of Brookhurst Street. BMPs are proposed to be installed on the project site to trap and filter pollutants from the runoff. The project would include treatment BMPs including landscaped bioswales and pervious areas to enhance on-site drainage and bioretention along the east side of Brookhurst Street. Under existing conditions untreated runoff sheet-flows from the project to Houston Channel. Because the project would add landscaping, would decrease the amount of impervious surface, and would provide on-site BMPs, it would benefit water quality. Based on the California Department of Conservation published data, the depth to the historical shallowest occurrence of groundwater in the area is approximately 40 feet. Groundwater was also not encountered to a depth of 20 feet in any of the soil borings. Though the project is located within the North Basin Groundwater Protection Project, where there are known contaminants in the groundwater, impacts are not anticipated ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 108 due to the limited grading required for project construction. No dewatering of groundwater would be required. Should it be determined that dewatering is required, the dewatered effluent shall be trucked off-site and disposed of according to existing laws and regulations. Since the project does not anticipate any contact with the groundwater, there would be no impacts associated with exposure to the contaminants in the groundwater. However, to ensure the project does not contribute to contaminants in the groundwater, BMPs that would allow the run off to infiltrate into the water table would not be permitted. During project construction, there would be a potential increase in erosion of soil and sediment. The project would be subject to the requirements of the existing NPDES Permit (Order No. R8-2010-0062), which requires implementation of BMPs during project construction and operation in order to control/reduce the discharge of pollutants to the maximum extent practicable. During the project, construction BMPs will be implemented, consisting of a variety of soil stabilization and sediment-control techniques to limit soil erosion and to maintain high level of water quality. These BMPs may include but are not limited to temporary concrete washouts, stabilized construction gates, silt fences, sand bag barriers, gravel bag berms, and fiber rolls. Drainage Pattern As discussed above the proposed improvements on Brookhurst Street will have a beneficial effect on current water quality and drainage features. The proposed project will include landscaped bioswales and pervious areas to enhance on-site drainage and bioretention along the east side of Brookhurst Street. Specifically, linear greenbelts will be provided to serve as bioretention areas. Street flows will be diverted to these areas via breaks in the curb along Brookhurst Street, which will take storm flows from the street and reverse parkway culverts on Falmouth Avenue and Huntington Avenue, which will also convey flows to the greenbelts/bioretention areas. Small bridges will be constructed to allow the flows from Brookhurst Street to traverse under the proposed sidewalk. The greenbelts will feature swales that will drain in a north-south direction to drainage inlets at the end of each swale, which will be connected to the existing storm drain system in the vicinity. Inlets will be set above the adjacent grade to maximize the potential for retention and/or infiltration in the greenbelt swale areas. From the swales, the storm water will be routed into the existing storm drain system and ultimately drain into the Houston Channel. This ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 109 would treat the existing runoff before it enters the proposed storm drains along Brookhurst Street. As a result, beneficial impacts on water quality would occur. The Build Alternative would be subject to the requirements of the existing NPDES Permit (Order No. R8-2010-0062), which requires implementation of BMPs during project construction and operation in order to control/reduce the discharge of pollutants to the maximum extent practicable. During the project, construction BMPs will be implemented, consisting of a variety of soil stabilization and sediment-control techniques to limit soil erosion and to maintain high level of water quality. These BMPs will be identified and approved by Caltrans in its Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan Therefore, with the implementation of the construction and operation BMPs, it is not expected that the project would result in substantial degradation of water quality. No-Build Alternative Under the No-Build Alternative, no changes to the existing drainage patterns or flows will occur. Therefore, no impacts related to water quality and storm water runoff are expected other than those that presently occur. However, the No-Build Alternative would not provide the benefit of treating the first flush runoff from storm events and improving local drainage. Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures The proposed project would result in an increase in pervious surface area allowing additional water percolation through the soil, and therefore the project would not require water quality post project treatment BMPs. However, the following standard condition and minimization measure would apply to the project and would minimize potential water quality impacts. Standard Condition SC-6 The City of Anaheim shall prepare and implement construction site Best Management Practices (BMPs) in compliance with the provisions of the Construction General Permit (NPDES No. CAS000002 and NPDES Permit No. CAS000003 within Caltrans right-of-way), the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Permit (Water Quality Order 2009- 0030), the State Water Resources Control Board National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activity, and any subsequent permit as they relate to construction activities for the project. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 110 This will include submittal of Permit Registration Documents (PRDs) on the SMARTS System in order to obtain permit coverage, preparation, and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan and submission of a Notice of Construction Completion (NCC) to the SMARTS System upon completion of construction and stabilization of the project site. The will identify construction-related BMPs to control sediment, to stabilize soil, and to protect slopes. These BMPs may include but are not limited to temporary concrete washouts, stabilized construction gates, silt fences, sand bag barriers, gravel bag berms, fiber rolls. Minimization Measure WQ-1 The City of Anaheim shall ensure appropriate post construction drainage design. The post construction roadway drainage will be intercepted through specialized street inlets (weirs) which will discharge the runoff into the bioswales. The bioswales will be designed to up to a maximum flow depth of 0.5 ft. These will have enhanced permeable soils that extend several feet below the existing basin floor elevation. An impermeable linear will be installed below the amended soil to prevent additional infiltration because of the existing contaminated groundwater plume in the area. WQ-2 Should it be determined that dewatering is required, the City of Anaheim shall ensure that the dewatered effluent is trucked off-site and disposed of according to existing laws and regulations. 2.2.2. Geology/Soils/Seismic/Topography Regulatory Setting For geologic and topographic features, the key federal law is the Historic Sites Act of 1935, which establishes a national registry of natural landmarks and protects “outstanding examples of major geological features.” This section also discusses geology, soils, and seismic concerns as they relate to public safety and project design. Earthquakes are prime considerations in the design and retrofit of structures. The Caltrans Office of Earthquake Engineering is responsible for assessing the seismic hazard for Caltrans projects. Structures are designed using Caltrans Seismic Design Criteria (SDC). The SDC provides the minimum seismic requirements for highway bridges designed in California. A ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 111 bridge’s category and classification will determine its seismic performance level and which methods are used for estimating the seismic demands and structural capabilities. For more information, please see Caltrans’ Division of Engineering Services, Office of Earthquake Engineering, Seismic Design Criteria. Affected Environment Information in this section comes from the Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed Roadway Widening and Improvements, Brookhurst Street between West La Palma Avenue and E 91 Onramp, City of Anaheim, California, prepared in February 2012. Geologic Formations and Soils The study site is underlain by San Emigdio soil series. The San Emigdio series consists of very deep, well drained soils that formed in dominantly sedimentary alluvium. San Emigdio soils are on alluvial fans, floodplains, and in narrow valleys at elevations of 100 to 2,000 feet above mean sea level with slopes that are less than 15 percent. The soils formed in moderately coarse textured alluvium dominantly from sedimentary formations. The San Emigdio formation generally consists of fine sand, grassland, and formerly cultivated cover. Artificial fill associated with Brookhurst Street, surrounding streets, and Houston Channel is widespread throughout the project area. The cover fill consists of sandy silt, clayey silt, and silty clay. Soil in the study area has a relatively consistent soil profile. In the upper three to five feet, the soils include sandy silt and silty sand that was damp to moist. Below this layer and extending to about eight feet below ground surface, the soils typically consist of silty sand that was damp to moist and medium dense. From a depth of 8 feet to about 18 feet, the soils typically consist of poorly graded sands that are damp to moist and medium dense to dense. Some layers of silty sand and sandy silt are also present in this zone. From 18 feet to 21 feet, the soils became finer grained and consist of sandy silts, clayey silts, and silty clays. On-site soils are highly corrosive to metals. As indicated above, the depth to the historical shallowest occurrence of groundwater in the area is approximately 40 feet. Groundwater was also not encountered to a depth of 20 feet in any of the soil borings. Liquefaction and Expansive Soils The study area is gently sloping and developed; both of these characteristics limit the potential for landslides. According to the City of Anaheim General Plan’s Seismic and Geologic Hazards Map (Figure S-3), the site is located within an area identified ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 112 to have a potential for liquefaction. The sands typically have a low expansion potential, however the silts and local clays could have medium to high expansion potential. The expansion potential of the on-site fills is currently unknown. Seismicity Based on the Generalized Geologic Map (Figure S-2) in the City of Anaheim General Plan’s Safety Element (May 2004), the site is not located within an area that is subject to severe seismic-related effects. There are no known faults traversing the project site, nor is it located within an Alquist-Priolo Fault Zone. The closest potentially active faults are the Norwalk Fault, located to the north and the El Modeno Fault located to the east of the project site. The site would potentially be subject to seismic ground shaking due to future earthquakes on regionally active faults. Environmental Consequences Build Alternative (Locally Preferred Alternative) Geologic Formations and Soils The project would not result in substantial topographical modifications. The project is located in an urban built out environment and the topography of the project is relatively flat. As with all grading activities, there would be an increased potential for erosion during construction; however, once construction is completed and the site is revegetated, increased erosion potential would not be a concern. All ground-disturbing activities would occur within the 10 feet below ground and thus do not have a potential to disrupt native soils which are located below artificial fill. These soils were placed on the site during the construction of Brookhurst Street. Liquefaction and Expansive Soils The City of Anaheim General Plan’s Safety Element (May 2004) identifies that the Project site is underlain by alluvium. Due to the site’s relatively flat topography and historically developed nature as an existing roadway, the risk of hazard associated with unstable or expansive soils, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse would not be significant. Furthermore, all construction activities would be performed pursuant to the current California Building Code. Seismicity There are no known active or potentially active faults crossing the project site, and the site is not within a designated Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. However, ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 113 the project site, as with Southern California in its entirety, is subject to the adverse effects of seismic activity emanating from active faults. The principal geological constraint for the project site is the potential for ground shaking and ground motion given the proximity of the project site to several active and potentially active faults. The improved roadway would be exposed to existing geologic and seismic conditions. This potential would be the same as it currently is under existing conditions. Erosion/Topsoils Since the area is relatively flat and developed, construction of the project is not anticipated to result in substantial erosion or loss of topsoil. Furthermore, construction activities would be performed pursuant to the current NPDES permit requirements, which limit sediment-laden runoff from the project site. Additionally, the project would comply with standard building practices as set forth in the 2010 California Building Code. No-Build Alternative Under the No-Build Alternative, no ground disturbance is planned. Thus, no impacts related to geology and seismicity are expected. Brookhurst Street and surrounding areas would be subject to the same geologic and seismic characteristics as they are under current conditions. Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures No Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures for geology, soils, seismic, and topography are required. However, implementation of water quality related measures SC-6 and WQ-1 as prescribed in Section 2.2.1, Water Quality, would minimize potential erosion impacts while enhancing water quality. 2.2.3. Hazardous Waste/Materials Regulatory Setting Hazardous materials including hazardous substances and wastes are regulated by many federal laws. Statutes govern the generation, treatment, storage and disposal of hazardous materials, substances, and waste, and the investigation and mitigation of waste releases, air and water quality, human health, and land use. The primary federal laws regulating hazardous wastes/materials are the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA). The ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 114 purpose of CERCLA, often referred to as “Superfund,” is to identify and clean up abandoned contaminated sites so that public health and welfare are not compromised. RCRA provides for “cradle to grave” regulation of hazardous waste generated by operating entities. Other federal laws include: • Community Environmental Response Facilitation Act (CERFA) of 1992 • Clean Water Act • Clean Air Act • Safe Drinking Water Act • Occupational Safety & Health Act (OSHA) • Atomic Energy Act • Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) • Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) Section 121(d) of CERCLA requires that remedial action plans include consideration of more stringent state environmental “Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements” (ARARs). The 1990 National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) also requires compliance with ARARs during remedial actions and during removal actions to the extent practicable. As a result, state laws pertaining to hazardous waste management and clean up of contamination are also pertinent. In addition to the acts listed above, Executive Order (EO) 12088, Federal Compliance with Pollution Control Standards, mandates that necessary actions be taken to prevent and control environmental pollution when federal activities or federal facilities are involved. Worker and public health and safety are key issues when addressing hazardous materials that may affect human health and the environment. Proper management and disposal of hazardous material is vital if it is found, disturbed, or generated during project construction. Affected Environment Information in this section comes from the Phase 1 Initial Site Assessment (ISA) prepared in May 2013. The study was done in conformance with the scope and limitations of American Standards for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Designation E1527-05. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 115 The purpose of the Phase I ISA was to assess the presence or likely presence of an existing, historical, or threatened release of any hazardous substances or petroleum products into structures, soil, and/or groundwater beneath the project site to the extent practical “recognized environmental conditions”). The Phase I ISA included a review of environmental regulatory agency database records; standard historical sources (historical topographic maps and aerial photographs, city directories, Sanborn Maps, and oil and gas well information); the physical setting sources; and other documents. As part of the Phase I evaluations, known electronic database listings were reviewed for possible hazardous waste generating establishments in the vicinity of the site and for adjacent sites or facilities with known environmental concerns. Aerial photographs of the project site dating from 1938 to 2005 were reviewed to identify historical land uses and surface conditions. Topographic maps from 1898 to 1981 were also reviewed. A project site reconnaissance was performed on July 6, 2012, to physically observe the project site and adjoining properties for conditions indicating a potential recognized environmental concern. Concerns would include but not be linked to any evidence of potential contamination, distressed vegetation, petroleum-hydrocarbon staining, waste drums, illegal dumping, or improper waste storage and/or handling. On-Site Land Uses Based on the historical documents reviewed (historical topographic maps and aerial photographs, city directories, Sanborn Maps, and oil and gas well information), the land use history of the site includes undeveloped vacant land and/or agricultural usage since at least 1938. A review of aerial photographs indicates the project site and vicinity were orchards, most likely citrus trees, from at least 1938 to the early 1960s. Between 1953 and 1968, Brookhurst Street was constructed in its existing configuration and adjoining residential neighborhoods. Site Conditions Legacy Pesticides Legacy pesticides may be present in the shallow subsurface soil because pesticides and other agricultural chemicals were likely used at the site in the past. Legacy pesticides include those that are no longer in use but persist in the environment. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 116 Because of this, legacy pesticides are considered a Non-Standard ASTM Recognized Environmental Condition (REC). Aerially Deposited Lead The presence of aerially deposited lead (ADL) is a greater issue along older highways that would have been in use when lead was placed in gasoline. This is especially an issue for those roadways that had high traffic volumes. Brookhurst Street was constructed before the use of lead in gasoline was regulated and thus there is a higher likelihood that ADL is present in soils on the site. ADL present on the project site would be considered a Non-Standard ASTM REC. Lead Based Paint Brookhurst Street has yellow traffic striping and pavement markings (paint, thermoplastic, permanent tape, and temporary tape) within the segment between SR- 91 and I-5. Lead chromate was commonly used in yellow traffic paint and yellow thermoplastic until 1996 and 2004, respectively. Therefore, lead and chromium are most likely present in the paint along Brookhurst Street. The structures adjacent to the project site most likely contain at least some lead based paint (LBP). LBP present on the site would be considered a Non-Standard ASTM REC. Asbestos-Containing Materials Asbestos, a natural fiber used in the manufacturing of a number of different buildings materials, has been identified as a human carcinogen. Most friable easily broken or crushed) asbestos-containing materials (ACMs) were banned in building materials by 1978. By 1989, most major manufacturers had voluntarily removed nonfriable ACMs flooring, roofing, and mastics/sealants) from the market. These materials, however, were not banned completely. The presumed asbestos containing materials (PACM) (as identified in the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) 1910 regulations) are likely present in structures located along Brookhurst Street since these were constructed in the early 1960s before the use of asbestos was regulated. ACM present on the site would be considered a Non-Standard ASTM REC. Biphenyls The project site was also examined for its potential to contain biphenyls (PCBs). During the field survey, one pole-mounted transformer was observed east of 1242 and 1246 North Brookhurst Street (No. 50-37704). To verify the potential for containing PCBs, a Public Utilities Records Request was submitted ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 117 to the City of Anaheim. According to the City of Anaheim, all known PCB- contaminated transformers were removed from their electric system. PCB present on the site would be considered a Non-Standard ASTM REC. Database Search Results Table 2.14 presents the results of the government search conducted for the Phase I ISA to determine the presence or absence of significant hazardous materials or conditions. There were nine database listings reported for properties adjacent to or upgradient of and within a ¼-mile of the site. As described in Table 2.14, five of these database listings were identified for the same site: 2175 West La Palma Avenue. Based on information provided in the Phase I ISA, properties in the vicinity of the project site have been historically included on various government agency lists of hazardous materials; however, none of the identified property database listings is expected to impact the site. With the exception of the “Circle Seals Control, Technetics Div.” facility located adjacent to the southwestern portion of the project site at 1111 North Brookhurst Street (current site of the Sa-Rang Community Church), there are no open cases requiring investigation or remediation. Subsurface investigations reportedly began at the facility in 1987 with the assessment of three underground storage tanks (USTs). Subsequent investigations indicated that subsurface soil has been contaminated by petroleum hydrocarbons and halogenated volatile organic compounds (HVOCs). In addition, the groundwater had been impacted by HVOCs, primarily trichloroethene (TCE). Remediation systems (including ten groundwater/vapor extraction wells, two air sparge wells, nine air sparge/soil vapor extraction dual completion wells, and four treated water injection wells) were operated between 1999 and 2004. The property is undergoing long-term post-remediation monitoring for contaminated groundwater. Reported groundwater may be flowing to the northwest, therefore the project site is downgradient to the property under remediation. The depth of groundwater at the site is approximately 40 feet below ground surface (bgs). ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 118 Table 2.14 Government Database Listings Listing Name Address Database Comments Status Circle Seal Controls Technetics Div. 1111 N Brookhurst St RCRA-SQG, FINDS, LUST, CA FID UST, UST, HIST UST, SWEEPS UST, HAZNET Listed as a cleanup site with a leak discovered during tank testing. The site has undergone groundwater extraction/reinjection which was discontinued in 2004 due to loss of access. Methane sparging/vapor extraction activities ceased in June 2006. Active long-term post remediation monitoring. Tune Up & Lube 1107 N Brookhurst St RCRA-SQG, FINDS, HIST CORTESE, LUST HAZNET Gasoline contaminated soil discovered in 1994 at 15 feet bgs in an area formerly occupied by 4 underground storage tanks. 2 additional borings were drilled up to 35 feet bgs and no additional contamination was encountered. Clean up case closed July 1995. Chevron #93558 2175 W La Palma Ave LUST, HIST Groundwater was reportedly contaminated with gasoline. Vapor extraction performed between 1994 and 1995 and again in 1996. Confirmation samples indicated the soil was “relatively” clean. Tank site closed in 1999. Remediation completed; tank site closed in November 1999. HIST UST 3 underground storage tanks were installed in 1974. No violations or releases reported. HIST CORTESE, LUST Gasoline contamination discovered. Groundwater was reported to be contaminated and facility was remediated with vapor extraction. Case Closed issued November 1999. UST Listed underground storage tank location. No violations or releases reported. CA FID UST, SWEEPS UST, HAZNET Listed as an active underground storage tank location. 6 underground storage tanks identified. Active Facility – No violations or releases reported. Marshall Elementary School 2066 W Falmouth Ave SCH, ENVIROSTOR Listed as a school investigation due to past use of agriculture row crops. No Further Action issued November 2011. Martin Luther Hospital 1830 Romneya Dr HIST CORTESE, LUST Diesel-contaminated soil discovered in 1995. Case Closed issued March 1996. RCRA-SQG: Resource Conservation and Recovery Act- Small Quantity Generator; FINDS: Facility Index System; LUST: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Incident Report; CA FID UST: Facility Inventory Database Underground Storage Tank List; UST: Underground Storage Tank Database; HIST UST: Historical Underground Storage Tank Registered Database; SWEEPS UST: Statewide Environmental Evaluation and Planning System Underground Storage Tank List; HAZNET: Department of Toxic Substances Control Hazardous Waste Data; HIST CORTESE: Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites; bgs: below ground surface; SCH: California Department of Toxic Substances Control Database; ENVIROSTOR: Brownfields and Environmental Restoration Program. Source: Initial Site Assessment 2013. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 119 During the field observations, four large black plastic aboveground storage tanks (ASTs) were identified at 1204 North Brookhurst Street, a portion of which is located within the project site. These tanks were not listed on any of the agency databases provided by the Environmental Data Resources (EDR) report, (an appendix of the ISA) and the use and/or contents of these tanks have not been ascertained. The presence or historical use of septic systems and/or cesspools at 1204 and 1313 North Brookhurst Street could not be verified. Radon Radon is a radioactive gas that has been identified as a human carcinogen. Radon gas is typically associated with fine-grained rock and soil, and results from the radioactive decay of radium. Sections 307 and 309 of the indoor Radon Abatement Act of 1988 (IRAA) directed the U.S. EPA to list and identify areas of the U.S. with the potential for elevated indoor radon levels. Based on such factors as indoor radon measurements, geology, aerial radioactivity, and soil permeability, the U.S EPA has identified Orange County as Zone 3 low potential for radon gas). This project does not involve the construction of any indoor facilities. Therefore, radon gas would not be a consideration for this project. Limitations No access to individual properties and/or residences in the project right-of-way was provided, and the facilities were only inspected from the property boundaries. Fences, vegetation, buildings limited the observations on some of these properties. In addition, no direct contact with property owners was being made as part of the Phase I ISA. Also, no title or judicial records review for Environmental Liens or Activity and Use Limitations was conducted for any parcel along Brookhurst Street. In evaluating potential on-site impacts from off-site sources, those off-site facilities not located adjacent to or within ¼ mile upgradient of the subject project are not considered to represent a substantial concern to the project. This interpretation is based on the assumption that a hazardous material release to the subsurface generally does not migrate laterally within the unsaturated soil for a significant distance, although a hazardous material can migrate in the groundwater in a generally downgradient direction. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 120 Environmental Consequences Build Alternative (Locally Preferred Alternative) Based on the finding of the ISA, there is an evidence of recognized environmental conditions under and/or on the project site. The first recognized environmental condition would be the groundwater contamination from the former Circle Seal facility. However, this REC will likely not be further impacted by the project. While groundwater underlying the project site may be contaminated by HVOCs from the former Circle Seal Control facility, based on the water quality and hydrology studies prepared for the project site, the depth of groundwater is approximately 40 feet bgs. The proposed improvements would not exceed ten feet bgs and would occur at the depth of the artificial fill soils only. Therefore, project ground-disturbing activities are not anticipated to encounter contaminated groundwater associated with the former Circle Seal Control facility. No right-of-way would be acquired from this property. No adverse effects are expected to occur. Use and Transport of Hazardous Materials The project site is located along Brookhurst Street between the SR-91 and I-5. Brookhurst Street is a major arterial identified in the Orange County MPAH and provides connection between SR-91 and I-5. As a major designated arterial, Brookhurst Street has the potential to be used to transport hazardous materials. However, the proposed project would not increase the frequency of hazardous materials transport, nor would it directly result in the release of hazardous materials. There would be no greater risk of an accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances than what exists under current conditions. Therefore, project impacts related to use and transportation of hazardous materials would not be considered adverse. The ground-disturbance and demolition activities for the project may generate hazardous wastes as discussed below in the form of ADL, LBP, ACM, pesticides, and radon, and construction may involve hazardous materials use. All activities would be conducted in compliance with applicable regulations pertaining to the handling, transport, and disposal of hazardous materials. Aerially Deposited Lead ADL was most likely discharged from vehicle exhaust and deposited on the soil surface adjacent to Brookhurst Street. However, the area surrounding the roadway ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 121 was graded in the early 1960s and single-family homes were constructed. It cannot be reasonably ascertained how the grading was performed; however, grading activities most likely altered the distribution of any ADL that may have been present in the project site. However, ADL may still be present in the shallow subsurface soil. Lead Based Paint Construction of the project would require removal of yellow paint on Brookhurst Street and demolition of residential structures. Thus, if construction activities result in the removal of yellow traffic striping, handling these materials should be made in accordance with the Caltrans document entitled Guidelines for Selecting Materials and Standard Special Provisions for Traffic Striping and Pavement Markings dated August 2006. Because of the age of the residential structures and the roadway, it is likely that these structures and roadway contain LBP. Since the structures on the project site most likely contain at least some LBP, testing these structures should be made prior to demolition and handling of LBP in accordance with all applicable local, State and federal regulations. Asbestos-Containing Materials The scope of the ISA did not include testing for ACMs. The project would require demolition of residential structures which include thermal system insulation and surfacing materials. These materials have high likelihood of containing friable asbestos. In addition, structural elements vinyl floor tiles, asphalt floor tiles, mastic) may include asbestos and thus need to be handled accordingly. Because the project would involve demolition of structures and relocation of some utility lines, there is some potential for ACM exposure. An O&M has to be prepared by the City of Anaheim and/or its consultant to address ACM prior to any demolitions within the project study area. Pesticides Because agriculture production occurred on site for many years, pesticides and other agricultural chemicals may be present in subsurface soils. The project would involve ground-disturbing activities that would have a potential to disrupt soils containing pesticides from previous agriculture use. Radon Orange County has been identified to have a low potential for radon exposure. Because of this, presence of radon is not a consideration for this project. No adverse effects would occur. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 122 No-Build Alternative Under the No-Build Alternative, no changes to the existing land uses are proposed. Thus, no change in hazardous materials use or hazardous waste generation will occur. Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures The City of Anaheim and/or its consultant will be responsible for preparing, developing, and implementing the Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures. The following mitigation measures will reduce the potential adverse impacts of the Build Alternative as they relate to hazardous waste/materials: HZ-1 Phase II Soil Sampling. Prior to property acquisition and/or construction, the City of Anaheim shall develop a soil sampling program to screen the soil for aerially deposited lead (ADL), legacy pesticides, and other potential chemicals of concern on the property proposed for acquisition. For construction purposes, the zone of impact considered for this sampling is anticipated to be limited to possible earth excavation within the area of proposed right-of-way construction. However, if needed, the zone of impact considered for sampling may extend beyond the depth of excavation. This soil sampling should assess potential chemicals of concern for constituents that are likely to be present in the subsurface. Chemicals of concern include, but are not limited to lead, pesticides, and arsenic (associated with pesticide use). HZ-2 Soil Mitigation Plan. The construction contractor shall prepare a soil mitigation plan so that soil excavation can be managed properly. The soil mitigation plan will describe a plan in the event that hazardous materials are discovered during construction in unpaved areas adjacent to the roadway, so that precautions can be taken to ensure that the materials are properly removed and so that workers are protected from hazardous materials. If contaminated soil is encountered, the delineation, removal, and disposal of contaminated soils will be conducted in accordance with local, State, and federal requirements. The soil mitigation plan will establish soil reuse criteria, establish a sampling plan for stockpiled materials; describe the disposition of materials that do not satisfy the reuse criteria; and specify guidelines for imported material. HZ-3 Health and Safety Plan. The City of Anaheim shall ensure that the construction contractor prepares the site specific health and safety plan ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 123 prior to the initiation of construction activities in order to reduce potential health and safety hazards to workers in the event unknown hazards are encountered during excavation activities. The health and safety plan will include a hazard awareness program for persons with potential exposure to the chemicals of concern. A health and safety plan will include a description of field safety procedures and personal protection monitoring requirements. HZ-4 Construction Observation/Monitoring. During project construction, the construction contractor shall implement a hazardous materials and petroleum products monitoring, mitigation and cleanup program. The program will include observations during any future development activities for features of concern or areas of possible contamination. Further investigation and analysis may be necessary, should such materials be encountered. If contamination is encountered during excavation activities, construction work will cease and the City must notify the local enforcement agency. HZ-5 If any of the structures are found to contain asbestos fibers, the construction contractor shall conduct demolition in accordance with the remediation and mitigation procedures established by federal, State, and local standards including federal and California Occupational Safety Hazard Administration (OSHA), and Air Quality Management District (AQMD) regulations for the excavation, removal, and proper disposal of asbestos containing materials (South Coast Air Quality Management District [SCAQMD] Regulation X − National Emission Standards For Hazardous Air Pollutants, Subpart M – National Emission Standards For Asbestos). The material shall be disposed of at a certified asbestos landfill. HZ-6 The construction contractor shall conduct an asbestos inspection in conformance with established protocols (as outlined in the Code of Federal Regulations (Title 40, Section763) or other applicable State or local regulations and shall conduct sampling of suspect materials and limited visual observations of building materials to identify the possible presence of presumed asbestos-containing materials (PACM). OSHA’s definition of PACM is limited to thermal system insulation and surfacing materials present in buildings constructed before 1981. Flooring material vinyl floor tiles, asphalt floor tiles, mastic) are not considered ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 124 PACM, but OSHA nonetheless requires that flooring material present in buildings constructed before 1981 be treated similarly to PACM. 2.2.4. Air Quality Regulatory Setting The Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA), as amended, is the primary federal law that governs air quality while the California Clean Air Act is its companion state law. These laws, and related regulations by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) and California Air Resources Board (ARB), set standards for the concentration of pollutants that can be in the air. At the federal level, these standards are called National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). NAAQS and state ambient air quality standards have been established for six transportation-related criteria pollutants that have been linked to potential health concerns: carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), ozone (O3), particulate matter (PM), which is broken down for regulatory purposes into particles of 10 micrometers or smaller (PM10) and particles of 2.5 micrometers and smaller (PM2.5), and sulfur dioxide (SO2). In addition, national and state standards exist for lead (Pb), and state standards exist for visibility reducing particles, sulfates, hydrogen sulfide (H2S), and vinyl chloride. The NAAQS and state standards are set at levels that protect public health with a margin of safety, and are subject to periodic review and revision. Both state and federal regulatory schemes also cover toxic air contaminants (air toxics); some criteria pollutants are also air toxics or may include certain air toxics in their general definition. Federal air quality standards and regulations provide the basic scheme for project- level air quality analysis under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). In addition to this environmental analysis, a parallel “Conformity” requirement under the FCAA also applies. Conformity The conformity requirement is based on Federal Clean Air Act Section 176(c), which prohibits the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) and other federal agencies from funding, authorizing, or approving plans, programs, or projects that do not conform to State Implementation Plan (SIP) for attaining the NAAQS. “Transportation Conformity” applies to highway and transit projects and takes place on two levels: the regional—or planning and programming—level and the project level. The proposed project must conform at both levels to be approved. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 125 Conformity requirements apply only in nonattainment and “maintenance” (former nonattainment) areas for the NAAQS, and only for the specific NAAQS that are or were violated. U.S. EPA regulations at 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 93 govern the conformity process. Conformity requirements do not apply in unclassifiable/attainment areas for NAAQS and do not apply at all for state standards regardless of the status of the area. Regional conformity is concerned with how well the regional transportation system supports plans for attaining the NAAQS for carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), ozone (O3), particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5), and in some areas (although not in California), sulfur dioxide (SO2). California has nonattainment or maintenance areas for all of these transportation-related “criteria pollutants” except SO2, and also has a nonattainment area for lead (Pb); however, lead is not currently required by the FCAA to be covered in transportation conformity analysis. Regional conformity is based on emission analysis of Regional Transportation Plans (FTIPs) and Federal Transportation Improvement Programs (FTIPs) that include all transportation projects planned for a region over a period of at least 20 years for the RTP, and 4 years for the FTIP. RTP and FTIP conformity uses travel demand and emission models to determine whether or not the implementation of those projects would conform to emission budgets or other tests at various analysis years showing that requirements of the Clean Air Act and the SIP are met. If the conformity analysis is successful, the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and Federal Transit Administration (FTA), make determinations that the RTP and FTIP are in conformity with the SIP for achieving the goals of the Clean Air Act. Otherwise, the projects in the RTP and/or FTIP must be modified until conformity is attained. If the design concept, scope, and “open-to- traffic” schedule of a proposed transportation project are the same as described in the RTP and FTIP, then the proposed project meets regional conformity requirements for purposes of project-level analysis. Conformity analysis at the project-level includes verification that the project is included in the regional conformity analysis and a “hot-spot” analysis if an area is “nonattainment” or “maintenance” for carbon monoxide (CO) and/or particulate matter (PM10 or PM2.5). A region is “nonattainment” if one or more of the monitoring stations in the region measures a violation of the relevant standard and the U.S. EPA officially designates the area nonattainment. Areas that were previously designated as nonattainment areas but subsequently meet the standard may be officially redesignated to attainment by the U.S. EPA, and are then called ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 126 “maintenance” areas. “Hot-spot” analysis is essentially the same, for technical purposes, as CO or particulate matter analysis performed for NEPA purposes. Conformity does include some specific procedural and documentation standards for projects that require a hot-spot analysis. In general, projects must not cause the “hot- spot”-related standard to be violated, and must not cause any increase in the number and severity of violations in nonattainment areas. If a known CO or particulate matter violation is located in the project vicinity, the project must include measures to reduce or eliminate the existing violation(s) as well. Affected Environment Information in this section comes from the Brookhurst Street Improvement Project From SR-91 to I-5 Air Quality Technical Report prepared in September 2013. Climate and Meteorology The project site is located in the Southern California Air Basin, which covers an area of approximately 6,000 square miles and is bound on the west by the Pacific Ocean; on the north and east by the San Gabriel, San Bernardino, and San Jacinto Mountains; and on the south by the San Diego County line. The climate around the project site, as with all of southern California, is controlled largely by the strength and position of the subtropical high pressure cell over the Pacific Ocean. The climate is characterized by moderate temperatures and comfortable humidity. Between the periods of dominant airflow, periods of air stagnation may occur, both in the morning and evening hours. 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. Regional Attainment Based on monitored air pollutant concentrations, the U.S. EPA and ARB designate an area’s status in attaining the NAAQS and California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS), respectively, for the criteria pollutants. Table 2.15 includes the NAAQS, CAAQS, and the attainment status in the South Coast Air Basin (SoCAB) for the criteria pollutants. The nonattainment and maintenance area boundaries for the pollutants listed in Table 2.15 are the boundaries of the SoCAB, which consists of Orange County and the non-desert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino counties. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 127 Table 2.15 State and Federal Criteria Air Pollutant Standards, Effects, and Sources Pollutant Averaging Time State8 Standard Federal8 Standard Principal Health and Atmospheric Effects Typical Sources Attainment Status Ozone (O3) 1 hour 8 hours 0.09 ppm 0.070 ppm – –4 0.075 ppm (4th highest in 3 years) High concentrations irritate lungs. Long-term exposure may cause lung tissue damage and cancer. Long-term exposure damages plant materials and reduces crop productivity. Precursor organic compounds include many known toxic air contaminants. Biogenic VOCs may also contribute. Low-altitude ozone is almost entirely formed from ROG or VOC and NOx in the presence of sunlight and heat. Common precursor emitters include motor vehicles and other internal combustion engines, solvent evaporation, boilers, furnaces, and industrial processes. Federal: 8-hour: Extreme Nonattainment State: Nonattainment Carbon Monoxide (CO) 1 hour 8 hours 8 hours (Lake Tahoe) 20 ppm 9.0 ppm1 6 ppm 35 ppm 9 ppm – CO interferes with the transfer of oxygen to the blood and deprives sensitive tissues of oxygen. CO also is a minor precursor for photochemical O3. Colorless, odorless. Combustion sources, especially gasoline- powered engines and motor vehicles. CO is the traditional signature pollutant for on-road mobile sources at the local and neighborhood scale. Federal: Maintenance State: Attainment Respirable Particulate Matter (PM10)2 24 hours Annual 50 μg/m3 20 μg/m3 150 μg/m3 –2 (expected number of days above standard < or equal to 1) Irritates eyes and respiratory tract. Decreases lung capacity. Associated with increased cancer and mortality. Contributes to haze and reduced visibility. Includes some toxic air contaminants. Many aerosol and solid compounds are part of PM10. Dust- and fume- producing industrial and agricultural operations; combustion smoke and vehicle exhaust; atmospheric chemical reactions; construction and other dust- producing activities; unpaved road dust and re-entrained paved road dust; natural sources. Federal: Maintenance11 State: Nonattainment Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5)2 24 hours Annual 24 hours (conformity process5) Secondary Standard (annual; also for conformity process5) – 12 μg/m3 – 35 μg/m3 12.0 μg/m3 65 μg/m3 15 μg/m3 (98th percentile over 3 years) Increases respiratory disease, lung damage, cancer, and premature death. Reduces visibility and produces surface soiling. Most diesel exhaust particulate matter—a toxic air contaminant—is in the PM2.5 size range. Many toxic and aerosol and solid compounds are part of PM2.5. Combustion including motor vehicles, other mobile sources, and industrial activities; residential and agricultural burning; also formed through atmospheric chemical and photochemical reactions involving other pollutants including NOx, sulfur oxides (SOx), ammonia, and ROG. Federal: Nonattainment State: Nonattainment Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) 1 hour Annual 0.18 ppm 0.030 ppm 0.100 ppm6 (98th percentile over 3 years) 0.053 ppm Irritating to eyes and respiratory tract. Colors atmosphere reddish- brown. Contributes to acid rain and nitrate contamination in storm water. Part of the “NOx” group of O3 precursors. Motor vehicles and other mobile or portable engines; especially diesel: refineries; industrial operations. Federal: Unclassifiable/ Attainment State: Nonattainment ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 128 Table 2.15 State and Federal Criteria Air Pollutant Standards, Effects, and Sources Pollutant Averaging Time State8 Standard Federal8 Standard Principal Health and Atmospheric Effects Typical Sources Attainment Status Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) 1 hour 3 hours 24 hours 0.25 ppm – 0.04 ppm – 0.075 ppb7 (99th percentile over 3 years) 0.5 ppm9 Irritates respiratory tract; injures lung tissue. Can yellow plant leaves. Destructive to marble, iron, steel. Contributes to acid rain. Limits visibility. Fuel combustion (especially coal and high-sulfur oil), chemical plants, sulfur recovery plants, metal processing; some natural sources like active volcanoes. Limited contribution possible from heavy- duty diesel vehicles if ultra-low sulfur fuel not used. Federal: Attainment State: Attainment Lead (Pb)3 Rolling 3-month average 1.5 μg/m3 – – – 0.15 μg/m3 10 Disturbs gastrointestinal system. Causes anemia, kidney disease, and neuromuscular and neurological dysfunction. Also a toxic air contaminant and water pollutant. Lead-based industrial processes like battery production and smelters. Lead paint, leaded gasoline. Aerially deposited lead from older gasoline use may exist in soils along major roads. Federal: Nonattainment (Los Angeles County) Attainment (remainder of SoCAB) State: Nonattainment (Los Angeles County) Attainment (remainder of SoCAB) Sulfate 24 hours 25 μg/m3 – Premature mortality and respiratory effects. Contributes to acid rain. Some toxic air contaminants attach to sulfate aerosol particles. Industrial processes, refineries and oil fields, mines, natural sources like volcanic areas, salt- covered dry lakes, and large sulfide rock areas. State Only: Attainment Hydrogen Sulfide (H2S) 1 hour 0.03 ppm – Colorless, flammable, poisonous. Respiratory irritant. Neurological damage and premature death. Headache, nausea. Strong odor. Industrial processes such as: refineries and oil fields, asphalt plants, livestock operations, sewage treatment plants, and mines. Some natural sources like volcanic areas and hot springs. State Only: Unclassified Visibility Reducing Particles (VRP) 8 hours Visibility of 10 miles or more (Tahoe: 30 miles) at relative humidity less than 70% – Reduces visibility. Produces haze. NOTE: not directly related to the Regional Haze program under the Federal Clean Air Act, which is oriented primarily toward visibility issues in National Parks and other “Class I” areas. However, some issues and measurement methods are similar. See particulate matter, above. Maybe related more to aerosols than to solid particles. State Only: Unclassified ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 129 Table 2.15 State and Federal Criteria Air Pollutant Standards, Effects, and Sources Pollutant Averaging Time State8 Standard Federal8 Standard Principal Health and Atmospheric Effects Typical Sources Attainment Status Vinyl Chloride3 24 hours 0.01 ppm – Neurological effects, liver damage, cancer. Also considered a toxic air contaminant. Industrial processes State Only: Unclassified Notes: ppm = parts per million; μg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter; ppb=parts per billion (thousand million) O3: ozone; ppm; parts per million; VOC: volatile organic compounds; ROG: reactive organic gases; NOx: nitrogenoxides; CO: carbon monoxide; PM10: inhalable particulate matter with a diameter of 10 microns or less; μg/m3: micrograms per cubic meter; PM2.5: fine particulate matter with a diameter of 2.5 microns or less; SOx: sulfur oxides; NO2: nitrogen dioxide; SO2: sulfur dioxide; Pb: lead; SoCAB: South Coast Air Basin; H2S: hydrogen sulfide; VRP: visibility reducing particles; ppb: parts per billion (thousand million). 1 Rounding to an integer value is not allowed for the State 8-hour CO standard. A violation occurs at or above 9.05 ppm. 2 Annual PM10 NAAQS revoked October 2006, and 50 μg/m3 for a 24-hour period. The PM2.5 NAAQS tightened October 2006 but was 65 μg/m3. Annual PM2.5 NAAQS tightened from 15 μg/m3 to 12 μg/m3 in December 2012 and the secondary annual standard is set at 15 μg/m3. 3 The ARB has identified vinyl chloride and the particulate matter fraction of diesel exhaust as toxic air contaminants. Diesel exhaust particulate matter is part of PM10 and, in larger proportion, PM2.5. Both the ARB and U.S. EPA have identified lead and various organic compounds that are precursors to O3 and PM2.5 as toxic air contaminants. There are no exposure criteria for adverse health effect due to toxic air contaminants, and control requirements may apply at ambient concentrations below any criteria levels specified above for these pollutants or the general categories of pollutants to which they belong. 