Document Anaheim_doc_ad7e526618

Draft Environmental Impact Report 340, Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Anaheim, California Prepared for Susan Kim, Senior Planner Planning Department City of Anaheim 200 South Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim, California 92805 Prepared by Jennifer Marks, Project Manager BonTerra Consulting 2 Executive Drive, Suite 175 Irvine, California 92614 T: (714) 444-9199 F: (714) 444-9599 September 14, 2012 ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\TOC-091112.docx i Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page 1.0 Executive Summary 1-1 1.1 Introduction 1-1 1.2 Project Summary 1-2 1.3 Project Alternatives 1-4 1.4 Issues to be Resolved 1-4 1.5 Areas of Controversy 1-4 1.6 Summary of Significant Environmental Impacts 1-5 1.7 Mitigation Monitoring 1-5 1.8 References 1-5 2.0 Introduction 2-1 2.1 Project Background 2-1 2.1.1 Commercial-Recreation (C-R) District 2-2 2.1.2 Public Recreational (PR) District 2-2 2.1.3 Summary of Existing and Permitted Development 2-3 2.2 Purpose and Type of EIR 2-4 2.3 Previous Environmental Documentation 2-6 2.4 EIR Focus and Effects Found Not to be Significant 2-10 2.4.1 Scoping Process 2-10 2.4.2 Effects Found Not to be Significant 2-11 2.5 Project Sponsors and Contact 2-14 2.6 Review of the Draft Supplemental EIR 2-15 2.7 References 2-15 3.0 Project Description 3-1 3.1 Project Location 3-1 3.2 Project Objectives 3-1 3.3 Project Description 3-2 3.3.1 Purpose 3-2 3.3.2 Project Characteristics 3-2 3.4 Basis for Cumulative Impact Analysis 3-5 3.4.1 City of Anaheim 3-7 3.4.2 Responsible and Trustee Agencies 3-7 3.5 References 3-8 4.0 Environmental Setting 4-1 4.1 Introduction 4-1 4.2 Regional Planning Considerations 4-1 4.2.1 Southern California Association of Governments 4-1 4.2.2 South Coast Air Quality Management District 4-1 4.3 Project Setting and Characteristics 4-2 4.3.1 Aesthetics 4-2 4.3.2 Air Quality 4-2 4.3.3 Biological Resources 4-3 4.3.4 Cultural Resources 4-3 4.3.5 Geology 4-3 4.3.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions 4-4 4.3.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials 4-4 4.3.8 Hydrology and Water Quality 4-4 4.3.9 Land Use 4-4 4.3.10 Noise 4-5 4.3.11 Population and Housing 4-5 ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) Section Page R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\TOC-091112.docx ii Table of Contents 4.3.12 Public Services and Utilities 4-5 4.3.13 Recreation 4-6 4.3.14 Transportation/Traffic 4-6 4.3.15 Water 4-7 4.3.16 Sewer 4-7 4.3.17 Electricity 4-7 4.3.18 Stormwater 4-8 4.3.19 Other Utilities 4-8 4.4 References 4-9 5.0 Environmental Impacts 5-1 5.0.1 Introduction 5-1 5.0.2 Approach to Cumulative Impact Analysis 5-2 5.0.3 References 5-3 5.1 Aesthetics 5.1-1 5.1.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Documentation 5.1-1 5.1.2 Plans, Policies, and Regulatory Conditions 5.1-1 5.1.3 Methodology 5.1-1 5.1.4 Existing Conditions 5.1-1 5.1.5 Thresholds of 5.1-4 5.1.6 Project Impact Analysis 5.1-5 5.1.7 Cumulative Impacts 5.1-9 5.1.8 Mitigation Measures 5.1-9 5.1.9 Level of Significance After Mitigation 5.1-11 5.1.10 References 5.1-12 5.2 Air Quality 5.2-1 5.2.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Documentation 5.2-3 5.2.2 Plans, Policies, and Regulatory Conditions 5.2-4 5.2.3 Methodology 5.2-8 5.2.4 Existing Conditions 5.2-10 5.2.5 Thresholds of 5.2-14 5.2.6 Project Impact Analysis 5.2-16 5.2.7 Cumulative Impacts 5.2-25 5.2.8 Mitigation Measures 5.2-26 5.2.9 Level of Significance After Mitigation 5.2-32 5.2.10 References 5.2-32 5.3 Biological Resources 5.3-1 5.3.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Documentation 5.3-1 5.3.2 Plans, Policies and Regulatory Conditions 5.3-1 5.3.3 Methodology 5.3-2 5.3.4 Existing Conditions 5.3-2 5.3.5 Thresholds of 5.3-3 5.3.6 Project Impact Analysis 5.3-3 5.3.7 Cumulative Impacts 5.3-5 5.3.8 Mitigation Measures 5.3-5 5.3.9 Level of Significance After Mitigation 5.3-5 5.3.10 References 5.3-6 5.4 Cultural Resources 5.4-1 5.4.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Documentation 5.4-1 5.4.2 Plans, Policies, and Regulatory Conditions 5.4-1 ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) Section Page R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\TOC-091112.docx iii Table of Contents 5.4.3 Methodology 5.4-4 5.4.4 Existing Conditions 5.4-4 5.4.5 Thresholds of 5.4-6 5.4.6 Project Impact Analysis 5.4-6 5.4.7 Cumulative Impacts 5.4-8 5.4.8 Mitigation Measures 5.4-8 5.4.9 Level of Significance After Mitigation 5.4-10 5.4.10 References 5.4-10 5.5 Geology and Soils 5.5-3 5.5.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Documentation 5.5-3 5.5.2 Plans, Policies, and Regulatory Conditions 5.5-3 5.5.3 Methodology 5.5-4 5.5.4 Existing Conditions 5.5-5 5.5.5 Thresholds of 5.5-10 5.5.6 Project Impact Analysis 5.5-11 5.5.7 Cumulative Impacts 5.5-13 5.5.8 Mitigation Measures 5.5-13 5.5.9 Level of Significance After Mitigation 5.5-14 5.5.10 References 5.5-14 5.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions 5.6-3 5.6.1 Greenhouse 5.6-3 5.6.2 Summary of Previous Environmental Documentation 5.6-3 5.6.3 Plans, Policies and Regulatory Conditions 5.6-3 5.6.4 Methodology 5.6-12 5.6.5 Existing Conditions 5.6-13 5.6.6 Thresholds of 5.6-18 5.6.7 Project Impact Analysis 5.6-18 5.6.8 Cumulative Impacts 5.6-24 5.6.9 Mitigation Measures 5.6-24 5.6.10 Level of Significance After Mitigation 5.6-32 5.6.11 References 5.6-33 5.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials 5.7-1 5.7.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Documentation 5.7-1 5.7.2 Plans, Policies, and Regulatory Conditions 5.7-1 5.7.3 Methodology 5.7-3 5.7.4 Existing Conditions 5.7-3 5.7.5 Thresholds of 5.7-4 5.7.6 Project Impact Analysis 5.7-5 5.7.7 Cumulative Impacts 5.7-8 5.7.8 Mitigation Measures 5.7-8 5.7.9 Level of Significance After Mitigation 5.7-10 5.8 Hydrology and Water 5.8-1 5.8.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Documentation 5.8-1 5.8.2 Plans, Policies, and Regulatory Conditions 5.8-1 5.8.3 Methodology 5.8-6 5.8.4 Existing Conditions 5.8-6 5.8.5 Thresholds of 5.8-7 5.8.6 Project Impact Analysis 5.8-8 5.8.7 Cumulative Impacts 5.8-14 ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) Section Page R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\TOC-091112.docx iv Table of Contents 5.8.8 Mitigation Measures 5.8-14 5.8.9 Level of Significance After Mitigation 5.8-17 5.8.10 References 5.8-17 5.9 Land Use and Planning 5.9-1 5.9.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Documentation 5.9-1 5.9.2 Plans, Policies, and Regulatory Conditions 5.9-2 5.9.3 Methodology 5.9-9 5.9.4 Existing Conditions 5.9-9 5.9.5 Thresholds of 5.9-10 5.9.6 Project Impact Analysis 5.9-10 5.9.7 Cumulative Impacts 5.9-28 5.9.8 Mitigation Measures 5.9-28 5.9.9 Level of Significance After Mitigation 5.9-28 5.9.10 References 5.9-29 5.10 Noise 5.10-1 5.10.1 Noise and Vibration Definitions 5.10-1 5.10.2 Summary of Previous Environmental Documentation 5.10-3 5.10.3 Plans, Policies, and Regulatory Conditions 5.10-3 5.10.4 Methodology 5.10-5 5.10.5 Existing Conditions 5.10-6 5.10.6 Thresholds of 5.10-8 5.10.7 Project Impact Analysis 5.10-8 5.10.8 Cumulative Impacts 5.10-23 5.10.9 Mitigation Measures 5.10-27 5.10.10 Level of Significance After Mitigation 5.10-29 5.10.11 References 5.10-29 5.11 Population and Housing 5.11-1 5.11.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Documentation 5.11-1 5.11.2 Plans, Policies, and Regulatory Conditions 5.11-1 5.11.3 Methodology 5.11-3 5.11.4 Existing Conditions 5.11-4 5.11.5 Thresholds of 5.11-5 5.11.6 Project Impact Analysis 5.11-6 5.11.7 Cumulative Impacts 5.11-9 5.11.8 Mitigation measures 5.11-10 5.11.9 Level of Significance After Mitigation 5.11-10 5.11.10 References 5.11-10 5.12 Public Services 5.12-1 5.12.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Documentation 5.12-1 5.12.2 Police Protection 5.12-1 5.12.3 Fire Protection 5.12-4 5.12.4 Schools 5.12-11 5.12.5 Library 5.12-14 5.12.6 References 5.12-17 5.13 Recreation 5.13-1 5.13.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Documentation 5.13-1 5.13.2 Plans, Policies, and Regulatory Conditions 5.13-1 5.13.3 Methodology 5.13-2 5.13.4 Existing Conditions 5.13-2 ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) Section Page R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\TOC-091112.docx v Table of Contents 5.13.5 Thresholds of 5.13-4 5.13.6 Project Impact Analysis 5.13-4 5.13.7 Cumulative Impacts 5.13-7 5.13.8 Mitigation Measures 5.13-7 5.13.9 Level of Significance After Mitigation 5.13-7 5.13.10 References 5.13-7 5.14 Transportation and Traffic 5.14-1 5.14.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Documentation 5.14-1 5.14.2 Plans, Policies, and Regulatory Conditions 5.14-1 5.14.3 Methodology 5.14-3 5.14.4 Existing Conditions 5.14-7 5.14.5 Thresholds of 5.14-19 5.14.6 Project Impact Analysis 5.14-21 5.14.7 Cumulative Impacts 5.14-64 5.14.8 Mitigation Measures 5.14-64 5.14.9 Level of Significance After Mitigation 5.14-72 5.14.10 References 5.14-75 5.15 Water Supply and Infrastructure 5.15-1 5.15.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Documentation 5.15-1 5.15.2 Plans, Policies, and Regulatory Conditions 5.15-1 5.15.3 Methodology 5.15-2 5.15.4 Existing Conditions 5.15-2 5.15.5 Thresholds of 5.15-4 5.15.6 Project Impact Analysis 5.15-4 5.15.7 Cumulative Impacts 5.15-7 5.15.8 Mitigation Measures 5.15-7 5.15.9 Level of Significance After Mitigation 5.15-9 5.15.10 References 5.15-9 5.16 Sewer 5.16-1 5.16.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Documentation 5.16-1 5.16.2 Plans, Policies, and Regulatory Conditions 5.16-1 5.16.3 Methodology 5.16-2 5.16.4 Existing Conditions 5.16-2 5.16.5 Thresholds of 5.16-3 5.16.6 Project Impact Analysis 5.16-3 5.16.7 Cumulative Impacts 5.16-7 5.16.8 Mitigation Measures 5.16-7 5.16.9 Level of Significance After Mitigation 5.16-8 5.16.10 References 5.16-8 5.17 Electricity 5.17-1 5.17.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Documentation 5.17-1 5.17.2 Plans, Policies, and Regulatory Conditions 5.17-1 5.17.3 Methodology 5.17-1 5.17.4 Existing Conditions 5.17-1 5.17.5 Thresholds of 5.17-2 5.17.6 Project Impact Analysis 5.17-2 5.17.7 Cumulative Impacts 5.17-4 5.17.8 Mitigation Measures 5.17-4 5.17.9 Level of Significance After Mitigation 5.17-6 ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) Section Page R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\TOC-091112.docx vi Table of Contents 5.17.10 References 5.17-6 5.18 Storm Water 5.18-1 5.18.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Documentation 5.18-1 5.18.2 Plans, Policies, and Regulatory Conditions 5.18-1 5.18.3 Methodology 5.18-1 5.18.4 Existing Conditions 5.18-1 5.18.5 Thresholds of 5.18-6 5.18.6 Project Impact Analysis 5.18-7 5.18.7 Cumulative Impacts 5.18-11 5.18.8 Mitigation Measures 5.18-11 5.18.9 Level of Significance After Mitigation 5.18-13 5.18.10 References 5.18-13 5.19 Other Utilities 5.19-1 5.19.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Documentation 5.19-1 5.19.2 Natural 5.19-1 5.19.3 Solid 5.19-2 5.19.4 Telephone 5.19-7 5.19.5 Television/Cable Service 5.19-9 5.19.6 References 5.19-10 6.0 Alternatives to the Proposed Project 6-1 6.1 Introduction 6-1 6.2 Project Summary 6-1 6.2.1 Project Objectives 6-2 6.2.2 Significant and Unavoidable Impacts 6-3 6.3 Alternatives to the Proposed Project 6-3 6.3.1 No Project/Continuing Development 6-4 6.3.2 Modified Land Use Alternative 6-4 6.3.3 Lower Intensity Land Use Alternative A: Year 2000 Scenario 6-4 6.3.4 Lower Intensity Land Use Alternative B: Year 2008 Scenario 6-6 6.4 Environmentally Superior Alternative 6-11 6.5 References 6-11 7.0 Long-Term Implications of the Proposed Project 7-1 7.1 Any Significant Environmental Effects Which Cannot be Avoided if the Proposed Project is 7-1 7.2 Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes Which Would be Caused by the Proposed Project Should it be Implemented 7-3 7.3 Growth-Inducing Impacts of the Proposed Action 7-3 7.4 References 7-5 8.0 List of EIR Preparers and 8-1 8.1 EIR Preparers 8-1 8.1.1 City of Anaheim 8-1 8.1.2 BonTerra Consulting 8-2 8.2 Contributors 8-2 8.2.1 Parsons Brinckerhoff 8-2 8.2.2 PSOMAS 8-2 ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\TOC-091112.docx vii Table of Contents LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1-1 Existing, Permitted and Proposed Development 1-2 1-2 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Program 1-6 2.1.3-1 Existing Development Analyzed by MEIR 313 and Current Existing Development 2-3 2.1.3-2 Permitted Development Analyzed by MEIR 313 and Current Environmental Documentation 2-4 2.1.3-3 Permitted Additional Development Analyzed by MEIR 313 and Current Environmental Documentation (Difference Between Permitted and Existing Development) 2-4 3.3-1 Maximum Build Out Analyzed for the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan by MEIR 313 3-4 3.3-2 Maximum Build Out Analyzed for the Anaheim Report Specific Plan by Current Environmental Documentation 3-4 3.3-3 Current Existing Development, Proposed Project and Proposed Increase 3-5 5-1 Geographic Scope of Cumulative Impact Analysis 5-3 5.1-1 Shade Impact: Summer Solstice, June 21 5.1-10 5.1-2 Shade Impacts: Winter Solstice, December 22 5.1-11 5.2-1 California and National Ambient Air Quality Standards 5.2-6 5.2-2 Ambient Air Quality at Anaheim and Costa Mesa Monitoring Stations 5.2-12 5.2-3 Attainment Status of Criteria Pollutants in the South Coast Air 5.2-13 5.2-4 Estimated Existing Daily Operational Emissions (Pounds/day) 5.2-14 5.2-5 SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds 5.2-15 5.2-6 Estimated Maximum Daily Construction Emissions (Pounds/day) 5.2-17 5.2-7 Local Significance Threshold Emissions 5.2-18 5.2-8 Estimated Daily Operational Emissions AT 2015 Conditions (Pounds/day) 5.2-19 5.2-9 Estimated Daily Operational Emissions AT 2030 Build out Conditions (Pounds/day) 5.2-20 5.2-10 LOS E and F Intersection Hourly Traffic Volumes at 2030 5.2-23 5.5-1 Principal Active Faults 5.5-9 5.5-2 Historical Earthquakes 5.5-10 5.6-1 AB 32 Scoping Plan Recommended Greenhouse Gas Reduction 5.6-7 5.6-2 Comparison of Worldwide GHG Emissions 5.6-14 5.6-3 Estimated Existing GHG Emissions 5.6-15 5.6-4 Estimated GHG Emissions from Construction 5.6-21 5.6-5 Estimated GHG Emissions at Build Out 5.6-22 5.6-6 Comparison of Estimated Existing and Future GHG Emissions With Future Emissions Including Projected Scoping Plan Reductions 5.6-33 5.9-1 Consistency of the Proposed Project With the General Plan 5.9-13 5.10-1 Structural Vibration Damage Thresholds 5.10-7 5.10-2 Human Response to Transient Vibration 5.10-7 5.10-3 Short-Term Noise Level Measurement Results 5.10-9 5.10-4 Typical Maximum Construction Equipment Noise Levels 5.10-12 5.10-5 Traffic Noise Level Contour Distances for Long-Term Conditions 5.10-14 5.10-6 2015 Project-Related Traffic Off-Site Noise Levels 5.10-18 5.10-7 2030 General Plan Build out Project-Related Traffic Off-Site Noise Levels 5.10-20 5.10-8 Typical Vibration Levels During Construction Activities 5.10-24 5.10-9 Cumulative Off-Site Noise Levels 5.10-26 5.11-1 City of Anaheim Regional Housing Needs Assessment Targets: 2006–2017 5.11-2 5.11-2 Orange County Population, Housing and Employment: 1980–2010 5.11-4 5.11-3 City of Anaheim Population, Housing and Employment: 1980–2010 5.11-4 5.11-4 Orange County Projections 5.11-5 5.11-5 City of Anaheim Projections 5.11-5 ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 LIST OF TABLES (Continued) Table Page R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\TOC-091112.docx viii Table of Contents 5.11-6 Population Generation and Housing Demand Calculations 5.11-6 5.12-1 City of Anaheim Police Station Facilities 5.12-2 5.12-2 City of Anaheim Fire Service Facilities 5.12-5 5.12-3 ARSP Demand on Fire and Emergency Service 5.12-7 5.12-4 Student Generation Rate 5.12-13 5.12-5 Library Service Indicators 5.12-15 5.14-1 LOS and ICU 5.14-5 5.14-2 Daily Arterial Segment Capacity Assumptions 5.14-5 5.14-3 Caltrans Intersection LOS Criteria 5.14-6 5.14-4 Caltrans Freeway Mainline and Ramp LOS Criteria 5.14-6 5.14-5 Caltrans Freeway Weaving LOS Criteria 5.14-7 5.14-6 Existing Peak Hour Intersection LOS 5.14-8 5.14-7 Existing Daily Arterial Segment LOS 5.14-10 5.14-8 Existing Arterial Segment Peak Hour LOS 5.14-12 5.14-9 Existing Peak Hour Ramp Termini Intersection LOS 5.14-13 5.14-10 Existing Peak Hour Ramp Termini Off-Ramp Queuing Analysis 5.14-14 5.14-11 Existing Peak Hour Freeway Ramp LOS 5.14-16 5.14-12 Existing Peak Hour Freeway Mainline LOS 5.14-18 5.14-13 Existing Peak Hour Freeway Weaving LOS 5.14-19 5.14-15 Interim Year 2015 With Project Peak Hour Intersection LOS 5.14-22 5.14-16 Interim Year 2015 With Project Daily Arterial Segment LOS 5.14-27 5.14-18 2015 Arterial Segment Mitigation Strategies 5.14-31 5.14-19 Interim Year 2015 With Project Peak Hour Ramp Termini Intersection LOS 5.14-32 5.14-20 Interim Year 2015 With Project Peak Hour Ramp Termini Off-Ramp Queuing 5.14-34 5.14-21 Interim Year 2015 With Project Peak Hour Freeway Ramp LOS 5.14-36 5.14-22 Interim Year 2015 With Project Peak Hour Freeway Mainline LOS 5.14-38 5.14-23 Interim Year 2015 With Project Peak Hour Freeway Weaving LOS 5.14-39 5.14-25 Recommended 2030 Intersection Mitigation Measures 5.14-44 5.14-28 2030 With Project Peak Hour Ramp Termini Intersection LOS 5.14-54 5.14-29 2030 Peak Hour Freeway Ramp Termini Mitigation Strategies 5.14-55 5.14-31 2030 With Project Peak Hour Freeway Ramp LOS 5.14-59 5.14-32 2030 With Project Peak Hour Freeway Mainline LOS 5.14-62 5.14-33 2030 With Project Peak Hour Freeway Weaving LOS 5.14-63 5.14-34 Project Mitigation Measures 5.14-72 5.15-1 Proposed ARSP Water Demand Increase 5.15-6 5.16-1 Sewage Generation of Convention Center Expansion 5.16-6 5.17-1 Projected increase in Electrical Consumption Due to Proposed Project (Maximum Build out) 5.17-3 5.19 1 Solid Waste Generation Calculation 5.19-5 6-1 Maximum Build Out Analyzed for the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan by Current Environmental Documentation 6-2 ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\TOC-091112.docx ix Table of Contents LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit Page 2-1 Development Area Plan 2-2 3-1 Regional Location 3-2 3-2 Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Boundaries 3-2 3-3 Aerial Photograph 3-2 5.1-1 Historic Photograph Locations 5.1-2 5.1-2 Historic Location A: Harbor Boulevard north of Katella Avenue looking north 5.1-2 5.1-3 Historic Location B: Katella Avenue at Clementine Street looking 5.1-2 5.1-4 Historic Location C: Harbor Boulevard at Freedman Way (Disney Way) looking north 5.1-2 5.1-5 Historic Location D: Katella Avenue at West Street looking east 5.1-2 5.1-6 Historic Location E: Katella Avenue at Haster Street looking west 5.1-2 5.1-7 Historic Location F: Harbor Boulevard looking south at Ball Road 5.1-2 5.1-8 Photograph Locations 5.1-4 5.1-9a Location A: Harbor Boulevard looking west down Convention Way 5.1-4 5.1-9b Location A: Harbor Boulevard looking west down Convention Way 5.1-4 5.1-10 Location B: North side Katella Avenue looking south 5.1-4 5.1-11 Location C: West side Harbor Boulevard looking north 5.1-4 5.1-12 Location D: South side of Katella Avenue looking north 5.1-4 5.1-13 Location E: Harbor Boulevard looking north 5.1-4 5.1-14 Location F: Manchester Avenue looking west 5.1-4 5.1-15 Location G: On Katella Avenue at Haster Street/Anaheim Boulevard looking west 5.1-4 5.1-16 Location H: On Katella at West Street looking east 5.1-4 5.1-17 Location I: Katella Avenue looking east 5.1-4 5.1-18 Location J: Harbor Boulevard at Wilken Way looking north 5.1-4 5.1-19 Shade Sensitive Land Uses 5.1-8 5.8-1 Flood Hazard Areas 5.8-6 5.8-2 Flood Hazard Zones 5.8-6 5.10-1 Noise Compatibility Guidelines 5.10-4 5.10-1 Noise Measurement Locations 5.10-8 5.14-1 Existing Peak Hour Intersection LOS 5.14-8 5.14-2 Intersection Mitigation Strategies 5.14-46 5.16-1 Existing Sewer Line Deficiencies 5.16-2 5.16-2 Sewer Improvements Needed at Buildout 5.16-6 5.18-1 Proposed Improvements: Anaheim Barber City Channel Tributary Area 5.18-8 5.18-2 Proposed Improvements: East Garden Grove Wintersburg Channel Tributary Area 5.18-8 ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\TOC-091112.docx x Table of Contents LIST OF APPENDICES A Specific Plan Amendments B Notice of Preparation/Initial Study Notice of Preparation/Initial Study NOP/IS Comment Letters C Air Quality Technical Appendix D Biological Resources Reports Biological Resources Report Biological Resources Memorandum E Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Appendix F Hazardous Material Database Searches EDR Report South EDR Report North G Noise Technical Appendix H Traffic Study Report I Water Technical Appendices Water Supply Assessment Water Facility Assessment Project Water Demand and Regional Supply Update J Sewer Technical Appendices Combined Central Anaheim Area Master Plan of Sanitary Sewers – Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Revision to the Technical Memorandum for the Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-1 Executive Summary SECTION 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.1 INTRODUCTION In September 1994, the City of Anaheim certified the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Master Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 313 (State Clearinghouse No. 91091062) in support of the adoption of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2 (Anaheim 1994b, 1994a). This Master EIR (MEIR 313) evaluated impacts associated with the establishment and implementation of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (ARSP) and created a Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP No. 0085) in order to mitigate impacts associated with Specific Plan development. Since being certified in 1994, two Validation Reports have been prepared (1999 and 2004) to evaluate the continued relevance and accuracy of MEIR 313 and its ability to be used as a Master EIR for all projected development within the boundaries of the ARSP area. As MEIR 313 is over 15 years old, the City has elected to prepare a Supplemental EIR to reevaluate all the environmental changes that have occurred in and around The Anaheim Resort and to evaluate an expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center and an update of the ARSP document (Proposed Project). The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that local government agencies, prior to taking action on projects over which they have discretionary approval authority, consider the environmental consequences of such projects. An EIR is a public document designed to provide the public, responsible/trustee agencies, special districts, and local and State government agency decision makers with an analysis of the potential environmental consequences of project implementation in order to support an informed decision. This EIR 340 has been prepared to address the environmental effects associated with the Proposed Project. A summary description of the proposed actions and development is provided in Section 1.2, Project Summary and a complete Project Description is provided in Section 3 of this EIR. This EIR focuses on those issues determined to be potentially significant as identified in the Initial Study completed for this Project (refer to Section 2.4.1, Scoping Process, of this EIR). In addition to addressing the potential environmental impacts that would result from the Proposed Project, this EIR further intends to serve as the primary environmental document for all future entitlements associated with the ARSP, including all discretionary approvals requested or required to implement the Project. The City of Anaheim (City) is the Lead Agency, and City staff has reviewed and revised, as necessary, all submitted technical studies and reports for consistency with City regulations and policies. The City has commissioned the preparation of this EIR to reflect its own independent judgment, including: reliance on applicable City technical personnel and review of all technical subconsultant reports. Data for this EIR was obtained from on-site field observations; discussions with affected agencies; review of adopted plans and policies; review of available technical studies, reports, and data; and specialized environmental assessments prepared for the Project air quality, geology and soils, hydrology and water quality, noise, traffic, and utilities). In addition to analyzing the expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center and the build out of the ARSP, this EIR discusses alternatives to the Proposed Project and includes a mitigation program that would offset, minimize, or avoid significant environmental impacts. Following is a summary of the Project; the Project alternatives; areas of controversy and issues to be resolved; potential significant impacts; and mitigation identified through the analysis presented in this EIR. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-2 Executive Summary 1.2 PROJECT SUMMARY The Proposed Project involves the build out of the ARSP, as defined in EIR No. 313 and subsequent amendments and adjustments to date and the expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center. Development in Accordance with the ARSP The ARSP area is divided into two Development Areas: Area 1 and Area 2. Development Area 1 is also known as the Commercial-Recreation (C-R) District and encompasses approximately 518.5 acres. Development Area 2 is also known as the Public Recreational (PR) District and encompassed 62.8 acres. Existing, permitted, and proposed development in these two areas is shown in Table 1-1. TABLE 1-1 EXISTING, PERMITTED AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT District Existing Development Permitted Development Proposed Development C-R District • 11,587 hotel rooms* • 32,500 hotel rooms • 32,500 hotel rooms P-R District • 1,600 hotel rooms • 1,712,004 sf convention center • 1,600 hotel rooms • 1,712,004 sf convention center • 119,414 sf future traffic generating uses • 100,000 sf outdoor programmable space • 2,500 hotel rooms • 2,118,363 sf convention center • 180,000 sf commercial development • 40,000 sf of additional hotel meeting and ballroom space • 100,000 sf outdoor programmable space * Commercial uses are converted to hotel room equivalents on a ratio of 600 square feet of commercial development = 1 hotel room The ARSP permits up to 32,500 hotel rooms within the C-R District. There are 11,587 hotel rooms or hotel room equivalents1 that are currently developed within the ARSP area. For impact analysis, commercial uses are converted to hotel room equivalents on a ratio of 600 square feet of commercial development to one hotel room. The Proposed Project does not include any changes to allowable number of hotel rooms in the C-R District. The PR District includes the 1,712,004 square foot (sf) Anaheim Convention Center (Convention Center) and the 1,600-room Anaheim Hilton Hotel. In addition, 219,414 sf of future traffic-generating development was environmentally cleared within the PR District through the certification of the MEIR. Of this development potential, 100,000 sf has been allocated toward outdoor programmable space for the Anaheim Convention Center Grand Plaza Project (Anaheim, 2010). 1 A hotel room equivalent is a defined area of a specific land use type that has been determined to result in environmental effects (such as traffic generation) that are roughly equivalent to a single hotel room. The use of hotel room equivalents allow for the development of other allowed land uses in an area that the maximum allowable density is defined in terms of hotel rooms. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-3 Executive Summary The Proposed Project includes a further expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center, with the following components: Convention Center Development • An additional 406,359 sf of Convention Center space (including exhibit halls, ballrooms, flexible meeting space, office and meeting rooms, and an interior bridge/skyway) and • 125,000 sf of commercial space (including, but not limited to, retail stores and restaurants). Hotel Development • A maximum of 900 hotel additional rooms, • A maximum of 40,000 sf of additional meeting and ballroom space, and • A maximum of 55,000 sf of additional commercial space (including retail stores, spa facilities, bars and and restaurants). Proposed Amendments As described in Section 3.3, Project Description, of this EIR, the primary discretionary and non-discretionary actions required to implement the Proposed Project include: the approval of final site plans; the processing of subdivision maps; and the submittal of plans for building permits unless a conditional use permit or a variance are required. The Proposed Project includes amendments to the documents that govern and regulate development within the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan area, including: • Anaheim General Plan (Case No. GPA2010-00482) • Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (Case No. SPN2010-00060) • Title 18 (Zoning Code) of the Anaheim Municipal Code (Case No. ZCA2010-00093) • The Anaheim Resort Identity Program (Case No. MIS2010-00478) • The Anaheim Resort Public Realm Landscape Program (Case No. MIS2010-00479) • Ordinance No. 5454 Conditions of Approval (Case No. MIS2010-00484) These amendments are intended to reflect the proposed increased development intensity in the PR District; streamline development standards, guidelines and requirements to reduce redundancy within and between documents; and, update the above documents to reflect current conditions within The Anaheim Resort. The proposed amendments do not change the types of land uses permitted within the ARSP or significantly modify the associated development standards. The proposed amendments are included in Appendix A. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-4 Executive Summary 1.3 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES In accordance with Section 15126.6 of the CEQA Guidelines, Section 6 of this EIR, Alternatives, includes an alternatives discussion that evaluates the comparative merits of the Project alternatives. This EIR includes an evaluation of the following alternatives to the Proposed Project, which were previously addressed as part of Master EIR 313: • No-Project/Continuing Development • Modified Land Use Alternative: Includes incorporating the Hotel Circle Specific Plan area into the Project Area • Lower Intensity Land Use Alternative A • Lower Intensity Land Use Alternative B Section 6 of this EIR provides descriptions and analyses of each alternative so the decision makers can determine whether an alternative should be adopted in lieu of the Proposed Project. As required by CEQA, this section identifies the environmentally superior alternative. 1.4 ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED Section 15123(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines requires that an EIR contain a discussion of issues to be resolved. With respect to the Proposed Project, the key issues to be resolved include decisions by the City, as Lead Agency, as to: • Whether this environmental document adequately describes the environmental impacts of the Proposed Project; • Whether the recommended mitigation measures and project design features should be modified and/or adopted; • Whether the Project benefits override those environmental impacts that cannot be feasibly avoided or mitigated to a level below significance; • Whether there are other mitigation measures that should be applied to the Project besides those identified in the EIR; and • Whether there are any alternatives to the Proposed Project that would substantially lessen any of the significant impacts of the Proposed Project and achieve most of the basic Project objectives. 1.5 AREAS OF CONTROVERSY Section 15123(b)(2) of the CEQA Guidelines indicates that an EIR summary should identify areas of controversy known to the Lead Agency, including issues raised by agencies and the public. At the time of the issuance of Notice of Availability for this Draft EIR, the City of Anaheim is not aware of any areas of controversy. This EIR has taken into consideration the comments received from the public, various agencies, and jurisdictions in response to the Notice of Preparation (NOP) and during the public scoping session held on February 25, 2009. Written comments received during the NOP and scoping period are contained in Appendix B. Environmental issues that have been raised during previous opportunities for public input on the Project are addressed in Section 2.4, EIR Focus and Effects Found Not to be Significant. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-5 Executive Summary 1.6 SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Table 1-2 summarizes the potential environmental effects of the Proposed Project, the recommended mitigation program, and the level of significance after mitigation. As shown in Table 1-2, implementation of the Proposed Project would result in potentially significant impacts for the following topical issues: aesthetics, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, greenhouse gas emissions, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, noise, public services, transportation and traffic, water, sewer, electricity, storm water, and other utilities. Implementation of the Standard Requirements (SRs) and Mitigation Measures (MMs), as detailed in each environmental analysis presented in Section 5 of this EIR, would reduce many of the potentially significant impacts to a less than significant level. However, even with implementation of the SRs and MMs, the Proposed Project would result in significant and unavoidable impacts for the following technical issues: aesthetics, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, noise, storm water, and transportation and traffic. 1.7 MITIGATION MONITORING State law requires the preparation of a Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) designed to ensure that MMs are adopted to avoid or lessen significant environmental effects. The mitigation program identified in this EIR has been described in sufficient detail to provide the necessary information to identify the party or parties responsible for carrying out the mitigation; when the mitigation will be implemented; and why the mitigation has been required. An MMP would be adopted by the City at the time of Project approval. This MMP will incorporate applicable measures previously identified in MMP Nos. 85, 85a, and 85b, which were adopted in conjunction with EIR No. 313 and subsequent amendments. 1.8 REFERENCES Anaheim, City of. 2010 (November). Addendum to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan EIR No. 313 Anaheim Convention Center Grand Plaza. Anaheim, CA: the City. California Office of Administrative Law. 2010. California Code of Regulations (Title 14, Natural Resources; Division 6, Resources Agency; Chapter 3, Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act). Eagen, MN: Westlaw for the State. http://government.westlaw.com/linkedslice/default.asp?Action=TOC&RS=GVT1.0& VR=2.0&SP=CCR-1000. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-6 Executive Summary TABLE 1-2 SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation 5.1 AESTHETICS Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? No Impact. The ARSP area does not contain any designated scenic resources, nor are any scenic vistas visible from the ARSP area. No impact related to scenic vistas or scenic highways would occur. This conclusion is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313 for the original ARSP. No mitigation measures are necessary. No impact. Would the project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? Significant and Unavoidable. The Proposed Project would alter the existing visual condition of the ARSP area through introduction of new, higher density development within the ARSP area. However, since new development would be required to conform to the ARSP, these changes would create a more visually cohesive and appealing environment and impacts would be less than significant. This conclusion is less than the impacts identified in MEIR 313 for the original ARSP. Shade and shadow impacts associated with the specific development proposed for the PR District would be less than significant. Buildout of the C-R District has the potential to introduce structures which may create a significant shade and shadow impact on surrounding properties, which may result in a significant and unavoidable impact. This conclusion is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313 for the original ARSP. MM 5.1-1 Prior to final site plan approval, the property owner/developer shall submit a shade and shadow analysis to the Planning Department for review and approval demonstrating that the proposed structure(s) would avoid creating significant shade and shadow impacts on adjacent land uses to the maximum extent feasible. A significant shade and shadow impact would occur when outdoor active areas outdoor eating areas, hotel/motel swimming pools, and residential front and back yards) or structures that include sensitive uses residences) have windows that normally receive sunlight are covered by shadows for more than 50 percent of the sunlight hours. (MEIR 313, MM 3.11-3, Visual Resources and Aesthetics) MM 5.1-2 Prior to issuance of building permits, all plumbing or other similar pipes and fixtures located on the exterior of the building shall be shown on plans as fully screened from view of adjacent public rights-of-way and from adjacent properties by architectural devices and/or appropriate building materials. A note indicating that these improvements will be installed prior to final building and zoning inspections shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. (Ord 5454, Condition 26) MM 5.1-3 Ongoing, the property owner/developer shall be responsible for the removal of any on-site graffiti within 24 hours of its application. (Ord 5454, Condition 27) Significant and Unavoidable ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-7 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation MM 5.1-4 Prior to Final Site Plan approval, the location and configuration of all lighting fixtures including ground-mounted lighting fixtures utilized to accent buildings, landscape elements, or to illuminate pedestrian areas shall be shown on all Final Site Plans. All proposed surface parking area lighting fixtures shall be down-lighted with a maximum height of twelve (12) feet adjacent to any residential properties. All lighting fixtures shall be shielded to direct lighting toward the area to be illuminated and away from adjacent residential property lines. (Ord 5454, Condition 28) MM 5.1-5 Prior to final building and zoning inspections, private streets within the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan area shall have street lights installed which are compatible with the design standards used for the public streets as determined by the Utilities Department. (Ord 5454, Condition 3) MM 5.1-6 Prior to final building and zoning inspections, root and sidewalk barriers shall be provided for trees within seven feet of public sidewalks. (Ord 5454, Condition 12) MM 5.1-7 Prior to final building and zoning inspections, the property owner/developer shall submit to the Planning Department a letter from a licensed landscape architect certifying that all landscaping and irrigation systems have been installed in accordance with landscaping plans approved in connection with the Final Site Plan. (Ord 5454, Condition 13) MM 5.1-8 Ongoing, all on-site non-Public Realm, landscaping and irrigation systems, and Public Realm landscaping and irrigation systems, within area in which dedication has not been accepted by the City, shall be maintained by the property owner/developer, in compliance with City standards. (Ord 5454, Condition 14) ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-8 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation MM 5.1-9 Ongoing, any tree planted within the Setback Realm shall be replaced in a timely manner in the event that it is removed, damaged, diseased and/or dead. (Ord 5454, Condition 15) MM 5.1-10 Ongoing, a licensed arborist shall be hired by the property owner/developer to be responsible for all tree trimming. (Ord 5454, Condition 16) MM 5.1-11 Prior to issuance of each building permit, unless records indicate previous payment, a fee for street tree purposes shall be paid or cause to be paid to the City of Anaheim based on the length of street frontage in an amount as established by City Council resolution or credit against the fee given for City authorized improvements installed by the property owner/developer. (Ord 5454, Condition 24) MM 5.1-12 Prior to issuance of each building permit, all air conditioning facilities and other roof and groundmounted equipment shall be shown on plans as shielded from public view and the sound buffered to comply with City of Anaheim noise ordinances from any adjacent residential or transient-occupied properties. A note indicating that these improvements shall be installed prior to final building and zoning inspections shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. (Ord 5454, Condition 25) MM 5.1-13 Prior to Final Site Plan approval, plans shall show that the rear elevations of buildings visible from off-site areas shall be architecturally accented to portray a finished look. (Ord 5454, Condition 29) MM 5.1-14 Prior to Final Site Plan approval, plans shall show that no shuttle/bus/vehicular drop-off areas shall be permitted in hotel/motel or vacation resort front setback area. (Ord 5454, Condition 31) ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-9 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation 5.2 AIR QUALITY Would the project violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? Significant and unavoidable. With incorporation of the proposed mitigation measures, construction emissions of criteria pollutants would be less than significant. The conclusion for construction emissions is not consistent with that provided in MEIR 313. MEIR 313 projected that construction emissions of VOC, NOx, CO, and PM10 would be significant and unavoidable. Long-term operational emissions of VOC, NOx, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 would exceed the SCAQMD CEQA significance thresholds. The proposed mitigation measures would reduce vehicle emissions, but the reductions are not reliably quantifiable and are not anticipated to reduce emissions to less than the SCAQMD CEQA thresholds. Therefore, the impact would be significant and unavoidable. The conclusion for operational emissions is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313, except for PM2.5, which was not a criteria pollutant when MEIR 313 was prepared. Local PM10 and PM2.5 emissions would exceed the SCAQMD CEQA significance thresholds for short-term periods when excavation would occur near sensitive receptors; the impact would be significant and unavoidable. The local impact analysis was not conducted for MEIR 313. MM 5.2-1 Ongoing during project operation, the property owner/developer shall implement measures to reduce emissions to the extent practical, schedule goods movements for off-peak traffic hours, and use clean fuel for vehicles and other equipment, as practicable (MEIR 313 MM 3.4-1, Air Quality). MM 5.2-2 Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit evidence that low emission paints and coatings are utilized in the design and construction of buildings, in compliance with SCAQMD regulations. The information shall be denoted on the project plans and specifications. The property owner/developer shall submit an architectural coating schedule and calculations demonstrating that VOC emissions from architectural coating operations would not exceed 75 pounds per day averaged over biweekly periods. The calculations shall show, for each coating, the surface area to be coated, gallons (or liters) of coating per unit surface area, and VOC content per gallon (or liter). The property owner/developer shall also implement the following to limit emissions from architectural coatings and asphalt usage: a. Use nonsolvent-based coatings on buildings, wherever appropriate; b. Use solvent based coatings, where they are necessary (MEIR 313 MM 3.4-2, Air Quality). MM 5.2-3 Ongoing during construction, the property owner/developer shall implement measures to reduce construction-related air quality impacts. These measures shall include, but are not limited to: c. Normal wetting procedures (at least twice daily) or other dust palliative measures shall be Significant and unavoidable. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-10 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation followed during earth-moving operations to minimize fugitive dust emissions, in compliance with the City of Anaheim Municipal Code including application of chemical soil stabilizers to exposed soils after grading is completed and replacing ground cover in disturbed areas as quickly as practicable. d. For projects where there is excavation for subterranean facilities (such as parking) on-site haul roads shall be watered at least every two hours or the on-site haul roads shall be paved. e. Enclosing, covering, watering twice daily, or applying approved soil binders, according to manufacturer’s specification, to exposed piles. f. Roadways adjacent to the project shall be swept and cleared of any spilled export materials at least twice a day to assist in minimizing fugitive dust; and, haul routes shall be cleared as needed if spills of materials exported from the project site occur. g. Where practicable, heavy duty construction equipment shall be kept onsite when not in operation to minimize exhaust emissions associated with vehicles repetitiously entering and exiting the project site. h. Trucks importing or exporting soil material and/or debris shall be covered prior to entering public streets. i. Taking preventive measures to ensure that trucks do not carry dirt on tires onto public streets, including treating onsite roads and staging areas. j. Preventing trucks from idling for longer than 2 minutes. k. Manually irrigate or activate irrigation systems necessary to water and maintain the vegetation as soon as planting is completed. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-11 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation l. Reduce Traffic speeds on all unpaved road surfaces to 15 miles per hour or less. m. Suspend all grading operations when wind speeds (as instantaneous gust) exceed 25 miles per hour and during first and second stage smog alerts. n. Comply with SCAQMD Rule 402, which states that no dust impacts offsite are sufficient to be called a nuisance, and SCAQMD Rule 403, which restricts visible emissions from construction. o. Use low emission mobile construction equipment tractors, scrapers, dozers, etc.) where practicable. p. Utilize existing power sources power poles) or clean-fuel generators rather than temporary power generators, where practicable. q. Maintain construction equipment engines by keeping them properly tuned. r. Use low sulfur fuel for equipment, to the extent practicable (MEIR 313 MM 3.4-3, Air Quality). MM 5.2-4 Prior to issuance of each grading permit (for Import/Export Plan) and prior to issuance of demolition permit (for Demolition Plan), the property owner/developer shall submit Demolition and Import/Export plans. The plans shall include identification of offsite locations for materials export from the project and options for disposal of excess material. These options may include recycling of materials onsite, sale to a soil broker or contractor, sale to a project in the vicinity or transport to an environmentally cleared landfill, with attempts made to move it within Orange County. The property owner/developer shall offer recyclable building materials, such as asphalt or concrete for sale or removal by private firms or public agencies for use in construction of other ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-12 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation projects, if not all can be reused on project site (MEIR 313 MM 3.4-4, Air Quality). MM 5.2-5 Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall comply with all SCAQMD offset regulations and implementation of Best Available Control Technology (BACT) and Best Available Retrofit Control Technology (BARCT) for any new or modified stationary source. Copies of permits shall be given to the Planning Department (MEIR 313 MM 3.4-5, Air Quality). MM 5.2-6 Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall implement, and demonstrate to the City, measures that are being taken to reduce operation-related air quality impacts. These measures may include, but are not limited to the following: a. Improve thermal integrity of structures and reduced thermal load through use of automated time clocks or occupant sensors. b. Incorporate efficient heating and other appliances. c. Incorporate energy conservation measures in site orientation and in building design, such as appropriate passive solar design. d. Use drought-resistant landscaping wherever feasible to reduce energy used in pumping and transporting water. e. To the extent feasible, provide daycare opportunities for employees or participate in a joint development daycare center f. Install facilities for electric vehicle recharging, unless it is demonstrated that the technology for these facilities or availability of the equipment current at the time makes this installation infeasible. (MEIR 313 MM 3.4-6, Air Quality). ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-13 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation MM 5.2-7 Prior to issuance of the first building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit a human health risk assessment (HRA) for any proposed sensitive land uses (according to SCAQMD standards at that time) to be located within 500 feet of the near edge of the I-5 freeway unless it is demonstrated that the health risks have been determined to be acceptable according to the standards of the SCAQMD at the time of building permit application. Mitigation Measures 5.14-4, 5.14-5, 5.14-8, 5.14-9. 5.14-20, 5.14-21, 5.14-23 from Section 5.14, Transportation and Traffic, would also be applicable. Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Significant and unavoidable. Exposure of persons to local CO concentrations would be less than significant; this conclusion is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313. Short-term exposure of persons to PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations exceeding the SCAQMD CEQA significance thresholds would occur during excavation near sensitive receptors; the impact would be significant and unavoidable. Exposure of persons to TACs would be less than significant. MEIR 313 did not evaluate impacts related to local PM concentrations or toxic air contaminants; therefore, consistency findings cannot be determined. Implementation of mitigation measures 5.2-1 through 5.2-7 as listed above would reduce impacts related to air quality. Mitigation Measures 5.14-4, 5.14-5, 5.14-8, 5.14-9. 5.14-20, 5.14-21, 5.14-23 from Section 5.14, Transportation and Traffic, would also be applicable. Significant and unavoidable. Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non- attainment under an applicable Federal or State ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? Significant and unavoidable. Build out of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan could result in cumulatively considerable increase of nonattainment pollutants during both the construction and operational phases of the project. Mitigation measures would not reduce the impact to less than significant. Therefore, the impact would be significant and unavoidable. The conclusion for cumulative emissions is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313. Implementation of mitigation measures 5.2-1 through 5.2-7 as listed above would reduce impacts related to air quality. Mitigation Measures 5.14-4, 5.14-5, 5.14-8, 5.14-9. 5.14-20, 5.14-21, 5.14-23 from Section 5.14, Transportation and Traffic, would also be applicable. Significant and unavoidable. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-14 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan Significant and unavoidable. The Proposed Project would conflict with the applicable air quality plan; the impact would be significant and unavoidable. The conclusion for conformance with the AQMP is more significant than the conclusion provided in MEIR 313. It should be noted, however, that the current criteria for conformance with the AQMP are different than the applicable criteria when MEIR 313 was prepared. Implementation of mitigation measures 5.2-1 through 5.2-7 as listed above would reduce impacts related to air quality. Mitigation Measures 5.14-4, 5.14-5, 5.14-8, 5.14-9. 5.14-20, 5.14-21, 5.14-23 from Section 5.14, Transportation and Traffic, would also be applicable. Significant and unavoidable. Would the project create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Less than significant. Odor impacts would be less than significant. MEIR 313 did not evaluate impacts related to odors; therefore, a consistency finding cannot be determined. No mitigation measures are necessary. Less than significant. 5.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Would the project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Potentially significant. The Project has the potential to impact nesting birds and raptors, which would result in a significant impact. Implementation of MMs 5.3-1 and 5.3-2 would reduce these impacts to less than significant levels. MEIR 313 did not evaluate impacts related to candidate, sensitive, or special status species; therefore, a consistency finding for this impact conclusion cannot be made. MM 5.3-1 Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit, grading permit, or building permit, whichever occurs first, a survey for active raptor nests shall be conducted by a qualified Biologist and submitted to the Planning Department 30 days prior to commencement of any demolition or construction activities during the raptor nesting season (February 1 to June 30) and within 500 feet of a fan palm, juniper, or canary island pine. Should an active nest be identified, restrictions defined by a qualified Biologist will be placed on construction activities in the vicinity of any active nest observed until the nest is no longer active, as determined by a qualified Biologist. These restrictions may include a 300- to 500-foot buffer zone designated around a nest to allow construction to proceed while minimizing disturbance to the active nest. Once the nest is no longer active, construction can proceed within the buffer zone. MM 5.3-2 Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit, grading permit, or building permit, whichever occurs first, a letter detailing the proposed schedule for vegetation removal Less than significant with mitigation. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-15 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation activities shall be submitted to the Planning Department, verifying that removal shall take place between August 1 and February 28 to avoid the bird nesting season. This would ensure that no active nests would be disturbed. If this is not feasible, then a qualified Biologist shall inspect any trees which would be impacted prior to demolition, grading or construction activities to ensure no nesting birds are present. If a nest is present, then appropriate minimization measures shall be developed by the Biologist. Would the project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? Less than significant. The ARSP area does not function as a migratory corridor or a native wildlife nursery site; therefore, no impacts would occur. MEIR 313 did not evaluate impacts related to migratory corridors or native wildlife nursery sites; therefore, a consistency finding for this impact conclusion cannot be made. No mitigation measures are necessary. Less than significant 5.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in § 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines and/or identified on the Qualified Historic Structure list of the Anaheim Colony Historic Preservation Plan (July 20, 1999)? Potentially significant. Future development and redevelopment associated with the Proposed Project has the potential to impact unknown historical resources. Implementation of MM 5.4-3 would reduce this potential impact to a less than significant level. The conclusion for impacts to historical resources is more significant than the conclusion provided in MEIR 313. MM 5.4-3 Prior to approval of a final site plan for properties that contain a structure over 45 years old, property owners/developers shall submit to the Planning Department, Planning Services Division documentation to verify the presence/absence of historic resources. On properties where resources are identified, such documentation shall provide a detailed mitigation plan, including a monitoring program and recovery and/or in situ preservation plan, based on the recommendations of a qualified specialist (EIR 330 MM 5.4-1, Cultural Resources). Less than significant with mitigation. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-16 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines? Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? Potentially significant. Grading and construction activities associated with build out of the ARSP could impact unknown archeological and/or paleontological resources, which would be considered significant. This impact would be mitigated to a level considered less than significant with implementation of the proposed mitigation measures. This conclusion is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313 for the original ARSP. MM 5.4-1 Prior to issuance of each grading permit, the property owner/developer shall submit a letter identifying the certified archaeologist that has been hired to ensure that the following actions are implemented: a. The archaeologist must be present at the pre- grading conference in order to establish procedures for temporarily halting or redirecting work to permit the sampling, identification, and evaluation of artifacts if potentially significant artifacts are uncovered. If artifacts are uncovered and determined to be significant, the archaeological observer shall determine appropriate actions in cooperation with the property owner/developer for exploration and/or salvage. b. Specimens that are collected prior to or during the grading process will be donated to an appropriate educational or research institution. c. Any archaeological work at the site shall be conducted under the direction of the certified archaeologist. If any artifacts are discovered during grading operations when the archaeological monitor is not present, grading shall be diverted around the area until the monitor can survey the area. d. A final report detailing the findings and disposition of the specimens shall be submitted to the City Engineer. Upon completion of the grading, the archaeologist shall notify the City as to when the final report will be submitted. (MEIR 313 MM 3.12-1, Cultural Resources). MM 5.4-2 Prior to issuance of each grading permit, the property owner/developer shall submit a letter identifying the certified paleontologist that has been hired to ensure that the following actions are implemented: a. The paleontologist must be present at the pre- grading conference in order to establish Less than significant with mitigation. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-17 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation procedures to temporarily halt or redirect work to permit the sampling, identification, and evaluation of fossils if potentially significant paleontological resources are uncovered. If artifacts are uncovered and found to be significant, the paleontological observer shall determine appropriate actions in cooperation with the property owner/developer for exploration and/or salvage. b. Specimens that are collected prior to or during the grading process will be donated to an appropriate educational or research institution. c. Any paleontological work at the site shall be conducted under the direction of the certified paleontologist. If any fossils are discovered during grading operations when the paleontological monitor is not present, grading shall be diverted around the area until the monitor can survey the area. (MEIR 313 MM 3.12-2, Cultural Resources). Implementation of mitigation measure 5.4-3 as listed above would also reduce impacts related to archeological and paleontological resources. Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Less than significant Grading and construction activities associated with build out of the ARSP could impact previously unknown human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries, which would be considered significant. However, compliance with the standard requirements would reduce this impact to a level considered less than significant. MEIR 313 did not evaluate impacts related to disturbance of human remains; therefore, a consistency finding for this impact conclusion cannot be made. No mitigation measures are necessary. Less than significant. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-18 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation 5.5 GEOLOGY AND SOILS Would the project expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving strong seismic ground shaking? Potentially significant. The Proposed Project would be exposed to seismic ground shaking; however, with implementation of the proposed mitigation measures, impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level. This conclusion is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313 for the original ARSP. MM 5.5-1 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit to the Planning Department, Building Services Division for review and approval, detailed foundation design information for the subject building(s), prepared by a civil engineer, based on recommendations by a geotechnical engineer. (MEIR 313 MM 3.6-2, Geology and Soils) MM 5.5-2 Prior to issuance of each foundation permit, the property owner/developer shall submit a report prepared by a geotechnical engineer to the Planning Department, Building Services Division for review and approval, which shall investigate the subject foundation excavations to determine if soft layers are present immediately beneath the footing site and to ensure that compressibility does not underlie the footing. (MEIR 313 MM 3.6-3, Geology and Soils) MM 5.5-3 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit plans to the Planning Department, Building Services Division for review and approval showing that the proposed structure has been analyzed for earthquake loading and designed according to the most recent seismic standards in the California Building Code adopted by the City of Anaheim. (MEIR 313 MM 3.6-4, Geology and Soils) MM 5.5-4 Prior to the final building and zoning inspection for a hotel/motel, the property owner/developer shall submit an earthquake emergency response plan for review and approval by the Fire Department. The plan shall require posted notices in all hotel rooms on earthquake safety procedures and incorporate ongoing earthquake training for hotel staff to the satisfaction of the Fire Department. (MEIR 313 MM 3.6-5, Geology and Soils) Less than significant with mitigation. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-19 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation MM 5.5-5 Ongoing during grading activities, the property owner/developer shall implement standard practices for all applicable codes and ordinances to prevent erosion to the satisfaction of the Planning Department, Building Services Division. (MEIR 313 MM 3.6-6, Geology and Soils) MM 5.5-6 Prior to issuance of building or grading permits, the property owner/developer shall submit to the Planning Department, Building Services Division geologic and geotechnical investigations in areas of potential seismic or geologic hazards and provide a note on plans that all grading operations will be conducted in conformance with the recommendations contained in the applicable geotechnical investigation. (EIR 330 MM 5.5-1, Geology and Soils) Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Less than significant. Future build out of the ARSP would expose areas to erosion and loss of topsoil during demolition and/or construction activities. Adherence to SR 5.8- 1 would ensure that this impact would be less than significant. This conclusion is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313 for the original ARSP. No mitigation measures are necessary. Less than significant. Would the project be located on expansive soil, as described by Section 1802.3.2 of the California Building Code (2007) creating substantial risks to life or property? Potentially significant. Expansive soils are known to exist within the ARSP area; therefore, build out of the ARSP may result in a significant impact related to expansive soil. Implementation of the proposed mitigation would reduce impacts to less than significant levels. MEIR 313 did not evaluate impacts related to expansive soils; therefore, a consistency finding for this impact conclusion cannot be made. Implementation of mitigation measures 5.5-1 through 5.5-3 would reduce impacts related expansive soils to a less than significant level. Less than significant with mitigation. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-20 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation 5.6 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Would the project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? Significant and unavoidable. Direct and indirect GHG emissions would be cumulatively considerable and would be a significant and unavoidable impact. MEIR No. 313 did not evaluate impacts related to GHG emissions; therefore, a consistency finding cannot be determined. The following mitigation measures for other impact areas would also contribute to the reduction of GHG emissions: 5.2-1, 5.2-4, 5.2-5, 5.2-6, 5.8-5, 5.14-4, 5.14-5, 5.14-8, 5.14-9, 5.15-1, 5.15-4, 5.17-1, 5.19-1, 5.19-2, 5.14-20, 5.14-21, 5.14-23, 5.17-3, 5.17-4, 5.19-4, 5.19-5. Significant and unavoidable. Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? Less than significant. With adherence to the standard requirements and implementation of the proposed mitigation measures, the Proposed Project would not conflict with applicable plans, policies or regulations, and the impact would be less than significant. MEIR No. 313 did not evaluate impacts related to greenhouse gas emissions; therefore, a consistency finding cannot be determined. The following mitigation measures for other impact areas would also contribute to the reduction of GHG emissions: 5.2-1, 5.2-4, 5.2-5, 5.2-6, 5.8-5, 5.14-4, 5.14-5, 5.14-8, 5.14-9, 5.15-1, 5.15-4, 5.17-1, 5.19-1, 5.19-2, 5.14-20, 5.14-21, 5.14-23, 5.17-3, 5.17-4, 5.19-4, 5.19-5. Less than significant. 5.7 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Would the project be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? Potentially significant. The Proposed Project would have the potential to disturb LBP and ACM depending on the age of existing structures within the PR and C-R Districts. Given the presence of USTs, including ones which have been identified as having leaked, the Proposed Project would have the potential to disturb hazardous materials. With implementation of mitigation, including compliance with the State of California Hazardous Substances Control Law, potential impacts related to hazardous material on or near the Project Site would be reduced to less than significant levels. This conclusion is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313 for the original ARSP. MM 5.7-1 Prior to issuance of the first grading or demolition permit, whichever occurs first, in areas of former service stations, in areas known or thought to have been previously occupied by USTs, and in areas where tank removal has not been verified prior to excavation or grading the property owner/developer shall retain the services of a qualified environmental professional to conduct an investigation for known, or the presence of, tanks, using geophysical methods. Soil sampling or a soil organic vapor survey may be required if soil sampling results are not available, or indicate contamination is present above regulatory guidelines. If warranted, subsurface investigation and sampling shall be undertaken in these areas, and appropriate remediation measures developed, if necessary, before demolition, excavation, or grading takes place in these areas. (MEIR 313 MM 3.10-1, Hazards and Hazardous Materials) Less than significant with mitigation. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-21 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation MM 5.7-2 Prior to the removal of USTs the property owner/developer shall obtain a permit from the Environmental Protection Section of the Fire Department for the removal of such tanks. During the removal of USTs, a representative from the Environmental Protection Section of the Fire Department shall be onsite to direct soil sampling. (MEIR 313 MM 3.10-2, Hazards and Hazardous Materials) MM 5.7-3 Ongoing during remediation all remediation activities of surface or subsurface contamination not related to USTs, conducted on behalf of the property owner/developer, shall be overseen by the Orange County Health Department. Information on subsurface contamination from USTs shall be provided to the Public Utilities Department, Water Services Administration, Environmental Services Division. (MEIR 313 MM 3.10-3, Hazards and Hazardous Materials) MM 5.7-4 Prior to issuance of the first grading or demolition permit, whichever occurs first the property owner/developer shall submit a plan for review and approval of the Fire Department which details procedures that will be taken if previously unknown USTs, or other unknown hazardous material or waste, is discovered onsite. (MEIR 313 MM 3.10-4, Hazards and Hazardous Materials) MM 5.7-5 Prior to issuance of the first grading plan or demolition permit, whichever occurs first for future developments within the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan area affecting any property on a published list of leaking underground storage tanks (LUST) that has not been officially closed or resolved, a qualified environmental professional, retained by the property owner/developer, shall attempt to contact the current and/or known former property/business owners to obtain information regarding the status of USTs and/or tank closures at these sites. If warranted, subsurface ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-22 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation investigation and sampling shall be undertaken by a qualified environmental professional, and results of these analyses shall be submitted to the Fire Department for review and approval. Appropriate remediation measures will be developed, if necessary, before demolition, excavation, or grading takes place in these areas. (MEIR 313 MM 3.10-5, Hazards and Hazardous Materials) MM 5.7-6 Ongoing during project demolition and construction, in the event that hazardous waste, including asbestos, is discovered during site preparation or construction, the property owner/developer shall ensure that the identified hazardous waste and/or hazardous material are handled and disposed of in the manner specified by the State of California Hazardous Substances Control Law (Health and Safety Code, Division 20, Chapter 6.5), and according to the requirements of the California Administrative Code, Title 30, Chapter 22. (MEIR 313 MM 3.10-7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials) MM 5.7-7 Prior to issuance of any discretionary permit for a current or former hazardous waste disposal site or solid waste disposal site, the project property owner/developer shall submit a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment to the City. If possible hazardous materials are identified during the site assessments, the appropriate response/remedial measures will be implemented in accordance with the requirements of the Orange County Health Care Agency (OCHCA) and/or the Regional Water Quality Control Board as appropriate. (EIR 330 MM 5.6-3, Hazards and Hazardous Materials) ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-23 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation 5.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Would the proposed project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? Would the proposed project otherwise substantially degrade water quality? Would the proposed project substantially degrade water quality by contributing pollutants from areas of material storage, vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle or equipment maintenance (including washing), waste handling, hazardous materials handling, or storage, delivery areas, loading docks or other outdoor work areas? Would the proposed project substantially degrade water quality by discharge which affects the beneficial uses swimming, fishing, etc.) of the receiving or waters? Potentially significant. Implementation of the Proposed Project would result in short-term construction-related and long- term operational water quality impacts. These impacts would be mitigated to a level considered less than significant with implementation of the proposed mitigation measures and compliance with the standard requirements. This conclusion is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313 for the original ARSP. MM 5.8-1 Prior to issuance of the first grading or building permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall submit a Master Drainage and Runoff Management Plan for review and approval by the Public Works Department, Development Services Division and Orange County Environmental Management Agency. The Master Plan shall include, but not be limited to, the following items: a. Backbone storm drain layout and pipe size, including supporting hydrology and hydraulic calculations for storms up to and including the 100-year storm; and, b. A delineation of the improvements to be implemented for control of project-generated drainage and runoff (MEIR 313 MM 3.7-1, Hydrology and Water Resources). MM 5.8-2 Prior to issuance of a grading permit for sites that disturb more than one acre of soil, the property owner/developer shall obtain coverage under the NPDES Statewide Industrial Stormwater Permit for General Construction Activities from the State Water Resources Control Board. Evidence of attainment shall be submitted to the Planning Department, Building Services Division. (MEIR 313 MM 3.7-3, Hydrology and Water Resources). MM 5.8-3 Ongoing during project operations, the property owner/developer shall provide for the following: cleaning of all paved areas not maintained by the City of Anaheim on a basis, including, but not limited to, private streets and parking lots. The use of water to clean streets, paved areas, parking lots, and other areas and flushing the debris and sediment down the storm drains shall be prohibited (MEIR 313 MM 3.7-4, Hydrology and Water Resources). Less than significant with mitigation. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-24 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation MM 5.8-4 Prior to each final building and zoning inspection, the property owner/developer shall submit a letter from a licensed landscape architect to the City certifying that the landscape installation and irrigation systems have been installed as specified in the approved landscaping and irrigation plans (MEIR 313 MM 3.7-5, Hydrology and Water Resources). MM 5.8-5 Prior to final building and zoning inspection, the property owner/developer shall install piping on-site with project water mains so that reclaimed water may be used for landscape irrigation, if and when it becomes available (MEIR 313 MM 3.7-6, Hydrology and Water Resources). MM 5.8-6 Prior to issuance of building permits, the property owner/developer shall provide written evidence that all storm drain, sewer, and street improvement plans shall be designed and constructed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. (Ord 5454, Condition 7) Would the proposed project substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level the production rate of pre- existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? Potentially significant. Excavation and grading activities for future development according to the ARSP would not result in direct impacts to the underlying groundwater resources. However, build out within the C-R and PR Districts would result in an increase in long-term demand for domestic water, landscape irrigation, and maintenance activities. Implementation of the proposed mitigation would reduce demand for groundwater resources, and potential impacts would be mitigated to less than significant levels. This conclusion is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313 for the original ARSP. Implementation of mitigation measures 5.8-3 through 5.8-6 as listed above would reduce impacts related to groundwater supplies and recharge. The following mitigation measures for from Section 5.15 (Water) would also reduce impacts related to groundwater supplies and recharge: 5.15-1, 5.15-2, 5.15-4, 5.15-8 and 5.15-9. Less than significant with mitigation. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-25 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation Would the proposed project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? Potentially significant. Implementation of the Proposed Project would result in site-specific changes to drainage patterns on development sites, but would not adversely impact regional hydrology or drainage flows in the surrounding area. Potential increases in impervious surfaces could increase runoff rates and volumes, while reducing potential for soil erosion. Implementation of the proposed mitigation measures and compliance with the standard requirements would reduce impacts to less than significant levels. This conclusion is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313 for the original ARSP. Implementation of mitigation measures 5.8-1 through 5.8-6 as listed above would reduce impacts related to drainage patterns. Less than significant with mitigation. Would the proposed project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? Would the proposed project create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of pollutant runoff Potentially significant. Implementation of the Proposed Project may increase runoff volumes and rates to exacerbate existing deficiencies, potentially leading to localized street flooding. Implementation of the proposed mitigation measures and compliance with the standard requirements would reduce impacts to less than significant levels. This conclusion is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313 for the original ARSP. Implementation of mitigation measures 5.8-1 through 5.8-6 as listed above would reduce impacts related to hydrology and water quality. Less than significant with mitigation. 5.9 LAND USE AND PLANNING Would the project physically divide an established community? Less than significant. Implementation of the Proposed Project has the potential to divide or eliminate the established community present at the two mobile home parks. However, pursuant to the Anaheim Municipal Code, impacts associated with the conversion the mobile home parks to other uses would be mitigated. Therefore, impacts associated with the division of an established community would be less than significant. This conclusion is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313. No mitigation measures are necessary. Less than significant. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-26 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation Would the project conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the Project (including but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating and environmental effect? Less than significant. The Proposed Project would be consistent with the respective goals and policies of local and regional regulatory and planning documents. No significant land use impacts would occur, and no mitigation is necessary. This conclusion is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313 for the original ARSP. No mitigation measures are necessary. Less than significant. 5.10 NOISE Would the Project expose people to or generate (short-term) noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? Would the Project result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Significant and unavoidable. Construction activities associated with future development within the ARSP area have the potential to significantly impact noise-sensitive receptors. Adherence to the standard requirements and implementation of the proposed mitigation measures would reduce potential impacts; however, these impacts may remain significant and unavoidable. This conclusion for temporary construction noise impacts is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313. MM 5.10-1 Ongoing during construction, the property owner/developer shall ensure that all internal combustion engines on construction equipment and trucks are fitted with properly maintained mufflers (MEIR 313 MM 3.5-3, Noise). MM 5.10-2 Prior to approval of each final site plan, the property owner/developer shall submit a noise study prepared by a certified acoustical engineer to the satisfaction of the Building Division Manager identifying whether noise attenuation is required and defining the attenuation measures and specific performance requirements, if warranted, to comply with the Uniform Building Code and Sound Pressure Level Ordinance. Ultimate noise attenuation requirements, if any, shall depend on the final location of such buildings and noise- sensitive uses inside and surrounding the buildings. Attenuation measures shall be implemented by the property owner/developer prior to final building and zoning inspections (MEIR 313 MM 3.5-4, Noise). MM 5.10-3 Prior to issuance of each building permit, for structures that are adjacent to noise- sensitive areas such as residences, the property owner/developer shall ensure that all mechanical ventilation units are shown on plans and installed in compliance with Sound Pressure Level Ordinance (MEIR 313 MM 3.5-5, Noise). MM 5.10-4 Prior to issuance of each building permit for a parking structure, the property Significant and unavoidable. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-27 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation owner/developer shall ensure that noise from parking structures adjacent to residential areas will be reduced by the provision of convenient access to parking facilities, sound attenuation devices (louvers and walls), the use of textured deck surfaces to reduce tire squalling, and tiering a parking facility to provide greater distance to the receptor (MEIR 313 MM 3.5-7, Noise). MM 5.10-5 Prior to issuance of each building permit, a note shall be provided on building plans indicating that during construction, the property owner/developer shall install and maintain specially designed construction barriers at the project perimeter areas. The construction sound barriers shall be a minimum height of 8 feet with a minimum surface weight of 1.25 pounds per square foot or a minimum Sound Transmission Class (STC) rating of 25. The structure shall be a continuous barrier. Gates and other entry doors shall be constructed with suitable mullions, astragals, seals, or other design techniques to minimize sound leakage when in the closed position. Access doors should be self closing where feasible. Vision ports are permissible providing they are filled with an acceptable solid vision product. (Ord 5454, Condition 17) MM 5.10-6 Ongoing during construction and project operation, pressure washing operations for purposes of building repair and maintenance due to graffiti or other aesthetical considerations shall be limited to daytime hours of operation between 7:00 AM and 8:00 PM. (Ord 5454, Condition 19) MM 5.10-7 Ongoing during construction and project operation, sweeping operations in the parking facilities and private on-site roadways shall be performed utilizing sweeping/scrubbing equipment which operate at a level measured not greater than 60 dBA at the nearest adjacent property line. (Ord 5454, Condition 18) ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-28 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation MM 5.10-8 Ongoing during construction, property owners/developers shall pay for all reasonable costs associated with noise monitoring which shall include monitoring conducted by a certified acoustical engineer under the direction of the Planning Department four times a year on a random basis to ensure that outdoor construction- related sound levels at any point on the exterior project boundary property line do not exceed 60 dBA between the hours of 7:00 PM and 7:00 AM of the following day where outside construction is occurring. If a complaint is received by the City, additional noise monitoring shall be conducted at the discretion of the City. If the monitoring finds that the 60 dBA threshold is being exceeded, construction activities will be modified immediately to bring the sound level below the 60 dBA requirement, with additional follow-up monitoring conducted to confirm compliance. (Ord 5454, Condition 20) MM 5.10-9 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall present plans and calculations to the Planning Department, Building Division to demonstrate that noise levels would be less than 65 dBA CNEL for outdoor use areas (including dining patios, pools, playgrounds, or outdoor gathering areas). This requirement can be accomplished through shielding areas behind buildings or the construction of a noise barrier. MM 5.10-10 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall present plans and calculations to the Planning Department, Building Division to demonstrate that noise levels from planned mechanical ventilation equipment, loading docks, trash compactors, and other proposed on-site noise sources are designed to meet the City’s 60 dBA Sound Pressure Levels standard at the property line, and not create a noise increase greater than 5 dBA over existing ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-29 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation ambient noise at the nearest noise sensitive receptor, whichever is more restrictive. MM 5.10-11 Prior to issuance of each building permit, a note shall be provided on plans indicating that there shall be no operation of large bulldozers or vibratory rollers within 25 feet of any existing home. MM 5.10-12 Prior to issuance of each building permit if pile driving and blasting is anticipated during construction, a noise and vibration analysis must be prepared and submitted to the Planning Department, Building Division, to assess and mitigate potential noise and vibration impacts related to these activities. Would the Project expose people to or generate (long-term) noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? Would the Project result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Potentially significant. Development associated with the Proposed Project would create land use compatibility issues related to noise and would expose receptors to noise levels in excess of established standards, thereby resulting in significant impacts. Adherence to the standard requirements and implementation of the proposed mitigation measures would reduce impacts to less than significant levels. The conclusion related to increased noise levels is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313. Implementation of mitigation measures 5.10-2 through 5.10-4 and 5.10-7 as listed above would reduce long-term and permanent impacts related to noise. Less than significant with mitigation. Would the project expose people to or generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Potentially significant. Construction activities related to future development projects within the ARSP area have the potential to generate vibration and groundborne vibration impacts. Implementation of the proposed mitigation would reduce these potential impacts to less than significant levels. MEIR 313 did not evaluate impacts related to vibration; therefore, a consistency finding cannot be made. Implementation of mitigation measures 5.10-1 through 5.10-12 as listed above would reduce impacts related to groundborne vibration and noise. Less than significant with mitigation. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-30 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation 5.11 POPULATION AND HOUSING Would the project induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through the extension of roads or other infrastructure)? Less than significant. The Proposed Project has the potential to increase population by approximately 9,099 residents and result in a demand for 2,757 housing units within the City of Anaheim. The increases related to population and housing would be well within City of Anaheim projections as stated in Table 5.11-5, representing a less than significant impact. This conclusion is consistent with the conclusion provided in MEIR 313. No mitigation measures are necessary. Less than significant. Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing houses, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Would the project displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Less than significant. Implementation of the Proposed Project has the potential to displace housing units and residents associated with the MHP overlay zone. However, assuming compliance with State law and the requirements of the Anaheim Municipal Code, impacts would be less than significant. MEIR 313 did not evaluate impacts related to the displacement of housing or people; therefore, a consistency finding for this impact conclusion cannot be made. No mitigation measures are necessary. Less than significant. 5.12 PUBLIC SERVICES Police Protection Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for police protection? Potentially significant. Build out of the ARSP would create additional demand for police services; implementation of MM 5.12- 1 through 5.12-4 would reduce impacts to less than significant. MM 5.12-1 Prior to the approval of each Final Site Plan and issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit plans to the Police Department for review and approval for safety, accessibility, crime prevention, and security provisions during both the construction and operative phases for the purpose of incorporating safety measures in the project design including the concept of crime prevention through environmental design building design, circulation, site planning, and lighting of parking structures and parking areas). (MEIR 313 MM 3.9.2-1, Public Services and Utilities and incorporates Ord 5454, Condition 32) Less than significant with mitigation. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-31 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation MM 5.12-2 Prior to the issuance of each building permit for a parking structure, the property owner/developer shall submit plans to the Police Department for review and approval indicating the provision of closed circuit television monitoring and recording or other substitute security measures as may be approved by the Police Department. Said measures shall be implemented prior to final building and zoning inspections. (MEIR 313 MM 3.9.2-2, Public Services and Utilities) MM 5.12-3 Ongoing during project operation, the property owner/developer shall provide private security on the premises to maintain adequate security for the entire project subject to review and approval of the Police Department. The use of security patrols and electronic security devices video monitors) should be considered to reduce the potential for criminal activity in the area. (MEIR 313 MM 3.9.2-3, Public Services and Utilities) MM 5.12-4 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the project design shall include parking lots and parking structures with controlled access points to limit ingress and egress if determined to be necessary by the Police Department, and shall be subject to the review and approval of the Police Department. (MEIR 313 MM 3.9.2-4, Public Services and Utilities) Fire Protection Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for fire protection? Potentially significant. Build out of the ARSP would create additional demand for fire and/or emergency rescue services; adherence to SRCs 5.12-1 and implementation of MM 5.12-5 through 5.12- 16 would reduce impacts to less than significant. MM 5.12-5 Prior to commencement of structural framing on each parcel or lot, onsite fire hydrants shall be installed and charged by the property owner/developer as required and approved by the Fire Department. (MEIR 313 MM 3.9-1.1, Public Services and Utilities) MM 5.12-6 Prior to issuance of each grading permit, the property owner/developer shall submit an emergency fire access plan to the Fire Department for review and approval to ensure that service to the site is in accordance with Fire Less than significant with mitigation. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-32 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation Department service requirements. (MEIR 313 MM 3.9-1.2, Public Services and Utilities) MM 5.12-7 Prior to issuance of each building permit; to be implemented prior to the final building and zoning inspection, plans shall indicate that all buildings, exclusive of parking structures, shall have sprinklers installed by the property owner/developer in accordance with the Anaheim Municipal Code. Said sprinklers shall be installed prior to each final building and zoning inspection. (MEIR 313 MM 3.9-1.3, Public Services and Utilities) MM 5.12-8 Prior to issuance of each building permit, plans shall be submitted to ensure that development is in accordance with the City of Anaheim Fire Department Standards, including: a. Overhead clearance shall not be less than 14 feet for the full width of access roads. b. Bridges and underground structures to be used for Fire Department access shall be designed to support Fire Department vehicles weighing 75,000 pounds. c. All underground tunnels shall have sprinklers. Water supplies are required at all entrances. Standpipes shall also be provided when determined to be necessary by the Fire Department. d. Adequate off-site public fire hydrants contiguous to the Specific Plan area and onsite private fire hydrants shall be provided by the property owner/developer. The precise number, types, and locations of the hydrants shall be determined during building permit review. Hydrants are to be a maximum of 400 feet apart. e. A minimum residual water pressure of 20 psi shall remain in the water system. Flow rates for public parking facilities shall be set at 1,000 to ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-33 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation 1,500 gpm. (MEIR 313 MM 3.9-1.4, Public Services and Utilities) MM 5.12-9 Prior to issuance of the first building permit, the property owner/developer shall enter into an agreement recorded against the property with the City of Anaheim to pay or cause to be paid their fair share of the funding to accommodate the following, which will serve the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan area: a. One additional fire truck company. b. One additional paramedic company. c. Modifications to existing fire stations to accommodate the additional fire units, additional manpower, equipment and facilities. d. A vehicle equipped with specialty tools and equipment to enable the Fire Department to provide heavy search and rescue response capability. e. A medical triage vehicle/trailer, equipped with sufficient trauma dressings, medical supplies, stretchers, etc., to handle 1,000 injured persons, and an appropriate storage facility. The determination of the allocable share of costs attributable to the property owner/developer shall be based on an apportionment of the costs of such equipment/facilities among property owners/developers in the Hotel Circle Specific Plan Area, the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan Area and the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Area or the otherwise defined service area, as applicable, depending on the area served. (Note: To implement this mitigation measure, the City has adopted the Fire Protection Facilities and Paramedic Services Impact Fee Program. Compliance with this Program by the property owner/developer (per Ordinance No. 5496 and Resolution No. 95R-73 dated May 16, 1995) shall satisfy the requirements of this Mitigation ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-34 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation Measure, or the City may enter into alternative financing arrangements.) (MEIR 313 MM 3.9-1.5, Public Services and Utilities) MM 5.12-10 Prior to each final building and zoning inspection, the property owner/developer shall place emergency telephone service numbers in prominent locations as approved by the Fire Department. (MEIR 313 MM 3.9-1.6, Public Services and Utilities) MM 5.12-11 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit a Construction Fire Protection Plan to the Fire Department for review and approval detailing accessibility of emergency fire equipment, fire hydrant location, and any other construction features required by the Fire Marshal. The property owner/developer shall be responsible for securing facilities acceptable to the Fire Department and hydrants shall be operational with required fire flow. (MEIR 313 MM 3.9-1.7, Public Services and Utilities) MM 5.12-12 Prior to the approval of each Final Site Plan and prior to the issuance of each building permit, plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Fire Department as being in conformance with the Uniform Fire Code. (Ord 5454, Condition 8) MM 5.12-13 Prior to the placement of building materials on a building site, an all-weather road shall be provided from the roadway system to and on the construction site and for fire hydrants at all times, as required by the Fire Department. Such routes shall be paved or, subject to the approval of the Fire Department, shall otherwise provide adequate emergency access. Every building constructed must be accessible to Fire Department apparatus. The width and radius of the driving surface must meet the requirements of Section 10.204 of the Uniform Fire Code, as adopted by the City of Anaheim. (Ord 5454, Condition 9) ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-35 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation MM 5.12-14 Prior to approval of building plans, the property owner/developer shall provide written evidence to the satisfaction of the Fire Department that all lockable pedestrian and/or vehicular access gates shall be equipped with “knox box” devices as required and approved by the Fire Department. (Ord 5454, Condition 10) MM 5.12-15 Prior to approval of on-site water plans, unless each commercial building is initially connected to separate fire services, an unsubordinated covenant satisfactory to the City Attorney’s Office shall be recorded prohibiting any individual sale of buildings until separate fire services are installed in the building(s) subject to the sale. (Ord 5454, Condition 11) MM 5.12-16 Prior to approval of water improvement plans, the water supply system shall be designed by the property owner/developer to provide sufficient fire flow pressure and storage for the proposed land use and fire protection services in accordance with Fire Department requirements. Schools Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for schools? Potentially significant. Build out of the ARSP would generate new school-aged students; implementation of MMs 5.12-17 and 5.12-18 would reduce impacts to less than significant. MM 5.12-17 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall provide proof of compliance with Government Code Section 53080 (Schools). (MEIR 313 MM 3.9.5-1, Public Services and Utilities) MM 5.12-18 Ongoing, the City will work cooperatively with school districts to identify opportunities for new schools and school expansion. Less than significant with mitigation. Library Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain Potentially significant. Build out of the ARSP would introduce new borrowers to the Anaheim Public Library service area; implementation of MM 5.12-19 would reduce impacts to less than significant. MEIR No. 313 did not evaluate impacts related to libraries; therefore, a consistency finding cannot be determined. MM 5.12-19 Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the property owner/developer shall comply with the Anaheim Municipal Code, Section 17.08.385, Public Library Facilities Services Areas – Payment of Fees Required. Less than significant with mitigation. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-36 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for library services? 5.13 RECREATION Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for parks? Would the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Less than significant. Implementation of the Proposed Project would indirectly increase population by approximately 9,099 residents (8,264 associated with build out of the C-R District and 835 associated with the convention center expansion within the PR District). Because this increase would take place over the next 20 years and because the ARSP area is not located within a designated Park Deficiency Area, impacts related to the construction or expansion of recreational uses would be less than significant. Additionally, any residential development project within the Residential Overlay Zone would be subject to the SR 5.13-1, which requires the provision of parkland and/or the payment of fees, consistent with the Quimby Act, thereby ensuring that a significant impact would not occur. The conclusion for recreational facilities impacts is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313. No mitigation measures are necessary. Less than significant Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? Less than significant. The increased visitation at any off-site park facilities because of the increased population generated by the Proposed Project would not be large enough to cause substantial physical deterioration, and no physical impacts to park and recreational facilities would occur. The conclusion for recreation facilities impacts is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313. No mitigation measures are necessary. Less than significant ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-37 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation 5.14 TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? Potentially significant. The Proposed Project would have the potential to cause intersections, arterial segments, freeway ramp termini intersections, freeway ramps, freeway mainlines and freeway weaving areas to operate at unacceptable LOS. Under Year 2030 conditions, the project would lead to significant adverse impacts at four freeway ramps; however, the necessary improvements are infeasible due to physical, right-of-way, and other environmental constraints, thereby resulting in a significant and unavoidable impact. Even with implementation of mitigation measures, potential impacts related to transportation and traffic will remain significant and unavoidable due to the infeasibility of necessary improvements. At intersections and arterial segments located in the City of Orange and on Caltrans facilities, including freeway ramps, mainline segments, and weaving segments, the City of Anaheim has no jurisdiction to implement the improvements necessary to mitigate project impacts. If improvements outside of the City are not completed for reasons beyond the City of Anaheim’s control the City of Anaheim cannot undertake or require improvements outside of Anaheim’s jurisdiction or the City cannot construct improvements in the Caltrans right-of-way without Caltrans approval), traffic impacts on these facilities would remain significant and unavoidable. This conclusion is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313 for the original ARSP. MM 5.14-1 Prior to approval of a Final Site Plan for any project forecast to generate 100 or more peak hour trips, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager utilizing Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model Trip Generation Rates, the property owner/developer shall prepare traffic improvement phasing analyses to identify when the improvements identified in this traffic analysis shall be designed and constructed. (MEIR 313 MM 3.3-1) MM 5.14-2 Prior to issuance of the first building permit for each building, the property owner/developer shall pay the appropriate Traffic Signal Assessment Fees and Transportation Impact and Improvement Fees to the City of Anaheim in amounts determined by the City Council Resolution in effect at the time of issuance of the building permit with credit given for City- authorized improvements provided by the property owner/developer. The property owner shall also and participate in all applicable reimbursement or benefit districts, which have been established. (MEIR 313 MM 3.3-2) MM 5.14-3 Prior to approval of the first final subdivision map or issuance of the first building permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall irrevocably offer for dedication (with subordination of easements), including necessary construction easements, the ultimate arterial highway right(s)-of-way adjacent to their property as shown in the Circulation Element of the Anaheim General Plan. (MEIR 313 MM 3.3-3) MM 5.14-4 Prior to the final building and zoning inspection, the property owner shall join and financially participate in a clean fuel shuttle program such as the Anaheim Resort Transit system, and shall participate in the Anaheim Significant and unavoidable. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-38 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation Transportation Network in conjunction with the on- going operation of the project. The property owner shall also record a covenant on the property that requires participation in these programs ongoing during project operation. The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney’s Office prior to recordation. (MEIR 313 MM 3.3-4) MM 5.14-5 Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the property owner/developer shall provide to the City of Anaheim Public Works Department a plan to coordinate rideshare services for construction employees with the Anaheim Transportation Network (ATN) for review and a approval and shall implement ATN recommendations to the extent feasible. (MEIR 313 MM 3.3-5) MM 5.14-6 Prior to the issuance of each building permit for a hotel development that exceeds 100 rooms per gross acre within the Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area 1) within the Convention Center (CC) Medium density category, the property owner shall record a covenant on the property requiring that ongoing during project implementation, the property owner/developer shall implement TDM measures sufficient to reduce the actual trip generation from the development to no more than the trips assumed by the City’s traffic model. The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney’s Office. (MEIR 313 MM 3.3-6) MM 5.14-7 Ongoing during construction, if the Anaheim Police Department or the Anaheim Traffic Management Center (TMC) personnel are required to provide temporary traffic control services, the property owner/developer shall reimburse the City, on a fair-share basis, if applicable, for reasonable costs associated with such services. (MEIR 313 MM 3.3-7) ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-39 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation MM 5.14-8 Prior to the final building and zoning inspection, the property owner shall record a covenant on the property requiring that ongoing during project implementation, the property owner/developer shall implement and administer a comprehensive Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program for all employees. The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney’s Office. Objectives of the TDM program shall be: a. Increase ridesharing and use of alternative transportation modes by guests. b. Provide a menu of commute alternatives for employees to reduce project-generated trips. c. Conduct an annual commuter survey to ascertain trip generation, trip origin, and Average Vehicle Ridership. (MEIR 313, MM 3.3-8 in part) MM 5.14-9 Prior to the final building and zoning inspection, the property owner/developer shall provide to the City of Anaheim Public Works Department for review and approval a menu of TDM program strategies and elements for both existing and future employees’ commute options, and incentives for hotel patrons transportation options, to include, but are not be limited to, the list below. The property owner shall also record a covenant on the property requiring that the approved TDM strategies and elements be implemented ongoing during project operation. The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney’s Office prior to recordation. a. On-site services. Provide, as feasible and permitted, on-site services such as the food, retail, and other services. b. Ridesharing. Develop a commuter listing of all employee members for the purpose of providing a “matching” of employees with ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-40 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation other employees who live in the same geographic areas and who could rideshare. c. Vanpooling. Develop a commuter listing of all employees for the purpose of matching numbers of employees who live in geographic proximity to one another and could comprise a vanpool or participate in the existing vanpool programs. d. Transit Pass. Promote Orange County Transportation Authority (including commuter rail) passes through financial assistance and on-site sales to encourage employees to use the various transit and bus services from throughout the region. e. Shuttle Service. Generate a commuter listing of all employees living in proximity to the project, and offer a local shuttle program to encourage employees to travel to work by means other than the automobile. When appropriate, event shuttle service shall also be made available for guests. f. Bicycling. Develop a Bicycling Program be developed to offer a bicycling alternative to employees. Secure bicycle racks, lockers, and showers should be provided as part of this program. Maps of bicycle routes throughout the area should be provided to inform potential bicyclists of these options. g. Guaranteed Ride Home Program. Develop a program to provide employees who rideshare, or use transit or other means of commuting to work, with a prearranged ride home in a taxi, rental car, shuttle, or other vehicle, in the event of emergencies during the work shift. h. Target Reduction of Longest Commute Trip. Promote an incentive program for ridesharing and other alternative transportation modes to put highest priority on reduction of longest ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-41 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation employee commute trips. i. Work Shifts. Stagger work shifts. j. Compressed Work Week. Develop a “compressed work week” program, which provides for fewer work days but longer daily shifts as an option for employees. k. Telecommuting. Explore the possibility of a “telecommuting” program that would link some employees via electronic means computer with modem). l. Parking Management. Develop a parking management program that provides incentives to those who rideshare or use transit means other than single-occupant auto to travel to work. m. Access. Provide preferential access to high occupancy vehicles and shuttles. n. Financial Incentive for Ridesharing and/or Public Transit. Offer employees financial incentives for ridesharing or using public transportation. Currently, federal law provides tax-free status for up to $65 per month per employee contributions to employees who vanpool or use public transit including commuter rail and/or express bus pools. o. Financial Incentive for Bicycling. Offer employees financial incentives for bicycling to work. p. Special “Premium” for the Participation and Promotion of Trip Reduction. Offer ticket/passes to special events, vacations, etc. to employees who recruit other employees for vanpool, carpool, or other trip reduction programs. q. Incentive Programs. Design incentive programs for carpooling and other alternative transportation modes so as to put highest priority on reduction of longest commute trips. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-42 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation (MEIR 313 MM 3.3-8 in part) MM 5.1-10 Prior to approval of each tentative tract or parcel map, the following Street Design Elements shall be shown on each tentative tract or parcel map: a. Street cross-sections, including dimensions, labels, circulation designation Resort Secondary) and whether public or private. b. Street grades and vertical alignment. c. Horizontal alignment, including radii, and cul- de-sac radii. (Ord 5454, Condition 4) MM 5.14-11 Prior to the recordation of a subdivision map or issuance of the first building permit, whichever occurs first, in the event that a parcel is subdivided and there is a need for common on-site circulation and/or parking, prior to recordation of a subdivision map, an unsubordinated covenant providing for reciprocal access and/or parking, as appropriate, approved by the Planning Director or Planning Services Manager, shall be recorded with the Office of the Orange County Recorder. A copy of the recorded covenant shall then be submitted to the Planning Division of the Planning Department. If the reciprocal access is across parcel lines or if public rights of way are required for reciprocal access; Public Works approval shall be required. (Ord 5454, condition 30) MM 5.14-12 Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the location of any proposed gates across a driveway shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer. Gates shall not be installed across any driveway or private street in a manner which may adversely affect vehicular traffic on the adjacent public streets. Installation of any gates shall conform to the current version of Engineering Standard Detail No. 475. (Ord 5454, ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-43 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation condition 34) MM 5.14-13 Prior to the issuance of building permits, plans shall show that all driveways shall be constructed with a minimum fifteen (15) foot radius curb returns as required by the City Engineer, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. (Ord 5454, condition 35) MM 5.14-14 Prior to the issuance of building permits or final map approval, whichever occurs first, security in the form of a bond, certificate of deposit, letter of credit, completion guarantee, or cash, in an amount and form satisfactory to the City Engineer shall be posted with the City to guarantee the satisfactory completion of all engineering requirements of the City of Anaheim, including preparation of improvement plans and installation of all improvements, such as curbs and gutters, sidewalks, water facilities, street grading and pavement, sewer and drainage facilities and other appurtenant work, as required by the City Engineer and in accordance with the specifications on file in the office of the City Engineer, as may be modified by the City Engineer. Installation of said improvements shall occur prior to final building and zoning inspections. (Ord 5454, condition 36) MM5.14-15 Based upon the improvement phasing analysis in the project traffic study, the property owner/developer shall implement traffic improvements as identified in the project traffic study to maintain satisfactory levels of service as defined by the City’s General Plan, based on thresholds of significance, performance standards, and methodologies established by the Orange County Congestion Management Program and the City of Anaheim Traffic Study Guidelines. The improvement phasing analyses will specify the timing, funding, construction, and fair-share responsibilities for all traffic improvements necessary to maintain satisfactory levels of service within the City of Anaheim and surrounding ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-44 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation jurisdictions. The property owner/developer shall construct, bond for or enter into a funding agreement for necessary circulation system improvements, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager, unless alternative funding sources have been identified. MM 5.14-16 Prior to approval of a Final Site Plan for any project forecast to generate 100 or more peak hour trips, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager utilizing Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model Trip Generation Rates, in conjunction with the preparation of any traffic improvement phasing analyses as required in MM 5.14-1, property owners/developers will determine when the intersection improvements shall be constructed, subject to the conditions identified in MM 5.14-1. MM 5.14-17 Prior to approval of a Final Site Plan for any project forecast to generate 100 or more peak hour trips, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager utilizing Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model Trip Generation Rates, in conjunction with the preparation of any traffic improvement phasing analyses as required in MM 5.14-1, the following actions shall be taken in cooperation with the City of Orange: a. The traffic improvement phasing analysis shall identify any impacts created by the project on facilities within the City of Orange. The fair- share percentage responsibility for mitigating these impacts shall be calculated in this analysis. b. The City of Anaheim shall estimate the cost of the project’s fair-share responsibility in cooperation with the City of Orange. c. The property owner/developer shall pay the City of Anaheim the fair-share cost prior to issuance of a building permit. The City of Anaheim shall hold the amount received in ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-45 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation trust, and then, once a mutually agreed upon joint program is executed by both cities, the City of Anaheim shall allocate the fair-share contribution to traffic mitigation programs that result in improved traffic flow at the impacted locations, via an agreement mutually acceptable to both cities. MM 5.14-18 Prior to approval of a Final Site Plan for any project forecast to generate 100 or more peak hour trips, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager utilizing Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model Trip Generation Rates, in conjunction with the preparation of any traffic improvement phasing analyses as required in MM 5.14-1, and assuming that a regional transportation agency has not already programmed and funded the warranted improvements to the impacted freeway mainline or freeway ramp locations, property owners/developers and the City will take the following actions in cooperation with Caltrans: a. The traffic study will identify the project’s proportionate impact on the specific freeway mainline and/or freeway ramp locations and its fair-share percentage responsibility for mitigating these impacts based on thresholds of significance, performance standards, and methodologies established in the Orange County Congestion Management Program and the City of Anaheim Traffic Study Guidelines. b. The City shall estimate the cost of the project’s fair-share responsibility in cooperation with Caltrans. MM 5.14-19 Prior to the approval of the final subdivision map or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall pay the identified fair-share responsibility as determined by the City as set forth in MM 5.14-15. The City shall allocate the ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-46 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation property owner/developer’s fair-share contribution to traffic mitigation programs that result in improved traffic flow on the impacted mainline and ramp locations, via an agreement mutually acceptable to Caltrans and the City. MM 5.14-20 Prior to the approval of a Final Site Plan, the property owner/developer shall meet with the Traffic and Transportation Manager to determine whether a bus stop(s) is required to be placed adjacent to the property. If a bus stop(s) is required, it shall be placed in a location that least impacts traffic flow and may be designed as a bus turnout or a far side bus stop as required by the Traffic and Transportation Manager and per the approval of the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA). MM 5.14-21 Prior to the first final building and zoning Inspection every property owner and/or lessee shall designate an on-site contact that will be responsible for coordinating with the ATN and implementing all trip mitigation measures. The on- site coordinator shall be the one point of contact representing the project with the ATN. The TDM requirements shall be included in the lease or other agreement with all of the project participants. MM 5.14-22 Subsequent to the certification of Final EIR No. 340, and prior to the approval of the first Final Site Plan, if the costs of the identified improvements in the Traffic Study Report for Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan cannot be covered by the total funding allocation under the existing City fee programs and funding sources, an update of the existing City traffic fee program or other fee programs shall be developed by the City of Anaheim to ensure completion of the recommended improvements. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-47 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation Would the project conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? Less than significant. The Proposed Project would not conflict with the Orange County CMP. No mitigation measures are required. No mitigation measures are necessary. Less than significant. 5.15 WATER Would the project require or result in the construction of new water treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Potentially significant. Project water demand associated with the Proposed Project would exceed capacities of existing water facilities. Adherence to the proposed mitigation measures would reduce impacts to less than significant. This conclusion is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313 for the original ARSP. MM 5.15-1 Prior to issuance of each building permit (to be implemented prior to final building and zoning inspections, and continuing on an on- going basis during project operation), the property owner/ developer shall submit to the Public Utilities Department plans for review and approval which shall ensure that water conservation measures are incorporated. The water conservation measures to be shown on the plans and implemented by the property owner/developer, to the extent applicable include, but are not limited to, the following: a. Use of low-flow sprinkler heads in irrigation systems. b. Use of waterway recirculation systems. c. Low-flow fittings, fixtures, and equipment, including low flush toilets and urinals. d. Use of self-closing valves on drinking valves. e. Use of efficient irrigation systems such as drip irrigation and automatic systems which use moisture sensors. f. Use of low-flow shower heads in hotels. g. Water efficient ice-machines, dishwashers, clothes washers and other water-using appliances. h. Use of irrigation systems primarily at night when evaporation rates are lowest. i. Provide information to the public in conspicuous places regarding water conservation. Less than significant with mitigation. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-48 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation j. Use of water conserving landscape plant materials wherever feasible (MEIR 313 MM 3.9.6-1, Water Service). MM 5.15-2 Prior to issuance of each building permit, all water supply planning for the project will be closely coordinated with, and be subject to the review and final approval of, the Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division and Fire Department (MEIR 313 MM 3.9.6-3, Water Service). MM 5.15-3 Prior to issuance of each building permit, water pressure greater than 80 pounds per square inch (psi) shall be reduced to 80 psi or less by means of pressure reducing valves installed at the property owner/developer’s service (MEIR 313 MM 3.9.6-4, Water Service). MM 5.15-4 Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit a landscape and irrigation plan which shall be prepared and certified by a licensed landscape architect. The irrigation plan shall specify methods for monitoring the irrigation system. The system shall ensure that irrigation rates do not exceed the infiltration of local soils, that the application of fertilizers and pesticides do not exceed appropriate levels of frequencies, and that surface runoff and overwatering is minimized. The landscaping and irrigation plans shall include water-conserving features such as low flow irrigation heads, automatic irrigation scheduling equipment, flow sensing controls, rain sensors, soil moisture sensors, and other water-conserving equipment. The landscaping and irrigation plans shall indicate that separate irrigation lines for recycled water shall be constructed and recycled water will be used when it becomes available. All irrigation systems shall be designed so that they will function properly with recycled water. (MEIR 313 MM3.11-2, Visual Resources and Aesthetics) ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-49 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation MM 5.15-5 Prior to approval of the Final Site Plan and building permits, plans shall specifically show that the water meter and backflow equipment and any other large water system equipment will be installed to the satisfaction of the Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Utility Division, aboveground and behind the building setback line in a manner fully screened from all public streets and alleys and in accordance with Ordinance No. 4156. Prior to the final building and zoning inspections, the water meter and backflow equipment and any other large water system equipment shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division, in accordance with the Final Site Plan and the building permit plans. (Ord 5454, Condition 39) MM 5.15-6 Prior to issuance of each building permit, unless records indicate previous payment, the appropriate fees for Primary Mains, Secondary Mains and Fire Protection Service shall be paid to the Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division in accordance with Rule 15A, and Rule 20 of the Public Utilities Department Water Rates, Rules and Regulations. (Ord 5454, Condition 40) MM 5.15-7 Prior to final building and zoning inspections, a separate water meter shall be installed for landscape water on all projects where the landscape area exceeds 2,500 square feet in accordance with Ordinance No. 5349. (Ord 5454, Condition 41) MM 5.15-8 Prior to the issuance of the first building permit or grading permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall comply with Rule 15E of the Public Utilities Department Water Rates, Rules, and Regulations. Rule 15E shall be amended to include: a. Construction of a new well with a minimum 1,500 GPM capacity to serve The Anaheim ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-50 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation Resort Area (tentative location near Ponderosa Park and Orangewood Avenue); and b. Construction of a new 16-inch water main along Harbor Boulevard from Orangewood to Chapman Avenue. MM 5.15-9 Ongoing, the City shall continue to collaborate with the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD), its member agencies, and the Orange County Water District (OCWD) to ensure that available water supplies meet anticipated demand. If it is forecasted that water demand exceeds available supplies, staff shall recommend to City Council to trigger application of the Water Conservation Ordinance (Anaheim Municipal Code, §10.18), as prescribed, to require mandatory conservation measures as authorized by Sections 10.18.070 through 10.18.090, as appropriate. Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project (including large-scale developments as defined by Public Resources Code Section 21151.9 and described in Question No. 20 of the Environmental Information Form) from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? Less than significant. Project water demand would be accommodated through existing and projected supplies, according to the Proposed Project’s Water Supply Assessment. Impacts would be less than significant; however implementation of the proposed mitigation measures would ensure water conservation measures are incorporated into the design and into each phase of the proposed development to ensure that water supplies remain reliable into the future. MEIR No. 313 did not evaluate impacts related to water supply; therefore, a consistency finding cannot be determined. Implementation of mitigation measures 5.15-1 through 5.15-9 as listed above would reduce impacts related to water supply. Less than significant. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-51 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation 5.16 SEWER Would the project exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? Less than significant. All wastewater generation would be subject to treatment pursuant to SR 5.16-1. No significant impacts would occur, and no additional mitigation would be required. The conclusion for impacts related to wastewater treatment requirements is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313. No mitigation measures are necessary. Less than significant Would the project require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Potentially significant. Build out of the ARSP would increase sewage flows in existing sewer lines and trunks serving the area, resulting in several sewer lines becoming deficient. Implementation of MM 5.16-1 would reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels. The conclusion for sewer capacity impacts is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313. MM 5.16-1 Prior to approval of a final subdivision map or issuance of a grading or building permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall participate in the City’s Master Plan of Sewers and related Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program to assist in mitigating existing and future sanitary sewer system deficiencies as follows: The property owner/developer shall submit a report for review and approval of the City Engineer to assist in determining the following: a. If the development/redevelopment does not discharge into a sewer system that is currently deficient or will become deficient because of that discharge and/or does not increase flows or change points of discharge, then the property owner’s/developer’s responsibility shall be limited to participation in the Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program. b. If the development/redevelopment discharges into a sewer system that is currently deficient or will become deficient because of that discharge and/or increases flows or changes points of discharge, then the property owner/developer shall be required to guarantee mitigation to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney of the impact prior to approval of a final subdivision map or issuance of a grading or building permit whichever occurs first, pursuant to the Less than significant with mitigation. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-52 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation improvements identified in the South Central Area Sewer Deficiency Study. The property owner/developer shall be required to install the sanitary sewer facilities, as recommended by the South Central Area Sewer Deficiency Study, prior to acceptance for maintenance of public improvements by the City or final building and zoning inspections for the building/structure, whichever comes first. Additionally, the property owner/developer shall participate in the Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program, as determined by the City Engineer, which may include fees, credits, reimbursements, or a combination thereof. As part of guaranteeing the mitigation of impacts for the sanitary sewer system, the property owner/developer shall submit a sanitary sewer system improvement phasing plan for the project to the City Engineer for review and approval which shall contain, at a minimum, a layout of the complete system, all facility sizes, including support calculations, construction phasing, and construction estimates. The study shall determine the impact of the project sewer flows for total build out of the project and identify local deficiencies for each project component each hotel). (MEIR 313 Mitigation Measure 3.9.7-1, Public Services and Utilities) MM 5.8-7 Prior to approval of building plans, the property owner/developer shall provide written evidence that all storm drain, sewer, and street improvement plans shall be designed and constructed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. (Ord 5454, Condition 7) ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-53 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has inadequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? Less than significant. Implementation of the Proposed Project would increase sewage flows by approximately 323,656 gpd in the PR District and 2.1 mgd in the C-R District. These increases in sewage flow would be accommodated by available capacity at OCSD Treatment Plant No. 1; impacts would be less than significant. Additionally, adherence to the standard requirements would ensure payment of required fees. The conclusion for impacts related to regional wastewater treatment facilities is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313. No mitigation measures are necessary. Less than significant. 5.17 ELECTRICITY Would the project result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations related to electricity? Potentially significant. Build out of the ARSP and expansion of the Convention Center would result in increased demand for electricity. Compliance with the standard requirements and implementation of the proposed mitigation measures would reduce anticipated demand through conservation efforts. It is expected that the existing electrical distribution system and future planned improvements would adequately accommodate the anticipated demand, thus resulting in a less than significant impact with mitigation. The conclusion for impacts is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313. MM 5.17-1 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/develop shall consult with the City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department, Resource Efficiency Business and Community Programs Division in order to review energy efficient measures to incorporate into the project design. Prior to the final building and zoning inspection, the property owner developer shall implement these energy efficient measures, which may include the following: a. High-efficiency air-conditioning systems with EMS (computer) control b. Variable air volume (VAV) distribution c. Outside air (100%) economizer cycle d. Staged compressors or variable speed drives to flow varying thermal loads e. Isolated HVAC zone control by floors/separable activity areas f. Specification of premium-efficiency electric motors compressor motors, air-handling units, and fan-coil units) g. Use of occupancy sensors in appropriate spaces Less than significant with mitigation. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-54 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation h. Use of compact fluorescent lamps i. Use of cold cathode fluorescent lamps j. Use of light emitting diode (LED) or equivalent energy-efficient lighting for outdoor lighting k. Use of Energy Star® exit lighting or exit signage l. Use of T-8 lamps and electronic ballasts where applications of standard fluorescent fixtures are identified m. Use of lighting power controllers in association with metal-halide or high-pressure sodium (high intensity discharge) lamps for outdoor lighting and parking lots n. Consideration of thermal energy storage air- conditioning for spaces or facilities that may require air-conditioning during summer, day- peak periods. o. For swimming pools and spas, incorporate solar heating, automatic covers, and efficient pumps and motors, as feasible. p. Consideration for participation in Advantage Services Programs such as: a. New construction design review, in which the City cost-shares engineering for up to $10,000 for design of energy efficient buildings and systems b. New Construction – cash incentives ($300 to $400 per kW reduction in load) for efficiency that exceeds Title 24 requirements c. Green Building Program – offers accelerated plan approval, financial incentives, waived plan check fees and free technical assistance. (MEIR 313, MMs 3.9.9-1 and 3.9.9-2 in part, Public Services and Utilities) ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-55 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation MM 5.17-2 Prior to final building and zoning inspection, the property owner/developer shall install an underground electrical service from the Public Utilities Distribution System. The Underground Service will be installed in accordance with the Electric Rules, Rates, Regulations and Electrical Specifications for Underground Systems. Electrical Service Fees and other applicable fees will be assessed in accordance with the Electric Rules, Rates, Regulations and Electrical Specifications for Underground Systems. (MEIR 313 MM 3.9.9-3, Public Services and Utilities) MM 5.17-3 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit plans and calculations to the City of Anaheim Planning Department, Building Division, to demonstrate that the energy efficiency of each building will exceed the Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings current at the time of application by at least 10 percent. MM 5.17-4 Prior to approval of a Final Site Plan, the property owner/developer shall coordinate with the Public Utilities Department to incorporate feasible renewable energy generation measures into the project. These measures may include but not be limited to use of solar and small wind turbine sources on new and existing facilities and the use of solar powered lighting in parking areas. 5.18 STORM WATER Would the project require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Potentially significant. Implementation of the Proposed Project may worsen several existing deficiencies within the City’s storm drain system. Specific impacts are discussed above according to the drainage areas, resulting in significant impacts related to the storm drain facilities. However, the property owner/developer for each future MM 5.18-1 Prior to approval of a final subdivision map, or issuance of a grading or building permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall participate in the City’s Master Plan of Storm Drains and related Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program to assist in mitigating existing and future storm drainage system deficiencies as follows: Significant and unavoidable. With implementation of the mitigation program described above, the Proposed Project would result in less than significant project impacts related to storm water. However, the Proposed ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-56 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation development project will be required to participate in the City’s Master Plan of Storm Drains and related Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program to assist in mitigating existing and future storm drainage system deficiencies. Additionally, implementation of the proposed mitigation will ensure that impacts to regional flood control facilities are reduced to less than significant levels. Future growth under the Proposed Project will require the implementation of new or modified storm water drainage facilities that would connect to existing utility systems provided by the City of Anaheim and other agencies. All new growth within the ARSP area would occur in compliance with mitigation measures provided in the EIR; however, the City has no control over the growth and storm water contributions of areas outside of its jurisdiction. Any addition of storm water to the regional storm water system may be cumulatively considerable when combined with potential storm water flow increases from surrounding jurisdictions. Therefore, mitigation of these impacts would be outside of the City’s jurisdiction, and the potential cumulative impact would be significant and unavoidable. a. The property owner/developer shall submit a report for review and approval by the City Engineer to assist with determining the following: a. If the specific development/redevelopment does not increase or redirect current or historic storm water quantities/flows, then the property owner/developer’s responsibility shall be limited to participation in the Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program to provide storm drainage facilities in 10- and 25-year storm frequencies and to protect properties/structures for a 100-year storm frequency. b. If the specific development/redevelopment increases or redirects the current or historic storm water quantity/flow, then the property owner/developer shall be required to guarantee mitigation to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and City Attorney’s office of the impact prior to approval of a final subdivision map or issuance of a grading or building permit, whichever occurs first, pursuant to the improvements identified in the Master Plan of Drainage for the South Central Area. The property owner/developer shall be required to install the storm drainage facilities as recommended by the Master Plan of Drainage for the South Central Area to provide storm drainage facilities for 10- and 25-year storm frequencies and to protect properties/structures for a 100-year storm frequency prior to acceptance for maintenance of public improvements by the City or final building and zoning inspection for the building/structure, whichever occurs first. Additionally, the property owner/developer shall participate Project’s cumulative contribution to the regional storm water collection system would be significant and unavoidable because the City would have no control over the amount of storm water added to the system from other jurisdictions. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-57 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation in the Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program as determined by the City Engineer which could include fees, credits, reimbursements, or a combination thereof. As part of guaranteeing the mitigation of impacts on the storm drainage system, a storm drainage system improvement phasing plan for the project shall be submitted by the property owner/developer to the City Engineer for review and approval and shall contain, at a minimum, a layout of the complete system; all facility sizes, including support calculations; construction phasing; and, construction estimates. (MEIR 313 MM 3.9.8-1, Public Services and Utilities) MM 5.18-2 Ongoing, the City shall work with the Orange County Flood Control District (OCFCD) to ensure that flood control facilities are well maintained and capable of accommodating, at a minimum, future 25-year storm flows for City- owned and maintained facilities, and 100-year storm flows for County facilities. Where improvements to local drainage facilities have the potential to increase discharges to County facilities, the City shall analyze potential impacts to County facilities in consultation with the Manager, County of Orange Flood Control Division. Encroachment Permits shall be obtained from the County’s Public Property Permits Section for any activity performed within OCFCD’s right of way. (EIR 330 MM 5.7-1, Hydrology and Water Quality) MM 5.18-3 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the City shall require that building plans indicate that new developments will minimize stormwater and urban runoff into drainage facilities by incorporating design features such as detention basins, on-site water features, and other strategies. (EIR 330 MM 5.7-2, Hydrology and Water Quality) ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-58 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation 5.19 OTHER PUBLIC UTILITIES Natural Gas Would the project result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations related to natural gas? No Impact. No impact would occur related to provision of natural gas service to future projects within the ARSP area. This conclusion is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313. No mitigation measures are necessary. No Impact. Solid Waste Would the project be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs? Would the project comply with Federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? No Impact. No impact would occur related to provision of solid waste service to future projects within the ARSP area; however, implementation of the proposed mitigation would further ensure that adequate solid waste services are provided and that solid waste generation would be minimized. This conclusion is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313. MM 5.19-1 Prior to issuance of each building permit; to be implemented prior to final building and zoning Inspection, the property owner/developer shall submit project plans to the Public Works Department for review and approval to ensure that the plans comply with AB 939, the Solid Waste Reduction Act of 1989, as administered by the City of Anaheim and the County of Orange and City of Anaheim Integrated Waste Management Plans. Prior to final building and zoning inspection, implementation of said plan shall commence and shall remain in full effect. Waste management mitigation measures that shall be taken to reduce solid waste generation include, but are not limited to: a. Detailing the location and design of on-site recycling facilities. b. Providing on-site recycling receptacles to encourage recycling. c. Complying with all Federal, State and City regulation for hazardous material disposal. d. Participating in the City of Anaheim’s “Recycle Anaheim” program or other substitute program as may be developed by the City. In order to meet the requirements of the Solid Waste Reduction Act of 1989 (AB 939), the property owner/developer shall implement numerous solid waste reduction programs, as required by the Public Works Department, including, but not limited to: No Impact. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-59 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation a. Facilitating recycling by providing chutes or convenient locations for sorting and recycling bins. b. Facilitating cardboard recycling (especially in retail areas) by providing adequate space and centralized locations for collection and storing. c. Facilitating glass recycling (especially from restaurants) by providing adequate space for sorting and storing. d. Providing trash compactors for non-recyclable materials whenever feasible to reduce the total volume of solid waste and the number of trips required for collection. e. Prohibiting curbside pick-up. (MEIR 313 MM 3.9.3-1, Public Services and Utilities) MM 5.19-2 Ongoing during project operation, the following practices shall be implemented, as feasible, by the property owner/developer: a. Usage of recycled paper products for stationary, letterhead, and packaging. b. Recovery of materials such as aluminum and cardboard. c. Collection of office paper for recycling. d. Collection of (foam) cups for recycling. e. Collection of glass, plastics, kitchen grease, laser printer toner cartridges, oil, batteries, and scrap metal for recycling or recovery. (MEIR 313 MM 3.9.3-2, Public Services and Utilities) MM 5.19-3 Prior to issuance of building permits, plans shall show that trash storage areas shall be provided and maintained in a location acceptable to the City of Anaheim Department of Public Works, Operations Division. On an ongoing basis, trash storage areas shall be provided and maintained in accordance with approved plans on file with said Department. (Ord 5454, Condition 33) ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\1.0 Exec Summ-090412.docx 1-60 Executive Summary Thresholds Applied Environmental Impacts/ Level of Significant Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance After Mitigation MM 5.19-4 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the Property Owner/Developer shall demonstrate that the plans include provisions for the installation of trash and recycle receptacles near all benches and near high traffic areas such as plazas, transit stops and retail and dining establishments. MM 5.19-5 Prior to issuance of each grading and building permit, the Property Owner/Developer shall submit to the Planning Director or Planning Services Manager for approval a Construction Waste Management Plan that, at a minimum, specifies that at least 75 percent of non-hazardous construction and demolition debris shall be recycled or salvaged and identifies the materials to be diverted from disposal and whether the materials will be sorted on site or co-mingled. Telephone Would the project result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations related to telephone service? No Impact. No impact would occur related to provision of telephone service to future projects within the ARSP area. This conclusion is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313. No mitigation measures are necessary. No Impact. Television/Cable Service Would the project result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations related to television service/reception? No Impact. No impact would occur related to provision of television and cable service to future projects within the ARSP area. This conclusion is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313. No mitigation measures are necessary. No Impact. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\2.0 Introduction-080812.docx 2-1 Introduction SECTION 2.0 INTRODUCTION 2.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND In September 1994, the City of Anaheim certified the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Master EIR 313 (State Clearinghouse No. 91091062) in support of the adoption of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2 (Anaheim 1994b, 1994a). This Master EIR (MEIR 313) evaluated impacts associated with the establishment and implementation of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (ARSP) and created a Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP No. 0085) in order to mitigate impacts associated with Specific Plan development. At the time the ARSP was adopted, the Specific Plan area (the Project Site) encompassed approximately 549.5 acres. Since certification of MEIR 313, proposed modifications to the ARSP have included 14 amendments (including the Proposed Project) and 4 adjustments, which included the expansion of the ARSP area to include 31.8 additional acres and increased the total acreage of the ARSP to 581.3 acres. On March 4, 2008, the Anaheim City Council adopted Ordinance No. 6098 (also referred to as the SOAR Initiative) generally prohibiting residential development within The Anaheim Resort without environmental and economic analysis, City Council approval and City voter approval at a City election. The SOAR Initiative did not preclude residential development within the ARSP area in compliance with the Anaheim Resort Residential Overlay. A detailed description of the amendments and adjustments, including the SOAR Initiative, is included as Appendix A. The 581.3-acre ARSP area is located in Anaheim, California, and is divided into two Development Areas as shown on Exhibit 2-1, Development Area Plan. Development Area 1 is known as the Commercial-Recreation (C-R) District and encompasses approximately 518.5 acres. Development Area 2 is known as the Public Recreational (PR) District and encompasses approximately 62.8 acres. This EIR No. 340 has been prepared to address the environmental effects associated with amendments to the documents that govern and regulate development within the ARSP area, including: • Anaheim General Plan (Case No. GPA2010-00482) • Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (Case No. SPN2010-00060) • Title 18 (Zoning Code) of the Anaheim Municipal Code (Case No. ZCA2010-00093) • The Anaheim Resort Identity Program (Case No. MIS2010-00478) • The Anaheim Resort Public Realm Landscape Program (Case No. MIS2010-00479) • Ordinance No. 5454 Conditions of Approval (Case No. MIS2010-00484) These amendments are intended to reflect a proposed increase in the amount of development permitted within the PR District to allow an additional 900 hotel rooms, 406,359 sf convention center uses, 180,000 sf commercial development and 40,000 sf hotel meeting/ballroom space; streamlined development standards, guidelines and requirements intended to reduce redundancy within and between documents; and, updates to the above documents to reflect current conditions within The Anaheim Resort. The proposed amendments do not change the types of land uses permitted within the ARSP or significantly modify the associated ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\2.0 Introduction-080812.docx 2-2 Introduction development standards. The primary discretionary actions required to implement the Proposed Project include: the approval of final site plans; the processing of subdivision maps; and the submittal of plans for building permits, unless a conditional use permit or a variance are required. The proposed amendments are included in Appendix A. 2.1.1 COMMERCIAL-RECREATION (C-R) DISTRICT Permitted development in the C-R District includes hotels, motels, restaurants, and other visitor serving uses. Accessory uses that are integrated with hotel/motel developments travel agencies, automobile rental agencies, and specialty retail shops) are also allowed. There are four Density Designations within the C-R District: Low Density (up to 50 hotel rooms/acre); Low- Medium Density (up to 75 hotel rooms/acre); Medium Density (up to 100 hotel rooms/acre); and Convention Center Medium Density (up to 125 hotel rooms/acre provided the trip generation characteristics are equivalent to 100 hotel rooms/acre). These designations are based on hotel rooms; however, accessory commercial uses are allowed in exchange for hotel rooms with each hotel room being equivalent to 600 square feet (sf) of commercial uses. The C-R District also includes three properties (on approximately 31.5 acres), which have a Mobile Home Park (MHP) Overlay designation. The MHP Overlay encompasses existing mobile home parks and provides development standards, regulations, and procedures to mitigate relocation problems and adverse effects of displacement upon mobile home owners when a park is converted to another land use. Additionally, the Anaheim Resort Residential Overlay (on 59.3 acres) allows for residential uses in conjunction with hotel development within two designated areas in the vicinity of Haster Street and Katella Avenue and Harbor Boulevard, south of Orangewood Avenue. The C-R District permits development in accordance with the Density Designation given to each parcel or 75 hotel rooms per lot/parcel (existing in September 1994 when the ARSP was adopted), whichever is greater. At the time of adoption, the ARSP estimated that build out of the C-R District would result in a maximum of 25,496 hotel rooms. This estimate was based on probable build out of the C-R District using the approximate acreages associated with each Density Designation. It was anticipated that the projected build out of 25,496 hotel rooms by the year 2010 was an aggressive scenario that represented a probable maximum number of hotel rooms. Since adoption, amendments to the ARSP have increased the estimated build out in the C-R District to 28,988 rooms (refer to Appendix The baseline analysis used in MEIR 313 identified 9,590 existing hotel rooms at the time of certification. In addition there was approximately 300,000 sf of commercial uses (excluding office) within the ARSP area at time of adoption. Therefore, MEIR 313 analyzed an increase of 15,906 additional hotel rooms at build out. For purposes of the analysis in MEIR 313, the ARSP and MEIR 313 did not convert existing commercial uses in the C-R District into hotel room equivalents. Using this conversion rate the ARSP provides, at the rate of 1 hotel/motel room per 600 gross square feet, the baseline would have been 10,090 existing hotel room equivalents (9,590 hotel rooms and 300,000 sf of commercial) which reduces the projected increase in hotel rooms from 15,906 to 15,406. 2.1.2 PUBLIC RECREATIONAL (PR) DISTRICT The PR District includes the 1.7 million square foot Anaheim Convention Center (Convention Center) and the Anaheim Hilton Hotel. Other allowed uses within the PR District include accessory uses such as concession stands, restaurants, and shops. The Anaheim Convention Center was first constructed in 1967 and consisted of approximately 460,000 sf and a single exhibit hall, now known as Hall A. Since initial construction, the Convention Center has been expanded in size and intensity. Beginning in 1974, approximately ---PAGE BREAK--- Development Area Plan Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Exhibit 2-1 (Rev 04-08-11 WAD) R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\Graphics\EIR\ex2-1_dev_plan.pdf The Disneyland Resort Anaheim Convention Center Walnut St Vermont Ave Disney Way Disneyland Dr Orangewood Ave West St West Dr c d St 5 Ball Rd Harbor Blvd Katella Ave Chapman Ave Anaheim Blvd East St Manchester Ave D:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\ex_dev_plan_streetbase_081108.mxd 2,000 0 2,000 1,000 Feet ² Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (SP92-2) Mobile Home Park Overlay Residential Overlay Development Areas Commercial Recreation District Public Recreation District ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\2.0 Introduction-080812.docx 2-3 Introduction 135,000 sf were added for the construction of Hall B. Hall C was built in 1982 and added approximately 150,000 sf; Hall D was built in 1990 and added approximately 158,000 sf; and Hall E was built in 1993 and added approximately 150,000 sf (Anaheim/Orange County Visitor and Convention Bureau). The PR District does not have a density designation; however, MEIR 313 analyzed the impacts associated with the PR District, including the construction of up to 412 additional hotel rooms. In 1997, the City of Anaheim Planning Department determined that the Convention Center could be increased from 1,056,874 sf to its current size of 1,712,004 sf with the same traffic-generating impacts as the development intensity analyzed by MEIR 313 for Development Area 2. In addition, this analysis determined that 219,414 sf of future development could also be constructed without significantly increasing any environmental impacts (Anaheim 1997). Addendum to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan EIR No. 313 Anaheim Convention Center Grand Plaza (Anaheim 2010) analyzed the allocation of 100,000 sf of the 219,414 sf of future development to the Anaheim Convention Center Grand Plaza project. 2.1.3 SUMMARY OF EXISTING AND PERMITTED DEVELOPMENT Tables 2.1.3-1 though 2.1.3-3 provide a summary of the development that was existing at the time MEIR 313 was prepared, existing development(Table 2.1.3-1); permitted development intensities analyzed by MEIR 313 and subsequent environmental analysis (Table 2.1.3-2); and the amount of additional development that could take place (the difference between permitted development and existing development, Table 2.1.3-3). Please note that commercial uses in the C-R District are converted to hotel room equivalents at a ratio of 600 square feet of commercial development to one hotel room. TABLE 2.1.3-1 EXISTING DEVELOPMENT ANALYZED BY MEIR 313 AND CURRENT EXISTING DEVELOPMENT District MEIR 313 Current Existing Development Acres Existing Development Acres Existing Development C-R District 486.7 • 10,090 hotel rooms* 518.5 • 11,587 hotel rooms* P-R District 62.8 • 1,600 hotel rooms • 1,056,874 sf convention center 62.8 • 1,600 hotel rooms • 1,712,004 sf convention center Total 549.5 • 11,690 hotel rooms • 1,056,874 sf convention center 581.3 • 13,187 hotel rooms • 1,712,004 sf convention center * Commercial uses are converted to hotel room equivalents on a ratio of 600 square feet of commercial development = 1 hotel room ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\2.0 Introduction-080812.docx 2-4 Introduction TABLE 2.1.3-2 PERMITTED DEVELOPMENT ANALYZED BY MEIR 313 AND CURRENT ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION District MEIR 313 Current Environmental Documentation Acres Permitted Development Acres Permitted Development C-R District 486.7 • 25,496 hotel rooms* 518.5 • 28,988 hotel rooms* P-R District 62.8 • 2,012 hotel rooms • 1,056,874 sf convention center 62.8 • 1,600 hotel rooms • 1,712,004 sf convention center • 119,414 sf future traffic generating uses • 100,000 sf outdoor programmable space Total 549.5 • 27,508 hotel rooms • 1,056,874 sf convention center 581.3 • 30,588 hotel rooms • 1,712,004 sf convention center • 119,414 sf future traffic generating uses • 100,000 sf outdoor programmable space * Commercial uses are converted to hotel room equivalents on a ratio of 600 square feet of commercial development = 1 hotel room TABLE 2.1.3-3 PERMITTED ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT ANALYZED BY MEIR 313 AND CURRENT ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION (DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PERMITTED AND EXISTING DEVELOPMENT) District MEIR 313 Current Environmental Documentation C-R District • 15,406 hotel rooms* • 17,401 hotel rooms* P-R District • 412 hotel rooms • 119,414 sf future traffic generating uses Total • 15,818 hotel rooms • 17,401 hotel rooms • 119,414 sf future traffic generating uses * Commercial uses are converted to hotel room equivalents on a ratio of 600 square feet of commercial development = 1 hotel room 2.2 PURPOSE AND TYPE OF EIR MEIR 313 was prepared to evaluate the potential environmental impacts associated with the build out of the ARSP area. Since being certified in 1994, two Validation Reports have been prepared (1999 and 2004) to evaluate the continued relevance and accuracy of MEIR 313 and its ability to be used as a Master EIR for all proposed development projects within the boundaries of the ARSP area. Section 15175 of the CEQA Guidelines provides the framework for preparing a Master EIR: 15175. Master EIR The Master EIR procedure is an alternative to preparing a project EIR, staged EIR, or program EIR for certain projects which will form the basis for later decision making. It is intended to streamline the later environmental review of ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\2.0 Introduction-080812.docx 2-5 Introduction projects or approval included within the project, plan or program analyzed in the Master EIR. Accordingly, a Master EIR shall, to the greatest extent feasible, evaluate the cumulative impacts, growth inducing impacts, and irreversible significant effects on the environment of subsequent projects. A lead agency may prepare a Master EIR for any of the following classes of projects: A general plan, general plan update, general plan element, general plan amendment, or specific plan. Public or private projects that will be carried out or approved pursuant to, or in furtherance of, a redevelopment plan. A project that consists of smaller individual projects which will be carried out in phases. A rule or regulation which will be implemented by later projects. Projects that will be carried out or approved pursuant to a development agreement. A state highway project or mass transit project which will be subject to multiple stages of review or approval. A plan proposed by a local agency, including a joint powers authority, for the reuse of a federal military base or reservation that has been closed or is proposed for closure by the federal government. A regional transportation plan or congestion management plan. Regulations adopted by the California Department of Fish and Game for the regulation or hunting and fishing. A lead agency may develop and implement a fee program in accordance with applicable provisions of law to generate the revenue necessary to prepare a Master EIR. Section 21166 of CEQA states that the lead agency must prepare a subsequent or supplemental EIR when one of the following events occurs: 1. Substantial changes to the Project are proposed that require major revisions to the EIR. 2. Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken, which will require major revisions in the EIR. 3. New information, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the EIR was certified as complete, becomes available. As MEIR 313 is over 15 years old, the City has elected to prepare a Supplemental EIR to reevaluate all the environmental changes that have occurred in and around The Anaheim Resort and to evaluate an expansion of the Convention Center. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\2.0 Introduction-080812.docx 2-6 Introduction Section 15163 of the CEQA Guidelines provides that a Supplement to an EIR may be prepared if “only minor additions or changes would be necessary to make the previous EIR adequately apply to the Project in the changed situation.” The City has determined that, although there have not been substantial changes to the ARSP, a Supplemental EIR is required to re-evaluate and update, if necessary, the potential impacts associated with build out of the ARSP area. This decision is based on changes in circumstances since MEIR 313 was certified in 1994, and new information that could potentially result in either new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects (refer to items 2 and 3 above). The EIR has been prepared in conformance with the CEQA (California Public Resources Code [PRC] §21000 et seq.) and the CEQA Guidelines (Title 14, California Code of Regulations [CCR] §15000 et seq.). The City of Anaheim (City) is the Lead Agency under CEQA, and is responsible for preparing the EIR (State Clearinghouse No. [PHONE REDACTED]). The City, as the Lead Agency, will review and consider this EIR in its decision to approve, revise, or deny the Proposed Project. As with MEIR 313, this EIR is a Master EIR and is intended to serve as the primary environmental document for all future entitlements associated with implementation of the ARSP and the expansion of the Convention Center, including all discretionary approvals requested or required to implement the Project. Subsequent actions will be reviewed as required by PRC Section 21166 and Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines. This EIR provides a comprehensive evaluation of the anticipated scope of the Proposed Project. It is intended to serve as an informational document for public agency decision makers and the general public regarding the Proposed Project’s objectives and components. This document also provides information about potentially significant environmental impacts that may be associated with the planning, construction, and operation of the Proposed Project; identifies appropriate feasible mitigation measures, including applicable measures from MMP Nos. 85, 85a, and 85b; and offers alternatives that may be adopted to reduce or eliminate these significant impacts. In addition, this EIR is the primary reference document in the formulation and implementation of the Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP No. 85c) for the Proposed Project. The City of Anaheim, as Lead Agency, has the responsibility for processing and approving the Proposed Project, and other public agencies responsible and trustee agencies) that may use this EIR in their decision-making or permitting processes will consider the information in this EIR along with other information that may be presented during the CEQA process. The discretionary actions involved in the City of Anaheim’s implementation of the Proposed Project as well as those of the responsible and trustee agencies are described in Section 3.6, Intended Use of the EIR, which can be found in Section 3.0, Project Description. In accordance with Section 15163 of the CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR), public agencies are required to make written findings for each of the Project’s environmental impacts that are identified in the EIR. If the lead agency and responsible agencies decide that the benefits of the Proposed Project outweigh any identified unmitigated significant environmental effects, they will be required to adopt a statement of overriding considerations supporting their actions. 2.3 PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION MEIR 313, certified in 1994, was prepared to address the potential impacts associated with the development of the ARSP area, which was proposed to provide a comprehensive, long-term plan that supports development of visitor-serving uses while addressing the potential impacts of ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\2.0 Introduction-080812.docx 2-7 Introduction this type of development within the context of The Anaheim Resort. Permitted uses included hotels, convention center uses, visitor-serving retail, and similar uses intended to provide for the needs of tourists and Convention Center visitors. The topics below were identified in MEIR 313 as significant, unavoidable adverse impacts. • Land Use-Related Plans and Policies. The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan EIR identified the loss of a 56-acre agricultural field, designated as Prime Farmland. As the land was designated as an agricultural preserve under the Williamson Act, its loss was considered a significant impact by the California Department of Conservation. • Land Use Compatibility. The construction of transportation improvements was found to have the potential to cause significant compatibility impacts with respect to noise, air quality, aesthetics, and traffic delays. Additionally, as stated above, the loss of a 56-acre agricultural field was identified as a significant and unavoidable impact per the California Department of Conservation. • Transportation and Circulation. MEIR 313 identified four intersections that would operate at unacceptable levels of service in 2010 given implementation of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan, the associated mitigation measures, and non-committed improvements. These intersections are: o Harbor Boulevard and Ball Road, o Anaheim Boulevard/Haster Street and Katella Avenue, o Haster Street and Orangewood Avenue, and o Lewis Street and Katella Avenue. • Air Quality. MEIR 313 identified that temporary (construction-related) significant and unavoidable emissions would result with respect to reactive organic gasses (ROG), nitrogen oxides (NOx), carbon monoxide (CO), and particulate matter less than 10 micrometers in diameter (PM10). Additionally, MEIR 313 determined that operation of the proposed ARSP would result in significant and unavoidable long-term Project-specific and cumulative increases in the emission of ROG, NOx, CO, and PM10. • Noise. MEIR 313 found that short-term, construction-related noise impacts would result from implementation of the ARSP. Mitigation measures and adherence to the City of Anaheim Noise Ordinance were found to reduce these impacts, but not below a level of significance. • Solid Waste Disposal Service. Given limited landfill capacity, the generation of solid waste anticipated to result from implementation of the ARSP was found to constitute a significant and unavoidable impact per MEIR 313. • Schools. Given payment of developer fees, future development pursuant to the ARSP was found not to have any direct impacts on the Anaheim Union High School District or the Anaheim City School District; however, future development pursuant to the ARSP was found to indirectly result in residential development, which would create significant impacts to these School Districts. • Visual Resources and Aesthetics. MEIR 313 identified significant and unavoidable impacts related to shade and shadow with respect to adjacent property owners, given implementation of the ARSP. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\2.0 Introduction-080812.docx 2-8 Introduction MEIR 313 identified the following potential impacts as significant, but reduced to a level of less than significant with the implementation of the identified mitigation measures. • Transportation and Circulation. MEIR 313 stated that adherence to the Orange County Congestion Management Plan and implementation of a Traffic Management Plan and Transportation Demand Management Program would reduce short-term circulation impacts to specific roadway segments to a less than significant level. Additionally, significant impacts related to right-of-way acquisition were to be addressed via mitigation. Payment of Traffic Signal Assessment Fees and Traffic Impact Improvement Fees reduced related impacts to a less than significant level. • Air Quality. MEIR 313 identified that fugitive dust emissions associated with land clearing, ground excavation, and cut and fill operations would impact sensitive receptors. Mitigation measures and compliance with South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rules 402 and 403 were found to reduce both this impact and peak day construction impacts related to ROG, NOx, CO, and PM10 to a less than significant level. • Noise. MEIR 313 found that implementation of the Project would result in both short- term (construction-related) and long-term (operational) increases in noise at sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the Project Site. Mitigation measures reduced this impact to a less than significant level. • Geology, Soils, and Seismicity. As the ARSP area is not within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Hazard Zone and all construction would be completed according to the Uniform Building Code (UBC), regional seismicity impacts were identified as less than significant. • Groundwater and Surface Hydrology. Future development pursuant to the ARSP was found to have the potential to impact the quality of runoff/surface water. Mitigation measures and adherence to National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit regulations reduced this impact to a less than significant level. • Fire Protection. Future development pursuant to the ARSP was found to have the potential to increase the concentration of hotel occupants in the Project area. As such, the Anaheim Fire Department identified the need for two vehicles to serve the ARSP area. Coordination with service providers, adherence to design requirements with respect to water flow, payment of impact fees, and installation of fire sprinklers reduced related impacts to a less than significant level. • Police Services. Future development pursuant to the ARSP was found to have the potential to result in significant impacts with respect to the demand for law enforcement services. This impact was reduced to a less than significant level given funding of additional police services via tax proceeds and implementation of mitigation measures. • Water Service. Future development pursuant to the ARSP was found to have the potential to incrementally increase the demand for water service. Implementation of mitigation measures, which included use of low-flow fixtures, reduced impacts to a less than significant level. • Wastewater/Sewer Service. MEIR 313 found that future development pursuant to the ARSP would result in future developments within the Project area and would trigger the ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\2.0 Introduction-080812.docx 2-9 Introduction need to implement improvements identified in the City Sewer Deficiency Studies. Implementation of mitigation measures, including measures intended to reduce water consumption, reduced impacts to a less than significant level. • Storm Drains. MEIR 313 found that the ARSP had the potential to temporarily impact storm drain infrastructure and incrementally increase storm water runoff. Implementation of mitigation measures, including the payment of fees, reduced impacts to a less than significant level. • Electricity. MEIR 313 concluded that implementation of the ARSP would create an increased demand for electricity. However, with implementation of the identified mitigation measures, including emergency conservation measures and the payment of fees, potentially significant impacts were reduced to a less than significant level. • Natural Gas Service. MEIR 313 concluded that implementation of the ARSP would create an increased demand for natural gas. However, with implementation of the identified mitigation measures, it was concluded that potentially significant impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level and that the Southern California Gas Company could provide for the increased demand without impacting existing service. • Television Service/Reception. MEIR 313 concluded that existing cable television facilities would need to be relocated or redesigned to accommodate an anticipated increase in demand resulting from Project implementation. Given implementation of mitigation measures, no adverse impacts to cable service were anticipated. • Hazardous Materials Compliance. Multiple leaking underground storage tanks and electrical transformers were identified in MEIR 313. Implementation of mitigation measures reduced impacts to a less than significant level. • Visual Resources and Aesthetics. Given mitigation, potentially significant impacts with respect to landscape and irrigation were reduced to a less than significant level. As noted above, significant and unavoidable impacts related to shade and shadow with respect to adjacent property owners were identified. • Cultural Resources. MEIR 313 concluded that implementation of the ARSP could result in the disturbance of undetected archaeological and paleontological resources during construction. Monitoring during grading activities was required to reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels. • Energy. MEIR 313 concluded that operation of the proposed ARSP would result in increased consumption of electricity and natural gas. Mitigation measures, as identified in Sections 3.9.9, Electricity, and 3.9.10, Natural Gas Service, of MEIR 313 reduced related impacts to a less than significant level. • Construction Impacts. Roadway and infrastructure improvements were anticipated to result in significant short-term impacts to circulation, air quality, and noise within the vicinity of sensitive receptors. Soil erosion was also identified as likely during construction activities, especially along the Project boundaries. Additionally, MEIR 313 addressed the need for housing for construction workers and the generation of solid waste by the Proposed Project. Impacts with respect to hazardous materials and aesthetics impacts, as well as the anticipated increases in the demand for energy and ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\2.0 Introduction-080812.docx 2-10 Introduction natural gas, were also identified. Mitigation measures were included in MEIR 313 to reduce all construction-related impacts to less than significant levels. Other impacts were identified in MEIR 313; however, they were found to be less than significant. Extensive mitigation measures were adopted in conjunction with MEIR 313 and, where appropriate, have been incorporated in this EIR. 2.4 EIR FOCUS AND EFFECTS FOUND NOT TO BE SIGNIFICANT 2.4.1 SCOPING PROCESS In compliance with the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Anaheim has taken steps to maximize opportunities for the public and other public agencies to participate in the environmental review process. The City conducted an Initial Study (IS) of the Proposed Project and determined that a Supplemental EIR was required to evaluate the potentially significant environmental effects of the Proposed Project and its related actions. The IS described the purpose of the Supplemental EIR and the proposed development within the Convention Center. The City distributed the IS along with a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of an EIR to responsible and interested agencies, including surrounding cities, and provided a notice of its availability to adjacent property owners and other interested parties in order to solicit comments and inform the public of the Proposed Project. The NOP/IS was distributed on February 11, 2009, for a 30-day review period as required by CEQA. A copy of the NOP/IS and responses received are included in Appendix B. The City held one public scoping meeting on February 25, 2009, to provide the public with a forum to identify any additional environmental issues to be evaluated in the EIR which were not previously identified in the IS. Attendees were provided an opportunity to identify verbally or in writing the issues they felt should be addressed in this EIR. The scoping meeting was attended by two members of the public, one of whom noted that potential traffic impacts should be taken into consideration. The NOP/IS comments were used to establish the scope of the issues addressed in this EIR. The City identified the following environmental issues through preparation of the IS and through the NOP and scoping process as being potential impacts associated with the implementation of the Proposed Project; these issues will be addressed in this EIR. Responses to the NOP were received from nine agencies, which raised concerns on the following issues (the section of the EIR where each issue is addressed is identified in parentheses): • Building heights in excess of 200 feet above ground level (Section 3.0, Project Description; Section 5.1, Aesthetics). • Discussion of heliports, if allowed (Section 3.0, Project Description). • Hazardous materials issues on the site, including any possible threat to the site, soils contamination, and soil remediation (Section 5.7, Hazardous Materials). • Native American Consultation, potential cultural resources on the Project Site, and encountering human remains or unmarked cemeteries during construction (Section 5.5, Cultural Resources). • The Project’s effect on traffic at specific City of Orange intersections (Section 5.14, Transportation/Traffic). ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\2.0 Introduction-080812.docx 2-11 Introduction • Cumulative traffic impacts resulting from build out of the ARSP area and the proposed land use scenario for the West Katella Corridor and the Uptown Orange area, as mentioned in the revised City of Orange General Plan (Section 5.14, Transportation/Traffic). • The Project’s effect on California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) facilities under the four following scenarios: Existing with No Project; Near Term or Opening Year With Project; Long-Term (2030) With Project; Long-Term (2030) Without Project (Section 5.14, Transportation/Traffic). • The Project’s need for a Caltrans Encroachment Permit (Section 5.14, Transportation/Traffic). • Construction surface runoff or drainage into Caltrans storm drain facilities (Section 5.8, Hydrology and Water Quality; Section 5.14, Transportation/Traffic). • Tracking of materials from construction equipment that may fall or blow onto Caltrans facilities (Section 5.2, Air Quality). Comments received in response to the NOP are provided in Appendix B. 2.4.2 EFFECTS FOUND NOT TO BE SIGNIFICANT Following is an identification of the impact categories that were checked “no impact” or “less than significant impact” on the IS checklist and the reasons why these issues were not considered potentially significant or applicable to the Project; these issues are not, therefore, addressed further in this EIR. Refer to the IS provided in Appendix B for additional information. I d. Aesthetics (Light and Glare). The Project Site is currently subject to night lighting associated with existing land uses including commercial, entertainment, and hotel/motel uses located within and surrounding the ARSP area; it is also subject to light standards and traffic along the existing roadway system. As stated in MEIR 313, no significant impacts generated by the continuation of nighttime illumination features are anticipated, provided that the lighting specifications outlined in the ARSP are followed and the appropriate mitigation measure is implemented. The introduction of sources of light and glare associated with the Proposed Project would need to comply with these lighting specifications; therefore, no new impact would occur. II a,b,c,d,e. Agricultural and Forest Resources. According to MEIR 313, at time of adoption, the Project Site contained an approximate 56-acre site located southeast of Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue which was designated as “Prime Farmland” (Anaheim 1994a) and which was under a Williamson Act contract set to expire on March 1, 2000. MEIR 313 evaluated the loss of the prime agricultural land and identified the impact as significant and unavoidable. Because the impact related to the loss of agricultural land has already been fully analyzed as part of MEIR 313, the Proposed Project analyzed as part of this Draft EIR would not result in a new significant impact related to agricultural resources. Additionally, the NOP/IS prepared for the City of Anaheim General Plan/Zoning Code Update, which is included as an appendix to the EIR 330, identified that there is no land within the Project Site currently under a Williamson Act contract; therefore, implementation of the ARSP would not conflict with a standing Williamson Act contract. There are no zoned or existing forest lands or timberland as defined in Public Resources Code, Section 12220(g) or 4526, respectively, on the Project Site. Therefore, the Proposed Project ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\2.0 Introduction-080812.docx 2-12 Introduction would not result in the conversion of forest land or timberland. Additionally, forest resources were not identified on the IS checklist, as the checklist was updated by the State after circulation of the IS. However, this issue was not considered potentially significant or applicable to the Project; this issue is not, therefore, addressed further in this EIR. IV f. Biological Resources (Sensitive Natural Community, Federally Protected Wetlands, Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, Wildlife Corridor, or other approved Local, Regional, or State Habitat Conservation Plan). The Project Site is not located within an area classified as riparian habitat or other sensitive community such as a designated Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP) area, nor do any areas meet the definition of jurisdictional wetlands. As stated previously, the Project Site is located within a fully developed and urbanized portion of the City, and there are no connected areas of open space that could serve as a migratory corridor. IV e. Biological Resources (Local policies or ordinances). According to the Anaheim General Plan’s Land Use Element, the Project Site is not located within the Scenic Corridor Overlay (which includes Specimen Tree preservation policies) and is not subject to any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources; therefore, the development within the ARSP area is not subject to any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. VI a(i). Geology and Soils (Rupture of a known earthquake fault). The Project Site, as with the entire Southern California region, is subject to secondary effects from earthquakes. According to MEIR 313’s Exhibit 3.6-2, the Project Site is not located within a mapped Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. However, implementation of the Proposed Project would be consistent with existing codes and regulations, including the Uniform Building Code, the Anaheim Municipal Code, and the requirements of the Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone Act (PRC §§2621 et seq.) as stated in MEIR 313. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not result in a significant impact related to rupture of a known earthquake fault. VI a(iii), (iv). Geology and Soils (Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction or landslides). According to MEIR 313, the Project Site is relatively flat and there are no major slopes in the immediate vicinity. Additionally, MEIR 313 identifies that the potential for liquefaction is very low based on underlying soils and the depth of groundwater in the area. Therefore, the possibility of seismically induced liquefaction and landslides associated with implementation of the Proposed Project is considered remote, resulting in a less than significant impact. VI c. Geology and Soils (landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse). As detailed in MEIR 313, the Project Site is located in an area of the City that can be characterized as relatively flat with a gentle grade, for which ground instability (including landslides) is not an issue. The earthen materials underlying the Project Site are fairly dense, making the potential for subsidence minimal. Additionally, MEIR 313 identifies that the water table that underlies the Project Site is deep (approximately 115 to 130 feet); this deep water table and the dense earthen materials make the potential for liquefaction very low. Therefore, potential impacts related to ground stability would be less than significant for the Project Site and no mitigation is required. VI e. Geology and Soils (Septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems). The Proposed Project would not involve the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems. The Proposed Project would incorporate the use of City sewer lines and wastewater disposal systems. Therefore, no impact would occur. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\2.0 Introduction-080812.docx 2-13 Introduction VII a,b,c. Hazards and Hazardous Materials (Transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials, release of hazardous materials, hazardous materials within one-quarter-mile of a school). The Proposed Project would not create a need to transport, use, or dispose of hazardous materials. Although there are a number of sensitive uses school campuses and daycare facilities) within or surrounding the Project Site, the Proposed Project is not anticipated to include uses that would emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous materials, substances, or waste. Several major arterial roadways—including Harbor Boulevard, Katella Avenue, and Ball Road—and the I-5 freeway are located within the ARSP area. Each of these roadways may be used to transport hazardous materials; however, the Project would neither increase the frequency of the transport, nor would it introduce hazards which would increase the likelihood for accidental release of hazardous materials into the environment. VII e,f. Hazards and Hazardous Materials (Airports, airstrips). According to Figure 5.6-1 from EIR 330, the ARSP area is not located within the adopted Airport Land Use Plan for the Los Alamitos Armed Forces Reserve Center or the Fullerton Municipal Airport, nor is it located in the vicinity of a private airstrip. Additionally, there are four heliports within city limits that are used for take-off and landing. However, development of the Proposed Project would not impact heliport operations. VII g. Hazards and Hazardous Materials (Emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan). The Project Site is located within a fully developed area of the City and no major modifications to the existing circulation system are proposed. Any future modifications to the circulation system with the potential to impact existing emergency response or evacuation plans would be subject to review and approval of the City of Anaheim’s Planning Department, Fire Department, and Department of Public Works. VII h. Hazards and Hazardous Materials (Wildland fires). The Project Site is surrounded by urban development and there are no areas considered wildlands near the Project Site. VIII g,h,i. Hydrology and Water Quality (Flood Hazards). According to the Figures S-6 and S-7 of the Anaheim General Plan, the Project Site is located within the 100-Year (with flooding below 1 foot) to 500-Year Flood Zone and within the general limits of the flood impact zones associated with Prado Dam failure. Implementation of the Proposed Project may potentially expose more people and habitable structures to potential flooding. However, development of structures in compliance with local, State, and federal regulations, including compliance with the Cobey-Alquist Floodplain Management Act requirements and State of California Model Ordinance as set forth in the City of Anaheim General Plan, would ensure that significant impacts would not occur. VIII j. Hydrology and Water Quality (Inundation by seiche or mudflow). According to EIR 330, the Project Site is not located near any large, enclosed bodies of water that would cause a seiche. Additionally, the Project Site is a generally flat area that experiences such a slight change in elevation that it would not be subject to mudflows. IX c. Land Use and Planning (Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural Community Conservation Plan). According to the Anaheim General Plan’s Green Element, the Project Site is not located within a designated Natural Community Conservation Plan area. V a,b Mineral Resources. The City of Anaheim General Plan (Figure G-3, Mineral Resource Map) does not identify the Project Site as a Mineral Resource Zone (MRZ) or a Regionally Significant Aggregate Resource Area; therefore, implementation of the Proposed Project would not result in the loss of the availability of mineral resources that would be of value locally or regionally. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\2.0 Introduction-080812.docx 2-14 Introduction V e,f. Noise (Airport Noise). According to the Anaheim General Plan EIR 330, the Project Site is not within an airport land use plan, nor is it in the vicinity of a private airstrip. Future visitors and occupants of the Proposed Project would not be exposed to excessive noise levels from aircraft-related operations. There would be no impact and no mitigation is necessary. XV c. Transportation and Traffic (Air traffic patterns). As previously discussed, the ARSP was originally adopted in 1994 and the assumptions associated with an increase in the number of visitors have been incorporated into long-range planning efforts. The Proposed Project would develop new visitor-serving uses consistent with the overall intent of the ARSP. Because airport planning is a regional issue and is tied to population projections that consider the continued increase in population, employment and visitors to the Project Site, the Proposed Project is not expected to result in new impacts to the volume of air travel that would occur. XV d,e. Transportation and Traffic (Increase in hazards, emergency access). The Project Site is within a fully developed area of the City. There are no major modifications to the existing vehicular circulation system proposed in conjunction with the Proposed Project. Any future modifications to the circulation system that could impact hazards related to design features or that could impact emergency access would be subject to the review and approval of the City of Anaheim’s Planning Department, Fire Department, and Department of Public Works to avoid potential roadway and traffic-related hazards. XV f. Transportation and Traffic (Parking). Parking associated with new developments within the Project Site would be subject to existing parking requirements set forth in Title 18 (Zoning) of the Anaheim Municipal Code and would be subject to review and approval by the City of Anaheim Planning Department. XV g. Transportation and Traffic (Alternative transportation). The Proposed Project will be developed in compliance with previously established alternative transportation modes and routes, including provisions for bus routes and bicycle lanes. The Proposed Project’s consistency with relevant adopted policies, plans, and programs will be discussed. 2.5 PROJECT SPONSORS AND CONTACT PERSONS The City of Anaheim is the Lead Agency for preparation of this Draft EIR. All inquiries regarding the Draft EIR should be directed to the City. The key contact person is: Lead Agency City of Anaheim Susan Kim, Senior Planner 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Suite 162 Anaheim, California 92805 (714) 765-4948 [EMAIL REDACTED] ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\2.0 Introduction-080812.docx 2-15 Introduction 2.6 REVIEW OF THE DRAFT SUPPLEMENTAL EIR The Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Supplemental EIR (EIR 340) has been distributed to responsible and trustee agencies, other affected agencies, surrounding cities, and interested parties, as well as other parties who requested a copy of the Draft EIR in accordance with Section 21092 of the Public Resources Code. The Notice of Completion (NOC) for the Draft EIR has also been filed with the California State Office of Planning and Research (OPR) as required by Section 15085 of the CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR). During the 45-day public review period, the Draft EIR is available for purchase at the City of Anaheim Planning Department, available on the City’s website at www.anaheim.net/planning (click on the link to Current Environmental Documents in the lower right-hand corner) and available for review at the following locations: City of Anaheim Planning Department 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Suite 162 Anaheim, California 92805 Central Branch Library 500 West Broadway Anaheim, California 92805 Written or electronic comments on the Draft EIR should be addressed to Ms. Susan Kim at the address provided above. Upon completion of the 45-day public review period, written responses to all significant environmental issues raised will be prepared and available for review prior to the public hearing before the City of Anaheim Planning Commission and City Council when certification of the Draft EIR is considered. These environmental comments and their responses will be included as part of the environmental record for consideration by the decision makers for the Project. 2.7 REFERENCES Anaheim, City of. 2010 (November). Addendum to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan EIR No. 313 Anaheim Convention Center Grand Plaza. Anaheim, CA: the City. 2009 (February). Initial Study for an Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan, City of Anaheim, California (prepared by BonTerra Consulting). Anaheim, CA: the City. 1997 (April Final Site Plan Review No. 97-02 - Review and Approval of Final Site Plan (Staff Report to the Planning Commission). Anaheim, CA: the City. 1994a (August). The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Draft EIR No. 313 with Addendum. Anaheim, CA: the City. 1994b (September). The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2. Anaheim, CA: the City. California Office of Administrative Law. 2010. California Code of Regulations (Title 14, Natural Resources; Division 6, Resources Agency; Chapter 3, Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act). Eagen, MN: Westlaw for the State. http://government.westlaw.com/linkedslice/default.asp?Action=TOC&RS=GVT1.0& VR=2.0&SP=CCR-1000. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\2.0 Introduction-080812.docx 2-16 Introduction California, State of. 2010a. California Public Resources Code (Sections 4521–4529.5, Definitions). Sacramento, CA: the State. http://info.sen.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode? section=prc&group=04001-05000&file=4521-4529.5. 2010b. California Public Resources Code (Section 12220, Definitions). Sacramento, CA: the State. http://info.sen.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=prc&group= 12001-13000&file=12220. 2010c. California Public Resources Code (Sections 21000 et seq., California Environmental Quality Act). Sacramento, CA: the State. http://info.sen.ca.gov/cgi- bin/calawquery?codesection=prc&codebody=&hits=20&site= sen. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\3.0 Project Desc-080812.docx 3-1 Project Description SECTION 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3.1 PROJECT LOCATION The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (ARSP) area encompasses 581.3 gross acres and is located in the City of Anaheim, 35 miles southeast of downtown Los Angeles and 7 miles northwest of Santa Ana, in Central Orange County. The Project’s regional setting is shown in Exhibit 3-1, Regional Location. As shown in Exhibit 3-2, Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Boundaries, the ARSP area is located generally west of the Interstate 5 corridor, south of Vermont Avenue, east of Walnut Street, and north of Chapman Avenue. The Convention Center is located within the ARSP area, south of Katella Avenue between West Street and Hotel Way. Exhibit 3-3, Aerial Photograph, provides an aerial depiction of the Project Site and surrounding uses. 3.2 PROJECT OBJECTIVES Section 15124 of the CEQA Guidelines requires an environmental impact report (EIR) to include a statement of objectives sought by the Proposed Project. This disclosure assists in developing the range of project alternatives to be investigated in the EIR and provides a rationale for the adoption of a Statement of Overriding Considerations, if one is, in fact, adopted. The City of Anaheim established development and community objectives relative to the Project as proposed in MEIR 313. The objectives were intended to set the framework and criteria in which the pattern of growth for the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan area was envisioned. The following General Plan policies were identified in MEIR 313 as being “especially relevant to development of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan”. These policies continue to apply to the currently Proposed Project: • Maintain and encourage Anaheim’s position as a nationally recognized tourist, convention, and recreation center. • Increase sales tax yields and further enhance the economic base of the community, thereby lessening the tax burden on real property. • Encourage the development of quality facilities which complement conventions, family entertainment, and recreation within appropriate areas of the community. • Maintain the integrity of the Commercial-Recreation (C-R) and Public Recreation (PR) Districts by permitting only compatible land uses within these designated areas. • Foster the growth of the City’s economic potential by revitalizing The Anaheim Resort. • Treat all landowners and users in The Anaheim Resort area fairly, while recognizing the economic and social needs of the entire City. • Ensure that development complements the City’s investment in the Anaheim Convention Center and other area resources and interests. • Maintain and enhance existing recreation and convention-oriented land uses. • Protect adjacent residential land uses by buffering them from land use impacts associated with development of The Anaheim Resort. • Maintain or enhance traffic and circulation in and around The Anaheim Resort. • Provide convenient access to all hotel, restaurant, and retail opportunities in The Anaheim Resort to enhance the areawide tourist experience. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\3.0 Project Desc-080812.docx 3-2 Project Description • Protect adjacent residential neighborhoods from unnecessary intrusion by vehicles traveling to and from The Anaheim Resort. • Accommodate potential future regional transportation networks into the Plan. • Provide for necessary public infrastructure and services to maximize the development potential of The Anaheim Resort. • Create a coherent, unique resort identity that reinforces the image of The Anaheim Resort as a high-quality destination resort. • Establish a high-quality pedestrian environment. • Improve the aesthetic character of The Anaheim Resort by visually defining the boundaries with appropriate landscape treatments. 3.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3.3.1 PURPOSE The primary purpose of this EIR is to reevaluate the analysis in MEIR 313 for the ARSP. Many aspects of the Specific Plan have been implemented over the 15 years since the ARSP was adopted and MEIR 313 was certified. It was determined that after two validations of the EIR, as required by CEQA for a Master EIR (in 1999 and 2004), a full re-evaluation of the area in light of the change that has taken place in the City and surrounding area was prudent. The Proposed Project involves amendments to the ARSP to allow for an increase in maximum allowable square footage in the PR District as well as to update the ARSP based on current development, regulations, and technology. Specifically, as part of this Project, the analysis will capture all allowable hotel rooms on individual parcels under one acre in size which were not specifically identified as part of the original ARSP. Despite the apparent increase in allowable density associated with the C-R District, these rooms, although not previously quantified, were accounted for using a conservative estimate when analyzing circulation, utility, and public service impacts. The difference in the manner of calculation results in an additional 3,512 rooms within the C-R District beyond those specified in MEIR 313 and its amendments and adjustments. 3.3.2 PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS The Proposed Project involves continuing development in accordance with the ARSP, as defined in MEIR 313 and subsequent amendments and adjustments (refer to Appendix A) and expanding the Anaheim Convention Center. Development in Accordance with the ARSP (C-R District) • As described in Section 2.0, Introduction, the 581.3-acre ARSP area is divided into two Development Areas: Area 1 and Area 2. Development Area 1 is also known as the C-R District and encompasses approximately 518.5 acres. This EIR analyzes the continued maximum build out of the C-R District using the allowed densities of Low Density (up to 50 rooms per acre), Low-Medium Density (up to 75 rooms per acre), Medium Density (up to 100 rooms per acre), and Convention Center Medium Density (up to 125 rooms per acre). Density is calculated using the the existing land use category or at 75 rooms per lot/parcel, whichever is greater. In addition, for purposes of establishing a baseline figure from which to measure the increase in hotel rooms at build out, existing commercial uses are converted into hotel room equivalents. There are currently 10,888 hotel rooms and approximately 419,000 square feet (sf) of commercial ---PAGE BREAK--- Regional Location Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Exhibit 3-1 R:/Projects/Anaheim/J050/Graphics/EIR/ex3-1_RL_022409.pdf National Angeles Forest Camp Pendleton Cleveland National Forest Lake Mathews ic e Los Angeles San Bernardino Orange San Diego Riverside San ta C la r a Ri v er [ Project Location 405 15 210 105 10 5 710 110 215 605 210 10 15 5 S T 14 S T 1 S T 138 S T 73 S T 22 S T 91 S T 118 S T 2 S T 18 S T 19 S T 30 S T 241 S T 74 S T 90 S T 261 S T 170 S T 142 S T 39 S T 107 S T 72 S T 134 S T 110 S T 60 S T 213 S T 71 S T 55 S T 133 S T 57 S T 187 S T 710 S T 241 S T 138 S T 91 S T 2 t u 395 t u 101 Corona Irvine Anaheim Palmdale Pasadena Riverside Long Beach Los Angeles Santa Monica San Lake Santa Viejo Beach Santa Rancho Rialto Rancho Downey Carson Island Ontario Mission Clarita Elsinore San Juan Whittier Clemente Lakewood Glendale Cucamonga Margarita Santa Ana Hawthorne Capistrano Huntington Costa Mesa Buena Park Seal Beach Victorville Yorba Linda West Covina Laguna Beach Palos Verdes Santa Catalina West Hollywood D:/Projects/Anaheim/J050/regional.mxd 10 0 10 5 Miles ² P A C I F I C O C E A N ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Boundaries Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Exhibit 3-2 (Rev 04-08-11 WAD) R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\Graphics\EIR\ex3-2_spec_plan.pdf The Disneyland Resort Anaheim Convention Center Boysen Park Disney Way Disneyland Dr Walnut St Orangewood Ave Vermont Ave 5 Santa Ana River Santa Ana River U V 22 Euclid St Ball Rd Harbor Blvd Katella Ave Chapman Ave East St Garden Grove Blvd Anaheim Blvd State College Blvd Lincoln Ave The City D r Manchester Ave West St ew St D:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\ex_spec_plan_021009.mxd 0.5 0 0.5 0.25 Miles ² Disneyland Resort Specific Plan (SP92-1) Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (SP92-2) Hotel Circle Specific Plan (SP93-1) ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Aerial Photograph Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Exhibit 3-3 (Rev 04-11-11 JFG) R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\Graphics\EIR\Ex3-3_aerial.pdf 5 WEST DR 5 HARBOR BLVD BALL RD KATELLA AVE HASTER ST ORANGEWOOD AVE ANAHEIM BLVD ANAHEIM WAY EAST ST CHAPMAN AVE ANAHEIM BLVD DISNEYLAND DR WALNUT ST D:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\Ex_aerial_031009.mxd 1,500 0 1,500 750 Feet Anaheim Resort Specific Plan: C-R District PR District ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\3.0 Project Desc-080812.docx 3-3 Project Description development within the C-R District. All development other than hotels within the C-R District has been analyzed for traffic in terms of equivalency to hotel rooms. For example, each hotel room is equivalent to 600 sf of retail commercial in terms of traffic. This results in a baseline hotel room equivalent of 11,587 hotel rooms. A maximum of 32,500 hotel rooms (or hotel room equivalents) are permitted in the C-R District. Of these hotel rooms, impacts associated with the development of 28,988 hotel rooms have been previously analyzed as part of EIRs 313 and 330 as well as other environmental documentation related to subsequent amendments to the ARSP. Therefore, this EIR serves to update the environmental conditions as previously evaluated in MEIR 313 and analyzes the future development of 20,913 hotel rooms, including an additional 3,512 hotel rooms within the C-R District based on a calculation by parcel (rather than total acres by density).1 This calculation by parcel includes parcels that could develop up to 75 units, which would represent a larger number of rooms than the designated density (Low Density, Low-Medium Density, Medium Density, or Convention Center Medium Density). No density has been changed, but the density calculations have been conducted on a parcel-by-parcel basis, which was not previously done. Convention Center Expansion (PR District) Development Area 2, encompassing 62.8 acres, is also known as the PR District and includes City-owned land such as the 1.7 million sf Anaheim Convention Center (Convention Center) and the 1,600-room Anaheim Hilton Hotel. Other allowed uses within the PR District include accessory uses such as concession stands, restaurants, and shops. The PR District does not have a density designation; however, MEIR 313 analyzed the impacts associated with the Anaheim Hilton Hotel; the Anaheim Convention Center, as it existed in 1993; and 412 additional hotel rooms for this area. The environmental analysis completed in conjunction with the expansion of the Convention Center in 1997 (Final Site Plan Review No. 97-02) determined that the Convention Center could be increased to its current size of 1,712,004 sf with the same traffic-generating impacts as the development intensity analyzed in MEIR 313 for Development Area 2. In addition, this analysis determined that an additional 219,414 sf of future traffic-generating development could also be developed. Addendum to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan EIR No. 313 Anaheim Convention Center Grand Plaza (2010) analyzed the allocation of 100,000 sf of the 219,414 sf of future development to the Anaheim Convention Center Grand Plaza project. The Proposed Project includes an increase in development intensity within the PR District to allow an expansion of the Convention Center and additional hotel development on City-owned land beyond what was previously approved, as listed below. Convention Center Development • 406,359 sf of Convention Center space (including exhibit halls, ballrooms, flexible meeting space, office and meeting rooms, and an interior bridge/skyway) and 1 MEIR 313 analyzed the maximum development of 28,988 hotel rooms based on density by acreage. Since the certification of MEIR 313, geographical information systems technology has increased precision in mapping data, thereby allowing density calculations to be determined based on parcels and acreage rather than just acreage. As established in the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan, the maximum density for each parcel that is under an acre in area is 75 rooms per lot or parcel or the maximum density based on acreage, whichever is greater. This criterion was used for approximately 90 parcels. Current day mapping and calculation methods are able to the total maximum development allowed on lots or parcels that are less than one acre in size which were not captured by previous mapping and calculation methods. Therefore, the difference of 3,512 hotel rooms represents an increase in technology and precision rather than an increase in permitted maximum density. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\3.0 Project Desc-080812.docx 3-4 Project Description • 125,000 sf of commercial space (including, but not limited to, retail stores and restaurants). Hotel Development • A maximum of 900 hotel additional rooms, • A maximum of 40,000 sf of additional meeting and ballroom space, and • A maximum of 55,000 sf of additional commercial space (including retail stores, spa facilities, bars and and restaurants). Tables 3.3-1, Maximum Build Out Analyzed for the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan by MEIR 313, and 3.3-2, Maximum Build Out Analyzed for the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan by the Current Environmental Documentation, provide comparisons of conditions that were previously analyzed in MEIR 313 (Table 3.3-1) and the MEIR plus subsequent environmental documents (Table 3.3-2) to those that are being analyzed currently as part of this EIR (Proposed Project). Table 3.3-3, Current Existing Development, Proposed Project and Proposed Increase, provides a comparison of the existing development and the Proposed Project. The increases shown in this table represent the Proposed Project as analyzed throughout this EIR. TABLE 3.3-1 MAXIMUM BUILD OUT ANALYZED FOR THE ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN BY MEIR 313 District MEIR 313 Proposed Project Increase C-R District • 25,496 hotel rooms* • 32,500 hotel rooms • 7,004 hotel rooms PR District • 2,012 hotel rooms • 1,056,874 sf convention center • 2,500 hotel rooms • 2,118,363 sf convention center • 180,000 sf commercial space • 40,000 sf hotel meeting and ballroom space • 100,000 sf outdoor programmable space** • 488 hotel rooms • 1,061,489 sf convention center • 180,000 sf commercial space • 40,000 sf hotel meeting and ballroom space • 100,000 sf outdoor programmable space * Commercial uses are converted to hotel room equivalents on a ratio of 600 square feet of commercial development = 1 hotel room **Analyzed by Addendum to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan EIR No. 313 Anaheim Convention Center Grand Plaza(2010) ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\3.0 Project Desc-080812.docx 3-5 Project Description TABLE 3.3-2 MAXIMUM BUILD OUT ANALYZED FOR THE ANAHEIM REPORT SPECIFIC PLAN BY CURRENT ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION District Existing Environmental Documentation Proposed Project Increase C-R District • 28,988 hotel rooms* • 32,500 hotel rooms • 3,512 hotel rooms PR District • 1,600 hotel rooms • 1,712,004 sf convention center • 119,414 sf of future traffic- generating uses • 100,000 sf outdoor programmable space • 2,500 hotel rooms • 2,118,363-sf convention center • 180,000 sf commercial development • 40,000 sf hotel meeting/ ballroom space • 900 hotel rooms • 406,359 sf convention center uses • The commercial development and meeting/ballroom space is 100,586 square feet more than the previously approved “traffic- generating uses” sf: square foot/feet; * Commercial uses are converted to hotel room equivalents on a ratio of 600 sf of commercial development = 1 hotel room TABLE 3.3-3 CURRENT EXISTING DEVELOPMENT, PROPOSED PROJECT AND PROPOSED INCREASE District Current Existing Development Proposed Project Increase C-R District • 11,587 hotel rooms* • 32,500 hotel rooms* • 20,913 hotel rooms* PR District • 1,600 hotel rooms • 1,712,004 sf convention center • 2,500 hotel rooms • 2,118,363 sf convention center • 180,000 sf commercial development • 40,000 sf hotel meeting/ballroom space • 100,000 sf outdoor programmable space** • 900 hotel rooms • 406,359 sf convention center • 180,000 sf commercial development • 40,000 sf hotel meeting/ballroom space • 100,000 sf outdoor programmable space Total • 13,187 hotel rooms • 1,712,004 sf convention center • 35,000 hotel rooms • 2,118,363 sf convention center • 180,000 sf commercial development • 40,000 sf hotel meeting/ballroom space • 100,000 sf outdoor programmable space • 21,813 hotel rooms • 406,359 sf convention center • 180,000 sf commercial development • 40,000 sf hotel meeting/ballroom space • 100,000 sf outdoor programmable space * Commercial uses are converted to hotel room equivalents on a ratio of 600 square feet of commercial development = 1 hotel room **Analyzed by Addendum to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan EIR No. 313 Anaheim Convention Center Grand Plaza (2010) 3.4 BASIS FOR CUMULATIVE IMPACT ANALYSIS Section 15355 of the CEQA Guidelines defines cumulative impacts as “two or more individual effects which when considered together are considerable or which compound or increase other environmental impacts”. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\3.0 Project Desc-080812.docx 3-6 Project Description Section 15355 further describes potential cumulative impacts as follows: The individual effects may be changes resulting from a single project or a number of separate projects. The cumulative impacts from several projects are the change in the environment which results from the incremental impact of the project when added to other closely related past, present, and reasonably foreseeable probable future projects. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant projects taking place over a period of time. Section 15130 of the CEQA Guidelines states that cumulative impacts shall be discussed where they are significant. It further states that this discussion shall reflect the level and severity of the impact and the likelihood of occurrence, but not in as great a level of detail as that necessary for the project alone. Cumulative impacts represent the change caused by the incremental impact of a project when added to other proposed or committed projects in the vicinity. The CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations [CCR] §15130[b][1]) states that the information utilized in an analysis of cumulative impacts should come from one of two sources, either: 1. A list of past, present, and probable future projects producing related cumulative impacts, including if necessary, those projects outside the control of the agency or 2. A summary of projections contained in an adopted general plan or related planning document designed to evaluate regional or areawide conditions. The cumulative impacts analyses contained in this EIR use both methods. As appropriate, the cumulative impact analyses provided in this EIR use the City of Anaheim General Plan as well as the City of Garden Grove General Plan and the City of Orange General Plan Update for analyses related to land use compatibility and traffic/circulation. These cumulative impact analyses take into consideration the demographic projections and land use build out assumptions outlined in the General Plan and Final EIR that were approved by the City of Anaheim in 2004 as well as projected build out of the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan. In addition to the City of Anaheim General Plan study area, the cumulative analyses for individual topical issues may consider specific cumulative study areas designated by respective agencies for regional or area wide conditions. The cumulative projects include projects associated with full build out of the City of Anaheim General Plan as well as general plans of adjacent jurisdictions (City of Garden Grove and City of Orange), as applicable. In addition to the list of projects, the cumulative analyses for individual topical issues may consider specific cumulative study areas designated by respective agencies for regional or areawide conditions. Topic-specific cumulative study areas have been developed for traffic, air quality, and aesthetics. Also, this EIR considers regional programs directed at mitigating cumulative development impacts such as those instituted for urban runoff. A description of the basis for cumulative impact analysis for individual topical issues is provided in Section 5, Intended Use of the EIR ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\3.0 Project Desc-080812.docx 3-7 Project Description 3.4.1 CITY OF ANAHEIM The City of Anaheim is expected to use the information contained in this Supplemental EIR for consideration of approvals related to and involved in the implementation of the Proposed Project. Potential actions to be considered by the City of Anaheim for the Proposed Project may include, but not be limited to, those actions below. Primary Discretionary Actions The Proposed Project requires a Water Supply Assessment (Case No. MIS2010-00421) and amendments to the following documents that govern and regulate development within the ARSP area: • Anaheim General Plan (Case No. GPA2010-00482) • Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (Case No. SPN2010-00060) • Title 18 (Zoning Code) of the Anaheim Municipal Code (Case No. ZCA2010-00093) • The Anaheim Resort Identity Program (Case No. MIS2010-00478) • The Anaheim Resort Public Realm Landscape Program (Case No. MIS2010-00479) • Ordinance No. 5454 Conditions of Approval (Case No. MIS2010-00484) Subsequent Discretionary and Ministerial Actions In addition to the discretionary actions listed above, subsequent approvals by the City of Anaheim may include: • Subdivision Maps, • Final Site Plans, • Building Permits, • Conditional Use Permits, and/or • Other entitlement action(s) associated with future development proposals in the ARSP area. 3.4.2 RESPONSIBLE AND TRUSTEE AGENCIES The EIR provides environmental information to responsible and trustee agencies and other public agencies that may be necessary to grant approvals or coordinate with the City of Anaheim as a part of project implementation. These agencies include, but are not limited to, those listed below. • South Coast Air Quality Management District. Air quality conditions in the South Coast Air Basin (SoCAB) are under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), a regional agency that regulates air emissions throughout the SoCAB. • Regional Water Quality Control Board. The Regional Water Quality Control Board administers the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) storm water permitting program. • Orange County Sanitation District. Wastewater is collected by City of Anaheim collector facilities and conveyed to trunk sewers owned and maintained by the Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD). ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\3.0 Project Desc-080812.docx 3-8 Project Description • California Department of Transportation (Caltrans, District 12). Freeways and associated on- and off-ramps owned and maintained by Caltrans are anticipated to be impacted by the Proposed Project. Recommended improvements at the Orangewood Avenue and SR-57 Southbound Ramps intersection would be within Caltrans right of way. These improvements are further described in Section 5.14 (Traffic and Transportation). • City of Orange. The Proposed Project results in cumulative impacts to three intersections that are either located within the City of Orange or are shared intersections between Orange and Anaheim including: o State College Boulevard at Orangewood Avenue o State College Boulevard at The City Drive/Chapman Avenue o Orangewood Avenue at SR-57 Southbound Ramps The City of Orange would be responsible for implementation of recommended improvements at these intersections. These improvements are further described in Section 5.14 (Traffic and Transportation). 3.5 REFERENCES Anaheim, City of. 2010 (November). Addendum to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan EIR No. 313 Anaheim Convention Center Grand Plaza. Anaheim, CA: the City. 2004 (May). Final Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update EIR No. 330. Anaheim, CA: the City. 1994a (August). The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Draft EIR No. 313 with Addendum. Anaheim, CA: the City. California Office of Administrative Law. 2010. California Code of Regulations (Title 14, Natural Resources; Division 6, Resources Agency; Chapter 3, Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act). Eagen, MN: Westlaw for the State. http://government.westlaw.com/linkedslice/default.asp?Action=TOC&RS=GVT1.0& VR=2.0&SP=CCR-1000. California, State of. 2010. California Public Resources Code (Sections 21000 et seq., California Environmental Quality Act). Sacramento, CA: California Resource Agency. http://info.sen.ca.gov/cgi-bin/calawquery?codesection=prc&codebody=&hits=20&site= sen. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\4.0 Env Setting-082312.docx 4-1 Environmental Setting SECTION 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 4.1 INTRODUCTION In conformance with Section 15125 of the CEQA Guidelines: An EIR must include a description of the physical environmental conditions in the vicinity of the Proposed Project, as they exist at the time the notice of preparation is published, or if no notice of preparation is published, at the time environmental analysis is commenced, from both a local and regional perspective. This environmental setting will normally constitute the baseline physical conditions by which a lead agency determines whether an impact is significant. The description of the environmental setting shall be no longer than is necessary to an understanding of the significant effects of the Proposed Project and its alternatives. The following is a brief description of the regional and local environmental setting for the Proposed Project and this EIR. Additional information is provided for each topical issue addressed in Section 5. 4.2 REGIONAL PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS 4.2.1 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for six counties: Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside, Ventura, and Imperial. The region has a population that exceeds 18 million persons in an area of more than 38,000 square miles. SCAG is mandated by the federal government to research and develop plans for transportation, growth management, hazardous waste management, and air quality. As the designated MPO, the federal government has also mandated SCAG to research and draw up plans for transportation, growth management, hazardous waste management, and air quality. 4.2.2 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT The ARSP area is located in the South Coast Air Basin (SoCAB) within the jurisdiction of South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The SCAQMD is responsible for controlling emissions of air pollution, primarily from stationary sources, including those from both businesses and residences. Emission standards for mobile sources are established by State or federal agencies, such as the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), rather than by local agencies such as the SCAQMD. The SCAQMD has jurisdiction over an area of approximately 10,743 square miles, which includes Orange County. The SoCAB is bound by the Pacific Ocean to the west and the San Gabriel, San Bernardino, and San Jacinto Mountains to the north and east. The SoCAB’s climate is generally mild and semi-arid, although the moist marine layer can add humidity and restrict visibility in the area. The SoCAB’s distinctive climate is determined by its terrain and geographic location. The SoCAB is a coastal plain with connecting broad valleys and low hills, bound by the Pacific Ocean to the southwest and high mountains around the rest of its perimeter. The usually mild climatological pattern is interrupted occasionally by periods of extremely hot weather, winter storms, or Santa Ana winds. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\4.0 Env Setting-082312.docx 4-2 Environmental Setting 4.3 PROJECT SETTING AND CHARACTERISTICS 4.3.1 AESTHETICS The ARSP is located within the City of Anaheim west of the Interstate 5 freeway within a relatively flat area of the City. The entirety of the ARSP area has been historically subject to grading, which has eliminated the area’s natural topography. As stated in MEIR 313, “there are no distinct natural landscape features or natural visual resources or vistas within the Project area”. While the Anaheim General Plan Green Element identifies that the contours of the Hill and Canyon Area, and the Santa Ana Mountains are visible from most areas in the City, the relatively flat topography of the ARSP area and distance from the Hill and Canyon Area and Santa Ana Mountains coupled with presence intervening structures (such as freeway overpasses, buildings, and sports venues) serve to obstruct views of these features. The ARSP is largely developed with visitor-serving uses, including mid- and high-rise hotels, motels, restaurants, offices, retail uses, mobile home parks, recreational vehicle (RV) parks, an elementary school, a surface parking lot for the Disneyland Resort, and the multi-story Anaheim Convention Center. Due to the size and physical layout of the ARSP, the visibility of land uses is dependent on location and intervening structures. Aesthetics is discussed in Section 5.1 of this EIR. 4.3.2 AIR QUALITY As stated above, the ARSP area is located in the SoCAB. The distinctive climate of the SoCAB is determined by its terrain and geographic location. The SoCAB is a coastal plain with connecting broad valleys and low hills; it is bound by the Pacific Ocean to the southwest and high mountains around the rest of its perimeter. The general region lies in the semi-permanent high pressure zone of the eastern Pacific, resulting in a mild climate tempered by cool sea breezes with light average wind speeds. The closest station to the ARSP for historical climate data is in Anaheim. The annual average maximum temperature measured at the Anaheim Climatic Station from 1989 through 2009 was 77.4 degrees Fahrenheit The highest average maximum temperature of 87.0°F occurs in August. The annual average minimum temperature is 55.4°F, and the lowest average minimum temperature of 46.9°F occurs in December. The average annual precipitation during the same period was 12.82 inches. The prevailing wind direction is southwest. Existing and future sensitive receptors within or adjacent to the ARSP area include several single family, multi-family, and mobile home park residential areas, and elementary schools, pools, outdoor gathering areas, and playgrounds. These uses would be considered sensitive receptors for subsequent construction for long-term emissions. Criteria air pollutant concentrations are measured by the SCAQMD at several monitoring stations in Orange County. The closest station to the ARSP area is the Anaheim Monitoring Station, located at 1630 Pampas Lane, Anaheim, approximately 0.6 mile west of the Specific Plan boundary. The Anaheim Monitoring Station is also identified as Source Receptor Area (SRA) 17, Central Orange County. Equipment at the station measures O3, CO, NO2, PM10, and PM2.5 levels. Since this Monitoring Station does not monitor SO2, data was supplemented from the Costa Mesa Station for this pollutant. Data from 2009 to 2011 show violations of the federal and State O3, PM10, and PM2.5 standards in Anaheim. Air quality is discussed in Section 5.2 of this EIR. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\4.0 Env Setting-082312.docx 4-3 Environmental Setting 4.3.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES The ARSP area exists as a previously disturbed urban area. Based on the results of the literature review, no federally or State-listed Threatened or Endangered species have been reported from the Proposed Project’s region the USGS Anaheim 7.5-minute quadrangle). There are no sensitive biological resources in the Public Recreation (PR) and Commercial-Recreation (C-R) Districts because of the urban nature of the ARSP area. On-site vegetation types are limited to ornamental landscaping. Six special status plant species have been reported from the Proposed Project’s region; however, these species were observed historically in the area, with no observations since the 1950’s. No special status plant species are expected to occur on the ARSP area due to lack of suitable habitat. Two special status wildlife species have been reported from the Proposed Project’s region: western mastiff bat and coast (San Diego) horned lizard. These species are not expected to occur on the ARSP area due to lack of suitable habitat. Biological Resources are discussed in Section 5.3 of this EIR. 4.3.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES The majority of the ARSP, as previously described in Section 3.0, Project Description, is highly urban in nature. No recorded archaeological sites, including human burial locations, have been identified within or near the ARSP area. Additionally, no areas of paleontologic sensitivity have been identified within or near the ARSP area. No designated historic or prehistoric cultural resources have been identified within a one-mile radius of the ARSP area. The westerly portion of the City, including the ARSP area, has been developed and redeveloped with suburban and urban uses over the past 50 plus years. In addition, though there are a number of structures that qualify as being 45 years of age or older in the ARSP area, none of these structures are expected to qualify as historic resources because these buildings, structures, objects, or sites have been physically altered and/or do not fulfill the criteria for local, State, or federal listing of historic resources. Cultural Resources are discussed in Section 5.4 of this EIR. 4.3.5 GEOLOGY The City of Anaheim is situated in the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province, extending from the southerly portion of the Los Angeles Basin easterly into the northern portions of the Santa Ana Mountains. The western portions of Anaheim, including the ARSP area, are located in the Central Block of the Los Angeles Basin. The Central Block is characterized by thick layers of alluvium overlying predominantly sedimentary rock of Pleistocene through Cretaceous age. The depths to basement rocks are known from petroleum well logs and geophysical data. The total thickness of the sedimentary section is roughly 13,000 feet near the southern end of the Los Angeles basin. The broad alluvial plain area in the western half of the City (including the ARSP area) is generally covered by Holocene age (up to 11,000 years old) alluvial deposits which become increasingly older with depth. East of the ARSP area, Pleistocene Age (11,000 to 2 million years old) terrace deposits are present on elevated terraces along the upper edges of the alluvial plains and the lower benches of the hillside areas. There are several active and potentially active faults in the region. Faults that are capable of generating ground motion at the site include the Newport-Inglewood, Whittier, and Elsinore Faults. Other faults that may be capable of generating strong ground motion at the site include faults located offshore Palos Verdes Fault Zone), more distant onshore faults San Jacinto and San Andreas Faults), and local faults Norwalk and Peralta Hills faults). Geology and soils are discussed in Section 5.5 of this EIR. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\4.0 Env Setting-082312.docx 4-4 Environmental Setting 4.3.6 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Climate change is a recorded change in the average weather of the earth measured by variables such as wind patterns, storms, precipitation, and temperature. Worldwide, China is the world’s largest emitter, contributing approximately 19 percent, just ahead of the U.S., with approximately 18 percent. Approximately half of global emissions come from developed countries and half from developing countries; note that China and India are considered developing countries (WRI 2009). The most common greenhouse gas (GHG) is CO2, which constitutes approximately 84 to 85 percent of all GHG emissions in the United States and California. The primary contributors to California GHG emissions are transportation; electric power production from both in-state and out-of-state sources; and industrial uses. Existing annual GHG emissions from the ARSP area total approximately 231,179 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent per year (MTCO2e/yr), which is a fraction of the state’s contribution of GHG emissions. Greenhouse Gas Emissions are discussed in Section 5.6 of this EIR. 4.3.7 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS More than 40 listed hazardous materials sites are listed either within the ARSP boundaries or located immediately adjacent to the ARSP area. Listed sites include both permitted facilities whose operations use, produce, or transport hazardous materials and the locations of reported releases and/or clean up operations (remediation). A single site can be listed in multiple databases. The ARSP area is located within a densely urbanized area and, as such, multiple underground storage tanks were identified, most of which are related to automotive service stations. Hazards and Hazardous Materials are discussed in Section 5.7 of this EIR. 4.3.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY The ARSP is located within the Lower Santa Ana River watershed, but does not drain into the Santa Ana River. Rather, the area slopes in a southwesterly direction and has drainage channels that convey runoff south and west for discharge to the Pacific Ocean at Anaheim Bay, Sunset Bay/Huntington Harbor, and Bolsa Bay. Both Anaheim Bay and Huntington Harbor are listed in Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act as impaired water bodies. The ARSP is located within the Coastal Plain of the Orange County Groundwater Basin, which underlies the northern half of Orange County. This groundwater basin covers approximately 310 square miles; is bordered by the Coyote and Chino Hills to the north, the Santa Ana Mountains to the northeast, the San Joaquin Hills to the south, and the Pacific Ocean to the southwest; and it terminates near the Orange County boundary to the northwest, where it connects to the Central Basin of Los Angeles. Groundwater levels in the ARSP area range from approximately 5 feet above mean sea level (msl) at the northeastern section to 35 feet below msl along the southern edge of the ARSP area (OCWD 2008). With ground elevations of 115 to 145 feet above msl, groundwater is approximately 140 to 150 feet below the ground surface. Groundwater quality has high concentrations of sodium-calcium bicarbonate, with the average total dissolved solids content in 240 public supply wells at 507 milligrams per liter. Sea water intrusion has occurred near the coast. Colored water, from natural organic materials in the Lower Aquifer and increasing levels of salinity, nitrates, and methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) have been observed. Hydrology and Water Quality is discussed in Section 5.8 of this EIR. 4.3.9 LAND USE The ARSP encompasses approximately 581.3 gross acres in the City of Anaheim in north Orange County. The ARSP is one of three specific plans within the larger, tourist-oriented Anaheim Resort. The ARSP is generally located east of Walnut Street, west of the I-5 freeway, ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\4.0 Env Setting-082312.docx 4-5 Environmental Setting north of Chapman Avenue, and south of Ball Road. A small portion of the ARSP is located north of the I-5 freeway/Harbor Boulevard interchange. Generally, the ARSP area is located in an area characterized by urban development including commercial, office, and residential development and visitor-serving uses including theme parks, hotels and motels, convention facilities and sports venues. Land use is discussed in Section 5.9 of this EIR. 4.3.10 NOISE The ARSP encompasses an area of approximately 581 acres in an urbanized area in the City of Anaheim. The area consists mostly of hotels and commercial uses and the Anaheim Convention Center. The primary source of noise within the ARSP area is vehicular traffic on I-5, Harbor Boulevard, Katella Avenue, Orangewood Avenue, Ball Road, Chapman Avenue, Anaheim Boulevard, West Street, and other local streets within the ARSP. Additional noise sources include heat, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) units; truck loading docks; and activities such as public announcement systems and fireworks at the Disneyland Resort. Noise is discussed in Section 5.10 of this EIR. 4.3.11 POPULATION AND HOUSING Orange County’s population has experienced a positive, though inconsistent, pattern of growth in recent history. Between 1980 and 1990, population increased by an average of 47,785 people annually. Population growth decreased to an average of 43,573 persons annually from 1990 to 2000. The rate of population growth decreased further to an average of 40,153 persons annually between 2000 and 2005. According to the Center for Demographic Research’s Orange County Projections-2010 Modified (OCP-2010 Modified) projections, the Orange County population is projected to grow by an average of approximately 22,997 per year between 2010 and 2035 (CDR 2012). Population and Housing is discussed in Section 5.11 of this EIR. 4.3.12 PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES Police Protection The City of Anaheim Police Department (Police Department) provides law enforcement services to over 330,000 residents and approximately 5,000 businesses in the City, including the ARSP area. Law enforcement services include traffic control and enforcement, narcotics violations, crime control, community and tourist regulation, detention facilities, various investigations, and patrol. The Police Department is divided into four service districts (Central [Main], South, East, and West) each containing a police station. The ARSP is located within the Central District and is served by the Central Station. Police Protection is discussed in Section 5.12 of this EIR. Fire Protection Fire protection services are provided for the ARSP area by the City of Anaheim Fire Department (Fire Department). The Fire Department operates 12 fire stations and employs a total of 227 sworn/safety, 48 civilian/professional, and 7.81 part time personnel. Fire stations are strategically located to ensure an efficient demand response to all risk hazards. The Fire Department staffs engine and ladder truck companies, and provides paramedic services, fire suppression, rescue, and hazardous materials response capabilities (Lutz 2012). ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\4.0 Env Setting-082312.docx 4-6 Environmental Setting The Fire Department presently staffs 10 engine companies, all of which are designated paramedic companies; 5 truck companies, three of which are paramedic companies; two contract paramedic companies; one dual-role hazardous-materials unit; one dual-role technical rescue unit; and 2 Battalions, housed in Fire Station 6 and Fire Station 8. Fire Protection is discussed in Section 5.12 of this EIR. Schools The ARSP area is served mainly by the Anaheim City School District (ACSD) and the Anaheim Union High School District (AUHSD). The ACSD operates 24 elementary schools (kindergarten through sixth grades within the City limits. The ACSD has prepared the Anaheim City School District Facility Planning and Development Facilities Master Plan, 2010 – 2030, which outlines a strategy for significant new construction, modernization, and additions to the ACSD. Total district-wide enrollment for the ACSD for the 2009/2010 school year was 19,304 students (Pidgen 2010a). The AUHSD has a student population of approximately 37,000, including Adult Education (AUHSD 2010). The District covers 46 square miles and serves the Cities of Anaheim, Cypress, Buena Park, La Palma, and Stanton. The AUHSD serves grades 7–12 and includes 8 junior high schools (grades 6–8); 10 high schools (grades 9–12); 1 comprehensive school (grades 7–12); and 6 alternative education facilities. Schools are discussed in Section 5.12 of this EIR. Library Library services for the City and the ARSP area are provided by the Anaheim Public Library. The Euclid Library, located at 1340 S. Euclid Street, and the Central Library, located at 500 W. Broadway, are the two closest Anaheim Public Library facilities nearest to the ARSP area. These two facilities offer print, video, and audio materials as well as access to computer workstations. Virtual Anaheim Library services are also available via the internet. Library Service is discussed in Section 5.12 of this EIR. 4.3.13 RECREATION There are over 50 City-owned and operated parks and recreational facilities, (totaling 677 acres) within the City of Anaheim. The major recreational facility within the Proposed Project’s footprint is the Anaheim Convention Center, which includes a basketball arena and over 800,000 square feet of exhibition floor space. Within The Anaheim Resort, Disney provides commercial recreational opportunities via the Disneyland Resort, which includes the Disneyland Park, Disney’s California Adventure Park, and the Downtown Disney shopping district. Multiple Disney-owned hotels provide recreational opportunities for guests. In addition, the Shops at Anaheim GardenWalk provide dining, shopping and entertainment options. Recreation is discussed in Section 5.13 of this EIR 4.3.14 TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC The ARSP is located within a highly traveled area. Roadways within and in the vicinity of the ARSP area include Ball Road, Disney Way and Manchester Avenue, Katella Avenue, Convention Way, Gene Autry Way (planned to be extended across the freeway to ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\4.0 Env Setting-082312.docx 4-7 Environmental Setting Haster Street), Orangewood Avenue, Chapman Avenue, Walnut Street, West Street, Disneyland Drive, Harbor Boulevard, Clementine Street, Haster Street and Anaheim Boulevard. Two intersections are currently operating at deficient levels of service during one or more peak hours during the day: • Euclid Street at Katella Avenue • Anaheim Boulevard at Ball Road Regional access to the ARSP area is provided by I-5, which is under the jurisdiction of the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), District 12. Although the ARSP area contains several major arterials, secondary arterials, and freeway on- and off-ramps, the ARSP is also subject to high levels of pedestrian traffic due to the close proximity of visitor-serving uses within the ARSP area, the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan area, and the Hotel Circle Specific Plan area. Transportation and traffic conditions are described in Section 5.14 of this EIR. 4.3.15 WATER Water service is provided to the ARSP area by the City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department, Water Division. The City obtains water from the following primary water sources: naturally and artificially recharged local groundwater and imported water from the Metropolitan Water District (MWD). In addition, the Public Utilities Department maintains 17 interconnections with adjacent water purveyors that are temporarily utilized from time to time on an as-needed or emergency basis. The majority of the City’s water (nearly 70 percent on average) is pumped from the Orange County Groundwater Basin, and the remaining is imported from the MWD. The current major water system facilities consist of 8 purchased water connections to MWD (1 untreated and 7 treated water connections), 18 active wells, one 920 million gallon (MG) reservoir for untreated water, one 15 million gallons per day (mgd) water treatment plant, 12 treated water reservoirs with 28.75 MG of total storage capacity, permanent chlorination facilities at various sites, and 9 booster pump stations. 4.3.16 SEWER The ARSP is served by local sewer lines owned and maintained by the City of Anaheim. Wastewater in the local sewer lines generally flows south and then west to the OCSD sewer trunks on Walnut Street, Euclid Street, 9th Street, Ball Road, and Katella Avenue. Wastewater from the ARSP area is conveyed through sewer trunks and interceptors to the OCSD Treatment Plant No. 1 in Fountain Valley. This treatment plant has the capacity to provide primary treatment to 204 million gallons per day (mgd) and secondary treatment to 122 mgd. It treated an average of 86 mgd in 2008 and 2009 (OCSD 2009). Thus, remaining capacity to treat 118 mgd is available at this plant. 4.3.17 ELECTRICITY The City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department provides electrical services to the ARSP area. The Public Utilities Board advises the City Council on public utility matters. Primary power supply comes from the Intermountain power plant in Utah and other entitlements in California via the state regulated transmission network. A combustion turbine generator located at Dowling substation supplies an additional 50 megawatts for peaking requirements. The City’s main ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\4.0 Env Setting-082312.docx 4-8 Environmental Setting receiving substation is located on Lewis Street east of Interstate 5. The existing facilities currently provide adequate service to the ARSP area, which is currently served by the Katella, Lewis, and the Southwest substations through 12-kilovolt (kV) distribution circuits and 69-kV transmission lines. 4.3.18 STORMWATER The City of Anaheim owns and maintains storm drain facilities within the City of Anaheim boundaries and, more specifically, the ARSP area. In 1973, the City of Anaheim published a Master Plan of Drainage that divided the City into 43 drainage areas. The Master Plan of Flood Control & Drainage Facilities in Orange County, last revised by Orange County Flood Control District in February 1999, identifies the Anaheim Barber City (ABC) Channel as Facility C03. According to the City of Anaheim Master Plan of Storm Drainage for East Garden Grove Wintersburg Channel Tributary Area (City of Anaheim 2006) and City of Anaheim Master Plan of Storm Drainage for Anaheim Barber City Channel Tributary Area (Anaheim 2009), the ARSP area is located within numerous designated drainage areas. Specifically, the C-R District is located within Drainage Areas 19, 20, 22, 24, 25, and 26. The PR District is located entirely within Drainage Area 24. Runoff from Drainage Areas 19, 20, and 22 discharge into the ABC Channel via inlets and storm drain pipes within the City limits. 4.3.19 OTHER UTILITIES Natural Gas The Southern California Gas Company (SCGC) is the natural gas provider for the City of Anaheim and has facilities throughout the City and near the ARSP area (Cesares 2009). The availability of natural gas service is based upon present conditions of gas supply and regulatory policies. As a public utility, the SCGC is under the jurisdiction of the California Public Utilities Commission and Federal regulatory agencies (City of Anaheim 2004b). The Proposed Project is located within an urban area where natural gas service and facilities currently exist. Solid Waste The City of Anaheim maintains an exclusive contract with Republic Waste Services of Southern California LLC (Anaheim Disposal) to provide waste hauling services. OC Waste & Recycling provides the landfill resource for Orange County. Solid waste generated from the ARSP area would be disposed of at the Olinda Alpha Landfill which is part of the Orange County landfill system operated by OC Waste & Recycling. Opened in 1960, the landfill is scheduled to close in approximately December 2021 and is proposed to be used as a County regional park after landfill closure. Once the Olinda Alpha Landfill is closed, solid waste from the ARSP area would be directed to the Frank R. Bowerman Landfill (FRB Landfill). Telephone Telephone Services in the vicinity of the ARSP area are provided by AT&T. Existing facilities are located in the developed areas surrounding the ARSP area. Television/Cable Service Time Warner Cable currently provides both fiber and coaxial feeds in the ARSP area for a variety of services including, but not limited to, standard and high definition cable television service, PRI T1 telephony circuit(s), cable television service, high speed internet, and digital telephone service to the ARSP area. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\4.0 Env Setting-082312.docx 4-9 Environmental Setting 4.4 REFERENCES Anaheim, City of. 2004 (May). Final Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update EIR No. 330. Anaheim, CA: the City. 1994a (August). The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Draft EIR No. 313 with Addendum. Anaheim, CA: the City. 1994b (September). The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2. Anaheim, CA: the City. California Office of Administrative Law. 2010. California Code of Regulations (Title 14, Natural Resources; Division 6, Resources Agency; Chapter 3, Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act). Eagen, MN: Westlaw for the State. http://government.westlaw.com/linkedslice/default.asp?Action=TOC&RS=GVT1.0& VR=2.0&SP=CCR-1000. California, State of. 2010. California Public Resources Code (Sections 21000 et seq., California Environmental Quality Act). Sacramento, CA: California Resource Agency. http://info.sen.ca.gov/cgi-bin/calawquery?codesection=prc&codebody=&hits= 20&site=sen. Center for Demographic Research (CDR). 2007 (March). Orange County Projections-2006. Fullerton, CA: California State University, Fullerton, CDR. Orange County Water District (OCWD). 2008 (June). Groundwater Elevation Contours for the Principal Aquifer - Central OCWD. Anaheim, CA: OCWD. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\4.0 Env Setting-082312.docx 4-10 Environmental Setting This page intentionally left blank ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.0 Impact Analysis-080812.docx 5-1 Environmental Impacts SECTION 5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 5.0.1 INTRODUCTION Sections 5.1 through 5.19 of this Environmental Impact Report (EIR) provide analysis of impacts for the environmental topics identified in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines (Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations). Each topical section includes the following information: summary of previous environmental documentation; description of the current regulatory setting; description of the methodology used for the analysis; description of the conditions that exist at the time the Notice of Preparation (NOP) was filed; identification of thresholds of significance; Standard Requirements; analysis of potential project effects; identification of cumulative impacts; identification of mitigation measures, if required, to reduce the identified impacts; identification of the level of significance of impacts after mitigation, including unavoidable significant adverse impacts; and references used in the analysis. For each topical issue in this section, the impact analysis is formatted to analyze the Proposed Project’s potential impacts related to each identified threshold of significance. Unless otherwise noted, the analysis under each threshold addresses impacts related to build out of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (ARSP), as described in Section 3.0, Project Description. The mitigation program identified to reduce potential impacts of the Proposed Project consists of Standard Requirements (SRs) and mitigation measures (MMs). The components of the mitigation program are described below. • Standard Requirements. Existing SRs are based on local, State, or federal regulations or laws that are frequently required independently of CEQA review and also serve to offset or prevent specific impacts. Typical SRs include compliance with the provisions of the California and local Building Codes, South Coast Air Quality Management District Rules, City ordinances, and local agency impact fees, among others. • Mitigation Measures. Where a potentially significant environmental effect has been identified and is not reduced to a level considered less than significant through the application of SRs, mitigation measures have been provided. MEIR 313 presented mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts associated with the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Project to less than significant levels. Where applicable, these mitigation measures have been incorporated into the Mitigation Program for this EIR. In addition, City Ordinance 5454 presented a list of conditions of approval that are applicable to all projects within the ARSP area as part of the reclassification of these properties into the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (SP92-2) Zone. As part of the Proposed Project, Ordinance 5454 is proposed to be amended to incorporate those conditions into the Mitigation Program for this EIR (Case No. MIS2010-00484). Any modifications to the mitigation measure from MEIR 313 or conditions from Ordinance 5454 are shown as strikethrough for deleted text and bold for new, inserted text. The City may substitute, at its discretion, any mitigation measure (and timing thereof) that has: the same or superior result as the original mitigation measure and the same or superior effect on the environment. The City of Anaheim Planning Department, in conjunction with any appropriate agencies or City departments, shall determine the adequacy of any proposed “environmental equivalent/timing” and, if determined necessary, may refer said determination to the Planning Commission. Any costs associated with information required in order to make a determination of equivalency/timing shall be borne by the Property Owner/Developer. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.0 Impact Analysis-080812.docx 5-2 Environmental Impacts 5.0.2 APPROACH TO CUMULATIVE IMPACT ANALYSIS Section 15130 of the CEQA Guidelines states that cumulative impacts shall be discussed in an EIR where identified environmental impacts are potentially “cumulatively considerable”, which is defined in Section 15065(a)(3) as “significant when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects”. Section 15130(b)(1) states that the cumulative impact discussion should reflect the level and severity of the impact and the likelihood of occurrence, but not in as great a level of detail as that necessary for the project alone and should focus on the cumulative impact to which the other identified projects contribute. The Section 15130(b)(1) of the CEQA Guidelines describes two allowable methods to determine the scope of projects considered in the cumulative impact analysis, as follows: 1. A list of past, present, and probable future projects producing related or cumulative impacts, including, if necessary, those projects outside the control of the agency or 2. A summary of projections contained in an adopted general plan or related planning document, or in a prior environmental document which has been adopted or certified, which describes or evaluates regional or areawide conditions contributing to the cumulative impact. The cumulative impacts analyses contained in this EIR use both methods. As appropriate, the cumulative impact analyses provided in this EIR use the City of Anaheim General Plan as well as the City of Garden Grove General Plan and the City of Orange General Plan Update for analyses related to land use compatibility and traffic/circulation. These cumulative impact analyses take into consideration the demographic projections and land use build out assumptions outlined in the General Plan and Final EIR that were approved by the City of Anaheim in 2004 as well as projected build out of the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan. In addition to the City of Anaheim General Plan study area, the cumulative analyses for individual topical issues may consider specific cumulative study areas designated by respective agencies for regional or area wide conditions. The cumulative projects include projects associated with full build out of the City of Anaheim General Plan as well as general plans of adjacent jurisdictions (City of Garden Grove and City of Orange), as applicable. In addition to the list of projects, the cumulative analyses for individual topical issues may consider specific cumulative study areas designated by respective agencies for regional or area wide conditions. Topic-specific cumulative study areas have been developed for traffic, air quality, and aesthetics. Also, this EIR considers regional programs directed at mitigating cumulative development impacts such as those instituted for urban runoff. Each environmental topic in Section 5.0 of this EIR provides a “cumulative impacts” subsection that provides the topic-specific cumulative impact analysis. In addition, Section 15130(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines states that “lead agencies shall define the geographic scope of the area affected by the cumulative effect and provide a reasonable explanation for the geographic limitation used”. Unless otherwise indicated in each topical analysis in Section 5.0, the geographic scope includes the City of Anaheim. However, there are environmental topics whose relevant geographic scope, for purposes of cumulative impacts, may be larger or smaller than this area, and may be defined by local, regional, or State agencies. One example of this is the geographic scope of cumulative air quality impacts, defined by the South Coast Air Quality Management District to encompass the South Coast Air Basin. Conversely, the geographic scope of cumulative aesthetics impacts is limited to ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.0 Impact Analysis-080812.docx 5-3 Environmental Impacts anticipated regional growth within immediately adjacent jurisdictions that share viewsheds or lines of sight with the City of Anaheim. Table 5-1 summarizes the generalized geographic area(s) associated with the environmental topics addressed in Section 5.0, using the following categories: global, Statewide, regional SCAG), local ARSP or City of Anaheim and adjacent jurisdictions), and other specific areas, as defined below. TABLE 5-1 GEOGRAPHIC SCOPE OF CUMULATIVE IMPACT ANALYSIS Environmental Topic Cumulative Geographic Area(s) Aesthetics Local Air Quality Other (South Coast Air Basin) Biological Resources Local, Regional, and State (depends on resource affected) Cultural Resources Regional Geology and Soils Local and Regional Greenhouse Gas Emissions Local, Regional, State, National, and Global Hazards and Hazardous Materials Local Hydrology and Water Quality Other (watershed) Land Use and Planning Regional Noise Local and Regional Population and Housing Regional Public Services Local and Regional (depends on coverage area of affected services) Recreation Regional Transportation and Traffic Local and Regional (dependent on methodology required by transportation agency) Utilities and Service Systems Regional and Local Finally, this EIR considers regional programs directed at mitigating cumulative impacts of development such as those instituted for urban runoff related to water quality impacts. Where there is a topic-specific geographic scope or an applicable regional program, these are discussed within the cumulative impact subsection of each environmental topic addressed in this EIR. 5.0.3 REFERENCES California Office of Administrative Law. 2010. California Code of Regulations (Title 14, Natural Resources; Division 6, Resources Agency; Chapter 3, Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act). Eagen, MN: Westlaw for the State. http://government.westlaw.com/linkedslice/default.asp?Action=TOC&RS=GVT1.0& VR=2.0&SP=CCR-1000. California, State of. 2010. California Public Resources Code (Sections 21000 et seq., California Environmental Quality Act). Sacramento, CA: California Resource Agency. http://info.sen.ca.gov/cgi-bin/calawquery?codesection=prc&codebody=&hits=20&site= sen. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.0 Impact Analysis-080812.docx 5-4 Environmental Impacts This page intentionally left blank ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.1 Aesthetics-080812.docx 5.1-1 Aesthetics 5.1 AESTHETICS This section describes the existing visual character of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (ARSP) area and surrounding areas. 5.1.1 SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION MEIR 313 included an assessment of land use and visual character throughout the proposed ARSP area. Due to existing development, MEIR 313 did not identify any scenic vistas, as ground level views of the ARSP area were found to be limited to short distances. Multiple area photographs were included as part of the analyses. It was determined that, after mitigation, the ARSP area would have beneficial impacts with respect to landscaping and design features, but resulting shade and shadow impacts would be significant and unavoidable. 5.1.2 PLANS, POLICIES, AND REGULATORY CONDITIONS Related Planning Programs City of Anaheim General Plan Community Design Element The Community Design Element of the City of Anaheim General Plan provides guidance for the City’s built environment and includes goals and policies related to aesthetics that are applicable to the Proposed Project. These goals and policies are provided in Table 5.9-2 of Section 5.9, Land Use and Planning, with a project consistency analysis. Anaheim Resort Specific Plan The ARSP provides regulatory and design guidance for the development within the ARSP area. Specifically, the ARSP includes development standards, design guidelines, and a streetscape program that promotes a consistent aesthetic appearance for the land within the ARSP area. Additionally, the Anaheim Commercial Recreation Area Maximum Permitted Structural Height Map of the ARSP identifies maximum permitted structural heights for all structures within the ARSP area and surrounding areas. 5.1.3 METHODOLOGY Key viewsheds have been identified, and views of the ARSP area have been analyzed. The potential visual changes resulting from implementation of the Proposed Project are addressed. The information presented in this section is based on field reconnaissance, review of the ARSP area and aerial photographs, and review of the Proposed Project elements. 5.1.4 EXISTING CONDITIONS Historic and Existing Views of the Project Site The ARSP area is located within the City of Anaheim west of the Interstate 5 freeway (I-5) within a relatively flat area of the City. The entirety of the ARSP area has been historically subject to grading, which has eliminated the area’s natural topography. As stated in MEIR 313, “there are no distinct natural landscape features or natural visual resources or vistas within the Project area”. While the Anaheim General Plan’s Green Element identifies that the contours of the Hill and Canyon Area and the Santa Ana Mountains are visible from most areas in the City, the relatively flat topography of the ARSP area and distance from the Hill and Canyon Area and ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.1 Aesthetics-080812.docx 5.1-2 Aesthetics Santa Ana Mountains coupled with presence intervening structures (such as freeway overpasses, buildings, and sports venues) serve to obstruct views of these features. The ARSP area is largely developed with visitor-serving uses, including mid- and high-rise hotels and motels, restaurants, office, retail uses, two mobile home parks, two recreational vehicle (RV) parks, an elementary school, a surface parking lot for the Disneyland Resort, and the multi-story Anaheim Convention Center. Due to the size and physical layout of the ARSP area, the visibility of land uses is dependent on location and intervening structures. Since adoption of the ARSP in 1994, the ARSP area has experienced dramatic changes to the visual character of the area. Exhibit 5.1-1 provides a graphic illustration of the location where historic photographs were taken. Exhibits 5.1-2 through 5.1-7 illustrate the visual character of the ARSP area prior to adoption of the Specific Plan. A brief description of each photo is provided below: • Harbor Boulevard north of Katella Avenue looking north. Exhibit 5.1-2 depicts a historic view of Harbor Boulevard looking north toward the Disneyland entrance. As shown, several signs are visible for a variety of land uses. Landscaping along the sidewalk consisted of a hedge separating the walkway from adjacent land uses and sparsely located palm trees. Overhead power lines are also visible in the photograph. • Katella Avenue at Clementine Street looking west. Exhibit 5.1-3 presents a historical view from the intersection of Katella Avenue and Clementine Street. As shown, a variety of signs are visible along the street. Limited landscaping is present and overhead power lines are visible along both sides of Katella Avenue. In the background, the Convention Center is partially visible. • Harbor Boulevard at Freedman Way (Disney Way) looking north. Exhibit 5.1-4 depicts a historical view of Harbor Boulevard and the intersection with Freedman Way (now Disney Way). As shown, the view is dominated by signs and overhead power lines. Sparse landscaping is visible between the signs along northbound Harbor Boulevard. • Katella Avenue at West Street looking east. Exhibit 5.1-5 represents the historic view of Katella Avenue from the West Street intersection. The dominant visual element is the Convention Center display screen and ornamental landscaping associated with the Convention Center. Overhead power lines are also visible along both sides of Katella Avenue. • Katella Avenue at Haster Street looking west. Exhibit 5.1-6 depicts a historical view from the intersection of Katella Avenue and Haster Street looking west along Katella Avenue. As shown, the view is dominated by a variety of signs and the overhead power lines that line both sides of the street. To the south, the top of the Convention Center is partially visible behind a row of palm trees and intervening signs. To the north, the multi- story Pan Pacific Hotel is partially visible. • Harbor Boulevard south of Vermont Avenue looking south. Exhibit 5.1-7 represents a historic view of Harbor Boulevard, south of Vermont Avenue, looking south. The view is dominated by overhead power lines along Harbor Boulevard and Ball Road. A variety of signs line Harbor Boulevard and patches of landscaping are visible along both sides of the street. In the background, abundant landscaping associated with Disneyland is visible. ---PAGE BREAK--- Historic Photograph Locations Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Exhibit 5.1-1 (REV 041111 JFG) R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\Graphics\EIR\Ex5.1-1_historic_photo_locations.pdf 5 < < < < < C B E D A < F CLEMENTINE ST WEST DR ORANGEWOOD AVE DISNEY WAY 5 HARBOR BLVD BALL RD KATELLA AVE HASTER ST ANAHEIM BLVD ANAHEIM WAY EAST ST CHAPMAN AVE ANAHEIM BLVD DISNEYLAND DR WALNUT ST D:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\Ex_historic_photo_locations_022509.mxd 1,500 0 1,500 750 Feet ² The Anaheim Resort < Photograph Location and Direction ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Historic Location A: Harbor Boulevard north of Katella Avenue looking north Exhibit 5.1-2 Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (rev: kfd 042810) R:/projects/anaheim/J050/Graphics/EIR/Ex_LocA_5.1-2_022409.pdf D:/Projects//J050/Graphics/Ex_LocA__022409.ai ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Historic Location B: Katella Avenue at Clementine Street looking west Exhibit 5.1-3 Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (rev: kfd 042810) R:/projects/anaheim/J050/Graphics/Ex_LocB_5.1-3_022409.pdf D:/Projects//J050/Graphics/Ex_LocB__022409.ai ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Historic Location C: Harbor Boulevard at Freedman Way (Disney Way) looking north Exhibit 5.1-4 Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (rev: kfd 042810) R:/projects/anaheim/J050/Graphics/EIR/Ex_LocC_5.1-4_022409.pdf D:/Projects//J050/Graphics/Ex_LocC__022409.ai ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Historic Location D: Katella Avenue at West Street looking east Exhibit 5.1-5 Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (rev: kfd 042810) R:/projects/anaheim/J050/Graphics/EIR/Ex_LocD_5.1-5_022409.pdf D:/Projects//J050/Graphics/Ex_LocD__022409.ai ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Historic Location E: Katella Avenue at Haster Street looking west Exhibit 5.1-6 Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (rev: kfd 042910) R:/projects/anaheim/J050/Graphics/EIR/Ex_LocE_5.1-6_022409.pdf D:/Projects//J050/Graphics/Ex_LocE_022409.ai ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Historic Location F: Harbor Boulevard looking south at Ball Road Exhibit 5.1-7 Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (rev 081210 KFD) R:/projects/anaheim/J050/Graphics/EIR/Ex_LocF_5.1-7_022409.pdf D:/Projects/Anaheim/J050/Graphics/Ex_LocF_022409.ai ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.1 Aesthetics-080812.docx 5.1-3 Aesthetics As shown, there was no unifying visual theme that tied individual land uses together as part of a common district. Some of the visual elements common to the historic photographs include overhead power lines; signs of varying height, size, and visual appearance; and a lack of consistent landscaping. Photographs were taken to represent the existing visual conditions within and around the ARSP area. Exhibit 5.1-8 provides a graphic illustration of the location of where the photographs were taken and depicts the view direction of each photograph. Exhibits 5.1-9 through 5.1-18, described below, provide a selection of current views that are representative of the ARSP area as a whole. As illustrated, the ARSP area has a much more visually consistent theme than in the past. • Location A: Harbor Boulevard looking west down Convention Way. Exhibits 5.1-9a and 5.1-9b depict views of the Convention Center and surrounding uses within the PR District. As shown, the foreground of View A is dominated by the Clarion Hotel, Morton’s The Steakhouse restaurant, and the Anaheim Hilton Hotel. The Clarion and Hilton Hotels are both mid-rise hotels with eight- to ten-levels each. Ornamental landscaping is also visible along Convention Way. These trees reach heights comparable to the surrounding buildings. Architectural elements of the Convention Center are also visible in the background of this view and exist at similar heights as the surrounding hotels. • Location B: North side Katella Avenue looking south. As shown in Exhibit 5.1-10, views are from the Anaheim GardenWalk development and the adjacent Holiday Inn. Foreground views are dominated by ornamental landscaping trees in the center median of Katella Avenue. A two-level motel and vacant lot are visible on the south side of Katella Avenue. In the background, the upper levels of several mid-rise hotels are visible, including the Red Lion Inn, the Radisson, and the top of the Clarion Hotel. • Location C: West side Harbor Boulevard looking north. Exhibit 5.1-11 depicts views from the Radisson and the Red Lion Inn located along Harbor Boulevard. As shown, the foreground view is dominated by the intersection and adjacent features including a bus shelter and ornamental landscaping. Land uses visible in the background include the Castle Inn Hotel along the east side of Harbor Boulevard and the Tower of Terror located in Disney’s California Adventure. • Location D: East side Harbor Boulevard looking north. Exhibit 5.1-12 depicts the view from the Red Lion Inn along the east side of Harbor Boulevard. Foreground views are dominated by ornamental palm trees in the center median of Katella Avenue and the small retail center and associated parking area located northeast of the intersection of Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue. The Castle Inn Hotel is visible directly north of the retail center’s parking area. To the west, the view is dominated by mature, ornamental trees. The Ramada Inn is visible to the east. • Location E: Harbor Boulevard looking north. Exhibit 5.1-13 represents views from motorists and pedestrians travelling north on Harbor Boulevard. The view is dominated by the Desert Inn and Suites Hotel, the Park Vue Inn, and the International House of Pancakes restaurant as well as mature ornamental trees along Harbor Boulevard. Other hotel and restaurant uses are visible further north along Harbor Boulevard as well. Refer to Exhibit 5.1-4 for a visual comparison of this area prior to implementation of the ARSP. • Location F: Manchester Avenue looking west. Exhibit 5.1-14 depicts views from motorists and pedestrians traveling west along Manchester Avenue to Harbor Boulevard. Foreground views are dominated by mature landscape trees and a parking area associated with the Fairfield Inn. Portions of the Mimi’s Café restaurant are visible in the ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.1 Aesthetics-080812.docx 5.1-4 Aesthetics center of the view, and The Disneyland Resort monorail track is visible in the background in addition to more landscaped areas. • Location G: On Katella Avenue at the southeast corner of Haster Street/Anaheim Boulevard looking west. Exhibit 5.1-15 represents views from motorists traveling west along Katella Avenue. This view is dominated by the WorldMark by Hotel located north of Katella Avenue as well as ornamental landscaping located along either side of Katella Avenue and in the center median. The Arena Inn is also visible south of Katella Avenue. Refer to Exhibit 5.1-6 for a visual comparison of this area prior to implementation of the ARSP. • Location H: On Katella Avenue at West Street looking east. Exhibit 5.1-16 represents views from motorists traveling east along Katella Avenue. As shown, ornamental landscaping is located along either side and in Katella Avenue’s center median. Along the north side of Katella Avenue, overhead power lines are visible above the palm trees, and the California Screamin’ roller coaster in Disney’s California Adventure is partially visible beyond the palm trees. Along the south side of Katella Avenue, a bus shelter and the upper levels of the Anabella Hotel are visible beyond the palm trees. • Location I: Katella Avenue looking east. Exhibit 5.1-17 depicts views from the intersection of Walnut Street and Katella Avenue, looking east. As shown, the view is dominated by ornamental landscaping located along either side and in the center median of Katella Avenue. Two Anaheim Resort monuments and a light-emitting diode (LED) reader board are also visible along the roadway. In the background and to the north, green fencing associated with the Disneyland Resort parking area is visible through the trees. To the south, the roof of the Anabella Hotel is visible along with a marquee for the Denny’s restaurant along Katella Avenue. • Location J: Harbor Boulevard at Wilken Way looking north. Exhibit 5.1-18 represents views of the ARSP area located south of Orangewood Avenue. As shown, visual elements in the foreground include a variety of restaurant, commercial, and hotel and City signs. Landscaping in the foreground is limited to weedy turf along the east side of Harbor Boulevard and a few palm trees and ornamental shrubs. In the background, the upper levels of the Days Inn, Vagabond Inn Executive, Ramada Limited, and Doubletree Guest Suites are visible along the west side of Harbor Boulevard, and the Hacienda Inn and Suites is visible to the east. Ornamental landscaping is visible to the north along Harbor Boulevard. 5.1.5 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE The following significance criteria are derived from the City of Anaheim Environmental Checklist. The Proposed Project would result in a significant impact related to aesthetics if it would: Threshold 5.1.1 Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista. Threshold 5.1.2 Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings. Threshold 5.1.3 Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway. ---PAGE BREAK--- Photograph Locations Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Exhibit 5.1-8 (Rev 04-11-11 JFG) R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\Graphics\EIR\Ex5.1-8_photo_locations.pdf 5 < < < < < < < < < < < F E B G A J H I C D DISNEY WAY CLEMENTINE ST WEST DR ORANGEWOOD AVE 5 HARBOR BLVD BALL RD KATELLA AVE HASTER ST ANAHEIM BLVD ANAHEIM WAY EAST ST CHAPMAN AVE ANAHEIM BLVD DISNEYLAND DR WALNUT ST D:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\Ex_photo_locations_022509.mxd 1,500 0 1,500 750 Feet ² The Anaheim Resort < Photograph Location and Direction ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Location A: Harbor Boulevard looking west down Convention Way Exhibit 5.1-9a Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (rev: kfd 042910) R:/projects/anaheim/J050/Graphics/EIR/Ex_5.1-9a_022409.pdf D:/Projects//J050/Graphics/Ex_A_022409.ai ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Location A: Harbor Boulevard looking west down Convention Way Exhibit 5.1-9b Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (rev: kfd 042910) R:/projects/anaheim/J050/Graphics/EIR/Ex_5.1-9b_022409.pdf D:/Projects//J050/Graphics/Ex_A2_022409.ai ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Location B: North side Katella Avenue looking south Exhibit 5.1-10 Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (rev: kfd 042910) R:/projects/anaheim/J050/Graphics/EIR/Ex_5.1-10_022409.pdf D:/Projects//J050/Graphics/Ex_B_022409.ai ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Location C: West side Harbor Boulevard looking north Exhibit 5.1-11 Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (rev: kfd 042910) R:/projects/anaheim/J050/Graphics/EIR/Ex_5.1-11_022409.pdf D:/Projects//J050/Graphics/Ex_C_022409.ai ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Location D: South side of Katella Avenue looking north Exhibit 5.1-12 Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (rev 081210 KFD) R:/projects/anaheim/J050/Graphics/EIR/Ex_D_5.1-12_022409.pdf D:/Projects/Anaheim/J050/Graphics/Ex_D_022409.ai ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Location E: Harbor Boulevard looking north Exhibit 5.1-13 Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (rev: kfd 042910) R:/projects/anaheim/J050/Graphics/EIR/Ex_5.1-13_022409.pdf D:/Projects//J050/Graphics/Ex_E_022409.ai ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Location F: Manchester Avenue looking west Exhibit 5.1-14 Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (rev: kfd 050610) R:/projects/anaheim/J050/Graphics/EIR/Ex_5.1-14_022409.pdf D:/Projects//J050/Graphics/Ex_F_022409.ai ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Location G: On Katella Avenue at Haster Street/Anaheim Boulevard looking west Exhibit 5.1-15 Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (rev 082912 KFD) R:/projects/anaheim/J050/Graphics/EIR/Ex_5.1-15_022409.pdf D:/Projects/Anaheim/J050/Graphics/Ex_G_022409.ai ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Location H: On Katella Avenue at West Street looking east Exhibit 5.1-16 Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (rev: kfd 082912) R:/projects/anaheim/J050/Graphics/EIR/Ex_5.1-16_022409.pdf D:/Projects/Anaheim/J050/Graphics/Ex_H_022409.ai ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Location I: Katella Avenue looking east Exhibit 5.1-17 Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (rev: kfd 050610) R:/projects/anaheim/J050/Graphics/EIR/Ex_5.1-17_022409.pdf D:/Projects//J050/Graphics/Ex_I_022409.ai ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Location J: Harbor Boulevard at Wilken Way looking north Exhibit 5.1-18 Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (rev: kfd 050610) R:/projects/anaheim/J050/Graphics/EIR/Ex_5.1-18_022409.pdf D:/Projects//J050/Graphics/Ex_J_022409.ai ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.1 Aesthetics-080812.docx 5.1-5 Aesthetics As previously discussed in Section 2.4.2, Effects Found Not to Be Significant, during preparation of the Initial Study, the City of Anaheim determined that the Proposed Project would not have a significant impact for the following threshold, and no further analysis of this issue is presented in the section. Would the Project: • Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? 5.1.6 PROJECT IMPACT ANALYSIS Standard Requirements No Standard Requirements have been identified. Impact Analysis Threshold 5.1.1 Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Threshold 5.1.2 Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway or local scenic roadway? As previously discussed, the City of Anaheim General Plan does not define or identify any scenic vistas in the Proposed Project’s vicinity, nor are any designated scenic resources within the City of Anaheim visible from the C-R and PR Districts. Additionally, no roadways in the vicinity of either District are designated as State scenic highways or local scenic roadways according to the California Department of Transportation (2007), nor are they within the Scenic Corridor Overlay Zone as established by the City of Anaheim Municipal Code (Section 18.18). Therefore, no impacts related to scenic vistas or scenic resources within a State scenic highway or local scenic highway would occur. Impact Summary: The ARSP area does not contain any designated scenic resources, nor are any scenic vistas visible from the ARSP area. No impact related to scenic vistas or scenic highways would occur. This conclusion is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313 for the original ARSP. Threshold 5.1.3 Would the project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.1 Aesthetics-080812.docx 5.1-6 Aesthetics C-R District Visual Character As previously discussed, the ARSP area is visible from numerous surrounding vantage points, as identified in MEIR 313. As previously illustrated in the comparisons between historical photographs and photographs of existing conditions, the ARSP area has undergone significant development which has altered the visual character of the ARSP area. Two of the primary objectives previously identified in MEIR 313 and restated in Section 3.0, Project Description, are: • To create a coherent, unique resort identity that reinforces the image of the Anaheim Resort as a high-quality destination resort, and • To improve the aesthetic character of the Anaheim Resort by visually defining the boundaries with appropriate landscape treatments. As such, the design guidelines for the ARSP have occurred intentionally to improve the visual character of the area. As previously detailed in Section 3.0, Project Description, the ARSP area is expected to undergo additional development, which will further alter the ARSP area’s visual character. Build out of the ARSP’s C-R District would add up to 20,913 additional hotel rooms. The Proposed Project does not propose any specific development projects within the C-R District and development, redevelopment or intensification of properties could occur anywhere throughout the ARSP area; therefore, specific impacts associated with individual proposals cannot be determined at this time. However, all future development within the C-R District would be required to comply with maximum height regulations and setback requirements as set forth in the ARSP. Additionally, all future development proposals would be subject to review by the City of Anaheim Planning Department. The ARSP area has undergone significant changes since certification of MEIR 313 such that the existing uses are largely reflective of the aesthetic vision of the ARSP and those areas that have not undergone redevelopment or aesthetic improvement pursuant to the ARSP are few in number. Therefore, future development and redevelopment associated with build out of the ARSP area would complement the visual appearance of the area. Although the existing visual character of individual areas may be changed, buildout of the ARSP area would create a more visually cohesive and appealing environment and impacts would be less than significant with implementation of the recommended mitigation program. Shade and Shadow As discussed in MEIR 313, development projects within the ARSP area have the potential to change an adjacent property’s exposure to the sun. Similar to the analysis in MEIR 313 and as discussed previously, the Proposed Project does not propose any specific development projects within the C-R District; therefore, specific impacts associated with individual proposals cannot be determined at this time. However, development standards within the C-R District are not proposed to change from what is currently allowed by the ARSP. Despite compliance with the design guidelines set forth in the ARSP and proposed mitigation that would require each property owner/developer to submit a shade and shadow analysis to the Planning Department for review and approval, prior to final site plan approval, demonstrating that the proposed structure(s) would avoid creating significant shade and shadow impacts on adjacent land uses to the maximum extent feasible, build out of the C-R District could result in potential shade and shadow impacts on properties immediately adjacent to the ARSP area that cannot be fully ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.1 Aesthetics-080812.docx 5.1-7 Aesthetics mitigated. As in MEIR 313, these potential impacts would be considered significant and unavoidable. PR District Visual Character As described in Section 3.0, Project Description, the Proposed Project proposes to increase the density of the Convention Center through the development of an additional 900 hotel rooms with ancillary uses and an increase in Convention Center exhibit area. Although it is anticipated that these increases in development intensity would result in additional mid-rise hotel(s) in the PR District, the immediate area is currently developed with several mid-rise hotels including the Hilton Anaheim Hotel (within the PR District) and the Anaheim Marriott and Clarion Hotel (in the C-R District) as shown on Exhibits 5.1-9a and 5.1-9b. Therefore, the proposed hotel(s) would fit into the existing context of the area and would be visually consistent with existing hotel development. The increase in development intensity related to the Convention Center would increase the overall density and, therefore, the square footage contained within the Convention Center; however, it is assumed that all new development would be contained within the current designation of the PR District and would be consistent with the aesthetic vision of the ARSP. Additionally, the expanded Convention Center and hotel development with the PR District would comply with the maximum structural height limitation of the height cone described in the Anaheim Municipal Code (Section 18.40.030) and all other design criteria set forth in the ARSP. Therefore, the expansion and related densification of the Convention Center as part of the PR District would create a more visually cohesive and appealing environment and impacts would be less than significant with implementation of the recommended mitigation program. Shade and Shadow As part of the EIR, potential shade and shadow impacts related to the expansion of the Convention Center were analyzed. Using the computer programs ArcView and SketchUp, the sun’s movement over the earth’s surface was modeled to illustrate the resulting shadow over the ARSP area. The analysis was conducted for the two times of the year when the sun is highest and lowest in the horizon, thus representing the longest and shortest days of the year, respectively: the summer solstice on June 21 and the winter solstice on December 22. Based on the maximum allowable building height as defined by Exhibit 3 of the ARSP, Maximum Permitted Structural Height Map, development within the PR District can vary in height between approximately 90 to 200 feet. For purposes of analysis, 14 shade-sensitive uses surrounding the PR District (depicted on Exhibit 5.1-19) were selected to represent shade-sensitive land uses. As shown on Exhibit 5.1-19, Receptors 1 and 2 represent The Disneyland Resort located north of the PR District. Receptors 3 through 8 represent pools associated with local hotels and/or motels located east and southeast of the PR District. Receptors 9 through 12 represent residential uses located south and west of the PR District. Receptors 13 and 14 represent pools associated with hotels/motels located northwest of the PR District. Based on the maximum allowable height limits, required setbacks, and the location of 14 shade-sensitive receptors, expansion of the PR District would not cast a shadow on any shade-sensitive land uses for more than 29.9 percent of daylight hours during the summer solstice and 36.4 percent during the winter solstice as calculated for year 2013 (refer to Tables 5.1-1 and 5.1-2). According to MEIR 313, significant shade and shadow impacts would occur when outdoor recreation areas eating areas along Harbor Boulevard, hotel/motel swimming pools, and residential uses) “are covered by shadows for more than 50 percent of ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.1 Aesthetics-080812.docx 5.1-8 Aesthetics sunlight hours”. Based on this threshold, a significant impact to shadow sensitive land uses surrounding the PR District would not occur. TABLE 5.1-1 SHADE IMPACT: SUMMER SOLSTICE, JUNE 21 Point Number Enters Shadow Exits Shadow Total Shade Percent Shadeda 1 Never Never 0 0.0% 2 Never Never 0 0.0% 3 17:00 18:00 1 hr 6.9% 4 17:30 19:06 1 hr 36 min 11.1% 5 17:00 19:06 2 hr 6 min 14.6% 6 18:10 19:06 56 min 6.5% 7 18:16 19:06 50 min 5.8% 8 17:50 19:06 1 hr 16 min 8.8% 9 17:20 19:06 1 hr 46 min 12.3% 10 Never Never 0 0.0% 11 4:41 9:00 4 hr 19 min 29.9% 12 4:41 6:30 1 hr 49 min 12.6% 13 4:41 5:25 44 min 5.1% 14 4:41 6:10 1 hr 29 min 10.3% hr: hour; min: minutes. a Based on sunrise at 4:41 and sunset at 19:06. TABLE 5.1-2 SHADE IMPACTS: WINTER SOLSTICE, DECEMBER 22 Point Number Enters Shadow Exits Shadow Total Shade Percent Shadeda 1 6:54 8:00 1 hr 6 min 11.1% 2 7:20 7:30 10 min 1.7% 3 14:45 16:47 2 hr 2 min 20.6% 4 15:10 16:47 1 hr 37 min 16.4% 5 14:50 16:47 1 hr 57 min 19.7% 6 Never Never 0 0.0% 7 Never Never 0 0.0% 8 Never Never 0 0.0% 9 Never Never 0 0.0% 10 Never Never 0 0.0% 11 6:54 10:30 3 hr 36 min 36.4% 12 6:54 8:45 1 hr 51 min 18.7% 13 6:54 9:50 2 hr 56 min 24.6% 14 6:54 8:30 1 hr 36 min 16.2% hr: hour; min: minutes a Based on sunrise at 6:54 and sunset at 16:47. ---PAGE BREAK--- Shade Sensitive Land Uses Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (Rev 0411-11 JFG) R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\Graphics\EIR\ex5.1-19_shade.pdf PR DISTRICT Orangewood Ave Convention Way Kathy Ln Robert Ln Cliffwood Ave West St Morgan Ln Bluebell Ave Hotel Way Wilken Way Disneyland Dr Mallul Dr Ricky Ave Daniel Ave Dewey Dr June Pl Acama St Broden St Lamark Ln Wakefield Ave Eugene St Lamark Dr Casa Grande Ave June St Kim Way Eugene Pl Dewey Pl Wakefield Pl Kathy Ln Eugene St Cliffwood Ave Robert Ln Harbor Blvd Katella Ave 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 14 13 12 11 10 D:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\shadow_work_021809.mxd 600 0 600 300 Feet ² Exhibit 5.1-19 Shade Sensitive Receptors PR District (Boundaries Are Approximate) ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.1 Aesthetics-080812.docx 5.1-9 Aesthetics Impact Summary: The Proposed Project would alter the existing visual condition of the ARSP area through introduction of new, higher density development within the ARSP area. However, since new development would be required to conform to the ARSP, these changes would create a more visually cohesive and appealing environment and impacts would be less than significant. This conclusion is less than the impacts identified in MEIR 313 for the original ARSP. Shade and shadow impacts associated with the specific development proposed for the PR District would be less than significant. Buildout of the C-R District has the potential to introduce structures which may create a significant shade and shadow impact on surrounding properties, which may result in a significant and unavoidable impact. This conclusion is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313 for the original ARSP. 5.1.7 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS The cumulative study area for aesthetic impacts is comprised of the viewshed that includes the ARSP area and the surrounding areas. This cumulative analysis is based on the assumption of full general plan build out over the next 20 years, as well as build out of adjacent jurisdictions in accordance with their general plans. The City of Anaheim, the ARSP area and adjacent areas have experienced considerable change and growth, resulting in conversion of previously under-developed areas to visitor- serving uses with associated aesthetic changes. As development pursuant to the ARSP continues to occur, the ARSP area continues to undergo visual changes. Combined with the development of new structures, development pursuant to current entitlements and under the current General Plan would result in a cumulative change in the overall visual character of the area. However, as identified in the preceding analysis, the Proposed Project would not degrade any scenic vistas or areas considered to be scenic resources. Consistent with the analysis in MEIR 313, continued implementation of the ARSP in compliance with design standards set forth by the ARSP would contribute to positive cumulative impacts to existing aesthetic/visual conditions and would not represent a cumulatively considerable impact. 5.1.8 MITIGATION MEASURES Previously Approved Measures MEIR 313 presented mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts associated with the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Project to less than significant levels. The following measure from MEIR 313 shall be incorporated into the Mitigation Program for this EIR. Modifications to the original measure are shown as strikethrough for deleted text and bold for new, inserted text. (Note that the measure number and section from MEIR 313 is listed in parentheses). MM 5.1-1 Prior to submittal of each final site plan approval, the property owner/developer shall submit a shade and shadow analysis to the Planning Department for review and approval demonstrating that the proposed structure(s) would not avoid createing significant shade and shadow impacts on adjacent land uses to the maximum extent feasible. A significant shade and shadow impact would occur when outdoor active areas outdoor eating areas along Harbor Boulevard, hotel/motel swimming pools, and residential front and back yards) or structures that include sensitive uses residences) have windows that normally receive sunlight are covered by shadows for more than 50 percent of the sunlight hours. If the analysis identifies shade and/or shadow impacts would occur and the building setback, architectural massing and landscape requirement provisions set ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.1 Aesthetics-080812.docx 5.1-10 Aesthetics forth in Section 5.0, Design Plan of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan, do not function as feasible mitigation measures, additional technical review of the structure(s) will be required. (MEIR 313, MM 3.11-3, Visual Resources and Aesthetics) Ordinance 5454 City Ordinance 5454 presented a list of conditions of approval that are applicable to all projects within the ARSP area. The following conditions shall be incorporated into the Mitigation Program for this EIR. Any modifications to the original conditions are shown as strikethrough for deleted text and bold for new, inserted text. (Note that the specific condition references from Ordinance 5454 are listed in parentheses). MM 5.1-2 That Prior to final building and zoning inspections issuance of building permits, all plumbing or other similar pipes and fixtures located on the exterior of the building shall be shown on plans as fully screened from view of adjacent public rights-of-way and from adjacent properties by architectural devices and/or appropriate building materials; and, further,. A note such information indicating that these improvements will be installed prior to final building and zoning inspections shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. (Ord 5454, Condition 26) MM 5.1-3 Ongoing, the That property owner/developer shall be responsible for the removal of any on-site graffiti within 24 hours of its application. (Ord 5454, Condition 27) MM 5.1-4 Prior to Final Site Plan approval, That the location and configuration of all lighting fixtures including ground-mounted lighting fixtures utilized to accent buildings, landscape elements, or to illuminate pedestrian areas shall be shown on all Final Site Plans. All proposed surface parking area lighting fixtures shall be down-lighted with a maximum height of twelve (12) feet adjacent to any residential properties. All lighting fixtures shall be shielded to direct lighting toward the area to be illuminated and away from adjacent residential property lines. All lighting fixtures, types and locations shall be identified on the plans submitted for building permits. (Ord 5454, Condition 28) MM 5.1-5 Prior to final building and zoning inspections, pPrivate streets within the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan area shall have street lights installed which are compatible with the design standards used for the public streets as determined by the Utilities Department. (Ord 5454, Condition 3) MM 5.1-6 Prior to final building and zoning inspections, That root and sidewalk barriers shall be provided for trees (with the exception of palm trees) within seven feet of public sidewalks. (Ord 5454, Condition 12) MM 5.1-7 That Prior to final building and zoning inspections, the property owner/developer shall submit to the Planning Department a letter from a licensed landscape architect shall provide a letter to the Planning Department certifying that all landscaping and irrigation systems have been installed in accordance with landscaping plans approved in connection with the Final Site Plan. (Ord 5454, Condition 13) ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.1 Aesthetics-080812.docx 5.1-11 Aesthetics MM 5.1-8 Ongoing, all That on-site non-Public Realm, landscaping and irrigation systems, and Public Realm landscaping and irrigation systems, within area in which dedication has not been accepted by the City, shall be maintained by the property owner/developer, in compliance with City standards. (Ord 5454, Condition 14) MM 5.1-9 Ongoing, That any tree planted within the Setback Realm shall be replaced in a timely manner in the event that it is removed, damaged, diseased and/or dead. (Ord 5454, Condition 15) MM 5.1-10 Ongoing, That a licensed arborist shall be hired by the property owner/developer to be responsible for all tree trimming. (Ord 5454, Condition 16) MM 5.1-11 That Prior to issuance of each building permits, unless records indicate previous payment, a fee for street tree purposes shall be paid or cause to be paid to the City of Anaheim based on the length of street frontage in an amount as established by City Council resolution or credit against the fee given for City authorized improvements installed by the property owner/developer. (Ord 5454, Condition 24) MM 5.1-12 That Prior to final building and zoning inspections issuance of each building permit, all air conditioning facilities and other roof and groundmounted equipment shall be shown on plans as shielded from public view as required by the Specific Plan and the sound buffered to comply with City of Anaheim noise ordinances from any adjacent residential or transient-occupied properties. A note indicating that these improvements shall be installed prior to final building and zoning inspections Such information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. (Ord 5454, Condition 25) MM 5.1-13 Prior to Final Site Plan approval, plans That In connection with the submittal of Final Site Plans, building elevations shall show that the rear elevations of buildings visible from off-site areas shall be architecturally accented to portray a finished look. (Ord 5454, Condition 29) MM 5.1-14 Prior to Final Site Plan approval, plans shall show that no shuttle/bus/vehicular drop-off areas shall be permitted in hotel/motel or vacation resort front setback area. (Ord 5454, Condition 31) Additional Mitigation Measures No additional mitigation measures have been identified for aesthetics. 5.1.9 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION With implementation of the mitigation program identified above, future build out of the ARSP area would create a more visually cohesive and appealing environment and impacts would be less than significant with implementation of the recommended mitigation program; however, future projects associated with buildout of the C-R District have the potential to introduce structures which may create a significant shade and shadow impact on surrounding properties, which may result in a significant and unavoidable impact. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.1 Aesthetics-080812.docx 5.1-12 Aesthetics 5.1.10 REFERENCES Anaheim, City of. 2010a (April 27, current through) City of Anaheim Municipal Code (Section 18.18, Scenic Corridor [SC] Overlay Zone). Cincinnatti, OH: American Legal Publishing Corporation for the City. http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/California/anaheim/ title18zoning/chapter1818sceniccorridorscoverlayzone?f=templates$fn=altmain- nf.htm$3.0#JD_Chapter18.18. 2010b (April 27, current through) City of Anaheim Municipal Code (Section 18.40.030, Structural Height Limitations). Cincinnatti, OH: American Legal Publishing Corporation for the City. http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/California/anaheim/title18zoning/ chapter1840generaldevelopmentstandards?f=templates$fn=altmain-nf.htm$3.0#JD_ Chapter18.40. Anaheim, City of. 2004 (May). General Plan for the City of Anaheim (City Council Resolution No. 2004-94). Anaheim, CA: the City. 1994a (August). The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Draft EIR No. 313 with Addendum. Anaheim, CA: the City. 1994b (September). The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2. Anaheim, CA: the City California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2007 (December 7, last update). California Scenic Highway Mapping System (Orange County, California). Sacramento, CA: Caltrans. http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/scenic_highways. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.2 Air Quality-082312.docx 5.2-1 Air Quality 5.2 AIR QUALITY This section analyzes potential local and regional air quality impacts. Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are addressed in Section 5.6, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, of this EIR. Description of Pollutants Criteria Pollutants Concentrations of the following air pollutants are used as indicators of ambient air quality conditions: nitrogen dioxide (NO2); ozone (O3); particulate matter, including both particulate matter equal to or less than 10 microns in diameter1 (PM10) and particulate matter equal to or less than 2.5 microns in diameter (PM2.5); carbon monoxide (CO); sulfur dioxide (SO2); and lead. These air pollutants are commonly referred to as “criteria air pollutants” since they are the most prevalent air pollutants known to be harmful to human health. A description of each criteria air pollutant, including source types and health effects, is provided below. Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) NO2 is a brownish, highly reactive gas that is present in all urban environments. NO2, nitric oxide (NO), and nitrous oxide (N2O) are constituents of oxides of nitrogen (NOx). Motor vehicle emissions are the main source of NOx in urban areas. NO2 is toxic to various animals and to humans because of its ability to combine with water in the eyes, lungs, mucus membranes, and skin to form nitric acid. Laboratory studies show that susceptible humans (such as asthmatics) who are exposed to high concentrations of NO2 can suffer lung irritation and, potentially, lung damage. Epidemiological studies have also shown associations among NO2 concentrations and mortality from respiratory and cardiovascular causes and hospital admissions for respiratory conditions. Ozone (O3) O3 is a secondary pollutant (not directly emitted) and is a gas that is formed when volatile organic compounds (VOCs) (also referred to as reactive organic gases or ROGs) and NOx undergo photochemical reactions that occur in the presence of sunlight. Thus, VOC and NOx are O3 precursors. The primary sources of VOC emissions are gasoline fueled motor vehicles and solvent evaporation from consumer products. Sunlight and hot weather cause ground-level O3 to form; as a result, low wind speeds or stagnant air combined with warm temperatures and clear skies provide the optimum conditions for O3 formation. As a result, O3 is known as a summertime air pollutant.2 Ground-level O3 is the primary constituent of smog. Because O3 formation occurs over extended periods of time, both O3 and its precursors are transported by wind, and high O3 concentrations can occur in areas well away from sources of its constituent pollutants. People with lung disease, children, older adults, and persons who spend more time outdoors participating in vigorous physical activities are at greater risk from the harmful health effects of ozone exposure. 1 About 1/7 of the diameter of a single human hair. 2 Ground-level O3 is not to be confused with atmospheric O3 or the “ozone layer”, which occurs very high in the atmosphere and shields the planet from some ultraviolet rays. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.2 Air Quality-082312.docx 5.2-2 Air Quality Particulate Matter Particulate matter includes both aerosols and solid particles of a wide range of size and composition. Of particular concern are those particles smaller than 10 microns in size (PM10) and smaller than or equal to 2.5 microns (PM2.5). Smaller particles are of greater concern because they can penetrate deeper into the lungs than large particles. PM10 is generally emitted directly as a result of mechanical processes that crush or grind larger particles most typically through construction activities and vehicular travel; the emissions are described as fugitive3 dust. Fugitive dust is also generated during moderate to high wind episodes. The principal sources of dust in urban areas include grading, construction, disturbed areas of soil, and dust entrained by vehicles on roadways. PM10 generally settles out of the atmosphere rapidly and is not readily transported over large distances. PM2.5, as well as being included in the PM10 sources described above, is directly emitted in combustion exhaust from diesel engines in trucks, construction equipment, and trains. PM2.5 can remain suspended in the atmosphere for days and/or weeks and can be transported long distances by the wind. The principal health effect of airborne particulate matter is on the respiratory system. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), some people are much more sensitive than others to breathing fine particles PM10 and PM2.5). People with influenza, chronic respiratory and cardiovascular diseases, and the elderly may suffer worse illnesses and premature death, and people with bronchitis can expect aggravated from breathing in fine particles. Children may experience a decline in lung function due to inhaling PM10 and PM2.5. Other groups considered sensitive include smokers and people who cannot breathe well through their noses. Exercising athletes are also considered sensitive because many breathe through their mouths. Carbon Monoxide (CO) Carbon monoxide is a colorless and odorless gas which, in the urban environment, is associated primarily with the incomplete combustion of fossil fuels in motor vehicles. CO combines with hemoglobin in the bloodstream and reduces the amount of oxygen that can be circulated through the body. High CO concentrations can cause headaches, can aggravate cardiovascular disease, and can impair central nervous system functions. CO concentrations can vary greatly over comparatively short distances. Relatively high concentrations are typically found near crowded intersections, along heavily used roadways carrying slow-moving traffic, and at or near ground level. Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) The primary source of SO2 emissions is fossil fuel combustion for generating electric power and combustion of motor fuels. However, stricter standards have removed most of the sulfur from fuels, greatly reducing SOx emissions from vehicles. SO2 combines easily with water vapor, forming aerosols of sulfurous acid, a colorless, mildly corrosive liquid. This liquid may then combine with oxygen in the air, forming the even more irritating and corrosive sulfuric acid. SO2 can cause temporary breathing difficulty for children, the elderly, and persons with asthma, especially asthmatics who are active outdoors. Longer- 3 In an air pollution discussion, “fugitive” describes sources that are not confined to specific emission points such as power plant stacks or vehicle exhaust pipes. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.2 Air Quality-082312.docx 5.2-3 Air Quality term exposures to high levels of SO2 gas and particles cause respiratory illness and aggravate existing heart disease. Lead Lead is a metal found naturally in the environment and in manufactured products. The major sources of lead emissions have historically been mobile and industrial sources. When the USEPA adopted the lead standard in 1978, it was estimated that over 90 percent of ambient lead concentrations were attributable to the use of lead in gasoline, and subsequent regulations virtually eliminated lead from the gasoline sold in California. Lead emissions from industrial sources can still pose “hot spot” problems in a few locations. In 2008, the USEPA revised the federal ambient air quality standard for lead, lowering it from 1.5 micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3) to 0.15 μg/m3 because health studies demonstrated health effects at much lower levels of lead than previously thought (CARB 2009a). Lead is a stable compound that persists and accumulates both in the environment and in animals. In humans, it affects the body’s blood-forming, nervous, and renal systems. In addition, lead has been shown to affect the normal functions of the reproductive, endocrine, hepatic, cardiovascular, immunological and gastrointestinal systems, although there is significant individual variability in response to lead exposure. Toxic Air Contaminants Toxic air contaminants (TACs) are a diverse group of air pollutants that may cause or contribute to an increase in deaths and serious illness or that may pose a present or potential hazard to human health. TACs include both organic and inorganic chemical substances emitted from a variety of common sources, including motor vehicles, industrial operations, gasoline stations, dry cleaners, painting operations, and research and teaching facilities. TACs are different than the “criteria” pollutants previously discussed in that ambient air quality standards have not been established for them. TACs occurring at extremely low levels may still cause health effects, and it is typically difficult to identify levels of exposure that do not produce adverse health effects. TAC impacts are described by carcinogenic risk, and chronic of long duration) and acute severe but of short duration) adverse effects on human health. Diesel engines emit a complex mixture of air pollutants, composed of gaseous and solid material. In 1998, California identified diesel exhaust particulate matter (diesel PM) as a TAC based on its potential to cause cancer, premature death, and other health problems. Those most vulnerable are children whose lungs are still developing and the elderly who may have other serious health problems. Overall, diesel engine emissions are responsible for the majority of California’s known cancer risk from outdoor air pollutants. In addition, diesel soot causes visibility reduction and is a potent global warmer (CARB 2009b). 5.2.1 SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION MEIR 313 included an assessment of construction and operational air quality impacts throughout the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (ARSP) area. The previous analysis concluded that construction-related emissions of VOC, NOx, CO, and PM10 without mitigation would constitute a significant direct adverse impact.4 To reduce impacts during construction, mitigation measures were included and are described in Section 5.2.8 of this report. 4 EIR 313 used the term “ROG”, but VOC is used in this section for consistency with SCAQMD CEQA significance standards. Also, when EIR 313 was prepared, PM2.5 was not a designated criteria pollutant. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.2 Air Quality-082312.docx 5.2-4 Air Quality The analysis for long-term impacts concluded that the implementation of the ARSP would not result in additional stationary source and utility emissions. Project-related traffic emissions were evaluated in terms of regional and local impacts. Regional project-related traffic emissions of VOC and CO would be significant without mitigation. Local vehicular emissions would not result in a significant adverse local carbon monoxide impact on a project basis. On a cumulative basis, the implementation of the Proposed Project would contribute to significant adverse impacts of VOC, NOx, CO, and PM10 emissions in the South Coast Air Basin (SoCAB), but would not result in a significant local CO impact on a cumulative basis. Mitigation Measures were included to reduce operational air quality impacts, and are presented in Section 5.2.8. Even with the mitigation measures presented in Section 5.2.8, construction emissions would result in significant and unavoidable VOC, NOx, CO, and PM10, impacts temporarily. Utility usage, stationary sources, on-site service engines, and mobile source emissions attributable to the Proposed Project were forecasted to result in significant increases in emissions of VOC, NOx, CO, and PM10 emissions in 2000, both on a project-specific and cumulative basis. 5.2.2 PLANS, POLICIES, AND REGULATORY CONDITIONS Related Planning Programs City of Anaheim General Plan, Green Element There are no City of Anaheim regulations applicable to the air quality aspects of the Proposed Project. However, the City of Anaheim General Plan’s Green Element, adopted in 2004 after creation of the ARSP, contains goals that focus on the reduction of vehicle trips and vehicle emissions (Anaheim 2004a). The Green Element comprehensively addresses topics concerning conservation, open space, parks and recreation, trails, and public landscaping. Applicable goals and policies from the Green Element that are related to the reduction of vehicle trips and vehicle emissions that are applicable to the Proposed Project are provided in Table 5.9-2 in Section 5.9, Land Use and Planning, with a project consistency analysis. Regulatory Setting Air quality in the ARSP area is regulated by the USEPA, the California Air Resources Board (CARB), and the SCAQMD. Each of these agencies develops rules, regulations, policies, and/or goals to comply with applicable legislation. Although the USEPA regulations may not be superseded, both State and local regulations may be more stringent. The federal, State, and local regulations for criteria air pollutants and TACs are discussed below. The determination of the Proposed Project’s consistency with air quality-related local and regional plans and policies is discussed in Section 5.9, Land Use and Planning. Federal At the federal level, the USEPA has been charged with implementing national air quality programs. The USEPA’s air quality mandates are drawn primarily from the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA), which was enacted in 1970. The most recent major amendments made by Congress were in 1990. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.2 Air Quality-082312.docx 5.2-5 Air Quality Criteria Air Pollutants The CAA requires the USEPA to establish National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). As shown in Table 5.2-1, the USEPA has established primary and secondary NAAQS for the seven criteria pollutants described in Section 5.2.1 above. The primary standards protect the public health and the secondary standards protect public welfare. The USEPA regulates emission sources that are under the exclusive authority of the federal government, such as aircraft, ships, and certain locomotives. As part of its enforcement responsibilities, the USEPA requires each State with federal nonattainment areas to prepare and submit a State Implementation Plan (SIP) that demonstrates how it means to attain and maintain the federal standards. The SIP must integrate federal, State, and local plan components and regulations to identify specific measures to reduce pollution by using a combination of performance standards and market-based programs within the SIP-identified timeframe. Toxic Air Contaminants The USEPA and the CARB regulate TACs through statutes and regulations that generally require the use of the maximum or best available control technology for toxics (MACT and BACT) to limit emissions. These, in conjunction with additional rules set forth by SCAQMD, establish the regulatory framework for TACs. State CARB, a part of the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA), is responsible for the coordination and administration of both federal and State air pollution control programs in California. In this capacity, CARB conducts research and sets the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) shown in Table 5.2-1. In most cases the CAAQS are more stringent than the NAAQS. Differences in the standards are generally explained by the health effects studies considered during the standard-setting process and the interpretation of the studies. In addition, the CAAQS incorporate a margin of safety to protect sensitive individuals. CARB compiles emission inventories, develops suggested control measures, provides oversight of local programs, and prepares the SIP. For regions that do not attain the CAAQS, CARB requires the air districts to prepare plans for attaining the standards. These plans are then integrated into the State SIP. CARB establishes emissions standards for motor vehicles sold in California, consumer products hair spray, aerosol paints, and barbecue lighter fluid), and various types of commercial equipment.5 It also sets fuel specifications to further reduce vehicular emissions. 5 In order to set vehicle emissions standards, CARB must obtain a waiver from USEPA. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.2 Air Quality-082312.docx 5.2-6 Air Quality TABLE 5.2-1 CALIFORNIA AND NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS Pollutant Averaging Time California Standards Federal Standards Primarya Secondaryb O3 1 Hour 0.09 ppm (180 µg/m3) – – 8 Hour 0.070 ppm (137 µg/m3) 0.075 ppm (147 µg/m3) Same as Primary PM10 24 Hour 50 µg/m3 150 µg/m3 Same as Primary AAM 20 µg/m3 – Same as Primary PM2.5 24 Hour – 35 µg/m3 Same as Primary AAM 12 µg/m3 15.0 µg/m3 Same as Primary CO 1 Hour 20 ppm (23 mg/m3) 35 ppm (40 mg/m3) – 8 Hour 9.0 ppm (10 mg/m3) 9 ppm (10 mg/m3) – 8 Hour (Lake Tahoe) 6 ppm (7 mg/m3) – – NO2 AAM 0.030 ppm (57 µg/m3) 0.053 ppm (100 µg/m3) Same as Primary 1 Hour 0.18 ppm (339 µg/m3) 0.100 ppm (188 µg/m3) – SO2 24 Hour 0.04 ppm (105 µg/m3) – – 3 Hour – – 0.5 ppm (1,300 µg/m3) 1 Hour 0.25 ppm (655 µg/m3) 0.075 ppm (196 µg/m3) – Lead 30-day Avg. 1.5 µg/m3 – – Calendar Quarter – 1.5 µg/m3 Same as Primary Rolling 3-month Avg. – 0.15 µg/m3 Visibility Reducing Particles 8 hour Extinction coefficient of 0.23 per km – visibility ≥ 10 miles ( 0.07 per km – ≥30 miles for Lake Tahoe) No Federal Standards Sulfates 24 Hour 25 µg/m3 Hydrogen Sulfide 1 Hour 0.03 ppm (42 µg/m3) Vinyl Chloride 24 Hour 0.01 ppm (26 µg/m3) O3: ozone; ppm: parts per million; µg/m 3: micrograms per cubic meter; PM10: large particulate matter; AAM: Annual Arithmetic Mean; PM2.5: fine particulate matter; CO: carbon monoxide; mg/m 3: milligrams per cubic meter; NO2: nitrogen dioxide; SO2: sulfur dioxide; km: kilometer; No Standard. a National Primary Standards: The levels of air quality necessary, within an adequate margin of safety, to protect the public health. b National Secondary Standards: The levels of air quality necessary to protect the public welfare from any known or anticipated adverse effects of a pollutant. Note: More detailed information in the data presented in this table can be found at the CARB website (www.arb.ca.gov). Source: CARB 2012a Toxic Air Contaminants TACs in California are primarily regulated through the Tanner Air Toxics Act (Assembly Bill [AB] 1807) and the Air Toxics Hot Spots Information and Assessment Act of 1987 (Hot Spots Act) (AB 2588). AB 1807 sets forth a formal procedure for CARB to designate substances as TACs. Research, public participation, and scientific peer review must occur before CARB can designate a substance as a TAC. To date, CARB has identified more than 21 TACs and ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.2 Air Quality-082312.docx 5.2-7 Air Quality adopted the USEPA’s list of Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs) as TACs. Diesel PM was added to the CARB list of TACs in 1998. Once a TAC is identified, the CARB then adopts an Airborne Toxics Control Measure for sources that emit that particular TAC. If there is a safe threshold for a substance at which there is no toxic effect, the control measure must reduce exposure below that threshold. If there is no safe threshold, the measure must incorporate Best Available Control Technology (BACT) to minimize emissions the Airborne Toxic Control Measure limits truck idling to five minutes in accordance with 13 California Code of Regulations (CCR), Section 2485). CARB published the Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective, which provides guidance concerning land use compatibility with TAC sources (CARB 2005). While not a law or adopted policy, the handbook offers advisory recommendations for siting sensitive receptors near uses associated with TACs (such as freeways and high-traffic roads, commercial distribution centers, rail yards, ports, refineries, dry cleaners, gasoline stations, and industrial facilities) to help keep children and other sensitive populations out of harm’s way. Regional and Local South Coast Air Quality Management District Anaheim is located in the SoCAB, which consists of all or part of four counties—San Bernardino, Riverside, Los Angeles, and Orange. The SCAQMD is the agency principally responsible for comprehensive air pollution control in the SoCAB. To that end, the SCAQMD, a regional agency, works directly with SCAG, County transportation commissions and local governments, and cooperates actively with all federal and State government agencies. The SCAQMD develops rules and regulations; establishes permitting requirements for stationary sources; inspects emissions sources; and enforces such measures through educational programs or fines, when necessary. The SCAQMD is directly responsible for reducing emissions from stationary (area and point), mobile, and indirect sources. It has responded to this requirement by preparing a sequence of Air Quality Management Plans (AQMPs). The SCAQMD Final 2007 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) is the air quality plan that was adopted by the SCAQMD on June 1, 2007. The 2007 AQMP is an update to the 2003 AQMP and incorporates new scientific data, primarily in the form of updated emissions inventories, ambient measurements, new meteorological episodes, and new air quality modeling tools. The California Air Resources Board (CARB) approved the plan when the State Strategy for the State Implementation Plan (SIP) was adopted on September 27, 2007. On November 28, 2007, CARB submitted a SIP revision to the USEPA for O3, PM2.5, CO, and NO2 in the SoCAB; this revision is identified as the “2007 South Coast SIP”. The 2007 AQMP/2007 South Coast SIP demonstrates attainment of the federal PM2.5 standard in the SoCAB by 2014 and attainment of the federal 8-hour O3 standard by 2023. The SIP also includes a request to reclassify the O3 attainment designation from “severe” to “extreme”. The USEPA approved the redesignation effective June 4, 2010. The Extreme designation requires the attainment of the 8-hour O3 standard in the SoCAB by June 2024. CARB approved PM2.5 SIP revisions in April 2011 and O3 SIP revisions in July 2011. The USEPA approved 3 of the 5 PM2.5 SIP requirements on January 9, 2012 and has approved 47 of the 62 O3 SIP requirements (USEPA 2012). ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.2 Air Quality-082312.docx 5.2-8 Air Quality The SCAQMD has drafted the 2012 AQMP, which is a regional and multi-agency effort (SCAQMD, CARB, the Southern California Association of Governments [SCAG], and USEPA). The 2012 AQMP will incorporate the latest scientific and technical information and planning assumptions, including the 2012 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP SCS); updated emission inventory methodologies for various source categories; and SCAG’s latest growth forecasts. It is expected that the 2012 AQMP will be approved by the SCAQMD Governing Board in November 2012 (SCAQMD 2012a). All projects6 are subject to SCAQMD rules and regulations in effect at the time of construction. Specific rules applicable to the construction of the Proposed Project may include, but are not limited to: • Rule 402 – Nuisance. A person shall not discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other material which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public, or which endanger the comfort, repose, health, or safety of any such persons or the public, or which cause, or have a natural tendency to cause injury or damage to business or property. The provisions of this rule do not apply to odors emanating from agricultural operations necessary for the growing of crops or the raising of fowl or animals. • Rule 403 – Fugitive Dust. This rule is intended to reduce the amount of particulate matter entrained in the ambient air as a result of anthropogenic (man-made) fugitive dust sources by requiring actions to prevent, reduce, or mitigate fugitive dust emissions. Rule 403 applies to any activity or man-made condition capable of generating fugitive dust. • Rule 1113 – Architectural Coatings. No person shall apply or solicit the application of any architectural coating within the SCAQMD, with VOC content in excess of the values specified in a table incorporated in the Rule. 5.2.3 METHODOLOGY Construction and Operational Mass Daily Emissions Construction and operational emissions were calculated by using Urban Emissions Model (URBEMIS) Version 9.2.4. URBEMIS is a computer program accepted by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) used to estimate anticipated emissions associated with land development projects in California by calculating emission rates for criteria pollutants utilizing the EMission FACtor model (EMFAC 2007) for on-road vehicles, OFFROAD 2007 for off-road vehicles, and USEPA formulas for non-vehiclular emissions. URBEMIS has separate databases for specific counties and air districts. The Orange County database was used for the Proposed Project. The model calculates emissions of VOC, NOx, CO, SO2, PM10, and PM2.5.7 Specific inputs to URBEMIS for both construction and operations include land uses and acreages associated with the Proposed Project. Construction input data include but are not limited to the start and finish dates of construction phases; inventories of construction equipment to be used during each phase; volumes of structures to be demolished; volumes of cut and fill grading and materials to be imported to and exported from the site; areas to be paved; and areas to be painted. Output emissions data sources include off-road equipment, on- 6 As defined by Section 15378 of the CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR). 7 URBEMIS also calculates carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. CO2 is not a criteria pollutant, but the data set is used in analysis of project impacts on greenhouse gas emissions; see Section 5.6. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.2 Air Quality-082312.docx 5.2-9 Air Quality road vehicles, fugitive dust, and VOCs from asphalt and architectural coatings. It is currently not possible to estimate future daily construction emissions from specific projects in the PR and C-R Districts of the ARSP area since the specific locations, construction details, and scheduling have not been developed. Therefore, project-generated emissions were modeled based on the maximum permitted development in the ARSP area (see Section 3, Project Description). Operational inputs include the year of analysis and vehicle trip generation rates. Output operational emissions data sources include area and mobile sources. The area sources are natural gas use, landscape maintenance equipment, and architectural coatings used for routine maintenance. Mobile sources are the vehicles used by residents and by patrons, staff, and vendors for hotels and commercial businesses. The mobile source emissions were derived from estimates of vehicle miles travelled (VMT) data provided by traffic engineer (Gupta 2010). Specific data inputs are further discussed in Section 5.2.6 below. The URBEMIS model includes data to calculate emissions reductions resulting from the implementation of standard requirements (SRs), and mitigation measures (MMs). Please refer to Appendix C of this EIR for detailed information on URBEMIS input assumptions and modeling output files. The limitations of the URBEMIS model should be noted. The current version of the model was last updated in February 2008. Therefore, the emission factors do not reflect anticipated improvements in on-road or off-road vehicle emissions based on legislation enacted subsequent to the update and can be considered conservative. Determinations of significance for construction and operational emissions were based on the comparison of project-generated emissions to applicable SCAQMD mass emissions thresholds. Toxic Air Contaminants At this time, the SCAQMD has not adopted a methodology for analyzing short-term, construction-related emissions of TACs and/or the exposure thereof. Therefore, project generated and construction-related TAC emissions were assessed in a qualitative manner. Quantitative analysis of long-term TAC emissions is not needed for the Proposed Project because there are no existing or proposed substantial sources of TACs in the ARSP area. Long-term exposure to TACs from roadway vehicles is discussed qualitatively. Local Concentrations of Criteria Pollutants As part of the SCAQMD’s environmental justice program, attention has focused on localized effects of air quality (SCAQMD 2008a). In addition to the mass daily emissions, or regional thresholds, the SCAQMD established CEQA significance thresholds for ambient air quality to address localized impacts. The localized impact analysis is based on the concentration of a pollutant at a receptor site; the concentration standard is either the same as, or based upon a health-based standard. It is possible for a pollutant to have a significant impact regionally and a less than significant impact locally, or vice versa, or for both impacts regionally and locally) to be significant or less than significant. The SCAQMD developed localized significance threshold (LST) methodology that can be used by public agencies to determine whether or not a project may generate significant adverse localized air quality impacts without requiring the time and expense to perform dispersion modeling. LSTs represent the maximum on-site emissions from a project that will not cause or contribute to an exceedance of the most stringent applicable federal or State ambient air quality ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.2 Air Quality-082312.docx 5.2-10 Air Quality standard (SCAQMD 2008a). The LST methodology translates the concentration standards into emissions thresholds that are a function of the location within the SoCAB and the ambient concentrations of that pollutant for each source receptor area (SRA), project site size, and source to receptor distance. Emissions thresholds are provided in look-up tables. The emissions analyzed under the LST methodology are NO2, CO, PM10, and PM2.5. For the Proposed Project, the sequence and timing of individual construction projects is not known. Therefore, a reasonable worst-case scenario was analyzed: the development of a two-acre site immediately adjacent to an existing residence. The LST analysis was performed for construction activities associated with implementation of the Proposed Project. The analysis was not performed for operations because there are no identified on-site long-term sources of LST pollutants, such as stationary engines or quarry operations. CO Hot Spots A CO hotspot is an area of localized CO pollution that is caused by severe vehicle congestion on major roadways, typically near intersections. An initial screening procedure is provided in the procedures and guidelines contained in the Transportation Project-Level Carbon Monoxide Protocol (the CO Protocol) to determine whether a project poses the potential for a CO hotspot (UCD ITS 1997). According to the protocol, projects may make air quality worse if they increase the percentage of vehicles in cold start mode by two percent or more; increase traffic volumes by five percent or more over existing volumes; or make traffic flow worse, which is defined for signalized intersections as increasing average delay at intersections operating at Level of Service (LOS) E or F, or causing an intersection that would operate at LOS D or better without a project to operate at LOS E or F with a project. If a project poses a potential for a CO hotspot, a quantitative screening is required. Various air quality agencies in California, but not the SCAQMD, have developed conservative screening methods. Therefore, the screening methods of the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD) are used. 5.2.4 EXISTING CONDITIONS Climate and Meteorology Air quality is affected by the rate and location of pollutant emissions and by meteorological conditions that influence movement and dispersal of pollutants. Atmospheric conditions (such as wind speed, wind direction, and air temperature gradients) and local topography provide the link between air pollutant emissions and air quality. The ARSP area is located in the SoCAB. The distinctive climate of the SoCAB is determined by its terrain and geographic location. The SoCAB is a coastal plain with connecting broad valleys and low hills; it is bound by the Pacific Ocean to the southwest and high mountains around the rest of its perimeter. The general region lies in the semi-permanent high pressure zone of the eastern Pacific, resulting in a mild climate tempered by cool sea breezes with light average wind speeds. The usually mild climatological pattern is interrupted occasionally by periods of extremely hot weather, winter storms, or Santa Ana winds. Winds in the ARSP area are usually driven by the dominant land/sea breeze circulation system. Regional wind patterns are dominated by daytime onshore sea breezes. At night, the wind generally slows and reverses direction traveling toward the sea. Local canyons can also alter wind direction, with wind tending to flow parallel to the canyons. The vertical dispersion of air pollutants in the SoCAB is hampered by the presence of persistent temperature inversions. High-pressure systems, such as the semi-permanent high pressure zone where the SoCAB is located, are characterized by an upper layer of dry air that warms as it descends, restricting the mobility of cooler ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.2 Air Quality-082312.docx 5.2-11 Air Quality marine-influenced air near the ground surface, and resulting in the formation of subsidence inversions. Such inversions restrict the vertical dispersion of air pollutants released into the marine layer and, together with strong sunlight, can produce worst-case conditions for the formation of photochemical smog. The basin-wide occurrence of inversions at 3,500 feet above sea level or less averages 191 days per year (SCAQMD 1993). The closest station to the ARSP for historical climate data is in Anaheim. The annual average maximum temperature measured at the Anaheim climatic station from 1989 through 2009 was 77.4 degrees Fahrenheit The highest average maximum temperature of 87.0°F occurs in August. The annual average minimum temperature is 55.4°F, and the lowest average minimum temperature of 46.9°F occurs in December. The average annual precipitation during the same period was 12.82 inches (WRCC 2010). The prevailing wind direction is southwest. Sensitive Receptors Some members of the population are especially sensitive to air pollutant emissions and should be given special consideration when evaluating air quality impacts from projects. These people include children, the elderly, persons with preexisting respiratory or cardiovascular illness, and athletes and others who engage in frequent exercise. The SCAQMD defines structures that house these persons or places where they gather (i.e. residences, schools, playgrounds, child- care centers, convalescent centers, retirement homes, and athletic fields) as “sensitive receptors” (SCAQMD 1993). Existing sensitive receptors within or adjacent to the ARSP area include several single family, multi-family, and mobile home park residential areas and elementary schools adjacent to the ARSP area. In addition to existing sensitive receptors, future sensitive use areas constructed in the area (including pools, outdoor gathering areas and playgrounds) would be considered sensitive receptors for subsequent construction for long-term emissions. Existing Regional Air Quality The SCAQMD measures criteria air pollutant concentrations at several monitoring stations in Orange County. The closest station to the ARSP area is the Anaheim Monitoring Station, located at 1630 Pampas Lane in Anaheim, approximately 0.6 mile west of the westernmost ARSP boundary. The Anaheim Monitoring Station is also identified as Source Receptor Area (SRA) 17, Central Orange County. Equipment at the station measures O3, CO, NO2, PM10, and PM2.5 levels. As this monitoring station does not monitor SO2, data was supplemented from the Costa Mesa Station for this pollutant. Data from 2009 to 2011 from these stations are summarized in Table 5.2-2. The data show violations of the federal and State O3, PM10, and PM2.5 standards. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.2 Air Quality-082312.docx 5.2-12 Air Quality TABLE 5.2-2 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY AT ANAHEIM AND COSTA MESA MONITORING STATIONS Pollutant Averaging Time Federal Primary Standards California Standards Maximum Concentrationsa Number of Days Exceeding Federal Standardb Number of Days Exceeding State Standardb 2009 2010 2011 2009 2010 2011 2009 2010 2011 O3 (Anaheim) 1 hour none 0.09 ppm 0.093 0.104 0.088 0 0 0 0 1 0 8 hour 0.08 ppm 0.07 ppm 0.077 0.088 0.073 1 1 0 2 1 1 CO (Anaheim) 1 hour 35 ppm 20 ppm – – – – – – – – – 8 hour 9 ppm 9.0 ppm 2.73 1.98 2.08 0 0 0 0 0 0 SO2 (Costa Mesa) 24 hours 0.14 ppm 0.04 ppm 0.004 0.002 0.002 0 0 0 0 0 0 Annual 0.03 ppm none 0.001 0.000 * 0 0 * – – – NO2 (Anaheim) 1 hour none 0.18 ppm 0.068 0.073 0.074 – – – 0 0 0 Annual 0.053 ppm 0.030 ppm 0.018 0.018 0.017 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM10c (Anaheim) 24 hours 150 µg/m3 50 µg/m3 62.0 43.0 53.0 0 0 0 1 0 2 Annual Revoked 20 µg/m3 – – – – – – – – – PM2.5 (Anaheim) 24 hours 35 µg/m3 None 64.5 31.7 39.2 5 0 2 – – – Annual 15 µg/m3 12 µg/m3 12.0 10.5 11.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ppm: parts per million; data not available or applicable; µg/m 3: micrograms per cubic meter * there was insufficient data to determine the value a Concentration units for O3, CO, and NO2 are in ppm. Concentration units for PM10 and PM2.5 are in µg/m 3. b For annual standards, a value of 1 indicates that the standard has been exceeded. c PM10 data are recorded separately for federal and State purposes because the USEPA and California methods are different. Federal values are shown. PM10 is measured every 6 days; the number of days exceeding standards is projected to a 365-day base from the measurements. Source: CARB 2012b. Attainment Designations Based on monitored air pollutant concentrations, the USEPA and CARB designate an area’s status in attaining the NAAQS and CAAQS, respectively, for the criteria pollutants identified above. As described in Section 5.2.3 above, when a region is designated as a nonattainment area, the State is required to prepare a SIP and the air district is required to prepare a regional attainment plan. When an area has been reclassified from a nonattainment to an attainment area for a federal standard, the status is identified as “maintenance”, and there must be a plan and measures that will keep the region in attainment for the following ten years. Table 5.2-3 summarizes the attainment status in the SoCAB for the criteria pollutants. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.2 Air Quality-082312.docx 5.2-13 Air Quality TABLE 5.2-3 ATTAINMENT STATUS OF CRITERIA POLLUTANTS IN THE SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN Pollutant State Federal O3 (1 hour) Nonattainment No standard O3 (8 hour) Extreme Nonattainmenta PM10 Nonattainment Serious Nonattainment PM2.5 Nonattainment Nonattainment CO Attainment Attainment/Maintenance NO2 Nonattainmentb Attainment/Maintenance SO2 Attainment Attainment Lead Attainment/Nonattainmentc Attainment/Nonattainmentc All others Attainment/Unclassified No standards a The USEPA approved redesignation from Severe 17 to Extreme Nonattainment effective June 4, 2010. b The SoCAB was reclassified from attainment to nonattainment for NO2 on March 25, 2010. c Los Angeles County was reclassified from attainment to nonattainment for lead on March 25, 2010; the remainder of the SoCAB is in attainment of the State standard. Sources: CARB 2012b. Toxic Air Contaminants Carcinogenic risks cancer risks) are estimated as the incremental probability that an individual will develop cancer over a lifetime as a direct result of exposure to potential carcinogens. The estimated risk is expressed as a probability 10 in 1 million). A risk level of 1 in 1 million implies a likelihood that up to 1 person out of 1 million equally exposed people would contract cancer if exposed continuously (24 hours per day) to the specific concentration over 70 years (an assumed lifetime). This would be in addition to those cancer cases that would normally occur in an unexposed population of one million people (USEPA 2009). The Hazard Index (HI) expresses the potential for chemicals to result in non-cancer-related health impacts. HIs are expressed using decimal notation 0.001). A calculated HI exposure less than 1.0 will likely not result in adverse non-cancer-related health effects over a lifetime of exposure. However, an HI greater than 1.0 does not necessarily mean that adverse effects will occur (USEPA 2009). Pursuant to SCAQMD Rule 1401(d)(1), the risks associated with potential exposure to emissions from a source equipped with the best available control technology for toxics (T-BACT) and from all emissions sources included within a “project” are acceptable if the incremental cancer risk is less than 10 in 1 million and is less than 1 in 1 million for sources not equipped with T-BACT. The Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study III (MATES III) is a monitoring and evaluation study conducted in the SoCAB. According to the MATES III Study, the carcinogenic risk from air toxics in the Basin, based on the average concentrations at the fixed monitoring sites during 2004, 2005, and 2006 is about 1,200 per 1 million. Using the MATES III methodology, about 94 percent of the risk is attributed to emissions associated with mobile sources, and about 6 percent of the risk is attributed to toxics emitted from stationary sources, which include industries and businesses such as dry cleaners and chrome plating operations. The results indicate that diesel exhaust is the major contributor to air toxics risk, accounting on average for about 84 percent of the total (SCAQMD 2008b). ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.2 Air Quality-082312.docx 5.2-14 Air Quality Existing Emissions from the Project Area The C-R District contains an equivalent of 11,587 hotel rooms.8 The PR district contains 1,600 hotel rooms and the 1.7 million square foot convention center. Each of these land uses contributes to existing area and mobile source criteria pollutant emissions. Existing emissions were calculated and are shown in Table 5.2-4. TABLE 5.2-4 ESTIMATED EXISTING DAILY OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS (POUNDS/DAY) Source Emissions (lbs/day) VOC NOx CO PM10 PM2.5 Area Sources 57 117 101 <0.5 <0.5 Mobile Sources 1,114 1,429 10,543 1,706 333 Total Emissions 1,171 1,546 10,644 1,706 333 lbs/day: pounds per day; less than Totals may not add due to rounding. Emissions are the higher of summer and winter scenarios. Refer to Appendix C of this document) for detailed assumptions and modeling output files. According to the CARB Community Health Air Pollution Information System, there are no major existing stationary sources of TACs within the ARSP area or within one mile of the ARSP area (CARB 2010d). 5.2.5 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE The following significance criteria are derived from the City of Anaheim Environmental Checklist. The Proposed Project would result in a significant impact related to air quality if it would: Threshold 5.2.1 Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. Threshold 5.2.2 Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Threshold 5.2.3 Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable Federal or State ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors). Threshold 5.2.4 Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan. Threshold 5.2.5 Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. SCAQMD Thresholds Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines states that the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon for CEQA thresholds. The SCAQMD has established significance thresholds to assess the regional and localized impacts of project related air pollutant emissions. Table 5.2-5 presents the significance 8 For analysis of emissions, commercial uses are converted to hotel room equivalents on a ratio of 600 square feet of commercial development to 1 hotel room. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.2 Air Quality-082312.docx 5.2-15 Air Quality thresholds for short-term construction and long-term operational emissions; maximum incremental cancer risk and hazard indices for TACs; and maximum ambient concentrations for exposure of sensitive receptors to localized pollutants. A project with daily emission rates, risk values, or concentrations below these thresholds is generally considered to have a less than significant effect on air quality. TABLE 5.2-5 SCAQMD AIR QUALITY SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLDS Mass Daily Thresholds Pollutant Construction Operation NOx 100 lbs/day 55 lbs/day VOC 75 lbs/day 55 lbs/day PM10 150 lbs/day 150 lbs/day PM2.5 55 lbs/day 55 lbs/day SOx 150 lbs/day 150 lbs/day CO 550 lbs/day 550 lbs/day Lead 3 lbs/day 3 lbs/day Toxic Air Contaminants TACsa Maximum Incremental Cancer Risk ≥ 10 in 1 million Cancer Burden > 0.5 excess cancer cases (in areas ≥ 1 in 1 million) Chronic & Acute Hazard Index ≥ 1.0 (project increment) Odor Project creates an odor nuisance pursuant to Rule 402b GHG 10,000 MT/yr CO2eq for industrial facilities Ambient Air Quality For Criteria Pollutants NO2 1-hour average ≥ 0.18 ppm Annual average ≥ 0.03 ppm PM10 24-hour average ≥ 10.4 µg/m3 (construction)c 24-hour average ≥ 2.5 µg/m3 (operation) Annual average ≥ 1.0 µg/m3 PM2.5 24-hour average ≥ 10.4 µg/m3 (construction)c 24-hour average ≥ 2.5 µg/m3 (operation) SO2 1-hour average ≥ 0.25 ppm (state) & 0.075 ppm (federal – 99th percentile) 24-hour average ≥ 0.04 ppm (state) Sulfate 24-hour average ≥ 25 µg/m3 (state) CO SCAQMD is in attainment; project is significant if it causes or contributes to an exceedance of the following attainment standards: 1-hour average ≥ 20 ppm (state) and 35 ppm (federal) 8-hour average ≥ 9.0 ppm (State/federal) Lead 30-day Average ≥ 1.5 μg/m3 (state) Rolling 3-month average ≥ 0.15 μg/m3 (federal) Quarterly average ≥ 1.5 μg/m3 (federal) lbs/day: pounds per day; ppm: parts per million; µg/m 3 – micrograms per cubic meter; greater than; greater than or equal to a Including carcinogens and non-carcinogens b Rule 402 states that a project shall not “discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other material which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public, or which endanger the comfort, repose, health or safety of any such persons or the public, or which cause, or have a natural tendency to cause, injury or damage to business or property. The provisions of this rule shall not apply to odors emanating from agricultural operations necessary for the growing of crops or the raising of fowl or animals.” c Ambient air quality threshold based on SCAQMD Rule 403. Source: SCAQMD 2011. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.2 Air Quality-082312.docx 5.2-16 Air Quality 5.2.6 PROJECT IMPACT ANALYSIS Standard Requirements The following standard requirements were derived from existing regulations, requirements, and standard practices set forth by regional and local agencies. SR 5.2-1 Prior to issuance of the first grading or building permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall provide written evidence of compliance to the Planning Director or Planning Services Manager that all construction activities shall comply with SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403, which shall assist in reducing short-term air pollutant emissions. SCAQMD Rule 402 requires that air pollutant emissions not be a nuisance off site. SCAQMD Rule 403 (Tables 1, 2, and 3 of Rule 403) requires that fugitive dust be controlled with the best available control measures so that the presence of such dust does not remain visible in the atmosphere beyond the property line of the emission source. This requirement shall be included as notes on the contractor specifications. SR 5.2-2 Prior to issuance of building permits, the property owner/developer shall provide notes on the contractor specifications indicating that all architectural coatings shall be selected so that the VOC content of the coatings is compliant with SCAQMD Rule 1113. Impact Analysis Threshold 5.2.1 Would the Proposed Project violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? Construction Emissions Temporary impacts would result from construction activities associated with the Proposed Project. Air pollutants would be emitted by off-road and on-road construction equipment and worker vehicles; fugitive dust would be generated during demolition and grading on the various projects that would be developed within the PR and C-R districts. Other construction activities that emit pollutants include painting, surface coating, and asphalt paving operations. It is not possible to estimate daily construction emissions that will occur from specific projects in the PR and C-R districts since the specific locations, construction details, and scheduling have not been developed. This analysis, however, provides a realistic approximation of construction emissions for development in the PR district and indicates construction-related mitigation measures that would be required for projects in the area. The PR district anticipates the expansion of the existing Convention Center by an additional 406,359 square feet (sf) of Convention Center space and 125,000 sf of commercial space. In addition, it anticipates hotel development, including up to 900 hotel rooms, 40,000 sf of meeting and ballroom space, and 55,000 sf of commercial space. The PR district encompasses approximately 68.2 acres and would be completed by 2015. For the emissions analysis, it was assumed that construction activities would occur in stages, with potential overlap between stages. The first stage would be the demolition of existing structures, which is anticipated to occur for two months. Demolition would be followed by grading and excavation that are expected to last for about six months. Approximately ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.2 Air Quality-082312.docx 5.2-17 Air Quality 100,000 cubic yards (cy) of soil would be excavated for below-grade structures; the soil would be exported off site. Below grade construction and utilities installation would begin immediately after the excavation phase is completed, and would last for approximately 3 months followed by approximately 18 months of building construction. Paving and architectural coating activities would occur during the building construction phase. Project-generated construction emissions were modeled based on the scenario described above, and information provided in Section 3.0, Project Description. Where specific information was not known, engineering judgment and default URBEMIS settings and parameters were used. Compliance with SCAQMD Rules is required; specifically, it is assumed that construction would be performed in accordance with Rule 403, Fugitive Dust, and Rule 1113, Architectural Coatings (SR 5.2-1 and SR 5.2-2, respectively) and the proposed mitigation measures. Therefore, emissions reductions consistent with those rules have been included in the estimate of construction emissions. Mass Emissions Thresholds – Maximum Daily Regional Emissions The results of the URBEMIS calculations for PR District development activities are shown in Table 5.2-6. The data are presented as the maximum anticipated daily emissions for comparison with the SCAQMD mass daily thresholds. TABLE 5.2-6 ESTIMATED MAXIMUM DAILY CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS (POUNDS/DAY)a Year of Construction Emissions (lbs/day) VOCb NOxc COd PM10c PM2.5c 2013 10 89 44 55 14 2014 11 97 78 58 15 2015 107 48 85 4 3 Maximum Daily Emissions 107 97 85 58 15 SCAQMD Significance Threshold (Table 5.2-5) 75 100 550 150 55 Exceeds SCAQMD Thresholds? Yes No No No No a Calculations assume compliance with SCAQMD Rules 403 and 1113; see SRs 5.2-1 and 5.2-2. b Maximum VOC emissions would occur on the days when paving, building construction, and architectural coating occur simultaneously. c Maximum NOx, PM10, and PM2.5 emissions would occur during mass grading and excavation activities. d Maximum CO emissions would occur during the concurrent below grade construction and trenching for utilities phases. Refer to Appendix C of this document for detailed assumptions and modeling output files. As shown in Table 5.2-6, the maximum NOx, PM10, and PM2.5 emissions would occur for the period in 2014 when there would be concurrent mass grading and trenching activity. The maximum CO emissions would occur subsequent to grading, during the below-grade building activities and concurrent trenching for utilities. Maximum VOC emissions would occur during painting, which could be concurrent with paving and building construction, which also cause VOC emissions. Based on the modeling conducted, VOC emissions would exceed the maximum daily threshold mass emissions during the architectural coating phase of construction. For all other criteria pollutants, estimated emissions during construction would be less than the applicable thresholds. Implementation of the proposed mitigation would reduce construction emissions for VOC and PM and require scheduling of architectural coating to limit VOC emissions to less than 75 pounds per day. With the implementation of the proposed mitigation, ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.2 Air Quality-082312.docx 5.2-18 Air Quality the Proposed Project’s construction-related emissions of criteria air pollutant and precursor emissions would be a less than significant impact. Ambient Air Quality for Criteria Pollutants – Local Significance Thresholds Local pollutant concentrations were calculated using the SCAQMD LST methodology described previously. As a reasonable worst-case analysis, an active grading/construction area of approximately 2 acres with a distance of 25 meters9 (which is the minimum distance prescribed for the LST methodology for all source-to-receptor distances of 25 meters or less) to the nearest sensitive receptor was used for analysis. The applicable thresholds were taken from the SCAQMD LST mass rate look-up tables. The results of the LST calculations are shown in Table 5.2-7. In the LST analysis, only on-site emissions are considered; off-site emissions such as the diesel exhaust from haul trucks and worker commuting are not included. Therefore, the emissions shown in Table 5.2-7 are less than shown in Table 5.2-6. TABLE 5.2-7 LOCAL SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLD EMISSIONS NOx CO PM10 PM2.5 Emissions (lbs/day) Maximum daily emissions 74 40 53 13 LST Thresholds at 25 m (82 ft)a 100b 550b 6 4 Exceed threshold? No No Yes Yes lbs/day: pounds per day; m: meters; ft: feet a Threshold tables data are given in meters. b Mass daily emissions thresholds are shown because the LST table values for NOx and CO are greater than the mass emissions thresholds. Source: SCAQMD 2009. As shown in Table 5.2-7, the maximum daily NOx and CO emissions would be below the LST thresholds. The maximum daily estimated PM10 and PM2.5 emissions would exceed the thresholds and indicate a potential for local particulate matter concentrations in excess of the 24-hour standards at nearby receptors. The PM10 and PM2.5 emissions would occur during the grading activities, particularly when excavating for below-grade facilities and hauling material off site. The Proposed Project would be required to implement SCAQMD Rule 403, Fugitive Dust (SR 5.2-1) and the proposed mitigation measures. The related particulate emission reductions available in the URBEMIS model have been included to reflect implementation of these requirements in the calculations. Rule 403 represents the feasible mitigation measures for dust control, and prohibits visible dust beyond the property line of the project site. This limitation may result in a reduction of impacts greater than calculated by the model, but the reduction cannot be quantified. To further reduce dust emissions to nearby receptors, proposed mitigation to reduce noise impacts, which requires an 8-foot-high perimeter or portable construction barrier along boundaries of construction areas which have noise-sensitive land use adjacent to them, would also reduce particulate dust concentrations to sensitive receptors. However, the effectiveness of this barrier cannot be quantified. In order to further reduce PM10 and PM2.5 emissions, mitigation is proposed that requires the watering of on-site haul roads at least every 2 hours, or the paving of on-site haul roads. Implementation of this measure would reduce on- site emissions of PM10 and PM2.5 to 17 and 6 pounds per day, respectively. This measure 9 The methodology for LST analysis uses the metric system for distance factors. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.2 Air Quality-082312.docx 5.2-19 Air Quality would substantially reduce PM emissions, but the values would remain above the thresholds for the closest receptors. Therefore, the local PM10 and PM2.5 impact would be significant and unavoidable for the short-term periods when large excavations would occur near sensitive receptors. Operational Emissions Project-generated regional area- and mobile-source emissions of criteria air pollutants were modeled using URBEMIS. Area source emissions for 2015 were modeled based on the existing and proposed land uses for the PR district; for 2030, the area sources considered the build out of both the PR and C-R districts. Mobile source emissions are based on vehicle travel mile forecasts for the Proposed Project (Gupta 2010). For both 2015 and 2030, the traffic analysis assumes development in both the PR and C-R Districts. Tables 5.2-8 and 5.2-9 represent increases in emissions compared with existing conditions. Table 5.2-8 summarizes the estimated daily operations emissions of criteria air pollutants and precursors in 2015. Operation-related air quality impacts were determined by comparing the modeling results to applicable SCAQMD CEQA thresholds. Based on the modeling conducted, long-term regional emissions of criteria pollutants resulting from implementation of the Proposed Project in 2015 would exceed the SCAQMD thresholds for VOC, NOx, and CO and would be less than the applicable thresholds for PM10 and PM2.5. The principal source of emissions would be vehicles. It is noted that estimated With Project emissions of VOC, NOx, and CO would be less than existing emissions of these pollutants because of the projected continuing improvements in vehicle emissions controls and fuel economy. TABLE 5.2-8 ESTIMATED DAILY OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS AT 2015 CONDITIONS (POUNDS/DAY) Year/Scenario/Source Emissions (lbs/day) VOC NOx CO PM10 PM2.5 2015 With Project Area Sources 64 129 116 <0.5 <0.5 Mobile Sources 1,018 1,259 9,418 2,260 441 Total Emissions 1,082 1,388 9,534 2,[PHONE REDACTED] Without Project Area Sources 57 117 101 <0.5 <0.5 Mobile Sources 928 1,176 8,788 2,132 416 Total Emissions 985 1,293 8,889 2,132 416 Net Increase in Emissions 97 97 645 128 25 SCAQMD Significance Threshold (Table 5.2-5) 55 55 550 150 55 Exceeds SCAQMD Thresholds? Yes Yes Yes No No lbs/day: pounds per day; less than Totals may not add due to rounding. Emissions are the higher of summer and winter scenarios. Refer to Appendix C of this document) for detailed assumptions and modeling output files. Table 5.2-9 summarizes the estimated daily operational emissions of criteria air pollutants and precursors at 2030 (build out) with the operation of the maximum allowable uses in the Specific Plan. Refer to Appendix C for detailed modeling input parameters and results. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.2 Air Quality-082312.docx 5.2-20 Air Quality With the completion of maximum allowable development at 2030, there would be increased area source emissions. Mobile source emissions of VOC, NOx, and CO would be substantially less than existing emissions of these pollutants, although 2030 VMT would be more than twice the existing VMT. However, as shown in Table 5.2-8, regional emissions of criteria pollutants resulting from operation of the ARSP at full build out, when compared to the No Project Alternative, would exceed the SCAQMD applicable thresholds for VOC, NOx, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 emissions. These exceedances would represent a significant impact. TABLE 5.2-9 ESTIMATED DAILY OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS AT 2030 BUILD OUT CONDITIONS (POUNDS/DAY) Year/Scenario/Source Emissions (lbs/day) VOC NOx CO PM10 PM2.5 2030 With Project Area Sources 138 296 256 0.5 0.5 Mobile Sources 870 781 7,127 3441 668 Total Emissions 1,007 1,077 7,383 3,[PHONE REDACTED] Without Project Area Sources 57 117 101 <0.5 <0.5 Mobile Sources 748 685 6,268 3,040 590 Total Emissions 805 802 6,369 3,040 590 Net Increase in Emissions 202 275 1,014 401 79 SCAQMD Significance Threshold (Table 5.2-5) 55 55 550 150 55 Exceeds SCAQMD Thresholds? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes lbs/day: pounds per day; less than Totals may not add due to rounding. Emissions are the higher of summer and winter scenarios. Refer to Appendix C of this document for detailed assumptions and modeling output files. VOC, NOx, and CO emissions would result from a combination of area and mobile sources. The principal contributor to VOC area source emissions would be building maintenance through the application of architectural coatings and the anticipated use of natural gas for heating and hot water. The area source emissions of NOx and CO would be from the consumption of natural gas. Essentially all operational PM10 and PM 2.5 emissions would result from vehicle operation. The proposed mitigation measures include many actions to reduce vehicle trips and VMT and therefore reduce mobile source emissions. Impact Summary: With incorporation of the proposed mitigation measures, construction emissions of criteria pollutants would be less than significant. The conclusion for construction emissions is not consistent with that provided in MEIR 313. MEIR 313 projected that construction emissions of VOC, NOx, CO, and PM10 would be significant and unavoidable. Long-term operational emissions of VOC, NOx, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 would exceed the SCAQMD CEQA significance thresholds. The proposed mitigation measures would reduce vehicle emissions, but the reductions are not reliably quantifiable and are not anticipated to reduce emissions to less than the SCAQMD CEQA thresholds. Therefore, the impact would be significant and unavoidable. The conclusion for operational emissions is consistent with that ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.2 Air Quality-082312.docx 5.2-21 Air Quality provided in MEIR 313, except for PM2.5, which was not a criteria pollutant when MEIR 313 was prepared. Local PM10 and PM2.5 emissions would exceed the SCAQMD CEQA significance thresholds for short-term periods when excavation would occur near sensitive receptors; the impact would be significant and unavoidable. The local impact analysis was not conducted for MEIR 313. Threshold 5.2.2 Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? Orange County is a nonattainment area for PM10, PM2.5, NO2, and O3; the latter requires consideration of VOC and NOx, which are O3 precursors. Construction Emissions As described for Threshold 5.2.1, the projected maximum daily emissions for construction of the proposed PR District improvements would not exceed the SCAQMD CEQA significance thresholds but would approach the thresholds for VOC and NOx. It is foreseeable that development in the C-R District could be built concurrently with those in the PR District, or that the size and intensity of concurrent future projects in the C-R district would exceed the assumptions for the calculations in Table 5.2-5 above. Thus, depending on the sizes of individual projects and the construction phase overlaps, the concurrent construction of several projects could result in a cumulative increase of VOC, NOx, and possibly other criteria pollutants to a level above the thresholds. Implementation of the proposed mitigation measures would reduce construction emissions of nonattainment pollutants. However, it cannot be demonstrated at the Specific Plan level that the cumulative construction emissions would be less than the SCAQMD CEQA thresholds. Therefore, the impact would be significant and unavoidable. Operational Emissions As described in the analysis above, Table 5.2-9, build out of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan would result in long-term emissions of VOC, NOx, PM10, and PM2.5 that would exceed the SCAQMD CEQA significance thresholds. The proposed mitigation measures would reduce vehicle emissions of nonattainment pollutants, but the reductions are not reliably quantifiable and are not anticipated to reduce emissions to less than the SCAQMD CEQA thresholds. Therefore, these emissions could result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to the nonattainment status of O3, NO2, PM10, and PM2.5 in the SoCAB. Impact Summary: Build out of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan could result in cumulatively considerable increase of nonattainment pollutants during both the construction and operational phases of the project. Mitigation measures would not reduce the impact to less than significant. Therefore, the impact would be significant and unavoidable. The conclusion for cumulative emissions is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313. Threshold 5.2.3 Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.2 Air Quality-082312.docx 5.2-22 Air Quality Carbon Monoxide Hotspots An initial screening for the potential for the Proposed Project to create a CO hotspot was conducted in accordance with the CO Protocol described previously. The traffic study prepared for the Proposed Project identifies intersections where the addition of project traffic would make traffic flow worse, which is defined for signalized intersections as increasing the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) by 0.01 or more at intersections operating at LOS E or F, or if the project causes an intersection that operates at acceptable levels of service to operate at unacceptable LOS E or F. (PB 2010). According to the traffic impact analysis, there are no intersections that would create a project related impact under the 2015 interim analysis. For 2030 Build out conditions, there are 20 signalized intersections that would operate at LOS E or F and would have increased delay compared with the No Project Scenario. These include: • Euclid Street/Katella Avenue • Ninth Street/Katella Avenue • Disneyland Drive/Ball Road • Disneyland Drive/West Street/Katella Avenue • Harbor Boulevard/Ball Road • Harbor Boulevard/Katella Avenue • Anaheim Boulevard/Ball Road • Anaheim Boulevard/Cerritos Avenue • Anaheim Boulevard/I-5 Northbound Ramps • Anaheim Boulevard/Haster Street/Katella Avenue • Haster Street/Gene Autry Way • Lewis Street/Cerritos Avenue • State College Boulevard/Katella Avenue • State College Boulevard/Gene Autry Way • State College Boulevard/Orangewood Avenue • State College Boulevard/The City Drive/Chapman Avenue • Howell Avenue/Katella Avenue • Rampart Street/Orangewood Avenue • Orangewood Avenue/SR-57 Southbound Ramps • Douglass Road/Katella Avenue The findings indicate that a quantitative screening is required for the 20 intersections listed above. The Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD) has developed simple conservative screening criteria for local CO impacts. The SMAQMD states that a proposed project would result in a less than significant impact to air quality for local CO if it would not result in an affected intersection experiencing more than 31,600 vehicles per hour where vertical and/or horizontal mixing is substantially limited tunnel, parking garage, bridge underpass, natural or urban street canyon, below-grade roadway) (SMAQMD 2009). The Traffic Study shows that the largest traffic volume of the affected intersections listed above would be approximately 9,400 vehicles per hour at Harbor Boulevard and Ball Road in the 2030 PM peak hour scenario (PB 2010). Traffic volumes forecasted for the nine highest volume intersections are shown in Table 5.2-10. There would be no potential for a CO hotspot or exposure of persons to CO in excess of SCAQMD criteria for CO ambient air quality. The impact would be less than significant and no mitigation is required. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.2 Air Quality-082312.docx 5.2-23 Air Quality TABLE 5.2-10 LOS E AND F INTERSECTION HOURLY TRAFFIC VOLUMES AT 2030 BUILD OUT CONDITIONS Intersection (Peak Hour) Peak Hour Total Traffic Volume Harbor Blvd/Ball Rd (PM) 9,400 Douglas Rd/Katella Ave (PM) 9,380 Anaheim Blvd/Haster St/Katella Ave (PM) 8,900 Harbor Blvd/Katella Ave (PM) 8,780 State College Blvd/Orangewood Ave (PM) 8,730 State College Blvd/Chapman Ave (PM) 8,720 Euclid St/Katella Ave (PM) 7,470 Anaheim Blvd/Ball Rd (PM) 7,400 Haster St/Gene Autry Way (PM) 7,290 Criteria Pollutants from On-Site Construction As described in the analysis under Threshold 5.2.1 above, there is a potential to expose the inhabitants of residential land uses adjacent to areas of large excavation to PM10 and PM2.5 emissions that exceed the 24-hour ambient air quality standard during the project’s mass grading and excavation phase. On-site particulate emissions would be minimized through implementation of standard requirements and the proposed mitigation measures; however there would still be the potential to exceed SCAQMD CEQA thresholds, thereby resulting in a significant and unavoidable impact. Toxic Air Contaminants Construction-related Emissions Construction activities would result in short-term, project-generated emissions of diesel PM from the exhaust of off-road heavy-duty diesel equipment used for site preparation excavation, grading, and clearing); paving; building construction; application of architectural coatings; and other miscellaneous activities. The CARB identified diesel PM as a TAC in 1998. The dose to which receptors are exposed is the primary factor used to determine health risk. “Dose” is a function of the concentration of a substance or substances in the environment and the duration of exposure to the substance. Thus, the risks estimated for a maximally exposed individual (MEI) are higher if a fixed exposure occurs over a longer period of time. According to the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, health risk assessments, which determine the exposure of sensitive receptors to TAC emissions, should be based on a 70-year exposure period; however, such assessments should be limited to the period/duration of activities associated with the Proposed Project. Project-generated, construction-related emissions of TACs would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial emissions of TACs because the use of off-road heavy-duty diesel equipment for construction activities would be temporary (short in duration when compared to 70 years) and in combination with the highly dispersive properties of diesel PM and further reductions in exhaust emissions from improved equipment and the impact would be less than significant. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.2 Air Quality-082312.docx 5.2-24 Air Quality Operational Emissions from Sources Within the Project Area Potential sources of TAC emissions within the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan area include diesel-fueled truck engines and food-service facility operations. Diesel engine delivery trucks could be used to service the retail stores and restaurants. Some trucks may be transportation refrigeration units (TRUs) to deliver cold-stored food items. Trucks equipped with TRUs typically result in higher TAC emissions because they are equipped with separate diesel generator sets to keep perishable food cold, in addition to the truck engine. CARB defines a screening level of 100 commercial trucks or 40 TRU-equipped trucks per day, which may occur at a large warehouse or distribution center (CARB 2005). These existing and proposed uses would not attract or support the volumes of trucks that would approach the screening levels described above. The truck traffic to the ARSP hotel, retail, and restaurant establishments would not approach those volumes. Restaurants emit organic gases from the cooking of animal fats and oils. However, both existing and potential future restaurant emissions are subject to permitting by the SCAQMD. Therefore, on-site operations of existing or proposed land uses within the ARSP would not be a significant source of TACs. The impact would be less than significant. Exposure to Off-Site Emissions from Mobile Sources (Traffic) The CARB guidance document Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective, includes the recommendation to avoid the siting of new sensitive land uses within 500 feet of freeways, urban roads with 100,000 vehicles/day, or rural roads with 50,000 vehicles/day. Sensitive land uses are defined in the handbook as schools and schoolyards, parks and playgrounds, daycare centers, nursing homes, hospitals, and residential communities. Most of the ARSP area is more than 500 feet from a freeway, except for the approximate 3,000 feet of the eastern boundary of the ARSP area from Orangewood Avenue to Katella Avenue facing the I-5 Freeway. The Proposed Project does not anticipate the development of the sensitive land uses described above as primary land uses; however, it is possible that a daycare center, park, or playground could be planned as part of a commercial or hotel development. The proposed mitigation would avoid siting these uses within 500 feet of the I-5 freeway. With the incorporation this mitigation, the impact would be less than significant. Impact Summary: Exposure of persons to local CO concentrations would be less than significant; this conclusion is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313. Short-term exposure of persons to PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations exceeding the SCAQMD CEQA significance thresholds would occur during excavation near sensitive receptors; the impact would be significant and unavoidable. Exposure of persons to TACs would be less than significant. MEIR 313 did not evaluate impacts related to local PM concentrations or toxic air contaminants; therefore, consistency findings cannot be determined. Threshold 5.2.4 Would the proposed project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? The two principal criteria for conformance to the AQMP are whether the project will result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations, cause or contribute to new violations, or delay timely attainment of air quality standards and whether the project will exceed the assumptions in the AQMP (SCAQMD 1993). With respect to the first criterion, the analysis discussed above under Threshold 5.2.1 demonstrates that the Proposed Project could result in an increase in the frequency or severity ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.2 Air Quality-082312.docx 5.2-25 Air Quality of existing air quality violations due to a projected operational exceedance of the SCAQMD CEQA significance thresholds for VOC, NOx, CO, PM10, and PM2.5. The proposed mitigation measures include many actions to reduce vehicle trips and VMT and therefore reduce mobile source emissions. The reductions are not reliably quantifiable and are not anticipated to reduce emissions to less than the SCAQMD CEQA thresholds. The exceedances would be significant and unavoidable. With respect to the second criterion, the Proposed Project does not propose a change to the General Plan land use designations. However, the anticipated increase in density may result in greater VMT than those anticipated in the 2007 AQMP. Based on the potential for the Proposed Project to result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations, it is concluded that the Proposed Project could conflict with or obstruct implementation of the 2007 AQMP. The impact would be significant and unavoidable. Impact Summary: The Proposed Project would conflict with the applicable air quality plan; the impact would be significant and unavoidable. The conclusion for conformance with the AQMP is more significant than the conclusion provided in MEIR 313. It should be noted, however, that the current criteria for conformance with the AQMP are different than the applicable criteria when MEIR 313 was prepared. Threshold 5.2.5 Would the project create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Sources of odors that are typically of concern include landfills, wastewater treatment plants, composting, agriculture, chemical plants, and dairies. The Proposed Project would not allow these types of development or locate receptors near these sources of odors. Construction equipment and activities associated with implementation of the Proposed Project could generate odors from diesel exhaust and roofing, painting, and paving operations that may be noticeable by nearby residents. As these odors are typical with construction, they would not be unfamiliar or necessarily objectionable. The odors would be temporary and would dissipate rapidly from the source with an increase in distance. Therefore, the construction odor impacts would be short-term, would not likely be objectionable, and would be less than significant. During long-term operations, some odors associated with commercial uses, such as restaurant cooking exhaust, may be perceived. The odors would be no different than in the existing areas of the ARSP that are currently developed. These odors would not be considered objectionable by a substantial number of people. The impact would be less than significant. Impact Summary: Odor impacts would be less than significant. MEIR 313 did not evaluate impacts related to odors; therefore, a consistency finding cannot be determined. 5.2.7 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS Cumulative impacts are discussed under Threshold 5.2.2 above, with the following conclusions: It is foreseeable that individual projects in the C-R District would be built concurrently with those in the PR District, or that the size and intensity of concurrent future projects in the C-R District would exceed the assumptions for the calculations of Table 5.2-5. Thus, depending on the size ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.2 Air Quality-082312.docx 5.2-26 Air Quality and construction phase overlaps, the construction of several projects could result in a cumulative increase of VOC, NOx, and possibly other criteria pollutants. The implementation of standard requirements and proposed mitigation measures would reduce construction emissions of nonattainment pollutants, but it cannot be demonstrated at the SP level that the emissions would be less than the SCAQMD CEQA thresholds. Therefore, cumulative construction emissions impacts would be significant and unavoidable. Build out of the ARSP would result in long-term emissions of VOC, NOx, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 that would exceed the SCAQMD CEQA significance thresholds, resulting in a potentially cumulatively considerable contribution to existing O3, NO2, PM10, and PM2.5 standard violations. Therefore, the Proposed Project would have significant cumulative air quality impact. The implementation of the proposed mitigation measures would reduce vehicle emissions of nonattainment pollutants, but the reductions are not reliably quantifiable and are not anticipated to reduce emissions to less than the SCAQMD CEQA thresholds. Therefore, the impact would be significant and unavoidable. 5.2.8 MITIGATION MEASURES Previously Approved Measures MEIR 313 presented mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts associated with the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Project to less than significant levels. The following measures from MEIR 313 shall be incorporated into the Mitigation Program for this EIR. Modifications to the original measure are shown as bold for new inserted text. (Note that the measure number and section number from MEIR 313 are listed in parentheses.) MM 5.2-1 Ongoing during project operation, the property owner/developer shall implement measures to reduce emissions to the extent practical, schedule goods movements for off-peak traffic hours, and use clean fuel for vehicles and other equipment, as practicable (MEIR 313 MM 3.4-1, Air Quality). MM 5.2-2 Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit evidence that low emission paints and coatings are utilized in the design and construction of buildings, in compliance with SCAQMD regulations. The information shall be denoted on the project plans and specifications. The property owner/developer shall submit an architectural coating schedule and calculations demonstrating that VOC emissions from architectural coating operations would not exceed 75 pounds per day averaged over biweekly periods. The calculations shall show, for each coating, the surface area to be coated, gallons (or liters) of coating per unit surface area, and VOC content per gallon (or liter). The property owner/developer shall also implement the following to limit emissions from architectural coatings and asphalt usage: a. Use nonsolvent-based coatings on buildings, wherever appropriate; b. Use solvent based coatings, where they are necessary (MEIR 313 MM 3.4-2, Air Quality). MM 5.2-3 Ongoing during construction, the property owner/developer shall implement measures to reduce construction-related air quality impacts. These measures shall include, but are not limited to: ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.2 Air Quality-082312.docx 5.2-27 Air Quality a. Normal wetting procedures (at least twice daily) or other dust palliative measures shall be followed during earth-moving operations to minimize fugitive dust emissions, in compliance with the City of Anaheim Municipal Code including application of chemical soil stabilizers to exposed soils after grading is completed and replacing ground cover in disturbed areas as quickly as practicable. b. For projects where there is excavation for subterranean facilities (such as parking) on-site haul roads shall be watered at least every two hours or the on-site haul roads shall be paved. c. Enclosing, covering, watering twice daily, or applying approved soil binders, according to manufacturer’s specification, to exposed piles. d. Roadways adjacent to the project shall be swept and cleared of any spilled export materials at least twice a day to assist in minimizing fugitive dust; and, haul routes shall be cleared as needed if spills of materials exported from the project site occur. e. Where practicable, heavy duty construction equipment shall be kept onsite when not in operation to minimize exhaust emissions associated with vehicles repetitiously entering and exiting the project site. f. Trucks importing or exporting soil material and/or debris shall be covered prior to entering public streets. g. Taking preventive measures to ensure that trucks do not carry dirt on tires onto public streets, including treating onsite roads and staging areas. h. Preventing trucks from idling for longer than 2 minutes. i. Manually irrigate or activate irrigation systems necessary to water and maintain the vegetation as soon as planting is completed. j. Reduce Traffic speeds on all unpaved road surfaces to 15 miles per hour or less. k. Suspend all grading operations when wind speeds (as instantaneous gust) exceed 25 miles per hour and during first and second stage smog alerts. l. Comply with SCAQMD Rule 402, which states that no dust impacts offsite are sufficient to be called a nuisance, and SCAQMD Rule 403, which restricts visible emissions from construction. m. Use low emission mobile construction equipment tractors, scrapers, dozers, etc.) where practicable. n. Utilize existing power sources power poles) or clean-fuel generators rather than temporary power generators, where practicable. o. Maintain construction equipment engines by keeping them properly tuned. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.2 Air Quality-082312.docx 5.2-28 Air Quality p. Use low sulfur fuel for equipment, to the extent practicable (MEIR 313 MM 3.4-3, Air Quality). MM 5.2-4 Prior to approval issuance of each grading permit plan (for Import/Export Plan) and prior to issuance of demolition permit (for Demolition Plan), the property owner/developer shall submit Demolition and Import/Export plans, if determined to be necessary by the Public Works/Engineering Department, Traffic Engineering Division and/or Maintenance Department. The plans shall include identification of offsite locations for materials export from the project and options for disposal of excess material. These options may include recycling of materials onsite, sale to a soil broker or contractor, sale to a project in the vicinity or transport to an environmentally cleared landfill, with attempts made to move it within Orange County. The property owner/developer shall offer recyclable building materials, such as asphalt or concrete for sale or removal by private firms or public agencies for use in construction of other projects, if not all can be reused on project site (MEIR 313 MM 3.4-4, Air Quality). MM 5.2-5 Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall comply with all SCAQMD offset regulations and implementation of Best Available Control Technology (BACT) and Best Available Retrofit Control Technology (BARCT) for any new or modified stationary source. Copies of permits shall be given to the Planning Department (MEIR 313 MM 3.4-5, Air Quality). MM 5.2-6 Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall implement, and demonstrate to the City, measures that are being taken to reduce operation-related air quality impacts. These measures may include, but are not limited to the following: a. Improve thermal integrity of structures and reduced thermal load through use of automated time clocks or occupant sensors. b. Incorporate efficient heating and other appliances. c. Incorporate energy conservation measures in site orientation and in building design, such as appropriate passive solar design. d. Use drought-resistant landscaping wherever feasible to reduce energy used in pumping and transporting water. e. Participate in marketing the existing Anaheim Telecenter (telecommuting/ video conferencing center) to guests in their hotels/businesses. To the extent feasible, provide daycare opportunities for employees or participate in a joint development daycare center f. Install facilities for electric vehicle recharging, unless it is demonstrated that the technology for these facilities or availability of the equipment current at the time makes this installation infeasible. (MEIR 313 MM 3.4-6, Air Quality). ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.2 Air Quality-082312.docx 5.2-29 Air Quality Measures from Section 5.14, Transportation and Traffic MM 5.14-4 Prior to the final building and zoning inspection, the property owner/developer shall join and financially participate in a clean fuel shuttle program such as the Anaheim Resort Transit system, if established, and shall participate in the Anaheim Transportation Network/Transportation Management Association in conjunction with the on-going operation of the project. The property owner shall also record a covenant on the property that requires participation in the program ongoing during project operation. The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney’s Office prior to recordation. (MEIR 313 MM 3.3-4) MM 5.14-5 Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the property owner/developer shall provide to the City of Anaheim Public Works Department a plan to coordinate rideshare services for construction employees with the Anaheim Transportation Network (ATN) for review and a approval and shall implement ATN recommendations to the extent feasible. (MEIR 313 MM 3.3-5) MM 5.14-8 Prior to the final building and zoning inspection, and, ongoing during project operation, the property owner/developer shall record a covenant on the property requiring that ongoing during project implementation, the property owner/developer will shall implement and administer a comprehensive Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program for all employees. The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney’s Office. Objectives of the TDM program shall be: a. Increase ridesharing and use of alternative transportation modes by guests. b. Provide a menu of commute alternatives for employees to reduce project- generated trips. c. Conduct an annual commuter survey to ascertain trip generation, trip origin, and Average Vehicle Ridership. (MEIR 313, MM3.3-8 in part) MM 5.14-9 Prior to the final building and zoning inspection, the property owner/developer shall provide to the City of Anaheim Public Works Department for review and approval a menu of TDM program strategies and elements for both existing and future employees’ commute options, and incentives for hotel patrons transportation options, to include, but are not be limited to, the following list below. The property owner shall also record a covenant on the property requiring that the approved TDM strategies and elements be implemented ongoing during project operation. The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney’s Office prior to recordation. a. On-site services. Provide, as feasible and permitted, on-site services such as the food, retail, and other services be provided. b. Ridesharing. Develop a commuter listing of all employee members be developed for the purpose of providing a “matching” of employees with other employees who live in the same geographic areas and who could rideshare. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.2 Air Quality-082312.docx 5.2-30 Air Quality c. Vanpooling. Develop a commuter listing of all employees for the purpose of matching numbers of employees who live in geographic proximity to one another and could comprise a vanpool or participate in the existing vanpool programs. d. Transit Pass. Promote Southern California Rapid Transit District and Orange County Transportation Authority (including commuter rail) passes be promoted through financial assistance and on-site sales to encourage employees to use the various transit and bus services from throughout the region. e. Commuter Bus. As commuter “express” bus service expands throughout the region, passes for use on these lines may be provided for employees who choose to use this service. Financial incentives be provided. e. Shuttle Service. Generate a commuter listing of all employees living in proximity to the project be generated, and offer a local shuttle program offered to encourage employees to travel to work by means other than the automobile. When appropriate, event shuttle service shall also be made available for guests. f. Bicycling. Develop a Bicycling Program be developed to offer a bicycling alternative to employees. Secure bicycle racks, lockers, and showers should be provided as part of this program. Maps of bicycle routes throughout the area should be provided to inform potential bicyclists of these options. g. Rental Car Fleet. A “fleet” vehicle program be developed to provide employees who travel to work by means other than an automobile with access to automobiles in case of emergency, medical appointments, etc. This service would help employees use alternative modes of transportation by ensuring that they would be able to have personal transportation in the event of special circumstances. g. Guaranteed Ride Home Program. Develop a program to provide employees who rideshare, or use transit or other means of commuting to work, with a prearranged ride home in a taxi, rental car, shuttle, or other vehicle, in the event of emergencies during the work shift. h. Target Reduction of Longest Commute Trip. Promote an incentive program for ridesharing and other alternative transportation modes to put highest priority on reduction of longest employee commute trips. i. Work Shifts. Stagger work shifts. j. Compressed Work Week. Develop a “compressed work week” program, which provides for fewer work days but longer daily shifts as an option for employees. k. Telecommuting. Explore the possibility of a “telecommuting” program that would link some employees via electronic means computer with modem). ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.2 Air Quality-082312.docx 5.2-31 Air Quality l. Parking Management. Develop a parking management program that provides incentives to those who rideshare or use transit means other than single-occupant auto to travel to work. m. Access. Provide preferential access to high occupancy vehicles and shuttles may be provided. n. Financial Incentive for Ridesharing and/or Public Transit. Offer employees financial incentives for ridesharing or using public transportation. Currently, federal law provides tax-free status for up to $65 60 per month per employee contributions to employees who vanpool or use public transit including commuter rail and/or express bus pools. o. Financial Incentive for Bicycling. Offer employees offered financial incentives for bicycling to work. p. Special “Premium” for the Participation and Promotion of Trip Reduction. Offer ticket/passes to special events, vacations, etc. be offered to employees who recruit other employees for vanpool, carpool, or other trip reduction programs. q. Actively recruit prospective employees residing within a 3-minute commute shed. q. Incentive Programs. Design incentive programs for carpooling and other alternative transportation modes so as to put highest priority on reduction of longest commute trips. (MEIR 313 MM 3.3-8 in part) MM 5.14-20 Prior to the approval of a Final Site Plan, the property owner/developer shall meet with the Traffic and Transportation Manager to determine whether a bus stop(s) is required to be placed adjacent to the property. If a bus stop(s) is required, it shall be placed in a location that least impacts traffic flow and may be designed as a bus turnout or a far side bus stop as required by the Traffic and Transportation Manager and per the approval of the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA). MM 5.14-21 Prior to the first final building and zoning Inspection every property owner and/or lessee shall designate an on-site contact that will be responsible for coordinating with the ATN and implementing all trip mitigation measures. The on-site coordinator shall be the one point of contact representing the project with the ATN. The TDM requirements shall be included in the lease or other agreement with all of the project participants. MM 5.14-23 Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the Property Owner/Developer shall demonstrate that the plans include the installation of bicycle parking spaces at each facility. Bicycle spaces for employees shall be easily accessible, secure, enclosed spaces. Bicycle spaces for visitors and customers shall be visible from the primary entrance, illuminated at night, and protected from damage from moving and parked vehicles. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.2 Air Quality-082312.docx 5.2-32 Air Quality Additional Mitigation Measures MM 5.2-7 Prior to issuance of the first building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit a human health risk assessment (HRA) for any proposed sensitive land uses (according to SCAQMD standards at that time) to be located within 500 feet of the near edge of the I-5 freeway unless it is demonstrated that the health risks have been determined to be acceptable according to the standards of the SCAQMD at the time of building permit application. 5.2.9 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION During construction, implementation of the proposed mitigation measures would reduce construction emissions; however, the Proposed Project’s construction-related emissions of criteria air pollutant and precursor emissions would remain significant. The Proposed Project would result in direct and cumulative impacts during construction that would be significant and unavoidable. Implementation of the proposed mitigation would reduce local PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations when large excavations would occur near sensitive receptors, but the potential impact would be significant and unavoidable for the short-term periods. Emissions of criteria pollutants resulting from operation of the full build out of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan would exceed the SCAQMD applicable thresholds for VOC, NOx, CO, PM10, and PM2.5. Implementation of the proposed mitigation measures would not reduce the emissions below the level of significance. Operation of the Proposed Project would result in direct and cumulative significant and unavoidable impacts. In addition, the Proposed Project could conflict with or obstruct implementation of the 2007 AQMP. This impact would be significant and unavoidable. The development of sensitive land uses adjacent to I-5 would result in a potential significant impact. With implementation of the proposed mitigation, the Proposed Project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant TACs and the impact would be less than significant. The Proposed Project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial CO local concentrations, nor would it create objectionable odors. 5.2.10 REFERENCES Anaheim, City of 2004 (May). City of Anaheim General Plan, Green Element. Anaheim, CA. (Anaheim). California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2012a (June Ambient Air Quality Standards. Sacramento, CA: CARB. http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/aaqs/aaqs2.pdf. 2012b (August 13 access date). Air Quality Data Statistics. Sacramento, CA: CARB. http://www.arb.ca.gov/adam/welcome.html. 2010c (page reviewed March 29) Area Designations. Sacramento, CA: CARB. http://www.arb.ca.gov/desig/desig.htm 2010d (accessed April 29). Community Health Air Pollution Information System. Sacramento, CA: CARB. http://www.arb.ca.gov/gismo2/chapis_v01_6_1_04/default.htm 2009a (August 26). Recommended Area Designations for the 2008 Federal Lead Standard, Staff Report. Sacramento. CARB ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.2 Air Quality-082312.docx 5.2-33 Air Quality 2009b (April 19, last reviewed). Health Effects of Diesel Exhaust. Sacramento, CA: CARB. http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/diesel/diesel-health.htm. 2005 (April). Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective. Sacramento, CA: CARB Gupta, 2010 (April 16). Personal Communication. Emails between M. Gupta, Senior Transportation Planner (PB) and F. Sotelo, Acoustical and Transportation Engineer (BonTerra Consulting). Parsons Brinckerhoff. 2010 (December). Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report. Orange, CA: Parsons Brinckerhoff. Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District. 2009 (August). Draft CEQA Guide to Air Quality Assessment. Sacramento. SMAQMD. South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2012a (updated July 25). 2012 Air Quality Management Plan. Diamond Bar, CA: SCAQMD. http://www.aqmd.gov/aqmp/ 2012aqmp/index.htm. South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) 2011 (March). SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds. Diamond Bar, CA: SCAQMD. 2009 (October 21). Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology, Appendix C. Diamond Bar, CA: SCAQMD. 2009b (March). SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds. Diamond Bar, CA: SCAQMD. 2008a (July, as revised). Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology. Diamond Bar, CA: SCAQMD. http://www.aqmd.gov/ceqa/handbook/LST/Method_final.pdf 2008b (September). Final Report, Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study in the South Coast Air Basin, MATES III September 2008, Executive Summary. Diamond Bar, CA: SCAQMD. http://www.aqmd.gov/prdas/matesIII/Final/Document/ab-MATESIIIExecutive Summary-Final92008.pdf. 2007 (June). Final 2007 Air Quality Management Plan. Diamond Bar, CA: SCAQMD. http://www.aqmd.gov/aqmp/07aqmp/index.html. 1993 (as amended). CEQA Air Quality Handbook. Diamond Bar, CA: SCAQMD. U.C. Davis Institute of Transportation Studies (UCD ITS). 1997 (December). Transportation Project-level Carbon Monoxide Protocol. Davis, CA: UCD ITS. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2012 (as of 08/05/12). Status of SIP Requirements for Designated Areas, California Areas by Pollutant. http://www.epa.gov/air/urbanair/sipstatus/reports/ca_areabypoll.html ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.2 Air Quality-082312.docx 5.2-34 Air Quality U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2009 USEPA Technology Transfer Network National Air Toxics Assessment Glossary of Key Terms. Washington D.C.: USEPA. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/nata2002/gloss1.html. Western Regional Climate Center (WRCC). 2010. Anaheim, California (040192), Period of Record Climate Summary. Reno, NV: WRCC. . http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/cgi- bin/cliMAIN.pl?ca0192 ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.3 Bio-080812.docx 5.3-1 Biological Resources 5.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES This section describes the existing biological setting of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (ARSP) area. Information presented in this section is based on the Biological Resources Report for the Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Project, prepared by BonTerra Consulting for the Proposed Project in March 2009 and the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Parcel off Harbor Blvd and Katella Avenue memorandum prepared but BonTerra Consulting in August 2010 and included as Appendix D. 5.3.1 SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION MEIR 313 did not address biological resources. 5.3.2 PLANS, POLICIES AND REGULATORY CONDITIONS Related Planning Programs City of Anaheim General Plan, Green Element The City of Anaheim General Plan’s Green Element comprehensively addresses topics concerning conservation of vital natural resources such as plant and animal species and areas of significant habitat. As stated in the Green Element, the ARSP area is not located within the Natural Communities Conservation Plan (NCCP), which occupies lands east of The Anaheim Resort. Applicable goals and policies from the Green Element that are related to biological resources and that are applicable to the Proposed Project are provided in Table 5.9-2 in Section 5.9, Land Use and Planning, with a project consistency analysis. Regulatory Setting Migratory Bird Treaty Act The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) prohibits actions, unless permitted, “to pursue, hunt, take, capture, kill, attempt to take, capture or kill, possess, offer for sale, sell, offer to purchase, purchase, deliver for shipment, ship, cause to be shipped, deliver for transportation, transport, cause to be transported, carry, or cause to be carried by any means whatever, receive for shipment, transportation or carriage, or export, at any time, or in any manner, any migratory bird, included in the terms of the Convention for the protection of migratory birds or any part, nest, or egg of any such bird” (16 United States Code [USC] 703). Bird species protected under the provisions of the MBTA are identified by the List of Migratory Birds (Title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations [CFR], Section 10.13), as updated by the 1983 American Ornithologists’ Union (AOU) Checklist and published supplements through 1995 by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). This federal statute may have originally been intended to reduce hunting of migratory birds, but has been interpreted more broadly by some resource agencies in recent years. The broader interpretation is that bird nests with eggs or young are protected under the MBTA from any disturbance that may directly or indirectly affect the success of the nesting attempt regardless of the intent of the activity that caused the disturbance. Although federal agencies have not enforced this interpretation, some State and local agencies have referred to it as reasoning to require avoidance measures and mitigation as part of project approval permits. Avoidance measures typically include surveys of the project site conducted prior to disturbance activities to determine if and where nesting is occurring on a site. If present, the nest site and an additional ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.3 Bio-080812.docx 5.3-2 Biological Resources buffer area (as appropriate) are avoided until a Biologist has determined that the nest is no longer active and project activities in that area may commence. California Fish and Game Code Section 3503.5 of the California Fish and Game Code specifically protects birds of prey. The Code states: It is unlawful to take, possess, or destroy any birds in the orders Falconiformes or Strigiformes (birds-of-prey) or to take, possess, or destroy the nest or eggs of any such bird except as otherwise provided by this code or any regulation adopted pursuant thereto. Section 3513 of the California Fish and Game Code duplicates the federal protection of migratory birds. The Code states: It is unlawful to take or possess any migratory nongame bird as designated in the Migratory Bird Treaty Act or any part of such migratory nongame bird except as provided by rules and regulations adopted by the Secretary of the Interior under provisions of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. 5.3.3 METHODOLOGY BonTerra Consulting prepared the Biological Resources Report for the Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Project. This report summarizes the biological resources potentially occurring with the ARSP area. As part of the report, BonTerra Consulting conducted a search of available literature to identify special status plant and wildlife species known to occur in the vicinity of the ARSP area. The California Native Plant Society’s (CNPS’) Electronic Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California (CNPS 2009) and the California Department of Fish and Game’s (CDFG’s) California Natural Diversity Database (CDFG 2009) were reviewed to identify special status plants, wildlife, and habitats known to occur in the vicinity of the ARSP area. BonTerra Consulting Ecologist Allison Rudalevige also reviewed aerial imagery of the ARSP area. 5.3.4 EXISTING CONDITIONS Special Status Plant and Wildlife Species Based on the results of the literature review, no federally or State-listed Threatened or Endangered species have been reported from the Proposed Project’s region the U.S. Geological Survey [USGS] Anaheim quadrangle). Six special status plant species have been reported from the Proposed Project’s region: chaparral sand-verbena (Abronia villosa var. aurita), Parish’s brittlescale (Atriplex parishii), southern tarplant (Centromadia parryi ssp. australis), many-stemmed dudleya (Dudleya multicaulis), salt spring checkerbloom (Sidalcea neomexicana), and Coulter’s goldfields (Lasthenia glabrata spp. coulteri). These species were observed historically in the area, with no observations since the 1950s. No special status plant species are expected to occur within the ARSP area due to lack of suitable habitat. Two special status wildlife species have been reported from the Proposed Project’s region: western mastiff bat (Eumops perotis californicus) and coast (San Diego) horned lizard coronatum [blainvillii population]). These species are not expected to occur within the ARSP area due to lack of suitable habitat. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.3 Bio-080812.docx 5.3-3 Biological Resources Based on the information outlined above, there are no sensitive biological resources in the Public Recreational (PR) and Commercial Recreation (C-R) Districts because of the urban nature of the ARSP area. 5.3.5 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE The following significance criteria are derived from the City of Anaheim Environmental Checklist. The Proposed Project would result in a significant impact related to biological resources if it would: Threshold 5.3.1 Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Threshold 5.3.2 Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites. As previously discussed in Section 2.4.2, Effects Found Not to Be Significant, during preparation of the Initial Study, the City of Anaheim determined that the Proposed Project would not have a significant impact for the following thresholds and no further analysis of this issue is presented in this section. Would the project: • Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? • Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? • Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as tree preservation policy or ordinance? • Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan? 5.3.6 PROJECT IMPACT ANALYSIS Standard Requirements No standard requirements have been identified. Impact Analysis Threshold 5.3-1 Would the project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.3 Bio-080812.docx 5.3-4 Biological Resources candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)? The ARSP area is located within an urbanized area of the City and is currently developed with a variety of resort and urban land uses. As discussed in Section 3.11.1.1 of MEIR 313, the study area was found to be urban in character interspersed with undeveloped areas (Anaheim 1994). The Biological Resources Report (BonTerra Consulting 2009) identified on-site vegetation types which consist of non-native, ornamental species and are not considered to be Candidate, Sensitive, or Special Status Species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The ARSP area contains ornamental trees that may have the potential to be used by nesting raptors. State regulations (California Fish and Game Code §§3503, 3503.5, and 3513) prohibit activities that “take, possess or destroy” any raptor nest or egg (California 2008). Therefore, if construction is initiated during the raptor nesting season (February 1 to June 30), further development of the ARSP has the potential to impact nesting raptors, thus resulting in a significant impact. This impact would be reduced to a level considered less than significant within implementation of Mitigation Measure (MM) 5.3-1. In addition, ornamental vegetation within the ARSP area has the potential to support nesting birds. Pursuant to the MBTA, disturbance of nesting birds would represent a significant impact; therefore, development of the ARSP has the potential to impact nesting birds that are protected by the MBTA. This impact would be reduced to a level considered less than significant with implementation of MM 5.3-2, which requires avoidance of nesting birds throughout the nesting season (typically March 1 through July 31). Impact Summary: The Project has the potential to impact nesting birds and raptors, which would result in a significant impact. Implementation of MMs 5.3-1 and 5.3-2 would reduce these impacts to less than significant levels. MEIR 313 did not evaluate impacts related to candidate, sensitive, or special status species; therefore, a consistency finding for this impact conclusion cannot be made. Threshold 5.3.2 Would the project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? Wildlife corridors link together areas of suitable wildlife habitat that are otherwise separated by rugged terrain, changes in vegetation, or human disturbance. The fragmentation of open space areas by urbanization creates isolated “islands” of wildlife habitat. In the absence of habitat linkages that allow movement to adjoining open space areas, various studies have concluded that some wildlife species (especially the larger and more mobile mammals) will not likely persist over time in fragmented or isolated habitat areas. Corridors mitigate the effects of this fragmentation by allowing wildlife to move between remaining habitats, thereby permitting depleted populations to be replenished and promoting genetic exchange; providing escape routes from fire, predators, and human disturbances, thus reducing the risk that catastrophic events (such as fire or disease) will result in population or local species extinction; and serving as travel routes for individual animals as they move in their home ranges in search of food, water, mates, and other necessary resources. As previously stated, the ARSP area is located in an urban setting that is highly developed with few isolated areas that have not been developed. Therefore, further development would not impact wildlife movement. Additionally, the ARSP area does not operate (in whole or part) as a ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.3 Bio-080812.docx 5.3-5 Biological Resources native wildlife nursery site; such sites are generally located in marshes, wetland margins, and tidal zones, none of which occur within the ARSP area. No impacts related to wildlife movement or use of native nursery sites would occur. Impact Summary: The ARSP area does not function as a migratory corridor or a native wildlife nursery site; therefore, no impacts would occur. MEIR 313 did not evaluate impacts related to migratory corridors or native wildlife nursery sites; therefore, a consistency finding for this impact conclusion cannot be made. 5.3.7 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS Implementation of the ARSP would not result in cumulatively significant impacts to biological resources. Since no significant resources exist today and the sites have been previously developed, no significant impacts are anticipated. 5.3.8 MITIGATION MEASURES Previously Approved Measures No previously approved measures have been identified for impacts related to biological resources. Additional Mitigation Measures MM 5.3-1 Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit, grading permit, or building permit, whichever occurs first, a survey for active raptor nests shall be conducted by a qualified Biologist and submitted to the Planning Department 30 days prior to commencement of any demolition or construction activities during the raptor nesting season (February 1 to June 30) and within 500 feet of a fan palm, juniper, or canary island pine. Should an active nest be identified, restrictions defined by a qualified Biologist will be placed on construction activities in the vicinity of any active nest observed until the nest is no longer active, as determined by a qualified Biologist. These restrictions may include a 300- to 500- foot buffer zone designated around a nest to allow construction to proceed while minimizing disturbance to the active nest. Once the nest is no longer active, construction can proceed within the buffer zone. MM 5.3-2 Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit, grading permit, or building permit, whichever occurs first, a letter detailing the proposed schedule for vegetation removal activities shall be submitted to the Planning Department, verifying that removal shall take place between August 1 and February 28 to avoid the bird nesting season. This would ensure that no active nests would be disturbed. If this is not feasible, then a qualified Biologist shall inspect any trees which would be impacted prior to demolition, grading or construction activities to ensure no nesting birds are present. If a nest is present, then appropriate minimization measures shall be developed by the Biologist. 5.3.9 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION Potential impacts related to biological resources would be reduced to levels considered less than significant with adherence to the mitigation measures presented in this section. No significant and unavoidable impacts to biological resources would result from implementation of the Proposed Project. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.3 Bio-080812.docx 5.3-6 Biological Resources 5.3.10 REFERENCES Anaheim, City of. 2004a (May). General Plan for the City of Anaheim (City Council Resolution No. 2004-94). Anaheim, CA: the City. 2004b (May). Final Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update EIR No. 330 (Prepared by The Planning Center). Anaheim, CA: the City. 1994 (August). The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Draft EIR No. 313 with Addendum. Anaheim, City of: Anaheim, CA. BonTerra Consulting. 2009 (March). Biological Resources Report for the Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Project. Costa Mesa, CA: BonTerra Consulting. California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). 2009. California Natural Diversity Database. Records of Occurrence for U.S. Geological Survey Anaheim 7.5-minute topographical quandrangle. Sacramento, California: California Department of Fish and Game, Natural Heritage Division. California Native Plant Society (CNPS). 2009. Electronic Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California. Records of Occurrence for U.S. Geological Survey Anaheim 7.5-minute topographical quandrangle. Sacramento, California: California Native Plant Society. http://www.cnps.org/inventory. California, State of. 2010. California Fish and Game Code (Sections 3500–3516). Sacramento, CA: the State. http://info.sen.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=fgc&group=03001- 04000&file=3500-3516. U.S. Congress. 2007 (January 16 United States Code (Chapter 7, Protection of Migratory Game and Insectivorous Birds; Subchapter II, Migratory Bird Treaty). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/usc.cgi?ACT ION=BROWSE&TITLE=16USCC7&PDFS=YES. U.S. National Archives and Records Administration. 2010 (June 50 Code of Federal Regulations (Section 10.13, List of Migratory Birds). Washington, D.C.: U.S. National Archives and Records Administration. http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text- idx?c=ecfr&sid=755c28601c1b003b0fff1e32a735d2c3&rgn=div8&view=text&node=50:1. 0.1.2.4.2.1.3&idno=50. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.4 Cultural Resources-080812.docx 5.4-1 Cultural Resources 5.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES This section describes the cultural resources within the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (ARSP), including historical, paleontological, and archaeological resources. The information in this section is based on the Final Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update EIR 330, (Anaheim 2004), the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan MEIR 313 (Anaheim 1994), and information compiled by the City of Anaheim Planning and Building Departments. 5.4.1 SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION MEIR 313 included data from the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan EIR, including the results of a cultural resources records search conducted in May of 1991. MEIR 313 stated that no historic or prehistoric cultural resources had been identified within the vicinity of the proposed Anaheim Resort Specific Plan. The analysis also concluded that earth-moving activities could result in the disturbance of undetected archaeological and paleontological resources. Monitoring during grading activities was required to reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels. 5.4.2 PLANS, POLICIES, AND REGULATORY CONDITIONS Related Planning Programs City of Anaheim General Plan, Community Design Element The Community Design Element addresses the issue of historical resources through the retention of individual areas’ historical identities. In particular, the Community Design Element addresses the Anaheim Colony area (located outside the ARSP) and other landmarks throughout the City, including the Matterhorn in The Disneyland Resort, “The Big A” at Angel Stadium of Anaheim, and the historic Kraemer Building and Anaheim Museum located within the Colony. This element does not directly address the ARSP, and there are no applicable goals or policies related to cultural resources within the ARSP. Regulatory Setting Federal National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 Cultural resources are considered during federal undertakings chiefly under Section 106 of National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966 (as amended) through one of its implementing regulations (36 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 800, Protection of Historic Properties). Properties of traditional religious and cultural importance to Native Americans are considered under Section 101(d)(6)(A) of NHPA. Section 106 of NHPA (16 United States Code [USC] 470f) requires federal agencies to take into account the effects of their undertakings on any district, site, building, structure, or object that is included in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and to afford the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) a reasonable opportunity to comment on such undertakings (36 CFR 800.1). Under Section 106, the significance of any adversely affected cultural resource is assessed and mitigation measures are proposed to reduce the impacts to a less than significant level. Significant cultural resources are those that are listed or are eligible for listing in the NRHP in accordance with the criteria stated at 36 CFR 60.4, which are listed below. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.4 Cultural Resources-080812.docx 5.4-2 Cultural Resources The quality of significance in American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering and culture is present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and association and that: Are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or Are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or Embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of installation, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or Have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. State California Register of Historical Resources CEQA requires a lead agency to determine whether a project would have a significant effect on one or more historical resources. A “historical resource” is defined as a resource listed in or determined to be eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) (California Public Resources Code [PRC] §21084.1); a resource included in a local register of historical resources (14 California Code of Regulations [CCR] §15064.5[a][2]); or any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript that a lead agency determines to be historically significant (14 CCR 15064.5[a][3]). Section 5024.1 of California Public Resources Code, Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR), and Sections 21083.2 and 21084.1 of the CEQA Statutes were used as the basic guidelines for the cultural resources study. PRC 5024.1 requires evaluation of historical resources to determine their eligibility for listing on the CRHR. The purposes of the CRHR are to maintain listings of the State’s historical resources and to indicate which properties are to be protected from substantial adverse change. The criteria for listing resources in the CRHR were expressly developed to be in accordance with previously established criteria developed for listing in the NRHP (per the criteria listed at 36 CFR 60.4) and include those listed below. The quality of significance in American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering and culture is present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and association and that: Are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or Are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or Embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of installation, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or Have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.4 Cultural Resources-080812.docx 5.4-3 Cultural Resources According to Section 15064.5(a)(3)(A–D) of the CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR), a resource is considered historically significant if it meets the criteria for listing in the NRHP (per the criteria listed at 36 CFR 60.4 previously discussed). Impacts that affect those characteristics of the resource that qualify it for the NRHP or that would adversely alter the significance of a resource listed in or eligible for listing in the CRHR are considered to have a significant effect on the environment. Impacts to cultural resources from the Proposed Project are thus considered significant if the project physically destroys or damages all or part of a resource; changes the character of the use of the resource or physical feature within the setting of the resource that contributes to its significance; or introduces visual, atmospheric, or audible elements that diminish the integrity of significant features of the resource. State Historical Landmarks Historical Landmarks are sites, buildings, features, or events that are of statewide significance and have anthropological, cultural, military, political, architectural, economic, scientific or technical, religious, experimental, or other value. State Historical Landmarks are recommended by the State Historical Resources Commission to the Director of California State parks for official designation. The nine members of the commission are appointed by the governor and review nominations for listing in the National Register of Historical Places. If a site is primarily of local interest, it may meet the criteria for the California Point of Historical Interest Program, which recognizes resources of local or countywide importance. Senate Bill 18 Senate Bill (SB) 18 (California Government Code §65352.3) incorporates the protection of California traditional tribal cultural places into land use planning for cities, counties, and agencies. SB 18 establishes requirements for local governments to contact, refer plans to, and consult with California Native American Tribes as part of the adoption or amendment of any general or specific plan proposed on or after March 1, 2005. SB 18 requires public notice to be sent to tribes listed on the Native American Heritage Commission’s (NAHC’s) SB 18 Tribal Consultation list within the geographical areas affected by the proposed changes. If consideration is desired, tribes must respond to a local government notice within 90 days (unless a shorter time frame has been agreed upon by the tribe), indicating that they want to consult with the local government. Consultations are for the purpose of preserving or mitigating impacts to places, features, and objects described in Sections 5097.9 and 5097.993 of the Public Resources Code that may be affected by the proposed adoption of or amendment to a general or specific plan. Human Remains Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code provides for the disposition of accidentally discovered human remains. Section 7050.5 states that if human remains are found, no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains shall occur until the County Coroner has determined the appropriate treatment and disposition of the human remains. Section 5097.98 of the California Public Resources Code states that, if remains are determined by the Coroner to be of Native American origin, the Coroner must notify the NAHC within 24 hours. The NAHC must then identify the person or persons it believes to be the most likely descended from the deceased Native American. The descendents shall complete their inspection within 48 hours of being granted access to the site. The designated Native American representative would then determine, in consultation with the property owner, the disposition of the human remains. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.4 Cultural Resources-080812.docx 5.4-4 Cultural Resources 5.4.3 METHODOLOGY Data for this section was compiled from the City of Anaheim General Plan (May 2004) and the Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update EIR 330 (May 2004). The City of Anaheim also solicited Native American consultation requests pursuant to SB 18 requirements. 5.4.4 EXISTING CONDITIONS The majority of the ARSP, as previously described in Section 3.0, Project Description, is highly urban in nature and has been developed with a variety of different land uses. A variety of community landmarks and prominent regional attractions exist in the immediate vicinity including Disneyland, Disney’s California Adventure, GardenWalk, and the Platinum Triangle. Archaeological Resources Archaeological sites are locations that contain significant evidence of pre-historic human activity. An archaeological site is defined by a “significant accumulation or presence of one or more of the following: food remains, waste from the manufacturing of tools, tools, concentrations or alignments of stones, modification of rock surfaces, unusual discoloration or accumulation of soil, or human skeletal remains” (Anaheim 2004). Archaeological sites are often located along creek areas, ridgelines, and vistas. According to EIR 330, many of these types of landforms are located within the Hill and Canyon Area of the City and the City’s Sphere-of-Influence area. One major cultural resource site (CA-Ora-303) has been identified and recorded within the City boundaries (Anaheim 2004). This site was first recorded in 1970 as a series of small north-facing rock shelters adjacent to State Route (SR) 91. Artifacts identified at this site included manos, hammerstones, choppers, lithic flakes, and some faunal bone. No recorded archaeological sites, including human burial locations, have been identified within or near the ARSP area (Anaheim 2004). Paleontological Resources Paleontological sites are those areas that show evidence of pre-human activity (Anaheim 2004). Paleontological sites are often characterized as small rock outcroppings or geologic formations that are encountered during earth disturbance. Because geologic formations have the potential to contain important fossils, paleontological sensitivity is often based on the underlying geologic formation. Because most of the City has been built out, there are very few areas containing rock outcroppings. According to EIR 330, the Hill and Canyon Area contain sedimentary rocks ranging in age from Late Cretaceous to Middle Miocene periods (Anaheim 2004). The oldest sedimentary rocks belong to the upper Cretaceous Holz Shale and the Schulz Ranch Member of the Williams Formation, which are located in the southeastern corner of the Hill and Canyon Area. No fossils have been recorded within these formations. No areas of paleontologic sensitivity have been identified within or near the ARSP. Historic Resources According to EIR 330, early Spanish explorations of Southern California date back to the mid-1500s when explorations included the identification of populations from ships, but did not include direct contact with Native American people. The first recorded direct contact with Native Americans was not made until the 1770s, when Father Garces traversed the Mojave Desert and entered coastal Southern California through the Cajon Pass. In 1771, the Mission San Gabriel Archangel was founded. The Gabrielino Indians are named after the mission. In the late 18th Century, Felipe de Neve, Spanish Governor of California, established a pueblo along the Los Angeles River north of the San Gabriel Mission in order to reaffirm Spain’s ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.4 Cultural Resources-080812.docx 5.4-5 Cultural Resources claim over the territory in the face of encroachments by Russia in the north and Britain from the sea. In August 1781, Governor de Neve, the settlers, soldiers, mission priests, and a few Native Americans arrived at the new pueblo alongside the Los Angeles River. Governor de Neve recorded September 4, 1781, as the official date of establishment of El Pueblo de la Reina de Los Angeles. The pueblo also helped to keep Spain’s California military garrisons supplied and fed (Anaheim 2004). Europeans first arrived in Los Angeles by sea via the San Pedro Port. Throughout the early 19th Century, U.S. vessels traded with local area farmers, and in 1818 a crewmember named Joseph Chapman helped construct the town’s first church. In 1826, fur trader Jedidiah Smith was the first known Caucasian to reach Los Angeles by traveling over land from the Missouri frontier. In 1821, the Mexican Revolution replaced Spanish rule with an independent Mexican government. In 1835, Mexico’s Congress declared Los Angeles the capital of California, but the provincial governor remained in San Francisco. Therefore, the City’s relative isolation and the local authority of farmers and ranchers remained unthreatened. By the 1840s, Los Angeles had become the largest settlement in Southern California (Anaheim 2004). Anaheim History According to EIR 330, Anaheim was founded in 1857 as a colony of German farmers and vintners. One of the founding members, George Hansen, settled the City’s original 1,165 acres. The City’s name was derived from the words “Ana” from the nearby Santa Ana River and “heim”, German for home, meaning “home by the river”. The early settlers constructed walls and fences made from willow poles to mark the boundaries of their settlement and to keep out herds of wild cattle. Some of these fence poles took root and became gates into the Colony. These first settlers were farmers, and also writers, artists and musicians. Among the first public buildings were a school and an opera house. The North Gate has been preserved at 775 N. Anaheim Boulevard and designated as a California State Landmark. This area currently comprises the City’s downtown area and surrounding historic neighborhoods bound by North, South, East and West Streets (Anaheim 2004). Grapes were among the crops cultivated for the first few decades, but a plague in the 1870s wiped out the vineyards. In their place, groves of citrus trees were planted, and the first commercially grown oranges in Orange County were grown in Anaheim. Other crops included walnuts and chili peppers. The City was incorporated in 1876 with a population of 881. By 1920, the City had grown into a tight-knit agricultural community with a population of 5,526. In 1887, the construction of the Santa Fe railroad depot linked Anaheim’s citrus growers with markets in the eastern United States. Anaheim’s small town lifestyle continued through the first half of the 20th Century. Center Street was the hub of community activity, where people gathered to celebrate local events and festivities and commemorate national and international events including the end of World Wars, the assassination of President John Kennedy, and the first steps on the moon. In 1950, the town’s population had grown to 14,556. Many of the resources from this area and earlier have been identified in the City’s Anaheim Colony Historic District Preservation Plan, which was adopted in 1999 (Anaheim 2004). According to MEIR 313, a subcommittee at the Orange County Historic Commission met in 1991 to determine whether the existing Disneyland Theme Park, immediately adjacent to the ARSP, should be designated as a County Historic Landmark. No historic designation was made at the time, and no future action was recommended. Since that time, no other historic features have been identified in the City (Anaheim 1994). At the time the ARSP was adopted, no designated historic or prehistoric cultural resources were identified within a one-mile radius of the ARSP. The City’s westerly portion, including the ARSP, ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.4 Cultural Resources-080812.docx 5.4-6 Cultural Resources has been developed and redeveloped with suburban and urban uses over the past 50 plus years. In addition, though there are a number of structures that qualify as being 45 years of age or older in the ARSP, none of these structures are expected to qualify as historic resources because these buildings, structures, objects, or sites have been physically altered, and/or do not fulfill the previously identified criteria for local, State, or national listing of historic resources. 5.4.5 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE The following significance criteria are derived from the City of Anaheim Environmental Checklist. The Proposed Project would result in a significant impact related to cultural resources if it would: Threshold 5.4.1 Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in § 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines and/or identified on the Qualified Historic Structure list of the Anaheim Colony Historic Preservation Plan (July 20, 1999). Threshold 5.4.2 Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines. Threshold 5.4.3 Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature. Threshold 5.4.4 Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries. 5.4.6 PROJECT IMPACT ANALYSIS Standard Requirements SR 5.4-1 Before and during construction, if human remains are discovered on-site, no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98 and California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5. SR 5.4-2 Prior to approval of any amendment to the ARSP or the City of Anaheim General Plan, the project property owner/developer shall coordinate with the City Planning Department to undergo a solicitation of Native American consultation pursuant to Senate Bill (SB) 18 (California Government Code, Section 65352.3). Impact Analysis Threshold 5.4.1 Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in § 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines and/or identified on the Qualified Historic Structure list of the Anaheim Colony Historic Preservation Plan (July 20, 1999)? No designated or eligible historical resources, as defined in Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, have been identified in ARSP. Due to the proximity of the ARSP to the designated structures, the Proposed Project would not conflict with any structures or resources identified in the Anaheim Colony Historic Preservation Plan’s Qualified Historic Structure List (Anaheim 2004a). The Anaheim Colony is located approximately 1,000 feet northeast of the ARSP, adjacent to the northbound lanes of the Interstate 5 freeway. Build out of the ARSP would be ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.4 Cultural Resources-080812.docx 5.4-7 Cultural Resources fully contained within the existing ARSP boundaries; therefore, no direct impacts to any designated historical resources within the Anaheim Colony are anticipated. There are numerous structures within the ARSP that are nearing the 45-year threshold to be considered for historic designation. Because this EIR does not evaluate any specific development applications, future project details and timing cannot be committed to at this time. To ensure that any potential resources that have not been formally identified are lost, and since a number of structures are nearing 45 years of age within the ARSP boundaries, implementation of the proposed mitigation would reduce any potential impacts related to historic resources to less than significant levels by requiring implementation of a detailed mitigation plan, if deemed necessary. Impact Summary: Future development and redevelopment associated with the Proposed Project has the potential to impact unknown historical resources. Implementation of MM 5.4-3 would reduce this potential impact to a less than significant level. The conclusion for impacts to historical resources is more significant than the conclusion provided in MEIR 313. Threshold 5.4.2 Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines? Threshold 5.4.3 Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? As stated previously, the ARSP is highly urban in nature and is developed with a variety of structures. No archaeological or paleontological resources have been identified within or near the ARSP (Anaheim 2004a). Additionally, no known unique geologic features are located within the ARSP (Anaheim 2004a). In compliance with the standard requirements, the City of Anaheim contacted known Native American groups to solicit consultation requests, pursuant to SB 18, in October 2009. No concerns were raised during this process. Although no resources are anticipated to be discovered in conjunction with build out of the ARSP, there is the potential for unknown subsurface cultural deposits to be discovered during grading activities, which would be considered a potentially significant impact. Implementation of the proposed mitigation would mitigate the potential for disturbing unidentified significant cultural resources, thus reducing the potential impact to a less than significant level. Impact Summary: Grading and construction activities associated with build out of the ARSP could impact unknown archeological and/or paleontological resources, which would be considered significant. This impact would be mitigated to a level considered less than significant with implementation of the proposed mitigation measures. This conclusion is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313 for the original ARSP. Threshold 5.4.4 Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? C-R District and PR District As previously discussed, there are no cemeteries or identified human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries, known to be located within the ARSP area (Anaheim 1994). Also, because of the highly urban and dense character of the C-R and PR districts, it is unlikely that these resources existed in the past. Although no human remains are ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.4 Cultural Resources-080812.docx 5.4-8 Cultural Resources anticipated to be discovered in conjunction with build out of the ARSP, there is potential for unknown remains to be discovered during grading activities, which would be considered a potentially significant impact. However, compliance with the standard requirements would mitigate the potential for disturbing unidentified resources, thus reducing the potential impact to a less than significant level. Impact Summary: Grading and construction activities associated with build out of the ARSP could impact previously unknown human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries, which would be considered significant. However, compliance with the standard requirements would reduce this impact to a level considered less than significant. MEIR 313 did not evaluate impacts related to disturbance of human remains; therefore, a consistency finding for this impact conclusion cannot be made. 5.4.7 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS Direct impacts to cultural resources are generally site specific. As defined in Section 15130 of the CEQA Guidelines, a cumulative impact consists of an impact that is created as a result of the incremental effects of a Proposed Project, together with the effects of other projects, causing related impacts. Although a project—in conjunction with the effects of past projects, other current projects, and probable future projects—may result in the disturbance of prehistoric archaeological resource sites and paleontological resources throughout the region, the proposed mitigation measures would diminish these impacts. Therefore, despite the site-specific nature of the resources, the mitigation identified for use in the event that unknown or undocumented resources are discovered would reduce the significance level of potential cumulative impacts. As a result, anticipated development within the ARSP area would not contribute to a significant cumulative impact. Cumulative effects on historic resources are a concern in the event that individual historical resources are impacted through implementation of multiple projects, thus resulting in a loss of multiple resources. Implementation of the proposed mitigation would reduce the likelihood of a significant impact. Further, as development occurs within surrounding cities, other historical resources representing a similar genre or type of architecture may be impacted; however, build out of the ARSP would not contribute to this cumulative impact to historic resources. A less than significant cumulative impact would occur with implementation of the proposed mitigation. 5.4.8 MITIGATION MEASURES Previously Approved Measures MEIR 313 presented mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts associated with the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Project to less than significant levels. The following measures from MEIR 313 shall be incorporated into the Mitigation Program for this EIR. (Note that the measure number and section from MEIR 313 are listed in parentheses.) MM 5.4-1 Prior to approval issuance of each grading permit plan, the property owner/developer shall submit a letter identifying the certified archaeologist that has been hired to ensure that the following actions are implemented: a. The archaeologist must be present at the pre-grading conference in order to establish procedures for temporarily halting or redirecting work to permit the sampling, identification, and evaluation of artifacts if potentially significant artifacts are uncovered. If artifacts are uncovered and determined to be ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.4 Cultural Resources-080812.docx 5.4-9 Cultural Resources significant, the archaeological observer shall determine appropriate actions in cooperation with the property owner/developer for exploration and/or salvage. b. Specimens that are collected prior to or during the grading process will be donated to an appropriate educational or research institution. c. Any archaeological work at the site shall be conducted under the direction of the certified archaeologist. If any artifacts are discovered during grading operations when the archaeological monitor is not present, grading shall be diverted around the area until the monitor can survey the area. d. A final report detailing the findings and disposition of the specimens shall be submitted to the City Engineer. Upon completion of the grading, the archaeologist shall notify the City as to when the final report will be submitted. (MEIR 313 MM 3.12-1, Cultural Resources). MM 5.4-2 Prior to approval issuance of each grading permit plan, the property owner/developer shall submit a letter identifying the certified paleontologist that has been hired to ensure that the following actions are implemented: a. The paleontologist must be present at the pre-grading conference in order to establish procedures to temporarily halt or redirect work to permit the sampling, identification, and evaluation of fossils if potentially significant paleontological resources are uncovered. If artifacts are uncovered and found to be significant, the paleontological observer shall determine appropriate actions in cooperation with the property owner/developer for exploration and/or salvage. b. Specimens that are collected prior to or during the grading process will be donated to an appropriate educational or research institution. c. Any paleontological work at the site shall be conducted under the direction of the certified paleontologist. If any fossils are discovered during grading operations when the paleontological monitor is not present, grading shall be diverted around the area until the monitor can survey the area. (MEIR 313 MM 3.12-2, Cultural Resources). Final EIR 330 presented mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts associated with the Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update project to less than significant levels. The following measure from EIR 330 shall be incorporated into the Mitigation Program for this EIR. Modifications to the original measure are shown as strikethrough for deleted text and bold for new, inserted text. (Note that the measure number and section from MEIR 313 are listed in parentheses.) MM 5.4-3 Prior to approval of a final site plan for properties that contain a structure over 45 years old, City staff shall require property owners/developers shall submit to the Planning Department, Planning Services Division to provide studies to documentation to verify the presence/absence of historic resources for areas with documented or inferred resource presence. On properties where resources are identified, such studies documentation shall provide a detailed mitigation plan, including a monitoring program and recovery and/or in situ ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.4 Cultural Resources-080812.docx 5.4-10 Cultural Resources preservation plan, based on the recommendations of a qualified specialist (EIR 330 MM 5.4-1, Cultural Resources). 5.4.9 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION Potential impacts related to cultural resources would be reduced to levels considered less than significant with implementation of the proposed mitigation measures and adherence to the standard requirements. No significant unavoidable impacts to cultural, archeological, or paleontological resources would result from Project implementation. 5.4.10 REFERENCES Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP). 1966 (as amended). National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, As amended through 2006 [With annotations]. Washington, D.C.: ACHP. http://www.achp.gov/docs/nhpa%202008-final.pdf. Anaheim, City of. 2004a (May). Final Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update EIR No. 330. Anaheim, CA: the City. 2004b (May). General Plan for the City of Anaheim (City Council Resolution No. 2004-94). Anaheim, CA: the City. 1999. Anaheim Colony Historic District Preservation Plan 1999. Anaheim CA: the City. http://www.anaheim.net/com_dev/ed/pdf/HistoricPreservationPlan.PDF. 1994 (August). The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Draft EIR No. 313 with Addendum. Anaheim, CA: the City. California Office of Administrative Law. 2010. California Code of Regulations (Title 14, Natural Resources; Division 6, Resources Agency; Chapter 3, Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act). Eagen, MN: Westlaw for the State. http://government.westlaw.com/linkedslice/default.asp?Action=TOC&RS=GVT1.0& VR=2.0&SP=CCR-1000. California, State of. 2010a. California Government Code (Sections 65350–65362, Preparation, Adoption, and Amendment of the General Plan). Sacramento, CA: the State of California. http://info.sen.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section= gov&group=65001- 66000&file=65350-65362. 2010b. California Health and Safety Code (Sections 7050.5–7055, General Provisions: General Provisions). Sacramento, CA: the State of California. http://info.sen.ca.gov/cgi- bin/displaycode?section=hsc&group=07001-08000 &file=7050.5-7055. 2010c. California Public Resources Code (Sections 5020–5029.5, State Parks and Monuments: Historical Resources). Sacramento, CA: the State of California. http://info.sen.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=prc& group=05001-06000&file=5020- 5029.5. 2010d. California Public Resources Code (Sections 5097.9–5097.991, Native American Historical, Cultural, and Sacred Sites). Sacramento, CA: the State of California. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.4 Cultural Resources-080812.docx 5.4-11 Cultural Resources http://info.sen.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=prc&group=05001- 06000&file=5097.9-5097.991. 2010e. California Public Resources Code (Sections 5097.993–5097.994). Sacramento, CA: the State. http://info.sen.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=prc&group=05001- 06000&file=5097.993-5097.994 2010f. California Public Resources Code (Sections 21000 et seq., California Environmental Quality Act). Sacramento, CA: California Resource Agency. http://info.sen.ca.gov/cgi-bin/calawquery?codesection=prc&codebody=&hits=20&site= sen. 2010g. California Public Resources Code (Sections 21080–21098, Environmental Quality: General). Sacramento, CA: the State of California. http://info.sen.ca.gov/cgi- bin/displaycode?section=prc&group=21001-22000&file=21080-21098. U.S. Congress. 2007 (January 16 United States Code (Chapter 1A, Historic Sites, Buildings, Objects, and Antiques; Section 470f, Effect of Federal undertakings upon property listed in National Register; comment by Advisory Council on Historic Preservation). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi- bin/usc.cgi?ACTION=RETRIEVE&FILE=$$xa$$busc16.wais&start=6201827&SIZE=379 5&TYPE=TEXT. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.4 Cultural Resources-080812.docx 5.4-12 Cultural Resources This page intentionally left blank ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.5 Geology-080812.docx 5.5-3 Geology and Soils 5.5 GEOLOGY AND SOILS This section analyzes potential geotechnical hazards that may adversely affect the potential site or that may be exacerbated by implementation of the Proposed Project. Information presented in this section is summarized from the City of Anaheim General Plan (Anaheim 2004a), the Final Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update EIR 330 (Anaheim 2004b), Anaheim Resort Specific Plan MEIR 313 (Anaheim 1994a), and the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (ARSP). 5.5.1 SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION MEIR 313 included information from the Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation, as prepared by Dames & Moore. The capacity for impacts from settlement, erosion, liquefaction, and flooding to development constructed in accordance with the ARSP were examined. MEIR 313 stated that the ARSP area was not located within an established Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone (known as Earthquake Fault Zones after 1994); the risk of ground rupture within the ARSP area was slight; and the liquefaction potential within the ARSP area was low, given the dense deposits underlying the ARSP area. Per the Mitigation Program for MEIR 313, development constructed in accordance to the ARSP was required to comply with the most recent approved Uniform Building Code. Given the geologic conditions present within the ARSP area, and given adherence to mitigation measures, related impacts were found to be less than significant. 5.5.2 PLANS, POLICIES, AND REGULATORY CONDITIONS Related Planning Programs City of Anaheim General Plan, Green Element and Safety Element There are two specific areas in the City of Anaheim General Plan that address the issue of geology: the Green Element and the Safety Element. The Green Element comprehensively addresses topics concerning conservation, open space, parks and recreation, trails, and public landscaping. The Safety Element establishes policies and programs to protect the community from risks associated with potential seismic, geologic, and flood hazards in an attempt to avoid or minimize exposure to these potential hazards. As part of the element, the conservation of land resources (including soils) is discussed and a goal with a related objective, and policies are identified. According to the Safety Element, the ARSP area is not located within a liquefaction or subsidence hazard zone, nor is it located within an area that would require preparation of a special geologic study. Applicable goals and policies from the Green Element and the Safety Element that are related to hazards and hazardous materials that are applicable to the Proposed Project are provided in Table 5.9-2 in Section 5.9, Land Use and Planning, with a project consistency analysis. Regulatory Setting The State regulates development in California through a variety of tools that reduce or mitigate potential hazards from earthquakes or other geologic hazards. The California Building Code (CBC), Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act, and the State of California Seismic Hazards Mapping Act govern development in potentially seismically active areas. California Building Code The CBC contains provisions to safeguard against major structural failures or loss of life caused by earthquakes or other geologic hazards. The California Building Code (CBC) is promulgated ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.5 Geology-080812.docx 5.5-4 Geology and Soils under the California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 24, Parts 1 through 12 (also known as the California Building Standards Code), and is administered by the California Building Standards Commission (CBSC). The CBSC is responsible for administering California’s building codes, which includes adopting, approving, publishing, and implementing codes and standards. The CBC is a compilation of three types of building standards from three different origins: 1. Standards adopted by State agencies without change from the national model codes; 2. Standards adopted and adapted from the national model code standards to meet California conditions; and 3. Standards authorized by the California legislature that constitute extensive additions not covered by the national model codes and adopted to address concerns particular to California. The national model code standards adopted into Title 24 apply to all occupancies in California except for modifications adopted by State agencies and local governing bodies. The current version of the CBC is the 2007 Triennial Edition (2007 CBC). Seismic Hazards Mapping Act of 1990 The Seismic Hazards Mapping Act of 1990 (Public Resources Code [PRC], Chapter 7.8, §§2690–2699.6) directs the California Department of Conservation to identify and map areas subject to earthquake hazards such as liquefaction, earthquake-induced landslides, and amplified ground shaking. Passed by the State legislature after the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake, the Seismic Hazards Mapping Act is aimed at reducing the threat to public safety and minimizing potential loss of life and property in the event of a damaging earthquake event. A product of the resultant Seismic Hazards Mapping Program, Seismic Zone Hazard Maps identify Zones of Required Investigation; most developments designed for human occupancy within these zones must conduct site-specific geotechnical investigations to identify the hazard and to develop appropriate mitigation measures prior to permitting by local jurisdictions. Pursuant to the Seismic Zone Hazard Maps, the ARSP area is not within an identified Liquefaction Hazard Zone. Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act was passed in 1972 to mitigate the hazard of surface faulting to structures designed for human occupancy. This State law was a direct result of the 1971 San Fernando Earthquake, which was associated with extensive surface fault ruptures that damaged numerous homes, commercial buildings, and other structures. The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act’s main purpose is to prevent the construction of buildings used for human occupancy on the surface trace of active faults. The Act only addresses the hazard of surface fault rupture and is not directed toward other earthquake hazards. The Seismic Hazards Mapping Act, passed in 1990 and discussed above, addresses non-surface fault rupture earthquake hazards, including liquefaction and seismically induced landslides. According to EIR 330, no Alquist-Priolo zones have been identified within the ARSP area (Anaheim 2004 5.5.3 METHODOLOGY The analysis in this section is based on review of information available in the City of Anaheim General Plan (Anaheim 2004a), the Final Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update EIR 330 (Anaheim 2004b), the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan MEIR 313 (Anaheim 1994a), and the ARSP. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.5 Geology-080812.docx 5.5-5 Geology and Soils 5.5.4 EXISTING CONDITIONS Regional Physiography, Topography and Geology The City of Anaheim is situated in the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province. The geomorphic province encompasses an area that extends approximately 900 miles from the Transverse Ranges and the Los Angeles Basin, south to the Southern tip of Baja California. The province varies in width from approximately 30 to 100 miles. In general, the province consists of a northwest-southeast oriented complex of blocks separated by similar trending faults. The basement bedrock complex includes Jurassic-age metavolcanic and metasedimentary rocks, and Cretaceous-age igneous rocks of the Southern California batholith. The City of Anaheim extends from the southerly portion of the Los Angeles Basin easterly into the northern portions of the Santa Ana Mountains. The western portions of Anaheim, including the ARSP, are located in the Central Block of the Los Angeles Basin. The Central Block is characterized by thick layers of alluvium overlying predominantly sedimentary rock of the Pleistocene through Cretaceous ages. The depths to basement rocks are known from petroleum well logs and geophysical data. The total thickness of the sedimentary section is roughly 13,000 feet near the southern end of the Los Angeles basin. Existing Local Geological Setting The distribution of geologic units at the surface within the City reflects the geography and can be divided into two general areas: west and east. The broad alluvial plain area in the western half of the City (including the ARSP) is generally mantled by Holocene-age (up to 11,000 years old) alluvial deposits, which become increasingly older with depth. East of the ARSP area, Pleistocene-age (11,000 to 2 million years old) terrace deposits are present on elevated terraces along the upper edges of the alluvial plains and the lower benches of the hillside areas. Undifferentiated Holocene Alluvium is composed primarily of unconsolidated gravel, sand, silt, and clay. The more recent alluvial deposits (less than 1,000 years old) are generally found along active stream and river courses (Anaheim 2004a). The majority of the flat, alluvial plain areas outside the active stream channels are underlain by alluvial deposits that are considered to have been deposited between 1,000 and 10,000 years ago. Geologic Hazards The following sections summarize potential geologic hazards in the ARSP area, including seismicity, faulting, landslides, and liquefaction. The State regulates development within California to reduce or mitigate potential hazards from earthquakes or other geologic hazards. Development in seismically active areas is also governed by the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act and the Seismic Hazards Mapping Act, referenced earlier. Each of these acts serves to promote, preserve, and to safeguard against major structural failure or loss of life in earthquake or ground-shaking events (Anaheim 2004a). The California Building Code regulates the design and construction of excavations, foundations, building frames, retaining walls, and other building elements to mitigate the effects of seismic shaking. Seismic zones are mapped areas that are based on proximity to known active faults and the potential future earthquakes and intensity of seismic shaking. Seismic zones range from 0 to 4, with areas mapped as Zone 4 being potentially subject to the highest accelerations due to seismic shaking and the shortest recurrence intervals. The City of Anaheim is located within Seismic Zone 4 (Anaheim 2004a). ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.5 Geology-080812.docx 5.5-6 Geology and Soils Faulting and Seismicity Earthquakes are common in Southern California; therefore, the City of Anaheim, as with the entire Southern California region, is located within a seismically active region. There are three types of fault movements in the Southern California area: strike-slip, reverse-slip, and reverse oblique slip. Strike-slip faults exhibit horizontal displacement, in which rocks slide past one another. Reverse faults exhibit vertical movement in which the rock above the fault plane moves upward relative to the rock below. Faults that experience components of reverse-slip and strike- slip are oblique faults. Geologic evidence is used to determine the likelihood of future rupture along a fault. Faults are described as active, potentially active, or inactive based on their potential for activity. Those faults that give evidence of surface displacement within Holocene time (the last 11,000 years) have the highest potential of generating earthquakes again and are described as active. Distinct landforms suggesting fault movement within the last 11,000 years include sag ponds, offset drainages, linear valleys, and springs. Faults that are poorly defined or inadequately studied but that have shown activity within the last 1.6 million years are considered potentially active. As such, their recurrence rates may be tens of thousands of years long, but they are still capable of producing moderate to large earthquakes within the design life of many critical or long-lifetime structures. Various methods are used to determine the impact an earthquake can have on the surrounding areas of a fault. These methods can be used as planning and engineering tools. They include the Modified Mercalli Intensity (MI) scale, Richter scale, the slip rate, recurrence intervals, and the maximum probable and maximum credible magnitudes (a description of these methods is detailed in Section 3.6-4, Earth Resources - Geology, Soils and Seismicity of MEIR 313). Earthquakes from several active and potentially active faults in the region could affect future developments within the ARSP area (please refer to Exhibit 3.6-2, Major Regional Faults of MEIR 313). The active and potentially active faults which are capable of generating the strongest ground motion at the site include the Newport-Inglewood, Whittier, and Elsinore Faults. Other faults that may be capable of generating strong ground motion at the site include faults located offshore Palos Verdes Fault Zone), more distant onshore faults San Jacinto and San Andreas faults), and local faults Norwalk and Peralta Hills faults). There are several active and potentially active faults in the region. • Newport-Inglewood Fault Zone (NIFZ) (Active): The NIFZ is a series of subparallel faults that begins off the coast and extends from Dana Point inland through Newport Beach, Long Beach, and Torrance until it either merges with or is truncated by the Santa Monica Fault. The total length of the fault zone is greater than 50 miles (80 kilometers Recent seismic activity is indicated by numerous historic earthquakes, including the 1933 Long Beach Earthquake. The estimated Quaternary (11,000 to 1.5 million years before present) slip rate for the northern segment of the fault zone is 0.1 to 1.2 millimeters per year (mm/yr). The nearest point to the NIFZ is located approximately 8 miles (12 km) southwest of the site. The California Division of Mines and Geology suspects that the NIFZ is capable of generating a maximum probable earthquake magnitude of 6.5 and a maximum credible earthquake of 7.5 Intensities could reach VII and VIII within the ARSP area because of such an earthquake. • Whittier Fault (Active): The Whittier Fault parallels the NIFZ northeast of Orange County and has a total length of 25 miles (40 km). At its nearest point, it is 8 miles (12 km) northeast of the ARSP area. Although no major historic earthquakes ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.5 Geology-080812.docx 5.5-7 Geology and Soils have been correlated to the fault, some earthquakes were centered in the vicinity of this fault on fault splays which may be part of the Whittier Fault. The estimated Quaternary slip rate for this fault is 1.6 to 2.9 mm/yr. Recent activity suggests that it has the ability to generate a 6.3-magnitude maximum probable earthquake and a 7.0-magnitude maximum credible earthquake. • Elsinore Fault (Active): The Elsinore Fault is approximately 130 miles (210 km) long and extends from its intersection with the Whittier and Chino faults on the north to its terminus from its intersection with the Whittier and Chino faults on the north to its terminus near the U.S. Mexico border. The northern end of the Elsinore Fault is approximately 21 miles (33 km) east of the ARSP area. The late Quaternary (2.5 million years before present) slip rate is estimated to range from 3.3 to 9.3 mm/yr with a best estimate of 4 to 7 mm/yr. The most notable historic earthquake on this fault is the 1910 Temescal Valley earthquake (magnitude 6.0) along the northernmost segment of the fault. In addition, 2 earthquakes of magnitude greater than 6.5 may have occurred on related faults in Mexico in 1892 and 1934. Available data suggest an average recurrence interval of approximately 200 years for large earthquakes (magnitude greater than 7.0) on the northernmost fault segment. The maximum probable earthquake magnitude is 6.3 and the maximum credible earthquake magnitude is 7.0. • Palos Verdes Hills Fault Zone (Active): Another fault exhibiting recent movement is the Palos Verdes Hills Fault Zone, which lies 19 miles southwest of the ARSP area. It is known to be the source of numerous small earthquakes. The approximate 80-mile-long fault runs under the Palos Verdes Peninsula through the subsurface of the Palos Verdes Hills (Anaheim 1994a). It is unclear whether the fault experiences reverse or reverse right oblique movement. The Palos Verdes Hills Fault could generate a maximum probable earthquake magnitude of 6.2 (Anaheim 1994a) and a 6.5 to 7.0-magnitude maximum credible event with a recurrence interval of 2,000 to 8,000 years (Dames and Moore 1983). • San Andreas Fault Zone (Active): The San Andreas Fault Zone marks the boundary between the Northern American Plate and the Pacific Plate; as such, it has been recognized as the major seismotectonic feature in California. The last major earthquake in Southern California originating from the San Andreas fault was the 1857 Fort Tejon earthquake (magnitude 8.0). This earthquake resulted in displacement of 16 to 36 feet (5 to 11 meters) along the fault and generated intensities of X to XI (Modified Mercalli scale). Intensities of X to XI indicate the destruction of some structures. The CDMG has determined that the San Andreas Fault is capable of generating a maximum probable magnitude event of 8.3. It is suspected that the segment of the San Andreas Fault Zone closest to the site is accumulating large amounts of energy which could be released during infrequent, large-magnitude (magnitude 7 to 8 or more) events rather than by more frequent smaller-magnitude earthquakes. The most recent great earthquake (magnitude 8 or greater) on this segment may have occurred over 150 years ago (Anaheim 1994a). The long-term slip rate for this portion of the fault zone is approximately 25 mm/yr at the Cajon Pass near San Bernardino. Although the ARSP area lies approximately 41 miles to the southwest of the San Andreas Fault, it may experience intensities of VII and VIII during a magnitude 8.3 earthquake. • San Jacinto Fault Zone (Active): The San Jacinto Fault Zone comprises up to 20 distinct but related northwest-trending, right-lateral strike slip fault segments. Historically, this fault zone has been the most highly active fault zone within Southern California, having generated between 6 and 10 earthquakes measuring magnitudes of 6.0 or greater on the Richter scale since 1989. The fault extends from its junction with ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.5 Geology-080812.docx 5.5-8 Geology and Soils the San Andreas Fault in the Cajon Pass to near the U.S.-Mexico border, and is approximately 165 miles (265 km) long. Individual faults within the fault zone are known to displace Pleistocene- and Holocene-age strata along its entire length. The San Jacinto Fault Zone is located approximately 39 miles (63 km) northeast of the ARSP area. It has had an estimated slip rate of 8 to 12 mm/yr during the late Pleistocene and Holocene ages. The maximum probable earthquake magnitude is 7.0, and the maximum credible earthquake magnitude is 7.5. • Peralta Hills Fault (Potentially Active): The Peralta hills Fault is a thrust fault that is most likely responsible for the uplift of the Peralta Hills. The Peralta Hills fault is located approximately 4.5 miles (7.5 km) east of the ARSP area. • Norwalk Fault (Potentially Active): The Norwalk Fault is a thrust fault located approximately 4 miles (6.5 km) north of the site. The Norwalk Fault is at least 8.5 miles (13.5 km) in length and may have been the source of a damaging earthquake (magnitude 4.7) in 1929. Although the recent history of activity on this fault and its service trace are uncertain, based upon the available data, it is still considered to be potentially active. • Elysian Park Thrust Fault (Active): The Elysian Park Thrust Fault is described as a “blind” west-striking thrust fault in that it does not emerge at the ground surface. The existence of this fault, which is located approximately 16 miles northeast of the ARSP area, was generally unrecognized prior to the occurrence of the October 1987 Whittier Narrows earthquake (magnitude 5.9), which had its focus at a depth of approximately 14.6 km on the Elysian Park Thrust Fault. It is believed that this fault may be part of a fold and thrust belt which extends along the northern and western flanks of the Los Angeles Basin. Because these faults do not extend to the surface (their only surface extensions are anticlines, that is, large-scaled, upward-convex folds in rocks), evaluation of associated seismic hazards is difficult. Slip rates on the Elysian Park Thrust Fault have been estimated to range from 2.5 to 5.2 mm/yr. Maximum credible earthquake magnitudes for the thrust fault in the Whittier area have been estimated to be between 5 and 6. Maximum credible earthquake magnitudes of up to 7.5 have been suggested for segments of the associated fold and thrust belt lying farther to the west. • Johnson Valley Fault Zone (Active): The Johnson Valley Fault is a northwest-trending, right lateral, strike-slip fault located approximately 89 miles east of the ARSP area. The epicenters of the June 28, 1992, Landers earthquake (magnitude 7.4) and a number of aftershocks were on this fault, although right-lateral surface faulting associated with that event appears to have occurred over a distance of more than 70 km on the nearby Lenwood, Homestead Valley, and Camp Rock-Emerson faults, which approximately parallel the Johnson Valley Fault. Maximum credible earthquake magnitudes on these faults were previously estimated to be in the 6.3 to 7.1 range but will be re-evaluated based on recent seismic activity. Re-evaluated maximum credible earthquake magnitudes may be as high as 7.9. Strong Ground Motion As stated in EIR 330, seismic activity along nearby or more distant fault zones is likely to cause ground shaking within the City limits. Based on a Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment for the Western United States, issued by the U.S. Geological Survey (1999), the horizontal peak ground acceleration having a 10 percent probability of being exceeded in 50 years ranges from ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.5 Geology-080812.docx 5.5-9 Geology and Soils approximately 0.35 g (the acceleration of gravity) to 0.56 g within the City limits. Distances from Anaheim to active faults within a 100km distance are presented in Table 5.5-1 below. TABLE 5.5-1 PRINCIPAL ACTIVE FAULTS Fault Approximate Distance to City Limits (miles) Maximum Moment Magnitude Earthquake (Richter Scale) Elsinore – Whittier 0.7 6.8 Elsinore – Glen Ivy 1.3 6.8 Chino-Central Avenue 2.0 6.7 Newport-Inglewood (L.A. Basin) 7.0 6.9 San Jose 13.0 6.5 Newport-Inglewood (offshore) 15.0 6.9 Palos Verdes 15.0 7.1 Cucamonga 19.0 7.0 Sierra Madre (central) 19.0 7.0 Raymond 21.0 6.5 Verdugo 22.0 6.7 Clamshell – Sawpit 23.0 6.5 Hollywood 23.5 6.5 San Jacinto – San Bernardino 25.0 6.7 San Jacinto – San Jacinto Valley 27.0 6.9 Santa Monica 28.5 6.6 San Andreas – Southern 31.0 7.4 Elsinore – Temecula 33.0 6.8 Malibu Coast 33.0 6.7 San Andreas – 1857 Rupture 33.0 7.8 Cleghorn 33.5 6.5 Sierra Madre (San Fernando) 35.0 6.7 San Gabriel 37.0 7.0 North Frontal Fault Zone (West) 38.0 7.0 Coronado Bank 39.0 7.4 Anacapa – Dume 40.5 7.3 San Jacinto – Anza 43.5 7.2 Santa Susana 44.0 6.6 Elsinore – Julian 50.0 7.1 Holister 50.0 6.7 Rose Canyon 53.0 6.9 Oak Ridge (onshore) 55.0 6.9 Simi – Santa Rosa 55.0 6.7 Helendate – South Lockhardt 57.8 7.1 San Cayentano 60.0 6.8 Source: Anaheim 2004 a In the recorded past, the City of Anaheim has not experienced a major destructive earthquake. However, several major earthquakes have been recorded within approximately 100 kilometers of the ARSP area as shown in Table 5.5-2 below. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.5 Geology-080812.docx 5.5-10 Geology and Soils TABLE 5.5-2 HISTORICAL EARTHQUAKES Date Location Maximum Magnitude (M)a Approximate Epicentral Distance (miles) 7/28/1769 Los Angeles Basin 6.0 10 11/22/1800 San Diego Basin 6.5 52 12/8/1812 Wrightwood 7.0 41 7/11/1855 Los Angeles Region 6.0 40 12/16/1858 San Bernardino Region 6.0 23 7/30/1894 Lytle Creek Region 6.0 37 4/21/1918 San Jacinto 6.9 43 7/23/1923 San Bernardino Region 6.0 56 3/11/1933 Long Beach 6.3 16 2/9/1971 San Fernando 6.5 51 10/1/1987 Whittier Narrows 5.8 20 1/17/1994 Northridge 6.7 45 a Magnitudes listed are “summary magnitudes”. Prior to 1898, these are adjusted intensity magnitudes and after 1898, are surface wave magnitudes. Source: Anaheim 2004 b 5.5.5 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE The following significance criteria are derived from the City of Anaheim Environmental Checklist. The Proposed Project would result in a significant environmental impact related to geology and soils if it would: Threshold 5.5.1 Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving strong seismic ground shaking. Threshold 5.5.2 Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. Threshold 5.5.3 Be located on expansive soil, as described by Section 1802.3.2 of the California Building Code (2007) creating substantial risks to life or property. As previously discussed in Section 2.4.2, Effects Found Not to be Significant, during preparation of the Initial Study, the City of Anaheim determined that the Proposed Project would not have a significant impact for the following thresholds and no further analysis of this issue is presented in this section. Would the Project: • Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.5 Geology-080812.docx 5.5-11 Geology and Soils • Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? • Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving landslides? • Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the Project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? • Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? 5.5.6 PROJECT IMPACT ANALYSIS Standard Requirements The following standard requirement was derived from EIR 330. SR 5.5-1 All grading operations will be conducted in conformance with the Anaheim Municipal Code, Title 17, Land Development and Resources, and the most recent version of the California Building Code. The following standard requirement is from Section 5.8, Hydrology and Water Quality: SR 5.8-1 Development projects that will result in soil disturbance of one or more acres of land shall comply with the State’s Construction General Permit by filing a Notice of Intent (NOI) with the State Water Resources Control Board and implementing a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan Prior to the issuance of preliminary or precise grading permits, the property owner or developer shall provide the City Engineer with evidence that an NOI has been filed with the by providing a copy of the NOI invoice and the assigned Waste Discharger Identification (WDID) No. for the project. The shall include Best Management Practices (BMPs) designed with a goal of preventing a net sediment load increase in storm water discharges relative to preconstruction levels and shall prohibit during the construction period discharges of storm water or non-storm water at levels which would cause or contribute to an exceedance of applicable water quality standards contained in the Basin Plan. The BMPs shall address erosion control, sediment control, wind erosion control, tracking control, non-stormwater management and waste management and materials pollution control during all phases of construction, including a sampling and analysis plan for sediment and non-visible storm water pollutants. The property owner or developer shall be responsible for proper implementation of the Impact Analysis Threshold 5.5.1 Would the project expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving strong seismic ground shaking? ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.5 Geology-080812.docx 5.5-12 Geology and Soils The possibility of ground acceleration or shaking within the ARSP area is considered similar to that for all of Southern California. As stated in EIR 330, seismic activity along nearby or more distant fault zones is likely to cause ground shaking within the City limits and within the ARSP, thus exposing people and structures to adverse effects related to seismic ground shaking. This impact would be considered potentially significant. Implementation of the proposed mitigation measures, conformance with Titles 15 and 17 of the Anaheim Municipal Code and the 2007 California Building Code, and completion of subsequent design-level studies to be prepared when detailed grading and building plans are available would reduce this potential impact to a less than significant level. Impact Summary: The Proposed Project would be exposed to seismic ground shaking; however, with implementation of the proposed mitigation measures, impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level. This conclusion is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313 for the original ARSP. Threshold 5.6.2 Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Erosion is a natural and inevitable geologic process whereby earth materials are loosened, worn away, decomposed, or dissolved and are removed from one location and transported to another. Precipitation, running water, waves, and wind are all agents of erosion. Ordinarily, erosion proceeds so slowly that it is imperceptible, but when the natural equilibrium of the environment is changed, the rate of erosion can be greatly accelerated. This can create aesthetic as well as engineering problems. Accelerated erosion within an urban area can cause damage by undermining structures; blocking storm sewers; and depositing silt, sand, or mud in roads and tunnels. Eroded materials may be eventually deposited into surface waters where the carried silt can remain suspended for some time, constituting a pollutant and altering the normal balance of plant and animal life. The ARSP area is located within an area of the City with relatively flat topography and minimal potential for erosion impacts. The majority of the ARSP is currently developed with urban uses with limited areas of bare ground. Future development of all other areas within the ARSP would expose soil to the effects of erosion during demolition and/or construction activities, resulting in a potentially significant impact. All future development within the ARSP would be subject to local and State codes and requirements for erosion control and grading. In addition, project sites encompassing an area of one or more acres would require compliance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit and the subsequent development and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan both of which are further discussed in Section 5.8, Hydrology and Water Quality, of this EIR. Adherence to the standard requirements would ensure that impacts related to erosion and loss of topsoil are less than significant. Impact Summary: Future build out of the ARSP would expose areas to erosion and loss of topsoil during demolition and/or construction activities. Adherence to SR 5.8-1 would ensure that this impact would be less than significant. This conclusion is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313 for the original ARSP. Threshold 5.6.3: Would the project be located on expansive soil, as described by Section 1802.3.2 of the California Building Code (2007) creating substantial risks to life or property? According to EIR 330, the City of Anaheim, including the ARSP area, contains soils that range from having “low” to “high” expansion potential; therefore, build out of the ARSP on these soils ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.5 Geology-080812.docx 5.5-13 Geology and Soils may create substantial risks to life and property, resulting in a potentially significant impact. However, implementation of current codes and regulations, as identified in the Anaheim Municipal Code (SR 5.5-1) and as described in the proposed mitigation, would reduce potential impacts related to expansive soils to less than significant levels. Impact Summary: Expansive soils are known to exist within the ARSP area; therefore, build out of the ARSP may result in a significant impact related to expansive soil. Implementation of the proposed mitigation would reduce impacts to less than significant levels. MEIR 313 did not evaluate impacts related to expansive soils; therefore, a consistency finding for this impact conclusion cannot be made. 5.5.7 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS The cumulative study area for geology and soils is the City of Anaheim. However, geology and soils impacts are generally site specific and there is typically little, if any, geologically related, cumulative relationship between the development of a project and development within a larger cumulative area, such as the citywide development. For example, development within the ARSP area would not alter geologic events or soil features/characteristics (such as ground shaking, seismic intensity, or soil expansion); therefore, the Proposed Project would not affect the level of intensity at which a seismic event on an adjacent site is experienced. Implementation of the Proposed Project and future development in the surrounding area may expose more persons to seismic hazards. However, the Proposed Project, as well as the foreseeable projects, would be required to comply with the applicable State and local requirements, such as the CBC. As such, potential impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level and to the maximum extent practicable under current engineering practices. Seismic impacts are a regional issue and are also addressed through compliance with applicable codes and design standards. For these reasons, the Project’s contribution to cumulative geotechnical and soil impacts would be less than significant. 5.5.8 MITIGATION MEASURES Previously Approved Measures MEIR 313 presented mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts associated with the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Project to less than significant levels. The following measures from MEIR 313 shall be incorporated into the Mitigation Program for this EIR. Modifications to the original measure are shown as strikethrough for deleted text and bold for new, inserted text. (Note that the measure number and section from MEIR 313 are listed in parentheses.) MM 5.5-1 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit to the Planning Department, Building Services Division for review and approval, detailed foundation design information for the subject building(s), prepared by a civil engineer, based on recommendations by a geotechnical engineer. (MEIR 313 MM 3.6-2, Geology and Soils) MM 5.5-2 Prior to issuance of each foundation permit, the property owner/developer shall submit a report prepared by a geotechnical engineer to the Planning Department, Building Services Division for review and approval, which shall investigate the subject foundation excavations to determine if soft layers are present immediately beneath the footing site and to ensure that compressibility does not underlie the footing. (MEIR 313 MM 3.6-3, Geology and Soils) ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.5 Geology-080812.docx 5.5-14 Geology and Soils MM 5.5-3 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit plans to the Planning Department, Building Services Division for review and approval showing that the proposed structure has been analyzed for earthquake loading and designed according to the most recent seismic standards in the California Building Code adopted by the City of Anaheim. (MEIR 313 MM 3.6-4, Geology and Soils) MM 5.5-4 Prior to the final building and zoning inspection for a hotel/motel, the property owner/developer shall submit an earthquake emergency response plan for review and approval by the Fire Department. The plan shall require posted notices in all hotel rooms on earthquake safety procedures and incorporate ongoing earthquake training for hotel staff to the satisfaction of the Fire Department. (MEIR 313 MM 3.6-5, Geology and Soils) MM 5.5-5 Ongoing during grading activities, the property owner/developer shall implement standard practices for all applicable codes and ordinances to prevent erosion to the satisfaction of the Planning Department, Building Services Division. (MEIR 313 MM 3.6-6, Geology and Soils) Final EIR 330 presented mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts associated with the Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update Project to less than significant levels. The following measures are derived from EIR 330 and shall be incorporated into the Mitigation Program for this EIR: MM 5.5-6 Prior to issuance of building or grading permits, the property owner/developer shall submit to the Planning Department, Building Services Division The City shall require geologic and geotechnical investigations in areas of potential seismic or geologic hazards as part of the environmental or development review process and provide a note on plans that all grading operations will be conducted in conformance with the recommendations contained in the applicable geotechnical investigation. (EIR 330 MM 5.5-1, Geology and Soils) Additional Mitigation Measures No additional mitigation measures have been identified. 5.5.9 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION With implementation of the mitigation program described above, there would be less than significant impacts related to geology and soils. 5.5.10 REFERENCES Anaheim. 2004a (May). General Plan for the City of Anaheim (City Council Resolution No. 2004-94). Anaheim, CA: the City. 2004b (May). Final Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update EIR No. 330 (Prepared by The Planning Center). Anaheim, CA: the City. 1994a (August). The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Draft EIR No. 313 with Addendum. Anaheim, City of: Anaheim, CA. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.5 Geology-080812.docx 5.5-15 Geology and Soils 1994b (September). The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2. Anaheim, CA: the City. California Building Standards Commission (CBSC). 2010 (Updated April 26). 2007 Triennial Edition of CCR, Title 24. Sacramento, CA: BSC. http://www.bsc.ca.gov/title_24/ t24_2007tried.htm. California, State of. 2010a. California Public Resources Code (Sections 2621–2630, Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act). Sacramento, CA: the State. http://info.sen.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=prc&group=02001-03000&file=2621- 2630. 2010b. California Public Resources Code (Sections 2690–2699.6: Seismic Hazards Mapping Act). Sacramento, CA: the State. http://info.sen.ca.gov/cgi- bin/displaycode?section=prc&group=02001-03000&file=2690-2699.6. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.5 Geology-080812.docx 5.5-16 Geology and Soils This page intentionally left blank ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.6 GHG-082312.docx 5.6-3 Greenhouse Gas Emissions 5.6 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS This section addresses the potential global climate change impacts that would occur from build out of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (ARSP), which includes build out of the Commercial-Recreation (C-R) District and expansion of the convention center within the Public Recreational (PR) District. At the direction of the State Legislature in Senate Bill (SB) 97, the California Natural Resources Agency adopted amendments to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines that require analysis of climate change and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in CEQA documents (OPR 2009); these amendments were effective March 18, 2010. 5.6.1 GREENHOUSE GASES GHGs are atmospheric gases and clouds within the atmosphere that influence the Earth’s temperature by absorbing most of the infrared radiation that rises from the sun-warmed surface and that would otherwise escape into space. This process is commonly known as the “Greenhouse Effect”. GHGs are emitted by natural processes and human activities. The Earth’s surface temperature averages about 58 degrees Fahrenheit because of the Greenhouse Effect. Without it, the Earth’s average surface temperature would be somewhere around an uninhabitable 0°F. Anthropogenic GHG emissions enhance the Greenhouse Effect by absorbing radiation from other atmospheric GHGs that would otherwise escape into space, thereby trapping more radiation in the atmosphere and causing temperatures to increase. GHGs, as defined under California’s Assembly Bill (AB) 32, include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), sulfur hexafluoride (SF6), and nitrogen trifluoride (NF3). CO2 is the most important anthropogenic GHG. The global atmospheric concentration of CO2 has increased from a pre-industrial (roughly 1750) value of about 280 parts per million (ppm) to 379 ppm in 2005, primarily due to fossil fuel use, with land use change providing a significant but smaller contribution. The annual growth rate in CO2 concentrations continues to increase, with a larger annual CO2 concentration growth rate during the ten-year period between 1995 and 2005 than since the beginning of continuous direct measurements in 1960. In December 2011, the concentration measured at Mauna Loa, Hawaii was more than 391 ppm (ESRL 2012). 5.6.2 SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION MEIR 313 did not address greenhouse gas emissions because GHG emissions were not addressed informally as a CEQA issue until 2006 and were not required as a CEQA issue until 2010. 5.6.3 PLANS, POLICIES AND REGULATORY CONDITIONS Regulatory Setting There have been a number of regulatory actions and activities over the past few years, especially at the State level that pertain to GHG emissions and climate change. The following section is limited to the regulatory issues that are most important or directly applicable to the proposed project. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.6 GHG-082312.docx 5.6-4 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Federal U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Findings There are no federal laws or regulations governing GHG emissions. However, the following statement by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) describes the most recent federal administrative action. On December 7, 2009, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Administrator signed two distinct findings regarding greenhouse gases under section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act, as follows: • Endangerment Finding: The Administrator finds that the current and projected concentrations of the six key well-mixed greenhouse gases— carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6)—in the atmosphere threaten the public health and welfare of current and future generations. • Cause or Contribute Finding: The Administrator finds that the combined emissions of these well-mixed greenhouse gases from new motor vehicles and new motor vehicle engines contribute to the greenhouse gas pollution which threatens public health and welfare. These findings do not themselves impose any requirements on industry or other entities. However, this action is a prerequisite to finalizing the EPA’s proposed greenhouse gas emission standards for light-duty vehicles, which were jointly proposed by EPA and the Department of Transportation’s National Highway Safety Administration on September 15, 2009 (USEPA 2009a). Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards On December 1, 2011, USEPA and NHTSA, on behalf of the Department of Transportation, issued a joint proposal to further reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve fuel economy for light-duty vehicles for model years 2017–2025. This proposal extends the National Program beyond the greenhouse gas and corporate average fuel economy standards set for model years 2012–2016. The standards proposed would apply to passenger cars and light trucks manufactured in model years 2017 through 2025. The proposed CAFE standards are projected to require an average combined 40.1 miles per gallon (mpg) in model year 2021, and 49.6 mpg in model year 2025. USEPA’s proposed GHG standards, which are harmonized with NHTSA’s CAFE standards, are projected to require 163 grams/mile of carbon dioxide (CO2) in model year 2025.1 The Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the proposed CAFE standards was issued on July 9, 2012; a final rulemaking and record of decision will be published no sooner than 30 days after publication of the Notice of Availability in the Federal Register (NHTSA 2012). 1 163 g/mi would be equivalent to 54.5 mpg, if the vehicles were to meet this CO2 level all through fuel economy improvements. The agencies expect, however, that a portion of these improvements will be made through reductions in air conditioning leakage, which would not contribute to fuel economy. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.6 GHG-082312.docx 5.6-5 Greenhouse Gas Emissions State of California The California Air Resources Board (CARB), a part of the California Environmental Protection Agency, is responsible for the coordination and administration of both federal and State air pollution control programs in California. In this capacity, CARB conducts research, sets the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS), compiles emission inventories, develops suggested control measures, and oversees local programs, including those relative to climate change and global warming. There are numerous State plans, policies, regulations, and laws related to GHGs and global climate change. Following is a brief discussion of some of these plans, policies, and regulations. Executive Order S-3-05 On June 1, 2005, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed Executive Order S-3-05. Executive Order S-3-05 calls for a reduction in GHG emissions to the year 2000 level by 2010, to year 1990 levels by 2020, and to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. Assembly Bill 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 AB 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, was signed by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in September 2006. AB 32 is now codified as Sections 38500–38599 of the California Health and Safety Code. AB 32 requires that statewide GHG emissions be reduced to 1990 levels by 2020. Senate Bill 97 and Recent Amendments to CEQA Guidelines Senate Bill (SB) 97 directs the California Natural Resources Agency (CNRA) to adopt amendments to the CEQA Guidelines by January 1, 2010 to require evaluation of GHG emissions or the effects of GHG emissions. The CNRA has done so, and the amendments to the CEQA Guidelines, in a new Section (§15064.4) entitled Determining the Significance of Impacts from Greenhouse Gas Emissions, provide that (CNRA 2009a): The determination of the significance of greenhouse gas emissions calls for a careful judgment by the lead agency consistent with the provisions in Section 15064. A lead agency should make a good-faith effort, based to the extent possible on scientific and factual data, to describe, calculate or estimate the amount of greenhouse gas emissions resulting from a project. A lead agency should consider the following factors, among others, when assessing the significance of impacts from greenhouse gas emissions on the environment: The extent to which the project may increase or reduce greenhouse gas emissions as compared to the existing environmental setting; Whether the project emissions exceed a threshold of significance that the lead agency determines applies to the project; ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.6 GHG-082312.docx 5.6-6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions The extent to which the project complies with regulations or requirements adopted to implement a statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction or mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions. Such requirements must be adopted by the relevant public agency through a public review process and must reduce or mitigate the project’s incremental contribution of greenhouse gas emissions. If there is substantial evidence that the possible effects of a particular project are still cumulatively considerable notwithstanding compliance with the adopted regulations or requirements, an EIR must be prepared for the project. The amendments add a new Section 15126.4(c), Mitigation Measures Related to Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Generally, this State CEQA Guidelines section requires lead agencies to consider feasible means, supported by substantial evidence and subject to monitoring or reporting, of mitigating the significant effects of greenhouse gas emissions. Potential measures to mitigate the significant effects of greenhouse gas emissions are identified, including those outlined in Appendix F, Energy Conservation, of the State CEQA Guidelines. CARB Scoping Plan In December 2007, CARB published California’s GHG inventory, which compiled statewide anthropogenic GHG emissions and sinks for the years 1990 through 2004. The total statewide greenhouse gas 1990 emissions level, and therefore the 2020 emissions target, is 427 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MMTCO2e).2 Achieving this target requires a reduction of 169 MMTCO2e (approximately 30 percent) from the State’s projected 2020 emissions of 596 MMTCO2e (business as usual), and a reduction of 42 MMTCO2e (almost 10 percent) from the 2002 through 2004 average emissions. AB 32 requires CARB to develop a Scoping Plan to lower the State’s GHG emissions to meet the required decrease by 2020. The Scoping Plan was approved at the December 2008 board meeting and the measures in the Scoping Plan, listed in Table 5.6-1, will be developed and in place by 2012. As shown in the table, statewide measures addressing vehicle emissions, energy efficiency, vehicle fuel, and power generation are planned to achieve the greater amounts of emissions reductions. However, reductions at all levels will be needed to reach the 2020 targets. 2 Carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) emissions are commonly expressed in metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e). Larger quantities of emissions, such as on the State or world scale, are expressed in million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MMTCO2e). Metric tons may also be stated as “tonnes”. The CO2e for a gas is derived by multiplying the tons of the gas by the associated global warming potential (GWP) such that MMTCO2e = (million metric tons of a GHG) x (GWP of the GHG). For example, the GWP for CH4 is 21. This means that emissions of 1 million metric tons of CH4 are equivalent to the emissions of 21 million metric tons of CO2. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.6 GHG-082312.docx 5.6-7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions TABLE 5.6-1 AB 32 SCOPING PLAN RECOMMENDED GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION MEASURES Recommended Reduction Measures Reductions Counted toward 2020 Target of 169 MMTCO 2e (MMTCO 2e) Percentage of Statewide Year 2020 Target Cap and Trade Program and Associated Measures California Light-Duty Vehicle GHG Standards 31.7 18.2% Energy Efficiency 26.3 15.1% Renewable Portfolio Standard (33% by 2020) 21.3 12.2% Low Carbon Fuel Standard 15 8.6% Regional Transportation-Related GHG Targetsa 5 2.9% Vehicle Efficiency Measures 4.5 2.6% Goods Movement 3.7 2.1% Million Solar Roofs 2.1 1.2% Medium/Heavy Duty Vehicles 1.4 0.8% High Speed Rail 1.0 0.6% Industrial Measures 0.3 0.2% Additional Reduction Necessary to Achieve Cap 34.4 19.8% Total Estimated Reductions from Cap and Trade Program and Associated Measures 146.7 84.3% Uncapped Sources/Sectors Measures High Global Warming Potential Gas Measures 20.2 11.6% Sustainable Forests 5.0 2.9% Industrial Measures (for sources not covered under cap and trade program) 1.1 0.6% Recycling and Waste (landfill methane capture) 1 0.6% Total Estimated Reductions from Uncapped Sources/Sectors 27.3 15.7% Total Reductions Counted Towards 2020 Target 174.0b 100% Other Recommended Measures – Not Counted Towards 2020 Target Estimated Reductions MMTCO2e State Government Operations 1.0 to 2.0 Local Government Operations To Be Determined Green Buildings 26 Recycling and Waste 9 Water Sector Measures 4.8 Methane Capture at Large Dairies 1 MMTCO2e: million metric tons of CO2e; GHG: greenhouse gas(es) a Reductions represent an estimate of what may be achieved from local land use changes. It is not the SB 375 Regional target. b The total reduction for the recommended measures exceeds the 169 MMTCO2e of reductions estimated in the Draft Scoping Plan. This is the net effect of adding several measures and adjusting the emission reduction estimates for some other measures. Source: CARB 2008. Key elements of the Scoping Plan include expansion and strengthening of existing energy efficiency programs and building and appliance standards; achievement of a statewide renewable energy mix of 33 percent; development of a California cap and trade program linked with other similar programs; establishment of targets for transportation-related GHG emissions for regions throughout California and pursuit of policies and incentives to achieve those targets; implementation of existing laws and standards such as California’s clean car ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.6 GHG-082312.docx 5.6-8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions standards (identified as Light Duty Vehicle GHG Standards in Table 5.6-1 and described above under the AB 1493 heading), goods movement measures, and the Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS); and issuing of targeted fees to fund the State’s long-term commitment to AB 32 administration (CARB 2008). On April 23, 2009, CARB approved the LCFS, which has a goal to reduce GHG emissions from California’s transportation fuels by 10 percent (equal to 16 MMTCO2e) by 2020. The regulation requires providers, refiners, importers, and blenders to ensure that the fuels they provide for the California market meet an average declining standard of “carbon intensity”. Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards The Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings (Title 24, Part 6 of the California Code of Regulations [CCR]) were established in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to reduce California’s energy consumption. Since that time, the energy efficiency standards have undergone several revisions. Effective January 1, 2010, the adopted 2008 Title 24 standards replaced the 2005 Title 24 standards. The California Energy Commission (CEC) adopted the 2008 standards in order to “Provide California with an adequate, reasonably-priced, and environmentally-sound supply of energy” and “Respond to Assembly Bill 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, which mandates that California must reduce its greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020” (CEC 2009). Title 24 Green Building Standards The 2010 California Green Building Standards Code (24 CCR, Part 11) CALGreen Code is a code with mandatory requirements for new residential and nonresidential buildings (including buildings for retail, office, public schools and hospitals) throughout California beginning on January 1, 2011. The code is Part 11 of the California Building Standards Code in Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations and is also known as the CALGreen Code (CBSC 2010). The CALGreen Code is intended to cause a reduction in GHG emissions from buildings; promote environmentally responsible, cost-effective, healthier places to live and work; reduce energy and water consumption; and respond to the directives by the Governor. In short, the code is established to reduce construction waste; make buildings more efficient in the use of materials and energy; and reduce environmental impacts during and after construction. The CALGreen Code contains requirements for construction site selection, storm water control during construction, construction waste reduction, indoor water use reduction, material selection, natural resource conservation, site irrigation conservation, and other conservation efforts. The code provides for design options allowing the designer to determine how best to achieve compliance for a given site or building condition. The code also requires building commissioning which is a process for the verification that all building systems heating and cooling equipment and lighting systems) are functioning at their maximum efficiency. With respect to the proposed Specific Plan, Sections 101.3.1(3) and 104 of the CALGreen Code explains that the Department of Housing and Community Development has adopted provisions of the CALGreen Code for low-rise residential structures. This category includes hotels, motels, apartments, condominiums, one and two family dwellings and other categories of residential structures, up to three stories. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.6 GHG-082312.docx 5.6-9 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Attorney General The California Attorney General (AG) has submitted numerous comment letters during public review processes setting forth the Office of the Attorney General’s view as to how climate change should be analyzed in CEQA documents. As part of the AG’s efforts to work with agencies on addressing climate change in their CEQA documents, the AG publishes and updates The California Environmental Quality Act, Addressing Global Warming Impacts at the Local Agency Level, which is a document with “information that may be helpful to local agencies in carrying out their duties under CEQA as they relate to global warming. Included in this document are various measures that may reduce the global warming related impacts of a project” (DOJ 2010a). The AG’s measures are discussed later in this section. Regional and Local Southern California Association of Governments and Senate Bill 375 Signed September 30, 2008, SB 375 provides for a new planning process to coordinate land use planning, regional transportation plans, and funding priorities in order to help California meet the GHG reduction goals established in AB 32. SB 375 requires Metropolitan Planning Organizations, including the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) to incorporate a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) in their regional transportation plans that will achieve GHG emission reduction targets set by CARB by reducing VMT and encouraging more compact, complete, and efficient communities for the future. In February 2011, CARB adopted GHG emission reduction targets; for SCAG, the targets are an 8 percent reduction in GHG emissions per capita by 2020 relative to 2005, and a 13 percent reduction by 2035 (CARB 2011). SCAG’s SCS is included in the SCAG 2012 Regional Transportation Plan Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) (SCAG 2012). The document was adopted in April 2012. The goals and policies of the RTP/SCS focus on transportation and land use planning that include building compact infill projects; locating residents closer to where they work and play; designing walkable environments; and designing communities so there is access to high quality transit service. South Coast Air Quality Management District Air quality in Orange County is regulated by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The SCAQMD is the agency principally responsible for comprehensive air pollution control in the South Coast Air Basin (SoCAB). To that end, the SCAQMD, a regional agency, works directly with SCAG, County transportation commissions, and local governments and cooperates actively with all federal and State government agencies. The SCAQMD develops rules and regulations; establishes permitting requirements for stationary sources; inspects emissions sources; and enforces such measures through educational programs or fines, when necessary. Beginning in April 2008, the SCAQMD convened a working group to provide guidance to local lead agencies on determining significance for GHG emissions in their CEQA documents. The Working Group meets approximately once per month. On December 5, 2008, the SCAQMD Governing Board adopted its staff proposal for an interim CEQA GHG significance threshold for industrial projects where the SCAQMD is the lead agency (SCAQMD 2008). The interim screening threshold for industrial projects is 10,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent per year (MTCO2e/yr) based on stationary (and not mobile) emissions. The Working Group adopted a philosophy similar to recommendations made by other agencies in California to identify “Significance Screening Levels” (or thresholds) for GHG emissions. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.6 GHG-082312.docx 5.6-10 Greenhouse Gas Emissions In September 2010, the Working Group presented a revised tiered approach to determining GHG significance (SCAQMD 2010). At Tier 1, GHG emissions impacts would be less than significant if the project qualifies under a categorical or statutory CEQA exemption. At Tier 2, for projects that do not meet the Tier 1 criteria, the GHG emissions impact would be less than significant if the project is consistent with a previously adopted GHG reduction plan that meets specific requirements.3 At Tier 3, the Working Group proposes extending the 10,000 MTCO2e/yr screening threshold currently applicable to industrial projects where the SCAQMD is the lead agency, described above, to other lead agency industrial projects. For residential and commercial projects, the Working Group proposes the following Tier 3 screening values: either a single 3,000 MTCO2e/yr threshold for all land use types or separate thresholds of 3,500 MTCO2e/yr for residential projects, 1,400 MTCO2e/yr for commercial projects, and 3,000 MTCO2e/yr for mixed-use projects. A project with emissions less than the applicable screening value would have less than significant GHG emissions. Projects with emissions greater than the Tier 3 screening values would be analyzed at Tier 4 by one of two methods: A percent emission reduction target; The SCAQMD Working Group made no quantitative recommendation relative to this method; and Efficiency targets; on the project level, 2020 GHG emissions should not exceed 4.8 MTCO2e/year per service population (SP) where SP is the number of project residents plus employees. Furthermore, 2035 GHG emissions should not exceed 3.0 MTCO2e/yr per SP. Projects with GHG emissions that do not meet the Tier 4 targets would be required to provide mitigation in the form of real, quantifiable, and verifiable offsets to achieve the target thresholds. The offsets may be achieved through project design features, other on-site methods, or off-site actions, such as energy efficiency upgrade of existing buildings. This proposed screening and mitigation proposal from SCAQMD remains a work in progress; the Working Group has not convened since the fall of 2010. As of August 2012, the proposal has not been considered or approved for use by the SCAQMD Board. While the SCAQMD Board may consider the recommendations in 2012, they are subject to change and may not represent what is ultimately approved. In the meantime, no GHG significance thresholds are approved for use in the SoCAB. City of Anaheim General Plan Green Element The General Plan for the City of Anaheim was adopted in May 2004. While the City of Anaheim General Plan’s Green Element, does not specifically address GHG emissions or climate change, it does address topics concerning conservation of natural resources, including vehicle emissions reduction; vehicle work trip reduction; expansion of transit trips; sound land use planning; efficient, clean-burning public transit; energy conservation; and building performance standards. The goals and policies from the Green Element applicable to the proposed ARSP Amendment and are included in table 5.9-2 of Section 5.9, Land Use and Planning, with a project consistency analysis. 3 The plan must Quantify greenhouse gas emissions, both existing and projected over a specified time period, resulting from activities within a defined geographic area; Establish a level, based on substantial evidence, below which the contribution to greenhouse gas emissions from activities covered by the plan would not be cumulatively considerable; Identify and analyze the greenhouse gas emissions resulting from specific actions or categories of actions anticipated within the geographic area; Specify measures or a group of measures, including performance standards, that substantial evidence demonstrates, if implemented on a project-by-project basis, would collectively achieve the specified emissions level; Establish a mechanism to monitor the plan’s progress toward achieving the level and to require amendment if the plan is not achieving specified levels; Be adopted in a public process following environmental review (CEQA Guidelines §15183.5). ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.6 GHG-082312.docx 5.6-11 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Green Connection The City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department (Anaheim Public Utilities) has established the Green Connection which functions as a centralized resource for Anaheim residents and businesses interested in conservation of energy and water resources. The Green Connection includes information regarding the City’s Green Resolution and Green Building Program, both of which are discussed below, as well as tips for energy and water savings. Green Resolution In August 2006, the City adopted Resolution 2006-187, . .authorizing and directing the General Manager of the Anaheim Public Utilities Department to establish the green connection that accommodates the principles of environmental soundness and sustainability.” The resolution sets the following goals to achieve environmental soundness and sustainable development: • Increase purchases of renewable energy resources to 10 percent by 2010 and 20 percent by 2015. • Develop a plan to reduce power plant and fleet emissions in accordance with California Environmental Protection Agency mandates. • All City-owned projects over 10,000 square feet in building area that enter the design and construction phase shall meet U.S. Green Building Council’s (USGBC’s) Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEEDTM) registration and certification, provided that the project is cost-effective over the life of the building. • Encourage developers and builders to receive LEEDTM registration and certification. • First acquire all cost effective, reliable and feasible energy efficiency and demand reduction resources before procuring other energy resources. • Achieve an overall citywide goal of 20 percent reduction in energy use and 15 percent in water use by 2015. • Accelerate the rate of fleet vehicle replacement with Alternative Fuel Vehicles so that 90 percent of Utilities light and medium vehicles are Alternative Fuel Vehicles by 2020. • Replace 10 percent of the City’s light, non-emergency vehicles with preferred low emission technologies as the vehicles are scheduled for normal replacement. • Provide community leadership as well as education in the principles of environmental soundness and sustainability to increase community awareness, responsibility and participation. Green Building Program Anaheim Public Utilities has developed the Green Building Program which encourages achievement of the goals established by the Green Resolution through incentives and reward programs. Specifically, the Green Building Program identifies numerous ways to certify a building project as green, qualify for rebates and savings, and take advantage of other benefits including accelerated plan approval, waived plan check fees, and free technical assistance. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.6 GHG-082312.docx 5.6-12 Greenhouse Gas Emissions 5.6.4 METHODOLOGY Calculation of GHG Emissions Construction and Operational GHG Emissions Long-term GHG emissions from mobile sources and area sources and short-term emissions from construction equipment were calculated by using Urban Emissions Model (URBEMIS) Version 9.2.4. URBEMIS was also used to calculate construction GHG emissions. URBEMIS is a computer program accepted by the SCAQMD that can be used to estimate anticipated emissions associated with land development projects. URBEMIS has separate databases for specific counties and air districts. Since the Proposed Project is located in Orange County, the Orange County database was used. To convert to CO2e, the CO2 values are multiplied by factors relating CH4 and N2O emissions to CO2 emissions for diesel engines and then converted to the metric equivalent. The diesel engine conversion data is taken from the CCAR General Reporting Protocol (GRP) (CCAR 2009). The limitations of the URBEMIS model should be noted. The current version of the model was last updated in February 2008. Therefore, the emission factors do not reflect anticipated improvements in on-road or off-road vehicle emissions based on legislation enacted subsequent to the update. The model does not have detailed emissions reductions measures for the different versions of Title 24 building efficiency standards. Specific inputs to URBEMIS for both construction and operations include land uses and acreages. Output operational emissions data include area sources and mobile sources. The area sources include natural gas used for heating and hot water and engine emissions from landscape maintenance equipment. Mobile sources are the vehicles used by patrons, staff, and vendors for commercial and hotel businesses. Mobile source emissions are based on VMT forecasts provided by the traffic engineer for the Proposed Project and scaling the emissions from the VMT generated by URBEMIS defaults (Gupta 2010). The emissions inventory assumes both residential and employment trips to be associated with land uses in the ARSP area and the immediate surrounding areas within the City of Anaheim. Therefore, all VMTs generated by those trips are considered to be part of the City’s GHG inventory even if part of the trip end is external to the City. In comparison, the Regional Target Committee for Senate Bill (SB) 375 is recommending that in scenarios where employment trips are split between jurisdictional boundaries, only 50 percent of the trip length is to be included as part of that region’s GHG inventory. What this means is the vehicle trip may originate in the City of Los Angeles, but end in the ARSP area (or vice-versa). The City considers this whole trip length and trip to be associated with the Proposed Project. Because the ARSP GHG inventory does not split trips associated with residential uses and trips associated with non-residential uses, this correction is not included in the GHG emissions inventory and results in an overestimation of VMT and trips generated by build out of the ARSP alone. Construction input data include but are not limited to the start and finish dates of project construction phases; inventories of construction equipment to be used during each phase; volumes of cut and fill grading and materials to be imported to and exported from the site; areas to be paved; and areas to be painted. Additional details relative to the URBEMIS calculations may be found in Section 5.2, Air Quality. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.6 GHG-082312.docx 5.6-13 Greenhouse Gas Emissions GHG Emissions from Electricity and Water Use GHG emissions resulting from electrical energy use were calculated by using the energy intensity data published by the California Energy Commission (CEC 2006a). The GHG data were then calculated using emissions data from the CCAR GRP (CCAR 2009). Water provided to the ARSP area is embodied with energy by virtue of the amount of energy consumed in collecting, extracting, conveying, treating, and distributing water to end users, and in treating and disposing of wastewater. Water use data for the existing and build out scenarios were calculated using the factors specified in the project Water Supply Assessment (Psomas 2009). All new water use attributed to the ARSP Amendment would be inside use subsequently treated as wastewater); outside (irrigation) water usage would remain unchanged due to the intensification as the outside water demand would have been included with the acreage already accounted for in the water duty factors for the original ARSP (Psomas 2009). CEC data indicates that potable water delivered to Southern California has an embodied energy of 13,022 kilowatt-hours per million gallons (kWh/MG) when used indoors (CEC 2006b). Depending on the data year, approximately 64 to 67 percent of Anaheim water is supplied from local groundwater and the remainder is imported. Based on the CEC paper describing the development of water-energy factors, a factor of 6,511 kWh/MG is used for the embodied energy in groundwater in Anaheim (CEC 2006b). The energy data for water consumption was converted to GHG emissions using the CCAR GRP emissions factor for CO2 in electricity use in California. 5.6.5 EXISTING CONDITIONS Global Climate Change and Greenhouse Gases Climate change is a recorded change in the average weather of the earth measured by variables such as wind patterns, storms, precipitation, and temperature. Increasing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions have led to an anthropogenic4 warming trend of the earth’s average temperature, which is causing changes in the earth’s climate. GHG emissions are primarily associated with the burning of fossil fuels during motorized transport, electricity generation, consumption of natural gas, industrial activity, manufacturing, and other activities; deforestation; agricultural activity; and solid waste decomposition. This increasing temperature phenomenon is known as “global warming”, and the climatic effect is known as “climate change” or “global climate change”. Greenhouse Gases GHGs are global pollutants and are therefore unlike air pollutants such as ozone, particulate matter and toxic air contaminants (TACs), which are pollutants of regional and local concern (see Section 5.2, Air Quality). While pollutants with localized air quality effects have relatively short atmospheric lifetimes (generally on the order of a few days), GHGs have relatively long atmospheric lifetimes, ranging from one year to several thousand years. Long atmospheric lifetimes allow for GHGs to disperse around the globe. Therefore, GHG impacts are global, as opposed to the localized air quality effects of criteria air pollutants and TACs. GHGs vary widely in the power of their climatic effects; therefore, climate scientists have established a unit called global warming potential (GWP). The GWP of a gas is a measure of both potency and lifespan in the atmosphere as compared to CO2. For example, since CH4 and N2O are approximately 21 and 310 times (respectively) more powerful than CO2 in their ability to 4 Caused or produced by humans. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.6 GHG-082312.docx 5.6-14 Greenhouse Gas Emissions trap heat in the atmosphere, they have GWPs of 21 and 310, respectively (CO2 has a GWP of Carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) is a quantity that enables all GHG emissions to be considered as a group despite their varying GWP. The GWP of each GHG is multiplied by the prevalence of that gas to produce CO2e. Global, National, State, and Regional Contributions to Greenhouse Gas Emissions Table 5.6-2 shows the magnitude of GHG emissions on the global, national, state, and regional scales. TABLE 5.6-2 COMPARISON OF WORLDWIDE GHG EMISSIONS Area and Data Year Annual GHG Emissions (MMTCO2e) World (2006) 29,000 United States (2009) 6,633a California (2008) 474b Orange County (2011) 21 MMTCO2e: million metric tons of CO2equivalent; GHG: greenhouse gas a Down from a high of 7,263 in 2007. b Down from emissions of 477 in 2007 Source: WRI 2009, USEPA 2011; CARB 2010b; SCAG 2011. Worldwide, China is the world’s largest emitter, contributing approximately 19 percent, just ahead of the U.S., with approximately 18 percent. Approximately half of global emissions come from developed countries and half from developing countries; note that China and India are considered developing countries (WRI 2009). The most common GHG is CO2, which constitutes approximately 84 to 85 percent of all GHG emissions in the United States and California. The primary contributors to California GHG emissions are transportation; electric power production from both in-state and out-of-state sources; and industrial uses. Existing Development and GHG Emissions The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan C-R District contains an equivalent of 11,587 hotel rooms.5 The PR district contains 1,600 hotel rooms and the 1.7 million square foot (sf) Anaheim Convention Center. Each of these land uses generates direct and indirect GHG emissions. Existing emissions were calculated using the methodology described in Section 5.6.3 above, and are shown in Table 5.6-3. 5 For analysis of emissions, commercial uses are converted to hotel room equivalents on a ratio of 600 square feet of commercial development = 1 hotel room. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.6 GHG-082312.docx 5.6-15 Greenhouse Gas Emissions TABLE 5.6-3 ESTIMATED EXISTING GHG EMISSIONS Source Emissions MTCO2e/yr Percent of Total C-R Hotel Electricity 11,587 eq rooms 29,909 12.9 PR Hotel Electricity 1,600 rooms 4,130 1.8 PR Conv Ctr Electricity 1,700 ksf 7,609 3.3 Less: Conv Ctr PV Generation -46 -0.02 Water Use – from MWD 1,302 0.6 Water Use – from Groundwater 1,166 0.5 Natural Gas 23,212 10.0 Vehicles 163,897 70.9 Annual GHG Emissions 231,179 100 MTCO2e/yr: metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent per year; eq: equivalent; Conv Ctr: Convention Center; ksf: thousand square feet; PV: Photovoltaic; MWD: Metropolitan Water District. Totals are rounded. It is noted that the Anaheim Public Utilities Department has installed and operates a 102 kilowatt photovoltaic power generation system on the roof of the Anaheim Convention Center. This system generates more than 141,000 kilowatt hours (kWh) of electricity annually, which reduces the equivalent of 46 MTCO2e, had the electricity been generated by traditional sources (Anaheim Public Utilities 2010). Continued Scientific Debate Regarding the Scope and Extent of Anthropogenic Global Warming, and (ii) Even Assuming that Human Beings are the Cause of Global Warming, Whether California’s AB 32 Goals Will Have Any Effect on Global Climate Change As a matter of public policy, through the enactment of AB 32 and other legislation, the State of California has declared that the continued rise in the level of GHGs pose a threat to the health and welfare of the people of the State. Thus, this EIR sets forth a comprehensive analysis consistent with the framework provided by state and regional authorities, of the Proposed Project’s impacts with respect to climate change. There continues to be significant debate among scientists on the cause and extent of anthropogenic global warming and, assuming human activities are the cause of climate change, the State’s ability to achieve the goals of AB 32 and whether this will have any effect on global climate change trends. In 2008, 650 scientists from around the globe submitted a several hundred page report calling into question the claims made by the IPCC that global warming exits and is caused by humans. (U.S. Senate Minority Report 2008) Additional evidence has been disclosed and debated over the past two years that calls into question the integrity of scientific methodologies of the IPCC which has served as the primary basis for much of the proposed regulatory action throughout the world. (Singer 2008; Tol 2007; Holland 2007; Gray, 2010; Monekton 2008; Delingpole 2009; Webster 2010; IPCC 2010; Leake 2010) Based on the assumption that the combustion of fossil fuels is the source of climate change and that the State of California can achieve its greenhouse gas emissions reductions goals set forth in AB 32, it remains to be seen if achievement of these goals would have any effect on any global warming trends. Specifically, according to a forecast by the California Air Resources Board, if no actions are taken to reduce GHG emissions, California emissions would be approximately 596.4 MMTCO2e by the year 2020, up from approximately 427 MMTCO2e and an average of 468.8 MMTCO2e between 2002 and 2004. (ARB 2010) Consequently, if the state is successful in reducing GHG emissions to 1990 level by 2020 (as required by AB 32), emissions ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.6 GHG-082312.docx 5.6-16 Greenhouse Gas Emissions will be reduced by approximately 169.4 MMTCO2e, compared to what they would be under a “business as usual” scenario. (ARB 2007) However, these savings are not adequate to compensate for the expected increase in emissions in developing countries during the same period alone. According to projections from the Energy Information Administration, carbon emissions from Brazil are expected to increase from 216 MMTCO2e in 1990 and 356 MMTCO2e in 2005 to 541 MMTCO2e in 2020 which equate to nearly double the amount of emissions which will be saved by the implementation of AB 32. During that period, India’s emissions are projected to increase by about 1,253 MMTCO2e. (EIA 2008) According to one estimate, projections indicate that the Chinese economy may grow by about 8 percent a year. Even if the Chinese government reduces carbon emissions by about 40 to 45 percent per unit of gross domestic product, the larger economy of China would result in an approximate 75 percent increase in carbon dioxide emissions by 2020; thus increasing China’s emissions to approximately 12,000 MMTCO2e in 2020. Another expert suggested that China’s emissions have the potential to double by 2020. (India Times) Based on this information, GHG reductions in California would be minor in comparison to global phenomena, thus calling into question whether the efforts of California (and perhaps other nations) would have any meaningful effect on global climate change. Currently, there is no international or national regulatory program regulating emissions from various nations. A brief summary of the state of international and national climate change regulation is set forth below. In 1992, 154 nations, including the United States, entered into the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change a nonbinding agreement under which industrialized countries pledged to work to reduce GHG emissions. Five years later, in 1997, the parties to the adopted the Kyoto Protocol, which set binding GHG reduction targets for 37 industrialized countries and the European Community, with the objective of reducing their collective emissions by 5 percent below 1990 levels during the “commitment period” of 2008- 2012. The Kyoto Protocol has been ratified by 182 countries, but has not been ratified by the United States. In 1995, the Senate passed the Byrd-Hagel Resolution by a 95-0 vote, stating the Senate’s directive that the United States should not enter into any protocol that did not set binding targets for developing, as well as industrialized, nations. Many of the industrialized countries which ratified the Kyoto Protocol have not and/or are not expected to meet their Kyoto targets. For example, Canada, which currently has emissions that are 30 percent above 1990 levels, announced last year that it would not be able to meet its obligations under Kyoto. Instead, Canada intends to focus on “the development and implementation of a Made-in-Canada plan for reducing greenhouse gases” which it says “will be effective, realistic and focus on achieving sustained reductions in emissions in Canada while ensuring a strong economy.” (Environment Canada) Japan has not indicated that it will not comply with its targets, but as of 2005, emissions were approximately 8 percent higher than in 1990. (NPR 2007) Despite this increase in emissions, Japan has not taken any regulatory steps to reduce the increase in its emissions. Since the United States declined to ratify the Kyoto Protocol in 1995, it has become evident that global climate change cannot be addressed without limiting GHG emissions from developing, as well as developed, countries. China has surpassed the United States as the world’s largest GHG emitter. Estimates state that China’s CO2 emissions are increasing by as much as 11 percent annually. In 2007, China released its first national plan on climate change, which ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.6 GHG-082312.docx 5.6-17 Greenhouse Gas Emissions includes goals related to increasing energy efficiency and increasing use of renewable resources. No commitments are stated regarding the reduction of GHG emissions. (BBC 2007; Watts 2007) Like China, India is already one of the top emitters of GHGs, and continues to grow rapidly. India has recently pledged to take more action to fight global warming through the pursuit of solar energy, urging energy efficiency, and conservation, but it has not set any concrete goals in these areas, let alone pledged to reduce its carbon emissions. To the contrary, India’s emissions are projected to increase fourfold by 2030. (The Economist 2008.) Similarly, Brazil, the largest economy in South America, and another rapidly developing county, has no national policy requiring it to reduce carbon emissions. Brazil’s carbon emissions increased by more than 60 percent between 1990 and 2004, and are projected to continue to rise at a similar pace. (IEA 2006.) The Kyoto Protocol is set to expire in 2012. Formal negotiations to replace the protocol officially began in December 2007 at the Climate Change Conference in Bali, Indonesia. The most recent meetings were at Cancun, Mexico in November-December 2010 and Bangkok, Thailand in April 2011 2011.) The federal government has taken a number of steps toward addressing global climate change over the past 30 years, but thus far, such actions have been mostly policy oriented. In 1978, Congress enacted the National Climate Program Act, which required an investigation into climate change (although at this time the federal concern was whether the world was entering into a prolonged ice age). In 1987, Congress enacted the Global Climate Protection Act for the purpose of “establish[ing] a national climate program that will assist the Nation and the world to understand and respond to natural and man-induced climate processes and their implications.” (15 USC § 2902.) The act required the establishment of various programs to further climate change research. (15 USC § 2904[d].) Congress has not enacted any legislation requiring economy-wide mandatory reductions in GHG emissions. Several different “cap-and-trade” proposals, which would require such reductions, have recently been introduced in Congress, but none of them have been passed by either branch of Congress. All such plans would place caps on the total amount of GHG which can be emitted during future years, and allow emitters to buy and sell emission credits. However, such plans vary widely on what caps they would place on emissions and how quickly such caps would come into effect, as well as how their specific mechanisms would work. (Pew Center) Currently, the Federal government’s policy on climate change has three objectives: “Slowing the growth of emissions”; “Strengthening science, technology and institutions”; and “Enhancing international cooperation,” which it is implementing “through voluntary and incentive-based programs.” (EPA 2010) In summary, despite the public policy direction of the State as evidenced by AB 32 and the recent actions of CARB, there remains considerable debate among scientists on the cause and extent of anthropogenic global warming, and if California’s reductions in GHG emissions would have a significant effect on global climate change. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.6 GHG-082312.docx 5.6-18 Greenhouse Gas Emissions 5.6.6 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE The following significance criteria are based on the City of Anaheim’s Environmental Checklist. The Proposed Project would result in a significant impact related to greenhouse gases if it would: Threshold 5.6.1 Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment. Threshold 5.6.2 Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. With respect to Threshold 5.6-1, the State, the SCAQMD, and the City of Anaheim have not established quantitative thresholds applicable to the Proposed Project to determine the quantity of GHG emissions that may have a significant effect on the environment. CARB, the SCAQMD, and various cities and agencies have proposed, or adopted on an interim basis, thresholds of significance or threshold levels that require the implementation of GHG emission reduction measures. For residential and commercial projects, these suggested thresholds have ranged from 900 to 10,000 MTCO2e per year. As described above, the SCAQMD has established an interim screening threshold of 10,000 MTCO2e per year for industrial projects where the SCAQMD is the lead agency. However, it may be inappropriate to establish threshold values for specific plans because a single emissions limit would discourage the development of larger projects that could otherwise take advantage of their size to be more energy and GHG efficient than individual, smaller projects. It is accepted as very unlikely that any individual development project would have GHG emissions of a magnitude to directly impact global climate change; therefore, any impact would be considered on a cumulative basis. The analysis presented in this section represents the cumulative impact analysis for the GHG emissions related to the Proposed Project. 5.6.7 PROJECT IMPACT ANALYSIS Standard Requirements The following standard requirement from Section 5.15, Water Supply and Infrastructure, would also minimize impacts related to GHG emissions: SR 5.15-1 Prior to the issue of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall be required to prepare and submit to the City for review and approval a Landscape Documentation Package and landscape and irrigation plans with appropriate water use calculations in accordance with the requirements of Anaheim Municipal Code Chapter 10.19, Landscape Water Efficiency. The following standard requirements from Section 5.17, Electricity, would also minimize impacts related to GHG emissions: SR 5.17-1 Prior to issuance of building permits, the property owner/developer shall be required to demonstrate to the Planning Department, Building Division that building plans meet the applicable Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings (24 CCR These standards are updated, nominally every three years, to incorporate improved energy efficiency technologies and methods. The 2008 standards, which were applicable ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.6 GHG-082312.docx 5.6-19 Greenhouse Gas Emissions January 1, 2010, are approximately 15 percent more energy efficient than the 2005 Building and Energy Efficiency Standards. SR 5.17-2 Prior to issuance of building permits, the property owner/developer shall be required to demonstrate to the Planning Department, Building Division that building plans meet the applicable California Green Building Standards (24 CCR 11). Impact Analysis General Environmental Effects of Global Climate Change Executive Order S-3-05 mandates the preparation of biennial science assessment reports on climate change impacts and adaptation options for California. Executive Order S-13-08 directs the CNRA to develop a State Climate Adaptation Strategy and provide state land-use planning guidance related to sea level rise and other climate change impacts. Current reports resulting from these directed actions are the Climate Action Team Biennial Report to the Governor and Legislature (CCCC 2009) and the California Climate Adaptation Strategy (CNRA 2009b). These studies report that global warming in California is anticipated to impact resources including, but not limited to, the following: • Public Health. Many Californians currently experience the worst air quality in the nation, and climate change would likely make matters worse. Higher temperatures would increase the frequency, duration, and intensity of conditions conducive to air pollution formation. If global background O3 levels increase as predicted under some scenarios, it may become impossible to meet local air quality standards. Air quality could be further compromised by more frequent wildfires, which emit fine particulate matter that can travel long distances. Rising temperatures and more frequent heat waves would increase the risk of death from dehydration, heat stroke/exhaustion, heart attack, stroke, and respiratory distress. Climate change may also increase asthma rates and the spread of infectious diseases and their vectors, as well as challenge food and water supplies. Children, the elderly, people with chronic heart or lung disease, outdoor workers, people who exercise outdoors, and the economically disadvantaged would be particularly vulnerable to these changes. In addition, more frequent extreme weather events could also result in increased injuries and deaths. • Energy. Increasing mean temperature and more frequent heat waves will drive up demand for cooling in summer; this new energy demand will only be partially offset by decreased demand for heating in winter. Hydropower, which currently provides 15 percent of in-state generation, would be threatened by declining snowpack, which serves as a natural reservoir for hydropower generation in the spring and summer. Winter storms, earlier snowmelt, and greater runoff may combine to cause flooding, damaging transmission lines and causing power outages. • Water Resources. Rising temperatures, less precipitation, and more precipitation falling as rain instead of snow could severely diminish snowpack. Because the Sierra Nevada snowpack provides most of California’s available water, this loss would increase the risk of summer water shortages and hamper water distribution and hydropower generation. The diminished snowpack would also nearly eliminate all skiing and other snow-related recreation. Rising sea levels would push saltwater into California’s estuaries, wetlands, and groundwater aquifers, threatening the water quality and reliability within the Sacramento/San Joaquin River Delta—a major California fresh water supply. Extreme precipitation and flooding could also damage water quality by creating sudden increases ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.6 GHG-082312.docx 5.6-20 Greenhouse Gas Emissions in runoff. Moreover, warming would increase evapotranspiration rates from plants, soil, and open water surfaces, resulting in greater demand for irrigation. Overall, climate change would reduce California’s water supplies even as its growing population requires additional resources. • Sea Level and Flooding. Sea level at California’s coasts is expected to rise by 11 to 18 inches above 2000 levels by 2050, and by 23 to 55 inches by 2100. These increases would create more frequent and higher storm surges, erode some coastal areas, and increase pressure on existing levees, creating greater risk of flooding in previously untouched inland areas. Consequently, continued development in vulnerable coastal areas would put more people and infrastructure at risk. • Agriculture. Although higher CO2 levels can stimulate plant production and increase plant water-use efficiency, in the long-term, climate change would reduce the quantity and quality of agricultural products statewide. As temperatures rise, farmers will face greater water demand for crops and a less reliable water supply, as well as increased competition from urban water users. Sea level rise may cause saltwater intrusion in the Delta region, making it difficult to raise certain crops. Rising temperatures will likely aggravate O3 pollution, interfering with plant growth and making plants more susceptible to disease and pests. In addition, warming would reduce the chill hours needed for fruit and nuts; shift pest and weed ranges; alter crop-pollinator timing; and increase the frequency of droughts, heat waves, and floods. Higher average temperatures would also increase mortality and decrease productivity in livestock. • Forestry. California timber production has declined over the past few decades, due in part to warming and increased wildfires. While further warming may increase production for some species in some locations, climate change is expected to reduce overall forest growth. Increasing average temperature and drought frequency would result in more wildfires and greater burned areas, while less frequent and more intense rainfall would increase soil erosion and landslides. Higher temperatures and less water would force many tree species to shift their ranges; those that run out of livable habitat may die out. Pests, diseases, and invasive species may also colonize new areas, further challenging forest health and biodiversity. • Ecosystems. Rising average temperature will subject plants and animals to greater thermal stress, causing some species to adapt or shift their ranges, while others may face extinction. Invasive species may also shift their ranges, threatening native species. Changing temperatures would also alter the timing of plant flowering and insect emergence, damaging species’ ability to reproduce. Changing precipitation patterns will impact aquatic and riparian ecosystems by reducing snow pack, stream flow, and groundwater, while increasing the frequency of droughts, floods, and wildfires. As sea levels rise, some coastal habitats may be permanently flooded or eroded, and salt water intrusion into fresh water resources may threaten terrestrial species. Changes in ocean circulation and temperature, ocean acidification, and increased runoff and sedimentation will threaten pelagic species. In sum, continued global warming would alter natural ecosystems and threaten California’s biological diversity. Again, and importantly, while these general effects of global climate change are contained in various regulatory documents, as set forth above, significant scientific debate exists regarding the cause and extent of anthropogenic global climate change. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.6 GHG-082312.docx 5.6-21 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Threshold 5.6.1 Would the project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? Construction Emissions Temporary impacts would result from project construction activities. GHGs would be emitted by off-road and on-road construction equipment and worker vehicles. Construction emissions were calculated using URBEMIS (Version 9.2.4), as described previously. As discussed in Section 5.2, Air Quality, it is not possible to estimate construction emissions that will occur from specific projects in the PR and C-R districts, since the specific locations, construction details and scheduling have not been developed. An analysis was performed to generate a realistic approximation of construction emissions for development in the PR district. The results of that analysis provide an order of magnitude estimate of annual GHG emissions that would result from implementation of the Proposed Project. The assumptions and inputs used for the construction emissions estimate are described in Section 5.2, Air Quality, and Appendix E. The estimated GHG emissions from construction are shown in Table 5.6-4. The average annual emissions are 1,367 MTCO2e. TABLE 5.6-4 ESTIMATED GHG EMISSIONS FROM CONSTRUCTION Year Emissions MTCO2e 2013 (5 months) 395 2014 (12 months) 1,435 2015 (10 months) 1,246 Total (27 months) 3,076 Average for 12 months 1,367 MTCO2e: metric tons of CO2 equivalent See Appendix E for calculations. Current practice does not assess the impact significance of construction GHG emissions. Instead, construction emissions are amortized over the operating lifetime of a project and the combined emissions are assessed for impact (SCAQMD 2008). Operations Emissions Long-term annual GHG emissions attributed to the Proposed Project would be generated from vehicle trips generated by the proposed land uses and from the increased use of electricity, natural gas, and water within the ARSP. GHG emissions were calculated as described in Section 5.6.3, Methodology, and are shown in Table 5.6-5. Vehicle emissions were estimated using the URBEMIS 2007 model. The calculations are shown for 2030 (General Plan Build Out) because GHG emissions and the effects on the environment are long-term concerns. Prior to General Plan build out, GHG emissions for the Proposed Project would be less than those identified in Table 5.6-5. This is because the Proposed Project would not be fully built-out. Anticipated vehicle trips and energy consumption would be less than expected in 2030 under full build out conditions. There would be, however, construction GHG emissions during the years prior to build out. As shown in Table 5.6-5, GHG emissions in 2030 are estimated to be 499,799 MTCO2e per year. The GHG emissions associated with build out of the ARSP in accordance with the ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.6 GHG-082312.docx 5.6-22 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Proposed Project would be more than twice the existing GHG emissions. Vehicle emissions would constitute 67 percent of the GHG emissions. However, it is noted that vehicle emissions are overestimated because current methodology does not include the anticipated vehicle GHG emission reductions that will result from implementation of recent federal and state legislation, such as the federal CAFE standards and California AB 1493 requirements to improve fuel economy and reduce vehicle GHG emissions. It is also noted that the methodology does not include reductions in GHG emissions that will result from the planned increase in renewable sources of electricity. TABLE 5.6-5 ESTIMATED GHG EMISSIONS AT BUILD OUT Source Existing (Table 5.6-3) 2030 Build Out of ARSP Emissions MTCO2e/yr Percent of Total Emissions MTCO2e/yr Percent of Total C-R Hotel Electricity 29,909 12.9 83,890 16.8 PR Hotel Electricity 4,130 1.8 6,453 1.3 PR Commercial Electricity 0 0 806 0.2 PR Conv Ctr Electricity 7,609 3.3 9,400 1.9 Less: Conv Ctr PV Generation -46 -0.02 -46 -0.01 Water Use – from MWD 1,302 0.6 2,826 0.6 Water Use – from Groundwater 1,166 0.5 2,828 0.6 Natural Gas 23,212 10.0 58,819 11.8 Vehicles 163,897 70.9 334,783 67.0 Annual GHG emissions 231,179 100 499,759 100 Increase over existing 268,580 MTCO2e/yr: metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent per year; Conv Ctr: Convention Center; PV: Photovoltaic; MWD; Metropolitan Water District Percentage totals are rounded. As shown in Table 5.6-5, build out of the ARSP Amendment would result in a substantial increase in annual GHG emissions. The concurrent construction emissions would increase the annual emissions, but the increase would be on the order of ½ of one percent or less. Although there are currently no applicable quantitative CEQA significance thresholds for GHG emissions, it is concluded that the ARSP Amendment has the potential to make a cumulatively considerable contribution to global GHG emissions during both construction and operation, and that mitigation measures to reduce GHG emissions must be implemented, in accordance with the CEQA. This conclusion is based not only on the magnitude of emissions, but also on the opinions of the California AG as stated in reviews of General Plans, Specific Plans, Transportation Plans, and large projects (DOJ 2010b). ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.6 GHG-082312.docx 5.6-23 Greenhouse Gas Emissions GHG Emission Reduction Measures In considering GHG emission reductions, it is not a goal to reduce emissions to less than a specific threshold level per project. This policy would be a disincentive to the creation of large projects that can achieve emissions reductions in greater quantities and more efficiently than small projects. Rather, the goal for GHG emission reductions on the plan and project level is to make a substantial contribution to the larger statewide and regional emissions reductions goals that have been and are being developed. GHG emissions from the ARSP area would be reduced from the values shown in Tables 5.6-4 and 5.6-5 through the implementation of the standard requirements and by implementation at the statewide level of the measures described in Section 5.6.2 above. These statewide measures include but are not limited to the requirements for new vehicles to have reduced GHG emissions the CAFE standards); the low carbon fuel standard; and the increasing amount of renewable energy generation. Additional GHG reductions would be achieved by the implementation of proposed mitigation measures for the Proposed Project. The proposed mitigation measures include many actions to reduce vehicle trips and VMT and therefore reduce mobile source emissions. The proposed mitigation measures also include a number of actions to reduce energy and water demand and therefore reduce emissions associated with electricity, natural gas, and water consumption. Impact Summary: Direct and indirect GHG emissions would be cumulatively considerable and would be a significant and unavoidable impact. EIR No. 313 did not evaluate impacts related to GHG emissions; therefore, a consistency finding cannot be determined. Threshold 5.6.2 Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emission of greenhouse gases? As discussed above under Section 5.6.2, Regulatory Setting, there are numerous State plans, policies and regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. The principal overall State plan and policy is AB 32. The quantitative goal of AB 32 is to reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. This goal has been calculated by various methods as reducing 2020 GHG emissions by 28 to 30 percent compared to “business as usual”. Achievement of this reduction quantitatively at the Specific Plan level requires speculation as to the timing of implementation and effectiveness of statewide policies as well as the characterization of “business as usual”. Implementation of the proposed mitigation measures for the Proposed Project would provide additional GHG emission reductions. Thus, the Proposed Project is consistent with AB 32 and the associated Scoping Plan. Statewide plans and regulations such as GHG emissions standards for vehicles (AB 1493) and the Low Carbon Fuel Standard are being implemented at the statewide level; therefore, compliance at the Specific Plan level is not addressed. Therefore, the Proposed Project does not conflict with those plans and regulations. SB 375 is being addressed at the State and regional level, and application at the Specific Plan level is not anticipated until 2012 or later. Notwithstanding future date of applicability, the Proposed Project is representative of the compact and efficient land use development envisioned by SB 375. Further, the Proposed Project, when compared with a similar development not immediately adjacent to bus facilities and connections to rail lines, would make a positive contribution to reducing regional VMT, another goal of SB 375. The Proposed Project would not, therefore, conflict with SB 375. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.6 GHG-082312.docx 5.6-24 Greenhouse Gas Emissions The regulations, plans, and polices adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions that are directly applicable to the proposed Specific Plan include the Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings and the Title 24 California Green Building Standards Code. Adherence to standard requirements would ensure that the Proposed Project would comply with both of these regulations. Therefore, it can be concluded that the Proposed Project would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation of State, regional, or local agencies. This impact is less than significant Impact Summary: With adherence to the standard requirements and implementation of the proposed mitigation measures, the Proposed Project would not conflict with applicable plans, policies or regulations, and the impact would be less than significant. MEIR No. 313 did not evaluate impacts related to greenhouse gas emissions; therefore, a consistency finding cannot be determined. 5.6.8 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS Because GHG emissions and climate change are global phenomena, the Proposed Project would not have a direct impact on GHG emissions. Therefore, the analysis presented in this section represents the cumulative impact analysis for GHG emissions related to the Proposed Project. With the incorporation of the proposed mitigation measures, the Proposed Project would not conflict with applicable plans, policies or regulations; however, direct and indirect GHG emissions would be cumulatively considerable. It is noted that the proposed mitigation measures would reduce vehicle emissions; however, due to the inability to reliably model the reductions due to the unique nature of the project, the reductions are not quantifiable, therefore, the cumulative impact must be considered significant. 5.6.9 MITIGATION MEASURES Previously Approved Measures MEIR 313 did not present any MMs related to greenhouse gas emissions. The following MMs originally from MEIR 313 and restated throughout this EIR would contribute to the reduction of GHG emissions. Any modifications to the original measures are shown as strikethrough for deleted text and bold for new, inserted text. (Note that the measure number and section from MEIR 313 are listed in parentheses.) Section 5.2, Air Quality MM 5.2-1 Ongoing during project operation, the property owner/developer shall implement measures to reduce emissions to the extent practical, schedule goods movements for off-peak traffic hours, and use clean fuel for vehicles and other equipment, as practicable (MEIR 313 MM 3.4-1, Air Quality). MM 5.2-4 Prior to approval issuance of each grading permit plan (for Import/Export Plan) and prior to issuance of demolition permit (for Demolition Plan), the property owner/developer shall submit Demolition and Import/Export plans, if determined to be necessary by the Public Works/Engineering Department, Traffic Engineering Division and/or Maintenance Department. The plans shall include identification of offsite locations for materials export from the project and options for disposal of excess material. These options may include recycling of materials ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.6 GHG-082312.docx 5.6-25 Greenhouse Gas Emissions onsite, sale to a soil broker or contractor, sale to a project in the vicinity or transport to an environmentally cleared landfill, with attempts made to move it within Orange County. The property owner/developer shall offer recyclable building materials, such as asphalt or concrete for sale or removal by private firms or public agencies for use in construction of other projects, if not all can be reused on project site (MEIR 313 MM 3.4-4, Air Quality). MM 5.2-5 Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall comply with all SCAQMD offset regulations and implementation of Best Available Control Technology (BACT) and Best Available Retrofit Control Technology (BARCT) for any new or modified stationary source. Copies of permits shall be given to the Planning Department (MEIR 313 MM 3.4-5, Air Quality). MM 5.2-6 Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall implement, and demonstrate to the City, measures that are being taken to reduce operation-related air quality impacts. These measures may include, but are not limited to the following: a. Improve thermal integrity of structures and reduced thermal load through use of automated time clocks or occupant sensors. b. Incorporate efficient heating and other appliances. c. Incorporate energy conservation measures in site orientation and in building design, such as appropriate passive solar design. d. Use drought-resistant landscaping wherever feasible to reduce energy used in pumping and transporting water. e. Participate in marketing the existing Anaheim Telecenter (telecommuting/ video conferencing center) to guests in their hotels/businesses. e. To the extent feasible, provide daycare opportunities for employees or participate in a joint development daycare center f. Install facilities for electric vehicle recharging, unless it is demonstrated that the technology for these facilities or availability of the equipment current at the time makes this installation infeasible. (MEIR 313 MM 3.4-6, Air Quality). Section 5.8, Hydrology and Water Quality MM 5.8-5 Prior to final building and zoning inspection, the property owner/developer shall install piping on-site with project water mains so that reclaimed water may be used for landscape irrigation, if and when it becomes available from the County Sanitation District of Orange County (MEIR 313 MM 3.7-6, Hydrology and Water Resources). ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.6 GHG-082312.docx 5.6-26 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Section 5.14, Transportation and Traffic MM 5.14-4 Prior to the final building and zoning inspection, the property owner/developer shall join and financially participate in a clean fuel shuttle program such as the Anaheim Resort Transit system, if established, and shall participate in the Anaheim Transportation Network/Transportation Management Association in conjunction with the on-going operation of the project. The property owner shall also record a covenant on the property that requires participation in these programs ongoing during project operation. The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney’s Office prior to recordation. (MEIR 313 MM 3.3-4) MM 5.14-5 Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the property owner/developer shall provide to the City of Anaheim Public Works Department a plan to coordinate rideshare services for construction employees with the Anaheim Transportation Network (ATN) for review and a approval and shall implement ATN recommendations to the extent feasible. (MEIR 313 MM 3.3-5) MM 5.14-8 Prior to the final building and zoning inspection, and, ongoing during project operation, the property owner/developer shall record a covenant on the property requiring that ongoing during project implementation, the property owner/developer will shall implement and administer a comprehensive Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program for all employees. The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney’s Office. Objectives of the TDM program shall be: a. Increase ridesharing and use of alternative transportation modes by guests. b. Provide a menu of commute alternatives for employees to reduce project- generated trips. c. Conduct an annual commuter survey to ascertain trip generation, trip origin, and Average Vehicle Ridership. (MEIR 313, MM3.3-8 in part) MM 5.14-9 Prior to the final building and zoning inspection, the property owner/developer shall provide to the City of Anaheim Public Works Department for review and approval a menu of TDM program strategies and elements for both existing and future employees’ commute options, and incentives for hotel patrons transportation options, to include, but are not be limited to, the following list below. The property owner shall also record a covenant on the property requiring that the approved TDM strategies and elements be implemented ongoing during project operation. The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney’s Office prior to recordation. a. On-site services. Provide, as feasible and permitted, on-site services such as the food, retail, and other services be provided. b. Ridesharing. Develop a commuter listing of all employee members be developed for the purpose of providing a “matching” of employees with other employees who live in the same geographic areas and who could rideshare. c. Vanpooling. Develop a commuter listing of all employees for the purpose of matching numbers of employees who live in geographic proximity to one ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.6 GHG-082312.docx 5.6-27 Greenhouse Gas Emissions another and could comprise a vanpool or participate in the existing vanpool programs. d. Transit Pass. Promote Southern California Rapid Transit District and Orange County Transportation Authority (including commuter rail) passes be promoted through financial assistance and on-site sales to encourage employees to use the various transit and bus services from throughout the region. e. Commuter Bus. As commuter “express” bus service expands throughout the region, passes for use on these lines may be provided for employees who choose to use this service. Financial incentives be provided. e. Shuttle Service. Generate a commuter listing of all employees living in proximity to the project be generated, and offer a local shuttle program offered to encourage employees to travel to work by means other than the automobile. When appropriate, event shuttle service shall also be made available for guests. f. Bicycling. Develop a Bicycling Program be developed to offer a bicycling alternative to employees. Secure bicycle racks, lockers, and showers should be provided as part of this program. Maps of bicycle routes throughout the area should be provided to inform potential bicyclists of these options. g. Rental Car Fleet. A “fleet” vehicle program be developed to provide employees who travel to work by means other than an automobile with access to automobiles in case of emergency, medical appointments, etc. This service would help employees use alternative modes of transportation by ensuring that they would be able to have personal transportation in the event of special circumstances. g. Guaranteed Ride Home Program. Develop a program to provide employees who rideshare, or use transit or other means of commuting to work, with a prearranged ride home in a taxi, rental car, shuttle, or other vehicle, in the event of emergencies during the work shift. h. Target Reduction of Longest Commute Trip. Promote an incentive program for ridesharing and other alternative transportation modes to put highest priority on reduction of longest employee commute trips. i. Work Shifts. Stagger work shifts. j. Compressed Work Week. Develop a “compressed work week” program, which provides for fewer work days but longer daily shifts as an option for employees. k. Telecommuting. Explore the possibility of a “telecommuting” program that would link some employees via electronic means computer with modem). l. Parking Management. Develop a parking management program that provides incentives to those who rideshare or use transit means other than single-occupant auto to travel to work. m. Access. Provide preferential access to high occupancy vehicles and shuttles may be provided. n. Financial Incentive for Ridesharing and/or Public Transit. Offer employees financial incentives for ridesharing or using public transportation. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.6 GHG-082312.docx 5.6-28 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Currently, federal law provides tax-free status for up to $65 60 per month per employee contributions to employees who vanpool or use public transit including commuter rail and/or express bus pools. o. Financial Incentive for Bicycling. Offer employees offered financial incentives for bicycling to work. p. Special “Premium” for the Participation and Promotion of Trip Reduction. Offer ticket/passes to special events, vacations, etc. be offered to employees who recruit other employees for vanpool, carpool, or other trip reduction programs. q. Actively recruit prospective employees residing within a 3-minute commute shed. q. Incentive Programs. Design incentive programs for carpooling and other alternative transportation modes so as to put highest priority on reduction of longest commute trips. (MEIR 313 MM 3.3-8 in part) Section 5.15, Water Supply and Infrastructure MM 5.15-1 Prior to issuance of each building permit (to be implemented prior to final building and zoning inspections, and continuing on an on-going basis during project operation), the property owner/ developer shall submit to the Public Utilities Department plans for review and approval which shall ensure that water conservation measures are incorporated. The water conservation measures to be shown on the plans and implemented by the property owner/developer, to the extent applicable include, but are not limited to, the following: a. Use of low-flow sprinkler heads in irrigation systems. b. Use of waterway recirculation systems. c. Low-flow fittings, fixtures, and equipment, including low flush toilets and urinals. d. Use of self-closing valves on drinking valves. e. Use of efficient irrigation systems such as drip irrigation and automatic systems which use moisture sensors. f. Use of low-flow shower heads in hotels. g. Water efficient ice-machines, dishwashers, clothes washers and other water- using appliances. h. Use of irrigation systems primarily at night when evaporation rates are lowest. i. Provide information to the public in conspicuous places regarding water conservation. j. Use of water conserving landscape plant materials wherever feasible (MEIR 313 MM 3.9.6-1, Water Service). MM 5.15-4 Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit a landscape and irrigation plan which shall be prepared and certified by a licensed landscape architect. The landscape plan shall include a phasing plan for the installation and maintenance of landscaping associated with the Water Efficiency Landscape Ordinance. The irrigation plan shall specify methods for monitoring the irrigation system. The system shall ensure that irrigation rates do ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.6 GHG-082312.docx 5.6-29 Greenhouse Gas Emissions not exceed the infiltration of local soils, that the application of fertilizers and pesticides do not exceed appropriate levels of frequencies, and that surface runoff and overwatering is minimized. The landscaping and irrigation plans shall include water-conserving features such as low flow irrigation heads, automatic irrigation scheduling equipment, flow sensing controls, rain sensors, soil moisture sensors, and other water-conserving equipment. The landscaping and irrigation plans shall indicate that separate irrigation lines for recycled water shall be constructed and recycled water will be used when it becomes available. All irrigation systems shall be designed so that they will function properly with recycled water. In addition, all irrigation systems shall be designed so that they will function properly with reclaimed water, once a system is available. (MEIR 313 MM3.11-2, Visual Resources and Aesthetics) Section 5.17, Electricity MM 5.17-1 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/develop shall submit plans showing that each structure will comply with the State Energy Efficiency Standards for Nonresidential Buildings (Title 24, Part 6, Article 2, California Code of Regulations) and will consult with the City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department, Resource Efficiency Business and Community Programs Division in order to review above Title 24 energy efficient measures to incorporate into the project design including energy efficient designs. Prior to the final building and zoning inspection, the property owner developer shall implement these energy efficient measures energy-saving practices in compliance with Title 24, which may include the following: a. Use of High-efficiency air-conditioning systems with EMS (computer) control controlled by a computerized management system including features such as a variable air volume system, a 100 percent outdoor air economizer cycle, sequential operation of air conditioning equipment in accordance with building demands, isolation of air conditioning to any selected floor or floors b. Variable air volume (VAV) distribution c. Outside air (100%) economizer cycle d. Staged compressors or variable speed drives to flow varying thermal loads e. Isolated HVAC zone control by floors/separable activity areas f. Use of electric motors designed to conserve energy Specification of premium-efficiency electric motors compressor motors, air- handling units, and fan-coil units) g. Use of special lighting fixtures such as motion sensing devices and compact florescent fixtures in place of incandescent lights. Occupancy sensors in appropriate spaces h. Compact fluorescent lamps i. Cold cathode fluorescent lamps j. Light emitting diode (LED) or equivalent energy-efficient lighting for outdoor lighting k. Energy Star® exit lighting or exit signage ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.6 GHG-082312.docx 5.6-30 Greenhouse Gas Emissions l. Use of T-8 lamps and electronic ballasts where applications of standard fluorescent fixtures are identified m. Lighting power controllers in association with metal-halide or high- pressure sodium (high intensity discharge) lamps for outdoor lighting and parking lots n. Thermal energy storage air-conditioning for spaces or facilities that may require air-conditioning during summer, day-peak periods o. For swimming pools and spas: solar heating, automatic covers, and efficient pumps and motors, as feasible p. Participate in Advantage Services Programs such as: a. New construction design review, in which the City cost-shares engineering for up to $10,000 for design of energy efficient buildings and systems b. New Construction – cash incentives ($300 to $400 per kW reduction in load) for efficiency that exceeds Title 24 requirements c. Green Building Program – offers accelerated plan approval, financial incentives, waived plan check fees and free technical assistance. (MEIR 313, MMs 3.9.9-1 and 3.9.9-2 in part, Public Services and Utilities) Section 5.19, Solid Waste MM 5.19-1 Prior to issuance of each building permit; to be implemented prior to final building and zoning Inspection, the property owner/developer shall submit project plans to the Maintenance Department Public Works Department for review and approval to ensure that the plans comply with AB 939, the Solid Waste Reduction Act of 1989, as administered by the City of Anaheim and the County of Orange and City of Anaheim Integrated Waste Management Plans. Prior to final building and zoning inspection, implementation of said plan shall commence and shall remain in full effect. Waste management mitigation measures that shall be taken to reduce solid waste generation include, but are not limited to: a. Detailing the location and design of on-site recycling facilities. b. Providing on-site recycling receptacles to encourage recycling. c. Complying with all Federal, State and City regulation for hazardous material disposal. d. Participating in the City of Anaheim’s “Recycle Anaheim” program or other substitute program as may be developed by the City. In order to meet the requirements of the Solid Waste Reduction Act of 1989 (AB 939), the property owner/developer shall implement numerous solid waste reduction programs, as required by the Maintenance Department Public Works Department, including, but not limited to: a. Facilitating paper recycling by providing chutes or convenient locations for sorting and recycling bins. b. Facilitating cardboard recycling (especially in retail areas) by providing adequate space and centralized locations for collection and bailing storing. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.6 GHG-082312.docx 5.6-31 Greenhouse Gas Emissions c. Facilitating glass recycling (especially from restaurants) by providing adequate space for sorting and storing. d. Providing trash compactors for non-recyclable materials whenever feasible to reduce the total volume of solid waste and the number of trips required for collection. e. Prohibiting curbside pick-up. (MEIR 313 MM 3.9.3-1, Public Services and Utilities) MM 5.19-2 Ongoing during project operation, the following practices shall be implemented, as feasible, by the property owner/developer: a. Usage of recycled paper products for stationary, letterhead, and packaging. b. Recovery of materials such as aluminum and cardboard. c. Collection of office paper for recycling. d. Collection of (foam) cups for recycling. e. Collection of glass, plastics, kitchen grease, laser printer toner cartridges, oil, batteries, and scrap metal for recycling or recovery. (MEIR 313 MM 3.9.3-2, Public Services and Utilities) Additional Mitigation Measures Section 5.14, Traffic and Transportation MM 5.14-20 Prior to the approval of a Final Site Plan, the property owner/developer shall meet with the Traffic and Transportation Manager to determine whether a bus stop(s) is required to be placed adjacent to the property. If a bus stop(s) is required, it shall be placed in a location that least impacts traffic flow and may be designed as a bus turnout or a far side bus stop as required by the Traffic and Transportation Manager and per the approval of the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA). MM 5.14-21 Prior to the first final building and zoning Inspection every property owner and/or lessee shall designate an on-site contact that will be responsible for coordinating with the ATN and implementing all trip mitigation measures. The on-site coordinator shall be the one point of contact representing the project with the ATN. The TDM requirements shall be included in the lease or other agreement with all of the project participants. MM 5.14-23 Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the Property Owner/Developer shall demonstrate that the plans include the installation of bicycle parking spaces at each facility. Bicycle spaces for employees shall be easily accessible, secure, enclosed spaces. Bicycle spaces for visitors and customers shall be visible from the primary entrance, illuminated at night, and protected from damage from moving and parked vehicles. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.6 GHG-082312.docx 5.6-32 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Section 5.17, Electricity MM 5.17-3 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit plans and calculations to the City of Anaheim Planning Department, Building Division, to demonstrate that the energy efficiency of each building will exceed the Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings current at the time of application by at least 10 percent. MM 5.17-4 Prior to approval of a Final Site Plan, the property owner/developer shall coordinate with the Public Utilities Department to incorporate feasible renewable energy generation measures into the project. These measures may include but not be limited to use of solar and small wind turbine sources on new and existing facilities and the use of solar powered lighting in parking areas. Section 5.19, Solid Waste MM 5.19-4 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the Property Owner/Developer shall demonstrate that the plans include provisions for the installation of trash and recycle receptacles near all benches and near high traffic areas such as plazas, transit stops and retail and dining establishments. MM 5.19-5 Prior to issuance of each grading and building permit, the Property Owner/Developer shall submit to the Planning Director or Planning Services Manager for approval a Construction Waste Management Plan that, at a minimum, specifies that at least 75 percent of non-hazardous construction and demolition debris shall be recycled or salvaged and identifies the materials to be diverted from disposal and whether the materials will be sorted on site or co- mingled. 5.6.10 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION Projected GHG emissions at build out of the ARSP Amendment (in 2030) would be more than double the existing emissions from the ARSP. The projected GHG emissions would be reduced by implementation of the mitigation program and the effects of implementation of federal and State measures to reduce GHG emissions. As shown on Table 5.6-6, anticipated reductions identified in the AB 32 Scoping Plan have the potential to reduce emission levels by more than 30 percent; however, these reductions are speculative at this stage of development of the Proposed Project and should not relied upon. Although the Proposed Project would not conflict with applicable regulations and policies adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions and although feasible mitigation measures would be incorporated into the Proposed Project, the magnitude of the increase in GHG emissions would remain cumulatively considerable and the impact to GHG emissions would be significant and unavoidable. This conclusion that impacts to GHG emissions would be significant and unavoidable is conservative. It could be argued that the Proposed Project’s compliance with the State’s regulatory program renders the increased emissions from the Proposed Project less-than-significant. This latter approach is the approach taken in other EIRs. Nevertheless, this EIR has taken a conservative approach and concluded that emissions are cumulatively considerable. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.6 GHG-082312.docx 5.6-33 Greenhouse Gas Emissions TABLE 5.6-6 COMPARISON OF ESTIMATED EXISTING AND FUTURE GHG EMISSIONS WITH FUTURE EMISSIONS INCLUDING PROJECTED SCOPING PLAN REDUCTIONS Source Existing (Table 5.6-3) 2030 Build Out of ARSP (Table 5.6-5) 2030 Build Out of ARSP w/Scoping Plan Reductionsa Emissions MTCO2e/yr Percent of Total Emissions MTCO2e/yr Percent of Total Emissions MTCO2e/yr Percent of Total C-R Hotel Electricity 29,909 12.9 83,890 16.8 66,273 20.4 PR Hotel Electricity 4,130 1.8 6,453 1.3 5,098 1.6 PR Commercial Electricity 0 0 806 0.2 637 0.2 PR Conv Ctr Electricity 7,609 3.3 9,400 1.9 7,426 2.3 Less: Conv Ctr PV Generation -46 -0.02 -46 -0.01 -46 -0.01 Water Use – from MWD 1,302 0.6 2,826 0.6 2,233 0.7 Water Use – from Groundwater 1,166 0.5 2,828 0.6 2,234 0.7 Natural Gas 23,212 10 58,819 11.8 49,996 15.4 Vehicles 163,897 70.9 334,783 67.0 191,496 58.9 Annual GHG emissions 231,179 100 499,759 100 325,346 100 Increase over existing 268,580 116.2 94,167 40.7 Scoping Plan reduction of 2030 emissions 174,413 Percent decrease from estimated 2030 emissions 34.9 MTCO2e/yr: metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent per year; Conv Ctr: Convention Center; PV: Photovoltaic; MWD; Metropolitan Water District Percentage totals are rounded. a Scoping plan reductions for electricity are based on an increase in renewable energy use from 12 percent to 33 percent by 2020; reductions for natural gas are based on an increase in 15 percent energy efficiency from the 2005 to 2008 Building and Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 24 California Building Code); and reductions for vehicle emissions are based on a 42.8 percent increase in fuel efficiency in passenger vehicles from 2008 to 2020 in the CARB 2008 technical advisory – Pavley 2 would require an average fleet fuel economy of new cars of 42.5 mpg by 2020 compared to an existing average of 24.4 mpg. 5.6.11 REFERENCES Anaheim, City of 2004 (May). City of Anaheim General Plan, Green Element and Bicycle Master Plan. Anaheim, CA. (Anaheim). Anaheim Public Utilities. 2010 (accessed May Renewable Energy. Anaheim, CA. http://www.anaheim.net/utilities/adv_svc_prog/renew_energy/info.html Anaheim Resort Transit (ART) 2010 (accessed May 10). Anaheim CA: ART http://www.rideart.org/index.php?loc=1 California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2011 (February 15). Executive Order No. G-11-024, Relating to Adoption of Regional Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Targets for Automobiles and Light Trucks Pursuant Senate Bill 375. Sacramento, CA: CARB. http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/sb375/executive_order_g11024.pdf. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.6 GHG-082312.docx 5.6-34 Greenhouse Gas Emissions California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2010b (last updated May 12). California Greenhouse Gas Inventory for 2000–2008 – by Category as Defined in the Scoping Plan. Sacramento, CA: CARB. http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/data/tables/ ghg_inventory_scopingplan_00-08_2010-05-12.pdf. 2008 (December). Climate Change Proposed Scoping Plan, a Framework for Change. Sacramento, CA: CARB. 2007 (November). Draft California Greenhouse Gas Inventory (millions of metric tonnes of CO2 equivalent) — By IPCC Category (a spreadsheet). Sacramento, CA: CARB. http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/data/tables/ghg_inventory_ipcc_ 00-06_all_2009-03- 13.pdf. California Building Standards Commission (CBSC). 2010 (November) Guide to the (Non-Residential) California Green Building Standards Code. Sacramento, CA: CBSC. http://www.documents.dgs.ca.gov/bsc/CALGreen/Master-CALGreen-Non-Res- Guide2010-sec-ed-final-11-09-10.pdf. California Climate Action Registry (CCAR). 2009 (January). California Climate Action Registry General Reporting Protocol, Version 3.1. Los Angeles, CA: CCAR. California Climate Change Center. 2009 (April). DRAFT 2008 Climate Action Team Biennial Report to the Governor and Legislature. http://www.energy.ca.gov/2009publications/ CAT-1000-2009-003/CAT-1000-2009-003-D.PDF California Department of Justice (DOJ). 2010a (January Addressing Global Warming Impacts at the Project Level, Sacramento, CA: DOJ. http://ag.ca.gov/globalwarming/ pdf/GW_mitigation_measures.pdf. 2010b. Comment Letters filed under the California Environmental Quality Act. Sacramento, CA: DOJ. http://ag.ca.gov/globalwarming/ceqa/comments.php. California Energy Commission (CEC). 2009. 2008 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. Sacramento, CA: CEC. http://www.energy.ca.gov/title24/2008standards/ 2006a (March). California Commercial End-Use Survey (CEC-400-2006-005, prepared by Itron, Inc.). Sacramento, CA: CEC. 2006b (December). Refining Estimates of Water-Related Energy Use in California (CEC-500-2006-118, prepared by Navigant Consulting). Sacramento, CA: CEC. California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR). 2008 (June 18). CEQA and Climate Change: Addressing Climate Change through California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Review. Sacramento, CA: OPR. http://www.opr.ca.gov/ceqa/pdfs/june08- ceqa.pdf. California Natural Resources Agency (CNRA). 2009a (December 30). CEQA Guidelines. http://ceres.ca.gov/ceqa/guidelines/.California Office of the Governor. 2009. Executive Order S-3-05. Sacramento, CA: the State. http://gov.ca.gov/executive-order/1861/. 2009b (December). California Climate Adaptation Strategy: A Report to the Governor of the State of California in Response to Executive Order S-13-2008. Sacramento, CA: CNRA. http://climatechange.ca.gov/adaptation/index.html ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.6 GHG-082312.docx 5.6-35 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Gupta, M. 2010 (April 16) Personal communication. Emails between M. Gupta, Senior Transportation Planner (PB) and F. Sotelo, Acoustical and Transportation Engineer (BonTerra Consulting) Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2007 (February). Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Summary for Policymakers (Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). Boulder, CO: IPCC, Working Group I. South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2008 (October). Draft Guidance Document – Interim CEQA Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Significance Thresholds. Diamond Bar, CA: SCAQMD. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) 2012 (Accessed August CAFÉ – Fuel Economy. http://www.nhtsa.gov/fuel-economy/. Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) 2010 (accessed May Bus Service. Orange, CA: OCTA. http://www.octa.net/routes-and-schedules.aspx Parsons Brinckerhoff. 2010 (December). Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report. Orange, CA: Parsons Brinckerhoff. Psomas. 2009 (November). Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Water Supply Assessment. Santa Ana, CA. South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2010 (September 28). Greenhouse Gas CEQA Significance Threshold Stakeholder Working Group #15 (slide presentation). Diamond Bar, CA. SCAQMD. http://www.aqmd.gov/ceqa/handbook/GHG/2010/ 2008 (October). Draft Guidance Document – Interim CEQA Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Significance Thresholds. Diamond Bar, CA: SCAQMD. Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). 2012 (April, adopted). 2012–2035 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), Sustainable Communities Strategy Towards a Sustainable Future. Los Angeles, CA: SCAG. 2035-RTP-SCS.aspx. 2011 (December). Draft Program Environmental Impact Report, Southern California Association of Governments 2012-2035 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy. Los Angeles: SCAG United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change 2011. Web site. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2011 (April). Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks. Washington, D.C.: USEPA. http://www.epa.gov/ climatechange/emissions/downloads11/GHG-Fast-Facts-2009.pdf. 2009a (December Climate Change – Regulatory Initiatives: Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings for Greenhouse Gases under the Clean Air Act. Washington, D.C. USEPA. http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/endangerment.html. 2009b (April). 2009 U.S. Greenhouse Gas Inventory Report, Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2007. Washington, D.C. USEPA. http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/usinventoryreport.html ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.6 GHG-082312.docx 5.6-36 Greenhouse Gas Emissions World Resources Institute (WRI). 2009. Climate Analysis Indicators Tool (CAIT) version 7.0. Washington, D.C.: WRI. http://cait.wri.org/. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.7 Hazards-080812.docx 5.7-1 Hazards and Hazardous Materials 5.7 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS The information presented in this section is based information from the following sources which are available in their entirety as Appendix F: • EDR Radius Map with Geocheck®, ARSP South, 2010 (May), Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR). • EDR Radius Map with Geocheck®, ARSP North, 2010 (May), Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR). 5.7.1 SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION MEIR 313 included data from the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan EIR (FEIR No. 311), including the identification of active known or suspected contamination sites within the vicinity of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan area. Multiple leaking underground storage tanks and biphenyl electrical transformers were identified. Implementation of mitigation measures served to reduce all impacts to a less than significant level. 5.7.2 PLANS, POLICIES, AND REGULATORY CONDITIONS Related Planning Programs City of Anaheim General Plan, Safety Element The Safety Element of the City of Anaheim General Plan addresses fire hazards, geologic and seismic hazards, flood hazards, risk-reduction strategies, hazard abatement measures, and potential hazard locations throughout the City. Applicable goals and policies from the Safety Element that are related to hazards and hazardous materials and that are applicable to the Proposed Project are provided in Table 5.9-2 in Section 5.9, Land Use, with a project consistency analysis. Regulatory Setting Hazardous Materials Transportation Act The Hazardous Materials Transportation Act is administered by the U.S. Department of Transportation and governs the transport of hazardous materials. The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) implements the federal regulations published as the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Title 49, known as the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act. These laws regulate the handling and transport of hazardous waste materials, such as lead-based paint. California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (CalOSHA) Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations, California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (CalOSHA) Standards, describes safety and health management regulations to minimize workplace hazards and protect the health of construction workers. The laws apply to operational activities and include all provisions for standard injury and illness prevention, construction requirements, and requirements for the handling of chemicals. Worker safety programs directly benefit public health by reducing the number of accidents and injuries that occur. Hazardous materials laws also protect worker and public safety by requiring specific training, handling, transportation, and storage procedures for hazardous materials. Chapter 4, Division of Industry Standards (specifically Article 4 of Subchapter 4, Construction ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.7 Hazards-080812.docx 5.7-2 Hazards and Hazardous Materials and Safety Orders), describes regulations relating to dust, fumes, mists, vapors, and gases. Section 1532.1 details the requirements for construction and demolition activities as they relate to the handling of materials containing lead. CalOSHA’s Process Safety Management (PSM) Rule, which enforces the federal PSM Rule under Section 29.1910.119 of the Code of Federal Regulations, is designed to protect the workers from accidental releases of specific hazardous substances, including chlorine. Among other requirements, there are annual operating procedure reviews, certifications, and periodic audits of the entire PSM program, and the same is conducted of the Risk Management Program every three years. Risk Management Program On June 20, 1998, the USEPA promulgated the Risk Management Program (RMP) rule, requiring certain facilities that handle hazardous wastes to create an RMP Plan. Its purpose is to protect the public from accidental releases. This Plan, which is available to the public, must include information about the hazards of the regulated substances at the facility and information about how the RMP helps prevent accidental releases and protects against the consequences of an accidental release. The California equivalent of the federal RMP is the California Accidental Release Prevention (CalARP) program, which replaced the California Risk Management and Prevention Program (RMPP). The USEPA has grated primary responsibility to California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) for administering and enforcing Hazardous Materials Management Plans Hazardous materials, as defined by CalEPA, include the chlorine and ammonia that would be delivered and used as part of the proposed water treatment system. State regulations for hazardous materials are equally or more stringent than the federal regulations. State regulations include detailed planning and management requirements to ensure that materials are properly handled, stored, used, or disposed of in a manner that reduces risks to the maximum extent. Emergency Response Public health is protected by numerous federal, State, and local agencies that provide emergency response services. Under the California Emergency Act, the State developed an Emergency Response Plan to coordinate emergency services provided by all government agencies. The plan is administered by the California Office of Emergency Services (OES). OES coordinates the responses of other agencies, including the CalEPA, the California Highway Patrol, the Regional Water Quality Control Boards, the Air Quality Management Districts, and the County Disaster Response Offices. Local emergency response teams include the fire, police, and sheriff’s departments, who provide most services to protect public health. Lead-Based Paint In California, the regulation of lead based paint (LBP) and other lead hazards is promulgated under 17 CCR (Division 1, Chapter 8, “Accreditation, Certification, and Work Practices for Lead-Based Paint and Lead Hazards”)(Title 17). Last updated in May of 2008, Title 17 regulates accreditation of training providers and certification of individuals to perform lead abatement, sets work practice standards for lead hazard evaluations and abatement, and implements the mandates of the California Health and Safety Code regarding LBP and other lead hazards. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.7 Hazards-080812.docx 5.7-3 Hazards and Hazardous Materials 5.7.3 METHODOLOGY The analysis in this section is based information from the following sources: • EDR Radius Map with Geocheck®, ARSP South, 2010 (May), Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR). • EDR Radius Map with Geocheck®, ARSP North, 2010 (May), Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR). 5.7.4 EXISTING CONDITIONS A hazardous material is defined by the CalEPA as a material that, because of its quantity, concentration, or physical or chemical characteristics, poses a significant present or potential hazard to human health and safety or to the environment if released (California Code of Regulations [CCR], Title 26, §25501). A material is also considered hazardous if it appears on a list of hazardous materials prepared by a federal, State, or local agency. Specific chemical and physical properties can cause a substance to be considered hazardous, including the properties of toxicity, ignitability, and reactivity (27 CCR§§66261.20–66261.24). The EDR Radius Map with GeoCheck® Reports (EDR Reports) were prepared for the Project Site to meet national record review requirements in accordance with both the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) E 1527-05 Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process and the USEPA Standards and Practices for All Appropriate Inquiries (40 CFR 312). These rules establish specific regulatory requirements for conducting an inquiry into the previous ownership, uses, and environmental conditions of a property. The EDR reports identify sites with known or potential environmental issues related to hazardous materials or wastes within the Project Site or located immediately along the boundaries of the Project Site, based upon a search of federal, State, local, tribal, and other databases. The EDR reports include information from multiple sources, including, but not limited to, the following databases: • National Priority List (NPL): The NPL is the list of hazardous waste sites eligible for long-term remedial action financed under the federal Superfund program. • Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System (CERCLIS): The CERCLIS database is maintained by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and contains general information on hazardous materials sites across the nation and in U.S. territories. It includes location, status, contaminants, and actions taken. The database includes potential and confirmed hazardous waste sites where the USEPA Superfund Program has some involvement. • Underground Storage Tank (UST): A national listing of underground storage tanks. Inclusion on this list does not indicate a spill or non-authorized release of toxic substances. • Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST): A national listing of leaking underground storage tanks. This list includes incidences in which a leak was discovered and remediation has been completed. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.7 Hazards-080812.docx 5.7-4 Hazards and Hazardous Materials • Resource Conservation and Recovery Act List (RCRA): The RCRA List includes small quantity generators (SQG) and information regarding the transportation, storage, and disposal (TSD) of hazardous materials. Inclusion on this list does not indicate a spill or non-authorized release of toxic substances. • Clandestine Drug Labs List (US CDL List): A U.S Government listing of known contamination from the operation of clandestine drug laboratories, usually methamphetamine laboratories. • California Hazardous Material Incident Reporting System (CHMIRS): This listing, compiled by the California Office of Emergency Services, contains information on reported hazardous materials incidents accidental releases or spills) within the State of California. • Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List (Cortese List): Under Section 65962.5 of the California Government Code, the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) maintains a list of hazardous substance sites. The Cortese List is a planning document used by the State, local agencies, and developers to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements in providing information about the location of hazardous materials release sites. The EDR reports identify more than 40 listed sites either within the project boundaries or located immediately adjacent to the Project Site. Listed sites include both permitted facilities whose operations use, produce, or transport hazardous materials and the locations of reported releases and/or clean up operations (remediation). A single site can be listed in multiple databases. The Project Site is located within a densely urbanized area and, as such, multiple USTs were identified, most of which are related to automotive service stations. 5.7.5 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE The following criteria are based on the City of Anaheim’s Initial Study for hazardous materials. The Proposed Project would result in a significant environmental impact related to hazardous materials if it would: Threshold 5.7.1 Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. As previously discussed in Section 2.4.2, Effects Found Not to Be Significant, during preparation of the Initial Study, the City of Anaheim determined that the Proposed Project would not have a significant impact for the following thresholds and no further analysis of this issue is presented in this section. Would the Project: • Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? • Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.7 Hazards-080812.docx 5.7-5 Hazards and Hazardous Materials • Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter-mile of an existing or proposed school? • For a project located within an airport land use plan (Los Alamitos Armed Forces Reserve Center or Fullerton Municipal Airport), would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? • For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip, heliport, or helistop, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? • Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? • Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? 5.7.6 PROJECT IMPACT ANALYSIS Standard Requirements SR 5.7-1 All construction activities, including demolition and renovation of the existing facilities and installation of the new facilities, shall be performed in compliance with all CalOSHA standards (California Code of Regulations, Title 8) to protect worker health and safety. SR 5.7-2 The removal and disposal of all lead-based paint (LBP) encountered on site during project implementation, shall be performed by an LBP Abatement Contractor that is licensed and registered in California pursuant to California Code of Regulations Title 17. SR 5.7-3 All transport and transfer of hazardous materials shall be performed by a licensed hauler in compliance with all applicable State and federal requirements, including the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act. Impact Analysis Threshold 5.7.1 Would the project be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? As identified above, the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) maintains the Cortese List, a list of hazardous materials sites pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the California Government Code. The EDR reports prepared for the Proposed Project identify multiple hazardous materials sites within the boundaries of the Proposed Project. Appendix F includes a listing of all identified sites either within or adjacent to the Proposed Project boundaries that have the potential to create a hazard to the public or the environment. It is important to note that only a select few of the identified cases have not been remediated and closed as of this writing. As stated below, three potentially active sites are identified as being located within the vicinity of the C-R District, and one potentially active site is identified as being within the vicinity of the PR District. It is important to note that, per the 2010 EDR reports, there have been no active sites identified on the Cortese List within the boundaries of or adjacent to, either the C-R or ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.7 Hazards-080812.docx 5.7-6 Hazards and Hazardous Materials PR Districts since 1994. This constitutes a marked improvement from the results of analyses conducted as part of MEIR 313. MEIR 313 identified nine active sites either within the Project Site or within ¼ mile of the Project Site. Of these sites, seven were active LUSTs with a known release of either diesel or gasoline fuel. One of the active sites, the California Chemical Company, located at 1772 South Haster Street, was identified as being within the boundaries of the Project Site, although the nature of contamination was not identified. C-R District Hazardous Materials Sites The ARSP North and ARSP South EDR Reports identify 35 sites either within or adjacent to the C-R District boundaries. Some of the identified sites include gas stations that are listed multiple times to identify multiple tanks. Additional identified sites include existing USTs that have not leaked and hazardous materials generators that use recycling services to properly dispose of such materials; these sites do not pose a significant hazard. Additionally, several of the 35 sites are identified as locations of one-time sewer blockage events, including several which occurred in 1965 and have since been remediated. A total of 28 LUSTs at 19 separate locations are identified. Except for the four sites listed below, all the reported LUST sites identify closure dates, which indicate that the problem has been resolved and the case has been closed. • Texaco Service Station – 100 East Katella Avenue, Anaheim, California. A gasoline leak occurred on 11/1990; the remediating action took place on 11/3/2003, but a closure date was not provided. • Stop ‘N Gulp – 1180 Ball Road, Anaheim, California. A gasoline leaks occurred on 2/1999 and 7/2006. The 1999 leak was stopped the same day, but the closure date not provided. No further information is provided for the 2006 leak. • Shell Oil Products – 601 Ball Road, Anaheim, California. A gasoline leak occurred on 2/2003; the leak was stopped the same day, but a closure date was not provided. • Thrifty Oil – 2101 South Harbor Boulevard, Anaheim, California. A gasoline leak occurred on 5/1995; remediating action has begun as of this writing, but the closure date is not provided. While it is possible that these sites have been remediated as necessary, the EDR reports do not provide evidence of case closure; therefore, development of these sites may result in a significant impact related to hazardous materials exposure. However, implementation of the proposed mitigation measures, would reduce these potentially significant impacts to less than significant levels. The Cortese List (hazardous materials sites pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the California Government Code) sites include the following: • Avis-Rent-A-Car – 1400 Harbor Boulevard, Anaheim, California. Leak of diesel from a UST. Case closed 3/1986. • Sheraton Anaheim Hotel – 1015 West Ball Road, Anaheim, California. Leak of diesel from a UST. Case closed 1/1991. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.7 Hazards-080812.docx 5.7-7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials • Exxon Service Station #3724 – 1100 Ball Road, Anaheim, California. Leak of gasoline from a UST. Case closed 9/1994. • Arco Service Station #0072 – 1037 West Ball Road, Anaheim, California. Leak of gasoline from a UST. Case closed 7/1989. As detailed, there have been no active sites identified on the Cortese List within the boundaries of or adjacent to, the Project Site since 1994. Therefore, no impact related to exposure of a hazardous material is expected to occur with development of these sites. Asbestos and Lead As discussed previously in Section 5.5, Cultural Resources, the C-R District contains structures constructed prior to 1972; therefore, structures within the ARSP area have the potential to contain asbestos. Additionally, the C-R District contains structures that were constructed prior to 1992; therefore, on-site structures have the potential to contain lead-based paint. Therefore, potential exposure to asbestos-containing materials (ACMs) or LBP represents a significant impact. However, adherence to standard requirements and proposed mitigation would reduce impacts to less than significant levels. PR District Hazardous Materials Sites The ARSP North and ARSP South EDR Reports identify 12 hazardous material sites either within or adjacent to the boundaries of the ARSP’s PR District. Some of the identified sites include existing USTs that have not leaked and hazardous materials generators that use recycling services to properly dispose of such materials; these sites do not pose a significant hazard. Of the reported 12 sites, 6 sites are identified as containing LUSTs. All reported LUST sites identify closure dates. No Cortese List sites were identified within or near the PR District area. Asbestos and Lead As discussed previously in Section 5.5, Cultural Resources, the PR District contains structures constructed prior to 1972; therefore, structures within the ARSP area have the potential to contain asbestos. Additionally, the PR District contains structures that were constructed prior to 1992; therefore, on-site structures have the potential to contain LBP. Therefore, potential exposure to ACMs or LBP represents a significant impact. However, adherence to the standard requirements and the proposed mitigation would reduce impacts to less than significant levels. Impact Summary: The Proposed Project would have the potential to disturb LBP and ACM depending on the age of existing structures within the PR and C-R Districts. Given the presence of USTs, including ones which have been identified as having leaked, the Proposed Project would have the potential to disturb hazardous materials. With implementation of mitigation, including compliance with the State of California Hazardous Substances Control Law, potential impacts related to hazardous material on or near the Project Site would be reduced to less than significant levels. This conclusion is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313 for the original ARSP. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.7 Hazards-080812.docx 5.7-8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials 5.7.7 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS The Proposed Project would not result in cumulatively considerable impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials. Cumulative impacts could occur if more than one project site were to utilize the same haul route to transport and/or deliver hazardous materials, contributing to cumulative impacts that are not site-specific. All potential direct impacts related to transport and/or delivery of hazardous materials would be fully mitigated with implementation of the mitigation program. These laws and regulations would also apply to transport of materials for related project sites, reducing any direct impacts from each of these projects to the maximum extent. Hazards identified on the Project Site are limited to the site itself and would not contribute to hazardous conditions in a larger cumulative study area. Development of future projects would cumulatively increase development intensity, population, and traffic in the region, thereby exposing a greater number of people to potential hazards in the area hazardous materials and/or waste contamination). The Proposed Project and potential future projects would be required to comply with applicable local, State, and federal requirements concerning hazardous materials. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not contribute to any significant cumulative hazardous materials impacts. 5.7.8 MITIGATION MEASURES Previously Approved Measures MEIR 313 presented mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts associated with the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan project to less than significant levels. The following measures from MEIR 313 shall be incorporated into the Mitigation Program for this EIR. Any modifications to the original measures are shown as strikethrough for deleted text and bold for new, inserted text. MM 5.7-1 Prior to approval issuance of the first grading plan or issuance of first demolition permit, whichever occurs first, in areas of former service stations, in areas known or thought to have been previously occupied by USTs, and in areas where tank removal has not been verified prior to excavation or grading the property owner/developer shall retain the services of a qualified environmental professional to conduct an investigation for known, or the presence of, tanks, using geophysical methods. Soil sampling or a soil organic vapor survey may be required if soil sampling results are not available, or indicate contamination is present above regulatory guidelines. If warranted, subsurface investigation and sampling shall be undertaken in these areas, and appropriate remediation measures developed, if necessary, before demolition, excavation, or grading takes place in these areas. (MEIR 313 MM 3.10-1, Hazards and Hazardous Materials) MM 5.7-2 Prior to the removal of USTs the property owner/developer shall obtain a permit from the Environmental Protection Section of the Fire Department for the removal of such tanks. During the removal of USTs, a representative from the Environmental Protection Section of the Fire Department shall be onsite to direct soil sampling. (MEIR 313 MM 3.10-2, Hazards and Hazardous Materials) ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.7 Hazards-080812.docx 5.7-9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials MM 5.7-3 Ongoing during remediation all remediation activities of surface or subsurface contamination not related to USTs, conducted on behalf of the property owner/developer, shall be overseen by the Orange County Health Department. Information on subsurface contamination from USTs shall be provided to the Fire Department. Public Utilities Department, Water Services Administration, Environmental Services Division. (MEIR 313 MM 3.10-3, Hazards and Hazardous Materials) MM 5.7-4 Prior to approval issuance of the first grading plan or issuance of first demolition permit, whichever occurs first the property owner/developer shall submit a plan for review and approval of the Fire Department which details procedures that will be taken if previously unknown USTs, or other unknown hazardous material or waste, is discovered onsite. (MEIR 313 MM 3.10-4, Hazards and Hazardous Materials) MM 5.7-5 Prior to approval issuance of the first grading plan or demolition permit, whichever occurs first for future developments within the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan area affecting the California Chemical Company, 1772 S. Haster Street; Arco Service Station, 1037 W. Ball Road; Avis Rent-a-Car System, 1400 S. Harbor Blvd.; Mobile Service Station, 1800 S. Harbor Blvd.; Shell Service Station, 2100 S. Harbor Blvd; Texaco Service Station, 100 W. Katella Avenue; and Mobil Service Station, 100 E. Katella Way any property on a published list of leaking underground storage tanks (LUST) that has not been officially closed or resolved, a qualified environmental professional, retained by the property owner/developer, shall attempt to contact the current and/or known former property/business owners to obtain information regarding the status of USTs and/or tank closures at these sites. If warranted, subsurface investigation and sampling shall be undertaken by a qualified environmental professional, and results of these analyses shall be submitted to the Fire Department for review and approval. Appropriate remediation measures will be developed, if necessary, before demolition, excavation, or grading takes place in these areas. (MEIR 313 MM 3.10-5, Hazards and Hazardous Materials) MM 5.7-6 Ongoing during project demolition and construction, in the event that hazardous waste, including asbestos, is discovered during site preparation or construction, the property owner/developer shall ensure that the identified hazardous waste and/or hazardous material are handled and disposed of in the manner specified by the State of California Hazardous Substances Control Law (Health and Safety Code, Division 20, Chapter 6.5), and according to the requirements of the California Administrative Code, Title 30, Chapter 22. (MEIR 313 MM 3.10-7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials) Final EIR 330 presented mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts associated with the Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update project to less than significant levels. The following measures from EIR 330 shall be incorporated into the Mitigation Program for this EIR. MM 5.7-7 Prior to issuance of any discretionary permit for a current or former hazardous waste disposal site or solid waste disposal site, the project property owner/developer shall submit a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment to the City. If possible hazardous materials are identified during the site assessments, the appropriate response/remedial measures will be implemented in accordance with the requirements of the Orange County Health Care Agency (OCHCA) ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.7 Hazards-080812.docx 5.7-10 Hazards and Hazardous Materials and/or the Regional Water Quality Control Board as appropriate. (EIR 330 MM 5.6-3, Hazards and Hazardous Materials) Additional Mitigation Measures No additional mitigation measures have been identified. 5.7.9 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION With implementation of the mitigation program described above, there would be less than significant impacts related to the transport, use and disposal of hazardous materials and wastes. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.8 Hydrology-080812.docx 5.8-1 Hydrology and Water Quality 5.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Information for this section is summarized from existing information in the City of Anaheim General Plan and the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Master EIR 313 (MEIR 313). 5.8.1 SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION MEIR 313 analyzed the impacts of implementation of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan on groundwater and surface hydrology, including impacts on groundwater recharge, runoff, and water quality degradation. Mitigation measures were provided to reduce impacts to less than significant levels. 5.8.2 PLANS, POLICIES, AND REGULATORY CONDITIONS Related Planning Programs City of Anaheim General Plan, Public Services and Facilities Element The Public Services and Facilities Element of the City of Anaheim General Plan addresses public services and infrastructure, such as fire protection, law enforcement, parks, schools, water, sewer, and storm drain systems. The Element discusses and shows the storm drain system map and existing deficiencies in the system. Applicable goals and policies from the Public Services and Facilities Element that relate to storm drainage and that are applicable to the Proposed Project are provided in Table 5.9-2 in Section 5.9, Land Use and Planning, with a project consistency analysis. City of Anaheim General Plan, Green Element The Green Element of the City of Anaheim General Plan is a single, comprehensive plan to add more green areas throughout the City and to protect and enhance its natural and recreational resources. It addresses ways to protect water quality on the City’s surface water and groundwater resources. Applicable goals and policies from the Green Element that are related to water quality and that are applicable to the Proposed Project are provided in Table 5.9-2 in Section 5.9, Land Use and Planning, with a project consistency analysis. City of Anaheim General Plan, Safety Element The Safety Element of the City of Anaheim General Plan addresses natural and man-made hazards in the City; ways to reduce fire hazards, geologic and seismic hazards, and flood hazards; and includes City-wide disaster preparedness measures. It identifies flood and inundation hazards and programs to protect the City from these hazards. Applicable goals and policies from the Safety Element that are related to flood hazards and that are applicable to the Proposed Project are provided in Table 5.9-2 in Section 5.9, Land Use and Planning, with a project consistency analysis. Regulatory Setting Hydrology National Flood Insurance Act The National Flood Insurance Act established the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), which provides flood insurance, floodplain management, and flood hazard mapping data. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.8 Hydrology-080812.docx 5.8-2 Hydrology and Water Quality Communities subject to flood hazards voluntarily participate in the NFIP by adopting and enforcing floodplain management ordinances to reduce the potential for flood damage. In turn, the NFIP offers federally funded flood insurance to homeowners, renters, and business owners in participating communities. Under this program, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) produces Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) that identify properties and buildings in flood risk areas. Flood hazards related to storm events are generally described in terms of 100- or 500-year floods. These are floods that, respectively, have a 1 percent and 0.2 percent chance of occurring every year. The City of Anaheim General Plan designates the ARSP area as being located in the 100-year to 500-year Flood Zone (refer to Exhibit 5.8-1, Flood Hazard Areas). Drainage and Flood Control Major regional drainage facilities are designed to provide protection against major loss of life and property for a 100-year storm event. Intermediate facilities include smaller channels and detention facilities (such as the Carbon Canyon Diversion, Carbon Canyon, Atwood, Richfield, and Southeast Anaheim Channels). The regional and intermediate drainage facilities serving the City of Anaheim are owned and maintained by the Orange County Flood Control Division. The City of Anaheim owns and maintains local drainage facilities, which include those with watersheds less than 640 acres. Improvements to local drainage and flood-control structures are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. These facilities must be designed to accommodate a 25-year frequency storm event, as outlined in the Orange County Hydrology Manual. Since there are no on-site regional or intermediate facilities and since all on-site facilities have tributary areas that are less than 640 acres, these local facilities need to meet the 25-year storm design standards. Orange County Water District Act The Act was amended by the State Legislature in 1953, authorizing a replenishment assessment to be charged to all groundwater pumpers and requiring that all pumpers report semi-annually the amount of groundwater they extract. By knowing the total amount of groundwater extraction in the basin, the Orange County Water District (OCWD) could estimate the amount of replenishment water needed to offset the annual overdraft, as well as reduce the accumulated overdraft (OCWD 2008b). This has allowed the OCWD to reverse the trend of groundwater depletion. Water Quality Clean Water Act In 1972, the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (Clean Water Act [CWA]) was amended to require National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits for the discharge of pollutants to “Waters of the U.S.” from any point source. In 1987, the CWA was again amended to require that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) establish regulations for permitting under the NPDES permit program for municipal and industrial storm water discharges. The USEPA published final regulations regarding storm water discharges on November 16, 1990. The regulations require that municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) discharges to surface waters be regulated by an NPDES permit. MS4s are a conveyance or system of conveyances (including roads with drainage systems, municipal streets, catch basins, curbs, gutters, ditches, manmade channels, or storm drains), and are owned or operated by a public body that has jurisdiction over the disposal of sewage, industrial wastes, storm water, or ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.8 Hydrology-080812.docx 5.8-3 Hydrology and Water Quality other wastes. The MS4s are designated or used for collecting or conveying storm water only not wastewater or combined sewage). In addition, the CWA requires States to adopt water quality standards for water bodies, to be approved by the USEPA. Water quality standards consist of designated beneficial uses for a particular water body wildlife habitat, agricultural supply, fishing), along with water quality criteria necessary to support those uses. Water quality criteria are prescribed concentrations or levels of constituents, such as lead, suspended sediment, and fecal coliform bacteria, or narrative statements that represent the quality of water that supports a particular use. Because California has not established a complete list of acceptable water quality criteria, the USEPA has established numeric water quality criteria for certain toxic constituents in the form of the California Toxics Rule (see 40 Code of Federal Regulations §131.38). When designated beneficial uses of a particular water body are compromised by water quality, Section 303(d) of the CWA requires identifying and listing that water body as impaired. Once a water body has been deemed impaired, a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) must be developed for each impairing water quality constituent. California Porter-Cologne Act The federal CWA places the primary responsibility for the control of water pollution and for planning the development and use of water resources with the states. California’s primary statute governing water quality and water pollution issues is the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act of 1970 (Porter-Cologne Act). The Porter-Cologne Act grants the State Water Resource Control Board and the nine Regional Water Quality Control Boards broad powers to protect water quality and is the primary vehicle for implementing California’s responsibilities under the Federal CWA. The Porter-Cologne Act grants the and the authority and responsibility to adopt plans and policies; regulate discharges to surface water and groundwater; regulate waste disposal sites; and require cleanup of discharges of hazardous materials and other pollutants. The Porter-Cologne Act also establishes reporting requirements for unintended discharges of any hazardous substance, sewage, and oil or petroleum products. Each must formulate and adopt a water quality plan (or Basin Plan) for its region. The regional plans conform to the policies set forth in the Porter-Cologne Act and those established by the in its State Water Policy. The Porter-Cologne Act also enables the to include water discharge prohibitions applicable to particular conditions, areas, or types of waste within its regional plan. The are also authorized to enforce discharge limitations; take actions to prevent violations of these limitations from occurring; and conduct investigations to determine the status of the quality of any “Waters of the State”. Civil and criminal penalties are imposed on persons who violate the requirements of the Porter-Cologne Act or any orders. California Toxics Rule The California Toxics Rule (CTR) is a federal regulation that is issued by the USEPA and provides water quality criteria for potentially toxic constituents in receiving waters with human health or aquatic life designated uses in California. CTR criteria are applicable to the receiving water body and therefore must be calculated based upon the probable hardness values of the receiving waters for evaluation of acute (and chronic) toxicity criteria. At higher hardness values for the receiving water, copper, lead, and zinc are more likely to bind with components in the water which, in turn, reduces the bioavailability and resulting potential toxicity of these metals. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.8 Hydrology-080812.docx 5.8-4 Hydrology and Water Quality The Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin objectives and the CTR criteria do not apply directly to discharges of urban runoff, but rather to specified receiving waters. Santa Ana River Basin Plan The Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin (also the Basin Plan for the Santa Ana Region, hereafter referred to as the “Basin Plan”) seeks to preserve and enhance water quality and to protect the beneficial uses of water bodies in the Santa Ana River Watershed. The Basin Plan discusses the existing water quality, beneficial uses of the groundwater and surface waters, and local water quality conditions and problems within the Santa Ana River watershed. The Basin Plan provides water quality standards for water resources in the Santa Ana River and its watershed, and includes an implementation plan to maintain these standards. The standards serve as the basis for the basin’s regulatory programs. Basin Plan implementation occurs primarily through issuance of individual Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs); discharge prohibitions; water quality certifications; programs for salt management, non-point sources, and storm water; and monitoring and regulatory enforcement actions, as necessary. An amendment to the Basin Plan is currently in progress, which would revise the definition and water quality objectives related to beneficial uses for REC-1 (water contact recreation) and REC-2 (non-contact water recreation). Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System Permit Pursuant to Section 402 of the CWA, the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (Santa Ana issued a renewal of the MS4 permit (Order No. R8-2009-0030) to the County, the OCFCD, and the northern Orange County cities, including the City of Anaheim (collectively “the Co-permittees”). This Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Permit regulates storm water discharges to the MS4 in northern Orange County and details the requirements for new development and significant redevelopment projects, including specific sizing criteria for treatment Best Management Practices (BMPs). To implement the requirements of the MS4 Permit, the Co-permittees have committed to the continued implementation of a Storm Water Management Program and Local Implementation Plan (LIP) and the development of a Proposed Plan of Storm Water Quality Management Activities. The Proposed Plan of Storm Water Quality Management Activities includes all the activities the Co-permittees propose to undertake during the next permit term, the goals and objectives of these activities, and an evaluation of the need for additional source control and/or structural and non-structural BMPs and proposed pilot studies. In addition, the Co-permittees have established a Performance Commitment for new and existing program elements and compliance schedules for implementing storm water pollutant controls, as well as procedures for detecting illicit discharges and illicit connections. Co-permittees must also follow enforcement procedures and actions to require compliance with the approved Storm Water Management Program and to provide information on public agency activities, monitoring results, and program effectiveness. Continued inspection, monitoring and reporting activities are also required, including continued implementation of the Water Quality Management Plans for new development and significant redevelopment projects within its jurisdiction as part of the development plan and entitlement approval process. The WQMP must identify permanent source-control BMPs, Site ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.8 Hydrology-080812.docx 5.8-5 Hydrology and Water Quality Design BMPs, and treatment-control BMPs that would be implemented to treat, infiltrate, or filter first flush runoff from individual development sites. NPDES General Construction Activities Permit Pursuant to CWA Section 402(p), which requires regulations for permitting of certain storm water discharges, the has issued a Statewide General NPDES Permit for storm water discharges from construction sites (NPDES No. CAS000002, Resolution No. 2001-046; Modification of Water Quality Order 99-08-DWQ, NPDES, General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction Activity). This permit was revised on September 2, 2009, and is now Construction General Permit Order 2009-0009- DWQ. Construction activities subject to this permit include clearing, grading, and ground disturbances such as stockpiling or excavation, but do not include regular maintenance activities performed to restore the original line, grade, or capacity of the facility. Under the Construction General Permit, storm water discharges from construction sites with a disturbance area of one acre or more are required to either obtain individual NPDES permits for storm water discharges or be covered by the Construction General Permit. Coverage under the Construction General Permit is obtained by completing and filing a Notice of Intent (NOI) with the and preparing a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan prior to any land disturbance. The identifies erosion control, sediment control, tracking control, wind erosion control, waste management, and non-storm water management BMPs that would be implemented during the construction phase to reduce or eliminate pollutants entering the storm drain system. The City of Anaheim’s Grading Ordinance requires that all construction projects of one acre or more file a Notice of Intent and prepare an Storm Drain Impact Fees The City of Anaheim has adopted Storm Drain Impact and Improvement Fees, as outlined in Chapter 10.14 of the City’s Municipal Code. The regulations implement the goals and objectives of the Master Plan of Drainage for the South Central Area; Section 4 of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan; the City’s General Plan; and the Sanitary Sewer and Storm Drain Financial Implementation Plan for the South Central City Area. The fees would mitigate the flooding and storm drainage impacts caused by new development and/or by additions and expansions to existing developments. The storm drain fees are placed in a separate and special account, and along with any interest earnings on that account, are used solely to pay for the construction of Master Plan of Drainage Facilities within the South Central City Area or to reimburse the City for drainage facilities constructed by the City with funds advanced by the City from other sources. Credits and fee adjustments are made for projects that include the construction of Master Plan of Drainage Facilities as part of the development. Local NPDES Regulations Chapter 10.09, National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) of the Anaheim Municipal Code, outlines the City’s regulations for complying with the NPDES and its MS4 Permit. It identifies prohibitions on illicit connections to the storm drain system; prohibited discharges; controls on urban runoff from new development and significant redevelopment through preparation of Water Quality Management Plans local discharge permits for non-storm water discharges into the storm drain system; and the City’s inspection and enforcement responsibilities. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.8 Hydrology-080812.docx 5.8-6 Hydrology and Water Quality 5.8.3 METHODOLOGY The analysis in this section is based on review of the State of California, California Regional Water Quality Control Board Santa Ana Region Order No. R8-2009-0030, NPDES No. CAS618030, Waste Discharge Requirements for the County of Orange, Orange County Flood Control District and The Incorporated Cities of Orange County within the Santa Ana Region Areawide Urban Storm Water Runoff, Orange County. 5.8.4 EXISTING CONDITIONS Hydrologic Setting Watershed The ARSP area is located within the Lower Santa Ana River Watershed, but does not drain into the Santa Ana River. Rather, the area slopes in a southwesterly direction with drainage channels conveying runoff south and west for discharge to the Pacific Ocean at Anaheim Bay, Sunset Bay/Huntington Harbor, and Bolsa Bay. The Basin Plan identifies the beneficial uses of waters within the Santa Ana River Watershed. The beneficial uses of Anaheim Bay, Sunset Bay/Huntington Harbor, and Bolsa Bay include navigation; recreational commercial and sportfishing; biological and wildlife habitats for rare, threatened or endangered species; aquatic habitats for spawning, reproduction and development; marine habitat; and estuarine habitat. Anaheim Bay is listed in Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act as an impaired water body for dieldrin, nickel, biphenyls (PCB), and sediment toxicity. Huntington Harbor is considered impaired for chlordane, copper, lead, nickel, pathogens, PCBs, and sediment toxicity. There are existing storm drain lines in and near the ARSP area, which provide storm water drainage to existing developments, some of which have been identified in the Anaheim General Plan as deficient. Storm water runoff from the planning area enters local drainage facilities and flows into the Anaheim Barber City Channel or the East Garden Grove- Wintersburg Channel. The Anaheim Barber City Channel conveys runoff in a southwesterly direction and connects to the Bolsa Chica Channel which, in turn, flows south and west and discharges runoff into the Anaheim Bay and Sunset Bay/Huntington Harbor. The East Garden Grove-Wintersburg Channel conveys runoff southerly and then southwesterly into Bolsa Bay. Floodplain According to the City of Anaheim General Plan (see Exhibit 5.8-1, Flood Hazard Areas) and FEMA’s FIRM (Panel Nos. 06059C0133J and 06059C0141J) as shown on Exhibit 5.8-2, Flood Hazard Zones, the ARSP area is located in Flood Hazard Zone – Other Flood Areas. Zone X is defined as an area inundated by a 500-year flood; an area inundated by 100-year flood with average depths of less than 1 foot or with drainage areas less than 1 square mile; or an area protected by levees from 100-year flooding. Groundwater Resources The ARSP area is located within the Coastal Plain of the Orange County Groundwater Basin (the Basin), which underlies the northern half of Orange County. This groundwater basin covers approximately 310 square miles; is bordered by the Coyote and Chino Hills to the north, the Santa Ana Mountains to the northeast, the San Joaquin Hills to the south, and the Pacific ---PAGE BREAK--- Flood Hazard Areas Exhibit 5.8-1 Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (Rev: WAD 050610) R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\Graphics\EIR\Ex5.8-1_FloodHazAreas.pdf D:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\Graphics\Ex_Flood_Haz_Areas.ai Source: City of Anaheim, 2004 ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Flood Hazard Zones Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Exhibit 5.8-2 (Rev: WAD 050610) R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\Graphics\EIR\Ex_5.8-2_FloodHazZones.pdf 5 5 HARBOR BLVD BALL RD KATELLA AVE HASTER ST ANAHEIM BLVD ANAHEIM WAY EAST ST CHAPMAN AVE ANAHEIM BLVD DISNEYLAND DR WALNUT ST D:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\Ex_FloodZones.mxd 2,000 0 2,000 1,000 Feet An area inundated by 100-year flooding, for which no BFEs have been determined. (BFE = Base Flood Elevation - The elevation associated with the flood having a one-percent annual chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year. It is shown on the Flood Insurance Rate Map.) FEMA Flood Zones An area inundated by 500-year flooding; an area inundated by 100-year flooding with average depths of less than 1 foot or with drainage areas less than 1 square mile; or an area protected by levees from 100-year flooding. Zone A Zone X500 Anaheim Resort Specific Plan(SP92-2) ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.8 Hydrology-080812.docx 5.8-7 Hydrology and Water Quality Ocean to the southwest; and terminates near the Orange County boundary to the northwest, where it connects to the Central Basin of Los Angeles. The Basin consists of the Upper, Middle and Lower Aquifers, where porous and permeable sediments or rock readily transmit and hold water; they are segregated by materials with low permeabilities. The Upper Aquifer has an average thickness of about 800 feet and consists mostly of sand, gravel, and conglomerate with some silt and clay beds. It provides most of the irrigation water for the Basin. The Middle Aquifer has an average thickness of 1,600 feet and is composed of sand, gravel, and minor amounts of clay. It provides 90 to 95 percent of the groundwater for the basin. The Lower Aquifer is composed of sand and conglomerate that is 350 to 500 feet thick and not used for groundwater production (DWR 2004). The total capacity of the basin is estimated at 38 million acre-feet (af), with 37.7 million af of water in storage. Basin recharge occurs through percolation of Santa Ana River flow, infiltration of rainfall, injection into wells, and surface recharge of imported water and recycled water (DWR 2004). Groundwater levels in the ARSP area range from approximately 5 feet above mean sea level (msl) at the northeastern section to 35 feet below msl along the southern edge of the ARSP area (OCWD 2008). With ground elevations of 115 to 145 feet above msl, groundwater is approximately 140 to 150 feet below the ground surface. Groundwater quality has high concentrations of sodium-calcium bicarbonate, with the average total dissolved solids content in 240 public supply wells at 507 milligrams per liter. Sea water intrusion has occurred near the coast. Colored water, from natural organic materials in the Lower Aquifer and increasing levels of salinity, nitrates, and methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) have been observed (DWR 2004). 5.8.5 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE The following significance criteria are based on the City of Anaheim Environmental Checklist. The Proposed Project would have a significant impact related to hydrology and water quality if it would: Threshold 5.8.1 Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. Threshold 5.8.2 Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted). Threshold 5.8.3 Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site. Threshold 5.8.4 Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.8 Hydrology-080812.docx 5.8-8 Hydrology and Water Quality Threshold 5.8.5 Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of pollutant runoff. Threshold 5.8.6 Otherwise substantially degrade water quality. Threshold 5.8.7 Substantially degrade water quality by contributing pollutants from areas of material storage, vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle or equipment maintenance (including washing), waste handling, hazardous materials handling, or storage, delivery areas, loading docks or other outdoor work areas. Threshold 5.8.8 Substantially degrade water quality by discharge which affects the beneficial uses swimming, fishing, etc.) of the receiving or waters. As previously discussed in Section 2.4.2, Effects Found Not to Be Significant, during preparation of the Initial Study, the City of Anaheim determined that the Proposed Project would not have a significant impact for the following thresholds and no further analysis of these issues are presented in this section. Would the Project: • Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? • Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? • Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? • Lead to inundation by seiche or mudflow? 5.8.6 PROJECT IMPACT ANALYSIS Project Design Features No project design features have been identified for hydrology and water quality. Standard Requirements The following standard requirements were derived from existing regulations, requirements, and standard practices set forth by regional and local agencies. SR 5.8-1 Development projects that will result in soil disturbance of one or more acres of land shall comply with the State’s Construction General Permit by filing a Notice of Intent (NOI) with the State Water Resources Control Board and implementing a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan Prior to the issuance of preliminary or precise grading permits, the property owner/developer shall provide the City Engineer with evidence that an NOI has been filed with the by providing a copy of the NOI invoice and the ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.8 Hydrology-080812.docx 5.8-9 Hydrology and Water Quality assigned Waste Discharger Identification (WDID) No. for the project. The shall include Best Management Practices (BMPs) designed with a goal of preventing a net sediment load increase in storm water discharges relative to preconstruction levels and shall prohibit during the construction period discharges of storm water or non-storm water at levels which would cause or contribute to an exceedance of applicable water quality standards contained in the Basin Plan. The BMPs shall address erosion control, sediment control, wind erosion control, tracking control, non-stormwater management and waste management and materials pollution control during all phases of construction, including a sampling and analysis plan for sediment and non-visible storm water pollutants. The property owner/developer shall be responsible for proper implementation of the SR 5.8-2 Prior to issuance of the precise grading permit, the property owner/developer shall prepare Water Quality Management Plans for review and approval by the Public Works, Development Services. The WQMP shall identify permanent site design, source control and treatment control Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used on the site to control predictable pollutant runoff. The WQMP shall also describe the long-term operation and maintenance requirements for the treatment control BMPs and the mechanism for funding the BMPs. The WQMP shall be recorded against the property to ensure long-term compliance. SR 5.8-3 Prior to issuance of the first building permit, the property owner/developer shall pay the Storm Drain Impact Fees which would go toward future storm drain improvements within The Anaheim Resort area and South Central City area. SR 5.8-4 Chapter 10.09 of the Anaheim Municipal Code is the City’s NPDES Ordinance, which provides regulations to comply with the CWA, the California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, and the City’s NPDES permit. This ordinance prohibits the discharge of specific pollutants into the storm water; regulates illicit connections to the storm drain system; requires development projects to implement permanent BMPs on individual sites to reduce pollutants in the storm water; and requires local discharge permits for non-storm water discharges into the storm drain system. SR 5.8-5 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the property owner/developer of individual developments shall provide written proof to the Public Works Department, Development Services Division of a water quality certification and/or waste discharge requirement (WDR) as well as a plan for compliance with the discharge prohibitions, and various programs of the Santa Ana The Santa Ana implements the Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin through the through issuance of individual WDRs; discharge prohibitions; water quality certifications; programs for salt management, non-point sources, and storm water; and monitoring and regulatory enforcement actions, as necessary. Impact Analysis Threshold 5.8.1 Would the proposed project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.8 Hydrology-080812.docx 5.8-10 Hydrology and Water Quality Threshold 5.8.6 Would the proposed project otherwise substantially degrade water quality? Threshold 5.8.7 Would the proposed project substantially degrade water quality by contributing pollutants from areas of material storage, vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle or equipment maintenance (including washing), waste handling, hazardous materials handling, or storage, delivery areas, loading docks or other outdoor work areas? Threshold 5.8.8 Would the proposed project substantially degrade water quality by discharge which affects the beneficial uses swimming, fishing, etc.) of the receiving or waters? Short-Term Construction-Related Water Quality Impacts Build out of the ARSP, in accordance with the Proposed Project, would lead to the development of a variety of commercial and recreational uses, such as hotels, restaurants, retail uses, bars/night clubs, meeting and office uses, ballrooms, spas, exhibit halls, and other uses allowed under the ARSP. Storm water runoff from individual construction sites could contain pollutants such as soils and sediments that are released during grading and excavation activities and petroleum-related pollutants due to spills or leaks from heavy equipment and machinery. Other common pollutants that can result from construction activities include solid or liquid chemical spills; concrete and related cutting or curing residues; wastes from paints, stains, sealants, solvents, detergents, glues, acids, lime, plaster, and cleaning agents; and heavy metals from equipment. The storm water runoff flows into the storm drain inlets in the ARSP area and would eventually be discharged into the Pacific Ocean at Anaheim Bay, Sunset Bay/Huntington Harbor, and/or Bolsa Bay. As discussed previously, Anaheim Bay and Sunset Bay/Huntington Harbor are considered to be impaired water bodies, and pollutants in the storm water could further degrade water quality and violate in these water bodies. The CWA establishes a framework for regulating potential water quality impacts from construction activities through the NPDES program. Projects with construction activities that disturb one acre or more of land are required to obtain an NPDES permit from the Division of Water Quality. An is required for a project to be covered under the Construction General NPDES permit and must include BMPs to reduce water quality impacts. These BMPs include various measures to control on-site erosion; reduce sediment flows into the storm water; control wind erosion; track soil and debris into adjacent roadways and off-site areas; and manage wastes, materials, wastewater, liquids, hazardous materials, stockpiles, equipment, and other site conditions in order to prevent pollutants from entering the storm drain system. Inspections, reporting, and storm water sampling and analysis are also required to ensure that visible and non-visible pollutants are not discharged off site. Implementation of the proposed mitigation and compliance with the standard requirements would minimize construction impacts from future developments in the ARSP area through implementation of BMPs that would reduce construction-related pollutants. This would ensure that any impacts to waters resulting from construction activities associated with the Project Site would be less than significant. In addition to the requirements of the NPDES General Construction Permit, the Uniform Building Code and grading permit requirements include elements that also require reduction of erosion and sedimentation impacts during construction. Full compliance with applicable local, State, and federal regulations, including implementation of the proposed mitigation, would reduce water quality impacts associated with construction to a less than significant level. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.8 Hydrology-080812.docx 5.8-11 Hydrology and Water Quality Long-Term Operational Water Quality Potential pollutants that could be generated by maximum build out of the C-R District and the expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center in the PR District could include, but are not limited to, bacteria/viruses, heavy metals, nutrients, pesticides, organic compounds, sediments, trash and debris, oxygen-demanding substances, and oil and grease. Specific pollutants would depend on the type of land use and the site improvements proposed by individual projects; basically, residential developments, industrial or commercial developments, automotive repair shops, restaurants, hillside developments, parking lots, and streets would have the potential to generate different storm water pollutants. Implementation of the proposed mitigation and compliance with the standard requirements would require future developments within the ARSP area to prepare individual that identify the potential pollutants of concern that would be generated by the Project and the site and hydrologic conditions of concern at locations. The WQMP would identify permanent site design, source-control, and treatment-control BMPs that would be implemented as part of the individual project, including maintenance responsibilities and funding sources, and would be signed as a notarized agreement between the City and the property owner to provide a long-term commitment to its implementation. Preparation and implementation of a WQMP for new development and redevelopment projects would satisfy MS4 Permit requirements and would allow the City to comply with the water quality standards for storm water runoff. Future developments in the ARSP area would also need to comply with the City’s NPDES Ordinance prohibits the discharges of certain pollutants into the storm water, regulates illicit connections to the storm drain system; requires implementation of permanent BMPs and requires local discharge permits for non-storm water discharges into the storm drain system. The Santa Ana requires industrial projects and land uses that generate storm water or discharges that can directly affect water courses/water bodies to obtain individual WDRs and/or water quality certifications, as provided in the standard requirements. Compliance with WDR conditions of approval and a water quality certification would prevent the violation of water quality standards. Implementation of the proposed mitigation measures and compliance with the standard requirements would reduce storm water pollutants that can affect water quality at Anaheim Bay, Sunset Bay/Huntington Harbor, and Bolsa Bay, thereby reducing impacts related to storm water pollution and water quality to less than significant levels. Impact Summary: Implementation of the Proposed Project would result in short-term construction-related and long-term operational water quality impacts. These impacts would be mitigated to a level considered less than significant with implementation of the proposed mitigation measures and compliance with the standard requirements. This conclusion is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313 for the original ARSP. Threshold 5.8.2 Would the proposed project substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level the production rate of pre- existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.8 Hydrology-080812.docx 5.8-12 Hydrology and Water Quality Build out of the ARSP in accordance to the Proposed Project would not lead to a direct withdrawal of groundwater. Additionally, future development and redevelopment would also not interfere with groundwater recharge since the ARSP area is not located near local spreading grounds in the City. Groundwater elevations in the planning area are approximately 140 to 150 feet below the ground surface. Excavation and grading activities for future development according to the ARSP are not expected to be deep enough (up to 140 feet) to affect the underlying groundwater resources. Thus, no direct impacts to the underlying groundwater resources would occur. As discussed in Section 5.15, Water Supply and Infrastructure, the City of Anaheim provides water services to the City using water sources from the local aquifer and imported water from the Metropolitan Water District (MWD) of Southern California. Build out of the ARSP in accordance with the Proposed Project would result in an increase in long-term demand for water to be used for domestic purposes, landscape irrigation, and maintenance activities. This increased water demand may lead to an increase in groundwater pumping. In accordance with the Orange County Water District Act, the City pays the OCWD a replenishment assessment for the amount of groundwater extracted. This assessment is used by the OCWD for various groundwater replenishment programs to ensure that no overdraft of local groundwater resources occurs. Thus, water demand from maximum build out of the ARSP in accordance with the Proposed Project would not deplete local groundwater resources. Implementation of proposed mitigation related to the provision of a reclaimed water system for future use of reclaimed water would reduce demand for groundwater resources. Therefore, impacts would be mitigated to less than significant levels. Impact Summary: Excavation and grading activities for future development according to the ARSP would not result in direct impacts to the underlying groundwater resources. However, build out within the C-R and PR Districts would result in an increase in long-term demand for domestic water, landscape irrigation, and maintenance activities. Implementation of the proposed mitigation would reduce demand for groundwater resources, and potential impacts would be mitigated to less than significant levels. This conclusion is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313 for the original ARSP. Threshold 5.8.3 Would the proposed project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? Future development related to the build out of the ARSP in accordance with the Proposed Project would connect to the City’s existing storm drain system as discussed in Section 5.18, Storm Water. While changes to the local hydrology would occur with the development of vacant lots or the redevelopment of underutilized parcels, this change would be confined to the individual sites and would not affect major underground storm drain lines and drainage channels in the City. Site-specific changes to drainage patterns on development sites would not adversely impact regional hydrology or drainage flows in the surrounding area. Potential increases in impervious surfaces related to development of buildings, parking areas, drive aisles, walkways and other paved areas could increase runoff rates and volumes, while reducing potential for soil erosion. The Anaheim Barber City Channel and the East Garden Grove-Wintersburg Channel are concrete-lined and no alteration in the course of these ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.8 Hydrology-080812.docx 5.8-13 Hydrology and Water Quality channels would occur with increases in runoff volumes from individual development sites. Construction activities would be required to implement erosion-control measures according to the as required by the proposed mitigation and the standard requirements. In addition, preparation of a WQMP would require the implementation of on-site BMPs to prevent off-site hydrologic conditions of concern (HCOCs), which include erosion and scour at channels. Compliance with the standard requirements would prevent erosion hazards on site and off site. Impacts would be less than significant. Impact Summary: Implementation of the Proposed Project would result in site-specific changes to drainage patterns on development sites, but would not adversely impact regional hydrology or drainage flows in the surrounding area. Potential increases in impervious surfaces could increase runoff rates and volumes, while reducing potential for soil erosion. Implementation of the proposed mitigation measures and compliance with the standard requirements would reduce impacts to less than significant levels. This conclusion is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313 for the original ARSP. Threshold 5.8.4 Would the proposed project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? Threshold 5.8.5 Would the proposed project create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of pollutant runoff? As discussed in Section 5.18, Storm Water, there are existing storm drain deficiencies in the ARSP. Future development related to build out of the ARSP in accordance with the Proposed Project may increase runoff volumes and rates to exacerbate these deficiencies, potentially leading to localized street flooding. However, the City requires that individual developments provide engineering plans for storm drainage on site and pay storm drain impact fees to fund the construction of improvements to the storm drainage system within The Anaheim Resort area and South Central City area. Payment of fees would allow for construction of necessary improvements to the storm drain system, thereby eliminating deficiencies in the storm drainage system serving the ARSP planning area and preventing localized flooding. In addition, any storm drain, sewer, and street improvement plans would be designed and constructed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Additionally, and as previously addressed in this section, the proposed mitigation and standard requirements would require the property owner/developer to implement BMPs as part of individual during construction. Future development would incorporate site design, source-control, and water quality treatment BMPs to effectively reduce potential pollutants of concern that may be generated by the development, and which would be outlined in the WQMP for each individual project. Therefore, sources of storm water pollutants would be reduced and impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels. Impact Summary: Implementation of the Proposed Project may increase runoff volumes and rates to exacerbate existing deficiencies, potentially leading to localized street flooding. Implementation of the proposed mitigation measures and compliance with the standard requirements would reduce impacts to less ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.8 Hydrology-080812.docx 5.8-14 Hydrology and Water Quality than significant levels. This conclusion is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313 for the original ARSP. 5.8.7 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS The cumulative study area with regard to hydrology and water quality includes the entire Orange County Groundwater Basin and its tributary waterways. Future development under the Proposed Project, in conjunction with the existing development and planned development in the City of Anaheim, may result in a cumulatively considerable impact to surface water runoff due to construction activities in the area and post-development runoff. All construction projects larger than one acre would be subject to the NPDES General Construction Permit requirements for implementation of individual which outline erosion control, sediment control, wind erosion control, tracking control, non-storm water management and waste management, and materials pollution control BMPs. Additionally, new development and significant redevelopment projects are required to prepare and implement for long-term implementation and maintenance of source-control, site design, and treatment-control BMPs to ensure compliance with water quality goals and compliance with the City’s NPDES Ordinance. Thus, pollutants generated by the Proposed Project and cumulative projects in the basin would be mitigated during construction activities and in the long-term. Compliance with the Santa Ana requirements for the water quality certifications and/or WDRs and discharge prohibitions would also prevent long-term storm water quality impacts. Payment of the replenishment assessment to the OCWD by the City and all other agencies that extract groundwater in the Coastal Plain would allow the OCWD to continue its programs to protect groundwater resources and to recharge the local aquifers in order to prevent overdraft. With regard to the existing storm drain system, compliance with the standard requirements would ensure that adequate storm drainage infrastructure is constructed or provided to serve existing and future developments and significant cumulative impacts would not occur. Therefore, on a cumulative basis, with implementation of standard requirements and the proposed mitigation measures, the Proposed Project’s contribution to cumulative hydrology and water quality impacts would not be cumulatively considerable. 5.8.8 MITIGATION MEASURES Previously Approved Measures MEIR 313 presented mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts associated with the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Project to less than significant levels. The following measures from MEIR 313 shall be incorporated into the Mitigation Program for this EIR. (Note that the measure number and section from MEIR 313 are listed in parentheses.) MM 5.8-1 Prior to approval issuance of the first grading plan or issuance of first building permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall submit a Master Drainage and Runoff Management Plan for review and approval by the Public Works/Engineering Department, Development Services Division and Orange County Environmental Management Agency. The Master Plan shall include, but not be limited to, the following items: a. Backbone storm drain layout and pipe size, including supporting hydrology and hydraulic calculations for storms up to and including the 100-year storm; and, ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.8 Hydrology-080812.docx 5.8-15 Hydrology and Water Quality b. A delineation of the improvements to be implemented for control of project-generated drainage and runoff (MEIR 313 MM 3.7-1, Hydrology and Water Resources). MM 5.8-2 Prior to issuance of a grading or demolition permit for sites that disturb more than one acre of soil; and, during clearing, the property owner/developer shall obtain coverage under the NPDES Statewide Industrial Stormwater Permit for General Construction Activities from the State Water Resources Control Board. Evidence of attainment shall be submitted to the Planning Department, Building Services Division City Engineer. (MEIR 313 MM 3.7-3, Hydrology and Water Resources). MM 5.8-3 Ongoing during project operations, the property owner/developer shall provide for the following: cleaning of all paved areas not maintained by the City of Anaheim on a basis, including, but not limited to, private streets and parking lots. The use of water to clean streets, paved areas, parking lots, and other areas and flushing the debris and sediment down the storm drains shall be prohibited (MEIR 313 MM 3.7-4, Hydrology and Water Resources). MM 5.8-4 Prior to each final building and zoning inspection, the property owner/developer shall submit a letter from a licensed landscape architect to the City certifying that the landscape installation and irrigation systems have been installed as specified in the approved landscaping and irrigation plans (MEIR 313 MM 3.7-5, Hydrology and Water Resources). MM 5.8-5 Prior to final building and zoning inspection, the property owner/developer shall install piping on-site with project water mains so that reclaimed water may be used for landscape irrigation, if and when it becomes available from the County Sanitation District of Orange County (MEIR 313 MM 3.7-6, Hydrology and Water Resources). Ordinance 5454 City Ordinance 5454 presented a list of conditions of approval that are applicable to all projects within the ARSP area. The following conditions shall be incorporated into the Mitigation Program for this EIR. Any modifications to the original conditions are shown as strikethrough for deleted text and bold for new, inserted text. (Note that the specific condition references from Ordinance 5454 are listed in parentheses). MM 5.8-6 Prior to issuance of building permits, the property owner/developer shall provide written evidence that all storm drain, sewer, and street improvement plans shall be designed and constructed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. (Ord 5454, Condition 7) ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.8 Hydrology-080812.docx 5.8-16 Hydrology and Water Quality Additional Mitigation Measures No additional mitigation measures are required for hydrology and water quality; however, the following mitigation measures from Section 5.15, Water, would also reduce impacts to groundwater resources and recharge: MM 5.15-1 Prior to issuance of each building permit (to be implemented prior to final building and zoning inspections, and continuing on an on-going basis during project operation), the property owner/ developer shall submit to the Public Utilities Department plans for review and approval which shall ensure that water conservation measures are incorporated. The water conservation measures to be shown on the plans and implemented by the property owner/developer, to the extent applicable include, but are not limited to, the following: a. Use of low-flow sprinkler heads in irrigation systems. b. Use of waterway recirculation systems. c. Low-flow fittings, fixtures, and equipment, including low flush toilets and urinals. d. Use of self-closing valves on drinking valves. e. Use of efficient irrigation systems such as drip irrigation and automatic systems which use moisture sensors. f. Use of low-flow shower heads in hotels. g. Water efficient ice-machines, dishwashers, clothes washers and other water- using appliances. h. Use of irrigation systems primarily at night when evaporation rates are lowest. i. Provide information to the public in conspicuous places regarding water conservation. j. Use of water conserving landscape plant materials wherever feasible (MEIR 313 MM 3.9.6-1, Water Service). MM 5.15-2 Prior to issuance of each building permit, all water supply planning for the project will be closely coordinated with, and be subject to the review and final approval of, the Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division and Fire Department (MEIR 313 MM 3.9.6-3, Water Service). MM 5.15-4 Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit a landscape and irrigation plan which shall be prepared and certified by a licensed landscape architect. The landscape plan shall include a phasing plan for the installation and maintenance of landscaping associated with the Water Efficiency Landscape Ordinance. The irrigation plan shall specify methods for monitoring the irrigation system. The system shall ensure that irrigation rates do not exceed the infiltration of local soils, that the application of fertilizers and pesticides do not exceed appropriate levels of frequencies, and that surface runoff and overwatering is minimized. The landscaping and irrigation plans shall include water-conserving features such as low flow irrigation heads, automatic irrigation scheduling equipment, flow sensing controls, rain sensors, soil moisture sensors, and other water-conserving equipment. The landscaping and irrigation plans shall indicate that separate irrigation lines for recycled water shall be constructed and recycled water will be used when it ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.8 Hydrology-080812.docx 5.8-17 Hydrology and Water Quality becomes available. All irrigation systems shall be designed so that they will function properly with recycled water. In addition, all irrigation systems shall be designed so that they will function properly with reclaimed water, once a system is available. (MEIR 313 MM 3.11-2, Visual Resources and Aesthetics) MM 5.15-8 Prior to the issuance of the first building permit or grading permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall comply with Rule 15E of the Public Utilities Department Water Rates, Rules, and Regulations. Rule 15E shall be amended to include: a. Construction of a new well with a minimum 1,500 GPM capacity to serve The Anaheim Resort Area (tentative location near Ponderosa Park and Orangewood Avenue); and b. Construction of a new 16-inch water main along Harbor Boulevard from Orangewood to Chapman Avenue. MM 5.15-9 Ongoing, the City shall continue to collaborate with the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD), its member agencies, and the Orange County Water District (OCWD) to ensure that available water supplies meet anticipated demand. If it is forecasted that water demand exceeds available supplies, staff shall recommend to City Council to trigger application of the Water Conservation Ordinance (Anaheim Municipal Code, §10.18), as prescribed, to require mandatory conservation measures as authorized by Sections 10.18.070 through 10.18.090, as appropriate. 5.8.9 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION Potentially significant hydrology and water quality impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels with implementation of the standard requirements and mitigation measures identified above. 5.8.10 REFERENCES Anaheim, City of. 2010a (May 4, current through). Anaheim Municipal Code (Chapter 10.09, National Pollution Discharge Elimination System [NPDES]). Cincinnati, OH: American Legal Publishing Corporation for the City. http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/ California/anaheim/title10publicserviceandutilities/chapter1009nationalpollutiondischarge eli?f=templates$fn=altmain-nf.htm$3.0#JD_Chapter10.09. 2010a (May 4, current through). Anaheim Municipal Code (Chapter 10.14, Storm Drain Impact and Improvement Fee). Cincinnati, OH: American Legal Publishing Corporation for the City. http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/California/anaheim/ title10publicserviceandutilities/chapter1014stormdrainimpactandimprovemen?f=template s$fn=altmain-nf.htm$3.0#JD_Chapter10.14. 2004 (May). Final Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update EIR No. 330. Anaheim, CA: the City. 1994a (August). The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Draft EIR No. 313 with Addendum. Anaheim, CA: the City. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.8 Hydrology-080812.docx 5.8-18 Hydrology and Water Quality 1994b (September). The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2. Anaheim, CA: the City. California Department of Water Resources (DWR). 2004 (February 27). Upper Santa Ana Valley Groundwater Basin, Cucamonga Subbasin. California’s Groundwater Bulletin 118. Sacramento, CA: DWR. http://www.water.ca.gov/pubs/groundwater/bulletin_118/ basindescriptions/8-2.02.pdf. California, State of. 2010 (January 1, effective date). California Water Code (Division 7, Water Quality, Sections 13000 et seq., Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act). Sacramento, CA: the State. laws_regulations/docs/portercologne.pdf. 1995 (current through). Orange County Water District Act. Sacramento, CA: the State. Orange County Water District (OCWD). 2008a (June). Groundwater Elevation Contours for the Principal Aquifer - Central OCWD. Fountain Valley, CA: OCWD. http://www.ocwd.com/ca-172.aspx 2008b. Historical Information. Fountain Valley, CA: OCWD. http://www.ocwd.com/ca- 19.aspx. Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (Santa Ana 2008 (last updated). Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin 1995, Updated 2008. Riverside, CA: Santa Ana 2011 (March 11, last updated). Orange County Municipal NPDES Storm Water Permit. Riverside, CA: Santa Ana http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/santaana/water_issues/programs/stormwater/oc_permit. U.S. Congress. 2007 (January 42 United States Code (Chapter 50, National Flood Insurance, Subchapter I, National Flood Insurance Program). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi- bin/usc.cgi?ACTION=BROWSE& TITLE=42USCC50&PDFS=YES. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2009 (January 12, last updated). Clean Water Act, Section 404. Washington, D.C.: USEPA. http://www.epa.gov/OWOW/wetlands/ regs/sec404.html. U.S. National Archives and Records Administration. 2010 (June 4, current through). 40 Code of Federal Regulations (Section 131.38, Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=dc447696e93180c78be0b 4ab95297785&rgn=div8&view=text&node=40:21.0.1.1.18.4.16.8&idno=40. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.9 Land Use-Planning-082712.docx 5.9-1 Land Use and Planning 5.9 LAND USE AND PLANNING This section describes the current land uses within the boundary and surroundings of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (ARSP) and addresses potential land use impacts that could result from implementation of the Proposed Project. Information presented in this section is based on field reconnaissance, review of aerial photographs, and review of relevant planning documents as identified herein. Project consistency with existing and planned land uses and land use policies is assessed through review of the land use goals and policies contained in the City of Anaheim General Plan and other related planning programs, including Southern California Association of Governments’ (SCAG’s) Compass Blueprint and the City of Anaheim’s Municipal Code. 5.9.1 SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION MEIR 313 addresses the consistency of the ARSP with the Land Use; Circulation; Environmental Resources and Management; Noise; Housing; Growth Management; and Parks, Recreation, and Community Services Elements of the City of Anaheim General Plan. The project was found to conflict with the Environmental Resources and Management Element of the City of Anaheim General Plan, as ARSP implementation would result in the loss of a 56-acre agricultural field designated as prime farmland. Additionally, MEIR 313 addresses the consistency of ARSP with: • City of Anaheim Zoning Code, • City Housing Assistance Programs, • The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan, • Hotel Circle Specific Plan, • Utility Underground Conversion Program, • South Central Area Sewer Deficiency Study, and • Master Plan of Drainage for the South Central Area. At the County and regional levels, ARSP consistency was evaluated with respect to: • Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways and the Congestion Management Program, • Existing Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) network, • Transportation planning projects within the County, • South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) 1991 Air Quality Management Plan, • Regional Mobility and Growth Management Plans of SCAG, and • California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Interstate 5 Widening Project. MEIR 313 concludes that implementation of the ARSP would not conflict with existing planning documents and related goals and policies, except for the removal of farmland. MEIR 313 addresses ARSP compatibility with existing land use and zoning as identified in the City of Anaheim General Plan and the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan. No significant incompatibilities were identified, as the ARSP was designed to complement and support the ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.9 Land Use-Planning-082712.docx 5.9-2 Land Use and Planning Disneyland Resort Specific Plan. Compatibility with respect to the setbacks permitted under the ARSP and within the C-R (Commercial Recreation) Zone, the zone that preceded the ARSP, was also addressed. While these variations were not considered significant, as stated above, the loss of a 56-acre agricultural field was considered a significant impact by the City based on California Department of Conservation guidelines. 5.9.2 PLANS, POLICIES, AND REGULATORY CONDITIONS Regulatory Setting State, regional, and local land use and planning programs relevant to the Proposed Project are discussed throughout this section and are described below. State Senate Bill SB 375 Senate Bill (SB) 375, signed by California Governor Schwarzenegger on September 30, 2008, provides for a new planning process to coordinate land use planning, regional transportation plans, and funding priorities in order to help California meet greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction goals established in Assembly Bill 32 (discussed in detail in Section 5.6, Greenhouse Gas Emissions). SB 375 requires regional transportation plans, developed by Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs), which for Anaheim is SCAG, to incorporate a “sustainable communities strategy” (SCS) in its regional transportation plan (RTP). The SCS is intended to demonstrate how the coordination of land use and transportation planning efforts may achieve a GHG emissions reduction target that is set by ARB. If SCS cannot achieve the GHG emissions target, the MPO is required to adopt an “alternative planning scenario” (APS) that will demonstrate what would need to be done to achieve GHG emissions reduction target and define the barriers to accomplishing the reduction. SB 375 also includes provisions for streamlined CEQA review for some infill projects that are established in transit priority areas. SB 375 will be implemented over the next several years with the SCAG region’s first SCS to be adopted in conjunction with its RTP in 2012. SB 375 is similar to the Regional Blueprint Planning Program, established by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), which provides discretionary grants to fund regional transportation and land use plans voluntarily developed by MPOs working in cooperation with Councils of Governments. Regional Southern California Association of Governments SCAG is the MPO for six counties: Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside, Ventura, and Imperial. The region encompasses a population exceeding 18 million persons in an area of more than 38,000 square miles. As the designated MPO, SCAG is mandated by the federal government to research and draw up plans for transportation, growth management, hazardous waste management, and air quality. The following is a list of some of the primary planning activities that SCAG performs: • Maintain a continuous, comprehensive, and coordinated planning process resulting in a Regional Transportation Plan and a Regional Transportation Improvement Program. • Develop demographic projections plus the integrated land use, housing, employment, transportation programs, measures, and strategies portions of the South Coast Air ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.9 Land Use-Planning-082712.docx 5.9-3 Land Use and Planning Quality Management Plan (AQMP); serve as co-lead agency for air quality planning for the Central Coast and Southeast Desert air basin districts. • For projects, plans and programs, determine conformity with the AQMP, as required under the Federal Clean Air Act. • Function as the authorized regional agency for intergovernmental review of programs proposed for federal financial assistance and direct development activities. • Review environmental impact reports for projects having regional significance for consistency with regional plans. • Pursuant to federal water pollution control statutes, function as the authorized area-wide waste treatment management planning agency. • Prepare the Regional Housing Needs Assessment in accordance with State law. • Prepare the Southern California Hazardous Waste Management Plan pursuant to the California Health and Safety Code in coordination with the San Diego Associate of Governments and the Santa Barbara County/Cities Area Planning Council. SCAG has developed a number of plans to achieve the regional objectives. The most applicable to the Proposed Project is the 2012-2035 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS). It should also be noted that SCAG has developed the Southern California Regional Comprehensive Plan (RCP) as a planning framework for the development and implementation of guidelines applied to both the public and private sectors. The RCP functions as a voluntary “toolbox” to assist local jurisdictions in making their General and Specific plans and individual projects more sustainable. Given its advisory nature, the 2008 RCP is not used in SCAG’s Inter- Governmental Review (IGR) process (SCAG 2008a). 2012-2035 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy Federal guidelines require all new, regionally significant transportation projects to be included in the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) before they can receive federal or State funds or approvals. The RTP must be updated and federally approved every four years. Federal approval requires a positive demonstration that the RTP projects will not generate travel emissions that exceed those assumed in the applicable Air Quality Management Plan; this requirement is known as “transportation conformity”. SCAG adopted the 2012−2035 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) on April 4, 2012. The RTP is a long-range transportation plan that provides a vision for regional transportation investments over a period of 20 years or more. Using growth forecasts and economic trends, the RTP considers the role of transportation in a more holistic light, including economic factors, environmental issues and quality-of-life goals. The RTP provides an opportunity to identify transportation strategies today that address our mobility needs for the future. The Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) is a new element of the RTP that demonstrates the integration of land use, transportation strategies, and transportation investments within the Plan. This new requirement was put in place by the passage of SB 375, with the goal of ensuring that the SCAG region can meet its regional greenhouse gas reduction targets set by the California Air Resources Board (ARB). The SCS exceeds the targets issued by ARB (8 percent reduction by 2020 and 13 percent reduction by 2035), resulting in a 9 percent reduction by 2020 and 16 percent by 2035 (SCAG 2012). Related Plans ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.9 Land Use-Planning-082712.docx 5.9-4 Land Use and Planning City of Anaheim General Plan The State of California requires that every city and county prepare and adopt a general plan. State law also specifies the content of the plan and requires that it be comprehensive and consistent and that it have a long-term perspective. The City of Anaheim General Plan is comprehensive, not only in terms of the geographic planning area that it considers, but also in the range of issues addressed. Issues associated with the City’s development include physical, social, and economic concerns. By law, the General Plan must address the following seven subject areas or elements: land use, circulation, housing, conservation, open space, noise, and safety. It may also address any other issues or include any other elements that relate to the physical development of the city or county. The City of Anaheim has also elected to include an Economic Development Element, a Growth Management Element, a Public Services and Facilities Element, and a Community Design Element. Each element is generally described below while a consistency analysis of the Proposed Project with specific objectives and policies is provided in the respective sections of this EIR. Land Use Element The Land Use Element of the General Plan designates the distribution and location of land uses throughout the City and addresses permitted density and intensity of the various land use designations. The incorporated area of the City comprises approximately 28,000 acres and the City’s sphere of influence includes 2,431 acres. The Land Use Element identifies 12 types of land uses throughout the City, including Residential, Commercial, Office, Mixed-Use, Non-Residential Mixed-Use, Industrial, Institutional, School, Open Space, Parks, Water, and Railroad. These land uses, several of which are divided into multiple designations, are defined in the Land Use Element and used to determine the amount and intensity of development that is allowed. Figure LU-5: Areas of the City with Special Density Limitations and Table LU-4: General Plan Density Provisions for Specific Areas of the City of the Land Use Element also identify eight areas of the City with special density limitations, including Mountain Park, Area A, The Disneyland Resort (SP 92-1), The Anaheim Resort (SP92-2), Hotel Circle (SP 93-1), The Platinum Triangle Area, Stonegate, and Area No. 17. The current General Plan land use designation for the ARSP area is Commercial-Recreation, which applies to all of The Anaheim Resort. This designation is intended to provide for tourist and entertainment-related industries, such as theme parks, hotels, tourist-oriented retail, restaurants, theaters, and other visitor-serving facilities. This designation is implemented by various Specific Plan Zones, which further define the maximum development intensities within this area. As shown in the Land Use Element and on Exhibit 3-2, Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Boundaries, the ARSP area is designated as SP92-2, or the ARSP. The land use-related goals and policies of the Land Use Element of the City’s General Plan that are relevant to the Proposed Project, as well as a project consistency analysis, are provided in Table 5.9-1 of this section. Circulation Element The Circulation Element describes the existing circulation system and serves as an infrastructure plan that addresses the mobility of people, goods and services, energy, water, sewage, storm drainage, and communications. According to the City of Anaheim General Plan, the purpose of the Circulation Element “is to design and improve a circulation system to meet the current and future needs of all Anaheim residents and visitors”. Within its borders, the ARSP ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.9 Land Use-Planning-082712.docx 5.9-5 Land Use and Planning area includes several major circulation routes including the Interstate 5 (I-5) Freeway and City streets such as Harbor Boulevard, Ball Road, and Katella Avenue. According to Figure C-1 of the Circulation Element, several area roadways within the ARSP area are classified on the City’s Planned Roadway Network, including: • Ball Road, Primary Arterial; • Katella Avenue, Resort • Orangewood Avenue, Secondary Arterial; • Chapman Avenue, Primary Arterial; • Disney Way, Major Arterial; • Gene Autry Way, Major Arterial/Primary Arterial; • Clementine Street, Secondary Arterial; • Haster Street, Primary Arterial; • Harbor Boulevard, Major Arterial; • Manchester Avenue, Secondary Arterial; • West Street/Disneyland Drive, Secondary Arterial; and • Walnut Street, Secondary Arterial. Existing traffic conditions in the ARSP area are described in Section 5.14, Transportation and Traffic, of this EIR. The circulation-related goals and policies of the Circulation Element of the City’s General Plan that are relevant to the Proposed Project, as well as a project consistency analysis, are provided in Table 5.9-1 of this section. Green Element The Green Element combines the previous City of Anaheim’s General Plan Conservation, Open Space, Parks, and Recreation and Community Services Elements to provide a comprehensive approach to conserving and protecting natural and recreational resources and adding more green areas throughout the City. The goals, objectives, and policies contained within the Green Space Element address the conservation, development, and utilization of natural resources as well as the management and conservation of open space areas to create a more beautiful city. Specifically, this element addresses water resources; wildlife resources; land resources; energy resources; air quality; visual/scenic resources; waste management and recycling; parks and recreation; and trail systems. According to the Green Element, there are no existing or proposed parks or service areas designated within the ARSP area, nor are there any designated trails in the ARSP area. Additionally, no mineral or biological resources are identified within the ARSP area. Table 5.9-1 provides resource related goals and policies of the Green Element regarding air quality, biological resources, and recreation; resource related goals and policies of the City’s General Plan that are relevant to the Proposed Project; and a project consistency analysis. Public Services and Facilities Element The Public Services and Facilities Element contains goals and policies related to fire protection, law enforcement, schools, water, sewer, and storm drain systems as well as other utilities and services. This element provides guidance for provision of new and expanded public facilities to ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.9 Land Use-Planning-082712.docx 5.9-6 Land Use and Planning support the continued growth of the City. Table 5.9-1 provides public services and facilities related goals and policies of the Public Services and Facilities Element that are relevant to the Proposed Project and a project consistency analysis. Growth Management Element The Growth Management Element provides guidance for future development based on the availability of capital facilities such as traffic management and other public facilities by augmenting and supporting the other General Plan Elements. The goal of the Growth Management Element is to reduce traffic congestion and “to ensure that growth is based on the City’s ability to provide adequate levels of traffic management and other public facilities and services pursuant to the Countywide Traffic Improvement and Growth Management Component of Measure According to Figure GM-1 of the Growth Management Element, the ARSP is located within County Growth Management Area 2. The goals and policies of the Growth Management Element that are relevant to the Proposed Project, as well as a project consistency analysis, are provided in Table 5.9-1. Safety Element The Safety Element identifies potential risks of natural or man-made hazards in the City and contains policies to address those hazards. The information contained in the Safety Element is also used to influence the types and locations of land uses and circulation facilities throughout the City. According to the Safety Element, the ARSP area is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Fault Zone, earthquake-induced Landslide Hazard zone, liquefaction hazard zone, or a fire hazard severity zone. The ARSP area is within the Prado Dam Inundation Area and the 100-Year (with flooding below 1 foot) to 500-Year Flood Zone. Potential seismic and geologic hazards are addressed in Section 5.5, Geology and Soils, and potential flood hazards are addressed in Section 5.8, Hydrology and Water Quality. The goals and policies of the Growth Management Element that are relevant to the Proposed Project, as well as a project consistency analysis, are provided in Table 5.9-1. Noise Element The Noise Element includes an overview of noise terminology; a description of the effects of noise on humans; applicable State regulations; a summary of the City’s noise environment; and a statement of goals, objectives, and policies designed to minimize existing and foreseeable noise impacts. The Noise Element is intended to be used as a guide in balancing land uses in the City to minimize incompatibilities and exposure to excessive noise while providing the range of uses needed to maintain a high quality of life. According to the Noise Element, sources of noise within the City of Anaheim include vehicular traffic, entertainment facilities, sports events, commercial and industrial activity, and periodic occurrences such as construction and aircraft travel. Portions of the ARSP area are located within the 70, 65, and 60 community noise equivalent level (CNEL) noise contours associated with major circulation routes within the City including Katella Avenue, Ball Road, and Harbor Boulevard. Portions of the ARSP area are also located within the 70, 65, and 60 CNEL noise contours associated with the I-5 Freeway. Additional information regarding the noise element and potential noise impacts resulting from the Proposed Project is provided in Section 5.10, Noise. The goals and policies of the Noise Element that are relevant to the Proposed Project, as well as a project consistency analysis, are provided in Table 5.9-1. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.9 Land Use-Planning-082712.docx 5.9-7 Land Use and Planning Economic Development Element The purpose of the Economic Development Element is to “guide the City in expanding the local economy, which provides jobs, attracts and retains businesses, supports diverse and vibrant commercial areas, and brings in sufficient revenue to support various local programs and services”. This element establishes goals and policies to ensure a prosperous economic future. A project consistency with applicable policies from the Economic Development Element is included in Table 5.9-1. Community Design Element The Community Design Element helps to establish a positive and strong community identity for the City of Anaheim. This element provides policy guidance in unifying the diverse areas of the City through carefully crafted design policies. According to the Community Design Element, the ARSP is located within The Anaheim Resort community design district. Section 5.1, Aesthetics, addresses visual impacts and consistency with The Anaheim Resort. A project consistency analysis with applicable policies from the Community Design Element is included in Table 5.9-1. Housing Element The City’s Housing Element identifies policies designed to carry out the State, regional, and local general plan policies. Housing Element policies relevant to the Proposed Project address the need for additional housing opportunities to meet continued demand and are identified in Table 5.9-1 in Section 5.9, Land Use. The California Department of Housing and Community Development found the City’s Housing Element to be in compliance with State housing laws in 2009. The Anaheim City Council certified its Housing Element on August 11, 2009, incorporating the RHNA target and the Anaheim Affordable Housing Strategic Plan goals. City of Anaheim Zoning Ordinance The City of Anaheim Zoning Ordinance is the primary tool for implementing the City’s General Plan. It provides development standards setbacks, building height, site-coverage, parking, and sign requirements), identifies allowable land uses, and specifies other regulations. In addition to guiding the uses, design and improvements of development projects, the Zoning Ordinance provides detailed guidance for development based on, and consistent with, the land use policies established in the General Plan. The Project Site is zoned Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (SP 92-2) and is subject to the development standards as set forth in the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan which are incorporated into the City’s Zoning Ordinance as Chapter 18.116. The Anaheim Resort The Anaheim Resort encompasses approximately 1,078 acres within the City of Anaheim. The Anaheim Resort is specifically designated by the City’s General Plan for recreation and tourist/convention-related activities along with related uses and is divided into three specific plan areas: The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan, the Hotel Circle Specific Plan, and the ARSP (refer to Exhibit 3-2). The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan (489.7 acres) provides for the development of an international multi-day vacation destination resort, including Disneyland and Disney’s California Adventure, and the 6.8-acre Hotel Circle Specific Plan provides for a hotel district. The third specific plan, the ARSP, is described below. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.9 Land Use-Planning-082712.docx 5.9-8 Land Use and Planning Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2 The 581.3-acre ARSP area is divided into two Development Areas. Development Area 1 is known as the C-R District and encompasses approximately 518.5 acres. Development Area 2 is known as the Public Recreational (PR) District and encompasses approximately 62.8 acres. Commercial-Recreation District Permitted development in the C-R District includes hotels, motels, restaurants and other visitor serving uses that are integrated with hotel/motel developments, such as travel agencies, automobile rental agencies, and specialty retail shops. There are four Density Designations within the C-R District: Low Density (up to 50 rooms/acre); Low-Medium Density (up to 75 rooms/acre); Medium Density (up to 100 rooms/acre); and Convention Center Medium Density (up to 125 rooms/acre). The C-R District also includes three properties that total approximately 31.5 acres that have a Mobile Home Park (MHP) Overlay zone designation. The MHP Overlay encompasses existing mobile home parks and provides development standards, regulations, and procedures to mitigate relocation issues and adverse effects of displacement upon mobile home residents when a park is converted to another land use. Additionally, a Residential Overlay zone, totaling 59.3 acres, allows for residential uses in conjunction with visitor-serving uses within two designated areas. Exhibit 2-1, Development Area Plan, identifies locations of the C-R District and the MHP and Residential Overlay zones. Public Recreational District The PR District includes City-owned land such as the 1.7 million sf Anaheim Convention Center (Convention Center) and the land underlying the Anaheim Hilton Hotel, as shown on Exhibit 2-1, Development Area Plan. Other allowed uses within the PR District include accessory uses such as concession stands, restaurants, and shops. The PR District does not have a density designation; however, MEIR 313 included the impacts associated with the 1,600-room Anaheim Hilton Hotel, the Anaheim Convention Center as it existed in 1993, and 412 additional hotel rooms for this area. The environmental analysis completed in conjunction with the expansion of the Convention Center in 1997 (Final Site Plan Review No. 97-02) determined that the Convention Center could be increased to its current size of 1,712,004 sf with the same traffic generating impacts as the development intensity analyzed by MEIR 313 for Development Area 2. In addition, this analysis determined that 219,000 sf of additional traffic generating development could be developed in the future. The ARSP contains land use regulations which define allowable uses within the ARSP area which are incorporated into the City’s Zoning Ordinance as Chapter 18.116. Additionally, the ARSP provides design guidelines that describe building landscape requirements and site development standards to regulate use of, density of, and setback from the property line or public right-of-way. On March 4, 2008, the Anaheim City Council adopted Ordinance No. 6098 (also referred to as the SOAR Initiative) generally prohibiting residential development within The Anaheim Resort without environmental and economic analysis, City Council approval and City voter approval at a City election. The SOAR Initiative did not preclude residential development within the ARSP in compliance with The Anaheim Resort Residential Overlay. A detailed description of the amendments and adjustments, including the SOAR Initiative, is included in Appendix A. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.9 Land Use-Planning-082712.docx 5.9-9 Land Use and Planning 5.9.3 METHODOLOGY Information for this section was compiled from the City of Anaheim General Plan (May 2004), the Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update EIR 330 (May 2004), and other related planning documents. 5.9.4 EXISTING CONDITIONS The ARSP area encompasses approximately 581.3 gross acres in the City of Anaheim in northern Orange County. The ARSP is one of three specific plans within the larger, tourist-oriented Anaheim Resort. As shown on Exhibit 3-2, the ARSP area is generally located east of Walnut Street, west of the I-5 Freeway, north of Chapman Avenue, and south of Ball Road. A small portion of the ARSP is located north of the I-5 Freeway/Harbor Boulevard interchange. Existing Land Uses Within the Project Site Exhibit 3-3, Aerial Photograph, provides an aerial view of the Project Site and surrounding areas. As shown, the Project Site is largely developed with urban uses with the exception of an open, active agricultural area located east of the intersection of Harbor Boulevard and Convention Way. Surrounding Land Uses Land uses surrounding the Project Site are shown on the aerial map presented in Exhibit 3-3. Generally, the Project Site is located in an area characterized by urban development including commercial, office, and residential development and visitor-serving uses including theme parks, hotels and motels, and sports venues. Following is a description of existing land uses surrounding the Project Site. North The Project Site is generally bound on the north by Vermont Avenue. Land uses north of the Project Site are predominately residential with limited commercial areas and motels. Residential uses include both single- and multi-family units. East The I-5 Freeway serves as the eastern project boundary for most of the ARSP area. Immediately east of the I-5 Freeway and south of Cerritos Avenue, existing developments are predominately industrial uses. Much of this area is under development associated with The Platinum Triangle, an 820-acre area east of the I-5 Freeway that includes Angel Stadium of Anaheim and the Honda Center, which includes upscale, mixed-use development and office uses. Land uses to the northeast are largely residential with some commercial areas and a school. West Land uses located west of the ARSP area are varied and include The Disneyland Resort theme parks and associated land uses such as hotels, parking areas, and commercial buildings. South of Katella Avenue, land uses west of the ARSP area are largely residential, including both single- and multi-family residences. South of Orangewood Avenue, land uses along the western boundary of the ARSP area transition from residential to hotels and related visitor-serving uses, including those in the City of Garden Grove. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.9 Land Use-Planning-082712.docx 5.9-10 Land Use and Planning South Land uses located south of the ARSP area are varied and include residential uses in the areas along Orangewood Avenue and a variety of commercial and visitor-serving hotel areas south of the Project Site along Chapman Avenue in the City of Garden Grove. 5.9.5 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE The following significance criteria are derived from the City of Anaheim Environmental Checklist. The Proposed Project would result in a significant impact related to land use and planning if it would: Threshold 5.9.1 Physically divide an established community. Threshold 5.9.2 Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the Project (including but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating and environmental effect. As previously discussed in Section 2.4.2, Effects Found Not to Be Significant, during preparation of the Initial Study, the City of Anaheim determined that the Proposed Project would not have a significant impact for the following threshold and no further analysis of these issues is presented in this section. Would the Project: • Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? 5.9.6 PROJECT IMPACT ANALYSIS Standard Requirements No standard requirements have been identified. Project Impact Analysis Threshold 5.9.1 Would the project physically divide an established community? C-R District As addressed in MEIR 313, several existing uses within the C-R District are considered non-conforming uses under the ARSP. Continued build out of the C-R District would eliminate non-conforming uses, thereby enhancing the continuity of the ARSP area as a single, unified community. Other parcels are considered to be underdeveloped and may be fully developed in the future with the densities and uses permitted by the ARSP. The only communities which may be subject to redevelopment are the two mobile home parks located southeast of the intersection of Katella Avenue and Haster Street. However, the land use impacts associated with redevelopment of the mobile home parks were previously addressed in MEIR 313. Specifically, these mobile home parks are within the MHP Overlay Zone, which is intended to mitigate potential relocation impacts and adverse effects of displacement upon the displaced mobile home owners when a park is converted to another land use. Consistent with the analysis in MEIR 313, no development proposals are currently being considered for these properties ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.9 Land Use-Planning-082712.docx 5.9-11 Land Use and Planning and, when such a proposal is submitted, the displacement of mobile home park residences could not occur until the requirements of State law pertaining to the closure of mobile home parks were met. In addition, prior to the conversion of the mobile home park properties, the requirements of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Section 18.26.070, Conversion and Reclassification from Mobilehome Park Overlay Zone, would also need to be fulfilled. Therefore, impacts associated with the physical division of an established community would be less than significant. PR District The expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center would occur within the development area known as the PR District. While the PR District includes the development with several land uses, none of the uses are considered to be a “community”. Therefore, the expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center would not physically divide an established community. No impact would occur. Impact Summary: Implementation of the Proposed Project has the potential to divide or eliminate the established community present at the two mobile home parks. However, pursuant to the Anaheim Municipal Code, impacts associated with the conversion the mobile home parks to other uses would be mitigated. Therefore, impacts associated with the division of an established community would be less than significant. This conclusion is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313. Threshold 5.9.2 Would the project conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating and environmental effect? Implementation of the Amendment to the ARSP would require amending the ARSP to allow for development of increased intensity within the PR District. An analysis of the consistency of these land use-related actions with existing regional and local plans (including applicable goals and policies) is provided below. For this program-level analysis, the various project components (C-R District and PR District) are addressed comprehensively. Therefore, the analysis describes the consistency of the Proposed Project as a whole with local and regional plans and policies. Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) The Proposed Project would be supportive of the three key principles set forth in the 2012-2035 RTP/SCS: mobility, economy, and sustainability. Mobility Build out of the ARSP area would increase the movement of people and goods within the area. Various roadway and intersection improvements (as discussed in Section 5.14, Transportation and Traffic) would maximize vehicular mobility and accessibility for people and goods in the region. Development pursuant to the ARSP would enhance this mobility through provision of high-traffic uses including hotels, commercial development, entertainment venues, and the Anaheim Convention Center proximate to major vehicular transportation corridors as well as existing and future mass transit opportunities which would ensure reliability. Mass transit ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.9 Land Use-Planning-082712.docx 5.9-12 Land Use and Planning opportunities including the Anaheim Resort Transit (ART) system, the future proposed Anaheim Rapid Connection (ARC) program, and pedestrian-friendly connections would enhance mobility and accessibility throughout the ARSP area. According to the ARSP development guidelines and City of Anaheim programs and policies, enhanced pedestrian opportunities would continue to be developed in a manner that provides accessibility while maintaining a physical separation landscaping) from the nearest vehicle travel lane, thus ensuring safety. Economy Implementation of the Proposed Project would result in the development of a mix of hotels and convention, retail, and other visitor-serving uses, which would increase the number of people in the local area and contribute to the local economy. The presence of a large variety of visitor- serving uses, including entertainment and recreation, retail, and restaurant uses, combined with the ease of mobility within the ARSP area would influence visitors to remain within the ARSP area throughout their stay rather than leave the area. Sustainability Implementation of the Proposed Project would minimize the impact to the environment through the development of a mix of hotels and convention, retail, and other visitor-serving uses that encourage visitors to the area to stay in the area. Future development associated with the Proposed Project would provide visitors with the opportunity to patronize the local area by walking rather than traveling by automobile. The developing network of sidewalks and crosswalks would promote easy pedestrian access between various uses within and adjacent to the ARSP area. Additionally, standard OCTA bus stops and ART stops exist along local roadways within the ARSP, which promote transit use, thereby reducing emissions and improving air quality and energy efficiency. These and other aspects of the Proposed Project, as discussed in Section 5.6, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, would directly and indirectly reduce the potential pollutant emissions associated with future development projects within the ARSP area. City of Anaheim City of Anaheim General Plan The City of Anaheim General Plan provides guidance for long-term growth and development in the City through comprehensive plans for future development. Land use designations and policies are developed to provide compatibility between existing and future land uses. The ARSP, which is the zoning for the Project Site, has been incorporated into the General Plan as a planned land use. The ARSP would allow for continued development of a cohesive development plan with unique development regulations that would be specific to the Proposed Project. Land uses would be designed and located to avoid potential land use incompatibilities. The Proposed Project would involve the continued development of the Project Site with a mix of hotels/motels, convention, retail, and other visitor-serving uses. Land use densities and allowed uses have been designed to complement existing land uses surrounding the Project Site, but the Proposed Project would not directly impact these uses. Table 5.9-1 addresses the consistency of the Proposed Project with the relevant land use related goals and policies outlined in the City of Anaheim General Plan. The Proposed Project’s consistency with goals and policies related to other topical issues addressed in this EIR are provided in the respective technical sections. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.9 Land Use-Planning-082712.docx 5.9-13 Land Use and Planning TABLE 5.9-1 CONSISTENCY OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN City of Anaheim General Plan Goal or Policy Consistency Analysis Land Use Element Goal 2.1 Continue to provide a variety of quality housing opportunities to address the City’s diverse housing needs. Although the goals of the ARSP are not directly tied to the provision of housing, Amendment No. 7 to the ARSP created a residential overlay for 2 sites within the ARSP area totaling 59.3 acres. As described in Section 3.0, Project Description, this overlay permits development of residential uses in conjunction with visitor-serving uses provided the overall densities would be limited to what would produce an environmental equivalent to the maximum entitled hotel density of each parcel. This overlay was created to provide opportunity for the development of mixed-use projects containing resort quality housing opportunities within the area encompassing the ARSP. Policy 4 Encourage the development and integration of residential land uses into mixed-use development where appropriate. Policy 6 Ensure quality development through appropriate development standards and by adherence to related Community Design Element policies and guidelines. As discussed previously, the Project Site is subject to the development guidelines as set forth in the ARSP, which was adopted as part of the City’s Zoning Ordinance (refer to Chapter 18.18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code). Future development associated with the build out of the C-R District and the expansion within the PR District would comply with all development guidelines as set forth in the ARSP, and development applications would be subject to review by the City Planning Department to ensure compliance with all applicable development standards and guidelines. Goal 3.1 Pursue land uses along major corridors that enhance the City’s image and stimulate appropriate development at strategic locations. As discussed previously in Section 5.6.2, the ARSP is located along several major circulation routes including Katella Avenue and Harbor Boulevard, which are designated as the Central Core of the ARSP area. Consistent with the intent of the original ARSP, the Proposed Project would facilitate the development of visitor-serving uses, the majority of which would front onto major transportation corridors. As detailed below for the consistency analysis with Policy 3, all development and redevelopment would comply with development guidelines set forth in the ARSP to maintain a consistent image throughout the ARSP area. Policy 3 Ensure quality development along corridors through adherence to established development standards and Community Design Element goals, policies and guidelines. Pursuant to the ARSP, development along roadways (corridors) would be subject to the established Design Plan, which promotes visual continuity in the public and setback realms through use of landscaping, street furniture, signage, lighting, color, and other pageantry elements. Additionally, the Central Core of the ARSP area would be subject to specific development standards intended to enhance the pedestrian experience and encourage people to stop and get out their vehicles. Special development standards for the Central Core include no parking between the public right-of-way and the building face, special landscape provisions, special landscaped intersections, and a requirement for buildings to occupy a minimum of 60 percent of the frontage adjacent to the right-of-way to create a well-defined “edge” for the street. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 5.9-1 (Continued) CONSISTENCY OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.9 Land Use-Planning-082712.docx 5.9-14 Land Use and Planning City of Anaheim General Plan Goal or Policy Consistency Analysis Policy 4 Continue to pursue additional open space, recreation, and landscaping amenities along major transportation routes. Although the ARSP does not designate any areas for open space or recreation, the ARSP has set forth requirements for landscaping along all major roadways within the ARSP area. All new development or redevelopment would be subject to the established Design Plan as detailed previously. Goal 4.1 Promote development that integrates with and minimizes impacts to surrounding land uses. The Proposed Project involves the build out of the C-R District of the ARSP as currently entitled and previously evaluated in EIRs 313 and 330, and the expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center within the PR District as detailed in Section 3.0, Project Description. The Proposed Project would continue the current land use pattern within the ARSP area, providing a more cohesive development. The location and density of planned land uses within the ARSP area were determined based on compatibility with on-site and surrounding land uses. Planned density along the periphery of the ARSP area varies; however, where the ARSP area borders residential uses, the density designation is generally low-medium density (up to 75 hotel rooms per acre) or low density (up to 50 hotel rooms per acre) to encourage land use compatibility. The only exception is the portions of the C-R District that immediately surround the PR District and which have a maximum density of 125 rooms per acre. Policy 1 Ensure that land uses develop in accordance with the Land Use Plan and Zoning Code in an effort to attain land use compatibility. Policy 2 Promote compatible development through adherence to Community Design Element policies and guidelines. Policy 3 Ensure that developers consider and address project impacts upon surrounding neighborhoods during the design and development process. Policy 4 Require new or expanded uses to provide mitigation or buffers between existing uses where potential adverse impacts could occur. Goal 5.1 Create and enhance dynamic, identifiable places for the benefit of Anaheim residents, employees and visitors. All future development within the ARSP area would be subject to development guidelines as set forth in the ARSP. These development guidelines identify pageantry elements, gateway elements, and landscaping which create a consistent visual theme and identity for development within the ARSP area. Policy 4 Promote development that is efficient, pedestrian-friendly, and served by a variety of transportation options. As stated previously, future development within the ARSP area would be subject to development guidelines as set forth in the ARSP. Specifically, development along the major transportation corridors would be developed with a variety of visitor-serving uses with generous sidewalks, landscaping, and street furniture to encourage passing motorists to leave their vehicles and travel by foot throughout the ARSP area. The system of sidewalks provide easy access to a variety of land uses within and adjacent to the ARSP area. In addition to the enhanced pedestrian areas, the ARSP area is also served by the Anaheim Resort Transit system, which provides access to a variety of ARSP uses and the Anaheim Amtrak/Metrolink Station. Additionally, Future Developers/Property Owners shall participate in the Anaheim Transportation Network in conjunction with the ongoing operation of the Proposed Project and comply with the City’s Transportation Demand Management program through the establishment of programs to increase ridesharing and the use of alternative modes of transportation by employees. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 5.9-1 (Continued) CONSISTENCY OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.9 Land Use-Planning-082712.docx 5.9-15 Land Use and Planning City of Anaheim General Plan Goal or Policy Consistency Analysis Goal 6.1 Enhance the quality of life and economic vitality in Anaheim through strategic infill development and revitalization of existing development. Build out of the ARSP would provide for a variety of visitor serving uses including hotels/motels, restaurants, and commercial/retail uses. Due to the largely developed nature of the ARSP area, the majority of development would consist of either redevelopment or infill development. All development applications would be subject to design criteria set forth in the ARSP to ensure quality development. Circulation Element Goal 1.1 Provide a comprehensive multimodal transportation system that facilitates current and long-term circulation of people and goods in and through the City. As discussed in Section 5.14, Transportation and Traffic, a traffic impact analysis would be required for each new development forecast to generate 100 or more peak hour (morning or evening) trip ends. The analysis must identify arterial and intersection improvements that may potentially be needed to allow levels of service no worse than LOS E along Interstates/State Routes/Smart Streets (unless current operation is LOS and no worse than LOS D along the balance of the arterials on the City’s Circulation Element. Projects that exceed the LOS standards must provide necessary improvements and/or funding to mitigate their impacts. Additionally, future development projects would be required to participate in the Anaheim Transportation Network (ATN), which provides rideshare programs, paratransit services, and the Anaheim Resort Transit (ART) service in the Anaheim Resort, with connection to Metrolink service. Enhanced sidewalks and landscaping will be provided throughout the ARSP area enhancing travel for non-motorized modes. Policy 3 Require that major new development proposals include traffic impact analyses that identify measures and financing to mitigate traffic impacts. Policy 6 Ensure the provision of needed transportation improvements through the site plan and environmental review process. Goal 1.2 Support improvements to highways passing near and through the City. As discussed in Section 5.14, Transportation and Traffic, impacts to the I-5 Freeway and related on- and off-ramps would be considered significant and unavoidable due to the City of Anaheim’s inability to ensure that necessary improvements are made. However, should Caltrans move forward with freeway improvements, the City would participate in the fair share funding of such improvements, thus supporting improvements to the regional facility. Policy 1 Continue working with Caltrans and the Federal Highway Administration to address traffic flow along State highways that traverse the City. Policy 3 Work with Caltrans to identify needed improvements to its facilities in the City as necessary. Policy 4 Work with Caltrans and adjacent jurisdictions to improve the operational performance of highways within and adjacent to the City. Policy 5 Work with Caltrans in analyzing the performance of freeway interchanges located in the City and seek appropriate improvements. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 5.9-1 (Continued) CONSISTENCY OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.9 Land Use-Planning-082712.docx 5.9-16 Land Use and Planning City of Anaheim General Plan Goal or Policy Consistency Analysis Goal 2.1 Maintain efficient traffic operations on City streets and maintain a peak hour level of service not worse than D at street intersections. As discussed in Section 5.14, Transportation and Traffic, the Proposed Project would have the potential to cause intersections, arterial segments, freeway ramp termini intersections, freeway ramps, freeway mainlines, and freeway weaving areas to operate at unacceptable LOS. Future projects would be required to adhere to the design plan requirements identified in the ARSP, including installation of planted medians along Harbor Boulevard, Katella Avenue, West Street/Disneyland Drive, Disney Way, Manchester Avenue, Walnut Street, Ball Road, Convention Way, and Gene Autry Way. Even with implementation of design features, standard requirements, and mitigation measures, potential impacts related to transportation and traffic will remain significant and unavoidable. Policy 1 Make improvements to streets and intersections experiencing conditions worse than the applicable Level of Service standard by providing appropriate improvements, including, but not limited to: • Landscaped median islands to restrict left turns, with median opening spacing occurring a minimum of 400 feet apart, and preferably limited to signalized locations. • Adequate driveway spacing of 125 feet (at 30 mph) to 230 feet (at 45 mph) between driveways on arterial highways. Goal 2.2 Provide a safe circulation system. As discussed in Section 2.4.2, the Project Site is within a fully developed area of the City. There are no major modifications to the existing vehicular circulation system proposed in conjunction with the Proposed Project. Any future modifications to the circulation system that could impact hazards relating to design features or impact emergency access would be subject to the review and approval of the City of Anaheim’s Planning Department, Fire Department, and Department of Public Works to avoid potential roadway and traffic-related hazards. Additionally, future development along the major transportation corridors would be developed with a variety of visitor-serving uses with generous sidewalks, landscaping, and street furniture to encourage passing motorists to leave their vehicles and travel by foot throughout the ARSP area. The system of sidewalks provide easy access to a variety of land uses within and adjacent to the ARSP area. In addition to the enhanced pedestrian areas, the ARSP area is also served by the Anaheim Resort Shuttle system, which provides access to a variety of ARSP uses. Policy 1 Promote the principle that streets have multiple uses and users, and protect the safety of all users. Policy 3 Design access onto major arterial streets in an orderly and controlled manner. Policy 6 Implement street design features such as the use of medians, bus turnouts, consolidated driveways and on street parking prohibitions to minimize mid-block traffic congestion. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 5.9-1 (Continued) CONSISTENCY OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.9 Land Use-Planning-082712.docx 5.9-17 Land Use and Planning City of Anaheim General Plan Goal or Policy Consistency Analysis Goal 5.1 Promote bus service and paratransit improvements. As discussed in Section 5.14, Transportation and Traffic, future development projects would be required to participate in the Anaheim Transportation Network (ATN), which provides rideshare programs, paratransit services, and the Anaheim Resort Transit (ART) service in the Anaheim Resort, with connection to Metrolink service. Additionally, Property Owners/Developers of future development projects would be required to develop transportation demand management (TDM) programs to reduce employee trips by promoting increased ridesharing and the use of alternative modes of transportation by employees. As part of TDM programs, future development would also be required to provide bus stops where appropriate. Policy 5 Intensify land uses in close proximity to future BRT stop(s) where appropriate. Policy 6 Improve pedestrian access to transit facilities. Goal 7.1 Protect and encourage bicycle travel. According to Section 5.14, Transportation and Traffic, future development projects may include a Bicycling Program, as part of the TDM program, which would offer a bicycling alternative to employees. If such a program was offered, the Property Owner/Developer would provide secure bicycle racks, lockers, and showers as well as maps of bicycle routes throughout the area to inform potential bicyclists of these options. All properties will provide bicycle parking as required by the California Green Building Code. Policy 2 Incorporate bicycle planning into the traditional transportation planning process. Goal 8.1 Protect and encourage pedestrian travel. As stated previously, future development within the ARSP area would be subject to development guidelines as set forth in the ARSP. Specifically, development along the major transportation corridors would be developed with a variety of visitor-serving uses with generous sidewalks, landscaping, and street furniture to encourage passing motorists to leave their vehicles and travel by foot throughout the ARSP area. The system of sidewalks provides easy access to a variety of land uses within and adjacent to the ARSP area. In addition to the enhanced pedestrian areas, the ARSP area is also served by Anaheim Resort Transit, which provides access to a variety of ARSP uses. Policy 1 Encourage and improve pedestrian facilities that link development to the circulation network and that serve as a transition between other modes of travel. Policy 5 Add raised, landscaped medians, and bulbouts, where appropriate, to reduce exposure to cross traffic at street crossings. Policy 6 When appropriate, walkways should include pedestrian amenities such as shade trees and/or plantings, trash bins, benches, shelters, and directional kiosks. Policy 7 Ensure that streets and intersections are designed to provide visibility and safety for pedestrians. Future development within the ARSP area would be subject to specific development standards intended to enhance the pedestrian experience and encourage people to stop and get out of their vehicles. Special development standards for the Central Core include no parking between the public right-of-way and the building face, which would allow for greater visibility between motorists and pedestrians, special landscape provisions, special landscaped intersections, and a requirement for buildings to occupy a minimum of 60 percent of the frontage adjacent to the right-of-way to create a well-defined “edge” for the street. The ARSP also defines additional setback and landscaping requirements for other streets within the ARSP area, such as Convention Way, Orangewood Avenue, Clementine Street, Manchester Avenue, Haster Street, West Street/Disneyland Drive, Walnut Street, and Ball Road, which would also reduce interface between pedestrians and motorists. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 5.9-1 (Continued) CONSISTENCY OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.9 Land Use-Planning-082712.docx 5.9-18 Land Use and Planning City of Anaheim General Plan Goal or Policy Consistency Analysis Goal 12.1 Ensure adequate parking is made available to City residents, visitors, and businesses. Parking associated with new development within the Project Site would be subject to existing parking requirements set forth in Title 18 (Zoning) of the Anaheim Municipal Code and would be subject to review and approval by the City of Anaheim Planning Department. Policy 1 Assess the adequacy of existing or proposed on- and off-street parking as needed, especially in urban and commercial areas, to ensure that an adequate supply is provided. Policy 5 Encourage the use of well-designed, aesthetically-enhanced parking structures as an alternative to large, expansive surface parking lots. Future development of parking areas, including parking structures, within the ARSP area would be subject to requirements set forth in the Design Plan to enhance the visual appearance of parking areas. Specifically, the Design Plan prohibits parking between the front setback and the building/structure in the Central Core area. Additionally, landscaping requirements are identified to conceal views of cars parked in parking structures. Green Element Goal 5.1 Continue Anaheim’s water conservation efforts to ensure that all City facilities are water efficient. As discussed in Section 5.15, future development projects would be subject to the City’s Water Conservation Ordinance, including the mandatory cuts authorized by Section 10.18.070 of the Ordinance if needed, which would achieve substantial water use savings. Additionally, implementation of mitigation would require use of water-conserving devices such as low-flow sprinkler heads in irrigation systems; waterway recirculation systems; low- flow fittings, fixtures, and equipment, including low flush toilets and urinals; use of self-closing valves on drinking valves; use of efficient irrigation systems such as drip irrigation and automatic systems that use moisture sensors; use of low-flow shower heads in hotels; water efficient ice-machines, dishwashers, clothes washers and other water-using appliances; use of irrigation systems primarily at night when evaporation rates are lowest; information to the public in conspicuous places regarding water conservation; and use of water conserving landscape plant materials wherever feasible. Policy 3 Specify and install water-conserving plumbing fixtures and fittings in public facilities such as parks, community centers, and government buildings. Goal 6.1 Develop a Groundwater Protection Management Program to ensure the quality of groundwater drinking supplies. As discussed in Section 5.8, Hydrology and Water Quality, excavation and grading activities for future development according to the ARSP would not result in direct impacts to the underlying groundwater resources. However, build out within the C-R and PR Districts would result in an increase in long-term demand for domestic water, landscape irrigation, and maintenance activities. Implementation of identified mitigation would reduce demand for groundwater resources and potential impacts would be mitigated to less than significant levels. Policy 3 Continue to coordinate groundwater protection efforts with the Orange County Water District, neighboring cities and other relevant agencies. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 5.9-1 (Continued) CONSISTENCY OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.9 Land Use-Planning-082712.docx 5.9-19 Land Use and Planning City of Anaheim General Plan Goal or Policy Consistency Analysis Goal 7.1 Reduce urban run-off from new and existing development. As discussed in Section 5.8, Hydrology and Water Quality, future development projects associated with the Amendment to the ARSP would be required to comply with federal and State requirements related to water quality, including the City’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Ordinance for construction and operation. Further, future development projects would be required to prepare individual Water Quality Management Plans that identify the potential pollutants of concern that would be generated by the Project and the site and hydrologic conditions of concern at locations. The WQMP would identify permanent site design, source control, and treatment control best management practices (BMPs) that would be implemented as part of the Proposed Project, including maintenance responsibilities and funding sources, and would be signed as a notarized agreement between the City and the Property Owner/Developer to provide a long-term commitment to its implementation. Preparation and implementation of a WQMP for new development would satisfy MS4 Permit requirements and allow the City to comply with the water quality standards for storm water runoff. Policy 1 Ensure compliance with the Federal Clean Water Act requirements for National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits, including developing and requiring the development of Water Quality Management Plans for all new development and significant redevelopment in the City. Policy 2 Continue to implement an urban runoff reduction program consistent with regional and federal requirements, which includes requiring and encouraging the following: • Increase permeable areas and install filtration controls (including grass lined swales and gravel beds) and divert flow to these permeable areas to allow more percolation of runoff into the ground; • Use natural drainage, detention ponds or infiltration pits to collect runoff; and, • Prevent rainfall from entering material and waste storage areas and pollution-laden surfaces. Policy 4 Require new development and significant redevelopment to utilize site preparation, grading and best management practices that provide erosion and sediment control to prevent construction-related contaminants from leaving the site and polluting waterways. Goal 8.1 Reduce locally generated emissions through improved traffic flows and construction management practices. As discussed in Section 5.2, Air Quality, construction and operation related to the implementation of the Proposed Project would generate emissions related to earth disturbance, construction activities, daily operational activities, and vehicular traffic. Adherence to South Coast Air Quality Management District Rules 402 and 403 would reduce fugitive dust emissions and Rule 1113 would reduce emissions associated with architectural coatings. Improvements to the circulation system would also reduce vehicular emissions through improved traffic flows and intersection wait time. Policy 1 Reduce vehicle emissions through traffic flow improvements, such as traffic signal Intelligent Transportation Systems, the Scoot Adaptive Traffic Control System, and related capital improvements. Policy 2 Regulate construction practices, including grading, dust suppression, chemical management, and encourage pre- determined construction routes that minimize dust and particulate matter pollution. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 5.9-1 (Continued) CONSISTENCY OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.9 Land Use-Planning-082712.docx 5.9-20 Land Use and Planning City of Anaheim General Plan Goal or Policy Consistency Analysis Goal 11.1 Encourage land planning and urban design that support alternatives to the private automobile such as mixed-use, provision of pedestrian amenities, and transit-oriented development. As stated previously, future development within the ARSP area would be subject to development guidelines as set forth in the ARSP. Specifically, development along the major transportation corridors would be developed with a variety of visitor-serving uses with generous sidewalks, landscaping, and street furniture to encourage passing motorists to leave their vehicles and travel by foot throughout the ARSP area. The system of sidewalks provide easy access to a variety of land uses within and adjacent to the ARSP area. Policy 1 Encourage commercial growth and the development of commercial centers in accordance with the Land Use Element. Development pursuant to the ARSP would be in accordance with the General Plan Commercial Recreation land use designation. Goal 14.1 Conserve natural habitat and protect rare, threatened and endangered species. As detailed in Section 5.3, Biological Resources, development in accordance with the Proposed Project would be subject to State law concerning migratory birds and/or nesting raptors when habitat is present. Implementation of the mitigation program detailed in Section 5.3, Biological Resources, would ensure that no significant impacts would occur. Goal 16.1 Continue to monitor and improve the Anaheim Recycle program. As discussed in Section 5.19, Other Utilities, the ARSP area is currently and will continue to be served by independent waste haulers. Additionally, the City of Anaheim maintains a comprehensive recycling program with the goal of reducing solid waste by 50 percent. Anaheim Waste Disposal provides all recovered recyclable residential and commercial waste to a hauling facility where recyclable materials are sorted. Property owners/operators within the ARSP area are encouraged to implement the on-site collection of recyclable waste as well as use of recycled materials, as appropriate and feasible. Policy 2 Provide adequate solid waste collection and recycling for commercial areas and construction activities. Goal 17.1 Encourage building and site design standards that reduce energy costs. As discussed in Section 5.6, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, future development within the ARSP area would be required to demonstrate that future development meet the applicable Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential and the applicable California Green Building Standards (24 CCR 11). Adherence to these requirements would comply with Goal 17.1 and the associated policy. Policy 1 Encourage designs that incorporate solar and wind exposure features such as daylighting design, natural ventilation, space planning and thermal massing. Public Services and Facilities Element Goal 1.1 Provide sufficient staffing, equipment and facilities to ensure effective fire protection, emergency medical and rescue services, permitting and fire inspection, and hazardous material response services that keep pace with growth. Implementation of the Proposed Project would increase demand on fire protection services, including a demand for additional resources and/or personnel. However, compliance with the identified mitigation measures and payment of the fire facilities fees, including the ARA Fire Protection Facilities and Paramedic Services Impact Fee ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 5.9-1 (Continued) CONSISTENCY OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.9 Land Use-Planning-082712.docx 5.9-21 Land Use and Planning City of Anaheim General Plan Goal or Policy Consistency Analysis Policy 1 Maintain adequate resources to enable the Fire Department to meet response time standards, keep pace with growth, and provide high levels of service. Policy 3 Maintain and/or upgrade water facilities to ensure adequate response to fire hazards. As discussed in Section 5.15, fire flow modeling runs performed for the Proposed Project identified insufficient pressure within existing facilities and implementation of identified mitigation related to payment of fees for Primary Mains; Secondary Mains; and Fire Protection Service in accordance with Rule 15A and 20 of the Water Utility Rates, Rules, and Regulations would reduce impacts related to capacity, pressure, and velocities to less than significant levels. Goal 2.1 Meet the community’s needs for public safety and law enforcement by ensuring adequate resources for the prevention, detection, and investigation of crime, and response to calls for service. Implementation of the Proposed Project would increase demand on police protection services, including a demand for additional resources and/or personnel. However, the funding for new officers and equipment needed to maintain acceptable service levels would come from the City’s General Fund. Property taxes, and other fees assessed on future Property Owners/Developers would contribute to the General Fund revenues as described in Section 5.12, Public Services. Policy 1 Maintain adequate resources to enable the Police Department to meet response time standards, keep pace with growth, and provide high levels of service. Goal 4.1 Provide a water system that produces high quality water, sufficient water pressure, and necessary quantities of water to meet domestic demands As discussed in Section 5.15, Water Supply and Infrastructure, the total water demand projection for the increase in land use intensification beyond what was considered in the 2005 UWMP is 0.876 million gallons per day (MGD) or 980 acre-feet per year (afy). The Water Supply Assessment identified that water supplies for the ARSP will remain stable in normal, single-dry year, and multiple-dry year scenarios through 2030. Therefore, it is anticipated that the utilization of the City’s Water Conservation Ordinance, including the mandatory cuts authorized by Section 10.18.070 of the Ordinance if needed, could easily achieve water use savings in an amount sufficient to make up for the identified shortfalls in the worst-case identified in the Water Supply Assessment. Additionally, even assuming water conservation does not achieve the necessary water use savings, the identified hypothetical shortfalls could be met through groundwater production from City wells. Therefore, impacts related to water supply resulting from implementation of the Proposed Project would be less than significant and the Proposed Project would be consistent with Goal 4.1 and associated policies. Policy 1 Provide for the efficient and economic distribution of adequate water supply and pressure to all residential, commercial, industrial, and public areas served by the Public Utilities Department. Policy 2 Continue to provide municipal water service that meets or exceeds State and Federal health standards and monitor water quality according to established criteria, with respect to health standards. Goal 5.1 Provide a safe and effective sewer system that meets the needs of the City’s residents, businesses, and visitors. Development of individual projects associated with the Amendment to the ARSP would increase wastewater flow entering the City’s and Orange County Sanitation District’s sewer facilities. As discussed in Section 5.16, Sewer, future Property Owners/Developers would be responsible for payment of the City’s Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program and/or construction the needed sewer line upgrades in order to avoid the exacerbation of existing deficiencies and to ensure that adequate facilities are available to provide sewer services to each development project. Policy 1 Ensure that appropriate sewer system mitigation measures are identified and implemented in conjunction with new development based on the recommendations of prior sewer studies and/or future sewer studies that may be required by the City Engineer. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 5.9-1 (Continued) CONSISTENCY OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.9 Land Use-Planning-082712.docx 5.9-22 Land Use and Planning City of Anaheim General Plan Goal or Policy Consistency Analysis Goal 6.1 Maintain a storm drain system that will adequately protect and enhance the health, safety and general welfare of residents, visitors, employees, and their property. As discussed in Section 5.18, Storm Water, implementation of the Proposed Project would exacerbate several existing deficiencies within the City’s storm drain system. However, the Property Owner/Developer for each future development project would be required to participate in the City’s Master Plan of Storm Drains and related Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program to assist in mitigating existing and future storm drainage system deficiencies. Implementation of additional mitigation measures would ensure that impacts to regional flood control facilities would be reduced to less than significant levels as well. Policy 1 Improve the City’s storm drain system to address current deficiencies as well as long-term needs associated with future development to minimize flood damage and adequately convey rainfall and subsequent runoff from a 25-year frequency storm. Policy 2 Develop Anaheim’s flood control system for multi-purpose uses whenever practical and financially feasible recreational, water quality/treatment, infiltration, etc.). Goal 7.1 Minimize, recycle and dispose of solid and hazardous waste in an efficient and environmentally sound manner. As discussed in Section 5.19, Other Utilities, future projects would be required to comply with AB 939, which identifies programs for material recycling and hazardous waste disposal. In addition to AB 939 strategies, the City of Anaheim would require additional materials collection for recycling or recovery. Policy 2 Reduce the volume of material sent to solid waste sites in accordance with State law by continuing source reduction and recycling programs and by ensuring the participation of all residents and businesses. Goal 8.1 Coordinate with private utilities to provide adequate natural gas and communications infrastructure to existing and new development in a manner compatible with the surrounding community. As appropriate, individual Property Owners/Developers would be responsible for coordination with private utility companies prior to and during construction to ensure adequate service to the proposed development project(s) and to avoid any loss of service to the surrounding community. Goal 9.1 Provide a dependable fiber optics system that meets existing and future needs. As discussed in Section 5.19, Other Utilities, AT&T would serve the ARSP area, providing telephone, digital cable, and high speed internet services. The infrastructure capacity for telephone service typically expands with new development. Facilities needed to connect the Proposed Project to the existing telephone system may include new conduit, fiber and copper facilities. These improvements would be implemented in accordance with applicable State and local regulations. Any new systems would be consistent with current technologies, whether or not that includes a fiber-optics system, as identified in Goal 9.1 and Policy 1, or alternative and higher technology. The Proposed Project would be consistent with the intent of this Goal and related policy. Policy 1 Maintain and, when desirable, expand fiber optics capacity to ensure Anaheim businesses and educational and governmental institutions enjoy adequate high-speed communications access. Goal 10.1 Improve the City’s appearance by mitigating the visual impacts of utility equipment and facilities. As discussed in Section 5.17, Electricity, future development projects would be required to install underground electrical distribution lines, thereby supporting the goals of the Underground Conversion Program and enhancing the visual appearance of the ARSP area. In addition to undergrounding utilities, future development would be subject to the ARSP Development Guidelines and Standards, which require appropriate siting, and screening through architectural features and/or landscaping to block views of utility infrastructure. Policy 1 Continue to implement the Underground Conversion Program in public rights-of-way and increase the number of underground utility districts, as appropriate. Policy 2 Use a combination of architectural enhancements, equipment undergrounding, screen walls and landscaping to reduce or eliminate visibility of utility equipment and facilities, whenever feasible. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 5.9-1 (Continued) CONSISTENCY OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.9 Land Use-Planning-082712.docx 5.9-23 Land Use and Planning City of Anaheim General Plan Goal or Policy Consistency Analysis Growth Management Element Goal 1.1 Provide a balance of housing options and job opportunities throughout the City. Although the goals of the ARSP are not directly tied to the provision of housing, Amendment No. 7 to the ARSP created a residential overlay for two sites within the ARSP area totaling 59.3 acres. As described in Section 3.0, Project Description, this overlay permits development of residential uses in conjunction with visitor-serving uses provided the overall densities would be limited to what would produce an environmental equivalent to the maximum entitled hotel density of each parcel. This overlay was created to provide opportunity for the development of mixed-use projects containing resort- quality housing opportunities within the ARSP. Policy 3 Ensure a balance of retail, office, industrial and residential land uses to enhance the economic base of the City when considering land use changes. The Proposed Project would allow the continued development of a visitor-serving district as established by the ARSP. Allowable land uses include a balance of visitor-serving uses including hotel/motel, retail, restaurant, and Anaheim Convention Center uses. Additionally, development within the residential overlay zones has the potential to include limited residential uses, further supporting the policy to provide balanced land uses. Goal 1.4 Develop land use strategies and incentives to reduce the amount of vehicle miles traveled within the City. Continued development of the ARSP area would enhance the pedestrian experience, thereby reducing the total vehicle miles traveled, by providing a variety of land uses within walking distance and along primary pedestrian corridors established as part of the public realm. Additionally, future development within the ARSP area would include high density hotel uses within the ARSP area and adjacent to the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan area. These areas are served by the OCTA bus lines, some of which connect with the Anaheim Metrolink and Amtrak Rail Station, the Anaheim Resort Transit (ART) shuttle service, and buses from John Wayne and Los Angeles International Airports. Therefore, the Proposed Project would facilitate walking and non-passenger car travel, for both employees and visitors/patrons, to a greater extent than would be the case for similar development in outlying areas not adjacent to the Disneyland area or areas without transit availability. Goal 2.1 Reduce traffic congestion on the City’s arterial highway system. Continued development of the ARSP area would encourage non-vehicular travel by providing a variety of land uses within walking distance, along primary pedestrian corridors. Policy 5 Promote the use of public transportation and alternative modes of transportation by increasing access to public transit, including Bus Rapid Transit, through land use planning locating higher density residential projects near transportation corridors), ensuring direct and convenient pedestrian access to public transit stops, implementing bicycle routes, encouraging pedestrian-friendly developments, and supporting High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes. Continued development of the ARSP area would enhance the pedestrian experience, thereby reducing the total vehicle miles traveled, by providing a variety of land uses within walking distance and along primary pedestrian corridors established as part of the public realm. Additionally, future development within the ARSP would include high density hotel uses within the ARSP and adjacent to the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan area. These areas are served by OCTA bus lines, some of which connect with the Anaheim Metrolink and Amtrak Rail Station, the Anaheim Resort Transit (ART) shuttle service, and buses from John Wayne and Los Angeles International Airports. Therefore, the Proposed Project ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 5.9-1 (Continued) CONSISTENCY OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.9 Land Use-Planning-082712.docx 5.9-24 Land Use and Planning City of Anaheim General Plan Goal or Policy Consistency Analysis would facilitate walking and non-passenger car travel, for both employees and visitors/patrons, to a greater extent than would be the case for similar development in outlying areas not adjacent to the Disneyland area or areas without transit availability. Goal 2.2 Evaluate the traffic-related impacts of proposed developments and/or intensification of existing land uses and address said impacts. As discussed in Section 5.14, Transportation and Traffic, a traffic impact analysis would be required for each new development forecast to generate 100 or more peak hour (morning or evening) trip ends. The analysis must identify arterial and intersection improvements that may potentially be needed to allow levels of service no worse than LOS E along Interstates/State Routes/Smart Streets (unless current operation is LOS and no worse than LOS D along the balance of the arterials on the City’s Circulation Element. Projects that exceed the LOS standards must provide necessary improvements and/or funding to mitigate their impacts. Policy 1 Continue to review development projects to ensure traffic-related impacts are addressed appropriately. Policy 4 Prior to issuing building permits for new development forecast to generate 100 or more peak hour (morning or evening) trip ends, require traffic impact analyses be completed that identify arterial and intersection improvements that may potentially be needed to provide no worse than LOS E along Interstates/State Routes/Smart Streets (unless current operation is LOS and not worse than LOS D along the balance of the arterials on the City’s Circulation Element that are measurably impacted by the new development and are under the City’s jurisdiction. Policy 5 Require development projects that exceed LOS standards beyond acceptable levels to provide necessary improvements and/or funding to mitigate said impacts, if determined necessary by the City. Safety Element Goal 1.1 Minimize the risk to public health and safety and disruptions to vital services, economic vitality, and social order resulting from seismic and geologic activities. As discussed in Section 5.6, Geology and Soils, all impacts related to the development of the Proposed Project would be reduced to a less than significant level through construction pursuant to current building codes and standards. Additionally, the ARSP area is not located within an earthquake hazard zone and all related seismic impacts would be less than significant. Policy 1 Minimize the risk to life and property through the identification of potentially hazardous areas, adherence to proper construction design criteria, and provision of public information. Goal 3.1 Reduce, to the greatest extent possible, the risk to life, property, public investment, and social order created by flood hazards. As discussed in Section 2.4.2, the ARSP area is located within the 100-Year (with flooding below 1 foot) to 500- Year Flood Zone and within the general limits of the flood impact zones associated with Prado Dam failure. Implementation of the Proposed Project may potentially expose more people and habitable structures to potential flooding. However, development of structures in compliance with local, State, and federal regulations, including compliance with the Cobey-Alquist Floodplain Management Act requirements and State of California Model Ordinance as set forth in the City of Anaheim General Plan, would ensure that significant impacts would not occur. Policy 1 Evaluate all development proposals located in areas that are subject to flooding to minimize the exposure of life and property to potential flood risks. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 5.9-1 (Continued) CONSISTENCY OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.9 Land Use-Planning-082712.docx 5.9-25 Land Use and Planning City of Anaheim General Plan Goal or Policy Consistency Analysis Goal 4.1 Decrease the risk of exposure for life, property and the environment to hazardous materials and hazardous waste. As discussed in Section 5.7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, all development within areas of known hazardous materials releases or spills would be subject to reclamation prior to construction of any new structure. Additionally, all development and redevelopment would be subject to regulations regarding handling of materials containing asbestos and/or lead based paint or development in areas subject to historic pesticide and/or herbicide use, effectively reducing potential impacts to a less than significant level. Policy 2 Promote the proper handling, treatment and disposal of hazardous materials and hazardous waste. Policy 4 Implement Federal, State and local regulations for the disposal, handling, and storage of hazardous materials. Noise Element Goal 1.1 Protect sensitive land uses from excessive noise through diligent planning and regulation. As detailed in Section 5.10, Noise, implementation of the Proposed Project has the potential to impact noise sensitive land uses during both construction and daily operation. Construction activities would be performed consistent with the City’s Municipal Code requirements. As discussed, this impact, although consistent with City Code, would continue to result in a significant and unavoidable, temporary impact. With regard to operational noise, future development projects would be required to comply with several measures which would reduce noise exposure levels related to HVAC systems, loading docks, and parking structures. Policy 2 Continue to enforce acceptable noise standards consistent with health and quality of life goals and employ effective techniques of noise abatement through such means as a noise ordinance, building codes, and subdivision and zoning regulations. Policy 3 Consider the compatibility of proposed land uses with the noise environment when preparing, revising or reviewing development proposals. Goal 2.1 Encourage the reduction of noise from transportation-related noise sources such as motor vehicles, aircraft operations, and railroad movements. Based on noise modeling data, the addition of project- related traffic would not create a significant change in the existing volume of traffic noise. However, adherence to the ARSP development code related to architectural elements and landscaping would assist in reducing noise levels at uses proposed adjacent to roadways. Policy 3 Require that development generating increased traffic and subsequent increases in the ambient noise level adjacent to noise-sensitive land uses provide appropriate mitigation measures. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 5.9-1 (Continued) CONSISTENCY OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.9 Land Use-Planning-082712.docx 5.9-26 Land Use and Planning City of Anaheim General Plan Goal or Policy Consistency Analysis Goal 3.1 Protect residents from the effects of “spill over” or nuisance noise emanating from the City’s activity centers. As discussed above with regard to operational noise, future development projects would be required to comply with several measures which would reduce noise exposure levels related to HVAC systems, loading docks, and parking structures. Further, construction activities would be performed consistent with the City’s Municipal Code requirements. Additionally, identified mitigation would include placement of an 8-foot-high perimeter or portable construction barrier along boundaries of construction areas which have noise- sensitive land use adjacent to them to minimize noise impacts as well as use of properly maintained mufflers on all construction equipment. As discussed, this impact, although consistent with City Code and reduced through implementation of mitigation, would continue to result in a significant and unavoidable, temporary impact. Policy 1 Discourage new projects located in commercial or entertainment areas from exceeding stationary-source noise standards at the property line of proximate residential or commercial uses, as appropriate. Policy 3 Enforce standards to regulate noise from construction activities. Particular emphasis shall be placed on the restriction of the hours in which work other than emergency work may occur. Discourage construction on weekends or holidays except in the case of construction proximate to schools where these operations could disturb the classroom environment. Policy 4 Require that construction equipment operate with mufflers and intake silencers no less effective than originally equipped. Policy 5 Encourage the use of portable noise barriers for heavy equipment operations performed within 100 feet of existing residences or make applicant provide evidence as to why the use of such barriers is infeasible. Community Design Element Goal 1.1 Create an aesthetically pleasing and unified community appearance within the context of distinct districts and neighborhoods. As previously discussed, all future development within the ARSP would be required to comply with the design guidelines set forth as the Design Plan of the ARSP. Specifically, the Design Plan promotes an aesthetically pleasing sense of visual continuity in the public and setback realms through use of landscaping, street furniture, signage, lighting, color palette, and other pageantry elements. In particular, the Central Core of the ARSP, defined by major corridors Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue, would be subject to specific development standards intended to enhance the pedestrian experience and encourage people to stop and get out of their vehicles. Special development standards for the Central Core include no parking between the public right-of-way and the building face, special landscape provisions, special landscaped intersections, and a requirement for buildings to occupy a minimum of 60 percent of the frontage adjacent to the right-of-way to create a well- defined “edge” for the street. Policy 4 Pursue unifying streetscape elements for major corridors, including coordinated streetlights, landscaping, public signage and street furniture, to reinforce Anaheim’s community image. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 5.9-1 (Continued) CONSISTENCY OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.9 Land Use-Planning-082712.docx 5.9-27 Land Use and Planning City of Anaheim General Plan Goal or Policy Consistency Analysis Policy 5 Identify and preserve/enhance view corridors for major landmarks, community facilities, and natural open space in the planning and design of all public and private projects. As discussed in Section 5.1, Aesthetics, the Project Site does not contain any designated scenic resources. However, continued implementation of the ARSP pursuant to the Development Plan would visually emphasize the Central Core of the ARSP area through use of landscaping and pageantry elements such as the trellised architectural features located in the ARSP gateway areas. Policy 7 Screen public and private facilities and above-ground infrastructure support and equipment, such as electrical substations, and water wells and recharge facilities, with appropriately scaled landscaping or other methods of screening. Pursuant to screening requirements set forth in Chapter 18.46 of the Anaheim Municipal Code, public facilities structures and infrastructure would be subject to screening requirements such as decorative walls, fences, and/or landscaping to conceal them from view. Further, Section 5.7.8.3 of the ARSP provides requirements for concealing building equipment including utility equipment, pipes, vents, and air conditioners. In compliance with the ARSP, as new construction progresses, all aboveground power lines would be undergrounded. Policy 8 Construct public and private facilities and support structures water pipes, irrigation and electrical controls, vents) to blend with the surrounding environment. Policy 9 Minimize visual impacts of public and private facilities and support structures through sensitive site design and construction. This includes, but is not limited to: appropriate placement of facilities; undergrounding, where possible; and aesthetic design cell tower stealthing). Goal 2.1 Attractively landscape and maintain Anaheim’s major arterial corridors and prepare/ implement distinctive streetscape improvement plans. The Central Core of the ARSP, defined by major corridors Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue, would be subject to specific development standards intended to enhance the pedestrian experience and encourage people to stop and get out of their vehicles. Special development standards for the Central Core include no parking between the public right-of-way and the building face, special landscape provisions, special landscaped intersections, and a requirement for buildings to occupy a minimum of 60 percent of the frontage adjacent to the right-of-way to create a well-defined “edge” for the street. The ARSP also defines additional setback and landscaping requirements for other streets within the ARSP, such as Convention Center Way, Orangewood Avenue, Clementine Street, Manchester Avenue, Haster Street, West Street/Disneyland Drive, Walnut Street, and Ball Road. Housing Element Guiding Principle D Sustainable design and the efficient utilization of resources create more livable neighborhoods and can have both environmental and financial benefits. Implementation of the Proposed Project would result in the development of a mix of hotels/motels, convention, retail, and other uses, all of which would serve to improve the attractiveness and vitality of The Anaheim Resort. Although the Proposed Project does not propose construction of residential neighborhoods, portions of the ARSP are located proximate to existing neighborhoods. Allowable development densities in these areas have been established in an effort to reduce impacts to the surrounding neighborhoods. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.9 Land Use-Planning-082712.docx 5.9-28 Land Use and Planning Anaheim Resort Specific Plan As previously discussed, the ARSP was originally processed and approved by the City of Anaheim in 1994. The Proposed Project would amend the ARSP to allow an increase in maximum allowable square footage in the PR District as well as update the ARSP to reflect current development, regulations, and technology. The increase in development intensity would occur within the current PR District area and would comply with all development guidelines as set forth in the ARSP, including the maximum height restrictions and setback requirements. The ARSP maintains the same maximum gross building area for the C-R District. The potential environmental impacts associated with implementation of the amended ARSP are addressed throughout this EIR. Impact Summary: The Proposed Project would be consistent with the respective goals and policies of local and regional regulatory and planning documents. No significant land use impacts would occur, and no mitigation is necessary. This conclusion is consistent with that provided in Final EIR 313 for the original ARSP. 5.9.7 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS Within the City of Anaheim, recent development actions have continued the ongoing trend of redevelopment of underdeveloped lands. However, previously approved and future development within the City is required to comply with the adopted land use standards, policies, and ordinances set forth in both the General Plan and the Municipal Code. Build out of the ARSP area would be consistent with the City’s General Plan goals and policies, the City’s Zoning Ordinance, and regional planning programs. Furthermore, any proposed future land uses would be required to be compatible with existing, surrounding uses. As is indicated above, the Proposed Project is in compliance with the General Plan and is considered to be compatible with the surrounding land uses in the vicinity of the Project Site. Therefore, this Proposed Project would not cause any significant adverse cumulative growth impacts related to land use. 5.9.8 MITIGATION MEASURES Previously Approved Measures No previously approved measures have been identified for impacts related to land use. Additional Mitigation Measures No additional mitigation measures have been identified for land use. 5.9.9 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION The Proposed Project would not result in any significant land use impacts. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.9 Land Use-Planning-082712.docx 5.9-29 Land Use and Planning 5.9.10 REFERENCES Anaheim, City of. 2010a (May Anaheim Municipal Code (Chapter 18.26.070, Conversion and Reclassification from the Mobile Home Park Overlay Zone). Cincinnati, OH: American Legal Publishing Corporation for the City. http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/ California/anaheim/anaheimmunicipalcode?f=templates$fn=default.htm$3.0$vid=amlega l:anaheim_ca 2010b (May Anaheim Municipal Code (Chapter 18.116, Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2 [SP 92-2] Zoning and Development Standards). Cincinnati, OH: American Legal Publishing Corporation for the City. http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/ California/anaheim/anaheimmunicipalcode?f=templates$fn=default.htm$3.0$vid=amlega l:anaheim_ca 2004a (May). General Plan for the City of Anaheim (City Council Resolution No. 2004-94). Anaheim, CA: the City. 2004b (May). Final Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update EIR No. 330 (Prepared by The Planning Center). Anaheim, CA: the City. 1994 (August). The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Draft EIR No. 313 with Addendum. Anaheim, City of: Anaheim, CA. California Senate. 2008 (September 30). Senate Bill No. 375: Transportation Planning: travel demand models: sustainable communities strategy: environmental review (Steinberg). Sacramento, CA: the State. http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/07-08/bill/sen/sb_0351- 0400/sb_375_bill_20080930_chaptered.pdf. Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). 2012 (April). 2012–2035 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy. Los Angeles, CA: SCAG. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.9 Land Use-Planning-082712.docx 5.9-30 Land Use and Planning This page intentionally left blank ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.10 Noise-080912.docx 5.10-1 Noise 5.10 NOISE This section analyzes potential noise and vibration impacts associated with the implementation of the Proposed Project. This section provides background information on noise and community noise assessment criteria; presents existing noise levels in the ARSP area; and examines noise and vibration impacts that could potentially occur during construction and operation with the implementation of the Proposed Project. 5.10.1 NOISE AND VIBRATION DEFINITIONS Noise “Sound” is a vibratory disturbance created by a moving or vibrating source and is capable of being detected. “Noise” is defined as sound that is loud, unpleasant, unexpected, or undesired. The effects of noise on people can include general annoyance, interference with speech communication, sleep disturbance and, in the extreme, hearing impairment (Caltrans 1998). Decibels and Frequency In its most basic form, a continuous sound can be described by its frequency or wavelength (pitch) and its amplitude (loudness). Frequency is expressed in cycles per second, or hertz (Hz). Frequencies are heard as the pitch or tone of sound. High-pitched sounds produce high frequencies; low-pitched sounds produce low frequencies. Sound pressure levels are described in units called the decibel (dB). Decibels are measured on a logarithmic scale that quantifies sound intensity in a manner similar to the Richter scale used for earthquake magnitudes. Thus, a doubling of the energy of a noise source, such as doubling of traffic volume, would increase the noise level by 3 dB. Perception of Noise A typical noise environment consists of a base of steady “background” noise that is the sum of many distant and indistinguishable noise sources. Superimposed on this background noise is the sound from individual local sources. The local sources can vary from an occasional aircraft or train passing by, intermittent periods of sound (such as amplified music), or virtually continuous noise such as traffic on a major highway. The human ear is not equally sensitive to all frequencies within the sound spectrum. To accommodate this phenomenon, the A-scale, which approximates the frequency response of the average healthy ear when listening to most ordinary everyday sounds, was devised. When people make relative judgments of the loudness or annoyance of a sound, their judgments correlate well with the A-scale sound levels of those sounds. Therefore, the “A-weighted” noise scale is used for measurements and standards involving the human perception of noise. Noise levels using A-weighted measurements are abbreviated dB(A) or dBA. Human perception of noise has no simple correlation with acoustical energy. Due to subjective thresholds of tolerance, the annoyance of a given noise source is perceived very differently from person to person. The most common sounds vary between 40 dBA (very quiet) to 100 dBA (very loud). Normal conversation at 3 feet is approximately 60 dBA, while loud jet engine noises equate to 110 dBA, which can cause serious discomfort. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.10 Noise-080912.docx 5.10-2 Noise Two noise sources do not “sound twice as loud” as one source. As stated above, a doubling of noise sources results in a noise level increase of 3 dBA. It is widely accepted that the average healthy ear can barely perceive changes of a 3 dBA increase or decrease; a change of 5 dBA is readily perceptible; and an increase (decrease) of 10 dBA sounds twice (half) as loud (Caltrans 1998). In community situations, noise exposure and changes in noise levels occur over a number of years, unlike the immediate comparison made in a field study situation. The generally accepted level at which changes in community noise levels become “barely perceptible” typically occurs at values of greater than 3 dBA. Noise Descriptors Several rating scales (or noise “metrics”) exist to analyze effects of noise on a community. These scales include the equivalent noise level (Leq), the community noise equivalent level (CNEL), and the day-night average sound level (DNL or Ldn). Average noise levels over a period of minutes or hours are usually expressed as dBA Leq, which is the equivalent noise level for that period of time. The period of time averaging may be specified; Leq(3) would be a 3-hour average. When no period is specified, a one-hour average is assumed. Noise of short duration substantially less than the averaging period) is averaged into ambient noise during the period of interest. Thus, a loud noise lasting several seconds or a few minutes may have minimal effect on the measured sound level averaged over a one-hour period. To evaluate community noise impacts, Ldn was developed to account for human sensitivity to nighttime noise. Ldn represents the 24-hour average sound level with a penalty for noise occurring at night. The Ldn computation divides the 24-hour day into 2 periods: daytime (7:00 AM to 10:00 PM) and nighttime (10:00 PM to 7:00 AM). The nighttime sound levels are assigned a 10 dBA penalty prior to averaging with daytime hourly sound levels due to the receptors’ increased sensitivity to noise. CNEL is similar to Ldn except that it separates a 24-hour day into 3 periods: daytime (7:00 AM to 7:00 PM), evening (7:00 PM to 10:00 PM), and nighttime (10:00 PM to 7:00 AM). The evening sound levels are assigned a 5 dBA penalty, and the nighttime sound levels are assigned a 10 dBA penalty prior to averaging with daytime hourly sound levels. Several statistical descriptors are also often used to describe noise, including Lmax, Lmin, and Lx. Lmax and Lmin are, respectively, the highest and lowest A-weighted sound levels that occur during a noise event. The Lx signifies the noise level that is exceeded x percent of the time; for example, L10 denotes the level that was exceeded 10 percent of the time. Vibration Vibration is the periodic movement of mass over time. It is described in terms of frequency and amplitude. The frequency of a vibrating object describes how rapidly it is oscillating. The number of cycles per second of oscillation is the vibration frequency, which is described in terms of hertz (Hz). Perception of Vibration While people have varying sensitivities to vibrations at different frequencies, in general they are most sensitive to low-frequency vibration. Vibration in buildings caused by construction activities may be perceived as motion of building surfaces or rattling of windows, items on shelves, and pictures hanging on walls. Vibration of building components can also take the form of an audible low-frequency rumbling noise, which is referred to as groundborne noise. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.10 Noise-080912.docx 5.10-3 Noise The source of groundborne noise is typically from trains and similar transit vehicles and not from construction activities. The normal frequency range of most groundborne vibration that can be felt generally starts from a low frequency of less than 1 Hz to a high of about 200 Hz. Groundborne vibration is rarely considered annoying to people who are outdoors (FTA 2006). Vibration Metrics Unlike sound, there is no standard way of measuring and reporting amplitude. Vibration levels are usually expressed as a single-number measure of vibration magnitude, in terms of velocity or acceleration, which describes the severity of the vibration without the frequency variable. The peak particle velocity (ppv) is defined as the maximum instantaneous positive or negative peak of the vibration signal, usually measured in inches per second (in/sec). Since it is related to the stresses that are experienced by buildings, ppv is often used to monitor blasting vibration. Vibration is also described in decibel units, written as VdB, to distinguish from noise level decibels. 5.10.2 SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION MEIR 313 included an assessment of short-term construction and long-term noise effects throughout the ARSP area. The previous analysis concluded that even though construction noise is exempt from compliance with the City’s noise ordinance between 7:00 AM and 7 PM, construction equipment would generate high noise levels when equipment operates near the edge of a property, causing annoyance to noise-sensitive land uses in the surrounding area. It was determined that construction noise would be a short-tem significant and unavoidable impact, even with the mitigation measures that were adopted to reduce short-term impacts. The analysis for long-term impacts concluded that the implementation of the ARSP would result in a less than significant increase in noise levels with implementation of mitigation measures. 5.10.3 PLANS, POLICIES, AND REGULATORY CONDITIONS Related Planning Programs City of Anaheim General Plan, Noise Element The City of Anaheim General Plan Noise Element is the guiding document for the City’s noise policy and contains policies designed to protect residents and businesses from excessive and persistent noise intrusions (Anaheim 2004). The Noise Element includes noise compatibility guidelines presented in Exhibit 5.10-1, which are derived from the State General Plan Guidelines. The noise compatibility guidelines are designed to ensure that proposed land uses are compatible with the predicted future noise environment. At different exterior noise levels, individual land uses are identified as “clearly acceptable”, “normally acceptable”, “normally unacceptable”, or “clearly unacceptable”. Applicable goals and policies from the Noise Element that are applicable to the Proposed Project are provided in Table 5.9-2 in Section 5.9, Land Use and Planning, with a project consistency analysis. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.10 Noise-080912.docx 5.10-4 Noise Regulatory Setting Noise State Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR, known as the California Building Standards Code) requires that residential structures other than detached single-family dwellings be designed to prevent the intrusion of exterior noise so that the interior CNEL with windows closed, attributable to exterior sources, shall not exceed 45 dBA in any habitable room. City of Anaheim Municipal Code Noise Ordinances are designed to control unnecessary, excessive, and annoying sounds from sources on one property to receivers on another; this is achieved by setting limits that cannot be exceeded at adjacent properties. Noise Ordinance requirements are not applicable to most mobile noise sources heavy trucks traveling on public roadways). Control of mobile noise sources on public roads is preempted by federal and State laws. However, Noise Ordinances do apply to vehicles while they are on private property. Chapter 6.70 of the City of Anaheim Municipal Code (“Sound Pressure Levels”) specifies that noise levels cannot exceed 60 dBA at any point on the property line “for extended periods”. Construction Noise Per Section 6.70.010, noise sources associated with construction or building repair are exempt from the City Sound Pressure Level standards between the hours of 7:00 AM to 7:00 PM. Additional work hours may be permitted if deemed necessary by the Director of Public Works or Building Official. Residential Zoning Noise Regulations Section 18.040.090 of the City’s Municipal Code provides noise regulations for residential developments. For single-family detached homes, the exterior noise level within a private yard and/or within any common recreational areas shall be attenuated to a maximum of 65 dBA CNEL. Interior noise levels shall be attenuated to a maximum of 45 dBA CNEL. Commercial and Mixed Use Zoning Noise Regulations Section 18.32.130, Compatibility Standards, of the Municipal Code includes noise standards to ensure the compatibility of uses in a mixed use project. Residential portions of the Proposed Project shall be designed to limit the interior noise caused by the commercial and parking portions of the Proposed Project to a maximum of 45 dBA CNEL in any habitable room with windows closed. Commercial uses shall be designed and operated, and hours of operation limited so neighboring residents are not exposed to offensive noise, especially from traffic, trash collection, routine deliveries, and/or late night activities. No use shall produce continual loading or unloading of heavy trucks at the site between the hours of 8:00 PM and 6:00 AM. ---PAGE BREAK--- Noise Compatibility Guidelines Exhibit 5.10-1 Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (07/27/10 KFD) R: Projects\Anaheim\J050\Graphics\Noise\EX5.10-1_NoiseCG.pdf D:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\Graphics\Ex_NoiseCG.ai Source: California Office of Noise Control 2004 Recreation, Cemeteries ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.10 Noise-080912.docx 5.10-5 Noise Vibration Local Section 18.32.130, Compatibility Standards, of the Anaheim Municipal Code states that “No use, activity or process shall produce continual vibrations or noxious odors that are perceptible, without instruments, by the average person at the property lines of the site, or within the interior of residential units on the site.” For this analysis, potential structural damage and human annoyance associated with vibration from construction activities are based on the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) vibration limits identified in Tables 5.10-1 and 5.10-2, respectively. TABLE 5.10-1 STRUCTURAL VIBRATION DAMAGE THRESHOLDS Structure and Condition Maximum ppv (in/sec) Transient Sources* Continuous/Frequent Intermittent Sources Extremely fragile historic buildings, ruins, ancient monuments 0.12 0.08 Fragile buildings 0.20 0.10 Historic and some old buildings 0.50 0.25 Older residential structures 0.50 0.30 New residential structures 1.00 0.50 Modern industrial/commercial buildings 2.00 0.50 ppv: peak particle velocity; in/sec: inches per second. * Transient sources create a single isolated vibration event, such as blasting or drop balls. Continuous/frequent intermittent sources include impact pile drivers, pogo-stick compactors, crack-and-seat equipment, vibratory pile drivers, and vibratory compaction equipment. Source: Caltrans 2004. TABLE 5.10-2 HUMAN RESPONSE TO TRANSIENT VIBRATION Average Human Response ppv (in/sec) Severe 2.000 Strongly perceptible 0.900 perceptible 0.240 Barely perceptible 0.035 ppv: peak particle velocity; in/sec: inches per second Source: Caltrans 2004. 5.10.4 METHODOLOGY Noise Measurements Noise level measurements were taken for a minimum duration of 15 minutes each, using a Larson Davis Laboratories Model 831 integrating sound level meter (LD 831). The LD 831 sound level meter and microphone was mounted on a tripod, four feet above the ground and equipped with a during all measurements. The LD 831 was calibrated before and after use with a Larson Davis Model CAL200 acoustical calibrator to ensure that the ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.10 Noise-080912.docx 5.10-6 Noise measurements were accurate. The sound level meters were programmed in “slow” mode to record noise levels in weighted form. Project Land Use Compatibility Land use compatibility is determined by the future noise level anticipated on a site and the type of existing or proposed land use on that site. In an urban environment (such as the ARSP area), transportation-related noise is the primary concern; therefore, the analysis for land use compatibility addresses traffic noise impacts on proposed uses. Traffic noise contour boundaries are often utilized by local land use planning and zoning authorities to evaluate sound level exposures on land that is being considered for development and is adjacent to highways; these traffic noise contour boundaries are utilized in this analysis to assess the traffic noise level impacts to the Proposed Project. The noise contours do not take into account the effect of any existing noise barriers that may affect ambient noise levels, and do not take into account the noise contribution from traffic on other roadways, aircraft noise, or noise associated with transit facilities. However, based upon field observation and a review of the ARSP area, the noise from aircraft and transit would be minimal compared to the noise from arterial roadways. Traffic Noise Modeling The traffic noise levels associated with the Proposed Project were estimated using the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model (RD-77-108). The FHWA model determines a predicted noise level through a series of adjustments to a reference sound level. These adjustments account for traffic flows, speed, truck mix, varying distances from the roadway, length of exposed roadway, and noise shielding. Vehicle speeds on each roadway were assumed to be the posted speed limit, and no reduction in speed was assigned due to congested traffic flows. Current roadway characteristics, such as the number of lanes and speed limits, were determined from field observations and according to roadway classification. 5.10.5 EXISTING CONDITIONS The ARSP area encompasses approximately 581 acres in an urbanized area in the City of Anaheim. The area consists mostly of hotels and commercial uses and the Anaheim Convention Center. The primary source of noise within the ARSP area is vehicular traffic on the Interstate 5 (I-5) freeway, Harbor Boulevard, Katella Avenue, Orangewood Avenue, Ball Road, Chapman Avenue, Anaheim Boulevard, West Street, and other local streets within the ARSP area. Additional noise sources include heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) units; truck loading docks; and activities such as public announcement systems and fireworks at the Disneyland Resort. Sensitive Receptors Noise-sensitive receptors are generally considered to be those people engaged in activities or utilizing land uses that may be subject to the stress of significant interference from noise. Activities usually associated with sensitive receptors include, but are not limited to, talking, reading, and sleeping. According to the City of Anaheim Noise Element, vibration-sensitive uses include but are not limited to concert halls, hospitals, libraries, vibration-sensitive research or manufacturing operations, residential areas, schools, and offices. The City of Anaheim also identifies that noise-sensitive land uses include, but are not limited to, residential areas, public or private schools, libraries, and churches. Existing noise- and vibration-sensitive receptors within or near the ARSP area include several single-family homes and multi-family condominiums and apartments, mobile homes, recreational vehicle parks, hotels, and a school. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.10 Noise-080912.docx 5.10-7 Noise In addition to existing sensitive receptors, all future hotel patrons and residents within the ARSP area would be sensitive receptors to noise generated on and off the site. Existing Noise Conditions An ambient noise survey was conducted by BonTerra Consulting on December 15, 2009 to document the existing noise environment at various locations in the ARSP area. Noise survey locations included areas within the ARSP area boundaries that are adjacent to the I-5 Freeway, major roadways, and the existing residential areas adjacent to the Anaheim Convention Center and vacant land that could be developed as part of the Proposed Project. Noise-level measurements were taken using an LD 831 sound level meter, as described in Section 5.10.4. Meteorological conditions during the measurement periods were favorable with clear skies, with daytime temperatures of approximately 70 degrees Fahrenheit and light winds. Six short-term noise level measurements were collected. Ambient noise survey locations are shown in Exhibit 5.10-2, Noise Measurement Locations. The Leq, Lmax, and Lmin values taken at each ambient noise measurement location are presented in Table 5.10-3. The short-term noise monitoring results are included in Appendix G. As shown in Table 5.10-3, during the survey, the average existing noise levels (Leq) in the vicinity of the Project Site ranged from 47.7 to 75.4 dBA Leq. The John Wayne Airport is located approximately 8 miles to the southeast. While aircraft overflights are heard sporadically, the dominant source of noise in the study area is traffic noise. The highest levels were recorded near the I-5 Freeway and along major roads such as Harbor Boulevard and West Street. The maximum noise levels occurred when trucks and buses passed by. Measured noise levels are typical for an urban environment or busy intersection. TABLE 5.10-3 SHORT-TERM NOISE LEVEL MEASUREMENT RESULTS Location Description Time Started Major noise sources Noise Level (dBA) Leq Lmax Lmin 1 At single-family homes’ frontyards, approximately 10 ft from the curb of West St across the street from the Anaheim Convention Center. 10:00 AM Traffic on West St 64.5 75.4 46.5 2 Adjacent to an 8-ft-high wall adjacent to a residential area south of the Anaheim Convention Center. 10:20 AM Traffic on West St 51.7 64.7 42.3 3 Near the Harbor Campus School classrooms approximately 30 ft from the curb of Harbor Blvd. 11:00 AM Traffic on Harbor Boulevard 64.7 74.3 48.6 4 Adjacent to a hotel building approximately 50 ft from the I-5 right- of-way. 11:30 AM Traffic on the I-5 75.4 83.2 69.2 5 At the boundary of a vacant portion of the ARSP area and a multi-family residential development at approximately 600 ft from Anaheim Blvd. 11:50 AM Traffic on Harbor Blvd 47.7 69.6 38.5 6 A vacant portion of the site and adjacent to a hotel approximately 80 ft from the centerline of Harbor Blvd. 12:15 PM Traffic on Harbor Blvd 63.8 78.0 47.1 ft: foot/feet ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.10 Noise-080912.docx 5.10-8 Noise 5.10.6 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE The following significance criteria are derived from the City of Anaheim Environmental Checklist. The Proposed Project would result in a significant impact related to noise if it would: Threshold 5.10.1 Expose people to or generate noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. Threshold 5.10.2 Result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. Threshold 5.10.3 Result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. Threshold 5.10.4 Expose people to or generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. As previously discussed in Section 2.4.2, Effects Found Not to be Significant, during preparation of the Initial Study, the City of Anaheim determined that the Proposed Project would not have a significant adverse impact for the following thresholds and no further analysis of these issues is presented in this section: Would the Project: • For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? • For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? 5.10.7 PROJECT IMPACT ANALYSIS Standard Requirements The following standard requirements were derived from existing regulations, requirements, and standard practices set forth by regional and local agencies. SR 5.10-1 Prior to issuance of grading and/or building permits, contractor specifications shall include a note indicating that noise-generating construction activities which produce a sound pressure level at any point along the property line in excess of 60 dBA shall be limited to between the hours of 7:00 AM to 7:00 PM on any day, except on Sundays or a City-recognized holiday when no noise-generating construction activities shall be permitted. This requirement is identified in Section 6.70.010 of the City of Anaheim’s Noise Ordinance. Additional work hours may be permitted if deemed necessary by and on approval of the Director of Public Works or Building Official. SR 5.10-2 Development shall comply with Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, also known as the California Building Standards Code, which establishes building standards applicable to all occupancies throughout the state. Title 24 requires that new hotels, motels, and multi-family residences be designed to prevent the ---PAGE BREAK--- Noise Measurement Locations Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Exhibit 5.10-2 (Rev 072710 KFD) R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\Graphics\Noise\Ex5.10-2_Noise_Meas_Loc.pdf Disneyland Resort Anaheim Convention Center Walnut St Vermont Ave Disney Way West St Orangewood Ave c d St Chapman Ave 5 Ball Rd Harbor Blvd Katella Ave Chapman Ave Anaheim Blvd East St West St Manchester Ave 6 5 4 3 2 1 D:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\Ex_Noise_Meas_Loc.mxd 2,000 0 2,000 1,000 Feet ² Noise Measurement Locations Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (SP92-2) Mobile Home Park Overlay Residential Overlay Development Areas Commercial Recreation District Public Recreation District 6 ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.10 Noise-080912.docx 5.10-9 Noise intrusion of exterior noise so that the interior noise, attributable to exterior sources, shall not exceed the 45 dBA Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) in any habitable room with windows closed. SR 5.10-3 No commercial use shall produce noise associated with continual loading or unloading of heavy trucks at the site between the hours of 8:00 PM and 6:00 AM (Municipal Code Section 18.32.130). Impact Analysis Threshold 5.10.1 Would the Project expose people to or generate (short-term) noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? Threshold 5.10.3 Would the Project result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Construction equipment can operate in two modes: stationary and mobile. Stationary equipment operates in a single location for one or more days at a time, with either a fixed-power operation (such as pumps, generators and compressors) or a variable noise operation (such as pile drivers, rock drills, and pavement breakers). Mobile equipment (such as bulldozers, graders, and loaders) move around the construction site with power applied in cyclic fashion. Noise impacts from stationary equipment are assessed from the location of the specific equipment, while noise impacts from mobile construction equipment are assessed from the center of the equipment activity or construction site. Variation in power imposes additional complexity in characterizing the noise source levels from construction equipment. Power variation is accounted for by describing the noise at a reference distance from equipment operating at full power and adjusting it based on the duty cycle of the activity to determine the Leq of the operation. Each phase of construction has a specific equipment mix, depending on the work to be accomplished during that phase. Each phase also has its own noise characteristics; some would have higher continuous noise levels than others, and some have high-impact noise levels. The Leq of each phase is determined by combining the Leq contributions from each piece of equipment used in that phase. Short-term maximum noise levels generated by heavy construction equipment can range from approximately 68 dBA to noise levels in excess of 100 dBA when measured at 50 feet. Typical duty cycles and associated noise levels generated by representative pieces of equipment are listed in Table 5.10-4. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.10 Noise-080912.docx 5.10-10 Noise TABLE 5.10-4 TYPICAL MAXIMUM CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT NOISE LEVELS Equipment Noise Level (dBA) at 50 ft Typical Duty Cycle Auger Drill Rig 85 20 Backhoe 80 40 Blasting 94 1 Chain Saw 85 20 Clam Shovel 93 20 Compactor (ground) 80 20 Compressor (air) 80 40 Concrete Mixer Truck 85 40 Concrete Pump 82 20 Concrete Saw 90 20 Crane (mobile or stationary) 85 20 Dozer 85 40 Dump Truck 84 40 Excavator 85 40 Front End Loader 80 40 Generator (25 KVA or less) 70 50 Generator (more than 25 KVA) 82 50 Grader 85 40 Hydra Break Ram 90 10 In situ Soil Sampling Rig 84 20 Jackhammer 85 20 Mounted Impact Hammer (hoe ram) 90 20 Paver 85 50 Pile Driver, Impact (diesel or pneumatic) 95 20 Pile Driver, Vibratory 95 20 Pneumatic Tools 85 50 Pumps 77 50 Rock Drill 85 20 Scraper 85 40 Tractor 84 40 Vacuum Excavator (vac-truck) 85 40 Vibratory Concrete Mixer 80 20 dBA: A-weighted decibel; ft = feet; KVA = kilovolt amps. Source: Thalheimer 2000. The Proposed Project would allow an increase in development intensity at the Public Recreational (PR) and Commercial-Recreation (C-R) Districts, but specific locations, site plans, and construction details have not been developed. Construction would be localized and would occur intermittently for varying periods of time. Because of the effects of noise attenuation, the distance from the noise source to a receptor is a primary consideration in determining the actual noise level experienced at the receptor. In addition, different construction stages involve different pieces of equipment and may involve only localized portions of a site so each stage of construction can result in different noise levels being generated, depending on the relative distance to sensitive receptors. Therefore, for the Proposed Project, it is not possible to quantify the construction noise impacts at specific noise-sensitive receptors. In construction projects, ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.10 Noise-080912.docx 5.10-11 Noise grading activities typically generate the highest noise levels as grading involves the largest equipment. Except for pile driving and blasting, maximum noise levels measured at a distance of 50 feet from an individual piece of typical construction equipment can reach 90 dBA Lmax. For the purposes of this analysis, considering a grader, a dozer, a backhoe, and a water truck operating simultaneously at the center of a construction site, an overall noise level of 86.2 dBA Leq at 50 feet is used as the maximum construction equipment noise level. These noise levels would diminish with distance from the construction site at a rate of approximately 6 dBA for each doubling of distance. A noise level of 86.2 dBA measured at 50 feet from the noise source to the receptor would be reduced to 80.2 dBA at 100 feet from the source to the receptor, and would be further reduced to 74.2 dBA at 200 feet from the source to the receptor. According to the City’s Noise ordinance, noise sources associated with construction or building repair are exempt from the City Noise Ordinance standards between the hours of 7:00 AM to 7:00 PM (SR 5.10-1). While the City exempts construction noise from the 60 dBA standard at the property line when construction occurs during these hours, construction noise would have the potential to generate noise levels well above the existing ambient noise levels presented in Table 5.10-3, and would result in a nuisance to noise-sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the construction sites. This would be a significant, short-term noise impact that would cease after completion of each future development project. Noise increases would vary depending on construction equipment noise relative to ambient noise conditions, distance, and shielding to noise-sensitive receptors. Anaheim Noise Element Goal 3.1, Policy 5 encourages the use of portable noise barriers for heavy equipment operations performed within 100 feet of existing residences unless the applicant provides evidence as to why the use of such barriers is infeasible. Implementation of the proposed mitigation measures would reduce the severity of this potential impact; however, noise impacts associated with the construction of a future development project would have the potential to create temporary significant and unavoidable impacts at nearby noise-sensitive receptors that would cease after construction. Impact Summary: Construction activities associated with future development within the ARSP area have the potential to significantly impact noise-sensitive receptors. Adherence to the standard requirements and implementation of the proposed mitigation measures would reduce potential impacts; however, these impacts may remain significant and unavoidable. This conclusion for temporary construction noise impacts is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313. Threshold 5.10.1 Would the Project expose people to or generate (long-term) noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? Threshold 5.10.2 Would the Project result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Project Land Use Compatibility Land use compatibility is determined by the future noise level anticipated on a site and the type of existing or proposed land use on that site. Noise-sensitive uses allowed by the ARSP are limited to hotels; proposed commercial uses and the expansion of the convention center, except for the hotel rooms, are not noise-sensitive. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.10 Noise-080912.docx 5.10-12 Noise As described in Section 5.10.4, traffic noise contours are utilized in this analysis to assess the traffic noise level impacts on the Project Site. Near-term noise levels would be lower than the future “build out” or cumulative noise levels when there would be more traffic. Thus, land use compatibility based on noise impacts has been determined using the 2030 General Plan With Project (build out) scenario daily traffic volumes, as determined in the Traffic Analysis prepared by Parsons Brinckerhoff (PB 2011) for the Proposed Project and summarized in Section 5.14, Transportation and Traffic of this EIR. Table 5.10-5 presents the anticipated 60, 65, and 70 dBA CNEL contours represented as a distance from the centerline of the roadway segments evaluated in the ARSP area. Appendix G presents the noise contour level assumptions and results for all segments. The Noise Compatibility Guidelines presented in Exhibit 5.10-1 shows that, for transient lodging-motels and hotels, an ambient noise level of up to 65 dBA CNEL is normally acceptable, an ambient noise level from 60 to 70 is conditionally acceptable, and an ambient noise level from 70 to 80 is normally unacceptable. Under normally acceptable conditions, the noise level exposure for the specified land use is satisfactory and no special noise insulation would be required. Under “conditionally acceptable” conditions, new construction or development should be undertaken only after detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements are made and needed noise insulation features in the design are determined. Under “normally unacceptable” conditions, new construction or development should generally be discouraged. If new construction or development does proceed, a detailed analysis of noise reduction requirements must be made and needed insulation features must be included in the design. The nearest roadways of concern for proposed uses within the ARSP area would be the I-5 Freeway, Harbor Boulevard, Katella Avenue, Ball Road, Convention Way, Disneyland Drive, and Anaheim Boulevard. These segments have the highest traffic volumes for the roadway segments within the ARSP area, which are the primary roadway segments contributing to existing and future on-site noise levels. The highest ambient noise levels measured were observed along some of these roadways. Outdoor activity areas such as pools, playgrounds and dining patios should not be exposed to noise levels greater than the “clearly acceptable” 65 dBA CNEL noise level. If outdoor use areas are proposed within the 65 dBA CNEL distances shown in Table 5.10-5, there would be a potentially significant impact. Additionally, MM 5.10-9 requires that noise levels be less than 65 dBA CNEL for outdoor use areas (including dining patios, pools, playgrounds, or outdoor gathering areas), as demonstrated through a detailed acoustical analysis. This requirement can be accomplished through project design features to be incorporated into future development projects such as shielding by existing or proposed buildings or the construction of a noise barrier. TABLE 5.10-5 TRAFFIC NOISE LEVEL CONTOUR DISTANCES FOR LONG-TERM CONDITIONS Roadway Segment Daily Traffic Volumes Noise Level at 50 Ft. (dBA CNEL) Distance To Noise Contour (ft.) 70 dBA CNEL 65 dBA CNEL 60 dBA CNEL Anaheim Boulevard Katella Avenue to I-5 Freeway 31,080 75.0 109 234 504 Anaheim Boulevard I-5 Freeway to Cerritos Avenue 55,320 77.6 159 343 740 Anaheim Boulevard Cerritos Avenue to Ball Road 46,190 75.2 112 241 519 Ball Road Euclid Street to Walnut Street 34,040 75.4 115 248 535 Ball Road Walnut Street to Disneyland Drive 42,390 76.4 133 288 620 Ball Road Disneyland Drive to Harbor Boulevard 58,690 77.8 166 357 770 ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 5.10-5 (Continued) TRAFFIC NOISE LEVEL CONTOUR DISTANCES FOR LONG-TERM CONDITIONS R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.10 Noise-080912.docx 5.10-13 Noise Roadway Segment Daily Traffic Volumes Noise Level at 50 Ft. (dBA CNEL) Distance To Noise Contour (ft.) 70 dBA CNEL 65 dBA CNEL 60 dBA CNEL Ball Road Harbor Boulevard to Anaheim Boulevard 47,460 76.9 144 310 668 Ball Road Anaheim Boulevard to East Street 46,390 76.8 142 305 658 Ball Road East Street to State College Boulevard 47,540 76.9 144 310 669 Ball Road State College Boulevard to Sunkist Street 48,590 75.5 116 249 537 Ball Road Sunkist Street to SR-57 Freeway 61,800 78.0 172 370 797 Ball Road SR-57 Freeway to Main Street 60,250 77.9 169 364 783 Clementine Street Manchester Avenue to Disney Way 24,080 70.7 55 119 257 Clementine Street Disney Way to Katella Avenue 8,470 66.1 28 59 128 Clementine Street Katella Avenue to Gene Autrey 5,720 64.4 21 46 98 Clementine Street Gene Autry Way to Orangewood 9,010 66.4 29 62 133 Convention Way/Gene Autry Way Harbor Boulevard to Clementine Street 24,940 74.1 94 202 435 Convention Way/Gene Autry Way Clementine Street to Haster Street 30,800 75.0 108 232 501 Convention Way/Gene Autry Way Haster Street to I-5 Freeway 38,780 76.0 126 271 584 Disney Way Harbor Boulevard to Clementine Street 17,040 72.4 73 157 337 Disney Way Clementine Street to Anaheim Boulevard 26,660 74.4 98 211 455 Disneyland Drive Katella Avenue to Magic Way 34,500 74.0 92 198 427 Disneyland Drive Magic Way to Ball Road 32,800 73.8 89 192 413 Disneyland Drive Ball Road to Manchester Avenue 42,930 76.5 135 290 625 Harbor Boulevard Wilken Way to Orangewood Avenue 50,410 77.1 150 323 695 Harbor Boulevard Orangewood Avenue to Convention Way 47,600 76.9 144 311 669 Harbor Boulevard Convention Way to Katella Avenue 50,570 77.2 150 323 697 Harbor Boulevard Katella Avenue to Disney Way 56,950 77.7 163 350 754 Harbor Boulevard Disney Way to Manchester Avenue 54,670 77.5 158 341 734 Harbor Boulevard I-5 Freeway to Ball Road 59,460 79.5 214 461 993 Haster Street Orangewood Avenue to Gene Autry Way 39,830 72.8 77 167 359 Haster Street Gene Autry Way to Katella Avenue 25,290 70.9 57 123 265 Katella Avenue Ninth Street to Walnut Street 48,170 77.0 145 313 675 Katella Avenue Walnut Street to Disneyland Drive 56,930 77.7 162 350 754 Katella Avenue Disneyland Drive to Hotel Way 67,110 78.4 181 391 842 Katella Avenue Hotel Way to Harbor Boulevard 63,060 78.1 174 375 807 Katella Avenue Harbor Boulevard to Clementine Street 59,260 77.9 167 360 775 Katella Avenue Clementine Street to Anaheim Boulevard 59,840 77.9 168 362 780 Katella Avenue Anaheim Boulevard to Manchester 57,710 77.7 164 353 761 ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 5.10-5 (Continued) TRAFFIC NOISE LEVEL CONTOUR DISTANCES FOR LONG-TERM CONDITIONS R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.10 Noise-080912.docx 5.10-14 Noise Roadway Segment Daily Traffic Volumes Noise Level at 50 Ft. (dBA CNEL) Distance To Noise Contour (ft.) 70 dBA CNEL 65 dBA CNEL 60 dBA CNEL Avenue Katella Avenue Manchester Avenue to Anaheim Way 53,740 77.4 156 337 726 Katella Avenue Anaheim Way to Lewis Street 61,390 78.0 171 368 793 Katella Avenue Lewis Street to State College Boulevard 57,860 77.7 164 354 762 Katella Avenue State College Boulevard to Sportstown 51,920 77.3 153 329 709 Katella Avenue Sportstown to Howell Avenue 62,310 78.1 173 372 801 Katella Avenue Howell Avenue to SR-57 Freeway 71,190 78.6 189 406 875 Katella Avenue SR-57 Freeway to Main Street 62,900 78.1 174 374 806 Manchester Avenue Clementine Street to Harbor Street 10,290 61.4 13 29 62 Orangewood Avenue West Street to Harbor Boulevard 22,670 70.4 53 114 247 Orangewood Avenue Harbor Boulevard to Clementine Street 21,850 70.2 52 112 241 Orangewood Avenue Clementine Street to Haster Street 21,480 70.2 51 110 238 Orangewood Avenue Haster Street to Manchester Avenue 25,910 71.0 58 125 270 Orangewood Avenue* Manchester Avenue to State College Boulevard 34,410 75.5 116 250 539 Orangewood Avenue State College Boulevard to Rampart Street 50,380 73.9 90 195 420 Orangewood Avenue* Rampart Street to SR-57 Freeway 47,660 73.6 87 188 405 Orangewood Avenue SR-57 Freeway to Eckhoff Street 49,090 75.5 116 251 541 Orangewood Avenue Eckhoff Street to Main Street 19,610 71.5 63 136 293 Walnut Street Katella Avenue to Cerritos Avenue 16,430 70.8 56 121 261 Walnut Street Cerritos Avenue to Ball Road 17,740 71.1 59 127 274 West Street Orangewood Avenue to Katella Avenue 15,030 68.6 40 87 187 Chapman Avenue State College Boulevard to SR-57 Freeway 38,400 76.0 125 269 580 Chapman Avenue SR-57 Freeway to Main Street 33,930 75.4 115 248 534 State College Boulevard Chapman Avenue to I-5 Freeway 45,860 78.3 180 388 835 State College Boulevard I-5 Freeway to Orangewood Avenue 48,060 78.5 186 400 862 State College Boulevard Orangewood Avenue to Gene Autry Way 46,900 76.8 143 308 663 State College Boulevard Gene Autry Way to Katella Avenue 34,920 75.6 117 253 544 State College Boulevard Katella Avenue to Howell Avenue 46,470 76.8 142 306 659 State College Boulevard Howell Avenue to Cerritos Avenue 31,130 75.1 109 234 504 State College Boulevard Cerritos Avenue to Ball Road 28,570 74.7 103 221 476 I-5 Freeway Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue 219,000 77.4 624 1,343 2,894 The following presents an analysis of the interior noise insulation requirements according to the expected ambient noise levels. Typical construction methods and building materials for the proposed hotel uses would provide a 25 dBA noise level reduction for exterior noise levels to building interiors with windows closed. Based on a 25 dBA noise level reduction, structures ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.10 Noise-080912.docx 5.10-15 Noise placed within the 70 dBA CNEL contour line would provide sufficient interior noise reduction with standard construction materials. However, as shown in Table 5.10-5, for long-term conditions, the 70 dBA CNEL extends outward approximately 214 feet from the centerline of local roads and approximately 624 feet from the centerline of the I-5 Freeway. Sensitive uses within these distances would be subject to noise levels greater than 70 dBA CNEL. To meet the California Building Code’s 45 dBA CNEL interior noise standard (see Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations), upgraded construction materials providing noise reduction greater than 25 dBA would be required. The interior noise exposure is the difference between the projected exterior noise exposure at the building facade and the noise reduction of the structure. New hotel rooms facing the I-5 Freeway, Anaheim Boulevard, Ball Road, Convention Way, Disney Way, Disneyland Drive, Harbor Boulevard, Haster Street, and Katella Avenue may be constructed in areas exposed to noise levels greater than 70 dBA CNEL. In these cases, the required interior noise reduction to meet the interior level standard of 45 dB CNEL may be achieved by locating the building facades facing these roads outside the 70 dBA CNEL noise contour, or by providing upgraded construction, including some or all of the following in the building design: • Upgraded dual-glazed windows, • Exterior wall/roof assemblies free of cut-outs or openings, • Upgraded exterior wall assemblies. Although compliance with SR 5.10-2 would ensure that that the required 45 dBA CNEL interior noise level is not exceeded, verification of these design requirements would be accomplished in a final noise study prior to building construction when the precise grading plans and architectural plans are available and when precise building construction requirements would be made, as required by the proposed mitigation. With implementation of proposed mitigation, which requires preparation of a detailed acoustical analysis to demonstrate that noise levels would be less than 65 dBA CNEL for outdoor use areas, future development projects would be compatible with future traffic noise levels and potential impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels. Project-Related Noise Impacts to the Project Site Vicinity The Proposed Project would generate additional vehicular traffic, and associated traffic noise has the potential to impact noise-sensitive uses along the roadways evaluated in the traffic impact analysis. The Proposed Project would also generate noise from stationary sources HVAC units, truck deliveries) within and adjacent to the Project Site. Project-Related Traffic Noise Noise during operation of projects developed in accordance with implementation of the Proposed Project would be primarily related to traffic generated by employees, patrons, and vendors of the land uses within the ARSP area. This noise analysis identifies potential traffic noise impacts adjacent to selected roadway segments included in the traffic impact analysis for the Proposed Project for the following five scenarios: • Existing: This scenario refers to noise conditions for existing traffic volumes without construction of the Proposed Project. • 2015 Without/With Project: These scenarios refer to the background noise conditions in 2015 without and with the Proposed Project, and correspond to the interim year analyzed for traffic impacts. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.10 Noise-080912.docx 5.10-16 Noise • 2030 General Plan Build Out Without/With Project: These scenarios refer to the background noise in 2030 General Plan build out conditions without and with the Proposed Project. Appendix G contains tables that present the anticipated 60, 65, and 70 dBA CNEL contours for each scenario and the traffic noise model outputs for each roadway segment. Tables 5.10-6 and 5.10-7 compare the noise levels at 50 feet from the centerline of each roadway segment without and with the Project for 2015 interim and 2030 General Plan build out conditions, respectively. Pursuant to CEQA, consideration must be given to the magnitude of the increase and the existence of noise-sensitive receptors in order to determine if the noise increase is a significant adverse environmental effect. Neither CEQA nor the City defines the magnitude of a significant increase. As previously discussed, a noise level increase of 3 dBA is considered barely perceptible, while an increase of 5 dBA is considered clearly noticeable. For the purpose of this analysis, a significant traffic noise impact would occur if the Proposed Project would increase the noise level at a roadway segment over 1 dBA, and the increase would result in a noise level exceeding 65 dBA CNEL. TABLE 5.10-6 2015 PROJECT-RELATED TRAFFIC OFF-SITE NOISE LEVELS Roadway Segment CNEL at 50 feet (dBA) No Project With Project Project Contribution Potential Impact? Anaheim Boulevard Katella Avenue to I-5 Freeway 73.7 73.7 0.0 no Anaheim Boulevard I-5 Freeway to Cerritos Avenue 76.1 76.1 0.0 no Anaheim Boulevard Cerritos Avenue to Ball Road 73.7 73.7 0.0 no Ball Road Euclid Street to Walnut Street 74.7 74.7 0.0 no Ball Road Walnut Street to Disneyland Drive 75.7 75.7 0.0 no Ball Road Disneyland Drive to Harbor Boulevard 77.0 77.0 0.0 no Ball Road Harbor Boulevard to Anaheim Boulevard 76.0 76.0 0.0 no Ball Road Anaheim Boulevard to East Street 75.9 75.9 0.0 no Ball Road East Street to State College Boulevard 76.2 76.2 0.0 no Ball Road State College Boulevard to Sunkist Street 74.9 74.9 0.0 no Ball Road Sunkist Street to SR-57 Freeway 77.3 77.3 0.0 no Ball Road SR-57 Freeway to Main Street 76.3 76.3 0.0 no Clementine Street Manchester Avenue to Disney Way 67.8 67.8 0.0 no Clementine Street Disney Way to Katella Avenue 65.8 65.8 0.0 no Convention Way/Gene Autry Way Haster Street to I-5 Freeway 70.3 70.3 0.0 no Disney Way Harbor Boulevard to Clementine Street 70.2 70.3 0.1 no Disney Way Clementine Street to Anaheim Boulevard 72.5 72.6 0.1 no Disneyland Drive Katella Avenue to Magic Way 72.4 72.5 0.1 no Disneyland Drive Magic Way to Ball Road 72.9 73.0 0.1 no Disneyland Drive Ball Road to Manchester Avenue 75.5 75.6 0.1 no Harbor Boulevard Wilken Way to Orangewood Avenue 76.1 76.2 0.1 no Harbor Boulevard Orangewood Avenue to Convention Way 76.1 76.2 0.1 no Harbor Boulevard Convention Way to Katella Avenue 76.5 76.8 0.3 no Harbor Boulevard Katella Avenue to Disney Way 76.6 76.9 0.3 no Harbor Boulevard Disney Way to Manchester Avenue 76.7 77.0 0.3 no ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 5.10-6 (Continued) 2015 PROJECT-RELATED TRAFFIC OFF-SITE NOISE LEVELS R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.10 Noise-080912.docx 5.10-17 Noise Roadway Segment CNEL at 50 feet (dBA) No Project With Project Project Contribution Potential Impact? Harbor Boulevard I-5 Freeway to Ball Road 78.6 78.7 0.0 no Haster Street Orangewood Avenue to Gene Autry Way 70.9 70.9 0.0 no Haster Street Gene Autry Way to Katella Avenue 70.1 70.2 0.1 no Katella Avenue Ninth Street to Walnut Street 75.6 75.7 0.1 no Katella Avenue Walnut Street to Disneyland Drive 76.3 76.4 0.1 no Katella Avenue Disneyland Drive to Hotel Way 76.8 77.1 0.3 no Katella Avenue Hotel Way to Harbor Boulevard 76.7 77.1 0.4 no Katella Avenue Harbor Boulevard to Clementine Street 76.7 77.0 0.3 no Katella Avenue Clementine Street to Anaheim Boulevard 76.6 77.0 0.3 no Katella Avenue Anaheim Boulevard to Manchester Avenue 76.5 76.8 0.3 no Katella Avenue Manchester Avenue to Anaheim Way 75.7 75.8 0.2 no Katella Avenue Anaheim Way to Lewis Street 75.8 75.9 0.1 no Katella Avenue Lewis Street to State College Boulevard 75.7 75.8 0.1 no Katella Avenue State College Boulevard to Sportstown 75.9 76.0 0.1 no Katella Avenue Sportstown to Howell Avenue 76.2 76.3 0.1 no Katella Avenue Howell Avenue to SR-57 Freeway 76.7 76.8 0.1 no Katella Avenue SR-57 Freeway to Main Street 75.9 76.0 0.1 no Manchester Avenue Clementine Street to Harbor Street 58.7 58.7 0.0 no Orangewood Avenue West Street to Harbor Boulevard 68.8 68.8 0.0 no Orangewood Avenue Harbor Boulevard to Clementine Street 69.1 69.1 0.0 no Orangewood Avenue Clementine Street to Haster Street 69.1 69.1 0.0 no Orangewood Avenue Haster Street to Manchester Avenue 69.9 69.9 0.0 no Orangewood Avenue* Manchester Avenue to State College Boulevard 73.7 73.7 0.0 no Orangewood Avenue State College Boulevard to Rampart Street 71.4 71.4 0.0 no Orangewood Avenue* Rampart Street to SR-57 Freeway 71.4 71.4 0.0 no Orangewood Avenue SR-57 Freeway to Eckhoff Street 73.8 73.8 0.0 no Orangewood Avenue Eckhoff Street to Main Street 70.4 70.4 0.0 no Walnut Street Katella Avenue to Cerritos Avenue 69.4 69.4 0.0 no Walnut Street Cerritos Avenue to Ball Road 70.7 70.7 0.0 no West Street Orangewood Avenue to Katella Avenue 68.0 68.1 0.0 no Chapman Avenue State College Boulevard to SR-57 Freeway 75.3 75.3 0.0 no Chapman Avenue SR-57 Freeway to Main Street 74.7 74.8 0.0 no State College Boulevard Chapman Avenue to I-5 Freeway 76.8 76.8 0.1 no State College Boulevard I-5 Freeway to Orangewood Avenue 76.3 76.3 0.1 no State College Boulevard Orangewood Avenue to Gene Autry Way 74.6 74.6 0.0 no State College Boulevard Gene Autry Way to Katella Avenue 73.9 74.0 0.1 no State College Boulevard Katella Avenue to Howell Avenue 74.8 74.8 0.0 no State College Boulevard Howell Avenue to Cerritos Avenue 74.1 74.1 0.0 no State College Boulevard Cerritos Avenue to Ball Road 74.0 74.0 0.0 no ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.10 Noise-080912.docx 5.10-18 Noise TABLE 5.10-7 2030 GENERAL PLAN BUILD OUT PROJECT-RELATED TRAFFIC OFF-SITE NOISE LEVELS Roadway Segment CNEL at 50 feet (dBA) No Project With Project Project Contribution Potential Impact? Anaheim Boulevard Katella Avenue to I-5 Freeway 75.0 75.0 0.1 no Anaheim Boulevard I-5 Freeway to Cerritos Avenue 77.4 77.6 0.2 no Anaheim Boulevard Cerritos Avenue to Ball Road 75.0 75.2 0.2 no Ball Road Euclid Street to Walnut Street 75.3 75.4 0.1 no Ball Road Walnut Street to Disneyland Drive 76.2 76.4 0.2 no Ball Road Disneyland Drive to Harbor Boulevard 77.7 77.8 0.1 no Ball Road Harbor Boulevard to Anaheim Boulevard 76.3 76.9 0.5 no Ball Road Anaheim Boulevard to East Street 76.6 76.8 0.2 no Ball Road East Street to State College Boulevard 76.6 76.9 0.3 no Ball Road State College Boulevard to Sunkist Street 75.3 75.5 0.2 no Ball Road Sunkist Street to SR-57 Freeway 77.8 78.0 0.2 no Ball Road SR-57 Freeway to Main Street 77.8 77.9 0.1 no Clementine Street Manchester Avenue to Disney Way 70.5 70.7 0.2 no Clementine Street Disney Way to Katella Avenue 66.1 66.1 0.0 no Clementine Street Katella Avenue to Gene Autrey 61.1 64.4 3.3 Yes Clementine Street Gene Autry Way to Orangewood 65.8 66.4 0.6 no Convention Way/Gene Autry Way Harbor Boulevard to Clementine Street 73.7 74.1 0.4 no Convention Way/Gene Autry Way Clementine Street to Haster Street 74.5 75.0 0.5 no Convention Way/Gene Autry Way Haster Street to I-5 Freeway 75.2 76.0 0.8 no Disney Way Harbor Boulevard to Clementine Street 72.1 72.4 0.4 no Disney Way Clementine Street to Anaheim Boulevard 74.0 74.4 0.3 no Disneyland Drive Katella Avenue to Magic Way 73.9 74.0 0.1 no Disneyland Drive Magic Way to Ball Road 73.8 73.8 0.0 no Disneyland Drive Ball Road to Manchester Avenue 76.4 76.5 0.0 no Harbor Boulevard Wilken Way to Orangewood Avenue 77.0 77.1 0.1 no Harbor Boulevard Orangewood Avenue to Convention Way 76.9 76.9 0.1 no Harbor Boulevard Convention Way to Katella Avenue 77.1 77.2 0.0 no Harbor Boulevard Katella Avenue to Disney Way 77.5 77.7 0.1 no Harbor Boulevard Disney Way to Manchester Avenue 77.4 77.5 0.1 no Harbor Boulevard I-5 Freeway to Ball Road 79.3 79.5 0.1 no Haster Street Orangewood Avenue to Gene Autry Way 72.5 72.8 0.3 no Haster Street Gene Autry Way to Katella Avenue 70.7 70.9 0.1 no Katella Avenue Ninth Street to Walnut Street 76.9 77.0 0.1 no Katella Avenue Walnut Street to Disneyland Drive 77.6 77.7 0.1 no Katella Avenue Disneyland Drive to Hotel Way 78.3 78.4 0.1 no Katella Avenue Hotel Way to Harbor Boulevard 78.0 78.1 0.1 no Katella Avenue Harbor Boulevard to Clementine Street 77.7 77.9 0.1 no Katella Avenue Clementine Street to Anaheim Boulevard 77.7 77.9 0.2 no Katella Avenue Anaheim Boulevard to Manchester Avenue 77.6 77.7 0.2 no ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 5.10-7 (Continued) 2030 GENERAL PLAN BUILD OUT PROJECT-RELATED TRAFFIC OFF-SITE NOISE LEVELS R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.10 Noise-080912.docx 5.10-19 Noise Roadway Segment CNEL at 50 feet (dBA) No Project With Project Project Contribution Potential Impact? Katella Avenue Manchester Avenue to Anaheim Way 76.8 77.4 0.6 no Katella Avenue Anaheim Way to Lewis Street 77.1 78.0 0.9 no Katella Avenue Lewis Street to State College Boulevard 77.0 77.7 0.7 no Katella Avenue State College Boulevard to Sportstown 76.9 77.3 0.3 no Katella Avenue Sportstown to Howell Avenue 77.5 78.1 0.6 no Katella Avenue Howell Avenue to SR-57 Freeway 78.0 78.6 0.7 no Katella Avenue SR-57 Freeway to Main Street 77.5 78.1 0.6 no Manchester Avenue Clementine Street to Harbor Street 60.9 61.4 0.5 no Orangewood Avenue West Street to Harbor Boulevard 70.2 70.4 0.2 no Orangewood Avenue Harbor Boulevard to Clementine Street 69.8 70.2 0.4 no Orangewood Avenue Clementine Street to Haster Street 69.9 70.2 0.3 no Orangewood Avenue Haster Street to Manchester Avenue 70.8 71.0 0.2 no Orangewood Avenue* Manchester Avenue to State College Boulevard 74.7 75.5 0.8 no Orangewood Avenue State College Boulevard to Rampart Street 72.6 73.9 1.2 Yes Orangewood Avenue* Rampart Street to SR-57 Freeway 72.9 73.6 0.8 no Orangewood Avenue SR-57 Freeway to Eckhoff Street 75.1 75.5 0.4 no Orangewood Avenue Eckhoff Street to Main Street 71.1 71.5 0.4 no Walnut Street Katella Avenue to Cerritos Avenue 70.5 70.8 0.2 no Walnut Street Cerritos Avenue to Ball Road 71.0 71.1 0.1 no West Street Orangewood Avenue to Katella Avenue 68.5 68.6 0.1 no Chapman Avenue State College Boulevard to SR-57 Freeway 75.8 76.0 0.1 no Chapman Avenue SR-57 Freeway to Main Street 75.3 75.4 0.2 no State College Boulevard Chapman Avenue to I-5 Freeway 78.0 78.3 0.3 no State College Boulevard I-5 Freeway to Orangewood Avenue 78.1 78.5 0.5 no State College Boulevard Orangewood Avenue to Gene Autry Way 76.1 76.8 0.7 no State College Boulevard Gene Autry Way to Katella Avenue 75.0 75.6 0.5 no State College Boulevard Katella Avenue to Howell Avenue 76.1 76.8 0.7 no State College Boulevard Howell Avenue to Cerritos Avenue 74.6 75.1 0.5 no State College Boulevard Cerritos Avenue to Ball Road 74.3 74.7 0.4 no Table 5.10-6 shows that, for 2015 conditions, the project-related traffic noise would increase noise levels by a maximum of 0.4 dBA, which is less than significant. For 2030 General Plan build out conditions, project-related traffic would increase noise levels to uses adjacent to Clementine Street from Katella Avenue to Gene Autry Way by 3.3 dBA. The resulting noise levels of 64.4 dBA CNEL along this road would be normally acceptable for the development of transient lodging motels and hotels. A less than significant impact would occur and no mitigation would be required. In addition, project-related traffic would increase noise levels to uses adjacent to Orangewood Avenue from State College Boulevard to Rampart Street by 1.2 dBA, however, there are no sensitive uses along this roadway segment. For all other roadway segments, project-related traffic noise would increase noise levels by 0.9 dBA or less, which would be less than significant. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.10 Noise-080912.docx 5.10-20 Noise Noise Impacts from On-Site Sources Operation of development built in accordance with the Proposed Project has the potential to create noise from on-site noise sources impacting sensitive uses within the ARSP area and vicinity. These would include the typical noise sources associated with lodging and commercial land uses (such as vehicles arriving and leaving, truck deliveries, HVAC units, and landscape maintenance machinery). HVAC Units All mechanical equipment on the Project Site would be required to comply with the City of Anaheim Sound Pressure Levels Ordinance (Section 6.70 of the Municipal Code), which specifies that noise levels cannot exceed 60 dBA at any point on the property line “for extended periods”. Because the equipment that would be installed in proposed buildings and the locations of the equipment are not currently known, implementation of the proposed mitigation would require that, prior to issuance of each building permit for structures that are adjacent to noise- sensitive areas such as residences,1 the property owner/developer shall ensure that all mechanical ventilation units are shown on plans and installed in compliance with the City of Anaheim’s 60 dBA standard. This may be achieved by several methods, including selection of quiet HVAC models, construction of barriers and parapet walls, equipment enclosures, and physical placement of the equipment near other uses. However, depending on the ambient noise level, a 60 dBA noise level at the property line may cause a substantial noise increase at a sensitive receptor, which would represent a significant noise impact. Therefore, implementation of the proposed mitigation is required to ensure that HVAC noise does not increase the long-term noise level at sensitive receptors more than 5 dBA. Therefore, noise- related impacts from HVAC units would be reduced to a less than significant level with mitigation. Truck Deliveries and Trash Compactors Control of mobile noise sources on public roads is preempted by federal and State laws. However, local ordinances do apply to vehicles while they are on private property. Noise generated by diesel engines, braking, and backup alarms during low speed maneuvering are treated as a single event from a point source. Based on observations at commercial center loading docks, the primary source of noise associated with truck deliveries is the arrival and departure of trucks and backup alarms. Additional noise sources may include trash compactors and materials handling. Truck movements, materials handling, and the use of trash compactors at nighttime have the potential to cause sleep disturbance, and excessive use of backup alarms at anytime have the potential to be offensive and annoying to noise-sensitive receptors. According to the City’s Compatibility Standards, no use shall produce continual heavy truck loading or unloading at the site between the hours of 8:00 PM and 6:00 AM (SR 5.10-3). The Municipal Code specifies that commercial uses shall be designed and operated, and hours of operation limited, so neighboring residents are not exposed to offensive noise, especially from traffic, trash collection, routine deliveries, or late night activities. Implementation of the proposed mitigation requires the property owner/developer to demonstrate that new commercial areas that include loading docks and trash compactors are designed to meet the City’s 60 dBA Sound Pressure Levels (Section 6.70 of the Municipal Code) standard at the property line and do not create a substantial noise increase (greater than 5 dBA) over existing ambient noise. This mitigation may be achieved by 1 The term “residence” includes single-family and multi-family residential areas, mixed-use residential areas, and mobile home parks. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.10 Noise-080912.docx 5.10-21 Noise siting loading docks as far as practicable from the property line, designing access and egress to minimize backup times, and adding screening walls to the loading dock and truck driveways to block the line of sight to the nearest homes. Adherence to the standard requirements and implementation of the proposed mitigation would reduce impacts related to truck deliveries and trash compactors to less than significant levels. Parking Facilities Parking operations (such as tire squealing, car horns, car door slamming, engine start-up, and alarm activation) have the potential to cause adverse noise impacts to nearby residents. The maximum noise levels associated with these parking activities range from 55 to 70 dBA Lmax at 50 feet from the source. These activities are governed by the City’s Sound Pressure Levels Ordinance, which limits noise for extended periods at property lines to 60 dBA. Implementation of proposed mitigation would require that, prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall ensure that noise from parking structures adjacent to residential areas be reduced by the provision of convenient access to parking facilities; sound attenuation devices (such as louvers and walls); the use of textured deck surfaces to reduce tire squalling; and tiering a parking facility to provide greater distance to the receptor. Implementation of proposed mitigation requires that engine noise from sweeping equipment used in any parking facilities and private on-site roadways operate at a noise level no greater than 60 dBA, as measured at the nearest adjacent property line. Implementation of proposed mitigation measures would reduce impacts related to noise from parking facilities to less than significant levels. Impact Summary: Development associated with the Proposed Project would create land use compatibility issues related to noise and would expose receptors to noise levels in excess of established standards, thereby resulting in significant impacts. Adherence to the standard requirements and implementation of the proposed mitigation measures would reduce impacts to less than significant levels. The conclusion related to increased noise levels is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313. Threshold 5.10.4 Would the Project expose people to or generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Activities and land uses often associated with vibration-sensitive receptors are similar to those associated with noise-sensitive receptors. The Proposed Project would allow an increase in development intensity in the PR and C-R Districts, but specific locations, site plans, and construction details and equipment have not been determined. Construction activity can result in varying degrees of ground vibration, depending on the equipment and methods used, distance to the affected structures, and soil type. Groundborne vibration generated by construction projects is usually highest during rock blasting, pile driving, soil compacting, jackhammers, and other demolition-related activities. Table 5.10-8 summarizes the typical vibration levels during construction activities in inches per second (in/sec) peak particle velocity (ppv) at 25 feet from the equipment. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.10 Noise-080912.docx 5.10-22 Noise TABLE 5.10-8 TYPICAL VIBRATION LEVELS DURING CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES Equipment PPV at 25 ft (in/sec)a, b PPV at 10 ft (in/sec)c Vibratory Roller 0.210 0.830 Large bulldozer 0.089 0.352 Loaded trucks 0.076 0.300 Jackhammer 0.035 0.138 Small bulldozer 0.003 0.012 ft: feet; ppv: peak particle velocity; in/sec: inches/second a The ppv is defined as the maximum instantaneous positive or negative peak of the vibration signal, and is usually measured in in/sec. b Source: FTA 2006. c Vibration levels at 10 feet obtained with the use of vibration propagation equations (Caltrans 2004). According to the data in Table 5.10-1, the threshold for structural vibration damage to older residential structures is 0.3 in/sec for intermittent sources, which include impact pile drivers, pogo-stick compactors, crack-and-seat equipment, vibratory pile drivers, and vibratory compaction equipment. Below this level, there is virtually no risk of building damage. Table 5.10-8 shows that construction vibration levels from equipment operating at 25 feet from a residential structure would be below the 0.3 in/sec ppv threshold; therefore, the operation of large bulldozers and vibratory rollers operating at 10 feet from a residential structure would have the potential to cause structural damage. Implementation of the proposed mitigation would prohibit the operation of large bulldozers and vibratory rollers within 25 feet of any existing residential structure, thereby reducing potential impacts to less than significant levels. The vibration data provided in Table 5.10-8 and the vibration propagation calculations indicate that construction equipment vibration levels would be below the 0.24 in/sec ppv level of distinct perceptibility (Table 5.10-2) when heavy construction equipment is operating at distances over 25 feet from the nearest residential structure. Given that vibration levels dissipate rapidly with distance and that most of the existing homes adjacent to the ARSP area are located more than 20 feet away from the ARSP area boundary, residential land uses are not expected to be subject to perceptible vibration levels over extended periods of time. Therefore, construction in the ARSP area would have the potential to cause vibration levels that would be noticeable for short periods, but would not be considered to be a significant impact. Pile driving and rock blasting, which are less common activities, have the potential to generate higher vibration levels than shown in Table 5.10-8 and discussed above. Implementation of the proposed mitigation would require that, if pile driving and/or blasting are anticipated during the construction of a project, a technical study be prepared to evaluate and mitigate potential vibration impacts to nearby structures and persons. Potential mitigation may include using non-explosive rock removal methods and low-impact pile driving methods. Implementation of the proposed mitigation would reduce impacts related to pile driving and rock blasting to less than significant levels. Impact Summary: Construction activities related to future development projects within the ARSP area have the potential to generate vibration and groundbourne vibration impacts. Implementation of the proposed mitigation would reduce these potential impacts to less than significant levels. MEIR 313 did not evaluate impacts related to vibration; therefore, a consistency finding cannot be made. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.10 Noise-080912.docx 5.10-23 Noise 5.10.8 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS Construction Noise Adverse noise impacts during construction would be localized and would occur intermittently for varying periods of time throughout the construction period. As discussed in Section 5.10.7, the construction of a development project would have the potential to create temporary, significant and unavoidable impacts at nearby noise-sensitive receptors, which would cease after construction. Thus, if construction within the ARSP area were to occur simultaneously at two or more projects in close proximity, construction noise at sensitive receptors may be greater than for a single project and would be significant and unavoidable. Construction Vibration Short-term cumulative impacts related to vibration levels would be less than significant because vibration dissipates rapidly with distance, and potentially concurrent construction projects would not occur close enough to a sensitive receptor for the effects to be additive. Cumulative Operational Noise Traffic Noise Cumulative increases in traffic noise levels were estimated by comparing the “2030 General Plan With Project” scenario to Existing Conditions. The traffic analysis considers cumulative traffic from future developments included in the traffic model and cumulative projects identified by the City of Anaheim. For the purpose of this analysis, a significant cumulative traffic noise impact would occur if the cumulative increase at a roadway segment would be greater than 3 dBA, resulting in a future noise level greater than 65 dBA CNEL and a more than 1 dBA increase in noise as a result of the Proposed Project. Table 5.10-9 shows that, the cumulative noise increases would range from 0.5 to 5.1 dBA CNEL. The project would contribute to more than 1 dBA at the segment of Orangewood Avenue from State College Boulevard to Rampart Street. There are no noise sensitive uses along this roadway segment. The project contribution to all remaining segments would be less than 1 dBA. Therefore, no cumulative noise impacts would occur. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.10 Noise-080912.docx 5.10-24 Noise TABLE 5.10-9 CUMULATIVE OFF-SITE NOISE LEVELS Roadway Segment CNEL at 50 feet (dBA) Existing With Project Cumulative Increase Project Contribution Potential Impact? Anaheim Boulevard Katella Avenue to I-5 Freeway 73.0 75.0 2.1 0.1 no Anaheim Boulevard I-5 Freeway to Cerritos Avenue 75.3 77.6 2.2 0.2 no Anaheim Boulevard Cerritos Avenue to Ball Road 72.9 75.2 2.4 0.2 no Ball Road Euclid Street to Walnut Street 74.3 75.4 1.1 0.1 no Ball Road Walnut Street to Disneyland Drive 75.4 76.4 1.0 0.2 no Ball Road Disneyland Drive to Harbor Boulevard 76.6 77.8 1.2 0.1 no Ball Road Harbor Boulevard to Anaheim Boulevard 75.8 76.9 1.1 0.5 no Ball Road Anaheim Boulevard to East Street 75.6 76.8 1.2 0.2 no Ball Road East Street to State College Boulevard 75.9 76.9 1.0 0.3 no Ball Road State College Boulevard to Sunkist Street 74.7 75.5 0.8 0.2 no Ball Road Sunkist Street to SR-57 Freeway 77.0 78.0 1.1 0.2 no Ball Road SR-57 Freeway to Main Street 75.3 77.9 2.6 0.1 no Clementine Street Manchester Avenue to Disney Way 65.6 70.7 5.1 0.2 no Clementine Street Disney Way to Katella Avenue 65.6 66.1 0.5 0.0 no Disney Way Harbor Boulevard to Clementine Street 69.0 72.4 3.4 0.4 no Disney Way Clementine Street to Anaheim Boulevard 71.5 74.4 2.8 0.3 no Disneyland Drive Katella Avenue to Magic Way 71.4 74.0 2.6 0.1 no Disneyland Drive Magic Way to Ball Road 72.4 73.8 1.4 0.0 no Disneyland Drive Ball Road to Manchester Avenue 75.0 76.5 1.4 0.0 no Harbor Boulevard Wilken Way to Orangewood Avenue 75.6 77.1 1.5 0.1 no Harbor Boulevard Orangewood Avenue to Convention Way 75.7 76.9 1.2 0.1 no Harbor Boulevard Convention Way to Katella Avenue 76.2 77.2 1.0 0.0 no Harbor Boulevard Katella Avenue to Disney Way 76.0 77.7 1.7 0.1 no Harbor Boulevard Disney Way to Manchester Avenue 76.3 77.5 1.2 0.1 no Harbor Boulevard I-5 Freeway to Ball Road 78.2 79.5 1.3 0.1 no Haster Street Orangewood Avenue to Gene Autry Way 69.8 72.8 3.0 0.3 no Haster Street Gene Autry Way to Katella Avenue 69.8 70.9 1.1 0.1 no ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 5.10-9 (Continued) CUMULATIVE OFF-SITE NOISE LEVELS R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.10 Noise-080912.docx 5.10-25 Noise Roadway Segment CNEL at 50 feet (dBA) Existing With Project Cumulative Increase Project Contribution Potential Impact? Katella Avenue Ninth Street to Walnut Street 74.8 77.0 2.2 0.1 no Katella Avenue Walnut Street to Disneyland Drive 75.6 77.7 2.1 0.1 no Katella Avenue Disneyland Drive to Hotel Way 75.9 78.4 2.5 0.1 no Katella Avenue Hotel Way to Harbor Boulevard 75.9 78.1 2.3 0.1 no Katella Avenue Harbor Boulevard to Clementine Street 76.0 77.9 1.8 0.1 no Katella Avenue Clementine Street to Anaheim Boulevard 76.0 77.9 1.9 0.2 no Katella Avenue Anaheim Boulevard to Manchester Avenue 75.9 77.7 1.8 0.2 no Katella Avenue Manchester Avenue to Anaheim Way 74.9 77.4 2.5 0.6 no Katella Avenue Anaheim Way to Lewis Street 74.9 78.0 3.1 0.9 no Katella Avenue Lewis Street to State College Boulevard 74.9 77.7 2.8 0.7 no Katella Avenue State College Boulevard to Sportstown 75.3 77.3 2.0 0.3 no Katella Avenue Sportstown to Howell Avenue 75.5 78.1 2.6 0.6 no Katella Avenue Howell Avenue to SR-57 Freeway 75.9 78.6 2.7 0.7 no Katella Avenue SR-57 Freeway to Main Street 74.8 78.1 3.3 0.6 no Manchester Avenue Clementine Street to Harbor Street 57.0 61.4 4.4 0.5 no Orangewood Avenue West Street to Harbor Boulevard 67.9 70.4 2.5 0.2 no Orangewood Avenue Harbor Boulevard to Clementine Street 68.8 70.2 1.5 0.4 no Orangewood Avenue Clementine Street to Haster Street 68.8 70.2 1.4 0.3 no Orangewood Avenue Haster Street to Manchester Avenue 69.4 71.0 1.6 0.2 no Orangewood Avenue* Manchester Avenue to State College Boulevard 73.1 75.5 2.4 0.8 no Orangewood Avenue State College Boulevard to Rampart Street 70.7 73.9 3.1 1.2 yes Orangewood Avenue* Rampart Street to SR-57 Freeway 70.5 73.6 3.1 0.8 no Orangewood Avenue SR-57 Freeway to Eckhoff Street 73.0 75.5 2.5 0.4 no Orangewood Avenue Eckhoff Street to Main Street 70.1 71.5 1.4 0.4 no Walnut Street Katella Avenue to Cerritos Avenue 68.8 70.8 2.0 0.2 no Walnut Street Cerritos Avenue to Ball Road 70.5 71.1 0.6 0.1 no West Street Orangewood Avenue to Katella Avenue 67.8 68.6 0.8 0.1 no ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 5.10-9 (Continued) CUMULATIVE OFF-SITE NOISE LEVELS R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.10 Noise-080912.docx 5.10-26 Noise Roadway Segment CNEL at 50 feet (dBA) Existing With Project Cumulative Increase Project Contribution Potential Impact? Chapman Avenue State College Boulevard to SR-57 Freeway 75.0 76.0 1.0 0.1 no Chapman Avenue SR-57 Freeway to Main Street 74.5 75.4 1.0 0.2 no State College Boulevard Chapman Avenue to I-5 Freeway 76.0 78.3 2.3 0.3 no State College Boulevard I-5 Freeway to Orangewood Avenue 75.0 78.5 3.5 0.5 no State College Boulevard Orangewood Avenue to Gene Autry Way 73.6 76.8 3.3 0.7 no State College Boulevard Gene Autry Way to Katella Avenue 73.2 75.6 2.4 0.5 no State College Boulevard Katella Avenue to Howell Avenue 73.9 76.8 2.9 0.7 no State College Boulevard Howell Avenue to Cerritos Avenue 73.8 75.1 1.2 0.5 no State College Boulevard Cerritos Avenue to Ball Road 73.8 74.7 0.9 0.4 no ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.10 Noise-080912.docx 5.10-27 Noise Stationary Source Noise As discussed in the previous off-site noise analysis, with implementation of the proposed mitigation measures, operation of stationary sources associated with the Proposed Project would create less than significant ambient noise levels. Operation of on-site mechanical equipment is not expected to exceed daytime or nighttime ambient noise levels in the ARSP area and/or established noise level standards in the City’s Noise Ordinance for adjacent properties. Therefore, because the Proposed Project would have less than significant operational noise impacts, the incremental contribution the Proposed Project would have on noise effects would not result in significant cumulative noise impacts. Development of more than one project at a time in the immediate ARSP area would not result in the exposure of people to, or the generation of, excessive groundborne vibration levels, due to the localized nature of vibration impacts and the fact that construction would not occur at the same time and at the same location. Operation of development built in accordance with the Proposed Project would not establish any new significant vibration sources; therefore, there would be no incremental contribution to cumulative vibration impacts. Consistent with the analysis in MEIR 313, continued implementation of the ARSP would not represent a cumulatively considerable noise and vibration impact. 5.10.9 MITIGATION MEASURES Previously Approved Measures MEIR 313 presented mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts associated with the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Project to less than significant levels. The following measures from MEIR 313 shall be incorporated into the Mitigation Program for this EIR. Any modifications to the original measures are shown as strikethrough for deleted text and bold for new, inserted text. (Note that the measure number and section from MEIR 313 are listed in parentheses). MM 5.10-1 Ongoing during construction, the property owner/developer shall ensure that all internal combustion engines on construction equipment and trucks are fitted with properly maintained mufflers (MEIR 313 MM 3.5-3, Noise). MM 5.10-2 Prior to submittal approval of each final site plan, the property owner/developer shall submit a noise study prepared by a certified acoustical engineer to the satisfaction of the Building Division Manager identifying whether noise attenuation is required and defining the attenuation measures and specific performance requirements, if warranted, to comply with the Uniform Building Code and Sound Pressure Level Ordinance. Ultimate noise attenuation requirements, if any, shall depend on the final location of such buildings and noise-sensitive uses inside and surrounding the buildings. Attenuation measures shall be implemented by the property owner/developer prior to final building and zoning inspections (MEIR 313 MM 3.5-4, Noise). MM 5.10-3 Prior to issuance of each building permit, for structures that are adjacent to noise-sensitive areas such as residences, the property owner/developer shall ensure that all mechanical ventilation units are shown on plans and installed in compliance with Sound Pressure Level Ordinance (MEIR 313 MM 3.5-5, Noise). MM 5.10-4 Prior to issuance of each building permit for a parking structure, the property owner/developer shall ensure that noise from parking structures adjacent to ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.10 Noise-080912.docx 5.10-28 Noise residential areas will be reduced by the provision of convenient access to parking facilities, sound attenuation devices (louvers and walls), the use of textured deck surfaces to reduce tire squalling, and tiering a parking facility to provide greater distance to the receptor (MEIR 313 MM 3.5-7, Noise). Ordinance 5454 City Ordinance 5454 presented a list of conditions of approval that are applicable to all projects within the ARSP area. The following conditions shall be incorporated into the Mitigation Program for this EIR. Any modifications to the original conditions are shown as strikethrough for deleted text and bold for new, inserted text. (Note that the specific condition references from Ordinance 5454 are listed in parentheses). MM 5.10-5 That Prior to issuance of each building permit, a note shall be provided on building plans indicating that during construction, the property owner/developer shall install and maintain specially designed construction barriers at the project perimeter areas. The construction sound barriers shall be a minimum height of 8 feet with a minimum surface weight of 1.25 pounds per square foot or a minimum Sound Transmission Class (STC) rating of 25. The structure shall be a continuous barrier. Gates and other entry doors shall be constructed with suitable mullions, astragals, seals, or other design techniques to minimize sound leakage when in the closed position. Access doors should be self closing where feasible. Vision ports are permissible providing they are filled with an acceptable solid vision product. (Ord 5454, Condition 17) MM 5.10-6 Ongoing during construction and project operation, That pressure washing operations for purposes of building repair and maintenance due to graffiti or other aesthetical considerations shall be limited to daytime hours of operation between 7:00 AM and 8:00 PM. (Ord 5454, Condition 19) MM 5.10-7 Ongoing during construction and project operation, That sweeping operations in the parking facilities and private on-site roadways shall be performed utilizing sweeping/scrubbing equipment which operate at a level measured not greater than 60 dBA at the nearest adjacent property line. (Ord 5454, Condition 18) MM 5.10-8 Ongoing during construction, That the property owners/developers shall pay for all reasonable costs associated with noise monitoring which shall include monitoring conducted by a certified acoustical engineer under the direction of the Planning Department four times a year on a random basis to ensure that outdoor construction-related sound levels at any point on the exterior project boundary property line do not exceed 60 dBA between the hours of 7:00 PM and 7:00 AM of the following day where outside construction is occurring. If a complaint is received by the City, additional noise monitoring shall be conducted at the discretion of the City. If the monitoring finds that the 60 dBA threshold is being exceeded, construction activities will be modified immediately to bring the sound level below the 60 dBA requirement, with additional follow-up monitoring conducted to confirm compliance. (Ord 5454, Condition 20) ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.10 Noise-080912.docx 5.10-29 Noise Additional Mitigation Measures MM 5.10-9 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall present plans and calculations to the Planning Department, Building Division to demonstrate that noise levels would be less than 65 dBA CNEL for outdoor use areas (including dining patios, pools, playgrounds, or outdoor gathering areas). This requirement can be accomplished through shielding areas behind buildings or the construction of a noise barrier. MM 5.10-10 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall present plans and calculations to the Planning Department, Building Division to demonstrate that noise levels from planned mechanical ventilation equipment, loading docks, trash compactors, and other proposed on-site noise sources are designed to meet the City’s 60 dBA Sound Pressure Levels standard at the property line, and not create a noise increase greater than 5 dBA over existing ambient noise at the nearest noise sensitive receptor, whichever is more restrictive. MM 5.10-11 Prior to issuance of each building permit, a note shall be provided on plans indicating that there shall be no operation of large bulldozers or vibratory rollers within 25 feet of any existing home. MM 5.10-12 Prior to issuance of each building permit if pile driving and blasting is anticipated during construction, a noise and vibration analysis must be prepared and submitted to the Planning Department, Building Division, to assess and mitigate potential noise and vibration impacts related to these activities. 5.10.10 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION Potential noise impacts during construction of future individual projects would remain significant and unavoidable; with implementation of the mitigation program identified above, short-term operational impacts related to construction would be reduced, but may not be reduced to less than significant levels. With implementation of the mitigation program identified above, long- term operational noise impacts related to the Proposed Project would be less than significant. Construction in the ARSP area would have the potential to cause vibration levels that would be noticeable for short periods. With implementation of the mitigation program, vibration impacts during construction would not be considered to be a significant impact. 5.10.11 REFERENCES Anaheim, City of. 2010a (May 4, current through). Anaheim Municipal Code (Chapter 6.70, Sound Pressure Levels). Cincinnati, OH: American Legal Publishing Corporation for the City. http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/California/anaheim/title6publichealthand safety/chapter670soundpressurelevels?f=templates$fn=altmain-nf.htm$3.0#JD_Chapter 6.70. 2010b (May 4, current through). Anaheim Municipal Code (Chapter 18.32, Mixed Use [MU] Overlay Zone; Section 18.32.130, Compatibility Standards). Cincinnati, OH: American Legal Publishing Corporation for the City. http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/ gateway.dll/California/anaheim/title18zoning/chapter1832mixedusemuoverlayzone?f=te mplates$fn=altmain-nf.htm$3.0#JD_Chapter18.32. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.10 Noise-080912.docx 5.10-30 Noise 2010b (May 4, current through). Anaheim Municipal Code (Chapter 18.40, General Development Standards; Section 18.40.090, Sound attenuation for residential developments). Cincinnati, OH: American Legal Publishing Corporation for the City. http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/California/anaheim/title18zoning/chapter1840ge neraldevelopmentstandards?f=templates$fn=altmain-nf.htm$3.0#JD_Chapter18.40. 2004a (May). Final Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update EIR No. 330. Anaheim, CA: the City. 2004b (May). General Plan for the City of Anaheim (City Council Resolution No. 2004-94). Anaheim, CA: the City. California Building Standards Commission (CBSC). 2010 (Updated April 12). 2007 Triennial Edition of CCR, Title 24. Sacramento, CA: BSC. http://www.bsc.ca.gov/title_24/ t24_2007tried.htm. California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2009 (November). Technical Noise Supplement: A Technical Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol. Sacramento, CA: Caltrans. http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/env/noise/pub/Technical%20Noise%20Supplement.pdf. ______2004 (June). Transportation- and Construction-Induced Vibration Guidance Manual (prepared by Jones and Stokes). Sacramento, CA: Jones and Stokes. http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/env/noise/pub/vibrationmanFINAL.pdf. Parsons Brinckerhoff 2010 (December). Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report, Orange, CA: Parsons Brinckerhoff. Thalheimer, E. 2000. Construction Noise Control Program and Mitigation Strategy as the Central Artery/Tunnel Project. Noise Control Engineering Journal 48(5), Sep–Oct. Indianapolis, IN: Institute of Noise Control Engineering. U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT), Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). 2006 (January). FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model User’s Guide (prepared by USDOT, Research and Innovative Technology Administration). Washington D.C.: FHWA. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.11 Pop Housing-082712.docx 5.11-1 Population and Housing 5.11 POPULATION AND HOUSING This section analyzes potential impacts related to population and housing associated with development of the Project Site. 5.11.1 SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION MEIR 313 included information from the Employment, Population, and Housing Report, as prepared by Hamilton, Rabinovitz & Alschuler Inc. in 1992 for the Disneyland Resort EIR. MEIR 313 presented an analysis of employment, population, and housing conditions potentially impacted by the implementation of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan. According to MEIR 313, implementation of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan would have created approximately 18,100 jobs in the year 2010, for which approximately 2,400 people would have relocated to the City of Anaheim. This influx, and the housing demand it would create, was determined to be a less than significant impact. 5.11.2 PLANS, POLICIES, AND REGULATORY CONDITIONS Related Planning Programs The City of Anaheim General Plan Adopted in May 2004, the City of Anaheim General Plan provides a road map for growth and development within the corporate boundaries and sphere of influence. While Orange County Projections 2006 (OCP-2006) discussed earlier in this document projects the distribution of population and housing growth between 2010 and 2035, the City’s General Plan focuses on the amount of growth at build out, which is expected to occur after 2035. Specifically, three components of the General Plan are particularly relevant to assessing the potential growth impacts of the Proposed Project: the Housing, Land Use, and Growth Management Elements. 2006-2014 Housing Element. The City’s Housing Element identifies policies designed to carry out the State, regional, and local general plan policies. Housing Element policies relevant to the Proposed Project address the need for additional housing opportunities to meet continued demand and are identified in Table 5.9-2 in Section 5.9, Land Use. The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) found the City’s Housing Element to be in compliance with State housing laws in 2009. The Anaheim City Council certified its Housing Element on August 11, 2009, incorporating the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) target and the Anaheim Affordable Housing Strategic Plan goals. Land Use Element. The City’s Land Use Element presents land use designations and policies for the City. In addition, the Element contains goals and policies aimed at providing a balance of jobs and housing opportunities within the City. Applicable policies are identified in Table 5.9-2 in Section 5.9, Land Use and Planning, with a discussion of the consistency with the Proposed Project. Growth Management Element. The Growth Management Element also contains a goal and policy promoting a balance of jobs and housing opportunities within the City (refer to Table 5.9-2 in Section 5.9, Land Use and Planning). Regulatory Setting The following adopted projections, plans, and policies address the future of this area and provide benchmarks for evaluating the potential population, housing, and employment impacts ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.11 Pop Housing-082712.docx 5.11-2 Population and Housing of the Proposed Project. Determination of the Proposed Project’s impacts would be based on a combination of these factors. Southern California Association of Governments The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is the nation’s largest metropolitan planning organization, representing 6 counties, 189 cities, and more than 18 million residents. The City of Anaheim is a member City of the SCAG and is considered in its regional planning efforts. State of California Regional Housing Needs Assessment California State Housing Law calls upon each local jurisdiction to provide its fair share of very-low, low, and moderate income housing to meet the needs of California’s residents. In implementing this law, the HCD assigns housing targets to each jurisdiction, and requires local General Plan Housing Elements to address how these housing targets can be achieved during a five- to six-year timeframe given local demographics, land use, and zoning. State law requires local jurisdictions to submit Housing Elements for HCD review and approval. The RHNA is mandated by State Housing Law as part of the periodic process of updating local housing elements of the General Plan. The RHNA is a key tool for SCAG and its member governments to plan for growth within its six-county region. State law requires all regional councils of government1, which includes SCAG, to determine existing and future housing needs for its region (California Government Code §65584.05[h]). SCAG is also required to determine the share of housing need to be allocated to each city and county within the SCAG region. The RHNA quantifies the need for housing within each jurisdiction during specified planning periods. The current planning period is January 1, 2006, to June 30, 2014. The Final RHNA target allocation was adopted by the SCAG Regional Council on July 12, 2007, and approved by the HCD in September 2007 (SCAG 2010). Table 5.11-1 identifies the 2006–2014 RHNA targets for the City. TABLE 5.11-1 CITY OF ANAHEIM REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT TARGETS: 2006–2017 Household Income Categorya Target Construction Achievementsb Adjusted RHNA Need Extremely Lowc 0 units 150 (150) Very Low Income 1,971 units (21 percent) 299 1,672 Low Income 1,618 units (17 percent) 352 1,266 Moderate Income 1,874 units (19 percent) 2,280 (406) Upper Income 4,035 units (42 percent) 615 3,420 Total 9,498 units (100 percent) 3,696 5,802 (61 percent) a Units allocated to very-low, low, and moderate income categories have been restricted to households that meet the income requirements for these categories. Units allocated to the above moderate income category include all market rate units that are not income restricted. b Based on building permits “issued and finalized” through May 2010. Includes projects currently under construction but does not include permits in the permit review and entitlement process. c The allocation for extremely low income units is assumed to be 50 percent of the very-low income allocation. The allocation is a subset of the very-low income allocation and is not added to the total construction need. Source: City of Anaheim 2010. 1 Also known as metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs). ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.11 Pop Housing-082712.docx 5.11-3 Population and Housing Compass Blueprint The Compass Blueprint, prepared by SCAG in 2004, provides a comprehensive vision for the growth of the SCAG region based on shared values within the Southern California region. As part of the report, SCAG identified four main principles. Table 5.9-1 in Section 5.9, Land Use and Planning, identifies these principles and provides an analysis of the Proposed Project’s consistency with these principles and associated policies. Senate Bill 375 Signed September 30, 2008, Senate Bill (SB) 375 provides for a new planning process to coordinate land use planning and regional transportation plans and funding priorities in order to help California meet the GHG reduction goals established in Assembly Bill (AB) 32. SB 375 requires Metropolitan Planning Organizations, including SCAG, to incorporate a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) or if the emissions target is not achieved in the SCS, an Alternative Planning Scenario (APS), in its regional transportation plans that will achieve GHG emission reduction targets set by the California Air Resources Board (CARB). There are two mutually important facets to SB 375: 1) reducing greenhouse gas emissions from automobiles and light trucks through the interactions of land use and the transportation system; and, 2) encouraging modes of travel other than the use of automobiles through more compact, complete, and efficient communities. SCAG’s SCS, or APS if it is necessary, is currently scheduled for adoption in April 2012. Orange County Projections OCP-2006 was prepared by the Center for Demographic Research at California State University, Fullerton to reflect population and housing statistics at the jurisdictional, regional statistical area, community analysis area, and census tract levels. OCP-2006 provides the best available estimate of existing demographics and projection of anticipated growth in Orange County. The projection is based on regional and national growth trends and development balanced with local land use information provided by Orange County jurisdictions, public agencies, utility and service providers, and the private sector. The OCP is a turn-key data set that is utilized in regional planning documents including the SCAG Compass Blueprint and regional transportation plan. As such, it is updated approximately every four years with the most recent update approved in November 2006. 5.11.3 METHODOLOGY Population and housing data were compiled through web-based research with the U.S. Census Bureau and the Center for Demographic Research. Additional data were collected from the City of Anaheim Planning Department. MEIR 313 used a conservative generation factor of 1.11 employees per hotel room for the ARSP to calculate the number of employment positions a given hotel use would generate. Since that time, research from sources such as the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) has further refined employment generation factors for hotel uses. This analysis is based on a refined factor of 0.9 employees per hotel or motel room (ITE 2003) within the ARSP area. Housing demand associated with the Proposed Project is based on the assumption that 13.3 percent of new hotel and motel employees will relocate their households into the City of Anaheim, as stated in MEIR 313. Based on the conservative assumption of one ARSP area employee per dwelling unit, the number of relocated households would also represent the number of housing units needed to fulfill anticipated demand. Additionally, the anticipated ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.11 Pop Housing-082712.docx 5.11-4 Population and Housing population increase within the City of Anaheim is determined by multiplying the number of housing units by an average factor of 3.3 persons per household. This persons-per-household factor is greater than the 3.1 persons-per-household used in MEIR 313 to reflect the factor from the 2000 Census. 5.11.4 EXISTING CONDITIONS Local and Regional Population and Housing The ARSP area’s demographics are best examined in the context of existing and projected population for the Orange County region and the City of Anaheim. Information on population and housing for the ARSP area is available from several sources, including U.S. Census Bureau data and the Center for Demographic Research’s OCP. U.S. Census Data The U.S. Bureau of the Census publishes population and household data gathered through the decennial census. This data provides a record of historic growth rates in Orange County and the City of Anaheim. Table 5.11-2 presents Orange County’s population and housing growth since 1980. Table 5.11-3 presents Anaheim’s population and housing growth since 1980. As shown, population and development trends present in the Orange County data are also present in the City of Anaheim data. TABLE 5.11-2 ORANGE COUNTY POPULATION, HOUSING AND EMPLOYMENT: 1980–2010 1980 1990 2000 2010 Population 1,932,709a 2,410,556a 2,846,289a 3,019,356b Households 721,514a 875,072a 969,484a 1,050,330b Sources: a U.S. Decennial Census b OCP-2010 Modified TABLE 5.11-3 CITY OF ANAHEIM POPULATION, HOUSING AND EMPLOYMENT: 1980–2010 1980 1990 2000 2010 Population 219,494a 266,406a 328,014a 338,594b Households 82,725a 93,177a 99,719a 105,018b Sources: a U.S. Decennial Census b OCP-2010 Modified Orange County Projections The Center for Demographic Research at the California State University, Fullerton provides projections of the population and housing numbers for Orange County. The data, compiled into a publication called the Orange County Projections, are periodically updated to reflect revised information. OCP-2010 Modified, which is the currently available data set, represents the eleventh in a series of projections dating back to 1978. OCP-2010 was a major update of OCP-2006 and was originally approved by the Orange County Council of ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.11 Pop Housing-082712.docx 5.11-5 Population and Housing Governments (OCCOG) on January 27, 2011. After final approval of the OCP-2010, Orange County agencies, along with other regional agencies, agreed to incorporate the 2010 Decennial U.S. Census population and housing information into the growth forecasts which is known as the OCP-2010 Modified and which was approved by the OCCOG on January 26, 2012. Orange County’s population has experienced a positive, though inconsistent, pattern of growth in recent history. Between 1980 and 1990, population increased by an average of 47,785 people annually. Population growth decreased to an average of 43,573 additional people annually from 1990 to 2000. The rate of population growth decreased further to an average of 17,306 people annually between 2000 and 2010. According to OCP-2010 Modified projections, the Orange County population is projected to grow by an average of approximately 22,997 people per year between 2010 and 2035. TABLE 5.11-4 ORANGE COUNTY PROJECTIONS 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 Population 3,019,356 3,154,580 3,266,107 3,349,157 3,410,773 3,421,228 Housing Units 1,050,330 1,076,158 1,105,238 1,140,571 1,160,556 1,180,929 Source: OCP-2010 Modified TABLE 5.11-5 CITY OF ANAHEIM PROJECTIONS 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 Population 338,594 357,273 369,107 382,267 397,563 405,787 Housing Units 105,018 108,361 113,804 119,033 125,197 130,930 Source: Anaheim 2012 5.11.5 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE The following significance criteria are derived from the City of Anaheim’s Environment Checklist. The Proposed Project would result in a significant impact related to population, housing, or employment if it would: Threshold 5.11.1 Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through the extension of roads or other infrastructure). Threshold 5.11.2 Displace substantial numbers of existing houses, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. Threshold 5.11.3 Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.11 Pop Housing-082712.docx 5.11-6 Population and Housing 5.11.6 PROJECT IMPACT ANALYSIS Standard Requirements No standard requirements have been identified. Impact Analysis Threshold 5.11.1 Would the project induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through the extension of roads or other infrastructure)? C-R District As described in Section 3.0, Project Description, build out of the C-R District would result in the construction of up to 20,913 additional hotel rooms. As stated in EIRs 313 and 330, the increases in housing and population associated with the ARSP were well within projections for the City of Anaheim at that time. Since the certification of EIRs 313 and 330, regional projections like the OCP-2010 Modified have been revised to include anticipated housing and population increases associated with the ARSP through 2035 but do not include build-out of the entire Proposed Project. It is anticipated that build out of the ARSP area will occur over time with a significant portion occurring after 2035. However, for purposes of evaluating the environmental impacts, full build out of the ARSP area is evaluated. Additionally, direct increases in population and housing associated with the residential overlay areas have been previously analyzed in the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No 92-2 Amendment No. 7, Anaheim Resort Residential Overlay (Amendment No. 7 MND), which was adopted in August 2006. As stated in the Amendment No. 7 MND, the increases in population and housing associated with the residential overlay were well within projections for the City of Anaheim. Therefore, the analysis below does not consider population and housing increases associated with the residential overlay. Calculations associated with population generation and housing demand are shown in Table 5.11-6, Population Generation and Housing Demand Calculations C-R District, and discussed in detail below. TABLE 5.11-6 POPULATION GENERATION AND HOUSING DEMAND CALCULATIONS C-R DISTRICT ARSP District Hotel Room Equivalentsa Employee Generationb Relocated Employeesc Dwelling Unitsd Populatione C-R District 20,913 18,822 2,504 2,504 8,264 a Commercial uses are converted to hotel room equivalents on a ratio of 600 square feet of commercial development = 1 hotel room b Assumes 0.9 employees per hotel room c Assumes that 13.3 percent of employees would choose to relocate to the City of Anaheim d Assumes each employee relocated to the City of Anaheim would require one dwelling unit e Assumes 3.3 persons per dwelling unit ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.11 Pop Housing-082712.docx 5.11-7 Population and Housing Population MEIR 313 anticipated a creation of 18,113 jobs by 2010 associated with build out of the hotel rooms entitled within the ARSP area. This number of employees acknowledges that 11,190 hotel rooms were constructed at that time and associated jobs already existed. According to MEIR 313, up to an additional 16,318 rooms could have been developed to reach a build out total of 27,508 hotel rooms. Based on a total build out of 32,500 hotel rooms with 11,587 existing hotel rooms, build out of the ARSP area for purposes of this EIR has the development potential for up to 20,913 additional hotel rooms. Based on this number and the employee generation rate of 0.9 employees per hotel room (versus 1.1 employees per hotel room as analyzed in MEIR 313), approximately 18,822 new employment positions would be created, as shown in Table 5.11-6. With the exception of the two areas within the residential overlay discussed previously, development of permitted land uses does not include dwelling units; therefore, the Proposed Project would not result in a direct increase in population within the City of Anaheim. The generation of new employment positions has the potential to indirectly result in new households, thereby indirectly increasing population. Of the 18,822 new employment positions created through build out of the ARSP area, approximately 13.3 percent, or 2,504 employees, are expected to relocate to the City of Anaheim, resulting in the need for 2,504 dwelling units as shown in Table 5.11-6. The balance of the employees are assumed to either already live within the City of Anaheim or live in another city and choose not to relocate to Anaheim. Assuming one ARSP area employee per household and 3.3 persons per household, the new households would result in 8,264 new residents within the City at full build out of the ARSP area, which is not expected before 2030. As shown in Table 5.11-5, population projections for the City of Anaheim between 2010 and 2030 show an increase of 58,969 people; the addition of approximately 8,264 new residents associated with build out of the C-R District would be well within population projections for the City of Anaheim. Housing As discussed above, the addition of 20,913 additional hotel rooms has the potential to indirectly increase demand for housing by 2,504 units. As shown in Table 5.11-5, housing projections for the City of Anaheim between 2010 and 2030 estimate an increase of 20,179housing units; the increased demand for 2,504 additional housing units associated with build out of the C-R District would be well within housing projections for the City of Anaheim. PR District As described in Section 3.0, Project Description, implementation of the Proposed Project would result in the construction of up to 900 additional hotel rooms, 406,359 sf of convention center space, 40,000 square feet (sf) of meeting and ballroom space, 180,000 sf of commercial space, and 100,000 sf of outdoor programmable space in the PR District. Population Using the same methodology in Table 5.11-6, Population Generation and Housing Demand Calculations C-R District, development of an additional 900 hotel rooms within the PR District would result in approximately 810 new jobs, which were not previously analyzed in EIRs 313 or 330. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.11 Pop Housing-082712.docx 5.11-8 Population and Housing The development of an additional 406,359 sf of convention center space; 40,000 sf of meeting and ballroom space; 180,000 sf of commercial space, including retail, restaurant, and spa facilities; and, 100,000 sf of outdoor programmable space would result in a total of 726,359 sf of additional ancillary uses within the PR District. The ITE specifies that 600 sf of ancillary uses has the same employment generation capacity as one hotel room. As such, the 726,359 sf of ancillary uses to be developed would generate approximately 1,090 employment positions in addition to the 810 hotel employees. Therefore, the total employment generation related to the Anaheim Convention Center expansion in the PR District would be approximately 1,900 employment positions. The expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center does not propose development of dwelling units; therefore, it would not result in a direct increase in population within the City of Anaheim. The generation of new employment positions has the potential to indirectly result in new households, thereby indirectly increasing population. Based on a figure identified in MEIR 313, approximately 13.3 percent of new hotel and motel employees would choose to relocate into the City of Anaheim. Therefore, approximately 253 employees would move their residences to Anaheim, resulting in a need for 253 dwelling units. Assuming 1 ARSP area employee per household and an average of 3.3 persons per household, the new households would result in 835 new residents. As shown in Table 5.11-5, population projections for the City of Anaheim between 2010 and 2030 estimate an increase of 58,969 people; the addition of approximately 835 new residents associated with the Anaheim Convention Center expansion in the PR District would be well within population projections for the City of Anaheim. Housing As discussed above, expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center has the potential to indirectly increase demand for housing by 253 units. As shown in Table 5.11-5, housing projections for the City of Anaheim between 2010 and 2030 estimate an increase of 20,179 housing units; the increased demand for 253 additional housing units associated with the Anaheim Convention Center expansion in the PR District would be well within housing projections for the City of Anaheim. Impact Summary: Because the build out of the CR-District and the expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center in the PR District represent different elements of the overall project evaluated in this EIR, consistency with regional projections must be evaluated on a cumulative basis, including both the C-R and PR Districts. Therefore, the Proposed Project has the potential to increase population by approximately 9,099 residents and result in a demand for 2,757 housing units within the City of Anaheim. The increases related to population and housing would be well within City of Anaheim projections as stated in Table 5.11-5, representing a less than significant impact. This conclusion is consistent with the conclusion provided in MEIR 313. According to SCAG, “the development of the Integrated Growth Forecast is driven by a principle of collaboration between the regional and local jurisdictions who are major contributors in the process. Integration of the output from the regional and local forecasts is achieved through joint efforts and collaboration among various contributors” (SCAG 2007). The City of Anaheim collaborated closely with SCAG in the development of the forecasted growth in households used for the RHNA. Although the Proposed Project could create 2,757 new households, these households were assumed in the RHNA. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.11 Pop Housing-082712.docx 5.11-9 Population and Housing No impact related to RHNA compliance would occur. MEIR 313 did not evaluate impacts related to RHNA consistency; therefore, a consistency finding cannot be determined. Threshold 5.11.2 Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing houses, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Threshold 5.11.3 Would the project displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? C-R District As described in Section 3.0, Project Description, a portion of the C-R District is located within the Mobile Home Park (MHP) overlay zone and is currently developed with mobile home park uses. Build out of the C-R District would displace these housing units and the residents occupying the mobile homes. The displacement of mobile home park residences could not occur until the requirements of State law pertaining to the closure of mobile home parks were met. In addition, prior to the conversion of the mobile home park properties, the requirements of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Section 18.26.070, Conversion and Reclassification from Mobilehome Park Overlay Zone, would also need to be fulfilled. Therefore, impacts associated with displacement of existing housing and people would be less than significant. PR District There are no housing uses that currently exist within the PR District; therefore, implementation of the Anaheim Convention Center expansion would not displace any housing or people. No impact would occur. Impact Summary: Implementation of the Proposed Project has the potential to displace housing units and residents associated with the MHP overlay zone. However, assuming compliance with State law and the requirements of the Anaheim Municipal Code, impacts would be less than significant. MEIR 313 did not evaluate impacts related to the displacement of housing or people; therefore, a consistency finding for this impact conclusion cannot be made. 5.11.7 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS The cumulative study area for employment, population, and housing would encompass all of the SCAG region. Build out of the Proposed Project is projected to result in an indirect increase of 2,757 housing units within the City and a population increase of 9,099 residents. Each of these components would be within the projections provided in OCP-2010 Modified for both the City of Anaheim and Orange County; therefore, these indirect increases are also within the projections for the SCAG region as a whole. The OCP-2010 Modified regional projections were compiled based on anticipated growth statistics provided by individual jurisdictions in Orange County and the projects take into account future anticipated projects and related changes in population and housing. Therefore, this Proposed Project would not cause any significant adverse cumulative growth impacts related to population and housing beyond those accounted for in the City’s General Plan or in the Orange County Projections. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.11 Pop Housing-082712.docx 5.11-10 Population and Housing 5.11.8 MITIGATION MEASURES Previously Approved Measures No previously approved measures have been identified for impacts related to population, housing, or employment. Additional Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are necessary. 5.11.9 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION The Proposed Project would be consistent with regional population and housing projections as well as the City’s established RHNA targets and would not displace substantial numbers of houses or people. Impacts would be less than significant. 5.11.10 REFERENCES Anaheim, City of. 2012 (August 21). Personal communication. Email from A. Avalos, Associate Planner (Anaheim Planning Department) to J. Marks, Senior Project Manager (BonTerra Consulting) entitled "Revised ARSP Sections" and including an excel attachment entitled "OCP2010_final_anaheim_20101116". 2009 (May). Draft 2006–2014 Housing Element. Anaheim, CA: the City. http://www.anaheim.net/departmentfolders/planning/HousingElement/UpcomingEvents/2 006-2014HousingElement.pdf. 2004a (May). General Plan for the City of Anaheim (City Council Resolution No. 2004-94). Anaheim, CA: the City. 2004b (May). Final Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update EIR No. 330 (Prepared by The Planning Center). Anaheim, CA: the City. 1994 (August). The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Draft EIR No. 313 with Addendum. Anaheim, City of: Anaheim, CA. California Department of Finance (DOF). 2012 (January E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, January 2011 and 2012, with 2010 Benchmark (an excel spreadsheet entitled "Table 2: E-5 City/County Population and Housing Estimates, 1/1/2012"). Sacramento, CA: DOF. http://www.dof.ca.gov/research/ demographic/reports/estimates/e-5/2011-20/view.php California, State of. 2010. California Government Code (Sections 65584–65995). Sacramento, CA: the State. http://info.sen.ca.gov/cgi-bin/calawquery?codesection=gov&codebody= &hits=20&site=sen Center for Demographic Research (CDR). 2012 (January 26, final approval). Orange County Projections 2010 Modified (Data Sets, an excel spreadsheet). Fullerton, CA: CDR. Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). 2003. Trip Generation (7th ed.). Washington, D.C.: ITE. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.11 Pop Housing-082712.docx 5.11-11 Population and Housing Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). 2008. Final 2008 Regional Comprehensive Plan. Los Angeles, CA: SCAG. http://www.scag.ca.gov/rcp/pdf/finalrcp/ f2008RCP_Complete.pdf. 2007 (July 12). Final Regional Housing Need Allocation Plan - Planning Period (January 1, 2006 - June 30, 2014) for Jurisdictions within the Six-County SCAG Region (a spreadsheet). Los Angeles, CA: SCAG. http://www.scag.ca.gov/Housing/pdfs/rhna/ RHNA_FinalAllocationPlan071207.pdf 2004 (June). Southern California Compass Growth Vision Report. Los Angeles, CA: SCAG. http://www.compassblueprint. org/files/scag-growthvision2004.pdf. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.11 Pop Housing-082712.docx 5.11-12 Population and Housing This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.12 Public Services-082312.docx 5.12-1 Public Services 5.12 PUBLIC SERVICES 5.12.1 SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION MEIR 313 includes data from the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan EIR, including facilities and response times of the City of Anaheim Police Department and Fire Department and their ability to serve the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan area. Locations of schools and libraries and potential impacts from implementation of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (ARSP) were also identified. Implementation of mitigation measures serve to reduce all impacts associated with police protection, fire protection, schools, and libraries to a less than significant level. 5.12.2 POLICE PROTECTION Plans, Policies, and Regulatory Conditions Related Planning Programs City of Anaheim General Plan, Public Services and Facilities Element The Public Services and Facilities Element of the City of Anaheim General Plan addresses law enforcement and crime prevention. Applicable goals and policies from the Public Services and Facilities Element that are related to police protection and that are applicable to the Proposed Project are provided in Table 5.9-2 in Section 5.9, Land Use and Planning, with a project consistency analysis. Regulatory Setting There are no federal, State, or local regulations related to police protection that are applicable to the Proposed Project or analysis. Methodology Information regarding current police services was generated from information in the Public Services and Facilities Element of the City of Anaheim General Plan (May 2004) and the Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update EIR 330 (May 2004). In addition, the City of Anaheim Police Department was contacted to determine the Police Department’s ability to provide services. Existing Conditions The City of Anaheim Police Department (Police Department) provides law enforcement services to over 330,000 residents and approximately 5,000 businesses in the City. Law enforcement services include traffic control and enforcement, narcotics violations, crime control, community and tourist regulation, detention facilities, various investigations, and patrol. The Police Department is divided into four service districts (Central [Main], South, East, and West) each containing a police station (see Table 5.12-1 below). The ARSP is located within the Central District and is served by the Central Station. The Fullerton Municipal Airport, located at 4011 West Commonwealth Avenue in the City of Fullerton, has a police heliport and houses the Anaheim Police Department’s three helicopters. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.12 Public Services-082312.docx 5.12-2 Public Services TABLE 5.12-1 CITY OF ANAHEIM POLICE STATION FACILITIES Police Station Location Distance to the ARSP Project Area Police Department Resources Central/Main Station 425 S. Harbor Blvd. 3.5 miles Investigative and detective functions South 1520 South Disneyland Dr. 1.2 miles Services to the surrounding resort district including investigative and detective operations West 320 South Beach Blvd. 6.7 miles Joint police services and community center facility East 8201 East Santa Ana Canyon Rd. 14.5 miles No follow-up investigative or detective services Source: Nguyen 2010 The Police Department prioritizes calls into five categories. Priority 1 calls pertain to the most life-threatening or time-crucial incidents. Police are sent immediately; if all units are busy, the department will send out an emergency broadcast and whichever unit is closest to the location will attend to the matter. With Priority 2 calls, units are dispatched immediately if they are available. The goal is to send police units that are assigned to that particular geographical area. If the area unit is not available, the nearest police unit is dispatched. If there are still no available units after five minutes, the need will again be dispatched. If the call is violent and text indicates imminent threat of injury and no units respond after the second broadcast, the nearest unit will be dispatched. Priority 3 calls are calls that may be held by the dispatch for up to 15 minutes. If 15 minutes pass and no units are available, the dispatcher will send the closest available unit. Priority 4 calls may be held up to one hour, and Priority 5 calls may be held up to two hours (Nguyen 2010). Thresholds of Significance The following significance criterion is derived from the City of Anaheim Environmental Checklist. The Proposed Project would result in a significant impact related to police protection services if it would: Threshold 5.12.1 Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for police protection. Project Impact Analysis Standard Requirements No standard requirements have been identified. Impact Analysis Threshold 5.12.1: Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.12 Public Services-082312.docx 5.12-3 Public Services governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for police protection? Based on correspondence from the City of Anaheim Police Department (Nguyen 2010), the ARSP at build out would generate, on average, in excess of 20,036 calls for service per year. This, in combination with the other proposed development projects in the area would reduce or delay delivery of service throughout the City. Information provided by the Police Department (Nguyen 2010) indicated that based on a Public Safety Impact Study prepared by Revenue & Cost Specialists, LLC for the Police Department, the calls generated by this intensification alone would require an increase in staffing of 60 officers and 31.5 full-time and 14.4 part-time civilian support personnel to maintain current levels of service. A staffing increase of that size would necessitate the acquisition of a minimum of 23,884 square feet of additional facility space, 53.4 new vehicles, and a minimum of $306,480 in assigned equipment. The funding for new officers and equipment needed to maintain acceptable service levels would come from the City’s General Fund. Property taxes and other fees assessed on future property owners would contribute to the General Fund revenues. However, because the Proposed Project buildout timeframe is over a 25-year period, the Anaheim Police Department would be able to accommodate these changes in future expansion plans, and no significant impacts would be associated with the Proposed Project. In addition, compliance with the proposed mitigation would further ensure adequate police protection services are provided and would minimize demand on police protection services. Impact Summary: Build out of the ARSP would create additional demand for police services; implementation of MM 5.12-1 through 5.12-5 would reduce impacts to less than significant. Cumulative Impacts The police protection study area considered the cumulative impact of the area that could be affected by implementation of the Proposed Project and the areas affected by other projects whose activities could directly or indirectly affect the police protection for the Proposed Project within a service area. The geographic area for cumulative analysis of police protection services is defined as the service territory for the Police Department. The Police Department has taken projected growth into account in its long-range planning efforts. The Police Department is currently meeting desired staffing and service objectives and expects to continue meeting these in the future. No cumulative impacts are anticipated. Therefore, the Proposed Project’s demand for police protection services would not result in or contribute to any significant cumulative impact to police protection services; however, as indicated above, compliance with the proposed mitigation would further ensure adequate police protection services are provided and would minimize demand on police protection services. Mitigation Measures Previously Approved Measures MEIR 313 presented mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts associated with the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Project to less than significant levels. The following measures from MEIR 313 shall be incorporated into the Mitigation Program for this EIR: ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.12 Public Services-082312.docx 5.12-4 Public Services MM 5.12-1 Prior to the approval of each Final Site Plan and issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit plans to the Police Department for review and approval for safety, accessibility, crime prevention, and security provisions during both the construction and operative phases for the purpose of incorporating safety measures in the project design including the concept of crime prevention through environmental design building design, circulation, site planning, and lighting of parking structures and parking areas). (MEIR 313 MM 3.9.2-1, Public Services and Utilities and incorporates Ord 5454, Condition 32 as shown in bold) MM 5.12-2 Prior to the issuance of each building permit for a parking structure, the property owner/developer shall submit plans to the Police Department for review and approval indicating the provision of closed circuit television monitoring and recording or other substitute security measures as may be approved by the Police Department. Said measures shall be implemented prior to final building and zoning inspections. (MEIR 313 MM 3.9.2-2, Public Services and Utilities) MM 5.12-3 Ongoing during project operation, the property owner/developer shall provide private security on the premises to maintain adequate security for the entire project subject to review and approval of the Police Department. The use of security patrols and electronic security devices video monitors) should be considered to reduce the potential for criminal activity in the area. (MEIR 313 MM 3.9.2-3, Public Services and Utilities) MM 5.12-4 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the project design shall include parking lots and parking structures with controlled access points to limit ingress and egress if determined to be necessary by the Police Department, and shall be subject to the review and approval of the Police Department. (MEIR 313 MM 3.9.2-4, Public Services and Utilities) Additional Mitigation Measures No additional mitigation measures have been identified. Level of Significance After Mitigation With implementation of the mitigation program described above, no significant impacts to the City of Anaheim Police Department and its service levels would occur. 5.12.3 FIRE PROTECTION Plans, Policies, and Regulatory Conditions Related Planning Programs City of Anaheim General Plan, Public Services and Facilities Element The Public Services and Facilities Element of the City of Anaheim General Plan addresses fire protection and emergency services. Applicable goals and policies from the Public Services and Facilities Element that are related to fire protection and that are applicable to the Proposed Project are provided in Table 5.9-2 in Section 5.9, Land Use and Planning, with a Project consistency analysis. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.12 Public Services-082312.docx 5.12-5 Public Services Regulatory Setting There are no federal, State, or local regulations related to fire protection services that are applicable to this Project. Methodology The information in this section regarding fire protection services is summarized from the Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update EIR 330 (May 2004), MEIR 313, and the City of Anaheim Public Safety Master Facilities Plan/Development Impact Fees (MFP/DIF) Calculation Report (Anaheim 2005). In addition, the City of Anaheim Fire Department was contacted to determine the Fire Departments’ ability to provide services. Existing Conditions The City of Anaheim Fire Department (Fire Department) operates 12 fire stations and employs a total of 227 sworn/safety, 48 civilian/professional, and 7.81 part time personnel. The Anaheim Fire Department employs both sworn and civilian personnel. Fire stations are strategically located to ensure an efficient demand response to all risk hazards. The Fire Department staffs engine and ladder truck companies, and provides paramedic services, fire suppression, rescue, and hazardous materials response capabilities (Lutz 2012). The Fire Department presently staffs 10 engine companies, all of which are designated paramedic companies; 5 truck companies, 3 of which are paramedic companies; 2 contract paramedic companies; 1 dual role hazardous-materials unit; 1 dual role technical rescue unit; and 2 Battalions housed in Fire Station 6 and Fire Station 8. Please refer to Table 5.12-2 for a summary of the Fire Protection resources in the City of Anaheim. TABLE 5.12-2 CITY OF ANAHEIM FIRE SERVICE FACILITIES Station Station Address Equipment Downtown Station 1 500 East Broadway Street Paramedic Engine 1, Truck 1, and Ambulance 1 Brookhurst Station 2 2141 West Crescent Avenue Paramedic Engine 2 and Truck 2 Resort Station 3 1717 South Clementine Paramedic Engine 3, Truck 3 and Ambulance 3, and USAR 3 West Anaheim Station 4 2736 West Orange Avenue Paramedic Engine 4 Kraemer Station 5 1154 North Kraemer Boulevard Paramedic Engine 5 Euclid Station 6 1330 South Euclid Street Paramedic Engine 6, Truck 6, Battalion 2, Ambulance 6, and Hazmat 6 Stadium Station 7 2222 East Ball Road Paramedic Engine 7 and Ambulance 7 Riverdale Station 8 4555 East Riverdale Battalion 1, Paramedic Truck 8 Anaheim Hills Station 9 6300 East Nohl Ranch Road Paramedic Engine 9 and Ambulance 9 Weir Canyon Station 10 8270 East Monte Vista Paramedic Engine 10 Twila Reid Station 11 3078 West Orange Avenue Paramedic Engine 11 and Ambulance 11 Disney Station Located in the Disneyland Resort Paramedic crews 4-3 and 4-4 Source: Lutz 2012 Fire stations are strategically located to ensure an efficient demand response to all risk hazards and maintain recommendations for response times (Anaheim 2004a). National response time standards for emergency response requires first engine response within 5 minutes to 90 percent ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.12 Public Services-082312.docx 5.12-6 Public Services of all incidents and 8 minutes to the remaining 10 percent. The Fire Department also requires a maximum of 10 minutes for truck company response to 100 percent of all incidents. Average total travel time for incidents in 2010 was 5 minutes and 18 seconds for all calls. In addition to fire protection services, the Fire Department provides emergency rescue and medical services. Because the majority of calls placed to the Fire Department are requests for medical aid, the Fire Department maintains a Paramedic Membership Program that guarantees that participants pay no out-of-pocket expenses for emergency medical services provided by the Anaheim Fire Department. However, the program does not cover ambulance services provided by a private company that coordinates with the Fire Department. The City is also part of a regional coordination system with other firefighting agencies. Fire units are dispatched through the Metro Cities Fire Authority. The Metro Cities Fire Communications Center currently serves the citizens of eight cities: Anaheim, Brea, Fountain Valley, Fullerton, Garden Grove, Huntington Beach, Newport Beach, and Orange. The Communication Center, commonly referred to as Metro Net, is located in the City of Anaheim and dispatches fire and emergency medical services for more than 1.2 million citizens residing in 188 square miles within Orange County. The Anaheim Fire Department manages the day-to-day operations of the Center. In addition to fire protection services, the Fire Department provides emergency rescue and medical services to Anaheim residents and visitors. The Fire Prevention Division of the Fire Department consists of two operational sections, which include the Hazardous Materials Section (HMS) and the Life Safety Section (LSS). The Hazardous Materials Section (HMS) administers and implements a comprehensive hazardous materials management program as a Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA), which is authorized by the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA). Some of the programs covered under this program include California Accidental Release Prevention (CalARP), Hazardous Materials Inventories, and Management/Release Response Plans (hazardous Materials Business Plans). The HMS also administers the countywide hazardous materials response team joint parties’ agreement under the Orange County-City Hazardous Materials Emergency Response Authority (OCCHMERA) (Lutz 2009). The LSS of the Fire Prevention Bureau provides a number of services to the community including fire safety inspections, annual fire code permits, plan reviews for new construction, and fire protection systems. The Fire Department also operates several educational and training programs on a number of issues related to fire prevention and public safety. Program topics include home fire safety, drowning prevention, used oil recycling, and cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). Thresholds of Significance The following significance criterion is derived from the City of Anaheim Environmental Checklist. The Proposed Project would result in a significant impact related to fire protection services if it would: Threshold 5.12.2 Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for fire protection. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.12 Public Services-082312.docx 5.12-7 Public Services Project Impact Analysis Standard Requirements The following standard requirement was derived from existing regulations, requirements, and standard practices set forth by regional and local agencies. SR 5.12-1 Prior to the final building and zoning inspection, the property owner/developer shall provide evidence to the Planning Director/Planning Services Manager of full payment of applicable fire facilities fees as deemed appropriate by the Fire Department. Impact Analysis Threshold 5.12.2: Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for fire protection? The City of Anaheim Fire Department uses the Public Safety Services Master Facilities Plan and Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report (April 2005, subsequently updated in May 2006 and October 2007) to forecast future demand on fire and emergency services for all new development projects in the City (Lutz 2009). The Proposed Project’s projected demand on fire services is calculated below in Table 5.12-3. TABLE 5.12-3 ARSP DEMAND ON FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICE District Existing Approved Development Within the ARSP Project Area Increase from Existing Approved Anaheim Resort Specific Plan MFP/DIF Calculation Report Service Factora Demand on Fire Services for ARSP Amendment – Annual Calls per Unit or KSF C-R District 28,988 hotel rooms 3,512 hotel rooms 0.040/Commercial Lodging Unit 141 PR District 1,600 hotel rooms (Anaheim Hilton) 900 hotel rooms 0.040/Commercial Lodging Unit 36 1.7 million sf convention center 406,359 sf of convention center uses 0.107/ City Entertainment Group (annual calls per unit or KSF)b 44 119,000 sf of additional traffic generating uses The commercial development and meeting/ballroom space is 100,586 sf more than the previously approved “traffic-generating uses” 0.066/ Commercial/Office Uses KSF 66 100,000 sf of outdoor programmable space None N/A 0 Total Additional Demand on Fire Services (Annual Calls) 287 a Anaheim 2005; Updated May 2006 and October 2007. b Entertainment Group service factor used per Marshal Lutz (Lutz 2009). N/A: Not applicable. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.12 Public Services-082312.docx 5.12-8 Public Services Approximately 287 annual requests for fire and/or emergency rescue services are anticipated with implementation of the Proposed Project. The Fire Department will require compliance with the existing mitigation measures currently in place and payment of the fire facilities fees. The Proposed Project would result in less than significant impacts to fire protection services with adherence to the standard requirements and the proposed mitigation measures (Lutz 2009). Impact Summary: Build out of the ARSP would create additional demand for fire and/or emergency rescue services; adherence to SRCs 5.12-1 and implementation of MM 5.12-6 through 5.12-17 would reduce impacts to less than significant. Cumulative Impacts The geographic area for the cumulative analysis of fire protection services is defined as the service territory for the Fire Department. The City is almost fully built out, with most new development occurring as infill development or redevelopment. The contribution of these projects to area growth is reflected in population and housing estimates and has been considered in long-range planning efforts undertaken by agencies, including the Fire Department who evaluates cumulative demand in order to plan for overall service. The Fire Department is currently meeting its response time objectives and expects to continue meeting its response time objectives. No cumulative impacts are anticipated. Therefore, the Proposed Project’s demand for fire protection services would not result in or contribute to a significant cumulative impact to fire protection services, and no mitigation is required. Mitigation Measures Previously Approved Measures MEIR 313 presented mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts associated with the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Project to less than significant levels. The following measures from MEIR 313 shall be incorporated into the Mitigation Program for this EIR: MM 5.12-5 Prior to commencement of structural framing on each parcel or lot, onsite fire hydrants shall be installed and charged by the property owner/developer as required and approved by the Fire Department. (MEIR 313 MM 3.9-1.1, Public Services and Utilities) MM 5.12-6 Prior to approval issuance of each grading permit plan, the property owner/developer shall submit an emergency fire access plan to the Fire Department for review and approval to ensure that service to the site is in accordance with Fire Department service requirements. (MEIR 313 MM 3.9-1.2, Public Services and Utilities) MM 5.12-7 Prior to issuance of each building permit; to be implemented prior to the final building and zoning inspection, plans shall indicate that all buildings, exclusive of parking structures, shall have sprinklers installed by the property owner/developer in accordance with the Anaheim Municipal Code. Said sprinklers shall be installed prior to each final building and zoning inspection. (MEIR 313 MM 3.9-1.3, Public Services and Utilities) MM 5.12-8 Prior to issuance of each building permit, plans shall be submitted to ensure that development is in accordance with the City of Anaheim Fire Department Standards, including: ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.12 Public Services-082312.docx 5.12-9 Public Services a. Overhead clearance shall not be less than 14 feet for the full width of access roads. b. Bridges and underground structures to be used for Fire Department access shall be designed to support Fire Department vehicles weighing 75,000 pounds. c. All underground tunnels shall have sprinklers. Water supplies are required at all entrances. Standpipes shall also be provided when determined to be necessary by the Fire Department. d. Adequate off-site public fire hydrants contiguous to the Specific Plan area and onsite private fire hydrants shall be provided by the property owner/developer. The precise number, types, and locations of the hydrants shall be determined during building permit review. Hydrants are to be a maximum of 400 feet apart. e. A minimum residual water pressure of 20 psi shall remain in the water system. Flow rates for public parking facilities shall be set at 1,000 to 1,500 gpm. (MEIR 313 MM 3.9-1.4, Public Services and Utilities) MM 5.12-9 Prior to issuance of the first building permit, the property owner/developer shall enter into an agreement recorded against the property with the City of Anaheim to pay or cause to be paid their fair share of the funding to accommodate the following, which will serve the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan area: a. One additional fire truck company. b. One additional paramedic company. c. Modifications to existing fire stations to accommodate the additional fire units, additional manpower, equipment and facilities. d. A vehicle equipped with specialty tools and equipment to enable the Fire Department to provide heavy search and rescue response capability. e. A medical triage vehicle/trailer, equipped with sufficient trauma dressings, medical supplies, stretchers, etc., to handle 1,000 injured persons, and an appropriate storage facility. The determination of the allocable share of costs attributable to the property owner/developer shall be based on an apportionment of the costs of such equipment/facilities among property owners/developers in the Hotel Circle Specific Plan Area, the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan Area and the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Area or the otherwise defined service area, as applicable, depending on the area served. (Note: To implement this mitigation measure, the City has adopted the Fire Protection Facilities and Paramedic Services Impact Fee Program. Compliance with this Program by the property owner/developer (per Ordinance No. 5496 and Resolution No. 95R-73 dated May 16, 1995) shall satisfy the requirements of this Mitigation Measure, or the City may enter into alternative financing arrangements.) (MEIR 313 MM 3.9-1.5, Public Services and Utilities) MM 5.12-10 Prior to each final building and zoning inspection, the property owner/developer shall place emergency telephone service numbers in prominent locations as approved by the Fire Department. (MEIR 313 MM 3.9-1.6, Public Services and Utilities) ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.12 Public Services-082312.docx 5.12-10 Public Services MM 5.12-11 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit a Construction Fire Protection Plan to the Fire Department for review and approval detailing accessibility of emergency fire equipment, fire hydrant location, and any other construction features required by the Fire Marshal. The property owner/developer shall be responsible for securing facilities acceptable to the Fire Department and hydrants shall be operational with required fire flow. (MEIR 313 MM 3.9-1.7, Public Services and Utilities) Ordinance 5454 City Ordinance 5454 presented a list of conditions of approval that are applicable to all projects within the ARSP area. The following conditions shall be incorporated into the Mitigation Program for this EIR. Any modifications to the original conditions are shown as strikethrough for deleted text and bold for new, inserted text. (Note that the specific condition references from Ordinance 5454 are listed in parentheses). MM 5.12-12 That Prior to the approval of each Final Site Plan and prior to the issuance of each building permit, plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Fire Department as being in conformance with the Uniform Fire Code. (Ord 5454, Condition 8) MM 5.12-13 That Prior to the placement of building materials on a building site, an all-weather road shall be provided from the roadway system to and on the construction site and for fire hydrants at all times, as required by the Fire Department. Such routes shall be paved or, subject to the approval of the Fire Department, shall otherwise provide adequate emergency access. Every building constructed must be accessible to Fire Department apparatus. The width and radius of the driving surface must meet the requirements of Section 10.204 of the Uniform Fire Code, as adopted by the City of Anaheim. (Ord 5454, Condition 9) MM 5.12-14 Prior to approval of building plans, the property owner/developer shall provide written evidence to the satisfaction of the Fire Department that all lockable pedestrian and/or vehicular access gates shall be equipped with “knox box” devices as required and approved by the Fire Department. (Ord 5454, Condition 10) MM 5.12-15 That Prior to approval of on-site water plans, unless each commercial building is initially connected to separate fire services, an unsubordinated covenant satisfactory to the City Attorney’s Office shall be recorded prohibiting any individual sale of buildings until separate fire services are installed in the building(s) subject to the sale. (Ord 5454, Condition 11) Additional Mitigation Measures MM 5.12-16 Prior to approval of water improvement plans, the water supply system shall be designed by the property owner/developer to provide sufficient fire flow pressure and storage for the proposed land use and fire protection services in accordance with Fire Department requirements. Level of Significance After Mitigation With implementation of the mitigation program described above, no significant impacts to the City of Anaheim Fire Department and its service levels would occur. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.12 Public Services-082312.docx 5.12-11 Public Services 5.12.4 SCHOOLS Plans, Policies, and Regulatory Conditions Related Planning Programs City of Anaheim General Plan, Public Services and Facilities Element The Public Services and Facilities Element of the City of Anaheim General Plan addresses school facilities. Applicable goals and policies from the Public Services and Facilities Element that are related to schools and that are applicable to the Proposed Project are provided in Table 5.9-2 in Section 5.9, Land Use and Planning, with a project consistency analysis. Regulatory Setting Senate Bill 50 (SB 50 or “Leroy Greene School Facilities Act”), enacted in 1998, represents the most significant school facility finance and developer fee reform legislation for school facilities construction and modernization since the adoption of the 1986 School Facilities Act. The payment of school mitigation impact fees authorized by SB 50 is deemed to provide full and complete mitigation of project impacts on school facilities. SB 50 provides that a State or local agency may not deny or refuse to approve the planning, use, or development of real property on the basis of a developer’s refusal to provide mitigation in amounts in excess of that established by SB 50. SB 50 authorized statewide bonds in the amount of $9.2 billion, with $2.9 billion for new kindergarten through twelfth grade (K–12) construction to add capacity to local school districts. In 2002, Assembly Bill 16 modified the School Facility Program and authorized two additional statewide bond measures. Proposition 47 provided $11.4 billion for K–12 schools and was approved by the voters in November 2002 billion for new construction). A second bond measure in the amount of $10 billion for K–12 schools ($7.7 billion for new construction) was approved by the voters in 2004. California Government Code, Section 65995 establishes the statutory criteria for assessing construction fees, also known as “developer’s fees”. The legislation has recognized the need for the fees to be adjusted periodically to keep pace with inflation; therefore, the State Allocation Board increases the maximum fees according to the adjustment for inflation in the statewide cost index for Class B construction. The current maximum rates are $0.36 per square foot of new commercial/industrial construction and $2.24 per square foot of new residential construction (Pidgen 2010a). Residential developer fees were increased to $1.485 per square foot and commercial fees were increased to $0.235 by the Anaheim City School District (ACSD) Board of Education on March 3, 2008; this rate is only for the ACSD. As of December 2009, Anaheim Union High School District (AUHSD) rates are $0.21 per square foot of commercial space and $1.32 per square foot of residential structures (Oskoui 2009). Methodology The following information is based on the websites of the ACSD and AUHSD. In addition, each school district was contacted to determine if the Proposed Project would significantly impact the districts’ abilities to provide services. Existing Conditions The ACSD operates 24 elementary schools (kindergarten through sixth grades within the City limits. The ACSD has prepared the Anaheim City School District Facility Planning and ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.12 Public Services-082312.docx 5.12-12 Public Services Development Facilities Master Plan, 2010 – 2030, which outlines a strategy for significant new construction, modernization, and additions to the ACSD. Total district-wide enrollment for the ACSD for the 2009/2010 school year was 19,304 students (Pidgen 2010a). The AUHSD has a student population of approximately 37,000, including Adult Education (AUHSD 2010). The District covers 46 square miles and serves the Cities of Anaheim, Cypress, Buena Park, La Palma, and Stanton. The AUHSD serves grades 7–12 and includes 8 junior high schools (grades 6–8); 10 high schools (grades 9–12); 1 comprehensive school (grades 7-12); and 6 alternative education facilities. Thresholds of Significance The following significance criterion is derived from the City of Anaheim Environmental Checklist. The Proposed Project would result in a significant impact related to school services if it would: Threshold 5.12.3 Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for schools. Project Impact Analysis Standard Requirements No standard requirements have been identified for schools. Impact Analysis Threshold 5.12.3 Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for schools? Consistent with the analysis presented in MEIR 313, the Proposed Project does not involve the construction of new dwelling units. Therefore, direct impacts on the ACSD or the AUHSD are not expected to occur as a result of the Proposed Project. However, implementation of the Proposed Project over the 25-year buildout period could produce an indirect impact, generating a population increase of 9,099 persons in the City. As detailed in Section 5.11, Population and Housing, the potential relocation of employees as a result of the build out of the ARSP could generate a need for 2,757 dwelling units to be constructed within the City limits. The current student generation rates used for planning purposes include a rate of 0.3609 students per household for elementary students and 0.07 students per household for junior high and high school students (Pidgen 2010a and Oskoui 2010). These generation factors are a combination of the number of students per average residential dwelling unit, which includes all households including those with no current students. The anticipated Student Generation Rate for the Proposed Project is detailed in Table 5.12-4 below. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.12 Public Services-082312.docx 5.12-13 Public Services TABLE 5.12-4 STUDENT GENERATION RATE School District Dwelling Units Student Generation Rate (students per household) No. of New Students ACSDa 2,757 0.3609 995 AUHSDb 2,757 0.07 193 Total 1,188 a Pidgen 2010a b Oskoui 2010 Approximately 1,188 school-aged students would be generated as an indirect result of the Proposed Project, including 995 elementary students and 193 junior and high school students. This increase in demand for school services and facilities would evolve over the 25-year buildout period as the ARSP area is constructed and potential employees decide to locate within the City limits. In addition, potential resort area employees could live anywhere within the city and would have the potential to utilize any of the Districts’ schools. As detailed in MEIR 313 and mandated by SB 50, payment of fees by the Developer would reduce the potential impacts to the ACSD and the AUHSD to less than significant levels. In addition, the proposed mitigation requiring the City, on an ongoing basis, to work cooperatively with school districts to identify opportunities for new schools and school expansion would also help mitigate impacts of the Proposed Project. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated. Impact Summary: Build out of the ARSP would generate new school-aged students; implementation of MMs 5.12-18 and 5.12-19 would reduce impacts to less than significant. Cumulative Impacts Future development under the Proposed Project would result in an increased student population over the 25-year build out. However, all new growth would occur in compliance with applicable goals and policies of the City’s General Plan and standard requirements such as SB 50. Therefore, potential impacts related to schools would be less than significant and would not be cumulatively considerable. Mitigation Measures Previously Approved Measures MEIR 313 presented mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts associated with the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Project to less than significant levels. The following measure from MEIR 313 shall be incorporated into the Mitigation Program for this EIR: MM 5.12-17 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall provide proof of compliance with Government Code Section 53080 (Schools). (MEIR 313 MM 3.9.5-1, Public Services and Utilities) Additional Mitigation Measures MM 5.12-18 Ongoing, the City will work cooperatively with school districts to identify opportunities for new schools and school expansion. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.12 Public Services-082312.docx 5.12-14 Public Services Level of Significance After Mitigation With implementation of the mitigation program described above, no significant impacts to school facilities would occur. 5.12.5 LIBRARY Plans, Policies, and Regulatory Conditions Related Planning Programs City of Anaheim General Plan, Public Services and Facilities Element The Public Services and Facilities Element of the City of Anaheim General Plan addresses library services. Applicable goals and policies from the Public Services and Facilities Element that are related to library services and that are applicable to the Proposed Project are provided in Table 5.9-2 in Section 5.9, Land Use and Planning, with a Project consistency analysis. Regulatory Setting There are no federal, State, or local regulations related to library services that are applicable to this Project. Methodology The following information is based on data from the City of Anaheim General Plan (May 2004). In addition, City of Anaheim library services staff was contacted to determine if the Proposed Project would significantly impact the City’s abilities to provide library services. Existing Conditions The Euclid Library, located at 1340 S. Euclid Street, and the Central Library, located at 500 W. Broadway, are the two closest Anaheim Public Library facilities nearest to The Anaheim Resort. Virtual Anaheim Library services would also be available via the internet. These services include an internet-based library catalog; book reserves and “Book News”, an online access to book clubs and newsletters; the ability to write and read book reviews online and post them in the library catalog through the Library’s Facebook Page; full text printable/downloadable databases including a Business and Company Resource Center, health and wellness resources, magazines, and local and national newspapers; one on one tutoring through Homework Help; and practice tests for school, jobs, and the military. Built in 1963, the Central Library is a 67,500-square-foot facility that provides library service 6 days a week to a local population of approximately 97,570 residents. The Central Library has a collection of 264,365 items including print, video, and audio materials. In fiscal year 2008/2009, approximately 55,669 users borrowed over 670,546 items. The outlet has seating for 256 persons, including seating for 47 public access computer workstations. Built in 1976, the Euclid Library is a 10,000-square-foot facility that provides library service 5 days a week to a local population of approximately 73,534 residents. The Euclid Library has a collection of 70,229 items including print, dvds/videos, and audio materials. To date, there are approximately 19,769 borrowers who have borrowed over 139,213 items. The outlet has seating for 102 persons, including seating for 22 public access computer workstations. As shown in Table 5.12-5, the Euclid Library is undersized compared to current Library Service Indicators. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.12 Public Services-082312.docx 5.12-15 Public Services TABLE 5.12-5 LIBRARY SERVICE INDICATORS Factor National Library Norms (HALPR’s Index) Euclid Branch of APL Square Feet per capita 0.3–0.5 sf 0.2 sf Volumes per square feet owned per capita 4.0–6.2 volumes 4.5 volumes Circulation per capita 4.5 4.04 Electronic Resource Use per capita .9 1.1 Information Assistance per capita 1.1 0.79 sf: square feet Source: Lujan 2009. On July 1, 2010, the Central Library completed the third phase of a major renovation to expand usable space for library services within this 65,000-square-foot structure. The renovation included the installation of an ADA accessible elevator and bathrooms, energy efficient lighting, the expansion of the Children’s Area, refurbishment of the exterior, and an upgrade of the entrance and parking lot to meet Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. The Anaheim Libraries Facilities Master Plan includes plans to expand the Euclid Library from 10,000 square feet to 15,000 square feet to provide a Quiet Zone, computer lab, and expanded children’s area. Thresholds of Significance The following significance criterion is derived from the City of Anaheim’s Environmental Checklist. The Proposed Project would result in a significant impact related to library services if it would: Threshold 5.12.4 Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for library services. Project Impact Analysis Project Design Features No project design features have been identified for library services. Standard Requirements No standard requirements have been identified for library services. Impact Analysis Threshold 5.12.4 Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for library services? ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.12 Public Services-082312.docx 5.12-16 Public Services Population and demographics of the projected new residential base are the key factors used to assess library needs/impacts. The number of dwelling units and population of surrounding libraries, such as number of patrons, circulation totals, and impact on existing collection, are considered when factoring impacts on services. Factors determining the service levels of a public library include total population; youth population; student population; language of households; income level of households; and educational level of households. Comparative data for service adequacy is available through the Public Library Data Service statistical reports. The quality and adequacy of services are measured on a per capita basis. A growth in population reduces the overall availability, per capita, of books, media, computers, and space. Increasingly, library services are virtual. These electronic resources are most impacted by population growth as the licensing fees for these databases, online tutor help, and other features is generally linked to the population of the library’s service area. Increases in population increase the licensing costs of electronic resources and reduce the per capita availability of virtual as well as physical collections, computers, programs, and space. In order to maintain current per capita levels and licensing agreements, additional physical and virtual resources need to be added to the Anaheim library system (Lujan 2009). Population growth associated with new residential development results in an increased demand for library services and facilities that negatively impacts the quality and quantity of library resources per capita. Developer fees are assessed to allow a community to establish a financing mechanism to help to offset the increased service needs that occur when new housing units are built. The increase in residents will impact the current per capita standard for books, equipment, computers, and other resources. As discussed in the Section 5.11, Population and Housing, a total increase of 9,099 additional residents could occur as a result of the Proposed Project. Currently, one in three Anaheim residents has a library card and uses the public library. This would add new borrowers to the Euclid/Central service areas. The growth in population will increase licensing costs for electronic resources. Therefore, additional funds to support increased demand for library services are required to maintain the current level of community support. The resources deficit caused by an increase in population is calculated by household size for residential projects. The Anaheim Municipal Code, Section 17.08.385, Public Library Facilities Services Areas – Payment of Fees Required, states that the City may by resolution establish a public library services plan that shall require a subdivider or developer to pay such fees as established in the public library services plan as a condition of approval. The library services fee that has been developed for earlier projects was assessed by population density per household. Implementation of such a fee would help minimize impacts on resources and services provided by the City of Anaheim Library to a less than significant level. No significant impacts on library services are anticipated in conjunction with the Proposed Project. Impact Summary: Build out of the ARSP would introduce new borrowers to the Anaheim Public Library service area; implementation of MM 5.12-16 would reduce impacts to less than significant. MEIR No. 313 did not evaluate impacts related to libraries; therefore, a consistency finding cannot be determined. Cumulative Impacts Implementation of the Proposed Project would affect the provision of library services. As with the Proposed Project, all future development projects would be required to assess potential impacts to library services and mitigate such impacts through the payment of fees, construction of physical improvements, and/or other established provisions. Prior to the implementation of the required mitigation program, the Project would incrementally contribute to cumulative ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.12 Public Services-082312.docx 5.12-17 Public Services impacts. However, as identified in this section, the Proposed Project would not result in significant and unavoidable impacts related to library services with implementation of the proposed mitigation. Mitigation Measures Previously Approved Measures No previously approved mitigation measures for library services were identified. Additional Mitigation Measures MM 5.12-19 Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the property owner/developer shall comply with the Anaheim Municipal Code, Section 17.08.385, Public Library Facilities Services Areas – Payment of Fees Required. Level of Significance After Mitigation With implementation of the mitigation program described above, no significant impacts to library services would occur. 5.12.6 REFERENCES Anaheim, City of. 2010 (May City of Anaheim Municipal Code (Section 17.08.385, Public Library Facilities Services Areas—Payment of Fees Required). Cincinnati, OH: American Legal Publishing Corporation for the City. http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/ California/anaheim/anaheimmunicipalcode?f=templates$fn=default.htm$3.0$vid=amlega l:anaheim_ca. 2005 (April) City of Anaheim Public Safety Master Facilities Plan/Development Impact Fee Calculation Report and Nexus Report. Anaheim, CA: the City. 2004a (May). General Plan for the City of Anaheim (City Council Resolution No. 2004- 94). Anaheim, CA: the City. 2004b (May). Final Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update EIR No. 330 (Prepared by The Planning Center). Anaheim, CA: the City. 1994 (August). The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Draft EIR No. 313 with Addendum. Anaheim, City of: Anaheim, CA. Anaheim City School District (ACSD). 2010 (April 7, last accessed). Anaheim City School District. Anaheim, CA: ACSD. http://www.acsd.k12.ca.us/ Anaheim Union High School District (AUHSD). 2010 (April 7, last accessed). Anaheim Union High School District, About Us. Anaheim, CA: AUHSD. http://www.auhsd.k12.ca.us/about_us.jsp?rn=5979983. California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR). 2010 (April 13). 2000 Planning, Zoning, and Development Laws. Sacramento, CA: OPR. Error! Hyperlink reference not valid.http://ceres.ca.gov/planning/ pzd/2000/pzd2000_web/pzd2000_misc6.html#anchor1257901. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.12 Public Services-082312.docx 5.12-18 Public Services California, State of. 2010. California Government Code (Sections 65995–65998). Sacramento, CA: The State of California. http://info.sen.ca.gov/cgi- bin/displaycode?section=gov&group=65001-66000&file=65995-65998. Lujan, A. 2009 (December Personal communication. Email from A. Lujan (Anaheim Library Services Department) to A. Armanino (BonTerra Consulting) entitled Impacts of Library Services – Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Amendment. Lutz, J. 2012 (August 22). Personal communication. Email from J. Lutz (Anaheim Fire Department) and S. Kim (Anaheim Planning Department). 2010 (April Personal communication. Email between J. Lutz (Anaheim Fire Department) and A. Armanino (BonTerra Consulting). 2009 (November 16). Personal communication. Email between J. Lutz (Anaheim Fire Department) and A. Armanino (BonTerra Consulting). Nguyen, M. 2010 (November 13) (April 13). Personal communication. Email from M. Nguyen (Anaheim Police Department) to A. Armanino (BonTerra Consulting) regarding Police Services Questionnaire and Updated Calculations for the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Amendment and Convention Center Expansion. Oskoui, J. 2010 (April 14). Personal communication. Email from J. Oskoui, Director of Planning, Design and Construction (AUHSD) to A. Armanino (BonTerra Consulting). 2009 (December Personal communication. Email from J. Oskoui, Director of Planning, Design and Construction (AUHSD) to A. Armanino (BonTerra Consulting). Pidgen, K. 2010a (April 14). Personal communication. Email from K. Pidgen (Facilities Technician ACSD) to A. Armanino (BonTerra Consulting). 2010b (April Personal communication. Email from K. Pidgen (Facilities Technician ACSD) to A. Armanino (BonTerra Consulting). Rizzuti, T. 2008 (October 15). Personal communication. Email from T. Rizutti (Anaheim City School District) to A. Armanino (BonTerra Consulting) entitled Proposed Development Project. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.13 Recreation-080912.docx 5.13-1 Recreation 5.13 RECREATION The following resources were used in this section: City of Anaheim General Plan (May 2004), the Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update EIR 330 (May 2004), and the websites of the City of Anaheim (Anaheim 2010b) and Orange County Parks (Orange 2009). 5.13.1 SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION MEIR 313, which was certified in September 1994, identified City parks and recreational facilities within the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan area and included information from the Parks, Recreation, and Community Services Elements of the Anaheim General Plan. According to MEIR 313, by 2010, implementation of the General Plan would have resulted in the relocation of 2,400 people to the City of Anaheim. MEIR 313 presented an analysis of potential recreation- related impacts as a result of implementation of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (ARSP). The ARSP was prepared in order to promote the development of commercial and recreational land uses within Anaheim. According to MEIR 313, the immediate vicinity of the Project Site included four parks: Stoddard Park, Ponderosa Park, Audre Plaza Park, and Palm Lane Park. MEIR No. 313 also identified two larger parks at distances of greater than one mile from the Project Site: Boysen Park and Modjeska Park. These 6 parks totaled 71.7 acres. Despite the fact that areas proximate to the ARSP area had a deficit of 46.2 acres of parkland, MEIR 313 finds that no increased deficit in City parklands would result from the projected population increase resulting from implementation of the ARSP. Thus, no significant impacts would result. 5.13.2 PLANS, POLICIES, AND REGULATORY CONDITIONS Related Planning Programs City of Anaheim General Plan, Green Element The City of Anaheim General Plan’s Green Element addresses the provision of open space, conservation, recreation, and landscaping resources. It includes existing parks and open space, and also potential recreational opportunities such as schools, utility easements, water uses, and vacant land. Applicable goals and policies from the Green Element that are related to recreation and are applicable to the Proposed Project are provided in Table 5.9-2 of Section 5.9, Land Use and Planning, with a project consistency analysis. City of Anaheim Municipal Code Per the Anaheim Municipal Code, Section 17.08.250, the City currently maintains park dedication standards that require new development within the City to ensure that 2 acres of parkland will be developed for each 1,000 residents (Anaheim 2010a). The dedication may be in the form of improved land, the payment of fees in lieu of dedication, or a combination of both. Per Table 5.9-2 of Section 5.9, Land Use and Planning, this is consistent with Goal 1 of Policy 18.1 of the Anaheim General Plan’s Green Element. Regulatory Setting The Quimby Act The California Legislature first established the Quimby Act in 1975 and amended the act in 1982. Per the Quimby Act, California allows a City or County to pass an ordinance that requires, as a condition of approval of a subdivision, the dedication of land, the payment of a fee in lieu of dedication, or a combination of both for park or recreational purposes (California Government ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.13 Recreation-080912.docx 5.13-2 Recreation Code §66477). This legislation establishes maximum parkland dedication standards for new subdivision development unless the amount of existing neighborhood and community parkland exceeds the limit. 5.13.3 METHODOLOGY Existing park and recreational facility data was compiled from the City of Anaheim General Plan (May 2004), the Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update EIR 330 (May 2004), and the websites of the City of Anaheim (Anaheim 2010b) and Orange County Parks (Orange 2009). 5.13.4 EXISTING CONDITIONS On-site Recreational Resources There are over 50 City-owned and operated parks and recreational facilities totaling 677 acres within the City of Anaheim. The major recreational facility within the Project footprint is the Anaheim Convention Center, which includes a basketball arena and over 800,000 square feet of exhibition floor space. Within the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan, Disney provides commercial recreational opportunities via the Disneyland Resort, which includes the Disneyland Park, Disney’s California Adventure Park, and the Downtown Disney shopping district. Multiple Disney-owned hotels provide recreational opportunities for guests. Off-site Recreational Uses State of California Chino Hills State Park is a 13,452-acre natural open space area owned and operated by California State Parks and located just outside the eastern City limits. Amenities throughout the park include hiking, biking, and riding trails; picnic areas; and an equestrian staging area (California State Parks 2009). This park is designed to serve a regional population. County of Orange The County of Orange owns and operates three regional parks located in or near the City: Yorba, Featherly, and Santiago Oaks. A fourth regional park, Weir Canyon Regional Park, is currently proposed (Galera 2009). Regional parks are usually 50 acres or more in size, generally serve between 50,000 and 100,000 people, and can be located up to 30 miles away. In addition to regional parks, the County operates approximately 30 miles of hiking, biking, and equestrian trails in or near the City, including the Santa Ana River Trail. As these parks are designed to serve a regional population, the ARSP is within their service area. City of Anaheim Local Parks Within the City of Anaheim, local parks include both Neighborhood and Community Parks. Community parks, by design, serve a larger area than neighborhood parks. Neighborhood parks are the most common type of park in Anaheim, with 24 facilities located throughout the City. These parks range in size from 5 to 15 acres, have a service radius of 0.5 mile, and are located in the neighborhoods they serve, thereby enabling people to walk or bike to the park. According ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.13 Recreation-080912.docx 5.13-3 Recreation to the Anaheim General Plan’s Green Element, the following is a list of neighborhood parks located within one mile of the Project Site (Anaheim 2004a). • Willow Park, 8.8 acres, is located at 1625 West Crone Avenue, approximately 3,000 feet northwest of the closest portion of the Project Site. • Palm Lane Park, 7.0 acres, is located at 1595 Palais Road, approximately 2,500 feet northwest of the closest portion of the Project Site. • Ponderosa Park, 9.0 acres, is located at 2100 South Haster Street, approximately 1,000 feet southeast of the closest portion of the Project Site. • Stoddard Park, 9.4 acres, is located at 1901 South Ninth Street, approximately 1,000 feet west of the closest portion of the Project Site. • Energy Field, 3 acres, is located at 1625 South Ninth Street, approximately 2,000 feet north of the closest portion of the Project Site. • Ross Park, 5.5 acres, is located at 1280 West Santa Ana Street, approximately 2,600 feet northwest of the closest portion of the Project Site. Community Parks are larger in size than Neighborhood Parks, ranging in size from 15 to 50 acres, and provide similar amenities to Neighborhood Parks. There are no Community Parks located within one mile of the Project Site; however, Boysen and Modjeska Parks, which are both identified in MEIR 313, are located within three miles of the Project Site. Mini-Parks Mini-Parks are the smallest type of park within Anaheim. Generally, these facilities provide for passive recreational uses, provide little to no parking, and serve a fairly small area. According to the Anaheim General Plan’s Green Element, the following is a list of Mini-Parks within one mile of the Project Site (Anaheim 2004a). • Walnut Grove Park, 3 acres, is located at 905 South Anaheim Boulevard, approximately 800 feet northwest of the closest portion of the Project Site. • Cottonwood Park, 0.5 acres, is located at 853 South Cottonwood Circle, approximately 100 feet east of the closest portion of the Project Site. This smaller park is located between two portions of the Project Site. • Little People’s Park, 1 acre, is located at 220 West Elm Street, approximately 4,000 feet north of the closest portion of the Project Site. This smaller park is located between two portions of the Project Site. Other Local Recreational Facilities The City of Anaheim operates specialized recreation centers and Special Use Parks that serve specialized, citywide recreational needs and often focus on one specific activity. These facilities include nature centers, City-owned golf courses, the Downtown Community Center, and the Anaheim Wetlands (Anaheim 2004a). None of the aforementioned facilities are within the vicinity of the Project Site. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.13 Recreation-080912.docx 5.13-4 Recreation City of Garden Grove Additional recreational facilities within the vicinity of the Project Site include several parks within the City of Garden Grove. These facilities, although located near the Project Site, are intended to serve City of Garden Grove residents that reside in local neighborhoods and are not considered to be recreational resources for Anaheim residents. Therefore, these facilities are identified for informational purposes and are not considered when determining an area’s park deficiency status or analyzing recreational impacts. There are three parks within one mile of the ARSP area located in the City of Garden Grove. The closest is Pioneer Park, which, at four acres in size, includes open fields and a hockey rink (Garden Grove 2010). Located 1,000 feet east of the intersection of Harbor Boulevard and Chapman Avenue, it is 500 feet west of the Project Site and shares its name with an unrelated park in the City of Anaheim. 5.13.5 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE The following significance criteria are derived from the City of Anaheim Environmental Checklist. The Proposed Project would result in a significant environmental impact related to recreation if it would: Threshold 5.13.1 Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for parks. Threshold 5.13.2 Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. Threshold 5.13.3 Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated. 5.13.6 PROJECT IMPACT ANALYSIS Standard Requirements The following standard requirement was derived from existing regulations, requirements, and standard practices set forth by regional and local agencies. SR 5.13-1 Prior to issuance of building permits, property owners/developers shall comply with Anaheim Municipal Code, Section 17.08.250, which requires the provision of parkland and/or the payment of fees, consistent with the Quimby Act. Impact Analysis Threshold 5.13.1 Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.13 Recreation-080912.docx 5.13-5 Recreation significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for parks? Threshold 5.13.2 Would the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? C-R District As discussed in Section 3.0, Project Description, build out of the C-R District would add up to 20,913 hotel rooms to the ARSP area. As stated in Section 5.11, Population and Housing, the Proposed Project would indirectly result in approximately 2,504 new households within the City of Anaheim, thereby increasing the City’s population by approximately 8,264 people over the next 20 years. MEIR 313 assumes that the ARSP would result in 7,468 new residents within the City of Anaheim as a direct result of employment generation. The projected increase in population within Anaheim anticipated to result from implementation of the Proposed Project would be 796 more than the projected population increase analyzed in MEIR 313. Presently, the City of Anaheim includes more parkland than was included in the analyses for MEIR 313. Specifically, Willow Park, Walnut Grove Park, Cottonwood Park, and Little People’s Park, which together include over 13 acres of park space, are all parks within the vicinity of the ARSP area and which were not included in the analyses prepared for MEIR 313. It should be noted that the lack of inclusion in MEIR 313 does not mean that these parks did not exist in 1994, only that previous analyses did not identify them. Additionally, Audre Plaza Park, identified as a half-acre park in MEIR 313, is no longer identified as a City Park and thus is not identified in this analysis. As discussed previously, the ARSP area is not within an area of the City designated as a Park Deficiency Area according to the Green Element of the Anaheim General Plan. Therefore, despite the minor increase in population projected to occur as a result of Project implementation, the inclusion of additional park acreage that was not previously analyzed as part of MEIR 313, coupled with the fact that the ARSP is not within a park deficiency area, would ensure that a significant impact would not occur related to the construction of new or physically altered facilities. Additionally, any residential units developed in conjunction with the Residential Overlay Zone would be required to comply with SR 5.13-1. Therefore, potential impacts related to the construction or expansion of recreational uses would be less than significant. PR District As described in Section 3.0, Project Description, implementation of the Proposed Project would include the construction of up to 900 hotel rooms and the expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center. As discussed in Section 5.11, Population and Housing, these increases in intensity would generate approximately 1,900 jobs and result in an indirect population increase of approximately 835 residents for the City of Anaheim. As identified above, the ARSP area (including the PR District) is not within a designated Park Deficiency Area. Therefore, this minor increase in population would not necessitate the construction of new or physically altered recreation facilities. No impact would occur. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.13 Recreation-080912.docx 5.13-6 Recreation Impact Summary: Implementation of the Proposed Project would indirectly increase population by approximately 9,099 residents (8,264 associated with build out of the C-R District and 835 associated with the convention center expansion within the PR District). Because this increase would take place over the next 20 years and because the ARSP area is not located within a designated Park Deficiency Area, impacts related to the construction or expansion of recreational uses would be less than significant. Additionally, any residential development project within the Residential Overlay Zone would be subject to the SR 5.13-1, which requires the provision of parkland and/or the payment of fees, consistent with the Quimby Act, thereby ensuring that a significant impact would not occur. The conclusion for recreational facilities impacts is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313. Threshold 5.13.3: Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? C-R and PR District As identified in MEIR 313, the ARSP has been designed to include amenities, such as landscaped walkways and lighting, to promote recreational opportunities. The Proposed Project would not include development of recreational facilities; however, build out of the C-R District and expansion of the PR District as described in Section 3.0, Project Description, would continue to develop amenities that promote recreational opportunities. Municipal Parks The Project Site is located proximate to several municipal parks, including those in Anaheim and Garden Grove. Although the Proposed Project would introduce more people into the area and generate additional demand for parks and recreational facilities, the Project’s increased demand for parks and recreational facilities would be accommodated, as discussed previously under Thresholds 5.13.1 and 5.13.2, through existing facilities without substantially contributing to or accelerating their physical deterioration. The increased visitation at any off-site park facilities because of the increased population generated by the Proposed Project would not be large enough to cause substantial physical deterioration and no physical impacts to off-site park and recreational facilities would occur. State and Regional Facilities As discussed previously, the Project Site is proximate to Chino Hills State Park and several regional recreational facilities: Yorba, Featherly, Santiago, and the proposed Weir Canyon Regional Parks. The State park system and countywide regional recreational facilities system have been designed to serve the existing and future needs of the residents of the State of California and Orange County, respectively. The Proposed Project would increase usage of the nearby facilities because it would introduce more people into the region. However, these facilities have been designed to meet the needs associated with the projected growth in the County. It is not anticipated that the Project would result in the over use of these facilities such that a substantial physical deterioration of the facilities would occur or be accelerated; a less than significant impact would occur. Impact Summary: The increased visitation at any off-site park facilities because of the increased population generated by the Proposed Project would not be large enough to cause substantial physical deterioration, and no physical impacts ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.13 Recreation-080912.docx 5.13-7 Recreation to park and recreational facilities would occur. The conclusion for recreation facilities impacts is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313. 5.13.7 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS The City of Anaheim develops parks on an as-needed basis. While the ARSP area is not within a Park Deficiency Area, the Proposed Project and reasonably foreseeable projects within the vicinity of the ARSP and Disneyland Resort, would result in an increased cumulative demand for recreational amenities. However, impacts to recreational amenities resulting from cumulative Project development would be less than significant with payment of fees by individual projects, including residential development, to ensure that acceptable park ratios and other recreation measures are maintained. As detailed throughout this section, the Proposed Project does not require the construction of additional recreational facilities to adequately serve the Proposed Project, and all additional resource needs specific to the Residential Overlay zone would be met through compliance with SR 5.13-1, which requires the dedication of land, the payment of a fee in lieu of dedication, or a combination of both for park or recreational purposes. 5.13.8 MITIGATION MEASURES Previously Approved Measures No previously approved measures have been identified for impacts related to recreation. 5.13.9 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION No impacts or mitigation were identified; no impact related to recreation would occur. 5.13.10 REFERENCES Anaheim, City of. 2010a (May City of Anaheim Municipal Code. Cincinnati, OH: American Legal Publishing Corporation for the City. http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/ California/anaheim/anaheimmunicipalcode?f=templates$fn=default.htm$3.0$vid=amlega l:anaheim_ca. 2010b. Parks Division, Anaheim Parks. Anaheim, CA: the City. http://anaheimcityparks.com/golf/proto/anaheimcityparks/. 2006 (May). Initial Study/Mitigation Negative Declaration: The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 9202 Amendment No. 7 – Anaheim Resort Residential Overlay. Anaheim, CA: the City. 2004a (May). General Plan for the City of Anaheim (City Council Resolution No. 2004- 94). Anaheim, CA: the City. 2004b (May). Final Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update EIR No. 330 (Prepared by The Planning Center). Anaheim, CA: the City. 1994 (August). The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Draft EIR No. 313 with Addendum. Anaheim, City of: Anaheim, CA. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.13 Recreation-080912.docx 5.13-8 Recreation California, State of. 2010. California Government Code (Sections 66475–66478, regarding dedicating real property). Sacramento, CA: the State. http://info.sen.ca.gov/cgi- bin/displaycode?section=gov&group=66001-67000&file=66475 -66478. Galera, P. 2009 (March Personal communication. Telephone conversation between P. Galera (City of Anaheim Parks and Recreation) and J. Partridge (BonTerra Consulting). Garden Grove, City of. 2009. Parks & Facilities. Garden Grove, CA: the City. http://www.ci.garden-grove.ca.us/?q=commserv/parksfacilities. Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). 2003. Trip Generation 7th Edition. Washington, D.C.: ITE. Orange, County of. 2009. Welcome to OC Parks. Orange County, CA: Orange County. http://www.ocparks.com/. California State Parks. 2009. Chino Hills State Park. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Parks and Recreation. http://www.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=648. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-1 Transportation and Traffic 5.14 TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC The information presented in this section is based on the Draft Traffic Study Report for the Amendment to the Anaheim Report Specific Plan (ARSP), prepared by Parsons Brinckerhoff in December 2010. The findings of the report are summarized below and the entire report provided in Appendix H of this EIR. 5.14.1 SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION MEIR 313 analyzed the impacts of implementation of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan on local and regional transportation systems. Changes in traffic volumes due to new development that would be allowed under the ARSP were estimated for the year 2000 and 2010 scenarios. Mitigation measures were identified to reduce identified traffic impacts but four intersections were projected to operate at unacceptable levels of service in 2010, even after implementation of project-specific and other area-wide roadway and freeway improvements. These intersections include: • Harbor Boulevard/Ball Road • Anaheim Boulevard-Haster Street/Katella Avenue • Haster Street/Orangewood Avenue • Lewis Street/Katella Avenue Significant impacts were also expected if the Katella Avenue Smart Street project improvements and/or the I-5 widening improvements (segments A and B) are not implemented. 5.14.2 PLANS, POLICIES, AND REGULATORY CONDITIONS Related Planning Programs City of Anaheim General Plan, Circulation Element The Circulation Element of the City of Anaheim General Plan calls for the development of a circulation system that meets the current and future needs of all Anaheim residents, businesses, and visitors. The Circulation Element includes goals and policies that support the City’s vision of an efficient transportation system and includes the Planned Roadway Network that would accommodate the transportation and circulation needs of current developments and future growth, as established by the Land Use Element of the General Plan. The Circulation Element establishes a standard of LOS D or better for major intersections in the City. Applicable goals and policies from the Circulation Element that are related to traffic and circulation and that are applicable to the Proposed Project are provided in 5.9-2 in Section 5.9, Land Use, with a project consistency analysis. City of Anaheim General Plan, Growth Management Element The Growth Management Element of the City of Anaheim General Plan ensures that growth in the City is based on the City’s ability to provide adequate levels of traffic management and other public facilities and services. It fulfills the mandates of Measure M, the Revised Traffic Improvement and Growth Management Ordinance that was passed by a Countywide initiative in 1990 and allocates sales tax revenue to local jurisdictions and Orange County for transportation improvements. The Element also implements the goals of the Orange County Congestion Management Program. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-2 Transportation and Traffic Policies in the Growth Management Element include requirements for a traffic impact analysis for any new development forecast to generate 100 or more peak hour (morning or evening) trip ends. The analysis must identify arterial and intersection improvements that may potentially be needed to allow levels of service no worse than LOS E along Interstates/State Routes/Smart Streets (unless current operation is LOS and no worse than LOS D along the balance of the arterials on the City’s Circulation Element. Projects that exceed the LOS standards must provide necessary improvements and/or funding to mitigate their impacts. Applicable goals and policies from the Growth Management Element that are related to traffic and circulation and that are applicable to the Proposed Project are provided in 5.9-2 in Section 5.9, Land Use, with a project consistency analysis. Regulatory Setting Orange County Congestion Management Program The Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) adopted the Congestion Management Program (CMP) for Orange County, which provides a mechanism for coordinating land use and transportation decisions on major freeways, highways, and roadways in the County. The CMP Highway System consists of the Orange County smart street network plus the state highway system. The includes seven streets in the City of Anaheim: Harbor Boulevard, State College Boulevard, Katella Avenue, Tustin Avenue (north of SR-91), Orangethorpe Avenue, Beach Boulevard and Imperial Highway (north of SR-91), as well as sixteen intersections: • Harbor Boulevard/Katella Avenue • Imperial Highway/Orangethorpe Avenue • I-5 NB Ramp/Harbor Boulevard • I-5 SB Ramp/Harbor Boulevard • Anaheim Way (I-5 NB1 Ramp)/Katella Avenue • SR-57 NB Ramp/Katella Avenue • SR-57 SB Ramp/Katella Avenue • SR-91 WB Ramp/Harbor Boulevard • SR-91 EB Ramp/Harbor Boulevard • SR-91 WB Ramp/Imperial Highway • SR-91 EB Ramp/Imperial Highway • SR-91 WB Ramp/State College Boulevard • SR-91 EB Ramp/State College Boulevard • SR-91 WB Ramp/Tustin Avenue • SR-91 EB Ramp/Tustin Avenue • Manchester Avenue (I-5 SB Ramp)/Katella Avenue The Congestion Management Program (CMP) establishes a standard of LOS E or better for CMP roadways and intersections. An increase in V/C ratio greater than 0.10 over the base condition at roadways and intersections that operate or are forecast to operate at LOS F are considered not in compliance with CMP’s LOS objectives and require mitigation or a deficiency plan. 1 NB = northbound, SB = southbound, WB = westbound, EB = eastbound ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-3 Transportation and Traffic Transportation Fee Program Chapter 17.32 - Transportation Impact and Improvement Fee of the Anaheim Municipal Code requires the payment of transportation impact fees by the developer of new projects to pay for their fair share of the costs of needed roadway and intersection improvements identified in the City of Anaheim Circulation Element. Anaheim Transportation Network (ATN) The Anaheim Transportation Network (ATN) is a transportation management organization providing transportation services to the general public in the City of Anaheim and surrounding communities. The ATN provides rideshare programs, paratransit services, and the Anaheim Resort Transit (ART) service in The Anaheim Resort, with connection to Metrolink service. Anaheim Rapid Connection(ARC) The proposed Anaheim Rapid Connection (ARC) is a fixed-guideway system that is currently in the environmental review process. ARC is proposed to connect visitors, high-speed rail riders, employees and area residents to Anaheim area destinations, including stops within the ARSP area. Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Program Chapter 14.60 - Transportation Demand of the Anaheim Municipal Code serves as the City’s Trip Reduction and Travel Demand Ordinance for compliance with the Orange County Congestion Management Program. The City of Anaheim’s Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program promotes increased ridesharing and the use of alternative modes of transportation by employees. The TDM program provides a menu of commute alternatives for employees to reduce project-generated trips and requires employers to conduct an annual commuter survey to ascertain project trip generation, trip origin, and average vehicle ridership. Projects with over 250 employees are required to submit annual commuter surveys to the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) under SCAQMD’s Rule 2202. The City’s TDM program is coordinated with the ATN, as all projects requiring compliance with the TDM program also are required to join the ATN. 5.14.3 METHODOLOGY Traffic Scenarios The Final Traffic Study Report for the Proposed Project analyzes potential traffic impacts of the Proposed Project under the following scenarios: • Existing Conditions • Interim Year 2015 No Project Conditions • Interim Year 2015 With Project Conditions • General Plan Build Out Year 2030 No Project Conditions • General Plan Build Out Year 2030 With Project Conditions ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-4 Transportation and Traffic The Interim Year 2015 scenarios analyze traffic impacts of the expansion of the Convention Center, along with other approved projects in the vicinity of the Convention Center. These scenarios include: • Interim Year 2015 No Project Conditions • Interim Year 2015 With Project Conditions The General Plan Build Out Year 2030 scenarios analyze traffic impacts at build out of the cities of Anaheim and Orange General Plans, including the maximum build out of the C-R and PR Districts, and the proposed Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion project, as well as full build out of the City’s Circulation Element (including the extension of Gene Autry Way west from Haster Street to Harbor Boulevard, and the extension of Clementine Street south from Katella Avenue to Orangewood Avenue). These scenarios include: • General Plan Build Out Year 2030 No Project Conditions • General Plan Build Out Year 2030 With Project Conditions The Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model (ATAM) was used to develop future (Years 2015 and 2030) traffic forecast volumes throughout the study area. This model is consistent with the Orange County Transportation Analysis Model (OCTAM), in that the ATAM relies on the OCTAM for the regional component of traffic activity in accordance with the Southern California Association of Governments’ (SCAG) regional transportation model and regional growth projections. Trip Generation The trip generation for use in the ATAM model uses an employment conversion rate based on regional demographic information, which converts land use quantities to number of employees. The total trip generation or number of trips is then calculated based on the trip purpose for each employee. Based on the citywide land use data and regional socioeconomic growth projections, future trip activity is estimated and assigned to the roadway circulation system. The internal trip capture is performed within the ATAM model and the outputs are post-processed based on established methodologies. The post-processor applies the model’s projected growth to each turning movement of the existing counts to forecast future growth. Traffic Analysis Consistent with the criteria outlined in the City of Anaheim Criteria for Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies, potential impacts on the circulation system were analyzed for an “average” day, since major events typically do not occur during weekdays. The analyses include the following: • Peak hour intersection analysis • Arterial segment daily analysis • Arterial segment peak hour analysis • Peak hour Caltrans ramp-termini intersection analysis • Peak hour Caltrans mainline analysis • Peak hour Caltrans freeway ramp analysis • Peak hour Caltrans weaving analysis Peak hour analyses were performed for 81 study intersections, including 64 intersections in the City of Anaheim, 2 shared intersections between the cities of Anaheim and Orange, and 19 intersections in the City of Orange. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-5 Transportation and Traffic ICU Methodology Level of Service (LOS) is a qualitative and quantitative measure used to describe the operational conditions within a traffic stream and a motorist's and/or passenger's perception of the roadway's performance. Levels of service range from LOS A (free flow, little congestion) to LOS F (forced flow, extreme congestion). The Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) analysis compares forecast peak hour traffic volumes to intersection capacity. A minimum clearance interval of 0.05 in association with lane capacities of 1,700 vehicles per hour of green time for through and turn lanes was assumed for the ICU calculations. Table 5.14-1 presents the ICU thresholds and the corresponding LOS. TABLE 5.14-1 LOS AND ICU Level of Service ICU A <0.60 B 0.61-0.70 C 0.71-0.80 D 0.81-0.90 E 0.91-1.00 F > 1.00 Source: Parsons Brinckerhoff 2010. This methodology is used for the analysis of local roadway intersections, as adopted by the cities of Anaheim and Orange. Volume-to-Capacity Analysis Volume-to-Capacity (V/C) analysis compares the daily traffic volume on a roadway segment to the capacity of the segment, to determine the LOS. Roadway capacities that are used by the City of Anaheim to calculate arterial V/C ratios are provided in Table 5.14-2. LOS C (V/C not to exceed 0.80) is the performance standard that has been adopted for the study area circulation system by the City of Anaheim. The City of Orange has used LOS D as the performance standard for arterials. The City of Orange applies a V/C analysis for daily traffic conditions similar to Anaheim although daily capacities for Orange differ from those recognized by the City of Anaheim. TABLE 5.14-2 DAILY ARTERIAL SEGMENT CAPACITY ASSUMPTIONS Facility Type Roadway Capacity (vehicles per day) City of Anaheim City of Orange 8-lane Divided 75,000 75,000 6-lane Divided 56,300 56,300 4-lane Divided 37,500 37,500 4-lane Undivided 25,000 24,000 2-lane Undivided 12,500 12,000 Source: Parsons Brinckerhoff 2010 ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-6 Transportation and Traffic HCM Methodology The Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), a publication of the Transportation Research Board, provides an alternative method for analyzing the performance of roadways and intersections. The HCM includes methodologies for analyzing signalized and unsignalized intersections, freeways, highways, arterial roads, interchange ramp terminals, and roundabouts. For roadway segments that have V/C ratios over 0.80, the City of Anaheim applies the Urban Streets analysis identified in Chapter 15 of the HCM to determine level of service under peak hour traffic volumes on deficient daily segments. In accordance with Caltrans requirements, freeway ramp termini intersections were analyzed in (version 7.0) through the application of HCM 2000 methodology. Lane configurations and various other parameters, such as signal timing, were based on current operating characteristics. Table 5.14-3 presents intersection delay and LOS standards per HCM methodology. TABLE 5.14-3 CALTRANS INTERSECTION LOS CRITERIA Level of Service Intersection Delay (in Seconds) A ≤ 10.0 B > 10.0 and ≤ 20.0 C > 20.0 and ≤ 35.0 D > 35.0 and ≤ 55.0 E > 55.0 and ≤80.0 F ≥ 80.0 Source: Parsons Brinckerhoff 2010 The Caltrans Ramp Meter Design Manual calls for freeway mainline and freeway ramp analysis to be performed based on peak hour HCM density analysis. The level of service (LOS) for freeway ramps is determined by traffic density based on criteria outlined in the HCM. Table 5.14-4 presents the correlation between LOS and density in terms of passenger cars per mile per lane (pc/mi/ln) for both freeway ramps and basic freeway segments. TABLE 5.14-4 CALTRANS FREEWAY MAINLINE AND RAMP LOS CRITERIA Level of Service Peak Hour Freeway Ramp Density (pc/mi/ln) Basic Freeway Segment Density (pc/mi/ln) A ≤ 10.0 0.0–11.0 B > 10.0 and ≤ 20.0 11.0 – 18.0 C > 20.0 and ≤ 28.0 18.0 – 26.0 D > 28.0 and ≤ 35.0 26.0 – 35.0 E > 35.0 35.0 – 45.0 F Exceeds Capacity >45.0 Source: Parsons Brinckerhoff 2010 Freeway weaving is defined as the crossing of two streams of traffic traveling in the same direction along a significant length of highway without the aid of traffic control devices. Weaving analysis uses the most current version of the HCM and provides a density for the weaving area ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-7 Transportation and Traffic within the freeway segment and corresponding LOS. Table 5.14-5 specifies the LOS for associated freeway weaving densities. TABLE 5.14-5 CALTRANS FREEWAY WEAVING LOS CRITERIA Level of Service Freeway Weaving Segment Density (pc/mi/ln) Multilane and Collector-Distributor Weaving Segments Density (pc/mi/ln A ≤ 10.0 ≤ 12.0 B > 10.0 and ≤ 20.0 > 12.0 and ≤ 24.0 C > 20.0 and ≤ 28.0 > 24.0 and ≤ 32.0 D > 28.0 and ≤ 35.0 > 32.0 and ≤ 36.0 E > 35.0 and ≤43.0 > 36.0 and ≤40.0 F ≥ 43.0 ≥ 40.0 pc/mi/ln: passenger cars per mile per lane Source: Parsons Brinckerhoff 2010 Fair-Share Analysis The City of Anaheim has applied a fair-share methodology to evaluate the financial responsibility of mitigating proposed project impacts. The methodology is consistent with that outlined in the Caltrans Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies. Appendix of the guidelines directs users to apply a formula to calculate equitable share responsibility for the traffic impacts of proposed projects. The fair-share calculation is based on the difference between the Future With Project and Future No Project total intersection entering volumes divided by the total growth entering volume from Existing to Future With Project conditions. The fair-share proportion is based on the value associated with the peak hour for which the deficiency has been identified. 5.14.4 EXISTING CONDITIONS Roadways in and near the ARSP include: East-West Roads: • Ball Road • Disney Way • Katella Avenue • Convention Way • Gene Autry Way • Orangewood Avenue • Chapman Avenue North-South Roads: • Walnut Street • West Street/Disneyland Drive • Harbor Boulevard • Clementine Street • Haster Street/Anaheim Boulevard • Manchester Avenue The Santa Ana Freeway (I-5) runs through the eastern edge of the ARSP in a northwest to southeast direction. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-8 Transportation and Traffic Intersection Operations The existing traffic conditions at intersections in and near the ARSP area are based on intersection traffic counts, collected by the City on a typical weekday in 2008. Table 5.14-6 presents existing ICU and LOS values for each study intersection during the AM peak hour and PM peak hour and Exhibit 5.14-1 shows the location of deficient intersections. As shown, only two intersections currently operate at unacceptable levels of service (LOS E or • Euclid Street at Katella Avenue (PM peak hour) • Anaheim Boulevard at Ball Road (PM peak hour) TABLE 5.14-6 EXISTING PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION LOS ID Intersection Jurisdiction AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ICU LOS ICU LOS I-1* Euclid St/Katella Ave Anaheim 0.89 D 1.02 F I-2 Ninth St/Katella Ave Anaheim 0.53 A 0.53 A I-3 Walnut St/Ball Rd Anaheim 0.57 A 0.55 A I-4 Walnut St/Katella Ave Anaheim 0.43 A 0.53 A I-5 Disneyland Dr/Ball Rd Anaheim 0.68 B 0.76 C I-6 Disneyland Dr/West St/Katella Ave Anaheim 0.53 A 0.57 A I-7 Harbor Blvd/Vermont Ave Anaheim 0.56 A 0.58 A I-8 Harbor Blvd/Ball Rd Anaheim 0.73 C 0.68 B I-9 Harbor Blvd/I-5 Northbound Ramps Anaheim 0.54 A 0.54 A I-10 Harbor Blvd/I-5 Southbound Ramps Anaheim 0.32 A 0.34 A I-11 Harbor Blvd/Disney Way Anaheim 0.33 A 0.42 A I-12 Harbor Blvd/Katella Ave Anaheim 0.55 A 0.63 B I-13 Harbor Blvd/Convention Way Anaheim 0.29 A 0.35 A I-14 Harbor Blvd/Orangewood Ave Anaheim 0.55 A 0.57 A I-15 Clementine St/Disney Way Anaheim 0.19 A 0.23 A I-16 Clementine St/Katella Ave Anaheim 0.53 A 0.60 A I-17 I-5 Southbound Off Ramp/Disney Way Anaheim 0.20 A 0.24 A I-18 Anaheim Blvd/Ball Rd Anaheim 0.63 B 0.91 E I-19 Anaheim Blvd/Cerritos Ave Anaheim 0.49 A 0.71 C I-20 Anaheim Blvd/I-5 Northbound Ramps Anaheim 0.44 A 0.59 A I-21 Anaheim Blvd/Disney Way Anaheim 0.44 A 0.49 A I-22 Anaheim Blvd/Haster St/Katella Ave Anaheim 0.47 A 0.58 A I-23 Haster St/Gene Autry Way Anaheim Not Applicable I-24 Haster St/Orangewood Ave Anaheim 0.54 A 0.65 B I-25 Manchester Ave (I-5 Southbound Ramps)/Katella Ave Anaheim 0.55 A 0.52 A I-26 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps)/Katella Ave Anaheim 0.46 A 0.50 A I-27 East St/Ball Rd Anaheim 0.51 A 0.67 B I-28 Lewis St/Ball Rd Anaheim 0.41 A 0.53 A I-29 Lewis St/Cerritos Ave Anaheim 0.28 A 0.31 A I-30 Lewis St/Katella Ave Anaheim 0.48 A 0.62 B I-31 Lewis St/Gene Autry Way Anaheim Not Applicable I-32 I-5 HOV Ramps/Gene Autry Way Anaheim 0.07 A 0.07 A I-33 Lewis St/Orangewood Ave Anaheim 0.53 A 0.48 A ---PAGE BREAK--- Existing Peak Hour Intersection LOS Exhibit 5.14-1 Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (Rev: WAD 050610) R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\Graphics\EIR\Ex5.14-1_Traffic_Peak_Hours.pdf D:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\Graphics\Ex_Traffic_Peak_Hours.ai Source: Parsons Brinckerhoff 2010 M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L DISNEYLAND DR OR AN GE C TR DR VERMONT AVE EAST ST MANCHESTER AVE MAGIC WY KATELLA AVE PL 73 74 76 77 78 7 28 27 29 36 44 48 54 57 59 58 81 55 56 52 53 46 61 33 34 35 38 39 40 41 42 43 47 66 65 62 49 64 45 LEWIS ST WY CHAPMAN AVE PHOENIX CLUB DR RA M P A R T ST DOUGLASS RD E LA PALMA AVE W LINCOLN AVE BALL RD WEST ST W LA PALMA AVE E LINCOLN AVE STATE COLLEGE BLVD NINTH ST HARBOR BLVD EUCLID ST LA VETA AVE SOUTH ST ANAHEIM BLVD WALNUT ST TAFT AVE KATELLA AVE ORANGEWOOD AVE S BROOKHURST ST LEWIS ST N EAST ST S NUTWOOD ST CERRITOS AVE N WEST ST COLLINS AVE ORANGEWOOD AVE E FRONTERA ST HASTER ST WAGNER AVE N HARBOR BLVD MAIN ST STRUCK AVE NUTWOOD ST W CRESCENT AVE ECKHOFF ST SUNKIST ST GARY ST GLASSELL ST N RIO VISTA ST N ANAHEIM BLVD N SUNKIST ST WALNUT AVE BATAVIA ST N BROOKHURST ST GENE AUTRY WY W FLETCHER AVE DISNEY WY PALMWOOD DR ANAHEIM WY HOWELL AVE Y N GLASSEL ST CONVENTION CERRITOS AVE KATELLA AVE W ORANGE AVE CHAPMAN AVE N EUCLID ST S NUTWOOD ST 71 72 9 69 10 70 12 75 11 6 1 4 68 8 67 5 3 16 50 51 17 20 26 19 79 21 13 25 15 14 24 22 2 102 80 30 37 32 18 ? l GARDEN GROVE ANAHEIM ORANGE V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\Anaheim Resort SEIR\Documentation\Figures\Fig3-1-y08-Existing-IsecLOS-012810.mxd μ Figure 3.1 - Existing Peak Hour Intersection LOS CLEMENTINE WEST ST FLORE ST ? ê SANTA ANA RIVER GLOBAL WY ? » 0 0.2 0.4 Miles LEGEND AM LOS PM LOS Adjacent Area The Anaheim Resort boundary Acceptable LOS L Deficient LOS L Acceptable LOS M Deficient LOS M Major Roadway Railroad Water Area City of Anaheim ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 5.14-6 (Continued) EXISTING PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION LOS R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-9 Transportation and Traffic ID Intersection Jurisdiction AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ICU LOS ICU LOS I-34 Manchester Ave/Orangewood Ave Anaheim 0.52 A 0.37 A I-35 Anaheim Way/Orangewood Ave Anaheim 0.36 A 0.50 A I-36 State College Blvd/Ball Rd Anaheim 0.57 A 0.65 B I-37 State College Blvd/Katella Ave Anaheim 0.43 A 0.53 A I-38 State College Blvd/Gene Autry Way Anaheim 0.30 A 0.29 A I-39 State College Blvd/Orangewood Ave Anaheim/Orange 0.46 A 0.47 A I-40 State College Blvd/Orange Center Dr Anaheim/Orange 0.21 A 0.21 A I-41 State College Blvd/I-5 Northbound Ramps Orange 0.33 A 0.28 A I-42 State College Blvd/I-5 Southbound Ramps Orange 0.43 A 0.28 A I-43 State College Blvd/The City Dr/ Chapman Ave Orange 0.71 C 0.66 B I-44 Sunkist St/Ball Rd Anaheim 0.82 D 0.79 C I-45 Howell Ave/Katella Ave Anaheim 0.38 A 0.55 A I-46 Rampart St/Orangewood Ave Anaheim 0.51 A 0.44 A I-47 Rampart St/Chapman Ave Orange 0.31 A 0.31 A I-48 Ball Rd/SR-57 Northbound Ramps Anaheim 0.54 A 0.58 A I-49 Ball Rd/SR-57 Southbound Ramps Anaheim 0.69 B 0.57 A I-50 SR-57 Northbound Ramps/Katella Ave Anaheim 0.36 A 0.40 A I-51 SR-57 Southbound Ramps/Katella Ave Anaheim 0.40 A 0.40 A I-52 Orangewood Ave/SR-57 Northbound Ramps Orange 0.52 A 0.49 A I-53 Orangewood Ave/SR-57 Southbound Ramps Orange 0.61 B 0.68 B I-54 Phoenix Club Dr/Ball Rd Anaheim 0.48 A 0.59 A I-55 Douglass Rd/Katella Ave Anaheim 0.41 A 0.49 A I-56 Eckhoff St/Orangewood Ave Orange 0.56 A 0.69 B I-57 Main St/Taft Ave Orange 0.68 B 0.73 C I-58 Main St/Katella Ave Orange 0.50 A 0.50 A I-59 Batavia St/Taft Ave Orange 0.65 B 0.67 B I-60 Clementine St/Gene Autry Way Anaheim Not Applicable I-61 Clementine St/Orangewood Ave Anaheim 0.33 A 0.33 A I-62 Flower St/Chapman Ave Orange 0.38 A 0.49 A I-63 Harbor Blvd/Chapman Ave Anaheim 0.55 A 0.61 B I-64 I-5 Ramps/Chapman Ave Orange 0.43 A 0.46 A I-65 SR-57 Northbound Ramps/ Chapman Ave Orange 0.40 A 0.39 A I-66 SR-57 Southbound Ramps/ Chapman Ave Orange 0.54 A 0.52 A I-67 Euclid St/Ball Rd Anaheim 0.59 A 0.66 B I-68 Walnut St/Cerritos Ave Anaheim 0.56 A 0.47 A I-69 Disneyland Dr/I-5 Southbound Off Ramp Anaheim 0.35 A 0.29 A I-70 Disneyland Dr/Magic Way Anaheim 0.28 A 0.30 A I-71 Ox Rd/Cast Place/Ball Rd Anaheim 0.56 A 0.55 A I-72 Convention Center/Katella Ave Anaheim 0.39 A 0.41 A ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 5.14-6 (Continued) EXISTING PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION LOS R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-10 Transportation and Traffic ID Intersection Jurisdiction AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ICU LOS ICU LOS I-73 Harbor Blvd/Lincoln Ave Anaheim 0.61 B 0.76 C I-74 Harbor Blvd/Broadway Anaheim 0.50 A 0.67 B I-75 Harbor Blvd/Manchester Ave Anaheim 0.29 A 0.43 A I-76 Anaheim Blvd/Lincoln Ave Anaheim 0.47 A 0.60 A I-77 Anaheim Blvd/Broadway Anaheim 0.46 A 0.52 A I-78 Olive St/Lincoln Ave Anaheim 0.40 A 0.43 A I-79 Flore St/West St/Ball Rd Anaheim 0.53 A 0.47 A I-80 West St/Orangewood Ave Anaheim 0.61 B 0.72 C I-81 Struck Ave/Katella Ave Orange 0.28 A 0.34 A Note: * The intersection of Euclid St/Katella Ave is currently under construction to enhance capacity. Source: Parsons Brinckerhoff 2010. Arterial Segment Operations The existing traffic conditions on arterial roadways in and near the ARSP area are based on traffic counts collected by the City on a typical weekday in 2008 and 2009. Table 5.14-7 presents the existing V/C ratio and LOS for each arterial segment. Table 5.14-7 indicates that four arterial segments operate at a deficient LOS under Existing Condition. Three of these segments currently are not at their ultimate configuration per the City’s Circulation Element. One deficient segment that is currently at the Circulation Element configuration is further analyzed under AM and PM peak hour conditions. The deficient segments are: • Ball Road between State College Boulevard and Sunkist Street • Ball Road between Sunkist Street and SR-57 (Ultimate configuration) • Orangewood Avenue between State College Boulevard and Rampart Street • Orangewood Avenue between Rampart Street and SR-57 TABLE 5.14-7 EXISTING DAILY ARTERIAL SEGMENT LOS ID Arterial From To Jurisdictiona 2008 Existing Daily Count Mid- Block Lanes Total Capacity V-C Ratio Daily LOS A-1 Anaheim Blvd Katella Ave I-5 Fwy Anaheim 19,380 6D 56,300 0.34 A A-2 Anaheim Blvd I-5 Fwy Cerritos Ave Anaheim 33,160 6D 56,300 0.59 A A-3 Anaheim Blvd Cerritos Ave Ball Rd Anaheim 26,790 4D 37,500 0.71 C A-4 Ball Rd Euclid St Walnut St Anaheim 26,330 6D 56,300 0.47 A A-5 Ball Rd Walnut St Disneyland Dr Anaheim 34,020 6D 56,300 0.60 A A-6 Ball Rd Disneyland Dr Harbor Blvd Anaheim 44,320 6D 56,300 0.79 C A-7 Ball Rd Harbor Blvd Anaheim Blvd Anaheim 36,890 6D 56,300 0.66 B A-8 Ball Rd Anaheim Blvd East St Anaheim 35,280 6D 56,300 0.63 B A-9 Ball Rd East St State College Blvd Anaheim 38,110 6D 56,300 0.68 B A-10 Ball Rd State College Sunkist St Anaheim 40,500 4D 37,500 1.08 F A-11 Ball Rd Sunkist St SR-57 Anaheim 48,400 6D 56,300 0.86 D A-12 Ball Rd SR-57 Fwy Main St Orange 32,740 6D 56,300 0.58 A A-13 Clementine St Manchester Disney Way Anaheim 7,510 4U 25,000 0.30 A ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 5.14-7 (Continued) EXISTING DAILY ARTERIAL SEGMENT LOS R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-11 Transportation and Traffic ID Arterial From To Jurisdictiona 2008 Existing Daily Count Mid- Block Lanes Total Capacity V-C Ratio Daily LOS A-14 Clementine St Disney Way Katella Ave Anaheim 7,510 4U 25,000 0.30 A A-20 Disney Way Harbor Blvd Clementine St Anaheim 7,770 6D 56,300 0.14 A A-21 Disney Way Clementine St Anaheim Blvd Anaheim 13,880 6D 56,300 0.25 A A-22 Disneyland Dr Katella Ave Magic Way Anaheim 19,130 4D 37,500 0.51 A A-23 Disneyland Dr Magic Way Ball Rd Anaheim 23,810 4D 37,500 0.63 B A-24 Disneyland Dr Ball Rd Manchester Ave Anaheim 30,910 6D 56,300 0.55 A A-25 Harbor Blvd Wilken Way Orangewood Ave Anaheim 35,560 6D 56,300 0.63 B A-26 Harbor Blvd Orangewood Ave Convention Way Anaheim 35,870 6D 56,300 0.64 B A-27 Harbor Blvd Convention Way Katella Ave Anaheim 40,430 6D 56,300 0.72 C A-28 Harbor Blvd Katella Ave Disney Way Anaheim 38,410 6D 56,300 0.68 B A-29 Harbor Blvd Disney Way Manchester Ave Anaheim 41,340 6D 56,300 0.73 C A-30 Harbor Blvd I-5 Fwy Ball Rd Anaheim 44,360 8D 75,000 0.59 A A-31 Haster St Orangewood Ave Gene Autry Way Anaheim 19,760 4U 25,000 0.79 C A-32 Haster St Gene Autry Way Katella Ave Anaheim 19,760 4U 25,000 0.79 C A-33 Katella Ave Ninth St Walnut St Anaheim 29,270 6D 56,300 0.52 A A-34 Katella Ave Walnut St Disneyland Dr Anaheim 35,240 6D 56,300 0.63 B A-35 Katella Ave Disneyland Dr Hotel Way Anaheim 37,440 6D 56,300 0.67 B A-36 Katella Ave Hotel Way Harbor Blvd Anaheim 37,440 6D 56,300 0.67 B A-37 Katella Ave Harbor Blvd Clementine St Anaheim 39,100 6D 56,300 0.69 B A-38 Katella Ave Clementine St Anaheim Blvd Anaheim 38,510 6D 56,300 0.68 B A-39 Katella Ave Anaheim Blvd Manchester Ave Anaheim 37,830 6D 56,300 0.67 B A- 40a Katella Ave Manchester Ave Anaheim Way Anaheim 30,260 6D 56,300 0.54 A A- 40b Katella Ave Anaheim Way Lewis St Anaheim 30,260 6D 56,300 0.54 A A- 40c Katella Ave Lewis St State College Blvd Anaheim 30,260 6D 56,300 0.54 A A-41 Katella Ave State College Blvd Sportstown Anaheim 32,800 6D 56,300 0.58 A A-42 Katella Ave Sportstown Howell Ave Anaheim 34,240 6D 56,300 0.61 B A-43 Katella Ave Howell Ave SR-57 Fwy Anaheim 37,990 6D 56,300 0.67 B A-44 Katella Ave SR-57 Fwy Main St Orange 29,610 6D 56,300 0.53 A A-45 Manchester Ave Clementine St Harbor Blvd Anaheim 3,730 2U 12,500 0.30 A A-46 Orangewood Ave West St Harbor Blvd Anaheim 12,750 4U 25,000 0.51 A A-47 Orangewood Ave Harbor Blvd Clementine St Anaheim 15,540 4U 25,000 0.62 B A-48 Orangewood Ave Clementine St Haster St Anaheim 15,540 4U 25,000 0.62 B A-49 Orangewood Ave Haster St Manchester Ave Anaheim 17,950 4U 25,000 0.62 B A-50 Orangewood Ave* Manchester Ave State College Blvd Anaheim /Orange 19,810 6D 56,300 0.35 A ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 5.14-7 (Continued) EXISTING DAILY ARTERIAL SEGMENT LOS R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-12 Transportation and Traffic ID Arterial From To Jurisdictiona 2008 Existing Daily Count Mid- Block Lanes Total Capacity V-C Ratio Daily LOS A-51 Orangewood Ave State College Blvd Rampart St Anaheim 24,490 4U 25,000 0.98 E A-52 Orangewood Ave* Rampart St SR-57 Fwy Anaheim /Orange 23,490 4U 25,000 0.94 E A-53 Orangewood Ave SR-57 Fwy Eckhoff St Orange 27,720 4D 37,500 0.74 C A-54 Orangewood Ave Eckhoff St Main St Orange 14,160 4D 37,500 0.38 A A-55 Walnut St Katella Ave Cerritos Ave Anaheim 10,400 4D 37,500 0.28 A A-56 Walnut St Cerritos Ave Ball Rd Anaheim 15,490 4D 37,500 0.41 A A-57 West St Orangewood Ave Katella Ave Anaheim 12,390 4U 25,000 0.50 A A-58 Chapman Ave State College Blvd SR-57 Fwy Orange 30,740 6D 56,300 0.55 A A-59 Chapman Ave SR-57 Fwy Main St Orange 27,260 6D 56,300 0.48 A A-60 State College Blvd Chapman Ave I-5 Fwy Orange 26,980 8D 75,000 0.36 A A-61 State College Blvd I-5 Fwy Orangewood Ave Orange 21,400 8D 75,000 0.29 A A-62 State College Blvd Orangewood Ave Gene Autry Way Anaheim 22,160 6D 56,300 0.39 A A-63 State College Blvd Gene Autry Way Katella Ave Anaheim 20,120 6D 56,300 0.36 A A-64 State College Blvd Katella Ave Howell Ave Anaheim 23,980 6D 56,300 0.43 A A-65 State College Blvd Howell Ave Cerritos Ave Anaheim 23,440 6D 56,300 0.42 A A-66 State College Blvd Cerritos Ave Ball Rd Anaheim 23,320 6D 56,300 0.41 A a Shared segment capacities are identified by the jurisdiction in which the traffic count was taken. Source: Parsons Brinckerhoff 2010. Arterial Segment Peak Hour LOS Analysis Table 5.14-8 reports the AM and PM peak hour arterial segment LOS for the deficient arterial segment that is at the Circulation Element configuration. The table indicates that there is no capacity inadequacy for this arterial segment during either the AM or PM peak hour. TABLE 5.14-8 EXISTING ARTERIAL SEGMENT PEAK HOUR LOS ID Arterial From To Jurisdictiona Traffic Volume Mid-Block Lanes Total Capacity V-C Ratio LOS AM Peak Hour A-11 Ball Rd Sunkist St SR-57 Fwy Anaheim 3,420 6 4,864 0.70 B PM Peak Hour A-11 Ball Rd Sunkist St SR-57 Fwy Anaheim 3,370 6 5,437 0.62 B Source: Parsons Brinckerhoff 2010. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-13 Transportation and Traffic Ramp Termini Intersection Operations Calculations of existing peak hour delays and levels of service for the ramp termini intersections are provided in Table 5.14-9. The table shows that all ramp intersections currently operate at an acceptable LOS in either peak hour. TABLE 5.14-9 EXISTING PEAK HOUR RAMP TERMINI INTERSECTION LOS ID Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay LOS Delay LOS I-9 Harbor Blvd/I-5 Northbound Ramps 10.8 B 14.4 B I-10 Harbor Blvd/I-5 Southbound Ramps 7.9 A 7.5 A I-17 I-5 Southbound Off Ramp/Disney Way 26.2 C 25.5 C I-20 Anaheim Blvd/I-5 Northbound Ramps 15.4 B 25.8 C I-21 Anaheim Blvd/Disney Way 33.7 C 19.2 B I-25 Manchester Ave (I-5 Southbound Ramps)/Katella Ave 27.5 C 15.9 B I-26 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps)/Katella Ave 17.9 B 20.2 C I-32 I-5 HOV Ramps/Gene Autry Way 6.0 A 6.3 A I-41 State College Blvd/I-5 Northbound Ramps 12.8 B 12.5 B I-42 State College Blvd/I-5 Southbound Ramps 17.4 B 12.5 B I-48 Ball Rd/SR-57 Northbound Ramps 19.3 B 21.4 C I-49 Ball Rd/SR-57 Southbound Ramps 32.1 C 17.6 B I-50 SR-57 Northbound Ramps/Katella Ave 10.4 B 7.5 A I-51 SR-57 Southbound Ramps/Katella Ave 11.3 B 8.5 A I-52 Orangewood Ave/SR-57 Northbound Ramps 15.6 B 8.3 A I-53 Orangewood Ave/SR-57 Southbound Ramps 19.4 B 28.7 C I-64 I-5 Ramps/Chapman Ave 41.7 D 42.4 D I-65 SR-57 Northbound Ramps/Chapman Ave 19.1 B 19.7 B I-66 SR-57 Southbound Ramps/Chapman Ave 36.4 D 36.1 D I-69 Disneyland Dr/I-5 Southbound Off Ramp 8.8 A 7.5 A Source: Parsons Brinckerhoff 2010. Peak Hour Ramp Termini Off-Ramp Queuing The existing queue and control delay at freeway off-ramp termini intersections were analyzed to determine if sufficient storage are available at these off-ramps. As shown in Table 5.14-10, the analysis shows that all ramp intersections have queue that are shorter than the existing off-ramp storage length and no deficiencies are present. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-14 Transportation and Traffic TABLE 5.14-10 EXISTING PEAK HOUR RAMP TERMINI OFF-RAMP QUEUING ANALYSIS ID Intersection Off-Ramp # of Lanes Off-Ramp Storage Length (feet) Off-Ramp Queue Length Control Delay Deficient Storage Length AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R I-9 Harbor Blvd/I-5 Northbound Ramps 1.5 1.5 400 1,280 20 10 40 60 12.2 18.5 15.9 31.7 No I-10 Harbor Blvd/I-5 Southbound Ramps 2 1 1,240 190 60 60 32.3 32.3 No I-17 I-5 Southbound Off Ramp/Disney Way 1.33 0.33 1.33 940 380 380 100 100 0 150 150 0 43.5 43.3 8.2 61.2 63.0 9.9 No I-25 Manchester Ave (I-5 Southbound Ramps) /Katella Ave 1.5 1.5 720 720 1,710 40 0 0 40 0 64.0 27.4 4.9 60.9 23.9 No I-26 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) /Katella Ave 1.5 3 0.5 1,540 1,060 130 120 210 220 20.4 17.5 25.6 20.9 No I-32 I-5 HOV Ramps/ Gene Autry Way 2 1,510 No I-5 HOV Southbound Ramps/ Gene Autry Way 2 1,340 0 0 4.9 6.7 No I-41 State College Blvd/ I-5 Northbound Ramps 1.5 1.5 2 1,580 690 690 70 70 0 70 70 0 52.7 48.6 7.9 54.5 49.8 8.7 No I-42 State College Blvd/ I-5 Southbound Ramps 1.5 0.5 2 2,960 2,190 1,590 40 230 130 100 140 90 29.3 47.5 35.1 46.4 52.3 32.1 No I-48 Ball Rd/SR-57 Northbound Ramps 1 1 1,030 680 180 240 280 30 28.9 42.7 53.0 10.7 No I-49 Ball Rd/SR- Southbound Ramps 0.5 1.5 1,290 570 390 400 250 250 35.3 45.0 39.5 46.4 No I-50 SR-57 Northbound Ramps/Katella Ave 1.5 1.5 1,030 590 70 50 50 40 18.4 20.5 18.8 19.1 No ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 5.14-10 (Continued) EXISTING PEAK HOUR RAMP TERMINI OFF-RAMP QUEUING ANALYSIS R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-15 Transportation and Traffic ID Intersection Off-Ramp # of Lanes Off-Ramp Storage Length (feet) Off-Ramp Queue Length Control Delay Deficient Storage Length AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R I-51 SR-57 Southbound Ramps/Katella Ave 1.5 1.5 930 600 80 70 60 60 19.5 23.1 18.1 23.4 No I-52 Orangewood Ave/ SR-57 Northbound Ramps 1.5 1.5 650 350 130 190 20 0 38.9 56.4 21.9 17.2 No I-53 Orangewood Ave/ SR-57 Southbound Ramps 1.5 1.5 1,050 630 340 210 110 0 140 60 247 66.3 33.4 8.4 68.5 26.0 23.9 No I-64 I-5 Ramps/ Chapman Ave 2 1 1,080 220 220 0 230 0 46.7 9.8 46.0 7.4 No I-65 SR-57 Northbound Ramps/Chapman Ave 1 1 1,240 760 20 0 10 0 14.8 3.5 13.8 3.0 No I-66 SR-57 Southbound Ramps/Chapman Ave 0.5 0.5 1 580 1,000 210 60 120 90 36.5 12.7 47.6 30.7 No I-69 Disneyland Dr/I-5 Southbound Off Ramp 3 1 2,130 70 40 30 10.6 7.9 No Source: Parsons Brinckerhoff 2010. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-16 Transportation and Traffic Peak Hour Freeway Ramp Operations Freeway ramp operations during the AM and PM peak hours are based on the ramp capacity, merge/diverge volumes and density of traffic flow. Table 5.14-11 shows that the I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Boulevard is deficient under PM peak hour conditions. Peak Hour Freeway Mainline Operations Freeway mainline operations during the AM and PM peak hours are based on the existing freeway mainline segment volumes and density. Table 5.14-12 shows that the following freeway mainline segments operate at deficient LOS of E or worse during the PM peak hour conditions: • I-5 Northbound between Lincoln Avenue and Harbor Boulevard • I-5 Northbound between Katella Avenue and State College Boulevard Freeway Weaving Operations Table 5.14-13 summarizes freeway weaving during the AM and PM peak hours. As shown, under existing conditions, the following weaving sections are deficient under the PM peak hour conditions: • I-5 Northbound between Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Lincoln Avenue Off-Ramp • I-5 Northbound between Anaheim Boulevard On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp • I-5 Northbound between State College Boulevard On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off- Ramp • I-5 Northbound between SR-22 Connector and Chapman Avenue Off-Ramp TABLE 5.14-11 EXISTING PEAK HOUR FREEWAY RAMP LOS ID Ramp Segment Ramp # of Lane A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS R-1 I-5 Northbound HOV Off- Ramp to Gene Autry Way/ Disney Way 1 6.5 A 10.3 B R-2 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from State College Blvd/ Chapman Ave 1 19.3 B 30.0 D R-3 I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Anaheim Ave/Katella Ave* 2 21.2 C 32.8 D R-4 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Way/ Orangewood Ave 1 19.9 B 28.0 C R-5 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Katella Ave 1 21.1 C 30.9 D R-6 I-5 Northbound HOV On- Ramp from Gene Autry Way 1 14.6 B 22.6 C R-7 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Blvd 1 22.2 C >Capacity F ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 5.14-11 (Continued) EXISTING PEAK HOUR FREEWAY RAMP LOS R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-17 Transportation and Traffic ID Ramp Segment Ramp # of Lane A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS R-8 I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Harbor Blvd 1 23.1 C 33.2 D R-9 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Harbor Blvd 1 19.6 B 32.2 D R-10 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Ball Rd 1 20.8 C 32.7 D R-11 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Disneyland Dr 1 21.9 C 33.9 D R-12 I-5 Southbound HOV Off- Ramp to Disneyland Dr 1 10.3 B 8.1 A R-13 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to Disneyland Dr 2 10.9 B 13.9 B R-14 I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Disneyland Dr 1 27.4 C 33.4 D R-15 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to Harbor Blvd 1 25.1 C 30.7 D R-16 I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Harbor Blvd 1 32.4 D 34.6 D R-17 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to Disney Way/Anaheim Blvd 1 26.6 C 30.2 D R-18 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Ave/Orangewood Ave 2 22.8 C 28.3 D R-19 I-5 Southbound HOV Off- Ramp to Gene Autry Way 1 10.2 B 5.8 A R-20 I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Blvd 1 23.2 C 30.5 D R-21 I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Katella Ave 1 24.0 C 31.1 D R-22 I-5 Southbound HOV On- Ramp from Gene Autry Way 1 20.2 C 13.1 B * Major Diverge Analysis utilized to calculate density Source: Parsons Brinckerhoff 2010. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-18 Transportation and Traffic TABLE 5.14-12 EXISTING PEAK HOUR FREEWAY MAINLINE LOS ID Freeway Segment Northbound/Eastbound Southbound/Westbound A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS F-1 I-5 between SR-91 and Brookhurst St 18.8 C 29.2 D 20.4 C 21.9 C F-2 I-5 between Brookhurst St and Euclid St 20.6 C 31.6 D 25.2 C 26.7 D F-3 I-5 between Euclid St and Lincoln Ave 19.1 C 32.2 D 32.9 D 34.1 D F-4 I-5 between Lincoln Ave and Harbor Blvd 19.6 C 36.6 E 24.7 C 27.0 D F-5 I-5 between Harbor Blvd and Katella Ave 16.8 B 34.5 D 22.0 C 24.9 C F-6 I-5 between Katella Ave and State College Blvd 17.5 B 39.7 E 25.5 C 27.0 D F-7 I-5 between State College Blvd and SR-22 16.2 B 34.0 D 26.5 D 24.8 C Source: Parsons Brinckerhoff 2010. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-19 Transportation and Traffic TABLE 5.14-13 EXISTING PEAK HOUR FREEWAY WEAVING LOS ID Weaving Segment Weaving Length (Ft) A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS W-1 I-5 Northbound between Brookhurst St On- Ramp and SR-91 Eastbound Off-Ramp 2,980 Not Applicable I-5 Southbound between SR-91 Connector / Magnolia Ave On-Ramp and Brookhurst St Off-Ramp 3,390 W-2 I-5 Northbound between Euclid St On-Ramp and Brookhurst St Off-Ramp 2,890 I-5 Southbound between Brookhurst St On- Ramp and Euclid St Off-Ramp 2,540 W-3 I-5 Northbound between Lincoln Ave On- Ramp and Euclid St Off-Ramp 2,000 19.8 B 34.1 D W-4 I-5 Northbound between Disneyland Dr On- Ramp and Lincoln Ave Off-Ramp 1,680 20.3 B 39.3 E I-5 Southbound between Lincoln Ave On- Ramp and Disneyland Dr Off-Ramp 3,060 Not Applicable W-5 I-5 Southbound between Disneyland Dr and Harbor Blvd Off-Ramp 1,520 29.5 C 34.5 D W-6 I-5 Northbound between Anaheim Blvd On- Ramp and Harbor Blvd Off-Ramp 2,080 19.1 B >Capacity F I-5 Southbound between Harbor Blvd On- Ramp and Disney Way Off-Ramp 2,650 Not Applicable W-7 I-5 Northbound between State College Blvd On-Ramp and Katella Ave Off-Ramp 2,350 18.3 B >Capacity F I-5 Southbound between Katella Ave On- Ramp and State College Blvd Off-Ramp 1,870 27.9 C 32.1 D W-8 I-5 Northbound between SR-22 Connector and Chapman Ave Off-Ramp 1,720 20.8 B >Capacity F I-5 Southbound between State College Blvd / Chapman Ave On-Ramp and SR-22 Connector 1,510 29.6 C 32.0 D Source: Parsons Brinckerhoff 2010. 5.14.5 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE The following criteria are based on the City of Anaheim Initial Study checklist for transportation/traffic. Based on these thresholds, the Proposed Project would result in a significant impact to transportation/traffic if it would: Threshold 5.14.1 Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit. Threshold 5.14.2 Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-20 Transportation and Traffic or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways. City Standards Standards that have been adopted by the City of Anaheim for the performance of intersections and arterial segments are outlined below, and are used in determining if the Proposed Project would have a significant adverse impact under Threshold 5.14.1. Intersection Operations – For the Interim Year analysis, a transportation impact is considered significant if the intersection is projected to operate at LOS C or worse and if the project-related increase in ICU would be 0.10 to 0.50, as provided in Table 5.14-14. The “Final V/C Ratio” refers to the future V/C ratio at an intersection with the Proposed Project but without any proposed mitigation. TABLE 5.14-14 SIGNIFICANT IMPACT CRITERIA LOS Final V/C Ratio* Project-Related Increase in V/C Ratio C > 0.700 – 0.800 Equal to or greater than 0.050 D >0.800 – 0.900 Equal to or greater than 0.030 E, F > 0.900 Equal to or greater than 0.010 * refers to the future V/C ratio at an intersection with the Proposed Project but without any proposed mitigation. Source: Parsons Brinckerhoff 2010. For General Plan Build Out analysis, a project is deemed to have a significant impact if the project results in deterioration of the LOS to an unacceptable LOS E or F or an increase in the ICU value of 0.01 if the intersection is projected to operate at LOS E or F under without project conditions. Arterial Roadway Capacities – The City’s arterial roadway criteria are based on the average daily traffic (ADT) volume to capacity (V/C) ratios, with LOS C (V/C not to exceed 0.80) set as the performance standard. For roadways that are developed to their ultimate configuration, a project is deemed to have a significant impact if the project results in deterioration of the LOS to an unacceptable LOS or an increase in the V/C ratio of 0.01 if the segment currently operates at LOS E or F under without project conditions. Caltrans Standards The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) evaluates freeway operations in accordance with the standards below: Intersection Operations – Caltrans requirements call for freeway ramp termini intersections to operate at LOS D or better, with ramp termini intersections operating at LOS E or F considered deficient. Freeway and Ramp Operations – LOS D (traffic density not to exceed 35.0 pc/mi/ln, which is the acceptable number of cars per mile segment per lane, for mainline segments and 35.0 pc/mi/ln for freeway ramps), has been established by Caltrans District 12 as the operating standard for freeway mainline segments and freeway ramps, with freeway segments and ramps operating below LOS D requiring improvements. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-21 Transportation and Traffic Freeway Weaving Operations – Caltrans considers weaving operations at LOS E or F to be deficient. CMP Standard As indicated above, the Congestion Management Program (CMP) establishes an LOS standard of LOS E or better for CMP roadways and intersections. This standard is used to determine if the Proposed Project would have a significant adverse impact under Threshold 14.2. Less than Significant Impacts As previously discussed in Section 2.4.2, Effects Fount Not to Be Significant, during preparation of the Initial Study, the City of Anaheim determined that the Proposed Project would not have a significant impact for the following thresholds and no further analysis of these issues are presented in this section. Would the Project: • Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or change in location that results in substantial safety risks? • Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses? • Result in inadequate emergency access? • Result in inadequate parking capacity? • Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation bus stops/routes, bicycle lanes, sidewalks, etc.)? 5.14.6 PROJECT IMPACT ANALYSIS Standard Requirements No standard requirements have been identified. Impact Analysis Threshold 14.1 Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? PR District – Interim Year 2015 As stated previously, the Interim Year 2015 scenarios analyze the traffic impacts of the expansion of the Convention Center in the PR District, along with other approved projects in the vicinity of the Anaheim Convention Center. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-22 Transportation and Traffic Intersection Operations The Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model (ATAM) was used to develop future Interim Year 2015 traffic forecast volumes, based on the citywide land use data and regional socioeconomic growth projections. These forecasts incorporate the following future key project assumptions in the study area vicinity: • Anaheim GardenWalk (Hotel) • Springhill Suites (Hotel) • Manchester/Orangewood (Multi-Family Residential) • Platinum Triangle Condominiums (Multi-Family Residential and Commercial) • BRE Properties Stadium Park & Stadium Club (Multi-Family Residential) • Lennar A-Town Metro (Residential and Commercial) • Orangewood Condominiums (Multi-Family Residential) • Lennar A-Town Stadium (Multi-Family Residential) • Platinum Vista (Multi-Family Residential and Restaurant) • The Experience at Gene Autry (Multi-Family Residential, Office, and Commercial) • Platinum Gateway (Multi-Family Residential, Office, and Hotel) • ARTIC (Transit Station) • Anaheim Convention Center Grand Plaza (Entertainment) Without the Proposed Project, the following four intersections are projected operate at an unacceptable LOS of E or worse in Year 2015, during the PM peak hour: • Anaheim Boulevard at Ball Road • Lewis Street at Katella Avenue • Sunkist Street at Ball Road • Main Street at Taft Avenue (City of Orange) With the addition of project-generated traffic associated with the Convention Center Expansion, the same four intersections would operate at an unacceptable LOS of E or worse. However, increases in V/C ratios due to the Proposed Project would not exceed the City’s thresholds as provided in Table 5.14-14. Table 5.14-15 provides the Year 2015 with and without project V/C ratios and LOS. The Proposed Project would have no significant impacts on intersection operations in Year 2015. However, individual developments would need to comply with all applicable mitigation measures. TABLE 5.14-15 INTERIM YEAR 2015 WITH PROJECT PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION LOS ID Intersection AM Peak Hour Change in V/C Sig. Impact PM Peak Hour Change in V/C Sig. Impact No Project With Project No Project With Project ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS I-1 Euclid St/Katella Ave 0.66 B 0.67 B 0.01 No 0.75 C 0.76 C 0.01 No I-2 Ninth St/Katella Ave 0.66 B 0.66 B 0.00 No 0.65 B 0.66 B 0.01 No I-3 Walnut St/Ball Rd 0.61 B 0.61 B 0.00 No 0.62 B 0.62 B 0.00 No I-4 Walnut St/Katella Ave 0.58 A 0.59 A 0.01 No 0.63 B 0.64 B 0.01 No ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 5.14-15 (Continued) INTERIM YEAR 2015 WITH PROJECT PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION LOS R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-23 Transportation and Traffic ID Intersection AM Peak Hour Change in V/C Sig. Impact PM Peak Hour Change in V/C Sig. Impact No Project With Project No Project With Project ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS I-5 Disneyland Dr/Ball Rd 0.74 C 0.74 C 0.01 No 0.81 D 0.81 D 0.00 No I-6 Disneyland Dr/West St/Katella Ave 0.66 B 0.67 B 0.01 No 0.68 B 0.69 B 0.01 No I-7 Harbor Blvd/Vermont Ave 0.68 B 0.68 B 0.00 No 0.71 C 0.71 C 0.00 No I-8 Harbor Blvd/Ball Rd 0.83 D 0.83 D 0.00 No 0.73 C 0.73 C 0.00 No I-9 Harbor Blvd/I-5 Northbound Ramps 0.60 A 0.60 A 0.00 No 0.62 B 0.61 B 0.01 No I-10 Harbor Blvd/I-5 Southbound Ramps 0.40 A 0.40 A 0.00 No 0.37 A 0.38 A 0.01 No I-11 Harbor Blvd/Disney Way 0.36 A 0.39 A 0.03 No 0.55 A 0.58 A 0.03 No I-12 Harbor Blvd/Katella Ave 0.66 B 0.68 B 0.02 No 0.71 C 0.74 C 0.02 No I-13 Harbor Blvd/ Convention Way 0.43 A 0.44 A 0.01 No 0.47 A 0.47 A 0.00 No I-14 Harbor Blvd/ Orangewood Ave 0.64 B 0.64 B 0.00 No 0.66 B 0.66 B 0.00 No I-15 Clementine St/ Disney Way 0.29 A 0.30 A 0.00 No 0.30 A 0.31 A 0.00 No I-16 Clementine St/ Katella Ave 0.62 B 0.63 B 0.01 No 0.72 C 0.73 C 0.01 No I-17 I-5 SB Off-Ramp/ Disney Way 0.27 A 0.28 A 0.01 No 0.29 A 0.32 A 0.03 No I-18 Anaheim Blvd/ Ball Rd 0.72 C 0.72 C 0.00 No 0.98 E 0.98 E 0.00 No I-19 Anaheim Blvd/ Cerritos Ave 0.70 B 0.70 B 0.00 No 0.85 D 0.85 D 0.00 No I-20 Anaheim Blvd/ I-5 Northbound Ramp 0.51 A 0.51 A 0.00 No 0.70 B 0.70 B 0.00 No I-21 Anaheim Blvd/ Disney Way 0.51 A 0.52 A 0.00 No 0.60 A 0.60 A 0.00 No I-22 Anaheim Blvd/ Haster St/Katella Ave 0.59 A 0.60 A 0.01 No 0.71 C 0.73 C 0.02 No I-23 Haster St/Gene Autry Way 0.35 A 0.35 A 0.00 No 0.44 A 0.45 A 0.01 No I-24 Haster St/ Orangewood Ave 0.66 B 0.66 B 0.00 No 0.79 C 0.79 C 0.00 No I-25 Manchester Ave (I-5 Southbound Ramps)/ Katella Ave 0.72 C 0.74 C 0.02 No 0.63 B 0.66 B 0.03 No I-26 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps)/ Katella Ave 0.55 A 0.55 A 0.00 No 0.61 B 0.62 B 0.01 No I-27 East St/Ball Rd 0.59 A 0.59 A 0.00 No 0.79 C 0.79 C 0.00 No I-28 Lewis St/Ball Rd 0.60 A 0.60 A 0.00 No 0.70 B 0.70 B 0.00 No I-29 Lewis St/Cerritos Ave 0.45 A 0.45 A 0.00 No 0.48 A 0.48 A 0.00 No I-30 Lewis St/Katella Ave 0.75 C 0.76 C 0.01 No 0.98 E 0.98 E 0.00 No ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 5.14-15 (Continued) INTERIM YEAR 2015 WITH PROJECT PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION LOS R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-24 Transportation and Traffic ID Intersection AM Peak Hour Change in V/C Sig. Impact PM Peak Hour Change in V/C Sig. Impact No Project With Project No Project With Project ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS I-31 Lewis St/Gene Autry Way Not Applicable Not Applicable I-32 I-5 HOV Ramps/Gene Autry Way 0.22 A 0.22 A 0.00 No 0.28 A 0.28 A 0.00 No I-33 Lewis St/ Orangewood Ave 0.56 A 0.56 A 0.00 No 0.51 A 0.51 A 0.00 No I-34 Manchester Ave/ Orangewood Ave 0.58 A 0.58 A 0.00 No 0.50 A 0.50 A 0.00 No I-35 Anaheim Way/ Orangewood Ave 0.47 A 0.47 A 0.00 No 0.54 A 0.54 A 0.00 No I-36 State College Blvd/ Ball Rd 0.66 B 0.66 B 0.00 No 0.75 C 0.75 C 0.00 No I-37 State College Blvd/ Katella Ave 0.52 A 0.53 A 0.00 No 0.66 B 0.66 B 0.00 No I-38 State College Blvd/ Gene Autry Way 0.57 A 0.57 A 0.00 No 0.62 B 0.62 B 0.00 No I-39 State College Blvd/ Orangewood Ave 0.58 A 0.58 A 0.00 No 0.61 B 0.61 B 0.00 No I-40 State College Blvd/ Orange Center Way 0.36 A 0.36 A 0.00 No 0.32 A 0.32 A 0.00 No I-41 State College Blvd/ I-5 Northbound Ramps 0.47 A 0.47 A 0.00 No 0.42 A 0.42 A 0.00 No I-42 State College Blvd/ I- 5 Southbound Ramps 0.59 A 0.59 A 0.00 No 0.44 A 0.44 A 0.00 No I-43 State College Blvd/ The City Dr/ Chapman Ave 0.76 C 0.76 C 0.00 No 0.70 B 0.70 B 0.00 No I-44 Sunkist St/Ball Rd 0.85 D 0.85 D 0.00 No 0.91 E .91 E 0.00 No I-45 Howell Ave/Katella Ave 0.46 A 0.47 A 0.01 No 0.66 B 0.67 B 0.01 No I-46 Rampart St/ Orangewood Ave 0.65 B 0.65 B 0.00 No 0.75 C 0.75 C 0.00 No I-47 Rampart St/ Chapman Ave 0.42 A 0.42 A 0.00 No 0.46 A 0.46 A 0.00 No I-48 Ball Rd/SR-57 Northbound Ramps 0.62 B 0.62 B 0.00 No 0.67 B 0.67 B 0.00 No I-49 Ball Rd/SR-57 Southbound Ramps 0.76 C 0.76 C 0.00 No 0.68 B 0.68 B 0.00 No I-50 SR-57 Northbound Ramps/Katella Ave 0.46 A 0.46 A 0.00 No 0.51 A 0.51 A 0.00 No I-51 SR-57 Southbound Ramps/Katella Ave 0.48 A 0.48 A 0.00 No 0.48 A 0.49 A 0.01 No I-52 Orangewood Ave/ SR-57 Northbound Ramps 0.60 A 0.60 A 0.00 No 0.58 A 0.58 A 0.00 No I-53 Orangewood Ave/ SR-57 Southbound Ramps 0.69 B 0.69 B 0.00 No 0.78 C 0.78 C 0.00 No ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 5.14-15 (Continued) INTERIM YEAR 2015 WITH PROJECT PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION LOS R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-25 Transportation and Traffic ID Intersection AM Peak Hour Change in V/C Sig. Impact PM Peak Hour Change in V/C Sig. Impact No Project With Project No Project With Project ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS I-54 Phoenix Club Dr/ Ball Rd 0.66 B 0.66 B 0.00 No 0.78 C 0.78 C 0.00 No I-55 Douglass Rd/ Katella Ave 0.67 B 0.68 B 0.00 No 0.78 C 0.78 C 0.00 No I-56 Eckhoff St/ Orangewood Ave 0.76 C 0.76 C 0.00 No 0.80 C 0.80 C 0.00 No I-57 Main St/Taft Ave 0.76 C 0.76 C 0.00 No 0.96 E 0.96 E 0.00 No I-58 Main St/Katella Ave 0.60 A 0.60 A 0.00 No 0.60 A 0.61 B 0.00 No I-59 Batavia St/Taft Ave 0.79 C 0.79 C 0.00 No 0.78 C 0.78 C 0.00 No I-60 Clementine St/Gene Autry Way Not Applicable Not Applicable I-61 Clementine St/ Orangewood Ave 0.36 A 0.36 A 0.00 No 0.54 A 0.54 A 0.00 No I-62 Flower St/Chapman Ave 0.44 A 0.44 A 0.00 No 0.59 A 0.59 A 0.00 No I-63 Harbor Blvd/ Chapman Ave 0.59 A 0.59 A 0.00 No 0.67 B 0.67 B 0.00 No I-64 I-5 Ramps/ Chapman Ave 0.44 A 0.44 A 0.00 No 0.51 A 0.51 A 0.00 No I-65 SR-57 Northbound Ramps/Chapman Ave 0.44 A 0.44 A 0.00 No 0.43 A 0.43 A 0.00 No I-66 SR-57 Southbound Ramps/Chapman Ave 0.60 A 0.60 A 0.00 No 0.62 B 0.62 B 0.00 No I-67 Euclid St/Ball Rd 0.64 B 0.64 B 0.00 No 0.70 B 0.70 B 0.00 No I-68 Walnut St/Cerritos Ave 0.61 B 0.61 B 0.00 No 0.48 A 0.48 A 0.00 No I-69 Disneyland Dr/I-5 Southbound Off- Ramp 0.41 A 0.42 A 0.01 No 0.35 A 0.36 A 0.01 No I-70 Disneyland Dr/Magic Way 0.35 A 0.37 A 0.02 No 0.35 A 0.36 A 0.01 No I-71 Ox Rd/Cast Place/Ball Rd 0.62 B 0.62 B 0.00 No 0.59 A 0.59 A 0.00 No I-72 Convention Center/ Katella Ave 0.51 A 0.56 A 0.05 No 0.52 A 0.52 A 0.00 No I-73 Harbor Blvd/Lincoln Ave 0.66 B 0.66 B 0.00 No 0.82 D 0.82 D 0.00 No I-74 Harbor Blvd/Broadway 0.54 A 0.54 A 0.00 No 0.72 C 0.72 C 0.00 No I-75 Harbor Blvd/ Manchester Ave 0.33 A 0.33 A 0.01 No 0.47 A 0.49 A 0.02 No I-76 Anaheim Blvd/ Lincoln Ave 0.56 A 0.56 A 0.00 No 0.68 B 0.68 B 0.00 No I-77 Anaheim Blvd/ Broadway 0.54 A 0.54 A 0.00 No 0.56 A 0.56 A 0.00 No I-78 Olive St/Lincoln Ave 0.45 A 0.45 A 0.00 No 0.48 A 0.48 A 0.00 No ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 5.14-15 (Continued) INTERIM YEAR 2015 WITH PROJECT PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION LOS R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-26 Transportation and Traffic ID Intersection AM Peak Hour Change in V/C Sig. Impact PM Peak Hour Change in V/C Sig. Impact No Project With Project No Project With Project ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS I-79 Flore St/West St/ Ball Rd 0.56 A 0.56 A 0.00 No 0.49 A 0.49 A 0.00 No I-80 West St/ Orangewood Ave 0.72 C 0.72 C 0.00 No 0.83 D 0.83 D 0.00 No I-81 Struck Ave/Katella Ave 0.40 A 0.40 A 0.00 No 0.49 A 0.49 A 0.00 No Source: Parsons Brinckerhoff 2010. Arterial Roadway Operations Without the Proposed Project, 12 arterial segments are projected to operate at a deficient LOS D or worse in Year 2015: • Anaheim Boulevard between Cerritos Avenue and Ball Road • Ball Road between Disneyland Drive and Harbor Boulevard (Ultimate configuration) • Ball Road between State College Boulevard and Sunkist Street • Ball Road between Sunkist Street and SR-57 (Ultimate configuration) • Harbor Boulevard between Disney Way and Manchester Avenue (Ultimate configuration) • Haster Street between Orangewood Avenue and Gene Autry Way • Haster Street between Gene Autry Way and Katella Avenue • Katella Avenue between Disneyland Drive and Hotel Way • Katella Avenue between Hotel Way and Harbor Boulevard • Orangewood Avenue between Haster Street and Manchester Avenue (Ultimate configuration) • Orangewood Avenue between State College and Rampart Street • Orangewood Avenue between Rampart Street and SR-57 Eight of these segments are not developed to their ultimate configurations per the City’s Circulation Element. These segments can be improved to operate at LOS C or better by improving to their ultimate configurations. The four other deficient segments have been improved to their ultimate configuration and, thus, were subject to further analysis under AM and PM peak hour conditions. The peak hour analysis indicates that no arterial segment would operate at deficient LOS during either peak hour. Table 5.14-16 shows that in Year 2015, with the addition of project-generated traffic associated with the expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center, six additional segments would operate at deficient LOS of D or worse: • Harbor Boulevard between Convention Way and Katella Avenue (Ultimate configuration) • Harbor Boulevard between Katella Avenue and Disney Way (Ultimate configuration) • Katella Avenue between Harbor Boulevard and Clementine Street • Katella Avenue between Clementine Street and Anaheim Boulevard • Katella Avenue between Anaheim Boulevard and I-5 Freeway • Katella Avenue between Howell Avenue and SR-57 (Ultimate configuration) ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-27 Transportation and Traffic TABLE 5.14-16 INTERIM YEAR 2015 WITH PROJECT DAILY ARTERIAL SEGMENT LOS ID Arterial From To Jurisdiction Mid- Block Lanes Total Capacity No Project With Project Change in V/C Sig. Impact ADT V-C Ratio Daily LOS ADT V-C Ratio Daily LOS A-1 Anaheim Blvd Katella Ave I-5 Fwy Anaheim 6D 56,300 22,950 0.40 A 22,950 0.41 A 0.00 No A-2 Anaheim Blvd I-5 Fwy Cerritos Ave Anaheim 6D 56,300 39,510 0.70 B 39,510 0.70 B 0.00 No A-3 Anaheim Blvd Cerritos Ave Ball Rd Anaheim 4D 37,500 32,240 0.86 D 32,240 0.86 D 0.00 No A-4 Ball Rd Euclid St Walnut St Anaheim 6D 56,300 28,490 0.51 A 28,490 0.51 A 0.00 No A-5 Ball Rd Walnut St Disneyland Dr Anaheim 6D 56,300 36,120 0.64 B 36,120 0.64 B 0.00 No A-6 Ball Rd Disneyland Dr Harbor Blvd Anaheim 6D 56,300 48,260 0.86 D 48,260 0.86 D 0.00 No A-7 Ball Rd Harbor Blvd Anaheim Blvd Anaheim 6D 56,300 38,480 0.68 B 38,480 0.68 B 0.00 No A-8 Ball Rd Anaheim Blvd East St Anaheim 6D 56,300 38,100 0.68 B 38,100 0.68 B 0.00 No A-9 Ball Rd East St State College Blvd Anaheim 6D 56,300 40,210 0.71 C 40,210 0.71 C 0.00 No A-10 Ball Rd State College Blvd Sunkist St Anaheim 4D 37,500 42,450 1.13 F 42,450 1.13 F 0.00 No A-11 Ball Rd Sunkist St SR-57 Fwy Anaheim 6D 56,300 51,710 0.92 E 51,710 0.92 E 0.00 No A-12 Ball Rd SR-57 Fwy Main St Orange 6D 56,300 41,120 0.73 C 41,120 0.73 C 0.00 No A-13 Clementine St Manchester Ave Disney Way Anaheim 4U 25,000 12,470 0.50 A 12,470 0.50 A 0.00 No A-14 Clementine St Disney Way Katella Ave Anaheim 4U 25,000 7,082 0.31 A 7,820 0.31 A 0.00 No A-19 Convention Way/Gene Autry Way Haster St I-5 Fwy Anaheim 6D 56,300 10,330 0.18 A 10,330 0.18 A 0.00 No A-20 Disney Way Harbor Blvd Clementine St Anaheim 6D 56,300 10,260 0.18 A 10,482 0.19 A 0.00 No A-21 Disney Way Clementine St Anaheim Blvd Anaheim 6D 56,300 17,320 0.31 A 17,542 0.31 A 0.00 No A-22 Disneyland Dr Katella Ave Magic Way Anaheim 4D 37,500 23,850 0.64 B 24,650 0.66 B 0.02 No A-23 Disneyland Dr Magic Way Ball Rd Anaheim 4D 37,500 26,660 0.71 C 27,460 0.73 C 0.02 No A-24 Disneyland Dr Ball Rd Manchester Ave Anaheim 6D 56,300 34,610 0.61 B 35,410 0.63 B 0.01 No A-25 Harbor Blvd Wilken Way Orangewood Ave Anaheim 6D 56,300 39,910 0.71 C 40,464 0.72 C 0.01 No A-26 Harbor Blvd Orangewood Ave Convention Way Anaheim 6D 56,300 39,680 0.70 B 40,314 0.72 C 0.01 No A-27 Harbor Blvd Convention Way Katella Ave Anaheim 6D 56,300 43,760 0.78 C 46,557 0.83 D 0.05 Yes A-28 Harbor Blvd Katella Ave Disney Way Anaheim 6D 56,300 43,990 0.78 C 47,592 0.84 D 0.06 Yes A-29 Harbor Blvd Disney Way Manchester Ave Anaheim 6D 56,300 45,340 0.81 D 48,710 0.87 D 0.06 Yes ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 5.14-16 (Continued) INTERIM YEAR 2015 WITH PROJECT DAILY ARTERIAL SEGMENT LOS R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-28 Transportation and Traffic ID Arterial From To Jurisdiction Mid- Block Lanes Total Capacity No Project With Project Change in V/C Sig. Impact ADT V-C Ratio Daily LOS ADT V-C Ratio Daily LOS A-30 Harbor Blvd I-5 Fwy Ball Rd Anaheim 8D 75,000 48,760 0.65 B 49,285 0.66 B 0.01 No A-31 Haster St Orangewood Ave Gene Autry Way Anaheim 4U 25,000 25,300 1.01 F 25,300 1.01 F 0.00 No A-32 Haster St Gene Autry Way Katella Ave Anaheim 4U 25,000 21,290 0.85 D 21,601 0.86 D 0.01 No A-33 Katella Ave Ninth St Walnut St Anaheim 6D 56,300 34,990 0.62 B 35,878 0.64 B 0.02 No A-34 Katella Ave Walnut St Disneyland Dr Anaheim 6D 56,300 41,650 0.74 C 42,538 0.76 C 0.02 No A-35 Katella Ave Disneyland Dr Hotel Way Anaheim 6D 56,300 46,340 0.82 D 49,583 0.88 D 0.06 Yes A-36 Katella Ave Hotel Way Harbor Blvd Anaheim 6D 56,300 45,350 0.81 D 49,891 0.89 D 0.08 Yes A-37 Katella Ave Harbor Blvd Clementine St Anaheim 6D 56,300 45,260 0.80 D 48,753 0.87 D 0.06 Yes A-38 Katella Ave Clementine St Anaheim Blvd Anaheim 6D 56,300 44,860 0.80 C 48,353 0.86 D 0.06 Yes A-39 Katella Ave Anaheim Blvd Manchester Ave Anaheim 6D 56,300 43,650 0.78 C 46,772 0.83 D 0.06 Yes A-40a Katella Ave Manchester Ave Anaheim Way Anaheim 6D 56,300 35,700 0.63 B 36,985 0.66 B 0.02 No A-40b Katella Ave Anaheim Way Lewis St Anaheim 6D 56,300 36,610 0.65 B 37,765 0.67 B 0.02 No A-40c Katella Ave Lewis St State College Blvd Anaheim 6D 56,300 36,170 0.64 B 37,325 0.66 B 0.02 No A-41 Katella Ave State College Blvd Sportstown Anaheim 6D 56,300 37,630 0.67 B 38,785 0.69 B 0.02 No A-42 Katella Ave Sportstown Howell Ave Anaheim 6D 56,300 40,650 0.72 C 41,805 0.74 C 0.02 No A-43 Katella Ave Howell Ave SR-57 Fwy Anaheim 6D 56,300 45,270 0.80 C 46,425 0.82 D 0.02 Yes A-44 Katella Ave SR-57 Fwy Main St Orange 6D 56,300 37,560 0.67 B 38,715 0.69 B 0.02 No A-45 Manchester Ave Clementine St Harbor Blvd Anaheim 2U 12,500 5,470 0.44 A 5,470 0.44 A 0.00 No A-46 Orangewood Ave West St Harbor Blvd Anaheim 4U 25,000 15,580 0.62 B 15,580 0.62 B 0.00 No A-47 Orangewood Ave Harbor Blvd Clementine St Anaheim 4U 25,000 16,900 0.68 B 16,900 0.68 B 0.00 No A-48 Orangewood Ave Clementine St Haster St Anaheim 4U 25,000 17,000 0.68 B 17,000 0.68 B 0.00 No A-49 Orangewood Ave Haster St Manchester Ave Anaheim 4U 25,000 20,140 0.81 D 20,140 0.81 D 0.00 No A-50 Orangewood Ave* Manchester Ave State College Blvd Anaheim/ Orange 6D 56,300 22,580 0.40 A 22,580 0.40 A 0.00 No A-51 Orangewood Ave State College Blvd Rampart St Anaheim 4U 25,000 28,810 1.15 F 28,810 1.15 F 0.00 No ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 5.14-16 (Continued) INTERIM YEAR 2015 WITH PROJECT DAILY ARTERIAL SEGMENT LOS R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-29 Transportation and Traffic ID Arterial From To Jurisdiction Mid- Block Lanes Total Capacity No Project With Project Change in V/C Sig. Impact ADT V-C Ratio Daily LOS ADT V-C Ratio Daily LOS A-52 Orangewood Ave* Rampart St SR-57 Fwy Anaheim/ Orange 4U 25,000 28,760 1.15 F 28,760 1.15 F 0.00 No A-53 Orangewood Ave SR-57 Fwy Eckhoff St Orange 4D 37,500 33,110 0.88 D 33,110 0.88 D 0.00 No A-54 Orangewood Ave Eckhoff St Main St Orange 4D 37,500 15,300 0.41 A 15,300 0.41 A 0.00 No A-55 Walnut St Katella Ave Cerritos Ave Anaheim 4D 37,500 12,080 0.32 A 12,080 0.32 A 0.00 No A-56 Walnut St Cerritos Ave Ball Rd Anaheim 4D 37,500 16,070 0.43 A 16,070 0.43 A 0.00 No A-57 West St Orangewood Ave Katella Ave Anaheim 4U 25,000 13,180 0.53 A 13,290 0.53 A 0.00 No A-58 Chapman Ave State College Blvd SR-57 Fwy Orange 6D 56,300 32,800 0.58 A 33,022 0.59 A 0.00 No A-59 Chapman Ave SR-57 Fwy Main St Orange 6D 56,300 28,960 0.51 A 29,182 0.52 A 0.00 No A-60 State College Blvd Chapman Ave I-5 Fwy Orange 8D 75,000 31,880 0.43 A 32,280 0.43 A 0.00 No A-61 State College Blvd I-5 Fwy Orangewood Ave Orange 8D 75,000 28,350 0.38 A 28,839 0.38 A 0.00 No A-62 State College Blvd Orangewood Ave Gene Autry Way Anaheim 6D 56,300 27,730 0.49 A 27,730 0.49 A 0.00 No A-63 State College Blvd Gene Autry Way Katella Ave Anaheim 6D 56,300 23,590 0.42 A 24,345 0.43 A 0.01 No A-64 State College Blvd Katella Ave Howell Ave Anaheim 6D 56,300 29,030 0.52 A 29,119 0.52 A 0.00 No A-65 State College Blvd Howell Ave Cerritos Ave Anaheim 6D 56,300 24,850 0.44 A 24,850 0.44 A 0.00 No A-66 State College Blvd Cerritos Ave Ball Rd Anaheim 6D 56,300 24,130 0.43 A 24,130 0.43 A 0.00 No Note: *Shared segment capacities are identified by the jurisdiction in which the traffic count was taken. Source: Parsons Brinckerhoff 2010. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-30 Transportation and Traffic Three of these additional deficient segments are not developed to their ultimate configurations per the City’s Circulation Element and can be improved to operate at LOS C or better by improving to their ultimate configuration. The three other additional deficient segments have been improved to their ultimate configuration and were subject to further analysis under AM and PM peak hour conditions. The results of the peak hour analysis are provided in Table 5.14-17 and indicate that no arterial segment would operate at deficient LOS during either peak hour in Year 2015 with the Proposed Project. TABLE 5.14-17 INTERIM YEAR 2015 WITH PROJECT PEAK HOUR ARTERIAL SEGMENT LOS ID Arterial From To Jurisdiction Traffic Volume Mid- Block Lanes Total Capacity V/C LOS AM Peak Hour A-6 Ball Rd Disneyland Dr Harbor Blvd Anaheim 3,110 6 5,304 0.59 A A-11 Ball Rd Sunkist St SR57 Anaheim 3,760 6 4,852 0.77 C A-27 Harbor Blvd Convention Way Katella Ave Anaheim 2,560 6 5,686 0.45 A A-28 Harbor Blvd Katella Ave Disney Way Anaheim 2,617 6 6,567 0.40 A A-29 Harbor Blvd Disney Way Manchester Ave Anaheim 2,763 6 6,567 0.42 A A-43 Katella Ave Howell Ave SR-57 Fwy Anaheim 3,129 6 7,386 0.42 A A-49 Orangewood Ave Haster St Manchester Ave Anaheim 1,470 4 4,297 0.34 A PM Peak Hour A-6 Ball Rd Disneyland Dr Harbor Blvd Anaheim 3,440 6 4,747 0.72 C A-11 Ball Rd Sunkist St SR-57 Anaheim 3,830 6 5,592 0.68 B A-27 Harbor Blvd Convention Way Katella Ave Anaheim 3,230 6 5,890 0.55 A A-28 Harbor Blvd Katella Ave Disney Way Anaheim 2,991 6 5,625 0.53 A A-29 Harbor Blvd Disney Way Manchester Ave Anaheim 3,161 6 5,910 0.53 A A-43 Katella Ave Howell Ave SR-57 Fwy Anaheim 3,486 6 6,941 0.50 A A-49 Orangewood Ave Haster St Manchester Ave Anaheim 1,660 4 5,023 0.33 A Source: Parsons Brinckerhoff 2010. Roadway segments that would operate at LOS D in Year 2015 with the Proposed Project are considered to have a significant impact if the increase in V/C ratio is equal to or greater than 0.05, if the roadways have not been developed to their ultimate configurations. Table 5.14-18 lists the arterial segments where impacts related to the Proposed Project would be significant in Year 2015, along with the V/C ratios and LOS that would occur with the upgrade of these roadways into 8-lane arterials, as planned under the City’s Circulation Element. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-31 Transportation and Traffic TABLE 5.14-18 2015 ARTERIAL SEGMENT MITIGATION STRATEGIES ID Arterial From To Jurisdiction 2015 With Project Scenario Without Mitigation 2015 With Project Scenario With Mitigation V/C LOS V/C LOS Mitigation Strategy A-35 Katella Ave Disneyland Dr Hotel Way Anaheim 0.88 D 0.66 B Upgrade to 8-lane arterial A-36 Katella Ave Hotel Way Harbor Blvd Anaheim 0.89 D 0.67 B Upgrade to 8-lane arterial A-37 Katella Ave Harbor Blvd Clementine St Anaheim 0.87 D 0.65 B Upgrade to 8-lane arterial A-38 Katella Ave Clementine St Anaheim Blvd Anaheim 0.86 D 0.64 B Upgrade to 8-lane arterial A-39 Katella Ave Anaheim Blvd Manchester Ave Anaheim 0.83 D 0.62 B Upgrade to 8-lane arterial Source: Parsons Brinckerhoff 2010. Expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center in accordance with the Proposed Project would require construction easements and ultimate rights-of-way dedication to facilitate arterial widening, as well as the preparation of a phasing analysis to identify when improvements need to be constructed. With improvements, the deficient arterial segments would operate at LOS B. Transportation Impact and Improvement Fees would also be paid to the City of Anaheim to compensate the fair share of roadway improvements, as called out in the City’s Circulation Element. Payment of these fees and compliance with applicable mitigation would reduce project impacts to less than significant levels. Ramp Termini Intersection Operations Projected peak hour delays and levels of service for the ramp termini intersections in Year 2015, without the Proposed Project, show that all ramp intersections are projected to operate at acceptable levels of service for both peak hours. With the addition of project-generated traffic associated with the expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center, all ramp intersections will continue to operate to acceptable levels of service with no significant impacts generated by the Proposed Project. Table 5.14-19 shows the changes in peak hour delays and LOS at ramp termini intersections in Year 2015, with and without the Proposed Project. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-32 Transportation and Traffic TABLE 5.14-19 INTERIM YEAR 2015 WITH PROJECT PEAK HOUR RAMP TERMINI INTERSECTION LOS ID Intersection AM Peak Hour Change in Delay PM Peak Hour Change in Delay No Project With Project No Project With Project Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS I-9 Harbor Blvd/I-5 Northbound Ramps 20.4 B 20.7 C 0.3 22.5 B 22.3 C -0.2 I-10 Harbor Blvd/I-5 Southbound Ramps 8.1 A 12.6 B 4.5 7.6 A 7.0 A -0.6 I-17 I-5 Southbound Off Ramp/Disney Way 22.8 D 22.6 C -0.2 19.7 C 19.5 C -0.2 I-20 Anaheim Blvd/I-5 Northbound Ramps 14.0 B 15.6 B 1.6 28.8 C 29.0 C 0.2 I-21 Anaheim Blvd/ Disney Way 23.3 B 23.2 C -0.1 21.9 B 22.5 C 0.6 I-25 Manchester Ave (I-5 Southbound Ramps)/Katella Ave 17.8 B 16.1 B -1.7 18.1 B 17.9 B -0.2 I-26 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps)/Katella Ave 17.2 B 18.2 B 1 25.6 C 25.1 C -0.5 I-32 I-5 HOV Ramps/ Gene Autry Way 28 C 28.1 C 0.1 23.8 C 24.0 C 0.2 I-41 I-5 Northbound Ramps/State College Blvd 17.7 C 17.7 B 0.0 16.0 B 19.9 B 3.9 I-42 I-5 Southbound Ramps/State College Blvd 17.5 B 17.5 B 0.0 9.7 B 15.1 B 5.4 I-48 Ball Rd/SR-57 Northbound Ramps 16.8 B 18.0 B 1.2 15.1 B 15.3 B 0.2 I-49 Ball Rd/SR-57 Southbound Ramps 25.6 C 28.9 C 3.3 15.3 B 19.2 B 3.9 I-50 SR-57 Northbound Ramps/Katella Ave 14.6 B 17.4 B 2.8 13.1 B 13.2 B 0.1 I-51 SR-57 Southbound Ramps/Katella Ave 18.2 B 21.9 C 3.7 13.3 B 13.4 B 0.1 ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 5.14-19 (Continued) INTERIM YEAR 2015 WITH PROJECT PEAK HOUR RAMP TERMINI INTERSECTION LOS R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-33 Transportation and Traffic ID Intersection AM Peak Hour Change in Delay PM Peak Hour Change in Delay No Project With Project No Project With Project Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS I-52 Orangewood Ave/ SR-57 Northbound Ramps 11.2 A 11.2 B 0.0 6.1 A 6.9 A 0.8 I-53 Orangewood Ave/ SR-57 Southbound Ramps 19.3 B 19.3 B 0.0 27.5 C 27.5 C 0.0 I-64 I-5 Ramps/ Chapman Ave 43.4 C 43.4 D 0.0 40.0 D 40.2 D 0.2 I-65 Chapman Ave/ SR-57 Northbound Ramps 3.9 A 4.1 A 0.2 4.6 A 4.4 A -0.2 I-66 Chapman Ave/ SR-57 Southbound Ramps 34.6 D 35.1 D 0.5 24.1 C 24.5 C 0.4 I-69 Disneyland Dr/I-5 Southbound Off- Ramps 9.3 A 9.5 A 0.2 8.1 A 8.2 A 0.1 Source: Parsons Brinckerhoff 2010. Peak Hour Ramp Termini Off-Ramp Queuing Operations Projections for queue in Year 2015, without the Proposed Project, indicate that all ramp intersections would have queuing that are shorter than available storage and no deficiencies would occur. With the Proposed Project, queuing would continue to be shorter than available storage and no deficiencies would occur. Table 5.14-20 shows off-ramp storage and queue with the Proposed Project in Year 2015. No adverse impacts from the Proposed Project would occur on off-ramp queuing operations. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-34 Transportation and Traffic TABLE 5.14-20 INTERIM YEAR 2015 WITH PROJECT PEAK HOUR RAMP TERMINI OFF-RAMP QUEUING ID Ramp Terminal Intersection Off-Ramp # of Lanes Off-Ramp Length (feet) Off-Ramp Queue Length Control Delay (sec) Deficient Storage Length AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R I-9 Harbor Blvd/I-5 Northbound Ramps 1.5 1.5 400 1,280 70 100 110 200 22.6 32.9 23.5 37.2 No I-10 Harbor Blvd/I-5 Southbound Ramps 2 1 1,240 190 110 110 57.1 56.9 No I-17 I-5 Southbound Off Ramp/Disney Way 1.33 0.33 1.33 940 380 380 160 160 150 150 57.1 57.3 57.7 58.8 No I-25 Manchester Ave (I-5 Southbound Ramps)/Katella Ave 1.5 1.5 720 720 1,710 50 10 0 50 10 52.3 16.7 12.8 50.9 15.8 No I-26 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps)/Katella Ave 1.5 3 0.5 1,540 1,060 210 210 370 390 33.4 31.3 48.3 40.3 No I-32 I-5 HOV Northbound Ramps/ Gene Autry Way 1 2 1,510 10 0 10 0 43.2 17.6 48.5 14.5 No I-5 HOV Southbound Ramps/ Gene Autry Way 2 1,340 110 0 60 0 56.3 7.8 56.1 9.6 No I-41 I-5 Northbound Ramps/State College Blvd 1.5 1.5 2 1,580 690 690 90 100 0 70 75 0 51.0 46.6 6.6 58.2 53.4 8.4 No I-42 I-5 Southbound Ramps/State College Blvd 1.5 0.5 2 2,960 2,190 1,590 30 330 110 90 270 110 21.1 41.3 25.7 33.4 47.8 31.3 No I-48 Ball Rd/SR-57 Northbound Ramps 1.5 1.5 1,030 680 220 220 190 110 44.2 51.5 46.1 33.2 No I-49 Ball Rd/SR-57 Southbound Ramps 0.5 1.5 1,290 570 400 350 260 230 35.3 30.3 50.8 44.2 No I-50 SR-57 Northbound Ramps/ Katella Ave 1.5 1.5 1,030 590 210 190 120 90 44.9 51.3 38.4 35.9 No I-51 SR-57 Southbound Ramps/ Katella Ave 1 2 930 600 250 230 140 170 48.6 43.2 38.1 39.5 No I-52 Orangewood Ave/SR-57 Northbound Ramps 1.5 1.5 650 350 110 150 30 0 32.8 46.5 25.0 17.0 No I-53 Orangewood Ave/SR-57 Southbound Ramps 1.5 1.5 1,050 630 340 170 100 0 180 100 247 59.7 32.6 8.8 78.3 38.5 36.8 No I-64 I-5 Ramps/Chapman Ave 2 1 1,080 220 220 40 260 0 45.7 18.7 50.4 7.4 No ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 5.14-20 (Continued) INTERIM YEAR 2015 WITH PROJECT PEAK HOUR RAMP TERMINI OFF-RAMP QUEUING R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-35 Transportation and Traffic ID Ramp Terminal Intersection Off-Ramp # of Lanes Off-Ramp Length (feet) Off-Ramp Queue Length Control Delay (sec) Deficient Storage Length AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R I-65 Chapman Ave/SR-57 Northbound Ramps 1 1 1,240 760 40 0 30 0 55.4 16.7 59.2 18.6 No I-66 Chapman Ave/SR-57 Southbound Ramps 0.5 0.5 1 580 1,000 230 0 130 10 58.2 7.8 49.2 10.9 No I-69 Disneyland Dr/I-5 Southbound Off-Ramps 3 1 2,130 70 50 30 11.6 9.7 No Source: Parsons Brinckerhoff 2010. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-36 Transportation and Traffic Peak Hour Freeway Ramp Operations Per the Caltrans Highway Design Manual, a 2-lane on- or off-ramp should be provided where volumes exceed 1,500 vehicles per hour during either the AM or PM peak hour. None of the freeway ramps exceed this criterion under the 2015 No Project conditions. Projections for ramp operations in Year 2015, without the Proposed Project, indicate that the following freeway ramps would be deficient during the PM peak hour: • I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from State College Boulevard/Chapman Avenue • I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Anaheim Way/Katella Avenue • I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Way/Orangewood Avenue • I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Katella Avenue • I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Boulevard • I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Harbor Boulevard • I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Harbor Boulevard • I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Ball Road • I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Disneyland Drive With the addition of project-generated traffic associated with the expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center Expansion, no additional freeway ramps would become deficient. Table 5.14-21 provides the Year 2015 peak hour LOS of freeway ramps with the Proposed Project. TABLE 5.14-21 INTERIM YEAR 2015 WITH PROJECT PEAK HOUR FREEWAY RAMP LOS ID Ramp Segment Ramp # of Lane A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Density LOS Density LOS (pc/mi/ln) (pc/mi/ln) R-1 I-5 Northbound HOV Off-Ramp to Gene Autry Way/Disney Way 1 8.4 A 12.7 B R-2 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from State College Blvd/Chapman Ave 1 19.3 B >Capacity F R-3 I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Anaheim Ave/Katella Ave* 2 21.1 C >Capacity F R-4 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Way/Orangewood Ave 1 20.0 B >Capacity F R-5 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Katella Ave 1 21.0 C >Capacity F R-6 I-5 Northbound HOV On-Ramp from Gene Autry Way 1 17.2 B 26.8 C R-7 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Blvd 1 22.3 C >Capacity F R-8 I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Harbor Blvd 1 22.6 C 38.4 E R-9 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Harbor Blvd 1 19.6 B >Capacity F R-10 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Ball Rd 1 21.7 C >Capacity F R-11 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Disneyland Dr 1 22.8 C >Capacity F R-12 I-5 Southbound HOV Off-Ramp to Disneyland Dr 1 14.5 B 13.2 B ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 5.14-21 (Continued) INTERIM YEAR 2015 WITH PROJECT PEAK HOUR FREEWAY RAMP LOS R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-37 Transportation and Traffic ID Ramp Segment Ramp # of Lane A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Density LOS Density LOS (pc/mi/ln) (pc/mi/ln) R-13 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to Disneyland Dr 2 11.4 B 14.3 B R-14 I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Disneyland Dr 1 29.2 D 34.0 D R-15 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to Harbor Blvd 1 26.0 C 29.9 D R-16 I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Harbor Blvd 1 32.5 D 33.5 D R-17 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to Disney Way/Anaheim Blvd 1 27.1 C 29.9 D R-18 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Ave/Orangewood Ave* 2 24.7 C 27.8 C R-19 I-5 Southbound HOV Off-Ramp to Gene Autry Way 1 14.8 B 11.5 B R-20 I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Blvd 1 24.5 C 29.8 D R-21 I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Katella Ave 1 26.9 C 31.6 D R-22 I-5 Southbound HOV On-Ramp from Gene Autry Way 1 13.9 B 12.6 B *Major diverge analysis utilized to calculate density Source: Parsons Brinckerhoff 2010. Freeway Mainline Operations The projected densities and LOS for the freeway mainline segments during the AM and PM peak hours in Year 2015, without the Proposed Project, indicate that the following freeway mainline segments would operate at a deficient LOS during the PM peak hour: • I-5 Northbound between Lincoln Avenue and Harbor Boulevard • I-5 Northbound between Katella Avenue and State College Boulevard With the addition of project-generated traffic associated with the expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center, one additional freeway mainline segment would operate at a deficient level during the PM peak hour: I-5 Southbound between Euclid Street and Lincoln Avenue. Table 5.14-22 provides the Year 2015 peak hour LOS of freeway mainlines with the Proposed Project. Improvements to the freeways could include the addition of travel lanes. However, capacity improvements are not feasible due to physical, right-of-way, and other environmental constraints and because the City has no control over State facilities. Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) and signage improvements could potentially improve the flow and operational capacity of freeways but would not reduce the impacts to less than significant levels. The City of Anaheim has required the traffic study to identify the Proposed Project’s proportionate impact on the specific freeway mainline and/or freeway ramp locations and its fair-share percentage responsibility for mitigating these impacts along with payment of fair share fees, but impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-38 Transportation and Traffic TABLE 5.14-22 INTERIM YEAR 2015 WITH PROJECT PEAK HOUR FREEWAY MAINLINE LOS ID Freeway Segment Northbound/Eastbound Southbound/Westbound A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS F-1 I-5 between SR-91 and Brookhurst St 19.0 C 26.4 D 21.1 C 21.8 C F-2 I-5 between Brookhurst St and Euclid St 19.9 C 30.3 D 25.3 C 28.0 D F-3 I-5 between Euclid St and Lincoln Ave 19.9 C 31.6 D 33.4 D 35.1 E F-4 I-5 between Lincoln Ave and Harbor Blvd 20.4 C 36.4 E 23.3 C 27.0 D F-5 I-5 between Harbor Blvd and Katella Ave 18.1 C 34.5 D 21.6 C 24.3 C F-6 I-5 between Katella Ave and State College Blvd 18.5 C 38.9 E 24.7 C 27.3 D F-7 I-5 between State College Blvd and SR- 22 17.9 B 34.0 D 26.3 D 25.7 C Source: Parsons Brinckerhoff 2010. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-39 Transportation and Traffic Freeway Weaving Operations Projected weaving on area freeways in Year 2015, without the Proposed Project, would result in deficient LOS at the following four segments under the PM peak hour condition: • I-5 Northbound between Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Lincoln Avenue Off-Ramp • I-5 Northbound between Anaheim Boulevard On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp • I-5 Northbound between State College Boulevard On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off- Ramp • I-5 Northbound between SR-22 Connector and Chapman Avenue Off-Ramp With the Proposed Project, no additional freeway weaving segments would become deficient when the Proposed Project trips are added in 2015. Table 5.14-23 shows weaving movement volume, density, and LOS with the Proposed Project in Year 2015, during the AM and PM peak hours. TABLE 5.14-23 INTERIM YEAR 2015 WITH PROJECT PEAK HOUR FREEWAY WEAVING LOS ID Weaving Segment Weaving Length (Ft) A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS W-1 I-5 Northbound between Brookhurst St On-Ramp and SR-91 Eastbound Off-Ramp 2,980 Not Applicable I-5 Southbound between SR-91 Connector/ Magnolia Ave On-Ramp and Brookhurst St Off- Ramp 3,390 W-2 I-5 Northbound between Euclid St On-Ramp and Brookhurst St Off-Ramp 2,890 I-5 Southbound between Brookhurst St On-Ramp and Euclid St Off-Ramp 2,540 W-3 I-5 Northbound between Lincoln Ave On-Ramp and Euclid St Off-Ramp 2,000 20.3 B 33.4 D W-4 I-5 Northbound between Disneyland Dr On-Ramp and Lincoln Ave Off-Ramp 1,680 21.2 B 39.5 E I-5 Southbound between Lincoln Ave On-Ramp and Disneyland Dr Off-Ramp 3,060 Not Applicable W-5 I-5 Southbound between Disneyland Dr and Harbor Blvd Off-Ramp 1,520 28.3 C 34.5 D W-6 I-5 Northbound between Anaheim Blvd On-Ramp and Harbor Blvd Off-Ramp 2,080 20.6 B >Capacity F I-5 Southbound between Harbor Blvd On-Ramp and Disney Way Off-Ramp 2,650 Not Applicable W-7 I-5 Northbound between State College Blvd On- Ramp and Katella Ave Off-Ramp 2,350 19.3 B >Capacity F I-5 Southbound between Katella Ave On-Ramp and State College Blvd Off-Ramp 1,870 28.4 C 32.6 D W-8 I-5 Northbound between SR-22 Connector and Chapman Ave Off-Ramp 1,720 22.5 B >Capacity F I-5 Southbound between State College Blvd/ Chapman Ave On-Ramp and SR-22 Connector 1,510 32.0 C 32.5 D Source: Parsons Brinckerhoff 2010. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-40 Transportation and Traffic The Proposed Project would have no significant impacts on freeway weaving operations in Year 2015. C-R and PR Districts – General Plan Build Out Year 2030 The General Plan Build Out Year 2030 scenarios analyze traffic impacts at build out of the Anaheim and Orange General Plans, the Proposed Project, the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan, the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan, and full build out of the City’s Circulation Element. Intersection Operations The Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model (ATAM) was again used to develop General Plan Build Out Year 2030 traffic forecast volumes, based on the citywide land use data and regional socioeconomic growth projections. Future lane geometrics were assumed in the ICU and LOS analyses. Without the Proposed Project, 20 intersections are forecast to operate at an unacceptable LOS of E or worse. Changes in average delays and LOS would occur with the Proposed Project. Table 5.14-24 show Year 2030 traffic volumes, with and without the Proposed Project, including V/C ratios and LOS. TABLE 5.14-24 2030 WITH PROJECT PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION LOS ID Intersection AM Peak Hour Change in V/C Sig. Impact PM Peak Hour Change in V/C Sig. Impact No Project With Project No Project With Project ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS I-1 Euclid St/ Katella Ave 0.85 D 0.87 D 0.02 No 0.92 E 0.94 E 0.02 Yes I-2 Ninth St/ Katella Ave 0.93 E 0.95 E 0.02 Yes 0.95 E 0.97 E 0.02 Yes I-3 Walnut St/ Ball Rd 0.71 C 0.73 C 0.02 No 0.70 B 0.72 C 0.02 No I-4 Walnut St/ Katella Ave 0.87 D 0.89 D 0.02 No 0.86 D 0.88 D 0.02 No I-5 Disneyland Dr/ Ball Rd 0.87 D 0.87 D 0.00 No 0.90 D 0.92 E 0.02 Yes I-6 Disneyland Dr/ West St/ Katella Ave 0.92 E 0.96 E 0.04 Yes 0.92 E 0.94 E 0.02 Yes I-7 Harbor Blvd/ Vermont Ave 0.75 C 0.75 C 0.00 No 0.77 C 0.78 C 0.01 No I-8 Harbor Blvd/ Ball Rd 1.05 F 1.10 F 0.05 Yes 0.93 E 0.96 E 0.03 Yes I-9 Harbor Blvd/ I-5 Northbound Ramps 0.74 C 0.74 C 0.00 No 0.77 C 0.79 C 0.02 No I-10 Harbor Blvd/ I-5 Southbound Ramps 0.58 A 0.61 B 0.03 No 0.49 A 0.51 A 0.02 No I-11 Harbor Blvd/ Disney Way 0.45 A 0.50 A 0.05 No 0.82 D 0.86 D 0.04 No I-12 Harbor Blvd/ Katella Ave 0.79 C 0.80 C 0.01 No 0.8 D 0.95 E 0.08 No I-13 Harbor Blvd/ Convention Way 0.59 A 0.60 A 0.02 No 0.76 C 0.81 D 0.05 No ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 5.14-24 (Continued) 2030 WITH PROJECT PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION LOS R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-41 Transportation and Traffic ID Intersection AM Peak Hour Change in V/C Sig. Impact PM Peak Hour Change in V/C Sig. Impact No Project With Project No Project With Project ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS I-14 Harbor Blvd/ Orangewood Ave 0.82 D 0.85 D 0.03 No 0.86 D 0.90 D 0.04 No I-15 Clementine St/ Disney Way 0.55 A 0.57 A 0.02 No 0.56 A 0.57 A 0.01 No I-16 Clementine St/ Katella Ave 0.65 B 0.66 B 0.01 No 0.88 D 0.90 D 0.02 No I-17 I-5 Southbound Offramp/ Disney Way 0.48 A 0.52 A 0.04 No 0.50 A 0.53 A 0.03 No I-18 Anaheim Blvd/ Ball Rd 0.88 D 0.88 D 0.00 No 0.99 E 1.01 F 0.02 Yes I-19 Anaheim Blvd/ Cerritos Ave 0.86 D 0.86 D 0.00 No 1.05 F 1.03 F -0.02 No I-20 Anaheim Blvd/ I-5 Northbound Ramps 0.66 B 0.66 B 0.00 No 0.92 E 0.95 E 0.03 Yes I-21 Anaheim Blvd/ Disney Way 0.68 B 0.71 C 0.03 No 0.83 D 0.85 D 0.02 No I-22 Anaheim Blvd/ Haster St/ Katella Ave 0.88 D 0.90 D 0.02 No 0.89 D 0.92 E 0.03 Yes I-23 Haster St/ Gene Autry Way 0.91 E 0.97 E 0.06 Yes 1.10 F 1.17 F 0.07 Yes I-24 Haster St/ Orangewood Ave 0.74 C 0.79 C 0.05 No 0.82 D 0.83 D 0.01 No I-25 Manchester Ave (I-5 Southbound Ramps)/Katella Ave 0.75 C 0.77 C 0.02 No 0.78 C 0.80 C 0.02 No I-26 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps)/ Katella Ave 0.96 E 0.95 E -0.01 No 0.85 D 0.90 D 0.05 No I-27 East St/ Ball Rd 0.84 D 0.86 D 0.02 No 0.80 C 0.81 D 0.01 No I-28 Lewis St/ Ball Rd 0.77 C 0.79 C 0.02 No 0.89 D 0.90 D 0.01 No I-29 Lewis St/ Cerritos Ave 0.85 D 0.85 D 0.00 No 0.91 E 0.95 E 0.04 Yes I-30 Lewis St/ Katella Ave 0.84 D 0.85 D 0.01 No 1.28 F 1.28 F 0.00 No I-31 Lewis St/Gene Autry Way 0.63 B 0.64 B 0.01 No 0.79 C 0.84 D 0.05 No I-32 I-5 HOV Ramps/ Gene Autry Way 0.54 A 0.53 A -0.01 No 0.73 C 0.76 C 0.03 No I-33 Lewis St/ Orangewood Ave 0.63 B 0.62 B -0.01 No 0.56 A 0.60 A 0.04 No I-34 Manchester Ave/ Orangewood Ave 0.73 C 0.76 C 0.03 No 0.80 C 0.81 D 0.01 No I-35 Anaheim Way/ Orangewood Ave 0.72 C 0.75 C 0.03 No 0.62 B 0.66 B 0.04 No I-36 State College Blvd/ Ball Rd 0.73 C 0.73 C 0.00 No 0.90 D 0.90 D 0.00 No ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 5.14-24 (Continued) 2030 WITH PROJECT PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION LOS R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-42 Transportation and Traffic ID Intersection AM Peak Hour Change in V/C Sig. Impact PM Peak Hour Change in V/C Sig. Impact No Project With Project No Project With Project ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS I-37 State College Blvd/ Katella Ave 0.86 D 0.94 E 0.08 Yes 0.98 E 0.99 E 0.01 Yes I-38 State College Blvd/ Gene Autry Way 0.98 E 1.02 F 0.04 Yes 0.84 D 0.84 D 0.00 No I-39 State College Blvd/ Orangewood Ave 0.89 D 0.91 E 0.02 Yes 0.97 E 0.97 E 0.00 No I-40 State College Blvd/ Orange Center Dr 0.71 C 0.72 C 0.01 No 0.58 A 0.59 A 0.01 No I-41 State College Blvd/ I-5 Northbound Ramps 0.77 C 0.77 C 0.00 No 0.73 C 0.74 C 0.01 No I-42 State College Blvd/ I-5 Southbound Ramps 0.91 E 0.90 D -0.01 No 0.78 C 0.80 C 0.02 No I-43 State College Blvd/ The City Dr/ Chapman Ave 0.86 D 0.88 D 0.02 No 0.92 E 0.96 E 0.04 Yes I-44 Sunkist St/ Ball Rd 0.85 D 0.86 D 0.01 No 0.87 D 0.89 D 0.02 No I-45 Howell Ave/ Katella Ave 0.62 B 0.62 B 0.00 No 0.91 E 0.95 E 0.04 Yes I-46 Rampart St/ Orangewood Ave 0.73 C 0.78 C 0.05 No 1.05 F 1.13 F 0.08 Yes I-47 Rampart St/ Chapman Ave 0.66 B 0.73 C 0.07 No 0.83 D 0.84 D 0.01 No I-48 Ball Rd/ SR-57 Northbound Ramps 0.69 B 0.68 B -0.01 No 0.72 C 0.73 C 0.01 No I-49 Ball Rd/ SR-57 Southbound Ramps 0.82 D 0.85 D 0.03 No 0.86 D 0.88 D 0.02 No I-50 SR-57 Northbound Ramps/ Katella Ave 0.67 B 0.68 B 0.01 No 0.73 C 0.73 C 0.00 No I-51 SR-57 Southbound Ramps/ Katella Ave 0.70 B 0.71 C 0.01 No 0.69 B 0.69 B 0.00 No I-52 Orangewood Ave/ S-57 Northbound Ramps 0.76 C 0.78 C 0.02 No 0.79 C 081 D 0.02 No I-53 Orangewood Ave/ SR-57 Southbound Ramps 0.85 D 0.84 D -0.01 No 0.99 E 1.04 F 0.05 Yes I-54 Phoenix Club Dr/ Ball Rd 0.81 D 0.82 D 0.01 No 0.87 D 0.87 D 0.00 No I-55 Douglass Rd/ Katella Ave 1.02 F 1.04 F 0.02 Yes 1.09 F 1.09 F 0.00 No I-56 Eckhoff St/ Orangewood Ave 0.88 D 0.90 D 0.02 No 0.85 D 0.90 D 0.05 No I-57 Main St/ Taft Ave 0.67 B 0.69 B 0.02 No 0.87 D 0.88 D 0.01 No I-58 Main St/ Katella Ave 0.77 C 0.80 C 0.03 No 0.78 C 0.81 D 0.03 No I-59 Batavia St/ Taft Ave 0.83 D 0.88 D 0.05 No 0.86 D 0.86 D 0.00 No I-60 Clementine St/ Gene Autry Way 0.53 A 0.58 A 0.05 No 0.83 D 0.85 D 0.02 No ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 5.14-24 (Continued) 2030 WITH PROJECT PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION LOS R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-43 Transportation and Traffic ID Intersection AM Peak Hour Change in V/C Sig. Impact PM Peak Hour Change in V/C Sig. Impact No Project With Project No Project With Project ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS I-61 Clementine St/ Orangewood Ave 0.54 A 0.61 B 0.07 No 0.76 C 0.76 C 0.00 No I-62 Flower St/ Chapman Ave 0.56 A 0.56 A 0.00 No 0.80 C 0.78 C -0.02 No I-63 Harbor Blvd/ Chapman Ave 0.67 B 0.69 B 0.02 No 0.81 D 0.83 D 0.02 No I-64 I-5 Ramps/ Chapman Ave 0.60 A 0.60 A 0.00 No 0.73 C 0.73 C 0.00 No I-65 SR-57 Northbound Ramps/ Chapman Ave 0.50 A 0.63 B 0.13 No 0.53 A 0.65 B 0.12 No I-66 SR-57 Southbound Ramps/ Chapman Ave 0.73 C 0.78 C 0.05 No 0.82 D 0.83 D 0.01 No I-67 Euclid St/ Ball Rd 0.74 C 0.75 C 0.01 No 0.79 C 0.80 C 0.01 No I-68 Walnut St/ Cerritos Ave 0.73 C 0.74 C 0.01 No 0.53 A 0.53 A 0.00 No I-69 Disneyland Dr/ I-5 Southbound Off Ramp 0.55 A 0.56 A 0.01 No 0.49 A 0.49 A 0.00 No I-70 Disneyland Dr/ Magic Way 0.50 A 0.51 A 0.01 No 0.46 A 0.47 A 0.01 No I-71 Ox Rd/ Cast Place/ Ball Rd 0.74 C 0.74 C 0.00 No 0.68 B 0.69 B 0.01 No I-72 Convention Center/ Katella Ave 0.59 A 0.65 B 0.06 No 0.58 A 0.60 A 0.02 No I-73 Harbor Blvd/ Lincoln Ave 0.69 B 0.70 B 0.01 No 0.81 D 0.82 D 0.01 No I-74 Harbor Blvd/ Broadway 0.58 A 0.59 A 0.01 No 0.71 C 0.72 C 0.01 No I-75 Harbor Blvd/ Manchester Ave 0.41 A 0.41 A 0.00 No 0.57 A 0.61 B 0.04 No I-76 Anaheim Blvd/ Lincoln Ave 0.75 C 0.78 C 0.03 No 0.85 D 0.86 D 0.01 No I-77 Anaheim Blvd/ Broadway 0.70 B 0.72 C 0.02 No 0.67 B 0.70 B 0.03 No I-78 Olive St/ Lincoln Ave 0.45 A 0.56 A 0.11 No 0.49 A 0.61 B 0.12 No I-79 Flore St/ West Place/ Ball Rd 0.63 B 0.64 B 0.01 No 0.50 A 0.52 A 0.02 No I-80 West St/ Orangewood Ave 0.63 B 0.65 B 0.02 No 0.65 B 0.68 B 0.03 No I-81 Struck Ave/ Katella Ave 0.67 B 0.67 B 0.00 No 0.80 C 0.81 D 0.01 No Source: Parsons Brinckerhoff 2010. As shown, with the addition of trips generated by the Proposed Project, 22 intersections would operate at an unacceptable LOS of E or worse. At these 22 intersections, the Proposed Project’s impact is considered significant if the additional trips associated with the Proposed ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-44 Transportation and Traffic Project result in deterioration of the LOS to an unacceptable LOS E or F, or an increase in the ICU value of 0.01 if the intersection is projected to operate at LOS E or F without the Proposed Project. The calculated increases in ICU due to the Proposed Project would exceed the City’s thresholds at 18 intersections, which include the following: • Euclid Street at Katella Avenue • Ninth Street at Katella Avenue • Disneyland Drive at Ball Road • Disneyland Drive/West Street at Katella Avenue • Harbor Boulevard at Ball Road • Anaheim Boulevard at Ball Road • Anaheim Boulevard at I-5 Northbound Ramps • Anaheim Boulevard/Haster Street at Katella Avenue • Haster Street at Gene Autry Way • Lewis Street at Cerritos Avenue • State College Boulevard at Katella Avenue • State College Boulevard at Gene Autry Way • State College Boulevard at Orangewood Avenue (Anaheim/Orange) • State College Boulevard/The City Drive at Chapman Avenue (Orange) • Howell Avenue at Katella Avenue • Rampart Street at Orangewood Avenue • Orangewood Avenue at SR-57 Southbound Ramps (Orange) • Douglass Road at Katella Avenue Thus, impacts associated with the Proposed Project at these intersections are considered significant. Roadway intersection improvements needed to allow the deficient intersections to operate at acceptable LOS D or better are shown in Exhibit 5.14-2 and provided in Table 5.14-25, along with the ICU and LOS that could be expected with implementation of the improvements. TABLE 5.14-25 RECOMMENDED 2030 INTERSECTION MITIGATION MEASURES ID Intersection Jurisdiction 2030 With Project Scenario Without Mitigation 2030 With Project Scenario With Mitigation Recommended Mitigation Strategy AM PM AM PM ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS I-1 Euclid St/ Katella Ave Anaheim 0.87 D 0.94 E 0.87 D 0.89 D Restripe NBR to NBTR, add 400’ NB departure lane (widen) I-2 Ninth St/ Katella Ave Anaheim 0.95 E 0.97 E 0.88 D 0.80 C Add 2nd NBL (Restripe #1 SB lane) I-5 Disneyland Dr/ Ball Rd Anaheim 0.87 D 0.92 E 0.83 D 0.87 D Add NBL, Restripe NB to 2L, 2T, 1R and SB to 2L, 2T. Remove Split Phase I-6 Disneyland Dr/ West St/ Katella Ave Anaheim 0.96 E 0.94 E 0.85 D 0.90 D Restripe EBR to EBT, Restripe WBR to WBT and add 4th WB lane to the Simba parking lot entrance ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 5.14-25 (Continued) RECOMMENDED 2030 INTERSECTION MITIGATION MEASURES R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-45 Transportation and Traffic ID Intersection Jurisdiction 2030 With Project Scenario Without Mitigation 2030 With Project Scenario With Mitigation Recommended Mitigation Strategy AM PM AM PM ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS I-8 Harbor Blvd/ Ball Rd Anaheim 1.10 F 0.96 E 0.90 D 0.90 D Add NBT, SBT, EBT, EBR I-18 Anaheim Blvd/ Ball Rd Anaheim 0.88 D 1.01 F 0.82 D 0.90 D Add NBR, EBL, EBR I-19 Anaheim Blvd/ Cerritos Ave Anaheim 0.86 D 1.03 F 0.68 B 0.86 D Add NBL, SBL, WBR, Restripe WB approach to 2L, 1TR, 1R I-20 Anaheim Blvd/ I-5 Northbound Ramps Anaheim 0.66 B 0.95 E 0.55 A 0.85 D Add SBT ( in median) I-22 Anaheim Blvd/ Haster St/ Katella Ave Anaheim 0.90 D 0.92 E 0.90 D 0.90 D Add WBR I-23 Haster St/ Gene Autry Way Anaheim 0.97 E 1.17 F 0.78 C 0.88 D Add WBL, SBL, SBR I-26 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps)/ Katella Ave Anaheim 0.95 E 0.90 D 0.82 D 0.78 C Add EBT, WBT I-29 Lewis St/ Cerritos Ave Anaheim 0.85 D 0.95 E 0.85 D 0.89 D Add WBR I-30 Lewis St/ Katella Ave Anaheim 0.85 D 1.28 F 0.70 B 0.83 D Add NBL, NBT, SBL, SBR, WBT; Restripe SB to 2L, 1T, 1TR, 1R I-37 State College Blvd/ Katella Ave Anaheim 0.94 E 0.99 E 0.90 D 0.85 D Add WBR, EBR; Restripe SB to 2L, 2T, 2R; EB to 3L, 3T, 1R I-38 State College Blvd/ Gene Autry Way Anaheim 1.02 F 0.84 D 0.90 D 0.73 C Add SBR I-39 State College Blvd/ Orangewood Ave Anaheim/ Orange 0.91 E 0.97 E 0.88 D 0.90 D Add NBR and WBT I-43 State College Blvd/ The City Dr/ Chapman Ave Orange 0.88 D 0.96 E 0.83 D 0.80 C Restripe WBT to WBTR I-45 Howell Ave/ Katella Ave Anaheim 0.62 B 0.95 E 0.62 B 0.85 D Add WBR I-46 Rampart St/ Orangewood Ave Anaheim 0.78 C 1.13 F 0.73 C 0.80 C Add NB Free Right, Add SBL ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 5.14-25 (Continued) RECOMMENDED 2030 INTERSECTION MITIGATION MEASURES R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-46 Transportation and Traffic ID Intersection Jurisdiction 2030 With Project Scenario Without Mitigation 2030 With Project Scenario With Mitigation Recommended Mitigation Strategy AM PM AM PM ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS I-53 Orangewood Ave/ SR-57 Southbound Ramps Orange 0.84 D 1.04 F 0.79 C 0.89 D Add WBL (Restripe) I-55 Douglass Rd/ Katella Ave Anaheim 1.04 F 1.09 F 0.84 D 0.87 D Add NBT and SBT; Reconfigure NBTR to NBT, Reconfigure SBTR to SBT, Add EBT and WBT Source: Parsons Brinckerhoff 2010. Thus, impacts associated with the Proposed Project at these 18 locations are considered significant. The Proposed Project would contribute to adverse impacts at the remaining 3 intersections that are anticipated to operate at LOS E or F. Each future development within the ARSP will be required to prepare a traffic impact analysis if it is forecast to generate 100 or more peak hour (morning or evening) trip ends. The analysis would identify arterial and intersection improvements needed to maintain acceptable LOS, with projects that exceed the LOS standards providing the necessary improvements and/or funding to mitigate their impacts. Each development would need to provide for construction easements and ultimate rights-of-way and temporary traffic control services. Future development within the ARSP will also be required to pay the City’s traffic impacts fees to fund intersections improvements needed to allow the City’s roadway network to operate at LOS D or better. Property owners/developers that chose to develop in accordance with the ARSP will also be required to participate in applicable reimbursement or benefit districts and the ATN as well as develop TDM programs to reduce employee trips. As part of TDM programs, property owners/developers will be required to meet with the Traffic and Transportation Manager to determine whether a bus stop is required adjacent to their property prior to Final Site Plan approval. Impacts on Anaheim intersections would not be significant with compliance with these mitigation measures. For the intersections that are located partially or entirely in the City of Orange, the identified improvements in Table 5.14-25 are not included within the City of Orange development impact fee program. Even though City of Anaheim does not have jurisdiction over the deficient circulation system components in the City of Orange, developments in the City of Anaheim shall fund appropriate fair-shares of the identified improvements, which have been calculated to be approximately 7 to 19 percent of improvement costs. The City shall endeavor to work with the City of Orange in developing a joint fee program to mitigate cross-municipal boundary impacts. However, the City of Anaheim cannot guarantee that the City of Orange will cooperate in the development of a fee program or will utilize funds collected by the City of Anaheim for City of Orange impacts for the intended purpose of such funds. Thus, for this analysis, impacts at the intersections in Orange will remain significant and unavoidable even though it is anticipated that the improvements will be made. ---PAGE BREAK--- Intersection Mitigation Strategies Exhibit 5.14-2 Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (Rev: WAD 050610) R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\Graphics\EIR\Ex5.14-2_Intersect_Mit_Strageties.pdf D:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\Graphics\Ex_Intersection_Mit_Strategies.ai Source: Parsons Brinckerhoff 2010 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! DISNEYLAND DR OR AN GE C TR DR VERMONT AVE EAST ST MANCHESTER AVE MAGIC WY KATELLA AVE PL 29 55 56 53 46 38 39 43 45 LEWIS ST WY CHAPMAN AVE PHOENIX CLUB DR SPORTSTOWN GATEWAY CENTER DR MARKET ST RA M P A R T ST - Add WBL, SBL, SBR CMP Intersection (No Mitigation Required) - Restripe NB to 2L, 2T, 1R - Restripe SB to 2L, 2T - Add WBR - Add NBT, SBT, EBT - Add 2nd EBR - Add NBR, EBL, EBR - Add NBL, SBL, WBR - Restripe WB to 2L, 1TR, 1R - Add SBT - Add WBR - Add EBT, WBT - Add NBL, NBT - Add SBL, SBR - Add WBT #37: - Add WBR, EBR - Restripe SB to 2L, 2T, 2R - Restripe EB to 3L, 3T, 1R #38: - Add SBR #39: - Add NBR - Add WBT - Restripe WBT to WBTR - Add NB Free Right - Add SBL - Add WBL - Add NBT; Reconfigure NBTR to NBT - Add SBT; Reconfigure SBTR to SBT - Add EBT - Add WBR - Add WBR E LA PALMA AVE W LINCOLN AVE BALL RD WEST ST W LA PALMA AVE E LINCOLN AVE STATE COLLEGE BLVD NINTH ST HARBOR BLVD EUCLID ST LA VETA AVE SOUTH ST ANAHEIM BLVD WALNUT ST TAFT AVE KATELLA AVE ORANGEWOOD AVE S BROOKHURST ST LEWIS ST N EAST ST S NUTWOOD ST CERRITOS AVE N WEST ST COLLINS AVE ORANGEWOOD AVE E FRONTERA ST HASTER ST WAGNER AVE N HARBOR BLVD MAIN ST STRUCK AVE NUTWOOD ST W CRESCENT AVE ECKHOFF ST SUNKIST ST GARY ST GLASSELL ST N RIO VISTA ST N ANAHEIM BLVD N SUNKIST ST WALNUT AVE BATAVIA ST N BROOKHURST ST GENE AUTRY WY W FLETCHER AVE DISNEY WY PALMWOOD DR ANAHEIM WY HOWELL AVE DUPONT DR Y N GLASSEL ST CONVENTION CERRITOS AVE KATELLA AVE W ORANGE AVE CHAPMAN AVE N EUCLID ST S NUTWOOD ST 70 12 6 1 8 5 20 26 19 22 2 30 37 18 ? l GARDEN GROVE ANAHEIM ORANGE V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\Anaheim Resort μ Figure 7.1 - Intersection Mitigation Strategies CLEMENTINE WEST ST FLORE ST ? ê ? » SANTA ANA RIVER GLOBAL WY 23 - Restripe NBR to NBT - Add 4th WBT - Add 2nd NBL - Restripe EBR to 4th EBT - Restripe WBR to 4th WBT - Add WBR DOUGLASS RD 0 0.25 0.5 Miles LEGEND Adjacent Area The Anaheim Resort boundary ! Major Roadway Railroad Water Area City of Anaheim Mitigated Intersection ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-47 Transportation and Traffic Arterial Roadway Operations Daily Arterial Segment LOS Analysis Without the Proposed Project, 24 arterial segments are projected to operate at deficient LOS of D or worse in Year 2030. Since the Year 2030 scenario assumes all roadways are built to the ultimate configurations, peak hour analysis was performed for the deficient segments. With the Proposed Project, nine additional arterial segments would operate at deficient LOS of D or worse in Year 2030, for a total of 33 arterial segments operating at deficient LOS. These segments include: • Anaheim Boulevard between I-5 and Cerritos Avenue • Anaheim Boulevard between Cerritos Avenue and Ball Road • Ball Road between Disneyland Drive and Harbor Boulevard • Ball Road between Harbor Boulevard and Anaheim Boulevard • Ball Road between Anaheim Boulevard and East Street • Ball Road between East Street and State College Boulevard • Ball Road between State College Boulevard and Sunkist Street • Ball Road between Sunkist Street and SR-57 • Ball Road between SR-57 and Main Street • Clementine Street between Manchester Avenue and Disney Way • Disneyland Drive between Katella Avenue and Magic Way • Disneyland Drive between Magic Way and Ball Road • Harbor Boulevard between Wilken Way and Orangewood Avenue • Harbor Boulevard between Orangewood Avenue and Convention Way • Harbor Boulevard between Convention Way and Katella Avenue • Harbor Boulevard between Katella Avenue and Disney Way • Harbor Boulevard between Disney Way and Manchester Boulevard • Katella Avenue between Ninth Street and Walnut Street • Katella Avenue between Walnut Street and Disneyland Drive • Katella Avenue between Disneyland Drive and Hotel Way • Katella Avenue between Hotel Way and Harbor Boulevard • Katella Avenue between Manchester Avenue and Anaheim Way • Katella Avenue between Anaheim Way and Lewis Street • Katella Avenue between Sportstown and Howell Avenue • Katella Avenue between Howell Avenue and SR-57 • Katella Avenue between SR-57 and Main Street • Orangewood Avenue between West Street and Harbor Boulevard • Orangewood Avenue between Harbor Boulevard and Clementine Street • Orangewood Avenue between Clementine Street and Haster Street • Orangewood Avenue between Haster Street and Manchester Avenue • Orangewood Avenue between State College Boulevard and Rampart Street • Orangewood Avenue between Rampart Street and SR-57 • State College Boulevard between Katella Avenue and Howell Avenue Table 5.14-26 provides the V/C ratios and LOS for arterial segments in Year 2030, with and without the Proposed Project. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-48 Transportation and Traffic TABLE 5.14-26 2030 WITH PROJECT DAILY ARTERIAL SEGMENT LOS ID Arterial From To Jurisdiction Mid-Block Lanes Total Capacity No Project With Project ADT V/C LOS ADT V/C LOS A-1 Anaheim Blvd Katella Ave I-5 Fwy Anaheim 6D 56,300 30,590 0.54 A 31,080 0.55 A A-2 Anaheim Blvd I-5 Fwy Cerritos Ave Anaheim 6D 56,300 53,130 0.94 E 55,320 0.98 E A-3 Anaheim Blvd Cerritos Ave Ball Rd Anaheim 6D 56,300 43,930 0.78 C 46,190 0.82 D A-4 Ball Rd Euclid St Walnut St Anaheim 6D 56,300 33,130 0.59 A 34,040 0.60 A A-5 Ball Rd Walnut St Disneyland Dr Anaheim 6D 56,300 40,610 0.72 C 42,390 0.75 C A-6 Ball Rd Disneyland Dr Harbor Blvd Anaheim 6D 56,300 56,710 1.01 F 58,690 1.04 F A-7 Ball Rd Harbor Blvd Anaheim Blvd Anaheim 6D 56,300 41,900 0.74 C 47,460 0.84 D A-8 Ball Rd Anaheim Blvd East St Anaheim 6D 56,300 44,140 0.78 C 46,390 0.82 D A-9 Ball Rd East St State College Blvd Anaheim 6D 56,300 44,720 0.79 C 47,540 0.84 D A-10 Ball Rd State College Blvd Sunkist St Anaheim 6D 56,300 46,630 0.83 D 48,590 0.86 D A-11 Ball Rd Sunkist St SR-57 Fwy Anaheim 6D 56,300 58,790 1.04 F 61,800 1.10 F A-12 Ball Rd SR-57 Fwy Main St Orange 6D 56,300 59,090 1.05 F 60,250 1.07 F A-13 Clementine St Manchester Ave Disney Way Anaheim 4U 25,000 23,110 0.92 E 24,080 0.96 E A-14 Clementine St Disney Way Katella Ave Anaheim 4U 25,000 8,470 0.34 A 8,470 0.34 A A-15 Clementine St Katella Ave Gene Autry Way Anaheim 4U 25,000 2,660 0.11 A 5,720 0.23 A A-16 Clementine St Gene Autry Way Orangewood Ave Anaheim 4U 25,000 7,930 0.32 A 9,010 0.36 A A-17 Convention Way/ Gene Autry Way Harbor Blvd Clementine St Anaheim 6D 56,300 22,550 0.40 A 24,940 0.44 A A-18 Convention Way/ Gene Autry Way Clementine St Haster St Anaheim 6D 56,300 27,220 0.48 A 30,800 0.55 A A-19 Convention Way/ Gene Autry Way Haster St I-5 Fwy Anaheim 6D 56,300 32,470 0.58 A 38,780 0.69 B A-20 Disney Way Harbor Blvd Clementine St Anaheim 6D 56,300 15,600 0.28 A 17,040 0.30 A A-21 Disney Way Clementine St Anaheim Blvd Anaheim 6D 56,300 24,690 0.44 A 26,660 0.47 A A-22 Disneyland Dr Katella Ave Magic Way Anaheim 4D 37,500 33,960 0.91 E 34,500 0.92 E A-23 Disneyland Dr Magic Way Ball Rd Anaheim 4D 37,500 32,760 0.87 D 32,800 0.87 D A-24 Disneyland Dr Ball Rd Manchester Ave Anaheim 6D 56,300 42,530 0.76 C 42,930 0.76 C A-25 Harbor Blvd Wilken Way Orangewood Ave Anaheim 6D 56,300 48,890 0.87 D 50,410 0.90 D A-26 Harbor Blvd Orangewood Ave Convention Way Anaheim 6D 56,300 47,050 0.84 D 47,600 0.85 D A-27 Harbor Blvd Convention Way Katella Ave Anaheim 6D 56,300 50,200 0.89 D 50,570 0.90 D A-28 Harbor Blvd Katella Ave Disney Way Anaheim 6D 56,300 55,240 0.98 E 56,950 1.01 F ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 5.14-26 (Continued) 2030 WITH PROJECT DAILY ARTERIAL SEGMENT LOS R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-49 Transportation and Traffic ID Arterial From To Jurisdiction Mid-Block Lanes Total Capacity No Project With Project ADT V/C LOS ADT V/C LOS A-29 Harbor Blvd Disney Way Manchester Ave Anaheim 6D 56,300 53,660 0.95 E 54,670 0.97 E A-30 Harbor Blvd I-5 Fwy Ball Rd Anaheim 8D 75,000 57,660 0.77 C 59,460 0.79 C A-31 Haster St Orangewood Ave Gene Autry Way Anaheim 6D 56,300 37,170 0.66 B 39,830 0.71 C A-32 Haster St Gene Autry Way Katella Ave Anaheim 6D 56,300 24,560 0.44 A 25,290 0.45 A A-33 Katella Ave Ninth St Walnut St Anaheim 6D 56,300 47,260 0.84 D 48,170 0.86 D A-34 Katella Ave Walnut St Disneyland Dr Anaheim 6D 56,300 55,400 0.98 E 56,930 1.01 F A-35 Katella Ave Disneyland Dr Hotel Way Anaheim 8D 75,000 65,400 0.87 D 67,110 0.89 D A-36 Katella Ave Hotel Way Harbor Blvd Anaheim 8D 75,000 61,020 0.81 D 63,060 0.84 D A-37 Katella Ave Harbor Blvd Clementine St Anaheim 8D 75,000 57,670 0.77 C 59,260 0.79 C A-38 Katella Ave Clementine St Anaheim Blvd Anaheim 8D 75,000 57,690 0.77 C 59,840 0.80 C A-39 Katella Ave Anaheim Blvd Manchester Ave Anaheim 8D 75,000 55,510 0.74 C 57,710 0.77 C A-40a Katella Ave Manchester Ave Anaheim Way Anaheim 6D 56,300 46,960 0.83 D 53,740 0.95 E A-40b Katella Ave Anaheim Way Lewis St Anaheim 8D 75,000 50,220 0.67 B 61,390 0.82 D A-40c Katella Ave Lewis St State College Blvd Anaheim 8D 75,000 48,820 0.65 B 57,860 0.77 C A-41 Katella Ave State College Blvd Sportstown Anaheim 8D 75,000 47,980 0.64 B 51,920 0.69 B A-42 Katella Ave Sportstown Howell Ave Anaheim 6D 56,300 54,380 0.97 E 62,310 1.11 F A-43 Katella Ave Howell Ave SR-57 Fwy Anaheim 6D 56,300 60,860 1.08 F 71,190 1.26 F A-44 Katella Ave SR-57 Fwy Main St Orange 6D 56,300 54,600 0.97 E 62,900 1.12 F A-45 Manchester Ave Clementine St Harbor Blvd Anaheim 4U 25,000 9,190 0.37 A 10,290 0.41 A A-46 Orangewood Ave West St Harbor Blvd Anaheim 4U 25,000 21,640 0.87 D 22,670 0.91 E A-47 Orangewood Ave Harbor Blvd Clementine St Anaheim 4U 25,000 19,800 0.79 C 21,850 0.87 D A-48 Orangewood Ave Clementine St Haster St Anaheim 4U 25,000 20,130 0.81 D 21,480 0.86 D A-49 Orangewood Ave Haster St Manchester Ave Anaheim 4U 25,000 24,830 0.99 E 25,910 1.04 F A-50 Orangewood Ave* Manchester Ave State College Blvd Anaheim /Orange 6D 56,300 28,530 0.51 A 34,410 0.61 B A-51 Orangewood Ave State College Blvd Rampart St Anaheim 6D 56,300 38,080 0.68 B 50,380 0.89 D A-52 Orangewood Ave Rampart St SR-57 Fwy Anaheim /Orange 6D 56,300 40,050 0.71 C 47,660 0.85 D A-53 Orangewood Ave SR-57 Fwy Eckhoff St Orange 6D 56,300 44,670 0.79 C 49,090 0.87 D A-54 Orangewood Ave Eckhoff St Main St Orange 6D 56,300 17,750 0.32 A 19,610 0.35 A A-55 Walnut St Katella Ave Cerritos Ave Anaheim 4D 37,500 15,670 0.42 A 16,430 0.44 A ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 5.14-26 (Continued) 2030 WITH PROJECT DAILY ARTERIAL SEGMENT LOS R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-50 Transportation and Traffic ID Arterial From To Jurisdiction Mid-Block Lanes Total Capacity No Project With Project ADT V/C LOS ADT V/C LOS A-56 Walnut St Cerritos Ave Ball Rd Anaheim 4D 37,500 17,310 0.46 A 17,740 0.47 A A-57 West St Orangewood Ave Katella Ave Anaheim 4U 25,000 14,520 0.58 A 15,030 0.60 A A-58 Chapman Ave State College Blvd SR-57 Fwy Orange 6D 56,300 37,220 0.66 B 38,400 0.68 B A-59 Chapman Ave SR-57 Fwy Main St Orange 6D 56,300 32,610 0.58 A 33,930 0.60 A A-60 State College Blvd Chapman Ave I-5 Fwy Orange 8D 75,000 42,370 0.56 A 45,860 0.61 B A-61 State College Blvd I-5 Fwy Orangewood Ave Orange 8D 75,000 43,240 0.58 A 48,060 0.64 B A-62 State College Blvd Orangewood Ave Gene Autry Way Anaheim 8D 75,000 39,670 0.53 A 46,900 0.63 B A-63 State College Blvd Gene Autry Way Katella Ave Anaheim 6D 56,300 31,040 0.55 A 34,920 0.62 B A-64 State College Blvd Katella Ave Howell Ave Anaheim 6D 56,300 39,840 0.71 C 46,470 0.83 D A-65 State College Blvd Howell Ave Cerritos Ave Anaheim 6D 56,300 27,860 0.49 A 31,130 0.55 A A-66 State College Blvd Cerritos Ave Ball Rd Anaheim 6D 56,300 25,880 0.46 A 28,570 0.51 A Note:*Shared segment capacities are identified by the jurisdiction in which the traffic count was taken. Source: Parsons Brinckerhoff 2010. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-51 Transportation and Traffic Peak Hour Arterial Segment LOS Analysis Table 5.14-27 reports the AM and PM peak hour arterial segment LOS for the deficient arterial segments under 2030 With Project conditions TABLE 5.14-27 2030 WITH PROJECT PEAK HOUR ARTERIAL SEGMENT LOS ID Arterial From To Jurisdiction Traffic Volume Mid- Block Lanes Total Capacity V-C LOS AM Peak Hour A-2 Anaheim Blvd I-5 Fwy Cerritos Ave Anaheim 3,320 6 5,586 0.59 A A-3 Anaheim Blvd Cerritos Ave Ball Rd Anaheim 2,870 6 5,586 0.51 A A-6 Ball Rd Disneyland Dr Harbor Blvd Anaheim 3,780 6 5,389 0.70 B A-7 Ball Rd Harbor Blvd Anaheim Blvd Anaheim 2,750 6 5,389 0.51 A A-8 Ball Rd Anaheim Blvd East St Anaheim 3,200 6 4,985 0.64 B A-9 Ball Rd East St State College Blvd Anaheim 3,310 6 4,646 0.71 C A-10 Ball Rd State College Blvd Sunkist St Anaheim 3,250 6 4,646 0.70 B A-11 Ball Rd Sunkist St SR-57 Fwy Anaheim 4,520 6 7,296 0.62 B A-12 Ball Rd SR-57 Fwy Main St Orange 4,070 6 8,659 0.47 A A-13 Clementine St Katella Ave Manchester Ave Anaheim 1,730 4 3,800 0.46 A A-22 Disneyland Dr Katella Ave Magic Way Anaheim 2,270 4 4,042 0.56 A A-23 Disneyland Dr Magic Way Ball Rd Anaheim 2,100 4 4,042 0.52 A A-25 Harbor Blvd Wilken Way Orangewood Ave Anaheim 2,580 6 3,838 0.67 B A-26 Harbor Blvd Orangewood Ave Convention Way Anaheim 2,560 6 5,814 0.44 A A-27 Harbor Blvd Convention Way Katella Ave Anaheim 2,730 6 5,814 0.47 A A-28 Harbor Blvd Katella Ave Disney Way Anaheim 2,990 6 6,042 0.49 A A-29 Harbor Blvd Disney Way Manchester Ave Anaheim 3,140 6 6,042 0.52 A A-33 Katella Ave Ninth St Walnut St Anaheim 2,780 6 6,840 0.41 A A-34 Katella Ave Walnut St Disneyland Dr Anaheim 3,730 6 6,954 0.54 A A-35 Katella Ave Disneyland Dr Hotel Way Anaheim 3,590 8 9,272 0.39 A A-36 Katella Ave Hotel Way Harbor Blvd Anaheim 3,360 8 9,282 0.36 A A-40a Katella Ave Manchester Ave Anaheim Way Anaheim 5,360 6 5,472 0.98 E A-40b Katella Ave Anaheim Way Lewis St Anaheim 5,360 8 8,446 0.63 B A-42 Katella Ave Sportstown Howell Ave Anaheim 3,050 6 7,624 0.40 A A-43 Katella Ave Howell Ave SR-57 Fwy Anaheim 4,140 6 7,624 0.54 A A-44 Katella Ave SR-57 Fwy Main St Orange 3,620 6 9,007 0.40 A A-46 Orangewood Ave West St Harbor Blvd Anaheim 1,950 4 3,458 0.56 A A-47 Orangewood Ave Harbor Blvd Clementine St Anaheim 1,480 4 3,458 0.43 A A-48 Orangewood Ave Clementine St Haster St Anaheim 1,340 4 2,875 0.47 A ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 5.14-27 (Continued) 2030 WITH PROJECT PEAK HOUR ARTERIAL SEGMENT LOS R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-52 Transportation and Traffic ID Arterial From To Jurisdiction Traffic Volume Mid- Block Lanes Total Capacity V-C LOS A-49 Orangewood Ave Haster St Manchester Ave Anaheim 1,680 4 4,236 0.40 A A-51 Orangewood Ave State College Blvd Rampart St Anaheim 2,200 6 4,010 0.55 A A-52 Orangewood Ave Rampart St SR-57 Fwy Anaheim /Orange 3,140 6 7,040 0.45 A A-64 State College Blvd Katella Ave Howell Ave Anaheim 2,560 6 6,443 0.40 A PM Peak Hour A-2 Anaheim Blvd I-5 Fwy Cerritos Ave Anaheim 5,090 6 5,700 0.89 D A-3 Anaheim Blvd Cerritos Ave Ball Rd Anaheim 4,300 6 4,902 0.88 D A-6 Ball Rd Disneyland Dr Harbor Blvd Anaheim 4,100 6 5,130 0.80 C A-7 Ball Rd Harbor Blvd Anaheim Blvd Anaheim 3,100 6 4,063 0.76 C A-8 Ball Rd Anaheim Blvd East St Anaheim 3,550 6 6,091 0.58 A A-9 Ball Rd East St State College Blvd Anaheim 3,520 6 6,091 0.58 A A-10 Ball Rd State College Blvd Sunkist St Anaheim 3,800 6 5,700 0.67 B A-11 Ball Rd Sunkist St SR-57 Fwy Anaheim 4,770 6 7,296 0.65 B A-12 Ball Rd SR-57 Fwy Main St Orange 5,020 6 8,165 0.61 B A-13 Clementine St Katella Ave Manchester Ave Anaheim 2,030 4 3,800 0.53 A A-22 Disneyland Dr Katella Ave Magic Way Anaheim 2,300 4 4,875 0.47 A A-23 Disneyland Dr Magic Way Ball Rd Anaheim 2,270 4 4,875 0.47 A A-25 Harbor Blvd Wilken Way Orangewood Ave Anaheim 3,410 6 4,395 0.78 C A-26 Harbor Blvd Orangewood Ave Convention Way Anaheim 3,260 6 4,446 0.73 C A-27 Harbor Blvd Convention Way Katella Ave Anaheim 3,580 6 4,104 0.87 D A-28 Harbor Blvd Katella Ave Disney Way Anaheim 3,560 6 4,902 0.73 C A-29 Harbor Blvd Disney Way Manchester Ave Anaheim 3,730 6 4,902 0.76 C A-33 Katella Ave Ninth St Walnut St Anaheim 4,260 6 7,980 0.53 A A-34 Katella Ave Walnut St Disneyland Dr Anaheim 4,540 6 7,980 0.57 A A-35 Katella Ave Disneyland Dr Hotel Way Anaheim 5,380 8 7,638 0.70 B A-36 Katella Ave Hotel Way Harbor Blvd Anaheim 5,340 8 7,638 0.70 B A-40a Katella Ave Manchester Ave Anaheim Way Anaheim 5,360 6 5,586 0.96 E A-40b Katella Ave Anaheim Way Lewis St Anaheim 5,360 8 8,570 0.63 B A-42 Katella Ave Sportstown Howell Ave Anaheim 4,020 6 7,302 0.55 A A-43 Katella Ave Howell Ave SR-57 Fwy Anaheim 4,530 6 7,859 0.58 A A-44 Katella Ave SR-57 Fwy Main St Orange 4,320 6 8,208 0.53 A A-46 Orangewood Ave West St Harbor Blvd Anaheim 2,180 4 3,610 0.60 A A-47 Orangewood Ave Harbor Blvd Clementine St Anaheim 1,390 4 2,622 0.53 A ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 5.14-27 (Continued) 2030 WITH PROJECT PEAK HOUR ARTERIAL SEGMENT LOS R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-53 Transportation and Traffic ID Arterial From To Jurisdiction Traffic Volume Mid- Block Lanes Total Capacity V-C LOS A-48 Orangewood Ave Clementine St Haster St Anaheim 1,780 4 2,132 0.84 D A-49 Orangewood Ave Haster St Manchester Ave Anaheim 2,000 4 3,550 0.56 A A-51 Orangewood Ave State College Blvd Rampart St Anaheim 2,610 6 4,022 0.65 B A-52 Orangewood Ave Rampart St SR-57 Fwy Anaheim /Orange 3,550 6 5,684 0.62 B A-64 State College Blvd Katella Ave Howell Ave Anaheim 4,260 6 5,581 0.76 C Source: Parsons Brinckerhoff 2010. Peak hour analysis for the deficient segments shows that all segments would operate at acceptable LOS during the peak hours, except for the segment of Katella Avenue between Manchester Avenue and Anaheim Way, which would operate at deficient LOS during the AM and PM peak hours. The build out of the Proposed Project will redistribute traffic such that the segments of Anaheim Boulevard and Harbor Boulevard, which were projected to operate at deficient LOS under the PM peak hour without the Proposed Project, would no longer operate at deficient LOS. Project impacts to the segment of Katella Avenue between Manchester Avenue and Anaheim Way are considered significant since peak hour operations on this arterial roadway would become deficient at LOS E in Year 2030. To allow this segment of operate at acceptable LOS, Katella Avenue would have to be widened from six to eight lanes between Manchester Avenue and Anaheim Way and upgraded to an eight-lane Stadium Smart Street. Future development would need to provide the construction easements and ultimate rights-of- way to facilitate arterial widening, temporary traffic control services and a phasing analysis to identify when improvements need to be constructed. Property owners/developers within the ARSP will be required to pay the City’s traffic impact fees to fund arterial improvements needed to allow the City’s roadway network to operate at LOS D or better prior to the approval of a final subdivision map or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. This would mitigate impacts to less than significant levels. Ramp Termini Intersection Operations Projected peak hour delays and LOS for the ramp termini intersections in Year 2030, without the Proposed Project, show that three ramp intersections would operate at an unacceptable LOS during the PM peak hour: • Anaheim Boulevard at I-5 Northbound Ramps (PM peak hour) • Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) at Katella Avenue (PM peak hour) • Orangewood Avenue at SR-57 Southbound Ramps (PM peak hour) With the addition of trips generated by build out of the amended ARSP, four ramp termini intersections would operate at an unacceptable LOS of E or worse: • Anaheim Boulevard at I-5 Northbound Ramps (PM peak hour) • Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) at Katella Avenue (PM peak hour) • Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) at Katella Avenue (PM peak hour) ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-54 Transportation and Traffic • Orangewood Avenue at SR-57 Southbound Ramps (PM peak hour) Table 5.14-28 shows the changes in peak hour delays and LOS at ramp termini intersections in Year 2030, with and without the Proposed Project. TABLE 5.14-28 2030 WITH PROJECT PEAK HOUR RAMP TERMINI INTERSECTION LOS ID Intersection AM Peak Hour Change in Delay PM Peak Hour Change in Delay No Project With Project No Project With Project Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS I-9 Harbor Blvd/ I-5 Northbound Ramps 11.2 B 11.6 B 0.4 21.9 C 27.8 C 5.9 I-10 Harbor Blvd/ I-5 Southbound Ramps 9.6 A 9.3 A -0.3 14.5 B 13.6 B -0.9 I-17 I-5 Southbound Off Ramp/ Disney Way 22.1 C 23.9 C 1.8 17.3 B 17.6 B 0.3 I-20 Anaheim Blvd/ I-5 Northbound Ramps 15.3 B 10.5 B -4.8 75.3 E 83.1 F 7.8 I-21 Anaheim Blvd/ Disney Way 24.3 C 26.4 C 2.1 45.6 D 46.5 D 0.9 I-25 Manchester Ave (I-5 Southbound Ramps)/ Katella Ave 42.4 D 41.3 D -1.1 51.1 D 67.4 F 16.3 I-26 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps)/ Katella Ave 22.6 C 24.7 C 2.1 71.3 E 89.0 E 17.7 I-32 I-5 HOV Ramps/ Gene Autry Way 27.5 C 35.5 D 8.0 18.6 B 18.4 B -0.2 I-41 I-5 Northbound Ramps/ State College Blvd 28.3 C 32.2 C 3.9 26.1 C 27.1 C 1.0 I-42 I-5 Southbound Ramps/ State College Blvd 45.0 D 46.6 D 1.6 22.0 C 24.5 C 2.5 I-48 Ball Rd/ SR-57 Northbound Ramps 16.5 B 15.6 B -0.9 15.7 B 15.0 B -0.7 I-49 Ball Rd/ SR-57 Southbound Ramps 24.0 C 24.9 C 0.9 26.7 C 26.7 C 0.0 I-50 SR-57 Northbound Ramps/ Katella Ave 11.5 B 11.4 B -0.1 11.8 B 12.8 B 1.0 I-51 SR-57 Southbound Ramps/ Katella Ave 14.8 B 19.9 B 5.1 10.8 B 12.8 B 2.0 I-52 Orangewood Ave/ SR- 57 Northbound Ramps 13.1 B 12.3 B -0.8 9.7 A 9.4 A -0.3 I-53 Orangewood Ave/ SR- 57 Southbound Ramps 33.4 C 30.9 C -2.5 65.0 E 80.9 F 15.9 I-64 I-5 Ramps/Chapman Ave 27.8 C 27.3 C -0.5 33.0 C 29.6 C -3.4 I-65 Chapman Ave/ SR-57 Northbound Ramps 4.6 A 5.0 A 0.4 3.9 A 4.3 A 0.4 I-66 Chapman Ave/ SR-57 Southbound Ramps 40.5 D 47.6 F 7.1 51.7 D 54.8 D 3.1 I-69 Disneyland Dr/ I-5 Southbound Off Ramp 12.2 B 12.3 B 0.1 9.7 A 9.7 A 0.0 Source: Parsons Brinckerhoff 2010. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-55 Transportation and Traffic The Proposed Project would contribute to significant adverse impacts at four ramp termini intersections, which would experience deficient operations in Year 2030. Table 5.14-29 identifies the improvements needed to allow these ramp termini intersections to operate at acceptable LOS D or better. The City of Anaheim does not have jurisdiction at intersections in the City of Orange and cannot implement the needed improvements to the ramp termini intersection in the City of Orange. Should the City of Orange improve the ramp termini intersection, the City of Anaheim will be subject to a fair-share contribution towards the improvement costs. However, the City cannot guarantee implementation of the necessary improvements; for this analysis this impact would remain significant and unavoidable. TABLE 5.14-29 2030 PEAK HOUR FREEWAY RAMP TERMINI MITIGATION STRATEGIES ID Intersection 2030 With Project With Proposed Mitigation AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Mitigation Measures Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS I-20 Anaheim Blvd/ I-5 Northbound Ramps 10.5 B 83.1 F 9.8 A 51.7 D Add 4th SBT I-25 Manchester Ave/Katella Ave 41.3 D 67.4 E 39.2 D 35.3 D Add 4th EBT, Add 4th WBT I-26 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps)/ Katella Ave 24.7 C 89.0 F 16.0 B 52.0 D Add 4th EBT, Add 5th WBT I-53 Orangewood Ave/ SR-57 Southbound Ramps 30.9 C 80.9 F 26.5 C 41.1 D Add WBL* (Restripe) *Consistent with mitigation strategy under ICU analysis Source: Parsons Brinckerhoff 2010. Peak Hour Ramp Termini Off-Ramp Queuing Operations Projections for queue in Year 2030, without the Proposed Project, indicate that all ramp intersections would have queuing that are shorter than available storage and no deficiencies would occur. With the Proposed Project, queuing would still be shorter than available storage and no deficiencies would occur. Table 5.14-30 shows off-ramp storage and queue with the Proposed Project in Year 2030. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-56 Transportation and Traffic TABLE 5.14-30 2030 WITH PROJECT PEAK HOUR RAMP TERMINI OFF-RAMP QUEUING ANALYSIS ID Ramp Termini Intersection Off-Ramp # of Lanes Off-Ramp Storage Length (feet) Off-Ramp Queue Length Control Delay Deficient Storage Length AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R I-9 Harbor Blvd/ I-5 Northbound Ramps 1.5 1.5 400 1,280 80 120 160 320 23.0 35.6 30.2 60.9 No I-10 Harbor Blvd/ I-5 Southbound Ramps 2 1 1,240 190 140 120 58.5 56.9 No I-17 I-5 Southbound Off Ramp/ Disney Way 1.33 0.33 1.33 940 380 380 240 260 200 200 68.1 75.1 63.5 65.4 No I-25 Manchester Ave (I-5 Southbound Ramps)/Katella Ave 1.5 1.5 720 720 1,710 100 10 200 100 70 68.7 19.1 79.1 41.6 28.7 No I-26 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps)/ Katella Ave 1.5 3 0.5 1,540 1,060 330 320 670 690 48.7 41.2 111.9 111.1 No I-32 I-5 HOV Northbound Ramps/ Gene Autry Way 1 2 1,510 20 0 40 0 29.5 12.6 46.2 8.8 No I-5 HOV Southbound Ramps/ Gene Autry Way 2 1 1,340 290 10 170 0 48.2 12.2 67.7 13.4 No I-41 State College Blvd/ I-5 Northbound Ramps 1.5 1.5 2 1,580 690 690 230 240 140 80 84 160 103.6 86.0 39.1 54.0 50.4 67.6 No I-42 State College Blvd/ I-5 Southbound Ramps 1.5 0.5 2 2,960 2,190 1,590 50 990 110 70 620 100 20.0 156.2 22.0 20.5 66.1 21.2 No I-48 Ball Rd/ SR-57 Northbound Ramps 1.5 1.5 1,030 680 240 240 230 220 45.9 58.2 45.0 56.7 No I-49 Ball Rd/ SR-57 Southbound Ramps 1 2 1,290 570 540 370 390 230 47.3 29.9 65.0 34.1 No I-50 SR-57 Northbound Ramps/ Katella Ave 1.5 1.5 1,030 590 250 250 200 200 41.9 51.3 49.5 59.2 No I-51 SR-57 Southbound Ramps/ Katella Ave 1 2 930 600 240 310 170 240 41.3 48.8 43.9 53.6 No ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 5.14-30 (Continued) 2030 WITH PROJECT PEAK HOUR RAMP TERMINI OFF-RAMP QUEUING ANALYSIS R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-57 Transportation and Traffic ID Ramp Termini Intersection Off-Ramp # of Lanes Off-Ramp Storage Length (feet) Off-Ramp Queue Length Control Delay Deficient Storage Length AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R I-52 Orangewood Ave/ SR-57 Northbound Ramps 1.5 1.5 650 350 140 210 70 70 39.7 68.0 50.7 60.8 No I-53 Orangewood Ave/ SR-57 Southbound Ramps 1.5 1.5 1,050 630 340 240 200 150 310 270 247 91.2 72.5 47.6 162.2 139.5 127.2 No I-64 I-5 Ramps/ Chapman Ave 2 1 1,080 220 200 60 240 0 27.6 10.0 34.1 5.3 No I-65 SR-57 Northbound Ramps/ Chapman Ave 1 1 1,240 760 70 0 40 0 63.3 14.4 60.9 17.8 No I-66 SR-57 Southbound Ramps/ Chapman Ave 0.5 0.5 1 580 1,000 270 50 130 350 87.4 16.2 50.3 129.4 No I-69 Disneyland Dr/ I-5 Southbound Off Ramp 3 1 2,130 70 70 50 13.8 No Source: Parsons Brinckerhoff 2010. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-58 Transportation and Traffic The Proposed Project would have no significant impacts on queuing operations at freeway off- ramps in Year 2030. Peak Hour Freeway Ramp Operations Per the Caltrans Highway Design Manual, a 2-lane on or off-ramp should be provided where volumes exceed 1,500 vehicles per hour during either the AM or PM peak hour. None of the freeway ramps exceeds this criterion under the 2030 No Project conditions. Projections for ramp operations in Year 2030, without the Proposed Project, indicate that the following 11 freeway ramps would be deficient during the PM peak hour conditions. • I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from State College Boulevard/Chapman Avenue • I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Anaheim Way/Katella Avenue • I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Way/Orangewood Avenue • I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Katella Avenue • I-5 Northbound HOV On-Ramp from Gene Autry Way • I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Boulevard • I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Harbor Boulevard • I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Harbor Boulevard • I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Ball Road • I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Disneyland Drive • I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Katella Avenue With build out of the amended ARSP in Year 2030, 12 freeway ramps would operate at deficient LOS E or worse during the AM and/or PM peak hour: • I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from State College Boulevard/Chapman Avenue • I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Anaheim Way/Katella Avenue • I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Way/Orangewood Avenue • I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Katella Avenue • I-5 Northbound HOV On-Ramp from Gene Autry Way • I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Boulevard • I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Harbor Boulevard • I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Harbor Boulevard • I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Ball Road • I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Disneyland Drive • I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Disneyland Drive • I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Katella Avenue ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-59 Transportation and Traffic Table 5.14-31 provides the peak hour LOS of freeway ramps with the project in Year 2030. TABLE 5.14-31 2030 WITH PROJECT PEAK HOUR FREEWAY RAMP LOS ID Ramp Segment Ramp # of Lane AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS R-1 I-5 Northbound HOV Off-Ramp to Gene Autry Way/ Disney Way 1 13.5 B 18.3 B R-2 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from State College Blvd/Chapman Ave 1 19.0 B >Capacity F R-3 I-5 Northbound Off Ramp to Anaheim Way/ Katella Ave* 2 22.5 C >Capacity F R-4 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Way/Orangewood Ave 1 21.3 C >Capacity F R-5 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Katella Ave 1 22.4 C >Capacity F R-6 I-5 Northbound HOV On-Ramp from Gene Autry Way 1 24.6 C 39.1 E R-7 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Blvd 1 24.1 C >Capacity F R-8 I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Harbor Blvd/ 1 24.3 C >Capacity F R-9 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Harbor Blvd 1 21.1 C >Capacity F R-10 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Ball Rd 1 23.3 C >Capacity F R-11 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Disneyland Dr 1 24.4 C >Capacity F R-12 I-5 Southbound HOV Off-Ramp to Disneyland Dr 1 24.4 C 24.1 C R-13 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to Disneyland Dr/Ball Rd 2 27.9 C 31.9 D R-14 I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Disneyland Dr 1 32.6 D >Capacity F R-15 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to Harbor Blvd 1 29.4 D 32.6 D R-16 I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Harbor Blvd 1 29.3 D 30.0 D R-17 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to Disney Way/Anaheim Blvd 1 31.4 D 33.1 D R-18 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Ave/Orangewood Ave* 2 26.5 C 30.1 D R-19 I-5 Southbound HOV Off-Ramp to Gene Autry Way 1 26.1 C 24.1 C R-20 I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Blvd 1 25.8 C 31.8 D R-21 I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Katella Ave 1 31.4 D >Capacity F R-22 I-5 Southbound HOV On-Ramp from Gene Autry Way 1 22.0 C 24.3 C *Major diverge analysis utilized to calculate density Source: Parsons Brinckerhoff 2010. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-60 Transportation and Traffic The Proposed Project would lead to significant adverse impacts at four freeway ramps during peak hours in Year 2030. Improvements to the State Highway System beyond the planned system improvements will be needed to maintain acceptable LOS. However, the addition of travel lanes to freeway mainline segments is not feasible since Caltrans has not identified any further improvements through a Corridor Study beyond those assumed in the build out analysis for the I-5 and the City has no control over State facilities. Additional capacity improvements are also infeasible due to physical, right-of-way, and other environmental constraints. In addition, the City of Anaheim does not support the displacement impacts that would accompany right-of-way acquisition for freeway widening, or the location of residences and businesses nearer to the freeway operations due to widening. Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) and signage improvements could potentially improve the flow and operational capacity of freeway ramps but would not reduce the impacts to less than significant levels. The City of Anaheim will require traffic studies to identify an individual project’s proportionate impact on the specific freeway mainline and/or freeway ramp locations and the property owner/developer’s fair-share percentage responsibility for mitigating these impacts along with payment of fair share fees (MM 5.14-12), but impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. Freeway Mainline Operations The projected densities and levels of service for the freeway mainline segments during the AM and PM peak hours in Year 2030, without the Proposed Project, indicate that five freeway mainline segments would operate at a deficient LOS of E or worse. These include: • I-5 Southbound between Euclid Street and Lincoln Avenue • I-5 Northbound between Lincoln Avenue and Harbor Boulevard • I-5 Northbound between Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue • I-5 Northbound between Katella Avenue and State College Boulevard • I-5 Northbound between State College Boulevard and SR-22 With build out of the amended ARSP in Year 2030, seven freeway mainline segments are projected to operate at deficient LOS during the AM or PM peak hour: • I-5 Northbound between Brookhurst Street and Euclid Street • I-5 Northbound between Euclid Street and Lincoln Avenue • I-5 Southbound between Euclid Street and Lincoln Avenue • I-5 Northbound between Lincoln Avenue and Harbor Boulevard • I-5 Northbound between Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue • I-5 Northbound between Katella Avenue and State College Boulevard • I-5 Northbound between State College Boulevard and SR-22 Table 5.14-32 provides the Year 2030 peak hour LOS of freeway mainlines with the Proposed Project. The Proposed Project would lead to significant adverse impacts at two freeway mainline segments during the PM peak hour in Year 2030, and would contribute to adverse impacts at five other mainline segments. As stated above, the addition of travel lanes to freeway mainline segments is not feasible since Caltrans has not identified any further improvements through a Corridor Study beyond those ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-61 Transportation and Traffic assumed in the build out analysis for the I-5 and the City has no control over State facilities. Additional capacity improvements are also infeasible due to physical, right-of-way, and other environmental constraints. In addition, the City does not support the displacement impacts that would accompany right-of-way acquisition for freeway widening, or the location of residences and businesses nearer to the freeway operations due to widening. Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) and signage improvements could potentially improve the flow and operational capacity of freeway ramps but would not reduce the impacts to less than significant levels. The City of Anaheim will require traffic studies to identify an individual project’s proportionate impact on the specific freeway mainline and/or freeway ramp locations and the property owner/developer/s fair-share percentage responsibility for mitigating these impacts along with payment of fair share fees, but impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. Freeway Weaving Operations Projected weaving on area freeways in Year 2030, without the Proposed Project, would result in deficient LOS of E or worse during either the AM or PM peak hours at the following locations: • I-5 Northbound between Lincoln Avenue On-Ramp and Euclid Street Off-Ramp • I-5 Northbound between Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Lincoln Avenue Off-Ramp • I-5 Northbound between Anaheim Boulevard On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp • I-5 Northbound between State College Boulevard On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off- Ramp • I-5 Southbound between Katella Avenue On-Ramp and State College Boulevard Off- Ramp • I-5 Northbound between SR-22 Connector and Chapman Avenue Off-Ramp • I-5 Southbound between State College Boulevard/Chapman Avenue On-Ramp and SR- 22 Connector With build out of the amended ARSP in Year 2030, one additional freeway weaving segment would become deficient: • I-5 Southbound between Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-62 Transportation and Traffic TABLE 5.14-32 2030 WITH PROJECT PEAK HOUR FREEWAY MAINLINE LOS ID Freeway Segment Northbound Southbound AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS F-1 I-5 between SR-91 and Brookhurst St 20.4 C 31.6 D 25.2 C 22.6 C F-2 I-5 between Brookhurst St and Euclid St 21.3 C 35.3 E 28.7 D 29.9 D F-3 I-5 between Euclid St and Lincoln Ave 21.3 C 36.7 E 38.3 E 37.5 E F-4 I-5 between Lincoln Ave and Harbor Blvd 21.9 C 41.8 E 26.6 D 29.9 D F-5 I-5 between Harbor Blvd and Katella Ave 19.6 C 39.8 E 23.2 C 26.3 D F-6 I-5 between Katella Ave and State College Blvd 19.7 C 43.0 E 25.8 C 29.2 D F-7 I-5 between State College Blvd and SR-22 19.1 C 39.0 E 28.9 D 28.0 D Source: Parsons Brinckerhoff 2010. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-63 Transportation and Traffic Table 5.14-33 shows weaving movement volume, density, and LOS with the Proposed Project in Year 2030, during the AM and PM peak hours. TABLE 5.14-33 2030 WITH PROJECT PEAK HOUR FREEWAY WEAVING LOS ID Weaving Segment Weaving Length (Ft) A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS W-1 I-5 Northbound between Brookhurst St On-Ramp and SR-91 Eastbound Off-Ramp 2,980 Not Applicable I-5 Southbound between SR-91 Connector/ Magnolia Ave On-Ramp and Brookhurst St Off- Ramp 3,390 W-2 I-5 Northbound between Euclid St On-Ramp and Brookhurst St Off-Ramp 2,890 I-5 Southbound between Brookhurst St On-Ramp and Euclid St Off-Ramp 2,540 W-3 I-5 Northbound between Lincoln Ave On-Ramp and Euclid St Off-Ramp 2,000 21.9 B 39.1 E W-4 I-5 Northbound between Disneyland Dr On-Ramp and Lincoln Ave Off-Ramp 1,680 23.0 B >Capacity F I-5 Southbound between Lincoln Ave On-Ramp and Disneyland Dr Off-Ramp 3,060 Not Applicable W-5 I-5 Southbound between Disneyland Dr On-Ramp and Harbor Blvd Off-Ramp 1,520 32.9 D 38.7 E W-6 I-5 Northbound between Anaheim Blvd On-Ramp and Harbor Blvd Off-Ramp 2,080 22.6 B >Capacity F I-5 Southbound between Harbor Blvd On-Ramp and Disney Way Off-Ramp 2,650 Not Applicable W-7 I-5 Northbound between State College Blvd On- Ramp and Katella Ave Off-Ramp 2,350 21.1 B >Capacity F I-5 Southbound between Katella Ave On-Ramp and State College Blvd Off-Ramp 1,870 31.7 C 36.7 E W-8 I-5 Northbound between SR-22 Connector and Chapman Ave Off-Ramp 1,720 24.6 C >Capacity F I-5 Southbound between State College Blvd/ Chapman Ave On-Ramp and SR-22 Connector 1,510 36.0 E 36.1 E Source: Parsons Brinckerhoff 2010. The Proposed Project would create an adverse impact on weaving operations at one freeway ramp and cumulatively contribute to seven other weaving deficiencies. Potential improvements include the implementation of an auxiliary lane within the weaving area to improve operations. However, the City has no control over State facilities. The City of Anaheim will require traffic studies to identify an individual project’s proportionate impact on the specific freeway mainline and/or freeway ramp locations and the property owner/developer’s fair-share percentage responsibility for mitigating these impacts along with payment of fair share fees, but impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. Impact Summary: The Proposed Project would have the potential to cause intersections, arterial segments, freeway ramp termini intersections, freeway ramps, freeway mainlines and freeway weaving areas to operate at unacceptable LOS. Even with implementation of mitigation measures, potential impacts related ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-64 Transportation and Traffic to transportation and traffic will remain significant and unavoidable. This conclusion is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313 for the original ARSP. Threshold 5.14.2 Would the project conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? Orange County CMP guidelines state that development projects must comply with CMP criteria. Since the CMP’s LOS standard of E or better is less stringent than the City of Anaheim’s LOS standard of LOS D or better and project impacts would be mitigated to LOS D or better, compliance with the City of Anaheim’s standard will generally mean compliance with the Orange County CMP standard. Since the Proposed Project would not have significant impacts on CMP intersections, no conflict with the CMP would occur. Impact Summary: The Proposed Project would not conflict with the Orange County CMP. No mitigation measures are required. 5.14.7 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS The analysis of traffic impacts above includes ambient growth and traffic increases from development projects approved near the Anaheim Convention Center for the Year 2015 scenarios and considers build out of the cities of Anaheim and Orange under the Year 2030 scenarios. Therefore, the analysis already includes the assessment of cumulative traffic impacts from planned and proposed developments in the surrounding area. The traffic analysis determined that the Proposed Project would have significant adverse impacts on several area intersections, arterial roadways, and freeway ramps, mainlines and weaving areas. Thus, significant cumulative impacts on traffic would occur with the proposed Amendment of the ARSP. 5.14.8 MITIGATION MEASURES Previously Approved Measures MEIR 313 presented mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts associated with the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan project to less than significant levels. The following measures from MEIR 313 shall be incorporated into the Mitigation Program for this EIR. Any modifications to the original measures are shown as strikethrough for deleted text and bold for new, inserted text: MM 5.14-1 Prior to approval of a the first Final Site Plan approval (excluding signage plans), the property owner/developer of development for any project forecast to generate 100 or more peak hour trips, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager utilizing Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model Trip Generation Rates, the property owner/developer shall prepare traffic improvement phasing analyses to identify when the improvements identified in this traffic analysis shall be designed and constructed. be required to pay the City of Anaheim for all costs associated with updating the City of Anaheim Resort Transportation Model to include the trips associated with their proposed development, This model update will be used to determine and program the ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-65 Transportation and Traffic extent and phasing of improvements necessary to accommodate the proposed development. a. If the model demonstrates that the proposed development will cause an intersection to operate at LOS E or worse, prior to the issuance of whichever building permit necessitates an improvement(s), the construction contract for said improvement(s) must have been awarded; and, prior to final building and zoning inspections for the applicable building permit, the improvement(s) shall be accepted by the City. The extent of improvements required for full buildout of the Anaheim Resort are listed in Tables 3.3-2, 3.3-4 and 3.3-6 of Section 3.3, Transportation and Circulation, of EIR No. 313. The property owner/developer shall have the option to: wait until the improvement(s) is constructed by others or, construct or pay the actual total costs of the improvement(s) which shall include the payment for consultant/contractor services for preliminary and final engineering, soils analysis, right-of-way acquisition, demolition, relocation, construction and inspection, and any other related expenses. The City Engineer may make the determination that Option may be waived based on the status and phased implementation of the planned improvement(s) and based on the supporting environmental analysis contained in EIR No. 313 or in supplemental environmental documentation. The City may have the ability to reimburse for the additional expense beyond the property owner/developer’s fair share contribution of improvement(s) based on the collection of other transportation improvement fees or funding through other However, if a reimbursement or fair share program has not been established by the City, to the extent that the property owner/developer’s costs exceed their “fair share” contribution for said improvement(s), the property owner/developer may petition the City Council to establish a reimbursement agreement or benefit district to include other benefitting properties. All costs associated with the establishment of any such agreement/district shall be at the expense of the property owner/developer. b. If the updated model demonstrates that LOS E will not be exceeded, no additional transportation improvement(s) will be required of the proposed development. In this instance, the property owner/developer shall, prior to issuance of each building permit, pay to the City of Anaheim all applicable transportation fees in an amount determined by City Council Resolution in effect at the time of issuance of the building permit and participate in all applicable reimbursement or benefit districts which have been established. (MEIR 313 MM 3.3-1) MM 5.14-2 Prior to issuance of the first each building permit for each building, the property owner/developer shall pay the appropriate Traffic Signal Assessment Fees and Transportation Impact and Improvement Fees shall be paid by the property owner/developer to the City of Anaheim in amounts determined by the City Council Resolution in effect at the time of issuance of the building permit with credit given for City-authorized improvements provided by the property owner/developer. The property owner shall also and participate in all applicable reimbursement or benefit districts, which have been established. (MEIR 313 MM 3.3-2) ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-66 Transportation and Traffic MM 5.14-3 Prior to approval of the first final subdivision map or issuance of the first building permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall irrevocably offer for dedication (with subordination of easements), including necessary construction easements, the ultimate arterial highway right(s)-of-way adjacent to their property as shown in the Circulation Element of the Anaheim General Plan adjacent to their property. (MEIR 313 MM 3.3-3) MM 5.14-4 Prior to the final building and zoning inspection, the property owner/developer shall join and financially participate in a clean fuel shuttle program such as the Anaheim Resort Transit system, if established, and shall participate in the Anaheim Transportation Network/Transportation Management Association in conjunction with the on-going operation of the project. The property owner shall also record a covenant on the property that requires participation in these programs ongoing during project operation. The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney’s Office prior to recordation. (MEIR 313 MM 3.3-4) MM 5.14-5 Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the property owner/developer shall provide to the City of Anaheim Public Works Department a plan to coordinate rideshare services for construction employees with the Anaheim Transportation Network (ATN) for review and a approval and shall implement ATN recommendations to the extent feasible. (MEIR 313 MM 3.3-5) MM 5.14-6 Prior to the issuance of each building permit for a hotel or motel development in the area designated Convention Center Medium density (see Exhibit 3.3.3b of the Specific Plan, *C-R District Development Density Plan*), which that exceeds 100 rooms per gross acre within the Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area 1) within the Convention Center (CC) Medium density category, the property owner/developer shall record a covenant on the property requiring that ongoing during project implementation, the property owner/developer shall enter into an agreement with the City to the satisfaction of the City’s Traffic and Transportation Manager and the City Attorney’s office to implement TDM measures sufficient to reduce the actual trip generation from the development to no more than the trips assumed by the City’s traffic model. The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney’s Office. (MEIR 313 MM 3.3-6) MM 5.14-7 Ongoing during construction, if the Anaheim Police Department or the Anaheim Traffic Management Center (TMC) personnel are required to provide temporary traffic control services, the property owner/developer shall reimburse the City, on a fair-share basis, if applicable, for reasonable costs associated with such services. (MEIR 313 MM 3.3-7) MM 5.14-8 Prior to the final building and zoning inspection, and, ongoing during project operation, the property owner/developer shall record a covenant on the property requiring that ongoing during project implementation, the property owner/developer will shall implement and administer a comprehensive Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program for all employees. The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney’s Office. Objectives of the TDM program shall be: a. Increase ridesharing and use of alternative transportation modes by guests. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-67 Transportation and Traffic b. Provide a menu of commute alternatives for employees to reduce project- generated trips. c. Conduct an annual commuter survey to ascertain trip generation, trip origin, and Average Vehicle Ridership. (MEIR 313, MM3.3-8 in part) MM 5.14-9 Prior to the final building and zoning inspection, the property owner/developer shall provide to the City of Anaheim Public Works Department for review and approval a menu of TDM program strategies and elements for both existing and future employees’ commute options, and incentives for hotel patrons transportation options, to include, but are not be limited to, the following list below. The property owner shall also record a covenant on the property requiring that the approved TDM strategies and elements be implemented ongoing during project operation. The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney’s Office prior to recordation. a. On-site services. Provide, as feasible and permitted, on-site services such as the food, retail, and other services be provided. b. Ridesharing. Develop a commuter listing of all employee members be developed for the purpose of providing a “matching” of employees with other employees who live in the same geographic areas and who could rideshare. c. Vanpooling. Develop a commuter listing of all employees for the purpose of matching numbers of employees who live in geographic proximity to one another and could comprise a vanpool or participate in the existing vanpool programs. d. Transit Pass. Promote Southern California Rapid Transit District and Orange County Transportation Authority (including commuter rail) passes be promoted through financial assistance and on-site sales to encourage employees to use the various transit and bus services from throughout the region. e. Commuter Bus. As commuter “express” bus service expands throughout the region, passes for use on these lines may be provided for employees who choose to use this service. Financial incentives be provided. e. Shuttle Service. Generate a commuter listing of all employees living in proximity to the project be generated, and offer a local shuttle program offered to encourage employees to travel to work by means other than the automobile. When appropriate, event shuttle service shall also be made available for guests. f. Bicycling. Develop a Bicycling Program be developed to offer a bicycling alternative to employees. Secure bicycle racks, lockers, and showers should be provided as part of this program. Maps of bicycle routes throughout the area should be provided to inform potential bicyclists of these options. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-68 Transportation and Traffic g. Rental Car Fleet. A “fleet” vehicle program be developed to provide employees who travel to work by means other than an automobile with access to automobiles in case of emergency, medical appointments, etc. This service would help employees use alternative modes of transportation by ensuring that they would be able to have personal transportation in the event of special circumstances. g. Guaranteed Ride Home Program. Develop a program to provide employees who rideshare, or use transit or other means of commuting to work, with a prearranged ride home in a taxi, rental car, shuttle, or other vehicle, in the event of emergencies during the work shift. h. Target Reduction of Longest Commute Trip. Promote an incentive program for ridesharing and other alternative transportation modes to put highest priority on reduction of longest employee commute trips. i. Work Shifts. Stagger work shifts. j. Compressed Work Week. Develop a “compressed work week” program, which provides for fewer work days but longer daily shifts as an option for employees. k. Telecommuting. Explore the possibility of a “telecommuting” program that would link some employees via electronic means computer with modem). l. Parking Management. Develop a parking management program that provides incentives to those who rideshare or use transit means other than single-occupant auto to travel to work. m. Access. Provide preferential access to high occupancy vehicles and shuttles may be provided. n. Financial Incentive for Ridesharing and/or Public Transit. Offer employees financial incentives for ridesharing or using public transportation. Currently, federal law provides tax-free status for up to $65 60 per month per employee contributions to employees who vanpool or use public transit including commuter rail and/or express bus pools. o. Financial Incentive for Bicycling. Offer employees offered financial incentives for bicycling to work. p. Special “Premium” for the Participation and Promotion of Trip Reduction. Offer ticket/passes to special events, vacations, etc. be offered to employees who recruit other employees for vanpool, carpool, or other trip reduction programs. q. Actively recruit prospective employees residing within a 3-minute commute shed. q. Incentive Programs. Design incentive programs for carpooling and other alternative transportation modes so as to put highest priority on reduction of longest commute trips. (MEIR 313 MM 3.3-8 in part) ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-69 Transportation and Traffic Ordinance 5454 City Ordinance 5454 presented a list of conditions of approval that are applicable to all projects within the ARSP area. The following conditions shall be incorporated into the Mitigation Program for this EIR. Any modifications to the original conditions are shown as strikethrough for deleted text and bold for new, inserted text. (Note that the specific condition references from Ordinance 5454 are listed in parentheses). MM 5.1-10 Prior to approval of each tentative tract or parcel map, That the following Street Design Elements shall be shown on each tentative tract or parcel map: a. Street cross-sections, including dimensions, labels, circulation designation Resort Secondary) and whether public or private. b. Street grades and vertical alignment. c. Horizontal alignment, including radii, and cul-de-sac radii. (Ord 5454, Condition 4) MM 5.14-11 Prior to the recordation of a subdivision map or issuance of the first building permit, whichever occurs first, That in the event that a parcel is subdivided and there is a need for common on-site circulation and/or parking, prior to recordation of a subdivision map, an unsubordinated covenant providing for reciprocal access and/or parking, as appropriate, approved by the Planning Director or Planning Services Manager City Traffic and Transportation Manager and the Planning Department and in a form satisfactory to the City Attorney, shall be recorded with the Office of the Orange County Recorder. A copy of the recorded covenant shall then be submitted to the Planning Division of the Planning Department. If the reciprocal access is across parcel lines or if public rights of way are required for reciprocal access; Public Works approval shall be required. (Ord 5454, condition 30) MM 5.14-12 Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the location of any proposed gates across a driveway shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer. That Gates shall not be installed across any driveway or private street in a manner which may adversely affect vehicular traffic on the adjacent public streets. Installation of any gates shall conform to the current version of Engineering Standard Detail Plan No. 475402 and shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Traffic and Transportation Manager prior to issuance of a building permit. (Ord 5454, condition 34) MM 5.14-13 Prior to the issuance of building permits, plans shall show that all driveways shall be constructed with a minimum fifteen (15) foot radius curb returns as required by the City Engineer, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. (Ord 5454, condition 35) MM 5.14-14 Prior to the issuance of building permits or final map approval, whichever occurs first, security in the form of a bond, certificate of deposit, letter of credit, completion guarantee, or cash, in an amount and form satisfactory to the City Engineer shall be posted with the City to guarantee the satisfactory completion of That all engineering requirements of the City of Anaheim, including preparation of improvement plans and installation of all ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-70 Transportation and Traffic improvements, such as curbs and gutters, sidewalks, water facilities, street grading and pavement, sewer and drainage facilities and other appurtenant work, shall be complied with as required by the City Engineer and in accordance with the specifications on file in the office of the City Engineer, as may be modified by the City Engineer., and security in the form of a bond, certificate of deposit, letter of credit, completion guarantee, or cash, in an amount and form satisfactory to the City of Anaheim, shall be posted with the City to guarantee the satisfactory completion of said improvements. Said security shall be posted with the City prior to the issuance of a building permit or final map approval , whichever comes first, to guarantee the Installation of the related said improvements shall occur prior to final building and zoning inspections. (Ord 5454, condition 36) Additional Mitigation Measures MM5.14-15 Based upon the improvement phasing analysis in the project traffic study, the property owner/developer shall implement traffic improvements as identified in the project traffic study to maintain satisfactory levels of service as defined by the City’s General Plan, based on thresholds of significance, performance standards, and methodologies established by the Orange County Congestion Management Program and the City of Anaheim Traffic Study Guidelines. The improvement phasing analyses will specify the timing, funding, construction, and fair-share responsibilities for all traffic improvements necessary to maintain satisfactory levels of service within the City of Anaheim and surrounding jurisdictions. The property owner/developer shall construct, bond for or enter into a funding agreement for necessary circulation system improvements, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager, unless alternative funding sources have been identified. MM 5.14-16 Prior to approval of a Final Site Plan for any project forecast to generate 100 or more peak hour trips, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager utilizing Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model Trip Generation Rates, in conjunction with the preparation of any traffic improvement phasing analyses as required in MM 5.14-1, property owners/developers will determine when the intersection improvements shall be constructed, subject to the conditions identified in MM 5.14-1. MM 5.14-17 Prior to approval of a Final Site Plan for any project forecast to generate 100 or more peak hour trips, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager utilizing Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model Trip Generation Rates, in conjunction with the preparation of any traffic improvement phasing analyses as required in MM 5.14-1, the following actions shall be taken in cooperation with the City of Orange: a. The traffic improvement phasing analysis shall identify any impacts created by the project on facilities within the City of Orange. The fair-share percentage responsibility for mitigating these impacts shall be calculated in this analysis. b. The City of Anaheim shall estimate the cost of the project’s fair-share responsibility in cooperation with the City of Orange. c. The property owner/developer shall pay the City of Anaheim the fair-share cost prior to issuance of a building permit. The City of Anaheim shall hold the ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-71 Transportation and Traffic amount received in trust, and then, once a mutually agreed upon joint program is executed by both cities, the City of Anaheim shall allocate the fair- share contribution to traffic mitigation programs that result in improved traffic flow at the impacted locations, via an agreement mutually acceptable to both cities. MM 5.14-18 Prior to approval of a Final Site Plan for any project forecast to generate 100 or more peak hour trips, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager utilizing Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model Trip Generation Rates, in conjunction with the preparation of any traffic improvement phasing analyses as required in MM 5.14-1, and assuming that a regional transportation agency has not already programmed and funded the warranted improvements to the impacted freeway mainline or freeway ramp locations, property owners/developers and the City will take the following actions in cooperation with Caltrans: a. The traffic study will identify the project’s proportionate impact on the specific freeway mainline and/or freeway ramp locations and its fair-share percentage responsibility for mitigating these impacts based on thresholds of significance, performance standards, and methodologies established in the Orange County Congestion Management Program and the City of Anaheim Traffic Study Guidelines. b. The City shall estimate the cost of the project’s fair-share responsibility in cooperation with Caltrans. MM 5.14-19 Prior to the approval of the final subdivision map or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall pay the identified fair- share responsibility as determined by the City as set forth in MM 5.14-15. The City shall allocate the property owner/developer’s fair-share contribution to traffic mitigation programs that result in improved traffic flow on the impacted mainline and ramp locations, via an agreement mutually acceptable to Caltrans and the City. MM 5.14-20 Prior to the approval of a Final Site Plan, the property owner/developer shall meet with the Traffic and Transportation Manager to determine whether a bus stop(s) is required to be placed adjacent to the property. If a bus stop(s) is required, it shall be placed in a location that least impacts traffic flow and may be designed as a bus turnout or a far side bus stop as required by the Traffic and Transportation Manager and per the approval of the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA). MM 5.14-21 Prior to the first final building and zoning Inspection every property owner and/or lessee shall designate an on-site contact that will be responsible for coordinating with the ATN and implementing all trip mitigation measures. The on-site coordinator shall be the one point of contact representing the project with the ATN. The TDM requirements shall be included in the lease or other agreement with all of the project participants. MM 5.14-22 Subsequent to the certification of Final EIR No. 340, and prior to the approval of the first Final Site Plan, if the costs of the identified improvements in the Traffic Study Report for Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan cannot be covered by the total funding allocation under the existing City fee programs ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-72 Transportation and Traffic and funding sources, an update of the existing City traffic fee program or other fee programs shall be developed by the City of Anaheim to ensure completion of the recommended improvements. 5.14.9 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION With implementation of the improvements presented in Table 5.14-34, the significant project- related or cumulative impacts associated with the Proposed Project could be fully mitigated. TABLE 5.14-34 PROJECT MITIGATION MEASURES ID Location Jurisdiction Impact Mitigation Strategy Comments Intersection I-1 Euclid St/ Katella Ave Anaheim Project Restripe NBR to NBTR, add 400’ NB departure lane (widen) Override I-2 Ninth St/ Katella Ave Anaheim Project Add 2nd NBL (Restripe #1 SB lane) I-5 Disneyland Dr/ Ball Rd Anaheim Project Add NBL, Restripe NB to 2L, 2T, 1R and SB to 2L, 2T. Remove Split Phase Override I-6 Disneyland Dr/ West St/ Katella Avea Anaheim Project Restripe EBR to EBT, Restripe WBR to WBT and add 4th WB lane to the Simba parking lot entrance Partial Override I-8 Harbor Blvd/ Ball Rd Anaheim Project Add NBT, SBT, EBT, EBR Override I-18 Anaheim Blvd/ Ball Rdb Anaheim Project Add NBR, EBL, EBR I-19 Anaheim Blvd/ Cerritos Ave Anaheim Project Add NBL, SBL, WBR, Restripe WB approach to 2L, 1TR, 1R I-20 Anaheim Blvd/ I-5 Northbound Ramps Anaheim Project Add SBT ( in median) I-22 Anaheim Blvd/ Haster St/ Katella Ave Anaheim Project Add WBR Override I-23 Haster St/ Gene Autry Way Anaheim Project Add WBL, SBL, SBR I-26 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps)/ Katella Ave Anaheim Project Add EBT, WBT I-29 Lewis St/ Cerritos Ave Anaheim Project Add WBR I-30 Lewis St/ Katella Aveb Anaheim Project Add NBL, NBT, SBL, SBR, WBT; Restripe SB to 2L, 1T, 1TR, 1R I-37 State College Blvd/ Katella Avec Anaheim Project Add WBR, EBR; Restripe SB to 2L, 2T, 2R, EB to 3L, 3T, 1R Partial Override I-38 State College Blvd/ Gene Autry Way Anaheim Project Add SBR I-39 State College Blvd/ Orangewood Ave Anaheim/ Orange Project Add NBR and WBT Override I-43 State College Blvd/ The City Dr/ Chapman Ave Orange Project Restripe WBT to WBTR I-45 Howell Ave/ Katella Ave Anaheim Project Add WBR I-46 Rampart St/ Orangewood Ave Anaheim Project Add NB Free Right, Add SBL ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 TABLE 5.14-36 (Continued) PROJECT MITIGATION MEASURES R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-73 Transportation and Traffic ID Location Jurisdiction Impact Mitigation Strategy Comments I-53 Orangewood Ave/ SR-57 Southbound Ramps Orange Project Add WBL (Restripe) Override I-55 Douglass Rd/ Katella Ave Anaheim Project Add NBT and SBT, Reconfigure NBTR to NBT, Reconfigure SBTR to SBT, Add EBT and WBT Arterial Segments A-35 Katella Ave between Disneyland Dr and Hotel Wayd Anaheim Project Upgrade to 8-lane arterial A-36 Katella Ave between Hotel Way and Harbor Anaheim Project Upgrade to 8-lane arterial A-37 Katella Ave between Harbor Blvd and Clementine Std Anaheim Project Upgrade to 8-lane arterial A-38 Katella Ave between Clementine St and Anaheim Anaheim Project Upgrade to 8-lane arterial A-39 Katella Ave between Anaheim Blvd and Manchester Aved Anaheim Project Upgrade to 8-lane arterial A-40a Katella Ave between Manchester Ave and Anaheim Way Anaheim Project Upgrade to 8-lane Stadium SmartSt Ramp Termini Intersections I-20 Anaheim Blvd/ I-5 Northbound Rampse Anaheim Project Add 4th SBT I-25 Manchester Ave/Katella Ave Anaheim Project Add 4th EBT, Add 4th WBT I-26 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps)/ Katella Avee Anaheim Project Add 4th EBT, Add 5th WBT I-53 Orangewood Ave/ SR-57 Southbound Rampse Orange Project Add WBL(restripe) Override a EB improvements are not being overridden b Intersection deficient in 2015 but no project related significant impact. The improvements from 2030 should be expedited to 2015 at these locations for the intersection to operate at an acceptable LOS in 2015 with the exception of the improvement at Katella Ave and Lewis St, which is infeasible in 2015. c Override recommended for restriping one EBT to EBL only d Arterial Segment deficient in 2015 e Intersection identified as deficient under both ICU and HCM analysis However, all needed roadway and intersection improvements may not be feasible due to high project cost, the inability to undertake right-of-way acquisitions as a matter of policy to preserve existing businesses, environmental constraints, or jurisdictional considerations. Specifically, the following City of Anaheim intersection improvements are likely not feasible due to right-of-way or other constraints: Intersection I-1: Euclid Street/Katella Avenue—Restripe Northbound Right turn lane to Northbound through/right turn lane, add 400 foot long Northbound departure lane by widening Euclid Street. This improvement at Euclid Street and Katella Avenue is infeasible due to the presence of a large number of existing and newly constructed businesses including a recently rebuilt mini-mall on the northeast corner of the intersection, which support economic development for the City of Anaheim. The potential right-of-way required for receiving lane on the northeast corner of the intersection would significantly impact the business and parking on the east side of Euclid Street, north of Katella Avenue. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-74 Transportation and Traffic Intersection I-5: Disneyland Drive/Ball Road—Add NBL: Restripe NB to 2L, 2T, 1R and SB to 2L, 2T; Remove Split Phase This improvement is infeasible due to the presence of a large number of Anaheim Resort supportive land uses that contribute to the economic development of the City. In order to accommodate the proposed improvement, the intersection would likely need to be expanded, potentially impacting the HOV ramp overpass to the Disneyland Resort. Both the City and Disney have invested heavily in supporting The Anaheim Resort and altering the street system in the area would be a cost prohibitive undertaking and disruptive to the effective operation of The Anaheim Resort. Intersection I-6: Disneyland Drive/West Street/Katella Avenue— Restripe WBR to WBT and add 4th WB lane to the Simba parking lot entrance This improvement is infeasible due to the presence of a large number of immediately adjacent Anaheim Resort supportive land uses that contribute to the economic development of the City. This access to the Disneyland Resort has been significantly reconfigured in recent years to accommodate new development at the park and adjacent parking areas. The addition of lane capacity at this intersection would require substantial right-of-way and affect the attractive gateway that the Disneyland Resort has created through extensive landscaping. Intersection I-8: Harbor Boulevard/Ball Road—Add Northbound Through lane, Southbound Through lane, Eastbound Through lane, and Eastbound Right-turn lane This improvement is infeasible due to the presence of a large number of immediately adjacent Anaheim Resort supportive land uses that contribute to the economic development of the City. To accommodate the proposed improvements, the intersection would have to be substantially expanded, impacting the right-of-way of several hotel buildings including the Days Inn Suites and Hotel Menage. Altering the street system in the area would be a cost prohibitive undertaking and disruptive to the effective operation of The Anaheim Resort. Intersection I-22: Anaheim Boulevard/Haster Street/Katella Avenue—Add Westbound Right-turn lane The City has invested heavily in supporting development in The Anaheim Resort and reconfiguring an intersection in this area would be disruptive to those goals. This improvement also serves a turning movement that could be considered redundant, as most of the vehicles using this movement would be better served using Anaheim Way to the east to access Anaheim Boulevard. Intersection I-37: State College Boulevard/Katella Avenue—Restripe eastbound to 3 left turn lanes, 3 through lanes, and 1 right turn lane This proposed restripe will reduce the number of through lanes on eastbound Katella Avenue from four lanes to three lanes. This proposed change will negatively affect signal coordination and timing for both streets. Katella Avenue is identified as an eight lane smart street by OCTA. All through lanes must be kept to ensure the higher capacities envisioned by OCTA on its smart street corridors. To add a third eastbound left turn lane without removing a through lane will significantly impact a recently developed residential mixed-use development on the northwest corner and a gas station on the southwest ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-75 Transportation and Traffic corner. This widening will also make Katella Avenue difficult for pedestrians to cross, as with this improvement, pedestrian traffic would have to cross 12 lanes. Intersection I-39: State College Boulevard/Orangewood Avenue—Add Northbound Right turn lane and Westbound through lane This improvement is infeasible due to the presence of a large number of immediately adjacent existing structures, including several high-density office buildings within close proximity to the public right of way. Additionally, State College Boulevard is a designated BRT corridor. Improvements to the circulation system in this area should be consistent with the goals of promoting transit use and limiting increased auto trips to this area. Impacts to these intersections cannot be mitigated to less than significant levels and would remain significant and unavoidable. At intersections and arterial segments located in the City of Orange and on Caltrans facilities, including freeway ramps, mainline segments, and weaving segments, the City of Anaheim has no jurisdiction to implement the improvements necessary to mitigate project impacts. Constraints to the improvement of two intersections in the City of Orange have also been identified: Intersection I-39: State College Boulevard/Orangewood Avenue (shared intersection between Anaheim and Orange)—Add Northbound Right and Westbound through lanes This improvement would significantly impact the high-density office buildings at the southeast and northwest corners of the intersection. These mitigation measures do not impact any area within the City of Orange. Intersection I-53: Orangewood Avenue/SR-57 Southbound Ramps—Restripe intersection to add Westbound Left. The existing curb lines up with the curb of the new bridge that will cross the Santa Ana River. The number 1 lane will become a left turn lane at this intersection, leaving two through lanes without an offset. Only signal loops, striping, and timing changes are required at this intersection. If improvements outside of the City are not completed for reasons beyond the City of Anaheim’s control the City of Anaheim cannot undertake or require improvements outside of Anaheim’s jurisdiction or the City cannot construct improvements in the Caltrans right-of-way without Caltrans approval), traffic impacts on these facilities would remain significant and unavoidable. 5.14.10 REFERENCES Anaheim, City of 2004 (May). City of Anaheim General Plan, Green Element and Bicycle Master Plan. Anaheim, CA. (Anaheim). Parsons Brinckerhoff. 2010 (December). Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report. Orange, CA: Parsons Brinckerhoff. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.14 Traffic-080912.docx 5.14-76 Transportation and Traffic This page intentionally left blank ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.15 Water-080912.docx 5.15-1 Water Supply and Infrastructure 5.15 WATER SUPPLY AND INFRASTRUCTURE Information regarding water supply and infrastructure and impacts were obtained from the Water Supply Assessment (2009), the Water Facility Assessment (2009) and the Project Water Demand and Regional Supply Update (2010) prepared for the Proposed Project and included as Appendix I of this EIR. 5.15.1 SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION The water service/facilities analyses contained in MEIR No. 313 were based on information from the Disneyland Resort Utility Study and from the City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department. The City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division was identified as the service provider for the ARSP area. Demand resulting from implementation of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan was projected to result from domestic use from various uses hotels, restaurants, bathrooms), landscaping, and system losses. Peak demand and fire flow demand estimates were also included in the analyses. Given implementation of mitigation, no significant impacts were identified. 5.15.2 PLANS, POLICIES, AND REGULATORY CONDITIONS Related Planning Programs City of Anaheim General Plan, Public Services and Facilities Element The Public Services and Facilities Element of the City of Anaheim General Plan addresses public services and infrastructure, such as fire protection, law enforcement, parks, schools, water, sewer, and storm drain systems. The Element summarizes current and projected water supplies; identifies the City’s water distribution system; and provides goals and policies related to water resources and conservation. Applicable goals and policies from the Public Services and Facilities Element that are related to water and that are applicable to the Proposed Project are provided in 5.9-2 in Section 5.9, Land Use and Planning, with a project consistency analysis. Regulatory Setting State Urban Water Management Planning Act The Urban Water Management Planning Act (UWMP Act) (California Water Code §§10610 et. seq.) was enacted in 1983. The UWMP Act applies to municipal water suppliers, such as the City of Anaheim, that serve more than 3,000 customers or that provide more than 3,000 acre feet per year (afy) of water. The UWMP Act requires these suppliers to update their Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) every five years to demonstrate an appropriate level of reliability in supplying anticipated short-term and long-term water demands during normal, dry, and multiple dry years. Senate Bill 610 and Senate Bill 221 Senate Bill (SB) 610 amended State law to improve the link between information on water supply availability and certain land use decisions made by Cities and Counties.1 Specifically, it requires land use planning entities (in this case, the City of Anaheim), when evaluating certain large development projects, to request an assessment of water supply availability from the 1 SB 610 amended section 21151.9 of the California Public Resources Code, and amended sections 10631, 10656, 10910, 10911, 10912, and 10915 of, repealed section 10913 of, and added and amended section 10657 of, the California Water Code. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.15 Water-080912.docx 5.15-2 Water Supply and Infrastructure water supply entity that would provide water to a project. A water supply assessment (WSA) must be prepared in conjunction with the land use approval process associated with a project and must include an evaluation of the sufficiency of the water supplies available to the water supplier to meet existing and anticipated future demands, including the demand associated with the project in question, over a 20-year horizon that includes normal, single-dry, and multiple dry- years. An SB 610 WSA is required for any “project” that is subject to CEQA and that proposes, among other things, residential development of more than 500 dwelling units. In addition, SB 221 requires land use planning agencies, such as the City, to include (as a condition in any tentative map that includes a subdivision involving more than 500 dwelling units) a requirement to obtain a written verification from the applicable public water system or, where there is no existing water supplier from a consultant directed by the City, that sufficient water supplies are available for the subdivision. SB 221 also addresses the issue of land use and water supply, but at a different point in the planning process than does SB 610. SB 221 requires a City or County to deny approval of a tentative or parcel map if the City or County finds that the project does not have a sufficient, reliable water supply as defined in the bill. Due to the size of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (ARSP), the State of California, through SB 610, requires that a WSA be completed to evaluate the potential effect of the proposed development on current and future water supplies. While the Proposed Project would be implemented by numerous individual development projects that may have fewer than the threshold of 500 units (or a water use equivalent of commercial or office square footage) that triggers the preparation of a WSA, collectively the total Proposed Project exceeds the threshold. Therefore a Water Supply Assessment has been prepared to evaluate the impacts of the ARSP. Local Rule 15E of Anaheim’s Water Rates, Rules and Regulations Rule 15E of Anaheim’s Water Rules, Rates and Regulations (Plan No. W2791B and W2792A) specifies water facility improvements required to accommodate the previously adopted projected land use water demands and includes the applicable Land Use Development Area Fee. Prior to MEIR No. 313, Rule 15E specified water facility improvements for the area around The Anaheim Resort area, which included construction of a new 3,500 gallons per minute well (Well No. 55) and upsizing distribution pipelines. 5.15.3 METHODOLOGY Hydraulic modeling analyses were conducted to analyze the effect the Proposed Project’s increased water demand would have on the water distribution system. In the hydraulic model, all distribution pipeline upgrades and the well specified in Rule 15E were assumed to be completed and in operation. The Proposed Project’s increased water demand was loaded into the model, along with a new 1,500 gallons per minute (GPM) water well (tentative location assumed to be near Orangewood Avenue and Ponderosa Park). 5.15.4 EXISTING CONDITIONS City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division Water service is provided to the ARSP area by the City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division. The City obtains water from the following primary water sources: naturally and artificially recharged local groundwater and imported water from the Metropolitan Water District (MWD). In addition, the Public Utilities Department maintains 17 interconnections with adjacent water purveyors that are temporarily utilized from time to time on an as-needed or emergency basis. The majority of the City’s water (nearly 70 percent on ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.15 Water-080912.docx 5.15-3 Water Supply and Infrastructure average) is pumped from the Orange County Groundwater Basin, and the remaining is imported from the MWD. The current major water system facilities consist of 8 purchased water connections to MWD (1 untreated and 7 treated water connections), 18 active wells, one 920 million gallon (MG) reservoir for untreated water, one 15 million gallons per day (mgd) water treatment plant, 12 treated water reservoirs with 28.75 MG of total storage capacity, permanent chlorination facilities at various sites, and 9 booster pump stations. The water system service area has elevations ranging from less than 60 feet to over 1,200 feet above mean sea level (msl). In order to provide appropriate operation pressures for such a wide range of elevations, the water system is divided into 19 pressure zones. The lowest pressure zone operates at a static hydraulic grade line (HGL) elevation of 220 feet above msl and the highest pressure zone having a static HGL elevation of 1,320 feet above msl. The Public Utilities Department’s water distribution system is generally divided into two main geographic areas: the “Flatland Area” 555 HGL elevation and below) and the “Hill and Canyon Area” the 585 HGL elevation and above). The Flatland Area is approximately 21,000 acres, is situated generally north and west of the Santa Ana River, and is almost entirely served by groundwater (with MWD imported water supplemented, as necessary). The Hill and Canyon Area is approximately 11,000 acres, situated generally south and east of the Santa Ana River, and is served primarily by imported water from MWD. Orange County Groundwater Basin The Orange County Groundwater Basin (Basin) is managed by the Orange County Water District (OCWD). The Basin underlies the northern half of Orange County beneath broad lowlands. The Basin covers an area of approximately 350 square miles. It is bordered by the Coyote and Chino Hills to the north, the Santa Ana Mountains to the northeast, and the Pacific Ocean to the southwest; it terminates at the Orange County line to the northwest, where its aquifer systems continue into the Central Basin of Los Angeles County. Of the Basin’s water resources, approximately 1.25 to 1.5 million acre feet (af) is available for use. To ensure that the Basin is not overdrawn, OCWD recharges the Basin with local and imported water. Groundwater conditions in the Basin are influenced by natural hydrologic conditions. The Basin is recharged primarily by four sources: local rainfall, which varies due to the extent of the annual seasonal precipitation; storm and base flows from the Santa Ana River, which includes recycled wastewater from treatment plants in Riverside and San Bernardino Counties; imported water; and highly treated recycled wastewater. In 2007–2008, the City of Anaheim produced groundwater for potable use from 20 existing wells located throughout the City. Groundwater produced at these wells is easily accessible to City water distribution and storage facilities. Metropolitan Water District MWD is a wholesale water agency for Southern California and is responsible for providing supplemental water (water from a source other then the local ground and surface water) to water agencies within its service area. MWD acquires water from Northern California via the State Water Project (SWP) and from the Colorado River to supply water to most of Southern California. As a wholesaler, MWD has no retail customers, and distributes treated and untreated water directly to its 26 member agencies. The City of Anaheim is a member agency. Water is transported from the wholesale agency’s storage facility or from turnouts (connection points) on the wholesaler’s distribution pipeline and provides water service to its clients. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.15 Water-080912.docx 5.15-4 Water Supply and Infrastructure 5.15.5 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE The following significance criteria are derived from the City of Anaheim Environmental Checklist. The project would result in a significant impact related to water supply and water infrastructure if it would: Threshold 5.15.1 Require or result in the construction of new water treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Threshold 5.15.2 Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project (including large-scale developments as defined by Public Resources Code Section 21151.9 and described in Question No. 20 of the Environmental Information Form) from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? 5.15.6 PROJECT IMPACT ANALYSIS Standard Requirements The following standard requirement was derived from existing regulations, requirements, and standard practices set forth by regional and local agencies. SR 5.15-1 Prior to the issue of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall be required to prepare and submit to the City for review and approval a Landscape Documentation Package and landscape and irrigation plans with appropriate water use calculations in accordance with the requirements of Anaheim Municipal Code Chapter 10.19, Landscape Water Efficiency. Impact Analysis Threshold 5.15.1 Would the project require or result in the construction of new water treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? According to the Water Facilities Assessment, existing facilities serving the ARSP are insufficient to serve the fully built out Commercial-Recreation (C-R) District and the expanded convention center in the Public Recreational (PR) District, resulting in a potentially significant impact. Implementation of the proposed mitigation requiring construction of a new 1,500 GPM capacity well near or within the ARSP area would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. The tentative location for the new well is planned to be near Ponderosa Park and Orangewood Avenue. Based on the hydraulic modeling analysis performed as part of the Water Facilities Assessment, the distribution main within Harbor Boulevard has insufficient capacity to serve the Proposed Project. Fire flow modeling runs also identified insufficient pressure along the east side of Harbor Boulevard and high velocities and headlosses in the existing pipeline. Implementation of the proposed mitigation would reduce impacts related to capacity, pressure, and velocities to less than significant levels by requiring construction of a new approximately 2,700-linear-foot, 16-inch diameter main from Orangewood Avenue to Chapman Avenue. This new main would be parallel to the existing ten-inch diameter main in Harbor Boulevard, providing for additional capacity. While implementation of these improvements would reduce the significance of anticipated impacts, adherence to the proposed mitigation measures would further reduce potential impacts related to water infrastructure. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.15 Water-080912.docx 5.15-5 Water Supply and Infrastructure Impact Summary: Project water demand associated with the Proposed Project would exceed capacities of existing water facilities. Adherence to the proposed mitigation measures would reduce impacts to less than significant. This conclusion is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313 for the original ARSP. Threshold 5.15.2 Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project (including large-scale developments as defined by Public Resources Code Section 21151.9 and described in Question No. 20 of the Environmental Information Form) from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? Water Demand As shown below in Table 5.15-1, the Proposed Project would create an increase in water demand, which is broken down by land use category. The total water demand projection for the increase in land use intensification beyond what was considered in the 2005 UWMP is 0.876 mgd or 980 afy. According to the Water Supply Assessment, the City’s water demand during the 20-year planning period is projected to range from 77,770 acre-feet per year (AFY) in 2009/10 to 88,520 AFY in 2029/30. The ARSP’s Water Supply Assessment identifies a sufficient and reliable water supply for the City, now and into the future, including a sufficient water supply for the ARSP (as shown in Table 5.15-1). These supplies are also sufficient to provide (and account) for growth projected in the 2005 UWMP, the May 2007 Water Supply Assessment for the Kaiser Permanente Medical Center, September 2009 Water Supply Assessment for the Platinum Triangle and the Proposed Project. It was determined through analysis detailed in the ARSP’s Water Supply Assessment that water supplies will remain stable in normal, single-dry year, and multiple-dry year scenarios through 2030. The Water Supply Assessment also analyzed a worst-case scenario based on the following assumptions: where demand exceeds supply ranging from a low of 1,350 af in year 2020 to 2,660 af in year 2030 for the 35 percent reduction scenario and a low of 740 af in year 2010, to 3,850 af in year 2030 for the 40 percent reduction scenarios. The analyses respectively assumed 35 and 40 percent reduction in SWP supplies under normal year, single- dry year, and multiple-dry year scenarios. As stated in the Water Supply Assessment, it is unlikely that these worst case assumptions would occur. It is anticipated that the utilization of the City’s Water Conservation Ordinance if needed, including the mandatory cuts authorized by Section 10.18.070 of the Ordinance, could easily achieve water use savings in an amount sufficient to make up for the identified shortfalls in the worst-case identified in the Water Supply Assessment. Additionally, even assuming water conservation does not achieve the necessary water use savings, the identified hypothetical shortfalls could be met through groundwater production from City wells. While groundwater supply is expected to remain relatively stable throughout the forecast period, the development phasing plan allows for the potential to have water demands met from sources that are currently being planned, developed, and implemented within the region, including additional conservation programs, recycled water, and desalted water. Extracting 2,660 to 3,850 af from the groundwater basin from existing Anaheim wells would not cause a significant impact to the local groundwater supply. Therefore, impacts related to water supply resulting from implementation of the Proposed Project would be less than significant. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.15 Water-080912.docx 5.15-6 Water Supply and Infrastructure While no significant impacts have been identified, mitigation measures are included to ensure that water conservation measures are incorporated into the design and into each phase of the proposed development to ensure that water supplies remain reliable into the future. Impact Summary: Project water demand would be accommodated through existing and projected supplies, according to the Proposed Project’s Water Supply Assessment. Impacts would be less than significant; however implementation of the proposed mitigation measures would ensure water conservation measures are incorporated into the design and into each phase of the proposed development to ensure that water supplies remain reliable into the future. MEIR No. 313 did not evaluate impacts related to water supply; therefore, a consistency finding cannot be determined. TABLE 5.15-1 PROPOSED ARSP WATER DEMAND INCREASE Development Area 1 – C-R District Units Demand Factor Demand gpd afy Additional Equivalent Hotel Rooms 3,638 rooms 125 gpd/room 454,750 509.4 3.8% Losses 17,281 19.4 Total C-R District 472,031 528.8 Development Area 2 - PR District Units Demand Factor Demand gpd afy Convention Center Expansion Flexible Meeting Space 265,000 sf 350 gpd/ksf 92,750 103.9 Ballroom Space 50,000 sf 350 gpd/ksf 17,500 19.6 Meeting and Office Space 43,914 sf 350 gpd/ksf 15,370 17.2 Exhibit Hall Space 20,295 sf 350 gpd/ksf 7,103 8.0 Bridge/Skywaya 27,150 sf 350 gpd/ksf 9,503 10.6 ACC Grand Plazab 100,000 sf 57c gpd/ksf 848 0.9 Restaurant Space 80,000 sf 1,000 gpd/ksf 80,000 89.6 Specialty Retail Space 45,000 sf 195 gpd/ksf 8,775 9.8 Subtotal 231,849 259.7 Hotel Development Two Hotels 900 rooms 125 gpd/room 112,500 126.0 Spa Facilities 15,000 sf 600 gpd/ksf 9,000 10.1 Restaurant Space 15,000 sf 1,000 gpd/ksf 15,000 16.8 Retail Space 10,000 sf 195 gpd/ksf 1,950 2.2 Meeting Space 30,000 sf 350 gpd/ksf 10,500 11.8 Ballroom Space 10,000 sf 350 gpd/ksf 3,500 3.9 Bar/Night Club Space 15,000 sf 350 gpd/ksf 5,250 5.9 Subtotal 157,700 176.7 Subtotal PR District 389,549 436.4 3.8% Losses 14,803 16.6 Total PR District 404,351 453.0 Grand Total ARSP 876,382 981.7 C-R District: Commercial-Recreation District; PR District: Public Recreational District; gpd: gallons per day; afy: acre-feet per year; sf: square feet; ksf: thousand square feet a Based on assumption that this space could be used as exhibit, meeting or commercial space b Outdoor programmable space with 15 percent landscaped and irrigated (planters and potted plant materials) c Factor is on irrigated area only, or 15 percent of 100,000 sf Source: PSOMAS and 2010 ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.15 Water-080912.docx 5.15-7 Water Supply and Infrastructure 5.15.7 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS The cumulative study area for the analysis of impacts to water supply and water infrastructure is the City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department’s water service area. The analysis of water supply presented above is inherently cumulative because it considers the contribution of the City’s growth based on the 2005 UWMP and the increase in intensity associated with the Proposed Project. Similarly, the analysis of water infrastructure is inherently cumulative as it considers the total water infrastructure capacity and anticipated need for future expansion of facilities that serve the entire Public Utilities Department’s water service area and not just the ARSP. Based on the analysis above, there would be less than significant cumulative impacts to water supply and infrastructure with adherence to the proposed mitigation measures. 5.15.8 MITIGATION MEASURES Previously Approved Mitigation Measures MEIR 313 presented mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts associated with the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Project to less than significant levels. The following measures from MEIR 313 shall be incorporated into the Mitigation Program for this EIR. Any modifications to the original measures are shown as strikethrough for deleted text and bold for new, inserted text. (Note that the measure number and section from MEIR 313 are listed in parentheses.) MM 5.15-1 Prior to issuance of each building permit (to be implemented prior to final building and zoning inspections, and continuing on an on-going basis during project operation), the property owner/ developer shall submit to the Public Utilities Department plans for review and approval which shall ensure that water conservation measures are incorporated. The water conservation measures to be shown on the plans and implemented by the property owner/developer, to the extent applicable include, but are not limited to, the following: a. Use of low-flow sprinkler heads in irrigation systems. b. Use of waterway recirculation systems. c. Low-flow fittings, fixtures, and equipment, including low flush toilets and urinals. d. Use of self-closing valves on drinking valves. e. Use of efficient irrigation systems such as drip irrigation and automatic systems which use moisture sensors. f. Use of low-flow shower heads in hotels. g. Water efficient ice-machines, dishwashers, clothes washers and other water- using appliances. h. Use of irrigation systems primarily at night when evaporation rates are lowest. i. Provide information to the public in conspicuous places regarding water conservation. j. Use of water conserving landscape plant materials wherever feasible (MEIR 313 MM 3.9.6-1, Water Service). ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.15 Water-080912.docx 5.15-8 Water Supply and Infrastructure MM 5.15-2 Prior to issuance of each building permit, all water supply planning for the project will be closely coordinated with, and be subject to the review and final approval of, the Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division and Fire Department (MEIR 313 MM 3.9.6-3, Water Service). MM 5.15-3 Prior to issuance of each building permit, water pressure greater than 80 pounds per square inch (psi) shall be reduced to 80 psi or less by means of pressure reducing valves installed at the property owner/developer’s service (MEIR 313 MM 3.9.6-4, Water Service). MM 5.15-4 Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit a landscape and irrigation plan which shall be prepared and certified by a licensed landscape architect. The landscape plan shall include a phasing plan for the installation and maintenance of landscaping associated with the Water Efficiency Landscape Ordinance. The irrigation plan shall specify methods for monitoring the irrigation system. The system shall ensure that irrigation rates do not exceed the infiltration of local soils, that the application of fertilizers and pesticides do not exceed appropriate levels of frequencies, and that surface runoff and overwatering is minimized. The landscaping and irrigation plans shall include water-conserving features such as low flow irrigation heads, automatic irrigation scheduling equipment, flow sensing controls, rain sensors, soil moisture sensors, and other water-conserving equipment. The landscaping and irrigation plans shall indicate that separate irrigation lines for recycled water shall be constructed and recycled water will be used when it becomes available. All irrigation systems shall be designed so that they will function properly with recycled water. In addition, all irrigation systems shall be designed so that they will function properly with reclaimed water, once a system is available. (MEIR 313 MM3.11-2, Visual Resources and Aesthetics) Ordinance 5454 City Ordinance 5454 presented a list of conditions of approval that are applicable to all projects within the ARSP area. The following conditions shall be incorporated into the Mitigation Program for this EIR. Any modifications to the original conditions are shown as strikethrough for deleted text and bold for new, inserted text. (Note that the specific condition references from Ordinance 5454 are listed in parentheses). MM 5.15-5 Prior to approval of the Final Site Plan and building permits, plans shall specifically show that That prior to final building and zoning inspections, the water meter and backflow equipment and any other large water system equipment will be installed to the satisfaction of the Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Utility Division, in either underground vaults or aboveground and behind the building setback line in a manner fully screened from all public streets and alleys and in accordance with Ordinance No. 4156 and Section 18.48.070.1107 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. Such information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for Final Site Plan approval and for building permits. Prior to the final building and zoning inspections, the water meter and backflow equipment and any other large water system equipment shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Utility Division, in accordance with the Final Site Plan and the building permit plans. (Ord 5454, Condition 39) ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.15 Water-080912.docx 5.15-9 Water Supply and Infrastructure MM 5.15-6 That Prior to issuance of each building permit, unless records indicate previous payment, the appropriate fees for Primary Mains, Secondary Mains and Fire Protection Service shall be paid to the Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Utility Division in accordance with Rule 15A, and Rule 20 of the Public Utilities Department Water Utility Rates, Rules and Regulations. (Ord 5454, Condition 40) MM 5.15-7 Prior to final building and zoning inspections, a separate water meter shall be installed for landscape water on all projects where the landscape area exceeds 2,500 square feet in accordance with Ordinance No. 5349. (Ord 5454, Condition 41) Additional Mitigation Measures MM 5.15-8 Prior to the issuance of the first building permit or grading permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall comply with Rule 15E of the Public Utilities Department Water Rates, Rules, and Regulations. Rule 15E shall be amended to include: a. Construction of a new well with a minimum 1,500 GPM capacity to serve The Anaheim Resort Area (tentative location near Ponderosa Park and Orangewood Avenue); and b. Construction of a new 16-inch water main along Harbor Boulevard from Orangewood to Chapman Avenue. MM 5.15-9 Ongoing, the City shall continue to collaborate with the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD), its member agencies, and the Orange County Water District (OCWD) to ensure that available water supplies meet anticipated demand. If it is forecasted that water demand exceeds available supplies, staff shall recommend to City Council to trigger application of the Water Conservation Ordinance (Anaheim Municipal Code, §10.18), as prescribed, to require mandatory conservation measures as authorized by Sections 10.18.070 through 10.18.090, as appropriate. 5.15.9 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION Impacts related to water infrastructure would be reduced to less than significant levels with implementation of identified mitigation measures. Potential impacts related to water supply would be less than significant; however, implementation of the recommended mitigation measures would ensure that appropriate water conservation measures are integrated into future development projects. 5.15.10 REFERENCES Anaheim, City of. 2010a (May 4, current through). Anaheim Municipal Code (Chapter 10.18, Water Reduction Provisions). Cincinnati, OH: American Legal Publishing Corporation for the City. http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/California/anaheim/title10publicservice andutilities/chapter1018waterreductionprovisions?f=templates$fn=altmain-nf.htm$3.0# JD_Chapter10.18. 2004 (May). Final Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update EIR No. 330. Anaheim, CA: the City. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.15 Water-080912.docx 5.15-10 Water Supply and Infrastructure 2009 (January 23). Water Facilities Assessment for the City of Anaheim Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Update/Anaheim Convention Center Expansion. Anaheim, CA: the City. California Senate. 2001a (October Senate Bill No. 221: Land use: water supplies (Kuehl). Sacramento, CA: the State. http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/01-02/bill/sen/sb_0201-0250/ sb_221_bill_20011009_chaptered.pdf. 2001b (October Senate Bill No. 610: Water supply planning (Costa). Sacramento, CA: the State. http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/01-02/bill/sen/sb_0601-0650/ sb_610_bill_20011009_chaptered.pdf. California, State of. 2010a. California Water Code (Sections 10610 et seq., Urban Water Management Planning Act). Sacramento, CA: the State. http://info.sen.ca.gov/cgi- bin/displaycode?section=wat&group=10001-11000&file=10610-10610.4. 2010b. California Water Code (Sections 13500–13556, Water Recycling Law). Sacramento, CA: the State. http://info.sen.ca.gov/cgi-bin/calawquery? codesection=wat&codebody=&hits=20&site=sen. PSOMAS. 2009 (November). Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Water Supply Assessment. Santa Ana, CA: PSOMAS. 2010 (November). Project Water Demand and Regional Supply Update Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Water Supply Assessment, City of Anaheim. Santa Ana, CA: PSOMAS. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.16 Sewer-080912.docx 5.16-1 Sewer 5.16 SEWER The information presented in this section is based on information from the technical memorandum prepared by CH2MHILL on the Combined Central Anaheim Area Master Plan of Sanitary Sewers – Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan in August 2009 and Revision to the Technical Memorandum for the Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan prepared in November 2010. The technical memorandums are provided in Appendix J to this Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The memorandums discuss sewer system capacity to serve development under the proposed Amendment using the City’s models for the Combined Central Anaheim Area Master Plan of Sanitary Sewers (CCAAMPSS). The models for the CCAAMPSS have been revised to account for recent sewer system improvements in Models 13, 21, 40, and 51. Model 15 was also modified to account for build out of the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project. For the Proposed Project, future development to achieve build out of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (ARSP) was distributed to individual parcels to identify the affected models: 1, 13, 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 22, 40, and 51. These models were then modified to incorporate maximum build out of the amended ARSP, assuming sewage generation is 80 percent of water consumption, except for the sewage generation of meeting rooms/offices, exhibit halls, ballrooms, and bridges/skyways, which was set at 350 gallons per 1,000 square feet. 5.16.1 SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION MEIR 313 included data from the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan EIR, including a discussion of the existing sewer system serving the City, along with known deficiencies and planned upgrades. It also identified deficient pipe segments that would need to be upgraded to serve development under the ARSP. Implementation of the mitigation measures identified in the MEIR would reduce ARSP impacts to a less than significant level. 5.16.2 PLANS, POLICIES, AND REGULATORY CONDITIONS Related Planning Programs City of Anaheim General Plan, Public Services and Facilities Element The Public Services and Facilities Element of the City of Anaheim General Plan addresses public services and infrastructure, such as fire protection, law enforcement, parks, schools, water, sewer, and storm drain systems. The Element shows the sanitary sewer system map and identifies deficiencies in the City’s sewer system. Applicable goals and policies from the Public Services and Facilities Element that are related to sewer services and that are applicable to the Proposed Project are provided in Table 5.9-2 in Section 5.9, Land Use, with a project consistency analysis. Regulatory Setting County Sanitation District Act Section 4700 et seq. of the California Health and Safety Code is also known as the County Sanitation District Act. This act regulates the formation, operation, and governance of County Sanitation Districts, including the construction, maintenance, and operation of a sewerage system and sewage disposal or treatment plant, a refuse transfer or disposal system, or both. It also authorizes the districts to charge a fee for connection to the sewer system or increases in the strength or quantity of wastewater from a specific parcel or operation. The capital facilities ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.16 Sewer-080912.docx 5.16-2 Sewer fee shall be sufficient to construct the incremental expansion of the sewer system in order to accommodate the development. Orange County Sanitation District Wastewater Discharge Regulations In accordance with the Clean Water Act, the General Pretreatment Regulations, and the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, the Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) has adopted Wastewater Discharge Regulations to address the types of discharges that may enter into the sewer system. The OCSD requires permits or waivers for specific discharges such as groundwater, surface runoff, or subsurface drainage; industrial wastewater; toxic materials in wastewater; fats, oil, and grease from food service establishments; medical wastes; and sludge subject to prohibitions, on-site treatment, self-monitoring, and reporting requirements. Liquid waste pumpers must also register with the Orange County Health Care Agency and obtain a Waste Hauler Permit from OCSD for the disposal of septage, chemical toilet, and grease trap wastes at Treatment Plant No. 1. The regulations include fees and charges for service, connection, permits, violations, and penalties to fund operation and maintenance of the regional sewer system. 5.16.3 METHODOLOGY The analysis in this section is based on review of the Combined Central Anaheim Area Master Plan of Sanitary Sewers – Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan. 5.16.4 EXISTING CONDITIONS The ARSP area is served by local sewer lines owned and maintained by the City of Anaheim. Wastewater in the local sewer lines generally flows south and then west to the OCSD sewer trunks on Walnut Street, Euclid Street, Ninth Street, Ball Road, and Katella Avenue. Modeling of the sewer system for the CCAAMPSS has identified existing deficiencies in the City’s sewer system. These include: • 500 feet of sewer line on the alley south of Cerritos Avenue between Ninth Street and Hampstead Street; • 840 feet of sewer line on Orangewood Avenue east of Ninth Street; • 1,753 feet of sewer line on Jacalene Lane north of Orangewood Avenue; • 724 feet of sewer line on Wilken Way east of Harbor Boulevard; • 1,485 feet of sewer line on Harbor Boulevard south of Wilken Way; and • 57 feet of sewer line on Chapman Avenue west of Harbor Boulevard. Exhibit 5.16-1, Existing Sewer Line Deficiencies, shows the location of existing sewer line deficiencies in and near the ARSP planning area. Wastewater from the ARSP area is conveyed through sewer trunks and interceptors to the OCSD Treatment Plant No. 1 in Fountain Valley. This treatment plant has the capacity to provide primary treatment to 204 million gallons per day (mgd) and secondary treatment to ---PAGE BREAK--- 15 21 13 1 22 40 17 16 51 21 21 20 20 21 22 INTERSTATE HWY 5 * * * DISNEYLAND DR LEWIS ST HASTER ST THE CITY DR HARBOR BLVD CHAPMAN AVE KATELLA AVE STATE COLLEGE BLVD WEST ST HOWELL AVE ORANGEWOOD AVE CHAPMAN AVE STATE COLLEGE BLVD BALL RD WALNUT ST NINTH ST CERRITOS AVE Exhibit 1 Recommended Existing Sewer Improvements for the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan LEGEND Manhole Sewer Lines Existing Sewer Improvements 8 Inches 10 Inches 15 Inches OCSD Trunk Sewer Central Sewer Study Area Anaheim City Limits Models Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Combined Central Anaheim Area Master Plan of Sanitary Sewers 1 inch equals 1300 feet 0 650 1,300 Feet Notes: * - Existing sewer improvements outside Anaheim city limits August 2009 SCO \\GALT\PROJ\CITYOFANAHEIM\360985\MAPFILES\11X17_ANAHEIMRESORTEXISTING_V1.MXD RANHORN 8/28/2009 13:10:41 15 Existing Sewer Line Deficiencies Exhibit 5.16-1 Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (Rev: WAD 050610) R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\Graphics\EIR\Ex5.16-1_SewerDefic.pdf D:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\Graphics\Ex_Sewer_Deficiencies.ai Source: CH2MHill August 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.16 Sewer-080912.docx 5.16-3 Sewer 122 mgd. It treated an average of 86 mgd in 2008 and 2009 (OCSD 2009). Thus, remaining capacity to treat 118 mgd is available at this plant. 5.16.5 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE The following significance criteria are derived from the City of Anaheim Environmental Checklist. The Proposed Project would result in a significant impact related to sewer systems if it would: Threshold 5.16.1 Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board. Threshold 5.16.2 Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. Threshold 5.16.3 Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has inadequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments. 5.16.6 PROJECT IMPACT ANALYSIS Standard Requirements The following standard requirements were derived from existing regulations, requirements, and standard practices set forth by regional and local agencies. SR 5.16-1 Prior to issuance of building permits, the property owner/developer shall provide evidence to the Planning Director/Planning Services Manager that all sewage and wastewater disposal into the sewer system shall comply with OCSD’s Wastewater Discharge Regulations, including the procurement of the necessary permits by food service establishments that would be developed in the ARSP area. SR 5.16-2 Prior to issuance of building permits, the property owner/developer shall provide proof of payment to the Planning Director/Planning Services Manager for a sanitary sewer service charge to OCSD. SR 5.16-3 Prior to issuance of building permits, the property owner/developer shall provide proof of payment to the Planning Director/Planning Services Manager for a capital facilities connection charge to OCSD. Impact Analysis Threshold 5.16.1 Would the project exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? Build out of the Proposed Project would lead to the development of a variety of commercial and recreational uses, such as hotels, restaurants, retail uses, bars/night clubs, meeting and office uses, ballrooms, spas, exhibit halls, and other uses allowed under the ARSP. The sewage and wastewater from these uses would be discharged into the City’s sewer system and conveyed to the Reclamation Plant No. 1 in Fountain Valley. No pre-treatment is required for the wastewater from the ARSP since the proposed land uses would not process any industrial wastewater; ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.16 Sewer-080912.docx 5.16-4 Sewer involve dewatering or groundwater clean up; directly discharge sewage effluent; and engage in other activities that would generate wastewater requiring treatment beyond what is provided at OCSD Treatment Plant No. 1. Future food service establishments shall provide on-site treatment (such as grease traps and grinders) as part of the permit that is needed from OCSD under SR 5.16-1. Other land uses or activities that may generate wastewater requiring special treatment shall comply with OCSD’s Wastewater Discharge Regulations. Thus, the wastewater treatment requirements of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board would not be exceeded by the Proposed Project. Impacts would be less than significant. Impact Summary: All wastewater generation would be subject to treatment pursuant to SR 5.16-1. No significant impacts would occur, and no additional mitigation would be required. The conclusion for impacts related to wastewater treatment requirements is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313. Threshold 5.16.2 Would the project require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Build out of the ARSP would increase sewage flows in existing sewer lines and trunks serving the area as part of Models 1, 13, 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 22, 40, and 51 of the CCAAMPSS. Results of the modeling indicate that several sewer lines would become deficient or that future development under the amended ARSP would contribute to existing deficiencies in Models 1, 13, 15, 16, and 40. No deficiencies exist nor would deficiencies be created in sewer lines in Models 17, 20, 21, 22, and 51 due to the Proposed Project. Improvements needed to eliminate the existing and projected sewer system deficiencies are described below: Model 1: 1,085 linear feet of sewer pipe is recommended for replacement along Hampstead Street, Pepperwood, and an alley in order to accommodate Proposed Project build out. The existing sewers range from 8 inches to 10 inches in diameter and are recommended for replacement with 12-inch diameter sewers. Model 13: 6,310 linear feet of sewer pipe for replacement along Orangewood Avenue, Jacalene Lane, and an easement in order to accommodate Proposed Project build out. The existing sewers are 8 inches to 18 inches in diameter and are recommended to be upsized with 10-inch to 27-inch diameter sewers. Model 15: 8,095 linear feet of sewer pipe are recommended for replacement along Haster Street, Katella Avenue, Clementine Street, and Harbor Boulevard in order to accommodate Proposed Project build out. The existing sewers range from 8 inches to 24 inches in diameter and are recommended for replacement with 10-inch to 33-inch diameter sewers. Along Harbor Boulevard, 161 linear feet of existing 8-inch sewer pipe are recommended for replacement with 12-inch sewer pipe. In addition, 1,064 linear feet of sewer pipe is recommended for replacement along Howell Avenue in order to accommodate build out of the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project. The existing sewers are 8 inches in diameter and are recommended for replacement with 12-inch diameter sewers. These improvements do not create cumulative impacts to the 14,250 linear feet of sewer pipe improvements located west of the Interstate 5 (I-5) Freeway. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.16 Sewer-080912.docx 5.16-5 Sewer Model 16: 917 linear feet of sewer pipe is recommended for replacement along Disneyland Drive within the Disneyland Resort to accommodate Proposed Project build out. The existing sewers are 10 inches in diameter and are recommended for replacement with 12-inch diameter sewers. Model 40: 2,266 linear feet of sewer pipe is recommended for replacement within the C-R District along Wilken Way, Harbor Boulevard, and Chapman Avenue in order to accommodate Proposed Project build out. The existing sewers are 12 inches to 15 inches in diameter and are recommended for replacement with 21-inch diameter sewers. These improvements are shown in Exhibit 5.16-2, Sewer Improvements Needed at Build out. The proposed mitigation would require the Property Owner/Developer to participate in the City’s Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program and/or construct the needed sewer line upgrades in order to avoid the exacerbation of existing deficiencies and to ensure that adequate facilities are available to provide sewer services to each development project. Compliance with this mitigation measure would eliminate existing and future deficiencies in the City’s sewer system. All sewer improvement plans would be required to be designed and constructed to the City Engineer’s satisfaction. In addition to construction noise and emissions, the impacts of the sewer line upgrades would be temporary and limited to the construction phase when roadway travel lanes may be blocked from use due to excavation and trenching activities. Compliance with the Anaheim Department of Public Works’ Standard Plans and Details, which are based on the American Public Works Association’s Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (Greenbook), the standard requirements for construction noise impacts (Section 5.10, Noise) and the standard requirements for construction emissions (Section 5.2, Air Quality) would reduce the construction impacts of sewer line upgrades to less than significant levels. Impact Summary: Build out of the ARSP would increase sewage flows in existing sewer lines and trunks serving the area, resulting in several sewer lines becoming deficient. Implementation of MM 5.16-1 would reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels. The conclusion for sewer capacity impacts is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313. Threshold 5.16.3: Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has inadequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? PR District The proposed expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center would lead to the increase in sewage generation from this development and within the PR District. Table 5.16-1 estimates the sewage generation from the proposed expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center at 324,340 gallons per day (gpd). ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.16 Sewer-080912.docx 5.16-6 Sewer TABLE 5.16-1 SEWAGE GENERATION OF CONVENTION CENTER EXPANSION Land Use Size Sewage Generation Factora Sewage Generation Convention Center Development Flexible Meeting Space 265,000 sf 280 gpd/ksf 74,200 gpd Ballroom Space 50,000 sf 350 gpd/ksf 17,500 gpd Meeting and Office Space 43,914 sf 350 gpd/ksf 15,370 gpd Exhibit Hall Space 20,295 sf 350 gpd/ksf 7,103 gpd Bridge/Skyway 27,150 sf 350 gpd/ksf 9,503 gpd ACC Grand Plaza 100,000 sf 45.6 gpd/ksfb Restaurant Space 80,000 sf 800 gpd/ksf 64,000 gpd Specialty Retail Space 45,000 sf 156 gpd/ksf 7,020 gpd Hotel Development Two hotels 900 rooms 100 gpd/room 90,000 gpd Spa Facilities 15,000 sf 480 gpd/ksf 7,200 gpd Restaurant Space 15,000 sf 800 gpd/ksf 12,000 gpd Retail Space 10,000 sf 156 gpd/ksf 1,560 gpd Meeting Space 30,000 sf 350 gpd/ksf 10,500 gpd Ballroom Space 10,000 sf 350 gpd/ksf 3,500 gpd Bar/Night Club Space 15,000 sf 280 gpd/ksf 4,200 gpd Total 324,340 gpd sf: square feet; ksf: thousand square feet; gpd: gallons per day a Assumes 80 percent of water demand factors, except for meeting rooms/offices, exhibit halls, ballrooms, and bridges/skyways, which are set at 350 gallons per 1,000 square feet. b Factor is on irrigated area only, or 15 percent of 100,000 square feet. Source: CH2MHill 2010. This estimated sewage volume (324,340 gpd) is less than the remaining capacity of OCSD Treatment Plant No. 1, which is 118 mgd. Thus, there is available capacity to treat the sewage volume that would be generated by the proposed expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center in the PR District. Payment of the sanitary sewer service charge and the capital facilities connection charge to OCSD would fund operation and maintenance of the OCSD treatment plant to accommodate the proposed expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center. Water conservation measures discussed in Section 5.15, Water Supply and Infrastructure, would also reduce sewage generation beyond what is identified in Table 5.16-1. Impacts related to the intensification of uses within the PR District in accordance with the Proposed Project would be less than significant. C-R District Assuming future build out in the C-R District could include 20,913 new hotel room equivalents, the sewage generation of this development at 100 gpd per room (80 percent of the water consumption rate of 125 gallons per room per day) is estimated at a total of 2,091,300 gpd or 2.1 mgd. As indicated above, OCSD Treatment Plant No. 1 has a remaining capacity to treat 118 mgd and can accommodate the 2.1 mgd from build out of the Amendment to the ARSP. Payment of the sanitary sewer service charge and the capital facilities connection charge by individual developments in the ARSP area to OCSD would fund operation and maintenance of ---PAGE BREAK--- 15 21 13 1 22 40 17 16 51 21 21 20 20 21 22 INTERSTATE HWY 5 * * * DISNEYLAND DR LEWIS ST HASTER ST THE CITY DR HARBOR BLVD CHAPMAN AVE KATELLA AVE STATE COLLEGE BLVD WEST ST HOWELL AVE ORANGEWOOD AVE CHAPMAN AVE STATE COLLEGE BLVD BALL RD WALNUT ST NINTH ST CERRITOS AVE Exhibit 3 Recommended Build Out Sewer Improvements for the Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan LEGEND Manhole Sewer Lines Build Out Sewer Improvements 10 Inches 12 Inches 15 Inches 18 Inches 21 Inches 24 Inches 27 Inches 30 Inches OCSD Trunk Sewer Central Sewer Study Area Anaheim City Limits Models Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Combined Central Anaheim Area Master Plan of Sanitary Sewers 1 inch equals 1300 feet 0 650 1,300 Feet Notes: * - Build out sewer improvements outside Anaheim city limits August 2009 SCO \\GALT\PROJ\CITYOFANAHEIM\360985\MAPFILES\11X17_ANAHEIMRESORT_V1.MXD RANHORN 8/20/2009 15:42:49 15 Sewer Improvements Needed at Buildout Exhibit 5.16-2 Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (Rev: WAD 050610) R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\Graphics\EIR\Ex5.16-2_SewerImproveNeeded.pdf D:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\Graphics\Ex_Sewer_Improvements_Needed.ai Source: CH2MHill August 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.16 Sewer-080912.docx 5.16-7 Sewer the OCSD treatment plant. Water conservation measures discussed in Section 5.15, Water Supply and Infrastructure, would also reduce sewage generation of future development under the amended ARSP. Thus, impacts on sewer treatment capacity would be less than significant. Impact Summary: Implementation of the Proposed Project would increase sewage flows by approximately 323,656 gpd in the PR District and 2.1 mgd in the C-R District. These increases in sewage flow would be accommodated by available capacity at OCSD Treatment Plant No. 1; impacts would be less than significant. Additionally, adherence to the standard requirements would ensure payment of required fees. The conclusion for impacts related to regional wastewater treatment facilities is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313. 5.16.7 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS The Proposed Project would result in cumulatively considerable impacts related to sewer services, as discussed above. Build out conditions in the City have been assumed in the CCAAMPSS models; thus, the model results account for the cumulative impacts of the Proposed Project and other future developments near the ARSP area. A number of sewer lines are deficient and others are expected become deficient at build out of the proposed Amendment to the ARSP. Participation of all developments in the City’s Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program and/or construction of needed sewer line upgrades by individual developments would reduce impacts to the City’s sewer system to less than significant levels. In addition, compliance with OCSD’s Waste Discharge Regulations and payment of the sanitary sewer service charge and the capital facilities connection charge by individual developments to the OCSD would reduce impacts to the regional sewer system and wastewater treatment plant. Cumulative impacts on sewer services from the Proposed Project and potential future projects would be less than significant. 5.16.8 MITIGATION MEASURES Previously Approved Measures MEIR 313 presented mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts associated with the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan project to less than significant levels. The following measures from MEIR 313 shall be incorporated into the Mitigation Program for this EIR. MM 5.16-1 Prior to approval of a final subdivision map or issuance of a grading or building permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall participate in the City’s Master Plan of Sewers and related Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program to assist in mitigating existing and future sanitary sewer system deficiencies as follows: The property owner/developer shall submit a report for review and approval of the City Engineer to assist in determining the following: a. If the development/redevelopment does not discharge into a sewer system that is currently deficient or will become deficient because of that discharge and/or does not increase flows or change points of discharge, then the property owner’s/developer’s responsibility shall be limited to participation in the Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program. b. If the development/redevelopment discharges into a sewer system that is currently deficient or will become deficient because of that discharge and/or ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.16 Sewer-080912.docx 5.16-8 Sewer increases flows or changes points of discharge, then the property owner/developer shall be required to guarantee mitigation to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney’s office of the impact prior to approval of a final subdivision map or issuance of a grading or building permit whichever occurs first, pursuant to the improvements identified in the South Central Area Sewer Deficiency Study. The property owner/developer shall be required to install the sanitary sewer facilities, as recommended by the South Central Area Sewer Deficiency Study, prior to acceptance for maintenance of public improvements by the City or final building and zoning inspections for the building/structure, whichever comes first. Additionally, the property owner/developer shall participate in the Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program, as determined by the City Engineer, which couldmay include fees, credits, reimbursements, or a combination thereof. As part of guaranteeing the mitigation of impacts for the sanitary sewer system, the property owner/developer shall submit a sanitary sewer system improvement phasing plan for the project to the City Engineer for review and approval which shall contain, at a minimum, a layout of the complete system, all facility sizes, including support calculations, construction phasing, and construction estimates. The study shall determine the impact of the project sewer flows for total build out of the project and identify local deficiencies for each project component each hotel). (MEIR 313 Mitigation Measure 3.9.7-1, Public Services and Utilities) Ordinance 5454 City Ordinance 5454 presented a list of conditions of approval that are applicable to all projects within the ARSP area. The following condition identified in Section 5.8, Hydrology and Water Quality, shall be incorporated into the Mitigation Program for this EIR. Any modifications to the original condition is shown as strikethrough for deleted text and bold for new, inserted text. (Note that the specific condition references from Ordinance 5454 are listed in parentheses). MM 5.8-7 Prior to approval of building plans, the property owner/developer shall provide written evidence that all storm drain, sewer, and street improvement plans shall be designed and constructed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. (Ord 5454, Condition 7) Additional Mitigation Measures No additional mitigation measures related to wastewater treatment requirements, capacities, and facilities have been identified. 5.16.9 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION With implementation of the mitigation program described above, there would be less than significant impacts related to wastewater treatment requirements, capacities, and facilities. 5.16.10 REFERENCES Anaheim, City of. 2004 (May). General Plan for the City of Anaheim (City Council Resolution No. 2004-94). Anaheim, CA: the City. 1994 (August). The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Draft EIR No. 313 with Addendum. Anaheim, City of: Anaheim, CA. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.16 Sewer-080912.docx 5.16-9 Sewer Anaheim, City of, Department of Public Works. 2010. Standard Plans and Details. Anaheim, CA: the City. http://www.anaheim.net/article.asp?id=528. California, State of. 2010. California Health and Safety Code (Section 4700 et seq.). Sacramento, CA: the State. http://info.sen.ca.gov/cgi-bin/calawquery?codesection=hsc& codebody=&hits=20&site=sen. CH2MHILL. 2010 (December). Revision to the Technical Memorandum for the Amendment to the Anaheim Report Specific Plan (ARSP). Los Angeles, CA: CH2MHILL. 2009 (August). Combined Central Anaheim Area Master Plan of Sanitary Sewers – Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan. Los Angeles, CA: CH2MHILL. Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD). 2009. Fiscal Year 2009–10 Budget Update. Fountain Valley, CA: OCSD. 2007 (May 23). Ordinance No. OCSD-31. Fountain Valley, CA: OCSD. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.16 Sewer-080912.docx 5.16-10 Sewer This page intentionally left blank ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.17 Elec-082312.docx 5.17-1 Electricity 5.17 ELECTRICITY 5.17.1 SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION MEIR 313 included data from the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan EIR, including the electrical consumption of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (ARSP) area. Electrical substations were identified and electromagnetic fields (EMFs) were discussed. Implementation of mitigation measures served to reduce all impacts to a less than significant level. 5.17.2 PLANS, POLICIES, AND REGULATORY CONDITIONS Related Planning Programs City of Anaheim General Plan, Public Services and Facilities Element The Public Services and Facilities Element of the City of Anaheim General Plan addresses electric utilities (service and facilities) throughout the City. Applicable goals and policies from the Public Services and Facilities Element that are related to electric utilities and that are applicable to the Proposed Project are provided in Table 5.9-2 in Section 5.9, Land Use, with a project consistency analysis. Regulatory Setting Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards The Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings (Title 24, Part 6 of the California Code of Regulations [CCR]) were established in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to reduce California’s energy consumption. Since that time, the energy efficiency standards have undergone several revisions. Effective January 1, 2010, the adopted 2008 Title 24 standards replaced the 2005 Title 24 standards. The California Energy Commission (CEC) adopted the 2008 standards in order to “Provide California with an adequate, reasonably-priced, and environmentally-sound supply of energy” and “Respond to Assembly Bill 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, which mandates that California must reduce its greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020” (CEC 2009). 5.17.3 METHODOLOGY As indicated below, the City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department provides electrical services to the ARSP area. The City of Anaheim prepared a validation report in 2009 for MEIR No. 313, which was used as the basis for the updated information in this section. The Anaheim Public Utilities Department was subsequently contacted to update the 2009 validation report information to determine if the Proposed Project would affect its ability to provide services to the ARSP area. 5.17.4 EXISTING CONDITIONS The City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department provides electrical services to the ARSP area. The Public Utilities Board advises the City Council on public utility matters. Primary power supply comes from the Intermountain power plant in Utah and other entitlements in California via the state regulated transmission network. A combustion turbine generator located at Dowling substation supplies an additional 50 megawatts for peaking requirements. The City’s main receiving substation is located on Lewis Street east of Interstate 5. The existing facilities currently provide adequate service to the ARSP area, which is currently served by the Katella, Lewis, and the Southwest substations through 12-kilovolt (kV) distribution circuits and 69-kV transmission lines. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.17 Elec-082312.docx 5.17-2 Electricity Electric and Magnetic Fields Previous research has raised much debate over the health effects associated with electric and magnetic fields EMFs). Electric fields are produced by electrical lines as a result of voltage applied to wiring, and is measured in volts per meter (V/m) or kilovolt per meter (kV/m). Electric field strength decreases dramatically with increasing distance. Electric fields can be shielded by objects, including trees and houses. Most exposure to residential electric fields is a result of internal household appliance use. Magnetic fields are a result of the movement (current) of electricity. These fields are measured in Gauss; however, this measure is extremely large, and fields from electrical lines are generally referred to in milligauss (mG). As with electric fields, magnetic field strength decreases dramatically as distance from the source increases; however, magnetic fields are not shielded by objects such as trees and buildings (Anaheim 1994). Exposure to EMFs is an existing circumstance that is typical in urban communities, including Anaheim, and EMF intensity varies with the type of electricity source. Whether the fields originate from household appliances or high-voltage transmission lines, public and scientific concern exists regarding the health effects resulting from exposure. The relationship between EMF exposure and health effects has not been scientifically proven; results from the plethora of epidemiological and laboratory studies that have taken place are inconclusive. Scientists for SCE, as well as scientists to date, have found no special value, dose response, or positive relationship that demonstrates evidence of any physical effects from EMF. 5.17.5 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE The following criterion is derived from the City of Anaheim Environmental Checklist. The Proposed Project would have a significant environmental impact related to electricity if it would: Threshold 5.17.1 Result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations related to electricity. 5.17.6 PROJECT IMPACT ANALYSIS Standard Requirements The following standard requirements were derived from existing regulations, requirements, and standard practices set forth by regional and local agencies. SR 5.17-1 Prior to issuance of building permits, the property owner/developer shall be required to demonstrate to the Planning Department, Building Division that building plans meet the applicable Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings (24 CCR These standards are updated, nominally every three years, to incorporate improved energy efficiency technologies and methods. The 2008 standards, which were applicable January 1, 2010, are approximately 15 percent more energy efficient than the 2005 Building and Energy Efficiency Standards. SR 5.17-2 Prior to issuance of building permits, the property owner/developer shall be required to demonstrate to the Planning Department, Building Division that building plans meet the applicable California Green Building Standards (24 CCR 11). ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.17 Elec-082312.docx 5.17-3 Electricity Impact Analysis Threshold 5.17.1 Would the project result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations related to electricity? Full build out of the ARSP, including the proposed convention center expansion, would result in an increase in the demand for electricity over existing conditions by approximately 184,059,772 kilowatts per hour (kWh) annually, an estimated 799,344 kWh on an average day (refer to Table 5.17-1). It is noted that the Anaheim Public Utilities Department has installed and operates a 102 kilowatt photovoltaic power generation system on the roof of the Anaheim Convention Center. This system generates more than 141,000 kilowatt hours (kWh) of electricity annually; however, the consumption figures in Table 5.17-1 are conservative in their projections and do not account for this electricity production. Therefore, the estimated net increase in electrical demand associated with implementation of the ARSP is 69.1 Mega Volt Amp (MVA). Future capacity would be provided by a new electrical substation and its associated distribution circuits and transmission lines, tentatively planned for construction in summer 2015 (LeBlanc 2010). In addition, compliance with the standard requirements and implementation of the proposed mitigation measures would further ensure that energy saving measures are implemented and that adequate electrical service would be provided. TABLE 5.17-1 PROJECTED INCREASE IN ELECTRICAL CONSUMPTION DUE TO PROPOSED PROJECT (MAXIMUM BUILD OUT) Component Area (sf) Load (kWh/sf/yr) Proposed Annual Consumption (kWh)a 21,813 Hotel Rooms 13,087,800b 13.1c 171,450,180 Convention Center and associated uses 726,359 17.36d 12,609,592 Total Annual Consumption at Build out 184,059,772 Total Average Daily Consumption 504,273 Component Area (sf) Load (volt- amp/sf) c Total Demand (volt-amp) 21,813 Hotel Rooms 13,087,800b 5 65,439,000 Convention Center and associated uses 726,359 5 3,631,795 Total Demand 69,070,795 or 69.1 MVA kWh: killowatt per hour; MVA: million volt amperes; sf: square foot/feet a All values are rounded to the nearest 1,000 kWh. b Assumes 600 square feet per room (MEIR 313, Table 3.9-19) c Anaheim 1994 d LeBlanc 2008, 2010 Impact Summary: Build out of the ARSP and expansion of the Convention Center would result in increased demand for electricity. Compliance with the standard requirements and implementation of the proposed mitigation measures would reduce anticipated demand through conservation efforts. It is expected that the existing electrical distribution system and future planned improvements would adequately accommodate the anticipated demand, thus resulting in a less than significant impact with mitigation. The conclusion for impacts is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.17 Elec-082312.docx 5.17-4 Electricity 5.17.7 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS The geographic area for the cumulative analysis of impacts related to electricity is the City of Anaheim since it provides electrical service within the City. The City has indicated that it would be able to serve the Proposed Project while maintaining existing and planned services within its respective service areas. Additionally, all projects are required to comply with State and local regulations related to energy conservation. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not have a cumulative impact related to electricity. 5.17.8 MITIGATION MEASURES Previously Approved Measures MEIR 313 presented mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts associated with the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Project to less than significant levels. The following measures from MEIR 313 shall be incorporated into the Mitigation Program for this EIR. Any modifications to the original measures are shown as strikethrough for deleted text and bold for new, inserted text: MM 5.17-1 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/develop shall submit plans showing that each structure will comply with the State Energy Efficiency Standards for Nonresidential Buildings (Title 24, Part 6, Article 2, California Code of Regulations) and will consult with the City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department, Resource Efficiency Business and Community Programs Division in order to review above Title 24 energy efficient measures to incorporate into the project design including energy efficient designs. Prior to the final building and zoning inspection, the property owner developer shall implement these energy efficient measures energy-saving practices in compliance with Title 24, which may include the following: a. Use of High-efficiency air-conditioning systems with EMS (computer) control controlled by a computerized management system including features such as a variable air volume system, a 100 percent outdoor air economizer cycle, sequential operation of air conditioning equipment in accordance with building demands, isolation of air conditioning to any selected floor or floors b. Variable air volume (VAV) distribution c. Outside air (100%) economizer cycle d. Staged compressors or variable speed drives to flow varying thermal loads e. Isolated HVAC zone control by floors/separable activity areas f. Use of electric motors designed to conserve energy Specification of premium-efficiency electric motors compressor motors, air- handling units, and fan-coil units) g. Use of special lighting fixtures such as motion sensing devices and compact florescent fixtures in place of incandescent lights. Use of occupancy sensors in appropriate spaces h. Use of compact fluorescent lamps i. Use of cold cathode fluorescent lamps j. Use of light emitting diode (LED) or equivalent energy-efficient lighting for outdoor lighting ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.17 Elec-082312.docx 5.17-5 Electricity k. Use of Energy Star® exit lighting or exit signage l. Use of T-8 lamps and electronic ballasts where applications of standard fluorescent fixtures are identified m. Use of lighting power controllers in association with metal-halide or high- pressure sodium (high intensity discharge) lamps for outdoor lighting and parking lots n. Consideration of thermal energy storage air-conditioning for spaces or facilities that may require air-conditioning during summer, day-peak periods. o. For swimming pools and spas, incorporate solar heating, automatic covers, and efficient pumps and motors, as feasible. p. Consideration for participation in Advantage Services Programs such as: a. New construction design review, in which the City cost-shares engineering for up to $10,000 for design of energy efficient buildings and systems b. New Construction – cash incentives ($300 to $400 per kW reduction in load) for efficiency that exceeds Title 24 requirements c. Green Building Program – offers accelerated plan approval, financial incentives, waived plan check fees and free technical assistance. (MEIR 313, MMs 3.9.9-1 and 3.9.9-2 in part, Public Services and Utilities) MM 5.17-2 Prior to final building and zoning inspection, the property owner/developer shall install an underground electrical service from the Public Utilities Distribution System. The Underground Service will be installed in accordance with the Electric Rules, Rates, Regulations and Electrical Specifications for Underground Systems. Electrical Service Fees and other applicable fees will be assessed in accordance with the Electric Rules, Rates, Regulations and Electrical Specifications for Underground Systems. (MEIR 313 MM 3.9.9-3, Public Services and Utilities) Additional Mitigation Measures MM 5.17-3 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit plans and calculations to the City of Anaheim Planning Department, Building Division, to demonstrate that the energy efficiency of each building will exceed the Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings current at the time of application by at least 10 percent. MM 5.17-4 Prior to approval of a Final Site Plan, the property owner/developer shall coordinate with the Public Utilities Department to incorporate feasible renewable energy generation measures into the project. These measures may include but not be limited to use of solar and small wind turbine sources on new and existing facilities and the use of solar powered lighting in parking areas. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.17 Elec-082312.docx 5.17-6 Electricity 5.17.9 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION With implementation of the mitigation program described above, there would be less than significant impacts related to the electricity services and facilities. 5.17.10 REFERENCES Anaheim, City of. 2004 (May). General Plan for the City of Anaheim (City Council Resolution No. 2004-94). Anaheim, CA: the City. 1994 (August). The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Draft EIR No. 313 with Addendum. Anaheim, City of: Anaheim, CA. California Energy Commission (CEC). 2009. 2008 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. Sacramento, CA: CEC. http://www.energy.ca.gov/title24/2008standards/ Le Blanc, M. 2008 (August 12). Personal communication. Email from M. Le Blanc (Anaheim Public Utilities Commission) to J. Marks, Project Manager (BonTerra Consulting), including a document entitled "EIR No. 313 2009 Validation Report; Public Utilities Department - Electric". 2010 (August 12). Personal communication. Email from M. Le Blanc (Anaheim Public Utilities Commission) to J. Marks, Project Manager (BonTerra Consulting). ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.18 Stormwater-080912.docx 5.18-1 Storm Water 5.18 STORM WATER The information presented in this section is based on information from the following sources: • Master Plan of Storm Drainage for Anaheim Barber City Channel Tributary Area, 2009 (June), City of Anaheim. • Master Plan of Storm Drainage for East Garden Grove Wintersburg Channel Tributary Area, 2006 (January), City of Anaheim. 5.18.1 SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION EIR No. 313 finds that the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (ARSP) has the potential to temporarily impact storm drain infrastructure and incrementally increase storm water runoff. Implementation of mitigation measures, including the payment of fees, reduces impacts to a less than significant level. 5.18.2 PLANS, POLICIES, AND REGULATORY CONDITIONS Related Planning Programs City of Anaheim General Plan, Public Services and Facilities Element The Public Services and Facilities Element of the City of Anaheim General Plan addresses the presence and effectiveness of community resources including public services and infrastructure. Applicable goals and policies from the Public Services and Facilities Element that are related to storm drain systems and that are applicable to the Proposed Project are provided in Table 5.9-2 in Section 5.9, Land Use, with a project consistency analysis. 5.18.3 METHODOLOGY The analysis in this section is based on review of the following documents: • Master Plan of Storm Drainage for Anaheim Barber City Channel Tributary Area, 2009 (June), City of Anaheim. • Master Plan of Storm Drainage for East Garden Grove Wintersburg Channel Tributary Area, 2006 (January), City of Anaheim. 5.18.4 EXISTING CONDITIONS In 1973, the City of Anaheim published a Master Plan of Drainage that divided the City into 43 drainage areas. The Master Plan of Flood Control & Drainage Facilities in Orange County, last revised by Orange County Flood Control District in February 1999, identifies the Anaheim Barber City (ABC) Channel as Facility C03. According to the City of Anaheim Master Plan of Storm Drainage for East Garden Grove Wintersburg Channel Tributary Area (City of Anaheim 2006) and City of Anaheim Master Plan of Storm Drainage for Anaheim Barber City Channel Tributary Area (Anaheim 2009), the ARSP area is located within numerous designated drainage areas. Specifically, the C-R District is located within Drainage Areas 19, 20, 22, 24, 25, and 26. The PR District is located entirely within Drainage Area 24. These reports, prepared by the City of Anaheim, evaluate the storm drainage system within the Anaheim Barber City Channel Tributary Area (ABCCTA) and the East Garden Grove Wintersburg Channel Tributary Area in the City of Anaheim in order to identify storm drainage system needs to reduce street flooding within the study area. Runoff from Drainage Areas 19, 20, and 22 discharge into the ABC Channel via inlets and storm drain pipes within the City limits. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.18 Stormwater-080912.docx 5.18-2 Storm Water Anaheim Barber City Channel Tributary Area Drainage Area 19 Drainage Area 19 drains approximately 643 acres and is generally bound by East Street on the east, Ball Road and Vermont Avenue on the south, and Walnut Street on the west; the northerly boundary of the Drainage Area meanders along Lincoln Avenue, Santa Ana Street, and Broadway. Generally, water flows over land and then through pipes from east to west and ties into the South Street storm drain flowing westerly, which joins the Walnut Street storm drain and continues south to the ABC Channel. The capacity of the existing facilities ranges from 37 percent to 100 percent of a 10-year storm, which means that at certain locations, the City’s flooded width criteria during a 10-, 25-, and 100-year storm event are not met. Improvements to the existing facilities are recommended in order to satisfy the City’s requirement of conveying the 10-year storm event, and the flooded width criteria. The improvements consist of parallel storm drains, relief drains, extensions of existing systems, and replacement of existing facilities. Existing Improvements Currently, the major storm drain system within Drainage Area 19 begins in South Street east of East Street and continues west along South Street and confluences with several laterals. The line continues to Harbor Boulevard, where it confluences with a major storm drain system at the intersection of South Street and Harbor Boulevard. The Harbor Boulevard storm drain line begins as a 24-inch reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) at a flow bifurcation structure on a 93-inch RCP at the intersection of Harbor Boulevard and Lincoln Boulevard. It continues south and crosses under a 42-inch RCP at Broadway. Excess flow from the lateral is then forced up an existing junction structure box to the 42-inch RCP in Broadway. The lateral continues south and increases to a 72-inch RCP before it confluences with the 78-inch mainline RCP in South Street and transitions to a 96-inch RCP in South Street. The storm drain continues west to Bellevue Drive, where it turns southerly and transitions to a 12-foot by 6-foot reinforced concrete box (RCB). The RCB then turns westerly and crosses under the I-5 (I-5) Freeway to Hampshire Drive, runs south in Walnut Street then west in Ball Road, and discharges into the ABC Channel. The estimated flow diverted from the 93-inch RCP in Lincoln Boulevard to the 24-inch lateral in Harbor Boulevard is estimated to be 24 cubic feet per second (cfs). This analysis assumes flows in excess of this amount in the lateral will be diverted to the 42-inch RCP in Broadway. The following street segments do not meet the City’s flooded width criteria: • Harbor Boulevard from Santa Ana Street to South Street; • South Street from Harbor Boulevard to Bellevue Drive; • Bellevue Drive from South Street to I-5; • Hampshire Avenue from Disneyland Drive to Walnut Street; • Walnut Street from Hampshire Avenue to Ball Road; and • Ball Road from Walnut Street to the ABC Channel. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.18 Stormwater-080912.docx 5.18-3 Storm Water Drainage Area 20 Drainage Area 20 drains approximately 815 acres. A large portion of the Drainage Area is on the eastern side of the I-5 Freeway and is generally bound by State College Road on the east, Ball Road on the south, and Vermont Avenue on the east and north. Flow from the east side of the I-5 Freeway is carried across the Freeway through two underground conduits along Ball Road. The flow is then augmented by the runoff from the portion of Drainage Area 20 west of the I-5 Freeway. The portion of the Drainage Area west of the I-5 Freeway is generally bound by the I-5 Freeway on the east, Disneyland Theme Park on the south, Union Pacific Railroad track on the west, and Ball Road on the north. Generally, water flows over land and then through pipes from east to west and discharges directly into the ABC Channel. The capacity of the existing facilities ranges from 17 percent to 100 percent of a 10-year storm, which means that at certain locations, the City’s flooded width criteria during a 10-, 25-, and 100-year storm events are not met. Improvements to the existing facilities are recommended in order to satisfy the City’s requirement of conveying the 10-year storm event and the flooded width criteria. The improvements consist of parallel storm drains, relief drains, extensions of existing systems, and replacement of existing facilities. Existing Improvements The major storm drain in Drainage Area 20 runs along Ball Road and discharges directly into the ABC Channel. The storm drain varies from a 36-inch RCP east of East Street to a double 7-foot by 7-foot RCB at the ABC Channel. Seven storm drain laterals feed into this storm drain within Drainage Area 20. The largest of these laterals is along Harbor Boulevard, which consists of a 90-inch RCP and turns westerly at Ball Road, continues parallel to the storm drain in Ball Road until it crosses the I-5 Freeway, and then confluences with the storm drain mainline. The City’s flooded width criteria are not satisfied along Ball Road, Harbor Boulevard, Turin Avenue, Avocado Street, and Norman Avenue. Drainage Area 22 Drainage Area 22 drains approximately 940 acres, and is generally bound by Lewis Street and the Union Pacific Railroad easement on the east, Katella Avenue on the south, Ninth Street and Walnut Street on the west, and Ball Road on the north. Generally, water flows over land and then through pipes from east to west and drains into the double 8-foot by 8.5-foot RCB storm drain in Katella Avenue. The capacity of the existing facilities ranges from 16 percent to 100 percent of a 10-year storm, which means that at certain locations, the City’s flooded width criteria during a 10-, 25- and 100-year storm event are not met. Improvements to the existing facilities are recommended in order to satisfy the City’s requirement of conveying the 10-year storm event and the flooded width criteria. The improvements consist of parallel storm drains, relief drains, extensions of existing systems, and replacement of existing facilities. Existing Improvements Presently, the major storm drain system in Drainage Area 22 consists of a 51-inch RCP that originates at Allec Street on Cerritos Avenue and runs west to Anaheim Boulevard, where it turns south in a 60-inch RCP line to Katella Avenue. The line crosses under the I-5 Freeway as a private California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) line for this portion of the run. The drain turns west and runs along the northerly side of Katella Avenue to Harbor Boulevard where ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.18 Stormwater-080912.docx 5.18-4 Storm Water two parallel 63-inch RCP and 72-inch RCP lines confluence with the main storm drain line on northerly side of Katella Avenue. The main line becomes a 12-foot by 7-foot RCP continuing to the west. Along the way, a 66-inch RCP cross-connector diverts some of the flow from the northerly line to a line running along the southerly side of Katella Avenue; two laterals from Disneyland (66-inch RCP and a 36-inch RCP) join the main northerly line; and another two parallel lines (48-inch RCP and 42-inch RCP) transition together just before confluencing with the main northerly line at Disneyland Drive. The main line continues past Disneyland Drive to the west in a 12.5-foot by 7.5-foot RCB to a point just east of Walnut Street, where it confluences with the southerly Katella Avenue storm drain line. The City’s flooded width criteria are not satisfied along Allec Street from Cerritos Avenue to approximately 2,100 feet upstream; Palais Road and Claudina Street; Guinida Lane; Winston Road; Palm Street; Anaheim Boulevard at the I-5 Freeway; Manchester Avenue between Harbor Boulevard and the I-5 Freeway; Katella Avenue between Harbor Boulevard and Ninth Street; and Walnut Street. East Garden Grove Wintersburg Channel Tributary Area Drainage Area 24 Drainage Area 24 drains approximately 170 acres, and is generally bound by Katella Avenue on the north, Harbor Boulevard on the east, Orangewood Avenue on the south, and West Street on the west. Generally, water flows over land to streets and then through pipes from the northeast to the southwest, and ties into the City of Garden Grove’s West Street storm drain at the Garden Grove City limits. All of the storm drains analyzed in Drainage Area 24 are adequately sized to carry the 10-year storm event. Also, the City’s flooded width criteria during a 10-, 25-, and 100-year storm event are satisfied. Existing Improvements Water in Drainage Area 24 is conveyed through three storm drains. One drain begins approximately 800 feet north of Convention Way in Harbor Boulevard, then turns west and follows Convention Way to West Street. This drain captures runoff from the northeastern and central region of Area 24. This drain varies in size from 24-inch to 66-inch RCP, and can convey a maximum of 100 cfs, which is equivalent to a 10-year storm event. The second storm drain begins approximately 800 feet north of Orangewood Avenue in Harbor Boulevard, then turns west and flows in Orangewood Avenue to West Street. This pipe varies from a 27-inch to 36-inch RCP, and can convey a maximum of 70 cfs, which is equivalent to a 10-year storm event. This drains captures runoff from the southern region of Drainage Area 24. A portion of this pipe in Orangewood Avenue east of Eugene Street is an 8-inch polyvinyl chloride (PVC) pipe that limits the flow into the City of Garden Grove’s storm drain. Flows greater than the pipe’s capacity are redirected to the surface and flow in the street. To the west of Eugene Street, the storm drain is outside the Anaheim City limits. The lateral storm drain in Eugene Street, which drains to the Orangewood storm drain, can convey a maximum of 18 cfs, which is equivalent to a 10-year storm event. The third storm drain begins approximately 600 feet south of Katella Avenue in West Street, and flows in West Street to the Anaheim city limits near Convention Way where it ties into the City of Garden Grove’s storm drain. This storm drain varies from a 36-inch to 45-inch RCP, and captures runoff from the northwestern region of Drainage Area 24. The storm drain can convey a maximum of 60 cfs, which is equivalent to a 10-year storm event. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.18 Stormwater-080912.docx 5.18-5 Storm Water The Convention Way storm drain confluences with the West Street storm drain just outside the Anaheim city limits. Approximately 700 feet south of this confluence, the Orangewood Avenue storm drain confluences with the West Street storm drain. This confluence occurs in the City of Garden Grove, where a 60-inch RCP conveys the flow south to the West Street Basin. All of the storm drains analyzed in Drainage Area 24 are adequately sized to carry the 10-year storm event. Also, the City’s flooded width criteria during a 10-, 25-, and 100-year storm event is satisfied. Currently, the storm drain in Hotel Way drains north to the Katella Avenue storm drain. It is proposed that the existing storm drain, which varies from 24-inch to 27-inch RCP, be replaced with a 30-inch RCP. Additionally, the slope of the storm drain should be reversed so that water flows south into the Convention Way storm drain to be consistent with previous master plans. This storm drain will tie into the existing 39-inch RCP in Convention Way. Drainage Area 25 Drainage Area 25 drains approximately 450 acres, and is generally bound by Katella Avenue on the north, the I-5 Freeway and Spinnaker Street on the east, Chapman Avenue on the south, and Harbor Boulevard on the west. Generally, water flows over land to streets and then through pipes from northeast to southwest to Chapman Avenue at the Anaheim city limits. The capacity of the existing facilities ranges from 50 percent to 100 percent of a 10-year storm. Also, the City’s flooded width criteria during a 10-, 25-, and 100-year storm event is not satisfied in certain locations. Improvements to the existing facilities are recommended in order to satisfy the City’s requirement of conveying the 10-year storm event the flooded width criteria. The improvements consist of parallel storm drains, extensions of existing systems, and replacement of existing facilities. Existing Improvements One major storm drain drains Area 25, with six laterals contributing to the flow along the way. This major storm drain begins in Haster Street, just north of Leatrice Lane. The drain runs south, then turns west in Orangewood Avenue, where it continues to Harbor Boulevard. The drain turns south again, and follows Harbor Boulevard to Chapman Avenue. At this point, the drain enters the City of Garden Grove, and turns east on Chapman Avenue, where it eventually outlets into the Oertley storm drain. This drain varies in size from 60-inch to 84-inch RCP, and has a maximum capacity of 280 cfs, which is 66 percent of a 10-year storm. The City’s flooded width criteria during a 25- and 100-year storm event is not satisfied on Harbor Boulevard or on Orangewood Avenue from Clementine Street to Harbor Boulevard. Drainage Area 26 Drainage Area 26 drains approximately 800 acres, and is generally bound by State College Boulevard on the east. The area extends about 2,200 feet north of Ball Road, and 2,150 feet south of Orangewood Avenue. The western boundary varies from 0 to 2,100 feet west of Lewis Street. Generally, water flows over land and then through pipes from north to south through two major storm drain systems, the Lewis Street storm drain, which ties into the County of Orange’s Spinnaker storm drain at Katella Avenue, and the Parallel Lewis Street storm drain system, which ties into the Spinnaker storm drain at Simmons Avenue. The Spinnaker storm drain flows into the East Garden Grove Wintersburg Channel. The capacity of the existing facilities ranges from 50 percent to 100 percent of a 10-year storm. Also, the City’s flooded width criteria during a 10-, 25-, and 100-year storm event are not satisfied in certain locations. Improvements to the existing facilities are recommended in order to satisfy the City’s ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.18 Stormwater-080912.docx 5.18-6 Storm Water requirement of conveying the 10-year storm event and the flooded width criteria. The improvements consist of parallel storm drains, relief drains, extensions of existing systems, and replacement of existing facilities. Existing Improvements The first major storm drain analyzed in Drainage Area 26 was the Lewis Street storm drain system. The drain begins on Clifpark Way and travels south to Ball Road, where it turns west and follows Ball Road to Lewis Street. At Lewis Street, the drain turns south and follows Lewis Street to Katella Avenue, where the drain ties into the Spinnaker storm drain which is owned by the County of Orange. The Lewis Street storm drain varies in size from a 33-inch to 78-inch RCP. The Spinnaker storm drain was analyzed from Katella Avenue south to Simmons Avenue, which is just south of the Anaheim city limits. The Spinnaker Storm Drain varies in size from 96-inch RCP to a 12-foot by 6-foot reinforced concrete box (RCB) and can convey a maximum of 400 cfs during a 10-year storm. The City’s flooded width criteria is not satisfied along Lewis Street from Cerritos Avenue to the I-5 Freeway. Flows unable to enter the storm drain will flood Lewis Street, turn on Anaheim Way, and flow to Orangewood Avenue. The Lewis Street storm drain north of Cerritos Avenue has a capacity of 110 cfs, which is 75 percent of the 10-year storm. The lateral on Cerritos Avenue that confluences with the Lewis Street storm drain is also inadequate to convey a 10-year storm. Its capacity is 110 cfs, which is 85 percent of the 10-year storm. The second major storm drain analyzed in Drainage Area 26 was the Parallel Lewis Street storm drain system. This drain begins 700 feet south of Katella in Lewis Street and flows south for 400 feet towards the freeway. At this point, the drain turns southeast and flows parallel to the I-5 Freeway in Anaheim Way. The drain runs parallel to the freeway until Orangewood Avenue, where the drain turns west and flows back to Lewis Street. The drain then turns south again and follows Lewis Street to Simmons Avenue, where the drain turns west and confluences with the Spinnaker storm drain. This storm drain system varies from 72-inch to 96-inch RCP. Currently, flow restricting RCBs are located at the intersection of Orangewood Avenue and Lewis Street, and along Simmons Avenue from Lewis Street to Spinnaker Street. With these flow restrictions in place, the system has a capacity of 225 cfs, which is 60 percent of a 10-year storm. There is also a lateral storm drain that confluences with this system near the freeway. It begins 1,200 feet west of Katella Avenue in Gene Autry Way, and travels west for 900 feet. The storm drain then turns southeast in Santa Cruz Street until it reaches Stanford Court. The drain then turns southwest and follows Stanford Court until it confluences with the major storm drain running parallel to the I-5 Freeway. With the flow restricting RCBs in place, this drain cannot convey the 10-year storm. 5.18.5 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE The following significance criterion is derived from the City of Anaheim’s Environmental Checklist. The Proposed Project would result in a significant impact related to storm water if it would: Threshold 5.18.1 Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.18 Stormwater-080912.docx 5.18-7 Storm Water 5.18.6 PROJECT IMPACT ANALYSIS Standard Requirements No standard requirements have been identified. Impact Analysis Threshold 5.18.1 Would the project require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? As discussed previously, the C-R District is located within Drainage Areas 19, 20, 22, 24, 25, and 26. The PR District is located entirely within Drainage Area 24. Implementation of the Proposed Project may worsen several existing deficiencies within the City’s storm drain system. Specific impacts are discussed below according to the drainage areas, resulting in significant impacts related to the storm drain facilities. However, the Property Owner/Developer for each future development project will be required to participate in the City’s Master Plan of Storm Drains and related Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program to assist in mitigating existing and future storm drainage system deficiencies. Additionally, implementation of proposed mitigation would ensure that impacts to regional flood control facilities are reduced to less than significant levels. Specific recommended improvements to the ABCCTA and the in the City of Anaheim are identified in detail below and shown on Exhibit 5.18-1, Proposed Improvements: Anaheim Barber City Channel Tributary Area, and Exhibit 5.18-2, Proposed Improvements: East Garden Grove Wintersburg Channel Tributary Area. Anaheim Barber City Channel Tributary Area Drainage Area 19 Several streets in Drainage Area 19 do not meet the City’s allowable flood width requirement. A few of the street segments currently do not have underground storm drain improvements. The Master Plan of Storm Drainage for Anaheim Barber City Channel Tributary Area (Anaheim 2009) recommends the installation of the following new storm drain improvements to convey the full flow of the 10-year storm along the following street segments: • 700 feet of 39-inch RCP in West Street from Santa Ana Street to Water Street; • 810 feet of 39-inch RCP in Janss Street from Water Street to South Street; • 270 feet of 39-inch RCP in Dickel Street from Hampshire Avenue to Clementine Street; and • 530 feet of 39-inch RCP in Hampshire Avenue from Harbor Boulevard to Dickel Street. The remaining street segments that do not meet the flood width requirement currently have underground storm drains but do not have sufficient flow capacity. Improvements to the storm drain system would be required Drainage Area 20 Several streets in Drainage Area 20 do not meet the City’s allowable flood width requirement. Several of these street segments currently have no underground storm drain improvements. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.18 Stormwater-080912.docx 5.18-8 Storm Water The Master Plan of Storm Drainage for Anaheim Barber City Channel Tributary Area (Anaheim 2009) recommends the installation of the following new storm drain improvements to convey the full flow of the 10-year storm along various street segments: • 450 feet of 30-inch RCP in Elder Street from Elm Street to Santa Ana Street; • 1,705 feet of 48-inch RCP in Santa Ana Street from Elder Street to join the existing storm drain at Haven Drive; • 480 feet of 42-inch RCP in South Street from Elder Street to join the existing storm drain at Barrett Street; • 490 feet of 36-inch RCP in Diana Avenue from the cul-de-sac to Verde Street; • 800 feet of 39-inch RCP in Verde Street from Diana Avenue to Tyrol Avenue; • 375 feet of 39-inch RCP in Tyrol Avenue from Verde Street to Wayside Street; • 290 feet of 39-inch RCP in Wayside Street from Tyrol Avenue to Vermont Avenue; • 1,275 feet of 39-inch RCP in Vermont Avenue from Wayside Street to join the existing storm drain at Avocado Street; • 585 feet of 42-inch RCP in Norman Avenue from McCloud Street to Avocado Street; • 435 feet of 42-inch RCP in Avocado Street from Norman Avenue to Turin Avenue; and • 850 feet of 51-inch RCP in Turin Avenue from Avocado Street to join the existing storm drain at the intersection of East Street and Turin Avenue. The remaining street segments that do not meet the flood width requirement currently have underground storm drains but do not have sufficient flow capacity. In order to meet the flood width criteria, it would be necessary to improve the storm drain capacity in Ball Road and Harbor Boulevard. Drainage Area 22 Several streets in Drainage Area 22 do not meet the City’s allowable flood width requirement. The Master Plan of Storm Drainage for Anaheim Barber City Channel Tributary Area (Anaheim 2009) recommends the installation of the following new storm drain improvements to convey the full flow of the 10-year storm along various street segments: • 1,425 feet of 51-inch RCP in Allec St. from Cerritos Ave. to the north • 590 feet of 39-inch RCP in Allec St. from the end of the 51-inch RCP to the north. • 925 feet of 42-inch RCP in Claudina from Palais Rd. to the northwest • 675 feet of 45-inch RCP in Palais Rd. from Anaheim Blvd. to Claudina • 250 feet of 39-inch RCP in Palm St. from the existing 36” RCP to Winston Rd. • 600 feet of 39-inch RCP in Winston Rd. from Palm St. to Claremont St. • 925 feet of 39-inch RCP in Guinida Lane from Palm St. to the east The pipe diameters for these storm drain lines are designed to carry the full, calculated 10-year flow. The remaining street segments that do not meet the flood width requirement currently have underground storm drains but do not have sufficient flow capacity. In order to meet the flood width criteria, it will be necessary to improve the storm drain capacity in Cerritos Avenue, Katella Avenue, Anaheim Boulevard, Manchester Avenue, Walnut Street, and Ninth Street. ---PAGE BREAK--- Proposed Improvements: Anaheim Barber City Channel Tributary Area Exhibit 5.18-1 Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (Rev 051110 JFG) Projects\Anaheim\J050\EX5.18-1_tributaryArea.pdf D:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\Ex_prposed_improvements_barberCity.mxd Source: CNC Engineering ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- 48" RCP 66" RCP 48" RCP 66" RCP 108" RCP 108" RCP 66" RCP 36" RCP 66" RCP 66" RCP 96" RCP 72" RCP 60" RCP 36" RCP 30" RCP 24" RCP 30" RCP 36" RCP 36" RCP 30" RCP 48" RCP 30" RCP 48" RCP 36" RCP 48" RCP 96" RCP 30" RCP 96" RCP 36" RCP 30" RCP HARBOR BLVD STATE COLLEGE BLVD WEST ST BALL RD CHAPMAN AVE EAST ST ANAHEIM BLVD KATELLA AVE SOUTH ST DISNEYLAND DR CERRITOS AVE ORANGEWOOD AVE HASTER ST LEWIS ST OLIVE ST MANCHESTER AVE VERMONT AVE FREEDMAN WAY CLEMENTINE ST CLEMENTINE ST SOUTH ST KATELLA AVE HARBOR BLVD BALL RD WEST ST WEST ST BALL RD HASTER ST VERMONT AVE LEGEND Replace Existing Storm Drain Proposed Storm Drain Existing Storm Drain Anaheim City Limits Drainage Basin Area 24 Area 25 Area 26 Figure 2 Proposed Improvements City of Anaheim Master Plan of Storm Drainage for East Garden Grove Wintersburg Area \\galt\gis2\anaheim\plots\11x17_ProposedPipes_v3.mxd 12/21/2005 0 600 1,200 Feet 1 inch equals 1200 feet³ Proposed Improvements: East Garden Grove Wintersburg Channel Tributary Area Exhibit 5.18-2 Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (Rev 051110 WAD) R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\Graphics\EIR\Ex5.18-2_Proposed_Improvements.pdf D:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\Graphics\Ex_Proposed_Improvemtns.ai Source: City of Anaheim, 2006 ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.18 Stormwater-080912.docx 5.18-9 Storm Water In order to minimize the size of the storm drain improvements in Katella Avenue, it is also recommended that the City consider constructing a retarding basin within one or both of the following sites: • The northern portion of the parking lot on the southern side of Katella Avenue between South Harbor Boulevard and South Haster Street. • The existing commercial lot at the northeastern corner of the intersection of East Katella Avenue and South Haster Street. East Garden Grove Wintersburg Channel Tributary Area Drainage Area 24 Currently, the storm drain in Hotel Way drains north to the Katella Avenue storm drain. It is recommended that the existing storm drain, which varies from 24-inch to 27-inch RCP, be replaced with a 30-inch RCP. Also, the slope of the storm drain should be reversed so that water flows south into the Convention Way storm drain to be consistent with previous master plans. This storm drain will tie into the existing 39-inch RCP in Convention Way. Drainage Area 25 In order to satisfy the City’s requirement of conveying the 10-year storm event in the storm drains, and also to satisfy the flooded width criteria, the following improvements are recommended and shown in Exhibit 5.18-2. A parallel 96-inch RCP is recommended in Harbor Boulevard from Chapman Avenue to Orangewood Avenue. This parallel storm drain along with the existing major storm drain will have the capacity to convey the 10-year storm. Once these drains enter the City of Garden Grove at Chapman Avenue, a single 96-inch RCP conveys the flow to the Oertley storm drain. This drain has a maximum capacity of 280 cfs, which is 66 percent of the 10-year storm. Flows greater than the pipe’s capacity will be redirected to the surface to flow in the street. To satisfy the City’s flooded width criteria, the storm drain in Haster Street, just north of Leatrice Lane, must be extended 1,000 feet north. This extension is recommended to be a 36-inch RCP for the first 400 feet, and a 30-inch RCP for the remaining 600 feet. At the point where these 2 drains meet, another 36-inch RCP is recommended to be extended 1,300 feet east in the future Gene Autry Way. Two laterals must also be improved and extended. The lateral in Orangewood Avenue from Haster Street to Mountain View Avenue varies from 30-inch to 39-inch RCP. The 39-inch RCP from Haster Street to 200 feet east of Haster Street is recommended to be replaced with a 48-inch RCP. This will allow the storm drain to convey the 10-year storm. In order to satisfy the City’s flooded width criteria, this drain must also be extended 600 feet east to Jetty Drive with a 24-inch RCP. The lateral in Wilken Way from Harbor Boulevard to Oertley Drive is recommended to be replaced with a 48-inch RCP in order to convey the 10-year storm event. Also, this storm drain must be extended 500 feet north in Oertley Drive to Bluebell Avenue, and 800 feet south in Oertley Drive to Sirius Avenue. These extensions are recommended to be 30-inch RCPs in order to satisfy the City’s flooded width criteria. Drainage Area 26 In order to satisfy the City’s requirement of conveying the 10-year storm event in the storm drains, and also to satisfy the flooded width criteria, the following improvements are recommended and shown in Exhibit 5.18-2. Beginning with the Lewis Street storm drain system, ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.18 Stormwater-080912.docx 5.18-10 Storm Water a parallel 48-inch RCP is recommended in Lewis Street from Cerritos Avenue north to Ball Road, then east 1,250 feet in Ball Road. This parallel drain along with the existing storm drain will have the capacity to convey the 10-year storm. In order to satisfy the City’s flooded width criteria, this storm drain must also be extended 550 feet north in McCloud Street, 650 feet east in Clifpark Way, and 700 feet north on Verde Street. All extensions are recommended to be 30-inch RCPs. Additionally, it is recommended that the lateral storm drain in Cerritos Avenue be replaced with a 60-inch RCP in order to adequately convey the 10-year storm. To prevent ponding of the 25- and 100-year storms on Cerritos Avenue near the railroad, a 48-inch RCP relief drain is recommended to convey street flow under the railroad. The flow will resurface to the street of the railroad through equalizers. It is recommended that the existing 30-inch RCP in Katella Avenue just west of Lewis Street will be replaced with a 36-inch RCP. This will prevent ponding of the 25- and 100-year storms on Katella Avenue near the railroad by conveying street flow under the railroad and resurfacing the flow through equalizers. Several improvements are also recommended for the Parallel Lewis Street storm drain system. In order to convey the 10-year storm, the flow-restricting RCBs on Simmons Avenue and at the intersection of Orangewood Avenue and Lewis Street must be removed and replaced with 96-inch RCPs once the East Garden Grove Wintersburg Channel has been improved. Also, it is recommended that a parallel 72-inch RCP be installed in Lewis Street from Howell Avenue south to Katella Avenue to convey the 10-year storm and to convey excess street flow on Lewis Street that does not meet the City’s flooded width criteria. At Katella Avenue, the parallel 72-inch RCP is recommended to be increased to a 108-inch RCP to convey the excess 100-year flow to prevent ponding at the Katella Avenue/Lewis Street intersection. This is necessary because the City plans to realign Lewis Street from Gene Autry Way to Katella Avenue, which will create a sump at the intersection. The 108-inch RCP will continue south towards the freeway, and connect with the existing 72-inch RCP. A parallel 66-inch RCP will be installed to handle the excess flow. This parallel system will continue south for approximately 500 feet. At this point, the existing 72-inch RCP turns into an 84-inch RCP and jogs to the east following the bridge abutments. It is recommended to abandon this portion of the existing 84-inch storm drain and combine the parallel system into a 108-inch RCP conveying the flow approximately 400 feet southeast in Anaheim Way until it reaches the existing 84-inch RCP. Once the 108-inch RCP reaches the existing 84-inch RCP, a parallel 66-inch RCP is recommended to be installed. This 66-inch pipe would run parallel to the existing pipe to the City Limits. At the City Limits, flow will be resurfaced onto Lewis Street through equalizers. To prevent ponding of the 25- and 100-year flows on Lewis Street near the railroad, a 66-inch RCP relief drain is recommended to convey street flow under the railroad. The flow will resurface to the street of the railroad through equalizers. In order to satisfy the City’s flooded width criteria, the following extensions are recommended: A 36-inch RCP is recommended in Orangewood Avenue, from Anaheim Way 1,000 feet east to State College Boulevard. The drain will then turn north, and follow State College Boulevard for 600 feet. The Gene Autry Way storm drain is recommended to be extended 1,200 feet east to State College Boulevard, then turn and extend 700 feet north. This entire extension should be 36-inch RCP. A 48-inch RCP is recommended in Howell Avenue. At the western end of Howell Avenue, the 48-inch RCP will connect to the parallel 72-inch RCP that is recommended along Lewis Street. At the eastern end of Howell Avenue, a 36-inch RCP is recommended to extend 900 feet northeast to Babbitt Avenue. The City is also proposing a grade separation at the railroad and State College Boulevard north of Katella Avenue. A portion of this area currently drains to Area 26. Once the grade separation is constructed, a sump will be created in State College Boulevard and a pump station will be constructed. It is recommended that this pump station drain to the drainage facility that ties into the Santa Ana River and not drain to the storm drains ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.18 Stormwater-080912.docx 5.18-11 Storm Water in Area 26. This is because many of the storm drains in Drainage Area 26 are undersized, and diverting additional area to Drainage Area 26 is not recommended. The drainage boundary for this area was set at the proposed right-of-way lines for State College Boulevard and Wright Circle as outlined in the Platinum Triangle Implementation Plan (November 2005). Finally, it is recommended that the current storm drain in Katella Avenue, from 500 feet west of State College Boulevard to Lewis Street, be connected to the parallel 72-inch RCP that is recommended along Lewis Street. Currently, this drain confluences with the Spinnaker storm drain at the intersection of Katella Avenue and Lewis Street. Impact Summary: Implementation of the Proposed Project may worsen several existing deficiencies within the City’s storm drain system. Specific impacts are discussed above according to the drainage areas, resulting in significant impacts related to the storm drain facilities. However, the property owner/developer for each future development project will be required to participate in the City’s Master Plan of Storm Drains and related Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program to assist in mitigating existing and future storm drainage system deficiencies. Additionally, implementation of the proposed mitigation will ensure that impacts to regional flood control facilities are reduced to less than significant levels. 5.18.7 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS Future growth under the Proposed Project will require the implementation of new or modified storm water drainage facilities that would connect to existing utility systems provided by the City of Anaheim and other agencies. All new growth within the ARSP area would occur in compliance with mitigation measures provided in the EIR; however, the City has no control over the growth and storm water contributions of areas outside of its jurisdiction. Any addition of storm water to the regional storm water system may be cumulatively considerable when combined with potential storm water flow increases from surrounding jurisdictions. Therefore, mitigation of these impacts would be outside of the City’s jurisdiction, and the potential cumulative impact would be significant and unavoidable. 5.18.8 MITIGATION MEASURES Previously Approved Measures MEIR 313 presented mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts associated with the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan project to less than significant levels. The following measures from MEIR 313 shall be incorporated into the Mitigation Program for this EIR: MM 5.18-1 Prior to approval of a final subdivision map, or issuance of a grading or building permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall participate in the City’s Master Plan of Storm Drains and related Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program to assist in mitigating existing and future storm drainage system deficiencies as follows: The property owner/developer shall submit a report for review and approval by the City Engineer to assist with determining the following: a. If the specific development/redevelopment does not increase or redirect current or historic storm water quantities/flows, then the property ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.18 Stormwater-080912.docx 5.18-12 Storm Water owner/developer’s responsibility shall be limited to participation in the Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program to provide storm drainage facilities in 10- and 25-year storm frequencies and to protect properties/structures for a 100-year storm frequency. b. If the specific development/redevelopment increases or redirects the current or historic storm water quantity/flow, then the property owner/developer shall be required to guarantee mitigation to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and City Attorney’s office of the impact prior to approval of a final subdivision map or issuance of a grading or building permit, whichever occurs first, pursuant to the improvements identified in the Master Plan of Drainage for the South Central Area. The property owner/developer shall be required to install the storm drainage facilities as recommended by the Master Plan of Drainage for the South Central Area to provide storm drainage facilities for 10- and 25-year storm frequencies and to protect properties/structures for a 100-year storm frequency prior to acceptance for maintenance of public improvements by the City or final building and zoning inspection for the building/structure, whichever occurs first. Additionally, the property owner/developer shall participate in the Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program as determined by the City Engineer which could include fees, credits, reimbursements, or a combination thereof. As part of guaranteeing the mitigation of impacts on the storm drainage system, a storm drainage system improvement phasing plan for the project shall be submitted by the property owner/developer to the City Engineer for review and approval and shall contain, at a minimum, a layout of the complete system; all facility sizes, including support calculations; construction phasing; and, construction estimates. (MEIR 313 MM 3.9.8-1, Public Services and Utilities) EIR 330 presented mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts associated with the Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code project to less than significant levels. The following measures from EIR 330 shall be incorporated into the Mitigation Program for this EIR. Any modifications to the original measures are shown as strikethrough for deleted text and bold for new, inserted text: MM 5.18-2 Ongoing, the City shall work with the Orange County Flood Control District (OCFCD) to ensure that flood control facilities are well maintained and capable of accommodating, at a minimum, future 25-year storm flows for City-owned and maintained facilities, and 100-year storm flows for County facilities. Where improvements to local drainage facilities have the potential to increase discharges to County facilities, the City shall analyze potential impacts to County facilities in consultation with the Manager, County of Orange Flood Control Division. Encroachment Permits shall be obtained from the County’s Public Property Permits Section for any activity performed within OCFCD’s right of way. (EIR 330 MM 5.7-1, Hydrology and Water Quality) MM 5.18-3 Prior to the issuance of building permits, Prior to final plan approval the City shall require that building plans indicate that new developments will minimize stormwater and urban runoff into drainage facilities by incorporating design features such as detention basins, on-site water features, and other strategies. (EIR 330 MM 5.7-2, Hydrology and Water Quality) ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.18 Stormwater-080912.docx 5.18-13 Storm Water Additional Mitigation Measures No additional mitigation measures have been identified. 5.18.9 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION With implementation of the mitigation program described above, the Proposed Project would result in less than significant impacts related to storm water. However, the Proposed Project’s cumulative contribution to the regional storm water collection system would be significant and unavoidable because the City would have no control over the amount of storm water added to the system from other jurisdictions. 5.18.10 REFERENCES Anaheim, City of. 2009 (June). Master Plan of Storm Drainage for Anaheim Barber City Channel Tributary Area. Anaheim, CA: the City. 2006 (January). Master Plan of Storm Drainage for East Garden Grove Wintersburg Channel Tributary Area. Anaheim, CA: the City. 2004a (May). General Plan for the City of Anaheim (City Council Resolution No. 2004- 94). Anaheim, CA: the City. 2004b (May). Final Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update EIR No. 330 (Prepared by The Planning Center). Anaheim, CA: the City. 1994 (August). The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Draft EIR No. 313 with Addendum. Anaheim, City of: Anaheim, CA. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.18 Stormwater-080912.docx 5.18-14 Storm Water This page intentionally left blank ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.19 Public Utilities-082312.docx 5.19-1 Other Public Utilities 5.19 OTHER UTILITIES 5.19.1 SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION MEIR 313 included data from the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan EIR, including the natural gas demand, solid waste generation, and telephone and television/cable service facilities in the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan area. Impacts associated with telephone service were determined to be less than significant. Implementation of mitigation measures served to reduce all impacts associated with natural gas, solid waste, and television/cable service to a less than significant level. 5.19.2 NATURAL GAS Plans, Policies, and Regulatory Conditions Related Planning Programs City of Anaheim General Plan, Public Services and Facilities Element The Public Services and Facilities Element of the City of Anaheim General Plan addresses private utilities, including natural gas. Applicable goals and policies from the Public Services and Facilities Element that are related to natural gas and that are applicable to the Proposed Project are provided in Table 5.9-2 in Section 5.9, Land Use, with a project consistency analysis. Regulatory Setting There are no federal, State, or local regulations related to natural gas that are applicable to the Proposed Project. Methodology The following information is summarized from the City of Anaheim General Plan and the General Plan EIR No. 330. In addition, the natural gas provider was contacted to determine if the Proposed Project would significantly impact the natural gas provider’s abilities to provide natural gas service. Existing Conditions The Southern California Gas Company (SCGC) is the natural gas provider for the City of Anaheim and has facilities throughout the City and near the ARSP area (Cesares 2009). The availability of natural gas service is based upon present conditions of gas supply and regulatory policies. As a public utility, the SCGC is under the jurisdiction of the California Public Utilities Commission and Federal regulatory agencies (City of Anaheim 2004b). The ARSP area is located within an urban area where natural gas service and facilities currently exist. Thresholds of Significance The following significance criterion is derived from the City of Anaheim Environmental Checklist. The Proposed Project would result in a significant impact related to natural gas services if it would: Threshold 5.19.1 Result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations related to natural gas. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.19 Public Utilities-082312.docx 5.19-2 Other Public Utilities Project Impact Analysis Standard Requirements No standard requirements have been identified. Impact Analysis Threshold 5.19.1 Would the project result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations related to natural gas? SCGC has indicated that natural gas service to the Proposed Project can be provided from an existing gas main that is accessible from various locations in the ARSP area (Cesares 2009). The service would be provided in accordance with the SCGC’s policies and extension rules on file with the California Public Utilities Commission. Therefore, the Proposed Project can be served by existing facilities, and no new systems or substantial alterations are required for the Proposed Project. Impact Summary: No impact would occur related to provision of natural gas service to future projects within the ARSP area. This conclusion is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313. Cumulative Impacts Development in the geographic area surrounding the ARSP area would result in continued natural gas use. The area surrounding the ARSP area is currently served by existing infrastructure that the Proposed Project would also use. SCGC has indicated its ability to serve the Proposed Project. Furthermore, similar to the Proposed Project, all future projects would be subject to Title 24 requirements and would be evaluated on a case-by-case basis to determine the need for specific distribution infrastructure improvements. As SCGC has identified adequate capacity and additional development within its service area would comply with Title 24, the Proposed Project’s contribution to cumulative natural gas impacts would be considered less than significant. Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures have been identified. Level of Significance After Mitigation With implementation of the mitigation program described above, no significant impacts are associated with natural gas service. 5.19.3 SOLID WASTE Plans, Policies, and Regulatory Conditions Related Planning Programs City of Anaheim General Plan, Public Services and Facilities Element The Public Services and Facilities Element of the City of Anaheim General Plan addresses solid waste services. Applicable goals and policies from the Public Services and Facilities Element that are related to solid waste and that are applicable to the Proposed Project are provided in Table 5.9-2 in Section 5.9, Land Use, with a project consistency analysis. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.19 Public Utilities-082312.docx 5.19-3 Other Public Utilities Regulatory Setting California Integrated Waste Management Act (AB 939) The California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939) requires all counties to prepare an Integrated Waste Management Plan. The County of Orange has an adopted plan that includes the following mandated components: a Source Reduction and Recycling Element; a Household Hazardous Waste Element; a countywide Siting Element that identifies 15 years of available disposal capacity; and a statement of significant solid waste disposal problems facing the jurisdiction. The Source Reduction and Recycling Element (SRRE) of the Integrated Waste Management Plan is required by AB 939 to identify how each jurisdiction would meet the mandatory State waste diversion goals of 25 percent by the year 1995 and 50 percent by the year 2000. The purpose of AB 939 was to “reduce, recycle, and re-use solid waste generated in the state to the maximum extent feasible”. Noncompliance with the goals and timelines set forth within AB 939 can be severe, as the bill imposes fines of up to $10,000 per day on jurisdictions (cities and counties) not meeting these recycling and planning goals. The term “integrated waste management” refers to the use of a variety of waste management practices to safely and effectively handle the municipal solid waste stream with the lowest adverse impact on human health and the environment. AB 939 has established a waste management hierarchy as follows: • Source Reduction; • Recycling; • Composting; • Transformation; and • Disposal. Methodology Information concerning solid waste services is based on correspondence from OC Waste & Recycling1 (Arnau 2009) and the Public Services and Facilities Element of the General Plan (City of Anaheim 2004a). Existing Conditions The City of Anaheim maintains an exclusive contract with Republic Waste Services of Southern California LLC (Anaheim Disposal) to provide waste hauling services. OC Waste & Recycling provides the landfill resource for Orange County. Solid waste generated from the Proposed Project would be disposed of at the Olinda Alpha Landfill which is part of the Orange County landfill system operated by OC Waste & Recycling. The landfill is located at 1942 North Valencia Avenue in the City of Brea and is permitted to accept up to 8,000 tons of solid waste per day. The landfill currently accepts 7,000 tons per day on average, with a remaining airspace capacity estimated at 27.3 million cubic yards as of June 30, 2009. The Olinda Alpha Landfill is approximately 565 acres with about 420 acres permitted for refuse disposal. Opened in 1960, the landfill is scheduled to close in approximately December 2021 and is proposed to be used as a County regional park after landfill closure. 1 OC Waste & Recycling is formerly known as the Orange County Integrated Waste Management Department. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.19 Public Utilities-082312.docx 5.19-4 Other Public Utilities Once the Olinda Alpha Landfill is closed, solid waste from the Proposed Project would be directed to the Frank R. Bowerman Landfill (FRB Landfill). The FRB Landfill is located at 11002 Bee Canyon Access Road in Irvine and is approximately 725 acres, of which 341 acres are permitted for disposal. The FRB Landfill can accept 11,500 tons per day with an estimated remaining air space capacity of 200.8 million cubic yards as of June 30, 2009 (Arnau 2010). The closure date for the FRB Landfill is anticipated in the year 2053. The City of Anaheim maintains a comprehensive recycling program with the goal of reducing solid waste by 50 percent (City of Anaheim 2004a). Anaheim Disposal provides all recyclable residential and commercial waste recovery to a Material Recovery Facility (MRF) where recyclable materials are sorted from construction debris. Waste from commercial and hotel facilities is processed; for large facilities, sites are encouraged to purchase recycled paper and have on-site recycling facilities (Mercado 2009). Thresholds of Significance The following significance criteria is derived from the City of Anaheim Environmental Checklist. The Proposed Project would result in a significant impact related to natural gas services if it would: Threshold 5.19.2 Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs? Threshold 5.19.3 Comply with Federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. Project Impact Analysis Standard Requirements No standard requirements have been identified. Impact Analysis Threshold 5.19.2 Would the project be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs? Threshold 5.19.3 Would the project comply with Federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Based on solid waste generation rates provided by CalRecycle,2 the Proposed Project would generate an estimated 109,514 pounds of solid waste per day or approximately 19,986 tons of solid waste annually (refer to Table 5.19-1). 2 CalRecycle was formerly known as the California Integrated Waste Management Board. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.19 Public Utilities-082312.docx 5.19-5 Other Public Utilities TABLE 5.19-1 SOLID WASTE GENERATION CALCULATION District Increase from Existing Conditions Estimated Solid Waste Generation Rates by Land Use Type Calculation C-R District 20,813 hotel rooms 4 lbs/room/day 83,252 lbs/day PR District 900 hotel rooms 4 lbs/room/day 3,600 lbs/day 726,359 square feet of convention center uses, commercial development, and hotel meeting/ballroom space (commercial) 3.12 lbs/100 sf/day 22,662 lbs/day TOTAL 109,514 lbs/solid waste per day lbs/day: pounds per day; sf: square foot/feet Source: CalRecycle 2009 No specific solid waste generation factor is available for the category of Anaheim Convention Center uses; therefore, a conservative commercial/retail solid waste generation factor was used (Arnau 2009). The Proposed Project would add approximately 19,986 tons of solid waste annually to existing solid waste facilities and capacity, which would impact the landfill system. However, the Proposed Project could be accommodated within the permitted capacity of the County’s landfill capacity (Arnau 2009). In addition, once the Alpha Olinda Landfill closes in 2021, capacity would exist for the Proposed Project in the FBR Landfill (Arnau 2009). No significant impacts would occur, and no mitigation is required; however, implementation of the proposed mitigation would further ensure that adequate solid waste services are provided and that solid waste generation would be minimized. Impact Summary: No significant impact would occur related to provision of solid waste service to future projects within the ARSP area; however, implementation of the proposed mitigation would further ensure that adequate solid waste services are provided and that solid waste generation would be minimized. This conclusion is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313. Cumulative Impacts The Proposed Project would not result in significant impacts to solid waste landfill capacity on a cumulative basis since Orange County currently has more than 15 years of available, countywide, solid waste disposal capacity. This threshold of significance is based on AB 939, which requires that all cities and counties in the State of California ensure that their jurisdiction can provide at least 15 years of available solid waste disposal capacity for the residents and businesses (or have another city or county provide it for them). The Proposed Project would not create demands for solid waste services that exceed the capabilities of the County’s waste management system. Consequently, the Proposed Project would not have a significant cumulative contribution to solid waste impacts. Therefore, cumulative impacts associated with solid waste in Orange County would be considered less than significant. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.19 Public Utilities-082312.docx 5.19-6 Other Public Utilities Mitigation Measures Previously Approved Measures MEIR 313 presents mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts associated with the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan project to less than significant levels. The following measures from MEIR 313 shall be incorporated into the Mitigation Program for this EIR. Any modifications to the original measures are shown as strikethrough for deleted text and bold for new, inserted text: MM 5.19-1 Prior to issuance of each building permit; to be implemented prior to final building and zoning Inspection, the property owner/developer shall submit project plans to the Maintenance Department Public Works Department for review and approval to ensure that the plans comply with AB 939, the Solid Waste Reduction Act of 1989, as administered by the City of Anaheim and the County of Orange and City of Anaheim Integrated Waste Management Plans. Prior to final building and zoning inspection, implementation of said plan shall commence and shall remain in full effect. Waste management mitigation measures that shall be taken to reduce solid waste generation include, but are not limited to: a. Detailing the location and design of on-site recycling facilities. b. Providing on-site recycling receptacles to encourage recycling. c. Complying with all Federal, State and City regulation for hazardous material disposal. d. Participating in the City of Anaheim’s “Recycle Anaheim” program or other substitute program as may be developed by the City. In order to meet the requirements of the Solid Waste Reduction Act of 1989 (AB 939), the property owner/developer shall implement numerous solid waste reduction programs, as required by the Maintenance Department Public Works Department, including, but not limited to: a. Facilitating paper recycling by providing chutes or convenient locations for sorting and recycling bins. b. Facilitating cardboard recycling (especially in retail areas) by providing adequate space and centralized locations for collection and bailing storing. c. Facilitating glass recycling (especially from restaurants) by providing adequate space for sorting and storing. d. Providing trash compactors for non-recyclable materials whenever feasible to reduce the total volume of solid waste and the number of trips required for collection. e. Prohibiting curbside pick-up. (MEIR 313 MM 3.9.3-1, Public Services and Utilities) MM 5.19-2 Ongoing during project operation, the following practices shall be implemented, as feasible, by the property owner/developer: a. Usage of recycled paper products for stationary, letterhead, and packaging. b. Recovery of materials such as aluminum and cardboard. c. Collection of office paper for recycling. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.19 Public Utilities-082312.docx 5.19-7 Other Public Utilities d. Collection of (foam) cups for recycling. e. Collection of glass, plastics, kitchen grease, laser printer toner cartridges, oil, batteries, and scrap metal for recycling or recovery. (MEIR 313 MM 3.9.3-2, Public Services and Utilities) Ordinance 5454 City Ordinance 5454 presented a list of conditions of approval that are applicable to all projects within the ARSP area. The following conditions shall be incorporated into the Mitigation Program for this EIR. Any modifications to the original conditions are shown as strikethrough for deleted text and bold for new, inserted text. (Note that the specific condition references from Ordinance 5454 are listed in parentheses). MM 5.19-3 Prior to issuance of building permits, plans shall show that trash storage areas shall be provided and maintained in a location acceptable to the City of Anaheim Department of Public Works, Operations Division. Maintenance and On an ongoing basis, trash storage areas shall be provided and maintained in accordance with approved plans on file with said Department. Such information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. (Ord 5454, Condition 33) Additional Mitigation Measures MM 5.19-4 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the Property Owner/Developer shall demonstrate that the plans include provisions for the installation of trash and recycle receptacles near all benches and near high traffic areas such as plazas, transit stops and retail and dining establishments. MM 5.19-5 Prior to issuance of each grading and building permit, the Property Owner/Developer shall submit to the Planning Director or Planning Services Manager for approval a Construction Waste Management Plan that, at a minimum, specifies that at least 75 percent of non-hazardous construction and demolition debris shall be recycled or salvaged and identifies the materials to be diverted from disposal and whether the materials will be sorted on site or co-mingled. Level of Significance After Mitigation No impact related to the Proposed Project’s contribution to the solid waste stream would occur. 5.19.4 TELEPHONE Plans, Policies, and Regulatory Conditions Related Planning Programs City of Anaheim General Plan, Public Services and Facilities Element The Public Services and Facilities Element of the City of Anaheim General Plan addresses telephone service and facilities. Applicable goals and policies from the Public Services and Facilities Element that are related to telephone service and facilities and that are applicable to the Proposed Project are provided in Table 5.9-2 in Section 5.9, Land Use, with a project consistency analysis. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.19 Public Utilities-082312.docx 5.19-8 Other Public Utilities Regulatory Setting There are no federal, State, or local regulations related to telephone service that are applicable to the Proposed Project. Methodology The following information is summarized from the City of Anaheim General Plan and from correspondence with telephone provider AT&T who was contacted to determine if the Proposed Project would significantly impact the telephone provider’s abilities to provide telephone service. Existing Conditions Telephone Services in the vicinity of the Proposed Project are provided by AT&T. Existing facilities are located in the developed areas surrounding the ARSP area. Thresholds of Significance The following significance criterion is derived from the City of Anaheim Environmental Checklist. The Proposed Project would result in a significant impact related to telephone services if it would: Threshold 5.19.4 Result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations related to telephone service. Project Impact Analysis Standard Requirements No standard requirements have been identified for telephone services. Impact Analysis Threshold 5.19.4: Would the project result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations related to telephone service? AT&T would serve the Proposed Project. AT&T can provide telephone, digital cable, and high-speed internet services. The infrastructure capacity for telephone service typically expands with new development. Facilities needed to connect the Proposed Project to the existing telephone system may include new conduit, fiber and copper facilities (Whittaker 2009). These improvements would be implemented in accordance with applicable State and local regulations. The Proposed Project’s impact related to additional demand for telephone service is less than significant. Mitigation is not required. Impact Summary: No impact would occur related to provision of telephone service to future projects within the ARSP area. This conclusion is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313. Cumulative Impacts The geographic area for the cumulative analysis of impacts to telephone service provision is the service territory of AT&T. The area surrounding the ARSP area is currently served by existing infrastructure that the Proposed Project would also use, and AT&T would serve the Proposed Project. The Proposed Project would not result in a significant contribution to cumulative impacts; mitigation measures are not required. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.19 Public Utilities-082312.docx 5.19-9 Other Public Utilities Mitigation Measures Previously Approved Measures No previously approved measures have been identified. Additional Mitigation Measures No additional mitigation measures have been identified. Level of Significance After Mitigation No impact to telephone service would occur. 5.19.5 TELEVISION/CABLE SERVICE Plans, Policies, and Regulatory Conditions Related Planning Programs City of Anaheim General Plan, Public Services and Facilities Element The Public Services and Facilities Element of the City of Anaheim General Plan addresses television/cable services. Applicable goals and policies from the Public Services and Facilities Element that are related to television/cable services and that are applicable to the Proposed Project are provided in Table 5.9-2 in Section 5.9, Land Use, with a project consistency analysis. Regulatory Setting There are no federal, State, or local regulations related to television/cable services that are applicable to the Proposed Project. Methodology The following information is summarized from the City of Anaheim General Plan and correspondence with television/cable service provider Time Warner Cable who was contacted to determine if the Proposed Project would significantly impact the television cable service provider’s abilities to provide services. Existing Conditions Time Warner Cable currently provides both fiber and coaxial feeds in the ARSP area for a variety of services including but not limited to standard and high definition cable television service, PRI T1 telephony circuit(s), cable television service, high speed internet, and digital telephone service to the ARSP area. Thresholds of Significance The following significance criterion is from the City of Anaheim Environmental Checklist. The Proposed Project would result in a significant impact related to television/cable television services if it would: ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.19 Public Utilities-082312.docx 5.19-10 Other Public Utilities Threshold 19.5 Result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations related to television service/reception? Project Impact Analysis Standard Requirements No standard requirements have been identified for television/cable television services. Impact Analysis Threshold 19.5 Would the project result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations related to television service/reception? Based on correspondence with Time Warner Cable (Dunning 2009), the ARSP area can be served by Time Warner Cable with the existing cable resources available to the site. Impact Summary: No impact would occur related to provision of television and cable service to future projects within the ARSP area. This conclusion is consistent with that provided in MEIR 313. Cumulative Impacts The geographic area for the cumulative impact analysis of television/cable service provision is the service territory of Time Warner Cable. The area surrounding the ARSP area is currently served by existing infrastructure that the Proposed Project would also use. Time Warner Cable has indicated its ability to serve the Proposed Project. The Proposed Project would not result in a significant contribution to cumulative impacts. Although no significant cumulative impacts would occur, adherence to the mitigation measure below would further ensure that no negative impacts would occur. Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures have been identified for television/cable television services. Level of Significance After Mitigation No impacts to television/cable television services would occur. 5.19.6 REFERENCES Anaheim, City of. 2004a (May). General Plan for the City of Anaheim (City Council Resolution No. 2004-94). Anaheim, CA: the City. 2004b (May). Final Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update EIR No. 330 (Prepared by The Planning Center). Anaheim, CA: the City. 1994 (August). The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Draft EIR No. 313 with Addendum. Anaheim, City of: Anaheim, CA. Arnau, J. 2010 (April 16). Personal communication. Telephone call by/between J. Arnau (Orange County Integrated Waste Management Department) and A. Armanino (BonTerra Consulting). ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.19 Public Utilities-082312.docx 5.19-11 Other Public Utilities 2009 (October 22) Personal communication. Telephone call by/between J. Arnau (Orange County Integrated Waste Management Department) and A. Armanino (BonTerra Consulting). California Assembly. 1989. Assembly Bill No. 939: Integrated Waste Management Act (Sher). Sacramento, CA: the State. California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). 2009. (December 30, last updated). Estimated Soled Waste Generation Rates for Service Establishments. Sacramento, CA: CalRecycle. http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/wastechar/wastegenrates/ Service/htm. Cesares E. 2009 (November Personal communication. Phone conversation between E. Cesares (Southern California Gas Company) and A. Armanino (BonTerra Consulting) entitled Anaheim Resort Specific Plan. Dunning, J. 2009 (November 4) Personal communication. Email between J. Dunning (Time Warner Cable) and A. Armanino (BonTerra Consulting) entitled Anaheim Resort Specific Plan – EIR. Mercado, L. 2009 (November 9) Personal communication. Phone conversation between J. Dunning (City of Anaheim Public Works Department) and A. Armanino (BonTerra Consulting). Whittaker, R. 2009 (November 23). Email communication between R. Whittaker (AT&T) and A. Armanino (BonTerra Consulting). ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\5.19 Public Utilities-082312.docx 5.19-12 Other Public Utilities This page intentionally left blank ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\6.0 Alternatives-082312.docx 6-1 Alternatives to the Proposed Project SECTION 6.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT 6.1 INTRODUCTION Section 15126.6 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines addresses the discussion of alternatives in an EIR. Key provisions of the CEQA Guidelines are identified throughout this section to explain the basis for the alternatives evaluation in this EIR. Section 15126.6(a) states: An EIR shall describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project, which would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives. An EIR need not consider every conceivable alternative to a project. Rather, it must consider a reasonable range of potentially feasible alternatives that will foster informed decision-making and public participation. An EIR is not required to consider alternatives which are infeasible. The lead agency is responsible for selecting a range of project alternatives for examination and must publicly disclose its reasoning for selecting those alternatives. There is no ironclad rule governing the nature or scope of the alternatives to be discussed other than the rule of reason. 6.2 PROJECT SUMMARY The Proposed Project involves amendments to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (ARSP) to allow for an increase in maximum allowable square footage in the Public Recreational (PR) District as well as to update the ARSP based on current development, regulations, and technology. Specifically, as part of this Project, the analysis will capture all allowable hotel rooms on individual parcels under one acre in size which were not specifically identified as part of the original ARSP. Despite the apparent increase in allowable density associated with the Commercial-Recreation (C-R) District, these rooms, although not previously quantified, were accounted for using a conservative estimate when analyzing circulation, utility, and public service impacts. The difference in the manner of calculation results in an additional 3,512 rooms within the C-R District beyond those specified in MEIR 313 and its amendments and adjustments. A maximum of 32,500 hotel rooms (or hotel room equivalents) are permitted in the C-R District. It is acknowledged that development would occur based on market demand and would be driven by the need to accommodate visitors to the area’s attractions, including the Anaheim Convention Center and The Disneyland Resort. Table 6-1 shows the difference between the maximum build out analyzed for the ARSP by the previous environmental documents and the Proposed Project as analyzed in this EIR. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\6.0 Alternatives-082312.docx 6-2 Alternatives to the Proposed Project TABLE 6-1 MAXIMUM BUILD OUT ANALYZED FOR THE ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN BY CURRENT ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION District Current Environmental Documentation Proposed Project Increase C-R District • 28,988 hotel rooms* • 32,500 hotel rooms • 3,512 hotel rooms P-R District • 1,600 hotel rooms • 1,712,004 sf convention center • 119,414 sf future traffic generating uses • 100,000 sf outdoor programmable space • 2,500 hotel rooms • 2,118,363 sf convention center • 180,000 sf commercial development • 40,000 sf hotel meeting/ballroom space • 900 hotel rooms • 406,359 sf convention center • The proposed hotel commercial meeting/ballroom space is 100,586 sf more than the previously approved “traffic generating uses” * Commercial uses are converted to hotel room equivalents on a ratio of 600 square feet of commercial development = 1 hotel room 6.2.1 PROJECT OBJECTIVES Section 15124(b) of the CEQA Guidelines indicates that an EIR should include “a statement of objectives sought by the Proposed Project”. The following are the objectives for the proposed Amendment to the ARSP: • To maintain and encourage Anaheim’s position as a nationally recognized tourist, convention, and recreation center. • To increase sales tax yields and further enhance the economic base of the community, thereby lessening the tax burden on real property. • To encourage the development of quality facilities which complement conventions, family entertainment, and recreation within appropriate areas of the community. • To maintain the integrity of the Commercial-Recreation and Public-Recreation Districts by permitting only compatible land uses within these designated areas. • To foster the growth of the City’s economic potential by revitalizing The Anaheim Resort. • To treat all landowners and users in The Anaheim Resort area fairly, while recognizing the economic and social needs of the entire City. • To ensure that development complements the City’s investment in the Anaheim Convention Center and other area resources and interests. • To maintain and enhance existing recreation and convention-oriented land uses. • To protect adjacent residential land uses by buffering them from land use impacts associated with development of The Anaheim Resort. • To maintain or enhance traffic and circulation in and around The Anaheim Resort. • To provide convenient access to all hotel, restaurant, and retail opportunities in The Anaheim Resort to enhance the areawide tourist experience. • To protect adjacent residential neighborhoods from unnecessary intrusion by vehicles traveling to and from The Anaheim Resort. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\6.0 Alternatives-082312.docx 6-3 Alternatives to the Proposed Project • To accommodate potential future regional transportation networks into the Plan. • To provide for necessary public infrastructure and services to maximize the development potential of The Anaheim Resort. • To create a coherent, unique resort identity that reinforces the image of The Anaheim Resort as a high-quality destination resort. • To establish a high-quality pedestrian environment. • To improve the aesthetic character of The Anaheim Resort by visually defining the boundaries with appropriate landscape treatments. 6.2.2 SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS As previously mentioned, an EIR should consider a range of feasible alternatives that would attain most of the Project objectives, listed above, while reducing one or more of the significant and unavoidable impacts of the Project. The significant impacts associated with the proposed Amendment to the ARSP, are summarized below: • Aesthetics: Shade and shadow impacts. • Air Quality: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOC); local construction emissions of respirable particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter (PM10) and fine particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in diameter (PM 2.5); long-term emissions of VOC, nitrogen oxides (NOx), carbon monoxide (CO), PM10, and PM2.5 would exceed established thresholds and the Project would conflict with the applicable air quality plan. • Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Direct and indirect greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions would be cumulatively considerable. • Noise: Construction activities would impact noise-sensitive receptors. • Transportation and Traffic: Intersections, arterial segments, freeway ramp termini intersections, freeway ramps, freeway mainlines and freeway weaving areas within the cities of Anaheim and Orange and California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) facilities would operate at unacceptable levels of service (LOS) under future conditions. 6.3 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT In accordance with the Section 15126.6(a) of the CEQA Guidelines, this section summarizes the range of alternatives considered in the EIR. MEIR 313 considered the following four alternatives: • No-Project/Continuing Development • Modified Land Use Alternative: Inclusive of Hotel Circle Specific Plan area into the Project Area • Lower Intensity Land Use Alternative A (Year 2000) • Lower Intensity Land Use Alternative B (Year 2008) Each of these alternatives is summarized below and, as appropriate, a comparison has been made for the currently Proposed Project. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\6.0 Alternatives-082312.docx 6-4 Alternatives to the Proposed Project 6.3.1 NO PROJECT/CONTINUING DEVELOPMENT MEIR 313 analyzed a No Project/Continuing Development Alternative which assumed that the General Plan land use designations and ARSP development standards, and regulations would remain as they pertained to the ARSP at the time of MEIR 313 preparation (circa 1994). Assumptions included that the 489.7-acre Disneyland Resort project would proceed as approved, but that the benefits associated with coordinating infrastructure, design, and streetscape improvements between The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan and the ARSP would not be realized. All impacts as detailed in MEIR 313, both positive and negative, would be avoided. It was also assumed that the Hotel Circle Specific Plan would be withdrawn or not approved. Similar to the analysis contained in MEIR 313, the No Project/Continuing Development Alternative would assume that current land use designations, development standards and regulations would remain as they do today, pursuant to the ARSP. The ARSP would continue to be developed in accordance with the current ARSP and all approved amendments, not including the Proposed Project. Unlike the alternative analysis contained in MEIR 313, under current conditions, development has occurred pursuant to the Hotel Circle Specific Plan, The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan, and the ARSP; therefore, much of the coordination related to infrastructure, design, and streetscape improvements has already occurred, creating three distinct but complimentary specific plan areas. Implementation of this alternative would involve continued development of the ARSP; however, MEIR 313 would no longer be valid and all future development would be subject to individual environmental reviews. Projects developed in accordance with the ARSP would not benefit from a streamlined environmental review process, thus resulting in a more costly and less time-efficient development process. 6.3.2 MODIFIED LAND USE ALTERNATIVE The Modified Land Use Alternative, as analyzed in MEIR 313, assumed implementation and build out of The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan; however, the 6.8-acre Hotel Circle Specific Plan would be withdrawn, not approved, or not approved as proposed. Under this alternative, it was assumed that the 6.8-acre property would be included as part of the ARSP which would permit development of up to 1,103 hotel units within the Hotel Circle Specific Plan area, which is the same density permitted under the Hotel Circle Specific Plan. The total number of acres within the ARSP would increase to a total of 556.3. Under current-day conditions, the Modified Land Use Alternative would not be feasible because the Hotel Circle Specific Plan has been approved and development has occurred according to the specific plan. Therefore, this alternative is not considered as an alternative to the currently Proposed Project. 6.3.3 LOWER INTENSITY LAND USE ALTERNATIVE A: YEAR 2000 SCENARIO The Lower Intensity Land Use Alternative A assumed that development would be limited to implementation of the first stage of ARSP development (Year 2000). Specifically, the alternative assumed that all approved hotel/motel development within the ARSP would be constructed by Year 2000, which would include approximately 1,000 hotel rooms. Total build out of the ARSP under this alternative would result in approximately 12,190 hotel rooms by Year 2000 (11,190 existing rooms at the time MEIR 313 was prepared] plus approximately 1,000 approved hotel rooms). ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\6.0 Alternatives-082312.docx 6-5 Alternatives to the Proposed Project As discussed in Section 3.0, Project Description, approximately 11,587 hotel rooms and hotel room equivalents exist in the ARSP, which is less than the assumption for the Lower Intensity Land Use Alternative A. Although the scenario year would not be Year 2000, this alternative can be applied to the Proposed Project to represent a No Project/No Development Alternative. No additional development would be allowed, and full build out would remain as 11,587 hotel rooms and hotel room equivalents. Further, this alternative would not include expansion of the PR District. All impacts as detailed in this EIR, both positive and negative, would be avoided; however, this alternative would fail to achieve established objectives for the Proposed Project related to increasing revenues and enhancing current conditions. Specifically, implementation of this alternative would be inconsistent with the following 12 of the Project’s 16 objectives. Each objective is followed by a brief statement (in italics) identifying why the alternative would not support achieving the objective. • To maintain and encourage Anaheim’s position as a nationally recognized tourist, convention, and recreation center. Implementation of this alternative would not allow for additional development to support future tourist demands. • To increase sales tax yields and further enhance the economic base of the community, thereby lessening the tax burden on real property. This alternative would not involve additional tax yielding development such as hotel, retail, and restaurant uses. Further, future tourists may be forced to find lodging outside of the City boundaries due to the lack of adequate hotel rooms, thereby reducing sales tax yields within Anaheim. • To encourage the development of quality facilities which complement conventions, family entertainment, and recreation within appropriate areas of the community. This alternative would not involve the expansion of the convention center, nor would it allow for development of additional hotels to complement the surrounding uses. • To foster the growth of the City’s economic potential by revitalizing The Anaheim Resort. Implementation of this alternative would not allow for additional development to support future tourist demands and generate sales tax yields, nor would it revitalize The Anaheim Resort through development of new and unique tourist-serving development. • To treat all landowners and users in The Anaheim Resort fairly, while recognizing the economic and social needs of the entire City. Implementation of this alternative would not allow future development, despite current entitlement and development rights. Therefore, private property owners would not be afforded the same development rights as those who have already developed their property to its full potential. • To ensure that development complements the City’s investment in the Anaheim Convention Center and other area resources and interests. Implementation of this alternative would not allow for future expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center, including expanded hotel development within the PR District as well as additional hotel development within the C-R District which would serve the Anaheim Convention Center. • To maintain and enhance existing recreation and convention-oriented land uses. Implementation of this alternative would not allow for enhancements such as future expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center, including expanded hotel development within the PR District and additional hotel development within the C-R District, which would serve the Anaheim Convention Center. • To maintain or enhance traffic and circulation in and around The Anaheim Resort. Implementation of this alternative would not allow for future development within the ARSP; therefore, any traffic and/or pedestrian movement improvements that would be implemented as part of future projects would not occur. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\6.0 Alternatives-082312.docx 6-6 Alternatives to the Proposed Project • To provide convenient access to all hotel, restaurant, and retail opportunities in The Anaheim Resort to enhance the area-wide tourist experience. Implementation of this alternative would not allow for additional development within the ARSP. Future tourists may be forced to find lodging outside the City boundaries due to the lack of adequate hotel rooms, thereby reducing the potential for convenient pedestrian access between hotels, restaurants, retail opportunities, and tourist attractions. • To protect adjacent residential neighborhoods from unnecessary intrusion by vehicles traveling to and from The Anaheim Resort. Implementation of this alternative would not allow for additional development within the ARSP. Future tourists may be forced to find lodging outside the City boundaries due to the lack of adequate hotel rooms, thereby increasing vehicle travel into The Anaheim Resort and the likelihood of intrusion into adjacent residential neighborhoods. • To accommodate potential future regional transportation networks into the Plan. Future tourists may be forced to find lodging outside of the City boundaries due to the lack of adequate hotel rooms, thereby reducing the demand for future regional transportation networks. • To provide for necessary public infrastructure and services to maximize the development potential of The Anaheim Resort. Implementation of this alternative would not allow for future development within the ARSP; therefore, any traffic and/or pedestrian movement improvements that would be implemented as part of future projects would not occur. Additionally, implementation of this Alternative would conflict with private property owner rights within already entitled areas. 6.3.4 LOWER INTENSITY LAND USE ALTERNATIVE B: YEAR 2008 SCENARIO Implementation of this alternative, as analyzed in MEIR 313, would allow for development of up to 16,200 hotel rooms within the ARSP by Year 2008. In comparison with the currently Proposed Project, this alternative would allow for development of up to 16,200 hotel rooms within the ARSP over a 14-year period, with the build out year changing to Year 2024. This is a net increase of 4,613 hotel rooms or hotel room equivalents over existing development. This would be approximately 1/5 of the total allowable increase associated with the Proposed Project (20,913 hotel rooms or hotel room equivalents). The Project area would encompass the current ARSP area, which has been expanded since certification of MEIR 313 and now includes approximately 581.3 acres. Further, this alternative would not include expansion of the PR District. Environmental Impacts Aesthetics Implementation of this alternative would result in development of the same types of urban uses as would the Proposed Project; however, the overall density of development within the ARSP would be reduced. Development associated with this alternative would be guided by the development standards, landscape, design, and setback standards identified in the ARSP. Similar mitigation measures would be required to those identified throughout this EIR and the overall changes to the visual character of the area would represent a less than significant impact, which is consistent with the Proposed Project. Similarly, this alternative has the potential to create significant shade and shadow impacts on surrounding properties which would create a significant and unavoidable impact as with the Proposed Project. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\6.0 Alternatives-082312.docx 6-7 Alternatives to the Proposed Project Air Quality The duration of construction activities associated with this alternative would be reduced due to the overall reduction in development. Mitigation measures similar to those identified throughout this EIR would be required; however, impacts related to daily construction emissions would continue to potentially exceed established air pollutant criteria because the daily construction activities are assumed to be similar to the Proposed Project and would just occur over a shorter duration due to fewer construction projects. This alternative would result in a significant and unavoidable impact which is consistent with the Proposed Project. Long-term air quality impacts would be similar to the Proposed Project since the proposed uses would be similar and the amount of daily traffic would not be substantially reduced (refer to Transportation and Traffic discussion, below). Mitigation measures similar to those identified throughout this EIR would be required; however, it is expected that impacts would remain significant and unavoidable which is consistent with the Proposed Project. Biological Resources Implementation of this alternative would develop the same physical area as was addressed throughout this EIR for the Proposed Project. Due to the nature of biological resources as physical resources that are tied to the land, impacts would be similar to those identified for the Proposed Project. Mitigation measures similar to those identified throughout this EIR would be required; it is expected that all impacts related biological resources would be reduced to less than significant levels, which is consistent with the Proposed Project. Cultural Resources Implementation of this alternative would develop the same physical area as was addressed throughout this EIR for the Proposed Project. Due to the nature of cultural resources as physical resources that are tied to the land, impacts would be similar to those identified for the Proposed Project. Mitigation measures that are similar to those identified throughout this EIR would be required; it is expected that all impacts related cultural resources would be reduced to less than significant levels, which is consistent with the Proposed Project. Geology and Soils Implementation of this alternative would develop the same physical area as was addressed throughout this EIR for the Proposed Project. Due to the nature of geology and soils resources as physical resources that are tied to the land, impacts would be similar to those identified for the Proposed Project. Mitigation measures that are similar to those identified throughout this EIR would be required; it is expected that all impacts related geology and soils would be reduced to less than significant levels, which is consistent with the Proposed Project. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Implementation of this alternative would result in development of the same types of urban uses as would the Proposed Project; however, the overall density of development within the ARSP would be reduced. Impacts associated with Greenhouse Gas Emissions associated with use of the hotel rooms lighting, heating, and cooling) would be reduced due to the overall reduction in scale between the Proposed Project and this alternative. However, because it is reasonable to assume that the overall demand for hotel rooms would remain fairly consistent, the GHG emissions may be displaced outside of the ARSP area, but would still occur within the region. There would be an incremental decrease associated with reduction in housing required ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\6.0 Alternatives-082312.docx 6-8 Alternatives to the Proposed Project to accommodate the additional workers (see Population and Housing discussion, below). It should be noted that, since the majority of GHG emissions are due to vehicular emissions, the assumption that the amount of daily traffic would not be substantially reduced under this alternative (refer to Transportation/Traffic discussion, below) means that vehicular emissions would be similar to the Proposed Project. Mitigation measures similar to those identified throughout this EIR would be required; however, it is expected that impacts would remain significant and unavoidable, which is consistent with the Proposed Project. Hazardous Materials Implementation of this alternative would develop the same physical area as was addressed throughout this EIR for the Proposed Project. As discussed in Section 5.7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, there are a number of hazardous materials sites that have been identified throughout the ARSP. Development pursuant to this alternative would result in similar impacts related to known and unknown hazardous material locations. Mitigation measures similar to those identified throughout this EIR would be required; it is expected that all impacts related hazardous materials would be reduced to less than significant levels, which is consistent with the Proposed Project. Hydrology and Water Quality Implementation of this alternative would result in development of the same types of urban uses as would the Proposed Project. Future projects associated with build out of this alternative would create similar hydrology and water quality issues as new or redeveloped urban uses are introduced to the area. Mitigation measures similar to those identified throughout this EIR would be required; also, it is expected that all impacts related hydrology and water quality would be reduced to less than significant levels, which is consistent with the Proposed Project. Land Use and Planning Implementation of this alternative would result in development of the same types of urban uses as would the Proposed Project. Development would be consistent with the current general plan and the ARSP. Land use impacts associated with future ARSP development would be anticipated to be less than those identified for the Proposed Project because the reduction in development would reduce potential opportunities for land use incompatibilities. Similar to the Proposed Project, this alternative would result in less than significant impacts related to land use and planning. Noise The duration of construction noise associated with this alternative would be reduced due to the overall reduction in development. Mitigation measures similar to those identified throughout this EIR would be required; however, impacts related to construction would continue to potentially exceed established noise criteria, thereby resulting in a significant and unavoidable impact, which is consistent with the Proposed Project. Long-term noise impacts would be similar to the Proposed Project since the types of proposed uses would be similar and the amount of daily traffic would not be significantly reduced (refer to Transportation and Traffic discussion, below). Mitigation measures similar to those identified throughout this EIR would be required, which would reduce impacts related to long-term operations to less than significant levels. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\6.0 Alternatives-082312.docx 6-9 Alternatives to the Proposed Project Population and Housing This alternative would generate approximately 4,152 jobs, which represents an approximately 78 percent decrease from the Proposed Project. The decrease in job creation would result in a decreased housing demand and a reduced population increase when compared to the Proposed Project. Impacts related to housing and population would be reduced in comparison to the Proposed Project. The housing and population impacts of this alternative and the Proposed Project would be less than significant. Public Services and Utilities The reduction in allowable development would result in a decreased demand for public services and utilities. As discussed throughout this EIR, no significant impacts on public services and utilities would occur after mitigation except for potential cumulative impacts related to storm water facilities. Impacts associated with this alternative would be similar because the same physical area would be subject to development. Due the reduced number of hotel rooms allowed, it is assumed that the amount of pervious surface associated with this alternative may be reduced in comparison to the Proposed Project. However, similar mitigation measures would be required to those identified throughout this EIR, resulting in an overall reduction in consumption and demand for public services and utilities, which would, in turn, reduce impacts to levels less than significant except for impacts to storm water facilities. Similar to the Proposed Project, the City of Anaheim cannot control storm water discharges from outside its jurisdictional boundaries. Because storm water flows from Anaheim enter into regional facilities, any contribution that the City of Anaheim makes has the potential to exceed capacity of regional facilities due to the volumes contributed by other jurisdictions. Although storm water flows may be reduced due to a reduced level of development and associated amount of impervious surface areas, this cumulative impact would remain significant as with the Proposed Project. Recreation The reduction in allowable development would result in a decreased demand for public services, including indirect impacts to recreational and park facilities. Similar to the Proposed Project, no significant impacts on recreation would occur assuming adherence to the standard requirements, which requires provision of parkland to the City of Anaheim and/or the payment of fees, consistent with the Anaheim Municipal Code, Section 17.08.250. Transportation and Traffic Development of this alternative would reduce impacts related to traffic based on an overall reduction in vehicle trips associated with hotel uses. However, development of this alternative would not alter the visitor demand for local tourist attractions, such as the Anaheim Convention Center and The Disneyland Resort. Rather, it is possible that an increased amount of vehicular traffic may occur within the ARSP area due to the lack of adequate, local hotel and motel accommodations to house visitors and encourage pedestrian travel from one attraction to another. Visitors would be forced to find alternative accommodations outside the ARSP, which would increase traffic flow into the area on a daily basis. Therefore, impacts associated with this alternative would be similar to the Proposed Project and would be significant and unavoidable. Summary Implementation of this alternative would reduce the impact related to employment from significant and unavoidable to less than significant; however, all other impact conclusions would remain similar to those identified for the Proposed Project. Additionally, this alternative would ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\6.0 Alternatives-082312.docx 6-10 Alternatives to the Proposed Project not support all of the identified Project objectives, as stated previously. Specifically, implementation of this alternative would result in the elimination of expansion of development within the PR District and would be inconsistent with the following nine objectives of the Proposed Project’s sixteen objectives. Each objective is followed by a brief statement (in italics) identifying why the alternative would not support achieving the objective. • To maintain and encourage Anaheim’s position as a nationally recognized tourist, convention, and recreation center. Implementation of this alternative would only allow for limited development to support future tourist demands in comparison to the Proposed Project. • To increase sales tax yields and further enhance the economic base of the community, thereby lessening the tax burden on real property. This alternative would limit the amount of additional, tax yielding development such as hotel, retail, and restaurant uses. Future tourists may be forced to find lodging outside the City boundaries due to the lack of adequate hotel rooms, thereby reducing sales tax yields within Anaheim. • To encourage the development of quality facilities which complement conventions, family entertainment, and recreation within appropriate areas of the community. This alternative would not involve the expansion of the convention center and would limit development of additional hotels to complement the surrounding uses. • To foster the growth of the City’s economic potential by revitalizing The Anaheim Resort. Implementation of this alternative would limit the amount of additional development to support future tourist demands and to generate sales tax yields, thus limiting the potential to revitalize The Anaheim Resort through development of new and unique tourist-serving development. • To ensure that development complements the City’s investment in the Anaheim Convention Center and other area resources and interests. Implementation of this alternative would not allow for future expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center, including expanded hotel development within the PR District, and would limit additional hotel development within the C-R District, which would also serve the Anaheim Convention Center. • To maintain and enhance existing recreation and convention-oriented land uses. Implementation of this alternative would not allow for enhancements such as future expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center, including expanded hotel development within the PR District, and would limit additional hotel development within the C-R District, which would also serve the Anaheim Convention Center. • To maintain or enhance traffic and circulation in and around The Anaheim Resort. Implementation of this alternative would limit future development within the ARSP; therefore, any traffic and/or pedestrian movement improvements that would be implemented as part of future projects may not occur. • To provide convenient access to all hotel, restaurant, and retail opportunities in The Anaheim Resort to enhance the areawide tourist experience. Implementation of this alternative would limit additional development within the ARSP. Future tourists may be forced to find lodging outside the City boundaries due to the lack of adequate hotel rooms, thereby reducing the potential for convenient pedestrian access between hotels, restaurants, retail opportunities, and tourist attractions. • To protect adjacent residential neighborhoods from unnecessary intrusion by vehicles traveling to and from The Anaheim Resort. Implementation of this alternative would limit future development within the ARSP; therefore, traffic and/or pedestrian movement improvements that would be implemented as part of future projects may not occur. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\6.0 Alternatives-082312.docx 6-11 Alternatives to the Proposed Project 6.4 ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE CEQA requires the identification of an environmentally superior alternative. Section 15126.6(e)(2) of the CEQA Guidelines states that if the No Project Alternative is the environmentally superior alternative, then the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives. The environmental analysis of alternatives above indicates that, through a comparison of potential impacts from each of the alternatives and the proposed Amendment to the ARSP, the Lower Intensity Land Use Alternative A: Year 2000 Scenario Alternative, as modified for this EIR, could be considered superior because no new environmental impacts would occur. However, this alternative would not meet the objectives for the Amendment to the ARSP and would conflict with existing private ownership rights. 6.5 REFERENCES Anaheim, City of. 2010 (May 4, current through). Anaheim Municipal Code (Chapter 17.08, Subdivisions; Section 17.08.250, Amount of land to be dedicated and development fee). Cincinnati, OH: American Legal Publishing Corporation for the City. http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/California/anaheim/title17landdevelopmentandre sources/chapter1708subdivisions?f=templates$fn=altmain-nf.htm$3.0#JD_ Chapter17.08. 1994a (August). The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Draft EIR No. 313 with Addendum. Anaheim, CA: the City. California Office of Administrative Law. 2010. California Code of Regulations (Title 14, Natural Resources; Division 6, Resources Agency; Chapter 3, Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act). Eagen, MN: Westlaw for the State. http://government.westlaw.com/linkedslice/default.asp?Action=TOC&RS=GVT1.0& VR=2.0&SP=CCR-1000. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\6.0 Alternatives-082312.docx 6-12 Alternatives to the Proposed Project This page intentionally left blank ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\7.0 Long Term-082412.docx 7-1 Long-Term Implications of the Proposed Project SECTION 7.0 LONG-TERM IMPLICATIONS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT 7.1 ANY SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED IF THE PROPOSED PROJECT IS IMPLEMENTED The environmental impacts of the Proposed Project are discussed in Sections 5.1 through 5.19 of this Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Implementation of the Proposed Project would result in potentially significant impacts prior to implementation of mitigation measures (MM) for the following topical issues: aesthetics, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, noise, public services, transportation and traffic, water, sewer, electricity, storm water, and other utilities. With the exception of aesthetics, air quality, GHG emissions, noise, transportation and traffic, and storm water, implementation of the mitigation measures provided would reduce identified impacts to less than significant levels. As currently proposed, implementation of the Proposed Project would result in the following significant impacts after implementation of the mitigation program and would require adoption of a Statement of Overriding Considerations: Aesthetics 1. Buildout of the C-R District has the potential to introduce structures which may create a significant shade and shadow impact on surrounding properties, which may result in a significant and unavoidable impact. Air Quality 1. Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and long-term operational emissions of VOC, nitrogen oxides (NOx), carbon monoxide (CO), respirable particulate matter with a diameter less than 10 microns (PM10), and fine particulate matter with a diameter less than 2.5 microns (PM 2.5) would exceed the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) CEQA significance thresholds and the impact would be significant and unavoidable. Local PM10 and PM2.5 emissions would exceed the SCAQMD CEQA significance thresholds for short-term periods when excavation would occur near sensitive receptors; the impact would be significant and unavoidable. 2. Build out of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (ARSP) would result in long-term emissions of VOC, NOx, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 that would exceed the SCAQMD CEQA significance thresholds, resulting in a potentially cumulatively considerable contribution to existing occasional ozone, nitrogen dioxide (NO2), PM10, and PM2.5 standard violations. Therefore, the Proposed Project would have a significant cumulative air quality impact. The implementation of the proposed mitigation would reduce vehicle emissions of nonattainment pollutants, but the reductions would be relatively small compared to the total magnitude of the emissions and would not reduce emissions to less than the SCAQMD CEQA thresholds. Therefore, the impact would be significant and unavoidable. 3. Short-term exposure of persons to PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations exceeding the SCAQMD CEQA significance thresholds would occur during excavation near sensitive receptors; the impact would be significant and unavoidable. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\7.0 Long Term-082412.docx 7-2 Long-Term Implications of the Proposed Project 4. The Proposed Project would conflict with the applicable air quality plan; the impact would be significant and unavoidable. Greenhouse Gas Emissions 1. Direct and indirect GHG emissions would be cumulatively considerable and would create a significant impact. GHG reductions would be achieved with implementation, at the statewide level, of the measures described in Section 5.6.2 of this EIR. Additional GHG reductions would be achieved with implementation of the proposed mitigation measures; however, these impacts would remain cumulatively considerable and would be significant and unavoidable. Noise 1. Construction activities associated with future development within the ARSP have the potential to significantly impact noise-sensitive receptors. Adherence to the standard requirements and implementation of the proposed mitigation measures would reduce potential impacts; however, these impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. Transportation and Traffic 1. Within the Cities of Anaheim and Orange and within California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) facilities, the Proposed Project would have the potential to cause intersections, arterial segments, freeway ramp termini intersections, freeway ramps, freeway mainlines, and freeway weaving areas to operate at unacceptable levels of service (LOS). Because all needed roadway and intersection improvements within the City of Anaheim may not be feasible for reasons discussed in Section 5.14, Transportation and Traffic, traffic-related impacts in the City of Anaheim would be significant and unavoidable. The Proposed Project’s contribution to traffic volumes and levels of service at intersections in the City of Orange and at freeway ramps and mainlines are considered significant and unavoidable since the City has no jurisdiction over the necessary improvements at these locations. Even with compliance with the standard requirements and implementation of the proposed mitigation measures, potential impacts related to transportation and traffic would remain significant and unavoidable. Storm Water 1. Future growth under the Proposed Project will require the implementation of new or modified storm water drainage facilities that would connect to existing utility systems provided by the City of Anaheim and other agencies. All new growth within the ARSP area would occur in compliance with mitigation measures provided in the EIR; however, the City has no control over the growth and storm water contributions of areas outside of its jurisdiction. Any addition of storm water to the regional storm water system may be cumulatively considerable when combined with potential storm water flow increases from surrounding jurisdictions. Therefore, mitigation of these impacts would be outside of the City’s jurisdiction, and the potential cumulative impact could be significant and unavoidable if development in the surrounding jurisdictions occurs without upgrades to the storm water infrastructure ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\7.0 Long Term-082412.docx 7-3 Long-Term Implications of the Proposed Project 7.2 SIGNIFICANT IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES WHICH WOULD BE CAUSED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT SHOULD IT BE IMPLEMENTED The environmental effects related to Project implementation are discussed in Sections 5.1 through 5.19 of this EIR. Project implementation would require the long-term commitment of natural resources and land. Development of the project would result in the commitment of land resources for the development of visitor-serving uses, as well as extensions of existing utilities. Construction and long-term operation of the Proposed Project would require the commitment and reduction of nonrenewable and slowly renewable resources, including petroleum fuels and natural gas (for vehicle emissions, construction, lighting, heating, and cooling of structures); lumber; sand/gravel; and steel, copper, lead, and other metals for use in building construction, piping, and roadway infrastructure. Other resources that are slow to renew and/or recover from environmental stressors would also be impacted by Project implementation air quality through fossil fuel combustion and GHG production, and water supply through the increased potable water demands for drinking, cooking, cleaning, landscaping, and general maintenance needs). 7.3 GROWTH-INDUCING IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION Pursuant to Sections 15126(d) and 15126.2(d) of the CEQA Guidelines, this section is provided to examine ways in which the Proposed Project could foster economic or population growth or the construction of additional development, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment. To address this issue, potential growth-inducing effects are examined through analysis of the following questions: 1. Would this project remove obstacles to growth through the construction or extension of major infrastructure facilities that do not presently exist in the project area or through changes in existing regulations pertaining to land development)? 2. Would this project result in the need to expand one or more public services to maintain desired levels of service? 3. Would this project encourage or facilitate economic effects that could result in other activities that could significantly affect the environment? 4. Would approval of this project involve some precedent-setting action that could encourage and facilitate other activities that could significantly affect the environment? It should be noted that growth-inducing effects are not necessarily beneficial, detrimental, or of little significance to the environment. This issue is presented to provide additional information on ways in which the proposed Project could contribute to significant changes in the environment, beyond the direct consequences of implementing the Proposed Project. 1. Would this project remove obstacles to growth through the construction or extension of major infrastructure facilities that do not presently exist in the project area, or through changes in existing regulations pertaining to land development)? As discussed in Section 5.17, Electricity; Section 5.15, Water; and Section 5.16, Sewer; infrastructure improvements would be required to develop the Proposed Project. However, extensions of existing utility facilities from nearby roadways will provide a sufficient tie-in to the existing utility systems to accommodate the demands of the Proposed Project at full build out. The Proposed Project consists of amendments to the Anaheim General Plan, Anaheim Resort Specific Plan and the Anaheim Municipal Code to allow for an increase in ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\7.0 Long Term-082412.docx 7-4 Long-Term Implications of the Proposed Project maximum allowable square footage in the PR District and update the ARSP based on current development, regulations, and technology. Specifically, as part of the Proposed Project, the analysis will capture all allowable hotel rooms on individual parcels less than one acre in size that were not specifically identified as part of the original ARSP. Despite the apparent increase in allowable density associated with the Commercial-Recreation (C-R) District, these rooms, although not previously quantified, were accounted for using a conservative estimate when analyzing circulation, utility, and public service impacts. The difference in the manner of calculation results in an additional 3,512 rooms within the C-R District beyond those specified in MEIR 313 and its amendments and adjustments. As such, the Proposed Project involves changes to the existing C-R and PR districts that already allow for ARSP development. Approval of the Proposed Project would not remove an existing regulatory obstacle to growth, but would redefine the nature of such growth. The Proposed Project is not, therefore, considered to be growth-inducing with respect to removal of growth obstacles within the Project site. 2. Would this project result in the need to expand one or more public services to maintain desired levels of service? As discussed in Section 5.16, Sewer; Section 5.15, Water; and Section 5.17, Electricity; implementation of the Proposed Project would necessitate the improvements to existing facilities over the course of Project build out in order to maintain desired levels of service. However, the Proposed Project is located within an urbanized area and existing infrastructure is located in close proximity to the Project site. Existing utilities currently serve the Project site; however, improvements would be needed to provide adequate service to the Proposed Project. The expansion of public services beyond the limits of the Proposed Project, and encouragement of other new growth in such areas, is not expected to occur. This is based on the fact that the area surrounding the Project site is largely built out. Therefore, the proposed expansion of public services to serve the Project site would not encourage development of areas beyond the Project boundary. 3. Would this project encourage or facilitate economic effects that could result in other activities that could significantly affect the environment? Build out of the ARSP and expansion of the Convention Center would create a number of design, engineering, and construction-related jobs. Build out of the ARSP and expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center would be subject to future review and approval by the City of Anaheim and would include any necessary environmental clearance in accordance with CEQA. As necessary, environmental review for individual projects would ensure that potentially significant adverse impacts are identified and mitigated in accordance with CEQA. Public utility and service providers would also need to determine if the additional growth associated with individual projects can be accommodated by existing or planned infrastructure improvements and public services and utility agencies’ capabilities to provide services. Public agencies’ and service providers’ reviews and approvals of individual developments would ensure that adequate services and infrastructure are available to serve future developments and that no land use conflicts are created. The standard requirements and the proposed mitigation measures that would be imposed on future projects in the ARSP area are expected to avoid or reduce environmental impacts. Thus, the growth-inducing impacts of the Proposed Project are not expected to result in significant adverse effects to the environment. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\7.0 Long Term-082412.docx 7-5 Long-Term Implications of the Proposed Project 4. Would approval of this project involve some precedent-setting action that could encourage and facilitate other activities that could significantly affect the environment? Approval of the Proposed Project would allow for the continued development of the ARSP as currently entitled and the expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center as proposed. The Proposed Project would continue development consistent with the original intent of the ARSP. The existing land use entitlement would remain substantially unchanged as the types of land uses allowed would not be altered. Therefore, approval of the Proposed Project would not involve a precedent-setting action which would have the potential to encourage and facilitate other activities that could significantly affect the environment. 7.4 REFERENCES California Office of Administrative Law. 2010 (May 21, current through). California Code of Regulations (Title 14, Natural Resources; Division 6, Resources Agency; Chapter 3, Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act). Sacramento, CA: the State. http://government.westlaw.com/linkedslice/default.asp?Action=TOC& RS=GVT1.0&VR=2.0&SP=CCR-1000. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\7.0 Long Term-082412.docx 7-6 Long-Term Implications of the Proposed Project This page intentionally left blank ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\8.0 Preparers-080912.docx 8-1 List of EIR Preparers and Contributors SECTION 8.0 LIST OF EIR PREPARERS AND CONTRIBUTORS 8.1 EIR PREPARERS 8.1.1 CITY OF ANAHEIM Planning Department Jonathan Borrego Principal Planner Susan Kim Senior Planner Ted White Senior Planner Tracy Sato Senior Planner Jennifer Velasquez GIS Operator Public Works Department David Kennedy, P.E. Associate Transportation Planner Sandip Budhia, P.E. Associate Civil Engineer Keith Linker, P.E. Principal Civil Engineer Linda Johnson. Principal Planner Utilities Department Michael LeBlanc Senior Engineer Sara Mathis, P.E. Principal Water Engineer Aladdin Shaikh, P.E. Senior Water Engineer Fire Department Jeff Lutz Fire Marshal Police Department Minh Nguyen Officer Parks Department Pamela Galera Principal Project Planner Anaheim Public Library Audrey Lujan Library Operations/Branch Services Manager ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\!Draft EIR\8.0 Preparers-080912.docx 8-2 List of EIR Preparers and Contributors 8.1.2 BONTERRA CONSULTING Joan Patronite Kelly, AICP Principal-in-Charge Jennifer Marks Project Manager James Kurtz Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Fernando Sotelo Noise and Air Quality Josephine Alido Environmental Analysis Julie Cho Environmental Analysis Anna-Lisa Armanino Environmental Analysis Kim Quinn Environmental Analysis Megan Keith Environmental Analysis Julia Black Technical Editor Sheryl Kristal Lead Word Processor Johnnie Garcia GIS Technician Kimberly Davis Graphics 8.2 CONTRIBUTORS 8.2.1 PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF Traffic Analysis Tim Byrne Senior Supervising Planner Shivaprasad Shivananjappa Senior Transportation Planner 8.2.2 PSOMAS Water Supply Assessment Michael D. Swan, P.E. Senior Project Manager ---PAGE BREAK--- APPENDIX A SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENTS ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix A‐1 Appendix A Approved and Proposed Amendments The Proposed Project includes amendments to the documents that govern and regulate development within the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan area, including:  Anaheim General Plan (Case No. GPA2010-00482)  Ordinance No. 5454 Conditions of Approval (Case No. MIS2010-00484)  Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (Case No. SPN2010-00060)  Title 18 (Zoning Code) of the Anaheim Municipal Code (Case No. ZCA2010-00093)  The Anaheim Resort Identity Program (Case No. MIS2010-00478)  The Anaheim Resort Public Realm Landscape Program (Case No. MIS2010-00479) This appendix describes the proposed amendments. In addition, Chapter 1, Executive Summary, the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2 document, dated September 2012, provided within this appendix, provides a description of all of the amendments that have been processed to date for the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 Appendix A‐2 This page is intentionally blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 Appendix A‐3 Anaheim General Plan (Case No. GPA2010-00482) The proposed General Plan Amendment would amend General Plan Land Use Element Table LU-4: General Plan Density Provisions for Specific Areas of the City to clarify the permitted amount of development in Development Area No. 2 (PR (Public Recreation) District). Deleted wording is shown in red strikethrough; new wording is shown in red bold type. TABLE LU-4: GENERAL PLAN DENSITY PROVISIONS FOR SPECIFIC AREAS OF THE CITY Location General Plan Land Use Designations Permitted Density The Mountain Park Area Low Medium Hillside Density Residential (Up to 6 du/ac) Low Medium Density Residential (Up to 16 du/ac) 485 2,015 (Up to 2,500 dwelling units) Area (Parcel Map 94-205) Low-Medium Density Residential Up to 140 dwelling units The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan (SP 92-1) Area Commercial Recreation See Note No. 1 on next page. The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (SP 92-2) Area Commercial Recreation See Note No. 2 on next page. Hotel Circle Specific Plan (SP 93-1) Area Commercial Recreation The Hotel Circle Specific Plan allows for a master planned hotel project including up to 969 hotel rooms and integrated guest oriented amenities including full-service restaurants, conference room/banquet facilities, pool and spa areas, tour bus/shuttle facilities, and pedestrian promenades and plaza areas with comprehensive landscaping. The Platinum Triangle Area Mixed-Use Residential Commercial Office Institutional Office-High and Office-Low Institutional Industrial Open Space 18,909 dwelling units 4,909,682 square feet 9,862,166 square feet 1,500,000 square feet 4,478,356 square feet* 3.0 FAR 0.5 FAR 0.1 FAR *The maximum FAR for properties designated Office- Low is 0.5; the maximum FAR for properties designated Office-High is 2.0 The Stonegate Development Area Low Density Residential Up to 35 dwelling units ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 Appendix A‐4 TABLE LU-4: GENERAL PLAN DENSITY PROVISIONS FOR SPECIFIC AREAS OF THE CITY (CONTINUED) Note No. 1: The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan provides for the development of an approximate 489.7 acre international multi-day vacation designation resort including ongoing modifications to the Disneyland theme park, the development of a new theme park, additional hotels and entertainment areas, administrative office facilities, new public and private parking facilities, and an internal transportation system. This development is within five planning Districts (Theme Park, Hotel, Parking, Future Expansion and District A) and a C-R Overlay, which allows development within the Overlay to either be consistent with the underlying Resort District or subject to the same land uses as in the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2 Zone. The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan also identifies maximum development density designations for hotel/motel development in the Hotel District (up to 5,600 hotel rooms for the entire District with up to 1,000 hotel rooms transferable to the Theme Park District), in District A (the maximum number of units permitted would be 75 hotel/motel rooms per gross acre or 75 hotel/motel rooms per parcel existing on June 29, 1993, whichever is greater) and the C-R Overlay (the maximum number of units permitted on a parcel would be the following: 1) for parcels designated Low Density – up to 50 hotel rooms per gross acre or 75 rooms, whichever is greater; and 2) for parcels designated Medium Density – up to 75 hotel rooms per gross acre or 75 rooms, whichever is greater; provided that for those parcels that are developed with hotel/motel rooms which exceeded the maximum density designation, the number of rooms existing on the date of adoption of The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan Ordinance may be rebuilt or modified at their existing density.) It should be noted that accessory uses may be developed as well as other visitor-serving commercial/retail and restaurant uses along with these hotel/motel uses. The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan also provides for the development of the Anaheim GardenWalk project pursuant to the Anaheim GardenWalk Overlay at the following density and subject to the approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 4078, as amended, to permit the following: up to 569,750 square feet of specialty retail, restaurants, and entertainment uses, including movie theaters; 1,628 hotel rooms/suites (including up to 500 vacation ownership units) and 278,817 square feet of hotel accessory uses; a transportation center, and 4,800 parking spaces. The Anaheim GardenWalk Overlay encompasses District A and the portion of the Parking District (East Parking Area)/CR Overlay south of Disney Way. Note No. 2: The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (ARSP) provides for the development of approximately 582 581.3 acres within The Anaheim Resort. The ARSP is divided into two development areas. Development Area No. 1 is referred to as the C-R (Commercial Recreation) District, which allows for hotels, motels, convention and conference facilities, as well as restaurants, retail shops and entertainment facilities; the. Development Area No. 2 is referred to as the PR (Public Recreation) District which encompasses the Anaheim Convention Center and associated parking facilities and provides for the orderly use of City-owned property as well as the existing Anaheim Hilton Hotel; the. The C-R District includes two overlays. The Mobilehome Park (MHP) Overlay, which encompasses existing mobilehome parks within the C-R District, and provides development standards for mobilehome parks and regulations and procedures to mitigate relocation concerns and adverse effects of displacement upon mobilehome owners when a park is converted to another land use; and, the. The Anaheim Resort Residential Overlay, which applies to focused areas of the Specific Plan, and provides for the incorporation of residential uses into hotel developments when such uses are fully integrated into a minimum 300-room full-service hotel. The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan also identifies maximum development density designations in the C- R District. These designations are based upon hotel/motel development and allow up to 20% of each hotel/motel project gross square footage, excluding parking facilities, to be developed with integrated included within the main hotel/motel complex) accessory uses. These accessory uses will reduce the otherwise maximum permitted hotel/motel density at the rate of one hotel/motel room per six hundred (600) gross square feet of accessory use. For properties proposed to be developed with permitted and conditionally permitted uses other than hotels/motels with accessory uses, the traffic generation characteristics of said uses shall not exceed those associated with the otherwise permitted hotel/motel (including accessory uses) density as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 Appendix A‐5 TABLE LU-4: GENERAL PLAN DENSITY PROVISIONS FOR SPECIFIC AREAS OF THE CITY (CONTINUED) Manager prior to Final Site Plan review and approval. The maximum development density for each of the designations are as follows:  “Low Density,” which has a maximum density of: up to 50 rooms per gross acre or 75 rooms per lot or parcel, whichever is greater;  “Low-Medium Density:,” up to 75 rooms per gross acre or 75 rooms per lot or parcel, whichever is greater;  “Low-Medium Density (Modified):,” up to 252 rooms and 75,593 square feet of accessory uses; “Medium Density,” up to 100 rooms per gross acre or 75 rooms per lot or parcel, whichever is greater; and,  “Convention Center (CC) Medium Density:,” up to 125 rooms per gross acre with trip generation characteristics mitigated to the equivalent of 100 rooms per gross acre or 75 rooms per lot or parcel, whichever is greater. For those parcels that are developed with hotel/motel rooms which exceed the maximum density designation, the number of rooms existing on the date of adoption of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Ordinance may be rebuilt or modified at their existing density. For projects that are developed in accordance with the Anaheim Resort Residential Overlay, the maximum number of dwelling units allowed shall be less than the number of hotel rooms proposed and such projects shall not create infrastructure impacts greater than the subject property’s permitted hotel/motel density, as permitted by the property’s underlying C-R District density designation unless otherwise mitigated through subsequent environmental analysis. The maximum development density for the PR District is up to:  2,158,363 square feet of convention center/meeting space  100,000 square feet of outdoor programmable space  2,500 hotel rooms  180,000 square feet of commercial space ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 Appendix A‐6 This page is intentionally blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 Appendix A‐7 Ordinance No. 5454 Conditions of Approval (Case No. MIS2010-00484) Ordinance No. 5454 was adopted in September 1994 to amend the Zoning Map, referred to in Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code, to rezone and reclassify property within the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan area to the SP 92-2 (Specific Plan 92-2) Zone. Property owners and/or developers within this area are subject to certain conditions of approval listed in Ordinance No. 5454 if they chose to develop their property in accordance with the SP 92-2 Zone. The Proposed Project would update these conditions of approval and consolidate them with all applicable mitigation measures within Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 0085C. This amendment is intended to help streamline the regulations applicable to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan area (SP 92-2 Zone). ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 Appendix A‐8 This page is intentionally blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 Appendix A‐9 Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (Case No. SPN2010-00060) Title 18 (Zoning Code) of the Anaheim Municipal Code (Case No. ZCA2010-00093) The Anaheim Resort Identity Program (Case No. MIS2010-00478) The Anaheim Resort Public Realm Landscape Program (Case No. MIS2010-00479) The proposed amendments to the above documents are intended to reflect the proposed increased development intensity in the PR District; streamline development standards, guidelines and requirements to reduce redundancy within and between documents; and, update the above documents to reflect current conditions within The Anaheim Resort. The proposed amendments do not change the types of land uses permitted within the ARSP or significantly modify the associated development standards. The following Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2 document, dated September 2012, is proposed to replace the existing specific plan document in its entirety. The proposed amendment to Title 18 is provided in Chapter 7 of the specific plan document and shows the proposed changes in red strikethrough and bold type. The proposed amendments to The Anaheim Resort Public Realm Landscape Program and The Anaheim Resort Identity Program are provided in Appendices B and C respectively and would replace the existing documents in their entirety. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Draft Supplemental EIR 340 Appendix A‐10 This page is intentionally blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- THE ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 92-2 City of Anaheim September 2012 ---PAGE BREAK--- This page is intentionally blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Table of Contents Table of Contents 1.0 Executive Summary 1-1 1.1 Introduction 1-1 1.2 Purpose of the Specific Plan 1-5 1.3 Organization of the Specific Plan Document 1-5 1.4 Existing Setting 1-5 1.4.1 The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan 1-7 1.4.2 The Hotel Circle Specific Plan 1-7 1.5 Implementing the General Plan 1-7 1.6 Specific Plan Goals 1-14 1.7 The Development Plan 1-14 1.7.1 Land Use 1-14 1.7.2 Development Density 1-15 1.7.3 Development Standards and Guidelines 1-15 1.7.4 Development Summary 1-16 1.8 Implementing the Specific Plan 1-16 2.0 PLANNING CONTENT 2-1 2.1 Purpose of the Specific Plan 2-1 2.2 Specific Plan Policies 2-1 2.2.1 Create and Enhance an Urban Destination Resort Environment 2-1 2.2.2 Establish a Unified Resort Identity 2-1 2.2.3 Supply Visitor and Convention Facilities to Meet Long-Term Demand 2-2 2.2.4 Improve Public Facilities, Services and Infrastructure to Accommodate Growth 2-2 2.2.5 Improve the Transportation 2-2 2.2.6 Develop Implementation Mechanisms to Assure Quality Development 2-3 2.2.7 Enhance and Protect Surrounding Uses 2-3 2.3 Authority and Scope of the Specific Plan 2-3 2.4 Relationship to City Planning Documents and Regulations 2-5 2.4.1 Relationship to the General Plan 2-5 2.4.2 Relationship to the Zoning Ordinance 2-5 2.4.3 California Environmental Quality Act Requirements 2-5 2.4.4 Relationship to The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan 2-5 2.4.5 Relationship to the Hotel Circle Specific 2-6 3.0 LAND USE PLAN 3-1 3.1 Regional Location 3-1 3.2 Existing Conditions 3-1 3.2.1 The Specific Plan Area 3-1 3.2.2 Existing Uses 3-1 3.3 Land Use Plan 3-5 3.3.1 Land Use 3-5 3.3.2 Commercial Recreation (C-R) District Development Density 3-7 3.3.3 Mobilehome Park (MHP) Overlay 3-9 ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Table of Contents 3.3.4 Anaheim Resort Residential (ARR) Overlay 3-9 3.3.5 Public Recreational (PR) Development Density 3-9 3.3.6 Central Core Development Standards 3-13 3.4 Non Visitor-Serving Uses 3-15 4.0 PUBLIC FACILITIES PLAN 4-1 4.1 Regional Circulation Programs 4-1 4.2 Regional Infrastructure Programs 4-3 4.3 Vehicular Circulation Plan for the Anaheim Resort 4-3 4.3.1 Connections to Interstate 5 (I-5) 4-3 4.4 Anaheim Resort Arterial/ Secondary System 4-4 4.5 Transit Plans 4-16 4.5.1 The Disneyland Resort 4-16 4.5.2 Anaheim Rapid Connection 4-16 4.5.3 HOV Lane System 4-17 4.5.4 Bus Service 4-17 4.5.5 Intercity Commuter Rail Service 4-17 4.6 Pedestrian Circulation Plans 4-17 4.7 Water 4-19 4.8 Sanitary Sewer 4-21 4.9 Storm Drain 4-23 4.10 Electricity 4-24 4.11 Natural Gas 4-25 4.12 Telephone Services 4-25 4.13 Television/Cable Service 4-25 4.14 Solid Waste 4-25 4.15 Public Services 4-26 5.0 DESIGN PLAN 5-1 5.1 Design Plan Objectives 5-2 5.1.1 Create Visual Continuity between the ARSP Area and the Adjacent Disneyland Resort Specific Plan Area 5-2 5.1.2 Create a High Quality, Visually Appealing, Pedestrian-Oriented Environment 5-2 5.1.3 Create Landscape and Design Guidelines to Reinforce the Area's Identity 5-3 5.2 Design Concepts 5-3 5.2.1 Transform and Unify with Landscape 5-3 5.2.2 Create a District with a Grand 5-3 5.2.3 Emphasize Landscaping on Public Streets 5-3 5.2.4 Orient Visitors Visually 5-4 5.2.5 Create a Recognizable Center for the Anaheim Resort 5-4 5.2.6 Coordinate Streetscape Improvements with other Improvements 5-4 5.2.7 Establish a Clear Design Hierarchy 5-4 5.3 Landscape Concept Plan 5-5 5.3.1 Plant Material Selection and Use 5-7 5.3.2 Layered Landscape Design Criteria 5-11 ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Table of Contents 5.3.3 Minimum Tree Density 5-14 5.3.4 Plant Selection Matrix 5-17 5.4 Landscape Cross Sections 5-22 5.5 Identity Concept Plan 5-55 5.6 Design Criteria for the Public Realm 5-56 5.6.1 Gateways 5-58 5.6.2 Public Streets 5-61 5.7 Design Criteria for the Setback Realm 5-62 5.7.1 Exterior Lighting 5-62 5.7.2 Freestanding Monument Sign 5-62 5.7.3 Central Core 5-63 5.7.4 Areas Outside of the Central Core 5-66 5.8 Design Criteria for the Private Realm 5-67 5.8.1 Organization of Private Realm Design Standards and Guidelines 5-67 5.8.2 General Site Planning Guidelines 5-67 5.8.3 Service, Storage and Maintenance Areas and Loading Docks Guidelines 5-68 5.8.4 Exterior Lighting Guidelines 5-68 5.8.5 Surface Parking Area Guidelines 5-69 5.8.6 Parking Structure Guidelines 5-70 5.8.7 Building Appearance Guidelines 5-71 5.8.8 Sign Guidelines 5-74 5.8.9 Landscape Guidelines 5-75 5.8.10 Wall and Fence Guidelines 5-76 5.8.11 Pedestrian Paving Guidelines 5-76 6.0 General Plan Consistency 6-1 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-1 18.116.010 PURPOSE AND INTENT. 7-2 18.116.020 GENERAL PROVISIONS. 7-3 18.116.025 CHANGES TO SPECIFIC PLAN BOUNDARIES. 7-5 18.116.030 DEFINITIONS. 7-5 18.116.040 METHODS AND PROCEDURES FOR SPECIFIC PLAN IMPLEMENTATION. 7-8 18.116.050 DEVELOPMENT AREAS. 7-11 18.116.060 DEVELOPMENT DENSITY AREAS –COMMERCIAL RECREATION (C-R) DISTRICT (DEVELOPMENT AREA 7-12 18.116.070 USES –COMMERCIAL RECREATION (C-R) DISTRICT (DEVELOPMENT AREA 7-14 18.116.075 RESIDENTIAL USES/AMENDMENTS. 7-41 18.116.080 STRUCTURAL HEIGHTS AND WIDTHS –COMMERCIAL RECREATION (C-R) DISTRICT (DEVELOPMENT AREA 7-42 18.116.090 STRUCTURAL SETBACKS –COMMERCIAL RECREATION (C-R) DISTRICT (DEVELOPMENT AREA 7-43 18.116.100 SCREENING, WALLS, FENCES, LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING –COMMERCIAL RECREATION (C-R) DISTRICT (DEVELOPMENT AREA 7-47 ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Table of Contents 18.116.110 LAND USE AND SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS –PUBLIC RECREATION (PR) DISTRICT (DEVELOPMENT AREA 7-54 18.116.120 MOBILE HOME PARK (MHP) OVERLAY. 7-54 18.116.125 ANAHEIM RESORT RESIDENTIAL (ARR) OVERLAY. 7-55 18.116.130 CENTRAL CORE. 7-58 18.116.140 OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING REQUIREMENTS. 7-61 18.116.150 REQUIREMENTS FOR VACATION OWNERSHIP RESORTS. 7-66 18.116.160 SIGN REGULATIONS. 7-70 18.116.170 RECLASSIFICATION PROCEDURE –VIOLATION. 7-98 8.0 Legal Description 8-1 LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit 1.4-1 ARSP/The Anaheim Resort Boundaries 1-6 Exhibit 1.8-1 Development Summary Plan 1-17 Exhibit 3.1-1 Regional Location Map 3-1 Exhibit 3.2-1 ARSP/The Anaheim Resort Boundaries 3-2 Exhibit 3.2-2 Aerial Photograph with the ARSP and Anaheim Resort Boundaries 3-3 Exhibit 3.2-3 Existing Land Use 3-4 Exhibit 3.3-1 Development Plan 3-6 Exhibit 3.3-2 Commercial Recreation (C-R) Development Density Plan 3-8 Exhibit 3.3-3 Mobilehome Park (MHP) Overlay in the C-R District 3-10 Exhibit 3.3-4 Anaheim Resort Residential (ARR) Overlay in the C-R District 3-11 Exhibit 3.3-5 Public Recreation (PR) District 3-12 Exhibit 3.3-6 Central Core Plan 3-14 Exhibit 4.1-1 Vehicular Circulation Plan 4-2 Exhibit 4.6-1 Pedestrian Circulation Plan 4-18 Exhibit 5.2-1 Utilize the Streets for Landscaping 5-4 Exhibit 5.2-2 The Three Elements of the Design Hierarchy: The Public Realm, The Setback Realm, and the Private Realm 5-5 Exhibit 5.3-1 Landscape Concept Diagram 5-6 Exhibit 5.3-2 Medium Canopy Trees 5-8 Exhibit 5.3-3 Large Canopy Trees 5-8 Exhibit 5.3-4 Vertical and Pyramidal Trees 5-9 Exhibit 5.3-5 Use of Shrubs to Screen Surface Parking Lots 5-10 Exhibit 5.3-6 Formal (Clipped) Hedges Vary in 5-10 Exhibit 5.3-7 Ground Cover Includes Turf and Other Grasses, Annuals, and Other Varieties of Plants . 5-11 Exhibit 5.3-8 Layered Landscape Design Criteria for Properties with Frontages Greater than 300 Feet 5-12 Exhibit 5.3-9 Layered Landscape Design Criteria for Properties with Frontages Less than 300 Feet 5-12 Exhibit 5.3-10 Layered Landscape Setback Width Criteria 5-13 Exhibit 5.3-11 Tree Density Factor Plan 5-16 Exhibit 5.3-12 Tree Selection Matrix (Part I) 5-18 Exhibit 5.3-13 Tree Selection Matrix (Part II) 5-19 Exhibit 5.3- 14 Shrub, Vine, and Ground Cover Matrix (Part I) 5-20 ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Table of Contents Exhibit 5.3-15 Shrub, Vine, and Ground Cover Matrix (Part II) 5-21 Exhibit 5.4-1 Landscape Cross Sections 5-23 Exhibit 5.6-1 The Three Elements of the Design Hierarchy: The Public Realm, The Setback Realm, and the Private Realm 5-56 Exhibit 5.6-2 The Public Realm 5-57 Exhibit 5.6-3 Gateway Location Plan 5-59 Exhibit 5.6-4 Harbor Boulevard North Gateway 5-60 Exhibit 5.6-5 Katella Avenue West Gateway 5-61 Exhibit 5.7-1 The Three Elements of the Design Hierarchy: The Public Realm, The Setback Realm, and the Private Realm 5-62 Exhibit 5.7-2 Freestanding Monument Sign 5-63 Exhibit 5.7-3 Freestanding Sign Design Criteria 5-63 Exhibit 5.7-4 Basic Central Core Design Principles 5-63 Exhibit 5.7-5 Redundant Curb Cuts 5-64 Exhibit 5.7-6 Consolidate Curb Cuts 5-64 Exhibit 5.7-7 Limit Portion of Elevation Devoted to Parking Area Entries 5-64 Exhibit 5.7-8 Special Intersection Landscape Treatment 5-65 Exhibit 5.7-9 Harbor Boulevard/Katella Avenue Intersection Area 5-65 Exhibit 5.8-1 The Three Elements of the Design Hierarchy: The Public Realm, The Setback Realm, and the Private Realm 5-67 Exhibit 5.8-2 Landscape Buffer between Uses 5-68 Exhibit 5.8-3 Screen Service Areas from View 5-68 Exhibit 5.8-4 Screen Parking From View 5-70 Exhibit 5.8-5 Pedestrians Move Perpendicular to Parking Spaces 5-70 Exhibit 5.8-6 Landscaping Detail at Ground Level 5-75 LIST OF TABLES Table 1.5-1 General Plan Goals and Policies 1-8 Table 1.8-1 Development Summary 1-18 Table 1.8-2 Existing and Permitted Development 1-18 Table 4.8-1 Existing Sewer System Deficiencies and Recommended Improvements for Year 2030 4-21 Table 5.3-1 Levels of Tree Density 5-14 Table 5.3-2 Tree Point Values 5-15 Table 5.8-1 Allowable Lighting Levels by Level of Security 5-69 APPENDICES Anaheim Commercial Recreation Area, Maximum Permitted Structural Height Map Appendix A The Anaheim Resort Public Realm and Landscape Program Appendix B The Anaheim Resort Identity Program Appendix C Planning Standard Details 5-8 Appendix D ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Table of Contents This page is intentionally blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 1.0 Executive Summary 1-1 1.0 Executive Summary 1.1 Introduction On September 27, 1994, the Anaheim City Council adopted Ordinance No. 5453 relating to the establishment of Zoning and Development Standards for the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (ARSP) No. 92-2 by the addition of Chapter 18.48 to the Anaheim Municipal Code, and Ordinance No. 5454, amending the zoning map to reclassify approximately 549.5 acres of certain real property into the ARSP. The ARSP was specifically designated by the City’s General Plan for recreation and tourist/convention-related activities. Since the adoption of the ARSP, proposed modifications to the specific plan having included 14 amendments and 6 adjustments, which have included an expansion of the ARSP area to include 31.8 additional acres, increasing the total acreage of the ARSP area to 581.3 acres. ARSP Amendment No. 1. In June 1997, the City Council approved General Plan Amendment No. 344, Amendment No. 1 to the ARSP, and Conditional Use Permit No. 3917. These actions designated 4.67 acres, located on the northern side of Orangewood Avenue and east of Harbor Boulevard, for Commercial Recreation land use and incorporated the site into the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (SP92-2) Zone. Conditional Use Permit No. 3917 approved the conversion of an existing 139-unit, 2-story, 8-building apartment complex on this site into a 136-unit Vacation Ownership Resort known as “Dolphin Cove.” ARSP Amendment No. 2. In October 1998, Amendment No. 2 to the ARSP was proposed to amend Chapter 18.116 of the Anaheim Municipal Code (Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 92-2 (SP92- 2) Zoning and Development Standards) to add “coffee house” as a Conditionally Permitted Accessory Use in conjunction with an Automotive Service Station. The Planning Commission denied the amendment and the Applicant subsequently withdrew the petition at the January 26, 1999, City Council meeting. ARSP Adjustment No. 1. In May 1999, the City Council approved Adjustment No. 1 to the ARSP, which amended Chapter 18.116 of the Anaheim Municipal Code (Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 92-2 (SP92-2) Zoning and Development Standards) to modify the setback and yard requirements to reflect the local street status of Convention Way. ARSP Amendment No. 3. In August 1999, the City Council approved General Plan Amendment No. 364 and Amendment No. 3 to the ARSP. These actions designated an approximate 0.73- acre site, located at the northwestern corner of Casa Grande Avenue and Casa Vista Street, for Commercial Recreation land use and reclassified the site into the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (SP92-2) Zone. The site is developed with 44 guest rooms of a 100-room motel. Prior to the amendments, the site was designated for Medium Density Residential land uses, while the balance of the motel (lobby and 56 guest rooms) was included in the SP 92-2 Zone and designated for Commercial Recreation land uses. As a result of the amendments, the entire hotel site is designated for Commercial Recreation land use and located in the SP 92-2 Zone. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 1.0 Executive Summary 1-2 ARSP Adjustment No. 2. In September 1999, the City Council approved Adjustment No. 2 to the ARSP, which amended Chapter 18.116 of the Anaheim Municipal Code (Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 92-2 (SP92-2) Zoning and Development Standards) to modify the minimum landscape setback requirement for properties adjacent to Manchester Avenue between Katella Avenue and the southern boundary of the ARSP area. ARSP Adjustment No. 3. In May 2001, the City Council approved Adjustment No. 3 to the ARSP, which amended the Zoning and Development Standards set forth in Chapter 18.116 of the Anaheim Municipal Code (Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 92-2 (SP92-2) Zoning and Development Standards) relating to temporary parking requirements including time limitations, landscape and screening requirements, and permitted fence and wall materials. ARSP Adjustment No. 4. In April 2004, the City Council approved Adjustment No. 4 to the ARSP, which amended Chapter 18.116 of the Anaheim Municipal Code (Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 92-2 (SP92-2) Zoning and Development Standards) to permit office uses in legal nonconforming buildings subject to the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. ARSP Amendment No. 4. In June 2004, the City Council adopted Zoning Code Amendment No. 2004-00029, a comprehensive update of Title 18 (Zoning) of the Anaheim Municipal Code. This code amendment incorporated ARSP Amendment No. 4, which included modifications to Chapter 18.116 (Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 92-2 (SP92-2) Zoning and Development Standards) intended to streamline the project review process. ARSP Amendment No. 5. In June 2004, the City Council approved Amendment No. 5 to the ARSP in conjunction with a comprehensive update of the City’s General Plan and Zoning Code. Amendment No. 5 expanded The Anaheim Resort to the southern City limits by incorporating approximately 26.4 acres, located along Harbor Boulevard, south of Orangewood Avenue, into the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (SP92-2) Zone. ARSP Amendment No. 6. In February 2005, the City Council approved Amendment No. 6 to the ARSP. This amendment modified Chapter 18.116 of the Anaheim Municipal Code (Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 92-2 (SP92-2) Zoning and Development Standards) to permit convenience markets to sell beer and wine for off-premises consumption, as an accessory use to service stations in conjunction with the relocation of an existing service station, if such service station is relocated from a location with street frontage on Harbor Boulevard to a location not fronting on Harbor Boulevard. ARSP Amendment No. 7 In August 2006, the City Council approved General Plan Amendment No. 2006-00042 and Amendment No. 7 to the ARSP to create a residential overlay that would allow the development of residential uses in certain targeted areas when such uses are fully integrated into a minimum 300-room full service hotel. ARSP Adjustment No. 5 In August 2006, the City Council approved Adjustment No. 5 to the ARSP, which amended Chapter 18.116 of the Anaheim Municipal Code (Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 92-2 (SP92-2) Zoning and Development Standards) in its entirety to provide consistent formatting with Title 18 (Zoning Code) along with minor modifications and clarifications. ARSP Amendment No. 8. In April 2007, the City Council approved General Plan Amendment No. 2006-00448 and Amendment No. 8 to the ARSP ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 1.0 Executive Summary 1-3 to allow for wholly-residential development, fifteen percent of which must be comprised of rental units affordable to low or very-low income households, on a designated 26.7-acre site located south and east of Katella Avenue and Haster Street. ARSP Amendment No. 9. In November 2007, City Council repealed General Plan Amendment No. 2006-00448 and initiated Amendment No. 9 to the ARSP to repeal Amendment No. 8 to the ARSP. In March 2008, City Council approved Amendment No. 9, which removed all provisions in Chapter 18.116 (Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 92-2 (SP92-2) Zoning and Development Standards) related to wholly-residential development, with the exception of residential uses in certain targeted areas when such uses are fully integrated into a minimum 300-room full service hotel (as approved by Amendment No. ARSP Amendment No. 10. In February 2008, Planning Commission reviewed a proposal for a General Plan Amendment, Specific Plan Amendment (Amendment No. 10 to the ARSP), Zoning Reclassification, Conditional Use Permit, Final Site Plan, Development Agreement, Tentative Parcel Map, and Tentative Tract Map to allow a 102-room hotel with 14,714 square feet of accessory commercial uses and a 191-unit condominium complex on approximately 5 acres located at 2232 Harbor Boulevard, in the southern portion of the ARSP area. Prior to the City Council taking final action on this request, the applicant withdrew the proposal due to the approval of the “SOAR” Initiative. ARSP Amendment No. 11. In March 2008, under General Plan Amendment No. 2008-00466 and Amendment No. 11 to the ARSP, City Council adopted an initiative measure, known as the “SOAR” Initiative, to amend the General Plan and ARSP to generally prohibit residential development within The Anaheim Resort unless such a project included environmental and economic analysis, City Council approval, and voter approval at a city election. ARSP Amendment No. 12. In October 2008, City Council approved Amendment No. 12 to the ARSP, which increased the allowable density on a 5.9-acre project site from C-R Low Density (50 hotel rooms per gross acre) to C-R Low Medium Density (75 hotel rooms per gross acre). The site was divided into two separate parcels, allowing development of 154 hotel rooms on Parcel 1 and up to 288 hotel rooms on Parcel 2 for a total of up to 442 hotel rooms. ARSP Amendment No. 13. In March 2009, City Council approved General Plan Amendment No. 2008-00470, Amendment No. 13 to the ARSP and an amendment to the Anaheim Resort Public Realm Landscape Program. These amendments modified the text in the General Plan Land Use Element and the ARSP to reflect a new density category created for the Commercial Recreation District, called “Low Medium Density (Modified); modified the Central Core and Special Intersection Landscape Treatment exhibits to allow special landscape and hardscape treatments at the corner of Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue; modified the sign code to allow a greater number and larger signs than currently permitted for hotels and accessory retail; allowed changeable copy signs for hotels when not visible from any public right-of-way, murals, and building integrated multi-tenant signs subject to approval of a conditional use permit. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 1.0 Executive Summary 1-4 ARSP Adjustment No. 6. In June 2012, City Council approved Zoning Code Amendment No. 2012-00106, which included Adjustment No. 6 to the ARSP. This adjustment modified the Code references and terminology for Restaurants with Outdoor Dining, Restaurants with Accessory Entertainment, Dance Venues, Massage Establishments, Amusement Devices, Amusement Arcades and Health Clubs to be consistent with Chapters 18.16 (Regulatory Permits) and 18.92 (Definitions) of Title 18 (Zoning Code). ARSP Amendment No. 14. In City Council approved General Plan Amendment No. 2010-00482 and Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP to update the ARSP to reflect current development conditions and regulations and increase the maximum allowable square footage in the Public Recreational (PR) district to accommodate future expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 1.0 Executive Summary 1-5 1.2 Purpose of the Specific Plan The purpose of the ARSP is to provide a long- range comprehensive plan for future development of approximately 581.3 acres within The Anaheim Resort, which encompasses 1,078 acres generally located adjacent to and southwest of Interstate 5 To achieve this, the ARSP establishes an overall identity and land use plan that is intended to maximize the area's potential, guide future development, and ensure a balance between growth and infrastructure. The ARSP additionally includes specific zoning and development standards, design guidelines, a streetscape program, and a public facilities plan, which describe how the Plan's goals and objectives will be realized. The ARSP will permit the development of hotel, convention, retail, and other visitor-serving uses as well as the infra- structure improvements that will be needed to support future development. 1.3 Organization of the Specific Plan Document The ARSP is divided into eight sections: Section 1.0 Executive Summary Section 2.0 Planning Context Section 3.0 Land Use Plan Section 4.0 Public Facilities Plan Section 5.0 Design Plan Section 6.0 General Plan Consistency Section 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards Section 8.0 Legal Description Section 1.0, the Executive Summary, is a brief overview of the ARSP. Section 2.0, the Planning Context, discusses the purpose of the ARSP, the City planning policies that affect development of the ARSP area, the authority and scope of the ARSP, and its relationship to other City planning documents. Section 3.0 contains the Land Use Plan and describes existing land uses and conditions within the ARSP area, and describes the proposed land uses and development densities. Section 4.0 contains the Public Facilities Plan. In Section 5.0, the Design Plan establishes the design criteria for the ARSP area. Section 6.0, General Plan Consistency, describes how the ARSP is consistent with the City's General Plan. Section 7.0 contains the detailed Zoning and Development Standards that will regulate development within the ARSP area. Section 8.0, contains a legal description of the ARSP area. For informational purposes, the Anaheim Commercial Recreation Area Maximum Permitted Structural Height Map, The Anaheim Resort Public Realm and Landscape Program, The Anaheim Resort Identity Program and Planning Standard Details 5-8 are also located at the back of this document, as appendices. 1.4 Existing Setting The ARSP area encompasses 581.3 acres within the 1,078-acre Anaheim Resort, a portion of the City of Anaheim specially designated by the City's General Plan for recreation and tourist/convention-related activities and supporting uses. The Anaheim Resort is located 35 miles southeast of downtown Los Angeles and 7 miles northwest of Santa Ana, in Central Orange County. As shown in Exhibit 1.4-1, ARSP/The Anaheim Resort Boundaries, The Anaheim Resort is located generally west of the I-5 corridor, south of Vermont Avenue, east of Walnut Street, and north of Chapman Avenue. In addition to the ARSP, two other specific plans, The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan and the Hotel Circle Specific Plan, have been approved for the remaining 496.5 acres of The Anaheim Resort. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 1.0 Executive Summary 1-6 Exhibit 1.4-1 ARSP/The Anaheim Resort Boundaries ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 1.0 Executive Summary 1-7 1.4.1 The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan On June 29, 1993, the City of Anaheim adopted The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan (SP 92-1) to provide for the development of an international multi-day vacation destination resort encompassing approximately 489.7 acres of The Anaheim Resort. The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan permits the development of a new theme park, additional hotels and entertainment areas, new parking facilities, and an internal transportation system. In addition, the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan permits the existing Disneyland theme park to continue to be modified with new attractions and other improvements. Although they are separate projects, the ARSP and The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan have been prepared to complement one another by incorporating similar zoning and development standards, streetscape and signage programs, and infrastructure improvements for the overall enhancement of The Anaheim Resort. 1.4.2 The Hotel Circle Specific Plan On August 16, 1994, the City of Anaheim adopted the Hotel Circle Specific Plan (SP 93-1) for the remaining 6.8 acres of The Anaheim Resort. This specific plan allows for the development of up to 969 hotel rooms. All of the parcels within the specific plan area are developed with a total of 818 hotel rooms. 1.5 Implementing the General Plan The ARSP implements the City's General Plan In 1994, when the ARSP was adopted, the following General Plan Policies, relevant to the ARSP, were in place:  To maintain and encourage Anaheim's position as a nationally recognized tourist, convention and recreation center;  To increase sales tax yields and further enhance the economic base of the community, thereby lessening the tax burden on real property;  To encourage the development of quality facilities that complement conventions, family entertainment, and recreation within appropriate areas of the community; and,  To maintain the integrity of the Commercial Recreation Area (now referred to as The Anaheim Resort) by permitting only compatible land uses within this designated area. In 2004, the Anaheim City Council adopted a comprehensive update of its General Plan. Table 1.4-1 indicates the updated General Plan Goals and Policies relevant to the ARSP. A complete discussion of the relationship between the ARSP and the Anaheim General Plan is found in Section 6.0, General Plan Consistency. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 1.0 Executive Summary 1-8 Table 1.5-1 General Plan Goals and Policies City of Anaheim General Plan Goal or Policy Land Use Goal 2.1 Continue to provide a variety of quality housing opportunities to address the City’s diverse housing needs. Policy 4 Encourage the development and integration of residential land uses into mixed-use development where appropriate. Policy 6 Ensure quality development through appropriate development standards and by adherence to related Community Design Element policies and guidelines. Goal 3.1 Pursue land uses along major corridors that enhance the City’s image and stimulate appropriate development at strategic locations. Policy 3 Ensure quality development along corridors through adherence to established development standards and Community Design Element goals, policies and guidelines. Policy 4 Continue to pursue additional open space, recreation, and landscaping amenities along major transportation routes. Goal 4.1 Promote development that integrates with and minimizes impacts to surrounding land uses. Policy 1 Ensure that land uses develop in accordance with the Land Use Plan and Zoning Code in an effort to attain land use compatibility. Policy 2 Promote compatible development through adherence to Community Design Element policies and guidelines. Policy 3 Ensure that developers consider and address project impacts upon surrounding neighborhoods during the design and development process. Policy 4 Require new or expanded uses to provide mitigation or buffers between existing uses where potential adverse impacts could occur. Goal 5.1 Create and enhance dynamic, identifiable places for the benefit of Anaheim residents, employees and visitors. Policy 4 Promote development that is efficient, pedestrian-friendly, and served by a variety of transportation options. Goal 6.1 Enhance the quality of life and economic vitality in Anaheim through strategic infill development and revitalization of existing development. Circulation Goal 1.1 Provide a comprehensive multimodal transportation system that facilitates current and long-term circulation of people and goods in and through the City. Policy 3 Require that major new development proposals include traffic impact analyses that identify measures and financing to mitigate traffic impacts. Policy 6 Ensure the provision of needed transportation improvements through the site plan and environmental review process. Goal 1.2 Support improvements to highways passing near and through the City. Policy 1 Continue working with Caltrans and the Federal Highway Administration to address traffic flow along State highways that traverse the City. Policy 3 Work with Caltrans to identify needed improvements to its facilities in the City as necessary. Policy 4 Work with Caltrans and adjacent jurisdictions to improve the operational performance of highways within and adjacent to the City. Policy 5 Work with Caltrans in analyzing the performance of freeway interchanges located in the City and seek appropriate improvements. Goal 2.1 Maintain efficient traffic operations on City streets and maintain a peak hour level of service not worse than D at street intersections. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 1.0 Executive Summary 1-9 City of Anaheim General Plan Goal or Policy Policy 1 Make improvements to streets and intersections experiencing conditions worse than the applicable Level of Service standard by providing appropriate improvements, including, but not limited to:  Landscaped median islands to restrict left turns, with median opening spacing occurring a minimum of 400 feet apart, and preferably limited to signalized locations.  Adequate driveway spacing of 125 feet (at 30 mph) to 230 feet (at 45 mph) between driveways on arterial highways. Goal 2.2 Provide a safe circulation system. Policy 1 Promote the principle that streets have multiple uses and users, and protect the safety of all users. Policy 3 Design access onto major arterial streets in an orderly and controlled manner. Policy 6 Implement street design features such as the use of medians, bus turnouts, consolidated driveways and on street parking prohibitions to minimize mid-block traffic congestion. Goal 5.1 Promote bus service and paratransit improvements. Policy 5 Intensify land uses in close proximity to future BRT stop(s) where appropriate. Policy 6 Improve pedestrian access to transit facilities. Goal 8.1 Protect and encourage pedestrian travel. Policy 1 Encourage and improve pedestrian facilities that link development to the circulation network and that serve as a transition between other modes of travel. Policy 5 Add raised, landscaped medians, and bulbouts, where appropriate, to reduce exposure to cross traffic at street crossings. Policy 6 When appropriate, walkways should include pedestrian amenities such as shade trees and/or plantings, trash bins, benches, shelters, and directional kiosks. Policy 7 Ensure that streets and intersections are designed to provide visibility and safety for pedestrians. Goal 12.1 Ensure adequate parking is made available to City residents, visitors, and businesses. Policy 1 Assess the adequacy of existing or proposed on- and off-street parking as needed, especially in urban and commercial areas, to ensure that an adequate supply is provided. Policy 5 Encourage the use of well-designed, aesthetically-enhanced parking structures as an alternative to large, expansive surface parking lots. Green Goal 5.1 Continue Anaheim’s water conservation efforts to ensure that all City facilities are water efficient. Policy 3 Specify and install water-conserving plumbing fixtures and fittings in public facilities such as parks, community centers, and government buildings. Goal 6.1 Develop a Groundwater Protection Management Program to ensure the quality of groundwater drinking supplies. Policy 3 Continue to coordinate groundwater protection efforts with the Orange County Water District, neighboring cities and other relevant agencies. Goal 7.1 Reduce urban run-off from new and existing development. Policy 1 Ensure compliance with the Federal Clean Water Act requirements for National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits, including developing and requiring the development of Water Quality Management Plans for all new development and significant redevelopment in the City. Policy 2 Continue to implement an urban runoff reduction program consistent with regional and federal requirements, which includes requiring and encouraging the following:  Increase permeable areas and install filtration controls (including grass lined swales and gravel beds) and divert flow to these permeable areas to allow more percolation of runoff into the ground;  Use natural drainage, detention ponds or infiltration pits to collect runoff; and,  Prevent rainfall from entering material and waste storage areas and pollution-laden surfaces. Policy 4 Require new development and significant redevelopment to utilize site preparation, grading and best management practices that provide erosion and sediment control to prevent construction-related contaminants from leaving the ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 1.0 Executive Summary 1-10 City of Anaheim General Plan Goal or Policy site and polluting waterways. Goal 8.1 Reduce locally generated emissions through improved traffic flows and construction management practices. Policy 1 Reduce vehicle emissions through traffic flow improvements, such as traffic signal Intelligent Transportation Systems, the Scoot Adaptive Traffic Control System, and related capital improvements. Policy 2 Regulate construction practices, including grading, dust suppression, chemical management, and encourage pre- determined construction routes that minimize dust and particulate matter pollution. Goal 11.1 Encourage land planning and urban design that support alternatives to the private automobile such as mixed-use, provision of pedestrian amenities, and transit-oriented development. Policy 1 Encourage commercial growth and the development of commercial centers in accordance with the Land Use Element. Goal 14.1 Conserve natural habitat and protect rare, threatened and endangered species. Goal 16.1 Continue to monitor and improve the Anaheim Recycle program. Policy 2 Provide adequate solid waste collection and recycling for commercial areas and construction activities. Goal 17.1 Encourage building and site design standards that reduce energy costs. Policy 1 Encourage designs that incorporate solar and wind exposure features such as daylighting design, natural ventilation, space planning and thermal massing. Public Services and Facilities Goal 1.1 Provide sufficient staffing, equipment and facilities to ensure effective fire protection, emergency medical and rescue services, permitting and fire inspection, and hazardous material response services that keep pace with growth. Policy 1 Maintain adequate resources to enable the Fire Department to meet response time standards, keep pace with growth, and provide high levels of service. Policy 3 Maintain and/or upgrade water facilities to ensure adequate response to fire hazards. Goal 2.1 Meet the community’s needs for public safety and law enforcement by ensuring adequate resources for the prevention, detection, and investigation of crime, and response to calls for service. Policy 1 Maintain adequate resources to enable the Police Department to meet response time standards, keep pace with growth, and provide high levels of service. Goal 4.1 Provide a water system that produces high quality water, sufficient water pressure, and necessary quantities of water to meet domestic demands Policy 1 Provide for the efficient and economic distribution of adequate water supply and pressure to all residential, commercial, industrial, and public areas served by the Public Utilities Department. Policy 2 Continue to provide municipal water service that meets or exceeds State and Federal health standards and monitor water quality according to established criteria, with respect to health standards. Goal 5.1 Provide a safe and effective sewer system that meets the needs of the City’s residents, businesses, and visitors. Policy 1 Ensure that appropriate sewer system mitigation measures are identified and implemented in conjunction with new development based on the recommendations of prior sewer studies and/or future sewer studies that may be required by the City Engineer. Goal 6.1 Maintain a storm drain system that will adequately protect and enhance the health, safety and general welfare of residents, visitors, employees, and their property. Policy 1 Improve the City’s storm drain system to address current deficiencies as well as long-term needs associated with future development to minimize flood damage and adequately convey rainfall and subsequent runoff from a 25-year frequency storm. Policy 2 Develop Anaheim’s flood control system for multi-purpose uses whenever practical and financially feasible recreational, water quality/treatment, infiltration, etc.). Goal 7.1 Minimize, recycle and dispose of solid and hazardous waste in an efficient and environmentally sound manner. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 1.0 Executive Summary 1-11 City of Anaheim General Plan Goal or Policy Policy 2 Reduce the volume of material sent to solid waste sites in accordance with State law by continuing source reduction and recycling programs and by ensuring the participation of all residents and businesses. Goal 8.1 Coordinate with private utilities to provide adequate natural gas and communications infrastructure to existing and new development in a manner compatible with the surrounding community. Goal 9.1 Provide a dependable fiber optics system that meets existing and future needs. Policy 1 Maintain and, when desirable, expand fiber optics capacity to ensure Anaheim businesses and educational and governmental institutions enjoy adequate high-speed communications access. Goal 10.1 Improve the City’s appearance by mitigating the visual impacts of utility equipment and facilities. Policy 1 Continue to implement the Underground Conversion Program in public rights-of-way and increase the number of underground utility districts, as appropriate. Policy 2 Use a combination of architectural enhancements, equipment undergrounding, screen walls and landscaping to reduce or eliminate visibility of utility equipment and facilities, whenever feasible. Growth Management Goal 1.1 Provide a balance of housing options and job opportunities throughout the City. Policy 3 Ensure a balance of retail, office, industrial and residential land uses to enhance the economic base of the City when considering land use changes. Goal 1.4 Develop land use strategies and incentives to reduce the amount of vehicle miles traveled within the City. Goal 2.1 Reduce traffic congestion on the City’s arterial highway system. Policy 5 Promote the use of public transportation and alternative modes of transportation by increasing access to public transit, including Bus Rapid Transit, through land use planning locating higher density residential projects near transportation corridors), ensuring direct and convenient pedestrian access to public transit stops, implementing bicycle routes, encouraging pedestrian-friendly developments, and supporting High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes. Goal 2.2 Evaluate the traffic-related impacts of proposed developments and/or intensification of existing land uses and address said impacts. Policy 1 Continue to review development projects to ensure traffic-related impacts are addressed appropriately. Policy 4 Prior to issuing building permits for new development forecast to generate 100 or more peak hour (morning or evening) trip ends, require traffic impact analyses be completed that identify arterial and intersection improvements that may potentially be needed to provide no worse than LOS E along Interstates/State Routes/Smart Streets (unless current operation is LOS and not worse than LOS D along the balance of the arterials on the City’s Circulation Element that are measurably impacted by the new development and are under the City’s jurisdiction. Policy 5 Require development projects that exceed LOS standards beyond acceptable levels to provide necessary improvements and/or funding to mitigate said impacts, if determined necessary by the City. Safety Goal 1.1 Minimize the risk to public health and safety and disruptions to vital services, economic vitality, and social order resulting from seismic and geologic activities. Policy 1 Minimize the risk to life and property through the identification of potentially hazardous areas, adherence to proper construction design criteria, and provision of public information. Goal 3.1 Reduce, to the greatest extent possible, the risk to life, property, public investment, and social order created by flood hazards. Policy 1 Evaluate all development proposals located in areas that are subject to flooding to minimize the exposure of life and property to potential flood risks. Goal 4.1 Decrease the risk of exposure for life, property and the environment to hazardous materials and hazardous waste. Policy 2 Promote the proper handling, treatment and disposal of hazardous materials and hazardous waste. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 1.0 Executive Summary 1-12 City of Anaheim General Plan Goal or Policy Policy 4 Implement Federal, State and local regulations for the disposal, handling, and storage of hazardous materials. Noise Goal 1.1 Protect sensitive land uses from excessive noise through diligent planning and regulation. Policy 2 Continue to enforce acceptable noise standards consistent with health and quality of life goals and employ effective techniques of noise abatement through such means as a noise ordinance, building codes, and subdivision and zoning regulations. Policy 3 Consider the compatibility of proposed land uses with the noise environment when preparing, revising or reviewing development proposals. Goal 2.1 Encourage the reduction of noise from transportation-related noise sources such as motor vehicles, aircraft operations, and railroad movements. Policy 3 Require that development generating increased traffic and subsequent increases in the ambient noise level adjacent to noise-sensitive land uses provide appropriate mitigation measures. Goal 3.1 Protect residents from the effects of “spill over” or nuisance noise emanating from the City’s activity centers. Policy 1 Discourage new projects located in commercial or entertainment areas from exceeding stationary-source noise standards at the property line of proximate residential or commercial uses, as appropriate. Policy 3 Enforce standards to regulate noise from construction activities. Particular emphasis shall be placed on the restriction of the hours in which work other than emergency work may occur. Discourage construction on weekends or holidays except in the case of construction proximate to schools where these operations could disturb the classroom environment. Policy 4 Require that construction equipment operate with mufflers and intake silencers no less effective than originally equipped. Policy 5 Encourage the use of portable noise barriers for heavy equipment operations performed within 100 feet of existing residences or make applicant provide evidence as to why the use of such barriers is infeasible. Economic Development Goal 1.1 Continue to expand the City’s Marketing and promotional campaign Policy 1 Continue to market Anaheim as a business-friendly city and implement the following strategies to promote the City’s special activity areas and neighborhoods:  Continue to market the Anaheim Convention Center as a showcase for the community and an opportunity for new and existing businesses to network.  Market The Anaheim Resort…as major entertainment amenities for local, regional and national business. Goal 1.2 Attract new businesses and help existing ones through effective Public Utilities programs. Policy 3 Continue and expand energy efficiency programs to new and existing businesses through the Anaheim Public Utilities Department Goal 1.3 Attract businesses through an efficient development approval process. Goal 1.4 Attract businesses through an efficient public works program. Goal 2.2 Enhance the quality of commercial development along major corridors Community Design Goal 1.1 Create an aesthetically pleasing and unified community appearance within the context of distinct districts and neighborhoods. Policy 4 Pursue unifying streetscape elements for major corridors, including coordinated streetlights, landscaping, public signage and street furniture, to reinforce Anaheim’s community image. Policy 5 Identify and preserve/enhance view corridors for major landmarks, community facilities, and natural open space in the planning and design of all public and private projects. Policy 7 Screen public and private facilities and above-ground infrastructure support and equipment, such as electrical substations, and water wells and recharge facilities, with appropriately scaled landscaping or other methods of ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 1.0 Executive Summary 1-13 City of Anaheim General Plan Goal or Policy screening. Policy 8 Construct public and private facilities and support structures water pipes, irrigation and electrical controls, vents) to blend with the surrounding environment. Policy 9 Minimize visual impacts of public and private facilities and support structures through sensitive site design and construction. This includes, but is not limited to: appropriate placement of facilities; undergrounding, where possible; and aesthetic design cell tower stealthing). Goal 2.1 Attractively landscape and maintain Anaheim’s major arterial corridors and prepare/ implement distinctive streetscape improvement plans. Housing Element Guiding Principle D Sustainable design and the efficient utilization of resources create more livable neighborhoods and can have both environmental and financial benefits. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 1.0 Executive Summary 1-14 1.6 Specific Plan Goals The General Plan is implemented through the following overall goals of the ARSP:  To foster the growth of the City's economic potential by revitalizing The Anaheim Resort;  To treat all landowners and users in The Anaheim Resort fairly, while recognizing the economic and social needs of the entire City;  To ensure that development complements the City's investment in the Anaheim Convention Center and other area resources and interests;  To maintain and enhance existing recreation and convention-oriented land uses;  To protect adjacent residential land uses by buffering them from potential land use impacts associated with development of The Anaheim Resort;  To maintain or enhance traffic and circulation in and around The Anaheim Resort;  To provide convenient access to all hotel, restaurant, and retail opportunities in The Anaheim Resort to enhance the area-wide tourist experience;  To protect adjacent residential neighborhoods from unnecessary intrusion by vehicles traveling to and from The Anaheim Resort;  To accommodate potential future regional transportation networks into the Plan;  To provide for necessary public infrastructure and services to maximize the development potential of The Anaheim Resort;  To create a coherent, unique resort identity that reinforces The Anaheim Resort's image as a high-quality destination resort;  To establish a high-quality pedestrian environment; and,  To improve the aesthetic character of The Anaheim Resort by visually defining the boundaries with appropriate landscape treatments. 