4 Prior to 6/2005, the 1-hour NAAQS was 0.12 ppm. Emission budgets for 1-hour ozone are still in use in some areas where 8-hour ozone emission budgets have not been developed, such as the San Francisco Bay Area. 5 The 65 μg/m3 PM2.5 (24-hr) NAAQS was not revoked when the 35 μg/m3 NAAQS was promulgated in 2006. The 15 μg/m3 annual PM2.5 standard was not revoked when the 12 μg/m3 standard was promulgated in 2012. The 0.08 ppm 1997 ozone standard is revoked FOR CONFORMITY PURPOSES ONLY when area designations for the 2008 0.75 ppm standard become effective for conformity use (7/20/2013). Conformity requirements apply for all NAAQS, including revoked NAAQS, until emission budgets for newer NAAQS are found adequate, SIP amendments for the newer NAAQS are approved with a emission budget, EPA specifically revokes conformity requirements for an older standard, or the area becomes attainment/unclassified. SIP-approved emission budgets remain in force indefinitely unless explicitly replaced or eliminated by a subsequent approved SIP amendment. During the “Interim” period prior to availability of emission budgets, conformity tests may include some combination of build vs. no build, build vs. baseline, or compliance with prior emission budgets for the same pollutant. 6 Final 1-hour NO2 NAAQS published in the Federal Register on 2/9/2010 (effective 3/9/2010). Initial area designation for California (2012) was attainment/unclassifiable throughout. Project-level hot spot analysis requirements do not currently exist. Near-road monitoring starting in 2013 may cause redesignation to nonattainment in some areas after 2016. 7 EPA finalized a 1-hour SO2 standard of 75 ppb in June 2010. Nonattainment areas have not yet been designated as of 9/2012. 8 State standards are “not to exceed” or “not to be equaled or exceeded” unless stated otherwise. Federal standards are “not to exceed more than once a year” or as described above. 9 Secondary standard, set to protect public welfare rather than health. Conformity and environmental analysis address both primary and secondary NAAQS. 10 Lead NAAQS are not considered in Transportation Conformity analysis. 11 The SoCAB was redesignated for PM10 from nonattainment to attainment-maintenance effective July 26, 2013. Source: Air Quality Technical Study 2013; USEPA 2013. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 130 Environmental Consequences Build Alternative (Locally Preferred Alternative) Regional Conformity The proposed project is listed in the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) 2012–2035 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS), Towards a Sustainable Future. The project is listed on Page 236 in the Financially-Constrained RTP Projects section of the RTP/SCS Project List as RTP ID 2A0704, an Orange County project on the Local Highway System. The RTP/SCS was found to conform by SCAG on April 4, 2012, and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) made a conformity determination on June 4, 2012. The project is also included in SCAG’s financially constrained 2013 Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP). The project was added to the 2013 FTIP via Amendment 13-01. The project is listed in the 2013 Federal Transportation Improvement Program Amendment Orange County Local Highway, including Amendments 1-10 and 12, on page 1 of 14 as RTPID 2A0704, Project ID ORA112622. The design concept and scope of the proposed project is consistent with the project description in the 2012–2035 RTP/SCS, the 2013 FTIP, and the “open to traffic” assumptions of the SCAG regional emissions analysis. Project Level Conformity Carbon Monoxide Hot Spot Analysis The CO hot spot analysis for the proposed project was conducted in accordance with the screening methodology in the Transportation Project-Level Carbon Monoxide Protocol (CO Protocol). The analysis finds that the project would not increase intersection delay at any of the four analyzed intersections within the project limits in 2015. In 2035, the project would not increase intersection delay at three of the four analyzed intersections. At the intersection of Brookhurst Street and La Palma Avenue, the project would decrease delay in the PM peak hour; however, the project would increase the delay in the AM peak hour. The increase in delay indicates a potential worsening of air quality. However, in 2035, the intersection of Brookhurst Street and La Palma Avenue would not be an intersection operating at level of service (LOS) E or F; the intersection would operate at LOS C in the AM peak hour under both the Build and No-Build Alternatives. There are no other reasons to believe the project would have adverse local CO impacts. Therefore, based on the above analysis, in accordance with the CO Protocol, the project is satisfactory and no further CO analysis is needed. No avoidance, minimization, or mitigation measures are required. There would be no potential for a CO hotspot or exposure of persons to CO in excess ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 131 of SCAQMD criteria for ambient air quality for CO. Thus the project would be in compliance with the applicable air quality regulations and would not worsen air quality. PM2.5 and PM10 Hotspot Analysis On March 10, 2006, the U.S. EPA published a Final Rule in the Federal Register that establishes the transportation conformity criteria and procedures for determining which transportation projects must be analyzed for local air quality impacts in PM2.5 and PM10 nonattainment and maintenance areas (“areas”). To meet statutory requirements, the March 10, 2006, Final Rule requires PM2.5 and PM10 hot-spot analyses to be performed for projects of air quality concern (POAQC). A POAQC would be a facility with 125,000 annual average daily trips (AADT) and where at least 8 percent of the traffic is comprised of diesel trucks. The proposed Brookhurst Street Widening would not meet any of the POAQC definitions. Future traffic volumes are not forecasted to exceed 50,000 AADT. Therefore, the proposed project is not a POAQC, and no qualitative or quantitative PM2.5 or PM10 analysis is required. The determination that the project is not a POAQC was confirmed by the interagency Southern California Transportation Conformity Working Group (TCWG) on May 14, 2013. Ozone Analysis There is no specific guidance from the U.S. EPA or Caltrans for O3 conformity analysis. However, the SCAQMD has established thresholds to limit project emissions to quantities that would not cause violations of the NAAQS or delay achievement of the standards. Thus projects with O3 precursor emissions not exceeding the SCAQMD thresholds would conform to the SIP. A quantitative estimate of vehicle pollutant emissions comparing the existing condition and the 2015 and 2035 With and Without Project Scenarios was made using EMFAC 2011 emission rates. The estimate shows that emissions of VOC and NOx, both O3 precursors, would be reduced with implementation of the project. Estimated project O3 precursor emissions would not exceed the thresholds. Therefore, the project would conform to the O3 SIP. Construction Short-Term Impacts Construction would include demolishing the 19 acquired homes and clearing acquired property for the road widening; grading and excavating the road; relocating utilities and underground infrastructure; exporting soil; importing subgrade materials for the widened roadway; paving; constructing privacy walls; and landscaping acquired lands ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 132 not used for roadway widening. The roadway would be open through all phases of construction; therefore, no detours are expected to be necessary. During demolition and construction, the proposed project would generate VOC, NOx, CO, PM10, PM2.5, and toxic air contaminants such as diesel exhaust particulate matter. As the construction period would be less than two years, construction emissions calculations are not included. Sources of fugitive dust would include disturbed soils at the construction site and trucks carrying uncovered loads of soils. Unless properly controlled, vehicles leaving the site could deposit mud on local streets, which could be an additional source of airborne dust after it dries. PM10 emissions would vary from day to day, depending on the nature and magnitude of construction activity and local weather conditions. PM10 emissions would depend on soil moisture, silt content of soil, wind speed, and the amount of equipment operating. Larger dust particles would settle near the source, while fine particles would be dispersed over greater distances from the construction site. If water or other soil stabilizers are used to control dust, the emissions can be reduced by up to 50 percent. Caltrans Standard Specifications (Section 10) pertaining to dust minimization requirements require use of water or dust palliative compounds to reduce potential fugitive dust emissions during construction. In addition to dust-related PM10 emissions, heavy-duty trucks and construction equipment powered by gasoline and diesel engines would generate CO, SO2, NOx, VOCs and some soot particulate (PM10 and PM2.5) in exhaust emissions. If construction activities were to increase traffic congestion in the area, CO and other emissions from traffic would increase while those vehicles are delayed. These emissions would be temporary and limited to the immediate area surrounding the construction site. No-Build Alternative Because no improvements would be made, there would be no construction-related air quality impacts. However, without the proposed roadway widening, local air quality would deteriorate due to increased vehicular congestion in the project study area. Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Most of the construction impacts to air quality are short-term in duration and, therefore, will not result in long-term adverse conditions. Implementation of the following standard conditions, some of which may also be required for other purposes ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 133 such as storm water pollution control, will reduce any air quality impacts resulting from construction activities: SC-7 The standard contract provisions with the City of Anaheim require that the construction contractor complies with Caltrans Standard Specifications in Section 14 (2010). • Section 14-9.02 specifically requires contractor compliance with all applicable laws and regulations related to air quality, including air pollution control district and air quality management district regulations and local ordinances. • Section 14-9.03 is directed at controlling dust. If dust-palliative materials other than water are to be used, material specifications are contained in Section 18. SC-8 The standard contract provisions with the City of Anaheim require that the construction contractor complies with SCAQMD Rule 403. • SCAQMD Rule 403 prohibits emissions of fugitive dust from any active operation, open storage pile, or disturbed surface area that remain visible beyond the emission source property line. • A person conducting active operations shall utilize one or more of the applicable best available control measures to minimize fugitive dust emissions from each fugitive dust source type. SC-9 The standard contract provisions with the City of Anaheim require that the construction contractor complies with SCAQMD Rule 1403. • SCAQMD Rule 1403 specifies work practice requirements to limit asbestos emissions from building demolition and renovation activities. Construction Conformity Construction activities will not last for more than 5 years at one general location, so construction-related emissions do not need to be included in regional and project- level conformity analysis (40 CFR 93.123 Naturally Occurring Asbestos Asbestos occurs naturally in ultramafic rock (which includes serpentine). When this material is disturbed in connection with construction, grading, quarrying, or surface ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 134 mining operations, asbestos-containing dust can be generated. Exposure to asbestos can result in health ailments such as lung cancer, mesothelioma (cancer of the linings of the lungs and abdomen), and asbestosis (scarring of lung tissues that results in constricted breathing).The California Department of Conservation (2000) prepared a map showing areas more likely to contain naturally occurring asbestos (NOA) in California. The map shows no NOA areas in Orange County. Therefore, the project site is not in an area likely to contain NOA. Mobile Source Air Toxics The proposed Brookhurst Street Improvement project is a project with low potential for mobile source air toxic (MSAT) effects. The types of projects included in this category are those that serve to improve operations of highway, transit, or freight without adding substantial new capacity or without creating a facility that is likely to meaningfully increase MSAT emissions. The proposed project would fall under minor improvement project category; maximum design year traffic is projected to be 48,970 AADT. Therefore, based on the nature of the project, a qualitative analysis is prescribed. Generally, the amount of MSAT emitted would be proportional to the vehicle miles traveled (VMT) assuming that other variables such as fleet mix are the same for the Build and No-Build Alternatives. The VMT estimated for the Build Alternative is estimated to be the same as for the No-Build Alternative. The VMT for the Build Alternative conceptually could be higher than that for the No-Build Alternative because the additional capacity would increase the roadway’s efficiency and would attract rerouted trips from elsewhere in the transportation network. This increase in VMT would lead to higher MSAT emissions for the preferred Build Alternative along Brookhurst Street, along with a corresponding decrease in MSAT emissions along the parallel routes. However, the VMT is not anticipated to increase by attracting rerouted trips. The adjacent parallel arterial streets that connect to SR-91 and I-5—Magnolia Avenue and Euclid Street—already have six lanes. Any emissions increase would be offset somewhat by lower MSAT emission rates due to increased speeds. According to the U.S. EPA’s MOBILE6.2 model, emissions of all priority MSAT (except for diesel particulate matter) decreases as speed increases. The extent to which these speed-related emissions decrease will offset any VMT-related emissions increases cannot be reliably projected due to the inherent deficiencies of technical models. With either the Build or No-Build Alternatives, emissions in the design year will likely be lower than present levels as a result of the ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 135 U.S. EPA’s national control programs that are projected to reduce annual MSAT emissions by 72 percent between 1999 and 2050. The additional travel lanes contemplated as part of the Build Alternative will have the effect of moving some traffic closer to nearby homes and businesses; therefore, there may be localized areas where ambient concentrations of MSAT could be higher under the Build Alternative than the No-Build Alternative. However, the magnitude and the duration of the Build Alternative’s potential increases compared to the No-Build Alternative’s increases cannot be reliably quantified due to incomplete or unavailable information in forecasting project-specific MSAT health impacts. In the FHWA’s view, information is incomplete or unavailable to credibly predict the project-specific health impacts due to changes in MSAT emissions associated with a proposed alternative; a discussion of this view is included in Appendix C of the Air Quality Technical Report. The U.S. EPA’s and ARB’s vehicle and fuel regulations, coupled with fleet turnover, will cause substantial reductions that, in almost all cases over time, will cause region- wide and local MSAT levels to be substantially lower than they are today. 2.2.5. Noise Regulatory Setting The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 provides the broad basis for analyzing and abating highway traffic noise effects. The intent of this law is to promote the general welfare and to foster a healthy environment. The requirements for noise analysis and consideration of noise abatement under NEPA are described below. National Environmental Policy Act and 23 CFR 772 For highway transportation projects with FHWA involvement (and Caltrans, as assigned), the federal-Aid Highway Act of 1970 and the associated implementing regulations (23 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 772) govern the analysis and abatement of traffic noise impacts. The regulations require that potential noise impacts in areas of frequent human use be identified during the planning and design of a highway project. The regulations include noise abatement criteria (NAC) that are used to determine when a noise impact would occur. The NAC differ depending on the type of land use under analysis. For example, the NAC for residences (67 A-weighted decibels [dBA]) is lower than the NAC for commercial areas ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 136 (72 dBA). The following table 2.16 lists the noise abatement criteria for use in the NEPA-23 CFR 772 analysis. Table 2.16 Noise Abatement Criteria Activity Category NAC, Hourly A- Weighted Noise Level dBA, Leq(h) Description of activity category A 57 (Exterior) Lands on which serenity and quiet are of extraordinary significance and serve an important public need and where the preservation of those qualities is essential if the area is to continue to serve its intended purpose. B1 67 (Exterior) Residential. C1 67 (Exterior) Active sport areas, amphitheaters, auditoriums, campgrounds, cemeteries, day care centers, hospitals, libraries, medical facilities, parks, picnic areas, places of worship, playgrounds, public meeting rooms, public or nonprofit institutional structures, radio studios, recording studios, recreation areas, Section 4(f) sites, schools, television studios, trails, and trail crossings. D 52 (Interior) Auditoriums, day care centers, hospitals, libraries, medical facilities, places of worship, public meeting rooms, public or nonprofit institutional structures, radio studios, recording studios, schools, and television studios. E 72 (Exterior) Hotels, motels, offices, restaurants/bars, and other developed lands, properties, or activities not included in A–D or F. F No NAC— reporting only Agriculture, airports, bus yards, emergency services, industrial, logging, maintenance facilities, manufacturing, mining, rail yards, retail facilities, shipyards, utilities (water resources, water treatment, electrical, etc.), and warehousing. G No NAC— reporting only Undeveloped lands that are not permitted. dBA: A-weighted decibels; Leq: average noise level; NAC: noise abatement criteria 1 Includes undeveloped lands permitted for this activity category. Figure 12 lists the noise levels of common activities to enable readers to compare the actual and predicted highway noise-levels discussed in this section with common activities. According to the Caltrans Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol for New Highway Construction and Reconstruction Projects, May 2011, a noise impact occurs when the predicted future noise level with the project substantially exceeds the existing noise level (defined as a 12 dBA or more increase) or when the future noise level with the project approaches or exceeds the NAC. Approaching the NAC is defined as coming within 1 dBA of the NAC. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 137 Figure 12: Noise Levels of Common Activities If it is determined that the project will have noise impacts, then potential abatement measures must be considered. Noise abatement measures that are determined to be reasonable and feasible at the time of final design are incorporated into the project plans and specifications. This document discusses noise abatement measures that would likely be incorporated in the project. The Caltrans Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol sets forth the criteria for determining when an abatement measure is reasonable and feasible. Feasibility of noise abatement is basically an engineering concern. A minimum 7 dBA reduction in the future noise level must be achieved for an abatement measure to be considered feasible. Other considerations include topography, access requirements, other noise sources and ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 138 safety considerations. The reasonableness determination is basically a cost-benefit analysis. Factors used in determining whether a proposed noise abatement measure is reasonable include: residents acceptance and the cost per benefited residence. Affected Environment The project’s noise impacts were analyzed and reported in Brookhurst Street Improvement Project Noise Study Report, from SR-91- to I-5, City of Anaheim, 12-ORA-0-Anaheim, STPL-5055(163), May 2013. The CEQA Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for this project analyzes noise impacts relative to City of Anaheim noise standards and noise compatibility guidelines as set forth in the City of Anaheim General Plan Noise Element. A general reconnaissance of the project area was performed within the project limits to identify land uses and sensitive noise receptors, particularly for areas of frequent human use that would benefit from reduced noise levels. Existing land uses in the project area are described below starting at La Palma Avenue (the southern portion of the project area) and continuing north along Brookhurst Street to SR-91. Land uses between La Palma Avenue and Falmouth Avenue are primarily commercial and do not have outdoor frequent human use areas. Land uses between Falmouth Avenue to Huntington Avenue are predominately single-family residential. The majority first row single-family residences do not have existing walls to shield the residences from noise generated from traffic traveling on the roadway. A few of the single-family residences west of Brookhurst Street currently have a mixture of wooden fences and brick walls ranging in height from four to six feet to shield residences from existing traffic noise. The predominant noise source for these single- family residences is traffic on Brookhurst Street. Land uses between Huntington Avenue and SR-91 also consist of single-family residences. Single-family residences on the east side are not shielded from noise. The single-family residences located west of Brookhurst Street are shielded predominately by brick walls approximately six feet in height. The predominant noise source for these single-family residences is traffic on Brookhurst Street and SR-91. The existing land uses in the project area are shown in Figure 8, which is provided in Section 2.1.1.1. Figures 13A and 13B show the locations where existing noise measurements were taken. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 139 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 140 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 141 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 142 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 143 Environmental Consequences Build Alternative (Locally Preferred Alternative) A Type I project is defined in Title 23 of the Code of Regulations (CFR), Part 772, as a proposed Federal or Federal aid highway project for the construction of a highway on a new location or the physical alteration of an existing highway, which changes either the horizontal or vertical alignment or increases the number of through traffic lanes. The proposed project is a Type I project because it would increase the number of through traffic lanes along Brookhurst Street between SR-91 and La Palma Avenue. Temporary Construction-Related Noise During construction of the proposed project, noise from construction activities may intermittently dominate the noise environment in the immediate area of construction. Table 2.17 summarizes noise levels produced by construction equipment that is commonly used on roadway construction projects. Construction equipment is expected to generate noise levels ranging from 70 to 90 dBA at a distance of 50 feet, and noise produced by construction equipment would be reduced over distance at a rate of about 6 dBA per doubling of distance. Table 2.17 Construction Equipment Noise Equipment Maximum Noise Level (dBA at 50 feet) Scrapers 89 Bulldozers 85 Heavy Trucks 88 Backhoe 80 Pneumatic Tools 85 Concrete Pump 82 dBA: A-weighted decibels Source: Noise Study Report 2013. The Anaheim Municipal Code (Section 6.70.10) has specific hours for construction. It states that sound created by construction or building repair of any premises within the city shall be exempt from the applications of this chapter between 7:00 AM and 7:00 PM, seven days a week. Future Exterior Noise Environment, Impacts, and Considered Abatement Six short-term measurement locations were selected to represent noise-sensitive land uses within the project area to characterize the existing environment and to assist with model calibration along with concurrent traffic counts. Measurements were taken for ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 144 a duration of 20-minutes at each site in March and April 2012 using Larson Davis Model 824 Type 1 sound level meters. One additional long-term measurement was conducted at 1249 North Brookhurst Street on April 2012 to gather data over a 24-hour period and to identify the noisiest hour for traffic. The data show that traffic noise peaks during the 6:00 PM to 7:00 PM hour at this location. It should be noted that, during the noisiest hour, existing noise levels exceeded the average (Leq) NAC standard of 67 dBA. This noisiest hour was used for analyzing noise impacts. The noise monitoring data were used to calibrate the FHWA Traffic Noise Model Version 2.5 (TNM 2.5) and to calculate existing noisiest hour noise levels at the residential receivers shown in Figures 13A and 13B. The existing traffic noise levels were calculated using the traffic volumes provided in the traffic study prepared for the project and posted travel speeds. Existing noise levels during the noisiest hour range from 49 to 71 dBA Leq; five residential receiver locations, R-2, R-8, R-17, R-23 and R-32, currently approach or exceed the NAC standard of 67 dBA Leq. Receivers R-2, R-8, and R-23 would be a part of the full property acquisitions planned for the project, and were included to calibrate the model. Potential long-term noise impacts associated with project operations are solely from traffic noise. Using TNM 2.5, traffic noise was evaluated for future 2035 Build and No-Build scenarios. Using coordinates obtained from the topographic maps, 36 receiver locations with frequent outdoor human use areas associated with existing single-family residences were evaluated in the model. As part of the Build Alternative, the City is proposing to construct eight foot privacy walls with the exception of the wall surrounding receiver R-32, which would be at a height of ten feet. Although privacy walls are being included as part of the project, Caltrans requirements necessitate an evaluation of noise impacts without the inclusion of the proposed privacy walls. Existing walls that would not be removed by the project were included in the analysis. Existing and predicted 2035 traffic noise levels are shown in Table 2.18. Though the project would not result in a substantial noise increase at any of the receptors, the modeling results in Table 2.18 indicate that predicted noise levels at six receiver locations (R-11, R-16, R-17, R-31, R-32, R-33) would approach or exceed the 67 dBA Leq NAC under Activity Category B within the project area under the future design year Build conditions. Therefore, a noise-abatement analysis was performed. Three sound walls were analyzed for the six receiver locations. This is discussed below under Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Abatement Measures. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 145 Table 2.18 Existing and Predicted Traffic Noise Levels Receptor Identification Number Location Barrier Identification Number Existing Noise Level (dBA) Predicted Noise Level without Project (dBA) Predicted Noise Level with Project (dBA) Noise Impact Requiring Abatement Consideration Predicted Noise Level with Abatement (dBA) Reasonable and Feasible 6- foot wall 8- foot wall 10- foot wall 12- foot wall 14- foot wall 16- foot wall R-3 2206 W Falmouth Ave No Barrier 58.1 59.7 60.8 No – – – – – – N/A R-4 2188 W Falmouth Ave 59.6 61.2 62.6 No – – – – – – N/A R-5 2184 W Falmouth Ave 57.2 58.7 60.3 No – – – – – – N/A R-6 2207 W Falmouth Ave 62.6 64.5 64.4 No – – – – – – N/A R-7 2202 W Grayson Ave 59.0 60.7 60.5 No – – – – – – N/A R-11 1204 N Brookhurst St Barrier SW24E 62.4 64.0 70.7 Yes 64.3 61.4 59.7 58.4 57.6 56.6 Yes R-12 1173 N Catalpa Ave No Barrier 56.4 57.2 58.2 No – – – – – – N/A R-13 2186 W Huntington Ave 59.1 60.1 63.9 No – – – – – – N/A R-14 1166 N Catalpa Ave 51.5 52.3 52.6 No – – – – – – N/A R-15 1203 N Brookhurst St 58.9 60.7 59.9 No – – – – – – N/A R-16 1249 N Brookhurst St SW 25E 64.1 66.1 66.0 Yes 64.3 62.3 61.2 60.4 59.5 58.9 Yes R-17 1257 N Brookhurst St 66.2 68.3 66.6 Yes 64.8 62.6 61.2 60.1 59.3 58.6 Yes R-18 1236 N Fulton St No Barrier 49.4 51.0 50.5 No – – – – – – N/A R-19 1256 N Fulton St 60.2 61.3 61.5 No – – – – – – N/A R-20 1247 N Fulton St 57.4 58.1 58.1 No – – – – – – N/A R-21 1269 N Fulton St 60.6 60.9 61.0 No – – – – – – N/A R-25 1237 N Catalpa Ave 62.6 63.3 64.5 No – – – – – – N/A R-26 1313 N Catalpa Ave 63.7 63.7 63.7 No – – – – – – N/A R-27 1327 N Catalpa Ave 64.4 64.7 64.8 No – – – – – – N/A R-28 1312 N Catalpa Ave 61.7 61.9 62.0 No – – – – – – N/A R-29 2203 W Huntington Ave 63.9 64.7 65.4 No – – – – – – N/A R-30 2207 W Huntington Ave 63.2 64.0 64.9 No – – – – – – N/A R-31 2208 W Coronet Ave SW 31E 65.2 66.2 71.0 Yes 65.7 64.0 63.1 62.4 61.9 61.5 Yes R-32 2209 W Coronet Ave 71.3 72.3 73.2 Yes 68.3 66.2 65.2 64.4 63.8 63.5 Yes R-33 2210 W Coronet Ave 64.8 65.1 66.7 Yes 65.1 65.0 64.8 64.7 64.6 64.5 Yes R-35 2211 W Coronet Ave No Barrier 63.4 63.6 64.0 No – – – – – – N/A R-36 2217 W Clover Ave 64.9 64.5 64.5 No – – – – – – N/A dBA: A-weighted decibels; N/A: not applicable ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 146 No-Build Alternative As shown in Table 2.18, noise levels with the No-Build Alternative would be higher than existing conditions and comparable to the Build Alternative (in some locations the traffic noise levels would be higher and in other locations lower when compared to the Build Alternative). Noise levels at Receptors R-16, R-17, R-31, R-32, and R-33 would approach or exceed the NAC with the No-Build Alternative but no abatement measure would be implemented. Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Abatement Measures Sound walls SW 24E, SW 25E, and SW 31E were evaluated along Brookhurst Street in 2-foot increments ranging in height from 6 feet to 16 feet for feasibility and cost reasonableness. All 3 of the analyzed barriers were found to be feasible by providing a minimum 5-decibel (dB) reduction and meeting Caltrans’ acoustical design goal of a 7 dB reduction at 1 receiver location. The sensitive receptors and corresponding soundwalls are shown in Figures 14A and 14B. • Soundwall (SW) 24E: Receptor R-11 represents 1 home located on Brookhurst Street. The traffic noise modeling results in Table 2.18 indicate the existing noise level is 62 dBA and the future traffic noise level is predicted to be 71 dBA Leq for the design year Build condition. Because the predicted future noise level exceeds the NAC for residential uses (67 dBA), the home at Receptor R-11 would be adversely affected by noise. Soundwall SW-24E was found reasonable and feasible at a height of eight feet. The predicted noise reduction of 9 dB would meet the minimum 7 dB per Caltrans requirements. The total cost allowance for this wall, calculated in accordance with the Caltrans Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol, is $55,000. The current estimated cost of the wall is $28,120. If the total cost of the wall at this location is less than the total cost allowance, then the wall would likely be incorporated into the project. The eight-foot-high privacy wall proposed as part of the project will meet the noise abatement requirement. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 147 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 148 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 149 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 150 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 151 • Soundwall (SW) 25E: Receptors R-16 and R-17 represent six homes located on Brookhurst Street. The traffic noise modeling results in Table 2.18 indicate the existing noise levels are 64 dBA and 66 dBA and the future traffic noise levels are predicted to be 66 and 67 dBA Leq for the design year Build condition. Because the predicted future noise levels approach or exceed the NAC for residential uses (67 dBA), the homes represented by Receptors R-16 and R-17 would be adversely affected by noise. SW 25E was found to be feasible at a minimum height of 12 feet to reduce noise levels by at least 7 dB per Caltrans requirements. The total cost allowance for this wall, calculated in accordance with the Caltrans Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol, is $333,000. The current estimated cost of the wall is $86,880. If the total cost of the wall at this location is less than the total cost allowance, then the wall would likely be incorporated into the project. • Soundwall (SW) 31E: Receptors R-31 and R-32 represent two homes located on Coronet Avenue. The traffic noise modeling results in Table 2.18 indicate the existing noise levels are 65 to 71 dBA and the future traffic noise levels are predicted to be 71 to 73 dBA Leq for the design year Build condition. Because the predicted future noise levels approach or exceed the NAC for residential uses (67 dBA), the homes represented by Receptors R-31 and R-32 would be adversely affected by noise. SW 31E was found to be feasible at a minimum height of 8 feet to reduce noise levels by at least 7 dB per Caltrans requirements. The total cost allowance for this wall, calculated in accordance with the Caltrans Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol, is $110,000. The current estimated cost of the wall is $68,780. If the total cost of the wall at this location is less than the total cost allowance, then the wall would likely be incorporated into the project. The eight-foot-high privacy wall proposed as part of the project will meet the noise abatement requirement. N-1 Based on the studies completed to date, the City of Anaheim and Caltrans intend to incorporate noise abatement in the form of barriers on Brookhurst Street with respective of 148, 362, and 305 feet and average heights of 8, 12, and 8 feet. Calculations based on preliminary design data show that the barriers will reduce noise levels by 7 to 9 dBA for 9 residences at a cost of approximately $184,000. If during final design, conditions have substantially changed, noise abatement may not be necessary. The final decision of the noise abatement will be made by the City of Anaheim upon completion of the project design and the public involvement processes. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 152 Construction The following measures would minimize the temporary noise impacts from construction of the Build Alternative: SC-10 The City of Anaheim shall ensure that the construction contractor requires all equipment to have sound-control devices that are no less effective than those provided on the original equipment. No equipment will have an unmuffled exhaust. SC-11 The standard contract provisions with the City of Anaheim require the contractor to implement appropriate noise mitigation measures, including changing the location of stationary construction equipment, turning off idling equipment, rescheduling construction activity, notifying adjacent residents in advance of construction work, and installing acoustic barriers around stationary construction noise sources. 2.3. Biological Environment 2.3.1. Plant Species Regulatory Setting The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) is responsible for the protection of federally listed special-status plant species. “Special-status” species are selected for protection because they are rare and/or subject to population and habitat declines. “Special status” is a general term for species that are afforded varying levels of regulatory protection. The highest level of protection is given to species that are formally listed or proposed for listing as endangered or threatened under the Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA). This section of the document discusses all federally protected special-status plant species, including USFWS candidate species. The regulatory requirements for FESA can be found at 16 United States Code (USC), Section 1531,et seq. See also 50 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 402. Affected Environment Information in this section is based on the Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impact) prepared in May 2013. California Natural Diversity Database and California Native Plant Society (CNPS) database search results were reviewed to ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 153 determine the potential for the special status plant species to occur in the biological study area. The biological study area is located on the U.S. Geologic Survey’s Anaheim 7.5-minute Quadrangle. The biological study area was defined by a 500-foot buffer from the center of the roadway. The biological study area is largely developed and consists of urban areas and roadways that lack vegetation. The only vegetation that is present in the area is ornamental landscaping. There are no native habitats present in the biological study area. Shrub and herb species used for landscaping include lantana (Lantana sp.), cape plumbago (Plumbago auricalata), Indian hawthorne (Raphiolepis sp.), and English ivy (Hedera helix). Tree species used for landscaping include Peruvian pepper tree (Schinus molle), pine (Pinus sp.), evergreen pear (Pyrus kawakamii), gum (Eucalyptus sp.), date palm (Phoenix sp.), and fan palm (Washingtonia sp.). There are no special status vegetation types on or immediately adjacent to the biological study area. Environmental Consequences Build Alternative Under the Build Alternative, the proposed project would result in the removal of ornamental landscaping and some mature trees. Brookhurst Street would be widened and would be constructed with a median, sidewalks, and meandering parkways. As part of the Build Alternative’s construction activities, several ornamental trees would be removed. However, there are no applicable tree preservation policies or ordinances related to the protection of biological resources on the project site. In accordance with Section 13.12.060 of the Anaheim Municipal Code, any street tree removed would be replaced as part of the proposed median or greenbelt in accordance with the Official Tree Species List and Tree Master Plan. Additionally, any mature vegetation removed would also be replaced within the proposed landscaped areas. Proposed medians and parkways would then be landscaped with drought-tolerant and low-maintenance plantings. The Landscaping Plan will be approved by Caltrans prior to project construction. The Build Alternative would impact areas that are urbanized and generally considered of low biological value to plant and wildlife species. Therefore, impacts to plant species would not be adverse and no Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures are proposed. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 154 No-Build Alternative Under the No-Build Alternative, no disturbance, destruction, or removal of existing plant species would occur. Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures The replacement of street trees in compliance with Section 13.12.060 of the Anaheim Municipal Code is identified as a Standard Condition (SC-4) under Visual/Aesthetics in Section 2.1.6 of this Environmental Assessment. This measure would minimize potential impacts on plant species. 2.3.2. Animal Environment Regulatory Setting Many federal laws regulate impacts on wildlife. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s National Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries Service) are responsible for implementing these laws. This section discusses potential impacts and permit requirements associated with animals not listed or proposed for listing under the federal Endangered Species Act. Federal laws and regulations pertaining to wildlife include the following: • National Environmental Policy Act • Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) • Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act Affected Environment Information in this section is based on the Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impact) prepared in May 2013. A and CNPS databases were researched to determine the potential of special status animal species to occur on the site. Several special status wildlife species are known to occur in the project region; however no Threatened or Endangered species are expected to occur in the biological study area due to the urban setting of the project site and lack of suitable habitat. There is no native habitat in the biological study area that would provide suitable habitat for wildlife species. Ornamental landscaping in the biological study area provides little habitat for native wildlife species; only urban-tolerant wildlife would be expected to occur in the biological study area. However, some ornamental trees on ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 155 site have potential to support nesting birds and have a limited potential to support nesting raptors. Nesting birds and raptor birds are protected by the MBTA. Wildlife species observed in the biological study area include mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), American crow (Corvus black phoebe (Sayornis nigricans), and house sparrow (Passer domesticus). No amphibian, reptile, or mammal species were observed. Common reptile species expected to occur in the Biological Study Area include side-blotched lizard (Uta stansburiana) and western fence lizard (Sceloporus occidentalis). Common mammal species expected to occur on the project site include Virginia opossum (Didelphis virginianus), house mouse (Mus musculus), and common raccoon (Procyon lotor). Environmental Consequences Build Alternative Because some ornamental trees (gum, pepper, palm) in the biological study area have potential to support nesting birds and raptor birds, construction activities have the potential to disturb active bird nests, which are protected by the MBTA. Also, construction activities have the potential to disturb active raptor nests, which is prohibited by California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) regulations. This protection generally ceases once nesting activity is completed. No other impacts related to wildlife species would occur in the biological study area because it does not support wildlife diversity. No-Build Alternative Under the No-Build Alternative, no disturbance, destruction, or removal of existing animal species would occur. Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Impacts on nesting birds and nesting raptors can typically be avoided or minimized. To prevent adverse impacts on nesting birds, the following minimization measure shall be implemented as part of the Build Alternative: BIO-1 The City of Anaheim shall ensure that a survey for active raptor nests is conducted within seven days prior to commencement of construction during the raptor breeding season (February 1 through June 30). A survey for active bird nests will be required within three days prior to commencement of construction during the peak bird nesting season (March 15 to September 15). Any occupied nests found during survey efforts will be mapped on the construction plans. Some restrictions on ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 156 construction activities may be required in the vicinity of the nest until the nest is no longer active, as determined by a qualified Biologist. 2.3.3. Invasive Species Regulatory Setting On February 3, 1999, President Clinton signed Executive Order (EO) 13112 requiring federal agencies to combat the introduction or spread of invasive species in the United States. The order defines invasive species as “any species, including its seeds, eggs, spores, or other biological material capable of propagating that species, that is not native to that ecosystem whose introduction does or is likely to cause economic or environmental harm or harm to human health.” Federal Highway (FHWA) guidance issued August 10, 1999 directs the use of the State’s invasive species list, currently maintained by the California Invasive Species Council to define the invasive plants that must be considered as part of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) analysis for a proposed project. Affected Environment Information in this section comes from the Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impact) prepared in May 2013. As described in Section 2.3.1, Plant Species, there are no native habitats in the biological study area, and all vegetation in the biological study area consists of ornamental landscaping. Some existing ornamental trees and plants such as English Ivy, Peruvian pepper tree, date palm, Mexican fan palm and gum within the Biological Study Area are listed on California Invasive Plant Council (Cal-IPC) list of exotic species. Environmental Consequences Build Alternative Under the Build Alternative, proposed landscaping in the proposed medians and parkways would include drought-tolerant and low-maintenance plantings. During project construction the exotic trees and invasive plants would be removed from the biological study area and transported off site according to the applicable laws and regulations and thus would not have potential to disperse their seeds off site. The project is built out in an urban environment and no native habitats and/or natural drainages are located on or adjacent to the site. Therefore, the project does not have the potential for the seeds and plants to invade and spread into native habitats within ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 157 the biological study area. In addition, implementation of Avoidance Measure BIO-2 would ensure that exotic trees and other landscaping to be removed from the site would be handled, transported, and disposed of at a green waste facility according to the applicable laws and regulations. As a result, the project would not disperse exotic plant species seeds and/or otherwise contribute to the invasion of exotic species into natural habitats. Federal requirements prohibit the planting of exotic species (Executive Order 13112) that have been identified as invasive, as seeds from invasive species could escape to natural areas and degrade native vegetation. Plantings within any landscaped areas must be consistent with this Executive Order; therefore, the proposed project would not plant any invasive exotic species. The list of proposed plant species used for landscaping purposes was reviewed in context of the Cal-IPC list. Therefore, no adverse effect is expected as a result of invasive exotic species. Avoidance Measures BIO-2 and BIO-3 will ensure compliance with Executive Order 13112. No-Build Alternative Under the No-Build Alternative, no disturbance, destruction, or removal of existing plant species would occur. No impacts related to invasive species are expected. Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures The following avoidance measures would prevent the use of invasive species for landscaping under the Build Alternative: BIO-2 The City of Anaheim shall ensure that the contract specifications direct the contractor on the appropriate handling of invasive plant species during the project construction. All invasive plant species will be handled, transported, and disposed of off site by a qualified contractor to minimize the potential of spreading invasive species and/or their seeds off site. All plants and their seed pods would be secured in such a manner that no contamination of native soils and natural areas would occur. A Principal Engineer for the City of Anaheim will verify compliance. BIO-3 Landscape designs will be submitted to the City of Anaheim for review and approval by a qualified Biologist. The review will determine that no invasive exotic plant species are to be used in any proposed landscaping. Suitable substitutes will be recommended by the Reviewing Biologist. All mulch, topsoil, and seed mixes used during landscaping activities and ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 158 erosion-control Best Management Practices (BMPs) implemented will be free of invasive plant species propagules. 2.4. Cumulative Impacts Regulatory Setting Cumulative impacts are those that result from past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions, combined with the potential impacts of the proposed project. A cumulative effect assessment looks at the collective impacts posed by individual land use plans and projects. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor, but collectively substantial impacts taking place over a period of time. Cumulative impacts on resources in the project area may result from the impacts of the transportation project together with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects such as residential, commercial, industrial, and other development, as well as from agricultural activities and the conversion to more intensive types of agricultural cultivation. Such land use activities may result in cumulative effects on a variety of natural resources such as species and their habitats, water resources, and air quality. Additionally, they can also contribute to cumulative impacts on the urban environment such as changes in community character, traffic volume and patterns, increased noise, housing availability, and employment. A definition of cumulative impacts under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) can be found in 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Section 1508.7 of the Council of Environmental Quality (CEQ) Regulations. Evaluation of Cumulative Impacts The cumulative analysis focuses on the resources that the project may affect. If the project would not result in impacts to a resource, it could not contribute to a cumulative impact. Additionally, the long-range (2035) analyses conducted for traffic, air quality, and noise reflect growth and development consistent with the local General Plans. Thus, the 2035 analysis is assumed to accurately reflect impacts that would be expected with implementation of cumulative projects. Therefore, the resource identified for cumulative analysis is limited to community resources. The cumulative study area for this resource is the same as the study area for the proposed project and has been discussed in Section 2.1, Human Environment. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 159 The cumulative evaluation considers expected growth from the City of Anaheim General Plan and regional development projections. This provides a long-range view of expected growth in the region. The regional projections are based on the Orange County Projections 2010 developed by the Center for Demographic Research at California State University, Fullerton. These projections are countywide growth and development forecasts based on input from the County of Orange and the Cities of Orange County. These projections reflect adopted land uses and future growth scenarios based on local land use policies. The purpose of establishing countywide projections is to establish a consistent database for jurisdictions to use for planning efforts. SCAG uses these adopted projections for regional planning efforts, such as the Air Quality Management Plan, the Regional Comprehensive Plan, and the Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy. Community Resources The project is located in the well-developed built out environment in the city of Anaheim. No vacant parcels are located in the project vicinity. The project has existed as a highly-utilized transportation route, providing access to tract-home neighborhoods and neighborhood commercial centers. These tract houses comprise the majority of residential uses in the area; however, two of the properties accessible from Brookhurst Street have buildings dating from 1911 and 1914. Construction of the two freeways, SR-91 and I-5, introduced more traffic to the project segment of Brookhurst Street and contributed to the current congestion. Additionally, construction of the Sa-Rang Community Church generated even more vehicular traffic along Brookhurst Street. Reasonably foreseeable projects identified within the city of Anaheim include redevelopment projects and transportation improvement projects. The reasonably foreseeable development projects located in proximity of the subject segment of Brookhurst Street are shown in Table 2.2 and are mostly infill, redevelopment, and transportation improvement projects. Therefore, there are limited displacements associated with these projects. The 13 cumulative projects listed in Table 2.2 include hotels, entertainment and convention venue expansions, mixed use development, schools, and roadway/freeway improvements. Due to the distance and location, it is not expected that residents of the project study area would experience major inconvenience as a result of combined effects of these projects. The SR-91 improvement project and Brookhurst Street improvements from Katella Avenue to Ball Road are projects that tie in to the same transportation network as the proposed ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 2 y Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 160 project. Although these projects would not be directly affected, they would benefit from the improvement of Brookhurst Street to its designated width. Construction of the Brookhurst Street Improvement Project is expected to begin in 2015 and be completed in 2016. Based on the anticipated construction schedules for the cumulative projects proposed in the city of Anaheim and the proposed project, residents in the project area would not experience prolonged inconvenience as a result of construction of these projects. Construction for the Brookhurst Street–Ball Road to Katella Avenue and the SR-91 projects has already begun and is not expected to substantially overlap. The other cumulative projects are not in the immediate vicinity of the proposed project so the potential for cumulative construction impacts is minimized. These projects would convert existing land uses into transportation land uses and commercial land uses. The widening of Brookhurst Street between Ball Road and Katella Avenue required the full acquisition of 23 properties and 12 partial acquisitions. The full acquisitions are complete, and relocation of the residents occurred prior to the evaluation of replacement housing opportunities for the proposed project. Because there is an adequate number of replacement properties and because project schedules do not substantially overlap, no conflict in availability and timing of replacement properties is expected to occur. Acquisition of residential properties associated with the proposed project would not impact other cumulative projects due to the availability of replacement properties to accommodate the relocated residents of the project. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan; is compatible with surrounding land uses; and would result in aesthetic and drainage improvements that would benefit local residents. These improvements would benefit other cumulative projects within the same drainage basin by improving the drainage conditions of the project. The cumulative transportation projects would improve the traffic level of service (LOS) in the city and thus provide a benefit for local and regional travelers. The proposed project would also improve the traffic LOS in the city, thus further benefitting local and regional travelers. For these reasons, the Brookhurst Street Improvement Project contribution to cumulative impacts is not expected to be adverse. ---PAGE BREAK--- Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 161 Chapter 3. Comments and Coordination Early and continuing coordination with the general public and appropriate public agencies is an essential part of the environmental process to determine the scope of environmental documentation, the level of analysis, potential impacts and avoidance, minimization, and/or mitigation measures and related environmental requirements. Agency consultation and public participation for this project have been accomplished through a variety of formal and informal methods, including interagency coordination meetings, public meetings, public review of the CEQA document, and contact with property owners in the study area. This chapter summarizes the results of the City of Anaheim’s and Caltrans’ efforts to fully identify, address and resolve project-related issues through early and continuing coordination. Stakeholders Stakeholders include those whose influence can significantly affect the efforts of the project. Stakeholders include individuals, community-based organizations, and governmental agencies. Federal, State, and local agencies involved with the project include the City of Anaheim and Caltrans. Additional agencies, such as OCTA, SCAG, SHPO, and FHWA, have been consulted on specific issues associated with their area of jurisdiction. The project also included opportunities for participation of residents and business owners that could be potentially impacted by the Build Alternative through a public outreach program. 3.1. Agency Consultation and Coordination Intergovernmental Consultation for Air Quality The Transportation Conformity Working Group (TCWG) is a forum for interagency coordination with the goal of improving air quality and maintaining transportation conformity in SCAG region. Interagency consultation for the project began on April 26, 2013. The agencies involved in the process were asked to provide concurrence, by May 10, 2013, that the project is not a project of air quality concern. SCAG received concurrence from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, FHWA, and Caltrans District 12 that the Brookhurst Street Improvement Project is not a project of air quality concern. No other comments were received. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 3 y Comments and Coordination Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 162 Native American Heritage Commission/Native American Tribal Contact Through preparation of the technical studies for cultural resources, a request was made to the Native American Heritage Commission for a review of the Sacred Lands Inventory to determine if any known cultural properties are present within or adjacent to the Area of Potential Effects. The Native American Heritage Commission responded on April 18, 2012, stating that no Native American cultural resources are known to exist within or adjacent to the Area of Potential Effects. Sixteen Native American tribes were contacted to seek information regarding this area and the potential of bearing Native American resources. Follow-up telephone calls were made on July 12, 2012. The majority of comments received were regarding monitoring during grading for the project. 3.2. Public Outreach Public Meetings The City of Anaheim held two public meetings to solicit input from the community. The first meeting was a general public information meeting held on May 10, 2012, at the Brookhurst Community Center, located at 2271 West Crescent Avenue, Anaheim, starting at 6:00 PM. The Brookhurst Community Center is located less than one mile south of the project site. Fifty-two people signed-in at the meeting; however, total attendance was greater than 52 because generally only 1 representative from each family signed-in. Notices, in English and Spanish, were sent to property owners and residents/tenants within a 500-foot radius of the project. Other organizations notified of the meeting include the West Anaheim Neighborhood District (WAND) Council, the City of Fullerton, Caltrans, the City of Anaheim Community Service District, and affected utilities. City staff made a presentation about the project and identified two potential build alternatives: widening to the east and widening to the west. Through the use of headsets, the presentation was simultaneously translated into Spanish. Alignment plans, a preliminary schedule, and identification of key issues were provided both in a PowerPoint presentation and on display boards located around the room. After the presentation, an open house was held where staff from the City and consultants were available to answer questions. Spanish translators were available. The right-of-way agent from the City of Anaheim present at the meeting also spoke Spanish. An informational handout describing the project and comment cards (in both English and Spanish) were available. The City received 10 comment cards, emails, or letters on the day of the meeting, May 10, 2012, and within the next 30 days (through June 9, ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 3 y Comments and Coordination Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 163 2012). Comments were submitted to City staff at the public meeting and were emailed and/or mailed to various contacts. The primary concerns were associated with property acquisition, relocation benefits, and schedule. A second public information meeting for the Brookhurst Street Improvement Project was held on December 12, 2012, as part of the public review period for the CEQA document. This meeting was also at the Brookhurst Community Center starting at 6:00 PM. Notices, in English and Spanish, were sent to property owners within a 500- foot radius of the project. In addition to providing notice for the December 12, 2012, public meeting, this notice identified the availability of the CEQA document on the City’s website and provided information on the January 29, 2013, city council meeting (discussed below). The public notice was also published in the Anaheim Bulletin, which is the local newspaper. City staff made a presentation about the project and identified that the alignment selected for evaluation as the Build Alternative in the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration proposed widening to the east. Through the use of headsets, the presentation was simultaneously translated into Spanish. Alignment plans, a preliminary schedule, and identification of key issues were provided both in a PowerPoint presentation and on display boards located around the room. After the presentation, an open house was held where staff from the City and consultants were available to answer questions. Spanish translators were available. The right-of-way agent from the City of Anaheim present at the meeting also spoke Spanish. An informational handout describing the project and comment cards (in both English and Spanish) were available. Based on the sign-in sheets and a count of people in attendance at the meeting, 87 people attended the meeting. Comments raised at the second public meeting focused on the relocation process and changes in local access. One comment card was received the day of the public meeting. As part of the CEQA process, the City received 6 comment cards, emails, or letters between the day of the meeting, December 12, 2012, and the end of the CEQA public comment period January 7, 2013). Comments were submitted to City staff at the public meeting and were emailed and/or mailed to various contacts. The comments on the CEQA document included concerns regarding the evaluation of potential impacts to Native American cultural resources; adherence to appropriate Caltrans requirements; water quality; drainage issues; and potential access issues. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 3 y Comments and Coordination Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 164 West Anaheim Neighborhood District Council The project was presented to the West Anaheim Neighborhood District (WAND) Council on October 17, 2012. The WAND is part of the Anaheim Neighborhood Improvement Program that uses an interdepartmental approach to improve the livability of Anaheim’s neighborhoods. This group is instrumental in focusing on the needs of the neighborhood. It is a partnership of community stakeholders working with City staff on the long-term vision for the neighborhood and on issues of concern. No separate noticing for the meeting was completed; however, WAND meetings are publically noticed. City staff provided an overview of the project and identified that the detailed analysis was being conducted on the eastern alignment alternative due to drainage benefits. The project impacts, benefits, and schedule were presented. Copies of the plan and other project information were set up on easels for the public to review prior to the start of the meeting. However, since this was just one item on the Council’s agenda, there was not opportunity after the presentation for the public to review the data. The Council supported the project; however, there was one question regarding the project limits and one question about access to the Sa-Rang Community Church property. These were addressed by City staff. City Council Meeting The Anaheim City Council held a public meeting on the adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration (CEQA environmental document) on January 29, 2013. The meeting was held in the City Council chambers located at 200 North Broadway, Anaheim, and was noticed for 5:00 PM. As discussed above, the Notice of Availability for the CEQA document also provided notice of the City Council meeting. City staff provided an overview of the project; the impacts identified in the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration; and the anticipated project schedule. One member of the public addressed the City Council. The speaker indicated that, though there would be delays during construction, the project would improve a vital circulation link and was needed. The Mitigated Negative Declaration was approved. Relocation Plan Preparation In addition to providing information on relocation assistance and the process at the public meetings, the City of Anaheim developed a draft Relocation Plan. Notices of Availability of a draft Relocation Plan were sent on behalf of the City of Anaheim to those residents that would be displaced by the project. Notices were sent in English and Spanish. The Relocation Plan was available for review at the following locations: ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 3 y Comments and Coordination Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 165 Haskett Branch Library Euclid Branch Library 2650 West Broadway 1340 South Euclid Street Anaheim, California 92804 Anaheim, California 92802 City Clerk’s Office Anaheim Department of Public Works 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, 200 South Anaheim Boulevard 2nd Floor (front counter) 2nd Floor (front counter) Anaheim, California 92805 Anaheim, California 92805 A 30-day public review period was provided from April 1 through April 30, 2013. One resident went to the City offices to discuss the plan. No written comments were received. Personal Interviews The Relocation Plan included one-on-one interviews with property owners regarding relocation options. Personal interviews with the residents to be permanently displaced were conducted in October and November 2012. The interviewer was successful in obtaining survey responses from 17 of the 18 occupied dwelling units in the project area to be displaced. Inquiries concerned household size and composition, income, rent or mortgage payment, length of occupancy, ethnicity, home language, physical disabilities, and replacement housing preferences. Most households surveyed expressed a preference to remain in the Anaheim Community to maintain access to employment, schools, religious organizations, family, shopping, and medical facilities. Some expressed an interest in moving to the cities of Fullerton, Buena Park, and Stanton. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 3 y Comments and Coordination Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 166 ---PAGE BREAK--- Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 167 Chapter 4. List of Preparers 4.1. Caltrans Charles Baker, Senior Environmental Planner. B.A. Anthropology, M.A. History, California State University, Fullerton. 12 years experience in environmental planning. Contribution: Environmental Branch Reviewer. Arman Behtash, Environmental Engineer. B.S. Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Wisconsin, Madison (WI). 23 years experience in environmental engineering. Contribution: Initial Site Assessment (ISA) Reviewer. Paul Chang, Associate Transportation Engineer. B.S Civil Engineering, California State University, Los Angeles. 32 years experience with Caltrans. Contribution: Air Quality Reviewer. Paul Cochran, Associate Environmental Planner. B.S. Biochemistry, University of California, Riverside. 12 years experience in water and soils remediation. Contribution: Water Quality Reviewer. Raouf Fam, Transportation Engineer. B.S. Civil Engineering, California State University Los Angeles. 14 years experience with Caltrans as Permits Engineer and Traffic Operations Engineer. Contribution: Traffic Analysis Reviewer. Bahar Heydari, Associate Environmental Planner. B.S. Geography and Environmental Analysis, California State Polytechnic University, Pomona. 6 years experience in environmental planning. Contribution: Environmental Assessment Reviewer. Jane Levy, Associate Right of Way Agent Local Programs . B.A. from Chapman University, California. 8 years experience with Caltrans Right of Way and 2 years with Local Programs. Contribution: Relocation Study Reviewer. Chris Waterston, Associate Environmental Planner (Biologist). B.S. Biological Science, California State University, Fullerton. 3 years experience in biological assessments, 10 months experience with Caltrans. Contribution: Biological Technical Study (NES MI) Oversight. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 4 y List of Preparers Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 168 Jonathan Wright, District Archaeologist. B.A. Anthropology, California State University, San Diego. 7 years experience with Caltrans. Contribution: Cultural document reviewer. Tara Ziaeian, Transportation Engineer. Contribution: Noise Study Reviewer. 4.2. City of Anaheim Susan Kim, Senior Planner; Bachelor of Arts, Geography, University of Colorado; Master of Planning, University of Southern California; 16 years planning experience. Contribution: Reviewer. Kevin Miako, Associate Engineer, BS, Civil Engineering, Cal State Fullerton University, CA, 6 years of civil engineering experience. Contribution: Reviewer. Tiberius Rosu, Senior Civil Engineer, Master of Science, Civil Engineering, California State University, Fullerton; 28 years of civil engineering experience. Contribution: Reviewer. Khanh Chu, Principal Civil Engineer; Master of Science, Civil Engineering, California State University of Long Beach; 26 years of civil engineering experience. Contribution: Reviewer. Rudy H. Emami, Capital Programs Manager; Bachelor and Masters of Science, Civil Engineering, California State University, Long Beach; 20 years of engineering and construction experience. Contribution: Engineering oversight. 4.3. Consultant Staff Advantec Edward Miller, Jr., PE, TE, Director of Civil Engineering; Bachelor of Science, Civil Engineering, The State University; 30 years of highway design and traffic analysis experience. Contribution: Project Manager of Traffic Study Report. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 4 y List of Preparers Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 169 BonTerra Psomas Kathleen Brady, AICP, Vice President of Technical Services; Bachelor of Science, Sociology, University of California, Riverside; 35 years of environmental planning experience. Contribution: Principal-in-Charge, managed the preparation of the EA. Jennifer Y. Marks, Senior Project Manager; Bachelor of Science, Natural Resources, Planning and Interpretation, Humboldt State University; 14 years of environmental document and analysis experience. Contribution: managed the preparation of the EA. Agnieszka Napiatek, Project Manager; Master of Science, Environmental Studies, California State University, Fullerton; 7 years of experience in environmental planning. Contribution: prepared the EA. Josephine Alido, AICP, Project Manager. Master of Planning, University of Southern California; 24 years of experience in environmental planning throughout Southern California. Contribution: Assisted in the preparation of the Environmental Assessment. Amber Oneal Heredia, Senior Project Manager/Ecologist. Master of Science, Biology, University of California, Riverside; 14 years experience in ecology and environmental documentation. Contribution: Prepared Natural Environment Study/Minimal Impact. James P. Kurtz, B.S., Director, Air Quality and Acoustical Programs. Bachelor of Science, Engineering, University of California, Los Angeles. 31 years of air quality analysis experience and 24 years of noise analysis experience. Contribution: Preparation of the Air Quality Analysis, review of the Noise Analysis. Patrick O. Maxon, M.A., RPA, Director of Cultural Resources. Master of Arts, Anthropology, California State University, Fullerton; 19 years of cultural resources management experience. Contribution: Preparation of the Archaeological Survey Report, Historic Property Survey Report. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 4 y List of Preparers Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 170 Jonathan A. Zimmer, GIS Specialist; Masters of Advanced Studies in Geographical Information Systems, Arizona State University; 5 years of professional GIS experience, 2 years of professional Remote Sensing experience. Contribution: Provide graphics for the EA. Julia R. Black, Technical Writer; Bachelor of Arts, English, California State University, Fullerton; 13 years writing and editing experience. Contribution: Performed technical editing of the EA. Sheryl A. Kristal, Senior Word Processor, Microsoft Office Specialist. General Studies, Golden West College; 10 years of word processing experience. Contribution: Formatted the EA. Daly & Associates Pamela Daly, Owner/Principal; Master of Science, Historic Preservation, University of Vermont; 16 years of experience in the documentation and evaluation of built-environment resources. Contribution: Principal Architectural Historian responsible for the survey, documentation, and evaluation, of built- environment resources in the Area-of- Potential-Effect, and for production of the Historic Resource Evaluation Report (HRER). Entech Northwest Michelle A. Jones, Principal of Technical Services. Bachelor of Science, University of Washington; 23 years of environmental consulting experience. Contribution: Principal-In-Charge, managed the preparation of the Noise Study Report. Joza M. Burnam, Environmental Scientist. Bachelor of Science, University of California, Riverside; 7 years of environmental consulting experience. Contribution: Environmental Scientist, assisted in the preparation of the Noise Study Report. Laguna GeoSciences Rachel Martinez, Principal Geologist; Bachelor of Science, Geology, Texas A&M, Corpus Christi, Texas; Bachelor of Business Administration, University of Texas, Austin, Texas; 30 years environmental and geologic consulting experience. Contribution: Principal-in-Charge, managed the preparation of the ISA. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 4 y List of Preparers Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 171 Michael Barnes, Senior Geologist; Bachelor of Science, Geology, Humboldt State University, Arcata, California; 26 years of environmental consulting experience. Contribution: performed site reconnaissance, data review and prepared ISA report. PACE Bruce Phillips, Senior Vice President of Stormwater Division; Registered California Professional Civil Engineer; Master of Science in Civil Engineering, California State University, Long Beach; Master of Science in Petroleum Engineering, University of Southern California; Over 30 years of Environmental Water Resources Civil Engineering Experience. Contribution: Project Manager, Managed the Preparation and Technical QA/QC of the Caltrans Storm Water Data Report and Supporting Documents. Saila Potukuchi, Project Civil Engineer; Registered California Professional Civil Engineer; Master of Science in Civil Engineering Structural Engineering, Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University, India; 16 years of Civil and Environmental Engineering. Contribution: Project Engineer, Prepared the Caltrans Storm Water Data Report and Supporting Documents. ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 4 y List of Preparers Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 172 ---PAGE BREAK--- Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 173 Chapter 5. Distribution List The draft Environmental Assessment was distributed to the following agencies on compact disk (CD). Paper copies and CDs were provided to the public libraries. FEDERAL AGENCIES U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Project Planning Branch 915 Wilshire Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90017-3401 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 6010 Hidden Valley Road, Suite 101 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Attn: Jim Bartel, Field Supervisor STATE AGENCIES State Clearinghouse Office of Planning and Research 1400 10th Street Sacramento, CA 95814-5502 California Department of Fish and Wildlife 3883 Ruffin Road San Diego, CA 92123 California Department of Parks and Recreation Office of Historic Preservation 1416 9th Street, Room 1442 Sacramento, CA 95814 California Highway Patrol 2031 E Santa Clara Avenue Santa Ana, CA 92705 Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board 3737 Main Street, Suite 500 Riverside, CA 92501-3348 Native American Heritage Commission 915 Capitol Mall, Room 364 Sacramento, CA 95814 LOCAL/REGIONAL AGENCIES South Coast Air Quality Management District 21865 Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 County of Orange Planning Department 300 North Flower Street Santa Ana, CA 92703-5000 Orange County Transportation Authority 550 S. Main St. P.O. Box 14184 Orange, CA 92863-1584 City of Anaheim Community Development Director 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Anaheim, CA 92805 City of Fullerton Community Development Director 303 W. Commonwealth Fullerton, CA 92832 Fire Chief –City of Anaheim 201 S. Anaheim Boulevard, Suite 300 Anaheim, CA 92805 Fire Chief Keith Richter Orange County Fire Authority 1 Fire Authority Road Irvine, CA 92602-0125 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 5 y Distribution List Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 174 LIBRARIES Euclid Branch Library Haskett Branch Library 1340 S. Euclid Street 2650 West Broadway Anaheim, CA 92802 Anaheim, CA 92804 Notices of availability were sent to elected officials, service providers, utility companies and adjacent property owners within the surrounding area including up to 1,650 feet east of Brookhurst Street, 2,650 feet west of Brookhurst Street, and 500 feet north and south of the project limits. The Notice of Availability provided information on the location of the document or how to download the document from the Caltrans website. ELECTED OFFICIALS Representative Edward Royce 40th District 1110 E. Chapman Ave., Ste. 207 Orange, CA 92866 Representative Gary Miller 42nd District 1800 E. Lambert Road, Ste. 150 Brea, CA. 92821 Representative Loretta Sanchez 47th District 12397 Lewis St., Ste. 101 Garden Grove, CA 92840 Senator Barbara Boxer 312 N. Spring Street, Suite 1748 Los Angeles, CA 90012 Senator Dianne Feinstein 750 B Street, Suite 1030 San Diego, CA 92101 Assembly Member Sharon Quirk-Silva 1400 North Harbor Blvd, Suite 601 Fullerton, CA 92835 County of Orange Board of Supervisors Todd Spitzer – District 3 333 W. Santa Ana Blvd Santa Ana, CA 92701 County of Orange Board of Supervisors Shawn Nelson, Chairman – District 4 333 W. Santa Ana Blvd Santa Ana, CA 92701 UTILITIES City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department Anaheim West Tower 201 South Anaheim Blvd. Anaheim, CA 92805 ORGANIZATIONS Anaheim Historical Society PO Box 927 Anaheim, CA 92815 NATIVE AMERICAN REPRESENTATIVES Mr. Bernie Acuna Gabrielino-Tongva Tribe 1875 Century Park East 1500 Los Angeles, CA 90067 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 5 y Distribution List Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 175 Ms. Cindi Alvitre, Chairwoman- Manisar Ti'At Society/Inter-Tribal Council of Pimu 3094 Mace Avenue, Apt B Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Mr. David Belardes, Chairperson Juaneño Band of Mission Indians Acjachemen Nation 32161 Avenida Los Amigos San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675-3702 Ms. Linda Candelaria, Chairwoman Gabrielino-Tongva Tribe 1875 Century Park East 1500 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Mr. Alfred Cruz, Cultural Resources Coordinator Juaneño Band of Mission Indians P.O. Box 25628 Santa Ana, CA 92799 Mr. Robert Dorame, Tribal Chair/Cultural Resources Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council PO Box 490 Bellflower, CA 90707 Mr. Samuel H. Dunlap, Chairperson Gabrielino Tongva Nation PO Box 86908 Los Angeles, CA 90086 Ms. Anita Espinoza Juaneño Band of Mission Indians 1740 Concerto Drive Anaheim, CA 92799 Ms. Sonia Johnston, Tribal Chairperson Juaneño Band of Mission Indians P.O. Box 25628 Santa Ana, CA 92799 Mr. Anthony Morales, Chairperson Gabrieleno/Tongva San Gabriel Board of Mission Indians P.O. Box 693 San Gabriel, CA 91778 Ms. Joyce Perry, Representing Tribal Chairperson Juaneño Band of Mission Indians Acjachemen Nation 4955 Paseo Segovia Irvine, CA 92603-3332 Mr. Anthony Rivera, Chairman Juaneño Band of Mission Indians 31411-A La Matanza Street San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675-2674 Ms. Rebecca Robles United Coalition to Protect Panhe (UCPP) 119 Avenida San Fernando San Clemente, CA 92672 Mr. John Tommy Rosas Tongva Ancestrial Territorial Tribal Nation Private Address Mr. Andrew Salas, Chairperson Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians P.O. Box 393 Covina, CA 91723 Mr. Adolph ‘Bud’ Sepulveda Juaneño Band of Mission Indians P.O. Box 25828 Santa Ana, CA 92799 ---PAGE BREAK--- Chapter 5 y Distribution List Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 176 ---PAGE BREAK--- Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 177 Appendix A Resources Evaluated Relative to the Requirements of Section 4(f) RESOURCES EVALUATED RELATIVE TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 4(f) The environmental review, consultation, and any other action required in accordance with applicable Federal laws for this project is being, or has been, carried-out by Caltrans under its assumption of responsibility pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 327. INTRODUCTION Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966, codified in federal law at 49 U.S.C. 303, declares that “it is the policy of the United States Government that special effort should be made to preserve the natural beauty of the and public park and recreation lands, wildlife and waterfowl refuges, and historic sites.” Section 4(f) specifies that the Secretary (of Transportation) may approve a transportation program or project requiring the use of publicly owned land of a public park, recreation area, or wildlife and waterfowl refuge of national, State, or local significance, or land on a historic site of national, State, or local significance (as determined by the federal, State, or local officials having jurisdiction over the park, area, refuge, or site) only if: • there is no prudent or feasible alternative to using that land and • the program or project includes all possible planning to minimize harm to the park, recreation area, wildlife and waterfowl refuge, or historic site resulting from the use. Section 4(f) further requires consultation with the Department of the Interior and, as appropriate, the involved offices of the Departments of Agriculture and Housing and Urban Development in developing transportation projects and programs that use lands protected by Section 4(f). If historic sites are involved, then coordination with the State Historic Preservation Officer is also needed. This section of the document discusses parks, recreational facilities, wildlife refuges and historic properties found within or adjacent to the project area that do not trigger ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix A y Resources Evaluated Relative to the Requirements of Section 4(f) Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 178 Section 4(f) protection either because: they are not publicly owned; they are not open to the public; they are not eligible historic properties; the project does not permanently use the property and does not hinder the preservation of the property; or the proximity impacts do not result in constructive use. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PROJECT Build Alternative (Locally Preferred Alternative) The Build Alternative would widen the segment of Brookhurst Avenue from a four- lane to six-lane roadway. The project proposes to shift the roadway centerline a maximum of 22 feet to the east and to widen the roadway right-of-way in order to accommodate the additional lanes in the northbound and southbound directions and the proposed bikeways, sidewalks, and landscaped areas, as described in more detail below. The project would require 19 full and 12 partial property acquisitions along the street corridor that is under the City of Anaheim’s jurisdiction. Full property takes would involve demolition of 19 single-family residences to accommodate the proposed project actions. The proposed partial property takes would involve non- structural areas of residential and commercial properties along Brookhurst Street. Currently, there are no features in place to address the water quality of the first flush from a rainfall event. With the proposed Brookhurst Street widening improvements, the project will construct storm water quality retention basins on the east side of Brookhurst Street to mitigate this condition. The project would also require encroachment onto Caltrans property in order to tie in the proposed roadway improvements to the State Route (SR) 91eastbound on- and off-ramps. No-Build Alternative With the No-Build Alternative, there would be no improvements to Brookhurst Street. Purpose and Need The purpose of the project is to accomplish the following specific objectives: • Relieve congestion along the roadway and provide continuity in the number of lanes on Brookhurst Street and • Improve drainage along the corridor. ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix A y Resources Evaluated Relative to the Requirements of Section 4(f) Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 179 A secondary benefit of the project would be enhanced aesthetics. Brookhurst Street extends for approximately 3.5 miles in the city of Anaheim and carries between 33,000 and 41,000 average daily traffic (ADT). In the study area, the ADT is approximately 41,000 vehicle trips. The City of Anaheim General Plan’s Circulation Element (2004) and the Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH) designate Brookhurst Street as a major six-lane arterial. However, within the project limits, Brookhurst Street is a four-lane arterial. In the city of Anaheim, only two segments of the roadway have not been improved to full arterial standards: the study area segment and the portion of Brookhurst Street from Katella Avenue to Ball Road. On this latter segment, property acquisition is complete and construction is expected to begin in 2014 and be completed in 2015. The segment of Brookhurst Street between La Palma Avenue on the south and SR-91 to the north is currently striped for two lanes in each direction. The reduction in lanes, compared to the rest of Brookhurst Street, results in congestion in the study area. In addition, within the project limits, there are no storm drains or features in place that address the water quality of the first flush from a rainfall event. The project is needed to relieve the existing congestion and to enhance operation of Brookhurst Street to bring it to compliance with its six-lane designation under the City of Anaheim General Plan’s Circulation Element and the Orange County MPAH. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTIES EVALUATED RELATIVE TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 4(f) This evaluation considered publicly owned recreational resources within ½ mile of the project site. There are no qualifying wildlife and waterfowl refuges or historic sites that would trigger the requirements under Section 4(f) protection. The resources considered include parks and a school. No bike lanes, bikeways, or hiking trails exist along Brookhurst Street in the project study area. John Marshall Park The John Marshall Park is a community park located approximately 1,600 feet east of Brookhurst Street between La Palma and Falmouth Avenues. This park covers 15 acres and is developed with softball fields, open play areas, a children’s play area, a picnic shelter, barbecue facilities, a football/soccer area, a basketball court, and restrooms. John Marshall Elementary School is located adjacent to and west of this park. This school has paved game courts in addition to athletic fields that are available for public use. ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix A y Resources Evaluated Relative to the Requirements of Section 4(f) Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 180 Brookhurst Community Park Brookhurst Community Park is another City park located within ½ mile of Brookhurst Street. Brookhurst Community Park is a 27-acre community park developed with a skate park, a community center, baseball and softball fields, an open play area, a children’s play area, barbecue facilities, a football/soccer area, a basketball court, and restrooms. It is located 1,300 feet south of the intersection of Brookhurst Street and La Palma Avenue. IMPACTS ON PROPERITIES EVALUATED PURSUANT TO SECTION 4(f) Build Alternative (Locally Preferred Alternative) The proposed project would not require any right-of-way from parks or other recreational facilities; therefore it would not have any indirect impacts on recreational uses such as John Marshall Park or Brookhurst Community Park in the project study area. Additionally, due to distance from the recreational resources, the project would not have any indirect impacts. There would be no direct views, alteration of access to the facilities, or increase in noise levels that could change the character or use of the existing facilities. Since no publicly owned recreational facilities or lands would be affected, no Section 4(f) resources would be affected for this project. John Marshall Park The proposed project would not require any right-of-way from John Marshall Park or have any direct impact on the park site. The Build Alternative would not impede the ability to access the recreational facilities or other park amenities. The project would not result in any proximity impacts (constructive use) impacts such as increased noise, change in visual character, or air quality changes due to the distance of the park from the roadway. Additionally, the project would not result in increased use of the park. Implementation of the Build Alternative would not result in an impact that would impair the use, activities, features, or attributes of this park. As a result, the John Marshall Park does not trigger the requirements for protection under Section 4(f) in the context of this project. Therefore, the provisions of Section 4(f) are not triggered. Brookhurst Community Park The proposed project would not require any right-of-way from Brookhurst Community Park or have any direct impact on the park site. Due to distance from the park, the project would not have any indirect impacts. There would be no direct views, alteration of access to the facilities, or increase in noise levels that could ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix A y Resources Evaluated Relative to the Requirements of Section 4(f) Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 181 change the character or use of the existing facilities. The project would not result in any proximity impacts (constructive use) impacts. Additionally, the project would not result in increased use of the park. Implementation of the Build Alternative would not result in an impact that would impair the use, activities, features, or attributes of this community park. As a result, the Brookhurst Community Park does not trigger the requirements for protection under Section 4(f) in the context of this project. Therefore, the provisions of Section 4(f) are not triggered. No-Build Alternative The No-Build Alternative does not propose any improvements; therefore, it would not impact parks or recreational facilities. However, it would not provide bike lanes on Brookhurst Street and would not implement the City’s Bicycle Master Plan. AVOIDANCE ALTERNATIVES No impacts were identified. Therefore, no avoidance alternative is required. MEASURES TO MINIMIZE HARM No impacts were identified. Therefore, no minimization measures are required. COORDINATION The City of Anaheim has prepared and reviewed engineering concept plans and determined that, due to the distance from recreational resources and lack of direct impacts on recreational uses in the project study area, no concerns related to parks and recreational facilities are anticipated. ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix A y Resources Evaluated Relative to the Requirements of Section 4(f) Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 182 ---PAGE BREAK--- Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 183 Appendix B Title VI Policy Statement ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix B y Title VI Policy Statement Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 184 ---PAGE BREAK--- Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 185 Appendix C Summary of Relocation Benefits The City of Anaheim will be responsible for providing relocation advisory assistance to any person displaced as a result of the City’s acquisition of real property for public use. The City will utilize only local money for the project from OCTA Measure M2. The City will assist residential displacees in obtaining comparable decent, safe, and sanitary replacement housing by providing current and continuing information on sales prices and rental rates of available housing. Residential replacement dwellings would be in equal or better neighborhoods, at prices within the financial means of the individuals and families displaced, and reasonably accessible to their places of employment. Before any displacement occurs, displacees would be offered comparable replacement dwellings that are open to all persons regardless of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin, and are consistent with the requirements of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1968. This assistance would also include supplying information concerning federal- and State-assisted housing programs and any other known services being offered by public and private agencies in the area. The following provides an overview of the Caltrans’ relocation policies. However, since the City of Anaheim would be implementing the relocation program, the text has been modified to identify the City of Anaheim as the agency responsible for complying with the Uniform Relocation and Assistance Act. Declaration of Policy “The purpose of this title is to establish a uniform policy for fair and equitable treatment of persons displaced as a result of federal and federally assisted programs in order that such persons shall not suffer disproportionate injuries as a result of programs designed for the benefit of the public as a whole.” The Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states, “No Person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law, nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.” The Uniform Act sets forth in statute the due process that must be followed in Real Property acquisitions involving federal funds. Supplementing the Uniform Act is the government-wide single rule for all agencies to follow, set forth in 49 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 24. Displaced ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 186 individuals, families, businesses, farms, and nonprofit organizations may be eligible for relocation advisory services and payments, as discussed below. Fair Housing The Fair Housing Law (Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968) sets forth the policy of the United States to provide, within constitutional limitations, for fair housing. This act, and as amended, makes discriminatory practices in the purchase and rental of most residential units illegal. Whenever possible, minority persons shall be given reasonable opportunities to relocate to any available housing regardless of neighborhood, as long as the replacement dwellings are decent, safe, and sanitary and are within their financial means. This policy, however, does not require the City of Anaheim to provide a person a larger payment than is necessary to enable a person to relocate to a comparable replacement dwelling. Any persons to be displaced will be assigned to a relocation advisor, who will work closely with each displacee in order to see that all payments and benefits are fully utilized and that all regulations are observed, thereby avoiding the possibility of displacees jeopardizing or forfeiting any of their benefits or payments. At the time of the initiation of negotiations (usually the first written offer to purchase), owner- occupants are given a detailed explanation of the state’s relocation services. Tenant occupants of properties to be acquired are contacted soon after the initiation of negotiations and also are given a detailed explanation of the City of Anaheim Relocation Assistance Program. To avoid loss of possible benefits, no individual, family, business, farm, or nonprofit organization should commit to purchase or rent a replacement property without first contacting the City of Anaheim relocation advisor. Relocation Assistance Advisory Services In accordance with the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, as amended, the City of Anaheim will provide relocation advisory assistance to any person, business, farm or nonprofit organization displaced as a result of the acquisition of real property for public use, so long as they are legally present in the United States. The City of Anaheim will assist eligible displacees in obtaining comparable replacement housing by providing current and continuing information on the availability and prices of both houses for sale and rental units that are “decent, safe and sanitary.” Nonresidential displacees will receive information on comparable properties for lease or purchase (for business, farm and nonprofit organization relocation services, see below). ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 187 Residential replacement dwellings will be in a location generally not less desirable than the displacement neighborhood at prices or rents within the financial ability of the individuals and families displaced, and reasonably accessible to their places of employment. Before any displacement occurs, comparable replacement dwellings will be offered to displacees that are open to all persons regardless of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, and consistent with the requirements of Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968. This assistance will also include the supplying of information concerning Federal and State assisted housing programs and any other known services being offered by public and private agencies in the area. Persons who are eligible for relocation payments and who are legally occupying the property required for the project will not be asked to move without first being given at least 90 days written notice. Residential occupants eligible for relocation payment(s) will not be required to move unless at least one comparable “decent, safe and sanitary” replacement dwelling, available on the market, is offered to them by the City of Anaheim. Residential Relocation Payments The Relocation Assistance Program will help eligible residential occupants by paying certain costs and expenses. These costs are limited to those necessary for or incidental to the purchase or rental of a replacement dwelling and actual reasonable moving expenses to a new location within 50 miles of the displacement property. Any actual moving costs in excess of the 50 miles are the responsibility of the displacee. The Residential Relocation Assistance Program can be summarized as follows: Moving Costs Any displaced person, who lawfully occupied the acquired property, regardless of the length of occupancy in the property acquired, will be eligible for reimbursement of moving costs. Displacees will receive either the actual reasonable costs involved in moving themselves and personal property up to a maximum of 50 miles, or a fixed payment based on a fixed moving cost schedule. Lawful occupants who move into the displacement property after the initiation of negotiations must wait until the City obtains control of the property in order to be eligible for relocation payments. Purchase Differential In addition to moving and related expense payments, fully eligible homeowners may be entitled to payments for increased costs of replacement housing. ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 188 Homeowners who have owned and occupied their property for 180 days or more prior to the date of the initiation of negotiations (usually the first written offer to purchase the property), may qualify to receive a price differential payment and may qualify to receive reimbursement for certain nonrecurring costs incidental to the purchase of the replacement property. An interest differential payment is also available if the interest rate for the loan on the replacement dwelling is higher than the loan rate on the displacement dwelling, subject to certain limitations on reimbursement based upon the replacement property interest rate. The maximum combination of these three supplemental payments that the owner-occupant can receive is $22,500. If the total entitlement (without the moving payments) is in excess of $22,500, the Last Resort Housing Program will be used (see the explanation of the Last Resort Housing Program below). Rent Differential Tenants and certain owner-occupants (based on length of ownership) who have occupied the property to be acquired by the City of Anaheim prior to the date of the initiation of negotiations may qualify to receive a rent differential payment. This payment is made when the City of Anaheim determines that the cost to rent a comparable “decent, safe and sanitary” replacement dwelling will be more than the present rent of the displacement dwelling. As an alternative, the tenant may qualify for a down payment benefit designed to assist in the purchase of a replacement property and the payment of certain costs incidental to the purchase, subject to certain limitations noted under the Down Payment section below. The maximum amount payable to any eligible tenant and any owner-occupant of less than 180 days, in addition to moving expenses, is $5,250. If the total entitlement for rent supplement exceeds $5,250, the Last Resort Housing Program will be used. To receive any relocation benefits, the displaced person must buy or rent and occupy a “decent, safe and sanitary” replacement dwelling within one year from the date the Department takes legal possession of the property, or from the date the displacee vacates the displacement property, whichever is later. Down Payment The down payment option has been designed to aid owner-occupants of less than 180 days and tenants in legal occupancy prior to the City of Anaheim’s initiation of negotiations. The down payment and incidental expenses cannot exceed the maximum payment of $5,250. The one-year eligibility period in which to purchase and occupy a “decent, safe and sanitary” replacement dwelling will apply. ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 189 Last Resort Housing Federal regulations (49 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 24) contain the policy and procedure for implementing the Last Resort Housing Program on federal-aid projects. Last Resort Housing benefits are, except for the amounts of payments and the methods in making them, the same as those benefits for standard residential relocation as explained above. Last Resort Housing has been designed primarily to cover situations where a displacee cannot be relocated because of lack of available comparable replacement housing, or when the anticipated replacement housing payments exceed the $22,500 and $5,250 limits of the standard relocation procedure, because either the displacee lacks the financial ability or other valid circumstances. After the initiation of negotiations, the City of Anaheim will within a reasonable length of time, personally contact the displacees to gather important information, including the following: • Number of people to be displaced. • Specific arrangements needed to accommodate any family member(s) with special needs. • Financial ability to relocate into comparable replacement dwelling which will adequately house all members of the family. • Preferences in area of relocation. • Location of employment or school. Nonresidential Relocation Assistance The Nonresidential Relocation Assistance Program provides assistance to businesses, farms and nonprofit organizations in locating suitable replacement property, and reimbursement for certain costs involved in relocation. The Relocation Advisory Assistance Program will provide current lists of properties offered for sale or rent, suitable for a particular business’s specific relocation needs. The types of payments available to eligible businesses, farms and nonprofit organizations are: searching and moving expenses, and possibly reestablishment expenses; or a fixed in lieu payment instead of any moving, searching and reestablishment expenses. The payment types can be summarized as follows: ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 190 Moving Expenses Moving expenses may include the following actual, reasonable costs: • The moving of inventory, machinery, equipment and similar business-related property, including: dismantling, disconnecting, crating, packing, loading, insuring, transporting, unloading, unpacking, and reconnecting of personal property. Items acquired in the right-of-way contract may not be moved under the Relocation Assistance Program. If the displacee buys an Item Pertaining to the Realty back at salvage value, the cost to move that item is borne by the displacee. • Loss of tangible personal property provides payment for actual, direct loss of personal property that the owner is permitted not to move. • Expenses related to searching for a new business site, up to $2,500, for reasonable expenses actually incurred. Reestablishment Expenses Reestablishment expenses related to the operation of the business at the new location, up to $10,000 for reasonable expenses actually incurred. Fixed In Lieu Payment A fixed payment in lieu of moving, searching, and reestablishment payments may be available to businesses that meet certain eligibility requirements. This payment is an amount equal to half the average annual net earnings for the last two taxable years prior to the relocation and may not be less than $1,000 nor more than $20,000. Additional Information Reimbursement for moving costs and replacement housing payments are not considered income for the purpose of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, or for the purpose of determining the extent of eligibility of a displacee for assistance under the Social Security Act, or any other law, except for any federal law providing local “Section 8” Housing Programs. Any person, business, farm or nonprofit organization that has been refused a relocation payment by the City of Anaheim relocation advisor or believes that the payment(s) offered by the agency are inadequate may appeal for a special hearing of the complaint. No legal assistance is required. Information about the appeal procedure is available from the relocation advisor. California law allows for the payment for lost goodwill that arises from the displacement for a public project. A list of ineligible expenses can be obtained from ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 191 the City of Anaheim Public Works. California’s law and the federal regulations covering relocation assistance provide that no payment shall be duplicated by other payments being made by the displacing agency. Residential Relocation Payments Program Following is the Caltrans brochure “Your Rights and Benefits as a Displacee Under the Uniform Relocation Assistance Program (Residential) 2007”, in both English and Spanish languages, which provides information about available relocation services and payment pursuant to the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, as amended. Summary of the City of Anaheim Relocation Plan The City of Anaheim has prepared a Relocation Program for the Brookhurst Street Improvement Project. The City of Anaheim adopted The Brookhurst Street Widening Project I-5 – SR-91 Final Relocation Plan on May 28, 2013. The City of Anaheim would implement the relocation program; therefore, the Relocation Plan outlines the City of Anaheim’s relocation program, including an assessment of the relocation needs of persons subject to displacement and the assessment of available replacement housing units within the City of Anaheim and surrounding communities. This Relocation Plan conforms to the requirements of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, as amended, California Relocation Assistance Law, Government Code Section 7260, et. seq, the Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Guidelines adopted by the Department of Housing and Community Development and Title 25, California Code of Regulations Section 6000, et. seq. Following is a summary of the City’s adopted Relocation Plan. ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 192 ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 193 ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 194 ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 195 ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 196 ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 197 ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 198 ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 199 ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 200 ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 201 ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 202 ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 203 ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 204 ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 205 ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 206 ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 207 ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 208 ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 209 ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 210 ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 211 ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 212 ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 213 ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 214 ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 215 ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 216 ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 217 ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 218 ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 219 ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 220 ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 221 ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 222 ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 223 ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 224 ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 225 ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 226 ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 227 ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 228 ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 229 ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 230 ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 231 IV THE RELOCATION PROGRAM The City’s Relocation Program is designed to minimize hardship, be responsive to unique project circumstances, emphasize maintaining personal contact with all affected individuals, consistently apply all regulatory criteria to formulate eligibility and benefit determinations and conform to all applicable requirements. The City has retained Overland, Pacific & Cutler, Inc. (“OPC”) to administer the Relocation Program. OPC has worked on more than 3,000 public acquisition and relocation projects over more than 32 years. Additionally, OPC has an extensive resume of redevelopment and public works projects undertaken in the City of Anaheim and other Southern California communities. Experienced City staff will monitor the performance of OPC and be responsible to approve or disapprove OPC recommendations concerning eligibility and benefit determinations and interpretations of the City’s policy. The Relocation Program consists of two principal constituents: Advisory Assistance and Financial Assistance. A. ADVISORY ASSISTANCE Individuals who will need to move from existing homes will receive advisory assistance. Advisory assistance services are intended to: • inform displacees about the relocation program • help in the process of finding appropriate replacement accommodations • facilitate claims processing • maintain a communication link with the City • coordinate the involvement of outside service providers To follow through on the advisory assistance component of the relocation program and assure that the City meets its obligations under the law, OPC staff will perform the following functions: 1. Distribute appropriate written information concerning the City’s relocation program; 2. Inform eligible project occupants of the nature of, and procedures for, obtaining available relocation assistance and benefits (See Exhibit 3. Determine the needs of each displacee eligible for assistance; ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 232 4. Provide residential displacees with at least one, and preferably three, referrals to comparable replacement housing within a reasonable time prior to displacement. Generally, a comparable replacement dwelling must satisfy the following criteria: The unit is decent, safe and sanitary - electrical, plumbing and heating systems in good repair - no major, observable hazards or defects. The unit is adequate in size and is comparable to the acquired dwelling with respect to number of rooms, habitable living space and type and quality of construction, but not lesser in rooms or living space as necessary to accommodate the displaced person. The unit is functionally equivalent, including principle features. The unit is located in an area not subjected to unreasonable adverse environmental conditions from either natural, or man-made sources, and not generally less desirable with respect to public utilities, transportation, public and commercial facilities, including schools and municipal services and reasonably accessible to the displaced person’s place of employment. The unit is available both on the private market and to all persons regardless of race, color, sex, marital status, religion or, national origin. 5. Maintain an updated database of available housing resources, and distribute referral information to displacees for the duration of the project; 6. Provide transportation to the residential displacees, if necessary, to inspect replacement sites within the local area; 7. Inspect replacement housing to assure it meets decent, safe and sanitary standards as described in the URA; 8. Supply information concerning federal and state programs and other governmental programs providing assistance to displaced persons; 9. Make benefit determinations and payments in accordance with applicable law and the City’s adopted relocation guidelines; 10. Assist eligible occupants in the preparation, and submission, of relocation assistance claims; 11. Assure that no occupant is required to move without a minimum of 90 days written notice to vacate; ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 233 12. Inform all persons subject to displacement of the City’s policies with regard to eviction and property management; 13. Provide additional reasonable services necessary to successfully relocate occupants; 14. Establish and maintain a formal grievance procedure for use by displaced persons seeking administrative review of the City’s decisions with respect to relocation assistance; and 15. Provide assistance that does not result in different or separate treatment based on or due to an individual’s sex, marital status, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, physical handicap, sexual orientation, and domestic partnership status. B. RELOCATION BENEFITS Specific eligibility requirements and benefit plans will be detailed on an individual basis with all displacees. In the course of a personal interview and follow-up visits, each displacee will be counseled as to available options and the consequences of any choice with respect to financial assistance. Relocation benefits will be provided in accordance with the provisions of the federal guidelines, and City rules, regulations and procedures pertaining thereto. Benefits will be paid to eligible displaced persons upon submission of required claim forms and documentation in accordance with the City’s normal administrative procedures. The City will process advance payment requests to mitigate hardships for residents who do not have access to sufficient funds to pay move-in costs such paying escrow or security deposits. Approved requests will be processed expeditiously to help avoid the loss of desirable, appropriate replacement housing. 1. Residential Moving Expense Payments All residential occupants to be permanently relocated will be eligible to receive a payment for moving expenses. Moving expense payments will be made based upon the actual cost of a professional move, a fixed payment based on a room-count schedule or a combination of both. a. Actual Cost (Professional Move) Displacees may elect to have a licensed professional mover perform the move. The actual cost of the moving services, based on at least two acceptable bids, will be ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 234 compensated by the City in the form of a direct payment to the moving company upon presentation of an invoice. Transportation costs are limited to a distance of 50 miles in either case. In addition to the actual move, costs associated with utility re- connections gas, water, electricity, telephone, and cable, if any), are eligible for reimbursement. b. Fixed Payment (based on Room Count Schedule) An occupant may elect to receive a fixed payment for moving expenses which is based on the number of rooms occupied in the displacement dwelling. In this case, the person to be relocated takes full responsibility for the move. The fixed payment includes all utility connections as described in above. The current schedule for fixed moving payments is set forth in Table 5 following: TABLE 5: Schedule of Fixed Moving Payments TABLE 6: Computation of Rental Assistance Payments (Tenants) 1 Old Rent $650 Old Rent, plus Utility Allowance or 2. Ability to Pay $700 30% of the Adjusted Gross Household Income* 3. Lesser of lines 1 or 2 $650 Base Rental Subtract From: 4. Actual New Rent $750 Actual New Rent including Utility Allowance or 5. Comparable Rent $775 Determined by Agency, includes Utility Allowance 6. Lesser of lines 4 or 5 $750 7. Yields Need $100 Subtract line 3 from line 6 8. Rental Assistance Payment $4,200 Multiply line 7 by 42 months 2. Rental Assistance to Tenants Who Choose to Rent To be eligible to receive the rental assistance benefits, the displaced tenant household has to rent or purchase and occupy a decent, safe, and sanitary replacement dwelling within one year from the date they move from the displacement dwelling. Based upon the available data regarding Project displacees, the displaced household may qualify for, and may be eligible to apply for, relocation benefits under URA provisions. Except in the case of Last Resort Housing situations, the potential payment to the household will be payable over a 42-month period and limited to a maximum of $5,250 as stated under URA guidelines. The relocation program is ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 235 explained in detail in the informational brochure to be provided to each permanently displaced household (see Exhibit Rental Assistance payment amounts are equal to 42 times the difference between the base rent and the lesser of: The rent and estimated average cost of utilities for a comparable replacement dwelling; or (ii) The rent and estimated average cost of utilities for the decent, safe, and sanitary replacement dwelling actually occupied by the displaced person. The base rent for the displacement dwelling is the lesser of: The average cost for rent and utilities at the displacement dwelling for a reasonable period prior to displacement, as determined by the City. For owner occupants or households, which paid little or no rent, fair market rent will be used as a substitute for actual rent; or (ii) Thirty percent (30%) of the displaced person’s average, gross household income, if the amount is classified as “low income” by the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Annual Survey of Income Limits for the Public Housing and Section 8 Programs. (HUD’s Survey is shown as Exhibit If a displacee refuses to provide appropriate evidence of income or is a dependent, the base rent shall be determined to be the average cost for rent and utilities at the displacement dwelling; or (iii) The total of the amount designated for shelter and utilities if receiving a welfare assistance payment from a program that designated the amounts for shelter and utilities. Table 6 portrays the benefits determination under the URA: ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 236 TABLE 6: Example Computation of URA Rental Assistance Payments TABLE 6: Computation of Rental Assistance Payments (Tenants) 1 Old Rent $650 Old Rent, plus Utility Allowance or 2. Ability to Pay $700 30% of the Adjusted Gross Household Income* 3. Lesser of lines 1 or 2 $650 Base Rental Subtract From: 4. Actual New Rent $750 Actual New Rent including Utility Allowance or 5. Comparable Rent $775 Determined by Agency, includes Utility Allowance 6. Lesser of lines 4 or 5 $750 7. Yields Need $100 Subtract line 3 from line 6 8. Rental Assistance Payment $4,200 Multiply line 7 by 42 months 3. Downpayment Assistance to Tenants Who Choose to Purchase The displaced household may opt to apply the entire benefit amount for which they are eligible toward the purchase of a replacement unit (Guidelines 49 CFR 24.402(b)). A displaced household, who chooses to utilize up to the full amount of their rental assistance eligibility (including any Last Resort benefits) to purchase a home, will have the funds deposited in an open escrow account, provided that the entire amount is used for the downpayment and eligible, incidental costs associated with the purchase of a decent, safe, and sanitary replacement home. A provision shall be made in the escrow arrangements for the prompt return of the City’s funds, in the event escrow should fail to close within a reasonable period of time. Final determination about the type of relocation benefits and assistance for which the household is eligible will be determined upon verification of the household’s occupants and income. 4. Purchase Assistance to Homeowners Homeowners displaced by this Project will be eligible for relocation replacement housing payments, if the following conditions are met: The displacee has owned and occupied their unit for not less than 180 days prior to the Initiation of Negotiations, and The displacee purchases and occupies a replacement unit within one year from: the date the displaced person receives final payment for the displacement dwelling - or - (ii) the date at least one ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 237 comparable replacement dwelling has been made available to the displacee, whichever is later. Displaced homeowner households will receive assistance in locating a “comparable replacement” unit and may be eligible for the following benefits: Purchase Price Differential Payment - A displaced household may be eligible for a replacement housing payment as an owner-occupant. Once the fair market value of the dwelling being acquired by the City is determined, an analysis of the existing housing market is made to determine the costs of a comparable replacement dwelling. The difference, if any, between the payment received for the displacement dwelling and the purchase price of a comparable replacement dwelling, results in the amount of a Purchase Price Differential (“PPD”) payment. Incidental Expense Payment - As a part of the cost associated with the purchase of a replacement dwelling, certain closing costs are generally incurred. These include, but are not limited to: appraisal fees, title and escrow fees, recording fees, loan processing fees, and cost for credit reports. These one-time non-recurring fees associated with purchasing a replacement dwelling are reimbursable to the displaced household by the City as an Incidental Expense Payment. These expenses must be actually incurred and documented on a Final Closing Statement supplied by the escrow or title company. Recurring costs such as real estate taxes, insurance and association dues are not eligible as reimbursable closing costs. Mortgage Interest Differential Payment - In some cases, an owner-occupant being displaced will find that current market interest rates or mortgage costs exceed their existing mortgage terms. A Mortgage Interest Differential Payment (MIDP) may be made to enable the displaced household to duplicate the amortization schedule for the displacement dwelling to that of the comparable replacement dwelling, as described in the Relocation Laws. The payment amount would cover the increased interest costs, if any, required to finance a replacement dwelling. Based upon the available data regarding Project displacees, the displaced households may qualify for, and may be eligible to apply for, several of these relocation benefits under URA provisions. Except in the case of Last Resort Housing situations, the potential total payment to the households will be limited to a maximum of $22,500 as stated under URA guidelines. The relocation program is explained in detail in the informational brochure to be provided to each permanently displaced household (see Exhibit ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 238 5. Rental Assistance Option to Owners Who Choose to Rent If a displaced homeowner household, which has purchased and occupied its current unit at least 90 days prior to the “initiation of negotiations,” desires to rent instead of purchase a replacement unit, the household is eligible for all the benefits and assistance that is available to tenant households. However, such replacement housing payments may not exceed the payments the household would have been entitled to if it had elected to purchase a replacement unit and been eligible as a 180-day owner- occupant. Table 7 illustrates the computation of a rental/downpayment assistance payment amount. TABLE 7: Computation of Rental Assistance Payments (Owners) TABLE 7: Computation of Rental Assistance Payments (Owners) 1 Old Rent $650 Old Rent, plus Utility Allowance Subtract From: 2. Actual New Rent $750 Actual New Rent including Utility Allowance or 3. Comparable Rent $775 Determined by City, includes Utility Allowance 4. Lesser of lines 2 or 3 $750 5. Yields Need $100 Subtract line 1 from line 4 6. Rental Assistance $4,200 Multiply line 5 by 42 months To be eligible to receive the rental assistance benefits, the displacee has rented and occupied a decent, safe, and sanitary replacement dwelling within one year (unless the City extends this period for good cause) from the latter of the date he or she moves from the displacement dwelling or the date they receive final payment for the dwelling. 6. Payment to Non-Tenured Residential Tenants A residential tenant who has actually and lawfully occupied the displacement dwelling for less than 90 days immediately prior to the initiation of negotiations is entitled to receive a moving expense payment. Additionally, non-tenured residential tenants may qualify for a rental assistance payment under the provisions of Last Resort Housing assistance (see Last Resort Housing, Section IV, Such assistance is authorized when comparable replacement housing is not available at rental rates within the tenant’s financial means (30% of gross household income). Last Resort Housing assistance to non-tenured households is based solely on income. ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 239 C. DETERMINATION OF COMPARABLE HOUSING Relocation staff will evaluate the cost of comparable replacement housing in the preparation of each individual Notice of Eligibility issued to residential displacees. For residential occupants, the cost of comparable replacement housing will be determined by the comparable method, which determines the most comparable dwellings in the local market for each type of unit needed. D. GENERAL INFORMATION REGARDING THE PAYMENT OF RELOCATION BENEFITS Claims and supporting documentation for relocation benefits must be filed with the City no later than 18 months after the date of displacement. The procedure for the preparation and filing of claims, and the processing and delivery of payments, will be as follows: 1. Claimant(s) will provide all necessary documentation to substantiate eligibility for assistance; 2. Relocation staff will review all necessary documentation including, but not limited to, income verification, lease documents and escrow material before reaching a determination as to which expenses are eligible for compensation; 3. Required claims forms will be prepared by relocation staff and presented to the claimant for review. Signed claims and supporting documentation will be returned to relocation staff and submitted to the City; 4. The City will review and approve claims for payment, or request additional information; 5. The City will issue benefit checks to claimants in the most secure, expeditious manner possible; 6. Final payments to residential displacees will be issued after confirmation that the project premises have been completely vacated and actual residency at the replacement unit is verified; 7. Receipts of payment and all claims materials will be maintained in the relocation case file. E. LAST RESORT HOUSING Specifically, for renters, when the computed replacement housing assistance eligibility exceeds $5,250 or replacement dwelling rental costs (including ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 240 utilities and other reasonable recurring expenses) exceeds 30% of the person’s average income, Last Resort Housing will have to be provided. Therefore, if the project is to go forward, the City will authorize its funds or funds authorized for the project to provide housing of last resort. Funds will be used to make payments in excess of the monetary limit specified in the statute ($5,250); hence, satisfying the requirement that “comparable replacement housing” is available. A displaced tenant household will be entitled to consideration for supplementary benefits in the form of Last Resort Housing assistance when the computed replacement housing assistance eligibility exceeds $5,250 or replacement dwelling rental costs (including utilities and other reasonable recurring expenses) exceed 30% of the person’s average income (financial means) or when a tenant fails to meet the 90-day occupancy requirement and comparable replacement rental housing is not available within the displaced person’s financial means. Calculations of Last Resort rental assistance benefits for tenants who fail to meet the 90-day occupancy requirement will be based solely on household income. Non 90- day qualifiers must meet basic eligibility requirements applied to all other displacees. For owner-occupants/homeowners, if there is not enough “comparable replacement housing” available (related to purchase price), the displacing entity shall pay whatever costs are necessary beyond the statutory cap of $22,500 to acquire a “comparable replacement” unit, including reasonable incidental expenses. In addition, there are several other Last Resort Housing options not associated with making replacement housing payments beyond the statutory limits. Options for any qualified household will be explored on a case by case basis. The City may pay Last Resort Housing payments in installments or a lump sum. Recipients of Last Resort rental assistance, who intend to purchase rather than re-rent replacement housing, will have the right to request a lump sum payment of all benefits in the form of downpayment assistance. F. IMMIGRATION STATUS Federal legislation (PL105-117) prohibits the payment of relocation assistance benefits under the Uniform Act to any alien not lawfully present in the United States unless such ineligibility would result in an exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to the alien’s spouse, parent, or child any of whom is a citizen or an alien admitted for permanent residence. Exceptional and extremely unusual hardship is ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 241 defined as significant and demonstrable adverse impact on the health or safety, continued existence of the family unit, and any other impact determined by the City to negatively affect the alien’s spouse, parent or child. In order to track and account for relocation assistance and benefit payments, City staff will be required to seek immigration status information from each displacee 18 years or older by having them self-certify as to their legal status. The City will pay relocation benefits to otherwise eligible non-lawfully present persons with nonfederal funds. G. RELOCATION TAX CONSEQUENCES In general, relocation payments are not considered income for the purpose of Division 2 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, which has been redesignated as the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (Title 26, U.S. Code), or for the purpose of determining the eligibility or extent of eligibility of any person for assistance under the Social Security Act (42 U.S. Code 301 et seq.) or the Personal Income Tax Law, Part 10 (commencing with Section17001) of the Revenue and Taxation Code, or the Bank and Corporation Tax Law, Part II (commencing with Section 23001) of Division 2 of Revenue and Taxation Code. The above statement on tax consequences is not intended as tax advice by the City or OPC. Displacees are responsible for consulting with their own tax advisors concerning the tax consequences of relocation payments. ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C y Summary of Relocation Benefits Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 242 ---PAGE BREAK--- Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 243 Appendix D Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix D y Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Summary Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 244 ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix D y Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Summary Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 245 ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS RECORD Brookhurst Street Improvements Federal ID #STPL-5055(163) 12-ORA-Anaheim Tiberius Rosu, City of Anaheim, (714) 765-4113 Item # Impact Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Review Responsibility Implementation Responsibility Timing/ Phase Status Approval/ Signature/Date SC-1 Relocations and Real Property Acquisition Prior to construction, the City of Anaheim shall obtain all required right- of-way for the roadway and grade separation. Owners of property to be acquired shall be compensated for the fair market value of the property as well as damages, if any, to the remaining portions of their properties in accordance with the Federal Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act. Relocation assistance and counseling will be provided to displaced businesses in accordance with the Federal Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act to ensure adequate relocation for displaced businesses. All eligible displacees will be eligible for moving expenses. All benefits and services will be provided equitably to all relocatees without regard to race, color, religion, age, national origin, or disability, as specified under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. City of Anaheim City of Anaheim Prior to construction SC-2 Utilities During project design, the City of Anaheim shall coordinate with utility providers regarding relocation of utilities without interrupting service. City of Anaheim City of Anaheim During the Plans, Specifications, and Estimates Phase SC-3 Traffic and Transportation The city of Anaheim shall develop a Traffic Management Plan during the Plans, Specifications, and Estimates Phase to ensure safe and efficient traffic flow throughout the project study area during all phases of construction. The Traffic Management Plan shall optimize City of Anaheim City of Anaheim During the Plans, Specifications, and Estimates Phase ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix D y Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Summary Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 246 Item # Impact Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Review Responsibility Implementation Responsibility Timing/ Phase Status Approval/ Signature/Date roadway capacity, signal phasing, and timing during construction. The City of Anaheim shall ensure that emergency service providers are aware of each stage of construction and of any potential service delays. In addition, prior to each construction phase, the City of Anaheim shall coordinate with OCTA to develop appropriate safety provisions during construction. The Traffic Management Plan will include public notification of any modifications to bus stop locations or operational procedures during construction. SC-4 Visual/Aesthetics The City of Anaheim shall ensure that tree removal is conducted in accordance with Section 13.12.060 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. Any tree would be replaced as part of the proposed median or greenbelt in accordance with the Official Tree Species List and Tree Master Plan. City of Anaheim City of Anaheim During the Plans, Specifications, and Estimates Phase SC-5 Cultural Resources If human remains are encountered during any excavation or other ground-disturbing work, Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code states that no further disturbances shall occur until the Orange County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Section 5097.98 of the California Public Resources Code. The City of Anaheim shall notify the Coroner of the find immediately. If the remains are determined to be prehistoric, the Coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which will determine and notify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD). With the permission of the landowner or his/her authorized representative, the MLD may inspect Principal Engineer City of Anaheim Principal Engineer During Construction ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix D y Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Summary Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 247 Item # Impact Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Review Responsibility Implementation Responsibility Timing/ Phase Status Approval/ Signature/Date the site of the discovery. The MLD shall complete the inspection within 48 hours of being granted access to the site. The MLD may recommend scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of the human remains and items associated with Native American burials. SC-6 Water Quality and Storm Water Runoff The City of Anaheim shall prepare and implement construction site Best Management Practices (BMPs) in compliance with the provisions of the Construction General Permit (NPDES No. CAS000002 and NPDES Permit No. CAS000003 within Caltrans right-of- way), the Municipal Separate Storm System (MS4) Permit (Water Quality Order 2009-0030), the State Water Resources Control Board National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activity, and any subsequent permit as they relate to construction activities for the project. This will include submittal of Permit Registration Documents (PRDs) on the SMARTS System in order to obtain permit coverage, preparation, and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan and submission of a Notice of Construction Completion (NCC) to the SMARTS System upon completion of construction and stabilization of the project site. The will identify construction-related BMPs to control sediment, to stabilize soil, and to protect slopes. These BMPs may include but are not limited to temporary concrete washouts, stabilized construction gates, silt fences, sand bag barriers, gravel bag berms, fiber rolls. Principal Engineer Construction Contractor/Principal Engineer Develop BMPs during the Plans, Specifications, and Estimates Phase Implementation/ monitoring during construction ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix D y Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Summary Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 248 Item # Impact Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Review Responsibility Implementation Responsibility Timing/ Phase Status Approval/ Signature/Date WQ-1 Water Quality and Storm Water Runoff The City of Anaheim shall ensure appropriate post construction drainage design. The surface drainage will be intercepted through specialized street inlets (weirs) which will discharge the runoff into the bioswales. The bioswales will be designed to up to a maximum flow depth of 0.5 ft. These will have enhanced permeable soils that extend several feet below the existing basin floor elevation. An impermeable linear will be installed below the amended soil to prevent additional infiltration because of the existing contaminated groundwater plume in the area. Principal Engineer Construction Contractor/Principal Engineer Develop BMPs during the Plans, Specifications, and Estimates Phase Implementation/ monitoring during construction WQ-2 Water Quality and Storm Water Runoff Should it be determined that dewatering is required, the City of Anaheim shall ensure that the dewatered effluent is trucked off-site and disposed of according to existing laws and regulations. City of Anaheim Principal Engineer Construction Contractor/Principal Engineer During construction HZ-1 Hazardous Waste/Materials Phase II Soil Sampling. Prior to property acquisition and/or construction, the City of Anaheim shall develop a soil sampling program to screen the soil for aerially deposited lead (ADL), legacy pesticides, and other potential chemicals of concern on the property proposed for acquisition. For construction purposes, the zone of impact considered for this sampling is anticipated to be limited to possible earth excavation within the area of proposed right-of-way construction. However, if needed, the zone of impact considered for sampling may extend beyond the depth of excavation. This soil sampling should assess potential chemicals of concern for constituents that are likely to be present in the Principal Engineer Contractor Prior to property acquisition and/or construction ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix D y Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Summary Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 249 Item # Impact Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Review Responsibility Implementation Responsibility Timing/ Phase Status Approval/ Signature/Date subsurface. Chemicals of concern include, but are not limited to lead, pesticides, and arsenic (associated with pesticide use). HZ-2 Hazardous Waste/Materials Soil Mitigation Plan. The construction contractor shall prepare a soil mitigation plan so that soil excavation can be managed properly. The soil mitigation plan will describe a plan in the event that hazardous materials are discovered during construction, in unpaved areas adjacent to the roadway, so that precautions can be taken to ensure that the materials are properly removed and so that workers are protected from hazardous materials. If contaminated soil is encountered, the delineation, removal, and disposal of contaminated soils will be conducted in accordance with local, State, and federal requirements. The soil mitigation plan will establish soil reuse criteria, establish a sampling plan for stockpiled materials; describe the disposition of materials that do not satisfy the reuse criteria; and specify guidelines for imported material. Principal Engineer Contractor After final construction plans are prepared HZ-3 Hazardous Waste/Materials Health and Safety Plan. The City of Anaheim shall ensure that the construction contractor prepares the site specific health and safety plan prior to the initiation of construction activities in order to reduce potential health and safety hazards to workers in the event unknown hazards are encountered during excavation activities. The health and safety plan will include a hazard awareness program for persons with potential exposure to the chemicals of concern. A health and safety plan will include a description of field safety Principal Engineer Contractor Prior to the initiation of construction ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix D y Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Summary Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 250 Item # Impact Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Review Responsibility Implementation Responsibility Timing/ Phase Status Approval/ Signature/Date procedures and personal protection monitoring requirements. HZ-4 Hazardous Waste/Materials Construction Observation/Monitoring. During project construction, the construction contractor shall implement hazardous materials and petroleum products monitoring, mitigation and cleanup program. The program will include observations during any future development activities for features of concern or areas of possible contamination. Further investigation and analysis may be necessary, should such materials be encountered. If contamination is encountered during excavation activities, construction work will cease and the City must notify the local enforcement agency. Principal Engineer Contractor During project construction HZ-5 Hazardous Waste/Materials If any of the structures are found to contain asbestos fibers, the construction contractor shall conduct demolition in accordance with the remediation and mitigation procedures established by federal, State, and local standards including federal and California Occupational Safety Hazard Administration (OSHA), and Air Quality Management District (AQMD) regulations for the excavation, removal, and proper disposal of asbestos containing materials (South Coast Air Quality Management District [SCAQMD] Regulation X − National Emission Standards For Hazardous Air Pollutants, Subpart M – National Emission Standards For Asbestos). The material shall be disposed of at a certified asbestos landfill. Principal Engineer Contractor Prior to the initiation of demolition ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix D y Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Summary Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 251 Item # Impact Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Review Responsibility Implementation Responsibility Timing/ Phase Status Approval/ Signature/Date HZ-6 Hazardous Waste/Materials The construction contractor shall conduct an asbestos inspection in conformance with established protocols (as outlined in the Code of Federal Regulations (Title 40, Section763) or other applicable State or local regulations and sampling of suspect materials and limited visual observations of building materials will be conducted to identify the possible presence of presumed asbestos- containing materials (PACM) shall be made. OSHA’s definition of PACM is limited to thermal system insulation and surfacing materials present in buildings constructed before 1981. Flooring material vinyl floor tiles, asphalt floor tiles, mastic) are not considered PACM, but OSHA nonetheless requires that flooring material present in buildings constructed before 1981 be treated similarly to PACM. Principal Engineer Contractor Prior to the initiation of demolition SC-7 Air Quality The standard contract provisions with the City of Anaheim require that the construction contractor complies with Caltrans Standard Specifications in Section 14 (2010). • Section 14-9.02 specifically requires contractor compliance with all applicable laws and regulations related to air quality, including air pollution control district and air quality management district regulations and local ordinances. • Section 14-9.03 is directed at controlling dust. If dust-palliative materials other than water are to be used, Principal Engineer City of Anaheim/Contractor During project construction ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix D y Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Summary Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 252 Item # Impact Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Review Responsibility Implementation Responsibility Timing/ Phase Status Approval/ Signature/Date material specifications are contained in Section 18. SC-8 Air Quality The standard contract provisions with the City of Anaheim require that the construction contractor complies with SCAQMD Rule 403. • SCAQMD Rule 403 prohibits emissions of fugitive dust from any active operation, open storage pile, or disturbed surface area that remain visible beyond the emission source property line. • A person conducting active operations shall utilize one or more of the applicable best available control measures to minimize fugitive dust emissions from each fugitive dust source type. Principal Engineer City of Anaheim/Contractor During project construction SC-9 Air Quality The standard contract provisions with the City of Anaheim require the construction contractor to comply with SCAQMD Rule 1403. • SCAQMD Rule 1403 specifies work practice requirements to limit asbestos emissions from building demolition and renovation activities. Principal Engineer City of Anaheim/Contractor During project construction ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix D y Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Summary Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 253 Item # Impact Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Review Responsibility Implementation Responsibility Timing/ Phase Status Approval/ Signature/Date N-1 Noise Based on the studies completed to date, the City of Anaheim and Caltrans intend to incorporate noise abatement in the form of barriers on Brookhurst Street with respective of 148, 362, and 305 feet and average heights of 8, 12, and 8 feet. Calculations based on preliminary design data indicate that the barriers will reduce noise levels by 7 to 9 dBA for 9 residences at a cost of approximately $184,000. If, during final design, conditions have substantially changed, noise abatement may not be necessary. The final decision of the noise abatement will be made by the City of Anaheim upon completion of the project design and the public involvement processes. Principal Engineer City of Anaheim Verify wall heights and locations during the Plans, Specifications, and Estimates Phase Implementation/ monitoring during construction SC-10 Noise The City of Anaheim shall ensure that the construction contractor requires all equipment to have sound-control devices that are no less effective than those provided on the original equipment. No equipment will have an unmuffled exhaust. Principal Engineer City of Anaheim/Contractor During project construction SC-11 Noise The standard contract provisions with the City of Anaheim require the contractor to implement appropriate noise mitigation measures, including changing the location of stationary construction equipment, turning off idling equipment, rescheduling construction activity, notifying adjacent residents in advance of construction work, and installing acoustic barriers around stationary construction noise sources. Principal Engineer City of Anaheim/Contractor During project construction ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix D y Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Summary Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 254 Item # Impact Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Review Responsibility Implementation Responsibility Timing/ Phase Status Approval/ Signature/Date BIO-1 Biological Resources The City of Anaheim shall ensure that a survey for active raptor nests is conducted within seven days prior to commencement of construction during the raptor breeding season (February 1 through June 30). A survey for active bird nests will be required within three days prior to commencement of construction during the peak bird nesting season (March 15 to September 15). Any occupied nests found during survey efforts will be mapped on the construction plans. Some restrictions on construction activities may be required in the vicinity of the nest until the nest is no longer active, as determined by a qualified Biologist. Qualified Biologist Biologist Within seven days prior to the commencement of construction during the raptor breeding season (February 1 through June 30) BIO-2 Biological Resources The City of Anaheim shall ensure that the contract specifications direct the contractor on the appropriate handling of invasive plant species during the project construction. All invasive plant species will be handled, transported, and disposed of off site by a qualified contractor to minimize the potential of spreading invasive species and/or their seeds off site. All plants and their seed pods would be secured in such a manner that no contamination of native soils and natural areas would occur. A Principal Engineer for the City of Anaheim will verify compliance. Principal Engineer Biologist Prior to the initiation of construction ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix D y Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Summary Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 255 Item # Impact Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Review Responsibility Implementation Responsibility Timing/ Phase Status Approval/ Signature/Date BIO-3 Biological Resources Landscape designs will be submitted to the City of Anaheim for review and approval by a qualified Biologist. The review will determine that no invasive exotic plant species are to be used in any proposed landscaping. Suitable substitutes will be recommended by the Reviewing Biologist. All mulch, topsoil, and seed mixes used during landscaping activities and erosion- control Best Management Practices (BMPs) implemented will be free of invasive plant species propagules. City of Anaheim/Qualified Biologist Biologist During project design ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix D y Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Summary Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 256 ---PAGE BREAK--- Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 257 Appendix E List of Acronyms This list contains the acronyms and abbreviations found in this document. A AADT: average annual daily traffic ACM: asbestos-containing material ACS: American Community Survey ADA: Americans with Disabilities Act ADL: aerially deposited lead ADT: average daily traffic AIRFA: American Indian Religious Freedom Act APE: Area of Potential Effects AQMD: Air Quality Management District AQMP: Air Quality Management Plan ARB: Air Resources Board ARPA: Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979 ARTIC: Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center ASR: Archaeological Survey Report AST: aboveground storage tank ASTM: American Society for Testing Materials B bgs: below ground surface BIA: Bureau of Indian Affairs BMP: Best Management Practice BSA: biological study area C C-G: General Commercial CAAQS: California Ambient Air Quality Standards CAFE: Corporate Average Fuel Economy CA FID UST: Facility Inventory Database Underground Storage Tank List Cal-IPC: California Invasive Plant Council CARB: California Air Resource Board CD: compact disc ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix E y List of Acronyms Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 258 CDFW: California Department of Fish and Wildlife CDR: Center for Demographic Research CEQ: Council on Environmental Quality CEQA: California Environmental Quality Act CERFA: Community Environmental Response Facility Act CERLA: Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act CFR: Code of Federal Regulations CIA: Community Impact Assessment California Natural Diversity Database CNEL: community noise equivalent level CNPS: California Native Plant Society CO: carbon monoxide CO2: carbon dioxide CRHR: California Register of Historical Resources CWA: Clean Water Act D DA: Department of the Army DAMP: Drainage Area Management Plan dB: decibel dBA: A-weighted decibel dBA Leq: A-weighted noise level DSA: Disturbed Soil Area DTSC: California Department of Toxic Substances Control E EA: Environmental Assessment [NEPA} EDR: Environmental Data Resources ENVIROSTOR: Brownfields and Environmental Restoration Program EIS: Environmental Impact Statement [NEPA] EO: Executive Order F FCAA: Federal Clean Air Act FEMA: Federal Emergency Management Agency ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix E y List of Acronyms Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 259 FHWA: Federal Highway Administration FIFRA: Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act FINDS: Facility Index System FONSI: Finding of No Significant Impact [NEPA] FTA: Federal Transit Authority FSTIP: Federal State Transportation Improvement Program FTIP: Federal Transportation Improvement Program G GHG: greenhouse gas GIS: Geographic Information Systems H H2S: hydrogen sulfide HAZNET: Department of Toxic Substances Control Hazardous Waste Data HCM: Highway Capacity Manual HIST CORTESE: Hazardous Waste Substances List HIST UST: Historical Underground Storage Tank Registered Database HPSR: Historic Property Survey Report HRER: Historical Resources Evaluation Report HUD: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development HVOC: halogenated volatile organic compound I I: Interstate ICU: intersection capacity utilization IRAA: Indoor Radon Abatement Act of 1988 ISA: Initial Site Assessment ITE: Institute of Transportation Engineers J K L LBP: lead-based paint LEDPA: Least Environmentally Damaging Practicable Alternative LOS: Level of Service ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix E y List of Acronyms Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 260 LUST: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Incident Report M MBTA: Migratory Bird Treaty Act MIDP: Mortgage Interest Differential Payment MLD: Most Likely Descendant MLUP: Master Land Use Plan MND: Mitigated Negative Declaration [CEQA] mph: miles per hour MPAH: Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways MPO: Metropolitan Planning Organization MPSD: Master Plan of Storm Drainage MS4: Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System MSAT: Mobile Source Air Toxics msl: mean sea level N NAAQS: National Ambient Air Quality Standards NAC: Noise Abatement Criteria NAHC: Native American Heritage Commission NBA: National Basketball Association NCC: Notice of Construction Completion NEPA: National Environmental Policy Act NES-MI: Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impact) NHPA: National Historic Preservation Act NOA: naturally occurring asbestos NOA: Notice of Availability NOD: Notice of Determination NOI: Notice of Intent NO2: nitrogen dioxide NOx: nitrogen oxide NPDES: National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NRHP: National Register of Historic Places O O3: ozone ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix E y List of Acronyms Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 261 OCTA: Orange County Transportation Authority OPC: Overland, Pacific, and Cutler, Inc. OSHA: Occupational Safety Hazard Administration P PA: Programmatic Agreement PACM: presumed asbestos-containing materials Pb: lead PCB: biphenyls pH: hydrogen potential PM: particulate matter PM: post mile PM10: particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter PM2.5: particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in diameter POAQC: Project of Air Quality Concern ppb: parts per billion PPD: purchase price differential ppm: parts per million PR: Project Report PRC: [California] Public Resources Code PSSR: Project Scope Summary Report PTMU: Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Q R RAP: Relocation Assistance Program RCRA: Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 RCRA-SQG: Resource Conservation and Recovery Act – Small Quantity Generator REC: recognized environmental condition RTP: Regional Transportation Plan Regional Water Quality Control Board S SAFETEA-LU: Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users SB: Senate Bill ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix E y List of Acronyms Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 262 SCAG: Southern California Association of Governments SCAQMD: South Coast Air Quality Management District SCCIC: South Central Coastal Information Center SCH: [California] State Clearinghouse SCH: California Department of Toxic Substances Control Sites Database SCS: Sustainable Communities Strategy SDC: Seismic Design Criteria sf: square feet SHPO: State Historic Preservation Officer SIP: State Implementation Plan SoCAB: South Coast Air Basin SR: State Route SRA: source-receptor area STIP: Statewide Transportation Improvement Program SW: soundwall SWEEPS UST: Statewide Environmental Evaluation and Planning System Underground Storage Tank List SWMP: Storm Water Management Plan Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan State Water Resources Control Board T TCE: trichloroethene TCWG: Transportation Conformity Working Group TMDL: Total Maximum Daily Load TMP: Traffic Management Plan TSCA: Toxic Substances Control Act U U.S.: United States U.S. EPA: United States Environmental Protection Agency USACE: United States Army Corps of Engineers USC: United States Code USDOT: United States Department of Transportation USFWS: United States Fish and Wildlife Service ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix E y List of Acronyms Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 263 UST: underground storage tanks UST: Underground Storage Tank Database V V/C: Volume/Capacity VMT: Vehicle Miles of Travel VOC: volatile organic compounds vph: vehicles per hour W WAND: West Anaheim Neighborhood District WDR: Waste Discharge Requirements WPCP: Water Pollution Control Program WQMP: Water Quality Management Plan X Y Z ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix E y List of Acronyms Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 264 ---PAGE BREAK--- Brookhurst Street Improvement Project y 265 List of Technical Studies Air Quality Technical Report September 2013 Noise Report May 2013 Traffic Study August 2013 Natural Environment Study- Minimal Impacts (NES-MI) March 2013 Community Impacts Assessment March 2013 Phase I Initial Site Assessment February 2013 Historic Properties Survey Report May 2012 Archaeological Survey Report April 2013 Historic Property Survey Report April 2013 Relocation Plan December 2012 Water Quality Technical Memorandum May 2013 Storm Water Data Report November 2012 ---PAGE BREAK---