1.7 The Development Plan The Development Plan establishes the basic framework for land use and development standards, which will govern development of the ARSP area. It defines the permitted uses, development density, building setbacks, building heights, and other design standards that will be complied with by individual property owners and developers when building new or renovating existing projects. 1.7.1 Land Use The land uses permitted within the ARSP area will be consistent with the overall goal of maximizing the area's potential, while establishing an overall identity. The primary intent is to provide for the needs of visitors to the area's attractions. Consequently, the permitted uses are primarily those that, by their nature, are related to tourism and entertainment. The 518.5-acre Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area which encompasses the entire ARSP area, except the Anaheim Convention Center and the Hilton Anaheim hotel, provides for the development of hotels, motels, convention and conference facilities, as well as restaurants, retail shops, and entertainment uses. Since the uses are oriented towards entertainment, retail uses such as neighborhood shopping centers will not be permitted. In addition, to discourage use of automobiles, drive-through restaurants and other similar uses will not be permitted. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 1.0 Executive Summary 1-15 The C-R District also includes three properties on approximately 31.5 acres, which are within the Mobilehome Park (MHP) Overlay. The MHP Overlay encompasses two existing mobile home parks and a recreational vehicle (RV) park. The requirements set forth in Chapter 18.26 of the Anaheim Municipal Code provide development standards, regulations, and procedures to mitigate relocation problems and adverse effects of effects of displacement upon mobilehome owners when a park is converted to another land use. Also located within the C-R District, the 59.3-acre Anaheim Resort Residential (ARR) Overlay allows for conditionally permitted residential uses in conjunction with the development of a full- service hotel having at least 300 hotel rooms and where hotel uses comprise at least half of the site density, (ii) residential uses on the site are fully integrated into the hotel, and (iii) adjacent to public rights-of-way, residential uses are at least two stories or 25 feet above ground level. The 62.8-acre Public Recreation (PR) District (Development Area 2) encompasses the City of Anaheim Convention Center and associated parking complexes, and the 1,600-room Hilton Anaheim hotel. The PR District allows up to 2,158,363 square feet of convention center/meeting space; 100,000 square feet of outdoor programmable space; 2,500 hotel rooms; and 180,000 square feet of commercial space. Development within this district is subject to the requirements of the Public Recreational (PR) Zone. The purpose of the PR Zone, which is set forth in Chapter 18.14 of the Anaheim Municipal Code, is to preserve, regulate and control the orderly use of City-owned property and adjacent private property. 1.7.2 Development Density Because of the location of the ARSP area in an urban setting, the density at which particular areas are developed is an important planning consideration. In particular, the timing and availability of infrastructure (such as vehicular access, water and sewer capacity, and storm drainage facilities) is the critical determinant for the future development potential of the ARSP area. In addition, proximity to the area’s attractions, and the relationship to surrounding land uses was considered. For the allowable development densities within the ARSP area, refer to Section 3.3 of the Land Use Plan. 1.7.3 Development Standards and Guidelines In addition to regulations that will govern development density, the ARSP contains development standards which regulate building mass and setbacks from property lines. The ARSP also contains regulations which define required landscape treatments both within the public right-of-way and in required setbacks, as well as guidelines for site planning, service area design, parking facility design, building appearance, signs, and other landscaping. In recognition of the importance of the Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue corridors to the identity of The Anaheim Resort, the plan establishes special standards and guidelines for the central portion of The Anaheim Resort. This area, known as the Central Core, encompasses lots or parcels in the ARSP area with frontage on Harbor Boulevard between I-5 and Orangewood Avenue, and on Katella Avenue between Walnut Street and Haster Street/Anaheim Boulevard. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 1.0 Executive Summary 1-16 1.7.4 Development Summary The maps and accompanying tables on the following pages summarize the Development Plan for the ARSP. Exhibit 1.7-1, Development Summary Plan, shows the location of the C-R District (Development Area the PR District (Development Area the Central Core, the Mobilehome Park (MHP) Overlay, and the Anaheim Resort Residential (ARR) Overlay. It is accompanied by Table 1.7-1, which summarizes the Development Plan; and Table 1.7-2, which summaries the existing and permitted development in the C-R and PR Districts. As shown in Table 1.7-2, the ARSP permits up to 32,500 hotel rooms or hotel room equivalents within the C-R District. There are 11,587 hotel rooms or hotel room equivalents that are currently developed within the ARSP area. For impact analysis, commercial uses are converted to hotel room equivalents on a ratio of 600 square feet of commercial development to one hotel room. The PR District includes the 1,712,004 square foot (sf) Anaheim Convention Center and the 1,600-room Hilton Anaheim hotel. The PR District allows development of up to 2,158,363 square feet of convention center/meeting space; 100,000 square feet of outdoor programmable space; 2,500 hotel rooms; and 180,000 square feet of commercial space. 1.8 Implementing the Specific Plan The sketches, diagrams, and plans included in the ARSP are intended to convey the overall design intent of the ARSP. As individual properties are developed, additional site planning, design review and approval will be required prior to the issuance of building permits. In order to convey the design intent of the ARSP, the trees and other plants shown in sketches and cross-sections have been drawn to show their sizes at maturity. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 1.0 Executive Summary 1-17 Exhibit 1.8-1 Development Summary Plan ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 1.0 Executive Summary 1-18 Table 1.8-1 Development Summary Districts/Rights-of-way Land Use Approximate Acreage Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area 1) Hotel/motel, restaurant and other visitor-serving uses 518.5 Public Recreation (PR) District (Development Area 2) Anaheim Convention Center, hotels, and accessory uses 62.8 TOTAL 581.3 Mobile Home Park (MHP) Overlay in C-R District Existing mobile homes 31.5 Anaheim Resort Residential (ARR) Overlay in C-R District Allows residential uses in conjunction with a full- service hotel 59.3 Table 1.8-2 Existing and Permitted Development District Existing Development Permitted Development C-R District  11,587 hotel rooms*  32,500 hotel rooms P-R District  1,600 hotel rooms  1,712,004 sf convention center  2,500 hotel rooms  2,118,363 sf convention center  180,000 sf commercial development  40,000 sf of additional hotel meeting and ballroom space  100,000 sf outdoor programmable space * Commercial uses are converted to hotel room equivalents on a ratio of 600 square feet of commercial development = 1 hotel room ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 2.0 Planning Context 2-1 2.0 PLANNING CONTENT 2.1 Purpose of the Specific Plan The Anaheim Resort, containing theme parks, convention facilities and visitor-serving uses such as hotels, is a unique type of land use concentration that requires special consideration and attention to ensure that the various elements come together to create an exciting, attractive environment. The unique synergy a destination resort must have is not easily addressed by traditional zoning. As a result, it is necessary to establish a basic framework, which provides planning policies and standards to assure that visitor-serving facilities and theme park uses will come together as an integrated whole. The ARSP is intended to establish this framework, thereby ensuring an attractive destination resort environment. In addition to overall planning policies, the ARSP establishes comprehensive zoning regulations and design guidelines, which recognize the distinctive nature of tourist and convention- oriented uses, and effectively implements the policies of the ARSP. It also identifies the public facilities and services that will be needed to support the development, and describes how the project and its related improvements will be phased. The zoning regulations contained within this specific plan in Section 7.0, Zoning and Development Standards, are regulatory in nature. Subsequent development plans and subdivision maps must be consistent with both the ARSP and the City of Anaheim General Plan. Any situation or condition not specifically covered by provisions contained within this specific plan will be subject to the regulations of the City of Anaheim Municipal Code. 2.2 Specific Plan Policies The specific plan goals stated in Section 1.6 define the basis for the following specific plan policies. They include:  Enhance the urban destination area and create a resort development;  Establish a unified resort identity;  Supply adequate visitor and convention facilities to meet the long-term demand for entertainment, convention, lodging, and retail uses;  Improve public facilities, services and infrastructure to accommodate projected growth;  Improve the transportation system;  Develop implementation measures to assure that the area will be enhanced by high quality development; and,  Protect and enhance surrounding uses. The following subsections describe these policies in more detail. 2.2.1 Create and Enhance an Urban Destination Resort Environment The primary planning policy for the ARSP is to enhance an urban destination area and create a resort environment that features the Anaheim Convention Center, hotels, restaurants, and shopping and entertainment opportunities. By enhancing this area, visitors will be encouraged to stay for several days, and enjoy the variety of recreation and entertainment opportunities available. 2.2.2 Establish a Unified Resort Identity In order to establish the identity of The Anaheim Resort as a premiere destination resort, the ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 2.0 Planning Context 2-2 ARSP proposes that a unifying theme be established throughout the ARSP area. This will be achieved by establishing a consistent visual language for the public areas that extend throughout the ARSP area. The main components of the unifying visual language will be: architectural character and quality of the buildings, landscape, signage, and street furnishings. The architectural character and quality of the buildings proposed will be regulated through a combination of setback requirements contained in Section 7.0, Zoning and Development Standards, and design guidelines contained in Section 5.0, Design Plan, of this specific plan. The landscape character of the ARSP will be created primarily by extensive planting of trees, shrubs and ground cover. Similarly, signage within the ARSP area will present a unified visual character through the use of compatible and complimentary colors, forms, and typography. Street furnishings, including lighting fixtures, benches, pageantry, and entry statements will also be selected to reinforce the overall identity of The Anaheim Resort. 2.2.3 Supply Visitor and Convention Facilities to Meet Long-Term Demand Another important specific plan policy is to supply the visitor and convention facilities that will be needed to meet the long-term demand for recreation, convention, and visitor-serving activities. There are three primary types of facilities needed to achieve this that are addressed by this plan: hotels, convention facilities and visitor-serving retail and entertainment facilities.  First, the ARSP provides for the development of up to 32,500 hotel rooms within the Commercial Recreation (C-R) District.  Second, the ARSP provides for the ongoing operation and expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center, the largest convention facility on the West Coast, and uses supportive of this important facility.  Third, the ARSP also provides for visitor- serving retail and entertainment facilities within the ARSP area. 2.2.4 Improve Public Facilities, Services and Infrastructure to Accommodate Growth Another important specific plan objective is to improve public facilities, services, and infrastructure to accommodate the growth and development that is planned to occur within the ARSP area. The public facility components to be improved as a result of the ARSP include: the transportation infrastructure (described in Section 4.0, Public Facilities Plan), and the pedestrian environment and the streetscape (described in Section 5.0, Design Plan). The ARSP is designed to create an inviting, integrated pedestrian environment that provides convenient connections throughout the ARSP area and the adjacent Disneyland Resort. Important elements of the pedestrian environment are the landscaped parkways and pedestrian facilities that are provided throughout the area. The ARSP includes streetscape improvements that are compatible with those in the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan and which contribute to a unifying visual character for the entire Anaheim Resort. Improvements to underground infrastructure, including the storm drainage, water supply, electrical and sewerage systems and enhanced public services are also provided. 2.2.5 Improve the Transportation System An essential part of the specific plan is to identify improvements to the transportation system so that access to the ARSP area will be improved. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 2.0 Planning Context 2-3 These improvements include a combination of new access routes to and from I-5 and local roadway improvements. The ARSP area can also be easily accessed by OCTA bus lines and Anaheim Resort Transit, both of which provide connections from nearby Metrolink/Amtrak and future high-speed rail stations, including ARTIC (Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center), a planned multimodal transportation facility. In addition, the Anaheim Rapid Connection, a proposed fixed- guideway system, will take visitors, future high- speed rail riders, employees, and area residents directly to and from ARTIC and the Platinum Triangle to The Anaheim Resort. Day visitors to the ARSP area will have convenient access to and from two new public day-use parking facilities (described in more detail in The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan). These facilities will have a maximum capacity of 34,300 cars and will accommodate Anaheim Convention Center, as well as theme park visitors. Access from the parking facilities to the Anaheim Convention Center will be by shuttle bus or via the pedestrian walkway system. Overnight visitors arriving by I-5 may use the same interchanges as day visitors, but will be directed to surface streets for access to hotels or other facilities within The Anaheim Resort. These facilities will complement those proposed within the adopted Disneyland Resort Specific Plan, which includes high-capacity public parking facilities, a monorail, and an elevated pedestrian way/people mover/moving sidewalk system. 2.2.6 Develop Implementation Mechanisms to Assure Quality Development To assure the overall quality of the ARSP area, the ARSP contains implementation mechanisms that promote the design goals of the Plan. These mechanisms include development regulations, standards, and design guidelines, as well as a public facilities plan. Section 5.0, Design Plan, describes the design concepts that will be implemented to provide a unified identity. The City has also adopted an Identity Program for The Anaheim Resort that has been developed in conjunction with this specific plan and which is also described in Section 5.0. The zoning and development standards are contained within Section 7 Zoning and Development Standards. They define the permitted uses and establish setback standards, among other things. 2.2.7 Enhance and Protect Surrounding Uses Implementation of the ARSP will enhance and protect the surrounding uses through the creation of development setback areas, which will be created and maintained to provide an aesthetically appealing, landscaped buffer be- tween development in the ARSP area and neighboring uses. As a fully integrated planning document, the ARSP provides the overall policy direction (in this Section, Section 3.0, Land Use Plan, and Section 4.0, Public Facilities Plan) as well as the particular planning tools (Section 5.0, Design Plan, and Section 7.0, Zoning and Development Standards) needed to ensure that these goals are achieved as development of the ARSP area proceeds. 2.3 Authority and Scope of the Specific Plan The City of Anaheim's authority to prepare, adopt, and implement specific plans is assured by California Government Code, Article 8 Specific Plans, Section 65450 through Section 65457. Procedures for the adoption, implementation, and amendment of specific plans are provided in Chapter 18.72 Specific ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 2.0 Planning Context 2-4 Plans, of the Anaheim Municipal Code. The Planning Commission must hold a public hearing before it can recommend the adoption of a specific plan by the City Council. The City Council may then adopt the specific plan by ordinance. As required by Chapter 18.72 of the Anaheim Municipal Code and California Government Code Sections 65450 et. seq., this document and the associated environmental impact reports that have been prepared for the ARSP, Master Environmental Impact Report No. 313 (MEIR No. 313) and Supplemental Environmental Impact Report No. 340 (SEIR No. 340), specify the following in detail:  The nature, location, density and size of all existing and proposed land uses, including open space.  Vehicular and pedestrian circulation within the project and surrounding area.  The provision of essential urban services including, but not limited to, energy, public safety, public utilities, sewage, solid waste disposal, storm water drainage, water, recreation and other essential facilities which may be needed to support proposed development.  Land use and other regulations that will implement the specific plan.  Programs, public works projects, and financing measures to implement the specific plan.  A statement of the relationship of the specific plan to the General Plan Chapter 18.72 also requires a development schedule setting forth phasing of development and target dates for completion. The ARSP is intended to provide guidelines and regulations for the future development of the ARSP area and does not contain any proposals for specific developments other than the Public Facilities Plan. As such, it does not contain a phasing plan, which establishes a precise sequence, time, and level of development. Development of the ARSP area will likely be spread over a number of years as individual landowners renovate their property, or replace existing buildings with new ones. SEIR No. 340 has assumed thresholds of development for modeling purposes in Year 2030 and contains mitigation measures to ensure that infrastructure improvements will be required commensurate with development. In addition, this document addresses subjects, such as urban design, which are necessary and desirable for implementation of the General Plan. Further, this document provides information that specifies how the proposed ARSP is in conformance with the following findings, which the Planning Commission and the City Council are required to make prior to approving or amending a specific plan:  That the property proposed for the specific plan has unique site characteristics such as topography, location or surroundings which are enhanced by special land use and development standards;  That the specific plan is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan and with the purposes, standards and land use guidelines therein;  That the specific plan results in development of desirable character, which will be compatible with existing and proposed development in the surrounding neighborhood;  That the specific plan contributes to a balance of land uses; and, ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 2.0 Planning Context 2-5  That the specific plan respects environmental and aesthetic resources consistent with economic realities. 2.4 Relationship to City Planning Documents and Regulations This section describes the relationship of the ARSP to other relevant City planning documents and regulations. 2.4.1 Relationship to the General Plan As previously mentioned, the ARSP is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan. Section 6.0, General Plan Consistency, includes a discussion of each of the applicable General Plan Element's goals and policies, and how they are implemented through the ARSP. 2.4.2 Relationship to the Zoning Ordinance The ARSP defines zoning districts, regulations, and development standards that will apply to the ARSP area. In cases where the ARSP does not address a particular situation, the regulations and development standards contained within Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code will apply. To the extent the two differ, the ARSP's policies, design guidelines, regulations, and development standards will apply. 2.4.3 California Environmental Quality Act Requirements The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that local agencies, prior to taking action on projects over which they have discretionary approval authority, consider the environmental consequences of such projects. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is a public document designed to provide the public, responsible/trustee agencies, special districts, and local and State government agency decision- makers with an analysis of the potential environmental consequences of project implementation in order to support an informed decision. Pursuant to local and State CEQA Guidelines, the City of Anaheim certified The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Master EIR No. 313 (State Clearinghouse No. 91091062) in support of the adoption of The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2 in September 1994. Master EIR No. 313 evaluated impacts associated with the establishment and implementation of the ARSP and created a Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP No. 0085) in order to mitigate impacts associated with ARSP area development. Since being certified in 1994, two Validation Reports have been prepared (1999 and 2004) to evaluate the continued relevance and accuracy of Master EIR No. 313 and its ability to be used as a Master EIR for all projected development within the boundaries of the ARSP area. In the City certified Supplemental EIR No. 340 to reevaluate all the environmental changes that have occurred in and around The Anaheim Resort and to evaluate an expansion of the Convention Center. In addition to addressing the potential environmental impacts that would result from the ARSP Update and the Anaheim Convention Center Expansion, Supplemental EIR No. 340 serves as the primary environmental document for all future entitlements associated with the ARSP, including all discretionary approvals requested or required to implement the ARSP. 2.4.4 Relationship to The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan The City of Anaheim adopted The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan (Specific Plan No. 92-1) and certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 2.0 Planning Context 2-6 311 on June 29, 1993. The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan provides for the development of an international multi-day vacation destination resort encompassing approximately 489.7 acres of The Anaheim Resort. The Plan permits the development of a new theme park, additional hotels and entertainment areas, new parking facilities, and an internal transportation system. In addition, the Plan permits the existing Disneyland theme park to continue to be modified with new attractions and other im- provements. Although they are separate projects, preparation of the ARSP and The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan were coordinated to ensure planning consis- tency, and to ensure that elements of the plans are complementary (for example, definition of planning area boundaries, the design of the streetscape improvements and the provision of adequate infrastructure). Where appropriate, references or descriptions of the programs proposed as part of The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan are included within this document in order to provide the reader with a better understanding of the relationship between the planning concepts and programs proposed as part of each of the two Specific Plans. 2.4.5 Relationship to the Hotel Circle Specific Plan On August 16, 1994, the City of Anaheim adopted the Hotel Circle Specific Plan (SP 93-1) for the remaining 6.8 acres of The Anaheim Resort. This specific plan allows for the development of up to 969 hotel rooms. All of the parcels within the specific plan area are developed with a total of 818 hotel rooms. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 3.0 Land Use Plan 3-1 3.0 LAND USE PLAN 3.1 Regional Location The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (ARSP) area is located in the City of Anaheim, which is 35 miles southeast of downtown Los Angeles and 7 miles northwest of Santa Ana, in Central Orange County, California. Exhibit 3.1-1 shows the regional location of the ARSP area. The ARSP area is generally located southwest of the I-5 corridor, south of Vermont Avenue, east of Walnut Avenue, and north of Chapman Avenue. Exhibit 3.1-1 Regional Location Map 3.2 Existing Conditions This Section contains a description of the ARSP area and other relevant existing conditions. 3.2.1 The Specific Plan Area The ARSP area is located within The Anaheim Resort, an area designated by the City of Anaheim General Plan for recreation and tourist/convention-related activities along with related visitor-serving uses. The Anaheim Resort itself contains approximately 1,078 acres. Exhibit 3.2-1 shows the location of the ARSP area within The Anaheim Resort. Harbor Boulevard, West Street/Disneyland Drive, and Haster Street are the main north-south thoroughfares through the project area. Katella Avenue, Ball Road, and Orangewood Avenue are the main east-west thoroughfares. I-5 also crosses through the ARSP area. 3.2.2 Existing Uses The current uses within the ARSP area include a variety of commercial, retail, hotel/motel, and visitor- and convention-serving uses. In addition, some nonconforming uses such as mobile home parks, and industrial and office facilities are located in the ARSP area. The Anaheim Convention Center is located on the south side of Katella Avenue, west of Harbor Boulevard. Residential neighborhoods consisting of single- family homes and multiple-family dwelling units are located south and west of the Anaheim Convention Center and around the periphery of The Anaheim Resort. Exhibit 3.2-2 is an aerial photograph of The Anaheim Resort and Exhibit 3.2-3 shows the general location of the existing uses within the ARSP area. The limits of ARSP area are also identified. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 3.0 Land Use Plan 3-2 Exhibit 3.2-1 ARSP/The Anaheim Resort Boundaries ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 3.0 Land Use Plan 3-3 Exhibit 3.2-2 Aerial Photograph with the ARSP and Anaheim Resort Boundaries ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 3.0 Land Use Plan 3-4 Exhibit 3.2-3 Existing Land Use ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 3.0 Land Use Plan 3-5 3.3 Land Use Plan This section contains a description of the land use plan for the ARSP. In particular, it estab- lishes the general policies that will govern land use within the ARSP area. Section 7.0, Zoning and Development Standards, contains specific, detailed zoning and development standards, which are based on the policies described herein. The land use plan is based on three major factors that will govern land use within the ARSP area. For each of these three factors, the ARSP provides a background rationale for the proposed land use regulations, as well as a description of the basic land use policies. They are:  The land uses permitted in the Commercial Recreation (C-R) and Public Recreation (PR) Districts as well as in the Mobilehome Park (MHP) Overlay and the Anaheim Resort Residential (ARR) Overlay;  The maximum development density permitted in the C-R District; and,  The types of development standards that will apply to development. Exhibit 3.3-1 is the Development Summary Plan for the ARSP, which shows the location of the C- R and PR Districts, the Central Core, and the MHP and ARR Overlays. Further information regarding development densities permitted within these development areas are depicted on the maps on the following pages of the Land Use Plan. 3.3.1 Land Use As implied in its name, The Anaheim Resort is intended for land uses with a commercial and/or recreational emphasis. The presence of the Anaheim Convention Center, the Disneyland Theme Park and Disney’s California Adventure Theme Park has established The Anaheim Resort as an important regional, as well as national and international destination. In the future, other similar attractions may be developed in The Anaheim Resort. As a result, visitors to The Anaheim Resort require many types of goods and services in order to make their visits safe, convenient and enjoyable. Among the most common visitor requirements are food and lodging. Consequently, in the majority of the 518.5-acre C-R District, hotels, motels and restaurants are permitted uses. In addition, many service and retail businesses intended to accommodate visitors, such as barber or beauty shops, travel agencies, automobile rental agencies, and specialty retail shops, will also be permitted when integrated within a hotel/motel development. Those uses which are consistent with the overall intent of the ARSP, but which may require special consider- ation in order to assure compatibility with surrounding uses will require conditional use permits. The 1.7 million square foot Anaheim Convention Center, one of the major visitor destinations in The Anaheim Resort, and the existing 1,600- room Hilton Anaheim hotel are located in the 62.8-acre PR District (Development Area Development within the PR District is subject to the requirements of the PR (Public Recreational) Zone, which is intended to preserve, regulate, and control the orderly use of City-owned properties such as Convention Center complexes and adjacent private properties. Other related visitor-serving uses allowed in the District as accessory uses are concession stands, restaurants, and shops. Section 7.0, Zoning and Development Standards, contains a complete list of all the permitted primary uses, as well as accessory uses, conditional uses, and prohibited uses. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 3.0 Land Use Plan 3-6 Exhibit 3.3-1 Development Plan ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 3.0 Land Use Plan 3-7 3.3.2 Commercial Recreation (C-R) District Development Density The ARSP establishes five density designations in the C-R District (Development Area 1) that will help assure that development of the area will be compatible with proposed infrastructure and with the goal to protect surrounding residential uses. These density designations are based upon hotel/motel development and allow up to 20% of each hotel/motel project gross square footage, excluding parking facilities, to be developed with integrated included within the main hotel/motel complex) accessory uses. These accessory uses will reduce the otherwise maximum permitted hotel/motel density at the rate of one hotel/motel room per six hundred (600) gross square feet of accessory use. For properties proposed to be developed with permitted and conditionally permitted uses other than hotels/motels with accessory uses, the traffic generation characteristics of said uses shall not exceed those associated with the other- wise permitted hotel/motel (including accessory uses) density as determined by the Planning Director or designee prior to Final Site Plan review and approval. The five density categories established by the plan are:  Low Density (up to 50 hotel rooms/acre)  Low- Medium Density (up to 75 hotel rooms/acre)  Low-Medium Density (Modified) (up to 252 rooms and 75,593 square feet of accessory uses)  Medium Density (up to 100 hotel rooms/acre)  Convention Center Medium Density (up to 125 hotel rooms/acre provided the trip generation characteristics are equivalent to 100 hotel rooms/acre) Exhibit 3.3-2, the C-R District Development Density Plan, identifies the location of each density designation within the C-R District. The areas with the Low Density designation are generally located where planned future infrastructure improvements will not support more intense development, or which are located further from the area's attractions. Areas with the Low- Medium and Medium Density designations are located where planned future infrastructure will be sufficient to accommodate these more intense levels of development, and which are located closer to the main attractions of The Anaheim Resort. Areas immediately adjacent to the Anaheim Convention Center have the Convention Center Medium designation in recognition that guests at these hotels typically do not have automobiles and, therefore, place fewer demands on area streets, one of the most important infrastructure factors that tend to limit development density. In addition, the Low Medium (Modified) density designation allows 252 hotel rooms and 75,593 square feet of commercial uses, which is equivalent to 378 hotel rooms, at the southeast corner of Katella Avenue and Harbor Boulevard. In recognition of the extensive existing development within The Anaheim Resort, the ARSP contains provisions, which permit existing hotels/motels to renovate or rebuild at the density existing on the date of adoption of the ARSP, even if the density exceeds the maximum permitted by the density category in which the property is located. The C-R District also encompasses properties that have a Mobile Home Park (MHP) Overlay designation and an Anaheim Resort Residential (ARR) Overlay designation. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 3.0 Land Use Plan 3-8 Exhibit 3.3-2 Commercial Recreation (C-R) Development Density Plan ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 3.0 Land Use Plan 3-9 3.3.3 Mobilehome Park (MHP) Overlay The C-R District includes three properties on approximately 31.5 acres, which have a Mobilehome Park (MHP) Overlay designation. The MHP Overlay encompasses two existing mobilehome parks and a recreational vehicle (RV) Park. The properties within the MHP Overlay are subject to the requirements set forth in Chapter 18.26 of the Anaheim Municipal Code, which provides development standards, regulations, and procedures to mitigate relocation problems and adverse effects of displacement upon mobilehome owners when a park is converted to another land use. Exhibit 3.3-3 identifies the parcels that are subject to the MHP Overlay in the C-R District. 3.3.4 Anaheim Resort Residential (ARR) Overlay The Anaheim Resort Residential (ARR) Overlay, which is located on 59.3 acres within the C-R District, allows for conditionally permitted residential uses in conjunction with the development of a full service hotel having at least 300 hotel rooms and where hotel uses comprise at least half of the site density, (ii) residential uses on the site are fully integrated into the hotel, and (iii) adjacent to public rights-of- way, residential uses are at least two stories or 25 feet above ground level. Exhibit 3.3-4 identifies the parcels that are subject to the ARR Overlay in the C-R District. 3.3.5 Public Recreational (PR) Development Density The 62.8-acre Public Recreation (PR) District (Development Area 2) encompasses the Anaheim Convention Center and associated parking complexes, and the 1,600-room Hilton Anaheim hotel. Development within the PR District can include up to 2,158,363 square feet of convention center/meeting space; 100,000 square feet of outdoor programmable space; 2,500 hotel rooms; and 180,000 square feet of commercial space. Development within this district is subject to the requirements of the Public Recreational (PR) Zone. The purpose of the PR Zone, which is set forth in Chapter 18.14 of the Anaheim Municipal Code, is to preserve, regulate and control the orderly use of City- owned property and adjacent private property. Exhibit 3.3-5 identifies the parcels that are subject to the PR District. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 3.0 Land Use Plan 3-10 Exhibit 3.3-3 Mobilehome Park (MHP) Overlay in the C-R District ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 3.0 Land Use Plan 3-11 Exhibit 3.3-4 Anaheim Resort Residential (ARR) Overlay in the C-R District ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 3.0 Land Use Plan 3-12 Exhibit 3.3-5 Public Recreation (PR) District Plan ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 3.0 Land Use Plan 3-13 3.3.6 Central Core Development Standards The third factor affecting land use within the ARSP area are the additional development standards applied to parcels in the heart, or Central Core, of The Anaheim Resort. The Central Core includes parcels with frontage on Harbor Boulevard between I-5 and Orangewood Avenue, and all parcels with frontage on Katella Avenue between Haster Street/Anaheim Boulevard and Walnut Street. For reasons described in the next paragraph, the Central Core requires different standards than does the periphery, especially with respect to building massing and provision for pedestrians. The Central Core is depicted in Exhibit 3.3-6. Development on the parcels within the Central Core has an especially important role to play in creating an overall image for The Anaheim Resort. Inasmuch as the Central Core is in close proximity to The Anaheim Resort's major attractions, the potential for pedestrian use is greatest in this area. By making the Central Core a more interesting area to walk through, the Central Core development standards will encourage more people to leave their cars and walk, thereby improving vehicular traffic flow. The uses adjacent to these stretches of road within the ARSP area will also have a stronger visual impression on the large number of vehicles that pass through it each. Among the differences in development standards between the Central Core and the periphery are the following:  In the Central Core, no parking will be allowed between the public right-of-way and the building face, making the Central Core more visually interesting since the parked vehicles will be behind the buildings. Whereas in the periphery, parking is allowed in front of a building provided said parking is not within the minimum required setback from the public right-of-way;  Special landscape provisions, which allow greater areas of hardscape to permit outdoor dining in the front setback area, will be allowed in the Central Core providing pedestrians with interesting activities to view. Outdoor dining in the front setbacks is not allowed in the periphery;  Buildings in the Central Core will be required to occupy a minimum of 60% of the frontage adjacent to the right-of-way (or provide a solid mass of landscape to achieve the same effect) in order to create a well-defined "edge" for the street. No such restrictions will apply to parcels outside the Central Core; and,  Special Landscaped Intersections will be required at the entrances to The Anaheim Resort and the center of the Central Core to create an edge and orient the pedestrian visually. These special development standards for the Central Core are described in Section 7.0, Zoning and Development Standards. Section 5.0, Design Plan, also contains guidelines which distinguish one area from another. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 4.0 Public Facilities Plan 3-14 Exhibit 3.3-6 Central Core Plan Special Landscape Intersections described in The Anaheim Resort Public Realm Landscape Program Harbor Boulevard/Katella Avenue Central Core Intersection Area described in The Anaheim Resort Public Realm Landscape Program ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 4.0 Public Facilities Plan 3-15 3.4 Non Visitor-Serving Uses In order to foster the establishment and growth within The Anaheim Resort of tourist, convention and entertainment-related industries, such as theme parks, hotels, motels, vacation ownership resorts, tourist-oriented retail and entertainment, restaurants, movie theaters, convention and conference facilities and other visitor-serving facilities, and recognizing that the presence of non-visitor-serving uses in The Anaheim Resort would be incompatible with this goal, residential uses may only be permitted in limited areas of the ARSP area as provided by and in accordance with the Anaheim Resort Residential (ARR) Overlay (Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.116.125) in effect as of March 19, 2007 (conditionally permitted residential uses in conjunction with the development of a full service hotel having at least 300 hotel rooms and where hotel uses comprise at least half of the site density, (ii) residential uses on the site are fully integrated into the hotel, and (iii) adjacent to public rights-of-way, residential uses are at least two stories or 25 feet above ground level, and residential uses are also permitted as provided by and in accordance with the Mobile Home Park (MHP) Overlay (Anaheim Municipal Code Chapter 18.26) in effect as of March 19, 2007. No other residential uses shall be incorporated into the Commercial Recreation land use designation and/or allowed within the ARSP area without completion of an Environmental Impact Report prepared in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, (ii) completion of a long-term economic impact analysis of the proposed change by an independent financial advisor retained by the City, (iii) approval by the City Council, and (iv) approval of a majority of voters of the City of Anaheim at a regularly-scheduled municipal election. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 4.0 Public Facilities Plan 3-16 This page is intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 4.0 Public Facilities Plan 4-1 4.0 PUBLIC FACILITIES PLAN The Public Facilities Plan contains a description of the proposed plans for transportation, utilities, infrastructure, and services for the ARSP area. The first two subsections describe regional improvements, which have an impact on the ARSP area. The improvements described under each of the remaining sections are intended to summarize the infrastructure/services needed for the complete build-out of The Anaheim Resort. More detailed information concerning the public facilities is provided in SEIR No. 340, which contains detailed maps and exhibits, including a thorough discussion of the existing conditions within the ARSP area. 4.1 Regional Circulation Programs Currently, several major facilities provide vehicular access to the ARSP area. They include: I-5, Katella Avenue, Haster Street/Anaheim Boulevard, Ball Road, Harbor Boulevard, Chapman Avenue, and Disney Way. Secondary roads within the ARSP area include: Manchester Avenue, Clementine Street, Orangewood Avenue, Walnut Street and West Street/ Disneyland Drive. All other streets within the ARSP area are Local Streets, including Alro Way, Casa Vista Street, Vermont Avenue, Wilken Way, and Zeyn Street. Many roads within the ARSP area have been, or are anticipated to be improved, in connection with other local, county, and State circulation programs. Facilities in this category include:  I-5, interchanges at West Street/ Disneyland Drive, Harbor Boulevard/Ball Road, and Katella Avenue/Disney Way/Anaheim Boulevard, Gene Autry Way, and Orangewood Avenue have been improved as part of the I-5 widening;  Katella Avenue has been improved and will be further widened as part of the Orange County Smart Street Program; and,  Several intersections have been identified in the City’s Planned Roadway Network to receive additional supplemental turning lanes, including but not limited to, Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue, Katella Avenue and Anaheim Boulevard/Haster Street, Harbor Boulevard and Ball Road, Harbor Boulevard and Convention Way, and Haster Street and Gene Autry Way. Improvements are funded by State and Federal funds, Orange County's Measure M funds, City Traffic Impact Fees, as well as other public and private sources. The City's General Plan identifies a future roadway extension of Gene Autry Way east of Harbor Boulevard to Haster Street. From Haster Street, Gene Autry Way connects to the I-5 high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes and the Platinum Triangle. Exhibit 4.1-1 shows the existing circulation system as well as planned improvements to the existing system described in the preceding paragraphs. The Transportation and Traffic Section of SEIR No. 340 also contains detailed information on the existing circulation system. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 4.0 Public Facilities Plan 4-2 Exhibit 4.1-1 Vehicular Circulation Plan ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 4.0 Public Facilities Plan 4-3 4.2 Regional Infrastructure Programs The Anaheim Resort is located in an area that has been served by public utilities and facilities for many years. As part of ongoing efforts to improve the City's infrastructure, new facilities have been installed within the ARSP area, are currently planned, or are underway. Some of these (such as improvements to the regional sewage treatment facilities) are planned to proceed regardless of the activity in the ARSP area. Among the projects currently proposed are:  Enlargement of sewers, or parallel lines to handle increased flows;  A new water transmission main and a new water well to supply increased demand;  Construction of a new electrical substation facility; and,  Upgrades to existing and construction of new storm drain facilities. These projects are discussed in greater detail in SEIR No. 340. 4.3 Vehicular Circulation Plan for the Anaheim Resort Convenient automobile access to The Anaheim Resort is an essential component to the success of the area. Most visitors will come to The Anaheim Resort by automobile or bus, and it is especially important that the visitors' experience be pleasant upon both arrival and departure. In connection with The Disneyland Resort, several improvements to the area wide circulation system have been implemented. These improvements are more fully described in The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan. The following is a discussion of the circulation improvements completed or proposed for The Anaheim Resort including those improvements completed as part of The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan. 4.3.1 Connections to Interstate 5 (I-5) Convenient connections from I-5 to the proposed public parking facilities in The Disneyland Resort have been implemented. Approximately 70% of the visitors to The Disneyland Resort arrive on I- 5. Moving them on and off I-5 safely and efficiently is accomplished in a variety of ways. During the early stage of implementation of The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan, a new mixed flow off-ramp was constructed at the Disneyland Drive exit north of Ball Road. This permits southbound traffic to exit on to Disneyland Drive, onto a ramp that provides a direct link to the public parking facility in the West Parking Area of The Disneyland Resort. When the traffic leaving the parking facilities in The Disneyland Resort exceeds the traffic entering these facilities, the lanes leading into the parking facilities and crossing over Ball Road are reversed, permitting visitors to exit conveniently onto I-5. Generally, the lanes are used for inbound traffic in the morning and for outbound traffic in the afternoon and evening. Use of the interchange by those not visiting The Disneyland Resort and/or not in a HOV, have also been accommodated. A similar system permits visitors arriving from the south to exit the HOV lane on a ramp that travels under the elevated portion of I-5 directly to Disney Way and provides convenient access to uses located in the east part of the ARSP area. This system keeps The Anaheim Resort traffic from congesting traffic on Katella Avenue. Existing access patterns to surrounding properties have generally been maintained, ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 4.0 Public Facilities Plan 4-4 except that West Street was made into a cul-de- sac south of Ball Road and renamed West Place. In addition, Cerritos Avenue has been relocated approximately 1,000 feet north of its previous location. The relocated street section is named Magic Way and was constructed when West Street was realigned south of Ball Road. 4.4 Anaheim Resort Arterial/ Secondary System One of the important objectives of the ARSP is to minimize traffic impacts on surrounding arterial and secondary streets. The system of connections to I-5 that lead conveniently to area uses contributes significantly to this objective. In addition, improvements that have been completed since the 1994 adoption of the ARSP or are proposed to be made to the local streets will enhance the overall vehicular circulation within The Anaheim Resort. The street cross sections described in this Section are typical mid- block sections. They are not intended to depict every condition which may exist in the ARSP area. Additionally, more detailed information about street rights-of-way can be found in the Design Plan. They are subject to variation at intersections and at other locations as determined by the City Engineer. Exhibit 4.1-1, Vehicular Circulation Plan, shows the location of the major roads and streets within the ARSP area. The specific improvements proposed for each street are discussed on the following pages. Exhibit 4.4-1 depicts the segments of the designated road cross sections, which correspond to the proposed improvements described for the following major roads and streets:  Disneyland Drive (Exhibits 4.4-2 and 4.4-3)  West Street (Exhibit 4.4-4)  West Place (Exhibit 4.4-5)  Disney Way (Exhibit 4.4-6)  Katella Avenue (Exhibits 4.4-7 to 4.4-9)  Walnut Street (Exhibit 4.4-10)  Harbor Boulevard (Exhibits 4.4-11 to 4.4-14)  Ball Road (Exhibits 4.4-15 to 4.4-17)  Clementine Street (Exhibit 4.4-18)  Haster Street/Anaheim Boulevard (Exhibit 4.4-19)  Convention Way (Exhibit 4.4-20)  Gene Autry Way (Exhibits 4.4-21 to 4.4-22)  Manchester Avenue (Exhibits 4.4-23 to 4.4- 25)  Orangewood Avenue (Exhibit 4.4-26)  Chapman Avenue (Exhibit 4.4-27)  Alro Way (Exhibit 4.4-28)  Casa Vista Street (Exhibit 4.4-29)  Vermont Avenue (Exhibit 4.4-30)  Wilken Way (Exhibit 4.4-31)  Zeyn Street (Exhibit 4.4-32) ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 4.0 Public Facilities Plan 4-5 ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 4.0 Public Facilities Plan 4-6 Disneyland Drive between I-5 and Katella Avenue serves both The Disneyland Resort and uses within the ARSP area such as the Anaheim Convention Center. Disneyland Drive is connected to I-5 with an interchange. Between I-5 and Ball Road, Disneyland Drive accommodates traffic arriving or departing from The Anaheim Resort, including the public parking facilities in The Disneyland Resort, the Anaheim Convention Center and area hotels. Exhibit 4.4-2, Disneyland Drive (North of Ball Road) Cross Section, shows the typical right-of-way, parkways, sidewalks and travel lanes for this portion of Disneyland Drive. Exhibit 4.4-2 Disneyland Drive (North of Ball Road) Cross Section 5-foot sidewalk 5-foot sidewalk 8-foot parkway 8-foot parkway 36 feet min 36 feet min 13 ft Right-of-way: 98 ft min 13 ft 3 travel lanes, typical 3 travel lanes, typical At Ball Road, traffic on Disneyland Drive may either go over Ball Road directly to and from The Disneyland Resort parking facilities via a two lane overpass with reversible lanes or through the Ball Road intersection. Traffic bound for other destinations has full access to Ball Road. South of the Ball Road intersection, Disneyland Drive has two basic cross section conditions. The first cross section is described and depicted in The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan and applies to the portion of Disneyland Drive located south of Ball Road up to the entry to The Disneyland Resort parking facilities. The second cross-section applies to the portion of Disneyland Drive located south of The Disneyland Resort parking facilities to Katella Avenue. This cross-section is depicted in Exhibit 4.4-3, Disneyland Drive (Between 825 feet n/o Katella Avenue and 1,350 feet n/o Katella Avenue). This portion of Disneyland Drive provides access to hotels and other uses within The Anaheim Resort. The cross-section depicts two northbound and two southbound lanes of traffic separated by a raised landscaped median. Right and left-turn lanes have been installed in some locations to improve traffic flow. Exhibit 4.4-3 Disneyland Drive (Between 825 feet n/o Katella Avenue and 1,350 feet n/o Katella Avenue) Cross Section 8-foot sidewalk 8-foot sidewalk 8-foot parkway 8-foot parkway 15 ft 24 ft Right-of-way: 95 ft min 2 travel lanes 16 ft 16 ft 24 ft Landscaped median 2 travel lanes ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 4.0 Public Facilities Plan 4-7 West Street is a continuation of Disneyland Drive, south of Katella Avenue. Supplemental turning lanes have been added to Disneyland Drive/West Street at the intersection of Katella Avenue to facilitate traffic flow. South of this intersection (approximately 600 feet south of the intersection with Katella Avenue), the right-of- way and roadway accommodates two lanes of travel in each direction. Exhibit 4.4-4, West Street (South of Katella Avenue) Cross Section shows the current configuration of this portion of West Street. Exhibit 4.4-4 West Street (South of Katella Avenue) Cross Section 5-foot sidewalk 5-foot sidewalk 8-foot parkway 8-foot parkway 32 ft 32 ft Right-of-way: 90 ft min typical typical 13 ft 13 ft 2 travel lanes, 2 travel lanes, West Place is a cul-de-sac, located immediately south of its intersection with Ball Road and depicted in Exhibit 4.4f, West Place Cross Section. Exhibit 4.4-5 West Place Cross Section 10-foot parkway 10-foot parkway 4-foot parkway 4-foot parkway 14-34 ft Minimum one travel lane each direction 0-20 foot parkway 52 ft 0-20 foot parkway Minimum right-of-way: 100-120 ft 14-34 ft Disney Way between Anaheim Boulevard and Harbor Boulevard has three travel lanes in each direction, except at Anaheim Boulevard and Clementine Street where the street has been widened to provide supplemental turning lanes. Classified as a Major Arterial, Disney Way serves the traffic entering and leaving the east portion of The Anaheim Resort and the public parking facility located in the East Parking Area of The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan. The portion of Disney Way west of Clementine Street is described in The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan. East of Clementine Street, a landscaped median will ultimately be constructed, as illustrated in Exhibit 4.4-6 Disney Way (East of Clementine Street) Cross Section. Exhibit 4.4-6 Disney Way (East of Clementine Street) Cross Section Median and travel lanes vary in width to a curb to curb width of 94 feet. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 4.0 Public Facilities Plan 4-8 Katella Avenue has three to four travel lanes in each direction within The Anaheim Resort. East and westbound Katella Avenue include right-turn lanes and double left-turn lanes at most intersections, as well as a raised landscaped median, which separates opposing traffic between signalized intersections. The interim condition for Katella Avenue, as depicted in Exhibit 4.4-7 Interim Katella Avenue (Between Interstate 5 and West Street/ Disneyland Drive) Cross Section, is three travel lanes in each direction. Katella Avenue ultimately will be widened to four lanes in each direction east of West Street/Disneyland Drive, as shown in Exhibit 4.4-8, Ultimate Katella Avenue (Between Interstate 5 and West Street/ Disneyland Drive) Cross Section. These exhibits show the location of the ultimate right-of-way as well as the interim condition. Katella Avenue is currently four lanes westbound from Manchester Avenue to 600 feet west of Clementine Street. Katella Avenue between Walnut Street and West Street/Disneyland Drive will continue to have three travel lanes in each direction, with a minimum 15 foot wide landscaped median. Exhibit 4.4-8, Ultimate Katella Avenue (Between Walnut Street and West Street/Disneyland Drive) Cross Section, shows the ultimate of Katella Avenue between West Street/Disneyland Drive and Walnut Street. Exhibit 4.4-7 Interim Katella Avenue (Between Interstate 5 and West Street/Disneyland Drive) Cross Section Ultimate right-of-way Ultimate right-of-way Additional landscape Additional landscape 8-foot landscaped parkway 8-foot landscaped parkway 8-foot sidewalk 8-foot sidewalk Right-of-way varies: 164-166 ft 3 travel lanes 3 travel lanes 8-foot landscaped parkway 35 ft 24 ft 11 ft 8-foot landscaped parkway 11 ft 24 ft 35 ft Landscaped median 24-26 ft ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 4.0 Public Facilities Plan 4-9 Exhibit 4.4-8 Ultimate Katella Avenue (Between Interstate 5 and West Street/Disneyland Drive) Cross Section Ultimate right-of-way Ultimate right-of-way 8-foot landscaped parkway 8-foot landscaped parkway 8-foot sidewalk 8-foot sidewalk 8-foot landscaped 8-foot landscaped parkway parkway 4 travel lanes 4 travel lanes Right-of-way: 164-166 ft 24 ft 46 ft 24-26 ft 46 ft 24 ft Landscaped median Exhibit 4.4-9 Ultimate Katella Avenue (Between Walnut Street and West Street/Disneyland Drive) Cross Section ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 4.0 Public Facilities Plan 4-10 Walnut Street carries two lanes of traffic in each direction between Katella Avenue and Ball Road with a raised median. The portion of Walnut Street south of Goodhue Avenue is described in the Disneyland Report Specific Plan. North of Goodhue Avenue, the cross section is depicted in Exhibit 4.4-10. Exhibit 4.4-10 Walnut Street (Between Ball Road and Goodhue Avenue) Cross Section Setback and sidewalk/parkway conditions varies; to remain as-is 5-foot sidewalk 8-foot parkway 9-11 ft 24 ft 15 ft 24 ft Landscaped median 2 travel lanes Right-of-way varies: 85-87 ft 2 travel lanes 13 ft Harbor Boulevard. Within the ARSP area, south of I-5, Harbor Boulevard is a six-lane divided road except at Manchester Avenue, Disney Way, Katella Avenue, Convention Way, Orangewood Avenue, and Chapman Avenue, where it has been widened to accommodate additional right- and left-turn lanes. Exhibit 4.4-11 Harbor Boulevard (Between Chapman Avenue and Orangewood Avenue) Cross Section reflects the ultimate condition of this section of Harbor Boulevard. A landscaped median will ultimately be constructed. The cross section in the exhibit below does not apply for the portion of Harbor Boulevard located within the City of Garden Grove, south of Wilken Way. Exhibit 4.4-11 Harbor Boulevard (Between Chapman Avenue and Orangewood Avenue) Cross Section Median and travel lanes vary in width to a curb to curb width of 94 feet. Exhibit 4.4-12 shows the typical Harbor Boulevard cross section which applies between Orangewood Avenue and a point approximately 150-250 feet south of Manchester Avenue on the west side and to Manchester Avenue on the east side. Exhibit 4.4-12 Harbor Boulevard (Orangewood Avenue to Manchester Avenue on the East Side and Orangewood Avenue to 150-250 Feet South of Manchester Avenue on the West Side) Cross Section ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 4.0 Public Facilities Plan 4-11 Exhibit 4.4-13 applies to Harbor Boulevard between Manchester Avenue on the East Side and 150-250 feet south of Manchester Avenue on the west side to the I-5 interchange, the Harbor Boulevard right-of-way. This portion of Harbor Boulevard narrows to transition to the Harbor Boulevard overpass, which is raised above I-5. Exhibit 4.4-13 Harbor Boulevard (Between Manchester Avenue on the East Side and 150-250 feet South of Manchester Avenue on the West Side to the Interstate 5 Interchange) Cross Section 9-foot parkway/ 9-foot parkway/ sidewalk sidewalk Minimum 3 travel lanes Minimum 3 travel lanes Landscaped median Right-of-way varies: 102-108 ft minimum 6-9 ft 6-9 ft 35 ft min 35 ft min 20 ft min North of I-5, Harbor Boulevard has a raised median and six lanes of travel except at Ball Road and I-5 where it has been widened to accommodate additional through, right- and left- lanes. The parkway consists of a 9-foot sidewalk with cutouts for tree wells. Exhibit 4.4-14 Harbor Boulevard (Interstate 5 to Vermont Avenue) Cross Section 9-foot sidewalk 9-foot sidewalk Tree wells Tree well 9 ft Ultimate Right-of-way: 120 ft 16 ft min 43 ft 43 ft 9 ft Minimum 3 travel lanes Minimum 3 travel lanes Landscaped median Ball Road is six lanes, except at West Street/ Disneyland Drive, Cast Place and Harbor Boulevard, where it is wider to accommodate additional through right- and left-turn lanes. Ball Road has landscape medians, with the exception of between West Place and Cast Place where it has painted medians. Currently the right-of-way varies from 103 to 106 feet. The ultimate right-of- way will continue to be 106 feet as designated in the General Plan. Exhibit 4.4-15 Ball Road (West of West Place) Cross Section 4-foot sidewalk 4-foot sidewalk 6-foot parkway 6-foot parkway 16 ft Landscaped median 3 travel lanes, typical 3 travel lanes, typical Ultimate Right-of-way: 106 ft 10 ft 10 ft 35 ft 35 ft Exhibit 4.4-16 Ball Road (Between West Place and Cast Place) Cross Section 4-foot sidewalk 4-foot sidewalk 6-foot parkway 6-foot parkway 10 ft* 35 ft 16 ft 35 ft 10 ft* Ultimate Right-of-way: 106 ft 3 travel lanes, typical 3 travel lanes, typical Painted median * Within 600 feet east and west of Harbor Boulevard, this dimension is 9 feet including 9-foot sidewalks with tree wells only. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 4.0 Public Facilities Plan 4-12 Exhibit 4.4-17 Ball Road (East of Cast Place) Cross Section 10-foot* sidewalk 10-foot* sidewalk Tree wells Tree wells 10 ft* Ultimate Right-of-way: 106 ft Raised median** 3 travel lanes, typical 3 travel lanes, typical 10 ft* 35 ft 16 ft 35 ft * Within 600 feet east and west of Harbor Boulevard, this dimension is 9 feet including 9-foot sidewalks with tree wells only. Median is landscaped east of Harbor Boulevard. Clementine Street serves two lanes of travel in each direction and is 87 feet to accommodate a landscaped median. Exhibit 4.4-18 Clementine Street Cross Section Haster Street/Anaheim Boulevard includes three travel lanes in each direction with a 16-foot wide raised median north of Katella Avenue. South of Katella Avenue, there are two travel lanes in each direction with a 12-foot wide painted median. At the street’s intersection with Katella Avenue, the street is wider to accommodate turning lanes. The ultimate condition for Haster Street, south of Katella Avenue is six lanes with a 16-foot wide landscaped median, consistent with its designation as a Primary Arterial Highway in the Circulation Element of the City's General Plan and the current street configuration north of Katella Avenue. At Gene Autry Way, Haster Street will also be widened to accommodate additional turning lanes. Exhibit 4.4-19 Haster Street/Anaheim Boulevard Cross Section 4-foot sidewalk 4-foot sidewalk 6-foot parkway 6-foot parkway 16 ft Landscaped median 3 travel lanes, typical 3 travel lanes, typical Ultimate Right-of-way: 106 ft 10 ft 10 ft 35 ft 35 ft Convention Way will continue to serve the Anaheim Convention Center in its current right- of-way width of 110 feet as depicted in Exhibit 4.4-20. An 18-foot wide landscape median is provided except where left-turn lanes reduce the median to 8 feet. Three travel lanes are provided in each direction and a 10-foot wide sidewalk area. The sidewalk has 4-foot wide landscaped cutouts at the back of the sidewalk. Exhibit 4.4-20 Convention Way Cross Section 4-foot planting areas 4-foot planting areas 10-foot sidewalk 10-foot sidewalk 10 ft Right-of-way: 110 ft Landscaped median 3 travel lanes 3 travel lanes 10 ft 36 ft 18 ft 36 ft The western portion of Convention Way is currently a private street and no typical cross section exists at this time. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 4.0 Public Facilities Plan 4-13 Gene Autry Way. The future extension of Gene Autry Way from Haster Street to Harbor Boulevard, where it would align with Convention Way, is shown on the Circulation Element of the General Plan. Current plans call for three travel lanes in each direction except at Harbor Boulevard and Haster Street where it will be widened to accommodate additional left- and right-turn lanes. A landscaped median is proposed to divide the travel lanes within a 110- foot right-of-way. A 4-foot wide sidewalk behind a 6-foot parkway is proposed on both sides of the right-of-way. Exhibit 4.4-21, Future Gene Autry Way (Between Harbor Boulevard and Haster Street) Cross Section, shows the proposed configuration. Exhibit 4.4-21 Gene Autry Way (Between Harbor Boulevard and Haster Street) Cross Section 4-foot sidewalk 4-foot sidewalk 6-foot landscaped 6-foot landscaped parkway parkway 10 ft 36 feet, typical 18 ft 36 feet, typical 10 ft Right-of-way: 110 ft Landscaped median 3 travel lanes 3 travel lanes Between Haster Street and I-5, Gene Autry Way transitions to the HOV interchange accommodating vehicles from the HOV lanes on I-5. This interchange is elevated and sound walls have also been constructed in this location. Exhibit 4.4-22 Gene Autry Way (East of Haster Street) Cross Section Manchester Avenue is divided into three parts: West Manchester Avenue (extends in an east-west direction from Harbor Boulevard); North Manchester Avenue (extends in a southeastern direction from West Manchester Avenue adjacent to I-5 to Clementine Street); and, Manchester Avenue, south of Katella (extends in a southeastern direction adjacent to I- 5, east of Disney Way to the southern boundary of The Anaheim Resort. West Manchester Avenue will retain its current right-of-way and parkway/sidewalk configuration, as depicted in Exhibit 4.4-23, Manchester Avenue Cross Section. Exhibit 4.4-23 West Manchester Avenue Cross Section 5-foot sidewalk 5-foot sidewalk 8.5-foot parkway 8.5-foot parkway Landscaped median 2 travel lanes 2 travel lanes 24 ft 15 ft 24 ft 13.5 ft Right-of-way: 90 ft 13.5 ft ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 4.0 Public Facilities Plan 4-14 North Manchester Avenue is the portion of Manchester Avenue located adjacent to I-5 that was relocated as part of the widening of the freeway and improvements for the interchange at Katella Avenue and I-5. The ultimate configuration for this portion of Manchester Avenue, which occurs adjacent to I-5, is depicted in Exhibit 4.4-24, North Manchester Avenue (Adjacent to Interstate 5, North of Alro Way) Cross Section. Exhibit 4.4-24 North Manchester Avenue (Adjacent to Interstate 5, North of Alro Way) Cross Section 4-foot sidewalk 5-foot parkway 8-foot parkway Right-of-way: 67 ft 5 ft 2 travel lanes 2 travel lanes 12 ft 25 ft 25 ft Manchester Avenue, south of Katella Avenue (Adjacent to Interstate 5, east of Disney Way) became a one-way (traveling south) frontage road adjacent to I-5 as part of the widening of I-5. There are three lanes of travel as depicted in Exhibit 4.4-25. Exhibit 4.4-25 Manchester Avenue, East of Anaheim Boulevard (Adjacent to Interstate 5) Cross Section 4-foot sidewalk 5-foot parkway 6-foot parkway (in one direction) Minimum 3 travel lanes Right-of-way: Minimum 52 ft 5 ft Minimum 37 ft 10 ft Orangewood Avenue is designated as Secondary Arterial with four travel lanes except at Harbor Boulevard where Orangewood Avenue will be widened to accommodate additional left- and right-turn lanes. Exhibit 4.4-26 Orangewood Avenue Cross Section 5-foot sidewalk 5-foot sidewalk 5-foot parkway 5-foot parkway Travel lanes vary 10 ft 35 ft 35 ft 10 ft Right-of-way: 90 ft ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 4.0 Public Facilities Plan 4-15 Chapman Avenue is a Primary Arterial with six travel lanes and a landscaped median. At Harbor Boulevard, Chapman Avenue will be widened to accommodate additional left- and right-turn lanes. Exhibit 4.4-27 Chapman Avenue Cross Section 4-foot sidewalk 4-foot sidewalk 6-foot parkway 6-foot parkway 16 ft Landscaped median 3 travel lanes, typical 3 travel lanes, typical Ultimate Right-of-way: 106 ft 10 ft 10 ft 35 ft 35 ft Alro Way has two travel lanes, a 4-foot wide sidewalk and a 6-foot wide parkway within its 60- foot right-of-way and is designated as a Local Street, as depicted below. Exhibit 4.4-28 Alro Way Cross Section 4-foot sidewalk 4-foot sidewalk 6-foot parkway 6-foot parkway Right-of-way: 60 ft 1 travel lane each direction 40 ft 10 ft 10 ft Casa Vista Street has one travel lane in each direction and a 4-foot wide sidewalk with a 6-foot wide parkway within its 60-foot wide right-of-way and is designated as a Local Street, as depicted below. Exhibit 4.4-29 Casa Vista Street Cross Section 4-foot sidewalk 4-foot sidewalk 6-foot parkway 6-foot parkway Right-of-way: 60 ft 1 travel lane each direction 40 ft 10 ft 10 ft Vermont Avenue has one travel land in each direction and 9-foot wide sidewalks with 5-foot wide tree wells within its 66-foot wide right-of-way and is designated as a Local Street. The exhibit below shows the Vermont Avenue cross section condition. Exhibit 4.4-30 Vermont Avenue Cross Section 9-foot sidewalk 9-foot sidewalk 5-foot tree well 5-foot tree well Right-of-way: 66 ft 1 travel lane each direction 9 ft 9 ft 48 ft ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 4.0 Public Facilities Plan 4-16 Wilken Way has one travel lane in each direction, 4-foot wide sidewalks and 6-foot wide parkways within a 60-foot wide right-of-way and is designated as a Local Street. The exhibit below shows the Wilken Way cross section condition. Exhibit 4.4-31 Wilken Way Cross Section 4-foot sidewalk 4-foot sidewalk 6-foot parkway 6-foot parkway Right-of-way: 60 ft 1 travel lane each direction 40 ft 10 ft 10 ft Zeyn Street has one travel lane in each direction, 4-foot wide sidewalks and 6-foot wide parkways within a 60-foot wide right-of way and is designated as a Local Street. The exhibit below shows the Zeyn Street cross section condition. Exhibit 4.4-32 Zeyn Street Cross Section 4-foot sidewalk 4-foot sidewalk 6-foot parkway 6-foot parkway Right-of-way: 60 ft 1 travel lane each direction 40 ft 10 ft 10 ft 4.5 Transit Plans To minimize automobile traffic on local streets, existing and proposed transit systems will service uses within the ARSP area. The main component of the existing system is the Orange County Transit Authority (OCTA) bus service to the ARSP area. Current bus routes are located on Harbor Boulevard, Katella Avenue and Ball Road, and provide regular service to The Anaheim Resort. 4.5.1 The Disneyland Resort The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan transports theme park visitors to the theme parks from public day-use parking facilities via pedestrian walkways, busses, tram services and monorail. These existing services could be expanded in the future to provide additional transit improvements. 4.5.2 Anaheim Rapid Connection The proposed Anaheim Rapid Connection (ARC) is a fixed-guideway system that is currently in the environmental review process. ARC is proposed to connect visitors, Metrolink, Amtrak, local bus and future bus rapid transit and high-speed rail riders, employees and area residents to Anaheim area destinations, including stops within the ARSP area and the Platinum Triangle. More information on the ARC project is available at www.AConnext.com. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 4.0 Public Facilities Plan 4-17 4.5.3 HOV Lane System OCTA and Caltrans have developed a plan to construct a countywide system of transit ways and commuter HOV lanes in freeway corridors. These facilities will be used by regional 'express' busses, regular intercity buses, shuttle buses, vanpools, and carpools. Buses and other HOVs would access or egress these facilities at exclusive HOV ramps to streets or at designated at-grade merge locations along freeways. HOV lanes have been constructed on I-5, State Route (SR) 57, and SR 22, with a direct HOV connection between SR-57 and I-5. The HOV interchange at Gene Autry Way allows access to and from areas east and west of I-5, including The Anaheim Resort and Angel Stadium of Anaheim. As part of a long-term project, exclusive HOV ramps have been identified at Cerritos Avenue on the SR-57. 4.5.4 Bus Service OCTA and Anaheim Transportation Network/Anaheim Resort Transit provide bus service to and within The Anaheim Resort. 4.5.5 Intercity Commuter Rail Service Amtrak and Metrolink provide train service to The Anaheim Resort via stations in Fullerton and Anaheim. 4.6 Pedestrian Circulation Plans An increase in the number of hotel rooms and the development of new attractions will increase pedestrian activity in The Anaheim Resort. This will enhance the urban character of the area and will require that facilities be enhanced to meet the needs of these pedestrians. Exhibit 4.6-1 illustrates the pedestrian circulation system within the ARSP area and the surrounding areas. On this plan, pedestrian routes have been identified, as well as the location of the three pedestrian overpasses proposed in The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan and a potential fourth pedestrian overpass over Katella Avenue. The primary destinations of pedestrians within The Anaheim Resort will include:  Hotels, restaurants and other businesses in The Anaheim Resort;  The Anaheim Convention Center;  The existing Disneyland theme park and Disney’s California Adventure theme park described in The Disneyland-Resort Specific Plan; and  The proposed East and West Parking Areas described in The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 4.0 Public Facilities Plan 4-18 Exhibit 4.6-1 Pedestrian Circulation Plan ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 4.0 Public Facilities Plan 4-19 4.7 Water The City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department provides water to the ARSP area. Its sources include both wells to tap groundwater resources, and water purchased from the Metropolitan Water District. Based on preliminary estimates, the average additional daily water consumption for The Anaheim Resort will be about 7 million gallons (including The Disneyland Resort). The existing water supply system consists of numerous water lines that surround or traverse the ARSP area. Modification of this system is necessary to provide water at the pressures and in the quantities needed to supply the ARSP area. The following is a list of the improvements that have been made to the water distribution system to support implementation of the ARSP.  Replacement of the 8-inch pipe in Clementine Street from Katella Avenue to Disney Way with a 20-inch pipe;  Replacement of the existing 10-inch pipe in Disney Way from Clementine Street to Harbor Boulevard with a 20-inch pipe;  Installation of a new well (Well 55) near the intersection of Clementine Street and Disney Way;  Replacement of the existing 10-inch pipe in Harbor Boulevard from Convention Way to Disney Way with a 20-inch pipe;  Replacement of the existing 10-inch pipe in Harbor Boulevard from Disney Way to Harbor Boulevard north of Manchester Avenue with a 16-inch pipe;  Replacement of the existing 12-inch pipe in Katella Avenue from Harbor Boulevard to Clementine Street with a 20-inch pipe; and,  Replacement of the existing 12-inch and 14- inch pipes in West Street/Disneyland Drive from Ball Road to Katella Avenue with a 20- inch pipe.  Replacement of the 8-inch pipe in Clementine Street from Katella Avenue to Disney Way with a 20-inch pipe;  Replacement of the existing 10-inch pipe in Disney Way from Clementine Street to Harbor Boulevard with a 20-inch pipe;  Installation of a new well (Well 55) near the intersection of Clementine Street and Disney Way;  Replacement of the existing 10-inch pipe in Harbor Boulevard from Convention Way to Disney Way with a 20-inch pipe;  Replacement of the existing 10-inch pipe in Harbor Boulevard from Disney Way to Harbor Boulevard north of Manchester Avenue with a 16-inch pipe;  Replacement of the existing 12-inch pipe in Katella Avenue from Harbor Boulevard to Clementine Street with a 20-inch pipe; and,  Replacement of the existing 12-inch and 14- inch pipes in West Street/Disneyland Drive from Ball Road to Katella Avenue with a 20- inch pipe. The following additional improvements to the water distribution system will be made as part of the on-going implementation of the ARSP.  Installation of a 16-inch pipe in Harbor Boulevard from Orangewood Avenue to Chapman Avenue; and  Provision for a new well to be constructed near the intersection of Haster Street and Orangewood Avenue. Additional information about water use, supply and improvements is provided in SEIR No. 340. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 4.0 Public Facilities Plan 4-20 Water conservation is an important part of the Plan and will be achieved through numerous measures intended to reduce water consumption. Among the measures to be implemented within the ARSP area to the extent applicable, include, but are not limited to, the following:  Low-flow sprinkler heads in irrigation systems;  Waterway recirculation systems;  Low-flow fittings, fixtures, and equipment, including low flush toilets and urinals;  Efficient irrigation systems such as drip irrigation, low flow irrigation heads, automatic irrigation scheduling equipment, flow sensing controls, rain sensors, soil moisture sensors and other water conserving equipment;  Low-flow shower heads in hotels;  Water efficient ice-machines, dishwashers, clothes washers and other water-using appliances;  Irrigation systems used primarily at night when evaporation rates are lowest;  Provision of information to the public in conspicuous places regarding water conservation;  Water conserving landscape plant materials; wherever feasible; and,  Construction of separate irrigation lines and implementation of recycled water when it becomes available. In addition to these measures, development in the ARSP area will comply with the Water Efficiency Landscape Ordinance adopted to implement the State of California Water Conservation in Landscaping Act (AB 1881) ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 4.0 Public Facilities Plan 4-21 4.8 Sanitary Sewer The ARSP area is served by local sewer lines owned and maintained by the City of Anaheim. Wastewater in the local sewer lines generally flows south and then west to the Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) sewer trunks on Walnut Street, Euclid Street, 9th Street, Ball Road and Katella Avenue. Wastewater from the ARSP area is conveyed through sewer trunks and interceptors to the OCSD Treatment Plant No. 1 in Fountain Valley. The Combined Central Anaheim Area Master Plan of Sanitary Sewers (adopted by Anaheim City Council on December 12, 2006 by Resolution No. 2006-255), the Combined Central Anaheim Area Master Plan of Sanitary Sewers – Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan study dated August 2009 and the Revision to the Technical Memorandum for the Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan prepared in November 2010 analyze sewer system capacity for the ARSP area. Table 4.8-1 lists the new sewer lines to be constructed or relocated specifically for continued development within the ARSP area. Table 4.8-1 Existing Sewer System Deficiencies and Recommended Improvements for Year 2030 Location Limits Existing Diameter (inches) Improvements (parallel or replacement) Selected Diameter Ball Road West St to E/Walnut 24 P 18 Ball Road Claremont to W/Harbor 24 P 18 Katella Ave Walnut to Ninth St 24 R 27 Katella Ave West St to Walnut 24 R 27 Katella Ave Harbor to 650 ft E/West St 24 R 27 Orangewood Ave Ninth to Harbor 18 P 21 Wakefield Ave Mt. View to W/Mt. View 8 R 12 Mt. View Ave Wakefield to Pearson 8 R 12 Mt. View Ave Pearson to Orangewood 8 R 15 Orangewood Ave Mt. View to Haster 10 R 15 Orangewood Ave Haster to Clementine 10 R 15 Orangewood Ave Clementine to Harbor 10 R 18 Katella Ave E/o Ninth St to Ninth St 24 R 27 Katella Ave Clementine to Harbor 21 R 24 ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 4.0 Public Facilities Plan 4-22 Location Limits Existing Diameter (inches) Improvements (parallel or replacement) Selected Diameter Katella Ave 300 ft E/Anaheim to Anaheim 21 R 24 Harbor Blvd 500 ft S/Katella to Katella 8 R 10 Harbor Blvd Wilken Way to Chapman 15 P 12 Wilken Way 700 ft W/Harbor to Harbor 12 R 15 Clementine St Disney Way to Katella 12 R 27 Haster 950 ft S/Katella to Katella 12 R 27 Disneyland Drive 1600 ft N/Katella to 2200 ft N/Katella ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 4.0 Public Facilities Plan 4-23 4.9 Storm Drain Storm water from the northern portion of the ARSP area will flow west in new or existing underground storm drains to the Anaheim-Barber Channel, located several hundred feet west of, and parallel to Walnut Street as identified in the Master Plan of Storm Drainage for Anaheim Barber City Channel Tributary Area June 2009 (adopted by Anaheim City Council on October 27, 2009 by Resolution No. 2009-163). Storm water from the southern portion of the ARSP area will flow south to the East Garden Grove- Wintersburg Channel as identified in the Master Plan of Storm Drainage for East Garden Grove Wintersburg Channel Tributary Area January 2006 (adopted by Anaheim City Council on March 7, 2006 by Resolution No. 2006-029). Eventually, the storm water from the entire ARSP area empties into the ocean at Huntington Harbor. The following is a list of the planned facilities to be constructed to handle the storm water flows from the ARSP area:  A relief drain in Harbor Boulevard, Vermont Avenue and East Street;  An upgrade drain in Ball Road;  A parallel or relief drain in Cerritos Avenue, Walnut Street and Magic Way;  An upgrade or parallel storm drain in Katella Avenue and an upgrade drain and new storm drain line north of it in Anaheim Boulevard;  An upgrade drain in Manchester Avenue;  New storm drain lines in Guinida Lane, Palm Street and Winston Road;  A parallel or upgrade drain in Orangewood Avenue, Harbor Boulevard and Wilken Way;  A relief drain in Haster Street and Gene Autry Way.  A parallel or upgrade drain in Hotel Way All new development and/or redevelopment projects shall participate in the City's Master Plan of Drainage and related Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Programs to assist in mitigating storm drainage system deficiencies as described in SEIR No. 340. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 4.0 Public Facilities Plan 4-24 4.10 Electricity Electricity for the ARSP area is provided by the City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department. Electric utilities are installed underground in accordance with City Electrical Construction Standards, the Electric Rates, Rules and Regulations, and the Development Standards and Guidelines for The Anaheim Resort. Full implementation of the ARSP will increase the demand for electricity by approximately 291.7 million kilowatt hours annually and an estimated 799,344 kilowatt hours on an average day. The estimated net increase in electrical demand as- sociated with implementation of the ARSP area is 110.5 million volt amperes. As part of an existing City of Anaheim Capital Improvement Program, the existing overhead electric utilities on Katella Avenue, West Street/ Disneyland Drive, and Harbor Boulevard were placed underground. The undergrounding was completed prior to or at the same time that the area street improvements were completed. New lines constructed to serve the area will also be placed underground. As The Anaheim Resort develops, a new substation facility will be constructed. The proposed substation is tentatively planned for construction in 2015. In order to conserve energy, the owner or developer shall implement energy saving practices which may include the following:  High-efficiency air-conditioning with EMS (computer) control;  Variable air volume (VAV) distribution  Outside air (100%) economizer cycle;  Staged compressors or variable speed drives to flow varying thermal loads;  Isolated HVAC zone control by floors/separable activity areas;  Specification of premium-efficiency electric motors compressor motors, air-handling units, and fan-coil units);  Use of occupancy sensors in appropriate spaces;  Use of compact fluorescent lamps;  Use of cold cathode fluorescent lamps;  Use of light emitting diode (LED) or equivalent energy-efficient lighting for outdoor lighting;  Use of Energy Star® exit lighting or exit signage;  Use of T-8 lamps and electronic ballasts where applications of standard fluorescent fixtures are identified;  Use of lighting power controllers in association with metal-halide or high- pressure sodium (high intensity discharge) lamps for outdoor lighting and parking lots;  Consideration of thermal energy storage air- conditioning for spaces or facilities that may require air-conditioning during summer, day- peak periods;  For swimming pools and spas, incorporate solar heating, automatic covers, and efficient pumps and motors, as feasible; and  Participation in energy efficiency incentive programs; The Public Utilities Department will coordinate with property owners and developers to incorporate feasible renewable energy generation measures, including but not be limited to the use of solar and small wind turbine sources on new and existing facilities and the use of solar powered lighting in parking areas. In ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 4.0 Public Facilities Plan 4-25 addition, new building construction will be required to exceed Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings at the time of building permit application by at least 10 percent. 4.11 Natural Gas Natural gas for the ARSP area will be delivered by Southern California Gas Company, which maintains both standard and high pressure gas lines in the vicinity of the ARSP area. Wherever practical, development within the ARSP area will be required to incorporate energy-saving means into the project to reduce consumption of natural gas. In addition, many of the energy conservation measures described in Section 4.10 above will also result in natural gas savings. 4.12 Telephone Services AT&T provides telephone, digital cable, and high- speed internet services to the ARSP area. Existing facilities are located in the developed areas surrounding the ARSP area. The infrastructure capacity for telephone service typically expands with new development. 4.13 Television/Cable Service Time Warner Cable currently provides both fiber and coaxial feeds in the ARSP area for a variety of services including, but not limited to, standard and high definition cable television service, PRI T1 telephony circuit(s), cable television service, high speed internet, and digital telephone service. 4.14 Solid Waste Solid waste from the ARSP area will be collected by a City contracted disposal company. Collected waste is processed through Republic Waste Services of Southern California LLC’s Regional Material Resource Recovery Facility (MRF). The facility contains an 800-foot-long automated and manual sorter/conveyor system that separates more than 70 types of recyclables. Remaining non-recyclable waste is processed and consolidated before delivery to the Brea-Olinda Alpha landfill in unincorporated Orange County adjacent to the City of Brea. In addition to the processing of collected waste at the MRF for recyclable materials, one or more solid waste reduction programs may be required of new development, including but not limited to:  Facilitating recycling by providing chutes or convenient locations for sorting and recycling bins;  Facilitating cardboard recycling (especially in retail areas) by providing adequate space and centralized locations for collection and storing;  Facilitating glass recycling (especially from restaurants) by providing adequate space for sorting and storing;  Providing trash compactors for non- recyclable materials whenever feasible to reduce the total volume of solid waste and the number of trips required for collection;  Prohibiting curbside pick-up; and,  Providing the following on-going practices during project operations as feasible: o Use of recycled paper products for stationery, letterhead, and packaging; o Recovery of materials such as aluminum and cardboard; o Collection of office paper for recycling; ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 4.0 Public Facilities Plan 4-26 o Collection of (foam) cups for recycling; and o Collection of glass, plastics, kitchen grease, laser printer toner cartridges, oil, batteries, and scrap metal for recycling or recovery. Property owners that develop in accordance with the ARSP will be required to implement a Waste Management Plan that includes, but is not limited to:  Detailing the location and design of on-site recycling facilities;  Providing on-site recycling receptacles to encourage recycling;  Complying with all Federal, State, County, and City regulations for hazardous material disposal; and,  Participating in the City's “Recycle Anaheim” program or any additional substitute programs as developed by the City. 4.15 Public Services The City of Anaheim Fire Department will provide fire protection, emergency medical response, fire inspection and other services to the ARSP area. The City Fire Department, in conjunction with the Utilities Department has set the minimum standards for water flow for the ARSP area. In addition, they will review all future development for compliance with City Fire Department standards. Typical requirements include the installation of sprinklers in accordance with the Anaheim Municipal Code, preparation of emergency fire access and construction fire protection plans, provision of adequate access to structures for fire fighting vehicles and location of fire hydrants in conveniently accessible locations. Since continued development in the ARSP area will increase the number of service calls to the Fire Department, new development shall be required to participate in fair share funding of the following measures intended to improve fire protection:  One additional fire truck company.  One additional paramedic company.  Modifications to existing fire stations to accommodate the additional fire units, additional manpower, equipment and facilities.  A vehicle equipped with specialty tools and equipment to enable the Fire Department to provide heavy search and rescue response capability.  A medical triage vehicle/trailer, equipped with sufficient trauma dressings, medical supplies, stretchers, etc., to handle 1,000 injured persons, and an appropriate storage facility. The Anaheim Police Department provides law enforcement services to the ARSP area. The Police Department is divided into four service districts (Central [Main], South, East, and West) each containing a police station. The ARSP is located within the Central District and is served by the Central Station. Law enforcement services to be provided by the Police Department include traffic control and enforcement, narcotics violations, crime control, community and tourist regulation, detention facilities, various investigations, and patrol. The additional police service personnel needed for the development of The Anaheim Resort will be funded through annual tax proceeds and incremental growth in and around The Anaheim Resort. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-1 5.0 DESIGN PLAN The Design Plan contains descriptions of the basic concepts that will help achieve the ARSP's fundamental goal of creating a unified resort identity for the ARSP area. Written text in this Section describes the fundamental design concepts, while the drawings that accompany the text show how the concepts will be implemented. The Design Plan has been coordinated with several adopted documents that describe design concepts for the ARSP area. These documents include The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan, The Anaheim Resort Public Realm Landscape Program, and The Anaheim Resort Identity Program. In addition, this Section is intended to supplement the Zoning and Development Standards contained in Section 7.0, which is codified as Chapter 18.118 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. Since the public streets are the interface between the ARSP and The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan, both specific plans describe in detail the design of the public streets, as well as the treatment of setback areas adjacent to public streets. The emphasis in both plans is on creating unity through landscape design, a standardized design vocabulary for streetscape elements (such as light poles and directional signs), and regulation of private property, including standards for signs, building heights, and setbacks. For ease of reference and to better depict the relationship between the two specific plans, the ARSP contains information about the treatment of all public streets that border or are within the ARSP area boundaries. As a result, there is an overlap in the information contained in both specific plans along the border between the two areas. For example, the description and illustrations of the design concept for Harbor Boulevard appear in both specific plans. On September 20, 1994, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 94R-239 approving The Anaheim Resort Public Realm Landscape Program. Subsequent amendments have been adopted including Resolution No. 96R-178 (Amendment No. 99R-137 (Amendment No. 2002R-56 (Amendment No. 2009R-037 (Amendment No. and _______(Amendment No. The Anaheim Resort Public Realm Landscape Program summarizes landscape concepts proposed for the public streets within The Anaheim Resort and provides a general overview of the different landscape treatments that will help create a unifying resort identity. The ARSP is also consistent with The Anaheim Resort Identity Program approved by the City Council by adoption of Resolution No. 94R-238 and amended by Resolution Nos. 2001R-239 (Amendment No. 1) and (Amendment No. The Anaheim Resort Identify Program contains specific recommendations for the location and design of gateways, directional signs, banners, light fixtures, and street furniture for The Anaheim Resort. Section 5.5 of the ARSP summarizes how signs and other identity elements will help create the unified environment envisioned for the entire Anaheim Resort area. The information in this Section supplements the Zoning and Development Standards contained in Section 7.0 in the following ways. First, it describes the fundamental design ideas and concepts that are the basis for the standards and regulations. This description of the basic concepts will assist in the interpretation of the intent of the ARSP in situations where several options may be consistent with the regulations. Also, it contains design guidelines that would be considered too general to be standards or regulations, but convey useful information about ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-2 the character and quality of development anticipated within the ARSP area. Finally, this Section contains sketches, cross-sections and photos that show what the physical appearance of important conditions in the ARSP area should be if the standards, regulations, and guidelines are implemented in accordance with this section and Section 7.0. By showing how the two work together, the intent of the ARSP can be conveyed in a more comprehensive manner. In addition to this introduction, this Section is divided into eight parts, including:  5.1 Design Plan Objectives;  5.2 Design Concepts;  5.3 Landscape Concept Plan;  5.4 Landscape Cross Sections;  5.5 Identity Concept Plan;  5.6 Design Criteria for the Public Realm;  5.7 Design Criteria for the Setback Realm; and  5.8 Design Criteria for the Private Realm. 5.1 Design Plan Objectives The Design Plan is intended to achieve three principal design objectives. They are:  Create visual continuity between the ARSP area and the adjacent Disneyland Resort Specific Plan area;  Create a high quality, visually appealing, pedestrian-oriented environment; and,  Create landscape and design standards and regulations to reinforce the area's identity. The following are descriptions of each of these objectives. 5.1.1 Create Visual Continuity between the ARSP Area and the Adjacent Disneyland Resort Specific Plan Area An important objective of the ARSP is to visually tie the ARSP area to the adjacent Disneyland Resort Specific Plan area through the consistent use of landscape and other streetscape elements including signs, gateways, lights and other elements. The Anaheim Resort will then have a more unified identity, and there will be a smooth transition from the ARSP area and The Dis- neyland Resort Specific Plan Area. 5.1.2 Create a High Quality, Visually Appealing, Pedestrian-Oriented Environment A second design objective is to create a high quality pedestrian environment that reinforces the urban character of the ARSP area. With the development of a second theme park and construction of the new public parking facilities in The Disneyland Resort, and the increase in the number of visitor accommodations both within The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan and the ARSP, there will be a measurable increase in the number of pedestrians in the area. Anticipated improvement and expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center will also contribute significant- ly to the increase in pedestrians. This will help support an active street environment for shopping, dining and lodging within walking distance from the theme parks and the Anaheim Convention Center. The Design Plan addresses the needs of pedestrians by:  Establishing the size and location of pedestrian walks;  Defining the type of landscape necessary to create a pedestrian scale; and,  Providing for other amenities, such as directional signs, intended to enhance the overall pedestrian experience. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-3 5.1.3 Create Landscape and Design Guidelines to Reinforce the Area's Identity The Design Plan also provides landscape guidelines for the setback areas and along the public streets that pass through the center of the ARSP area in order to reinforce the overall consistency of the area's identity. The setback landscape will also help provide a continuity ele- ment in front of existing buildings that have a variety of architectural styles. In addition, the Design Plan includes design guidelines intended to support the overall quality of development in the ARSP area by establishing sound minimum criteria for private development. 5.2 Design Concepts The concepts described below are the basic design policies for the ARSP area and form the basis for implementation of the Design Plan. They address the objectives of the Design Plan described in Section 5.1 and include a description of the important site factors that will affect implementation of the design concepts. 5.2.1 Transform and Unify with Landscape The primary concept of the Design Plan is to transform the visual character of The Anaheim Resort with landscape. The primary component of this transformation will be the streetscape, which includes trees and shrubs, as well as man- made elements such as light fixtures, benches, entry gateways, and signs. Setback areas on private land between the public street and buildings are also important in this transformation. In some instances, the visible portions of buildings and private land behind the setbacks will also play a role in defining the character of the ARSP area. 5.2.2 Create a District with a Grand Scale The Anaheim Resort encompasses approximately 1,078 acres, a large urban area in which to create a unified identity. In addition, many of the streets within The Anaheim Resort are wide and provide important regional circulation linkages. Finally, the number of visitors to the area is already significant and will grow with development of the Anaheim Resort and The Disneyland Resort Specific Plans. Consequently, the character of The Anaheim Resort as a whole must be grand in scale to complement the size and importance of the area as a world-class destination resort. The Design Plan proposes creating a grand scale primarily with large-scale landscape plantings and architectural regulations, including building heights and setbacks. 5.2.3 Emphasize Landscaping on Public Streets Most visitors to the ARSP area and the adjacent Disneyland Resort Specific Plan area will experience the area's streets at some time during their visit, either from automobiles, other vehicles (such as the pedestrian way/people mover/moving side system and/or monorail discussed in The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan), or on foot. Nearly all of the publicly-owned land within both areas is contained within the street rights-of-way (or in easements), though the space available for landscaping within the public right-of-way will be somewhat limited because of the need to serve vehicle and pedestrian circulation. Streets and their edges furnish the primary space in which landscaping can be placed to transform the identity of The Anaheim Resort. Where new rights-of-way are being created, sufficient space will be provided within the right-of-way to accommodate the proposed landscape. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-4 Exhibit 5.2-1 Utilize the Streets for Landscaping 5.2.4 Orient Visitors Visually Visitors to the ARSP area and the adjacent Disneyland Resort Specific Plan area often come from great distances and lack familiarity with Anaheim and The Anaheim Resort. These visitors need well-defined visual cues that orient them to their location within the area. In addition, there is great variety in the different uses and functions of the spaces within the ARSP area, and the scale of the spaces often varies as well. The Design Plan differentiates the major streets within the ARSP area by establishing landscape treatments that will help create a unique character for each. 5.2.5 Create a Recognizable Center for the Anaheim Resort In coordination with The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan, the Design Plan establishes an area known as the Central Core, which will have special design standards. It includes parcels located on Harbor Boulevard between Interstate 5 and Orangewood Avenue, and on Katella Avenue between Interstate 5 and Walnut Street. For parcels adjacent to Harbor Boulevard and to Katella Avenue, special design standards will apply to setbacks and streetscape treatments that are different from other locations in The Anaheim Resort. 5.2.6 Coordinate Streetscape Improvements with other Improvements The construction of the streetscape improvements in the ARSP area will be coordinated to the extent feasible with public and private improvements, such as the undergrounding of utilities. The intent is to install public streetscape improvements as soon as possible, while minimizing the need to disrupt these improvements once they have been installed. 5.2.7 Establish a Clear Design Hierarchy The ARSP specifies three distinct levels of design hierarchy called the Public Realm, the Setback Realm, and the Private Realm. The intent is that the most visually prominent areas have the most rigorous design controls, and that the design of less visually prominent areas be more flexible. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-5 Exhibit 5.2-2 The Three Elements of the Design Hierarchy: The Public Realm, The Setback Realm, and the Private Realm Setback Realm Private Realm Public Realm Ultimate Public Right-of-Way Building Setback Buildable Portion Buiding Envelope Areas within the ultimate public right-of-way are called the Public Realm. This visually prominent area is the most precisely defined and designed of the three Realms. The Public Realm concepts for the entire Anaheim Resort area are regulated by The Anaheim Resort Public Realm Landscape Plan. The Setback and Private Realm concepts are regulated for the respective specific plan areas by the Anaheim Resort and Disneyland Resort Specific Plans. The Setback Realm includes the private property between the ultimate right-of way and the required minimum building setback. Since these areas are not quite as significant to the overall character of the ARSP area as the Public Realm, the plan provides for more flexibility in their design. The Private Realm, which includes areas behind building setbacks adjacent to public streets, is guided by design criteria that are the most flexible of the three realms, but still contain important design guidelines intended to enhance the overall identity of the ARSP area. Development of the Private Realm will occur with less predictability than the other Realms, and so less specificity is provided in the design guidelines. Additional discussion of the three Realms can be found in Subsections 5.6, 5.7, and 5.8. 5.3 Landscape Concept Plan This section of the Design Plan describes the landscape design principles for the ARSP area that will contribute to the unified environment envisioned by the Plan. It contains a description of the basic landscape concepts, criteria for the selection of plant material, and general planting design guidelines for the public streets and adjacent setbacks, which the Plan calls the Public Realm and the Setback Realm. The Landscape Concept Diagram (Exhibit 5.3-1) shows how the principles have been applied to the important streets within the ARSP area, and Section 5.4 Landscape Cross Sections illustrates the basic landscape design principles. The landscape design drawings, photos and landscape cross sections found in this Section and Section 5.4, illustrate basic landscape design concepts, and, unless needed to illustrate a concept described in the text, do not contain dimensions or other detailed information about street right-of-way widths or minimum setback dimensions. Information about street rights-of way and minimum setbacks can be found in Section 4.3, Vehicular Circulation Plan, and Section 7.0, Zoning and Development Standards, respectively. The Landscape Concept Plan is more fully described in Appendix 2, The Anaheim Resort Public Realm Landscape Program. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-6 Exhibit 5.3-1 Landscape Concept Diagram ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-7 5.3.1 Plant Material Selection and Use The purpose of this subsection is to:  Describe the basic plant selection criteria for the plants that will be used in the ARSP area;  Describe the role each type of plant (tree, shrub, ground cover) will play in establishing the overall character of the ARSP area; and,  Identify in a general way where and how each type will be used. The information in this subsection is supplemented by a detailed plant palette in Section 5.3.4, which contains a list of plants recommended for use in the ARSP area. The purpose here is to provide the rationale that serves as the basis for the plant palette. 5.3.1.1 Basic Selection Criteria The desirable attributes of plants to be used in the ARSP area include:  Drought tolerant;  Reasonably low in maintenance;  Relatively free from disease and pest infestation,  Outstanding in some characteristic, such as form, color, bark, etc.;  Unlikely to be familiar outside subtropical areas;  Evergreen;  Exotic in appearance;  Moderate or fast in growth; and,  Suitable for use around people. The intent is to establish an overall appearance that is recognizably Southern Californian in character. There is virtually no list of plants that could be developed that would completely satisfy all of these conditions. The intent is to provide a list from which plants can be selected that will provide the best plants to respond to the needs of different uses/functions in the ARSP area, as well as the flexibility to be used in a variety of different situations. 5.3.1.2 Tree Selection and Use Criteria Trees will be the backbone plant material of the planting design because of the size and widespread presence in the street rights-of-way and setback areas. The following describes the different types of tree forms that will be used throughout the ARSP area, and the criteria that will be used to determine how they will be used. Small canopy trees: Small canopy trees are intended for use where it is desirable to create a more intimate scale (such as along narrow streets or in pedestrian areas), where a contrast with a larger tree will help reinforce the layered landscape concept, or to contrast with a tree with a different form. On wide streets where the separation between trees from one side of the street to another (or from a parkway to a median planting) is thirty feet or greater, small canopy trees should always be combined with medium or large canopy trees. Small canopy trees will have a mature height of at least twenty feet, but not more than forty feet. Their mature spread will be approximately equal to their height. Along streets with regularly spaced trees, small canopy trees will be planted at a rate of one tree for each twenty to thirty lineal feet of frontage; spreading trees may require a somewhat wider spacing. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-8 Medium canopy trees: Medium canopy trees may serve the same purposes as either the large or small canopy trees. Typically, they will have a mature height of at least thirty feet, but will not typically exceed sixty feet. Their mature spread will approximately equal their height. Along streets with regularly spaced trees, medium canopy trees will be planted at a rate of one tree for each twenty-five to thirty-five lineal feet of frontage; spreading trees may require a somewhat wider spacing. Medium canopy trees may be used on local or secondary streets, but should not be used alone on arterial roads or other streets greater than sixty feet wide unless there is a landscaped median. Exhibit 5.3-2 Medium Canopy Trees Large canopy trees: Large canopy trees will be used on arterial roads to help reinforce the grand, civic scale of The Anaheim Resort landscape. They are intended to be large scale elements that create a strong, positive visual impression. Their mature height will not be less than fifty feet, and may exceed eighty feet. For the smaller trees in this category, the spread will approximately equal the mature height, while in larger trees the spread will typically be 50% to 75% of the height. Along streets with regularly spaced trees, large canopy trees will be planted at a rate of one tree for each thirty to forty lineal feet of frontage; spreading trees may require a somewhat wider spacing. Large canopy trees may also be used in setback areas that exceed twenty feet in width, and may be planted in masses. Exhibit 5.3-3 Large Canopy Trees ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-9 Vertical and Pyramidal trees: Vertical trees have a mature height that dramatically exceeds their mature width. Vertical trees will have a ratio of height to width not less than 4:1, but which may (in the case of certain varieties of palm) exceed 20:1. Vertical trees will range in height from 30 to 100 feet when mature. The spacing of vertical trees will typically be from eight feet to thirty feet on center for streets on which they are regularly spaced, depending on the ultimate size and spread of the specific tree. When the primary purpose is screening, vertical trees will be evergreen and will be spaced so that the mature trees form a dense visual barrier. When used in the Public Realm, vertical trees will generally be used in combination with canopy trees, especially areas with pedestrians, who will need canopy trees to provide shade. Vertical trees are especially useful in narrow setback areas as a contrast with lower growing canopy trees or shrubs to create the layered landscape. Vertical and pyramidal trees are intended to serve a variety of purposes. Among these are:  Screening views of adjacent uses or property;  Establishing regular, easily recognizable geometric patterns; and,  Providing a dramatic vertical expression that stands out from the surrounding landscape. Pyramidal trees have a characteristic shape like a pyramid, and benefit from having space that permits their lower branches to touch the ground. Many needle leafed evergreens, such as pine and cedar trees, belong to this category. Pyramidal trees will be used as screens, as large-scale backdrop, in formal rows within setbacks, or, where space permits, as large specimens. Exhibit 5.3-4 Vertical and Pyramidal Trees 5.3.1.3 Shrub, Vine and Ground Cover Selection and Use Criteria This subsection explains the role that will be played by shrubs, vines and ground cover to support the basic design established by the trees. Shrubs: Shrubs will serve several main design purposes to reinforce the basic landscape plan, including the following:  Screen views of surface parking lots, service areas, trash enclosures, and other sights that detract from the garden-like character envisioned for the area, or to provide privacy for pool areas, outdoor eating areas, and patios associated with ground floor hotel rooms;  Providing a physical barrier to discourage pedestrians from crossing streets mid-block, or to direct pedestrian and vehicular traffic; and,  Introducing an intermediate to low layer within a layered landscape. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-10 Exhibit 5.3-5 Use of Shrubs to Screen Surface Parking Lots To create a stronger impact, shrubs will be planted in large masses dominated by a single species. They will often appear as either loose (unclipped) or formal (clipped) hedges of consistent height that may vary from two feet to more than fifteen feet high. Shrubs that are very low growing (less than two feet tall), and that spread widely will be used as a ground cover. Exhibit 5.3-6 Formal (Clipped) Hedges Vary in Height Vines: Vines will be used for the following main purposes:  Creating a cloak to cover walls and buildings. For example, clinging vines will be used on parking facilities, buildings and walls to enhance building elevations, and will help discourage graffiti;  Creating vertical and hanging gardens. Vines will be trained to the trunks of palms in order to enhance their appearance at the pedestrian level, and will be used in planters on parking facilities or other buildings. Vines will also be used on garden structures such as arbors and trellises, especially where limited planting area precludes a more traditional planting of trees and shrubs; and,  Establishing a sprawling ground cover in large areas where the vine's growth can be contained in the available space. Ground Cover: In addition to spreading, low growing shrubs and sprawling vines, ground covers include turf and other grasses, annuals, and other varieties of plants that do not generally exceed two or three feet in height at maturity. Generally, ground covers will be used to create a green or colored blanket over the ground. They will be planted so that large areas have a uniform appearance. The use of turf as a ground cover will be limited to particular areas where its smooth, green, manicured appearance and ability to accommodate light pedestrian traffic is needed. Large areas of landscape will be planted with drought tolerant ground covers in order to reduce water usage and long-term maintenance costs. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-11 Exhibit 5.3-7 Ground Cover Includes Turf and Other Grasses, Annuals, and Other Varieties of Plants 5.3.2 Layered Landscape Design Criteria This subsection describes in more detail the layered landscape concept and provides criteria that will be used to design areas in the Setback Realm designated to have a layered landscape treatment. Since planting in both the Public Realm and adjacent Setback Realm will be needed to create a layered landscape, successful implementation requires that planting in both reinforce each other. As a result, setback landscaping will vary depending on the treatment of adjacent public landscape. Implementation of the layered landscape is most important in two areas: along Katella Avenue and Harbor Boulevard, the two major streets within the Central Core; as an additional device to create a unified appearance; and, adjacent to large parking facilities, which will benefit from the articulation of the building facade provided by the variation in the size and height of plant material. Such effective articulation for these buildings would be difficult to provide only with architecture. While construction of the layered landscape in the Public Realm will be achieved in large continuous sections of street, layered landscape in the Setback Realm will be constructed in smaller pieces as individual parcels develop or are renovated. Achievement of the layered landscape look will depend on the successful enforcement of the concept on numerous parcels over a number of years. The length of the street frontage of individual parcels is the most important factor that will influence implementation of the layered landscape. Parcel frontages of more than five hundred lineal feet are long enough to provide the variation needed to create the layered landscape look within a single parcel, while frontages of less than three hundred feet are too short to provide much variation. Therefore, areas that have many parcels with short frontages will require special consideration. Exhibits 5.3-12 and 5.3-13 illustrate diagrammatically the criteria for creating layered landscape based on the length of parcel frontage. The width of the landscape setback will also affect the creation of the layered landscape. In order to create a layered landscape, there needs to be at least two horizontal or two vertical layers of landscape. This means that in narrow set- backs (10-20 feet wide), the selection of plant material is likely to be different than for medium (20-30 feet), or wide (greater than 30 feet) setbacks. Wider setbacks permit the use of a larger canopy or pyramidal trees, or will allow more than three layers in the Setback Realm alone. Exhibits 5.3-8, 5.3-9 and 5.3-10 illustrate diagrammatically the criteria for creating layered landscape based on setback width. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-12 Exhibit 5.3-8 Layered Landscape Design Criteria for Properties with Frontages Greater than 300 Feet Consistent street tree planting forms layers(s) in Public Realm (typical) Minimum length: 150 ft Vertical or canopy tree greater than 50 ft tall at maturity No minimum length for ground covers Minimum length: 100 ft Min length: 50 ft Tall shrub or small canopy tree, 10-25 ft tall Medium shrub, 5-15 ft tall at maturity Exhibit 5.3-9 Layered Landscape Design Criteria for Properties with Frontages Less than 300 Feet Consistent with street tree Within Setback Realm, each property planting forms layer(s) in must match the layered landscape of Public Realm (typical) one of its adjacent neighbors Property B Property C Property A ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-13 Exhibit 5.3-10 Layered Landscape Setback Width Criteria Larger scale plants should be used on wider setbacks Alternate use of medium scale plant permitted (typical) Typical plant material "envelope" 10-15 ft 15-25 ft 25-45 ft Minimum of 3 horizontal and 3 vertical layers in wide setback areas Minimum of 2 horizontal and 3 vertical layers in narrow width setback areas Minimum of 3 horizontal and 3 vertical layers in medium width setback areas Each layer shall be landscaped. The number and size of trees shall be balanced between all layers. See Exhibit 5.6-23, Tree Density Factor Plan for size and number of trees in the setback areas. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-14 5.3.3 Minimum Tree Density The Design Plan identifies trees as a critical element necessary to create a civic scale, and trees are also needed to establish the layered landscape envisioned for the Setback Realm. Trees in the setbacks adjacent to public streets also support the landscaping proposed for the Public Realm. Therefore, both the size and number of trees, which are to be planted in the Setback Realm are regulated by the minimum landscape requirement. To permit flexibility and design creativity in landscape design, the minimum landscape requirement recognizes that the effect of planting many smaller sized trees is comparable to the effect created by planting fewer large trees. Therefore, the regulation allows for variation in the size and number of trees. However, the Setback Realm landscaping adjacent to public streets must also be in conformance with the requirements identified in Section 5.3.2, Layered Landscape Design Criteria, which requires a balanced number of trees/plants/shrubs to be planted within the various landscaping layers. 5.3.3.1 Tree Density to Vary According to Adjacent Use The Design Plan also recognizes that the density of trees adjacent to some types of uses should be different than the density adjacent to others. The densest tree planting will be required adjacent to residential uses. Dense planting will also be required when intended to screen an area as in the case adjacent to parking structures or service areas. The least dense planting will be required adjacent to the public right-of-way for hotels, restaurants, or other visitor-serving uses where visibility to the public is important. 5.3.3.2 The Tree Density Factor To differentiate one tree density from another, all final landscape plans submitted to the City for approval will be required to show the Tree Density Factor for each landscape area. To establish the Tree Density Factor, all trees planted in the setback areas will have a point value based upon their size at installation. The point value varies depending on the size of the tree: large trees have a higher point value than small trees (the actual values are defined below). The Tree Density Factor for any landscape area is defined as the sum of the point values for all trees installed divided by the total area required to be landscaped. The ARSP establishes three levels of tree density, as indicated in Table 5.3-1 Levels of Tree Density. Table 5.3-1 Levels of Tree Density Tree Density Level Tree Density Factor Very Dense Screening adjacent to sensitive areas, for example next to residential zones and the MHP Overlay Zone Dense Screening adjacent to parking structures, interior property lines or the I-5 freeways/ramps Moderately Dense Landscaping adjacent to the public right-of-way for hotels, restaurants and other visitor-serving uses ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-15 Exhibit 5.3-11, Tree Density Factor Plan, shows the location of each density of tree planting required by the plan adjacent to all public streets and to properties bordering the ARSP area. All trees are also subject to a minimum size at the time of installation. Exhibits 5.3-11 and 5.3-12 ‘Tree Selection Matrix,’ define the minimum permitted tree size to be used. The tree point values are defined in Table 5.3-2 Tree Point Values. Table 5.3-2 Tree Point Values 5 points 5-gallon tree (minimum tree size permitted in the Setback Realm) 15 points 15-gallon tree 50 points 24-inch box canopy or vertical tree; Washingtonia or Brahea species palm with a trunk 125 points 36-inch box canopy or vertical tree; Washingtonia or Brahea species palm with a trunk ≤ 20 feet in height; Phoenix species palm with trunk < 5 feet in height 300 points 48-inch box canopy or vertical tree; Washingtonia or Brahea species palm with a trunk > 20 feet in height; Phoenix species palm with trunk ≤ 20 feet in height 600 points 60-inch box canopy or vertical tree; Phoenix species palm with trunk > 20 feet in height 1,200 points 72-inch box canopy or vertical tree The total number of points for a given landscape area within the setback must be equal to or greater than the product of the Tree Density Factor and the area to be landscaped. For example, a 10,000 square foot landscape area with a factor of .5 requires the total point value of trees planted in this area to equal or exceed 5,000 points. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-16 Exhibit 5.3-11 Tree Density Factor Plan ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-17 5.3.4 Plant Selection Matrix This subsection is intended to assist in the selection of plant material to be used within all three Realms of the ARSP area. It contains two plant selection matrices: one for trees and another for shrubs, ground covers and vines. The plants listed in these matrices fulfill the planting design requirements contained in subsection 5.3.2, and identify the specific plant material that may be used to satisfy the landscape requirements defined in the plans and cross sections contained in the Design Plan. The Tree Selection Matrix (Exhibits 5.3-15 and 5.3-16) divides the trees into four subgroups: small canopy trees, medium canopy trees, large canopy trees, and vertical and pyramidal trees. Section 5.3.2 contains a description of these classifications, and generally describes the basic uses for each type of tree. For each species, the matrix contains detailed information about the character of the tree, including:  Mature height and spread;  Evergreen or deciduous;  Drought tolerance; and,  Normal rate of growth. The matrix also identifies the preferred planting locations, and how the tree should be used. Within the Public Realm, the matrix specifies whether the tree should be used within the Freeway interchanges, on the two major Central Core streets, or on other streets. The matrix additionally indicates the minimum parkway width required for the particular tree, based on the City's criteria, the minimum size for the indicated use, and the maximum recommended separation between trees when planted in regular rows. Similarly, the matrix identifies where and how trees should be used in the Setback Realm, and the appropriateness of each species for use in narrow (10-20 feet), medium (20-30 feet), or wide (>30 feet) setbacks. For the Private Realm, the matrix identifies trees to be used for parking areas, pool areas, general landscaping, or as focal points. The Shrub Selection Matrix (Exhibits 5.3-17 and 5.3-18) follows a similar pattern by first dividing the recommended plants is into three groups (shrubs, vines, and ground cover), and then indicating the character of the plant and where and how it should be used to achieve the objectives of the Design Plan. For both matrices, a solid diamond indicates that the particular plant has either the quality indicated (in the case of the portion of the matrix which describes the plant's character), or that the plant is preferred for the designation. A hollow dot indicates that the plant is acceptable for the indicated use, and the absence of a symbol generally means that the plant should not be used for the specified situation. Within the Private Realm, the matrix may be interpreted more freely; for example, it is acceptable for trees not identified as focal points to be used as focal points if planted in larger sizes (48" box, or larger). The intent is to permit somewhat more flexibility in the Private Realm. It is also acceptable to occasionally use plants not listed in the matrices. However, plants from the matrices should comprise at least 80% of the area to be landscaped, and 80% of total list of plants to be used within each Realm. Limiting the variety of plants will strengthen the overall unity of The Anaheim Resort. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-18 Exhibit 5.3-12 Tree Selection Matrix (Part I) Plant Name Comments Botanical Name Common Name Height (feet) Spread Evergreen Deciduous Drought tolerant Slow growing Approved City Street Tree Freeway Interchange Harbor Blvd. street tree Katella Ave. street tree Street Tree: other streets 8 ft Parkways 6 ft Parkways 5 ft Sidewalk cut outs Central Core: Harbor Blvd Central Core: Katella Ave Entries Screening >10-20 ft setbacks 20-30 ft setbacks >30 ft setbacks Parking areas Pool areas General landscaping Focal Points Minimum size at installation Small Canopy Trees Albizia julibrissin Silk Tree 25 35    15 Attractive spreading form. Conspicuous Butia capitata Pindo Palm 20 15    15 Shrub-like small palm. Very hardy. Callistemon citrinus Lemon Bottlebrush 20 15        15 Flowers attract bees in summer. Cassia Gold Medallion Tree 25 25        15 Showy flowers. Citrus spp. Citrus 20 20    15 Fruit management required. sykesii Coral Tree 20 20        15 Showy red flowers in winter. Geijera parvifolia Australian Willow 25 20        15 Looks like willow. Very tough. Melaleuca linariifolia Flaxleaf Paperbark 25 25      15 Shrub-like. Showy white flowers in summer. Metrosideros excelsus New Zealand Christmas Tree 30 30     15 Shrub-like. Red summer flowers. Olea europaea Olive 25 25     15 Use fruitless varieties. Pittosporum napaulense Cape pittosporum 20 20      15 Dense. Fragrant yellow summer flowers. Tabebuia umbellata Trumpet Tree 20 20      15 Showy flowers. Needs good drainage. Stenocarpus sinuatus Firewheel Tree 20 20        15 Showy red or yellow flowers in early fall. Medium Canopy Trees Bauhinia variegata Purple Orchid Tree 35 35        15 Attractive purple flowers. 'Candida', white. Calodendrum capense Cape Chestnut 35 40  15 Summer flowers. Briefly deciduous. Castanospermum australe Moreton Bay Chestnut 40 40      15 Profuse red and yellow summer flowers. falcata Coral Tree 35 35      15 Showy red flowers in winter. Corymbia ficifolia Red-flowering Gum 40 40       15 Showy flowers in summer. Ficus rubiginosa Rustyleaf Fig 40 50    24 Beautiful spreading form. Jacaranda mimosifolia Jacaranda 40 30      24 Purple flowers. Long blooming. Briefly Koelreuteria bipinnata Chinese Flame Tree 35 30      15 Summer flowers and attractive fall fruit. Phoenix dactylifera Date Palm 50 20       P Grey green trends. Fruit management required. Pinus brutia Calabrian Pine 40 30        15 Tough. Regular pine form. Pistacia chinensis Chinese Pistache 40 35    15 Round 'headed.' Bright red fall color. Quercus suber Cork Oak 50 50       24 Very attractive bark. Schinus molle California Pepper 40 40    15 Attractive willowy foliage. Branches to ground. Tabebuia avellanedae Tabebuia 35 35       15 Showy flowers. Tipuana tipu Tipu Tree 40 50         15 Showy yellow spring flowers. Briefly Tristania conferta Brisbane Box 50 40        5 Attractive coarse foliage. Minimum Size (Setback and Private Realm only): 5 = 5-gallon container; 15 = 15-gallon container; 24 = 24-inch box; P = palm sizes; minimum 20-ft trunk height in Public Realm Preferred Use Acceptable Use * Selection of all trees in the Public Realm shall be subject to the City's approval Character Min. Pkwy Public Realm Setback Realm Private Realm Where to use Use Where to use Min Stbk Where to use ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-19 Exhibit 5.3-13 Tree Selection Matrix (Part II) Plant Name Comments Botanical Name Common Name Height (feet) Spread Evergreen Deciduous Drought tolerant Slow growing Approved City Street Tree Freeway Interchange Harbor Blvd. street tree Katella Ave. street tree Street Tree: other streets 8 ft Parkways 6 ft Parkways 5 ft Sidewalk cut outs Central Core: Harbor Blvd Central Core: Katella Ave Entries Screening >10-20 ft setbacks 20-30 ft setbacks >30 ft setbacks Parking areas Pool areas General landscaping Focal Points Minimum size at installation Large Canopy Trees Chorisia speciosa Silk Floss Tree 50 60    15 Slow. Showy spiked bark and purple flowers in fall. Cinnamomum camphorum Camphor Tree 50 60       24 Very slow. Attractive form and foliage. Ficus Moreton Bay Fig 75 100   24 Needs a lot of room. Attractive form and Liriodendron tulipifera Tulip Tree 60 40       15 Flowers inconspicuous. Attractive form. Magnolia grandiflora Magnolia 60 30        15 Showy white flowers. Dark green leaves. M. grandiflora 'St. Mary' Magnolia 25 20        15 Good for confined spaces. M. grandiflora 'Little Gem' Magnolia 20 15        15 Good for confined spaces. Pinus pinea Italian Stone Pine 80 50      24 Needs a lot of room when young. Platanus racemosa California Sycamore 60 60       15 Native. Deciduous. Ulmus parvifolia Evergreen Elm 60 70       15 Deciduous in cold weather. Vertical and Pyramidal Trees Brahea armata Guadalupe Palm 40 5       P Good alternative to W. filifera. Brahea edulis Guadalupe Palm 30 10       P Good alternative to W. filifera. Cedrus deodara Deodar Cedar 60 30         15 Branches to ground. Cupressus sempervirens Italian Cypress 50 10          15 Use species of upright variety. Dombeya cacuminum Dombeya 30 15      15 Showy tropical foliage and red flowers in spring. Ginkgo biloba 'Fairmont' Ginkgo 50 20   24 Use sterile variety. Attractive fall color. Melaleuca quinquenervia Cajuput Tree 40 15     15 Very attractive spongy bark. Pinus canariensis Canary Pine Island 75 20         15 Awkward appearance when young. Populus nigra 'Italica' Lombardy Poplar 75 15       5 Very fast. Attractive form and foliage. Sequoia sempervirens Redwood 75 25    15 Use variety adapted to S. California. Thuja orientalis Arborvitae 50 15       5 Useful as an evergreen screen. Washingtonia filifera California Fan Palm 40 10       P Wide trunk. Washingtonia robusta Mexican Fan Palm 60 10         P Fast. Requires special pruning equipment when Minimum Size (Setback and Private Realm only): 5 = 5-gallon container; 15 = 15-gallon container; 24 = 24-inch box; P = palm sizes; minimum 20-ft trunk height in Public Realm Preferred Use Acceptable Use * Selection of all trees in the Public Realm shall be subject to the City's approval Character Use Public Realm Setback Realm Private Realm Where to use Min. Pkwy Where to use Min Stbk Where to use ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-20 Exhibit 5.3- 14 Shrub, Vine, and Ground Cover Matrix (Part I) Plant Name How to Use Botanical Name Common Name Freeway Interchange Harbor Boulevard Katella Avenue Walnut Avenue Other streets Medians Parkways next to street Parkways behind sidewalks Corners of major streets Harbor Blvd front yard Katella Ave front yard Pedestrian areas Corners of major streets Interior setbacks Parking areas Pool areas General landscaping As specimen Screen Physical barrier Clipped hedge Loose hedge Ground cover mass Trellis or arbor On walls and building faces Minimum size at installation Shrubs Agave spp. Agave         1 Aloe spp. Aloe            1 Arbutus unedo Strawberry Tree   5 Bambusa spp. Bamboo    1 Callistemon spp. Bottlebrush    5 Cassia splendida Golden Wonder Senna     5 Dracaena draco Dragon Tree      1 bidwillii Coral Tree     5 Ficus nitida 'Green Gem' no common name      5 Gardenia spp. Gardenia   5 Grevillea noellii no common name       1 Hedychium gardnerianum Kahili Ginger      1 Heteromeles arbutifolia Christmas Berry     5 Hibiscus rosa-sinensis Chinese Hibiscus         1 Juniperus chinensis 'Tortulosa' Hollywood Juniper       5 Ligustrum japonica Ligustrum        5 Melaleuca nesophila Pink Melaleuca       1 Miscanthus sinensis Eulalia Grass   1 Philodendron evansii Philodendron       1 Philodendron selloum Philodendron      1 Phormium tenax New Zealand Flax              1 Pittosporum undulatum Victorian Box          5 Plumbago capensis Plumbago         1 Podocarpus gracilior Fern Pine    5 Podocarpus henkelii Long-leafed Yellowwood    5 Punica granatum Pomegranate    5 Rosa spp. Roses    1 Strelitzia nicolai Giant Bird of Paradise           5 Strelitzia reginae Bird of Paradise         5 paniculatum Australian Brush Cherry    5 Taxus baccata English Yew   1 Tecoma stans Yellow Trumpet Flower      1 Thevetia thevetioides Giant Thevetia     1 Umbellularia californica California Laurel      5 Yucca whipplei Our Lord's Candle     5 Minimum Key Size: 5 = 5-gallon container; 1 = 1-gallon container; 4" = 4-inch box; na = not applicable * Selection of all shrubs in the Public Realm shall be subject to the City's approval Where to Use Private Realm Setback Realm Public Realm ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-21 Exhibit 5.3-15 Shrub, Vine, and Ground Cover Matrix (Part II) Plant Name How to Use Botanical Name Common Name Freeway Interchange Harbor Boulevard Katella Avenue Walnut Avenue Other streets Medians Parkways next to street Parkways behind sidewalks Corners of major streets Harbor Blvd front yard Katella Ave front yard Pedestrian areas Corners of major streets Interior setbacks Parking areas Pool areas General landscaping As specimen Screen Physical barrier Clipped hedge Loose hedge Ground cover mass Trellis or arbor On walls and building faces Minimum size at installation Vines Bougainvillea spp. Bougainvillea               1 Clematis spp. Clematis    1 Distictis buccinatoria Blood Red Trumpet Vine      1 Ficus pumila Creeping Fig      4" Macfadyena unguis-cati Cat's Claw  1 Mandevilla suaveolens Chilean Jasmine       1 Parthenocissus tricuspidata Boston Ivy  4" Passiflora spp. Passion Flower        1 Rosa banksiae Lady Banks' Rose              1 Rosa floribunda 'Cecile Brunner' Climbing Rose              1 Vitis vinifera Grape         4" Wisteria floribunda Japanese Wisteria        1 Grasses and Ground Covers Agapanthus africanus Giant Agapanthus             1 Lavandula Lavender          4" Limonium perezii Sea Lavender        4" Pennisetum setaceum Fountain Grass       4" Phalaris arundinacea picta Ribbon Grass            4" Rosmarinus officinalis Rosemary       4" Santolina spp. Lavender Cotton 4" Stipa pulchra  4" Vinca major Periwinkle              4" Turf            na Minimum Key Size: 5 = 5-gallon container; 1 = 1-gallon container; 4" = 4-inch box; na = not applicable * Selection of all shrubs in the Public Realm shall be subject to the City's approval Where to Use Public Realm Setback Realm Private Realm ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-22 5.4 Landscape Cross Sections The Landscape Concept Diagram in Exhibit 5.3-1 shows the different landscape treatments proposed for each of the major streets in the area. This Diagram is intended to illustrate the overall planting design concept and does not show the actual size or placement of trees and other landscape elements. The following landscape cross sections are intended to provide a general overview of the different landscape treatments that will help create the unifying identity for The Anaheim Resort. They also show the approximate location of the Public Realm, Setback Realm and Private Realm on each street in the ARSP area. In this way they provide a key to Sections 5.6, 5.7 and 5.8, which contain more detailed information about each Realm, including the role of each Realm creating an overall unifying identity and a description of the specific components of each respective Realm. The cross sections are not intended to illustrate every condition that may occur within or adjacent to the street right-of-way, nor do they contain setback and right-of-way dimensions. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-23 Exhibit 5.4-1 Landscape Cross Sections ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-24 Disneyland Drive Exhibit 5.4-2 Disneyland Drive (North of Ball Road) Landscape Cross Section Private Realm Setback landscape to consist of trees, shrubs, ground cover and/or turf; planting design to be layered landscape Private Realm Setback Realm Public Realm Setback Realm Street trees in parkway to consist of closely spaced vertical trees Pedestrian sidewalk ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-25 Exhibit 5.4-3 Disneyland Drive (Between 825 feet n/o Katella Avenue and 1,350 feet n/o Katella Avenue) Landscape Cross Section Private Realm Setback Realm Public Realm Setback Realm Private Realm Planting on ground may include shrubs, ground cover and/or turf Setback landscape to consist of trees, shrubs, and ground cover and/or turf. Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Disneyland Resort Specific Plan Pedestrian sidewalk Street trees in parkways and median to consist of alternating vertical trees and medium or large canopy trees ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-26 West Street Exhibit 5.4-4 West Street (South of Katella Avenue) Landscape Cross Section Private Realm Setback Realm Public Realm Setback Realm Private Realm Parkway planting to consist of medium or large canopy trees Pedestrian sidewalk Layered landscape in setback to consist of trees, shrubs, vines, ground cover and/or turf Planting on ground may include ground cover and/or turf ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-27 West Place Exhibit 5.4-5 West Place Landscape Cross Section Parkway landscape to consist of trees, shrubs, ground cover and/or turf; planting design to be layered landscape Private Realm Private Realm Setback Realm Public Realm Setback Realm Pedestrian Sidewalk Planting on ground may include ground cover and/or turf Small or medium canopy tree as street tree ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-28 Disney Way Exhibit 5.4-6 Disney Way (East of Clementine Street) Landscape Cross Section ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-29 Katella Avenue Exhibit 5.4-7 Interim Katella Avenue ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-30 Exhibit 5.4-8 Ultimate Katella Avenue (Between Interstate 5 and West Street/Disneyland Drive) Landscape Cross Section ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-31 Exhibit 5.4-9 Ultimate Katella Avenue (Between Walnut Street and West Street/Disneyland Drive) Landscape Cross Section Private Realm Private Realm Public Realm Setback Realm Setback Realm Layered landscape in setback consists of trees, shrubs, ground cover and turf. Double row of Date Palms twenty-four feet (24) on center Ground cover may include turf, ground cover, or shrubs Special light fixtures with banners in parkway and ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-32 Walnut Street Exhibit 5.4-10 Walnut Street Landscape Cross Section Private Realm Public Realm Setback Realm Trees in parkway and median to be regularly spaced medium canopy trees Setback landscape to consist of trees, shrubs, ground cover and/or turf; planting design to be layered landscape. Landscape on ground may consist of shrubs, ground cover and/or turf and may be bermed ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-33 Harbor Boulevard Exhibit 5.4-11 Harbor Boulevard (Between Chapman Avenue and Orangewood Avenue) Landscape Cross Section ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-34 Exhibit 5.4-12 Harbor Boulevard (Orangewood to Manchester on the East Side and Orangewood to 150-250 Feet South of Manchester Avenue on the West Side) Landscape Cross Section Private Realm Public Realm Setback Realm Medium or large canopy trees in parkway and median, thirty-two feet (32') on center, typical Vertical trees with vines planted at base, thirty-two feet (32') on center, Layered landscape consisting of trees, shrubs and/or ground cover Private Realm Setback Realm Planting on ground to consist of barrier shrubs, ground cover and/or turf Special light fixtures with banners in parkway and median, typical ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-35 Exhibit 5.4-13 Harbor Boulevard (Between Manchester Avenue on the East Side and 150- 250 feet South of Manchester Avenue on the West Side to the Interstate 5 Interchange) Landscape Cross Section Medium or large canopy trees in median and parkway (as space permits), thirty- two feet (32) on center, typical Special light fixtures with banners in parkway and median, typical Fence to be planted with vines Public Realm Setback Realm Private Realm Fence to be planted with vines Planting on ground to consist of shrubs, ground cover and/or turf Note: Planting of vines and parkway tree as shown subject to approval of Caltrans and the City Engineer. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-36 Exhibit 5.4-14 Harbor Boulevard (Interstate 5 to Vermont Avenue) Landscape Cross Section ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-37 Ball Road Exhibit 5.4-15 Ball Road (West of West Place) Landscape Cross Section ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-38 Exhibit 5.4-16 Ball Road (Between West Place and Cast Place) Landscape Cross Section Private Realm Setback Realm Public Realm Private Realm Medium or large canopy trees to be planted in landscaped parkways Setback landscape to consist of trees, shrubs, vines and ground cover Painted median ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-39 Exhibit 5.4-17 Ball Road (East of Cast Place) Landscape Cross Section ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-40 Clementine Street Exhibit 4.4-18 Clementine Street Landscape Cross Section Public Realm Setback Realm Private Realm Planting on ground may include ground cover and/or turf Parkway planting to consist of alternating vertical trees and small or medium canopy trees Median planting to consist of small canopy trees, shrubs, vines, ground cover and/or turf Potential people mover north of Katella Avenue ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-41 Haster Street/Anaheim Boulevard Exhibit 5.4-19 Haster Street/Anaheim Boulevard Landscape Cross Section ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-42 Convention Way Exhibit 5.4-20 Convention Way Landscape Cross Section Public Realm Setback Realm Private Realm Private Realm Setback Realm Pedestrian Sidewalk Vertical palm where possible in planting areas Setback landscape to consist of trees, shrubs, ground cover and/or turf; planting design to be layered landscape Regularly spaced planting; alternating between palms and canopy trees; barrier shrubs and ground cover in median. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-43 Gene Autry Way Exhibit 5.4-21 Gene Autry Way (Between Harbor Boulevard and Haster Street) Landscape Cross Section Private Realm Public Realm Setback Realm Setback Realm Private Realm Canary Island Date Palm in parkways and medians Pedestrian Sidewalk Setback landscape to consist of trees, shrubs, ground cover and/or turf Supplementary median planting of large, upright, broad-leaf evergreen shrubs ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-44 Exhibit 5.4-22 Gene Autry Way (East of Haster Street) Landscape Cross Section ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-45 Manchester Avenue Exhibit 5.4-23 West Manchester Avenue Landscape Cross Section Private Realm Setback Realm Public Realm Setback landscape to consist of trees, shrubs, ground cover and/or turf; planting design to be layered landscape. Setback Realm Private Realm Street trees in parkways and median to consist of alternating vertical trees and small or medium canopy trees Pedestrian Sidewalk ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-46 Exhibit 5.4-24 North Manchester Avenue (Adjacent to Interstate 5, North of Alro Way) Landscape Cross Section Public Realm Setback Realm Pedestrian Sidewalk Setback landscape to consist of trees, shrubs, ground cover and/or turf; planting design to be layered landscape Interstate 5 Right-of-Way Private Realm Street trees in parkways to consist of alternating vertical trees and small or medium canopy trees ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-47 Exhibit 5.4-25 Manchester Avenue, East of Anaheim Boulevard (Adjacent to Interstate 5) Landscape Cross Section Interstate 5 Right-Of-Way Pedestrian Sidewalk Setback landscape to consist of trees, shrubs, ground cover and/or turf; planting design to be layered landscape Public Realm Setback Realm Private Realm Street trees in parkways to consist of alternating vertical trees and small or medium canopy ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-48 Orangewood Avenue Exhibit 5.4-26 Orangewood Avenue Landscape Cross Section Public Realm Private Realm Setback Realm Pedestrian Sidewalk Planting on ground may include ground cover and/or turf Parkway planting to consist of medium or large canopy trees ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-49 Chapman Avenue Exhibit 5.4-27 Chapman Avenue Landscape Cross Section Setback landscape to consist of trees, shrubs, vines and ground cover Public Realm Setback Realm Private Realm Medium or large canopy trees to be planted in existing landscaped median Medium or large canopy trees to be painted in landscaped parkway ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-50 Local Streets Exhibit 5.4-28 Alro Way Landscape Cross Section Public Realm Setback Realm Private Realm Pedestrian Sidewalk Setback landscape to consist of trees, shrubs, ground cover and/or turf; planting design to be layered landscape Planting on ground may include ground cover and/or turf Small or medium canopy tree as street trees ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-51 Exhibit 5.4-29 Casa Vista Street Landscape Cross Section Public Realm Setback Realm Private Realm Pedestrian Sidewalk Setback landscape to consist of trees, shrubs, ground cover and/or turf; planting design to be layered landscape Planting on ground may include ground cover and/or turf Small or medium canopy tree as street trees ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-52 Exhibit 5.4-30 Vermont Avenue Landscape Cross Section Setback landscape to consist of trees, shrubs, ground cover and/or turf; planting design to be layered landscape Private Realm Setback Realm Public Realm Small or medium canopy tree as street trees Pedestrian Sidewalk ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-53 Exhibit 5.4-31 Wilken Way Landscape Cross Section Public Realm Setback Realm Private Realm Pedestrian Sidewalk Setback landscape to consist of trees, shrubs, ground cover and/or turf; planting design to be layered landscape Planting on ground may include ground cover and/or turf Small or medium canopy tree as street trees ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-54 Exhibit 5.4-32 Zeyn Street Landscape Cross Section Public Realm Setback Realm Private Realm Pedestrian Sidewalk Setback landscape to consist of trees, shrubs, ground cover and/or turf; planting design to be layered landscape Planting on ground may include ground cover and/or turf Small or medium canopy tree as street trees ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-55 5.5 Identity Concept Plan The Anaheim Resort Identity Program (Appendix describes how signs and other identity elements, such as entry gateways and street furniture in the Public Realm, and freestanding monument signs identifying private businesses in the Setback Realm, will help create the unified environment envisioned for the entire Anaheim Resort. The Anaheim Resort Identity Program was approved by the City Council as a separate document. All Public Realm Identity elements, as well as the Freestanding Monument Sign Design, described in the Anaheim Resort Identity Program are applicable to the entire Anaheim Resort. This sign program for the ARSP will have the following characteristics:  Prior to installation, plans will be prepared which show the location, sign type, and message (or messages, in the case of a changeable message sign) that will be used for each sign in the Specific Plan area;  Signs in the Public Realm (the ultimate public right-of-way) and the freestanding monument signs in the Setback Realm have been designed as a family of signs with a con- sistent design vocabulary; and,  Consistent regulations for signs on private property will make it easier for visitors to quickly find their destination. Additional important information about signs is also contained elsewhere in the ARSP in Section 5.6, Design Criteria for the Public Realm; Section 5.7, Design Criteria for the Setback Realm; and Section 1.1, Design Criteria for the Private Realm. Section 7.0, Zoning and Development Standards, contains the Anaheim Municipal Code regulations which apply to signs in the ARSP area. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-56 5.6 Design Criteria for the Public Realm Exhibit 5.6-1 The Three Elements of the Design Hierarchy: The Public Realm, The Setback Realm, and the Private Realm Setback Realm Private Realm Public Realm Ultimate Public Right-of-Way Building Setback Buildable Portion Buiding Envelope As described in Section 5.2.7, the Design Plan divides the ARSP area into three segments: the Public Realm, the Setback Realm, and the Private Realm. The most visible segment, known as the Public Realm, includes all the area within the ultimate public right-of-way within the specific plan area and includes public streets, street medians, parkways and sidewalks. Because of its visual prominence and because development of this segment will primarily be implemented by the City or other government agencies Caltrans), more specific design solutions are prescribed for the Public Realm than for the other Realms. These design solutions are described The Anaheim Resort Public Realm Landscape and Identity Programs included in Appendices B and C of the ARSP, with supplemental information provided in this section. The primary design emphasis in the Public Realm is to provide a streetscape design that implements the major design concepts described in the preceding sections. Adherence to the streetscape design concepts for the Public Realm is extremely important because of the dominant role a street's image has in creating The Anaheim Resort's identity. Creating a strong identity is critically dependent on implementing a consistent, high quality, streetscape treatment. Virtually all who pass through the area will be affected by the quality of the street environment. The Public Realm includes public streets wholly within the ARSP area or public streets on the border of the Specific Plan area. The ARSP describes all public streets contained wholly or partially within the ARSP area. The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan also identifies the ultimate right-of-way within its boundaries as the Public Realm. The design concepts of streets within the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan and the ARSP have been designed to be compatible so that The Anaheim Resort, as a whole will have a consistent design and identity. The public streets that are entirely outside the ARSP area are not described in this document. Interstate 5, which is located outside The Anaheim Resort, has been included within the Public Realm because of its importance to the arriving visitor's experience. Exhibit 5.6.2, The Public Realm, shows the extent of the Public Realm throughout The Anaheim Resort. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-57 Exhibit 5.6-2 The Public Realm ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-58 5.6.1 Gateways Since many visitors will arrive in the area by vehicle, the Specific Plan defines two different types of gateways that will be oriented primarily to vehicles: Freeway Gateways and Arterial Gateways. The design of the arrival gateways reinforces the overall identity of The Anaheim Resort according to the Identity Concept Plan described in Section 5.5. The locations of the freeway gateways and arterial road gateways are shown on Exhibit 5.6-4, Gateway Location Plan. The following is a general description and guiding principles for each of these major gateways. 5.6.1.1 Freeway Gateways: The Plan identities three freeway gateways along Interstate 5 as shown on Exhibit 5.6-4, Gateway Location Plan. They will be the first experience of The Anaheim Resort for nearly 70% of arriving visitors and will be oriented primarily to vehicles. Because most of the visitors to The Anaheim Resort will be arriving via Interstate 5, it has an important role in creating and enhancing the overall Anaheim Resort identity. The design of the Interstate 5 interchanges with Disneyland Drive, Harbor Boulevard/Ball Road, and Katella Avenue/Disney Way will reinforce and complement the overall design objectives of the Plan. Secondary carpool access to The Anaheim Resort and Platinum Triangle is provided at Gene Autry Way; however this interchange does not include the same design considerations as the other major interchanges. Each interchange is treated as a large-scale gar- den easily perceived from vehicles traveling at freeway speeds. To differentiate the interchanges from one another, each features a distinct landscape type found in Southern California. The West Street/Disneyland Drive interchange is a temperate garden, featuring vertical evergreen trees; the Harbor Boulevard/Ball Road interchange, a temperate/subtropical garden, featuring large flowering canopy & vertical trees consistent with the Public Realm landscape on Harbor Boulevard; and the Katella Avenue/ Disney Way interchange, a temperate/tropical garden, featuring vertical trees. Plants are selected for their drought tolerance to the extent feasible, as well as their ability to create a visual impact while still complying with State of California requirements for treating water runoff. The three primary Freeway arrival gateways are located at the Interstate 5 Katella Avenue/Disney Way, Harbor Boulevard/Ball Road, and Disneyland Drive interchanges, since the majority of vehicles to The Anaheim Resort will use these interchanges. The design concept for these gateways extends the landscape treatment of the adjacent Freeway interchange in The Anaheim Resort until a smooth transition can be made to the public streets. The character of the freeway gateways will be created primarily by landscaping, which may consist of large-scale plantings of trees and directional signs. Other features incorporated into these gateways include:  Night lighting which highlights the arrival experience;  Architectural elements consistent with the other garden-like elements to be used in the area; and,  Identification signs to supplement the directional signs. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-59 Exhibit 5.6-3 Gateway Location Plan ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-60 5.6.1.2 Arterial Gateways: Arterial gateways occur on Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue near the edges of the Central Core area. They are oriented primarily to vehicles and include the following primary elements:  Trellis-like architectural elements located in the median and/or parkways, depending on local conditions;  Trellis elements with the same appearance at each location, though their arrangement may vary;  Trellis elements placed on a base which reinforces the element's traditional character;  Landscape on the ground features color and large, uniform shrub masses, seasonal color, or other similar landscape plantings;  The gateways allow for the attachment of flags and banners; the deployment of these elements is related to seasonal or event- driven needs;  The Anaheim Resort logo is included in the gateway; and,  Night lighting highlights the gateway after sunset. There are four arterial road gateways, which are described below. Additional information regarding the arterial road gateways is provided in The Anaheim Resort Identity Program. 5.6.1.2.1 Harbor Boulevard North The Harbor Boulevard North gateway is located at the northern entry into the Central Core area. It is located immediately south of the intersection of Harbor Boulevard and Manchester Avenue. Because of the constrictions in the parkways on the east side of Harbor Boulevard, the garden trellis architectural elements are limited solely to the medians. Exhibit 5.6-4 Harbor Boulevard North Gateway 5.6.1.2.2 Harbor Boulevard South The Harbor Boulevard South gateway is located at the southern entry into the Central Core area. It is located immediately north of the intersection of Harbor Boulevard and Orangewood Avenue. To match the Harbor Boulevard North gateway, the garden trellis architectural elements are limited solely to the medians. 5.6.1.2.3 Katella Avenue East The Katella Avenue East gateway is located west of the intersection of Katella Avenue and Anaheim Boulevard/Haster Street. The gateway elements, including the garden-trellis architectural elements are placed in both the median and 8-foot parkway on either side of the street. No elements span the street. The gateway area begins several hundred feet west from the intersection with Haster Street west of the left- turn lane median. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-61 5.6.1.2.4 Katella Avenue West The Katella Avenue West gateway is located east of the intersection of Katella Avenue and Walnut Street. The gateway elements, including the garden-trellis architectural elements, are placed in both the median and 8-foot parkway on either side of the street. No elements span the street. The gateway area begins immediately east of the intersection unless there is a left-turn lane for westbound traffic, in which case the gateway area will begin immediately east of the left-turn lane median. Exhibit 5.6-5 Katella Avenue West Gateway 5.6.2 Public Streets Public streets are the backbone of the Public Realm. The design concepts for the public streets are described in The Anaheim Resort Public Realm Landscape Program (Appendix ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-62 5.7 Design Criteria for the Setback Realm The Setback Realm includes the required structural setback area between the Public and Private Realms. The primary role of the Setback Realm is to support the design objectives for ARSP area by reinforcing the design of the streets. The setback areas vary significantly in width, use and character. Consequently, the design guidelines for the Setback Realm vary depending on these factors. Visual consistency will be achieved by application of the common landscape vocabulary, such as the layered landscape concept described in preceding sections, and the regularity of the landscape treatment along the adjacent public streets. The widths of the setback areas are identified in Section 7.0, Zoning and Development Standards. Exhibit 5.7-1 The Three Elements of the Design Hierarchy: The Public Realm, The Setback Realm, and the Private Realm Setback Realm Private Realm Public Realm Ultimate Public Right-of-Way Building Setback Buildable Portion Buiding Envelope 5.7.1 Exterior Lighting The following guidelines apply to exterior lighting in the Setback Realm or where visible from the public right-of-way.  Special accent lighting may illuminate unique architectural details where appropriate, but such lighting should be focused and used sparingly.  Multi-colored lights may only be used sparingly.  Landscape lighting, including tree uplights, small bare-bulb incandescent lights, "twinkle" lights, and other similar lighting effects are encouraged to add a glittering or specular effect to supplement the indirect nature of the rest of the Specific Plan area's night lighting. Requirements for exterior lighting are found in Section 7.0, Zoning and Development Standards. 5.7.2 Freestanding Monument Sign Guidelines The major sign element in the Setback Realm is the freestanding monument sign for identification of private businesses. Since these signs are designed to reinforce the identity of The Anaheim Resort, a similar trellis vocabulary is used. The plan provides for freestanding monument signs to be located within the Setback Realm. These signs are intended to identify particular uses or properties. The Anaheim Resort Identity Program (Appendix C) and Section 7.0, Zoning and Development Standards, contains design criteria, which regulate the location, size, appearance and message of these signs. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-63 Exhibit 5.7-2 Freestanding Monument Sign Hotel/motel owners may place standardized affiliation information on the Freestanding Monument Sign as shown in Exhibit 5.7-3. Exhibit 5.7-3 Freestanding Sign Design Criteria Ultimate public right-of-way Minimum setback adjcaent to Katella Avenue between Haster Street and Walnut Street, and Harbor Boulevard between Interstate 5 and Orangewood Avenue: 0 feet; elsewhere, 7 feet minimum. Freestanding monument signs are located in the Setback Realm to provide a primary source of business identification for all categories of commercial enterprise. They are part of the identity elements for The Anaheim Resort and as such contribute to the unifying effect of the overall identity sign and streetscape program. 5.7.3 Central Core The principal objective within the Setback Realm in the Central Core is to create a consistent, high quality pedestrian environment that reinforces the character established by the landscape and other street elements contained in the Public Realm. Generally, these objectives are achieved by:  Building massing that defines the street edge in a consistent manner;  Limiting the extent of the area devoted to the automobile;  Special intersection landscape treatment for intersections in the Central Core as well as other major entrances in The Anaheim Resort;  Planting design which is compatible with the treatment of the adjacent Public Realm  Limiting the variety of outdoor lighting effects; and,  Consistent size, placement and treatment of signs. Requirements for the Central Core are contained in Section 7.0, Zoning and Development Standards. Exhibit 5.7-14 is a diagram, which illustrates the basic Central Core design principles. The following guidelines provide property owners with additional recommendations for this area. Exhibit 5.7-4 Basic Central Core Design Principles ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-64 5.7.3.1 Central Core Architectural Guidelines Property owners are encouraged to articulate building masses adjacent to the right-of-way with elements such as:  Recesses in windows and door openings.  Variations in building height.  Balconies and awnings.  Buildings with distinct layers—a base, a middle and a top. 5.7.3.2 Central Core Circulation and Parking Guidelines The following circulation and parking guidelines are intended to enhance the pedestrian experience:  Eliminate curb cuts and driveways that disrupt the flow of pedestrians whenever feasible; eliminate redundant access driveways to the same parcel or consolidate driveways on adjacent parcels.  The maximum width of a driveway should not exceed twenty-eight (28) feet.  Entry to hotel parking areas (including those located under buildings) and surface parking lots may be directly from the adjacent Central Core street provided such entry is not more than 28 feet wide and is less than 20% of the width of the property.  The maximum number of curb cuts per lot should adhere to the following: Parcel Width Number of Curb Cuts 300 feet or less 1 >300 feet 2 Exhibit 5.7-5 Redundant Curb Cuts Parcel A Parcel A Parcel B Parcel B access access driveway driveway Property Line Right-of-way Sidewalk Central Redundant curb Core Street cuts disrupt pedestrian traffic Exhibit 5.7-6 Consolidate Curb Cuts Parcel A Parcel B Right-of-way Sidewalk Central Consolidated Core Street driveways smooth pedestrain flow driveway access Parcel B Property Line Reciprocal access easements may be necessary to assure permanent access driveway access Parcel A Exhibit 5.7-7 Limit Portion of Elevation Devoted to Parking Area Entries 5.7.3.3 Entry to parking areas covers no more than 28 feet Parcel Width ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-65 5.7.3.4 Central Core Landscape Guidelines The landscape character of the Setback Realm in the Central Core should support the "garden district" image of The Anaheim Resort, the landscape of the adjacent Public Realm and the underlying layered-landscape concept described earlier in Section 5.3.2, Layered Landscape Design Criteria. Where there is adequate space and the scale is appropriately grand, trees should be planted in a way that creates large-scale horizontal and vertical layers. Special intersection landscape treatment, as depicted in Exhibit 5.7-8, is required and further described in Section 7.0, Zoning and Development Standards, for the following intersections, which are either entry points to The Anaheim Resort or major intersections within this area. All of these intersections are within the Central Core except for the Ball Road intersections:  Harbor Boulevard and Manchester Avenue;  Harbor Boulevard and Orangewood Avenue;  Katella Avenue and Anaheim Boulevard/Haster Street;  Katella Avenue and West Street;  Ball Road and West Street/Disneyland Drive; and,  Ball Road and West Street (to be renamed West Place). The criteria for the Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue Intersection Area are located in Section 7.0, Zoning and Development Standards and Section 1.5 of The Anaheim Resort Public Realm Landscape Program and are generally depicted in Exhibit 5.7-9. Exhibit 5.7-8 Special Intersection Landscape Treatment Exhibit 5.7-9 Harbor Boulevard/Katella Avenue Intersection Area ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-66 5.7.4 Areas Outside of the Central Core In the areas of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan outside of the Central Core, the intent of the Design Plan is to permit flexibility in site planning, architectural design, location of parking areas, and landscape design. The design standards for this area are contained in Section 7.0, Zoning and Development Standards. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-67 5.8 Design Criteria for the Private Realm Exhibit 5.8-1 The Three Elements of the Design Hierarchy: The Public Realm, The Setback Realm, and the Private Realm Setback Realm Private Realm Public Realm Ultimate Public Right- of-Way Building Setback Buildable Portion Buiding The Private Realm includes the privately-owned property not included in the Setback Realm described in the previous section. It encompasses all of the developable area of a parcel. Although the Private Realm is less visually prominent than the Public Realm and the Setback Realm, the design guidelines contained in this section and the design standards contained in Section 7.0, Zoning and Development Standards, are intended to help strengthen the over quality and character of development in the Specific Plan area. The design guidelines and standards serve two main purposes:  To ensure high quality development projects will occur over time by providing uniform design criteria; and,  To help minimize development costs by reducing ambiguity about what type of criteria will be applied by the City when evaluating specific development proposals. 5.8.1 Organization of Private Realm Design Standards and Guidelines The design guidelines and design standards provide both the general design principles and the specific regulations that will guide the design of private development projects within the Specific Plan area. In this Section, "guidelines" are considered to be generalized rules to be applied by designers with discretion and judgment to the particular condition which they address. They are intended to help guide designers to solutions that will enhance the quality of development projects within the Specific Plan area. They are not intended to provide the only design solution to every condition a designer might face, and should not discourage creative and innovative solutions. In situations where they apply, how- ever, they should be followed. The term "standards" refers to regulations found in Section 7.0 of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (ARSP) and in Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. City staff and decision makers will use both the guidelines and standards to evaluate projects for conformance with the intent of the Design Plan and the specific requirements of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 5.8.2 General Site Planning Guidelines Site planning is the process of arranging buildings, landscaped areas, circulation, parking, and service areas on a particular site. The following are recommended in addition to the requirements in Section 7.0, Zoning and Development Standards:  Long, unarticulated building facades should not be placed adjacent to portions of the Setback Realm adjacent to public rights-of- way. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-68  Provide landscape buffers between different land uses.  Orient at least one public entry toward major streets.  Provide direct pedestrian access from public walkways to buildings, where appropriate.  Provide secondary entries to buildings from parking areas or interior pedestrian walks.  Design buildings to allow pedestrians to circulate around buildings without stepping into vehicular driveways.  Provide pedestrian circulation between adjacent commercial properties where appropriate.  Provide reciprocal easements between adjacent properties for shared driveways and parking aisle connections. Exhibit 5.8-2 Landscape Buffer between Uses 5.8.3 Service, Storage and Maintenance Areas and Loading Docks Guidelines Although service, storage and maintenance areas and loading docks are important to the smooth function of uses within the Specific Plan area, they are not aesthetically compatible with the planned resort and entertainment areas. These areas should be incorporated into the main building whenever possible It is important that the requirements in Section 7.0, Zoning and Development Standards be followed so that these areas do not detract from the visual quality of the Specific Plan area. Exhibit 5.8-3 Screen Service Areas from View demonstrates how these areas should be screened. Exhibit 5.8-3 Screen Service Areas from View 5.8.4 Exterior Lighting Guidelines Nighttime illumination of buildings is important in creating an interesting and safe environment. In addition, it can highlight building design features, add emphasis to prominent entrances and plazas, and create an ambiance of vitality and security. In addition to the requirements of Section 7.0, Zoning and Development Standards, the following guidelines suggest ways in which these purposes can best be served.  Relate exterior lighting to the design elements of the site and building they serve. Lighting should highlight architectural elements and details and not entire walls. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-69  Design exterior lighting to be an integral part of the overall architectural concept. Fixtures, standards and all exposed accessories should be harmonious with the building design and the visual environment. Obtrusive lighting elements that detract from the appearance of their setting should be avoided.  Illuminate the entrances of buildings and parking areas to promote convenient, safe and easy identification.  Exterior lighting within private development should complement and not conflict with public lighting.  Consider energy conservation in nighttime lighting plans. Plans for the design and operation of lighting and illumination should be developed consistent with the latest technical and operational energy conservation concepts.  Include exterior lighting of pedestrian walkways within private development. Pedestrian walkway lighting levels should be set relative to the level of security necessary The guidelines shown in Exhibit 5.7-5 Allowable Lighting Levels by Level of Security, are averages. Higher lighting levels may be necessary to provide for safety, subject to the approval of the City. Table 5.8-1 Allowable Lighting Levels by Level of Security Average conditions 0.5 footcandle Security conditions, 9-15 foot tall fixtures 2.0 footcandle Security conditions, 15-30 foot tall fixtures 4.0 footcandle 5.8.5 Surface Parking Area Guidelines Parking lot design is a critical factor in the success or failure of a commercial use. In considering the possibilities for development of a parking area, the following factors will be an- alyzed: ingress and egress; avoidance of pedestrian and vehicular conflicts; conflicts with street traffic; and the overall configuration and appearance of the parking area. The following guidelines are in addition to the requirements of Section 7.0, Zoning and Development Standards:  If future expansion is contemplated, areas should be reserved for parking expansion and indicated as such on plan submittals.  Shared parking should be accommodated between adjacent parcels when appropriate.  Avoid heavily-textured paving that may create a difficult walking surface.  Provide pavement strength of all parking areas consistent with the expected traffic.  Discourage surface parking (excluding short- term parking associated with hotel drop-off areas) between the street setback and a building/structure within one hundred feet of a street intersection, as measured from the ultimate right-of-way line. (Surface parking is prohibited in the Central Core between the front setback and the building/structure.)  Locate parking areas to the rear or, if no space is available, to the side of buildings, whenever possible.  Design parking facilities in a manner such that any vehicle on the property will be able to maneuver to exit from the property traveling in a forward direction.  Design parking facilities so that a car within a parking area will not have to enter a street to move from one location to another within the same site. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-70  Use landscape areas, walkways, and plazas to reduce the visual impact of large surface parking areas.  Encourage right angle (90°) parking stalls to minimize total surface parking area.  Design parking areas so that pedestrians walk parallel to moving cars.  Minimize situations where pedestrians must cross parking aisles at right angles.  Design the parking lot so that drive aisles are perpendicular to the main building wherever feasible.  Direct vehicular circulation through a parking area to the outer edge of the lot where there is less pedestrian traffic.  Direct vehicular circulation away from fire lanes.  Design the parking area to link the building to a sidewalk system that is an extension of the pedestrian walk system through the use of design elements such as painted or en- hanced paving, architectural features, and/or landscape treatments.  Minimize the number of entrances and exits to reduce conflicts at entries and lessen possible congestion at street intersections. Exhibit 5.8-4 Screen Parking From View Exhibit 5.8-5 Pedestrians Move Perpendicular to Parking Spaces 5.8.6 Parking Structure Guidelines Parking structures will be found throughout the ARSP area, and their design is an important consideration in the overall visual quality of The Anaheim Resort. The design guidelines in this section and the requirements in Section 7.0, Zoning and Development Standards are intended to assure that parking structures incorporate design features, which make them more attractive.  Consider allowing climbing vines to grow on the surfaces of parking structures on elevations of the structure that face public streets.  Consider adding planters for hanging or climbing vines on the elevations of the structure that face public streets.  Consider stepping back parking structures above the fourth level on elevations adjacent to a public street, when such structures exceed four levels in height. If a parking structure has frontage adjacent to two or more public streets, consider stepping the structure back on the street with the highest traffic volume.  Consider creating openings in the upper decks that allow light to lower levels for parking structures that are only one or two levels above grade, and permit trees to be ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-71 planted on grade under the openings that, when mature, will extend above the structure.  Parking levels may be stepped or terraced to visually soften the overall mass of the structure.  Parking structure facade articulation should: o Create a sense of order through play of light, shadow and texture. o Minimize horizontal or vertical banding by balancing both vertical and horizontal elements. o Use openings, columns and beams to visually segment exterior surface and provide scale. o Spandrels are to be level and uniform when feasible. o Differentiate pedestrian and vehicular entrances.  Building design should employ clean, simple, geometric forms and coordinated massing that produce overall unity, scale and interest. Appropriate treatments include: o Straightforward geometry. o Unified composition. o Delineation of floor levels and structure. o Solid parapets.  Facades should reflect a coordinated design concept, including portrayal of building function, structure and scale. Appropriate treatments include: o Straightforward, functional design. o Expression of structure with columns and beams. o Unity and scale reinforced through an integrated grid module. o Surface delineation through use of reveals, mullions and recesses.  Detailing should be clean, clear and straightforward. Details should reinforce overall design unity, interest and scale. Appropriate treatments include: o Coordinated mullions and details. o Delineation and alignment of structural connections o Finishes commensurate with building materials. o Coordinated entry spaces and landscaping.  Street facades should be designed to be visually interesting and screen parked cars from exterior views.  Avoid horizontal banding. 5.8.7 Building Appearance Guidelines Building appearance guidelines in this section and the requirements in Section 7.0, Zoning and Development Standards address the following elements: massing, shape, scale, and materials. The intent of these guidelines and standards is to assure a harmonious relationship between buildings in the ARSP area without requiring a particular architectural theme. This can be achieved by careful attention to building massing, building materials and color. The guidelines in this section are intended to apply to both new construction and renovation of existing buildings. Existing buildings may need more latitude in the interpretation of these guidelines because of the limited opportunities to make fundamental changes in building massing, for example, than would be possible in new construction. 5.8.7.1 Building Massing Creating attractive building masses is an important factor contributing to the overall character of the Specific Plan area. The intent of the guidelines is to promote building mass that is rich visually and creates a more exciting and varied urban landscape, but does not place too much importance on any single building. Buildings, which have a large undifferentiated mass are often unattractive, and detract from the ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-72 Specific Plan's goal of encouraging more pedestrian activity, because their size and scale make pedestrians feel uncomfortable. The following guidelines are intended to guide designers in creating building masses that satisfy the goals of the Specific Plan. It is not necessary that every guideline be employed in the design of every building; rather, each guideline should be viewed as a suggestion that should be considered for any building in the Specific Plan area.  Create spaces with building masses, whenever possible; avoid creating building masses which are perceived as objects.  Design buildings to be members of a harmonious group, rather than independent, sculptural masses.  Use building mass to enhance the pedestrian scale of the street. Increase the articulation of building massing adjacent to major pedestrian walks and gathering places. In- crease landscape and architectural detail at the ground level.  Consider the location, size and scale of neighboring buildings when massing new buildings. Create a harmonious relationship between adjacent facilities, regardless of whether or not they are on the same parcel.  Articulate the different parts of a building facade using color, arrangement of facade elements, a change in materials, or other architectural devices.  Vary the height of the building so that it appears to be divided into distinct elements.  Use rooflines to help establish the mass of a building; whenever feasible, the form of the roofline should physically represent its function; avoid mansard roofs. 5.8.7.2 Building Materials and Colors The intent of these guidelines is to encourage the use of materials and colors that enhance the physical cohesiveness of the area, and to convey a sense of permanence. Although no particular material is specifically prohibited, the use of some materials is discouraged because it would be difficult to achieve the guidelines' goal of promoting cohesiveness and permanence. 5.8.7.2.1 Walls  The preferred dominant material for walls is masonry in any of the following forms: natural stone (including granite, sandstone, marble and limestone), brick, stucco, poured in place or precast natural concrete (sandblasted, textured, or exposed aggregate), and painted concrete.  Wall materials that may be used with care include: o Split face, slump, or other forms of concrete block. o Shingle, clapboard, vertical, or angled wood siding.  Use of the following materials will require a special design solution or other unique condition in order to be successful: o Exotic wood treatments, such as distressed wood, pecky cedar, log cabin look, stained fir plywood, or gingerbread filigree. o Reflective (mirror) glass curtain wall. o Corrugated metal. o Imitation rock work. o Plastic molded imitations of any conventional building material. o Silver or clear anodized aluminum sheets. o Imitation wood siding. o Flat or molded plastic sheeting. o White brick. o Tilt-up concrete. o Antique or old brick with partial paint, mottled light variegated brick, oversized brick, and white brick mortar. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-73  Discourage wall and/or window mounted room air conditioners unless they are concealed from public view, or are integrated into the architecture. 5.8.7.2.2 Windows  The preferred dominant material for windows is transparent or tinted glass.  reflective or solar glass may be used above the first floor.  Windows of dark or highly reflective glass are not recommended, especially on the first floor elevations, and will require exceptional or unique solutions to make them acceptable. 5.8.7.2.3 Roof Materials  When visible from the street, the preferred roof materials include natural colored terra cotta tile, concrete tile, and other similar materials.  Roof materials that will require a special design solution or other unique condition in order to be successful include: wood shakes, wood shingles, fiberglass shingles, composition shingles, corrugated metal and standing seam roofs. 5.8.7.2.4 Building Color Building color guidelines provide another means to visually unify the ARSP area by narrowing the range of choices to a group of colors that are visually compatible with one another. Although it is not the intent of the guidelines to eliminate any specific color from consideration or use within the Private Realm, the following criteria provide appropriate guidance for the selection of building color.  Encourage large building surface areas to be light colored. In general, accent elements, including, but not limited to, windows, doors, awnings, building trim and light fixtures may be either dark or light colored.  Limit the dominant surfaces of a building to only complementary colors; accent areas may include a greater variety of colors. 5.8.7.2.5 Awnings Awnings can be used to create an inviting space in front of a building where people may step away from the flow of pedestrian traffic and find a shady protected area.  Allow awnings that are continuous or broken to differentiate windows and display areas; awnings can become an important element in a storefront design as they may be used to unify a storefront with the whole building.  Design the shape of the awning to fit the architecture. Awnings that are barrel shaped segmented arches or round-ended create distinctive images, but should be used sparingly and only when they do not conflict with the building's architectural elements.  Ensure the highest point of a first floor awning not be higher than the midpoint of the space between the second story window sills and the top of the first floor storefront window, awning, canopy, or transom. This attachment should leave a comfortable space between awning and architectural elements, which comprise the building.  Ensure that the awnings do not obstruct the views to adjacent businesses.  Avoid awnings of more than a single color per building. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-74 5.8.8 Sign Guidelines Signs are one of the most visible design elements in the ARSP area. The purpose of establishing sign guidelines solely for the Specific Plan area is to:  Reinforce Identity.  Encourage graphic excellence.  Reduce conflicts between signs.  Improve appearance of the Specific Plan area.  Create consistency among signs.  Promote sign legibility.  Promote smooth flow of traffic as people are able to identify sites. The guidelines below establish positive criteria for the design of desirable signs and which complement the other building elements in the ARSP area.  Use a brief message. The fewer the words, the more effective the sign. A sign with a brief, succinct message is simpler and faster to read, looks cleaner and is more attractive.  Avoid faddish and bizarre typefaces. Such typefaces may look good today, but soon go out of style. The image conveyed may quickly become that of a dated and unfashionable business.  Avoid hard-to-read, intricate typefaces. These typefaces reduce the sign's ability to communicate.  Select sign colors and materials to contribute to legibility and design integrity. Even the most carefully thought out sign may be unattractive and a poor communicator be- cause of poor color selection.  Use significant contrast between the background and letter or symbol colors. If there is little contrast between the brightness or hue of the message of a sign and its background, it will be difficult to read.  Use complementary colors on signs. Too many colors overwhelm the basic function of communication. The colors compete with content for the viewer's attention. Limited use of the accent colors can increase legibility, while large areas of competing colors tend to confuse and disturb.  Harmonize sign size with the scale of the structure.  Place signs consistent with the proportions of scale of building elements within the facade. Within a building facade, the sign may be placed in different areas. A particular sign may fit well on a plain wall area, but would overpower the finer scale and proportion of the lower storefront. A sign appropriate near the building entry may look tiny and out of place above the ground level.  Place wall signs to establish facade scale and proportion where facade does not exist. In many buildings that have a monolithic or plain facade, signs can establish or continue appropriate design scale, and proportion.  Use widely recognized logos rather than print/text whenever possible.  Avoid signs with strange shapes. Signs that are unnecessarily narrow or oddly shaped can restrict the legibility of the message. If an unusual shape is not symbolic, it is probably confusing.  Consider carefully the proportion of letter area to overall sign background area. If letters take up too much sign, they may be harder to read. Large letters are not neces- sarily more legible than smaller ones. A general rule is that letters should not appear to occupy more than 75% of the sign panel area.  Make signs smaller if they are oriented to pedestrians. The pedestrian-oriented sign should read from a distance of fifteen to twenty feet, the vehicle-oriented sign is viewed from a much greater distance. The closer a sign's viewing distance, the smaller that sign need be. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-75  Design wall signs to be appropriate to the building on which it is placed. The wall sign is an integral part of the building facade. The style of a wall sign should be appropriate to the style of a building's design. 5.8.9 Landscape Guidelines  Design landscape and open space areas to be an integral part of the overall site plan design.  Use trees to define and enclose exterior spaces, and to provide physical protection from the sun and wind.  Provide for landscaped open space areas that enhance the building design and public views and provide buffers and transitions between adjacent uses.  Use trees, shrubs and vines to conceal walls, building elevations and parking facilities.  Use arbors, trellises, walls, gates and other elements to reinforce the architecture of adjacent buildings; landscape structures should be compatible and consistent with the architectural treatment of the adjacent build- ings.  Screen undeveloped, vacant land intended for future phases with plants that prevent wind and water erosion.  Space plants to assure unobstructed visual access for vehicles and pedestrians.  Ensure that plant materials do not interfere with security lighting, or restrict access to emergency apparatus such as fire hydrants or fire alarm boxes.  Provide simple, bold and easy to maintain landscape planting designs which incorporate many drought tolerant plant materials.  Landscape elements visible from the public right-of-way should blend with and seem a part of the public right-of-way landscaping.  Provide for plant palettes that include both long- and short-lived plant materials. Long- lived materials include trees and most shrubs; short-lived materials include perennials, annuals and some shrubs.  Select plant materials which are suited to the soil and climatic conditions of the site.  Minimize the use of water through the selection of plants that are drought tolerant when they are mature.  Space trees and shrubs with consideration for their ultimate size.  Ensure that all ground cover is healthy and densely foliated, and is comprised of well- rooted cuttings or container plants.  Provide a mix of plant material sizes in informal plantings. Exhibit 5.8-6 Landscaping Detail at Ground Level ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 5.0 Design Plan 5-76 5.8.10 Wall and Fence Guidelines  Use walls and fences for security, visual screening, and aesthetic purposes.  Ensure that walls and fences are consistent with the architecture of the adjacent building in terms of material, color, and form.  Avoid walls which feature long, unarticulated surfaces. Use pilasters, height variation, setback variation, landscaping, and surface texture to vary the wall surface.  Provide walls and fences that are of the following preferred materials: masonry, wrought iron and painted steel tubing. 5.8.11 Pedestrian Paving Guidelines These guidelines for pedestrian pavements apply to all paved areas on private property intended for use by pedestrians, including areas to be used by both pedestrians and vehicles. Pedestrian pavements may include, but are not necessarily limited to: sidewalks, paths, walkways, courtyards, and plazas.  Desirable qualities of pedestrian paving surfaces: o A surface texture rough enough to prevent slipping, but smooth enough to prevent stumbling. o Maintenance free. o Stain resistant. o Fade resistant. o Non-reflective.  Acceptable pedestrian paving materials: o Concrete: broom finished, salt finished, heavy sandblasted. o Colored concrete. o Stamped and saw-cut concrete, provided the pattern does not have joints or score lines that catch high heels, or cause tripping. o Unit pavers, including brick, stone, concrete and tile, provided the pavers do not have joints or score lines that catch high heels, or cause tripping.  Pedestrian paving surfaces which may be used in situations where the limitations of the material have been considered include: o Decomposed granite (not suitable for use where disabled access should be provided). o Loose gravel (not suitable for use where disabled access should be provided, or where heavy pedestrian traffic can be expected). o White, or very light colored paving (not suitable where glare from the surface will affect pedestrian safety). o Asphalt (not suitable where the asphalt is likely to become soft on hot days). o Wooden boardwalk type paving (not suitable where heels might catch in the cracks between the boards). ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 6.0 General Plan Consistency 6-1 6.0 General Plan Consistency California Government Code §65450-§65453 permits the adoption and administration of Specific Plans as an implementation tool for elements contained within the local General Plan. The City of Anaheim General Plan provides guidance for long-term growth and development in the City through comprehensive plans for future development. Specific Plans must demonstrate consistency in regulations, guidelines and programs with the goals, objectives, policies, programs and uses that are set forth in the General Plan. Table 5.9-1 of Supplemental Environmental impact Report No. 340 addresses the consistency of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (ARSP) with the relevant City of Anaheim General Plan Goals and Policies and said table is incorporated by reference into the ARSP. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 6.0 General Plan Consistency 6-2 This page is intentionally blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-1 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards The following excerpt from the Anaheim Municipal Code indicates changes proposed to Chapter 18.116 (Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2 (SP 92-2) Zoning and Development Standards as a part of Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan. Deletions are shown in red strikethrough and additions are shown in red bold type. Anaheim Municipal Code Title 18 ZONING Chapter 18.116 ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 92-2 (SP 92-2) ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Chapter 18.116 ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 92-2 (SP 92-2) ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Sections: 18.116.010 Purpose and intent. 18.116.020 General provisions. 18.116.025 Changes to Specific Plan Boundaries. 18.116.030 Definitions. 18.116.040 Methods and procedures for Specific Plan implementation. 18.116.050 Development areas. 18.116.060 Development density areas – Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area 18.116.070 Uses – Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area 18.116.075 Residential Uses/Amendments. 18.116.080 Structural heights and widths – Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area 18.116.090 Structural setbacks – Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area 18.116.100 Screening, walls, fences, landscaping and lighting – Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-2 18.116.110 Land use and site development standards – Public Recreation (PR) District (Development Area 18.116.120 Mobile Home Park (MHP) Overlay. 18.116.125 Anaheim Resort Residential (ARR) Overlay. 18.116.130 Central Core. 18.116.140 Off-street parking and loading requirements. 18.116.150 Requirements for vacation ownership resorts. 18.116.160 Sign regulations. 18.116.170 Reclassification procedure –violation. 18.116.010 PURPOSE AND INTENT. .010 Purpose. The regulations set forth in this chapter have been established to provide for orderly development of, and upon adoption of an ordinance reclassifying said property to SP 92- 2 (the “Zone”), shall be applicable to that certain property (hereinafter referred to as the “Specific Plan area”) described in that Specific Plan No. 92-2 document (hereinafter referred to as the “Specific Plan”) marked “Exhibit A” and on file in the office of the City Clerk, approved by the City Council on September 27, 1994 (Ordinance No. 5453), and amended on June 3, 1997 (Ordinance No. 5599), amended on May 18, 1999 (Ordinance No. 5685), amended on August 17, 1999, (Ordinance No. 5694), amended on September 21, 1999 (Ordinance No. 5703) and amended on May 1, 2001 (Ordinance No. 5769), amended on April 27, 2004 (Ordinance No. 5910), amended on May 25, 2004 (Ordinance No. 5920), as part of the comprehensive Zoning Code Update, amended on June 8, 2004 (Ordinance No. 5922), amended on February 8, 2005 (Ordinance No. 5954), amended on February 8, 2005 (Ordinance No. 5954), amended on September 12, 2006 (Ordinance 6036), amended on May 8, 2007 (Ordinance No. 6058), amended on March 4, 2008 (Ordinance Nos. 6098 and 6099), amended on October 14, 2008 (Ordinance No. 6117), amended on March 31, 2009 (Ordinance No. 6141), and amended on (Ordinance No. as the same may be hereinafter amended. .020 Intent. The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Zone recognizes the uniqueness of The Anaheim Resort as a family-oriented tourist destination and encourages facilities catering to tourist and convention-related events. This zone is intended to provide for and encourage the development of integrated facilities in attractive settings for retail businesses directly related to entertaining, lodging and supplying services to tourists and visitors. This Zone is further intended to preserve locally recognized values of community appearance; to safeguard and enhance property values in the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Zone; to protect public investment in, and the character of, public thoroughfares; and, to aid in the attraction of ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-3 tourists and other visitors important to the economy of the city. Application of these regulations is specifically intended to provide for the most appropriate use of the land, create a harmonious relationship among land uses and protect the health, safety and welfare of the community. .030 Organization. In accordance with the provisions of Chapter 18.72 (Specific Plans), the standards herein are patterned after the zone districts and definitions contained in Title 18 (Zoning). (Ord. 5453 § 1 (part); September 27, 1994: Ord. 5920 § 1 (part); June 8, 2004: Ord. 6031 § 64 (part); August 22, 2006.) 18.116.020 GENERAL PROVISIONS. .010 Compliance with Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Code and Conditions of Approval. All uses and development in this Zone shall comply with any applicable provisions of the code expressly referred to in this chapter, including, unless specifically amended herein, the provisions of Chapters 18.92 (Definitions); 18.40 (General Development Standards); and 18.60 (Procedures) provided, however, that in the event of any conflict or inconsistency between any provision contained in any other chapter of this code and any provision contained in this chapter, the provision contained in this chapter shall govern and apply. All Engineering Standards referred to in this chapter are on file in the office of the City Engineer and are incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth in this chapter. Where the provisions of this Zone do not discuss a specific condition or situation which arises, the nonconflicting provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code shall apply. All uses and development in this Zone shall further be subject to conditions of approval imposed by resolution and ordinance upon the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan and shall comply with all applicable provisions of Mitigation Monitoring Program Nos. 0085, 0085a, and 0085b and 0085C. .020 The Anaheim Resort Design Plan. The site development standards set forth in Sections 18.116.060 (Development Density Areas - Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area through 18.116.160 (Sign Regulations) of this chapter have been adopted to operate in conjunction with the Design Plan for the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan identified in Section 5.0 of the Specific Plan document (hereinafter referred to in this chapter as the “Design Plan”) as the same may be hereinafter amended in accordance with the Specific Plan amendment procedures set forth in Chapter 18.72 (Specific Plans). Said Design Plan is incorporated herein by this reference as if fully set forth in this chapter. All development otherwise permitted by this chapter shall comply with any applicable provisions of the Design Plan. .030 Compliance with City of Anaheim Codes. All grading and subdivision plans shall comply with all applicable regulations and be reviewed and processed in accordance with the procedures contained in Title 17 (Land Development and Resources) of the Anaheim Municipal Code. All construction shall comply with the provisions of the Uniform Building Code, as adopted by the City of Anaheim, and applicable sections of Title 15 (Building and Housing) of the Anaheim Municipal Code. Construction within the Specific Plan area may commence only after the Planning Director finds that the construction proposal is in substantial compliance with these regulations, applicable policies and guidelines of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan. With the exception of exemptions provided in paragraph 18.116.[PHONE REDACTED], Table 116-A (Final ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-4 Site Plan Exemptions), the issuance of building permits may only occur after Final Site Plan approval has been obtained from the City of Anaheim, subject to the procedures set forth in Section 18.116.040.020 (Final Site Plan Review and Approval). .040 Specific Plan Boundaries. The Specific Plan boundaries are identified on Exhibit 3.3.1a entitled “Development Plan” of the Specific Plan document. The Specific Plan area encompasses two land use districts: the Commercial Recreation (C-R) District and the Public Recreation (PR) District. The Specific Plan also encompasses the includes a Mobile Home Park (MHP) Overlay Zone as shown on Exhibit 3.3. 2a (Mobile Home Park (MHP) Overlay Zone) of the Specific Plan document and the Anaheim Resort Residential (ARR) Overlay. Both overlays are within the C-R District. The project area legal description is provided in Section 9.0 of the Specific Plan document. The Zoning Map of the City shall reflect the boundaries of the Specific Plan area. .050 Nonconforming Structures and Uses. The provisions of Chapter 18.56 (Nonconformities) of the Anaheim Municipal Code, shall apply to this zone except as stated herein. .0501 Signs. The provisions of Section 18.116.[PHONE REDACTED] (Legal Nonconforming Signs-General) of this chapter shall apply to nonconforming signs. .0502 Landscaping. The site development standards in subsection 18.116.100 (Screening, Walls, Fences, Landscaping and Lighting - Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area shall apply to all landscaping hereinafter installed or modified and to all landscape on any lot or parcel containing a building hereinafter structurally modified to an extent exceeding forty-five percent (45%) of the gross floor area of said existing building within any two-year period. .0503 Structural Expansion. The site development standards in this chapter shall apply to the structural expansion portion of every building hereinafter expanded. The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan encourages the enhancement of all buildings and structures within the specific plan boundaries, including legal nonconforming buildings and structures, in accordance with the following procedures. .01 Expansion of nonconforming uses and/or structures which bring the use and/or structure into greater conformity with the intent of the Specific Plan may be permitted subject to the approval of a conditional use permit in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 18.66 (Conditional Use Permits). .02 Facade improvements, interior building improvements and improvements interior to or at the rear of a building or development/building complex may be made to legal nonconforming buildings or structures subject to the approval of the Planning Director provided the improvements do not exceed five percent of each building's floor area, are in substantial conformance with the building envelope, do not adversely impact any adjacent parcels and are in conformance with the Design Plan and this chapter. If the Planning Director determines that adverse impacts would occur from the improvements, if the improvements would add any additional square footage beyond five percent of each building's floor area, or if the ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-5 improvements are not in substantial conformance with the building envelope, the improvement plans shall require a conditional use permit subject to the provisions of Chapter 18.66 (Conditional Use Permits). Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Planning Director may refer any of the above-noted improvement plans to the Planning Commission for consideration as a conditional use permit. .060 Terms. Terms used in this chapter shall have the same definitions as provided in the Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.92 (Definitions) unless otherwise defined in Section 18.116.030 (Definitions). .070 General Plan Consistency. In adopting its resolution adopting the Specific Plan, the City Council of the City of Anaheim made certain findings of consistency between the General Plan of the city and the Specific Plan. In granting future approvals as contemplated by this chapter and by the Specific Plan, the particular person or body so acting shall not do so in such a manner as to abrogate or nullify those findings. (Ord. 5453 § 1 (part); September 27, 1994: Ord. 5920 § 1 (part); June 8, 2004: Ord. 6031 § 64 (part); August 22, 2006.) 18.116.025 CHANGES TO SPECIFIC PLAN BOUNDARIES. The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan boundaries shall only be amended or modified by completion of an Environmental Impact Report prepared in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, (ii) completion of a long-term economic impact analysis of the proposed change by an independent financial advisor retained by the City, (iii) approval by the City Council, and (iv) approval by a majority of voters of the City of Anaheim at a regularly-scheduled municipal election. (Ord. 6098 § 1 (part); March 4, 2008.) 18.116.030 DEFINITIONS. .010 Words, Terms And Phrases. “Accessory Use, Permitted.” A permitted accessory use is a use which is considered to be compatible with a permitted primary use while also being clearly incidental to and integrated with the permitted primary use. A permitted accessory use is permitted as of right, provided that the specific proposal for such a use conforms to all requirements of the Specific Plan. A permitted accessory use is a use which is secondary or subordinate to a permitted primary use. “Acres, Gross.” The total acreage of a parcel or lot measured from the ultimate public right-of-way except that when computing density, properties along the following streets may include the following additional right-of-way widths in their gross acreage due to the enhanced ultimate right-of-way widths required by adopted General Plan Amendment No. 331 to implement the Anaheim Resort Public Realm streetscape program: Harbor Boulevard, between the Interstate-5 Freeway and Orangewood Avenue twelve (12) feet; Katella Avenue twenty-eight (28) feet; Disney Way eleven and one half (11-1/2) feet; Disneyland Drive north of Ball Road ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-6 ten (10) feet; and Disneyland Drive, between Magic Way and Katella Avenue two and one half (2-1/2) feet. “Acreage, Net.” The total acreage of a parcel or lot, excluding the ultimate right-of-way for all public streets. .015 Words, Terms And Phrases. “Banquet/Meeting Room.” A room within a hotel/motel that is rented by individuals or groups to accommodate private functions such as banquets, weddings, anniversaries, and other similar celebrations; and/or meetings, conferences, conventions or educational classes. “Breakfast Room.” A room within a hotel or motel where breakfast is provided free of charge to the hotel or motel guests and use of the room is limited strictly to the guests and/or employees of the hotel or motel. .020 Words, Terms And Phrases. “Density.” For purposes of this specific plan, hotel/motel densities are established in Section 18.116.060 (Development Density Areas - Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area Any accessory uses, that are not identified as “limited strictly to the use of the guests and/or employees of such hotel” within Table 116 E, Accessory Uses Incidental to and Integrated within a Hotel or Motel Including Suite-Type Hotels, and Otherwise Limited Herein: C-R District (Development Area shall reduce the otherwise maximum permitted hotel/motel density at the rate of one hotel/motel room per six-hundred (600) gross square feet of accessory use. .030 Words, Terms And Phrases. “Emergency Medical Facilities.” A facility that provides skilled medical services for unexpected and unforeseen events and bodily trauma that demand immediate medical action. .040 Words, Terms And Phrases. “Gross Square Footage.” The total square footage of a building or structure, including the exterior walls of all floors. .050 Words, Terms And Phrases. “Headshop.” Any commercial enterprise or establishment, whether ongoing or transient, which sells any devices, contrivances, instruments or drug paraphernalia as defined by the California Health and Safety Code. “Hotel/Motel Guest Suite.” A hotel/motel guest suite or room that is for rent by a single party with one entry door key for the guest that also controls any doors into or within the guest room or into the service/kitchen area. A hotel/motel guest suite shall be considered one room for ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-7 the purpose of total room count permitted in the Specific Plan area, even if it includes more than one room. .060 Words, Terms And Phrases. “Parking Facilities.” An area or structure intended for the temporary storage of automobiles and other vehicles. Such facilities may consist of, but are not limited to, surface parking lots, parking structures and parking areas under buildings. “Public Right-of-Way.” Any area of real property dedicated to or owned by the City of Anaheim, or over which the City of Anaheim holds any easement, for public street, alley, sidewalk, landscape, utility or pedestrian purposes; and, accepted by resolution of the City Council. .065 Words, Terms And Phrases. “Recreation Buildings and Structures.” Recreational uses associated with hotels and motels, such as tennis and racquetball courts, spas, swimming pools, cabanas, dressing rooms, and play equipment. .070 Words, Terms And Phrases. “Sign.” See subsection 18.116.160.010 (Definitions Pertaining To Signs). “Specialty Retail Centers.” A retail center where all goods and services are oriented, marketed and intended for tourist, visitor and/or recreational consumers and not oriented to the general public. Such center shall consist of a minimum of five acres; have integrated management; have a “festive theme” orientation; plazas and/or other pedestrian –oriented amenities shall be part of the center’s design; and, land uses may include, but need not be limited to: custom print and art shops; souvenir, gift, and/or novelty shops; toy shops; hobby shops; photo supply shops; clothing stores; confectionery shops, including candy stores, ice cream parlors, baked goods cookies, muffins, etc.) for on-premises sale or consumption; floral shops; luggage and accessory shops; jewelry stores; sale of beer and wine for off-premises consumption; sale of alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption; entertainment facilities; and amusement arcades, subject to the provisions of Section 18.16.050 (Amusement Devices). A complete listing of proposed uses shall be submitted with every conditional use permit application. “Strip Shopping Centers.” A building or collection of buildings containing retail and/or commercial uses in which the primary orientation of the buildings, entrances, signs, and uses is toward the adjacent public street, and in which parking areas or access to parking areas are prominently displayed to passing vehicles. Such shopping centers contain uses intended to attract either the general public or tourists, visitor and/or recreational consumers. .080 Words, Terms And Phrases. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-8 “Temporary Parking Lots.” An area intended for the temporary parking of automobiles and other vehicles and not intended to be the ultimate use of the property. “Transportation Facility.” Facilities and structures intended to accommodate transportation terminal stations (facilities intended to accommodate the transfer from automobile or pedestrian travel to bus, train or other forms of mass transit), fixed transit guideways, and other structures intended to move passengers or pedestrians from one location to another. “Turf Block.” Any one of several paving products made of concrete or plastic which permit turf or other low-growing plant materials to grow through the paving so that the paving is not easily seen. Turf block paving is intended for occasional vehicle traffic, such as required emergency access through landscaped areas. .090 Words, Terms And Phrases. “Ultimate Planned Right-Of-Way.” The maximum extent, as provided in a legal instrument or as shown on a City Adopted roadway plan, that a right-of-way may be expanded in the future to serve its intended purpose. The right-of-way designated in the Circulation Element of the Anaheim General Plan as further described in Sections 4.0 (Public Facilities Plan) and 5.0 (Design Plan), of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan document. Required setbacks shall be measured from the ultimate planned right-of-way shown on the General Plan, including any critical intersection standard applicable to the property. (Ord. 5453 § 1 (part); September 27, 1994: Ord. 5944 34; September 28, 2004.) .100 Words, Terms and Phrases “Vacation Ownership Resort.” A timeshare facility in which a person or entity receives the right in perpetuity, for life or for a specific period of time, to the recurrent, exclusive use or occupancy of a lot, parcel, unit, space, or portion of real property for a period of time which has been or will be allocated from the use or occupancy periods into which the facility has been divided. A vacation ownership resort interest may be coupled with an estate in real property, or it may entail a license, contract, membership, or other right of occupancy not coupled with an estate in the real property. (Ord. 5920 § 1 (part); June 8, 2004: Ord. 6031 § 64 (part); August 22, 2006.) 18.116.040 METHODS AND PROCEDURES FOR SPECIFIC PLAN IMPLEMENTATION. The methods and procedures for implementation and administration of the Specific Plan are prescribed as follows: .010 Implementation. The Specific Plan shall be implemented through the processing and approval of Final Site Plans prior to the issuance of building permits except as expressly provided in paragraph 18.116.[PHONE REDACTED] (Final Site Plan Exemptions). For uses requiring a conditional use permit or variance to waive code requirements, the Final Site Plan shall be ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-9 submitted and reviewed for consistency with the Specific Plan in conjunction with the processing of the conditional use permit or variance. .020 Final Site Plan Review and Approval. Final Site Plans, shall be processed in accordance with Chapter 18.70 (Final Site Plans) except as provided for as follows: .0201 Site Plan Review. Plans shall be prepared and submitted to the Planning Department for review and approval by the City of Anaheim Planning Commission as a Report and Recommendation item in accordance with the procedures and containing the information set forth in the Final Site Plan Review Application. .0202 Site Plan Approval. If the Final Site Plan is found to be in conformance with the Specific Plan, the Design Plan and the provisions of this chapter, the Final Site Plan shall be approved. The Planning Commission's decision shall be final unless appealed to the City Council within ten (10) days from the date of such decision. .0203 Appeal Process. The appeal shall be processed in accordance with Section 18.60.130 (Procedures/Appeals-General) through 18.60.150 (Scope of Review) in the same manner as appeals for decisions on reclassifications, conditional use permits or variances as set forth in Sections 18.60.130 (Procedures/Appeals-General) except that the appeal period shall be a maximum of ten (10) days. .0204 Environmental Review. Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, Final Site Plan review by the Planning Department under paragraph 18.116.040.020 (Final Site Plan Review and Approval) shall include a ministerial determination whether the proposed building, structure or use has been environmentally cleared on a project-specific level by the Master Environmental Impact Report for the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (MEIR No. 313) and Supplemental Environmental Impact Report For Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (SEIR No. 340), or other final environmental documentation. If not, then the proposed activity shall be subject to the preparation of an initial study and potential further environmental review and mitigation pursuant to the procedures outlined for subsequent projects under a Master EIR in Public Resources Code Section 21157.1. .0205 Final Site Plan Exemptions. The following projects or improvements are exempt from the Final Site Plan review and approval process as set forth in subsection 18.116.040.020 (Final Site Plan Review and Approval); however, plans depicting these improvements shall be submitted to the Planning Department for review and approval for consistency with the Specific Plan prior to the issuance of building and/or sign permits: TABLE 116-A FINAL SITE PLAN EXEMPTIONS Exemption Special Provisions Interior building alterations Modifications or improvements that do not result in an increase in the gross square footage of the building. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-10 Minor building additions or improvements to or at the rear of a building or development complex Must not be visible from the public right-of-way; do not exceed five percent of the building’s gross square footage or one thousand (1,000) square feet, whichever is lesser; are in substantial conformance with the building envelope; and, are in conformance with the Design Plan and the Zoning and Development Standards set forth in this chapter. Exterior facade improvements Must not add to the gross square footage of a building or development complex; are in substantial conformance with the building envelope; and, are in conformance with the Design Plan and the Zoning and Development Standards set forth in this chapter. Such improvements may include, but are not limited to, the installation of window awnings and/or canopies, replacement of existing doors and windows, and modification, repair or resurfacing of exterior walls and roof areas. Signage Including Anaheim Resort freestanding monument signs, wall signs, and on-site directional/informational signs, which are in conformance with the Design Plan and the Zoning and Development Standards set forth in this chapter except as provided for in Section 18.116.160. Landscape/Hardscape Improvements or modifications that are not in connection with building modifications. .030 Development Review and Permits. All building and site plans shall be subject to review by the Zoning and Building Divisions of the Planning Department for conformance with the Specific Plan and the approved Final Site Plans. Permits shall be issued in compliance with all provisions of Section 18.90.110 (Development Review and Permits - General). In addition, where there are existing buildings and structures on a site for which more intensive development is proposed under the provisions of this Zone, no building permit shall be issued until the Chief Building Official and the Fire Chief have certified that the existing buildings and structures are safe for occupancy and for human habitation. .040 Landscape Plan Review. The location of all proposed landscaping, including landscaping, irrigation and lighting treatments located within the parkway area (the area within the ultimate public right-of-way and described in Sections 4.0 (Public Facilities Plan) and 5.0 (Design Plan) of the Specific Plan document), shall be shown on a site plan, drawn to scale, and shall be subject to the review and approval of the City prior to installation. Landscaping plans shall be consistent with Final Site Plans approved pursuant to subsection 18.116.040.020 (Final Site Plan Review and Approval) and the provisions of the Design Plan. Improvements within the parkway area shall be prepared in compliance with City standards to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and shall be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer prior to installation. .050 Specific Plan Amendments. Amendments to the Specific Plan shall be processed in accordance with Chapter 18.72 (Specific Plans). .060 Master Planned Developments. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-11 .0601 In order to encourage the assemblage of contiguous parcels of land to facilitate master planning and also to recognize and accommodate the uniqueness of land uses consolidation of parcels leading to a reuse or intensification of land use), property located in this Zone may be reclassified to its own Specific Plan Zone pursuant to the procedures set forth in Chapter 18.72 (Specific Plans). .0602 Any properties so reclassified shall be subject to the development standards adopted for said zone pursuant to Section 18.72 (Specific Plans); provided, however, that: .01 The height of all structures shall not exceed the maximum heights defined in Section 18.40.080 (Structural Height Limitation - Anaheim Commercial Recreation Area). .02 The landscape and setback requirements for all structures shall be the same as set forth in Sections 18.116.090 (Structural Setbacks - Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area through 18.116.100 (Screening, Walls, Fences, Landscaping and Lighting - Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area .03 Development abutting Harbor Boulevard between Interstate-5 Freeway and Orangewood Avenue and Katella Avenue between Walnut Street and Interstate-5 Freeway shall be in conformance with the standards set forth in Section 18.116.130 (Central Core) and the Design Plan. .04 Prior to approving any new development standards for said zone, the Planning Commission and City Council shall consider the proposed standards in light of the goals and purpose identified in the City of Anaheim General Plan for the Commercial Recreation land use designation as well as the goals and objectives of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan as described in the Executive Summary (Section 1.0) and the Design Plan. (Ord. 5453 § 1 (part); September 27, 1994: Ord. 5920 § 1 (part); June 8, 2004: Ord. 6031 § 64 (part); August 22, 2006.) 18.116.050 DEVELOPMENT AREAS. The Specific Plan area encompasses two land use districts and two overlays as set forth below: .010 Commercial Recreation (C-R) District - Identified as Development Area 1 on Exhibit 3.3.1a of the Specific Plan document entitled “Development Plan.” Development density areas for this district are set forth in Section 18.116.060 (Development Density Areas - Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area Development regulations for this district are set forth in this chapter. .020 Public Recreation (PR) District - Identified as Development Area 2 on Exhibit 3.3.1a of the Specific Plan document entitled “Development Plan.” Development Regulations for this district are set forth in Section 18.116.110 (Land Use and Site Development Standards - Public Recreation (PR) District (Development Area ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-12 .030 Mobile Home Park (MHP) Overlay - MHP Overlay boundaries are identified on Exhibit 3.3.32a of the Specific Plan Document entitled “Mobile Home Park (MHP) Overlay Zone.” Development Regulations for the MHP Overlay are set forth in Section 18.116.120 (Mobile Home Park (MHP) Overlay). (Ord. 5453 § 1 (part); September 27, 1994: Ord. 5920 § 1 (part); June 8, 2004: Ord. 6031 § 64 (part); August 22, 2006: Ord. 6036 § 2; September 12, 2006.) .040 Anaheim Resort Residential (ARR) Overlay – ARR boundaries are identified on Exhibit 3.3-4 of the Specific Plan document entitled “Anaheim Resort Residential (ARR) Overlay.” Development Regulations for this district are set forth in Section 18.116.125 (Anaheim Resort Residential (ARR) Overlay). 18.116.060 DEVELOPMENT DENSITY AREAS –COMMERCIAL RECREATION (C-R) DISTRICT (DEVELOPMENT AREA .010 Purpose. To permit the maximum amount of development in the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan area consistent with The Anaheim Resort’s infrastructure capacity, the Specific Plan establishes four (4)five density categories in the C-R District. The following criteria establish density modifications for hotel/motel accessory uses and uses other than hotels/motels. .0101 Hotel/Motel Accessory Uses. These designations are based upon hotel/motel development and allow Up to twenty percent (20%) of each hotel/motel project gross square footage, excluding parking facilities, to may be developed with integrated included within the main hotel/motel complex) accessory uses. Any accessory use, that is not identified as “limited strictly to the use of the guests and/or employees of such hotel” within Table 116- E, Accessory Uses Incidental to and Integrated within a Hotel or Motel Including Suite- Type Hotels, and Otherwise Limited Herein: C-R District (Development Area will reduce the otherwise maximum permitted hotel/motel density at the rate of one hotel/motel room per six hundred (600) gross square feet of accessory use. .0102 Uses other than Hotels/Motels. For properties proposed to be developed with permitted and conditionally permitted uses other than hotels/motels with accessory uses, the traffic generation characteristics of said uses shall not exceed those associated with the otherwise permitted hotel/motel (including accessory uses) density as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager prior to Final Site Plan review and approval. Boundaries of the density areas are depicted in Exhibit 3.3.3b2, (Commercial Recreation (C-R) District Development Density Plan) of the Specific Plan document. .020 The maximum number of hotel/motel rooms allowed in each density category is shown in Table 116-B of Section 18.116.060 (Development Density Areas - Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-13 TABLE 116-B HOTEL/MOTEL ROOM DENSITY Density Category Maximum Density Low Density Up to 50 rooms per gross acre or 75 rooms per lot or parcel existing on the date of adoption of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (or for amended areas, the date of the adoption of the specific plan amendment), whichever is greater. Low-Medium Density Up to 75 rooms per gross acre or 75 rooms per lot or parcel existing on the date of adoption of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan, whichever is greater, except that for that area identified in Ordinance No. 5694 as Area 8 on Exhibit 9.1a of the Specific Plan document entitled “Legal Description Areas” (Amendment No. the maximum density shall be 75 rooms per gross acre. Low-Medium Density (Modified) Up to 252 rooms and 75,593 square feet of accessory uses. Medium Density Up to 100 rooms per gross acre or 75 rooms per lot or parcel existing on the date of adoption of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan, whichever is greater. Convention Center (CC) Medium Density Up to 125 rooms per gross acre (with trip generation characteristics mitigated to the equivalent of 100 rooms per gross) or 75 rooms per lot or parcel existing on the date of adoption of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan, whichever is greater. .030 Exceptions. .0301 For parcels that are developed with hotel or motel rooms which exceed the maximum density designation, the number of rooms existing on the date of adoption of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Ordinance (Ordinance No. 5453, Adopted on September 27, 1994) (or for amended areas, the date of the adoption of the specific plan amendment ordinance) may be rebuilt or modified at their existing density. (Ord. 5453 § 1 (part); September 27, 1994: Ord. 5694 § 1; August 17, 1999.) .0302 Densities of contiguous parcels/lots may be combined for the purpose of developing a master plan project without processing a subdivision map to combine the parcels/lots subject to the following: .01 That the density on one or more parcels/lots may exceed the maximum density allowed for said parcel/lot provided that: the maximum overall density permitted for the combined parcels/lots is not exceeded; the proposed project does not exceed traffic impacts associated with the otherwise permitted hotel/motel density as determined by the City’s Traffic and Transportation Manager; and, that the environmental effects associated with the proposed project are consistent with those cleared by the Master Environmental Impact Report for the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (MEIR No. 313) and Supplemental Environmental impact Report for Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (SEIR No. 340), or other final environmental documentation. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-14 .02 That the proposed density for each parcel/lot is shown on the Final Site Plan processed in accordance with subsection 18.116.040.020 (Final Site Plan Review and Approval). .03 That an unsubordinated covenant shall be recorded on each of the affected parcels limiting the density of each parcel to that shown on the approved Final Site Plan and that said covenant shall be recorded prior to the issuance of the first building permit for the master plan project. The covenant shall be prepared in a form satisfactory to the City Attorney and shall be recorded with the Office of the Orange County Recorder. A copy of the recorded covenant shall then be submitted to the Planning Department. (Ord. 5920 § 1 (part); June 8, 2004: Ord. 6031 § 64 (part); August 22, 2006.) .0303 Properties along the following street segments may include the following additional right-of-way widths in their gross acreage due to the enhanced ultimate right-of- way widths required by adopted General Plan Amendment No. 331 to implement the Anaheim Resort Public Realm streetscape program: Harbor Boulevard, between the Interstate-5 Freeway and Orangewood Avenue twelve (12) feet; Katella Avenue twenty- eight (28) feet; Disney Way eleven and one half (11-1/2) feet; Disneyland Drive north of Ball Road ten (10) feet; and Disneyland Drive, between Magic Way and Katella Avenue two and one half (2-1/2) feet. 18.116.070 USES –COMMERCIAL RECREATION (C-R) DISTRICT (DEVELOPMENT AREA .010 Permitted Uses and Structures - General. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this chapter, the following additional limitations shall apply to the conduct of any use permitted in this district: .0101 All uses except service stations, automobile parking lots, semi-enclosed restaurants, food or beverage carts in conjunction with a hotel, or as otherwise exempted in this chapter, shall be conducted wholly within a building. .0102 All uses shall be conducted in a manner so as not to be objectionable by reason of noise, odor, dust, fumes, smoke, gas, vibrations or other similar causes detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare. .0103 All stores shall deal primarily in new merchandise, excepting as otherwise specified in this chapter. .0104 Special Provisions. Special provisions related to a use are referenced in the “Special Provisions” column of Tables 116-C through 116-F. Such provisions may include references to other applicable code sections or limitations. .020 Permitted Primary Uses and Structures. Table 116-C identifies allowable primary uses and structures either singly or in combination, listed by classes as defined in Section 18.36.040 ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-15 (Non-Residential Primary Use Classes) or in this chapter for the Commercial Recreation (C-R) District. .030 Conditionally Permitted Uses. Due to the uniqueness of The Anaheim Resort as a tourist and visitor center and the associated concerns of the circulation and traffic system and other infrastructure impacts and land use compatibility, certain buildings, structures and uses shall be permitted provided a conditional use permit is approved therefore pursuant to, and subject to, the conditions and required showings of Chapter 18.66 (Conditional Use Permits). .040 The allowable uses in Table 116-C are established by letter designations as follows: .0401 designates classes of uses permitted by right; .0402 designates classes of uses permitted by a conditional use permit; and, .0403 designates classes of uses that are prohibited; .050 Accessory Uses. Table 116-D (Accessory Uses and Structures Integrated with a Permitted Primary Use: C-R District (Development Area and Table 116-E (Accessory Uses Incidental to and Integrated within a Hotel/Motel: C-R District (Development Area identify accessory uses and structures within the Specific Plan area, listed by classes of uses as defined in Section 18.36.050 (Accessory Use Classes) and in this chapter. .060 Temporary Uses and Structures. Table 116-F identifies allowable Temporary Uses and Structures within the Specific Plan area. .070 Interpreting Classes of Uses. The provisions for interpreting the classes of uses in Tables 116-C through 116-F are set forth in Section 18.36.020 (Classification of Uses) of Chapter 18.36 (Types of Uses) or as otherwise defined in Chapter 18.92 (Definitions) and Code Section 18.116.030 (Definitions). TABLE 116-C PRIMARY USES AND STRUCTURES: C-R DISTRICT (DEVELOPMENT AREA 1) P Permitted by Right C Conditional Use Permit N Prohibited T Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit Required Classes of Uses C-R District Special Provisions Agricultural uses crops P Alcoholic Beverages – Off-Sale N Except as permitted subject to Section 18.116.070.090 or as an accessory use incidental to and integrated within a hotel or motel. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-16 TABLE 116-C PRIMARY USES AND STRUCTURES: C-R DISTRICT (DEVELOPMENT AREA 1) P Permitted by Right C Conditional Use Permit N Prohibited T Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit Required Classes of Uses C-R District Special Provisions Alcoholic Beverages – On-Sale P Ambulance Services N Amusement parks, theme-type complexes, aviaries, zoos C Such uses may include the keeping of animals or birds used in the operation of the facility, provided that such animals or birds shall be maintained in physical confinement sufficient to prohibit the movement of said animals or birds upon any real property not owned or under the lawful possession or control of the person or entity owning or controlling said animals or birds. Further, no animals or birds shall be confined closer than forty (40) feet from any building used for human habitation, including hotel or motel rooms, and no closer than forty (40) feet from any property line. Conditional use permits for the keeping of animals and birds shall specify the maximum number and type of animals and birds permitted. Any increase in the number and/or variations in the type of animals and birds kept shall require either an amendment to said conditional use permit or a new conditional use permit. Animal Boarding C No animals or birds shall be confined closer than forty (40) feet from any building used for human habitation, including hotel or motel rooms, and no closer than forty (40) feet from any property line. Conditional use permits for the keeping of animals and birds shall specify the maximum number and type of animals and birds permitted. Any increase in the number and/or variations in the type of animals and birds kept shall require either an amendment to said conditional use permit or a new conditional use permit. Animal Grooming N Antennas – Broadcasting C Antennas - Telecommunications T Stealth facilities integrated within a building are permitted subject to Section 18.38.060 and Section 18.62.020 Freestanding ground-mounted facilities including stealth facilities are not permitted. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-17 TABLE 116-C PRIMARY USES AND STRUCTURES: C-R DISTRICT (DEVELOPMENT AREA 1) P Permitted by Right C Conditional Use Permit N Prohibited T Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit Required Classes of Uses C-R District Special Provisions Automated Teller Machines (ATM’s) P Shall be located wholly within a building or within a hotel complex in a location not visible from the public right-of-way. Subject to Section 18.36.040. Art galleries C Automotive – Parking Lots or Parking Structures/Garages C Parking lots or parking structures/garages not otherwise permitted by Table 116-D. Automotive – Car Sales and Rental N/C Car sales are prohibited. Automotive - Rental not otherwise permitted by Table 116-D requires a conditional use permit. Automotive – Parts Sales N Automotive – Public Parking C Parking lots or parking structures/garages not otherwise permitted by Table 116-D. Automotive – Repair and Modification N Automotive – Service Station C Subject to requirements of Chapter Section 18.38.070 (Automotive Service Stations) and subsection 18.116.070.090. Automotive – Service Station: Convenience Markets or Mini- markets with or without the sale of beer and wine for off-premises consumption N Except as permitted subject to Section 18.116.070.090. Automotive –Service Station: Rental and/or display of utility trailers or trucks N ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-18 TABLE 116-C PRIMARY USES AND STRUCTURES: C-R DISTRICT (DEVELOPMENT AREA 1) P Permitted by Right C Conditional Use Permit N Prohibited T Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit Required Classes of Uses C-R District Special Provisions Automotive –Service Station: Sale of alcoholic beverages for on- premises and/or off- premises consumption N Except as permitted subject to Section 18.116.070.090 Automotive – Service Station: Tow Truck Operations C In conjunction with an Automotive - Service Station only subject to the following: A maximum of one tow truck shall be permitted. When on-site, the tow truck shall be screened from view of the public right-of-way at all times. All vehicles towed to the site shall be stored indoors in a service bay. Under no circumstances shall outdoor storage of the towed vehicles be permitted. No additional signage advertising tow truck operations shall be permitted. Tow truck operations or towing services not in compliance with the above requirements shall be prohibited. Automotive – Washing C In conjunction with an Automotive – Service Station only. Bars & C Bed and Breakfast Inns N Beekeeping N Billboards N As defined in subsection 18.116.160.010 (Definitions Pertaining to Signs). Bingo N ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-19 TABLE 116-C PRIMARY USES AND STRUCTURES: C-R DISTRICT (DEVELOPMENT AREA 1) P Permitted by Right C Conditional Use Permit N Prohibited T Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit Required Classes of Uses C-R District Special Provisions Boat and RV Sales N Building and Material Sales N Cemeteries N Christmas tree sales lots and/or stands N Commercial retail centers N Including commercial retail centers, strip shopping centers, mini- malls and other shopping centers not in conformance with the requirements of a Specialty Retail Center, as defined in Section 18.116.030 (Definitions) and detailed within this table (Table 116-C) “Specialty Retail Centers”. Computer Internet Facility C Community and Religious Assembly C Computer Internet & Amusement Facilities C Convalescent & Rest Homes N Convenience markets or mini-markets Stores N Except as allowed by Section 18.116.070.090 Conversion of hotels or motels to semi- permanent or permanent living quarters N Except a caretaker/manager unit may be provided as specified in Table 116-D, or vacation ownership resorts as detailed within this table (Table 116-C) “Vacation Ownership”. Dance Venue C As defined in Section 18.92.070 Words, Terms And Phrases.) of the Anaheim Municipal Code. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-20 TABLE 116-C PRIMARY USES AND STRUCTURES: C-R DISTRICT (DEVELOPMENT AREA 1) P Permitted by Right C Conditional Use Permit N Prohibited T Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit Required Classes of Uses C-R District Special Provisions Dance & Fitness Studios – Large N Dance & Fitness Studios – Small N Permitted by right as an accessory use incidental to and integrated within a hotel or motel Day Care Centers N Permitted by right as an accessory use incidental to and integrated within a hotel or motel Drive-Through Facilities N Dwelling units N Single-family or multiple-family, except caretaker/manager units allowed as an accessory use integrated within a hotel, motel or vacation ownership resort. Educational Institutions – Business C Educational Institutions – General C Emergency Medical Facilities C Entertainment Venue C Equipment Rental – Large N Equipment Rental – Small N Golf Courses & Country Clubs C Group Care Facilities N Headshop N ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-21 TABLE 116-C PRIMARY USES AND STRUCTURES: C-R DISTRICT (DEVELOPMENT AREA 1) P Permitted by Right C Conditional Use Permit N Prohibited T Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit Required Classes of Uses C-R District Special Provisions Heliport N As defined in Chapter 18.92 (Definitions). Helistop C As defined in Chapter 18.92 (Definitions) (excluding heliports); that any such helistop shall be located a minimum of one thousand (1,000) feet from any residentially zoned property. Hotels and motels located north of Orangewood Avenue P Including suite type hotels Hotels and motels located south of Orangewood C Including suite type hotels Hospitals N As defined in Chapter 18.92 (Definitions). Industrial Uses Industry N As set forth in Chapter 18.10 (Industrial Zones) Industry-Heavy N Inflatable advertising display N Junkyards N Kitchens or kitchenettes C In hotel or motel guest rooms or suites. Massage establishments C Those integrated within a hotel or motel only, for which a permit is required pursuant to Section 18.16.070 (Massage) of the Anaheim Municipal Code. Markets-Large N Markets-Small N Medical & Dental Offices N ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-22 TABLE 116-C PRIMARY USES AND STRUCTURES: C-R DISTRICT (DEVELOPMENT AREA 1) P Permitted by Right C Conditional Use Permit N Prohibited T Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit Required Classes of Uses C-R District Special Provisions Mobile home parks N Except as otherwise permitted by Section 18.116.120 (Mobile Home Park (MHP) Overlay) for parcels encompassed by the MHP Overlay as identified on Exhibit 3.3.2a of the Specific Plan document (Mobile Home Park (MHP) Overlay Zone). Expansion of existing facilities to increase the number of mobile homes or mobile home spaces is prohibited. Mortuaries N Museums C Nonconforming Structures and Uses – Expansion of nonconforming uses and structures C Provided that the expansion brings the use and/or structure into greater conformity with the intent of the Specific Plan. Nonconforming Structure – Facade improvements not exceeding 5% of the building floor area P Provided that the improvements are in substantial conformance with the building envelope, do not adversely impact any adjacent parcels and are in conformance with the Design Plan. If the Planning Director determines that adverse impacts would occur from the improvements or if the improvements are not in substantial conformance with the building envelope, the plans shall be referred to the Planning Commission as a conditional use permit. Nonconforming Structure – Facade improvements exceeding 5% of the building floor area C Nonconforming Structure – Office uses in a legal nonconforming building C Non-publicly operated convention centers C Including exhibition halls and auditoriums ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-23 TABLE 116-C PRIMARY USES AND STRUCTURES: C-R DISTRICT (DEVELOPMENT AREA 1) P Permitted by Right C Conditional Use Permit N Prohibited T Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit Required Classes of Uses C-R District Special Provisions Offices - Development C Office buildings when accessory to, and integrated as part of, an on-site permitted primary or when located in a legal non- conforming building. Offices – General C Office buildings when accessory to, and integrated as part of, an on-site permitted primary or when located in a legal non- conforming building. Oil Production N Outdoor advertising of merchandise, products and/or services N Including, but not limited to, merchandise promotions, sales, pricing, etc. Outdoor sales events N Including Christmas Tree/Pumpkin sales lots or stands Outdoor storage yards of goods and materials N Except as otherwise permitted in this Zone Personal Services – General N Permitted by right as an accessory use incidental to and integrated within a hotel or motel Personal Services - Restricted N Plant Nurseries N Public Services C Pawnshops N Pennants or pennant- type banners N Where visible from a public right-of-way and/or adjacent property Recreation-Billiards C Recreation Buildings and Structures, as defined by Section 18.116.030, are permitted by right as an accessory use incidental to and integrated within a hotel or motel ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-24 TABLE 116-C PRIMARY USES AND STRUCTURES: C-R DISTRICT (DEVELOPMENT AREA 1) P Permitted by Right C Conditional Use Permit N Prohibited T Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit Required Classes of Uses C-R District Special Provisions Recreation–Bowling Commercial Indoor C Including sales of alcoholic beverages for on-premise consumption Recreation Buildings and Structures, as defined by Section 18.116.030, are permitted by right as an accessory use incidental to and integrated within a hotel or motel Recreation –Golf Courses/ Miniature golf courses Commercial Outdoor C Recreation Buildings and Structures, as defined by Section 18.116.030, are permitted by right as an accessory use incidental to and integrated within a hotel or motel Recreation –Low Impact C Recreation Buildings and Structures, as defined by Section 18.116.030, are permitted by right as an accessory use incidental to and integrated within a hotel or motel Recreation –Outdoor recreational playground areas P In conjunction with permitted primary uses and structures listed in Table 116-C only Recreation –Swimming & Tennis C Recreation Buildings and Structures, as defined by Section 18.116.030, are permitted by right as an accessory use incidental to and integrated within a hotel or motel Recreation –Skating rinks C Recreational vehicle and campsite parks C Limited to use for short-term visits, not to exceed 30 days in any calendar year, by tourists and visitors. Recycling Services – Consumer General N Recycling Services - Processing N Repair Services - General N Repair Services – Limited N ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-25 TABLE 116-C PRIMARY USES AND STRUCTURES: C-R DISTRICT (DEVELOPMENT AREA 1) P Permitted by Right C Conditional Use Permit N Prohibited T Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit Required Classes of Uses C-R District Special Provisions Research & Development N Residential hotels/motels N Restaurants –General P Enclosed and with outdoor dining, with or without sale of alcoholic beverages for on premises consumption, as defined in Chapter 18.92 (Definitions). Restaurants allowed as permitted uses shall be full service establishment. Such establishments may provide take-out service, but as a limited, ancillary function only. Outdoor seating areas visible from the public right-of-way shall not include table umbrellas that display any symbol, name, writing or product advertising. Restaurants –Drive-in or Drive-through N Restaurants – Outdoor Dining P Restaurants allowed as permitted uses shall be full service establishment. Such establishments may provide take-out service, but as a limited, ancillary function only. Outdoor seating areas visible from the public right-of-way shall not include table umbrellas that display any symbol, name, writing or product advertising. Restaurants – Walk- Up N Restaurants allowed as permitted uses shall be full service establishment. Such establishments may provide take-out service, but as a limited, ancillary function only Restaurants with accessory entertainment with cover charge C Pursuant to and as defined in Chapter 18.92 (Definitions) Retail Sales - General N Permitted by right as an accessory use incidental to and integrated within a hotel or motel or subject to the requirements for a specialty retail center Retail Sales - Kiosk N Permitted by right as an accessory use incidental to and integrated within a hotel or motel or as part of a conditional use permit for a specialty retail center Retail Sales – Outdoor N ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-26 TABLE 116-C PRIMARY USES AND STRUCTURES: C-R DISTRICT (DEVELOPMENT AREA 1) P Permitted by Right C Conditional Use Permit N Prohibited T Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit Required Classes of Uses C-R District Special Provisions Retail Sales – Used Merchandise N Room & Board N Sale of alcoholic beverages for on- premises and/or off- premises consumption N Except as otherwise expressly permitted in conjunction with automobile service station convenience markets or min-markets subject to Code Section 18.116.070.090. Secondhand shops N Self Storage N Sex-oriented businesses N As defined in Chapter 18.92 (Definitions) Specialty retail centers C Where all goods and services are oriented, marketed and intended for tourist, visitor and/or recreational consumers and not oriented to the general public. Such centers shall Consist of a minimum of five acres; Have integrated management; Have a “festive theme” orientation; Plazas and/or other pedestrian-oriented amenities shall be part of the center’s design as set forth in the Design Plan; and, ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-27 TABLE 116-C PRIMARY USES AND STRUCTURES: C-R DISTRICT (DEVELOPMENT AREA 1) P Permitted by Right C Conditional Use Permit N Prohibited T Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit Required Classes of Uses C-R District Special Provisions Land uses may include, but need not be limited to: custom print and art shops; souvenir, gift, and/or novelty shops; toy shops; hobby shops; photo supply shops; clothing stores; confectionery shops, including candy stores, ice cream parlors, baked goods cookies, muffins, etc.) for on-premises sale or consumption; floral shops; luggage and accessory shops; jewelry stores; sale of beer and wine for off-premises consumption; sale of alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption; entertainment facilities; and amusement arcades, subject to the provisions of Section 18.16.050 (Amusement Devices). A complete listing of proposed uses shall be submitted with every conditional use permit application. Structures –Height exceeding 1/2 the distance from the building or structure to a single- family, multi- family and/or MHP Overlay zone boundary. C Structures within one hundred and fifty (150) feet of any single- family residential zone boundary (other than property under a resolution of intent to any commercial zone), or, for property located south of Orangewood Avenue, within one hundred and fifty (150) feet of any multi-family residential zone boundary (other than property under a resolution of intent to any commercial zone), or property within the Specific Plan area encompassed by the MHP Overlay as shown on Exhibit 3.3.2a3 (Mobile Home Park (MHP) Overlay Zone) exceeding a height equal to one-half (1/2) the distance from said building or structure to said zone or overlay boundary. Dedicated streets shall be included in calculating distance. Heights shall not exceed the maximum heights defined in Section 18.40.080 (Structural Height limitation - Anaheim Commercial Recreation Area). Structures –Height Limits exceeding the maximum heights defined in Section 18.40.080 (Structure Height Limitation – Anaheim Commercial Recreation Area). N ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-28 TABLE 116-C PRIMARY USES AND STRUCTURES: C-R DISTRICT (DEVELOPMENT AREA 1) P Permitted by Right C Conditional Use Permit N Prohibited T Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit Required Classes of Uses C-R District Special Provisions Structures –Interior Setbacks N Interior setbacks less than two times the height of any proposed building or structure when such building or structure is within one hundred and fifty (150) feet of any single-family residential zone boundary (other than property under a resolution of intent to any commercial zone), or, for property located south of Orangewood Avenue, within one hundred and fifty (150) feet of any multi-family residential zone boundary (other than property under a resolution of intent to any commercial zone), or property within the Specific Plan area encompassed by the MHP Overlay as shown on Exhibit 3.3.2a3 (Mobile Home Park (MPH) Overlay Zone). Structures originally designed or intended for residential use but used for non-residential purposes N Studios –Broadcasting C Including accommodations for filming/taping in front of live audiences Studios –Recording C Including accommodations for filming/taping in front of live audiences Theaters C Including dinner, legitimate or motion picture theaters, performance theaters or clubs, and indoor or outdoor amphitheaters Tow truck operators Towing Services C Permitted only in conjunction with an automotive service station facility. See Automotive –Service Stations Tow Truck Operations Permitted only in conjunction with Automotive – Service Station Trailer and Truck Rental Services N Transportation facility C As defined in paragraph subsection 18.116.030.080 Words, Terms and Phrases) of this chapter; helistops, as defined in Chapter 18.92 (Definitions) (excluding heliports); provided that any such station or helistop shall be located a minium of one thousand (1,000) feet from any residentially zoned property ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-29 TABLE 116-C PRIMARY USES AND STRUCTURES: C-R DISTRICT (DEVELOPMENT AREA 1) P Permitted by Right C Conditional Use Permit N Prohibited T Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit Required Classes of Uses C-R District Special Provisions Truck Repair & Sales N Uses or activities not listed N Uses or activities not specifically listed in this chapter which are inconsistent or incompatible with the intended purpose of the Specific Plan are prohibited. C Uses or activities not specifically listed or prohibited in this chapter may be established by conditional use permit when determined by the Planning Commission to be consistent and compatible with the intended purpose of the Specific Plan. Utilities –Major C As defined in paragraph 18.36.040.210 Utilities –Minor P As defined in paragraph 18.36.040.210 and subject to paragraph 18.116.100 (Screening, Walls, Fences, Landscaping and Lighting –Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area Vacation ownership resorts C Subject to compliance with the requirements of Section 18.116.150 (Requirements for Vacation Ownership Resorts) Veterinary Services N Warehousing & Storage-Enclosed N Wholesaling N ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-30 TABLE 116-D ACCESSORY USES AND STRUCTURES INTEGRATED WITH A PERMITTED PRIMARY USE: C-R DISTRICT (DEVELOPMENT AREA 1) P Permitted by Right C Conditional Use Permit N Prohibited T Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit Required Classes of Uses C-R District Special Provisions Administrative, maintenance and/or indoor storage facilities service, storage and maintenance areas and loading docks P Those uses necessary to support the operation of a primary use. Shall be positioned to prevent disruption of the traffic flow by service vehicles to and from the site. Shall be located entirely on-site, including space for truck maneuvers; off-site vehicle loading is prohibited. Shall be located on interior, side, or rear yards, concealed from public view. Subject to Section 18.116.100 (Screening, Walls, Fences, Landscaping and Lighting –Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area Agricultural Workers Quarters N Amusement Devices P Antennas – Telecommunication P N Stealth-integrated within a building Freestanding ground-mounted facility including stealth designs Antennas- Dish P Subject to Section 18.38.050 Antennas-Receiving P Subject to Section 18.38.050 Automated Teller Machines (ATMs) P Subject to Section 18.36.040 Automobile/vehicle parking lots or structures P To provide off-street parking spaces, as required by this Code, to serve the on-site uses permitted under this chapter. Automotive –Rental agencies with on-site storage and/or display of rental vehicles. P Subject to a maximum of three parking spaces for on-site parking of vehicles available for rental in reserved parking spaces in a location not visible from the public right-of-way. Said spaces shall be in addition to those required by Chapter 18.42 (Parking and Loading) ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-31 TABLE 116-D ACCESSORY USES AND STRUCTURES INTEGRATED WITH A PERMITTED PRIMARY USE: C-R DISTRICT (DEVELOPMENT AREA 1) P Permitted by Right C Conditional Use Permit N Prohibited T Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit Required Classes of Uses C-R District Special Provisions Bingo Establishments N Caretakers/manager units P As an accessory use integrated within a hotel, motel or vacation ownership resort Entertainment - Accessory P Subject to Section 18.16.060 Fences and walls P Subject to Section 18.116.100 (Screening, Walls, Fences, Landscaping and Lighting –Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area 1) Landscaping & Gardens P Subject to Section 18.116.100 (Screening, Walls, Fences, Landscaping and Lighting –Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area 1) Mechanical and Utility Equipment –Ground Mounted P Subject to Section 18.116.100 (Screening, Walls, Fences, Landscaping and Lighting –Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area 1) Mechanical and Utility Equipment –Roof- Mounted P Subject to Section 18.116.100 (Screening, Walls, Fences, Landscaping and Lighting –Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area 1) Outdoor Displays N Outdoor Storage N Office uses P Only those accessory to and integrated as part of, an on-site permitted primary or conditional use. Parking Lots & Garages P To provide off-street parking spaces, as required by this Code, to serve the on-site uses permitted under this chapter. Petroleum Storage – Incidental N Portable Food Carts N ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-32 TABLE 116-D ACCESSORY USES AND STRUCTURES INTEGRATED WITH A PERMITTED PRIMARY USE: C-R DISTRICT (DEVELOPMENT AREA 1) P Permitted by Right C Conditional Use Permit N Prohibited T Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit Required Classes of Uses C-R District Special Provisions Recycling Services – Consumer N Retail Floor, Wall & Window Coverings N Retail Sales - Kiosk C May be permitted as part of a conditional use permit for a specialty retail center Solar energy panels P Subject to Section 18.116.100 (Screening, Walls, Fences, Landscaping and Lighting) Signs P Subject to Section 18.116.160 (Signs) Thematic Elements P Subject to Section 18.116.160 (Signs) Vending Machines P Shall be screened from view from public rights-of-way and shall not encroach onto sidewalks. Warehousing & Storage – Outdoors N TABLE 116-E ACCESSORY USES INCIDENTAL TO AND INTEGRATED WITHIN A HOTEL OR MOTEL INCLUDING SUITE-TYPE HOTELS, AND OTHERWISE LIMITED HEREIN: C-R DISTRICT (DEVELOPMENT AREA 1) P Permitted by Right C Conditional Use Permit N Permitted T Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit Required Classes of Uses C-R District Special Provisions Alcoholic Beverages – Off-Sale P Alcoholic Beverages – On-Sale P ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-33 TABLE 116-E ACCESSORY USES INCIDENTAL TO AND INTEGRATED WITHIN A HOTEL OR MOTEL INCLUDING SUITE-TYPE HOTELS, AND OTHERWISE LIMITED HEREIN: C-R DISTRICT (DEVELOPMENT AREA 1) P Permitted by Right C Conditional Use Permit N Permitted T Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit Required Classes of Uses C-R District Special Provisions Amusement arcades Devices P No public access directly from the exterior of the building. Subject to Section 18.16.050 (Amusement Devices). Antennas- Dish P Subject to Section 18.38.050 Antennas-Receiving P Subject to Section 18.38.050 Automobile - Rental agency offices P With a maximum of three parking spaces for on-site parking of vehicles available for rental in reserved parking spaces in a location not visible from the public right-of-way. Said spaces should be in addition to those required by Chapter 18.42 (Parking and Loading) and subject to Section 18.116.140 (Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements). Automated Teller Machines (ATMs) P Shall be located wholly within a building or within a hotel complex in a location not visible from the public right-of-way. Subject to Section 18.36.040. Banquet/Meeting Room P Bingo Establishments N Banking facilities Business & Financial Services P Including automated teller machines located wholly within a building or within a hotel complex in a location not visible from the public right-of-way. Caretaker Unit P One unit Limited to less than one thousand two-hundred twenty-five (1,225) gross square feet in size Must comply with the parking standards for dwellings under Chapter 18.06 (Multiple Family Residential Zones). Barber shops P Beauty shops P Book stores P Including newspaper and periodical sales ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-34 TABLE 116-E ACCESSORY USES INCIDENTAL TO AND INTEGRATED WITHIN A HOTEL OR MOTEL INCLUDING SUITE-TYPE HOTELS, AND OTHERWISE LIMITED HEREIN: C-R DISTRICT (DEVELOPMENT AREA 1) P Permitted by Right C Conditional Use Permit N Permitted T Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit Required Classes of Uses C-R District Special Provisions Clothing stores P Confectionery shops P Including candy stores, ice cream parlors and establishment selling bakery goods and/or coffee Custom print and art galleries P Day Care services Centers P Limited strictly to the use of the guests and/or employees of such hotel or motel Dog/cat kennels Animal Boarding P Limited strictly to the pets of guests and patrons of such hotel or motel, provided such kennels shall not be located closer than forty (40) feet from hotel/motel guest rooms or residentially zoned property. Drugstores P Floral shops P Entertainment - Accessory P Subject to Section 18.16.060 Health spas/physical fitness center Dance and Fitness Studios - Small P Limited strictly to the use of the guests and/or employees of such hotel or motel Fences and walls P Subject to Section 18.116.100 (Screening, Walls, Fences, Landscaping and Lighting –Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area 1) Landscaping & Gardens P Subject to Section 18.116.100 (Screening, Walls, Fences, Landscaping and Lighting –Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area 1) Mechanical and Utility Equipment –Ground Mounted P Subject to Section 18.116.100 (Screening, Walls, Fences, Landscaping and Lighting –Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area 1) ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-35 TABLE 116-E ACCESSORY USES INCIDENTAL TO AND INTEGRATED WITHIN A HOTEL OR MOTEL INCLUDING SUITE-TYPE HOTELS, AND OTHERWISE LIMITED HEREIN: C-R DISTRICT (DEVELOPMENT AREA 1) P Permitted by Right C Conditional Use Permit N Permitted T Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit Required Classes of Uses C-R District Special Provisions Mechanical and Utility Equipment –Roof- Mounted P Subject to Section 18.116.100 (Screening, Walls, Fences, Landscaping and Lighting –Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area 1) Outdoor Displays N Outdoor Storage N Jewelry stores P Laundry facilities and Dry Cleaning services P Limited strictly to the use of the guests and/or employees of such hotel or motel Luggage and accessory shops P Meeting/banquet facilities P One caretaker/manager residential unit P Less than one thousand two-hundred twenty-five (1,225) gross square feet in size subject to compliance with the parking standards for Multiple-Family Dwellings under Chapter 18.06 (Multiple Family Residential Zones). Parking Lots & Garages P To provide off-street parking spaces, as required by this Code, to serve the on-site uses permitted under this chapter. Petroleum Storage – Incidental N ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-36 TABLE 116-E ACCESSORY USES INCIDENTAL TO AND INTEGRATED WITHIN A HOTEL OR MOTEL INCLUDING SUITE-TYPE HOTELS, AND OTHERWISE LIMITED HEREIN: C-R DISTRICT (DEVELOPMENT AREA 1) P Permitted by Right C Conditional Use Permit N Permitted T Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit Required Classes of Uses C-R District Special Provisions Outdoor food and/or beverage carts Portable Food Carts C In conjunction with a hotel and subject to the following: The design of the cart shall be compatible with the architectural design and/or theme of the hotel. The cart shall not be permitted to encroach into any required setback areas. One non-illuminated business identification sign, not exceeding four square feet in area with a maximum letter and/or logo height of 10-inches, may be displayed on or below the valance of the roof canopy. One menu pricing sign, not to exceed 12-inches in width by 18-inches in height, may be displayed on the cart below the roof canopy. One trash receptacle shall be provided adjacent to the cart. The trash receptacle shall be decorative and designed to complement the design of the cart. The trash receptacle and the area around the cart shall be permanently maintained and kept clean by the cart operator. The precise size, number and location of carts shall be determined by conditional use permit, provided that the cart(s) shall not be visible from the public right-of-way. All equipment, products and/or supplies shall be stored wholly on or inside the cart at all times. When not in use, all carts shall be stored in an on-site commissary approved by the Orange County Health Department and specifically shown on plans submitted in connection with a conditional use permit. Such commissary shall be fully enclosed and shall not be visible from any public right-of-way or adjacent properties. The cart operator shall obtain all applicable State and/or local licenses and/or permits and shall prominently display such current and valid licenses and/or permits on the cart at all times. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-37 TABLE 116-E ACCESSORY USES INCIDENTAL TO AND INTEGRATED WITHIN A HOTEL OR MOTEL INCLUDING SUITE-TYPE HOTELS, AND OTHERWISE LIMITED HEREIN: C-R DISTRICT (DEVELOPMENT AREA 1) P Permitted by Right C Conditional Use Permit N Permitted T Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit Required Classes of Uses C-R District Special Provisions Personal Services – General P Photo supply shops P Postal and copy service facilities P Recreational facilities Recreation Buildings and Structures P Including, but not limited to, outdoor playground areas, tennis and racquetball courts, spas and swimming pools. Limited strictly to the use of the guests and/or employees of such hotel or motel. Restaurants – Drive- Through N Restaurants - General P Restaurants – Outdoor Dining P Restaurants – Walk-Up P Restaurants P Enclosed or with outdoor dining, full-service, walk-up, fast food and/or delicatessen only Retail Floor, Wall & Window Coverings N Retail Sales - General P Retail Sales - Kiosk P Retail Sales – Outdoor N Retail Sales – Used Merchandise N Signs P Subject to Section 18.116.160 (Signs) ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-38 TABLE 116-E ACCESSORY USES INCIDENTAL TO AND INTEGRATED WITHIN A HOTEL OR MOTEL INCLUDING SUITE-TYPE HOTELS, AND OTHERWISE LIMITED HEREIN: C-R DISTRICT (DEVELOPMENT AREA 1) P Permitted by Right C Conditional Use Permit N Permitted T Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit Required Classes of Uses C-R District Special Provisions Thematic Elements P Subject to Section 18.116.160 (Signs) Vending Machines P Shall be screened from view from public rights-of-way and shall not encroach onto sidewalks. Warehousing & Storage – Outdoors N Sales of alcoholic beverages P On-premises and off-premises consumption Shoe repair shops P Souvenir, gift, and/or novelty shops P Including sales of sundry items Ticket agencies P Tobacco shops P Travel agencies P ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-39 TABLE 116-F TEMPORARY USES AND STRUCTURES: C-R DISTRICT (DEVELOPMENT AREA 1) P Permitted by Right C Conditional Use Permit N Prohibited Classes of Uses C-R District Special Provisions Carnivals & Circuses N May be permitted as part of a conditional use permit for an Amusement Park, Theme-Type Complex, Aviary, or Zoo Christmas Tree & Pumpkin Sales N Contractor’s Office and/or Storage P Temporary structures including the housing of tools and equipment or containing supervisor offices in connection with construction projects may be established and maintained during the progress of such construction on such projects, provided the time of such use shall not exceed one year unless a request for an extension of time for good cause is approved by the Planning Director. Special Events and Temporary Signs, Flags, Banners and Balloons P The temporary use of premises for special events as defined in Chapter 18.92 (Definitions), shall be subject to compliance with the provisions of Section 18.38.240 (Special Events) and Section 18.44.170 (Temporary Signs - Special Event Permit), provided that the following additional limitations shall apply in this District: One banner may be displayed upon the premises provided the banner is used in association with an on-site convention, a grand opening or any other event that is determined by the Planning Director to be in conformance with the goals and policies of the Specific Plan. The message on the banner shall be limited to the name, logo of the business and/or the event. The banner shall be securely attached to the building wall on which it is displayed. The following uses or activities are specifically prohibited: Any outdoor display and/or sales of merchandise or promotional materials in a location that is visible from a public right-of-way and/or adjacent property; Inflatable advertising displays; Outdoor advertising of merchandise, products and/or services, including, but not limited to, merchandise promotions, sales, pricing, etc.; ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-40 Roof-mounted displays of flags, banners, balloons, inflatable devices, or similar promotional displays; Display of pennants or pennant-type banners in a location that is visible from a public right-of-way and/or adjacent property; Flags, banners or balloons displayed in a landscape area or on a fence; and, Worn, frayed or faded flags or balloons shall not be permitted. Open-Air Festivals N May be permitted as part of a conditional use permit for an Amusement Park, Theme-Type Complex, Aviary, Zoo or Specialty Retail Center Real Estate Tract Office N Real Estate Tract Signs N Temporary Parking Lots P Subject to review and approval of the City Traffic and Transportation Manager in accordance with subsection 18.116.140.060 (Temporary Parking) and Section 18.116.100 (Screening, Walls, Fences, Landscaping and Lighting - Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area .080 General Building Site Requirements. The size and shape of the site proposed for the use shall be adequate to allow the full development of the proposed use in a manner consistent with the stated purpose and intent of this Zone. Adequate provision shall be made for the safe and orderly circulation of both pedestrian and vehicular traffic between the proposed site and all streets and highways. The proposed development shall not limit or adversely affect the growth and development potential of adjoining lands or the general area in which it is proposed to be located. .090 Automotive - Service Station, subject to the requirements of Chapter 18,38.070 (Automotive Service Stations) (except as certain associated uses are conditionally permitted or prohibited in this subsection) provided that site development shall be governed by the provisions of this chapter and the Design Plan. New service stations shall be designed so that buildings are located adjacent to the front setback areas abutting the street, and pumps, service bays and other functions are located behind the building. As a condition of granting any conditional use permit for an automobile service station, the property owner shall record an unsubordinated covenant against the property agreeing to remove all structures, including underground tanks, in the event that the station is closed for a period of twelve (12) consecutive months or longer. A service station shall be considered closed during any month in which it is open for less than fifteen (15) days. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-41 .0901 Conditionally Permitted Accessory Use. Convenience markets or mini-markets with or without the sale of beer and wine for off-premises consumption may be permitted in conjunction with a service station facility, subject to the approval of a conditional use permit and , subject to the following requirements. Such convenience market or mini-market has a maximum floor area of 3,200 square feet, provided that this use is only permitted in connection with the relocation of an existing service station facility with frontage on Harbor Boulevard to another location in the Anaheim Resort not adjacent to Harbor Boulevard, and further provided that: Prior to issuance of a building permit for the relocated service station, the property owner shall record a covenant on both the existing and the new service station properties satisfactory to the Planning Department and the City Attorney’s Office that prior to final zoning and building inspections of the relocated service station, the existing service station shall be closed, demolition of the existing service station building, canopy and site improvements completed and removal of the underground storage tanks commenced in accordance with a permit issued by the Anaheim Fire Department. The covenant shall further provided that the site shall be screened by a chain link fence with green scrim on the side oriented towards the public right-of-way and adjacent properties while demolition and tank removal is in process, and that within a period of sixty (60) days following the completions of demolition and tank removal activities, the site shall be screened by a minimum 3-foot wide, 3-foot high landscape berm or shrubs adjacent to the public right-of way. The site may be additionally screened by a 6-foot high chain link fence with green scrim oriented towards the public right-of-way located behind the landscape berm or shrubs. (Ord. 6031 § 64 (part); August 22, 2006.) .0902 Tow truck operations may be permitted in conjunction with a service station facility, subject to the approval of a conditional use permit and the following requirements. A maximum of one tow truck shall be permitted. When on-site, the tow truck shall be screened from view of the public right- of-way at all times. All vehicles towed to the site shall be stored indoors in a service bay. Under no circumstances shall outdoor storage of the towed vehicles be permitted. No additional signage advertising tow truck operations shall be permitted. 18.116.075 RESIDENTIAL USES/AMENDMENTS. Residential uses may only be conditionally permitted in limited areas of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan area as specifically provided by and in accordance with the Anaheim Resort Residential Overlay (Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.116.125) in effect as of March 19, 2007 and may also be permitted as provided by and in accordance with the Mobile Home Park Overlay (Anaheim Municipal Code Chapter 18.26) in effect as of March 19, 2007. No other ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-42 residential uses shall be incorporated into the Commercial Recreation land use designation and/or allowed within the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan area and no amendment to the Anaheim Resort Residential Overlay (Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.116.125) in effect as of March 19, 2007, shall be approved without completion of an Environmental Impact Report prepared in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, (ii) completion of a long-term economic impact analysis of the proposed change by an independent financial advisor retained by the City, (iii) approval by the City Council, and (iv) approval by a majority of voters of the City of Anaheim at a regularly-scheduled municipal election. (Ord. 6098 § 1 (part); March 4, 2008.) 18.116.080 STRUCTURAL HEIGHTS AND WIDTHS –COMMERCIAL RECREATION (C-R) DISTRICT (DEVELOPMENT AREA This section contains general building height and parcel width requirements that apply to this Zone, except as otherwise provided by this chapter. .010 Maximum Permitted Structural Height. The maximum structural height of any building or structure, including roof-mounted equipment, shall not exceed the maximum heights defined in Section 18.40.080 (Structural Height Limitations - Anaheim Commercial Recreation Area). For those properties located south of Orangewood Avenue, the maximum height shall be the same as the height defined in Section 18.40.080 (Structural Height Limitations - Anaheim Commercial Recreation Area) for the intersection of Harbor Boulevard and Orangewood Avenue. .020 Height Adjacent to Residential Zones and the MHP Overlay. The height of any building or structure within one hundred fifty (150) feet of any single-family residential zone boundary (other than property under a resolution of intent to any commercial zone), or, for property located south of Orangewood Avenue, within one hundred fifty (150) feet of any multi- family residential zone boundary (other than property under a resolution of intent to any commercial zone), or property within the Specific Plan area encompassed by the MHP Overlay as shown on Exhibit 3.3.2a3 of the Specific Plan document, (Mobile Home Park (MHP) Overlay Zone) shall not exceed a height equal to one-half the distance from said building or structure to said zone or overlay boundary. Dedicated streets shall be included in calculating distance. Heights greater than one-half the distance from said building or structure to said zone or overlay boundary may be permitted subject to the approval of a conditional use permit as set forth in Table 116-C, provided that the maximum height shall not exceed the maximum height set forth for the property in Section 18.116.080.010 (Maximum Permitted Structural Height). .030 Minimum Lot Width. Each lot shall have a minimum width at the street frontage of not less than one hundred seventy-five (175) feet. This requirement shall not apply to any lot lawfully created prior to the effective date of this chapter and shall not render any such lot nonconforming to this chapter for purposes of applying any other requirements contained herein. (Ord. 6031 § 64; August 22, 2006.) ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-43 18.116.090 STRUCTURAL SETBACKS –COMMERCIAL RECREATION (C-R) DISTRICT (DEVELOPMENT AREA .010 Structural Setback and Yard Requirements. Buildings and structures within this Specific Plan area shall be provided with open yards and setbacks extending across the full width of the property as provided herein. All setbacks shall be fully landscaped, irrigated, and maintained in a manner in compliance with the Design Plan, including, but not limited to, the Layered Landscape Concept and the Minimum Tree Density. The following minimum setback requirements set forth in Table 116-G shall apply to permanent buildings and structures constructed within this Zone, except as otherwise provided in paragraph 18.116.[PHONE REDACTED] (Special Intersection Landscape Treatment) and elsewhere in this chapter. .020 Minimum Required Building and Landscape Setbacks. Table 116-G provides specific setbacks for certain streets including major, primary, secondary roads and local streets. Such setbacks as indicated in Table 116-G shall be measured from the ultimate planned right-of-way as designated on the Circulation Element of the General Plan and as further described in Sections 4.0 (Public Facilities Plan) and 5.0 (Design Plan) of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan document. TABLE 116-G MINIMUM SETBACKS: C-R DISTRICT Street Buildings up to 35 feet in height Buildings 35- 75 feet in height Buildings greater than 75 feet in height Special Provisions Acama Street 10 feet 20 feet 20 feet Adjacent to Interstate 5 Private property located immediately adjacent to the ultimate right- of-way line of Interstate 5 Freeway. 10 feet 10 feet 10 feet Freeway on private property located immediately adjacent to the ultimate right-of-way line of Interstate 5 Freeway. Alro Way 10 feet 20 feet 20 feet Ball Road 20 feet 20 feet 30 feet Casa Grande Avenue 20 feet 20 feet 20 feet Casa Vista Street 10 feet 20 feet 20 feet Cast Place 10 feet 20 feet 20 feet ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-44 TABLE 116-G MINIMUM SETBACKS: C-R DISTRICT Street Buildings up to 35 feet in height Buildings 35- 75 feet in height Buildings greater than 75 feet in height Special Provisions Chapman Avenue 20 feet 20 feet 30 feet Clementine Street 20 feet 20 feet 30 feet Convention Way 20 feet 20 feet 30 feet As measured from the right-of-way as shown in Exhibit 5.8.1s – Convention Way: Full Cross Street Section of the Specific Plan Disney Way 20 feet 20 feet 30 feet Disneyland Drive between Katella Avenue and Ball Road 19 feet 19 feet 19 feet Disneyland Drive, north of Ball Road 20 feet 20 feet 30 feet Gene Autry Way (Alignment shown on the Circulation Element of the City of Anaheim General Plan) 20 feet 20 feet 30 feet Harbor Boulevard between the Interstate-5 Freeway and Orangewood Avenue 26 feet 26 feet 26 feet Harbor Boulevard, north of I-5 Freeway and south of Orangewood Avenue 20 feet 20 feet 30 feet Haster Street/Anaheim Boulevard 20 feet 20 feet 30 feet Katella Avenue between Walnut Street and Interstate-5 Freeway and Orangewood Avenue 11 feet 11 feet 11 feet Mallul Drive 10 feet 20 feet 20 feet ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-45 TABLE 116-G MINIMUM SETBACKS: C-R DISTRICT Street Buildings up to 35 feet in height Buildings 35- 75 feet in height Buildings greater than 75 feet in height Special Provisions Manchester Avenue between Katella Avenue to the southern border of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan. 20 feet 20 feet 20 feet Manchester Avenue (between Harbor Boulevard and Clementine Street) 20 feet 20 feet 30 feet Mountain View Avenue 10 feet 20 feet 20 feet Orangewood Avenue 20 feet 20 feet 30 feet Vermont Avenue 10 feet 20 feet 20 feet Walnut Street 30 feet 30 feet 30 feet West Place 10 feet 20 feet 20 feet West Street, south of Katella Avenue 20 feet 20 feet 30 feet Wilken Way 10 feet 20 feet 20 feet Zeyn Street 10 feet 20 feet 20 feet .030 Setbacks - Adjacent to Interstate-5 (Santa Ana Freeway). A minimum ten (10) foot wide fully landscaped area shall be provided on any private property located immediately adjacent to the ultimate right-of-way line of Interstate-5. .040.030 Setbacks - Interior. A minimum ten (10) foot wide fully landscaped setback shall be required within the area abutting any interior lot property lines; except that when an interior lot property line is within one hundred fifty (150) feet of any single-family or multiple-family residential zone (excepting a T Zone, which has a resolution of intent to a zone other than residential) or any property encompassed by the MHP Overlay, an open side yard setback area, with not less than twenty (20) feet of landscaping adjacent to the property line, equal to two times the height of any proposed building or structure as measured to the highest point of the building, including any penthouse or other structure, shall be provided. Such setbacks shall be measured from the interior property line. Setbacks less than two times the height of any proposed building or structure may be permitted subject to the approval of a conditional use permit as set forth in Table 116-C. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-46 .050.040 Permitted Encroachments into Required Yard and Setback Areas. Allowable encroachments into required setback areas are contained in Table 116-H. Buildings shall comply with the provisions provided herein. TABLE 116-H PERMITTED ENCROACHMENTS: C-R DISTRICT Encroachments Special Provisions Parking in Interior Lot Setbacks Where an interior lot property line abuts a single-family or multiple- family residential zone, the required setback area adjacent to such interior lot property line may be used as part of an automobile parking area provided that trees are planted and permanently maintained in compliance with the Design Plan adjacent to the residential zone property line on maximum fifteen (15) foot centers; and, further provided that such parking area does not encroach within the required twenty (20) foot landscape setback area as specified in Table 116-I of Section 18.116.100 (Screening, Walls, Fences, Landscaping and Lighting - Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area Decorative Elements Fountains, planters, and sculptures (not to exceed thirty-six (36) inches in height) and, decorative paving, walkways and ponds shall be permitted within the required front yard setback, provided they are an integral part of the landscaping plans and comply with the vehicular sight distance requirements. Signs Signs shall be permitted as provided in Section 18.116.160 (Sign Regulations) of this chapter. Flagpole A maximum of one flagpole for the display of a maximum of three flags shall be permitted within the required front yard setback provided said flagpole does not exceed fifty (50) feet in height and is set back a minimum of ten (10) feet from any property line abutting a public-right-of-way; and, further provided each flag displayed thereon has a size dimension not to exceed five feet by nine feet. All flags shall be kept in good repair. Fences and walls Fences and walls in compliance with Section 18.116.100 (Screening, Walls, Fences, Landscaping and Lighting - Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area 1) may encroach into any required setback. Driveways and Walkways Entrance and exit driveways and walkways into buildings or parking areas, including driveways and walkways that provide reciprocal access between adjacent properties, shall be permitted subject to the approval of the City’s Traffic and Transportation Manager. Balconies, Awnings, Trellises and Architectural Projections A maximum three foot encroachment into the required minimum building setback area adjacent to the ultimate public right-of-way shall be permitted for balconies, awnings, trellises, and architectural projections. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-47 TABLE 116-H PERMITTED ENCROACHMENTS: C-R DISTRICT Encroachments Special Provisions Tree shrubs, flowers or plants Permitted in any required setback in compliance with Section 18.116.100 (Screening, Walls, Fences, Landscaping and Lighting - Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area Walkways Limited to walkways leading from parking areas and public sidewalks provided the walkway is integrated with the landscape design and does not significantly reduce the landscape area. Light fixtures Permitted in any required setback except within required minimum 20-foot wide interior landscape setback areas adjacent to residential uses and/or zones. Utility Elements and Associated Decorative Screening Walls/Fences Permitted to encroach into the required interior setback areas, provided such utility elements shall not exceed six feet in height and shall not be visible when the site is viewed at any point measured six feet above grade from any public right-of-way or adjacent property, and such associated walls or fences do not prohibit access to utility devices or facilities or block access or egress from any emergency exit or exit way. Utility elements, devices or facilities are prohibited from encroaching into the front setback area. 060..050 Vehicle Sight Distance to be Maintained. No landscape materials or other elements exceeding twenty-four (24) inches in height shall be permitted within the “Commercial Drive Approach” area as defined by engineering standards on file in the City. All living landscaping must be maintained, pruned or trimmed in a manner which complies with the requirement contained in this chapter. 070..060 Parking in Required Setbacks Prohibited. Parking of privately owned and operated automobiles is not permitted within the required setbacks. (Ord. 6031 § 64 (part); August 22, 2006.) 18.116.100 SCREENING, WALLS, FENCES, LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING – COMMERCIAL RECREATION (C-R) DISTRICT (DEVELOPMENT AREA .010 Screening. Table 116-I provides required site screening within the Specific Plan Area: TABLE 116-I REQUIRED SITE SCREENING: C-R DISTRICT Abutting Residential Zone or Except as otherwise provided herein, a landscape buffer shall be provided along and immediately adjacent to the site property line abutting any residential zone ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-48 TABLE 116-I REQUIRED SITE SCREENING: C-R DISTRICT MHP Overlay Property boundary as set forth in Section 18.116.090 (Structural Setbacks - Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area The buffer shall be landscaped, irrigated and maintained in compliance with the Design Plan. Eight foot high masonry wall located at property line, and an adjacent twenty (20) foot wide permanently planted, irrigated and maintained landscaped area required. Said wall shall be with clinging vines whereby growth occurs on both sides of wall. The height of any such wall and/or berm shall be measured from the highest finished grade level of the subject or adjacent properties, whichever is the higher. Abutting Freeway Except as otherwise provided herein, a landscape buffer shall be provided along and immediately adjacent to the site property line abutting any freeway boundary as set forth in Section 18.116.090 (Structural Setbacks - Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area The buffer shall be landscaped, irrigated and maintained in compliance with the Design Plan. Minimum ten (10) foot wide landscape buffer required. Said buffer shall be permanently planted, irrigated and maintained. Walls are not permitted to encroach within this required buffer. Automotive Related Uses Including service station auto working bays, truck loading docks, service entrances, rental car storage areas, storage of transit vehicles, and similar uses shall be screened so as not to be visible from adjacent public streets or adjacent properties. Parking Areas Where parking is visible from a public right-of-way, the parking shall be screened with a landscape area in compliance with the Design Plan. Said landscape area shall consist of the following: Shrubs or bushes that can attain a minimum height of thirty-six (36) inches within two years of installation. Landscaped berms with a minimum height of thirty-six (36) inches (including the mature height of landscape planted thereon); or, Decorative walls or fences upon which are planted clinging vines, and shall be landscaped, irrigated and maintained in compliance with the Design Plan this Chapter and the engineering standards on file in the City. Exception: Surface parking areas adjacent to Casa Grande Avenue shall be screened by an eight foot high decorative masonry wall. Said wall shall not encroach into the required front yard setback area and shall be planted with either clinging vines and/or fast-growing shrubbery which will screen the wall surface within two years of installation. Utility Equipment Utility equipment and communication devices shall be screened from public view so that such devices are not visible when the site is viewed at any point measured six feet above grade from other public or private property. These devices may include, but are not limited to: dish-type and other antennae, cross connection devices, stand pipes, back flow assemblies, cable TV equipment, gas meters, ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-49 TABLE 116-I REQUIRED SITE SCREENING: C-R DISTRICT ventilating fans, microwave and cellular transmitters, and electrical transformers. Utility equipment attached to walls shall be painted the same color as the wall. Roof-Mounted Equipment Roof-mounted equipment s Shall be painted the same color as the roof, Shall be screened from view of adjacent public rights-of-way and from adjacent properties at any point measured six feet above grade, Shall be screened from nearby taller buildings with screening devices, Shall be screened on buildings two stories or less on all sides, including from above, Shall be integrated into and screened by the architectural design of the building, and Shall be considered as part of the total building height. Equipment penthouses or screening components which are not an integral part of the architectural design of the building are prohibited. Refuse Container and/or Trash Compactor Enclosures Refuse container and/or trash compactor enclosures are required and shall be screened from public view and shall be designed, constructed, and maintained in compliance with the Maintenance Standard entitled “Refuse Container Enclosure for Multiple-Family Residential, Commercial and Industrial Use” on file in the Building Division of the Planning Department. Locate refuse collection areas in an accessible interior, side, or rear yard to the satisfaction of the City Maintenance Department. Screen refuse collection areas from public view with a solid wall (minimum six feet, maximum eight feet high) using materials and colors compatible with those of the adjacent buildings. Refuse container and/or trash compactor enclosures shall be constructed with a roof, and the exterior walls shall be landscaped and maintained with clinging vines or fast-growing shrubbery which will cover the exterior walls of the enclosure within two years of installation to eliminate graffiti opportunities. Vacant Land Vacant land shall be screened from view from the public right-of-way by one of the screening methods set forth in the following sub-paragraphs or or the vacant land shall be planted with temporary landscaping or groundcover complete with temporary irrigation and maintained until such time as a valid grading or building permit has been issued for construction on the site and such work commences. Weed abatement shall be enforced at all times. Any temporary landscaping that is removed shall be replaced by permanent landscaping upon completion of construction for the portion of the site where construction has not occurred. This requirement shall be in addition to the landscaping requirements for the site as otherwise required by this chapter. Agricultural use for the purpose ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-50 TABLE 116-I REQUIRED SITE SCREENING: C-R DISTRICT of growing field crops, trees, vegetables, fruits, berries or nursery stock is not subject to the screening requirements contained herein. Land which is vacant for under one year may be screened with a six foot high chainlink fence adjacent to all public rights-of-way and adjacent properties with green scrim securely attached to the street side and adjacent property side of the chainlink fence. Land which is vacant for over one year may be screened by a chainlink fence and green scrim as required in .01 above; however, the fence shall be relocated so that a minimum three foot high and minimum ten (10) foot wide berm, or a minimum three foot high hedge screen located in a minimum three foot wide landscape area shall be planted adjacent to the public right-of-way in front of the chainlink fence with scrim. Landscape on said berm or hedge screen shall be maintained in a healthy condition as described in subsection 18.116.100 (Screening, Walls, Fences, Landscaping and Lighting - Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area and shall conform to the Design Plan. Service, Storage and Maintenance Areas and Loading Docks Screen all service, storage and maintenance areas and loading docks from public view from adjacent buildings, streets, freeways, sidewalks, and driveways. If these areas cannot be screened by adjacent structures, screen these areas with walls, berms, and landscaping. Screening walls shall be a minimum of six feet and a maximum of eight feet high. Construct architectural screening of the same materials and finishes compatible with the adjacent building and designed and placed to complement the building design. All screening walls shall be planted with clinging vines. Store materials, supplies or equipment inside an enclosed building to prevent visibility from neighboring property and streets. Service, storage, maintenance, parking, and loading areas are prohibited from extending into a required landscape area. .020 Walls and Fences. Walls and fences shall be planted with either clinging vines or fast-growing shrubbery which will screen the wall or fence surface within two years of installation so as to eliminate graffiti opportunities. The maximum permitted wall or fence height shall not exceed eight feet adjacent to commercially and/or residentially-zoned properties. The use of chain link fencing (with the exception of temporary chain link fences used to screen vacant land as set forth in Section 18.116.100 (Screening, Walls, Fences, Landscaping and Lighting - Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area barbed wire and/or razor wire is prohibited. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-51 .0201 Retaining Wall Treatment. In instances where a retaining wall is required between adjoining properties, and where other walls are required on one or more of the adjoining properties, said walls shall be offset a minimum of two feet between the retaining wall and the other required wall or walls; and, said walls shall be decorative and landscaped with clinging vines in compliance with the Design Plan. The two foot offset area between the retaining wall and the other required wall or walls shall be landscaped, irrigated and maintained in compliance with the Design Plan. Where a slope exists, any required wall shall be erected at the property line with the slope itself, permanently planted, irrigated, and maintained. .0202 Within Front Yard Setback. Within any required front yard setback area, walls and/or fences shall be permitted to a maximum height of thirty-six (36) inches with the exception of walls and/or fences used as barriers to create enclosure for outdoor dining areas, which shall be permitted to a maximum height of forty-two (42) inches. All walls and/or fences within the vehicular line-of-sight area, as described in paragraph 18.116.090.060 (Vehicle Sight Distance to be Maintained), shall be a maximum of twenty-four (24) inches. Walls and/or fences shall be decorative and in compliance with the Design Plan. .030 Landscaping. .0301 Compliance with Design Plan Required. Except as otherwise provided in this chapter and in Section 18.116.130 (Central Core), all required setback areas shall be fully and permanently landscaped with lawn, trees and shrubs and may include walkways, plazas, fountains, and other similar materials (not including turf block) in accordance with the Design Plan. This includes, but is not limited to, the Design Plan’s Layered Landscape Design Criteria, Minimum Tree Density, and Plant Selection Matrix. A minimum of eighty percent (80%) of the required setback area, excluding driveways perpendicular to the street, on all lots abutting all public streets shall contain live landscape materials; plants used within this area shall be selected from the Design Plan’s Plant Selection Matrix. .0302 Maintenance of Landscaping Required. Prepare and show on landscape plans, maintenance specifications describing the irrigation, pruning, weeding, fertilizer application and other pertinent maintenance criteria for all landscaped areas. All landscaped areas shall be permanently maintained in a neat and orderly manner as a condition of use and in accordance with the Design Plan.following: Maintain all landscape materials, including trees, shrubs, ground covers and vines in a healthy condition at all times. Remove overgrown, oversized, or hazardous plant materials when they cannot be pruned to a safe condition and threaten public health, safety or welfare. .0303 Required Size of Plant Material. All required trees shall be of a size at the time of planting not less than the minimum size specified in the Design Plan. If not specified in the Design Plan, the trees shall be fifteen (15) gallon. All required shrubs shall be of a size at time of planting not less than the minimum size specified in the Design Plan. If not specified in the Design Plan, the shrubs shall be five gallon. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-52 .0304 Replacement of Damaged, Diseased, or Dead Plant Material. Any required plant material planted on-site which is subsequently removed, damaged, diseased and/or dead shall be replaced on-site in a timely manner with comparable plant material with a minimum size as recommended specified by the Design Plan. .0305 Coverage. Groundcover shall be planted and maintained where shrubbery and/or trees are not sufficient to cover exposed soil. Mulch may be used in place of groundcover where groundcover will not grow or where groundcover will cause harm to the plant materials, subject to the approval of the Planning Department. .0306 Irrigation. All required landscape areas shall be provided and maintained with a permanent, automatic irrigation system in accordance with the following: Design Plan. Irrigate all permanently landscaped or required landscape areas with a permanent, underground irrigation system that is operated by an automatic irrigation con- troller. Irrigate turf areas with low gallon spray heads with a minimum six-inch pop-up body. Use triangular spacing of spray heads in turf areas whenever feasible. Irrigate shrub areas with low gallon spray heads. When appropriate, drip irrigation should be provided in shrub areas. Irrigate individual shrubs with a pressure compensation bubbler with low flow characteristics. Irrigate at night and early morning to reduce evaporation due to sun and wind. Apply irrigation water in multiple short applications to reduce runoff on to areas not needing irrigation. Ensure that irrigation water is not applied to walks, driveways, walls, fences and building faces. Provide methods of retaining irrigation runoff water on site; it should not flow on to other property or the public right-of-way. Provide approved backflow preventers on all systems. (10) Screen from public view all irrigation equipment including backflow preventers and controller boxes. (11) Install automatic valves in valve boxes, and use pop-up spray heads, whenever feasible. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-53 (12) Such The irrigation system shall incorporate water conserving features. .0307 Minimum Landscape and Open Space. The minimum landscape and recreation area for any hotel or motel use shall be fifteen (15%) percent of the total area of the site. Such minimum landscaped open space may include: landscape areas with plantings of trees, shrubs and groundcover; water features including, but not limited to, swimming pools, spas, ponds, lakes, and fountains; pedestrian walkways and patios; landscaped areas within parking facilities; and, areas intended for emergency access paved with turf block. Paved areas intended primarily for vehicular traffic including, but not limited to, temporary and/or permanent parking facilities; driveways, and porte-cocheres shall not be considered as landscaped open space for the purposes of this requirement. .0308 Special Intersection Landscape Treatment. Special intersection landscape treatment is required for the following special intersection landscape areas, which are either entry points to The Anaheim Resort or major intersections within this area. The special intersection landscape area shall consist of a fifty foot triangular area, except for critical intersections where eight feet of additional landscape will be required. Property owners shall landscape this area with the same type of parkway trees as required on the adjacent streets as shown in the Design Plan. All of these intersections are within the Central Core except for the Ball Road intersections. Implementation shall be concurrent with the construction of any building hereinafter erected in this Zone or the improvements of any building structurally modified to an extent exceeding forty-five percent (45%) of the gross floor area of said existing building within any two year period, and which building is located on any lot abutting any of the following intersections, landscaping, paving and lighting improvements shall be provided within that certain intersection area as described in and in compliance with the criteria set forth in the Design Plan: .01 Ball Road and Disneyland Drive. .02 Deleted. Ball Road and West Place. .03 Harbor Boulevard and Orangewood Avenue. .04 Harbor Boulevard and Manchester Avenue .04.05 Katella Avenue and Haster Street/Anaheim Boulevard. .05.06 Katella Avenue and Disneyland Drive/West Street. .06 Manchester Avenue/Harbor Boulevard. .0309 Pedestrian Paving. Stamped concrete or unit pavers with deep, rounded joints, or score lines and joints that are wider than ¼-inch and turf block shall not be used for paved areas on private property intended for use by pedestrians, including areas to be used by both pedestrians and vehicles. Pedestrian pavements may include, but are not ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-54 necessarily limited to: sidewalks, paths, walkways, courtyards, and plazas. .040 Exterior Lighting. Decorative lighting such as tree uplights, tree downlights, small lights in trees or on shrubs, outdoor string lights that outline building masses, and similar lighting effects are permitted and may be visible from the public right-of-way. All exterior lighting shall be in conformance with the Design Plan. conform with the following: .0401 Exterior lights should be predominantly incandescent or metal halide and have a "warm" color; high pressure sodium fixtures may be used where they are visible from the public right-of-way, but should be limited to areas which are not visually prominent; fluorescent, low pressure sodium, and mercury vapor fixtures shall not be visible from the public right-of-way. .0402 Illuminated areas shall be localized as much as possible; light fixtures which broadcast light over large areas, or are a source of glare are not permitted. .0403 Exterior building illumination shall be focused at the pedestrian level – storefronts, building entries, porte cochères, and other comparable locations. .0404 Night lighting effects, which illuminate entire buildings, or large portions of buildings will not be permitted where such buildings are prominently visible from adjacent public streets. .0405 Except for small, bare-bulb and “twinkle” lights, all landscape light fixtures, including tree uplights, shall be concealed from view by burial in the ground or by locating them in landscaped areas. (Ord. 6031 § 64 (part); August 22, 2006: Ord. 6141 § 2; April 14, 2009.) 18.116.110 LAND USE AND SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS –PUBLIC RECREATION (PR) DISTRICT (DEVELOPMENT AREA .010 Maximum Development. The maximum development density permitted for the PR District is up to 2,158,363 square feet of convention center/meeting space; 100,000 square feet of outdoor programmable space; 2,500 hotel rooms; and, 180,000 square feet of commercial space. .020 Development Standards. Parcels encompassed by the PR District shall be subject to the standards and regulations of the “PR” (Public Recreational) Zone as set forth in Chapter 18.14 (Public and Special Purpose Zones) of the Anaheim Municipal Code. (Ord. 5453 § 1 (part); September 27, 1994: Ord. 5920 § 1 (part); June 8, 2004: Ord. 6031 § 64 (part); August 22, 2006.) 18.116.120 MOBILE HOME PARK (MHP) OVERLAY. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-55 Parcels encompassed by the MHP Overlay shall be subject to the procedures and regulations set forth in the Mobile Home Park (MHP) Overlay Zone as set forth in Chapter 18.26. The underlying Zone designation for the MHP Overlay is the C-R District. (Ord. 5453 § 1 (part); September 27, 1994: Ord. 5920 § 1 (part); June 8, 2004: Ord. 6031 § 64 (part); August 22, 2006.) 18.116.125 ANAHEIM RESORT RESIDENTIAL (ARR) OVERLAY. .010 Purpose. The purpose of the ARR Overlay is to provide the opportunity to develop residential units in conjunction with high-quality, luxury hotels (Hotel Residences). .020 Approval. Projects that are developed according to the standards of the ARR Overlay as Hotel Residences require approval of a final site plan and a conditional use permit as provided for in Section 18.116.040 and may require a development agreement as determined by the Planning Director and processed according to the procedures set forth in Resolution No. 82R-565 (Procedures Resolution) adopted by the City of Anaheim pursuant to Section 65865 of the Development Agreement statute. .030 Location. The residential overlay boundaries are identified on Attachment A to Ordinance 6036 adopted on September 12, 2006 (Amendment No. 7 to The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2) and include those areas within the C-R District located east of Anaheim Boulevard/Haster Street and those areas within the C-R District located south of Wilken Way. .040 Option to Use Underlying Zone. The provisions of this section shall not apply to parcels that have been or are proposed to be developed entirely pursuant to the underlying C-R District, provided that all requirements of the underlying District are met by the project except as specifically approved otherwise by variance or other official action by the City. .050 Residential Zone. The ARR Overlay shall not be considered a residential zone, where such designation requires properties that develop adjacent to residential zones to meet additional setback and height restrictions. .060 Uses. Projects developed pursuant to the ARR Overlay may include any of the uses permitted or conditionally permitted in the underlying C-R District and shall include a minimum three hundred (300) room full-service hotel that complies with California Civil Code Section 1940(b)(2) and may include residential uses as accessory to the hotel. .070 Development Standards. All development standards established for the C-R District shall be applicable to the ARR Overlay. In addition, Hotel Residences shall meet the following requirements: .0701 New Construction. The Residential Overlay shall apply to new construction only and not to projects that are renovations or remodels. The conversion of existing hotels rooms to dwelling units is prohibited. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-56 .0702 Integration of Uses. All residential units shall be physically integrated into a hotel development as defined in Section 18.116.125.060. .0703 Maximum Number of Residential Units. The project’s total number of residential units shall not exceed the proposed development’s total number of hotel rooms. .0704 Location of Residential Units. Adjacent to the public right-of-way, residential units shall be located at least two floors or twenty-five (25) feet above ground-level. .0705 Infrastructure and Service Impacts. The proposed development shall not result in infrastructure impacts greater than those associated with the subject property’s permitted hotel/motel density, as allowed by the property’s underlying C-R District density designation, unless such impacts are duly analyzed and mitigated pursuant to subsequent environmental review. Such impacts shall be determined through a sewer and traffic impact analysis to be submitted to the City Engineer. Additional infrastructure studies may be required as determined by the Planning Director. .0706 Parking. Due to variations in parking demand and the needs of each project, vehicle parking requirements, the demand for drop-off and pick-up locations and the design of the parking areas, including ingress and egress, shall be determined as part of the final site plan review based upon information contained in a parking demand study prepared by an independent traffic engineer, as approved by the City of Anaheim. The parking demand study shall be prepared at the property owner/developer’s expense and provided as part of the final site plan application. Parking spaces specifically designated for non-residential and residential uses shall be marked by the use of posting, pavement markings, and/or physical separation. Parking design shall incorporate separate entrances and exits or a designated lane for residents. .0707 Floor Area. The minimum floor area for residential units is shown in Table 116-J (Minimum Floor Area: Anaheim Resort Residential (ARR) Overlay Zone). For purposes of this section, a “bedroom” is a private habitable room planned or used for sleeping, separated from other rooms by a door or a similar partition. Further, all rooms (other than a living room, family room, dining room, bathroom, hall, lobby, closet, or pantry) having seventy (70) square feet or more of floor area, or less than fifty percent (50%) of the total length of any wall open to an adjacent room or hallway, shall be considered a “bedroom.” TABLE 116-J MINIMUM FLOOR AREA: ANAHEIM RESORT RESIDENTIAL (ARR) OVERLAY ZONE Minimum Floor Area Studio units 600 square feet. The number of studio units shall not exceed 20% of the total number of residential units. One-bedroom units 700 square feet Two-bedroom units 825 square feet ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-57 TABLE 116-J MINIMUM FLOOR AREA: ANAHEIM RESORT RESIDENTIAL (ARR) OVERLAY ZONE Minimum Floor Area Three-bedroom units 1,000 square feet More than three- bedroom units 1,000 square feet plus 200 square feet for each bedroom over three .0708 Minimum Landscape and Recreational-Leisure Areas. In addition to the minimum landscape and open space required by Section 18.116.[PHONE REDACTED] 18.116.[PHONE REDACTED], recreational-leisure area shall be provided equal to a minimum of ten (10) percent of the total area of the site. This recreational-leisure area may be provided in private areas, common areas, or a combination of both. .01 Common Recreational-Leisure Areas. All common recreational-leisure areas shall be conveniently located and readily accessible from all residential units located on the building site and shall be integrated with and contiguous to other common areas on the building site. The common recreational-leisure areas shall not include any required setback areas, any driveways or parking areas, trash pickup or storage areas or utility areas. Areas counted toward meeting this requirement may be located inside or outside the building, subject to the approval of the Planning Director. .02 Private Recreational-Leisure Areas. In order for private patios and balconies to count toward the Recreational-Leisure Area requirement, they shall not be less than thirty (35) square feet in area, with a minimum dimension of five feet. .0709 Loading Areas. Residential uses shall have one off-street loading space or moving plaza for every one hundred and fifty (150) units. Loading spaces or moving plazas shall be located near entries and/or elevators and shall be incorporated into the design of vehicular access areas. Decorative paving, removable bollards and potted plants are permitted and encouraged to enhance loading spaces or moving plazas. .0710 Private Storage Facilities. General storage cabinets with a minimum size of one hundred (100) cubic feet capacity shall be required for each residential unit. Provision of said storage areas shall be in addition to the minimum floor area of the unit. Storage areas may be located inside the dwelling unit, adjacent to the dwelling unit's balcony or patio, in close proximity to the dwelling unit, or in close proximity to an elevator. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-58 .0711 Security. Residential units shall be designed to ensure the security of residents through the provision of secured access points/lobbies, entrances and exits that are separate from the non-residential uses and are directly accessible to residential parking areas. .0712 Restriction on Activities. Commercial uses shall be designed and operated, and hours of operation limited, so that residents are not exposed to offensive noise, especially from traffic, trash collection, routine deliveries or late night activity. No use shall produce continual loading or unloading of heavy trucks at the site between the hours of 8 p.m. and 6 a.m. .0713 Vibrations and Odors. No use, activity or process shall produce continual vibrations or noxious odors that are perceptible without instruments by the average person at the property lines of the site or within the interior of residential units or recreational-leisure areas on the site. .0714 Lighting. Outdoor lighting associated with commercial uses shall not adversely impact residential uses, but shall provide sufficient illumination for access and security purposes. Such lighting shall not blink, flash, or oscillate. .0715 Windows. Residential windows shall not directly face loading areas and docks. To the extent windows of residential units face each other or hotel rooms, the windows shall be designed and/or oriented to maximize privacy." (Ord. 6036 § 3; September 12, 2006: Ord. 6099 § 3; March 4, 2008.) 18.116.130 CENTRAL CORE. .010 Purpose. The purpose of the Central Core is to create a consistent, high quality pedestrian environment that reinforces the character established by the landscape and other streetscape elements identified in The Anaheim Resort Identity Program. The Central Core boundaries encompass lots or parcels with frontage on Harbor Boulevard between Interstate-5 Freeway and Orangewood Avenue and on Katella Avenue between Interstate-5 Freeway and Walnut Street. The following subsections apply to this area as follows: .0101 Subsections .020 and .040 below apply to the minimum required setback areas adjacent to the ultimate public right-of-way. .0102 Subsection .030 below applies to the area between the ultimate public right-of- way and the actual (constructed) building setback. .0103 Subsections .050 through .070 below apply to development encompassing lots or parcels with frontage on both Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue, identified as the "Harbor Boulevard/Katella Avenue Intersection Area" and depicted on Exhibit 5.3.4a (Central Core Plan). ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-59 .0105 Subsection .080 applies to all properties within the Central Core. Other guidelines for development of uses within the Central Core are provided in the Design Plan. .020 Required Landscape Setback Area. The required landscape setback area within the Central Core shall comply with the following: .0201 Up to eighty percent (80%) of the required landscape setback area adjacent to the ultimate public right-of-way may be paved provided: .0201 The paved area will serve pedestrian-related activities (outdoor dining, access to retail stores integrated with hotel/motel developments, and similar uses); and, .0202 Landscape shall be designed and installed in conformance with the tree density requirements identified in the Design Plan and depicted in Exhibit 5.6.6.3a (Tree Density Factor Plan).; .03 The paved area includes cutout areas for trees (minimum of one tree per 200 square feet), planters, pots, colored or enriched paving, and other pedestrian- oriented amenities; .0202 Shrubs, decorative walls, and fences may be used as barriers within the Setback Realm to create enclosure for outdoor eating and pedestrian gathering areas, pro- vided that any barrier greater than 42 inches high shall be transparent. .0203 Areas that have a more intimate scale, such as those oriented towards pedestrians (outdoor eating areas, for example), may use smaller-scale trees and shrubs within the required landscape setback area. .030 Location of Parking Areas, Structures and Circulation. Parking and circulation for properties within the Central Core shall comply with the following: .0301 No parking areas shall be located between the ultimate public right-of-way and the actual (constructed) building setback. .0302 Parking structures shall be located in separate buildings at the rear portion of the site unless more than seventy-five percent (75%) of the parking structure building wall facing the street contains pedestrian oriented uses, which have openings to the adjacent Central Core street. .0303 Curb cuts separated by less than forty feet are prohibited. .040 Lighting. .0401 Exterior lights may be incandescent or metal halide. Fluorescent, low pressure sodium, high pressure sodium, and mercury vapor are prohibited in the front setback areas. .0402 Decorative lighting with a festive "Tivoli Garden" character is permitted within the front setback areas. It may include: tree uplights, tree downlights, small lights in ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-60 trees or on shrubs, outdoor string lights that outline building masses, and similar lighting effects. Visible light bulbs shall be incandescent, or shall have a warm lighting characteristic similar to incandescent fixtures. .0403 Lighting that illuminates building walls is not permitted. .050 Required Landscaped Setback Area Within the Harbor Boulevard/Katella Avenue Intersection Area. The minimum setback along Harbor Boulevard may be reduced to eleven (11) feet. .060 Permitted Encroachments Within the Harbor Boulevard/Katella Avenue Intersection Area. Canopies and balconies may encroach three feet into the required setback along both Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue. Canopies for ground floor seating and dining areas may encroach within the required setback along Katella Avenue to the property line. .070 Paving within the Harbor Boulevard/Katella Avenue Intersection Area. Development of properties within this area shall comply with the landscape, hardscape and urban design elements described in Section 5 of The Anaheim Resort Public Realm Landscape Program. Up to one hundred percent (100%) of the setback area may be paved provided: .0701 The paved area will serve pedestrian-related activities (outdoor dining, access to retail stores integrated with hotel/motel developments, and similar uses); and .0702 Landscaping shall be designed and installed in conformance with the tree density requirements identified in the Design Plan and depicted in Exhibit 5.6.6.3a (Tree Density Factor Plan). Trees may be provided in decorative containers consistent with the architecture of the project. .080 Site Planning. Properties within the Central Core shall comply with the following: .0801 Ground-floor uses, such as restaurants, retail stores and other similar types of businesses that attract pedestrians adjacent to the right-of-way, shall be provided adjacent to Central Core streets. .0802 Direct pedestrian access shall be provided to uses on the ground floor of buildings from the sidewalk adjacent to the street. Accessory uses for hotels may also provide entries and openings from inside the hotel building. .0803 Buildings shall be placed on parcels so that a minimum of 60% of the property frontage is occupied by building; if this is not possible, closely spaced vertical trees shall be planted at the building setback line in order to create a "green mass" which has the effect of enclosing the street in a manner similar to the effect of a building mass. .0804 New buildings added to existing development sites should be located adjacent to the setback line, and parking concealed from view; .0805 Uses likely to attract pedestrians, such as outdoor dining should be placed within the setback area along Harbor Boulevard. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-61 .0806 Uses intended primarily to attract automobiles are prohibited, such as drive- through restaurants. .0807 Large, blank, undifferentiated building elevations and monolithic building masses that would be visible from the public right-of-way are prohibited. (Ord. 5453 § 1 (part); September 27, 1994: Ord. 5920 1 (part); June 8, 2004: Ord. 6031 § 64 (part); August 22, 2006: Ord. 6141 § 3; April 14, 2009.) 18.116.140 OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING REQUIREMENTS. All vehicle accessways and parking and loading areas shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 18.42 ( Parking and Loading) of this code, except as provided herein. .010 Location of Required Parking Spaces. All parking areas shall comply with the provisions of subsection 18.42.050 (Location of Parking); provided, however, that: .0101 Parking areas shall be permitted to encroach into required setback areas in compliance with the provisions of Section 18.116.090. (Structural Setbacks - Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area .0102 No parking is permitted between the ultimate right-of-way and the building setback line. .0103 Parking may be located between the front building setback line and the building face provided it is screened by a continuous hedge, wall or berm (or combination thereof) with a minimum height of 36 inches. .0104 Arrival and visitor drop-off areas may be located adjacent to the front building setback and are not subject to the screening required for parking areas, provided they present an attractive "front door" appearance as visible from the adjacent public right-of-way. .020 Layout and Design. Layout and design of parking areas and vehicle accessways shall comply with the requirements of Chapter 18.42 (Parking and Loading). .030 Hotel/Motel/Vacation Ownership Passenger Drop-Off Areas. All hotel/motels and vacation ownership resorts shall have a passenger drop-off area located on-site. Passenger drop- off areas (which may include a covered area or porte-cochere) shall be for the purpose of dropping off and picking up passengers and luggage, accommodating valet parking, pedestrian access and safety, and fire access while providing free flow of vehicles. Such areas shall not encroach into the required front yard setback, except as provided in Section 18.116.090 (Structural Setbacks - Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area .040 Parking Lot Plan Review. Parking lot plans, including parking facilities, shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Department and the City Traffic and ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-62 Transportation Manager during Final Site Plan Review and prior to issuance of building permits, and shall, at a minimum, incorporate all applicable Engineering Standards and shall contain the following information. .0401 Dimensions for internal spacing, circulation and landscaped areas; .0402 Curbing, stall markings, signing and other traffic control devices; .0403 Location and height of lighting fixtures; .0404 Location, dimensions and accessibility of trash containers for refuse trucks; .0405 Location of fire hydrants and fire accessways; .0406 Location and height of perimeter walls; .0407 Tour bus and/or shuttle parking and loading; .0408 Grade elevations and ramps associated with parking facilities; .0409 Location of utility devices and other related above-ground features utility poles); and .0410 Delivery truck parking/loading areas and bicycle racks. .050 Paving. All permanent off-street parking facilities, including access aisles and driveways, shall be permanently paved (not to include turf block). Such surfacing, as well as striping, signing, and directional markings, shall be maintained in good condition at all times. .060 Temporary parking. Temporary parking facilities shall be paved and screened with landscaping in accordance with Section 18.116.100 (Screening, Walls, Fences Landscaping and Lighting - Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area and shall be subject to the review and joint approval of the City Traffic and Transportation Manager and the City Manager. Such facilities shall be permitted for a period not to exceed one year, but may be renewed for up to a total of five years in one year increments subject to the review and approval of the City Traffic and Transportation Manager. Permitted fencing shall be in accordance with the following: .0601 The location, height and color of fencing/walls for temporary parking facilities shall be approved in connection with the temporary parking lot plan. .0602 Permitted fence/wall materials include, but are not limited to, decorative wrought- iron, coated chain link and decorative masonry blocks. .0603 Scrim, in a color and design approved in connection with the temporary parking lot plan, shall be affixed to the exterior side of the chain link fencing facing the public right-of- way and adjacent properties. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-63 .0604 The maximum fence/wall height shall be twelve (12) feet; except that within a twenty (20) foot setback from an adjacent residential zone boundary or property within the Specific Plan Area encompassed by the MHP Overlay as shown on Exhibit 3.3.32a of the Specific Plan document entitled “Mobile Home Park (MHP)” Overlay Zone, the maximum fence/wall height shall be eight feet; and further provided that fence/wall heights greater than eight feet shall not cause a shade/shadow impact on adjacent properties wherein outdoor active areas or structures that have windows that normally receive sunlight are covered by shadows for more than 50 percent (50%) of the sunlight hours. (Ord. 5769; May 1, 2001.) .070 Parking Markings and Separations. All parking spaces shall be clearly and permanently outlined on the surface of the parking facility in accordance with engineering standards on file with the City. Parking shall be separated from buildings, sidewalks, and plazas by landscaped areas having a minimum width of five feet. A six-inch continuous raised curb shall be provided on all parking stalls (except parallel parking) heading into a sidewalk, planting area, or setback area. Parking shall be separated from any abutting property line by sideyard setback landscaping and, by a minimum six inch curb, and. Parking shall be screened from view of public rights-of-way and adjacent properties in compliance with the Design PlanSection 18.16.100 (Screening Walls, Fences, Landscaping and Lighting, Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area (Ord. 5998 § 74; October 25, 2005.) .080 Driveway Abandonment. When use of a driveway to a public street is abandoned or otherwise discontinued, the owner, upon receipt of notice from the Public Works-Engineering Department, shall remove all driveway pavement, curb and gutter; and, shall replace the curb, gutter and sidewalk, and landscape the area to match the adjacent landscaped areas. .090 Required Improvement of Parking Areas. All parking areas shall be improved in compliance with Section 18.42.090 (Parking Lot Improvements and Landscaping); provided further that all portions of vehicular parking lots not used for parking stalls or circulation shall be planted, irrigated and maintained in accordance with the standards listed below and the Design Plan. .0901 Minimum Number of Trees. Surface parking lots shall be landscaped and maintained with a minimum of one twenty-four (24) inch box tree per each five parking spaces, which trees shall be equally spaced. Trees shall have a spreading canopy that is sufficient to cover at least thirty percent (30%) of the parking surface with the tree canopy within five years of installation. Tree wells shall be designed with decorative paving and/or landscaped with shrubs and/or ground cover. .0902 Size of Planters. There shall be an average of forty-eight (48) square feet of planter area provided for each tree required in the above subsection with a minimum dimension of five feet, provided that the planter area for new trees planted in existing legal nonconforming parking lots may be reduced to a minimum dimension and design approved by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager. .0903 Minimum Width of Perimeter Landscaping. Parking structures shall have a landscaped area with a minimum width of ten (10) feet provided along the peripheral edges of ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-64 the parking structure. Such areas shall be landscaped and maintained with a combination of shrubs, ground cover and trees. Adjacent to any parking structure, trees shall be provided and maintained consisting of at least one twenty-four (24) inch box tree for each ten (10) linear feet of parking facility perimeter. Such trees may be either grouped informally or formally. .0904 Tree Branches. Tree branches shall be trimmed to ensure that the lowest tree branches are more than six feet above the finish grade at the base of the tree to prevent damage from automobiles. .100 Conformance with the Design Plan. Tree, shrub and ground cover selection and planting design shall conform with the Design Plan. .110 Parking Space and Access Design. Layout and design of parking areas and vehicle accessways shall comply with the requirements of Sections 18.42.060 (Parking Dimensions and Access) and 18.42.070 (Parking Lot Design), and engineering standards on file with the City, except as follows: .1101. Maximum Curb Openings per Street Frontage. The maximum number of curb openings per street frontage shall not exceed the following standards: .01 Parcel width three hundred (300) feet or less: One .02 Parcel width over three hundred (300) feet: Two .03 One additional curb opening may be allowed if it is used as legal access to one or more adjacent parcels. .1102 Driveway Separation and Spacing. There shall be a minimum distance of thirty- six (36) feet between driveways (nearest driveway edge to nearest driveway edge) serving the same parcel, and a minimum distance of forty (40) feet between driveways (nearest driveway edge to nearest driveway edge) serving adjacent parcels. .1103 Driveway Width Dimensions. Driveways shall be a minimum of twenty-four (24) feet wide, and a maximum of thirty-five (35) feet wide, with wider widths subject to the approval of the City’s Traffic and Transportation Manager based on sound engineering practices. .1104 Curb Return. The curb cut shall provide a minimum radius curb return and sight distance clearance in accordance with engineering standards on file with the City, or as otherwise approved by the City’s Traffic and Transportation Manager based on sound engineering practices. .1105 Entry Drive Dimension. A The following minimum entry driveway (throat) of forty (40) feet length shall be provided as indicated below, measured from the nearest point of the ultimate street right-of-way line to the nearest point of the on-site parking area or on-site vehicular accessway to said parking area. Parking shall be designed so as to preclude a car from backing out of a stall and into the forty (40) foot entry driveway in accordance with engineering standards on file with the City. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-65 .01 A forty (40) foot-long driveway is required to serve sixty (60) or fewer parking spaces; .02 A sixty (60) foot-long driveway is required to serve sixty-one to one hundred twenty (61-120) parking spaces; and, .03 An one hundred (100) foot long driveway is required to serve greater than one hundred twenty (120) parking spaces. (Ord. 5998 § 75; October 25, 2005.) .120 Minimum Parking Requirements. The minimum number, type and design of off-street parking spaces shall comply with the requirements of Section 18.42.040 (Non-Residential Parking Requirements). .130 Truck Loading. Truck loading facilities shall comply with the requirements of Section 18.42.100 (Loading Requirements) and engineering standards on file with the City. A minimum of one truck dock or truck loading area shall be provided for each hotel or motel. (Ord. 5998 § 76; October 25, 2005.) .140 Bus Parking Areas. Hotels/motels shall provide space for on-site bus parking subject to the approval of the City's Traffic and Transportation Manager and the Planning Department in accordance with the latest Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) Bus Facilities Handbook Guidelines, or as otherwise approved by the City’s Traffic and Transportation Manager based on sound engineering practice. (Ord. 5453 § 1 (part); September 27, 1994: Ord. 5920 § 1 (part); June 8, 2004: Ord. 6031 § 64 (part); August 22, 2006.) .150 Parking Structures. Parking structures shall comply with the following requirements: .1501 Parking structures shall have a landscaped area with a minimum width of ten (10) feet provided along the peripheral edges of the parking structure. Such areas shall be landscaped and maintained with a combination of shrubs, ground cover and trees. Adjacent to any parking structure, trees shall be provided and maintained consisting of at least one twenty-four (24) inch box tree for each ten (10) linear feet of parking facility perimeter. Such trees may be either grouped informally or formally. .1502 Vehicles parked in parking structures shall be concealed from view through a combination of visual barriers, planting, or other means; open sided facilities that allow complete views of parked vehicles are not permitted. .1503 The elevations of parking facilities visible from public streets shall be articulated; such articulation may consist of indentations in the structure, changes in color, addition of applied elements to the surface of the facility, or other devices, including the provision of a landscape buffer with a minimum width of ten (10) feet. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-66 .1504 Parking structures shall be constructed of masonry materials that are predominantly light in color. .1505 Pedestrian and vehicular entrances shall be clearly identified and easily accessible to minimize pedestrian/vehicle conflict. 18.116.150 REQUIREMENTS FOR VACATION OWNERSHIP RESORTS. .010 Purpose of Section. The City Council has determined that vacation ownership resorts constitute a commercial use similar to hotel/motel facilities. Due to the mixed method of operation, hybrid ownership, the potential generation of large numbers of people and vehicles, and the potential impact on the city's tourism-related facilities, special criteria are warranted for the development of vacation ownership resorts in addition to the requirements of the underlying zone. .020 Limits on Occupancy. Occupancy, or right of occupancy, of any vacation ownership resort unit (including different units within the same facility) in a vacation ownership resort facility by a person or entity shall be limited to no more than thirty (30) consecutive days nor more than a total of sixty (60) days during any consecutive twelve (12) month period. Units which do not meet such criteria shall be considered to be residential units and shall be prohibited. .030 Required Zoning. Vacation ownership resorts and conversions to vacation ownership resorts shall be permitted in the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Zone, excluding property encompassed by the Mobile Home Park (MHP) Overlay as identified on Exhibit 3.3.2a3, (Mobile Home Park (MHP) Overlay Zone) of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Document, subject to obtaining a Conditional Use Permit and the requirements of Section 18.116.150.050 (Development Standards). The conversion of vacation ownership resorts to residential condominium use is prohibited. .040 Related Uses. Vacation ownership resorts may include other uses, either as accessory uses to the vacation ownership resort use or as independent facilities, so long as the specific use is allowed by the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan zone designation. Such uses shall meet all city laws and requirements. .050 Development Standards. The development standards established in the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan zone designation shall be applicable to vacation ownership resorts and the conversion of existing facilities to vacation ownership resort use. Additional requirements may be imposed by the Planning Commission/City Council as follows: .0501 Required facilities. The Planning Commission and/or City Council may require the provision of facilities, amenities, or design features usually associated with hotels/motels (for example, lobbies, check-in areas, registration desks, service closets, laundry facilities, and the like) to ensure that the vacation ownership resort will adequately function in the same manner as a hotel/motel facility. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-67 .0502 Parking. Additional parking may be required if the design of the facility and units indicates that additional parking is necessary. .0503 Setback, height, landscaping, signage requirements and recreation amenities. Additional restrictions may be required to ensure that the facility is adequately buffered from surrounding uses. .0504 Kitchen facilities suitable for visitors may be permitted by the Conditional Use Permit permitting the vacation ownership resort. .060 Conversion to Vacation Ownership Uses. The following standards shall apply to conversions of existing facilities to vacation ownership resort uses. Any conversion of an existing facility to vacation ownership resort use shall be required to meet the same standards as new facilities. .0601 The conversion of any type of existing unit or facility to vacation ownership resort use shall be subject to the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. Conversion shall be evaluated in terms of the physical suitability of the units or facilities for vacation ownership resort use. Items to be considered shall include the general maintenance and upkeep of the structures; general physical condition of the facility; age of the structures; suitability of the units for the type of occupancy proposed; the age, condition, and general repair of any recreational facility; and, conformance with appropriate building, safety and fire standards. The facility shall be upgraded to mitigate any identified deficiencies. Conversions shall also be evaluated to ensure that the conversion does not create or add to the shortage of the particular type of unit proposed to be converted in the city as a whole or in any particular area of the city. .0602 All facilities converted to vacation ownership resort use shall meet all applicable city requirements, including building, safety, and fire standards, as well as the other requirements of this section. .0603 Conversions which would significantly reduce the overall number of conventional overnight accommodations in the city for visitors shall not be allowed. The effect of the conversion on existing conventional overnight accommodations shall be quantified by means of a survey prepared to the satisfaction of the city. The survey shall include a representative sample of the existing unit supply in terms of location, price and type of unit. (Ord. 5769 § 1; May 1, 2001.) .070 Information Required for Applications. In addition to any information requirements established by other applicable Sections of the Anaheim Municipal Code, the following information shall also be submitted as part of any application to develop or institute a vacation ownership resort: .0701 Typical floor plans for each vacation ownership resort unit type; .0702 The phasing of the construction of the vacation ownership resort use; ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-68 .0703 The type of vacation ownership resort method to be used (fee simple, leasehold, tenancy-in-common, license, membership, and the like) and how such use may be created; .0704 The identification of vacation ownership resort intervals and the number of intervals per unit; .0705 Identification of which units are in the vacation ownership resort program, the use of the units not included in the program, and the method whereby other units may be added, deleted, or substituted; .0706 A description and identification of any accessory uses which are proposed in conjunction with the vacation ownership resort; .0707 A description of the availability of the vacation ownership resort project, including accessory uses, to the general public; .0708 The provisions made for management and maintenance of the project and indication of a contact person or party responsible for the day-to-day operation of the project; .0709 A description of the type and operation of any other uses (commercial and/or recreational) which are included in the facility; .0710 The formula, fraction or percentage, of the common expenses and any voting rights assigned to each vacation ownership resort unit and where applicable, to each unit within the project which unit is not subject to the vacation ownership resort program; .0711 Any restrictions on the use, occupancy, alteration, or alienation of vacation ownership resort units; .0712 A parking demand study prepared by an independent traffic engineer licensed by the State of California or such other study as approved by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager and provided to the city by the applicant at applicant's sole expense; .0713 A description of the method to be used consistent and in compliance with the provisions of Chapter 2.12 (Transient Occupancy Tax) of the Anaheim Municipal Code, to collect and transmit the transient occupancy tax to the city; .0714 Any other information or documentation the applicant, city staff, the Planning Commission and/or City Council deems reasonably necessary to the consideration of the project, including any required environmental or fiscal impact report documents; .0715 Applications for the conversion of any portion of an existing facility to a vacation ownership resort shall include the following information, as well as the other information required by this section: ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-69 .01 A property report describing in detail the condition and useful life of the roof, foundations, and mechanical, electrical, plumbing, and structural elements prepared by a licensed engineer or architect, .02 A comprehensive list of all improvements, upgrading, and additional facilities proposed, and .03 A report prepared by a licensed engineer or architect describing all repairs and replacements needed, if any, to bring all structures into substantial compliance with the Uniform Building Code, Uniform Housing Code, National Electrical Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, Uniform Fire Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, and any other uniform building related codes as modified and adopted by the city. Approval shall be subject to receipt of such information and applicant’s failure to submit such documentation may be grounds for disapproval. .080 Building Permits. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the legal property owner shall be required to provide the following: .0801 Copies of all relevant enabling documentation, including, but not limited to, articles of incorporation, bylaws, declarations of covenants, conditions, and restrictions, and membership or license agreements; and .0802 Copies of all State Department of Real Estate applications and permits, including any public report issued. .090 Findings of Fact Necessary for Approval. In addition to the findings of fact otherwise required by any other provision of the Anaheim Municipal Code, approval of any conditional use permit for a vacation ownership resort shall require the following finding: That there are adequate visitor-serving facilities in the City and that the project will not preclude or significantly reduce the development of other needed tourist facilities or hotel or motel facilities. .100 Vacation Ownership Resort Subject to Transient Occupancy Tax. Notwithstanding any other provision of the Anaheim Municipal Code, all vacation ownership resort units shall be subject to the payment of the transient occupancy tax as otherwise prescribed by Chapter 2.12 (Transient Occupancy Tax). No vacation ownership resort shall be established as a conditional use unless the property owner/developer establishes and implements a method of ownership acceptable to the city which guarantees the city’s collection of Transient Occupancy Tax for all vacation ownership units as if they were hotel rooms. The city reserves the right to audit all such vacation ownership resorts. The manager of the facility (or if the facility has no manager, the owner of the facility) shall be deemed the “operator” within the meaning of Chapter 2.12 entitled (Transient Occupancy Tax) of the Anaheim Municipal Code for purposes of collection and remittance of the tax. (Ord. 5453 § 1 (part); September 27, 1994: Ord. 5920 § 1 (part); June 8, 2004: Ord. 6031 § 64 (part); August 22, 2006.) ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-70 18.116.160 SIGN REGULATIONS. The purpose of this section is to recognize the function of signs in this Zone, to provide for their inclusion under this section of the Anaheim Municipal Code, and to regulate and control all matters relating to such signs, except the construction thereof. All definitions in Chapter 18.44 (Signs) shall apply except as listed below. .010 Definitions Pertaining to Signs. For the purpose of this chapter, the following abbreviations, terms, phrases and words shall be construed as specified below: .0101 “Animated Sign.” Any sign that uses movement or change of lighting to depict or simulate movement, action or to otherwise create a special effect or scene. .0102 “Area of Sign.” The area of a sign shall include the entire area within any type of perimeter or border which may enclose the outer limits of any writing, representation, emblem, logo, figure or character. The area of the sign having no such perimeter or border shall be computed by enclosing the entire area constituting the advertising message within the smallest polygon required to enclose all typographic/graphic elements, in compliance with the Design Plan. .0103 “Area of Sign Face.” Refers to the permitted sign copy area as shown on the Anaheim Resort Sign Standard Details on file in the Planning Department. .0104 “Beacon.” Any light with one or more beams directed into the atmosphere or directed at one or more points not on the same parcel as the light source; also, any light with one or more beams that rotate or move. .0105 “Business Information Sign.” Any informational sign (not a project identification sign) on the project premises that relates to the principal business or use of the premises upon which the sign is erected. This sign type may include signs which direct attention to a business commodity, service, or other activity which is sold, offered, or conducted on the premises upon which the sign is located, or to which it is affixed. .0106 “Can-Type Sign.” A box-shaped sign which has copy on the outside of its surface and is internally illuminated. .0107 “Canopy Sign.” Any sign that is a part of or attached to an awning, canopy, or other fabric, plastic, or structural protective cover over a door, entrance, window, or outdoor service area. A marquee sign as defined herein is not a canopy sign. .0108 “Cornice.” Any prominent, continuous horizontally projecting feature extending from a wall or other structure. .0109 “Emitting Sign.” Any sign that releases smoke, steam, water, bubbles or other solids, liquids or gases as a device for advertising. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-71 .0110 “Entrance/Exit Sign.” A sign located at a driveway entrance displaying a directional symbol and/or directional copy and which may include the name and/or symbol/logo of the business. .0111 “Exposed Neon Sign.” A sign where the neon or argon/mercury illuminated glass tubing is visible and not shielded from view by any material or sign structure. .0112 “Flag.” Any fabric attached to a flagpole and complying with Section 18.116.070 (Uses - Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area 1) and containing distinctive colors, patterns, or symbols, and used as a symbol of a government or other entity. .0113 “Informational, Regulatory and Directional Sign System (IRD Sign System).” Any group of signs that are intentionally designed to be a unified family of signs through a consistent use of color, typography, graphics, design detailing and structural detailing. .0114 “Landscape Sign.” An arrangement of any plant type (flowers, shrubs, etc.), which spells out words or resembles a symbol or a figure. .0115 “Magnetic Sign.” A sign which is magnetically attached to a surface. .0116 “Noncommercial Message Sign.” A sign displaying political or social (public information) messages. .0117 “On-Site Directional Guidance Sign.” Any sign located on-site and not visible from the public right-of-way, giving direction for on-site pedestrian or vehicular circulation. .0118 “On-Site Directory Sign.” Any on-site sign exhibiting the names and locations of on-site uses and/or facilities, and intended to facilitate the movement of patrons or visitors throughout the site. The sign may display a site map. .0119 “Open Pan Channel Letters With Interior Neon Illumination.” Individual channel letters formed as a sign can structure with neon tubing molded to fit the interior wall of the sign can and fitted with a clear transparent face panel allowing the halo from the neon tubing to be visible through the transparent face panel. .0120 “Outdoor Advertising.” Advertising on any board, fence, sign device, structure or building, or the placing thereon of any poster, bill, printing, painting, device or any advertising matter of any kind whatsoever; and the pasting, posting, printing, painting, nailing or tacking or otherwise fastening of any handbill, card, banner, sign, poster, advertisement or notice of any kind upon any property or place. Said term shall not include any signs or notices posted or displayed by any public officer in the performance of a public duty or a private person in giving a legal notice. .0121 “Parapet Sign.” A sign attached to a vertical wall extending from and above the actual roof line and intended to visually heighten the building. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-72 .0122 “Pole Sign.” A sign which is affixed to one or more poles attached to the ground and which is constructed in a manner which does not fully obstruct the view of the area between the sign and the ground. .0123 “Readerboard.” See Section 18.44.030 (Definitions) “Marquee.” .0124.0123 “Raceway.” A metal box containing wiring, transformers and housings for a sign. .0125 “Real Estate Sign.” Any sign and sign structure of a temporary nature relating to the sale, lease or other disposition of real property. .0126.0124 “Restaurant Menu Board.” An illuminated or non-illuminated glass case which is used to display a restaurant menu. Said case may be built-in, visible through a window or affixed to the exterior building wall and shall be located immediately adjacent to the main entrance to the restaurant. .0127.0125 “Reverse Pan Channel Letters with Neon Halo Illumination.” Individual letters formed as a sign can structure where the front surface is opaque and the back is open. Neon tubing is molded to fit the form of the can structure and is placed inside the can structure. The light from the neon shines out the opening in the back of the letter and reflects off the surface of the building or structure where the letter is mounted. At night, this reflection appears to be a halo around the opaque letterform. .0128.0126 “Storefront.” A wall of a business containing display windows and a public entry. .0129.0127 “Structure.” The supports, uprights, bracing, guy rods, cables and framework of a sign or outdoor advertising display. .0130.0128 “Typeface.” The general form, structure, style, or character common to all elements comprising an alphabet. .0131.0129 “Window Identification Sign.” Any sign bearing only the name and/or logo and/or address of the business occupying the premises; and, consisting of letters and/or numbers permanently affixed to the window, and made of gold leaf, paint, stencil, or other such material. .0132 “Window Sign.” Any sign, picture, symbol, or combination thereof, designed to communicate information about an activity, business, commodity, event, sale, or service, that is placed inside a window or upon the window panes or glass of a building and which is visible from the exterior side of the window, excluding any window identification sign. .020 Signs - General. .0201 Application. Sign standards and regulations contained within this section apply to properties within the Specific Plan area. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-73 .0202 Administrative Provisions - Sign Regulations. The location, size, type, construction and all other matters relating to signs in the Specific Plan area shall be regulated and controlled exclusively by the provisions of this chapter except to the extent reference is expressly made in this chapter to any other provision of the Anaheim Municipal Code. In the event of any conflict between the provisions of this chapter and any other provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code so referenced herein, the provisions of this chapter shall govern and prevail. All signs and all applications therefore shall be exclusively administered by the Planning Director except those signs which may be sought in conjunction with a conditional use permit or a zone variance. .0203 Coordinated Sign Program. All signs on a property shall be designed as part of a coordinated architectural, informational, regulatory and directional sign system with a consistent design detailing, typeface and color system. The capital letter height of all tenant identification copy shall be the same on a single multi-tenant sign face. Multi-tenant wall signs shall either be all wall signs or all canopy signs except as provided elsewhere in this chapter for hotel/motel accessory uses. While not required, all multi-tenant signs are encouraged to consist of one consistent typeface for all tenants or one color for all sign copy .0204 Resolution of Inconsistent Provisions. Notwithstanding any other provision of this code to the contrary, all provisions governing signs or advertising structures of any type in this Zone shall be contained within this chapter; provided, however, the provisions of Section 18.44.170 (Temporary Signs - Special Event Permit) and Chapters 4.04 (Outdoor Advertising Signs and Structures - General) and 4.09 (Advertising of Motel and Hotel Rental Rates) of the Anaheim Municipal Code shall apply to signs and advertising structures in this Zone to the extent such provisions are not inconsistent with this chapter. .0205 Variances From Sign Requirements. No person shall install or maintain any sign in this zone, except as permitted herein; provided, however, that any requirements or restrictions may be waived, in whole or in part, upon such conditions as may be imposed by the Planning Commission or the City Council, by a zone variance processed and approved in accordance with all procedures, requirements and restrictions established for variances pursuant to Chapters 18.60 (Procedures) of the Anaheim Municipal Code. .0206 Signs Approved in Conjunction with Conditional Use Permits. Approval of any conditional use permit shall be deemed to constitute approval of any on-site signs which are otherwise permitted in the Specific Plan area unless, as part of the action approving the conditional use permit, more restrictive sign requirements are imposed. .0207 Legal Nonconforming Signs - General. Any sign or other advertising display or structure of whatever type or nature, other than an illegal sign, which violates or otherwise does not comply with the applicable requirements of this chapter shall be subject to compliance with the regulations prescribed herein in the time and manner hereinafter set forth. .01 Legal Nonconforming Signs - Continuation and Termination. Any legal nonconforming sign or sign structure in existence on the effective date of this chapter which violates or otherwise does not conform to the provisions hereof shall be removed, altered or ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-74 replaced so as to conform to the requirements of this chapter (hereinafter the "abatement") in accordance with the following: For signage on properties adjacent to Harbor Boulevard between Interstate-5 and Orangewood Avenue and Katella Avenue between Walnut Street and Interstate-5, the signage shall be removed, altered or replaced within five years after the date said sign first becomes nonconforming to the provisions of this chapter, or on or before December 31, 1999, whichever is later; For signage on properties other than those adjacent to Harbor Boulevard between I-5 and Orangewood Avenue and Katella Avenue between Walnut Street and I-5, or identified in Table 116-M (Real Estate Signs), the signage shall be removed, altered or replaced within eight years after the date said sign first becomes nonconforming to the provisions of this chapter, or on or before December 31, 2002, whichever is later; For signage on properties adjacent to the south side of Orangewood Avenue; adjacent to Harbor Boulevard, south of Orangewood Avenue; adjacent to Wilken Way; and, adjacent to Chapman Avenue, the signage shall be removed, altered or replaced within fifteen (15) years after the date said sign first becomes nonconforming to the provisions or this chapter, or on or before December 31, 2019, whichever is later; Provided, however, in no event shall such abatement be required unless and until the owner of said sign has received not less than one year's advance written notice from the Planning Director requiring the removal or alteration of sign. .02 Notwithstanding the foregoing: Any advertising display which was lawfully erected which does not conform to the provisions of this chapter, but whose use has ceased, or the structure upon which the display exists has been abandoned by its owner, for a period of not less than ninety (90) days, shall be removed, altered or replaced so as to conform to the provisions of this chapter within six months from the date of receipt of a written order of abatement from the Planning Director requiring such abatement. Costs incurred by the city in removing an abandoned display shall be borne by or charged to the legal owner of the real property upon which said sign is located. Any advertising display structure which does not conform to the provisions of this chapter which has been more than fifty percent (50%) destroyed, and the destruction is other than facial copy replacement, and said structure cannot be repaired within thirty (30) days of the date of its destruction shall be removed, altered or replaced so as to conform to the provisions of this chapter within six months from the date of receipt of a written order of abatement from the Planning Director requiring such abatement. Any advertising display which does not conform to the provisions of this chapter, whose owner, outside of a change of copy, requests permission to remodel and remodels that advertising display, or expands or enlarges the building or intensifies the land use upon which the advertising display is located, and the display is affected by the construction, enlargement, or remodeling, or the cost of construction, enlargement or remodeling of the ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-75 advertising display exceeds fifty percent (50%) of the cost of reconstruction of the building, shall remove, alter or replace such sign so as to conform to the requirements of this chapter in conjunction with said project. Any advertising display which does not conform to the provisions of this chapter, whose owner seeks relocation thereof and relocates the advertising display shall be required to conform said relocated advertising display to the provisions of this chapter within six months from the date of receipt of a written order of abatement from the Planning Director requiring such abatement. Any advertising display which does not conform to the provisions of this chapter for which there has been an agreement between the advertising display owner and the city for its removal as of any given date shall remove such sign in accordance with the provisions of said agreement. Any temporary advertising display erected pursuant to a special events permit issued by the city shall be removed as specified under Section 18.44.170 (Temporary Signs - Special Event Permit) or within such other time as expressly authorized by the city. Any advertising display which may become a danger to the public or is unsafe shall be removed, altered or replaced so as to conform to the requirements of this chapter within thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of a written order of abatement from the Planning Director requiring such removal or alteration. Any advertising display which poses an immediate danger to public health or safety, shall be abated as provided in the written order of abatement from the Planning Director. Any advertising display which is determined by the City Engineer to constitute a traffic hazard not created by the relocation of streets or highways or by acts of the city shall be removed, altered or replaced so as to conform to the requirements of this chapter as provided in the written order of abatement from the Planning Director requiring such removal or alteration. Any other advertising display which does not conform to the provisions of this chapter for which the city is exempt from the payment of compensation in conjunction with requiring its removal as specified in Chapter 2.5 of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code of the State of California, or any successor provisions thereto shall be subject to removal as specified in said code. Illegal Signs. “Illegal Signs” as defined in Section 18.44.030 (Definitions) shall be removed, altered or replaced so as to conform to the requirements of this chapter within six months following the effective date of this chapter. .0208 Minimum Sight Distance Requirements for Freestanding Signs. A line-of-sight triangle is hereby established at each corner of every intersection of two streets. Two legs of the triangle shall extend twenty-five (25) feet along the ultimate right-of-way line of each street right-of-way (except at the intersection of Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue where the legs of the triangle shall extend twenty-five (25) feet along the back of the sidewalk) and the third leg ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-76 shall connect the termini of each of the other two legs. No sign above twenty-four (24) inches in height (as measured from the finished grade of the adjacent sidewalk) shall be permitted within the line-of-sight triangle. Any freestanding sign installation located within fifty (50) feet of any driveway, including driveways on adjacent properties, shall meet the provisions of engineering standards on file in the City. .0209 Lighted Signs. No artificial light of whatever type or nature used in conjunction with, or for the purpose of, lighting any sign shall be so erected or constructed or placed, nor shall any substance or material capable of reflecting light be so placed, as to result in directing such artificial light into any structure used exclusively for residential purposes. For the purpose of this provision, structures devoted to hotel and motel use are not to be construed as structures used exclusively for residential purposes. .01 Indirect Lighting. No sign lighted by any type of indirect lighting shall have any such lighting which exceeds eight hundred (800) milliamps rated capacity nor shall any sign lighted by neon or similar materials have any such neon or similar material which exceeds thirty (30) milliamps rated capacity. .02 Intensity of Illumination. The approval of any illuminated sign shall not be final until thirty (30) days after installation, during which period the Planning Director may order the dimming of any illumination found to be excessively brilliant and no sign permit shall be valid until such order has been carried out to an extent satisfactory to the Planning Director. For purposes of this section, illumination shall be considered excessively brilliant when it prevents normal perception of objects or buildings beyond or in the vicinity of the sign, or when it shines directly onto any residentially developed property. .0210 Signs Required By Law. Nothing contained in this chapter shall prevent the erection, location or construction of any sign on private property where such erection, location or construction of said sign is required by any law; provided, however, no such sign erected, placed or maintained pursuant to this provision shall exceed four square feet in area except to the extent a greater sign area is expressly required by law. .0211 Signs in the Public Rights-of-Way. Signs shall be prohibited in any public rights- of-way as provided in Section 4.04.130 (Prohibition of Signs in the Public Right-of-Way) of the Anaheim Municipal Code except signs and gateways as described in the Design Plan and private Anaheim Resort business identification freestanding monument signs within the ultimate public right-of-way along Katella Avenue, provided an Encroachment License is approved for such signs by the Public Works Department. .0212 Address Identification. Identify the address of each building and each tenant with an exterior public entrance in six-inch high numbers, a maximum of three feet above the main entry doorway or within three feet from either side of the main entry. .030 Permitted, Conditionally Permitted and Prohibited Signs. Table 116-J contains permitted and prohibited sign types. It also includes sign types permitted subject to the approval of a Conditional Use Permit pursuant to and in accordance with the applicable provisions of Chapters 18.60 (Procedures), 18.66 (Conditional Use Permits) and this chapter. This section is ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-77 not intended to conditionally allow signs prohibited by this chapter or to change the standards contained herein, but is intended to provide a mechanism to address special circumstances. Business and identification signs shall comply with the Design Plan and shall consist of permanent non-changeable copy except as provided for changeable copy signs as set forth in Table 116-K. TABLE 116-K PERMITTED, CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED AND PROHIBITED SIGNS P Permitted by Right C Conditional Use Permit N Prohibited Sign Type C-R District Special Provisions A-frame or “sandwich board” signs N Animated signs N Attachments or “riders” to signs N Automotive Service Station Signs C Subject to Table 116-K of Section 18.116.[PHONE REDACTED] (Automotive Service Station Signs) and Planning Standard Detail No. 7. Awning (Canopy Signs) P Canopy signs on awning valances are considered wall signs and are subject to the provisions of wall signs as provided in Section 18.116.160 Table 116-S; Table 116-T; and Table 116-U; and, the following provisions: Such signs shall be permitted on awning valances, provided awnings shall not be permitted to project over or into a public right- of-way and the awnings shall be an integral part of the building design. Said signs shall be pedestrian oriented; Said signs shall not be internally illuminated; Only fifteen percent (15%) of the entire surface of the awning may be utilized for the sign; Said sign may include the company name and/or company symbol/logo; and, Up to one canopy/awning may have “The Anaheim ResortTM” logo located on the canopy/awning in a size and location approved by the Planning Director. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-78 TABLE 116-K PERMITTED, CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED AND PROHIBITED SIGNS P Permitted by Right C Conditional Use Permit N Prohibited Sign Type C-R District Special Provisions Beacon lights or beacon signs, when the intent of such signs is advertising and not entertainment, which shall not have adverse glare on adjoining properties. N Billboards N Business information signs N Can-type signs which incorporate translucent copy and translucent background. N Changeable copy signs C Including electronic message boards for a theater, entertainment facility, convention center, amusement park; for hotel complexes and recreational vehicle or campsite parks provided the site on which the use is located is a minimum of four acres in area; or, for hotel complexes when the sign is not visible from any public right-of-way, as may be seen from a point six feet above ground level. In addition, the following provisions shall apply to such signs: In addition to the permitted business identification wall signs, changeable copy signs shall be wall signs provided the top of such sign is below the cornice of the building or twenty-five (25) feet, whichever is lower, except theaters or entertainment facilities, which may have a changeable copy sign which displays identification and program information, the name of the theater or auditorium and it may be a marquee sign. Changeable copy signs for hotel complexes which are not visible from any public right-of-way, as may be seen from a point six feet above ground level may exceed the twenty- five (25) foot height limitation subject to compliance with applicable height standards. Such signs shall not be visible from residentially developed properties. The design of such signs shall be integrated with the architecture of the building. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-79 TABLE 116-K PERMITTED, CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED AND PROHIBITED SIGNS P Permitted by Right C Conditional Use Permit N Prohibited Sign Type C-R District Special Provisions Animation and bare bulbs are allowed as they pertain to bulb matrix technology (a technology used for reader board changeable message signs). Except under the above provisions, no other changeable copy signs are otherwise permitted. “Come-on” signs “Sale Today,” “Stop,” “Look,” “Going out of Business,” etc.). N “Closed and Open” Signs P Subject to Table 116-O of this Section. Emitting signs N Exposed neon signs. N Flashing or traveling light signs. N Fluorescent colors on signs except for colors on company symbols. N Freestanding Monument Signs. P Subject to Table 116-P of Section 18.116.160.040 and Planning Standard Detail Nos. 5, 6, 7 or 8. Inflatable advertising display N Informational, Regulatory and Directional (IRD) signs NOT visible from the Public Right- of-Way. P Subject to Table 116-R of Section 18.116.[PHONE REDACTED] (Informational, Regulatory and Directional (IRD) signs NOT visible from the Public Right-of-Way). Informational, Regulatory and Directional (IRD) signs VISIBLE from the Public Right-of-Way P Subject to Section 18.[PHONE REDACTED] (Informational, Regulatory and Directional (IRD) signs VISIBLE from the Public Right-of-Way). Landscape signs. N ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-80 TABLE 116-K PERMITTED, CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED AND PROHIBITED SIGNS P Permitted by Right C Conditional Use Permit N Prohibited Sign Type C-R District Special Provisions Magnetic signs. N Off-premises or off-site directional signs. N On-site directional guidance and on-site directory signs which are not part of a coordinated architectural, informational, directional and regulatory sign system. N Paper, cloth and plastic streamer signs, and flags, banners and fixed balloons except as otherwise permitted pursuant to Section 18.44.170 (Temporary Signs –Special Event Permit). N Painted signs on exterior walls. N Parapet signs N Except as otherwise permitted for automotive service stations pursuant to section 18.116.[PHONE REDACTED] (Automotive Service Station). Pennants or pennant-type banners except as otherwise permitted pursuant to Section 18.44.170 (Temporary Signs – Special Event Permit). N Where visible from a public right-of-way and/or adjacent property, except as otherwise permitted pursuant to Section 18.44.170 (Temporary Signs –Special Event Permit). Pole signs N Political Campaign signs P Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, political campaign signs shall be permitted on private property subject to 18.44.210.030 (Political Signs) with the exception that such signs shall comply with the following: ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-81 TABLE 116-K PERMITTED, CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED AND PROHIBITED SIGNS P Permitted by Right C Conditional Use Permit N Prohibited Sign Type C-R District Special Provisions Sight Distance. Such signs shall comply with the minimum sight distance requirements set forth in paragraph 18.116.[PHONE REDACTED] (Minimum Sight Distance Requirements for Freestanding Signs); Code Compliance. Such signs shall comply with the provisions of Section 4.04.130 (Prohibition of Signs in the Public Right-of- Way); and Compliance with Title 15. Any structure to which a political sign is attached shall comply with all applicable provisions of Title 15 “Building and Housing” of the Anaheim Municipal Code, except that no building permit shall be required for a temporary political campaign sign having a surface area of thirty-five (35) square feet or less and which structure is removed within one hundred and twenty (120) days of its erection or placement, or within thirty (30) days after the election to which the sign relates, whichever occurs first. Portable signs N Product advertising signs soft drinks, cigarettes, etc.). N Projecting signs C As defined in subsection 18.44.030 (Signs) and subject to the following provisions: A maximum sign area of four square feet; One per business or store front Limited to the business name and/or logo Lowest point of sign shall be eight feet above ground level directly below sign. Maximum height to be determined by Conditional Use Permit. Sixteen(16)-foot minimum distance between signs on the same parcel. Thirty (30) inch maximum projection from building face. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-82 TABLE 116-K PERMITTED, CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED AND PROHIBITED SIGNS P Permitted by Right C Conditional Use Permit N Prohibited Sign Type C-R District Special Provisions Externally illuminated signs only. Replicas of official traffic control signs or signs so similar as to be confusing or hazardous to traffic. N Restaurant Menu Board P Subject to the following provisions: One per main entrance to restaurant; Limited to display of restaurant menu only; Shall be permanently affixed to building wall adjacent to main entrance; A maximum sign area per face of 4 square feet; A maximum 3-inch projection from building face; May be internally illuminated. Roof signs N Rotating or revolving signs N Signs attached to trees or landscaping N Signs neither otherwise expressly permitted nor otherwise expressly prohibited in this Zone. C Signs projecting over or into the public right-of-way except as otherwise expressly permitted herein. N ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-83 TABLE 116-K PERMITTED, CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED AND PROHIBITED SIGNS P Permitted by Right C Conditional Use Permit N Prohibited Sign Type C-R District Special Provisions Statues utilized for advertising purposes. N Temporary signs except as otherwise expressly permitted herein. N Vehicle entrance or exit signs which incorporate business name(s) or other advertising not in compliance with Section 18.116.[PHONE REDACTED] and Table 116-N “Informational, Regulatory and Directional (IRD) Signs Visible from the Public Right-of-Way.” N Vehicle signs (signs mounted or displayed on a vehicle for advertising purposes) or the parking or storing of advertising vehicles on public or private property. N Wall Signs P Walls located below the third (3rd) floor level of a building and which signs are located on a property adjacent to and visible from residentially developed properties are not permitted. Subject to Table 116-Q, Table 116-R and Table 116-S of Section 18.116.160.050 (Regulation of Specific Types of Signs) Window Identification Signs P Subject to the following provisions: A maximum sign area of ten percent (10%) of the area of the largest glass windowpane or four square feet, whichever is less, positioned so that views into the premises are not obstructed; The maximum number of signs per lot is subject to the provisions for wall signs indicated in Tables 116-Q 116-R and 116-S; Sign copy is limited to the business name and/or logo; ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-84 TABLE 116-K PERMITTED, CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED AND PROHIBITED SIGNS P Permitted by Right C Conditional Use Permit N Prohibited Sign Type C-R District Special Provisions Painted, screen-printed or leafed letters/symbol on to interior surface of glass; and Only one sign per glass window panel, two maximum per business. Window Signs N Including neon signs and plaques of signs suspended behind the glass and signs painted on display windows with day-glo, or temporary paint (other than permitted window identification signs as defined above (Window Identification Sign)). .0301 Automotive Service Station Signs. All Automotive Service Station Signs shall comply with Table 116-L: TABLE 116-L AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE STATION SIGNS Sign Type Provisions Business Identification Freestanding Monument Sign The sign design and materials shall be subject to Planning Standard Detail No. 7. Information on the sign shall include only the company symbol or logo, company name, special services (such as car wash) and pricing information. If the automotive service station is located on a corner lot, either one of the following shall be permitted: one double-faced freestanding monument sign located at the corner or one double-faced freestanding monument sign per street frontage with each sign located at least seventy-five (75) feet from any intersection. If the automotive service station is not located upon a corner lot, one double-faced freestanding monument sign shall be permitted, located in the approximate middle forty (40) percent of the street frontage of said lot. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-85 TABLE 116-L AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE STATION SIGNS Sign Type Provisions Pricing signs shall conform to the provisions of Division 5, Chapter 14, Article 12, Code Sections 13530-13540, of the Business and Professions Code of the State of California, or any successor provisions thereto. The height of any pricing numbers shall be a minimum of six inches and a maximum of ten (10) inches provided the height is less than the height of the company name and shall be either manually or electronically changeable. Said signs shall be illuminated internally; however, the permanent background portion shall be opaque, with only the message portion being illuminated. Said signs shall be constructed of materials Canopy, Wall, and Parapet Signs Signs shall consist of individually fabricated letters and/or company symbol or logo. Lighted signs may be internally illuminated only. All signs shall be attached to the building or pump island canopy face without the use of visible supports or raceways. Letter height shall be a maximum of eighteen (18) inches. Company symbol or logo height shall be a maximum of twenty- four (24) inches. Signs shall be limited to one exposure for each direction of traffic flow, up to a maximum of four exposures. Lighter Box Gasoline Service Station Signs Lighter box gasoline services station signs, as defined in subsection 18.116.160.010 Section 18.44.030 (Definitions), shall be permitted in service stations; provided, that said signs Shall only be internally illuminated; Shall be either single-faced or double-faced; Advertising thereon shall be limited to the company name or company symbol or logo. Such signs have dimensions not exceeding four feet in height and the span of the working area or thirteen (13) feet, whichever is less. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-86 TABLE 116-L AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE STATION SIGNS Sign Type Provisions Said name or logo shall not exceed twenty (20) percent of the total area of each face of said sign. Pump Top and Pump Face Signs No signs other than instructional or operational signs “Self Service,” “Pay Cashier First”) shall be permitted on the pump top or pump island canopy, unless they are part of an overall, designed corporate identity program for signage. .0302 Future Establishment Signs. The future establishment of a business or other activity on a parcel or lot may be advertised by means of on-site signage, which shall comply with Table 116-M. TABLE 116-M FUTURE ESTABLISHMENT SIGNS Sign Type Provisions Maximum Sign Area Per Sign Face Sixty (60) square feet Maximum Height Four feet with a two foot berm, for a maximum total height of six feet. Maximum Number of Signs One single-faced or double-faced freestanding sign per each street or highway frontage. Location All future establishment signs shall be located in the middle thirty (30) percent of the street frontage except for corner lot locations where said sign may be located at the corner. Time Limit One year from date of construction or erection unless prior to expiration, approved by the Planning Director for an additional period not to exceed one year. Names and Dates Required on Signs The name of the sign owner, property owner or sign builder along with a phone number, as well as the date the sign is erected, shall be securely placed on each sign. Ownership of Property The subject property upon which the sign is located must be owned in fee interest, or must be under lease for a minimum ten (10) year period (from the date of issuance of the sign permit), by, or for the purpose of, the future business or establishment referred to upon the copy of said sign. Proof of compliance with this subsection shall be submitted to the Building Division of the Planning Department prior to issuance of a permit. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-87 TABLE 116-M FUTURE ESTABLISHMENT SIGNS Sign Type Provisions Sign Permit Fees and Deposits For each and every on-site future establishment sign, a sign permit fee and cash deposit to guarantee removal of each sign shall be paid to the Building Division of the Planning Department. The amount of said fees and deposits shall be as specified by City Council Resolution. Further, all such signs shall be subject to the following conditions: Return of Deposit. If said sign is removed within thirty (30) days following the expiration date, the removal deposit shall be refunded to the depositor in full. Failure to Remove. If said sign is not removed prior to or upon the permit expiration date, the city or its agents may enter upon subject property and remove the sign, the cost of the removal to be deducted from the removal deposit, and the remainder of the removal deposit, if any, to be returned to the depositor. The sign owner, property owner or sign builder whose name appears on the sign (collectively "person") shall be notified of the city's intent to remove the sign not less than fourteen (14) days prior to removal by the city. Following removal by the city, said person shall be notified of the removal and said sign shall be retained for a minimum of ten (10) days following the date of such notice after which said sign may be disposed of by the city. Authority Before a permit for such a sign is issued, the owners of record of the premises and the person proposing to erect the sign must furnish the Building Division written authority granting the City of Anaheim or any of its agents or employees irrevocable permission to enter upon the premises and irrevocably appointing the Chief Building Official as the agent of the owners with permission and authority to remove such sign pursuant to the provisions of this section. .0303 Real Estate Signs. Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, temporary real estate signs advertising property for sale, lease, rental or for inspection by the public shall be permitted on the property on which such sign is located subject to the following limitations in Table 116-N. Any such sign(s) may also include the name, address, and phone number of the person, firm, entity or agent offering said premises for sale, lease, rental or other disposition. TABLE 116-N REAL ESTATE SIGNS Parcel Size Sign Size Provisions ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-88 TABLE 116-N REAL ESTATE SIGNS Parcel Size Sign Size Provisions Parcels less than twenty-two thousand (22,000) square feet in area. One unlighted, single-faced or double-faced freestanding sign per each lot or parcel. Maximum sign area shall not exceed ten (10) square feet per sign face. Maximum height, as installed, shall not exceed four feet. Parcels of between twenty-two thousand (22,000) and forty-three thousand (43,000) square feet in area. One unlighted, single-faced or double-faced freestanding sign per each street or highway frontage of the lot or parcel. Maximum sign area shall not exceed twenty-four (24) square feet per sign face. Maximum height, as installed, shall not exceed four feet. Parcels forty-three thousand (43,000) square feet or more in area. One unlighted, single-faced or double-faced freestanding sign per each street or highway frontage of the lot or parcel. Maximum sign area shall not exceed twenty-four (24) square feet per sign face. Maximum heigh, as installed, shall not exceed four feet. .0304 Informational, Regulatory and Directional (IRD) Signs. All IRD Signs shall comply with Table 116-O: TABLE 116-O INFORMATIONAL, REGULATORY AND DIRECTIONAL SIGNS Sign Requirement Signs Visible from the Public Right- of-Way Signs Not Visible from the Public Right-of-Way Maximum Sign Area Per Face Eight square feet Not applicable Sign Copy Limitations Be designed as a coordinated architectural, information, directional and regulatory sign system for the project with consistent design detailing and color scheme. Be designed to direct pedestrians and/or vehicular traffic while said traffic is on the parcel on which said signage is located. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-89 TABLE 116-O INFORMATIONAL, REGULATORY AND DIRECTIONAL SIGNS Sign Requirement Signs Visible from the Public Right- of-Way Signs Not Visible from the Public Right-of-Way Limited to the directional symbol or directional copy and may include the business name and/or logo. Be designed as a coordinated, architectural, informational, directional and regulatory sign system for the project with consistent design detailing and color scheme. If a company symbol or logo is part of the sign copy, it may occupy up to a maximum of twenty-five percent (25%) of the sign area. If a company symbol or logo is part of the sign copy, it may occupy up to a maximum of fifty percent (50%) of the sign copy area. Maximum Height As required by local, state or national code. As required by state or national code. Illumination Sign cabinets with letters/symbols routed from opaque background with internally illuminated copy. Not applicable Other Limitations No more than two directional (entrance/exit) signs per driveway. Signs shall be located outside any required setback area. May be designed per Planning Standard Detail No. 8. May be designed per Planning Standard Detail No. 8. On-site directional (entrance/exit) signs located within the setback area adjacent to a public street shall comply with the minimum setback requirements for monument signs and shall comply with vehicular line- of- site requirements; all other on- site directional, informational or regulatory signs visible from the public right-of-way shall not be located within the setback area adjacent to a public street. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-90 .0305 Open and Closed Signs. All Open and Closed signs shall comply with Table 116- P. TABLE 116-P OPEN AND CLOSED SIGNS Sign Requirements Provisions Maximum Sign Area Per Face Two square feet Maximum Number of Signs Per Lot One per main entrance Sign Copy Limitations Message limited to “open” and/or “closed” only Illumination May be internally illuminated or exposed neon No bare bulbs or flashing signs No can signs with translucent back-lit panels. Other Limitations Placed inside the building adjacent to the main entrance. .040 Freestanding Monument Signs. Freestanding signs shall be monument signs except as provided elsewehre elsewhere in this chapter and shall comply with Table 116-Q. TABLE 116-Q FREESTANDING MONUMENT SIGNS Street Frontage 0-60 ft. >60-150 ft. >150-300 ft. >300 ft. Maximum Sign Area Per Sign Face None See Planning Standard Detail Nos. 5, 6 and 7 on file in the Planning Department. Maximum Number of Signs Per Lot None One per street frontage. One per six hundred and sixty (660) feet of street frontage. Minimum Setback From Public Right-of- Way Not Applicable Two feet Except adjacent to Harbor Boulevard between Orangewood Avenue and Interstate-5 Freeway and adjacent to Katella Avenue between Walnut Street and Interstate-5 Freeway where it shall be zero feet. Maximum Height to Top Not Applicable Nine feet oriented on a horizontal format. Eleven and one half (11.5) feet oriented on a vertical format. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-91 Sign Copy Not Applicable Name and/or logo of the development and/or name and/or logo of up to three tenants/accessory uses. Total area for sign copy shall not exceed seventy-five percent (75%) of total sign face and shall not be closer than ten (10) inches to any edge. Illumination Not Applicable Illumination Limitations No bare bulbs, exposed neon, animated or flashing signs. Allowable illumination Letters/symbols routed from painted opaque background with internally illuminated push-through copy. Ground mounted spotlights screed from public view by landscaping. Other Limitations Not Applicable All signs to be mounted on the standard Anaheim Resort sign base which is not included in the area calculation of the sign. Standard sign base shall be precast colored concrete as specified in the Anaheim Resort Identity Program. An Anaheim Resort logo will appear on three sides of each column on the standard sign base. Signs shall identify development address in the location specified on sign details on file in the Planning Department, using the typeface consistent with the identity sign elements for the street address. All signs except corner locations shall be located in the middle 40% of the street frontage. For corner locations signs may be located at the corner. Any attachments or “riders” to signs shall be prohibited. All signs shall be placed perpendicular to the street. For Hotels/Motels, affiliation and vacancy information signs shall be in the location designated on the standard base diagram. For corner lots, one freestanding monument sign is permitted on each street frontage (up to two signs per lot), provided that if two signs are installed, each sign shall be located a minimum distance of seventy-five (75) feet from the intersection and the sign copy of both signs is not legible at the same time from any point on the adjacent rights-of-way. If one sign is installed, it is permitted to be installed at the corner or along either street frontage. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-92 Maximum of two signs per street frontage with a minimum distance of three hundred (300) feet between signs. Signs located adjacent to Harbor Boulevard, between Orangewood Avenue and Interstate 5 Freeway; Orangewood Avenue; Walnut Street; and, West Street, south of Katella Avenue shall be oriented on a horizontal format, signs on all other streets in the District shall be oriented on a vertical format. Multi-tenant signs are encouraged to use one consistent typeface for all tenants or one color for all sign copy. The capital letter height and logo of all tenant identification copy shall be the same on a single sign face. If a retail business within the Hotel/Motel is identified on the sign, the sign shall be considered a multi-tenant sign. A special district has been created on Convention Way and Disneyland Drive between Katella Avenue and Ball Road. Hotels/Motels developed in this district may integrate the allowable sign area specified for freestanding monument signs into a feature landscape element, such as a wall or other landscape feature that expresses the architecture or thematic character of the development or establishment. This sign area shall be defined according to Code Section 18.116.[PHONE REDACTED] “Area of Sign” in the Sign Code. This feature landscape element shall be used for identity signage in lieu of the standard monument sign base and can include the street address, professional affiliations, and vacancy information. These feature landscape elements are to frame the entry drive of each major hotel and can occur on one or both sides of the main driveway entrance to the hotel. The landscape element can extend into the required landscape setback, with the provision that: a minimum 7-ft. setback from the public right-of-way be maintained; that the landscape element does not violate the City's vehicle sight distance standards; and, that it does not create a continuous wall along the Convention Way or the Disneyland Drive frontage. The maximum height of the landscape element within the required landscape shall not exceed 10 ft. and there shall not be more than two sign faces per hotel entry drive, consistent with the Design Plan sign standards. The type of sign illumination permitted shall be the same as those permitted under FREESTANDING MONUMENT SIGN listed above. For development located within the Harbor Boulevard/Katella Avenue Central Core Intersection Area as depicted on Exhibit 5.3.4a (Central Core Plan) of the Specific Plan, Multi- Tenant Signs integrated with the building architecture may be permitted in lieu of a Freestanding Monument Sign subject to approval of a conditional use permit. The sign(s) must be integrated into the design of the building, consistent with project architecture and designed in accordance with the following: One sign is permitted on each street frontage (up to two signs per lot), provided that if two signs are installed, each sign shall be located a minimum distance of seventy-five (75) feet from the intersection. If one sign is installed, it may be installed at the corner or along either street frontage. (ii) Unless installed at the corner, the sign must be oriented perpendicular to the adjacent street. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-93 (iii) The maximum permitted height is fourteen (14) feet and maximum permitted width is 11 feet. (iv) The sign may be single or double sided. The total area of tenant copy may not exceed 135 square feet per side. Up to four tenants may be advertised. .050 Business Identification Wall Signs - General. Business Identification Wall Signs shall comply with Table 116-R except for Hotel/Motel Business Identification Wall Signs which shall comply with Table 116-S. Table 116-R Business Identification Wall Sign Street Frontage 0-30 ft. >30-60 ft. >60-100 ft. >100-150 ft. >150 ft. Maximum Sign Area per Sign Face 30 square feet 60 square feet 100 square feet 140 square feet 160 square feet Maximum Number of Signs per Lot Mid-block Locations One per building or store front. Corner Lots One per building or store front; or, one per building per each street frontage as long as only one sign is legible at any time from any point on the adjacent public right-of-way. Sign Copy Number of Stories Maximum Letter/ Symbol Height Symbol Only Maximum Height 1 - 2 24 inches 36 inches Over 2 36 inches 48 inches Sign copy limited to building name and/or logo, individual business name and/or logo, or generic name Pizza, Gift Shop) and/or logo. Sign copy shall be located no closer than one-half the size of the largest letter/symbol to the top and sides of the building wall. Sign copy shall be located at the cornice line or twenty-five (25) feet from the ground, whichever is lower. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-94 Table 116-R Business Identification Wall Sign Illumination Illumination Limitations No bare bulbs, exposed neon, animated or flashing signs. No internally illuminated canopies/awnings. No white or light colored translucent back lit panels. All raceways shall be concealed. Allowable Illumination For symbols only, sign cabinet with letters/symbol routed from opaque background with internally illuminated copy. Reverse metal pan channel letters/symbol with neon halo illumination. Internally illuminated channel letters/symbol with translucent face panels. Open pan channel letters/symbol with clear translucent face panels. Other Limitations 12 inch maximum projection from building face. Projection over the public right-of-way is prohibited. There must be a minimum distance of 16 feet between signs on the same parcel. Canopy and awning sign design must be an integral part of the building design and are in lieu or permitted wall signs. Multi-tenant wall signs shall either be all wall signs or all canopy signs. Wall signs located below the third floor level of a building and which signs are located on a properly adjacent to and visible from residentially developed properties are not permitted. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-95 .060 Business Identification Wall Signs –Hotel/Motel. Hotel/Motel Business Identification Wall Signs shall comply with Table 116-S. Table 116-S Business Identification Wall Sign –Hotel/Motel Number of Stories 1 - 2 3 - 4 5 - 7 8 or more Maximum Sign Area per Sign Face 160 square feet 200 square feet 250 square feet 300 square feet Maximum Letter/Symbol Height 2 feet 4 feet 4 feet, 6 inches 5 feet, 6 inches Symbol Only Maximum Height 3 feet 7 feet 8 feet 10 feet Maximum Number of Signs per Building Two except that for hotels or motels located on a corner property, up to four signs may be permitted. For buildings at mid-block locations, signs shall be located on non-adjacent building elevations; provided that for buildings over five stories in height, the two wall signs may be located on adjacent building elevations as long as only one sign is legible at any time from any point on the adjacent public right-of-way. Buildings over five stories may have one additional wall sign located on the porte-cochere with a maximum letter/symbol height of twenty-four (24) inches and one additional wall sign located above the main lobby pedestrian entrance with a maximum letter/symbol height of twenty-four (24) inches. Sign Copy Sign copy limited to hotel/motel name and/or logo. Sign copy shall be located no closer than one-half the size of the largest letter/symbol to the top and sides of the building wall or fascia or to the closest window line adjacent to the sign. Sign copy shall be located below the top of the building eave line or roof line, whichever is lower. Illumination Illumination Limitations No bare bulbs, exposed neon, animated or flashing signs. No internally illuminated can signs displaying corporate hotel/motel affiliations. No internally illuminated canopies/awnings. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-96 Table 116-S Business Identification Wall Sign –Hotel/Motel All raceways shall be concealed. Allowable Illumination For symbols only, sign cabinet with letters/symbol routed from opaque background with internally illuminated copy. Reverse metal pan channel letters/symbol with neon halo illumination. Internally illuminated channel letters/symbol with translucent face panels. Open pan channel letters/symbol with clear translucent face panels. Other Limitations 12 inch maximum projection from building face or from architectural projection. Projection over the public right-of-way is prohibited. Signs shall be attached without visible supports or raceways. Canopy and awning sign design must be an integral part of the building design and are in lieu of permitted wall signs. Wall signs located below the third floor level of a building and which signs are located on a property adjacent to and visible from residentially developed properties are not permitted. .070 Accessory Business Wall Sign –Hotel/Motel. Hotel/Motel Accessory Walls signs shall comply with Table 116-T. Table 116-T Accessory Business Wall Sign – Hotel/Motel Maximum Length of Sign Up to eighty percent (80%) of the tenant storefront length. Maximum Number of Signs Per Business One sign that is visible from the public right-of-way per business. If a business has frontage on two streets, two signs may be permitted, one facing each street. An additional sign may be permitted on the corner, if the main entrance to the business is located on the corner. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-97 Table 116-T Accessory Business Wall Sign – Hotel/Motel Sign Copy Limitations Limited to business name and/or logo. Shall be located below the second floor line. Maximum Letter Height: thirty-six (36) inches for the first letters, twenty-four (24) inches for copy. Maximum Symbol Height (when used with a company name or logo): thirty-six (36) inches Symbol Only Maximum Height: thirty-six (36) inches Other Limitations No flashing signs, exposed neon or bare bulbs. Signs shall be attached without visible supports or raceways. Signs shall be installed directly above or adjacent to the main entrance of the business. Wall signs are permitted for restaurant or retail shops with a GFA of less than 10,000 square feet when it has a separate entrance other than through hotel/motel lobby; businesses with a GFA of 10,000 square feet or more may have one wall sign per street frontage whether or not it has a separate entrance other than through the hotel/motel lobby. Accessory business wall signs not visible from the public right-of-way are exempt, provided they are part of a coordinated sign program. .080 Anaheim Resort Nonconforming Signage Program–Replacement Signs. Notwithstanding the foregoing, for participants in the Anaheim Resort Nonconforming Signage Program, modifications (size, location, design) to freestanding monument signs and wall signs may be permitted subject to the approval of the Planning Director to comply with the Anaheim Resort Nonconforming Signage Program adopted by resolution of the City Council concurrently with adoption of SP92-2. The Planning Director’s decision shall be final unless appealed to the City Council within ten (10) days from the date of such decision. .090 Sign Materials. All signs, with the exception of Canopy and Window Signs shall be constructed as follows: .0901 Construct street number and main identity sign boxes of fiberglass or aluminum materials. All other materials, including wood and steel are not allowed. .0902 The sign face shall read as a single surface with sign copy applied by silk screening or push through acrylic flush to the surface. .0903 Fiberglass signs shall be constructed of fiberglass reinforced plastic with a smooth surface prior to painting. Coloring integral to the fiberglass material is also acceptable. .0904 Aluminum signs shall be of an appropriate thickness to avoid oil ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 7.0 Zoning and Development Standards 7-98 canning or buckling. A 1/8 inch minimum thickness is required. All seams shall be filled and ground smooth. There shall be no visible fasteners and all edges shall be eased. .0905 All surfaces shall be thoroughly prepared and appropriately primed and painted conforming to industry standards to prevent oxidation, pitting or rust. .0906 Identification of sign fabricator credits shall be hidden from public view. .0907 Construct signs of permanent exterior sign materials. (Ord. 5453 § 1 (part); September 27, 1994: Ord. 5920 § 1 (part); June 8, 2004: Ord. 6031 § 64 (part); August 22, 2006: Ord. 6156 § 47; September 22, 2009.) 18.116.170 RECLASSIFICATION PROCEDURE –VIOLATION. Concurrent with or subsequent to introduction of an ordinance adding this chapter to the Anaheim Municipal Code, the City Council may introduce an ordinance to reclassify the property covered by Specific Plan No. 92-2 (SP No. 92-2) and this chapter to the zoning designation SP No. 92-2. Such reclassification shall be subject to each of those certain conditions of approval of SP No. 92-2 as set forth therein. Any violation of any of said conditions shall be deemed a violation of this chapter as well as of the reclassification ordinance and shall be punishable as set forth in Section 1.01.370 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. (Ord. 5453 § 1 (part); September 27, 1994: Ord. 5920 § 1 (part); June 8, 2004: Ord. 6031 § 64 (part); August 22, 2006.) ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 8.0 Legal Description 8-1 8.0 Legal Description ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 8.0 Legal Description 8-2 ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 8.0 Legal Description 8-3 ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 8.0 Legal Description 8-4 ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Appendix A Anaheim Commercial Area Maximum Permitted Structural Height Map ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Appendix A This page is intentionally blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Appendix A ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Appendix A This page is intentionally blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Appendix B The Anaheim Resort Public Realm Landscape Program ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Appendix B This page is intentionally blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Public Realm Landscape Program City of Anaheim Adopted September 1994 (94R-239) Amendment No. 1 October 1996 (96R-178) Amendment No. 2 June 1999 (99R-137) Amendment No. 3 February 2001 (2002R-56) Amendment No. 4 March 2009 (2009R-037) Amendment No. 5 ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Public Realm Landscape Program This page is intentionally blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Public Landscape Program TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Introduction 1 2 Purpose 2 3 Landscape Concepts 2 3.1 Unity and Diversity 2 3.2 Use Plant Material to Create Scale 2 3.3 Establish a Recognizable Streetscape 2 3.4 Define a Plant Palette 2 3.5 Layer Landscape to Create Depth 3 3.6 Contrast Plant Material for Diversity and Balance 4 3.7 Colorful Plants to Emphasize a Festive Atmosphere 4 3.8 Landscape Perspectives 5 3.9 Landscape Concept Diagram 6 4 Public Streets 8 4.1 Harbor Boulevard 8 4.2 Katella Avenue 8 4.3 Disneyland Drive 9 4.4 West Street 9 4.5 Disney Way 9 4.6 Clementine Street 9 4.7 Manchester Avenue 9 4.8 Walnut Street 9 4.9 Ball Road 10 4.10 Anaheim Boulevard/Haster Street 10 4.11 Convention Way 10 4.12 Gene Autry Way 10 4.13 Orangewood Avenue 10 4.14 Local Streets 10 5 Harbor Boulevard/ Katella Avenue Intersection 11 5.1 Streetscape 11 5.2 Sculptural Urban Design Elements 11 LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit 3.5-1 Layered Landscape Creates Depth 3 Exhibit 3.7-1 Use of Varied Types of Colorful Plants 4 Exhibit 3.8-3 Harbor Boulevard Perspective Looking South 5 Exhibit 3.8-4 Harbor Boulevard Perspective Looking North 5 Exhibit 3.8-5 Harbor Boulevard Gateway 5 Exhibit 3.8-6 Katella Avenue Perspective Looking 5 Exhibit 3.8-7 Katella Avenue Perspective Looking East 5 Exhibit 3.8-8 The Anaheim Resort Looking North from Katella Avenue 6 Exhibit 3.9-1 Landscape Concept Diagram for The Anaheim Resort Public Realm 7 Exhibit 1.5-1 Corner of Harbor Boulevard and Katella 12 ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Public Realm Landscape Program This page is intentionally blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Public Landscape Program 1 1 INTRODUCTION On September 20, 1994, the Anaheim City Council adopted Resolution No. 94R-239 approving The Anaheim Resort Public Realm Landscape Program Since the adoption of the proposed modifications to the landscape program have included five amendments. Amendment No. 1. In October 1996, City Council adopted Resolution No. 96R-178 approving Amendment No. 1 to in conjunction with Amendment No. 3 to The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan No. 92-1. Amendment No. 1 modified that landscape treatments within and adjacent to The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan Area (Disney Way, Harbor Boulevard, Walnut Street and West Street/Disneyland Drive). Amendment No. 2. In June 1999, City Council adopted Resolution No. 99R-137 approving Amendment No. 2 to the to provide for a mid-block median break on Clementine Street between Disney Way and Katella Avenue in conjunction with General Plan Amendment No. 359, Amendment No. 4 to The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan No. 92-1, Conditional Use Permit No. 4078, and Development Agreement No. 99-01. Amendment No. 3. In February 2002, City Council adopted Resolution No. 2002R-56 approving Amendment No. 3 to the to modify landscape concept plans for Disney Way between Harbor Boulevard and Clementine Street to reflect a mid-block median island opening to permit vehicle ingress and egress to the Anaheim Garden Walk (formerly, Pointe Anaheim) project. Amendment No. 3 to the was approved in conjunction with General Plan Amendment No. 2001-00393, Amendment No. 5 to The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan No. 92-1, and Amendment to Conditional Use Permit No. 4078. Amendment No. 4. In March 2009, City Council adopted Resolution No. 2009-055 approving Amendment No. 4 to provide special criteria for the “Harbor Boulevard/Katella Avenue Intersection Area” to introduce special paving, sculptural urban design elements, and to modify the landscape concept plan for this intersection. Amendment No. 4 was approved in conjunction with General Plan Amendment No. 2008-00470, Amendment No. 13 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (SPN2008-00055), Conditional Use Permit No. 2009-05403, Variance No. 2008- 004761, Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity No. 2009-00056, and Final Site Plan No. 2008-00004. Amendment No. 5. In City Council adopted Resolution No. approving Amendment No. 5 to to reduce redundancy within and between documents and, update the document to reflect current conditions within The Anaheim Resort. Amendment No. 5 was approved in conjunction with General Plan Amendment No. 2010-00482, Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (SPN2010-00060), Zoning Code Amendment No. 2010-00093, and Amendment No. 2 to The Anaheim Resort Identity Program (Case No. MIS2010-00478). ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Public Realm Landscape Program 2 2 PURPOSE The information in this document is intended to summarize the landscape concepts for the public streets (or Public Realm as it is referred to in this document) within The Anaheim Resort and provide a general overview of the different landscape treatments that help create a unifying resort identity. Additional details showing how the concepts are implemented are shown in the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (ARSP) and the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan (DRSP) respective Design Plans (Section 5.0 of each document). Streets and their edges furnish the primary space in which landscape can be placed to transform the identity of The Anaheim Resort. The most visually prominent areas have the greatest impact on the design of the area. 3 LANDSCAPE CONCEPTS The following landscape concepts are intended to define the character of the landscape for The Anaheim Resort. 3.1 Unity and Diversity Public Realm landscape planting must create an overall unity, while allowing diversity to create distinct differences between places. This is achieved by establishing a planting design system in which basic elements are repeated in an orderly, regular way, while the elements vary to respond to particular situations. 3.2 Use Plant Material to Create Scale It is important that the scale of the landscape plantings reflect the scale of place they are intended to enhance. For example, major streets and entries that are viewed primarily from automobiles require a landscape treatment that is grander in scale and texture than areas intended solely for pedestrians. When they are overlapping needs, that is, when both pedestrian and automobile scales much be accommodated, the planting design addresses both needs. 3.3 Establish a Recognizable Streetscape Geometry Throughout The Anaheim Resort, landscape elements including trees and shrubs, as well as man-made elements such as light fixtures, are arranged in regular patterns that establish order and a recognizable geometry. The patterns vary to create different effects, and help differentiate one location from another. Generally, street tree plantings feature regularly spaced trees, and the same trees are used consistently for considerably of the same street. Changes in the variety of tree, or the geometry of the planting design may occur when a street changes in width, changes direction, or crosses another important street. Informal masses of trees only occur in the Public Realm where the total width of the combined landscape area in the Public Realm and the required street setback areas exceeds forty feet. Planting designs in which trees are scattered randomly are inconsistent with the intent of this concept. 3.4 Define a Plant Palette Another way the Public Realm Landscape Program creates a unified identity is by identifying the plant material used within The Anaheim Resort, especially within the areas visible from the street. The plant palette emphasizes plants that have a positive visual impact and are well adapted to The Anaheim Resort. Many of the recommended plants are typical of Southern California gardens and emphasize the special qualities of plants that ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Public Realm Landscape Program 3 only grow in moderate, subtropical climates. Palms, broad leafed evergreens (such as Eucalyptus), and exotic flowering shrubs (such as the Bird of Paradise), are typical of the kinds of preferred plants. A complete of list of the plants for use in The Anaheim Resort is included in the ARSP (Section 5.3.4) and the DRSP (Section 5.8.4). 3.5 Layer Landscape to Create Depth To create an illusion of greater depth in narrow spaces throughout the Specific Plan area, and to add further variety, landscape is planted in layers. The layers include plants in both the Public Realm and the required setback areas. Layers are expressed vertically by the varying heights of plant material, streetlights and other landscape elements; layers are also expressed horizontally by establishing several distinct planting areas with consistent setback relationships. Exhibit 3.5-1 Layered Landscape Creates Depth Horizontal layers of landscape Vertical layers of landscape ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Public Realm Landscape Program 4 3.6 Contrast Plant Material for Diversity and Balance To create diversity, landscape planting design relies on contrasting one plant material with another. The types of contrast include form (large vs. small, tall vs. short, narrow vs. broad, rigid vs. loose), texture (coarse vs. fine, lush vs. sparse, open vs. closed), and color (dark vs. light, gray vs. green). This contrast is expressed in the Public Realm, for example, with street tree plantings that consist of alternating tall narrow trees (such as palms) with short broad trees (such as a small or medium sized canopy tree). There will also be contrast between the planting in the Public Realm and the adjacent Setback Realm. For example, a formal planting of regularly spaced palms in the Public Realm might be complemented by plantings in the Setback Realm of masses of eucalyptus or pines with less regular forms. 3.7 Colorful Plants to Emphasize a Festive Atmosphere Colorful plant materials are used throughout The Anaheim Resort to help create a festive, cheerful atmosphere. Where appropriate, flowering trees may be used, as well as flowering shrubs and ground covers. These colorful shrubs and ground covers are often be planted in large masses of the same plant material in order to create a more dramatic impression. The types of colorful plants are varied so that color is apparent throughout the year. The preferred color for flowering plants is deeply colored reds, oranges, yellows and purples. The use of plants with pale colors, including pale blue, pink, and off-white is limited. Exhibit 3.7-1 Use of Varied Types of Colorful Plants ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Public Realm Landscape Program 5 3.8 Landscape Perspectives The following landscape perspectives are intended to provide a general overview of the different landscape treatments that help create the unifying identity for The Anaheim Resort. Exhibit 3.8-1 Harbor Boulevard Perspective Looking South Exhibit 3.8-2 Harbor Boulevard Perspective Looking North Exhibit 3.8-3 Harbor Boulevard Gateway Exhibit 3.8-4 Katella Avenue Perspective Looking West Exhibit 3.8-5 Katella Avenue Perspective Looking East ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Public Landscape Program 6 Exhibit 3.8-6 The Anaheim Resort Looking North from Katella Avenue 3.9 Landscape Concept Diagram The Landscape Concept Diagram on the following page shows the different landscape treatments for each of the major streets in the area. This Diagram is intended to illustrate the overall planting design concept and does not show the actual size or placement of trees and other landscape elements. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Public Realm Landscape Program 7 Exhibit 3.9-1 Landscape Concept Diagram for The Anaheim Resort Public Realm ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Public Realm Landscape Program 8 4 PUBLIC STREETS This Section of the Public Realm Landscape Program describes the design concepts for each street. Both the Anaheim and Disneyland Resort Specific Plans provide diagrams of these streets and show the approximate location of the Public Realm as well as guidelines for the setback areas of each street. 4.1 Harbor Boulevard Harbor Boulevard is the main north-south street within The Anaheim Resort. Between Manchester Avenue and Orangewood Avenue, the landscape treatment is intended to unify the two sides of the street by establishing a landscape treatment that is consistent on both sides of the street. The treatment consists of regularly spaced medium or large spreading canopy trees and vertical trees. The canopy trees provide shade for pedestrians that walk to the theme parks, Anaheim Convention Center or other Anaheim Resort uses from the hotels on Harbor Boulevard, and the vertical trees are intended to provide a skyline identity for the street. The median is planted with the same canopy trees that are planted in the landscaped parkways. The intent is that the trees eventually close over the street to create a green canopy. Pedestrians are separated from vehicular traffic by a landscaped parkway. Within the median, shrubs are planted to form a barrier to prevent pedestrian crossings at mid-block. This barrier should be easily seen to be impenetrable to pedestrians. Due to the configuration of the DRSP Theme Park District Drop-Off Area and the monorail and fences along the Disneyland Theme Park boundary, the street design has been modified to remove the vertical palm trees from the west side of the street north of the southernmost point of the DRSP Theme Park District Drop-Off Area. From the I-5 to the DRSP Theme Park District Drop-Off Area, the landscaped parkway ranges from 6 to 12 feet to provide for layered landscaping adjacent to the Disneyland Theme Park back-of-house fence. At Manchester Avenue, as Harbor Boulevard begins to rise over Interstate 5 as well as south of Orangewood Avenue, the Harbor Boulevard right-of-way begins to be restricted in width. Within these southern and northern most reaches of Harbor Boulevard, within The Anaheim Resort, the landscape treatment continues the Harbor Boulevard skyline identity with vertical trees alternating with a medium or large canopy tree. However, because there is not adequate right-of-way for a landscaped parkway, the street trees are placed in sidewalk cutouts. 4.2 Katella Avenue Katella Avenue is the main east-west street within The Anaheim Resort. In the spirit of differentiating the major streets from each other, the landscape on Katella Avenue features formal colonnades of regularly spaced Date Palms. The intent is to:  Create a dramatic impression with the multiple rows of closely spaced palms;  Maximize the effectiveness of the area available for landscape by using the multiple layers to create an increased sense of depth of the landscape along the street; and,  Use the palm's ultimate height to help create a feeling of enclosure, thereby reducing the apparent scale of the street. Pedestrian walks on both sides of the street are separated from the vehicular traffic by a landscaped parkway. The broad canopy of the palm provides shade on the walks, and the narrow trunk permits views into adjoining properties. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Public Realm Landscape Program 9 4.3 Disneyland Drive Disneyland Drive has two typical conditions. North of Ball Road, it is the northern arrival street into The Anaheim Resort. The landscape treatment is an extension of the landscape treatment of the I-5/Disneyland Drive interchange, which features evergreen vertical trees and other temperate zone plants. Tall vertical canopy trees are placed in existing sidewalks to help screen residential uses to the west. South of Ball Road, the landscape for the Public Realm is intended to help tie together the different uses on either side of the street with a planting of medium or small canopy trees and vertical trees. Pedestrian walks on both sides of the street are separated from vehicular traffic by a landscaped parkway along the entire length of the street. A grade separated crossing has been constructed under Downtown Disney. Within the grade separation area, the parkway and median may be eliminated. 4.4 West Street In order to maintain the residential quality of this street, Magnolia trees within an 8-foot turf parkway and 4-foot sidewalk are the dominant character of the streetscape of West Street, south of Katella Avenue. 4.5 Disney Way Disney Way is intended to be used to bring automobiles efficiently into the planned public parking facility in the DRSP East Parking Area. The landscape treatment within the Public Realm features regularly spaced, alternating small or medium canopy trees. An eight-foot landscaped parkway separates pedestrians from vehicular traffic. A mid-block median break is permitted on Disney Way (between Harbor Boulevard and Clementine Street). 4.6 Clementine Street Like Disney Way, Clementine Street is an important vehicular access road to the planned public parking facility in the DRSP East Parking Area. The landscape for the public right-of-way of this street is similar to the treatment of Disney Way. Pedestrian walks are separated from vehicular traffic by a landscaped parkway. In the future, a pedestrian way/ people mover/ moving sidewalk system may be located in the median to connect DRSP East Parking Area to the DRSP Future Expansion District located south of Katella Avenue. A mid-block median break is permitted on Clementine Street (between Disney Way and Katella Avenue). 4.7 Manchester Avenue Like Disney Way and Clementine Street, Manchester Avenue is an important vehicular access road to The Anaheim Resort. The landscape for the public right-of-way of the west portion is similar, with regularly spaced, alternating small or medium canopy and vertical trees in an 8-foot landscape parkway and in a landscaped median. Adjacent to I-5, the landscape of Manchester Avenue continues the regularly spaced, alternating small or medium canopy and vertical trees in an 8-foot landscape parkway. Adjacent to I-5, there is no pedestrian walkway and the parkway is reduced to 5 feet in width. 4.8 Walnut Street Walnut Street forms the western edge of the Specific Plan area. The landscape within the public right-of-way includes large canopy trees ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Public Realm Landscape Program 10 planted in a continuous parkway on the east side of the street and in a median between Ball Road and Katella Avenue. Trees of a similar size and type are located on the west side of the street. These tall trees are intended to buffer the uses within the DRSP Hotel District, including the 220- kv transmission lines along Walnut Street. A continuous pedestrian walk on the east side of the street is separated from vehicular traffic by a landscaped parkway. 4.9 Ball Road Ball Road is another major east-west street within the Specific Plan area. The landscape treatment for the public right-of-way includes a planting of medium or large canopy trees in tree wells, cut into the sidewalk east of I-5.The large canopy trees are placed in parkways west of I-5. Trees of the same species are planted in raised medians, as are complementary ground cover. 4.10 Anaheim Boulevard/Haster Street The Anaheim Boulevard/Haster Street landscape consists of alternating, regularly spaced small or medium canopy trees and vertical trees. Pedestrian sidewalks are separated from vehicular traffic by a landscaped parkway. 4.11 Convention Way Convention Way has been designed and constructed to create a grand and civic character through the use of large stately palm trees alternating with large canopy trees. A subtropical plant palette provides a backdrop to the palms. Palms have been inserted within the sidewalks on both sides of the street. Where there is a raised median, palms and barrier shrubs were added in order to create a consistent streetscape. 4.12 Gene Autry Way Between Haster Street and Interstate 5, Gene Autry transitions to the HOV (High Occupancy Vehicle) interchange accommodating vehicles from the HOV lanes on the I-5 freeway. In this location, retaining and soundwalls are located along both sides of Gene Autry Way since the road is elevated. The Circulation Element of the Anaheim General Plan designates the future extension of Gene Autry Way from Haster Street to Harbor Boulevard where it would align with Convention Way. The landscape on Gene Autry Way between Haster Street and Harbor Boulevard is proposed to feature a formal colonnade of regularly spaced palms with a subtropical plant palette to provide a backdrop to the palms. The sidewalks will be set behind a parkway of uniform dimension. 4.13 Orangewood Avenue Although Orangewood Avenue is generally outside The Anaheim Resort, the intersection with Harbor Boulevard and the segment of the street adjacent to The Anaheim Resort has been included in the Plan. The basic concept is to extend the planting of the existing street tree, Magnolia grandiflora, within the existing right-of- way and parkway/sidewalk. 4.14 Local Streets Local streets are those streets intended to primarily serve local traffic. The typical configuration of a local street includes one travel lane in each direction with on-street parking. Public Realm improvements include both a landscaped parkway with street trees or trees within tree wells, and a pedestrian sidewalk. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Public Realm Landscape Program 11 5 HARBOR BOULEVARD/ KATELLA AVENUE INTERSECTION AREA The area immediately adjacent to the Harbor Boulevard/Katella Avenue Intersection is critical to the overall image of The Anaheim Resort. To promote an urban, pedestrian friendly environment at this intersection, the following special criteria for landscape, hardscape and urban design elements have been created to guide future development of the parcels having frontage on both Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue. These parcels are located within the Harbor Boulevard/Katella Avenue Intersection Area. 5.1 Streetscape For parcels having frontage on both Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue, the following landscape and hardscape criteria shall apply within the Public Realm:  Street trees along both Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue frontages shall include a double row of Date Palms. Date Palms in the second row of the parkway may be provided in tree grates where special paving occurs.  Where bus shelters occur, one King Palm in tree grate shall be planted on each side of the bus shelter.  Special paving shall be provided at the Harbor Boulevard/Katella Avenue Intersection Area corners to highlight this distinct, heavily pedestrian-traveled intersection. Special paving shall extend a minimum of two hundred feet (200’) from the edge of curb return at the corner along both Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue frontages for each parcel, or combined parcels for a single project, or extend the entire length of the frontage if the parcel/project frontage is less than two hundred feet (200’). Paving materials shall be per City standards and be consistent on all four corners, subject to review and approval by the Planning Director and City Engineer.  Sculptural urban design elements are encourages at each corner of the Harbor Boulevard/Katella Avenue Intersection Area, as described in Section 1.5.2 below. 5.2 Sculptural Urban Design Elements Sculptural urban design elements are encouraged within the Public Realm of the parcels that have frontages on both Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue. These sculptural urban design elements are intended to be iconic forms that identify the Harbor Boulevard/Katella Avenue intersection as a distinctive urban environment. The design and arrangement of these elements should be unique to each corner property of the intersection in order to provide for diversity and visual interest. They can be located within the public realm providing there is adequate circulation space for pedestrians. The design of the elements may include water and lighting subject to the approval of the Planning Director and City Engineer. The number of sculptural urban design elements is limited to two per street frontage. The final design is subject to review and approval by the Planning Director and City Engineer. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Public Realm Landscape Program 12 Exhibit 5.2-1 Corner of Harbor Boulevard and Katella ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Appendix C The Anaheim Resort Identity Program ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Appendix C This page is intentionally blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Identity Program City of Anaheim Adopted September 1994 (94R-238) Amendment No. 1 September 2001 (2001R- 239) Amendment No. 2 ---PAGE BREAK--- This page is intentionally blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Identity Program TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Introduction 1-2 1.1 Amendments 1-2 1.2 Purpose 1-2 2 Design Theme 2-1 2.1 Color Palette 2-1 2.2 The Anaheim Resort Logo 2-3 2.3 Realms 2-3 3 Streetscape Elements 3-2 3.1 Gateways 3-2 3.1.1 Freeway Gateways: 3-2 3.1.2 Arterial Road Gateways: 3-2 3.1.3 Katella Avenue Gateways 4 3.1.4 Harbor Boulevard Gateways 4 3.1.5 Arterial Gateway 4 Exhibit 3.1-5 Gateway from Above 5 3.1.6 Gateway Pageantry 5 3.1.7 Gateway Night Lighting 6 3.2 Lighting Fixtures, Street Pageantry and Street 6 3.2.1 Lighting Fixtures 6 3.2.2 Street Pageantry 6 3.2.3 Street Furniture 7 3.2.4 Bus Shelters 7 3.2.5 Benches 7 3.2.6 Trash Receptacles 7 3.2.7 Newspaper Racks 8 4 Sign Elements 4-10 4.1 Guiding Principles 4-10 4.1.1 Reinforce the Landscape Character of The Anaheim Resort 4-10 4.1.2 Forms to be Traditional in Appearance 4-10 4.1.3 Integrated Sign Program Directs Visitors Efficiently 4-10 4.1.4 Consistent Color System 4-11 4.1.5 Family of Signs 4-11 4.2 Graphic Standards 4-11 4.3 Sign Hierarchy 4-12 4.3.1 Cantilever Signs 4-13 4.3.2 Median and Parkway Signs 4-14 4.3.3 Regulatory Signs 4-15 4.3.4 Street Identification Signs 4-15 4.3.5 Pedestrian Directional and Informational Signs 4-16 4.3.6 Freestanding Monument Signs 4-16 ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Identity Program LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit 1.2-1 The Anaheim Resort Boundaries 0 Exhibit 2.1-1 Color Palette 2-2 Exhibit 2.2-1 The Anaheim Resort Logo 2-3 Exhibit 2.3-1 Three Realms of the Design Hierarchy 2-3 Exhibit 3.1-1 Gateway Location Plan 3-3 Exhibit 3.1-2 Katella Avenue Gateway 4 Exhibit 3.1-3 Harbor Boulevard Gateway 4 Exhibit 3.1-4 Gateway Elevation 4 Exhibit 3.1-5 Gateway from Above 5 Exhibit 3.1-6 Column Plan 5 Exhibit 3.1-7 Gateway Pageantry 6 Exhibit 3.1-8 Conceptual Lighting Plan 6 Exhibit 3.2-1 Special Light Fixture with Banner 7 Exhibit 3.2-2 Bus Shelter with Benches, Trash Receptacles and Newspaper Racks 8 Exhibit 3.2-3 Trash Receptacle and Bus Shelter with Benches 8 Exhibit 3.2-4 Newspaper Racks 8 Exhibit 4.2-1 Family of Signs 11 Exhibit 4.3-1 Sign Hierarchy 12 Exhibit 4.3-2 Cantilever Sign 13 Exhibit 4.3-3 Fixed Message Signs 4-14 Exhibit 4.3-4 Electronic Message Signs 4-14 Exhibit 4.3-5 Median and Parkway Signs 4-14 Exhibit 4.3-6 Regulatory Signs 4-15 Exhibit 4.3-7 Street Identification Sign 4-15 Exhibit 4.3-8 Pedestrian Directional and Informational Signs 4-16 Exhibit 4.3-9 Freestanding Monument Sign 4-16 ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Identity Program 1-2 1 INTRODUCTION On September 20, 1994, the Anaheim City Council adopted Resolution No. 94R-238 approving The Anaheim Resort Identity Program (TARIP). Since the adoption of the TARIP, proposed modifications to the identity program have included two amendments. 1.1 Amendments TARIP Amendment No. 1. In September 2011, City Council adopted Resolution No. 2001R-239 approving Amendment No. 1 to TARIP. Amendment No. 1 provided criteria relating to the permitted number, location and design for newspaper racks within The Anaheim Resort public rights-of-way. TARIP Amendment No. 2. In City Council adopted Resolution No. approving Amendment No. 2 to TARIP to reduce redundancy within and between documents and, update the document to reflect current conditions within The Anaheim Resort. Amendment No. 2 was approved in conjunction with General Plan Amendment No. 2010-00482, Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (SPN2010-00060), Zoning Code Amendment No. 2010-00093, and Amendment No. 5 to The Anaheim Resort Public Realm Landscape Program (Case No. MIS2010-00478). 1.2 Purpose The purpose of this document is to create a consistent visual theme in the City of Anaheim’s Anaheim Resort, which is generally located adjacent to and southwest of Interstate The Anaheim Resort, as the term is used in this document, refers to an approximate1,078-acre area designated for Commercial Recreation land uses on the City of Anaheim General Plan. The Anaheim Resort includes three specific plans: the 489.7-acre Disneyland Resort Specific Plan (DRSP), 6.8-acre Hotel Circle Specific Plan (HCSP) and the 581.3-acre Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (ARSP). The DRSP (SP92-1) provides for the development of an international multi-day vacation destination resort including a new theme park (Disney’s California Adventure), additional hotels and entertainment areas, new parking facilities, and an internal transportation system. In addition, the DRSP permits the existing Disneyland theme park to continue to be modified with new attractions and other improvements. The HCSP (SP93-1) allows for the development of up to 969 hotel rooms. All of the parcels within the specific plan area are developed with a total of 818 hotel rooms. The ARSP (SP92-2) provides a long-range comprehensive plan for development of hotel, convention, and visitor serving uses and associated infrastructure improvements. The primary purpose of these Specific Plans is to create a premier urban destination resort that encourages visitors to stay for several days to enjoy the variety of recreation and entertainment opportunities available. This is achieved through the establishment of a consistent visual language for the public areas that extend throughout The Anaheim Resort. The main components of the unifying visual language will be: landscape, street furnishings and signs. This document will deal primarily with signs and street furnishings and how they help create the unified Anaheim Resort Identity. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Identity Program Exhibit 1.2-1 The Anaheim Resort Boundaries ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Identity Program 2-1 2 DESIGN THEME This document contains photographs and conceptual design drawings of the majority of the identity elements for The Anaheim Resort. The purpose of the drawings within the document is to communicate design intent. Material specifications and dimensions may have changed as refinements, mock-ups, and value engineering of these identity elements have and will continue to occur. The Anaheim Resort has transformed into a garden environment through installation of extensive landscape improvements which are described in detail in the ARSP, DRSP and Different landscape treatments have been implemented for each of the major streets in the area. In order to unify The Anaheim Resort, streetscape and sign elements reinforce this landscape character. This is achieved in several ways. All streetscape and sign elements:  Provide consistency with the geometry established by the landscape planting, particularly the regularly spaced street trees.  Convey a warmth and friendliness that make visitors feel welcome.  Emulate traditional garden elements, such as trellises, pergolas, garden benches and other typical garden architectural elements.  Have an open, traditional, metal trellis-work design vocabulary, when appropriate The basic forms of the streetscape and sign elements are more traditional and classical in principle and appearance. The following principles help to achieve this:  Symmetry is employed in both the design of individual elements and in their placement in the landscape.  Classic garden furnishings provide prototypical forms for sign and streetscape elements.  Specially designed street furniture, such as benches, bus shelters, and trash receptacles create a richer, more interesting and inviting pedestrian environment. Night lighting is another component of the consistent visual identity. Lighting is especially important in helping to create the festive, garden- like atmosphere of The Anaheim Resort. Accordingly, the following night lighting concepts are applied within The Anaheim Resort:  Identity is created by night lighting using warm and cool light effects.  Special identity elements in the public right- of-way (such as gateways), can feature special night lighting effects not permitted elsewhere. 2.1 Color Palette A consistent color system for all sign and streetscape elements in the public right-of-way and for freestanding monument signs on individual properties has been established to further enhance the area’s cohesive visual appearance and provide a distinct identity. The dominant hues of the color system complement the landscape and incorporate the colors found in traditional garden furnishings. The color system has the following characteristics:  The color palette is limited; a few major colors dominate sign and streetscape elements, and any minor colors used will be limited to accents and other minor usage.  The colors P-1, P-2, P-3, P-4, P-5, P-7, M-1, and C-1 will be applied to all elements in the public right-of-way as specified in this document. The colors P-1, P-3, P-5, P-6 and C-1 will be applied to the freestanding monument signs. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Identity Program 2-2 Exhibit 2.1-1 Color Palette Precise color samples for all colors are on file at the City of Anaheim. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Identity Program 2-3 2.2 The Anaheim Resort Logo This logo has been designed to be a symbol of welcome. The floral bouquet uses blossoms indigenous to the area, specifically the California Poppy and the Orange Blossom. The square shape was intentional for its application to the streetscape and sign elements as a full color ceramic tile. Exhibit 2.2-1 The Anaheim Resort Logo 2.3 Realms The ARSP and the DRSP specify three distinct levels of design hierarchy. They are called the Public Realm, the Setback Realm and the Private Realm. This document discusses identity elements in the Public and Setback Realms only. Areas within the ultimate public right-of-way are called the Public Realm. This visually prominent area is the most precisely defined and designed of the three Realms. The Setback Realm includes private property between the ultimate right-of-way and the minimum required setback for adjacent buildings. Exhibit 2.3-1 Three Realms of the Design Hierarchy Setback Realm Private Realm Public Realm Ultimate Public Right-of-Way Building Setback Buildable Portion Buiding Envelope ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Identity Program 2-1 This page is intentionally blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Identity Program 3-2 3 STREETSCAPE ELEMENTS This section contains the design principles and conceptual material specifications that define the character of the major streetscape elements in The Anaheim Resort.  Gateways (Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue).  Gateway pageantry (banner) elements.  Gateway night lighting.  Light fixtures and street pageantry.  Street furniture (benches, bus shelters, trash receptacles and newspaper racks). 3.1 Gateways Gateways define the entries into The Anaheim Resort. They help establish the area as different from surrounding areas and inform arriving visitors that they are entering a special place with a resort/recreation character. Since many visitors will arrive in the area by vehicle, the Specific Plan defines two different types of gateways that will be oriented primarily to vehicles: Freeway Gateways and Arterial Road Gateways. The following is a general description and guiding principles for each of these major gateways, which are identified on Exhibit 3.1-1, Gateway Location Plan. 3.1.1 Freeway Gateways: This document identities three freeway gateways along Interstate 5. They will be the first experience of The Anaheim Resort for nearly 70% of arriving visitors and will be oriented primarily to vehicles. The character of the freeway gateways will be created primarily by landscaping, which may consist of large-scale plantings of trees and directional signs. Other optional features, which may be incorporated into these gateways include:  Night lighting which highlights the arrival experience;  Architectural elements consistent with the other garden-like elements to be used in the area; and,  Identification signs to supplement the directional signs. 3.1.2 Arterial Road Gateways: Arterial Road Gateways occur on Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue. Gateways are intended to have the feeling of an event that has duration, as well as location. They are oriented primarily to vehicles and include the following primary elements:  Trellis-like architectural elements located in the median and/or parkways, depending on local conditions;  Trellis elements that have the same appearance at each location, though their arrangement may vary;  Trellis elements placed on a base which reinforces the element's traditional character;  Landscape on the ground that feature color and may consist of large, uniform shrub masses, seasonal color, or other similar landscape plantings;  Flags and banners; the deployment of which may be related to seasonal or event-driven needs;  A logo identifying The Anaheim Resort; and,  Night lighting will be used to highlight the gateway after sunset. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Identity Program 3-3 Exhibit 3.1-1 Gateway Location Plan ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Identity Program 4 3.1.3 Katella Avenue Gateways The two gateways on Katella Avenue are located near the Walnut Avenue and Anaheim Boulevard/Haster Street intersections. Site conditions at these two locations permit both median and parkway elements. The total Gateway at each location spans a length of 34 feet. A special diamond grid paving pattern is incorporated into the major intersection crosswalks to create a more pronounced sense of passage. Exhibit 3.1-2 Katella Avenue Gateway 3.1.4 Harbor Boulevard Gateways The two gateways on Harbor Boulevard are located near the Manchester and Orangewood Avenue intersections. Site conditions at these two locations permit a median element only. Exhibit 3.1-3 Harbor Boulevard Gateway 3.1.5 Arterial Gateway Materials A. The base of the median element of the gateway is cast in place colored concrete plinth (the slab-like platform beneath the base of the columns) rising approximately 12” from the ground plane. The concrete is colored to match C1. The center area is an open berm landscaped with colorful plants. Large planters are placed on each berm. B. Each median element includes 7 columns which are painted to match P1 in the color palette. These 16’ high columns are fabricated from four 8” square painted steel tubes at the corners. The major horizontal straps are 2” square tubes painted red bronze P5. Secondary horizontal bands are created with ¾” x 1/8” painted aluminum straps tack welded to the surface of square tubes. The diamond trellis is ¾” x ¾” painted structural steel tube overlapped to create the pattern. The diamond trellis is backed by stainless steel (M1). Exhibit 3.1-4 Gateway Elevation ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Identity Program 5 Exhibit 3.1-5 Gateway from Above Exhibit 3.1-6 Column Plan C. The cap is a working lantern, circular in shape and colored with a darker green bronze patina to match P2 on the color palette. The lantern openings relate to the floral pattern of The Anaheim Resort logo. The light source is protected by a decorative glass sheath flush to the interior diameter of the cast bronze lantern. D. A finial at the very top of each lantern is a custom casting and is painted red bronze P5 to match the horizontal bands of the columns. E. The Anaheim Resort logo appears just below the lantern on all four sides as a full color square ceramic tile. F. The curving arms that arch back from the leading column are formed from ¾” x ¾” painted structural steel tubes overlapped to create a square and diamond pattern. The mesh is welded at the top and bottom to painted metal channels. G. The parkway elements that are part of the Katella Gateway are separate individual columns and employ the same design just described. These columns are spaced to align with the columns in the median. 3.1.6 Gateway Pageantry To create a special festive appearance, decorative banners may be added to the Arterial Road Gateways. Three flagpoles located inside the median element, just behind the leading column, may display banners year-round. The flagpoles are standard, off-the-shelf aluminum poles painted to match P1 on the color palette. Additional banners may be attached onto the three flagpoles to announce special occasions. To maintain the garden-like character of the gateway structures, no banners will be displayed on the median or parkway columns. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Identity Program 6 Exhibit 3.1-7 Gateway Pageantry 3.1.7 Gateway Night Lighting A strong night lighting scheme highlights the gateways as being a point of entry. They are primarily illuminated by a cool temperature light source, Hydrel brand well light fixtures (or fixtures of equivalent quality) with a metal halide lamp. These fixtures are located as shown in Exhibit 3.1.8, Conceptual Lighting Plan. The lanterns are internally illuminated with a warm light source, sodium HID lamp. The lantern pattern is silhouetted by this light and the lanterns act as a warm beacon in relationship to the cool light on the rest of the gateway. Exhibit 3.1-8 Conceptual Lighting Plan 3.2 Lighting Fixtures, Street Pageantry and Street Furniture 3.2.1 Lighting Fixtures The standard street light used in the City of Anaheim has been replaced within The Anaheim Resort by a fixture that fits with the garden trellis design vocabulary. This street light has a tapered fluted pole with a “Hancock Base.” A decorative arm with a cobra head light fixture is attached at the top. The base, pole and arm have a powder coated finish to match P7 on the color palette. 3.2.2 Street Pageantry Street lights are designed with a removable armature for pageantry. One banner per pole is deployed in a regular symmetrical arrangement along Harbor Boulevard, ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Identity Program 7 Katella Avenue and West Street/Disneyland Drive. If a street light has two arms, two banners are attached. The color of the armature bracket is P7 on the color palette. Banners may appear on street lights in the median or parkway. The intent is to plan for regular changes to the pageantry element. Banners should be colored, festive and may be fabricated as sewn or on nylon of photo image reproductions on an exterior grade substrate. The intent is that pageantry elements always look current. Exhibit 3.2-1 Special Light Fixture with Banner 3.2.3 Street Furniture Design and placement of street furniture within The Anaheim Resort will consist of: bus shelters, benches, trash receptacles and newspaper racks. All street furniture elements are compatible with and enhance the landscaped garden theme. Bus shelters and trash receptacles are a custom design. A bench design has been selected from a standard street furniture catalogue, but it will be customized for use in the area. 3.2.4 Bus Shelters With an approximate dimension of 12’ x 28’, the roof of the bus shelter is fabricated from plate steel. The columns of the bus shelter are 8” diameter steel tubes that meet at the base to form a solid unit. Approximately 6’ above grade these tubes radiate and rise weld to rafter beams in the roof. The bottom edge of the roof is approximately 9’ above grade. The decorative band at the top of the bus shelter has a pattern cut (or approved equal) into sheet steel. The roof, the columns and the decorative band should match P1 on the color palette. The Anaheim Resort finial is fastened at each end of the decorative band. Finials match P5 on the color palette. Signs are attached to the structure on the roof. Provisions have also been made for a bus stop schedule and route sign at each bus shelter. 3.2.5 Benches A custom cast iron or alternate fabricated trellis arm has been added to a standard of the shelf bench for The Anaheim Resort. A center arm has also been added. They are painted to match P7. The bench is fabricated from teak wood or wood with a similar finish. The wood slats are treated with a protective coating for ease of maintenance. 3.2.6 Trash Receptacles These units are fabricated from malleable steel and rolled into circular form. They will be painted to match P7 and a plastic insert is used to help simplify maintenance. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Identity Program 8 Exhibit 3.2-2 Bus Shelter with Benches, Trash Receptacles and Newspaper Racks Exhibit 3.2-3 Trash Receptacle and Bus Shelter with Benches 3.2.7 Newspaper Racks The design and placement of newspaper racks upon The Anaheim Resort public rights-of-way will be compatible with and enhance the landscaped garden theme. The newspaper rack base incorporates a trellis design with a stainless steel background overlaid with an open diamond pattern trellis painted the same color of green (P-7) as the street light poles. The newspaper rack cabinets will be set on top of the base and painted to match the green base and trellis work. Newspaper racks located upon the public rights-of-way within The Anaheim Resort will only be placed at designated bus shelters. Please see Appendix A – Newspaper Racks for more information. Exhibit 3.2-4 Newspaper Racks ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Identity Program 3-9 This page is intentionally blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Identity Program 4-10 4 SIGN ELEMENTS Signs contribute to the unified appearance of The Anaheim Resort. Signs in the public right-of-way have a consistent theme that includes support structures, typeface, and color palette. Sign elements may be externally or internally illuminated. The placement of signs and their individual messages should be established prior to sign construction and installation. The major sign elements in the public right-of-way include:  Vehicular directional signs;  Regulatory signs;  Street identification signs; and,  Pedestrian directional signs. 4.1 Guiding Principles The following five concepts are the guiding principles, which apply to the development of sign elements within The Anaheim Resort. 4.1.1 Reinforce the Landscape Character of The Anaheim Resort In order to unify the area, sign elements reinforce the landscape character of The Anaheim Resort. This is achieved in several ways. All sign and identity elements are:  Consistent with the geometry established by the landscape planting, particularly the regularly spaced street trees;  Convey a warmth and friendliness that will make visitors feel welcome;  Emulate traditional garden elements, such as trellises, pergolas, garden benches, and other typical garden architectural elements; and,  Have an open, traditional, metal trellis- work design vocabulary, when appropriate. Lattice grids may be open or closed, square or diamond mesh, simple or elaborate, regular or irregular. Typically, trellis design vocabulary include uprights and capping elements in addition to the grids. 4.1.2 Forms to be Traditional in Appearance The basic forms of the sign elements are more traditional and classical in principle and appearance. The following principles help achieve this:  Symmetry is employed in both the design of individual elements and in their placement in the landscape;  Classic garden furnishings provide prototypical forms for sign and streetscape elements; and,  Specially designed street furniture, such as benches, bus shelters, and trash receptacles create a richer, more interesting and inviting pedestrian environment. 4.1.3 Integrated Sign Program Directs Visitors Efficiently In order to better orient visitors, an integrated program, which includes informational, regulatory and directional signs, has been established. The overall intent of this system is to inform, rather than advertise. This system has the following characteristics:  Prior to installation, plans are prepared which show the location, sign type, and message (or messages, in the case of a changeable message sign) that will be ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Identity Program 4-11 used for each sign in The Anaheim Resort;  Signs in the Public Realm (the ultimate public right-of-way) and the freestanding monument signs in the Setback Realm have been designed as a family of signs with a consistent design vocabulary; and,  Consistent regulations for signs on private property make it easier for visitors to quickly find their destination. 4.1.4 Consistent Color System A consistent color system for all sign and identity elements in the Public Realm and freestanding monument signs in the Setback Realm has been established to further enhance the area's visual appearance and provide a distinct identity. The dominant hues of the color system complement the landscape and incorporate the colors found in traditional garden- furnishings. 4.1.5 Family of Signs The family of signs has been specially designed to give The Anaheim Resort a unique identity and provide optimum legibility in the environment. 4.2 Graphic Standards Sign graphics are designed to be crisp, clear, succinct and easy to read. Sign panels are of two types; Department of Transportation off-the-shelf signs (such as stop signs) and custom signs. The latter is discussed here. Sign panels will consist of light colored (white and colored) symbols on a dark green background. A 60 degree diagonal (diamond) pattern in applied vinyl or graphics creates a unique look for the district. The contrast between the background color (P3) of the sign panel and the diamond mesh pattern (P4) will be very subtle so as not to conflict with the legibility of the message. A sans serif typeface is used for text because of its legibility. “Stone” is a typeface that has a unique recreation quality. It reinforces The Anaheim Resort identity. Sign copy will be applied 3M reflective film to provide illumination at night and meet Caltrans standards. Exhibit 4.2-1 Family of Signs ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Identity Program 4-12 4.3 Sign Hierarchy The communication of information in this sign system is a hierarchical task. The hierarchy is based on communicating the right information in the right place at the right time. In an effort to achieve this goal, three zones of information were created.  Primary Vehicular Directional messages are displayed on cantilever signs that extend over the road. With vehicles traveling on Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue at speeds of 45 mph of more it is important that this information can be read from a distance in a way similar to freeway signs. Electronic changeable message also provide timely information.  Secondary vehicular information messages and trailblazers are located on smaller sign elements on both the median and the parkways.  Regulatory messages appear only within the parkways  Freestanding monument signs identifying private businesses only appear in the setback realm. As visitors to the area arrive and navigate through the area over one or more days, the information zones will be apparent in a subconscious way. Visitors will look for certain information in specific areas. For this system to work it is important to reduce visual sign clutter. All necessary information is consolidated on as few signs as possible. A sign hierarchy can only be effective if the number of signs is minimized and the information on the signs is communicated clearly and Exhibit 4.3-1 Sign Hierarchy ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Identity Program 4-13 4.3.1 Cantilever Signs Cantilever Signs are primary vehicular signs which extend over, but do not span the roadway. The sign face is supported on one side of the road by a 28’-0” column. The decorative exterior column is supported internally by a steel tube or tubes engineered to equal the strength of a 16” square steel tube. This steel support is attached to a concrete foundation. This center steel column is covered by a painted metal shroud. The construction of the decorative exterior elements is similar to the construction of the Gateway columns. The decorative arms are custom cast pieces painted to match P1. The lanterns on the top of the columns are not internally illuminated. The sign is constructed of 1/8” aluminum sheets, mounted to both sides of the rectangular steel frame which creates the top and bottom edge. An internal steel truss connects to the center steel tube of the column to support the sign. The front and back face of the sign has a dark green painted background to match P3. The front face has an applied vinyl diamond mesh pattern (custom color to match P4) and applied machine cut vinyl type and symbols. Type and symbols use 3M reflective film to provide illumination at night and meet Caltrans standards. Cantilever signs have two categories: fixed with an optional changeable message and electronic changeable message. Exhibit 4.3-2 Cantilever Sign ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Identity Program 4-14 4.3.1.1 Fixed Message Signs: Fixed signs usually do not incorporate any changeable features. This type of Cantilever sign has primarily static messages. Some signs however, may have a changeable message. Tri-View Technology is employed with a capability of 3 messages per changeable panel. These messages are controlled by the City’s traffic control center for quick modification as needed. Exhibit 4.3-3 Fixed Message Signs 4.3.1.2 Electronic Changeable Message Signs Electronic changeable message signs feature existing 5’ x 20’ electronically controlled display areas which allow custom messages to be displayed. The messages may vary during the day and provide important information to arriving or departing visitors about the location of attractions, parking, or traffic conditions. Electronic changeable message signs are supported by the same sign pole and armature with the garden trellis character found in the other vehicular sign elements. Exhibit 4.3-4 Electronic Message Signs 4.3.2 Median and Parkway Signs Tertiary vehicular information and trailblazer signs are located in the median or parkway. Most of these signs are non-changeable, however, some of the fixed signs may include changeable tri-view portions which can direct traffic or provide information about current events. These vehicular information signs are designed to be compatible with other signs and identity elements in terms of character, color and typeface. Both have colored concrete bases with a single 8” square tube post at each vertical support. There are two posts per sign and they are capped with an angled faceted metal cap and finial. These signs may also incorporate a graffiti- resistant coating. Exhibit 4.3-5 Median and Parkway Signs ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Identity Program 4-15 4.3.3 Regulatory Signs Regulatory signs appear on the parkway only. Standard Department of Transportation signs, such as stop signs and speed limit signs, are used throughout The Anaheim Resort. These signs are mounted on sign poles, which complement the design character of The Anaheim Resort light fixture. The pole is powder coated metal with an approximate taper from a 4” diameter to a 2” diameter. The ‘Hancock base” design is scaled down to fit the size of the pole. A metal cap is placed at the top of the pole. The powder coating matches P7 on the color palette. Exhibit 4.3-6 Regulatory Signs Exhibit 4.3-7 Street Identification Sign 4.3.4 Street Identification Signs Internally illuminated street identification signs are located on traffic light poles at major intersections and at secondary intersections on street light poles. If there is not an existing light pole at the appropriate location a larger version of The Anaheim Resort regulatory sign pole will be used. The overall height of this pole is 13’4”. Existing traffic light poles may have an appropriately scaled “Hancock Base” attached and all light/sign poles match P7. The total length of this double-sided sign panel is 5’6” to 6’6”. The sign is fabricated as a box that fits over and fastens to the tapered pole with a tapered bracket. The street sign portion is fabricated so that the street name may be changed if necessary. The graphics are divided into 3 parts:  A 1’0” square Anaheim Resort logo appears on the end.  A 1’0” square, powder coated to match P7 on the color palette, separates the logo from the street name.  The actual street name section of this sign is approximately 3’0” to 4’0” in length. This painted aluminum sign is framed with a powder coated metal channel (P7). The sign face matches P3 on the color palette. When power is available, this portion of the sign will be internally illuminated. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Identity Program 4-16 4.3.5 Pedestrian Directional and Informational Signs Pedestrian directional and information signs are located at major intersections. These signs are maps imbedded in the sidewalk on each of the comers. The map is fabricated from cast bronze and is approximately 4’0” square. A “You are Here” locator specifies the pedestrian’s location. Their purpose is to orient pedestrians and provide direction information to destinations. Exhibit 4.3-8 Pedestrian Directional and Informational Signs 4.3.6 Freestanding Monument Signs Freestanding Monument Signs include those signs on private property which are intended to identify particular businesses, uses or properties. Since these signs are designed to reinforce the identity of The Anaheim Resort, a similar trellis vocabulary is used.  The maximum area of a monument sign identifying a particular property will be determined by the amount of frontage that particular property has on the adjacent public street;  Monument signs will have a consistent relationship to the adjacent street, including a minimum setback and a perpendicular orientation to the ultimate public right-of-way;  Monument signs will have a consistent design which identifies the use as being part of The Anaheim Resort; and,  The message on the sign will be limited to essential information about the use on the property: its name, identifying logo, address, and, in the case of hotels, the availability of rooms for rent and professional affiliation. For additional information pertaining to these signs, please refer to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan and the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan. Exhibit 4.3-9 Freestanding Monument Sign ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Identity Program Appendix A-1 This page is intentionally blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Identity Program Appendix A-2 Appendix A Newspaper Racks ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Identity Program Appendix A-3 ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Identity Program Appendix A-4 ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Identity Program Appendix A-5 ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Identity Program Appendix A-6 ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Identity Program Appendix A-7 ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Appendix D Planning Standard Details 5-8 ---PAGE BREAK--- The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Appendix D This page is intentionally blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- December 6, 2011 THE HORIZONTAL SIGN FORMAT SHALL BE USED ALONG HARBOR BOULEVARD BETWEEN THE INTERSTATE 5 FREEWAY AND ORANGEWOOD AVENUE, THE VERTICAL SIGN FORMAT (PLANNING STANDARD DETAIL NO. 6) SHALL BE USED ALONG ALL OTHER STREET FRONTAGES THE ANAHEIM RESORT MONUMENT SIGN HORIZONTAL SIGN FORMAT  The finish, color and materials of the sign shall conform to the Anaheim Resort Monument Sign Specifications on file in the Anaheim Planning Department.  Sign copy shall not occupy more than 75% of the total sign area and shall not be located within 10 inches of the perimeter of the sign face.  A minimum 2-foot wide landscape border shall be planted with flowers, irrigated and permanently maintained around the sign base.  See Chapters 18.116 (The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan), 18.118 (Anaheim Resort Specific Plan) or 18.118 (Hotel Circle Specific Plan) of the Anaheim Municipal Code for additional sign requirements (including maximum sign copy area).  All letters and symbols need to be routed out and have an acrylic backer so that the letters are flush with the sign face. City of Anaheim PLANNING DEPARTMENT THE ANAHEIM RESORT MONUMENT SIGN HORIZONTAL SIGN FORMAT PLANNING STANDARD DETAIL 5 AVAILABLE SIGN COPY AREA (INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED) STREET ADDRESS THE ANAHEIM RESORT PANEL LOGO (ON 3 EXTERIOR SIDES) ---PAGE BREAK--- December 6, 2011 THE ANAHEIM RESORT MONUMENT SIGN HORIZONTAL SIGN FORMAT 10’- 0” HORIZONTAL SIGN 12’- 0” HORIZONTAL SIGN 14’- 0” HORIZONTAL SIGN 2’ WIDE FLOWERING LANDSCAPE BORDER (Pantone 330C) ---PAGE BREAK--- December 6, 2011 THE VERTICAL SIGN FORMAT SHALL BE USED ALONG ALL STREET FRONTAGES WITHIN THE ANAHEIM RESORT™ EXCEPT ALONG HARBOR BOULEVARD BETWEEN THE INTERSTATE 5 FREEWAY AND ORANGEWOOD AVENUE WHERE THE HORIZONTAL SIGN FORMAT (PLANNING STANDARD DETAIL No. 5) SHALL BE USED THE ANAHEIM RESORT MONUMENT SIGN VERTICAL SIGN FORMAT  The finish, color and materials of the sign shall conform to the Anaheim Resort Monument Sign Specifications on file in the Anaheim Planning Department.  Sign copy shall not occupy more than 75% of the total sign area and shall not be located within 10 inches of the perimeter of the sign face.  A minimum 2-foot wide landscape border shall be planted with flowers, irrigated and permanently maintained around the sign base.  See Chapters 18.116 (The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan), 18.118 (Anaheim Resort Specific Plan) or 18.118 (Hotel Circle Specific Plan) of the Anaheim Municipal Code for additional sign requirements (including maximum sign copy area).  All letters and symbols need to be routed out and have an acrylic backer so that the letters are flush with the sign face. City of Anaheim PLANNING DEPARTMENT THE ANAHEIM RESORT MONUMENT SIGN VERTICAL SIGN FORMAT PLANNING STANDARD DETAIL 6 AVAILABLE SIGN COPY AREA (INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED) STREET ADDRESS THE ANAHEIM RESORT PANEL LOGO (ON 3 EXTERIOR SIDES) ---PAGE BREAK--- December 6, 2011 THE ANAHEIM RESORT FREESTANDING MONUMENT SIGN VERTICAL SIGN FORMAT 6” VERTICAL SIGN 4” VERTICAL SIGN (Pantone 330C) ---PAGE BREAK--- December 6, 2011 THE ANAHEIM RESORT MONUMENT SIGN DETAIL AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE STATION SIGN FORMAT  The finish, color and materials of the sign base shall conform to the Anaheim Resort Monument Sign Specifications on file in the Anaheim Planning Department.  Sign copy shall not be located within 6 inches of the perimeter of the sign face.  Changeable copy for pricing information located in the sign area shall be either manually or electronically changeable. Characters shall not be greater than 10 inches (provided they are smaller in height than the company name) nor smaller than 6 inches in height.  A minimum 2-foot wide landscape border shall be planted with flowers, irrigated and permanently maintained around the sign base.  All automotive service station signs shall be designed as part of a unified informational sign system.  See Chapters 18.116 (The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan) and 18.118 (Anaheim Resort Specific Plan) of the Anaheim Municipal Code for additional sign requirements (including maximum sign copy area). City of Anaheim PLANNING DEPARTMENT THE ANAHEIM RESORT MONUMENT SIGN AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE STATION SIGN FORMAT PLANNING STANDARD DETAIL 7 UP TO 3 SPECIAL SERVICES 6-INCH HIGH MAXIMUM LETTERS FLOWERING LANDSCAPE BORDER (INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED) STREET ADDRESS THE ANAHEIM RESORT PANEL LOGO (ON 3 EXTERIOR SIDES) ---PAGE BREAK--- December 6, 2011 THE ANAHEIM RESORT FREESTANDING MONUMENT SIGN AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE STATION SIGN FORMAT GENERAL SPECIFICATIONS Color Schedule 1. Gold (Mathews VOC 286-401) 2. Almond Tone (Devoe 2H26P) 3. Green (Pantone 330C) 0” WIDE FLOWERING LANDSCAPE BORDER MINOR MODIFICATIONS MAY BE PERMITTED SUBJECT TO THE PLANNING DIRECTOR’S APPROVAL 10’- 0” Horizontal Sign ---PAGE BREAK--- December 6, 2011 THE ANAHEIM RESORT MONUMENT SIGN DETAIL FREESTANDING DIRECTIONAL MONUMENT SIGN THE ANAHEIM RESORT MONUMENT SIGN FREESTANDING DIRECTIONAL SIGN FORMAT  Freestanding directional signs that exceed 24-inches in height may use The Anaheim Resort standard directional monument sign base.  The finish, color and materials of the directional sign base shall conform to The Anaheim Resort Monument Sign Specifications on file in the Anaheim Planning Department.  The Anaheim Resort logo panel shall be applied at each end (narrowest side) of The Anaheim Resort directional sign base.  Sign copy shall be limited to the name and/or logo of the establishment or facility (not to exceed 25% of the sign copy area) and directional symbols and/or directional copy only.  A minimum 2-foot wide landscape color border shall be planted with flowers, irrigated and permanently maintained around the sign base.  All letters and symbols need to routed out and have an acrylic backer so that the letters are flush with the sign face.  See Chapters 18.116 (The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan), 18.118 (Anaheim Resort Specific Plan) or 18.118 (Hotel Circle Specific Plan) of the Anaheim Municipal Code for additional sign requirements (including maximum sign copy area). City of Anaheim PLANNING DEPARTMENT THE ANAHEIM RESORT MONUMENT SIGN FREESTANDING DIRECTIONAL SIGN FORMAT PLANNING STANDARD DETAIL 8 AVAILABLE SIGN AREA (INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED) ---PAGE BREAK--- December 6, 2011 THE ANAHEIM RESORT MONUMENT SIGN FREESTANDING DIRECTIONAL SIGN FORMAT GENERAL SPECIFICATIONS Directional Cabinet Color Schedule 1. Gold (Mathews VOC 286-401) 2. Almond Tone (Devoe 2H26P) 3. Green (Pantone 330C) 2’ WIDE FLOWERING LANDSCAPE BORDER Available Sign Area ---PAGE BREAK--- APPENDIX B NOTICE OF PREPARATION/INITIAL STUDY Notice of Preparation/Initial Study NOP/IS Comment Letters ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Initial Study for an AMENDMENT TO THE ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN City of Anaheim, California Lead Agency: City of Anaheim 200 South Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim, California 92805 Prepared by: BonTerra Consulting 151 Kalmus Drive, Suite E-200 Costa Mesa, California 92626 (714) 444-9199 February 10, 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\IS-NOP\IS-021009.doc i Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 10 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected 10 Determination 10 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 11 I. Aesthetics 13 II. Agricultural Resources 13 III. Air Quality 14 IV. Biological Resources 14 V. Cultural Resources 15 VI. Geology and Soils 16 VII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials 17 VIII. Hydrology and Water Quality 18 IX. Land Use and Planning 20 X. Mineral Resources 20 XI. Noise 21 XII. Population and Housing 21 XIII. Public Services 22 XIV. Recreation 22 XV. Transportation/Traffic 22 XVI. Utilities and Service Systems 23 Mandatory Findings of Significance 24 REFERENCES CITED 26 LIST OF PREPARERS 27 LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit Page 1 Development Plan Area 3 2 Regional Location 5 3 Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Boundaries 6 4 Aerial Photograph 7 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Amendments and Adjustments ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\IS-NOP\IS-021009.doc 1 Notice of Preparation & Initial Study SECTION 1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Introduction The City of Anaheim is the Lead Agency responsible for preparing a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) for an Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan. In September 1994, the City of Anaheim certified Master EIR No. 313 (State Clearinghouse No. 91091062) in support of the adoption of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2 (Anaheim 1994a, 1994b). This EIR evaluated impacts associated with the establishment and implementation of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (ARSP) and created a mitigation monitoring program (MMP No. 0085) in order to mitigate any such impacts. Since being certified in 1994, two Validation Reports have been prepared (1999 and 2004) to evaluate the continued relevance and accuracy of the Master EIR and its ability to be used as a Project EIR for all projected development within the boundaries of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan area. As the Master EIR will be 15 years old at the time of the next required validation in August 2009, the City has elected to prepare a Supplemental EIR to reevaluate all the environmental changes that have occurred in and around The Anaheim Resort. This process will serve to evaluate the potential environmental impacts associated with the build-out of hotel and other visitor-serving uses in the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan area and a proposed expansion to the Anaheim Convention Center, including additional exhibit space; ballrooms; meeting and office space; up to 900 hotel rooms; and specialty retail, restaurant and entertainment uses. Background At the time of adoption, the ARSP area encompassed approximately 549.5 acres. Since certification of EIR No. 313, modifications to the ARSP have included 12 amendments and 4 adjustments, which have increased the total ARSP area to 581.3 acres. The most significant of these modifications is Amendment No. 5 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan, which was approved in June 2004 in conjunction with a comprehensive update of the City’s General Plan and Zoning Code. Amendment No. 5 expanded the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan to the southern City limits by incorporating approximately 26.4 acres that are located along Harbor Boulevard, south of Orangewood Avenue. EIR No. 330 was certified in conjunction with the approval of these actions and applicable mitigation measures related to Amendment No. 5 are contained in Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 0085a. A detailed description of all amendments and adjustments are included in Appendix A. The 581.3-acre ARSP area is divided into two Development Areas. Development Area 1 is known as the Commercial-Recreation (C-R) District and encompasses approximately 518.5 acres. Development Area 2 is known as the Public Recreational (PR) District and encompasses approximately 62.8 acres. Commercial-Recreation (C-R) District Permitted development in the C-R District includes hotels, motels, restaurants and other visitor-serving uses. Accessory uses that are integrated with hotel/motel developments, such as travel agencies, automobile rental agencies, and specialty retail shops are also allowed. There are four Density Designations within the C-R District: Low Density (up to 50 hotel rooms/acre); Low-Medium Density (up to 75 hotel rooms/acre); Medium Density (up to 100 hotel rooms/acre); and Convention Center Medium Density (up to 125 hotel rooms/acre provided the trip generation characteristics are equivalent to 100 hotel rooms/acre). These designations are based on hotel rooms; however, accessory commercial uses are allowed with 600 square feet of commercial uses equivalent to 1 hotel room. The C-R District also includes three properties ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\IS-NOP\IS-021009.doc 2 Notice of Preparation & Initial Study that total approximately 31.5 acres that have a Mobile Home Park (MHP) Overlay zone designation. The MHP Overlay encompasses existing mobile home parks and provides development standards, regulations, and procedures to mitigate relocation problems and adverse effects of displacement upon mobile home owners when a park is converted to another land use. Additionally, a Residential Overlay zone, totaling 59.3 acres, allows for residential uses in conjunction with visitor-serving uses within two designated areas. See Exhibit 1, Development Area Plan, for locations of the C-R District and the MHP and Residential Overlay zones. The C-R District permits development in accordance with the Density Designation given to each parcel or 75 hotel rooms per lot/parcel (existing in September 1994 when the ARSP was adopted), whichever is greater. At the time of adoption, the ARSP estimated that buildout of the C-R District would result in a maximum of 25,496 hotel rooms, as shown on the ARSP’s Exhibit 3.3.3a. This estimate was based on probable buildout of the C-R District using the approximate acreages associated with each Density Designation. This estimate did not include the maximum buildout figures with a minimum of 75 rooms per lot/parcel where this would result in a greater density. It was anticipated that the projected buildout of 25,496 hotel rooms by the year 2010 was an aggressive scenario that represented a realistic maximum number of hotel rooms. Since adoption, amendments to the ARSP have increased the estimated buildout in the C-R District to 28,862 rooms. In addition, there is a pending proposed amendment to the ARSP that would create a new Low Medium (Modified) density designation which would allow 252 hotel rooms and 75,593 square feet of commercial uses which is equivalent to 378 hotel rooms at the southeast corner of Katella Avenue and Harbor Boulevard. The baseline analysis used in EIR 313 at time of certification identified 9,590 hotel rooms. Therefore, EIR 313 measured an increase of 15,906 hotel rooms at buildout. The ARSP and EIR 313 did not convert existing commercial uses in the C-R District into hotel room equivalents. There was approximately 300,000 square feet (sf) of commercial uses (excluding office) within the ARSP at time of adoption. The ARSP provides a conversion rate between commercial and hotel uses at the rate of 1 hotel/motel room per 600 gross square feet. Using this conversion rate, the baseline would have been 10,090 hotel room equivalents (an increase of 500 hotel rooms) which would have reduced the projected increase in hotel rooms from 15,906 to 15,406. As described further in the Project Description, the proposed process will update the analysis used in EIR 313 and its subsequent amendments to reflect a maximum buildout of the C-R District using the allowed densities or 75 rooms per lot/parcel, whichever is greater. In addition, for purposes of establishing a baseline figure from which to measure the increase in hotel rooms at buildout, this process will convert existing commercial uses into hotel room equivalents in order to accurately gauge the amount of growth anticipated. Public Recreational (PR) District The PR District includes the 1.7-million-sf Anaheim Convention Center (Convention Center) owned by the City and the Anaheim Hilton Hotel, as shown on Exhibit 1, Development Area Plan. Other allowed uses within the PR District include accessory uses such as concession stands, restaurants, and shops. The PR District does not have a density designation; however, EIR 313 analyzed the impacts associated with the 1,600-room Anaheim Hilton Hotel, the Anaheim Convention Center as it existed in 1993, and 358,000 square feet of additional traffic generating uses. The environmental analysis completed in conjunction with the expansion of the Convention Center in 1997 (Final Site Plan Review No. 97-02) determined that following the expansion of the Convention Center to its current size of 1,712,004 sf that 219,000 sf of additional traffic-generating development could be developed in the future. ---PAGE BREAK--- Development Area Plan Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Exhibit 1 R:/Projects/Anaheim/J050/Graphics/NOP/ex1_dev_plan_021009.pdf Disneyland Resort Anaheim Convention Center Walnut St Vermont Ave Disney Way West St Orangewood Ave c d St Chapman Ave 5 Ball Rd Harbor Blvd Katella Ave Chapman Ave Anaheim Blvd East St West St Manchester Ave D:/Projects/Anaheim/J050/ex_dev_plan_streetbase_081108.mxd 2,000 0 2,000 1,000 Feet ² Anaheim Resort Specific Plan(SP92-2) Mobile Home Park Overlay Residential Overlay Development Areas Commercial Recreation District Public Recreation District 3 ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\IS-NOP\IS-021009.doc 4 Notice of Preparation & Initial Study Purpose of the Initial Study This Initial Study presents information on the Proposed Project description, identifies the actions required for Project approval, and evaluates the probable environmental effects anticipated upon Project implementation. Together with the Notice of Preparation (NOP) and the Environmental Checklist Form, the Initial Study will be distributed to all responsible agencies, trustee agencies, and interested parties as required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Project Location The ARSP area (the “Project Site”) is located in the City of Anaheim, 35 miles southeast of downtown Los Angeles and 7 miles northwest of Santa Ana, in central Orange County. The regional setting of the Project is shown in Exhibit 2, Regional Location. As shown in Exhibit 3, Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Boundaries, the Project Site is located generally west of the Interstate 5 (I-5) corridor, south of Vermont Avenue, east of Walnut Street, and north of Chapman Avenue. Existing Project Site Setting The ARSP area encompasses 581.3 gross acres. The Project Site is located in an urban, developed area of the City of Anaheim. The ARSP area includes the Anaheim Convention Center and is primarily developed with a mix of hotels, retail stores, restaurants, and other visitor-serving uses. There are also small industrial and office uses, mobile home parks, an elementary school, and agricultural land uses. Surrounding land uses include The Disneyland Resort, including Disneyland and Disney’s California Adventure theme parks; Anaheim GardenWalk; and hotels and visitor-serving uses within the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan and the Hotel Circle Specific Plan (see Exhibit Other surrounding land uses including a mix of commercial, retail, residential, and visitor-serving uses. Exhibit 4, Aerial Photograph, depicts an aerial image of the ARSP area and the surrounding land uses. Project Description The Proposed Project consists of two components: the buildout of development within the C-R District; and an increase in the maximum permitted development in the PR District to provide for the expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center (the “Proposed Project”). The following provides an overview of each component of the Proposed Project: Buildout of the Commercial Recreation (C-R) District: The SEIR will analyze maximum buildout of the C-R District using the allowed densities or 75 rooms per lot/parcel, whichever is greater. In addition, for purposes of establishing a baseline figure from which to measure the increase in hotel rooms at buildout, this process will convert existing commercial uses into hotel room equivalents. There are currently 10,888 hotel rooms and approximately 419,000 sf of commercial development within the C-R District. This results in a baseline hotel room equivalent of 11,587 hotel rooms. A maximum of 32,500 hotel rooms are permitted in the C-R District. Therefore, the SEIR will analyze the addition of up to 20,913 additional hotel rooms within this area. ---PAGE BREAK--- Regional Location Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Exhibit 2 R:/Projects/Anaheim/J050/Graphics/NOP/ex2_RL_021009.pdf National Angeles Forest Camp Pendleton Cleveland National Forest Lake Mathews ic e Los Angeles San Bernardino Orange San Diego Riverside San ta C la r a Ri v er [ Project Location 405 15 210 105 10 5 710 110 215 605 210 10 15 5 S T 14 S T 1 S T 138 S T 73 S T 22 S T 91 S T 118 S T 2 S T 18 S T 19 S T 30 S T 241 S T 74 S T 90 S T 261 S T 170 S T 142 S T 39 S T 107 S T 72 S T 134 S T 110 S T 60 S T 213 S T 71 S T 55 S T 133 S T 57 S T 187 S T 710 S T 241 S T 138 S T 91 S T 2 t u 395 t u 101 Corona Irvine Anaheim Palmdale Pasadena Riverside Long Beach Los Angeles Santa Monica San Lake Santa Viejo Beach Santa Rancho Rialto Rancho Downey Carson Island Ontario Mission Clarita Elsinore San Juan Whittier Clemente Lakewood Glendale Cucamonga Margarita Santa Ana Hawthorne Capistrano Huntington Costa Mesa Buena Park Seal Beach Victorville Yorba Linda West Covina Laguna Beach Palos Verdes Santa Catalina West Hollywood D:/Projects/Anaheim/J050/ex_RL_081108.mxd 10 0 10 5 Miles ² P A C I F I C O C E A N 5 ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Boundaries Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Exhibit 3 R:/Projects/Anaheim/J050/Graphics/NOP/ex3_spec_plan_021009.pdf Disneyland Resort Anaheim Convention Center Boysen Park Disney Way West St Walnut St Orangewood Ave Vermont Ave 5 Santa Ana River Santa Ana River U V 22 Euclid St Ball Rd Harbor Blvd Katella Ave Chapman Ave East St Garden Grove Blvd Anaheim Blvd State College Blvd Lincoln Ave The City D r Manchester Ave West St Fairview St Santa Ana River Santa Ana River D:/Projects/Anaheim/J050/ex_spec_plan_021008.mxd 0.5 0 0.5 0.25 Miles ² Disneyland Resort Specific Plan (SP92-1) Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (SP92-2) Hotel Circle Specific Plan (SP93-1) 6 ---PAGE BREAK--- Aerial Photograph Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Exhibit 4 R:/Projects/Anaheim/J050/Graphics/NOP/ex4_aerial_021009.pdf 5 5 HARBOR BLVD BALL RD KATELLA AVE HASTER ST E CHAPMAN AVE ANAHEIM BLVD ANAHEIM WAY EAST ST CHAPMAN AVE ANAHEIM BLVD DISNEYLAND DR WALNUT ST D:/Projects/Anaheim/J050/ex_aerial_081108.pdf 1,500 0 1,500 750 Feet ² Anaheim Resort Specific Plan(SP92-2) 7 ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\IS-NOP\IS-021009.doc 8 Notice of Preparation & Initial Study Increase in the maximum permitted development in the PR District to provide for expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center: The Proposed Project includes a further expansion of the existing Anaheim Convention Center, with the components listed below. Convention Center Development, including: • 406,359 sf of Convention Center space (including exhibit halls, ballrooms, flexible meeting space, office and meeting rooms, and an interior bridge/skyway) and • 125,000 sf of commercial space (including, but not limited to, retail stores and restaurants) Hotel Development, including up to: • 900 hotel rooms • 40,000 sf of meeting and ballroom space • 55,000 sf of commercial space (including retail stores, spa facilities, bars and and restaurants) This would increase the maximum permitted development in the PR District to a total of 2,158,363 square feet of Convention Center/meeting space, 2,500 hotel rooms, and 180,000 square feet of commercial space. Proposed Amendments Development that occurs within the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan area is implemented through the approval of final site plans, the processing of subdivision maps, and the submittal of plans for building permits unless a conditional use permit, variance or other type of entitlement is requested. The Proposed Project includes amendments to the documents that govern and regulate development within the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan area, including the General Plan, the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan, and Title 18 (Zoning Code) of the Anaheim Municipal Code. Responsible and Trustee Agencies The Draft SEIR for the Proposed Project would also provide environmental information to responsible and trustee agencies and other public agencies, which may be required to grant approvals or coordinate with the City of Anaheim as a part of implementation of future actions. These agencies include, but are not limited to: • South Coast Air Quality Management District. Air quality conditions in the South Coast Air Basin (Basin) are under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), a regional agency that regulates air emissions throughout the Basin. • Regional Water Quality Control Board. The Regional Water Quality Control Board administers the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES storm water permitting program. • Orange County Sanitation District. Wastewater is collected by City of Anaheim collector facilities and conveyed to trunk sewers owned and maintained by the Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD). ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\IS-NOP\IS-021009.doc 9 Notice of Preparation & Initial Study Anticipated Schedule A public scoping meeting will be held during the NOP/Initial Study (IS) public comment period. A separate notification of the meeting date and location will be provided. Following receipt of comments on the NOP/IS and completion of Project scoping, the Draft SEIR will be prepared and a 45-day public review period will be provided. All comments on the NOP/IS must be submitted to Mr. Ted White, Senior Planner, at the following address by 5:00 PM, March 13, 2009. Mr. Ted White, AICP Senior Planner City of Anaheim Planning Department P.O. Box 3222 Anaheim, CA 92803 (714) 465-4949 [EMAIL REDACTED] Conclusion The City of Anaheim requests careful review and consideration of this notice, and it invites any and all input and comments from interested agencies and persons regarding the preparation of the proposed SEIR. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 10 Notice of Preparation & Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM CASE NO.: Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan PROJECT LOCATION/SITE ADDRESS: Refer to Exhibits 1 through 4 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by the Proposed Project, involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. † Aesthetic/Visual † Agricultural Resources ; Air Quality ; Biological Resources ; Cultural Resources ; Geology/Soils ; Hazards & Hazardous Materials ; Hydrology/Water Quality ; Land Use/Planning † Mineral Resources ; Noise ; Population/Housing ; Public Services ; Recreation ; Transportation/Traffic ; Utilities/Service Systems ; Mandatory Findings of Significance DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the City) On the basis of this initial evaluation: † I find that the proposed is exempt from CEQA † I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a Negative Declaration will be prepared. † I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ; I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. † I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially significant unless mitigated impact” on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. † I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Signature of City of Anaheim Representative Date Printed Name/Title ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 11 Notice of Preparation & Initial Study The County of Orange requires that the City notify the County of certain zoning actions. The following checklist will determine the need for notification. The County will be notified of any “yes” responses to questions 1 through 4: 1. Does this zoning action involve adoption or amendment to either the Anaheim General Plan, a Specific Plan, or a Reclassification? Yes 9 No IF YES, COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING: 2. Does this zoning action involve land located east of the alignment of Weir Canyon Road? Yes No 9 3. Does this zoning action involve a residential project over 99 acres or 99 units in size? Yes No 9 4. Does this zoning action involve a non-residential project over 29 acres or a non-residential project with more than 99 employees? Yes 9 No EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including offsite as well as onsite, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 2) A list of “Supporting Information Sources” must be attached and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the Narrative Summary for each section. 3) Response Column Heading Definitions: a) Potentially Significant Impact is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more “Potentially Significant Impact” entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. b) Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less Than Significant Impact”. The mitigation measures must be described, along with a brief explanation of how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level. c) Less Than Significant Impact applies where the project creates no significant impacts, only Less Than Significant impacts. d) No Impact applies where a project does not create an impact in that category. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one proposed the project falls outside of a fault rupture zone). A “No Impact” answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project- specific screening analysis). ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 12 Notice of Preparation & Initial Study e) No New Impact applies where the proposed project’s impact is the same as that previously analyzed as part of a previously approved EIR. 4) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to a tiering, program EIR, Master EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration (Section 15062(c)(3)(D)). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated”, describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. 5) Incorporate into the checklist any references to information sources for potential impacts the General Plan, zoning ordinance). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 6) The explanation of each issue should identify: a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significant. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 13 Notice of Preparation & Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES (see attachment explanation and for information sources) Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact No New Impact I. AESTHETICS: Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? † † † † „ b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway or local scenic roadway? † † † † „ c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? † † † † „ d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? † † † † „ Narrative Summary: Questions A through C – No New Impact. The Project Site is located in an urban, developed area in the City of Anaheim. The Anaheim General Plan does not identify any scenic resources on the ARSP Project Site. Furthermore, there are no roadways on the Project Site that are designated as scenic roadways. As described in EIR No. 313, implementation of the ARSP has the potential to alter the existing visual character of the ARSP area on a temporary basis through construction activities, and on a long-term basis through the indirect intensification of the urban and commercial- recreation character of the Project area. The construction-related impacts would be short-term in nature, and would not represent a significant impact. The intensification of land uses associated with ARSP implementation is consistent with the Commercial Recreation land use designation; however, portions of the ARSP would interface with uses along the perimeters of the ARSP area, thereby creating the potential for visual impacts to the surrounding areas. As addressed in EIR No. 313, potential impacts related to the juxtaposition of these land uses would be reduced to less than significant levels with mitigation and adherence to the development standards and design plan set forth in the ARSP. This issue will be further addressed in the Draft SEIR and mitigation measures wil be identified, as appropriate. Buildout of the ARSP C-R District would occur in accordance with the development standards and design guidelines identified in the ARSP. Additionally, although the Convention Center expansion would increase the currently allowed development intensity of the P-R District, it is assumed that the expansion would occur within the regulatory development constraints stated in the ARSP. As stated in EIR No. 313, implementation of the ARSP and the Proposed Project has the potential to change some adjacent property’s exposure to the sun. EIR No. 313 evaluated the potential for shade and shadow impacts and identified the potential impacts as significant and unavoidable. Because the Proposed Project includes new development , the Draft SEIR will address potential impacts related to the shade and shadow. Question D – No New Impact. The Project Site is currently subject to night lighting associated with existing land uses including commercial, entertainment, and hotel/motel uses located within and surrounding the ARSP area, as well as light standards and traffic along the existing roadway system. As stated in EIR No. 313, no significant impacts generated by the continuation of nighttime illumination features are anticipated, provided that the lighting specifications outlined in the ARSP are followed and the appropriate mitigation measure is implemented. The introduction of sources of light and glare associated with the Proposed Project would need to comply with these lighting specifications; therefore, no new impact would occur. Further discussion of this issue in the Draft SEIR is not required, however, the appropriate mitigation measures from EIR 313 will be incorporated into the Mitigation Monitoring Program. II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES: In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Mode (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? † † † † „ b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? † † † † „ ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 14 Notice of Preparation & Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES (see attachment explanation and for information sources) Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact No New Impact c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? † † † † „ Narrative Summary: Questions A through C – No New Impact. According to EIR No. 313, at time of adoption, the Project Site contained an approximate 56-acre site located southeast of Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue which was designated as prime farmland (Anaheim 1994a) and which was under a Williamson Act contract set to expire on March 1, 2000. EIR No. 313 evaluated the loss of the prime agricultural land and identified the impact as significant and unavoidable. Because the impact related to the loss of agricultural land has already been fully analyzed as part of the previous EIR, the Proposed Project to be analyzed as part of the Draft SEIR would not result in a new significant impact related to agricultural resources. Additionally, the NOP/IS prepared for the City of Anaheim General Plan/Zoning Code Update, which is included as an appendix to the EIR No. 330, identified that there is no land within the Project Site currently under a Williamson Act contract; therefore, implementation of the ARSP would not conflict with a standing Williamson Act contract (Anaheim 2004a). Therefore, no further analysis of this issue in the Draft SEIR is warranted. III. AIR QUALITY: Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? † † „ † † b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? „ † † † † c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in non-attainment under an applicable Federal or State ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? „ † † † † d) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutant concentrations? „ † † † † e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? „ † † † † Narrative Summary: Question A – Less than Significant Impact. Although the Proposed Project has the potential to impact local and regional air quality, development of the Proposed Project would be required to comply with applicable air quality plans. Any impact related to the implementation of the applicable air quality plan would be considered less than significant. However, because the applicable Air Quality Management Plan has been updated since certification of EIR No. 313, the Draft SEIR will address the Proposed Project’s conformity with the current Air Quality Management Plan. Questions B through E – Potentially Significant Impact. Development of land uses associated with the ARSP will generate short-term construction-related and long-term operational air emissions that have the potential to affect local and regional air quality. An air quality analysis will be prepared for the Draft SEIR which will discuss the potential air quality impacts related to the Proposed Project and will also recommend appropriate mitigation measures. Additionally, the Draft SEIR will address the Proposed Project’s contribution to climate change through greenhouse gas emissions. IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? „ † † † † ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 15 Notice of Preparation & Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES (see attachment explanation and for information sources) Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact No New Impact b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? † † † „ † c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? † † † „ † d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? „ † † † † e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as tree preservation policy or ordinance? † † † „ † f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan? † † † „ † Narrative Summary: Question A and D – Potentially Significant Impact. The Project Site is located within an urbanized area of the City and is currently developed with urban land uses. As discussed in Section 1.2.3 of EIR No. 313, the study area was found to be void of biological resources which would support any Rare, Threatened, or Endangered wildlife or fish species (Anaheim 1994a). Based on preliminary review of the ARSP area, on-site vegetation types are expected to consist of non-native, ornamental species that are not considered to be Candidate, Sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. However, the Project Site contains ornamental trees that may have the potential to be used by nesting raptors. Further, due to the dynamic nature of biological resources, there is the potential that resources that are not currently present may occur in the future and present a potentially significant impact. The Draft SEIR will analyze potential impacts related to biological resources, if any, and identify mitigation, as appropriate. Questions B, C and F – No Impact. The Project Site is not located within an area classified as riparian habitat or other sensitive community such as a designated Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP) area, nor do any areas meet the definition of jurisdictional wetlands (Anaheim 2004b). As stated previously, the Project Site is located within a fully developed and urbanized portion of the City, and there are no connected areas of open space which would serve as a migratory corridor. No further evaluation in the Draft SEIR is required. Question E – No Impact. According to the Anaheim General Plan’s Land Use Element, the Project Site is not located within the Scenic Corridor Overlay (which includes Specimen Tree preservation policies) and is not subject to any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources; therefore, the ARSP is not subject to any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources (Anaheim 2004b). No further discussion in the Draft SEIR is warranted. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines and/or identified on the Qualified Historic Structures list of the Anaheim Colony Historic District Preservation Plan (July 20, 1999)? „ † † † † b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines? „ † † † † ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 16 Notice of Preparation & Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES (see attachment explanation and for information sources) Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact No New Impact c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature? „ † † † † d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? „ † † † † Narrative Summary: Questions A–D – Potentially Significant Impact. According to EIR No. 313, past surveys of the Project Site have not uncovered any cultural, historic, or prehistoric resources (Anaheim 1994a). Additionally, no prehistoric sites containing fossils, archaeological and paleontological remains or early Native American artifacts were identified on the Project Site or within surrounding areas. Based on this previous analysis and the fact that the study area has been subject to previous earth disturbance related to development, no impacts to cultural, historic, or prehistoric resources are anticipated. Despite this conclusion, the Draft SEIR will address cultural resources and identify appropriate mitigation measures. VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS: Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. † † † † „ ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? „ † † † † iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? † † † † „ iv) Landslides? † † † † „ b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? „ † † † † c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? † † † † „ d) Be located on expansive soil, as described by Section 1802.3.2 of the California Building Code (2007), creating substantial risks to life or property? „ † † † † e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? † † † † „ Narrative Summary: Question A(i) – No New Impact. The Project Site, as with the entire Southern California region, is subject to secondary effects from earthquakes. According to Exhibit 3.6-2 of EIR No. 313, the Project Site is not located within a mapped Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. However, implementation of the Proposed Project would be consistent with existing codes and regulations, including the Uniform Building Code, the Anaheim Municipal Code (Anaheim 2004b), and the requirements of the Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone Act (California Public Resources Code, §§2621 et seq.) as stated in EIR No. 313. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not result in a significant impact related to rupture of a known earthquake fault. No mitigation is required and no further evaluation in the Draft SEIR is required. Question A(ii) – Potentially Significant Impact. As with most of the Southern California region, the Project Site may be subject to ground shaking as a result of movement along active and potentially active fault zones. As stated in EIR No. 313, the soils underlying the Project Site are susceptible to ground motion. Additionally, due to the proximity of the site to ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 17 Notice of Preparation & Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES (see attachment explanation and for information sources) Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact No New Impact active and potentially active faults, as described in EIR No. 313, it is likely that the Project Site and Proposed Project, would be subjected to strong ground motion resulting in a potentially significant impact. The Draft SEIR will analyze potential impacts related to seismic ground shaking and identify mitigation, as appropriate. Question A(iii—iv) – No New Impact. According to EIR No. 313, the Project Site is relatively flat and there are no major slopes in the immediate vicinity. Additionally, EIR No. 313 identifies that the potential for liquefaction is very low based on underlying soils and the depth of groundwater in the area. Therefore, the possibility of seismically induced liquefaction and landslides associated with implementation of the Proposed Project is considered remote, resulting in a less than significant impact. No mitigation is required and no further evaluation in the Draft SEIR is required. Question B – Potentially Significant Impact. Consistent with the findings of EIR No. 313, the Project Site is largely covered by impervious surfaces concrete and asphalt). This impervious condition would continue with implementation of the Proposed Project. However, limited earth material would be available for erosion, and any related impacts associated with development of the Proposed Project may be considered potentially significant. The Draft SEIR will analyze potential impacts related to erosion and identify mitigation as appropriate. Question C – No New Impact. As detailed in EIR No. 313, the Project Site is located in an area of the City that can be characterized as relatively flat with a gentle grade, for which ground instability (including landslides) is not an issue. The earthen materials underlying the Project Site are fairly dense, making the potential for subsidence minimal. Additionally, EIR No. 313 identifies that the water table that underlies the Project Site is deep (approximately 115 to 130 feet); this deep water table and the dense earthen materials make the potential for liquefaction very low. Therefore, potential impacts related to ground stability would be less than significant for the Project Site and no mitigation is required. No further evaluation in the Draft SEIR is required. Question D – Potentially Significant Impact. According to EIR No. 330, the City of Anaheim, including the Project Site, contains soils that range from having “low” to “high” expansion potential. The Draft SEIR will analyze potential impacts related to expansive soils and identify mitigation, as appropriate. Question E – No New Impact. The Proposed Project would not involve the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems. The Proposed Project would incorporate the use of City sewer lines and wastewater disposal systems. Therefore, no impact would occur. No mitigation is required, and no further evaluation in the Draft SEIR is required. VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? † † † „ † b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? † † † „ † c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter-mile of an existing or proposed school? † † † „ † d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? „ † † † † e) For a project located within an airport land use plan (Los Alamitos Armed Forces Reserve Center or Fullerton Municipal Airport), would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? † † † „ † ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 18 Notice of Preparation & Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES (see attachment explanation and for information sources) Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact No New Impact f) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip, heliport, or helistop, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? † † † „ † g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? † † † „ † h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? † † † „ † Narrative Summary: Question A, B, and C – No Impact. The Proposed Project would not create a need to transport, use, or dispose of hazardous materials. Although there are a number of sensitive uses such as school campuses and daycare facilities within or surrounding the Project Site, the Proposed Project is not anticipated to include uses that would emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous materials, substances, or waste. As shown in Exhibit 4, several major arterial roadways— including Harbor Boulevard, Katella Avenue, and Ball Road—and the I-5 freeway are located within the ARSP area. Each of these roadways may be used to transport hazardous materials; however, the Project would neither increase the frequency of the transport nor would it introduce hazards which would increase the likelihood for accidental release of hazardous materials into the environment. This issue will not be addressed in the Draft SEIR. Question D – Potentially Significant Impact. A search of hazardous materials databases will be prepared for the Project. The Draft SEIR will summarize this report and identify any recommended mitigation measures. Questions E and F – No Impact. According to Figure 5.6-1 from EIR No. 330, the ARSP area is not located within the adopted Airport Land Use Plan for the Los Alamitos Armed Forces Reserve Center or the Fullerton Municipal Airport, nor is it located in the vicinity of a private airstrip (Anaheim 2004a). Additionally, there are four heliports within city limits that are used for take-off and landing. However, development of the Proposed Project would not impact heliport operations; therefore, further discussion of hazards related to airports, airstrips, or heliports is not warranted and will not be addressed in the Draft SEIR. Question G – No Impact. The Project Site is located within a fully developed area of the City and no major modifications to the existing circulation system are proposed. Any future modifications to the circulation system with the potential to impact existing emergency response or evacuation plans would be subject to review and approval of the City of Anaheim Planning Department, Fire Department, and Department of Public Works. This issue will not be discussed further in the Draft SEIR. Question H – No Impact. The Project Site is surrounded by urban development and there are no areas considered wildlands in proximity to the Project (EIR 330; Anaheim 2004a). Therefore, there is no risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildfires and this issue will not be discussed further in the Draft SEIR. VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? „ † † † † b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? „ † † † † c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? „ † † † † ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 19 Notice of Preparation & Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES (see attachment explanation and for information sources) Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact No New Impact d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? „ † † † † e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of pollutant runoff? „ † † † † f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? „ † † † † g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? † † † „ † h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? † † † „ † i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? † † † „ † j) Inundation by seiche or mudflow? † † † „ † k) Substantially degrade water quality by contributing pollutants from areas of material storage, vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle or equipment maintenance (including washing), waste handling, hazardous materials handling, or storage, delivery areas, loading docks or other outdoor work areas? „ † † † † l) Substantially degrade water quality by discharge which affects the beneficial uses swimming, fishing, etc.) of the receiving or waters? „ † † † † Narrative Summary: Questions A, B, C, D, E, F, K, and L – Potentially Significant Impact. As stated in EIR No. 313, the Project Site does not contribute significantly to groundwater recharge due to the small amount of area that is unpaved and subject to surface water infiltration. Implementation of the ARSP would result in an estimated loss of 12 acre-feet per year (AFY) of recharge water from the South Coast Groundwater Basin through development of the existing agricultural field in the southern portion of the ARSP area. However, this loss is considered less than significant relative to the total amount of recharge to the South Coast Groundwater Basin as a whole. The issue of groundwater recharge will not be discussed further in the Draft SEIR. A portion of the water supplied to the Project Site by the City is from groundwater sources. As discussed in EIR No. 313, water conservation measures which will be required of all new projects developed within the Project Site would reduce impacts to the groundwater supplies. These measures, as well as any additional measures that have been adopted since certification of EIR No. 313, will be included in the Draft SEIR. The Draft SEIR will address any new impacts related to groundwater supply which were not previously analyzed as part of EIR No. 313. The Draft SEIR will also include a discussion of the potential impacts related to hydrology. As discussed in EIR No. 313, the Proposed Project would be required to comply with current water quality regulations. Although EIR No. 313 previously analyzed hydrology and water quality impacts adequately for the ARSP, the Draft SEIR will address any new impacts related to compliance with current water quality regulations and address impacts associated with the Proposed Project. Mitigation measures will be identified as appropriate. Questions G, H, and I – No Impact. According to the Figures S-6 and S-7 of the Anaheim General Plan, the Project Site is located within the 100-Year (with flooding below 1 foot) to 500-Year Flood Zone and within the general limits of the flood impact zones associated with Prado Dam failure (Anaheim 2004a). Implementation of the Proposed Project may potentially expose more people and habitable structures to potential flooding. However, development of structures in compliance with local, State, and federal regulations, including compliance with the Cobey-Alquist Floodplain Management Act requirements and State of California Model Ordinance as set forth in the City of Anaheim General Plan ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 20 Notice of Preparation & Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES (see attachment explanation and for information sources) Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact No New Impact (2004b), would ensure that significant impacts would not occur. No mitigation is required and further discussion in the Draft SEIR is not warranted. Question J – No Impact. According to EIR No. 330, the Project Site is not located near any large, enclosed bodies of water that would cause a seiche. Additionally, the Project Site is a generally flat area that experiences such a slight change in elevation that it would not be subject to mudflows. This issue will not be discussed further in the Draft SEIR. IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING: Would the project a) Physically divide an established community? „ † † † † b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of any agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? „ † † † † c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? † † † „ † Narrative Summary: Question A – Potentially Significant Impact. As discussed in the Project Description, the ARSP area is largely developed with urban uses. Implementation of the Proposed Project would replace a number of the existing uses with visitor-serving uses consistent with the General Plan and ARSP. As detailed in EIR No. 313, future development has the potential to result in indirect compatibility impacts with adjacent residential uses located along the periphery of the Project Site, thereby resulting in a significant and unavoidable impact. The Draft SEIR will address potential compatibility impacts with adjacent existing land uses. Question B – Potentially Significant Impact. The Proposed Project continues development in accordance with the land use designations set forth in the ARSP and subsequent amendments. The Proposed Project is wholly consistent with existing General Plan and Specific Plan land use designations; the Convention Center expansion component of the Proposed Project would require an amendment to the ARSP. The Draft SEIR will evaluate the Proposed Project’s consistency with the General Plan and ARSP. It will also address consistency with other relevant local and regional planning documents, including the Southern California Association of Government’s (SCAG) Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide (RCPG). Question C – No Impact. According to the Anaheim General Plan Green Element, the Project Site is not located within a designated NCCP area (Anaheim 2004b). No further evaluation in the Draft SEIR is required. X. MINERAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? † † † „ † b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use? † † † „ † Narrative Summary: Question A and B – No Impact. The City of Anaheim General Plan (Figure G-3, Mineral Resource Map) does not identify the Project Site as a Mineral Resource Zone (MRZ) or a Regionally Significant Aggregate Resource Area (Anaheim 2004b); therefore, implementation of the Proposed Project would not result in the loss of the availability of mineral resources that would be of value locally or regionally. Therefore, no additional discussion of this issue in the Draft SEIR is necessary. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 21 Notice of Preparation & Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES (see attachment explanation and for information sources) Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact No New Impact XI. NOISE: Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? „ † † † † b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? „ † † † † c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? „ † † † † d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? „ † † † † e) For a project located within an airport land use plan (Los Alamitos Armed Forces Reserve Center or Fullerton Municipal Airport), would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? † † † „ † f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? † † † „ † Narrative Summary: Questions A, C, and D – Potentially Significant Impact. The Project Site is within a developed area; it is currently subject to roadway noise from the local circulation system and from other on-site and off-site noise sources that are typical of an urban area. Noise impacts will be evaluated in the Draft SEIR based on the City’s Noise Ordinance or other applicable standards. Mitigation measures will be identified, as necessary. Question B – Potentially Significant Impact. The Proposed Project would not lead to on-going Project operations that would generate any significant amounts of long-term groundborne vibration or noise; thus, no impact would occur based on the type of development proposed. However, there is the potential for temporary vibration and noise impacts during construction. Groundborne noise and vibration impacts will be addressed in the Draft SEIR and mitigation measures will be identified, as necessary. Questions E and F – No Impact. According to the Anaheim General Plan EIR No. 330, the Project Site is not within an airport land use plan, nor is it in the vicinity of a private airstrip (Anaheim 2004a). Future visitors and occupants of the Proposed Project would not be exposed to excessive noise levels from aircraft-related operations. There would be no impact and no mitigation is necessary. This issue will not be discussed further in the Draft SEIR. XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING: Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through the extension of roads or other infrastructure)? „ † † † † b) Displace substantial numbers of existing houses, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? „ † † † † c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? „ † † † † Narrative Summary: Questions A–C – Potentially Significant Impact. Potential impacts on local and regional population, housing, and employment resulting from implementation of the Proposed Project, as well as consistency with local and regional planning programs will be addressed in the Draft SEIR. This analysis will provide a comparison between what was ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 22 Notice of Preparation & Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES (see attachment explanation and for information sources) Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact No New Impact presented in EIR No. 313 and will focus analysis on any new impacts which were not previously addressed as part of EIR No. 313. XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES: Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? „ † † † † Police protection? „ † † † † Schools? „ † † † † Parks? „ † † † † Other public facilities? „ † † † † Narrative Summary: Question XIII. – Potentially Significant Impact. As discussed in EIR No. 313, there is the potential for implementation of the Proposed Project to significantly impact public services, including fire and police protection and parks, as well as other public facilities. Impacts to public services will be evaluated in the Draft SEIR and appropriate mitigation measures will be identified, as necessary. XIV. RECREATION: Would the project: a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? „ † † † † b) Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? „ † † † † Narrative Summary: Questions A and B – Potentially Significant Impact. The Proposed Project may indirectly and directly generate additional residents in the City of Anaheim and could result in an increase in use of park and recreational facilities provided in the City. Potential impacts to recreational resources will be discussed in the Draft SEIR. Similar to the Population and Housing analysis, this analysis will provide a comparison between what was presented in EIR No. 313 and will focus analysis on any new impacts which were not previously addressed as part of EIR No. 313. XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC: Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? „ † † † † b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? „ † † † † c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or change in location that results in substantial safety risks? † † † „ † ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 23 Notice of Preparation & Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES (see attachment explanation and for information sources) Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact No New Impact d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses? † † † „ † e) Result in inadequate emergency access? † † † „ † f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? † † † „ † g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation bus stops/routes, bicycle lanes, sidewalks, etc.)? † † † „ † Narrative Summary: Questions A and B – Potentially Significant Impact. The Proposed Project will create an increase in the volume of traffic and increase the number of vehicle trips to and from, and within, the Project Site in comparison to current levels. The previous analysis prepared as part of EIR No. 313 identified mitigation measures appropriate for reducing anticipated impacts. For the Proposed Project, a Traffic and Circulation Study will be prepared for the Draft SEIR to determine the potential traffic impacts, including compliance with level of service standards established for designated roads and highways in the vicinity of the Project Site, related to current traffic conditions. The Draft SEIR will present a comparison between the previous analysis presented in EIR No. 313 and the analysis based on current conditions. Any new impacts which were not previously identified and mitigated will be identified. Question C – No Impact. As previously discussed, the ARSP was originally adopted in 1994 and the assumptions associated with an increase in the number of visitors have been incorporated into long-range planning efforts. The Proposed Project would develop new visitor-serving uses consistent with the overall intent of the ARSP. Because airport planning is a regional issue and is tied to population projections which consider the continued increase in population, employment and visitors to the Project Site, the Proposed Project is not expected to result in new impacts to the volume of air travel that would occur. No mitigation is required and further discussion of this issue in the Draft SEIR is not warranted. Questions D and E – No Impact. The Project Site is within a fully developed area of the City. There are no major modifications to the existing vehicular circulation system proposed in conjunction with the Proposed Project. Any future modifications to the circulation system that could impact hazards relating to design features or impact emergency access would be subject to the review and approval of the City of Anaheim Planning Department, Fire Department, and Department of Public Works to avoid potential roadway and traffic-related hazards. No mitigation is required and further evaluation in the Draft SEIR is not warranted. Question F – No Impact. Parking associated with new developments within the Project Site would be subject to existing parking requirements set forth in Title 18 (Zoning) of the Anaheim Municipal Code and would be subject to review and approval by the City of Anaheim Planning Department. Question G – No Impact. The Proposed Project will be developed in compliance with previously-established alternative transportation modes and routes, including provisions for bus routes and bicycle lanes. Consistency of the Proposed Project with relevant adopted policies, plans, and programs will be discussed. No mitigation is required and no further evaluation in the Draft SEIR is required. XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? „ † † † † b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? „ † † † † c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? „ † † † † ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 24 Notice of Preparation & Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES (see attachment explanation and for information sources) Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact No New Impact d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project (including large-scale developments as defined by Public Resources Code Section 21151.9 and described in Question No. 20 of the Environmental Information Form) from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? „ † † † † e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? „ † † † † f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs? „ † † † † g) Comply with Federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? „ † † † † h) Result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations related to electricity? „ † † † † i) Result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations related to natural gas? „ † † † † j) Result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations related to telephone service? „ † † † † k) Result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations related to television service/ reception? „ † † † † Narrative Summary: Questions A, B, C, and E through K – Potentially Significant Impact. As previously addressed in EIR No. 313, implementation of the Proposed Project will require the implementation of new or modified water, wastewater, and storm water drainage facilities that would connect to existing utility systems provided by the City of Anaheim and other agencies. Additionally, the Proposed Project will generate solid waste that would be disposed of in the County of Orange’s landfill system. Based on the analysis presented in EIR No. 313, all impacts associated with utilities would be fully mitigated. However, new technical information based on current conditions and new regulations will be prepared and/or obtained through coordination with utility/service providers, and the Draft SEIR will evaluate any new impacts to utility/service systems related to the Proposed Project. The Draft SEIR will also evaluate the Proposed Project’s consistency with applicable statutes and regulations related to public services and utilities and potential physical impacts associated with implementation of utility systems. Through project design or mitigation, impacts to utility or services are expected to be fully mitigated to less than significant levels. Question D – Potentially Significant Impact. The Draft SEIR will evaluate impacts associated with implementation of the Proposed Project. A Water Supply Assessment will be prepared and summarized as part of the Draft SEIR. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? „ † † † † ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 25 Notice of Preparation & Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES (see attachment explanation and for information sources) Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact No New Impact b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) „ † † † † c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? „ † † † † Narrative Summary: Questions A through C – Potentially Significant Impact. Implementation of the Proposed Project has the potential to degrade the quality of the natural and human environment related to air quality, hydrology, and water quality and to also cumulatively affect the natural and human environment. Because of this potential for significant adverse effects, an SEIR will be prepared for the Project. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 26 Notice of Preparation & Initial Study REFERENCES CITED Anaheim, City of. 2006 (May). Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2 Amendment No. 7 Anaheim Resort Residential Overlay (prepared by BonTerra Consulting). Anaheim, CA: BonTerra Consulting. 2004a (March). Draft Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update Environmental Impact Report No. 330 SCH #[PHONE REDACTED] (prepared by The Planning Center). Anaheim, CA: The Planning Center. 2004b (May). General Plan for the City of Anaheim. Anaheim, CA: the City. 1994a (June). Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report No. 313 State Clearinghouse No. 91091062 (prepared by Michael Brandman Associates). Anaheim, CA: Michael Brandman Associates. 1994b (September). The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2. Anaheim, CA: the City. California, State of. 2008. Fish and Game Code (Sections 3500–3516, protection of resident and migratory game birds). Sacramento, CA: the State. http://info.sen.ca.gov/cgi- bin/waisgate?WAISdocID=84805710464+1+0+0&WAISaction=retrieve. 1994. California Public Resources Code (Section 2621–2630). Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act. Sacramento, CA: the State. http://info.sen.ca.gov/cgi- bin/displaycode?section=prc&group=02001-03000&file=2621-2630. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 27 Notice of Preparation & Initial Study LIST OF PREPARERS BonTerra Consulting (Environmental Document Preparation) Principal in Charge Joan Patronite Kelly, AICP Project Manager Jennifer Marks GIS/Graphics Johnnie Garcia Technical Editor Julia Smith Word Processor Sheryl Kristal ---PAGE BREAK--- APPENDIX A ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENTS AND ADJUSTMENTS ---PAGE BREAK--- A-1 Appendix A ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENTS AND ADJUSTMENTS In September 1994, the City of Anaheim certified The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan EIR No. 313 (State Clearinghouse No. 91091062) in support of the adoption of The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2 (Anaheim 1994b, 1994a). This EIR evaluated impacts associated with the establishment and implementation of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (ARSP) and created a mitigation monitoring program (MMP No. 0085) in order to mitigate any such impacts. At the time the ARSP was adopted, the Specific Plan area encompassed approximately 549.5 acres. The project site is located within the original boundaries of the ARSP. Since certification of EIR No. 313, proposed modifications to the ARSP have included twelve amendments and four adjustments. ARSP Amendment No. 1. In June 1997, the City Council approved General Plan Amendment No. 344, Amendment No. 1 to the ARSP, and Conditional Use Permit No 3917. These actions designated 4.67 acres, located on the northern side of Orangewood Avenue and east of Harbor Boulevard, for Commercial Recreation land use and incorporated the site into the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (SP92-2) Zone. Conditional Use Permit No. 3917 approved the conversion of an existing 139-unit, 2-story, 8-building apartment complex on this site into a 136-unit Vacation Ownership Resort (known as “Dolphin Cove”). An Initial Study was prepared to evaluate the environmental impacts of these actions and found that with implementation of the mitigation measures in Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 0085, there would not be a significant impact associated with the actions. A Mitigated Negative Declaration was approved along with Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 096, which incorporated applicable mitigation measures from Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 0085. ARSP Amendment No. 2. In October 1998, Amendment No. 2 to the ARSP was proposed to amend Chapter 18.116 of the Anaheim Municipal Code (Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 92-2 (SP92-2) Zoning and Development Standards) to add “coffee house” as a Conditionally Permitted Accessory Use in conjunction with an Automotive Service Station. The Planning Commission denied the amendment and the Applicant subsequently withdrew their petition at the January 26, 1999, City Council meeting. ARSP Amendment No. 3. In July 1999, the City Council approved General Plan Amendment No. 364 and Amendment No. 3 to the ARSP. These actions designated an approximate 0.73-acre site, located at the northwestern corner of Casa Grande Avenue and Casa Vista Street, for Commercial Recreation land use and reclassified the site into the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (SP92-2) Zone. The site is developed with 44 guest rooms of a 100-room motel. Prior to the amendments, the site was designated for Medium Density Residential land uses, while the balance of the motel (lobby and 56 guest rooms) was included in the SP 92-2 Zone and designated for Commercial Recreation land uses. As a result of the amendments, the entire hotel site is designated for Commercial Recreation land use and located in the SP 92-2 Zone. An Initial Study was prepared to evaluate the environmental impacts of these actions and found that, with the implementation of applicable mitigation measures from Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 0085, there would not be a significant impact associated with the actions. A Mitigated Negative Declaration was approved and Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 0108 was adopted, which incorporated applicable mitigation measures from Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 0085. ARSP Amendment No. 4. In June 2004, the City Council adopted Zoning Code Amendment No. 2004-00029, a comprehensive update of Title 18 (Zoning) of the Anaheim Municipal Code. This code amendment incorporated Amendment No. 4 into the ARSP, which included modifications to Chapter 18.116 (Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 92-2 (SP92-2) Zoning and Development Standards) intended to streamline the project review process. EIR No. 330, ---PAGE BREAK--- A-2 Appendix A certified in conjunction with the approval of the amendment, provided analysis of the amendment’s potential environmental impacts, as well as, analysis of the City’s comprehensive General Plan update (General Plan Amendment No. 2004-00419) and other related actions, including ARSP Amendment No. 5. ARSP Amendment No. 5. In June 2004, the City Council approved Amendment No. 5 to the ARSP in conjunction with a comprehensive update of the City’s General Plan and Zoning Code. Amendment No. 5 expanded The Anaheim Resort to the southern City limits by incorporating approximately 26.4 acres, located along Harbor Boulevard, south of Orangewood Avenue, into the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (SP92-2) Zone. EIR No. 330 was certified in conjunction with the approval of these actions; applicable mitigation measures related to Amendment No. 5 are contained in Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 0085a. ARSP Amendment No. 6. In February 2005, the City Council approved Amendment No. 6 to the ARSP. This amendment modified Chapter 18.116 of the Anaheim Municipal Code (Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 92-2 (SP92-2) Zoning and Development Standards) to permit convenience markets to sell beer and wine for off-premises consumption, as an accessory use to service stations in conjunction with the relocation of an existing service station, if such service station is relocated from a location with street frontage on Harbor Boulevard to a location not fronting on Harbor Boulevard. The City Council determined that the amendment was within the parameters assumptions and time frames analyzed in the previously certified EIR No. 313 for the ARSP. ARSP Amendment No. 7. In August 2006, the City Council approved General Plan Amendment No. 2006-00042 and Amendment No. 7 to the ARSP to create a residential overlay that would allow the development of residential uses in certain targeted areas when such uses are fully integrated into a minimum 300-room full service hotel. An Initial Study was prepared to evaluate the environmental impacts of Amendment No. 7 and determined that with the implementation of the mitigation measures in Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 0085b, there would not be a significant impact associated with Amendment No. 7, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration was approved. ARSP Amendment No. 8. In April 2007, the City Council approved General Plan Amendment No. 2006-00448 and Amendment No. 8 to the ARSP to allow for wholly-residential development, fifteen percent of which must be comprised of rental units affordable to low or very-low income households, on a designated 26.7-acre site located south and east of Katella Avenue and Haster Street. An addendum to the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for Amendment No. 7 analyzed the environmental impacts associated with Amendment No. 8. The City Council determined that the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Addendum were adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for these actions. ARSP Amendment No. 9. In November 2007, City Council repealed General Plan Amendment No. 2006-00448 and initiated Amendment No. 9 to the ARSP to repeal Amendment No. 8 to the ARSP. In March 2008, City Council approved Amendment No. 9, which removed all provisions in Chapter 18.116 (Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 92-2 (SP92-2) Zoning and Development Standards) related to wholly-residential development, with the exception of residential uses in certain targeted areas when such uses are fully integrated into a minimum 300-room full service hotel (as approved by Amendment No. The City Council determined that Amendment No. 9 did not constitute a “project” under CEQA, and, alternatively, if the amendment were to be considered a “project” that it would be exempt from CEQA under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3). ARSP Amendment No. 10. In February 2008, Planning Commission reviewed a proposal for a General Plan Amendment, Specific Plan Amendment (Amendment No. 10 to the ARSP), Zoning Reclassification, Conditional Use Permit, Final Site Plan, Development Agreement, Tentative ---PAGE BREAK--- A-3 Appendix A Parcel Map, and Tentative Tract Map to allow a 102-room hotel with 14,714 square feet of accessory commercial uses and a 191-unit condominium complex on approximately 5 acres located at 2232 Harbor Boulevard, in the southern portion of the ARSP area. Prior to the City Council taking final action on this request, the applicant withdrew the proposal due to the approval of the “SOAR” Initiative (see ARSP Amendment No. 11). A mitigated negative declaration was prepared as the environmental documentation for this project. ARSP Amendment No. 11. In March 2008, City Council adopted an initiative measure (the “SOAR” Initiative) to amend the General Plan and ARSP to generally prohibit residential development within The Anaheim Resort unless such a project included environmental and economic analysis, city council approval and voter approval at a city election (General Plan Amendment No. 2008-00466 and Amendment No. 11 to the ARSP). Approval of the initiative measure did not require environmental review under CEQA. ARSP Amendment No. 12. Amendment No. 12 to the ARSP is currently being processed to increase the allowable density on a 5.912-acre project site from C-R low density (50 hotel rooms per gross acre) to C-R Low Medium Density (75 hotel rooms per gross acre). The site would be divided into two separate parcels, allowing development of 154 hotel rooms on Parcel 1 and up to 288 hotel rooms on Parcel 2 for a total of up to 442 hotel rooms. This amendment is expected to be considered by City Council in Fall 2008. A mitigated negative declaration has been prepared as the environmental documentation for this amendment. ARSP Adjustment No. 1. In May 1999, the City Council approved Adjustment No. 1 to the ARSP, which amended Chapter 18.116 of the Anaheim Municipal Code (Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 92-2 (SP92-2) Zoning and Development Standards) to modify the setback and yard requirements to reflect the local street status of Convention Way. No environmental impacts are associated with this action. The City Council determined that the action was Categorically Exempt per Section 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines. ARSP Adjustment No. 2. In September 1999, the City Council approved Adjustment No. 2 to the ARSP, which amended Chapter 18.116 of the Anaheim Municipal Code (Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 92-2 (SP92-2) Zoning and Development Standards) to modify the minimum landscape setback requirement for properties adjacent to Manchester Avenue between Katella Avenue and the southern boundary of The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan area. No environmental impacts are associated with this action. The City Council determined that the action was Categorically Exempt per Section 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines. ARSP Adjustment No. 3. In May 2001, the City Council approved Adjustment No. 3 to the ARSP, which amended the temporary parking requirements in Chapter 18.116 of the Anaheim Municipal Code (Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 92-2 (SP92-2) Zoning and Development Standards). No environmental impacts are associated with this action. The City determined that the action was Categorically Exempt per Section 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines. ARSP Adjustment No. 4. In April 2004, the City Council approved Adjustment No. 4 to the ARSP, which amended Chapter 18.116 of the Anaheim Municipal Code (Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 92-2 (SP92-2) Zoning and Development Standards) to permit office uses in legal nonconforming buildings subject to the approval of a conditional use permit. The City determined that the previously certified EIR No. 313 and Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 0085 were the appropriate environmental documentation for the request. Environmental impacts associated with a specific office use in a legal nonconforming building are evaluated in connection with the Conditional Use Permit application. ---PAGE BREAK--- A-4 Appendix A TABLE 1 ARSP AMENDMENTS AND ADJUSTMENTS SUMMARY Action Proposal/ Approval Date Acreagea Existing Roomsa Permitted New Roomsa Total Roomsa Original Project As Approved ARSP Approved August 1994 549.5 11,190 16,318 27,508 Proposed and Approved Modifications to Original Project Amendment No. 1 Approved June 1997 4.67 136 214 350 Amendment No. 2 Proposed Amendment Withdrawn Amendment No. 3 Approved July 1999 0.73 44 10 54 Amendment No. 4 Amendment No. 4 included as part of the citywide Zoning Code Update, which was adopted in June 2004. Amendment No. 5b Approved June 2004 26.4 515 2,260 2,775 Amendment No. 6 Amendment No. 6, which was approved in February 2005, modified the zoning code to allow sale of beer and wine for off-premises consumption. Amendment No. 7 Amendment No. 7 established a residential overlay that allows for residential uses in conjunction with visitor-serving uses on two sites totaling 59.3 acres. Amendment No. 8 Amendment No. 8, approved in April 2007, allows for a wholly-residential development on 26.7 acres. Amendment No. 9 Amendment No. 9 repealed development standards for wholly residential development, previously approved by Amendment No. 8, with the exception of residential uses integrated into a full-service hotel (allowed by Amendment No. Amendment No. 10 Proposed Amendment Withdrawn Amendment No. 11 Amendment No. 11 involved the adoption of an initiative measure; No new uses proposed. Amendment No. 12 Approved September 2008 n/a 255 442 187c Adjustment No. 1 May 1999 Amendment of setback and yard requirements adjacent to Convention Way; no new uses proposed. Adjustment No. 2 September 1999 Amendment of setback and yard requirements adjacent to Manchester Avenue; no new uses proposed. Adjustment No. 3 May 2001 Amendment of temporary parking requirements; no new uses proposed. Adjustment No. 4 April 2004 Amendment relating to permitting office uses in a legal nonconforming building subject to the approval of a conditional use permit. Sub-Total Approved Modifications 31.8 950 2,926 3,366 Total ARSP plus Approved Modifications 581.3 12,140 19,244 30,874 a All amendment acreages and room counts are additive to the total amount. b All amendments through Amendment No. 5 have been considered and analyzed as part of The General Plan and Zoning Code Update EIR No. 330 c Amendment No. 12 would allow for development of up to 442 hotel rooms on two parcels currently within the ARSP. However, because 255 hotel rooms are already built, the amendment would allow for development of up to 187 additional rooms. ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- APPENDIX C AIR QUALITY TECHNICAL APPENDIX ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 5/3/2010 03:53:35 PM ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 57.27 116.87 101.23 0.00 0.22 0.22 ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 860.85 994.66 8,822.71 8.75 1,427.54 278.53 unadjusted 1,028.72 1,188.62 10,543.14 10.46 1,705.91 332.84 VMT ratio 1.195 adjusted for forecast VMT ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 918.12 1,111.53 8,923.94 8.75 1,427.76 278.75 unadjusted 1,086 1,305 10,644 10 1,706 333 adjusted for forecast VMT Urbemis 2007 Version 9.2.4 Summary Report for Summer Emissions (Pounds/Day) File Name: C:\Documents and Settings\BonTerra User\My Documents\Current\Anaheim J050 convention\Air\Urbemis\CR-PR 2010 exist 050310.urb924 Project Name: ARSP 2010 EXISTING P-R C-R District Project Location: South Coast AQMD On-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006 TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) SUM OF AREA SOURCE AND OPERATIONAL EMISSION ESTIMATES TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) Off-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: OFFROAD2007 AREA SOURCE EMISSION ESTIMATES TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) OPERATIONAL (VEHICLE) EMISSION ESTIMATES ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 5/3/2010 03:54:58 PM ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 57.02 116.83 98.14 0.00 0.21 0.21 ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 931.83 1,195.97 8,650.00 7.29 1,427.54 278.53 unadjusted 1,113.54 1,429.18 10,336.75 8.71 1,705.91 332.84 VMT ratio 1.195 adjusted for forecast VMT ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 988.85 1,312.80 8,748.14 7.29 1,427.75 278.74 unadjusted 1,171 1,546 10,435 9 1,706 333 adjusted for forecast VMT Urbemis 2007 Version 9.2.4 Summary Report for Winter Emissions (Pounds/Day) File Name: C:\Documents and Settings\BonTerra User\My Documents\Current\Anaheim J050 convention\Air\Urbemis\CR-PR 2010 exist 050310.urb924 Project Name: ARSP 2010 EXISTING P-R C-R District Project Location: South Coast AQMD On-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006 TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) SUM OF AREA SOURCE AND OPERATIONAL EMISSION ESTIMATES TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) Off-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: OFFROAD2007 AREA SOURCE EMISSION ESTIMATES TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) OPERATIONAL (VEHICLE) EMISSION ESTIMATES ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 5/3/2010 03:54:18 PM ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 8.48 116.83 98.14 0.00 0.21 0.25 0.04 3.09 0.00 0.01 0.00 48.54 57.27 116.87 101.23 0.00 0.22 Architectural Coatings TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) 0.22 Area Source Changes to Defaults Hearth - No Summer Emissions Landscape 0.01 Consumer Products Off-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: OFFROAD2007 AREA SOURCE EMISSION ESTIMATES (Summer Pounds Per Day, Unmitigated) Source PM2.5 Natural Gas 0.21 Urbemis 2007 Version 9.2.4 Detail Report for Summer Area Source Unmitigated Emissions (Pounds/Day) File Name: C:\Documents and Settings\BonTerra User\My Documents\Current\Anaheim J050 convention\Air\Urbemis\CR-PR 2010 exist 050310.urb924 Project Name: ARSP 2010 EXISTING P-R C-R District Project Location: South Coast AQMD On-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006 ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 5/3/2010 03:53:54 PM Light Auto 51.7 1.2 98.6 0.2 Vehicle Fleet Mix Vehicle Type Percent Type Non-Catalyst Catalyst Diesel 152,489.06 126,454.79 825,716.63 General office building 11.01 1000 sq ft 1,700.00 18,717.00 Total VMT Hotel 8.17 rooms 13,187.00 107,737.79 673,227.57 Land Use Type Acreage Trip Rate Unit Type No. Units Total Trips 278.53 Includes correction for passby trips Does not include double counting adjustment for internal trips Analysis Year: 2010 Temperature 80 Season: Summer Emfac: Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006 Summary of Land Uses TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) 860.85 994.66 8,822.71 8.75 1,427.54 227.10 General office building 143.12 179.48 1,627.08 1.62 263.62 51.43 Hotel 717.73 815.18 7,195.63 7.13 1,163.92 Off-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: OFFROAD2007 OPERATIONAL EMISSION ESTIMATES (Summer Pounds Per Day, Unmitigated) Source ROG NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM25 Urbemis 2007 Version 9.2.4 Detail Report for Summer Operational Unmitigated Emissions (Pounds/Day) File Name: C:\Documents and Settings\BonTerra User\My Documents\Current\Anaheim J050 convention\Air\Urbemis\CR-PR 2010 exist 050310.urb924 Project Name: ARSP 2010 EXISTING P-R C-R District Project Location: South Coast AQMD On-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006 ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 5/3/2010 03:53:54 PM Operational Changes to Defaults 92.5 General office building 35.0 17.5 47.5 Hotel 5.0 2.5 % of Trips - Commercial (by land use) 30.0 % of Trips - Residential 32.9 18.0 49.1 Trip speeds (mph) 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 8.9 Rural Trip Length (miles) 17.6 12.1 14.9 15.4 9.6 12.6 Urban Trip Length (miles) 12.7 7.0 9.5 13.3 7.4 Residential Commercial Home-Work Home-Shop Home-Other Commute Non-Work Customer Motor Home 0.9 0.0 88.9 11.1 Travel Conditions 2.8 67.9 32.1 0.0 School Bus 0.1 0.0 0.0 100.0 Other Bus 0.1 0.0 0.0 100.0 Urban Bus 0.1 0.0 0.0 100.0 Med-Heavy Truck 14,001-33,000 lbs 0.9 0.0 22.2 77.8 Heavy-Heavy Truck 33,001-60,000 lbs 0.5 0.0 0.0 100.0 Lite-Heavy Truck 8501-10,000 lbs 1.6 0.0 81.2 18.8 Lite-Heavy Truck 10,001-14,000 lbs 0.5 0.0 60.0 40.0 Light Truck 3751-5750 lbs 22.9 0.4 99.6 0.0 Med Truck 5751-8500 lbs 10.6 0.9 99.1 0.0 Light Truck < 3750 lbs 7.3 2.7 94.6 2.7 ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 5/4/2010 09:13:35 AM unadjusted 872.87 979.96 8,788.22 2,131.95 415.59 VMT ratio 1.494 adjusted for forecast VMT unadjusted 930 1,097 8,889 2,132 416 adjusted for forecast VMT Urbemis 2007 Version 9.2.4 Combined Summer Emissions Reports (Pounds/Day) File Name: C:\Documents and Settings\BonTerra User\My Documents\Current\Anaheim J050 convention\Air\Urbemis\CR-PR 2015 no proj 050410.urb924 Project Name: ARSP 2015 No Project P-R C-R District Project Location: South Coast AQMD On-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006 NOx CO SO2 PM10 Off-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: OFFROAD2007 Summary Report: AREA SOURCE EMISSION ESTIMATES PM2.5 TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) 57.27 116.87 101.23 0.00 0.22 0.22 ROG OPERATIONAL (VEHICLE) EMISSION ESTIMATES ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) 584.25 655.93 5,882.34 8.73 1,427.01 278.17 SUM OF AREA SOURCE AND OPERATIONAL EMISSION ESTIMATES ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) 641.52 772.80 5,983.57 8.73 1,427.23 278.39 Area Source Unmitigated Detail Report: AREA SOURCE EMISSION ESTIMATES Summer Pounds Per Day, Unmitigated Source ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Natural Gas 8.48 116.83 98.14 0.00 0.21 0.21 Hearth - No Summer Emissions ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 5/4/2010 09:13:35 AM 0.04 3.09 0.00 0.01 0.01 Consumer Products 0.00 Landscape 0.25 Architectural Coatings 48.54 SO2 PM10 TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) 57.27 116.87 101.23 0.00 0.22 0.22 1,163.48 226.80 Area Source Changes to Defaults Operational Unmitigated Detail Report: OPERATIONAL EMISSION ESTIMATES Summer Pounds Per Day, Unmitigated Source ROG NOX CO 118.15 1,085.75 1.62 263.53 PM25 Hotel 488.38 537.78 4,796.59 7.11 51.37 TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) 584.25 655.93 5,882.34 8.73 1,427.01 278.17 General office building 95.87 Operational Settings: Includes correction for passby trips Does not include double counting adjustment for internal trips Analysis Year: 2015 Temperature 80 Season: Summer Emfac: Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006 Summary of Land Uses 107,737.79 673,227.57 Land Use Type Acreage Trip Rate Unit Type No. Units Total Trips 11.01 1000 sq ft 1,700.00 18,717.00 Total VMT Hotel 8.17 rooms 13,187.00 152,489.06 126,454.79 825,716.63 General office building Vehicle Fleet Mix ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 5/4/2010 09:13:35 AM Vehicle Type Percent Type Non-Catalyst Catalyst Diesel Light Auto 50.9 0.2 99.6 0.2 Light Truck < 3750 lbs 7.3 1.4 95.9 2.7 Light Truck 3751-5750 lbs 23.2 0.0 100.0 0.0 Med Truck 5751-8500 lbs 10.8 0.0 100.0 0.0 Lite-Heavy Truck 8501-10,000 lbs 1.7 0.0 82.4 17.6 Lite-Heavy Truck 10,001-14,000 lbs 0.5 0.0 60.0 40.0 Med-Heavy Truck 14,001-33,000 lbs 0.9 0.0 22.2 77.8 Heavy-Heavy Truck 33,001-60,000 lbs 0.6 0.0 0.0 100.0 Other Bus 0.1 0.0 0.0 100.0 Urban Bus 0.1 0.0 0.0 100.0 2.9 48.3 51.7 0.0 School Bus 0.1 0.0 0.0 100.0 Motor Home 0.9 0.0 88.9 11.1 Travel Conditions Residential Commercial Home-Work Home-Shop Home-Other Commute Non-Work Customer 9.6 12.6 Urban Trip Length (miles) 12.7 7.0 9.5 13.3 7.4 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 8.9 Rural Trip Length (miles) 17.6 12.1 14.9 15.4 30.0 % of Trips - Residential 32.9 18.0 49.1 Trip speeds (mph) 30.0 5.0 2.5 % of Trips - Commercial (by land use) 92.5 General office building 35.0 17.5 47.5 Hotel ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 5/4/2010 09:14:16 AM unadjusted 927.79 1,175.51 8,497.13 2,131.95 415.59 VMT ratio 1.494 adjusted for forecast VMT unadjusted 985 1,292 8,595 2,132 416 adjusted for forecast VMT Urbemis 2007 Version 9.2.4 Combined Winter Emissions Reports (Pounds/Day) File Name: C:\Documents and Settings\BonTerra User\My Documents\Current\Anaheim J050 convention\Air\Urbemis\CR-PR 2015 no proj 050410.urb924 Project Name: ARSP 2015 No Project P-R C-R District Project Location: South Coast AQMD On-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006 NOx CO SO2 PM10 Off-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: OFFROAD2007 Summary Report: AREA SOURCE EMISSION ESTIMATES PM2.5 TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) 57.02 116.83 98.14 0.00 0.21 0.21 ROG OPERATIONAL (VEHICLE) EMISSION ESTIMATES ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) 621.01 786.82 5,687.50 7.25 1,427.01 278.17 SUM OF AREA SOURCE AND OPERATIONAL EMISSION ESTIMATES ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) 678.03 903.65 5,785.64 7.25 1,427.22 278.38 Area Source Unmitigated Detail Report: AREA SOURCE EMISSION ESTIMATES Winter Pounds Per Day, Unmitigated Source ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Natural Gas 8.48 116.83 98.14 0.00 0.21 0.21 ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 5/4/2010 09:14:16 AM 0.00 0.00 Hearth 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Consumer Products 0.00 Landscaping - No Winter Emissions Architectural Coatings 48.54 SO2 PM10 TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) 57.02 116.83 98.14 0.00 0.21 0.21 1,163.48 226.80 Area Source Changes to Defaults Operational Unmitigated Detail Report: OPERATIONAL EMISSION ESTIMATES Winter Pounds Per Day, Unmitigated Source ROG NOX CO 141.96 1,032.82 1.34 263.53 PM25 Hotel 516.82 644.86 4,654.68 5.91 51.37 TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) 621.01 786.82 5,687.50 7.25 1,427.01 278.17 General office building 104.19 Operational Settings: Includes correction for passby trips Does not include double counting adjustment for internal trips Analysis Year: 2015 Temperature 60 Season: Winter Emfac: Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006 Summary of Land Uses 107,737.79 673,227.57 Land Use Type Acreage Trip Rate Unit Type No. Units Total Trips 11.01 1000 sq ft 1,700.00 18,717.00 Total VMT Hotel 8.17 rooms 13,187.00 152,489.06 126,454.79 825,716.63 General office building ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 5/4/2010 09:14:16 AM Vehicle Fleet Mix Vehicle Type Percent Type Non-Catalyst Catalyst Diesel Light Auto 50.9 0.2 99.6 0.2 Light Truck < 3750 lbs 7.3 1.4 95.9 2.7 Light Truck 3751-5750 lbs 23.2 0.0 100.0 0.0 Med Truck 5751-8500 lbs 10.8 0.0 100.0 0.0 Lite-Heavy Truck 8501-10,000 lbs 1.7 0.0 82.4 17.6 Lite-Heavy Truck 10,001-14,000 lbs 0.5 0.0 60.0 40.0 Med-Heavy Truck 14,001-33,000 lbs 0.9 0.0 22.2 77.8 Heavy-Heavy Truck 33,001-60,000 lbs 0.6 0.0 0.0 100.0 Other Bus 0.1 0.0 0.0 100.0 Urban Bus 0.1 0.0 0.0 100.0 2.9 48.3 51.7 0.0 School Bus 0.1 0.0 0.0 100.0 Motor Home 0.9 0.0 88.9 11.1 Travel Conditions Residential Commercial Home-Work Home-Shop Home-Other Commute Non-Work Customer 9.6 12.6 Urban Trip Length (miles) 12.7 7.0 9.5 13.3 7.4 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 8.9 Rural Trip Length (miles) 17.6 12.1 14.9 15.4 30.0 % of Trips - Residential 32.9 18.0 49.1 Trip speeds (mph) 30.0 5.0 2.5 % of Trips - Commercial (by land use) 92.5 General office building 35.0 17.5 47.5 Hotel ---PAGE BREAK--- ROG NOx 2.87 21.56 2.87 21.56 0.00 0.00 2.84 21.51 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.05 9.76 88.74 9.76 88.74 0.00 0.00 7.56 62.72 2.14 25.91 0.06 0.12 9.15 81.09 9.15 81.09 0.00 0.00 7.17 58.30 1.93 22.68 0.06 0.11 11.18 96.84 9.15 81.09 0.00 0.00 7.17 58.30 1.93 22.68 0.06 0.11 2.03 15.75 2.00 15.71 0.02 0.04 Page: 1 4/28/2010 01:14:44 PM Urbemis 2007 Version 9.2.4 Detail Report for Summer Construction Mitigated Emissions (Pounds/Day) File Name: C:\Documents and Settings\BonTerra User\My Documents\Current\Anaheim J050 convention\Air\PR district.urb924 Project Name: ARSP P-R District Project Location: South Coast AQMD On-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006 Off-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: OFFROAD2007 CONSTRUCTION EMISSION ESTIMATES (Summer Pounds Per Day, Mitigated) CO SO2 PM10 Dust PM10 Exhaust PM10 Total PM2.5 Dust PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Total Time Slice 8/5/2013-10/4/2013 Active D 45 14.21 0.00 0.01 1.25 1.25 0.00 1.15 1.15 Demolition 08/05/2013-10/04/2013 14.21 0.00 0.01 1.25 1.25 0.00 1.15 1.15 Fugitive Dust 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Demo Off Road Diesel 13.37 0.00 0.00 1.24 1.24 0.00 1.14 1.14 Demo On Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Demo Worker Trips 0.84 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 Time Slice 10/7/2013-12/31/2013 A i D 62 43.62 0.05 51.32 3.76 55.08 10.74 3.46 14.20 Mass Grading 10/07/2013- 01/31/2014 43.62 0.05 51.32 3.76 55.08 10.74 3.46 14.20 Mass Grading Dust 0.00 0.00 51.14 0.00 51.14 10.68 0.00 10.68 Mass Grading Off Road Diesel 31.47 0.00 0.00 2.75 2.75 0.00 2.53 2.53 Mass Grading On Road Diesel 10.04 0.05 0.17 1.00 1.17 0.05 0.92 0.97 Mass Grading Worker Trips 2.11 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 Time Slice 1/1/2014-1/3/2014 Active D 3 40.88 0.05 51.32 3.38 54.70 10.74 3.11 13.85 Mass Grading 10/07/2013- 01/31/2014 40.88 0.05 51.32 3.38 54.70 10.74 3.11 13.85 Mass Grading Dust 0.00 0.00 51.14 0.00 51.14 10.68 0.00 10.68 Mass Grading Off Road Diesel 30.07 0.00 0.00 2.52 2.52 0.00 2.32 2.32 Mass Grading On Road Diesel 8.84 0.05 0.17 0.86 1.02 0.05 0.79 0.84 Mass Grading Worker Trips 1.96 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 Time Slice 1/6/2014-1/31/2014 Active D 20 51.77 0.05 51.33 4.19 55.51 10.74 3.85 14.59 Mass Grading 10/07/2013- 01/31/2014 40.88 0.05 51.32 3.38 54.70 10.74 3.11 13.85 Mass Grading Dust 0.00 0.00 51.14 0.00 51.14 10.68 0.00 10.68 Mass Grading Off Road Diesel 30.07 0.00 0.00 2.52 2.52 0.00 2.32 2.32 Mass Grading On Road Diesel 8.84 0.05 0.17 0.86 1.02 0.05 0.79 0.84 Mass Grading Worker Trips 1.96 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 Trenching 01/06/2014-04/04/2014 10.90 0.00 0.01 0.80 0.81 0.00 0.74 0.74 Trenching Off Road Diesel 10.11 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.80 0.00 0.73 0.73 Trenching Worker Trips 0.79 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 4/28/2010 01:14:44 PM 4.46 34.87 2.44 19.12 0.00 0.00 2.41 19.08 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.04 2.03 15.75 2.00 15.71 0.02 0.04 2.03 15.75 2.03 15.75 2.00 15.71 0.02 0.04 6.62 33.84 6.62 33.84 4.34 23.60 0.71 7.24 1.57 3.00 6.05 30.91 6.05 30.91 3.98 21.82 0.64 6.34 1.43 2.75 102.60 30.96 6.05 30.91 3.98 21.82 0.64 6.34 1.43 2.75 96.55 0.05 96.52 0.00 0.03 0.05 106.69 47.81 4.09 16.85 1.62 0.00 2.12 13.07 0.33 3.73 0.03 0.05 6.05 30.91 3.98 21.82 Time Slice 2/3/2014-3/7/2014 Active D 25 22.42 0.00 56.56 1.69 58.25 11.81 1.56 13.37 Fine Grading 02/03/2014- 03/07/2014 11.52 0.00 56.56 0.89 57.45 11.81 0.82 12.63 Fine Grading Dust 0.00 0.00 56.55 0.00 56.55 11.81 0.00 11.81 Fine Grading Off Road Diesel 10.74 0.00 0.00 0.89 0.89 0.00 0.82 0.82 Fine Grading On Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Fine Grading Worker Trips 0.79 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 Trenching 01/06/2014-04/04/2014 10.90 0.00 0.01 0.80 0.81 0.00 0.74 0.74 Trenching Off Road Diesel 10.11 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.80 0.00 0.73 0.73 Trenching Worker Trips 0.79 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 Time Slice 3/10/2014-4/4/2014 Active D 20 10.90 0.00 0.01 0.80 0.81 0.00 0.74 0.74 Trenching 01/06/2014-04/04/2014 10.90 0.00 0.01 0.80 0.81 0.00 0.74 0.74 Trenching Off Road Diesel 10.11 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.80 0.00 0.73 0.73 Trenching Worker Trips 0.79 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 Time Slice 4/7/2014-12/31/2014 Active D 193 77.62 0.11 0.48 1.96 2.44 0.17 1.78 1.96 Building 04/07/2014-09/25/2015 77.62 0.11 0.48 1.96 2.44 0.17 1.78 1.96 Building Off Road Diesel 16.54 0.00 0.00 1.41 1.41 0.00 1.30 1.30 Building Vendor Trips 6.95 0.02 0.08 0.30 0.37 0.03 0.27 0.30 Building Worker Trips 54.13 0.09 0.40 0.25 0.66 0.15 0.21 0.36 Time Slice 1/1/2015-1/2/2015 Active D 2 72.87 0.11 0.48 1.82 2.31 0.17 1.66 1.83 Building 04/07/2014-09/25/2015 72.87 0.11 0.48 1.82 2.31 0.17 1.66 1.83 Building Off Road Diesel 16.06 0.00 0.00 1.31 1.31 0.00 1.21 1.21 Building Vendor Trips 6.41 0.02 0.08 0.26 0.34 0.03 0.24 0.26 Building Worker Trips 50.40 0.09 0.40 0.25 0.66 0.15 0.21 0.36 Time Slice 1/5/2015-5/29/2015 Active D 105 73.79 0.11 0.49 1.83 2.32 0.18 1.66 1.83 Building 04/07/2014-09/25/2015 72.87 0.11 0.48 1.82 2.31 0.17 1.66 1.83 Building Off Road Diesel 16.06 0.00 0.00 1.31 1.31 0.00 1.21 1.21 Building Vendor Trips 6.41 0.02 0.08 0.26 0.34 0.03 0.24 0.26 Building Worker Trips 50.40 0.09 0.40 0.25 0.66 0.15 0.21 0.36 Coating 01/05/2015-10/30/2015 0.92 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 Architectural Coating 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Coating Worker Trips 0.92 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 Time Slice 6/1/2015-6/26/2015 Active D 20 85.10 0.12 0.53 3.08 3.61 0.19 2.81 3.00 Asphalt 06/01/2015-06/26/2015 11.31 0.01 0.04 1.25 1.29 0.01 1.15 1.16 Paving Off-Gas 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Paving Off Road Diesel 8.93 0.00 0.00 1.11 1.11 0.00 1.02 1.02 Paving On Road Diesel 1.46 0.01 0.03 0.14 0.17 0.01 0.13 0.14 Paving Worker Trips 0.91 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 Building 04/07/2014-09/25/2015 72.87 0.11 0.48 1.82 2.31 0.17 1.66 1.83 Building Off Road Diesel 16.06 0.00 0.00 1.31 1.31 0.00 1.21 1.21 ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 4/28/2010 01:14:44 PM 0.64 6.34 1.43 2.75 96.55 0.05 96.52 0.00 0.03 0.05 102.60 30.96 6.05 30.91 3.98 21.82 0.64 6.34 1.43 2.75 96.55 0.05 96.52 0.00 0.03 0.05 96.55 0.05 96.55 0.05 96.52 0.00 0.03 0.05 Building Vendor Trips 6.41 0.02 0.08 0.26 0.34 0.03 0.24 0.26 Building Worker Trips 50.40 0.09 0.40 0.25 0.66 0.15 0.21 0.36 Coating 01/05/2015-10/30/2015 0.92 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 Architectural Coating 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Coating Worker Trips 0.92 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 Time Slice 6/29/2015-9/25/2015 Active D 65 73.79 0.11 0.49 1.83 2.32 0.18 1.66 1.83 Building 04/07/2014-09/25/2015 72.87 0.11 0.48 1.82 2.31 0.17 1.66 1.83 Building Off Road Diesel 16.06 0.00 0.00 1.31 1.31 0.00 1.21 1.21 Building Vendor Trips 6.41 0.02 0.08 0.26 0.34 0.03 0.24 0.26 Building Worker Trips 50.40 0.09 0.40 0.25 0.66 0.15 0.21 0.36 Coating 01/05/2015-10/30/2015 0.92 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 Architectural Coating 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Coating Worker Trips 0.92 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 Time Slice 9/28/2015-10/30/2015 A i D 25 0.92 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 Coating 01/05/2015-10/30/2015 0.92 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 Architectural Coating 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Coating Worker Trips 0.92 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 Construction Related Mitigation Measures The following mitigation measures apply to Phase: Fine Grading 2/3/2014 - 3/7/2014 - Default Fine Site Grading/Excavation Description For Soil Stablizing Measures, the Water exposed surfaces 2x daily watering mitigation reduces emissions by: PM10: 55% PM25: 55% The following mitigation measures apply to Phase: Mass Grading 10/7/2013 - 1/31/2014 - Default Mass Site Grading/Excavation Description For Soil Stablizing Measures, the Apply soil stabilizers to inactive areas mitigation reduces emissions by: PM10: 84% PM25: 84% For Soil Stablizing Measures, the Water exposed surfaces 3x daily watering mitigation reduces emissions by: PM10: 61% PM25: 61% For Soil Stablizing Measures, the Equipment loading/unloading mitigation reduces emissions by: PM10: 69% PM25: 69% The following mitigation measures apply to Phase: Architectural Coating 1/5/2015 - 10/30/2015 - Default Architectural Coating Description For Nonresidential Architectural Coating Measures, the Nonresidential Exterior: Use Low VOC Coatings mitigation reduces emissions by: ROG: 10% For Nonresidential Architectural Coating Measures, the Nonresidential Interior: Use Low VOC Coatings mitigation reduces emissions by: ROG: 10% Phase Assumptions Phase: Demolition 8/5/2013 - 10/4/2013 - Default Demolition Description ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 4/28/2010 01:14:44 PM Building Volume Total (cubic feet): 0 Building Volume Daily (cubic feet): 0 On Road Truck Travel (VMT): 0 Off-Road Equipment: 1 Rubber Tired Dozers (357 hp) operating at a 0.59 load factor for 8 hours per day 3 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes (108 hp) operating at a 0.55 load factor for 8 hours per day Phase: Fine Grading 2/3/2014 - 3/7/2014 - Default Fine Site Grading/Excavation Description Total Acres Disturbed: 20 Maximum Daily Acreage Disturbed: 5 Fugitive Dust Level of Detail: Default 20 lbs per acre-day On Road Truck Travel (VMT): 0 Off-Road Equipment: 1 Graders (174 hp) operating at a 0.61 load factor for 6 hours per day 1 Rubber Tired Dozers (357 hp) operating at a 0.59 load factor for 6 hours per day 1 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes (108 hp) operating at a 0.55 load factor for 7 hours per day 1 Water Trucks (189 hp) operating at a 0.5 load factor for 8 hours per day Phase: Mass Grading 10/7/2013 - 1/31/2014 - Default Mass Site Grading/Excavation Description Total Acres Disturbed: 20 Maximum Daily Acreage Disturbed: 5 Fugitive Dust Level of Detail: Low Onsite Cut/Fill: 1500 cubic yards/day; Offsite Cut/Fill: 0 cubic yards/day On Road Truck Travel (VMT): 1176.47 Off-Road Equipment: 1 Graders (174 hp) operating at a 0.61 load factor for 6 hours per day 2 Rubber Tired Dozers (357 hp) operating at a 0.59 load factor for 6 hours per day 2 Scrapers (313 hp) operating at a 0.72 load factor for 8 hours per day 2 Signal Boards (15 hp) operating at a 0.78 load factor for 8 hours per day 2 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes (108 hp) operating at a 0.55 load factor for 7 hours per day 1 Water Trucks (189 hp) operating at a 0.5 load factor for 8 hours per day Phase: Trenching 1/6/2014 - 4/4/2014 - Default Trenching Description Off-Road Equipment: ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 4/28/2010 01:14:44 PM 2 Excavators (168 hp) operating at a 0.57 load factor for 8 hours per day 1 Other General Industrial Equipment (238 hp) operating at a 0.51 load factor for 8 hours per day 1 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes (108 hp) operating at a 0.55 load factor for 8 hours per day Phase: Paving 6/1/2015 - 6/26/2015 - Default Paving Description Acres to be Paved: 12.36 Off-Road Equipment: 1 Pavers (100 hp) operating at a 0.62 load factor for 8 hours per day 2 Paving Equipment (104 hp) operating at a 0.53 load factor for 6 hours per day 2 Rollers (95 hp) operating at a 0.56 load factor for 6 hours per day Phase: Building Construction 4/7/2014 - 9/25/2015 - Default Building Construction Description Off-Road Equipment: 2 Cranes (399 hp) operating at a 0.43 load factor for 7 hours per day 2 Forklifts (145 hp) operating at a 0.3 load factor for 7 hours per day 2 Generator Sets (49 hp) operating at a 0.74 load factor for 8 hours per day 2 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes (108 hp) operating at a 0.55 load factor for 8 hours per day 3 Welders (45 hp) operating at a 0.45 load factor for 8 hours per day Rule: Nonresidential Exterior Coatings begins 1/1/2005 ends 12/31/2040 specifies a VOC of 250 Phase: Architectural Coating 1/5/2015 - 10/30/2015 - Default Architectural Coating Description Rule: Residential Interior Coatings begins 1/1/2005 ends 6/30/2008 specifies a VOC of 100 Rule: Residential Interior Coatings begins 7/1/2008 ends 12/31/2040 specifies a VOC of 50 Rule: Residential Exterior Coatings begins 1/1/2005 ends 6/30/2008 specifies a VOC of 250 Rule: Residential Exterior Coatings begins 7/1/2008 ends 12/31/2040 specifies a VOC of 100 Rule: Nonresidential Interior Coatings begins 1/1/2005 ends 12/31/2040 specifies a VOC of 250 ---PAGE BREAK--- ROG NOx 2.87 21.56 2.87 21.56 0.00 0.00 2.84 21.51 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.05 9.76 88.74 9.76 88.74 0.00 0.00 7.56 62.72 2.14 25.91 0.06 0.12 9.15 81.09 9.15 81.09 0.00 0.00 7.17 58.30 1.93 22.68 0.06 0.11 11.18 96.84 9.15 81.09 0.00 0.00 7.17 58.30 1.93 22.68 0.06 0.11 2.03 15.75 2.00 15.71 0.02 0.04 Page: 1 4/29/2010 08:57:24 AM Urbemis 2007 Version 9.2.4 Detail Report for Summer Construction Mitigated Emissions (Pounds/Day) File Name: C:\Documents and Settings\BonTerra User\My Documents\Current\Anaheim J050 convention\Air\Urbemis\PR district -2 042810.urb924 Project Name: ARSP P-R District const with haul road mitigation Project Location: South Coast AQMD On-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006 Off-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: OFFROAD2007 CONSTRUCTION EMISSION ESTIMATES (Summer Pounds Per Day, Mitigated) CO SO2 PM10 Dust PM10 Exhaust PM10 Total PM2.5 Dust PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Total Time Slice 8/5/2013-10/4/2013 Active D 45 14.21 0.00 0.01 1.25 1.25 0.00 1.15 1.15 Demolition 08/05/2013-10/04/2013 14.21 0.00 0.01 1.25 1.25 0.00 1.15 1.15 Fugitive Dust 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Demo Off Road Diesel 13.37 0.00 0.00 1.24 1.24 0.00 1.14 1.14 Demo On Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Demo Worker Trips 0.84 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 Time Slice 10/7/2013-12/31/2013 A i D 62 43.62 0.05 14.06 3.76 17.82 2.96 3.46 6.42 Mass Grading 10/07/2013- 01/31/2014 43.62 0.05 14.06 3.76 17.82 2.96 3.46 6.42 Mass Grading Dust 0.00 0.00 13.88 0.00 13.88 2.90 0.00 2.90 Mass Grading Off Road Diesel 31.47 0.00 0.00 2.75 2.75 0.00 2.53 2.53 Mass Grading On Road Diesel 10.04 0.05 0.17 1.00 1.17 0.05 0.92 0.97 Mass Grading Worker Trips 2.11 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 Time Slice 1/1/2014-1/3/2014 Active D 3 40.88 0.05 14.06 3.38 17.44 2.96 3.11 6.07 Mass Grading 10/07/2013- 01/31/2014 40.88 0.05 14.06 3.38 17.44 2.96 3.11 6.07 Mass Grading Dust 0.00 0.00 13.88 0.00 13.88 2.90 0.00 2.90 Mass Grading Off Road Diesel 30.07 0.00 0.00 2.52 2.52 0.00 2.32 2.32 Mass Grading On Road Diesel 8.84 0.05 0.17 0.86 1.02 0.05 0.79 0.84 Mass Grading Worker Trips 1.96 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 Time Slice 1/6/2014-1/31/2014 Active D 20 51.77 0.05 14.07 4.19 18.25 2.96 3.85 6.81 Mass Grading 10/07/2013- 01/31/2014 40.88 0.05 14.06 3.38 17.44 2.96 3.11 6.07 Mass Grading Dust 0.00 0.00 13.88 0.00 13.88 2.90 0.00 2.90 Mass Grading Off Road Diesel 30.07 0.00 0.00 2.52 2.52 0.00 2.32 2.32 Mass Grading On Road Diesel 8.84 0.05 0.17 0.86 1.02 0.05 0.79 0.84 Mass Grading Worker Trips 1.96 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 Trenching 01/06/2014-04/04/2014 10.90 0.00 0.01 0.80 0.81 0.00 0.74 0.74 Trenching Off Road Diesel 10.11 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.80 0.00 0.73 0.73 Trenching Worker Trips 0.79 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 4/29/2010 08:57:24 AM 4.46 34.87 2.44 19.12 0.00 0.00 2.41 19.08 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.04 2.03 15.75 2.00 15.71 0.02 0.04 2.03 15.75 2.03 15.75 2.00 15.71 0.02 0.04 6.62 33.84 6.62 33.84 4.34 23.60 0.71 7.24 1.57 3.00 6.05 30.91 6.05 30.91 3.98 21.82 0.64 6.34 1.43 2.75 102.60 30.96 6.05 30.91 3.98 21.82 0.64 6.34 1.43 2.75 96.55 0.05 96.52 0.00 0.03 0.05 106.69 47.81 4.09 16.85 1.62 0.00 2.12 13.07 0.33 3.73 0.03 0.05 6.05 30.91 3.98 21.82 Time Slice 2/3/2014-3/7/2014 Active D 25 22.42 0.00 6.13 1.69 7.82 1.28 1.56 2.84 Fine Grading 02/03/2014- 03/07/2014 11.52 0.00 6.12 0.89 7.01 1.28 0.82 2.10 Fine Grading Dust 0.00 0.00 6.11 0.00 6.11 1.28 0.00 1.28 Fine Grading Off Road Diesel 10.74 0.00 0.00 0.89 0.89 0.00 0.82 0.82 Fine Grading On Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Fine Grading Worker Trips 0.79 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 Trenching 01/06/2014-04/04/2014 10.90 0.00 0.01 0.80 0.81 0.00 0.74 0.74 Trenching Off Road Diesel 10.11 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.80 0.00 0.73 0.73 Trenching Worker Trips 0.79 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 Time Slice 3/10/2014-4/4/2014 Active D 20 10.90 0.00 0.01 0.80 0.81 0.00 0.74 0.74 Trenching 01/06/2014-04/04/2014 10.90 0.00 0.01 0.80 0.81 0.00 0.74 0.74 Trenching Off Road Diesel 10.11 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.80 0.00 0.73 0.73 Trenching Worker Trips 0.79 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 Time Slice 4/7/2014-12/31/2014 Active D 193 77.62 0.11 0.48 1.96 2.44 0.17 1.78 1.96 Building 04/07/2014-09/25/2015 77.62 0.11 0.48 1.96 2.44 0.17 1.78 1.96 Building Off Road Diesel 16.54 0.00 0.00 1.41 1.41 0.00 1.30 1.30 Building Vendor Trips 6.95 0.02 0.08 0.30 0.37 0.03 0.27 0.30 Building Worker Trips 54.13 0.09 0.40 0.25 0.66 0.15 0.21 0.36 Time Slice 1/1/2015-1/2/2015 Active D 2 72.87 0.11 0.48 1.82 2.31 0.17 1.66 1.83 Building 04/07/2014-09/25/2015 72.87 0.11 0.48 1.82 2.31 0.17 1.66 1.83 Building Off Road Diesel 16.06 0.00 0.00 1.31 1.31 0.00 1.21 1.21 Building Vendor Trips 6.41 0.02 0.08 0.26 0.34 0.03 0.24 0.26 Building Worker Trips 50.40 0.09 0.40 0.25 0.66 0.15 0.21 0.36 Time Slice 1/5/2015-5/29/2015 Active D 105 73.79 0.11 0.49 1.83 2.32 0.18 1.66 1.83 Building 04/07/2014-09/25/2015 72.87 0.11 0.48 1.82 2.31 0.17 1.66 1.83 Building Off Road Diesel 16.06 0.00 0.00 1.31 1.31 0.00 1.21 1.21 Building Vendor Trips 6.41 0.02 0.08 0.26 0.34 0.03 0.24 0.26 Building Worker Trips 50.40 0.09 0.40 0.25 0.66 0.15 0.21 0.36 Coating 01/05/2015-10/30/2015 0.92 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 Architectural Coating 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Coating Worker Trips 0.92 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 Time Slice 6/1/2015-6/26/2015 Active D 20 85.10 0.12 0.53 3.08 3.61 0.19 2.81 3.00 Asphalt 06/01/2015-06/26/2015 11.31 0.01 0.04 1.25 1.29 0.01 1.15 1.16 Paving Off-Gas 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Paving Off Road Diesel 8.93 0.00 0.00 1.11 1.11 0.00 1.02 1.02 Paving On Road Diesel 1.46 0.01 0.03 0.14 0.17 0.01 0.13 0.14 Paving Worker Trips 0.91 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 Building 04/07/2014-09/25/2015 72.87 0.11 0.48 1.82 2.31 0.17 1.66 1.83 Building Off Road Diesel 16.06 0.00 0.00 1.31 1.31 0.00 1.21 1.21 ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 4/29/2010 08:57:24 AM 0.64 6.34 1.43 2.75 96.55 0.05 96.52 0.00 0.03 0.05 102.60 30.96 6.05 30.91 3.98 21.82 0.64 6.34 1.43 2.75 96.55 0.05 96.52 0.00 0.03 0.05 96.55 0.05 96.55 0.05 96.52 0.00 0.03 0.05 Building Vendor Trips 6.41 0.02 0.08 0.26 0.34 0.03 0.24 0.26 Building Worker Trips 50.40 0.09 0.40 0.25 0.66 0.15 0.21 0.36 Coating 01/05/2015-10/30/2015 0.92 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 Architectural Coating 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Coating Worker Trips 0.92 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 Time Slice 6/29/2015-9/25/2015 Active D 65 73.79 0.11 0.49 1.83 2.32 0.18 1.66 1.83 Building 04/07/2014-09/25/2015 72.87 0.11 0.48 1.82 2.31 0.17 1.66 1.83 Building Off Road Diesel 16.06 0.00 0.00 1.31 1.31 0.00 1.21 1.21 Building Vendor Trips 6.41 0.02 0.08 0.26 0.34 0.03 0.24 0.26 Building Worker Trips 50.40 0.09 0.40 0.25 0.66 0.15 0.21 0.36 Coating 01/05/2015-10/30/2015 0.92 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 Architectural Coating 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Coating Worker Trips 0.92 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 Time Slice 9/28/2015-10/30/2015 A i D 25 0.92 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 Coating 01/05/2015-10/30/2015 0.92 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 Architectural Coating 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Coating Worker Trips 0.92 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 Construction Related Mitigation Measures The following mitigation measures apply to Phase: Fine Grading 2/3/2014 - 3/7/2014 - Default Fine Site Grading/Excavation Description For Soil Stablizing Measures, the Apply soil stabilizers to inactive areas mitigation reduces emissions by: PM10: 84% PM25: 84% For Soil Stablizing Measures, the Water exposed surfaces 3x daily watering mitigation reduces emissions by: PM10: 61% PM25: 61% For Soil Stablizing Measures, the Equipment loading/unloading mitigation reduces emissions by: PM10: 69% PM25: 69% For Unpaved Roads Measures, the Reduce speed on unpaved roads to less than 15 mph mitigation reduces emissions by: PM10: 44% PM25: 44% For Unpaved Roads Measures, the Manage haul road dust 3x daily watering mitigation reduces emissions by: PM10: 61% PM25: 61% The following mitigation measures apply to Phase: Mass Grading 10/7/2013 - 1/31/2014 - Default Mass Site Grading/Excavation Description For Soil Stablizing Measures, the Apply soil stabilizers to inactive areas mitigation reduces emissions by: PM10: 84% PM25: 84% For Soil Stablizing Measures, the Water exposed surfaces 3x daily watering mitigation reduces emissions by: PM10: 61% PM25: 61% For Soil Stablizing Measures, the Equipment loading/unloading mitigation reduces emissions by: PM10: 69% PM25: 69% ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 4/29/2010 08:57:24 AM For Unpaved Roads Measures, the Reduce speed on unpaved roads to less than 15 mph mitigation reduces emissions by: PM10: 44% PM25: 44% For Unpaved Roads Measures, the Manage haul road dust 3x daily watering mitigation reduces emissions by: PM10: 61% PM25: 61% The following mitigation measures apply to Phase: Architectural Coating 1/5/2015 - 10/30/2015 - Default Architectural Coating Description For Nonresidential Architectural Coating Measures, the Nonresidential Exterior: Use Low VOC Coatings mitigation reduces emissions by: ROG: 10% For Nonresidential Architectural Coating Measures, the Nonresidential Interior: Use Low VOC Coatings mitigation reduces emissions by: ROG: 10% Phase Assumptions Phase: Demolition 8/5/2013 - 10/4/2013 - Default Demolition Description Building Volume Total (cubic feet): 0 Building Volume Daily (cubic feet): 0 On Road Truck Travel (VMT): 0 Off-Road Equipment: 1 Rubber Tired Dozers (357 hp) operating at a 0.59 load factor for 8 hours per day 3 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes (108 hp) operating at a 0.55 load factor for 8 hours per day Phase: Fine Grading 2/3/2014 - 3/7/2014 - Default Fine Site Grading/Excavation Description Total Acres Disturbed: 20 Maximum Daily Acreage Disturbed: 5 Fugitive Dust Level of Detail: Default 20 lbs per acre-day On Road Truck Travel (VMT): 0 Off-Road Equipment: 1 Graders (174 hp) operating at a 0.61 load factor for 6 hours per day 1 Rubber Tired Dozers (357 hp) operating at a 0.59 load factor for 6 hours per day 1 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes (108 hp) operating at a 0.55 load factor for 7 hours per day 1 Water Trucks (189 hp) operating at a 0.5 load factor for 8 hours per day Phase: Mass Grading 10/7/2013 - 1/31/2014 - Default Mass Site Grading/Excavation Description Total Acres Disturbed: 20 Maximum Daily Acreage Disturbed: 5 Fugitive Dust Level of Detail: Low ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 4/29/2010 08:57:24 AM Onsite Cut/Fill: 1500 cubic yards/day; Offsite Cut/Fill: 0 cubic yards/day On Road Truck Travel (VMT): 1176.47 Off-Road Equipment: 1 Graders (174 hp) operating at a 0.61 load factor for 6 hours per day 2 Rubber Tired Dozers (357 hp) operating at a 0.59 load factor for 6 hours per day 2 Scrapers (313 hp) operating at a 0.72 load factor for 8 hours per day 2 Signal Boards (15 hp) operating at a 0.78 load factor for 8 hours per day 2 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes (108 hp) operating at a 0.55 load factor for 7 hours per day 1 Water Trucks (189 hp) operating at a 0.5 load factor for 8 hours per day Phase: Trenching 1/6/2014 - 4/4/2014 - Default Trenching Description Off-Road Equipment: 2 Excavators (168 hp) operating at a 0.57 load factor for 8 hours per day 1 Other General Industrial Equipment (238 hp) operating at a 0.51 load factor for 8 hours per day 1 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes (108 hp) operating at a 0.55 load factor for 8 hours per day Phase: Paving 6/1/2015 - 6/26/2015 - Default Paving Description Acres to be Paved: 12.36 Off-Road Equipment: 1 Pavers (100 hp) operating at a 0.62 load factor for 8 hours per day 2 Paving Equipment (104 hp) operating at a 0.53 load factor for 6 hours per day 2 Rollers (95 hp) operating at a 0.56 load factor for 6 hours per day Phase: Building Construction 4/7/2014 - 9/25/2015 - Default Building Construction Description Off-Road Equipment: 2 Cranes (399 hp) operating at a 0.43 load factor for 7 hours per day 2 Forklifts (145 hp) operating at a 0.3 load factor for 7 hours per day 2 Generator Sets (49 hp) operating at a 0.74 load factor for 8 hours per day 2 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes (108 hp) operating at a 0.55 load factor for 8 hours per day 3 Welders (45 hp) operating at a 0.45 load factor for 8 hours per day Phase: Architectural Coating 1/5/2015 - 10/30/2015 - Default Architectural Coating Description Rule: Residential Interior Coatings begins 1/1/2005 ends 6/30/2008 specifies a VOC of 100 Rule: Residential Interior Coatings begins 7/1/2008 ends 12/31/2040 specifies a VOC of 50 Rule: Residential Exterior Coatings begins 1/1/2005 ends 6/30/2008 specifies a VOC of 250 ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 4/29/2010 08:57:24 AM Rule: Nonresidential Exterior Coatings begins 1/1/2005 ends 12/31/2040 specifies a VOC of 250 Rule: Residential Exterior Coatings begins 7/1/2008 ends 12/31/2040 specifies a VOC of 100 Rule: Nonresidential Interior Coatings begins 1/1/2005 ends 12/31/2040 specifies a VOC of 250 ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 5/4/2010 08:46:27 AM unadjusted 942.84 1,049.78 9,418.14 2,259.69 440.69 VMT ratio 1.285 adjusted for forecast VMT unadjusted 1,008 1,179 9,534 2,260 441 adjusted for forecast VMT Urbemis 2007 Version 9.2.4 Combined Summer Emissions Reports (Pounds/Day) File Name: C:\Documents and Settings\BonTerra User\My Documents\Current\Anaheim J050 convention\Air\Urbemis\CR-PR 2015 w-proj 050410.urb924 Project Name: ARSP 2015 build P-R Project Location: South Coast AQMD On-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006 NOx CO SO2 PM10 Off-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: OFFROAD2007 Summary Report: AREA SOURCE EMISSION ESTIMATES PM2.5 TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) 64.80 128.84 115.87 0.00 0.26 0.26 ROG OPERATIONAL (VEHICLE) EMISSION ESTIMATES ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) 733.73 816.95 7,329.29 10.76 1,758.51 342.95 SUM OF AREA SOURCE AND OPERATIONAL EMISSION ESTIMATES ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) 798.53 945.79 7,445.16 10.76 1,758.77 343.21 Area Source Unmitigated Detail Report: AREA SOURCE EMISSION ESTIMATES Summer Pounds Per Day, Unmitigated Source ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Natural Gas 9.35 128.74 108.14 0.00 0.23 0.23 ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 5/4/2010 08:46:27 AM 0.10 7.73 0.00 0.03 Hearth - No Summer Emissions 0.03 Consumer Products 0.00 Landscape 0.61 Architectural Coatings 54.84 SO2 PM10 TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) 64.80 128.84 115.87 0.00 0.26 0.26 43.49 8.52 Area Source Changes to Defaults Operational Unmitigated Detail Report: OPERATIONAL EMISSION ESTIMATES Summer Pounds Per Day, Unmitigated Source ROG NOX CO 55.21 494.53 0.66 106.40 PM25 High turnover (sit-down) rest. 21.87 22.24 199.09 0.27 20.85 Hotel 521.71 574.49 5,123.96 7.59 1,242.89 242.28 Fast food rest. w/o drive thru 55.27 332.67 64.85 Strip mall 13.86 15.87 141.11 0.20 33.06 816.95 7,329.29 10.76 1,758.51 6.45 General office building 121.02 149.14 1,370.60 2.04 Total Trips Total VMT 342.95 Operational Settings: Includes correction for passby trips Does not include double counting adjustment for internal trips Analysis Year: 2015 Temperature 80 Season: Summer Emfac: Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006 TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) 733.73 Summary of Land Uses Land Use Type Acreage Trip Rate Unit Type No. Units ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 5/4/2010 08:46:27 AM 127.15 1000 sq ft 54.00 6,866.10 25,131.62 Fast food rest. w/o drive thru 496.12 1000 sq ft 36.00 17,860.32 61,480.00 High turnover (sit-down) rest. 3,864.60 19,124.39 Hotel 8.17 rooms 14,087.00 115,090.79 11.01 1000 sq ft 2,146.00 23,627.46 719,174.70 Strip mall 42.94 1000 sq ft 90.00 192,495.02 167,309.27 1,017,405.73 General office building Vehicle Fleet Mix Vehicle Type Percent Type Non-Catalyst Catalyst Diesel Light Auto 50.9 0.2 99.6 0.2 Light Truck < 3750 lbs 7.3 1.4 95.9 2.7 Light Truck 3751-5750 lbs 23.2 0.0 100.0 0.0 Med Truck 5751-8500 lbs 10.8 0.0 100.0 0.0 Lite-Heavy Truck 8501-10,000 lbs 1.7 0.0 82.4 17.6 Lite-Heavy Truck 10,001-14,000 lbs 0.5 0.0 60.0 40.0 Med-Heavy Truck 14,001-33,000 lbs 0.9 0.0 22.2 77.8 Heavy-Heavy Truck 33,001-60,000 lbs 0.6 0.0 0.0 100.0 Other Bus 0.1 0.0 0.0 100.0 Urban Bus 0.1 0.0 0.0 100.0 2.9 48.3 51.7 0.0 School Bus 0.1 0.0 0.0 100.0 Home-Other Commute Non-Work Customer Motor Home 0.9 0.0 88.9 11.1 Travel Conditions 7.0 9.5 13.3 7.4 Residential Commercial Home-Work Home-Shop 8.9 Rural Trip Length (miles) 17.6 12.1 14.9 15.4 9.6 12.6 Urban Trip Length (miles) 12.7 ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 5/4/2010 08:46:27 AM Trip speeds (mph) 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 % of Trips - Residential 32.9 18.0 49.1 % of Trips - Commercial (by land use) 2.5 92.5 High turnover (sit-down) rest. 5.0 2.5 5.0 2.5 92.5 Fast food rest. w/o drive thru 5.0 92.5 Strip mall 2.0 1.0 97.0 Hotel 47.5 General office building 35.0 17.5 ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 5/4/2010 08:47:13 AM unadjusted 1,017.90 1,258.66 9,147.68 2,259.69 440.69 VMT ratio 1.285 adjusted for forecast VMT unadjusted 1,082 1,387 9,256 2,260 441 adjusted for forecast VMT Urbemis 2007 Version 9.2.4 Combined Winter Emissions Reports (Pounds/Day) File Name: C:\Documents and Settings\BonTerra User\My Documents\Current\Anaheim J050 convention\Air\Urbemis\CR-PR 2015 w-proj 050410.urb924 Project Name: ARSP 2015 build P-R Project Location: South Coast AQMD On-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006 NOx CO SO2 PM10 Off-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: OFFROAD2007 Summary Report: AREA SOURCE EMISSION ESTIMATES PM2.5 TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) 64.19 128.74 108.14 0.00 0.23 0.23 ROG OPERATIONAL (VEHICLE) EMISSION ESTIMATES ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) 792.14 979.50 7,118.82 8.95 1,758.51 342.95 SUM OF AREA SOURCE AND OPERATIONAL EMISSION ESTIMATES ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) 856.33 1,108.24 7,226.96 8.95 1,758.74 343.18 Area Source Unmitigated Detail Report: AREA SOURCE EMISSION ESTIMATES Winter Pounds Per Day, Unmitigated Source ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 0.00 0.00 Natural Gas 9.35 128.74 108.14 0.00 0.23 0.23 Hearth 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 5/4/2010 08:47:13 AM Consumer Products 0.00 Landscaping - No Winter Emissions Architectural Coatings 54.84 SO2 PM10 TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) 64.19 128.74 108.14 0.00 0.23 0.23 43.49 8.52 Area Source Changes to Defaults Operational Unmitigated Detail Report: OPERATIONAL EMISSION ESTIMATES Winter Pounds Per Day, Unmitigated Source ROG NOX CO 65.88 502.27 0.55 106.40 PM25 High turnover (sit-down) rest. 26.06 26.55 201.13 0.22 20.85 Hotel 552.09 688.87 4,972.36 6.31 1,242.89 242.28 Fast food rest. w/o drive thru 66.46 332.67 64.85 Strip mall 16.01 19.00 139.28 0.17 33.06 979.50 7,118.82 8.95 1,758.51 6.45 General office building 131.52 179.20 1,303.78 1.70 Total Trips Total VMT 342.95 Operational Settings: Includes correction for passby trips Does not include double counting adjustment for internal trips Analysis Year: 2015 Temperature 60 Season: Winter Emfac: Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006 TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) 792.14 127.15 1000 sq ft 54.00 6,866.10 Summary of Land Uses Land Use Type Acreage Trip Rate Unit Type No. Units 25,131.62 High turnover (sit-down) rest. ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 5/4/2010 08:47:13 AM Fast food rest. w/o drive thru 496.12 1000 sq ft 36.00 17,860.32 61,480.00 3,864.60 19,124.39 Hotel 8.17 rooms 14,087.00 115,090.79 11.01 1000 sq ft 2,146.00 23,627.46 719,174.70 Strip mall 42.94 1000 sq ft 90.00 192,495.02 167,309.27 1,017,405.73 General office building Vehicle Fleet Mix Vehicle Type Percent Type Non-Catalyst Catalyst Diesel Light Auto 50.9 0.2 99.6 0.2 Light Truck < 3750 lbs 7.3 1.4 95.9 2.7 Light Truck 3751-5750 lbs 23.2 0.0 100.0 0.0 Med Truck 5751-8500 lbs 10.8 0.0 100.0 0.0 Lite-Heavy Truck 8501-10,000 lbs 1.7 0.0 82.4 17.6 Lite-Heavy Truck 10,001-14,000 lbs 0.5 0.0 60.0 40.0 Med-Heavy Truck 14,001-33,000 lbs 0.9 0.0 22.2 77.8 Heavy-Heavy Truck 33,001-60,000 lbs 0.6 0.0 0.0 100.0 Other Bus 0.1 0.0 0.0 100.0 Urban Bus 0.1 0.0 0.0 100.0 2.9 48.3 51.7 0.0 School Bus 0.1 0.0 0.0 100.0 Home-Other Commute Non-Work Customer Motor Home 0.9 0.0 88.9 11.1 Travel Conditions 7.0 9.5 13.3 7.4 Residential Commercial Home-Work Home-Shop 8.9 Rural Trip Length (miles) 17.6 12.1 14.9 15.4 9.6 12.6 Urban Trip Length (miles) 12.7 Trip speeds (mph) 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 5/4/2010 08:47:13 AM % of Trips - Residential 32.9 18.0 49.1 % of Trips - Commercial (by land use) 2.5 92.5 High turnover (sit-down) rest. 5.0 2.5 5.0 2.5 92.5 Fast food rest. w/o drive thru 5.0 92.5 Strip mall 2.0 1.0 97.0 Hotel 47.5 General office building 35.0 17.5 ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 5/3/2010 04:48:57 PM ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 57.27 116.87 101.23 0.00 0.22 0.22 ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 330.83 267.59 2,938.40 8.76 1,425.28 276.62 unadjusted 705.66 570.77 6,267.61 18.69 3,040.12 590.03 VMT ratio 2.133 adjusted for forecast VMT ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 388.10 384.46 3,039.63 8.76 1,425.50 276.84 unadjusted 763 688 6,369 19 3,040 590 adjusted for forecast VMT Urbemis 2007 Version 9.2.4 Summary Report for Summer Emissions (Pounds/Day) File Name: C:\Documents and Settings\BonTerra User\My Documents\Current\Anaheim J050 convention\Air\Urbemis\CR-PR 2030 no proj 050310.urb924 Project Name: ARSP 2030 NO PROJECT P-R C-R District Project Location: South Coast AQMD On-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006 TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) SUM OF AREA SOURCE AND OPERATIONAL EMISSION ESTIMATES TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) Off-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: OFFROAD2007 AREA SOURCE EMISSION ESTIMATES TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) OPERATIONAL (VEHICLE) EMISSION ESTIMATES ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 5/3/2010 04:50:35 PM ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 57.02 116.83 98.14 0.00 0.21 0.21 ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 350.63 321.37 2,803.91 7.29 1,425.28 276.62 unadjusted 747.89 685.48 5,980.74 15.55 3,040.12 590.03 VMT ratio 2.133 adjusted for forecast VMT ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 407.65 438.20 2,902.05 7.29 1,425.49 276.83 unadjusted 805 802 6,079 16 3,040 590 adjusted for forecast VMT Urbemis 2007 Version 9.2.4 Summary Report for Winter Emissions (Pounds/Day) File Name: C:\Documents and Settings\BonTerra User\My Documents\Current\Anaheim J050 convention\Air\Urbemis\CR-PR 2030 no proj 050310.urb924 Project Name: ARSP 2030 NO PROJECT P-R C-R District Project Location: South Coast AQMD On-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006 TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) SUM OF AREA SOURCE AND OPERATIONAL EMISSION ESTIMATES TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) Off-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: OFFROAD2007 AREA SOURCE EMISSION ESTIMATES TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) OPERATIONAL (VEHICLE) EMISSION ESTIMATES ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 5/3/2010 04:49:38 PM ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 8.48 116.83 98.14 0.00 0.21 0.25 0.04 3.09 0.00 0.01 0.00 48.54 57.27 116.87 101.23 0.00 0.22 Architectural Coatings TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) 0.22 Area Source Changes to Defaults Hearth - No Summer Emissions Landscape 0.01 Consumer Products Off-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: OFFROAD2007 AREA SOURCE EMISSION ESTIMATES (Summer Pounds Per Day, Unmitigated) Source PM2.5 Natural Gas 0.21 Urbemis 2007 Version 9.2.4 Detail Report for Summer Area Source Unmitigated Emissions (Pounds/Day) File Name: C:\Documents and Settings\BonTerra User\My Documents\Current\Anaheim J050 convention\Air\Urbemis\CR-PR 2030 no proj 050310.urb924 Project Name: ARSP 2030 NO PROJECT P-R C-R District Project Location: South Coast AQMD On-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006 ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 5/3/2010 04:50:08 PM Light Auto 49.4 0.0 100.0 0.0 Vehicle Fleet Mix Vehicle Type Percent Type Non-Catalyst Catalyst Diesel 152,489.06 126,454.79 825,716.63 General office building 11.01 1000 sq ft 1,700.00 18,717.00 Total VMT Hotel 8.17 rooms 13,187.00 107,737.79 673,227.57 Land Use Type Acreage Trip Rate Unit Type No. Units Total Trips 276.62 Includes correction for passby trips Does not include double counting adjustment for internal trips Analysis Year: 2030 Temperature 80 Season: Summer Emfac: Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006 Summary of Land Uses TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) 330.83 267.59 2,938.40 8.76 1,425.28 225.53 General office building 53.89 48.25 542.99 1.62 263.22 51.09 Hotel 276.94 219.34 2,395.41 7.14 1,162.06 Off-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: OFFROAD2007 OPERATIONAL EMISSION ESTIMATES (Summer Pounds Per Day, Unmitigated) Source ROG NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM25 Urbemis 2007 Version 9.2.4 Detail Report for Summer Operational Unmitigated Emissions (Pounds/Day) File Name: C:\Documents and Settings\BonTerra User\My Documents\Current\Anaheim J050 convention\Air\Urbemis\CR-PR 2030 no proj 050310.urb924 Project Name: ARSP 2030 NO PROJECT P-R C-R District Project Location: South Coast AQMD On-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006 ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 5/3/2010 04:50:08 PM Operational Changes to Defaults 92.5 General office building 35.0 17.5 47.5 Hotel 5.0 2.5 % of Trips - Commercial (by land use) 30.0 % of Trips - Residential 32.9 18.0 49.1 Trip speeds (mph) 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 8.9 Rural Trip Length (miles) 17.6 12.1 14.9 15.4 9.6 12.6 Urban Trip Length (miles) 12.7 7.0 9.5 13.3 7.4 Residential Commercial Home-Work Home-Shop Home-Other Commute Non-Work Customer Motor Home 1.1 0.0 90.9 9.1 Travel Conditions 2.7 33.3 66.7 0.0 School Bus 0.1 0.0 0.0 100.0 Other Bus 0.1 0.0 0.0 100.0 Urban Bus 0.1 0.0 0.0 100.0 Med-Heavy Truck 14,001-33,000 lbs 1.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 Heavy-Heavy Truck 33,001-60,000 lbs 0.6 0.0 0.0 100.0 Lite-Heavy Truck 8501-10,000 lbs 1.8 0.0 83.3 16.7 Lite-Heavy Truck 10,001-14,000 lbs 0.5 0.0 60.0 40.0 Light Truck 3751-5750 lbs 23.9 0.0 100.0 0.0 Med Truck 5751-8500 lbs 11.4 0.0 100.0 0.0 Light Truck < 3750 lbs 7.3 0.0 100.0 0.0 ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 5/4/2010 08:22:46 AM ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) 138.14 296.15 256.41 0.00 0.56 0.56 ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) 853.77 680.88 7,454.70 22.13 3,599.25 698.72 unadjusted 816.20 650.92 7,126.69 21.16 3,440.88 667.98 VMT ratio 0.956 adjusted for forecast VMT ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) 991.91 977.03 7,711.11 22.13 3,599.81 699.28 unadjusted 954 947 7,383 21 3,441 669 adjusted for forecast VMT Off-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: OFFROAD2007 AREA SOURCE EMISSION ESTIMATES OPERATIONAL (VEHICLE) EMISSION ESTIMATES SUM OF AREA SOURCE AND OPERATIONAL EMISSION ESTIMATES Urbemis 2007 Version 9.2.4 Summary Report for Summer Emissions (Pounds/Day) File Name: C:\Documents and Settings\BonTerra User\My Documents\Current\Anaheim J050 convention\Air\Urbemis\CR-PR 2030 w-proj 050310.urb924 Project Name: ARSP 2030 BUILDOUT P-R C-R District Project Location: South Coast AQMD On-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006 ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 5/4/2010 08:24:33 AM ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 137.53 296.05 248.68 0.00 0.53 0.53 ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 909.60 817.31 7,137.61 18.44 3,599.25 698.72 unadjusted 869.58 781.35 6,823.56 17.63 3,440.88 667.98 VMT ratio 0.956 adjusted for forecast VMT ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 1,047.13 1,113.36 7,386.29 18.44 3,599.78 699.25 unadjusted 1,007 1,077 7,072 18 3,441 669 adjusted for forecast VMT Urbemis 2007 Version 9.2.4 Summary Report for Winter Emissions (Pounds/Day) File Name: C:\Documents and Settings\BonTerra User\My Documents\Current\Anaheim J050 convention\Air\Urbemis\CR-PR 2030 w-proj 050310.urb924 Project Name: ARSP 2030 BUILDOUT P-R C-R District Project Location: South Coast AQMD On-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006 TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) SUM OF AREA SOURCE AND OPERATIONAL EMISSION ESTIMATES TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) Off-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: OFFROAD2007 AREA SOURCE EMISSION ESTIMATES TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) OPERATIONAL (VEHICLE) EMISSION ESTIMATES ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 5/4/2010 08:23:58 AM ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 21.49 296.05 248.68 0.00 0.53 0.61 0.10 7.73 0.00 0.03 0.00 116.04 138.14 296.15 256.41 0.00 0.56 Architectural Coatings TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) 0.56 Area Source Changes to Defaults Hearth - No Summer Emissions Landscape 0.03 Consumer Products Off-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: OFFROAD2007 AREA SOURCE EMISSION ESTIMATES (Summer Pounds Per Day, Unmitigated) Source PM2.5 Natural Gas 0.53 Urbemis 2007 Version 9.2.4 Detail Report for Summer Area Source Unmitigated Emissions (Pounds/Day) File Name: C:\Documents and Settings\BonTerra User\My Documents\Current\Anaheim J050 convention\Air\Urbemis\CR-PR 2030 w-proj 050310.urb924 Project Name: ARSP 2030 BUILDOUT P-R C-R District Project Location: South Coast AQMD On-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006 ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 5/4/2010 08:25:07 AM ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 21.49 296.05 248.68 0.00 0.53 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 116.04 137.53 296.05 248.68 0.00 0.53 Architectural Coatings TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) 0.53 Area Source Changes to Defaults Hearth 0.00 Landscaping - No Winter Consumer Products Off-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: OFFROAD2007 AREA SOURCE EMISSION ESTIMATES (Winter Pounds Per Day, Unmitigated) Source PM2.5 Natural Gas 0.53 Urbemis 2007 Version 9.2.4 Detail Report for Winter Area Source Unmitigated Emissions (Pounds/Day) File Name: C:\Documents and Settings\BonTerra User\My Documents\Current\Anaheim J050 convention\Air\Urbemis\CR-PR 2030 w-proj 050310.urb924 Project Name: ARSP 2030 BUILDOUT P-R C-R District Project Location: South Coast AQMD On-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006 ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 5/4/2010 08:23:23 AM Source High turnover (sit-down) rest. Fast food rest. w/o drive thru Hotel Strip mall General office building TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) 19,124.39 General office building 11.01 1000 sq ft 2,146.00 23,627.46 192,495.02 Strip mall 42.94 1000 sq ft 90.00 3,864.60 61,480.00 Hotel 8.17 rooms 35,000.00 285,950.00 1,786,832.87 Fast food rest. w/o drive thru 496.12 1000 sq ft 36.00 17,860.32 Total Trips Total VMT High turnover (sit-down) rest. 127.15 1000 sq ft 54.00 6,866.10 25,131.62 Includes correction for passby trips Does not include double counting adjustment for internal trips Analysis Year: 2030 Temperature 80 Season: Summer Emfac: Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006 Summary of Land Uses Land Use Type Acreage Trip Rate Unit Type No. Units 853.77 680.88 7,454.70 22.13 3,599.25 698.72 68.03 60.91 685.44 2.05 332.27 64.49 7.77 6.46 70.14 0.20 33.02 6.42 735.04 582.16 6,357.72 18.95 3,084.25 598.60 30.74 22.34 243.28 0.66 106.28 20.74 12.19 9.01 98.12 0.27 43.43 8.47 Off-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: OFFROAD2007 OPERATIONAL EMISSION ESTIMATES (Summer Pounds Per Day, Unmitigated) ROG NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM25 Urbemis 2007 Version 9.2.4 Detail Report for Summer Operational Unmitigated Emissions (Pounds/Day) File Name: C:\Documents and Settings\BonTerra User\My Documents\Current\Anaheim J050 convention\Air\Urbemis\CR-PR 2030 w-proj 050310.urb924 Project Name: ARSP 2030 BUILDOUT P-R C-R District Project Location: South Coast AQMD On-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006 ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 5/4/2010 08:23:23 AM % of Trips - Commercial (by land use) 30.0 % of Trips - Residential 32.9 18.0 49.1 Trip speeds (mph) 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 8.9 Rural Trip Length (miles) 17.6 12.1 14.9 15.4 9.6 12.6 Urban Trip Length (miles) 12.7 7.0 9.5 13.3 7.4 Residential Commercial Home-Work Home-Shop Home-Other Commute Non-Work Customer Motor Home 1.1 0.0 90.9 9.1 Travel Conditions 2.7 33.3 66.7 0.0 School Bus 0.1 0.0 0.0 100.0 Other Bus 0.1 0.0 0.0 100.0 Urban Bus 0.1 0.0 0.0 100.0 Med-Heavy Truck 14,001-33,000 lbs 1.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 Heavy-Heavy Truck 33,001-60,000 lbs 0.6 0.0 0.0 100.0 Lite-Heavy Truck 8501-10,000 lbs 1.8 0.0 83.3 16.7 Lite-Heavy Truck 10,001-14,000 lbs 0.5 0.0 60.0 40.0 Light Truck 3751-5750 lbs 23.9 0.0 100.0 0.0 Med Truck 5751-8500 lbs 11.4 0.0 100.0 0.0 Light Auto 49.4 0.0 100.0 0.0 Light Truck < 3750 lbs 7.3 0.0 100.0 0.0 2,085,063.90 Vehicle Fleet Mix Vehicle Type Percent Type Non-Catalyst Catalyst Diesel 338,168.48 ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 5/4/2010 08:23:23 AM 47.5 Operational Changes to Defaults General office building 35.0 17.5 92.5 Strip mall 2.0 1.0 97.0 Hotel 5.0 2.5 92.5 Fast food rest. w/o drive thru 5.0 2.5 92.5 High turnover (sit-down) rest. 5.0 2.5 ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 5/4/2010 08:26:09 AM 61,480.00 Hotel 8.17 rooms 35,000.00 285,950.00 1,786,832.87 Fast food rest. w/o drive thru 496.12 1000 sq ft 36.00 17,860.32 Total Trips Total VMT High turnover (sit-down) rest. 127.15 1000 sq ft 54.00 6,866.10 25,131.62 Includes correction for passby trips Does not include double counting adjustment for internal trips Analysis Year: 2030 Temperature 60 Season: Winter Emfac: Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006 Summary of Land Uses Land Use Type Acreage Trip Rate Unit Type No. Units 64.49 TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated) 909.60 817.31 7,137.61 18.44 3,599.25 698.72 General office building 73.84 73.28 645.65 1.71 332.27 598.60 Strip mall 8.95 7.74 68.09 0.17 33.02 6.42 Hotel 775.38 698.87 6,084.46 15.78 3,084.25 8.47 Fast food rest. w/o drive thru 36.93 26.66 242.19 0.55 106.28 20.74 High turnover (sit-down) rest. 14.50 10.76 97.22 0.23 43.43 Off-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: OFFROAD2007 OPERATIONAL EMISSION ESTIMATES (Winter Pounds Per Day, Unmitigated) Source ROG NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM25 Urbemis 2007 Version 9.2.4 Detail Report for Winter Operational Unmitigated Emissions (Pounds/Day) File Name: C:\Documents and Settings\BonTerra User\My Documents\Current\Anaheim J050 convention\Air\Urbemis\CR-PR 2030 w-proj 050310.urb924 Project Name: ARSP 2030 BUILDOUT P-R C-R District Project Location: South Coast AQMD On-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006 ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 5/4/2010 08:26:09 AM 30.0 % of Trips - Residential 32.9 18.0 49.1 Trip speeds (mph) 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 8.9 Rural Trip Length (miles) 17.6 12.1 14.9 15.4 9.6 12.6 Urban Trip Length (miles) 12.7 7.0 9.5 13.3 7.4 Residential Commercial Home-Work Home-Shop Home-Other Commute Non-Work Customer Motor Home 1.1 0.0 90.9 9.1 Travel Conditions 2.7 33.3 66.7 0.0 School Bus 0.1 0.0 0.0 100.0 Other Bus 0.1 0.0 0.0 100.0 Urban Bus 0.1 0.0 0.0 100.0 Med-Heavy Truck 14,001-33,000 lbs 1.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 Heavy-Heavy Truck 33,001-60,000 lbs 0.6 0.0 0.0 100.0 Lite-Heavy Truck 8501-10,000 lbs 1.8 0.0 83.3 16.7 Lite-Heavy Truck 10,001-14,000 lbs 0.5 0.0 60.0 40.0 Light Truck 3751-5750 lbs 23.9 0.0 100.0 0.0 Med Truck 5751-8500 lbs 11.4 0.0 100.0 0.0 Light Auto 49.4 0.0 100.0 0.0 Light Truck < 3750 lbs 7.3 0.0 100.0 0.0 2,085,063.90 Vehicle Fleet Mix Vehicle Type Percent Type Non-Catalyst Catalyst Diesel 338,168.48 19,124.39 General office building 11.01 1000 sq ft 2,146.00 23,627.46 192,495.02 Strip mall 42.94 1000 sq ft 90.00 3,864.60 ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 5/4/2010 08:26:09 AM 47.5 Operational Changes to Defaults General office building 35.0 17.5 92.5 Strip mall 2.0 1.0 97.0 Hotel 5.0 2.5 92.5 Fast food rest. w/o drive thru 5.0 2.5 92.5 High turnover (sit-down) rest. 5.0 2.5 % of Trips - Commercial (by land use) ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- APPENDIX D BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES REPORTS Biological Resources Report Biological Resources Memorandum ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- 151 Kalmus Drive, Suite E-200 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 T: (714) 4447-9199 F: (714) 4447-9599 MEMORANDUM March 2, 2009 To: Jennifer Marks From: Allison Rudalevige Project Manager Ecologist/Regulatory Technician BonTerra Consulting BonTerra Consulting Subject: Biological Resources Report for the Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Project The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan project site is located in the City of Anaheim, California. This memo summarizes the biological resources potentially occurring on the project site. The findings presented in this memo are based on a review of the literature and aerial photographs of the project site. A field survey was not conducted. The California Native Plant Society’s (CNPS) Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California (CNPS 2008) and the California Department of Fish and Game’s (CDFG’s) California Natural Diversity Database (CDFG 2008) were reviewed to identify special status plants, wildlife, and habitats known to occur in the vicinity of the project site. Database searches included the Anaheim U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute quadrangles. Results The project site consists almost entirely of commercial/recreation and public/recreation land uses. The only large, undeveloped area on the project site consists of an agricultural field located north of Orangewood Avenue, east of Harbor Boulevard, south of Katella Avenue, and west of Haster Street. The aerial image shows this area to be planted with row crops, with portions fallow. Special Status Plant and Wildlife Species Based on the results of the literature review, no federally or state-listed Threatened or Endangered species have been reported from the project region the USGS Anaheim quadrangle). Six special status plant species have been reported from the project region: chaparral sand- verbena (Abronia villosa var. aurita), Parish’s brittlescale (Atriplex parishii), southern tarplant (Centromadia parryi ssp. australis), many-stemmed dudleya (Dudleya multicaulis), salt spring checkerbloom (Sidalcea neomexicana), and Coulter’s goldfields (Lasthenia glabrata spp. coulteri). These species were observed historically in the area, with no observations since the 1950’s. No special status plant species are expected to occur on the project site due to lack of suitable habitat. Two special status wildlife species have been reported from the project region: western mastiff bat (Eumops perotis californicus) and coast (San Diego) horned lizard coronatum [blainvillii population]). These species are not expected to occur on the project site due to lack of suitable habitat. In addition to the wildlife species reported in the project region, burrowing owl ---PAGE BREAK--- Ms. Jennifer Marks March 2, 2009 Page 2 BonTerra Consulting (Athene cunicularia) has a limited potential to occur in the agricultural field on the project site for breeding or wintering. This species is discussed below. Burrowing Owl (Athene cunicularia) Burrowing owl is a California Species of Special Concern. The burrowing owl occurs throughout western North America, where it occupies open areas with short vegetation and bare ground with shrub, desert, and grassland environments. It was once abundant and widely distributed within coastal southern California, but has declined precipitously in counties such as Los Angeles, Orange, San Diego, Riverside, and San Bernardino. A petition was filed to list the California population as an Endangered or Threatened species; however, the CDFG determined that a listing was not warranted. Impacts on an active owl burrow, if present, would be considered significant per Section 15380 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Therefore, to avoid impacts on burrowing owl, a pre-construction survey would be required. Other Considerations Wildlife Movement Wildlife corridors link together areas of suitable wildlife habitat that are otherwise separated by rugged terrain, changes in vegetation, or human disturbance. The fragmentation of open space areas by urbanization creates isolated “islands” of wildlife habitat. In the absence of habitat linkages that allow movement to adjoining open space areas, various studies have concluded that some wildlife species (especially the larger and more mobile mammals) will not likely persist over time in fragmented or isolated habitat areas. Corridors mitigate the effects of this fragmentation by: allowing wildlife to move between remaining habitats, thereby permitting depleted populations to be replenished and promoting genetic exchange; providing escape routes from fire, predators, and human disturbances thus reducing the risk that catastrophic events (such as fire or disease) will result in population or local species extinction; and serving as travel routes for individual animals as they move in their home ranges in search of food, water, mates, and other necessary resources. The project site is located in an urban setting that is highly developed with few, isolated areas that have not been developed. Therefore, further development would not impact wildlife movement. The project site does not operate (in whole or part) as a native wildlife nursery site; such sites are generally located in marshes, wetland margins, and tidal zones, none of which occur on the project site. Migratory Bird Treaty Act Ornamental vegetation throughout the project site could support nesting birds. Due to recent interpretations of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and expectations of many local and state agencies, it is our recommendation that tree and shrub removal be scheduled to avoid the nesting season (typically March 1 through July 31) of birds that may potentially nest on the project site. Nesting Raptors Ornamental trees present throughout the project site have potential to be used for nesting by raptors. Regulations prohibit activities that “take, possess or destroy” any raptor nest or egg (CDFG Code 3503, 3503.5, and 3513). Therefore, if construction is initiated during the raptor ---PAGE BREAK--- Ms. Jennifer Marks March 2, 2009 Page 3 BonTerra Consulting nesting season (February 1 to June 30; March 1 to August 31 for burrowing owl) a pre- construction raptor survey is recommended. Recommendations The following measures are recommended to avoid or minimize impacts on biological resources: • A pre-construction survey within 30 days prior to ground disturbance will be conducted by a qualified Biologist to avoid direct take of burrowing owls. This measure will apply year-round in order to avoid impacts on nesting or wintering owls. If owls are observed during the breeding season (March 1 to August 31), the measures to protect active raptor nests (as outlined below) shall be followed. If owls are observed during the winter season (September 1 to February 28), the burrow shall be closed by a qualified Biologist while the owl is away from the burrow following CDFG-approved methods for closing burrowing owl burrows. • Vegetation removal activities should be scheduled between August 1 and February 28 to avoid the bird nesting season. This would ensure that no active nests would be disturbed. If this is not feasible, then a qualified Biologist will inspect any trees which would be impacted prior to project activities to ensure no nesting birds are present. If a nest is present, then appropriate minimization measures will be developed by the Biologist. • A survey for active raptor nests will be conducted by a qualified Biologist 30 days prior to commencement of any demolition or construction activities during the raptor nesting season (February 1 to June 30) and within 500 feet of a fan palm, juniper, or canary island pine, or during the burrowing owl breeding season (March 1 to August 31) within 500 feet of the agricultural field. Should an active nest be identified, restrictions will be placed on construction activities in the vicinity of any active nest observed until the nest is no longer active as determined by a qualified Biologist. These restrictions may include a 300- to 500-foot buffer zone designated around a nest to allow construction to proceed while minimizing disturbance to the active nest. Once the nest is no longer active, construction can proceed within the buffer zone. References California Department of Fish and Game. 2009. California Natural Diversity Database. Records of Occurrence for U.S. Geological Survey Anaheim 7.5-minute topographical quandrangle. Sacramento, California: California Department of Fish and Game, Natural Heritage Division. California Native Plant Society. 2009. Electronic Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California. Records of Occurrence for U.S. Geological Survey Anaheim 7.5- minute topographical quandrangle. Sacramento, California: California Native Plant Society. http://www.cnps.org/inventory. S:\Anaheim J050\appendices\D- Biological Resources Report\Bio Memo-030209.doc ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- 151 Kalmus Drive, Suite E-200 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 T: (714) 444-9199 F: (714) 444-9599 MEMORANDUM To: Jennifer Marks From: Amber Oneal Subject: Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Parcel off Harbor Blvd and Katella Avenue On August 6, 2010, BonTerra Consulting Senior Biologist Amber Oneal visited a parcel of open space within the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan. The parcel is located off Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue. This parcel was formerly approximately 58 acres but has been reduced to approximately 18 acres following expansion of the Disneyland Resort Toy Story parking area. The parcel is currently surrounded by tall chain link fences, and thus was not accessible for a walkover survey; however, Ms. Oneal was able to view the parcel through the chain link fence from the southeast corner of the parcel. The parcel is an area that has been graded and compacted and is generally lacking vegetation. A few individuals of ruderal (weedy) species were present, such as horseweed (Conyza canadensis) and sow-thistle (Sonchus sp.). The southeast corner of the parcel has been graded into a debris basin. Ms. Oneal examined the slopes of the basin area and the surrounding lot using binoculars and no mammal burrows were observed, presumably due to the compacted nature of the soil following grading. Due to the previous grading activity and the isolation of the parcel, no special status plant or wildlife species would be expected to occur on this parcel. The mitigation measure included in the previous memo (BonTerra Consulting March 2, 2009) recommending a pre-construction survey for burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia) is no longer considered necessary due to the reduction in habitat area, because the remaining open space has been graded and compacted, and because no mammal burrows were observed during the site visit. August 6, 2010 ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- APPENDIX E GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS TECHNICAL APPENDIX ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 5/3/2010 03:55:29 PM CO2 25,586.65 CO2 151,184.06 unadjusted 180665 VMT ratio 1.195 adjusted for forecast VMT CO2 176,770.71 Urbemis 2007 Version 9.2.4 Summary Report for Annual Emissions (Tons/Year) File Name: C:\Documents and Settings\BonTerra User\My Documents\Current\Anaheim J050 convention\Air\Urbemis\CR-PR 2010 exist 050310.urb924 Project Name: ARSP 2010 EXISTING P-R C-R District Project Location: South Coast AQMD On-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006 TOTALS (tons/year, unmitigated) SUM OF AREA SOURCE AND OPERATIONAL EMISSION ESTIMATES TOTALS (tons/year, unmitigated) Off-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: OFFROAD2007 AREA SOURCE EMISSION ESTIMATES TOTALS (tons/year, unmitigated) OPERATIONAL (VEHICLE) EMISSION ---PAGE BREAK--- Trenching Off Road Diesel 66.37 Mass Grading On Road Diesel 57.34 Mass Grading Worker Trips 3.57 Trenching 01/06/2014-04/04/2014 70.41 Mass Grading 10/07/2013- 01/31/2014 140.42 Mass Grading Dust 0.00 Mass Grading Off Road Diesel 79.50 Mass Grading On Road Diesel 154.58 Mass Grading Worker Trips 9.64 2014 1,568.27 Mass Grading 10/07/2013- 01/31/2014 378.52 Mass Grading Dust 0.00 Mass Grading Off Road Diesel 214.30 Demo Off Road Diesel 50.13 Demo On Road Diesel 0.00 Demo Worker Trips 2.80 2013 431.44 Demolition 08/05/2013-10/04/2013 52.93 Fugitive Dust 0.00 Project Location: South Coast AQMD On-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006 Off-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: OFFROAD2007 CONSTRUCTION EMISSION ESTIMATES (Annual Tons Per Year, Mitigated) CO2 Page: 1 4/28/2010 01:19:09 PM Urbemis 2007 Version 9.2.4 Detail Report for Annual Construction Mitigated Emissions (Tons/Year) File Name: C:\Documents and Settings\BonTerra User\My Documents\Current\Anaheim J050 convention\Air\PR district.urb924 Project Name: ARSP P-R District ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 4/28/2010 01:19:09 PM Construction Related Mitigation Measures The following mitigation measures apply to Phase: Fine Grading 2/3/2014 - 3/7/2014 - Default Fine Site Grading/Excavation Description For Soil Stablizing Measures, the Water exposed surfaces 2x daily watering mitigation reduces emissions by: PM10: 55% PM25: 55% The following mitigation measures apply to Phase: Mass Grading 10/7/2013 - 1/31/2014 - Default Mass Site Grading/Excavation Description Paving Off Road Diesel 12.72 Paving On Road Diesel 9.40 Paving Worker Trips 1.55 Coating Worker Trips 16.73 Asphalt 06/01/2015-06/26/2015 23.68 Paving Off-Gas 0.00 Building Worker Trips 822.10 Coating 01/05/2015-10/30/2015 16.73 Architectural Coating 0.00 Building 04/07/2014-09/25/2015 1,320.86 Building Off Road Diesel 287.02 Building Vendor Trips 211.74 Building Vendor Trips 212.83 Building Worker Trips 826.45 2015 1,361.27 Fine Grading Worker Trips 1.55 Building 04/07/2014-09/25/2015 1,327.80 Building Off Road Diesel 288.51 Fine Grading Dust 0.00 Fine Grading Off Road Diesel 28.09 Fine Grading On Road Diesel 0.00 Trenching Worker Trips 4.04 Fine Grading 02/03/2014- 03/07/2014 29.65 ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 4/28/2010 01:19:09 PM Phase: Mass Grading 10/7/2013 - 1/31/2014 - Default Mass Site Grading/Excavation Description Total Acres Disturbed: 20 On Road Truck Travel (VMT): 0 Off-Road Equipment: 1 Graders (174 hp) operating at a 0.61 load factor for 6 hours per day 1 Rubber Tired Dozers (357 hp) operating at a 0.59 load factor for 6 hours per day 1 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes (108 hp) operating at a 0.55 load factor for 7 hours per day 1 Water Trucks (189 hp) operating at a 0.5 load factor for 8 hours per day Phase: Fine Grading 2/3/2014 - 3/7/2014 - Default Fine Site Grading/Excavation Description Total Acres Disturbed: 20 Maximum Daily Acreage Disturbed: 5 Fugitive Dust Level of Detail: Default 20 lbs per acre-day Building Volume Total (cubic feet): 0 Building Volume Daily (cubic feet): 0 On Road Truck Travel (VMT): 0 Off-Road Equipment: 1 Rubber Tired Dozers (357 hp) operating at a 0.59 load factor for 8 hours per day 3 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes (108 hp) operating at a 0.55 load factor for 8 hours per day For Nonresidential Architectural Coating Measures, the Nonresidential Exterior: Use Low VOC Coatings mitigation reduces emissions by: ROG: 10% For Nonresidential Architectural Coating Measures, the Nonresidential Interior: Use Low VOC Coatings mitigation reduces emissions by: ROG: 10% Phase Assumptions Phase: Demolition 8/5/2013 - 10/4/2013 - Default Demolition Description PM10: 84% PM25: 84% For Soil Stablizing Measures, the Water exposed surfaces 3x daily watering mitigation reduces emissions by: PM10: 61% PM25: 61% For Soil Stablizing Measures, the Equipment loading/unloading mitigation reduces emissions by: PM10: 69% PM25: 69% The following mitigation measures apply to Phase: Architectural Coating 1/5/2015 - 10/30/2015 - Default Architectural Coating Description For Soil Stablizing Measures, the Apply soil stabilizers to inactive areas mitigation reduces emissions by: ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 4/28/2010 01:19:09 PM Phase: Architectural Coating 1/5/2015 - 10/30/2015 - Default Architectural Coating Description Rule: Residential Interior Coatings begins 1/1/2005 ends 6/30/2008 specifies a VOC of 100 2 Cranes (399 hp) operating at a 0.43 load factor for 7 hours per day 2 Forklifts (145 hp) operating at a 0.3 load factor for 7 hours per day 2 Generator Sets (49 hp) operating at a 0.74 load factor for 8 hours per day 2 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes (108 hp) operating at a 0.55 load factor for 8 hours per day 3 Welders (45 hp) operating at a 0.45 load factor for 8 hours per day 1 Pavers (100 hp) operating at a 0.62 load factor for 8 hours per day 2 Paving Equipment (104 hp) operating at a 0.53 load factor for 6 hours per day 2 Rollers (95 hp) operating at a 0.56 load factor for 6 hours per day Phase: Building Construction 4/7/2014 - 9/25/2015 - Default Building Construction Description Off-Road Equipment: 1 Other General Industrial Equipment (238 hp) operating at a 0.51 load factor for 8 hours per day 1 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes (108 hp) operating at a 0.55 load factor for 8 hours per day Phase: Paving 6/1/2015 - 6/26/2015 - Default Paving Description Acres to be Paved: 12.36 Off-Road Equipment: 2 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes (108 hp) operating at a 0.55 load factor for 7 hours per day 1 Water Trucks (189 hp) operating at a 0.5 load factor for 8 hours per day Phase: Trenching 1/6/2014 - 4/4/2014 - Default Trenching Description Off-Road Equipment: 2 Excavators (168 hp) operating at a 0.57 load factor for 8 hours per day On Road Truck Travel (VMT): 1176.47 Off-Road Equipment: 1 Graders (174 hp) operating at a 0.61 load factor for 6 hours per day 2 Rubber Tired Dozers (357 hp) operating at a 0.59 load factor for 6 hours per day 2 Scrapers (313 hp) operating at a 0.72 load factor for 8 hours per day 2 Signal Boards (15 hp) operating at a 0.78 load factor for 8 hours per day Maximum Daily Acreage Disturbed: 5 Fugitive Dust Level of Detail: Low Onsite Cut/Fill: 1500 cubic yards/day; Offsite Cut/Fill: 0 cubic yards/day ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 4/28/2010 01:19:09 PM Rule: Nonresidential Exterior Coatings begins 1/1/2005 ends 12/31/2040 specifies a VOC of 250 Rule: Residential Interior Coatings begins 7/1/2008 ends 12/31/2040 specifies a VOC of 50 Rule: Residential Exterior Coatings begins 1/1/2005 ends 6/30/2008 specifies a VOC of 250 Rule: Residential Exterior Coatings begins 7/1/2008 ends 12/31/2040 specifies a VOC of 100 Rule: Nonresidential Interior Coatings begins 1/1/2005 ends 12/31/2040 specifies a VOC of 250 ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 5/3/2010 04:51:13 PM CO2 25,586.65 CO2 152,775.87 unadjusted 325871 VMT ratio 2.133 adjusted for forecast VMT CO2 178,362.52 Urbemis 2007 Version 9.2.4 Summary Report for Annual Emissions (Tons/Year) File Name: C:\Documents and Settings\BonTerra User\My Documents\Current\Anaheim J050 convention\Air\Urbemis\CR-PR 2030 no proj 050310.urb924 Project Name: ARSP 2030 NO PROJECT P-R C-R District Project Location: South Coast AQMD On-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006 TOTALS (tons/year, unmitigated) SUM OF AREA SOURCE AND OPERATIONAL EMISSION ESTIMATES TOTALS (tons/year, unmitigated) Off-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: OFFROAD2007 AREA SOURCE EMISSION ESTIMATES TOTALS (tons/year, unmitigated) OPERATIONAL (VEHICLE) EMISSION ---PAGE BREAK--- Page: 1 5/4/2010 08:27:06 AM CO2 64,836.78 CO2 386,020.04 unadjusted 369035 VMT ratio 0.956 adjusted for forecast VMT CO2 450,856.82 Urbemis 2007 Version 9.2.4 Summary Report for Annual Emissions (Tons/Year) File Name: C:\Documents and Settings\BonTerra User\My Documents\Current\Anaheim J050 convention\Air\Urbemis\CR-PR 2030 w-proj 050310.urb924 Project Name: ARSP 2030 BUILDOUT P-R C-R District Project Location: South Coast AQMD On-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006 TOTALS (tons/year, unmitigated) SUM OF AREA SOURCE AND OPERATIONAL EMISSION ESTIMATES TOTALS (tons/year, unmitigated) Off-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: OFFROAD2007 AREA SOURCE EMISSION ESTIMATES TOTALS (tons/year, unmitigated) OPERATIONAL (VEHICLE) EMISSION ---PAGE BREAK--- Emission Source Quantity Unit Percent of Annual Emissions C‐R Hotel Electricity 32,500 eq rooms 19,500,000 gsf 13.1 kwh/gsf/yr 255,450,000 kwh/yr 83,890,004 kg CO2 83,890 MTCO2 16.8% P‐R Commercial Electricity 180 ksf 180,000 gsf 13.63 kwh/gsf/yr 2,453,400 kwh/yr 805,699 kg CO2 806 MTCO2 0.2% P‐R Hotel Electricity 2,500 rooms 1,500,000 gsf 13.1 kwh/gsf/yr 19,650,000 kwh/yr 6,453,077 kg CO2 6,453 MTCO2 1.3% P‐R Conv Ctr Electricity 2,100 ksf 2,100,000 gsf 13.63 kwh/gsf/yr 28,623,000 kwh/yr 9,399,818 kg CO2 9,400 MTCO2 1.9% Less: Conv Ctr PV Generation ‐141,000 kwh/yr ‐46,305 kg CO2 ‐46 MTCO2 ‐0.01% 660.94 MG/yr 0.6% 8,606,825 kwh/year 1,322.6 MG/yr 0.6% 8,611,180 kwh/year Combined Natural Gas and Landscape from URBEMIS 64,837 ton CO2 58,819 MTCO2 11.8% Vehicle Trips from URBEMIS 369,035 ton CO2 334,783 MTCO2 67.0% 499,759 MTCO2 100% C‐R Hotel Electricity 11,587 eq rooms 6,952,200 gsf 13.1 kwh/gsf/yr 91,073,820 kwh/yr 29,908,722 kg CO2 29,909 MTCO2 12.9% P‐R Commercial Electricity 0 ksf 0 gsf 13.63 kwh/gsf/yr 0 kwh/yr 0 kg CO2 0 MTCO2 0.0% P‐R Hotel Electricity 1,600 rooms 960,000 gsf 13.1 kwh/gsf/yr 12,576,000 kwh/yr 4,129,969 kg CO2 4,130 MTCO2 1.8% P‐R Conv Ctr Electricity 1,700 ksf 1,700,000 gsf 13.63 kwh/gsf/yr 23,171,000 kwh/yr 7,609,377 kg CO2 7,609 MTCO2 3.3% Less: Conv Ctr PV Generation ‐141,000 kwh/yr ‐46,305 kg CO2 ‐46 MTCO2 ‐0.02% 304.50 MG/yr 3,965,217 kwh/year 545.5 MG/yr 0.5% 3,551,521 kwh/year Combined Natural Gas and Landscape from URBEMIS 25,587 ton CO2 23,212 MTCO2 10.0% Vehicle Trips from URBEMIS 180,665 ton CO2 163,897 MTCO2 70.9% 231,179 MTCO2 100.0% 268,580 MTCO2 Emission Category Purchased Electricity 0.72 Emergency Diesel Generators 9.96 Propane Liquid Gas 5.67 Purchased Campus Natural Gas 53.06 Water Indoor Potable Water from MWD 13,022 Indoor Potable Water from groundwater 6,511 Outdoor Potable Water Consumption 11,111 Convert… Pounds to Metric Tons, multiply pounds by: 0.000453592 Existing Buildout Tons to Metric Tons, multiply tons by: 0.90718474 AFY Mgal/yr AFY Mgal/yr Kilogram to pounds, multiply kg by: 2.2046 Water Use 2608 850.0 6086 1983.5 Pound to kilograms, multiply lbs. by: 0.45359237 from MWD 0.36 304.5 0.33 660.9 kilogram to Metric Tons, multiply kg by: 0.001 from Groundwater 0.64 545.5 0.67 1322.6 kBTU to kilowatt hours, multiply kBTU by: 0.293071083 kBTU to megawatt hours, multiply kBTU by: 0.000293071 Acre feet to million gallons, multiply AF by 0.325900 Notes: kwh = kilowatt hour kg = kilogram gsf = gross square foot CO2 = carbon dioxide mmBTU = million British Thermal Units MT = Metric Tons MG = million gallons ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT ‐ GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ‐ 050310 Annual Usage Factor Annual Use Total Estimated Annual Emissions Proposed Project at Buildout Water Use ‐ from MWD 1 project 2,826,489 kg CO2 2,826 MTCO2 Water Use ‐ from Groundwater 1 project 2,827,919 kg CO2 2,828 MTCO2 Total, Proposed Project Buildout Existing Land Uses on Site 1,166,323 Water Use ‐ from MWD 1 project 1,302,181 Net Increase in Emissions = Buildout ‐ Existing kg CO2 1,302 MTCO2 0.6% Water Use ‐ from Groundwater 1 project 116.2% CO2 Emission Factor lbs/kwh kg/gallon kg/gallon kg CO2 1,166 MTCO2 Total, Existing Land Uses kg/mmBTU Energy Usage Factor kwh/MG kwh/MG kwh/MG Percentage Increase in Annual Emissions: Existing to Project ---PAGE BREAK--- gpd= afy 1 0.00112 Existing Buildout (gpd) AFY gpd gpd afy 3,638 rooms 125 gpd/room 454,750 509.4 11587 rooms 1448375 1622.2 32500 rooms 4062500 4550.0 17,281 19.4 Losses 61.6 Losses 172.9 472,031 528.8 Total‐ CR Dist 1683.8 4722.9 (gpd) AFY gpd afy gpd afy Flexible Meeting Space 265,000 s.f. 350 gpd/ksf 92,750 103.9 1700 ksf 595000 666.4 2100 ksf 735000 823.2 Ballroom Space 50,000 s.f. 350 gpd/ksf 17,500 19.6 Meeting and Office Space 43,914 s.f. 350 gpd/ksf 15,370 17.2 Exhibit Hall Space 20,295 s.f. 350 gpd/ksf 7,103 8 Bridge/Skyway1 27,150 s.f. 350 gpd/ksf 9,503 10.6 Restaurant Space 80,000 s.f. 1,000 gpd/ksf 80,000 89.6 0 ksf 0 0.0 80 ksf 80000 89.6 Specialty Retail Space 45,000 s.f. 195 gpd/ksf 8,775 9.8 531,359 434.7 Subtotal 231,001 258.8 595000 666.4 815000 912.8 Two Hotels 900 rooms 125 gpd/room 112,[PHONE REDACTED] rooms 200000 224.0 2500 rooms 312500 350.0 Spa Facilities 15,000 s.f. 600 gpd/ksf 9,000 10.1 0 0 15 ksf 9000 10.1 Restaurant Space 15,000 s.f. 1,000 gpd/ksf 15,000 16.8 0 0 15 ksf 15000 16.8 Retail Space 10,000 s.f. 195 gpd/ksf 1,950 2.2 0 0 10 ksf 1950 2.2 Meeting Space 30,000 s.f. 350 gpd/ksf 10,500 11.8 0 0 30 ksf 10500 11.8 Ballroom Space 10,000 s.f. 350 gpd/ksf 3,500 3.9 0 0 10 ksf 3500 3.9 Bar/Night Club Space 15,000 s.f. 350 gpd/ksf 5,250 5.9 0 0 15 ksf 5250 5.9 95,000 157,700 176.7 200000 224 357700 400.624 388,701 435.4 Subtotal PR dist 890.4 1313.424 14,771 16.5 Losses 33.8 49.9 403,471 452 total‐ PR Dist 924.2 1363.3 875,502 980.8 Total ARSP 2608.1 6086.2 626,359 Supply capacity ‐ afy 2010 2030 Imported 29090 0.36 29640 0.33 Groundwater 52110 0.64 59310 0.67 total 81200 1.00 88950 1.00 Units Demand Factor Development Area 1 - Commercial Recreational (CR) District Demand Units Demand Factor Additional Equivalent Hotel Rooms Source: Water Supply Assessment 2009 Convention Center Expansion Hotel Development Subtotal Subtotal PR District ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT ‐ GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ‐ 050310 Water Use Calculations 3.8% Losses Total PR District Grand Total ARSP 1) Based on assumption that this space could be used as exhibit, meeting or commercial space 3.8% Losses Total CR District Development Area 2 - Public Recreational (PR) District Demand ---PAGE BREAK--- APPENDIX F HAZARDOUS MATERIAL DATABASE SEARCHES EDR Report South EDR Report North ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- FORM-NULL-KEN ® k c e h C o e G h ti w tr o p e R ™ p a M s u i d a R R D E e h T 440 Wheelers Farms Road Milford, CT 06461 Toll Free: [PHONE REDACTED] www.edrnet.com ARSP South Harbor/Convention Way Anaheim, CA 92802 Inquiry Number: 2760975.1s May 03, 2010 ---PAGE BREAK--- SECTION PAGE Executive Summary ES1 Overview Map 2 Detail Map 3 Map Findings Summary 4 Map Findings 8 Orphan Summary 312 Government Records Searched/Data Currency Tracking GR-1 GEOCHECK ADDENDUM Physical Setting Source Addendum A-1 Physical Setting Source Summary A-2 Physical Setting SSURGO Soil Map A-6 Physical Setting Source Map A-10 Physical Setting Source Map Findings A-11 Physical Setting Source Records Searched A-33 TC2760975.1s Page 1 Thank you for your business. Please contact EDR at 1-[PHONE REDACTED] with any questions or comments. Disclaimer - Copyright and Trademark Notice This Report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Environmental Data Resources, Inc. It cannot be concluded from this Report that coverage information for the target and surrounding properties does not exist from other sources. NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS THE MAKING OF ANY SUCH WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR USE OR PURPOSE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. BE LIABLE TO ANYONE, WHETHER ARISING OUT OF ERRORS OR OMISSIONS, NEGLIGENCE, ACCIDENT OR ANY OTHER CAUSE, FOR ANY LOSS OF DAMAGE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES. ANY LIABILITY ON THE PART OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. IS STRICTLY LIMITED TO A REFUND OF THE AMOUNT PAID FOR THIS REPORT. Purchaser accepts this Report "AS IS". Any analyses, estimates, ratings, environmental risk levels or risk codes provided in this Report are provided for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to provide, nor should they be interpreted as providing any facts regarding, or prediction or forecast of, any environmental risk for any property. Only a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment performed by an environmental professional can provide information regarding the environmental risk for any property. Additionally, the information provided in this Report is not to be construed as legal advice. Copyright 2010 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole or in part, of any report or map of Environmental Data Resources, Inc., or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission. EDR and its logos (including Sanborn and Sanborn Map) are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, Inc. or its affiliates. All other trademarks used herein are the property of their respective owners. TABLE OF CONTENTS ---PAGE BREAK--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC2760975.1s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 A search of available environmental records was conducted by Environmental Data Resources, Inc (EDR). The report was designed to assist parties seeking to meet the search requirements of EPA’s Standards and Practices for All Appropriate Inquiries (40 CFR Part 312), the ASTM Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments (E 1527-05) or custom requirements developed for the evaluation of environmental risk associated with a parcel of real estate. TARGET PROPERTY INFORMATION ADDRESS HARBOR/CONVENTION WAY ANAHEIM, CA 92802 COORDINATES 33.799500 - 33˚ 47’ 58.2’’ Latitude (North): 117.914000 - 117˚ 54’ 50.4’’ Longitude (West): Zone 11 Universal Tranverse Mercator: 415393.0 UTM X (Meters): 3740107.0 UTM Y (Meters): 133 ft. above sea level Elevation: USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP ASSOCIATED WITH TARGET PROPERTY 33117-G8 ANAHEIM, CA Target Property Map: 1981 Most Recent Revision: TARGET PROPERTY SEARCH RESULTS The target property was not listed in any of the databases searched by EDR. DATABASES WITH NO MAPPED SITES No mapped sites were found in EDR’s search of available ("reasonably ascertainable government records either on the target property or within the search radius around the target property for the following databases: STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS Federal NPL site list NPL National Priority List Proposed NPL Proposed National Priority List Sites NPL LIENS Federal Superfund Liens Federal Delisted NPL site list Delisted NPL National Priority List Deletions ---PAGE BREAK--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC2760975.1s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2 Federal CERCLIS list CERCLIS Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System FEDERAL FACILITY Federal Facility Site Information listing Federal RCRA CORRACTS facilities list CORRACTS Corrective Action Report Federal RCRA non-CORRACTS TSD facilities list RCRA-TSDF RCRA - Treatment, Storage and Disposal Federal RCRA generators list RCRA-CESQG RCRA - Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generator Federal institutional controls / engineering controls registries US ENG CONTROLS Engineering Controls Sites List US INST CONTROL Sites with Institutional Controls State- and tribal - equivalent NPL RESPONSE State Response Sites State and tribal leaking storage tank lists INDIAN LUST Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land State and tribal registered storage tank lists INDIAN UST Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land FEMA UST Underground Storage Tank Listing State and tribal voluntary cleanup sites INDIAN VCP Voluntary Cleanup Priority Listing VCP Voluntary Cleanup Program Properties ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS Local Brownfield lists US BROWNFIELDS A Listing of Brownfields Sites Local Lists of Landfill / Solid Waste Disposal Sites DEBRIS REGION 9 Torres Martinez Reservation Illegal Dump Site Locations ODI Open Dump Inventory HAULERS Registered Waste Tire Haulers Listing INDIAN ODI Report on the Status of Open Dumps on Indian Lands Local Lists of Hazardous waste / Contaminated Sites US CDL Clandestine Drug Labs ---PAGE BREAK--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC2760975.1s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3 HIST Cal-Sites Historical Calsites Database Toxic Pits Toxic Pits Cleanup Act Sites US HIST CDL National Clandestine Laboratory Register Local Land Records LIENS 2 CERCLA Lien Information LUCIS Land Use Control Information System LIENS Environmental Liens Listing DEED Deed Restriction Listing Records of Emergency Release Reports HMIRS Hazardous Materials Information Reporting System LDS Land Disposal Sites Listing MCS Military Cleanup Sites Listing Other Ascertainable Records DOT OPS Incident and Accident Data DOD Department of Defense Sites FUDS Formerly Used Defense Sites CONSENT Superfund (CERCLA) Consent Decrees ROD Records Of Decision UMTRA Uranium Mill Tailings Sites MINES Mines Master Index File TRIS Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act FTTS FIFRA/ TSCA Tracking System - FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act) HIST FTTS FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System Administrative Case Listing SSTS Section 7 Tracking Systems ICIS Integrated Compliance Information System PADS PCB Activity Database System MLTS Material Licensing Tracking System RADINFO Radiation Information Database RAATS RCRA Administrative Action Tracking System CA BOND EXP. PLAN Bond Expenditure Plan CA WDS Waste Discharge System Cortese "Cortese" Hazardous Waste & Substances Sites List WIP Well Investigation Program Case List INDIAN RESERV Indian Reservations SCRD State Coalition for Remediation of Listing FINANCIAL ASSURANCE Financial Assurance Information Listing HWP EnviroStor Permitted Facilities Listing HWT Registered Hazardous Waste Transporter Database COAL ASH EPA Coal Combustion Residues Surface Impoundments List PCB TRANSFORMER PCB Transformer Registration Database COAL ASH DOE Sleam-Electric Plan Operation Data MWMP Medical Waste Management Program Listing PROC Certified Processors Database EDR PROPRIETARY RECORDS EDR Proprietary Records Manufactured Gas Plants EDR Proprietary Manufactured Gas Plants ---PAGE BREAK--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC2760975.1s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4 EDR Historical Auto Stations EDR Proprietary Historic Gas Stations EDR Historical Cleaners EDR Proprietary Historic Dry Cleaners SURROUNDING SITES: SEARCH RESULTS Surrounding sites were identified in the following databases. Elevations have been determined from the USGS Digital Elevation Model and should be evaluated on a relative (not an absolute) basis. Relative elevation information between sites of close proximity should be field verified. Sites with an elevation equal to or higher than the target property have been differentiated below from sites with an elevation lower than the target property. Page numbers and map identification numbers refer to the EDR Radius Map report where detailed data on individual sites can be reviewed. Sites listed in bold italics are in multiple databases. Unmappable (orphan) sites are not considered in the foregoing analysis. STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS Federal CERCLIS NFRAP site List CERC-NFRAP: Archived sites are sites that have been removed and archived from the inventory of CERCLIS sites. Archived status indicates that, to the best of EPA’s knowledge, assessment at a site has been completed and that EPA has determined no further steps will be taken to list this site on the National Priorities List (NPL), unless information indicates this decision was not appropriate or other considerations require a recommendation for listing at a later time. This decision does not necessarily mean that there is no hazard associated with a given site; it only means that, based upon available information, the location is not judged to be a potential NPL site. A review of the CERC-NFRAP list, as provided by EDR, and dated 06/23/2009 has revealed that there is 1 CERC-NFRAP site within approximately 1 mile of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation CORCORAN MFG CO INC 1745 S HASTER ST NE 1/2 - 1 (0.602 mi.) Y160 168 Federal RCRA generators list RCRA-LQG: RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Large quantity generators (LQGs) generate over 1,000 kilograms (kg) of hazardous waste, or over 1 kg of acutely hazardous waste per month. A review of the RCRA-LQG list, as provided by EDR, and dated 01/13/2010 has revealed that there are 2 RCRA-LQG sites within approximately 0.75 miles of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation CHEVRON 302222 100 E KATELLA ENE 1/2 - 1 (0.503 mi.) U147 155 Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation DISNEYLAND RESORT 1900-2000 S HARBOR BLVD WNW 0 - 1/8 (0.065 mi.) 1 8 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC2760975.1s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5 RCRA-SQG: RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Small quantity generators (SQGs) generate between 100 kg and 1,000 kg of hazardous waste per month. A review of the RCRA-SQG list, as provided by EDR, and dated 01/13/2010 has revealed that there are 20 RCRA-SQG sites within approximately 0.75 miles of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation FLOUROCARBON CO 1754 S CLEMENTINE ST NNE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.422 mi.) N104 114 SATELLITE CLEANERS INC 1730 S CLEMENTIME ST NNE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.454 mi.) N124 131 ALS TEXACO 100 W KATELLA ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.493 mi.) U137 146 COWBOY AUTO 1763 HASTER NE 1/2 - 1 (0.561 mi.) W152 159 CORCORAN MFG CO INC 1745 S HASTER ST NE 1/2 - 1 (0.602 mi.) Y160 168 DEWEY PEST CONTROL 1813 S MANCHESTER BLVD ENE 1/2 - 1 (0.602 mi.) 161 170 SATELLITE CLEANERS 1831 S MANCHESTER ENE 1/2 - 1 (0.644 mi.) AA163 177 CAL DEPT OF TRANSPORTAION 1628 S ANAHEIM BLVD NE 1/2 - 1 (0.702 mi.) 169 185 SHERWIN-WILLIAMS CO 1550 S ANAHEIM BLVD, SU NE 1/2 - 1 (0.703 mi.) 170 188 DUNN-EDWARDS CORPORATION 1901 SOUTH MANCHESTER AE 1/2 - 1 (0.737 mi.) AG179 204 ODETICS INC 1515 MANCHESTER AVE NNE 1/2 - 1 (0.749 mi.) AC189 219 Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation SHELL SERVICE STATION 2100 S HARBOR SSW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.247 mi.) C28 31 ARCO FACILITY NO 09727 2101 S HARBOR BLVD SSW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.247 mi.) C32 37 BUCHNER AND YOUNG DBA FASTER F 777 CONVENTION WAY W 1/4 - 1/2 (0.260 mi.) E42 51 CHEVRON STATION 95321 1801 S HARBOR BLVD NNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.270 mi.) D61 81 HOME DEPOT USA INC HD 6664 2300 S HARBOR BLVD S 1/2 - 1 (0.631 mi.) Z162 173 HYATT REGENCY 100 PLAZA ALICANTE SSW 1/2 - 1 (0.648 mi.) 165 181 HOTOB OWNERS ASSOCIATION 300 PLAZA ALICANTE S 1/2 - 1 (0.697 mi.) AB168 184 LORDS CLEANERS 509 W CHAPMAN S 1/2 - 1 (0.731 mi.) AF177 198 ENECOTECH SOUTHWEST INCORPORAT 12602 CHAPMAN AVENUE S 1/2 - 1 (0.742 mi.) AH187 217 Federal ERNS list ERNS: The Emergency Response Notification System records and stores information on reported releases of oil and hazardous substances. The source of this database is the U.S. EPA. A review of the ERNS list, as provided by EDR, and dated 12/31/2009 has revealed that there are 2 ERNS sites within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation 1850 S HARBOMR 1850 S HARBOMR NNW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.154 mi.) B8 15 1800 SOUTH HARBOR 1800 SOUTH HARBOR NNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.267 mi.) D48 60 State- and tribal - equivalent CERCLIS ENVIROSTOR: The Department of Toxic Substances Control’s (DTSC’s) Site Mitigation and Brownfields Reuse Program’s EnviroStor database identifes sites that have known contamination or sites for which ---PAGE BREAK--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC2760975.1s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 6 there may be reasons to investigate further. The database includes the following site types: Federal Superfund sites (National Priorities List (NPL)); State Response, including Military Facilities and State Superfund; Voluntary Cleanup; and School sites. EnviroStor provides similar information to the information that was available in CalSites, and provides additional site information, including, but not limited to, identification of formerly-contaminated properties that have been released for reuse, properties where environmental deed restrictions have been recorded to prevent inappropriate land uses, and risk characterization information that is used to assess potential impacts to public health and the environment at contaminated sites. A review of the ENVIROSTOR list, as provided by EDR, and dated 02/08/2010 has revealed that there are 7 ENVIROSTOR sites within approximately 1.5 miles of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation PONDEROSA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL MOUNTAIN VIEW AVENUE/WI ESE 1/2 - 1 (0.716 mi.) 172 190 Status: No Further Action ORANGE EMPIRE HEAT TREATING 1000 E KATELLA ST ENE 1 - 2 (1.021 mi.) AR227 296 Status: Refer: Other Agency PLATINUM TRIANGLE 1016 EAST KATELLA AVENU ENE 1 - 2 (1.031 mi.) AR228 300 Status: Inactive - Action Required SILGAN PLASTICS CORPORATION 611 EAST CERRITOS AVENU NE 1 - 2 (1.053 mi.) 229 304 Status: Refer: 1248 Local Agency REVERE SCHOOL EXPANSION 126/132/138/144/150/WES NNE 1 - 2 (1.057 mi.) AS230 305 Status: No Further Action 1400 126/132/138/144/150 WES NNE 1 - 2 (1.057 mi.) AS231 308 Status: No Further Action THE CITY PLACE NORTH 3745 WEST CHAPMAN AVENUESE 1 - 2 (1.401 mi.) 233 311 Status: Refer: 1248 Local Agency State and tribal landfill and/or solid waste disposal site lists SWF/LF: The Solid Waste Facilities/Landfill Sites records typically contain an inventory of solid waste disposal facilities or landfills in a particular state. The data come from the Integrated Waste Management Board’s Solid Waste Information System (SWIS) database. A review of the SWF/LF list, as provided by EDR, and dated 02/22/2010 has revealed that there are 2 SWF/LF sites within approximately 1 mile of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation LONGSDON PIT SOUTH/ALICANTE NW CORNER CHAPMAN AND HS 1/2 - 1 (0.708 mi.) AB171 190 LONGSDON PIT/GARDEN GROVE SAN. HARBOR / CHAPMAN S 1/2 - 1 (0.722 mi.) AD174 194 State and tribal leaking storage tank lists LUST: The Leaking Underground Storage Tank Incident Reports contain an inventory of reported leaking underground storage tank incidents. The data come from the State Water Resources Control Board Leaking Underground Storage Tank Information System. A review of the LUST list, as provided by EDR, and dated 03/22/2010 has revealed that there are 62 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC2760975.1s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 7 LUST sites within approximately 1 mile of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation UNOCAL 1779 HARBOR NNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.336 mi.) J72 90 Status: Completed - Case Closed KATELLA CAR WASH (FORMER) 350 W KATELLA AVE NE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.367 mi.) L82 99 Status: Completed - Case Closed KATELLA CAR WASH (FORMER) 350 KATELLA AVE NE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.367 mi.) L85 100 TEXACO SERVICE STATION 100 KATELLA AVE ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.487 mi.) U133 143 TEXACO SERVICE STATION 100 W KATELLA AVE ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.492 mi.) U136 145 Status: Completed - Case Closed MEDDOCK MOBIL 100 KATELLA AVE ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.495 mi.) U141 150 MEDDOCK MOBIL 100 E KATELLA AVE ENE 1/2 - 1 (0.502 mi.) U144 152 Status: Completed - Case Closed RYDER TRUCK RENTAL-CAL TRANS 1730 S ANAHEIM BLVD NE 1/2 - 1 (0.539 mi.) W149 158 Status: Completed - Case Closed RYDER TRUCK RENTAL 1730 S ANAHEIM BLVD NE 1/2 - 1 (0.539 mi.) W150 158 Status: Completed - Case Closed ANAHEIM FIRE STATION FRMER 1680 S CLEMENTINE ST NNE 1/2 - 1 (0.579 mi.) X155 162 Status: Completed - Case Closed STEINER CORPORATION 1755 HASTER NE 1/2 - 1 (0.579 mi.) Y157 164 Status: Completed - Case Closed ANAHEIM FIRE STATION FRMER 1680 CLEMENTINE ST NNE 1/2 - 1 (0.580 mi.) X158 166 CANO’S 950 ANAHEIM BLVD ENE 1/2 - 1 (0.731 mi.) AE176 197 DANA EDWARDS 1901 MANCHESTER E 1/2 - 1 (0.737 mi.) AG180 207 Status: Completed - Case Closed RYDER TRUCK RENTAL 1730 ANAHEIM BLVD ENE 1/2 - 1 (0.741 mi.) AE181 209 RYDER TRUCK RENTAL-CAL TRANS 1730 ANAHEIM BLVD ENE 1/2 - 1 (0.771 mi.) AE190 225 WESTSIDE MATERIALS 700 E KATELLA AVE ENE 1/2 - 1 (0.861 mi.) AK196 235 Status: Completed - Case Closed WESTSIDE MATERIALS 700 KATELLA AVE ENE 1/2 - 1 (0.861 mi.) AK197 236 JOHN DAVID INTERNATIONAL 1858 S ANAHEIM BLVD E 1/2 - 1 (0.876 mi.) AL199 240 Status: Completed - Case Closed JOHN DAVID INTERNATIONAL 1858 ANAHEIM BLVD E 1/2 - 1 (0.876 mi.) AL200 240 WONDRIES TOYOTA OF ANAHEIM 1601 S ANAHEIM BLVD NNE 1/2 - 1 (0.890 mi.) AM201 242 Status: Completed - Case Closed WONDRIES TOYOTA OF ANAHEIM 1601 ANAHEIM BLVD NNE 1/2 - 1 (0.890 mi.) AM202 242 ANAHEIM CITY, CONVENTION CTR 800 W KATELLA AVE ENE 1/2 - 1 (0.895 mi.) AK203 246 Status: Completed - Case Closed AVIS RENT - A - CAR SYSTEM 1400 HARBOR BLVD N 1/2 - 1 (0.909 mi.) AN204 252 AVIS RENT - A - CAR SYSTEM 1400 S HARBOR BLVD N 1/2 - 1 (0.910 mi.) AN205 254 Status: Completed - Case Closed DISNEYLAND 1313 S. HARBOR BLVD. N 1/2 - 1 (0.910 mi.) AN206 254 DISNEYLAND 1313 S HARBOR BLVD N 1/2 - 1 (0.910 mi.) AN207 272 DISNEYLAND TOMORROWLAND RR ST. 1313 HARBOR BLVD N 1/2 - 1 (0.910 mi.) AN208 283 DISNEYLAND-AUTOPIA 1313 HARBOR BLVD N 1/2 - 1 (0.910 mi.) AN209 285 DISNEYLAND-AUTOPIA 1313 S HARBOR BLVD N 1/2 - 1 (0.911 mi.) AN210 286 Status: Open - Assessment & Interim Remedial Action DISNEYLAND - MATERHORN 1313 S HARBOR BLVD N 1/2 - 1 (0.911 mi.) AN211 286 Status: Completed - Case Closed DISNEYLAND, FUEL STATION 1313 S HARBOR BLVD N 1/2 - 1 (0.911 mi.) AN212 287 Status: Completed - Case Closed ---PAGE BREAK--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC2760975.1s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 8 Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation DISNEYLAND TOMORROWLAND RR ST. 1313 S HARBOR BLVD N 1/2 - 1 (0.911 mi.) AN213 287 Status: Completed - Case Closed DISNEYLAND - ROUNDHOUSE 1313 W HARBOR BLVD. N 1/2 - 1 (0.911 mi.) AN214 287 Status: Completed - Case Closed DISNEYLAND ROUNDHOUSE FACILITY 1313 SOUTH HARBOR N 1/2 - 1 (0.911 mi.) AN215 288 Status: Completed - Case Closed ANIK STOP 1460 S ANAHEIM BLVD NNE 1/2 - 1 (0.933 mi.) AM216 288 Status: Completed - Case Closed TEXACO SERVICE STATION 818 E KATELLA AVE ENE 1/2 - 1 (0.933 mi.) 217 289 Status: Completed - Case Closed ANIK STOP 1460 ANAHEIM BLVD NNE 1/2 - 1 (0.934 mi.) AM218 289 TOSCO - 76 STATION #8800 1818 S LEWIS ST ENE 1/2 - 1 (0.952 mi.) AP220 291 Status: Completed - Case Closed STEVE CRAIG PROPERTY 1818 S. LEWIS ENE 1/2 - 1 (0.952 mi.) AP221 291 Status: Open - Site Assessment TOSCO/76 SS #8800 1818 SOUTH LEWIS STREET ENE 1/2 - 1 (0.952 mi.) AP222 292 Status: Completed - Case Closed TOSCO - 76 STATION #8800 1818 LEWIS ST ENE 1/2 - 1 (0.952 mi.) AP223 294 Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation ANAHEIM MARRIOT 700 W CONVENTION WAY W 1/8 - 1/4 (0.225 mi.) E17 20 Status: Completed - Case Closed SHELL #2100 2100 S HARBOR BLVD SSW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.246 mi.) C18 21 Status: Completed - Case Closed THRIFTY OIL #359 2101 HARBOR BLVD SSW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.247 mi.) C21 24 SHELL #2100 2100 HARBOR BLVD SSW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.247 mi.) C30 35 THRIFTY OIL #359 2101 S HARBOR BLVD SSW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.248 mi.) C34 40 Status: Completed - Case Closed MOBIL #18-106 1800 S HARBOR BLVD NNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.266 mi.) D44 57 Status: Completed - Case Closed MOBIL #18-106 1800 HARBOR BLVD NNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.267 mi.) D49 60 ANAHEIM MARRIOT 700 CONVENTION WAY W 1/4 - 1/2 (0.268 mi.) E53 67 CHEVRON #9-5321 1801 S HARBOR BLVD NNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.269 mi.) D54 69 Status: Completed - Case Closed CHEVRON #9-5321 1801 HARBOR BLVD NNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.270 mi.) D57 73 NATIONAL CAR RENTAL FAC. 711 KATELLA AVE NW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.352 mi.) K78 96 NATIONAL CAR RENTAL FAC. 711 W KATELLA AVE NW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.352 mi.) K80 98 Status: Completed - Case Closed TEXACO SERVICE STATION 818 KATELLA AVE NW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.393 mi.) 92 105 UNOCAL #3746 12002 HARBOR S 1/2 - 1 (0.742 mi.) AD184 211 Status: Completed - Case Closed 4-DAY TIRE STORE 12602 CHAPMAN S 1/2 - 1 (0.742 mi.) AH186 216 Status: Completed - Case Closed SHELL #1101 1101 W KATELLA AVE WNW 1/2 - 1 (0.801 mi.) AI191 228 Status: Completed - Case Closed SHELL OIL CO 1101 W KATELLA WNW 1/2 - 1 (0.802 mi.) AI192 228 Status: Completed - Case Closed SHELL #1101 1101 KATELLA AVE WNW 1/2 - 1 (0.802 mi.) AI193 232 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC2760975.1s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 9 Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation GARDEN GROVE FIRE STATION 12111 CHAPMAN SSW 1/2 - 1 (0.846 mi.) 195 233 Status: Completed - Case Closed CHEVRON #9-9719 13002 CHAPMAN AVE SSE 1/2 - 1 (0.866 mi.) AJ198 237 Status: Completed - Case Closed SLIC: SLIC Region comes from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board. A review of the SLIC list, as provided by EDR, and dated 03/22/2010 has revealed that there is 1 SLIC site within approximately 1 mile of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation DISNEYLAND 1313 S. HARBOR BLVD. N 1/2 - 1 (0.910 mi.) AN206 254 Facility Status: Completed - Case Closed State and tribal registered storage tank lists UST: The Underground Storage Tank database contains registered USTs. USTs are regulated under Subtitle I of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The data come from the State Water Resources Control Board’s Hazardous Substance Storage Container Database. A review of the UST list, as provided by EDR, and dated 03/22/2010 has revealed that there are 17 UST sites within approximately 0.75 miles of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation EAGLE CAR WASH 350 W KATELLA AVE NE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.367 mi.) L84 100 DAVES USED CARS 231 W KATELLA AVE NE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.406 mi.) L98 110 HERTZ CORPORATION 221 W KATELLA AVE NE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.414 mi.) L99 110 AVIS RENT A CAR 200 W KATELLA AVE NE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.439 mi.) O111 122 SATELLITE MOBIL 100 E KATELLA AVE ENE 1/2 - 1 (0.503 mi.) U146 155 ACCURATE AUTOMOTIVE 1763 S HASTER ST NE 1/2 - 1 (0.561 mi.) W153 161 STEINER CORP 1755 S HASTER ST NE 1/2 - 1 (0.579 mi.) Y156 163 CULLIGAN WATER 1911 S MANCHESTER AVE E 1/2 - 1 (0.744 mi.) AG188 219 Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation SHELL (0222-28) 2100 S HARBOR BLVD SSW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.247 mi.) C22 25 TARGET STATION 82 2101 S HARBOR BLVD SSW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.247 mi.) C26 27 MOBIL STATION (18-106) 1800 S HARBOR BLVD NNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.267 mi.) D47 59 ANAHEIM MARRIOTT HOTEL 700 W CONVENTION WAY W 1/4 - 1/2 (0.268 mi.) E51 63 MIKE CHEVRON STATION 1801 S HARBOR BLVD NNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.270 mi.) D58 79 DOLLAR RENT A CAR SYSTEMS 2132 S HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.322 mi.) I71 89 NATIONAL CAR RENTAL SYSTEM 711 W KATELLA AVE NW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.352 mi.) K76 94 ANAHEIM CONVENTION CENTER 800 W KATELLA AVE NW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.377 mi.) K86 102 NUR-AY INC 12592 CHAPMAN AVE S 1/2 - 1 (0.736 mi.) AF178 203 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC2760975.1s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 10 AST: The Aboveground Storage Tank database contains registered ASTs. The data come from the State Water Resources Control Board’s Hazardous Substance Storage Container Database. A review of the AST list, as provided by EDR, and dated 08/01/2009 has revealed that there are 2 AST sites within approximately 0.75 miles of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation Not reported 777 W. CONVENTION WAY W 1/4 - 1/2 (0.295 mi.) 66 85 Not reported 800 W KATELLA AVE NW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.378 mi.) K91 105 ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS Local Lists of Landfill / Solid Waste Disposal Sites WMUDS/SWAT: The Waste Management Unit Database System is used for program tracking and inventory of waste management units. The source is the State Water Resources Control Board. A review of the WMUDS/SWAT list, as provided by EDR, and dated 04/01/2000 has revealed that there are 2 WMUDS/SWAT sites within approximately 1 mile of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation LONGSDON PIT/GARDEN GROVE SAN. HARBOR / CHAPMAN S 1/2 - 1 (0.722 mi.) AD174 194 GARDEN GROVE-LONGSDON PIT D.S. HARBOR / CHAPMAN S 1/2 - 1 (0.724 mi.) AD175 196 A listing of recycling facilities in California. A review of the list, as provided by EDR, and dated 01/06/2010 has revealed that there are 5 sites within approximately 1 mile of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation SANCHEZ RECYCLING CENTER 1459 S ANAHEIM BLVD NNE 1/2 - 1 (0.965 mi.) AQ225 295 B J RECYCLING 1440 S ANAHEIM BLVD NNE 1/2 - 1 (0.993 mi.) AQ226 296 Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation 12961 CHAPMAN AVE SSE 1/2 - 1 (0.844 mi.) AJ194 233 BAUTISTA RECYCLING CENTER 12048 WEST ST SW 1/2 - 1 (0.947 mi.) AO219 290 RECYCLO 12062 WEST ST SW 1/2 - 1 (0.952 mi.) AO224 295 Local Lists of Hazardous waste / Contaminated Sites SCH: This category contains proposed and existing school sites that are being evaluated by DTSC for possible hazardous materials contamination. In some cases, these properties may be listed in the CalSites category. depending on the level of threat to public health and safety or the. environment they pose. A review of the SCH list, as provided by EDR, and dated 02/08/2010 has revealed that there is 1 SCH site within approximately 0.75 miles of the target property. ---PAGE BREAK--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC2760975.1s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 11 Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation PONDEROSA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL MOUNTAIN VIEW AVENUE/WI ESE 1/2 - 1 (0.716 mi.) 172 190 CDL: A listing of drug lab locations. Listing of a location in this database does not indicate that any illegal drug lab materials were or were not present there, and does not constitute a determination that the location either requires or does not require additional cleanup work. A review of the CDL list, as provided by EDR, and dated 12/31/2009 has revealed that there are 3 CDL sites within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation Not reported 2045 HASTER ESE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.442 mi.) Q116 125 Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation Not reported 2175 S MALLUL DR SSW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.403 mi.) M93 107 Not reported 2200 S HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.463 mi.) S127 139 Local Lists of Registered Storage Tanks CA FID UST: The Facility Inventory Database contains active and inactive underground storage tank locations. The source is the State Water Resource Control Board. A review of the CA FID UST list, as provided by EDR, and dated 10/31/1994 has revealed that there are 18 CA FID UST sites within approximately 0.75 miles of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation EAGLE CAR WASH 350 W KATELLA AVE NE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.367 mi.) L83 99 HERTZ RENT A CAR 221 W KATELLA AVE NE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.414 mi.) L100 111 AVIS RENT A CAR SYSTEM, INC. 200 W KATELLA AVE NE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.439 mi.) O112 122 MOBIL STATION 100 E KATELLA AVE ENE 1/2 - 1 (0.503 mi.) U145 152 DEWEY PEST CONTROL 1813 S MANCHESTER BLVD ENE 1/2 - 1 (0.602 mi.) 161 170 ANAHEIM FIRE STATION #3 1580 S CLEMENTINE NNE 1/2 - 1 (0.645 mi.) 164 180 ODETICS INC 1515 MANCHESTER AVE NNE 1/2 - 1 (0.749 mi.) AC189 219 Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation CHALLENGE MARKETING #82 2101 S HARBOR BLVD SSW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.247 mi.) C27 28 SHELL OIL-PETROCELL 2100 S HARBOR BLVD SSW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.247 mi.) C29 33 MOBIL STATION (18-106) 1800 S HARBOR BLVD NNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.267 mi.) D45 57 ANAHEIM MARRIOT 700 CONVENTION WAY W 1/4 - 1/2 (0.268 mi.) E53 67 CHEVRON STATION 9-5321 1801 S HARBOR BLVD NNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.270 mi.) D55 70 CHEVRON #9-5321 1801 HARBOR BLVD NNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.270 mi.) D57 73 DOLLAR RENT A CAR SYSTEMS 2132 S HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.322 mi.) I69 88 NATIONAL CAR RENTAL SYSTEM, IN 711 W KATELLA AVE NW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.352 mi.) K77 95 WATER PRODUCTION WELL NO. 41 2004 S WEST ST W 1/2 - 1 (0.570 mi.) 154 161 HYATT PLAZA ALICANTE 11891 HARBOR BLVD S 1/2 - 1 (0.654 mi.) Z166 182 UNOCAL #3746 12002 HARBOR S 1/2 - 1 (0.742 mi.) AD184 211 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC2760975.1s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 12 HIST UST: Historical UST Registered Database. A review of the HIST UST list, as provided by EDR, and dated 10/15/1990 has revealed that there are 25 HIST UST sites within approximately 0.75 miles of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation UNION OIL SERVICE STATION #422 1779 S HARBOR BLVD NNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.336 mi.) J73 91 CAR RENTAL & LEASE SALES INC. 231 W KATELLA AVE NE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.406 mi.) L97 109 HERTZ CORPORATION 221 W KATELLA AVE NE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.414 mi.) L99 110 HERTZ CORP 221 W KATELLA AVE NE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.414 mi.) L101 112 AVIS 200 W KATELLA AVE NE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.439 mi.) O113 123 TEXACO 100 W. KATELLA / HAST ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.487 mi.) U134 144 CLARANCE & REHA MEDDLOCK 100 E KATELLA AVE ENE 1/2 - 1 (0.503 mi.) U148 157 ADVANCED AUTOMOTIVE 1763 S HASTER ST NE 1/2 - 1 (0.561 mi.) W151 159 STEINER CORP 1755 S HASTER ST NE 1/2 - 1 (0.579 mi.) Y156 163 DEWEY PEST CONTROL 1813 S MANCHESTER BLVD ENE 1/2 - 1 (0.602 mi.) 161 170 FIRE STATION #3 1563 S MANCHESTER AVE NNE 1/2 - 1 (0.720 mi.) AC173 194 DUNN-EDWARDS CORPORATION 1901 SOUTH MANCHESTER AE 1/2 - 1 (0.737 mi.) AG179 204 ODETICS INC 1515 MANCHESTER AVE NNE 1/2 - 1 (0.749 mi.) AC189 219 Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation HIROSHI FIJISHIGE 1854 S HARBOR BLVD NNW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.147 mi.) B6 14 STATION 082 2101 S HARBOR BLVD SSW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.247 mi.) C19 21 ZAREH DERKRIKORIAN 2100 S HARBOR BLVD SSW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.247 mi.) C31 36 MOBIL OIL 1800 S HARBOR BLVD NNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.267 mi.) D46 58 ANAHEIM MARRIOTT HOTEL 700 W CONVENTION WAY W 1/4 - 1/2 (0.268 mi.) E51 63 95321 1801 S HARBOR BLVD NNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.270 mi.) D56 72 DOLLAR RENT A CAR SYSTEMS 2132 S HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.322 mi.) I71 89 NATIONAL CAR RENTAL SYSTEM 711 W KATELLA AVE NW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.352 mi.) K76 94 COVENCONVENTION CENTER 800 W KATELLA AVE NW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.377 mi.) K90 105 STATION #3746 12002 HARBOR BLVD S 1/2 - 1 (0.742 mi.) AD182 210 UNION OIL SERVICE STATION 12002 HARBOR BLVD S 1/2 - 1 (0.742 mi.) AD183 211 HARDING SCHAD UNION 76 12002 HARBOR BLVD S 1/2 - 1 (0.742 mi.) AD185 215 SWEEPS UST: Statewide Environmental Evaluation and Planning System. This underground storage tank listing was updated and maintained by a company contacted by the in the early 1990’s. The listing is no longer updated or maintained. The local agency is the contact for more information on a site on the SWEEPS list. A review of the SWEEPS UST list, as provided by EDR, and dated 06/01/1994 has revealed that there are 20 SWEEPS UST sites within approximately 0.75 miles of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation EAGLE CAR WASH 350 W KATELLA AVE NE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.367 mi.) L84 100 HERTZ RENT A CAR 221 W KATELLA AVE NE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.414 mi.) L100 111 AVIS RENT A CAR SYSTEM, INC. 200 W KATELLA AVE NE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.439 mi.) O112 122 TEXACO (61-106-434) 100 W KATELLA AVE ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.493 mi.) U139 147 MOBIL STATION 100 E KATELLA AVE ENE 1/2 - 1 (0.503 mi.) U145 152 SOUTHWEST LEASING COMPANY 330 E KATELLA WAY ENE 1/2 - 1 (0.583 mi.) 159 167 DEWEY PEST CONTROL 1813 S MANCHESTER BLVD ENE 1/2 - 1 (0.602 mi.) 161 170 ANAHEIM FIRE STATION #3 1580 S CLEMENTINE NNE 1/2 - 1 (0.645 mi.) 164 180 ODETICS INC 1515 MANCHESTER AVE NNE 1/2 - 1 (0.749 mi.) AC189 219 Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation CHALLENGE MARKETING #82 2101 S HARBOR BLVD SSW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.247 mi.) C27 28 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC2760975.1s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 13 Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation SHELL OIL-PETROCELL 2100 S HARBOR BLVD SSW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.247 mi.) C29 33 MOBIL STATION (18-106) 1800 S HARBOR BLVD NNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.267 mi.) D47 59 ANAHEIM MARRIOTT HOTEL 700 W CONVENTION WAY W 1/4 - 1/2 (0.268 mi.) E51 63 CHEVRON STATION 9-5321 1801 S HARBOR BLVD NNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.270 mi.) D55 70 CHEVRON #9-5321 1801 HARBOR BLVD NNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.270 mi.) D57 73 DOLLAR RENT A CAR SYSTEMS 2132 S HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.322 mi.) I71 89 NATIONAL CAR RENTAL SYSTEM, IN 711 W KATELLA AVE NW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.352 mi.) K77 95 WATER PRODUCTION WELL NO. 41 2004 S WEST ST W 1/2 - 1 (0.570 mi.) 154 161 HYATT PLAZA ALICANTE 11891 HARBOR BLVD S 1/2 - 1 (0.654 mi.) Z166 182 UNOCAL #3746 12002 HARBOR S 1/2 - 1 (0.742 mi.) AD184 211 Records of Emergency Release Reports CHMIRS: The California Hazardous Material Incident Report System contains information on reported hazardous material incidents, i.e., accidental releases or spills. The source is the California Office of Emergency Services. A review of the CHMIRS list, as provided by EDR, and dated 12/31/2007 has revealed that there are 13 CHMIRS sites within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation Not reported 1742 SOUTH CELMENTINE S NNE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.432 mi.) N108 117 Not reported 1742 CLEMENTINE NNE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.432 mi.) N109 119 PACIFIC PALMS APARTMENTS 2045 S HASTER ST ESE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.442 mi.) Q117 125 Not reported 104 E. LEATRICE AVE E 1/4 - 1/2 (0.446 mi.) Q118 127 Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation Not reported 1850 S. HARBOR NNW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.156 mi.) B11 16 Date Completed: 11-NOV-88 Not reported 777 CONVENTION WAY W 1/4 - 1/2 (0.260 mi.) E38 43 MOBIL OIL CORP. 18-106 1800 SOUTH HARBOR NNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.266 mi.) D43 54 Not reported 700 CONVENTION WAY W 1/4 - 1/2 (0.268 mi.) E50 62 Not reported 640 W. KATELLA NNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.307 mi.) H67 85 Not reported 640 WEST KATELA AVE. NNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.307 mi.) H68 87 Not reported 800 W. KATELLA AVE NW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.377 mi.) K88 103 Date Completed: 29-FEB-88 Not reported 2175 SOUTH MALLUL DRIVE SSW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.403 mi.) M94 107 Not reported 2155 SOUTH MADRID ST. SSE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.433 mi.) P110 120 The Orange County Industrial Site Cleanups list comes from the Health Care Agency. A review of the Orange Co. Industrial Site list, as provided by EDR, and dated 12/02/2009 has revealed that there are 2 Orange Co. Industrial Site sites within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation MOTOR MART 1733 S ZEYN ST NE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.487 mi.) T135 145 Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation HIROSHI FIJISHIGE 1854 S HARBOR BLVD NNW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.147 mi.) B6 14 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC2760975.1s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 14 Other Ascertainable Records RCRA-NonGen: RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Non-Generators do not presently generate hazardous waste. A review of the RCRA-NonGen list, as provided by EDR, and dated 01/13/2010 has revealed that there are 3 RCRA-NonGen sites within approximately 0.75 miles of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation RAVIS ONE HOUR PHOTO 1734 S HARBOR BLVD N 1/4 - 1/2 (0.432 mi.) 107 116 ODETICS INC 1859 S MANCHESTER AVE ENE 1/2 - 1 (0.691 mi.) AA167 183 Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation DISNEYLAND RESORT KCML 1854 S HARBOR BLVD NNW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.147 mi.) B4 10 FINDS: The Facility Index System contains both facility information and "pointers" to other sources of information that contain more detail. These include: RCRIS; Permit Compliance System (PCS); Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS); FATES (FIFRA [Federal Insecticide Fungicide Rodenticide Act] and TSCA Enforcement System, FTTS [FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System]; CERCLIS; DOCKET (Enforcement Docket used to manage and track information on civil judicial enforcement cases for all environmental statutes); Federal Underground Injection Control (FURS); Federal Reporting Data System (FRDS); Surface Impoundments (SIA); TSCA Chemicals in Commerce Information System (CICS); PADS; RCRA-J (medical waste transporters/disposers); TRIS; and TSCA. The source of this database is the U.S. EPA/NTIS. A review of the FINDS list, as provided by EDR, and dated 10/19/2009 has revealed that there are 11 FINDS sites within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation FLOUROCARBON CO 1754 S CLEMENTINE ST NNE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.422 mi.) N104 114 RAVIS ONE HOUR PHOTO 1734 S HARBOR BLVD N 1/4 - 1/2 (0.432 mi.) 107 116 SATELLITE CLEANERS INC 1730 S CLEMENTIME ST NNE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.454 mi.) N124 131 ALS TEXACO 100 W KATELLA ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.493 mi.) U137 146 Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation DISNEYLAND RESORT KCML 1854 S HARBOR BLVD NNW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.147 mi.) B4 10 SHELL SERVICE STATION 2100 S HARBOR SSW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.247 mi.) C28 31 ARCO FACILITY NO 09727 2101 S HARBOR BLVD SSW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.247 mi.) C32 37 ANAHEIM HOTEL PARTNERSHIP,ANAH 777 CONVENTION WAY W 1/4 - 1/2 (0.260 mi.) E41 51 BUCHNER AND YOUNG DBA FASTER F 777 CONVENTION WAY W 1/4 - 1/2 (0.260 mi.) E42 51 CHEVRON STATION 95321 1801 S HARBOR BLVD NNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.270 mi.) D61 81 PARKVIEW ELEMENTARY 12272 WILKEN WAY SW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.496 mi.) V143 152 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC2760975.1s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 15 NPDES: A listing of NPDES permits, including stormwater. A review of the NPDES list, as provided by EDR, and dated 02/22/2010 has revealed that there are 6 NPDES sites within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation ANAHEIM GARDENWALK PH 1A 1B 321 W KATELLA AVE NE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.338 mi.) 74 92 ANAHEIM GARDEN WALK 321 W KATELLA AVE NNE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.418 mi.) 103 113 WORLD MARK BY TRENDWEST 201 W KATELLA AVE NE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.431 mi.) O106 116 ALSCL 1750 S ZEYN ST NE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.474 mi.) T132 142 Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation MARRIOTT COURTYARD 2045 S HARBOR BLVD SSW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.148 mi.) A7 15 ANAHEIM MARRIOTT HOTEL 700 W CONVENTION WAY W 1/4 - 1/2 (0.268 mi.) E51 63 HIST CORTESE: The sites for the list are designated by the State Water Resource Control Board [LUST], the Integrated Waste Board [SWF/LS], and the Department of Toxic Substances Control [CALSITES]. A review of the HIST CORTESE list, as provided by EDR, and dated 04/01/2001 has revealed that there are 4 HIST CORTESE sites within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation KATELLA CAR WASH (FORMER) 350 KATELLA AVE NE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.367 mi.) L85 100 Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation SHELL #2100 2100 HARBOR BLVD SSW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.247 mi.) C30 35 CHEVRON #9-5321 1801 HARBOR BLVD NNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.270 mi.) D57 73 TEXACO SERVICE STATION 818 KATELLA AVE NW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.393 mi.) 92 105 Notify 65: Notify 65 records contain facility notifications about any release that could impact drinking water and thereby expose the public to a potential health risk. The data come from the State Water Resources Control Board’s Proposition 65 database. A review of the Notify 65 list, as provided by EDR, and dated 10/21/1993 has revealed that there are 2 Notify 65 sites within approximately 1.5 miles of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation #72 1037 WEST BALL NNW 1 - 2 (1.387 mi.) 232 310 Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation MOBIL OIL CORP. 18-106 1800 SOUTH HARBOR NNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.266 mi.) D43 54 A list of related facilities that have EPA ID numbers. These are facilities with certain SIC codes: power laundries, family and commercial; garment pressing and cleaners’ agents; linen supply; coin-operated laundries and cleaning; plants except rugs; carpet and upholster cleaning; industrial launderers; laundry and garment services. A review of the list, as provided by EDR, and dated 12/22/2009 has revealed that there ---PAGE BREAK--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC2760975.1s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 16 are 3 sites within approximately 0.75 miles of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation SATELLITE CLEANERS INC 1730 S CLEMENTIME ST NNE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.454 mi.) N124 131 SATELLITE CLEANERS 1831 S MANCHESTER ENE 1/2 - 1 (0.644 mi.) AA163 177 Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation LORDS CLEANERS 509 W CHAPMAN S 1/2 - 1 (0.731 mi.) AF177 198 HAZNET: The data is extracted from the copies of hazardous waste manifests received each year by the DTSC. The annual volume of manifests is typically 700,000-1,000,000 annually, representing approximately 350,000-500,000 shipments. Data from non-California manifests & continuation sheets are not included at the present time. Data are from the manifests submitted without correction, and therefore many contain some invalid values for data elements such as generator ID, TSD ID, waste category, & disposal method. The source is the Department of Toxic Substance Control is the agency A review of the HAZNET list, as provided by EDR, and dated 12/31/2008 has revealed that there are 60 HAZNET sites within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation CRAIG LEE HOWLETT 415 WEST KATELLA AVE NNE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.281 mi.) F62 83 TOM ZABY 434 W KATELLA AVE NNE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.289 mi.) F65 85 D&J 1HOUR PHOTO 1770 HARBOR BLVD SOUTH NNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.345 mi.) J75 93 HERTZ CORP 221 W KATELLA AVE NE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.414 mi.) L101 112 HERTZ CAR RENTAL 221 W KATELLA AVE NE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.414 mi.) L102 113 THOMAS F JONES 2001 S HASTER E 1/4 - 1/2 (0.430 mi.) 105 115 AVIS RENT A CAR SYSTEM INC 200 WEST KATELLA AVE NE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.439 mi.) O114 123 AVIS RENT A CAR SYSTEM INC 200 W KATELLA AVE NE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.439 mi.) O115 124 PACIFIC PALMS APARTMENTS 2045 S HASTER ST ESE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.442 mi.) Q117 125 SATELLITE CLEANERS INC 1730 S CLEMENTIME ST NNE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.454 mi.) N124 131 PRICE LEGACY CORP 1731-1741 CLEMENTINE ST NNE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.460 mi.) N126 138 CITY OF ANAHIEM /PUBLIC WORKS 130 KATELLA AVE ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.472 mi.) U131 141 ALSCL 1750 S ZEYN ST NE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.474 mi.) T132 142 ALS TEXACO SUC 100 W KATELLA ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.493 mi.) U138 147 Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation CONVENTION CENTER INN LP 2017 S HARBOR BLVD SW 0 - 1/8 (0.107 mi.) A2 9 1X COMFORT CALIF INC 616 CONVENTION WAY W 0 - 1/8 (0.120 mi.) 3 10 DISNEYLAND RESORT KCML 1854 S HARBOR BLVD NNW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.147 mi.) B4 10 HERCULES 1854 SOUTH HARBOR BLVD. NNW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.147 mi.) B5 14 THE RED LION HOTEL 1850 S HARBOR BLVD NNW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.155 mi.) B9 15 THE RED LION HOTEL 1850 S HARBOR BLVD NNW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.155 mi.) B10 16 ORANGEWOOD LLC 2051 HARBOR BLVD SSW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.158 mi.) 12 18 IHOP 1840 HARBOR BLVD NNW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.179 mi.) B13 18 1X INN AT THE PARK 1855 S. HARBOR BLVD NNW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.181 mi.) B14 19 ERIC CHUNG 2080 HARBOR BLVD SSW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.217 mi.) C15 20 ANAHEIM PHOTONATION 1824 SO HARBOR BLVD NNW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.217 mi.) D16 20 THRIFTY OIL COMPANY #359 2101 HARBOR SSW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.247 mi.) C20 23 SHELL OIL STATION #204-0222-28 2100 S HARBOR SSW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.247 mi.) C23 25 SHELL 2100 S HARBOR BLVD SSW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.247 mi.) C24 25 ARCO PRODUCTS COMPANY #9727 2101 S HARBOR SSW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.247 mi.) C25 26 CHALLENGE MARKETING #82 2101 S HARBOR BLVD SSW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.247 mi.) C27 28 SHELL SERVICE STATION 2100 S HARBOR SSW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.247 mi.) C28 31 ARCO FACILITY NO 09727 2101 S HARBOR BLVD SSW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.247 mi.) C32 37 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC2760975.1s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 17 Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation MJS ENGEL NO 1 INC 2101 S HARBOR BLVD SSW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.247 mi.) C33 39 NALCO CHEMICAL CO 777 CONVENTION WAY W 1/4 - 1/2 (0.260 mi.) E35 40 FUJI PHOTO FILM USA INC C/O: H 777 W CONVENTION WY W 1/4 - 1/2 (0.260 mi.) E36 41 ANAHEIM HILTON & TOWER 777 CONVENTION WAY W 1/4 - 1/2 (0.260 mi.) E37 41 ANAHEIM HILTON AND TOWERS 777 CONVENTION WY W 1/4 - 1/2 (0.260 mi.) E39 45 HOFFMANN LAROCHE 777 CONVENTION WAY W 1/4 - 1/2 (0.260 mi.) E40 46 BUCHNER AND YOUNG DBA FASTER F 777 CONVENTION WAY W 1/4 - 1/2 (0.260 mi.) E42 51 ANAHEIM MARRIOTT HOTEL 700 W CONVENTION WAY W 1/4 - 1/2 (0.268 mi.) E51 63 ANAHEIM MARRIOT 700 CONVENTION WAY W 1/4 - 1/2 (0.268 mi.) E53 67 CHEVRON 95321 1801 S HARBOR BLVD NNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.270 mi.) D59 79 MIKE CHEVRON 1801 SOUTH HARBOR BLVD NNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.270 mi.) D60 80 RSR TRUCKING INC 611 W KATELLA AVE NNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.285 mi.) G63 84 SIR RUDIMAR MOTEL 615 W KATELLA AVE NNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.287 mi.) G64 84 1X DOLLAR RENT A CAR 2132 SOUTH HARBOR S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.322 mi.) I70 89 NATIONAL CAR RENTAL SYSTEM INC 711 W KATELLA NW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.352 mi.) K79 97 FUJI PHOTO FILM ANAHEIM HILTON 777 CONVENTION WY PMA WNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.358 mi.) 81 98 DOMINO AMJET INC 800 W KATELLA AVE NW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.377 mi.) K87 102 WESTPORT RESEARCH INC 800 W KATELLA AVE NW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.377 mi.) K89 104 LEGACY PARTNERS 2175 MALLUL DR SSW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.404 mi.) M95 108 ANAHEIM WILKEN PARK ASSOCIATES 2175 MALLUL DR SSW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.404 mi.) M96 109 AMERICAN AUTOMOTIVE CENTER 450 W WILKEN WAY #C S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.450 mi.) R119 128 S & L AUTO SERVICE CENTER 450 W WILKEN WAY #A S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.450 mi.) R120 128 MOTOR CARRIER INSPECTION SERVI 450 W. WILKEN WAY #B S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.450 mi.) R121 129 OC FULL TECH AUTOMOTIVE & ELEC 450 W WILKEN WAY # C SSE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.457 mi.) P125 138 MANDA MOTORS INC 2201 S HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.463 mi.) S128 139 FAMILY DENTAL OFFICE 2207 SOUTH HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.467 mi.) S129 139 HOUSING URBAN & DEVELOPMENT 132 BLUEBELL AVE SE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.494 mi.) 140 149 GARDEN GROVE USD/PARKVIEW ELEM 12272 WILKEN WAY SW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.496 mi.) V142 151 EMI: Toxics and criteria pollutant emissions data collected by the ARB and local air pollution agencies A review of the EMI list, as provided by EDR, and dated 12/31/2007 has revealed that there are 6 EMI sites within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation SAND T WOODWORKING 1735 S CLEMENTINE NNE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.454 mi.) N122 130 KDOC TV 1730 S CLEMENTINE ST NNE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.454 mi.) N123 130 FLUOROCARBON CO 1753 S ZEYN ST NE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.469 mi.) T130 141 Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation ANAHEIM HILTON & TOWER 777 CONVENTION WAY W 1/4 - 1/2 (0.260 mi.) E37 41 HOFFMANN LAROCHE 777 CONVENTION WAY W 1/4 - 1/2 (0.260 mi.) E40 46 ANAHEIM MARRIOTT HOTEL 700 W CONVENTION WY W 1/4 - 1/2 (0.268 mi.) E52 66 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC2760975.1s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 18 Due to poor or inadequate address information, the following sites were not mapped: Site Name Database(s) DOUBLETREE HOTEL NPDES ANAHEIM OFFICE BUILDING NPDES A TOWN METRO NPDES FUJISHIGE TEMPORARY PARKING LOT NPDES KATELLA COTTAGES TRACT 16363 NPDES CHAPMAN AVE RETAIL NPDES HOME DEPOT USA INC NPDES CITI CLEANERS PAN PACIFIC HOTEL LUST SAN MATEO ANAHEIM RESORT PUMP HOUSE #55 UST ALAMEDA ARCO (AM/PM MINI MRKT.) #9727 UST ALAMEDA BLACK GOLD UNOCAL #5669 UST ALAMEDA UNOCAL #4227 UST ALAMEDA UNOCAL #5698 UST ALAMEDA JIFFY LUBE STORE # 1991 UST ALAMEDA P & M #949 UST ALAMEDA HSH INTERPLAN USA HAZNET CENTER WALLCOVERING & PAINTING HAZNET CT MACHINING INC HAZNET SEPHORA STORES HAZNET AIDA Y. LIM D.D.S. A PROFESSIONAL HAZNET A-TOWN METRO HAZNET TEAM THOMPSON AUTO COLLISION DBA E HAZNET A-TOWN METRO HAZNET A-TOWN METRO HAZNET A-TOWN METRO HAZNET FEI-ZYFER INC HAZNET CHAPMAN AUTO REPAIR INC HAZNET CALTRANS DISTRICT 12 EA 071611 HAZNET JULIES REMEDIATION HAZNET ADVANCED AUTO BODY HAZNET AUTOZONE #3308 HAZNET CUSHMAN & WAKEFIELD OF CA HAZNET ---PAGE BREAK--- EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. 230 kV 230 kV 230 kV 230 kV 230 kV 230 kV 230 kV 230 kV 230 kV 230 kV 230 kV 230 kV ---PAGE BREAK--- EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY Search Target Distance Total Database Property (Miles) < 1/8 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS Federal NPL site list 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.500 NPL 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.500 Proposed NPL 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500 NPL LIENS Federal Delisted NPL site list 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.500 Delisted NPL Federal CERCLIS list 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000 CERCLIS 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.500 FEDERAL FACILITY Federal CERCLIS NFRAP site List 1 NR 1 0 0 0 1.000 CERC-NFRAP Federal RCRA CORRACTS facilities list 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.500 CORRACTS Federal RCRA non-CORRACTS TSD facilities list 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000 RCRA-TSDF Federal RCRA generators list 2 NR 1 0 0 1 0.750 RCRA-LQG 20 NR 13 5 2 0 0.750 RCRA-SQG 0 NR 0 0 0 0 0.750 RCRA-CESQG Federal institutional controls / engineering controls registries 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000 US ENG CONTROLS 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000 US INST CONTROL Federal ERNS list 2 NR NR 1 1 0 0.500 ERNS State- and tribal - equivalent NPL 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.500 RESPONSE State- and tribal - equivalent CERCLIS 7 6 1 0 0 0 1.500 ENVIROSTOR State and tribal landfill and/or solid waste disposal site lists 2 NR 2 0 0 0 1.000 SWF/LF State and tribal leaking storage tank lists 62 NR 43 14 5 0 1.000 LUST 1 NR 1 0 0 0 1.000 SLIC TC2760975.1s Page 4 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY Search Target Distance Total Database Property (Miles) < 1/8 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000 INDIAN LUST State and tribal registered storage tank lists 17 NR 5 10 2 0 0.750 UST 2 NR 0 2 0 0 0.750 AST 0 NR 0 0 0 0 0.750 INDIAN UST 0 NR 0 0 0 0 0.750 FEMA UST State and tribal voluntary cleanup sites 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000 INDIAN VCP 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000 VCP ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS Local Brownfield lists 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000 US BROWNFIELDS Local Lists of Landfill / Solid Waste Disposal Sites 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000 DEBRIS REGION 9 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000 ODI 2 NR 2 0 0 0 1.000 WMUDS/SWAT 5 NR 5 0 0 0 1.000 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500 HAULERS 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000 INDIAN ODI Local Lists of Hazardous waste / Contaminated Sites 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500 US CDL 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.500 HIST Cal-Sites 1 NR 1 0 0 0 0.750 SCH 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.500 Toxic Pits 3 NR NR 3 0 0 0.500 CDL 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500 US HIST CDL Local Lists of Registered Storage Tanks 18 NR 7 9 2 0 0.750 CA FID UST 25 NR 10 12 3 0 0.750 HIST UST 20 NR 8 10 2 0 0.750 SWEEPS UST Local Land Records 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500 LIENS 2 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000 LUCIS 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500 LIENS 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000 DEED Records of Emergency Release Reports 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500 HMIRS 13 NR NR 12 1 0 0.500 CHMIRS 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500 LDS TC2760975.1s Page 5 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY Search Target Distance Total Database Property (Miles) < 1/8 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500 MCS 2 NR NR 1 1 0 0.500 Orange Co. Industrial Site Other Ascertainable Records 3 NR 1 1 1 0 0.750 RCRA-NonGen 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500 DOT OPS 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.500 DOD 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.500 FUDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.500 CONSENT 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.500 ROD 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000 UMTRA 0 NR 0 0 0 0 0.750 MINES 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500 TRIS 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500 TSCA 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500 FTTS 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500 HIST FTTS 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500 SSTS 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500 ICIS 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500 PADS 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500 MLTS 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500 RADINFO 11 NR NR 8 3 0 0.500 FINDS 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500 RAATS 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.500 CA BOND EXP. PLAN 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500 CA WDS 6 NR NR 5 1 0 0.500 NPDES 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000 Cortese 4 NR NR 3 1 0 0.500 HIST CORTESE 2 1 0 1 0 0 1.500 Notify 65 3 NR 2 1 0 0 0.750 0 NR 0 0 0 0 0.750 WIP 60 NR NR 41 17 2 0.500 HAZNET 6 NR NR 6 0 0 0.500 EMI 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.500 INDIAN RESERV 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000 SCRD 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500 FINANCIAL ASSURANCE 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.500 HWP 0 NR 0 0 0 0 0.750 HWT 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000 COAL ASH EPA 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500 PCB TRANSFORMER 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500 COAL ASH DOE 0 NR 0 0 0 0 0.750 MWMP 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000 PROC EDR PROPRIETARY RECORDS EDR Proprietary Records 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.500 Manufactured Gas Plants 0 NR 0 0 0 0 0.750 EDR Historical Auto Stations 0 NR 0 0 0 0 0.750 EDR Historical Cleaners TC2760975.1s Page 6 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY Search Target Distance Total Database Property (Miles) < 1/8 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted NOTES: TP = Target Property NR = Not Requested at this Search Distance Sites may be listed in more than one database TC2760975.1s Page 7 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation No U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: 06/10/2001 Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: Not reported Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: Not reported Not reported Owner/operator address: DISNEYLAND RESORT Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: 06/10/2001 Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: Not reported Owner/operator telephone: US Owner/operator country: ANAHEIM, CA 92803 P.O. BOX 3232 Owner/operator address: WALT DISNEY PARKS & RESORTS, US INC. Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: 100 kg of that material at any time hazardous waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than from the cleanup of a spill, into or on any land or water, of acutely of any residue or contaminated soil, waste or other debris resulting kg of acutely hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less hazardous waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1 waste during any calendar month; or generates 1 kg or less of acutely cleanup of a spill, into or on any land or water, of acutely hazardous residue or contaminated soil, waste or other debris resulting from the during any calendar month; or generates more than 100 kg of any calendar month; or generates more than 1 kg of acutely hazardous waste Handler: generates 1,000 kg or more of hazardous waste during any Description: Large Quantity Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: [EMAIL REDACTED] Contact email: (714) 781-1756 Contact telephone: US Contact country: ANAHEIM, CA 92803-3232 P.O. BOX 3232 Contact address: DONNA A BAKER Contact: ANAHEIM, CA 92803-3232 P.O. BOX 3232 Mailing address: CAR000202242 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 1900-2000 S HARBOR BLVD Facility address: DISNEYLAND RESORT Facility name: 08/18/2009 Date form received by agency: RCRA-LQG: 341 ft. 0.065 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 132 ft. < 1/8 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 WNW 1900-2000 S HARBOR BLVD CAR000202242 1 RCRA-LQG DISNEYLAND RESORT [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 8 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation No violations found Violation Status: LEAD Waste name: D008 Waste code: Hazardous Waste Summary: Not reported Generated waste on-site: No Accumulated waste on-site: Thermostats Waste type: Not reported Generated waste on-site: No Accumulated waste on-site: Pesticides Waste type: Not reported Generated waste on-site: No Accumulated waste on-site: Lamps Waste type: Not reported Generated waste on-site: No Accumulated waste on-site: Batteries Waste type: No Generated waste on-site: No Accumulated waste on-site: Other Waste type: Universal Waste Summary: Commercial status unknown Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: No Furnace exemption: No On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: No Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): DISNEYLAND RESORT (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1734 S HARBOR BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: CONVENTION CENTER INN Contact: CAC002100776 Gepaid: HAZNET: 567 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster A 0.107 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 132 ft. < 1/8 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 SW 2017 S HARBOR BLVD N/A A2 HAZNET CONVENTION CENTER INN LP S103958499 TC2760975.1s Page 9 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: 30.3408 Tons: Disposal, Land Fill Disposal Method: Asbestos-containing waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD009007626 TSD EPA ID: CONVENTION CENTER INN LP (Continued) S103958499 Orange Facility County: 14.3276 Tons: Disposal, Land Fill Disposal Method: Asbestos-containing waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD009007626 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SILVER SPRING, MD 209010000 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: THE CORP Contact: CAC000643968 Gepaid: HAZNET: 634 ft. 0.120 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 130 ft. < 1/8 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 West 616 CONVENTION WAY N/A 3 HAZNET 1X COMFORT CALIF INC S103667004 PO BOX 3232 Owner/operator address: WALT DISNEY PARKS AND RESORTS US INC Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: Handler: Non-Generators do not presently generate hazardous waste Description: Non-Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: [EMAIL REDACTED] Contact email: [PHONE REDACTED] Contact telephone: US Contact country: ANAHEIM, CA 92803 PO BOX 3232 Contact address: DONNA BAKER Contact: ANAHEIM, CA 92803 PO BOX 3232 Mailing address: CAR000054569 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 1854 S HARBOR BLVD Facility address: DISNEYLAND RESORT KCML Facility name: 08/19/2009 Date form received by agency: RCRA-NonGen: 778 ft. Site 1 of 9 in cluster B 0.147 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 132 ft. 1/8-1/4 HAZNET ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NNW FINDS 1854 S HARBOR BLVD CAR000054569 B4 RCRA-NonGen DISNEYLAND RESORT KCML [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 10 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Generated waste on-site: No Accumulated waste on-site: Thermostats Waste type: Not reported Generated waste on-site: No Accumulated waste on-site: Pesticides Waste type: Not reported Generated waste on-site: No Accumulated waste on-site: Lamps Waste type: Not reported Generated waste on-site: No Accumulated waste on-site: Batteries Waste type: No Generated waste on-site: No Accumulated waste on-site: Other Waste type: Universal Waste Summary: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: No Furnace exemption: No On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: No Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): No U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: 06/10/2001 Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: Not reported Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: Not reported Not reported Owner/operator address: DISNEYLAND RESORT WDI Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: 06/10/2001 Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: Not reported Owner/operator telephone: US Owner/operator country: ANAHEIM, CA 92803 DISNEYLAND RESORT KCML (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 11 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 1854 S HARBOR BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Not reported Contact: CAR000054569 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 67.424 Tons: Disposal, Other Disposal Method: Fluid-cracking catalyst (FCC) waste Waste Category: Kings TSD County: CAT000646117 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1854 S HARBOR BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Not reported Contact: CAR000054569 Gepaid: HAZNET: corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource Environmental Interest/Information System 110002928994 Registry ID: FINDS: No violations found Violation Status: LEAD Waste name: D008 Waste code: Hazardous Waste Summary: Small Quantity Generator Classification: FUJISHIGE FARMS INC Site name: DISNEYLAND RESORT KCML Facility name: 07/21/1999 Date form received by agency: Large Quantity Generator Classification: FUJISHIGE FARMS INC Site name: DISNEYLAND RESORT KCML Facility name: 07/21/1999 Date form received by agency: Large Quantity Generator Classification: DISNEYLAND RESORT KCML Facility name: 07/28/2009 Date form received by agency: Historical Generators: DISNEYLAND RESORT KCML (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 12 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 4 additional CA_HAZNET: record(s) in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access Orange Facility County: 12.85 Tons: Treatment, Incineration Disposal Method: Waste oil and mixed oil Waste Category: 0 TSD County: NED981723513 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1854 S HARBOR BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Not reported Contact: CAR000054569 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 2.55 Tons: Treatment, Incineration Disposal Method: Other inorganic solid waste Waste Category: 0 TSD County: NED981723513 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1854 S HARBOR BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Not reported Contact: CAR000054569 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 67.424 Tons: Disposal, Land Fill Disposal Method: Unspecified oil-containing waste Waste Category: Kings TSD County: CAT000646117 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1854 S HARBOR BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Not reported Contact: CAR000054569 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 25.284 Tons: Disposal, Other Disposal Method: Other inorganic solid waste Waste Category: Kings TSD County: CAT000646117 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: DISNEYLAND RESORT KCML (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 13 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: 3.2500 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Other inorganic solid waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD000088252 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: LOS ANGELES, CA 900130000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 555 WEST 5TH STREET Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: CITY TOWER INVESTMENTS INCORP. Contact: CAC001484488 Gepaid: HAZNET: 778 ft. Site 2 of 9 in cluster B 0.147 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 132 ft. 1/8-1/4 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NNW 1854 SOUTH HARBOR BLVD. N/A B5 HAZNET HERCULES S103967636 DDT TOXAPHENE Released Chemical: Closure certification issued Closure Type: CLOSED 12/22/2003 Current Status: RO0003265 Record ID: ORANGE Region: 03IC026 Case ID: Orange Co. Industrial Site: None Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: REGULAR Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00000550 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 1 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 Owner City,St,Zip: 1854 S. HARBOR BLVD Owner Address: HIROSHI FIJISHIGE Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Not reported Contact Name: 0001 Total Tanks: FARM Other Type: Other Facility Type: 00000053232 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: 778 ft. Site 3 of 9 in cluster B 0.147 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 132 ft. 1/8-1/4 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NNW Orange Co. Industrial Site 1854 S HARBOR BLVD N/A B6 HIST UST HIROSHI FIJISHIGE U001578609 TC2760975.1s Page 14 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Discharge Zip: Not reported Discharge State: Not reported Discharge City: Not reported Discharge Address: Tarasdia Hotels Discharge Name: 4/25/2007 Termination Date Of Regulatory Measure: Not reported Expiration Date Of Regulatory Measure: 4/14/2005 Effective Date Of Regulatory Measure: Not reported Adoption Date Of Regulatory Measure: CONSTW Program Type: 8 30C333639 WDID: 621949 Place Id: Storm water construction Regulatory Measure Type: 99-08DWQ Order No: 284432 Regulatory Measure Id: 8 Region: 258603 Agency Id: Terminated Facility Status: Not reported Npdes Number: NPDES: 780 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster A 0.148 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 130 ft. 1/8-1/4 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 SSW 2045 S HARBOR BLVD N/A A7 NPDES MARRIOTT COURTYARD S109449834 additional ERNS detail in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access 812 ft. Site 4 of 9 in cluster B 0.154 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 132 ft. 1/8-1/4 ANAHEIM, CA NNW 1850 S HARBOMR N/A B8 ERNS 1850 S HARBOMR 8874402 Orange Facility County: 117.2 Tons: H132 Disposal Method: Asbestos-containing waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD009007626 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SPOKANE, WA 992012284 Mailing City,St,Zip: 201 W NORTH RIVER DR Mailing Address: RLH BUILDING Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: JIM HOOPER Contact: CAC002629000 Gepaid: HAZNET: 819 ft. Site 5 of 9 in cluster B 0.155 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 132 ft. 1/8-1/4 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NNW 1850 S HARBOR BLVD N/A B9 HAZNET THE RED LION HOTEL S109928734 TC2760975.1s Page 15 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: 251.2 Tons: H132 Disposal Method: Asbestos-containing waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD009007626 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SPOKANE, WA 992012284 Mailing City,St,Zip: 201 W NORTH RIVER DR Mailing Address: RLH BUILDING Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: JIM HOOPER Contact: CAC002635289 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 16 Tons: H132 Disposal Method: Asbestos-containing waste Waste Category: 99 TSD County: AZC950823111 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SPOKANE, WA 992012284 Mailing City,St,Zip: 201 W NORTH RIVER DR Mailing Address: RLH BUILDING Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: JIM HOOPER Contact: CAC002635289 Gepaid: HAZNET: 819 ft. Site 6 of 9 in cluster B 0.155 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 132 ft. 1/8-1/4 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NNW 1850 S HARBOR BLVD N/A B10 HAZNET THE RED LION HOTEL S109931460 Not reported Special Studies 2: Not reported Special Studies 1: U Property Management: Not reported Estimated Temperature: 500 Surrounding Area: 1818 Time Completed: 1643 Time Notified: 17182 Agency Incident Number: 30005 Agency Id Number: 962 Property Use: 11-NOV-88 Date Completed: 11-NOV-88 Incident Date: Not reported OES Time: Not reported OES Date: Not reported OES notification: 8803809 OES Incident Number: CHMIRS: 825 ft. Site 7 of 9 in cluster B 0.156 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 132 ft. 1/8-1/4 ANAHEIM, CA NNW 1850 S. HARBOR N/A B11 CHMIRS S100279107 TC2760975.1s Page 16 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Number of Injuries: Not reported Evacuations: Not reported Description: Not reported Unknown: Not reported Tons: Not reported Sheen: Not reported Quarts: Not reported Pints: Not reported Ounces: Not reported Liters: Not reported Pounds: Not reported Grams: Not reported Gallons: Not reported CUFT: Not reported Cups: Not reported BBLS: Not reported Quantity Released: Not reported Substance: 02-MAR-89 E Date: Not reported Site Type: Not reported Contained: Not reported Amount: Not reported Admin Agency: Not reported Incident Date: Not reported Agency: 88-92 Year: Not reported Date/Time: Not reported Other: Not reported Measure: Not reported Type: Not reported What Happened: Not reported Containment: Not reported Cleanup By: Not reported Spill Site: Not reported Waterway: Not reported Waterway Involved: [PHONE REDACTED] Facility Telephone: Y Comments: 13-NOV-88 Report Date: ZUBER Reporting Officer Name/ID: Not reported Company Name: Not reported CA/DOT/PUC/ICC Number: Not reported Vehicle Id Number: CA Vehicle State: Not reported Vehicle License Number: DATSUN FLAT BED Vehicle Make/year: Not reported Others Number Of Fatalities: Not reported Others Number Of Injuries: Not reported Others Number Of Decontaminated: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Fatalities: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Injuries: Not reported Resp Agncy Personel # Of Decontaminated: N More Than Two Substances Involved?: Not reported Special Studies 6: Not reported Special Studies 5: Not reported Special Studies 4: Not reported Special Studies 3: (Continued) S100279107 TC2760975.1s Page 17 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Description: Not reported Number of Fatalities: (Continued) S100279107 Not reported Facility County: 1.04 Tons: Not reported Disposal Method: Waste oil and mixed oil Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 Mailing City,St,Zip: 635 W KATELLA AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: JOHN BISSELL Contact: CAC002575832 Gepaid: HAZNET: 836 ft. 0.158 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 130 ft. 1/8-1/4 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 SSW 2051 HARBOR BLVD N/A 12 HAZNET ORANGEWOOD LLC S108215540 Not reported Facility County: 12.64 Tons: Disposal, Land Fill Disposal Method: Asbestos-containing waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD009007626 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SANTA ANA, CA 92701 Mailing City,St,Zip: 520 W SANTA ANA BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: ABED ELHI Contact: CAC002583041 Gepaid: HAZNET: 948 ft. Site 8 of 9 in cluster B 0.179 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 131 ft. 1/8-1/4 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NNW 1840 HARBOR BLVD N/A B13 HAZNET IHOP S108209315 TC2760975.1s Page 18 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: 75.8520 Tons: Disposal, Land Fill Disposal Method: Asbestos-containing waste Waste Category: 5 TSD County: CAL000027741 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SAME, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: SAME Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: DALLAS/ANAHEIM HOTEL ASSOC. Contact: CAC000780528 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 10.9564 Tons: Not reported Disposal Method: Asbestos-containing waste Waste Category: 5 TSD County: CAL000027741 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SAME, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: SAME Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: DALLAS/ANAHEIM HOTEL ASSOC. Contact: CAC000780528 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 8.4280 Tons: Disposal, Land Fill Disposal Method: Asbestos-containing waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD009007626 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SAME, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: SAME Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: DALLAS/ANAHEIM HOTEL ASSOC. Contact: CAC000780528 Gepaid: HAZNET: 958 ft. Site 9 of 9 in cluster B 0.181 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 131 ft. 1/8-1/4 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NNW 1855 S. HARBOR BLVD N/A B14 HAZNET 1X INN AT THE PARK S103637821 TC2760975.1s Page 19 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Facility County: 12.64 Tons: Disposal, Land Fill Disposal Method: Asbestos-containing waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: Not reported TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1324 E KATELLA AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: ERIC CHUNG Contact: CAC002484487 Gepaid: HAZNET: 1143 ft. Site 1 of 18 in cluster C 0.217 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 128 ft. 1/8-1/4 ANAHEIM, CA 92806 SSW 2080 HARBOR BLVD N/A C15 HAZNET ERIC CHUNG S106085922 Orange Facility County: .3418 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Photochemicals/photoprocessing waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD108040858 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928023510 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1824 S HARBOR BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: RAHMAT Contact: CAL000163902 Gepaid: HAZNET: 1146 ft. Site 1 of 16 in cluster D 0.217 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 132 ft. 1/8-1/4 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NNW 1824 SO HARBOR BLVD N/A D16 HAZNET ANAHEIM PHOTONATION S103950104 1997-07-18 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -117.920091 Longitude: 33.7985758 Latitude: T0605902045 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 1187 ft. Site 1 of 13 in cluster E 0.225 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 128 ft. 1/8-1/4 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 West 700 W CONVENTION WAY N/A E17 LUST ANAHEIM MARRIOT S109284766 TC2760975.1s Page 20 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Site History: Diesel Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083002986T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: ANAHEIM MARRIOT (Continued) S109284766 Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083000341T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 1996-07-23 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -117.914634 Longitude: 33.795763 Latitude: T0605900267 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 1298 ft. Site 2 of 18 in cluster C 0.246 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 128 ft. 1/8-1/4 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 SSW 2100 S HARBOR BLVD N/A C18 LUST SHELL #2100 S109284166 00010000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 82-1 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: DOWNEY, CA 90242 Owner City,St,Zip: 12739 LAKEWOOD BLVD. Owner Address: CALIFORNIA TARGET ENTERPRISES, Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Not reported Contact Name: 0003 Total Tanks: Not reported Other Type: Gas Station Facility Type: 00000012748 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: 1305 ft. Site 3 of 18 in cluster C 0.247 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 127 ft. 1/8-1/4 ANAHEIM, CA 92801 SSW 2101 S HARBOR BLVD N/A C19 HIST UST STATION 082 U001578572 TC2760975.1s Page 21 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: PREMIUM Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00007500 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 82-3 Container Num: 003 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: REGULAR Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00007500 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 82-4 Container Num: 003 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00012000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 82-2 Container Num: 002 Tank Num: Visual, Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: WASTE OIL Type of Fuel: WASTE Tank Used for: 00000000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 3 Container Num: 002 Tank Num: Visual Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: WASTE OIL Type of Fuel: WASTE Tank Used for: 00000000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 82-5 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: REGULAR Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: STATION 082 (Continued) U001578572 TC2760975.1s Page 22 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: 1.2510 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Waste oil and mixed oil Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD099452708 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: DOWNEY, CA 902404020 Mailing City,St,Zip: 10000 LAKEWOOD BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: THRIFTY OIL COMPANY Contact: CAL000157129 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .9174 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Unspecified oil-containing waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD089446710 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: DOWNEY, CA 902404020 Mailing City,St,Zip: 10000 LAKEWOOD BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: THRIFTY OIL COMPANY Contact: CAL000157129 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 2.5228 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Waste oil and mixed oil Waste Category: San Bernardino TSD County: CAT080025711 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: DOWNEY, CA 902404020 Mailing City,St,Zip: 10000 LAKEWOOD BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: THRIFTY OIL COMPANY Contact: CAL000157129 Gepaid: HAZNET: 1305 ft. Site 4 of 18 in cluster C 0.247 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 127 ft. 1/8-1/4 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 SSW 2101 HARBOR N/A C20 HAZNET THRIFTY OIL COMPANY #359 S103991352 TC2760975.1s Page 23 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: RM Staff Initials: VJJ Staff: B MTBE Class: MTBE Detected. Site tested for MTBE & MTBE detected MTBE Tested: 0 MTBE Fuel: 3.9 Max MTBE Soil: 2 MTBE Concentration: 3600 Max MTBE GW: 9/19/1997 MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.7960121 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: = Soil Qualifies: = GW Qualifies: 9/20/1995 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: 1/20/2004 Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: Not reported Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 5/11/1995 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: 7/31/1995 Review Date: 9/20/1995 Enter Date: Not reported How Stopped Date: T0605901878 Global ID: Not reported Leak Source: Not reported Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Not reported How Discovered: Not reported Funding: SEL Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Misc. Motor Vehicle Fuels Substance: Aquifer affected Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083002706T Case Number: Remedial action (cleanup) Underway Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 1305 ft. Site 5 of 18 in cluster C 0.247 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 127 ft. 1/8-1/4 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 SSW 2101 HARBOR BLVD N/A C21 LUST THRIFTY OIL #359 S103943465 TC2760975.1s Page 24 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation GASOLINE AND DIESEL Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: THRIFTY OIL #359 (Continued) S103943465 -117.91507 Longitude: 33.79573 Latitude: 9430 Global ID: UST: 1305 ft. Site 6 of 18 in cluster C 0.247 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 127 ft. 1/8-1/4 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 SSW 2100 S HARBOR BLVD N/A C22 UST SHELL (0222-28) U003782402 Orange Facility County: .4170 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Waste oil and mixed oil Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD099452708 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: CARSON, CA 907490000 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 6249 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: SHELL OIL COMPANY Contact: CAC001163880 Gepaid: HAZNET: 1305 ft. Site 7 of 18 in cluster C 0.247 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 127 ft. 1/8-1/4 ANAHEIM, CA 90749 SSW 2100 S HARBOR N/A C23 HAZNET SHELL OIL STATION #204-0222-2804 S103641303 7 TSD County: CAD982484933 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: HOUSTON, TX 772522099 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 2099 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: EQUILON ENTERPRISES LLC Contact: CAL000194892 Gepaid: HAZNET: 1305 ft. Site 8 of 18 in cluster C 0.247 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 127 ft. 1/8-1/4 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 SSW 2100 S HARBOR BLVD N/A C24 HAZNET SHELL S105126813 TC2760975.1s Page 25 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: 0.1251 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT000613893 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: HOUSTON, TX 772522099 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 2099 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: EQUILON ENTERPRISES LLC Contact: CAL000194892 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.225 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Other organic solids Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD028409019 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: HOUSTON, TX 772522099 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 2099 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: EQUILON ENTERPRISES LLC Contact: CAL000194892 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 1.5000 Tons: Disposal, Other Disposal Method: Empty containers less than 30 gallons Waste Category: SHELL (Continued) S105126813 CAL000187278 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .1042 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ARTESIA, CA 907026038 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 6038 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: PRESTIGE STATION INC Contact: CAL000187544 Gepaid: HAZNET: 1305 ft. Site 9 of 18 in cluster C 0.247 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 127 ft. 1/8-1/4 ANAHEIM, CA 92801 SSW 2101 S HARBOR N/A C25 HAZNET ARCO PRODUCTS COMPANY #9727 S103641360 TC2760975.1s Page 26 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation -1 additional CA_HAZNET: record(s) in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access Not reported Facility County: 3.74 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: Not reported TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ARTESIA, CA 907026038 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 6038 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: CARLOS RODRIGUEZ Contact: CAL000225595 Gepaid: Not reported Facility County: 2.34 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: Not reported TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ARTESIA, CA 907026038 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 6038 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: CARLOS RODRIGUEZ Contact: CAL000225594 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 2.5020 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Tank bottom waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ARTESIA, CA 907020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 6038 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: ARCO PRODUCTS COMPANY Contact: ARCO PRODUCTS COMPANY #9727 (Continued) S103641360 -117.91511 Longitude: 33.79573 Latitude: 11971 Global ID: UST: 1305 ft. Site 10 of 18 in cluster C 0.247 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 127 ft. 1/8-1/4 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 SSW 2101 S HARBOR BLVD N/A C26 UST TARGET STATION 82 U003799341 TC2760975.1s Page 27 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 12000 Capacity: 08-10-92 Actv Date: 30-011-005025-000002 Tank Id: 2 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 08-10-92 Act Date: 08-10-92 Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 5025 Comp Number: A Status: 5 Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: 08-10-92 Actv Date: 30-011-005025-000001 Tank Id: 1 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 08-10-92 Act Date: 08-10-92 Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 5025 Comp Number: A Status: SWEEPS UST: Active Status: Not reported Comments: Not reported EPA ID: Not reported NPDES Number: Not reported DUNs Number: Not reported Contact Phone: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM 92802 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 12739 LAKEWOOD BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mail To: [PHONE REDACTED] Facility Phone: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported Cortese Code: Not reported Regulated ID: UTNKA Regulated By: 30011972 Facility ID: CA FID UST: 1305 ft. Site 11 of 18 in cluster C 0.247 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 127 ft. 1/8-1/4 HAZNET ANAHEIM, CA 92802 SSW SWEEPS UST 2101 S HARBOR BLVD N/A C27 CA FID UST CHALLENGE MARKETING #82 S101589431 TC2760975.1s Page 28 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: JACK OMAN WASTE SPECIALIST Contact: CAR000101741 Gepaid: HAZNET: Not reported Number Of Tanks: WASTE OIL Content: W Stg: OIL Tank Use: 550 Capacity: 08-10-92 Actv Date: 30-011-005025-000005 Tank Id: 5 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 08-10-92 Act Date: 08-10-92 Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 5025 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: DIESEL Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 7500 Capacity: 08-10-92 Actv Date: 30-011-005025-000004 Tank Id: 4 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 08-10-92 Act Date: 08-10-92 Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 5025 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 7500 Capacity: 08-10-92 Actv Date: 30-011-005025-000003 Tank Id: 3 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 08-10-92 Act Date: 08-10-92 Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 5025 Comp Number: A Status: CHALLENGE MARKETING #82 (Continued) S101589431 TC2760975.1s Page 29 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation JACK OMAN WASTE SPECIALIST Contact: CAR000101741 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 2.94 Tons: H039 Disposal Method: Aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: RCHO STA MARG, CA 926880000 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 80249 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: RUTH HA / WASTE SPECIALIST Contact: CAR000101741 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.105 Tons: Not reported Disposal Method: Aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: RCHO STA MARG, CA 926880000 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 80249 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: RUTH HA / WASTE SPECIALIST Contact: CAR000101741 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.15 Tons: H132 Disposal Method: Other organic solids Waste Category: 99 TSD County: NVT330010000 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: RCHO STA MARG, CA 926880000 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 80249 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: RUTH HA / WASTE SPECIALIST Contact: CAR000101741 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.18 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: RCHO STA MARG, CA 926880000 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 80249 Mailing Address: CHALLENGE MARKETING #82 (Continued) S101589431 TC2760975.1s Page 30 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 4 additional CA_HAZNET: record(s) in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access Orange Facility County: 0.05 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Other organic solids Waste Category: Orange TSD County: CAD008302903 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: RCHO STA MARG, CA 926880000 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 80249 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: CHALLENGE MARKETING #82 (Continued) S101589431 Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (713) 241-5036 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: HOUSTON, TX 77252 P O BOX 2099 Owner/operator address: EQUILON ENTERPRISES Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: (713) 241-5036 Contact telephone: US Contact country: HOUSTON, TX 77252 P O BOX 2099 TSP 1501 Contact address: SONDRA BIENVENU Contact: HOUSTON, TX 77252 P O BOX 2099 Mailing address: CAR000085548 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 SAP [PHONE REDACTED] S HARBOR Facility address: SHELL SERVICE STATION Facility name: 10/25/2000 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: 1305 ft. Site 12 of 18 in cluster C 0.247 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 127 ft. 1/8-1/4 HAZNET ANAHEIM, CA 92805 SSW FINDS 2100 S HARBOR CAR000085548 C28 RCRA-SQG SHELL SERVICE STATION [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 31 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation CAR000085548 Gepaid: HAZNET: corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource facilities. generators, transporters, and treatment, storage, and disposal provides California with information on hazardous waste shipments for California Hazardous Waste Tracking System - Datamart (HWTS-DATAMART) Environmental Interest/Information System 110012229613 Registry ID: FINDS: No violations found Violation Status: BENZENE Waste name: D018 Waste code: WHICH WOULD BE CONSIDERED AS IGNITABLE HAZARDOUS WASTE. MATERIAL. LACQUER THINNER IS AN EXAMPLE OF A COMMONLY USED SOLVENT WHICH CAN BE OBTAINED FROM THE MANUFACTURER OR DISTRIBUTOR OF THE FLASH POINT OF A WASTE IS TO REVIEW THE MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET, CLOSED CUP FLASH POINT TESTER. ANOTHER METHOD OF DETERMINING THE LESS THAN 140 DEGREES FAHRENHEIT AS DETERMINED BY A PENSKY-MARTENS IGNITABLE HAZARDOUS WASTES ARE THOSE WASTES WHICH HAVE A FLASHPOINT OF Waste name: D001 Waste code: Not Defined Waste name: D000 Waste code: Hazardous Waste Summary: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: No Furnace exemption: No On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): No U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: SHELL SERVICE STATION (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 32 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Facility County: 0.89 Tons: Treatment, Tank Disposal Method: Tank bottom waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: Not reported TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: Houston, TX 77252 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 2099 Tsp 1501 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Sondra Bienvenu Contact: CAR000085548 Gepaid: Not reported Facility County: 0.31 Tons: Treatment, Tank Disposal Method: Aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: Not reported TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: Houston, TX 77252 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 2099 Tsp 1501 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Sondra Bienvenu Contact: CAR000085548 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Other organic solids Waste Category: Orange TSD County: CAD028409019 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: Houston, TX 770672508 Mailing City,St,Zip: 12700 NORTHBOROUGH DR Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Sap 135048 Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: N CORTEZ/ENVT’L DATA ANALYST Contact: SHELL SERVICE STATION (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] Not reported Mail To: [PHONE REDACTED] Facility Phone: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported Cortese Code: Not reported Regulated ID: UTNKA Regulated By: 30000427 Facility ID: CA FID UST: 1305 ft. Site 13 of 18 in cluster C 0.247 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 127 ft. 1/8-1/4 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 SSW SWEEPS UST 2100 S HARBOR BLVD N/A C29 CA FID UST SHELL OIL-PETROCELL S101588929 TC2760975.1s Page 33 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 07-08-92 Actv Date: 30-011-004058-000003 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 07-08-92 Act Date: 07-08-92 Ref Date: 44-000074 Board Of Equalization: 2 Number: 4058 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: 07-08-92 Actv Date: 30-011-004058-000002 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 07-08-92 Act Date: 07-08-92 Ref Date: 44-000074 Board Of Equalization: 2 Number: 4058 Comp Number: A Status: 3 Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: 07-08-92 Actv Date: 30-011-004058-000001 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 07-08-92 Act Date: 07-08-92 Ref Date: 44-000074 Board Of Equalization: 2 Number: 4058 Comp Number: A Status: SWEEPS UST: Active Status: Not reported Comments: Not reported EPA ID: Not reported NPDES Number: Not reported DUNs Number: Not reported Contact Phone: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM 92805 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address 2: PO BOX 4848 Mailing Address: SHELL OIL-PETROCELL (Continued) S101588929 TC2760975.1s Page 34 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: SHELL OIL-PETROCELL (Continued) S101588929 33.7959731 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 12/31/1986 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: 11/12/1986 Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 7/23/1996 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 7/16/1986 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: 5/18/1987 Review Date: 12/31/1986 Enter Date: 7/16/1986 How Stopped Date: T0605900267 Global ID: Other Source Leak Source: Structure Failure Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Tank Test How Discovered: Not reported Funding: Not reported Enf Type: ORANGEWOOD Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: 500 Qty Leaked: Unleaded Gasoline Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083000341T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 083000341T Reg Id: LINKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: CORTESE: 1305 ft. Site 14 of 18 in cluster C 0.247 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 127 ft. 1/8-1/4 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 SSW LUST 2100 HARBOR BLVD N/A C30 HIST CORTESE SHELL #2100 S104791726 TC2760975.1s Page 35 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation FILL BUNG BROKEN DURING INSTALLATION. TANK REPAIRED BY MANUFACTURING COMPANY Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: ROW Staff Initials: CAB Staff: * MTBE Class: Site NOT Tested for MTBE.Includes Unknown and Not Analyzed. MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: SHELL #2100 (Continued) S104791726 1985 Year Installed: 3 Container Num: 003 Tank Num: Stock Inventor, Groundwater Monitoring Well, 10 Leak Detection: 1/4 inches Tank Construction: REGULAR Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00010000 Tank Capacity: 1983 Year Installed: 2 Container Num: 002 Tank Num: Stock Inventor, Groundwater Monitoring Well, 10 Leak Detection: 1/4 inches Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00010000 Tank Capacity: 1983 Year Installed: 1 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: ANAHEIM, CA 92803 Owner City,St,Zip: P.O. BOX 4848 Owner Address: SHELL OIL COMPANY Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: SAME Contact Name: 0004 Total Tanks: Not reported Other Type: Gas Station Facility Type: 00000008784 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: 1305 ft. Site 15 of 18 in cluster C 0.247 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 127 ft. 1/8-1/4 ANAHEIM, CA 92505 SSW 2100 S HARBOR BLVD N/A C31 HIST UST ZAREH DERKRIKORIAN U001576437 TC2760975.1s Page 36 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Stock Inventor, 10 Leak Detection: 12 gauge Tank Construction: WASTE OIL Type of Fuel: WASTE Tank Used for: 00000550 Tank Capacity: 1983 Year Installed: 5 Container Num: 004 Tank Num: Stock Inventor, Groundwater Monitoring Well, 10 Leak Detection: 1/4 inches Tank Construction: PREMIUM Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00010000 Tank Capacity: ZAREH DERKRIKORIAN (Continued) U001576437 Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): No U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (714) 690-2425 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: ARTESIA, CA 90702 P O BOX 6038 Owner/operator address: B P W COAST PRODUCTS LLC Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: (714) 690-2425 Contact telephone: US Contact country: ARTESIA, CA 907026038 P O BOX 6038 Contact address: JACK OMAN Contact: ARTESIA, CA 907026038 P O BOX 6038 Mailing address: CAR000101741 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92801 2101 S HARBOR BLVD Facility address: ARCO FACILITY NO 09727 Facility name: 07/15/2002 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: 1305 ft. Site 16 of 18 in cluster C 0.247 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 127 ft. 1/8-1/4 HAZNET ANAHEIM, CA 92801 SSW FINDS 2101 S HARBOR BLVD CAR000101741 C32 RCRA-SQG ARCO FACILITY NO 09727 [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 37 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Jack Oman Contact: CAR000101741 Gepaid: HAZNET: corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource facilities. generators, transporters, and treatment, storage, and disposal provides California with information on hazardous waste shipments for California Hazardous Waste Tracking System - Datamart (HWTS-DATAMART) Environmental Interest/Information System 110012202179 Registry ID: FINDS: No violations found Violation Status: BENZENE Waste name: D018 Waste code: WHICH WOULD BE CONSIDERED AS IGNITABLE HAZARDOUS WASTE. MATERIAL. LACQUER THINNER IS AN EXAMPLE OF A COMMONLY USED SOLVENT WHICH CAN BE OBTAINED FROM THE MANUFACTURER OR DISTRIBUTOR OF THE FLASH POINT OF A WASTE IS TO REVIEW THE MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET, CLOSED CUP FLASH POINT TESTER. ANOTHER METHOD OF DETERMINING THE LESS THAN 140 DEGREES FAHRENHEIT AS DETERMINED BY A PENSKY-MARTENS IGNITABLE HAZARDOUS WASTES ARE THOSE WASTES WHICH HAVE A FLASHPOINT OF Waste name: D001 Waste code: Not Defined Waste name: D000 Waste code: Hazardous Waste Summary: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: No Furnace exemption: No On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: ARCO FACILITY NO 09727 (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 38 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Facility County: 0.06 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: Not reported TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: Artesia, CA 907026038 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 6038 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Jack Oman Contact: CAR000101741 Gepaid: Not reported Facility County: 0.08 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Other organic solids Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: Not reported TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: Artesia, CA 907026038 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 6038 Mailing Address: ARCO FACILITY NO 09727 (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] Other organic solids Waste Category: 99 TSD County: NVT330010000 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 Mailing City,St,Zip: 2101 S HARBOR BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: JAMAL GANNAM Contact: CAL000276937 Gepaid: Not reported Facility County: 0.03 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Other organic solids Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD008302903 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 Mailing City,St,Zip: 2101 S HARBOR BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: JAMAL GANNAM Contact: CAL000276937 Gepaid: HAZNET: 1305 ft. Site 17 of 18 in cluster C 0.247 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 127 ft. 1/8-1/4 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 SSW 2101 S HARBOR BLVD N/A C33 HAZNET MJS ENGEL NO 1 INC S108214146 TC2760975.1s Page 39 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: 0.07 Tons: H132 Disposal Method: MJS ENGEL NO 1 INC (Continued) S108214146 Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Aquifer used for drinking water supply Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083002706T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 2005-09-15 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -117.915525 Longitude: 33.7957729 Latitude: T0605901878 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 1311 ft. Site 18 of 18 in cluster C 0.248 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 127 ft. 1/8-1/4 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 SSW 2101 S HARBOR BLVD N/A C34 LUST THRIFTY OIL #359 S109284615 1 NALCO CTR Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: NALCO CHEMICAL CO Contact: CAC001472320 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.005 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Off-specification, aged, or surplus inorganics Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD028409019 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: NAPERVILLE, IL 605630000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1 NALCO CTR Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: NALCO CHEMICAL CO Contact: CAC001472320 Gepaid: HAZNET: 1373 ft. Site 2 of 13 in cluster E 0.260 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 127 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 West 777 CONVENTION WAY N/A E35 HAZNET NALCO CHEMICAL CO S104568316 TC2760975.1s Page 40 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: 0.005 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Other organic solids Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD028409019 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: NAPERVILLE, IL 605630000 Mailing City,St,Zip: NALCO CHEMICAL CO (Continued) S104568316 Orange Facility County: 1.6469 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Photochemicals/photoprocessing waste Waste Category: Orange TSD County: CAT000613976 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ELMSFORD, NY 105230000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 555 TAXTER RD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: FUJI PHOTO FILM USA INC Contact: CAC000745464 Gepaid: HAZNET: 1373 ft. Site 3 of 13 in cluster E 0.260 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 127 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 West 777 W CONVENTION WY N/A E36 HAZNET FUJI PHOTO FILM USA INC C/O: HILTON TOWE S103965294 [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: ANAHEIM HOTEL PARTNERSHIP Contact: CAL000125949 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 1.1000 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Unspecified oil-containing waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD000088252 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928023425 Mailing City,St,Zip: 777 W CONVENTION WAY Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: ANAHEIM HOTEL PARTNERSHIP Contact: CAL000125949 Gepaid: HAZNET: 1373 ft. Site 4 of 13 in cluster E 0.260 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 127 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 West EMI 777 CONVENTION WAY N/A E37 HAZNET ANAHEIM HILTON & TOWER S103950102 TC2760975.1s Page 41 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: 0.22 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Unspecified organic liquid mixture Waste Category: Orange TSD County: CAD008252405 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928023425 Mailing City,St,Zip: 777 W CONVENTION WAY Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: JACOB VOGELESANG PROP OPS MGR Contact: CAL000125949 Gepaid: Not reported Facility County: 0.22 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Unspecified organic liquid mixture Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: Not reported TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928023425 Mailing City,St,Zip: 777 W CONVENTION WAY Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: JACOB VOGELESANG PROP OPS MGR Contact: CAL000125949 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 4.7955 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Waste oil and mixed oil Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928023425 Mailing City,St,Zip: 777 W CONVENTION WAY Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: ANAHEIM HOTEL PARTNERSHIP Contact: CAL000125949 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 4.7955 Tons: Not reported Disposal Method: Waste oil and mixed oil Waste Category: 0 TSD County: CAT080013332 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928023425 Mailing City,St,Zip: 777 W CONVENTION WAY Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: ANAHEIM HILTON & TOWER (Continued) S103950102 TC2760975.1s Page 42 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation .2728 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: .274 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: .022 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: .662 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: .186 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: .21 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: .4751004898051757210 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7011 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 63903 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 2006 Year: EMI: 4 additional CA_HAZNET: record(s) in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access ANAHEIM HILTON & TOWER (Continued) S103950102 Not reported Vehicle License Number: Not reported Vehicle Make/year: Not reported Others Number Of Fatalities: Not reported Others Number Of Injuries: Not reported Others Number Of Decontaminated: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Fatalities: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Injuries: Not reported Resp Agncy Personel # Of Decontaminated: Not reported More Than Two Substances Involved?: Not reported Special Studies 6: Not reported Special Studies 5: Not reported Special Studies 4: Not reported Special Studies 3: Not reported Special Studies 2: Not reported Special Studies 1: Not reported Property Management: Not reported Estimated Temperature: Not reported Surrounding Area: Not reported Time Completed: Not reported Time Notified: Not reported Agency Incident Number: Not reported Agency Id Number: Not reported Property Use: Not reported Date Completed: Not reported Incident Date: Not reported OES Time: Not reported OES Date: 10/21/200410:52:07 AM OES notification: 04-5485 OES Incident Number: CHMIRS: 1373 ft. Site 5 of 13 in cluster E 0.260 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 127 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA West 777 CONVENTION WAY N/A E38 CHMIRS S107450746 TC2760975.1s Page 43 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation storm drains. with water and it went down the street, unkn if it went into any was put on and around the substance but some of it was also sprayed Truck was parked at their loading dock and was leaking fuel. Sand Description: 0 Number of Fatalities: 0 Number of Injuries: 0 Evacuations: Not reported Description: 0 Unknown: 0 Tons: 0 Sheen: 0 Quarts: 0 Pints: 0 Ounces: 0 Liters: 0 Pounds: 0 Grams: 1/4 Gallons: 0 CUFT: 0 Cups: 0 BBLS: Not reported Quantity Released: Diesel Substance: Not reported E Date: Other Site Type: Yes Contained: Not reported Amount: Anaheim Fire Department Admin Agency: 10/21/200412:00:00 AM Incident Date: Hilton Anaheim Agency: 2004 Year: Not reported Date/Time: Not reported Other: Not reported Measure: Not reported Type: Not reported What Happened: Not reported Containment: Reporting Party Cleanup By: Not reported Spill Site: Not reported Waterway: Not reported Waterway Involved: Not reported Facility Telephone: Not reported Comments: Not reported Report Date: Not reported Reporting Officer Name/ID: Not reported Company Name: Not reported CA/DOT/PUC/ICC Number: Not reported Vehicle Id Number: Not reported Vehicle State: (Continued) S107450746 TC2760975.1s Page 44 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 000000000 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Not reported Contact: CAP400478686 Gepaid: 0 Facility County: 1.0721 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Unspecified oil-containing waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD000088252 TSD EPA ID: 0 Gen County: 000000000 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Not reported Contact: CAP400478686 Gepaid: 0 Facility County: .8428 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Other inorganic solid waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD000088252 TSD EPA ID: 0 Gen County: 000000000 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Not reported Contact: CAP400478686 Gepaid: 0 Facility County: .1042 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Off-specification, aged, or surplus organics Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD000088252 TSD EPA ID: 0 Gen County: 000000000 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Not reported Contact: CAP400478686 Gepaid: HAZNET: 1373 ft. Site 6 of 13 in cluster E 0.260 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 127 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 West 777 CONVENTION WY N/A E39 HAZNET ANAHEIM HILTON AND TOWERS S103672002 TC2760975.1s Page 45 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 4 additional CA_HAZNET: record(s) in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access 0 Facility County: .0300 Tons: Disposal, Other Disposal Method: Other organic solids Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080033681 TSD EPA ID: 0 Gen County: 000000000 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Not reported Contact: CAP400478686 Gepaid: 0 Facility County: .2293 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Alkaline solution without metals (pH > 12.5) Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD000088252 TSD EPA ID: 0 Gen County: ANAHEIM HILTON AND TOWERS (Continued) S103672002 Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7011 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 63903 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1990 Year: EMI: Orange Facility County: .0250 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Photochemicals/photoprocessing waste Waste Category: Kern TSD County: CAD981402522 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: NUTLEY, NJ 071100000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 340 KINGS LAND ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: HOFFMAN LAROCHE Contact: CAC001135080 Gepaid: HAZNET: 1373 ft. Site 7 of 13 in cluster E 0.260 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 127 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 West EMI 777 CONVENTION WAY N/A E40 HAZNET HOFFMANN LAROCHE S103967893 TC2760975.1s Page 46 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 3 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 1 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 2 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 3 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7011 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 63903 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1996 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 4 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 1 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 2 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 3 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7011 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 63903 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1995 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 4 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 1 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 2 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 3 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7011 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 63903 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1993 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 5 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 1 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 0 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: HOFFMANN LAROCHE (Continued) S103967893 TC2760975.1s Page 47 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 2000 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 3 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 1 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 35 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 36 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7011 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 63903 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1999 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 3 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 1 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 35 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 36 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7011 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 63903 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1998 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 3 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 1 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 35 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 36 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7011 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 63903 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1997 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: HOFFMANN LAROCHE (Continued) S103967893 TC2760975.1s Page 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7011 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 63903 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 2003 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 1 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 1 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7011 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 63903 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 2002 Year: 1 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 1 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 2 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 1 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 0 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7011 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 63903 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 2001 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 3 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 1 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 35 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 36 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7011 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 63903 Facility ID: HOFFMANN LAROCHE (Continued) S103967893 TC2760975.1s Page 49 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation .274 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: .022 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: .662 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: .186 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: .21 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: .4751004898051757210 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7011 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 63903 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 2007 Year: .26655916 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: .26829 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: .02491 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: .767265 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: .204325 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: .101516864 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: .20962 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7011 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 63903 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 2005 Year: 0.27 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0.266575 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0.023429 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0.436739 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0.131341 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 1.05 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 1.427751 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7011 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 63903 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 2004 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 1 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 1 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: HOFFMANN LAROCHE (Continued) S103967893 TC2760975.1s Page 50 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation .2728 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: HOFFMANN LAROCHE (Continued) S103967893 their precursors, as well as hazardous air pollutants (HAPs). on stationary and mobile sources that emit criteria air pollutants and The NEI (National Emissions Inventory) database contains information Environmental Interest/Information System 110022792637 Registry ID: FINDS: 1373 ft. Site 8 of 13 in cluster E 0.260 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 127 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 West 777 CONVENTION WAY N/A E41 FINDS ANAHEIM HOTEL PARTNERSHIP,ANAH [PHONE REDACTED] JOYCE YOUNG Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: Not reported Contact telephone: Not reported Contact country: Not reported Not reported Contact address: Not reported Contact: CAD982503963 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 777 CONVENTION WAY Facility address: BUCHNER & YOUNG DBA FASTER FOTO Facility name: 09/01/1996 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: 1373 ft. Site 9 of 13 in cluster E 0.260 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 127 ft. 1/4-1/2 HAZNET ANAHEIM, CA 92802 West FINDS 777 CONVENTION WAY CAD982503963 E42 RCRA-SQG BUCHNER AND YOUNG DBA FASTER FOTO [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 51 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: BUCHNER & YOUNG Contact: CAD982503963 Gepaid: HAZNET: corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource facilities. generators, transporters, and treatment, storage, and disposal provides California with information on hazardous waste shipments for California Hazardous Waste Tracking System - Datamart (HWTS-DATAMART) Environmental Interest/Information System 110009546946 Registry ID: FINDS: No violations found Violation Status: Large Quantity Generator Classification: BUCHNER & YOUNG DBA FASTER FOTO Facility name: 01/03/1990 Date form received by agency: Historical Generators: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: Unknown Furnace exemption: Unknown On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): Unknown U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: BUCHNER AND YOUNG DBA FASTER FOTO (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 52 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Recycler Disposal Method: vanadium, and zinc) copper, lead, mercury, molybdenum, nickel, selenium, silver, thallium, (antimony, arsenic, barium, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, Metal sludge - Alkaline solution (pH 12.5) with metals Waste Category: Kern TSD County: CAD981402522 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 777 W CONVENTION WAY Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: BUCHNER & YOUNG Contact: CAD982503963 Gepaid: Not reported Facility County: 0.12 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Photochemicals/photoprocessing waste Waste Category: Kern TSD County: CAD981402522 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 777 W CONVENTION WAY Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: Telephone: JOYCE YOUNG Contact: CAD982503963 Gepaid: Not reported Facility County: 0.12 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Photochemicals/photoprocessing waste Waste Category: Kern TSD County: Not reported TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 777 W CONVENTION WAY Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: Telephone: JOYCE YOUNG Contact: CAD982503963 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .0850 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Photochemicals/photoprocessing waste Waste Category: Kern TSD County: CAD981402522 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 777 W CONVENTION WAY Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: BUCHNER AND YOUNG DBA FASTER FOTO (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 53 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation additional CA_HAZNET: detail in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access Orange Facility County: .0800 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: vanadium, and zinc) copper, lead, mercury, molybdenum, nickel, selenium, silver, thallium, (antimony, arsenic, barium, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, Metal sludge - Alkaline solution (pH 12.5) with metals Waste Category: Kern TSD County: CAD981402522 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 777 W CONVENTION WAY Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: BUCHNER & YOUNG Contact: CAD982503963 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .0360 Tons: BUCHNER AND YOUNG DBA FASTER FOTO (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] Not reported Others Number Of Fatalities: Not reported Others Number Of Injuries: Not reported Others Number Of Decontaminated: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Fatalities: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Injuries: Not reported Resp Agncy Personel # Of Decontaminated: Not reported More Than Two Substances Involved?: Not reported Special Studies 6: Not reported Special Studies 5: Not reported Special Studies 4: Not reported Special Studies 3: Not reported Special Studies 2: Not reported Special Studies 1: Not reported Property Management: Not reported Estimated Temperature: Not reported Surrounding Area: Not reported Time Completed: Not reported Time Notified: Not reported Agency Incident Number: Not reported Agency Id Number: Not reported Property Use: Not reported Date Completed: Not reported Incident Date: 06:50:00 PM OES Time: 6/6/1993 OES Date: Not reported OES notification: 28067 OES Incident Number: CHMIRS: 1403 ft. Site 2 of 16 in cluster D 0.266 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 132 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 90680 NNW Notify 65 1800 SOUTH HARBOR N/A D43 CHMIRS MOBIL OIL CORP. 18-106 S100179564 TC2760975.1s Page 54 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Agency Id Number: Not reported Property Use: Not reported Date Completed: Not reported Incident Date: 06:50:00 PM OES Time: 6/6/1993 OES Date: Not reported OES notification: 28067 OES Incident Number: Not reported Description: Not reported Number of Fatalities: Not reported Number of Injuries: Not reported Evacuations: drove off with nozzle in tank Description: Not reported Unknown: Not reported Tons: Not reported Sheen: Not reported Quarts: Not reported Pints: Not reported Ounces: Not reported Liters: Not reported Pounds: Not reported Grams: Not reported Gallons: Not reported CUFT: Not reported Cups: Not reported BBLS: Not reported Quantity Released: gasoline Substance: Not reported E Date: Not reported Site Type: Not reported Contained: 5 gallons Amount: Not reported Admin Agency: 6/6/93/18:00 Incident Date: mobile oil Agency: 1993 Year: Not reported Date/Time: Not reported Other: Not reported Measure: PETROLEUM Type: Not reported What Happened: Not reported Containment: attendant Cleanup By: Not reported Spill Site: Not reported Waterway: Not reported Waterway Involved: Not reported Facility Telephone: Not reported Comments: Not reported Report Date: Not reported Reporting Officer Name/ID: Not reported Company Name: Not reported CA/DOT/PUC/ICC Number: Not reported Vehicle Id Number: Not reported Vehicle State: Not reported Vehicle License Number: Not reported Vehicle Make/year: MOBIL OIL CORP. 18-106 (Continued) S100179564 TC2760975.1s Page 55 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Ounces: Not reported Liters: Not reported Pounds: Not reported Grams: Not reported Gallons: Not reported CUFT: Not reported Cups: Not reported BBLS: Not reported Quantity Released: gasoline Substance: Not reported E Date: Not reported Site Type: Not reported Contained: 5 gallons Amount: Not reported Admin Agency: 6/6/93/18:00 Incident Date: mobile oil Agency: 1993 Year: Not reported Date/Time: Not reported Other: Not reported Measure: PETROLEUM Type: Not reported What Happened: Not reported Containment: attendant Cleanup By: Not reported Spill Site: Not reported Waterway: Not reported Waterway Involved: Not reported Facility Telephone: Not reported Comments: Not reported Report Date: Not reported Reporting Officer Name/ID: Not reported Company Name: Not reported CA/DOT/PUC/ICC Number: Not reported Vehicle Id Number: Not reported Vehicle State: Not reported Vehicle License Number: Not reported Vehicle Make/year: Not reported Others Number Of Fatalities: Not reported Others Number Of Injuries: Not reported Others Number Of Decontaminated: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Fatalities: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Injuries: Not reported Resp Agncy Personel # Of Decontaminated: Not reported More Than Two Substances Involved?: Not reported Special Studies 6: Not reported Special Studies 5: Not reported Special Studies 4: Not reported Special Studies 3: Not reported Special Studies 2: Not reported Special Studies 1: Not reported Property Management: Not reported Estimated Temperature: Not reported Surrounding Area: Not reported Time Completed: Not reported Time Notified: Not reported Agency Incident Number: MOBIL OIL CORP. 18-106 (Continued) S100179564 TC2760975.1s Page 56 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 90680 Incident Description: Not reported Discharge Date: Not reported Facility Type: Not reported Board File Number: Not reported Staff Initials: Not reported Date Reported: Notify 65: Not reported Description: Not reported Number of Fatalities: Not reported Number of Injuries: Not reported Evacuations: drove off with nozzle in tank Description: Not reported Unknown: Not reported Tons: Not reported Sheen: Not reported Quarts: Not reported Pints: MOBIL OIL CORP. 18-106 (Continued) S100179564 Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Aquifer used for drinking water supply Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083001662T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 1998-02-09 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.803104 Latitude: T0605901251 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 1405 ft. Site 3 of 16 in cluster D 0.266 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 132 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NNW 1800 S HARBOR BLVD N/A D44 LUST MOBIL #18-106 S109284539 [PHONE REDACTED] Facility Phone: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported Cortese Code: Not reported Regulated ID: UTNKA Regulated By: 30001080 Facility ID: CA FID UST: 1410 ft. Site 4 of 16 in cluster D 0.267 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 132 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92807 NNW 1800 S HARBOR BLVD N/A D45 CA FID UST MOBIL STATION (18-106) S101589042 TC2760975.1s Page 57 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Active Status: Not reported Comments: Not reported EPA ID: Not reported NPDES Number: Not reported DUNs Number: Not reported Contact Phone: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM 92807 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 3225 GALLOWS RD Mailing Address: Not reported Mail To: MOBIL STATION (18-106) (Continued) S101589042 004 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: PREMIUM Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00001000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 3 Container Num: 003 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: REGULAR Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00006000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 2 Container Num: 002 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00008000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 1 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: LOS ANGELES, CA 90017 Owner City,St,Zip: 612 S. FLOWER STREET Owner Address: MOBIL OIL CORPORATION Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: RUSSELL ECKENBOY 08-106 Contact Name: 0004 Total Tanks: Not reported Other Type: Gas Station Facility Type: 00000039430 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: 1410 ft. Site 5 of 16 in cluster D 0.267 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 132 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NNW 1800 S HARBOR BLVD N/A D46 HIST UST MOBIL OIL U001578614 TC2760975.1s Page 58 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: WASTE OIL Type of Fuel: WASTE Tank Used for: 00000280 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 4 Container Num: MOBIL OIL (Continued) U001578614 1 Number: 2399 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: WASTE OIL Content: W Stg: OIL Tank Use: 280 Capacity: 07-08-92 Actv Date: 30-011-002399-000004 Tank Id: 18-106-4 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 07-08-92 Act Date: 07-08-92 Ref Date: 44-000400 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 2399 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: 07-08-92 Actv Date: 30-011-002399-000003 Tank Id: 18-106-3 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 07-08-92 Act Date: 07-08-92 Ref Date: 44-000400 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 2399 Comp Number: A Status: SWEEPS UST: -117.91519 Longitude: 33.80318 Latitude: 6695 Global ID: UST: 1410 ft. Site 6 of 16 in cluster D 0.267 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 132 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NNW SWEEPS UST 1800 S HARBOR BLVD N/A D47 UST MOBIL STATION (18-106) U003780443 TC2760975.1s Page 59 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 4 Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 8000 Capacity: 07-08-92 Actv Date: 30-011-002399-000001 Tank Id: 18-106-2 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 07-08-92 Act Date: 07-08-92 Ref Date: 44-000400 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 2399 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 6000 Capacity: 07-08-92 Actv Date: 30-011-002399-000006 Tank Id: 18-106-1 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 07-08-92 Act Date: 07-08-92 Ref Date: 44-000400 Board Of Equalization: MOBIL STATION (18-106) (Continued) U003780443 additional ERNS detail in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access 1410 ft. Site 7 of 16 in cluster D 0.267 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 132 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NNW 1800 SOUTH HARBOR N/A D48 ERNS 1800 SOUTH HARBOR 93327894 EDVE Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Gasoline Substance: Aquifer affected Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083001662T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 1410 ft. Site 8 of 16 in cluster D 0.267 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 132 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NNW 1800 HARBOR BLVD N/A D49 LUST MOBIL #18-106 S103248970 TC2760975.1s Page 60 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation & FLOW DIRECTION = SW. VES STARTED 12/13/94 LEAK DISCOVERED 2/20/91 DURING TANK TEST. 12/94 VES INSTALLED. GW DEPTH 80’ Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: ROW Staff Initials: RS Staff: Not reported MTBE Class: MTBE Detected. Site tested for MTBE & MTBE detected MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: 10 Max MTBE Soil: 2 MTBE Concentration: 18 Max MTBE GW: 8/1/1996 MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.803104 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Yes Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: < Soil Qualifies: = GW Qualifies: 9/16/1990 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: 12/1/1994 Remed Action: 9/26/1994 Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: 2/20/1991 Workplan: 2/9/1998 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 9/14/1990 Discover Date: 9/14/1990 Prelim Assess: 9/14/1990 Review Date: 9/16/1990 Enter Date: Not reported How Stopped Date: T0605901251 Global ID: Not reported Leak Source: Not reported Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: OM How Discovered: Not reported Funding: NONE Enf Type: KATELLA AVE Cross Street: MOBIL #18-106 (Continued) S103248970 TC2760975.1s Page 61 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Amount: Anaheim Fire Department Admin Agency: 4/13/2007 12:00:00 AM Incident Date: City of Anaheim Agency: 2007 Year: Not reported Date/Time: Not reported Other: Not reported Measure: Not reported Type: Not reported What Happened: Not reported Containment: Reporting Party Cleanup By: Not reported Spill Site: Bolsa Chica Waterway: Not reported Waterway Involved: Not reported Facility Telephone: Not reported Comments: Not reported Report Date: Not reported Reporting Officer Name/ID: Not reported Company Name: Not reported CA/DOT/PUC/ICC Number: Not reported Vehicle Id Number: Not reported Vehicle State: Not reported Vehicle License Number: Not reported Vehicle Make/year: Not reported Others Number Of Fatalities: Not reported Others Number Of Injuries: Not reported Others Number Of Decontaminated: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Fatalities: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Injuries: Not reported Resp Agncy Personel # Of Decontaminated: Not reported More Than Two Substances Involved?: Not reported Special Studies 6: Not reported Special Studies 5: Not reported Special Studies 4: Not reported Special Studies 3: Not reported Special Studies 2: Not reported Special Studies 1: Not reported Property Management: Not reported Estimated Temperature: Not reported Surrounding Area: Not reported Time Completed: Not reported Time Notified: Not reported Agency Incident Number: Not reported Agency Id Number: Not reported Property Use: Not reported Date Completed: Not reported Incident Date: Not reported OES Time: Not reported OES Date: 4/13/2007 03:18:12 PM OES notification: 07-2301 OES Incident Number: CHMIRS: 1415 ft. Site 10 of 13 in cluster E 0.268 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 127 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA West 700 CONVENTION WAY N/A E50 CHMIRS S109040441 TC2760975.1s Page 62 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Improper connection of sewer line to stormdrain. Description: 0 Number of Fatalities: 0 Number of Injuries: 0 Evacuations: Not reported Description: 0 Unknown: 0 Tons: 0 Sheen: 0 Quarts: 0 Pints: 0 Ounces: 0 Liters: 0 Pounds: 0 Grams: 10,000 Gallons: 0 CUFT: 0 Cups: 0 BBLS: Not reported Quantity Released: Sewage Substance: Not reported E Date: Merchant/Business Site Type: Yes Contained: (Continued) S109040441 -117.91757 Longitude: 33.79961 Latitude: 5397 Global ID: UST: Not reported Discharge Zip: Not reported Discharge State: Not reported Discharge City: Not reported Discharge Address: Tarasdia Hotels Discharge Name: Not reported Termination Date Of Regulatory Measure: Not reported Expiration Date Of Regulatory Measure: 11/7/2005 Effective Date Of Regulatory Measure: Not reported Adoption Date Of Regulatory Measure: CONSTW Program Type: 8 30C337587 WDID: 622613 Place Id: Storm water construction Regulatory Measure Type: 99-08DWQ Order No: 285097 Regulatory Measure Id: 8 Region: 258603 Agency Id: Active Facility Status: Not reported Npdes Number: NPDES: 1415 ft. HAZNET Site 11 of 13 in cluster E 0.268 mi. SWEEPS UST Relative: Lower Actual: 127 ft. 1/4-1/2 HIST UST ANAHEIM, CA 92802 West UST 700 W CONVENTION WAY N/A E51 NPDES ANAHEIM MARRIOTT HOTEL U001578593 TC2760975.1s Page 63 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 06-23-94 Act Date: 02-15-94 Ref Date: 44-016204 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 4503 Comp Number: A Status: 2 Number Of Tanks: DIESEL Content: P Stg: OIL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: 03-21-94 Actv Date: 30-011-004503-000001 Tank Id: 044600 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 06-23-94 Act Date: 02-15-94 Ref Date: 44-016204 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 4503 Comp Number: A Status: SWEEPS UST: None Leak Detection: 1/4 inches Tank Construction: DIESEL Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00009900 Tank Capacity: 1980 Year Installed: 2 Container Num: 002 Tank Num: None Leak Detection: 1/4 inches Tank Construction: DIESEL Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00009994 Tank Capacity: 1983 Year Installed: 1 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 Owner City,St,Zip: 700 WEST CONVENTION WAY Owner Address: ANAHEIM MARRIOTT HOTEL Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: JOEL ROTHMAN, GENERAL MANAGER Contact Name: 0002 Total Tanks: HOTEL Other Type: Other Facility Type: 00000042085 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: ANAHEIM MARRIOTT HOTEL (Continued) U001578593 TC2760975.1s Page 64 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation T TOMASEK DIR OF ENGINEERING Contact: CAL000251940 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.8 Tons: H061 Disposal Method: Waste oil and mixed oil Waste Category: 99 TSD County: TXD077603371 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 Mailing City,St,Zip: 700 W CONVENTION WAY Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: T TOMASEK DIR OF ENGINEERING Contact: CAL000251940 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.01 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 Mailing City,St,Zip: 700 W CONVENTION WAY Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: T TOMASEK DIR OF ENGINEERING Contact: CAL000251940 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.2 Tons: H141 Disposal Method: Unspecified oil-containing waste Waste Category: 99 TSD County: TXD077603371 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 Mailing City,St,Zip: 700 W CONVENTION WAY Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: T TOMASEK DIR OF ENGINEERING Contact: CAL000251940 Gepaid: HAZNET: Not reported Number Of Tanks: DIESEL Content: P Stg: OIL Tank Use: 15000 Capacity: 03-21-94 Actv Date: 30-011-004503-000002 Tank Id: 044601 Owner Tank Id: ANAHEIM MARRIOTT HOTEL (Continued) U001578593 TC2760975.1s Page 65 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 1 additional CA_HAZNET: record(s) in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access Orange Facility County: 2.7105 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Oil/water separation sludge Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD981696420 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: ANAHEIM MARRIOTT Contact: CAC001030808 Gepaid: Not reported Facility County: 1.27 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 Mailing City,St,Zip: 700 W CONVENTION WAY Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: ANAHEIM MARRIOTT HOTEL (Continued) U001578593 SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1993 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 1 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 0 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7011 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 44158 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1990 Year: EMI: 1415 ft. Site 12 of 13 in cluster E 0.268 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 127 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 West 700 W CONVENTION WY N/A E52 EMI ANAHEIM MARRIOTT HOTEL S106825905 TC2760975.1s Page 66 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 1 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 1 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 2 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7011 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 44158 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1995 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 1 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 1 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 2 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7011 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 44158 Facility ID: ANAHEIM MARRIOTT HOTEL (Continued) S106825905 Not reported How Stopped Date: T0605902045 Global ID: Piping Leak Source: Not reported Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Tank Closure How Discovered: Not reported Funding: CLOS Enf Type: HARBOR Cross Street: approved site Excavate and Dispose - remove contaminated soil and dispose in Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Diesel Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083002986T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 1415 ft. Site 13 of 13 in cluster E 0.268 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 127 ft. 1/4-1/2 HAZNET ANAHEIM, CA 92802 West CA FID UST 700 CONVENTION WAY N/A E53 LUST ANAHEIM MARRIOT S101619848 TC2760975.1s Page 67 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Active Status: Not reported Comments: Not reported EPA ID: Not reported NPDES Number: Not reported DUNs Number: Not reported Contact Phone: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM 92802 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 19800 MAC ARTHUR BLVD 1000 Mailing Address: Not reported Mail To: [PHONE REDACTED] Facility Phone: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported Cortese Code: Not reported Regulated ID: UTNKA Regulated By: 30003168 Facility ID: CA FID UST: Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: ROW Staff Initials: VJJ Staff: * MTBE Class: MTBE Detected. Site tested for MTBE & MTBE detected MTBE Tested: 0 MTBE Fuel: .1 Max MTBE Soil: 1 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.799539 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: < Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 6/19/1997 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: 12/26/1996 Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 7/18/1997 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 12/26/1996 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: 12/26/1996 Review Date: 6/19/1997 Enter Date: ANAHEIM MARRIOT (Continued) S101619848 TC2760975.1s Page 68 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: .2293 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Paint sludge Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD008252405 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Not reported Contact: CAC000605840 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 1.2510 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Waste oil and mixed oil Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Not reported Contact: CAC000605840 Gepaid: HAZNET: ANAHEIM MARRIOT (Continued) S101619848 Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083003335T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 1999-10-11 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8033998 Latitude: T0605902232 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 1420 ft. Site 9 of 16 in cluster D 0.269 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 132 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NNW 1801 S HARBOR BLVD N/A D54 LUST CHEVRON #9-5321 S109284743 TC2760975.1s Page 69 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 5000 Capacity: 11-17-93 Actv Date: 30-011-002396-000002 Tank Id: 2 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 05-24-94 Act Date: 11-17-93 Ref Date: 44-032934 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 2396 Comp Number: A Status: 5 Number Of Tanks: PRM UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: 11-17-93 Actv Date: 30-011-002396-000001 Tank Id: 1 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 05-24-94 Act Date: 11-17-93 Ref Date: 44-032934 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 2396 Comp Number: A Status: SWEEPS UST: Active Status: Not reported Comments: Not reported EPA ID: Not reported NPDES Number: Not reported DUNs Number: Not reported Contact Phone: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM 92802 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address 2: P O BOX Mailing Address: Not reported Mail To: [PHONE REDACTED] Facility Phone: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported Cortese Code: Not reported Regulated ID: UTNKA Regulated By: 30010585 Facility ID: CA FID UST: 1425 ft. Site 10 of 16 in cluster D 0.270 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 132 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NNW SWEEPS UST 1801 S HARBOR BLVD N/A D55 CA FID UST CHEVRON STATION 9-5321 S101589402 TC2760975.1s Page 70 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Number Of Tanks: METHANOL Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: 11-18-93 Actv Date: 30-011-002396-000005 Tank Id: 5 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 05-24-94 Act Date: 11-17-93 Ref Date: 44-032934 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 2396 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: 11-17-93 Actv Date: 30-011-002396-000004 Tank Id: 4 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 05-24-94 Act Date: 11-17-93 Ref Date: 44-032934 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 2396 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: 11-17-93 Actv Date: 30-011-002396-000003 Tank Id: 3 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 05-24-94 Act Date: 11-17-93 Ref Date: 44-032934 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 2396 Comp Number: A Status: CHEVRON STATION 9-5321 (Continued) S101589402 TC2760975.1s Page 71 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Stock Inventor Leak Detection: 0000130 unknown Tank Construction: Not reported Type of Fuel: WASTE Tank Used for: 00001000 Tank Capacity: 1972 Year Installed: 4 Container Num: 004 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: 0000250 unknown Tank Construction: Not reported Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00010000 Tank Capacity: 1972 Year Installed: 3 Container Num: 003 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: 0000250 unknown Tank Construction: Not reported Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00010000 Tank Capacity: 1972 Year Installed: 2 Container Num: 002 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: 0000250 unknown Tank Construction: Not reported Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00005000 Tank Capacity: 1972 Year Installed: 1 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94105 Owner City,St,Zip: 575 MARKET Owner Address: CHEVRON U.S.A. INC. Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: M Contact Name: 0004 Total Tanks: Not reported Other Type: Gas Station Facility Type: 00000062743 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: 1425 ft. Site 11 of 16 in cluster D 0.270 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 132 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NNW 1801 S HARBOR BLVD N/A D56 HIST UST 95321 U001578588 TC2760975.1s Page 72 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Workplan: 10/11/1999 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 10/9/1998 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: 10/9/1998 Review Date: 3/5/1999 Enter Date: Not reported How Stopped Date: T0605902232 Global ID: Piping Leak Source: UNK Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Tank Closure How Discovered: Not reported Funding: Not reported Enf Type: KATELLA Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Gasoline Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083003335T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 083002396T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: 083001214T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: 083000065T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: 083003415T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: 083003335T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: CORTESE: 1425 ft. Site 12 of 16 in cluster D 0.270 mi. SWEEPS UST Relative: Lower Actual: 132 ft. 1/4-1/2 CA FID UST ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NNW LUST 1801 HARBOR BLVD N/A D57 HIST CORTESE CHEVRON #9-5321 S101619845 TC2760975.1s Page 73 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 4473 Comp Number: Not reported Status: SWEEPS UST: Active Status: Not reported Comments: Not reported EPA ID: Not reported NPDES Number: Not reported DUNs Number: Not reported Contact Phone: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM 92801 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 1801 PENHALL WAY Mailing Address: Not reported Mail To: [PHONE REDACTED] Facility Phone: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported Cortese Code: Not reported Regulated ID: UTNKA Regulated By: 30000986 Facility ID: CA FID UST: Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: ROW Staff Initials: TME Staff: * MTBE Class: MTBE Detected. Site tested for MTBE & MTBE detected MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: 7 Max MTBE Soil: 1 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.803122 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: = Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 3/5/1999 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: CHEVRON #9-5321 (Continued) S101619845 TC2760975.1s Page 74 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-004473-000007 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: Not reported Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 4473 Comp Number: Not reported Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: Not reported Content: WASTE Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 550 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-004473-000006 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: Not reported Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 4473 Comp Number: Not reported Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: Not reported Content: WASTE Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 550 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-004473-000005 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: Not reported Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 4473 Comp Number: Not reported Status: 11 Number Of Tanks: JET FUEL Content: PRODUCT Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 550 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-004473-000003 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: CHEVRON #9-5321 (Continued) S101619845 TC2760975.1s Page 75 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: WASTE Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 5000 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-004473-000010 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: Not reported Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 4473 Comp Number: Not reported Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: GASHOL Content: WASTE Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 5000 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-004473-000009 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: Not reported Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 4473 Comp Number: Not reported Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: GASHOL Content: WASTE Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 5000 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-004473-000008 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: Not reported Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 4473 Comp Number: Not reported Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: GASHOL Content: WASTE Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: CHEVRON #9-5321 (Continued) S101619845 TC2760975.1s Page 76 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Act Date: Not reported Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 4473 Comp Number: Not reported Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: WASTE Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-004473-000013 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: Not reported Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 4473 Comp Number: Not reported Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: WASTE Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-004473-000012 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: Not reported Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 4473 Comp Number: Not reported Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: WASTE Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-004473-000011 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: Not reported Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 4473 Comp Number: Not reported Status: CHEVRON #9-5321 (Continued) S101619845 TC2760975.1s Page 77 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 10000 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-004473-000017 Tank Id: 732 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 02-11-92 Act Date: 02-11-92 Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: 9 Number: 4473 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: GASHOL Content: W Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-004473-000016 Tank Id: 732 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 02-11-92 Act Date: 02-11-92 Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: 9 Number: 4473 Comp Number: A Status: 3 Number Of Tanks: LEADED Content: W Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-004473-000015 Tank Id: 732 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 02-11-92 Act Date: 02-11-92 Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: 9 Number: 4473 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: WASTE Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 8000 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-004473-000014 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: CHEVRON #9-5321 (Continued) S101619845 TC2760975.1s Page 78 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Number Of Tanks: GASHOL Content: W Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: CHEVRON #9-5321 (Continued) S101619845 -117.9154 Longitude: 33.80318 Latitude: 9387 Global ID: UST: 1425 ft. Site 13 of 16 in cluster D 0.270 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 132 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NNW 1801 S HARBOR BLVD N/A D58 UST MIKE CHEVRON STATION #9-5321 U003940519 [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: CHERVON PRODUCTS CO Contact: CAD983638941 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 3.3360 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Unspecified oil-containing waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD008302903 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SAN RAMON, CA 945830000 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 6004 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: CHERVON PRODUCTS CO Contact: CAD983638941 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.22 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues Waste Category: Orange TSD County: CAD008302903 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SAN RAMON, CA 945830000 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 6004 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: KATHY NORRIS Contact: CAD983638941 Gepaid: HAZNET: 1425 ft. Site 14 of 16 in cluster D 0.270 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 132 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NNW 1801 S HARBOR BLVD N/A D59 HAZNET CHEVRON 95321 S103955870 TC2760975.1s Page 79 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation additional CA_HAZNET: detail in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access Orange Facility County: 3.25 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Unspecified oil-containing waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD008302903 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SAN RAMON, CA 945830000 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 6004 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: KATHY NORRIS Contact: CAD983638941 Gepaid: Not reported Facility County: 0.08 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD008302903 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SAN RAMON, CA 945830000 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 6004 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: KATHY NORRIS Contact: CAD983638941 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 21.0015 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Other empty containers 30 gallons or more Waste Category: 7 TSD County: CAD982484933 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SAN RAMON, CA 945830000 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 6004 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: CHEVRON 95321 (Continued) S103955870 1801 S HARBOR BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: KEDIR IBRAHIM MICHAEL M Contact: CAL000070462 Gepaid: HAZNET: 1425 ft. Site 15 of 16 in cluster D 0.270 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 132 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NNW 1801 SOUTH HARBOR BLVD N/A D60 HAZNET MIKE CHEVRON S103977634 TC2760975.1s Page 80 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: .4170 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Oil/water separation sludge Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD099452708 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928023509 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1801 S HARBOR BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Not reported Contact: CAL000070462 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .1251 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Unspecified oil-containing waste Waste Category: Kern TSD County: CAD980883177 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928023509 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1801 S HARBOR BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Not reported Contact: CAL000070462 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.83 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Waste oil and mixed oil Waste Category: Orange TSD County: CAD099452708 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928023509 Mailing City,St,Zip: MIKE CHEVRON (Continued) S103977634 (925) 842-5931 Contact telephone: US Contact country: SAN RAMON, CA 94583 P O BOX 6004 Contact address: KATHY NORRIS Contact: SAN RAMON, CA 94583 P O BOX 6004 Mailing address: CAD983638941 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 928023509 1801 S HARBOR BLVD Facility address: CHEVRON STATION 95321 Facility name: 05/16/2002 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: 1425 ft. Site 16 of 16 in cluster D 0.270 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 132 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NNW FINDS 1801 S HARBOR BLVD CAD983638941 D61 RCRA-SQG CHEVRON STATION 95321 [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 81 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 110002878164 Registry ID: FINDS: No violations found Violation Status: BENZENE Waste name: D018 Waste code: WHICH WOULD BE CONSIDERED AS IGNITABLE HAZARDOUS WASTE. MATERIAL. LACQUER THINNER IS AN EXAMPLE OF A COMMONLY USED SOLVENT WHICH CAN BE OBTAINED FROM THE MANUFACTURER OR DISTRIBUTOR OF THE FLASH POINT OF A WASTE IS TO REVIEW THE MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET, CLOSED CUP FLASH POINT TESTER. ANOTHER METHOD OF DETERMINING THE LESS THAN 140 DEGREES FAHRENHEIT AS DETERMINED BY A PENSKY-MARTENS IGNITABLE HAZARDOUS WASTES ARE THOSE WASTES WHICH HAVE A FLASHPOINT OF Waste name: D001 Waste code: Hazardous Waste Summary: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: No Furnace exemption: No On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): No U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (925) 842-5931 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: SAN RAMON, CA 94583 P O BOX 6004 Owner/operator address: CHEVRON PRODUCTS CO Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: CHEVRON STATION 95321 (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 82 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource facilities. generators, transporters, and treatment, storage, and disposal provides California with information on hazardous waste shipments for California Hazardous Waste Tracking System - Datamart (HWTS-DATAMART) Environmental Interest/Information System CHEVRON STATION 95321 (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] Orange Facility County: .0075 Tons: Disposal, Other Disposal Method: Laboratory waste chemicals Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD044429835 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SACRAMENTO, CA 958120806 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 806 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Not reported Contact: CLU970015103 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .0341 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Laboratory waste chemicals Waste Category: 99 TSD County: AZD049318009 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SACRAMENTO, CA 958120806 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 806 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Not reported Contact: CLU970015103 Gepaid: HAZNET: 1485 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster F 0.281 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 135 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NNE 415 WEST KATELLA AVE N/A F62 HAZNET CRAIG LEE HOWLETT S103959053 TC2760975.1s Page 83 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: 0.62 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Tank bottom waste Waste Category: Orange TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: FONTANA, CA 92335 Mailing City,St,Zip: 10187 BEECH AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: MITCH RIEDELL/MAINT SUPERVSR Contact: CAC002565880 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.1 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Contaminated soil from site clean-ups Waste Category: Orange TSD County: CAD028409019 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: FONTANA, CA 92335 Mailing City,St,Zip: 10187 BEECH AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: MITCH RIEDELL/MAINT SUPERVSR Contact: CAC002565880 Gepaid: HAZNET: 1505 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster G 0.285 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 132 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NNW 611 W KATELLA AVE N/A G63 HAZNET RSR TRUCKING INC S107141544 Not reported Facility County: 0.84 Tons: Disposal, Land Fill Disposal Method: Asbestos-containing waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: Not reported TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 631 W KATELLA AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: RAJ HANSJI Contact: CAC002554979 Gepaid: HAZNET: 1514 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster G 0.287 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 132 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NNW 615 W KATELLA AVE N/A G64 HAZNET SIR RUDIMAR MOTEL S106088482 TC2760975.1s Page 84 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: 2.52 Tons: Disposal, Land Fill Disposal Method: Asbestos-containing waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD009007626 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 Mailing City,St,Zip: 444 W KATELLA AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: TOM ZABY Contact: CAC002601710 Gepaid: HAZNET: 1528 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster F 0.289 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 136 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NNE 434 W KATELLA AVE N/A F65 HAZNET TOM ZABY S108756676 Anaheim Certified Unified Program Agencies: 4,910 Total Gallons: MAKAR ANAHEIM, LLC DBA HILTON ANAHEIM Owner: AST: 1559 ft. 0.295 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 126 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA West 777 W. CONVENTION WAY N/A 66 AST A100340834 Not reported Special Studies 4: Not reported Special Studies 3: Not reported Special Studies 2: Not reported Special Studies 1: Not reported Property Management: Not reported Estimated Temperature: Not reported Surrounding Area: Not reported Time Completed: Not reported Time Notified: Not reported Agency Incident Number: Not reported Agency Id Number: Not reported Property Use: Not reported Date Completed: Not reported Incident Date: Not reported OES Time: Not reported OES Date: 3/3/200211:06:45 AM OES notification: 02-1192 OES Incident Number: CHMIRS: 1622 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster H 0.307 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 131 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA NNW 640 W. KATELLA N/A H67 CHMIRS S105883184 TC2760975.1s Page 85 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Sewer backup caused the release into the parking lot. Description: 0 Number of Fatalities: 0 Number of Injuries: 0 Evacuations: Not reported Description: 0 Unknown: 0 Tons: 0 Sheen: 0 Quarts: 0 Pints: 0 Ounces: 0 Liters: 0 Pounds: 0 Grams: 100 Gallons: 0 CUFT: 0 Cups: 0 BBLS: Not reported Quantity Released: Sewage Substance: Not reported E Date: Merchant/Business Site Type: Yes Contained: Not reported Amount: Anaheim Fire Department Admin Agency: 3/3/200212:00:00 AM Incident Date: City of Anaheim Agency: 2002 Year: Not reported Date/Time: Not reported Other: Not reported Measure: Not reported Type: Not reported What Happened: Not reported Containment: Reporting Party Cleanup By: Not reported Spill Site: Not reported Waterway: No Waterway Involved: Not reported Facility Telephone: Not reported Comments: Not reported Report Date: Not reported Reporting Officer Name/ID: Not reported Company Name: Not reported CA/DOT/PUC/ICC Number: Not reported Vehicle Id Number: Not reported Vehicle State: Not reported Vehicle License Number: Not reported Vehicle Make/year: Not reported Others Number Of Fatalities: Not reported Others Number Of Injuries: Not reported Others Number Of Decontaminated: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Fatalities: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Injuries: Not reported Resp Agncy Personel # Of Decontaminated: Not reported More Than Two Substances Involved?: Not reported Special Studies 6: Not reported Special Studies 5: (Continued) S105883184 TC2760975.1s Page 86 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Amount: Anaheim Fire Department Admin Agency: 6/10/200112:00:00 AM Incident Date: City of Anahiem Agency: 2001 Year: Not reported Date/Time: Not reported Other: Not reported Measure: Not reported Type: Not reported What Happened: Not reported Containment: Reporting Party Cleanup By: Not reported Spill Site: Santa Ana River Waterway: Yes Waterway Involved: Not reported Facility Telephone: Not reported Comments: Not reported Report Date: Not reported Reporting Officer Name/ID: Not reported Company Name: Not reported CA/DOT/PUC/ICC Number: Not reported Vehicle Id Number: Not reported Vehicle State: Not reported Vehicle License Number: Not reported Vehicle Make/year: Not reported Others Number Of Fatalities: Not reported Others Number Of Injuries: Not reported Others Number Of Decontaminated: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Fatalities: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Injuries: Not reported Resp Agncy Personel # Of Decontaminated: Not reported More Than Two Substances Involved?: Not reported Special Studies 6: Not reported Special Studies 5: Not reported Special Studies 4: Not reported Special Studies 3: Not reported Special Studies 2: Not reported Special Studies 1: Not reported Property Management: Not reported Estimated Temperature: Not reported Surrounding Area: Not reported Time Completed: Not reported Time Notified: Not reported Agency Incident Number: Not reported Agency Id Number: Not reported Property Use: Not reported Date Completed: Not reported Incident Date: Not reported OES Time: Not reported OES Date: 6/10/200109:39:15 AM OES notification: 01-3347 OES Incident Number: CHMIRS: 1622 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster H 0.307 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 131 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA NNW 640 WEST KATELA AVE. N/A H68 CHMIRS S105674055 TC2760975.1s Page 87 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Grease blockage in a private lateral. Description: 0 Number of Fatalities: 0 Number of Injuries: 0 Evacuations: Not reported Description: 0.000000 Unknown: 0 Tons: 0 Sheen: 0 Quarts: 0 Pints: 0 Ounces: 0 Liters: 0 Pounds: 0 Grams: 0 Gallons: 0 CUFT: 0 Cups: 0 BBLS: Not reported Quantity Released: Raw Sewage Substance: Not reported E Date: Road Site Type: Yes Contained: (Continued) S105674055 Active Status: Not reported Comments: Not reported EPA ID: Not reported NPDES Number: Not reported DUNs Number: Not reported Contact Phone: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM 92802 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 6141 W CENTURY BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mail To: [PHONE REDACTED] Facility Phone: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported Cortese Code: Not reported Regulated ID: UTNKA Regulated By: 30005450 Facility ID: CA FID UST: 1699 ft. Site 1 of 3 in cluster I 0.322 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 126 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 South 2132 S HARBOR BLVD N/A I69 CA FID UST DOLLAR RENT A CAR SYSTEMS S101629999 TC2760975.1s Page 88 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: 1.0425 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Tank bottom waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: TULSA, OK 741350000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 5330 EAST 31ST ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: DOLLAR RENT A CAR Contact: CAC000945680 Gepaid: HAZNET: 1699 ft. Site 2 of 3 in cluster I 0.322 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 126 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 South 2132 SOUTH HARBOR N/A I70 HAZNET 1X DOLLAR RENT A CAR S103641829 Not reported Board Of Equalization: 9 Number: 2825 Comp Number: A Status: SWEEPS UST: Visual Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00010000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 01 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 Owner City,St,Zip: 2132 S. HARBOR BLVD. Owner Address: WISHCORP Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: CHRIS R. BEACH Contact Name: 0001 Total Tanks: RENT A CAR Other Type: Other Facility Type: 00000042793 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: -117.91505 Longitude: 33.79494 Latitude: 8500 Global ID: UST: 1699 ft. Site 3 of 3 in cluster I 0.322 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 126 ft. 1/4-1/2 SWEEPS UST ANAHEIM, CA 92802 South HIST UST 2132 S HARBOR BLVD N/A I71 UST DOLLAR RENT A CAR SYSTEMS U001578601 TC2760975.1s Page 89 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 1 Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: W Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-002825-000003 Tank Id: 390 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 03-18-92 Act Date: 03-18-92 Ref Date: DOLLAR RENT A CAR SYSTEMS (Continued) U001578601 9/9/9999 How Stopped Date: T0605949878 Global ID: Unknown Leak Source: Unknown Leak Cause: Close Tank How Stopped: Tank Closure How Discovered: Not reported Funding: Not reported Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: 0 Qty Leaked: Gasoline Substance: Undefined Case Type: 86UT046 Local Case Num: Not reported Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Under Investigation Potential Media Affect: Local Agency File Location: 86UT046 LOC Case Number: Not reported RB Case Number: ORANGE COUNTY LOP Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ORANGE COUNTY LOP Lead Agency: 1986-06-23 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -117.915406 Longitude: 33.804136 Latitude: T0605949878 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 1776 ft. Site 1 of 3 in cluster J 0.336 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 134 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NNW 1779 HARBOR N/A J72 LUST UNOCAL S105774300 TC2760975.1s Page 90 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: MUN Beneficial: Not reported Hydr Basin 30000L Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: WJ Staff Initials: NOM Staff: * MTBE Class: Site NOT Tested for MTBE.Includes Unknown and Not Analyzed. MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: Not reported Longitude: Not reported Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: Not reported Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 6/23/1986 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 1/1/1965 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: Not reported Review Date: Not reported Enter Date: UNOCAL (Continued) S105774300 4227-11 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: SAN DIEGO, CA 92108 Owner City,St,Zip: 123 CAMINO DELA REINA Owner Address: UNION OIL COMPANY OF CALIFORNI Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: SHIKWAN SUNG Contact Name: 0004 Total Tanks: Not reported Other Type: Gas Station Facility Type: 00000017867 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: 1776 ft. Site 2 of 3 in cluster J 0.336 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 134 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NNW 1779 S HARBOR BLVD N/A J73 HIST UST UNION OIL SERVICE STATION #422 U001578623 TC2760975.1s Page 91 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation None Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: WASTE OIL Type of Fuel: WASTE Tank Used for: 00000280 Tank Capacity: 1956 Year Installed: 4227-44 Container Num: 004 Tank Num: Stock Inventor, 10 Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: DIESEL Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00006000 Tank Capacity: 1956 Year Installed: 4227-33 Container Num: 003 Tank Num: Stock Inventor, 10 Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: PREMIUM Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00006000 Tank Capacity: 1956 Year Installed: 4227-22 Container Num: 002 Tank Num: Stock Inventor, 10 Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00010000 Tank Capacity: 1977 Year Installed: UNION OIL SERVICE STATION #422 (Continued) U001578623 San Diego Discharge City: 17140 Bernardo Center Dr #310 Discharge Address: Anaheim Gardenwalk LLC Discharge Name: Not reported Termination Date Of Regulatory Measure: Not reported Expiration Date Of Regulatory Measure: 3/5/2003 Effective Date Of Regulatory Measure: Not reported Adoption Date Of Regulatory Measure: CONSTW Program Type: 8 30C320324 WDID: 205687 Place Id: Storm water construction Regulatory Measure Type: 99-08DWQ Order No: 207685 Regulatory Measure Id: 8 Region: 260963 Agency Id: Active Facility Status: Not reported Npdes Number: NPDES: 1782 ft. 0.338 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 137 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NE 321 W KATELLA AVE N/A 74 NPDES ANAHEIM GARDENWALK PH 1A 1B S109436046 TC2760975.1s Page 92 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 92128 Discharge Zip: CA Discharge State: ANAHEIM GARDENWALK PH 1A 1B (Continued) S109436046 Orange Facility County: .0045 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Other inorganic solid waste Waste Category: Kern TSD County: CAD981402522 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928022313 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1770 S HARBOR BLVD STE 138 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: DONALD E WILLIAMS Contact: CAL000082760 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .0457 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Photochemicals/photoprocessing waste Waste Category: Kern TSD County: CAD981402522 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928022313 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1770 S HARBOR BLVD STE 138 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: DONALD E WILLIAMS Contact: CAL000082760 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .0600 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: vanadium, and zinc) copper, lead, mercury, molybdenum, nickel, selenium, silver, thallium, (antimony, arsenic, barium, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, Metal sludge - Alkaline solution (pH 12.5) with metals Waste Category: Kern TSD County: CAD981402522 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928022313 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1770 S HARBOR BLVD STE 138 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: DONALD E WILLIAMS Contact: CAL000082760 Gepaid: HAZNET: 1823 ft. Site 3 of 3 in cluster J 0.345 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 134 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NNW 1770 HARBOR BLVD SOUTH N/A J75 HAZNET D&J 1HOUR PHOTO S103959606 TC2760975.1s Page 93 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 1 additional CA_HAZNET: record(s) in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access Orange Facility County: .1150 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: vanadium, and zinc) copper, lead, mercury, molybdenum, nickel, selenium, silver, thallium, (antimony, arsenic, barium, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, Metal sludge - Alkaline solution (pH 12.5) with metals Waste Category: Kern TSD County: CAD981402522 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928022313 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1770 S HARBOR BLVD STE 138 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: DONALD E WILLIAMS Contact: CAL000082760 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .0000 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Not reported Waste Category: Kern TSD County: CAD981402522 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928022313 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1770 S HARBOR BLVD STE 138 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: DONALD E WILLIAMS Contact: CAL000082760 Gepaid: D&J 1HOUR PHOTO (Continued) S103959606 7700 FRANCE AVENUE SOUTH Owner Address: NATIONAL CAR RENTAL SYSTEM Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: ANDREW J. BUZA Contact Name: 0003 Total Tanks: AUTOMOBILE RENTING Other Type: Other Facility Type: 00000058516 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: -117.91805 Longitude: 33.8034 Latitude: 4805 Global ID: UST: 1857 ft. Site 1 of 11 in cluster K 0.352 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 130 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NW HIST UST 711 W KATELLA AVE N/A K76 UST NATIONAL CAR RENTAL SYSTEM U001578615 TC2760975.1s Page 94 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Visual Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: Not reported Type of Fuel: WASTE Tank Used for: 00000000 Tank Capacity: 1981 Year Installed: 004-02-03 Container Num: 003 Tank Num: Visual, Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00012000 Tank Capacity: 1981 Year Installed: 004-02-02 Container Num: 002 Tank Num: Visual, Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00004000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 004-02-01 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55435 Owner City,St,Zip: NATIONAL CAR RENTAL SYSTEM (Continued) U001578615 1826 Comp Number: A Status: SWEEPS UST: Active Status: Not reported Comments: Not reported EPA ID: Not reported NPDES Number: Not reported DUNs Number: Not reported Contact Phone: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM 92802 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 711 W KATELLA AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mail To: [PHONE REDACTED] Facility Phone: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported Cortese Code: Not reported Regulated ID: UTNKA Regulated By: 30017716 Facility ID: CA FID UST: 1857 ft. Site 2 of 11 in cluster K 0.352 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 130 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NW SWEEPS UST 711 W KATELLA AVE N/A K77 CA FID UST NATIONAL CAR RENTAL SYSTEM, INC S101630000 TC2760975.1s Page 95 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 4000 Capacity: 03-07-94 Actv Date: 30-011-001826-000002 Tank Id: 00402-2 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 05-24-94 Act Date: 03-07-94 Ref Date: 44-003123 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 1826 Comp Number: A Status: 2 Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 12000 Capacity: 03-07-94 Actv Date: 30-011-001826-000001 Tank Id: 00402-1 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 05-24-94 Act Date: 03-07-94 Ref Date: 44-003123 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: NATIONAL CAR RENTAL SYSTEM, INC (Continued) S101630000 T0605902020 Global ID: UNK Leak Source: Not reported Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Tank Closure How Discovered: Not reported Funding: CLOS Enf Type: HARBOR Cross Street: approved site Excavate and Dispose - remove contaminated soil and dispose in Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Gasoline Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083002950T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 1857 ft. Site 3 of 11 in cluster K 0.352 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 130 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NW 711 KATELLA AVE N/A K78 LUST NATIONAL CAR RENTAL FAC. S102532332 TC2760975.1s Page 96 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation DETECTED IN THE EXCAVATED SOIL. TWO UST REMOVED, NO CONTAMINATION FOUND BELOW THE UST. BTEX AND TPH WAS Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: UNK Staff Initials: NOM Staff: * MTBE Class: Site NOT Tested for MTBE.Includes Unknown and Not Analyzed. MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -117.916851 Longitude: 33.803501 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: Not reported Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 12/19/1996 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 10/16/1996 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: Not reported Review Date: Not reported Enter Date: 10/16/1996 How Stopped Date: NATIONAL CAR RENTAL FAC. (Continued) S102532332 Waste oil and mixed oil Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: MINNESOTA, MN 554350000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 7700 FRANCE AVE SOUTH Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: NATIONAL CAR RENTAL SYSTEM INC Contact: CAC001220728 Gepaid: HAZNET: 1857 ft. Site 4 of 11 in cluster K 0.352 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 130 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NW 711 W KATELLA N/A K79 HAZNET NATIONAL CAR RENTAL SYSTEM INC S103670039 TC2760975.1s Page 97 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: 1.2510 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: NATIONAL CAR RENTAL SYSTEM INC (Continued) S103670039 Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083002950T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 1996-12-19 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8034115 Latitude: T0605902020 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 1858 ft. Site 5 of 11 in cluster K 0.352 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 130 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NW 711 W KATELLA AVE N/A K80 LUST NATIONAL CAR RENTAL FAC. S109284617 0 Facility County: .2710 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Photochemicals/photoprocessing waste Waste Category: Kern TSD County: CAD981402522 TSD EPA ID: 0 Gen County: 000000000 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Not reported Contact: CAP400478161 Gepaid: HAZNET: 1888 ft. 0.358 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 126 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 WNW 777 CONVENTION WY PMA BTH 304 N/A 81 HAZNET FUJI PHOTO FILM ANAHEIM HILTON S103671969 TC2760975.1s Page 98 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083001842T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 1996-09-23 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -117.911978 Longitude: 33.802881 Latitude: T0605901378 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 1936 ft. Site 1 of 10 in cluster L 0.367 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 137 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NE 350 W KATELLA AVE N/A L82 LUST KATELLA CAR WASH (FORMER) S109284465 Active Status: Not reported Comments: Not reported EPA ID: Not reported NPDES Number: Not reported DUNs Number: Not reported Contact Phone: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM 92802 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 350 W KATELLA AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mail To: Not reported Facility Phone: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported Cortese Code: Not reported Regulated ID: UTNKA Regulated By: 30001156 Facility ID: CA FID UST: 1939 ft. Site 2 of 10 in cluster L 0.367 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 137 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NE 350 W KATELLA AVE N/A L83 CA FID UST EAGLE CAR WASH S101589054 TC2760975.1s Page 99 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Number Of Tanks: Not reported Content: W Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-009595-000002 Tank Id: 254 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 03-19-92 Act Date: 03-19-92 Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: 9 Number: 9595 Comp Number: A Status: 2 Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: W Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 12000 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-009595-000001 Tank Id: 254 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 03-19-92 Act Date: 03-19-92 Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: 9 Number: 9595 Comp Number: A Status: SWEEPS UST: -117.9094 Longitude: 33.80323 Latitude: 15450 Global ID: UST: 1939 ft. Site 3 of 10 in cluster L 0.367 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 137 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NE SWEEPS UST 350 W KATELLA AVE N/A L84 UST EAGLE CAR WASH U003785392 083001842T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: CORTESE: 1939 ft. Site 4 of 10 in cluster L 0.367 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 137 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NE LUST 350 KATELLA AVE N/A L85 HIST CORTESE KATELLA CAR WASH (FORMER) S101307712 TC2760975.1s Page 100 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: ROW Staff Initials: RS Staff: * MTBE Class: MTBE Detected. Site tested for MTBE & MTBE detected MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 1 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.803129 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 6/11/1991 Enter Date: 8/13/1996 Monitoring: 6/1/1995 Remed Action: 5/20/1995 Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: 5/14/1991 Workplan: 9/23/1996 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 4/12/1991 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: 4/12/1991 Review Date: 6/11/1991 Enter Date: 4/12/1991 How Stopped Date: T0605901378 Global ID: UNK Leak Source: UNK Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Subsurface Monitoring How Discovered: Not reported Funding: CLOS Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Gasoline Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083001842T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: KATELLA CAR WASH (FORMER) (Continued) S101307712 TC2760975.1s Page 101 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation -117.9193 Longitude: 33.80322 Latitude: 10552 Global ID: UST: 1990 ft. Site 6 of 11 in cluster K 0.377 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 129 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NW 800 W KATELLA AVE N/A K86 UST ANAHEIM CONVENTION CENTER U003802354 Transfer Station Disposal Method: Off-specification, aged, or surplus organics Waste Category: Sacramento TSD County: CAD980884183 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: GURNEE, IL 60031 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1290 LAKESIDE DR Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: DAVE MARDON/TRADE SHOW MGR Contact: CAC002585813 Gepaid: Not reported Facility County: 0.04 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Off-specification, aged, or surplus organics Waste Category: Sacramento TSD County: CAD980884183 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: GURNEE, IL 60031 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1290 LAKESIDE DR Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: DAVE MARDON/TRADE SHOW MGR Contact: CAC002588947 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.0108 Tons: H061 Disposal Method: Unspecified solvent mixture Waste Waste Category: Sacramento TSD County: CAD980884183 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: GURNEE, IL 60031 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1290 LAKESIDE DR Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: LISA APOLINSKI X1170 Contact: CAC002626109 Gepaid: HAZNET: 1990 ft. Site 7 of 11 in cluster K 0.377 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 129 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NW 800 W KATELLA AVE N/A K87 HAZNET DOMINO AMJET INC S108205113 TC2760975.1s Page 102 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Facility County: 0.01 Tons: DOMINO AMJET INC (Continued) S108205113 88-92 Year: Not reported Date/Time: Not reported Other: Not reported Measure: Not reported Type: Not reported What Happened: Not reported Containment: Not reported Cleanup By: Not reported Spill Site: Not reported Waterway: Not reported Waterway Involved: [PHONE REDACTED] Facility Telephone: N Comments: 29-FEB-88 Report Date: CAPT. RANDELL L. GOLDSMITH Reporting Officer Name/ID: Not reported Company Name: Not reported CA/DOT/PUC/ICC Number: Not reported Vehicle Id Number: Not reported Vehicle State: Not reported Vehicle License Number: Not reported Vehicle Make/year: Not reported Others Number Of Fatalities: Not reported Others Number Of Injuries: Not reported Others Number Of Decontaminated: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Fatalities: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Injuries: Not reported Resp Agncy Personel # Of Decontaminated: N More Than Two Substances Involved?: Not reported Special Studies 6: Not reported Special Studies 5: Not reported Special Studies 4: Not reported Special Studies 3: Not reported Special Studies 2: Not reported Special Studies 1: C Property Management: 58 Estimated Temperature: 100 Surrounding Area: 1958 Time Completed: 1637 Time Notified: 3333 Agency Incident Number: 30005 Agency Id Number: 100 Property Use: 29-FEB-88 Date Completed: 29-FEB-88 Incident Date: Not reported OES Time: Not reported OES Date: Not reported OES notification: 8800739 OES Incident Number: CHMIRS: 1990 ft. Site 8 of 11 in cluster K 0.377 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 129 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA NW 800 W. KATELLA AVE N/A K88 CHMIRS S100278724 TC2760975.1s Page 103 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Description: Not reported Number of Fatalities: Not reported Number of Injuries: Not reported Evacuations: Not reported Description: Not reported Unknown: Not reported Tons: Not reported Sheen: Not reported Quarts: Not reported Pints: Not reported Ounces: Not reported Liters: Not reported Pounds: Not reported Grams: Not reported Gallons: Not reported CUFT: Not reported Cups: Not reported BBLS: Not reported Quantity Released: Not reported Substance: Not reported E Date: Not reported Site Type: Not reported Contained: Not reported Amount: Not reported Admin Agency: Not reported Incident Date: Not reported Agency: (Continued) S100278724 Not reported Facility County: 0.93 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Unspecified oil-containing waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 Mailing City,St,Zip: 800 W KATELLA AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: BRIAN BAKER Contact: CAC002582440 Gepaid: HAZNET: 1990 ft. Site 9 of 11 in cluster K 0.377 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 129 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NW 800 W KATELLA AVE N/A K89 HAZNET WESTPORT RESEARCH INC S108225351 TC2760975.1s Page 104 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: DIESEL Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00001000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 1 Container Num: 002 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: REGULAR Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00001000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 1 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 Owner City,St,Zip: 200 SOUTH ANAHEIM BOULEVARD, S Owner Address: CITY OF ANAHEIM-DEPARTMENT OF Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: BOB Contact Name: 0002 Total Tanks: CONVENTION CENTER Other Type: Other Facility Type: 00000056382 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: 1990 ft. Site 10 of 11 in cluster K 0.377 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 129 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NW 800 W KATELLA AVE N/A K90 HIST UST COVENCONVENTION CENTER U001578738 Anaheim Certified Unified Program Agencies: 4,000 Total Gallons: ANAHEIM CONVENTION CENTER Owner: AST: 1996 ft. Site 11 of 11 in cluster K 0.378 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 129 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA NW 800 W KATELLA AVE N/A K91 AST A100340844 083000719T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: CORTESE: 2072 ft. 0.393 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 129 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92801 NW LUST 818 KATELLA AVE N/A 92 HIST CORTESE TEXACO SERVICE STATION S101299283 TC2760975.1s Page 105 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: ROW Staff Initials: NOM Staff: * MTBE Class: MTBE Detected. Site tested for MTBE & MTBE detected MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: .26 Max MTBE Soil: 1 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8031401 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: = Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 12/18/1987 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: 12/18/1987 Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 8/19/1998 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 8/29/1987 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: 9/25/1987 Review Date: 12/18/1987 Enter Date: 8/29/1987 How Stopped Date: T0605900569 Global ID: UNK Leak Source: UNK Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Tank Closure How Discovered: State Funds Funding: Not reported Enf Type: LEWIS Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Gasoline Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083000719T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 083001410T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: TEXACO SERVICE STATION (Continued) S101299283 TC2760975.1s Page 106 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation VES PROPOSED JUNE 24, 1994 WP. APPROVE BY ANAHIEM F.D. 7/13/94 Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: TEXACO SERVICE STATION (Continued) S101299283 or drug lab equipment and/or materials were stored. Illegal Drug Lab - location where an illegal drug lab was operated Lab Type: 200101104 Facility ID: CDL: 2129 ft. Site 1 of 4 in cluster M 0.403 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 124 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 SSW 2175 S MALLUL DR N/A M93 CDL S107530995 Not reported CA/DOT/PUC/ICC Number: Not reported Vehicle Id Number: Not reported Vehicle State: Not reported Vehicle License Number: Not reported Vehicle Make/year: Not reported Others Number Of Fatalities: Not reported Others Number Of Injuries: Not reported Others Number Of Decontaminated: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Fatalities: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Injuries: Not reported Resp Agncy Personel # Of Decontaminated: Not reported More Than Two Substances Involved?: Not reported Special Studies 6: Not reported Special Studies 5: Not reported Special Studies 4: Not reported Special Studies 3: Not reported Special Studies 2: Not reported Special Studies 1: Not reported Property Management: Not reported Estimated Temperature: Not reported Surrounding Area: Not reported Time Completed: Not reported Time Notified: Not reported Agency Incident Number: Not reported Agency Id Number: Not reported Property Use: Not reported Date Completed: Not reported Incident Date: Not reported OES Time: Not reported OES Date: 6/19/200002:36:45 PM OES notification: 00-2713 OES Incident Number: CHMIRS: 2129 ft. Site 2 of 4 in cluster M 0.403 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 124 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 SSW 2175 SOUTH MALLUL DRIVE N/A M94 CHMIRS S105667042 TC2760975.1s Page 107 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Caused by a blocked city sewer line. Description: 0 Number of Fatalities: 0 Number of Injuries: 0 Evacuations: Not reported Description: 0 Unknown: 0 Tons: 0 Sheen: 0 Quarts: 0 Pints: 0 Ounces: 0 Liters: 0 Pounds: 0 Grams: 7.5 Gallons: 0 CUFT: 0 Cups: 0 BBLS: Not reported Quantity Released: raw sewage Substance: Not reported E Date: Residence Site Type: Yes Contained: Not reported Amount: Anaheim Fire Department Admin Agency: 6/17/200012:00:00 AM Incident Date: City of Anaheim, Streets & Sanitation Agency: 2000 Year: Not reported Date/Time: Not reported Other: Not reported Measure: Not reported Type: Not reported What Happened: Not reported Containment: Reporting Party Cleanup By: Not reported Spill Site: Not reported Waterway: No Waterway Involved: Not reported Facility Telephone: Not reported Comments: Not reported Report Date: Not reported Reporting Officer Name/ID: Not reported Company Name: (Continued) S105667042 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 Mailing City,St,Zip: 2175 MALLUL DR Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: DAVID CASTANEDA Contact: CAC002602911 Gepaid: HAZNET: 2135 ft. Site 3 of 4 in cluster M 0.404 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 124 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 SSW 2175 MALLUL DR N/A M95 HAZNET LEGACY PARTNERS S108750190 TC2760975.1s Page 108 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: 0.01 Tons: Not reported Disposal Method: Other organic solids Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD981696420 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 Mailing City,St,Zip: 2175 MALLUL DR Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: DAVID CASTANEDA Contact: CAC002602911 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.01 Tons: H141 Disposal Method: Other organic solids Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD981696420 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: LEGACY PARTNERS (Continued) S108750190 Orange Facility County: 33.7120 Tons: Not reported Disposal Method: Asbestos-containing waste Waste Category: 99 TSD County: AZC950823111 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: TORRANCE, CA 905050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 23505 S CRENSHAW BLVD STE 103 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: ANAHEIM WILKEN PARK ASSOCIATES Contact: CAC001460008 Gepaid: HAZNET: 2135 ft. Site 4 of 4 in cluster M 0.404 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 124 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 SSW 2175 MALLUL DR N/A M96 HAZNET ANAHEIM WILKEN PARK ASSOCIATES S103950126 CAR RENTAL Other Type: Other Facility Type: 00000048989 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: 2146 ft. Site 5 of 10 in cluster L 0.406 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 138 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NE 231 W KATELLA AVE N/A L97 HIST UST CAR RENTAL & LEASE SALES INC. U001578598 TC2760975.1s Page 109 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00008000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 2 Container Num: 003 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: REGULAR Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00008000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 3 Container Num: 002 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00010000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 1 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 Owner City,St,Zip: 231 W. CATELLA AVE. Owner Address: CAR RENTAL & LEASE SALES INC. Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: ANN MERLO Contact Name: 0003 Total Tanks: CAR RENTAL & LEASE SALES INC. (Continued) U001578598 -117.90879 Longitude: 33.80343 Latitude: 3868 Global ID: UST: 2146 ft. Site 6 of 10 in cluster L 0.406 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 138 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NE 231 W KATELLA AVE N/A L98 UST DAVES USED CARS U003879457 -117.90864 Longitude: 33.80343 Latitude: 10164 Global ID: UST: 2186 ft. Site 7 of 10 in cluster L 0.414 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 138 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NE HIST UST 221 W KATELLA AVE N/A L99 UST HERTZ CORPORATION U001599307 TC2760975.1s Page 110 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Visual Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00001000 Tank Capacity: 1980 Year Installed: 2 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: EMERYVILLE, CA 94608 Owner City,St,Zip: 4377 ADELINE ST. Owner Address: RED TOP ELECTRIC CO. EMERYVILL Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: KATHERINE CURRAN Contact Name: 0001 Total Tanks: CONTRACTOR Other Type: Other Facility Type: 00000038842 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: HERTZ CORPORATION (Continued) U001599307 30-011-002826-000001 Tank Id: 1 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 08-06-92 Act Date: 08-06-92 Ref Date: 44-009876 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 2826 Comp Number: A Status: SWEEPS UST: Active Status: Not reported Comments: Not reported EPA ID: Not reported NPDES Number: Not reported DUNs Number: Not reported Contact Phone: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM 92802 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 225 BRAE BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mail To: [PHONE REDACTED] Facility Phone: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported Cortese Code: Not reported Regulated ID: UTNKA Regulated By: 30017717 Facility ID: CA FID UST: 2186 ft. Site 8 of 10 in cluster L 0.414 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 138 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NE SWEEPS UST 221 W KATELLA AVE N/A L100 CA FID UST HERTZ RENT A CAR S101589597 TC2760975.1s Page 111 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Number Of Tanks: WASTE OIL Content: W Stg: OIL Tank Use: 550 Capacity: 08-06-92 Actv Date: 30-011-002826-000003 Tank Id: 2 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 08-06-92 Act Date: 08-06-92 Ref Date: 44-009876 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 2826 Comp Number: A Status: 2 Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: 08-06-92 Actv Date: HERTZ RENT A CAR (Continued) S101589597 Not reported Tank Construction: WASTE OIL Type of Fuel: WASTE Tank Used for: 00000000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 3 Container Num: 002 Tank Num: Pressure Test Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00010000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 4 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 Owner City,St,Zip: 4000 CAMPUS DR Owner Address: HERTZ CORP. Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: JIM CALPIN OR MANAGER ON DUTY Contact Name: 0002 Total Tanks: CAR RENTAL Other Type: Other Facility Type: 00000006074 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: 2186 ft. Site 9 of 10 in cluster L 0.414 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 138 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NE HAZNET 221 W KATELLA AVE N/A L101 HIST UST HERTZ CORP U001578608 TC2760975.1s Page 112 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: 0.924 Tons: H141 Disposal Method: Unspecified aqueous solution Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD981696420 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: LOS ANGELES, CA 90045 Mailing City,St,Zip: 6151 W CENTURY BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: DAVID UDDEN Contact: CAC002615832 Gepaid: HAZNET: Pressure Test Leak Detection: HERTZ CORP (Continued) U001578608 Orange Facility County: 1.14 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Oil/water separation sludge Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: NEWPORT BEACH, CA 926602207 Mailing City,St,Zip: 4000 CAMPUS DR Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: PURVI SAVANI, EXT 106 Contact: CAC002602113 Gepaid: HAZNET: 2186 ft. Site 10 of 10 in cluster L 0.414 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 138 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NE 221 W KATELLA AVE N/A L102 HAZNET HERTZ CAR RENTAL S108748358 8 30C338570 WDID: 622381 Place Id: Storm water construction Regulatory Measure Type: 99-08DWQ Order No: 284865 Regulatory Measure Id: 8 Region: 260963 Agency Id: Active Facility Status: Not reported Npdes Number: NPDES: 2209 ft. 0.418 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 138 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NNE 321 W KATELLA AVE N/A 103 NPDES ANAHEIM GARDEN WALK S109436045 TC2760975.1s Page 113 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 92128 Discharge Zip: CA Discharge State: San Diego Discharge City: 17140 Bernardo Center Dr #310 Discharge Address: Anaheim Gardenwalk LLC Discharge Name: Not reported Termination Date Of Regulatory Measure: Not reported Expiration Date Of Regulatory Measure: 12/21/2005 Effective Date Of Regulatory Measure: Not reported Adoption Date Of Regulatory Measure: CONSTW Program Type: ANAHEIM GARDEN WALK (Continued) S109436045 Not reported Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: THE FLOUROCARBON CO Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: (714) 772-7920 Contact telephone: Not reported Contact country: Not reported Not reported Contact address: CLARENCE E BATCHELDER Contact: CAD981388838 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 928030000 1754 S CLEMENTINE ST Facility address: THE FLOUROCARBON CO Site name: FLOUROCARBON CO Facility name: 06/04/1991 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: 2227 ft. Site 1 of 7 in cluster N 0.422 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 138 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92803 NNE FINDS 1754 S CLEMENTINE ST CAD981388838 N104 RCRA-SQG FLOUROCARBON CO [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 114 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource Environmental Interest/Information System 110002690678 Registry ID: FINDS: No violations found Violation Status: Small Quantity Generator Classification: FLOUROCARBON CO Facility name: 02/18/1986 Date form received by agency: Historical Generators: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: Unknown Used oil transporter: Unknown Used oil transfer facility: Unknown Used oil Specification marketer: Unknown Used oil fuel marketer to burner: Unknown User oil refiner: Unknown Used oil processor: Unknown Used oil fuel burner: Unknown Furnace exemption: Unknown On-site burner exemption: Unknown Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: Unknown Transporter of hazardous waste: Unknown Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): Unknown U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: FLOUROCARBON CO (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] Los Angeles TSD County: CAD000088252 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 2001 S HASTER Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: THOMAS F JONES Contact: CAC001273008 Gepaid: HAZNET: 2268 ft. 0.430 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 135 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 East 2001 S HASTER N/A 105 HAZNET THOMAS F JONES S103991213 TC2760975.1s Page 115 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: .0405 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Other organic solids Waste Category: THOMAS F JONES (Continued) S103991213 98052 Discharge Zip: WA Discharge State: Redmond Discharge City: 9805 Willows Rd Ne Discharge Address: Trendwest Resorts Inc Discharge Name: 8/7/2008 Termination Date Of Regulatory Measure: Not reported Expiration Date Of Regulatory Measure: 3/22/2005 Effective Date Of Regulatory Measure: Not reported Adoption Date Of Regulatory Measure: CONSTW Program Type: 8 30C333158 WDID: 622019 Place Id: Storm water construction Regulatory Measure Type: 99-08DWQ Order No: 284502 Regulatory Measure Id: 8 Region: 46228 Agency Id: Terminated Facility Status: Not reported Npdes Number: NPDES: 2274 ft. Site 1 of 6 in cluster O 0.431 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 139 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NE 201 W KATELLA AVE N/A O106 NPDES WORLD MARK BY TRENDWEST S109465910 Handler: Non-Generators do not presently generate hazardous waste Description: Non-Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: (714) 778-4540 Contact telephone: US Contact country: ANAHEIM, CA 928022374 1734 S HARBOR BLVD Contact address: AJIT PATEL Contact: ANAHEIM, CA 928022374 S HARBOR BLVD Mailing address: CAD983628157 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 928022374 1734 S HARBOR BLVD Facility address: RAVIS ONE HOUR PHOTO Facility name: 08/25/1993 Date form received by agency: RCRA-NonGen: 2279 ft. 0.432 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 135 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 North FINDS 1734 S HARBOR BLVD CAD983628157 107 RCRA-NonGen RAVIS ONE HOUR PHOTO [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 116 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource Environmental Interest/Information System 110002872598 Registry ID: FINDS: No violations found Violation Status: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: No Furnace exemption: No On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): No U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (714) 778-4540 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 1734 S HARBOR BLVD Owner/operator address: RAVIS ONE HOUR PHOTO Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: RAVIS ONE HOUR PHOTO (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] Not reported Date Completed: Not reported Incident Date: Not reported OES Time: Not reported OES Date: 7/17/2007 03:25:41 PM OES notification: 07-4282 OES Incident Number: CHMIRS: 2279 ft. Site 2 of 7 in cluster N 0.432 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 138 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NNE 1742 SOUTH CELMENTINE STREET N/A N108 CHMIRS S109036717 TC2760975.1s Page 117 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 0 Pounds: 0 Grams: 2000 Gallons: 0 CUFT: 0 Cups: 0 BBLS: Not reported Quantity Released: Sewage Substance: Not reported E Date: Merchant/Business Site Type: Yes Contained: Not reported Amount: Anaheim Fire Department Admin Agency: 7/13/2007 12:00:00 AM Incident Date: City of Anaheim Streets and Sanitation Agency: 2007 Year: Not reported Date/Time: Not reported Other: Not reported Measure: Not reported Type: Not reported What Happened: Not reported Containment: Reporting Party Cleanup By: Not reported Spill Site: Storm Drain Waterway: Not reported Waterway Involved: Not reported Facility Telephone: Not reported Comments: Not reported Report Date: Not reported Reporting Officer Name/ID: Not reported Company Name: Not reported CA/DOT/PUC/ICC Number: Not reported Vehicle Id Number: Not reported Vehicle State: Not reported Vehicle License Number: Not reported Vehicle Make/year: Not reported Others Number Of Fatalities: Not reported Others Number Of Injuries: Not reported Others Number Of Decontaminated: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Fatalities: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Injuries: Not reported Resp Agncy Personel # Of Decontaminated: Not reported More Than Two Substances Involved?: Not reported Special Studies 6: Not reported Special Studies 5: Not reported Special Studies 4: Not reported Special Studies 3: Not reported Special Studies 2: Not reported Special Studies 1: Not reported Property Management: Not reported Estimated Temperature: Not reported Surrounding Area: Not reported Time Completed: Not reported Time Notified: Not reported Agency Incident Number: Not reported Agency Id Number: Not reported Property Use: (Continued) S109036717 TC2760975.1s Page 118 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation recovered. located in parking lot overflowed as well. 1600 gallons were overflowed is in the parking lot. Private lateralclean out also rags. Private lines runs through parking lot. The manhole that private lateral line as a result of various debris such as grease and 7/13/07, Site is a hotel and they had an obstruction in their Description: 0 Number of Fatalities: 0 Number of Injuries: 0 Evacuations: Not reported Description: 0 Unknown: 0 Tons: 0 Sheen: 0 Quarts: 0 Pints: 0 Ounces: 0 Liters: (Continued) S109036717 Not reported Company Name: Not reported CA/DOT/PUC/ICC Number: Not reported Vehicle Id Number: Not reported Vehicle State: Not reported Vehicle License Number: Not reported Vehicle Make/year: Not reported Others Number Of Fatalities: Not reported Others Number Of Injuries: Not reported Others Number Of Decontaminated: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Fatalities: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Injuries: Not reported Resp Agncy Personel # Of Decontaminated: Not reported More Than Two Substances Involved?: Not reported Special Studies 6: Not reported Special Studies 5: Not reported Special Studies 4: Not reported Special Studies 3: Not reported Special Studies 2: Not reported Special Studies 1: Not reported Property Management: Not reported Estimated Temperature: Not reported Surrounding Area: Not reported Time Completed: Not reported Time Notified: Not reported Agency Incident Number: Not reported Agency Id Number: Not reported Property Use: Not reported Date Completed: Not reported Incident Date: Not reported OES Time: Not reported OES Date: 7/29/200402:40:38 AM OES notification: 04-3921 OES Incident Number: CHMIRS: 2279 ft. Site 3 of 7 in cluster N 0.432 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 138 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA NNE 1742 CLEMENTINE N/A N109 CHMIRS S107448900 TC2760975.1s Page 119 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation stay America’s private lateral. Caller is estimating that 1200 Gal. has been released from a extended Description: 0 Number of Fatalities: 0 Number of Injuries: 0 Evacuations: Not reported Description: 0 Unknown: 0 Tons: 0 Sheen: 0 Quarts: 0 Pints: 0 Ounces: 0 Liters: 0 Pounds: 0 Grams: 0.000000 Gallons: 0 CUFT: 0 Cups: 0 BBLS: Not reported Quantity Released: Sewage Substance: Not reported E Date: Merchant/Business Site Type: Yes Contained: Not reported Amount: Anaheim Fire Department Admin Agency: 7/29/200412:00:00 AM Incident Date: City of Anaheim Agency: 2004 Year: Not reported Date/Time: Not reported Other: Not reported Measure: Not reported Type: Not reported What Happened: Not reported Containment: Reporting Party Cleanup By: Not reported Spill Site: Not reported Waterway: Not reported Waterway Involved: Not reported Facility Telephone: Not reported Comments: Not reported Report Date: Not reported Reporting Officer Name/ID: (Continued) S107448900 Not reported Property Use: Not reported Date Completed: Not reported Incident Date: 12:13:59 PM OES Time: 9/10/1994 OES Date: Not reported OES notification: 4080 OES Incident Number: CHMIRS: 2285 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster P 0.433 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 126 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92804 SSE 2155 SOUTH MADRID ST. N/A P110 CHMIRS S105634021 TC2760975.1s Page 120 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Liters: Not reported Pounds: Not reported Grams: Not reported Gallons: Not reported CUFT: Not reported Cups: Not reported BBLS: Not reported Quantity Released: OIL Substance: Not reported E Date: RESIDENCE Site Type: YES Contained: 1 QT. Amount: Not reported Admin Agency: 1141 10 SEP 94 Incident Date: ORANGE CO COMM Agency: 1994 Year: Not reported Date/Time: Not reported Other: Not reported Measure: PETROLEUM Type: Not reported What Happened: Not reported Containment: ANAHEIM FD Cleanup By: Not reported Spill Site: STORM DRAIN TO OCEAN Waterway: YES Waterway Involved: Not reported Facility Telephone: Not reported Comments: Not reported Report Date: Not reported Reporting Officer Name/ID: Not reported Company Name: Not reported CA/DOT/PUC/ICC Number: Not reported Vehicle Id Number: Not reported Vehicle State: Not reported Vehicle License Number: Not reported Vehicle Make/year: Not reported Others Number Of Fatalities: Not reported Others Number Of Injuries: Not reported Others Number Of Decontaminated: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Fatalities: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Injuries: Not reported Resp Agncy Personel # Of Decontaminated: Not reported More Than Two Substances Involved?: Not reported Special Studies 6: Not reported Special Studies 5: Not reported Special Studies 4: Not reported Special Studies 3: Not reported Special Studies 2: Not reported Special Studies 1: Not reported Property Management: Not reported Estimated Temperature: Not reported Surrounding Area: Not reported Time Completed: Not reported Time Notified: Not reported Agency Incident Number: Not reported Agency Id Number: (Continued) S105634021 TC2760975.1s Page 121 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Description: NO Number of Fatalities: NO Number of Injuries: NO Evacuations: RESIDENT DUMPED INTO STORM DRAIN Description: Not reported Unknown: Not reported Tons: Not reported Sheen: Not reported Quarts: Not reported Pints: Not reported Ounces: (Continued) S105634021 -117.90774 Longitude: 33.80323 Latitude: 10160 Global ID: UST: 2319 ft. Site 2 of 6 in cluster O 0.439 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 139 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NE 200 W KATELLA AVE N/A O111 UST AVIS RENT A CAR U003802123 12-31-88 Created Date: 05-09-94 Act Date: 05-06-93 Ref Date: 44-000421 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 4373 Comp Number: A Status: SWEEPS UST: Active Status: Not reported Comments: Not reported EPA ID: Not reported NPDES Number: Not reported DUNs Number: Not reported Contact Phone: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM 92802 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 900 OLD COUNTRY RD ATTN: Mailing Address: Not reported Mail To: [PHONE REDACTED] Facility Phone: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported Cortese Code: Not reported Regulated ID: UTNKA Regulated By: 30005189 Facility ID: CA FID UST: 2319 ft. Site 3 of 6 in cluster O 0.439 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 139 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NE SWEEPS UST 200 W KATELLA AVE N/A O112 CA FID UST AVIS RENT A CAR SYSTEM, INC. S101619658 TC2760975.1s Page 122 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 1 Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 6000 Capacity: 05-06-93 Actv Date: 30-011-004373-000001 Tank Id: 1 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: AVIS RENT A CAR SYSTEM, INC. (Continued) S101619658 Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00007500 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 1 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: GARDEN CITY, NY 11530 Owner City,St,Zip: 900 OLD COUNTRY ROAD Owner Address: AVIS RENT A CAR SYSTEM, INC. Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: B. FOSTER Contact Name: 0001 Total Tanks: VEHICLE RENTAL Other Type: Other Facility Type: 00000042786 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: 2319 ft. Site 4 of 6 in cluster O 0.439 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 139 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92646 NE 200 W KATELLA AVE N/A O113 HIST UST AVIS U001577215 Recycler Disposal Method: Waste oil and mixed oil Waste Category: Orange TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: PARSIPPANY, NJ 7054 Mailing City,St,Zip: 6 SYLVAN WAY Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: ROSE PELINO Contact: CAL000036763 Gepaid: HAZNET: 2319 ft. Site 5 of 6 in cluster O 0.439 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 139 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92646 NE 200 WEST KATELLA AVE N/A O114 HAZNET AVIS RENT A CAR SYSTEM INC S107145459 TC2760975.1s Page 123 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Facility County: 1.04 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Tank bottom waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: PARSIPPANY, NJ 07054 Mailing City,St,Zip: 6 SYLVAN WAY Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: ROSE PELINO Contact: CAL000036763 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 1 Tons: AVIS RENT A CAR SYSTEM INC (Continued) S107145459 Orange Facility County: .2293 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Tank bottom waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD099452708 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SANTA ANA, CA 927070000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 4101 S MAIN ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: AVIS RENT A CAR CORP Contact: CAC000946872 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .0834 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Tank bottom waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 926460000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 200 W KATELLA AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: CHARLES SWIEGARD Contact: CAC001191496 Gepaid: HAZNET: 2319 ft. Site 6 of 6 in cluster O 0.439 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 139 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NE 200 W KATELLA AVE N/A O115 HAZNET AVIS RENT A CAR SYSTEM INC S103639705 TC2760975.1s Page 124 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation or drug lab equipment and/or materials were stored. Illegal Drug Lab - location where an illegal drug lab was operated Lab Type: 200112122 Facility ID: CDL: 2336 ft. Site 1 of 3 in cluster Q 0.442 mi. Relative: Equal Actual: 133 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 ESE 2045 HASTER N/A Q116 CDL S107530629 Not reported Containment: Reporting Party Cleanup By: Not reported Spill Site: storm drain Waterway: Yes Waterway Involved: Not reported Facility Telephone: Not reported Comments: Not reported Report Date: Not reported Reporting Officer Name/ID: Not reported Company Name: Not reported CA/DOT/PUC/ICC Number: Not reported Vehicle Id Number: Not reported Vehicle State: Not reported Vehicle License Number: Not reported Vehicle Make/year: Not reported Others Number Of Fatalities: Not reported Others Number Of Injuries: Not reported Others Number Of Decontaminated: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Fatalities: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Injuries: Not reported Resp Agncy Personel # Of Decontaminated: Not reported More Than Two Substances Involved?: Not reported Special Studies 6: Not reported Special Studies 5: Not reported Special Studies 4: Not reported Special Studies 3: Not reported Special Studies 2: Not reported Special Studies 1: Not reported Property Management: Not reported Estimated Temperature: Not reported Surrounding Area: Not reported Time Completed: Not reported Time Notified: Not reported Agency Incident Number: Not reported Agency Id Number: Not reported Property Use: Not reported Date Completed: Not reported Incident Date: Not reported OES Time: Not reported OES Date: 12/15/200201:44:43 PM OES notification: 02-6798 OES Incident Number: CHMIRS: 2336 ft. Site 2 of 3 in cluster Q 0.442 mi. Relative: Equal Actual: 133 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 ESE HAZNET 2045 S HASTER ST N/A Q117 CHMIRS PACIFIC PALMS APARTMENTS S105887358 TC2760975.1s Page 125 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Facility County: 0.12 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Waste oil and mixed oil Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: Not reported TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 Mailing City,St,Zip: 2045 S HASTER ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: MICHELLE BONSEAL Contact: CAL000262995 Gepaid: HAZNET: Per caller, a blocked sewer line caused the release. Description: 0 Number of Fatalities: 0 Number of Injuries: 0 Evacuations: Not reported Description: 0 Unknown: 0 Tons: 0 Sheen: 0 Quarts: 0 Pints: 0 Ounces: 0 Liters: 0 Pounds: 0 Grams: 0.000000 Gallons: 0 CUFT: 0 Cups: 0 BBLS: Not reported Quantity Released: Sewage Substance: Not reported E Date: Residence Site Type: Yes Contained: Not reported Amount: Anaheim Fire Department Admin Agency: 12/15/200212:00:00 AM Incident Date: City of Anaheim Agency: 2002 Year: Not reported Date/Time: Not reported Other: Not reported Measure: Not reported Type: Not reported What Happened: PACIFIC PALMS APARTMENTS (Continued) S105887358 TC2760975.1s Page 126 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Amount: Anaheim Fire Department Admin Agency: 10/15/2007 12:00:00 AM Incident Date: City of Anaheim Agency: 2007 Year: Not reported Date/Time: Not reported Other: Not reported Measure: Not reported Type: Not reported What Happened: Not reported Containment: Reporting Party Cleanup By: Not reported Spill Site: Anaheim Barber Channel Waterway: Not reported Waterway Involved: Not reported Facility Telephone: Not reported Comments: Not reported Report Date: Not reported Reporting Officer Name/ID: Not reported Company Name: Not reported CA/DOT/PUC/ICC Number: Not reported Vehicle Id Number: Not reported Vehicle State: Not reported Vehicle License Number: Not reported Vehicle Make/year: Not reported Others Number Of Fatalities: Not reported Others Number Of Injuries: Not reported Others Number Of Decontaminated: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Fatalities: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Injuries: Not reported Resp Agncy Personel # Of Decontaminated: Not reported More Than Two Substances Involved?: Not reported Special Studies 6: Not reported Special Studies 5: Not reported Special Studies 4: Not reported Special Studies 3: Not reported Special Studies 2: Not reported Special Studies 1: Not reported Property Management: Not reported Estimated Temperature: Not reported Surrounding Area: Not reported Time Completed: Not reported Time Notified: Not reported Agency Incident Number: Not reported Agency Id Number: Not reported Property Use: Not reported Date Completed: Not reported Incident Date: Not reported OES Time: Not reported OES Date: 10/15/2007 06:08:03 PM OES notification: 07-6307 OES Incident Number: CHMIRS: 2357 ft. Site 3 of 3 in cluster Q 0.446 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 134 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 East 104 E. LEATRICE AVE N/A Q118 CHMIRS S109035473 TC2760975.1s Page 127 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Debris from the street cause the sewer line to overflow Description: 0 Number of Fatalities: 0 Number of Injuries: 0 Evacuations: Not reported Description: 0 Unknown: 0 Tons: 0 Sheen: 0 Quarts: 0 Pints: 0 Ounces: 0 Liters: 0 Pounds: 0 Grams: 150 Gallons: 0 CUFT: 0 Cups: 0 BBLS: Not reported Quantity Released: Sewage Substance: Not reported E Date: Residence Site Type: Yes Contained: (Continued) S109035473 Not reported Facility County: 0.12 Tons: Disposal, Other Disposal Method: Liquids with halogenated organic compounds > 1000 mg/l Waste Category: Santa Clara TSD County: Not reported TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 450 W WILKEN WAY #C Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: Telephone: INACTIVE VIA RETURNED MAIL Contact: CAL000088211 Gepaid: HAZNET: 2378 ft. Site 1 of 3 in cluster R 0.450 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 125 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 South 450 W WILKEN WAY #C N/A R119 HAZNET AMERICAN AUTOMOTIVE CENTER S105722788 [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: SWARTZ PROPERTY MGMT Contact: CAL000088989 Gepaid: HAZNET: 2378 ft. Site 2 of 3 in cluster R 0.450 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 125 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 South 450 W WILKEN WAY #A N/A R120 HAZNET S & L AUTO SERVICE CENTER S103985775 TC2760975.1s Page 128 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: .2293 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Unspecified aqueous solution Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1763 S ANAHEIM Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: S & L AUTO SERVICE CENTER (Continued) S103985775 CAD099452708 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 450 W. WILKEN WAY #B Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: SWARTZ INVESTMENTS Contact: CAL000121706 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.417 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Aqueous solution with 10% or more total organic residues Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD099452708 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 450 W. WILKEN WAY #B Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: SWARTZ INVESTMENTS Contact: CAL000121706 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .2293 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD050099696 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 450 W. WILKEN WAY #B Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: SWARTZ INVESTMENTS Contact: CAL000121706 Gepaid: HAZNET: 2378 ft. Site 3 of 3 in cluster R 0.450 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 125 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 South 450 W. WILKEN WAY #B N/A R121 HAZNET MOTOR CARRIER INSPECTION SERVICE S103978494 TC2760975.1s Page 129 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: .2085 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Aqueous solution with 10% or more total organic residues Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: MOTOR CARRIER INSPECTION SERVICE (Continued) S103978494 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 3 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 4 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 2 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 60470 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1990 Year: EMI: 2396 ft. Site 4 of 7 in cluster N 0.454 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 138 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NNE 1735 S CLEMENTINE N/A N122 EMI SAND T WOODWORKING S106838858 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 2 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 0 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7812 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 72746 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1990 Year: EMI: 2396 ft. Site 5 of 7 in cluster N 0.454 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 138 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NNE 1730 S CLEMENTINE ST N/A N123 EMI KDOC TV S106833738 TC2760975.1s Page 130 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation No violations found Violation Status: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: No Furnace exemption: No On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): No U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (714) 991-3200 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 1730 S CLEMENTIME ST Owner/operator address: STEVEN H MORRIS Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: (714) 991-3206 Contact telephone: US Contact country: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 1730 S CLEMENTIME ST Contact address: STEVEN MORRIS Contact: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 S CLEMENTIME ST Mailing address: CAR000010298 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 1730 S CLEMENTIME ST Facility address: SATELLITE CLEANERS INC Facility name: 03/21/1996 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: 2396 ft. Site 6 of 7 in cluster N 0.454 mi. HAZNET Relative: Higher Actual: 138 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NNE FINDS 1730 S CLEMENTIME ST CAR000010298 N124 RCRA-SQG SATELLITE CLEANERS INC [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 131 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation CA Mailing State: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 1730 S CLEMENTINE ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: 6/30/2005 10:01:00 AM Inactive Date: No Facility Active: 6/20/1996 Create Date: Laundry and Garment Services, NEC (except diaper service and clothing alteration and repair) SIC Description: 7219 SIC Code: and Laundry Services (except Coin-Operated) NAICS Description: 81232 NAICS Code: CAR000010298 EPA Id: [PHONE REDACTED] Contact Telephone: Not reported Contact Address 2: 1730 S CLEMENTINE ST Contact Address: FRANK GIVENS CEO Contact Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Owner Telephone: Not reported Owner Address 2: 1730 S CLEMENTINE ST Owner Address: SATELLITE CLEANERS Owner Name: 0 Region Code: 928020000 Mailing Zip: CA Mailing State: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 1730 S CLEMENTINE ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: 6/30/2005 10:01:00 AM Inactive Date: No Facility Active: 6/20/1996 Create Date: Business Services, NEC (apparel pressing service for the trade) SIC Description: 7389 SIC Code: and Laundry Services (except Coin-Operated) NAICS Description: 81232 NAICS Code: CAR000010298 EPA Id: corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource facilities. generators, transporters, and treatment, storage, and disposal provides California with information on hazardous waste shipments for California Hazardous Waste Tracking System - Datamart (HWTS-DATAMART) Environmental Interest/Information System 110002910832 Registry ID: FINDS: SATELLITE CLEANERS INC (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 132 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Contact Address 2: 1730 S CLEMENTINE ST Contact Address: FRANK GIVENS CEO Contact Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Owner Telephone: Not reported Owner Address 2: 1730 S CLEMENTINE ST Owner Address: SATELLITE CLEANERS Owner Name: 0 Region Code: 928020000 Mailing Zip: CA Mailing State: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 1730 S CLEMENTINE ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: 6/30/2005 10:01:00 AM Inactive Date: No Facility Active: 6/20/1996 Create Date: Plants, Except Rug Cleaning SIC Description: 7216 SIC Code: and Laundry Services (except Coin-Operated) NAICS Description: 81232 NAICS Code: CAR000010298 EPA Id: [PHONE REDACTED] Contact Telephone: Not reported Contact Address 2: 1730 S CLEMENTINE ST Contact Address: FRANK GIVENS CEO Contact Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Owner Telephone: Not reported Owner Address 2: 1730 S CLEMENTINE ST Owner Address: SATELLITE CLEANERS Owner Name: 0 Region Code: 928020000 Mailing Zip: CA Mailing State: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 1730 S CLEMENTINE ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: 6/30/2005 10:01:00 AM Inactive Date: No Facility Active: 6/20/1996 Create Date: Garment Pressing, and Agents for Laundries and SIC Description: 7212 SIC Code: and Laundry Services (except Coin-Operated) NAICS Description: 81232 NAICS Code: CAR000010298 EPA Id: [PHONE REDACTED] Contact Telephone: Not reported Contact Address 2: 1730 S CLEMENTINE ST Contact Address: FRANK GIVENS CEO Contact Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Owner Telephone: Not reported Owner Address 2: 1730 S CLEMENTINE ST Owner Address: SATELLITE CLEANERS Owner Name: 0 Region Code: 928020000 Mailing Zip: SATELLITE CLEANERS INC (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 133 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Yes Facility Active: 4/8/2009 8:40:00 AM Create Date: Garment Pressing, and Agents for Laundries and SIC Description: 7212 SIC Code: and Laundry Services (except Coin-Operated) NAICS Description: 81232 NAICS Code: CAL000341958 EPA Id: [PHONE REDACTED] Contact Telephone: Not reported Contact Address 2: 1730 S CLEMENTINE ST Contact Address: NAS ALTAHER Contact Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Owner Telephone: Not reported Owner Address 2: 1730 S CLEMENTINE ST Owner Address: GREEN CLEAN INVESTMENT INC Owner Name: 4 Region Code: 928022902 Mailing Zip: CA Mailing State: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 1730 S CLEMENTINE ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: Not reported Inactive Date: Yes Facility Active: 4/8/2009 8:40:00 AM Create Date: Business Services, NEC (apparel pressing service for the trade) SIC Description: 7389 SIC Code: and Laundry Services (except Coin-Operated) NAICS Description: 81232 NAICS Code: CAL000341958 EPA Id: [PHONE REDACTED] Contact Telephone: Not reported Contact Address 2: 1730 S CLEMENTINE ST Contact Address: FRANK GIVENS CEO Contact Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Owner Telephone: Not reported Owner Address 2: 1730 S CLEMENTINE ST Owner Address: SATELLITE CLEANERS Owner Name: 0 Region Code: 928020000 Mailing Zip: CA Mailing State: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 1730 S CLEMENTINE ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: 6/30/2005 10:01:00 AM Inactive Date: No Facility Active: 6/20/1996 Create Date: Power Laundries, Family and Commercial SIC Description: 7211 SIC Code: and Laundry Services (except Coin-Operated) NAICS Description: 81232 NAICS Code: CAR000010298 EPA Id: [PHONE REDACTED] Contact Telephone: SATELLITE CLEANERS INC (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 134 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation GREEN CLEAN INVESTMENT INC Owner Name: 4 Region Code: 928022902 Mailing Zip: CA Mailing State: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 1730 S CLEMENTINE ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: Not reported Inactive Date: Yes Facility Active: 4/8/2009 8:40:00 AM Create Date: Plants, Except Rug Cleaning SIC Description: 7216 SIC Code: and Laundry Services (except Coin-Operated) NAICS Description: 81232 NAICS Code: CAL000341958 EPA Id: [PHONE REDACTED] Contact Telephone: Not reported Contact Address 2: 1730 S CLEMENTINE ST Contact Address: NAS ALTAHER Contact Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Owner Telephone: Not reported Owner Address 2: 1730 S CLEMENTINE ST Owner Address: GREEN CLEAN INVESTMENT INC Owner Name: 4 Region Code: 928022902 Mailing Zip: CA Mailing State: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 1730 S CLEMENTINE ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: Not reported Inactive Date: Yes Facility Active: 4/8/2009 8:40:00 AM Create Date: Power Laundries, Family and Commercial SIC Description: 7211 SIC Code: and Laundry Services (except Coin-Operated) NAICS Description: 81232 NAICS Code: CAL000341958 EPA Id: [PHONE REDACTED] Contact Telephone: Not reported Contact Address 2: 1730 S CLEMENTINE ST Contact Address: NAS ALTAHER Contact Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Owner Telephone: Not reported Owner Address 2: 1730 S CLEMENTINE ST Owner Address: GREEN CLEAN INVESTMENT INC Owner Name: 4 Region Code: 928022902 Mailing Zip: CA Mailing State: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 1730 S CLEMENTINE ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: Not reported Inactive Date: SATELLITE CLEANERS INC (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 135 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation CAD981397417 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1730 S CLEMENTINE ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: STEVEN H MORRIS Contact: CAR000010298 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.225 Tons: H141 Disposal Method: Off-specification, aged, or surplus organics Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD008364432 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1730 S CLEMENTINE ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: FRANK GIVENS CEO Contact: CAR000010298 Gepaid: HAZNET: [PHONE REDACTED] Contact Telephone: Not reported Contact Address 2: 1730 S CLEMENTINE ST Contact Address: NAS ALTAHER Contact Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Owner Telephone: Not reported Owner Address 2: 1730 S CLEMENTINE ST Owner Address: GREEN CLEAN INVESTMENT INC Owner Name: 4 Region Code: 928022902 Mailing Zip: CA Mailing State: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 1730 S CLEMENTINE ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: Not reported Inactive Date: Yes Facility Active: 4/8/2009 8:40:00 AM Create Date: Laundry and Garment Services, NEC (except diaper service and clothing alteration and repair) SIC Description: 7219 SIC Code: and Laundry Services (except Coin-Operated) NAICS Description: 81232 NAICS Code: CAL000341958 EPA Id: [PHONE REDACTED] Contact Telephone: Not reported Contact Address 2: 1730 S CLEMENTINE ST Contact Address: NAS ALTAHER Contact Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Owner Telephone: Not reported Owner Address 2: 1730 S CLEMENTINE ST Owner Address: SATELLITE CLEANERS INC (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 136 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 10 additional CA_HAZNET: record(s) in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access Not reported Facility County: 0 Tons: Not reported Disposal Method: etc.) Halogenated solvents (chloroform, methyl chloride, perchloroethylene, Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: Not reported TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1730 S CLEMENTINE ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: STEVEN H MORRIS Contact: CAR000010298 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .2293 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: etc.) Halogenated solvents (chloroform, methyl chloride, perchloroethylene, Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD008302903 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1730 S CLEMENTINE ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: STEVEN H MORRIS Contact: CAR000010298 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.15 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Off-specification, aged, or surplus organics Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD008364432 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1730 S CLEMENTINE ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: FRANK GIVENS CEO Contact: CAR000010298 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 1.4621 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: etc.) Halogenated solvents (chloroform, methyl chloride, perchloroethylene, Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: SATELLITE CLEANERS INC (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 137 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: .2293 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD099452708 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 450 W WILKEN WAY # C Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: ANTONIO GARCIA Contact: CAL000216648 Gepaid: HAZNET: 2415 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster P 0.457 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 126 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 SSE 450 W WILKEN WAY # C N/A P125 HAZNET OC FULL TECH AUTOMOTIVE & ELECTRIC S105093141 Not reported Facility County: 416.29 Tons: Disposal, Land Fill Disposal Method: Asbestos-containing waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: Not reported TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 17140 BERNARDO CENTER DR Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: JEOFF SHERMAN Contact: CAC002553069 Gepaid: Not reported Facility County: 0.10 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: biphenyls and material containing PCB’s Waste Category: 99 TSD County: Not reported TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 17140 BERNARDO CENTER DR Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: JEOFF SHERMAN Contact: CAC002553069 Gepaid: HAZNET: 2430 ft. Site 7 of 7 in cluster N 0.460 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 138 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NNE 1731-1741 CLEMENTINE ST N/A N126 HAZNET PRICE LEGACY CORP S106087701 TC2760975.1s Page 138 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation or drug lab equipment and/or materials were stored. Illegal Drug Lab - location where an illegal drug lab was operated Lab Type: 200505036 Facility ID: CDL: 2446 ft. Site 1 of 3 in cluster S 0.463 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 124 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 South 2200 S HARBOR BLVD N/A S127 CDL S107531061 Orange Facility County: 0.6046 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Unspecified aqueous solution Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD099452708 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928023521 Mailing City,St,Zip: 2201 S HARBOR BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: IQBAL MANDA/PRES Contact: CAL000174759 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .4170 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Unspecified aqueous solution Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD099452708 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928023521 Mailing City,St,Zip: 2201 S HARBOR BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: IQBAL MANDA/PRES Contact: CAL000174759 Gepaid: HAZNET: 2446 ft. Site 2 of 3 in cluster S 0.463 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 124 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 South 2201 S HARBOR BLVD N/A S128 HAZNET MANDA MOTORS INC S103976092 [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: DR AMIR NESHAT Contact: CAL000180752 Gepaid: HAZNET: 2465 ft. Site 3 of 3 in cluster S 0.467 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 124 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 South 2207 SOUTH HARBOR BLVD N/A S129 HAZNET FAMILY DENTAL OFFICE S103964019 TC2760975.1s Page 139 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: .0417 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Photochemicals/photoprocessing waste Waste Category: Orange TSD County: CAD982524613 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928023521 Mailing City,St,Zip: 2207 S HARBOR BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: NEIL S WILENSKY DDS Contact: CAL000100508 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .0208 Tons: Not reported Disposal Method: Photochemicals/photoprocessing waste Waste Category: Kern TSD County: CAD981402522 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928023521 Mailing City,St,Zip: 2207 S HARBOR BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: NEIL S WILENSKY DDS Contact: CAL000100508 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .0750 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Photochemicals/photoprocessing waste Waste Category: Kern TSD County: CAD981402522 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928023521 Mailing City,St,Zip: 2207 S HARBOR BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: NEIL S WILENSKY DDS Contact: CAL000100508 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .0002 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Other inorganic solid waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD028409019 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 2207 S HARBOR BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: FAMILY DENTAL OFFICE (Continued) S103964019 TC2760975.1s Page 140 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 9 additional CA_HAZNET: record(s) in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access Orange Facility County: .0500 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Other inorganic solid waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD097854541 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928023521 Mailing City,St,Zip: 2207 S HARBOR BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: NEIL S WILENSKY DDS Contact: CAL000100508 Gepaid: FAMILY DENTAL OFFICE (Continued) S103964019 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 0 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 9999 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 57335 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1987 Year: EMI: 2479 ft. Site 1 of 3 in cluster T 0.469 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 139 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92803 NE 1753 S ZEYN ST N/A T130 EMI FLUOROCARBON CO S106831168 ANAHEIM, CA 928030000 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 3222 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: CITY OF ANAHEIM Contact: CAC001170584 Gepaid: HAZNET: 2490 ft. Site 1 of 13 in cluster U 0.472 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 140 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 ENE 130 KATELLA AVE N/A U131 HAZNET CITY OF ANAHIEM /PUBLIC WORKS S103956762 TC2760975.1s Page 141 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: 5.8996 Tons: Disposal, Land Fill Disposal Method: Asbestos-containing waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD009007626 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: CITY OF ANAHIEM /PUBLIC WORKS (Continued) S103956762 Orange Facility County: 0.6255 Tons: H039 Disposal Method: Tank bottom waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928022904 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1750 S ZEYN ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: SHAUN SWINGHOLM Contact: CAC002633766 Gepaid: HAZNET: Not reported Discharge Zip: Not reported Discharge State: Not reported Discharge City: Not reported Discharge Address: Alsco Discharge Name: Not reported Termination Date Of Regulatory Measure: Not reported Expiration Date Of Regulatory Measure: 7/9/2008 9:58:45 AM Effective Date Of Regulatory Measure: Not reported Adoption Date Of Regulatory Measure: CONSTW Program Type: 8 30C352542 WDID: 721708 Place Id: Storm water construction Regulatory Measure Type: 99-08DWQ Order No: 348613 Regulatory Measure Id: 8 Region: 476894 Agency Id: Active Facility Status: Not reported Npdes Number: NPDES: 2503 ft. Site 2 of 3 in cluster T 0.474 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 140 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NE HAZNET 1750 S ZEYN ST N/A T132 NPDES ALSCL S109435847 TC2760975.1s Page 142 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: SW Staff Initials: TME Staff: A MTBE Class: MTBE Detected. Site tested for MTBE & MTBE detected MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 1 MTBE Concentration: 38000 Max MTBE GW: 4/29/1996 MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.803146 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: = GW Qualifies: 12/17/1990 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: 11/3/2003 Remed Action: 2/7/1995 Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: Not reported Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 11/27/1990 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: 11/27/1990 Review Date: 12/17/1990 Enter Date: 11/27/1990 How Stopped Date: T0605901304 Global ID: UNK Leak Source: UNK Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: OM How Discovered: Not reported Funding: Not reported Enf Type: HASTER Cross Street: Vapor Extraction Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Gasoline Substance: Aquifer affected Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083001732T Case Number: Remedial action (cleanup) Underway Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 2571 ft. Site 2 of 13 in cluster U 0.487 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 140 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 ENE 100 KATELLA AVE N/A U133 LUST TEXACO SERVICE STATION S101299282 TC2760975.1s Page 143 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation THREE GW MONITORING WELL. LOW CONCENTRATION. Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: TEXACO SERVICE STATION (Continued) S101299282 Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: PREMIUM Type of Fuel: Not reported Tank Used for: 00004000 Tank Capacity: 1963 Year Installed: 4 Container Num: 004 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: REGULAR Type of Fuel: Not reported Tank Used for: 00004000 Tank Capacity: 1963 Year Installed: 3 Container Num: 003 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: REGULAR Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00004000 Tank Capacity: 1963 Year Installed: 2 Container Num: 002 Tank Num: None Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: WASTE OIL Type of Fuel: WASTE Tank Used for: 00000550 Tank Capacity: 1963 Year Installed: 1 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: LOS ANGELES, CA 90010 Owner City,St,Zip: 3350 WILSHIRE BLVD. Owner Address: TEXACO U.S.A. Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: ALBERT AGUERA Contact Name: 0006 Total Tanks: Not reported Other Type: Gas Station Facility Type: 00000007282 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: 2571 ft. Site 3 of 13 in cluster U 0.487 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 140 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 ENE 100 W. KATELLA / HASTER N/A U134 HIST UST TEXACO U001578620 TC2760975.1s Page 144 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00008000 Tank Capacity: 1978 Year Installed: 6 Container Num: 006 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: PREMIUM Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00004000 Tank Capacity: 1963 Year Installed: 5 Container Num: 005 Tank Num: TEXACO (Continued) U001578620 DATA NOT ENTERED, SEE FILE Released Chemical: Closed pre 1994, file review required to determine closure type Closure Type: CLOSED 12/30/1987 Current Status: RO0000109 Record ID: ORANGE Region: 87IC027 Case ID: Orange Co. Industrial Site: 2574 ft. Site 3 of 3 in cluster T 0.487 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 140 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NE 1733 S ZEYN ST N/A T135 Orange Co. Industrial Site MOTOR MART S101126229 Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Aquifer used for drinking water supply Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083001732T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 2006-10-30 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.803146 Latitude: T0605901304 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 2600 ft. Site 4 of 13 in cluster U 0.492 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 140 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 ENE 100 W KATELLA AVE N/A U136 LUST TEXACO SERVICE STATION S109284451 TC2760975.1s Page 145 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation FINDS: No violations found Violation Status: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: No Furnace exemption: No On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): No U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (714) 434-8600 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: SANTA ANA, CA 92704 3631 HARBOR STE 225 Owner/operator address: TEXACO OIL CO Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: (714) 635-8543 Contact telephone: US Contact country: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 100 W KATELLA Contact address: AL AGUERA SR Contact: CAD983602343 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 100 W KATELLA Facility address: ALS TEXACO Facility name: 07/29/1991 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: 2604 ft. Site 5 of 13 in cluster U 0.493 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 140 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 ENE FINDS 100 W KATELLA CAD983602343 U137 RCRA-SQG ALS TEXACO [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 146 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource Environmental Interest/Information System 110006187937 Registry ID: ALS TEXACO (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] Orange Facility County: .0166 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Unspecified solvent mixture Waste Waste Category: Fresno TSD County: CAD093459485 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928023602 Mailing City,St,Zip: 100 W KATELLA AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: AGUERA ALBERT Contact: CAL000002880 Gepaid: HAZNET: 2604 ft. Site 6 of 13 in cluster U 0.493 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 140 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 ENE 100 W KATELLA N/A U138 HAZNET ALS TEXACO SUC S100946356 6 Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 8000 Capacity: 08-03-92 Actv Date: 30-011-004500-000001 Tank Id: UNKNOWN Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 08-03-92 Act Date: 08-03-92 Ref Date: 44-000217 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 4500 Comp Number: A Status: SWEEPS UST: 2604 ft. Site 7 of 13 in cluster U 0.493 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 140 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 ENE 100 W KATELLA AVE N/A U139 SWEEPS UST TEXACO (61-106-434) S106932865 TC2760975.1s Page 147 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 08-03-92 Act Date: 08-03-92 Ref Date: 44-000217 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 4500 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 4000 Capacity: 08-03-92 Actv Date: 30-011-004500-000004 Tank Id: UNKNOWN Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 08-03-92 Act Date: 08-03-92 Ref Date: 44-000217 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 4500 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 4000 Capacity: 08-03-92 Actv Date: 30-011-004500-000003 Tank Id: UNKNOWN Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 08-03-92 Act Date: 08-03-92 Ref Date: 44-000217 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 4500 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 4000 Capacity: 08-03-92 Actv Date: 30-011-004500-000002 Tank Id: UNKNOWN Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 08-03-92 Act Date: 08-03-92 Ref Date: 44-000217 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 4500 Comp Number: A Status: TEXACO (61-106-434) (Continued) S106932865 TC2760975.1s Page 148 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Number Of Tanks: WASTE OIL Content: W Stg: OIL Tank Use: 550 Capacity: 08-03-92 Actv Date: 30-011-004500-000006 Tank Id: UNKNOWN Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 08-03-92 Act Date: 08-03-92 Ref Date: 44-000217 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 4500 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 4000 Capacity: 08-03-92 Actv Date: 30-011-004500-000005 Tank Id: UNKNOWN Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: TEXACO (61-106-434) (Continued) S106932865 Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928070000 Mailing City,St,Zip: IN TOWN PROPERTIES Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: HUD Contact: CAC001159400 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .0208 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Waste oil and mixed oil Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD000088252 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928070000 Mailing City,St,Zip: IN TOWN PROPERTIES Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: HUD Contact: CAC001159400 Gepaid: HAZNET: 2610 ft. 0.494 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 130 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92807 SE 132 BLUEBELL AVE N/A 140 HAZNET HOUSING URBAN & DEVELOPMENT S103968311 TC2760975.1s Page 149 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: .0100 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Other inorganic solid waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD000088252 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928070000 Mailing City,St,Zip: IN TOWN PROPERTIES Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: HUD Contact: CAC001159400 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .0834 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Oxygenated solvents (acetone, butanol, ethyl acetate, etc.) Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD000088252 TSD EPA ID: HOUSING URBAN & DEVELOPMENT (Continued) S103968311 Not reported Remed Action: 1/11/1999 Remed Plan: 12/18/1987 Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 10/18/1999 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 11/13/1987 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: 12/4/1987 Review Date: 12/18/1987 Enter Date: Not reported How Stopped Date: T0605900554 Global ID: Not reported Leak Source: Not reported Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: OM How Discovered: State Funds Funding: Not reported Enf Type: HASTER Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Gasoline Substance: Aquifer affected Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083000701T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 2612 ft. Site 8 of 13 in cluster U 0.495 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 140 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 ENE 100 KATELLA AVE N/A U141 LUST MEDDOCK MOBIL S104233746 TC2760975.1s Page 150 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation CAP - PROPOSED VAPOR EXTRACTION. Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: ROW Staff Initials: RS Staff: Not reported MTBE Class: MTBE Detected. Site tested for MTBE & MTBE detected MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: 120 Max MTBE Soil: 2 MTBE Concentration: 760 Max MTBE GW: 6/17/1996 MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.803152 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: = Soil Qualifies: = GW Qualifies: 12/18/1987 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: MEDDOCK MOBIL (Continued) S104233746 Not reported Facility County: 3.37 Tons: Disposal, Land Fill Disposal Method: Asbestos-containing waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD009007626 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: GARDEN GROVE, CA 92841 Mailing City,St,Zip: 8211 LAMPSON AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: TINA FRANKS Contact: CAC002584505 Gepaid: HAZNET: 2618 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster V 0.496 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 121 ft. 1/4-1/2 GARDEN GROVE, CA 92840 SW 12272 WILKEN WAY N/A V142 HAZNET GARDEN GROVE USD/PARKVIEW ELEM S108207542 TC2760975.1s Page 151 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation sciences. United States and other nations and the institute of education entity for collecting and analyzing data related to education in the NCES (National Center for Education Statistics) is the primary federal electronic documents. applying geographic names to federal maps and other printed and for geographic names used by the federal government and the source for US Geographic Names Information System (GNIS) is the official vehicle Environmental Interest/Information System 110021891737 Registry ID: FINDS: 2618 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster V 0.496 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 121 ft. 1/4-1/2 GARDEN GROVE, CA 92840 SW 12272 WILKEN WAY N/A V143 FINDS PARKVIEW ELEMENTARY [PHONE REDACTED] Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Aquifer used for drinking water supply Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083000701T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 1999-10-18 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -117.906064 Longitude: 33.80286 Latitude: T0605900554 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 2650 ft. Site 9 of 13 in cluster U 0.502 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 141 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 ENE 100 E KATELLA AVE N/A U144 LUST MEDDOCK MOBIL S109284326 284514 Regulatory Measure Id: 8 Region: 8404 Agency Id: Active Facility Status: Not reported Npdes Number: NPDES: 2655 ft. Site 10 of 13 in cluster U 0.503 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 141 ft. 1/2-1 SWEEPS UST ANAHEIM, CA 92806 ENE CA FID UST 100 E KATELLA AVE N/A U145 NPDES MOBIL STATION S101588983 TC2760975.1s Page 152 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 44-034061 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 2400 Comp Number: A Status: 5 Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 8000 Capacity: 11-10-92 Actv Date: 30-011-002400-000001 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 11-10-92 Act Date: 11-10-92 Ref Date: 44-034061 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 2400 Comp Number: A Status: SWEEPS UST: Active Status: Not reported Comments: Not reported EPA ID: Not reported NPDES Number: Not reported DUNs Number: Not reported Contact Phone: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM 92806 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 1420 E KATELLA AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mail To: [PHONE REDACTED] Facility Phone: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported Cortese Code: Not reported Regulated ID: UTNKA Regulated By: 30000716 Facility ID: CA FID UST: 92821 Discharge Zip: CA Discharge State: Brea Discharge City: 145 S State College Blvd Ste 4 Discharge Address: Chevron USA Production Co Discharge Name: Not reported Termination Date Of Regulatory Measure: Not reported Expiration Date Of Regulatory Measure: 3/21/2005 Effective Date Of Regulatory Measure: Not reported Adoption Date Of Regulatory Measure: CONSTW Program Type: 8 30C333094 WDID: 622031 Place Id: Storm water construction Regulatory Measure Type: 99-08DWQ Order No: MOBIL STATION (Continued) S101588983 TC2760975.1s Page 153 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 30-011-002400-000009 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 11-10-92 Act Date: 11-10-92 Ref Date: 44-034061 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 2400 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: PRM UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 8000 Capacity: 11-10-92 Actv Date: 30-011-002400-000008 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 11-10-92 Act Date: 11-10-92 Ref Date: 44-034061 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 2400 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: WASTE OIL Content: W Stg: OIL Tank Use: 1000 Capacity: 11-10-92 Actv Date: 30-011-002400-000007 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 11-10-92 Act Date: 11-10-92 Ref Date: 44-034061 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 2400 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 5000 Capacity: 11-10-92 Actv Date: 30-011-002400-000006 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 11-10-92 Act Date: 11-10-92 Ref Date: MOBIL STATION (Continued) S101588983 TC2760975.1s Page 154 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 5000 Capacity: 11-10-92 Actv Date: MOBIL STATION (Continued) S101588983 -117.90645 Longitude: 33.80323 Latitude: 6707 Global ID: UST: 2655 ft. Site 11 of 13 in cluster U 0.503 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 141 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 ENE 100 E KATELLA AVE N/A U146 UST SATELLITE MOBIL U003804990 CHEVRON USA INC Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: 100 kg of that material at any time hazardous waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than from the cleanup of a spill, into or on any land or water, of acutely of any residue or contaminated soil, waste or other debris resulting kg of acutely hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less hazardous waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1 waste during any calendar month; or generates 1 kg or less of acutely cleanup of a spill, into or on any land or water, of acutely hazardous residue or contaminated soil, waste or other debris resulting from the during any calendar month; or generates more than 100 kg of any calendar month; or generates more than 1 kg of acutely hazardous waste Handler: generates 1,000 kg or more of hazardous waste during any Description: Large Quantity Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: [PHONE REDACTED] Contact telephone: US Contact country: SAN RAMON, CA 94583 P O BOX 6004 Contact address: KATHY L NORRIS Contact: SAN RAMON, CA 94583 P O BOX 6004 Mailing address: CAD981460470 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 AT HASTER 100 E KATELLA Facility address: CHEVRON 302222 Facility name: 10/13/2005 Date form received by agency: RCRA-LQG: 2655 ft. Site 12 of 13 in cluster U 0.503 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 141 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 ENE FINDS 100 E KATELLA CAD981460470 U147 RCRA-LQG CHEVRON 302222 [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 155 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource Environmental Interest/Information System 110002715287 Registry ID: FINDS: No violations found Violation Status: BENZENE Waste name: D018 Waste code: Hazardous Waste Summary: Not a generator, verified Classification: SHELL OIL CO Site name: CHEVRON 302222 Facility name: 10/12/2000 Date form received by agency: Historical Generators: Commercial status unknown Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: No Furnace exemption: No On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: No Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): No U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: 01/01/2005 Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: Not reported Owner/operator telephone: US Owner/operator country: Not reported Not reported Owner/operator address: CHEVRON USA INC Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: 01/01/2005 Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: Not reported Owner/operator telephone: US Owner/operator country: SAN RAMON, CA 94583 PO BOX 6004 Owner/operator address: CHEVRON 302222 (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 156 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, CHEVRON 302222 (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] 1/4 inches Tank Construction: REGULAR Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00005000 Tank Capacity: 1968 Year Installed: 4 Container Num: 004 Tank Num: Stock Inventor, 10 Leak Detection: 1/4 inches Tank Construction: REGULAR Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00005000 Tank Capacity: 1968 Year Installed: 3 Container Num: 003 Tank Num: Stock Inventor, 10 Leak Detection: 1/4 inches Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00008000 Tank Capacity: 1970 Year Installed: 2 Container Num: 002 Tank Num: Stock Inventor, 10 Leak Detection: 1/4 inches Tank Construction: PREMIUM Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00008000 Tank Capacity: 1968 Year Installed: 1 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: ANAHEIM, CA 92803 Owner City,St,Zip: P.O. BOX 4848 Owner Address: SHELL OIL COMPANY Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Not reported Contact Name: 0005 Total Tanks: Not reported Other Type: Gas Station Facility Type: 00000010647 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: 2655 ft. Site 13 of 13 in cluster U 0.503 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 141 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 ENE 100 E KATELLA AVE N/A U148 HIST UST CLARANCE & REHA MEDDLOCK U001578599 TC2760975.1s Page 157 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Stock Inventor Leak Detection: 12 gauge Tank Construction: WASTE OIL Type of Fuel: WASTE Tank Used for: 00000500 Tank Capacity: 1968 Year Installed: 5 Container Num: 005 Tank Num: Stock Inventor, 10 Leak Detection: CLARANCE & REHA MEDDLOCK (Continued) U001578599 Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083003130T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 1998-05-12 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8049876 Latitude: T0605902134 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 2846 ft. Site 1 of 5 in cluster W 0.539 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 142 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NE 1730 S ANAHEIM BLVD N/A W149 LUST RYDER TRUCK RENTAL-CAL TRANS S109284837 Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083002985T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 1997-12-10 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8049876 Latitude: T0605902044 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 2846 ft. Site 2 of 5 in cluster W 0.539 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 142 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NE 1730 S ANAHEIM BLVD N/A W150 LUST RYDER TRUCK RENTAL S109284698 TC2760975.1s Page 158 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Site History: Waste Oil / Motor / Hydraulic / Lubricating Potential Contaminants of Concern: RYDER TRUCK RENTAL (Continued) S109284698 Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00001000 Tank Capacity: 1976 Year Installed: 2 Container Num: 002 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Unkown inches Tank Construction: 5 Type of Fuel: WASTE Tank Used for: 00000280 Tank Capacity: 1976 Year Installed: 1 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 Owner City,St,Zip: 1755 SOUTH HASTER STREET Owner Address: STEINER CORPORATION Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: NORM LEFEBURE Contact Name: 0002 Total Tanks: AUTO REPAIR Other Type: Other Facility Type: 00000068652 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: 2963 ft. Site 3 of 5 in cluster W 0.561 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 143 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NE 1763 S HASTER ST N/A W151 HIST UST ADVANCED AUTOMOTIVE U001578591 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 1763 HASTER Contact address: ERNIE SHAFTER Contact: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 HASTER Mailing address: CAD983596891 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 1763 HASTER Facility address: COWBOY AUTO Facility name: 02/11/1993 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: 2963 ft. Site 4 of 5 in cluster W 0.561 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 143 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NE FINDS 1763 HASTER CAD983596891 W152 RCRA-SQG COWBOY AUTO [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 159 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Environmental Interest/Information System 110002854439 Registry ID: FINDS: No violations found Violation Status: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: No Furnace exemption: No On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): No U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (714) 533-3911 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 1763 HASTER Owner/operator address: COWBOY AUTO Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: (714) 533-3911 Contact telephone: US Contact country: COWBOY AUTO (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 160 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource COWBOY AUTO (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] -117.90661 Longitude: 33.80481 Latitude: 13885 Global ID: UST: 2963 ft. Site 5 of 5 in cluster W 0.561 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 143 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NE 1763 S HASTER ST N/A W153 UST ACCURATE AUTOMOTIVE U003784251 Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-001745-000001 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: Not reported Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 1745 Comp Number: Not reported Status: SWEEPS UST: Active Status: Not reported Comments: Not reported EPA ID: Not reported NPDES Number: Not reported DUNs Number: Not reported Contact Phone: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM 92802 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 200 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mail To: Not reported Facility Phone: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported Cortese Code: Not reported Regulated ID: UTNKA Regulated By: 30017714 Facility ID: CA FID UST: 3011 ft. 0.570 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 122 ft. 1/2-1 HAZNET ANAHEIM, CA 92802 West SWEEPS UST 2004 S WEST ST N/A 154 CA FID UST WATER PRODUCTION WELL NO. 41 S101589595 TC2760975.1s Page 161 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Facility County: 0.14 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: Not reported TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 Mailing City,St,Zip: 2004 S WEST ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: BOB AYALA Contact: CAC002557203 Gepaid: HAZNET: 1 Number Of Tanks: DIESEL Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 3000 Capacity: 08-06-92 Actv Date: 30-011-001745-000002 Tank Id: UNKNOWN Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 08-06-92 Created Date: 08-06-92 Act Date: 08-06-92 Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: 4 Number: 1745 Comp Number: A Status: 1 Number Of Tanks: Not reported Content: PRODUCT Stg: EMPTY Tank Use: 3000 Capacity: WATER PRODUCTION WELL NO. 41 (Continued) S101589595 083003182T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 1998-08-26 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8073756 Latitude: T0605902163 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 3058 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster X 0.579 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 141 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NNE 1680 S CLEMENTINE ST N/A X155 LUST ANAHEIM FIRE STATION FRMER S109284655 TC2760975.1s Page 162 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Site History: Diesel Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: ANAHEIM FIRE STATION FRMER (Continued) S109284655 004 Tank Num: Visual, Stock Inventor, None Leak Detection: 1/4 inches Tank Construction: REGULAR Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00009940 Tank Capacity: 1974 Year Installed: 1 Container Num: 003 Tank Num: Visual, Stock Inventor Leak Detection: 3/16 inches Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00001000 Tank Capacity: 1956 Year Installed: 2 Container Num: 002 Tank Num: Visual, Stock Inventor Leak Detection: 1/4 inches Tank Construction: DIESEL Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00009940 Tank Capacity: 1976 Year Installed: 3 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 Owner City,St,Zip: 1755 SO HASTER Owner Address: STEINER CORP Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Not reported Contact Name: 0004 Total Tanks: LINEN SERVICE Other Type: Other Facility Type: 00000008676 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: -117.90657 Longitude: 33.80506 Latitude: 10647 Global ID: UST: 3058 ft. Site 1 of 3 in cluster Y 0.579 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 144 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NE HIST UST 1755 S HASTER ST N/A Y156 UST STEINER CORP [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 163 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Visual, Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: DIESEL Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00003000 Tank Capacity: 1956 Year Installed: 4 Container Num: STEINER CORP (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] T0605900866 Global ID: Unknown Leak Source: Unknown Leak Cause: Close Tank How Stopped: Tank Closure How Discovered: Not reported Funding: Not reported Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: 0 Qty Leaked: Gasoline Substance: Soil only Case Type: 88UT181 Local Case Num: 083001096T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Local Agency File Location: 88UT181 LOC Case Number: 083001096T RB Case Number: ORANGE COUNTY LOP Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ORANGE COUNTY LOP Lead Agency: 1991-02-13 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8033995 Latitude: T0605900866 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 083001096T Reg Id: LINKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: CORTESE: 3058 ft. Site 2 of 3 in cluster Y 0.579 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 144 ft. 1/2-1 EMI ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NE LUST 1755 HASTER N/A Y157 HIST CORTESE STEINER CORPORATION S102438098 TC2760975.1s Page 164 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 2 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 0 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7211 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 6069 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1987 Year: EMI: Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: MUN Beneficial: Not reported Hydr Basin 30000L Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: WJ Staff Initials: PAH Staff: * MTBE Class: Site NOT Tested for MTBE.Includes Unknown and Not Analyzed. MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.803257 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: Not reported Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 2/13/1991 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 9/6/1988 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: Not reported Review Date: Not reported Enter Date: 9/9/9999 How Stopped Date: STEINER CORPORATION (Continued) S102438098 TC2760975.1s Page 165 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 1 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 1 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7213 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 6069 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1995 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 2 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 0 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7213 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 6069 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1990 Year: STEINER CORPORATION (Continued) S102438098 Not reported Leak Source: Not reported Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Not reported How Discovered: Not reported Funding: CLOS Enf Type: KATELLA Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Diesel Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083003182T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 3060 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster X 0.580 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 141 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NNE 1680 CLEMENTINE ST N/A X158 LUST ANAHEIM FIRE STATION FRMER S103943459 TC2760975.1s Page 166 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: UNK Staff Initials: NOM Staff: * MTBE Class: MTBE Detected. Site tested for MTBE & MTBE detected MTBE Tested: 0 MTBE Fuel: .4 Max MTBE Soil: 1 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.805895 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: = Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 6/29/1998 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 8/26/1998 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 3/20/1998 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: 3/20/1998 Review Date: 6/29/1998 Enter Date: Not reported How Stopped Date: T0605902163 Global ID: ANAHEIM FIRE STATION FRMER (Continued) S103943459 Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-000100-000001 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: Not reported Ref Date: 44-022519 Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 100 Comp Number: Not reported Status: SWEEPS UST: 3077 ft. 0.583 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 145 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ENE 330 E KATELLA WAY N/A 159 SWEEPS UST SOUTHWEST LEASING COMPANY S106932436 TC2760975.1s Page 167 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 1 Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: PRODUCT Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: SOUTHWEST LEASING COMPANY (Continued) S106932436 RCRA-SQG: Not reported Priority Level: 05/01/1985 Date Completed: Not reported Date Started: ARCHIVE SITE Action: NFRAP: No further Remedial Action planned Priority Level: 05/01/1985 Date Completed: 03/01/1985 Date Started: PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT Action: Not reported Priority Level: 07/01/1980 Date Completed: Not reported Date Started: DISCOVERY Action: CERCLIS-NFRAP Assessment History: (415) 972-3096 Contact Tel: Matt Mitguard Contact Name: Not reported Contact Title: (415) 972-3219 Contact Tel: Karen Jurist Contact Name: Not reported Contact Title: (415) 972-3095 Contact Tel: Jeff Inglis Contact Name: Not reported Contact Title: (415) 972-3162 Contact Tel: Brunilda Davila Contact Name: Not reported Contact Title: (415) 972-3814 Contact Tel: Carl Brickner Contact Name: Not reported Contact Title: CERCLIS-NFRAP Site Contact Name(s): NFRAP Non NPL Status: Not on the NPL NPL Status: Not a Federal Facility Federal Facility: 0901009 Site ID: CERC-NFRAP: 3176 ft. Site 3 of 3 in cluster Y 0.602 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 147 ft. 1/2-1 FINDS ANAHEIM, CA 92803 NE RCRA-SQG 1745 S HASTER ST CAD008266140 Y160 CERC-NFRAP CORCORAN MFG CO INC [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 168 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: Unknown Furnace exemption: Unknown On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): Unknown U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: CORCORAN, T.P. Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: Not reported Contact telephone: Not reported Contact country: Not reported Not reported Contact address: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM, CA 92803 PO BOX 4465 Mailing address: CAD008266140 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92803 1745 S HASTER ST Facility address: CORCORAN MFG CO INC Facility name: 09/01/1996 Date form received by agency: CORCORAN MFG CO INC (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 169 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource Environmental Interest/Information System 110002631331 Registry ID: FINDS: No violations found Violation Status: Large Quantity Generator Classification: CORCORAN MFG CO INC Facility name: 07/18/1980 Date form received by agency: Historical Generators: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: CORCORAN MFG CO INC (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: Not reported Contact telephone: Not reported Contact country: Not reported Not reported Contact address: Not reported Contact: LOS ANGLES, CA 90004 3711 BEVERLY BLVD Mailing address: CAD981431547 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 1813 S MANCHESTER BLVD Facility address: DEWEY PEST CONTROL Facility name: 09/01/1996 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: HAZNET 3177 ft. SWEEPS UST 0.602 mi. HIST UST Relative: Higher Actual: 141 ft. 1/2-1 CA FID UST ANAHEIM, CA 92802 ENE FINDS 1813 S MANCHESTER BLVD CAD981431547 161 RCRA-SQG DEWEY PEST CONTROL [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 170 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation CA FID UST: corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource Environmental Interest/Information System 110002703067 Registry ID: FINDS: No violations found Violation Status: Large Quantity Generator Classification: DEWEY PEST CONTROL Facility name: 07/30/1986 Date form received by agency: Historical Generators: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: Unknown Furnace exemption: Unknown On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): Unknown U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: DEWEY SERVICES INC Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: DEWEY PEST CONTROL (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 171 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 1 Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 7500 Capacity: 06-30-93 Actv Date: 30-011-004489-000001 Tank Id: STEEL Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 05-24-94 Act Date: 06-30-93 Ref Date: 44-011974 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 4489 Comp Number: A Status: SWEEPS UST: Visual Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00007500 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 1 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: LOS ANGELES, CA 90004 Owner City,St,Zip: 3711 BEVERLY BLVD. Owner Address: DEWEY PEST CONTROL-DEWEY SERVI Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: STEVEN EASTWOOD Contact Name: 0001 Total Tanks: PEST CONTROL Other Type: Other Facility Type: 00000027156 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: Active Status: Not reported Comments: Not reported EPA ID: Not reported NPDES Number: Not reported DUNs Number: Not reported Contact Phone: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM 92802 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 3711 BEVERLY BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mail To: [PHONE REDACTED] Facility Phone: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported Cortese Code: Not reported Regulated ID: UTNKA Regulated By: 30006267 Facility ID: DEWEY PEST CONTROL (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 172 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: 1.8348 Tons: Not reported Disposal Method: Not reported Waste Category: 99 TSD County: KSD981506025 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: LOS ANGLES, CA 900040000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 3711 BEVERLY BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Not reported Contact: CAD981431547 Gepaid: HAZNET: DEWEY PEST CONTROL (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] HOME DEPOT USA Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: 01/06/2000 Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: Not reported Owner/operator telephone: US Owner/operator country: ATLANTA, GA 30339 2455 PACES FERRY RD Owner/operator address: HOME DEPOT USA Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: [EMAIL REDACTED] Contact email: [PHONE REDACTED] Contact telephone: US Contact country: CARLSBAD, CA 92008 1905 ASTON AVE STE 100 Contact address: ROBERT PERKINS Contact: CARLSBAD, CA 92008 STE 100 1905 ASTON AVE Mailing address: CAR000065458 EPA ID: COSTA MESA, CA 92626 2300 S HARBOR BLVD Facility address: HOME DEPOT USA INC HD 6664 Facility name: 06/22/2005 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: 3330 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster Z 0.631 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 122 ft. 1/2-1 HAZNET COSTA MESA, CA 92627 South FINDS 2300 S HARBOR BLVD CAR000065458 Z162 RCRA-SQG HOME DEPOT USA INC HD 6664 [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 173 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation DISPOSED, THE WASTE WOULD BE A CORROSIVE HAZARDOUS WASTE. THESE CAUSTIC OR ACID SOLUTIONS BECOME CONTAMINATED AND MUST BE USED BY MANY INDUSTRIES TO CLEAN METAL PARTS PRIOR TO PAINTING. WHEN OR DEGREASE PARTS. HYDROCHLORIC ACID, A SOLUTION WITH A LOW PH, IS CAUSTIC SOLUTION WITH A HIGH PH, IS OFTEN USED BY INDUSTRIES TO CLEAN CONSIDERED TO BE A CORROSIVE HAZARDOUS WASTE. SODIUM HYDROXIDE, A A WASTE WHICH HAS A PH OF LESS THAN 2 OR GREATER THAN 12.5 IS Waste name: D002 Waste code: WHICH WOULD BE CONSIDERED AS IGNITABLE HAZARDOUS WASTE. MATERIAL. LACQUER THINNER IS AN EXAMPLE OF A COMMONLY USED SOLVENT WHICH CAN BE OBTAINED FROM THE MANUFACTURER OR DISTRIBUTOR OF THE FLASH POINT OF A WASTE IS TO REVIEW THE MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET, CLOSED CUP FLASH POINT TESTER. ANOTHER METHOD OF DETERMINING THE LESS THAN 140 DEGREES FAHRENHEIT AS DETERMINED BY A PENSKY-MARTENS IGNITABLE HAZARDOUS WASTES ARE THOSE WASTES WHICH HAVE A FLASHPOINT OF Waste name: D001 Waste code: Hazardous Waste Summary: Small Quantity Generator Classification: THE HOME DEPOT NO 6664 Site name: HOME DEPOT USA INC HD 6664 Facility name: 01/31/2000 Date form received by agency: Small Quantity Generator Classification: THE HOME DEPOT NO 6664 Site name: HOME DEPOT USA INC HD 6664 Facility name: 03/04/2004 Date form received by agency: Historical Generators: Commercial status unknown Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: No Furnace exemption: No On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: No Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): No U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: 01/06/2000 Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: Not reported Owner/operator telephone: US Owner/operator country: Not reported Not reported Owner/operator address: HOME DEPOT USA INC HD 6664 (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 174 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: MELANIE KOSKE/HRT SPECIALIST Contact: CAR000065458 Gepaid: HAZNET: corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource facilities. generators, transporters, and treatment, storage, and disposal provides California with information on hazardous waste shipments for California Hazardous Waste Tracking System - Datamart (HWTS-DATAMART) Environmental Interest/Information System 110009553982 Registry ID: FINDS: No violations found Violation Status: THESE SPENT SOLVENTS AND SPENT SOLVENT MIXTURES. LISTED IN F001, F002, OR F004; AND STILL BOTTOMS FROM THE RECOVERY OF ONE OR MORE OF THE ABOVE NON-HALOGENATED SOLVENTS OR THOSE SOLVENTS CONTAINING, BEFORE USE, A TOTAL OF TEN PERCENT OR MORE (BY VOLUME) OF 2-ETHOXYETHANOL, AND 2-NITROPROPANE; ALL SPENT SOLVENT MIXTURES/BLENDS KETONE, CARBON DISULFIDE, ISOBUTANOL, PYRIDINE, BENZENE, THE FOLLOWING SPENT NON-HALOGENATED SOLVENTS: TOLUENE, METHYL ETHYL Waste name: F005 Waste code: MIXTURES. BOTTOMS FROM THE RECOVERY OF THESE SPENT SOLVENTS AND SPENT SOLVENT MORE OF THOSE SOLVENTS LISTED IN F001, F002, F004, AND F005, AND STILL SOLVENTS, AND, A TOTAL OF TEN PERCENT OR MORE (BY VOLUME) OF ONE OR CONTAINING, BEFORE USE, ONE OR MORE OF THE ABOVE NON-HALOGENATED NON-HALOGENATED SOLVENTS; AND ALL SPENT SOLVENT MIXTURES/BLENDS MIXTURES/BLENDS CONTAINING, BEFORE USE, ONLY THE ABOVE SPENT ALCOHOL, CYCLOHEXANONE, AND METHANOL; ALL SPENT SOLVENT ACETATE, ETHYL BENZENE, ETHYL ETHER, METHYL ISOBUTYL KETONE, N-BUTYL THE FOLLOWING SPENT NON-HALOGENATED SOLVENTS: XYLENE, ACETONE, ETHYL Waste name: F003 Waste code: METHYL ETHYL KETONE Waste name: D035 Waste code: BENZENE Waste name: D018 Waste code: 2,4-D Waste name: D016 Waste code: MERCURY Waste name: D009 Waste code: HOME DEPOT USA INC HD 6664 (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 175 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: 1.7025 Tons: H061 Disposal Method: Off-specification, aged, or surplus organics Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD008364432 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: CARLSBAD, CA 920080000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1905 ASTON AVE STE 100 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: MELANIE KOSKE/HRT SPECIALIST Contact: CAR000065458 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.0835 Tons: H061 Disposal Method: Hydrocarbon solvents (benzene, hexane, Stoddard, etc.) Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD008364432 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: CARLSBAD, CA 920080000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1905 ASTON AVE STE 100 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: MELANIE KOSKE/HRT SPECIALIST Contact: CAR000065458 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.15 Tons: H141 Disposal Method: Waste oil and mixed oil Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD008364432 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: CARLSBAD, CA 920080000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1905 ASTON AVE STE 100 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: MELANIE KOSKE/HRT SPECIALIST Contact: CAR000065458 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.059 Tons: H141 Disposal Method: Off-specification, aged, or surplus inorganics Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD008364432 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: CARLSBAD, CA 920080000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1905 ASTON AVE STE 100 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: HOME DEPOT USA INC HD 6664 (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 176 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 31 additional CA_HAZNET: record(s) in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access Orange Facility County: 0.493 Tons: H141 Disposal Method: Off-specification, aged, or surplus organics Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD008364432 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: CARLSBAD, CA 920080000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1905 ASTON AVE STE 100 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: MELANIE KOSKE/HRT SPECIALIST Contact: CAR000065458 Gepaid: HOME DEPOT USA INC HD 6664 (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: STEVE MORRIS Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: Facility is not located on Indian land. Additional information is not known. Land type: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: Not reported Contact telephone: Not reported Contact country: Not reported Not reported Contact address: Not reported Contact: CAD981966799 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 1831 S MANCHESTER Facility address: SATELLITE CLEANERS Facility name: 09/01/1996 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: 3401 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster AA 0.644 mi. HAZNET Relative: Higher Actual: 142 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 ENE FINDS 1831 S MANCHESTER CAD981966799 AA163 RCRA-SQG SATELLITE CLEANERS [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 177 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation CAD981966799 EPA Id: corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource Environmental Interest/Information System 110002758481 Registry ID: FINDS: State Contractor/Grantee Evaluation lead agency: Not reported Date achieved compliance: Not reported Area of violation: COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Evaluation: 08/15/1994 Evaluation date: Evaluation Action Summary: No violations found Violation Status: Large Quantity Generator Classification: SATELLITE CLEANERS Facility name: 02/06/1987 Date form received by agency: Historical Generators: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: Unknown Furnace exemption: Unknown On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): Unknown U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: SATELLITE CLEANERS (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 178 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Contact: CAD981966799 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 1.9524 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: etc.) Halogenated solvents (chloroform, methyl chloride, perchloroethylene, Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD981397417 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1831 S MANCHESTER Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Not reported Contact: CAD981966799 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .0000 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Not reported Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD981397417 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1831 S MANCHESTER Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Not reported Contact: CAD981966799 Gepaid: HAZNET: Contact Telephone: Not reported Contact Address 2: Contact Address: INACTIVE PER ’96 VQ Contact Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Owner Telephone: Not reported Owner Address 2: Owner Address: Owner Name: 4 Region Code: 928020000 Mailing Zip: CA Mailing State: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 1831 S MANCHESTER Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: 6/30/1996 Inactive Date: No Facility Active: 7/3/1987 Create Date: Not reported SIC Description: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported NAICS Description: Not reported NAICS Code: SATELLITE CLEANERS (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 179 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: .5568 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: etc.) Halogenated solvents (chloroform, methyl chloride, perchloroethylene, Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD981397417 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1831 S MANCHESTER Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: SATELLITE CLEANERS (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] 1 Number Of Tanks: DIESEL Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 1000 Capacity: 07-17-92 Actv Date: 30-011-005823-000001 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 07-17-92 Act Date: 07-17-92 Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: 4 Number: 5823 Comp Number: A Status: SWEEPS UST: Active Status: Not reported Comments: Not reported EPA ID: Not reported NPDES Number: Not reported DUNs Number: Not reported Contact Phone: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM 92802 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 200 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mail To: [PHONE REDACTED] Facility Phone: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported Cortese Code: Not reported Regulated ID: UTNKA Regulated By: 30016257 Facility ID: CA FID UST: 3405 ft. 0.645 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 142 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NNE SWEEPS UST 1580 S CLEMENTINE N/A 164 CA FID UST ANAHEIM FIRE STATION #3 S101589502 TC2760975.1s Page 180 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation FINDS: No violations found Violation Status: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: No Furnace exemption: No On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): No U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (714) 750-1234 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: GARDEN GROVE, CA 92640 100 PLAZA ALICANTE Owner/operator address: HYATT REGENCY GATEWAY PROPERTY Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: (714) 750-1234 Contact telephone: US Contact country: GARDEN GROVE, CA 92640 100 PLAZA ALICANTE Contact address: DALE LANG Contact: CAD983663451 EPA ID: GARDEN GROVE, CA 92840 100 PLAZA ALICANTE Facility address: HYATT REGENCY Facility name: 03/30/1993 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: 3422 ft. 0.648 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 122 ft. 1/2-1 GARDEN GROVE, CA 92840 SSW FINDS 100 PLAZA ALICANTE CAD983663451 165 RCRA-SQG HYATT REGENCY [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 181 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource Environmental Interest/Information System 110006484606 Registry ID: HYATT REGENCY (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] Not reported Number Of Tanks: Not reported Content: Not reported Stg: Not reported Tank Use: Not reported Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: Not reported Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: 02-29-88 Created Date: 09-15-92 Act Date: 09-30-92 Ref Date: 44-016444 Board Of Equalization: 9 Number: 6226 Comp Number: A Status: SWEEPS UST: Active Status: Not reported Comments: Not reported EPA ID: Not reported NPDES Number: Not reported DUNs Number: Not reported Contact Phone: Not reported Contact: GARDEN GROVE 92640 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 300 PLAZA ALICANTE Mailing Address: Not reported Mail To: [PHONE REDACTED] Facility Phone: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported Cortese Code: Not reported Regulated ID: UTNKA Regulated By: 30017534 Facility ID: CA FID UST: 3452 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster Z 0.654 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 122 ft. 1/2-1 GARDEN GROVE, CA 92640 South SWEEPS UST 11891 HARBOR BLVD N/A Z166 CA FID UST HYATT PLAZA ALICANTE S101631339 TC2760975.1s Page 182 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: No Furnace exemption: No On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): No U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: JOHN ADAMS Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: Handler: Non-Generators do not presently generate hazardous waste Description: Non-Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: (714) 750-2111 Contact telephone: US Contact country: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 1859 S MANCHESTER AVE Contact address: ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGER Contact: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 S MANCHESTER AVE Mailing address: CAD048765937 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 1859 S MANCHESTER AVE Facility address: ODETICS INC Facility name: 08/18/1980 Date form received by agency: RCRA-NonGen: 3646 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster AA 0.691 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 143 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 ENE FINDS 1859 S MANCHESTER AVE CAD048765937 AA167 RCRA-NonGen ODETICS INC [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 183 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource Environmental Interest/Information System 110002647468 Registry ID: FINDS: No violations found Violation Status: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: ODETICS INC (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (714) 750-0121 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: GARDEN GROVE, CA 92641 300 PLAZA ALICANTE Owner/operator address: HOTOB OWNERS ASSOC Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: (714) 860-7777 Contact telephone: US Contact country: DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 1360 VALLEY VISTA DR Contact address: GHASSAN ANDRAOS Contact: CAD983648387 EPA ID: GARDEN GROVE, CA 92841 300 PLAZA ALICANTE Facility address: HOTOB OWNERS ASSOC Facility name: 09/17/1992 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: 3679 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster AB 0.697 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 121 ft. 1/2-1 GARDEN GROVE, CA 92841 South FINDS 300 PLAZA ALICANTE CAD983648387 AB168 RCRA-SQG HOTOB OWNERS ASSOCIATION [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 184 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource Environmental Interest/Information System 110006483778 Registry ID: FINDS: No violations found Violation Status: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: No Furnace exemption: No On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): No U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: HOTOB OWNERS ASSOCIATION (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: (714) 724-2518 Contact telephone: US Contact country: SANTA ANA, CA 92705 2501 PULLMAN ST BLDG NO C Contact address: SUSANNE DOMINGUEZ Contact: SANTA ANA, CA 92705 PULLMAN ST BLDG NO C Mailing address: CAR000019562 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 1628 S ANAHEIM BLVD Facility address: CAL DEPT OF TRANSPORTAION Facility name: 05/05/1997 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: 3708 ft. 0.702 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 162 ft. 1/2-1 HAZNET ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NE FINDS 1628 S ANAHEIM BLVD CAR000019562 169 RCRA-SQG CAL DEPT OF TRANSPORTAION [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 185 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Gen County: SANTA ANA, CA 927055511 Mailing City,St,Zip: 2501 PULLMAN ST BLDG NO Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: CAL DEPT OF TRANS Contact: CAR000019562 Gepaid: HAZNET: corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource Environmental Interest/Information System 110002917247 Registry ID: FINDS: No violations found Violation Status: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: No Furnace exemption: No On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): No U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: State Legal status: (714) 724-2518 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: SANTA ANA, CA 92705 2501 PULLMAN ST Owner/operator address: CAL DEPT OF TRANS Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of CAL DEPT OF TRANSPORTAION (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 186 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation -1 additional CA_HAZNET: record(s) in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access Orange Facility County: .0625 Tons: Not reported Disposal Method: Alkaline solution without metals (pH > 12.5) Waste Category: San Bernardino TSD County: CAT080022148 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SANTA ANA, CA 927055511 Mailing City,St,Zip: 2501 PULLMAN ST BLDG NO Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: CAL DEPT OF TRANS Contact: CAR000019562 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .0200 Tons: Not reported Disposal Method: Other empty containers 30 gallons or more Waste Category: San Bernardino TSD County: CAT080022148 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SANTA ANA, CA 927055511 Mailing City,St,Zip: 2501 PULLMAN ST BLDG NO Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: CAL DEPT OF TRANS Contact: CAR000019562 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .1251 Tons: Not reported Disposal Method: Liquids with pH 2 Waste Category: San Bernardino TSD County: CAT080022148 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SANTA ANA, CA 927055511 Mailing City,St,Zip: 2501 PULLMAN ST BLDG NO Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: CAL DEPT OF TRANS Contact: CAR000019562 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .2293 Tons: Not reported Disposal Method: Laboratory waste chemicals Waste Category: San Bernardino TSD County: CAT080022148 TSD EPA ID: CAL DEPT OF TRANSPORTAION (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 187 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: Unknown Furnace exemption: Unknown On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): Unknown U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: SHERWIN-WILLIAMS CO Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: Not reported Contact telephone: Not reported Contact country: Not reported Not reported Contact address: Not reported Contact: CAT000619031 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 1550 S ANAHEIM BLVD, SUITE A Facility address: SHERWIN-WILLIAMS CO Facility name: 09/01/1996 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: 3713 ft. 0.703 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 166 ft. 1/2-1 HAZNET ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NE FINDS 1550 S ANAHEIM BLVD, SUITE A CAT000619031 170 RCRA-SQG SHERWIN-WILLIAMS CO [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 188 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: .6463 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Unspecified solvent mixture Waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD008252405 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: CLEVELAND, OH 441150000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 101 PROSPECT AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: THE SHERWIN-WILLIAMS CO Contact: CAT000619031 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .4378 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Oxygenated solvents (acetone, butanol, ethyl acetate, etc.) Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD008302903 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: CLEVELAND, OH 441150000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 101 PROSPECT AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: THE SHERWIN-WILLIAMS CO Contact: CAT000619031 Gepaid: HAZNET: corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource Environmental Interest/Information System 110002944002 Registry ID: FINDS: No violations found Violation Status: Large Quantity Generator Classification: SHERWIN-WILLIAMS CO Facility name: 08/18/1980 Date form received by agency: Historical Generators: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: SHERWIN-WILLIAMS CO (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 189 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Remaining Capacity with Units: 0 Remaining Capacity: 0 Permitted Capacity with Units: Not reported Actual Throughput with Units: 0 Permitted Throughput with Units: Not reported Program Type: Orlando, FL 32801-1672 Issue & Observations: 30-AB-0356 Swisnumber: 0 Disposal Acreage: Estimated Closure Type: 12/31/1960 Closure Date: Not reported Accepted Waste: Quarterly Inspection Frequency: 01 Unit Number: Disposal Category: Map GIS Source: Residential,Industrial,Commercial Landuse Name: Pre-regulations Regulation Status: Solid Waste Disposal Site Activity: 0 Permitted Acreage: Not reported Permit Status: Not reported Permit Date: Closed Operator’s Status: Orlando, FL 32801-1672 Operator City,St,Zip: 200 South Orange Avenue Suite 1200 Operator Address2: Carol McKnight, Director Operator Address: [PHONE REDACTED] Operator Phone: Inland American Lodging Garden HarborLLC Operator: Garden Grove, CA 92843 Owner City,St,Zip: 13802 Newhope Street Owner Address2: A. J. Holmon - Public Works Department Owner Address: [PHONE REDACTED] Owner Telephone: City of Garden Grove Owner Name: 33.78333 / -117.93333 Lat/Long: 30-AB-0356 Facility ID: STATE Region: SWF/LF (SWIS): 3737 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster AB 0.708 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 121 ft. 1/2-1 GARDEN GROVE, CA South NW CORNER CHAPMAN AND HARBOR N/A AB171 SWF/LF LONGSDON PIT SOUTH/ALICANTE S102361452 NONE SPECIFIED Lead Agency: DTSC Cleanup Oversight Agencies: NO National Priorities List: 14.06 Acres: NONE SPECIFIED Site Mgmt. Req.: School Site Type Detail: School Investigation Site Type: 30880003 Facility ID: SCH: 3779 ft. 0.716 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 134 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ESE ENVIROSTOR MOUNTAIN VIEW AVENUE/WILKEN WAY N/A 172 SCH PONDEROSA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL S105628715 TC2760975.1s Page 190 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Environmental Oversight Agreement Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Not reported Comments: 2003-08-11 00:00:00 Completed Date: Cost Recovery Closeout Memo Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Not reported Comments: 2003-08-07 00:00:00 Completed Date: Preliminary Endangerment Assessment Report Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Not reported Comments: 2003-06-06 00:00:00 Completed Date: Preliminary Endangerment Assessment Report Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Not reported Comments: 2002-07-18 00:00:00 Completed Date: * Workplan Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Completed Info: Alternate Name Alias Type: PONDEROSA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (PROPOSED) Alias Name: Alternate Name Alias Type: ANAHEIM CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT Alias Name: Envirostor ID Number Alias Type: 30880003 Alias Name: Alternate Name Alias Type: ANAHEIM CITY SD-PROPOSED PONDEROSA ELEM Alias Name: Project Code (Site Code) Alias Type: 404300 Alias Name: SOIL Potential Description: NONE SPECIFIED Confirmed COC: , 30018 Potential COC: RESIDENTIAL AREA Past Use: NONE SPECIFIED APN: -117.90688928482 Longitude: 33.8130985274212 Latitude: School District Funding: NO Restricted Use: 2003-08-07 00:00:00 Status Date: No Further Action Status: Not reported Special Program Status: 34 Senate: 69 Assembly: 404300 Site Code: Cypress Division Branch: Shahir Haddad Supervisor: TAWFIQ DEEK Project Manager: Not reported Lead Agency Description: PONDEROSA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (Continued) S105628715 TC2760975.1s Page 191 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 30880003 Alias Name: Alternate Name Alias Type: ANAHEIM CITY SD-PROPOSED PONDEROSA ELEM Alias Name: Project Code (Site Code) Alias Type: 404300 Alias Name: SOIL Potential Description: NONE SPECIFIED Confirmed COC: , 30018 Potential COC: RESIDENTIAL AREA Past Use: NONE SPECIFIED APN: -117.90688928482 Longitude: 33.8130985274212 Latitude: School District Funding: NONE SPECIFIED Site Mgmt. Req.: NO Restricted Use: 2003-08-07 00:00:00 Status Date: No Further Action Status: Not reported Special Program: 34 Senate: 69 Assembly: 404300 Site Code: 30880003 Facility ID: Cypress Division Branch: Shahir Haddad Supervisor: TAWFIQ DEEK Program Manager: NONE SPECIFIED Lead Agency: DTSC Regulatory Agencies: NO NPL: 14.06 Acres: School Site Type Detailed: School Investigation Site Type: ENVIROSTOR: Not reported Schedule Revised Date: Not reported Schedule Due Date: Not reported Schedule Document Type: Not reported Schedule Sub Area Name: Not reported Schedule Area Name: Not reported Future Due Date: Not reported Future Document Type: Not reported Future Sub Area Name: Not reported Future Area Name: Not reported Comments: 2003-01-13 00:00:00 Completed Date: Site Inspections/Visit (Non LUR) Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Not reported Comments: 2002-01-29 00:00:00 Completed Date: Site Inspections/Visit (Non LUR) Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Not reported Comments: 2002-01-15 00:00:00 Completed Date: PONDEROSA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (Continued) S105628715 TC2760975.1s Page 192 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Schedule Revised Date: Not reported Schedule Due Date: Not reported Schedule Document Type: Not reported Schedule Sub Area Name: Not reported Schedule Area Name: Not reported Future Due Date: Not reported Future Document Type: Not reported Future Sub Area Name: Not reported Future Area Name: Not reported Comments: 2003-01-13 00:00:00 Completed Date: Site Inspections/Visit (Non LUR) Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Not reported Comments: 2002-01-29 00:00:00 Completed Date: Site Inspections/Visit (Non LUR) Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Not reported Comments: 2002-01-15 00:00:00 Completed Date: Environmental Oversight Agreement Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Not reported Comments: 2003-08-11 00:00:00 Completed Date: Cost Recovery Closeout Memo Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Not reported Comments: 2003-08-07 00:00:00 Completed Date: Preliminary Endangerment Assessment Report Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Not reported Comments: 2003-06-06 00:00:00 Completed Date: Preliminary Endangerment Assessment Report Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Not reported Comments: 2002-07-18 00:00:00 Completed Date: * Workplan Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Completed Info: Alternate Name Alias Type: PONDEROSA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (PROPOSED) Alias Name: Alternate Name Alias Type: ANAHEIM CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT Alias Name: Envirostor ID Number Alias Type: PONDEROSA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (Continued) S105628715 TC2760975.1s Page 193 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: DIESEL Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00000550 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 1 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 Owner City,St,Zip: 200 SOUTH ANAHEIM BOULEVARD, S Owner Address: CITY OF ANAHEIM-DEPARTMENT OF Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: BOB Contact Name: 0001 Total Tanks: FIRE STATION Other Type: Other Facility Type: 00000056384 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: 3804 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster AC 0.720 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 144 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NNE 1563 S MANCHESTER AVE N/A AC173 HIST UST FIRE STATION #3 U001578747 12/31/1970 Closure Date: Not reported Accepted Waste: Quarterly Inspection Frequency: 01 Unit Number: Disposal Category: Map GIS Source: Residential,Commercial Landuse Name: Pre-regulations Regulation Status: Solid Waste Disposal Site Activity: 0 Permitted Acreage: Not reported Permit Status: Not reported Permit Date: Closed Operator’s Status: Not reported Operator City,St,Zip: Not reported Operator Address2: Not reported Operator Address: Not reported Operator Phone: Not reported Operator: Garden Grove, CA 92843 Owner City,St,Zip: 13802 Newhope Street Owner Address2: A. J. Holmon - Public Works Department Owner Address: [PHONE REDACTED] Owner Telephone: City of Garden Grove Owner Name: 33.79193 / -117.91745 Lat/Long: 30-AB-0359 Facility ID: STATE Region: SWF/LF (SWIS): 3812 ft. Site 1 of 6 in cluster AD 0.722 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 121 ft. 1/2-1 GARDEN GROVE, CA 92642 South WMUDS/SWAT HARBOR / CHAPMAN N/A AD174 SWF/LF LONGSDON PIT/GARDEN GROVE SAN. S102361454 TC2760975.1s Page 194 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 1 Number of WMUDS at Facility: GSR Regional Board Project Officer: False Sub Chapter 15: Not reported Threat to Water Quality: ORANGE COUNTY Solid Waste Assessment Test Program: False Department of Defence: False Resource Conservation Recovery Act: False Toxic Pits Cleanup Act Program: True Solid Waste Assessment Test Program: False Waste Discharge System: Last Facility Editors: Not reported Comments: Not reported Secondary SIC: Not reported Primary SIC: LONGSDON PIT/GARDEN GROVE SAN. DIST. SWAT Facility Name: Not reported Facility Telephone: Not reported Facility Description: Not reported Facility Type: 8 Region: Not reported Land Owner Phone: Not reported Land Owner Contact: GARDEN GROVE, CA 92640 Land Owner City,St,Zip: 11391 ACACIA PARKWAY Land Owner Address: GARDEN GROVE SANITATION DISTRI Land Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Agency Telephone: SUZANNE MCCLANAHAN Agency Contact: SANTA ANA 92701 Agency City,St,Zip: 1200 N. MAIN, SUITE 206 Agency Address: WASTE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Agency Department: ORANGE COUNTY Agency Name: Not reported Agency Type: False Waste List: False Open To Public: False Superorder: False Municipal Solid Waste: Not reported Regional Board ID: 0 Tonnage: Not reported NPID: SB Base Meridian: Not reported Secondary Waste Type: Not reported Secondary Waste: Not reported Primary Waste Type: Not reported Primary Waste: Not reported Complexity: 19930429 Edit Date: WMUDS/SWAT: Not reported Remaining Capacity with Units: 0 Remaining Capacity: 0 Permitted Capacity with Units: Not reported Actual Throughput with Units: 0 Permitted Throughput with Units: Not reported Program Type: Not reported Issue & Observations: 30-AB-0359 Swisnumber: 0 Disposal Acreage: Estimated Closure Type: LONGSDON PIT/GARDEN GROVE SAN. (Continued) S102361454 TC2760975.1s Page 195 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 30-AB-0356 Solid Waste Information ID: 8 300006NUR Waste Discharge System ID: Not reported Self-Monitoring Rept. Frequency: Not reported Waste Discharge Requirements: Not reported RCRA Facility: 04S10W27 Section Range: LONGSDON PIT/GARDEN GROVE SAN. (Continued) S102361454 MA Regional Board Project Officer: False Sub Chapter 15: Not reported Threat to Water Quality: Not reported Solid Waste Assessment Test Program: False Department of Defence: False Resource Conservation Recovery Act: False Toxic Pits Cleanup Act Program: True Solid Waste Assessment Test Program: False Waste Discharge System: Not reported Last Facility Editors: Not reported Comments: Not reported Secondary SIC: Not reported Primary SIC: GARDEN GROVE-LONGSDON PIT D.S. (CLOSED SWAT Facility Name: Not reported Facility Telephone: Not reported Facility Description: Not reported Facility Type: 8 Region: [PHONE REDACTED] Land Owner Phone: Not reported Land Owner Contact: GARDEN GROVE, CA 92642 Land Owner City,St,Zip: PO BOX 1437 Land Owner Address: GARDEN GROVE SANITARY SERVICE Land Owner Name: Not reported Agency Telephone: Not reported Agency Contact: 0 Agency City,St,Zip: Not reported Agency Address: Not reported Agency Department: GARDEN GROVE SANITATION DIST. Agency Name: Not reported Agency Type: False Waste List: False Open To Public: False Superorder: False Municipal Solid Waste: Not reported Regional Board ID: 0 Tonnage: Not reported NPID: SB Base Meridian: Not reported Secondary Waste Type: Not reported Secondary Waste: Not reported Primary Waste Type: Not reported Primary Waste: Not reported Complexity: Not reported Edit Date: WMUDS/SWAT: 3821 ft. Site 2 of 6 in cluster AD 0.724 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 121 ft. 1/2-1 GARDEN GROVE, CA 92642 South HARBOR / CHAPMAN N/A AD175 WMUDS/SWAT GARDEN GROVE-LONGSDON PIT D.S. S103320693 TC2760975.1s Page 196 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 30-AB-0359 Solid Waste Information ID: 8 300058NUR Waste Discharge System ID: Not reported Self-Monitoring Rept. Frequency: Not reported Waste Discharge Requirements: Not reported RCRA Facility: 04S10W27 Section Range: 1 Number of WMUDS at Facility: GARDEN GROVE-LONGSDON PIT D.S. (Continued) S103320693 .026 Max MTBE Soil: 1 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8462591 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: = Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 6/10/1987 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 1/8/1999 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 10/6/1989 Discover Date: 12/4/1989 Prelim Assess: 11/8/1989 Review Date: 6/10/1987 Enter Date: Not reported How Stopped Date: T0605900209 Global ID: Not reported Leak Source: Not reported Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Not reported How Discovered: Not reported Funding: CLOS Enf Type: LA PALMA Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Gasoline Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083000269T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 3857 ft. Site 1 of 3 in cluster AE 0.731 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 160 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ENE 950 ANAHEIM BLVD N/A AE176 LUST CANO’S S101299241 TC2760975.1s Page 197 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: ROW Staff Initials: CAB Staff: * MTBE Class: MTBE Detected. Site tested for MTBE & MTBE detected MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: CANO’S (Continued) S101299241 Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (714) 750-5673 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 509 W CHAPMAN Owner/operator address: NANCY CHAU Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: (714) 750-5673 Contact telephone: US Contact country: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 509 W CHAPMAN Contact address: NANCY CHAU Contact: CAD981984404 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 509 W CHAPMAN Facility address: LORDS CLEANERS Facility name: 08/02/1995 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: 3857 ft. EMI Site 1 of 2 in cluster AF 0.731 mi. HAZNET Relative: Lower Actual: 122 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 South FINDS 509 W CHAPMAN CAD981984404 AF177 RCRA-SQG LORDS CLEANERS [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 198 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation [PHONE REDACTED] Owner Telephone: Not reported Owner Address 2: 509 W CHAPMAN AVE Owner Address: PETER TRAN Owner Name: 4 Region Code: 928020000 Mailing Zip: CA Mailing State: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 509 W CHAPMAN AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: 6/30/2008 Inactive Date: No Facility Active: 7/3/1987 Create Date: Garment Pressing, and Agents for Laundries and SIC Description: 7212 SIC Code: and Laundry Services (except Coin-Operated) NAICS Description: 81232 NAICS Code: CAD981984404 EPA Id: corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource Environmental Interest/Information System 110002764820 Registry ID: FINDS: No violations found Violation Status: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: No Furnace exemption: No On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): No U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: LORDS CLEANERS (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 199 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 7219 SIC Code: and Laundry Services (except Coin-Operated) NAICS Description: 81232 NAICS Code: CAD981984404 EPA Id: [PHONE REDACTED] Contact Telephone: Not reported Contact Address 2: 509 W CHAPMAN AVE Contact Address: PETER TRAN Contact Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Owner Telephone: Not reported Owner Address 2: 509 W CHAPMAN AVE Owner Address: PETER TRAN Owner Name: 4 Region Code: 928020000 Mailing Zip: CA Mailing State: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 509 W CHAPMAN AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: 6/30/2008 Inactive Date: No Facility Active: 7/3/1987 Create Date: Power Laundries, Family and Commercial SIC Description: 7211 SIC Code: and Laundry Services (except Coin-Operated) NAICS Description: 81232 NAICS Code: CAD981984404 EPA Id: [PHONE REDACTED] Contact Telephone: Not reported Contact Address 2: 509 W CHAPMAN AVE Contact Address: PETER TRAN Contact Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Owner Telephone: Not reported Owner Address 2: 509 W CHAPMAN AVE Owner Address: PETER TRAN Owner Name: 4 Region Code: 928020000 Mailing Zip: CA Mailing State: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 509 W CHAPMAN AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: 6/30/2008 Inactive Date: No Facility Active: 7/3/1987 Create Date: Business Services, NEC (apparel pressing service for the trade) SIC Description: 7389 SIC Code: and Laundry Services (except Coin-Operated) NAICS Description: 81232 NAICS Code: CAD981984404 EPA Id: [PHONE REDACTED] Contact Telephone: Not reported Contact Address 2: 509 W CHAPMAN AVE Contact Address: PETER TRAN Contact Name: LORDS CLEANERS (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 200 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation etc.) Halogenated solvents (chloroform, methyl chloride, perchloroethylene, Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD981397417 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 509 W CHAPMAN AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Not reported Contact: CAD981984404 Gepaid: HAZNET: [PHONE REDACTED] Contact Telephone: Not reported Contact Address 2: 509 W CHAPMAN AVE Contact Address: PETER TRAN Contact Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Owner Telephone: Not reported Owner Address 2: 509 W CHAPMAN AVE Owner Address: PETER TRAN Owner Name: 4 Region Code: 928020000 Mailing Zip: CA Mailing State: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 509 W CHAPMAN AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: 6/30/2008 Inactive Date: No Facility Active: 7/3/1987 Create Date: Plants, Except Rug Cleaning SIC Description: 7216 SIC Code: and Laundry Services (except Coin-Operated) NAICS Description: 81232 NAICS Code: CAD981984404 EPA Id: [PHONE REDACTED] Contact Telephone: Not reported Contact Address 2: 509 W CHAPMAN AVE Contact Address: PETER TRAN Contact Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Owner Telephone: Not reported Owner Address 2: 509 W CHAPMAN AVE Owner Address: PETER TRAN Owner Name: 4 Region Code: 928020000 Mailing Zip: CA Mailing State: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 509 W CHAPMAN AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: 6/30/2008 Inactive Date: No Facility Active: 7/3/1987 Create Date: Laundry and Garment Services, NEC (except diaper service and clothing alteration and repair) SIC Description: LORDS CLEANERS (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 201 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 509 W CHAPMAN AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Not reported Contact: CAD981984404 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .1167 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: etc.) Halogenated solvents (chloroform, methyl chloride, perchloroethylene, Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD981397417 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 509 W CHAPMAN AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Not reported Contact: CAD981984404 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .0000 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Not reported Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD981397417 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 509 W CHAPMAN AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Not reported Contact: CAD981984404 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .0542 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: etc.) Halogenated solvents (chloroform, methyl chloride, perchloroethylene, Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD981397417 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 509 W CHAPMAN AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Not reported Contact: CAD981984404 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .0500 Tons: Not reported Disposal Method: LORDS CLEANERS (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 202 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 1 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7216 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 57587 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1990 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 1 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 9999 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 57587 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1987 Year: EMI: 9 additional CA_HAZNET: record(s) in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access Orange Facility County: .0000 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Not reported Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD981397417 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: LORDS CLEANERS (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] -117.91254 Longitude: 33.78878 Latitude: 3915 Global ID: UST: 3887 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster AF 0.736 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 122 ft. 1/2-1 GARDEN GROVE, CA 92840 South 12592 CHAPMAN AVE N/A AF178 UST NUR-AY INC U003778914 TC2760975.1s Page 203 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Unknown On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): Unknown U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: RUSSELL T JACOBS PRES Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: Facility is not located on Indian land. Additional information is not known. Land type: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: Not reported Contact telephone: Not reported Contact country: Not reported Not reported Contact address: Not reported Contact: LOS ANGELES, CA 90040 4885 EAST FIFTY SECOND PLACE Mailing address: CAD981399157 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 1901 SOUTH MANCHESTER AVE Facility address: DUNN-EDWARDS CORPORATION Facility name: 09/01/1996 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: 3890 ft. Site 1 of 3 in cluster AG 0.737 mi. HAZNET Relative: Higher Actual: 142 ft. 1/2-1 HIST UST ANAHEIM, CA 92802 East FINDS 1901 SOUTH MANCHESTER AVE CAD981399157 AG179 RCRA-SQG DUNN-EDWARDS CORPORATION [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 204 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Tank Construction: Not reported Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00010000 Tank Capacity: 1962 Year Installed: 15-T-1 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: LOS ANGELES, CA 90040 Owner City,St,Zip: 4885 EAST 52ND PLACE Owner Address: DUNN-EDWARDS CORPORATION Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: LARRY BENSON Contact Name: 0001 Total Tanks: RETAILER Other Type: Other Facility Type: 00000000743 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource Environmental Interest/Information System 110002693817 Registry ID: FINDS: State Contractor/Grantee Evaluation lead agency: Not reported Date achieved compliance: Not reported Area of violation: COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Evaluation: 10/18/1994 Evaluation date: Evaluation Action Summary: No violations found Violation Status: Large Quantity Generator Classification: DUNN-EDWARDS CORPORATION Facility name: 04/25/1986 Date form received by agency: Historical Generators: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: Unknown Furnace exemption: DUNN-EDWARDS CORPORATION (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 205 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation OKD089761290 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: LOS ANGELES, CA 900402828 Mailing City,St,Zip: 4885 E 52ND PL Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: DUNN-EDWARDS ORP Contact: CAD981399157 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .4587 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Unspecified aqueous solution Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD089446710 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: LOS ANGELES, CA 900402828 Mailing City,St,Zip: 4885 E 52ND PL Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: DUNN-EDWARDS ORP Contact: CAD981399157 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .4587 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Off-specification, aged, or surplus organics Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD089446710 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: LOS ANGELES, CA 900402828 Mailing City,St,Zip: 4885 E 52ND PL Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: DUNN-EDWARDS ORP Contact: CAD981399157 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .2293 Tons: Not reported Disposal Method: Oxygenated solvents (acetone, butanol, ethyl acetate, etc.) Waste Category: 0 TSD County: OHD000816620 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: LOS ANGELES, CA 900402828 Mailing City,St,Zip: 4885 E 52ND PL Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: DUNN-EDWARDS ORP Contact: CAD981399157 Gepaid: HAZNET: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: DUNN-EDWARDS CORPORATION (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 206 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 2 additional CA_HAZNET: record(s) in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access Orange Facility County: .0135 Tons: Not reported Disposal Method: Oxygenated solvents (acetone, butanol, ethyl acetate, etc.) Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT000613893 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: LOS ANGELES, CA 900402828 Mailing City,St,Zip: 4885 E 52ND PL Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: DUNN-EDWARDS ORP Contact: CAD981399157 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .4586 Tons: Not reported Disposal Method: Latex waste Waste Category: 99 TSD County: DUNN-EDWARDS CORPORATION (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: Not reported Site History: Stoddard solvent / Mineral Spriits / Distillates Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Local Agency File Location: 86UT077 LOC Case Number: 083000936T RB Case Number: ORANGE COUNTY LOP Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ORANGE COUNTY LOP Lead Agency: 1986-07-11 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8005611 Latitude: T0605900745 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 083000936T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: CORTESE: 3890 ft. Site 2 of 3 in cluster AG 0.737 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 142 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 East LUST 1901 MANCHESTER N/A AG180 HIST CORTESE DANA EDWARDS S102428993 TC2760975.1s Page 207 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: MUN Beneficial: Not reported Hydr Basin 30000L Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: WJ Staff Initials: PAH Staff: * MTBE Class: Not Required to be Tested. MTBE Tested: 0 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8005611 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: Not reported Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 7/11/1986 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 1/1/1965 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: Not reported Review Date: Not reported Enter Date: 9/9/9999 How Stopped Date: T0605900745 Global ID: Unknown Leak Source: Unknown Leak Cause: Close Tank How Stopped: Tank Closure How Discovered: Not reported Funding: Not reported Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: 0 Qty Leaked: Paint Thinner Substance: Soil only Case Type: 86UT077 Local Case Num: 083000936T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: DANA EDWARDS (Continued) S102428993 TC2760975.1s Page 208 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 6/19/1997 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: 5/12/1997 Workplan: 12/10/1997 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 4/21/1997 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: 5/14/1997 Review Date: 6/19/1997 Enter Date: 4/21/1997 How Stopped Date: T0605902044 Global ID: UNK Leak Source: Not reported Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Tank Closure How Discovered: Not reported Funding: Not reported Enf Type: I-5 Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Waste Oil Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083002985T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 083002985T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: 083003088T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: 083003130T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: 083001442T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: CORTESE: 3912 ft. Site 2 of 3 in cluster AE 0.741 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 161 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ENE LUST 1730 ANAHEIM BLVD N/A AE181 HIST CORTESE RYDER TRUCK RENTAL S104756863 TC2760975.1s Page 209 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: ROW Staff Initials: CAB Staff: * MTBE Class: Not Required to be Tested. MTBE Tested: 0 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.806167 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: RYDER TRUCK RENTAL (Continued) S104756863 Visual Leak Detection: 6 inches Tank Construction: Not reported Type of Fuel: WASTE Tank Used for: 00000000 Tank Capacity: 1954 Year Installed: 3746-00 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: SAN DIEGO, CA 92108 Owner City,St,Zip: 1450 FRAZEE ROAD Owner Address: UNION OIL COMPANY OF CALIFORNI Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: HARDING SCHAD Contact Name: 0001 Total Tanks: Not reported Other Type: Gas Station Facility Type: 00000043808 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: 3916 ft. Site 3 of 6 in cluster AD 0.742 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 121 ft. 1/2-1 GARDEN GROVE, CA 92640 South 12002 HARBOR BLVD N/A AD182 HIST UST STATION #3746 U001577118 TC2760975.1s Page 210 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation None Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: WASTE OIL Type of Fuel: Not reported Tank Used for: 00000280 Tank Capacity: 1954 Year Installed: 3746-34 Container Num: 003 Tank Num: Stock Inventor, 10 Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: PREMIUM Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00010000 Tank Capacity: 1982 Year Installed: 3746-22 Container Num: 002 Tank Num: Stock Inventor, 10 Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00010000 Tank Capacity: 1982 Year Installed: 3746-11 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: SAN DIEGO, CA 92108 Owner City,St,Zip: 123 CAMINO DELA REINA Owner Address: UNION OIL COMPANY OF CALIF. Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: HARDING SCHAD Contact Name: 0003 Total Tanks: Not reported Other Type: Gas Station Facility Type: 00000017886 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: 3916 ft. Site 4 of 6 in cluster AD 0.742 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 121 ft. 1/2-1 GARDEN GROVE, CA 92640 South 12002 HARBOR BLVD N/A AD183 HIST UST UNION OIL SERVICE STATION U001577121 LUST: 083002246T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: CORTESE: HAZNET 3916 ft. Orange Co. Industrial Site Site 5 of 6 in cluster AD 0.742 mi. SWEEPS UST Relative: Lower Actual: 121 ft. 1/2-1 CA FID UST GARDEN GROVE, CA 92640 South LUST 12002 HARBOR N/A AD184 HIST CORTESE UNOCAL #3746 S101589445 TC2760975.1s Page 211 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 6/11/1997 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 6/22/1993 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: Not reported Review Date: Not reported Enter Date: 9/9/9999 How Stopped Date: T0605901645 Global ID: Unknown Leak Source: Unknown Leak Cause: Close Tank How Stopped: Tank Closure How Discovered: Not reported Funding: Not reported Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: 0 Qty Leaked: Gasoline Substance: Soil only Case Type: 93UT075 Local Case Num: 083002246T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: RO0002771 Record ID: Soil Only Case Type: 06/11/1997 Date Closed: Gasoline-Automotive (motor gasoline and additives), leaded & unleaded Released Substance: Certification (Case Closed) Current Status: 93UT075 Facility Id: ORANGE Region: ORANGE CO. LUST: Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Local Agency File Location: 93UT075 LOC Case Number: 083002246T RB Case Number: ORANGE COUNTY LOP Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ORANGE COUNTY LOP Lead Agency: 1997-06-11 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -117.914503 Longitude: 33.788516 Latitude: T0605901645 Global Id: STATE Region: UNOCAL #3746 (Continued) S101589445 TC2760975.1s Page 212 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation A Tank Status: 02-29-88 Created Date: 09-15-92 Act Date: 09-30-92 Ref Date: 44-001057 Board Of Equalization: 9 Number: 2121 Comp Number: A Status: SWEEPS UST: Active Status: Not reported Comments: Not reported EPA ID: Not reported NPDES Number: Not reported DUNs Number: Not reported Contact Phone: Not reported Contact: GARDEN GROVE 92640 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 911 WILSHIRE BLVD STE 10 Mailing Address: Not reported Mail To: [PHONE REDACTED] Facility Phone: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported Cortese Code: Not reported Regulated ID: UTNKA Regulated By: 30012980 Facility ID: CA FID UST: Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: MUN Beneficial: Not reported Hydr Basin 30000L Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: SS Staff Initials: NOM Staff: * MTBE Class: Site NOT Tested for MTBE.Includes Unknown and Not Analyzed. MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.7887493 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: Not reported Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: UNOCAL #3746 (Continued) S101589445 TC2760975.1s Page 213 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: MARJI NELSON Contact: CAL000323213 Gepaid: HAZNET: GASOLINE Released Chemical: Closure certification issued Closure Type: CLOSED 9/29/1994 Current Status: RO0000449 Record ID: ORANGE Region: 93IC007 Case ID: Orange Co. Industrial Site: Not reported Number Of Tanks: DIESEL Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-000-002121-000003 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 02-29-88 Created Date: 09-15-92 Act Date: 09-30-92 Ref Date: 44-001057 Board Of Equalization: 9 Number: 2121 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-000-002121-000002 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 02-29-88 Created Date: 09-15-92 Act Date: 09-30-92 Ref Date: 44-001057 Board Of Equalization: 9 Number: 2121 Comp Number: A Status: 3 Number Of Tanks: Not reported Content: P Stg: PETROLEUM Tank Use: 500 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-000-002121-000001 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: UNOCAL #3746 (Continued) S101589445 TC2760975.1s Page 214 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: 0.0155 Tons: Not reported Disposal Method: Unspecified aqueous solution Waste Category: Not reported TSD County: OHD083377010 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: DEERFIELD, IL 600150000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 200 WILMOT RD Mailing Address: PROCUREMENT Mailing Name: UNOCAL #3746 (Continued) S101589445 None Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: WASTE OIL Type of Fuel: WASTE Tank Used for: 00000200 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: #3 Container Num: 003 Tank Num: None Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00010000 Tank Capacity: 1981 Year Installed: #2 Container Num: 002 Tank Num: None Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: PREMIUM Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00010000 Tank Capacity: 1981 Year Installed: #1 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: GARDEN GROVE, CA 92640 Owner City,St,Zip: 12002 HARBOR Owner Address: HARDING SCHAD Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: HARDING SCHAD Contact Name: 0003 Total Tanks: Not reported Other Type: Gas Station Facility Type: 00000052324 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: 3916 ft. Site 6 of 6 in cluster AD 0.742 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 121 ft. 1/2-1 GARDEN GROVE, CA 92640 South 12002 HARBOR BLVD N/A AD185 HIST UST HARDING SCHAD UNION 76 U001577101 TC2760975.1s Page 215 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Abate Method: 0 Qty Leaked: 12034,800661 Substance: Soil only Case Type: 91UT015 Local Case Num: 083001746T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: RO0001177 Record ID: Soil Only Case Type: 03/18/1998 Date Closed: Gasoline-Automotive (motor gasoline and additives), leaded & unleaded Released Substance: Certification (Case Closed) Current Status: 91UT015 Facility Id: ORANGE Region: RO0001177 Record ID: Soil Only Case Type: 03/18/1998 Date Closed: Diesel fuel oil and additives, Nos.1-D, 2-D, 2-4 Released Substance: Certification (Case Closed) Current Status: 91UT015 Facility Id: ORANGE Region: ORANGE CO. LUST: Not reported Site History: Diesel, Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Local Agency File Location: 91UT015 LOC Case Number: 083001746T RB Case Number: ORANGE COUNTY LOP Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ORANGE COUNTY LOP Lead Agency: 1998-03-18 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.7887753 Latitude: T0605901313 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 083001746T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: CORTESE: 3916 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster AH 0.742 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 124 ft. 1/2-1 GARDEN GROVE, CA 92640 South LUST 12602 CHAPMAN N/A AH186 HIST CORTESE 4-DAY TIRE STORE S101299613 TC2760975.1s Page 216 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: MUN Beneficial: Not reported Hydr Basin 30000L Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: SS Staff Initials: VJJ Staff: * MTBE Class: Not Required to be Tested. MTBE Tested: 0 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.7887753 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: Not reported Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 3/18/1998 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 1/9/1991 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: Not reported Review Date: Not reported Enter Date: 9/9/9999 How Stopped Date: T0605901313 Global ID: Unknown Leak Source: Unknown Leak Cause: Close Tank How Stopped: Tank Closure How Discovered: Not reported Funding: Not reported Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: 4-DAY TIRE STORE (Continued) S101299613 GARDEN GROVE, CA 92840 12602 CHAPMAN AVE Facility address: ENECOTECH SOUTHWEST INC HARBOR Facility name: 08/10/1994 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: 3916 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster AH 0.742 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 124 ft. 1/2-1 HAZNET GARDEN GROVE, CA 92840 South FINDS 12602 CHAPMAN AVENUE CA0000565796 AH187 RCRA-SQG ENECOTECH SOUTHWEST INCORPORATED HARBOR [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 217 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource Environmental Interest/Information System 110006466083 Registry ID: FINDS: No violations found Violation Status: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: No Furnace exemption: No On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): No U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (407) 265-1300 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: DELRAY BEACH, FL 33445 220 CONGRESS PARK DR Owner/operator address: NEVADA INVESTMENT HOLDING INC Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: (310) 618-9790 Contact telephone: US Contact country: TORRANCE, CA 90501 373 VAN NESS AVE STE 110 Contact address: JEFFREY KIDD Contact: CA0000565796 EPA ID: ENECOTECH SOUTHWEST INCORPORATED HARBOR (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 218 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: .0000 Tons: Not reported Disposal Method: Other organic solids Waste Category: 0 TSD County: WAD009477275 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: TORRANCE, CA 905010000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 373 VAN NESS AVE STE 110 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: NEVADA INVESTMENT HOLDING INC Contact: CA0000565796 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 2.0000 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Other organic solids Waste Category: 99 TSD County: WAD009477175 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: TORRANCE, CA 905010000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 373 VAN NESS AVE STE 110 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: NEVADA INVESTMENT HOLDING INC Contact: CA0000565796 Gepaid: HAZNET: ENECOTECH SOUTHWEST INCORPORATED HARBOR (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] -117.90113 Longitude: 33.80122 Latitude: 12332 Global ID: UST: 3931 ft. Site 3 of 3 in cluster AG 0.744 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 142 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 East 1911 S MANCHESTER AVE N/A AG188 UST CULLIGAN WATER U003879450 CAD980893390 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 1515 MANCHESTER AVE Facility address: ODETICS INC Facility name: 09/01/1996 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: EMI HAZNET 3955 ft. SWEEPS UST Site 2 of 2 in cluster AC 0.749 mi. HIST UST Relative: Higher Actual: 144 ft. 1/2-1 CA FID UST ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NNE FINDS 1515 MANCHESTER AVE CAD980893390 AC189 RCRA-SQG ODETICS INC [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 219 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 04/15/1985 Date form received by agency: Historical Generators: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: Unknown Furnace exemption: Unknown On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): Unknown U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: Facility is not located on Indian land. Additional information is not known. Land type: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: Not reported Contact telephone: Not reported Contact country: Not reported Not reported Contact address: Not reported Contact: ODETICS INC (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 220 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: JOHN CRESSE Contact Name: 0003 Total Tanks: MANUFACTURING Other Type: Other Facility Type: 00000008656 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: Active Status: Not reported Comments: Not reported EPA ID: Not reported NPDES Number: Not reported DUNs Number: Not reported Contact Phone: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM 92802 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 1515 S MANCHESTER Mailing Address: Not reported Mail To: [PHONE REDACTED] Facility Phone: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported Cortese Code: Not reported Regulated ID: UTNKA Regulated By: 30003463 Facility ID: CA FID UST: corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource their precursors, as well as hazardous air pollutants (HAPs). on stationary and mobile sources that emit criteria air pollutants and The NEI (National Emissions Inventory) database contains information Environmental Interest/Information System 110002676480 Registry ID: FINDS: State Contractor/Grantee Evaluation lead agency: Not reported Date achieved compliance: Not reported Area of violation: COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Evaluation: 09/19/1994 Evaluation date: Evaluation Action Summary: No violations found Violation Status: Large Quantity Generator Classification: ODETICS INC Facility name: ODETICS INC (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 221 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 02-11-92 Act Date: 02-11-92 Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: 9 Number: 968 Comp Number: A Status: 1 Number Of Tanks: JET FUEL Content: PRODUCT Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 500 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-000968-000002 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: Not reported Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 968 Comp Number: Not reported Status: SWEEPS UST: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: .27 inches Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00010000 Tank Capacity: 1983 Year Installed: 002 Container Num: 003 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: 12 gauge Tank Construction: WASTE OIL Type of Fuel: WASTE Tank Used for: 00000550 Tank Capacity: 1983 Year Installed: 003 Container Num: 002 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: .27 inches Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00010000 Tank Capacity: 1983 Year Installed: 001 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 Owner City,St,Zip: 1515 S. MANCHESTER Owner Address: ODETICS, INC. Owner Name: ODETICS INC (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 222 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: .1668 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Unspecified solvent mixture Waste Waste Category: 99 TSD County: AZD049318009 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928022907 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1515 S MANCHESTER AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: ODETICS INC Contact: CAD980893390 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 1.2510 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Unspecified organic liquid mixture Waste Category: 99 TSD County: AZD049318009 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928022907 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1515 S MANCHESTER AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: ODETICS INC Contact: CAD980893390 Gepaid: HAZNET: Not reported Number Of Tanks: LEADED Content: W Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-000968-000005 Tank Id: 77 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 02-11-92 Act Date: 02-11-92 Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: 9 Number: 968 Comp Number: A Status: 2 Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: W Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-000968-000004 Tank Id: 77 Owner Tank Id: ODETICS INC (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 223 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 3679 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 42616 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1987 Year: EMI: 55 additional CA_HAZNET: record(s) in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access Orange Facility County: 0.03 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Liquids with pH 2 Waste Category: Orange TSD County: CAD008302903 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928022907 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1515 S MANCHESTER AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: TIMOTHY OLCOTT SAFETY MGR Contact: CAD980893390 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Off-specification, aged, or surplus organics Waste Category: Orange TSD County: CAD008302903 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928022907 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1515 S MANCHESTER AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: TIMOTHY OLCOTT SAFETY MGR Contact: CAD980893390 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.2 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Unspecified organic liquid mixture Waste Category: Orange TSD County: CAD008302903 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928022907 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1515 S MANCHESTER AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: TIMOTHY OLCOTT SAFETY MGR Contact: CAD980893390 Gepaid: ODETICS INC (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 224 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 4 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: ODETICS INC (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] 1 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.806167 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: = Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 3/31/1998 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 5/12/1998 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 8/27/1998 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: 8/27/1998 Review Date: 3/31/1998 Enter Date: Not reported How Stopped Date: T0605902134 Global ID: Not reported Leak Source: Not reported Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Not reported How Discovered: Not reported Funding: Not reported Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Gasoline Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083003130T Case Number: Leak being confirmed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 4072 ft. Site 3 of 3 in cluster AE 0.771 mi. Orange Co. Industrial Site Relative: Higher Actual: 155 ft. 1/2-1 SWEEPS UST ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ENE CA FID UST 1730 ANAHEIM BLVD N/A AE190 LUST RYDER TRUCK RENTAL-CAL TRANS S101589159 TC2760975.1s Page 225 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 1 Number: 4864 Comp Number: A Status: 5 Number Of Tanks: DIESEL Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 12000 Capacity: 11-08-93 Actv Date: 30-011-004864-000001 Tank Id: 4864-001 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 06-30-89 Created Date: 05-24-94 Act Date: 11-08-93 Ref Date: 44-000631 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 4864 Comp Number: A Status: SWEEPS UST: Active Status: Not reported Comments: Not reported EPA ID: Not reported NPDES Number: Not reported DUNs Number: Not reported Contact Phone: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM 92805 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 1730 S ANAHEIM Mailing Address: Not reported Mail To: [PHONE REDACTED] Facility Phone: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported Cortese Code: Not reported Regulated ID: UTNKA Regulated By: 30001932 Facility ID: CA FID UST: UNTIL 2/23/98. CALTRANS/OTCA DID NOT NOTIFY THE CITY OF ANAHEIM OF THE DISCOVERY OF A RELEASE Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: ROW Staff Initials: CAB Staff: * MTBE Class: MTBE Detected. Site tested for MTBE & MTBE detected MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: .46 Max MTBE Soil: RYDER TRUCK RENTAL-CAL TRANS (Continued) S101589159 TC2760975.1s Page 226 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 4864-005 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 06-30-89 Created Date: 05-24-94 Act Date: 11-08-93 Ref Date: 44-000631 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 4864 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: WASTE OIL Content: W Stg: OIL Tank Use: 2000 Capacity: 11-08-93 Actv Date: 30-011-004864-000004 Tank Id: 4864-004 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 06-30-89 Created Date: 05-24-94 Act Date: 11-08-93 Ref Date: 44-000631 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 4864 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 12000 Capacity: 11-08-93 Actv Date: 30-011-004864-000003 Tank Id: 4864-003 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 06-30-89 Created Date: 05-24-94 Act Date: 11-08-93 Ref Date: 44-000631 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 4864 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: DIESEL Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 12000 Capacity: 11-08-93 Actv Date: 30-011-004864-000002 Tank Id: 4864-002 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 06-30-89 Created Date: 05-24-94 Act Date: 11-08-93 Ref Date: 44-000631 Board Of Equalization: RYDER TRUCK RENTAL-CAL TRANS (Continued) S101589159 TC2760975.1s Page 227 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation LEAD COMPOUNDS Released Chemical: Closure certification issued Closure Type: CLOSED 3/22/1995 Current Status: RO0000456 Record ID: ORANGE Region: 94IC010 Case ID: Orange Co. Industrial Site: Not reported Number Of Tanks: BULK OIL (30 Content: P Stg: OIL Tank Use: 6000 Capacity: 11-08-93 Actv Date: 30-011-004864-000005 Tank Id: RYDER TRUCK RENTAL-CAL TRANS (Continued) S101589159 Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083002951T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 1997-08-01 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8033737 Latitude: T0605902021 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 4229 ft. Site 1 of 3 in cluster AI 0.801 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 126 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 WNW 1101 W KATELLA AVE N/A AI191 LUST SHELL #1101 S109284608 777 WALKER ST Contact address: SONDRA BIENVENU Contact: HOUSTON, TX 772104453 PO BOX 4453 Mailing address: CAD981447808 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 1101 W KATELLA Facility address: SHELL OIL CO Facility name: 10/12/2000 Date form received by agency: RCRA-NonGen: 4234 ft. HAZNET Site 2 of 3 in cluster AI 0.802 mi. LUST Relative: Lower Actual: 126 ft. 1/2-1 HIST CORTESE ANAHEIM, CA 92802 WNW FINDS 1101 W KATELLA CAD981447808 AI192 RCRA-NonGen SHELL OIL CO [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 228 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation IGNITABLE HAZARDOUS WASTES ARE THOSE WASTES WHICH HAVE A FLASHPOINT OF Waste name: D001 Waste code: Hazardous Waste Summary: Small Quantity Generator Classification: SHELL OIL CO Facility name: 09/01/1996 Date form received by agency: Historical Generators: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: No Furnace exemption: No On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): No U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (713) 241-2258 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: HOUSTON, TX 77210 PO BOX 4453 Owner/operator address: EQUILON ENTERPRISES L L C Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: Handler: Non-Generators do not presently generate hazardous waste Description: Non-Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: (713) 241-5036 Contact telephone: US Contact country: HOUSTON, TX 77002 SHELL OIL CO (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 229 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 86UT165 Local Case Num: 083000353T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Under Investigation Potential Media Affect: Local Agency File Location: 86UT165 LOC Case Number: 083000353T RB Case Number: ORANGE COUNTY LOP Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ORANGE COUNTY LOP Lead Agency: 1987-03-06 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8034286 Latitude: T0605900279 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 083000353T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: CORTESE: corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource Environmental Interest/Information System 110002710399 Registry ID: FINDS: No violations found Violation Status: BENZENE Waste name: D018 Waste code: WHICH WOULD BE CONSIDERED AS IGNITABLE HAZARDOUS WASTE. MATERIAL. LACQUER THINNER IS AN EXAMPLE OF A COMMONLY USED SOLVENT WHICH CAN BE OBTAINED FROM THE MANUFACTURER OR DISTRIBUTOR OF THE FLASH POINT OF A WASTE IS TO REVIEW THE MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET, CLOSED CUP FLASH POINT TESTER. ANOTHER METHOD OF DETERMINING THE LESS THAN 140 DEGREES FAHRENHEIT AS DETERMINED BY A PENSKY-MARTENS SHELL OIL CO (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 230 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: CONVENTION SHELL SERVICE Contact: CAL922594862 Gepaid: HAZNET: Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: MUN Beneficial: Not reported Hydr Basin 30000L Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: WJ Staff Initials: CAB Staff: * MTBE Class: Site NOT Tested for MTBE.Includes Unknown and Not Analyzed. MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8034659 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: Not reported Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 3/6/1987 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 1/1/1965 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: Not reported Review Date: Not reported Enter Date: 9/9/9999 How Stopped Date: T0605900279 Global ID: Unknown Leak Source: Unknown Leak Cause: Close Tank How Stopped: Tank Closure How Discovered: Not reported Funding: Not reported Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: 0 Qty Leaked: Gasoline Substance: Undefined Case Type: SHELL OIL CO (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 231 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: .2085 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Unspecified oil-containing waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD099452708 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928022804 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1101 W KATELLA AVE Mailing Address: SHELL OIL CO (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -117.924264 Longitude: 33.803263 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: = Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 3/13/1997 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 8/1/1997 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 12/18/1996 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: 12/23/1996 Review Date: 3/13/1997 Enter Date: Not reported How Stopped Date: T0605902021 Global ID: Not reported Leak Source: Not reported Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Not reported How Discovered: Not reported Funding: Not reported Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Gasoline Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083002951T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 4234 ft. Site 3 of 3 in cluster AI 0.802 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 126 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 WNW 1101 KATELLA AVE N/A AI193 LUST SHELL #1101 S104791737 TC2760975.1s Page 232 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: ROW Staff Initials: CAB Staff: * MTBE Class: MTBE Detected. Site tested for MTBE & MTBE detected MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: 11.2 Max MTBE Soil: 1 MTBE Concentration: SHELL #1101 (Continued) S104791737 Not reported Refillable Beverage Containers Redeemed: OB Other mat beverage containers redeemed: PL Plastic Beverage Containers Redeemed: GL Glass Beverage Containers Redeemed: AL Aluminum Beverage Containers Redeemed: Not Accepted Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located 7: Not Accepted Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located 6: Not Accepted Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located 5: Not Accepted Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located 4: Not Accepted Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located 3: Not Accepted Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located 2: 1396 Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located: Not reported Whether The Facility Is Grandfathered: Still operating Date facility ceased operating: 11/17/1994 Date facility began operating: 10/28/1994 Date facility became certified: (909) 796-2210 Facility Phone Number: O Certification Status: 4458 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster AJ 0.844 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 129 ft. 1/2-1 GARDEN GROVE, CA 92840 SSE 12961 CHAPMAN AVE N/A AJ194 S107137509 STATE Region: LUST: 083000892T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: CORTESE: 4467 ft. 0.846 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 117 ft. 1/2-1 GARDEN GROVE, CA 92643 SSW LUST 12111 CHAPMAN N/A 195 HIST CORTESE GARDEN GROVE FIRE STATION S102430598 TC2760975.1s Page 233 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 3/13/1989 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 3/25/1988 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: Not reported Review Date: Not reported Enter Date: 9/9/9999 How Stopped Date: T0605900706 Global ID: Unknown Leak Source: Unknown Leak Cause: Close Tank How Stopped: Tank Closure How Discovered: Not reported Funding: Not reported Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: 0 Qty Leaked: Diesel Substance: Soil only Case Type: 88UT074 Local Case Num: 083000892T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: RO0002638 Record ID: Soil Only Case Type: 03/13/1989 Date Closed: Diesel fuel oil and additives, Nos.1-D, 2-D, 2-4 Released Substance: Certification (Case Closed) Current Status: 88UT074 Facility Id: ORANGE Region: ORANGE CO. LUST: Not reported Site History: Diesel Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Local Agency File Location: 88UT074 LOC Case Number: 083000892T RB Case Number: ORANGE COUNTY LOP Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ORANGE COUNTY LOP Lead Agency: 1989-03-13 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.7889942 Latitude: T0605900706 Global Id: GARDEN GROVE FIRE STATION (Continued) S102430598 TC2760975.1s Page 234 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: MUN Beneficial: Not reported Hydr Basin 30000L Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: SS Staff Initials: PAH Staff: * MTBE Class: Not Required to be Tested. MTBE Tested: 0 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.7889942 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: Not reported Enter Date: GARDEN GROVE FIRE STATION (Continued) S102430598 Not reported Site History: Diesel Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083000648T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 1991-02-08 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -117.89964 Longitude: 33.802759 Latitude: T0605900518 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 4544 ft. Site 1 of 3 in cluster AK 0.861 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 146 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ENE 700 E KATELLA AVE N/A AK196 LUST WESTSIDE MATERIALS S109284200 TC2760975.1s Page 235 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation * MTBE Class: Not Required to be Tested. MTBE Tested: 0 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8032201 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 10/13/1987 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: 10/15/1987 Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 2/8/1991 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 9/10/1987 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: Not reported Review Date: 10/13/1987 Enter Date: Not reported How Stopped Date: T0605900518 Global ID: Not reported Leak Source: Not reported Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Not reported How Discovered: State Funds Funding: LFOR Enf Type: LEWIS Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Diesel Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083000648T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 083000648T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: CORTESE: 4549 ft. Site 2 of 3 in cluster AK 0.861 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 146 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ENE LUST 700 KATELLA AVE N/A AK197 HIST CORTESE WESTSIDE MATERIALS S102441230 TC2760975.1s Page 236 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: ROW Staff Initials: PAH Staff: WESTSIDE MATERIALS (Continued) S102441230 5/10/2000 Enter Date: 10/28/1998 How Stopped Date: T0605999096 Global ID: Other Source Leak Source: UNK Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: OM How Discovered: Not reported Funding: Not reported Enf Type: HASTER ST Cross Street: approved site Excavate and Dispose - remove contaminated soil and dispose in Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Gasoline Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083003667T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083003667T RB Case Number: Not reported Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: SANTA ANA (REGION 8) Lead Agency: 1998-10-20 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -117.905817 Longitude: 33.788565 Latitude: T0605999096 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 4571 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster AJ 0.866 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 130 ft. 1/2-1 GARDEN GROVE, CA 92840 SSE HAZNET 13002 CHAPMAN AVE N/A AJ198 LUST CHEVRON #9-9719 S104539397 TC2760975.1s Page 237 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: MONTRI PHUVADAKOM- GEN MGR Contact: CAL000183628 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.05 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Other organic solids Waste Category: Orange TSD County: CAD982444481 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: PASADENA, CA 911070000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 3410 EAST FOOTHILL BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: MONTRI PHUVADAKOM- GEN MGR Contact: CAL000183628 Gepaid: HAZNET: Not reported Summary: No Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30000 Local Agency: Regional Board Lead Agency: ALV Staff Initials: TME Staff: * MTBE Class: Site NOT Tested for MTBE.Includes Unknown and Not Analyzed. MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -117.909497 Longitude: 33.789036 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 5/10/2000 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 10/20/1998 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 10/20/1998 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: Not reported Review Date: CHEVRON #9-9719 (Continued) S104539397 TC2760975.1s Page 238 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Facility County: 0.90 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Unspecified organic liquid mixture Waste Category: San Bernardino TSD County: Not reported TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: PASADENA, CA 928400000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 3410 EAST FOOTHILL BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: MONTRI PHUVADAKOM- GEN MGR Contact: CAL000183628 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.02 Tons: H010 Disposal Method: Other organic solids Waste Category: San Bernardino TSD County: CAD982444481 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: PASADENA, CA 911070000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 3410 EAST FOOTHILL BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: MONTRI PHUVADAKOM- GEN MGR Contact: CAL000183628 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.18 Tons: H141 Disposal Method: Aqueous solution with 10% or more total organic residues Waste Category: San Bernardino TSD County: CAD982444481 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: PASADENA, CA 911070000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 3410 EAST FOOTHILL BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: MONTRI PHUVADAKOM- GEN MGR Contact: CAL000183628 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.01 Tons: H141 Disposal Method: Other organic solids Waste Category: San Bernardino TSD County: CAD982444481 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: PASADENA, CA 911070000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 3410 EAST FOOTHILL BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: CHEVRON #9-9719 (Continued) S104539397 TC2760975.1s Page 239 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 2 additional CA_HAZNET: record(s) in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access CHEVRON #9-9719 (Continued) S104539397 Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083002305T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 1995-02-02 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8017841 Latitude: T0605901679 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 4626 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster AL 0.876 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 144 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 East 1858 S ANAHEIM BLVD N/A AL199 LUST JOHN DAVID INTERNATIONAL S109284528 Not reported Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Not reported How Discovered: Not reported Funding: CLOS Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Gasoline Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083002305T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 083002305T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: CORTESE: 4626 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster AL 0.876 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 144 ft. 1/2-1 Orange Co. Industrial Site ANAHEIM, CA 92805 East LUST 1858 ANAHEIM BLVD N/A AL200 HIST CORTESE JOHN DAVID INTERNATIONAL S101126252 TC2760975.1s Page 240 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation LEAD COMPOUNDS Released Chemical: Transferred to City Program Closure Type: CLOSED 8/4/1993 Current Status: RO0000432 Record ID: ORANGE Region: 93IC002 Case ID: Orange Co. Industrial Site: Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: ROW Staff Initials: CAB Staff: * MTBE Class: Site NOT Tested for MTBE.Includes Unknown and Not Analyzed. MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8017841 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 9/20/1993 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 2/2/1995 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 12/22/1992 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: 12/22/1993 Review Date: 9/20/1993 Enter Date: Not reported How Stopped Date: T0605901679 Global ID: Not reported Leak Source: JOHN DAVID INTERNATIONAL (Continued) S101126252 TC2760975.1s Page 241 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Site History: Waste Oil / Motor / Hydraulic / Lubricating Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083001679T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 1992-03-25 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8088042 Latitude: T0605901265 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 4700 ft. Site 1 of 4 in cluster AM 0.890 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 148 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NNE 1601 S ANAHEIM BLVD N/A AM201 LUST WONDRIES TOYOTA OF ANAHEIM S109284458 10/18/1990 Review Date: 12/15/1990 Enter Date: Not reported How Stopped Date: T0605901265 Global ID: Not reported Leak Source: Not reported Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Not reported How Discovered: Not reported Funding: CLOS Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Waste Oil Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083001679T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 083001679T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: CORTESE: HAZNET 4701 ft. Orange Co. Industrial Site Site 2 of 4 in cluster AM 0.890 mi. SWEEPS UST Relative: Higher Actual: 148 ft. 1/2-1 CA FID UST ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NNE LUST 1601 ANAHEIM BLVD N/A AM202 HIST CORTESE WONDRIES TOYOTA OF ANAHEIM S101589312 TC2760975.1s Page 242 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation SWEEPS UST: Active Status: Not reported Comments: Not reported EPA ID: Not reported NPDES Number: Not reported DUNs Number: Not reported Contact Phone: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM 92805 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 902 VAN NESS AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mail To: [PHONE REDACTED] Facility Phone: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported Cortese Code: Not reported Regulated ID: UTNKA Regulated By: 30005889 Facility ID: CA FID UST: Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: Not reported Staff Initials: CAB Staff: * MTBE Class: Not Required to be Tested. MTBE Tested: 0 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8101039 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 12/15/1990 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 3/25/1992 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 10/18/1990 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: WONDRIES TOYOTA OF ANAHEIM (Continued) S101589312 TC2760975.1s Page 243 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Closed pre 1994, file review required to determine closure type Closure Type: CLOSED 10/20/1992 Current Status: RO0000356 Record ID: ORANGE Region: 92IC011 Case ID: Orange Co. Industrial Site: Not reported Number Of Tanks: JET FUEL Content: W Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 550 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-001928-000008 Tank Id: 443 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 02-11-92 Act Date: 02-11-92 Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: 9 Number: 1928 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: W Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 2000 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-001928-000005 Tank Id: 443 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 02-11-92 Act Date: 02-11-92 Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: 9 Number: 1928 Comp Number: A Status: 3 Number Of Tanks: JET FUEL Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 550 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-001928-000001 Tank Id: 443 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 02-11-92 Act Date: 02-11-92 Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: 9 Number: 1928 Comp Number: A Status: WONDRIES TOYOTA OF ANAHEIM (Continued) S101589312 TC2760975.1s Page 244 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation CAD008252405 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1601 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: FCI CONSTRUCTORS Contact: CAC001443256 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 5.4210 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Oil/water separation sludge Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1601 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: FCI CONSTRUCTORS Contact: CAC001443256 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .8340 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Latex waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080033681 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1601 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: FCI CONSTRUCTORS Contact: CAC001443256 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .8428 Tons: Disposal, Land Fill Disposal Method: Other organic solids Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080033681 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1601 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: FCI CONSTRUCTORS Contact: CAC001443256 Gepaid: HAZNET: PAINT / STAIN / THINNER WASTE Released Chemical: WONDRIES TOYOTA OF ANAHEIM (Continued) S101589312 TC2760975.1s Page 245 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation additional CA_HAZNET: detail in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access Orange Facility County: .0400 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Unspecified solvent mixture Waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD008252405 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1601 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: FCI CONSTRUCTORS Contact: CAC001443256 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .1000 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Off-specification, aged, or surplus organics Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: WONDRIES TOYOTA OF ANAHEIM (Continued) S101589312 NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: ANAHEIM CITY OF Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: (714) 520-6871 Contact telephone: US Contact country: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 800 W KATELLA AVE Contact address: ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGER Contact: CAD982489627 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 800 W KATELLA AVE Facility address: ANAHEIM CONVENTION CENTER Facility name: 05/19/1990 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: EMI HAZNET SWEEPS UST 4723 ft. CA FID UST Site 3 of 3 in cluster AK 0.895 mi. LUST Relative: Higher Actual: 146 ft. 1/2-1 HIST CORTESE ANAHEIM, CA 92801 ENE FINDS 800 W KATELLA AVE CAD982489627 AK203 RCRA-SQG ANAHEIM CITY, CONVENTION CTR [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 246 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation CORTESE Region: CORTESE: corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource facilities. generators, transporters, and treatment, storage, and disposal provides California with information on hazardous waste shipments for California Hazardous Waste Tracking System - Datamart (HWTS-DATAMART) Environmental Interest/Information System 110002418330 Registry ID: FINDS: No violations found Violation Status: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: No Furnace exemption: No On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): No U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: Municipal Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Municipal Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: ANAHEIM CITY, CONVENTION CTR (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 247 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: Not reported Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 11/21/1989 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 10/20/1988 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: Not reported Review Date: Not reported Enter Date: 9/9/9999 How Stopped Date: T0605900945 Global ID: Unknown Leak Source: Unknown Leak Cause: Close Tank How Stopped: Tank Closure How Discovered: Not reported Funding: Not reported Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: 0 Qty Leaked: Diesel Substance: Soil only Case Type: 89UT078 Local Case Num: 083001209T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: Not reported Site History: Diesel Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Local Agency File Location: 89UT078 LOC Case Number: 083001209T RB Case Number: ORANGE COUNTY LOP Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ORANGE COUNTY LOP Lead Agency: 1989-11-21 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8032546 Latitude: T0605900945 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 083001209T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: ANAHEIM CITY, CONVENTION CTR (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 248 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 1000 Capacity: 11-10-92 Actv Date: 30-011-006262-000001 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 11-10-92 Act Date: 11-10-92 Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: 4 Number: 6262 Comp Number: A Status: SWEEPS UST: Active Status: Not reported Comments: Not reported EPA ID: Not reported NPDES Number: Not reported DUNs Number: Not reported Contact Phone: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM 92802 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 200 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mail To: [PHONE REDACTED] Facility Phone: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported Cortese Code: Not reported Regulated ID: UTNKA Regulated By: 30002075 Facility ID: CA FID UST: Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: MUN Beneficial: Not reported Hydr Basin 30000L Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: WJ Staff Initials: PAH Staff: * MTBE Class: Not Required to be Tested. MTBE Tested: 0 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -117.918375 Longitude: 33.80227306 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: ANAHEIM CITY, CONVENTION CTR (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 249 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation DAVID M MEEK Contact: CAD982489627 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.0834 Tons: H061 Disposal Method: Organic liquids (nonsolvents) with halogens Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD008252405 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928023415 Mailing City,St,Zip: 800 W KATELLA AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: DAVID M MEEK Contact: CAD982489627 Gepaid: HAZNET: Not reported Number Of Tanks: PRM UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 2500 Capacity: 11-10-92 Actv Date: 30-011-006262-000003 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 11-10-92 Act Date: 11-10-92 Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: 4 Number: 6262 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: DIESEL Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 1000 Capacity: 11-10-92 Actv Date: 30-011-006262-000002 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 11-10-92 Act Date: 11-10-92 Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: 4 Number: 6262 Comp Number: A Status: 3 Number Of Tanks: DIESEL Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: ANAHEIM CITY, CONVENTION CTR (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 250 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: 1.6856 Tons: H061 Disposal Method: Unspecified solvent mixture Waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD008252405 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928023415 Mailing City,St,Zip: 800 W KATELLA AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: DAVID M MEEK Contact: CAD982489627 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.1251 Tons: H141 Disposal Method: Off-specification, aged, or surplus inorganics Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD097030993 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928023415 Mailing City,St,Zip: 800 W KATELLA AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: DAVID M MEEK Contact: CAD982489627 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.1668 Tons: H039 Disposal Method: Unspecified oil-containing waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928023415 Mailing City,St,Zip: 800 W KATELLA AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: DAVID M MEEK Contact: CAD982489627 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.0834 Tons: H061 Disposal Method: Not reported Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD008252405 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928023415 Mailing City,St,Zip: 800 W KATELLA AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: ANAHEIM CITY, CONVENTION CTR (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 251 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 0 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7389 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 24711 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1996 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 0 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7389 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 24711 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1990 Year: EMI: 112 additional CA_HAZNET: record(s) in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access ANAHEIM CITY, CONVENTION CTR (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] Not reported Local Case Num: 083000056T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 083000056T Reg Id: LINKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: CORTESE: 4799 ft. Site 1 of 12 in cluster AN 0.909 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 142 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 North LUST 1400 HARBOR BLVD N/A AN204 HIST CORTESE AVIS RENT - A - CAR SYSTEM S103463896 TC2760975.1s Page 252 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: ROW Staff Initials: NOM Staff: * MTBE Class: Not Required to be Tested. MTBE Tested: 0 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8135668 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 12/31/1986 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: 8/26/1986 Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 3/13/1996 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 5/30/1986 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: 11/6/1990 Review Date: 12/31/1986 Enter Date: Not reported How Stopped Date: T0605900045 Global ID: Piping Leak Source: Spill Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Tank Test How Discovered: Not reported Funding: CLOS Enf Type: FREEDMAN Cross Street: approved site Excavate and Dispose - remove contaminated soil and dispose in Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Diesel Substance: Soil only Case Type: AVIS RENT - A - CAR SYSTEM (Continued) S103463896 TC2760975.1s Page 253 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Site History: Diesel Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083000056T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 1996-03-13 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8135668 Latitude: T0605900045 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 4802 ft. Site 2 of 12 in cluster AN 0.910 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 142 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 North 1400 S HARBOR BLVD N/A AN205 LUST AVIS RENT - A - CAR SYSTEM S109284277 kg of acutely hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less hazardous waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1 waste during any calendar month; or generates 1 kg or less of acutely cleanup of a spill, into or on any land or water, of acutely hazardous residue or contaminated soil, waste or other debris resulting from the during any calendar month; or generates more than 100 kg of any calendar month; or generates more than 1 kg of acutely hazardous waste Handler: generates 1,000 kg or more of hazardous waste during any Description: Large Quantity Generator Classification: Private Land type: 09 EPA Region: [EMAIL REDACTED] Contact email: (714) 781-1756 Contact telephone: Not reported Contact country: Not reported Not reported Contact address: DONNA A BAKER Contact: ANAHEIM, CA 92803 MAIL CODE 219-N P.O. BOX 3232 Mailing address: CAD027828250 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92803 1313 SOUTH HARBOR BLVD. Facility address: DISNEYLAND Facility name: 02/27/2008 Date form received by agency: RCRA-LQG: EMI CHMIRS SLIC CA FID UST 4806 ft. LUST Site 3 of 12 in cluster AN 0.910 mi. HIST CORTESE Relative: Higher Actual: 142 ft. 1/2-1 NPDES ANAHEIM, CA 92803 North CA WDS 1313 S. HARBOR BLVD. CAD027828250 AN206 RCRA-LQG DISNEYLAND [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 254 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Generated waste on-site: No Accumulated waste on-site: Pesticides Waste type: Not reported Generated waste on-site: No Accumulated waste on-site: Lamps Waste type: Not reported Generated waste on-site: No Accumulated waste on-site: Batteries Waste type: Universal Waste Summary: Commercial status unknown Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: No Furnace exemption: No On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: No Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): No U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: 11/10/1953 Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: Not reported Owner/operator telephone: US Owner/operator country: Not reported Not reported Owner/operator address: THE WALT DISNEY COMPANY Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: 11/10/1953 Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: Not reported Owner/operator telephone: US Owner/operator country: ANAHEIM, CA 92803 P.O. BOX 3232 Owner/operator address: THE WALT DISNEY COMPANY Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: 100 kg of that material at any time hazardous waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than from the cleanup of a spill, into or on any land or water, of acutely of any residue or contaminated soil, waste or other debris resulting DISNEYLAND (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 255 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation FLASH POINT OF A WASTE IS TO REVIEW THE MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET, CLOSED CUP FLASH POINT TESTER. ANOTHER METHOD OF DETERMINING THE LESS THAN 140 DEGREES FAHRENHEIT AS DETERMINED BY A PENSKY-MARTENS IGNITABLE HAZARDOUS WASTES ARE THOSE WASTES WHICH HAVE A FLASHPOINT OF Waste name: D001 Waste code: Hazardous Waste Summary: Large Quantity Generator Classification: DISNEYLAND Facility name: 08/01/1990 Date form received by agency: Large Quantity Generator Classification: DISNEYLAND Facility name: 02/20/1992 Date form received by agency: Large Quantity Generator Classification: DISNEYLAND Facility name: 04/25/1994 Date form received by agency: Large Quantity Generator Classification: DISNEYLAND Facility name: 02/20/1996 Date form received by agency: Large Quantity Generator Classification: DISNEYLAND Facility name: 09/01/1996 Date form received by agency: Large Quantity Generator Classification: DISNEYLAND Facility name: 04/28/1997 Date form received by agency: Large Quantity Generator Classification: DISNEYLAND ATT. LARRY VICK Site name: DISNEYLAND Facility name: 03/04/1999 Date form received by agency: Large Quantity Generator Classification: DISNEYLAND Facility name: 10/12/2000 Date form received by agency: Large Quantity Generator Classification: DISNEYLAND Facility name: 02/16/2002 Date form received by agency: Large Quantity Generator Classification: DISNEYLAND Facility name: 03/01/2004 Date form received by agency: Large Quantity Generator Classification: DISNEYLAND Facility name: 02/22/2006 Date form received by agency: Historical Generators: Not reported Generated waste on-site: No Accumulated waste on-site: Thermostats Waste type: DISNEYLAND (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 256 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation THE FOLLOWING SPENT NON-HALOGENATED SOLVENTS: XYLENE, ACETONE, ETHYL Waste name: F003 Waste code: SPENT SOLVENT MIXTURES. F005, AND STILL BOTTOMS FROM THE RECOVERY OF THESE SPENT SOLVENTS AND OF THE ABOVE HALOGENATED SOLVENTS OR THOSE LISTED IN F001, F004, OR BEFORE USE, A TOTAL OF TEN PERCENT OR MORE (BY VOLUME) OF ONE OR MORE 1,1,2-TRICHLOROETHANE; ALL SPENT SOLVENT MIXTURES/BLENDS CONTAINING, ORTHO-DICHLOROBENZENE, TRICHLOROFLUOROMETHANE, AND CHLOROBENZENE, 1,1,2-TRICHLORO-1,2,2-TRIFLUOROETHANE, METHYLENE CHLORIDE, TRICHLOROETHYLENE, 1,1,1-TRICHLOROETHANE, THE FOLLOWING SPENT HALOGENATED SOLVENTS: TETRACHLOROETHYLENE, Waste name: F002 Waste code: TRICHLOROETHYLENE Waste name: D040 Waste code: TETRACHLOROETHYLENE Waste name: D039 Waste code: PYRIDINE Waste name: D038 Waste code: METHYL ETHYL KETONE Waste name: D035 Waste code: BENZENE Waste name: D018 Waste code: LEAD Waste name: D008 Waste code: CHROMIUM Waste name: D007 Waste code: CADMIUM Waste name: D006 Waste code: OF SUCH WASTE WOULD BY WASTE GUNPOWDER. DETONATION OR EXPLOSION WHEN EXPOSED TO HEAT OR A FLAME. ONE EXAMPLE WHEN EXPOSED TO WATER OR CORROSIVE MATERIALS, OR IF IT IS CAPABLE OF NORMALLY UNSTABLE, REACTS VIOLENTLY WITH WATER, GENERATES TOXIC GASES A MATERIAL IS CONSIDERED TO BE A REACTIVE HAZARDOUS WASTE IF IT IS Waste name: D003 Waste code: DISPOSED, THE WASTE WOULD BE A CORROSIVE HAZARDOUS WASTE. THESE CAUSTIC OR ACID SOLUTIONS BECOME CONTAMINATED AND MUST BE USED BY MANY INDUSTRIES TO CLEAN METAL PARTS PRIOR TO PAINTING. WHEN OR DEGREASE PARTS. HYDROCHLORIC ACID, A SOLUTION WITH A LOW PH, IS CAUSTIC SOLUTION WITH A HIGH PH, IS OFTEN USED BY INDUSTRIES TO CLEAN CONSIDERED TO BE A CORROSIVE HAZARDOUS WASTE. SODIUM HYDROXIDE, A A WASTE WHICH HAS A PH OF LESS THAN 2 OR GREATER THAN 12.5 IS Waste name: D002 Waste code: WHICH WOULD BE CONSIDERED AS IGNITABLE HAZARDOUS WASTE. MATERIAL. LACQUER THINNER IS AN EXAMPLE OF A COMMONLY USED SOLVENT WHICH CAN BE OBTAINED FROM THE MANUFACTURER OR DISTRIBUTOR OF THE DISNEYLAND (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 257 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation CHROMIUM Waste name: D007 Waste code: 23264 Amount (Lbs): CADMIUM Waste name: D006 Waste code: 2328 Amount (Lbs): OF SUCH WASTE WOULD BY WASTE GUNPOWDER. DETONATION OR EXPLOSION WHEN EXPOSED TO HEAT OR A FLAME. ONE EXAMPLE WHEN EXPOSED TO WATER OR CORROSIVE MATERIALS, OR IF IT IS CAPABLE OF NORMALLY UNSTABLE, REACTS VIOLENTLY WITH WATER, GENERATES TOXIC GASES A MATERIAL IS CONSIDERED TO BE A REACTIVE HAZARDOUS WASTE IF IT IS Waste name: D003 Waste code: 45 Amount (Lbs): DISPOSED, THE WASTE WOULD BE A CORROSIVE HAZARDOUS WASTE. THESE CAUSTIC OR ACID SOLUTIONS BECOME CONTAMINATED AND MUST BE USED BY MANY INDUSTRIES TO CLEAN METAL PARTS PRIOR TO PAINTING. WHEN OR DEGREASE PARTS. HYDROCHLORIC ACID, A SOLUTION WITH A LOW PH, IS CAUSTIC SOLUTION WITH A HIGH PH, IS OFTEN USED BY INDUSTRIES TO CLEAN CONSIDERED TO BE A CORROSIVE HAZARDOUS WASTE. SODIUM HYDROXIDE, A A WASTE WHICH HAS A PH OF LESS THAN 2 OR GREATER THAN 12.5 IS Waste name: D002 Waste code: 29586 Amount (Lbs): WHICH WOULD BE CONSIDERED AS IGNITABLE HAZARDOUS WASTE. MATERIAL. LACQUER THINNER IS AN EXAMPLE OF A COMMONLY USED SOLVENT WHICH CAN BE OBTAINED FROM THE MANUFACTURER OR DISTRIBUTOR OF THE FLASH POINT OF A WASTE IS TO REVIEW THE MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET, CLOSED CUP FLASH POINT TESTER. ANOTHER METHOD OF DETERMINING THE LESS THAN 140 DEGREES FAHRENHEIT AS DETERMINED BY A PENSKY-MARTENS IGNITABLE HAZARDOUS WASTES ARE THOSE WASTES WHICH HAVE A FLASHPOINT OF Waste name: D001 Waste code: Annual Waste Handled: Last Biennial Reporting Year: 2007 Biennial Reports: THESE SPENT SOLVENTS AND SPENT SOLVENT MIXTURES. LISTED IN F001, F002, OR F004; AND STILL BOTTOMS FROM THE RECOVERY OF ONE OR MORE OF THE ABOVE NON-HALOGENATED SOLVENTS OR THOSE SOLVENTS CONTAINING, BEFORE USE, A TOTAL OF TEN PERCENT OR MORE (BY VOLUME) OF 2-ETHOXYETHANOL, AND 2-NITROPROPANE; ALL SPENT SOLVENT MIXTURES/BLENDS KETONE, CARBON DISULFIDE, ISOBUTANOL, PYRIDINE, BENZENE, THE FOLLOWING SPENT NON-HALOGENATED SOLVENTS: TOLUENE, METHYL ETHYL Waste name: F005 Waste code: MIXTURES. BOTTOMS FROM THE RECOVERY OF THESE SPENT SOLVENTS AND SPENT SOLVENT MORE OF THOSE SOLVENTS LISTED IN F001, F002, F004, AND F005, AND STILL SOLVENTS, AND, A TOTAL OF TEN PERCENT OR MORE (BY VOLUME) OF ONE OR CONTAINING, BEFORE USE, ONE OR MORE OF THE ABOVE NON-HALOGENATED NON-HALOGENATED SOLVENTS; AND ALL SPENT SOLVENT MIXTURES/BLENDS MIXTURES/BLENDS CONTAINING, BEFORE USE, ONLY THE ABOVE SPENT ALCOHOL, CYCLOHEXANONE, AND METHANOL; ALL SPENT SOLVENT ACETATE, ETHYL BENZENE, ETHYL ETHER, METHYL ISOBUTYL KETONE, N-BUTYL DISNEYLAND (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 258 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation ONE OR MORE OF THE ABOVE NON-HALOGENATED SOLVENTS OR THOSE SOLVENTS CONTAINING, BEFORE USE, A TOTAL OF TEN PERCENT OR MORE (BY VOLUME) OF 2-ETHOXYETHANOL, AND 2-NITROPROPANE; ALL SPENT SOLVENT MIXTURES/BLENDS KETONE, CARBON DISULFIDE, ISOBUTANOL, PYRIDINE, BENZENE, THE FOLLOWING SPENT NON-HALOGENATED SOLVENTS: TOLUENE, METHYL ETHYL Waste name: F005 Waste code: 38266 Amount (Lbs): MIXTURES. BOTTOMS FROM THE RECOVERY OF THESE SPENT SOLVENTS AND SPENT SOLVENT MORE OF THOSE SOLVENTS LISTED IN F001, F002, F004, AND F005, AND STILL SOLVENTS, AND, A TOTAL OF TEN PERCENT OR MORE (BY VOLUME) OF ONE OR CONTAINING, BEFORE USE, ONE OR MORE OF THE ABOVE NON-HALOGENATED NON-HALOGENATED SOLVENTS; AND ALL SPENT SOLVENT MIXTURES/BLENDS MIXTURES/BLENDS CONTAINING, BEFORE USE, ONLY THE ABOVE SPENT ALCOHOL, CYCLOHEXANONE, AND METHANOL; ALL SPENT SOLVENT ACETATE, ETHYL BENZENE, ETHYL ETHER, METHYL ISOBUTYL KETONE, N-BUTYL THE FOLLOWING SPENT NON-HALOGENATED SOLVENTS: XYLENE, ACETONE, ETHYL Waste name: F003 Waste code: 16709 Amount (Lbs): SPENT SOLVENT MIXTURES. F005, AND STILL BOTTOMS FROM THE RECOVERY OF THESE SPENT SOLVENTS AND OF THE ABOVE HALOGENATED SOLVENTS OR THOSE LISTED IN F001, F004, OR BEFORE USE, A TOTAL OF TEN PERCENT OR MORE (BY VOLUME) OF ONE OR MORE 1,1,2-TRICHLOROETHANE; ALL SPENT SOLVENT MIXTURES/BLENDS CONTAINING, ORTHO-DICHLOROBENZENE, TRICHLOROFLUOROMETHANE, AND CHLOROBENZENE, 1,1,2-TRICHLORO-1,2,2-TRIFLUOROETHANE, METHYLENE CHLORIDE, TRICHLOROETHYLENE, 1,1,1-TRICHLOROETHANE, THE FOLLOWING SPENT HALOGENATED SOLVENTS: TETRACHLOROETHYLENE, Waste name: F002 Waste code: 1530 Amount (Lbs): TRICHLOROETHYLENE Waste name: D040 Waste code: 28350 Amount (Lbs): TETRACHLOROETHYLENE Waste name: D039 Waste code: 1530 Amount (Lbs): PYRIDINE Waste name: D038 Waste code: 18239 Amount (Lbs): METHYL ETHYL KETONE Waste name: D035 Waste code: 2213 Amount (Lbs): BENZENE Waste name: D018 Waste code: 43444 Amount (Lbs): LEAD Waste name: D008 Waste code: 27829 Amount (Lbs): DISNEYLAND (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 259 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Enf. disp. status date: Not reported Enf. disposition status: 06/21/1990 Enforcement action date: INITIAL 3008(A) COMPLIANCE Enforcement action: EPA Violation lead agency: 09/29/1994 Date achieved compliance: 02/26/1990 Date violation determined: Generators - General Area of violation: FR - 262.20-23.B Regulation violated: Not reported Paid penalty amount: Not reported Final penalty amount: Not reported Proposed penalty amount: EPA Enforcement lead agency: Not reported Enf. disp. status date: Not reported Enf. disposition status: 06/21/1990 Enforcement action date: INITIAL 3008(A) COMPLIANCE Enforcement action: EPA Violation lead agency: 09/29/1994 Date achieved compliance: 02/26/1990 Date violation determined: LDR - General Area of violation: FR - 268.7 Regulation violated: Not reported Paid penalty amount: Not reported Final penalty amount: Not reported Proposed penalty amount: State Enforcement lead agency: Not reported Enf. disp. status date: Not reported Enf. disposition status: 02/17/2004 Enforcement action date: WRITTEN INFORMAL Enforcement action: State Violation lead agency: 02/17/2004 Date achieved compliance: 02/17/2004 Date violation determined: Generators - General Area of violation: Not reported Regulation violated: Not reported Paid penalty amount: Not reported Final penalty amount: Not reported Proposed penalty amount: EPA Enforcement lead agency: 03/20/2006 Enf. disp. status date: Action Satisfied (Case Closed) Enf. disposition status: 03/20/2006 Enforcement action date: WRITTEN INFORMAL Enforcement action: EPA Violation lead agency: 11/16/2005 Date achieved compliance: 10/19/2005 Date violation determined: TSD IS-Container Use and Management Area of violation: Not reported Regulation violated: Facility Has Received Notices of Violations: 18239 Amount (Lbs): THESE SPENT SOLVENTS AND SPENT SOLVENT MIXTURES. LISTED IN F001, F002, OR F004; AND STILL BOTTOMS FROM THE RECOVERY OF DISNEYLAND (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 260 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation CA WDS: EPA Evaluation lead agency: 09/29/1994 Date achieved compliance: LDR - General Area of violation: COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Evaluation: 02/26/1990 Evaluation date: EPA Evaluation lead agency: 09/29/1994 Date achieved compliance: Generators - General Area of violation: COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Evaluation: 02/26/1990 Evaluation date: State Contractor/Grantee Evaluation lead agency: Not reported Date achieved compliance: Not reported Area of violation: COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Evaluation: 09/29/1994 Evaluation date: State Contractor/Grantee Evaluation lead agency: 02/17/2004 Date achieved compliance: Generators - General Area of violation: COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Evaluation: 02/17/2004 Evaluation date: EPA Evaluation lead agency: 11/16/2005 Date achieved compliance: TSD IS-Container Use and Management Area of violation: COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Evaluation: 10/19/2005 Evaluation date: State Evaluation lead agency: Not reported Date achieved compliance: Not reported Area of violation: COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Evaluation: 03/13/2008 Evaluation date: Evaluation Action Summary: Not reported Paid penalty amount: Not reported Final penalty amount: Not reported Proposed penalty amount: EPA Enforcement lead agency: Not reported Enf. disp. status date: Not reported Enf. disposition status: 06/21/1990 Enforcement action date: INITIAL 3008(A) COMPLIANCE Enforcement action: EPA Violation lead agency: 09/29/1994 Date achieved compliance: 02/26/1990 Date violation determined: Generators - General Area of violation: FR - 262.50-60 Regulation violated: Not reported Paid penalty amount: Not reported Final penalty amount: Not reported Proposed penalty amount: EPA Enforcement lead agency: DISNEYLAND (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 261 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 220328 Place Id: NPDES Permits Regulatory Measure Type: R8-2003-0001 Order No: 131606 Regulatory Measure Id: 8 Region: 12932 Agency Id: Historical Facility Status: CA0106283 Npdes Number: NPDES: dairy waste ponds. dischargers having waste storage systems with land disposal such as disposal systems, such as septic systems with subsurface disposal, or management practices, facilities with passive waste treatment and cooling water dischargers or thosewho must comply through best Category C - Facilities having no waste treatment systems, such as Complexity: from a waste treatment facility. or municipal water supply. Awsthetic impairment would include nuisance significant human population, or render unusable a potential domestic adverse impact on receiving biota, can cause aesthetic impairment to a Moderate Threat to Water Quality. A violation could have a major Treat To Water: The facility is not a POTW. POTW: No reclamation requirements associated with this facility. Reclamation: 0 Baseline Flow: 0 Design Flow: Not reported Secondary Waste Type: Not reported Secondary Waste: waste). construction wastes, manure, vegetable or animal solid and semisolid liquid wastes garbage, trash, refuse, paper, demolition and nonhazardous putrescible and non putrescible solid, semisolid, and Nonhazardous Solid Wastes/Influent or Solid Wastes that contain Primary Waste Type: seepage and other wastes of this type) overflow, swimming pool wastes, water ride wastewater, ground water Miscellaneous (Includes wastes from dewatering, recreational lake Primary Waste: Not reported SIC Code 2: 7996 SIC Code: Private Agency Type: [PHONE REDACTED] Agency Telephone: FRANK DELA VARA Agency Contact: ANAHEIM 92803 Agency City,St,Zip: PO BOX 3232 - TDA219N Agency Address: DISNEYLAND Agency Name: ACCOUNTS PAYABLE TDA-229W Facility Contact: Not reported Facility Telephone: 8 Subregion: are assigned by the Regional Board CA0106283 The 1st 2 characters designate the state. The remaining 7 NPDES Number: under Waste Discharge Requirements. Active - Any facility with a continuous or seasonal discharge that is Facility Status: pumping. repairing, oil production, storage and disposal operations, water washing, geothermal operations, air conditioning, ship building and processing operation of whatever nature, including mining, gravel semisolid wastes from any servicing, producing, manufacturing or Industrial - Facility that treats and/or disposes of liquid or Facility Type: Santa Ana River 301000001 Facility ID: DISNEYLAND (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 262 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Spill Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Tank Closure How Discovered: State Funds Funding: Not reported Enf Type: KATELLA Cross Street: approved site Excavate and Dispose - remove contaminated soil and dispose in Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Hydraulic Oil Substance: Soil only Case Type: 083000903T Local Case Num: 083000903T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 083000903T Reg Id: LINKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: CORTESE: 92803 Discharge Zip: CA Discharge State: Anaheim Discharge City: Po Box 3232 - Tda219n Discharge Address: Disneyland Resort Discharge Name: Not reported Termination Date Of Regulatory Measure: 1/1/2013 Expiration Date Of Regulatory Measure: 1/18/2008 Effective Date Of Regulatory Measure: 1/18/2008 Adoption Date Of Regulatory Measure: NPDES Program Type: 8 301000001 WDID: 220328 Place Id: NPDES Permits Regulatory Measure Type: R8-2008-0001 Order No: 345363 Regulatory Measure Id: 8 Region: 12932 Agency Id: Active Facility Status: Not reported Npdes Number: 92803 Discharge Zip: CA Discharge State: Anaheim Discharge City: Po Box 3232 - Tda219n Discharge Address: Disneyland Resort Discharge Name: 1/17/2008 Termination Date Of Regulatory Measure: 1/1/2008 Expiration Date Of Regulatory Measure: 1/17/2003 Effective Date Of Regulatory Measure: 1/17/2003 Adoption Date Of Regulatory Measure: NPDES Program Type: 8 301000001 WDID: DISNEYLAND (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 263 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported How Stopped: Not reported How Discovered: Not reported Funding: Not reported Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Diesel Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083002708T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: TURBINE OIL TANKS @ MATTERHORN ABANDONED INSITU 7/19/92; SITE CAPPED 550 HYDRAULIC OIL TANK @ DUMBO WAS REMOVED 10/19/90 FOUR 250 GALLON Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: ROW Staff Initials: NOM Staff: * MTBE Class: Not Required to be Tested. MTBE Tested: 0 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8149817 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 6/15/1988 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 11/10/1994 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 7/7/1988 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: 6/1/1988 Review Date: 6/15/1988 Enter Date: 7/7/1988 How Stopped Date: T0605900717 Global ID: Other Source Leak Source: DISNEYLAND (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 264 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported NPDES Number: Not reported DUNs Number: Not reported Contact Phone: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM 92803 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 500 S BUENA VISTA ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mail To: [PHONE REDACTED] Facility Phone: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported Cortese Code: Not reported Regulated ID: UTNKA Regulated By: 30000064 Facility ID: CA FID UST: Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: ROW Staff Initials: NOM Staff: * MTBE Class: Not Required to be Tested. MTBE Tested: 0 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8149817 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 9/20/1995 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 10/24/1996 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 8/3/1995 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: 8/9/1995 Review Date: 9/20/1995 Enter Date: Not reported How Stopped Date: T0605901880 Global ID: Not reported Leak Source: Not reported Leak Cause: DISNEYLAND (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 265 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Injuries: Not reported Resp Agncy Personel # Of Decontaminated: Not reported More Than Two Substances Involved?: Not reported Special Studies 6: Not reported Special Studies 5: Not reported Special Studies 4: Not reported Special Studies 3: Not reported Special Studies 2: Not reported Special Studies 1: Not reported Property Management: Not reported Estimated Temperature: Not reported Surrounding Area: Not reported Time Completed: Not reported Time Notified: Not reported Agency Incident Number: Not reported Agency Id Number: Not reported Property Use: Not reported Date Completed: Not reported Incident Date: Not reported OES Time: Not reported OES Date: 12/16/200508:32:31 AM OES notification: 05-7240 OES Incident Number: CHMIRS: XXX Thomas Bros Code: XXX Location Code: XXX Lead Agency: XXX Substance: XXX Staff: 8 Region: Closed Facility Status: Soil and Groundwater Type: SLIC: Not reported General Comments: Not reported Potential Contaminants of Concern: Not reported Potential Media Affected: Not reported File Location: SLT8R128 RB Case Number: Not reported Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: Cleanup Program Site Case Type: -117.914541 Longitude: 33.815025 Latitude: Not reported Lead Agency Case Number: SANTA ANA (REGION 8) Lead Agency: SLT8R1284126 Global Id: 1991-08-28 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Facility Status: STATE Region: SLIC: Active Status: Not reported Comments: Not reported EPA ID: DISNEYLAND (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 266 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation (less than 100-yards). The park was closed at the time. unknown status. Local area was evacuated, unknown number of people inadvertently. Three employees were transported to be checked, Released when a water treatment plumber mixed two chemicals Description: 0 Number of Fatalities: 3 Number of Injuries: 0 Evacuations: Not reported Description: 0 Unknown: 0 Tons: 0 Sheen: 0 Quarts: 0 Pints: 0 Ounces: 0 Liters: 1 Pounds: 0 Grams: 0.000000 Gallons: 0 CUFT: 0 Cups: 0 BBLS: Not reported Quantity Released: chlorine gas Substance: Not reported E Date: Other Site Type: Yes Contained: Not reported Amount: Anaheim Fire Department Admin Agency: 12/16/200512:00:00 AM Incident Date: Disneyland Resort Anaheim Agency: 2005 Year: Not reported Date/Time: Not reported Other: Not reported Measure: Not reported Type: Not reported What Happened: Not reported Containment: Fire Dept. Cleanup By: Not reported Spill Site: Not reported Waterway: Not reported Waterway Involved: Not reported Facility Telephone: Not reported Comments: Not reported Report Date: Not reported Reporting Officer Name/ID: Not reported Company Name: Not reported CA/DOT/PUC/ICC Number: Not reported Vehicle Id Number: Not reported Vehicle State: Not reported Vehicle License Number: Not reported Vehicle Make/year: Not reported Others Number Of Fatalities: Not reported Others Number Of Injuries: Not reported Others Number Of Decontaminated: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Fatalities: DISNEYLAND (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 267 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation SC Air District Name: 800189 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1995 Year: 1 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 1 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 1 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 31 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 191 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 36 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 63 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7996 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 800189 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1993 Year: 5 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 5 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 4 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 81 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 221 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 38 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 81 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7996 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 800189 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1990 Year: 3 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 3 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 2 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 55 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 201 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 34 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 64 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7996 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 800189 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1987 Year: EMI: DISNEYLAND (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 268 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 22 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 44 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7996 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 800189 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1998 Year: 2 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 2 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 2 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 37 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 196 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 24 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 44 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7996 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 800189 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1997 Year: 2 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 2 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 1 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 63 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 336 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 34 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 57 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7996 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 800189 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1996 Year: 1 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 1 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 1 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 31 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 191 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 36 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 63 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7996 SIC Code: DISNEYLAND (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 269 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 2 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 2 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 1 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 34 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 181 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 17 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 68 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: B Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Y Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7996 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 800189 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 2001 Year: 2 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 2 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 2 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 37 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 196 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 24 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 44 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7996 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 800189 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 2000 Year: 2 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 2 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 2 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 37 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 196 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 24 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 44 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7996 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 800189 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1999 Year: 2 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 2 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 2 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 37 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 196 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: DISNEYLAND (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 270 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 7996 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 800189 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 2005 Year: 2.3 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 2.488509135 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0.940189 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 38.8411714 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 165.366304 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 15.1 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 32.51529899 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Y Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7996 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 800189 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 2004 Year: 2 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 2 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 1 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 39 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 165 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 15 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 33 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7996 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 800189 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 2003 Year: 2 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 2 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 1 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 39 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 165 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 15 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 33 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7996 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 800189 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 2002 Year: DISNEYLAND (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 271 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 11.4437113 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 14.682 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: .221 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 36.82 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 57.834 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 4.871 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 13.69002114022331116 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7996 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 800189 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 2007 Year: 4.025241676 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 4.081845 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: .876965 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 36.237105 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 163.37902 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 8.57904608279041 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 10.[PHONE REDACTED] Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: DISNEYLAND (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] 92803 Discharge Zip: CA Discharge State: Anaheim Discharge City: Po Box 3232 - Tda219n Discharge Address: Disneyland Resort Discharge Name: 6/5/2007 Termination Date Of Regulatory Measure: Not reported Expiration Date Of Regulatory Measure: 3/21/2007 8:31:17 AM Effective Date Of Regulatory Measure: Not reported Adoption Date Of Regulatory Measure: CONSTW Program Type: 8 30C346158 WDID: 647942 Place Id: Storm water construction Regulatory Measure Type: 99-08DWQ Order No: 322184 Regulatory Measure Id: 8 Region: 12932 Agency Id: Terminated Facility Status: Not reported Npdes Number: NPDES: EMI HAZNET Orange Co. Industrial Site 4806 ft. CHMIRS Site 4 of 12 in cluster AN 0.910 mi. SWEEPS UST Relative: Higher Actual: 142 ft. 1/2-1 UST ANAHEIM, CA 92802 North LUST 1313 S HARBOR BLVD N/A AN207 NPDES DISNEYLAND U003713747 TC2760975.1s Page 272 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Anaheim Discharge City: Po Box 3232 - Tda219n Discharge Address: Disneyland Resort Discharge Name: Not reported Termination Date Of Regulatory Measure: Not reported Expiration Date Of Regulatory Measure: 12/11/2008 12:35:49 PM Effective Date Of Regulatory Measure: Not reported Adoption Date Of Regulatory Measure: CONSTW Program Type: 8 30C354173 WDID: 730298 Place Id: Storm water construction Regulatory Measure Type: 99-08DWQ Order No: 356768 Regulatory Measure Id: 8 Region: 12932 Agency Id: Active Facility Status: Not reported Npdes Number: 92803 Discharge Zip: CA Discharge State: Anaheim Discharge City: Po Box 3232 - Tda219n Discharge Address: Disneyland Resort Discharge Name: 4/10/2008 Termination Date Of Regulatory Measure: Not reported Expiration Date Of Regulatory Measure: 8/28/2006 12:25:30 PM Effective Date Of Regulatory Measure: Not reported Adoption Date Of Regulatory Measure: CONSTW Program Type: 8 30C343293 WDID: 639799 Place Id: Storm water construction Regulatory Measure Type: 99-08DWQ Order No: 308259 Regulatory Measure Id: 8 Region: 12932 Agency Id: Terminated Facility Status: Not reported Npdes Number: 92803 Discharge Zip: CA Discharge State: Anaheim Discharge City: Po Box 3232 - Tda219n Discharge Address: Disneyland Resort Discharge Name: 8/3/2007 Termination Date Of Regulatory Measure: Not reported Expiration Date Of Regulatory Measure: 2/8/2007 8:46:12 AM Effective Date Of Regulatory Measure: Not reported Adoption Date Of Regulatory Measure: CONSTW Program Type: 8 30C345616 WDID: 646653 Place Id: Storm water construction Regulatory Measure Type: 99-08DWQ Order No: 320226 Regulatory Measure Id: 8 Region: 12932 Agency Id: Terminated Facility Status: Not reported Npdes Number: DISNEYLAND (Continued) U003713747 TC2760975.1s Page 273 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: RM Staff Initials: NOM Staff: * MTBE Class: Not Required to be Tested. MTBE Tested: 0 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -117.915541 Longitude: 33.813894 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 3/13/2002 Enter Date: 10/26/2001 Monitoring: 10/21/2001 Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 3/5/2002 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 9/21/2001 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: Not reported Review Date: 3/13/2002 Enter Date: 9/21/2001 How Stopped Date: T0605999311 Global ID: Piping Leak Source: Structure Failure Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: OM How Discovered: Not reported Funding: Not reported Enf Type: BALL ROAD Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Diesel Substance: Soil only Case Type: 083003819T Local Case Num: 083003819T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 92803 Discharge Zip: CA Discharge State: DISNEYLAND (Continued) U003713747 TC2760975.1s Page 274 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-003609-000017 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: Not reported Ref Date: 44-016067 Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 3609 Comp Number: Not reported Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: DIESEL Content: PRODUCT Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 9940 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-003609-000015 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: Not reported Ref Date: 44-016067 Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 3609 Comp Number: Not reported Status: 6 Number Of Tanks: DIESEL Content: PRODUCT Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 7500 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-003609-000014 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: Not reported Ref Date: 44-016067 Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 3609 Comp Number: Not reported Status: SWEEPS UST: -117.91543 Longitude: 33.81234 Latitude: 9548 Global ID: UST: ATTRACTION : SAW LEAK : WILL CONDUCT ADDITIONAL ASSESSMENT Haz Mat incident report filed : AT RAILROAD ROUNDHOUSE NEAR SMALL WORLD Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: DISNEYLAND (Continued) U003713747 TC2760975.1s Page 275 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Number Of Tanks: Not reported Content: PRODUCT Stg: EMPTY Tank Use: 250 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-003609-000020 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: Not reported Ref Date: 44-016067 Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 3609 Comp Number: Not reported Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: Not reported Content: PRODUCT Stg: EMPTY Tank Use: 250 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-003609-000019 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: Not reported Ref Date: 44-016067 Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 3609 Comp Number: Not reported Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: Not reported Content: PRODUCT Stg: EMPTY Tank Use: 250 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-003609-000018 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: Not reported Ref Date: 44-016067 Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 3609 Comp Number: Not reported Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: INERT MATERI Content: PRODUCT Stg: EMPTY Tank Use: 250 Capacity: DISNEYLAND (Continued) U003713747 TC2760975.1s Page 276 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 05-24-94 Act Date: 01-13-94 Ref Date: 44-016067 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 3609 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: DIESEL Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: 08-03-92 Actv Date: 30-011-003609-000007 Tank Id: 4 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 05-24-94 Act Date: 01-13-94 Ref Date: 44-016067 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 3609 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: DIESEL Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: 08-03-92 Actv Date: 30-011-003609-000002 Tank Id: 3 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 05-24-94 Act Date: 01-13-94 Ref Date: 44-016067 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 3609 Comp Number: A Status: 11 Number Of Tanks: DIESEL Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: 05-17-93 Actv Date: 30-011-003609-000001 Tank Id: 10 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 05-24-94 Act Date: 01-13-94 Ref Date: 44-016067 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 3609 Comp Number: A Status: DISNEYLAND (Continued) U003713747 TC2760975.1s Page 277 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 10000 Capacity: 08-03-92 Actv Date: 30-011-003609-000011 Tank Id: 8 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 05-24-94 Act Date: 01-13-94 Ref Date: 44-016067 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 3609 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 9940 Capacity: 08-03-92 Actv Date: 30-011-003609-000010 Tank Id: 7 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 05-24-94 Act Date: 01-13-94 Ref Date: 44-016067 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 3609 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: 08-03-92 Actv Date: 30-011-003609-000009 Tank Id: 6 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 05-24-94 Act Date: 01-13-94 Ref Date: 44-016067 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 3609 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: DIESEL Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 9940 Capacity: 08-03-92 Actv Date: 30-011-003609-000008 Tank Id: 5 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: DISNEYLAND (Continued) U003713747 TC2760975.1s Page 278 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: DIESEL Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 1000 Capacity: 08-03-92 Actv Date: 30-011-003609-000016 Tank Id: 15 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 05-24-94 Act Date: 01-13-94 Ref Date: 44-016067 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 3609 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 6000 Capacity: 08-03-92 Actv Date: 30-011-003609-000013 Tank Id: 12 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 05-24-94 Act Date: 01-13-94 Ref Date: 44-016067 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 3609 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: DIESEL Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: 08-03-92 Actv Date: 30-011-003609-000012 Tank Id: 9 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 05-24-94 Act Date: 01-13-94 Ref Date: 44-016067 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 3609 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: DISNEYLAND (Continued) U003713747 TC2760975.1s Page 279 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Spill Site: storm drain, Anaheim Barber Channel Waterway: Yes Waterway Involved: Not reported Facility Telephone: Not reported Comments: Not reported Report Date: Not reported Reporting Officer Name/ID: Not reported Company Name: Not reported CA/DOT/PUC/ICC Number: Not reported Vehicle Id Number: Not reported Vehicle State: Not reported Vehicle License Number: Not reported Vehicle Make/year: Not reported Others Number Of Fatalities: Not reported Others Number Of Injuries: Not reported Others Number Of Decontaminated: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Fatalities: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Injuries: Not reported Resp Agncy Personel # Of Decontaminated: Not reported More Than Two Substances Involved?: Not reported Special Studies 6: Not reported Special Studies 5: Not reported Special Studies 4: Not reported Special Studies 3: Not reported Special Studies 2: Not reported Special Studies 1: Not reported Property Management: Not reported Estimated Temperature: Not reported Surrounding Area: Not reported Time Completed: Not reported Time Notified: Not reported Agency Incident Number: Not reported Agency Id Number: Not reported Property Use: Not reported Date Completed: Not reported Incident Date: Not reported OES Time: Not reported OES Date: 4/7/200003:39:15 PM OES notification: 00-1607 OES Incident Number: CHMIRS: Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: 08-03-92 Actv Date: 30-011-003609-000025 Tank Id: 2 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 05-24-94 Act Date: 01-13-94 Ref Date: 44-016067 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 3609 Comp Number: DISNEYLAND (Continued) U003713747 TC2760975.1s Page 280 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Closed pre 1994, file review required to determine closure type Closure Type: CLOSED 8/14/1991 Current Status: RO0000185 Record ID: ORANGE Region: 89IC011 Case ID: WASTE (OR SLOP) OIL Released Chemical: Closed pre 1994, file review required to determine closure type Closure Type: CLOSED 10/22/1991 Current Status: RO0000236 Record ID: ORANGE Region: 89IC007 Case ID: WASTE (OR SLOP) OIL Released Chemical: Closed pre 1994, file review required to determine closure type Closure Type: CLOSED 9/14/1990 Current Status: RO0000152 Record ID: ORANGE Region: 88IC068 Case ID: Orange Co. Industrial Site: released into the storm drain system. Released caused by a sewage backup in the kitchen. The sewage Description: 0 Number of Fatalities: 0 Number of Injuries: 0 Evacuations: Not reported Description: 0 Unknown: 0 Tons: 0 Sheen: 0 Quarts: 0 Pints: 0 Ounces: 0 Liters: 0 Pounds: 0 Grams: 3000 Gallons: 0 CUFT: 0 Cups: 0 BBLS: Not reported Quantity Released: raw sewage Substance: Not reported E Date: Other Site Type: Yes Contained: Not reported Amount: Anaheim Fire Department Admin Agency: 4/7/200012:00:00 AM Incident Date: Disneyland Agency: 2000 Year: Not reported Date/Time: Not reported Other: Not reported Measure: Not reported Type: Not reported What Happened: Not reported Containment: Contractor Cleanup By: DISNEYLAND (Continued) U003713747 TC2760975.1s Page 281 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation CAD000633164 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928033232 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 3232 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: WALT DISNEY WORLD COMPANY Contact: CAD027828250 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .6375 Tons: Treatment, Tank Disposal Method: Other organic solids Waste Category: Imperial TSD County: CAD000633164 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928033232 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 3232 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: WALT DISNEY WORLD COMPANY Contact: CAD027828250 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 9.2068 Tons: Treatment, Tank Disposal Method: Other inorganic solid waste Waste Category: Imperial TSD County: CAD000633164 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928033232 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 3232 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: WALT DISNEY WORLD COMPANY Contact: CAD027828250 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 1.3750 Tons: Disposal, Land Fill Disposal Method: Other organic solids Waste Category: Imperial TSD County: CAD000633164 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928033232 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 3232 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: WALT DISNEY WORLD COMPANY Contact: CAD027828250 Gepaid: HAZNET: LEAD COMPOUNDS Released Chemical: DISNEYLAND (Continued) U003713747 TC2760975.1s Page 282 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 11.4375373 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 14.682 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: .221 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 36.82 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 57.834 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 4.871 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 14.11462856770570192 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7996 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 800189 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 2006 Year: EMI: 336 additional CA_HAZNET: record(s) in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access Orange Facility County: 15.8460 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Oil/water separation sludge Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928033232 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 3232 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: WALT DISNEY WORLD COMPANY Contact: CAD027828250 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 30.3408 Tons: Disposal, Land Fill Disposal Method: Asbestos-containing waste Waste Category: Imperial TSD County: DISNEYLAND (Continued) U003713747 Diesel Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083002812T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 4806 ft. Site 5 of 12 in cluster AN 0.910 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 142 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 North 1313 HARBOR BLVD N/A AN208 LUST DISNEYLAND TOMORROWLAND RR ST. S100933981 TC2760975.1s Page 283 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: ROW Staff Initials: NOM Staff: * MTBE Class: MTBE Detected. Site tested for MTBE & MTBE detected MTBE Tested: 0 MTBE Fuel: .05 Max MTBE Soil: 1 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8149817 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: < Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 6/17/1996 Enter Date: 8/9/1999 Monitoring: 6/15/1998 Remed Action: 10/8/1997 Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 2/23/2000 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 3/4/1996 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: 3/21/1996 Review Date: 6/17/1996 Enter Date: Not reported How Stopped Date: T0605901936 Global ID: Not reported Leak Source: Not reported Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Not reported How Discovered: Not reported Funding: Not reported Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: DISNEYLAND TOMORROWLAND RR ST. (Continued) S100933981 TC2760975.1s Page 284 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: RM Staff Initials: NOM Staff: D MTBE Class: MTBE Detected. Site tested for MTBE & MTBE detected MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: 1.1 Max MTBE Soil: 2 MTBE Concentration: 2 Max MTBE GW: 11/22/1999 MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8033549 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: = Soil Qualifies: = GW Qualifies: 11/4/1999 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: 1/15/2004 Remed Action: 2/5/2003 Remed Plan: 6/13/2000 Pollution Char: 10/21/1999 Workplan: Not reported Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 10/21/1999 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: 10/21/1999 Review Date: 11/4/1999 Enter Date: Not reported How Stopped Date: T0605902330 Global ID: Not reported Leak Source: Not reported Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Not reported How Discovered: Not reported Funding: Not reported Enf Type: KATELLA Cross Street: EDVE Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Gasoline Substance: Other ground water affected Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083003568T Case Number: Remedial action (cleanup) Underway Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 4806 ft. Site 6 of 12 in cluster AN 0.910 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 142 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 North 1313 HARBOR BLVD N/A AN209 LUST DISNEYLAND-AUTOPIA S104405118 TC2760975.1s Page 285 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Summary: No Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: DISNEYLAND-AUTOPIA (Continued) S104405118 Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Other Groundwater (uses other than drinking water) Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083003568T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 2009-03-27 00:00:00 Status Date: Open - Assessment & Interim Remedial Action Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8033549 Latitude: T0605902330 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 4812 ft. Site 7 of 12 in cluster AN 0.911 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 142 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 North 1313 S HARBOR BLVD N/A AN210 LUST DISNEYLAND-AUTOPIA S109284593 Not reported Site History: Waste Oil / Motor / Hydraulic / Lubricating Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: 083000903T LOC Case Number: 083000903T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 1994-11-10 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -117.918985 Longitude: 33.80907 Latitude: T0605900717 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 4812 ft. Site 8 of 12 in cluster AN 0.911 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 142 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92803 North 1313 S HARBOR BLVD N/A AN211 LUST DISNEYLAND - MATERHORN S109284388 TC2760975.1s Page 286 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Site History: Diesel Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083002708T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 1996-10-24 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -117.918985 Longitude: 33.80907 Latitude: T0605901880 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 4812 ft. Site 9 of 12 in cluster AN 0.911 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 142 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 North 1313 S HARBOR BLVD N/A AN212 LUST DISNEYLAND, FUEL STATION S109284594 Not reported Site History: Diesel Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083002812T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 2000-02-23 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -117.918985 Longitude: 33.80907 Latitude: T0605901936 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 4812 ft. Site 10 of 12 in cluster AN 0.911 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 142 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 North 1313 S HARBOR BLVD N/A AN213 LUST DISNEYLAND TOMORROWLAND RR ST. S109284577 33.813894 Latitude: T0605999311 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 4812 ft. Site 11 of 12 in cluster AN 0.911 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 142 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 North 1313 W HARBOR BLVD. N/A AN214 LUST DISNEYLAND - ROUNDHOUSE S109284918 TC2760975.1s Page 287 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Site History: Diesel Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: 083003819T LOC Case Number: 083003819T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 2002-03-05 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -117.915541 Longitude: DISNEYLAND - ROUNDHOUSE (Continued) S109284918 Not reported Site History: Diesel Potential Contaminants of Concern: Not reported Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083003829T RB Case Number: Not reported Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 2002-03-05 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -117.918985 Longitude: 33.80907 Latitude: T060597891 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 4812 ft. Site 12 of 12 in cluster AN 0.911 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 142 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA North 1313 SOUTH HARBOR N/A AN215 LUST DISNEYLAND ROUNDHOUSE FACILITY S109283870 083001634T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 1991-02-01 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8121759 Latitude: T0605901242 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 4924 ft. Site 3 of 4 in cluster AM 0.933 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 148 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NNE 1460 S ANAHEIM BLVD N/A AM216 LUST ANIK STOP S109284439 TC2760975.1s Page 288 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: ANIK STOP (Continued) S109284439 Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083000719T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 1998-08-19 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -117.89824 Longitude: 33.80297 Latitude: T0605900569 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 4927 ft. 0.933 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 146 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92801 ENE 818 E KATELLA AVE N/A 217 LUST TEXACO SERVICE STATION S109284194 Not reported Funding: CLOS Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Gasoline Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083001634T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 083001634T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: CORTESE: 4930 ft. Site 4 of 4 in cluster AM 0.934 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 148 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NNE LUST 1460 ANAHEIM BLVD N/A AM218 HIST CORTESE ANIK STOP S102424019 TC2760975.1s Page 289 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation GASOLINE AND DIESEL CONTAMINATION PRESENT IN THE SOIL. Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: ROW Staff Initials: PAH Staff: * MTBE Class: Site NOT Tested for MTBE.Includes Unknown and Not Analyzed. MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8121009 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 9/16/1990 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 2/1/1991 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 7/3/1990 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: 10/20/1989 Review Date: 9/16/1990 Enter Date: Not reported How Stopped Date: T0605901242 Global ID: Not reported Leak Source: Not reported Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Not reported How Discovered: ANIK STOP (Continued) S102424019 3589 Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located: Not reported Whether The Facility Is Grandfathered: Still operating Date facility ceased operating: 7/1/2006 Date facility began operating: 6/12/2006 Date facility became certified: (714) 417-0188 Facility Phone Number: O Certification Status: 5000 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster AO 0.947 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 108 ft. 1/2-1 GARDEN GROVE, CA 92840 SW 12048 WEST ST N/A AO219 BAUTISTA RECYCLING CENTER S107869751 TC2760975.1s Page 290 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Refillable Beverage Containers Redeemed: Not reported Other mat beverage containers redeemed: PL Plastic Beverage Containers Redeemed: GL Glass Beverage Containers Redeemed: AL Aluminum Beverage Containers Redeemed: Not Accepted Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located 7: Not Accepted Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located 6: Not Accepted Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located 5: Not Accepted Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located 4: Not Accepted Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located 3: Not Accepted Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located 2: BAUTISTA RECYCLING CENTER (Continued) S107869751 Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: 90UT209 LOC Case Number: 083001680T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 1995-10-09 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -117.897519 Longitude: 33.802991 Latitude: T0605901266 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 5025 ft. Site 1 of 4 in cluster AP 0.952 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 146 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ENE 1818 S LEWIS ST N/A AP220 LUST TOSCO - 76 STATION #8800 S109284523 Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083004021T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 2009-03-27 00:00:00 Status Date: Open - Site Assessment Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -117.897475 Longitude: 33.802988 Latitude: T0605983677 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 5026 ft. Site 2 of 4 in cluster AP 0.952 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 146 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92806 ENE 1818 S. LEWIS N/A AP221 LUST STEVE CRAIG PROPERTY S106875010 TC2760975.1s Page 291 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: STEVE CRAIG PROPERTY (Continued) S106875010 Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 1/16/2002 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: Not reported Discover Date: 5/1/2001 Prelim Assess: Not reported Review Date: Not reported Enter Date: Not reported How Stopped Date: T060590323 Global ID: D Leak Source: Other Cause Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: FI How Discovered: Not reported Funding: Not reported Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Diesel Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083003827T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: Not reported Site History: Diesel Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083003827T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 2002-01-16 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: 0 Longitude: 0 Latitude: T060590323 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 5026 ft. Site 3 of 4 in cluster AP 0.952 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 146 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA ENE HAZNET 1818 SOUTH LEWIS STREET N/A AP222 LUST TOSCO/76 SS #8800 S101299297 TC2760975.1s Page 292 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Treatment, Tank Disposal Method: Aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD028409019 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SANTA ANA, CA 927995376 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 25376 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: UNION OIL COMPANY OF CALIFORNI Contact: CAL000046690 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .1709 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Aqueous solution with 10% or more total organic residues Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080011059 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SANTA ANA, CA 927995376 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 25376 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: UNION OIL COMPANY OF CALIFORNI Contact: CAL000046690 Gepaid: HAZNET: Haz Mat incident report filed : LEAKING DISPENSER REPAIRED : BAD SEAL Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: Not reported Hydr Basin Not reported Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: ROW Staff Initials: NOM Staff: * MTBE Class: Not Required to be Tested. MTBE Tested: 0 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: 0 Longitude: 0 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: Not reported Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: 5/17/2001 Remed Action: TOSCO/76 SS #8800 (Continued) S101299297 TC2760975.1s Page 293 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: .2919 Tons: TOSCO/76 SS #8800 (Continued) S101299297 ROW Staff Initials: NOM Staff: * MTBE Class: Site NOT Tested for MTBE.Includes Unknown and Not Analyzed. MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8029081 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 12/15/1990 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 10/9/1995 Close Date: 1/1/1965 Enforcement Date: 9/19/1990 Discover Date: 10/3/1990 Prelim Assess: 9/19/1990 Review Date: 12/15/1990 Enter Date: 9/19/1990 How Stopped Date: T0605901266 Global ID: UNK Leak Source: UNK Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Tank Closure How Discovered: Not reported Funding: None Taken Enf Type: KATELLA Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Gasoline Substance: Soil only Case Type: 90UT209 Local Case Num: 083001680T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 5026 ft. Site 4 of 4 in cluster AP 0.952 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 146 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ENE 1818 LEWIS ST N/A AP223 LUST TOSCO - 76 STATION #8800 S105693568 TC2760975.1s Page 294 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: TOSCO - 76 STATION #8800 (Continued) S105693568 Not reported Refillable Beverage Containers Redeemed: Not reported Other mat beverage containers redeemed: PL Plastic Beverage Containers Redeemed: GL Glass Beverage Containers Redeemed: AL Aluminum Beverage Containers Redeemed: Not Accepted Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located 7: Not Accepted Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located 6: Not Accepted Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located 5: Not Accepted Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located 4: Not Accepted Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located 3: Not Accepted Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located 2: Not Accepted Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located: Not reported Whether The Facility Is Grandfathered: 8/19/1992 Date facility ceased operating: 9/6/1991 Date facility began operating: 7/29/1991 Date facility became certified: (000) 000-0000 Facility Phone Number: R Certification Status: 5027 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster AO 0.952 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 107 ft. 1/2-1 GARDEN GROVE, CA 92840 SW 12062 WEST ST N/A AO224 RECYCLO S107137710 AL Aluminum Beverage Containers Redeemed: Not Accepted Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located 7: Not Accepted Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located 6: Not Accepted Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located 5: Not Accepted Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located 4: Not Accepted Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located 3: Not Accepted Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located 2: 4752 Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located: Not reported Whether The Facility Is Grandfathered: Still operating Date facility ceased operating: 6/26/2006 Date facility began operating: 6/8/2006 Date facility became certified: (714) 465-6732 Facility Phone Number: O Certification Status: 5095 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster AQ 0.965 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 148 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NNE 1459 S ANAHEIM BLVD N/A AQ225 SANCHEZ RECYCLING CENTER S107869743 TC2760975.1s Page 295 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Refillable Beverage Containers Redeemed: Not reported Other mat beverage containers redeemed: PL Plastic Beverage Containers Redeemed: GL Glass Beverage Containers Redeemed: SANCHEZ RECYCLING CENTER (Continued) S107869743 Not reported Refillable Beverage Containers Redeemed: Not reported Other mat beverage containers redeemed: PL Plastic Beverage Containers Redeemed: GL Glass Beverage Containers Redeemed: AL Aluminum Beverage Containers Redeemed: Not Accepted Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located 7: Not Accepted Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located 6: Not Accepted Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located 5: Not Accepted Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located 4: Not Accepted Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located 3: Not Accepted Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located 2: 4752 Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located: Not reported Whether The Facility Is Grandfathered: Still operating Date facility ceased operating: 10/21/1999 Date facility began operating: 9/30/1999 Date facility became certified: Not reported Facility Phone Number: O Certification Status: 5243 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster AQ 0.993 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 149 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NNE 1440 S ANAHEIM BLVD N/A AQ226 B J RECYCLING S107136678 (415) 972-3095 Contact Tel: Jeff Inglis Contact Name: Not reported Contact Title: (415) 972-3162 Contact Tel: Brunilda Davila Contact Name: Not reported Contact Title: (415) 972-3814 Contact Tel: Carl Brickner Contact Name: Not reported Contact Title: CERCLIS-NFRAP Site Contact Name(s): NFRAP Non NPL Status: Not on the NPL NPL Status: Not a Federal Facility Federal Facility: 0900449 Site ID: CERC-NFRAP: 5392 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster AR 1.021 mi. ENVIROSTOR Relative: Higher Actual: 147 ft. > 1 FINDS ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ENE RCRA-SQG 1000 E KATELLA ST CAD049903271 AR227 CERC-NFRAP ORANGE EMPIRE HEAT TREATING [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 296 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: DOWNEY HEAT TREATING COMPANY Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: Not reported Contact telephone: Not reported Contact country: Not reported Not reported Contact address: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 E KATELLA ST Mailing address: CAD049903271 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 1000 E KATELLA ST Facility address: ORANGE EMPIRE HEAT TREATING Facility name: 09/01/1996 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: Not reported Priority Level: 11/14/1988 Date Completed: Not reported Date Started: ARCHIVE SITE Action: NFRAP: No further Remedial Action planned Priority Level: 11/14/1988 Date Completed: Not reported Date Started: PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT Action: Not reported Priority Level: 12/01/1987 Date Completed: Not reported Date Started: DISCOVERY Action: CERCLIS-NFRAP Assessment History: CA Not reported Alias Address: ORANGE EMPIRE HEAT TREATING Alias Name: CERCLIS-NFRAP Site Alias Name(s): (415) 972-3096 Contact Tel: Matt Mitguard Contact Name: Not reported Contact Title: (415) 972-3219 Contact Tel: Karen Jurist Contact Name: Not reported Contact Title: ORANGE EMPIRE HEAT TREATING (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 297 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation NONE SPECIFIED Lead Agency: NONE SPECIFIED Regulatory Agencies: NO NPL: Not reported Acres: * Historical Site Type Detailed: Historical Site Type: ENVIROSTOR: corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource Environmental Interest/Information System 110002647734 Registry ID: FINDS: No violations found Violation Status: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: Unknown Furnace exemption: Unknown On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): Unknown U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: ORANGE EMPIRE HEAT TREATING (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 298 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Schedule Area Name: Not reported Future Due Date: Not reported Future Document Type: Not reported Future Sub Area Name: Not reported Future Area Name: FACILITY IDENTIFIED PHONE BOOK SEARCH (1971) Comments: 1981-09-01 00:00:00 Completed Date: * Discovery Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: SITE SCREENING DONE MORE INFO NEEDED Comments: 1987-05-21 00:00:00 Completed Date: Site Screening Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: PROBLEM PRELIM ASSESS DONE HISTORICAL RECORDS DO NOT INDICATE FAC WAS A Comments: 1988-04-20 00:00:00 Completed Date: Preliminary Assessment Report Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: DATABASE VALIDATION PROGRAM CONFIRMS NFA FOR DTSC. Comments: 1994-10-28 00:00:00 Completed Date: Site Screening Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Completed Info: Envirostor ID Number Alias Type: 30330009 Alias Name: EPA Identification Number Alias Type: CAD049903271 Alias Name: Alternate Name Alias Type: LEONARDO MARBLE Alias Name: NONE SPECIFIED Potential Description: NONE SPECIFIED Confirmed COC: 10195 Potential COC: NONE SPECIFIED Past Use: NONE SPECIFIED APN: -117.896630534664 Longitude: 33.8026958000869 Latitude: Not reported Funding: NONE SPECIFIED Site Mgmt. Req.: NO Restricted Use: 1988-04-20 00:00:00 Status Date: Refer: Other Agency Status: * CERC2 Special Program: 34 Senate: 69 Assembly: Not reported Site Code: 30330009 Facility ID: Cypress Division Branch: * MMONROY Supervisor: Not reported Program Manager: ORANGE EMPIRE HEAT TREATING (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.1s Page 299 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Schedule Revised Date: Not reported Schedule Due Date: Not reported Schedule Document Type: Not reported Schedule Sub Area Name: ORANGE EMPIRE HEAT TREATING (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Completed Info: APN Alias Type: 375-381-35 Alias Name: APN Alias Type: 083-751-14 Alias Name: APN Alias Type: 375-381-34 Alias Name: Project Code (Site Code) Alias Type: 404830 Alias Name: Envirostor ID Number Alias Type: 60001110 Alias Name: APN Alias Type: 083-751-15 Alias Name: APN Alias Type: 083-751-01 Alias Name: SOIL, SV, UE Potential Description: 30022,30484,30018,30027 Confirmed COC: 30018, 30022, 30027, 30484 Potential COC: STORAGE TANKS, VEHICLE MAINTENANCE, TRANSPORTATION - WAREHOUSING ABOVE GROUND STORAGE TANKS, AGRICULTURAL - ORCHARD, UNDERGROUND Past Use: 375-381-34, 375-381-35, 083-751-14, 083-751-01, 083-751-15 APN: -117.8966 Longitude: 33.8033 Latitude: School District Funding: NO Restricted Use: 2009-10-23 00:00:00 Status Date: Inactive - Action Required Status: Not reported Special Program Status: 33, 34 Senate: 69, 72 Assembly: 404830 Site Code: Cypress Division Branch: Shahir Haddad Supervisor: CHRISTINE CHIU Project Manager: DTSC - Site Mitigation And Brownfield Reuse Program Lead Agency Description: Lead Agency: Cleanup Oversight Agencies: NO National Priorities List: 3.76 Acres: NONE SPECIFIED Site Mgmt. Req.: School Site Type Detail: School Investigation Site Type: 60001110 Facility ID: SCH: 5446 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster AR 1.031 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 147 ft. > 1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ENE ENVIROSTOR 1016 EAST KATELLA AVENUE N/A AR228 SCH PLATINUM TRIANGLE S109548352 TC2760975.1s Page 300 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation On 10/23/2009, DTSC prepared & transmitted the project close out Cost Comments: 2009-10-23 00:00:00 Completed Date: Cost Recovery Closeout Memo Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: ready. however, that a summary data report will be submitted to DTSC when the Agreement effective immediately. The letter also indicates, August 12, 2009, with notification that the District is terminating On August 17, 2009, DTSC received a letter from the District, dated Comments: 2009-08-17 00:00:00 Completed Date: Agreement Terminated Notification Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Signed agreement sent (FedEx) to District. Comments: 2009-06-10 00:00:00 Completed Date: Environmental Oversight Agreement Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: to risk and hazard. 10-5 and the total hazard index as 17. PCE is the primary contributor due to chlorinated compounds via the vapor intrusion pathway as 1.5 x of PCE; 20 ug/l of TCE. The risk evaluation estimated the cancer risk in soil gas include the following: 0.15 ug/l of naphthalene; 580 ug/l results from fieldwork conducted in July 2009. Maximum concentrations Report. The report summarized the soil and soil vapor sampling the District terminated the EOA (August 2009) prior to receipt of the DTSC did not review the Environmental Assessment Summary Report since Comments: 2009-10-22 00:00:00 Completed Date: Technical Report Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: line of sight of the proposed school property. and 1016 E. Katella properties and delivered to properties within the Work Notice and was informed that the Notice was posted at the 1010 Via email on July 7, 2009, DTSC received a final copy of the Field Comments: 2009-07-07 00:00:00 Completed Date: Public Notice Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: On July 10, 2009, fieldwork was completed per District’s consultant. Comments: 2009-07-10 00:00:00 Completed Date: Fieldwork Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: and provided comments on the site sampling plan. appeared consistent with discussions with the District’s consultant Via email on 07/03/2009, DTSC noted that the site sampling plan Comments: 2009-07-03 00:00:00 Completed Date: Technical Workplan Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PLATINUM TRIANGLE (Continued) S109548352 TC2760975.1s Page 301 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Completed Info: APN Alias Type: 375-381-35 Alias Name: APN Alias Type: 083-751-14 Alias Name: APN Alias Type: 375-381-34 Alias Name: Project Code (Site Code) Alias Type: 404830 Alias Name: Envirostor ID Number Alias Type: 60001110 Alias Name: APN Alias Type: 083-751-15 Alias Name: APN Alias Type: 083-751-01 Alias Name: SOIL, SV, UE Potential Description: 30022,30484,30018,30027 Confirmed COC: 30018, 30022, 30027, 30484 Potential COC: STORAGE TANKS, VEHICLE MAINTENANCE, TRANSPORTATION - WAREHOUSING ABOVE GROUND STORAGE TANKS, AGRICULTURAL - ORCHARD, UNDERGROUND Past Use: 375-381-34, 375-381-35, 083-751-14, 083-751-01, 083-751-15 APN: -117.8966 Longitude: 33.8033 Latitude: School District Funding: NONE SPECIFIED Site Mgmt. Req.: NO Restricted Use: 2009-10-23 00:00:00 Status Date: Inactive - Action Required Status: Not reported Special Program: 33, 34 Senate: 69, 72 Assembly: 404830 Site Code: 60001110 Facility ID: Cypress Division Branch: Shahir Haddad Supervisor: CHRISTINE CHIU Program Manager: Lead Agency: Regulatory Agencies: NO NPL: 3.76 Acres: School Site Type Detailed: School Investigation Site Type: ENVIROSTOR: Not reported Schedule Revised Date: Not reported Schedule Due Date: Not reported Schedule Document Type: Not reported Schedule Sub Area Name: Not reported Schedule Area Name: Not reported Future Due Date: Not reported Future Document Type: Not reported Future Sub Area Name: Not reported Future Area Name: Recovery Unit Memorandum. PLATINUM TRIANGLE (Continued) S109548352 TC2760975.1s Page 302 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation On 10/23/2009, DTSC prepared & transmitted the project close out Cost Comments: 2009-10-23 00:00:00 Completed Date: Cost Recovery Closeout Memo Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: ready. however, that a summary data report will be submitted to DTSC when the Agreement effective immediately. The letter also indicates, August 12, 2009, with notification that the District is terminating On August 17, 2009, DTSC received a letter from the District, dated Comments: 2009-08-17 00:00:00 Completed Date: Agreement Terminated Notification Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Signed agreement sent (FedEx) to District. Comments: 2009-06-10 00:00:00 Completed Date: Environmental Oversight Agreement Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: to risk and hazard. 10-5 and the total hazard index as 17. PCE is the primary contributor due to chlorinated compounds via the vapor intrusion pathway as 1.5 x of PCE; 20 ug/l of TCE. The risk evaluation estimated the cancer risk in soil gas include the following: 0.15 ug/l of naphthalene; 580 ug/l results from fieldwork conducted in July 2009. Maximum concentrations Report. The report summarized the soil and soil vapor sampling the District terminated the EOA (August 2009) prior to receipt of the DTSC did not review the Environmental Assessment Summary Report since Comments: 2009-10-22 00:00:00 Completed Date: Technical Report Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: line of sight of the proposed school property. and 1016 E. Katella properties and delivered to properties within the Work Notice and was informed that the Notice was posted at the 1010 Via email on July 7, 2009, DTSC received a final copy of the Field Comments: 2009-07-07 00:00:00 Completed Date: Public Notice Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: On July 10, 2009, fieldwork was completed per District’s consultant. Comments: 2009-07-10 00:00:00 Completed Date: Fieldwork Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: and provided comments on the site sampling plan. appeared consistent with discussions with the District’s consultant Via email on 07/03/2009, DTSC noted that the site sampling plan Comments: 2009-07-03 00:00:00 Completed Date: Technical Workplan Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PLATINUM TRIANGLE (Continued) S109548352 TC2760975.1s Page 303 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Schedule Revised Date: Not reported Schedule Due Date: Not reported Schedule Document Type: Not reported Schedule Sub Area Name: Not reported Schedule Area Name: Not reported Future Due Date: Not reported Future Document Type: Not reported Future Sub Area Name: Not reported Future Area Name: Recovery Unit Memorandum. PLATINUM TRIANGLE (Continued) S109548352 Not reported Future Document Type: Not reported Future Sub Area Name: Not reported Future Area Name: SB 1248 Orange County Comments: 2001-02-20 00:00:00 Completed Date: SB 1248 Notification Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Completed Info: Envirostor ID Number Alias Type: 30300130 Alias Name: NONE SPECIFIED Potential Description: NONE SPECIFIED Confirmed COC: NONE SPECIFIED Potential COC: NONE SPECIFIED Past Use: NONE SPECIFIED APN: -117.900991804765 Longitude: 33.8116393672691 Latitude: Not Applicable Funding: NONE SPECIFIED Site Mgmt. Req.: NO Restricted Use: 2001-03-02 00:00:00 Status Date: Refer: 1248 Local Agency Status: Not reported Special Program: 34 Senate: 69 Assembly: Not reported Site Code: 30300130 Facility ID: Cypress Division Branch: Referred - Not Assigned Supervisor: Not reported Program Manager: NONE SPECIFIED Lead Agency: NONE SPECIFIED Regulatory Agencies: NO NPL: Not reported Acres: Evaluation Site Type Detailed: Evaluation Site Type: ENVIROSTOR: 5559 ft. 1.053 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 153 ft. > 1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NE 611 EAST CERRITOS AVENUE N/A 229 ENVIROSTOR SILGAN PLASTICS CORPORATION S106797612 TC2760975.1s Page 304 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Schedule Revised Date: Not reported Schedule Due Date: Not reported Schedule Document Type: Not reported Schedule Sub Area Name: Not reported Schedule Area Name: Not reported Future Due Date: SILGAN PLASTICS CORPORATION (Continued) S106797612 the information presented in the PEA, neither an actual a potential DTSC approved the Preliminary Endangerment Assessment (PEA). Based on Comments: 2001-10-31 00:00:00 Completed Date: Preliminary Endangerment Assessment Report Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Completed Info: Alternate Name Alias Type: ANAHEIM CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT Alias Name: Envirostor ID Number Alias Type: 30880002 Alias Name: Project Code (Site Code) Alias Type: 404118 Alias Name: Alternate Name Alias Type: REVERE SCHOOL EXPANSION Alias Name: SOIL Potential Description: 40001-NO,30013-NO Confirmed COC: 40001, 30013 Potential COC: RESIDENTIAL AREA Past Use: NONE SPECIFIED APN: -117.899080633358 Longitude: 33.8228454954444 Latitude: School District Funding: NO Restricted Use: 2001-10-31 00:00:00 Status Date: No Further Action Status: Not reported Special Program Status: 34 Senate: 69 Assembly: 404118 Site Code: Cypress Division Branch: Javier Hinojosa Supervisor: GREG NEAL Project Manager: DTSC - Site Mitigation And Brownfield Reuse Program Lead Agency Description: Lead Agency: Cleanup Oversight Agencies: NO National Priorities List: 1.78 Acres: NONE SPECIFIED Site Mgmt. Req.: School Site Type Detail: School Investigation Site Type: 30880002 Facility ID: SCH: 5579 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster AS 1.057 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 147 ft. > 1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NNE ENVIROSTOR 126/132/138/144/150/WEST GUINIDA LANE N/A AS230 SCH REVERE SCHOOL EXPANSION S105628714 TC2760975.1s Page 305 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 404118 Site Code: 30880002 Facility ID: Cypress Division Branch: Javier Hinojosa Supervisor: GREG NEAL Program Manager: Lead Agency: Regulatory Agencies: NO NPL: 1.78 Acres: School Site Type Detailed: School Investigation Site Type: ENVIROSTOR: Not reported Schedule Revised Date: Not reported Schedule Due Date: Not reported Schedule Document Type: Not reported Schedule Sub Area Name: Not reported Schedule Area Name: Not reported Future Due Date: Not reported Future Document Type: Not reported Future Sub Area Name: Not reported Future Area Name: CRU Memo Completed. Comments: 2007-06-19 00:00:00 Completed Date: Cost Recovery Closeout Memo Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Revere Expansion site. oversight for a Preliminary Endangerment Assessment for the proposed HSA-A 00/01-158) with Anaheim City School District to provide DTSC entered into an Environmental Oversight Agreement (Docket Number Comments: 2001-01-30 00:00:00 Completed Date: Environmental Oversight Agreement Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: an agreement with DTSC and ACSD. activities (if needed) after the PEA would be conducted pursuant to Anaheim City School District (ACSD). Any subsequent cleanup under DTSC’s oversight pursuant to an agreement between DTSC and the Endangerment Assessment (PEA) is required. The PEA will be conducted Environmental Assessment and has determined that a Preliminary DTSC’s Site Mitigation Program completed review of a Phase I Substances Control (DTSC) and the California Department of Education, Phase I - Pursuant to an agreement between the Department of Toxic Comments: 2000-07-07 00:00:00 Completed Date: Phase 1 Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: required at this site, and approved the PEA. concurred that no further environmental investigation or cleanup was human health or the environment under any land use. Therefore, DTSC occurring hazardous material indicated at the site pose threat to release of hazardous material, nor the presence of naturally REVERE SCHOOL EXPANSION (Continued) S105628714 TC2760975.1s Page 306 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation oversight for a Preliminary Endangerment Assessment for the proposed HSA-A 00/01-158) with Anaheim City School District to provide DTSC entered into an Environmental Oversight Agreement (Docket Number Comments: 2001-01-30 00:00:00 Completed Date: Environmental Oversight Agreement Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: an agreement with DTSC and ACSD. activities (if needed) after the PEA would be conducted pursuant to Anaheim City School District (ACSD). Any subsequent cleanup under DTSC’s oversight pursuant to an agreement between DTSC and the Endangerment Assessment (PEA) is required. The PEA will be conducted Environmental Assessment and has determined that a Preliminary DTSC’s Site Mitigation Program completed review of a Phase I Substances Control (DTSC) and the California Department of Education, Phase I - Pursuant to an agreement between the Department of Toxic Comments: 2000-07-07 00:00:00 Completed Date: Phase 1 Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: required at this site, and approved the PEA. concurred that no further environmental investigation or cleanup was human health or the environment under any land use. Therefore, DTSC occurring hazardous material indicated at the site pose threat to release of hazardous material, nor the presence of naturally the information presented in the PEA, neither an actual a potential DTSC approved the Preliminary Endangerment Assessment (PEA). Based on Comments: 2001-10-31 00:00:00 Completed Date: Preliminary Endangerment Assessment Report Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Completed Info: Alternate Name Alias Type: ANAHEIM CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT Alias Name: Envirostor ID Number Alias Type: 30880002 Alias Name: Project Code (Site Code) Alias Type: 404118 Alias Name: Alternate Name Alias Type: REVERE SCHOOL EXPANSION Alias Name: SOIL Potential Description: 40001-NO,30013-NO Confirmed COC: 40001, 30013 Potential COC: RESIDENTIAL AREA Past Use: NONE SPECIFIED APN: -117.899080633358 Longitude: 33.8228454954444 Latitude: School District Funding: NONE SPECIFIED Site Mgmt. Req.: NO Restricted Use: 2001-10-31 00:00:00 Status Date: No Further Action Status: Not reported Special Program: 34 Senate: 69 Assembly: REVERE SCHOOL EXPANSION (Continued) S105628714 TC2760975.1s Page 307 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Schedule Revised Date: Not reported Schedule Due Date: Not reported Schedule Document Type: Not reported Schedule Sub Area Name: Not reported Schedule Area Name: Not reported Future Due Date: Not reported Future Document Type: Not reported Future Sub Area Name: Not reported Future Area Name: CRU Memo Completed. Comments: 2007-06-19 00:00:00 Completed Date: Cost Recovery Closeout Memo Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Revere Expansion site. REVERE SCHOOL EXPANSION (Continued) S105628714 ANAHEIM CITY SD-REVERE SCHOOL EXPANSION Alias Name: Project Code (Site Code) Alias Type: 404327 Alias Name: Project Code (Site Code) Alias Type: 404118 Alias Name: NMA Potential Description: 31000-NO Confirmed COC: NONE SPECIFIED,31000 Potential COC: RESIDENTIAL AREA Past Use: NONE SPECIFIED APN: -117.907194 Longitude: 33.814194 Latitude: School District Funding: NO Restricted Use: 2004-08-04 00:00:00 Status Date: No Further Action Status: Not reported Special Program Status: 34 Senate: 69 Assembly: 404327 Site Code: Chatsworth Division Branch: Javier Hinojosa Supervisor: GREG NEAL Project Manager: Not reported Lead Agency Description: NONE SPECIFIED Lead Agency: DTSC Cleanup Oversight Agencies: NO National Priorities List: 2 Acres: NONE SPECIFIED Site Mgmt. Req.: School Site Type Detail: School Investigation Site Type: 30880005 Facility ID: SCH: 5579 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster AS 1.057 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 147 ft. > 1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NNE ENVIROSTOR 126/132/138/144/150 WEST GUINIDA LANE N/A AS231 SCH 1400 S107735765 TC2760975.1s Page 308 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 404118 Alias Name: NMA Potential Description: 31000-NO Confirmed COC: NONE SPECIFIED,31000 Potential COC: RESIDENTIAL AREA Past Use: NONE SPECIFIED APN: -117.907194 Longitude: 33.814194 Latitude: School District Funding: NONE SPECIFIED Site Mgmt. Req.: NO Restricted Use: 2004-08-04 00:00:00 Status Date: No Further Action Status: Not reported Special Program: 34 Senate: 69 Assembly: 404327 Site Code: 30880005 Facility ID: Chatsworth Division Branch: Javier Hinojosa Supervisor: GREG NEAL Program Manager: NONE SPECIFIED Lead Agency: DTSC Regulatory Agencies: NO NPL: 2 Acres: School Site Type Detailed: School Investigation Site Type: ENVIROSTOR: Not reported Schedule Revised Date: Not reported Schedule Due Date: Not reported Schedule Document Type: Not reported Schedule Sub Area Name: Not reported Schedule Area Name: Not reported Future Due Date: Not reported Future Document Type: Not reported Future Sub Area Name: Not reported Future Area Name: Not reported Comments: 2004-08-04 00:00:00 Completed Date: Cost Recovery Closeout Memo Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Not reported Comments: 2001-10-31 00:00:00 Completed Date: Preliminary Endangerment Assessment Report Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Completed Info: Envirostor ID Number Alias Type: 30880005 Alias Name: Alternate Name Alias Type: ANAHEIM CITY SD-REVERE SCH EXPAN./CDE Alias Name: Alternate Name Alias Type: 1400 (Continued) S107735765 TC2760975.1s Page 309 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Schedule Revised Date: Not reported Schedule Due Date: Not reported Schedule Document Type: Not reported Schedule Sub Area Name: Not reported Schedule Area Name: Not reported Future Due Date: Not reported Future Document Type: Not reported Future Sub Area Name: Not reported Future Area Name: Not reported Comments: 2004-08-04 00:00:00 Completed Date: Cost Recovery Closeout Memo Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Not reported Comments: 2001-10-31 00:00:00 Completed Date: Preliminary Endangerment Assessment Report Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Completed Info: Envirostor ID Number Alias Type: 30880005 Alias Name: Alternate Name Alias Type: ANAHEIM CITY SD-REVERE SCH EXPAN./CDE Alias Name: Alternate Name Alias Type: ANAHEIM CITY SD-REVERE SCHOOL EXPANSION Alias Name: Project Code (Site Code) Alias Type: 404327 Alias Name: Project Code (Site Code) Alias Type: 1400 (Continued) S107735765 90680 Incident Description: Not reported Discharge Date: Not reported Facility Type: Not reported Board File Number: Not reported Staff Initials: Not reported Date Reported: Notify 65: 7324 ft. 1.387 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 138 ft. > 1 ANAHEIM, CA 90680 NNW 1037 WEST BALL N/A 232 Notify 65 #72 S100178848 TC2760975.1s Page 310 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Schedule Revised Date: Not reported Schedule Due Date: Not reported Schedule Document Type: Not reported Schedule Sub Area Name: Not reported Schedule Area Name: Not reported Future Due Date: Not reported Future Document Type: Not reported Future Sub Area Name: Not reported Future Area Name: Not reported Comments: Not reported Completed Date: Not reported Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: Not reported Completed Area Name: Completed Info: Envirostor ID Number Alias Type: 30000017 Alias Name: NONE SPECIFIED Potential Description: NONE SPECIFIED Confirmed COC: NONE SPECIFIED Potential COC: NONE SPECIFIED Past Use: NONE SPECIFIED APN: -117.893599662155 Longitude: 33.7895276722326 Latitude: Not Applicable Funding: NONE SPECIFIED Site Mgmt. Req.: NO Restricted Use: 2000-12-05 00:00:00 Status Date: Refer: 1248 Local Agency Status: Not reported Special Program: 33 Senate: 72 Assembly: Not reported Site Code: 30000017 Facility ID: Cypress Division Branch: Referred - Not Assigned Supervisor: Not reported Program Manager: NONE SPECIFIED Lead Agency: NONE SPECIFIED Regulatory Agencies: NO NPL: Not reported Acres: Evaluation Site Type Detailed: Evaluation Site Type: ENVIROSTOR: 7397 ft. 1.401 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 134 ft. > 1 ORANGE, CA 92868 ESE 3745 WEST CHAPMAN AVENUE N/A 233 ENVIROSTOR THE CITY PLACE NORTH S106893791 TC2760975.1s Page 311 ---PAGE BREAK--- ORPHAN SUMMARY City EDR ID Site Name Site Address Zip Database(s) GARDEN GROVE S108200640 CALTRANS DISTRICT 12 EA 071611 HWY 22 BTWN HWY 605 / HWY 55 92840 HAZNET ANAHEIM S108201150 CENTER WALLCOVERING & PAINTING 1600 S ANAHEIM BLVD STE E 92805 HAZNET ANAHEIM S108201321 CHAPMAN AUTO REPAIR INC 450 W WILKEN WAY UNIT D 92802 HAZNET ORANGE S108204206 CUSHMAN & WAKEFIELD OF CA 200 S MANCHESTER AVE B100 92868 HAZNET GARDEN GROVE S108210708 JULIES REMEDIATION 12904 HARBOR BLVD UNIT R 94132 HAZNET ANAHEIM S108220183 SEPHORA STORES 1570 S DISNEYLAND DR STE 101 92802 HAZNET ANAHEIM S108222137 TEAM THOMPSON AUTO COLLISION DBA E 2223 E KATELLA AVE UNIT C 92806 HAZNET GARDEN GROVE S108540651 CITI CLEANERS 13518 HARBOR BLVD STE A2 92843 ANAHEIM S108741622 A-TOWN METRO 1200-1228,1230-1238 E KATELLA 92805 HAZNET ANAHEIM S108741623 A-TOWN METRO 1260-1278,1284-1296 E KATELLA 92805 HAZNET ANAHEIM S108741624 A-TOWN METRO 1300-1316,1320-1350 E KATELLA 92805 HAZNET ANAHEIM S108741627 A-TOWN METRO 1500-1522,1530-1558 E KATELLA 92805 HAZNET GARDEN GROVE S108742713 AUTOZONE #3308 10842 KATELLA AVE STE B 92840 HAZNET ANAHEIM S108748552 HSH INTERPLAN USA 1564 S ANAHEIM BLVD STE B 92805 HAZNET ANAHEIM S109284367 PAN PACIFIC HOTEL 1717 S WEST ST 92802 LUST SAN MATEO ANAHEIM S109422779 AIDA Y. LIM D.D.S. A PROFESSIONAL 225 S HARBOR BLVD STE 100 92805 HAZNET ANAHEIM S109425471 CT MACHINING INC 1525 S ANAHEIM BLVD UNIT A 92805 HAZNET ANAHEIM S109426412 FEI-ZYFER INC 1515 S MANCHESTER AVE STE D 92802 HAZNET ANAHEIM S109435290 A TOWN METRO SW OF STATE COLLEGE BLVD / K 92806 NPDES ANAHEIM S109436051 ANAHEIM OFFICE BUILDING 900 S HARBOR BLVD / 406 410 92805 NPDES ORANGE S109439450 CHAPMAN AVE RETAIL SW CORNER OF CHAPMAN AVE / M 92868 NPDES ANAHEIM S109442031 DOUBLETREE HOTEL 2065 / 2085 HARBOR BLVD 92805 NPDES ANAHEIM S109444129 FUJISHIGE TEMPORARY PARKING LOT SEC OF KATELLA AVE / HARBOR 92802 NPDES SOQUEL S109446153 HOME DEPOT USA INC 2600 41ST AVE / ST HWY 1 92868 NPDES GARDEN GROVE S109447337 KATELLA COTTAGES TRACT 16363 KATELLA AVE 92840 NPDES GARDEN GROVE S109935122 ADVANCED AUTO BODY 13692 HARBOR BLVD STE B 92843 HAZNET ANAHEIM U003937563 ANAHEIM RESORT PUMP HOUSE #55 1713 S CLEMENTINE ST # 55 92802 UST ALAMEDA ANAHEIM U003937851 ARCO (AM/PM MINI MRKT.) #9727 2101 S HARBOR BLVD # 9727 92802 UST ALAMEDA GARDEN GROVE U003940165 JIFFY LUBE STORE # 1991 13950 HARBOR BLVD # 1991 92843 UST ALAMEDA GARDEN GROVE U003940979 P & M #949 13502 HARBOR BLVD # 949 92843 UST ALAMEDA ANAHEIM U003942645 UNOCAL #4227 1779 S HARBOR BLVD # 4227 92802 UST ALAMEDA ANAHEIM U003948794 BLACK GOLD UNOCAL #5669 801 N HARBOR BLVD # 5669 92805 UST ALAMEDA ANAHEIM U003949192 UNOCAL #5698 2001 E KATELLA AVE # 5698 92806 UST ALAMEDA TC2760975.1s Page 312 ---PAGE BREAK--- To maintain currency of the following federal and state databases, EDR contacts the appropriate governmental agency on a or quarterly basis, as required. Number of Days to Update: Provides confirmation that EDR is reporting records that have been updated within 90 days from the date the government agency made the information available to the public. STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS Federal NPL site list NPL: National Priority List National Priorities List (Superfund). The NPL is a subset of CERCLIS and identifies over 1,200 sites for priority cleanup under the Superfund Program. NPL sites may encompass relatively large areas. As such, EDR provides polygon coverage for over 1,000 NPL site boundaries produced by EPA’s Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC) and regional EPA offices. Date of Government Version: 03/31/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/02/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2010 Number of Days to Update: 10 Source: EPA Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: 04/02/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/26/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly NPL Site Boundaries Sources: EPA’s Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC) Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] EPA Region 1 EPA Region 6 Telephone [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] EPA Region 3 EPA Region 7 Telephone [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] EPA Region 4 EPA Region 8 Telephone [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] EPA Region 5 EPA Region 9 Telephone [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] EPA Region 10 Telephone [PHONE REDACTED] Proposed NPL: Proposed National Priority List Sites A site that has been proposed for listing on the National Priorities List through the issuance of a proposed rule in the Federal Register. EPA then accepts public comments on the site, responds to the comments, and places on the NPL those sites that continue to meet the requirements for listing. Date of Government Version: 03/31/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/02/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2010 Number of Days to Update: 10 Source: EPA Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: 04/02/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/26/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly NPL LIENS: Federal Superfund Liens Federal Superfund Liens. Under the authority granted the USEPA by CERCLA of 1980, the USEPA has the authority to file liens against real property in order to recover remedial action expenditures or when the property owner received notification of potential liability. USEPA compiles a listing of filed notices of Superfund Liens. Date of Government Version: 10/15/1991 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/02/1994 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/30/1994 Number of Days to Update: 56 Source: EPA Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/01/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/31/2010 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned TC2760975.1s Page GR-1 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- Federal Delisted NPL site list DELISTED NPL: National Priority List Deletions The National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) establishes the criteria that the EPA uses to delete sites from the NPL. In accordance with 40 CFR 300.425.(e), sites may be deleted from the NPL where no further response is appropriate. Date of Government Version: 03/31/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/02/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2010 Number of Days to Update: 10 Source: EPA Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: 04/02/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/26/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly Federal CERCLIS list CERCLIS: Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System CERCLIS contains data on potentially hazardous waste sites that have been reported to the USEPA by states, municipalities, private companies and private persons, pursuant to Section 103 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). CERCLIS contains sites which are either proposed to or on the National Priorities List (NPL) and sites which are in the screening and assessment phase for possible inclusion on the NPL. Date of Government Version: 01/29/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/09/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2010 Number of Days to Update: 62 Source: EPA Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/30/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/12/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly FEDERAL FACILITY: Federal Facility Site Information listing A listing of NPL and Base Realighnment & Closure sites found in the CERCLIS database where FERRO is involved in cleanup projects. Date of Government Version: 06/23/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/15/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/10/2010 Number of Days to Update: 26 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/30/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/26/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies Federal CERCLIS NFRAP site List CERCLIS-NFRAP: CERCLIS No Further Remedial Action Planned Archived sites are sites that have been removed and archived from the inventory of CERCLIS sites. Archived status indicates that, to the best of EPA’s knowledge, assessment at a site has been completed and that EPA has determined no further steps will be taken to list this site on the National Priorities List (NPL), unless information indicates this decision was not appropriate or other considerations require a recommendation for listing at a later time. This decision does not necessarily mean that there is no hazard associated with a given site; it only means that, based upon available information, the location is not judged to be a potential NPL site. Date of Government Version: 06/23/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/02/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/21/2009 Number of Days to Update: 19 Source: EPA Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/11/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/14/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly Federal RCRA CORRACTS facilities list CORRACTS: Corrective Action Report CORRACTS identifies hazardous waste handlers with RCRA corrective action activity. Date of Government Version: 12/11/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/29/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/10/2010 Number of Days to Update: 43 Source: EPA Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/15/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/31/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly TC2760975.1s Page GR-2 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- Federal RCRA non-CORRACTS TSD facilities list RCRA-TSDF: RCRA - Treatment, Storage and Disposal RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Transporters are individuals or entities that move hazardous waste from the generator offsite to a facility that can recycle, treat, store, or dispose of the waste. treat, store, or dispose of the waste. Date of Government Version: 01/13/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/15/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 34 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: (415) 495-8895 Last EDR Contact: 04/29/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/19/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly Federal RCRA generators list RCRA-LQG: RCRA - Large Quantity Generators RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Large quantity generators (LQGs) generate over 1,000 kilograms (kg) of hazardous waste, or over 1 kg of acutely hazardous waste per month. Date of Government Version: 01/13/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/15/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 34 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: (415) 495-8895 Last EDR Contact: 04/29/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/19/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly RCRA-SQG: RCRA - Small Quantity Generators RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Small quantity generators (SQGs) generate between 100 kg and 1,000 kg of hazardous waste per month. Date of Government Version: 01/13/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/15/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 34 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: (415) 495-8895 Last EDR Contact: 04/29/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/19/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly RCRA-CESQG: RCRA - Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generators RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Conditionally exempt small quantity generators (CESQGs) generate less than 100 kg of hazardous waste, or less than 1 kg of acutely hazardous waste per month. Date of Government Version: 01/13/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/15/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 34 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: (415) 495-8895 Last EDR Contact: 04/29/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/19/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies Federal institutional controls / engineering controls registries TC2760975.1s Page GR-3 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- US ENG CONTROLS: Engineering Controls Sites List A listing of sites with engineering controls in place. Engineering controls include various forms of caps, building foundations, liners, and treatment methods to create pathway elimination for regulated substances to enter environmental media or effect human health. Date of Government Version: 12/20/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/20/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2010 Number of Days to Update: 82 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/15/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/28/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies US INST CONTROL: Sites with Institutional Controls A listing of sites with institutional controls in place. Institutional controls include administrative measures, such as groundwater use restrictions, construction restrictions, property use restrictions, and post remediation care requirements intended to prevent exposure to contaminants remaining on site. Deed restrictions are generally required as part of the institutional controls. Date of Government Version: 12/20/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/20/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2010 Number of Days to Update: 82 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/15/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/28/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies Federal ERNS list ERNS: Emergency Response Notification System Emergency Response Notification System. ERNS records and stores information on reported releases of oil and hazardous substances. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/22/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/11/2010 Number of Days to Update: 20 Source: National Response Center, United States Coast Guard Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/07/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/19/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually State- and tribal - equivalent NPL RESPONSE: State Response Sites Identifies confirmed release sites where DTSC is involved in remediation, either in a lead or oversight capacity. These confirmed release sites are generally high-priority and high potential risk. Date of Government Version: 02/08/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/09/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 9 Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/09/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/24/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly State- and tribal - equivalent CERCLIS ENVIROSTOR: EnviroStor Database The Department of Toxic Substances Control’s (DTSC’s) Site Mitigation and Brownfields Reuse Program’s EnviroStor database identifes sites that have known contamination or sites for which there may be reasons to investigate further. The database includes the following site types: Federal Superfund sites (National Priorities List (NPL)); State Response, including Military Facilities and State Superfund; Voluntary Cleanup; and School sites. EnviroStor provides similar information to the information that was available in CalSites, and provides additional site information, including, but not limited to, identification of formerly-contaminated properties that have been released for reuse, properties where environmental deed restrictions have been recorded to prevent inappropriate land uses, and risk characterization information that is used to assess potential impacts to public health and the environment at contaminated sites. TC2760975.1s Page GR-4 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- Date of Government Version: 02/08/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/09/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 9 Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/09/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/24/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly State and tribal landfill and/or solid waste disposal site lists SWF/LF (SWIS): Solid Waste Information System Active, Closed and Inactive Landfills. SWF/LF records typically contain an inve ntory of solid waste disposal facilities or landfills. These may be active or i nactive facilities or open dumps that failed to meet RCRA Section 4004 criteria for solid waste landfills or disposal sites. Date of Government Version: 02/22/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/24/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/04/2010 Number of Days to Update: 8 Source: Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/24/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/07/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly State and tribal leaking storage tank lists LUST REG 9: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Report Orange, Riverside, San Diego counties. For more current information, please refer to the State Water Resources Control Board’s LUST database. Date of Government Version: 03/01/2001 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/23/2001 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/21/2001 Number of Days to Update: 28 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board San Diego Region Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/29/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/12/2010 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned LUST REG 7: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Case Listing Leaking Underground Storage Tank locations. Imperial, Riverside, San Diego, Santa Barbara counties. Date of Government Version: 02/26/2004 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/26/2004 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/24/2004 Number of Days to Update: 27 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Colorado River Basin Region Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/16/2010 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned LUST REG 6V: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Case Listing Leaking Underground Storage Tank locations. Inyo, Kern, Los Angeles, Mono, San Bernardino counties. Date of Government Version: 06/07/2005 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/07/2005 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/29/2005 Number of Days to Update: 22 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Victorville Branch Office Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/15/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/28/2010 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned LUST REG 6L: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Case Listing For more current information, please refer to the State Water Resources Control Board’s LUST database. Date of Government Version: 09/09/2003 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/10/2003 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/07/2003 Number of Days to Update: 27 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Lahontan Region Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/12/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/31/2010 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned LUST REG 5: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Database Leaking Underground Storage Tank locations. Alameda, Alpine, Amador, Butte, Colusa, Contra Costa, Calveras, El Dorado, Fresno, Glenn, Kern, Kings, Lake, Lassen, Madera, Mariposa, Merced, Modoc, Napa, Nevada, Placer, Plumas, Sacramento, San Joaquin, Shasta, Solano, Stanislaus, Sutter, Tehama, Tulare, Tuolumne, Yolo, Yuba counties. TC2760975.1s Page GR-5 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- Date of Government Version: 07/01/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/22/2008 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/31/2008 Number of Days to Update: 9 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/05/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/19/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly LUST REG 4: Underground Storage Tank Leak List Los Angeles, Ventura counties. For more current information, please refer to the State Water Resources Control Board’s LUST database. Date of Government Version: 09/07/2004 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/07/2004 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/12/2004 Number of Days to Update: 35 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Los Angeles Region Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/08/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/21/2010 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned LUST REG 3: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Database Leaking Underground Storage Tank locations. Monterey, San Benito, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Santa Cruz counties. Date of Government Version: 05/19/2003 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/19/2003 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/02/2003 Number of Days to Update: 14 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Coast Region Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/19/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/02/2010 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned LUST REG 2: Fuel Leak List Leaking Underground Storage Tank locations. Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano, Sonoma counties. Date of Government Version: 09/30/2004 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/20/2004 Date Made Active in Reports: 11/19/2004 Number of Days to Update: 30 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board San Francisco Bay Region Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/22/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/05/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly LUST REG 1: Active Toxic Site Investigation Del Norte, Humboldt, Lake, Mendocino, Modoc, Siskiyou, Sonoma, Trinity counties. For more current information, please refer to the State Water Resources Control Board’s LUST database. Date of Government Version: 02/01/2001 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/28/2001 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/29/2001 Number of Days to Update: 29 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board North Coast Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/16/2010 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned LUST: Geotracker’s Leaking Underground Fuel Tank Report Leaking Underground Storage Tank Incident Reports. LUST records contain an inventory of reported leaking underground storage tank incidents. Not all states maintain these records, and the information stored varies by state. For more information on a particular leaking underground storage tank sites, please contact the appropriate regulatory agency. Date of Government Version: 03/22/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/23/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/09/2010 Number of Days to Update: 17 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: see region list Last EDR Contact: 03/23/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/05/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly LUST REG 8: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks California Regional Water Quality Control Board Santa Ana Region For more current information, please refer to the State Water Resources Control Board’s LUST database. TC2760975.1s Page GR-6 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/15/2005 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/28/2005 Number of Days to Update: 41 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Santa Ana Region Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/19/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/02/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies SLIC: Statewide SLIC Cases The SLIC (Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanup) program is designed to protect and restore water quality from spills, leaks, and similar discharges. Date of Government Version: 03/22/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/23/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/09/2010 Number of Days to Update: 17 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/23/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/05/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies SLIC REG 1: Active Toxic Site Investigations The SLIC (Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanup) program is designed to protect and restore water quality from spills, leaks, and similar discharges. Date of Government Version: 04/03/2003 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/07/2003 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/25/2003 Number of Days to Update: 18 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board, North Coast Region Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/16/2010 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned SLIC REG 2: Spills, Leaks, Investigation & Cleanup Cost Recovery Listing The SLIC (Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanup) program is designed to protect and restore water quality from spills, leaks, and similar discharges. Date of Government Version: 09/30/2004 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/20/2004 Date Made Active in Reports: 11/19/2004 Number of Days to Update: 30 Source: Regional Water Quality Control Board San Francisco Bay Region Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/22/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/05/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly SLIC REG 3: Spills, Leaks, Investigation & Cleanup Cost Recovery Listing The SLIC (Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanup) program is designed to protect and restore water quality from spills, leaks, and similar discharges. Date of Government Version: 05/18/2006 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/18/2006 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/15/2006 Number of Days to Update: 28 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Coast Region Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/19/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/02/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually SLIC REG 4: Spills, Leaks, Investigation & Cleanup Cost Recovery Listing The SLIC (Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanup) program is designed to protect and restore water quality from spills, leaks, and similar discharges. Date of Government Version: 11/17/2004 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/18/2004 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/04/2005 Number of Days to Update: 47 Source: Region Water Quality Control Board Los Angeles Region Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/05/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/19/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies SLIC REG 5: Spills, Leaks, Investigation & Cleanup Cost Recovery Listing The SLIC (Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanup) program is designed to protect and restore water quality from spills, leaks, and similar discharges. TC2760975.1s Page GR-7 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- Date of Government Version: 04/01/2005 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/05/2005 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/21/2005 Number of Days to Update: 16 Source: Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/15/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/28/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually SLIC REG 6V: Spills, Leaks, Investigation & Cleanup Cost Recovery Listing The SLIC (Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanup) program is designed to protect and restore water quality from spills, leaks, and similar discharges. Date of Government Version: 05/24/2005 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/25/2005 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/16/2005 Number of Days to Update: 22 Source: Regional Water Quality Control Board, Victorville Branch Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 12/10/2009 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/29/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually SLIC REG 6L: SLIC Sites The SLIC (Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanup) program is designed to protect and restore water quality from spills, leaks, and similar discharges. Date of Government Version: 09/07/2004 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/07/2004 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/12/2004 Number of Days to Update: 35 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Lahontan Region Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/15/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/31/2010 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned SLIC REG 7: SLIC List The SLIC (Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanup) program is designed to protect and restore water quality from spills, leaks, and similar discharges. Date of Government Version: 11/24/2004 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/29/2004 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/04/2005 Number of Days to Update: 36 Source: California Regional Quality Control Board, Colorado River Basin Region Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/16/2010 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned SLIC REG 8: Spills, Leaks, Investigation & Cleanup Cost Recovery Listing The SLIC (Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanup) program is designed to protect and restore water quality from spills, leaks, and similar discharges. Date of Government Version: 04/03/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/03/2008 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/14/2008 Number of Days to Update: 11 Source: California Region Water Quality Control Board Santa Ana Region Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/15/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/28/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually SLIC REG 9: Spills, Leaks, Investigation & Cleanup Cost Recovery Listing The SLIC (Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanup) program is designed to protect and restore water quality from spills, leaks, and similar discharges. Date of Government Version: 09/10/2007 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/11/2007 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/28/2007 Number of Days to Update: 17 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board San Diego Region Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/08/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/24/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually INDIAN LUST R10: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land LUSTs on Indian land in Alaska, Idaho, Oregon and Washington. TC2760975.1s Page GR-8 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- Date of Government Version: 02/02/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/03/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 15 Source: EPA Region 10 Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/16/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly INDIAN LUST R1: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land A listing of leaking underground storage tank locations on Indian Land. Date of Government Version: 02/19/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/19/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/16/2009 Number of Days to Update: 25 Source: EPA Region 1 Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/16/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies INDIAN LUST R8: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land LUSTs on Indian land in Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah and Wyoming. Date of Government Version: 02/25/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/25/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2010 Number of Days to Update: 46 Source: EPA Region 8 Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/16/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly INDIAN LUST R6: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land LUSTs on Indian land in New Mexico and Oklahoma. Date of Government Version: 03/05/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/05/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2010 Number of Days to Update: 38 Source: EPA Region 6 Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/16/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies INDIAN LUST R4: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land LUSTs on Indian land in Florida, Mississippi and North Carolina. Date of Government Version: 03/10/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/16/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2010 Number of Days to Update: 27 Source: EPA Region 4 Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/16/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually INDIAN LUST R9: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land LUSTs on Indian land in Arizona, California, New Mexico and Nevada Date of Government Version: 02/01/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/03/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2010 Number of Days to Update: 40 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/16/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly INDIAN LUST R7: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land LUSTs on Indian land in Iowa, Kansas, and Nebraska Date of Government Version: 03/24/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/20/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/17/2009 Number of Days to Update: 28 Source: EPA Region 7 Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/01/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/17/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies State and tribal registered storage tank lists TC2760975.1s Page GR-9 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- UST: Active UST Facilities Active UST facilities gathered from the local regulatory agencies Date of Government Version: 03/22/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/23/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/14/2010 Number of Days to Update: 22 Source: Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/23/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/05/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually AST: Aboveground Petroleum Storage Tank Facilities Registered Aboveground Storage Tanks. Date of Government Version: 08/01/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/10/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/01/2009 Number of Days to Update: 21 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/12/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/26/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly INDIAN UST R10: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian land in EPA Region 10 (Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, Washington, and Tribal Nations). Date of Government Version: 02/02/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/03/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 15 Source: EPA Region 10 Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/16/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly INDIAN UST R9: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian land in EPA Region 9 (Arizona, California, Hawaii, Nevada, the Pacific Islands, and Tribal Nations). Date of Government Version: 02/01/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/03/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2010 Number of Days to Update: 40 Source: EPA Region 9 Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/16/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly INDIAN UST R8: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian land in EPA Region 8 (Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, Wyoming and 27 Tribal Nations). Date of Government Version: 02/25/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/25/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2010 Number of Days to Update: 46 Source: EPA Region 8 Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/16/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly INDIAN UST R7: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian land in EPA Region 7 (Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, and 9 Tribal Nations). Date of Government Version: 04/01/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/30/2008 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/16/2009 Number of Days to Update: 76 Source: EPA Region 7 Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/01/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/17/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies INDIAN UST R6: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian land in EPA Region 6 (Louisiana, Arkansas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Texas and 65 Tribes). TC2760975.1s Page GR-10 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- Date of Government Version: 02/08/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/09/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 9 Source: EPA Region 6 Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/16/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually INDIAN UST R5: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian land in EPA Region 5 (Michigan, Minnesota and Wisconsin and Tribal Nations). Date of Government Version: 02/11/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/11/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2010 Number of Days to Update: 60 Source: EPA Region 5 Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/16/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies INDIAN UST R4: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian land in EPA Region 4 (Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee and Tribal Nations) Date of Government Version: 03/10/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/16/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2010 Number of Days to Update: 27 Source: EPA Region 4 Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/16/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually INDIAN UST R1: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian land in EPA Region 1 (Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont and ten Tribal Nations). Date of Government Version: 02/19/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/19/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/16/2009 Number of Days to Update: 25 Source: EPA, Region 1 Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/16/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies FEMA UST: Underground Storage Tank Listing A listing of all FEMA owned underground storage tanks. Date of Government Version: 01/01/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/16/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2010 Number of Days to Update: 55 Source: FEMA Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/19/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/02/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies State and tribal voluntary cleanup sites INDIAN VCP R7: Voluntary Cleanup Priority Lisitng A listing of voluntary cleanup priority sites located on Indian Land located in Region 7. Date of Government Version: 03/20/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/22/2008 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/19/2008 Number of Days to Update: 27 Source: EPA, Region 7 Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/20/2009 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/20/2009 Data Release Frequency: Varies VCP: Voluntary Cleanup Program Properties Contains low threat level properties with either confirmed or unconfirmed releases and the project proponents have request that DTSC oversee investigation and/or cleanup activities and have agreed to provide coverage for DTSC’s costs. TC2760975.1s Page GR-11 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- Date of Government Version: 02/08/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/09/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 9 Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/09/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/22/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly INDIAN VCP R1: Voluntary Cleanup Priority Listing A listing of voluntary cleanup priority sites located on Indian Land located in Region 1. Date of Government Version: 04/02/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/22/2008 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/19/2008 Number of Days to Update: 27 Source: EPA, Region 1 Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/05/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/19/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS Local Brownfield lists US BROWNFIELDS: A Listing of Brownfields Sites Included in the listing are brownfields properties addresses by Cooperative Agreement Recipients and brownfields properties addressed by Targeted Brownfields Assessments. Targeted Brownfields Assessments-EPA’s Targeted Brownfields Assessments (TBA) program is designed to help states, tribes, and municipalities--especially those without EPA Brownfields Assessment Demonstration Pilots--minimize the uncertainties of contamination often associated with brownfields. Under the TBA program, EPA provides funding and/or technical assistance for environmental assessments at brownfields sites throughout the country. Targeted Brownfields Assessments supplement and work with other efforts under EPA’s Brownfields Initiative to promote cleanup and redevelopment of brownfields. Cooperative Agreement Recipients-States, political subdivisions, territories, and Indian tribes become Brownfields Cleanup Revolving Loan Fund cooperative agreement recipients when they enter into cooperative agreements with the U.S. EPA. EPA selects cooperative agreement recipients based on a proposal and application process. cooperative agreement recipients must use EPA funds provided through cooperative agreement for specified brownfields-related cleanup activities. Date of Government Version: 10/01/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/04/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 12/16/2009 Number of Days to Update: 42 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/23/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/12/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually Local Lists of Landfill / Solid Waste Disposal Sites ODI: Open Dump Inventory An open dump is defined as a disposal facility that does not comply with one or more of the Part 257 or Part 258 Subtitle D Criteria. Date of Government Version: 06/30/1985 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/09/2004 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/17/2004 Number of Days to Update: 39 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 06/09/2004 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned DEBRIS REGION 9: Torres Martinez Reservation Illegal Dump Site Locations A listing of illegal dump sites location on the Torres Martinez Indian Reservation located in eastern Riverside County and northern Imperial County, California. Date of Government Version: 01/12/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/07/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/21/2009 Number of Days to Update: 137 Source: EPA, Region 9 Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/22/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/21/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies TC2760975.1s Page GR-12 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- WMUDS/SWAT: Waste Management Unit Database Waste Management Unit Database System. WMUDS is used by the State Water Resources Control Board staff and the Regional Water Quality Control Boards for program tracking and inventory of waste management units. WMUDS is composed of the following databases: Facility Information, Scheduled Inspections Information, Waste Management Unit Information, SWAT Program Information, SWAT Report Summary Information, SWAT Report Summary Data, Chapter 15 (formerly Subchapter 15) Information, Chapter 15 Monitoring Parameters, TPCA Program Information, RCRA Program Information, Closure Information, and Interested Parties Information. Date of Government Version: 04/01/2000 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/10/2000 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/10/2000 Number of Days to Update: 30 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/15/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/31/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly Recycler Database A listing of recycling facilities in California. Date of Government Version: 01/06/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/24/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/09/2010 Number of Days to Update: 16 Source: Department of Conservation Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/24/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/05/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly HAULERS: Registered Waste Tire Haulers Listing A listing of registered waste tire haulers. Date of Government Version: 03/09/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/10/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/09/2010 Number of Days to Update: 30 Source: Integrated Waste Management Board Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/08/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/07/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies INDIAN ODI: Report on the Status of Open Dumps on Indian Lands Location of open dumps on Indian land. Date of Government Version: 12/31/1998 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/03/2007 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/24/2008 Number of Days to Update: 52 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/08/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/24/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies Local Lists of Hazardous waste / Contaminated Sites US CDL: Clandestine Drug Labs A listing of clandestine drug lab locations. The U.S. Department of Justice ("the Department") provides this web site as a public service. It contains addresses of some locations where law enforcement agencies reported they found chemicals or other items that indicated the presence of either clandestine drug laboratories or dumpsites. In most cases, the source of the entries is not the Department, and the Department has not verified the entry and does not guarantee its accuracy. Members of the public must verify the accuracy of all entries by, for example, contacting local law enforcement and local health departments. Date of Government Version: 08/19/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/29/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/10/2010 Number of Days to Update: 43 Source: Drug Enforcement Administration Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 12/14/2009 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/22/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly HIST CAL-SITES: Calsites Database The Calsites database contains potential or confirmed hazardous substance release properties. In 1996, California EPA reevaluated and significantly reduced the number of sites in the Calsites database. No longer updated by the state agency. It has been replaced by ENVIROSTOR. TC2760975.1s Page GR-13 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- Date of Government Version: 08/08/2005 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/03/2006 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/24/2006 Number of Days to Update: 21 Source: Department of Toxic Substance Control Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/23/2009 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/25/2009 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned SCH: School Property Evaluation Program This category contains proposed and existing school sites that are being evaluated by DTSC for possible hazardous materials contamination. In some cases, these properties may be listed in the CalSites category depending on the level of threat to public health and safety or the environment they pose. Date of Government Version: 02/08/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/09/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 9 Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/09/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/24/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly TOXIC PITS: Toxic Pits Cleanup Act Sites Toxic PITS Cleanup Act Sites. TOXIC PITS identifies sites suspected of containing hazardous substances where cleanup has not yet been completed. Date of Government Version: 07/01/1995 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/30/1995 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/26/1995 Number of Days to Update: 27 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 01/26/2009 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 04/27/2009 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned CDL: Clandestine Drug Labs A listing of drug lab locations. Listing of a location in this database does not indicate that any illegal drug lab materials were or were not present there, and does not constitute a determination that the location either requires or does not require additional cleanup work. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/25/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/04/2010 Number of Days to Update: 7 Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/05/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/19/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies US HIST CDL: National Clandestine Laboratory Register A listing of clandestine drug lab locations. The U.S. Department of Justice ("the Department") provides this web site as a public service. It contains addresses of some locations where law enforcement agencies reported they found chemicals or other items that indicated the presence of either clandestine drug laboratories or dumpsites. In most cases, the source of the entries is not the Department, and the Department has not verified the entry and does not guarantee its accuracy. Members of the public must verify the accuracy of all entries by, for example, contacting local law enforcement and local health departments. Date of Government Version: 09/01/2007 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/19/2008 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/30/2009 Number of Days to Update: 131 Source: Drug Enforcement Administration Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/23/2009 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/22/2009 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned Local Lists of Registered Storage Tanks CA FID UST: Facility Inventory Database The Facility Inventory Database (FID) contains a historical listing of active and inactive underground storage tank locations from the State Water Resource Control Board. Refer to local/county source for current data. Date of Government Version: 10/31/1994 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/05/1995 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/29/1995 Number of Days to Update: 24 Source: California Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 12/28/1998 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned TC2760975.1s Page GR-14 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- UST MENDOCINO: Mendocino County UST Database A listing of underground storage tank locations in Mendocino County. Date of Government Version: 09/23/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/23/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/01/2009 Number of Days to Update: 8 Source: Department of Public Health Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/08/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/21/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually HIST UST: Hazardous Substance Storage Container Database The Hazardous Substance Storage Container Database is a historical listing of UST sites. Refer to local/county source for current data. Date of Government Version: 10/15/1990 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/25/1991 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/12/1991 Number of Days to Update: 18 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 07/26/2001 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned SWEEPS UST: SWEEPS UST Listing Statewide Environmental Evaluation and Planning System. This underground storage tank listing was updated and maintained by a company contacted by the in the early 1990’s. The listing is no longer updated or maintained. The local agency is the contact for more information on a site on the SWEEPS list. Date of Government Version: 06/01/1994 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/07/2005 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/11/2005 Number of Days to Update: 35 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: 06/03/2005 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned Local Land Records LIENS 2: CERCLA Lien Information A Federal CERCLA (’Superfund’) lien can exist by operation of law at any site or property at which EPA has spent Superfund monies. These monies are spent to investigate and address releases and threatened releases of contamination. CERCLIS provides information as to the identity of these sites and properties. Date of Government Version: 02/05/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/11/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2010 Number of Days to Update: 60 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/16/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies LUCIS: Land Use Control Information System LUCIS contains records of land use control information pertaining to the former Navy Base Realignment and Closure properties. Date of Government Version: 12/09/2005 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/11/2006 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/11/2007 Number of Days to Update: 31 Source: Department of the Navy Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/17/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/07/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies LIENS: Environmental Liens Listing A listing of property locations with environmental liens for California where DTSC is a lien holder. Date of Government Version: 01/28/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/29/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 20 Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/02/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies TC2760975.1s Page GR-15 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- DEED: Deed Restriction Listing Site Mitigation and Brownfields Reuse Program Facility Sites with Deed Restrictions & Hazardous Waste Management Program Facility Sites with Deed / Land Use Restriction. The DTSC Site Mitigation and Brownfields Reuse Program list includes sites cleaned up under the program’s oversight and generally does not include current or former hazardous waste facilities that required a hazardous waste facility permit. The list represents deed restrictions that are active. Some sites have multiple deed restrictions. The DTSC Hazardous Waste Management Program (HWMP) has developed a list of current or former hazardous waste facilities that have a recorded land use restriction at the local county recorder’s office. The land use restrictions on this list were required by the DTSC HWMP as a result of the presence of hazardous substances that remain on site after the facility (or part of the facility) has been closed or cleaned up. The types of land use restriction include deed notice, deed restriction, or a land use restriction that binds current and future owners. Date of Government Version: 03/15/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/16/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/09/2010 Number of Days to Update: 24 Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/16/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/28/2009 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually Records of Emergency Release Reports HMIRS: Hazardous Materials Information Reporting System Hazardous Materials Incident Report System. HMIRS contains hazardous material spill incidents reported to DOT. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/06/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/10/2010 Number of Days to Update: 35 Source: U.S. Department of Transportation Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/07/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/19/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually CHMIRS: California Hazardous Material Incident Report System California Hazardous Material Incident Reporting System. CHMIRS contains information on reported hazardous material incidents (accidental releases or spills). Date of Government Version: 12/31/2007 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/09/2008 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/20/2008 Number of Days to Update: 42 Source: Office of Emergency Services Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/16/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies LDS: Land Disposal Sites Listing The Land Disposal program regulates of waste discharge to land for treatment, storage and disposal in waste management units. Date of Government Version: 03/22/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/23/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/09/2010 Number of Days to Update: 17 Source: State Water Qualilty Control Board Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/23/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/05/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly MCS: Military Cleanup Sites Listing The State Water Resources Control Board and nine Regional Water Quality Control Boards partner with the Department of Defense (DoD) through the Defense and State Memorandum of Agreement (DSMOA) to oversee the investigation and remediation of water quality issues at military facilities. Date of Government Version: 03/22/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/23/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/09/2010 Number of Days to Update: 17 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/23/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/05/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly Other Ascertainable Records TC2760975.1s Page GR-16 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- RCRA-NonGen: RCRA - Non Generators RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Non-Generators do not presently generate hazardous waste. Date of Government Version: 01/13/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/15/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 34 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: (415) 495-8895 Last EDR Contact: 04/29/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/19/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies DOT OPS: Incident and Accident Data Department of Transporation, Office of Pipeline Safety Incident and Accident data. Date of Government Version: 01/12/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/09/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2010 Number of Days to Update: 62 Source: Department of Transporation, Office of Pipeline Safety Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/09/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/24/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies DOD: Department of Defense Sites This data set consists of federally owned or administered lands, administered by the Department of Defense, that have any area equal to or greater than 640 acres of the United States, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2005 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/10/2006 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/11/2007 Number of Days to Update: 62 Source: USGS Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/21/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/02/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually FUDS: Formerly Used Defense Sites The listing includes locations of Formerly Used Defense Sites properties where the US Army Corps of Engineers is actively working or will take necessary cleanup actions. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/30/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 12/01/2009 Number of Days to Update: 62 Source: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/18/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/28/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies CONSENT: Superfund (CERCLA) Consent Decrees Major legal settlements that establish responsibility and standards for cleanup at NPL (Superfund) sites. Released periodically by United States District Courts after settlement by parties to litigation matters. Date of Government Version: 08/03/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/27/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 11/09/2009 Number of Days to Update: 13 Source: Department of Justice, Consent Decree Library Telephone: Varies Last EDR Contact: 04/05/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/19/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies ROD: Records Of Decision Record of Decision. ROD documents mandate a permanent remedy at an NPL (Superfund) site containing technical and health information to aid in the cleanup. Date of Government Version: 12/01/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/15/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/19/2010 Number of Days to Update: 35 Source: EPA Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/02/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/28/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually TC2760975.1s Page GR-17 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- UMTRA: Uranium Mill Tailings Sites Uranium ore was mined by private companies for federal government use in national defense programs. When the mills shut down, large piles of the sand-like material (mill tailings) remain after uranium has been extracted from the ore. Levels of human exposure to radioactive materials from the piles are low; however, in some cases tailings were used as construction materials before the potential health hazards of the tailings were recognized. Date of Government Version: 01/05/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/07/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/08/2009 Number of Days to Update: 1 Source: Department of Energy Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 01/21/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/14/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies MINES: Mines Master Index File Contains all mine identification numbers issued for mines active or opened since 1971. The data also includes violation information. Date of Government Version: 11/17/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/08/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/19/2010 Number of Days to Update: 42 Source: Department of Labor, Mine Safety and Health Administration Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/10/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/21/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually TRIS: Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System Toxic Release Inventory System. TRIS identifies facilities which release toxic chemicals to the air, water and land in reportable quantities under SARA Title III Section 313. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/13/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 36 Source: EPA Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/02/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/14/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually TSCA: Toxic Substances Control Act Toxic Substances Control Act. TSCA identifies manufacturers and importers of chemical substances included on the TSCA Chemical Substance Inventory list. It includes data on the production volume of these substances by plant site. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2002 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/14/2006 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/30/2006 Number of Days to Update: 46 Source: EPA Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/21/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/12/2010 Data Release Frequency: Every 4 Years FTTS: FIFRA/ TSCA Tracking System - FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act) FTTS tracks administrative cases and pesticide enforcement actions and compliance activities related to FIFRA, TSCA and EPCRA (Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act). To maintain currency, EDR contacts the Agency on a quarterly basis. Date of Government Version: 04/09/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/16/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/11/2009 Number of Days to Update: 25 Source: EPA/Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/01/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/14/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly FTTS INSP: FIFRA/ TSCA Tracking System - FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act) A listing of FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System (FTTS) inspections and enforcements. Date of Government Version: 04/09/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/16/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/11/2009 Number of Days to Update: 25 Source: EPA Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/01/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/14/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly TC2760975.1s Page GR-18 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- HIST FTTS: FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System Administrative Case Listing A complete administrative case listing from the FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System (FTTS) for all ten EPA regions. The information was obtained from the National Compliance Database (NCDB). NCDB supports the implementation of FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act) and TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act). Some EPA regions are now closing out records. Because of that, and the fact that some EPA regions are not providing EPA Headquarters with updated records, it was decided to create a HIST FTTS database. It included records that may not be included in the newer FTTS database updates. This database is no longer updated. Date of Government Version: 10/19/2006 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/01/2007 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/10/2007 Number of Days to Update: 40 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 12/17/2007 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/17/2008 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned HIST FTTS INSP: FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System Inspection & Enforcement Case Listing A complete inspection and enforcement case listing from the FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System (FTTS) for all ten EPA regions. The information was obtained from the National Compliance Database (NCDB). NCDB supports the implementation of FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act) and TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act). Some EPA regions are now closing out records. Because of that, and the fact that some EPA regions are not providing EPA Headquarters with updated records, it was decided to create a HIST FTTS database. It included records that may not be included in the newer FTTS database updates. This database is no longer updated. Date of Government Version: 10/19/2006 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/01/2007 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/10/2007 Number of Days to Update: 40 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 12/17/2008 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/17/2008 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned SSTS: Section 7 Tracking Systems Section 7 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act, as amended (92 Stat. 829) requires all registered pesticide-producing establishments to submit a report to the Environmental Protection Agency by March 1st each year. Each establishment must report the types and amounts of pesticides, active ingredients and devices being produced, and those having been produced and sold or distributed in the past year. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/06/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/10/2010 Number of Days to Update: 35 Source: EPA Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/16/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually ICIS: Integrated Compliance Information System The Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS) supports the information needs of the national enforcement and compliance program as well as the unique needs of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program. Date of Government Version: 11/10/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/18/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/19/2010 Number of Days to Update: 62 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/29/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/12/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly PADS: PCB Activity Database System PCB Activity Database. PADS Identifies generators, transporters, commercial storers and/or brokers and disposers of PCB’s who are required to notify the EPA of such activities. Date of Government Version: 09/01/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/21/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 12/01/2009 Number of Days to Update: 41 Source: EPA Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/22/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/02/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually TC2760975.1s Page GR-19 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- MLTS: Material Licensing Tracking System MLTS is maintained by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and contains a list of approximately 8,100 sites which possess or use radioactive materials and which are subject to NRC licensing requirements. To maintain currency, EDR contacts the Agency on a quarterly basis. Date of Government Version: 12/24/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/31/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/10/2010 Number of Days to Update: 41 Source: Nuclear Regulatory Commission Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/15/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/28/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly RADINFO: Radiation Information Database The Radiation Information Database (RADINFO) contains information about facilities that are regulated by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations for radiation and radioactivity. Date of Government Version: 01/12/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/13/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/10/2010 Number of Days to Update: 28 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/14/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/26/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly FINDS: Facility Index System/Facility Registry System Facility Index System. FINDS contains both facility information and ’pointers’ to other sources that contain more detail. EDR includes the following FINDS databases in this report: PCS (Permit Compliance System), AIRS (Aerometric Information Retrieval System), DOCKET (Enforcement Docket used to manage and track information on civil judicial enforcement cases for all environmental statutes), FURS (Federal Underground Injection Control), C-DOCKET (Criminal Docket System used to track criminal enforcement actions for all environmental statutes), FFIS (Federal Facilities Information System), STATE (State Environmental Laws and Statutes), and PADS (PCB Activity Data System). Date of Government Version: 10/19/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/22/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 12/01/2009 Number of Days to Update: 40 Source: EPA Telephone: (415) 947-8000 Last EDR Contact: 03/15/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/28/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly RAATS: RCRA Administrative Action Tracking System RCRA Administration Action Tracking System. RAATS contains records based on enforcement actions issued under RCRA pertaining to major violators and includes administrative and civil actions brought by the EPA. For administration actions after September 30, 1995, data entry in the RAATS database was discontinued. EPA will retain a copy of the database for historical records. It was necessary to terminate RAATS because a decrease in agency resources made it impossible to continue to update the information contained in the database. Date of Government Version: 04/17/1995 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/03/1995 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/07/1995 Number of Days to Update: 35 Source: EPA Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 06/02/2008 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/01/2008 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned BRS: Biennial Reporting System The Biennial Reporting System is a national system administered by the EPA that collects data on the generation and management of hazardous waste. BRS captures detailed data from two groups: Large Quantity Generators (LQG) and Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2007 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/19/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/22/2009 Number of Days to Update: 92 Source: EPA/NTIS Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/25/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/07/2010 Data Release Frequency: Biennially TC2760975.1s Page GR-20 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- CA BOND EXP. PLAN: Bond Expenditure Plan Department of Health Services developed a site-specific expenditure plan as the basis for an appropriation of Hazardous Substance Cleanup Bond Act funds. It is not updated. Date of Government Version: 01/01/1989 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/27/1994 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/02/1994 Number of Days to Update: 6 Source: Department of Health Services Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/31/1994 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned CA WDS: Waste Discharge System Sites which have been issued waste discharge requirements. Date of Government Version: 06/19/2007 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/20/2007 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/29/2007 Number of Days to Update: 9 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/01/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/14/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly NPDES: NPDES Permits Listing A listing of NPDES permits, including stormwater. Date of Government Version: 02/22/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/24/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/04/2010 Number of Days to Update: 8 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/24/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/07/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly CORTESE: "Cortese" Hazardous Waste & Substances Sites List The sites for the list are designated by the State Water Resource Control Board (LUST), the Integrated Waste Board (SWF/LS), and the Department of Toxic Substances Control (Cal-Sites). This listing is no longer updated by the state agency. Date of Government Version: 01/06/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/06/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 12 Source: CAL EPA/Office of Emergency Information Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/07/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/19/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly HIST CORTESE: Hazardous Waste & Substance Site List The sites for the list are designated by the State Water Resource Control Board [LUST], the Integrated Waste Board [SWF/LS], and the Department of Toxic Substances Control [CALSITES]. Date of Government Version: 04/01/2001 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/22/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/08/2009 Number of Days to Update: 76 Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 01/22/2009 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned NOTIFY 65: Proposition 65 Records Proposition 65 Notification Records. NOTIFY 65 contains facility notifications about any release which could impact drinking water and thereby expose the public to a potential health risk. Date of Government Version: 10/21/1993 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/01/1993 Date Made Active in Reports: 11/19/1993 Number of Days to Update: 18 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/29/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/12/2010 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned TC2760975.1s Page GR-21 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- Cleaner Facilities A list of related facilities that have EPA ID numbers. These are facilities with certain SIC codes: power laundries, family and commercial; garment pressing and cleaner’s agents; linen supply; coin-operated laundries and cleaning; plants, except rugs; carpet and upholster cleaning; industrial launderers; laundry and garment services. Date of Government Version: 12/22/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/25/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/29/2010 Number of Days to Update: 4 Source: Department of Toxic Substance Control Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/15/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/28/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually WIP: Well Investigation Program Case List Well Investigation Program case in the San Gabriel and San Fernando Valley area. Date of Government Version: 07/03/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/21/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/03/2009 Number of Days to Update: 13 Source: Los Angeles Water Quality Control Board Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/14/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/19/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies HAZNET: Facility and Manifest Data Facility and Manifest Data. The data is extracted from the copies of hazardous waste manifests received each year by the DTSC. The annual volume of manifests is typically 700,000 - 1,000,000 annually, representing approximately 350,000 - 500,000 shipments. Data are from the manifests submitted without correction, and therefore many contain some invalid values for data elements such as generator ID, TSD ID, waste category, and disposal method. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/21/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/28/2009 Number of Days to Update: 7 Source: California Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/26/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/02/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually EMI: Emissions Inventory Data Toxics and criteria pollutant emissions data collected by the ARB and local air pollution agencies. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2007 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/14/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/23/2009 Number of Days to Update: 9 Source: California Air Resources Board Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/09/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/12/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies INDIAN RESERV: Indian Reservations This map layer portrays Indian administered lands of the United States that have any area equal to or greater than 640 acres. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2005 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/08/2006 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/11/2007 Number of Days to Update: 34 Source: USGS Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/21/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/02/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually SCRD State Coalition for Remediation of Listing The State Coalition for Remediation of was established in 1998, with support from the U.S. EPA Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation. It is comprised of representatives of states with established remediation programs. Currently the member states are Alabama, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, North Carolina, Oregon, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Wisconsin. Date of Government Version: 02/10/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/11/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2010 Number of Days to Update: 60 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/23/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/09/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies TC2760975.1s Page GR-22 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- PROC: Certified Processors Database A listing of certified processors. Date of Government Version: 01/06/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/24/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/09/2010 Number of Days to Update: 16 Source: Department of Conservation Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/24/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/05/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly MWMP: Medical Waste Management Program Listing The Medical Waste Management Program (MWMP) ensures the proper handling and disposal of medical waste by permitting and inspecting medical waste Offsite Treatment Facilities (PDF) and Transfer Stations (PDF) throughout the state. MWMP also oversees all Medical Waste Transporters. Date of Government Version: 02/24/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/17/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/09/2010 Number of Days to Update: 23 Source: Department of Public Health Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/15/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/28/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies COAL ASH DOE: Sleam-Electric Plan Operation Data A listing of power plants that store ash in surface ponds. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2005 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/07/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/22/2009 Number of Days to Update: 76 Source: Department of Energy Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/21/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/02/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies COAL ASH EPA: Coal Combustion Residues Surface Impoundments List A listing of coal combustion residues surface impoundments with high hazard potential ratings. Date of Government Version: 11/09/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/18/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/10/2010 Number of Days to Update: 54 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: 03/16/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/28/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies HWT: Registered Hazardous Waste Transporter Database A listing of hazardous waste transporters. In California, unless specifically exempted, it is unlawful for any person to transport hazardous wastes unless the person holds a valid registration issued by DTSC. A hazardous waste transporter registration is valid for one year and is assigned a unique registration number. Date of Government Version: 01/18/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/19/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/29/2010 Number of Days to Update: 10 Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/21/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/02/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly HWP: EnviroStor Permitted Facilities Listing Detailed information on permitted hazardous waste facilities and corrective action (a??cleanupsa??) tracked in EnviroStor. Date of Government Version: 02/08/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/09/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 9 Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/09/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/24/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly TC2760975.1s Page GR-23 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- FINANCIAL ASSURANCE 2: Financial Assurance Information Listing A listing of financial assurance information for solid waste facilities. Financial assurance is intended to ensure that resources are available to pay for the cost of closure, post-closure care, and corrective measures if the owner or operator of a regulated facility is unable or unwilling to pay. Date of Government Version: 03/09/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/10/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/09/2010 Number of Days to Update: 30 Source: California Integrated Waste Management Board Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/08/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/07/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies FINANCIAL ASSURANCE: Financial Assurance Information Listing Financial Assurance information Date of Government Version: 03/01/2007 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/01/2007 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/29/2007 Number of Days to Update: 28 Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/12/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/17/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies FEDLAND: Federal and Indian Lands Federally and Indian administrated lands of the United States. Lands included are administrated by: Army Corps of Engineers, Bureau of Reclamation, National Wild and Scenic River, National Wildlife Refuge, Public Domain Land, Wilderness, Wilderness Study Area, Wildlife Management Area, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Bureau of Land Management, Department of Justice, Forest Service, Fish and Wildlife Service, National Park Service. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2005 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/06/2006 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/11/2007 Number of Days to Update: 339 Source: U.S. Geological Survey Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/21/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/02/2010 Data Release Frequency: N/A PCB TRANSFORMER: PCB Transformer Registration Database The database of PCB transformer registrations that includes all PCB registration submittals. Date of Government Version: 01/01/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/18/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/29/2009 Number of Days to Update: 100 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/24/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/17/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies EDR PROPRIETARY RECORDS EDR Proprietary Records Manufactured Gas Plants: EDR Proprietary Manufactured Gas Plants The EDR Proprietary Manufactured Gas Plant Database includes records of coal gas plants (manufactured gas plants) compiled by EDR’s researchers. Manufactured gas sites were used in the United States from the 1800’s to 1950’s to produce a gas that could be distributed and used as fuel. These plants used whale oil, rosin, coal, or a mixture of coal, oil, and water that also produced a significant amount of waste. Many of the byproducts of the gas production, such as coal tar (oily waste containing volatile and non-volatile chemicals), sludges, oils and other compounds are potentially hazardous to human health and the environment. The byproduct from this process was frequently disposed of directly at the plant site and can remain or spread slowly, serving as a continuous source of soil and groundwater contamination. Date of Government Version: N/A Date Data Arrived at EDR: N/A Date Made Active in Reports: N/A Number of Days to Update: N/A Source: EDR, Inc. Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: N/A Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned TC2760975.1s Page GR-24 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- EDR Historical Auto Stations: EDR Proprietary Historic Gas Stations EDR has searched selected national collections of business directories and has collected listings of potential gas station/filling station/service station sites that were available to EDR researchers. EDR’s review was limited to those categories of sources that might, in EDR’s opinion, include gas station/filling station/service station establishments. The categories reviewed included, but were not limited to gas, gas station, gasoline station, filling station, auto, automobile repair, auto service station, service station, etc. Date of Government Version: N/A Date Data Arrived at EDR: N/A Date Made Active in Reports: N/A Number of Days to Update: N/A Source: EDR, Inc. Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: N/A Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A Data Release Frequency: Varies EDR Historical Cleaners: EDR Proprietary Historic Dry Cleaners EDR has searched selected national collections of business directories and has collected listings of potential dry cleaner sites that were available to EDR researchers. EDR’s review was limited to those categories of sources that might, in EDR’s opinion, include dry cleaning establishments. The categories reviewed included, but were not limited to dry cleaners, cleaners, laundry, laundromat, cleaning/laundry, wash & dry etc. Date of Government Version: N/A Date Data Arrived at EDR: N/A Date Made Active in Reports: N/A Number of Days to Update: N/A Source: EDR, Inc. Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: N/A Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A Data Release Frequency: Varies COUNTY RECORDS ALAMEDA COUNTY: Contaminated Sites A listing of contaminated sites overseen by the Toxic Release Program (oil and groundwater contamination from chemical releases and spills) and the Leaking Underground Storage Tank Program (soil and ground water contamination from leaking petroleum USTs). Date of Government Version: 01/19/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/21/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/29/2010 Number of Days to Update: 8 Source: Alameda County Environmental Health Services Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/05/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/19/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually Underground Tanks Underground storage tank sites located in Alameda county. Date of Government Version: 01/19/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/21/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/02/2010 Number of Days to Update: 12 Source: Alameda County Environmental Health Services Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/05/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/19/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually CONTRA COSTA COUNTY: Site List List includes sites from the underground tank, hazardous waste generator and business plan/2185 programs. Date of Government Version: 02/10/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/11/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 7 Source: Contra Costa Health Services Department Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/08/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/24/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually FRESNO COUNTY: TC2760975.1s Page GR-25 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- CUPA Resources List Certified Unified Program Agency. CUPA’s are responsible for implementing a unified hazardous materials and hazardous waste management regulatory program. The agency provides oversight of businesses that deal with hazardous materials, operate underground storage tanks or aboveground storage tanks. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/20/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/29/2010 Number of Days to Update: 9 Source: Dept. of Community Health Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/16/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/02/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually KERN COUNTY: Underground Storage Tank Sites & Tank Listing Kern County Sites and Tanks Listing. Date of Government Version: 03/16/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/17/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/14/2010 Number of Days to Update: 28 Source: Kern County Environment Health Services Department Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/15/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/31/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly LOS ANGELES COUNTY: San Gabriel Valley Areas of Concern San Gabriel Valley areas where VOC contamination is at or above the MCL as designated by region 9 EPA office. Date of Government Version: 03/30/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/31/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/23/2009 Number of Days to Update: 206 Source: EPA Region 9 Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/29/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/12/2010 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned HMS: Street Number List Industrial Waste and Underground Storage Tank Sites. Date of Government Version: 09/30/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/28/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 21 Source: Department of Public Works Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/19/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/02/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually List of Solid Waste Facilities Solid Waste Facilities in Los Angeles County. Date of Government Version: 01/25/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/27/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 22 Source: La County Department of Public Works Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/23/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/09/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies City of Los Angeles Landfills Landfills owned and maintained by the City of Los Angeles. Date of Government Version: 03/05/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/10/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/08/2009 Number of Days to Update: 29 Source: Engineering & Construction Division Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/02/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/07/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies TC2760975.1s Page GR-26 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- Site Mitigation List Industrial sites that have had some sort of spill or complaint. Date of Government Version: 02/09/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/12/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/04/2010 Number of Days to Update: 20 Source: Community Health Services Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/22/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/09/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually City of El Segundo Underground Storage Tank Underground storage tank sites located in El Segundo city. Date of Government Version: 01/25/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/25/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/02/2010 Number of Days to Update: 8 Source: City of El Segundo Fire Department Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/23/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/09/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually City of Long Beach Underground Storage Tank Underground storage tank sites located in the city of Long Beach. Date of Government Version: 03/28/2003 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/23/2003 Date Made Active in Reports: 11/26/2003 Number of Days to Update: 34 Source: City of Long Beach Fire Department Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/16/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually City of Torrance Underground Storage Tank Underground storage tank sites located in the city of Torrance. Date of Government Version: 01/21/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/25/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/02/2010 Number of Days to Update: 8 Source: City of Torrance Fire Department Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/19/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/02/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually MARIN COUNTY: Underground Storage Tank Sites Currently permitted USTs in Marin County. Date of Government Version: 01/20/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/03/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/23/2010 Number of Days to Update: 20 Source: Public Works Department Waste Management Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/12/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/26/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually NAPA COUNTY: Sites With Reported Contamination A listing of leaking underground storage tank sites located in Napa county. Date of Government Version: 07/09/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/09/2008 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/31/2008 Number of Days to Update: 22 Source: Napa County Department of Environmental Management Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/08/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/21/2010 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned TC2760975.1s Page GR-27 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- Closed and Operating Underground Storage Tank Sites Underground storage tank sites located in Napa county. Date of Government Version: 01/15/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/16/2008 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/08/2008 Number of Days to Update: 23 Source: Napa County Department of Environmental Management Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/08/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/21/2010 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned ORANGE COUNTY: List of Industrial Site Cleanups Petroleum and non-petroleum spills. Date of Government Version: 12/02/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/16/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/04/2010 Number of Days to Update: 16 Source: Health Care Agency Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/12/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/31/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually List of Underground Storage Tank Cleanups Orange County Underground Storage Tank Cleanups (LUST). Date of Government Version: 02/03/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/16/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/04/2010 Number of Days to Update: 16 Source: Health Care Agency Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/12/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/31/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly List of Underground Storage Tank Facilities Orange County Underground Storage Tank Facilities (UST). Date of Government Version: 02/03/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/12/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/23/2010 Number of Days to Update: 11 Source: Health Care Agency Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/12/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/31/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly PLACER COUNTY: Master List of Facilities List includes aboveground tanks, underground tanks and cleanup sites. Date of Government Version: 03/16/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/17/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/09/2010 Number of Days to Update: 23 Source: Placer County Health and Human Services Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/15/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/28/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually RIVERSIDE COUNTY: Listing of Underground Tank Cleanup Sites Riverside County Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Sites (LUST). Date of Government Version: 01/21/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/27/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 22 Source: Department of Public Health Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/29/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/12/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly TC2760975.1s Page GR-28 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- Underground Storage Tank Tank List Underground storage tank sites located in Riverside county. Date of Government Version: 01/21/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/27/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/02/2010 Number of Days to Update: 6 Source: Health Services Agency Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/29/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/12/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly SACRAMENTO COUNTY: Toxic Site Clean-Up List List of sites where unauthorized releases of potentially hazardous materials have occurred. Date of Government Version: 01/05/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/15/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/29/2010 Number of Days to Update: 14 Source: Sacramento County Environmental Management Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/12/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/26/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly Master Hazardous Materials Facility List Any business that has hazardous materials on site - hazardous material storage sites, underground storage tanks, waste generators. Date of Government Version: 01/21/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/02/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 16 Source: Sacramento County Environmental Management Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/12/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/26/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY: Hazardous Material Permits This listing includes underground storage tanks, medical waste handlers/generators, hazardous materials handlers, hazardous waste generators, and waste oil generators/handlers. Date of Government Version: 03/16/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/17/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/09/2010 Number of Days to Update: 23 Source: San Bernardino County Fire Department Hazardous Materials Division Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/15/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/31/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly SAN DIEGO COUNTY: Hazardous Materials Management Division Database The database includes: HE58 - This report contains the business name, site address, business phone number, establishment permit number, type of permit, and the business status. HE17 - In addition to providing the same information provided in the HE58 listing, HE17 provides inspection dates, violations received by the establishment, hazardous waste generated, the quantity, method of storage, treatment/disposal of waste and the hauler, and information on underground storage tanks. Unauthorized Release List - Includes a summary of environmental contamination cases in San Diego County (underground tank cases, non-tank cases, groundwater contamination, and soil contamination are included.) Date of Government Version: 07/16/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/29/2008 Date Made Active in Reports: 11/26/2008 Number of Days to Update: 28 Source: Hazardous Materials Management Division Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/31/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/28/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly TC2760975.1s Page GR-29 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- Solid Waste Facilities San Diego County Solid Waste Facilities. Date of Government Version: 10/01/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/04/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 45 Source: Department of Health Services Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/16/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies Environmental Case Listing The listing contains all underground tank release cases and projects pertaining to properties contaminated with hazardous substances that are actively under review by the Site Assessment and Mitigation Program. Date of Government Version: 09/23/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/15/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 34 Source: San Diego County Department of Environmental Health Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/16/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/28/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY: Local Oversite Facilities A listing of leaking underground storage tank sites located in San Francisco county. Date of Government Version: 09/19/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/19/2008 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/29/2008 Number of Days to Update: 10 Source: Department Of Public Health San Francisco County Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/16/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/31/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly Underground Storage Tank Information Underground storage tank sites located in San Francisco county. Date of Government Version: 09/19/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/19/2008 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/01/2008 Number of Days to Update: 12 Source: Department of Public Health Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/16/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/31/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY: San Joaquin Co. UST A listing of underground storage tank locations in San Joaquin county. Date of Government Version: 10/14/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/15/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 11/02/2009 Number of Days to Update: 18 Source: Environmental Health Department Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: 03/29/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/12/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually SAN MATEO COUNTY: Business Inventory List includes Hazardous Materials Business Plan, hazardous waste generators, and underground storage tanks. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/05/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 13 Source: San Mateo County Environmental Health Services Division Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/22/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/05/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually TC2760975.1s Page GR-30 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- Fuel Leak List A listing of leaking underground storage tank sites located in San Mateo county. Date of Government Version: 03/22/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/23/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/09/2010 Number of Days to Update: 17 Source: San Mateo County Environmental Health Services Division Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/22/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/05/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually SANTA CLARA COUNTY: HIST LUST - Fuel Leak Site Activity Report A listing of open and closed leaking underground storage tanks. This listing is no longer updated by the county. Leaking underground storage tanks are now handled by the Department of Environmental Health. Date of Government Version: 03/29/2005 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/30/2005 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/21/2005 Number of Days to Update: 22 Source: Santa Clara Valley Water District Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/23/2009 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/22/2009 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned LOP Listing A listing of leaking underground storage tanks located in Santa Clara county. Date of Government Version: 05/29/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/01/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/15/2009 Number of Days to Update: 14 Source: Department of Environmental Health Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/08/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/21/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually Hazardous Material Facilities Hazardous material facilities, including underground storage tank sites. Date of Government Version: 08/31/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/31/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/18/2009 Number of Days to Update: 18 Source: City of San Jose Fire Department Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/15/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/31/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually SOLANO COUNTY: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks A listing of leaking underground storage tank sites located in Solano county. Date of Government Version: 03/11/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/16/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/09/2010 Number of Days to Update: 24 Source: Solano County Department of Environmental Management Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/08/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/21/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly Underground Storage Tanks Underground storage tank sites located in Solano county. Date of Government Version: 03/11/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/16/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/14/2010 Number of Days to Update: 29 Source: Solano County Department of Environmental Management Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/08/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/21/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly SONOMA COUNTY: TC2760975.1s Page GR-31 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- Leaking Underground Storage Tank Sites A listing of leaking underground storage tank sites located in Sonoma county. Date of Government Version: 01/05/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/06/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 12 Source: Department of Health Services Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/05/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/19/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly SUTTER COUNTY: Underground Storage Tanks Underground storage tank sites located in Sutter county. Date of Government Version: 04/01/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/02/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/09/2009 Number of Days to Update: 7 Source: Sutter County Department of Agriculture Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/13/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/28/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually VENTURA COUNTY: Business Plan, Hazardous Waste Producers, and Operating Underground Tanks The BWT list indicates by site address whether the Environmental Health Division has Business Plan Waste Producer and/or Underground Tank information. Date of Government Version: 01/26/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/25/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/04/2010 Number of Days to Update: 7 Source: Ventura County Environmental Health Division Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/23/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/07/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly Inventory of Illegal Abandoned and Inactive Sites Ventura County Inventory of Closed, Illegal Abandoned, and Inactive Sites. Date of Government Version: 08/01/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/05/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/13/2009 Number of Days to Update: 8 Source: Environmental Health Division Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/16/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually Listing of Underground Tank Cleanup Sites Ventura County Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Sites (LUST). Date of Government Version: 05/29/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/24/2008 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/31/2008 Number of Days to Update: 37 Source: Environmental Health Division Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/23/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/07/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly Underground Tank Closed Sites List Ventura County Operating Underground Storage Tank Sites (UST)/Underground Tank Closed Sites List. Date of Government Version: 03/05/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/24/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/14/2010 Number of Days to Update: 21 Source: Environmental Health Division Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/24/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/05/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly YOLO COUNTY: TC2760975.1s Page GR-32 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- Underground Storage Tank Comprehensive Facility Report Underground storage tank sites located in Yolo county. Date of Government Version: 12/28/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/31/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 18 Source: Yolo County Department of Health Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/29/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/12/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually OTHER DATABASE(S) Depending on the geographic area covered by this report, the data provided in these specialty databases may or may not be complete. For example, the existence of wetlands information data in a specific report does not mean that all wetlands in the area covered by the report are included. Moreover, the absence of any reported wetlands information does not necessarily mean that wetlands do not exist in the area covered by the report. CT MANIFEST: Hazardous Waste Manifest Data Facility and manifest data. Manifest is a document that lists and tracks hazardous waste from the generator through transporters to a tsd facility. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2007 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/26/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/11/2009 Number of Days to Update: 16 Source: Department of Environmental Protection Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/02/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/07/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually NJ MANIFEST: Manifest Information Hazardous waste manifest information. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/20/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/05/2010 Number of Days to Update: 16 Source: Department of Environmental Protection Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: 04/23/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/02/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually NY MANIFEST: Facility and Manifest Data Manifest is a document that lists and tracks hazardous waste from the generator through transporters to a TSD facility. Date of Government Version: 01/04/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/11/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/17/2010 Number of Days to Update: 34 Source: Department of Environmental Conservation Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/11/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/24/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually PA MANIFEST: Manifest Information Hazardous waste manifest information. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/01/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 12/14/2009 Number of Days to Update: 13 Source: Department of Environmental Protection Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: 02/23/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/07/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually RI MANIFEST: Manifest information Hazardous waste manifest information Date of Government Version: 11/03/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/12/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/22/2010 Number of Days to Update: 10 Source: Department of Environmental Management Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/01/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/14/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually TC2760975.1s Page GR-33 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- WI MANIFEST: Manifest Information Hazardous waste manifest information. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/17/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/10/2009 Number of Days to Update: 24 Source: Department of Natural Resources Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: 03/22/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/05/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually Oil/Gas Pipelines: This data was obtained by EDR from the USGS in 1994. It is referred to by USGS as GeoData Digital Line Graphs from 1:100,000-Scale Maps. It was extracted from the transportation category including some oil, but primarily gas pipelines. Electric Power Transmission Line Data Source: PennWell Corporation Telephone: (800) 823-6277 This map includes information copyrighted by PennWell Corporation. This information is provided on a best effort basis and PennWell Corporation does not guarantee its accuracy nor warrant its fitness for any particular purpose. Such information has been reprinted with the permission of PennWell. Sensitive Receptors: There are individuals deemed sensitive receptors due to their fragile immune systems and special sensitivity to environmental discharges. These sensitive receptors typically include the elderly, the sick, and children. While the location of all sensitive receptors cannot be determined, EDR indicates those buildings and facilities - schools, daycares, hospitals, medical centers, and nursing homes - where individuals who are sensitive receptors are likely to be located. AHA Hospitals: Source: American Hospital Association, Inc. Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] The database includes a listing of hospitals based on the American Hospital Association’s annual survey of hospitals. Medical Centers: Provider of Services Listing Source: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] A listing of hospitals with Medicare provider number, produced by Centers of Medicare & Medicaid Services, a federal agency within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Nursing Homes Source: National Institutes of Health Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Information on Medicare and Medicaid certified nursing homes in the United States. Public Schools Source: National Center for Education Statistics Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] The National Center for Education Statistics’ primary database on elementary and secondary public education in the United States. It is a comprehensive, annual, national statistical database of all public elementary and secondary schools and school districts, which contains data that are comparable across all states. Private Schools Source: National Center for Education Statistics Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] The National Center for Education Statistics’ primary database on private school locations in the United States. Daycare Centers: Licensed Facilities Source: Department of Social Services Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Flood Zone Data: This data, available in select counties across the country, was obtained by EDR in 2003 & 2009 from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Data depicts 100-year and 500-year flood zones as defined by FEMA. NWI: National Wetlands Inventory. This data, available in select counties across the country, was obtained by EDR in 2002 and 2005 from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. TC2760975.1s Page GR-34 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- STREET AND ADDRESS INFORMATION © 2010 Tele Atlas North America, Inc. All rights reserved. This material is proprietary and the subject of copyright protection and other intellectual property rights owned by or licensed to Tele Atlas North America, Inc. The use of this material is subject to the terms of a license agreement. You will be held liable for any unauthorized copying or disclosure of this material. TC2760975.1s Page GR-35 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.1s Page A-1 geologic strata. of the soil, and nearby wells. Groundwater flow velocity is generally impacted by the nature of the Groundwater flow direction may be impacted by surface topography, hydrology, hydrogeology, characteristics 2. Groundwater flow velocity. 1. Groundwater flow direction, and Assessment of the impact of contaminant migration generally has two principle investigative components: forming an opinion about the impact of potential contaminant migration. EDR’s GeoCheck Physical Setting Source Addendum is provided to assist the environmental professional in 1981 Most Recent Revision: 33117-G8 ANAHEIM, CA Target Property Map: USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP 133 ft. above sea level Elevation: 3740107.0 UTM Y (Meters): 415393.0 UTM X (Meters): Zone 11 Universal Tranverse Mercator: 117.914 - 117˚ 54’ 50.4’’ Longitude (West): 33.79950 - 33˚ 47’ 58.2’’ Latitude (North): TARGET PROPERTY COORDINATES ANAHEIM, CA 92802 HARBOR/CONVENTION WAY ARSP SOUTH TARGET PROPERTY ADDRESS GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE ADDENDUM ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.1s Page A-2 should be field verified. on a relative (not an absolute) basis. Relative elevation information between sites of close proximity Source: Topography has been determined from the USGS 7.5’ Digital Elevation Model and should be evaluated SURROUNDING TOPOGRAPHY: ELEVATION PROFILES Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) TP TP 0 1/2 1 Miles ✩Target Property Elevation: 133 ft. North South West East 115 117 120 122 123 125 127 128 131 133 133 133 135 137 139 140 141 143 158 117 117 120 122 123 124 125 127 130 133 136 136 134 136 138 139 141 143 145 General WSW General Topographic Gradient: TARGET PROPERTY TOPOGRAPHY should contamination exist on the target property, what downgradient sites might be impacted. assist the environmental professional in forming an opinion about the impact of nearby contaminated properties or, Surface topography may be indicative of the direction of surficial groundwater flow. This information can be used to TOPOGRAPHIC INFORMATION collected on nearby properties, and regional groundwater flow information (from deep aquifers). sources of information, such as surface topographic information, hydrologic information, hydrogeologic data using site-specific well data. If such data is not reasonably ascertainable, it may be necessary to rely on other Groundwater flow direction for a particular site is best determined by a qualified environmental professional GROUNDWATER FLOW DIRECTION INFORMATION GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.1s Page A-3 Not Reported 1/8 - 1/4 Mile SSW 3 GENERAL DIRECTION LOCATION GROUNDWATER FLOW FROM TP MAP ID hydrogeologically, and the depth to water table. authorities at select sites and has extracted the date of the report, groundwater flow direction as determined flow at specific points. EDR has reviewed reports submitted by environmental professionals to regulatory EDR has developed the AQUIFLOW Information System to provide data on the general direction of groundwater AQUIFLOW® Search Radius: 1.000 Mile. * ©1996 Site−specific hydrogeological data gathered by CERCLIS Alerts, Inc., Bainbridge Island, WA. All rights reserved. All of the information and opinions presented are those of the cited EPA report(s), which were completed under a Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Information System (CERCLIS) investigation. Information is inferred in the CERCLIS investigation report(s) Data Quality: No information about a sole source aquifer is available Sole Source Aquifer: clay layers. upper 100 feet of the subsurface. The Talbert aquifer underlies these The site area is characterized by discontinuous clay layers within the Hydraulic Connection: approximately 100 feet. Inferred Depth to Water: S IN THE TALBERT AQUIFER. Groundwater Flow Direction: CAD982359879 Site EPA ID Number: ITASCO Site Name: 1 - 2 Miles ENE Location Relative to TP: 1.25 miles Search Radius: Site-Specific Hydrogeological Data*: * ©1996 Site−specific hydrogeological data gathered by CERCLIS Alerts, Inc., Bainbridge Island, WA. All rights reserved. All of the information and opinions presented are those of the cited EPA report(s), which were completed under a Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Information System (CERCLIS) investigation. contamination exist on the target property, what downgradient sites might be impacted. environmental professional in forming an opinion about the impact of nearby contaminated properties or, should of groundwater flow direction in the immediate area. Such hydrogeologic information can be used to assist the Hydrogeologic information obtained by installation of wells on a specific site can often be an indicator HYDROGEOLOGIC INFORMATION YES - refer to the Overview Map and Detail Map ANAHEIM NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY NWI Electronic Data Coverage NWI Quad at Target Property Not Reported Additional Panels in search area: 06059C - FEMA DFIRM Flood data Flood Plain Panel at Target Property: YES - refer to the Overview Map and Detail Map ORANGE, CA FEMA FLOOD ZONE FEMA Flood Electronic Data Target Property County and bodies of water). Refer to the Physical Setting Source Map following this summary for hydrologic information (major waterways contamination exist on the target property, what downgradient sites might be impacted. the environmental professional in forming an opinion about the impact of nearby contaminated properties or, should Surface water can act as a hydrologic barrier to groundwater flow. Such hydrologic information can be used to assist HYDROLOGIC INFORMATION GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.1s Page A-4 For additional site information, refer to Physical Setting Source Map Findings. Not Reported 1/2 - 1 Mile ENE D25 Not Reported 1/2 - 1 Mile ENE D21 SW 1/2 - 1 Mile South 9 SW 1/2 - 1 Mile WNW 8 N 1/2 - 1 Mile ENE 7 Not Reported 1/4 - 1/2 Mile NNW 4 GENERAL DIRECTION LOCATION GROUNDWATER FLOW FROM TP MAP ID GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.1s Page A-5 Map, USGS Digital Data Series DDS - 11 (1994). of the Conterminous U.S. at 1:2,500,000 Scale - a digital representation of the 1974 P.B. King and H.M. Beikman Geologic Age and Rock Stratigraphic Unit Source: P.G. Schruben, R.E. Arndt and W.J. Bawiec, Geology ROCK STRATIGRAPHIC UNIT GEOLOGIC AGE IDENTIFICATION Stratifed Sequence Category: Cenozoic Era: Quaternary System: Quaternary Series: Q Code: (decoded above as Era, System & Series) at which contaminant migration may be occurring. Geologic information can be used by the environmental professional in forming an opinion about the relative speed GEOLOGIC INFORMATION IN GENERAL AREA OF TARGET PROPERTY move more quickly through sandy-gravelly types of soils than silty-clayey types of soils. characteristics data collected on nearby properties and regional soil information. In general, contaminant plumes to rely on other sources of information, including geologic age identification, rock stratigraphic unit and soil using site specific geologic and soil strata data. If such data are not reasonably ascertainable, it may be necessary Groundwater flow velocity information for a particular site is best determined by a qualified environmental professional GROUNDWATER FLOW VELOCITY INFORMATION GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY ® ---PAGE BREAK--- EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. 3 1 2 0 1/16 1/8 1/4 Miles ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.1s Page A-7 Somewhat excessively drained Soil Drainage Class: excessively drained sands and gravels. Class A - High infiltration rates. Soils are deep, well drained to Hydrologic Group: loamy sand Soil Surface Texture: METZ Soil Component Name: Soil Map ID: 2 Min: 6.6 Max: 8.4 Min: 4 Max: 14 Silty Sand. Sands with fines, SOILS, Sands, COARSE-GRAINED and Sand. Clayey Gravel 200), Silty, or passing No. pct. or less materials (35 Granular loam to fine sandy stratified sand 62 inches 16 inches 2 Min: 6.6 Max: 8.4 Min: 4 Max: 14 Silty Sand. Sands with fines, SOILS, Sands, COARSE-GRAINED and Sand. Clayey Gravel 200), Silty, or passing No. pct. or less materials (35 Granular loamy sand 16 inches 0 inches 1 Soil Layer Information Boundary Classification Saturated hydraulic conductivity micro m/sec Layer Upper Lower Soil Texture Class AASHTO Group Unified Soil Soil Reaction (pH) > 0 inches Depth to Watertable Min: > 0 inches Depth to Bedrock Min: High Corrosion Potential - Uncoated Steel: Hydric Status: Not hydric Somewhat excessively drained Soil Drainage Class: excessively drained sands and gravels. Class A - High infiltration rates. Soils are deep, well drained to Hydrologic Group: loamy sand Soil Surface Texture: METZ Soil Component Name: Soil Map ID: 1 in a landscape. The following information is based on Soil Conservation Service SSURGO data. for privately owned lands in the United States. A soil map in a soil survey is a representation of soil patterns Survey (NCSS) and is responsible for collecting, storing, maintaining and distributing soil survey information The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Soil Conservation Service (SCS) leads the National Cooperative Soil DOMINANT SOIL COMPOSITION IN GENERAL AREA OF TARGET PROPERTY GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.1s Page A-8 Min: 7.4 Max: 8.4 Min: 14 Max: 42 Not reported Not reported fine sandy loam 27 inches 0 inches 1 Soil Layer Information Boundary Classification Saturated hydraulic conductivity micro m/sec Layer Upper Lower Soil Texture Class AASHTO Group Unified Soil Soil Reaction (pH) > 0 inches Depth to Watertable Min: > 0 inches Depth to Bedrock Min: High Corrosion Potential - Uncoated Steel: Hydric Status: Not hydric Soil Drainage Class: textures. moderately well and well drained soils with moderately coarse Class B - Moderate infiltration rates. Deep and moderately deep, Hydrologic Group: fine sandy loam Soil Surface Texture: HUENEME Soil Component Name: Soil Map ID: 3 Min: 6.6 Max: 8.4 Min: 1 Max: 14.11 Not reported Not reported sandy clay loam stratified 59 inches 46 inches 4 Min: 6.6 Max: 8.4 Min: 1 Max: 14.11 Not reported Not reported silt loam 46 inches 40 inches 3 Min: 6.6 Max: 8.4 Min: 1 Max: 14.11 Not reported Not reported loam to sandy clay stratified sand 40 inches 16 inches 2 Min: 6.6 Max: 8.4 Min: 1 Max: 14.11 Not reported Not reported loamy sand 16 inches 0 inches 1 Soil Layer Information Boundary Classification Saturated hydraulic conductivity micro m/sec Layer Upper Lower Soil Texture Class AASHTO Group Unified Soil Soil Reaction (pH) > 0 inches Depth to Watertable Min: > 0 inches Depth to Bedrock Min: High Corrosion Potential - Uncoated Steel: Hydric Status: Not hydric GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.1s Page A-9 1/8 - 1/4 Mile ENE CADW40000005731 1 STATE DATABASE WELL INFORMATION LOCATION FROM TP WELL ID MAP ID Note: PWS System location is not always the same as well location. No PWS System Found FEDERAL FRDS PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM INFORMATION LOCATION FROM TP WELL ID MAP ID 1/2 - 1 Mile SSW USGS3124823 C20 1/2 - 1 Mile SE USGS3124655 17 1/2 - 1 Mile SSW USGS3124824 C16 1/2 - 1 Mile NW USGS3124677 B11 1/4 - 1/2 Mile NW USGS3124674 A5 FEDERAL USGS WELL INFORMATION LOCATION FROM TP WELL ID MAP ID 1.000 State Database Nearest PWS within 1 mile Federal FRDS PWS 1.000 Federal USGS WELL SEARCH DISTANCE INFORMATION SEARCH DISTANCE (miles) DATABASE opinion about the impact of contaminant migration on nearby drinking water wells. professional in assessing sources that may impact ground water flow direction, and in forming an EDR Local/Regional Water Agency records provide water well information to assist the environmental LOCAL / REGIONAL WATER AGENCY RECORDS Min: 7.4 Max: 8.4 Min: 14 Max: 42 Not reported Not reported to silt loam stratified sand 59 inches 27 inches 2 Soil Layer Information Boundary Classification Saturated hydraulic conductivity micro m/sec Layer Upper Lower Soil Texture Class AASHTO Group Unified Soil Soil Reaction (pH) GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.1s Page A-10 1 - 2 Miles NW CAOG60000019261 7 1 - 2 Miles SE CAOG60000015978 6 1 - 2 Miles NNE CAOG60000019840 5 1 - 2 Miles North CAOG60000019554 4 1 - 2 Miles NNE CAOG60000019428 3 1/2 - 1 Mile WSW CAOG60000016937 2 1/4 - 1/2 Mile SSE CAOG60000016927 1 STATE OIL/GAS WELL INFORMATION LOCATION FROM TP WELL ID MAP ID OTHER STATE DATABASE INFORMATION 1/2 - 1 Mile SSW CADW40000005690 24 1/2 - 1 Mile NNE 5143 23 1/2 - 1 Mile SSE CADW40000005687 22 1/2 - 1 Mile North 5142 19 1/2 - 1 Mile SW CADW40000005697 C18 1/2 - 1 Mile SSW CADW40000005698 C15 1/2 - 1 Mile NNE CADW40000005774 14 1/2 - 1 Mile NW CADW40000005757 B13 1/2 - 1 Mile NNW CADW40000005772 12 1/2 - 1 Mile ENE CADW40000005744 10 1/4 - 1/2 Mile NW CADW40000005742 A6 1/8 - 1/4 Mile West 5155 2 STATE DATABASE WELL INFORMATION LOCATION FROM TP WELL ID MAP ID GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY ® ---PAGE BREAK--- EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. 1 0 0 100 CA ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.1s Page A-11 NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 18.8 MG/L Findings: 10/05/2009 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 4800 UG/L Findings: 07/02/2009 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 21.3 MG/L Findings: 07/02/2009 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 3930 UG/L Findings: 04/02/2009 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 17.4 MG/L Findings: 04/02/2009 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 3800 UG/L Findings: 01/05/2009 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 16.8 MG/L Findings: 01/05/2009 Sample Collected: ANAHEIM Area Served: 57397 Connections: 292900 Pop Served: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 P.O. BOX 3222 (#559) Organization That Operates System: City of Anaheim System Name: 3010001 System Number: WELL 041 Source Name: 1 Mile (One Minute) Precision: 334800.0 1175500.0 Source Lat/Long: Active Untreated Well Status: Well/Groundwater Water Type: WELL/AMBNT/MUN/INTAKE Station Type: 08 District Number: Orange County: [PHONE REDACTED] FRDS Number: TEE User ID: 04S/10W-27D03 S Prime Station Code: Water System Information: 2 West 1/8 - 1/4 Mile Lower 5155 CA WELLS CADW40000005731 Site id: 800100 Gwcode: 30 Countyco: Z Welluseco: 3 Districtco: 04S10W27A001S Stwellno: 33.8005 Latiude: -117.9101 Longitude: 1 ENE 1/8 - 1/4 Mile Higher CADW40000005731 CA WELLS Map ID Direction Distance Elevation EDR ID Number Database GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.1s Page A-12 SPECIFIC CONDUCTANCE Chemical: 946 US Findings: 07/01/2008 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 3910 UG/L Findings: 04/02/2008 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 17.31 MG/L Findings: 04/02/2008 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 4110 UG/L Findings: 01/02/2008 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 18.2 MG/L Findings: 01/02/2008 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 3970 UG/L Findings: 10/01/2007 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 17.6 MG/L Findings: 10/01/2007 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 3960 UG/L Findings: 07/03/2007 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 17.5 MG/L Findings: 07/03/2007 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 3990 UG/L Findings: 04/02/2007 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 17.66 MG/L Findings: 04/02/2007 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 4250 UG/L Findings: 01/02/2007 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 18.79 MG/L Findings: 01/02/2007 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 4560 UG/L Findings: 10/03/2006 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 20.19 MG/L Findings: 10/03/2006 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 4290 UG/L Findings: 07/12/2006 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 18.96 MG/L Findings: 07/12/2006 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 4530 UG/L Findings: 04/05/2006 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 20.03 MG/L Findings: 04/05/2006 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 4420 UG/L Findings: 01/03/2006 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 19.56 MG/L Findings: 01/03/2006 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 4250 UG/L Findings: 10/05/2009 Sample Collected: GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.1s Page A-13 NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 17.78 MG/L Findings: 10/01/2008 Sample Collected: URANIUM COUNTING ERROR Chemical: .97 PCI/L Findings: 07/01/2008 Sample Collected: URANIUM (PCI/L) Chemical: 7.96 PCI/L Findings: 07/01/2008 Sample Collected: GROSS ALPHA COUNTING ERROR Chemical: 1.61 PCI/L Findings: 07/01/2008 Sample Collected: GROSS ALPHA Chemical: 7.88 PCI/L Findings: 07/01/2008 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 4080 UG/L Findings: 07/01/2008 Sample Collected: TURBIDITY, LABORATORY Chemical: .2 NTU Findings: 07/01/2008 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 18.1 MG/L Findings: 07/01/2008 Sample Collected: TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS Chemical: 590 MG/L Findings: 07/01/2008 Sample Collected: BROMOFORM (THM) Chemical: 1.4 UG/L Findings: 07/01/2008 Sample Collected: BORON Chemical: 180 UG/L Findings: 07/01/2008 Sample Collected: FLUORIDE (NATURAL-SOURCE) Chemical: .43 MG/L Findings: 07/01/2008 Sample Collected: CHLORIDE Chemical: 90.6 MG/L Findings: 07/01/2008 Sample Collected: POTASSIUM Chemical: 4.2 MG/L Findings: 07/01/2008 Sample Collected: SODIUM Chemical: 68.8 MG/L Findings: 07/01/2008 Sample Collected: MAGNESIUM Chemical: 19.2 MG/L Findings: 07/01/2008 Sample Collected: CALCIUM Chemical: 106 MG/L Findings: 07/01/2008 Sample Collected: HARDNESS (TOTAL) AS CACO3 Chemical: 344 MG/L Findings: 07/01/2008 Sample Collected: TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC) Chemical: .38 MG/L Findings: 07/01/2008 Sample Collected: BICARBONATE ALKALINITY Chemical: 250 MG/L Findings: 07/01/2008 Sample Collected: ALKALINITY (TOTAL) AS CACO3 Chemical: 205 MG/L Findings: 07/01/2008 Sample Collected: PH, LABORATORY Chemical: 8 Findings: 07/01/2008 Sample Collected: GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.1s Page A-14 89 Ground water data count: 1986-08-29 Ground water data end date: Ground water data begin date: 1969-06-30 0 Water quality data count: 0000-00-00 Water quality data end date: 0000-00-00 Water quality data begin date: 0 Peak flow data count: 0000-00-00 Peak flow data end date: 0000-00-00 Peak flow data begin date: 0 Daily flow data count: 0000-00-00 Daily flow data end date: 0000-00-00 Daily flow data begin date: 0 Real time data flag: 479300200 Project number: Not Reported Source of depth data: 226 Hole depth: 190 Well depth: Not Reported Aquifer: Not Reported Aquifer Type: Single well, other than collector or Ranney type Type of ground water site: Y Local standard time flag: PST Mean greenwich time offset: Not Reported Date inventoried: Not Reported Date construction: Ground-water other than Spring Site type: Not Reported Topographic: Seal Beach. California. Area = 90 sq.mi. Hydrologic: National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 Altitude datum: 2.5 Altitude accuracy: Interpolated from topographic map Altitude method: 128.00 Altitude: 24000 Map scale: ANAHEIM Location map: NENWS27T04SR10WS Land net: US Country: 059 County: 06 State: 06 District: NAD83 Dec latlong datum: NAD27 Latlong datum: S Coor accr: M Coor meth: -117.91755864 Dec lon: 33.80307152 Dec lat: 1175500 Longitude: USGS3124674 EDR Site id: 334811 Latitude: 004S010W27C002S Site name: 334811117550001 Site no: USGS Agency cd: A5 NW 1/4 - 1/2 Mile Lower USGS3124674 FED USGS Date: 02/06/1998 Average Water Depth: Not Reported Deep Water Depth: 86.6 Shallow Water Depth: 74.1 Groundwater Flow: Not Reported Site ID: 083001662T 4 NNW 1/4 - 1/2 Mile Higher 54915 AQUIFLOW Date: 03/31/1994 Average Water Depth: 85 Deep Water Depth: Not Reported Shallow Water Depth: Not Reported Groundwater Flow: Not Reported Site ID: 083000341T 3 SSW 1/8 - 1/4 Mile Lower 65047 AQUIFLOW NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 4020 UG/L Findings: 10/01/2008 Sample Collected: GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.1s Page A-15 A6 NW 1/4 - 1/2 Mile Lower CADW40000005742 CA WELLS 1969-06-30 79.10 1969-09-02 80.60 1969-08-06 79.40 1969-11-03 78.80 1969-10-03 79.30 1970-02-03 75.20 1969-12-31 76.70 1970-04-01 76.70 1970-03-10 76.10 1970-06-01 77.40 1970-04-29 77.10 1970-08-06 79.20 1970-06-30 78.20 1970-10-05 88.00 1970-08-31 80.00 1970-12-10 81.70 1970-11-02 81.30 1971-04-08 84.50 1971-03-03 81.00 1971-06-09 82.80 1971-04-30 81.90 1971-08-30 86.50 1971-07-09 83.00 1972-01-11 89.80 1971-11-02 88.90 1972-05-01 92.20 1972-02-29 90.30 1972-08-31 95.50 1972-07-06 94.40 1973-01-05 100.10 1972-11-02 99.20 1973-05-10 98.00 1973-03-05 102.30 1973-09-12 103.10 1973-07-06 101.70 1974-01-24 104.30 1973-11-02 104.00 1974-04-30 102.90 1974-03-19 105.60 1974-08-30 105.80 1974-07-03 105.20 1975-01-02 104.70 1974-10-22 105.80 1975-04-30 103.30 1975-03-19 104.10 1975-09-02 105.80 1975-07-02 107.10 1976-01-07 107.50 1975-11-06 106.40 1976-05-04 107.20 1976-03-08 106.90 1976-12-28 110.80 1976-10-29 107.00 1977-10-28 115.00 1977-03-08 111.20 1978-11-01 105.34 1978-09-26 106.21 1979-05-02 97.65 1979-02-06 101.27 1979-11-13 94.69 1979-08-06 95.35 1980-06-11 89.06 1980-02-08 94.10 1980-08-28 85.97 1980-08-08 86.54 1981-02-05 82.47 1980-10-28 79.29 1981-07-31 79.20 1981-05-07 79.96 1982-01-27 81.39 1981-11-04 80.89 1982-08-05 79.83 1982-04-29 80.58 1983-02-11 80.75 1982-11-04 80.84 1983-08-12 76.03 1983-05-20 77.53 1984-02-15 69.20 1983-11-02 73.75 1984-09-06 70.13 1984-05-17 67.68 1985-02-14 72.73 1984-11-14 72.42 1985-08-17 73.02 1985-05-09 71.17 1986-02-12 75.67 1985-11-05 75.06 1986-08-29 76.37 1986-05-06 74.70 Date Feet below Surface Feet to Sealevel Date Feet below Surface Feet to Sealevel Ground-water levels, Number of Measurements: 89 GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.1s Page A-16 B11 NW 1/2 - 1 Mile Lower USGS3124677 FED USGS CADW40000005744 Site id: 800100 Gwcode: 30 Countyco: Z Welluseco: 3 Districtco: 04S10W26C001S Stwellno: 33.8039 Latiude: -117.9015 Longitude: 10 ENE 1/2 - 1 Mile Higher CADW40000005744 CA WELLS Date: 05/27/1997 Average Water Depth: 130 Deep Water Depth: Not Reported Shallow Water Depth: Not Reported Groundwater Flow: SW Site ID: 083002246T 9 South 1/2 - 1 Mile Lower 67218 AQUIFLOW Date: 12/04/1992 Average Water Depth: 100 Deep Water Depth: Not Reported Shallow Water Depth: Not Reported Groundwater Flow: SW Site ID: 083002178T 8 WNW 1/2 - 1 Mile Lower 49805 AQUIFLOW Date: 02/1997 Average Water Depth: Not Reported Deep Water Depth: 79.81 Shallow Water Depth: 74.85 Groundwater Flow: N Site ID: 083001732T 7 ENE 1/2 - 1 Mile Higher 66475 AQUIFLOW CADW40000005742 Site id: 800100 Gwcode: 30 Countyco: Z Welluseco: 3 Districtco: 04S10W27C002S Stwellno: 33.8031 Latiude: -117.9176 Longitude: GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.1s Page A-17 1970-08-06 80.10 1970-06-30 79.30 1970-10-05 82.00 1970-08-31 80.40 1970-12-10 82.50 1970-11-02 82.10 1971-04-08 82.30 1971-03-02 82.70 1971-06-09 83.30 1971-04-30 82.70 1971-08-30 87.50 1971-07-09 84.90 1972-01-11 90.50 1971-11-02 89.70 1972-07-06 95.50 1972-02-29 91.00 1973-01-05 101.00 1972-11-02 99.30 1973-05-10 99.00 1973-03-05 101.50 1973-09-12 104.40 1973-07-09 100.50 1974-05-04 108.70 1974-01-24 102.60 1974-08-30 107.30 1974-07-03 106.50 1975-04-30 104.80 1975-03-19 105.40 1976-01-07 108.50 1975-09-02 104.70 1976-12-28 112.20 1976-10-28 108.40 1978-09-26 108.59 1977-10-28 119.20 1979-02-06 103.63 1978-11-01 107.74 1979-08-06 98.23 1979-05-02 100.03 1980-02-08 95.98 1979-11-13 96.92 Note: The well was destroyed (no water level is recorded). 1980-06-11 Date Feet below Surface Feet to Sealevel Date Feet below Surface Feet to Sealevel Ground-water levels, Number of Measurements: 62 62 Ground water data count: 1980-06-11 Ground water data end date: Ground water data begin date: 1968-03-05 0 Water quality data count: 0000-00-00 Water quality data end date: 0000-00-00 Water quality data begin date: 0 Peak flow data count: 0000-00-00 Peak flow data end date: 0000-00-00 Peak flow data begin date: 0 Daily flow data count: 0000-00-00 Daily flow data end date: 0000-00-00 Daily flow data begin date: 0 Real time data flag: 479300200 Project number: Not Reported Source of depth data: Not Reported Hole depth: Not Reported Well depth: Not Reported Aquifer: Not Reported Aquifer Type: Single well, other than collector or Ranney type Type of ground water site: Y Local standard time flag: PST Mean greenwich time offset: Not Reported Date inventoried: Not Reported Date construction: Ground-water other than Spring Site type: Not Reported Topographic: Seal Beach. California. Area = 90 sq.mi. Hydrologic: National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 Altitude datum: 2.5 Altitude accuracy: Interpolated from topographic map Altitude method: 128.00 Altitude: 24000 Map scale: ANAHEIM Location map: Land net: US Country: 059 County: 06 State: 06 District: NAD83 Dec latlong datum: NAD27 Latlong datum: S Coor accr: M Coor meth: -117.92367002 Dec lon: 33.8069603 Dec lat: 1175522 Longitude: USGS3124677 EDR Site id: 334825 Latitude: 004S010W22N001S Site name: 334825117552201 Site no: USGS Agency cd: GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.1s Page A-18 CADW40000005774 Site id: 800100 Gwcode: 30 Countyco: X Welluseco: 3 Districtco: 04S10W22G001S Stwellno: 33.8111 Latiude: -117.9098 Longitude: 14 NNE 1/2 - 1 Mile Higher CADW40000005774 CA WELLS CADW40000005757 Site id: 800100 Gwcode: 30 Countyco: Z Welluseco: 3 Districtco: 04S10W22N001S Stwellno: 33.807 Latiude: -117.9237 Longitude: B13 NW 1/2 - 1 Mile Lower CADW40000005757 CA WELLS CADW40000005772 Site id: 800100 Gwcode: 30 Countyco: Z Welluseco: 3 Districtco: 04S10W22L002S Stwellno: 33.8106 Latiude: -117.9168 Longitude: 12 NNW 1/2 - 1 Mile Higher CADW40000005772 CA WELLS 1968-03-05 81.00 1968-06-11 83.40 1968-04-08 73.80 1968-08-08 84.40 1968-07-08 83.70 1969-01-09 85.70 1968-11-05 56.40 1969-04-29 82.30 1969-04-03 74.50 1969-06-30 79.60 1969-06-05 81.50 1969-09-02 80.30 1969-08-06 80.30 1969-11-03 80.10 1969-10-03 80.10 1970-02-03 78.00 1969-12-31 78.70 1970-04-01 77.60 1970-03-10 77.10 1970-06-01 78.40 1970-04-29 78.10 Date Feet below Surface Feet to Sealevel Date Feet below Surface Feet to Sealevel Ground-water levels, continued. GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.1s Page A-19 1 Ground water data count: 2000-06-07 Ground water data end date: Ground water data begin date: 2000-06-07 8 Water quality data count: 2000-06-07 Water quality data end date: 1999-11-22 Water quality data begin date: 0 Peak flow data count: 0000-00-00 Peak flow data end date: 0000-00-00 Peak flow data begin date: 0 Daily flow data count: 0000-00-00 Daily flow data end date: 0000-00-00 Daily flow data begin date: 0 Real time data flag: 470652422 Project number: driller Source of depth data: 38.5 Hole depth: 38.5 Well depth: ALLUVIUM (QUATERNARY) Aquifer: Unconfined single aquifer Aquifer Type: Single well, other than collector or Ranney type Type of ground water site: Y Local standard time flag: PST Mean greenwich time offset: 19991122 Date inventoried: 19991122 Date construction: Ground-water other than Spring Site type: Flat surface Topographic: Santa Ana. California. Area = 1680 sq.mi. Hydrologic: National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 Altitude datum: 2.5 Altitude accuracy: Interpolated from topographic map Altitude method: 115 Altitude: 24000 Map scale: ANAHEIM Location map: Not Reported Land net: US Country: 059 County: 06 State: 06 District: NAD83 Dec latlong datum: NAD83 Latlong datum: 5 Coor accr: G Coor meth: -117.92199167 Dec lon: 33.78897222 Dec lat: 1175519.17 Longitude: USGS3124824 EDR Site id: 334720.30 Latitude: 004S010W27N003S Site name: 334720117551901 Site no: USGS Agency cd: C16 SSW 1/2 - 1 Mile Lower USGS3124824 FED USGS CADW40000005698 Site id: 800100 Gwcode: 30 Countyco: Z Welluseco: 3 Districtco: 04S10W27N002S Stwellno: 33.7891 Latiude: -117.9207 Longitude: C15 SSW 1/2 - 1 Mile Lower CADW40000005698 CA WELLS Map ID Direction Distance Elevation EDR ID Number Database GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.1s Page A-20 C18 SW 1/2 - 1 Mile Lower CADW40000005697 CA WELLS 2000-08-15 75 Date Feet below Surface Feet to Sealevel Ground-water levels, Number of Measurements: 1 1 Ground water data count: 2000-08-15 Ground water data end date: Ground water data begin date: 2000-08-15 2 Water quality data count: 2001-08-22 Water quality data end date: 2000-08-22 Water quality data begin date: 0 Peak flow data count: 0000-00-00 Peak flow data end date: 0000-00-00 Peak flow data begin date: 0 Daily flow data count: 0000-00-00 Daily flow data end date: 0000-00-00 Daily flow data begin date: 0 Real time data flag: 470652400 Project number: other reported Source of depth data: 216 Hole depth: 216 Well depth: ALLUVIUM (QUATERNARY) Aquifer: Confined single aquifer Aquifer Type: Single well, other than collector or Ranney type Type of ground water site: Y Local standard time flag: PST Mean greenwich time offset: 20000713 Date inventoried: 19240412 Date construction: Ground-water other than Spring Site type: Flat surface Topographic: Not Reported Hydrologic: National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 Altitude datum: 2.5 Altitude accuracy: Interpolated from topographic map Altitude method: 131 Altitude: Not Reported Map scale: Not Reported Location map: Not Reported Land net: US Country: 059 County: 06 State: 06 District: NAD83 Dec latlong datum: NAD27 Latlong datum: S Coor accr: M Coor meth: -117.90200238 Dec lon: 33.79196072 Dec lat: 1175404 Longitude: USGS3124655 EDR Site id: 334731 Latitude: 004S010W26N001S Site name: 334731117540401 Site no: USGS Agency cd: 17 SE 1/2 - 1 Mile Higher USGS3124655 FED USGS 2000-06-07 23.9 Date Feet below Surface Feet to Sealevel Ground-water levels, Number of Measurements: 1 GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.1s Page A-21 GROSS ALPHA COUNTING ERROR Chemical: 1.94 PCI/L Findings: 08/14/2002 Sample Collected: GROSS ALPHA Chemical: 11.2 PCI/L Findings: 08/14/2002 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 4300 UG/L Findings: 08/14/2002 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 19.06 MG/L Findings: 08/14/2002 Sample Collected: URANIUM COUNTING ERROR Chemical: 1.65 PCI/L Findings: 06/05/2002 Sample Collected: URANIUM (PCI/L) Chemical: 10.7 PCI/L Findings: 06/05/2002 Sample Collected: RADIUM 228 COUNTING ERROR Chemical: .4 PCI/L Findings: 06/05/2002 Sample Collected: GROSS ALPHA COUNTING ERROR Chemical: 1.94 PCI/L Findings: 06/05/2002 Sample Collected: GROSS ALPHA Chemical: 11.2 PCI/L Findings: 06/05/2002 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 4600 UG/L Findings: 06/05/2002 Sample Collected: Not Reported Area Served: 145 Connections: 200 Pop Served: Anaheim, CA 92805 200 W. Midway Dr. Organization That Operates System: Midway Trailer City System Name: 3000962 System Number: O STREET WELL Source Name: 100 Feet (one Second) Precision: 334844.0 1175438.0 Source Lat/Long: Active Untreated Well Status: Well/Groundwater Water Type: WELL/AMBNT/MUN/INTAKE/SUPPLY Station Type: 08 District Number: Orange County: [PHONE REDACTED] FRDS Number: TEE User ID: 04S/10W-22G01 S Prime Station Code: Water System Information: 19 North 1/2 - 1 Mile Higher 5142 CA WELLS CADW40000005697 Site id: 800100 Gwcode: 30 Countyco: Z Welluseco: 3 Districtco: 04S10W27N003S Stwellno: 33.789 Latiude: -117.922 Longitude: GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.1s Page A-22 HARDNESS (TOTAL) AS CACO3 Chemical: 347 MG/L Findings: 01/08/2003 Sample Collected: BICARBONATE ALKALINITY Chemical: 248 MG/L Findings: 01/08/2003 Sample Collected: ALKALINITY (TOTAL) AS CACO3 Chemical: 204 MG/L Findings: 01/08/2003 Sample Collected: PH, LABORATORY Chemical: 7.7 Findings: 01/08/2003 Sample Collected: SPECIFIC CONDUCTANCE Chemical: 965 US Findings: 01/08/2003 Sample Collected: URANIUM COUNTING ERROR Chemical: 1.65 PCI/L Findings: 12/04/2002 Sample Collected: URANIUM (PCI/L) Chemical: 10.7 PCI/L Findings: 12/04/2002 Sample Collected: RADIUM 228 COUNTING ERROR Chemical: .4 PCI/L Findings: 12/04/2002 Sample Collected: GROSS ALPHA COUNTING ERROR Chemical: 1.94 PCI/L Findings: 12/04/2002 Sample Collected: GROSS ALPHA Chemical: 11.2 PCI/L Findings: 12/04/2002 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 4800 UG/L Findings: 12/04/2002 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 21.3 MG/L Findings: 12/04/2002 Sample Collected: VANADIUM Chemical: 3.3 UG/L Findings: 12/04/2002 Sample Collected: BORON Chemical: 160 UG/L Findings: 12/04/2002 Sample Collected: POTASSIUM Chemical: 4.1 MG/L Findings: 12/04/2002 Sample Collected: SODIUM Chemical: 68.5 MG/L Findings: 12/04/2002 Sample Collected: MAGNESIUM Chemical: 20.5 MG/L Findings: 12/04/2002 Sample Collected: CALCIUM Chemical: 103 MG/L Findings: 12/04/2002 Sample Collected: HARDNESS (TOTAL) AS CACO3 Chemical: 342 MG/L Findings: 12/04/2002 Sample Collected: URANIUM COUNTING ERROR Chemical: 1.65 PCI/L Findings: 08/14/2002 Sample Collected: URANIUM (PCI/L) Chemical: 10.7 PCI/L Findings: 08/14/2002 Sample Collected: RADIUM 228 COUNTING ERROR Chemical: .4 PCI/L Findings: 08/14/2002 Sample Collected: GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.1s Page A-23 NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 4900 UG/L Findings: 05/20/2003 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 21.49 MG/L Findings: 05/20/2003 Sample Collected: VANADIUM Chemical: 3.5 UG/L Findings: 05/20/2003 Sample Collected: BORON Chemical: 160 UG/L Findings: 05/20/2003 Sample Collected: POTASSIUM Chemical: 4.4 MG/L Findings: 05/20/2003 Sample Collected: SODIUM Chemical: 68 MG/L Findings: 05/20/2003 Sample Collected: MAGNESIUM Chemical: 19.2 MG/L Findings: 05/20/2003 Sample Collected: CALCIUM Chemical: 94 MG/L Findings: 05/20/2003 Sample Collected: HARDNESS (TOTAL) AS CACO3 Chemical: 314 MG/L Findings: 05/20/2003 Sample Collected: CHROMIUM (TOTAL CR-CRVI SCREEN) Chemical: 1.1 UG/L Findings: 01/08/2003 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 5100 UG/L Findings: 01/08/2003 Sample Collected: BROMIDE Chemical: .21 MG/L Findings: 01/08/2003 Sample Collected: TURBIDITY, LABORATORY Chemical: .2 NTU Findings: 01/08/2003 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 22.49 MG/L Findings: 01/08/2003 Sample Collected: BORON Chemical: 170 UG/L Findings: 01/08/2003 Sample Collected: ARSENIC Chemical: 3.5 UG/L Findings: 01/08/2003 Sample Collected: FLUORIDE (NATURAL-SOURCE) Chemical: .36 MG/L Findings: 01/08/2003 Sample Collected: CHLORIDE Chemical: 92.3 MG/L Findings: 01/08/2003 Sample Collected: POTASSIUM Chemical: 3.9 MG/L Findings: 01/08/2003 Sample Collected: SODIUM Chemical: 67.5 MG/L Findings: 01/08/2003 Sample Collected: MAGNESIUM Chemical: 19.3 MG/L Findings: 01/08/2003 Sample Collected: CALCIUM Chemical: 107 MG/L Findings: 01/08/2003 Sample Collected: GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.1s Page A-24 NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 22.85 MG/L Findings: 12/04/2000 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 4700 UG/L Findings: 08/02/2000 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 20.83 MG/L Findings: 08/02/2000 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 4500 UG/L Findings: 05/17/2000 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 19.83 MG/L Findings: 05/17/2000 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 4600 UG/L Findings: 03/07/2000 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 20 MG/L Findings: 03/07/2000 Sample Collected: TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS Chemical: 628 MG/L Findings: 03/07/2000 Sample Collected: BORON Chemical: 170 UG/L Findings: 03/07/2000 Sample Collected: ARSENIC Chemical: 3 UG/L Findings: 03/07/2000 Sample Collected: CHLORIDE Chemical: 90 MG/L Findings: 03/07/2000 Sample Collected: POTASSIUM Chemical: 4 MG/L Findings: 03/07/2000 Sample Collected: SODIUM Chemical: 67 MG/L Findings: 03/07/2000 Sample Collected: MAGNESIUM Chemical: 18 MG/L Findings: 03/07/2000 Sample Collected: CALCIUM Chemical: 98 MG/L Findings: 03/07/2000 Sample Collected: HARDNESS (TOTAL) AS CACO3 Chemical: 316 MG/L Findings: 03/07/2000 Sample Collected: BICARBONATE ALKALINITY Chemical: 244 MG/L Findings: 03/07/2000 Sample Collected: ALKALINITY (TOTAL) AS CACO3 Chemical: 200 MG/L Findings: 03/07/2000 Sample Collected: PH, LABORATORY Chemical: 8 Findings: 03/07/2000 Sample Collected: SPECIFIC CONDUCTANCE Chemical: 955 US Findings: 03/07/2000 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 5000 UG/L Findings: 07/07/2003 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 22.03 MG/L Findings: 07/07/2003 Sample Collected: GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.1s Page A-25 NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 4700 UG/L Findings: 11/26/2001 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 20.94 MG/L Findings: 11/26/2001 Sample Collected: VANADIUM Chemical: 3.6 UG/L Findings: 11/26/2001 Sample Collected: BORON Chemical: 150 UG/L Findings: 11/26/2001 Sample Collected: POTASSIUM Chemical: 4.9 MG/L Findings: 11/26/2001 Sample Collected: SODIUM Chemical: 73.2 MG/L Findings: 11/26/2001 Sample Collected: MAGNESIUM Chemical: 20.7 MG/L Findings: 11/26/2001 Sample Collected: CALCIUM Chemical: 107 MG/L Findings: 11/26/2001 Sample Collected: HARDNESS (TOTAL) AS CACO3 Chemical: 352 MG/L Findings: 11/26/2001 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 4800 UG/L Findings: 08/29/2001 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 21 MG/L Findings: 08/29/2001 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 4500 UG/L Findings: 06/12/2001 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 21.35 MG/L Findings: 06/12/2001 Sample Collected: BORON Chemical: 170 UG/L Findings: 06/12/2001 Sample Collected: POTASSIUM Chemical: 4.8 MG/L Findings: 06/12/2001 Sample Collected: SODIUM Chemical: 74.6 MG/L Findings: 06/12/2001 Sample Collected: MAGNESIUM Chemical: 18.3 MG/L Findings: 06/12/2001 Sample Collected: CALCIUM Chemical: 101 MG/L Findings: 06/12/2001 Sample Collected: HARDNESS (TOTAL) AS CACO3 Chemical: 327 MG/L Findings: 06/12/2001 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 4800 UG/L Findings: 03/06/2001 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 21.26 MG/L Findings: 03/06/2001 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 5200 UG/L Findings: 12/04/2000 Sample Collected: GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.1s Page A-26 PST Mean greenwich time offset: Not Reported Date inventoried: Not Reported Date construction: Ground-water other than Spring Site type: Not Reported Topographic: Seal Beach. California. Area = 90 sq.mi. Hydrologic: National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 Altitude datum: 2.5 Altitude accuracy: Interpolated from topographic map Altitude method: 113.00 Altitude: 24000 Map scale: ANAHEIM Location map: Land net: US Country: 059 County: 06 State: 06 District: NAD83 Dec latlong datum: NAD27 Latlong datum: S Coor accr: M Coor meth: -117.92200291 Dec lon: 33.78807178 Dec lat: 1175516 Longitude: USGS3124823 EDR Site id: 334717 Latitude: 004S010W34D003S Site name: 334717117551601 Site no: USGS Agency cd: C20 SSW 1/2 - 1 Mile Lower USGS3124823 FED USGS NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 20.58 MG/L Findings: 06/05/2002 Sample Collected: VANADIUM Chemical: 4 UG/L Findings: 06/05/2002 Sample Collected: BORON Chemical: 160 UG/L Findings: 06/05/2002 Sample Collected: POTASSIUM Chemical: 4.4 MG/L Findings: 06/05/2002 Sample Collected: SODIUM Chemical: 73.5 MG/L Findings: 06/05/2002 Sample Collected: MAGNESIUM Chemical: 20.2 MG/L Findings: 06/05/2002 Sample Collected: CALCIUM Chemical: 105 MG/L Findings: 06/05/2002 Sample Collected: HARDNESS (TOTAL) AS CACO3 Chemical: 345 MG/L Findings: 06/05/2002 Sample Collected: URANIUM COUNTING ERROR Chemical: 1.65 PCI/L Findings: 02/11/2002 Sample Collected: URANIUM (PCI/L) Chemical: 10.7 PCI/L Findings: 02/11/2002 Sample Collected: RADIUM 228 COUNTING ERROR Chemical: .4 PCI/L Findings: 02/11/2002 Sample Collected: GROSS ALPHA COUNTING ERROR Chemical: 1.94 PCI/L Findings: 02/11/2002 Sample Collected: GROSS ALPHA Chemical: 11.2 PCI/L Findings: 02/11/2002 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 4800 UG/L Findings: 02/11/2002 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 21.29 MG/L Findings: 02/11/2002 Sample Collected: GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.1s Page A-27 23 NNE 1/2 - 1 Mile Higher 5143 CA WELLS CADW40000005687 Site id: 800100 Gwcode: 30 Countyco: Z Welluseco: 3 Districtco: 04S10W34A004S Stwellno: 33.7876 Latiude: -117.9056 Longitude: 22 SSE 1/2 - 1 Mile Lower CADW40000005687 CA WELLS Date: 10/23/1997 Average Water Depth: Not Reported Deep Water Depth: 82.11 Shallow Water Depth: 76.83 Groundwater Flow: Not Reported Site ID: 083000719T D21 ENE 1/2 - 1 Mile Higher 66476 AQUIFLOW 1978-11-03 45.57 1979-11-13 59.45 1979-08-06 29.49 1980-08-28 34.92 1980-06-11 15.09 1981-08-06 27.70 1980-10-28 73.87 1982-07-28 19.13 1981-11-03 71.19 1983-08-12 15.50 1982-11-04 32.07 1984-09-06 59.31 1984-05-17 15.87 1985-08-17 19.79 1984-11-14 61.92 1986-09-02 19.08 1985-11-05 61.42 Date Feet below Surface Feet to Sealevel Date Feet below Surface Feet to Sealevel Ground-water levels, Number of Measurements: 17 17 Ground water data count: 1986-09-02 Ground water data end date: Ground water data begin date: 1978-11-03 0 Water quality data count: 0000-00-00 Water quality data end date: 0000-00-00 Water quality data begin date: 0 Peak flow data count: 0000-00-00 Peak flow data end date: 0000-00-00 Peak flow data begin date: 0 Daily flow data count: 0000-00-00 Daily flow data end date: 0000-00-00 Daily flow data begin date: 0 Real time data flag: 479300200 Project number: Not Reported Source of depth data: 106 Hole depth: Not Reported Well depth: Not Reported Aquifer: Not Reported Aquifer Type: Single well, other than collector or Ranney type Type of ground water site: Y Local standard time flag: GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.1s Page A-28 Date: 02/01/1993 Average Water Depth: 100 Deep Water Depth: Not Reported Shallow Water Depth: Not Reported Groundwater Flow: Not Reported Site ID: 083001680T D25 ENE 1/2 - 1 Mile Higher 69434 AQUIFLOW CADW40000005690 Site id: 800100 Gwcode: 30 Countyco: Z Welluseco: 3 Districtco: 04S10W34D003S Stwellno: 33.7881 Latiude: -117.922 Longitude: 24 SSW 1/2 - 1 Mile Lower CADW40000005690 CA WELLS Not Reported Area Served: 145 Connections: 200 Pop Served: Anaheim, CA 92805 200 W. Midway Dr. Organization That Operates System: Midway Trailer City System Name: 3000962 System Number: C STREET WELL Source Name: 1,000 Feet (10 Seconds) Precision: 334844.4 1175428.8 Source Lat/Long: Active Untreated Well Status: Well/Groundwater Water Type: WELL/AMBNT/MUN/INTAKE Station Type: 08 District Number: Orange County: [PHONE REDACTED] FRDS Number: TEE User ID: 04S/10W-22H02 S Prime Station Code: Water System Information: GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.1s Page A-29 3 NNE 1 - 2 Miles CAOG60000019428 OIL_GAS CAOG60000016937 Site id: 1 District: Not Reported Comments 1: 12/30/1899 Abanddate: 12/12/1968 Spuddate: Not Reported Zone: 0 Y coord: 0 X coord: SB Bm: 10W Rge: 4S Twn: 28 Sec: 7481 Td: -117.926147 Longitude8: 33.795442 Latitude83: -117.925255 Longitude2: 33.795426 Latitude27: hud Source: 006 Status cod: W1-6 Map: Not Reported Caog m2 area: ORANGE COUNTY Field: 1-1 Well no: Garden Grove Unit Lease: The Superior Oil Co. Operator: 05901226 Apinumber: 2 WSW 1/2 - 1 Mile CAOG60000016937 OIL_GAS CAOG60000016927 Site id: 1 District: Not Reported Comments 1: 12/30/1899 Abanddate: 12/12/1968 Spuddate: Not Reported Zone: 0 Y coord: 0 X coord: SB Bm: 10W Rge: 4S Twn: 27 Sec: 6608 Td: -117.910724 Longitude8: 33.795354 Latitude83: -117.909832 Longitude2: 33.795338 Latitude27: hud Source: 006 Status cod: W1-6 Map: Not Reported Caog m2 area: ORANGE COUNTY Field: 1 Well no: Reed-Burbank Lease: Lawrence Barker, Jr. & Roy Naftzger, Jr. Operator: 05900869 Apinumber: 1 SSE 1/4 - 1/2 Mile CAOG60000016927 OIL_GAS Map ID Direction Distance EDR ID Number Database GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.1s Page A-30 0 Td: -117.905327 Longitude8: 33.817789 Latitude83: -117.904435 Longitude2: 33.817773 Latitude27: Not Reported Source: 006 Status cod: W1-6 Map: Not Reported Caog m2 area: Orange County Field: 1 Well no: Not Reported Lease: Not Reported Operator: Not Reported Apinumber: 5 NNE 1 - 2 Miles CAOG60000019840 OIL_GAS CAOG60000019554 Site id: 1 District: Not Reported Comments 1: 12/30/1899 Abanddate: 12/12/1968 Spuddate: Not Reported Zone: 0 Y coord: 0 X coord: SB Bm: 10W Rge: 4S Twn: 22 Sec: 0 Td: -117.911217 Longitude8: 33.815646 Latitude83: -117.910325 Longitude2: 33.81563 Latitude27: hud Source: 014 Status cod: W1-6 Map: Not Reported Caog m2 area: ANAHEIM Field: 1 Well no: Holsinger Lease: McVicar-Rood-Hall Operator: 05900429 Apinumber: 4 North 1 - 2 Miles CAOG60000019554 OIL_GAS CAOG60000019428 Site id: 1 District: Not Reported Comments 1: 12/30/1899 Abanddate: 12/12/1968 Spuddate: Not Reported Zone: 0 Y coord: 0 X coord: SB Bm: 10W Rge: 4S Twn: 22 Sec: 4700 Td: -117.91007 Longitude8: 33.814707 Latitude83: -117.909178 Longitude2: 33.814691 Latitude27: hud Source: 006 Status cod: W1-6 Map: Not Reported Caog m2 area: ANAHEIM Field: 1 Well no: Foiles Lease: Sun Oil Co. Operator: 05900430 Apinumber: GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.1s Page A-31 CAOG60000019261 Site id: 1 District: Not Reported Comments 1: 12/30/1899 Abanddate: 12/12/1968 Spuddate: Not Reported Zone: 0 Y coord: 0 X coord: SB Bm: 10W Rge: 4S Twn: 21 Sec: 8555 Td: -117.933007 Longitude8: 33.813594 Latitude83: -117.932114 Longitude2: 33.813578 Latitude27: hud Source: 006 Status cod: W1-6 Map: Not Reported Caog m2 area: ORANGE COUNTY Field: 1 Well no: Nel-Cal-Lu Community Lease: Chevron U.S.A. Inc. Operator: 05901259 Apinumber: 7 NW 1 - 2 Miles CAOG60000019261 OIL_GAS CAOG60000015978 Site id: 1 District: Not Reported Comments 1: 12/30/1899 Abanddate: 12/12/1968 Spuddate: Not Reported Zone: 0 Y coord: 0 X coord: SB Bm: 10W Rge: 4S Twn: 35 Sec: 5342 Td: -117.898755 Longitude8: 33.782926 Latitude83: -117.897864 Longitude2: 33.78291 Latitude27: hud Source: 006 Status cod: W1-6 Map: Not Reported Caog m2 area: ORANGE COUNTY Field: 1 Well no: Crawford Lease: Chevron U.S.A. Inc. Operator: 05901240 Apinumber: 6 SE 1 - 2 Miles CAOG60000015978 OIL_GAS CAOG60000019840 Site id: 1 District: Not Reported Comments 1: 12/30/1899 Abanddate: 12/12/1968 Spuddate: Not Reported Zone: 0 Y coord: 0 X coord: SB Bm: 10W Rge: 4S Twn: 23 Sec: GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.1s Page A-32 Not Reported Not Reported Not Reported Not Reported Basement Not Reported Not Reported Not Reported Not Reported Living Area - 2nd Floor 0% 0% 100% 0.763 pCi/L Living Area - 1st Floor % >20 pCi/L % 4-20 pCi/L % <4 pCi/L Average Activity Area Number of sites tested: 30 Federal Area Radon Information for ORANGE COUNTY, CA : Zone 3 indoor average level < 2 pCi/L. : Zone 2 indoor average level 2 pCi/L and 4 pCi/L. Note: Zone 1 indoor average level > 4 pCi/L. Federal EPA Radon Zone for ORANGE County: 3 0.00 0 4 92802 Pct. > 4 Pci/L > 4 Pci/L Total Sites Zip Radon Test Results State Database: CA Radon AREA RADON INFORMATION GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS RADON ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TOPOGRAPHIC INFORMATION USGS 7.5’ Digital Elevation Model (DEM) Source: United States Geologic Survey EDR acquired the USGS 7.5’ Digital Elevation Model in 2002 and updated it in 2006. The 7.5 minute DEM corresponds to the USGS 1:24,000- and 1:25,000-scale topographic quadrangle maps. The DEM provides elevation data with consistent elevation units and projection. HYDROLOGIC INFORMATION Flood Zone Data: This data, available in select counties across the country, was obtained by EDR in 2003 & 2009 from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Data depicts 100-year and 500-year flood zones as defined by FEMA. NWI: National Wetlands Inventory. This data, available in select counties across the country, was obtained by EDR in 2002 and 2005 from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. HYDROGEOLOGIC INFORMATION AQUIFLOW Information System R Source: EDR proprietary database of groundwater flow information EDR has developed the AQUIFLOW Information System (AIS) to provide data on the general direction of groundwater flow at specific points. EDR has reviewed reports submitted to regulatory authorities at select sites and has extracted the date of the report, hydrogeologically determined groundwater flow direction and depth to water table information. GEOLOGIC INFORMATION Geologic Age and Rock Stratigraphic Unit Source: P.G. Schruben, R.E. Arndt and W.J. Bawiec, Geology of the Conterminous U.S. at 1:2,500,000 Scale - A digital representation of the 1974 P.B. King and H.M. Beikman Map, USGS Digital Data Series DDS - 11 (1994). STATSGO: State Soil Geographic Database Source: Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Services The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) leads the national Conservation Soil Survey (NCSS) and is responsible for collecting, storing, maintaining and distributing soil survey information for privately owned lands in the United States. A soil map in a soil survey is a representation of soil patterns in a landscape. Soil maps for STATSGO are compiled by generalizing more detailed (SSURGO) soil survey maps. SSURGO: Soil Survey Geographic Database Source: Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Services (NRCS) Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] SSURGO is the most detailed level of mapping done by the Natural Resources Conservation Services, mapping scales generally range from 1:12,000 to 1:63,360. Field mapping methods using national standards are used to construct the soil maps in the Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) database. SSURGO digitizing duplicates the original soil survey maps. This level of mapping is designed for use by landowners, townships and county natural resource planning and management. LOCAL / REGIONAL WATER AGENCY RECORDS FEDERAL WATER WELLS PWS: Public Water Systems Source: EPA/Office of Drinking Water Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Public Water System data from the Federal Reporting Data System. A PWS is any water system which provides water to at least 25 people for at least 60 days annually. PWSs provide water from wells, rivers and other sources. TC2760975.1s Page A-33 PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE RECORDS SEARCHED ---PAGE BREAK--- PWS ENF: Public Water Systems Violation and Enforcement Data Source: EPA/Office of Drinking Water Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Violation and Enforcement data for Public Water Systems from the Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS) after August 1995. Prior to August 1995, the data came from the Federal Reporting Data System (FRDS). USGS Water Wells: USGS National Water Inventory System (NWIS) This database contains descriptive information on sites where the USGS collects or has collected data on surface water and/or groundwater. The groundwater data includes information on wells, springs, and other sources of groundwater. STATE RECORDS Water Well Database Source: Department of Water Resources Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] California Drinking Water Quality Database Source: Department of Health Services Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] The database includes all drinking water compliance and special studies monitoring for the state of California since 1984. It consists of over 3,200,000 individual analyses along with well and water system information. OTHER STATE DATABASE INFORMATION California Oil and Gas Well Locations Source: Department of Conservation Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Oil and Gas well locations in the state. RADON State Database: CA Radon Source: Department of Health Services Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Radon Database for California Area Radon Information Source: USGS Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] The National Radon Database has been developed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and is a compilation of the EPA/State Residential Radon Survey and the National Residential Radon Survey. The study covers the years 1986 - 1992. Where necessary data has been supplemented by information collected at private sources such as universities and research institutions. EPA Radon Zones Source: EPA Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Sections 307 & 309 of IRAA directed EPA to list and identify areas of U.S. with the potential for elevated indoor radon levels. OTHER Airport Landing Facilities: Private and public use landing facilities Source: Federal Aviation Administration, [PHONE REDACTED] Epicenters: World earthquake epicenters, Richter 5 or greater Source: Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration California Earthquake Fault Lines: The fault lines displayed on EDR’s Topographic map are digitized quaternary fault lines, prepared in 1975 by the United State Geological Survey. Additional information (also from 1975) regarding activity at specific fault lines comes from California’s Preliminary Fault Activity Map prepared by the California Division of Mines and Geology. TC2760975.1s Page A-34 PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE RECORDS SEARCHED ---PAGE BREAK--- STREET AND ADDRESS INFORMATION © 2010 Tele Atlas North America, Inc. All rights reserved. This material is proprietary and the subject of copyright protection and other intellectual property rights owned by or licensed to Tele Atlas North America, Inc. The use of this material is subject to the terms of a license agreement. You will be held liable for any unauthorized copying or disclosure of this material. TC2760975.1s Page A-35 PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE RECORDS SEARCHED ---PAGE BREAK--- FORM-NULL-KEN ® k c e h C o e G h ti w tr o p e R ™ p a M s u i d a R R D E e h T 440 Wheelers Farms Road Milford, CT 06461 Toll Free: [PHONE REDACTED] www.edrnet.com ARSP North Harbor/Manchester Anaheim, CA 92805 Inquiry Number: 2760975.2s May 03, 2010 ---PAGE BREAK--- SECTION PAGE Executive Summary ES1 Overview Map 2 Detail Map 3 Map Findings Summary 4 Map Findings 8 Orphan Summary 385 Government Records Searched/Data Currency Tracking GR-1 GEOCHECK ADDENDUM Physical Setting Source Addendum A-1 Physical Setting Source Summary A-2 Physical Setting SSURGO Soil Map A-6 Physical Setting Source Map A-10 Physical Setting Source Map Findings A-11 Physical Setting Source Records Searched A-34 TC2760975.2s Page 1 Thank you for your business. Please contact EDR at 1-[PHONE REDACTED] with any questions or comments. Disclaimer - Copyright and Trademark Notice This Report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Environmental Data Resources, Inc. It cannot be concluded from this Report that coverage information for the target and surrounding properties does not exist from other sources. NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS THE MAKING OF ANY SUCH WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR USE OR PURPOSE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. BE LIABLE TO ANYONE, WHETHER ARISING OUT OF ERRORS OR OMISSIONS, NEGLIGENCE, ACCIDENT OR ANY OTHER CAUSE, FOR ANY LOSS OF DAMAGE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES. ANY LIABILITY ON THE PART OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. IS STRICTLY LIMITED TO A REFUND OF THE AMOUNT PAID FOR THIS REPORT. Purchaser accepts this Report "AS IS". Any analyses, estimates, ratings, environmental risk levels or risk codes provided in this Report are provided for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to provide, nor should they be interpreted as providing any facts regarding, or prediction or forecast of, any environmental risk for any property. Only a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment performed by an environmental professional can provide information regarding the environmental risk for any property. Additionally, the information provided in this Report is not to be construed as legal advice. Copyright 2010 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole or in part, of any report or map of Environmental Data Resources, Inc., or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission. EDR and its logos (including Sanborn and Sanborn Map) are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, Inc. or its affiliates. All other trademarks used herein are the property of their respective owners. TABLE OF CONTENTS ---PAGE BREAK--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC2760975.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 A search of available environmental records was conducted by Environmental Data Resources, Inc (EDR). The report was designed to assist parties seeking to meet the search requirements of EPA’s Standards and Practices for All Appropriate Inquiries (40 CFR Part 312), the ASTM Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments (E 1527-05) or custom requirements developed for the evaluation of environmental risk associated with a parcel of real estate. TARGET PROPERTY INFORMATION ADDRESS HARBOR/MANCHESTER ANAHEIM, CA 92805 COORDINATES 33.816700 - 33˚ 49’ 0.1’’ Latitude (North): 117.916000 - 117˚ 54’ 57.6’’ Longitude (West): Zone 11 Universal Tranverse Mercator: 415224.8 UTM X (Meters): 3742015.8 UTM Y (Meters): 150 ft. above sea level Elevation: USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP ASSOCIATED WITH TARGET PROPERTY 33117-G8 ANAHEIM, CA Target Property Map: 1981 Most Recent Revision: TARGET PROPERTY SEARCH RESULTS The target property was not listed in any of the databases searched by EDR. DATABASES WITH NO MAPPED SITES No mapped sites were found in EDR’s search of available ("reasonably ascertainable government records either on the target property or within the search radius around the target property for the following databases: STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS Federal NPL site list NPL National Priority List Proposed NPL Proposed National Priority List Sites NPL LIENS Federal Superfund Liens Federal Delisted NPL site list Delisted NPL National Priority List Deletions ---PAGE BREAK--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC2760975.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2 Federal CERCLIS list CERCLIS Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System FEDERAL FACILITY Federal Facility Site Information listing Federal RCRA CORRACTS facilities list CORRACTS Corrective Action Report Federal institutional controls / engineering controls registries US ENG CONTROLS Engineering Controls Sites List US INST CONTROL Sites with Institutional Controls State- and tribal - equivalent NPL RESPONSE State Response Sites State and tribal leaking storage tank lists INDIAN LUST Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land State and tribal registered storage tank lists INDIAN UST Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land FEMA UST Underground Storage Tank Listing State and tribal voluntary cleanup sites INDIAN VCP Voluntary Cleanup Priority Listing VCP Voluntary Cleanup Program Properties ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS Local Brownfield lists US BROWNFIELDS A Listing of Brownfields Sites Local Lists of Landfill / Solid Waste Disposal Sites DEBRIS REGION 9 Torres Martinez Reservation Illegal Dump Site Locations ODI Open Dump Inventory WMUDS/SWAT Waste Management Unit Database HAULERS Registered Waste Tire Haulers Listing INDIAN ODI Report on the Status of Open Dumps on Indian Lands Local Lists of Hazardous waste / Contaminated Sites US CDL Clandestine Drug Labs HIST Cal-Sites Historical Calsites Database Toxic Pits Toxic Pits Cleanup Act Sites US HIST CDL National Clandestine Laboratory Register Local Land Records LIENS 2 CERCLA Lien Information ---PAGE BREAK--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC2760975.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3 LUCIS Land Use Control Information System LIENS Environmental Liens Listing DEED Deed Restriction Listing Records of Emergency Release Reports HMIRS Hazardous Materials Information Reporting System LDS Land Disposal Sites Listing MCS Military Cleanup Sites Listing Other Ascertainable Records DOT OPS Incident and Accident Data DOD Department of Defense Sites FUDS Formerly Used Defense Sites CONSENT Superfund (CERCLA) Consent Decrees ROD Records Of Decision UMTRA Uranium Mill Tailings Sites MINES Mines Master Index File TRIS Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act FTTS FIFRA/ TSCA Tracking System - FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act) HIST FTTS FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System Administrative Case Listing ICIS Integrated Compliance Information System PADS PCB Activity Database System MLTS Material Licensing Tracking System RADINFO Radiation Information Database RAATS RCRA Administrative Action Tracking System CA BOND EXP. PLAN Bond Expenditure Plan Cortese "Cortese" Hazardous Waste & Substances Sites List INDIAN RESERV Indian Reservations SCRD State Coalition for Remediation of Listing FINANCIAL ASSURANCE Financial Assurance Information Listing HWT Registered Hazardous Waste Transporter Database COAL ASH EPA Coal Combustion Residues Surface Impoundments List PCB TRANSFORMER PCB Transformer Registration Database COAL ASH DOE Sleam-Electric Plan Operation Data MWMP Medical Waste Management Program Listing PROC Certified Processors Database EDR PROPRIETARY RECORDS EDR Proprietary Records Manufactured Gas Plants EDR Proprietary Manufactured Gas Plants EDR Historical Auto Stations EDR Proprietary Historic Gas Stations EDR Historical Cleaners EDR Proprietary Historic Dry Cleaners SURROUNDING SITES: SEARCH RESULTS Surrounding sites were identified in the following databases. ---PAGE BREAK--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC2760975.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4 Elevations have been determined from the USGS Digital Elevation Model and should be evaluated on a relative (not an absolute) basis. Relative elevation information between sites of close proximity should be field verified. Sites with an elevation equal to or higher than the target property have been differentiated below from sites with an elevation lower than the target property. Page numbers and map identification numbers refer to the EDR Radius Map report where detailed data on individual sites can be reviewed. Sites listed in bold italics are in multiple databases. Unmappable (orphan) sites are not considered in the foregoing analysis. STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS Federal CERCLIS NFRAP site List CERC-NFRAP: Archived sites are sites that have been removed and archived from the inventory of CERCLIS sites. Archived status indicates that, to the best of EPA’s knowledge, assessment at a site has been completed and that EPA has determined no further steps will be taken to list this site on the National Priorities List (NPL), unless information indicates this decision was not appropriate or other considerations require a recommendation for listing at a later time. This decision does not necessarily mean that there is no hazard associated with a given site; it only means that, based upon available information, the location is not judged to be a potential NPL site. A review of the CERC-NFRAP list, as provided by EDR, and dated 06/23/2009 has revealed that there is 1 CERC-NFRAP site within approximately 1 mile of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation CORCORAN MFG CO INC 1745 S HASTER ST SE 1/2 - 1 (0.940 mi.) AU249 335 Federal RCRA non-CORRACTS TSD facilities list RCRA-TSDF: RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Transporters are individuals or entities that move hazardous waste from the generator offsite to a facility that can recycle, treat, store, or dispose of the waste. treat, store, or dispose of the waste. A review of the RCRA-TSDF list, as provided by EDR, and dated 01/13/2010 has revealed that there is 1 RCRA-TSDF site within approximately 1 mile of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation L 3 INTERSTATE ELECTRONICS COR 707 E VERMONT AVE NE 1/2 - 1 (0.968 mi.) 253 342 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC2760975.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5 Federal RCRA generators list RCRA-LQG: RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Large quantity generators (LQGs) generate over 1,000 kilograms (kg) of hazardous waste, or over 1 kg of acutely hazardous waste per month. A review of the RCRA-LQG list, as provided by EDR, and dated 01/13/2010 has revealed that there are 2 RCRA-LQG sites within approximately 0.75 miles of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation SHELL SERVICE STATION 2331 E. KATELLA AVENUE NNE 0 - 1/8 (0.107 mi.) A14 18 DISNEYLAND 1313 S. HARBOR BLVD. S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.281 mi.) C48 48 RCRA-SQG: RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Small quantity generators (SQGs) generate between 100 kg and 1,000 kg of hazardous waste per month. A review of the RCRA-SQG list, as provided by EDR, and dated 01/13/2010 has revealed that there are 25 RCRA-SQG sites within approximately 0.75 miles of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation SHARPSHOOTER SPECTRUM IMAGING 1313 S HARBOR BLVD TRAI S 0 - 1/8 (0.123 mi.) 16 23 PERTH CLEANERS 135 W BALL RD ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.395 mi.) I91 125 ANAHEIM SUZUKI 1125 S ANAHEIM BLVD ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.464 mi.) N116 145 UNITED WESTERN MEDICAL CENTER 1025 SOUTH ANAHEIM BOUL ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.484 mi.) Q133 163 WESTERN MEDICL CENTER-ANAHEIM 1025 ANAHEIM BLVD ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.484 mi.) Q134 164 STEFFY BUICK CO 953 S ANAHEIM BLVD NE 1/2 - 1 (0.521 mi.) T148 191 QUALITY MOTORCARS 1354 S ANAHEIM BLVD ESE 1/2 - 1 (0.558 mi.) W154 201 KOCH, H & SONS 1360 S. ANAHEIM BLVD. ESE 1/2 - 1 (0.562 mi.) W155 202 ORANGE COUNTY LIFT TRUCK, INC 235 E BALL RD E 1/2 - 1 (0.565 mi.) V157 207 AEROSCIENTIFIC CORPORATION 1244 S. CLAUDINA ST. E 1/2 - 1 (0.623 mi.) AA171 225 TEXTURED DESIGN 1303 S CLAUDINA E 1/2 - 1 (0.649 mi.) AD178 231 KANSTUL MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS IN 1332 S CLAUDINA ST E 1/2 - 1 (0.668 mi.) AD186 242 DICO COMPANY 323 EAST BALL RD E 1/2 - 1 (0.670 mi.) AC187 249 GEORGES AUTO RPR 807 S ANAHEIM BLVD NNE 1/2 - 1 (0.728 mi.) AK218 283 Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation TEXACO KHALS 519 W BALL RD NE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.129 mi.) A22 26 ORANGE COUNTY DEPT OF AGRICULT 1010 SOUTH HARBOR BLVD NNE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.267 mi.) B32 37 1-DAY PAINT AND BODY CENTERS I 900 W VERMONT AVE NW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.354 mi.) 72 101 ODETICS INC 1515 MANCHESTER AVE SE 1/2 - 1 (0.575 mi.) Y159 209 SUPER SHUTTLE 1430 S ANAHEIM BLVD ESE 1/2 - 1 (0.622 mi.) AB168 222 USPS ANAHEIM HOLIDAY STATION 1180 W BALL ROAD W 1/2 - 1 (0.676 mi.) AG192 255 SEPHORA STORE 30 ANAHEIM DISNE 1570 SOUTH DISNEYLAND D SW 1/2 - 1 (0.680 mi.) 201 262 DISNEYLAND HOTEL 1150 W CERRITOS AVE SW 1/2 - 1 (0.712 mi.) AJ209 274 ALJO ENTERPRISES INC 1558 A S ANAHEIM BLVD SE 1/2 - 1 (0.740 mi.) AM221 287 VEGAS TRANSMISSIONS 1558 SOUTH ANAHEIM BLVD SE 1/2 - 1 (0.740 mi.) AM222 290 DNR INDUSTRIES 1562 S ANAHEIM BLVD STE SE 1/2 - 1 (0.743 mi.) AM224 291 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC2760975.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 6 RCRA-CESQG: RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Conditionally exempt small quantity generators (CESQGs) generate less than 100 kg of hazardous waste, or less than 1 kg of acutely hazardous waste per month. A review of the RCRA-CESQG list, as provided by EDR, and dated 01/13/2010 has revealed that there is 1 RCRA-CESQG site within approximately 0.75 miles of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation TRANSLINE TECHNOLOGY INC 1106 S. TECHNOLOGY CIRC ENE 1/2 - 1 (0.563 mi.) 156 204 Federal ERNS list ERNS: The Emergency Response Notification System records and stores information on reported releases of oil and hazardous substances. The source of this database is the U.S. EPA. A review of the ERNS list, as provided by EDR, and dated 12/31/2009 has revealed that there are 2 ERNS sites within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation 1200 SOUTH HARBOR BLVD 1200 SOUTH HARBOR BLVD NNE 0 - 1/8 (0.110 mi.) A15 22 1480 S HARBOR BLVD 1480 S HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.395 mi.) G89 123 State- and tribal - equivalent CERCLIS ENVIROSTOR: The Department of Toxic Substances Control’s (DTSC’s) Site Mitigation and Brownfields Reuse Program’s EnviroStor database identifes sites that have known contamination or sites for which there may be reasons to investigate further. The database includes the following site types: Federal Superfund sites (National Priorities List (NPL)); State Response, including Military Facilities and State Superfund; Voluntary Cleanup; and School sites. EnviroStor provides similar information to the information that was available in CalSites, and provides additional site information, including, but not limited to, identification of formerly-contaminated properties that have been released for reuse, properties where environmental deed restrictions have been recorded to prevent inappropriate land uses, and risk characterization information that is used to assess potential impacts to public health and the environment at contaminated sites. A review of the ENVIROSTOR list, as provided by EDR, and dated 02/08/2010 has revealed that there are 13 ENVIROSTOR sites within approximately 1.5 miles of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation SILGAN PLASTICS CORPORATION 611 EAST CERRITOS AVENU ESE 1/2 - 1 (0.938 mi.) 248 334 Status: Refer: 1248 Local Agency L 3 INTERSTATE ELECTRONICS COR 707 E VERMONT AVE NE 1/2 - 1 (0.968 mi.) 253 342 Status: * Inactive DIXCO DIVERSIFIED CHEMICAL SAL 1014 E SOUTH STREET NE 1 - 2 (1.216 mi.) 256 355 Status: Refer: Other Agency LAYCO CHEMICAL ENGINEERING #3 525 SOUTH ROSE NE 1 - 2 (1.367 mi.) 259 370 Status: Refer: Other Agency ---PAGE BREAK--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC2760975.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 7 Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation HERITAGE SCHOOL CYPRESS STREET/ANAHEIM N 1 - 2 (1.451 mi.) 262 379 Status: Inactive - Needs Evaluation Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation REVERE SCHOOL EXPANSION 126/132/138/144/150/WES ESE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.487 mi.) R140 171 Status: No Further Action 1400 126/132/138/144/150 WES ESE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.487 mi.) R141 174 Status: No Further Action ANAHEIM HIGH SCHOOL 811 WEST LINCOLN AVENUE NNW 1 - 2 (1.221 mi.) 257 361 Status: No Further Action HOME OIL CO OF ANAHEIM 1422 W BROADWAY NW 1 - 2 (1.243 mi.) 258 364 Status: Refer: Other Agency ORANGE EMPIRE HEAT TREATING 1000 E KATELLA ST SE 1 - 2 (1.438 mi.) AV260 371 Status: Refer: Other Agency PLATINUM TRIANGLE 1016 EAST KATELLA AVENU SE 1 - 2 (1.447 mi.) AV261 374 Status: Inactive - Action Required CALIFORNIA TOWEL & LINEN SUPPL 1126 EUCLID AVE. W 1 - 2 (1.464 mi.) 263 381 Status: Refer: CLOCK LIQUOR CENTER DRY CLEANE 1223 S. EUCLID ST. W 1 - 2 (1.469 mi.) 264 383 Status: Refer: 1248 Local Agency State and tribal landfill and/or solid waste disposal site lists SWF/LF: The Solid Waste Facilities/Landfill Sites records typically contain an inventory of solid waste disposal facilities or landfills in a particular state. The data come from the Integrated Waste Management Board’s Solid Waste Information System (SWIS) database. A review of the SWF/LF list, as provided by EDR, and dated 02/22/2010 has revealed that there is 1 SWF/LF site within approximately 1 mile of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation VERMONT STREET SWEEPER TRANSFE 400 EAST VERMONT AVENUE NE 1/2 - 1 (0.763 mi.) 227 296 State and tribal leaking storage tank lists LUST: The Leaking Underground Storage Tank Incident Reports contain an inventory of reported leaking underground storage tank incidents. The data come from the State Water Resources Control Board Leaking Underground Storage Tank Information System. A review of the LUST list, as provided by EDR, and dated 03/22/2010 has revealed that there are 78 LUST sites within approximately 1 mile of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation 7-ELEVEN STORE #26216 107 W. BALL RD ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.441 mi.) I112 143 Status: Completed - Case Closed ---PAGE BREAK--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC2760975.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 8 Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation 7 - ELEVEN STORE 107 W BALL RD ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.441 mi.) I113 143 Status: Completed - Case Closed 7 - ELEVEN STORE 107 BALL RD ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.445 mi.) I114 143 HARDIN OLDSMOBILE/GMC TRUCKS 1300 S ANAHEIM BLVD E 1/2 - 1 (0.518 mi.) U146 180 Status: Completed - Case Closed Status: Completed - Case Closed STEFFY BUICK 953 S ANAHEIM BLVD NE 1/2 - 1 (0.521 mi.) T147 191 Status: Completed - Case Closed STEFFY BUICK CO 953 S ANAHEIM BLVD NE 1/2 - 1 (0.521 mi.) T148 191 VACANT LOT 901 ANAHEIM NE 1/2 - 1 (0.582 mi.) X160 214 Status: Completed - Case Closed AEROSCIENTIFIC CORPORATION II 1244 S CLAUDINA ST E 1/2 - 1 (0.623 mi.) AA169 224 Status: Completed - Case Closed AEROSCIENTIFIC CORPORATION 1244 S. CLAUDINA ST. E 1/2 - 1 (0.623 mi.) AA171 225 GRUBBS, DAVID 315 E BALL RD E 1/2 - 1 (0.648 mi.) AC177 231 Status: Completed - Case Closed BELL INDUSTRIES 1304 CLAUDINA E 1/2 - 1 (0.651 mi.) AD179 235 Status: Completed - Case Closed JOHN PIERRE APPAREL 251 PALAIS ESE 1/2 - 1 (0.660 mi.) AE184 239 Status: Completed - Case Closed GRUBBS, DAVID 315 BALL RD E 1/2 - 1 (0.662 mi.) AC185 241 WEYERHAEUSER PAPER COMPANY 601 E BALL RD E 1/2 - 1 (0.750 mi.) 225 294 Status: Completed - Case Closed WEYERHAEUSER PAPER COMPANY 601 BALL RD ENE 1/2 - 1 (0.753 mi.) 226 295 ANAHEIM FLT MAINT.FUELING FAC. 955 S MELROSE ENE 1/2 - 1 (0.793 mi.) AN228 297 Status: Completed - Case Closed ANAHEIM FLT MAINT.FUELING FAC. 955 MELROSE NE 1/2 - 1 (0.796 mi.) AN229 297 X- L CLEANERS 630 S ANAHEIM BLVD NNE 1/2 - 1 (0.816 mi.) AO230 300 Status: Completed - Case Closed X L CLEANERS 630 S ANAHEIM BLVD NNE 1/2 - 1 (0.816 mi.) AO231 300 PENSKE TRUCK LEASING 620 E BALL RD E 1/2 - 1 (0.824 mi.) AP232 306 Status: Completed - Case Closed ANAHEIM SCHOOL DISTRICT 501 E VERMONT AVE NE 1/2 - 1 (0.827 mi.) AQ233 307 Status: Completed - Case Closed LAKESIDE TOWING 512 VERMONT NE 1/2 - 1 (0.840 mi.) AQ234 307 Status: Completed - Case Closed INTERSTATE ENGINEERING 522 VERMONT NE 1/2 - 1 (0.848 mi.) AQ235 309 Status: Completed - Case Closed PENSKE TRUCK LEASING 620 BALL RD E 1/2 - 1 (0.865 mi.) AP237 315 Status: Completed - Case Closed ANAHEIM SCHOOL DISTRICT 501 VERMONT AVE NE 1/2 - 1 (0.889 mi.) 240 320 ANAHEIM POLICE DEPT 425 HARBOR N 1/2 - 1 (0.956 mi.) 251 338 Status: Completed - Case Closed CASADA CONSTRUCTION CO. 1426 ALLEC, S. ESE 1/2 - 1 (0.968 mi.) 254 352 Status: Completed - Case Closed Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation G & M OIL #8 (AKA HOYER CHEVRO 1200 HARBOR BLVD NNE 0 - 1/8 (0.101 mi.) A2 8 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC2760975.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 9 Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation G & M OIL #8 (AKA HOYER CHEVRO 1200 S HARBOR BLVD NNE 0 - 1/8 (0.101 mi.) A8 14 Status: Completed - Case Closed SHELL OIL PRODUCTS US 601 BALL RD. W. NNE 0 - 1/8 (0.107 mi.) A13 17 Status: Open - Site Assessment HARBOR AUTO CARE FACILITY 519 W BALL RD NE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.128 mi.) A17 24 Status: Completed - Case Closed HARBOR AUTO CARE FACILITY 519 BALL RD NNE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.171 mi.) 24 30 DISNEYLAND - ROUNDHOUSE 1313 W HARBOR BLVD. S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.279 mi.) C38 42 Status: Completed - Case Closed DISNEYLAND ROUNDHOUSE FACILITY 1313 SOUTH HARBOR S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.279 mi.) C39 42 Status: Completed - Case Closed DISNEYLAND TOMORROWLAND RR ST. 1313 S HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.279 mi.) C40 43 Status: Completed - Case Closed DISNEYLAND - MATERHORN 1313 S HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.279 mi.) C41 43 Status: Completed - Case Closed DISNEYLAND-AUTOPIA 1313 S HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.279 mi.) C43 44 Status: Open - Assessment & Interim Remedial Action DISNEYLAND, FUEL STATION 1313 S HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.279 mi.) C44 44 Status: Completed - Case Closed DISNEYLAND 1313 S. HARBOR BLVD. S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.281 mi.) C48 48 DISNEYLAND 1313 S HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.281 mi.) C51 71 DISNEYLAND-AUTOPIA 1313 HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.281 mi.) C54 87 DISNEYLAND TOMORROWLAND RR ST. 1313 HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.281 mi.) C55 88 AVIS RENT - A - CAR SYSTEM 1400 S HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.282 mi.) C56 89 Status: Completed - Case Closed AVIS RENT - A - CAR SYSTEM 1400 HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.282 mi.) C58 90 ANAHEIM SHERATON 1015 BALL WNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.301 mi.) D63 95 Status: Completed - Case Closed MARY’S GAS STATION 900 HARBOR BLVD N 1/4 - 1/2 (0.351 mi.) F71 100 MARY’S GAS STATION 900 S HARBOR BLVD N 1/4 - 1/2 (0.356 mi.) F76 112 Status: Completed - Case Closed ARCO #0072 1037 W BALL RD WNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.385 mi.) H82 118 Status: Completed - Case Closed ARCO #0072 1037 BALL RD WNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.386 mi.) H88 122 EXXON SERVICE STATION #3724 1100 W BALL RD W 1/4 - 1/2 (0.473 mi.) L125 154 Status: Completed - Case Closed EXXON SERVICE STATION #3724 1100 BALL RD W 1/4 - 1/2 (0.474 mi.) L127 154 CAMPING WORLD 866 WEST ST NW 1/2 - 1 (0.506 mi.) 144 177 UNOCAL #5669 801 HARBOR BLVD N 1/2 - 1 (0.603 mi.) Z164 217 UNOCAL #5669 801 S HARBOR BLVD N 1/2 - 1 (0.603 mi.) Z165 220 Status: Completed - Case Closed U S POST OFFICE 1180 BALL RD W 1/2 - 1 (0.676 mi.) AG190 253 ANIK STOP 1460 S ANAHEIM BLVD ESE 1/2 - 1 (0.679 mi.) AH196 258 Status: Completed - Case Closed ANIK STOP 1460 ANAHEIM BLVD ESE 1/2 - 1 (0.680 mi.) AH200 261 U S POST OFFICE 1180 W BALL RD W 1/2 - 1 (0.687 mi.) AG202 265 Status: Completed - Case Closed WONDRIES TOYOTA OF ANAHEIM 1601 S ANAHEIM BLVD SE 1/2 - 1 (0.705 mi.) AH203 265 Status: Completed - Case Closed ---PAGE BREAK--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC2760975.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 10 Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation WONDRIES TOYOTA OF ANAHEIM 1601 ANAHEIM BLVD SE 1/2 - 1 (0.706 mi.) AH205 266 CONESTOGA HOTEL 1240 WALNUT ST W 1/2 - 1 (0.707 mi.) AI206 270 CONESTOGA HOTEL 1240 S WALNUT ST W 1/2 - 1 (0.708 mi.) AI208 273 Status: Completed - Case Closed STOP N SHOP 1198 W BALL RD W 1/2 - 1 (0.714 mi.) AG212 279 Status: Open - Remediation STOP N SHOP 1198 BALL RD W 1/2 - 1 (0.716 mi.) AG214 280 ANAHEIM FIRE STATION FRMER 1680 CLEMENTINE ST SSE 1/2 - 1 (0.735 mi.) AL219 285 ANAHEIM FIRE STATION FRMER 1680 S CLEMENTINE ST SSE 1/2 - 1 (0.736 mi.) AL220 286 Status: Completed - Case Closed UNOCAL 1779 HARBOR S 1/2 - 1 (0.859 mi.) 236 314 Status: Completed - Case Closed CENTRAL PLANTS, INC. 1600 S WALNUT ST SW 1/2 - 1 (0.881 mi.) AR238 318 Status: Completed - Case Closed CENTRAL PLANTS, INC. 1600 WALNUT ST SW 1/2 - 1 (0.884 mi.) AR239 318 NATIONAL CAR RENTAL FAC. 711 W KATELLA AVE S 1/2 - 1 (0.924 mi.) AS241 321 Status: Completed - Case Closed NATIONAL CAR RENTAL FAC. 711 KATELLA AVE S 1/2 - 1 (0.924 mi.) AS242 321 CHEVRON #9-5321 1801 HARBOR BLVD S 1/2 - 1 (0.928 mi.) AT243 323 MOBIL #18-106 1800 HARBOR BLVD S 1/2 - 1 (0.928 mi.) AT244 329 CHEVRON #9-5321 1801 S HARBOR BLVD S 1/2 - 1 (0.929 mi.) AT245 330 Status: Completed - Case Closed MOBIL #18-106 1800 S HARBOR BLVD S 1/2 - 1 (0.929 mi.) AT246 330 Status: Completed - Case Closed TEXACO SERVICE STATION 818 KATELLA AVE S 1/2 - 1 (0.942 mi.) 250 337 STEINER CORPORATION 1755 HASTER SE 1/2 - 1 (0.960 mi.) AU252 340 Status: Completed - Case Closed KATELLA CAR WASH (FORMER) 350 KATELLA AVE SSE 1/2 - 1 (1.000 mi.) 255 354 SLIC: SLIC Region comes from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board. A review of the SLIC list, as provided by EDR, and dated 03/22/2010 has revealed that there are 3 SLIC sites within approximately 1 mile of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation SMTEK INTERNATIONAL INC FORMER 1240-1244 SOUTH CLAUDIN E 1/2 - 1 (0.622 mi.) AA167 221 Facility Status: Open - Site Assessment SMTEK (FORMER AERO DDL) 1244 S CLAUDINA STREET E 1/2 - 1 (0.623 mi.) AA170 225 Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation DISNEYLAND 1313 S. HARBOR BLVD. S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.281 mi.) C48 48 Facility Status: Completed - Case Closed ---PAGE BREAK--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC2760975.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 11 State and tribal registered storage tank lists UST: The Underground Storage Tank database contains registered USTs. USTs are regulated under Subtitle I of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The data come from the State Water Resources Control Board’s Hazardous Substance Storage Container Database. A review of the UST list, as provided by EDR, and dated 03/22/2010 has revealed that there are 28 UST sites within approximately 0.75 miles of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation 7-ELEVEN STORE 107 W BALL RD ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.441 mi.) I108 138 WESTERN MEDICAL CENTER OF ANAH 1025 S ANAHEIM BLVD ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.484 mi.) Q131 159 ANAHEIM DODGE 1120 S ANAHEIM BLVD ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.486 mi.) N138 170 STEFFY BUICK CO 953 S ANAHEIM BLVD NE 1/2 - 1 (0.521 mi.) T148 191 BELL PIPE AND SUPPLY CO 215 E BALL RD E 1/2 - 1 (0.551 mi.) V151 199 UNKNOWN / BOB DEE BIRD 901 S ANAHEIM BLVD NE 1/2 - 1 (0.567 mi.) X158 208 AEROSCIENTIFIC CORP 1244 S CLAUDINA ST E 1/2 - 1 (0.623 mi.) AA172 228 BELL INDUSTRIES INC 1304 S CLAUDINA ST E 1/2 - 1 (0.651 mi.) AD181 237 JOHN PIERRE APPARELL 251 E PALAIS RD ESE 1/2 - 1 (0.657 mi.) AE183 239 DYCORP 323 E BALL RD E 1/2 - 1 (0.670 mi.) AC188 252 PRECISION FRAMERS 1346 S CLAUDINA ST E 1/2 - 1 (0.677 mi.) AF195 257 GEORGE’S AUTO REPAIR 807 S ANAHEIM BLVD NNE 1/2 - 1 (0.728 mi.) AK217 283 Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation G & M OIL #8 1200 HARBOR S NNE 0 - 1/8 (0.101 mi.) A3 9 HARBOR SERVICE CENTER 1200 S HARBOR BLVD NNE 0 - 1/8 (0.101 mi.) A7 14 JINS HARBOR SHELL 601 W BALL RD NNE 0 - 1/8 (0.107 mi.) A9 14 KHALS SERVICE CENTER 519 W BALL RD NE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.129 mi.) A20 26 DISNEYLAND 1313 S HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.281 mi.) C51 71 AVIS RENT A CAR 1400 S HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.282 mi.) C59 91 SHERATON HOTEL 1015 W BALL RD WNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.301 mi.) D64 97 ARCO-ANAHEIM RESORT CENTER 1037 W BALL RD WNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.386 mi.) H87 122 SHELL SERVICE STATION 4530 TORRANCE BLVD WNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.425 mi.) L98 132 MIKES EXXON (EXXON 7-3724) 1100 W BALL RD W 1/4 - 1/2 (0.474 mi.) L126 154 HARBOR ULTRAMAR 805 S HARBOR BLVD N 1/2 - 1 (0.593 mi.) Z161 216 ANIK STOP 1460 S ANAHEIM BLVD ESE 1/2 - 1 (0.680 mi.) AH199 260 CONESTOGA HOTEL 1240 S WALNUT ST W 1/2 - 1 (0.707 mi.) AI207 272 SAV-ON OSCO DRUGS 1500 S ANAHEIM BLVD SE 1/2 - 1 (0.714 mi.) AH211 279 ATLAS OIL CO 1198 W BALL RD W 1/2 - 1 (0.716 mi.) AG213 280 LEAVERTON COMPANY 1562 S ANAHEIM BLVD SE 1/2 - 1 (0.743 mi.) AM223 291 AST: The Aboveground Storage Tank database contains registered ASTs. The data come from the State Water Resources Control Board’s Hazardous Substance Storage Container Database. A review of the AST list, as provided by EDR, and dated 08/01/2009 has revealed that there are 2 AST sites within approximately 0.75 miles of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation Not reported 251 E PALAIS RD ESE 1/2 - 1 (0.657 mi.) AE182 237 Not reported 1341 S CLAUDINA ST E 1/2 - 1 (0.673 mi.) AF189 252 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC2760975.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 12 ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS Local Lists of Landfill / Solid Waste Disposal Sites A listing of recycling facilities in California. A review of the list, as provided by EDR, and dated 01/06/2010 has revealed that there are 2 sites within approximately 1 mile of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation B J RECYCLING 1440 S ANAHEIM BLVD ESE 1/2 - 1 (0.634 mi.) AB175 230 SANCHEZ RECYCLING CENTER 1459 S ANAHEIM BLVD ESE 1/2 - 1 (0.645 mi.) AB176 230 Local Lists of Hazardous waste / Contaminated Sites SCH: This category contains proposed and existing school sites that are being evaluated by DTSC for possible hazardous materials contamination. In some cases, these properties may be listed in the CalSites category. depending on the level of threat to public health and safety or the. environment they pose. A review of the SCH list, as provided by EDR, and dated 02/08/2010 has revealed that there are 2 SCH sites within approximately 0.75 miles of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation REVERE SCHOOL EXPANSION 126/132/138/144/150/WES ESE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.487 mi.) R140 171 1400 126/132/138/144/150 WES ESE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.487 mi.) R141 174 CDL: A listing of drug lab locations. Listing of a location in this database does not indicate that any illegal drug lab materials were or were not present there, and does not constitute a determination that the location either requires or does not require additional cleanup work. A review of the CDL list, as provided by EDR, and dated 12/31/2009 has revealed that there are 3 CDL sites within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation Not reported 871 SOUTH HARBOR BLVD. N 1/4 - 1/2 (0.434 mi.) 105 137 Not reported 1544 S HARBOR BLVD, ROO S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.485 mi.) O136 167 Not reported 608 W PROVENTIAL, #2 N 1/4 - 1/2 (0.496 mi.) S143 177 Local Lists of Registered Storage Tanks CA FID UST: The Facility Inventory Database contains active and inactive underground storage tank locations. The source is the State Water Resource Control Board. A review of the CA FID UST list, as provided by EDR, and dated 10/31/1994 has revealed that there are 21 CA FID UST sites within approximately 0.75 miles of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation 7 - ELEVEN FOOD STORES 107 W BALL RD ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.441 mi.) I111 142 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC2760975.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 13 Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation ANAHEIM DODGE INC 1120 SO ANAHEIM BLVD ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.486 mi.) N137 167 HARDIN OLDSMOBILE/GMC TRUCKS 1300 S ANAHEIM BLVD E 1/2 - 1 (0.518 mi.) U146 180 STEFFY BUICK CO 953 S ANAHEIM BLVD NE 1/2 - 1 (0.521 mi.) T148 191 BELL PIPE & SUPPLY CO 215 E BALL RD E 1/2 - 1 (0.551 mi.) V152 199 CUSTOM LAMINATORS 1350 S CLAUDINA ST E 1/2 - 1 (0.679 mi.) AF197 258 Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation G&M OIL CO., INC. #8 1200 S HARBOR BLVD NNE 0 - 1/8 (0.101 mi.) A4 9 SHELL (0222-3406) 601 W BALL RD NNE 0 - 1/8 (0.107 mi.) A10 14 A-KHAL’S SERVICE CENTER 519 W BALL RD NE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.129 mi.) A23 28 DISNEYLAND 1313 S. HARBOR BLVD. S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.281 mi.) C48 48 AVIS RENT A CAR 1400 S HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.282 mi.) C60 93 MARY’S GAS / JOHN KOCYLA 900 S HARBOR BLVD N 1/4 - 1/2 (0.354 mi.) F73 107 ARCO FACILITY NO. 0072 1037 W BALL RD WNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.386 mi.) H85 120 PACIFIC INLAND PLAZA 888 S WEST ST WNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.415 mi.) J94 129 EXXON SERVICE STATION #3724 1100 BALL RD W 1/4 - 1/2 (0.474 mi.) L127 154 ODETICS INC 1515 MANCHESTER AVE SE 1/2 - 1 (0.575 mi.) Y159 209 UNOCAL #5669 801 HARBOR BLVD N 1/2 - 1 (0.603 mi.) Z164 217 HOLIDAY STATION 1180 W BALL RD W 1/2 - 1 (0.676 mi.) AG191 254 ANAHEIM FIRE STATION #3 1580 S CLEMENTINE SSE 1/2 - 1 (0.676 mi.) 194 257 WONDRIES TOYOTA OF ANAHEIM 1601 ANAHEIM BLVD SE 1/2 - 1 (0.706 mi.) AH205 266 CONESTOGA HOTEL 1240 WALNUT ST W 1/2 - 1 (0.707 mi.) AI206 270 HIST UST: Historical UST Registered Database. A review of the HIST UST list, as provided by EDR, and dated 10/15/1990 has revealed that there are 30 HIST UST sites within approximately 0.75 miles of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation 7-ELEVEN 2112/26216 107 W BALL RD ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.441 mi.) I107 138 BASSAM SHABAZ 107 W BALL RD ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.441 mi.) I109 140 MCPEEK PLYMOUTH 1200 S ANAHEIM BLVD ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.471 mi.) P122 151 ANAHEIM DODGE INC 1120 SO ANAHEIM BLVD ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.486 mi.) N137 167 HARDIN OLDSMOBILE/GMC TRUCKS 1300 S ANAHEIM BLVD E 1/2 - 1 (0.518 mi.) U146 180 STEFFY BUICK CO 953 S ANAHEIM BLVD NE 1/2 - 1 (0.521 mi.) T148 191 ANAHEIM DATSUN 100 W WINSTON RD ESE 1/2 - 1 (0.534 mi.) U149 197 BELL PIPE & SUPPLY CO. 215 E BALL RD E 1/2 - 1 (0.551 mi.) V153 200 ATHLETIC SHOE ASSEMBLY PLANT 1240 S CLAUDINA ST E 1/2 - 1 (0.622 mi.) AA166 221 AEROSCIENTIFIC CORPORATION 1244 S. CLAUDINA ST. E 1/2 - 1 (0.623 mi.) AA171 225 AEROSCIENTIFIC CORP-PLANT III 1244 S CLAUDINA ST E 1/2 - 1 (0.623 mi.) AA173 229 FAB STEEL SUPPLY, INC. 1304 S CLAUDINA ST E 1/2 - 1 (0.651 mi.) AD180 237 Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation G&M OIL #8 1200 S HARBOR BLVD NNE 0 - 1/8 (0.101 mi.) A5 12 DAH’S SERVICE CENTER 519 W BALL RD NE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.129 mi.) A19 25 SERVICE STATION DISNEYLAND 1313 S HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.281 mi.) C49 66 AVIS RENT A CAR 1400 S HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.282 mi.) C59 91 D. E. HOXSIE 901 S HARBOR BLVD N 1/4 - 1/2 (0.354 mi.) F74 109 POLPET TEXACO 900 S HARBOR BLVD N 1/4 - 1/2 (0.354 mi.) F75 110 PRESTIGE STATIONS INC #632 1037 W BALL RD WNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.386 mi.) H84 119 GABE’S DISNEYLAND ARCO SERVICE 1340 S WEST ST W 1/4 - 1/2 (0.465 mi.) 117 147 EXXON SERVICE STATION 1100 W BALL RD W 1/4 - 1/2 (0.474 mi.) L129 157 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC2760975.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 14 Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation UNKNOWN 1451 S WEST ST SW 1/2 - 1 (0.542 mi.) 150 198 ODETICS INC 1515 MANCHESTER AVE SE 1/2 - 1 (0.575 mi.) Y159 209 UNION OIL SERVICE STATION #566 801 S HARBOR BLVD N 1/2 - 1 (0.603 mi.) Z162 216 STATION #5669 801 S HARBOR BLVD N 1/2 - 1 (0.603 mi.) Z163 217 FIRE STATION #3 1563 S MANCHESTER AVE SE 1/2 - 1 (0.623 mi.) Y174 229 HOLIDAY STATION 1180 W BALL RD W 1/2 - 1 (0.676 mi.) AG193 256 ADVANCED AUTOMOTIVE 1460 S ANAHEIM BLVD ESE 1/2 - 1 (0.680 mi.) AH198 260 ANAHEIM TOYOTA 1601 S ANAHEIM BLVD SE 1/2 - 1 (0.706 mi.) AH204 265 GO CAL INC 1198 W BALL RD W 1/2 - 1 (0.716 mi.) AG215 281 SWEEPS UST: Statewide Environmental Evaluation and Planning System. This underground storage tank listing was updated and maintained by a company contacted by the in the early 1990’s. The listing is no longer updated or maintained. The local agency is the contact for more information on a site on the SWEEPS list. A review of the SWEEPS UST list, as provided by EDR, and dated 06/01/1994 has revealed that there are 23 SWEEPS UST sites within approximately 0.75 miles of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation 7-ELEVEN STORE 107 W BALL RD ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.441 mi.) I108 138 WESTERN MEDICAL CENTER ANAHEIM 1025 S ANAHEIM BLVD ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.484 mi.) Q132 159 ANAHEIM DODGE INC 1120 SO ANAHEIM BLVD ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.486 mi.) N137 167 HARDIN OLDSMOBILE/GMC TRUCKS 1300 S ANAHEIM BLVD E 1/2 - 1 (0.518 mi.) U146 180 STEFFY BUICK CO 953 S ANAHEIM BLVD NE 1/2 - 1 (0.521 mi.) T148 191 BELL PIPE AND SUPPLY CO 215 E BALL RD E 1/2 - 1 (0.551 mi.) V151 199 CUSTOM LAMINATORS 1350 S CLAUDINA ST E 1/2 - 1 (0.679 mi.) AF197 258 Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation G&M OIL CO., INC. #8 1200 S HARBOR BLVD NNE 0 - 1/8 (0.101 mi.) A4 9 SHELL (0222-3406) 601 W BALL RD NNE 0 - 1/8 (0.107 mi.) A10 14 A-KHAL’S SERVICE CENTER 519 W BALL RD NE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.129 mi.) A23 28 DISNEYLAND 1313 S HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.281 mi.) C51 71 AVIS RENT A CAR 1400 S HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.282 mi.) C59 91 MARY’S GAS / JOHN KOCYLA 900 S HARBOR BLVD N 1/4 - 1/2 (0.354 mi.) F73 107 ARCO FACILITY NO. 0072 1037 W BALL RD WNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.386 mi.) H85 120 PACIFIC INLAND PLAZA 888 S WEST ST WNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.415 mi.) J94 129 EXXON SERVICE STATION #3724 1100 BALL RD W 1/4 - 1/2 (0.474 mi.) L127 154 ODETICS INC 1515 MANCHESTER AVE SE 1/2 - 1 (0.575 mi.) Y159 209 UNOCAL #5669 801 HARBOR BLVD N 1/2 - 1 (0.603 mi.) Z164 217 HOLIDAY STATION 1180 W BALL RD W 1/2 - 1 (0.676 mi.) AG191 254 ANAHEIM FIRE STATION #3 1580 S CLEMENTINE SSE 1/2 - 1 (0.676 mi.) 194 257 WONDRIES TOYOTA OF ANAHEIM 1601 ANAHEIM BLVD SE 1/2 - 1 (0.706 mi.) AH205 266 CONESTOGA HOTEL 1240 S WALNUT ST W 1/2 - 1 (0.707 mi.) AI207 272 ATLAS OIL CO 1198 W BALL RD W 1/2 - 1 (0.716 mi.) AG216 282 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC2760975.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 15 Records of Emergency Release Reports CHMIRS: The California Hazardous Material Incident Report System contains information on reported hazardous material incidents, i.e., accidental releases or spills. The source is the California Office of Emergency Services. A review of the CHMIRS list, as provided by EDR, and dated 12/31/2007 has revealed that there are 13 CHMIRS sites within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation Not reported 135 W. BALL RD ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.395 mi.) I92 127 Date Completed: 08-MAY-89 Not reported 310 WEST VERMONT AVENUENNE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.425 mi.) M100 133 Not reported 310 W. VERMONT NNE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.425 mi.) M101 134 Not reported 1101 SOUTH ANAHEIM BLVD ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.468 mi.) N120 149 Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation Not reported 999 W. BALL RD. WNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.273 mi.) D35 39 Not reported 1313 SOUTH HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.281 mi.) C46 45 DISNEYLAND 1313 S. HARBOR BLVD. S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.281 mi.) C48 48 DISNEYLAND 1313 S HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.281 mi.) C51 71 FOX PHOTO INC 1313 HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.281 mi.) C53 83 Not reported 1011 WEST BALL ROAD WNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.292 mi.) D61 93 Not reported 1460 S. HARBOR BLVD. S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.367 mi.) G77 112 Not reported 1480 S HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.395 mi.) G90 123 Not reported 900 S. DISNEYLAND DRIVE WNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.421 mi.) J96 130 The Orange County Industrial Site Cleanups list comes from the Health Care Agency. A review of the Orange Co. Industrial Site list, as provided by EDR, and dated 12/02/2009 has revealed that there are 4 Orange Co. Industrial Site sites within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation ANAHEIM DODGE 1120 S ANAHEIM BLVD ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.486 mi.) N138 170 Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation COUNTY OF ORANGE - AGRICULTURA 1010 S HARBOR BLVD NNE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.267 mi.) B30 35 ORANGE COUNTY COOPERATIVE EXT 1000 S HARBOR BLVD N 1/4 - 1/2 (0.275 mi.) B36 41 DISNEYLAND 1313 S HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.281 mi.) C51 71 Other Ascertainable Records RCRA-NonGen: RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Non-Generators do not presently generate hazardous waste. A review of the RCRA-NonGen list, as provided by EDR, and dated 01/13/2010 has revealed that there ---PAGE BREAK--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC2760975.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 16 are 5 RCRA-NonGen sites within approximately 0.75 miles of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation ANAHEIM DODGE INC 1120 SO ANAHEIM BLVD ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.486 mi.) N137 167 WORTHEN STAMP & SEAL CO INC 967 S ANAHEIM BLVD NE 1/2 - 1 (0.510 mi.) T145 178 HARDIN OLDSMOBILE/GMC TRUCKS 1300 S ANAHEIM BLVD E 1/2 - 1 (0.518 mi.) U146 180 Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation SPECTRUM PHOTOGRAPHIC AND IMAG 1313 S HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.281 mi.) C50 68 SPECTRUM PHOTOGRAPHIC IMAGING 1150 W CERRITOS ST SW 1/2 - 1 (0.712 mi.) AJ210 278 SSTS: Section 7 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act, as amended (92 Stat. 829) requires all registered pesticide-producing establishments to submit a report to the Environmental Protection Agency by March 1st each year. Each establishment must report the types and amounts of pesticides, active ingredients and devices being produced, and those having been produced and sold or distributed in the past year. A review of the SSTS list, as provided by EDR, and dated 12/31/2008 has revealed that there is 1 SSTS site within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation ORANGE COUNTY AGRIC COMM 1010 SOUTH HARBOR BOULE NNE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.267 mi.) B31 35 FINDS: The Facility Index System contains both facility information and "pointers" to other sources of information that contain more detail. These include: RCRIS; Permit Compliance System (PCS); Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS); FATES (FIFRA [Federal Insecticide Fungicide Rodenticide Act] and TSCA Enforcement System, FTTS [FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System]; CERCLIS; DOCKET (Enforcement Docket used to manage and track information on civil judicial enforcement cases for all environmental statutes); Federal Underground Injection Control (FURS); Federal Reporting Data System (FRDS); Surface Impoundments (SIA); TSCA Chemicals in Commerce Information System (CICS); PADS; RCRA-J (medical waste transporters/disposers); TRIS; and TSCA. The source of this database is the U.S. EPA/NTIS. A review of the FINDS list, as provided by EDR, and dated 10/19/2009 has revealed that there are 11 FINDS sites within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation PERTH CLEANERS 135 W BALL RD ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.395 mi.) I91 125 ANAHEIM SUZUKI 1125 S ANAHEIM BLVD ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.464 mi.) N116 145 UNITED WESTERN MEDICAL CENTER 1025 SOUTH ANAHEIM BOUL ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.484 mi.) Q133 163 ANAHEIM DODGE INC 1120 SO ANAHEIM BLVD ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.486 mi.) N137 167 Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation SHELL SERVICE STATION 2331 E. KATELLA AVENUE NNE 0 - 1/8 (0.107 mi.) A14 18 TEXACO KHALS 519 W BALL RD NE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.129 mi.) A22 26 ORANGE COUNTY DEPT OF AGRICULT 1010 SOUTH HARBOR BLVD NNE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.267 mi.) B32 37 ORANGE GROVE ELEMENTARY 1000 SOUTH HARBOR BLVD. NNE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.275 mi.) B37 41 SPECTRUM PHOTOGRAPHIC AND IMAG 1313 S HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.281 mi.) C50 68 1-DAY PAINT AND BODY CENTERS I 900 W VERMONT AVE NW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.354 mi.) 72 101 R MORRIS INN AT THE PK S MANF 1460 S HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.367 mi.) G79 115 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC2760975.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 17 CA WDS: California Water Resources Control Board - Waste Discharge System. A review of the CA WDS list, as provided by EDR, and dated 06/19/2007 has revealed that there is 1 CA WDS site within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation DISNEYLAND 1313 S. HARBOR BLVD. S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.281 mi.) C48 48 NPDES: A listing of NPDES permits, including stormwater. A review of the NPDES list, as provided by EDR, and dated 02/22/2010 has revealed that there are 9 NPDES sites within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation JP EDMONDSON 1380 S HARBOR BLVD S 1/8 - 1/4 (0.247 mi.) C28 34 DISNEY CA ADVENTURE CARS LAND 1313 S HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.279 mi.) C42 43 BACKSTAGE PAVING IMPROVEMENTS 1313 S HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.279 mi.) C45 45 Not reported 1313 SOUTH HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.281 mi.) C46 45 DISNEYLAND 1313 S. HARBOR BLVD. S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.281 mi.) C48 48 DISNEYLAND 1313 S HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.281 mi.) C51 71 ANAHEIM SHERATON HOTEL 900 SOUTH DISNEYLAND DR WNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.421 mi.) J97 132 888 BLDG LLC 888 DISNEYLAND DR WNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.456 mi.) J115 145 BACK OF HOUSE INFRASTRUCTURE 1515 S HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.465 mi.) O118 148 HIST CORTESE: The sites for the list are designated by the State Water Resource Control Board [LUST], the Integrated Waste Board [SWF/LS], and the Department of Toxic Substances Control [CALSITES]. A review of the HIST CORTESE list, as provided by EDR, and dated 04/01/2001 has revealed that there are 7 HIST CORTESE sites within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation 7 - ELEVEN STORE 107 BALL RD ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.445 mi.) I114 143 Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation DISNEYLAND 1313 S. HARBOR BLVD. S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.281 mi.) C48 48 AVIS RENT - A - CAR SYSTEM 1400 HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.282 mi.) C58 90 ANAHEIM SHERATON 1015 BALL WNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.301 mi.) D63 95 MARY’S GAS STATION 900 HARBOR BLVD N 1/4 - 1/2 (0.351 mi.) F71 100 ARCO #0072 1037 BALL RD WNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.386 mi.) H88 122 EXXON SERVICE STATION #3724 1100 BALL RD W 1/4 - 1/2 (0.474 mi.) L127 154 Notify 65: Notify 65 records contain facility notifications about any release that could impact drinking water and thereby expose the public to a potential health risk. The data come from the State Water Resources Control Board’s Proposition 65 database. A review of the Notify 65 list, as provided by EDR, and dated 10/21/1993 has revealed that there are 2 Notify 65 sites within approximately 1.5 miles of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation #72 1037 WEST BALL WNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.425 mi.) L99 133 MOBIL OIL CORP. 18-106 1800 SOUTH HARBOR S 1/2 - 1 (0.930 mi.) AT247 331 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC2760975.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 18 A list of related facilities that have EPA ID numbers. These are facilities with certain SIC codes: power laundries, family and commercial; garment pressing and cleaners’ agents; linen supply; coin-operated laundries and cleaning; plants except rugs; carpet and upholster cleaning; industrial launderers; laundry and garment services. A review of the list, as provided by EDR, and dated 12/22/2009 has revealed that there is 1 site within approximately 0.75 miles of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation PERTH CLEANERS 135 W BALL RD ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.395 mi.) I91 125 WIP: Well Investigation Program case in the San Gabriel and San Fernando Valley area. A review of the WIP list, as provided by EDR, and dated 07/03/2009 has revealed that there is 1 WIP site within approximately 0.75 miles of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation U S POST OFFICE 1180 BALL RD W 1/2 - 1 (0.676 mi.) AG190 253 Facility Status: Historical HAZNET: The data is extracted from the copies of hazardous waste manifests received each year by the DTSC. The annual volume of manifests is typically 700,000-1,000,000 annually, representing approximately 350,000-500,000 shipments. Data from non-California manifests & continuation sheets are not included at the present time. Data are from the manifests submitted without correction, and therefore many contain some invalid values for data elements such as generator ID, TSD ID, waste category, & disposal method. The source is the Department of Toxic Substance Control is the agency A review of the HAZNET list, as provided by EDR, and dated 12/31/2008 has revealed that there are 54 HAZNET sites within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation HUD INTOWN PROPERTIES 1132 CITRON ST S NNW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.182 mi.) 25 32 CALTRANS DISTRICT 12 1361 SOUTH PALM SE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.203 mi.) 26 33 VILLA APARTMENTS 1000 S LEMON ST UNIT D NE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.409 mi.) 93 129 7-ELEVEN STORE 26216 107 W BALL RD ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.441 mi.) I110 141 ANAHEIM SUZUKI 1125 S ANAHEIM BLVD ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.464 mi.) N116 145 GREANEY MEDICAL GROUP 1103 SO ANAHEIM BLVD ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.467 mi.) N119 148 MCPEEKS DODGE OF ANAHEIM 1200 S ANAHEIM BLVD ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.471 mi.) P123 152 MEDI-CENTER MEDICAL CLINIC INC 1020 S ANAHEIM BLVD,STE ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.481 mi.) N130 158 WESTERN MEDICAL CENTER ANAHEIM 1025 S ANAHEIM BLVD ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.484 mi.) Q132 159 WESTERN MEDICL CENTER-ANAHEIM 1025 ANAHEIM BLVD ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.484 mi.) Q134 164 REALTY CORP 1120 / 1126 S ANAHEIM ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.486 mi.) N139 170 Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation CAL TRANS 1200 S HARBOR NNE 0 - 1/8 (0.101 mi.) A1 8 G&M OIL CO., INC. #8 1200 S HARBOR BLVD NNE 0 - 1/8 (0.101 mi.) A4 9 G & M OIL CO INC #8 1200 S HARBOR BLVD NNE 0 - 1/8 (0.101 mi.) A6 13 JIN’S HARBOR SHELL 601 W BALL RD NNE 0 - 1/8 (0.107 mi.) A11 16 SHELL 601 W BALL NNE 0 - 1/8 (0.107 mi.) A12 16 SHELL SERVICE STATION 2331 E. KATELLA AVENUE NNE 0 - 1/8 (0.107 mi.) A14 18 PAL MALL PROPERTIES 519 W BALL ROAD NE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.129 mi.) A18 24 CITY OF ANAHEIM PUBLIC WORKS 519 WEST BALL ROAD NE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.129 mi.) A21 26 A-KHAL’S SERVICE CENTER 519 W BALL RD NE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.129 mi.) A23 28 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC2760975.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 19 Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation HARBOR AUTO CARE FACILITY 519 BALL RD NNE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.171 mi.) 24 30 CITY OF ANAHEIM 1040 HARBOR BLVD NNE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.244 mi.) B27 33 JP EDMONDSON 1380 S HARBOR BLVD S 1/8 - 1/4 (0.247 mi.) C28 34 ORANGE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF AG 1010 SO HARBOR BLVD NNE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.267 mi.) B29 34 COUNTY OF ORANGE - AGRICULTURA 1010 S HARBOR BLVD NNE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.267 mi.) B30 35 ANAHEIM HARBOR R V PARK INC 1009 S HARBOR BLVD N 1/4 - 1/2 (0.269 mi.) B33 39 ORANGE COUNTY COOPERATIVE EXT 1000 S HARBOR BLVD N 1/4 - 1/2 (0.275 mi.) B36 41 KIEWIT PACIFIC CO 1313 S HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.281 mi.) C47 47 SPECTRUM PHOTOGRAPHIC AND IMAG 1313 S HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.281 mi.) C50 68 DISNEYLAND 1313 S HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.281 mi.) C51 71 ANAHEIM PUBLIC UTILITIES 1313 S HARBOR S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.281 mi.) C52 82 FOX PHOTO INC 1313 HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.281 mi.) C53 83 HOWARD JOHNSON HOTEL 1400 SO HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.282 mi.) C57 90 1X SHERATON ANAHEIM HOTEL 1015 W BALL ROAD WNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.301 mi.) D66 98 ORANGE COUNTY TRANSP AUTHORITY 318 W PALAIS RD SE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.333 mi.) 67 98 SO. CAL. DIST. COUNCIL CARPENT 608 W. VERMONT NNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.340 mi.) E68 99 COAST CORVETTE 828 W VERMONT AVE NNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.348 mi.) E70 99 1-DAY PAINT AND BODY CENTERS I 900 W VERMONT AVE NW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.354 mi.) 72 101 FAIRFIELD INN 1460 S HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.367 mi.) G78 114 1X RAMADA MAIN GATE 1460 S HARBOR BLVD. S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.367 mi.) G80 117 GRAND CALIFORNIAN HOTEL DISNEY 1150 DISNEYLAND DR WNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.369 mi.) H81 117 ARCO ANAHEIM RESORT CENTER 1037 W BALL RD WNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.386 mi.) H83 118 ARCO PRODUCTS COMPANY 1037 W BALL RD WNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.386 mi.) H86 121 PACIFIC INLAND PLAZA 888 S WEST ST WNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.415 mi.) J94 129 DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION 861 COTTONWOOD ST NW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.421 mi.) K95 130 JIM HANSEN 701 W BELLEVUE DR NNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.428 mi.) 102 136 CAL TRANS 855 WEST COTTONWOOD NW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.429 mi.) K103 136 DEPT. TRANSPORTATION/COTTONWOO 835 WEST COTTONWOOD AVENW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.434 mi.) K104 137 DEPT. TRANSPORTATION/COTTONWOO 845 WEST COTTONWOOD AVENW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.438 mi.) K106 137 MCCARTHY BUILDING COMPANIES 1221 WEST PLACE W 1/4 - 1/2 (0.468 mi.) 121 150 ALMAN CONSTRUCTION CO INC 1477 S MANCHESTER AVE SE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.473 mi.) 124 153 EXXON CO USA #73724 1100 WEST BALL ROAD W 1/4 - 1/2 (0.474 mi.) L128 157 BEST WESTERN PARK PLACE INN & 1544 S HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.485 mi.) O135 166 PAMELA KING 613 WEST PROVENTIAL DR N 1/4 - 1/2 (0.496 mi.) S142 176 EMI: Toxics and criteria pollutant emissions data collected by the ARB and local air pollution agencies A review of the EMI list, as provided by EDR, and dated 12/31/2007 has revealed that there are 12 EMI sites within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation PERTH CLEANERS 135 W BALL RD ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.395 mi.) I91 125 WESTERN MEDICAL CENTER ANAHEIM 1025 S ANAHEIM BLVD ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.484 mi.) Q132 159 ANAHEIM DODGE INC 1120 SO ANAHEIM BLVD ENE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.486 mi.) N137 167 Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation SPAGHETTI STATION RESTAURANT 999 BALL ROAD WNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.273 mi.) D34 39 DISNEYLAND 1313 S. HARBOR BLVD. S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.281 mi.) C48 48 DISNEYLAND 1313 S HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.281 mi.) C51 71 ACAPULCO RESTAURANTS INC 1410 HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.296 mi.) C62 95 SHERATON-ANAHEIM MOTOR HOTEL 1015 W BALL RD WNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.301 mi.) D65 97 CARROWS RESTAURANT, INC. 915 S HARBOR BL. N 1/4 - 1/2 (0.343 mi.) F69 99 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC2760975.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 20 Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Lower Elevation 1-DAY PAINT AND BODY CENTERS I 900 W VERMONT AVE NW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.354 mi.) 72 101 R MORRIS INN AT THE PK S MANF 1460 S HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.367 mi.) G79 115 Not reported 1480 S HARBOR BLVD S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.395 mi.) G90 123 HWP: Detailed information on permitted hazardous waste facilities and corrective action (a??cleanupsa??) tracked in EnviroStor. A review of the HWP list, as provided by EDR, and dated 02/08/2010 has revealed that there is 1 HWP site within approximately 1.5 miles of the target property. Page Map ID Direction / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation L 3 INTERSTATE ELECTRONICS COR 707 E VERMONT AVE NE 1/2 - 1 (0.968 mi.) 253 342 ---PAGE BREAK--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TC2760975.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 21 Due to poor or inadequate address information, the following sites were not mapped: Site Name Database(s) ANAHEIM OFFICE BUILDING NPDES OLD KWIKSET SITE NPDES 2950 W BALL RD (NE CORNER BALL CDL 1700 S HARBOR BLVD (ANAHEIM PL CDL ACTION CLEANERS & LAUNDRY PAN PACIFIC HOTEL LUST SAN MATEO PHILLIPS AUTOMOTIVE #1012 UST ALAMEDA WORLD OIL STATION #39 UST ALAMEDA CHEVRON STATION #92378 UST ALAMEDA ANAHEIM RESORT PUMP HOUSE #55 UST ALAMEDA ARCO (AM/PM MINI MRKT.) #9727 UST ALAMEDA UNOCAL #4227 UST ALAMEDA HARVEY CAPITAL CORP HAZNET CAL TRANS HAZNET HSH INTERPLAN USA HAZNET CENTER WALLCOVERING & PAINTING HAZNET CT MACHINING INC HAZNET PALM LANE APTS HAZNET RONDELL HOMES HAZNET TECHNICAL DUPLICATOR INC HAZNET SUMMERCREST APARTMENTS HAZNET MEDI-PHYSICS INC DBA GE HEALTHCARE HAZNET CONSOLIDATED CONTAINER COMPANY LP FINDS,HAZNET ACUREN INSPECTION HAZNET SEPHORA STORES HAZNET AIDA Y. LIM D.D.S. A PROFESSIONAL HAZNET ANAHEIM CITY UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT HAZNET FEI-ZYFER INC HAZNET CALTRANS DISTRICT 12 EA 071611 HAZNET THREE DAY BLINDS INC RCRA-SQG CREEK PARK SHELL RCRA-SQG,FINDS CW WOODCRAFTERS WDS EL MORRO CONVERSION TO CAMPGRO WDS FOGERTY & EXXON ET AL TRUST WDS CALTRANS/FCI CONSTRUCTOR ICIS S & S HEADERS INC EMI PAN PACIFIC HOTEL EMI ---PAGE BREAK--- EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. 230 kV 230 kV 230 kV 230 kV 230 kV 230 k 230 kV 230 kV 230 kV 230 kV 230 kV 230 kV ---PAGE BREAK--- EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY Search Target Distance Total Database Property (Miles) < 1/8 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS Federal NPL site list 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.500 NPL 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.500 Proposed NPL 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500 NPL LIENS Federal Delisted NPL site list 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.500 Delisted NPL Federal CERCLIS list 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000 CERCLIS 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.500 FEDERAL FACILITY Federal CERCLIS NFRAP site List 1 NR 1 0 0 0 1.000 CERC-NFRAP Federal RCRA CORRACTS facilities list 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.500 CORRACTS Federal RCRA non-CORRACTS TSD facilities list 1 NR 1 0 0 0 1.000 RCRA-TSDF Federal RCRA generators list 2 NR 0 1 0 1 0.750 RCRA-LQG 25 NR 17 6 1 1 0.750 RCRA-SQG 1 NR 1 0 0 0 0.750 RCRA-CESQG Federal institutional controls / engineering controls registries 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000 US ENG CONTROLS 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000 US INST CONTROL Federal ERNS list 2 NR NR 1 0 1 0.500 ERNS State- and tribal - equivalent NPL 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.500 RESPONSE State- and tribal - equivalent CERCLIS 13 9 2 2 0 0 1.500 ENVIROSTOR State and tribal landfill and/or solid waste disposal site lists 1 NR 1 0 0 0 1.000 SWF/LF State and tribal leaking storage tank lists 78 NR 51 22 2 3 1.000 LUST 3 NR 2 1 0 0 1.000 SLIC TC2760975.2s Page 4 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY Search Target Distance Total Database Property (Miles) < 1/8 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000 INDIAN LUST State and tribal registered storage tank lists 28 NR 15 9 1 3 0.750 UST 2 NR 2 0 0 0 0.750 AST 0 NR 0 0 0 0 0.750 INDIAN UST 0 NR 0 0 0 0 0.750 FEMA UST State and tribal voluntary cleanup sites 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000 INDIAN VCP 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000 VCP ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS Local Brownfield lists 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000 US BROWNFIELDS Local Lists of Landfill / Solid Waste Disposal Sites 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000 DEBRIS REGION 9 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000 ODI 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000 WMUDS/SWAT 2 NR 2 0 0 0 1.000 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500 HAULERS 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000 INDIAN ODI Local Lists of Hazardous waste / Contaminated Sites 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500 US CDL 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.500 HIST Cal-Sites 2 NR 0 2 0 0 0.750 SCH 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.500 Toxic Pits 3 NR NR 3 0 0 0.500 CDL 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500 US HIST CDL Local Lists of Registered Storage Tanks 21 NR 10 8 1 2 0.750 CA FID UST 30 NR 17 11 1 1 0.750 HIST UST 23 NR 11 9 1 2 0.750 SWEEPS UST Local Land Records 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500 LIENS 2 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000 LUCIS 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500 LIENS 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000 DEED Records of Emergency Release Reports 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500 HMIRS 13 NR NR 13 0 0 0.500 CHMIRS 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500 LDS TC2760975.2s Page 5 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY Search Target Distance Total Database Property (Miles) < 1/8 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500 MCS 4 NR NR 4 0 0 0.500 Orange Co. Industrial Site Other Ascertainable Records 5 NR 3 2 0 0 0.750 RCRA-NonGen 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500 DOT OPS 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.500 DOD 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.500 FUDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.500 CONSENT 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.500 ROD 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000 UMTRA 0 NR 0 0 0 0 0.750 MINES 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500 TRIS 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500 TSCA 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500 FTTS 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500 HIST FTTS 1 NR NR 1 0 0 0.500 SSTS 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500 ICIS 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500 PADS 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500 MLTS 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500 RADINFO 11 NR NR 9 1 1 0.500 FINDS 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500 RAATS 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.500 CA BOND EXP. PLAN 1 NR NR 1 0 0 0.500 CA WDS 9 NR NR 8 1 0 0.500 NPDES 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000 Cortese 7 NR NR 7 0 0 0.500 HIST CORTESE 2 0 1 1 0 0 1.500 Notify 65 1 NR 0 1 0 0 0.750 1 NR 1 0 0 0 0.750 WIP 54 NR NR 40 8 6 0.500 HAZNET 12 NR NR 12 0 0 0.500 EMI 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.500 INDIAN RESERV 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000 SCRD 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500 FINANCIAL ASSURANCE 1 0 1 0 0 0 1.500 HWP 0 NR 0 0 0 0 0.750 HWT 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000 COAL ASH EPA 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500 PCB TRANSFORMER 0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500 COAL ASH DOE 0 NR 0 0 0 0 0.750 MWMP 0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000 PROC EDR PROPRIETARY RECORDS EDR Proprietary Records 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.500 Manufactured Gas Plants 0 NR 0 0 0 0 0.750 EDR Historical Auto Stations 0 NR 0 0 0 0 0.750 EDR Historical Cleaners TC2760975.2s Page 6 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY Search Target Distance Total Database Property (Miles) < 1/8 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted NOTES: TP = Target Property NR = Not Requested at this Search Distance Sites may be listed in more than one database TC2760975.2s Page 7 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: 3.3360 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Tank bottom waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SANTA ANA, CA 927055511 Mailing City,St,Zip: 2501 PULLMAN ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: CAL TRANS Contact: CAL000120301 Gepaid: HAZNET: 531 ft. Site 1 of 22 in cluster A 0.101 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 147 ft. < 1/8 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NNE 1200 S HARBOR N/A A1 HAZNET CAL TRANS S103625304 8/29/1994 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: 7/15/1996 Remed Plan: 2/24/1994 Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 12/11/2002 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 12/8/1993 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: 4/5/1994 Review Date: 8/29/1994 Enter Date: Not reported How Stopped Date: T0605901763 Global ID: UNK Leak Source: UNK Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Not reported How Discovered: Not reported Funding: Not reported Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Gasoline Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083002482T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 531 ft. Site 2 of 22 in cluster A 0.101 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 147 ft. < 1/8 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NNE 1200 HARBOR BLVD N/A A2 LUST G & M OIL #8 (AKA HOYER CHEVRON) S106387343 TC2760975.2s Page 8 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 92713-9772 ERIK FRIESS, OF NOSSAMAN, GUTHNER, KNOX & ELLIOTT, P.O BOX 19772, IRVINE, CA MAN.,15402 ELECTRONIC LN, HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649. ATTORNEY FOR HOYER: K. PROPOSING VES NOT OWNED BY CHEVRON, ADDTL. RP:MR. R. T. OTJEN, GEN. Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: RM Staff Initials: NOM Staff: * MTBE Class: Site NOT Tested for MTBE.Includes Unknown and Not Analyzed. MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8179557 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: G & M OIL #8 (AKA HOYER CHEVRON) (Continued) S106387343 -117.91526 Longitude: 33.81788 Latitude: 11056 Global ID: UST: 531 ft. Site 3 of 22 in cluster A 0.101 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 147 ft. < 1/8 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NNE 1200 HARBOR S N/A A3 UST G & M OIL #8 U003939843 Not reported Mailing Address 2: 15402 ELECTRONIC LN Mailing Address: Not reported Mail To: [PHONE REDACTED] Facility Phone: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported Cortese Code: Not reported Regulated ID: UTNKA Regulated By: 30011096 Facility ID: CA FID UST: 531 ft. Site 4 of 22 in cluster A 0.101 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 147 ft. < 1/8 HAZNET ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NNE SWEEPS UST 1200 S HARBOR BLVD N/A A4 CA FID UST G&M OIL CO., INC. #8 S101589415 TC2760975.2s Page 9 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 8000 Capacity: 04-09-93 Actv Date: 30-011-004883-000004 Tank Id: 3 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 05-24-94 Act Date: 04-09-93 Ref Date: 44-016849 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 4883 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: PRM UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 8000 Capacity: 04-09-93 Actv Date: 30-011-004883-000003 Tank Id: 4 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 05-24-94 Act Date: 04-09-93 Ref Date: 44-016849 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 4883 Comp Number: A Status: 6 Number Of Tanks: PRM UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: 04-09-93 Actv Date: 30-011-004883-000002 Tank Id: 5 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 05-24-94 Act Date: 04-09-93 Ref Date: 44-016849 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 4883 Comp Number: A Status: SWEEPS UST: Active Status: Not reported Comments: Not reported EPA ID: Not reported NPDES Number: Not reported DUNs Number: Not reported Contact Phone: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM 92805 Mailing City,St,Zip: G&M OIL CO., INC. #8 (Continued) S101589415 TC2760975.2s Page 10 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation CAC002560764 Gepaid: HAZNET: Not reported Number Of Tanks: DIESEL Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: 04-09-93 Actv Date: 30-011-004883-000007 Tank Id: 6 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 05-24-94 Act Date: 04-09-93 Ref Date: 44-016849 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 4883 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 8000 Capacity: 04-09-93 Actv Date: 30-011-004883-000006 Tank Id: 2 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 05-24-94 Act Date: 04-09-93 Ref Date: 44-016849 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 4883 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: 04-09-93 Actv Date: 30-011-004883-000005 Tank Id: 1 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 05-24-94 Act Date: 04-09-93 Ref Date: 44-016849 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 4883 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: G&M OIL CO., INC. #8 (Continued) S101589415 TC2760975.2s Page 11 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: 0.54 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Unspecified organic liquid mixture Waste Category: Orange TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SAN DIEGO, CA 92121 Mailing City,St,Zip: 3323 CARMEL MOUNTAIN RD 2ND FL Mailing Address: GARY AHARONIAN/OPRS MGR Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: GARY AHARONIAN Contact: G&M OIL CO., INC. #8 (Continued) S101589415 Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00008000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 3 Container Num: 003 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: REGULAR Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00008000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 2 Container Num: 002 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: REGULAR Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00010000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 1 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 Owner City,St,Zip: 2120 MAIN STREET, SUITE 140 Owner Address: GEORGE A. PEARSON Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: R.T. OTJEN Contact Name: 0006 Total Tanks: Not reported Other Type: Gas Station Facility Type: 00000052489 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: 531 ft. Site 5 of 22 in cluster A 0.101 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 147 ft. < 1/8 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NNE 1200 S HARBOR BLVD N/A A5 HIST UST G&M OIL #8 U001578758 TC2760975.2s Page 12 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: DIESEL Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00010000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 6 Container Num: 006 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: PREMIUM Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00008000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 5 Container Num: 005 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00010000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 4 Container Num: 004 Tank Num: G&M OIL #8 (Continued) U001578758 Orange Facility County: 3.3360 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Tank bottom waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 926470000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 16868 A STREET Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: G & M OIL CO INC Contact: CAL000004971 Gepaid: HAZNET: 531 ft. Site 6 of 22 in cluster A 0.101 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 147 ft. < 1/8 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NNE 1200 S HARBOR BLVD N/A A6 HAZNET G & M OIL CO INC #8 S103625305 TC2760975.2s Page 13 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation -117.91526 Longitude: 33.81788 Latitude: 3610 Global ID: UST: 531 ft. Site 7 of 22 in cluster A 0.101 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 147 ft. < 1/8 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NNE 1200 S HARBOR BLVD N/A A7 UST HARBOR SERVICE CENTER U003778758 Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083002482T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 2002-12-11 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -117.914717 Longitude: 33.817705 Latitude: T0605901763 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 532 ft. Site 8 of 22 in cluster A 0.101 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 147 ft. < 1/8 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NNE 1200 S HARBOR BLVD N/A A8 LUST G & M OIL #8 (AKA HOYER CHEVRON) S109284694 -117.91551 Longitude: 33.81819 Latitude: 13903 Global ID: UST: 563 ft. Site 9 of 22 in cluster A 0.107 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 147 ft. < 1/8 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NNE 601 W BALL RD N/A A9 UST JINS HARBOR SHELL U003784257 Not reported Cortese Code: Not reported Regulated ID: UTNKA Regulated By: 30000737 Facility ID: CA FID UST: 563 ft. Site 10 of 22 in cluster A 0.107 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 147 ft. < 1/8 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NNE SWEEPS UST 601 W BALL RD N/A A10 CA FID UST SHELL (0222-3406) S101588986 TC2760975.2s Page 14 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 10-23-92 Act Date: 10-23-92 Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 7688 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: PRM UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M. V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: 10-23-92 Actv Date: 30-011-007688-000002 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 10-23-92 Act Date: 10-23-92 Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 7688 Comp Number: A Status: 3 Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M. V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: 10-23-92 Actv Date: 30-011-007688-000001 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 10-23-92 Act Date: 10-23-92 Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 7688 Comp Number: A Status: SWEEPS UST: Active Status: Not reported Comments: Not reported EPA ID: Not reported NPDES Number: Not reported DUNs Number: Not reported Contact Phone: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM 92805 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address 2: PO BOX 4848 Mailing Address: Not reported Mail To: [PHONE REDACTED] Facility Phone: Not reported SIC Code: SHELL (0222-3406) (Continued) S101588986 TC2760975.2s Page 15 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M. V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: 10-23-92 Actv Date: 30-011-007688-000003 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: SHELL (0222-3406) (Continued) S101588986 Orange Facility County: 0.05 Tons: H13 Disposal Method: Aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: CULVER CITY, CA 902304901 Mailing City,St,Zip: 5183 COTA ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: JIN S KWAK Contact: CAL000313303 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.084 Tons: H039 Disposal Method: Aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: CULVER CITY, CA 902304901 Mailing City,St,Zip: 5183 COTA ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: JIN S KWAK Contact: CAL000313303 Gepaid: HAZNET: 563 ft. Site 11 of 22 in cluster A 0.107 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 147 ft. < 1/8 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NNE 601 W BALL RD N/A A11 HAZNET JIN’S HARBOR SHELL S108749152 [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: EQUILON ENTERPRISES LLC Contact: CAL000194927 Gepaid: HAZNET: 563 ft. Site 12 of 22 in cluster A 0.107 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 147 ft. < 1/8 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NNE 601 W BALL N/A A12 HAZNET SHELL S105126820 TC2760975.2s Page 16 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: 3.0000 Tons: Disposal, Other Disposal Method: Empty containers less than 30 gallons Waste Category: 7 TSD County: CAD982484933 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: HOUSTON, TX 772522099 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 2099 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: SHELL (Continued) S105126820 Not reported Enter Date: 2/26/2003 How Stopped Date: T0605982279 Global ID: UNK Leak Source: UNK Leak Cause: Other Means How Stopped: SAS How Discovered: Not reported Funding: Not reported Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Gasoline Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083003964T Case Number: Preliminary site assessment underway Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083003964T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 2009-03-27 00:00:00 Status Date: Open - Site Assessment Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -117.915956 Longitude: 33.818598 Latitude: T0605982279 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 563 ft. Site 13 of 22 in cluster A 0.107 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 147 ft. < 1/8 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NNE 601 BALL RD. W. N/A A13 LUST SHELL OIL PRODUCTS US S105850447 TC2760975.2s Page 17 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: Not reported Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: SW Staff Initials: CAB Staff: * MTBE Class: MTBE Detected. Site tested for MTBE & MTBE detected MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: 15000 Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: 41 Max MTBE GW: 8/1/2003 MTBE Date: 0 Longitude: 0 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: = Soil Qualifies: = GW Qualifies: Not reported Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: Not reported Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 2/26/2003 Discover Date: 11/3/2003 Prelim Assess: Not reported Review Date: SHELL OIL PRODUCTS US (Continued) S105850447 (714) 731-8337 Contact telephone: Not reported Contact country: Not reported Not reported Contact address: GARY V WING Contact: HOUSTON, TX 770672508 12700 NORTHBOROUGH DR SHELL OIL PRODUCTS US Mailing address: CAR000125476 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92804 SAP #[PHONE REDACTED] E. KATELLA AVENUE Facility address: SHELL SERVICE STATION Facility name: 02/26/2004 Date form received by agency: RCRA-LQG: 563 ft. Site 14 of 22 in cluster A 0.107 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 147 ft. < 1/8 HAZNET ANAHEIM, CA 92804 NNE FINDS 2331 E. KATELLA AVENUE CAR000125476 A14 RCRA-LQG SHELL SERVICE STATION [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 18 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation No Furnace exemption: No On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: No Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): No U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (713) 241-5036 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: HOUSTON, TX 77252 P O BOX 2648 Owner/operator address: EQUILON ENTERPRISES L L C Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: 08/01/1998 Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: Not reported Owner/operator telephone: US Owner/operator country: HOUSTON, TX 77252 PO BOX 2648 Owner/operator address: EQUILON ENTERPRISES LLC DBA SHELL OIL PR Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: 08/01/1998 Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: Not reported Owner/operator telephone: US Owner/operator country: Not reported Not reported Owner/operator address: SHELL OIL PRODUCTS US Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: 100 kg of that material at any time hazardous waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than from the cleanup of a spill, into or on any land or water, of acutely of any residue or contaminated soil, waste or other debris resulting kg of acutely hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less hazardous waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1 waste during any calendar month; or generates 1 kg or less of acutely cleanup of a spill, into or on any land or water, of acutely hazardous residue or contaminated soil, waste or other debris resulting from the during any calendar month; or generates more than 100 kg of any calendar month; or generates more than 1 kg of acutely hazardous waste Handler: generates 1,000 kg or more of hazardous waste during any Description: Large Quantity Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: [EMAIL REDACTED] Contact email: SHELL SERVICE STATION (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 19 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation WHICH WOULD BE CONSIDERED AS IGNITABLE HAZARDOUS WASTE. MATERIAL. LACQUER THINNER IS AN EXAMPLE OF A COMMONLY USED SOLVENT WHICH CAN BE OBTAINED FROM THE MANUFACTURER OR DISTRIBUTOR OF THE FLASH POINT OF A WASTE IS TO REVIEW THE MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET, CLOSED CUP FLASH POINT TESTER. ANOTHER METHOD OF DETERMINING THE LESS THAN 140 DEGREES FAHRENHEIT AS DETERMINED BY A PENSKY-MARTENS IGNITABLE HAZARDOUS WASTES ARE THOSE WASTES WHICH HAVE A FLASHPOINT OF Waste name: D001 Waste code: BENZENE Waste name: D018 Waste code: WHICH WOULD BE CONSIDERED AS IGNITABLE HAZARDOUS WASTE. MATERIAL. LACQUER THINNER IS AN EXAMPLE OF A COMMONLY USED SOLVENT WHICH CAN BE OBTAINED FROM THE MANUFACTURER OR DISTRIBUTOR OF THE FLASH POINT OF A WASTE IS TO REVIEW THE MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET, CLOSED CUP FLASH POINT TESTER. ANOTHER METHOD OF DETERMINING THE LESS THAN 140 DEGREES FAHRENHEIT AS DETERMINED BY A PENSKY-MARTENS IGNITABLE HAZARDOUS WASTES ARE THOSE WASTES WHICH HAVE A FLASHPOINT OF Waste name: D001 Waste code: Hazardous Waste Summary: Small Quantity Generator Classification: SHELL SERVICE STATION Facility name: 08/14/2002 Date form received by agency: Large Quantity Generator Classification: SHELL SERVICE STATION Facility name: 02/26/2004 Date form received by agency: Historical Generators: No Generated waste on-site: No Accumulated waste on-site: Thermostats Waste type: No Generated waste on-site: No Accumulated waste on-site: Pesticides Waste type: No Generated waste on-site: No Accumulated waste on-site: Lamps Waste type: No Generated waste on-site: No Accumulated waste on-site: Batteries Waste type: Universal Waste Summary: Commercial status unknown Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: SHELL SERVICE STATION (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 20 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: N CORTEZ/ENVT’L DATA ANALYST Contact: CAR000125476 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.02 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Other organic solids Waste Category: Orange TSD County: CAD982444481 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: Houston, TX 770672508 Mailing City,St,Zip: 12700 NORTHBOROUGH DRIVE MFT 240-G Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: S A P 135049 Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: N CORTEZ/ENVT’L DATA ANALYST Contact: CAR000125476 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 1.45 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues Waste Category: Orange TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: Houston, TX 770672508 Mailing City,St,Zip: 12700 NORTHBOROUGH DRIVE MFT 240-G Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: S A P 135049 Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: N CORTEZ/ENVT’L DATA ANALYST Contact: CAR000125476 Gepaid: HAZNET: corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource facilities. generators, transporters, and treatment, storage, and disposal provides California with information on hazardous waste shipments for California Hazardous Waste Tracking System - Datamart (HWTS-DATAMART) Environmental Interest/Information System 110013309062 Registry ID: FINDS: No violations found Violation Status: BENZENE Waste name: D018 Waste code: SHELL SERVICE STATION (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 21 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 2 additional CA_HAZNET: record(s) in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access Orange Facility County: 13.25 Tons: Disposal, Other Disposal Method: Other empty containers 30 gallons or more Waste Category: Orange TSD County: CAD982484933 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: Houston, TX 770672508 Mailing City,St,Zip: 12700 NORTHBOROUGH DRIVE MFT 240-G Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: S A P 135049 Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: N CORTEZ/ENVT’L DATA ANALYST Contact: CAR000125476 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.01 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Other organic solids Waste Category: Orange TSD County: CAD008364432 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: Houston, TX 770672508 Mailing City,St,Zip: 12700 NORTHBOROUGH DRIVE MFT 240-G Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: S A P 135049 Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: N CORTEZ/ENVT’L DATA ANALYST Contact: CAR000125476 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 2.46 Tons: Treatment, Tank Disposal Method: Aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues Waste Category: Orange TSD County: CAD028409019 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: Houston, TX 770672508 Mailing City,St,Zip: 12700 NORTHBOROUGH DRIVE MFT 240-G Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: S A P 135049 Facility Addr2: SHELL SERVICE STATION (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] additional ERNS detail in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access 580 ft. Site 15 of 22 in cluster A 0.110 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 147 ft. < 1/8 ANAHEIM, CA NNE 1200 SOUTH HARBOR BLVD N/A A15 ERNS 1200 SOUTH HARBOR BLVD 91466334 TC2760975.2s Page 22 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: No Furnace exemption: No On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): No U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (800) 742-7742 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: FRISCO, CO 80443 P O BOX 4200 Owner/operator address: PAUL LAINE Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: (530) 544-6511 Contact telephone: US Contact country: FRISCO, CO 80443 P O BOX 4200 Contact address: JOSE OLIVARES Contact: FRISCO, CO 80443 P O BOX 4200 Mailing address: CAR000018770 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92803 E SERVICE AREA 1313 S HARBOR BLVD TRAILER NO Facility address: SHARPSHOOTER SPECTRUM IMAGING Facility name: 01/27/2000 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: 652 ft. 0.123 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 154 ft. < 1/8 ANAHEIM, CA 92803 South 1313 S HARBOR BLVD TRAILER NO CAR000018770 16 RCRA-SQG SHARPSHOOTER SPECTRUM IMAGING [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 23 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation No violations found Violation Status: SILVER Waste name: D011 Waste code: Not Defined Waste name: D000 Waste code: Hazardous Waste Summary: SHARPSHOOTER SPECTRUM IMAGING (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083002949T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 2002-03-26 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -117.914993 Longitude: 33.8182037 Latitude: T0605902019 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 676 ft. Site 16 of 22 in cluster A 0.128 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 147 ft. 1/8-1/4 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NE 519 W BALL RD N/A A17 LUST HARBOR AUTO CARE FACILITY S109284579 Orange Facility County: 1.1467 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Tank bottom waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD099452708 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 519 W BALL ROAD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: ART SHIPKEY Contact: CAC001269880 Gepaid: HAZNET: 680 ft. Site 17 of 22 in cluster A 0.129 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 147 ft. 1/8-1/4 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NE 519 W BALL ROAD N/A A18 HAZNET PAL MALL PROPERTIES S103980833 TC2760975.2s Page 24 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation None Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: WASTE OIL Type of Fuel: WASTE Tank Used for: 00000500 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 4 Container Num: 004 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: REGULAR Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00009940 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: #3 Container Num: 003 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00009940 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: #2 Container Num: 002 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: PREMIUM Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00006000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: #1 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 Owner City,St,Zip: 1560 S. HARBOR BLVD. Owner Address: TRAVELERS WORLD Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: ADNAN EL DAH Contact Name: 0004 Total Tanks: Not reported Other Type: Gas Station Facility Type: 00000046058 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: 680 ft. Site 18 of 22 in cluster A 0.129 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 147 ft. 1/8-1/4 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NE 519 W BALL RD N/A A19 HIST UST DAH’S SERVICE CENTER U001578741 TC2760975.2s Page 25 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation -117.91466 Longitude: 33.81817 Latitude: 6840 Global ID: UST: 680 ft. Site 19 of 22 in cluster A 0.129 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 147 ft. 1/8-1/4 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NE 519 W BALL RD N/A A20 UST KHALS SERVICE CENTER U003780556 Orange Facility County: 1.0425 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Tank bottom waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 200 SO ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: CITY OF ANAHEIM Contact: CAC001243424 Gepaid: HAZNET: 680 ft. Site 20 of 22 in cluster A 0.129 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 147 ft. 1/8-1/4 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NE 519 WEST BALL ROAD N/A A21 HAZNET CITY OF ANAHEIM PUBLIC WORKS S103956759 hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: (714) 774-8030 Contact telephone: US Contact country: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 519 W BALL RD Contact address: ELDAH ADNAN Contact: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 W BALL RD Mailing address: CAD983592809 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 519 W BALL RD Facility address: TEXACO KHALS Facility name: 07/18/1991 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: 680 ft. Site 21 of 22 in cluster A 0.129 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 147 ft. 1/8-1/4 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NE FINDS 519 W BALL RD CAD983592809 A22 RCRA-SQG TEXACO KHALS [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 26 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource Environmental Interest/Information System 110002851334 Registry ID: FINDS: No violations found Violation Status: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: No Furnace exemption: No On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): No U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: TRAVELERS WORLD RV PARK Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of TEXACO KHALS (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 27 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Number Of Tanks: DIESEL Content: W Stg: M. V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: 04-12-93 Actv Date: 30-011-002412-000002 Tank Id: UNKNOWN Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 05-09-94 Act Date: 04-14-93 Ref Date: 44-024127 Board Of Equalization: 2 Number: 2412 Comp Number: A Status: 4 Number Of Tanks: WASTE OIL Content: W Stg: OIL Tank Use: 550 Capacity: 04-12-93 Actv Date: 30-011-002412-000001 Tank Id: UNKNOWN Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 05-09-94 Act Date: 04-14-93 Ref Date: 44-024127 Board Of Equalization: 2 Number: 2412 Comp Number: A Status: SWEEPS UST: Active Status: Not reported Comments: Not reported EPA ID: Not reported NPDES Number: Not reported DUNs Number: Not reported Contact Phone: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM 92805 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 1428 W BAY ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mail To: [PHONE REDACTED] Facility Phone: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported Cortese Code: Not reported Regulated ID: UTNKA Regulated By: 30010183 Facility ID: CA FID UST: 680 ft. Site 22 of 22 in cluster A 0.129 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 147 ft. 1/8-1/4 HAZNET ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NE SWEEPS UST 519 W BALL RD N/A A23 CA FID UST A-KHAL’S SERVICE CENTER S101589392 TC2760975.2s Page 28 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: 0.41 Tons: H039 Disposal Method: Waste oil and mixed oil Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928056054 Mailing City,St,Zip: 519 W BALL RD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: CHUCK YANTANI Contact: CAL000123551 Gepaid: HAZNET: Not reported Number Of Tanks: PRM UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M. V. FUEL Tank Use: 6000 Capacity: 04-12-93 Actv Date: 30-011-002412-000004 Tank Id: UNKNOWN Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 05-09-94 Act Date: 04-14-93 Ref Date: 44-024127 Board Of Equalization: 2 Number: 2412 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: W Stg: M. V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: 04-12-93 Actv Date: 30-011-002412-000003 Tank Id: UNKNOWN Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 05-09-94 Act Date: 04-14-93 Ref Date: 44-024127 Board Of Equalization: 2 Number: 2412 Comp Number: A Status: A-KHAL’S SERVICE CENTER (Continued) S101589392 TC2760975.2s Page 29 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: ROW Staff Initials: CAB Staff: * MTBE Class: MTBE Detected. Site tested for MTBE & MTBE detected MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: .0071 Max MTBE Soil: 2 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -117.915255 Longitude: 33.81828533 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: = Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 3/13/1997 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: 2/4/1997 Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 3/26/2002 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 11/13/1996 Discover Date: 11/13/1996 Prelim Assess: 11/27/1995 Review Date: 3/13/1997 Enter Date: Not reported How Stopped Date: T0605902019 Global ID: Not reported Leak Source: Not reported Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: OM How Discovered: Not reported Funding: Not reported Enf Type: HARBOR Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Gasoline Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083002949T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 905 ft. 0.171 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 147 ft. 1/8-1/4 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NNE HAZNET 519 BALL RD N/A 24 LUST HARBOR AUTO CARE FACILITY S102532331 TC2760975.2s Page 30 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 519 W BALL RD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: CHUCK YANTANI Contact: CAL000123551 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .1668 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Unspecified aqueous solution Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD099452708 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928056054 Mailing City,St,Zip: 519 W BALL RD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: CHUCK YANTANI Contact: CAL000123551 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .2085 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Unspecified aqueous solution Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD099452708 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928056054 Mailing City,St,Zip: 519 W BALL RD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: CHUCK YANTANI Contact: CAL000123551 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .2085 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Unspecified aqueous solution Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD050099696 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928056054 Mailing City,St,Zip: 519 W BALL RD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: CHUCK YANTANI Contact: CAL000123551 Gepaid: HAZNET: Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: HARBOR AUTO CARE FACILITY (Continued) S102532331 TC2760975.2s Page 31 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation additional CA_HAZNET: detail in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access Orange Facility County: .2085 Tons: Not reported Disposal Method: Unspecified aqueous solution Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD050099696 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928056054 Mailing City,St,Zip: 519 W BALL RD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: CHUCK YANTANI Contact: CAL000123551 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .0333 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT000613893 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928056054 Mailing City,St,Zip: HARBOR AUTO CARE FACILITY (Continued) S102532331 CAD028409019 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM HILLS, CA 928070000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 5528-3A E LA PALMA AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: HUD Contact: CAC002172257 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.17 Tons: Not reported Disposal Method: Household waste Waste Category: 0 TSD County: CAD028209109 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM HILLS, CA 928070000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 5528-3A E LA PALMA AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: HUD Contact: CAC002172257 Gepaid: HAZNET: 963 ft. 0.182 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 151 ft. 1/8-1/4 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NNW 1132 CITRON ST S N/A 25 HAZNET HUD INTOWN PROPERTIES S104570891 TC2760975.2s Page 32 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: 0.17 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Household waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: HUD INTOWN PROPERTIES (Continued) S104570891 Orange Facility County: 3.3712 Tons: Disposal, Land Fill Disposal Method: Asbestos-containing waste Waste Category: 99 TSD County: IRC957100891 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SANTA ANA, CA 927050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 2501 PULLMAN ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: CALTRANS Contact: CAC001255840 Gepaid: HAZNET: 1070 ft. 0.203 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 158 ft. 1/8-1/4 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 SE 1361 SOUTH PALM N/A 26 HAZNET CALTRANS DISTRICT 12 S103954466 Not reported Facility County: 1.68 Tons: Not reported Disposal Method: Asbestos-containing waste Waste Category: 99 TSD County: Not reported TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 92803 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 3222 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: NICOLE CLOUSE Contact: CAC002554244 Gepaid: HAZNET: 1287 ft. Site 1 of 8 in cluster B 0.244 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 147 ft. 1/8-1/4 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NNE 1040 HARBOR BLVD N/A B27 HAZNET CITY OF ANAHEIM S106088167 TC2760975.2s Page 33 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: 3.28 Tons: Disposal, Land Fill Disposal Method: Asbestos-containing waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD009007626 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928022310 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1380 S HARBOR BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: DAVID CEAGER Contact: CAC002599821 Gepaid: HAZNET: 92802 Discharge Zip: CA Discharge State: Anaheim Discharge City: 1380 S Harbor Blvd Discharge Address: Howard Johnsons Discharge Name: Not reported Termination Date Of Regulatory Measure: Not reported Expiration Date Of Regulatory Measure: 5/12/2004 Effective Date Of Regulatory Measure: Not reported Adoption Date Of Regulatory Measure: CONSTW Program Type: 8 30C327512 WDID: 231959 Place Id: Storm water construction Regulatory Measure Type: 99-08DWQ Order No: 207998 Regulatory Measure Id: 8 Region: 21395 Agency Id: Active Facility Status: Not reported Npdes Number: NPDES: 1305 ft. Site 1 of 25 in cluster C 0.247 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 142 ft. 1/8-1/4 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 South HAZNET 1380 S HARBOR BLVD N/A C28 NPDES JP EDMONDSON S108749312 CAD981458466 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1010 SO HARBOR BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: COUNTY OF ORANGE Contact: CAD000629675 Gepaid: HAZNET: 1412 ft. Site 2 of 8 in cluster B 0.267 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 148 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NNE 1010 SO HARBOR BLVD N/A B29 HAZNET ORANGE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF AGRIC S103620309 TC2760975.2s Page 34 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: .7297 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: ORANGE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF AGRIC (Continued) S103620309 Orange Facility County: .3225 Tons: Not reported Disposal Method: Off-specification, aged, or surplus organics Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD008364432 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928060000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 10852 DOUGLASS RD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: COUNTY OF ORANGE Contact: CAC001437600 Gepaid: HAZNET: WASTE (OR SLOP) OIL Released Chemical: Closure certification issued Closure Type: CLOSED 7/3/2000 Current Status: RO0000003 Record ID: ORANGE Region: 00IC010 Case ID: Orange Co. Industrial Site: 1412 ft. Site 3 of 8 in cluster B 0.267 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 148 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NNE HAZNET 1010 S HARBOR BLVD N/A B30 Orange Co. Industrial Site COUNTY OF ORANGE - AGRICULTURAL COMMIS S105083517 Not reported Region: Marketed in the United States Market: Not reported UOM: All other products Product Use: Rodenticide Product Class: End-use blend, formulation, or concentrate Product Type: 034481CF00002 Product Number: Unregistered Permit: 1990 Report Year: 034481CA 001 Registration Number: Inactive Status: Not reported Contact: RODENT BAIT CHLOROPHACINONE TREATED GRAIN Product: SSTS: 1412 ft. Site 4 of 8 in cluster B 0.267 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 148 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NNE 1010 SOUTH HARBOR BOULEVARD N/A B31 SSTS ORANGE COUNTY AGRIC COMM [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 35 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Registered Permit: 1992 Report Year: 034481CA 001 Registration Number: Inactive Status: Not reported Contact: RODENT BAIT DIPHACIONE TREATED GRAIN (0.005%) Product: Not reported Pesticide RUP report: Not reported Zero product: Not reported Region: Marketed in the United States Market: Not reported UOM: All other products Product Use: Rodenticide Product Class: End-use blend, formulation, or concentrate Product Type: 034481CF00001 Product Number: Unregistered Permit: 1991 Report Year: 034481CA 001 Registration Number: Inactive Status: Not reported Contact: RODENT BAIT DI0PHACINONE TREATED GRAIN .005% Product: Not reported Pesticide RUP report: Not reported Zero product: Not reported Region: Marketed in the United States Market: Not reported UOM: All other products Product Use: Rodenticide Product Class: End-use blend, formulation, or concentrate Product Type: 034481CF00002 Product Number: Unregistered Permit: 1991 Report Year: 034481CA 001 Registration Number: Inactive Status: Not reported Contact: RODENT BAIT CHLOROPHACINONE TREATED GRAIN .005% Product: Not reported Pesticide RUP report: Not reported Zero product: Not reported Region: Marketed in the United States Market: Not reported UOM: All other products Product Use: Rodenticide Product Class: End-use blend, formulation, or concentrate Product Type: 034481CF00001 Product Number: Unregistered Permit: 1990 Report Year: 034481CA 001 Registration Number: Inactive Status: Not reported Contact: RODENT BAIT DIPHACINONE TREATED GRAIN Product: Not reported Pesticide RUP report: Not reported Zero product: ORANGE COUNTY AGRIC COMM (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 36 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Pesticide RUP report: Not reported Zero product: Not reported Region: Marketed in the United States Market: Not reported UOM: All other products Product Use: Rodenticide Product Class: Repackaged or relabeled Product Type: 01096550001 Product Number: ORANGE COUNTY AGRIC COMM (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: COUNTY OF ORANGE Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: Facility is not located on Indian land. Additional information is not known. Land type: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: Not reported Contact telephone: Not reported Contact country: Not reported Not reported Contact address: Not reported Contact: CAD000629675 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 1010 SO HARBOR BLVD Facility address: ORANGE CO DEPT OF AGRI Facility name: 09/01/1996 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: 1412 ft. Site 5 of 8 in cluster B 0.267 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 148 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NNE FINDS 1010 SOUTH HARBOR BLVD CAD000629675 B32 RCRA-SQG ORANGE COUNTY DEPT OF AGRICULTURE [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 37 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource and settlements. regions and states with cooperative agreements, enforcement actions, Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). The system tracks inspections in Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the NCDB (National Compliance Data Base) supports implementation of the Environmental Interest/Information System 110002628229 Registry ID: FINDS: State Contractor/Grantee Evaluation lead agency: Not reported Date achieved compliance: Not reported Area of violation: COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Evaluation: 08/10/1994 Evaluation date: Evaluation Action Summary: No violations found Violation Status: Large Quantity Generator Classification: ORANGE CO DEPT OF AGRI Facility name: 08/20/1980 Date form received by agency: Historical Generators: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: Unknown Furnace exemption: Unknown On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): Unknown U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: ORANGE COUNTY DEPT OF AGRICULTURE (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 38 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: 4.2140 Tons: Disposal, Land Fill Disposal Method: Asbestos-containing waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD009007626 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SANTA ANA, CA 927050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1700 GARRY AVE STE 219 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: ANAHEIM HARBOR RV PARK INC Contact: CAC002272529 Gepaid: HAZNET: 1419 ft. Site 6 of 8 in cluster B 0.269 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 148 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 North 1009 S HARBOR BLVD N/A B33 HAZNET ANAHEIM HARBOR R V PARK INC S105086062 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 0 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 5812 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 73245 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1990 Year: EMI: 1440 ft. Site 1 of 7 in cluster D 0.273 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 144 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 90803 WNW 999 BALL ROAD N/A D34 EMI SPAGHETTI STATION RESTAURANT S106839836 Not reported Incident Date: Not reported OES Time: Not reported OES Date: 7/12/200110:11:26 AM OES notification: 01-4012 OES Incident Number: CHMIRS: 1444 ft. Site 2 of 7 in cluster D 0.273 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 144 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 WNW 999 W. BALL RD. N/A D35 CHMIRS S105673346 TC2760975.2s Page 39 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 0 Grams: 45 Gallons: 0 CUFT: 0 Cups: 0 BBLS: Not reported Quantity Released: Sewage Substance: Not reported E Date: Merchant/Business Site Type: Yes Contained: Not reported Amount: Orange County Emergency Management Division Admin Agency: 7/12/200112:00:00 AM Incident Date: Anahiem Public Works Agency: 2001 Year: Not reported Date/Time: Not reported Other: Not reported Measure: Not reported Type: Not reported What Happened: Not reported Containment: Private Plumber Cleanup By: Not reported Spill Site: Storm Drain Waterway: Yes Waterway Involved: Not reported Facility Telephone: Not reported Comments: Not reported Report Date: Not reported Reporting Officer Name/ID: Not reported Company Name: Not reported CA/DOT/PUC/ICC Number: Not reported Vehicle Id Number: Not reported Vehicle State: Not reported Vehicle License Number: Not reported Vehicle Make/year: Not reported Others Number Of Fatalities: Not reported Others Number Of Injuries: Not reported Others Number Of Decontaminated: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Fatalities: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Injuries: Not reported Resp Agncy Personel # Of Decontaminated: Not reported More Than Two Substances Involved?: Not reported Special Studies 6: Not reported Special Studies 5: Not reported Special Studies 4: Not reported Special Studies 3: Not reported Special Studies 2: Not reported Special Studies 1: Not reported Property Management: Not reported Estimated Temperature: Not reported Surrounding Area: Not reported Time Completed: Not reported Time Notified: Not reported Agency Incident Number: Not reported Agency Id Number: Not reported Property Use: Not reported Date Completed: (Continued) S105673346 TC2760975.2s Page 40 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation A plugged up private sewer line in a business The Spaghetti Station. Description: 0 Number of Fatalities: 0 Number of Injuries: 0 Evacuations: Not reported Description: 0.000000 Unknown: 0 Tons: 0 Sheen: 0 Quarts: 0 Pints: 0 Ounces: 0 Liters: 0 Pounds: (Continued) S105673346 Orange Facility County: .0025 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Laboratory waste chemicals Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD050806850 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: DAVIS, CA 956168593 Mailing City,St,Zip: DANR-OFPM UNIV OF CA DAVIS Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: UNIV OF CAL REGIONS Contact: CAL000082883 Gepaid: HAZNET: HEAVY METAL WASTE - NON PLATING FUEL WASTE Released Chemical: Closure certification issued Closure Type: CLOSED 11/25/2002 Current Status: RO0003096 Record ID: ORANGE Region: 02IC014 Case ID: Orange Co. Industrial Site: 1452 ft. Site 7 of 8 in cluster B 0.275 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 148 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 North HAZNET 1000 S HARBOR BLVD N/A B36 Orange Co. Industrial Site ORANGE COUNTY COOPERATIVE EXT S100869609 NCES (National Center for Education Statistics) is the primary federal Environmental Interest/Information System 110036097247 Registry ID: FINDS: 1453 ft. Site 8 of 8 in cluster B 0.275 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 148 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NNE 1000 SOUTH HARBOR BLVD. N/A B37 FINDS ORANGE GROVE ELEMENTARY [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 41 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation sciences. United States and other nations and the institute of education entity for collecting and analyzing data related to education in the ORANGE GROVE ELEMENTARY (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] Not reported Site History: Diesel Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: 083003819T LOC Case Number: 083003819T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 2002-03-05 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -117.915541 Longitude: 33.813894 Latitude: T0605999311 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 1475 ft. Site 2 of 25 in cluster C 0.279 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 142 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 South 1313 W HARBOR BLVD. N/A C38 LUST DISNEYLAND - ROUNDHOUSE S109284918 Not reported Site History: Diesel Potential Contaminants of Concern: Not reported Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083003829T RB Case Number: Not reported Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 2002-03-05 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -117.918985 Longitude: 33.80907 Latitude: T060597891 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 1475 ft. Site 3 of 25 in cluster C 0.279 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 142 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA South 1313 SOUTH HARBOR N/A C39 LUST DISNEYLAND ROUNDHOUSE FACILITY S109283870 TC2760975.2s Page 42 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Site History: Diesel Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083002812T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 2000-02-23 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -117.918985 Longitude: 33.80907 Latitude: T0605901936 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 1475 ft. Site 4 of 25 in cluster C 0.279 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 142 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 South 1313 S HARBOR BLVD N/A C40 LUST DISNEYLAND TOMORROWLAND RR ST. S109284577 Not reported Site History: Waste Oil / Motor / Hydraulic / Lubricating Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: 083000903T LOC Case Number: 083000903T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 1994-11-10 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -117.918985 Longitude: 33.80907 Latitude: T0605900717 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 1475 ft. Site 5 of 25 in cluster C 0.279 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 142 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92803 South 1313 S HARBOR BLVD N/A C41 LUST DISNEYLAND - MATERHORN S109284388 12932 Agency Id: Active Facility Status: Not reported Npdes Number: NPDES: 1475 ft. Site 6 of 25 in cluster C 0.279 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 142 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92803 South 1313 S HARBOR BLVD N/A C42 NPDES DISNEY CA ADVENTURE CARS LAND S109692272 TC2760975.2s Page 43 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 92803 Discharge Zip: CA Discharge State: Anaheim Discharge City: Po Box 3232 - Tda219n Discharge Address: Disneyland Resort Discharge Name: Not reported Termination Date Of Regulatory Measure: Not reported Expiration Date Of Regulatory Measure: 4/14/2009 9:02:01 AM Effective Date Of Regulatory Measure: Not reported Adoption Date Of Regulatory Measure: CONSTW Program Type: 8 30C355097 WDID: 736189 Place Id: Storm water construction Regulatory Measure Type: 99-08DWQ Order No: 363811 Regulatory Measure Id: 8 Region: DISNEY CA ADVENTURE CARS LAND (Continued) S109692272 Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Other Groundwater (uses other than drinking water) Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083003568T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 2009-03-27 00:00:00 Status Date: Open - Assessment & Interim Remedial Action Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8033549 Latitude: T0605902330 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 1475 ft. Site 7 of 25 in cluster C 0.279 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 142 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 South 1313 S HARBOR BLVD N/A C43 LUST DISNEYLAND-AUTOPIA S109284593 ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 1996-10-24 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -117.918985 Longitude: 33.80907 Latitude: T0605901880 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 1475 ft. Site 8 of 25 in cluster C 0.279 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 142 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 South 1313 S HARBOR BLVD N/A C44 LUST DISNEYLAND, FUEL STATION S109284594 TC2760975.2s Page 44 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Site History: Diesel Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083002708T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: DISNEYLAND, FUEL STATION (Continued) S109284594 92803 Discharge Zip: CA Discharge State: Anaheim Discharge City: Po Box 3232 - Tda219n Discharge Address: Disneyland Resort Discharge Name: Not reported Termination Date Of Regulatory Measure: Not reported Expiration Date Of Regulatory Measure: 8/15/2006 6:30:03 AM Effective Date Of Regulatory Measure: Not reported Adoption Date Of Regulatory Measure: CONSTW Program Type: 8 30C343050 WDID: 637798 Place Id: Storm water construction Regulatory Measure Type: 99-08DWQ Order No: 306807 Regulatory Measure Id: 8 Region: 12932 Agency Id: Terminated Facility Status: Not reported Npdes Number: NPDES: 1475 ft. Site 9 of 25 in cluster C 0.279 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 142 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92803 South 1313 S HARBOR BLVD N/A C45 NPDES BACKSTAGE PAVING IMPROVEMENTS S109691786 Not reported Expiration Date Of Regulatory Measure: 7/18/2005 Effective Date Of Regulatory Measure: Not reported Adoption Date Of Regulatory Measure: CONSTW Program Type: 8 30C335466 WDID: 621666 Place Id: Storm water construction Regulatory Measure Type: 99-08DWQ Order No: 284149 Regulatory Measure Id: 8 Region: 12932 Agency Id: Terminated Facility Status: Not reported Npdes Number: NPDES: 1482 ft. Site 10 of 25 in cluster C 0.281 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 142 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA South CHMIRS 1313 SOUTH HARBOR BLVD N/A C46 NPDES S108406596 TC2760975.2s Page 45 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Disneyland Resort Anaheim Agency: 2005 Year: Not reported Date/Time: Not reported Other: Not reported Measure: Not reported Type: Not reported What Happened: Not reported Containment: Reporting Party Cleanup By: Not reported Spill Site: Not reported Waterway: Not reported Waterway Involved: Not reported Facility Telephone: Not reported Comments: Not reported Report Date: Not reported Reporting Officer Name/ID: Not reported Company Name: Not reported CA/DOT/PUC/ICC Number: Not reported Vehicle Id Number: Not reported Vehicle State: Not reported Vehicle License Number: Not reported Vehicle Make/year: Not reported Others Number Of Fatalities: Not reported Others Number Of Injuries: Not reported Others Number Of Decontaminated: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Fatalities: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Injuries: Not reported Resp Agncy Personel # Of Decontaminated: Not reported More Than Two Substances Involved?: Not reported Special Studies 6: Not reported Special Studies 5: Not reported Special Studies 4: Not reported Special Studies 3: Not reported Special Studies 2: Not reported Special Studies 1: Not reported Property Management: Not reported Estimated Temperature: Not reported Surrounding Area: Not reported Time Completed: Not reported Time Notified: Not reported Agency Incident Number: Not reported Agency Id Number: Not reported Property Use: Not reported Date Completed: Not reported Incident Date: Not reported OES Time: Not reported OES Date: 12/17/200508:27:58 PM OES notification: 05-7265 OES Incident Number: CHMIRS: 92803 Discharge Zip: CA Discharge State: Anaheim Discharge City: Po Box 3232 - Tda219n Discharge Address: Disneyland Resort Discharge Name: 11/7/2008 Termination Date Of Regulatory Measure: (Continued) S108406596 TC2760975.2s Page 46 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation sent to a local hospital and subsequently released. medical facility for evaluation. One (1 ) of those employees was precaution. Thirteen (13) employees were sent to the on site evacuated. The tram route was closed along the perimeter as a evacuated to include approximately twenty (20) employees. No tourists and reacted, creating alot of heat . The immediate area was three vapors. The products were possibly mixed disproportionately Two materials, an apoxy resin and a catalyst reacted to release above Description: 0 Number of Fatalities: 1 Number of Injuries: 0 Evacuations: Not reported Description: 0 Unknown: 0 Tons: 0 Sheen: 0 Quarts: 0 Pints: 0 Ounces: 0 Liters: 0 Pounds: 0 Grams: 0.000000 Gallons: 0 CUFT: 0 Cups: 0 BBLS: Not reported Quantity Released: Carbon Monoxide Substance: Not reported E Date: Other Site Type: Yes Contained: Not reported Amount: Anaheim Fire Department Admin Agency: 12/17/200512:00:00 AM Incident Date: (Continued) S108406596 Orange Facility County: .4170 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Unspecified oil-containing waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SANTA FE SPRINGS, CA 906700000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 10704 SHOEMAKER AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: KIEWIT PACIFIC CO Contact: CAC001347976 Gepaid: HAZNET: 1482 ft. Site 11 of 25 in cluster C 0.281 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 142 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92803 South 1313 S HARBOR BLVD N/A C47 HAZNET KIEWIT PACIFIC CO S103973450 TC2760975.2s Page 47 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Operator Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: Not reported Owner/operator telephone: US Owner/operator country: Not reported Not reported Owner/operator address: THE WALT DISNEY COMPANY Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: 11/10/1953 Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: Not reported Owner/operator telephone: US Owner/operator country: ANAHEIM, CA 92803 P.O. BOX 3232 Owner/operator address: THE WALT DISNEY COMPANY Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: 100 kg of that material at any time hazardous waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than from the cleanup of a spill, into or on any land or water, of acutely of any residue or contaminated soil, waste or other debris resulting kg of acutely hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less hazardous waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1 waste during any calendar month; or generates 1 kg or less of acutely cleanup of a spill, into or on any land or water, of acutely hazardous residue or contaminated soil, waste or other debris resulting from the during any calendar month; or generates more than 100 kg of any calendar month; or generates more than 1 kg of acutely hazardous waste Handler: generates 1,000 kg or more of hazardous waste during any Description: Large Quantity Generator Classification: Private Land type: 09 EPA Region: [EMAIL REDACTED] Contact email: (714) 781-1756 Contact telephone: Not reported Contact country: Not reported Not reported Contact address: DONNA A BAKER Contact: ANAHEIM, CA 92803 MAIL CODE 219-N P.O. BOX 3232 Mailing address: CAD027828250 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92803 1313 SOUTH HARBOR BLVD. Facility address: DISNEYLAND Facility name: 02/27/2008 Date form received by agency: RCRA-LQG: EMI CHMIRS SLIC CA FID UST 1482 ft. LUST Site 12 of 25 in cluster C 0.281 mi. HIST CORTESE Relative: Lower Actual: 142 ft. 1/4-1/2 NPDES ANAHEIM, CA 92803 South CA WDS 1313 S. HARBOR BLVD. CAD027828250 C48 RCRA-LQG DISNEYLAND [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 03/04/1999 Date form received by agency: Large Quantity Generator Classification: DISNEYLAND Facility name: 10/12/2000 Date form received by agency: Large Quantity Generator Classification: DISNEYLAND Facility name: 02/16/2002 Date form received by agency: Large Quantity Generator Classification: DISNEYLAND Facility name: 03/01/2004 Date form received by agency: Large Quantity Generator Classification: DISNEYLAND Facility name: 02/22/2006 Date form received by agency: Historical Generators: Not reported Generated waste on-site: No Accumulated waste on-site: Thermostats Waste type: Not reported Generated waste on-site: No Accumulated waste on-site: Pesticides Waste type: Not reported Generated waste on-site: No Accumulated waste on-site: Lamps Waste type: Not reported Generated waste on-site: No Accumulated waste on-site: Batteries Waste type: Universal Waste Summary: Commercial status unknown Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: No Furnace exemption: No On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: No Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): No U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: 11/10/1953 Owner/Op start date: DISNEYLAND (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 49 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation CADMIUM Waste name: D006 Waste code: OF SUCH WASTE WOULD BY WASTE GUNPOWDER. DETONATION OR EXPLOSION WHEN EXPOSED TO HEAT OR A FLAME. ONE EXAMPLE WHEN EXPOSED TO WATER OR CORROSIVE MATERIALS, OR IF IT IS CAPABLE OF NORMALLY UNSTABLE, REACTS VIOLENTLY WITH WATER, GENERATES TOXIC GASES A MATERIAL IS CONSIDERED TO BE A REACTIVE HAZARDOUS WASTE IF IT IS Waste name: D003 Waste code: DISPOSED, THE WASTE WOULD BE A CORROSIVE HAZARDOUS WASTE. THESE CAUSTIC OR ACID SOLUTIONS BECOME CONTAMINATED AND MUST BE USED BY MANY INDUSTRIES TO CLEAN METAL PARTS PRIOR TO PAINTING. WHEN OR DEGREASE PARTS. HYDROCHLORIC ACID, A SOLUTION WITH A LOW PH, IS CAUSTIC SOLUTION WITH A HIGH PH, IS OFTEN USED BY INDUSTRIES TO CLEAN CONSIDERED TO BE A CORROSIVE HAZARDOUS WASTE. SODIUM HYDROXIDE, A A WASTE WHICH HAS A PH OF LESS THAN 2 OR GREATER THAN 12.5 IS Waste name: D002 Waste code: WHICH WOULD BE CONSIDERED AS IGNITABLE HAZARDOUS WASTE. MATERIAL. LACQUER THINNER IS AN EXAMPLE OF A COMMONLY USED SOLVENT WHICH CAN BE OBTAINED FROM THE MANUFACTURER OR DISTRIBUTOR OF THE FLASH POINT OF A WASTE IS TO REVIEW THE MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET, CLOSED CUP FLASH POINT TESTER. ANOTHER METHOD OF DETERMINING THE LESS THAN 140 DEGREES FAHRENHEIT AS DETERMINED BY A PENSKY-MARTENS IGNITABLE HAZARDOUS WASTES ARE THOSE WASTES WHICH HAVE A FLASHPOINT OF Waste name: D001 Waste code: Hazardous Waste Summary: Large Quantity Generator Classification: DISNEYLAND Facility name: 08/01/1990 Date form received by agency: Large Quantity Generator Classification: DISNEYLAND Facility name: 02/20/1992 Date form received by agency: Large Quantity Generator Classification: DISNEYLAND Facility name: 04/25/1994 Date form received by agency: Large Quantity Generator Classification: DISNEYLAND Facility name: 02/20/1996 Date form received by agency: Large Quantity Generator Classification: DISNEYLAND Facility name: 09/01/1996 Date form received by agency: Large Quantity Generator Classification: DISNEYLAND Facility name: 04/28/1997 Date form received by agency: Large Quantity Generator Classification: DISNEYLAND ATT. LARRY VICK Site name: DISNEYLAND Facility name: DISNEYLAND (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 50 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Last Biennial Reporting Year: 2007 Biennial Reports: THESE SPENT SOLVENTS AND SPENT SOLVENT MIXTURES. LISTED IN F001, F002, OR F004; AND STILL BOTTOMS FROM THE RECOVERY OF ONE OR MORE OF THE ABOVE NON-HALOGENATED SOLVENTS OR THOSE SOLVENTS CONTAINING, BEFORE USE, A TOTAL OF TEN PERCENT OR MORE (BY VOLUME) OF 2-ETHOXYETHANOL, AND 2-NITROPROPANE; ALL SPENT SOLVENT MIXTURES/BLENDS KETONE, CARBON DISULFIDE, ISOBUTANOL, PYRIDINE, BENZENE, THE FOLLOWING SPENT NON-HALOGENATED SOLVENTS: TOLUENE, METHYL ETHYL Waste name: F005 Waste code: MIXTURES. BOTTOMS FROM THE RECOVERY OF THESE SPENT SOLVENTS AND SPENT SOLVENT MORE OF THOSE SOLVENTS LISTED IN F001, F002, F004, AND F005, AND STILL SOLVENTS, AND, A TOTAL OF TEN PERCENT OR MORE (BY VOLUME) OF ONE OR CONTAINING, BEFORE USE, ONE OR MORE OF THE ABOVE NON-HALOGENATED NON-HALOGENATED SOLVENTS; AND ALL SPENT SOLVENT MIXTURES/BLENDS MIXTURES/BLENDS CONTAINING, BEFORE USE, ONLY THE ABOVE SPENT ALCOHOL, CYCLOHEXANONE, AND METHANOL; ALL SPENT SOLVENT ACETATE, ETHYL BENZENE, ETHYL ETHER, METHYL ISOBUTYL KETONE, N-BUTYL THE FOLLOWING SPENT NON-HALOGENATED SOLVENTS: XYLENE, ACETONE, ETHYL Waste name: F003 Waste code: SPENT SOLVENT MIXTURES. F005, AND STILL BOTTOMS FROM THE RECOVERY OF THESE SPENT SOLVENTS AND OF THE ABOVE HALOGENATED SOLVENTS OR THOSE LISTED IN F001, F004, OR BEFORE USE, A TOTAL OF TEN PERCENT OR MORE (BY VOLUME) OF ONE OR MORE 1,1,2-TRICHLOROETHANE; ALL SPENT SOLVENT MIXTURES/BLENDS CONTAINING, ORTHO-DICHLOROBENZENE, TRICHLOROFLUOROMETHANE, AND CHLOROBENZENE, 1,1,2-TRICHLORO-1,2,2-TRIFLUOROETHANE, METHYLENE CHLORIDE, TRICHLOROETHYLENE, 1,1,1-TRICHLOROETHANE, THE FOLLOWING SPENT HALOGENATED SOLVENTS: TETRACHLOROETHYLENE, Waste name: F002 Waste code: TRICHLOROETHYLENE Waste name: D040 Waste code: TETRACHLOROETHYLENE Waste name: D039 Waste code: PYRIDINE Waste name: D038 Waste code: METHYL ETHYL KETONE Waste name: D035 Waste code: BENZENE Waste name: D018 Waste code: LEAD Waste name: D008 Waste code: CHROMIUM Waste name: D007 Waste code: DISNEYLAND (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 51 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 28350 Amount (Lbs): TETRACHLOROETHYLENE Waste name: D039 Waste code: 1530 Amount (Lbs): PYRIDINE Waste name: D038 Waste code: 18239 Amount (Lbs): METHYL ETHYL KETONE Waste name: D035 Waste code: 2213 Amount (Lbs): BENZENE Waste name: D018 Waste code: 43444 Amount (Lbs): LEAD Waste name: D008 Waste code: 27829 Amount (Lbs): CHROMIUM Waste name: D007 Waste code: 23264 Amount (Lbs): CADMIUM Waste name: D006 Waste code: 2328 Amount (Lbs): OF SUCH WASTE WOULD BY WASTE GUNPOWDER. DETONATION OR EXPLOSION WHEN EXPOSED TO HEAT OR A FLAME. ONE EXAMPLE WHEN EXPOSED TO WATER OR CORROSIVE MATERIALS, OR IF IT IS CAPABLE OF NORMALLY UNSTABLE, REACTS VIOLENTLY WITH WATER, GENERATES TOXIC GASES A MATERIAL IS CONSIDERED TO BE A REACTIVE HAZARDOUS WASTE IF IT IS Waste name: D003 Waste code: 45 Amount (Lbs): DISPOSED, THE WASTE WOULD BE A CORROSIVE HAZARDOUS WASTE. THESE CAUSTIC OR ACID SOLUTIONS BECOME CONTAMINATED AND MUST BE USED BY MANY INDUSTRIES TO CLEAN METAL PARTS PRIOR TO PAINTING. WHEN OR DEGREASE PARTS. HYDROCHLORIC ACID, A SOLUTION WITH A LOW PH, IS CAUSTIC SOLUTION WITH A HIGH PH, IS OFTEN USED BY INDUSTRIES TO CLEAN CONSIDERED TO BE A CORROSIVE HAZARDOUS WASTE. SODIUM HYDROXIDE, A A WASTE WHICH HAS A PH OF LESS THAN 2 OR GREATER THAN 12.5 IS Waste name: D002 Waste code: 29586 Amount (Lbs): WHICH WOULD BE CONSIDERED AS IGNITABLE HAZARDOUS WASTE. MATERIAL. LACQUER THINNER IS AN EXAMPLE OF A COMMONLY USED SOLVENT WHICH CAN BE OBTAINED FROM THE MANUFACTURER OR DISTRIBUTOR OF THE FLASH POINT OF A WASTE IS TO REVIEW THE MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET, CLOSED CUP FLASH POINT TESTER. ANOTHER METHOD OF DETERMINING THE LESS THAN 140 DEGREES FAHRENHEIT AS DETERMINED BY A PENSKY-MARTENS IGNITABLE HAZARDOUS WASTES ARE THOSE WASTES WHICH HAVE A FLASHPOINT OF Waste name: D001 Waste code: Annual Waste Handled: DISNEYLAND (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 52 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Generators - General Area of violation: Not reported Regulation violated: Not reported Paid penalty amount: Not reported Final penalty amount: Not reported Proposed penalty amount: EPA Enforcement lead agency: 03/20/2006 Enf. disp. status date: Action Satisfied (Case Closed) Enf. disposition status: 03/20/2006 Enforcement action date: WRITTEN INFORMAL Enforcement action: EPA Violation lead agency: 11/16/2005 Date achieved compliance: 10/19/2005 Date violation determined: TSD IS-Container Use and Management Area of violation: Not reported Regulation violated: Facility Has Received Notices of Violations: 18239 Amount (Lbs): THESE SPENT SOLVENTS AND SPENT SOLVENT MIXTURES. LISTED IN F001, F002, OR F004; AND STILL BOTTOMS FROM THE RECOVERY OF ONE OR MORE OF THE ABOVE NON-HALOGENATED SOLVENTS OR THOSE SOLVENTS CONTAINING, BEFORE USE, A TOTAL OF TEN PERCENT OR MORE (BY VOLUME) OF 2-ETHOXYETHANOL, AND 2-NITROPROPANE; ALL SPENT SOLVENT MIXTURES/BLENDS KETONE, CARBON DISULFIDE, ISOBUTANOL, PYRIDINE, BENZENE, THE FOLLOWING SPENT NON-HALOGENATED SOLVENTS: TOLUENE, METHYL ETHYL Waste name: F005 Waste code: 38266 Amount (Lbs): MIXTURES. BOTTOMS FROM THE RECOVERY OF THESE SPENT SOLVENTS AND SPENT SOLVENT MORE OF THOSE SOLVENTS LISTED IN F001, F002, F004, AND F005, AND STILL SOLVENTS, AND, A TOTAL OF TEN PERCENT OR MORE (BY VOLUME) OF ONE OR CONTAINING, BEFORE USE, ONE OR MORE OF THE ABOVE NON-HALOGENATED NON-HALOGENATED SOLVENTS; AND ALL SPENT SOLVENT MIXTURES/BLENDS MIXTURES/BLENDS CONTAINING, BEFORE USE, ONLY THE ABOVE SPENT ALCOHOL, CYCLOHEXANONE, AND METHANOL; ALL SPENT SOLVENT ACETATE, ETHYL BENZENE, ETHYL ETHER, METHYL ISOBUTYL KETONE, N-BUTYL THE FOLLOWING SPENT NON-HALOGENATED SOLVENTS: XYLENE, ACETONE, ETHYL Waste name: F003 Waste code: 16709 Amount (Lbs): SPENT SOLVENT MIXTURES. F005, AND STILL BOTTOMS FROM THE RECOVERY OF THESE SPENT SOLVENTS AND OF THE ABOVE HALOGENATED SOLVENTS OR THOSE LISTED IN F001, F004, OR BEFORE USE, A TOTAL OF TEN PERCENT OR MORE (BY VOLUME) OF ONE OR MORE 1,1,2-TRICHLOROETHANE; ALL SPENT SOLVENT MIXTURES/BLENDS CONTAINING, ORTHO-DICHLOROBENZENE, TRICHLOROFLUOROMETHANE, AND CHLOROBENZENE, 1,1,2-TRICHLORO-1,2,2-TRIFLUOROETHANE, METHYLENE CHLORIDE, TRICHLOROETHYLENE, 1,1,1-TRICHLOROETHANE, THE FOLLOWING SPENT HALOGENATED SOLVENTS: TETRACHLOROETHYLENE, Waste name: F002 Waste code: 1530 Amount (Lbs): TRICHLOROETHYLENE Waste name: D040 Waste code: DISNEYLAND (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 53 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Evaluation: 03/13/2008 Evaluation date: Evaluation Action Summary: Not reported Paid penalty amount: Not reported Final penalty amount: Not reported Proposed penalty amount: EPA Enforcement lead agency: Not reported Enf. disp. status date: Not reported Enf. disposition status: 06/21/1990 Enforcement action date: INITIAL 3008(A) COMPLIANCE Enforcement action: EPA Violation lead agency: 09/29/1994 Date achieved compliance: 02/26/1990 Date violation determined: Generators - General Area of violation: FR - 262.50-60 Regulation violated: Not reported Paid penalty amount: Not reported Final penalty amount: Not reported Proposed penalty amount: EPA Enforcement lead agency: Not reported Enf. disp. status date: Not reported Enf. disposition status: 06/21/1990 Enforcement action date: INITIAL 3008(A) COMPLIANCE Enforcement action: EPA Violation lead agency: 09/29/1994 Date achieved compliance: 02/26/1990 Date violation determined: Generators - General Area of violation: FR - 262.20-23.B Regulation violated: Not reported Paid penalty amount: Not reported Final penalty amount: Not reported Proposed penalty amount: EPA Enforcement lead agency: Not reported Enf. disp. status date: Not reported Enf. disposition status: 06/21/1990 Enforcement action date: INITIAL 3008(A) COMPLIANCE Enforcement action: EPA Violation lead agency: 09/29/1994 Date achieved compliance: 02/26/1990 Date violation determined: LDR - General Area of violation: FR - 268.7 Regulation violated: Not reported Paid penalty amount: Not reported Final penalty amount: Not reported Proposed penalty amount: State Enforcement lead agency: Not reported Enf. disp. status date: Not reported Enf. disposition status: 02/17/2004 Enforcement action date: WRITTEN INFORMAL Enforcement action: State Violation lead agency: 02/17/2004 Date achieved compliance: 02/17/2004 Date violation determined: DISNEYLAND (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 54 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Miscellaneous (Includes wastes from dewatering, recreational lake Primary Waste: Not reported SIC Code 2: 7996 SIC Code: Private Agency Type: [PHONE REDACTED] Agency Telephone: FRANK DELA VARA Agency Contact: ANAHEIM 92803 Agency City,St,Zip: PO BOX 3232 - TDA219N Agency Address: DISNEYLAND Agency Name: ACCOUNTS PAYABLE TDA-229W Facility Contact: Not reported Facility Telephone: 8 Subregion: are assigned by the Regional Board CA0106283 The 1st 2 characters designate the state. The remaining 7 NPDES Number: under Waste Discharge Requirements. Active - Any facility with a continuous or seasonal discharge that is Facility Status: pumping. repairing, oil production, storage and disposal operations, water washing, geothermal operations, air conditioning, ship building and processing operation of whatever nature, including mining, gravel semisolid wastes from any servicing, producing, manufacturing or Industrial - Facility that treats and/or disposes of liquid or Facility Type: Santa Ana River 301000001 Facility ID: CA WDS: EPA Evaluation lead agency: 09/29/1994 Date achieved compliance: LDR - General Area of violation: COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Evaluation: 02/26/1990 Evaluation date: EPA Evaluation lead agency: 09/29/1994 Date achieved compliance: Generators - General Area of violation: COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Evaluation: 02/26/1990 Evaluation date: State Contractor/Grantee Evaluation lead agency: Not reported Date achieved compliance: Not reported Area of violation: COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Evaluation: 09/29/1994 Evaluation date: State Contractor/Grantee Evaluation lead agency: 02/17/2004 Date achieved compliance: Generators - General Area of violation: COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Evaluation: 02/17/2004 Evaluation date: EPA Evaluation lead agency: 11/16/2005 Date achieved compliance: TSD IS-Container Use and Management Area of violation: COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Evaluation: 10/19/2005 Evaluation date: State Evaluation lead agency: Not reported Date achieved compliance: Not reported Area of violation: DISNEYLAND (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 55 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 1/18/2008 Adoption Date Of Regulatory Measure: NPDES Program Type: 8 301000001 WDID: 220328 Place Id: NPDES Permits Regulatory Measure Type: R8-2008-0001 Order No: 345363 Regulatory Measure Id: 8 Region: 12932 Agency Id: Active Facility Status: Not reported Npdes Number: 92803 Discharge Zip: CA Discharge State: Anaheim Discharge City: Po Box 3232 - Tda219n Discharge Address: Disneyland Resort Discharge Name: 1/17/2008 Termination Date Of Regulatory Measure: 1/1/2008 Expiration Date Of Regulatory Measure: 1/17/2003 Effective Date Of Regulatory Measure: 1/17/2003 Adoption Date Of Regulatory Measure: NPDES Program Type: 8 301000001 WDID: 220328 Place Id: NPDES Permits Regulatory Measure Type: R8-2003-0001 Order No: 131606 Regulatory Measure Id: 8 Region: 12932 Agency Id: Historical Facility Status: CA0106283 Npdes Number: NPDES: dairy waste ponds. dischargers having waste storage systems with land disposal such as disposal systems, such as septic systems with subsurface disposal, or management practices, facilities with passive waste treatment and cooling water dischargers or thosewho must comply through best Category C - Facilities having no waste treatment systems, such as Complexity: from a waste treatment facility. or municipal water supply. Awsthetic impairment would include nuisance significant human population, or render unusable a potential domestic adverse impact on receiving biota, can cause aesthetic impairment to a Moderate Threat to Water Quality. A violation could have a major Treat To Water: The facility is not a POTW. POTW: No reclamation requirements associated with this facility. Reclamation: 0 Baseline Flow: 0 Design Flow: Not reported Secondary Waste Type: Not reported Secondary Waste: waste). construction wastes, manure, vegetable or animal solid and semisolid liquid wastes garbage, trash, refuse, paper, demolition and nonhazardous putrescible and non putrescible solid, semisolid, and Nonhazardous Solid Wastes/Influent or Solid Wastes that contain Primary Waste Type: seepage and other wastes of this type) overflow, swimming pool wastes, water ride wastewater, ground water DISNEYLAND (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 56 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8149817 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 6/15/1988 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 11/10/1994 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 7/7/1988 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: 6/1/1988 Review Date: 6/15/1988 Enter Date: 7/7/1988 How Stopped Date: T0605900717 Global ID: Other Source Leak Source: Spill Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Tank Closure How Discovered: State Funds Funding: Not reported Enf Type: KATELLA Cross Street: approved site Excavate and Dispose - remove contaminated soil and dispose in Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Hydraulic Oil Substance: Soil only Case Type: 083000903T Local Case Num: 083000903T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 083000903T Reg Id: LINKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: CORTESE: 92803 Discharge Zip: CA Discharge State: Anaheim Discharge City: Po Box 3232 - Tda219n Discharge Address: Disneyland Resort Discharge Name: Not reported Termination Date Of Regulatory Measure: 1/1/2013 Expiration Date Of Regulatory Measure: 1/18/2008 Effective Date Of Regulatory Measure: DISNEYLAND (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 57 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 33.8149817 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 9/20/1995 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 10/24/1996 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 8/3/1995 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: 8/9/1995 Review Date: 9/20/1995 Enter Date: Not reported How Stopped Date: T0605901880 Global ID: Not reported Leak Source: Not reported Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Not reported How Discovered: Not reported Funding: Not reported Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Diesel Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083002708T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: TURBINE OIL TANKS @ MATTERHORN ABANDONED INSITU 7/19/92; SITE CAPPED 550 HYDRAULIC OIL TANK @ DUMBO WAS REMOVED 10/19/90 FOUR 250 GALLON Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: ROW Staff Initials: NOM Staff: * MTBE Class: Not Required to be Tested. MTBE Tested: 0 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: DISNEYLAND (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 58 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported General Comments: Not reported Potential Contaminants of Concern: Not reported Potential Media Affected: Not reported File Location: SLT8R128 RB Case Number: Not reported Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: Cleanup Program Site Case Type: -117.914541 Longitude: 33.815025 Latitude: Not reported Lead Agency Case Number: SANTA ANA (REGION 8) Lead Agency: SLT8R1284126 Global Id: 1991-08-28 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Facility Status: STATE Region: SLIC: Active Status: Not reported Comments: Not reported EPA ID: Not reported NPDES Number: Not reported DUNs Number: Not reported Contact Phone: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM 92803 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 500 S BUENA VISTA ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mail To: [PHONE REDACTED] Facility Phone: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported Cortese Code: Not reported Regulated ID: UTNKA Regulated By: 30000064 Facility ID: CA FID UST: Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: ROW Staff Initials: NOM Staff: * MTBE Class: Not Required to be Tested. MTBE Tested: 0 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: DISNEYLAND (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 59 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Measure: Not reported Type: Not reported What Happened: Not reported Containment: Fire Dept. Cleanup By: Not reported Spill Site: Not reported Waterway: Not reported Waterway Involved: Not reported Facility Telephone: Not reported Comments: Not reported Report Date: Not reported Reporting Officer Name/ID: Not reported Company Name: Not reported CA/DOT/PUC/ICC Number: Not reported Vehicle Id Number: Not reported Vehicle State: Not reported Vehicle License Number: Not reported Vehicle Make/year: Not reported Others Number Of Fatalities: Not reported Others Number Of Injuries: Not reported Others Number Of Decontaminated: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Fatalities: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Injuries: Not reported Resp Agncy Personel # Of Decontaminated: Not reported More Than Two Substances Involved?: Not reported Special Studies 6: Not reported Special Studies 5: Not reported Special Studies 4: Not reported Special Studies 3: Not reported Special Studies 2: Not reported Special Studies 1: Not reported Property Management: Not reported Estimated Temperature: Not reported Surrounding Area: Not reported Time Completed: Not reported Time Notified: Not reported Agency Incident Number: Not reported Agency Id Number: Not reported Property Use: Not reported Date Completed: Not reported Incident Date: Not reported OES Time: Not reported OES Date: 12/16/200508:32:31 AM OES notification: 05-7240 OES Incident Number: CHMIRS: XXX Thomas Bros Code: XXX Location Code: XXX Lead Agency: XXX Substance: XXX Staff: 8 Region: Closed Facility Status: Soil and Groundwater Type: SLIC: DISNEYLAND (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 60 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation SC Air District Name: 800189 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1990 Year: 3 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 3 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 2 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 55 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 201 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 34 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 64 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7996 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 800189 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1987 Year: EMI: (less than 100-yards). The park was closed at the time. unknown status. Local area was evacuated, unknown number of people inadvertently. Three employees were transported to be checked, Released when a water treatment plumber mixed two chemicals Description: 0 Number of Fatalities: 3 Number of Injuries: 0 Evacuations: Not reported Description: 0 Unknown: 0 Tons: 0 Sheen: 0 Quarts: 0 Pints: 0 Ounces: 0 Liters: 1 Pounds: 0 Grams: 0.000000 Gallons: 0 CUFT: 0 Cups: 0 BBLS: Not reported Quantity Released: chlorine gas Substance: Not reported E Date: Other Site Type: Yes Contained: Not reported Amount: Anaheim Fire Department Admin Agency: 12/16/200512:00:00 AM Incident Date: Disneyland Resort Anaheim Agency: 2005 Year: Not reported Date/Time: Not reported Other: DISNEYLAND (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 61 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 34 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 57 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7996 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 800189 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1996 Year: 1 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 1 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 1 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 31 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 191 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 36 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 63 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7996 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 800189 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1995 Year: 1 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 1 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 1 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 31 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 191 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 36 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 63 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7996 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 800189 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1993 Year: 5 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 5 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 4 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 81 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 221 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 38 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 81 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7996 SIC Code: DISNEYLAND (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 62 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 2 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 2 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 2 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 37 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 196 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 24 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 44 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7996 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 800189 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1999 Year: 2 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 2 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 2 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 37 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 196 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 22 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 44 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7996 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 800189 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1998 Year: 2 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 2 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 2 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 37 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 196 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 24 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 44 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7996 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 800189 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1997 Year: 2 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 2 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 1 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 63 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 336 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: DISNEYLAND (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 63 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 7996 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 800189 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 2003 Year: 2 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 2 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 1 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 39 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 165 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 15 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 33 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7996 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 800189 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 2002 Year: 2 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 2 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 1 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 34 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 181 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 17 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 68 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: B Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Y Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7996 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 800189 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 2001 Year: 2 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 2 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 2 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 37 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 196 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 24 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 44 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7996 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 800189 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 2000 Year: DISNEYLAND (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 64 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 57.834 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 4.871 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 13.69002114022331116 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7996 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 800189 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 2007 Year: 4.025241676 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 4.081845 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: .876965 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 36.237105 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 163.37902 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 8.57904608279041 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 10.[PHONE REDACTED] Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7996 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 800189 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 2005 Year: 2.3 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 2.488509135 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0.940189 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 38.8411714 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 165.366304 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 15.1 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 32.51529899 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Y Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7996 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 800189 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 2004 Year: 2 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 2 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 1 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 39 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 165 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 15 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 33 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: DISNEYLAND (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 65 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 11.4437113 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 14.682 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: .221 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 36.82 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: DISNEYLAND (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] Vapor Sniff Well Leak Detection: 1/4 inches Tank Construction: DIESEL Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00010000 Tank Capacity: 1973 Year Installed: 4 Container Num: 004 Tank Num: Vapor Sniff Well Leak Detection: 1/4 inches Tank Construction: DIESEL Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00010000 Tank Capacity: 1973 Year Installed: 3 Container Num: 003 Tank Num: Vapor Sniff Well Leak Detection: 1/4 inches Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00010000 Tank Capacity: 1973 Year Installed: 2 Container Num: 002 Tank Num: Vapor Sniff Well Leak Detection: 1/4 inches Tank Construction: REGULAR Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00005000 Tank Capacity: 1973 Year Installed: 1 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: ANAHEIM, CA 92803 Owner City,St,Zip: 1313 HARBOR BLVD. Owner Address: DISNEYLAND Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: JIM COYNE Contact Name: 0015 Total Tanks: Not reported Other Type: Gas Station Facility Type: 00000059704 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: 1482 ft. Site 13 of 25 in cluster C 0.281 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 142 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92803 South 1313 S HARBOR BLVD N/A C49 HIST UST SERVICE STATION DISNEYLAND U001578653 TC2760975.2s Page 66 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 1960 Year Installed: 11 Container Num: 011 Tank Num: Vapor Sniff Well Leak Detection: 1/4 inches Tank Construction: DIESEL Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00010000 Tank Capacity: 1975 Year Installed: 10 Container Num: 010 Tank Num: Vapor Sniff Well Leak Detection: 1/4 inches Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00010000 Tank Capacity: 1975 Year Installed: 9 Container Num: 009 Tank Num: Vapor Sniff Well Leak Detection: 1/4 inches Tank Construction: DIESEL Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00001000 Tank Capacity: 1973 Year Installed: 8 Container Num: 008 Tank Num: Vapor Sniff Well Leak Detection: 1/4 inches Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00010000 Tank Capacity: 1973 Year Installed: 7 Container Num: 007 Tank Num: Vapor Sniff Well Leak Detection: 1/4 inches Tank Construction: REGULAR Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00010000 Tank Capacity: 1973 Year Installed: 6 Container Num: 006 Tank Num: Vapor Sniff Well Leak Detection: 1/4 inches Tank Construction: DIESEL Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00010000 Tank Capacity: 1973 Year Installed: 5 Container Num: 005 Tank Num: SERVICE STATION DISNEYLAND (Continued) U001578653 TC2760975.2s Page 67 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Vapor Sniff Well Leak Detection: 1/4 inches Tank Construction: DIESEL Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00008000 Tank Capacity: 1974 Year Installed: 15 Container Num: 015 Tank Num: Vapor Sniff Well Leak Detection: 1/4 inches Tank Construction: DIESEL Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00008000 Tank Capacity: 1974 Year Installed: 14 Container Num: 014 Tank Num: Vapor Sniff Well Leak Detection: 1/4 inches Tank Construction: REGULAR Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00006000 Tank Capacity: 1956 Year Installed: 13 Container Num: 013 Tank Num: Vapor Sniff Well Leak Detection: 1/4 inches Tank Construction: DIESEL Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00002000 Tank Capacity: 1960 Year Installed: 12 Container Num: 012 Tank Num: Vapor Sniff Well Leak Detection: 10/4 inches Tank Construction: DIESEL Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00002000 Tank Capacity: SERVICE STATION DISNEYLAND (Continued) U001578653 JOSE OLIVARES Contact: SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94133 POWELL ST STE 505 Mailing address: CAR000007393 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 928033232 MARS BLDG 1313 S HARBOR BLVD Facility address: SPECTRUM PHOTOGRAPHIC AND IMAGING Facility name: 04/14/1997 Date form received by agency: RCRA-NonGen: 1482 ft. Site 14 of 25 in cluster C 0.281 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 142 ft. 1/4-1/2 HAZNET ANAHEIM, CA 92803 South FINDS 1313 S HARBOR BLVD CAR000007393 C50 RCRA-NonGen SPECTRUM PHOTOGRAPHIC AND IMAGING [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 68 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation PAUL LAINE Contact: CAR000007393 Gepaid: HAZNET: corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource Environmental Interest/Information System 110002916729 Registry ID: FINDS: No violations found Violation Status: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: No Furnace exemption: No On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): No U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 982-3514 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94133 2351 POWELL ST STE 505 Owner/operator address: PAUL LAINE Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: Handler: Non-Generators do not presently generate hazardous waste Description: Non-Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: (916) 544-6511 Contact telephone: US Contact country: SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94133 2351 POWELL ST STE 505 Contact address: SPECTRUM PHOTOGRAPHIC AND IMAGING (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 69 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Other inorganic solid waste Waste Category: Kern TSD County: CAD981402522 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SAN FRANCISCO, CA 941331443 Mailing City,St,Zip: 2351 POWELL ST STE 505 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: PAUL LAINE Contact: CAR000007393 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .2650 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: vanadium, and zinc) copper, lead, mercury, molybdenum, nickel, selenium, silver, thallium, (antimony, arsenic, barium, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, Metal sludge - Alkaline solution (pH 12.5) with metals Waste Category: Kern TSD County: CAD981402522 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SAN FRANCISCO, CA 941331443 Mailing City,St,Zip: 2351 POWELL ST STE 505 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: PAUL LAINE Contact: CAR000007393 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .0125 Tons: Not reported Disposal Method: Other inorganic solid waste Waste Category: Kern TSD County: CAD981402522 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SAN FRANCISCO, CA 941331443 Mailing City,St,Zip: 2351 POWELL ST STE 505 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: PAUL LAINE Contact: CAR000007393 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .3544 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Photochemicals/photoprocessing waste Waste Category: Kern TSD County: CAD981402522 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SAN FRANCISCO, CA 941331443 Mailing City,St,Zip: 2351 POWELL ST STE 505 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: SPECTRUM PHOTOGRAPHIC AND IMAGING (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 70 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 5 additional CA_HAZNET: record(s) in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access Orange Facility County: .0850 Tons: Not reported Disposal Method: vanadium, and zinc) copper, lead, mercury, molybdenum, nickel, selenium, silver, thallium, (antimony, arsenic, barium, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, Metal sludge - Alkaline solution (pH 12.5) with metals Waste Category: Kern TSD County: CAD981402522 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SAN FRANCISCO, CA 941331443 Mailing City,St,Zip: 2351 POWELL ST STE 505 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: PAUL LAINE Contact: CAR000007393 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .0340 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: SPECTRUM PHOTOGRAPHIC AND IMAGING (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] 12932 Agency Id: Terminated Facility Status: Not reported Npdes Number: 92803 Discharge Zip: CA Discharge State: Anaheim Discharge City: Po Box 3232 - Tda219n Discharge Address: Disneyland Resort Discharge Name: 6/5/2007 Termination Date Of Regulatory Measure: Not reported Expiration Date Of Regulatory Measure: 3/21/2007 8:31:17 AM Effective Date Of Regulatory Measure: Not reported Adoption Date Of Regulatory Measure: CONSTW Program Type: 8 30C346158 WDID: 647942 Place Id: Storm water construction Regulatory Measure Type: 99-08DWQ Order No: 322184 Regulatory Measure Id: 8 Region: 12932 Agency Id: Terminated Facility Status: Not reported Npdes Number: NPDES: EMI HAZNET Orange Co. Industrial Site 1482 ft. CHMIRS Site 15 of 25 in cluster C 0.281 mi. SWEEPS UST Relative: Lower Actual: 142 ft. 1/4-1/2 UST ANAHEIM, CA 92802 South LUST 1313 S HARBOR BLVD N/A C51 NPDES DISNEYLAND U003713747 TC2760975.2s Page 71 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 92803 Discharge Zip: CA Discharge State: Anaheim Discharge City: Po Box 3232 - Tda219n Discharge Address: Disneyland Resort Discharge Name: Not reported Termination Date Of Regulatory Measure: Not reported Expiration Date Of Regulatory Measure: 12/11/2008 12:35:49 PM Effective Date Of Regulatory Measure: Not reported Adoption Date Of Regulatory Measure: CONSTW Program Type: 8 30C354173 WDID: 730298 Place Id: Storm water construction Regulatory Measure Type: 99-08DWQ Order No: 356768 Regulatory Measure Id: 8 Region: 12932 Agency Id: Active Facility Status: Not reported Npdes Number: 92803 Discharge Zip: CA Discharge State: Anaheim Discharge City: Po Box 3232 - Tda219n Discharge Address: Disneyland Resort Discharge Name: 4/10/2008 Termination Date Of Regulatory Measure: Not reported Expiration Date Of Regulatory Measure: 8/28/2006 12:25:30 PM Effective Date Of Regulatory Measure: Not reported Adoption Date Of Regulatory Measure: CONSTW Program Type: 8 30C343293 WDID: 639799 Place Id: Storm water construction Regulatory Measure Type: 99-08DWQ Order No: 308259 Regulatory Measure Id: 8 Region: 12932 Agency Id: Terminated Facility Status: Not reported Npdes Number: 92803 Discharge Zip: CA Discharge State: Anaheim Discharge City: Po Box 3232 - Tda219n Discharge Address: Disneyland Resort Discharge Name: 8/3/2007 Termination Date Of Regulatory Measure: Not reported Expiration Date Of Regulatory Measure: 2/8/2007 8:46:12 AM Effective Date Of Regulatory Measure: Not reported Adoption Date Of Regulatory Measure: CONSTW Program Type: 8 30C345616 WDID: 646653 Place Id: Storm water construction Regulatory Measure Type: 99-08DWQ Order No: 320226 Regulatory Measure Id: 8 Region: DISNEYLAND (Continued) U003713747 TC2760975.2s Page 72 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Haz Mat incident report filed : AT RAILROAD ROUNDHOUSE NEAR SMALL WORLD Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: RM Staff Initials: NOM Staff: * MTBE Class: Not Required to be Tested. MTBE Tested: 0 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -117.915541 Longitude: 33.813894 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 3/13/2002 Enter Date: 10/26/2001 Monitoring: 10/21/2001 Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 3/5/2002 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 9/21/2001 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: Not reported Review Date: 3/13/2002 Enter Date: 9/21/2001 How Stopped Date: T0605999311 Global ID: Piping Leak Source: Structure Failure Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: OM How Discovered: Not reported Funding: Not reported Enf Type: BALL ROAD Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Diesel Substance: Soil only Case Type: 083003819T Local Case Num: 083003819T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: DISNEYLAND (Continued) U003713747 TC2760975.2s Page 73 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation PRODUCT Stg: EMPTY Tank Use: 250 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-003609-000017 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: Not reported Ref Date: 44-016067 Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 3609 Comp Number: Not reported Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: DIESEL Content: PRODUCT Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 9940 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-003609-000015 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: Not reported Ref Date: 44-016067 Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 3609 Comp Number: Not reported Status: 6 Number Of Tanks: DIESEL Content: PRODUCT Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 7500 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-003609-000014 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: Not reported Ref Date: 44-016067 Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 3609 Comp Number: Not reported Status: SWEEPS UST: -117.91543 Longitude: 33.81234 Latitude: 9548 Global ID: UST: ATTRACTION : SAW LEAK : WILL CONDUCT ADDITIONAL ASSESSMENT DISNEYLAND (Continued) U003713747 TC2760975.2s Page 74 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 1 Number: 3609 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: Not reported Content: PRODUCT Stg: EMPTY Tank Use: 250 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-003609-000020 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: Not reported Ref Date: 44-016067 Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 3609 Comp Number: Not reported Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: Not reported Content: PRODUCT Stg: EMPTY Tank Use: 250 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-003609-000019 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: Not reported Ref Date: 44-016067 Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 3609 Comp Number: Not reported Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: Not reported Content: PRODUCT Stg: EMPTY Tank Use: 250 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-003609-000018 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: Not reported Ref Date: 44-016067 Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 3609 Comp Number: Not reported Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: INERT MATERI Content: DISNEYLAND (Continued) U003713747 TC2760975.2s Page 75 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 5 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 05-24-94 Act Date: 01-13-94 Ref Date: 44-016067 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 3609 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: DIESEL Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: 08-03-92 Actv Date: 30-011-003609-000007 Tank Id: 4 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 05-24-94 Act Date: 01-13-94 Ref Date: 44-016067 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 3609 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: DIESEL Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: 08-03-92 Actv Date: 30-011-003609-000002 Tank Id: 3 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 05-24-94 Act Date: 01-13-94 Ref Date: 44-016067 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 3609 Comp Number: A Status: 11 Number Of Tanks: DIESEL Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: 05-17-93 Actv Date: 30-011-003609-000001 Tank Id: 10 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 05-24-94 Act Date: 01-13-94 Ref Date: 44-016067 Board Of Equalization: DISNEYLAND (Continued) U003713747 TC2760975.2s Page 76 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: 08-03-92 Actv Date: 30-011-003609-000011 Tank Id: 8 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 05-24-94 Act Date: 01-13-94 Ref Date: 44-016067 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 3609 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 9940 Capacity: 08-03-92 Actv Date: 30-011-003609-000010 Tank Id: 7 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 05-24-94 Act Date: 01-13-94 Ref Date: 44-016067 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 3609 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: 08-03-92 Actv Date: 30-011-003609-000009 Tank Id: 6 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 05-24-94 Act Date: 01-13-94 Ref Date: 44-016067 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 3609 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: DIESEL Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 9940 Capacity: 08-03-92 Actv Date: 30-011-003609-000008 Tank Id: DISNEYLAND (Continued) U003713747 TC2760975.2s Page 77 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 44-016067 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 3609 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: DIESEL Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 1000 Capacity: 08-03-92 Actv Date: 30-011-003609-000016 Tank Id: 15 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 05-24-94 Act Date: 01-13-94 Ref Date: 44-016067 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 3609 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 6000 Capacity: 08-03-92 Actv Date: 30-011-003609-000013 Tank Id: 12 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 05-24-94 Act Date: 01-13-94 Ref Date: 44-016067 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 3609 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: DIESEL Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: 08-03-92 Actv Date: 30-011-003609-000012 Tank Id: 9 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 05-24-94 Act Date: 01-13-94 Ref Date: 44-016067 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 3609 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: DISNEYLAND (Continued) U003713747 TC2760975.2s Page 78 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported What Happened: Not reported Containment: Contractor Cleanup By: Not reported Spill Site: storm drain, Anaheim Barber Channel Waterway: Yes Waterway Involved: Not reported Facility Telephone: Not reported Comments: Not reported Report Date: Not reported Reporting Officer Name/ID: Not reported Company Name: Not reported CA/DOT/PUC/ICC Number: Not reported Vehicle Id Number: Not reported Vehicle State: Not reported Vehicle License Number: Not reported Vehicle Make/year: Not reported Others Number Of Fatalities: Not reported Others Number Of Injuries: Not reported Others Number Of Decontaminated: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Fatalities: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Injuries: Not reported Resp Agncy Personel # Of Decontaminated: Not reported More Than Two Substances Involved?: Not reported Special Studies 6: Not reported Special Studies 5: Not reported Special Studies 4: Not reported Special Studies 3: Not reported Special Studies 2: Not reported Special Studies 1: Not reported Property Management: Not reported Estimated Temperature: Not reported Surrounding Area: Not reported Time Completed: Not reported Time Notified: Not reported Agency Incident Number: Not reported Agency Id Number: Not reported Property Use: Not reported Date Completed: Not reported Incident Date: Not reported OES Time: Not reported OES Date: 4/7/200003:39:15 PM OES notification: 00-1607 OES Incident Number: CHMIRS: Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: 08-03-92 Actv Date: 30-011-003609-000025 Tank Id: 2 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 05-24-94 Act Date: 01-13-94 Ref Date: DISNEYLAND (Continued) U003713747 TC2760975.2s Page 79 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation LEAD COMPOUNDS Released Chemical: Closed pre 1994, file review required to determine closure type Closure Type: CLOSED 8/14/1991 Current Status: RO0000185 Record ID: ORANGE Region: 89IC011 Case ID: WASTE (OR SLOP) OIL Released Chemical: Closed pre 1994, file review required to determine closure type Closure Type: CLOSED 10/22/1991 Current Status: RO0000236 Record ID: ORANGE Region: 89IC007 Case ID: WASTE (OR SLOP) OIL Released Chemical: Closed pre 1994, file review required to determine closure type Closure Type: CLOSED 9/14/1990 Current Status: RO0000152 Record ID: ORANGE Region: 88IC068 Case ID: Orange Co. Industrial Site: released into the storm drain system. Released caused by a sewage backup in the kitchen. The sewage Description: 0 Number of Fatalities: 0 Number of Injuries: 0 Evacuations: Not reported Description: 0 Unknown: 0 Tons: 0 Sheen: 0 Quarts: 0 Pints: 0 Ounces: 0 Liters: 0 Pounds: 0 Grams: 3000 Gallons: 0 CUFT: 0 Cups: 0 BBLS: Not reported Quantity Released: raw sewage Substance: Not reported E Date: Other Site Type: Yes Contained: Not reported Amount: Anaheim Fire Department Admin Agency: 4/7/200012:00:00 AM Incident Date: Disneyland Agency: 2000 Year: Not reported Date/Time: Not reported Other: Not reported Measure: Not reported Type: DISNEYLAND (Continued) U003713747 TC2760975.2s Page 80 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Asbestos-containing waste Waste Category: Imperial TSD County: CAD000633164 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928033232 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 3232 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: WALT DISNEY WORLD COMPANY Contact: CAD027828250 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .6375 Tons: Treatment, Tank Disposal Method: Other organic solids Waste Category: Imperial TSD County: CAD000633164 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928033232 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 3232 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: WALT DISNEY WORLD COMPANY Contact: CAD027828250 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 9.2068 Tons: Treatment, Tank Disposal Method: Other inorganic solid waste Waste Category: Imperial TSD County: CAD000633164 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928033232 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 3232 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: WALT DISNEY WORLD COMPANY Contact: CAD027828250 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 1.3750 Tons: Disposal, Land Fill Disposal Method: Other organic solids Waste Category: Imperial TSD County: CAD000633164 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928033232 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 3232 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: WALT DISNEY WORLD COMPANY Contact: CAD027828250 Gepaid: HAZNET: DISNEYLAND (Continued) U003713747 TC2760975.2s Page 81 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 11.4375373 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 14.682 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: .221 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 36.82 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 57.834 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 4.871 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 14.11462856770570192 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7996 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 800189 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 2006 Year: EMI: 336 additional CA_HAZNET: record(s) in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access Orange Facility County: 15.8460 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Oil/water separation sludge Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928033232 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 3232 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: WALT DISNEY WORLD COMPANY Contact: CAD027828250 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 30.3408 Tons: Disposal, Land Fill Disposal Method: DISNEYLAND (Continued) U003713747 Los Angeles TSD County: CAD009007626 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 201 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: ANAHEIM PUBLIC UTILITIES Contact: CAC000984456 Gepaid: HAZNET: 1482 ft. Site 16 of 25 in cluster C 0.281 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 142 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 South 1313 S HARBOR N/A C52 HAZNET ANAHEIM PUBLIC UTILITIES S103950105 TC2760975.2s Page 82 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: 1.2642 Tons: Disposal, Land Fill Disposal Method: Asbestos-containing waste Waste Category: ANAHEIM PUBLIC UTILITIES (Continued) S103950105 Not reported Other: Not reported Measure: Not reported Type: Not reported What Happened: Not reported Containment: Contractor Cleanup By: Not reported Spill Site: Not reported Waterway: No Waterway Involved: Not reported Facility Telephone: Not reported Comments: Not reported Report Date: Not reported Reporting Officer Name/ID: Not reported Company Name: Not reported CA/DOT/PUC/ICC Number: Not reported Vehicle Id Number: Not reported Vehicle State: Not reported Vehicle License Number: Not reported Vehicle Make/year: Not reported Others Number Of Fatalities: Not reported Others Number Of Injuries: Not reported Others Number Of Decontaminated: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Fatalities: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Injuries: Not reported Resp Agncy Personel # Of Decontaminated: Not reported More Than Two Substances Involved?: Not reported Special Studies 6: Not reported Special Studies 5: Not reported Special Studies 4: Not reported Special Studies 3: Not reported Special Studies 2: Not reported Special Studies 1: Not reported Property Management: Not reported Estimated Temperature: Not reported Surrounding Area: Not reported Time Completed: Not reported Time Notified: Not reported Agency Incident Number: Not reported Agency Id Number: Not reported Property Use: Not reported Date Completed: Not reported Incident Date: Not reported OES Time: Not reported OES Date: 10/21/199903:48:18 PM OES notification: 99-4472 OES Incident Number: CHMIRS: 1482 ft. Site 17 of 25 in cluster C 0.281 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 142 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92803 South HAZNET 1313 HARBOR BLVD N/A C53 CHMIRS FOX PHOTO INC S103964875 TC2760975.2s Page 83 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Fatalities: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Injuries: Not reported Resp Agncy Personel # Of Decontaminated: Not reported More Than Two Substances Involved?: Not reported Special Studies 6: Not reported Special Studies 5: Not reported Special Studies 4: Not reported Special Studies 3: Not reported Special Studies 2: Not reported Special Studies 1: Not reported Property Management: Not reported Estimated Temperature: Not reported Surrounding Area: Not reported Time Completed: Not reported Time Notified: Not reported Agency Incident Number: Not reported Agency Id Number: Not reported Property Use: Not reported Date Completed: Not reported Incident Date: Not reported OES Time: Not reported OES Date: 3/15/200101:36:52 PM OES notification: 01-1579 OES Incident Number: it probably leaked gasoline at some time. of the gasoline. Per the R/P there is an old fuel line in the area, the surface suspended gasoline in the soil, unkn the length or width Construction being conducted - tree was dug out and approx 2-3’ below Description: 0 Number of Fatalities: 0 Number of Injuries: 0 Evacuations: Not reported Description: 0 Unknown: 0 Tons: 0 Sheen: 0 Quarts: 0 Pints: 0 Ounces: 0 Liters: 0 Pounds: 0 Grams: 42 Gallons: 0 CUFT: 0 Cups: 0 BBLS: Not reported Quantity Released: Gasoline Substance: Not reported E Date: Merchant/Business Site Type: Yes Contained: Not reported Amount: Anaheim Fire Department Admin Agency: 10/20/199912:00:00 AM Incident Date: Disneyland Agency: 1999 Year: Not reported Date/Time: FOX PHOTO INC (Continued) S103964875 TC2760975.2s Page 84 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation FOX PHOTO INC Contact: CAL000076821 Gepaid: HAZNET: at once or over a period of days. of it has spilled onto the ground. It is unknown if it occurred all There are three 55 gallon drums of the substance on a pallet. Some Description: 0 Number of Fatalities: 0 Number of Injuries: 0 Evacuations: Not reported Description: Unk Unknown: 0 Tons: 0 Sheen: 0 Quarts: 0 Pints: 0 Ounces: 0 Liters: 0 Pounds: 0 Grams: 0 Gallons: 0 CUFT: 0 Cups: 0 BBLS: Not reported Quantity Released: Oil substance Substance: Not reported E Date: Other Site Type: Yes Contained: Not reported Amount: Anaheim Fire Department Admin Agency: 3/14/200112:00:00 AM Incident Date: Disneyland Agency: 2001 Year: Not reported Date/Time: Not reported Other: Not reported Measure: Not reported Type: Not reported What Happened: Not reported Containment: Contractor Cleanup By: Not reported Spill Site: Not reported Waterway: No Waterway Involved: Not reported Facility Telephone: Not reported Comments: Not reported Report Date: Not reported Reporting Officer Name/ID: Not reported Company Name: Not reported CA/DOT/PUC/ICC Number: Not reported Vehicle Id Number: Not reported Vehicle State: Not reported Vehicle License Number: Not reported Vehicle Make/year: Not reported Others Number Of Fatalities: Not reported Others Number Of Injuries: Not reported Others Number Of Decontaminated: FOX PHOTO INC (Continued) S103964875 TC2760975.2s Page 85 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Alkaline solution (pH 12.5) with metals (antimony, arsenic, Waste Category: 99 TSD County: NVD981639826 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SAINT LOUIS, MO 631031717 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1706 WASHINGTON AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: FOX PHOTO INC Contact: CAL000076821 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .0040 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Not reported Waste Category: Kern TSD County: CAD981402522 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SAINT LOUIS, MO 631031717 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1706 WASHINGTON AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: FOX PHOTO INC Contact: CAL000076821 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .0170 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Other inorganic solid waste Waste Category: Kern TSD County: CAD981402522 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SAINT LOUIS, MO 631031717 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1706 WASHINGTON AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: FOX PHOTO INC Contact: CAL000076821 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .0910 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: vanadium, and zinc) copper, lead, mercury, molybdenum, nickel, selenium, silver, thallium, (antimony, arsenic, barium, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, Metal sludge - Alkaline solution (pH 12.5) with metals Waste Category: Kern TSD County: CAD981402522 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SAINT LOUIS, MO 631031717 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1706 WASHINGTON AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: FOX PHOTO INC (Continued) S103964875 TC2760975.2s Page 86 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 9 additional CA_HAZNET: record(s) in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access Orange Facility County: .0250 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: molybdenum, nickel, selenium, silver, thallium, vanadium, and zinc) barium, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, copper, lead, mercury, Alkaline solution (pH 12.5) with metals (antimony, arsenic, Waste Category: Sacramento TSD County: CAD982513814 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SAINT LOUIS, MO 631031717 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1706 WASHINGTON AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: FOX PHOTO INC Contact: CAL000076821 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .3369 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: molybdenum, nickel, selenium, silver, thallium, vanadium, and zinc) barium, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, copper, lead, mercury, FOX PHOTO INC (Continued) S103964875 Not reported Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 10/21/1999 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: 10/21/1999 Review Date: 11/4/1999 Enter Date: Not reported How Stopped Date: T0605902330 Global ID: Not reported Leak Source: Not reported Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Not reported How Discovered: Not reported Funding: Not reported Enf Type: KATELLA Cross Street: EDVE Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Gasoline Substance: Other ground water affected Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083003568T Case Number: Remedial action (cleanup) Underway Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 1482 ft. Site 18 of 25 in cluster C 0.281 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 142 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 South 1313 HARBOR BLVD N/A C54 LUST DISNEYLAND-AUTOPIA S104405118 TC2760975.2s Page 87 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Summary: No Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: RM Staff Initials: NOM Staff: D MTBE Class: MTBE Detected. Site tested for MTBE & MTBE detected MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: 1.1 Max MTBE Soil: 2 MTBE Concentration: 2 Max MTBE GW: 11/22/1999 MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8033549 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: = Soil Qualifies: = GW Qualifies: 11/4/1999 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: 1/15/2004 Remed Action: 2/5/2003 Remed Plan: 6/13/2000 Pollution Char: 10/21/1999 Workplan: DISNEYLAND-AUTOPIA (Continued) S104405118 Not reported How Stopped Date: T0605901936 Global ID: Not reported Leak Source: Not reported Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Not reported How Discovered: Not reported Funding: Not reported Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Diesel Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083002812T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 1482 ft. Site 19 of 25 in cluster C 0.281 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 142 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 South 1313 HARBOR BLVD N/A C55 LUST DISNEYLAND TOMORROWLAND RR ST. S100933981 TC2760975.2s Page 88 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: ROW Staff Initials: NOM Staff: * MTBE Class: MTBE Detected. Site tested for MTBE & MTBE detected MTBE Tested: 0 MTBE Fuel: .05 Max MTBE Soil: 1 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8149817 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: < Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 6/17/1996 Enter Date: 8/9/1999 Monitoring: 6/15/1998 Remed Action: 10/8/1997 Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 2/23/2000 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 3/4/1996 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: 3/21/1996 Review Date: 6/17/1996 Enter Date: DISNEYLAND TOMORROWLAND RR ST. (Continued) S100933981 Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083000056T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 1996-03-13 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8135668 Latitude: T0605900045 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 1488 ft. Site 20 of 25 in cluster C 0.282 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 142 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 South 1400 S HARBOR BLVD N/A C56 LUST AVIS RENT - A - CAR SYSTEM S109284277 TC2760975.2s Page 89 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Site History: Diesel Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: AVIS RENT - A - CAR SYSTEM (Continued) S109284277 Orange Facility County: 7.1638 Tons: Disposal, Land Fill Disposal Method: Asbestos-containing waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD009007626 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1380 SO HARBOR BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: HOWARD JOHNSON HOTEL Contact: CAC001354240 Gepaid: HAZNET: 1490 ft. Site 21 of 25 in cluster C 0.282 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 142 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 South 1400 SO HARBOR BLVD N/A C57 HAZNET HOWARD JOHNSON HOTEL S103968348 Spill Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Tank Test How Discovered: Not reported Funding: CLOS Enf Type: FREEDMAN Cross Street: approved site Excavate and Dispose - remove contaminated soil and dispose in Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Diesel Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083000056T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 083000056T Reg Id: LINKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: CORTESE: 1490 ft. Site 22 of 25 in cluster C 0.282 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 142 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 South LUST 1400 HARBOR BLVD N/A C58 HIST CORTESE AVIS RENT - A - CAR SYSTEM S103463896 TC2760975.2s Page 90 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: ROW Staff Initials: NOM Staff: * MTBE Class: Not Required to be Tested. MTBE Tested: 0 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8135668 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 12/31/1986 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: 8/26/1986 Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 3/13/1996 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 5/30/1986 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: 11/6/1990 Review Date: 12/31/1986 Enter Date: Not reported How Stopped Date: T0605900045 Global ID: Piping Leak Source: AVIS RENT - A - CAR SYSTEM (Continued) S103463896 Not reported Other Type: Gas Station Facility Type: 00000005788 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: -117.91525 Longitude: 33.81233 Latitude: 10650 Global ID: UST: 1490 ft. Site 23 of 25 in cluster C 0.282 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 142 ft. 1/4-1/2 SWEEPS UST ANAHEIM, CA 92802 South HIST UST 1400 S HARBOR BLVD N/A C59 UST AVIS RENT A CAR U001578596 TC2760975.2s Page 91 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation W Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 7500 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-004495-000002 Tank Id: 864 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 02-11-92 Act Date: 02-11-92 Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: 9 Number: 4495 Comp Number: A Status: 2 Number Of Tanks: LEADED Content: W Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 5000 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-004495-000001 Tank Id: 864 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 02-11-92 Act Date: 02-11-92 Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: 9 Number: 4495 Comp Number: A Status: SWEEPS UST: None Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: DIESEL Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00005000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 2 Container Num: 002 Tank Num: None Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00007500 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 1 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 Owner City,St,Zip: 1380 SOUTH HARBOR BLVD Owner Address: GREAT AMERICAN LAND COMPANY-LE Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Not reported Contact Name: 0002 Total Tanks: AVIS RENT A CAR (Continued) U001578596 TC2760975.2s Page 92 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Number Of Tanks: GASHOL Content: AVIS RENT A CAR (Continued) U001578596 Active Status: Not reported Comments: Not reported EPA ID: Not reported NPDES Number: Not reported DUNs Number: Not reported Contact Phone: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM 92802 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 9841 AIRPORT BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mail To: [PHONE REDACTED] Facility Phone: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported Cortese Code: Not reported Regulated ID: UTNKA Regulated By: 30000387 Facility ID: CA FID UST: 1490 ft. Site 24 of 25 in cluster C 0.282 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 142 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 South 1400 S HARBOR BLVD N/A C60 CA FID UST AVIS RENT A CAR S101629998 Not reported More Than Two Substances Involved?: Not reported Special Studies 6: Not reported Special Studies 5: Not reported Special Studies 4: Not reported Special Studies 3: Not reported Special Studies 2: Not reported Special Studies 1: Not reported Property Management: Not reported Estimated Temperature: Not reported Surrounding Area: Not reported Time Completed: Not reported Time Notified: Not reported Agency Incident Number: Not reported Agency Id Number: Not reported Property Use: Not reported Date Completed: Not reported Incident Date: Not reported OES Time: Not reported OES Date: 12/26/199912:59:57 PM OES notification: 99-5431 OES Incident Number: CHMIRS: 1544 ft. Site 3 of 7 in cluster D 0.292 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 142 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 WNW 1011 WEST BALL ROAD N/A D61 CHMIRS S105658502 TC2760975.2s Page 93 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Buildup of grease in sewer line Description: 0 Number of Fatalities: 0 Number of Injuries: 0 Evacuations: Not reported Description: 0 Unknown: 0 Tons: 0 Sheen: 0 Quarts: 0 Pints: 0 Ounces: 0 Liters: 0 Pounds: 0 Grams: 60 Gallons: 0 CUFT: 0 Cups: 0 BBLS: Not reported Quantity Released: Raw Sewage Substance: Not reported E Date: Merchant/Business Site Type: Yes Contained: Not reported Amount: Anaheim Fire Department Admin Agency: 12/26/199912:00:00 AM Incident Date: City of Anaheim Streets of Sanitation Agency: 1999 Year: Not reported Date/Time: Not reported Other: Not reported Measure: Not reported Type: Not reported What Happened: Not reported Containment: Reporting Party Cleanup By: Not reported Spill Site: Not reported Waterway: No Waterway Involved: Not reported Facility Telephone: Not reported Comments: Not reported Report Date: Not reported Reporting Officer Name/ID: Not reported Company Name: Not reported CA/DOT/PUC/ICC Number: Not reported Vehicle Id Number: Not reported Vehicle State: Not reported Vehicle License Number: Not reported Vehicle Make/year: Not reported Others Number Of Fatalities: Not reported Others Number Of Injuries: Not reported Others Number Of Decontaminated: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Fatalities: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Injuries: Not reported Resp Agncy Personel # Of Decontaminated: (Continued) S105658502 TC2760975.2s Page 94 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 0 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 5812 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 66096 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1990 Year: EMI: 1564 ft. Site 25 of 25 in cluster C 0.296 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 141 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92804 South 1410 HARBOR BLVD N/A C62 EMI ACAPULCO RESTAURANTS INC S106825271 Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: Not reported Site History: Diesel Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Local Agency File Location: 90UT262 LOC Case Number: 083001677T RB Case Number: ORANGE COUNTY LOP Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ORANGE COUNTY LOP Lead Agency: 1991-01-31 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8181832 Latitude: T0605901263 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 083001677T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: CORTESE: 1587 ft. Site 4 of 7 in cluster D 0.301 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 142 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 WNW LUST 1015 BALL N/A D63 HIST CORTESE ANAHEIM SHERATON S102423983 TC2760975.2s Page 95 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: MUN Beneficial: Not reported Hydr Basin 30000L Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: WJ Staff Initials: PAH Staff: * MTBE Class: Not Required to be Tested. MTBE Tested: 0 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8181686 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: Not reported Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 1/31/1991 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 11/28/1990 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: Not reported Review Date: Not reported Enter Date: 9/9/9999 How Stopped Date: T0605901263 Global ID: Unknown Leak Source: Unknown Leak Cause: Close Tank How Stopped: Tank Closure How Discovered: Not reported Funding: Not reported Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: 0 Qty Leaked: Diesel Substance: Soil only Case Type: 90UT262 Local Case Num: 083001677T Case Number: ANAHEIM SHERATON (Continued) S102423983 TC2760975.2s Page 96 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation -117.92096 Longitude: 33.81815 Latitude: 3956 Global ID: UST: 1587 ft. Site 5 of 7 in cluster D 0.301 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 142 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 WNW 1015 W BALL RD N/A D64 UST SHERATON HOTEL U003778939 Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7011 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 23303 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1995 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 1 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 0 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7011 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 23303 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1990 Year: 1 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 1 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 4 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 0 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 6513 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 23303 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1987 Year: EMI: 1587 ft. Site 6 of 7 in cluster D 0.301 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 142 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 WNW 1015 W BALL RD N/A D65 EMI SHERATON-ANAHEIM MOTOR HOTEL S106839307 TC2760975.2s Page 97 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 1 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 0 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: SHERATON-ANAHEIM MOTOR HOTEL (Continued) S106839307 Orange Facility County: 50.5680 Tons: Disposal, Land Fill Disposal Method: Asbestos-containing waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD067786749 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1015 W BALL ROAD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: SHARATON ANAHEIM HOTEL Contact: CAC000572552 Gepaid: HAZNET: 1587 ft. Site 7 of 7 in cluster D 0.301 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 142 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 WNW 1015 W BALL ROAD N/A D66 HAZNET 1X SHERATON ANAHEIM HOTEL S103620463 Orange Facility County: 16.8560 Tons: Disposal, Land Fill Disposal Method: Asbestos-containing waste Waste Category: 99 TSD County: IRC957100891 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SANTA ANA, CA 927050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: C/O CALTRANS Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: CALTRANS Contact: CAC001240336 Gepaid: HAZNET: 1757 ft. 0.333 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 146 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 SE 318 W PALAIS RD N/A 67 HAZNET ORANGE COUNTY TRANSP AUTHORITY S103652324 TC2760975.2s Page 98 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: .4214 Tons: Disposal, Land Fill Disposal Method: Asbestos-containing waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD009007626 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ORANGE, CA 926680000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1918 W. CHAPMAN AVE. #200 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Not reported Contact: CAC000934504 Gepaid: HAZNET: 1793 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster E 0.340 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 145 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NNW 608 W. VERMONT N/A E68 HAZNET SO. CAL. DIST. COUNCIL CARPENTERS S103988375 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 0 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 5812 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 65256 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1990 Year: EMI: 1812 ft. Site 1 of 6 in cluster F 0.343 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 148 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 North 915 S HARBOR BL. N/A F69 EMI CARROWS RESTAURANT, INC. S106828114 Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: CHARLES HANCE Contact: CAL000171859 Gepaid: HAZNET: 1839 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster E 0.348 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 145 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NNW 828 W VERMONT AVE N/A E70 HAZNET COAST CORVETTE S104580414 TC2760975.2s Page 99 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: 1.1467 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Liquids with halogenated organic compounds > 1000 mg/l Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD008252405 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 828 W VERMONT AVE Mailing Address: COAST CORVETTE (Continued) S104580414 Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 6/30/1992 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 1/13/1993 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 4/24/1992 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: 4/24/1992 Review Date: 6/30/1992 Enter Date: Not reported How Stopped Date: T0605901543 Global ID: Not reported Leak Source: Not reported Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Not reported How Discovered: Not reported Funding: CLOS Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Gasoline Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083002075T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 083002075T Reg Id: LINKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: CORTESE: 1851 ft. Site 2 of 6 in cluster F 0.351 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 148 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 North LUST 900 HARBOR BLVD N/A F71 HIST CORTESE MARY’S GAS STATION S101307710 TC2760975.2s Page 100 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation DIESEL TOO Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: UNK Staff Initials: NOM Staff: * MTBE Class: Site NOT Tested for MTBE.Includes Unknown and Not Analyzed. MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8218096 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: MARY’S GAS STATION (Continued) S101307710 Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: Facility is not located on Indian land. Additional information is not known. Land type: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: Not reported Contact telephone: Not reported Contact country: Not reported Not reported Contact address: Not reported Contact: TORRANCE, CA 90510 PO BOX 3037 Mailing address: CAD981399611 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 900 W VERMONT AVE Facility address: 1-DAY PAINT AND BODY CENTERS INC Facility name: 09/01/1996 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: 1867 ft. 0.354 mi. EMI Relative: Lower Actual: 144 ft. 1/4-1/2 HAZNET ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NW FINDS 900 W VERMONT AVE CAD981399611 72 RCRA-SQG 1-DAY PAINT AND BODY CENTERS INC [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 101 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation their precursors, as well as hazardous air pollutants (HAPs). on stationary and mobile sources that emit criteria air pollutants and The NEI (National Emissions Inventory) database contains information Environmental Interest/Information System 110001178038 Registry ID: FINDS: State Contractor/Grantee Evaluation lead agency: Not reported Date achieved compliance: Not reported Area of violation: COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Evaluation: 07/22/1994 Evaluation date: Evaluation Action Summary: No violations found Violation Status: Large Quantity Generator Classification: 1-DAY PAINT AND BODY CENTERS INC Facility name: 04/25/1986 Date form received by agency: Historical Generators: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: Unknown Furnace exemption: Unknown On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): Unknown U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: 1-DAY PAINT AND BODY CENTERS INC Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: 1-DAY PAINT AND BODY CENTERS INC (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 102 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: 1-DAY PAINT & BODY CENTERS,INC Contact: CAD981399611 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .0100 Tons: Not reported Disposal Method: Off-specification, aged, or surplus organics Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD008252405 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: TORRANCE, CA 905103037 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 3037 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: 1-DAY PAINT & BODY CENTERS,INC Contact: CAD981399611 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .8757 Tons: Not reported Disposal Method: Unspecified organic liquid mixture Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD008252405 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: TORRANCE, CA 905103037 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 3037 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: 1-DAY PAINT & BODY CENTERS,INC Contact: CAD981399611 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .0800 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Not reported Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD050806850 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: TORRANCE, CA 905103037 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 3037 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: 1-DAY PAINT & BODY CENTERS,INC Contact: CAD981399611 Gepaid: HAZNET: corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource 1-DAY PAINT AND BODY CENTERS INC (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 103 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7532 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 38857 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1990 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 1 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 1 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7532 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 38857 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1987 Year: EMI: 3 additional CA_HAZNET: record(s) in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access Orange Facility County: .1000 Tons: Disposal, Other Disposal Method: Other organic solids Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080033681 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: TORRANCE, CA 905103037 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 3037 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: 1-DAY PAINT & BODY CENTERS,INC Contact: CAD981399611 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .1209 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Unspecified organic liquid mixture Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD008252405 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: TORRANCE, CA 905103037 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 3037 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: 1-DAY PAINT AND BODY CENTERS INC (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 104 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 4 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 5 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7532 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 38857 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1996 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 7 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 9 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7532 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 38857 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1995 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 7 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 9 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7532 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 38857 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1993 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 11 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 13 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: 1-DAY PAINT AND BODY CENTERS INC (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 105 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 38857 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 2000 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 1 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 2 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7532 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 38857 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1999 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 1 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 2 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7532 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 38857 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1998 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 1 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 2 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7532 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 38857 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1997 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 1-DAY PAINT AND BODY CENTERS INC (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 106 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 1 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 2 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7532 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 38857 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 2001 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 1 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 2 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7532 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 1-DAY PAINT AND BODY CENTERS INC (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] Not reported Status: SWEEPS UST: Inactive Status: Not reported Comments: Not reported EPA ID: Not reported NPDES Number: Not reported DUNs Number: Not reported Contact Phone: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM 92805 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address 2: P O BOX Mailing Address: Not reported Mail To: [PHONE REDACTED] Facility Phone: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported Cortese Code: Not reported Regulated ID: UTNKI Regulated By: 30001296 Facility ID: CA FID UST: 1872 ft. Site 3 of 6 in cluster F 0.354 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 148 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 North SWEEPS UST 900 S HARBOR BLVD N/A F73 CA FID UST MARY’S GAS / JOHN KOCYLA S101589098 TC2760975.2s Page 107 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: Not reported Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 4902 Comp Number: Not reported Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: LEADED Content: PRODUCT Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 4000 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-004902-000003 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: Not reported Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 4902 Comp Number: Not reported Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: PRODUCT Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 4000 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-004902-000002 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: Not reported Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 4902 Comp Number: Not reported Status: 5 Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: PRODUCT Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 4000 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-004902-000001 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: Not reported Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 4902 Comp Number: MARY’S GAS / JOHN KOCYLA (Continued) S101589098 TC2760975.2s Page 108 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Number Of Tanks: WASTE OIL Content: WASTE Stg: OIL Tank Use: 1000 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-004902-000005 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: Not reported Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 4902 Comp Number: Not reported Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: PRODUCT Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-004902-000004 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: MARY’S GAS / JOHN KOCYLA (Continued) S101589098 00005000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 2 Container Num: 002 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00005000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 1 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: LOS ANGELES, CA 90017 Owner City,St,Zip: 612 S. FLOWER STREET Owner Address: MOBIL OIL CORPORATION Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Not reported Contact Name: 0004 Total Tanks: Not reported Other Type: Gas Station Facility Type: 00000039319 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: 1872 ft. Site 4 of 6 in cluster F 0.354 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 148 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 North 901 S HARBOR BLVD N/A F74 HIST UST D. E. HOXSIE U001578739 TC2760975.2s Page 109 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: WASTE OIL Type of Fuel: WASTE Tank Used for: 00000280 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 4 Container Num: 004 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: PREMIUM Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00005000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 3 Container Num: 003 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: REGULAR Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: D. E. HOXSIE (Continued) U001578739 Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: REGULAR Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00004000 Tank Capacity: 1956 Year Installed: 2 Container Num: 002 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: REGULAR Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00006000 Tank Capacity: 1956 Year Installed: 1 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: SANTA FE SPRINGS, CA 90670 Owner City,St,Zip: 10518 SO. PAINTER Owner Address: LEWIS C. POLLARD Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Not reported Contact Name: 0008 Total Tanks: Not reported Other Type: Gas Station Facility Type: 00000011038 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: 1872 ft. Site 5 of 6 in cluster F 0.354 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 148 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 North 900 S HARBOR BLVD N/A F75 HIST UST POLPET TEXACO U001578782 TC2760975.2s Page 110 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00010000 Tank Capacity: 1976 Year Installed: 4 Container Num: 008 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: PREMIUM Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00004000 Tank Capacity: 1956 Year Installed: 3 Container Num: 007 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: REGULAR Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00004000 Tank Capacity: 1956 Year Installed: 2 Container Num: 006 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: REGULAR Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00006000 Tank Capacity: 1956 Year Installed: 1 Container Num: 005 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00010000 Tank Capacity: 1976 Year Installed: 4 Container Num: 004 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: PREMIUM Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00004000 Tank Capacity: 1956 Year Installed: 3 Container Num: 003 Tank Num: POLPET TEXACO (Continued) U001578782 TC2760975.2s Page 111 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083002075T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 1993-01-13 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.818914 Latitude: T0605901543 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 1877 ft. Site 6 of 6 in cluster F 0.356 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 148 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 North 900 S HARBOR BLVD N/A F76 LUST MARY’S GAS STATION S109284321 Not reported Vehicle License Number: Not reported Vehicle Make/year: Not reported Others Number Of Fatalities: Not reported Others Number Of Injuries: Not reported Others Number Of Decontaminated: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Fatalities: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Injuries: Not reported Resp Agncy Personel # Of Decontaminated: Not reported More Than Two Substances Involved?: Not reported Special Studies 6: Not reported Special Studies 5: Not reported Special Studies 4: Not reported Special Studies 3: Not reported Special Studies 2: Not reported Special Studies 1: Not reported Property Management: Not reported Estimated Temperature: Not reported Surrounding Area: Not reported Time Completed: Not reported Time Notified: Not reported Agency Incident Number: Not reported Agency Id Number: Not reported Property Use: Not reported Date Completed: Not reported Incident Date: Not reported OES Time: Not reported OES Date: 9/13/200112:26:46 AM OES notification: 01-5209 OES Incident Number: CHMIRS: 1936 ft. Site 1 of 6 in cluster G 0.367 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 141 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 South 1460 S. HARBOR BLVD. N/A G77 CHMIRS S105672049 TC2760975.2s Page 112 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Fairfield Inn. On a private property out of a man hole on a private line, at Description: 0 Number of Fatalities: 0 Number of Injuries: 0 Evacuations: Not reported Description: 0.000000 Unknown: 0 Tons: 0 Sheen: 0 Quarts: 0 Pints: 0 Ounces: 0 Liters: 0 Pounds: 0 Grams: 600 Gallons: 0 CUFT: 0 Cups: 0 BBLS: Not reported Quantity Released: Raw Sewage Substance: Not reported E Date: Merchant/Business Site Type: Yes Contained: Not reported Amount: Anaheim Fire Department Admin Agency: 9/12/200112:00:00 AM Incident Date: City of Anaheim Agency: 2001 Year: Not reported Date/Time: Not reported Other: Not reported Measure: Not reported Type: Not reported What Happened: Not reported Containment: Contractor Cleanup By: Not reported Spill Site: Not reported Waterway: No Waterway Involved: Not reported Facility Telephone: Not reported Comments: Not reported Report Date: Not reported Reporting Officer Name/ID: Not reported Company Name: Not reported CA/DOT/PUC/ICC Number: Not reported Vehicle Id Number: Not reported Vehicle State: (Continued) S105672049 TC2760975.2s Page 113 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: 1.2134 Tons: Treatment, Tank Disposal Method: Aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD028409019 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1460 S HARBOR BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: MARRIOTT CORP Contact: CAC001465632 Gepaid: Not reported Facility County: 0.05 Tons: Not reported Disposal Method: Aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 908020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1460 S HARBOR BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: STEVE MCALPINE/CA HAZ SERVICES Contact: CAC002334473 Gepaid: Not reported Facility County: 0.00 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: Not reported TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 908020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1460 S HARBOR BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: STEVE MCALPINE/CA HAZ SERVICES Contact: CAC002334473 Gepaid: HAZNET: 1936 ft. Site 2 of 6 in cluster G 0.367 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 141 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 South 1460 S HARBOR BLVD N/A G78 HAZNET FAIRFIELD INN S103963951 TC2760975.2s Page 114 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7011 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 76313 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1998 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 1 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 0 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7011 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 76313 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1997 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 0 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7011 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 76313 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1990 Year: EMI: their precursors, as well as hazardous air pollutants (HAPs). on stationary and mobile sources that emit criteria air pollutants and The NEI (National Emissions Inventory) database contains information Environmental Interest/Information System 110013827920 Registry ID: FINDS: 1936 ft. Site 3 of 6 in cluster G 0.367 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 141 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 South EMI 1460 S HARBOR BLVD N/A G79 FINDS R MORRIS INN AT THE PK S MANF [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 115 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 0 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7011 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 76313 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 2001 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 1 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 0 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7011 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 76313 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 2000 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 1 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 0 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7011 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 76313 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1999 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 1 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 0 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: R MORRIS INN AT THE PK S MANF (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 116 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: R MORRIS INN AT THE PK S MANF (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] Orange Facility County: .2085 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Unspecified solvent mixture Waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD089446710 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1460 S HARBOR BLVD. Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: MANFRED TAUBMAN CO Contact: CAC001073448 Gepaid: HAZNET: 1936 ft. Site 4 of 6 in cluster G 0.367 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 141 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 South 1460 S HARBOR BLVD. N/A G80 HAZNET 1X RAMADA MAIN GATE S103631098 Not reported Facility County: 0.12 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Photochemicals/photoprocessing waste Waste Category: Kern TSD County: CAD981402522 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: DURHAM, CA 277040000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 3404 N DUKE ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: Not reported Telephone: GRAND CALIFORNIAN HOTEL DISNEYLAND Contact: CAP000151670 Gepaid: HAZNET: 1947 ft. Site 1 of 8 in cluster H 0.369 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 140 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 WNW 1150 DISNEYLAND DR N/A H81 HAZNET GRAND CALIFORNIAN HOTEL DISNEYLAND S108208115 TC2760975.2s Page 117 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083001147T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 1995-07-25 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8181714 Latitude: T0605900906 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 2032 ft. Site 2 of 8 in cluster H 0.385 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 138 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 WNW 1037 W BALL RD N/A H82 LUST ARCO #0072 S109284386 Orange Facility County: 0.01 Tons: H141 Disposal Method: Unspecified solvent mixture Waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD044429835 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 Mailing City,St,Zip: 301 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: JERRY ZOMORODIAN Contact: CAL000284486 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.22 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Unspecified organic liquid mixture Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 Mailing City,St,Zip: 301 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: JERRY ZOMORODIAN Contact: CAL000284486 Gepaid: HAZNET: 2036 ft. Site 3 of 8 in cluster H 0.386 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 138 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 WNW 1037 W BALL RD N/A H83 HAZNET ARCO ANAHEIM RESORT CENTER S108197982 TC2760975.2s Page 118 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Facility County: 0.35 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Unspecified organic liquid mixture Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 Mailing City,St,Zip: 301 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: JERRY ZOMORODIAN Contact: CAL000284486 Gepaid: ARCO ANAHEIM RESORT CENTER (Continued) S108197982 0000167 inches Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00004000 Tank Capacity: 1967 Year Installed: [PHONE REDACTED] Container Num: 003 Tank Num: Stock Inventor, 10 Leak Detection: 0000240 inches Tank Construction: PREMIUM Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00006000 Tank Capacity: 1967 Year Installed: [PHONE REDACTED] Container Num: 002 Tank Num: Stock Inventor, 10 Leak Detection: 0000167 inches Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00004000 Tank Capacity: 1967 Year Installed: [PHONE REDACTED] Container Num: 001 Tank Num: LOS ANGELES, CA 90071 Owner City,St,Zip: 515 SOUTH FLOWER STREET Owner Address: ARCO PETROLEUM PRODUCTS CO. Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Not reported Contact Name: 0004 Total Tanks: Not reported Other Type: Gas Station Facility Type: 00000026481 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: 2036 ft. Site 4 of 8 in cluster H 0.386 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 138 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92804 WNW 1037 W BALL RD N/A H84 HIST UST PRESTIGE STATIONS INC #632 U001578697 TC2760975.2s Page 119 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Stock Inventor, 10 Leak Detection: 0000240 inches Tank Construction: REGULAR Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00006000 Tank Capacity: 1973 Year Installed: [PHONE REDACTED] Container Num: 004 Tank Num: Stock Inventor, 10 Leak Detection: PRESTIGE STATIONS INC #632 (Continued) U001578697 1 Number: 4530 Comp Number: A Status: 3 Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M. V. FUEL Tank Use: 12000 Capacity: 11-03-92 Actv Date: 30-011-004530-000001 Tank Id: 2 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 07-08-92 Act Date: 07-08-92 Ref Date: 44-000506 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 4530 Comp Number: A Status: SWEEPS UST: Active Status: Not reported Comments: Not reported EPA ID: Not reported NPDES Number: Not reported DUNs Number: Not reported Contact Phone: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM 92802 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 17315 STUDEBAKER RD Mailing Address: Not reported Mail To: [PHONE REDACTED] Facility Phone: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported Cortese Code: Not reported Regulated ID: UTNKA Regulated By: 30000898 Facility ID: CA FID UST: 2036 ft. Site 5 of 8 in cluster H 0.386 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 138 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 WNW SWEEPS UST 1037 W BALL RD N/A H85 CA FID UST ARCO FACILITY NO. 0072 S101589013 TC2760975.2s Page 120 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M. V. FUEL Tank Use: 12000 Capacity: 11-03-92 Actv Date: 30-011-004530-000007 Tank Id: 1 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 07-08-92 Act Date: 07-08-92 Ref Date: 44-000506 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 4530 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M. V. FUEL Tank Use: 12000 Capacity: 11-03-92 Actv Date: 30-011-004530-000002 Tank Id: 3 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 07-08-92 Act Date: 07-08-92 Ref Date: 44-000506 Board Of Equalization: ARCO FACILITY NO. 0072 (Continued) S101589013 Orange Facility County: 9.5910 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Waste oil and mixed oil Waste Category: 1 TSD County: CAD980887418 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ARTESIA, CA 907026038 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 6038 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: ATLANTIC RICHFIELD COMPANY Contact: CAL000028042 Gepaid: HAZNET: 2036 ft. Site 6 of 8 in cluster H 0.386 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 138 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 WNW 1037 W BALL RD N/A H86 HAZNET ARCO PRODUCTS COMPANY S103621064 TC2760975.2s Page 121 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation -117.92157 Longitude: 33.81814 Latitude: 10718 Global ID: UST: 2036 ft. Site 7 of 8 in cluster H 0.386 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 138 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 WNW 1037 W BALL RD N/A H87 UST ARCO-ANAHEIM RESORT CENTER U003982060 Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 2/8/1989 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: 2/8/1989 Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 7/25/1995 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 1/31/1989 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: 2/2/1989 Review Date: 2/8/1989 Enter Date: Not reported How Stopped Date: T0605900906 Global ID: Not reported Leak Source: Not reported Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Not reported How Discovered: State Funds Funding: Not reported Enf Type: WEST Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Gasoline Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083001147T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 083001147T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: CORTESE: 2036 ft. Site 8 of 8 in cluster H 0.386 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 138 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 WNW LUST 1037 BALL RD N/A H88 HIST CORTESE ARCO #0072 S102424401 TC2760975.2s Page 122 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: ROW Staff Initials: VJJ Staff: * MTBE Class: Site NOT Tested for MTBE.Includes Unknown and Not Analyzed. MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8181516 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: ARCO #0072 (Continued) S102424401 additional ERNS detail in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access 2084 ft. Site 5 of 6 in cluster G 0.395 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 141 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 South 1480 S HARBOR BLVD N/A G89 ERNS 1480 S HARBOR BLVD 91202921 Not reported Special Studies 5: Not reported Special Studies 4: Not reported Special Studies 3: Not reported Special Studies 2: Not reported Special Studies 1: Not reported Property Management: Not reported Estimated Temperature: Not reported Surrounding Area: Not reported Time Completed: Not reported Time Notified: Not reported Agency Incident Number: Not reported Agency Id Number: Not reported Property Use: Not reported Date Completed: Not reported Incident Date: Not reported OES Time: Not reported OES Date: 3/9/200110:31:57 AM OES notification: 01-1425 OES Incident Number: CHMIRS: 2084 ft. Site 6 of 6 in cluster G 0.395 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 141 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 South EMI 1480 S HARBOR BLVD N/A G90 CHMIRS S105676364 TC2760975.2s Page 123 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation grease. Sewage leaked from the man hole cover in to a storm drain. Millies restaurant experienced a clog on the sewer line due to Description: 0 Number of Fatalities: 0 Number of Injuries: 0 Evacuations: Not reported Description: 0.000000 Unknown: 0 Tons: 0 Sheen: 0 Quarts: 0 Pints: 0 Ounces: 0 Liters: 0 Pounds: 0 Grams: 750 Gallons: 0 CUFT: 0 Cups: 0 BBLS: Not reported Quantity Released: Raw Sewage Substance: Not reported E Date: Other Site Type: Unknown Contained: Not reported Amount: Anaheim Fire Department Admin Agency: 3/9/200112:00:00 AM Incident Date: City of Anaheim Agency: 2001 Year: Not reported Date/Time: Not reported Other: Not reported Measure: Not reported Type: Not reported What Happened: Not reported Containment: Unknown Cleanup By: Not reported Spill Site: Storm drain Waterway: Yes Waterway Involved: Not reported Facility Telephone: Not reported Comments: Not reported Report Date: Not reported Reporting Officer Name/ID: Not reported Company Name: Not reported CA/DOT/PUC/ICC Number: Not reported Vehicle Id Number: Not reported Vehicle State: Not reported Vehicle License Number: Not reported Vehicle Make/year: Not reported Others Number Of Fatalities: Not reported Others Number Of Injuries: Not reported Others Number Of Decontaminated: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Fatalities: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Injuries: Not reported Resp Agncy Personel # Of Decontaminated: Not reported More Than Two Substances Involved?: Not reported Special Studies 6: (Continued) S105676364 TC2760975.2s Page 124 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 0 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 5812 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 67594 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1990 Year: EMI: (Continued) S105676364 Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: TED KULJIAN Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: Not reported Contact telephone: Not reported Contact country: Not reported Not reported Contact address: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 W BALL RD Mailing address: CAD981962491 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 135 W BALL RD Facility address: PERTH CLEANERS Facility name: 09/01/1996 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: 2085 ft. Site 1 of 10 in cluster I 0.395 mi. EMI Relative: Higher Actual: 151 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ENE FINDS 135 W BALL RD CAD981962491 I91 RCRA-SQG PERTH CLEANERS [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 125 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation CA Mailing State: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 135 W BALL RD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: 1/1/1995 Inactive Date: No Facility Active: 7/3/1987 Create Date: Not reported SIC Description: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported NAICS Description: Not reported NAICS Code: CAD981962491 EPA Id: corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource Environmental Interest/Information System 110002756535 Registry ID: FINDS: No violations found Violation Status: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: Unknown Furnace exemption: Unknown On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): Unknown U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator name: PERTH CLEANERS (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 126 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 8 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7216 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 44080 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1987 Year: EMI: Contact Telephone: Not reported Contact Address 2: 12/94 NW Contact Address: UNDELIVERABLE PER SURVEY Contact Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Owner Telephone: Not reported Owner Address 2: Owner Address: Owner Name: 4 Region Code: 928050000 Mailing Zip: PERTH CLEANERS (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] N More Than Two Substances Involved?: Not reported Special Studies 6: Not reported Special Studies 5: Not reported Special Studies 4: Not reported Special Studies 3: Not reported Special Studies 2: Not reported Special Studies 1: P Property Management: 75 Estimated Temperature: 500 Surrounding Area: 1637 Time Completed: 1551 Time Notified: 7199 Agency Incident Number: 30005 Agency Id Number: 500 Property Use: 08-MAY-89 Date Completed: 08-MAY-89 Incident Date: Not reported OES Time: Not reported OES Date: Not reported OES notification: 8906148 OES Incident Number: CHMIRS: 2085 ft. Site 2 of 10 in cluster I 0.395 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 151 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92804 ENE 135 W. BALL RD N/A I92 CHMIRS S100274934 TC2760975.2s Page 127 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Description: Not reported Number of Fatalities: Not reported Number of Injuries: Not reported Evacuations: Not reported Description: Not reported Unknown: Not reported Tons: Not reported Sheen: Not reported Quarts: Not reported Pints: Not reported Ounces: Not reported Liters: Not reported Pounds: Not reported Grams: Not reported Gallons: Not reported CUFT: Not reported Cups: Not reported BBLS: Not reported Quantity Released: Not reported Substance: 10-MAY-90 E Date: Not reported Site Type: Not reported Contained: Not reported Amount: Not reported Admin Agency: Not reported Incident Date: Not reported Agency: 88-92 Year: Not reported Date/Time: Not reported Other: Not reported Measure: Not reported Type: Not reported What Happened: Not reported Containment: Not reported Cleanup By: Not reported Spill Site: Not reported Waterway: Not reported Waterway Involved: [PHONE REDACTED] Facility Telephone: Not reported Comments: 08-MAY-89 Report Date: RANDALL L. GOLDSMITH Reporting Officer Name/ID: Not reported Company Name: Not reported CA/DOT/PUC/ICC Number: Not reported Vehicle Id Number: Not reported Vehicle State: Not reported Vehicle License Number: Not reported Vehicle Make/year: 0 Others Number Of Fatalities: 0 Others Number Of Injuries: 0 Others Number Of Decontaminated: 0 Responding Agency Personel # Of Fatalities: 0 Responding Agency Personel # Of Injuries: 0 Resp Agncy Personel # Of Decontaminated: (Continued) S100274934 TC2760975.2s Page 128 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: .6742 Tons: Disposal, Land Fill Disposal Method: Asbestos-containing waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD009007626 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SANTA ANA, CA 927050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 2323 N TUSTIN STE G Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: WILLIAM NORWOOD Contact: CAC002291873 Gepaid: HAZNET: 2160 ft. 0.409 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 152 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NE 1000 S LEMON ST UNIT D N/A 93 HAZNET VILLA APARTMENTS S105087165 Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-011445-000001 Tank Id: 1698 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 06-30-90 Created Date: 02-12-92 Act Date: 02-12-92 Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: 9 Number: 11445 Comp Number: A Status: SWEEPS UST: Active Status: Not reported Comments: Not reported EPA ID: Not reported NPDES Number: Not reported DUNs Number: Not reported Contact Phone: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM 92802 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 13191 N CROSSROADS PKY Mailing Address: Not reported Mail To: Not reported Facility Phone: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported Cortese Code: Not reported Regulated ID: UTNKA Regulated By: 30017771 Facility ID: CA FID UST: 2192 ft. Site 1 of 4 in cluster J 0.415 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 139 ft. 1/4-1/2 HAZNET ANAHEIM, CA 92802 WNW SWEEPS UST 888 S WEST ST N/A J94 CA FID UST PACIFIC INLAND PLAZA S101589642 TC2760975.2s Page 129 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: .0417 Tons: Treatment, Tank Disposal Method: Aqueous solution with 10% or more total organic residues Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD028409019 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 888 SOUTH WEST ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: PACIFIC INLAND PLAZA Contact: CAC001307728 Gepaid: HAZNET: 1 Number Of Tanks: GASHOL Content: W Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 110 Capacity: PACIFIC INLAND PLAZA (Continued) S101589642 Orange Facility County: 1.2642 Tons: Disposal, Land Fill Disposal Method: Asbestos-containing waste Waste Category: 99 TSD County: IRC957100891 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SANTA ANA, CA 927050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 2501 PULLMAN ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION Contact: CAC000885656 Gepaid: HAZNET: 2221 ft. Site 1 of 4 in cluster K 0.421 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 142 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NW 861 COTTONWOOD ST N/A K95 HAZNET DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION S102795837 Not reported Incident Date: Not reported OES Time: Not reported OES Date: 5/12/200108:49:49 AM OES notification: 01-2757 OES Incident Number: CHMIRS: 2222 ft. Site 2 of 4 in cluster J 0.421 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 139 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 WNW 900 S. DISNEYLAND DRIVE N/A J96 CHMIRS S105674866 TC2760975.2s Page 130 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 0 Grams: 2400 Gallons: 0 CUFT: 0 Cups: 0 BBLS: Not reported Quantity Released: Sewage Substance: Not reported E Date: Road Site Type: Yes Contained: Not reported Amount: Anaheim Fire Department Admin Agency: 5/12/200112:00:00 AM Incident Date: City of Anaheim Agency: 2001 Year: Not reported Date/Time: Not reported Other: Not reported Measure: Not reported Type: Not reported What Happened: Not reported Containment: Reporting Party Cleanup By: Not reported Spill Site: storm drain, Anaheim Barber Channel Waterway: Yes Waterway Involved: Not reported Facility Telephone: Not reported Comments: Not reported Report Date: Not reported Reporting Officer Name/ID: Not reported Company Name: Not reported CA/DOT/PUC/ICC Number: Not reported Vehicle Id Number: Not reported Vehicle State: Not reported Vehicle License Number: Not reported Vehicle Make/year: Not reported Others Number Of Fatalities: Not reported Others Number Of Injuries: Not reported Others Number Of Decontaminated: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Fatalities: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Injuries: Not reported Resp Agncy Personel # Of Decontaminated: Not reported More Than Two Substances Involved?: Not reported Special Studies 6: Not reported Special Studies 5: Not reported Special Studies 4: Not reported Special Studies 3: Not reported Special Studies 2: Not reported Special Studies 1: Not reported Property Management: Not reported Estimated Temperature: Not reported Surrounding Area: Not reported Time Completed: Not reported Time Notified: Not reported Agency Incident Number: Not reported Agency Id Number: Not reported Property Use: Not reported Date Completed: (Continued) S105674866 TC2760975.2s Page 131 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation A grease blockage in sewer line caused an overflow at manhole. Description: 0 Number of Fatalities: 0 Number of Injuries: 0 Evacuations: Not reported Description: 0.000000 Unknown: 0 Tons: 0 Sheen: 0 Quarts: 0 Pints: 0 Ounces: 0 Liters: 0 Pounds: (Continued) S105674866 Not reported Discharge Zip: Not reported Discharge State: Not reported Discharge City: Not reported Discharge Address: Anaheim Sheraton Hotel Discharge Name: 3/12/2007 Termination Date Of Regulatory Measure: Not reported Expiration Date Of Regulatory Measure: 2/10/2006 2:23:24 PM Effective Date Of Regulatory Measure: Not reported Adoption Date Of Regulatory Measure: CONSTW Program Type: 8 30C339523 WDID: 628560 Place Id: Storm water construction Regulatory Measure Type: 99-08DWQ Order No: 296783 Regulatory Measure Id: -None Assigned Region: 297736 Agency Id: Terminated Facility Status: Not reported Npdes Number: NPDES: 2225 ft. Site 3 of 4 in cluster J 0.421 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 139 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92807 WNW 900 SOUTH DISNEYLAND DRIVE N/A J97 NPDES ANAHEIM SHERATON HOTEL S109436059 Active Facility Status: Not reported Suite: 3848 Facility ID: TORRANCE Region: TORRANCE UST: 2243 ft. Site 1 of 7 in cluster L 0.425 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 138 ft. 1/4-1/2 TORRANCE, CA WNW 4530 TORRANCE BLVD N/A L98 UST SHELL SERVICE STATION U003895753 TC2760975.2s Page 132 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 90680 Incident Description: Not reported Discharge Date: Not reported Facility Type: Not reported Board File Number: Not reported Staff Initials: Not reported Date Reported: Notify 65: 2243 ft. Site 2 of 7 in cluster L 0.425 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 138 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 90680 WNW 1037 WEST BALL N/A L99 Notify 65 #72 S100178848 Not reported Waterway: YES Waterway Involved: Not reported Facility Telephone: Not reported Comments: Not reported Report Date: Not reported Reporting Officer Name/ID: Not reported Company Name: Not reported CA/DOT/PUC/ICC Number: Not reported Vehicle Id Number: Not reported Vehicle State: Not reported Vehicle License Number: Not reported Vehicle Make/year: Not reported Others Number Of Fatalities: Not reported Others Number Of Injuries: Not reported Others Number Of Decontaminated: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Fatalities: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Injuries: Not reported Resp Agncy Personel # Of Decontaminated: Not reported More Than Two Substances Involved?: Not reported Special Studies 6: Not reported Special Studies 5: Not reported Special Studies 4: Not reported Special Studies 3: Not reported Special Studies 2: Not reported Special Studies 1: Not reported Property Management: Not reported Estimated Temperature: Not reported Surrounding Area: Not reported Time Completed: Not reported Time Notified: Not reported Agency Incident Number: Not reported Agency Id Number: Not reported Property Use: Not reported Date Completed: Not reported Incident Date: 08:32:28 AM OES Time: 10/28/1996 OES Date: Not reported OES notification: 016224 OES Incident Number: CHMIRS: 2246 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster M 0.425 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 151 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA NNE 310 WEST VERMONT AVENUE N/A M100 CHMIRS S105643633 TC2760975.2s Page 133 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Description: NO Number of Fatalities: NO Number of Injuries: NO Evacuations: sewage from a sewer lateral coming from an apartment building. Description: Not reported Unknown: Not reported Tons: Not reported Sheen: Not reported Quarts: Not reported Pints: Not reported Ounces: Not reported Liters: Not reported Pounds: Not reported Grams: Not reported Gallons: Not reported CUFT: Not reported Cups: Not reported BBLS: Not reported Quantity Released: raw sewage Substance: Not reported E Date: Not reported Site Type: NO Contained: small amt Amount: Not reported Admin Agency: 0730 28Oct96 Incident Date: city of anaheim Agency: 1996 Year: Not reported Date/Time: Not reported Other: Not reported Measure: SEWAGE Type: Not reported What Happened: Not reported Containment: city of anaheim Cleanup By: Not reported Spill Site: (Continued) S105643633 Not reported Property Management: Not reported Estimated Temperature: Not reported Surrounding Area: Not reported Time Completed: Not reported Time Notified: Not reported Agency Incident Number: Not reported Agency Id Number: Not reported Property Use: Not reported Date Completed: Not reported Incident Date: 11:15:19 AM OES Time: 5/29/1995 OES Date: Not reported OES notification: 008456 OES Incident Number: CHMIRS: 2246 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster M 0.425 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 151 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA NNE 310 W. VERMONT N/A M101 CHMIRS S105640305 TC2760975.2s Page 134 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation lateral to main line plugged up. Description: Not reported Unknown: Not reported Tons: Not reported Sheen: Not reported Quarts: Not reported Pints: Not reported Ounces: Not reported Liters: Not reported Pounds: Not reported Grams: Not reported Gallons: Not reported CUFT: Not reported Cups: Not reported BBLS: Not reported Quantity Released: raw sewage Substance: Not reported E Date: RESIDENCE Site Type: YES Contained: 7200gals Amount: Not reported Admin Agency: 5/28/95 1000 Incident Date: city of anaheim Agency: 1995 Year: Not reported Date/Time: Not reported Other: Not reported Measure: SEWAGE Type: Not reported What Happened: Not reported Containment: city of anaheim Cleanup By: Not reported Spill Site: stormdrain catch basin Waterway: YES Waterway Involved: Not reported Facility Telephone: Not reported Comments: Not reported Report Date: Not reported Reporting Officer Name/ID: Not reported Company Name: Not reported CA/DOT/PUC/ICC Number: Not reported Vehicle Id Number: Not reported Vehicle State: Not reported Vehicle License Number: Not reported Vehicle Make/year: Not reported Others Number Of Fatalities: Not reported Others Number Of Injuries: Not reported Others Number Of Decontaminated: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Fatalities: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Injuries: Not reported Resp Agncy Personel # Of Decontaminated: Not reported More Than Two Substances Involved?: Not reported Special Studies 6: Not reported Special Studies 5: Not reported Special Studies 4: Not reported Special Studies 3: Not reported Special Studies 2: Not reported Special Studies 1: (Continued) S105640305 TC2760975.2s Page 135 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Description: NO Number of Fatalities: NO Number of Injuries: NO Evacuations: (Continued) S105640305 Not reported Facility County: 0.41 Tons: Disposal, Land Fill Disposal Method: Off-specification, aged, or surplus inorganics Waste Category: 99 TSD County: NVT330010000 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 92855 Mailing City,St,Zip: 195 S AVENIDA SELIPE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: TRAVIS KELLER Contact: CAC002591467 Gepaid: HAZNET: 2258 ft. 0.428 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 146 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NNW 701 W BELLEVUE DR N/A 102 HAZNET JIM HANSEN S108210267 Orange Facility County: 4.2140 Tons: Disposal, Land Fill Disposal Method: Asbestos-containing waste Waste Category: 99 TSD County: IRC957100891 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SANTA ANA, CA 927050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 2501 PULLMAN STREET Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANS Contact: CAC000717064 Gepaid: HAZNET: 2263 ft. Site 2 of 4 in cluster K 0.429 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 142 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NW 855 WEST COTTONWOOD N/A K103 HAZNET CAL TRANS S103674420 TC2760975.2s Page 136 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: .8428 Tons: Disposal, Land Fill Disposal Method: Asbestos-containing waste Waste Category: 99 TSD County: IRC957100891 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SANTA ANA, CA 927050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 2501 PULLMAN ST. Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: ST. OF CA. DEPT. TRANS. Contact: CAC000969296 Gepaid: HAZNET: 2290 ft. Site 3 of 4 in cluster K 0.434 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 143 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 91208 NW 835 WEST COTTONWOOD AVE N/A K104 HAZNET DEPT. TRANSPORTATION/COTTONWOOD S103673864 or drug lab equipment and/or materials were stored. Illegal Drug Lab - location where an illegal drug lab was operated Lab Type: 199804061 Facility ID: CDL: 2292 ft. 0.434 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 148 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 North 871 SOUTH HARBOR BLVD. ROOM 208 N/A 105 CDL S107536786 Orange Facility County: 10.1136 Tons: Disposal, Land Fill Disposal Method: Asbestos-containing waste Waste Category: 99 TSD County: IRC957100891 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SANTA ANA, CA 927050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 2501 PULLMAN ST. Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: ST. OF CA. DEPT. TRANS. Contact: CAC000969288 Gepaid: HAZNET: 2311 ft. Site 4 of 4 in cluster K 0.438 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 143 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 91208 NW 845 WEST COTTONWOOD AVE N/A K106 HAZNET DEPT. TRANSPORTATION/COTTONWOOD S103674107 TC2760975.2s Page 137 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Stock Inventor, 10 Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: 06 Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00010000 Tank Capacity: 1985 Year Installed: 03 Container Num: 003 Tank Num: Stock Inventor, 10 Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: REGULAR Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00010000 Tank Capacity: 1985 Year Installed: 02 Container Num: 002 Tank Num: Stock Inventor, 10 Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00010000 Tank Capacity: 1985 Year Installed: 01 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: ANAHEIM, CA 92806 Owner City,St,Zip: 1240 S. STATE COLLEGE BLVD., S Owner Address: THE SOUTHLAND CORPORATION Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: STEVE WILLIAMS Contact Name: 0003 Total Tanks: Not reported Other Type: Gas Station Facility Type: 00000065025 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: 2328 ft. Site 3 of 10 in cluster I 0.441 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 152 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ENE 107 W BALL RD N/A I107 HIST UST 7-ELEVEN 2112/26216 U001578710 6717 Comp Number: A Status: SWEEPS UST: -117.90852 Longitude: 33.81818 Latitude: 13290 Global ID: UST: 2328 ft. Site 4 of 10 in cluster I 0.441 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 152 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ENE SWEEPS UST 107 W BALL RD N/A I108 UST 7-ELEVEN STORE U003783886 TC2760975.2s Page 138 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M. V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: 12-03-92 Actv Date: 30-011-006717-000003 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 12-03-92 Act Date: 12-03-92 Ref Date: 44-031897 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 6717 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: PRM UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M. V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: 12-03-92 Actv Date: 30-011-006717-000002 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 12-03-92 Act Date: 12-03-92 Ref Date: 44-031897 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 6717 Comp Number: A Status: 3 Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M. V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: 12-03-92 Actv Date: 30-011-006717-000001 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 12-03-92 Act Date: 12-03-92 Ref Date: 44-031897 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 7-ELEVEN STORE (Continued) U003783886 TC2760975.2s Page 139 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: WASTE OIL Type of Fuel: WASTE Tank Used for: 00000280 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 4 Container Num: 004 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: PREMIUM Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00005000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 3 Container Num: 003 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: REGULAR Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00006000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 2 Container Num: 002 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00006000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 1 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: LOS ANGELES, CA 90017 Owner City,St,Zip: 612 S. FLOWEWR STREET Owner Address: MOBIL OIL CORPORATION Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Not reported Contact Name: 0004 Total Tanks: Not reported Other Type: Gas Station Facility Type: 00000039320 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: 2328 ft. Site 5 of 10 in cluster I 0.441 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 152 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92806 ENE 107 W BALL RD N/A I109 HIST UST BASSAM SHABAZ U001578831 TC2760975.2s Page 140 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation DALLAS, TX 752210711 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 711 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: RANDY MARTIN-ENVIRONMENTAL MGR Contact: CAD981464910 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .1249 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: DALLAS, TX 752210711 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 711 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: THE SOUTHLAND CORPORATION Contact: CAD981464910 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .2293 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Waste oil and mixed oil Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: DALLAS, TX 752210711 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 711 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: THE SOUTHLAND CORPORATION Contact: CAD981464910 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.1425 Tons: H132 Disposal Method: Other organic solids Waste Category: 99 TSD County: NVT330010000 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: DALLAS, TX 752210711 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 711 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: KEN HILLIARD, ENVT’L MANAGER Contact: CAD981464910 Gepaid: HAZNET: 2328 ft. Site 6 of 10 in cluster I 0.441 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 152 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ENE 107 W BALL RD N/A I110 HAZNET 7-ELEVEN STORE 26216 S103621824 TC2760975.2s Page 141 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 10 additional CA_HAZNET: record(s) in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access Orange Facility County: 0.41 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues Waste Category: Orange TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: DALLAS, TX 752210711 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 711 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: RANDY MARTIN-ENVIRONMENTAL MGR Contact: CAD981464910 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.04 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Other organic solids Waste Category: Orange TSD County: CAD028409019 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: 7-ELEVEN STORE 26216 (Continued) S103621824 Active Status: Not reported Comments: Not reported EPA ID: Not reported NPDES Number: Not reported DUNs Number: Not reported Contact Phone: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM 92805 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 120 S STATE COLLEGE BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mail To: [PHONE REDACTED] Facility Phone: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported Cortese Code: Not reported Regulated ID: UTNKA Regulated By: 30006495 Facility ID: CA FID UST: 2328 ft. Site 7 of 10 in cluster I 0.441 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 152 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ENE 107 W BALL RD N/A I111 CA FID UST 7 - ELEVEN FOOD STORES S101589327 TC2760975.2s Page 142 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083004030T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 2008-08-15 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -117.908733 Longitude: 33.818466 Latitude: T0605940185 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 2328 ft. Site 8 of 10 in cluster I 0.441 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 152 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92806 ENE 107 W. BALL RD N/A I112 LUST 7-ELEVEN STORE #26216 S107863107 Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083002738T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 1997-07-28 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -117.908639 Longitude: 33.818393 Latitude: T0605901889 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 2329 ft. Site 9 of 10 in cluster I 0.441 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 152 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ENE 107 W BALL RD N/A I113 LUST 7 - ELEVEN STORE S109284611 LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: CORTESE: 2349 ft. Site 10 of 10 in cluster I 0.445 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 152 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ENE LUST 107 BALL RD N/A I114 HIST CORTESE 7 - ELEVEN STORE S104754860 TC2760975.2s Page 143 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: ROW Staff Initials: CAB Staff: * MTBE Class: Site NOT Tested for MTBE.Includes Unknown and Not Analyzed. MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -117.908289 Longitude: 33.8182087 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 12/15/1995 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 7/28/1997 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 8/7/1995 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: 8/11/1995 Review Date: 12/15/1995 Enter Date: Not reported How Stopped Date: T0605901889 Global ID: Not reported Leak Source: Not reported Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Not reported How Discovered: Not reported Funding: NONE Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Gasoline Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083002738T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 083002738T Reg Id: 7 - ELEVEN STORE (Continued) S104754860 TC2760975.2s Page 144 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: 7 - ELEVEN STORE (Continued) S104754860 91302 Discharge Zip: CA Discharge State: Calabasas Discharge City: 26635 Agoura Rd Discharge Address: Johnston Group Discharge Name: Not reported Termination Date Of Regulatory Measure: Not reported Expiration Date Of Regulatory Measure: 5/28/2004 Effective Date Of Regulatory Measure: Not reported Adoption Date Of Regulatory Measure: CONSTW Program Type: 8 30C327831 WDID: 203774 Place Id: Storm water construction Regulatory Measure Type: 99-08DWQ Order No: 208005 Regulatory Measure Id: 8 Region: 341318 Agency Id: Active Facility Status: Not reported Npdes Number: NPDES: 2408 ft. Site 4 of 4 in cluster J 0.456 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 139 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA WNW 888 DISNEYLAND DR N/A J115 NPDES 888 BLDG LLC S109435185 hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: (714) 774-6621 Contact telephone: US Contact country: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 1125 S ANAHEIM BLVD Contact address: CAVNESS BOB Contact: CAD983592767 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 1125 S ANAHEIM BLVD Facility address: ANAHEIM SUZUKI Facility name: 07/18/1991 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: 2449 ft. Site 1 of 7 in cluster N 0.464 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 153 ft. 1/4-1/2 HAZNET ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ENE FINDS 1125 S ANAHEIM BLVD CAD983592767 N116 RCRA-SQG ANAHEIM SUZUKI [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 145 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation CAL000000159 Gepaid: HAZNET: corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource Environmental Interest/Information System 110002851290 Registry ID: FINDS: No violations found Violation Status: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: No Furnace exemption: No On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): No U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: AMERICAN SUZUKI Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: ANAHEIM SUZUKI (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 146 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: .2293 Tons: Not reported Disposal Method: Aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD981696420 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1125 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: ANAHEIM SUZUKI INC Contact: ANAHEIM SUZUKI (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] None Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: 06 Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00000000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 3 Container Num: 003 Tank Num: None Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: 06 Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00000000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 2 Container Num: 002 Tank Num: None Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: 06 Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00000000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 1 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 Owner City,St,Zip: 1340 S. WEST ST. Owner Address: GABE’S DISNEYLAND ARCO SERVICE Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: GABE Contact Name: 0004 Total Tanks: Not reported Other Type: Gas Station Facility Type: 00000048774 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: 2455 ft. 0.465 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 137 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 West 1340 S WEST ST N/A 117 HIST UST GABE’S DISNEYLAND ARCO SERVICE U001578604 TC2760975.2s Page 147 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation None Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: 06 Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00000000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 4 Container Num: 004 Tank Num: GABE’S DISNEYLAND ARCO SERVICE (Continued) U001578604 92803 Discharge Zip: CA Discharge State: Anaheim Discharge City: Po Box 3232 - Tda219n Discharge Address: Disneyland Resort Discharge Name: Not reported Termination Date Of Regulatory Measure: Not reported Expiration Date Of Regulatory Measure: 3/24/2009 4:04:05 PM Effective Date Of Regulatory Measure: Not reported Adoption Date Of Regulatory Measure: CONSTW Program Type: 8 30C354866 WDID: 734523 Place Id: Storm water construction Regulatory Measure Type: 99-08DWQ Order No: 361969 Regulatory Measure Id: 8 Region: 12932 Agency Id: Active Facility Status: Not reported Npdes Number: NPDES: 2455 ft. Site 1 of 3 in cluster O 0.465 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 139 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92803 South 1515 S HARBOR BLVD N/A O118 NPDES BACK OF HOUSE INFRASTRUCTURE S109691785 .0010 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Not reported Waste Category: Kern TSD County: CAD981402522 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928055811 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1103 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: PETER P GREANEY MD Contact: CAL923034167 Gepaid: HAZNET: 2467 ft. Site 2 of 7 in cluster N 0.467 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 153 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ENE 1103 SO ANAHEIM BLVD N/A N119 HAZNET GREANEY MEDICAL GROUP S103966640 TC2760975.2s Page 148 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: .0125 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Photochemicals/photoprocessing waste Waste Category: Kern TSD County: CAD981402522 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928055811 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1103 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: PETER P GREANEY MD Contact: CAL923034167 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: GREANEY MEDICAL GROUP (Continued) S103966640 Not reported Reporting Officer Name/ID: Not reported Company Name: Not reported CA/DOT/PUC/ICC Number: Not reported Vehicle Id Number: Not reported Vehicle State: Not reported Vehicle License Number: Not reported Vehicle Make/year: Not reported Others Number Of Fatalities: Not reported Others Number Of Injuries: Not reported Others Number Of Decontaminated: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Fatalities: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Injuries: Not reported Resp Agncy Personel # Of Decontaminated: Not reported More Than Two Substances Involved?: Not reported Special Studies 6: Not reported Special Studies 5: Not reported Special Studies 4: Not reported Special Studies 3: Not reported Special Studies 2: Not reported Special Studies 1: Not reported Property Management: Not reported Estimated Temperature: Not reported Surrounding Area: Not reported Time Completed: Not reported Time Notified: Not reported Agency Incident Number: Not reported Agency Id Number: Not reported Property Use: Not reported Date Completed: Not reported Incident Date: Not reported OES Time: Not reported OES Date: 11/30/200009:47:23 AM OES notification: 00-5610 OES Incident Number: CHMIRS: 2472 ft. Site 3 of 7 in cluster N 0.468 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 153 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ENE 1101 SOUTH ANAHEIM BLVD N/A N120 CHMIRS S105664341 TC2760975.2s Page 149 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation City Channel line blockage, 75 gal to storm drain, flushed to the Anaheim/Barber Description: 0 Number of Fatalities: 0 Number of Injuries: 0 Evacuations: Not reported Description: 0 Unknown: 0 Tons: 0 Sheen: 0 Quarts: 0 Pints: 0 Ounces: 0 Liters: 0 Pounds: 0 Grams: 90 Gallons: 0 CUFT: 0 Cups: 0 BBLS: Not reported Quantity Released: raw sewage Substance: Not reported E Date: Road Site Type: Yes Contained: Not reported Amount: Anaheim Fire Department Admin Agency: 11/30/200012:00:00 AM Incident Date: City of Anaheim Agency: 2000 Year: Not reported Date/Time: Not reported Other: Not reported Measure: Not reported Type: Not reported What Happened: Not reported Containment: Reporting Party Cleanup By: Not reported Spill Site: storm drain Waterway: Yes Waterway Involved: Not reported Facility Telephone: Not reported Comments: Not reported Report Date: (Continued) S105664341 Orange Gen County: NEWPORT BEACH, CA 926600000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 100 BAYVIEW CIRCLE STE 3000 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: MICHAEL M MCCARTHY Contact: CAC002250233 Gepaid: HAZNET: 2473 ft. 0.468 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 136 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92803 West 1221 WEST PLACE N/A 121 HAZNET MCCARTHY BUILDING COMPANIES S105085634 TC2760975.2s Page 150 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: 1.2510 Tons: Disposal, Land Fill Disposal Method: Off-specification, aged, or surplus organics Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080033681 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: NEWPORT BEACH, CA 926600000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 100 BAYVIEW CIRCLE STE 3000 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: MICHAEL M MCCARTHY Contact: CAC002250233 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .4170 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Unspecified organic liquid mixture Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD008252405 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: NEWPORT BEACH, CA 926600000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 100 BAYVIEW CIRCLE STE 3000 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: MICHAEL M MCCARTHY Contact: CAC002250233 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .6255 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Unspecified oil-containing waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: MCCARTHY BUILDING COMPANIES (Continued) S105085634 Not reported Year Installed: 1 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 Owner City,St,Zip: 1200 S. ANAHEIM BLVD. Owner Address: FRANK BUSALACHI Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: FRANK BUSALACHI Contact Name: 0001 Total Tanks: NEW CAR DLR. Other Type: Other Facility Type: 00000040723 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: 2485 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster P 0.471 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 152 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ENE 1200 S ANAHEIM BLVD N/A P122 HIST UST MCPEEK PLYMOUTH [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 151 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Visual Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: WASTE OIL Type of Fuel: WASTE Tank Used for: 00000000 Tank Capacity: MCPEEK PLYMOUTH (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] Orange Facility County: .1251 Tons: Not reported Disposal Method: Unspecified solvent mixture Waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD008252405 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928150730 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 730 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: FRANK BUSALACCHI Contact: CAD048763387 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 1.6054 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Unspecified aqueous solution Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928150730 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 730 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: FRANK BUSALACCHI Contact: CAD048763387 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.1668 Tons: H141 Disposal Method: Unspecified sludge waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD097030993 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928150730 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 730 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: FRANK BUSALACCHI, PRESIDENT Contact: CAD048763387 Gepaid: HAZNET: 2485 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster P 0.471 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 152 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ENE 1200 S ANAHEIM BLVD N/A P123 HAZNET MCPEEKS DODGE OF ANAHEIM S100939814 TC2760975.2s Page 152 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 24 additional CA_HAZNET: record(s) in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access Orange Facility County: .0498 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Unspecified solvent mixture Waste Waste Category: Fresno TSD County: CAD093459485 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928150730 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 730 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: FRANK BUSALACCHI Contact: CAD048763387 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .2960 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Unspecified solvent mixture Waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD008252405 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928150730 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 730 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: FRANK BUSALACCHI Contact: CAD048763387 Gepaid: MCPEEKS DODGE OF ANAHEIM (Continued) S100939814 Orange Facility County: 3.75 Tons: H14 Disposal Method: Other organic solids Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD097030993 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928022905 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1477 S MANCHESTER AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: REVA SANCHEZ/PROJ MGR Contact: CAC002609546 Gepaid: HAZNET: 2495 ft. 0.473 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 144 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 SE 1477 S MANCHESTER AVE N/A 124 HAZNET ALMAN CONSTRUCTION CO INC S108742097 TC2760975.2s Page 153 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083002078T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 1994-09-15 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -117.92452 Longitude: 33.817707 Latitude: T0605901546 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 2500 ft. Site 3 of 7 in cluster L 0.473 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 136 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 West 1100 W BALL RD N/A L125 LUST EXXON SERVICE STATION #3724 S109284428 -117.92431 Longitude: 33.81802 Latitude: 6654 Global ID: UST: 2501 ft. Site 4 of 7 in cluster L 0.474 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 136 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 West 1100 W BALL RD N/A L126 UST MIKES EXXON (EXXON 7-3724) U003780418 Not reported Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Gasoline Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083002078T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 083002078T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: CORTESE: 2501 ft. Site 5 of 7 in cluster L 0.474 mi. SWEEPS UST Relative: Lower Actual: 136 ft. 1/4-1/2 CA FID UST ANAHEIM, CA 92802 West LUST 1100 BALL RD N/A L127 HIST CORTESE EXXON SERVICE STATION #3724 S101589100 TC2760975.2s Page 154 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Mailing Address 2: 4550 DACOMA Mailing Address: Not reported Mail To: [PHONE REDACTED] Facility Phone: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported Cortese Code: Not reported Regulated ID: UTNKA Regulated By: 30001299 Facility ID: CA FID UST: MINOR LEVEL OF TOLUENE, AND XYLENE FOUND SOIL REMEDIATED THRU VES. Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: ROW Staff Initials: CAB Staff: * MTBE Class: Site NOT Tested for MTBE.Includes Unknown and Not Analyzed. MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8178886 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 7/3/1992 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 9/15/1994 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 3/19/1992 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: 7/6/1993 Review Date: 7/3/1992 Enter Date: Not reported How Stopped Date: T0605901546 Global ID: UNK Leak Source: UNK Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: OM How Discovered: Not reported Funding: Not reported Enf Type: WEST Cross Street: EXXON SERVICE STATION #3724 (Continued) S101589100 TC2760975.2s Page 155 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation M. V. FUEL Tank Use: 12000 Capacity: 08-25-92 Actv Date: 30-011-002395-000004 Tank Id: 3 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 08-25-92 Act Date: 08-25-92 Ref Date: 44-000285 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 2395 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M. V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: 08-25-92 Actv Date: 30-011-002395-000003 Tank Id: 2 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 08-25-92 Act Date: 08-25-92 Ref Date: 44-000285 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 2395 Comp Number: A Status: 4 Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M. V. FUEL Tank Use: 8000 Capacity: 08-25-92 Actv Date: 30-011-002395-000002 Tank Id: 1 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 08-25-92 Act Date: 08-25-92 Ref Date: 44-000285 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 2395 Comp Number: A Status: SWEEPS UST: Active Status: Not reported Comments: Not reported EPA ID: Not reported NPDES Number: Not reported DUNs Number: Not reported Contact Phone: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM 92802 Mailing City,St,Zip: EXXON SERVICE STATION #3724 (Continued) S101589100 TC2760975.2s Page 156 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Number Of Tanks: WASTE OIL Content: W Stg: OIL Tank Use: 1000 Capacity: 08-25-92 Actv Date: 30-011-002395-000005 Tank Id: 4 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 08-25-92 Act Date: 08-25-92 Ref Date: 44-000285 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 2395 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: EXXON SERVICE STATION #3724 (Continued) S101589100 Orange Facility County: 2.0850 Tons: Treatment, Tank Disposal Method: Unspecified oil-containing waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD028409019 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: HOUSTON, TX 722522180 Mailing City,St,Zip: P O BOX 2180 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: EXXON CO USA Contact: CAL000002748 Gepaid: HAZNET: 2501 ft. Site 6 of 7 in cluster L 0.474 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 136 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 West 1100 WEST BALL ROAD N/A L128 HAZNET EXXON CO USA #73724 S103622652 ZAKARIA HADRI Contact Name: 0004 Total Tanks: Not reported Other Type: Gas Station Facility Type: 00000024065 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: 2501 ft. Site 7 of 7 in cluster L 0.474 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 136 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 West 1100 W BALL RD N/A L129 HIST UST EXXON SERVICE STATION U001578603 TC2760975.2s Page 157 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: WASTE OIL Type of Fuel: WASTE Tank Used for: 00001000 Tank Capacity: 1970 Year Installed: 4 Container Num: 004 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: P unknown Tank Construction: REGULAR Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00010000 Tank Capacity: 1970 Year Installed: 3 Container Num: 003 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00008000 Tank Capacity: 1970 Year Installed: 2 Container Num: 002 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: PREMIUM Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00006000 Tank Capacity: 1970 Year Installed: 1 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: HOUSTON, TX 77210 Owner City,St,Zip: 16945 BLVD. Owner Address: EXXON COMPANY U.S.A. Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: EXXON SERVICE STATION (Continued) U001578603 Kern TSD County: CAD981402522 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1020 S ANAHEIM BLVD STE 220 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: ALLEN JAY Contact: CAL000152455 Gepaid: HAZNET: 2541 ft. Site 4 of 7 in cluster N 0.481 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 153 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ENE 1020 S ANAHEIM BLVD,STE 220 N/A N130 HAZNET MEDI-CENTER MEDICAL CLINIC INC S103976983 TC2760975.2s Page 158 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: .0208 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Photochemicals/photoprocessing waste Waste Category: MEDI-CENTER MEDICAL CLINIC INC (Continued) S103976983 -117.90897 Longitude: 33.82047 Latitude: 7558 Global ID: UST: 2554 ft. Site 1 of 4 in cluster Q 0.484 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 153 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ENE 1025 S ANAHEIM BLVD N/A Q131 UST WESTERN MEDICAL CENTER OF ANAHEIM U003805196 Orange Facility County: .0100 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Other inorganic solid waste Waste Category: Orange TSD County: CAD088504881 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1025 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: TENET HEALTH SYSTEMS OF CA Contact: CAL000181939 Gepaid: HAZNET: 1 Number Of Tanks: DIESEL Content: P Stg: PETROLEUM Tank Use: 3000 Capacity: 11-12-91 Actv Date: 30-011-000030-000001 Tank Id: UNKNOWN Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 05-16-94 Created Date: 05-16-94 Act Date: 11-12-91 Ref Date: 44-035280 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 30 Comp Number: A Status: SWEEPS UST: 2554 ft. Site 2 of 4 in cluster Q 0.484 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 153 ft. 1/4-1/2 EMI ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ENE HAZNET 1025 S ANAHEIM BLVD N/A Q132 SWEEPS UST WESTERN MEDICAL CENTER ANAHEIM S100878126 TC2760975.2s Page 159 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation (antimony, arsenic, barium, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, Metal sludge - Alkaline solution (pH 12.5) with metals Waste Category: Kern TSD County: CAD981402522 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928055806 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1025 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: WESTERN MEDICAL CENTER ANAHEIM Contact: CAL000077067 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .0050 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Other inorganic solid waste Waste Category: Kern TSD County: CAD981402522 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928055806 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1025 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: WESTERN MEDICAL CENTER ANAHEIM Contact: CAL000077067 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .0208 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Photochemicals/photoprocessing waste Waste Category: Kern TSD County: CAD981402522 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928055806 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1025 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: WESTERN MEDICAL CENTER ANAHEIM Contact: CAL000077067 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .0250 Tons: Not reported Disposal Method: Other inorganic solid waste Waste Category: San Bernardino TSD County: CAL000827758 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1025 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: TENET HEALTH SYSTEMS OF CA Contact: CAL000181939 Gepaid: WESTERN MEDICAL CENTER ANAHEIM (Continued) S100878126 TC2760975.2s Page 160 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 1 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 1 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 1 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 8062 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 11269 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1997 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 0 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 8011 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 11269 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1995 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 1 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 8011 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 11269 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1990 Year: EMI: 29 additional CA_HAZNET: record(s) in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access Orange Facility County: .0230 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: vanadium, and zinc) copper, lead, mercury, molybdenum, nickel, selenium, silver, thallium, WESTERN MEDICAL CENTER ANAHEIM (Continued) S100878126 TC2760975.2s Page 161 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 30 County Code: 2001 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 1 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 1 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 1 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 8062 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 11269 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 2000 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 1 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 1 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 1 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 8062 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 11269 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1999 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 1 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 1 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 1 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 8062 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 11269 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1998 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: WESTERN MEDICAL CENTER ANAHEIM (Continued) S100878126 TC2760975.2s Page 162 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 1 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 1 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 1 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 8062 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 11269 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: WESTERN MEDICAL CENTER ANAHEIM (Continued) S100878126 NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: GSH INC Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: Not reported Contact telephone: Not reported Contact country: Not reported Not reported Contact address: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing address: CAD076074137 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 1025 S ANAHEIM BLVD Facility address: GOOD SAMARITAN HOSPITAL OF ORANGE CTY Facility name: 09/01/1996 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: 2554 ft. Site 3 of 4 in cluster Q 0.484 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 153 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ENE FINDS 1025 SOUTH ANAHEIM BOULEVARD CAD076074137 Q133 RCRA-SQG UNITED WESTERN MEDICAL CENTER [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 163 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource their precursors, as well as hazardous air pollutants (HAPs). on stationary and mobile sources that emit criteria air pollutants and The NEI (National Emissions Inventory) database contains information Environmental Interest/Information System 110013861810 Registry ID: FINDS: No violations found Violation Status: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: Unknown Furnace exemption: Unknown On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): Unknown U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: UNITED WESTERN MEDICAL CENTER (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing address: CAD981664170 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 1025 ANAHEIM BLVD Facility address: WESTERN MEDICL CENTER-ANAHEIM Facility name: 10/29/1986 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: 2554 ft. Site 4 of 4 in cluster Q 0.484 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 153 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ENE HAZNET 1025 ANAHEIM BLVD CAD981664170 Q134 RCRA-SQG WESTERN MEDICL CENTER-ANAHEIM [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 164 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation CAL000144862 Gepaid: HAZNET: No violations found Violation Status: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: No Furnace exemption: No On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): No U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: UNIWEST CORP Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: (714) 533-2912 Contact telephone: US Contact country: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 1025 ANAHEIM BLVD Contact address: ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGER Contact: WESTERN MEDICL CENTER-ANAHEIM (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 165 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: .7506 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues Waste Category: San Bernardino TSD County: CAT080025711 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928055806 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1025 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: UWMC HOSPITAL CORP Contact: WESTERN MEDICL CENTER-ANAHEIM (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] Orange Facility County: 0.06 Tons: Treatment, Tank Disposal Method: Unspecified aqueous solution Waste Category: Orange TSD County: CAD028409019 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1544 S HARBOR BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: SEAN FELLER Contact: CAC002560857 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.05 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Other inorganic solid waste Waste Category: Orange TSD County: CAD028409019 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1544 S HARBOR BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: SEAN FELLER Contact: CAC002560857 Gepaid: HAZNET: 2560 ft. Site 2 of 3 in cluster O 0.485 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 139 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 South 1544 S HARBOR BLVD N/A O135 HAZNET BEST WESTERN PARK PLACE INN & MINY SUITES S107139613 TC2760975.2s Page 166 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation or drug lab equipment and/or materials were stored. Illegal Drug Lab - location where an illegal drug lab was operated Lab Type: 200301062 Facility ID: CDL: 2560 ft. Site 3 of 3 in cluster O 0.485 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 139 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 South 1544 S HARBOR BLVD, ROOM 162 (PARK PLACE INN) N/A O136 CDL S107529069 No U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: DODGE CENTRAL INC Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: Handler: Non-Generators do not presently generate hazardous waste Description: Non-Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: (714) 778-6000 Contact telephone: US Contact country: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 1120 SO ANAHEIM BLVD Contact address: DOUGLAS YOUNG Contact: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 SO ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing address: CAD981692239 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 1120 SO ANAHEIM BLVD Facility address: ANAHEIM DODGE INC Facility name: 03/29/1993 Date form received by agency: RCRA-NonGen: EMI 2567 ft. SWEEPS UST Site 5 of 7 in cluster N 0.486 mi. HIST UST Relative: Higher Actual: 153 ft. 1/4-1/2 CA FID UST ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ENE FINDS 1120 SO ANAHEIM BLVD CAD981692239 N137 RCRA-NonGen ANAHEIM DODGE INC [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 167 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Contact Name: 0002 Total Tanks: Not reported Other Type: Other Facility Type: 00000001721 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: Active Status: Not reported Comments: Not reported EPA ID: Not reported NPDES Number: Not reported DUNs Number: Not reported Contact Phone: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM 92805 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 1120 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mail To: [PHONE REDACTED] Facility Phone: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported Cortese Code: Not reported Regulated ID: UTNKA Regulated By: 30007198 Facility ID: CA FID UST: corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource Environmental Interest/Information System 110002754957 Registry ID: FINDS: No violations found Violation Status: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: No Furnace exemption: No On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): ANAHEIM DODGE INC (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 168 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 2 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 2 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 5511 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 42513 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1987 Year: EMI: 1 Number Of Tanks: WASTE OIL Content: W Stg: OIL Tank Use: 550 Capacity: 07-08-92 Actv Date: 30-011-004867-000001 Tank Id: HQ44-016288 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 07-10-92 Act Date: 07-08-92 Ref Date: 44-016288 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 4867 Comp Number: A Status: SWEEPS UST: None Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: WASTE OIL Type of Fuel: WASTE Tank Used for: 00000000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 2 Container Num: 002 Tank Num: None Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00000000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 1 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: DETROIT, MI 48277 Owner City,St,Zip: P.O. BOX 77196 Owner Address: REALTY CORPORATION Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: ANAHEIM DODGE INC (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 169 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 2 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 2 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 5511 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 42513 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1990 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: ANAHEIM DODGE INC (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] FUEL WASTE Released Chemical: Closure certification issued Closure Type: CLOSED 6/9/1994 Current Status: RO0000433 Record ID: ORANGE Region: 93IC020 Case ID: Orange Co. Industrial Site: -117.90828 Longitude: 33.81893 Latitude: 11044 Global ID: UST: 2567 ft. Site 6 of 7 in cluster N 0.486 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 153 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ENE Orange Co. Industrial Site 1120 S ANAHEIM BLVD N/A N138 UST ANAHEIM DODGE U003713756 Los Angeles TSD County: CAD028409019 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: LOS ANGELES, CA 900160000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 3717 S LA BREA AVE #238 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: REALTY CORP Contact: CAC000964088 Gepaid: HAZNET: 2567 ft. Site 7 of 7 in cluster N 0.486 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 153 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ENE 1120 / 1126 S ANAHEIM BLVD N/A N139 HAZNET REALTY CORP S102800071 TC2760975.2s Page 170 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: 2.6090 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Other organic solids Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD028409019 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: LOS ANGELES, CA 900160000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 3717 S LA BREA AVE #238 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: REALTY CORP Contact: CAC000964088 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 1.2510 Tons: Treatment, Tank Disposal Method: Aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues Waste Category: REALTY CORP (Continued) S102800071 404118 Alias Name: Alternate Name Alias Type: REVERE SCHOOL EXPANSION Alias Name: SOIL Potential Description: 40001-NO,30013-NO Confirmed COC: 40001, 30013 Potential COC: RESIDENTIAL AREA Past Use: NONE SPECIFIED APN: -117.899080633358 Longitude: 33.8228454954444 Latitude: School District Funding: NO Restricted Use: 2001-10-31 00:00:00 Status Date: No Further Action Status: Not reported Special Program Status: 34 Senate: 69 Assembly: 404118 Site Code: Cypress Division Branch: Javier Hinojosa Supervisor: GREG NEAL Project Manager: DTSC - Site Mitigation And Brownfield Reuse Program Lead Agency Description: Lead Agency: Cleanup Oversight Agencies: NO National Priorities List: 1.78 Acres: NONE SPECIFIED Site Mgmt. Req.: School Site Type Detail: School Investigation Site Type: 30880002 Facility ID: SCH: 2573 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster R 0.487 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 147 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ESE ENVIROSTOR 126/132/138/144/150/WEST GUINIDA LANE N/A R140 SCH REVERE SCHOOL EXPANSION S105628714 TC2760975.2s Page 171 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Schedule Revised Date: Not reported Schedule Due Date: Not reported Schedule Document Type: Not reported Schedule Sub Area Name: Not reported Schedule Area Name: Not reported Future Due Date: Not reported Future Document Type: Not reported Future Sub Area Name: Not reported Future Area Name: CRU Memo Completed. Comments: 2007-06-19 00:00:00 Completed Date: Cost Recovery Closeout Memo Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Revere Expansion site. oversight for a Preliminary Endangerment Assessment for the proposed HSA-A 00/01-158) with Anaheim City School District to provide DTSC entered into an Environmental Oversight Agreement (Docket Number Comments: 2001-01-30 00:00:00 Completed Date: Environmental Oversight Agreement Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: an agreement with DTSC and ACSD. activities (if needed) after the PEA would be conducted pursuant to Anaheim City School District (ACSD). Any subsequent cleanup under DTSC’s oversight pursuant to an agreement between DTSC and the Endangerment Assessment (PEA) is required. The PEA will be conducted Environmental Assessment and has determined that a Preliminary DTSC’s Site Mitigation Program completed review of a Phase I Substances Control (DTSC) and the California Department of Education, Phase I - Pursuant to an agreement between the Department of Toxic Comments: 2000-07-07 00:00:00 Completed Date: Phase 1 Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: required at this site, and approved the PEA. concurred that no further environmental investigation or cleanup was human health or the environment under any land use. Therefore, DTSC occurring hazardous material indicated at the site pose threat to release of hazardous material, nor the presence of naturally the information presented in the PEA, neither an actual a potential DTSC approved the Preliminary Endangerment Assessment (PEA). Based on Comments: 2001-10-31 00:00:00 Completed Date: Preliminary Endangerment Assessment Report Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Completed Info: Alternate Name Alias Type: ANAHEIM CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT Alias Name: Envirostor ID Number Alias Type: 30880002 Alias Name: Project Code (Site Code) Alias Type: REVERE SCHOOL EXPANSION (Continued) S105628714 TC2760975.2s Page 172 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Environmental Assessment and has determined that a Preliminary DTSC’s Site Mitigation Program completed review of a Phase I Substances Control (DTSC) and the California Department of Education, Phase I - Pursuant to an agreement between the Department of Toxic Comments: 2000-07-07 00:00:00 Completed Date: Phase 1 Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: required at this site, and approved the PEA. concurred that no further environmental investigation or cleanup was human health or the environment under any land use. Therefore, DTSC occurring hazardous material indicated at the site pose threat to release of hazardous material, nor the presence of naturally the information presented in the PEA, neither an actual a potential DTSC approved the Preliminary Endangerment Assessment (PEA). Based on Comments: 2001-10-31 00:00:00 Completed Date: Preliminary Endangerment Assessment Report Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Completed Info: Alternate Name Alias Type: ANAHEIM CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT Alias Name: Envirostor ID Number Alias Type: 30880002 Alias Name: Project Code (Site Code) Alias Type: 404118 Alias Name: Alternate Name Alias Type: REVERE SCHOOL EXPANSION Alias Name: SOIL Potential Description: 40001-NO,30013-NO Confirmed COC: 40001, 30013 Potential COC: RESIDENTIAL AREA Past Use: NONE SPECIFIED APN: -117.899080633358 Longitude: 33.8228454954444 Latitude: School District Funding: NONE SPECIFIED Site Mgmt. Req.: NO Restricted Use: 2001-10-31 00:00:00 Status Date: No Further Action Status: Not reported Special Program: 34 Senate: 69 Assembly: 404118 Site Code: 30880002 Facility ID: Cypress Division Branch: Javier Hinojosa Supervisor: GREG NEAL Program Manager: Lead Agency: Regulatory Agencies: NO NPL: 1.78 Acres: School Site Type Detailed: School Investigation Site Type: ENVIROSTOR: REVERE SCHOOL EXPANSION (Continued) S105628714 TC2760975.2s Page 173 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Schedule Revised Date: Not reported Schedule Due Date: Not reported Schedule Document Type: Not reported Schedule Sub Area Name: Not reported Schedule Area Name: Not reported Future Due Date: Not reported Future Document Type: Not reported Future Sub Area Name: Not reported Future Area Name: CRU Memo Completed. Comments: 2007-06-19 00:00:00 Completed Date: Cost Recovery Closeout Memo Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Revere Expansion site. oversight for a Preliminary Endangerment Assessment for the proposed HSA-A 00/01-158) with Anaheim City School District to provide DTSC entered into an Environmental Oversight Agreement (Docket Number Comments: 2001-01-30 00:00:00 Completed Date: Environmental Oversight Agreement Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: an agreement with DTSC and ACSD. activities (if needed) after the PEA would be conducted pursuant to Anaheim City School District (ACSD). Any subsequent cleanup under DTSC’s oversight pursuant to an agreement between DTSC and the Endangerment Assessment (PEA) is required. The PEA will be conducted REVERE SCHOOL EXPANSION (Continued) S105628714 NO Restricted Use: 2004-08-04 00:00:00 Status Date: No Further Action Status: Not reported Special Program Status: 34 Senate: 69 Assembly: 404327 Site Code: Chatsworth Division Branch: Javier Hinojosa Supervisor: GREG NEAL Project Manager: Not reported Lead Agency Description: NONE SPECIFIED Lead Agency: DTSC Cleanup Oversight Agencies: NO National Priorities List: 2 Acres: NONE SPECIFIED Site Mgmt. Req.: School Site Type Detail: School Investigation Site Type: 30880005 Facility ID: SCH: 2573 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster R 0.487 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 147 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ESE ENVIROSTOR 126/132/138/144/150 WEST GUINIDA LANE N/A R141 SCH 1400 S107735765 TC2760975.2s Page 174 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Special Program: 34 Senate: 69 Assembly: 404327 Site Code: 30880005 Facility ID: Chatsworth Division Branch: Javier Hinojosa Supervisor: GREG NEAL Program Manager: NONE SPECIFIED Lead Agency: DTSC Regulatory Agencies: NO NPL: 2 Acres: School Site Type Detailed: School Investigation Site Type: ENVIROSTOR: Not reported Schedule Revised Date: Not reported Schedule Due Date: Not reported Schedule Document Type: Not reported Schedule Sub Area Name: Not reported Schedule Area Name: Not reported Future Due Date: Not reported Future Document Type: Not reported Future Sub Area Name: Not reported Future Area Name: Not reported Comments: 2004-08-04 00:00:00 Completed Date: Cost Recovery Closeout Memo Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Not reported Comments: 2001-10-31 00:00:00 Completed Date: Preliminary Endangerment Assessment Report Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Completed Info: Envirostor ID Number Alias Type: 30880005 Alias Name: Alternate Name Alias Type: ANAHEIM CITY SD-REVERE SCH EXPAN./CDE Alias Name: Alternate Name Alias Type: ANAHEIM CITY SD-REVERE SCHOOL EXPANSION Alias Name: Project Code (Site Code) Alias Type: 404327 Alias Name: Project Code (Site Code) Alias Type: 404118 Alias Name: NMA Potential Description: 31000-NO Confirmed COC: NONE SPECIFIED,31000 Potential COC: RESIDENTIAL AREA Past Use: NONE SPECIFIED APN: -117.907194 Longitude: 33.814194 Latitude: School District Funding: 1400 (Continued) S107735765 TC2760975.2s Page 175 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Schedule Revised Date: Not reported Schedule Due Date: Not reported Schedule Document Type: Not reported Schedule Sub Area Name: Not reported Schedule Area Name: Not reported Future Due Date: Not reported Future Document Type: Not reported Future Sub Area Name: Not reported Future Area Name: Not reported Comments: 2004-08-04 00:00:00 Completed Date: Cost Recovery Closeout Memo Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Not reported Comments: 2001-10-31 00:00:00 Completed Date: Preliminary Endangerment Assessment Report Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Completed Info: Envirostor ID Number Alias Type: 30880005 Alias Name: Alternate Name Alias Type: ANAHEIM CITY SD-REVERE SCH EXPAN./CDE Alias Name: Alternate Name Alias Type: ANAHEIM CITY SD-REVERE SCHOOL EXPANSION Alias Name: Project Code (Site Code) Alias Type: 404327 Alias Name: Project Code (Site Code) Alias Type: 404118 Alias Name: NMA Potential Description: 31000-NO Confirmed COC: NONE SPECIFIED,31000 Potential COC: RESIDENTIAL AREA Past Use: NONE SPECIFIED APN: -117.907194 Longitude: 33.814194 Latitude: School District Funding: NONE SPECIFIED Site Mgmt. Req.: NO Restricted Use: 2004-08-04 00:00:00 Status Date: No Further Action Status: 1400 (Continued) S107735765 Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Not reported Contact: CAC001233784 Gepaid: HAZNET: 2618 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster S 0.496 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 146 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 North 613 WEST PROVENTIAL DR #B N/A S142 HAZNET PAMELA KING S103980906 TC2760975.2s Page 176 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: .5056 Tons: Disposal, Land Fill Disposal Method: Asbestos-containing waste Waste Category: 99 TSD County: IRC957100891 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: CORONA DEL MAR, CA 926250000 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 2000 #51 Mailing Address: PAMELA KING (Continued) S103980906 or drug lab equipment and/or materials were stored. Illegal Drug Lab - location where an illegal drug lab was operated Lab Type: 200106102 Facility ID: CDL: 2619 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster S 0.496 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 146 ft. 1/4-1/2 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 North 608 W PROVENTIAL, #2 N/A S143 CDL S107535306 Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 10/19/1994 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 6/21/1993 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: 6/21/1993 Review Date: 9/20/1993 Enter Date: Not reported How Stopped Date: T0605901681 Global ID: Not reported Leak Source: Not reported Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Not reported How Discovered: Not reported Funding: CLOS Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Waste Oil Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083002307T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 2673 ft. 0.506 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 138 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NW 866 WEST ST N/A 144 LUST CAMPING WORLD S100931827 TC2760975.2s Page 177 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: ROW Staff Initials: VJJ Staff: * MTBE Class: Not Required to be Tested. MTBE Tested: 0 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8212366 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 9/20/1993 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: CAMPING WORLD (Continued) S100931827 NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: WORTHEN JAMES F LEGAL OWNER Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: Handler: Non-Generators do not presently generate hazardous waste Description: Non-Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: (714) 774-6222 Contact telephone: US Contact country: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 967 S ANAHEIM BLVD Contact address: ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGER Contact: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 PO BOX 532 Mailing address: CAD067629493 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 967 S ANAHEIM BLVD Facility address: WORTHEN STAMP & SEAL CO INC Facility name: 08/12/1980 Date form received by agency: RCRA-NonGen: 2695 ft. Site 1 of 3 in cluster T 0.510 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 154 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NE FINDS 967 S ANAHEIM BLVD CAD067629493 T145 RCRA-NonGen WORTHEN STAMP & SEAL CO INC [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 178 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource Environmental Interest/Information System 110002655243 Registry ID: FINDS: No violations found Violation Status: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: No Furnace exemption: No On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): No U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: WORTHEN STAMP & SEAL CO INC (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 179 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation No Used oil fuel burner: No Furnace exemption: No On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): No U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: VICTOR K HARDIN Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: Handler: Non-Generators do not presently generate hazardous waste Description: Non-Generator Classification: Facility is not located on Indian land. Additional information is not known. Land type: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: (714) 635-2020 Contact telephone: US Contact country: ANAHEIM, CA 92806 1321 AUTO CENTER DR Contact address: WALTER CADMAN Contact: CAD981376791 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 1300 S ANAHEIM BLVD Facility address: HARDIN OLDSMOBILE & HONDA, INC Facility name: 09/28/2000 Date form received by agency: RCRA-NonGen: EMI HAZNET SWEEPS UST HIST UST 2734 ft. CA FID UST Site 1 of 2 in cluster U 0.518 mi. LUST Relative: Higher Actual: 151 ft. 1/2-1 HIST CORTESE ANAHEIM, CA 92805 East FINDS 1300 S ANAHEIM BLVD CAD981376791 U146 RCRA-NonGen HARDIN OLDSMOBILE/GMC TRUCKS [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 180 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Waste Oil / Motor / Hydraulic / Lubricating Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Local Agency File Location: 88UT073 LOC Case Number: Not reported RB Case Number: ORANGE COUNTY LOP Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ORANGE COUNTY LOP Lead Agency: 1988-08-04 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -117.906633 Longitude: 33.816198 Latitude: T0605916963 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 083000975T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: CORTESE: corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource their precursors, as well as hazardous air pollutants (HAPs). on stationary and mobile sources that emit criteria air pollutants and The NEI (National Emissions Inventory) database contains information Environmental Interest/Information System 110009534799 Registry ID: FINDS: State Contractor/Grantee Evaluation lead agency: Not reported Date achieved compliance: Not reported Area of violation: COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Evaluation: 07/07/1994 Evaluation date: Evaluation Action Summary: No violations found Violation Status: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: HARDIN OLDSMOBILE/GMC TRUCKS (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 181 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: Not reported Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 9/5/1990 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 12/4/1989 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: Not reported Review Date: Not reported Enter Date: 9/9/9999 How Stopped Date: T0605900774 Global ID: Unknown Leak Source: Unknown Leak Cause: Close Tank How Stopped: Tank Closure How Discovered: Not reported Funding: Not reported Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: 0 Qty Leaked: 106423,12035 Substance: Soil only Case Type: 90UT001 Local Case Num: 083000975T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: Not reported Site History: Xylene, Waste Oil / Motor / Hydraulic / Lubricating, * Solvents Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Local Agency File Location: 90UT001 LOC Case Number: 083000975T RB Case Number: ORANGE COUNTY LOP Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ORANGE COUNTY LOP Lead Agency: 1990-09-05 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8526598 Latitude: T0605900774 Global Id: STATE Region: Not reported Site History: HARDIN OLDSMOBILE/GMC TRUCKS (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 182 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: Not reported Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 8/4/1988 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 3/24/1988 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: Not reported Review Date: Not reported Enter Date: 9/9/9999 How Stopped Date: T0605916963 Global ID: Unknown Leak Source: Unknown Leak Cause: Close Tank How Stopped: Tank Closure How Discovered: Not reported Funding: Not reported Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: 0 Qty Leaked: Waste Oil Substance: Soil only Case Type: 88UT073 Local Case Num: Not reported Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: MUN Beneficial: Not reported Hydr Basin 30000L Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: WJ Staff Initials: PAH Staff: * MTBE Class: Not Required to be Tested. MTBE Tested: 0 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8158448 Latitude: HARDIN OLDSMOBILE/GMC TRUCKS (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 183 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00002500 Tank Capacity: 1964 Year Installed: 1 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 Owner City,St,Zip: 1300 S. ANAHEIM BLVD. Owner Address: HARDIN OLDSMOBILE Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: STUART HEISLER Contact Name: 0004 Total Tanks: NEW CAR DEALER Other Type: Other Facility Type: 00000019377 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: Active Status: Not reported Comments: Not reported EPA ID: Not reported NPDES Number: Not reported DUNs Number: Not reported Contact Phone: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM 92805 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 1300 S ANAHEIM Mailing Address: Not reported Mail To: [PHONE REDACTED] Facility Phone: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported Cortese Code: Not reported Regulated ID: UTNKA Regulated By: 30001944 Facility ID: CA FID UST: Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: MUN Beneficial: Not reported Hydr Basin 30000L Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: WJ Staff Initials: PAH Staff: * MTBE Class: Not Required to be Tested. MTBE Tested: 0 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: Not reported Longitude: Not reported Latitude: HARDIN OLDSMOBILE/GMC TRUCKS (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 184 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: Not reported Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 1929 Comp Number: Not reported Status: 1 Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: W Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 2000 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-001929-000019 Tank Id: 1411 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 02-11-92 Act Date: 02-11-92 Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: 9 Number: 1929 Comp Number: A Status: SWEEPS UST: Not reported Leak Detection: 12 gauge Tank Construction: Not reported Type of Fuel: WASTE Tank Used for: 00000500 Tank Capacity: 1983 Year Installed: 4 Container Num: 004 Tank Num: Not reported Leak Detection: 12 gauge Tank Construction: WASTE OIL Type of Fuel: WASTE Tank Used for: 00000150 Tank Capacity: 1964 Year Installed: 3 Container Num: 003 Tank Num: None Leak Detection: 12 gauge Tank Construction: Not reported Type of Fuel: WASTE Tank Used for: 00000500 Tank Capacity: 1982 Year Installed: 2 Container Num: 002 Tank Num: Visual Leak Detection: 3/16 inches Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: HARDIN OLDSMOBILE/GMC TRUCKS (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 185 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: 2.0850 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Unspecified aqueous solution Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928056205 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1300 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: CORPORATION Contact: CAD981376791 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 4.1074 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Unspecified organic liquid mixture Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAL000113451 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928056205 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1300 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: CORPORATION Contact: CAD981376791 Gepaid: HAZNET: Not reported Number Of Tanks: WASTE OIL Content: WASTE Stg: UNKNOWN Tank Use: 500 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-001929-000015 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: Not reported Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 1929 Comp Number: Not reported Status: 2 Number Of Tanks: OTHER Content: WASTE Stg: UNKNOWN Tank Use: 500 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-001929-000001 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: HARDIN OLDSMOBILE/GMC TRUCKS (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 186 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 5511 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 22474 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1987 Year: EMI: 30 additional CA_HAZNET: record(s) in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access Orange Facility County: 0.15 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Other organic solids Waste Category: Orange TSD County: IND000646943 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1321 AUTO CENTER DR Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: JAMIE TRUJILLO SERVICE MANAGER Contact: CAD981376791 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.01 Tons: Disposal, Other Disposal Method: Other organic solids Waste Category: Orange TSD County: CAD980884183 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1321 AUTO CENTER DR Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: JAMIE TRUJILLO SERVICE MANAGER Contact: CAD981376791 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .4587 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Aqueous solution with 10% or more total organic residues Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928056205 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1300 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: CORPORATION Contact: CAD981376791 Gepaid: HARDIN OLDSMOBILE/GMC TRUCKS (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 187 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 6 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 7 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 5511 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 22474 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1995 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 6 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 7 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 5511 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 22474 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1993 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 2 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 2 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 5510 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 22474 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1990 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 5 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 5 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: HARDIN OLDSMOBILE/GMC TRUCKS (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 188 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1999 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 1 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 3 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 5511 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 22474 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1998 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 2 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 4 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 5511 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 22474 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1997 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 2 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 3 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 5511 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 22474 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1996 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: HARDIN OLDSMOBILE/GMC TRUCKS (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 189 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 2 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 4 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 5511 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 22474 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 2001 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 2 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 4 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 5511 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 22474 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 2000 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 2 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 4 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 5511 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 22474 Facility ID: HARDIN OLDSMOBILE/GMC TRUCKS (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 190 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083002354T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 1994-01-04 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -117.909456 Longitude: 33.8219067 Latitude: T0605901698 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 2752 ft. Site 2 of 3 in cluster T 0.521 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 154 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NE 953 S ANAHEIM BLVD N/A T147 LUST STEFFY BUICK S109284418 NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: RICHARD STEFFY Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: (714) 776-7360 Contact telephone: US Contact country: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 953 S ANAHEIM BLVD Contact address: ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGER Contact: CAD027836212 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 953 S ANAHEIM BLVD Facility address: STEFFY BUICK CO Facility name: 06/03/1986 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: EMI HAZNET SWEEPS UST HIST UST UST 2752 ft. CA FID UST Site 3 of 3 in cluster T 0.521 mi. LUST Relative: Higher Actual: 154 ft. 1/2-1 HIST CORTESE ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NE FINDS 953 S ANAHEIM BLVD CAD027836212 T148 RCRA-SQG STEFFY BUICK CO [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 191 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 083002354T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: CORTESE: corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource Environmental Interest/Information System 110002639501 Registry ID: FINDS: No violations found Violation Status: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: No Furnace exemption: No On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): No U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: STEFFY BUICK CO (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 192 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: ROW Staff Initials: CAB Staff: * MTBE Class: Site NOT Tested for MTBE.Includes Unknown and Not Analyzed. MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8218746 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Yes Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 12/22/1993 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 1/4/1994 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 9/17/1993 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: 9/17/1993 Review Date: 12/22/1993 Enter Date: 9/17/1993 How Stopped Date: T0605901698 Global ID: Piping Leak Source: UNK Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Tank Closure How Discovered: Not reported Funding: CLOS Enf Type: BALL Cross Street: spreading or land farming) Excavate and Treat - remove contaminated soil and treat (includes Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Gasoline Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083002354T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: STEFFY BUICK CO (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 193 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation None Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: WASTE OIL Type of Fuel: WASTE Tank Used for: 00000200 Tank Capacity: 1963 Year Installed: #2 Container Num: 002 Tank Num: None Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00001000 Tank Capacity: 1963 Year Installed: #1 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 Owner City,St,Zip: 953 S. ANAHEIM BLVD. Owner Address: STEFFY BUICK CO. Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: RICHARD E. STEFFY Contact Name: 0002 Total Tanks: NEW CAR DEALER Other Type: Other Facility Type: 00000012167 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: -117.90947 Longitude: 33.82197 Latitude: 5271 Global ID: UST: Active Status: Not reported Comments: Not reported EPA ID: Not reported NPDES Number: Not reported DUNs Number: Not reported Contact Phone: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM 92805 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 953 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mail To: [PHONE REDACTED] Facility Phone: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported Cortese Code: Not reported Regulated ID: UTNKA Regulated By: 30008408 Facility ID: CA FID UST: Not reported Summary: STEFFY BUICK CO (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 194 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 1931 Comp Number: Not reported Status: 2 Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: WASTE Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 1000 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-001931-000014 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: Not reported Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 1931 Comp Number: Not reported Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: W Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 1000 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-001931-000007 Tank Id: 218 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 02-11-92 Act Date: 02-11-92 Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: 9 Number: 1931 Comp Number: A Status: 2 Number Of Tanks: Not reported Content: P Stg: UNKNOWN Tank Use: Not reported Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-001931-000003 Tank Id: 218 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 02-11-92 Act Date: 02-11-92 Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: 9 Number: 1931 Comp Number: A Status: SWEEPS UST: STEFFY BUICK CO (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 195 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 2 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 2 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 5511 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 6526 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1987 Year: EMI: Orange Facility County: .8428 Tons: Disposal, Land Fill Disposal Method: Asbestos-containing waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD009007626 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 953 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Not reported Contact: CAD027836212 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .3000 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: biphenyls and material containing PCB’s Waste Category: San Diego TSD County: CAT080010101 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 953 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Not reported Contact: CAD027836212 Gepaid: HAZNET: Not reported Number Of Tanks: JET FUEL Content: PRODUCT Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 200 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-001931-000015 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: STEFFY BUICK CO (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 196 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 2 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 2 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 5511 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 6526 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1990 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: STEFFY BUICK CO (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] Visual, Stock Inventor Leak Detection: 1/4 inches Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00008000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: #1 Container Num: 002 Tank Num: Visual, Stock Inventor Leak Detection: 1/4 inches Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00008000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: #2 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 Owner City,St,Zip: 100 WINSTON RD Owner Address: ANAHEIM DATSUN Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: BERND H. EMMERICH Contact Name: 0002 Total Tanks: STORAGE LOT Other Type: Other Facility Type: 00000035934 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: 2819 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster U 0.534 mi. Relative: Equal Actual: 150 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ESE 100 W WINSTON RD N/A U149 HIST UST ANAHEIM DATSUN U001578721 TC2760975.2s Page 197 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation None Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: 06 Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00006000 Tank Capacity: 1971 Year Installed: 4 Container Num: 004 Tank Num: 10 Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: 06 Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00004000 Tank Capacity: 1955 Year Installed: 3 Container Num: 003 Tank Num: Not reported Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: 06 Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00004000 Tank Capacity: 1955 Year Installed: 2 Container Num: 002 Tank Num: 10 Leak Detection: Unkown inches Tank Construction: 6G Type of Fuel: WASTE Tank Used for: 00004000 Tank Capacity: 1955 Year Installed: 1 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: LOS ANGELES, CA 90071 Owner City,St,Zip: 515 SOUTH FLOWER STREET Owner Address: ATLANTIC RICHFIELD COMPANY Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Not reported Contact Name: 0004 Total Tanks: Not reported Other Type: Gas Station Facility Type: 00000067545 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: 2860 ft. 0.542 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 139 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 SW 1451 S WEST ST N/A 150 HIST UST UNKNOWN U001578624 TC2760975.2s Page 198 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Number Of Tanks: PRM UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M. V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: 11-19-93 Actv Date: 30-011-005248-000002 Tank Id: H708098 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 05-24-94 Act Date: 11-19-93 Ref Date: 44-035590 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 5248 Comp Number: A Status: 2 Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M. V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: 11-19-93 Actv Date: 30-011-005248-000001 Tank Id: H708098 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 05-24-94 Act Date: 11-19-93 Ref Date: 44-035590 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 5248 Comp Number: A Status: SWEEPS UST: -117.90649 Longitude: 33.81819 Latitude: 12266 Global ID: UST: 2912 ft. Site 1 of 4 in cluster V 0.551 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 154 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 East SWEEPS UST 215 E BALL RD N/A V151 UST BELL PIPE AND SUPPLY CO U003938419 [PHONE REDACTED] Facility Phone: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported Cortese Code: Not reported Regulated ID: UTNKA Regulated By: 30017740 Facility ID: CA FID UST: 2912 ft. Site 2 of 4 in cluster V 0.551 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 154 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 East 215 E BALL RD N/A V152 CA FID UST BELL PIPE & SUPPLY CO S101619862 TC2760975.2s Page 199 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Active Status: Not reported Comments: Not reported EPA ID: Not reported NPDES Number: Not reported DUNs Number: Not reported Contact Phone: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM 92805 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 215 E BALL RD Mailing Address: Not reported Mail To: BELL PIPE & SUPPLY CO (Continued) S101619862 Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 215 EAST BALL RD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: BELL PIPE & SUPPLY CO Contact: CAC001406568 Gepaid: HAZNET: None Leak Detection: 1/4 inches Tank Construction: REGULAR Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00010000 Tank Capacity: 1980 Year Installed: H708098-2 Container Num: 002 Tank Num: None Leak Detection: 1/4 inches Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00010000 Tank Capacity: 1980 Year Installed: H708098-1 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 Owner City,St,Zip: 215 EAST BALL ROAD Owner Address: BELL PIPE & SUPPLY CO. Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: MIKE FEDORCHEK Contact Name: 0002 Total Tanks: INDUSTRIAL PLUMBING Other Type: Other Facility Type: 00000059205 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: 2912 ft. Site 3 of 4 in cluster V 0.551 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 154 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 East HAZNET 215 E BALL RD N/A V153 HIST UST BELL PIPE & SUPPLY CO. U001578730 TC2760975.2s Page 200 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: 1.8765 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Waste oil and mixed oil Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: BELL PIPE & SUPPLY CO. (Continued) U001578730 No U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (714) 774-3133 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 1354 S ANAHEIM BLVD Owner/operator address: BILTMORE INVESTMENT GROUP INC Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: Private Land type: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: (714) 774-3133 Contact telephone: US Contact country: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 1354 S ANAHEIM BLVD Contact address: JOEL MILAZZO Contact: CAD981691702 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 1354 S ANAHEIM BLVD Facility address: QUALITY MOTORCARS Facility name: 07/30/1993 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: 2944 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster W 0.558 mi. Relative: Equal Actual: 150 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ESE FINDS 1354 S ANAHEIM BLVD CAD981691702 W154 RCRA-SQG QUALITY MOTORCARS [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 201 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource Environmental Interest/Information System 110002754733 Registry ID: FINDS: State Contractor/Grantee Evaluation lead agency: Not reported Date achieved compliance: Not reported Area of violation: COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Evaluation: 05/15/1992 Evaluation date: Evaluation Action Summary: No violations found Violation Status: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: No Furnace exemption: No On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): QUALITY MOTORCARS (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] Not reported Contact email: Not reported Contact telephone: Not reported Contact country: Not reported Not reported Contact address: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 S. ANAHEIM BLVD. Mailing address: CAT080011810 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 1360 S. ANAHEIM BLVD. Facility address: KOCH, H & SONS Facility name: 09/01/1996 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: 2967 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster W 0.562 mi. Relative: Equal Actual: 150 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ESE FINDS 1360 S. ANAHEIM BLVD. CAT080011810 W155 RCRA-SQG KOCH, H & SONS [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 202 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource Environmental Interest/Information System 110002945500 Registry ID: FINDS: No violations found Violation Status: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: Unknown Furnace exemption: Unknown On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): Unknown U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: GULF & WESTERN MANUFACTURING INC. Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: KOCH, H & SONS (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 203 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA KOCH, H & SONS (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] Private Legal status: Not reported Owner/operator telephone: US Owner/operator country: Not reported Not reported Owner/operator address: GEORGE BARAJA Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: 01/08/1998 Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: Not reported Owner/operator telephone: US Owner/operator country: Not reported Not reported Owner/operator address: LARRY PADMANI Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste the cleanup of a spill, into or on any land or water, of acutely any residue or contaminated soil, waste or other debris resulting from time: 1 kg or less of acutely hazardous waste; or 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month, and accumulates at any from the cleanup of a spill, into or on any land or water, of acutely of any residue or contaminated soil, waste or other debris resulting land or water, of acutely hazardous waste; or generates 100 kg or less other debris resulting from the cleanup of a spill, into or on any waste; or 100 kg or less of any residue or contaminated soil, waste or month, and accumulates at any time: 1 kg or less of acutely hazardous or generates 1 kg or less of acutely hazardous waste per calendar month, and accumulates 1000 kg or less of hazardous waste at any time; Handler: generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste per calendar Description: Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: [EMAIL REDACTED] Contact email: (714) 533-8300 Contact telephone: Not reported Contact country: Not reported Not reported Contact address: LARRY J PADMANI Contact: CAL000140139 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 1106 S. TECHNOLOGY CIRCLE Facility address: TRANSLINE TECHNOLOGY INC Facility name: 07/01/2008 Date form received by agency: RCRA-CESQG: 2973 ft. 0.563 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 155 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ENE 1106 S. TECHNOLOGY CIRCLE CAL000140139 156 RCRA-CESQG TRANSLINE TECHNOLOGY INC [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 204 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Thermostats Waste type: No Generated waste on-site: No Accumulated waste on-site: Pesticides Waste type: No Generated waste on-site: No Accumulated waste on-site: Lamps Waste type: No Generated waste on-site: No Accumulated waste on-site: Batteries Waste type: Universal Waste Summary: Commercial status unknown Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: No Furnace exemption: No On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: No Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): No U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: 08/01/1998 Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: Not reported Owner/operator telephone: US Owner/operator country: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 1106 S. TECHNOLOGY CIRCLE Owner/operator address: BOB SAVALIA Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: 01/08/2008 Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: Not reported Owner/operator telephone: US Owner/operator country: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 1106 S. TECHNOLOGY CIRCLE Owner/operator address: LARRY PADMANI Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: 01/05/1999 Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: TRANSLINE TECHNOLOGY INC (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 205 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Last Biennial Reporting Year: 2007 Biennial Reports: LEAD Waste name: D008 Waste code: ARSENIC Waste name: D004 Waste code: DISPOSED, THE WASTE WOULD BE A CORROSIVE HAZARDOUS WASTE. THESE CAUSTIC OR ACID SOLUTIONS BECOME CONTAMINATED AND MUST BE USED BY MANY INDUSTRIES TO CLEAN METAL PARTS PRIOR TO PAINTING. WHEN OR DEGREASE PARTS. HYDROCHLORIC ACID, A SOLUTION WITH A LOW PH, IS CAUSTIC SOLUTION WITH A HIGH PH, IS OFTEN USED BY INDUSTRIES TO CLEAN CONSIDERED TO BE A CORROSIVE HAZARDOUS WASTE. SODIUM HYDROXIDE, A A WASTE WHICH HAS A PH OF LESS THAN 2 OR GREATER THAN 12.5 IS Waste name: D002 Waste code: ARSENIC Waste name: D004 Waste code: DISPOSED, THE WASTE WOULD BE A CORROSIVE HAZARDOUS WASTE. THESE CAUSTIC OR ACID SOLUTIONS BECOME CONTAMINATED AND MUST BE USED BY MANY INDUSTRIES TO CLEAN METAL PARTS PRIOR TO PAINTING. WHEN OR DEGREASE PARTS. HYDROCHLORIC ACID, A SOLUTION WITH A LOW PH, IS CAUSTIC SOLUTION WITH A HIGH PH, IS OFTEN USED BY INDUSTRIES TO CLEAN CONSIDERED TO BE A CORROSIVE HAZARDOUS WASTE. SODIUM HYDROXIDE, A A WASTE WHICH HAS A PH OF LESS THAN 2 OR GREATER THAN 12.5 IS Waste name: D002 Waste code: Hazardous Waste Summary: Small Quantity Generator Classification: TRANSLINE TECHNOLOGY INC Facility name: 03/01/2004 Date form received by agency: Historical Generators: Not reported Generated waste on-site: No Accumulated waste on-site: Thermostats Waste type: Not reported Generated waste on-site: No Accumulated waste on-site: Pesticides Waste type: Not reported Generated waste on-site: No Accumulated waste on-site: Lamps Waste type: Not reported Generated waste on-site: No Accumulated waste on-site: Batteries Waste type: No Generated waste on-site: No Accumulated waste on-site: TRANSLINE TECHNOLOGY INC (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 206 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation No violations found Violation Status: 504.6 Amount (Lbs): LEAD Waste name: D008 Waste code: 6559.6 Amount (Lbs): ARSENIC Waste name: D004 Waste code: 18236 Amount (Lbs): DISPOSED, THE WASTE WOULD BE A CORROSIVE HAZARDOUS WASTE. THESE CAUSTIC OR ACID SOLUTIONS BECOME CONTAMINATED AND MUST BE USED BY MANY INDUSTRIES TO CLEAN METAL PARTS PRIOR TO PAINTING. WHEN OR DEGREASE PARTS. HYDROCHLORIC ACID, A SOLUTION WITH A LOW PH, IS CAUSTIC SOLUTION WITH A HIGH PH, IS OFTEN USED BY INDUSTRIES TO CLEAN CONSIDERED TO BE A CORROSIVE HAZARDOUS WASTE. SODIUM HYDROXIDE, A A WASTE WHICH HAS A PH OF LESS THAN 2 OR GREATER THAN 12.5 IS Waste name: D002 Waste code: Annual Waste Handled: TRANSLINE TECHNOLOGY INC (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: WALT HAMILTON Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: Not reported Contact telephone: Not reported Contact country: Not reported Not reported Contact address: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 E BALL RD Mailing address: CAD027834027 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 235 E BALL RD Facility address: ORANGE COUNTY LIFT TRUCK, INC Facility name: 09/01/1996 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: 2985 ft. Site 4 of 4 in cluster V 0.565 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 154 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 East FINDS 235 E BALL RD CAD027834027 V157 RCRA-SQG ORANGE COUNTY LIFT TRUCK, INC [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 207 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource Environmental Interest/Information System 110002639495 Registry ID: FINDS: No violations found Violation Status: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: Unknown Furnace exemption: Unknown On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): Unknown U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: ORANGE COUNTY LIFT TRUCK, INC (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] -117.90981 Longitude: 33.82295 Latitude: 14371 Global ID: UST: 2993 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster X 0.567 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 154 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NE 901 S ANAHEIM BLVD N/A X158 UST UNKNOWN / BOB DEE BIRD U003784526 TC2760975.2s Page 208 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Unknown On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): Unknown U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: Facility is not located on Indian land. Additional information is not known. Land type: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: Not reported Contact telephone: Not reported Contact country: Not reported Not reported Contact address: Not reported Contact: CAD980893390 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 1515 MANCHESTER AVE Facility address: ODETICS INC Facility name: 09/01/1996 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: EMI HAZNET 3036 ft. SWEEPS UST Site 1 of 2 in cluster Y 0.575 mi. HIST UST Relative: Lower Actual: 144 ft. 1/2-1 CA FID UST ANAHEIM, CA 92802 SE FINDS 1515 MANCHESTER AVE CAD980893390 Y159 RCRA-SQG ODETICS INC [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 209 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported NPDES Number: Not reported DUNs Number: Not reported Contact Phone: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM 92802 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 1515 S MANCHESTER Mailing Address: Not reported Mail To: [PHONE REDACTED] Facility Phone: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported Cortese Code: Not reported Regulated ID: UTNKA Regulated By: 30003463 Facility ID: CA FID UST: corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource their precursors, as well as hazardous air pollutants (HAPs). on stationary and mobile sources that emit criteria air pollutants and The NEI (National Emissions Inventory) database contains information Environmental Interest/Information System 110002676480 Registry ID: FINDS: State Contractor/Grantee Evaluation lead agency: Not reported Date achieved compliance: Not reported Area of violation: COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Evaluation: 09/19/1994 Evaluation date: Evaluation Action Summary: No violations found Violation Status: Large Quantity Generator Classification: ODETICS INC Facility name: 04/15/1985 Date form received by agency: Historical Generators: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: Unknown Furnace exemption: ODETICS INC (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 210 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 500 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-000968-000002 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: Not reported Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 968 Comp Number: Not reported Status: SWEEPS UST: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: .27 inches Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00010000 Tank Capacity: 1983 Year Installed: 002 Container Num: 003 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: 12 gauge Tank Construction: WASTE OIL Type of Fuel: WASTE Tank Used for: 00000550 Tank Capacity: 1983 Year Installed: 003 Container Num: 002 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: .27 inches Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00010000 Tank Capacity: 1983 Year Installed: 001 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 Owner City,St,Zip: 1515 S. MANCHESTER Owner Address: ODETICS, INC. Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: JOHN CRESSE Contact Name: 0003 Total Tanks: MANUFACTURING Other Type: Other Facility Type: 00000008656 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: Active Status: Not reported Comments: Not reported EPA ID: ODETICS INC (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 211 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation ODETICS INC Contact: CAD980893390 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 1.2510 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Unspecified organic liquid mixture Waste Category: 99 TSD County: AZD049318009 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928022907 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1515 S MANCHESTER AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: ODETICS INC Contact: CAD980893390 Gepaid: HAZNET: Not reported Number Of Tanks: LEADED Content: W Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-000968-000005 Tank Id: 77 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 02-11-92 Act Date: 02-11-92 Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: 9 Number: 968 Comp Number: A Status: 2 Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: W Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-000968-000004 Tank Id: 77 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 02-11-92 Act Date: 02-11-92 Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: 9 Number: 968 Comp Number: A Status: 1 Number Of Tanks: JET FUEL Content: PRODUCT Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: ODETICS INC (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 212 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: 0.03 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Liquids with pH 2 Waste Category: Orange TSD County: CAD008302903 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928022907 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1515 S MANCHESTER AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: TIMOTHY OLCOTT SAFETY MGR Contact: CAD980893390 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Off-specification, aged, or surplus organics Waste Category: Orange TSD County: CAD008302903 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928022907 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1515 S MANCHESTER AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: TIMOTHY OLCOTT SAFETY MGR Contact: CAD980893390 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.2 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Unspecified organic liquid mixture Waste Category: Orange TSD County: CAD008302903 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928022907 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1515 S MANCHESTER AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: TIMOTHY OLCOTT SAFETY MGR Contact: CAD980893390 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .1668 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Unspecified solvent mixture Waste Waste Category: 99 TSD County: AZD049318009 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928022907 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1515 S MANCHESTER AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: ODETICS INC (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 213 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 4 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 3679 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 42616 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1987 Year: EMI: 55 additional CA_HAZNET: record(s) in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access ODETICS INC (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: Not reported Site History: Waste Oil / Motor / Hydraulic / Lubricating, Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Local Agency File Location: 89UT041 LOC Case Number: 083001204T RB Case Number: ORANGE COUNTY LOP Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ORANGE COUNTY LOP Lead Agency: 1989-06-13 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8459591 Latitude: T0605900940 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 083001204T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: CORTESE: 3071 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster X 0.582 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 154 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 NE LUST 901 ANAHEIM N/A X160 HIST CORTESE VACANT LOT S102425277 TC2760975.2s Page 214 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: MUN Beneficial: Not reported Hydr Basin 30000L Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: WJ Staff Initials: PAH Staff: * MTBE Class: Not Required to be Tested. MTBE Tested: 0 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8230636 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: Not reported Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 6/13/1989 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 1/19/1989 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: Not reported Review Date: Not reported Enter Date: 9/9/9999 How Stopped Date: T0605900940 Global ID: Unknown Leak Source: Unknown Leak Cause: Close Tank How Stopped: Tank Closure How Discovered: Not reported Funding: Not reported Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: 0 Qty Leaked: 12035,800661 Substance: Soil only Case Type: 89UT041 Local Case Num: 083001204T Case Number: VACANT LOT (Continued) S102425277 TC2760975.2s Page 215 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation -117.9166 Longitude: 33.82508 Latitude: 9789 Global ID: UST: 3130 ft. Site 1 of 5 in cluster Z 0.593 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 147 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 North 805 S HARBOR BLVD N/A Z161 UST HARBOR ULTRAMAR U003989488 Stock Inventor, 10 Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00010000 Tank Capacity: 1966 Year Installed: 3 Container Num: 003 Tank Num: Stock Inventor, 10 Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: PREMIUM Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00010000 Tank Capacity: 1966 Year Installed: 2 Container Num: 002 Tank Num: None Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: WASTE OIL Type of Fuel: WASTE Tank Used for: 00000280 Tank Capacity: 1966 Year Installed: 1 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: SAN DIEGO, CA 92108 Owner City,St,Zip: 123 CAMINO DELA REINA Owner Address: UNION OIL COMPANY OF CALIFORNI Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: AUSTIN POTTER Contact Name: 0003 Total Tanks: Not reported Other Type: Gas Station Facility Type: 00000055195 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: 3181 ft. Site 2 of 5 in cluster Z 0.603 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 147 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 North 801 S HARBOR BLVD N/A Z162 HIST UST UNION OIL SERVICE STATION #566 U001578800 TC2760975.2s Page 216 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Visual Leak Detection: 6 inches Tank Construction: Not reported Type of Fuel: WASTE Tank Used for: 00000000 Tank Capacity: 1966 Year Installed: 5669-00 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: SAN DIEGO, CA 92108 Owner City,St,Zip: 1450 FRAZEE ROAD Owner Address: UNION OIL COMPANY Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: THOMAS K. SCHUMACHER Contact Name: 0001 Total Tanks: Not reported Other Type: Gas Station Facility Type: 00000043745 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: 3181 ft. Site 3 of 5 in cluster Z 0.603 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 147 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 North 801 S HARBOR BLVD N/A Z163 HIST UST STATION #5669 U001578789 Not reported Workplan: 11/14/1997 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 4/1/1994 Discover Date: 1/11/1995 Prelim Assess: 9/7/1994 Review Date: 12/12/1994 Enter Date: Not reported How Stopped Date: T0605901783 Global ID: Not reported Leak Source: Not reported Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Not reported How Discovered: Not reported Funding: CLOS Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Gasoline Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083002528T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 3182 ft. Site 4 of 5 in cluster Z 0.603 mi. HAZNET Relative: Lower Actual: 147 ft. 1/2-1 SWEEPS UST ANAHEIM, CA 92805 North CA FID UST 801 HARBOR BLVD N/A Z164 LUST UNOCAL #5669 S101589453 TC2760975.2s Page 217 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 44-000051 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 63 Comp Number: A Status: SWEEPS UST: Active Status: Not reported Comments: Not reported EPA ID: Not reported NPDES Number: Not reported DUNs Number: Not reported Contact Phone: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM 92805 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 911 W WILSHIRE BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mail To: [PHONE REDACTED] Facility Phone: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported Cortese Code: Not reported Regulated ID: UTNKA Regulated By: 30013004 Facility ID: CA FID UST: EXTRACTION SYSTEM W/ CATALYTIC OXIDIZER. GW NOT ENCOUNTERED (DOWN TO 50’ BGS). INTERIM RAP 7/11/95, PROPOSES VAPOR Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: ROW Staff Initials: NOM Staff: * MTBE Class: MTBE Detected. Site tested for MTBE & MTBE detected MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: 1.8 Max MTBE Soil: 1 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8253235 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: = Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 12/12/1994 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: 7/11/1995 Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: 4/1/1995 Pollution Char: UNOCAL #5669 (Continued) S101589453 TC2760975.2s Page 218 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation CAD982484933 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SANTA ANA, CA 927995376 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 25376 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: UNION OIL COMPANY OF CALIFORNI Contact: CAL000046579 Gepaid: HAZNET: Not reported Number Of Tanks: WASTE OIL Content: W Stg: OIL Tank Use: 500 Capacity: 08-10-92 Actv Date: 30-011-000063-000003 Tank Id: 5669-3 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 08-10-92 Act Date: 08-10-92 Ref Date: 44-000051 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 63 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 9950 Capacity: 08-10-92 Actv Date: 30-011-000063-000002 Tank Id: 5669-2 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 08-10-92 Act Date: 08-10-92 Ref Date: 44-000051 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 63 Comp Number: A Status: 3 Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 9950 Capacity: 08-10-92 Actv Date: 30-011-000063-000001 Tank Id: 5669-1 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 08-10-92 Act Date: 08-10-92 Ref Date: UNOCAL #5669 (Continued) S101589453 TC2760975.2s Page 219 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: 2.5020 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Waste oil and mixed oil Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SANTA ANA, CA 927995376 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 25376 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: UNION OIL COMPANY OF CALIFORNI Contact: CAL000046579 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .0000 Tons: Disposal, Other Disposal Method: Not reported Waste Category: 7 TSD County: CAD982484933 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SANTA ANA, CA 927995376 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 25376 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: UNION OIL COMPANY OF CALIFORNI Contact: CAL000046579 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 10.4500 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Other empty containers 30 gallons or more Waste Category: 7 TSD County: UNOCAL #5669 (Continued) S101589453 Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083002528T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 1997-11-14 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8253235 Latitude: T0605901783 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 3183 ft. Site 5 of 5 in cluster Z 0.603 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 147 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 North 801 S HARBOR BLVD N/A Z165 LUST UNOCAL #5669 S109284721 TC2760975.2s Page 220 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Site History: UNOCAL #5669 (Continued) S109284721 Visual Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: Not reported Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00002000 Tank Capacity: 1981 Year Installed: 0004 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 Owner City,St,Zip: 2220 ORANGEWOOD Owner Address: VAN DOREN RUBBER CO Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: JERRY PERITY Contact Name: 0001 Total Tanks: SHOE MANUFACTOR Other Type: Other Facility Type: 00000003350 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: 3282 ft. Site 1 of 7 in cluster AA 0.622 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 155 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92804 East 1240 S CLAUDINA ST N/A AA166 HIST UST ATHLETIC SHOE ASSEMBLY PLANT U001578676 Not reported General Comments: Not reported Potential Contaminants of Concern: Not reported Potential Media Affected: Not reported File Location: SL188033849 RB Case Number: Not reported Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: Cleanup Program Site Case Type: -117.903878688812 Longitude: 33.816715909734 Latitude: Not reported Lead Agency Case Number: SANTA ANA (REGION 8) Lead Agency: SL188033849 Global Id: 2008-05-23 00:00:00 Status Date: Open - Site Assessment Facility Status: STATE Region: SLIC: 3282 ft. Site 2 of 7 in cluster AA 0.622 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 155 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 East 1240-1244 SOUTH CLAUDINA STREET N/A AA167 SLIC SMTEK INTERNATIONAL INC FORMERLY DDL ELECTRONICS S106483877 TC2760975.2s Page 221 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation No violations found Violation Status: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: No Furnace exemption: No On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): No U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (714) 517-6616 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 1430 S ANAHEIM BLVD Owner/operator address: SUPER SHUTTLE Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: (714) 517-6616 Contact telephone: US Contact country: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 1430 S ANAHEIM BLVD Contact address: BILL MCCOY Contact: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing address: CAD983666371 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 1430 S ANAHEIM BLVD Facility address: SUPER SHUTTLE Facility name: 04/29/1993 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: 3283 ft. Site 1 of 3 in cluster AB 0.622 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 149 ft. 1/2-1 HAZNET ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ESE FINDS 1430 S ANAHEIM BLVD CAD983666371 AB168 RCRA-SQG SUPER SHUTTLE [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 222 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation metals (antimony, arsenic, barium, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, Organic liquids with metals Alkaline solution (pH 12.5) with Waste Category: Fresno TSD County: CAD093459485 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1430 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: SUPER SHUTTLE Contact: CAD983666371 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 1.2091 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Unspecified organic liquid mixture Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAL000113451 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1430 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: SUPER SHUTTLE Contact: CAD983666371 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .1834 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT000613893 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1430 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: SUPER SHUTTLE Contact: CAD983666371 Gepaid: HAZNET: corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource Environmental Interest/Information System 110002897731 Registry ID: FINDS: SUPER SHUTTLE (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 223 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 20 additional CA_HAZNET: record(s) in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access Orange Facility County: 1.1258 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Unspecified organic liquid mixture Waste Category: San Mateo TSD County: CAD009452657 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1430 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: SUPER SHUTTLE Contact: CAD983666371 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.2502 Tons: Not reported Disposal Method: Unspecified organic liquid mixture Waste Category: San Mateo TSD County: CAD009452657 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1430 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: SUPER SHUTTLE Contact: CAD983666371 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .1292 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: thallium, vanadium, and zinc) cobalt, copper, lead, mercury, molybdenum, nickel, selenium, silver, SUPER SHUTTLE (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] Not reported LOC Case Number: 083000021T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 1986-07-09 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8170848 Latitude: T0605900018 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 3288 ft. Site 3 of 7 in cluster AA 0.623 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 155 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 East 1244 S CLAUDINA ST N/A AA169 LUST AEROSCIENTIFIC CORPORATION II S109284262 TC2760975.2s Page 224 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: AEROSCIENTIFIC CORPORATION II (Continued) S109284262 EGK Thomas Bros Code: EGK Location Code: EGK Lead Agency: EGK Substance: EGK Staff: 8 Region: 39604 Facility Status: Soil and Groundwater Type: SLIC: 3289 ft. Site 4 of 7 in cluster AA 0.623 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 155 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA East 1244 S CLAUDINA STREET N/A AA170 SLIC SMTEK (FORMER AERO DDL) S108985875 Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: DATA-DESIGN LABORATORIES Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: Not reported Contact telephone: Not reported Contact country: Not reported Not reported Contact address: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 1244 S. CLAUDINA ST Mailing address: CAT080010812 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 1244 S CLAUDINA ST Facility address: AEROSCIENTIFIC CORP PLT 3 Facility name: 09/01/1996 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: 3289 ft. HIST UST Site 5 of 7 in cluster AA 0.623 mi. LUST Relative: Higher Actual: 155 ft. 1/2-1 HIST CORTESE ANAHEIM, CA 92805 East FINDS 1244 S. CLAUDINA ST. CAT080010812 AA171 RCRA-SQG AEROSCIENTIFIC CORPORATION [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 225 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 110002145269 Registry ID: FINDS: No violations found Violation Status: Large Quantity Generator Classification: AEROSCIENTIFIC CORP PLT 3 Facility name: 08/18/1980 Date form received by agency: Large Quantity Generator Classification: AEROSCIENTIFIC CORP PLANT 3 Site name: AEROSCIENTIFIC CORP PLT 3 Facility name: 04/04/1990 Date form received by agency: Large Quantity Generator Classification: AEROSCIENTIFIC CORP PLANT 3 Site name: AEROSCIENTIFIC CORP PLT 3 Facility name: 02/28/1992 Date form received by agency: Small Quantity Generator Classification: AEROSCIENTIFIC CORP PLT 3 Facility name: 09/01/1996 Date form received by agency: Historical Generators: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: Unknown Furnace exemption: Unknown On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): Unknown U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: AEROSCIENTIFIC CORPORATION (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 226 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 7/9/1986 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: Not reported Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: Not reported Review Date: Not reported Enter Date: Not reported How Stopped Date: T0605900018 Global ID: Not reported Leak Source: Not reported Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Not reported How Discovered: Not reported Funding: CLOS Enf Type: BALL Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Gasoline Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083000021T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 083000021T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: CORTESE: corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource transported off-site. these facilities release directly to air, water, land, or that are from facilities on the amounts of over 300 listed toxic chemicals that US EPA TRIS (Toxics Release Inventory System) contains information their precursors, as well as hazardous air pollutants (HAPs). on stationary and mobile sources that emit criteria air pollutants and The NEI (National Emissions Inventory) database contains information Environmental Interest/Information System AEROSCIENTIFIC CORPORATION (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 227 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Visual Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: Not reported Type of Fuel: Not reported Tank Used for: 00004085 Tank Capacity: 1965 Year Installed: 31 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 Owner City,St,Zip: 1244 S. CLAUDINA Owner Address: AEROSCIENTIFIC CORP. Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Not reported Contact Name: 0000 Total Tanks: ELECTRONICS MFG. Other Type: Other Facility Type: 00000050030 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: UNK Staff Initials: PAH Staff: * MTBE Class: Site NOT Tested for MTBE.Includes Unknown and Not Analyzed. MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8170848 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: AEROSCIENTIFIC CORPORATION (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] -117.90508 Longitude: 33.81686 Latitude: 4161 Global ID: UST: 3289 ft. Site 6 of 7 in cluster AA 0.623 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 155 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 East Orange Co. Industrial Site 1244 S CLAUDINA ST N/A AA172 UST AEROSCIENTIFIC CORP U003713537 TC2760975.2s Page 228 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation COPPER ETCHANTS Released Chemical: Not reported Closure Type: OPEN Current Status: RO0000376 Record ID: ORANGE Region: 92IC003 Case ID: Orange Co. Industrial Site: AEROSCIENTIFIC CORP (Continued) U003713537 Visual Leak Detection: 4 inches Tank Construction: Not reported Type of Fuel: WASTE Tank Used for: 00003000 Tank Capacity: 1964 Year Installed: 30 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 Owner City,St,Zip: 1244 SOUTH CLAUDINA STREET Owner Address: AEROSCIENTIFIC CORP. Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Not reported Contact Name: 0001 Total Tanks: ELECTRONICS MFG. Other Type: Other Facility Type: 00000024848 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: 3289 ft. Site 7 of 7 in cluster AA 0.623 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 155 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 East 1244 S CLAUDINA ST N/A AA173 HIST UST AEROSCIENTIFIC CORP-PLANT III U001578715 Not reported Year Installed: 1 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 Owner City,St,Zip: 200 SOUTH ANAHEIM BOULEVARD, S Owner Address: CITY OF ANAHEIM-DEPARTMENT OF Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: BOB Contact Name: 0001 Total Tanks: FIRE STATION Other Type: Other Facility Type: 00000056384 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: 3289 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster Y 0.623 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 144 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 SE 1563 S MANCHESTER AVE N/A Y174 HIST UST FIRE STATION #3 U001578747 TC2760975.2s Page 229 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: DIESEL Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00000550 Tank Capacity: FIRE STATION #3 (Continued) U001578747 Not reported Refillable Beverage Containers Redeemed: Not reported Other mat beverage containers redeemed: PL Plastic Beverage Containers Redeemed: GL Glass Beverage Containers Redeemed: AL Aluminum Beverage Containers Redeemed: Not Accepted Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located 7: Not Accepted Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located 6: Not Accepted Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located 5: Not Accepted Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located 4: Not Accepted Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located 3: Not Accepted Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located 2: 4752 Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located: Not reported Whether The Facility Is Grandfathered: Still operating Date facility ceased operating: 10/21/1999 Date facility began operating: 9/30/1999 Date facility became certified: Not reported Facility Phone Number: O Certification Status: 3349 ft. Site 2 of 3 in cluster AB 0.634 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 149 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ESE 1440 S ANAHEIM BLVD N/A AB175 B J RECYCLING S107136678 Not reported Other mat beverage containers redeemed: PL Plastic Beverage Containers Redeemed: GL Glass Beverage Containers Redeemed: AL Aluminum Beverage Containers Redeemed: Not Accepted Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located 7: Not Accepted Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located 6: Not Accepted Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located 5: Not Accepted Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located 4: Not Accepted Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located 3: Not Accepted Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located 2: 4752 Convenience Zone Where Faciltiy Located: Not reported Whether The Facility Is Grandfathered: Still operating Date facility ceased operating: 6/26/2006 Date facility began operating: 6/8/2006 Date facility became certified: (714) 465-6732 Facility Phone Number: O Certification Status: 3406 ft. Site 3 of 3 in cluster AB 0.645 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 148 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ESE 1459 S ANAHEIM BLVD N/A AB176 SANCHEZ RECYCLING CENTER S107869743 TC2760975.2s Page 230 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Refillable Beverage Containers Redeemed: SANCHEZ RECYCLING CENTER (Continued) S107869743 Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083001436T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 1992-05-15 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8181069 Latitude: T0605901088 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 3421 ft. Site 1 of 4 in cluster AC 0.648 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 157 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 East 315 E BALL RD N/A AC177 LUST GRUBBS, DAVID S109284360 LONG BEACH, CA 90815 2708 PALO VERDE Owner/operator address: JOSE LUIS GONZALEZ Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: (714) 502-9121 Contact telephone: US Contact country: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 1303 S CLAUDINA Contact address: HEATHER HILTON Contact: CAR000059535 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 1303 S CLAUDINA Facility address: TEXTURED DESIGN Facility name: 11/23/1999 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: 3429 ft. Site 1 of 5 in cluster AD 0.649 mi. EMI Relative: Higher Actual: 155 ft. 1/2-1 HAZNET ANAHEIM, CA 92805 East FINDS 1303 S CLAUDINA CAR000059535 AD178 RCRA-SQG TEXTURED DESIGN [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 231 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation estimation of total national emissions. AFS is undergoing a major to comply with regulatory programs and by EPA as an input for the AFS data are utilized by states to prepare State Implementation Plans used to track emissions and compliance data from industrial plants. information concerning airborne pollution in the United States. AFS is Aerometric Data (SAROAD). AIRS is the national repository for National Emission Data System (NEDS), and the Storage and Retrieval of replaces the former Compliance Data System (CDS), the AFS (Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS) Facility Environmental Interest/Information System 110001188456 Registry ID: FINDS: No violations found Violation Status: WHICH WOULD BE CONSIDERED AS IGNITABLE HAZARDOUS WASTE. MATERIAL. LACQUER THINNER IS AN EXAMPLE OF A COMMONLY USED SOLVENT WHICH CAN BE OBTAINED FROM THE MANUFACTURER OR DISTRIBUTOR OF THE FLASH POINT OF A WASTE IS TO REVIEW THE MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET, CLOSED CUP FLASH POINT TESTER. ANOTHER METHOD OF DETERMINING THE LESS THAN 140 DEGREES FAHRENHEIT AS DETERMINED BY A PENSKY-MARTENS IGNITABLE HAZARDOUS WASTES ARE THOSE WASTES WHICH HAVE A FLASHPOINT OF Waste name: D001 Waste code: Hazardous Waste Summary: Small Quantity Generator Classification: TEXTURED DESIGN Facility name: 11/23/1999 Date form received by agency: Historical Generators: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: No Furnace exemption: No On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): No U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (714) 502-9125 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: TEXTURED DESIGN (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 232 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation CAR000059535 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .9173 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Off-specification, aged, or surplus organics Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD008252405 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1303 S CLAUDINA Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: JOSE LUIS GONZALEZ Contact: CAR000059535 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .6250 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Other organic solids Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD008252405 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1303 S CLAUDINA Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: JOSE LUIS GONZALEZ Contact: CAR000059535 Gepaid: HAZNET: corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource transported off-site. these facilities release directly to air, water, land, or that are from facilities on the amounts of over 300 listed toxic chemicals that US EPA TRIS (Toxics Release Inventory System) contains information facilities. generators, transporters, and treatment, storage, and disposal provides California with information on hazardous waste shipments for California Hazardous Waste Tracking System - Datamart (HWTS-DATAMART) their precursors, as well as hazardous air pollutants (HAPs). on stationary and mobile sources that emit criteria air pollutants and The NEI (National Emissions Inventory) database contains information of the Clean Air Act. redesign to support facility operating permits required under Title V TEXTURED DESIGN (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 233 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 3444 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 48066 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1987 Year: EMI: 11 additional CA_HAZNET: record(s) in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access Not reported Facility County: 0.3 Tons: Not reported Disposal Method: Other organic solids Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: Not reported TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1303 S CLAUDINA Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: Not reported Telephone: JOSE LUIS GONZALEZ Contact: CAR000059535 Gepaid: Not reported Facility County: 2.29 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Off-specification, aged, or surplus organics Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: Not reported TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1303 S CLAUDINA Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: Not reported Telephone: JOSE LUIS GONZALEZ Contact: CAR000059535 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.22 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Off-specification, aged, or surplus organics Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD008252405 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928056235 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1303 S CLAUDINA ST STE N Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: JOSE LUIS GONZALEZ Contact: TEXTURED DESIGN (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 234 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 1 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 3599 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 48066 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1990 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 3 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: TEXTURED DESIGN (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] 8 Region: LUST REG 8: Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Local Agency File Location: 89UT207 LOC Case Number: 083001369T RB Case Number: ORANGE COUNTY LOP Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ORANGE COUNTY LOP Lead Agency: 1990-02-07 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -117.904143 Longitude: 33.816095 Latitude: T0605901033 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 083001369T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: CORTESE: 3435 ft. Site 2 of 5 in cluster AD 0.651 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 155 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 East LUST 1304 CLAUDINA N/A AD179 HIST CORTESE BELL INDUSTRIES S102852324 TC2760975.2s Page 235 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: MUN Beneficial: Not reported Hydr Basin 30000L Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: WJ Staff Initials: PAH Staff: * MTBE Class: Site NOT Tested for MTBE.Includes Unknown and Not Analyzed. MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8157508 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: Not reported Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 2/7/1990 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 10/19/1989 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: Not reported Review Date: Not reported Enter Date: 9/9/9999 How Stopped Date: T0605901033 Global ID: Unknown Leak Source: Unknown Leak Cause: Close Tank How Stopped: Tank Closure How Discovered: Not reported Funding: Not reported Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: 0 Qty Leaked: Regular Gasoline Substance: Soil only Case Type: 89UT207 Local Case Num: 083001369T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: BELL INDUSTRIES (Continued) S102852324 TC2760975.2s Page 236 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Visual Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: REGULAR Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00001000 Tank Capacity: 1966 Year Installed: 1 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 Owner City,St,Zip: 1304 SO. CLAUDINA ST. Owner Address: FS BUILDING CO. Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Not reported Contact Name: 0001 Total Tanks: WHOLESALE DIST. Other Type: Other Facility Type: 00000054805 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: 3435 ft. Site 3 of 5 in cluster AD 0.651 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 155 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 East 1304 S CLAUDINA ST N/A AD180 HIST UST FAB STEEL SUPPLY, INC. U001578744 -117.90474 Longitude: 33.81581 Latitude: 14262 Global ID: UST: 3435 ft. Site 4 of 5 in cluster AD 0.651 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 155 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 East 1304 S CLAUDINA ST N/A AD181 UST BELL INDUSTRIES INC U003641741 Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 251 E PALAIS RD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: JAMES D INGHAM/GENERAL MANAGER Contact: CAL000189945 Gepaid: HAZNET: Anaheim Certified Unified Program Agencies: 28,850 Total Gallons: RYVEC INC Owner: AST: 3467 ft. Site 1 of 3 in cluster AE 0.657 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 152 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA ESE HAZNET 251 E PALAIS RD N/A AE182 AST [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 237 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: JAMES D INGHAM/GENERAL MANAGER Contact: CAL000189945 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.62 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Unspecified organic liquid mixture Waste Category: Orange TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 251 E PALAIS RD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: JAMES D INGHAM/GENERAL MANAGER Contact: CAL000189945 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.18 Tons: H141 Disposal Method: Off-specification, aged, or surplus organics Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD028409019 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 251 E PALAIS RD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: JAMES D INGHAM/GENERAL MANAGER Contact: CAL000189945 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.36 Tons: H141 Disposal Method: Off-specification, aged, or surplus organics Waste Category: Not reported TSD County: AZR000501510 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 251 E PALAIS RD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: JAMES D INGHAM/GENERAL MANAGER Contact: CAL000189945 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.07 Tons: H039 Disposal Method: Waste oil and mixed oil Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 238 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 16 additional CA_HAZNET: record(s) in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access Orange Facility County: 0.41 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Waste oil and mixed oil Waste Category: Orange TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 251 E PALAIS RD Mailing Address: (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] -117.90512 Longitude: 33.81363 Latitude: 3903 Global ID: UST: 3467 ft. Site 2 of 3 in cluster AE 0.657 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 152 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ESE 251 E PALAIS RD N/A AE183 UST JOHN PIERRE APPARELL U003778907 LUST REG 8: Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Local Agency File Location: 89UT143 LOC Case Number: 083001070T RB Case Number: ORANGE COUNTY LOP Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ORANGE COUNTY LOP Lead Agency: 1990-04-30 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8133616 Latitude: T0605900844 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 083001070T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: CORTESE: 3484 ft. Site 3 of 3 in cluster AE 0.660 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 152 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ESE LUST 251 PALAIS N/A AE184 HIST CORTESE JOHN PIERRE APPAREL S102431957 TC2760975.2s Page 239 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: MUN Beneficial: Not reported Hydr Basin 30000L Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: WJ Staff Initials: PAH Staff: * MTBE Class: Site NOT Tested for MTBE.Includes Unknown and Not Analyzed. MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8137008 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: Not reported Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 4/30/1990 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 8/2/1989 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: Not reported Review Date: Not reported Enter Date: 9/9/9999 How Stopped Date: T0605900844 Global ID: Unknown Leak Source: Unknown Leak Cause: Close Tank How Stopped: Tank Closure How Discovered: Not reported Funding: Not reported Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: 0 Qty Leaked: Gasoline Substance: Soil only Case Type: 89UT143 Local Case Num: 083001070T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: JOHN PIERRE APPAREL (Continued) S102431957 TC2760975.2s Page 240 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation * MTBE Class: Site NOT Tested for MTBE.Includes Unknown and Not Analyzed. MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8181967 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 3/5/1990 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 5/15/1992 Close Date: 1/1/1965 Enforcement Date: 1/8/1990 Discover Date: 3/6/1990 Prelim Assess: 3/1/1990 Review Date: 3/5/1990 Enter Date: Not reported How Stopped Date: T0605901088 Global ID: Not reported Leak Source: Not reported Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Not reported How Discovered: Not reported Funding: CLOS Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Gasoline Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083001436T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 083001436T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: CORTESE: 3493 ft. Site 2 of 4 in cluster AC 0.662 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 157 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 East LUST 315 BALL RD N/A AC185 HIST CORTESE GRUBBS, DAVID S102431007 TC2760975.2s Page 241 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: UNK Staff Initials: CAB Staff: GRUBBS, DAVID (Continued) S102431007 Not reported Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (714) 563-1000 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 1332 S CLAUDINA ST Owner/operator address: ZIGMANT J KANSTUL Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: Private Land type: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: (714) 563-1000 Contact telephone: US Contact country: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 1332 S CLAUDINA ST Contact address: ZIGMANT KANSTUL Contact: CAD047780648 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 1332 S CLAUDINA ST Facility address: KANSTUL MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS Facility name: 09/16/1992 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: 3525 ft. Site 5 of 5 in cluster AD 0.668 mi. EMI Relative: Higher Actual: 155 ft. 1/2-1 HAZNET ANAHEIM, CA 92805 East FINDS 1332 S CLAUDINA ST CAD047780648 AD186 RCRA-SQG KANSTUL MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS IN [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 242 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation facilities. generators, transporters, and treatment, storage, and disposal provides California with information on hazardous waste shipments for California Hazardous Waste Tracking System - Datamart (HWTS-DATAMART) their precursors, as well as hazardous air pollutants (HAPs). on stationary and mobile sources that emit criteria air pollutants and The NEI (National Emissions Inventory) database contains information Environmental Interest/Information System 110002417171 Registry ID: FINDS: State Evaluation lead agency: 03/17/2008 Date achieved compliance: Generators - General Area of violation: COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Evaluation: 02/19/2008 Evaluation date: Evaluation Action Summary: Not reported Paid penalty amount: Not reported Final penalty amount: Not reported Proposed penalty amount: Not reported Enforcement lead agency: Not reported Enf. disp. status date: Not reported Enf. disposition status: Not reported Enforcement action date: Not reported Enforcement action: State Violation lead agency: 03/17/2008 Date achieved compliance: 02/19/2008 Date violation determined: Generators - General Area of violation: Not reported Regulation violated: Facility Has Received Notices of Violations: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: No Furnace exemption: No On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): No U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: KANSTUL MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS IN (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 243 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: MARK KANSTUL/SUPERVISOR Contact: CAD047780648 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 1.8 Tons: H039 Disposal Method: Waste oil and mixed oil Waste Category: 99 TSD County: NVT330010000 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928056234 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1332 S CLAUDINA ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: MARK KANSTUL/SUPERVISOR Contact: CAD047780648 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.55 Tons: H132 Disposal Method: Waste oil and mixed oil Waste Category: 99 TSD County: NVT330010000 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928056234 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1332 S CLAUDINA ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: MARK KANSTUL/SUPERVISOR Contact: CAD047780648 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.34 Tons: H141 Disposal Method: Unspecified organic liquid mixture Waste Category: Sacramento TSD County: CAD980884183 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928056234 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1332 S CLAUDINA ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: MARK KANSTUL/SUPERVISOR Contact: CAD047780648 Gepaid: HAZNET: corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource KANSTUL MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS IN (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 244 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 3087 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 4424 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1990 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 7 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 7 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 3079 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 4424 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1987 Year: EMI: 91 additional CA_HAZNET: record(s) in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access Orange Facility County: 0.834 Tons: H141 Disposal Method: Liquids with pH 2 with metals Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD097030993 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928056234 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1332 S CLAUDINA ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: MARK KANSTUL/SUPERVISOR Contact: CAD047780648 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.45 Tons: H132 Disposal Method: Other inorganic solid waste Waste Category: 99 TSD County: NVT330010000 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928056234 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1332 S CLAUDINA ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: KANSTUL MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS IN (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 245 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 6 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 3931 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 91351 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1996 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 5 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 3931 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 91351 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1995 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 5 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 3931 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 91351 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1993 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 2 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 2 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: KANSTUL MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS IN (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 246 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 91351 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 2000 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 2 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 3931 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 91351 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1999 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 2 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 3931 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 91351 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1998 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 2 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 3931 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 91351 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1997 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: KANSTUL MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS IN (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 247 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 0 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 3931 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 91351 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 2003 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 0 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 3931 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 91351 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 2002 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 0 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 3931 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 91351 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 2001 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 2 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 3931 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: KANSTUL MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS IN (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 248 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation .0027704 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: .0029 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: .00022 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: .05393 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: .02093 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: .032613275 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: .04014 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 3931 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 91351 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 2005 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0.002058 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0.0002277 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0.03575 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0.009625 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0.03 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 0.030765 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 3931 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 91351 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 2004 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: KANSTUL MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS IN (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] Not reported Not reported Contact address: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 323 E BALL RD Mailing address: CAD051971695 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 323 EAST BALL RD Facility address: DICO COMPANY Facility name: 09/01/1996 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: 3539 ft. Site 3 of 4 in cluster AC 0.670 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 157 ft. 1/2-1 RAATS ANAHEIM, CA 92805 East FINDS 323 EAST BALL RD CAD051971695 AC187 RCRA-SQG DICO COMPANY [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 249 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Large Quantity Generator Classification: DICO COMPANY Facility name: 05/21/1981 Date form received by agency: Historical Generators: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: Unknown Furnace exemption: Unknown On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): Unknown U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: DYNEER CORPORATION Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: Facility is not located on Indian land. Additional information is not known. Land type: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: Not reported Contact telephone: Not reported Contact country: DICO COMPANY (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 250 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation EPA Evaluation lead agency: 02/26/1995 Date achieved compliance: LDR - General Area of violation: NON-FINANCIAL RECORD REVIEW Evaluation: 02/26/1990 Evaluation date: EPA Evaluation lead agency: 02/26/1995 Date achieved compliance: Generators - General Area of violation: NON-FINANCIAL RECORD REVIEW Evaluation: 02/26/1990 Evaluation date: Evaluation Action Summary: Not reported Paid penalty amount: Not reported Final penalty amount: Not reported Proposed penalty amount: EPA Enforcement lead agency: Not reported Enf. disp. status date: Not reported Enf. disposition status: 09/27/1990 Enforcement action date: INITIAL 3008(A) COMPLIANCE Enforcement action: EPA Violation lead agency: 02/26/1995 Date achieved compliance: 02/26/1990 Date violation determined: LDR - General Area of violation: FR - 268.7 Regulation violated: Not reported Paid penalty amount: Not reported Final penalty amount: Not reported Proposed penalty amount: EPA Enforcement lead agency: Not reported Enf. disp. status date: Not reported Enf. disposition status: 09/27/1990 Enforcement action date: INITIAL 3008(A) COMPLIANCE Enforcement action: EPA Violation lead agency: 02/26/1995 Date achieved compliance: 02/26/1990 Date violation determined: Generators - General Area of violation: FR - 262.50-60 Regulation violated: Not reported Paid penalty amount: Not reported Final penalty amount: Not reported Proposed penalty amount: EPA Enforcement lead agency: Not reported Enf. disp. status date: Not reported Enf. disposition status: 09/27/1990 Enforcement action date: INITIAL 3008(A) COMPLIANCE Enforcement action: EPA Violation lead agency: 02/26/1995 Date achieved compliance: 02/26/1990 Date violation determined: Generators - General Area of violation: FR - 262.20-23.B Regulation violated: Facility Has Received Notices of Violations: DICO COMPANY (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 251 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Incident Tracking, Compliance Assistance, and Compliance Monitoring. that support Compliance and Enforcement programs. These include; has the capability to track other activities occurring in the Region that information with Federal actions already in the system. ICIS also Compliance System (PCS) which supports the NPDES and will integrate it Headquarters. A future release of ICIS will replace the Permit information is maintained in ICIS by EPA in the Regional offices and Federal Administrative and Judicial enforcement actions. This a single repository for that information. Currently, ICIS contains all replace EPA’s independent databases that contain Enforcement data with information across most of EPA’s programs. The vision for ICIS is to complete, will contain integrated Enforcement and Compliance Compliance Information System and provides a database that, when ICIS (Integrated Compliance Information System) is the Integrated corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource Environmental Interest/Information System 110002648662 Registry ID: FINDS: DICO COMPANY (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] -117.90456 Longitude: 33.81819 Latitude: 7113 Global ID: UST: 3539 ft. Site 4 of 4 in cluster AC 0.670 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 157 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 East 323 E BALL RD N/A AC188 UST DYCORP U003780810 Anaheim Certified Unified Program Agencies: 16,000 Total Gallons: RYVEC INC Owner: AST: 3553 ft. Site 1 of 3 in cluster AF 0.673 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 155 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA East 1341 S CLAUDINA ST N/A AF189 AST A100324861 TC2760975.2s Page 252 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Site NOT Tested for MTBE.Includes Unknown and Not Analyzed. MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8181246 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 11/18/1994 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: 8/22/1994 Workplan: 9/5/1995 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 3/2/1993 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: 6/3/1993 Review Date: 11/18/1994 Enter Date: Not reported How Stopped Date: T0605901785 Global ID: Piping Leak Source: UNK Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Tank Closure How Discovered: Not reported Funding: CLOS Enf Type: WALNUT Cross Street: approved site Excavate and Dispose - remove contaminated soil and dispose in Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Gasoline Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083002537T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 083002537T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: CORTESE: 3567 ft. Site 1 of 10 in cluster AG 0.676 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 132 ft. 1/2-1 WIP ANAHEIM, CA 92808 West LUST 1180 BALL RD N/A AG190 HIST CORTESE U S POST OFFICE S103248953 TC2760975.2s Page 253 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Facility Suite: UNIDENTIFIED Staff: Historical File Status: 112.0352 File Number: 4 Region: WIP: ON 3/2/94 (DISPOSAL OF SOIL ON 5/5/94) LOW LEVELS OF CONTAMINATION BELOW DISPENSER WAS REMEDIATED BY OVER EXCAVATION Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: ROW Staff Initials: VJJ Staff: * MTBE Class: U S POST OFFICE (Continued) S103248953 Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-008139-000001 Tank Id: 262 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 02-12-92 Act Date: 02-12-92 Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: 9 Number: 8139 Comp Number: A Status: SWEEPS UST: Active Status: Not reported Comments: Not reported EPA ID: Not reported NPDES Number: Not reported DUNs Number: Not reported Contact Phone: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM 92802 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address 2: ATTN: FRED SPAHN 677 AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mail To: [PHONE REDACTED] Facility Phone: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported Cortese Code: Not reported Regulated ID: UTNKA Regulated By: 30017058 Facility ID: CA FID UST: 3570 ft. Site 2 of 10 in cluster AG 0.676 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 132 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 West SWEEPS UST 1180 W BALL RD N/A AG191 CA FID UST HOLIDAY STATION S101619850 TC2760975.2s Page 254 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 1 Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: W Stg: M. V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: HOLIDAY STATION (Continued) S101619850 No U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Federal Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: U S POSTAL SERVICE Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: Federal Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: (714) 848-9994 Contact telephone: US Contact country: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 1180 W BALL ROAD Contact address: ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGER Contact: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 W BALL ROAD Mailing address: CA2180090464 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 1180 W BALL ROAD Facility address: USPS ANAHEIM HOLIDAY STATION Facility name: 06/02/1988 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: 3570 ft. Site 3 of 10 in cluster AG 0.676 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 132 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 West FINDS 1180 W BALL ROAD CA2180090464 AG192 RCRA-SQG USPS ANAHEIM HOLIDAY STATION [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 255 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource Environmental Interest/Information System 110002625099 Registry ID: FINDS: No violations found Violation Status: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: No Furnace exemption: No On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): USPS ANAHEIM HOLIDAY STATION (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] Stock Inventor Leak Detection: 7/16 inches Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00010000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: HOL-1 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: SANTA ANA, CA 92799 Owner City,St,Zip: 3101 W. SUNFLOWER Owner Address: U.S. POSTAL SERVICE Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: KAREN MARTIN Contact Name: 0001 Total Tanks: MAIL Other Type: Other Facility Type: 00000052267 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: 3570 ft. Site 4 of 10 in cluster AG 0.676 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 132 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 West 1180 W BALL RD N/A AG193 HIST UST HOLIDAY STATION U001578611 TC2760975.2s Page 256 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 1 Number Of Tanks: DIESEL Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 1000 Capacity: 07-17-92 Actv Date: 30-011-005823-000001 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 07-17-92 Act Date: 07-17-92 Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: 4 Number: 5823 Comp Number: A Status: SWEEPS UST: Active Status: Not reported Comments: Not reported EPA ID: Not reported NPDES Number: Not reported DUNs Number: Not reported Contact Phone: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM 92802 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 200 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mail To: [PHONE REDACTED] Facility Phone: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported Cortese Code: Not reported Regulated ID: UTNKA Regulated By: 30016257 Facility ID: CA FID UST: 3572 ft. 0.676 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 142 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 SSE SWEEPS UST 1580 S CLEMENTINE N/A 194 CA FID UST ANAHEIM FIRE STATION #3 S101589502 -117.90449 Longitude: 33.81508 Latitude: 3850 Global ID: UST: 3573 ft. Site 2 of 3 in cluster AF 0.677 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 155 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 East 1346 S CLAUDINA ST N/A AF195 UST PRECISION FRAMERS U003778864 TC2760975.2s Page 257 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083001634T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 1991-02-01 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8121759 Latitude: T0605901242 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 3584 ft. Site 1 of 8 in cluster AH 0.679 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 148 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ESE 1460 S ANAHEIM BLVD N/A AH196 LUST ANIK STOP S109284439 Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: Not reported Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 900021 Comp Number: Not reported Status: SWEEPS UST: Inactive Status: Not reported Comments: Not reported EPA ID: Not reported NPDES Number: Not reported DUNs Number: Not reported Contact Phone: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM 92805 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 146 E ORANGETHORPE Mailing Address: Not reported Mail To: [PHONE REDACTED] Facility Phone: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported Cortese Code: Not reported Regulated ID: UTNKI Regulated By: 30004499 Facility ID: CA FID UST: 3587 ft. Site 3 of 3 in cluster AF 0.679 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 154 ft. 1/2-1 HAZNET ANAHEIM, CA 92805 East SWEEPS UST 1350 S CLAUDINA ST N/A AF197 CA FID UST CUSTOM LAMINATORS S101589251 TC2760975.2s Page 258 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: .2293 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Unspecified solvent mixture Waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD008252405 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928010000 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: BRYAN INDUSTRIAL PROP Contact: CAC000602184 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .1251 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Latex waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD000088252 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928010000 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: BRYAN INDUSTRIAL PROP Contact: CAC000602184 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .0750 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Unspecified oil-containing waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD000088252 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928010000 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: BRYAN INDUSTRIAL PROP Contact: CAC000602184 Gepaid: HAZNET: 1 Number Of Tanks: DIESEL Content: PRODUCT Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-900021-000001 Tank Id: CUSTOM LAMINATORS (Continued) S101589251 TC2760975.2s Page 259 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Visual Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: DIESEL Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00005000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 3 Container Num: 003 Tank Num: Visual Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: REGULAR Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00010000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 2 Container Num: 002 Tank Num: Visual Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00010000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 1 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: LOS ANGELES, CA 90025 Owner City,St,Zip: 1990 WESTWOOD BLVD. Owner Address: LEDERER ANAHEIM, LTD. Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Not reported Contact Name: 0003 Total Tanks: Not reported Other Type: Gas Station Facility Type: 00000014772 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: 3590 ft. Site 2 of 8 in cluster AH 0.680 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 148 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ESE 1460 S ANAHEIM BLVD N/A AH198 HIST UST ADVANCED AUTOMOTIVE U001578714 -117.90608 Longitude: 33.81144 Latitude: 11045 Global ID: UST: 3590 ft. Site 3 of 8 in cluster AH 0.680 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 148 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ESE 1460 S ANAHEIM BLVD N/A AH199 UST ANIK STOP U003783054 TC2760975.2s Page 260 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation * MTBE Class: Site NOT Tested for MTBE.Includes Unknown and Not Analyzed. MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8121009 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 9/16/1990 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 2/1/1991 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 7/3/1990 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: 10/20/1989 Review Date: 9/16/1990 Enter Date: Not reported How Stopped Date: T0605901242 Global ID: Not reported Leak Source: Not reported Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Not reported How Discovered: Not reported Funding: CLOS Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Gasoline Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083001634T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 083001634T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: CORTESE: 3590 ft. Site 4 of 8 in cluster AH 0.680 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 148 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ESE LUST 1460 ANAHEIM BLVD N/A AH200 HIST CORTESE ANIK STOP S102424019 TC2760975.2s Page 261 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation GASOLINE AND DIESEL CONTAMINATION PRESENT IN THE SOIL. Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: ROW Staff Initials: PAH Staff: ANIK STOP (Continued) S102424019 Operator Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: Not reported Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: Not reported Not reported Owner/operator address: SEPHORA Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: 01/12/2001 Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: Not reported Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: Not reported Not reported Owner/operator address: DFS Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: [PHONE REDACTED] Contact telephone: US Contact country: SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94105 525 MARKET STREET Contact address: SANDI BAKER Contact: SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94105 525 MARKET STREET Mailing address: CAR000147470 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 1570 SOUTH DISNEYLAND DRIVE Facility address: SEPHORA STORE 30 ANAHEIM DISNEYLAND Facility name: 08/19/2003 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: 3589 ft. 0.680 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 132 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 SW HAZNET 1570 SOUTH DISNEYLAND DRIVE CAR000147470 201 RCRA-SQG SEPHORA STORE 30 ANAHEIM DISNEYLAND [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 262 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Gen County: SAN FRANCISCO, CA 941050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 525 MARKET ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: SANDI BAKER FACILITIES MGR Contact: CAR000147470 Gepaid: Not reported Facility County: 0.42 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Unspecified solvent mixture Waste Waste Category: 99 TSD County: AZD081705402 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SAN FRANCISCO, CA 941050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 525 MARKET ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: SANDI BAKER FACILITIES MGR Contact: CAR000147470 Gepaid: HAZNET: No violations found Violation Status: WHICH WOULD BE CONSIDERED AS IGNITABLE HAZARDOUS WASTE. MATERIAL. LACQUER THINNER IS AN EXAMPLE OF A COMMONLY USED SOLVENT WHICH CAN BE OBTAINED FROM THE MANUFACTURER OR DISTRIBUTOR OF THE FLASH POINT OF A WASTE IS TO REVIEW THE MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET, CLOSED CUP FLASH POINT TESTER. ANOTHER METHOD OF DETERMINING THE LESS THAN 140 DEGREES FAHRENHEIT AS DETERMINED BY A PENSKY-MARTENS IGNITABLE HAZARDOUS WASTES ARE THOSE WASTES WHICH HAVE A FLASHPOINT OF Waste name: D001 Waste code: Hazardous Waste Summary: Commercial status unknown Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: No Furnace exemption: No On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: No Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): No U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: 01/12/2001 Owner/Op start date: SEPHORA STORE 30 ANAHEIM DISNEYLAND (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 263 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 1 additional CA_HAZNET: record(s) in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access Orange Facility County: 0.39 Tons: H061 Disposal Method: Off-specification, aged, or surplus organics Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD008252405 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SAN FRANCISCO, CA 941050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 425 MARKET ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: SANDI BAKER FACILITIES MGR Contact: CAR000147470 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.15 Tons: H061 Disposal Method: Unspecified solvent mixture Waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD008364432 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SAN FRANCISCO, CA 941050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 425 MARKET ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: SANDI BAKER FACILITIES MGR Contact: CAR000147470 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.5445 Tons: H061 Disposal Method: Off-specification, aged, or surplus organics Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD008252405 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: SAN FRANCISCO, CA 941050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 425 MARKET ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: SANDI BAKER FACILITIES MGR Contact: CAR000147470 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.04 Tons: H06 Disposal Method: Unspecified solvent mixture Waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD008364432 TSD EPA ID: SEPHORA STORE 30 ANAHEIM DISNEYLAND (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 264 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083002537T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 1995-09-05 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8179592 Latitude: T0605901785 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 3628 ft. Site 5 of 10 in cluster AG 0.687 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 132 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92808 West 1180 W BALL RD N/A AG202 LUST U S POST OFFICE S109284765 Not reported Site History: Waste Oil / Motor / Hydraulic / Lubricating Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083001679T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 1992-03-25 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8088042 Latitude: T0605901265 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 3722 ft. Site 5 of 8 in cluster AH 0.705 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 148 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 SE 1601 S ANAHEIM BLVD N/A AH203 LUST WONDRIES TOYOTA OF ANAHEIM S109284458 Other Facility Type: 00000053742 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: 3726 ft. Site 6 of 8 in cluster AH 0.706 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 148 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 SE 1601 S ANAHEIM BLVD N/A AH204 HIST UST ANAHEIM TOYOTA [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 265 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Visual Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: WASTE OIL Type of Fuel: WASTE Tank Used for: 00000000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 3 Container Num: 003 Tank Num: Visual Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: WASTE OIL Type of Fuel: WASTE Tank Used for: 00000000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 2 Container Num: 002 Tank Num: Visual, Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00002000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 1 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 Owner City,St,Zip: 1601 SO. ANAHEIM BLVD. Owner Address: C.A.M.T. INC. Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: BERNIE EMMERICH Contact Name: 0003 Total Tanks: AUTO DEALER Other Type: ANAHEIM TOYOTA (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] Waste Oil Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083001679T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 083001679T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: CORTESE: HAZNET 3726 ft. Orange Co. Industrial Site Site 7 of 8 in cluster AH 0.706 mi. SWEEPS UST Relative: Lower Actual: 148 ft. 1/2-1 CA FID UST ANAHEIM, CA 92805 SE LUST 1601 ANAHEIM BLVD N/A AH205 HIST CORTESE WONDRIES TOYOTA OF ANAHEIM S101589312 TC2760975.2s Page 266 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Mail To: [PHONE REDACTED] Facility Phone: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported Cortese Code: Not reported Regulated ID: UTNKA Regulated By: 30005889 Facility ID: CA FID UST: Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: Not reported Staff Initials: CAB Staff: * MTBE Class: Not Required to be Tested. MTBE Tested: 0 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8101039 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 12/15/1990 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 3/25/1992 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 10/18/1990 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: 10/18/1990 Review Date: 12/15/1990 Enter Date: Not reported How Stopped Date: T0605901265 Global ID: Not reported Leak Source: Not reported Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Not reported How Discovered: Not reported Funding: CLOS Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: WONDRIES TOYOTA OF ANAHEIM (Continued) S101589312 TC2760975.2s Page 267 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-001928-000008 Tank Id: 443 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 02-11-92 Act Date: 02-11-92 Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: 9 Number: 1928 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: W Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 2000 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-001928-000005 Tank Id: 443 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 02-11-92 Act Date: 02-11-92 Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: 9 Number: 1928 Comp Number: A Status: 3 Number Of Tanks: JET FUEL Content: P Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 550 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-001928-000001 Tank Id: 443 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 02-11-92 Act Date: 02-11-92 Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: 9 Number: 1928 Comp Number: A Status: SWEEPS UST: Active Status: Not reported Comments: Not reported EPA ID: Not reported NPDES Number: Not reported DUNs Number: Not reported Contact Phone: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM 92805 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 902 VAN NESS AVE Mailing Address: WONDRIES TOYOTA OF ANAHEIM (Continued) S101589312 TC2760975.2s Page 268 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Oil/water separation sludge Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1601 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: FCI CONSTRUCTORS Contact: CAC001443256 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .8340 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Latex waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080033681 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1601 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: FCI CONSTRUCTORS Contact: CAC001443256 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .8428 Tons: Disposal, Land Fill Disposal Method: Other organic solids Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080033681 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1601 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: FCI CONSTRUCTORS Contact: CAC001443256 Gepaid: HAZNET: PAINT / STAIN / THINNER WASTE Released Chemical: Closed pre 1994, file review required to determine closure type Closure Type: CLOSED 10/20/1992 Current Status: RO0000356 Record ID: ORANGE Region: 92IC011 Case ID: Orange Co. Industrial Site: Not reported Number Of Tanks: JET FUEL Content: W Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 550 Capacity: WONDRIES TOYOTA OF ANAHEIM (Continued) S101589312 TC2760975.2s Page 269 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation additional CA_HAZNET: detail in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access Orange Facility County: .0400 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Unspecified solvent mixture Waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD008252405 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1601 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: FCI CONSTRUCTORS Contact: CAC001443256 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .1000 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Off-specification, aged, or surplus organics Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD008252405 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1601 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: FCI CONSTRUCTORS Contact: CAC001443256 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 5.4210 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: WONDRIES TOYOTA OF ANAHEIM (Continued) S101589312 Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083002771T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 083002771T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: CORTESE: 3735 ft. Site 1 of 3 in cluster AI 0.707 mi. HAZNET Relative: Lower Actual: 131 ft. 1/2-1 CA FID UST ANAHEIM, CA 92802 West LUST 1240 WALNUT ST N/A AI206 HIST CORTESE CONESTOGA HOTEL S101589637 TC2760975.2s Page 270 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Facility Phone: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported Cortese Code: Not reported Regulated ID: UTNKA Regulated By: 30017766 Facility ID: CA FID UST: Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: ROW Staff Initials: CAB Staff: * MTBE Class: MTBE Detected. Site tested for MTBE & MTBE detected MTBE Tested: 0 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 2 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8173036 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 12/19/1995 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 11/17/1996 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 9/14/1994 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: 9/14/1994 Review Date: 12/19/1995 Enter Date: Not reported How Stopped Date: T0605901911 Global ID: Not reported Leak Source: Not reported Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Not reported How Discovered: Not reported Funding: CLOS Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Diesel Substance: CONESTOGA HOTEL (Continued) S101589637 TC2760975.2s Page 271 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: 1.3552 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Waste oil and mixed oil Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1240 S WALNUT ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: DEL HEIL Contact: CAC001024744 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 10.0000 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Other empty containers 30 gallons or more Waste Category: 7 TSD County: CAD982484933 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928020000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1240 S WALNUT ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: DEL HEIL Contact: CAC001024744 Gepaid: HAZNET: Active Status: Not reported Comments: Not reported EPA ID: Not reported NPDES Number: Not reported DUNs Number: Not reported Contact Phone: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM 92802 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 1240 S WALNUT ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mail To: CONESTOGA HOTEL (Continued) S101589637 10965 Comp Number: A Status: SWEEPS UST: -117.9283 Longitude: 33.81667 Latitude: 3724 Global ID: UST: 3735 ft. Site 2 of 3 in cluster AI 0.707 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 131 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 West SWEEPS UST 1240 S WALNUT ST N/A AI207 UST CONESTOGA HOTEL U003778794 TC2760975.2s Page 272 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: W Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-010965-000002 Tank Id: 1494 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 06-30-90 Created Date: 03-19-92 Act Date: 03-19-92 Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: 9 Number: 10965 Comp Number: A Status: 2 Number Of Tanks: GASHOL Content: W Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-010965-000001 Tank Id: 1494 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 06-30-90 Created Date: 03-19-92 Act Date: 03-19-92 Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: 9 Number: CONESTOGA HOTEL (Continued) U003778794 Not reported Site History: Diesel Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083002771T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 1996-11-17 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8172812 Latitude: T0605901911 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 3739 ft. Site 3 of 3 in cluster AI 0.708 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 131 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 West 1240 S WALNUT ST N/A AI208 LUST CONESTOGA HOTEL S109284764 TC2760975.2s Page 273 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: No Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): No U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: 04/07/1986 Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: Not reported Owner/operator telephone: US Owner/operator country: ANAHEIM, CA 92803 P.O. BOX 3232 Owner/operator address: THE WALT DISNEY COMPANY Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: 04/07/1986 Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: Not reported Owner/operator telephone: US Owner/operator country: Not reported Not reported Owner/operator address: THE WALT DISNEY COMPANY Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: Private Land type: 09 EPA Region: [EMAIL REDACTED] Contact email: (714) 781-1756 Contact telephone: Not reported Contact country: Not reported Not reported Contact address: DONNA A BAKER Contact: ANAHEIM, CA 92803 MAIL CODE 205I P.O. BOX 3232 Mailing address: CAD115501777 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 1150 W. MAGIC WAY Facility address: DISNEYLAND HOTEL Facility name: 05/16/2008 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: 3762 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster AJ 0.712 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 133 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 SW HAZNET 1150 W CERRITOS AVE CAD115501777 AJ209 RCRA-SQG DISNEYLAND HOTEL [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 274 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation CLOSED CUP FLASH POINT TESTER. ANOTHER METHOD OF DETERMINING THE LESS THAN 140 DEGREES FAHRENHEIT AS DETERMINED BY A PENSKY-MARTENS IGNITABLE HAZARDOUS WASTES ARE THOSE WASTES WHICH HAVE A FLASHPOINT OF Waste name: D001 Waste code: Hazardous Waste Summary: Large Quantity Generator Classification: DISNEYLAND HOTEL Facility name: 03/15/1991 Date form received by agency: Large Quantity Generator Classification: 1X DISNEYLAND HOTEL Site name: DISNEYLAND HOTEL Facility name: 06/24/1991 Date form received by agency: Large Quantity Generator Classification: WCO HOTELS, INC. Site name: DISNEYLAND HOTEL Facility name: 02/28/1992 Date form received by agency: Small Quantity Generator Classification: DISNEYLAND HOTEL Facility name: 09/01/1996 Date form received by agency: Small Quantity Generator Classification: DISNEYLAND HOTEL Facility name: 02/24/2006 Date form received by agency: Historical Generators: Not reported Generated waste on-site: No Accumulated waste on-site: Thermostats Waste type: Not reported Generated waste on-site: No Accumulated waste on-site: Pesticides Waste type: Not reported Generated waste on-site: No Accumulated waste on-site: Lamps Waste type: Not reported Generated waste on-site: No Accumulated waste on-site: Batteries Waste type: Universal Waste Summary: Commercial status unknown Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: No Furnace exemption: No On-site burner exemption: DISNEYLAND HOTEL (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 275 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: WCO HOTELS INC DBA DISNEYLAND Contact: CAD115501777 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 12.6420 Tons: Disposal, Land Fill Disposal Method: Other inorganic solid waste Waste Category: Imperial TSD County: CAD000633164 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928022247 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1150 W CERRITOS AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: WCO HOTELS INC DBA DISNEYLAND Contact: CAD115501777 Gepaid: HAZNET: State Contractor/Grantee Evaluation lead agency: Not reported Date achieved compliance: Not reported Area of violation: COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Evaluation: 12/30/1993 Evaluation date: Evaluation Action Summary: No violations found Violation Status: 7000 Amount (Lbs): LEAD Waste name: D008 Waste code: 635 Amount (Lbs): WHICH WOULD BE CONSIDERED AS IGNITABLE HAZARDOUS WASTE. MATERIAL. LACQUER THINNER IS AN EXAMPLE OF A COMMONLY USED SOLVENT WHICH CAN BE OBTAINED FROM THE MANUFACTURER OR DISTRIBUTOR OF THE FLASH POINT OF A WASTE IS TO REVIEW THE MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET, CLOSED CUP FLASH POINT TESTER. ANOTHER METHOD OF DETERMINING THE LESS THAN 140 DEGREES FAHRENHEIT AS DETERMINED BY A PENSKY-MARTENS IGNITABLE HAZARDOUS WASTES ARE THOSE WASTES WHICH HAVE A FLASHPOINT OF Waste name: D001 Waste code: Annual Waste Handled: Last Biennial Reporting Year: 2007 Biennial Reports: LEAD Waste name: D008 Waste code: WHICH WOULD BE CONSIDERED AS IGNITABLE HAZARDOUS WASTE. MATERIAL. LACQUER THINNER IS AN EXAMPLE OF A COMMONLY USED SOLVENT WHICH CAN BE OBTAINED FROM THE MANUFACTURER OR DISTRIBUTOR OF THE FLASH POINT OF A WASTE IS TO REVIEW THE MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET, DISNEYLAND HOTEL (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 276 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: .0900 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Oxygenated solvents (acetone, butanol, ethyl acetate, etc.) Waste Category: Orange TSD County: CAT000613976 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928022247 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1150 W CERRITOS AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: WCO HOTELS INC DBA DISNEYLAND Contact: CAD115501777 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 28.8237 Tons: Disposal, Land Fill Disposal Method: Asbestos-containing waste Waste Category: 5 TSD County: CAL000027741 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928022247 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1150 W CERRITOS AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: WCO HOTELS INC DBA DISNEYLAND Contact: CAD115501777 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .4462 Tons: Disposal, Land Fill Disposal Method: biphenyls and material containing PCB’s Waste Category: 99 TSD County: AZD982465866 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928022247 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1150 W CERRITOS AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: WCO HOTELS INC DBA DISNEYLAND Contact: CAD115501777 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .2478 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: biphenyls and material containing PCB’s Waste Category: 99 TSD County: AZD982465866 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928022247 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1150 W CERRITOS AVE Mailing Address: DISNEYLAND HOTEL (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 277 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 75 additional CA_HAZNET: record(s) in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access DISNEYLAND HOTEL (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] No violations found Violation Status: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: No Furnace exemption: No On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): No U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 982-3514 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94133 2351 POWELL ST NO 505 Owner/operator address: PAUL LAINE Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: Handler: Non-Generators do not presently generate hazardous waste Description: Non-Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: (530) 544-6511 Contact telephone: US Contact country: FRISCO, CO 80443 P O BOX 4200 Contact address: JOSE OLIVARES Contact: CAR000013953 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 WEST STREET STORAGE 1150 W CERRITOS ST Facility address: SPECTRUM PHOTOGRAPHIC IMAGING Facility name: 01/27/2000 Date form received by agency: RCRA-NonGen: 3762 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster AJ 0.712 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 133 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 SW FINDS 1150 W CERRITOS ST CAR000013953 AJ210 RCRA-NonGen SPECTRUM PHOTOGRAPHIC IMAGING [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 278 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource Environmental Interest/Information System 110009552670 Registry ID: FINDS: SPECTRUM PHOTOGRAPHIC IMAGING (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] -117.90594 Longitude: 33.81056 Latitude: 15632 Global ID: UST: 3771 ft. Site 8 of 8 in cluster AH 0.714 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 148 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 SE 1500 S ANAHEIM BLVD N/A AH211 UST SAV-ON OSCO DRUGS U003879910 Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Aquifer used for drinking water supply Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083003428T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 2009-03-27 00:00:00 Status Date: Open - Remediation Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8179026 Latitude: T0605902268 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 3772 ft. Site 6 of 10 in cluster AG 0.714 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 131 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 West 1198 W BALL RD N/A AG212 LUST STOP N SHOP S109284623 TC2760975.2s Page 279 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation -117.92815 Longitude: 33.81796 Latitude: 13756 Global ID: UST: 3780 ft. Site 7 of 10 in cluster AG 0.716 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 131 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 West 1198 W BALL RD N/A AG213 UST ATLAS OIL CO U003805035 Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: = Soil Qualifies: = GW Qualifies: 3/25/1999 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: 9/8/1999 Workplan: Not reported Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 2/18/1999 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: 2/18/1999 Review Date: 3/25/1999 Enter Date: 2/18/1999 How Stopped Date: T0605902268 Global ID: Tank Leak Source: UNK Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Tank Closure How Discovered: Not reported Funding: Not reported Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Gasoline Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083003428T Case Number: Preliminary site assessment workplan submitted Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 083003428T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: CORTESE: 3780 ft. Site 8 of 10 in cluster AG 0.716 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 131 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 West LUST 1198 BALL RD N/A AG214 HIST CORTESE STOP N SHOP S103771071 TC2760975.2s Page 280 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Medium priority Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: RM Staff Initials: TME Staff: * MTBE Class: MTBE Detected. Site tested for MTBE & MTBE detected MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: 137.85 Max MTBE Soil: 1 MTBE Concentration: 3 Max MTBE GW: 9/28/2001 MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8179026 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: STOP N SHOP (Continued) S103771071 Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: REGULAR Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00009950 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 2 Container Num: 002 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: PREMIUM Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00009950 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 1 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 Owner City,St,Zip: 1198 W BALL Owner Address: GO CAL INC Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: Not reported Contact Name: 0004 Total Tanks: Not reported Other Type: Gas Station Facility Type: 00000056402 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: 3780 ft. Site 9 of 10 in cluster AG 0.716 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 131 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 West 1198 W BALL RD N/A AG215 HIST UST GO CAL INC U001578607 TC2760975.2s Page 281 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation None Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: WASTE OIL Type of Fuel: WASTE Tank Used for: 00000400 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 4 Container Num: 004 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: UNLEADED Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00009950 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 3 Container Num: 003 Tank Num: GO CAL INC (Continued) U001578607 Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M. V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: 08-25-92 Actv Date: 30-011-000998-000002 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 08-25-92 Act Date: 08-25-92 Ref Date: 44-000074 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 998 Comp Number: A Status: 4 Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M. V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: 08-25-92 Actv Date: 30-011-000998-000001 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 08-25-92 Act Date: 08-25-92 Ref Date: 44-000074 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 998 Comp Number: A Status: SWEEPS UST: 3780 ft. Site 10 of 10 in cluster AG 0.716 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 131 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 West 1198 W BALL RD N/A AG216 SWEEPS UST ATLAS OIL CO U003785544 TC2760975.2s Page 282 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: P Stg: M. V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: 08-25-92 Actv Date: 30-011-000998-000004 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 08-25-92 Act Date: 08-25-92 Ref Date: 44-000074 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 998 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: DIESEL Content: P Stg: M. V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: 08-25-92 Actv Date: 30-011-000998-000003 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 08-25-92 Act Date: 08-25-92 Ref Date: 44-000074 Board Of Equalization: 1 Number: 998 Comp Number: A Status: ATLAS OIL CO (Continued) U003785544 -117.91094 Longitude: 33.82634 Latitude: 9352 Global ID: UST: 3846 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster AK 0.728 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 155 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NNE 807 S ANAHEIM BLVD N/A AK217 UST GEORGE’S AUTO REPAIR U003971015 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 807 S ANAHEIM BLVD Facility address: GEORGES AUTO RPR Facility name: 08/13/1991 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: 3846 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster AK 0.728 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 155 ft. 1/2-1 HAZNET ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NNE FINDS 807 S ANAHEIM BLVD CAD983601006 AK218 RCRA-SQG GEORGES AUTO RPR [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 283 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource Environmental Interest/Information System 110002857524 Registry ID: FINDS: No violations found Violation Status: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: No Furnace exemption: No On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): No U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (714) 535-1580 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 807 S ANAHEIM BLVD Owner/operator address: GEORGE SEPULVEDA Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: (714) 535-1580 Contact telephone: US Contact country: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 807 S ANAHEIM BLVD Contact address: DENNIS LESENNE AUTOMO Contact: CAD983601006 EPA ID: GEORGES AUTO RPR (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 284 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: .7089 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Waste oil and mixed oil Waste Category: San Joaquin TSD County: CAD982446890 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928055202 Mailing City,St,Zip: 807 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: SEPULVEDA GEORGE Contact: CAL000045093 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .8340 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Unspecified oil-containing waste Waste Category: 1 TSD County: CAL000161741 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928055202 Mailing City,St,Zip: 807 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: SEPULVEDA GEORGE Contact: CAL000045093 Gepaid: HAZNET: GEORGES AUTO RPR (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] Not reported How Stopped Date: T0605902163 Global ID: Not reported Leak Source: Not reported Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Not reported How Discovered: Not reported Funding: CLOS Enf Type: KATELLA Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Diesel Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083003182T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 3879 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster AL 0.735 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 141 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 SSE 1680 CLEMENTINE ST N/A AL219 LUST ANAHEIM FIRE STATION FRMER S103943459 TC2760975.2s Page 285 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: UNK Staff Initials: NOM Staff: * MTBE Class: MTBE Detected. Site tested for MTBE & MTBE detected MTBE Tested: 0 MTBE Fuel: .4 Max MTBE Soil: 1 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.805895 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: = Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 6/29/1998 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 8/26/1998 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 3/20/1998 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: 3/20/1998 Review Date: 6/29/1998 Enter Date: ANAHEIM FIRE STATION FRMER (Continued) S103943459 Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083003182T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 1998-08-26 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8073756 Latitude: T0605902163 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 3884 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster AL 0.736 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 141 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 SSE 1680 S CLEMENTINE ST N/A AL220 LUST ANAHEIM FIRE STATION FRMER S109284655 TC2760975.2s Page 286 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Site History: Diesel Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: ANAHEIM FIRE STATION FRMER (Continued) S109284655 No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): No U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: ALJO INC Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: (714) 563-9606 Contact telephone: US Contact country: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 1558 A S ANAHEIM BLVD Contact address: BOB MILLER Contact: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 1588 A S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing address: CAD983596867 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 1558 A S ANAHEIM BLVD Facility address: ALJO ENTERPRISES INC Facility name: 07/26/1991 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: 3908 ft. Site 1 of 4 in cluster AM 0.740 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 148 ft. 1/2-1 HAZNET ANAHEIM, CA 92805 SE FINDS 1558 A S ANAHEIM BLVD CAD983596867 AM221 RCRA-SQG ALJO ENTERPRISES INC [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 287 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Transfer Station Disposal Method: Aqueous solution with less than 10% total organic residues Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT000613893 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: CHINO, CA 917106225 Mailing City,St,Zip: C/O 4040 CHEYENNE CT Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: ALJO INC Contact: CAD983596867 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .3750 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Unspecified oil-containing waste Waste Category: San Bernardino TSD County: CAD982444481 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: CHINO, CA 917106225 Mailing City,St,Zip: C/O 4040 CHEYENNE CT Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: ALJO INC Contact: CAD983596867 Gepaid: HAZNET: corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource Environmental Interest/Information System 110002854411 Registry ID: FINDS: No violations found Violation Status: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: No Furnace exemption: No On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: ALJO ENTERPRISES INC (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 288 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 6 additional CA_HAZNET: record(s) in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access Orange Facility County: .3000 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Unspecified oil-containing waste Waste Category: San Bernardino TSD County: CAD982444481 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: CHINO, CA 917106225 Mailing City,St,Zip: C/O 4040 CHEYENNE CT Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: ALJO INC Contact: CAD983596867 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 1.8346 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Unspecified oil-containing waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD000088252 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: CHINO, CA 917106225 Mailing City,St,Zip: C/O 4040 CHEYENNE CT Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: ALJO INC Contact: CAD983596867 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .2293 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Other inorganic solid waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD000088252 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: CHINO, CA 917106225 Mailing City,St,Zip: C/O 4040 CHEYENNE CT Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: ALJO INC Contact: CAD983596867 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .1792 Tons: ALJO ENTERPRISES INC (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 289 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: No Furnace exemption: No On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): No U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: HERIBERTO VEGA Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: (714) 991-4092 Contact telephone: US Contact country: AHAHEIM, CA 92805 1558 S ANAHEIM BLVD Contact address: HERIBERTO VEGA Contact: CAD983584129 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 1558 S ANAHEIM BLVD Facility address: VEGAS TRANSMISSIONS Facility name: 06/03/1991 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: 3908 ft. Site 2 of 4 in cluster AM 0.740 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 148 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 SE FINDS 1558 SOUTH ANAHEIM BLVD CAD983584129 AM222 RCRA-SQG VEGAS TRANSMISSIONS [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 290 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource Environmental Interest/Information System 110006481182 Registry ID: FINDS: No violations found Violation Status: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: VEGAS TRANSMISSIONS (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] -117.90617 Longitude: 33.81082 Latitude: 3565 Global ID: UST: 3921 ft. Site 3 of 4 in cluster AM 0.743 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 148 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 SE 1562 S ANAHEIM BLVD N/A AM223 UST LEAVERTON COMPANY U003778733 waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: (714) 533-1888 Contact telephone: US Contact country: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 1562 S ANAHEIM BLVD STE B Contact address: MIKE FIGUEROA Contact: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 S ANAHEIM BLVD STE B Mailing address: CAR000019091 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 1562 S ANAHEIM BLVD STE B Facility address: DNR INDUSTRIES Facility name: 04/09/1997 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: 3921 ft. Site 4 of 4 in cluster AM 0.743 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 148 ft. 1/2-1 HAZNET ANAHEIM, CA 92805 SE FINDS 1562 S ANAHEIM BLVD STE B CAR000019091 AM224 RCRA-SQG DNR INDUSTRIES [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 291 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation JOE BERTOLA Contact: CAR000019091 Gepaid: HAZNET: corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource facilities. generators, transporters, and treatment, storage, and disposal provides California with information on hazardous waste shipments for California Hazardous Waste Tracking System - Datamart (HWTS-DATAMART) Environmental Interest/Information System 110002916916 Registry ID: FINDS: No violations found Violation Status: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: No Furnace exemption: No On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): No U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (714) 533-1888 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 1562 S ANAHEIM BLVD STE B Owner/operator address: JOE BERTOLA Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous DNR INDUSTRIES (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 292 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Unspecified oil-containing waste Waste Category: San Bernardino TSD County: Not reported TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1562 S ANAHEIM BLVD STE B Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: Telephone: JOE BERTOLA Contact: CAR000019091 Gepaid: Not reported Facility County: 0.45 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: etc.) Halogenated solvents (chloroform, methyl chloride, perchloroethylene, Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: Not reported TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1562 S ANAHEIM BLVD STE B Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: Telephone: JOE BERTOLA Contact: CAR000019091 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .2417 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: etc.) Halogenated solvents (chloroform, methyl chloride, perchloroethylene, Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD008364432 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1562 S ANAHEIM BLVD STE B Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: JOE BERTOLA Contact: CAR000019091 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 0.45 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: etc.) Halogenated solvents (chloroform, methyl chloride, perchloroethylene, Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD008364432 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1562 S ANAHEIM BLVD STE B Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: Telephone: DNR INDUSTRIES (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 293 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 12 additional CA_HAZNET: record(s) in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access Orange Facility County: 0.67 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: etc.) Halogenated solvents (chloroform, methyl chloride, perchloroethylene, Waste Category: Orange TSD County: CAD008364432 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 1562 S ANAHEIM BLVD STE B Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: 0 Telephone: JOE BERTOLA Contact: CAR000019091 Gepaid: Not reported Facility County: 0.35 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: DNR INDUSTRIES (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] Not reported Site History: Diesel Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083000744T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 1997-06-09 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8181998 Latitude: T0605900588 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 3960 ft. 0.750 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 158 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 East 601 E BALL RD N/A 225 LUST WEYERHAEUSER PAPER COMPANY S109284236 TC2760975.2s Page 294 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: ROW Staff Initials: CAB Staff: * MTBE Class: Not Required to be Tested. MTBE Tested: 0 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8181998 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Yes Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 2/17/1988 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: 2/17/1988 Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 6/9/1997 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 10/22/1987 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: 12/28/1987 Review Date: 2/17/1988 Enter Date: Not reported How Stopped Date: T0605900588 Global ID: Piping Leak Source: UNK Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Tank Closure How Discovered: State Funds Funding: Not reported Enf Type: HARBOR Cross Street: EDET Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Diesel Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083000744T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 3974 ft. 0.753 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 159 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ENE 601 BALL RD N/A 226 LUST WEYERHAEUSER PAPER COMPANY S103943454 TC2760975.2s Page 295 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: WEYERHAEUSER PAPER COMPANY (Continued) S103943454 Tons/year Remaining Capacity with Units: Not reported Remaining Capacity: 920 Permitted Capacity with Units: Tons/day Actual Throughput with Units: 4 Permitted Throughput with Units: Not reported Program Type: Anaheim, CA 92805 Issue & Observations: 30-AB-0433 Swisnumber: Not reported Disposal Acreage: Not reported Closure Type: Not reported Closure Date: Inert,Mixed municipal Accepted Waste: Quarterly Inspection Frequency: 01 Unit Number: Transfer/Processing Category: Map GIS Source: Residential,Commercial Landuse Name: Notification Regulation Status: Limited Volume Transfer Operation Activity: 0.1 Permitted Acreage: Notification Permit Status: 6/20/2008 Permit Date: Active Operator’s Status: Anaheim, CA 92805 Operator City,St,Zip: 400 East Vermont Avenue Operator Address2: Ayumi Wunder, Mamanger Operator Address: [PHONE REDACTED] Operator Phone: City of Anaheim, Public Works Operations Operator: Anaheim, CA 92805 Owner City,St,Zip: 200 South Anaheim Blvd. Owner Address2: Not reported Owner Address: [PHONE REDACTED] Owner Telephone: City of Anaheim, Finance Department Owner Name: 33.82335 / -117.9052 Lat/Long: 30-AB-0433 Facility ID: STATE Region: SWF/LF (SWIS): 4029 ft. 0.763 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 158 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA NE 400 EAST VERMONT AVENUE N/A 227 SWF/LF VERMONT STREET SWEEPER TRANSFER STATION S109349409 TC2760975.2s Page 296 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083002879T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: SANTA ANA (REGION 8) Lead Agency: 1999-06-03 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8228077 Latitude: T0605901974 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 4188 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster AN 0.793 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 159 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ENE 955 S MELROSE N/A AN228 LUST ANAHEIM FLT MAINT.FUELING FAC. S109284720 Not reported Remed Plan: 5/17/1999 Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 6/3/1999 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 8/26/1996 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: 8/26/1996 Review Date: 9/16/1996 Enter Date: Not reported How Stopped Date: T0605901974 Global ID: Piping Leak Source: Corrosion Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Not reported How Discovered: Not reported Funding: Not reported Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: approved site Excavate and Dispose - remove contaminated soil and dispose in Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Unleaded Gasoline Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083002879T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 4203 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster AN 0.796 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 159 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NE HAZNET 955 MELROSE N/A AN229 LUST ANAHEIM FLT MAINT.FUELING FAC. [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 297 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD008252405 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928055614 Mailing City,St,Zip: 955 S MELROSE ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: CITY OF ANAHEIM Contact: CAD981984222 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .0834 Tons: Not reported Disposal Method: Liquids with halogenated organic compounds > 1000 mg/l Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD008252405 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928055614 Mailing City,St,Zip: 955 S MELROSE ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: CITY OF ANAHEIM Contact: CAD981984222 Gepaid: HAZNET: PIPING CAUSED LEAK. DISPENSER AREA EXCAVATED & CONTAMINATED SOIL WAS FOUND. DIESEL ALSO. REFERED TO RB 12/04/96. PIPING UPGRADED 9/1/96 - CORROSION ON Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Regional Board Lead Agency: UNK Staff Initials: NOM Staff: * MTBE Class: Site NOT Tested for MTBE.Includes Unknown and Not Analyzed. MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8228077 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 9/16/1996 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: ANAHEIM FLT MAINT.FUELING FAC. (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 298 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 69 additional CA_HAZNET: record(s) in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access Orange Facility County: 2.3560 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Unspecified organic liquid mixture Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAL000113451 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928055614 Mailing City,St,Zip: 955 S MELROSE ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: CITY OF ANAHEIM Contact: CAD981984222 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 1.1467 Tons: Not reported Disposal Method: Unspecified organic liquid mixture Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD008252405 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928055614 Mailing City,St,Zip: 955 S MELROSE ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: CITY OF ANAHEIM Contact: CAD981984222 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .1750 Tons: Not reported Disposal Method: Other organic solids Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD008252405 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928055614 Mailing City,St,Zip: 955 S MELROSE ST Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: CITY OF ANAHEIM Contact: CAD981984222 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 1.0425 Tons: Not reported Disposal Method: ANAHEIM FLT MAINT.FUELING FAC. (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 299 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083001372T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 2002-01-24 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -117.911037 Longitude: 33.8278869 Latitude: T0605901035 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 4307 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster AO 0.816 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 157 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NNE 630 S ANAHEIM BLVD N/A AO230 LUST X- L CLEANERS S109284408 8/15/1995 Remed Plan: 10/9/1990 Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 1/24/2002 Close Date: 1/1/1965 Enforcement Date: 8/26/1989 Discover Date: 12/29/1989 Prelim Assess: 12/14/1989 Review Date: 12/23/1989 Enter Date: 10/30/1989 How Stopped Date: T0605901035 Global ID: Tank Leak Source: Not reported Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Tank Test How Discovered: Not reported Funding: None Taken Enf Type: WATER Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Gasoline Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083001372T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: EMI 4309 ft. HAZNET Site 2 of 2 in cluster AO 0.816 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 157 ft. 1/2-1 HIST UST ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NNE UST 630 S ANAHEIM BLVD N/A AO231 LUST X L CLEANERS U001578811 TC2760975.2s Page 300 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Visual Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: 06 Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00000950 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: TANK I Container Num: 001 Tank Num: ORANGE, CA 92667 Owner City,St,Zip: 520 E CHESTNUT Owner Address: CARL C MAFFOILI Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: FRANK DE MATTELS Contact Name: 0002 Total Tanks: DRY CLEANERS Other Type: Other Facility Type: 00000006009 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: -117.91123 Longitude: 33.82776 Latitude: 8471 Global ID: UST: CONTAMINATION IS LIMITED. ADDITIONAL SITE ASSESSMENT UNDERWAY. SOIL IS TO BE EXCAVATED IF THE EXTENT OF Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: ROW Staff Initials: CAB Staff: * MTBE Class: Site NOT Tested for MTBE.Includes Unknown and Not Analyzed. MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.82745134 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 12/23/1989 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: X L CLEANERS (Continued) U001578811 TC2760975.2s Page 301 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 630 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: CARL MAFFIOLI Contact: CAD981663875 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .3120 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Liquids with halogenated organic compounds > 1000 mg/l Waste Category: Orange TSD County: CAT000613976 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 630 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: CARL MAFFIOLI Contact: CAD981663875 Gepaid: HAZNET: [PHONE REDACTED] Contact Telephone: Not reported Contact Address 2: 630 S ANAHEIM BLVD Contact Address: CARL MAFFIOLI/OWNER Contact Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Owner Telephone: Not reported Owner Address 2: 630 S ANAHEIM BLVD Owner Address: CARL C MAFFIOLI Owner Name: 4 Region Code: 928050000 Mailing Zip: CA Mailing State: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 630 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: 6/30/2002 Inactive Date: No Facility Active: 4/10/1987 Create Date: Not reported SIC Description: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported NAICS Description: Not reported NAICS Code: CAD981663875 EPA Id: Visual Leak Detection: Not reported Tank Construction: Not reported Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00000950 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: TANK II Container Num: 002 Tank Num: X L CLEANERS (Continued) U001578811 TC2760975.2s Page 302 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Facility County: 0.20 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Liquids with halogenated organic compounds > 1000 mg/l Waste Category: Orange TSD County: Not reported TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 630 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: CARL MAFFIOLI/OWNER Contact: CAD981663875 Gepaid: Not reported Facility County: 0.67 Tons: Disposal, Other Disposal Method: Oxygenated solvents (acetone, butanol, ethyl acetate, etc.) Waste Category: Sacramento TSD County: Not reported TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 630 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: CARL MAFFIOLI/OWNER Contact: CAD981663875 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .4631 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: etc.) Halogenated solvents (chloroform, methyl chloride, perchloroethylene, Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD981397417 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: 630 S ANAHEIM BLVD Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: CARL MAFFIOLI Contact: CAD981663875 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 1.6856 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: etc.) Halogenated solvents (chloroform, methyl chloride, perchloroethylene, Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD981397417 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928050000 Mailing City,St,Zip: X L CLEANERS (Continued) U001578811 TC2760975.2s Page 303 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 30 County Code: 1996 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 6 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 6 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7216 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 13739 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1995 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 5 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 5 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7216 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 13739 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1990 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 8 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7216 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 13739 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1987 Year: EMI: 4 additional CA_HAZNET: record(s) in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access X L CLEANERS (Continued) U001578811 TC2760975.2s Page 304 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7216 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 13739 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1999 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 4 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 4 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7216 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 13739 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1998 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 4 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 4 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7216 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 13739 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1997 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 4 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 4 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7216 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 13739 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: X L CLEANERS (Continued) U001578811 TC2760975.2s Page 305 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 2 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 2 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7216 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 13739 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 2001 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 4 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 4 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7216 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 13739 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 2000 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 4 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 4 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: X L CLEANERS (Continued) U001578811 ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 1998-07-16 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -117.901689 Longitude: 33.817121 Latitude: T0605901685 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 4348 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster AP 0.824 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 159 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 East 620 E BALL RD N/A AP232 LUST PENSKE TRUCK LEASING S109284621 TC2760975.2s Page 306 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083002312T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: PENSKE TRUCK LEASING (Continued) S109284621 Not reported Site History: Diesel Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083001513T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 1994-10-19 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8244123 Latitude: T0605901154 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 4364 ft. Site 1 of 3 in cluster AQ 0.827 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 159 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NE 501 E VERMONT AVE N/A AQ233 LUST ANAHEIM SCHOOL DISTRICT S109284379 ORANGE COUNTY LOP Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ORANGE COUNTY LOP Lead Agency: 1987-08-12 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -117.904319 Longitude: 33.823948 Latitude: T0605900696 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 083000881T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: CORTESE: 4433 ft. Site 2 of 3 in cluster AQ 0.840 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 160 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NE LUST 512 VERMONT N/A AQ234 HIST CORTESE LAKESIDE TOWING S102432476 TC2760975.2s Page 307 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Local Agency Lead Agency: WJ Staff Initials: PAH Staff: * MTBE Class: Not Required to be Tested. MTBE Tested: 0 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -117.904864 Longitude: 33.8241746 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: Not reported Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 8/12/1987 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 1/1/1965 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: Not reported Review Date: Not reported Enter Date: 9/9/9999 How Stopped Date: T0605900696 Global ID: Unknown Leak Source: Unknown Leak Cause: Close Tank How Stopped: Tank Closure How Discovered: Not reported Funding: Not reported Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: 0 Qty Leaked: Diesel Substance: Undefined Case Type: 87UT032 Local Case Num: 083000881T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: Not reported Site History: Diesel Potential Contaminants of Concern: Under Investigation Potential Media Affect: Local Agency File Location: 87UT032 LOC Case Number: 083000881T RB Case Number: LAKESIDE TOWING (Continued) S102432476 TC2760975.2s Page 308 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: MUN Beneficial: Not reported Hydr Basin 30000L Local Agency: LAKESIDE TOWING (Continued) S102432476 Unknown Leak Source: Unknown Leak Cause: Close Tank How Stopped: Tank Closure How Discovered: Not reported Funding: Not reported Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: 0 Qty Leaked: Gasoline Substance: Soil only Case Type: 90UT124 Local Case Num: 083001525T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Local Agency File Location: 90UT124 LOC Case Number: 083001525T RB Case Number: ORANGE COUNTY LOP Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ORANGE COUNTY LOP Lead Agency: 1990-06-05 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8244638 Latitude: T0605901165 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 083001525T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: CORTESE: EMI 4478 ft. HAZNET Site 3 of 3 in cluster AQ 0.848 mi. SWEEPS UST Relative: Higher Actual: 160 ft. 1/2-1 CA FID UST ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NE LUST 522 VERMONT N/A AQ235 HIST CORTESE INTERSTATE ENGINEERING S101589367 TC2760975.2s Page 309 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Comments: Not reported EPA ID: Not reported NPDES Number: Not reported DUNs Number: Not reported Contact Phone: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM 92805 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 522 E VERMONT AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mail To: [PHONE REDACTED] Facility Phone: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported Cortese Code: Not reported Regulated ID: UTNKA Regulated By: 30008316 Facility ID: CA FID UST: Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: MUN Beneficial: Not reported Hydr Basin 30000L Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: WJ Staff Initials: PAH Staff: * MTBE Class: Site NOT Tested for MTBE.Includes Unknown and Not Analyzed. MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -117.904712 Longitude: 33.8242076 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: Not reported Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 6/5/1990 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 5/9/1990 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: Not reported Review Date: Not reported Enter Date: 9/9/9999 How Stopped Date: T0605901165 Global ID: INTERSTATE ENGINEERING (Continued) S101589367 TC2760975.2s Page 310 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: PRIMUS HOLDING Contact: CAD008288987 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 10.3207 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Oil/water separation sludge Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928055603 Mailing City,St,Zip: 522 E VERMONT AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: PRIMUS HOLDING Contact: CAD008288987 Gepaid: HAZNET: 1 Number Of Tanks: GASHOL Content: W Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 30000 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-001158-000008 Tank Id: 846 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 03-18-92 Act Date: 03-18-92 Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: 9 Number: 1158 Comp Number: A Status: 1 Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: WASTE Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 1000 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-001158-000007 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: Not reported Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 1158 Comp Number: Not reported Status: SWEEPS UST: Active Status: INTERSTATE ENGINEERING (Continued) S101589367 TC2760975.2s Page 311 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Orange Facility County: .9174 Tons: Treatment, Tank Disposal Method: Alkaline solution without metals (pH > 12.5) Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD097030993 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928055603 Mailing City,St,Zip: 522 E VERMONT AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: PRIMUS HOLDING Contact: CAD008288987 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .0834 Tons: Treatment, Tank Disposal Method: Aqueous solution with 10% or more total organic residues Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD028409019 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928055603 Mailing City,St,Zip: 522 E VERMONT AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: PRIMUS HOLDING Contact: CAD008288987 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 10.5292 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Oil/water separation sludge Waste Category: San Bernardino TSD County: CAD982403198 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928055603 Mailing City,St,Zip: 522 E VERMONT AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: PRIMUS HOLDING Contact: CAD008288987 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 5.0000 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Unspecified oil-containing waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD000088252 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928055603 Mailing City,St,Zip: 522 E VERMONT AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: INTERSTATE ENGINEERING (Continued) S101589367 TC2760975.2s Page 312 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 49 County Code: 2007 Year: 1 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 2 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 4 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 1 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 0 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 3589 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 14800 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1995 Year: 1 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 2 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 4 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 1 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 0 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 3589 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 14800 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1993 Year: 1 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 1 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 2 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 1 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 0 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 3589 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 14800 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1990 Year: EMI: 14 additional CA_HAZNET: record(s) in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access INTERSTATE ENGINEERING (Continued) S101589367 TC2760975.2s Page 313 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: .0468062 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: .067 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: BAY AREA AQMD Air District Name: 7216 SIC Code: BA Air District Name: 14800 Facility ID: SF Air Basin: INTERSTATE ENGINEERING (Continued) S101589367 Unknown Leak Source: Unknown Leak Cause: Close Tank How Stopped: Tank Closure How Discovered: Not reported Funding: Not reported Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: 0 Qty Leaked: Gasoline Substance: Undefined Case Type: 86UT046 Local Case Num: Not reported Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Under Investigation Potential Media Affect: Local Agency File Location: 86UT046 LOC Case Number: Not reported RB Case Number: ORANGE COUNTY LOP Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ORANGE COUNTY LOP Lead Agency: 1986-06-23 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -117.915406 Longitude: 33.804136 Latitude: T0605949878 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 4537 ft. 0.859 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 134 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 South 1779 HARBOR N/A 236 LUST UNOCAL S105774300 TC2760975.2s Page 314 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: MUN Beneficial: Not reported Hydr Basin 30000L Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: WJ Staff Initials: NOM Staff: * MTBE Class: Site NOT Tested for MTBE.Includes Unknown and Not Analyzed. MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: Not reported Longitude: Not reported Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: Not reported Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 6/23/1986 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 1/1/1965 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: Not reported Review Date: Not reported Enter Date: 9/9/9999 How Stopped Date: T0605949878 Global ID: UNOCAL (Continued) S105774300 083003959T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 2009-06-15 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -117.902004 Longitude: 33.816868 Latitude: T0605993005 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 4565 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster AP 0.865 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 159 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 East 620 BALL RD N/A AP237 LUST PENSKE TRUCK LEASING S101299246 TC2760975.2s Page 315 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: ROW Staff Initials: VJJ Staff: Not reported MTBE Class: MTBE Detected. Site tested for MTBE & MTBE detected MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: 1000 Max MTBE Soil: 2 MTBE Concentration: 10 Max MTBE GW: 6/18/1996 MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8179818 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: < Soil Qualifies: < GW Qualifies: 9/20/1993 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 7/16/1998 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 2/25/1993 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: 2/25/1993 Review Date: 9/20/1993 Enter Date: Not reported How Stopped Date: T0605901685 Global ID: Not reported Leak Source: Not reported Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Not reported How Discovered: Not reported Funding: Not reported Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Gasoline Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083002312T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: Not reported Site History: Diesel Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: PENSKE TRUCK LEASING (Continued) S101299246 TC2760975.2s Page 316 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: RM Staff Initials: VJJ Staff: * MTBE Class: Not Required to be Tested. MTBE Tested: 0 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: 0 Longitude: 0 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: Not reported Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: Not reported Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 3/10/2003 Discover Date: 3/28/2003 Prelim Assess: Not reported Review Date: Not reported Enter Date: 3/18/2003 How Stopped Date: T0605993005 Global ID: UNK Leak Source: UNK Leak Cause: RPP How Stopped: UM How Discovered: Not reported Funding: Not reported Enf Type: ANAHEIM BLVD. Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Diesel Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083003959T Case Number: Preliminary site assessment underway Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: WASTE OIL ALSO Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin PENSKE TRUCK LEASING (Continued) S101299246 TC2760975.2s Page 317 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: Not reported Hydr Basin PENSKE TRUCK LEASING (Continued) S101299246 Not reported Site History: Diesel Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083003069T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 1998-02-02 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8083088 Latitude: T0605902089 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 4654 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster AR 0.881 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 129 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 SW 1600 S WALNUT ST N/A AR238 LUST CENTRAL PLANTS, INC. S109284658 LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: 083003248T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: 083003069T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: 083003148T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: CORTESE: 4669 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster AR 0.884 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 128 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 SW LUST 1600 WALNUT ST N/A AR239 HIST CORTESE CENTRAL PLANTS, INC. S103340503 TC2760975.2s Page 318 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Local Agency Lead Agency: ROW Staff Initials: RS Staff: * MTBE Class: MTBE Detected. Site tested for MTBE & MTBE detected MTBE Tested: 0 MTBE Fuel: .1 Max MTBE Soil: 1 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8082958 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: < Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 10/24/1997 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: 10/1/1997 Workplan: 2/2/1998 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 7/10/1997 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: 7/10/1997 Review Date: 10/24/1997 Enter Date: Not reported How Stopped Date: T0605902089 Global ID: Not reported Leak Source: Not reported Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Not reported How Discovered: Not reported Funding: CLOS Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Diesel Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083003069T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 083000594T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: 083000503T Reg Id: CENTRAL PLANTS, INC. (Continued) S103340503 TC2760975.2s Page 319 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: CENTRAL PLANTS, INC. (Continued) S103340503 Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 4/30/1990 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 10/19/1994 Close Date: 1/1/1965 Enforcement Date: 3/22/1990 Discover Date: 5/14/1990 Prelim Assess: 5/8/1990 Review Date: 4/30/1990 Enter Date: 3/22/1990 How Stopped Date: T0605901154 Global ID: Tank Leak Source: Corrosion Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Tank Closure How Discovered: Not reported Funding: Cleanup and Abatement Orders Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: approved site Excavate and Dispose - remove contaminated soil and dispose in Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Diesel Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083001513T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 083001513T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: CORTESE: 4696 ft. 0.889 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 161 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NE LUST 501 VERMONT AVE N/A 240 HIST CORTESE ANAHEIM SCHOOL DISTRICT S102770005 TC2760975.2s Page 320 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: ROW Staff Initials: CAB Staff: * MTBE Class: Not Required to be Tested. MTBE Tested: 0 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -117.905053 Longitude: 33.8243586 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Yes Interim: ANAHEIM SCHOOL DISTRICT (Continued) S102770005 Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083002950T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 1996-12-19 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8034115 Latitude: T0605902020 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 4877 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster AS 0.924 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 130 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 South 711 W KATELLA AVE N/A AS241 LUST NATIONAL CAR RENTAL FAC. S109284617 Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 4881 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster AS 0.924 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 130 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 South 711 KATELLA AVE N/A AS242 LUST NATIONAL CAR RENTAL FAC. S102532332 TC2760975.2s Page 321 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation DETECTED IN THE EXCAVATED SOIL. TWO UST REMOVED, NO CONTAMINATION FOUND BELOW THE UST. BTEX AND TPH WAS Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: UNK Staff Initials: NOM Staff: * MTBE Class: Site NOT Tested for MTBE.Includes Unknown and Not Analyzed. MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -117.916851 Longitude: 33.803501 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: Not reported Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 12/19/1996 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 10/16/1996 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: Not reported Review Date: Not reported Enter Date: 10/16/1996 How Stopped Date: T0605902020 Global ID: UNK Leak Source: Not reported Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Tank Closure How Discovered: Not reported Funding: CLOS Enf Type: HARBOR Cross Street: approved site Excavate and Dispose - remove contaminated soil and dispose in Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Gasoline Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083002950T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: NATIONAL CAR RENTAL FAC. (Continued) S102532332 TC2760975.2s Page 322 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Workplan: 10/11/1999 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 10/9/1998 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: 10/9/1998 Review Date: 3/5/1999 Enter Date: Not reported How Stopped Date: T0605902232 Global ID: Piping Leak Source: UNK Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Tank Closure How Discovered: Not reported Funding: Not reported Enf Type: KATELLA Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Gasoline Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083003335T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 083002396T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: 083001214T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: 083000065T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: 083003415T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: 083003335T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: CORTESE: 4899 ft. Site 1 of 5 in cluster AT 0.928 mi. SWEEPS UST Relative: Lower Actual: 132 ft. 1/2-1 CA FID UST ANAHEIM, CA 92802 South LUST 1801 HARBOR BLVD N/A AT243 HIST CORTESE CHEVRON #9-5321 S101619845 TC2760975.2s Page 323 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 4473 Comp Number: Not reported Status: SWEEPS UST: Active Status: Not reported Comments: Not reported EPA ID: Not reported NPDES Number: Not reported DUNs Number: Not reported Contact Phone: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM 92801 Mailing City,St,Zip: Not reported Mailing Address 2: 1801 PENHALL WAY Mailing Address: Not reported Mail To: [PHONE REDACTED] Facility Phone: Not reported SIC Code: Not reported Cortese Code: Not reported Regulated ID: UTNKA Regulated By: 30000986 Facility ID: CA FID UST: Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: ROW Staff Initials: TME Staff: * MTBE Class: MTBE Detected. Site tested for MTBE & MTBE detected MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: 7 Max MTBE Soil: 1 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.803122 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: = Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 3/5/1999 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: CHEVRON #9-5321 (Continued) S101619845 TC2760975.2s Page 324 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-004473-000007 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: Not reported Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 4473 Comp Number: Not reported Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: Not reported Content: WASTE Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 550 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-004473-000006 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: Not reported Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 4473 Comp Number: Not reported Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: Not reported Content: WASTE Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 550 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-004473-000005 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: Not reported Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 4473 Comp Number: Not reported Status: 11 Number Of Tanks: JET FUEL Content: PRODUCT Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 550 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-004473-000003 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: CHEVRON #9-5321 (Continued) S101619845 TC2760975.2s Page 325 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: WASTE Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 5000 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-004473-000010 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: Not reported Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 4473 Comp Number: Not reported Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: GASHOL Content: WASTE Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 5000 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-004473-000009 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: Not reported Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 4473 Comp Number: Not reported Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: GASHOL Content: WASTE Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 5000 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-004473-000008 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: Not reported Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 4473 Comp Number: Not reported Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: GASHOL Content: WASTE Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: CHEVRON #9-5321 (Continued) S101619845 TC2760975.2s Page 326 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Act Date: Not reported Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 4473 Comp Number: Not reported Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: WASTE Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-004473-000013 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: Not reported Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 4473 Comp Number: Not reported Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: WASTE Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-004473-000012 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: Not reported Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 4473 Comp Number: Not reported Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: WASTE Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-004473-000011 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: Not reported Act Date: Not reported Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: Not reported Number: 4473 Comp Number: Not reported Status: CHEVRON #9-5321 (Continued) S101619845 TC2760975.2s Page 327 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 10000 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-004473-000017 Tank Id: 732 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 02-11-92 Act Date: 02-11-92 Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: 9 Number: 4473 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: GASHOL Content: W Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-004473-000016 Tank Id: 732 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 02-11-92 Act Date: 02-11-92 Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: 9 Number: 4473 Comp Number: A Status: 3 Number Of Tanks: LEADED Content: W Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 10000 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-004473-000015 Tank Id: 732 Owner Tank Id: A Tank Status: 12-31-88 Created Date: 02-11-92 Act Date: 02-11-92 Ref Date: Not reported Board Of Equalization: 9 Number: 4473 Comp Number: A Status: Not reported Number Of Tanks: REG UNLEADED Content: WASTE Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: 8000 Capacity: Not reported Actv Date: 30-011-004473-000014 Tank Id: Not reported Owner Tank Id: Not reported Tank Status: Not reported Created Date: CHEVRON #9-5321 (Continued) S101619845 TC2760975.2s Page 328 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Number Of Tanks: GASHOL Content: W Stg: M.V. FUEL Tank Use: CHEVRON #9-5321 (Continued) S101619845 Not reported MTBE Class: MTBE Detected. Site tested for MTBE & MTBE detected MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: 10 Max MTBE Soil: 2 MTBE Concentration: 18 Max MTBE GW: 8/1/1996 MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.803104 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Yes Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: < Soil Qualifies: = GW Qualifies: 9/16/1990 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: 12/1/1994 Remed Action: 9/26/1994 Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: 2/20/1991 Workplan: 2/9/1998 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 9/14/1990 Discover Date: 9/14/1990 Prelim Assess: 9/14/1990 Review Date: 9/16/1990 Enter Date: Not reported How Stopped Date: T0605901251 Global ID: Not reported Leak Source: Not reported Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: OM How Discovered: Not reported Funding: NONE Enf Type: KATELLA AVE Cross Street: EDVE Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Gasoline Substance: Aquifer affected Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083001662T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 4901 ft. Site 2 of 5 in cluster AT 0.928 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 132 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 South 1800 HARBOR BLVD N/A AT244 LUST MOBIL #18-106 S103248970 TC2760975.2s Page 329 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation & FLOW DIRECTION = SW. VES STARTED 12/13/94 LEAK DISCOVERED 2/20/91 DURING TANK TEST. 12/94 VES INSTALLED. GW DEPTH 80’ Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: ROW Staff Initials: RS Staff: MOBIL #18-106 (Continued) S103248970 Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083003335T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 1999-10-11 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8033998 Latitude: T0605902232 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 4904 ft. Site 3 of 5 in cluster AT 0.929 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 132 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 South 1801 S HARBOR BLVD N/A AT245 LUST CHEVRON #9-5321 S109284743 Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083001662T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 1998-02-09 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.803104 Latitude: T0605901251 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 4906 ft. Site 4 of 5 in cluster AT 0.929 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 132 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 South 1800 S HARBOR BLVD N/A AT246 LUST MOBIL #18-106 S109284539 TC2760975.2s Page 330 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Aquifer used for drinking water supply Potential Media Affect: MOBIL #18-106 (Continued) S109284539 Not reported Date/Time: Not reported Other: Not reported Measure: PETROLEUM Type: Not reported What Happened: Not reported Containment: attendant Cleanup By: Not reported Spill Site: Not reported Waterway: Not reported Waterway Involved: Not reported Facility Telephone: Not reported Comments: Not reported Report Date: Not reported Reporting Officer Name/ID: Not reported Company Name: Not reported CA/DOT/PUC/ICC Number: Not reported Vehicle Id Number: Not reported Vehicle State: Not reported Vehicle License Number: Not reported Vehicle Make/year: Not reported Others Number Of Fatalities: Not reported Others Number Of Injuries: Not reported Others Number Of Decontaminated: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Fatalities: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Injuries: Not reported Resp Agncy Personel # Of Decontaminated: Not reported More Than Two Substances Involved?: Not reported Special Studies 6: Not reported Special Studies 5: Not reported Special Studies 4: Not reported Special Studies 3: Not reported Special Studies 2: Not reported Special Studies 1: Not reported Property Management: Not reported Estimated Temperature: Not reported Surrounding Area: Not reported Time Completed: Not reported Time Notified: Not reported Agency Incident Number: Not reported Agency Id Number: Not reported Property Use: Not reported Date Completed: Not reported Incident Date: 06:50:00 PM OES Time: 6/6/1993 OES Date: Not reported OES notification: 28067 OES Incident Number: CHMIRS: 4909 ft. Site 5 of 5 in cluster AT 0.930 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 132 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 90680 South Notify 65 1800 SOUTH HARBOR N/A AT247 CHMIRS MOBIL OIL CORP. 18-106 S100179564 TC2760975.2s Page 331 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Vehicle Make/year: Not reported Others Number Of Fatalities: Not reported Others Number Of Injuries: Not reported Others Number Of Decontaminated: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Fatalities: Not reported Responding Agency Personel # Of Injuries: Not reported Resp Agncy Personel # Of Decontaminated: Not reported More Than Two Substances Involved?: Not reported Special Studies 6: Not reported Special Studies 5: Not reported Special Studies 4: Not reported Special Studies 3: Not reported Special Studies 2: Not reported Special Studies 1: Not reported Property Management: Not reported Estimated Temperature: Not reported Surrounding Area: Not reported Time Completed: Not reported Time Notified: Not reported Agency Incident Number: Not reported Agency Id Number: Not reported Property Use: Not reported Date Completed: Not reported Incident Date: 06:50:00 PM OES Time: 6/6/1993 OES Date: Not reported OES notification: 28067 OES Incident Number: Not reported Description: Not reported Number of Fatalities: Not reported Number of Injuries: Not reported Evacuations: drove off with nozzle in tank Description: Not reported Unknown: Not reported Tons: Not reported Sheen: Not reported Quarts: Not reported Pints: Not reported Ounces: Not reported Liters: Not reported Pounds: Not reported Grams: Not reported Gallons: Not reported CUFT: Not reported Cups: Not reported BBLS: Not reported Quantity Released: gasoline Substance: Not reported E Date: Not reported Site Type: Not reported Contained: 5 gallons Amount: Not reported Admin Agency: 6/6/93/18:00 Incident Date: mobile oil Agency: 1993 Year: MOBIL OIL CORP. 18-106 (Continued) S100179564 TC2760975.2s Page 332 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 90680 Incident Description: Not reported Discharge Date: Not reported Facility Type: Not reported Board File Number: Not reported Staff Initials: Not reported Date Reported: Notify 65: Not reported Description: Not reported Number of Fatalities: Not reported Number of Injuries: Not reported Evacuations: drove off with nozzle in tank Description: Not reported Unknown: Not reported Tons: Not reported Sheen: Not reported Quarts: Not reported Pints: Not reported Ounces: Not reported Liters: Not reported Pounds: Not reported Grams: Not reported Gallons: Not reported CUFT: Not reported Cups: Not reported BBLS: Not reported Quantity Released: gasoline Substance: Not reported E Date: Not reported Site Type: Not reported Contained: 5 gallons Amount: Not reported Admin Agency: 6/6/93/18:00 Incident Date: mobile oil Agency: 1993 Year: Not reported Date/Time: Not reported Other: Not reported Measure: PETROLEUM Type: Not reported What Happened: Not reported Containment: attendant Cleanup By: Not reported Spill Site: Not reported Waterway: Not reported Waterway Involved: Not reported Facility Telephone: Not reported Comments: Not reported Report Date: Not reported Reporting Officer Name/ID: Not reported Company Name: Not reported CA/DOT/PUC/ICC Number: Not reported Vehicle Id Number: Not reported Vehicle State: Not reported Vehicle License Number: MOBIL OIL CORP. 18-106 (Continued) S100179564 TC2760975.2s Page 333 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Schedule Revised Date: Not reported Schedule Due Date: Not reported Schedule Document Type: Not reported Schedule Sub Area Name: Not reported Schedule Area Name: Not reported Future Due Date: Not reported Future Document Type: Not reported Future Sub Area Name: Not reported Future Area Name: SB 1248 Orange County Comments: 2001-02-20 00:00:00 Completed Date: SB 1248 Notification Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Completed Info: Envirostor ID Number Alias Type: 30300130 Alias Name: NONE SPECIFIED Potential Description: NONE SPECIFIED Confirmed COC: NONE SPECIFIED Potential COC: NONE SPECIFIED Past Use: NONE SPECIFIED APN: -117.900991804765 Longitude: 33.8116393672691 Latitude: Not Applicable Funding: NONE SPECIFIED Site Mgmt. Req.: NO Restricted Use: 2001-03-02 00:00:00 Status Date: Refer: 1248 Local Agency Status: Not reported Special Program: 34 Senate: 69 Assembly: Not reported Site Code: 30300130 Facility ID: Cypress Division Branch: Referred - Not Assigned Supervisor: Not reported Program Manager: NONE SPECIFIED Lead Agency: NONE SPECIFIED Regulatory Agencies: NO NPL: Not reported Acres: Evaluation Site Type Detailed: Evaluation Site Type: ENVIROSTOR: 4955 ft. 0.938 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 153 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ESE 611 EAST CERRITOS AVENUE N/A 248 ENVIROSTOR SILGAN PLASTICS CORPORATION S106797612 TC2760975.2s Page 334 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM, CA 92803 PO BOX 4465 Mailing address: CAD008266140 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92803 1745 S HASTER ST Facility address: CORCORAN MFG CO INC Facility name: 09/01/1996 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: Not reported Priority Level: 05/01/1985 Date Completed: Not reported Date Started: ARCHIVE SITE Action: NFRAP: No further Remedial Action planned Priority Level: 05/01/1985 Date Completed: 03/01/1985 Date Started: PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT Action: Not reported Priority Level: 07/01/1980 Date Completed: Not reported Date Started: DISCOVERY Action: CERCLIS-NFRAP Assessment History: (415) 972-3096 Contact Tel: Matt Mitguard Contact Name: Not reported Contact Title: (415) 972-3219 Contact Tel: Karen Jurist Contact Name: Not reported Contact Title: (415) 972-3095 Contact Tel: Jeff Inglis Contact Name: Not reported Contact Title: (415) 972-3162 Contact Tel: Brunilda Davila Contact Name: Not reported Contact Title: (415) 972-3814 Contact Tel: Carl Brickner Contact Name: Not reported Contact Title: CERCLIS-NFRAP Site Contact Name(s): NFRAP Non NPL Status: Not on the NPL NPL Status: Not a Federal Facility Federal Facility: 0901009 Site ID: CERC-NFRAP: 4963 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster AU 0.940 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 147 ft. 1/2-1 FINDS ANAHEIM, CA 92803 SE RCRA-SQG 1745 S HASTER ST CAD008266140 AU249 CERC-NFRAP CORCORAN MFG CO INC [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 335 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Large Quantity Generator Classification: CORCORAN MFG CO INC Facility name: 07/18/1980 Date form received by agency: Historical Generators: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: Unknown Furnace exemption: Unknown On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): Unknown U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: CORCORAN, T.P. Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: Not reported Contact telephone: Not reported Contact country: Not reported Not reported Contact address: CORCORAN MFG CO INC (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 336 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource Environmental Interest/Information System 110002631331 Registry ID: FINDS: No violations found Violation Status: CORCORAN MFG CO INC (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] 8/19/1998 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 8/29/1987 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: 9/25/1987 Review Date: 12/18/1987 Enter Date: 8/29/1987 How Stopped Date: T0605900569 Global ID: UNK Leak Source: UNK Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Tank Closure How Discovered: State Funds Funding: Not reported Enf Type: LEWIS Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Gasoline Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083000719T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 083001410T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: 083000719T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: CORTESE: 4973 ft. 0.942 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 129 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92801 South LUST 818 KATELLA AVE N/A 250 HIST CORTESE TEXACO SERVICE STATION S101299283 TC2760975.2s Page 337 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation VES PROPOSED JUNE 24, 1994 WP. APPROVE BY ANAHIEM F.D. 7/13/94 Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: ROW Staff Initials: NOM Staff: * MTBE Class: MTBE Detected. Site tested for MTBE & MTBE detected MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: .26 Max MTBE Soil: 1 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8031401 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: = Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 12/18/1987 Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: 12/18/1987 Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: TEXACO SERVICE STATION (Continued) S101299283 89UT014 LOC Case Number: 083001141T RB Case Number: ORANGE COUNTY LOP Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ORANGE COUNTY LOP Lead Agency: 1989-02-16 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -117.919348 Longitude: 33.830241 Latitude: T0605900901 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 083001141T Reg Id: LINKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: CORTESE: 5046 ft. 0.956 mi. Relative: Equal Actual: 150 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 North LUST 425 HARBOR N/A 251 HIST CORTESE ANAHEIM POLICE DEPT S102423981 TC2760975.2s Page 338 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Hydr Basin 30000L Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: WJ Staff Initials: PAH Staff: * MTBE Class: Site NOT Tested for MTBE.Includes Unknown and Not Analyzed. MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8305294 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: Not reported Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 2/16/1989 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 1/9/1989 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: Not reported Review Date: Not reported Enter Date: 9/9/9999 How Stopped Date: T0605900901 Global ID: Unknown Leak Source: Unknown Leak Cause: Close Tank How Stopped: Tank Closure How Discovered: Not reported Funding: Not reported Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: 0 Qty Leaked: Gasoline Substance: Soil only Case Type: 89UT014 Local Case Num: 083001141T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Local Agency File Location: ANAHEIM POLICE DEPT (Continued) S102423981 TC2760975.2s Page 339 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: MUN Beneficial: ANAHEIM POLICE DEPT (Continued) S102423981 Not reported Enter Date: 9/9/9999 How Stopped Date: T0605900866 Global ID: Unknown Leak Source: Unknown Leak Cause: Close Tank How Stopped: Tank Closure How Discovered: Not reported Funding: Not reported Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: 0 Qty Leaked: Gasoline Substance: Soil only Case Type: 88UT181 Local Case Num: 083001096T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: Not reported Site History: Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Local Agency File Location: 88UT181 LOC Case Number: 083001096T RB Case Number: ORANGE COUNTY LOP Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ORANGE COUNTY LOP Lead Agency: 1991-02-13 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.8033995 Latitude: T0605900866 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 083001096T Reg Id: LINKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: CORTESE: 5068 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster AU 0.960 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 144 ft. 1/2-1 EMI ANAHEIM, CA 92805 SE LUST 1755 HASTER N/A AU252 HIST CORTESE STEINER CORPORATION S102438098 TC2760975.2s Page 340 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 30 County Code: 1990 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 2 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 0 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7211 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 6069 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1987 Year: EMI: Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: MUN Beneficial: Not reported Hydr Basin 30000L Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: WJ Staff Initials: PAH Staff: * MTBE Class: Site NOT Tested for MTBE.Includes Unknown and Not Analyzed. MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.803257 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: Not reported Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: Not reported Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 2/13/1991 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 9/6/1988 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: Not reported Review Date: STEINER CORPORATION (Continued) S102438098 TC2760975.2s Page 341 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 1 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 1 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7213 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 6069 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1995 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 2 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 0 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 7213 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 6069 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: STEINER CORPORATION (Continued) S102438098 Not reported TSD commencement date: waste Handler is engaged in the treatment, storage or disposal of hazardous Description: TSDF Classification: Private Land type: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: (714) 758-4098 Contact telephone: US Contact country: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 707 E VERMONT AVE Contact address: MARTIN HERNANDEZ Contact: CAD008289043 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 707 E VERMONT AVE Facility address: L 3 INTERSTATE ELECTRONICS CORPORATION Facility name: 04/12/2001 Date form received by agency: RCRA-TSDF: HWP ENVIROSTOR 5110 ft. EMI 0.968 mi. HAZNET Relative: Higher Actual: 162 ft. 1/2-1 FINDS ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NE RCRA-SQG 707 E VERMONT AVE CAD008289043 253 RCRA-TSDF L 3 INTERSTATE ELECTRONICS CORPORATION [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 342 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Hazardous Waste Summary: Large Quantity Generator Classification: INTERSTATE ELECTRONICS CORPORA Site name: L 3 INTERSTATE ELECTRONICS CORPORATION Facility name: 01/29/1992 Date form received by agency: Not a generator, verified Classification: L 3 INTERSTATE ELECTRONICS CORPORATION Facility name: 09/16/1993 Date form received by agency: Large Quantity Generator Classification: INTERSTATE ELECTRONICS CORP Site name: L 3 INTERSTATE ELECTRONICS CORPORATION Facility name: 03/17/1994 Date form received by agency: Historical Generators: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: No Furnace exemption: No On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): No U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Other Legal status: (212) 697-1111 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NEW YORK, NY 10016 600 3RD AVE Owner/operator address: L 3 COMMUNICATIONS Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (714) 772-2811 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: CITY NOT REPORTED, CA 99999 PO BOX 3117 Owner/operator address: INTERSTATE ELECTRONICS CORPORATION Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: L 3 INTERSTATE ELECTRONICS CORPORATION (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 343 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 01/01/1990 Event date: Corrective Action Summary: THESE SPENT SOLVENTS AND SPENT SOLVENT MIXTURES. LISTED IN F001, F002, OR F004; AND STILL BOTTOMS FROM THE RECOVERY OF ONE OR MORE OF THE ABOVE NON-HALOGENATED SOLVENTS OR THOSE SOLVENTS CONTAINING, BEFORE USE, A TOTAL OF TEN PERCENT OR MORE (BY VOLUME) OF 2-ETHOXYETHANOL, AND 2-NITROPROPANE; ALL SPENT SOLVENT MIXTURES/BLENDS KETONE, CARBON DISULFIDE, ISOBUTANOL, PYRIDINE, BENZENE, THE FOLLOWING SPENT NON-HALOGENATED SOLVENTS: TOLUENE, METHYL ETHYL Waste name: F005 Waste code: MIXTURES. BOTTOMS FROM THE RECOVERY OF THESE SPENT SOLVENTS AND SPENT SOLVENT MORE OF THOSE SOLVENTS LISTED IN F001, F002, F004, AND F005, AND STILL SOLVENTS, AND, A TOTAL OF TEN PERCENT OR MORE (BY VOLUME) OF ONE OR CONTAINING, BEFORE USE, ONE OR MORE OF THE ABOVE NON-HALOGENATED NON-HALOGENATED SOLVENTS; AND ALL SPENT SOLVENT MIXTURES/BLENDS MIXTURES/BLENDS CONTAINING, BEFORE USE, ONLY THE ABOVE SPENT ALCOHOL, CYCLOHEXANONE, AND METHANOL; ALL SPENT SOLVENT ACETATE, ETHYL BENZENE, ETHYL ETHER, METHYL ISOBUTYL KETONE, N-BUTYL THE FOLLOWING SPENT NON-HALOGENATED SOLVENTS: XYLENE, ACETONE, ETHYL Waste name: F003 Waste code: MERCURY Waste name: D009 Waste code: LEAD Waste name: D008 Waste code: OF SUCH WASTE WOULD BY WASTE GUNPOWDER. DETONATION OR EXPLOSION WHEN EXPOSED TO HEAT OR A FLAME. ONE EXAMPLE WHEN EXPOSED TO WATER OR CORROSIVE MATERIALS, OR IF IT IS CAPABLE OF NORMALLY UNSTABLE, REACTS VIOLENTLY WITH WATER, GENERATES TOXIC GASES A MATERIAL IS CONSIDERED TO BE A REACTIVE HAZARDOUS WASTE IF IT IS Waste name: D003 Waste code: DISPOSED, THE WASTE WOULD BE A CORROSIVE HAZARDOUS WASTE. THESE CAUSTIC OR ACID SOLUTIONS BECOME CONTAMINATED AND MUST BE USED BY MANY INDUSTRIES TO CLEAN METAL PARTS PRIOR TO PAINTING. WHEN OR DEGREASE PARTS. HYDROCHLORIC ACID, A SOLUTION WITH A LOW PH, IS CAUSTIC SOLUTION WITH A HIGH PH, IS OFTEN USED BY INDUSTRIES TO CLEAN CONSIDERED TO BE A CORROSIVE HAZARDOUS WASTE. SODIUM HYDROXIDE, A A WASTE WHICH HAS A PH OF LESS THAN 2 OR GREATER THAN 12.5 IS Waste name: D002 Waste code: WHICH WOULD BE CONSIDERED AS IGNITABLE HAZARDOUS WASTE. MATERIAL. LACQUER THINNER IS AN EXAMPLE OF A COMMONLY USED SOLVENT WHICH CAN BE OBTAINED FROM THE MANUFACTURER OR DISTRIBUTOR OF THE FLASH POINT OF A WASTE IS TO REVIEW THE MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET, CLOSED CUP FLASH POINT TESTER. ANOTHER METHOD OF DETERMINING THE LESS THAN 140 DEGREES FAHRENHEIT AS DETERMINED BY A PENSKY-MARTENS IGNITABLE HAZARDOUS WASTES ARE THOSE WASTES WHICH HAVE A FLASHPOINT OF Waste name: D001 Waste code: Not Defined Waste name: D000 Waste code: L 3 INTERSTATE ELECTRONICS CORPORATION (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 344 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Final penalty amount: Not reported Proposed penalty amount: State Enforcement lead agency: Not reported Enf. disp. status date: Not reported Enf. disposition status: 03/22/1988 Enforcement action date: WRITTEN INFORMAL Enforcement action: State Violation lead agency: 06/22/1988 Date achieved compliance: 03/22/1988 Date violation determined: TSD - Financial Requirements Area of violation: F - 264.140-150.H Regulation violated: Not reported Paid penalty amount: Not reported Final penalty amount: Not reported Proposed penalty amount: State Enforcement lead agency: Not reported Enf. disp. status date: Not reported Enf. disposition status: 04/21/1988 Enforcement action date: WRITTEN INFORMAL Enforcement action: State Violation lead agency: 06/22/1988 Date achieved compliance: 03/23/1988 Date violation determined: TSD - Closure/Post-Closure Area of violation: FR - 264.110-120.G Regulation violated: Not reported Paid penalty amount: Not reported Final penalty amount: Not reported Proposed penalty amount: EPA Enforcement lead agency: Not reported Enf. disp. status date: Not reported Enf. disposition status: 07/05/1988 Enforcement action date: WRITTEN INFORMAL Enforcement action: State Violation lead agency: 08/15/1988 Date achieved compliance: 03/23/1988 Date violation determined: LDR - General Area of violation: FR - 268.7 Regulation violated: Not reported Paid penalty amount: Not reported Final penalty amount: Not reported Proposed penalty amount: State Enforcement lead agency: Not reported Enf. disp. status date: Not reported Enf. disposition status: 04/21/1988 Enforcement action date: WRITTEN INFORMAL Enforcement action: State Violation lead agency: 06/22/1988 Date achieved compliance: 03/23/1988 Date violation determined: Generators - General Area of violation: FR - 262.50-60 Regulation violated: Facility Has Received Notices of Violations: CA029ST Event: L 3 INTERSTATE ELECTRONICS CORPORATION (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 345 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation State Evaluation lead agency: 06/22/1988 Date achieved compliance: Generators - General Area of violation: COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Evaluation: 03/23/1988 Evaluation date: State Evaluation lead agency: 06/22/1988 Date achieved compliance: TSD - Closure/Post-Closure Area of violation: COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Evaluation: 03/23/1988 Evaluation date: Evaluation Action Summary: Not reported Paid penalty amount: Not reported Final penalty amount: Not reported Proposed penalty amount: State Enforcement lead agency: Not reported Enf. disp. status date: Not reported Enf. disposition status: 11/25/1985 Enforcement action date: WRITTEN INFORMAL Enforcement action: State Violation lead agency: 12/23/1985 Date achieved compliance: 11/05/1985 Date violation determined: Generators - General Area of violation: F - 262.10-12.A Regulation violated: Not reported Paid penalty amount: Not reported Final penalty amount: Not reported Proposed penalty amount: Not reported Enforcement lead agency: Not reported Enf. disp. status date: Not reported Enf. disposition status: Not reported Enforcement action date: Not reported Enforcement action: State Violation lead agency: 12/23/1985 Date achieved compliance: 12/23/1985 Date violation determined: Generators - General Area of violation: F - 262.10-12.A Regulation violated: Not reported Paid penalty amount: Not reported Final penalty amount: Not reported Proposed penalty amount: Not reported Enforcement lead agency: Not reported Enf. disp. status date: Not reported Enf. disposition status: Not reported Enforcement action date: Not reported Enforcement action: EPA Violation lead agency: 01/31/1986 Date achieved compliance: 01/29/1986 Date violation determined: Generators - General Area of violation: FR - 262.10-12.A Regulation violated: Not reported Paid penalty amount: L 3 INTERSTATE ELECTRONICS CORPORATION (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 346 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource transported off-site. these facilities release directly to air, water, land, or that are from facilities on the amounts of over 300 listed toxic chemicals that US EPA TRIS (Toxics Release Inventory System) contains information facilities. generators, transporters, and treatment, storage, and disposal provides California with information on hazardous waste shipments for California Hazardous Waste Tracking System - Datamart (HWTS-DATAMART) their precursors, as well as hazardous air pollutants (HAPs). on stationary and mobile sources that emit criteria air pollutants and The NEI (National Emissions Inventory) database contains information Environmental Interest/Information System 110002145232 Registry ID: FINDS: State Evaluation lead agency: Not reported Date achieved compliance: Not reported Area of violation: NON-FINANCIAL RECORD REVIEW Evaluation: 11/05/1985 Evaluation date: State Evaluation lead agency: 12/23/1985 Date achieved compliance: Generators - General Area of violation: COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Evaluation: 11/05/1985 Evaluation date: State Evaluation lead agency: 12/23/1985 Date achieved compliance: Generators - General Area of violation: COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE EVALUATION Evaluation: 12/23/1985 Evaluation date: EPA Evaluation lead agency: 01/31/1986 Date achieved compliance: Generators - General Area of violation: COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Evaluation: 01/29/1986 Evaluation date: State Evaluation lead agency: 06/22/1988 Date achieved compliance: TSD - Financial Requirements Area of violation: FINANCIAL RECORD REVIEW Evaluation: 03/22/1988 Evaluation date: State Evaluation lead agency: 08/15/1988 Date achieved compliance: LDR - General Area of violation: COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Evaluation: 03/23/1988 Evaluation date: L 3 INTERSTATE ELECTRONICS CORPORATION (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 347 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: FIGGIE INTERNATIONAL INC Contact: CAD008289043 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .2000 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Other inorganic solid waste Waste Category: Santa Clara TSD County: CAD003963592 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928055918 Mailing City,St,Zip: 707 E VERMONT AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: FIGGIE INTERNATIONAL INC Contact: CAD008289043 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .2085 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: etc.) Halogenated solvents (chloroform, methyl chloride, perchloroethylene, Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD008364432 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928055918 Mailing City,St,Zip: 707 E VERMONT AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: FIGGIE INTERNATIONAL INC Contact: CAD008289043 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: .0850 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Off-specification, aged, or surplus organics Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD000088252 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928055918 Mailing City,St,Zip: 707 E VERMONT AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: FIGGIE INTERNATIONAL INC Contact: CAD008289043 Gepaid: HAZNET: corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA L 3 INTERSTATE ELECTRONICS CORPORATION (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 348 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 0 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 3812 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 126773 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 2002 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 1 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 1 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 3679 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 19047 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1996 Year: EMI: 117 additional CA_HAZNET: record(s) in the EDR Site Report. Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access Orange Facility County: .0200 Tons: Transfer Station Disposal Method: Unspecified oil-containing waste Waste Category: San Bernardino TSD County: CAT080022148 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928055918 Mailing City,St,Zip: 707 E VERMONT AVE Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: FIGGIE INTERNATIONAL INC Contact: CAD008289043 Gepaid: Orange Facility County: 1.0632 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Unspecified solvent mixture Waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAD044429835 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928055918 Mailing City,St,Zip: 707 E VERMONT AVE Mailing Address: L 3 INTERSTATE ELECTRONICS CORPORATION (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 349 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: .034075985 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: .03479 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 3812 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 126773 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 2005 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0.12 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 0.1674 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 3812 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 126773 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 2004 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 0 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 3812 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 126773 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 2003 Year: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: L 3 INTERSTATE ELECTRONICS CORPORATION (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 350 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Permit Maintenance Lead: CYPRESS, GEOLOGY CAL SUPPORT Region: Not reported Cleanup Status: HAZ WASTE - NON-OPERATING Facility Type: -117.902297 Longitude: 33.824953 Latitude: CAD008289043 EPA Id: HWP: Not reported Schedule Revised Date: Not reported Schedule Due Date: Not reported Schedule Document Type: Not reported Schedule Sub Area Name: Not reported Schedule Area Name: Not reported Future Due Date: Not reported Future Document Type: Not reported Future Sub Area Name: Not reported Future Area Name: Not reported Comments: Not reported Completed Date: Not reported Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: Not reported Completed Area Name: Completed Info: EPA Identification Number Alias Type: CAD008289043 Alias Name: Envirostor ID Number Alias Type: 80001545 Alias Name: NONE SPECIFIED Potential Description: NONE SPECIFIED Confirmed COC: NONE SPECIFIED Potential COC: NONE SPECIFIED Past Use: NONE SPECIFIED APN: -117.902297 Longitude: 33.824953 Latitude: Not reported Funding: NONE SPECIFIED Site Mgmt. Req.: NO Restricted Use: 2008-01-01 00:00:00 Status Date: * Inactive Status: Not reported Special Program: 69 Senate: 69 Assembly: Not reported Site Code: 80001545 Facility ID: Cypress Division Branch: * Unknown Supervisor: Not reported Program Manager: NONE SPECIFIED Lead Agency: NONE SPECIFIED Regulatory Agencies: NO NPL: 0 Acres: Corrective Action Site Type Detailed: Corrective Action Site Type: ENVIROSTOR: L 3 INTERSTATE ELECTRONICS CORPORATION (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 351 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Doc Comments: 1982-10-21 00:00:00 Actual Date: Applicant Was A Protective Filer Event Description: CONTAIN1, WASTPILE1 Unit Names: CAD008289043 EPA Id: Not reported Doc Comments: 1988-06-30 00:00:00 Actual Date: Approved Request Event Description: CONTAIN1, WASTPILE1 Unit Names: CAD008289043 EPA Id: Not reported Doc Comments: 1988-04-11 00:00:00 Actual Date: Applicant Was A Protective Filer Event Description: CONTAIN1, WASTPILE1 Unit Names: CAD008289043 EPA Id: Not reported Doc Comments: 1980-11-20 00:00:00 Actual Date: Initial Submittal Event Description: CONTAIN1, WASTPILE1 Unit Names: CAD008289043 EPA Id: HWP: Not reported Site History: Not reported Facility Status: Not reported Public Information Officer: Not reported Senate District: Not reported Assembly District: Not reported Site Code: Not reported Supervisor: Not reported Corrective Action Lead: Not reported Permit Renewal Lead: L 3 INTERSTATE ELECTRONICS CORPORATION (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] Diesel, Gasoline Potential Contaminants of Concern: Soil Potential Media Affect: Not reported File Location: Not reported LOC Case Number: 083004011T RB Case Number: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency: Not reported Case Worker: ANAHEIM, CITY OF Lead Agency: 2005-01-25 00:00:00 Status Date: Completed - Case Closed Status: LUST Cleanup Site Case Type: -117.898347 Longitude: 33.812111 Latitude: T0605912781 Global Id: STATE Region: LUST: 5112 ft. 0.968 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 155 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 ESE 1426 ALLEC, S. N/A 254 LUST CASADA CONSTRUCTION CO. S106660910 TC2760975.2s Page 352 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: Not reported Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: RM Staff Initials: TME Staff: * MTBE Class: Not Required to be Tested. MTBE Tested: 0 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 0 MTBE Concentration: Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: 0 Longitude: 0 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: Not reported Enter Date: Not reported Monitoring: 10/13/2004 Remed Action: Not reported Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: Not reported Workplan: 1/25/2005 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 9/10/2004 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: 10/13/2004 Review Date: Not reported Enter Date: Not reported How Stopped Date: T0605912781 Global ID: Piping Leak Source: UNK Leak Cause: Close Tank How Stopped: Tank Closure How Discovered: LOPS Funding: Not reported Enf Type: CERRITOS AVE. Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: 12034,800661 Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083004011T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: Not reported Site History: CASADA CONSTRUCTION CO. (Continued) S106660910 TC2760975.2s Page 353 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: CASADA CONSTRUCTION CO. (Continued) S106660910 Not reported Max MTBE GW: Not reported MTBE Date: -[PHONE REDACTED] Longitude: 33.803129 Latitude: LUST Oversite Program: Not reported Interim: Not reported Facility Contact: Not reported Operator: Not reported Soil Qualifies: Not reported GW Qualifies: 6/11/1991 Enter Date: 8/13/1996 Monitoring: 6/1/1995 Remed Action: 5/20/1995 Remed Plan: Not reported Pollution Char: 5/14/1991 Workplan: 9/23/1996 Close Date: Not reported Enforcement Date: 4/12/1991 Discover Date: Not reported Prelim Assess: 4/12/1991 Review Date: 6/11/1991 Enter Date: 4/12/1991 How Stopped Date: T0605901378 Global ID: UNK Leak Source: UNK Leak Cause: Not reported How Stopped: Subsurface Monitoring How Discovered: Not reported Funding: CLOS Enf Type: Not reported Cross Street: Not reported Abate Method: Not reported Qty Leaked: Gasoline Substance: Soil only Case Type: Not reported Local Case Num: 083001842T Case Number: Case Closed Facility Status: Santa Ana Region Regional Board: Orange County: 8 Region: LUST REG 8: 083001842T Reg Id: LTNKA Reg By: 30 Facility County Code: CORTESE Region: CORTESE: 5278 ft. 1.000 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 137 ft. 1/2-1 ANAHEIM, CA 92802 SSE LUST 350 KATELLA AVE N/A 255 HIST CORTESE KATELLA CAR WASH (FORMER) S101307712 TC2760975.2s Page 354 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Summary: Not reported Work Suspended: Not reported Cleanup Fund Id: Not reported Priority: Not reported Beneficial: COASTAL PLAIN OF ORA Hydr Basin 30011 Local Agency: Local Agency Lead Agency: ROW Staff Initials: RS Staff: * MTBE Class: MTBE Detected. Site tested for MTBE & MTBE detected MTBE Tested: 1 MTBE Fuel: Not reported Max MTBE Soil: 1 MTBE Concentration: KATELLA CAR WASH (FORMER) (Continued) S101307712 CA Not reported Alias Address: DIXCO Alias Name: CERCLIS-NFRAP Site Alias Name(s): (415) 972-3096 Contact Tel: Matt Mitguard Contact Name: Not reported Contact Title: (415) 972-3219 Contact Tel: Karen Jurist Contact Name: Not reported Contact Title: (415) 972-3095 Contact Tel: Jeff Inglis Contact Name: Not reported Contact Title: (415) 972-3162 Contact Tel: Brunilda Davila Contact Name: Not reported Contact Title: (415) 972-3814 Contact Tel: Carl Brickner Contact Name: Not reported Contact Title: CERCLIS-NFRAP Site Contact Name(s): Addressed as Part of Another non-NPL Site Non NPL Status: Not on the NPL NPL Status: Not a Federal Facility Federal Facility: 0900133 Site ID: CERC-NFRAP: ENVIROSTOR EMI 6418 ft. HIST UST 1.216 mi. UST Relative: Higher Actual: 166 ft. > 1 FINDS ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NE RCRA-NonGen 1014 E SOUTH STREET CAD058230038 256 CERC-NFRAP DIXCO DIVERSIFIED CHEMICAL SALES INC [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 355 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: DIXCO DIVERSIFIED CHEMICAL SALES INC Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: Handler: Non-Generators do not presently generate hazardous waste Description: Non-Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: (714) 535-0646 Contact telephone: US Contact country: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 1014 E SOUTH STREET Contact address: ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGER Contact: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 E SOUTH STREET Mailing address: CAD058230038 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 1014 E SOUTH STREET Facility address: DIXCO DIVERSIFIED CHEMICAL SALES INC Facility name: 11/12/1980 Date form received by agency: RCRA-NonGen: Not reported Priority Level: 08/25/2005 Date Completed: Not reported Date Started: PRE-CERCLIS SCREENING Action: Not reported Priority Level: 09/01/1988 Date Completed: Not reported Date Started: ARCHIVE SITE Action: NFRAP: No further Remedial Action planned Priority Level: 09/01/1988 Date Completed: Not reported Date Started: PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT Action: Not reported Priority Level: 12/01/1987 Date Completed: Not reported Date Started: DISCOVERY Action: CERCLIS-NFRAP Assessment History: DIXCO DIVERSIFIED CHEMICAL SALES INC (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 356 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation NO. 1 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 Owner City,St,Zip: 1014 E. SOUTH STREET Owner Address: DIXCO DIVERSIFIED CHEMICAL SAL Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: CADES, RICHARD Contact Name: 0009 Total Tanks: CHEMICAL DISTRIBUTIO Other Type: Other Facility Type: 00000032262 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: -117.90081 Longitude: 33.82907 Latitude: 4760 Global ID: UST: corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource Environmental Interest/Information System 110002651602 Registry ID: FINDS: No violations found Violation Status: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: No Furnace exemption: No On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: Yes Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): No U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: DIXCO DIVERSIFIED CHEMICAL SALES INC (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 357 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00008000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: NO. 7 Container Num: 007 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: 1/2" inches Tank Construction: Not reported Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00008000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: NO. 6 Container Num: 006 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: 1/2" inches Tank Construction: Not reported Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00008000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: NO. 5 Container Num: 005 Tank Num: Stock Inventor, Pressure Test Leak Detection: 1/2" inches Tank Construction: Not reported Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00008000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: NO. 4 Container Num: 004 Tank Num: Not reported Leak Detection: 1/2" inches Tank Construction: Not reported Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00001000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: NO. 3 Container Num: 003 Tank Num: Stock Inventor, Pressure Test Leak Detection: 1/4" inches Tank Construction: Not reported Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00001000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: NO. 2 Container Num: 002 Tank Num: Visual, Stock Inventor Leak Detection: 1/4" inches Tank Construction: DIESEL Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00001000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: DIXCO DIVERSIFIED CHEMICAL SALES INC (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 358 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Refer: Other Agency Status: * CERC2 Special Program: 34 Senate: 69 Assembly: Not reported Site Code: 30280448 Facility ID: Cypress Division Branch: * MMONROY Supervisor: Not reported Program Manager: NONE SPECIFIED Lead Agency: NONE SPECIFIED Regulatory Agencies: NO NPL: Not reported Acres: * Historical Site Type Detailed: Historical Site Type: ENVIROSTOR: 0 Part. Matter 10 Micrometers & Tons/Yr: 0 Particulate Matter Tons/Yr: 0 SOX - Oxides of Sulphur Tons/Yr: 0 NOX - Oxides of Nitrogen Tons/Yr: 0 Carbon Monoxide Emissions Tons/Yr: 0 Reactive Organic Gases Tons/Yr: 0 Total Organic Hydrocarbon Gases Tons/Yr: Not reported Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule: Not reported Community Health Air Pollution Info System: SOUTH COAST AQMD Air District Name: 2842 SIC Code: SC Air District Name: 9271 Facility ID: SC Air Basin: 30 County Code: 1987 Year: EMI: Visual, Stock Inventor Leak Detection: 1/2 inches Tank Construction: Not reported Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00008000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: NO. 9 Container Num: 009 Tank Num: Visual, Stock Inventor Leak Detection: 1/2" inches Tank Construction: Not reported Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00008000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: NO. 8 Container Num: 008 Tank Num: Visual, Stock Inventor Leak Detection: 1/2" inches Tank Construction: Not reported Type of Fuel: DIXCO DIVERSIFIED CHEMICAL SALES INC (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 359 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Schedule Revised Date: Not reported Schedule Due Date: Not reported Schedule Document Type: Not reported Schedule Sub Area Name: Not reported Schedule Area Name: Not reported Future Due Date: Not reported Future Document Type: Not reported Future Sub Area Name: Not reported Future Area Name: MISSILE COMPONENTS FACILITY IDENTIFIED VIA TELEPHONE DIRECTORY (1966) (ADAMS/DIXCO) Comments: 1981-08-15 00:00:00 Completed Date: * Discovery Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: SITE SCREENING DONE PA RECOM TO DETERMINE CURRENT STATUS OF CLEAN UP. Comments: 1987-06-15 00:00:00 Completed Date: Site Screening Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: PRELIM ASSESS DONE PENDING STATUS Comments: 1988-04-20 00:00:00 Completed Date: Preliminary Assessment Report Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: DATABASE VALIDATION PROGRAM CONFIRMS NFA FOR DTSC. Comments: 1995-02-08 00:00:00 Completed Date: Site Screening Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Completed Info: Alternate Name Alias Type: ADAMS CO Alias Name: Envirostor ID Number Alias Type: 30280448 Alias Name: NONE SPECIFIED Potential Description: NONE SPECIFIED Confirmed COC: 10009, 10015, 10067, 10097, 10119, 10120, 10193, 20012, 30160 Potential COC: NONE SPECIFIED Past Use: NONE SPECIFIED APN: -117.900686840774 Longitude: 33.8286087819246 Latitude: Not reported Funding: NONE SPECIFIED Site Mgmt. Req.: NO Restricted Use: 1995-02-08 00:00:00 Status Date: DIXCO DIVERSIFIED CHEMICAL SALES INC (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 360 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Not reported Comments: 2003-11-04 00:00:00 Completed Date: * Workplan Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Not reported Comments: 2004-07-08 00:00:00 Completed Date: Technical Report Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Completed Info: Alternate Name Alias Type: ANAHEIM UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT Alias Name: Envirostor ID Number Alias Type: 30820020 Alias Name: Alternate Name Alias Type: ANAHEIM UNION HSD-ANAHEIM HS Alias Name: Alternate Name Alias Type: ANAHEIM HIGH SCHOOL Alias Name: Project Code (Site Code) Alias Type: 404433 Alias Name: SOIL Potential Description: NONE SPECIFIED Confirmed COC: 30001, 30013, 30007, 30207, 30008, 30004 Potential COC: * EDUCATIONAL SERVICES Past Use: NONE SPECIFIED APN: -117.925036428573 Longitude: 33.8354314089903 Latitude: School District Funding: NO Restricted Use: 2004-05-13 00:00:00 Status Date: No Further Action Status: Not reported Special Program Status: 34 Senate: 72 Assembly: 404433 Site Code: Cypress Division Branch: * Rafat Abbasi Supervisor: Not reported Project Manager: Not reported Lead Agency Description: NONE SPECIFIED Lead Agency: DTSC Cleanup Oversight Agencies: NO National Priorities List: 2 Acres: NONE SPECIFIED Site Mgmt. Req.: School Site Type Detail: School Investigation Site Type: 30820020 Facility ID: SCH: 6445 ft. 1.221 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 148 ft. > 1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NNW ENVIROSTOR 811 WEST LINCOLN AVENUE N/A 257 SCH ANAHEIM HIGH SCHOOL S107735842 TC2760975.2s Page 361 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation NO Restricted Use: 2004-05-13 00:00:00 Status Date: No Further Action Status: Not reported Special Program: 34 Senate: 72 Assembly: 404433 Site Code: 30820020 Facility ID: Cypress Division Branch: * Rafat Abbasi Supervisor: Not reported Program Manager: NONE SPECIFIED Lead Agency: DTSC Regulatory Agencies: NO NPL: 2 Acres: School Site Type Detailed: School Investigation Site Type: ENVIROSTOR: Not reported Schedule Revised Date: Not reported Schedule Due Date: Not reported Schedule Document Type: Not reported Schedule Sub Area Name: Not reported Schedule Area Name: Not reported Future Due Date: Not reported Future Document Type: Not reported Future Sub Area Name: Not reported Future Area Name: Not reported Comments: 2003-08-29 00:00:00 Completed Date: Site Inspections/Visit (Non LUR) Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Not reported Comments: 2003-05-13 00:00:00 Completed Date: Site Inspections/Visit (Non LUR) Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Not reported Comments: 2004-11-15 00:00:00 Completed Date: Cost Recovery Closeout Memo Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Not reported Comments: 2004-10-18 00:00:00 Completed Date: Supplemental Site Investigation Report Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Not reported Comments: 2004-05-13 00:00:00 Completed Date: Preliminary Endangerment Assessment Report Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: ANAHEIM HIGH SCHOOL (Continued) S107735842 TC2760975.2s Page 362 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Not reported Comments: 2003-05-13 00:00:00 Completed Date: Site Inspections/Visit (Non LUR) Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Not reported Comments: 2004-11-15 00:00:00 Completed Date: Cost Recovery Closeout Memo Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Not reported Comments: 2004-10-18 00:00:00 Completed Date: Supplemental Site Investigation Report Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Not reported Comments: 2004-05-13 00:00:00 Completed Date: Preliminary Endangerment Assessment Report Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Not reported Comments: 2003-11-04 00:00:00 Completed Date: * Workplan Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Not reported Comments: 2004-07-08 00:00:00 Completed Date: Technical Report Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Completed Info: Alternate Name Alias Type: ANAHEIM UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT Alias Name: Envirostor ID Number Alias Type: 30820020 Alias Name: Alternate Name Alias Type: ANAHEIM UNION HSD-ANAHEIM HS Alias Name: Alternate Name Alias Type: ANAHEIM HIGH SCHOOL Alias Name: Project Code (Site Code) Alias Type: 404433 Alias Name: SOIL Potential Description: NONE SPECIFIED Confirmed COC: 30001, 30013, 30007, 30207, 30008, 30004 Potential COC: * EDUCATIONAL SERVICES Past Use: NONE SPECIFIED APN: -117.925036428573 Longitude: 33.8354314089903 Latitude: School District Funding: NONE SPECIFIED Site Mgmt. Req.: ANAHEIM HIGH SCHOOL (Continued) S107735842 TC2760975.2s Page 363 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Schedule Revised Date: Not reported Schedule Due Date: Not reported Schedule Document Type: Not reported Schedule Sub Area Name: Not reported Schedule Area Name: Not reported Future Due Date: Not reported Future Document Type: Not reported Future Sub Area Name: Not reported Future Area Name: Not reported Comments: 2003-08-29 00:00:00 Completed Date: Site Inspections/Visit (Non LUR) Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: ANAHEIM HIGH SCHOOL (Continued) S107735842 CERCLIS-NFRAP Assessment History: CA Not reported Alias Address: HOME OIL CO Alias Name: CERCLIS-NFRAP Site Alias Name(s): (415) 972-3096 Contact Tel: Matt Mitguard Contact Name: Not reported Contact Title: (415) 972-3219 Contact Tel: Karen Jurist Contact Name: Not reported Contact Title: (415) 972-3095 Contact Tel: Jeff Inglis Contact Name: Not reported Contact Title: (415) 972-3162 Contact Tel: Brunilda Davila Contact Name: Not reported Contact Title: (415) 972-3814 Contact Tel: Carl Brickner Contact Name: Not reported Contact Title: CERCLIS-NFRAP Site Contact Name(s): NFRAP Non NPL Status: Not on the NPL NPL Status: Not a Federal Facility Federal Facility: 0900123 Site ID: CERC-NFRAP: ENVIROSTOR HAZNET 6561 ft. HIST UST 1.243 mi. FINDS Relative: Lower Actual: 135 ft. > 1 SSTS ANAHEIM, CA 92803 NW RCRA-SQG 1422 W BROADWAY CAD027830678 258 CERC-NFRAP HOME OIL CO OF ANAHEIM [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 364 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: HOME OIL CO OF ANAHEIM A CORP Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: Facility is not located on Indian land. Additional information is not known. Land type: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: Not reported Contact telephone: Not reported Contact country: Not reported Not reported Contact address: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM, CA 92803 PO BOX 3580 Mailing address: CAD027830678 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92803 1422 W BROADWAY Facility address: HOME OIL CO OF ANAHEIM Facility name: 09/01/1996 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: Not reported Priority Level: 08/01/1988 Date Completed: Not reported Date Started: ARCHIVE SITE Action: NFRAP: No further Remedial Action planned Priority Level: 08/01/1988 Date Completed: Not reported Date Started: PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT Action: Not reported Priority Level: 12/01/1987 Date Completed: Not reported Date Started: DISCOVERY Action: HOME OIL CO OF ANAHEIM (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 365 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 046024CA 001 Registration Number: Active Status: Not reported Contact: VAPAM HL Product: Not reported Pesticide RUP report: Not reported Zero product: Not reported Region: Marketed in the United States Market: Not reported UOM: Restricted use only Product Use: Other Pesticides (includes insect repellents such as DEET) Product Class: Repackaged or relabeled Product Type: 00548100423034704 Product Number: Registered Permit: Not reported Report Year: 046024CA 001 Registration Number: Active Status: Not reported Contact: NEMASOL 426 Product: SSTS: State Contractor/Grantee Evaluation lead agency: Not reported Date achieved compliance: Not reported Area of violation: COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Evaluation: 02/08/1994 Evaluation date: Evaluation Action Summary: No violations found Violation Status: Large Quantity Generator Classification: HOME OIL CO OF ANAHEIM Facility name: 08/15/1980 Date form received by agency: Historical Generators: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: Unknown Furnace exemption: Unknown On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): Unknown U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: HOME OIL CO OF ANAHEIM (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 366 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation HOME OIL CO. OF ANAHEIM Owner Name: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: ROBERT V. BARTON Contact Name: 0003 Total Tanks: BULK PLANT Other Type: Other Facility Type: 00000022629 Facility ID: STATE Region: HIST UST: corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource and settlements. regions and states with cooperative agreements, enforcement actions, Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). The system tracks inspections in Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the NCDB (National Compliance Data Base) supports implementation of the Environmental Interest/Information System 110002639486 Registry ID: FINDS: Not reported Pesticide RUP report: Not reported Zero product: Not reported Region: Marketed in the United States Market: G UOM: All other products Product Use: Not reported Product Class: Technical material or active ingredient Product Type: 00548100468 Product Number: Registered Permit: 1997 Report Year: 046024CA 001 Registration Number: Active Status: Not reported Contact: VAPAM HL Product: Not reported Pesticide RUP report: Not reported Zero product: Not reported Region: Marketed in the United States Market: G UOM: All other products Product Use: Not reported Product Class: Technical material or active ingredient Product Type: 01018200392 Product Number: Registered Permit: 1996 Report Year: HOME OIL CO OF ANAHEIM (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 367 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Cypress Division Branch: * MMONROY Supervisor: Not reported Program Manager: NONE SPECIFIED Lead Agency: NONE SPECIFIED Regulatory Agencies: NO NPL: Not reported Acres: * Historical Site Type Detailed: Historical Site Type: ENVIROSTOR: Orange Facility County: .8340 Tons: Recycler Disposal Method: Tank bottom waste Waste Category: Los Angeles TSD County: CAT080013352 TSD EPA ID: Orange Gen County: ANAHEIM, CA 928030000 Mailing City,St,Zip: PO BOX 3580 Mailing Address: Not reported Mailing Name: Not reported Facility Addr2: [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: HOME OIL CO OF ANAHEIM A CORP Contact: CAD027830678 Gepaid: HAZNET: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: 12 gauge Tank Construction: REGULAR Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00000550 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 3 Container Num: 003 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: 10 gauge Tank Construction: PREMIUM Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00001000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 2 Container Num: 002 Tank Num: Stock Inventor Leak Detection: 1/4 inches Tank Construction: PREMIUM Type of Fuel: PRODUCT Tank Used for: 00010000 Tank Capacity: Not reported Year Installed: 1 Container Num: 001 Tank Num: ANAHEIM, CA 92803 Owner City,St,Zip: 1422 W. BROADWAY Owner Address: HOME OIL CO OF ANAHEIM (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 368 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Schedule Revised Date: Not reported Schedule Due Date: Not reported Schedule Document Type: Not reported Schedule Sub Area Name: Not reported Schedule Area Name: Not reported Future Due Date: Not reported Future Document Type: Not reported Future Sub Area Name: Not reported Future Area Name: FACILITY IDENTIFIED I’D VIA TELEPHONE DIRECTORY (1966) OIL & GAS CO Comments: 1981-08-15 00:00:00 Completed Date: * Discovery Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: SITE SCREENING DONE CERCLA GRANT PA REQ’D. Comments: 1987-04-23 00:00:00 Completed Date: Site Screening Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: INCLUDES WST OILS AND SMALL QUANITIES OF SOLVENTS. WST ARE RECYCLED PRELIM ASSESS DONE ONLY WST GENERATED IS FROM THE MACHINE SHOP WHICH Comments: 1988-04-14 00:00:00 Completed Date: Preliminary Assessment Report Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: DATABASE VALIDATION PROGRAM CONFIRMS NFA FOR DTSC. Comments: 1994-10-25 00:00:00 Completed Date: Site Screening Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Completed Info: Envirostor ID Number Alias Type: 30510020 Alias Name: NONE SPECIFIED Potential Description: NONE SPECIFIED Confirmed COC: 10097 Potential COC: NONE SPECIFIED Past Use: NONE SPECIFIED APN: -117.898054297292 Longitude: 33.8365357675417 Latitude: Not reported Funding: NONE SPECIFIED Site Mgmt. Req.: NO Restricted Use: 1988-04-14 00:00:00 Status Date: Refer: Other Agency Status: * CERC2 Special Program: 34 Senate: 72 Assembly: Not reported Site Code: 30510020 Facility ID: HOME OIL CO OF ANAHEIM (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 369 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: SITE SCREENING DONE CERCLA GRANT SITE; WILL UNDERGO PA. Comments: 1987-04-23 00:00:00 Completed Date: Site Screening Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: THEM UP.NO FURTHER ACTION PRELIM ASSESS DONE DRUMS ARE STORED ONLY UNTIL ORIGNAL MFG. PICKS Comments: 1988-06-30 00:00:00 Completed Date: Preliminary Assessment Report Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Database Validation Program confirms NFA for DTSC. Comments: 1994-10-28 00:00:00 Completed Date: Site Screening Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Completed Info: Alternate Name Alias Type: ANAHEIM PLASTICS CO. Alias Name: Envirostor ID Number Alias Type: 30280476 Alias Name: NONE SPECIFIED Potential Description: NONE SPECIFIED Confirmed COC: NONE SPECIFIED Potential COC: NONE SPECIFIED Past Use: NONE SPECIFIED APN: -117.902222222222 Longitude: 33.8327777777778 Latitude: Not reported Funding: NONE SPECIFIED Site Mgmt. Req.: NO Restricted Use: 1988-06-23 00:00:00 Status Date: Refer: Other Agency Status: * CERC2 Special Program: 34 Senate: 69 Assembly: Not reported Site Code: 30280476 Facility ID: Cypress Division Branch: * MMONROY Supervisor: Not reported Program Manager: NONE SPECIFIED Lead Agency: NONE SPECIFIED Regulatory Agencies: NO NPL: Not reported Acres: * Historical Site Type Detailed: Historical Site Type: ENVIROSTOR: 7218 ft. 1.367 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 168 ft. > 1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 NE 525 SOUTH ROSE N/A 259 ENVIROSTOR LAYCO CHEMICAL ENGINEERING #3 S102860929 TC2760975.2s Page 370 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Schedule Revised Date: Not reported Schedule Due Date: Not reported Schedule Document Type: Not reported Schedule Sub Area Name: Not reported Schedule Area Name: Not reported Future Due Date: Not reported Future Document Type: Not reported Future Sub Area Name: Not reported Future Area Name: CONTAINS DRUMS-OLD, CORRODED & POSSIBLY ABAND EMPTY. FACILITY IDENTIFIED DURING DRIVEBY FACILITY DRIVE-BY YARD ADJ TO BLDG Comments: 1982-11-17 00:00:00 Completed Date: * Discovery Completed Document Type: LAYCO CHEMICAL ENGINEERING #3 (Continued) S102860929 Not reported Date Started: DISCOVERY Action: CERCLIS-NFRAP Assessment History: CA Not reported Alias Address: ORANGE EMPIRE HEAT TREATING Alias Name: CERCLIS-NFRAP Site Alias Name(s): (415) 972-3096 Contact Tel: Matt Mitguard Contact Name: Not reported Contact Title: (415) 972-3219 Contact Tel: Karen Jurist Contact Name: Not reported Contact Title: (415) 972-3095 Contact Tel: Jeff Inglis Contact Name: Not reported Contact Title: (415) 972-3162 Contact Tel: Brunilda Davila Contact Name: Not reported Contact Title: (415) 972-3814 Contact Tel: Carl Brickner Contact Name: Not reported Contact Title: CERCLIS-NFRAP Site Contact Name(s): NFRAP Non NPL Status: Not on the NPL NPL Status: Not a Federal Facility Federal Facility: 0900449 Site ID: CERC-NFRAP: 7591 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster AV 1.438 mi. ENVIROSTOR Relative: Lower Actual: 147 ft. > 1 FINDS ANAHEIM, CA 92805 SE RCRA-SQG 1000 E KATELLA ST CAD049903271 AV260 CERC-NFRAP ORANGE EMPIRE HEAT TREATING [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 371 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Operator Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator name: Not reported Owner/Op end date: Not reported Owner/Op start date: Owner Owner/Operator Type: Private Legal status: (415) 555-1212 Owner/operator telephone: Not reported Owner/operator country: NOT REQUIRED, ME 99999 NOT REQUIRED Owner/operator address: DOWNEY HEAT TREATING COMPANY Owner/operator name: Owner/Operator Summary: hazardous waste at any time waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous Description: Small Small Quantity Generator Classification: 09 EPA Region: Not reported Contact email: Not reported Contact telephone: Not reported Contact country: Not reported Not reported Contact address: Not reported Contact: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 E KATELLA ST Mailing address: CAD049903271 EPA ID: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 1000 E KATELLA ST Facility address: ORANGE EMPIRE HEAT TREATING Facility name: 09/01/1996 Date form received by agency: RCRA-SQG: Not reported Priority Level: 11/14/1988 Date Completed: Not reported Date Started: ARCHIVE SITE Action: NFRAP: No further Remedial Action planned Priority Level: 11/14/1988 Date Completed: Not reported Date Started: PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT Action: Not reported Priority Level: 12/01/1987 Date Completed: ORANGE EMPIRE HEAT TREATING (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 372 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation NONE SPECIFIED Past Use: NONE SPECIFIED APN: -117.896630534664 Longitude: 33.8026958000869 Latitude: Not reported Funding: NONE SPECIFIED Site Mgmt. Req.: NO Restricted Use: 1988-04-20 00:00:00 Status Date: Refer: Other Agency Status: * CERC2 Special Program: 34 Senate: 69 Assembly: Not reported Site Code: 30330009 Facility ID: Cypress Division Branch: * MMONROY Supervisor: Not reported Program Manager: NONE SPECIFIED Lead Agency: NONE SPECIFIED Regulatory Agencies: NO NPL: Not reported Acres: * Historical Site Type Detailed: Historical Site Type: ENVIROSTOR: corrective action activities required under RCRA. program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource Environmental Interest/Information System 110002647734 Registry ID: FINDS: No violations found Violation Status: Verified to be non-commercial Off-site waste receiver: No Used oil transporter: No Used oil transfer facility: No Used oil Specification marketer: No Used oil fuel marketer to burner: No User oil refiner: No Used oil processor: No Used oil fuel burner: Unknown Furnace exemption: Unknown On-site burner exemption: No Underground injection activity: No Treater, storer or disposer of HW: No Transporter of hazardous waste: No Recycler of hazardous waste: Unknown Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): Unknown U.S. importer of hazardous waste: Handler Activities Summary: ORANGE EMPIRE HEAT TREATING (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 373 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Schedule Revised Date: Not reported Schedule Due Date: Not reported Schedule Document Type: Not reported Schedule Sub Area Name: Not reported Schedule Area Name: Not reported Future Due Date: Not reported Future Document Type: Not reported Future Sub Area Name: Not reported Future Area Name: FACILITY IDENTIFIED PHONE BOOK SEARCH (1971) Comments: 1981-09-01 00:00:00 Completed Date: * Discovery Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: SITE SCREENING DONE MORE INFO NEEDED Comments: 1987-05-21 00:00:00 Completed Date: Site Screening Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: PROBLEM PRELIM ASSESS DONE HISTORICAL RECORDS DO NOT INDICATE FAC WAS A Comments: 1988-04-20 00:00:00 Completed Date: Preliminary Assessment Report Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: DATABASE VALIDATION PROGRAM CONFIRMS NFA FOR DTSC. Comments: 1994-10-28 00:00:00 Completed Date: Site Screening Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Completed Info: Envirostor ID Number Alias Type: 30330009 Alias Name: EPA Identification Number Alias Type: CAD049903271 Alias Name: Alternate Name Alias Type: LEONARDO MARBLE Alias Name: NONE SPECIFIED Potential Description: NONE SPECIFIED Confirmed COC: 10195 Potential COC: ORANGE EMPIRE HEAT TREATING (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] NONE SPECIFIED Site Mgmt. Req.: School Site Type Detail: School Investigation Site Type: 60001110 Facility ID: SCH: 7643 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster AV 1.447 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 147 ft. > 1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 SE ENVIROSTOR 1016 EAST KATELLA AVENUE N/A AV261 SCH PLATINUM TRIANGLE S109548352 TC2760975.2s Page 374 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation 2009-07-07 00:00:00 Completed Date: Public Notice Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: On July 10, 2009, fieldwork was completed per District’s consultant. Comments: 2009-07-10 00:00:00 Completed Date: Fieldwork Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: and provided comments on the site sampling plan. appeared consistent with discussions with the District’s consultant Via email on 07/03/2009, DTSC noted that the site sampling plan Comments: 2009-07-03 00:00:00 Completed Date: Technical Workplan Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Completed Info: APN Alias Type: 375-381-35 Alias Name: APN Alias Type: 083-751-14 Alias Name: APN Alias Type: 375-381-34 Alias Name: Project Code (Site Code) Alias Type: 404830 Alias Name: Envirostor ID Number Alias Type: 60001110 Alias Name: APN Alias Type: 083-751-15 Alias Name: APN Alias Type: 083-751-01 Alias Name: SOIL, SV, UE Potential Description: 30022,30484,30018,30027 Confirmed COC: 30018, 30022, 30027, 30484 Potential COC: STORAGE TANKS, VEHICLE MAINTENANCE, TRANSPORTATION - WAREHOUSING ABOVE GROUND STORAGE TANKS, AGRICULTURAL - ORCHARD, UNDERGROUND Past Use: 375-381-34, 375-381-35, 083-751-14, 083-751-01, 083-751-15 APN: -117.8966 Longitude: 33.8033 Latitude: School District Funding: NO Restricted Use: 2009-10-23 00:00:00 Status Date: Inactive - Action Required Status: Not reported Special Program Status: 33, 34 Senate: 69, 72 Assembly: 404830 Site Code: Cypress Division Branch: Shahir Haddad Supervisor: CHRISTINE CHIU Project Manager: DTSC - Site Mitigation And Brownfield Reuse Program Lead Agency Description: Lead Agency: Cleanup Oversight Agencies: NO National Priorities List: 3.76 Acres: PLATINUM TRIANGLE (Continued) S109548352 TC2760975.2s Page 375 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation NO NPL: 3.76 Acres: School Site Type Detailed: School Investigation Site Type: ENVIROSTOR: Not reported Schedule Revised Date: Not reported Schedule Due Date: Not reported Schedule Document Type: Not reported Schedule Sub Area Name: Not reported Schedule Area Name: Not reported Future Due Date: Not reported Future Document Type: Not reported Future Sub Area Name: Not reported Future Area Name: Recovery Unit Memorandum. On 10/23/2009, DTSC prepared & transmitted the project close out Cost Comments: 2009-10-23 00:00:00 Completed Date: Cost Recovery Closeout Memo Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: ready. however, that a summary data report will be submitted to DTSC when the Agreement effective immediately. The letter also indicates, August 12, 2009, with notification that the District is terminating On August 17, 2009, DTSC received a letter from the District, dated Comments: 2009-08-17 00:00:00 Completed Date: Agreement Terminated Notification Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Signed agreement sent (FedEx) to District. Comments: 2009-06-10 00:00:00 Completed Date: Environmental Oversight Agreement Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: to risk and hazard. 10-5 and the total hazard index as 17. PCE is the primary contributor due to chlorinated compounds via the vapor intrusion pathway as 1.5 x of PCE; 20 ug/l of TCE. The risk evaluation estimated the cancer risk in soil gas include the following: 0.15 ug/l of naphthalene; 580 ug/l results from fieldwork conducted in July 2009. Maximum concentrations Report. The report summarized the soil and soil vapor sampling the District terminated the EOA (August 2009) prior to receipt of the DTSC did not review the Environmental Assessment Summary Report since Comments: 2009-10-22 00:00:00 Completed Date: Technical Report Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: line of sight of the proposed school property. and 1016 E. Katella properties and delivered to properties within the Work Notice and was informed that the Notice was posted at the 1010 Via email on July 7, 2009, DTSC received a final copy of the Field Comments: PLATINUM TRIANGLE (Continued) S109548352 TC2760975.2s Page 376 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Via email on July 7, 2009, DTSC received a final copy of the Field Comments: 2009-07-07 00:00:00 Completed Date: Public Notice Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: On July 10, 2009, fieldwork was completed per District’s consultant. Comments: 2009-07-10 00:00:00 Completed Date: Fieldwork Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: and provided comments on the site sampling plan. appeared consistent with discussions with the District’s consultant Via email on 07/03/2009, DTSC noted that the site sampling plan Comments: 2009-07-03 00:00:00 Completed Date: Technical Workplan Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Completed Info: APN Alias Type: 375-381-35 Alias Name: APN Alias Type: 083-751-14 Alias Name: APN Alias Type: 375-381-34 Alias Name: Project Code (Site Code) Alias Type: 404830 Alias Name: Envirostor ID Number Alias Type: 60001110 Alias Name: APN Alias Type: 083-751-15 Alias Name: APN Alias Type: 083-751-01 Alias Name: SOIL, SV, UE Potential Description: 30022,30484,30018,30027 Confirmed COC: 30018, 30022, 30027, 30484 Potential COC: STORAGE TANKS, VEHICLE MAINTENANCE, TRANSPORTATION - WAREHOUSING ABOVE GROUND STORAGE TANKS, AGRICULTURAL - ORCHARD, UNDERGROUND Past Use: 375-381-34, 375-381-35, 083-751-14, 083-751-01, 083-751-15 APN: -117.8966 Longitude: 33.8033 Latitude: School District Funding: NONE SPECIFIED Site Mgmt. Req.: NO Restricted Use: 2009-10-23 00:00:00 Status Date: Inactive - Action Required Status: Not reported Special Program: 33, 34 Senate: 69, 72 Assembly: 404830 Site Code: 60001110 Facility ID: Cypress Division Branch: Shahir Haddad Supervisor: CHRISTINE CHIU Program Manager: Lead Agency: Regulatory Agencies: PLATINUM TRIANGLE (Continued) S109548352 TC2760975.2s Page 377 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Schedule Revised Date: Not reported Schedule Due Date: Not reported Schedule Document Type: Not reported Schedule Sub Area Name: Not reported Schedule Area Name: Not reported Future Due Date: Not reported Future Document Type: Not reported Future Sub Area Name: Not reported Future Area Name: Recovery Unit Memorandum. On 10/23/2009, DTSC prepared & transmitted the project close out Cost Comments: 2009-10-23 00:00:00 Completed Date: Cost Recovery Closeout Memo Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: ready. however, that a summary data report will be submitted to DTSC when the Agreement effective immediately. The letter also indicates, August 12, 2009, with notification that the District is terminating On August 17, 2009, DTSC received a letter from the District, dated Comments: 2009-08-17 00:00:00 Completed Date: Agreement Terminated Notification Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Signed agreement sent (FedEx) to District. Comments: 2009-06-10 00:00:00 Completed Date: Environmental Oversight Agreement Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: to risk and hazard. 10-5 and the total hazard index as 17. PCE is the primary contributor due to chlorinated compounds via the vapor intrusion pathway as 1.5 x of PCE; 20 ug/l of TCE. The risk evaluation estimated the cancer risk in soil gas include the following: 0.15 ug/l of naphthalene; 580 ug/l results from fieldwork conducted in July 2009. Maximum concentrations Report. The report summarized the soil and soil vapor sampling the District terminated the EOA (August 2009) prior to receipt of the DTSC did not review the Environmental Assessment Summary Report since Comments: 2009-10-22 00:00:00 Completed Date: Technical Report Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: line of sight of the proposed school property. and 1016 E. Katella properties and delivered to properties within the Work Notice and was informed that the Notice was posted at the 1010 PLATINUM TRIANGLE (Continued) S109548352 TC2760975.2s Page 378 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Future Area Name: Not reported Comments: 2001-08-31 00:00:00 Completed Date: Environmental Oversight Agreement Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Not reported Comments: 2002-09-10 00:00:00 Completed Date: Cost Recovery Closeout Memo Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Completed Info: Alternate Name Alias Type: ANAHEIM CITY SD-HERITAGE SCHOOL SITE Alias Name: Alternate Name Alias Type: HERITAGE SCHOOL (PROPOSED) Alias Name: Project Code (Site Code) Alias Type: 404249 Alias Name: Envirostor ID Number Alias Type: 30590002 Alias Name: Alternate Name Alias Type: ANAHEIM CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT Alias Name: NONE SPECIFIED Potential Description: NONE SPECIFIED Confirmed COC: NONE SPECIFIED Potential COC: * RETIAL - MISC. Past Use: NONE SPECIFIED APN: -117.90688928482 Longitude: 33.8130985274212 Latitude: School District Funding: NO Restricted Use: 2002-09-10 00:00:00 Status Date: Inactive - Needs Evaluation Status: Not reported Special Program Status: 34 Senate: 69 Assembly: 404249 Site Code: Cypress Division Branch: * Rebecca Chou Supervisor: Not reported Project Manager: DTSC - Site Mitigation And Brownfield Reuse Program Lead Agency Description: Lead Agency: Cleanup Oversight Agencies: NO National Priorities List: Not reported Acres: NONE SPECIFIED Site Mgmt. Req.: School Site Type Detail: School Investigation Site Type: 30590002 Facility ID: SCH: 7659 ft. 1.451 mi. Relative: Higher Actual: 159 ft. > 1 ANAHEIM, CA 92805 North ENVIROSTOR CYPRESS STREET/ANAHEIM BOULEVARD N/A 262 SCH HERITAGE SCHOOL S107736441 TC2760975.2s Page 379 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Environmental Oversight Agreement Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Not reported Comments: 2002-09-10 00:00:00 Completed Date: Cost Recovery Closeout Memo Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Completed Info: Alternate Name Alias Type: ANAHEIM CITY SD-HERITAGE SCHOOL SITE Alias Name: Alternate Name Alias Type: HERITAGE SCHOOL (PROPOSED) Alias Name: Project Code (Site Code) Alias Type: 404249 Alias Name: Envirostor ID Number Alias Type: 30590002 Alias Name: Alternate Name Alias Type: ANAHEIM CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT Alias Name: NONE SPECIFIED Potential Description: NONE SPECIFIED Confirmed COC: NONE SPECIFIED Potential COC: * RETIAL - MISC. Past Use: NONE SPECIFIED APN: -117.90688928482 Longitude: 33.8130985274212 Latitude: School District Funding: NONE SPECIFIED Site Mgmt. Req.: NO Restricted Use: 2002-09-10 00:00:00 Status Date: Inactive - Needs Evaluation Status: Not reported Special Program: 34 Senate: 69 Assembly: 404249 Site Code: 30590002 Facility ID: Cypress Division Branch: * Rebecca Chou Supervisor: Not reported Program Manager: Lead Agency: Regulatory Agencies: NO NPL: Not reported Acres: School Site Type Detailed: School Investigation Site Type: ENVIROSTOR: Not reported Schedule Revised Date: Not reported Schedule Due Date: Not reported Schedule Document Type: Not reported Schedule Sub Area Name: Not reported Schedule Area Name: Not reported Future Due Date: Not reported Future Document Type: Not reported Future Sub Area Name: HERITAGE SCHOOL (Continued) S107736441 TC2760975.2s Page 380 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Schedule Revised Date: Not reported Schedule Due Date: Not reported Schedule Document Type: Not reported Schedule Sub Area Name: Not reported Schedule Area Name: Not reported Future Due Date: Not reported Future Document Type: Not reported Future Sub Area Name: Not reported Future Area Name: Not reported Comments: 2001-08-31 00:00:00 Completed Date: HERITAGE SCHOOL (Continued) S107736441 Not reported Date Started: SITE REASSESSMENT Action: Low priority for further assessment Priority Level: 01/27/00 Date Completed: 02/23/99 Date Started: PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT Action: Not reported Priority Level: 07/08/93 Date Completed: Not reported Date Started: DISCOVERY Action: CERCLIS Assessment History: Site Description: Not reported Not reported Alias Address: CHAING PROPERTY Alias Name: CERCLIS Site Alias Name(s): Site Assessment Manager (SAM) Contact Title: (415) 972-3814 Contact Tel: Carl Brickner Contact Name: Site Assessment Manager (SAM) Contact Title: (415) 972-3095 Contact Tel: Jeff Inglis Contact Name: Site Assessment Manager (SAM) Contact Title: (415) 972-3219 Contact Tel: Karen Jurist Contact Name: CERCLIS Site Contact Name(s): Other Cleanup Activity: State-Lead Cleanup Non NPL Status: Not on the NPL NPL Status: Not a Federal Facility Federal Facility: 0904866 Site ID: CERCLIS: 7731 ft. 1.464 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 120 ft. > 1 ENVIROSTOR ANAHEIM, CA 92802 West FINDS 1126 EUCLID AVE. CAD983670779 263 CERCLIS CALIFORNIA TOWEL & LINEN SUPPLY CO. [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 381 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Future Area Name: EPA designated site for State follow up Comments: 2007-06-06 00:00:00 Completed Date: Site Screening Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Completed Info: EPA (FRS Alias Type: 110009268844 Alias Name: Envirostor ID Number Alias Type: 60000568 Alias Name: NONE SPECIFIED Potential Description: NONE SPECIFIED Confirmed COC: NONE SPECIFIED Potential COC: NONE SPECIFIED Past Use: NONE SPECIFIED APN: 0 Longitude: 0 Latitude: EPA Grant Funding: NONE SPECIFIED Site Mgmt. Req.: NO Restricted Use: 2008-01-15 00:00:00 Status Date: Refer: Status: EPA - PASI Special Program: 34 Senate: 67 Assembly: Not reported Site Code: 60000568 Facility ID: Cypress Division Branch: Greg Holmes Supervisor: EILEEN KHACHATOURIANS Program Manager: US EPA Lead Agency: US EPA Regulatory Agencies: NO NPL: 2.5 Acres: Evaluation Site Type Detailed: Evaluation Site Type: ENVIROSTOR: and financial information. including an inventory of sites, planned and actual site activities, system contains information on all aspects of hazardous waste sites, to support management in all phases of the Superfund program. The Liability Information System) is the Superfund database that is used CERCLIS (Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Environmental Interest/Information System 110009268844 Registry ID: FINDS: Low priority for further assessment Priority Level: 06/06/07 Date Completed: CALIFORNIA TOWEL & LINEN SUPPLY CO. (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] TC2760975.2s Page 382 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Schedule Revised Date: Not reported Schedule Due Date: Not reported Schedule Document Type: Not reported Schedule Sub Area Name: Not reported Schedule Area Name: Not reported Future Due Date: Not reported Future Document Type: Not reported Future Sub Area Name: CALIFORNIA TOWEL & LINEN SUPPLY CO. (Continued) [PHONE REDACTED] Not reported Schedule Sub Area Name: Not reported Schedule Area Name: Not reported Future Due Date: Not reported Future Document Type: Not reported Future Sub Area Name: Not reported Future Area Name: SB 1248 Orange County Comments: 2001-01-04 00:00:00 Completed Date: SB 1248 Notification Completed Document Type: Not reported Completed Sub Area Name: PROJECT WIDE Completed Area Name: Completed Info: Envirostor ID Number Alias Type: 30720011 Alias Name: NONE SPECIFIED Potential Description: NONE SPECIFIED Confirmed COC: NONE SPECIFIED Potential COC: NONE SPECIFIED Past Use: NONE SPECIFIED APN: 0 Longitude: 0 Latitude: Not Applicable Funding: NONE SPECIFIED Site Mgmt. Req.: NO Restricted Use: 2001-01-04 00:00:00 Status Date: Refer: 1248 Local Agency Status: Not reported Special Program: 34 Senate: 68 Assembly: Not reported Site Code: 30720011 Facility ID: Cypress Division Branch: Referred - Not Assigned Supervisor: Not reported Program Manager: NONE SPECIFIED Lead Agency: NONE SPECIFIED Regulatory Agencies: NO NPL: Not reported Acres: Evaluation Site Type Detailed: Evaluation Site Type: ENVIROSTOR: 7758 ft. 1.469 mi. Relative: Lower Actual: 119 ft. > 1 ANAHEIM, CA 92804 West 1223 S. EUCLID ST. N/A 264 ENVIROSTOR CLOCK LIQUOR CENTER DRY CLEANER S106797629 TC2760975.2s Page 383 ---PAGE BREAK--- MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction EDR ID Number Distance EPA ID Number Database(s) Site Elevation Not reported Schedule Revised Date: Not reported Schedule Due Date: Not reported Schedule Document Type: CLOCK LIQUOR CENTER DRY CLEANER (Continued) S106797629 TC2760975.2s Page 384 ---PAGE BREAK--- ORPHAN SUMMARY City EDR ID Site Name Site Address Zip Database(s) ANAHEIM [PHONE REDACTED] CREEK PARK SHELL 15809 IMPERIAL HWY 92803 RCRA-SQG,FINDS ANAHEIM [PHONE REDACTED] THREE DAY BLINDS INC 22220 E CERRITOS AVE 92806 RCRA-SQG ANAHEIM [PHONE REDACTED] CONSOLIDATED CONTAINER COMPANY LP 1201 E CERRITOS AVE UNIT 121 92805 FINDS,HAZNET ANAHEIM [PHONE REDACTED] CALTRANS/FCI CONSTRUCTOR INTERSTATE 5, MILE 36.9 TO 38. 92801 ICIS ANAHEIM S104565364 CAL TRANS RTE 91 / I 5 INTERSECTION 00000 HAZNET ANAHEIM S105084834 ANAHEIM CITY UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT 10001010 S HARBOR BLVD 92801 HAZNET ANAHEIM S105940413 PAN PACIFIC HOTEL 1717 S WEST ST 92802 EMI ANAHEIM S106088870 RONDELL HOMES 2660 W BALL RD STE 89 92804 HAZNET ANAHEIM S106089091 TECHNICAL DUPLICATOR INC 1401 E BALL RD UNIT A 92805 HAZNET ANAHEIM S106104995 CW WOODCRAFTERS 520 S CLAUDINA ST H 92805 WDS SAN DIEGO S106203478 FOGERTY & EXXON ET AL TRUST 946 W HAWTHORN ST./2945 PACIFI 9 WDS ANAHEIM S106838632 S & S HEADERS INC 1401 E BALL RD SUITE C 92805 EMI ANAHEIM S106858389 ACTION CLEANERS & LAUNDRY 1201 E BALL RD STE A 92805 S106905435 EL MORRO CONVERSION TO CAMPGRO PACIFIC COAST HWY 0 WDS ANAHEIM S107140212 SUMMERCREST APARTMENTS 2828 W BALL RD APT N35 92804 HAZNET ANAHEIM S107145404 PALM LANE APTS 1640 W BALL RD APT 104 92802 HAZNET ANAHEIM S107529632 1700 S HARBOR BLVD (ANAHEIM PL 92802 CDL ANAHEIM S107532410 2950 W BALL RD (NE CORNER BALL 92801 CDL GARDEN GROVE S108200640 CALTRANS DISTRICT 12 EA 071611 HWY 22 BTWN HWY 605 / HWY 55 92840 HAZNET ANAHEIM S108201150 CENTER WALLCOVERING & PAINTING 1600 S ANAHEIM BLVD STE E 92805 HAZNET ANAHEIM S108220183 SEPHORA STORES 1570 S DISNEYLAND DR STE 101 92802 HAZNET ANAHEIM S108748552 HSH INTERPLAN USA 1564 S ANAHEIM BLVD STE B 92805 HAZNET ANAHEIM S109284367 PAN PACIFIC HOTEL 1717 S WEST ST 92802 LUST SAN MATEO ANAHEIM S109422695 ACUREN INSPECTION 2051 E CERRITOS AVE SUITE 8 A 92806 HAZNET ANAHEIM S109422779 AIDA Y. LIM D.D.S. A PROFESSIONAL 225 S HARBOR BLVD STE 100 92805 HAZNET ANAHEIM S109425471 CT MACHINING INC 1525 S ANAHEIM BLVD UNIT A 92805 HAZNET ANAHEIM S109426412 FEI-ZYFER INC 1515 S MANCHESTER AVE STE D 92802 HAZNET ANAHEIM S109428941 MEDI-PHYSICS INC DBA GE HEALTHCARE 150 W CERRITOS AVE STE 150 92805 HAZNET ANAHEIM S109436051 ANAHEIM OFFICE BUILDING 900 S HARBOR BLVD / 406 410 92805 NPDES ANAHEIM S109452692 OLD KWIKSET SITE NE S OLIVE ST WATER ST 92805 NPDES ANAHEIM S109927930 HARVEY CAPITAL CORP 1201 E BALL RD STE E / F 92805 HAZNET ANAHEIM U003780478 CHEVRON STATION #92378 2792 W BALL RD # 92378 92804 UST ALAMEDA ANAHEIM U003937563 ANAHEIM RESORT PUMP HOUSE #55 1713 S CLEMENTINE ST # 55 92802 UST ALAMEDA ANAHEIM U003937851 ARCO (AM/PM MINI MRKT.) #9727 2101 S HARBOR BLVD # 9727 92802 UST ALAMEDA ANAHEIM U003941142 PHILLIPS AUTOMOTIVE #1012 3175 W BALL RD # 1012 92804 UST ALAMEDA ANAHEIM U003942645 UNOCAL #4227 1779 S HARBOR BLVD # 4227 92802 UST ALAMEDA ANAHEIM U003943059 WORLD OIL STATION #39 3490 W BALL RD # 39 92804 UST ALAMEDA TC2760975.2s Page 385 ---PAGE BREAK--- To maintain currency of the following federal and state databases, EDR contacts the appropriate governmental agency on a or quarterly basis, as required. Number of Days to Update: Provides confirmation that EDR is reporting records that have been updated within 90 days from the date the government agency made the information available to the public. STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS Federal NPL site list NPL: National Priority List National Priorities List (Superfund). The NPL is a subset of CERCLIS and identifies over 1,200 sites for priority cleanup under the Superfund Program. NPL sites may encompass relatively large areas. As such, EDR provides polygon coverage for over 1,000 NPL site boundaries produced by EPA’s Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC) and regional EPA offices. Date of Government Version: 03/31/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/02/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2010 Number of Days to Update: 10 Source: EPA Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: 04/02/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/26/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly NPL Site Boundaries Sources: EPA’s Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC) Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] EPA Region 1 EPA Region 6 Telephone [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] EPA Region 3 EPA Region 7 Telephone [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] EPA Region 4 EPA Region 8 Telephone [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] EPA Region 5 EPA Region 9 Telephone [PHONE REDACTED] Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] EPA Region 10 Telephone [PHONE REDACTED] Proposed NPL: Proposed National Priority List Sites A site that has been proposed for listing on the National Priorities List through the issuance of a proposed rule in the Federal Register. EPA then accepts public comments on the site, responds to the comments, and places on the NPL those sites that continue to meet the requirements for listing. Date of Government Version: 03/31/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/02/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2010 Number of Days to Update: 10 Source: EPA Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: 04/02/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/26/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly NPL LIENS: Federal Superfund Liens Federal Superfund Liens. Under the authority granted the USEPA by CERCLA of 1980, the USEPA has the authority to file liens against real property in order to recover remedial action expenditures or when the property owner received notification of potential liability. USEPA compiles a listing of filed notices of Superfund Liens. Date of Government Version: 10/15/1991 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/02/1994 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/30/1994 Number of Days to Update: 56 Source: EPA Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/01/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/31/2010 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned TC2760975.2s Page GR-1 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- Federal Delisted NPL site list DELISTED NPL: National Priority List Deletions The National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) establishes the criteria that the EPA uses to delete sites from the NPL. In accordance with 40 CFR 300.425.(e), sites may be deleted from the NPL where no further response is appropriate. Date of Government Version: 03/31/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/02/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2010 Number of Days to Update: 10 Source: EPA Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: 04/02/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/26/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly Federal CERCLIS list CERCLIS: Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System CERCLIS contains data on potentially hazardous waste sites that have been reported to the USEPA by states, municipalities, private companies and private persons, pursuant to Section 103 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). CERCLIS contains sites which are either proposed to or on the National Priorities List (NPL) and sites which are in the screening and assessment phase for possible inclusion on the NPL. Date of Government Version: 01/29/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/09/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2010 Number of Days to Update: 62 Source: EPA Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/30/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/12/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly FEDERAL FACILITY: Federal Facility Site Information listing A listing of NPL and Base Realighnment & Closure sites found in the CERCLIS database where FERRO is involved in cleanup projects. Date of Government Version: 06/23/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/15/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/10/2010 Number of Days to Update: 26 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/30/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/26/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies Federal CERCLIS NFRAP site List CERCLIS-NFRAP: CERCLIS No Further Remedial Action Planned Archived sites are sites that have been removed and archived from the inventory of CERCLIS sites. Archived status indicates that, to the best of EPA’s knowledge, assessment at a site has been completed and that EPA has determined no further steps will be taken to list this site on the National Priorities List (NPL), unless information indicates this decision was not appropriate or other considerations require a recommendation for listing at a later time. This decision does not necessarily mean that there is no hazard associated with a given site; it only means that, based upon available information, the location is not judged to be a potential NPL site. Date of Government Version: 06/23/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/02/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/21/2009 Number of Days to Update: 19 Source: EPA Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/11/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/14/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly Federal RCRA CORRACTS facilities list CORRACTS: Corrective Action Report CORRACTS identifies hazardous waste handlers with RCRA corrective action activity. Date of Government Version: 12/11/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/29/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/10/2010 Number of Days to Update: 43 Source: EPA Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/15/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/31/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly TC2760975.2s Page GR-2 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- Federal RCRA non-CORRACTS TSD facilities list RCRA-TSDF: RCRA - Treatment, Storage and Disposal RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Transporters are individuals or entities that move hazardous waste from the generator offsite to a facility that can recycle, treat, store, or dispose of the waste. treat, store, or dispose of the waste. Date of Government Version: 01/13/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/15/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 34 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: (415) 495-8895 Last EDR Contact: 04/29/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/19/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly Federal RCRA generators list RCRA-LQG: RCRA - Large Quantity Generators RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Large quantity generators (LQGs) generate over 1,000 kilograms (kg) of hazardous waste, or over 1 kg of acutely hazardous waste per month. Date of Government Version: 01/13/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/15/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 34 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: (415) 495-8895 Last EDR Contact: 04/29/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/19/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly RCRA-SQG: RCRA - Small Quantity Generators RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Small quantity generators (SQGs) generate between 100 kg and 1,000 kg of hazardous waste per month. Date of Government Version: 01/13/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/15/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 34 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: (415) 495-8895 Last EDR Contact: 04/29/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/19/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly RCRA-CESQG: RCRA - Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generators RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Conditionally exempt small quantity generators (CESQGs) generate less than 100 kg of hazardous waste, or less than 1 kg of acutely hazardous waste per month. Date of Government Version: 01/13/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/15/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 34 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: (415) 495-8895 Last EDR Contact: 04/29/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/19/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies Federal institutional controls / engineering controls registries TC2760975.2s Page GR-3 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- US ENG CONTROLS: Engineering Controls Sites List A listing of sites with engineering controls in place. Engineering controls include various forms of caps, building foundations, liners, and treatment methods to create pathway elimination for regulated substances to enter environmental media or effect human health. Date of Government Version: 12/20/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/20/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2010 Number of Days to Update: 82 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/15/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/28/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies US INST CONTROL: Sites with Institutional Controls A listing of sites with institutional controls in place. Institutional controls include administrative measures, such as groundwater use restrictions, construction restrictions, property use restrictions, and post remediation care requirements intended to prevent exposure to contaminants remaining on site. Deed restrictions are generally required as part of the institutional controls. Date of Government Version: 12/20/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/20/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2010 Number of Days to Update: 82 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/15/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/28/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies Federal ERNS list ERNS: Emergency Response Notification System Emergency Response Notification System. ERNS records and stores information on reported releases of oil and hazardous substances. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/22/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/11/2010 Number of Days to Update: 20 Source: National Response Center, United States Coast Guard Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/07/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/19/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually State- and tribal - equivalent NPL RESPONSE: State Response Sites Identifies confirmed release sites where DTSC is involved in remediation, either in a lead or oversight capacity. These confirmed release sites are generally high-priority and high potential risk. Date of Government Version: 02/08/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/09/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 9 Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/09/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/24/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly State- and tribal - equivalent CERCLIS ENVIROSTOR: EnviroStor Database The Department of Toxic Substances Control’s (DTSC’s) Site Mitigation and Brownfields Reuse Program’s EnviroStor database identifes sites that have known contamination or sites for which there may be reasons to investigate further. The database includes the following site types: Federal Superfund sites (National Priorities List (NPL)); State Response, including Military Facilities and State Superfund; Voluntary Cleanup; and School sites. EnviroStor provides similar information to the information that was available in CalSites, and provides additional site information, including, but not limited to, identification of formerly-contaminated properties that have been released for reuse, properties where environmental deed restrictions have been recorded to prevent inappropriate land uses, and risk characterization information that is used to assess potential impacts to public health and the environment at contaminated sites. TC2760975.2s Page GR-4 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- Date of Government Version: 02/08/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/09/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 9 Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/09/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/24/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly State and tribal landfill and/or solid waste disposal site lists SWF/LF (SWIS): Solid Waste Information System Active, Closed and Inactive Landfills. SWF/LF records typically contain an inve ntory of solid waste disposal facilities or landfills. These may be active or i nactive facilities or open dumps that failed to meet RCRA Section 4004 criteria for solid waste landfills or disposal sites. Date of Government Version: 02/22/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/24/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/04/2010 Number of Days to Update: 8 Source: Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/24/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/07/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly State and tribal leaking storage tank lists LUST REG 9: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Report Orange, Riverside, San Diego counties. For more current information, please refer to the State Water Resources Control Board’s LUST database. Date of Government Version: 03/01/2001 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/23/2001 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/21/2001 Number of Days to Update: 28 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board San Diego Region Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/29/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/12/2010 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned LUST REG 7: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Case Listing Leaking Underground Storage Tank locations. Imperial, Riverside, San Diego, Santa Barbara counties. Date of Government Version: 02/26/2004 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/26/2004 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/24/2004 Number of Days to Update: 27 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Colorado River Basin Region Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/16/2010 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned LUST REG 6V: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Case Listing Leaking Underground Storage Tank locations. Inyo, Kern, Los Angeles, Mono, San Bernardino counties. Date of Government Version: 06/07/2005 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/07/2005 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/29/2005 Number of Days to Update: 22 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Victorville Branch Office Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/15/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/28/2010 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned LUST REG 6L: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Case Listing For more current information, please refer to the State Water Resources Control Board’s LUST database. Date of Government Version: 09/09/2003 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/10/2003 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/07/2003 Number of Days to Update: 27 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Lahontan Region Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/12/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/31/2010 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned LUST REG 5: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Database Leaking Underground Storage Tank locations. Alameda, Alpine, Amador, Butte, Colusa, Contra Costa, Calveras, El Dorado, Fresno, Glenn, Kern, Kings, Lake, Lassen, Madera, Mariposa, Merced, Modoc, Napa, Nevada, Placer, Plumas, Sacramento, San Joaquin, Shasta, Solano, Stanislaus, Sutter, Tehama, Tulare, Tuolumne, Yolo, Yuba counties. TC2760975.2s Page GR-5 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- Date of Government Version: 07/01/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/22/2008 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/31/2008 Number of Days to Update: 9 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/05/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/19/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly LUST REG 4: Underground Storage Tank Leak List Los Angeles, Ventura counties. For more current information, please refer to the State Water Resources Control Board’s LUST database. Date of Government Version: 09/07/2004 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/07/2004 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/12/2004 Number of Days to Update: 35 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Los Angeles Region Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/08/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/21/2010 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned LUST REG 3: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Database Leaking Underground Storage Tank locations. Monterey, San Benito, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Santa Cruz counties. Date of Government Version: 05/19/2003 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/19/2003 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/02/2003 Number of Days to Update: 14 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Coast Region Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/19/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/02/2010 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned LUST REG 2: Fuel Leak List Leaking Underground Storage Tank locations. Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano, Sonoma counties. Date of Government Version: 09/30/2004 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/20/2004 Date Made Active in Reports: 11/19/2004 Number of Days to Update: 30 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board San Francisco Bay Region Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/22/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/05/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly LUST REG 1: Active Toxic Site Investigation Del Norte, Humboldt, Lake, Mendocino, Modoc, Siskiyou, Sonoma, Trinity counties. For more current information, please refer to the State Water Resources Control Board’s LUST database. Date of Government Version: 02/01/2001 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/28/2001 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/29/2001 Number of Days to Update: 29 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board North Coast Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/16/2010 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned LUST: Geotracker’s Leaking Underground Fuel Tank Report Leaking Underground Storage Tank Incident Reports. LUST records contain an inventory of reported leaking underground storage tank incidents. Not all states maintain these records, and the information stored varies by state. For more information on a particular leaking underground storage tank sites, please contact the appropriate regulatory agency. Date of Government Version: 03/22/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/23/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/09/2010 Number of Days to Update: 17 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: see region list Last EDR Contact: 03/23/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/05/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly LUST REG 8: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks California Regional Water Quality Control Board Santa Ana Region For more current information, please refer to the State Water Resources Control Board’s LUST database. TC2760975.2s Page GR-6 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/15/2005 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/28/2005 Number of Days to Update: 41 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Santa Ana Region Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/19/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/02/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies SLIC: Statewide SLIC Cases The SLIC (Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanup) program is designed to protect and restore water quality from spills, leaks, and similar discharges. Date of Government Version: 03/22/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/23/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/09/2010 Number of Days to Update: 17 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/23/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/05/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies SLIC REG 1: Active Toxic Site Investigations The SLIC (Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanup) program is designed to protect and restore water quality from spills, leaks, and similar discharges. Date of Government Version: 04/03/2003 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/07/2003 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/25/2003 Number of Days to Update: 18 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board, North Coast Region Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/16/2010 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned SLIC REG 2: Spills, Leaks, Investigation & Cleanup Cost Recovery Listing The SLIC (Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanup) program is designed to protect and restore water quality from spills, leaks, and similar discharges. Date of Government Version: 09/30/2004 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/20/2004 Date Made Active in Reports: 11/19/2004 Number of Days to Update: 30 Source: Regional Water Quality Control Board San Francisco Bay Region Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/22/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/05/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly SLIC REG 3: Spills, Leaks, Investigation & Cleanup Cost Recovery Listing The SLIC (Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanup) program is designed to protect and restore water quality from spills, leaks, and similar discharges. Date of Government Version: 05/18/2006 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/18/2006 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/15/2006 Number of Days to Update: 28 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Coast Region Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/19/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/02/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually SLIC REG 4: Spills, Leaks, Investigation & Cleanup Cost Recovery Listing The SLIC (Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanup) program is designed to protect and restore water quality from spills, leaks, and similar discharges. Date of Government Version: 11/17/2004 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/18/2004 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/04/2005 Number of Days to Update: 47 Source: Region Water Quality Control Board Los Angeles Region Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/05/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/19/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies SLIC REG 5: Spills, Leaks, Investigation & Cleanup Cost Recovery Listing The SLIC (Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanup) program is designed to protect and restore water quality from spills, leaks, and similar discharges. TC2760975.2s Page GR-7 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- Date of Government Version: 04/01/2005 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/05/2005 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/21/2005 Number of Days to Update: 16 Source: Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/15/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/28/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually SLIC REG 6V: Spills, Leaks, Investigation & Cleanup Cost Recovery Listing The SLIC (Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanup) program is designed to protect and restore water quality from spills, leaks, and similar discharges. Date of Government Version: 05/24/2005 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/25/2005 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/16/2005 Number of Days to Update: 22 Source: Regional Water Quality Control Board, Victorville Branch Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 12/10/2009 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/29/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually SLIC REG 6L: SLIC Sites The SLIC (Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanup) program is designed to protect and restore water quality from spills, leaks, and similar discharges. Date of Government Version: 09/07/2004 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/07/2004 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/12/2004 Number of Days to Update: 35 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Lahontan Region Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/15/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/31/2010 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned SLIC REG 7: SLIC List The SLIC (Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanup) program is designed to protect and restore water quality from spills, leaks, and similar discharges. Date of Government Version: 11/24/2004 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/29/2004 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/04/2005 Number of Days to Update: 36 Source: California Regional Quality Control Board, Colorado River Basin Region Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/16/2010 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned SLIC REG 8: Spills, Leaks, Investigation & Cleanup Cost Recovery Listing The SLIC (Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanup) program is designed to protect and restore water quality from spills, leaks, and similar discharges. Date of Government Version: 04/03/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/03/2008 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/14/2008 Number of Days to Update: 11 Source: California Region Water Quality Control Board Santa Ana Region Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/15/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/28/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually SLIC REG 9: Spills, Leaks, Investigation & Cleanup Cost Recovery Listing The SLIC (Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanup) program is designed to protect and restore water quality from spills, leaks, and similar discharges. Date of Government Version: 09/10/2007 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/11/2007 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/28/2007 Number of Days to Update: 17 Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board San Diego Region Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/08/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/24/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually INDIAN LUST R10: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land LUSTs on Indian land in Alaska, Idaho, Oregon and Washington. TC2760975.2s Page GR-8 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- Date of Government Version: 02/02/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/03/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 15 Source: EPA Region 10 Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/16/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly INDIAN LUST R1: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land A listing of leaking underground storage tank locations on Indian Land. Date of Government Version: 02/19/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/19/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/16/2009 Number of Days to Update: 25 Source: EPA Region 1 Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/16/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies INDIAN LUST R8: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land LUSTs on Indian land in Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah and Wyoming. Date of Government Version: 02/25/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/25/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2010 Number of Days to Update: 46 Source: EPA Region 8 Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/16/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly INDIAN LUST R6: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land LUSTs on Indian land in New Mexico and Oklahoma. Date of Government Version: 03/05/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/05/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2010 Number of Days to Update: 38 Source: EPA Region 6 Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/16/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies INDIAN LUST R4: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land LUSTs on Indian land in Florida, Mississippi and North Carolina. Date of Government Version: 03/10/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/16/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2010 Number of Days to Update: 27 Source: EPA Region 4 Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/16/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually INDIAN LUST R9: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land LUSTs on Indian land in Arizona, California, New Mexico and Nevada Date of Government Version: 02/01/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/03/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2010 Number of Days to Update: 40 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/16/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly INDIAN LUST R7: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land LUSTs on Indian land in Iowa, Kansas, and Nebraska Date of Government Version: 03/24/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/20/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/17/2009 Number of Days to Update: 28 Source: EPA Region 7 Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/01/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/17/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies State and tribal registered storage tank lists TC2760975.2s Page GR-9 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- UST: Active UST Facilities Active UST facilities gathered from the local regulatory agencies Date of Government Version: 03/22/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/23/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/14/2010 Number of Days to Update: 22 Source: Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/23/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/05/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually AST: Aboveground Petroleum Storage Tank Facilities Registered Aboveground Storage Tanks. Date of Government Version: 08/01/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/10/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/01/2009 Number of Days to Update: 21 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/12/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/26/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly INDIAN UST R10: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian land in EPA Region 10 (Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, Washington, and Tribal Nations). Date of Government Version: 02/02/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/03/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 15 Source: EPA Region 10 Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/16/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly INDIAN UST R9: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian land in EPA Region 9 (Arizona, California, Hawaii, Nevada, the Pacific Islands, and Tribal Nations). Date of Government Version: 02/01/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/03/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2010 Number of Days to Update: 40 Source: EPA Region 9 Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/16/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly INDIAN UST R8: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian land in EPA Region 8 (Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, Wyoming and 27 Tribal Nations). Date of Government Version: 02/25/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/25/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2010 Number of Days to Update: 46 Source: EPA Region 8 Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/16/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly INDIAN UST R7: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian land in EPA Region 7 (Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, and 9 Tribal Nations). Date of Government Version: 04/01/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/30/2008 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/16/2009 Number of Days to Update: 76 Source: EPA Region 7 Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/01/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/17/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies INDIAN UST R6: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian land in EPA Region 6 (Louisiana, Arkansas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Texas and 65 Tribes). TC2760975.2s Page GR-10 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- Date of Government Version: 02/08/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/09/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 9 Source: EPA Region 6 Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/16/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually INDIAN UST R5: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian land in EPA Region 5 (Michigan, Minnesota and Wisconsin and Tribal Nations). Date of Government Version: 02/11/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/11/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2010 Number of Days to Update: 60 Source: EPA Region 5 Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/16/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies INDIAN UST R4: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian land in EPA Region 4 (Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee and Tribal Nations) Date of Government Version: 03/10/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/16/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2010 Number of Days to Update: 27 Source: EPA Region 4 Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/16/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually INDIAN UST R1: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian land in EPA Region 1 (Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont and ten Tribal Nations). Date of Government Version: 02/19/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/19/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/16/2009 Number of Days to Update: 25 Source: EPA, Region 1 Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/16/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies FEMA UST: Underground Storage Tank Listing A listing of all FEMA owned underground storage tanks. Date of Government Version: 01/01/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/16/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2010 Number of Days to Update: 55 Source: FEMA Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/19/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/02/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies State and tribal voluntary cleanup sites INDIAN VCP R7: Voluntary Cleanup Priority Lisitng A listing of voluntary cleanup priority sites located on Indian Land located in Region 7. Date of Government Version: 03/20/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/22/2008 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/19/2008 Number of Days to Update: 27 Source: EPA, Region 7 Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/20/2009 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/20/2009 Data Release Frequency: Varies VCP: Voluntary Cleanup Program Properties Contains low threat level properties with either confirmed or unconfirmed releases and the project proponents have request that DTSC oversee investigation and/or cleanup activities and have agreed to provide coverage for DTSC’s costs. TC2760975.2s Page GR-11 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- Date of Government Version: 02/08/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/09/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 9 Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/09/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/22/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly INDIAN VCP R1: Voluntary Cleanup Priority Listing A listing of voluntary cleanup priority sites located on Indian Land located in Region 1. Date of Government Version: 04/02/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/22/2008 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/19/2008 Number of Days to Update: 27 Source: EPA, Region 1 Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/05/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/19/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS Local Brownfield lists US BROWNFIELDS: A Listing of Brownfields Sites Included in the listing are brownfields properties addresses by Cooperative Agreement Recipients and brownfields properties addressed by Targeted Brownfields Assessments. Targeted Brownfields Assessments-EPA’s Targeted Brownfields Assessments (TBA) program is designed to help states, tribes, and municipalities--especially those without EPA Brownfields Assessment Demonstration Pilots--minimize the uncertainties of contamination often associated with brownfields. Under the TBA program, EPA provides funding and/or technical assistance for environmental assessments at brownfields sites throughout the country. Targeted Brownfields Assessments supplement and work with other efforts under EPA’s Brownfields Initiative to promote cleanup and redevelopment of brownfields. Cooperative Agreement Recipients-States, political subdivisions, territories, and Indian tribes become Brownfields Cleanup Revolving Loan Fund cooperative agreement recipients when they enter into cooperative agreements with the U.S. EPA. EPA selects cooperative agreement recipients based on a proposal and application process. cooperative agreement recipients must use EPA funds provided through cooperative agreement for specified brownfields-related cleanup activities. Date of Government Version: 10/01/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/04/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 12/16/2009 Number of Days to Update: 42 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/23/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/12/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually Local Lists of Landfill / Solid Waste Disposal Sites ODI: Open Dump Inventory An open dump is defined as a disposal facility that does not comply with one or more of the Part 257 or Part 258 Subtitle D Criteria. Date of Government Version: 06/30/1985 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/09/2004 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/17/2004 Number of Days to Update: 39 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 06/09/2004 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned DEBRIS REGION 9: Torres Martinez Reservation Illegal Dump Site Locations A listing of illegal dump sites location on the Torres Martinez Indian Reservation located in eastern Riverside County and northern Imperial County, California. Date of Government Version: 01/12/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/07/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/21/2009 Number of Days to Update: 137 Source: EPA, Region 9 Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/22/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/21/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies TC2760975.2s Page GR-12 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- WMUDS/SWAT: Waste Management Unit Database Waste Management Unit Database System. WMUDS is used by the State Water Resources Control Board staff and the Regional Water Quality Control Boards for program tracking and inventory of waste management units. WMUDS is composed of the following databases: Facility Information, Scheduled Inspections Information, Waste Management Unit Information, SWAT Program Information, SWAT Report Summary Information, SWAT Report Summary Data, Chapter 15 (formerly Subchapter 15) Information, Chapter 15 Monitoring Parameters, TPCA Program Information, RCRA Program Information, Closure Information, and Interested Parties Information. Date of Government Version: 04/01/2000 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/10/2000 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/10/2000 Number of Days to Update: 30 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/15/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/31/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly Recycler Database A listing of recycling facilities in California. Date of Government Version: 01/06/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/24/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/09/2010 Number of Days to Update: 16 Source: Department of Conservation Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/24/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/05/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly HAULERS: Registered Waste Tire Haulers Listing A listing of registered waste tire haulers. Date of Government Version: 03/09/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/10/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/09/2010 Number of Days to Update: 30 Source: Integrated Waste Management Board Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/08/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/07/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies INDIAN ODI: Report on the Status of Open Dumps on Indian Lands Location of open dumps on Indian land. Date of Government Version: 12/31/1998 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/03/2007 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/24/2008 Number of Days to Update: 52 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/08/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/24/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies Local Lists of Hazardous waste / Contaminated Sites US CDL: Clandestine Drug Labs A listing of clandestine drug lab locations. The U.S. Department of Justice ("the Department") provides this web site as a public service. It contains addresses of some locations where law enforcement agencies reported they found chemicals or other items that indicated the presence of either clandestine drug laboratories or dumpsites. In most cases, the source of the entries is not the Department, and the Department has not verified the entry and does not guarantee its accuracy. Members of the public must verify the accuracy of all entries by, for example, contacting local law enforcement and local health departments. Date of Government Version: 08/19/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/29/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/10/2010 Number of Days to Update: 43 Source: Drug Enforcement Administration Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 12/14/2009 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/22/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly HIST CAL-SITES: Calsites Database The Calsites database contains potential or confirmed hazardous substance release properties. In 1996, California EPA reevaluated and significantly reduced the number of sites in the Calsites database. No longer updated by the state agency. It has been replaced by ENVIROSTOR. TC2760975.2s Page GR-13 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- Date of Government Version: 08/08/2005 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/03/2006 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/24/2006 Number of Days to Update: 21 Source: Department of Toxic Substance Control Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/23/2009 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/25/2009 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned SCH: School Property Evaluation Program This category contains proposed and existing school sites that are being evaluated by DTSC for possible hazardous materials contamination. In some cases, these properties may be listed in the CalSites category depending on the level of threat to public health and safety or the environment they pose. Date of Government Version: 02/08/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/09/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 9 Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/09/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/24/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly TOXIC PITS: Toxic Pits Cleanup Act Sites Toxic PITS Cleanup Act Sites. TOXIC PITS identifies sites suspected of containing hazardous substances where cleanup has not yet been completed. Date of Government Version: 07/01/1995 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/30/1995 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/26/1995 Number of Days to Update: 27 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 01/26/2009 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 04/27/2009 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned CDL: Clandestine Drug Labs A listing of drug lab locations. Listing of a location in this database does not indicate that any illegal drug lab materials were or were not present there, and does not constitute a determination that the location either requires or does not require additional cleanup work. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/25/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/04/2010 Number of Days to Update: 7 Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/05/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/19/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies US HIST CDL: National Clandestine Laboratory Register A listing of clandestine drug lab locations. The U.S. Department of Justice ("the Department") provides this web site as a public service. It contains addresses of some locations where law enforcement agencies reported they found chemicals or other items that indicated the presence of either clandestine drug laboratories or dumpsites. In most cases, the source of the entries is not the Department, and the Department has not verified the entry and does not guarantee its accuracy. Members of the public must verify the accuracy of all entries by, for example, contacting local law enforcement and local health departments. Date of Government Version: 09/01/2007 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/19/2008 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/30/2009 Number of Days to Update: 131 Source: Drug Enforcement Administration Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/23/2009 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/22/2009 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned Local Lists of Registered Storage Tanks CA FID UST: Facility Inventory Database The Facility Inventory Database (FID) contains a historical listing of active and inactive underground storage tank locations from the State Water Resource Control Board. Refer to local/county source for current data. Date of Government Version: 10/31/1994 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/05/1995 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/29/1995 Number of Days to Update: 24 Source: California Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 12/28/1998 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned TC2760975.2s Page GR-14 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- UST MENDOCINO: Mendocino County UST Database A listing of underground storage tank locations in Mendocino County. Date of Government Version: 09/23/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/23/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/01/2009 Number of Days to Update: 8 Source: Department of Public Health Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/08/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/21/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually HIST UST: Hazardous Substance Storage Container Database The Hazardous Substance Storage Container Database is a historical listing of UST sites. Refer to local/county source for current data. Date of Government Version: 10/15/1990 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/25/1991 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/12/1991 Number of Days to Update: 18 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 07/26/2001 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned SWEEPS UST: SWEEPS UST Listing Statewide Environmental Evaluation and Planning System. This underground storage tank listing was updated and maintained by a company contacted by the in the early 1990’s. The listing is no longer updated or maintained. The local agency is the contact for more information on a site on the SWEEPS list. Date of Government Version: 06/01/1994 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/07/2005 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/11/2005 Number of Days to Update: 35 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: 06/03/2005 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned Local Land Records LIENS 2: CERCLA Lien Information A Federal CERCLA (’Superfund’) lien can exist by operation of law at any site or property at which EPA has spent Superfund monies. These monies are spent to investigate and address releases and threatened releases of contamination. CERCLIS provides information as to the identity of these sites and properties. Date of Government Version: 02/05/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/11/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2010 Number of Days to Update: 60 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/16/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies LUCIS: Land Use Control Information System LUCIS contains records of land use control information pertaining to the former Navy Base Realignment and Closure properties. Date of Government Version: 12/09/2005 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/11/2006 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/11/2007 Number of Days to Update: 31 Source: Department of the Navy Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/17/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/07/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies LIENS: Environmental Liens Listing A listing of property locations with environmental liens for California where DTSC is a lien holder. Date of Government Version: 01/28/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/29/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 20 Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/02/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies TC2760975.2s Page GR-15 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- DEED: Deed Restriction Listing Site Mitigation and Brownfields Reuse Program Facility Sites with Deed Restrictions & Hazardous Waste Management Program Facility Sites with Deed / Land Use Restriction. The DTSC Site Mitigation and Brownfields Reuse Program list includes sites cleaned up under the program’s oversight and generally does not include current or former hazardous waste facilities that required a hazardous waste facility permit. The list represents deed restrictions that are active. Some sites have multiple deed restrictions. The DTSC Hazardous Waste Management Program (HWMP) has developed a list of current or former hazardous waste facilities that have a recorded land use restriction at the local county recorder’s office. The land use restrictions on this list were required by the DTSC HWMP as a result of the presence of hazardous substances that remain on site after the facility (or part of the facility) has been closed or cleaned up. The types of land use restriction include deed notice, deed restriction, or a land use restriction that binds current and future owners. Date of Government Version: 03/15/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/16/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/09/2010 Number of Days to Update: 24 Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/16/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/28/2009 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually Records of Emergency Release Reports HMIRS: Hazardous Materials Information Reporting System Hazardous Materials Incident Report System. HMIRS contains hazardous material spill incidents reported to DOT. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/06/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/10/2010 Number of Days to Update: 35 Source: U.S. Department of Transportation Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/07/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/19/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually CHMIRS: California Hazardous Material Incident Report System California Hazardous Material Incident Reporting System. CHMIRS contains information on reported hazardous material incidents (accidental releases or spills). Date of Government Version: 12/31/2007 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/09/2008 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/20/2008 Number of Days to Update: 42 Source: Office of Emergency Services Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/16/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies LDS: Land Disposal Sites Listing The Land Disposal program regulates of waste discharge to land for treatment, storage and disposal in waste management units. Date of Government Version: 03/22/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/23/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/09/2010 Number of Days to Update: 17 Source: State Water Qualilty Control Board Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/23/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/05/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly MCS: Military Cleanup Sites Listing The State Water Resources Control Board and nine Regional Water Quality Control Boards partner with the Department of Defense (DoD) through the Defense and State Memorandum of Agreement (DSMOA) to oversee the investigation and remediation of water quality issues at military facilities. Date of Government Version: 03/22/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/23/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/09/2010 Number of Days to Update: 17 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/23/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/05/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly Other Ascertainable Records TC2760975.2s Page GR-16 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- RCRA-NonGen: RCRA - Non Generators RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Non-Generators do not presently generate hazardous waste. Date of Government Version: 01/13/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/15/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 34 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: (415) 495-8895 Last EDR Contact: 04/29/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/19/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies DOT OPS: Incident and Accident Data Department of Transporation, Office of Pipeline Safety Incident and Accident data. Date of Government Version: 01/12/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/09/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2010 Number of Days to Update: 62 Source: Department of Transporation, Office of Pipeline Safety Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/09/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/24/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies DOD: Department of Defense Sites This data set consists of federally owned or administered lands, administered by the Department of Defense, that have any area equal to or greater than 640 acres of the United States, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2005 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/10/2006 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/11/2007 Number of Days to Update: 62 Source: USGS Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/21/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/02/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually FUDS: Formerly Used Defense Sites The listing includes locations of Formerly Used Defense Sites properties where the US Army Corps of Engineers is actively working or will take necessary cleanup actions. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/30/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 12/01/2009 Number of Days to Update: 62 Source: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/18/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/28/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies CONSENT: Superfund (CERCLA) Consent Decrees Major legal settlements that establish responsibility and standards for cleanup at NPL (Superfund) sites. Released periodically by United States District Courts after settlement by parties to litigation matters. Date of Government Version: 08/03/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/27/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 11/09/2009 Number of Days to Update: 13 Source: Department of Justice, Consent Decree Library Telephone: Varies Last EDR Contact: 04/05/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/19/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies ROD: Records Of Decision Record of Decision. ROD documents mandate a permanent remedy at an NPL (Superfund) site containing technical and health information to aid in the cleanup. Date of Government Version: 12/01/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/15/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/19/2010 Number of Days to Update: 35 Source: EPA Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/02/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/28/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually TC2760975.2s Page GR-17 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- UMTRA: Uranium Mill Tailings Sites Uranium ore was mined by private companies for federal government use in national defense programs. When the mills shut down, large piles of the sand-like material (mill tailings) remain after uranium has been extracted from the ore. Levels of human exposure to radioactive materials from the piles are low; however, in some cases tailings were used as construction materials before the potential health hazards of the tailings were recognized. Date of Government Version: 01/05/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/07/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/08/2009 Number of Days to Update: 1 Source: Department of Energy Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 01/21/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/14/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies MINES: Mines Master Index File Contains all mine identification numbers issued for mines active or opened since 1971. The data also includes violation information. Date of Government Version: 11/17/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/08/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/19/2010 Number of Days to Update: 42 Source: Department of Labor, Mine Safety and Health Administration Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/10/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/21/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually TRIS: Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System Toxic Release Inventory System. TRIS identifies facilities which release toxic chemicals to the air, water and land in reportable quantities under SARA Title III Section 313. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/13/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 36 Source: EPA Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/02/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/14/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually TSCA: Toxic Substances Control Act Toxic Substances Control Act. TSCA identifies manufacturers and importers of chemical substances included on the TSCA Chemical Substance Inventory list. It includes data on the production volume of these substances by plant site. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2002 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/14/2006 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/30/2006 Number of Days to Update: 46 Source: EPA Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/21/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/12/2010 Data Release Frequency: Every 4 Years FTTS: FIFRA/ TSCA Tracking System - FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act) FTTS tracks administrative cases and pesticide enforcement actions and compliance activities related to FIFRA, TSCA and EPCRA (Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act). To maintain currency, EDR contacts the Agency on a quarterly basis. Date of Government Version: 04/09/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/16/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/11/2009 Number of Days to Update: 25 Source: EPA/Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/01/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/14/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly FTTS INSP: FIFRA/ TSCA Tracking System - FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act) A listing of FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System (FTTS) inspections and enforcements. Date of Government Version: 04/09/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/16/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/11/2009 Number of Days to Update: 25 Source: EPA Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/01/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/14/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly TC2760975.2s Page GR-18 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- HIST FTTS: FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System Administrative Case Listing A complete administrative case listing from the FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System (FTTS) for all ten EPA regions. The information was obtained from the National Compliance Database (NCDB). NCDB supports the implementation of FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act) and TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act). Some EPA regions are now closing out records. Because of that, and the fact that some EPA regions are not providing EPA Headquarters with updated records, it was decided to create a HIST FTTS database. It included records that may not be included in the newer FTTS database updates. This database is no longer updated. Date of Government Version: 10/19/2006 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/01/2007 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/10/2007 Number of Days to Update: 40 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 12/17/2007 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/17/2008 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned HIST FTTS INSP: FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System Inspection & Enforcement Case Listing A complete inspection and enforcement case listing from the FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System (FTTS) for all ten EPA regions. The information was obtained from the National Compliance Database (NCDB). NCDB supports the implementation of FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act) and TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act). Some EPA regions are now closing out records. Because of that, and the fact that some EPA regions are not providing EPA Headquarters with updated records, it was decided to create a HIST FTTS database. It included records that may not be included in the newer FTTS database updates. This database is no longer updated. Date of Government Version: 10/19/2006 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/01/2007 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/10/2007 Number of Days to Update: 40 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 12/17/2008 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/17/2008 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned SSTS: Section 7 Tracking Systems Section 7 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act, as amended (92 Stat. 829) requires all registered pesticide-producing establishments to submit a report to the Environmental Protection Agency by March 1st each year. Each establishment must report the types and amounts of pesticides, active ingredients and devices being produced, and those having been produced and sold or distributed in the past year. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/06/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/10/2010 Number of Days to Update: 35 Source: EPA Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/16/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually ICIS: Integrated Compliance Information System The Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS) supports the information needs of the national enforcement and compliance program as well as the unique needs of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program. Date of Government Version: 11/10/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/18/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/19/2010 Number of Days to Update: 62 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/29/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/12/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly PADS: PCB Activity Database System PCB Activity Database. PADS Identifies generators, transporters, commercial storers and/or brokers and disposers of PCB’s who are required to notify the EPA of such activities. Date of Government Version: 09/01/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/21/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 12/01/2009 Number of Days to Update: 41 Source: EPA Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/22/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/02/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually TC2760975.2s Page GR-19 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- MLTS: Material Licensing Tracking System MLTS is maintained by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and contains a list of approximately 8,100 sites which possess or use radioactive materials and which are subject to NRC licensing requirements. To maintain currency, EDR contacts the Agency on a quarterly basis. Date of Government Version: 12/24/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/31/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/10/2010 Number of Days to Update: 41 Source: Nuclear Regulatory Commission Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/15/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/28/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly RADINFO: Radiation Information Database The Radiation Information Database (RADINFO) contains information about facilities that are regulated by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations for radiation and radioactivity. Date of Government Version: 01/12/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/13/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/10/2010 Number of Days to Update: 28 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/14/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/26/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly FINDS: Facility Index System/Facility Registry System Facility Index System. FINDS contains both facility information and ’pointers’ to other sources that contain more detail. EDR includes the following FINDS databases in this report: PCS (Permit Compliance System), AIRS (Aerometric Information Retrieval System), DOCKET (Enforcement Docket used to manage and track information on civil judicial enforcement cases for all environmental statutes), FURS (Federal Underground Injection Control), C-DOCKET (Criminal Docket System used to track criminal enforcement actions for all environmental statutes), FFIS (Federal Facilities Information System), STATE (State Environmental Laws and Statutes), and PADS (PCB Activity Data System). Date of Government Version: 10/19/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/22/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 12/01/2009 Number of Days to Update: 40 Source: EPA Telephone: (415) 947-8000 Last EDR Contact: 03/15/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/28/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly RAATS: RCRA Administrative Action Tracking System RCRA Administration Action Tracking System. RAATS contains records based on enforcement actions issued under RCRA pertaining to major violators and includes administrative and civil actions brought by the EPA. For administration actions after September 30, 1995, data entry in the RAATS database was discontinued. EPA will retain a copy of the database for historical records. It was necessary to terminate RAATS because a decrease in agency resources made it impossible to continue to update the information contained in the database. Date of Government Version: 04/17/1995 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/03/1995 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/07/1995 Number of Days to Update: 35 Source: EPA Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 06/02/2008 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/01/2008 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned BRS: Biennial Reporting System The Biennial Reporting System is a national system administered by the EPA that collects data on the generation and management of hazardous waste. BRS captures detailed data from two groups: Large Quantity Generators (LQG) and Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2007 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/19/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/22/2009 Number of Days to Update: 92 Source: EPA/NTIS Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/25/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/07/2010 Data Release Frequency: Biennially TC2760975.2s Page GR-20 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- CA BOND EXP. PLAN: Bond Expenditure Plan Department of Health Services developed a site-specific expenditure plan as the basis for an appropriation of Hazardous Substance Cleanup Bond Act funds. It is not updated. Date of Government Version: 01/01/1989 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/27/1994 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/02/1994 Number of Days to Update: 6 Source: Department of Health Services Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/31/1994 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned CA WDS: Waste Discharge System Sites which have been issued waste discharge requirements. Date of Government Version: 06/19/2007 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/20/2007 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/29/2007 Number of Days to Update: 9 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/01/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/14/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly NPDES: NPDES Permits Listing A listing of NPDES permits, including stormwater. Date of Government Version: 02/22/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/24/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/04/2010 Number of Days to Update: 8 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/24/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/07/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly CORTESE: "Cortese" Hazardous Waste & Substances Sites List The sites for the list are designated by the State Water Resource Control Board (LUST), the Integrated Waste Board (SWF/LS), and the Department of Toxic Substances Control (Cal-Sites). This listing is no longer updated by the state agency. Date of Government Version: 01/06/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/06/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 12 Source: CAL EPA/Office of Emergency Information Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/07/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/19/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly HIST CORTESE: Hazardous Waste & Substance Site List The sites for the list are designated by the State Water Resource Control Board [LUST], the Integrated Waste Board [SWF/LS], and the Department of Toxic Substances Control [CALSITES]. Date of Government Version: 04/01/2001 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/22/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/08/2009 Number of Days to Update: 76 Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 01/22/2009 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned NOTIFY 65: Proposition 65 Records Proposition 65 Notification Records. NOTIFY 65 contains facility notifications about any release which could impact drinking water and thereby expose the public to a potential health risk. Date of Government Version: 10/21/1993 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/01/1993 Date Made Active in Reports: 11/19/1993 Number of Days to Update: 18 Source: State Water Resources Control Board Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/29/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/12/2010 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned TC2760975.2s Page GR-21 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- Cleaner Facilities A list of related facilities that have EPA ID numbers. These are facilities with certain SIC codes: power laundries, family and commercial; garment pressing and cleaner’s agents; linen supply; coin-operated laundries and cleaning; plants, except rugs; carpet and upholster cleaning; industrial launderers; laundry and garment services. Date of Government Version: 12/22/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/25/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/29/2010 Number of Days to Update: 4 Source: Department of Toxic Substance Control Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/15/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/28/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually WIP: Well Investigation Program Case List Well Investigation Program case in the San Gabriel and San Fernando Valley area. Date of Government Version: 07/03/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/21/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/03/2009 Number of Days to Update: 13 Source: Los Angeles Water Quality Control Board Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/14/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/19/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies HAZNET: Facility and Manifest Data Facility and Manifest Data. The data is extracted from the copies of hazardous waste manifests received each year by the DTSC. The annual volume of manifests is typically 700,000 - 1,000,000 annually, representing approximately 350,000 - 500,000 shipments. Data are from the manifests submitted without correction, and therefore many contain some invalid values for data elements such as generator ID, TSD ID, waste category, and disposal method. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/21/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/28/2009 Number of Days to Update: 7 Source: California Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/26/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/02/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually EMI: Emissions Inventory Data Toxics and criteria pollutant emissions data collected by the ARB and local air pollution agencies. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2007 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/14/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/23/2009 Number of Days to Update: 9 Source: California Air Resources Board Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/09/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/12/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies INDIAN RESERV: Indian Reservations This map layer portrays Indian administered lands of the United States that have any area equal to or greater than 640 acres. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2005 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/08/2006 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/11/2007 Number of Days to Update: 34 Source: USGS Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/21/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/02/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually SCRD State Coalition for Remediation of Listing The State Coalition for Remediation of was established in 1998, with support from the U.S. EPA Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation. It is comprised of representatives of states with established remediation programs. Currently the member states are Alabama, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, North Carolina, Oregon, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Wisconsin. Date of Government Version: 02/10/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/11/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2010 Number of Days to Update: 60 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/23/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/09/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies TC2760975.2s Page GR-22 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- PROC: Certified Processors Database A listing of certified processors. Date of Government Version: 01/06/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/24/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/09/2010 Number of Days to Update: 16 Source: Department of Conservation Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/24/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/05/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly MWMP: Medical Waste Management Program Listing The Medical Waste Management Program (MWMP) ensures the proper handling and disposal of medical waste by permitting and inspecting medical waste Offsite Treatment Facilities (PDF) and Transfer Stations (PDF) throughout the state. MWMP also oversees all Medical Waste Transporters. Date of Government Version: 02/24/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/17/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/09/2010 Number of Days to Update: 23 Source: Department of Public Health Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/15/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/28/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies COAL ASH DOE: Sleam-Electric Plan Operation Data A listing of power plants that store ash in surface ponds. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2005 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/07/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/22/2009 Number of Days to Update: 76 Source: Department of Energy Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/21/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/02/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies COAL ASH EPA: Coal Combustion Residues Surface Impoundments List A listing of coal combustion residues surface impoundments with high hazard potential ratings. Date of Government Version: 11/09/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/18/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/10/2010 Number of Days to Update: 54 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: 03/16/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/28/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies HWT: Registered Hazardous Waste Transporter Database A listing of hazardous waste transporters. In California, unless specifically exempted, it is unlawful for any person to transport hazardous wastes unless the person holds a valid registration issued by DTSC. A hazardous waste transporter registration is valid for one year and is assigned a unique registration number. Date of Government Version: 01/18/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/19/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/29/2010 Number of Days to Update: 10 Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/21/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/02/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly HWP: EnviroStor Permitted Facilities Listing Detailed information on permitted hazardous waste facilities and corrective action (a??cleanupsa??) tracked in EnviroStor. Date of Government Version: 02/08/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/09/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 9 Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/09/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/24/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly TC2760975.2s Page GR-23 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- FINANCIAL ASSURANCE 2: Financial Assurance Information Listing A listing of financial assurance information for solid waste facilities. Financial assurance is intended to ensure that resources are available to pay for the cost of closure, post-closure care, and corrective measures if the owner or operator of a regulated facility is unable or unwilling to pay. Date of Government Version: 03/09/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/10/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/09/2010 Number of Days to Update: 30 Source: California Integrated Waste Management Board Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/08/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/07/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies FINANCIAL ASSURANCE: Financial Assurance Information Listing Financial Assurance information Date of Government Version: 03/01/2007 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/01/2007 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/29/2007 Number of Days to Update: 28 Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/12/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/17/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies FEDLAND: Federal and Indian Lands Federally and Indian administrated lands of the United States. Lands included are administrated by: Army Corps of Engineers, Bureau of Reclamation, National Wild and Scenic River, National Wildlife Refuge, Public Domain Land, Wilderness, Wilderness Study Area, Wildlife Management Area, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Bureau of Land Management, Department of Justice, Forest Service, Fish and Wildlife Service, National Park Service. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2005 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/06/2006 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/11/2007 Number of Days to Update: 339 Source: U.S. Geological Survey Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/21/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/02/2010 Data Release Frequency: N/A PCB TRANSFORMER: PCB Transformer Registration Database The database of PCB transformer registrations that includes all PCB registration submittals. Date of Government Version: 01/01/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/18/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 05/29/2009 Number of Days to Update: 100 Source: Environmental Protection Agency Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/24/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/17/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies EDR PROPRIETARY RECORDS EDR Proprietary Records Manufactured Gas Plants: EDR Proprietary Manufactured Gas Plants The EDR Proprietary Manufactured Gas Plant Database includes records of coal gas plants (manufactured gas plants) compiled by EDR’s researchers. Manufactured gas sites were used in the United States from the 1800’s to 1950’s to produce a gas that could be distributed and used as fuel. These plants used whale oil, rosin, coal, or a mixture of coal, oil, and water that also produced a significant amount of waste. Many of the byproducts of the gas production, such as coal tar (oily waste containing volatile and non-volatile chemicals), sludges, oils and other compounds are potentially hazardous to human health and the environment. The byproduct from this process was frequently disposed of directly at the plant site and can remain or spread slowly, serving as a continuous source of soil and groundwater contamination. Date of Government Version: N/A Date Data Arrived at EDR: N/A Date Made Active in Reports: N/A Number of Days to Update: N/A Source: EDR, Inc. Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: N/A Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned TC2760975.2s Page GR-24 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- EDR Historical Auto Stations: EDR Proprietary Historic Gas Stations EDR has searched selected national collections of business directories and has collected listings of potential gas station/filling station/service station sites that were available to EDR researchers. EDR’s review was limited to those categories of sources that might, in EDR’s opinion, include gas station/filling station/service station establishments. The categories reviewed included, but were not limited to gas, gas station, gasoline station, filling station, auto, automobile repair, auto service station, service station, etc. Date of Government Version: N/A Date Data Arrived at EDR: N/A Date Made Active in Reports: N/A Number of Days to Update: N/A Source: EDR, Inc. Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: N/A Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A Data Release Frequency: Varies EDR Historical Cleaners: EDR Proprietary Historic Dry Cleaners EDR has searched selected national collections of business directories and has collected listings of potential dry cleaner sites that were available to EDR researchers. EDR’s review was limited to those categories of sources that might, in EDR’s opinion, include dry cleaning establishments. The categories reviewed included, but were not limited to dry cleaners, cleaners, laundry, laundromat, cleaning/laundry, wash & dry etc. Date of Government Version: N/A Date Data Arrived at EDR: N/A Date Made Active in Reports: N/A Number of Days to Update: N/A Source: EDR, Inc. Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: N/A Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A Data Release Frequency: Varies COUNTY RECORDS ALAMEDA COUNTY: Contaminated Sites A listing of contaminated sites overseen by the Toxic Release Program (oil and groundwater contamination from chemical releases and spills) and the Leaking Underground Storage Tank Program (soil and ground water contamination from leaking petroleum USTs). Date of Government Version: 01/19/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/21/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/29/2010 Number of Days to Update: 8 Source: Alameda County Environmental Health Services Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/05/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/19/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually Underground Tanks Underground storage tank sites located in Alameda county. Date of Government Version: 01/19/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/21/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/02/2010 Number of Days to Update: 12 Source: Alameda County Environmental Health Services Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/05/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/19/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually CONTRA COSTA COUNTY: Site List List includes sites from the underground tank, hazardous waste generator and business plan/2185 programs. Date of Government Version: 02/10/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/11/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 7 Source: Contra Costa Health Services Department Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/08/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/24/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually FRESNO COUNTY: TC2760975.2s Page GR-25 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- CUPA Resources List Certified Unified Program Agency. CUPA’s are responsible for implementing a unified hazardous materials and hazardous waste management regulatory program. The agency provides oversight of businesses that deal with hazardous materials, operate underground storage tanks or aboveground storage tanks. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/20/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/29/2010 Number of Days to Update: 9 Source: Dept. of Community Health Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/16/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/02/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually KERN COUNTY: Underground Storage Tank Sites & Tank Listing Kern County Sites and Tanks Listing. Date of Government Version: 03/16/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/17/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/14/2010 Number of Days to Update: 28 Source: Kern County Environment Health Services Department Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/15/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/31/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly LOS ANGELES COUNTY: San Gabriel Valley Areas of Concern San Gabriel Valley areas where VOC contamination is at or above the MCL as designated by region 9 EPA office. Date of Government Version: 03/30/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/31/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/23/2009 Number of Days to Update: 206 Source: EPA Region 9 Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/29/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/12/2010 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned HMS: Street Number List Industrial Waste and Underground Storage Tank Sites. Date of Government Version: 09/30/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/28/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 21 Source: Department of Public Works Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/19/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/02/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually List of Solid Waste Facilities Solid Waste Facilities in Los Angeles County. Date of Government Version: 01/25/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/27/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 22 Source: La County Department of Public Works Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/23/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/09/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies City of Los Angeles Landfills Landfills owned and maintained by the City of Los Angeles. Date of Government Version: 03/05/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/10/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/08/2009 Number of Days to Update: 29 Source: Engineering & Construction Division Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/02/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/07/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies TC2760975.2s Page GR-26 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- Site Mitigation List Industrial sites that have had some sort of spill or complaint. Date of Government Version: 02/09/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/12/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/04/2010 Number of Days to Update: 20 Source: Community Health Services Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/22/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/09/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually City of El Segundo Underground Storage Tank Underground storage tank sites located in El Segundo city. Date of Government Version: 01/25/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/25/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/02/2010 Number of Days to Update: 8 Source: City of El Segundo Fire Department Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/23/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/09/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually City of Long Beach Underground Storage Tank Underground storage tank sites located in the city of Long Beach. Date of Government Version: 03/28/2003 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/23/2003 Date Made Active in Reports: 11/26/2003 Number of Days to Update: 34 Source: City of Long Beach Fire Department Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/16/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually City of Torrance Underground Storage Tank Underground storage tank sites located in the city of Torrance. Date of Government Version: 01/21/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/25/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/02/2010 Number of Days to Update: 8 Source: City of Torrance Fire Department Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/19/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/02/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually MARIN COUNTY: Underground Storage Tank Sites Currently permitted USTs in Marin County. Date of Government Version: 01/20/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/03/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/23/2010 Number of Days to Update: 20 Source: Public Works Department Waste Management Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/12/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/26/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually NAPA COUNTY: Sites With Reported Contamination A listing of leaking underground storage tank sites located in Napa county. Date of Government Version: 07/09/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/09/2008 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/31/2008 Number of Days to Update: 22 Source: Napa County Department of Environmental Management Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/08/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/21/2010 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned TC2760975.2s Page GR-27 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- Closed and Operating Underground Storage Tank Sites Underground storage tank sites located in Napa county. Date of Government Version: 01/15/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/16/2008 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/08/2008 Number of Days to Update: 23 Source: Napa County Department of Environmental Management Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/08/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/21/2010 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned ORANGE COUNTY: List of Industrial Site Cleanups Petroleum and non-petroleum spills. Date of Government Version: 12/02/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/16/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/04/2010 Number of Days to Update: 16 Source: Health Care Agency Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/12/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/31/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually List of Underground Storage Tank Cleanups Orange County Underground Storage Tank Cleanups (LUST). Date of Government Version: 02/03/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/16/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/04/2010 Number of Days to Update: 16 Source: Health Care Agency Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/12/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/31/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly List of Underground Storage Tank Facilities Orange County Underground Storage Tank Facilities (UST). Date of Government Version: 02/03/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/12/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/23/2010 Number of Days to Update: 11 Source: Health Care Agency Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/12/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/31/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly PLACER COUNTY: Master List of Facilities List includes aboveground tanks, underground tanks and cleanup sites. Date of Government Version: 03/16/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/17/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/09/2010 Number of Days to Update: 23 Source: Placer County Health and Human Services Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/15/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/28/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually RIVERSIDE COUNTY: Listing of Underground Tank Cleanup Sites Riverside County Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Sites (LUST). Date of Government Version: 01/21/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/27/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 22 Source: Department of Public Health Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/29/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/12/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly TC2760975.2s Page GR-28 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- Underground Storage Tank Tank List Underground storage tank sites located in Riverside county. Date of Government Version: 01/21/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/27/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/02/2010 Number of Days to Update: 6 Source: Health Services Agency Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/29/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/12/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly SACRAMENTO COUNTY: Toxic Site Clean-Up List List of sites where unauthorized releases of potentially hazardous materials have occurred. Date of Government Version: 01/05/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/15/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/29/2010 Number of Days to Update: 14 Source: Sacramento County Environmental Management Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/12/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/26/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly Master Hazardous Materials Facility List Any business that has hazardous materials on site - hazardous material storage sites, underground storage tanks, waste generators. Date of Government Version: 01/21/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/02/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 16 Source: Sacramento County Environmental Management Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/12/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/26/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY: Hazardous Material Permits This listing includes underground storage tanks, medical waste handlers/generators, hazardous materials handlers, hazardous waste generators, and waste oil generators/handlers. Date of Government Version: 03/16/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/17/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/09/2010 Number of Days to Update: 23 Source: San Bernardino County Fire Department Hazardous Materials Division Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/15/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/31/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly SAN DIEGO COUNTY: Hazardous Materials Management Division Database The database includes: HE58 - This report contains the business name, site address, business phone number, establishment permit number, type of permit, and the business status. HE17 - In addition to providing the same information provided in the HE58 listing, HE17 provides inspection dates, violations received by the establishment, hazardous waste generated, the quantity, method of storage, treatment/disposal of waste and the hauler, and information on underground storage tanks. Unauthorized Release List - Includes a summary of environmental contamination cases in San Diego County (underground tank cases, non-tank cases, groundwater contamination, and soil contamination are included.) Date of Government Version: 07/16/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/29/2008 Date Made Active in Reports: 11/26/2008 Number of Days to Update: 28 Source: Hazardous Materials Management Division Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/31/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/28/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly TC2760975.2s Page GR-29 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- Solid Waste Facilities San Diego County Solid Waste Facilities. Date of Government Version: 10/01/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/04/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 45 Source: Department of Health Services Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/16/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies Environmental Case Listing The listing contains all underground tank release cases and projects pertaining to properties contaminated with hazardous substances that are actively under review by the Site Assessment and Mitigation Program. Date of Government Version: 09/23/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/15/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 34 Source: San Diego County Department of Environmental Health Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/16/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/28/2010 Data Release Frequency: Varies SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY: Local Oversite Facilities A listing of leaking underground storage tank sites located in San Francisco county. Date of Government Version: 09/19/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/19/2008 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/29/2008 Number of Days to Update: 10 Source: Department Of Public Health San Francisco County Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/16/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/31/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly Underground Storage Tank Information Underground storage tank sites located in San Francisco county. Date of Government Version: 09/19/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/19/2008 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/01/2008 Number of Days to Update: 12 Source: Department of Public Health Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/16/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/31/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY: San Joaquin Co. UST A listing of underground storage tank locations in San Joaquin county. Date of Government Version: 10/14/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/15/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 11/02/2009 Number of Days to Update: 18 Source: Environmental Health Department Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: 03/29/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/12/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually SAN MATEO COUNTY: Business Inventory List includes Hazardous Materials Business Plan, hazardous waste generators, and underground storage tanks. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/05/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 13 Source: San Mateo County Environmental Health Services Division Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/22/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/05/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually TC2760975.2s Page GR-30 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- Fuel Leak List A listing of leaking underground storage tank sites located in San Mateo county. Date of Government Version: 03/22/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/23/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/09/2010 Number of Days to Update: 17 Source: San Mateo County Environmental Health Services Division Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/22/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/05/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually SANTA CLARA COUNTY: HIST LUST - Fuel Leak Site Activity Report A listing of open and closed leaking underground storage tanks. This listing is no longer updated by the county. Leaking underground storage tanks are now handled by the Department of Environmental Health. Date of Government Version: 03/29/2005 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/30/2005 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/21/2005 Number of Days to Update: 22 Source: Santa Clara Valley Water District Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/23/2009 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/22/2009 Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned LOP Listing A listing of leaking underground storage tanks located in Santa Clara county. Date of Government Version: 05/29/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/01/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 06/15/2009 Number of Days to Update: 14 Source: Department of Environmental Health Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/08/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/21/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually Hazardous Material Facilities Hazardous material facilities, including underground storage tank sites. Date of Government Version: 08/31/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/31/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/18/2009 Number of Days to Update: 18 Source: City of San Jose Fire Department Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/15/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/31/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually SOLANO COUNTY: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks A listing of leaking underground storage tank sites located in Solano county. Date of Government Version: 03/11/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/16/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/09/2010 Number of Days to Update: 24 Source: Solano County Department of Environmental Management Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/08/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/21/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly Underground Storage Tanks Underground storage tank sites located in Solano county. Date of Government Version: 03/11/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/16/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/14/2010 Number of Days to Update: 29 Source: Solano County Department of Environmental Management Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/08/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/21/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly SONOMA COUNTY: TC2760975.2s Page GR-31 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- Leaking Underground Storage Tank Sites A listing of leaking underground storage tank sites located in Sonoma county. Date of Government Version: 01/05/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/06/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 12 Source: Department of Health Services Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/05/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/19/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly SUTTER COUNTY: Underground Storage Tanks Underground storage tank sites located in Sutter county. Date of Government Version: 04/01/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/02/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/09/2009 Number of Days to Update: 7 Source: Sutter County Department of Agriculture Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 04/13/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/28/2010 Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually VENTURA COUNTY: Business Plan, Hazardous Waste Producers, and Operating Underground Tanks The BWT list indicates by site address whether the Environmental Health Division has Business Plan Waste Producer and/or Underground Tank information. Date of Government Version: 01/26/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/25/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/04/2010 Number of Days to Update: 7 Source: Ventura County Environmental Health Division Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/23/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/07/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly Inventory of Illegal Abandoned and Inactive Sites Ventura County Inventory of Closed, Illegal Abandoned, and Inactive Sites. Date of Government Version: 08/01/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/05/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 10/13/2009 Number of Days to Update: 8 Source: Environmental Health Division Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/16/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually Listing of Underground Tank Cleanup Sites Ventura County Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Sites (LUST). Date of Government Version: 05/29/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/24/2008 Date Made Active in Reports: 07/31/2008 Number of Days to Update: 37 Source: Environmental Health Division Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/23/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/07/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly Underground Tank Closed Sites List Ventura County Operating Underground Storage Tank Sites (UST)/Underground Tank Closed Sites List. Date of Government Version: 03/05/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/24/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 04/14/2010 Number of Days to Update: 21 Source: Environmental Health Division Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/24/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/05/2010 Data Release Frequency: Quarterly YOLO COUNTY: TC2760975.2s Page GR-32 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- Underground Storage Tank Comprehensive Facility Report Underground storage tank sites located in Yolo county. Date of Government Version: 12/28/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/31/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 01/18/2010 Number of Days to Update: 18 Source: Yolo County Department of Health Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/29/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/12/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually OTHER DATABASE(S) Depending on the geographic area covered by this report, the data provided in these specialty databases may or may not be complete. For example, the existence of wetlands information data in a specific report does not mean that all wetlands in the area covered by the report are included. Moreover, the absence of any reported wetlands information does not necessarily mean that wetlands do not exist in the area covered by the report. CT MANIFEST: Hazardous Waste Manifest Data Facility and manifest data. Manifest is a document that lists and tracks hazardous waste from the generator through transporters to a tsd facility. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2007 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/26/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 09/11/2009 Number of Days to Update: 16 Source: Department of Environmental Protection Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/02/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/07/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually NJ MANIFEST: Manifest Information Hazardous waste manifest information. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/20/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/05/2010 Number of Days to Update: 16 Source: Department of Environmental Protection Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: 04/23/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/02/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually NY MANIFEST: Facility and Manifest Data Manifest is a document that lists and tracks hazardous waste from the generator through transporters to a TSD facility. Date of Government Version: 01/04/2010 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/11/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 03/17/2010 Number of Days to Update: 34 Source: Department of Environmental Conservation Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 02/11/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/24/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually PA MANIFEST: Manifest Information Hazardous waste manifest information. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/01/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 12/14/2009 Number of Days to Update: 13 Source: Department of Environmental Protection Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: 02/23/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/07/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually RI MANIFEST: Manifest information Hazardous waste manifest information Date of Government Version: 11/03/2009 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/12/2010 Date Made Active in Reports: 02/22/2010 Number of Days to Update: 10 Source: Department of Environmental Management Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Last EDR Contact: 03/01/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/14/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually TC2760975.2s Page GR-33 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- WI MANIFEST: Manifest Information Hazardous waste manifest information. Date of Government Version: 12/31/2008 Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/17/2009 Date Made Active in Reports: 08/10/2009 Number of Days to Update: 24 Source: Department of Natural Resources Telephone: N/A Last EDR Contact: 03/22/2010 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/05/2010 Data Release Frequency: Annually Oil/Gas Pipelines: This data was obtained by EDR from the USGS in 1994. It is referred to by USGS as GeoData Digital Line Graphs from 1:100,000-Scale Maps. It was extracted from the transportation category including some oil, but primarily gas pipelines. Electric Power Transmission Line Data Source: PennWell Corporation Telephone: (800) 823-6277 This map includes information copyrighted by PennWell Corporation. This information is provided on a best effort basis and PennWell Corporation does not guarantee its accuracy nor warrant its fitness for any particular purpose. Such information has been reprinted with the permission of PennWell. Sensitive Receptors: There are individuals deemed sensitive receptors due to their fragile immune systems and special sensitivity to environmental discharges. These sensitive receptors typically include the elderly, the sick, and children. While the location of all sensitive receptors cannot be determined, EDR indicates those buildings and facilities - schools, daycares, hospitals, medical centers, and nursing homes - where individuals who are sensitive receptors are likely to be located. AHA Hospitals: Source: American Hospital Association, Inc. Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] The database includes a listing of hospitals based on the American Hospital Association’s annual survey of hospitals. Medical Centers: Provider of Services Listing Source: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] A listing of hospitals with Medicare provider number, produced by Centers of Medicare & Medicaid Services, a federal agency within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Nursing Homes Source: National Institutes of Health Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Information on Medicare and Medicaid certified nursing homes in the United States. Public Schools Source: National Center for Education Statistics Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] The National Center for Education Statistics’ primary database on elementary and secondary public education in the United States. It is a comprehensive, annual, national statistical database of all public elementary and secondary schools and school districts, which contains data that are comparable across all states. Private Schools Source: National Center for Education Statistics Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] The National Center for Education Statistics’ primary database on private school locations in the United States. Daycare Centers: Licensed Facilities Source: Department of Social Services Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Flood Zone Data: This data, available in select counties across the country, was obtained by EDR in 2003 & 2009 from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Data depicts 100-year and 500-year flood zones as defined by FEMA. NWI: National Wetlands Inventory. This data, available in select counties across the country, was obtained by EDR in 2002 and 2005 from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. TC2760975.2s Page GR-34 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- STREET AND ADDRESS INFORMATION © 2010 Tele Atlas North America, Inc. All rights reserved. This material is proprietary and the subject of copyright protection and other intellectual property rights owned by or licensed to Tele Atlas North America, Inc. The use of this material is subject to the terms of a license agreement. You will be held liable for any unauthorized copying or disclosure of this material. TC2760975.2s Page GR-35 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.2s Page A-1 geologic strata. of the soil, and nearby wells. Groundwater flow velocity is generally impacted by the nature of the Groundwater flow direction may be impacted by surface topography, hydrology, hydrogeology, characteristics 2. Groundwater flow velocity. 1. Groundwater flow direction, and Assessment of the impact of contaminant migration generally has two principle investigative components: forming an opinion about the impact of potential contaminant migration. EDR’s GeoCheck Physical Setting Source Addendum is provided to assist the environmental professional in 1981 Most Recent Revision: 33117-G8 ANAHEIM, CA Target Property Map: USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP 150 ft. above sea level Elevation: 3742015.8 UTM Y (Meters): 415224.8 UTM X (Meters): Zone 11 Universal Tranverse Mercator: 117.916 - 117˚ 54’ 57.6’’ Longitude (West): 33.81670 - 33˚ 49’ 0.1’’ Latitude (North): TARGET PROPERTY COORDINATES ANAHEIM, CA 92805 HARBOR/MANCHESTER ARSP NORTH TARGET PROPERTY ADDRESS GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE ADDENDUM ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.2s Page A-2 should be field verified. on a relative (not an absolute) basis. Relative elevation information between sites of close proximity Source: Topography has been determined from the USGS 7.5’ Digital Elevation Model and should be evaluated SURROUNDING TOPOGRAPHY: ELEVATION PROFILES Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft) TP TP 0 1/2 1 Miles ✩Target Property Elevation: 150 ft. North South West East 131 132 134 136 137 138 142 142 156 150 148 148 147 148 147 149 150 151 153 126 120 129 131 134 136 139 141 147 150 150 147 149 151 152 157 157 158 159 General SW General Topographic Gradient: TARGET PROPERTY TOPOGRAPHY should contamination exist on the target property, what downgradient sites might be impacted. assist the environmental professional in forming an opinion about the impact of nearby contaminated properties or, Surface topography may be indicative of the direction of surficial groundwater flow. This information can be used to TOPOGRAPHIC INFORMATION collected on nearby properties, and regional groundwater flow information (from deep aquifers). sources of information, such as surface topographic information, hydrologic information, hydrogeologic data using site-specific well data. If such data is not reasonably ascertainable, it may be necessary to rely on other Groundwater flow direction for a particular site is best determined by a qualified environmental professional GROUNDWATER FLOW DIRECTION INFORMATION GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.2s Page A-3 Not Reported 1/2 - 1 Mile South 22 Not Reported 1/2 - 1 Mile NNE 20 Not Reported 1/2 - 1 Mile East 19 Not Reported 1/2 - 1 Mile North 15 Not Reported 1/4 - 1/2 Mile ENE 10 Not Reported 1/4 - 1/2 Mile WNW 9 Not Reported 1/4 - 1/2 Mile WNW 5 Not Reported 0 - 1/8 Mile SSE A2 Not Reported 0 - 1/8 Mile SSE A1 GENERAL DIRECTION LOCATION GROUNDWATER FLOW FROM TP MAP ID hydrogeologically, and the depth to water table. authorities at select sites and has extracted the date of the report, groundwater flow direction as determined flow at specific points. EDR has reviewed reports submitted by environmental professionals to regulatory EDR has developed the AQUIFLOW Information System to provide data on the general direction of groundwater AQUIFLOW® Search Radius: 1.000 Mile. Not found Status: 1.25 miles Search Radius: Site-Specific Hydrogeological Data*: * ©1996 Site−specific hydrogeological data gathered by CERCLIS Alerts, Inc., Bainbridge Island, WA. All rights reserved. All of the information and opinions presented are those of the cited EPA report(s), which were completed under a Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Information System (CERCLIS) investigation. contamination exist on the target property, what downgradient sites might be impacted. environmental professional in forming an opinion about the impact of nearby contaminated properties or, should of groundwater flow direction in the immediate area. Such hydrogeologic information can be used to assist the Hydrogeologic information obtained by installation of wells on a specific site can often be an indicator HYDROGEOLOGIC INFORMATION YES - refer to the Overview Map and Detail Map ANAHEIM NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY NWI Electronic Data Coverage NWI Quad at Target Property Not Reported Additional Panels in search area: 06059C - FEMA DFIRM Flood data Flood Plain Panel at Target Property: YES - refer to the Overview Map and Detail Map ORANGE, CA FEMA FLOOD ZONE FEMA Flood Electronic Data Target Property County and bodies of water). Refer to the Physical Setting Source Map following this summary for hydrologic information (major waterways contamination exist on the target property, what downgradient sites might be impacted. the environmental professional in forming an opinion about the impact of nearby contaminated properties or, should Surface water can act as a hydrologic barrier to groundwater flow. Such hydrologic information can be used to assist HYDROLOGIC INFORMATION GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.2s Page A-4 For additional site information, refer to Physical Setting Source Map Findings. SW 1/2 - 1 Mile SSW 27 GENERAL DIRECTION LOCATION GROUNDWATER FLOW FROM TP MAP ID GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.2s Page A-5 Map, USGS Digital Data Series DDS - 11 (1994). of the Conterminous U.S. at 1:2,500,000 Scale - a digital representation of the 1974 P.B. King and H.M. Beikman Geologic Age and Rock Stratigraphic Unit Source: P.G. Schruben, R.E. Arndt and W.J. Bawiec, Geology ROCK STRATIGRAPHIC UNIT GEOLOGIC AGE IDENTIFICATION Stratifed Sequence Category: Cenozoic Era: Quaternary System: Quaternary Series: Q Code: (decoded above as Era, System & Series) at which contaminant migration may be occurring. Geologic information can be used by the environmental professional in forming an opinion about the relative speed GEOLOGIC INFORMATION IN GENERAL AREA OF TARGET PROPERTY move more quickly through sandy-gravelly types of soils than silty-clayey types of soils. characteristics data collected on nearby properties and regional soil information. In general, contaminant plumes to rely on other sources of information, including geologic age identification, rock stratigraphic unit and soil using site specific geologic and soil strata data. If such data are not reasonably ascertainable, it may be necessary Groundwater flow velocity information for a particular site is best determined by a qualified environmental professional GROUNDWATER FLOW VELOCITY INFORMATION GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY ® ---PAGE BREAK--- EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. 2 1 2 3 0 1/16 1/8 1/4 Miles ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.2s Page A-7 Somewhat excessively drained Soil Drainage Class: excessively drained sands and gravels. Class A - High infiltration rates. Soils are deep, well drained to Hydrologic Group: loamy sand Soil Surface Texture: METZ Soil Component Name: Soil Map ID: 2 Min: 7.9 Max: 8.4 Min: 14 Max: 42 Not reported Not reported loam very fine sandy coarse sand to gravelly loamy stratified 61 inches 7 inches 2 Min: 7.9 Max: 8.4 Min: 14 Max: 42 Not reported Not reported fine sandy loam 7 inches 0 inches 1 Soil Layer Information Boundary Classification Saturated hydraulic conductivity micro m/sec Layer Upper Lower Soil Texture Class AASHTO Group Unified Soil Soil Reaction (pH) > 0 inches Depth to Watertable Min: > 0 inches Depth to Bedrock Min: High Corrosion Potential - Uncoated Steel: Hydric Status: Not hydric Well drained Soil Drainage Class: textures. moderately well and well drained soils with moderately coarse Class B - Moderate infiltration rates. Deep and moderately deep, Hydrologic Group: fine sandy loam Soil Surface Texture: SAN EMIGDIO Soil Component Name: Soil Map ID: 1 in a landscape. The following information is based on Soil Conservation Service SSURGO data. for privately owned lands in the United States. A soil map in a soil survey is a representation of soil patterns Survey (NCSS) and is responsible for collecting, storing, maintaining and distributing soil survey information The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Soil Conservation Service (SCS) leads the National Cooperative Soil DOMINANT SOIL COMPOSITION IN GENERAL AREA OF TARGET PROPERTY GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.2s Page A-8 > 0 inches Depth to Watertable Min: > 0 inches Depth to Bedrock Min: High Corrosion Potential - Uncoated Steel: Hydric Status: Not hydric Well drained Soil Drainage Class: textures. moderately well and well drained soils with moderately coarse Class B - Moderate infiltration rates. Deep and moderately deep, Hydrologic Group: fine sandy loam Soil Surface Texture: SAN EMIGDIO Soil Component Name: Soil Map ID: 3 Min: 6.6 Max: 8.4 Min: 4 Max: 14 Silty Sand. Sands with fines, SOILS, Sands, COARSE-GRAINED and Sand. Clayey Gravel 200), Silty, or passing No. pct. or less materials (35 Granular loam to fine sandy stratified sand 62 inches 16 inches 2 Min: 6.6 Max: 8.4 Min: 4 Max: 14 Silty Sand. Sands with fines, SOILS, Sands, COARSE-GRAINED and Sand. Clayey Gravel 200), Silty, or passing No. pct. or less materials (35 Granular loamy sand 16 inches 0 inches 1 Soil Layer Information Boundary Classification Saturated hydraulic conductivity micro m/sec Layer Upper Lower Soil Texture Class AASHTO Group Unified Soil Soil Reaction (pH) > 0 inches Depth to Watertable Min: > 0 inches Depth to Bedrock Min: High Corrosion Potential - Uncoated Steel: Hydric Status: Not hydric GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.2s Page A-9 FEDERAL USGS WELL INFORMATION LOCATION FROM TP WELL ID MAP ID 1.000 State Database Nearest PWS within 1 mile Federal FRDS PWS 1.000 Federal USGS WELL SEARCH DISTANCE INFORMATION SEARCH DISTANCE (miles) DATABASE opinion about the impact of contaminant migration on nearby drinking water wells. professional in assessing sources that may impact ground water flow direction, and in forming an EDR Local/Regional Water Agency records provide water well information to assist the environmental LOCAL / REGIONAL WATER AGENCY RECORDS Min: 7.9 Max: 8.4 Min: 14 Max: 42 50%), Lean Clay limit less than Clays (liquid SOILS, Silts and FINE-GRAINED Soils. 200), Silty passing No. than 35 pct. Materials (more Silt-Clay loam very fine sandy coarse sand to gravelly loamy stratified 61 inches 44 inches 4 Min: 7.9 Max: 8.4 Min: 14 Max: 42 50%), Lean Clay limit less than Clays (liquid SOILS, Silts and FINE-GRAINED Soils. 200), Silty passing No. than 35 pct. Materials (more Silt-Clay silty clay loam 44 inches 40 inches 3 Min: 7.9 Max: 8.4 Min: 14 Max: 42 50%), Lean Clay limit less than Clays (liquid SOILS, Silts and FINE-GRAINED Soils. 200), Silty passing No. than 35 pct. Materials (more Silt-Clay loam very fine sandy coarse sand to gravelly loamy stratified 40 inches 7 inches 2 Min: 7.9 Max: 8.4 Min: 14 Max: 42 50%), Lean Clay limit less than Clays (liquid SOILS, Silts and FINE-GRAINED Soils. 200), Silty passing No. than 35 pct. Materials (more Silt-Clay fine sandy loam 7 inches 0 inches 1 Soil Layer Information Boundary Classification Saturated hydraulic conductivity micro m/sec Layer Upper Lower Soil Texture Class AASHTO Group Unified Soil Soil Reaction (pH) GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.2s Page A-10 1 - 2 Miles ESE CAOG60000019050 8 1 - 2 Miles East CAOG60000019998 7 1 - 2 Miles ENE CAOG60000020124 6 1 - 2 Miles WSW CAOG60000019261 5 1/2 - 1 Mile East CAOG60000019840 4 1/2 - 1 Mile WNW CAOG60000020107 3 1/4 - 1/2 Mile ESE CAOG60000019428 2 1/4 - 1/2 Mile ESE CAOG60000019554 1 STATE OIL/GAS WELL INFORMATION LOCATION FROM TP WELL ID MAP ID OTHER STATE DATABASE INFORMATION 1/2 - 1 Mile South CADW40000005742 E24 1/2 - 1 Mile East 5124 21 1/2 - 1 Mile SW CADW40000005757 D18 1/2 - 1 Mile NE 5234 16 1/2 - 1 Mile SE 5143 13 1/4 - 1/2 Mile NNE CADW40000005808 C12 1/4 - 1/2 Mile SE CADW40000005774 11 1/4 - 1/2 Mile SSW CADW40000005772 8 1/4 - 1/2 Mile SE 5142 7 1/4 - 1/2 Mile WSW CADW40000005784 6 1/4 - 1/2 Mile NW CADW40000005799 B4 STATE DATABASE WELL INFORMATION LOCATION FROM TP WELL ID MAP ID Note: PWS System location is not always the same as well location. 1/2 - 1 Mile SW CA3000546 25 FEDERAL FRDS PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM INFORMATION LOCATION FROM TP WELL ID MAP ID 1/2 - 1 Mile North USGS3124725 26 1/2 - 1 Mile South USGS3124674 E23 1/2 - 1 Mile SSW USGS3124677 D17 1/2 - 1 Mile NE USGS3124714 C14 1/4 - 1/2 Mile NW USGS3124708 B3 FEDERAL USGS WELL INFORMATION LOCATION FROM TP WELL ID MAP ID GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY ® ---PAGE BREAK--- EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. EDR Inc. CA ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.2s Page A-11 1 Ground water data count: 1976-12-28 Ground water data end date: Ground water data begin date: 1976-12-28 0 Water quality data count: 0000-00-00 Water quality data end date: 0000-00-00 Water quality data begin date: 0 Peak flow data count: 0000-00-00 Peak flow data end date: 0000-00-00 Peak flow data begin date: 0 Daily flow data count: 0000-00-00 Daily flow data end date: 0000-00-00 Daily flow data begin date: 0 Real time data flag: 479300200 Project number: Not Reported Source of depth data: 180 Hole depth: Not Reported Well depth: Not Reported Aquifer: Not Reported Aquifer Type: Single well, other than collector or Ranney type Type of ground water site: Y Local standard time flag: PST Mean greenwich time offset: Not Reported Date inventoried: Not Reported Date construction: Ground-water other than Spring Site type: Not Reported Topographic: Seal Beach. California. Area = 90 sq.mi. Hydrologic: National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 Altitude datum: 2.5 Altitude accuracy: Interpolated from topographic map Altitude method: 140.00 Altitude: 24000 Map scale: ANAHEIM Location map: SESWS15T04SR10WS Land net: US Country: 059 County: 06 State: 06 District: NAD83 Dec latlong datum: NAD27 Latlong datum: S Coor accr: M Coor meth: -117.91950348 Dec lon: 33.81918231 Dec lat: 1175507 Longitude: USGS3124708 EDR Site id: 334909 Latitude: 004S010W15P001S Site name: 334909117550701 Site no: USGS Agency cd: B3 NW 1/4 - 1/2 Mile Lower USGS3124708 FED USGS Date: 07/10/1998 Average Water Depth: Not Reported Deep Water Depth: 140 Shallow Water Depth: 130 Groundwater Flow: Not Reported Site ID: Not Reported A2 SSE 0 - 1/8 Mile Higher 38632 AQUIFLOW Date: 07/10/1998 Average Water Depth: Not Reported Deep Water Depth: 140 Shallow Water Depth: 130 Groundwater Flow: Not Reported Site ID: 083002812T A1 SSE 0 - 1/8 Mile Higher 38631 AQUIFLOW Map ID Direction Distance Elevation EDR ID Number Database GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.2s Page A-12 O STREET WELL Source Name: 100 Feet (one Second) Precision: 334844.0 1175438.0 Source Lat/Long: Active Untreated Well Status: Well/Groundwater Water Type: WELL/AMBNT/MUN/INTAKE/SUPPLY Station Type: 08 District Number: Orange County: [PHONE REDACTED] FRDS Number: TEE User ID: 04S/10W-22G01 S Prime Station Code: Water System Information: 7 SE 1/4 - 1/2 Mile Lower 5142 CA WELLS CADW40000005784 Site id: 800100 Gwcode: 30 Countyco: Z Welluseco: 3 Districtco: 04S10W22E001S Stwellno: 33.8145 Latiude: -117.9213 Longitude: 6 WSW 1/4 - 1/2 Mile Lower CADW40000005784 CA WELLS Date: 07/25/1995 Average Water Depth: 100 Deep Water Depth: Not Reported Shallow Water Depth: Not Reported Groundwater Flow: Not Reported Site ID: 083001147T 5 WNW 1/4 - 1/2 Mile Lower 34027 AQUIFLOW CADW40000005799 Site id: 800100 Gwcode: 30 Countyco: Z Welluseco: 3 Districtco: 04S10W15P001S Stwellno: 33.8192 Latiude: -117.9195 Longitude: B4 NW 1/4 - 1/2 Mile Lower CADW40000005799 CA WELLS 1976-12-28 140.10 Date Feet below Surface Feet to Sealevel Ground-water levels, Number of Measurements: 1 GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.2s Page A-13 BORON Chemical: 160 UG/L Findings: 12/04/2002 Sample Collected: POTASSIUM Chemical: 4.1 MG/L Findings: 12/04/2002 Sample Collected: SODIUM Chemical: 68.5 MG/L Findings: 12/04/2002 Sample Collected: MAGNESIUM Chemical: 20.5 MG/L Findings: 12/04/2002 Sample Collected: CALCIUM Chemical: 103 MG/L Findings: 12/04/2002 Sample Collected: HARDNESS (TOTAL) AS CACO3 Chemical: 342 MG/L Findings: 12/04/2002 Sample Collected: URANIUM COUNTING ERROR Chemical: 1.65 PCI/L Findings: 08/14/2002 Sample Collected: URANIUM (PCI/L) Chemical: 10.7 PCI/L Findings: 08/14/2002 Sample Collected: RADIUM 228 COUNTING ERROR Chemical: .4 PCI/L Findings: 08/14/2002 Sample Collected: GROSS ALPHA COUNTING ERROR Chemical: 1.94 PCI/L Findings: 08/14/2002 Sample Collected: GROSS ALPHA Chemical: 11.2 PCI/L Findings: 08/14/2002 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 4300 UG/L Findings: 08/14/2002 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 19.06 MG/L Findings: 08/14/2002 Sample Collected: URANIUM COUNTING ERROR Chemical: 1.65 PCI/L Findings: 06/05/2002 Sample Collected: URANIUM (PCI/L) Chemical: 10.7 PCI/L Findings: 06/05/2002 Sample Collected: RADIUM 228 COUNTING ERROR Chemical: .4 PCI/L Findings: 06/05/2002 Sample Collected: GROSS ALPHA COUNTING ERROR Chemical: 1.94 PCI/L Findings: 06/05/2002 Sample Collected: GROSS ALPHA Chemical: 11.2 PCI/L Findings: 06/05/2002 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 4600 UG/L Findings: 06/05/2002 Sample Collected: Not Reported Area Served: 145 Connections: 200 Pop Served: Anaheim, CA 92805 200 W. Midway Dr. Organization That Operates System: Midway Trailer City System Name: 3000962 System Number: GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.2s Page A-14 NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 22.49 MG/L Findings: 01/08/2003 Sample Collected: BORON Chemical: 170 UG/L Findings: 01/08/2003 Sample Collected: ARSENIC Chemical: 3.5 UG/L Findings: 01/08/2003 Sample Collected: FLUORIDE (NATURAL-SOURCE) Chemical: .36 MG/L Findings: 01/08/2003 Sample Collected: CHLORIDE Chemical: 92.3 MG/L Findings: 01/08/2003 Sample Collected: POTASSIUM Chemical: 3.9 MG/L Findings: 01/08/2003 Sample Collected: SODIUM Chemical: 67.5 MG/L Findings: 01/08/2003 Sample Collected: MAGNESIUM Chemical: 19.3 MG/L Findings: 01/08/2003 Sample Collected: CALCIUM Chemical: 107 MG/L Findings: 01/08/2003 Sample Collected: HARDNESS (TOTAL) AS CACO3 Chemical: 347 MG/L Findings: 01/08/2003 Sample Collected: BICARBONATE ALKALINITY Chemical: 248 MG/L Findings: 01/08/2003 Sample Collected: ALKALINITY (TOTAL) AS CACO3 Chemical: 204 MG/L Findings: 01/08/2003 Sample Collected: PH, LABORATORY Chemical: 7.7 Findings: 01/08/2003 Sample Collected: SPECIFIC CONDUCTANCE Chemical: 965 US Findings: 01/08/2003 Sample Collected: URANIUM COUNTING ERROR Chemical: 1.65 PCI/L Findings: 12/04/2002 Sample Collected: URANIUM (PCI/L) Chemical: 10.7 PCI/L Findings: 12/04/2002 Sample Collected: RADIUM 228 COUNTING ERROR Chemical: .4 PCI/L Findings: 12/04/2002 Sample Collected: GROSS ALPHA COUNTING ERROR Chemical: 1.94 PCI/L Findings: 12/04/2002 Sample Collected: GROSS ALPHA Chemical: 11.2 PCI/L Findings: 12/04/2002 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 4800 UG/L Findings: 12/04/2002 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 21.3 MG/L Findings: 12/04/2002 Sample Collected: VANADIUM Chemical: 3.3 UG/L Findings: 12/04/2002 Sample Collected: GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.2s Page A-15 MAGNESIUM Chemical: 18 MG/L Findings: 03/07/2000 Sample Collected: CALCIUM Chemical: 98 MG/L Findings: 03/07/2000 Sample Collected: HARDNESS (TOTAL) AS CACO3 Chemical: 316 MG/L Findings: 03/07/2000 Sample Collected: BICARBONATE ALKALINITY Chemical: 244 MG/L Findings: 03/07/2000 Sample Collected: ALKALINITY (TOTAL) AS CACO3 Chemical: 200 MG/L Findings: 03/07/2000 Sample Collected: PH, LABORATORY Chemical: 8 Findings: 03/07/2000 Sample Collected: SPECIFIC CONDUCTANCE Chemical: 955 US Findings: 03/07/2000 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 5000 UG/L Findings: 07/07/2003 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 22.03 MG/L Findings: 07/07/2003 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 4900 UG/L Findings: 05/20/2003 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 21.49 MG/L Findings: 05/20/2003 Sample Collected: VANADIUM Chemical: 3.5 UG/L Findings: 05/20/2003 Sample Collected: BORON Chemical: 160 UG/L Findings: 05/20/2003 Sample Collected: POTASSIUM Chemical: 4.4 MG/L Findings: 05/20/2003 Sample Collected: SODIUM Chemical: 68 MG/L Findings: 05/20/2003 Sample Collected: MAGNESIUM Chemical: 19.2 MG/L Findings: 05/20/2003 Sample Collected: CALCIUM Chemical: 94 MG/L Findings: 05/20/2003 Sample Collected: HARDNESS (TOTAL) AS CACO3 Chemical: 314 MG/L Findings: 05/20/2003 Sample Collected: CHROMIUM (TOTAL CR-CRVI SCREEN) Chemical: 1.1 UG/L Findings: 01/08/2003 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 5100 UG/L Findings: 01/08/2003 Sample Collected: BROMIDE Chemical: .21 MG/L Findings: 01/08/2003 Sample Collected: TURBIDITY, LABORATORY Chemical: .2 NTU Findings: 01/08/2003 Sample Collected: GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.2s Page A-16 BORON Chemical: 170 UG/L Findings: 06/12/2001 Sample Collected: POTASSIUM Chemical: 4.8 MG/L Findings: 06/12/2001 Sample Collected: SODIUM Chemical: 74.6 MG/L Findings: 06/12/2001 Sample Collected: MAGNESIUM Chemical: 18.3 MG/L Findings: 06/12/2001 Sample Collected: CALCIUM Chemical: 101 MG/L Findings: 06/12/2001 Sample Collected: HARDNESS (TOTAL) AS CACO3 Chemical: 327 MG/L Findings: 06/12/2001 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 4800 UG/L Findings: 03/06/2001 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 21.26 MG/L Findings: 03/06/2001 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 5200 UG/L Findings: 12/04/2000 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 22.85 MG/L Findings: 12/04/2000 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 4700 UG/L Findings: 08/02/2000 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 20.83 MG/L Findings: 08/02/2000 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 4500 UG/L Findings: 05/17/2000 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 19.83 MG/L Findings: 05/17/2000 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 4600 UG/L Findings: 03/07/2000 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 20 MG/L Findings: 03/07/2000 Sample Collected: TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS Chemical: 628 MG/L Findings: 03/07/2000 Sample Collected: BORON Chemical: 170 UG/L Findings: 03/07/2000 Sample Collected: ARSENIC Chemical: 3 UG/L Findings: 03/07/2000 Sample Collected: CHLORIDE Chemical: 90 MG/L Findings: 03/07/2000 Sample Collected: POTASSIUM Chemical: 4 MG/L Findings: 03/07/2000 Sample Collected: SODIUM Chemical: 67 MG/L Findings: 03/07/2000 Sample Collected: GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.2s Page A-17 CALCIUM Chemical: 105 MG/L Findings: 06/05/2002 Sample Collected: HARDNESS (TOTAL) AS CACO3 Chemical: 345 MG/L Findings: 06/05/2002 Sample Collected: URANIUM COUNTING ERROR Chemical: 1.65 PCI/L Findings: 02/11/2002 Sample Collected: URANIUM (PCI/L) Chemical: 10.7 PCI/L Findings: 02/11/2002 Sample Collected: RADIUM 228 COUNTING ERROR Chemical: .4 PCI/L Findings: 02/11/2002 Sample Collected: GROSS ALPHA COUNTING ERROR Chemical: 1.94 PCI/L Findings: 02/11/2002 Sample Collected: GROSS ALPHA Chemical: 11.2 PCI/L Findings: 02/11/2002 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 4800 UG/L Findings: 02/11/2002 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 21.29 MG/L Findings: 02/11/2002 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 4700 UG/L Findings: 11/26/2001 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 20.94 MG/L Findings: 11/26/2001 Sample Collected: VANADIUM Chemical: 3.6 UG/L Findings: 11/26/2001 Sample Collected: BORON Chemical: 150 UG/L Findings: 11/26/2001 Sample Collected: POTASSIUM Chemical: 4.9 MG/L Findings: 11/26/2001 Sample Collected: SODIUM Chemical: 73.2 MG/L Findings: 11/26/2001 Sample Collected: MAGNESIUM Chemical: 20.7 MG/L Findings: 11/26/2001 Sample Collected: CALCIUM Chemical: 107 MG/L Findings: 11/26/2001 Sample Collected: HARDNESS (TOTAL) AS CACO3 Chemical: 352 MG/L Findings: 11/26/2001 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 4800 UG/L Findings: 08/29/2001 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 21 MG/L Findings: 08/29/2001 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 4500 UG/L Findings: 06/12/2001 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 21.35 MG/L Findings: 06/12/2001 Sample Collected: GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.2s Page A-18 CADW40000005774 Site id: 800100 Gwcode: 30 Countyco: X Welluseco: 3 Districtco: 04S10W22G001S Stwellno: 33.8111 Latiude: -117.9098 Longitude: 11 SE 1/4 - 1/2 Mile Lower CADW40000005774 CA WELLS Date: 12/11/1995 Average Water Depth: 70 Deep Water Depth: Not Reported Shallow Water Depth: Not Reported Groundwater Flow: Not Reported Site ID: 083002738T 10 ENE 1/4 - 1/2 Mile Higher 33996 AQUIFLOW Date: 06/30/1995 Average Water Depth: Not Reported Deep Water Depth: 58 Shallow Water Depth: 56 Groundwater Flow: Not Reported Site ID: 083002078T 9 WNW 1/4 - 1/2 Mile Lower 38883 AQUIFLOW CADW40000005772 Site id: 800100 Gwcode: 30 Countyco: Z Welluseco: 3 Districtco: 04S10W22L002S Stwellno: 33.8106 Latiude: -117.9168 Longitude: 8 SSW 1/4 - 1/2 Mile Lower CADW40000005772 CA WELLS NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 20.58 MG/L Findings: 06/05/2002 Sample Collected: VANADIUM Chemical: 4 UG/L Findings: 06/05/2002 Sample Collected: BORON Chemical: 160 UG/L Findings: 06/05/2002 Sample Collected: POTASSIUM Chemical: 4.4 MG/L Findings: 06/05/2002 Sample Collected: SODIUM Chemical: 73.5 MG/L Findings: 06/05/2002 Sample Collected: MAGNESIUM Chemical: 20.2 MG/L Findings: 06/05/2002 Sample Collected: GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.2s Page A-19 PST Mean greenwich time offset: Not Reported Date inventoried: Not Reported Date construction: Ground-water other than Spring Site type: Not Reported Topographic: Seal Beach. California. Area = 90 sq.mi. Hydrologic: National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 Altitude datum: 2.5 Altitude accuracy: Interpolated from topographic map Altitude method: 150.00 Altitude: 24000 Map scale: ANAHEIM Location map: NESES15T04SR10WS Land net: US Country: 059 County: 06 State: 06 District: NAD83 Dec latlong datum: NAD27 Latlong datum: S Coor accr: M Coor meth: -117.91061439 Dec lon: 33.8227934 Dec lat: 1175435 Longitude: USGS3124714 EDR Site id: 334922 Latitude: 004S010W15J004S Site name: 334922117543501 Site no: USGS Agency cd: C14 NE 1/2 - 1 Mile Higher USGS3124714 FED USGS Not Reported Area Served: 145 Connections: 200 Pop Served: Anaheim, CA 92805 200 W. Midway Dr. Organization That Operates System: Midway Trailer City System Name: 3000962 System Number: C STREET WELL Source Name: 1,000 Feet (10 Seconds) Precision: 334844.4 1175428.8 Source Lat/Long: Active Untreated Well Status: Well/Groundwater Water Type: WELL/AMBNT/MUN/INTAKE Station Type: 08 District Number: Orange County: [PHONE REDACTED] FRDS Number: TEE User ID: 04S/10W-22H02 S Prime Station Code: Water System Information: 13 SE 1/2 - 1 Mile Lower 5143 CA WELLS CADW40000005808 Site id: 800100 Gwcode: 30 Countyco: Z Welluseco: 3 Districtco: 04S10W15J004S Stwellno: 33.8228 Latiude: -117.9106 Longitude: C12 NNE 1/4 - 1/2 Mile Higher CADW40000005808 CA WELLS Map ID Direction Distance Elevation EDR ID Number Database GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.2s Page A-20 D17 SSW 1/2 - 1 Mile Lower USGS3124677 FED USGS Not Reported Area Served: Unknown, Small System Connections: Unknown, Small System Pop Served: Not Reported Organization That Operates System: SAVANNA MUTUAL WATER CORP System Name: 3000539 System Number: WELL 01 - DESTROYED Source Name: 1,000 Feet (10 Seconds) Precision: 334925.0 1175425.0 Source Lat/Long: Destroyed Well Status: Well/Groundwater Water Type: WELL/AMBNT/MUN/INTAKE Station Type: 08 District Number: Orange County: [PHONE REDACTED] FRDS Number: TEE User ID: 04S/11W-15R02 S Prime Station Code: Water System Information: 16 NE 1/2 - 1 Mile Higher 5234 CA WELLS Date: 06/1995 Average Water Depth: Not Reported Deep Water Depth: 50 Shallow Water Depth: 40 Groundwater Flow: Not Reported Site ID: 083002528T 15 North 1/2 - 1 Mile Lower 68300 AQUIFLOW 1977-10-28 157.80 Date Feet below Surface Feet to Sealevel Ground-water levels, Number of Measurements: 1 1 Ground water data count: 1977-10-28 Ground water data end date: Ground water data begin date: 1977-10-28 0 Water quality data count: 0000-00-00 Water quality data end date: 0000-00-00 Water quality data begin date: 0 Peak flow data count: 0000-00-00 Peak flow data end date: 0000-00-00 Peak flow data begin date: 0 Daily flow data count: 0000-00-00 Daily flow data end date: 0000-00-00 Daily flow data begin date: 0 Real time data flag: 479300200 Project number: Not Reported Source of depth data: Not Reported Hole depth: Not Reported Well depth: Not Reported Aquifer: Not Reported Aquifer Type: Single well, other than collector or Ranney type Type of ground water site: Y Local standard time flag: GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.2s Page A-21 1970-08-06 80.10 1970-06-30 79.30 1970-10-05 82.00 1970-08-31 80.40 1970-12-10 82.50 1970-11-02 82.10 1971-04-08 82.30 1971-03-02 82.70 1971-06-09 83.30 1971-04-30 82.70 1971-08-30 87.50 1971-07-09 84.90 1972-01-11 90.50 1971-11-02 89.70 1972-07-06 95.50 1972-02-29 91.00 1973-01-05 101.00 1972-11-02 99.30 1973-05-10 99.00 1973-03-05 101.50 1973-09-12 104.40 1973-07-09 100.50 1974-05-04 108.70 1974-01-24 102.60 1974-08-30 107.30 1974-07-03 106.50 1975-04-30 104.80 1975-03-19 105.40 1976-01-07 108.50 1975-09-02 104.70 1976-12-28 112.20 1976-10-28 108.40 1978-09-26 108.59 1977-10-28 119.20 1979-02-06 103.63 1978-11-01 107.74 1979-08-06 98.23 1979-05-02 100.03 1980-02-08 95.98 1979-11-13 96.92 Note: The well was destroyed (no water level is recorded). 1980-06-11 Date Feet below Surface Feet to Sealevel Date Feet below Surface Feet to Sealevel Ground-water levels, Number of Measurements: 62 62 Ground water data count: 1980-06-11 Ground water data end date: Ground water data begin date: 1968-03-05 0 Water quality data count: 0000-00-00 Water quality data end date: 0000-00-00 Water quality data begin date: 0 Peak flow data count: 0000-00-00 Peak flow data end date: 0000-00-00 Peak flow data begin date: 0 Daily flow data count: 0000-00-00 Daily flow data end date: 0000-00-00 Daily flow data begin date: 0 Real time data flag: 479300200 Project number: Not Reported Source of depth data: Not Reported Hole depth: Not Reported Well depth: Not Reported Aquifer: Not Reported Aquifer Type: Single well, other than collector or Ranney type Type of ground water site: Y Local standard time flag: PST Mean greenwich time offset: Not Reported Date inventoried: Not Reported Date construction: Ground-water other than Spring Site type: Not Reported Topographic: Seal Beach. California. Area = 90 sq.mi. Hydrologic: National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 Altitude datum: 2.5 Altitude accuracy: Interpolated from topographic map Altitude method: 128.00 Altitude: 24000 Map scale: ANAHEIM Location map: Land net: US Country: 059 County: 06 State: 06 District: NAD83 Dec latlong datum: NAD27 Latlong datum: S Coor accr: M Coor meth: -117.92367002 Dec lon: 33.8069603 Dec lat: 1175522 Longitude: USGS3124677 EDR Site id: 334825 Latitude: 004S010W22N001S Site name: 334825117552201 Site no: USGS Agency cd: GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.2s Page A-22 WELL 025 Source Name: Undefined Precision: 334900.0 1175400.0 Source Lat/Long: Active Untreated Well Status: Well/Groundwater Water Type: WELL/AMBNT/MUN/INTAKE/SUPPLY Station Type: 08 District Number: Orange County: [PHONE REDACTED] FRDS Number: TEE User ID: 04S/10W-14M01 S Prime Station Code: Water System Information: 21 East 1/2 - 1 Mile Higher 5124 CA WELLS Date: 10/09/1990 Average Water Depth: 50 ft Deep Water Depth: Not Reported Shallow Water Depth: Not Reported Groundwater Flow: Not Reported Site ID: 083001372T 20 NNE 1/2 - 1 Mile Higher 50948 AQUIFLOW Date: 07/15/1998 Average Water Depth: Not Reported Deep Water Depth: 86.15 Shallow Water Depth: 82.36 Groundwater Flow: Not Reported Site ID: 083002312T 19 East 1/2 - 1 Mile Higher 64496 AQUIFLOW CADW40000005757 Site id: 800100 Gwcode: 30 Countyco: Z Welluseco: 3 Districtco: 04S10W22N001S Stwellno: 33.807 Latiude: -117.9237 Longitude: D18 SW 1/2 - 1 Mile Lower CADW40000005757 CA WELLS 1968-03-05 81.00 1968-06-11 83.40 1968-04-08 73.80 1968-08-08 84.40 1968-07-08 83.70 1969-01-09 85.70 1968-11-05 56.40 1969-04-29 82.30 1969-04-03 74.50 1969-06-30 79.60 1969-06-05 81.50 1969-09-02 80.30 1969-08-06 80.30 1969-11-03 80.10 1969-10-03 80.10 1970-02-03 78.00 1969-12-31 78.70 1970-04-01 77.60 1970-03-10 77.10 1970-06-01 78.40 1970-04-29 78.10 Date Feet below Surface Feet to Sealevel Date Feet below Surface Feet to Sealevel Ground-water levels, continued. GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.2s Page A-23 SODIUM Chemical: 91 MG/L Findings: 04/03/2007 Sample Collected: MAGNESIUM Chemical: 18.9 MG/L Findings: 04/03/2007 Sample Collected: CALCIUM Chemical: 91.3 MG/L Findings: 04/03/2007 Sample Collected: HARDNESS (TOTAL) AS CACO3 Chemical: 306 MG/L Findings: 04/03/2007 Sample Collected: TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC) Chemical: .59 MG/L Findings: 04/03/2007 Sample Collected: BICARBONATE ALKALINITY Chemical: 252 MG/L Findings: 04/03/2007 Sample Collected: ALKALINITY (TOTAL) AS CACO3 Chemical: 206 MG/L Findings: 04/03/2007 Sample Collected: PH, LABORATORY Chemical: 8.1 Findings: 04/03/2007 Sample Collected: SPECIFIC CONDUCTANCE Chemical: 1040 US Findings: 04/03/2007 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 4530 UG/L Findings: 01/03/2007 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 20.03 MG/L Findings: 01/03/2007 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 4410 UG/L Findings: 10/03/2006 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 19.5 MG/L Findings: 10/03/2006 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 4430 UG/L Findings: 07/11/2006 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 19.61 MG/L Findings: 07/11/2006 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 4530 UG/L Findings: 04/05/2006 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 20.05 MG/L Findings: 04/05/2006 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 4610 UG/L Findings: 01/04/2006 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 20.4 MG/L Findings: 01/04/2006 Sample Collected: ANAHEIM Area Served: 57397 Connections: 292900 Pop Served: ANAHEIM, CA 92805 P.O. BOX 3222 (#559) Organization That Operates System: City of Anaheim System Name: 3010001 System Number: GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.2s Page A-24 URANIUM (PCI/L) Chemical: 10.2 PCI/L Findings: 07/01/2008 Sample Collected: GROSS ALPHA COUNTING ERROR Chemical: 1.72 PCI/L Findings: 07/01/2008 Sample Collected: GROSS ALPHA Chemical: 8.7 PCI/L Findings: 07/01/2008 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 4610 UG/L Findings: 07/01/2008 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 20.4 MG/L Findings: 07/01/2008 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 3930 UG/L Findings: 04/02/2008 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 17.39 MG/L Findings: 04/02/2008 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 3810 UG/L Findings: 01/02/2008 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 16.9 MG/L Findings: 01/02/2008 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 4480 UG/L Findings: 10/02/2007 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 19.8 MG/L Findings: 10/02/2007 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 4170 UG/L Findings: 07/02/2007 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 18.46 MG/L Findings: 07/02/2007 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 3330 UG/L Findings: 04/03/2007 Sample Collected: BROMIDE Chemical: .22 MG/L Findings: 04/03/2007 Sample Collected: TURBIDITY, LABORATORY Chemical: .2 NTU Findings: 04/03/2007 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 14.71 MG/L Findings: 04/03/2007 Sample Collected: TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS Chemical: 638 MG/L Findings: 04/03/2007 Sample Collected: BORON Chemical: 280 UG/L Findings: 04/03/2007 Sample Collected: FLUORIDE (NATURAL-SOURCE) Chemical: .47 MG/L Findings: 04/03/2007 Sample Collected: CHLORIDE Chemical: 109 MG/L Findings: 04/03/2007 Sample Collected: POTASSIUM Chemical: 5 MG/L Findings: 04/03/2007 Sample Collected: GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.2s Page A-25 PST Mean greenwich time offset: Not Reported Date inventoried: Not Reported Date construction: Ground-water other than Spring Site type: Not Reported Topographic: Seal Beach. California. Area = 90 sq.mi. Hydrologic: National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 Altitude datum: 2.5 Altitude accuracy: Interpolated from topographic map Altitude method: 128.00 Altitude: 24000 Map scale: ANAHEIM Location map: NENWS27T04SR10WS Land net: US Country: 059 County: 06 State: 06 District: NAD83 Dec latlong datum: NAD27 Latlong datum: S Coor accr: M Coor meth: -117.91755864 Dec lon: 33.80307152 Dec lat: 1175500 Longitude: USGS3124674 EDR Site id: 334811 Latitude: 004S010W27C002S Site name: 334811117550001 Site no: USGS Agency cd: E23 South 1/2 - 1 Mile Lower USGS3124674 FED USGS Date: 02/06/1998 Average Water Depth: Not Reported Deep Water Depth: 86.6 Shallow Water Depth: 74.1 Groundwater Flow: Not Reported Site ID: 083001662T 22 South 1/2 - 1 Mile Lower 54915 AQUIFLOW NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 3170 UG/L Findings: 04/01/2009 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 14 MG/L Findings: 04/01/2009 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 3250 UG/L Findings: 01/05/2009 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 14.39 MG/L Findings: 01/05/2009 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 4380 UG/L Findings: 10/13/2008 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 19.37 MG/L Findings: 10/13/2008 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 4390 UG/L Findings: 10/13/2008 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 19.4 MG/L Findings: 10/13/2008 Sample Collected: NITRATE + NITRITE (AS N) Chemical: 4430 UG/L Findings: 10/02/2008 Sample Collected: NITRATE (AS NO3) Chemical: 19.6 MG/L Findings: 10/02/2008 Sample Collected: URANIUM COUNTING ERROR Chemical: 1.09 PCI/L Findings: 07/01/2008 Sample Collected: GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.2s Page A-26 1970-06-01 77.40 1970-04-29 77.10 1970-08-06 79.20 1970-06-30 78.20 1970-10-05 88.00 1970-08-31 80.00 1970-12-10 81.70 1970-11-02 81.30 1971-04-08 84.50 1971-03-03 81.00 1971-06-09 82.80 1971-04-30 81.90 1971-08-30 86.50 1971-07-09 83.00 1972-01-11 89.80 1971-11-02 88.90 1972-05-01 92.20 1972-02-29 90.30 1972-08-31 95.50 1972-07-06 94.40 1973-01-05 100.10 1972-11-02 99.20 1973-05-10 98.00 1973-03-05 102.30 1973-09-12 103.10 1973-07-06 101.70 1974-01-24 104.30 1973-11-02 104.00 1974-04-30 102.90 1974-03-19 105.60 1974-08-30 105.80 1974-07-03 105.20 1975-01-02 104.70 1974-10-22 105.80 1975-04-30 103.30 1975-03-19 104.10 1975-09-02 105.80 1975-07-02 107.10 1976-01-07 107.50 1975-11-06 106.40 1976-05-04 107.20 1976-03-08 106.90 1976-12-28 110.80 1976-10-29 107.00 1977-10-28 115.00 1977-03-08 111.20 1978-11-01 105.34 1978-09-26 106.21 1979-05-02 97.65 1979-02-06 101.27 1979-11-13 94.69 1979-08-06 95.35 1980-06-11 89.06 1980-02-08 94.10 1980-08-28 85.97 1980-08-08 86.54 1981-02-05 82.47 1980-10-28 79.29 1981-07-31 79.20 1981-05-07 79.96 1982-01-27 81.39 1981-11-04 80.89 1982-08-05 79.83 1982-04-29 80.58 1983-02-11 80.75 1982-11-04 80.84 1983-08-12 76.03 1983-05-20 77.53 1984-02-15 69.20 1983-11-02 73.75 1984-09-06 70.13 1984-05-17 67.68 1985-02-14 72.73 1984-11-14 72.42 1985-08-17 73.02 1985-05-09 71.17 1986-02-12 75.67 1985-11-05 75.06 1986-08-29 76.37 1986-05-06 74.70 Date Feet below Surface Feet to Sealevel Date Feet below Surface Feet to Sealevel Ground-water levels, Number of Measurements: 89 89 Ground water data count: 1986-08-29 Ground water data end date: Ground water data begin date: 1969-06-30 0 Water quality data count: 0000-00-00 Water quality data end date: 0000-00-00 Water quality data begin date: 0 Peak flow data count: 0000-00-00 Peak flow data end date: 0000-00-00 Peak flow data begin date: 0 Daily flow data count: 0000-00-00 Daily flow data end date: 0000-00-00 Daily flow data begin date: 0 Real time data flag: 479300200 Project number: Not Reported Source of depth data: 226 Hole depth: 190 Well depth: Not Reported Aquifer: Not Reported Aquifer Type: Single well, other than collector or Ranney type Type of ground water site: Y Local standard time flag: GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.2s Page A-27 Not Reported Enf. Action: Not Reported Enforcement Date: 95V0001 Violation ID: 1993-07-01 - 2015-12-31 Compliance Period: LEAD & COPPER RULE Contaminant: Initial Tap Sampling for Pb and Cu Violation Type: TRACT 1322 WATER SYSTEM IN System Name: ENFORCEMENT INFORMATION: Violations information not reported. 00000030 Population: Untreated Treatment Class: Not Reported City Served: 117 55 42 Facility Longitude: 33 48 30 Facility Latitude: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 1661 W CERRITOS AVENUE TRACT 1322 WATER SYSTEM INC System Owner/Responsible Party Addressee / Facility: ANAHEIM, CA 92802 1669 W CERRITOS AV TRACT 1322 WATER SYSTEM INC TRACT 1322 WATER SYSTEM INC PWS Name: Not Reported Date Deactivated: 8404 Date Initiated: CA3000546 PWS ID: 25 SW 1/2 - 1 Mile Lower CA3000546 FRDS PWS CADW40000005742 Site id: 800100 Gwcode: 30 Countyco: Z Welluseco: 3 Districtco: 04S10W27C002S Stwellno: 33.8031 Latiude: -117.9176 Longitude: E24 South 1/2 - 1 Mile Lower CADW40000005742 CA WELLS 1969-06-30 79.10 1969-09-02 80.60 1969-08-06 79.40 1969-11-03 78.80 1969-10-03 79.30 1970-02-03 75.20 1969-12-31 76.70 1970-04-01 76.70 1970-03-10 76.10 Date Feet below Surface Feet to Sealevel Date Feet below Surface Feet to Sealevel Ground-water levels, continued. GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.2s Page A-28 Date: 12/04/1992 Average Water Depth: 100 Deep Water Depth: Not Reported Shallow Water Depth: Not Reported Groundwater Flow: SW Site ID: 083002178T 27 SSW 1/2 - 1 Mile Lower 49805 AQUIFLOW 1999-04-13 112 Date Feet below Surface Feet to Sealevel Ground-water levels, Number of Measurements: 1 1 Ground water data count: 1999-04-13 Ground water data end date: Ground water data begin date: 1999-04-13 1 Water quality data count: 2000-09-19 Water quality data end date: 2000-09-19 Water quality data begin date: 0 Peak flow data count: 0000-00-00 Peak flow data end date: 0000-00-00 Peak flow data begin date: 0 Daily flow data count: 0000-00-00 Daily flow data end date: 0000-00-00 Daily flow data begin date: 0 Real time data flag: 470652400 Project number: other reported Source of depth data: 411 Hole depth: 411 Well depth: Not Reported Aquifer: Not Reported Aquifer Type: Single well, other than collector or Ranney type Type of ground water site: Y Local standard time flag: PST Mean greenwich time offset: 20000712 Date inventoried: Not Reported Date construction: Ground-water other than Spring Site type: Flat surface Topographic: Not Reported Hydrologic: National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 Altitude datum: 2.5 Altitude accuracy: Interpolated from topographic map Altitude method: 154 Altitude: 24000 Map scale: ANAHEIM Location map: Not Reported Land net: US Country: 059 County: 06 State: 06 District: NAD83 Dec latlong datum: NAD27 Latlong datum: S Coor accr: M Coor meth: -117.91283683 Dec lon: 33.83029324 Dec lat: 1175443 Longitude: USGS3124725 EDR Site id: 334949 Latitude: 004S010W15B005S Site name: 334949117544301 Site no: USGS Agency cd: 26 North 1/2 - 1 Mile Higher USGS3124725 FED USGS Map ID Direction Distance Elevation EDR ID Number Database GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.2s Page A-29 3 WNW 1/2 - 1 Mile CAOG60000020107 OIL_GAS CAOG60000019428 Site id: 1 District: Not Reported Comments 1: 12/30/1899 Abanddate: 12/12/1968 Spuddate: Not Reported Zone: 0 Y coord: 0 X coord: SB Bm: 10W Rge: 4S Twn: 22 Sec: 4700 Td: -117.91007 Longitude8: 33.814707 Latitude83: -117.909178 Longitude2: 33.814691 Latitude27: hud Source: 006 Status cod: W1-6 Map: Not Reported Caog m2 area: ANAHEIM Field: 1 Well no: Foiles Lease: Sun Oil Co. Operator: 05900430 Apinumber: 2 ESE 1/4 - 1/2 Mile CAOG60000019428 OIL_GAS CAOG60000019554 Site id: 1 District: Not Reported Comments 1: 12/30/1899 Abanddate: 12/12/1968 Spuddate: Not Reported Zone: 0 Y coord: 0 X coord: SB Bm: 10W Rge: 4S Twn: 22 Sec: 0 Td: -117.911217 Longitude8: 33.815646 Latitude83: -117.910325 Longitude2: 33.81563 Latitude27: hud Source: 014 Status cod: W1-6 Map: Not Reported Caog m2 area: ANAHEIM Field: 1 Well no: Holsinger Lease: McVicar-Rood-Hall Operator: 05900429 Apinumber: 1 ESE 1/4 - 1/2 Mile CAOG60000019554 OIL_GAS Map ID Direction Distance EDR ID Number Database GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.2s Page A-30 8555 Td: -117.933007 Longitude8: 33.813594 Latitude83: -117.932114 Longitude2: 33.813578 Latitude27: hud Source: 006 Status cod: W1-6 Map: Not Reported Caog m2 area: ORANGE COUNTY Field: 1 Well no: Nel-Cal-Lu Community Lease: Chevron U.S.A. Inc. Operator: 05901259 Apinumber: 5 WSW 1 - 2 Miles CAOG60000019261 OIL_GAS CAOG60000019840 Site id: 1 District: Not Reported Comments 1: 12/30/1899 Abanddate: 12/12/1968 Spuddate: Not Reported Zone: 0 Y coord: 0 X coord: SB Bm: 10W Rge: 4S Twn: 23 Sec: 0 Td: -117.905327 Longitude8: 33.817789 Latitude83: -117.904435 Longitude2: 33.817773 Latitude27: Not Reported Source: 006 Status cod: W1-6 Map: Not Reported Caog m2 area: Orange County Field: 1 Well no: Not Reported Lease: Not Reported Operator: Not Reported Apinumber: 4 East 1/2 - 1 Mile CAOG60000019840 OIL_GAS CAOG60000020107 Site id: 1 District: Not Reported Comments 1: 12/30/1899 Abanddate: 12/12/1968 Spuddate: Not Reported Zone: 0 Y coord: 0 X coord: SB Bm: 10W Rge: 4S Twn: 16 Sec: 5994 Td: -117.923903 Longitude8: 33.819838 Latitude83: -117.92301 Longitude2: 33.819822 Latitude27: hud Source: 006 Status cod: W1-6 Map: Not Reported Caog m2 area: ORANGE COUNTY Field: 1 Well no: Weisel Lease: CalResources LLC Operator: 05901145 Apinumber: GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.2s Page A-31 CAOG60000019998 Site id: 1 District: Not Reported Comments 1: 12/30/1899 Abanddate: 12/12/1968 Spuddate: Not Reported Zone: 0 Y coord: 0 X coord: SB Bm: 10W Rge: 4S Twn: 14 Sec: 5658 Td: -117.893053 Longitude8: 33.818963 Latitude83: -117.892161 Longitude2: 33.818947 Latitude27: hud Source: 006 Status cod: W1-6 Map: Not Reported Caog m2 area: ORANGE COUNTY Field: 1 Well no: Mauerham Lease: British-American Oil Producing Co. Operator: 05900881 Apinumber: 7 East 1 - 2 Miles CAOG60000019998 OIL_GAS CAOG60000020124 Site id: 1 District: Not Reported Comments 1: 12/30/1899 Abanddate: 12/12/1968 Spuddate: Not Reported Zone: 0 Y coord: 0 X coord: SB Bm: 10W Rge: 4S Twn: 14 Sec: 4488 Td: -117.897628 Longitude8: 33.819922 Latitude83: -117.896736 Longitude2: 33.819906 Latitude27: hud Source: 006 Status cod: W1-6 Map: Not Reported Caog m2 area: ORANGE COUNTY Field: 1 Well no: Bank Of America Lease: British-American Oil Producing Co. Operator: 05900879 Apinumber: 6 ENE 1 - 2 Miles CAOG60000020124 OIL_GAS CAOG60000019261 Site id: 1 District: Not Reported Comments 1: 12/30/1899 Abanddate: 12/12/1968 Spuddate: Not Reported Zone: 0 Y coord: 0 X coord: SB Bm: 10W Rge: 4S Twn: 21 Sec: GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.2s Page A-32 CAOG60000019050 Site id: 1 District: Not Reported Comments 1: 12/30/1899 Abanddate: 12/12/1968 Spuddate: Not Reported Zone: 0 Y coord: 0 X coord: SB Bm: 10W Rge: 4S Twn: 23 Sec: 4455 Td: -117.891395 Longitude8: 33.811957 Latitude83: -117.890504 Longitude2: 33.811941 Latitude27: hud Source: 006 Status cod: W1-6 Map: Not Reported Caog m2 area: ORANGE COUNTY Field: 1 Well no: Thomas Lease: Lindley C. Morton Operator: 05901072 Apinumber: 8 ESE 1 - 2 Miles CAOG60000019050 OIL_GAS Map ID Direction Distance EDR ID Number Database GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TC2760975.2s Page A-33 Not Reported Not Reported Not Reported Not Reported Basement Not Reported Not Reported Not Reported Not Reported Living Area - 2nd Floor 0% 0% 100% 0.763 pCi/L Living Area - 1st Floor % >20 pCi/L % 4-20 pCi/L % <4 pCi/L Average Activity Area Number of sites tested: 30 Federal Area Radon Information for ORANGE COUNTY, CA : Zone 3 indoor average level < 2 pCi/L. : Zone 2 indoor average level 2 pCi/L and 4 pCi/L. Note: Zone 1 indoor average level > 4 pCi/L. Federal EPA Radon Zone for ORANGE County: 3 8.33 1 12 92805 Pct. > 4 Pci/L > 4 Pci/L Total Sites Zip Radon Test Results State Database: CA Radon AREA RADON INFORMATION GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS RADON ® ---PAGE BREAK--- TOPOGRAPHIC INFORMATION USGS 7.5’ Digital Elevation Model (DEM) Source: United States Geologic Survey EDR acquired the USGS 7.5’ Digital Elevation Model in 2002 and updated it in 2006. The 7.5 minute DEM corresponds to the USGS 1:24,000- and 1:25,000-scale topographic quadrangle maps. The DEM provides elevation data with consistent elevation units and projection. HYDROLOGIC INFORMATION Flood Zone Data: This data, available in select counties across the country, was obtained by EDR in 2003 & 2009 from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Data depicts 100-year and 500-year flood zones as defined by FEMA. NWI: National Wetlands Inventory. This data, available in select counties across the country, was obtained by EDR in 2002 and 2005 from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. HYDROGEOLOGIC INFORMATION AQUIFLOW Information System R Source: EDR proprietary database of groundwater flow information EDR has developed the AQUIFLOW Information System (AIS) to provide data on the general direction of groundwater flow at specific points. EDR has reviewed reports submitted to regulatory authorities at select sites and has extracted the date of the report, hydrogeologically determined groundwater flow direction and depth to water table information. GEOLOGIC INFORMATION Geologic Age and Rock Stratigraphic Unit Source: P.G. Schruben, R.E. Arndt and W.J. Bawiec, Geology of the Conterminous U.S. at 1:2,500,000 Scale - A digital representation of the 1974 P.B. King and H.M. Beikman Map, USGS Digital Data Series DDS - 11 (1994). STATSGO: State Soil Geographic Database Source: Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Services The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) leads the national Conservation Soil Survey (NCSS) and is responsible for collecting, storing, maintaining and distributing soil survey information for privately owned lands in the United States. A soil map in a soil survey is a representation of soil patterns in a landscape. Soil maps for STATSGO are compiled by generalizing more detailed (SSURGO) soil survey maps. SSURGO: Soil Survey Geographic Database Source: Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Services (NRCS) Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] SSURGO is the most detailed level of mapping done by the Natural Resources Conservation Services, mapping scales generally range from 1:12,000 to 1:63,360. Field mapping methods using national standards are used to construct the soil maps in the Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) database. SSURGO digitizing duplicates the original soil survey maps. This level of mapping is designed for use by landowners, townships and county natural resource planning and management. LOCAL / REGIONAL WATER AGENCY RECORDS FEDERAL WATER WELLS PWS: Public Water Systems Source: EPA/Office of Drinking Water Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Public Water System data from the Federal Reporting Data System. A PWS is any water system which provides water to at least 25 people for at least 60 days annually. PWSs provide water from wells, rivers and other sources. TC2760975.2s Page A-34 PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE RECORDS SEARCHED ---PAGE BREAK--- PWS ENF: Public Water Systems Violation and Enforcement Data Source: EPA/Office of Drinking Water Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Violation and Enforcement data for Public Water Systems from the Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS) after August 1995. Prior to August 1995, the data came from the Federal Reporting Data System (FRDS). USGS Water Wells: USGS National Water Inventory System (NWIS) This database contains descriptive information on sites where the USGS collects or has collected data on surface water and/or groundwater. The groundwater data includes information on wells, springs, and other sources of groundwater. STATE RECORDS Water Well Database Source: Department of Water Resources Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] California Drinking Water Quality Database Source: Department of Health Services Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] The database includes all drinking water compliance and special studies monitoring for the state of California since 1984. It consists of over 3,200,000 individual analyses along with well and water system information. OTHER STATE DATABASE INFORMATION California Oil and Gas Well Locations Source: Department of Conservation Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Oil and Gas well locations in the state. RADON State Database: CA Radon Source: Department of Health Services Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Radon Database for California Area Radon Information Source: USGS Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] The National Radon Database has been developed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and is a compilation of the EPA/State Residential Radon Survey and the National Residential Radon Survey. The study covers the years 1986 - 1992. Where necessary data has been supplemented by information collected at private sources such as universities and research institutions. EPA Radon Zones Source: EPA Telephone: [PHONE REDACTED] Sections 307 & 309 of IRAA directed EPA to list and identify areas of U.S. with the potential for elevated indoor radon levels. OTHER Airport Landing Facilities: Private and public use landing facilities Source: Federal Aviation Administration, [PHONE REDACTED] Epicenters: World earthquake epicenters, Richter 5 or greater Source: Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration California Earthquake Fault Lines: The fault lines displayed on EDR’s Topographic map are digitized quaternary fault lines, prepared in 1975 by the United State Geological Survey. Additional information (also from 1975) regarding activity at specific fault lines comes from California’s Preliminary Fault Activity Map prepared by the California Division of Mines and Geology. TC2760975.2s Page A-35 PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE RECORDS SEARCHED ---PAGE BREAK--- STREET AND ADDRESS INFORMATION © 2010 Tele Atlas North America, Inc. All rights reserved. This material is proprietary and the subject of copyright protection and other intellectual property rights owned by or licensed to Tele Atlas North America, Inc. The use of this material is subject to the terms of a license agreement. You will be held liable for any unauthorized copying or disclosure of this material. TC2760975.2s Page A-36 PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE RECORDS SEARCHED ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- APPENDIX G NOISE TECHNICAL APPENDIX ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- 70 dBA CNEL 65 dBA CNEL 60 dBA CNEL Anaheim Boulevard Katella Avenue to I‐5 Freeway 19,380 73.0 79 171 368 Anaheim Boulevard I‐5 Freeway to Cerritos Avenue 33,160 75.3 113 244 526 Anaheim Boulevard Cerritos Avenue to Ball Road 26,790 72.9 78 168 361 Ball Road Euclid Street to Walnut Street 26,330 74.3 97 209 451 Ball Road Walnut Street to Disneyland Drive 34,020 75.4 115 248 535 Ball Road Disneyland Drive to Harbor Boulevard 44,320 76.6 138 296 638 Ball Road Harbor Boulevard to Anaheim Boulevard 36,890 75.8 122 262 565 Ball Road Anaheim Boulevard to East Street 35,280 75.6 118 254 548 Ball Road East Street to State College Boulevard 38,110 75.9 124 268 577 Ball Road State College Boulevard to Sunkist Street 40,500 74.7 102 221 475 Ball Road Sunkist Street to SR‐57 Freeway 48,400 77.0 146 314 677 Ball Road SR‐57 Freeway to Main Street 32,740 75.3 112 242 522 Clementine Street Manchester Avenue to Disney Way 7,510 65.6 25 55 118 Clementine Street Disney Way to Katella Avenue 7,510 65.6 25 55 118 Disney Way Harbor Boulevard to Clementine Street 7,770 69.0 43 93 200 Disney Way Clementine Street to Anaheim Boulevard 13,880 71.5 63 137 294 Disneyland Drive Katella Avenue to Magic Way 19,130 71.4 62 134 288 Disneyland Drive Magic Way to Ball Road 23,810 72.4 72 155 334 Disneyland Drive Ball Road to Manchester Avenue 30,910 75.0 108 233 502 Harbor Boulevard Wilken Way to Orangewood Avenue 35,560 75.6 119 256 551 Harbor Boulevard Orangewood Avenue to Convention Way 35,870 75.7 119 257 554 Harbor Boulevard Convention Way to Katella Avenue 40,430 76.2 129 279 600 Harbor Boulevard Katella Avenue to Disney Way 38,410 76.0 125 269 580 Harbor Boulevard Disney Way to Manchester Avenue 41,340 76.3 131 283 609 Harbor Boulevard I‐5 Freeway to Ball Road 44,360 78.2 176 379 817 Haster Street Orangewood Avenue to Gene Autry Way 19,760 69.8 48 104 225 Haster Street Gene Autry Way to Katella Avenue 19,760 69.8 48 104 225 Katella Avenue Ninth Street to Walnut Street 29,270 74.8 104 225 484 Katella Avenue Walnut Street to Disneyland Drive 35,240 75.6 118 254 548 Katella Avenue Disneyland Drive to Hotel Way 37,440 75.9 123 265 570 Katella Avenue Hotel Way to Harbor Boulevard 37,440 75.9 123 265 570 Katella Avenue Harbor Boulevard to Clementine Street 39,100 76.0 126 273 587 Katella Avenue Clementine Street to Anaheim Boulevard 38,510 76.0 125 270 581 Katella Avenue Anaheim Boulevard to Manchester Avenue 37,830 75.9 124 267 574 Katella Avenue Manchester Avenue to Anaheim Way 30,260 74.9 107 230 495 Katella Avenue Anaheim Way to Lewis Street 30,260 74.9 107 230 495 Katella Avenue Lewis Street to State College Boulevard 30,260 74.9 107 230 495 Katella Avenue State College Boulevard to Sportstown 32,800 75.3 113 242 522 Katella Avenue Sportstown to Howell Avenue 34,240 75.5 116 249 537 Katella Avenue Howell Avenue to SR‐57 Freeway 37,990 75.9 124 267 576 Katella Avenue SR‐57 Freeway to Main Street 29,610 74.8 105 226 488 Manchester Avenue Clementine Street to Harbor Street 3,730 57.0 7 15 32 Orangewood Avenue West Street to Harbor Boulevard 12,750 67.9 36 78 168 Orangewood Avenue Harbor Boulevard to Clementine Street 15,540 68.8 41 89 192 Orangewood Avenue Clementine Street to Haster Street 15,540 68.8 41 89 192 Orangewood Avenue Haster Street to Manchester Avenue 17,950 69.4 45 98 211 Orangewood Avenue* Manchester Avenue to State College Boulevard 19,810 73.1 80 173 373 Orangewood Avenue State College Boulevard to Rampart Street 24,490 70.7 56 120 260 Orangewood Avenue* Rampart Street to SR‐57 Freeway 23,490 70.5 54 117 252 Orangewood Avenue SR‐57 Freeway to Eckhoff Street 27,720 73.0 80 171 369 Orangewood Avenue Eckhoff Street to Main Street 14,160 70.1 51 110 236 Walnut Street Katella Avenue to Cerritos Avenue 10,400 68.8 41 89 192 Walnut Street Cerritos Avenue to Ball Road 15,490 70.5 54 116 251 West Street Orangewood Avenue to Katella Avenue 12,390 67.8 36 77 165 Chapman Avenue State College Boulevard to SR‐57 Freeway 30,740 75.0 108 232 500 Chapman Avenue SR‐57 Freeway to Main Street 27,260 74.5 99 214 462 State College Boulevard Chapman Avenue to I‐5 Freeway 26,980 76.0 126 272 586 State College Boulevard I‐5 Freeway to Orangewood Avenue 21,400 75.0 108 233 502 State College Boulevard Orangewood Avenue to Gene Autry Way 22,160 73.6 87 187 402 State College Boulevard Gene Autry Way to Katella Avenue 20,120 73.2 81 175 377 State College Boulevard Katella Avenue to Howell Avenue 23,980 73.9 91 197 424 State College Boulevard Howell Avenue to Cerritos Avenue 23,440 73.8 90 194 417 State College Boulevard Cerritos Avenue to Ball Road 23,320 73.8 90 193 416 Table 1 Noise Contours for Existing Conditions Roadway Segment Daily Traffic Volumes Noise level at 50 feet (dBA CNEL) Distance to noise contour (feet) ---PAGE BREAK--- 70 dBA CNEL 65 dBA CNEL 60 dBA CNEL Anaheim Boulevard Katella Avenue to I‐5 Freeway 22,950 73.7 89 191 412 Anaheim Boulevard I‐5 Freeway to Cerritos Avenue 39,510 76.1 127 274 591 Anaheim Boulevard Cerritos Avenue to Ball Road 32,240 73.7 88 190 408 Ball Road Euclid Street to Walnut Street 28,490 74.7 102 221 475 Ball Road Walnut Street to Disneyland Drive 36,120 75.7 120 258 557 Ball Road Disneyland Drive to Harbor Boulevard 48,260 77.0 146 314 676 Ball Road Harbor Boulevard to Anaheim Boulevard 38,480 76.0 125 270 581 Ball Road Anaheim Boulevard to East Street 38,100 75.9 124 268 577 Ball Road East Street to State College Boulevard 40,210 76.2 129 278 598 Ball Road State College Boulevard to Sunkist Street 42,450 74.9 106 228 491 Ball Road Sunkist Street to SR‐57 Freeway 51,710 77.3 152 328 707 Ball Road SR‐57 Freeway to Main Street 41,120 76.3 131 282 607 Clementine Street Manchester Avenue to Disney Way 12,470 67.8 36 77 166 Clementine Street Disney Way to Katella Avenue 7,820 65.8 26 56 121 Convention Way/Gene AHaster Street to I‐5 Freeway 10,330 70.3 52 112 242 Disney Way Harbor Boulevard to Clementine Street 10,260 70.2 52 112 241 Disney Way Clementine Street to Anaheim Boulevard 17,320 72.5 74 158 341 Disneyland Drive Katella Avenue to Magic Way 23,850 72.4 72 155 334 Disneyland Drive Magic Way to Ball Road 26,660 72.9 78 167 360 Disneyland Drive Ball Road to Manchester Avenue 34,610 75.5 117 251 541 Harbor Boulevard Wilken Way to Orangewood Avenue 39,910 76.1 128 276 595 Harbor Boulevard Orangewood Avenue to Convention Way 39,650 76.1 128 275 593 Harbor Boulevard Convention Way to Katella Avenue 43,760 76.5 136 294 633 Harbor Boulevard Katella Avenue to Disney Way 43,990 76.6 137 295 635 Harbor Boulevard Disney Way to Manchester Avenue 45,430 76.7 140 301 649 Harbor Boulevard I‐5 Freeway to Ball Road 48,760 78.6 187 404 870 Haster Street Orangewood Avenue to Gene Autry Way 25,300 70.9 57 123 265 Haster Street Gene Autry Way to Katella Avenue 21,290 70.1 51 110 236 Katella Avenue Ninth Street to Walnut Street 34,990 75.6 117 253 545 Katella Avenue Walnut Street to Disneyland Drive 41,650 76.3 132 284 612 Katella Avenue Disneyland Drive to Hotel Way 46,340 76.8 142 305 658 Katella Avenue Hotel Way to Harbor Boulevard 45,350 76.7 140 301 648 Katella Avenue Harbor Boulevard to Clementine Street 45,260 76.7 139 300 647 Katella Avenue Clementine Street to Anaheim Boulevard 44,860 76.6 139 299 643 Katella Avenue Anaheim Boulevard to Manchester Avenue 43,650 76.5 136 293 632 Katella Avenue Manchester Avenue to Anaheim Way 35,700 75.7 119 256 553 Katella Avenue Anaheim Way to Lewis Street 36,610 75.8 121 261 562 Katella Avenue Lewis Street to State College Boulevard 36,170 75.7 120 259 557 Katella Avenue State College Boulevard to Sportstown 37,630 75.9 123 266 572 Katella Avenue Sportstown to Howell Avenue 40,650 76.2 130 280 603 Katella Avenue Howell Avenue to SR‐57 Freeway 45,270 76.7 139 300 647 Katella Avenue SR‐57 Freeway to Main Street 37,560 75.9 123 265 572 Manchester Avenue Clementine Street to Harbor Street 5,470 58.7 9 19 41 Orangewood Avenue West Street to Harbor Boulevard 15,580 68.8 41 89 192 Orangewood Avenue Harbor Boulevard to Clementine Street 16,900 69.1 44 94 203 Orangewood Avenue Clementine Street to Haster Street 17,000 69.1 44 94 204 Orangewood Avenue Haster Street to Manchester Avenue 20,140 69.9 49 106 228 Orangewood Avenue* Manchester Avenue to State College Boulevard 22,580 73.7 88 189 407 Orangewood Avenue State College Boulevard to Rampart Street 28,810 71.4 62 134 289 Orangewood Avenue* Rampart Street to SR‐57 Freeway 28,760 71.4 62 134 289 Orangewood Avenue SR‐57 Freeway to Eckhoff Street 33,110 73.8 90 193 416 Orangewood Avenue Eckhoff Street to Main Street 15,300 70.4 54 115 248 Walnut Street Katella Avenue to Cerritos Avenue 12,080 69.4 46 99 212 Walnut Street Cerritos Avenue to Ball Road 16,070 70.7 55 119 257 West Street Orangewood Avenue to Katella Avenue 13,180 68.0 37 80 172 Chapman Avenue State College Boulevard to SR‐57 Freeway 32,800 75.3 113 242 522 Chapman Avenue SR‐57 Freeway to Main Street 28,960 74.7 104 223 481 State College Boulevard Chapman Avenue to I‐5 Freeway 31,880 76.8 141 304 655 State College Boulevard I‐5 Freeway to Orangewood Avenue 28,350 76.3 131 281 606 State College Boulevard Orangewood Avenue to Gene Autry Way 27,730 74.6 101 217 467 State College Boulevard Gene Autry Way to Katella Avenue 23,590 73.9 90 195 419 State College Boulevard Katella Avenue to Howell Avenue 29,030 74.8 104 223 481 State College Boulevard Howell Avenue to Cerritos Avenue 24,850 74.1 94 201 434 State College Boulevard Cerritos Avenue to Ball Road 24,130 74.0 92 198 426 Table 2 Noise Contours for 2015 Without Project Conditions Roadway Segment Daily Traffic Volumes Noise level at 50 feet (dBA CNEL) Distance to noise contour (feet) ---PAGE BREAK--- 70 dBA CNEL 65 dBA CNEL 60 dBA CNEL Anaheim Boulevard Katella Avenue to I‐5 Freeway 22,950 73.7 89 191 412 Anaheim Boulevard I‐5 Freeway to Cerritos Avenue 39,510 76.1 127 274 591 Anaheim Boulevard Cerritos Avenue to Ball Road 32,240 73.7 88 190 408 Ball Road Euclid Street to Walnut Street 28,490 74.7 102 221 475 Ball Road Walnut Street to Disneyland Drive 36,120 75.7 120 258 557 Ball Road Disneyland Drive to Harbor Boulevard 48,260 77.0 146 314 676 Ball Road Harbor Boulevard to Anaheim Boulevard 38,480 76.0 125 270 581 Ball Road Anaheim Boulevard to East Street 38,100 75.9 124 268 577 Ball Road East Street to State College Boulevard 40,210 76.2 129 278 598 Ball Road State College Boulevard to Sunkist Street 42,450 74.9 106 228 491 Ball Road Sunkist Street to SR‐57 Freeway 51,710 77.3 152 328 707 Ball Road SR‐57 Freeway to Main Street 41,120 76.3 131 282 607 Clementine Street Manchester Avenue to Disney Way 12,470 67.8 36 77 166 Clementine Street Disney Way to Katella Avenue 7,820 65.8 26 56 121 Convention Way/Gene Autr Haster Street to I‐5 Freeway 10,330 70.3 52 112 242 Disney Way Harbor Boulevard to Clementine Street 10,482 70.3 53 113 244 Disney Way Clementine Street to Anaheim Boulevard 17,542 72.6 74 160 344 Disneyland Drive Katella Avenue to Magic Way 24,650 72.5 74 158 341 Disneyland Drive Magic Way to Ball Road 27,460 73.0 79 170 367 Disneyland Drive Ball Road to Manchester Avenue 35,410 75.6 118 255 550 Harbor Boulevard Wilken Way to Orangewood Avenue 40,464 76.2 129 279 601 Harbor Boulevard Orangewood Avenue to Convention Way 40,314 76.2 129 278 599 Harbor Boulevard Convention Way to Katella Avenue 46,557 76.8 142 306 660 Harbor Boulevard Katella Avenue to Disney Way 47,542 76.9 144 310 669 Harbor Boulevard Disney Way to Manchester Avenue 48,710 77.0 146 316 680 Harbor Boulevard I‐5 Freeway to Ball Road 49,285 78.7 189 407 876 Haster Street Orangewood Avenue to Gene Autry Way 25,300 70.9 57 123 265 Haster Street Gene Autry Way to Katella Avenue 21,601 70.2 51 111 239 Katella Avenue Ninth Street to Walnut Street 35,878 75.7 119 257 554 Katella Avenue Walnut Street to Disneyland Drive 42,538 76.4 134 288 621 Katella Avenue Disneyland Drive to Hotel Way 49,583 77.1 148 319 688 Katella Avenue Hotel Way to Harbor Boulevard 49,891 77.1 149 321 691 Katella Avenue Harbor Boulevard to Clementine Street 48,753 77.0 147 316 680 Katella Avenue Clementine Street to Anaheim Boulevard 48,353 77.0 146 314 676 Katella Avenue Anaheim Boulevard to Manchester Avenue 46,772 76.8 143 307 662 Katella Avenue Manchester Avenue to Anaheim Way 36,985 75.8 122 263 566 Katella Avenue Anaheim Way to Lewis Street 37,765 75.9 124 266 574 Katella Avenue Lewis Street to State College Boulevard 37,325 75.8 123 264 569 Katella Avenue State College Boulevard to Sportstown 38,785 76.0 126 271 584 Katella Avenue Sportstown to Howell Avenue 41,805 76.3 132 285 614 Katella Avenue Howell Avenue to SR‐57 Freeway 46,425 76.8 142 306 658 Katella Avenue SR‐57 Freeway to Main Street 38,715 76.0 126 271 583 Manchester Avenue Clementine Street to Harbor Street 5,470 58.7 9 19 41 Orangewood Avenue West Street to Harbor Boulevard 15,580 68.8 41 89 192 Orangewood Avenue Harbor Boulevard to Clementine Street 16,900 69.1 44 94 203 Orangewood Avenue Clementine Street to Haster Street 17,000 69.1 44 94 204 Orangewood Avenue Haster Street to Manchester Avenue 20,140 69.9 49 106 228 Orangewood Avenue* Manchester Avenue to State College Boulev 22,580 73.7 88 189 407 Orangewood Avenue State College Boulevard to Rampart Street 28,810 71.4 62 134 289 Orangewood Avenue* Rampart Street to SR‐57 Freeway 28,760 71.4 62 134 289 Orangewood Avenue SR‐57 Freeway to Eckhoff Street 33,110 73.8 90 193 416 Orangewood Avenue Eckhoff Street to Main Street 15,300 70.4 54 115 248 Walnut Street Katella Avenue to Cerritos Avenue 12,080 69.4 46 99 212 Walnut Street Cerritos Avenue to Ball Road 16,070 70.7 55 119 257 West Street Orangewood Avenue to Katella Avenue 13,290 68.1 37 80 173 Chapman Avenue State College Boulevard to SR‐57 Freeway 33,022 75.3 113 243 525 Chapman Avenue SR‐57 Freeway to Main Street 29,182 74.8 104 224 483 State College Boulevard Chapman Avenue to I‐5 Freeway 32,280 76.8 142 307 661 State College Boulevard I‐5 Freeway to Orangewood Avenue 28,839 76.3 132 285 613 State College Boulevard Orangewood Avenue to Gene Autry Way 27,730 74.6 101 217 467 State College Boulevard Gene Autry Way to Katella Avenue 24,345 74.0 92 199 428 State College Boulevard Katella Avenue to Howell Avenue 29,119 74.8 104 224 482 State College Boulevard Howell Avenue to Cerritos Avenue 24,850 74.1 94 201 434 State College Boulevard Cerritos Avenue to Ball Road 24,130 74.0 92 198 426 Table 3 Noise Contours for 2015 With Project Conditions Roadway Segment Daily Traffic Volumes Noise level at 50 feet (dBA CNEL) Distance to noise contour (feet) ---PAGE BREAK--- 70 dBA CNEL 65 dBA CNEL 60 dBA CNEL Anaheim Boulevard Katella Avenue to I‐5 Freeway 30,590 75.0 107 231 498 Anaheim Boulevard I‐5 Freeway to Cerritos Avenue 53,130 77.4 155 334 720 Anaheim Boulevard Cerritos Avenue to Ball Road 43,930 75.0 108 233 502 Ball Road Euclid Street to Walnut Street 33,130 75.3 113 244 526 Ball Road Walnut Street to Disneyland Drive 40,610 76.2 130 279 602 Ball Road Disneyland Drive to Harbor Boulevard 56,710 77.7 162 349 752 Ball Road Harbor Boulevard to Anaheim Boulevard 41,900 76.3 132 285 615 Ball Road Anaheim Boulevard to East Street 44,140 76.6 137 295 637 Ball Road East Street to State College Boulevard 44,720 76.6 138 298 642 Ball Road State College Boulevard to Sunkist Street 46,630 75.3 113 242 522 Ball Road Sunkist Street to SR‐57 Freeway 58,790 77.8 166 358 771 Ball Road SR‐57 Freeway to Main Street 59,090 77.8 167 359 773 Clementine Street Manchester Avenue to Disney Way 23,110 70.5 54 116 250 Clementine Street Disney Way to Katella Avenue 8,470 66.1 28 59 128 Clementine Street Katella Avenue to Gene Autrey 2,660 61.1 13 27 59 Clementine Street Gene Autry Way to Orangewood 7,930 65.8 26 57 122 Convention Way/Gene AutryHarbor Boulevard to Clementine Street 22,550 73.7 88 189 407 Convention Way/Gene Street to Haster Street 27,220 74.5 99 214 461 Convention Way/Gene AutryHaster Street to I‐5 Freeway 32,470 75.2 112 241 519 Disney Way Harbor Boulevard to Clementine Street 15,600 72.1 69 148 318 Disney Way Clementine Street to Anaheim Boulevard 24,690 74.0 93 201 432 Disneyland Drive Katella Avenue to Magic Way 33,960 73.9 91 196 423 Disneyland Drive Magic Way to Ball Road 32,760 73.8 89 192 413 Disneyland Drive Ball Road to Manchester Avenue 42,530 76.4 134 288 621 Harbor Boulevard Wilken Way to Orangewood Avenue 48,890 77.0 147 316 681 Harbor Boulevard Orangewood Avenue to Convention Way 47,050 76.9 143 308 664 Harbor Boulevard Convention Way to Katella Avenue 50,200 77.1 149 322 694 Harbor Boulevard Katella Avenue to Disney Way 55,240 77.5 159 343 739 Harbor Boulevard Disney Way to Manchester Avenue 53,660 77.4 156 337 725 Harbor Boulevard I‐5 Freeway to Ball Road 57,660 79.3 210 452 973 Haster Street Orangewood Avenue to Gene Autry Way 37,170 72.5 74 159 343 Haster Street Gene Autry Way to Katella Avenue 24,560 70.7 56 121 260 Katella Avenue Ninth Street to Walnut Street 47,260 76.9 144 309 666 Katella Avenue Walnut Street to Disneyland Drive 55,400 77.6 160 344 741 Katella Avenue Disneyland Drive to Hotel Way 65,400 78.3 178 384 827 Katella Avenue Hotel Way to Harbor Boulevard 61,020 78.0 170 367 790 Katella Avenue Harbor Boulevard to Clementine Street 57,670 77.7 164 353 761 Katella Avenue Clementine Street to Anaheim Boulevard 57,690 77.7 164 353 761 Katella Avenue Anaheim Boulevard to Manchester Avenue 55,510 77.6 160 344 742 Katella Avenue Manchester Avenue to Anaheim Way 46,960 76.8 143 308 663 Katella Avenue Anaheim Way to Lewis Street 50,220 77.1 149 322 694 Katella Avenue Lewis Street to State College Boulevard 48,820 77.0 147 316 681 Katella Avenue State College Boulevard to Sportstown 47,980 76.9 145 312 673 Katella Avenue Sportstown to Howell Avenue 54,380 77.5 158 340 732 Katella Avenue Howell Avenue to SR‐57 Freeway 60,860 78.0 170 366 789 Katella Avenue SR‐57 Freeway to Main Street 54,600 77.5 158 340 733 Manchester Avenue Clementine Street to Harbor Street 9,190 60.9 12 27 58 Orangewood Avenue West Street to Harbor Boulevard 21,640 70.2 51 111 239 Orangewood Avenue Harbor Boulevard to Clementine Street 19,800 69.8 49 105 225 Orangewood Avenue Clementine Street to Haster Street 20,130 69.9 49 106 228 Orangewood Avenue Haster Street to Manchester Avenue 24,830 70.8 56 122 262 Orangewood Avenue* Manchester Avenue to State College Bouleva 28,530 74.7 103 221 476 Orangewood Avenue State College Boulevard to Rampart Street 38,080 72.6 75 162 348 Orangewood Avenue* Rampart Street to SR‐57 Freeway 40,050 72.9 78 167 360 Orangewood Avenue SR‐57 Freeway to Eckhoff Street 44,670 75.1 109 236 508 Orangewood Avenue Eckhoff Street to Main Street 17,750 71.1 59 127 274 Walnut Street Katella Avenue to Cerritos Avenue 15,670 70.5 54 117 252 Walnut Street Cerritos Avenue to Ball Road 17,310 71.0 58 125 270 West Street Orangewood Avenue to Katella Avenue 14,520 68.5 39 85 183 Chapman Avenue State College Boulevard to SR‐57 Freeway 37,220 75.8 122 264 568 Chapman Avenue SR‐57 Freeway to Main Street 32,610 75.3 112 241 520 State College Boulevard Chapman Avenue to I‐5 Freeway 42,370 78.0 171 368 792 State College Boulevard I‐5 Freeway to Orangewood Avenue 43,240 78.1 173 373 803 State College Boulevard Orangewood Avenue to Gene Autry Way 39,670 76.1 128 275 593 State College Boulevard Gene Autry Way to Katella Avenue 31,040 75.0 108 234 503 State College Boulevard Katella Avenue to Howell Avenue 39,840 76.1 128 276 594 State College Boulevard Howell Avenue to Cerritos Avenue 27,860 74.6 101 217 468 State College Boulevard Cerritos Avenue to Ball Road 25,880 74.3 96 207 446 Table 4 Noise Contours for 2030 No Project Conditions Roadway Segment Daily Traffic Volumes Noise level at 50 feet (dBA CNEL) Distance to noise contour (feet) ---PAGE BREAK--- 70 dBA CNEL 65 dBA CNEL 60 dBA CNEL Anaheim Boulevard Katella Avenue to I-5 Freeway 31,080 75.0 109 234 504 Anaheim Boulevard I-5 Freeway to Cerritos Avenue 55,320 77.6 159 343 740 Anaheim Boulevard Cerritos Avenue to Ball Road 46,190 75.2 112 241 519 Ball Road Euclid Street to Walnut Street 34,040 75.4 115 248 535 Ball Road Walnut Street to Disneyland Drive 42,390 76.4 133 288 620 Ball Road Disneyland Drive to Harbor Boulevard 58,690 77.8 166 357 770 Ball Road Harbor Boulevard to Anaheim Boulevard 47,460 76.9 144 310 668 Ball Road Anaheim Boulevard to East Street 46,390 76.8 142 305 658 Ball Road East Street to State College Boulevard 47,540 76.9 144 310 669 Ball Road State College Boulevard to Sunkist Street 48,590 75.5 116 249 537 Ball Road Sunkist Street to SR-57 Freeway 61,800 78.0 172 370 797 Ball Road SR-57 Freeway to Main Street 60,250 77.9 169 364 783 Clementine Street Manchester Avenue to Disney Way 24,080 70.7 55 119 257 Clementine Street Disney Way to Katella Avenue 8,470 66.1 28 59 128 Clementine Street Katella Avenue to Gene Autrey 5,720 64.4 21 46 98 Clementine Street Gene Autry Way to Orangewood 9,010 66.4 29 62 133 Convention Way/Gene Autry W Harbor Boulevard to Clementine Street 24,940 74.1 94 202 435 Convention Way/Gene Autry W Clementine Street to Haster Street 30,800 75.0 108 232 501 Convention Way/Gene Autry W Haster Street to I-5 Freeway 38,780 76.0 126 271 584 Disney Way Harbor Boulevard to Clementine Street 17,040 72.4 73 157 337 Disney Way Clementine Street to Anaheim Boulevard 26,660 74.4 98 211 455 Disneyland Drive Katella Avenue to Magic Way 34,500 74.0 92 198 427 Disneyland Drive Magic Way to Ball Road 32,800 73.8 89 192 413 Disneyland Drive Ball Road to Manchester Avenue 42,930 76.5 135 290 625 Harbor Boulevard Wilken Way to Orangewood Avenue 50,410 77.1 150 323 695 Harbor Boulevard Orangewood Avenue to Convention Way 47,600 76.9 144 311 669 Harbor Boulevard Convention Way to Katella Avenue 50,570 77.2 150 323 697 Harbor Boulevard Katella Avenue to Disney Way 56,950 77.7 163 350 754 Harbor Boulevard Disney Way to Manchester Avenue 54,670 77.5 158 341 734 Harbor Boulevard I-5 Freeway to Ball Road 59,460 79.5 214 461 993 Haster Street Orangewood Avenue to Gene Autry Way 39,830 72.8 77 167 359 Haster Street Gene Autry Way to Katella Avenue 25,290 70.9 57 123 265 Katella Avenue Ninth Street to Walnut Street 48,170 77.0 145 313 675 Katella Avenue Walnut Street to Disneyland Drive 56,930 77.7 162 350 754 Katella Avenue Disneyland Drive to Hotel Way 67,110 78.4 181 391 842 Katella Avenue Hotel Way to Harbor Boulevard 63,060 78.1 174 375 807 Katella Avenue Harbor Boulevard to Clementine Street 59,260 77.9 167 360 775 Katella Avenue Clementine Street to Anaheim Boulevard 59,840 77.9 168 362 780 Katella Avenue Anaheim Boulevard to Manchester Avenue 57,710 77.7 164 353 761 Katella Avenue Manchester Avenue to Anaheim Way 53,740 77.4 156 337 726 Katella Avenue Anaheim Way to Lewis Street 61,390 78.0 171 368 793 Katella Avenue Lewis Street to State College Boulevard 57,860 77.7 164 354 762 Katella Avenue State College Boulevard to Sportstown 51,920 77.3 153 329 709 Katella Avenue Sportstown to Howell Avenue 62,310 78.1 173 372 801 Katella Avenue Howell Avenue to SR-57 Freeway 71,190 78.6 189 406 875 Katella Avenue SR-57 Freeway to Main Street 62,900 78.1 174 374 806 Manchester Avenue Clementine Street to Harbor Street 10,290 61.4 13 29 62 Orangewood Avenue West Street to Harbor Boulevard 22,670 70.4 53 114 247 Orangewood Avenue Harbor Boulevard to Clementine Street 21,850 70.2 52 112 241 Orangewood Avenue Clementine Street to Haster Street 21,480 70.2 51 110 238 Orangewood Avenue Haster Street to Manchester Avenue 25,910 71.0 58 125 270 Orangewood Avenue* Manchester Avenue to State College Boulevard 34,410 75.5 116 250 539 Orangewood Avenue State College Boulevard to Rampart Street 50,380 73.9 90 195 420 Orangewood Avenue* Rampart Street to SR-57 Freeway 47,660 73.6 87 188 405 Orangewood Avenue SR-57 Freeway to Eckhoff Street 49,090 75.5 116 251 541 Orangewood Avenue Eckhoff Street to Main Street 19,610 71.5 63 136 293 Walnut Street Katella Avenue to Cerritos Avenue 16,430 70.8 56 121 261 Walnut Street Cerritos Avenue to Ball Road 17,740 71.1 59 127 274 West Street Orangewood Avenue to Katella Avenue 15,030 68.6 40 87 187 Chapman Avenue State College Boulevard to SR-57 Freeway 38,400 76.0 125 269 580 Chapman Avenue SR-57 Freeway to Main Street 33,930 75.4 115 248 534 State College Boulevard Chapman Avenue to I-5 Freeway 45,860 78.3 180 388 835 State College Boulevard I-5 Freeway to Orangewood Avenue 48,060 78.5 186 400 862 State College Boulevard Orangewood Avenue to Gene Autry Way 46,900 76.8 143 308 663 State College Boulevard Gene Autry Way to Katella Avenue 34,920 75.6 117 253 544 State College Boulevard Katella Avenue to Howell Avenue 46,470 76.8 142 306 659 State College Boulevard Howell Avenue to Cerritos Avenue 31,130 75.1 109 234 504 State College Boulevard Cerritos Avenue to Ball Road 28,570 74.7 103 221 476 Table 5 Noise Contours for 2030 With Project Conditions Roadway Segment Daily Traffic Volumes Noise level at 50 feet (dBA CNEL) Distance to noise contour (feet) ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Anaheim Boulevard Analyst FJS Segment: Katella Avenue to I-5 Freeway Date: ADT 31,080 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 72 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 2051 10 10 718 4 4 444 2 2 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 1.3 -21.7 -21.7 -3.3 -26.2 -26.2 -5.4 -28.3 -28.3 Distance 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 72.9 58.2 62.7 68.3 53.7 58.2 66.3 51.6 56.1 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 73.4 Leq EVENING= 68.9 Leq NIGHT= 66.8 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 74.8 CNEL= 75.0 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 104 224 482 CNEL: 109 234 504 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 26-Apr-11 1 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Anaheim Boulevard Analyst FJS Segment: I-5 Freeway to Cerritos Avenue Date: ADT 55,320 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 72 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 3651 18 18 1278 6 6 791 4 4 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 3.8 -19.2 -19.2 -0.8 -23.7 -23.7 -2.9 -25.8 -25.8 Distance 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 75.4 60.7 65.2 70.8 56.2 60.7 68.8 54.1 58.6 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 75.9 Leq EVENING= 71.4 Leq NIGHT= 69.3 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 77.3 CNEL= 77.6 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 152 328 707 CNEL: 159 343 740 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 2 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Anaheim Boulevard Analyst FJS Segment: Cerritos Avenue to Ball Road Date: ADT 46,190 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 48 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 3049 15 15 1067 5 5 661 3 3 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 3.0 -20.0 -20.0 -1.6 -24.5 -24.5 -3.6 -26.6 -26.6 Distance 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 73.1 58.4 62.9 68.5 53.8 58.4 66.5 51.8 56.3 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 73.6 Leq EVENING= 69.1 Leq NIGHT= 67.0 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 75.0 CNEL= 75.2 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 107 230 496 CNEL: 112 241 519 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 3 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Ball Road Analyst FJS Segment: Euclid Street to Walnut Street Date: ADT 34,040 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 72 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 2247 11 11 786 4 4 487 2 2 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 1.7 -21.3 -21.3 -2.9 -25.8 -25.8 -5.0 -27.9 -27.9 Distance 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 73.3 58.6 63.1 68.7 54.0 58.6 66.7 52.0 56.5 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 73.8 Leq EVENING= 69.3 Leq NIGHT= 67.2 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 75.2 CNEL= 75.4 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 110 238 512 CNEL: 115 248 535 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 4 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Ball Road Analyst FJS Segment: Walnut Street to Disneyland Drive Date: ADT 42,390 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 72 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 2798 14 14 979 5 5 606 3 3 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 2.6 -20.3 -20.3 -1.9 -24.9 -24.9 -4.0 -27.0 -27.0 Distance 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 74.2 59.6 64.1 69.7 55.0 59.5 67.6 52.9 57.4 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 74.8 Leq EVENING= 70.2 Leq NIGHT= 68.1 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 76.1 CNEL= 76.4 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 128 275 592 CNEL: 133 288 620 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 5 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Ball Road Analyst FJS Segment: Disneyland Drive to Harbor BoulevDate: ADT 58,690 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 72 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 3874 20 20 1356 7 7 839 4 4 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 4.0 -18.9 -18.9 -0.5 -23.5 -23.5 -2.6 -25.6 -25.6 Distance 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 75.7 61.0 65.5 71.1 56.4 60.9 69.0 54.3 58.9 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 76.2 Leq EVENING= 71.6 Leq NIGHT= 69.6 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 77.5 CNEL= 77.8 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 159 342 736 CNEL: 166 357 770 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 6 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Ball Road Analyst FJS Segment: Harbor Boulevard to Anaheim Bou Date: ADT 47,460 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 72 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 3132 16 16 1096 6 6 679 3 3 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 3.1 -19.8 -19.8 -1.4 -24.4 -24.4 -3.5 -26.5 -26.5 Distance 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 74.7 60.1 64.6 70.2 55.5 60.0 68.1 53.4 57.9 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 75.3 Leq EVENING= 70.7 Leq NIGHT= 68.6 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 76.6 CNEL= 76.9 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 138 296 639 CNEL: 144 310 668 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 7 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Ball Road Analyst FJS Segment: Anaheim Boulevard to East Street Date: ADT 46,390 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 72 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 3062 15 15 1072 5 5 663 3 3 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 3.0 -19.9 -19.9 -1.5 -24.5 -24.5 -3.6 -26.6 -26.6 Distance 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 74.6 60.0 64.5 70.1 55.4 59.9 68.0 53.3 57.8 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 75.2 Leq EVENING= 70.6 Leq NIGHT= 68.5 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 76.5 CNEL= 76.8 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 136 292 629 CNEL: 142 305 658 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 8 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Ball Road Analyst FJS Segment: East Street to State College Boule Date: ADT 47,540 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 72 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 3138 16 16 1098 6 6 680 3 3 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 3.1 -19.8 -19.8 -1.4 -24.4 -24.4 -3.5 -26.5 -26.5 Distance 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 74.7 60.1 64.6 70.2 55.5 60.0 68.1 53.4 57.9 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 75.3 Leq EVENING= 70.7 Leq NIGHT= 68.6 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 76.6 CNEL= 76.9 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 138 297 639 CNEL: 144 310 669 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 9 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Ball Road Analyst FJS Segment: State College Boulevard to Sunkis Date: ADT 48,590 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 48 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 3207 16 16 1122 6 6 695 4 4 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 3.2 -19.7 -19.7 -1.3 -24.3 -24.3 -3.4 -26.4 -26.4 Distance 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 73.3 58.6 63.1 68.8 54.1 58.6 66.7 52.0 56.5 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 73.8 Leq EVENING= 69.3 Leq NIGHT= 67.2 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 75.2 CNEL= 75.5 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 111 238 513 CNEL: 116 249 537 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 10 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Ball Road Analyst FJS Segment: Sunkist Street to SR-57 Freeway Date: ADT 61,800 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 72 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 4079 21 21 1428 7 7 884 4 4 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 4.3 -18.7 -18.7 -0.3 -23.3 -23.3 -2.4 -25.3 -25.3 Distance 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 75.9 61.2 65.7 71.3 56.6 61.2 69.2 54.6 59.1 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 76.4 Leq EVENING= 71.9 Leq NIGHT= 69.8 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 77.7 CNEL= 78.0 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 164 354 762 CNEL: 172 370 797 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 11 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Ball Road Analyst FJS Segment: SR-57 Freeway to Main Street Date: ADT 60,250 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 72 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 3977 20 20 1392 7 7 862 4 4 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 4.2 -18.8 -18.8 -0.4 -23.4 -23.4 -2.5 -25.5 -25.5 Distance 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 75.8 61.1 65.6 71.2 56.5 61.0 69.1 54.4 59.0 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 76.3 Leq EVENING= 71.7 Leq NIGHT= 69.7 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 77.6 CNEL= 77.9 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 161 348 749 CNEL: 169 364 783 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 12 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Clementine Street Analyst FJS Segment: Manchester Avenue to Disney WayDate: ADT 24,080 SPEED (mph) 40 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 36 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 1589 8 8 556 3 3 344 2 2 Speed in MPH 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 67.4 76.3 81.2 67.4 76.3 81.2 67.4 76.3 81.2 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 0.7 -22.3 -22.3 -3.9 -26.8 -26.8 -6.0 -28.9 -28.9 Distance 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 68.4 54.4 59.2 63.8 49.8 54.7 61.8 47.7 52.6 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 69.0 Leq EVENING= 64.5 Leq NIGHT= 62.4 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 70.4 CNEL= 70.7 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 53 114 245 CNEL: 55 119 257 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 13 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Clementine Street Analyst FJS Segment: Disney Way to Katella Avenue Date: ADT 8,470 SPEED (mph) 40 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 36 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 559 3 3 196 1 1 121 1 1 Speed in MPH 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 67.4 76.3 81.2 67.4 76.3 81.2 67.4 76.3 81.2 ADJUSTMENTS Flow -3.9 -26.8 -26.8 -8.4 -31.4 -31.4 -10.5 -33.5 -33.5 Distance 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 63.9 49.8 54.7 59.3 45.3 50.1 57.2 43.2 48.0 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 64.5 Leq EVENING= 59.9 Leq NIGHT= 57.9 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 65.8 CNEL= 66.1 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 26 57 122 CNEL: 28 59 128 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 14 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Clementine Street Analyst FJS Segment: Katella Avenue to Gene Autrey Date: ADT 5,720 SPEED (mph) 40 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 36 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 378 2 2 132 1 1 82 0 0 Speed in MPH 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 67.4 76.3 81.2 67.4 76.3 81.2 67.4 76.3 81.2 ADJUSTMENTS Flow -5.6 -28.5 -28.5 -10.1 -33.1 -33.1 -12.2 -35.2 -35.2 Distance 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 62.1 48.1 53.0 57.6 43.6 48.4 55.5 41.5 46.3 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 62.8 Leq EVENING= 58.2 Leq NIGHT= 56.2 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 64.1 CNEL= 64.4 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 20 44 94 CNEL: 21 46 98 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 14a ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Clementine Street Analyst FJS Segment: Gene Autry Way to Orangewood Date: ADT 9,010 SPEED (mph) 40 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 36 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 595 3 3 208 1 1 129 1 1 Speed in MPH 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 67.4 76.3 81.2 67.4 76.3 81.2 67.4 76.3 81.2 ADJUSTMENTS Flow -3.6 -26.6 -26.6 -8.1 -31.1 -31.1 -10.2 -33.2 -33.2 Distance 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 64.1 50.1 55.0 59.6 45.6 50.4 57.5 43.5 48.3 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 64.8 Leq EVENING= 60.2 Leq NIGHT= 58.1 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 66.1 CNEL= 66.4 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 27 59 127 CNEL: 29 62 133 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 14b ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Convention Way/Gene Autry Way Analyst FJS Segment: Harbor Boulevard to Clementine S Date: ADT 24,940 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 72 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 1646 8 8 576 3 3 357 2 2 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 0.3 -22.6 -22.6 -4.2 -27.2 -27.2 -6.3 -29.3 -29.3 Distance 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 71.9 57.3 61.8 67.4 52.7 57.2 65.3 50.6 55.1 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 72.5 Leq EVENING= 67.9 Leq NIGHT= 65.8 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 73.8 CNEL= 74.1 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 90 193 416 CNEL: 94 202 435 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 14c ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Convention Way/Gene Autry Way Analyst FJS Segment: Clementine Street to Haster StreetDate: ADT 30,800 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 72 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 2033 10 10 711 4 4 440 2 2 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 1.2 -21.7 -21.7 -3.3 -26.3 -26.3 -5.4 -28.4 -28.4 Distance 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 72.9 58.2 62.7 68.3 53.6 58.1 66.2 51.5 56.1 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 73.4 Leq EVENING= 68.8 Leq NIGHT= 66.8 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 74.7 CNEL= 75.0 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 103 222 479 CNEL: 108 232 501 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 14d ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Convention Way/Gene Autry Way Analyst FJS Segment: Haster Street to I-5 Freeway Date: ADT 38,780 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 72 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 2559 13 13 896 5 5 555 3 3 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 2.2 -20.7 -20.7 -2.3 -25.3 -25.3 -4.4 -27.4 -27.4 Distance 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 73.9 59.2 63.7 69.3 54.6 59.1 67.2 52.5 57.1 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 74.4 Leq EVENING= 69.8 Leq NIGHT= 67.8 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 75.7 CNEL= 76.0 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 120 259 558 CNEL: 126 271 584 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 14e ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Disney Way Analyst FJS Segment: Harbor Boulevard to Clementine S Date: ADT 17,040 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 72 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 1125 6 6 394 2 2 244 1 1 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow -1.3 -24.3 -24.3 -5.9 -28.9 -28.9 -8.0 -30.9 -30.9 Distance 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 70.3 55.6 60.1 65.7 51.0 55.6 63.6 49.0 53.5 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 70.8 Leq EVENING= 66.3 Leq NIGHT= 64.2 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 72.1 CNEL= 72.4 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 70 150 323 CNEL: 73 157 337 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 15 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Disney Way Analyst FJS Segment: Clementine Street to Anaheim BouDate: ADT 26,660 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 72 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 1760 9 9 616 3 3 381 2 2 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 0.6 -22.4 -22.4 -3.9 -26.9 -26.9 -6.0 -29.0 -29.0 Distance 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 72.2 57.5 62.1 67.7 53.0 57.5 65.6 50.9 55.4 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 72.8 Leq EVENING= 68.2 Leq NIGHT= 66.1 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 74.1 CNEL= 74.4 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 94 202 435 CNEL: 98 211 455 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 16 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Disneyland Drive Analyst FJS Segment: Katella Avenue to Magic Way Date: ADT 34,500 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 48 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 2277 12 12 797 4 4 493 2 2 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 1.7 -21.2 -21.2 -2.8 -25.8 -25.8 -4.9 -27.9 -27.9 Distance 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 71.8 57.1 61.7 67.3 52.6 57.1 65.2 50.5 55.0 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 72.4 Leq EVENING= 67.8 Leq NIGHT= 65.7 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 73.7 CNEL= 74.0 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 88 190 408 CNEL: 92 198 427 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 17 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Disneyland Drive Analyst FJS Segment: Magic Way to Ball Road Date: ADT 32,800 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 48 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 2165 11 11 758 4 4 469 2 2 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 1.5 -21.5 -21.5 -3.0 -26.0 -26.0 -5.1 -28.1 -28.1 Distance 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 71.6 56.9 61.4 67.0 52.4 56.9 65.0 50.3 54.8 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 72.1 Leq EVENING= 67.6 Leq NIGHT= 65.5 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 73.5 CNEL= 73.8 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 85 183 395 CNEL: 89 192 413 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 18 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Disneyland Drive Analyst FJS Segment: Ball Road to Manchester Avenue Date: ADT 42,930 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 72 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 2833 14 14 992 5 5 614 3 3 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 2.7 -20.3 -20.3 -1.9 -24.8 -24.8 -4.0 -26.9 -26.9 Distance 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 74.3 59.6 64.1 69.7 55.1 59.6 67.7 53.0 57.5 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 74.8 Leq EVENING= 70.3 Leq NIGHT= 68.2 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 76.2 CNEL= 76.5 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 129 277 597 CNEL: 135 290 625 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 19 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Harbor Boulevard Analyst FJS Segment: Wilken Way to Orangewood AvenuDate: ADT 50,410 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 72 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 3327 17 17 1164 6 6 721 4 4 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 3.4 -19.6 -19.6 -1.2 -24.1 -24.1 -3.3 -26.2 -26.2 Distance 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 75.0 60.3 64.8 70.4 55.8 60.3 68.4 53.7 58.2 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 75.5 Leq EVENING= 71.0 Leq NIGHT= 68.9 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 76.9 CNEL= 77.1 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 143 309 665 CNEL: 150 323 695 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 20 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Harbor Boulevard Analyst FJS Segment: Orangewood Avenue to ConventioDate: ADT 47,600 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 72 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 3142 16 16 1100 6 6 681 3 3 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 3.1 -19.8 -19.8 -1.4 -24.4 -24.4 -3.5 -26.5 -26.5 Distance 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 74.8 60.1 64.6 70.2 55.5 60.0 68.1 53.4 57.9 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 75.3 Leq EVENING= 70.7 Leq NIGHT= 68.6 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 76.6 CNEL= 76.9 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 138 297 640 CNEL: 144 311 669 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 21 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Harbor Boulevard Analyst FJS Segment: Convention Way to Katella AvenueDate: ADT 50,570 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 72 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 3338 17 17 1168 6 6 723 4 4 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 3.4 -19.6 -19.6 -1.2 -24.1 -24.1 -3.2 -26.2 -26.2 Distance 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 75.0 60.3 64.8 70.5 55.8 60.3 68.4 53.7 58.2 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 75.5 Leq EVENING= 71.0 Leq NIGHT= 68.9 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 76.9 CNEL= 77.2 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 144 309 666 CNEL: 150 323 697 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 22 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Harbor Boulevard Analyst FJS Segment: Katella Avenue to Disney Way Date: ADT 56,950 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 72 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 3759 19 19 1316 7 7 814 4 4 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 3.9 -19.1 -19.1 -0.6 -23.6 -23.6 -2.7 -25.7 -25.7 Distance 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 75.5 60.8 65.4 71.0 56.3 60.8 68.9 54.2 58.7 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 76.1 Leq EVENING= 71.5 Leq NIGHT= 69.4 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 77.4 CNEL= 77.7 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 155 335 721 CNEL: 163 350 754 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 23 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Harbor Boulevard Analyst FJS Segment: Disney Way to Machester Avenue Date: ADT 54,670 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 72 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 3608 18 18 1263 6 6 782 4 4 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 3.7 -19.2 -19.2 -0.8 -23.8 -23.8 -2.9 -25.9 -25.9 Distance 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 75.4 60.7 65.2 70.8 56.1 60.6 68.7 54.0 58.5 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 75.9 Leq EVENING= 71.3 Leq NIGHT= 69.2 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 77.2 CNEL= 77.5 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 151 326 702 CNEL: 158 341 734 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 24 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Harbor Boulevard Analyst FJS Segment: I-5 Freeway to Ball Road Date: ADT 59,460 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 84 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 3924 20 20 1374 7 7 850 4 4 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 4.1 -18.9 -18.9 -0.5 -23.4 -23.4 -2.5 -25.5 -25.5 Distance 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 77.3 62.6 67.2 72.8 58.1 62.6 70.7 56.0 60.5 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 77.9 Leq EVENING= 73.3 Leq NIGHT= 71.2 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 79.2 CNEL= 79.5 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 205 441 949 CNEL: 214 461 993 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 25 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Haster Street Analyst FJS Segment: Orangewood Avenue to Gene AutrDate: ADT 39,830 SPEED (mph) 40 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 36 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 2629 13 13 920 5 5 570 3 3 Speed in MPH 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 67.4 76.3 81.2 67.4 76.3 81.2 67.4 76.3 81.2 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 2.9 -20.1 -20.1 -1.7 -24.7 -24.7 -3.8 -26.7 -26.7 Distance 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 70.6 56.6 61.4 66.0 52.0 56.9 63.9 49.9 54.8 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 71.2 Leq EVENING= 66.7 Leq NIGHT= 64.6 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 72.5 CNEL= 72.8 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 74 159 343 CNEL: 77 167 359 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 26 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Haster Street Analyst FJS Segment: Gene Autry Way to Katella AvenueDate: ADT 25,290 SPEED (mph) 40 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 36 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 1669 8 8 584 3 3 362 2 2 Speed in MPH 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 67.4 76.3 81.2 67.4 76.3 81.2 67.4 76.3 81.2 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 0.9 -22.1 -22.1 -3.7 -26.6 -26.6 -5.7 -28.7 -28.7 Distance 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 68.6 54.6 59.4 64.0 50.0 54.9 62.0 47.9 52.8 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 69.3 Leq EVENING= 64.7 Leq NIGHT= 62.6 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 70.6 CNEL= 70.9 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 55 118 254 CNEL: 57 123 265 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 27 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Katella Avenue Analyst FJS Segment: Ninth Street to Walnut Street Date: ADT 48,170 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 72 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 3179 16 16 1113 6 6 689 3 3 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 3.2 -19.8 -19.8 -1.4 -24.3 -24.3 -3.5 -26.4 -26.4 Distance 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 74.8 60.1 64.6 70.2 55.6 60.1 68.2 53.5 58.0 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 75.3 Leq EVENING= 70.8 Leq NIGHT= 68.7 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 76.7 CNEL= 77.0 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 139 299 645 CNEL: 145 313 675 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 28 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Katella Avenue Analyst FJS Segment: Walnut Street to Disneyland Drive Date: ADT 56,930 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 72 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 3757 19 19 1315 7 7 814 4 4 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 3.9 -19.1 -19.1 -0.6 -23.6 -23.6 -2.7 -25.7 -25.7 Distance 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 75.5 60.8 65.4 71.0 56.3 60.8 68.9 54.2 58.7 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 76.1 Leq EVENING= 71.5 Leq NIGHT= 69.4 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 77.4 CNEL= 77.7 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 155 335 721 CNEL: 162 350 754 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 29 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Katella Avenue Analyst FJS Segment: Disneyland Drive to Hotel Way Date: ADT 67,110 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 72 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 4429 22 22 1550 8 8 960 5 5 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 4.6 -18.3 -18.3 0.1 -22.9 -22.9 -2.0 -25.0 -25.0 Distance 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 76.2 61.6 66.1 71.7 57.0 61.5 69.6 54.9 59.4 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 76.8 Leq EVENING= 72.2 Leq NIGHT= 70.1 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 78.1 CNEL= 78.4 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 173 373 805 CNEL: 181 391 842 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 30 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Katella Avenue Analyst FJS Segment: Hotel Way to Harbor Boulevard Date: ADT 63,060 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 72 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 4162 21 21 1457 7 7 902 5 5 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 4.4 -18.6 -18.6 -0.2 -23.2 -23.2 -2.3 -25.3 -25.3 Distance 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 76.0 61.3 65.8 71.4 56.7 61.2 69.3 54.6 59.2 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 76.5 Leq EVENING= 71.9 Leq NIGHT= 69.9 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 77.8 CNEL= 78.1 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 166 358 772 CNEL: 174 375 807 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 31 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Katella Avenue Analyst FJS Segment: Harbor Boulevard to Clementine S Date: ADT 59,260 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 72 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 3911 20 20 1369 7 7 847 4 4 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 4.1 -18.9 -18.9 -0.5 -23.4 -23.4 -2.6 -25.5 -25.5 Distance 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 75.7 61.0 65.5 71.1 56.5 61.0 69.1 54.4 58.9 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 76.2 Leq EVENING= 71.7 Leq NIGHT= 69.6 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 77.6 CNEL= 77.9 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 160 344 741 CNEL: 167 360 775 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 32 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Katella Avenue Analyst FJS Segment: Clementine Street to Anaheim BouDate: ADT 59,840 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 72 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 3949 20 20 1382 7 7 856 4 4 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 4.1 -18.8 -18.8 -0.4 -23.4 -23.4 -2.5 -25.5 -25.5 Distance 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 75.7 61.1 65.6 71.2 56.5 61.0 69.1 54.4 58.9 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 76.3 Leq EVENING= 71.7 Leq NIGHT= 69.6 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 77.6 CNEL= 77.9 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 161 346 745 CNEL: 168 362 780 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 33 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Katella Avenue Analyst FJS Segment: Anaheim Boulevard to ManchesterDate: ADT 57,710 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 72 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 3809 19 19 1333 7 7 825 4 4 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 4.0 -19.0 -19.0 -0.6 -23.6 -23.6 -2.7 -25.6 -25.6 Distance 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 75.6 60.9 65.4 71.0 56.3 60.9 68.9 54.3 58.8 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 76.1 Leq EVENING= 71.6 Leq NIGHT= 69.5 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 77.4 CNEL= 77.7 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 157 338 728 CNEL: 164 353 761 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 34 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Katella Avenue Analyst FJS Segment: Manchester Avenue to Anaheim WDate: ADT 53,740 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 72 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 3547 18 18 1241 6 6 768 4 4 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 3.7 -19.3 -19.3 -0.9 -23.9 -23.9 -3.0 -25.9 -25.9 Distance 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 75.3 60.6 65.1 70.7 56.0 60.6 68.6 53.9 58.5 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 75.8 Leq EVENING= 71.3 Leq NIGHT= 69.2 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 77.1 CNEL= 77.4 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 149 322 694 CNEL: 156 337 726 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 35 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Katella Avenue Analyst FJS Segment: Anaheim Way to Lewis Street Date: ADT 61,390 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 72 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 4052 20 20 1418 7 7 878 4 4 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 4.2 -18.7 -18.7 -0.3 -23.3 -23.3 -2.4 -25.4 -25.4 Distance 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 75.9 61.2 65.7 71.3 56.6 61.1 69.2 54.5 59.0 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 76.4 Leq EVENING= 71.8 Leq NIGHT= 69.7 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 77.7 CNEL= 78.0 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 163 352 758 CNEL: 171 368 793 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 36 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Katella Avenue Analyst FJS Segment: Lewis Street to State College Boul Date: ADT 57,860 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 72 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 3819 19 19 1337 7 7 827 4 4 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 4.0 -19.0 -19.0 -0.6 -23.5 -23.5 -2.7 -25.6 -25.6 Distance 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 75.6 60.9 65.4 71.0 56.4 60.9 69.0 54.3 58.8 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 76.1 Leq EVENING= 71.6 Leq NIGHT= 69.5 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 77.5 CNEL= 77.7 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 157 338 729 CNEL: 164 354 762 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 37 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Katella Avenue Analyst FJS Segment: State College Boulevard to ADT 51,920 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 72 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 3427 17 17 1199 6 6 742 4 4 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 3.5 -19.5 -19.5 -1.0 -24.0 -24.0 -3.1 -26.1 -26.1 Distance 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 75.1 60.4 65.0 70.6 55.9 60.4 68.5 53.8 58.3 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 75.7 Leq EVENING= 71.1 Leq NIGHT= 69.0 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 77.0 CNEL= 77.3 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 146 315 678 CNEL: 153 329 709 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 38 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Katella Avenue Analyst FJS Segment: Sportstown to Howell Avenue Date: ADT 62,310 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 72 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 4112 21 21 1439 7 7 891 5 5 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 4.3 -18.7 -18.7 -0.3 -23.2 -23.2 -2.3 -25.3 -25.3 Distance 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 75.9 61.2 65.8 71.4 56.7 61.2 69.3 54.6 59.1 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 76.5 Leq EVENING= 71.9 Leq NIGHT= 69.8 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 77.8 CNEL= 78.1 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 165 355 766 CNEL: 173 372 801 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 39 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Katella Avenue Analyst FJS Segment: Howell Avenue to SR-57 Freeway Date: ADT 71,190 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 72 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 4699 24 24 1644 8 8 1018 5 5 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 4.9 -18.1 -18.1 0.3 -22.6 -22.6 -1.8 -24.7 -24.7 Distance 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 76.5 61.8 66.3 71.9 57.3 61.8 69.9 55.2 59.7 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 77.0 Leq EVENING= 72.5 Leq NIGHT= 70.4 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 78.4 CNEL= 78.6 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 180 388 837 CNEL: 189 406 875 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 40 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Katella Avenue Analyst FJS Segment: SR-57 Freeway to Main Street Date: ADT 62,900 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 72 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 4151 21 21 1453 7 7 899 5 5 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 4.3 -18.6 -18.6 -0.2 -23.2 -23.2 -2.3 -25.3 -25.3 Distance 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 76.0 61.3 65.8 71.4 56.7 61.2 69.3 54.6 59.2 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 76.5 Leq EVENING= 71.9 Leq NIGHT= 69.9 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 77.8 CNEL= 78.1 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 166 358 771 CNEL: 174 374 806 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 41 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Manchester Avenue Analyst FJS Segment: Clementine Street to Harbor StreetDate: ADT 10,290 SPEED (mph) 25 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 12 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 679 3 3 238 1 1 147 1 1 Speed in MPH 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 59.4 71.1 77.2 59.4 71.1 77.2 59.4 71.1 77.2 ADJUSTMENTS Flow -1.0 -23.9 -23.9 -5.5 -28.5 -28.5 -7.6 -30.6 -30.6 Distance -0.1 -0.1 -0.1 -0.1 -0.1 -0.1 -0.1 -0.1 -0.1 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 58.4 47.1 53.3 53.9 42.5 48.7 51.8 40.5 46.6 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 59.8 Leq EVENING= 55.3 Leq NIGHT= 53.2 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 61.1 CNEL= 61.4 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 13 28 59 CNEL: 13 29 62 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 42 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Orangewood Avenue Analyst FJS Segment: West Street to Harbor Boulevard Date: ADT 22,670 SPEED (mph) 40 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 36 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 1496 8 8 524 3 3 324 2 2 Speed in MPH 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 67.4 76.3 81.2 67.4 76.3 81.2 67.4 76.3 81.2 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 0.4 -22.5 -22.5 -4.1 -27.1 -27.1 -6.2 -29.2 -29.2 Distance 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 68.1 54.1 59.0 63.6 49.6 54.4 61.5 47.5 52.3 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 68.8 Leq EVENING= 64.2 Leq NIGHT= 62.1 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 70.1 CNEL= 70.4 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 51 109 236 CNEL: 53 114 247 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 43 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Orangewood Avenue Analyst FJS Segment: Harbor Boulevard to Clementine S Date: ADT 21,850 SPEED (mph) 40 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 36 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 1442 7 7 505 3 3 312 2 2 Speed in MPH 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 67.4 76.3 81.2 67.4 76.3 81.2 67.4 76.3 81.2 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 0.3 -22.7 -22.7 -4.3 -27.3 -27.3 -6.4 -29.3 -29.3 Distance 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 68.0 54.0 58.8 63.4 49.4 54.2 61.3 47.3 52.2 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 68.6 Leq EVENING= 64.1 Leq NIGHT= 62.0 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 69.9 CNEL= 70.2 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 50 107 230 CNEL: 52 112 241 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 44 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Orangewood Avenue Analyst FJS Segment: Clementine Street to Haster StreetDate: ADT 21,480 SPEED (mph) 40 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 36 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 1418 7 7 496 3 3 307 2 2 Speed in MPH 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 67.4 76.3 81.2 67.4 76.3 81.2 67.4 76.3 81.2 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 0.2 -22.8 -22.8 -4.4 -27.3 -27.3 -6.5 -29.4 -29.4 Distance 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 67.9 53.9 58.7 63.3 49.3 54.2 61.3 47.2 52.1 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 68.5 Leq EVENING= 64.0 Leq NIGHT= 61.9 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 69.9 CNEL= 70.2 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 49 106 227 CNEL: 51 110 238 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 45 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Orangewood Avenue Analyst FJS Segment: Haster Street to Manchester AvenuDate: ADT 25,910 SPEED (mph) 40 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 36 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 1710 9 9 599 3 3 371 2 2 Speed in MPH 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 67.4 76.3 81.2 67.4 76.3 81.2 67.4 76.3 81.2 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 1.0 -22.0 -22.0 -3.6 -26.5 -26.5 -5.6 -28.6 -28.6 Distance 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 68.7 54.7 59.5 64.2 50.1 55.0 62.1 48.1 52.9 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 69.4 Leq EVENING= 64.8 Leq NIGHT= 62.7 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 70.7 CNEL= 71.0 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 56 120 258 CNEL: 58 125 270 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 46 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Orangewood Avenue* Analyst FJS Segment: Manchester Avenue to State Colle Date: ADT 34,410 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 72 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 2271 11 11 795 4 4 492 2 2 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 1.7 -21.2 -21.2 -2.8 -25.8 -25.8 -4.9 -27.9 -27.9 Distance 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 73.3 58.7 63.2 68.8 54.1 58.6 66.7 52.0 56.5 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 73.9 Leq EVENING= 69.3 Leq NIGHT= 67.2 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 75.2 CNEL= 75.5 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 111 239 515 CNEL: 116 250 539 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 47 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Orangewood Avenue Analyst FJS Segment: State College Boulevard to RampaDate: ADT 50,380 SPEED (mph) 40 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 36 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 3325 17 17 1164 6 6 720 4 4 Speed in MPH 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 67.4 76.3 81.2 67.4 76.3 81.2 67.4 76.3 81.2 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 3.9 -19.1 -19.1 -0.7 -23.6 -23.6 -2.8 -25.7 -25.7 Distance 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 71.6 57.6 62.4 67.0 53.0 57.9 65.0 50.9 55.8 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 72.2 Leq EVENING= 67.7 Leq NIGHT= 65.6 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 73.6 CNEL= 73.9 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 86 186 401 CNEL: 90 195 420 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Orangewood Avenue* Analyst FJS Segment: Rampart Street to SR-57 Freeway Date: ADT 47,660 SPEED (mph) 40 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 36 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 3146 16 16 1101 6 6 682 3 3 Speed in MPH 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 67.4 76.3 81.2 67.4 76.3 81.2 67.4 76.3 81.2 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 3.7 -19.3 -19.3 -0.9 -23.9 -23.9 -3.0 -26.0 -26.0 Distance 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 71.4 57.3 62.2 66.8 52.8 57.6 64.7 50.7 55.5 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 72.0 Leq EVENING= 67.4 Leq NIGHT= 65.4 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 73.3 CNEL= 73.6 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 83 180 387 CNEL: 87 188 405 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 49 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Orangewood Avenue Analyst FJS Segment: SR-57 Freeway to Eckhoff Street Date: ADT 49,090 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 48 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 3240 16 16 1134 6 6 702 4 4 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 3.3 -19.7 -19.7 -1.3 -24.3 -24.3 -3.4 -26.3 -26.3 Distance 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 73.4 58.7 63.2 68.8 54.1 58.6 66.7 52.0 56.5 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 73.9 Leq EVENING= 69.3 Leq NIGHT= 67.2 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 75.2 CNEL= 75.5 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 111 240 517 CNEL: 116 251 541 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 50 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Orangewood Avenue Analyst FJS Segment: Eckhoff Street to Main Street Date: ADT 19,610 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 48 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 1294 7 7 453 2 2 280 1 1 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow -0.7 -23.7 -23.7 -5.3 -28.2 -28.2 -7.4 -30.3 -30.3 Distance 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 69.4 54.7 59.2 64.8 50.1 54.6 62.7 48.0 52.6 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 69.9 Leq EVENING= 65.3 Leq NIGHT= 63.3 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 71.2 CNEL= 71.5 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 60 130 280 CNEL: 63 136 293 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 51 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Walnut Street Analyst FJS Segment: Katella Avenue to Cerritos AvenueDate: ADT 16,430 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 48 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 1084 5 5 380 2 2 235 1 1 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow -1.5 -24.5 -24.5 -6.0 -29.0 -29.0 -8.1 -31.1 -31.1 Distance 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 68.6 53.9 58.4 64.0 49.4 53.9 62.0 47.3 51.8 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 69.1 Leq EVENING= 64.6 Leq NIGHT= 62.5 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 70.5 CNEL= 70.8 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 54 116 249 CNEL: 56 121 261 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 52 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Walnut Street Analyst FJS Segment: Cerritos Avenue to Ball Road Date: ADT 17,740 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 48 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 1171 6 6 410 2 2 254 1 1 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow -1.2 -24.1 -24.1 -5.7 -28.7 -28.7 -7.8 -30.8 -30.8 Distance 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 68.9 54.3 58.8 64.4 49.7 54.2 62.3 47.6 52.1 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 69.5 Leq EVENING= 64.9 Leq NIGHT= 62.8 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 70.8 CNEL= 71.1 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 56 122 262 CNEL: 59 127 274 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 53 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: West Street Analyst FJS Segment: Orangewood Avenue to Katella AvDate: ADT 15,030 SPEED (mph) 40 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 36 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 992 5 5 347 2 2 215 1 1 Speed in MPH 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 67.4 76.3 81.2 67.4 76.3 81.2 67.4 76.3 81.2 ADJUSTMENTS Flow -1.4 -24.3 -24.3 -5.9 -28.9 -28.9 -8.0 -31.0 -31.0 Distance 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 66.3 52.3 57.2 61.8 47.8 52.6 59.7 45.7 50.5 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 67.0 Leq EVENING= 62.4 Leq NIGHT= 60.4 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 68.3 CNEL= 68.6 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 39 83 179 CNEL: 40 87 187 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 54 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Chapman Avenue Analyst FJS Segment: State College Boulevard to SR-57 Date: ADT 38,400 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 72 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 2534 13 13 887 4 4 549 3 3 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 2.2 -20.8 -20.8 -2.4 -25.3 -25.3 -4.4 -27.4 -27.4 Distance 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 73.8 59.1 63.7 69.3 54.6 59.1 67.2 52.5 57.0 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 74.4 Leq EVENING= 69.8 Leq NIGHT= 67.7 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 75.7 CNEL= 76.0 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 119 257 555 CNEL: 125 269 580 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 55 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: Chapman Avenue Analyst FJS Segment: SR-57 Freeway to Main Street Date: ADT 33,930 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 72 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 2239 11 11 784 4 4 485 2 2 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 1.7 -21.3 -21.3 -2.9 -25.9 -25.9 -5.0 -27.9 -27.9 Distance 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 73.3 58.6 63.1 68.7 54.0 58.6 66.6 52.0 56.5 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 73.8 Leq EVENING= 69.3 Leq NIGHT= 67.2 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 75.1 CNEL= 75.4 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 110 237 511 CNEL: 115 248 534 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 56 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: State College Boulevard Analyst FJS Segment: Chapman Avenue to I-5 Freway Date: ADT 45,860 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 84 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 3027 15 15 1059 5 5 656 3 3 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 3.0 -20.0 -20.0 -1.6 -24.6 -24.6 -3.7 -26.6 -26.6 Distance 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 76.2 61.5 66.0 71.6 56.9 61.5 69.6 54.9 59.4 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 76.7 Leq EVENING= 72.2 Leq NIGHT= 70.1 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 78.0 CNEL= 78.3 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 172 371 798 CNEL: 180 388 835 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 57 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: State College Boulevard Analyst FJS Segment: I-5 Freeway to Orangewood AvenuDate: ADT 48,060 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 84 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 3172 16 16 1110 6 6 687 3 3 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 3.2 -19.8 -19.8 -1.4 -24.4 -24.4 -3.5 -26.4 -26.4 Distance 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 76.4 61.7 66.2 71.8 57.1 61.7 69.8 55.1 59.6 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 76.9 Leq EVENING= 72.4 Leq NIGHT= 70.3 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 78.3 CNEL= 78.5 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 177 382 824 CNEL: 186 400 862 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 58 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: State College Boulevard Analyst FJS Segment: Orangewood Avenue to Gene AutrDate: ADT 46,900 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 72 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 3095 16 16 1083 5 5 671 3 3 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 3.1 -19.9 -19.9 -1.5 -24.5 -24.5 -3.6 -26.5 -26.5 Distance 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 74.7 60.0 64.5 70.1 55.4 60.0 68.0 53.4 57.9 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 75.2 Leq EVENING= 70.7 Leq NIGHT= 68.6 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 76.5 CNEL= 76.8 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 137 294 634 CNEL: 143 308 663 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 59 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: State College Boulevard Analyst FJS Segment: Gene Autry Way to Katella AvenueDate: ADT 34,920 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 72 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 2305 12 12 807 4 4 499 3 3 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 1.8 -21.2 -21.2 -2.8 -25.7 -25.7 -4.9 -27.8 -27.8 Distance 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 73.4 58.7 63.2 68.8 54.2 58.7 66.8 52.1 56.6 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 73.9 Leq EVENING= 69.4 Leq NIGHT= 67.3 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 75.3 CNEL= 75.6 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 112 242 521 CNEL: 117 253 544 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 60 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: State College Boulevard Analyst FJS Segment: Katella Avenue to Howell Avenue Date: ADT 46,470 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 72 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 3067 15 15 1073 5 5 665 3 3 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 3.0 -19.9 -19.9 -1.5 -24.5 -24.5 -3.6 -26.6 -26.6 Distance 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 74.6 60.0 64.5 70.1 55.4 59.9 68.0 53.3 57.8 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 75.2 Leq EVENING= 70.6 Leq NIGHT= 68.5 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 76.5 CNEL= 76.8 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 136 292 630 CNEL: 142 306 659 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 61 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: State College Boulevard Analyst FJS Segment: Howell Avenue to Cerritos Avenue Date: ADT 31,130 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 72 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 2055 10 10 719 4 4 445 2 2 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 1.3 -21.7 -21.7 -3.3 -26.2 -26.2 -5.4 -28.3 -28.3 Distance 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 72.9 58.2 62.7 68.3 53.7 58.2 66.3 51.6 56.1 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 73.4 Leq EVENING= 68.9 Leq NIGHT= 66.8 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 74.8 CNEL= 75.1 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 104 224 482 CNEL: 109 234 504 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 62 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: State College Boulevard Analyst FJS Segment: Cerritos Avenue to Ball Road Date: ADT 28,570 SPEED (mph) 45 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 72 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 50 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 1886 10 10 660 3 3 409 2 2 Speed in MPH 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 69.3 77.6 82.1 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 0.9 -22.1 -22.1 -3.6 -26.6 -26.6 -5.7 -28.7 -28.7 Distance 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 72.5 57.8 62.4 68.0 53.3 57.8 65.9 51.2 55.7 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 73.1 Leq EVENING= 68.5 Leq NIGHT= 66.4 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 74.4 CNEL= 74.7 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 98 211 455 CNEL: 103 221 476 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 63 ---PAGE BREAK--- FHWA RD-77-108 NOISE PREDICTION MODEL Scenario: 2030 WP Project: ARSP Roadway: I-5 Freeway Analyst FJS Segment: Harbor Boulevard and Katella Ave Date: ADT SPEED (mph) 65 ROAD NEAR-FAR LN. DIST. 200 DAILY HOURLY DISTANCE ROAD CL (ft) 200 % A 99.0% DAY 80.0% SOFT/HARD CONDITIONS Soft % MT 0.5% EVENING 7.0% GRADE 0% % HT 0.5% NIGHT 13.0% LEFT VIEW -90 RIGHT VIEW 90 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT AUTOS MT HT Vehicles per hour 14454 73 73 5059 26 26 3132 16 16 Speed in MPH 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 Left angle -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Right angle 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Reference levels (dBA) 75.5 81.7 85.2 75.5 81.7 85.2 75.5 81.7 85.2 ADJUSTMENTS Flow 8.2 -14.8 -14.8 3.6 -19.4 -19.4 1.5 -21.4 -21.4 Distance -8.2 -8.2 -8.2 -8.2 -8.2 -8.2 -8.2 -8.2 -8.2 Finite Roadway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barrier 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEQ 75.5 58.7 62.2 70.9 54.2 57.6 68.9 52.1 55.6 VEHICULAR NOISE DAY= 75.8 Leq EVENING= 71.2 Leq NIGHT= 69.1 Leq NOISE LEVELS AT 200 FEET FROM CENTERLINE (dBA): Ldn= 77.1 CNEL= 77.4 NOISE CONTOUR: 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA ROAD CENTERLINE DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOUR (FEET): Ldn: 596 1284 2767 CNEL: 624 1343 2894 26-Apr-11 ROADWAY INPUTS VEHICLE MIX INPUTS CALCULATION AREA RESULTS 64 ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- APPENDIX H TRAFFIC STUDY REPORT ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan TRAFFIC STUDY REPORT Prepared for CITY OF ANAHEIM Prepared by December 2010 ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY a ES.1 Project Description a ES.2 Analysis scope and Methodology a ES.3 Project Related Traffic Impacts and Mitigation Strategies a Intersection Impacts a Arterial Segment Impacts b Caltrans Intersection Impacts b Caltrans Mainline and Ramp Improvements b 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Study Area 1 1.2 Project Description 5 1.3 Report Organization 6 2.0 ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY 8 2.1 Model Background 8 2.2 Model 9 Roadway Network 9 2.3 Level of Service Analysis 10 ICU Analysis 11 Arterial Segment V/C Analysis 12 Caltrans Intersection 13 Caltrans Freeway and Ramp Analysis 13 Caltrans Freeway Weaving Analysis 14 Fair-Share Analysis 14 3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS Intersection Analysis 15 Daily Arterial Segment LOS 17 Arterial Segment Peak Hour LOS Analysis 19 Caltrans Ramp Termini Intersection Analysis 21 Caltrans Peak Hour Ramp Termini Off-Ramp Queuing Analysis 21 Caltrans Peak Hour Freeway Ramp Analysis 23 Caltrans Freeway Mainline Analysis 23 Source: City of Anaheim, Caltrans 24 Caltrans Freeway Weaving Analysis 24 Summary 25 4.0 INTERIM YEAR 2015 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS 4.1 Interim Year 2015, No Project 26 Intersection Analysis 26 Daily Arterial Segment LOS 30 Peak Hour Arterial Segment LOS Analysis 32 ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report Caltrans Ramp Termini Intersection Analysis 32 Caltrans Peak Hour Ramp Termini Off-Ramp Queuing Analysis 33 Caltrans Peak Hour Freeway Ramp Analysis 35 Caltrans Freeway Mainline Analysis 36 Caltrans Freeway Weaving Analysis 36 4.2 Interim Year 2015, With Project 37 Intersection Analysis 37 Daily Arterial Segment LOS 41 Peak Hour Arterial Segment LOS Analysis 45 Caltrans Ramp Termini Intersection Analysis 45 Caltrans Peak Hour Ramp Termini Off-Ramp Queuing Analysis 46 Caltrans Peak Hour Freeway Ramp Analysis 48 Caltrans Freeway Mainline Analysis 49 Caltrans Freeway Weaving Analysis 50 Interim Analysis Summary 51 5.0 GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT CONDITIONS 2030 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS 5.1 2030 General Plan, No Project 52 Intersection Analysis 52 Daily Arterial Segment LOS 56 Peak Hour Arterial Segment LOS Analysis 58 Caltrans Peak Hour Ramp Termini Off-Ramp Queuing Analysis 60 Caltrans Peak Hour Freeway Ramp Analysis 62 Caltrans Freeway Mainline Analysis 63 Caltrans Freeway Weaving Analysis 64 5.2 2030 General Plan, With Project 65 Intersection Analysis 65 Daily Arterial Segment LOS 70 Peak Hour Arterial Segment LOS Analysis 73 Caltrans Ramp Termini Intersection Analysis 74 Caltrans Peak Hour Ramp Termini Off-Ramp Queuing Analysis 75 Caltrans Peak Hour Freeway Ramp Analysis 77 Caltrans Freeway Mainline Analysis 78 Caltrans Freeway Weaving Analysis 79 Summary 80 6.0 PROJECT 6.1 2015 Analysis Impacts 81 Intersections 81 Arterial Segments 81 Ramp Termini Intersections 81 Caltrans Ramp Termini Off-Ramp Queuing 82 Peak Hour Freeway Ramps 82 Freeway 82 ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report Freeway Weaving Segments 82 6.2 2030 Analysis Impacts 85 Intersections 85 Arterial Segments 85 Ramp Termini Intersections 86 Caltrans Ramp Termini Off-Ramp Queuing 86 Peak Hour Freeway Ramps 87 Freeway 87 Freeway Weaving Segments 87 7.0 PROPOSED MITIGATION AND IMPROVEMENT 7.1 Traffic Fee Program 90 7.2 Intersection Improvements 91 2015 Interim Year Analysis 91 2030 Analysis 92 7.3 Arterial Segment Improvements 93 2015 Interim Year Analysis 93 2030 Analysis 94 7.4 Peak Hour Freeway Ramp Termini Improvements 94 2015 Interim Year Analysis 94 7.5 City of Orange Improvements 97 2015 Interim Year Analysis 97 2030 Analysis 97 7.6 Freeway Facility Improvements 98 7.7 Mitigation Measures 102 7.8 Unavoidable Impacts and Statement of Overriding Considerations 108 City of Orange Facilities 112 Caltrans Mainline Segments, Ramps, and Weaving Segments 113 8.0 CONCLUSION 115 Project Related Traffic Impacts and Mitigation Strategies 115 2015 Interim Year Impacts 115 2030 Impacts 115 Intersection Impacts 115 Arterial Segment Impacts 115 Caltrans Intersection Impacts 115 Caltrans Mainline and Ramp Improvements 115 Mitigation Monitoring Program 116 9.0 REFERENCES 121 10.0 GLOSSARY OF TRANSPORTATION TERMS 122 11.0 APPENDICES 127 Appendix A-1 ICU Worksheets under Existing Conditions Appendix A-2 ICU Worksheets under 2015 No Project Conditions ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report Appendix A-3 ICU Worksheets under 2015 With Project Conditions Appendix A-4 ICU Worksheets under 2030 No Project Conditions Appendix A-5 ICU Worksheets under 2030 With Project Conditions Appendix A-6 Worksheets under 2030 With Project Conditions (Mitigated) Appendix B Intersection Lane Configurations Appendix C-1 Caltrans Ramp Termini Analysis Worksheets under Existing Conditions Appendix C-2 Caltrans Ramp Termini Analysis Worksheets under 2015 No Project Conditions Appendix C-3 Caltrans Ramp Termini Analysis Worksheets under 2015 With Project Conditions Appendix C-4 Caltrans Ramp Termini Analysis Worksheets under 2030 No Project Conditions Appendix C-5 Caltrans Ramp Termini Analysis Worksheets under 2030 With Project Conditions Appendix C-6Caltrans Ramp Termini Analysis Worksheets under 2030 With Project Conditions (Mitigated) Appendix D-1 Caltrans Ramp Termini Queuing Analysis Worksheets under Existing Conditions Appendix D-2 Caltrans Ramp Termini Queuing Analysis Worksheets 2015 No Project Conditions Appendix D-3 Caltrans Ramp Termini Queuing Analysis Worksheets 2015 With Project Conditions Appendix D-4 Caltrans Ramp Termini Queuing Analysis Worksheets 2030 No Project Conditions Appendix D-5 Caltrans Ramp Termini Queuing Analysis Worksheets 2030 With Project Conditions Appendix E-1 HCS Freeway Ramp Analysis Worksheets under Existing Conditions Appendix E-2 HCS Freeway Ramp Analysis Worksheets under 2015 No Project Conditions Appendix E-3 HCS Freeway Ramp Analysis Worksheets under 2015 With Project Conditions Appendix E-4 HCS Freeway Ramp Analysis Worksheets under 2030 No Project Conditions Appendix E-5 HCS Freeway Ramp Analysis Worksheets under 2030 With Project Conditions Appendix E-6 Freeway Ramp Analysis Worksheets under 2030 With Project Conditions (Mitigated) Appendix F-1 HCS Freeway Mainline Analysis Worksheets under Existing Conditions Appendix F-2 HCS Freeway Mainline Analysis Worksheets under 2015 No Project Conditions Appendix F-3 HCS Freeway Mainline Analysis Worksheets under 2015 With Project Conditions Appendix F-4 HCS Freeway Mainline Analysis Worksheets under 2030 No Project Conditions Appendix F-5 HCS Freeway Mainline Analysis Worksheets under 2030 With Project Conditions Appendix F-6 HCS Freeway Mainline Analysis Worksheets under 2030 With Project Conditions (Mitigated) Appendix G-1 HCS Freeway Weaving Analysis Worksheets under Existing Conditions Appendix G-2 HCS Freeway Weaving Analysis Worksheets under 2015 No Project Conditions Appendix G-3 HCS Freeway Weaving Analysis Worksheets under 2015 With Project Conditions Appendix G-4 HCS Freeway Weaving Analysis Worksheets under 2030 No Project Conditions Appendix G-5 HCS Freeway Weaving Analysis Worksheets under 2030 With Project Conditions Appendix G-6 HCS Freeway Weaving Analysis Worksheets under 2030 With Project Conditions (Mitigated) Appendix H Year 2025 Peak Hour Raw Model Volume Difference With Project vs. No Project List of Figures Figure 1.1: Project Location 2 Figure 1.2: Study Area 3 Figure 1.3: ARSP Study Area Boundary for C-R and PR Land 4 Figure 3.1: Existing Peak Hour Intersection LOS 20 Figure 4.1: Interim Year 2015 No Project Peak Hour Intersection LOS 29 Figure 4.2: Interim Year 2015 With Project Peak Hour Intersection LOS 40 Figure 5.1: 2030 No Project Peak Hour Intersection LOS 55 Figure 5.2: 2030 With Project Peak Hour Intersection LOS 69 Figure 7.1: Intersection Mitigation Strategies 96 List of Tables Table 2.1: Intersection Level of Service 11 Table 2.2: Significant Impact 11 Table 2.3: Daily Arterial Segment Capacity Assumptions 12 ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report Table 2.4: Caltrans Intersection LOS Criteria 13 Table 2.5: Caltrans Freeway Mainline and Ramp LOS Criteria 14 Table 2.6: Caltrans Freeway Weaving LOS Criteria 14 Table 3.1: Existing Peak Hour Intersection LOS 15 Table 3.2: Existing Daily Arterial Segment LOS 17 Table 3.3: Existing Arterial Segment Peak Hour LOS 19 Table 3.4: Existing Peak Hour Ramp Termini Intersection LOS 21 Table 3.5: Existing Peak Hour Ramp Termini Off-Ramp Queuing Analysis 22 Table 3.6: Existing Peak Hour Freeway Ramp LOS 23 Table 3.7: Existing Peak Hour Freeway Mainline LOS 24 Table 3.8: Existing Peak Hour Freeway Weaving LOS 25 Table 4.1: Interim Year 2015 No Project Peak Hour Intersection LOS 27 Table 4.2: Interim Year 2015 No Project Daily Arterial Segment 31 Table 4.3: Interim Year 2015 No Project Peak Hour Arterial Segment LOS 32 Table 4.4: Interim Year 2015 No Project Peak Hour Ramp Termini Intersection LOS 33 Table 4.5: Interim Year 2015 No Project Peak Hour Ramp Termini Off-Ramp Queuing Analysis 34 Table 4.6: Interim Year 2015 No Project Peak Hour Freeway Ramp LOS 35 Table 4.7: Interim Year 2015 No Project Peak Hour Freeway Mainline LOS 36 Table 4.8: Interim Year 2015 No Project Peak Hour Freeway Weaving LOS 37 Table 4.9: Interim Year 2015 With Project Peak Hour Intersection LOS 38 Table 4.10: Interim Year 2015 With Project Daily Arterial Segment LOS 42 Table 4.11: Interim Year 2015 With Project Peak Hour Arterial Segment LOS 45 Table 4.12: Interim Year 2015 With Project Peak Hour Ramp Termini Intersection LOS 46 Table 4.13: Interim Year 2015 With Project Peak Hour Ramp Termini Off-Ramp Queuing Analysis 47 Table 4.14: Interim Year 2015 With Project Peak Hour Freeway Ramp LOS 49 Table 4.15: Interim Year 2015 With Project Peak Hour Freeway Mainline LOS 50 Table 4.16: Interim Year 2015 With Project Peak Hour Freeway Weaving LOS 51 Table 5.1: 2030 No Project Peak Hour Intersection LOS 53 Table 5.2: 2030 No Project Daily Arterial Segment LOS 57 Table 5.3: 2030 No Project Peak Hour Arterial Segment LOS 58 Table 5.4: 2030 No Project Peak Hour Ramp Termini Intersection LOS 60 Table 5.5: 2030 No Project Peak Hour Ramp Termini Off-Ramp Queuing Analysis 61 Table 5.6: 2030 No Project Peak Hour Freeway Ramp LOS 63 Table 5.7: 2030 No Project Peak Hour Freeway Mainline LOS 64 Table 5.8: 2030 No Project Peak Hour Freeway Weaving LOS 65 Table 5.9: 2030 With Project Peak Hour Intersection LOS 67 Table 5.10: 2030 With Project Daily Arterial Segment LOS 71 Table 5.11: 2030 With Project Peak Hour Arterial Segment LOS 73 Table 5.12: 2030 With Project Peak Hour Ramp Termini Intersection LOS 75 Table 5.13: 2030 With Project Peak Hour Ramp Termini Off-Ramp Queuing 76 Table 5.14: 2030 With Project Peak Hour Freeway Ramp LOS 78 Table 5.15: 2030 With Project Peak Hour Freeway Mainline LOS 79 Table 5.16: 2030 With Project Peak Hour Freeway Weaving LOS 80 Table 6.1: 2015 Project Related Arterial Segment 81 Table 6.2: 2015 Project Related Peak Hour Freeway Ramp Impacts 83 Table 6.3: 2015 Project Related Freeway Mainline Impacts 83 Table 6.4: 2015 Project Related Freeway Weaving Impacts 84 Table 6.5: 2030 Project Related Intersection Impacts 85 Table 6.6: 2030 Project Related Arterial Segment 86 Table 6.7: 2030 Project Related Peak Hour Freeway Ramp Termini Impacts 86 Table 6.8: 2030 Project Related Peak Hour Freeway Ramp Impacts 88 Table 6.9: 2030 Project Related Freeway Mainline Impacts 88 Table 6.10: 2030 Project Related Peak Hour Freeway Weaving Impacts 89 ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report Table 7.1: Fair-share Analysis Computational Example 90 Table 7.2: Recommended 2030 Intersection Mitigation Strategies 92 Table 7.3: 2015 Arterial Segment Mitigation Strategies 94 Table 7.4: 2030 Arterial Segment Mitigation Strategies 94 Table 7.5: 2030 Peak Hour Freeway Ramp Termini Mitigation Strategies 95 Table 7.6: Potential 2030 Intersection Mitigation and Fair-share for Orange Facilities 97 Table 7.7: Potential 2030 Ramp Termini Intersection Mitigation and Fair-Share for Orange Facilities 98 Table 7.8: Potential 2030 Freeway Facility Mitigation Strategies and Fair-Share Percentages 100 Table 7.9: Project Mitigation Strategies 110 ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report a EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ES.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION This traffic study has been prepared to analyze and identify impacts relating to proposed Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (ARSP). The proposed amendment, hereinafter referred to as the “Proposed Project” includes buildout of the development currently permitted by the ARSP in the ARSP’s Commercial Recreation (C-R) District and an increase in the amount of permitted development in the ARSP’s Public Recreation (PR) District to provide for the expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center. The traffic study analyzes the addition from existing conditions of up to 20,913 additional hotel rooms within the C-R District and the addition of 900 hotel rooms, approximately 400,000 square feet of convention space, and 180,000 square feet of commercial space, 40,000 square feet of hotel meeting/ballroom space and 100,000 square feet of outdoor programmable space in the PR District. The traffic analysis evaluates existing operations in the vicinity of the Proposed Project and forecasts future operating conditions with and without the Proposed Project. ES.2 ANALYSIS SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY The key traffic study components can be summarized as follows:  Analysis of existing, interim, and buildout traffic conditions in the study area  Peak hour Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) analysis for study area intersections  Daily and peak hour arterial segment Volume to Capacity (V/C) ratio analysis for study area segments  analysis for study area freeway ramp termini intersections based on the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 2000 methodology  Peak hour HCM analysis for study area freeway segments and freeway ramps  Peak hour HCM weaving analysis for study area freeway segments  Identification of timing of mitigation measure requirements and summary of levels of service under mitigated conditions ES.3 PROJECT RELATED TRAFFIC IMPACTS AND MITIGATION STRATEGIES Intersection Impacts Under interim conditions, the traffic study determined that no intersections are significantly impacted by the proposed project in 2015. The traffic study also determined that 21 intersections are significantly impacted by the 2030 buildout of the With Project scenario. Improvements have been proposed for all 21 locations and with the implementation of the mitigation strategies, all intersections within the study area operate at an acceptable LOS. However, seven of the intersection improvements within the City of Anaheim may not be feasible due to potential constraints and will be included in a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Proposed Project. The Statement of Overriding Considerations will also apply to the four intersections identified as deficient within the City of Orange under the ICU analysis ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report b methodology, since the City of Anaheim has no jurisdiction to implement the physical improvements within the City of Orange. Arterial Segment Impacts Under interim conditions, the traffic study determined that five arterial segments will need to be improved to their buildout configuration by 2015. Based on the analysis, there is one required arterial segment improvement in the City of Anaheim under buildout conditions. Caltrans Intersection Impacts Under interim conditions, the traffic study determined that no Caltrans ramp termini intersections will need to be improved to operate at an acceptable LOS in 2015. Four Caltrans ramp termini intersection deficiencies have been identified through peak hour analysis under buildout conditions including the intersection identified under the 2015 analysis. Of the four locations, three were also identified by the ICU analysis as deficient. Proposed improvements have been compared to those strategies identified through the ICU analysis and improvements applied to both the types of analyses. Additional mitigation strategies have been proposed for the locations identified only through the HCM analysis where a project related impact has been identified. Caltrans Mainline and Ramp Improvements Since the major freeway facility within the study area, the I-5 Freeway has reached its design capacity and the required physical improvements are largely the result of background regional traffic, consultation between the City of Anaheim and Caltrans will be necessary to reach consensus on any potential operational improvement measures. The improvement measures could consist of ITS improvements, enhanced signage, or other operational improvements. The City of Anaheim has no jurisdiction to implement the physical improvements on the Caltrans facilities and a Statement of Overriding Considerations will be prepared identifying the potential operational improvements to Caltrans facilities. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION In September 1994, the City of Anaheim adopted the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Master Environmental Impact Report (EIR) in connection with the adoption of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-1 (ARSP). At the time the specific plan was adopted, it encompassed approximately 549.5 acres that has subsequently been increased to 581.3 acres1. Since its adoption in 1994, two validation reports have been prepared (in 1999 and 2004) and a subsequent validation report was due in August 2009. Since the Master EIR is over 15 years old, the City has opted to prepare a Supplemental EIR to reevaluate all the environmental changes that have occurred in and around the Anaheim Resort. In addition, the Supplemental EIR is intended to analyze proposed expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center. The Proposed Project is further described in Section 1.2, Project Description. This report presents the findings from the traffic study that was conducted in support of the Proposed Project. It addresses the traffic impacts generated by the Proposed Project within the study area and subsequently recommends mitigation measures to maintain mobility within this area and its immediate surroundings. 1.1 STUDY AREA The ARSP area (the “study area”) is located within the City of Anaheim, approximately 35 miles southeast of downtown Los Angeles and about 7 miles northwest of Santa Ana in central Orange County. The study area is specifically located within The Anaheim Resort, which is divided into three sub-areas regulated by the ARSP, the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan, and the Hotel Circle Specific Plan. The study area encompasses approximately 581 acres of land and is generally, located west of the I-5 Freeway and east of Walnut Street. The northern and southern boundaries of the study area are generally defined by Ball Road and Chapman Avenue, respectively. The ARSP regulates two development areas. Development Area 1 is known as the Commercial Recreation (C-R) District and encompasses approximately 518.5 acres. Development Area 2 is known as the Public Recreational (PR) District and encompasses approximately 62.8 acres and includes the Anaheim Convention Center. Figure 1.1 shows the location of the project site within the regional context while Figure 1.2 presents the study area boundaries. Figure 1.3 displays the land uses within the ARSP, including the land use densities allowed within the C-R District. 1 Initial Study for an Amendment to The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan, BonTerra Consulting, February 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- This page is intentionally kept blank to facilitate double sided printing ---PAGE BREAK--- IRVINE YORBA LINDA FULLERTON BUENA PARK STANTON PLACENTIA ANAHEIM GARDEN GROVE WESTMINSTER FOUNTAIN VALLEY CAN NO N ST ESP ER AN ZA RD ? l V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\Anaheim Resort SEIR\Documentation\Figures\Fig1-1-ProjectLocation-010810.mxd μ Figure 1.1: Project Location % & l ( ? k ORANGE ? ê A » A » VILLA PARK TUSTIN SANTA ANA ? k 0 0.7 1.4 Miles LEGEND The Anaheim Resort boundary Adjacent Area Roadway City of Anaheim Water Area ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- DISNEYLAND DR OR AN G E C TR D R VERMONT AVE EAST ST MANCHESTER AVE MAGIC WY KATELLA AVE PL LEWIS ST WY CHAPMAN AVE PHOENIX CLUB DR R A M P A RT ST ? l ? ê ? » E LA PALMA AVE TRASK AVE ORAN GARDEN GROVE BLVD W LINCOLN AVE BALL RD WEST ST W LA PALMA AVE E LINCOLN AVE STATE COLLEGE BLVD NINTH ST HARBOR BLVD EUCLID ST LA VETA AVE SOUTH ST ANAHEIM BLVD WALNUT ST TAFT AVE KATELLA AVE ORANGEWOOD AVE S BROOKHURST ST LEWIS ST N E AST S T S NUTWOOD ST CERRITOS AVE N WEST ST COLLINS AVE ORANGEW OOD AVE E FRONTERA ST HASTER ST WAGNER AVE N HARBO R BLVD MAIN ST STRUCK AVE NUTWOOD ST W CRESCENT AVE W MEMORY LN ECKHOFF ST N BRISTOL ST SUNKIST S T GARY ST ROMNEYA DR W SANTA CLARA AVE GLASSELL ST N RIO VISTA ST N ANAHEIM BLVD N SUNKIST ST E MEMORY LN WALNUT AVE FAIRVIEW ST CENTURY BLVD BATAVIA ST N BROOKHURST ST O GENE AUTRY WY W FLETCHER AVE DISNEY WY ST PALMWOOD DR ANAHEIM WY HOWELL AVE MAINPLACE DR N G LASSEL ST PL CONVENTION CERRITOS AVE KATELLA AVE LINCOLN AVE W ORANGE AVE GARDEN GROVE FWY N BROADWAY CHAPMAN AVE N EUCLID ST S NUTWOOD ST GARDEN GROVE ANAHEIM ORANGE V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\Anaheim Resort SEIR\Documentation\Figures\Fig1-2-StudyArea-012810.mxd μ Figure 1.2: Study Area CLEMENTINE WEST ST FLORE ST SANTA ANA RIVER CAST PL 0 0.25 0.5 Miles LEGEND Adjacent Area The Anaheim Resort boundary Major Roadway Railroad Water Area City of Anaheim DOUGLASS RD ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK---                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                5 G A R D E N G R O V E G A R D E N G R O V E O R A N G E O R A N G E                           !  Anaheim City Boundary The Anaheim Resort™ Boundary Disneyland Resort Specific Plan Hotel Circle Specific Plan Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Districts Commercial Recreation District Public Recreation District Commercial Recreation District Densities                             Low Low-Medium Medium Convention Center Medium ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 5 1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project consists of two components: the buildout of development within the C-R District; and an increase in the maximum permitted development in the PR District to provide for the expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center. The following description provides an overview of each component of the Proposed Project: Buildout of the C-R District The traffic study analyzes maximum buildout of the C-R District using the maximum densities permitted per parcel by the ARSP. Four density districts are established within the C-R District, as shown in Figure 1.3. These densities are:  Low Density- 50 rooms per gross acre or 75 rooms, whichever is greater  Low-Medium Density- 75 rooms per gross acre or 75 rooms, whichever is greater  Medium Density- 100 rooms per gross acre or 75 rooms, whichever is greater  Convention Center Medium Density- Up to 125 rooms per gross acre with trip generation characteristics mitigated to the equivalent of 100 room per gross acre or 75 rooms, whichever is greater For purposes of establishing a baseline figure from which to measure the increase in hotel rooms at buildout, existing commercial uses are converted into hotel room equivalents at a ratio of 600 square feet of commercial development to one hotel room. This ratio is determined by comparing the retail trip rate to the hotel room trip rate. There are currently 10,888 hotel rooms and approximately 419,000 square feet of commercial development within the C-R District. This results in a baseline hotel room equivalent of 11,587 hotel rooms. A maximum of 32,500 hotel rooms are permitted in the C-R District. Therefore, the traffic study will analyze the addition of up to 20,913 additional hotel rooms within this area. Increase in the maximum permitted development in the PR District to provide for expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center: The Proposed Project includes expansion of the existing Anaheim Convention Center, with the following components: Convention Center development, including:  406,359 square feet of Convention Center space (including exhibit halls, ballrooms, flexible meeting space, office and meeting rooms, and an interior bridge/skyway) and  125,000 square feet of commercial space (including, but not limited to, retail stores and restaurants) Hotel development, including up to:  900 hotel rooms  40,000 square feet of meeting and ballroom space  55,000 square feet of commercial space (including retail stores, spa facilities, bars and and restaurants) ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 6 This would increase the maximum permitted development in the PR District to a total of 2,118,363 square feet of Convention Center space, 2,500 hotel rooms, 180,000 square feet of commercial space, 40,000 square feet of hotel meeting/ballroom space and 100,000 square feet of outdoor programmable space. Potential traffic impacts associated with the land use intensification with the Proposed Project were evaluated for the following scenarios:  Existing Conditions  Interim Year 2015 No Project Conditions  Interim Year 2015 With Project Conditions  General Plan Buildout Year 2030 No Project Conditions  General Plan Buildout Year 2030 With Project Conditions The Interim Year scenarios analyze the Convention Center Expansion as a project. This scenario includes increases in background regional traffic as well as approved projects within the vicinity of the proposed expansion. The Interim Year With Project scenario reflects the proposed changes in the PR District. The General Plan Buildout scenarios represent the currently adopted land use intensities in the study area as well as the proposed Orange General Plan land use assumptions (City of Orange General Plan Update Traffic Analysis, June 2009) and the proposed Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project. The With Project scenario reflects the addition of the Proposed Project. It should be noted that the General Plan Buildout assumes the extension of Gene Autry Way west from Haster Street to Harbor Boulevard, and the extension of Clementine Street south from Katella Avenue to Orangewood Avenue. The following are the key components of this traffic study:  Analysis of Existing (2008) and Future traffic conditions in the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Area, a No Project and With Project Interim Year Analysis (2015) and a No Project and With Project Buildout Analysis 2030  Peak hour Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) analysis for study area intersections  Peak hour Intersection Delay analysis for study area Caltrans ramp intersections based on the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 2000 methodology  Daily and peak hour arterial segment Volume to Capacity (V/C) ratio analysis for study area segments  Identification of mitigation measure requirements and summary of levels-of-service (LOS) under mitigated conditions for each Future scenario 1.3 REPORT ORGANIZATION This report summarizes the Existing conditions as well as the four scenarios demonstrating buildout under No Project and With Project conditions, in 2015 and 2030. The analysis identifies roadway segments, intersections, and ramp intersections that are currently deficient, or that will become deficient based on the proposed land use changes. In addition to this chapter, the report is organized as follows:  Chapter 1: Introduction ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 7  Chapter 2: Analysis Methodology  Chapter 3: Existing (2008) Traffic Analysis  Chapter 4: Interim (2015) Traffic Analysis  Chapter 5: Future 2030 Traffic Analysis  Chapter 6: Project Impacts and Proposed Mitigations  Chapter 7: Mitigation Strategies  Chapter 8: Conclusion  Chapter 9: References  Chapter 10: Glossary of Transportation Terms ---PAGE BREAK--- This page is intentionally kept blank to facilitate double sided printing ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 8 2.0 ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY The primary objective of this Traffic Study is to compare the potential traffic impacts associated with buildout of the ARSP and the expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center. The traffic analysis methodology used for this study is consistent with the criteria outlined in the City of Anaheim Criteria for Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies. In order to evaluate the potential impacts associated with the proposed circulation system amendment, the following analyses were performed:  Peak hour intersection analysis  Arterial segment daily analysis  Arterial segment peak hour analysis  Peak hour Caltrans ramp-termini intersection analysis  Peak hour Caltrans mainline HCM analysis  Peak hour Caltrans freeway ramp HCM analysis  Peak hour Caltrans weaving HCM analysis 2.1 MODEL BACKGROUND The analysis was performed by application of the Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model (ATAM) to develop future traffic forecast volumes throughout the study area. ATAM is the traffic forecasting modeling tool for the City of Anaheim and has been certified by the Orange County Transportation Authority as consistent with the Orange County Transportation Analysis Model (OCTAM). ATAM relies on OCTAM for the regional component of traffic activity and OCTAM is based on and consistent with the Southern California Association of Governments’ (SCAG) regional transportation model, and therefore, incorporates adopted regional growth projections. As noted, ATAM has been found to be consistent with OCTAM and was developed in accordance to the Orange County Subarea Modeling Guidelines Manual (OCTA, 2005). The subarea guideline procedures recommend that trip generation be based on socioeconomic data and associated socioeconomic based trip rates. To identify trips generated by development projects throughout the city for use in ATAM, an employment conversion rate is applied to convert land uses to employment. The land use conversion rates are based on regional demographic information and converts land use quantities to number of employees. Trip generation by trip purpose is then calculated based on the number of employees as determined from the land use conversion rates. Based on the citywide land use data and regional socioeconomic growth projections, future trip activity is forecast and assigned to the roadway circulation system. The internal trip capture is performed within the model and the outputs post-processed based on established post- processing methodologies. The post-processor applies the model’s projected growth to each turning movement of the existing counts for both 2030 No Project and 2030 With Project scenarios, forecasting a value that reflects future growth. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 9 2.2 MODEL ASSUMPTIONS Roadway Network The base highway network used in this analysis remains consistent with networks adopted for various other traffic studies previously carried out for the City of Anaheim within The Anaheim Resort. The existing and future year local circulation system was refined to provide further detail within the study area to accurately forecast travel activity. In addition, new traffic analysis zones (TAZs) were defined to more accurately reflect traffic patterns throughout the study area. Zonal connectors were reviewed and updated as appropriate to reflect appropriate development access to the surrounding circulation system. The TAZ and zonal connector refinements were incorporated into the No Project and Project alternatives for consistency purposes. It should be noted that all network modifications included the southerly extension of Clementine Street to Orangewood Avenue and the westerly extension of Gene Autry Way to Harbor Boulevard for Future 2030 alternatives only, consistent with the City of Anaheim General Plan. For 2015, the roadway network basically remains the same as under existing conditions with the exception of the ultimate improvements at the Euclid Street/Katella Avenue intersection. The baseline 2030 No Project network is consistent with the Anaheim General Plan circulation network and include the following key assumptions within the immediate project study area:  Orangewood Avenue, widen from State College Boulevard to SR-57 to 6-lane divided facility  Howell Avenue, improve to 4-lane secondary facility  Katella Avenue, widen to 8-lane facility between Sportstown and Walnut Street  Walnut Street (Orange), maintain existing classification  Glassell Street/Chapman Avenue (Orange), maintain existing classification through Historic Orange Plaza  Metropolitan Drive (Orange), provide connection between The City Drive and Chapman Avenue at Rampart Street  Main Street (Orange), improve to 6-lane major facility between Collins Avenue and Chapman Avenue  Taft Avenue (Orange), improve to 6-lane major facility between Tustin Avenue and City of Anaheim  Ball Road, improve to 6-lane major facility between Sunkist Street and State College Boulevard  Lewis Street, improve to 4-lane secondary facility between Katella Avenue and Gene Autry Way  Cerritos Avenue, improve to 4-lane primary facility between State College Boulevard and Anaheim Boulevard  Gene Autry Way, extend from current terminus at I-5 HOV ramps westerly to Harbor Boulevard It should be noted that there are no roadway network changes proposed with the project and as a result the No Project and With Project 2030 networks are identical. To account for planned projects throughout the study area as development occurs, the localized circulation system was refined to incorporate further network assumptions as appropriate. The following specific circulation system assumptions were incorporated into the network to account for buildout of the study area:  Provision of a connection between Dupont Drive and Rampart Street parallel to Orangewood Avenue  A loop access road within the Angel Stadium parking lot connecting access points to Angel Stadium from State College Boulevard/Gene Autry Way, Orangewood Avenue, and Douglass Road ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 10  SR-57 direct connection with ARTIC  SR-57 HOV drop ramps at Cerritos Avenue Land Use Assumptions The ARSP established four density districts within the C-R District, as shown in Figure 1.3. These densities are:  Low Density - 50 rooms per gross acre or 75 rooms, whichever is greater  Low-Medium Density - 75 rooms per gross acre or 75 rooms, whichever is greater  Medium Density - 100 rooms per gross acre or 75 rooms, whichever is greater  Convention Center Medium Density - Up to 125 rooms per gross acre with trip generation characteristics mitigated to the equivalent of 100 room per gross acre or 75 rooms, whichever is greater Each density is incorporated into ATAM as defined, and is coded as Resort Hotel. Convention Center Medium density districts are coded at 100 rooms per gross acre consistent with the mitigation requirements for the density district. It should be noted that the Resort Hotel land use generates less vehicle trips than the standard Hotel land use. The Resort Hotel is geared towards the tourist and vacation industry, typically with amenities and facilities that are not present at standard hotels. The established Anaheim Resort Transit routes connect all ARSP hotels to the area’s major attractions, reducing the need for automobiles. The land use for the PR District is coded in ATAM as stated in Section 1.2. The Anaheim Convention Center (ACC) is a special generator in ATAM. The trip generation estimates for the ACC were provided by City of Anaheim staff during the ATAM development in February 2003. ATAM estimates traffic on an “average” day, since major events typically do not occur during weekdays. Details of this development are included in the Traffic Model Consistency Report - Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model (Parsons Brinckerhoff, Inc., February 2003). 2.3 LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS In order to evaluate traffic impacts within the study area and its immediate vicinity, the following level of service (LOS) analyses were performed:  Peak hour arterial signalized intersection capacity utilization (ICU) analysis  Arterial segment daily analysis  Arterial segment peak hour analysis  Peak hour ramp-termini intersection analysis  Freeway ramp merge-diverge analysis  Freeway mainline segment analysis  Freeway mainline weaving analysis For intersections and arterial segments, significant impacts are determined using the City of Anaheim Criteria for Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies. Under the General Plan Buildout scenarios, these locations are governed by the City’s Growth Management Element. All State owned facilities are analyzed consistent with the Caltrans Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies for all scenarios. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 11 ICU Analysis The City’s Growth Management Element requires a volume-to-capacity ratio of 0.90, or LOS D, as the lowest acceptable service level at intersections. Intersections that operate at a level of service below LOS D are deemed to be operating at insufficient levels. The City requires study area intersections to be evaluated through an intersection capacity utilization (ICU) analysis that compares forecast peak hour traffic volumes to intersection capacity. A minimum clearance interval of 0.05 in association with lane capacities of 1,700 vehicles per hour of green time for through and turn lanes was assumed for the ICU calculations. The City of Orange ICU analysis is consistent with the City of Anaheim analysis as are the LOS thresholds; therefore the same assumptions were applied for intersection in both jurisdictions. Table 2.1 presents the ICU level of service thresholds utilized in this traffic study. Table 2.1: Intersection Level of Service Thresholds LOS ICU A < 0.60 B 0.61 – 0.70 C 0.71 – 0.80 D 0.81 – 0.90 E 0.91 – 1.00 F > 1.00 Source: City of Anaheim, City of Orange Peak hour ICU and level of service (LOS) analyses were performed for 81 study intersections - 64 intersections in the City of Anaheim, 2 shared intersections between Anaheim and Orange, and 19 in the City of Orange. The City of Orange identified the preferred intersections for analysis within the City of Orange. For the Interim Year analysis, a transportation impact is considered significant in accordance with Table 2.2. For purposes of this calculation, the “Final V/C Ratio” refers to the future V/C ratio at an intersection with the proposed project but without any proposed mitigation. Mitigation measures sufficient to bring the level of service to a less than significant level are identified later in the report. Table 2.2: Significant Impact Criteria LOS Final V/C Ratio Project-Related Increase in V/C C >0.700 – 0.800 Equal to or greater than 0.050 D >0.800 – 0.900 Equal to or greater than 0.030 E, F > 0.900 Equal to or greater than 0.010 Source: City of Anaheim For General Plan Buildout analysis, a project is deemed to have a significant impact if the project results in deterioration of the LOS to an unacceptable LOS or an increase in the ICU value of 0.01 if the intersection is projected to operate at LOS E or F under without project conditions. Mitigation measures, discussed later in the report are required to bring deficient intersections and roadway segments to an acceptable LOS. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 12 Arterial Segment V/C Analysis The arterial roadway criteria for the City of Anaheim involve the use of average daily traffic (ADT) volume to capacity (V/C) ratios. LOS C (V/C not to exceed 0.80) is the performance standard that has been adopted for the study area circulation system by the City of Anaheim. The City of Orange has utilized LOS D as the performance standard for arterials. The City of Orange applies a V/C analysis for daily traffic conditions similar to Anaheim although daily capacities for Orange arterials differ from those recognized by the City of Anaheim. LOS analysis of forecast daily traffic volumes was applied for the arterial segments throughout the Study Area. The segment analysis assumes roadway capacities as shown in Table 2.3. The City of Anaheim does not currently account for capacity enhancements to Smart Streets. Table 2.3: Daily Arterial Segment Capacity Assumptions Facility Type Anaheim Orange 8-lane Divided 75,000 75,000 6-lane Divided 56,300 56,300 4-lane Divided 37,500 37,500 4-lane Undivided 25,000 24,000 2-lane Undivided 12,500 12,000 Source: City of Anaheim Mitigation measures sufficient to bring roadway segments down to an acceptable level of service must be identified if the roadway segment is not built to the City’s Circulation Element classification. If the roadway segment is already built to its ultimate classification, the segment is analyzed under peak hour conditions to ensure that arterial segments provide sufficient capacity feeding into signalized intersections on that segment, as signalized intersections control flow on arterial segments in urban areas. It should be noted that the General Plan Buildout scenario assumes the full buildout of the Circulation Element; therefore, any roadway segments with a daily LOS of D, E, or F under these scenarios are analyzed under peak hour conditions to determine if significant impacts must be addressed. The City of Anaheim applies the Urban Streets analysis identified in Chapter 15 of the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) to determine level of service under peak hour traffic volumes on deficient daily segments. The peak hour link analysis determines directional AM and PM peak hour V/C ratios for each link that exceeds the daily LOS threshold. The peak hour capacity is determined by using Equation 15-7 of the HCM, multiplying the mid-block number of lanes for each direction by a lane capacity of 1,900 vehicles per hour, then multiplied by the percentage of green time at the controlling signalized intersection for that arterial segment. The percentage of green time is estimated by dividing the directional V/C ratios by the total V/C ratio at signalized intersections along the arterial segment. The smallest resulting percentage is the estimated percentage of green time for that arterial segment. If the V/C ratio of the arterial segment under peak hour conditions is LOS E or F, improvements should be considered to improve the segment to an acceptable LOS. For those segments not requiring a peak hour analysis, a transportation impact is considered significant in accordance with Table 2.2 shown previously. For purposes of this calculation, the “Final V/C Ratio” refers to the future daily V/C ratio on a roadway segment with the proposed project but without any proposed mitigation. The AM and PM peak hour analysis is performed for all roadway segments that are built to the City’s Circulation Element classification during that analysis period. For those roadway segments requiring peak hour analysis, a transportation impact is considered significant if the project ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 13 results in deterioration of the LOS to an unacceptable LOS or an increase in the ICU value of 0.01 if the segment is projected to operate at LOS E or F under without project conditions for either peak hour. Mitigation measures, discussed later in the report are required to bring deficient intersections and roadway segments to an acceptable LOS. Caltrans Intersection Analysis Freeway ramp termini intersections were analyzed in (version 7.0) through the application of Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 2000 methodology per Caltrans requirements. Lane configurations and various other parameters such as signal timing were based on current operating characteristics. Future lane configurations were assumed for the No Project and With Project scenarios per Anaheim General Plan buildout conditions. Table 2.4 presents Caltrans intersection delay and LOS standards. Table 2.4: Caltrans Intersection LOS Criteria LOS Intersection Delay (in Seconds) A  10.0 B > 10.0 and  20.0 C > 20.0 and  35.0 D > 35.0 and  55.0 E > 55.0 and  80.0 F  80.0 Source: Caltrans, HCM 2000 Caltrans Freeway and Ramp Analysis The freeway mainline and freeway ramp criteria are based on peak hour HCM density analysis. The revised methodology has been applied to the freeway analyses in the study per Caltrans’ recommendation. The capacities are based on information contained in the HCM and the Caltrans Ramp Meter Design Manual. Existing count data was provided by Caltrans for the freeway mainline volumes. Ramp merge and diverge analysis was carried out by applying Highway Capacity Software (HCS), the electronic version of the HCM for freeway-to-arterial interchanges. According to HCM methodology, the ramp merge and diverge areas focus on an influential area of 1,500 feet, including the acceleration or deceleration lane and adjacent freeway lanes. The methodology incorporates three fundamental steps:  Determination of the traffic entering the freeway lanes upstream of the merge or at the beginning of the deceleration lane at diverge;  Determination of the capacity for the segment; and  Determination of the density of traffic flow within the ramp influence area and its level of service The level of service (LOS) for freeway ramps is determined by traffic density based on criteria outlined in the HCM. Freeway mainline levels of service are similarly determined from segment density. Table 2.5 presents the correlation between LOS and density in terms of passenger cars per mile per lane (pc/mi/ln) for both freeway ramps and basic freeway segments. LOS D (density not to exceed 35.0 pc/mi/ln for mainline segments and 35.0 pc/mi/ln for freeway ramps), has been established by Caltrans District 12 as the operating standard for freeway mainline segments and freeway ramps. Caltrans has determined that freeway segments and ramps that operate below LOS D should be identified and improved to an acceptable LOS although specific criteria to identify project related impacts is not specified in the Caltrans Traffic Impact Study Guidelines. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 14 Table 2.5: Caltrans Freeway Mainline and Ramp LOS Criteria LOS Peak Hour Freeway Ramp Density (pc/mi/ln) Basic Freeway Segment Density (pc/mi/ln) A  10.0 0-11.0 B > 10.0 and  20.0 11.0 – 18.0 C > 20.0 and  28.0 18.0 – 26.0 D > 28.0 and  35.0 26.0 – 35.0 E > 35.0 35.0 – 45.0 F Exceeds Capacity >45.0 Source: HCM 2000, Exhibit 25-4, Exhibit 23-2 Caltrans Freeway Weaving Analysis Freeway weaving is defined as the crossing of two streams of traffic traveling in the same direction along a significant length of highway without the aid of traffic control devices. Weaving analysis uses the most current version of the HCM and provides a density for the weaving area within the freeway segment and corresponding LOS. Table 2.6 specifies the LOS for associated freeway weaving densities. Table 2.6: Caltrans Freeway Weaving LOS Criteria LOS Freeway Weaving Segment Density (pc/mi/ln) Multilane and Collector-Distributor Weaving Segments Density (pc/mi/ln) A  10.0  12.0 B > 10.0 and  20.0 > 12.0 and  24.0 C > 20.0 and  28.0 > 24.0 and  32.0 D > 28.0 and  35.0 > 32.0 and  36.0 E >35.0 and  43.0 >36.0 and  40.0 F >43.0 >40.0 Source: HCM 2000 Exhibit 24-2 The following sections present the traffic analysis results for the study intersections, arterial segments, freeway ramp termini intersections, and ramp merge-diverge locations and freeway mainline sections reflecting existing conditions, interim year 2015 No Project and With Project scenarios and buildout 2030 No Project and With Project scenarios. Fair-Share Analysis The City of Anaheim has applied a fair-share methodology to evaluate the financial responsibility of mitigating proposed project impacts. The methodology is consistent with that outlined in the Caltrans Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies. Appendix of the guidelines directs users to apply a formula to calculate equitable share responsibility for the traffic impacts of proposed projects. The fair- share calculation is based on the difference between the Future With Project and Future No Project total intersection entering volumes divided by the total growth entering volume from Existing to Future With Project conditions. The fair-share proportion is based on the value associated with the peak hour for which the deficiency has been identified. Further discussion of specific application of the fair-share methodology is discussed in Section 7.1. ---PAGE BREAK--- This page is intentionally kept blank to facilitate double sided printing ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 15 3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS The existing conditions analysis establishes the framework for the future forecasts for the Proposed Project. The analysis is based on existing intersection and arterial segment traffic counts, collected by the City on a typical weekday in 2008 and included in the existing conditions analysis. The existing conditions analysis reflects these count volumes as well as existing lane configurations for all circulation system elements in the study area. Intersection Analysis Table 3.1 presents ICU and LOS results for the study intersections under existing conditions during the AM peak hour and PM peak hour. Existing lane geometrics were assumed in the ICU and LOS analyses. The detailed existing ICU worksheets are presented in Appendix A-1. The following two intersections currently operate at unacceptable levels of service during the PM peak hour:  Euclid Street at Katella Avenue  Anaheim Boulevard at Ball Road Figure 3.1 presents study intersection LOS under existing conditions. A table summarizing the existing and future lane configurations is included in Appendix B. Table 3.1: Existing Peak Hour Intersection LOS ID Intersection Jurisdiction AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ICU LOS ICU LOS I-1* Euclid Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.89 D 1.02 F I-2 Ninth Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.53 A 0.53 A I-3 Walnut Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.57 A 0.55 A I-4 Walnut Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.43 A 0.53 A I-5 Disneyland Drive / Ball Road Anaheim 0.68 B 0.76 C I-6 Disneyland Drive / West Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.53 A 0.57 A I-7 Harbor Boulevard / Vermont Avenue Anaheim 0.56 A 0.58 A I-8 Harbor Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 0.73 C 0.68 B I-9 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps Anaheim 0.54 A 0.54 A I-10 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps Anaheim 0.32 A 0.34 A I-11 Harbor Boulevard / Disney Way Anaheim 0.33 A 0.42 A I-12 Harbor Boulevard / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.55 A 0.63 B I-13 Harbor Boulevard / Convention Way Anaheim 0.29 A 0.35 A I-14 Harbor Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 0.55 A 0.57 A I-15 Clementine Street / Disney Way Anaheim 0.19 A 0.23 A I-16 Clementine Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.53 A 0.60 A I-17 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp / Disney Way Anaheim 0.20 A 0.24 A I-18 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 0.63 B 0.91 E I-19 Anaheim Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.49 A 0.71 C I-20 Anaheim Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps Anaheim 0.44 A 0.59 A I-21 Anaheim Boulevard / Disney Way Anaheim 0.44 A 0.49 A I-22 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.47 A 0.58 A I-23 Haster Street / Gene Autry Way Anaheim Not Applicable ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 16 Table 3.1: Existing Peak Hour Intersection LOS, Continued ID Intersection Jurisdiction AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ICU LOS ICU LOS I-24 Haster Street / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 0.54 A 0.65 B I-25 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.55 A 0.52 A I-26 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.46 A 0.50 A I-27 East Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.51 A 0.67 B I-28 Lewis Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.41 A 0.53 A I-29 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.28 A 0.31 A I-30 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.48 A 0.62 B I-31 Lewis Street / Gene Autry Way Anaheim Not Applicable I-32 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way Anaheim 0.07 A 0.07 A I-33 Lewis Street / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 0.53 A 0.48 A I-34 Manchester Avenue / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 0.52 A 0.37 A I-35 Anaheim Way / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 0.36 A 0.50 A I-36 State College Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 0.57 A 0.65 B I-37 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.43 A 0.53 A I-38 State College Boulevard / Gene Autry Way Anaheim 0.30 A 0.29 A I-39 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim/Orange 0.46 A 0.47 A I-40 State College Boulevard / Orange Center Drive Anaheim/Orange 0.21 A 0.21 A I-41 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps Orange 0.33 A 0.28 A I-42 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps Orange 0.43 A 0.28 A I-43 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue Orange 0.71 C 0.66 B I-44 Sunkist Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.82 D 0.79 C I-45 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.38 A 0.55 A I-46 Rampart Street / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 0.51 A 0.44 A I-47 Rampart Street / Chapman Avenue Orange 0.31 A 0.31 A I-48 Ball Road / SR-57 Northbound Ramps Anaheim 0.54 A 0.58 A I-49 Ball Road / SR-57 Southbound Ramps Anaheim 0.69 B 0.57 A I-50 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.36 A 0.40 A I-51 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.40 A 0.40 A I-52 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Northbound Ramps Orange 0.52 A 0.49 A I-53 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Southbound Ramps Orange 0.61 B 0.68 B I-54 Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road Anaheim 0.48 A 0.59 A I-55 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.41 A 0.49 A I-56 Eckhoff Street / Orangewood Avenue Orange 0.56 A 0.69 B I-57 Main Street / Taft Avenue Orange 0.68 B 0.73 C I-58 Main Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.50 A 0.50 A I-59 Batavia Street / Taft Avenue Orange 0.65 B 0.67 B I-60 Clementine Street / Gene Autry Way Anaheim Not Applicable I-61 Clementine Street / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 0.33 A 0.33 A I-62 Flower Street / Chapman Avenue Orange 0.38 A 0.49 A I-63 Harbor Boulevard / Chapman Avenue Anaheim 0.55 A 0.61 B I-64 I-5 Ramps / Chapman Avenue Orange 0.43 A 0.46 A I-65 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Chapman Avenue Orange 0.40 A 0.39 A I-66 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Chapman Avenue Orange 0.54 A 0.52 A I-67 Euclid Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.59 A 0.66 B I-68 Walnut Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.56 A 0.47 A I-69 Disneyland Drive / I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp Anaheim 0.35 A 0.29 A I-70 Disneyland Drive/ Magic Way Anaheim 0.28 A 0.30 A I-71 Ox Road / Cast Place / Ball Road Anaheim 0.56 A 0.55 A I-72 Convention Center/ Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.39 A 0.41 A ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 17 Table 3.1: Existing Peak Hour Intersection LOS, Continued ID Intersection Jurisdiction AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ICU LOS ICU LOS I-73 Harbor Boulevard / Lincoln Avenue Anaheim 0.61 B 0.76 C I-74 Harbor Boulevard / Broadway Anaheim 0.50 A 0.67 B I-75 Harbor Boulevard / Manchester Avenue Anaheim 0.29 A 0.43 A I-76 Anaheim Boulevard / Lincoln Avenue Anaheim 0.47 A 0.60 A I-77 Anaheim Boulevard / Broadway Anaheim 0.46 A 0.52 A I-78 Olive Street / Lincoln Avenue Anaheim 0.40 A 0.43 A I-79 Flore Street / West Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.53 A 0.47 A I-80 West Street / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 0.61 B 0.72 C I-81 Struck Avenue / Katella Avenue Orange 0.28 A 0.34 A Source: City of Anaheim Note: * The intersection of Euclid Street / Katella Avenue is currently under construction to enhance capacity. Daily Arterial Segment LOS Analysis Table 3.2 presents average daily traffic (ADT) and LOS for study area arterial segments under existing conditions. The analysis is based on existing traffic counts, collected by the City on a typical weekday in 2008 and 2009. The table indicates that four arterial segments operate at a deficient LOS under Existing condition. Three of these segments currently are not at their ultimate configuration per the City’s Circulation Element. One deficient segment that is currently at the Circulation Element configuration is further analyzed under AM and PM peak hour conditions. The deficient segments are:  Ball Road between State College Boulevard and Sunkist Street  Ball Road between Sunkist Street and SR-57 (Ultimate configuration)  Orangewood Avenue between State College Boulevard and Rampart Street  Orangewood Avenue between Rampart Street and SR-57 Table 3.2: Existing Daily Arterial Segment LOS ID Arterial From To Jurisdiction 2008 Existing Daily Count Mid-Block Lanes Total Capacity V-C Ratio Daily LOS A-1 Anaheim Boulevard Katella Avenue I-5 Freeway Anaheim 19,380 6D 56,300 0.34 A A-2 Anaheim Boulevard I-5 Freeway Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 33,160 6D 56,300 0.59 A A-3 Anaheim Boulevard Cerritos Avenue Ball Road Anaheim 26,790 4D 37,500 0.71 C A-4 Ball Road Euclid Street Walnut Street Anaheim 26,330 6D 56,300 0.47 A A-5 Ball Road Walnut Street Disneyland Drive Anaheim 34,020 6D 56,300 0.60 A A-6 Ball Road Disneyland Drive Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 44,320 6D 56,300 0.79 C A-7 Ball Road Harbor Boulevard Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim 36,890 6D 56,300 0.66 B A-8 Ball Road Anaheim Boulevard East Street Anaheim 35,280 6D 56,300 0.63 B A-9 Ball Road East Street State College Boulevard Anaheim 38,110 6D 56,300 0.68 B A-10 Ball Road State College Boulevard Sunkist Street Anaheim 40,500 4D 37,500 1.08 F A-11 Ball Road Sunkist Street SR-57 Freeway Anaheim 48,400 6D 56,300 0.86 D A-12 Ball Road SR-57 Freeway Main Street Orange 32,740 6D 56,300 0.58 A A-13 Clementine Street Manchester Avenue Disney Way Anaheim 7,510 4U 25,000 0.30 A A-14 Clementine Street Disney Way Katella Avenue Anaheim 7,510 4U 25,000 0.30 A A-20 Disney Way Harbor Boulevard Clementine Street Anaheim 7,770 6D 56,300 0.14 A A-21 Disney Way Clementine Street Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim 13,880 6D 56,300 0.25 A ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 18 Table 3.2: Existing Daily Arterial Segment LOS, Continued ID Arterial From To Jurisdiction 2008 Existing Daily Count Mid-Block Lanes Total Capacity V-C Ratio Daily LOS A-22 Disneyland Drive Katella Avenue Magic Way Anaheim 19,130 4D 37,500 0.51 A A-23 Disneyland Drive Magic Way Ball Road Anaheim 23,810 4D 37,500 0.63 B A-24 Disneyland Drive Ball Road Manchester Avenue Anaheim 30,910 6D 56,300 0.55 A A-25 Harbor Boulevard Wilken Way Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 35,560 6D 56,300 0.63 B A-26 Harbor Boulevard Orangewood Avenue Convention Way Anaheim 35,870 6D 56,300 0.64 B A-27 Harbor Boulevard Convention Way Katella Avenue Anaheim 40,430 6D 56,300 0.72 C A-28 Harbor Boulevard Katella Avenue Disney Way Anaheim 38,410 6D 56,300 0.68 B A-29 Harbor Boulevard Disney Way Manchester Avenue Anaheim 41,340 6D 56,300 0.73 C A-30 Harbor Boulevard I-5 Freeway Ball Road Anaheim 44,360 8D 75,000 0.59 A A-31 Haster Street Orangewood Avenue Gene Autry Way Anaheim 19,760 4U 25,000 0.79 C A-32 Haster Street Gene Autry Way Katella Avenue Anaheim 19,760 4U 25,000 0.79 C A-33 Katella Avenue Ninth Street Walnut Street Anaheim 29,270 6D 56,300 0.52 A A-34 Katella Avenue Walnut Street Disneyland Drive Anaheim 35,240 6D 56,300 0.63 B A-35 Katella Avenue Disneyland Drive Hotel Way Anaheim 37,440 6D 56,300 0.67 B A-36 Katella Avenue Hotel Way Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 37,440 6D 56,300 0.67 B A-37 Katella Avenue Harbor Boulevard Clementine Street Anaheim 39,100 6D 56,300 0.69 B A-38 Katella Avenue Clementine Street Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim 38,510 6D 56,300 0.68 B A-39 Katella Avenue Anaheim Boulevard Manchester Avenue Anaheim 37,830 6D 56,300 0.67 B A-40a Katella Avenue Manchester Avenue Anaheim Way Anaheim 30,260 6D 56,300 0.54 A A-40b Katella Avenue Anaheim Way Lewis Street Anaheim 30,260 6D 56,300 0.54 A A-40c Katella Avenue Lewis Street State College Boulevard Anaheim 30,260 6D 56,300 0.54 A A-41 Katella Avenue State College Boulevard Sportstown Anaheim 32,800 6D 56,300 0.58 A A-42 Katella Avenue Sportstown Howell Avenue Anaheim 34,240 6D 56,300 0.61 B A-43 Katella Avenue Howell Avenue SR-57 Freeway Anaheim 37,990 6D 56,300 0.67 B A-44 Katella Avenue SR-57 Freeway Main Street Orange 29,610 6D 56,300 0.53 A A-45 Manchester Avenue Clementine Street Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 3,730 2U 12,500 0.30 A A-46 Orangewood Avenue West Street Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 12,750 4U 25,000 0.51 A A-47 Orangewood Avenue Harbor Boulevard Clementine Street Anaheim 15,540 4U 25,000 0.62 B A-48 Orangewood Avenue Clementine Street Haster Street Anaheim 15,540 4U 25,000 0.62 B A-49 Orangewood Avenue Haster Street Manchester Avenue Anaheim 17,950 4U 25,000 0.62 B A-50 Orangewood Avenue* Manchester Avenue State College Boulevard Anaheim /Orange 19,810 6D 56,300 0.35 A A-51 Orangewood Avenue State College Boulevard Rampart Street Anaheim 24,490 4U 25,000 0.98 E A-52 Orangewood Avenue* Rampart Street SR-57 Freeway Anaheim /Orange 23,490 4U 25,000 0.94 E A-53 Orangewood Avenue SR-57 Freeway Eckhoff Street Orange 27,720 4D 37,500 0.74 C A-54 Orangewood Avenue Eckhoff Street Main Street Orange 14,160 4D 37,500 0.38 A A-55 Walnut Street Katella Avenue Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 10,400 4D 37,500 0.28 A A-56 Walnut Street Cerritos Avenue Ball Road Anaheim 15,490 4D 37,500 0.41 A A-57 West Street Orangewood Avenue Katella Avenue Anaheim 12,390 4U 25,000 0.50 A A-58 Chapman Avenue State College Boulevard SR-57 Freeway Orange 30,740 6D 56,300 0.55 A A-59 Chapman Avenue SR-57 Freeway Main Street Orange 27,260 6D 56,300 0.48 A A-60 State College Boulevard Chapman Avenue I-5 Freeway Orange 26,980 8D 75,000 0.36 A A-61 State College Boulevard I-5 Freeway Orangewood Avenue Orange 21,400 8D 75,000 0.29 A A-62 State College Boulevard Orangewood Avenue Gene Autry Way Anaheim 22,160 6D 56,300 0.39 A A-63 State College Boulevard Gene Autry Way Katella Avenue Anaheim 20,120 6D 56,300 0.36 A A-64 State College Boulevard Katella Avenue Howell Avenue Anaheim 23,980 6D 56,300 0.43 A A-65 State College Boulevard Howell Avenue Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 23,440 6D 56,300 0.42 A A-66 State College Boulevard Cerritos Avenue Ball Road Anaheim 23,320 6D 56,300 0.41 A Source: City of Anaheim Notes: * Shared segment capacities are identified by the jurisdiction in which the traffic count was taken ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 19 Arterial Segment Peak Hour LOS Analysis Table 3-3 reports the AM and PM peak hour arterial segment LOS for the deficient arterial segment that is at the Circulation Element configuration. The table indicates that there is no capacity inadequacy for this arterial segment during either the AM or PM peak hour. Table 3.3: Existing Arterial Segment Peak Hour LOS ID Arterial From To Jurisdiction Traffic Volume Mid- Block Lanes Total Capacity V/C LOS AM Peak Hour A-11 Ball Road Sunkist Street SR-57 Freeway Anaheim 3,420 6 4,864 0.70 B PM Peak Hour A-11 Ball Road Sunkist Street SR-57 Freeway Anaheim 3,370 6 5,437 0.62 B Source: City of Anaheim ---PAGE BREAK--- This page is intentionally kept blank to facilitate double sided printing ---PAGE BREAK--- M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L DISNEYLAND DR OR AN GE C TR DR VERMONT AVE EAST ST MANCHESTER AVE MAGIC WY KATELLA AVE PL 73 74 76 77 78 7 28 27 29 36 44 48 54 57 58 81 55 56 52 53 46 61 33 34 35 38 39 40 41 42 43 47 66 65 62 49 64 45 LEWIS ST WY CHAPMAN AVE PHOENIX CLUB DR RA M P A R T S T DOUGLASS RD BALL RD WEST ST E LINCOLN AVE STATE COLLEGE BLVD NINTH ST HARBOR BLVD EUCLID ST SOUTH ST ANAHEIM BLVD WALNUT ST ORANGEWOOD AVE LEWIS ST CERRITOS AVE N WEST ST HASTER ST WAGNER AVE N HARBOR BLVD MAIN ST NT AVE ECKHOFF ST SUNKIST ST N RIO VISTA ST LVD N SUN GENE AUTRY WY DISNEY WY ANAHEIM WY HOWELL AVE CONVENTION CERRITOS AVE KATELLA AVE N 71 72 9 69 10 70 12 75 11 6 1 4 68 8 67 5 3 16 50 51 17 20 26 19 79 21 13 25 15 14 24 22 2 102 80 30 37 32 18 ? l GARDEN GROVE ANAHEIM CLEMENTINE WEST ST FLORE ST SANTA ANA RIVER CAST PL ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 21 Caltrans Ramp Termini Intersection Analysis Table 3.4 presents the results of peak hour delays and levels of service for the ramp termini intersections under Existing conditions. Detailed analysis worksheets are included in Appendix C-1. The analysis indicates that nall the Caltrans Ramp intersections operate at an acceptable LOS in either peak hour. Under all scenarios, freeway ramp termini intersections were evaluated according to both ICU and HCM methodology. The analysis under existing conditions is generally consistent in terms of LOS with the ICU analysis for the ramp termini intersections. Table 3.4: Existing Peak Hour Ramp Termini Intersection LOS ID Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay LOS Delay LOS I-9 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 10.8 B 14.4 B I-10 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps 7.9 A 7.5 A I-17 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp / Disney Way 26.2 C 25.5 C I-20 Anaheim Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 15.4 B 25.8 C I-21 Anaheim Boulevard / Disney Way 33.7 C 19.2 B I-25 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 27.5 C 15.9 B I-26 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 17.9 B 20.2 C I-32 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way 6.0 A 6.3 A I-41 I-5 Northbound Ramps / State College Boulevard 12.8 B 12.5 B I-42 I-5 Southbound Ramps / State College Boulevard 17.4 B 12.5 B I-48 Ball Road / SR-57 Northbound Ramps 19.3 B 21.4 C I-49 Ball Road / SR-57 Southbound Ramps 32.1 C 17.6 B I-50 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 10.4 B 7.5 A I-51 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 11.3 B 8.5 A I-52 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Northbound Ramps 15.6 B 8.3 A I-53 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Southbound Ramps 19.4 B 28.7 C I-64 Chapman Avenue / I-5 Southbound On-Ramp 41.7 D 42.4 D I-65 Chapman Avenue / SR-57 Northbound Ramps 19.1 B 19.7 B I-66 Chapman Avenue / SR-57 Southbound Ramps 36.4 D 36.1 D I-69 Disneyland Drive / I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp 8.8 A 7.5 A Source: City of Anaheim Caltrans Peak Hour Ramp Termini Off-Ramp Queuing Analysis Table 3.5 presents the queue and control delay determined by for the study area off-ramp termini intersections under Existing conditions. Detailed queuing analysis worksheets are included in Appendix D-1. The analysis indicates that no Caltrans Ramp intersections have a queue length that is greater than the existing off-ramp storage length. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 22 Table 3.5: Existing Peak Hour Ramp Termini Off-Ramp Queuing Analysis ID Ramp Termini Intersection Off-Ramp # of Lanes Off-Ramp Storage Length (feet) Off-Ramp Queue Length Control Delay (sec) Deficient Storage Length AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R I - 9 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 1.5 1.5 400 1,280 20 10 40 60 12.2 18.5 15.9 31.7 No I - 10 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps 2 1 1,240 190 60 60 32.3 32.3 No I - 17 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp / Disney Way 1.33 0.33 1.33 940 380 380 100 100 0 150 150 0 43.5 43.3 8.2 61.2 63.0 9.9 No I - 25 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 1.5 1.5 720 720 1,710 40 0 0 40 0 64.0 27.4 4.9 60.9 23.9 No I - 26 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 1.5 3 0.5 1,540 1,060 130 120 210 220 20.4 17.5 25.6 20.9 No I - 32 I-5 HOV Northbound Ramps / Gene Autry Way 2 1,510 No I-5 HOV Southbound Ramps / Gene Autry Way 2 1,340 0 0 4.9 6.7 No I - 41 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 1.5 1.5 2 1,580 690 690 70 70 0 70 70 0 52.7 48.6 7.9 54.5 49.8 8.7 No I - 42 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps 1.5 0.5 2 2,960 2,190 1,590 40 230 130 100 140 90 29.3 47.5 35.1 46.4 52.3 32.1 No I - 48 Ball Road / SR-57 Northbound Ramps 1 1 1,030 680 180 240 280 30 28.9 42.7 53.0 10.7 No I - 49 Ball Road / SR-57 Southbound Ramps 0.5 1.5 1,290 570 390 400 250 250 35.3 45.0 39.5 46.4 No I - 50 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 1.5 1.5 1,030 590 70 50 50 40 18.4 20.5 18.8 19.1 No I - 51 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 1.5 1.5 930 600 80 70 60 60 19.5 23.1 18.8 23.4 No I - 52 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Northbound Ramps 1.5 1.5 650 350 130 190 20 0 38.9 56.4 21.9 17.2 No I - 53 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Southbound Ramps 1.5 1.5 1,050 630 340 210 110 0 140 60 247 66.3 33.4 8.4 68.5 26.0 23.9 No I - 64 I-5 Ramps / Chapman Avenue 2 1 1,080 220 220 0 230 0 46.7 9.8 46.0 7.4 No I - 65 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Chapman Avenue 1 1 1,240 760 20 0 10 0 14.8 3.5 13.8 3.0 No I - 66 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Chapman Avenue 0.5 0.5 1 580 1,000 210 60 120 90 36.5 12.7 47.6 30.7 No I - 69 Disneyland Drive / I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp 3 1 2130 70 40 30 10.6 7.9 No ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 23 Caltrans Peak Hour Freeway Ramp Analysis Table 3.6 summarizes HCM analysis results for the study area ramps for the AM and PM peak hours. The HCM reports a density based on the existing freeway mainline segment and ramp merge/diverge volumes. Detailed HCM analysis worksheets are included in Appendix E-1. According to the analysis, the I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Boulevard is deficient under PM peak hour conditions. Table 3.6: Existing Peak Hour Freeway Ramp LOS ID Ramp Segment Ramp # of Lane A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS R-1 I-5 Northbound HOV Off-Ramp to Gene Autry Way / Disney Way 1 6.5 A 10.3 B R-2 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from State College Boulevard/Chapman Avenue 1 19.3 B 30.0 D R-3 I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Anaheim Way/Katella Avenue* 2 21.2 C 32.8 D R-4 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Way/Orangewood Avenue 1 19.9 B 28.0 C R-5 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Katella Avenue 1 21.1 C 30.9 D R-6 I-5 Northbound HOV On-Ramp from Gene Autry Way 1 14.6 B 22.6 C R-7 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Boulevard 1 22.2 C > Capacity F R-8 I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Harbor Boulevard 1 23.1 C 33.2 D R-9 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Harbor Boulevard 1 19.6 B 32.2 D R-10 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Ball Road 1 20.8 C 32.7 D R-11 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Disneyland Drive 1 21.9 C 33.9 D R-12 I-5 Southbound HOV Off-Ramp to Disneyland Drive 1 10.3 B 8.1 A R-13 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to Disneyland Drive/Ball Road 2 10.9 B 13.9 B R-14 I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Disneyland Drive 1 27.4 C 33.4 D R-15 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to Harbor Boulevard 1 25.1 C 30.7 D R-16 I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Harbor Boulevard 1 32.4 D 34.6 D R-17 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to Disney Way/Anaheim Boulevard 1 26.6 C 30.2 D R-18 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue/Orangewood Avenue* 2 22.8 C 28.3 D R-19 I-5 Southbound HOV Off-Ramp to Gene Autry Way 1 10.2 B 5.8 A R-20 I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Boulevard 1 23.2 C 30.5 D R-21 I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Katella Avenue 1 24.0 C 31.1 D R-22 I-5 Southbound HOV On-Ramp from Gene Autry Way 1 20.2 C 13.1 B * Major Diverge Analysis utilized to calculate density Source: City of Anaheim, Caltrans Caltrans Freeway Mainline Analysis Table 3.7 summarizes HCS analysis results for the densities and levels of service for study area mainline segments for the AM and PM peak hours. Detailed HCM mainline analysis worksheets are included in Appendix F-1. According to the analysis the following freeway mainline segments are deficient under PM peak hour conditions:  I-5 Northbound between Lincoln Avenue and Harbor Boulevard ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 24  I-5 Northbound between Katella Avenue and State College Boulevard Table 3.7: Existing Peak Hour Freeway Mainline LOS ID Freeway Segment Northbound / Eastbound Southbound / Westbound A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS F - 1 I-5 between SR-91 and Brookhurst Street 18.8 C 29.2 D 20.4 C 21.9 C F - 2 I-5 between Brookhurst Street and Euclid Street 20.6 C 31.6 D 25.2 C 26.7 D F - 3 I-5 between Euclid Street and Lincoln Avenue 19.1 C 32.2 D 32.9 D 34.1 D F - 4 I-5 between Lincoln Avenue and Harbor Boulevard 19.6 C 36.6 E 24.7 C 27.0 D F - 5 I-5 between Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue 16.8 B 34.5 D 22.0 C 24.9 C F - 6 I-5 between Katella Avenue and State College Boulevard 17.5 B 39.7 E 25.5 C 27.0 D F - 7 I-5 between State College Boulevard and SR- 22 16.2 B 34.0 D 26.5 D 24.8 C Source: City of Anaheim, Caltrans Caltrans Freeway Weaving Analysis Table 3.8 summarizes HCS analysis results for the weaving areas during the AM and PM peak hours. Detailed HCM weaving analysis worksheets are included in Appendix G-1. Under existing conditions, the following weaving sections are deficient under the PM peak hour conditions:  I-5 Northbound between Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Lincoln Avenue Off-Ramp  I-5 Northbound between Anaheim Boulevard On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp  I-5 Northbound between State College Boulevard On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp  I-5 Northbound between SR-22 Connector and Chapman Avenue Off-Ramp ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 25 Table 3.8: Existing Peak Hour Freeway Weaving LOS ID Weaving Segment Weaving Length (Ft) A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS W - 1 I-5 Northbound between Brookhurst Street On-Ramp and SR-91 Eastbound Off-Ramp 2,980 Not Applicable I-5 Southbound between SR-91 Connector / Magnolia Avenue On-Ramp and Brookhurst Street Off-Ramp 3,390 W - 2 I-5 Northbound between Euclid Street On-Ramp and Brookhurst Street Off-Ramp 2,890 I-5 Southbound between Brookhurst Street On-Ramp and Euclid Street Off-Ramp 2,540 W - 3 I-5 Northbound between Lincoln Avenue On-Ramp and Euclid Street Off-Ramp 2,000 19.8 B 34.1 D W - 4 I-5 Northbound between Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Lincoln Avenue Off-Ramp 1,680 20.3 B 39.3 E I-5 Southbound between Lincoln Avenue On-Ramp and Disneyland Drive Off-Ramp 3,060 Not Applicable W - 5 I-5 Southbound between Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp 1,520 29.5 C 34.5 D W - 6 I-5 Northbound between Anaheim Boulevard On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off- Ramp 2,080 19.1 B > Capacity F I-5 Southbound between Harbor Boulevard On-Ramp and Disney Way Off-Ramp 2,650 Not Applicable W - 7 I-5 Northbound between State College Boulevard On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off- Ramp 2,350 18.3 B > Capacity F I-5 Southbound between Katella Avenue On-Ramp and State College Boulevard Off- Ramp 1,870 27.9 C 32.1 D W - 8 I-5 Northbound between SR-22 Connector and Chapman Avenue Off-Ramp 1,720 20.8 B > Capacity F I-5 Southbound between State College Boulevard / Chapman Avenue On-Ramp and SR-22 Connector 1,510 29.6 C 32.0 D Source: City of Anaheim Summary As noted in the analysis above, the circulation system in the study area generally operates at an acceptable LOS. Locations that are deficient under existing conditions will be considered when determining future project related impacts and mitigation measures. The existing conditions assessment for the base year 2008 provides the framework for applying the General Plan future forecasts to both the No Project and With Project scenarios under interim year 2015 and buildout year 2030. ---PAGE BREAK--- This page is intentionally kept blank to facilitate double sided printing ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 26 4.0 INTERIM YEAR 2015 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS 4.1 INTERIM YEAR 2015, NO PROJECT Since the interim year is more than five years after the date of the traffic counts, the analysis was performed by application of the Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model (ATAM) to develop future Interim Year 2015 traffic forecast volumes through an interpolation process. Based on the citywide land use data and regional socioeconomic growth projections, future trip activity is estimated and assigned to the circulation system. These forecasts incorporate the following future key project assumptions in the study area vicinity:  Anaheim GardenWalk (Hotel)  Springhill Suites (Hotel)  Manchester/Orangewood (Multi-Family Residential)  Platinum Triangle Condominiums (Multi-Family Residential and Commercial)  BRE Properties Stadium Park & Stadium Club (Multi-Family Residential)  Lennar A-Town Metro (Residential and Commercial)  Orangewood Condominiums (Multi-Family Residential)  Lennar A-Town Stadium (Multi-Family Residential)  Platinum Vista (Multi-Family Residential and Restaurant)  The Experience at Gene Autry (Multi-Family Residential, Office, and Commercial)  Platinum Gateway (Multi-Family Residential, Office, and Hotel)  ARTIC (Transit Station)  Anaheim Convention Center Grand Plaza (Entertainment) Intersection Analysis Table 4.1 presents ICU and LOS results for the study intersections under Interim Year 2015 No Project conditions during the AM peak hour and PM peak hour. Existing lane geometrics were assumed in the ICU and LOS analyses, with the exception of the intersection of Haster Street and Gene Autry Way, which currently does not exist, and the intersection of Euclid Street and Katella Avenue, which is currently being widened. Figure 4.1 presents the study intersection locations and LOS without the project. The detailed ICU worksheets for the No Project conditions are presented in Appendix A-2. Under these conditions, the following four intersections operate at an unacceptable LOS, during the PM peak hour including one location in the City of Orange:  Anaheim Boulevard at Ball Road  Lewis Street at Katella Avenue  Sunkist Street at Ball Road  Main Street at Taft Avenue (Orange) ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 27 Table 4.1: Interim Year 2015 No Project Peak Hour Intersection LOS ID Intersection Jurisdiction AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ICU LOS ICU LOS I-1 Euclid Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.66 B 0.75 C I-2 Ninth Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.66 B 0.65 B I-3 Walnut Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.61 B 0.62 B I-4 Walnut Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.58 A 0.63 B I-5 Disneyland Drive / Ball Road Anaheim 0.74 C 0.81 D I-6 Disneyland Drive / West Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.66 B 0.68 B I-7 Harbor Boulevard / Vermont Avenue Anaheim 0.68 B 0.71 C I-8 Harbor Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 0.83 D 0.73 C I-9 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps Anaheim 0.60 A 0.61 B I-10 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps Anaheim 0.40 A 0.37 A I-11 Harbor Boulevard / Disney Way Anaheim 0.36 A 0.55 A I-12 Harbor Boulevard / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.66 B 0.71 C I-13 Harbor Boulevard / Convention Way Anaheim 0.43 A 0.47 A I-14 Harbor Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 0.64 B 0.66 B I-15 Clementine Street / Disney Way Anaheim 0.29 A 0.30 A I-16 Clementine Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.62 B 0.72 C I-17 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp / Disney Way Anaheim 0.27 A 0.29 A I-18 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 0.72 C 0.98 E I-19 Anaheim Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.70 B 0.85 D I-20 Anaheim Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps Anaheim 0.51 A 0.70 B I-21 Anaheim Boulevard / Disney Way Anaheim 0.51 A 0.60 A I-22 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.59 A 0.71 C I-23 Haster Street/Gene Autry Way Anaheim 0.35 A 0.44 A I-24 Haster Street / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 0.66 B 0.79 C I-25 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.72 C 0.63 B I-26 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.55 A 0.61 B I-27 East Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.59 A 0.79 C I-28 Lewis Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.60 A 0.70 B I-29 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.45 A 0.48 A I-30 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.75 C 0.98 E I-31 Lewis Street / Gene Autry Way Anaheim Not Applicable I-32 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way Anaheim 0.22 A 0.28 A I-33 Lewis Street / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 0.56 A 0.51 A I-34 Manchester Avenue / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 0.58 A 0.50 A I-35 Anaheim Way / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 0.47 A 0.54 A I-36 State College Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 0.66 B 0.75 C I-37 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.52 A 0.66 B I-38 State College Boulevard / Gene Autry Way Anaheim 0.57 A 0.62 B I-39 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim/Orange 0.58 A 0.61 B I-40 State College Boulevard / Orange Center Drive Anaheim/Orange 0.36 A 0.32 A ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 28 Table 4.1: Interim Year 2015 No Project Peak Hour Intersection LOS, Continued ID Intersection Jurisdiction AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ICU LOS ICU LOS I-41 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps Orange 0.47 A 0.42 A I-42 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps Orange 0.59 A 0.44 A I-43 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue Orange 0.76 C 0.70 B I-44 Sunkist Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.85 D 0.91 E I-45 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.46 A 0.66 B I-46 Rampart Street / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 0.65 B 0.75 C I-47 Rampart Street / Chapman Avenue Orange 0.42 A 0.46 A I-48 Ball Road / SR-57 Northbound Ramps Anaheim 0.62 B 0.67 B I-49 Ball Road / SR-57 Southbound Ramps Anaheim 0.76 C 0.68 B I-50 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.46 A 0.51 A I-51 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.48 A 0.48 A I-52 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Northbound Ramps Orange 0.60 A 0.58 A I-53 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Southbound Ramps Orange 0.69 B 0.78 C I-54 Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road Anaheim 0.66 B 0.78 C I-55 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.67 B 0.78 C I-56 Eckhoff Street / Orangewood Avenue Orange 0.76 C 0.80 C I-57 Main Street / Taft Avenue Orange 0.76 C 0.96 E I-58 Main Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.60 A 0.60 A I-59 Batavia Street / Taft Avenue Orange 0.79 C 0.78 C I-60 Clementine Street / Gene Autry Way Anaheim Not Applicable I-61 Clementine Street / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 0.36 A 0.54 A I-62 Flower Street / Chapman Avenue Orange 0.44 A 0.59 A I-63 Harbor Boulevard / Chapman Avenue Anaheim 0.59 A 0.67 B I-64 I-5 Ramps / Chapman Avenue Orange 0.44 A 0.51 A I-65 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Chapman Avenue Orange 0.44 A 0.43 A I-66 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Chapman Avenue Orange 0.60 A 0.62 B I-67 Euclid Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.64 B 0.70 B I-68 Walnut Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.61 B 0.48 A I-69 Disneyland Drive / I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp Anaheim 0.41 A 0.35 A I-70 Disneyland Drive/ Magic Way Anaheim 0.35 A 0.35 A I-71 Ox Road / Cast Place / Ball Road Anaheim 0.62 B 0.59 A I-72 Convention Center/ Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.51 A 0.52 A I-73 Harbor Boulevard / Lincoln Avenue Anaheim 0.66 B 0.82 D I-74 Harbor Boulevard / Broadway Anaheim 0.54 A 0.72 C I-75 Harbor Boulevard / Manchester Avenue Anaheim 0.33 A 0.47 A I-76 Anaheim Boulevard / Lincoln Avenue Anaheim 0.56 A 0.68 B I-77 Anaheim Boulevard / Broadway Anaheim 0.54 A 0.56 A I-78 Olive Street / Lincoln Avenue Anaheim 0.45 A 0.48 A I-79 Flore Street / West Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.56 A 0.49 A I-80 West Street / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 0.72 C 0.83 D I-81 Struck Avenue / Katella Avenue Orange 0.40 A 0.49 A ---PAGE BREAK--- This page is intentionally kept blank to facilitate double sided printing ---PAGE BREAK--- M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L DISNEYLAND DR OR AN GE C TR DR VERMONT AVE EAST ST MANCHESTER AVE MAGIC WY KATELLA AVE PL 73 74 76 77 78 7 28 27 29 36 44 48 54 57 58 81 55 56 52 53 46 61 33 34 35 38 39 40 41 42 43 47 66 65 62 49 64 45 LEWIS ST WY CHAPMAN AVE PHOENIX CLUB DR SPORTSTOWN GATEWAY CENTER DR MARKET ST RA M P A R T S T BALL RD WEST ST E LINCOLN AVE STATE COLLEGE BLVD NINTH ST HARBOR BLVD EUCLID ST SOUTH ST ANAHEIM BLVD WALNUT ST ORANGEWOOD AVE LEWIS ST CERRITOS AVE N WEST ST HASTER ST WAGNER AVE N HARBOR BLVD MAIN ST NT AVE ECKHOFF ST SUNKIST ST N RIO VISTA ST LVD N SUN GENE AUTRY WY DISNEY WY ANAHEIM WY HOWELL AVE DUPONT DR CONVENTION CERRITOS AVE KATELLA AVE N 71 72 9 69 10 70 12 75 11 6 1 4 68 8 67 5 3 16 50 51 17 20 26 19 79 21 13 25 15 14 24 22 2 102 80 30 37 32 18 ? l GARDEN GROVE ANAHEIM CLEMENTINE WEST ST FLORE ST SANTA ANA RIVER CAST PL DOUGLASS RD ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 30 Daily Arterial Segment LOS Analysis Table 4.2 presents average daily traffic (ADT) and LOS for all arterial segments within the study area under Interim Year No Project conditions. The table indicates that 12 arterial segments operate at a deficient LOS without the project. Eight of these segments are not at their ultimate configuration per the City’s Circulation Element. The four deficient segments that are at the Circulation Element configuration are further analyzed under AM and PM peak hour conditions. The deficient segments are:  Anaheim Boulevard between Cerritos Avenue and Ball Road  Ball Road between Disneyland Drive and Harbor Boulevard (Ultimate configuration)  Ball Road between State College Boulevard and Sunkist Street  Ball Road between Sunkist Street and SR-57 (Ultimate configuration)  Harbor Boulevard between Disney Way and Manchester Avenue (Ultimate configuration)  Haster Street between Orangewood Avenue and Gene Autry Way  Haster Street between Gene Autry Way and Katella Avenue  Katella Avenue between Disneyland Drive and Hotel Way  Katella Avenue between Hotel Way and Harbor Boulevard  Orangewood Avenue between Haster Street and Manchester Avenue (Ultimate configuration)  Orangewood Avenue between State College Boulevard and Rampart Street  Orangewood Avenue between Rampart Street and SR-57 ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 31 Table 4.2: Interim Year 2015 No Project Daily Arterial Segment LOS ID Arterial From To Jurisdiction Mid- Block Lanes Total Capacity No Project 2015 ADT V-C Ratio Daily LOS A-1 Anaheim Boulevard Katella Avenue I-5 Freeway Anaheim 6D 56,300 22,950 0.41 A A-2 Anaheim Boulevard I-5 Freeway Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 6D 56,300 39,510 0.70 B A-3 Anaheim Boulevard Cerritos Avenue Ball Road Anaheim 4D 37,500 32,240 0.86 D A-4 Ball Road Euclid Street Walnut Street Anaheim 6D 56,300 28,490 0.51 A A-5 Ball Road Walnut Street Disneyland Drive Anaheim 6D 56,300 36,120 0.64 B A-6 Ball Road Disneyland Drive Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 6D 56,300 48,260 0.86 D A-7 Ball Road Harbor Boulevard Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim 6D 56,300 38,480 0.68 B A-8 Ball Road Anaheim Boulevard East Street Anaheim 6D 56,300 38,100 0.68 B A-9 Ball Road East Street State College Boulevard Anaheim 6D 56,300 40,210 0.71 C A-10 Ball Road State College Boulevard Sunkist Street Anaheim 4D 37,500 42,450 1.13 F A-11 Ball Road Sunkist Street SR-57 Freeway Anaheim 6D 56,300 51,710 0.92 E A-12 Ball Road SR-57 Freeway Main Street Orange 6D 56,300 41,120 0.73 C A-13 Clementine Street Manchester Avenue Disney Way Anaheim 4U 25,000 12,470 0.50 A A-14 Clementine Street Disney Way Katella Avenue Anaheim 4U 25,000 7,820 0.31 A A-19 Convention Way/Gene Autry Way Haster Street I-5 Freeway Anaheim 6D 56,300 10,330 0.18 A A-20 Disney Way Harbor Boulevard Clementine Street Anaheim 6D 56,300 10,260 0.18 A A-21 Disney Way Clementine Street Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim 6D 56,300 17,320 0.31 A A-22 Disneyland Drive Katella Avenue Magic Way Anaheim 4D 37,500 23,850 0.64 B A-23 Disneyland Drive Magic Way Ball Road Anaheim 4D 37,500 26,660 0.71 C A-24 Disneyland Drive Ball Road Manchester Avenue Anaheim 6D 56,300 34,610 0.61 B A-25 Harbor Boulevard Wilken Way Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 6D 56,300 39,910 0.71 C A-26 Harbor Boulevard Orangewood Avenue Convention Way Anaheim 6D 56,300 39,650 0.70 B A-27 Harbor Boulevard Convention Way Katella Avenue Anaheim 6D 56,300 43,760 0.78 C A-28 Harbor Boulevard Katella Avenue Disney Way Anaheim 6D 56,300 43,990 0.78 C A-29 Harbor Boulevard Disney Way Manchester Avenue Anaheim 6D 56,300 45,430 0.81 D A-30 Harbor Boulevard I-5 Freeway Ball Road Anaheim 8D 75,000 48,760 0.65 B A-31 Haster Street Orangewood Avenue Gene Autry Way Anaheim 4U 25,000 25,300 1.01 F A-32 Haster Street Gene Autry Way Katella Avenue Anaheim 4U 25,000 21,290 0.85 D A-33 Katella Avenue Ninth Street Walnut Street Anaheim 6D 56,300 34,990 0.62 B A-34 Katella Avenue Walnut Street Disneyland Drive Anaheim 6D 56,300 41,650 0.74 C A-35 Katella Avenue Disneyland Drive Hotel Way Anaheim 6D 56,300 46,340 0.82 D A-36 Katella Avenue Hotel Way Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 6D 56,300 45,350 0.81 D A-37 Katella Avenue Harbor Boulevard Clementine Street Anaheim 6D 56,300 45,260 0.80 C A-38 Katella Avenue Clementine Street Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim 6D 56,300 44,860 0.80 C A-39 Katella Avenue Anaheim Boulevard Manchester Avenue Anaheim 6D 56,300 43,650 0.78 C A-40a Katella Avenue Manchester Avenue Anaheim Way Anaheim 6D 56,300 35,700 0.63 B A-40b Katella Avenue Anaheim Way Lewis Street Anaheim 6D 56,300 36,610 0.65 B A-40c Katella Avenue Lewis Street State College Boulevard Anaheim 6D 56,300 36,170 0.64 B A-41 Katella Avenue State College Boulevard Sportstown Anaheim 6D 56,300 37,630 0.67 B A-42 Katella Avenue Sportstown Howell Avenue Anaheim 6D 56,300 40,650 0.72 C A-43 Katella Avenue Howell Avenue SR-57 Freeway Anaheim 6D 56,300 45,270 0.80 C A-44 Katella Avenue SR-57 Freeway Main Street Orange 6D 56,300 37,560 0.67 B A-45 Manchester Avenue Clementine Street Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 2U 12,500 5,470 0.44 A A-46 Orangewood Avenue West Street Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 4U 25,000 15,580 0.62 B A-47 Orangewood Avenue Harbor Boulevard Clementine Street Anaheim 4U 25,000 16,900 0.68 B A-48 Orangewood Avenue Clementine Street Haster Street Anaheim 4U 25,000 17,000 0.68 B A-49 Orangewood Avenue Haster Street Manchester Avenue Anaheim 4U 25,000 20,140 0.81 D ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 32 Table 4.2: Interim Year 2015 No Project Daily Arterial Segment LOS, Continued ID Arterial From To Jurisdiction Mid- Block Lanes Total Capacity No Project 2015 ADT V-C Ratio Daily LOS A-50 Orangewood Avenue* Manchester Avenue State College Boulevard Anaheim /Orange 6D 56,300 22,580 0.40 A A-51 Orangewood Avenue State College Boulevard Rampart Street Anaheim 4U 25,000 28,810 1.15 F A-52 Orangewood Avenue* Rampart Street SR-57 Freeway Anaheim /Orange 4U 25,000 28,760 1.15 F A-53 Orangewood Avenue SR-57 Freeway Eckhoff Street Orange 4D 37,500 33,110 0.88 D A-54 Orangewood Avenue Eckhoff Street Main Street Orange 4D 37,500 15,300 0.41 A A-55 Walnut Street Katella Avenue Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 4D 37,500 12,080 0.32 A A-56 Walnut Street Cerritos Avenue Ball Road Anaheim 4D 37,500 16,070 0.43 A A-57 West Street Orangewood Avenue Katella Avenue Anaheim 4U 25,000 13,180 0.53 A A-58 Chapman Avenue State College Boulevard SR-57 Freeway Orange 6D 56,300 32,800 0.58 A A-59 Chapman Avenue SR-57 Freeway Main Street Orange 6D 56,300 28,960 0.51 A A-60 State College Boulevard Chapman Avenue I-5 Freeway Orange 8D 75,000 31,880 0.43 A A-61 State College Boulevard I-5 Freeway Orangewood Avenue Orange 8D 75,000 28,350 0.38 A A-62 State College Boulevard Orangewood Avenue Gene Autry Way Anaheim 6D 56,300 27,730 0.49 A A-63 State College Boulevard Gene Autry Way Katella Avenue Anaheim 6D 56,300 23,590 0.42 A A-64 State College Boulevard Katella Avenue Howell Avenue Anaheim 6D 56,300 29,030 0.52 A A-65 State College Boulevard Howell Avenue Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 6D 56,300 24,850 0.44 A A-66 State College Boulevard Cerritos Avenue Ball Road Anaheim 6D 56,300 24,130 0.43 A Note: *Shared segment capacities are identified by the jurisdiction in which the traffic count was taken Peak Hour Arterial Segment LOS Analysis Table 4.3 reports the AM and PM peak hour arterial segment LOS for the four deficient arterial segments under Interim Year 2015 No Project conditions identified above that are at the Circulation Element configuration. The table indicates that no arterial segment is deficient in either peak hour. Table 4.3: Interim Year 2015 No Project Peak Hour Arterial Segment LOS ID Arterial From To Jurisdiction Traffic Volume Mid- Block Lanes Total Capacity V/C LO S AM Peak Hour A-6 Ball Road Disneyland Drive Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 3,110 6 4,758 0.65 B A-11 Ball Road Sunkist Street SR-57 Anaheim 3,760 6 5,592 0.67 B A-29 Harbor Boulevard Disney Way Manchester Avenue Anaheim 2,640 6 5,665 0.47 A A-49 Orangewood Avenue Haster Street Manchester Avenue Anaheim 1,470 4 5,023 0.29 A PM Peak Hour A-6 Ball Road Disneyland Drive Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 3,440 6 4,758 0.72 C A-11 Ball Road Sunkist Street SR-57 Anaheim 3,830 6 5,592 0.68 B A-29 Harbor Boulevard Disney Way Manchester Avenue Anaheim 2,980 6 5,665 0.53 A A-49 Orangewood Avenue Haster Street Manchester Avenue Anaheim 1,660 4 5,023 0.33 A Caltrans Ramp Termini Intersection Analysis Table 4.4 presents the results of peak hour delays and levels of service for the ramp termini intersections under the Interim Year 2015 No Project conditions. Detailed analysis worksheets ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 33 are included in Appendix C-2. The table indicates that all Caltrans Ramp Intersections operate at an acceptable LOS for both peak hours Table 4.4: Interim Year 2015 No Project Peak Hour Ramp Termini Intersection LOS ID Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay LOS Delay LOS I-9 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 20.4 C 22.5 C I-10 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps 8.1 A 7.6 A I-17 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp / Disney Way 22.8 C 19.7 B I-20 Anaheim Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 14.0 B 28.8 C I-21 Anaheim Boulevard / Disney Way 23.3 C 21.9 C I-25 Manchester Avenue / Katella Avenue 17.8 B 18.1 B I-26 Anaheim Way/ Katella Avenue 17.2 B 25.6 C I-32 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way 28.0 C 23.8 C I-41 I-5 Northbound Ramps / State College Boulevard 17.7 B 16.0 B I-42 I-5 Southbound Ramps / State College Boulevard 17.5 B 9.7 A I-48 Ball Road / SR-57 Northbound Ramps 16.8 B 15.1 B I-49 Ball Road / SR-57 Southbound Ramps 25.6 C 15.3 B I-50 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 14.6 B 13.1 B I-51 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 18.2 B 13.3 B I-52 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Northbound Ramps 11.2 B 6.1 A I-53 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Southbound Ramps 19.3 B 27.5 C I-64 Chapman Avenue / I-5 Southbound On-Ramp 43.4 D 40.0 D I-65 Chapman Avenue / SR-57 Northbound Ramps 3.9 A 4.6 A I-66 Chapman Avenue / SR-57 Southbound Ramps 34.6 C 24.1 C I-69 Disneyland Drive / I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp 9.3 A 8.1 A Caltrans Peak Hour Ramp Termini Off-Ramp Queuing Analysis Table 4.5 presents the queue determined by for the study area off-ramp termini intersections under Interim Year 2015 No Project conditions. Detailed queuing analysis worksheets are included in Appendix D-2. The analysis indicates that no Caltrans Ramp intersections are forecast to have a queuing length that is greater than the off-ramp storage length. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 34 Table 4.5: Interim Year 2015 No Project Peak Hour Ramp Termini Off-Ramp Queuing Analysis ID Ramp Termini Intersection Off-Ramp # of Lanes Off-Ramp Storage Length (feet) Off-Ramp Queue Length Control Delay (sec) Deficient Storage Length AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R I - 9 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 1.5 1.5 400 1,280 70 100 120 220 22.5 32.7 24.3 39.3 No I - 10 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps 2 1 1,240 190 110 110 57.1 56.9 No I - 17 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp / Disney Way 1.33 0.33 1.33 940 380 380 160 160 150 150 57.1 57.3 57.7 58.8 No I - 25 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 1.5 1.5 720 720 1,710 60 10 0 50 10 63.9 22.3 12.8 50.9 15.8 No I - 26 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 1.5 3 0.5 1,540 1,060 210 210 350 370 33.4 31.3 38.5 33.5 No I - 32 I-5 HOV Northbound Ramps / Gene Autry Way 1 2 1,510 10 0 10 0 42.8 17.6 48.1 14.5 No I-5 HOV Southbound Ramps / Gene Autry Way 2 1 1,340 110 0 60 0 56.2 25.0 56.4 9.9 No I - 41 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 1.5 1.5 2 1,580 690 690 90 100 0 70 75 0 51.0 46.6 6.6 58.2 53.4 8.4 No I - 42 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps 1.5 0.5 2 2,960 2,190 1,590 30 330 110 40 110 50 21.1 41.3 25.7 16.3 25.7 16.3 No I - 48 Ball Road / SR-57 Northbound Ramps 1.5 1.5 1,030 680 220 220 190 140 44.2 51.5 44.8 40.4 No I - 49 Ball Road / SR-57 Southbound Ramps 0.5 1.5 1,290 570 400 350 260 230 35.3 30.3 44.5 40.8 No I - 50 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 1.5 1.5 1,030 590 210 200 120 90 44.8 51.3 38.4 35.9 No I - 51 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 1 2 930 600 250 220 140 160 50.6 42.8 39.3 39.5 No I - 52 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Northbound Ramps 1.5 1.5 650 350 110 150 30 0 32.8 46.5 25.0 17.0 No I - 53 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Southbound Ramps 1.5 1.5 1,050 630 340 170 100 0 180 100 247 59.7 32.6 8.8 78.3 38.5 36.8 No I - 64 I-5 Ramps / Chapman Avenue 2 1 1,080 220 220 0 260 0 45.7 6.7 50.4 7.4 No I - 65 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Chapman Avenue 1 1 1,240 760 40 0 30 0 55.4 16.7 59.2 18.6 No I - 66 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Chapman Avenue 0.5 0.5 1 580 1,000 230 0 130 10 58.2 7.8 49.2 10.9 No I - 69 Disneyland Drive / I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp 3 1 2130 70 50 30 12 9.6 No ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 35 Caltrans Peak Hour Freeway Ramp Analysis Table 4.6 summarizes HCM analysis results for the study area ramps for the AM and PM peak hours. Per the Caltrans Highway Design Manual, a 2-lane on- or off-ramp should be provided where volumes exceed 1,500 vehicles per hour during either the AM or PM peak hour. None of the freeway ramps exceed this criterion under the 2015 No Project conditions. Detailed analysis worksheets are included in Appendix E-2. According to the analysis, the following freeway ramps are deficient under the PM peak hour for Interim Year 2015 No Project conditions:  I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from State College Boulevard/Chapman Avenue  I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Anaheim Way/Katella Avenue  I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Way/Orangewood Avenue  I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Katella Avenue  I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Boulevard  I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Harbor Boulevard  I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Harbor Boulevard  I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Ball Road  I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Disneyland Drive Table 4.6: Interim Year 2015 No Project Peak Hour Freeway Ramp LOS ID Ramp Segment Ramp # of Lane A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS R-1 I-5 Northbound HOV Off-Ramp to Gene Autry Way / Disney Way 1 8.4 A 12.7 B R-2 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from State College Boulevard/Chapman Avenue 1 19.1 B > Capacity F R-3 I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Anaheim Way/Katella Avenue* 2 20.8 C > Capacity F R-4 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Way/Orangewood Avenue 1 19.7 B > Capacity F R-5 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Katella Avenue 1 20.8 C > Capacity F R-6 I-5 Northbound HOV On-Ramp from Gene Autry Way 1 17.2 B 26.8 C R-7 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Boulevard 1 22.0 C > Capacity F R-8 I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Harbor Boulevard 1 22.6 C 38.4 E R-9 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Harbor Boulevard 1 19.3 B > Capacity F R-10 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Ball Road 1 21.5 C > Capacity F R-11 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Disneyland Drive 1 22.6 C > Capacity F R-12 I-5 Southbound HOV Off-Ramp to Disneyland Drive 1 14.5 B 13.2 B R-13 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to Disneyland Drive/Ball Road 2 11.0 B 14.0 B R-14 I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Disneyland Drive 1 29.0 D 33.8 D R-15 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to Harbor Boulevard 1 25.5 C 29.4 D R-16 I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Harbor Boulevard 1 32.5 D 33.5 D R-17 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to Disney Way/Anaheim Boulevard 1 27.1 C 29.5 D R-18 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue/Orangewood Avenue* 2 24.7 C 27.8 C R-19 I-5 Southbound HOV Off-Ramp to Gene Autry Way 1 14.8 B 11.5 B R-20 I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Boulevard 1 24.5 C 29.8 D R-21 I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Katella Avenue 1 26.8 C 31.3 D R-22 I-5 Southbound HOV On-Ramp from Gene Autry Way 1 13.9 B 12.5 B * Major Diverge Analysis Utilized to calculate density pc/mi/ln - Passenger Cars per Mile per Lane ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 36 Caltrans Freeway Mainline Analysis Table 4.7 summarizes HCS analysis results for the densities and levels of service for study area mainline segments for the AM and PM peak hours. Detailed analysis worksheets are included in Appendix F-2. According to the analysis, the following freeway mainline segment is deficient under PM peak hour conditions:  I-5 Northbound between Lincoln Avenue and Harbor Boulevard  I-5 Northbound between Katella Avenue and State College Boulevard Table 4.7: Interim Year 2015 No Project Peak Hour Freeway Mainline LOS ID Freeway Segment Northbound / Eastbound Southbound / Westbound A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS F - 1 I-5 between SR-91 and Brookhurst Street 18.9 C 26.4 D 21.1 C 21.5 C F - 2 I-5 between Brookhurst Street and Euclid Street 19.8 C 30.3 D 25.3 C 27.7 D F - 3 I-5 between Euclid Street and Lincoln Avenue 19.8 C 31.6 D 33.4 D 34.7 D F - 4 I-5 between Lincoln Avenue and Harbor Boulevard 20.3 C 36.4 E 23.3 C 26.8 D F - 5 I-5 between Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue 18.1 C 34.5 D 21.6 C 24.3 C F - 6 I-5 between Katella Avenue and State College Boulevard 18.2 C 38.9 E 24.7 C 27.1 D F - 7 I-5 between State College Boulevard and SR-22 17.7 B 34.0 D 26.3 D 25.5 C Source: City of Anaheim, Caltrans Caltrans Freeway Weaving Analysis Table 4.8 summarizes HCS analysis results for the weaving areas on the studied freeway facilities during the AM and PM peak hours. Detailed HCM mainline analysis worksheets are included in Appendix G-2. Under the Interim Year 2015 No Project scenario, there are four freeway weaving segments identified as being deficient under PM peak hour conditions:  I-5 Northbound between Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Lincoln Avenue Off-Ramp  I-5 Northbound between Anaheim Boulevard On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp  I-5 Northbound between State College Boulevard On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp  I-5 Northbound between SR-22 Connector and Chapman Avenue Off-Ramp ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 37 Table 4.8: Interim Year 2015 No Project Peak Hour Freeway Weaving LOS ID Weaving Segment Weaving Length (Ft) A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS W - 1 I-5 Northbound b/w Brookhurst Street On-Ramp and SR-91 Eastbound Off-Ramp 2,980 Not Applicable I-5 Southbound b/w SR-91 Connector / Magnolia Avenue On-Ramp and Brookhurst Street Off-Ramp 3,390 W - 2 I-5 Northbound b/w Euclid Street On-Ramp and Brookhurst Street Off-Ramp 2,890 I-5 Southbound b/w Brookhurst Street On-Ramp and Euclid Street Off-Ramp 2,540 W - 3 I-5 Northbound b/w Lincoln Avenue On-Ramp and Euclid Street Off-Ramp 2,000 20.2 B 33.4 D W - 4 I-5 Northbound b/w Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Lincoln Avenue Off-Ramp 1,680 21.1 B 39.5 E I-5 Southbound b/w Lincoln Avenue On-Ramp and Disneyland Drive Off-Ramp 3,060 Not Applicable W - 5 I-5 Southbound b/w Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp 1,520 28.1 C 34.0 D W - 6 I-5 Northbound b/w Anaheim Boulevard On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp 2,080 20.6 B > Capacity F I-5 Southbound b/w Harbor Boulevard On-Ramp and Disney Way Off-Ramp 2,650 Not Applicable W - 7 I-5 Northbound b/w State College Boulevard On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp 2,350 19.1 B > Capacity F I-5 Southbound b/w Katella Avenue On-Ramp and State College Boulevard Off-Ramp 1,870 28.4 C 32.2 D W - 8 I-5 Northbound b/w SR-22 Connector and Chapman Avenue Off-Ramp 1,720 22.2 B > Capacity F I-5 Southbound b/w State College Boulevard / Chapman Avenue On-Ramp and SR-22 Connector 1,510 32.0 C 32.2 D 4.2 INTERIM YEAR 2015, WITH PROJECT The analysis was performed by application of the Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model (ATAM) to develop future Interim Year 2015 traffic forecast volumes throughout the study area under Interim Year 2015 With Project conditions. The 2015 With Project scenario assumes completion of the Convention Center Expansion as identified earlier in this study. Based on the citywide land use data and regional socioeconomic growth projections, future trip activity is estimated and assigned to the circulation system. Intersection Analysis The intersection analysis describes the effect of future growth on the study area intersections, with the Proposed Project in the interim year 2015. Table 4.9 presents ICU and LOS results for the study intersections with the project during the AM peak hour and PM peak hour. Existing lane geometrics were assumed in the ICU and LOS analyses, with the exception of the intersection of Haster Street and Gene Autry Way, which currently does not exist, and the intersection of Euclid Street and Katella Avenue, which is currently being widened. The detailed ICU worksheets for the With Project conditions are presented in Appendix A-3. With the Project, four intersections operate at an unacceptable LOS. Figure 4.2 presents the study intersection locations and LOS under future Interim Year 2015 With Project conditions. Under these conditions, the following intersections operate at an unacceptable LOS, including one intersection in the City of Orange:  Anaheim Boulevard at Ball Road  Lewis Street at Katella Avenue ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 38  Sunkist Street at Ball Road  Main Street at Taft Avenue (Orange) When compared to the No Project analysis, there are no additional intersections that become deficient under the With Project scenario. Project impacts and mitigation strategies for the interim year analysis are discussed in Chapter 6.0 and Chapter 7.0. Table 4.9: Interim Year 2015 With Project Peak Hour Intersection LOS ID Intersection AM Peak Hour Change in V/C Sig. Impact PM Peak Hour Change in V/C Sig. Impact No Project With Project No Project With Project ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS I-1 Euclid Street / Katella Avenue 0.66 B 0.67 B 0.01 No 0.75 C 0.76 C 0.01 No I-2 Ninth Street / Katella Avenue 0.66 B 0.66 B 0.00 No 0.65 B 0.66 B 0.01 No I-3 Walnut Street / Ball Road 0.61 B 0.61 B 0.00 No 0.62 B 0.62 B 0.00 No I-4 Walnut Street / Katella Avenue 0.58 A 0.59 A 0.01 No 0.63 B 0.64 B 0.01 No I-5 Disneyland Drive / Ball Road 0.74 C 0.74 C 0.01 No 0.81 D 0.81 D 0.00 No I-6 Disneyland Drive / West Street / Katella Avenue 0.66 B 0.67 B 0.01 No 0.68 B 0.69 B 0.01 No I-7 Harbor Boulevard / Vermont Avenue 0.68 B 0.68 B 0.00 No 0.71 C 0.71 C 0.00 No I-8 Harbor Boulevard / Ball Road 0.83 D 0.83 D 0.00 No 0.73 C 0.73 C 0.00 No I-9 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 0.60 A 0.60 A 0.00 No 0.61 B 0.62 B 0.01 No I-10 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps 0.40 A 0.40 A 0.00 No 0.37 A 0.38 A 0.01 No I-11 Harbor Boulevard / Disney Way 0.36 A 0.39 A 0.03 No 0.55 A 0.58 A 0.03 No I-12 Harbor Boulevard / Katella Avenue 0.66 B 0.68 B 0.02 No 0.71 C 0.74 C 0.02 No I-13 Harbor Boulevard / Convention Way 0.43 A 0.44 A 0.01 No 0.47 A 0.47 A 0.00 No I-14 Harbor Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue 0.64 B 0.64 B 0.00 No 0.66 B 0.66 B 0.00 No I-15 Clementine Street / Disney Way 0.29 A 0.30 A 0.00 No 0.30 A 0.31 A 0.00 No I-16 Clementine Street / Katella Avenue 0.62 B 0.63 B 0.01 No 0.72 C 0.73 C 0.01 No I-17 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp / Disney Way 0.27 A 0.28 A 0.01 No 0.29 A 0.32 A 0.03 No I-18 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road 0.72 C 0.72 C 0.00 No 0.98 E 0.98 E 0.00 No I-19 Anaheim Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue 0.70 B 0.70 B 0.00 No 0.85 D 0.85 D 0.00 No I-20 Anaheim Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 0.51 A 0.51 A 0.00 No 0.70 B 0.70 B 0.00 No I-21 Anaheim Boulevard / Disney Way 0.51 A 0.52 A 0.00 No 0.60 A 0.60 A 0.00 No I-22 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue 0.59 A 0.60 A 0.01 No 0.71 C 0.73 C 0.02 No I-23 Haster Street / Gene Autry Way 0.35 A 0.35 A 0.00 No 0.44 A 0.45 A 0.01 No I-24 Haster Street / Orangewood Avenue 0.66 B 0.66 B 0.00 No 0.79 C 0.79 C 0.00 No I-25 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 0.72 C 0.74 C 0.02 No 0.63 B 0.66 B 0.03 No I-26 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 0.55 A 0.55 A 0.00 No 0.61 B 0.62 B 0.01 No I-27 East Street / Ball Road 0.59 A 0.59 A 0.00 No 0.79 C 0.79 C 0.00 No I-28 Lewis Street / Ball Road 0.60 A 0.60 A 0.00 No 0.70 B 0.70 B 0.00 No I-29 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue 0.45 A 0.45 A 0.00 No 0.48 A 0.48 A 0.00 No I-30 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue 0.75 C 0.76 C 0.01 No 0.98 E 0.98 E 0.00 No I-31 Lewis Street / Gene Autry Way Not Applicable Not Applicable I-32 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way 0.22 A 0.22 A 0.00 No 0.28 A 0.28 A 0.00 No I-33 Lewis Street / Orangewood Avenue 0.56 A 0.56 A 0.00 No 0.51 A 0.51 A 0.00 No I-34 Manchester Avenue / Orangewood Avenue 0.58 A 0.58 A 0.00 No 0.50 A 0.50 A 0.00 No I-35 Anaheim Way / Orangewood Avenue 0.47 A 0.47 A 0.00 No 0.54 A 0.54 A 0.00 No ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 39 Table 4.9: Interim Year 2015 With Project Peak Hour Intersection LOS, Continued ID Intersection AM Peak Hour Change in V/C Sig. Impact PM Peak Hour Change in V/C Sig. Impact No Project With Project No Project With Project ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS I-36 State College Boulevard / Ball Road 0.66 B 0.66 B 0.00 No 0.75 C 0.75 C 0.00 No I-37 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue 0.52 A 0.53 A 0.00 No 0.66 B 0.66 B 0.00 No I-38 State College Boulevard / Gene Autry Way 0.57 A 0.57 A 0.00 No 0.62 B 0.62 B 0.00 No I-39 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue 0.58 A 0.58 A 0.00 No 0.61 B 0.61 B 0.00 No I-40 State College Boulevard / Orange Center Drive 0.36 A 0.36 A 0.00 No 0.32 A 0.32 A 0.00 No I-41 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 0.47 A 0.47 A 0.00 No 0.42 A 0.42 A 0.00 No I-42 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps 0.59 A 0.59 A 0.00 No 0.44 A 0.44 A 0.00 No I-43 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue 0.76 C 0.76 C 0.00 No 0.70 B 0.70 B 0.00 No I-44 Sunkist Street / Ball Road 0.85 D 0.85 D 0.00 No 0.91 E 0.91 E 0.00 No I-45 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue 0.46 A 0.47 A 0.01 No 0.66 B 0.67 B 0.01 No I-46 Rampart Street / Orangewood Avenue 0.65 B 0.65 B 0.00 No 0.75 C 0.75 C 0.00 No I-47 Rampart Street / Chapman Avenue 0.42 A 0.42 A 0.00 No 0.46 A 0.46 A 0.00 No I-48 Ball Road / SR-57 Northbound Ramps 0.62 B 0.62 B 0.00 No 0.67 B 0.67 B 0.00 No I-49 Ball Road / SR-57 Southbound Ramps 0.76 C 0.76 C 0.00 No 0.68 B 0.68 B 0.00 No I-50 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 0.46 A 0.46 A 0.00 No 0.51 A 0.51 A 0.00 No I-51 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 0.48 A 0.48 A 0.00 No 0.48 A 0.49 A 0.01 No I-52 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Northbound Ramps 0.60 A 0.60 A 0.00 No 0.58 A 0.58 A 0.00 No I-53 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Southbound Ramps 0.69 B 0.69 B 0.00 No 0.78 C 0.78 C 0.00 No I-54 Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road 0.66 B 0.66 B 0.00 No 0.78 C 0.78 C 0.00 No I-55 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue 0.67 B 0.68 B 0.00 No 0.78 C 0.78 C 0.00 No I-56 Eckhoff Street / Orangewood Avenue 0.76 C 0.76 C 0.00 No 0.80 C 0.80 C 0.00 No I-57 Main Street / Taft Avenue 0.76 C 0.76 C 0.00 No 0.96 E 0.96 E 0.00 No I-58 Main Street / Katella Avenue 0.60 A 0.60 A 0.00 No 0.60 A 0.61 B 0.00 No I-59 Batavia Street / Taft Avenue 0.79 C 0.79 C 0.00 No 0.78 C 0.78 C 0.00 No I-60 Clementine Street / Gene Autry Way Not Applicable Not Applicable I-61 Clementine Street / Orangewood Avenue 0.36 A 0.36 A 0.00 No 0.54 A 0.54 A 0.00 No I-62 Flower Street / Chapman Avenue 0.44 A 0.44 A 0.00 No 0.59 A 0.59 A 0.00 No I-63 Harbor Boulevard / Chapman Avenue 0.59 A 0.59 A 0.00 No 0.67 B 0.67 B 0.00 No I-64 I-5 Ramps / Chapman Avenue 0.44 A 0.44 A 0.00 No 0.51 A 0.51 A 0.00 No I-65 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Chapman Avenue 0.44 A 0.44 A 0.00 No 0.43 A 0.43 A 0.00 No I-66 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Chapman Avenue 0.60 A 0.60 A 0.00 No 0.62 B 0.62 B 0.00 No I-67 Euclid Street / Ball Road 0.64 B 0.64 B 0.00 No 0.70 B 0.70 B 0.00 No I-68 Walnut Street / Cerritos Avenue 0.61 B 0.61 B 0.00 No 0.48 A 0.48 A 0.00 No I-69 Disneyland Drive / I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp 0.41 A 0.42 A 0.01 No 0.35 A 0.36 A 0.01 No I-70 Disneyland Drive/ Magic Way 0.35 A 0.37 A 0.02 No 0.35 A 0.36 A 0.01 No I-71 Ox Road / Cast Place / Ball Road 0.62 B 0.62 B 0.00 No 0.59 A 0.59 A 0.00 No I-72 Convention Center/ Katella Avenue 0.51 A 0.56 A 0.05 No 0.52 A 0.52 A 0.00 No I-73 Harbor Boulevard / Lincoln Avenue 0.66 B 0.66 B 0.00 No 0.82 D 0.82 D 0.00 No I-74 Harbor Boulevard / Broadway 0.54 A 0.54 A 0.00 No 0.72 C 0.72 C 0.00 No I-75 Harbor Boulevard / Manchester Avenue 0.33 A 0.33 A 0.01 No 0.47 A 0.49 A 0.02 No I-76 Anaheim Boulevard / Lincoln Avenue 0.56 A 0.56 A 0.00 No 0.68 B 0.68 B 0.00 No I-77 Anaheim Boulevard / Broadway 0.54 A 0.54 A 0.00 No 0.56 A 0.56 A 0.00 No I-78 Olive Street / Lincoln Avenue 0.45 A 0.45 A 0.00 No 0.48 A 0.48 A 0.00 No I-79 Flore Street / West Street / Ball Road 0.56 A 0.56 A 0.00 No 0.49 A 0.49 A 0.00 No I-80 West Street / Orangewood Avenue 0.72 C 0.72 C 0.00 No 0.83 D 0.83 D 0.00 No I-81 Struck Avenue / Katella Avenue 0.40 A 0.40 A 0.00 No 0.49 A 0.49 A 0.00 No ---PAGE BREAK--- M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L DISNEYLAND DR OR AN GE C TR DR VERMONT AVE EAST ST MANCHESTER AVE MAGIC WY KATELLA AVE PL 73 74 76 77 78 7 28 27 29 36 44 48 54 57 58 81 55 56 52 53 46 61 33 34 35 38 39 40 41 42 43 47 66 65 62 49 64 45 LEWIS ST WY CHAPMAN AVE PHOENIX CLUB DR SPORTSTOWN GATEWAY CENTER DR MARKET ST RA M P A R T S T DOUGLASS RD BALL RD WEST ST E LINCOLN AVE STATE COLLEGE BLVD NINTH ST HARBOR BLVD EUCLID ST SOUTH ST ANAHEIM BLVD WALNUT ST ORANGEWOOD AVE LEWIS ST CERRITOS AVE N WEST ST HASTER ST WAGNER AVE N HARBOR BLVD MAIN ST NT AVE ECKHOFF ST SUNKIST ST N RIO VISTA ST LVD N SUN GENE AUTRY WY DISNEY WY ANAHEIM WY HOWELL AVE DUPONT DR CONVENTION CERRITOS AVE KATELLA AVE N 71 72 9 69 10 70 12 75 11 6 1 4 68 8 67 5 3 16 50 51 17 20 26 19 79 21 13 25 15 14 24 22 2 102 80 30 37 32 18 ? l GARDEN GROVE ANAHEIM CLEMENTINE WEST ST FLORE ST SANTA ANA RIVER CAST PL ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 41 Daily Arterial Segment LOS Analysis Table 4.10 presents average daily traffic (ADT) and LOS for all study area arterial segments. Segments operating at LOS D, E, or F under daily conditions within the City of Anaheim are further analyzed under AM and PM peak hour conditions in the following section. Six additional locations are deficient under the With Project scenario than the No Project scenario. Eleven of the deficient segments are not at their ultimate configuration per the City’s Circulation Element. The seven deficient locations under daily conditions that are at the Circulation Element configuration are analyzed under peak hour conditions to see if improvements are warranted under the City’s Traffic Guidelines. The table indicates that the following arterial segments operate at a deficient LOS under forecast 2015 With Project conditions:  Anaheim Boulevard between Cerritos Avenue and Ball Road  Ball Road between Disneyland Drive and Harbor Boulevard (Ultimate configuration)  Ball Road between State College Boulevard and Sunkist Street  Ball Road between Sunkist Street and SR-57 (Ultimate configuration)  Harbor Boulevard between Convention Way and Katella Avenue * (Ultimate configuration)  Harbor Boulevard between Katella Avenue and Disney Way * (Ultimate configuration)  Harbor Boulevard between Disney Way and Manchester Avenue (Ultimate configuration)  Haster Street between Orangewood Avenue and Gene Autry Way  Haster Street between Gene Autry Way and Katella Avenue  Katella Avenue between Disneyland Drive and Hotel Way  Katella Avenue between Hotel Way and Harbor Boulevard  Katella Avenue between Harbor Boulevard and Clementine Street *  Katella Avenue between Clementine Street and Anaheim Boulevard *  Katella Avenue between Anaheim Boulevard and Manchester Avenue *  Katella Avenue between Howell Avenue and SR-57* (Ultimate configuration)  Orangewood Avenue between Haster Street and Manchester Avenue (Ultimate configuration)  Orangewood Avenue between State College Boulevard and Rampart Street  Orangewood Avenue between Rampart Street and SR-57 * Additional deficient locations under 2015 With Project Conditions ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 42 Table 4.10: Interim Year 2015 With Project Daily Arterial Segment LOS ID Arterial From To Jurisdiction Mid- Block Lanes Total Capacity No Project With Project Change in V/C Sig. Impact ADT V-C Ratio Daily LOS ADT V-C Ratio Daily LOS A-1 Anaheim Boulevard Katella Avenue I-5 Freeway Anaheim 6D 56,300 22,950 0.41 A 22,950 0.41 A 0.00 No A-2 Anaheim Boulevard I-5 Freeway Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 6D 56,300 39,510 0.70 B 39,510 0.70 B 0.00 No A-3 Anaheim Boulevard Cerritos Avenue Ball Road Anaheim 4D 37,500 32,240 0.86 D 32,240 0.86 D 0.00 No A-4 Ball Road Euclid Street Walnut Street Anaheim 6D 56,300 28,490 0.51 A 28,490 0.51 A 0.00 No A-5 Ball Road Walnut Street Disneyland Drive Anaheim 6D 56,300 36,120 0.64 B 36,120 0.64 B 0.00 No A-6 Ball Road Disneyland Drive Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 6D 56,300 48,260 0.86 D 48,260 0.86 D 0.00 No A-7 Ball Road Harbor Boulevard Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim 6D 56,300 38,480 0.68 B 38,480 0.68 B 0.00 No A-8 Ball Road Anaheim Boulevard East Street Anaheim 6D 56,300 38,100 0.68 B 38,100 0.68 B 0.00 No A-9 Ball Road East Street State College Boulevard Anaheim 6D 56,300 40,210 0.71 C 40,210 0.71 C 0.00 No A-10 Ball Road State College Boulevard Sunkist Street Anaheim 4D 37,500 42,450 1.13 F 42,450 1.13 F 0.00 No A-11 Ball Road Sunkist Street SR-57 Freeway Anaheim 6D 56,300 51,710 0.92 E 51,710 0.92 E 0.00 No A-12 Ball Road SR-57 Freeway Main Street Orange 6D 56,300 41,120 0.73 C 41,120 0.73 C 0.00 No A-13 Clementine Street Manchester Avenue Disney Way Anaheim 4U 25,000 12,470 0.50 A 12,470 0.50 A 0.00 No A-14 Clementine Street Disney Way Katella Avenue Anaheim 4U 25,000 7,820 0.31 A 7,820 0.31 A 0.00 No A-19 Convention Way/Gene Autry Way Haster Street I-5 Freeway Anaheim 6D 56,300 10,330 0.18 A 10,330 0.18 A 0.00 No A-20 Disney Way Harbor Boulevard Clementine Street Anaheim 6D 56,300 10,260 0.18 A 10,482 0.19 A 0.00 No A-21 Disney Way Clementine Street Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim 6D 56,300 17,320 0.31 A 17,542 0.31 A 0.00 No A-22 Disneyland Drive Katella Avenue Magic Way Anaheim 4D 37,500 23,850 0.64 B 24,650 0.66 B 0.02 No A-23 Disneyland Drive Magic Way Ball Road Anaheim 4D 37,500 26,660 0.71 C 27,460 0.73 C 0.02 No A-24 Disneyland Drive Ball Road Manchester Avenue Anaheim 6D 56,300 34,610 0.61 B 35,410 0.63 B 0.01 No A-25 Harbor Boulevard Wilken Way Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 6D 56,300 39,910 0.71 C 40,464 0.72 C 0.01 No A-26 Harbor Boulevard Orangewood Avenue Convention Way Anaheim 6D 56,300 39,650 0.70 B 40,314 0.72 C 0.01 No A-27 Harbor Boulevard Convention Way Katella Avenue Anaheim 6D 56,300 43,760 0.78 C 46,557 0.83 D 0.05 Yes A-28 Harbor Boulevard Katella Avenue Disney Way Anaheim 6D 56,300 43,990 0.78 C 47,542 0.84 D 0.06 Yes A-29 Harbor Boulevard Disney Way Manchester Avenue Anaheim 6D 56,300 45,430 0.81 D 48,710 0.87 D 0.06 Yes A-30 Harbor Boulevard I-5 Freeway Ball Road Anaheim 8D 75,000 48,760 0.65 B 49,285 0.66 B 0.01 No A-31 Haster Street Orangewood Avenue Gene Autry Way Anaheim 4U 25,000 25,300 1.01 F 25,300 1.01 F 0.00 No A-32 Haster Street Gene Autry Way Katella Avenue Anaheim 4U 25,000 21,290 0.85 D 21,601 0.86 D 0.01 No A-33 Katella Avenue Ninth Street Walnut Street Anaheim 6D 56,300 34,990 0.62 B 35,878 0.64 B 0.02 No A-34 Katella Avenue Walnut Street Disneyland Drive Anaheim 6D 56,300 41,650 0.74 C 42,538 0.76 C 0.02 No A-35 Katella Avenue Disneyland Drive Hotel Way Anaheim 6D 56,300 46,340 0.82 D 49,583 0.88 D 0.06 Yes ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 43 Table 4.10: Interim Year 2015 With Project Daily Arterial Segment LOS, Continued ID Arterial From To Jurisdiction Mid- Block Lanes Total Capacity No Project With Project Change in V/C Sig. Impact ADT V-C Ratio Daily LOS ADT V-C Ratio Daily LOS A-36 Katella Avenue Hotel Way Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 6D 56,300 45,350 0.81 D 49,891 0.89 D 0.08 Yes A-37 Katella Avenue Harbor Boulevard Clementine Street Anaheim 6D 56,300 45,260 0.80 C 48,753 0.87 D 0.06 Yes A-38 Katella Avenue Clementine Street Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim 6D 56,300 44,860 0.80 C 48,353 0.86 D 0.06 Yes A-39 Katella Avenue Anaheim Boulevard Manchester Avenue Anaheim 6D 56,300 43,650 0.78 C 46,772 0.83 D 0.06 Yes A-40a Katella Avenue Manchester Avenue Anaheim Way Anaheim 6D 56,300 35,700 0.63 B 36,985 0.66 B 0.02 No A-40b Katella Avenue Anaheim Way Lewis Street Anaheim 6D 56,300 36,610 0.65 B 37,765 0.67 B 0.02 No A-40c Katella Avenue Lewis Street State College Boulevard Anaheim 6D 56,300 36,170 0.64 B 37,325 0.66 B 0.02 No A-41 Katella Avenue State College Boulevard Sportstown Anaheim 6D 56,300 37,630 0.67 B 38,785 0.69 B 0.02 No A-42 Katella Avenue Sportstown Howell Avenue Anaheim 6D 56,300 40,650 0.72 C 41,805 0.74 C 0.02 No A-43 Katella Avenue Howell Avenue SR-57 Freeway Anaheim 6D 56,300 45,270 0.80 C 46,425 0.82 D 0.02 Yes A-44 Katella Avenue SR-57 Freeway Main Street Orange 6D 56,300 37,560 0.67 B 38,715 0.69 B 0.02 No A-45 Manchester Avenue Clementine Street Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 2U 12,500 5,470 0.44 A 5,470 0.44 A 0.00 No A-46 Orangewood Avenue West Street Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 4U 25,000 15,580 0.62 B 15,580 0.62 B 0.00 No A-47 Orangewood Avenue Harbor Boulevard Clementine Street Anaheim 4U 25,000 16,900 0.68 B 16,900 0.68 B 0.00 No A-48 Orangewood Avenue Clementine Street Haster Street Anaheim 4U 25,000 17,000 0.68 B 17,000 0.68 B 0.00 No A-49 Orangewood Avenue Haster Street Manchester Avenue Anaheim 4U 25,000 20,140 0.81 D 20,140 0.81 D 0.00 No A-50 Orangewood Avenue* Manchester Avenue State College Boulevard Anaheim/ Orange 6D 56,300 22,580 0.40 A 22,580 0.40 A 0.00 No A-51 Orangewood Avenue State College Boulevard Rampart Street Anaheim 4U 25,000 28,810 1.15 F 28,810 1.15 F 0.00 No A-52 Orangewood Avenue* Rampart Street SR-57 Freeway Anaheim/ Orange 4U 25,000 28,760 1.15 F 28,760 1.15 F 0.00 No A-53 Orangewood Avenue SR-57 Freeway Eckhoff Street Orange 4D 37,500 33,110 0.88 D 33,110 0.88 D 0.00 No A-54 Orangewood Avenue Eckhoff Street Main Street Orange 4D 37,500 15,300 0.41 A 15,300 0.41 A 0.00 No A-55 Walnut Street Katella Avenue Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 4D 37,500 12,080 0.32 A 12,080 0.32 A 0.00 No A-56 Walnut Street Cerritos Avenue Ball Road Anaheim 4D 37,500 16,070 0.43 A 16,070 0.43 A 0.00 No A-57 West Street Orangewood Avenue Katella Avenue Anaheim 4U 25,000 13,180 0.53 A 13,290 0.53 A 0.00 No A-58 Chapman Avenue State College Boulevard SR-57 Freeway Orange 6D 56,300 32,800 0.58 A 33,022 0.59 A 0.00 No A-59 Chapman Avenue SR-57 Freeway Main Street Orange 6D 56,300 28,960 0.51 A 29,182 0.52 A 0.00 No ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 44 Table 4.10: Interim Year 2015 With Project Daily Arterial Segment LOS, Continued ID Arterial From To Jurisdiction Mid- Block Lanes Total Capacity No Project With Project Change in V/C Sig. Impact ADT V-C Ratio Daily LOS ADT V-C Ratio Daily LOS A-60 State College Boulevard Chapman Avenue I-5 Freeway Orange 8D 75,000 31,880 0.43 A 32,280 0.43 A 0.00 No A-61 State College Boulevard I-5 Freeway Orangewood Avenue Orange 8D 75,000 28,350 0.38 A 28,839 0.38 A 0.00 No A-62 State College Boulevard Orangewood Avenue Gene Autry Way Anaheim 6D 56,300 27,730 0.49 A 27,730 0.49 A 0.00 No A-63 State College Boulevard Gene Autry Way Katella Avenue Anaheim 6D 56,300 23,590 0.42 A 24,345 0.43 A 0.01 No A-64 State College Boulevard Katella Avenue Howell Avenue Anaheim 6D 56,300 29,030 0.52 A 29,119 0.52 A 0.00 No A-65 State College Boulevard Howell Avenue Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 6D 56,300 24,850 0.44 A 24,850 0.44 A 0.00 No A-66 State College Boulevard Cerritos Avenue Ball Road Anaheim 6D 56,300 24,130 0.43 A 24,130 0.43 A 0.00 No Note: *Shared segment capacities are identified by the jurisdiction in which the traffic count was taken ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 45 Peak Hour Arterial Segment LOS Analysis Table 4.11 reports the AM and PM peak hour arterial segment LOS for the seven deficient arterial segments under 2015 With Project conditions identified above that are at the Circulation Element configuration. The table indicates that no arterial segment is deficient in either peak hours. Table 4.11: Interim Year 2015 With Project Peak Hour Arterial Segment LOS ID Arterial From To Jurisdiction Traffic Volume Mid-Block Lanes Total Capacity V/C LOS AM Peak Hour A-6 Ball Road Disneyland Drive Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 3,110 6 5,304 0.59 A A-11 Ball Road Sunkist Street SR-57 Anaheim 3,760 6 4,852 0.77 C A-27 Harbor Boulevard Convention Way Katella Avenue Anaheim 2,560 6 5,686 0.45 A A-28 Harbor Boulevard Katella Avenue Disney Way Anaheim 2,617 6 6,567 0.40 A A-29 Harbor Boulevard Disney Way Manchester Avenue Anaheim 2,763 6 6,567 0.42 A A-43 Katella Avenue Howell Avenue SR-57 Freeway Anaheim 3,129 6 7,386 0.42 A A-49 Orangewood Avenue Haster Street Manchester Avenue Anaheim 1,470 4 4,297 0.34 A PM Peak Hour A-6 Ball Road Disneyland Drive Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 3,440 6 4,747 0.72 C A-11 Ball Road Sunkist Street SR-57 Anaheim 3,830 6 5,592 0.68 B A-27 Harbor Boulevard Convention Way Katella Avenue Anaheim 3,230 6 5,890 0.55 A A-28 Harbor Boulevard Katella Avenue Disney Way Anaheim 2,991 6 5,625 0.53 A A-29 Harbor Boulevard Disney Way Manchester Avenue Anaheim 3,161 6 5,910 0.53 A A-43 Katella Avenue Howell Avenue SR-57 Freeway Anaheim 3,486 6 6,941 0.50 A A-49 Orangewood Avenue Haster Street Manchester Avenue Anaheim 1,660 4 5,023 0.33 A Caltrans Ramp Termini Intersection Analysis Table 4.12 presents the results of peak hour delays and levels of service for the ramp termini intersections under Interim Year 2015 With Project conditions. Detailed analysis worksheets are included in Appendix C-3. The table indicates that all the Caltrans Ramp Intersections operate at an acceptable LOS during both peak hours. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 46 Table 4.12: Interim Year 2015 With Project Peak Hour Ramp Termini Intersection LOS ID Intersection AM Peak Hour Change in Delay PM Peak Hour Change in Delay No Project With Project No Project With Project Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS I-9 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 20.4 B 20.7 C 0.3 22.5 B 22.3 C -0.2 I-10 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps 8.1 A 12.6 B 4.5 7.6 A 7.0 A -0.6 I-17 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp / Disney Way 22.8 D 22.6 C -0.2 19.7 C 19.5 B -0.2 I-20 Anaheim Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 14.0 B 15.6 B 1.6 28.8 C 29.0 C 0.2 I-21 Anaheim Boulevard / Disney Way 23.3 B 23.2 C -0.1 21.9 B 22.5 C 0.6 I-25 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 17.8 B 16.1 B -1.7 18.1 B 17.9 B -0.2 I-26 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps)/ Katella Avenue 17.2 B 18.2 B 1 0 25.6 C 25.1 C -0.5 I-32 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way 28 C 28.1 C 0.1 23.8 C 24.0 C 0.2 I-41 I-5 Northbound Ramps / State College Boulevard 17.7 C 17.7 B 0.0 16.0 B 19.9 B 3.9 I-42 I-5 Southbound Ramps / State College Boulevard 17.5 B 17.5 B 0.0 9.7 B 15.1 B 5.4 I-48 Ball Road / SR-57 Northbound Ramps 16.8 B 18.0 B 1.2 15.1 B 15.3 B 0.2 I-49 Ball Road / SR-57 Southbound Ramps 25.6 C 28.9 C 3.3 15.3 B 19.2 B 3.9 I-50 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 14.6 B 17.4 B 2.8 13.1 B 13.2 B 0.1 I-51 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 18.2 B 21.9 C 3.7 13.3 B 13.4 B 0.1 I-52 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Northbound Ramps 11.2 A 11.2 B 0.0 6.1 A 6.9 A 0.8 I-53 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Southbound Ramps 19.3 B 19.3 B 0.0 27.5 C 27.5 C 0.0 I-64 Chapman Avenue / I-5 Southbound On-Ramp 43.4 C 43.4 D 0.0 40.0 B 40.2 D 0.2 I-65 Chapman Avenue / SR-57 Northbound Ramps 3.9 A 4.1 A 0.2 4.6 A 4.4 A -0.2 I-66 Chapman Avenue / SR-57 Southbound Ramps 34.6 D 35.1 D 0.5 24.1 C 24.5 C 0.4 I-69 Disneyland Drive / I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp 9.3 A 9.5 A 0.2 8.1 A 8.2 A 0.1 Caltrans Peak Hour Ramp Termini Off-Ramp Queuing Analysis Table 4.13 presents the queue determined by for the study area off-ramp termini intersections under Interim Year 2015 With Project conditions. Detailed queuing analysis worksheets are included in Appendix D-3. The analysis indicates that no Caltrans Ramp intersections are forecast to have a queuing length that is greater than the off-ramp storage length. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 47 Table 4.13: Interim Year 2015 With Project Peak Hour Ramp Termini Off-Ramp Queuing Analysis ID Ramp Termini Intersection Off-Ramp # of Lanes Off-Ramp Storage Length (feet) Off-Ramp Queue Length Control Delay (sec) Deficient Storage Length AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R I - 9 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 1.5 1.5 400 1,280 70 100 110 200 22.6 32.9 23.5 37.2 No I - 10 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps 2 1 1,240 190 110 110 57.1 56.9 No I - 17 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp / Disney Way 1.33 0.33 1.33 940 380 380 160 160 150 150 57.1 57.3 57.7 58.8 No I - 25 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 1.5 1.5 720 720 1,710 50 10 0 50 10 52.3 16.7 12.8 50.9 15.8 No I - 26 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 1.5 3 0.5 1,540 1,060 210 210 370 390 33.4 31.3 48.3 40.3 No I - 32 I-5 HOV Northbound Ramps / Gene Autry Way 1 2 1,510 10 0 10 0 43.2 17.6 48.5 14.5 No I-5 HOV Southbound Ramps / Gene Autry Way 2 1 1,340 110 0 60 0 56.3 7.8 56.1 9.6 No I - 41 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 1.5 1.5 2 1,580 690 690 90 100 0 70 75 0 51.0 46.6 6.6 58.2 53.4 8.4 No I - 42 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps 1.5 0.5 2 2,960 2,190 1,590 30 330 110 90 270 110 21.1 41.3 25.7 33.4 47.8 31.3 No I - 48 Ball Road / SR-57 Northbound Ramps 1.5 1.5 1,030 680 220 220 190 110 44.2 51.5 46.1 33.2 No I - 49 Ball Road / SR-57 Southbound Ramps 0.5 1.5 1,290 570 400 350 260 230 35.3 30.3 50.8 44.2 No I - 50 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 1.5 1.5 1,030 590 210 190 120 90 44.9 51.3 38.4 35.9 No I - 51 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 1 2 930 600 250 230 140 170 48.6 43.2 38.1 39.5 No I - 52 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Northbound Ramps 1.5 1.5 650 350 110 150 30 0 32.8 46.5 25.0 17.0 No I - 53 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Southbound Ramps 1.5 1.5 1,050 630 340 170 100 0 180 100 247 59.7 32.6 8.8 78.3 38.5 36.8 No I - 64 I-5 Ramps / Chapman Avenue 2 1 1,080 220 220 40 260 0 45.7 18.7 50.4 7.4 No I - 65 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Chapman Avenue 1 1 1,240 760 40 0 30 0 55.4 16.7 59.2 18.6 No I - 66 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Chapman Avenue 0.5 0.5 1 580 1,000 230 0 130 10 58.2 7.8 49.2 10.9 No I - 69 Disneyland Drive / I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp 3 1 2130 70 50 30 11.6 9.7 No ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 48 Caltrans Peak Hour Freeway Ramp Analysis Table 4.14 summarizes HCM Interim Year 2015 analysis results for the study area ramps for the AM and PM peak hours with the project. Per the Caltrans Highway Design Manual, a 2-lane on or off-ramp should be provided where volumes exceed 1,500 vehicles per hour during either the AM or PM peak hour. None of the freeway ramps exceed this criterion under the 2015 With Project conditions. Detailed HCM analysis worksheets are included in Appendix E-3. The HCM reports a density based on the post- processed volumes on freeway mainline segments and ramps. According to the analysis, the following freeway ramps are deficient under the PM peak hours:  I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from State College Boulevard/Chapman Avenue  I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Anaheim Way/Katella Avenue  I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Way/Orangewood Avenue  I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Katella Avenue  I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Boulevard  I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Harbor Boulevard  I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Harbor Boulevard  I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Ball Road  I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Disneyland Drive When compared to the No Project scenario, no additional freeway ramps become deficient with the Proposed Project trips added in 2015. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 49 Table 4.14: Interim Year 2015 With Project Peak Hour Freeway Ramp LOS ID Ramp Segment Ramp # of Lane A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS R-1 I-5 Northbound HOV Off-Ramp to Gene Autry Way / Disney Way 1 8.4 A 12.7 B R-2 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from State College Boulevard/Chapman Avenue 1 19.3 B > Capacity F R-3 I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Anaheim Way/Katella Avenue* 2 21.1 C > Capacity F R-4 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Way/Orangewood Avenue 1 20.0 B > Capacity F R-5 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Katella Avenue 1 21.0 C > Capacity F R-6 I-5 Northbound HOV On-Ramp from Gene Autry Way 1 17.2 B 26.8 C R-7 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Boulevard 1 22.3 C > Capacity F R-8 I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Harbor Boulevard 1 22.6 C 38.4 E R-9 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Harbor Boulevard 1 19.6 B > Capacity F R-10 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Ball Road 1 21.7 C > Capacity F R-11 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Disneyland Drive 1 22.8 C > Capacity F R-12 I-5 Southbound HOV Off-Ramp to Disneyland Drive 1 14.5 B 13.2 B R-13 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to Disneyland Drive/Ball Road 2 11.4 B 14.3 B R-14 I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Disneyland Drive 1 29.2 D 34.0 D R-15 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to Harbor Boulevard 1 26.0 C 29.9 D R-16 I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Harbor Boulevard 1 32.5 D 33.5 D R-17 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to Disney Way/Anaheim Boulevard 1 27.1 C 29.9 D R-18 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue/Orangewood Avenue* 2 24.7 C 27.8 C R-19 I-5 Southbound HOV Off-Ramp to Gene Autry Way 1 14.8 B 11.5 B R-20 I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Boulevard 1 24.5 C 29.8 D R-21 I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Katella Avenue 1 26.9 C 31.6 D R-22 I-5 Southbound HOV On-Ramp from Gene Autry Way 1 13.9 B 12.6 B *Major Diverge Analysis Utilized to calculate density pc/mi/ln - Passenger Cars per Mile per Lane Caltrans Freeway Mainline Analysis Table 4.15 summarizes HCM analysis results for the densities and levels of service for study area mainline segments for the AM and PM peak hours. Detailed HCM mainline analysis worksheets are included in Appendix F-3. According to the analysis, the following freeway segments are deficient under PM peak hour conditions:  I-5 Northbound between Lincoln Avenue and Harbor Boulevard  I-5 Northbound between Katella Avenue and State College Boulevard  I-5 Southbound between Euclid Street and Lincoln Avenue Between the No Project and With Project scenarios, there is one additional deficiency under With Project conditions, I-5 Southbound between Euclid Street and Lincoln Avenue. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 50 Table 4.15: Interim Year 2015 With Project Peak Hour Freeway Mainline LOS ID Freeway Segment Northbound / Eastbound Southbound / Westbound A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS F - 1 I-5 between SR-91 and Brookhurst Street 19.0 C 26.4 D 21.1 C 21.8 C F - 2 I-5 between Brookhurst Street and Euclid Street 19.9 C 30.3 D 25.3 C 28.0 D F - 3 I-5 between Euclid Street and Lincoln Avenue 19.9 C 31.6 D 33.4 D 35.1 E F - 4 I-5 between Lincoln Avenue and Harbor Boulevard 20.4 C 36.4 E 23.3 C 27.0 D F - 5 I-5 between Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue 18.1 C 34.5 D 21.6 C 24.3 C F - 6 I-5 between Katella Avenue and State College Boulevard 18.5 C 38.9 E 24.7 C 27.3 D F - 7 I-5 between State College Boulevard and SR-22 17.9 B 34.0 D 26.3 D 25.7 C Source: City of Anaheim, Caltrans Caltrans Freeway Weaving Analysis Table 4.16 summarizes HCM analysis results for the weaving areas on study area freeway facilities during the AM and PM peak hours. Detailed HCM mainline analysis worksheets are included in Appendix G-3. Under the 2015 With Project scenario, the following freeway weaving segments are deficient under PM peak hour conditions:  I-5 Northbound between Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Lincoln Avenue Off-Ramp  I-5 Northbound between Anaheim Boulevard On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp  I-5 Northbound between State College Boulevard On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp  I-5 Northbound between SR-22 Connector and Chapman Avenue Off-Ramp When compared to the No Project scenario, no additional freeway weaving section that becomes deficient when the Proposed Project trips added in 2015. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 51 Table 4.16: Interim Year 2015 With Project Peak Hour Freeway Weaving LOS ID Weaving Segment Weaving Length (Ft) A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS W - 1 I-5 Northbound between Brookhurst Street On-Ramp and SR-91 Eastbound Off-Ramp 2,980 Not Applicable I-5 Southbound between SR-91 Connector / Magnolia Avenue On-Ramp and Brookhurst Street Off-Ramp 3,390 W - 2 I-5 Northbound between Euclid Street On-Ramp and Brookhurst Street Off-Ramp 2,890 I-5 Southbound between Brookhurst Street On-Ramp and Euclid Street Off-Ramp 2,540 W - 3 I-5 Northbound between Lincoln Avenue On-Ramp and Euclid Street Off-Ramp 2,000 20.3 B 33.4 D W - 4 I-5 Northbound between Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Lincoln Avenue Off-Ramp 1,680 21.2 B 39.5 E I-5 Southbound between Lincoln Avenue On-Ramp and Disneyland Drive Off-Ramp 3,060 Not Applicable W - 5 I-5 Southbound between Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp 1,520 28.3 C 34.5 D W - 6 I-5 Northbound between Anaheim Boulevard On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off- Ramp 2,080 20.6 B > Capacity F I-5 Southbound between Harbor Boulevard On-Ramp and Disney Way Off-Ramp 2,650 Not Applicable W - 7 I-5 Northbound between State College Boulevard On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off- Ramp 2,350 19.3 B > Capacity F I-5 Southbound between Katella Avenue On-Ramp and State College Boulevard Off- Ramp 1,870 28.4 C 32.6 D W - 8 I-5 Northbound between SR-22 Connector and Chapman Avenue Off-Ramp 1,720 22.5 B > Capacity F I-5 Southbound between State College Boulevard / Chapman Avenue On-Ramp and SR-22 Connector 1,510 32.0 C 32.5 D Interim Analysis Summary As demonstrated in the traffic analysis, the circulation system in the study area is forecast to deteriorate under both the Interim Year 2015 No Project and With Project scenarios. The increasing intensities leading to the buildout of the Proposed Project contribute to additional deficiencies when compared to the existing conditions. The regional circulation State Highway System has several components that are expected operate at a deficient LOS in 2015. Under the City of Anaheim’s traffic analysis guidelines, short-term project related significant impacts will require mitigation to an acceptable LOS. Chapter 6.0 identifies project related impacts while Chapter 7.0 demonstrates that the proposed improvements allow the system to operate at an acceptable LOS. ---PAGE BREAK--- This page is intentionally kept blank to facilitate double sided printing ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 52 5.0 GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT CONDITIONS 2030 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS 5.1 2030 GENERAL PLAN, NO PROJECT The analysis was performed by application of the Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model (ATAM) to develop future traffic forecast volumes throughout the study area. The forecasts that represent 2030 conditions are based on citywide land use data and regional socioeconomic growth projections. These forecasts incorporate the following future key project assumptions:  Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan  City of Orange General Plan Update  Disneyland Resort Specific Plan Future trip activity was estimated and assigned to the circulation system based on the existing City of Anaheim General Plan. Intersection Analysis Table 5.1 presents ICU and LOS results for the study intersections under 2030 No Project conditions during the AM peak hour and PM peak hour. Future lane geometrics were assumed in the ICU and LOS analyses. Figure 5.1 presents the study intersection locations and LOS under 2030 No Project conditions. The detailed ICU worksheets for the No Project conditions are presented in Appendix A-4. Under these conditions, the following intersections are forecast to operate at an unacceptable LOS, including three intersections in the City of Orange and one shared intersection between the Cities of Anaheim and Orange:  Euclid Street at Katella Avenue  Ninth Street at Katella Avenue  Disneyland Drive/West Street at Katella Avenue  Harbor Boulevard at Ball Road  Anaheim Boulevard at Ball Road  Anaheim Boulevard at Cerritos Avenue  Anaheim Boulevard at I-5 Northbound Ramps  Haster Street at Gene Autry Way  Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) at Katella Avenue  Lewis Street at Cerritos Avenue  Lewis Street at Katella Avenue  State College Boulevard at Katella Avenue  State College Boulevard at Gene Autry Way  State College Boulevard at Orangewood Avenue (Anaheim/Orange)  State College Boulevard at I-5 Southbound Ramps (Orange) ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 53  State College Boulevard/The City Drive at Chapman Avenue (Orange)  Howell Avenue at Katella Avenue  Rampart Street at Orangewood Avenue  Orangewood Avenue at SR-57 Southbound Ramps (Orange)  Douglass Road at Katella Avenue Table 5.1: 2030 No Project Peak Hour Intersection LOS ID Intersection Jurisdiction AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ICU LOS ICU LOS I-1 Euclid Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.85 D 0.92 E I-2 Ninth Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.93 E 0.95 E I-3 Walnut Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.71 C 0.70 B I-4 Walnut Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.87 D 0.86 D I-5 Disneyland Drive / Ball Road Anaheim 0.87 D 0.90 D I-6 Disneyland Drive / West Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.92 E 0.92 E I-7 Harbor Boulevard / Vermont Avenue Anaheim 0.75 C 0.77 C I-8 Harbor Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 1.05 F 0.93 E I-9 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps Anaheim 0.74 C 0.77 C I-10 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps Anaheim 0.58 A 0.49 A I-11 Harbor Boulevard / Disney Way Anaheim 0.45 A 0.82 D I-12 Harbor Boulevard / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.79 C 0.87 D I-13 Harbor Boulevard / Convention Way Anaheim 0.59 A 0.76 C I-14 Harbor Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 0.82 D 0.86 D I-15 Clementine Street / Disney Way Anaheim 0.55 A 0.56 A I-16 Clementine Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.65 B 0.88 D I-17 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp / Disney Way Anaheim 0.48 A 0.50 A I-18 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 0.88 D 0.99 E I-19 Anaheim Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.86 D 1.05 F I-20 Anaheim Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps Anaheim 0.66 B 0.92 E I-21 Anaheim Boulevard / Disney Way Anaheim 0.68 B 0.83 D I-22 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.88 D 0.89 D I-23 Haster Street / Gene Autry Way Anaheim 0.91 E 1.10 F I-24 Haster Street / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 0.74 C 0.82 D I-25 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.75 C 0.78 C I-26 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.96 E 0.85 D I-27 East Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.84 D 0.80 C I-28 Lewis Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.77 C 0.89 D I-29 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.85 D 0.91 E I-30 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.84 D 1.28 F I-31 Lewis Street / Gene Autry Way Anaheim 0.63 B 0.79 C I-32 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way Anaheim 0.54 A 0.73 C I-33 Lewis Street / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 0.63 B 0.56 A I-34 Manchester Avenue / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 0.73 C 0.80 C I-35 Anaheim Way / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 0.72 C 0.62 B I-36 State College Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 0.73 C 0.90 D I-37 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.86 D 0.98 E I-38 State College Boulevard / Gene Autry Way Anaheim 0.98 E 0.84 D I-39 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim/ Orange 0.89 D 0.97 E I-40 State College Boulevard / Orange Center Drive Anaheim/ Orange 0.71 C 0.58 A ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 54 Table 5.1: 2030 No Project Peak Hour Intersection LOS, Continued ID Intersection Jurisdiction AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ICU LOS ICU LOS I-41 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps Orange 0.77 C 0.73 C I-42 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps Orange 0.91 E 0.78 C I-43 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue Orange 0.86 D 0.92 E I-44 Sunkist Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.85 D 0.87 D I-45 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.62 B 0.91 E I-46 Rampart Street / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 0.73 C 1.05 F I-47 Rampart Street / Chapman Avenue Orange 0.66 B 0.83 D I-48 Ball Road / SR-57 Northbound Ramps Anaheim 0.69 B 0.72 C I-49 Ball Road / SR-57 Southbound Ramps Anaheim 0.82 D 0.86 D I-50 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.67 B 0.73 C I-51 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.70 B 0.69 B I-52 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Northbound Ramps Orange 0.76 C 0.79 C I-53 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Southbound Ramps Orange 0.85 D 0.99 E I-54 Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road Anaheim 0.81 D 0.87 D I-55 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Anaheim 1.02 F 1.09 F I-56 Eckhoff Street / Orangewood Avenue Orange 0.88 D 0.85 D I-57 Main Street / Taft Avenue Orange 0.67 B 0.87 D I-58 Main Street / Katella Avenue Orange 0.77 C 0.78 C I-59 Batavia Street / Taft Avenue Orange 0.83 D 0.86 D I-60 Clementine Street / Gene Autry Way Anaheim 0.53 A 0.83 D I-61 Clementine Street / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 0.54 A 0.76 C I-62 Flower Street / Chapman Avenue Orange 0.56 A 0.80 C I-63 Harbor Boulevard / Chapman Avenue Anaheim 0.67 B 0.81 D I-64 I-5 Ramps / Chapman Avenue Orange 0.60 A 0.73 C I-65 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Chapman Avenue Orange 0.50 A 0.53 A I-66 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Chapman Avenue Orange 0.73 C 0.82 D I-67 Euclid Street / Ball Road Anaheim 0.74 C 0.79 C I-68 Walnut Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.73 C 0.53 A I-69 Disneyland Drive / I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp Anaheim 0.55 A 0.49 A I-70 Disneyland Drive/ Magic Way Anaheim 0.50 A 0.46 A I-71 Ox Road / Cast Place / Ball Road Anaheim 0.74 C 0.68 B I-72 Convention Center/ Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.59 A 0.58 A I-73 Harbor Boulevard / Lincoln Avenue Anaheim 0.69 B 0.81 D I-74 Harbor Boulevard / Broadway Anaheim 0.58 A 0.71 C I-75 Harbor Boulevard / Manchester Avenue Anaheim 0.41 A 0.57 A I-76 Anaheim Boulevard / Lincoln Avenue Anaheim 0.75 C 0.85 D I-77 Anaheim Boulevard / Broadway Anaheim 0.70 B 0.67 B I-78 Olive Street / Lincoln Avenue Anaheim 0.45 A 0.49 A I-79 Flore Street / West Place / Ball Road Anaheim 0.63 B 0.50 A I-80 West Street / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 0.63 B 0.65 B I-81 Struck Avenue / Katella Avenue Orange 0.67 B 0.80 C ---PAGE BREAK--- This page is intentionally kept blank to facilitate double sided printing ---PAGE BREAK--- M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L DISNEYLAND DR OR AN GE C TR DR VERMONT AVE EAST ST MANCHESTER AVE MAGIC WY KATELLA AVE PL 73 74 76 77 78 7 28 27 29 36 44 48 54 57 58 81 55 56 52 53 46 61 33 34 35 38 39 40 41 42 43 47 66 65 62 49 64 45 LEWIS ST WY CHAPMAN AVE PHOENIX CLUB DR SPORTSTOWN GATEWAY CENTER DR MARKET ST RA M P A R T S T DOUGLASS RD BALL RD WEST ST E LINCOLN AVE STATE COLLEGE BLVD NINTH ST HARBOR BLVD EUCLID ST SOUTH ST ANAHEIM BLVD WALNUT ST ORANGEWOOD AVE LEWIS ST CERRITOS AVE N WEST ST HASTER ST WAGNER AVE N HARBOR BLVD MAIN ST NT AVE ECKHOFF ST SUNKIST ST N RIO VISTA ST LVD N SUN GENE AUTRY WY DISNEY WY ANAHEIM WY HOWELL AVE DUPONT DR CONVENTION CERRITOS AVE KATELLA AVE N 71 72 9 69 10 70 12 75 11 6 1 4 68 8 67 5 3 16 50 51 17 20 26 19 79 21 13 25 15 14 24 22 2 102 80 30 37 32 18 ? l GARDEN GROVE ANAHEIM CLEMENTINE WEST ST FLORE ST SANTA ANA RIVER CAST PL 60 23 ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 56 Daily Arterial Segment LOS Analysis Table 5.2 presents average daily traffic (ADT) and LOS for all arterial segments within the study area under forecast 2030 conditions. The table indicates that the arterial segments below operate at a deficient LOS under 2030 No Project conditions. Deficient segments are analyzed under AM and PM peak hour conditions in the following section.  Anaheim Boulevard between I-5 and Cerritos Avenue  Ball Road between Disneyland Drive and Harbor Boulevard  Ball Road between State College Boulevard and Sunkist Street  Ball Road between Sunkist Street and SR-57  Ball Road between SR-57 and Main Street  Clementine Street between Manchester Avenue and Disney Way  Disneyland Drive between Katella Avenue and Magic Way  Disneyland Drive between Magic Way and Ball Road  Harbor Boulevard between Wilken Way and Orangewood Avenue  Harbor Boulevard between Orangewood Avenue and Convention Way  Harbor Boulevard between Convention Way and Katella Avenue  Harbor Boulevard between Katella Avenue and Disney Way  Harbor Boulevard between Disney Way and Manchester Boulevard  Katella Avenue between Ninth Street and Walnut Street  Katella Avenue between Walnut Street and Disneyland Drive  Katella Avenue between Disneyland Drive and Hotel Way  Katella Avenue between Hotel Way and Harbor Boulevard  Katella Avenue between Manchester Avenue and Anaheim Way  Katella Avenue between Sportstown and Howell Avenue  Katella Avenue between Howell Avenue and SR-57  Katella Avenue between SR-57 and Main Street  Orangewood Avenue between West Street and Harbor Boulevard  Orangewood Avenue between Clementine Street and Haster Street  Orangewood Avenue between Haster Street and Manchester Avenue ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 57 Table 5.2: 2030 No Project Daily Arterial Segment LOS ID Arterial From To Jurisdiction No Project 2030 ADT Mid-Block Lanes Total Capacity V-C Ratio Daily LOS A-1 Anaheim Boulevard Katella Avenue I-5 Freeway Anaheim 30,590 6D 56,300 0.54 A A-2 Anaheim Boulevard I-5 Freeway Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 53,130 6D 56,300 0.94 E A-3 Anaheim Boulevard Cerritos Avenue Ball Road Anaheim 43,930 6D 56,300 0.78 C A-4 Ball Road Euclid Street Walnut Street Anaheim 33,130 6D 56,300 0.59 A A-5 Ball Road Walnut Street Disneyland Drive Anaheim 40,610 6D 56,300 0.72 C A-6 Ball Road Disneyland Drive Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 56,710 6D 56,300 1.01 F A-7 Ball Road Harbor Boulevard Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim 41,900 6D 56,300 0.74 C A-8 Ball Road Anaheim Boulevard East Street Anaheim 44,140 6D 56,300 0.78 C A-9 Ball Road East Street State College Boulevard Anaheim 44,720 6D 56,300 0.79 C A-10 Ball Road State College Boulevard Sunkist Street Anaheim 46,630 6D 56,300 0.83 D A-11 Ball Road Sunkist Street SR-57 Freeway Anaheim 58,790 6D 56,300 1.04 F A-12 Ball Road SR-57 Freeway Main Street Orange 59,090 6D 56,300 1.05 F A-13 Clementine Street Manchester Avenue Disney Way Anaheim 23,110 4U 25,000 0.92 E A-14 Clementine Street Disney Way Katella Avenue Anaheim 8,470 4U 25,000 0.34 A A-15 Clementine Street Katella Avenue Gene Autry Way Anaheim 2,660 4U 25,000 0.11 A A-16 Clementine Street Gene Autry Way Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 7,930 4U 25,000 0.32 A A-17 Convention Way/ Gene Autry Way Harbor Boulevard Clementine Street Anaheim 22,550 6D 56,300 0.40 A A-18 Convention Way/ Gene Autry Way Clementine Street Haster Street Anaheim 27,220 6D 56,300 0.48 A A-19 Convention Way/ Gene Autry Way Haster Street I-5 Freeway Anaheim 32,470 6D 56,300 0.58 A A-20 Disney Way Harbor Boulevard Clementine Street Anaheim 15,600 6D 56,300 0.28 A A-21 Disney Way Clementine Street Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim 24,690 6D 56,300 0.44 A A-22 Disneyland Drive Katella Avenue Magic Way Anaheim 33,960 4D 37,500 0.91 E A-23 Disneyland Drive Magic Way Ball Road Anaheim 32,760 4D 37,500 0.87 D A-24 Disneyland Drive Ball Road Manchester Avenue Anaheim 42,530 6D 56,300 0.76 C A-25 Harbor Boulevard Wilken Way Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 48,890 6D 56,300 0.87 D A-26 Harbor Boulevard Orangewood Avenue Convention Way Anaheim 47,050 6D 56,300 0.84 D A-27 Harbor Boulevard Convention Way Katella Avenue Anaheim 50,200 6D 56,300 0.89 D A-28 Harbor Boulevard Katella Avenue Disney Way Anaheim 55,240 6D 56,300 0.98 E A-29 Harbor Boulevard Disney Way Manchester Avenue Anaheim 53,660 6D 56,300 0.95 E A-30 Harbor Boulevard I-5 Freeway Ball Road Anaheim 57,660 8D 75,000 0.77 C A-31 Haster Street Orangewood Avenue Gene Autry Way Anaheim 37,170 6D 56,300 0.66 B A-32 Haster Street Gene Autry Way Katella Avenue Anaheim 24,560 6D 56,300 0.44 A A-33 Katella Avenue Ninth Street Walnut Street Anaheim 47,260 6D 56,300 0.84 D A-34 Katella Avenue Walnut Street Disneyland Drive Anaheim 55,400 6D 56,300 0.98 E A-35 Katella Avenue Disneyland Drive Hotel Way Anaheim 65,400 8D 75,000 0.87 D A-36 Katella Avenue Hotel Way Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 61,020 8D 75,000 0.81 D A-37 Katella Avenue Harbor Boulevard Clementine Street Anaheim 57,670 8D 75,000 0.77 C A-38 Katella Avenue Clementine Street Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim 57,690 8D 75,000 0.77 C A-39 Katella Avenue Anaheim Boulevard Manchester Avenue Anaheim 55,510 8D 75,000 0.74 C A-40a Katella Avenue Manchester Avenue Anaheim Way Anaheim 46,960 6D 56,300 0.83 D A-40b Katella Avenue Anaheim Way Lewis Street Anaheim 50,220 8D 75,000 0.67 B A-40c Katella Avenue Lewis Street State College Boulevard Anaheim 48,820 8D 75,000 0.65 B A-41 Katella Avenue State College Boulevard Sportstown Anaheim 47,980 8D 75,000 0.64 B A-42 Katella Avenue Sportstown Howell Avenue Anaheim 54,380 6D 56,300 0.97 E A-43 Katella Avenue Howell Avenue SR-57 Freeway Anaheim 60,860 6D 56,300 1.08 F A-44 Katella Avenue SR-57 Freeway Main Street Orange 54,600 6D 56,300 0.97 E A-45 Manchester Avenue Clementine Street Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 9,190 4U 25,000 0.37 A A-46 Orangewood Avenue West Street Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 21,640 4U 25,000 0.87 D ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 58 Table 5.2: 2030 No Project Daily Arterial Segment LOS, Continued ID Arterial From To Jurisdiction No Project 2030 ADT Mid- Block Lanes Total Capacity V-C Ratio Daily LOS A-47 Orangewood Avenue Harbor Boulevard Clementine Street Anaheim 19,800 4U 25,000 0.79 C A-48 Orangewood Avenue Clementine Street Haster Street Anaheim 20,130 4U 25,000 0.81 D A-49 Orangewood Avenue Haster Street Manchester Avenue Anaheim 24,830 4U 25,000 0.99 E A-50 Orangewood Avenue* Manchester Avenue State College Boulevard Anaheim /Orange 28,530 6D 56,300 0.51 A A-51 Orangewood Avenue State College Boulevard Rampart Street Anaheim 38,080 6D 56,300 0.68 B A-52 Orangewood Avenue* Rampart Street SR-57 Freeway Anaheim /Orange 40,050 6D 56,300 0.71 C A-53 Orangewood Avenue SR-57 Freeway Eckhoff Street Orange 44,670 6D 56,300 0.79 C A-54 Orangewood Avenue Eckhoff Street Main Street Orange 17,750 6D 56,300 0.32 A A-55 Walnut Street Katella Avenue Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 15,670 4D 37,500 0.42 A A-56 Walnut Street Cerritos Avenue Ball Road Anaheim 17,310 4D 37,500 0.46 A A-57 West Street Orangewood Avenue Katella Avenue Anaheim 14,520 4U 25,000 0.58 A A-58 Chapman Avenue State College Boulevard SR-57 Freeway Orange 37,220 6D 56,300 0.66 B A-59 Chapman Avenue SR-57 Freeway Main Street Orange 32,610 6D 56,300 0.58 A A-60 State College Boulevard Chapman Avenue I-5 Freeway Orange 42,370 8D 75,000 0.56 A A-61 State College Boulevard I-5 Freeway Orangewood Avenue Orange 43,240 8D 75,000 0.58 A A-62 State College Boulevard Orangewood Avenue Gene Autry Way Anaheim 39,670 8D 75,000 0.53 A A-63 State College Boulevard Gene Autry Way Katella Avenue Anaheim 31,040 6D 56,300 0.55 A A-64 State College Boulevard Katella Avenue Howell Avenue Anaheim 39,840 6D 56,300 0.71 C A-65 State College Boulevard Howell Avenue Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 27,860 6D 56,300 0.49 A A-66 State College Boulevard Cerritos Avenue Ball Road Anaheim 25,880 6D 56,300 0.46 A Note: *Shared segment capacities are identified by the jurisdiction in which the traffic count was taken Peak Hour Arterial Segment LOS Analysis Table 5.3 reports the AM and PM peak hour arterial segment LOS for the deficient arterial segments under 2030 No Project conditions identified above. Improvement strategies are discussed in Chapter 6.0 and Chapter 7.0. The table indicates that the following two arterial segments will be deficient under the PM peak hour condition:  Anaheim Boulevard between I-5 and Cerritos Avenue  Harbor Boulevard between Convention Way and Katella Avenue Table 5.3: 2030 No Project Peak Hour Arterial Segment LOS ID Arterial From To Jurisdiction Traffic Volume Mid- Block Lanes Total Capacity V/C LOS AM Peak Hour A-2 Anaheim Boulevard I-5 Freeway Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 3,330 6 7,062 0.47 A A-6 Ball Road Disneyland Drive Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 3,760 6 5,296 0.71 C A-10 Ball Road State College Boulevard Sunkist Street Anaheim 3,270 6 4,554 0.72 C A-11 Ball Road Sunkist Street SR-57 Freeway Anaheim 4,500 6 5,130 0.88 D A-12 Ball Road SR-57 Freeway Main Street Orange 4,090 6 8,700 0.47 A A-13 Clementine Street Manchester Avenue Disney Way Anaheim 1,740 4 3,800 0.46 A A-22 Disneyland Drive Katella Avenue Magic Way Anaheim 2,270 4 4,047 0.56 A A-23 Disneyland Drive Magic Way Ball Road Anaheim 2,060 4 4,047 0.51 A A-25 Harbor Boulevard Wilken Way Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 2,610 6 3,783 0.69 B ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 59 Table 5.3: 2030 No Project Peak Hour Arterial Segment LOS, Continued ID Arterial From To Jurisdiction Traffic Volume Mid- Block Lanes Total Capacity V/C LOS A-26 Harbor Boulevard Orangewood Avenue Convention Way Anaheim 2,500 6 6,386 0.39 A A-27 Harbor Boulevard Convention Way Katella Avenue Anaheim 2,790 6 6,386 0.44 A A-28 Harbor Boulevard Katella Avenue Disney Way Anaheim 2,940 6 6,814 0.43 A A-29 Harbor Boulevard Disney Way Manchester Avenue Anaheim 2,950 6 6,814 0.43 A A-33 Katella Avenue Ninth Street Walnut Street Anaheim 2,710 6 6,600 0.41 A A-34 Katella Avenue Walnut Street Disneyland Drive Anaheim 3,670 6 7,086 0.52 A A-35 Katella Avenue Disneyland Drive Hotel Way Anaheim 3,560 8 9,448 0.38 A A-36 Katella Avenue Hotel Way Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 3,190 8 9,448 0.34 A A-40a Katella Avenue Manchester Avenue Anaheim Way Anaheim 2,950 6 7,086 0.42 A A-42 Katella Avenue Sportstown Howell Avenue Anaheim 2,980 6 7,564 0.39 A A-43 Katella Avenue Howell Avenue SR-57 Freeway Anaheim 4,080 6 7,564 0.54 A A-44 Katella Avenue SR-57 Freeway Main Street Orange 3,620 6 8,993 0.40 A A-46 Orangewood Avenue West Street Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 1,880 4 3,471 0.54 A A-48 Orangewood Avenue Clementine Street Haster Street Anaheim 1,520 4 3,613 0.42 A A-49 Orangewood Avenue Haster Street Manchester Avenue Anaheim 1,680 4 4,525 0.37 A PM Peak Hour A-2 Anaheim Boulevard I-5 Freeway Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 5,020 6 5,059 0.99 E A-6 Ball Road Disneyland Drive Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 4,070 6 4,745 0.86 D A-10 Ball Road State College Boulevard Sunkist Street Anaheim 3,850 6 5,958 0.65 B A-11 Ball Road Sunkist Street SR-57 Freeway Anaheim 4,830 6 7,068 0.68 B A-12 Ball Road SR-57 Freeway Main Street Orange 5,040 6 8,207 0.61 B A-13 Clementine Street Manchester Avenue Disney Way Anaheim 1,960 4 3,800 0.52 A A-22 Disneyland Drive Katella Avenue Magic Way Anaheim 2,230 4 4,854 0.46 A A-23 Disneyland Drive Magic Way Ball Road Anaheim 2,250 4 4,854 0.46 A A-25 Harbor Boulevard Wilken Way Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 3,400 6 4,523 0.75 C A-26 Harbor Boulevard Orangewood Avenue Convention Way Anaheim 3,170 6 4,523 0.70 B A-27 Harbor Boulevard Convention Way Katella Avenue Anaheim 3,610 6 3,813 0.95 E A-28 Harbor Boulevard Katella Avenue Disney Way Anaheim 3,460 6 4,646 0.74 C A-29 Harbor Boulevard Disney Way Manchester Avenue Anaheim 3,550 6 4,911 0.72 C A-33 Katella Avenue Ninth Street Walnut Street Anaheim 4,180 6 8,034 0.52 A A-34 Katella Avenue Walnut Street Disneyland Drive Anaheim 4,460 6 8,034 0.56 A A-35 Katella Avenue Disneyland Drive Hotel Way Anaheim 5,240 8 7,736 0.68 B A-36 Katella Avenue Hotel Way Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 4,870 8 7,736 0.63 B A-40a Katella Avenue Manchester Avenue Anaheim Way Anaheim 3,850 6 5,802 0.66 B A-42 Katella Avenue Sportstown Howell Avenue Anaheim 4,020 6 7,624 0.53 A A-43 Katella Avenue Howell Avenue SR-57 Freeway Anaheim 4,550 6 8,019 0.57 A A-44 Katella Avenue SR-57 Freeway Main Street Orange 4,340 6 8,169 0.53 A A-46 Orangewood Avenue West Street Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 2,130 4 3,602 0.59 A A-48 Orangewood Avenue Clementine Street Haster Street Anaheim 1,520 4 2,622 0.58 A A-49 Orangewood Avenue Haster Street Manchester Avenue Anaheim 1,790 4 4,908 0.36 A ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 60 Caltrans Ramp Termini Intersection Analysis Table 5.4 presents the results of peak hour delays and levels of service for the ramp termini intersections under the 2030 No Project conditions. Detailed analysis worksheets are included in Appendix C-4. The table indicates that three Caltrans Ramp intersections operate at an unacceptable LOS in either peak hour:  Anaheim Boulevard at I-5 Northbound Ramps (PM peak hour)  Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) at Katella Avenue (PM peak hour)  Orangewood Avenue at SR-57 Southbound Ramps (PM peak hour) Table 5.4: 2030 No Project Peak Hour Ramp Termini Intersection LOS ID Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay LOS Delay LOS I-9 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 11.2 B 21.9 C I-10 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps 9.6 A 14.5 B I-17 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp / Disney Way 22.1 C 17.3 B I-20 Anaheim Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 15.3 B 75.3 E I-21 Anaheim Boulevard / Disney Way 24.3 C 45.6 D I-25 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 42.4 D 51.21 D I-26 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 22.6 C 71.3 E I-32 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way 27.5 C 18.6 B I-41 I-5 Northbound Ramps / State College Boulevard 28.3 C 26.1 C I-42 I-5 Southbound Ramps / State College Boulevard 45.0 D 22.0 C I-48 Ball Road / SR-57 Northbound Ramps 16.5 B 15.7 B I-49 Ball Road / SR-57 Southbound Ramps 24.0 C 26.7 C I-50 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 11.5 B 11.8 B I-51 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 14.8 B 10.8 B I-52 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Northbound Ramps 13.1 B 9.7 A I-53 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Southbound Ramps 33.4 C 65.0 E I-64 Chapman Avenue / I-5 Southbound On-Ramp 27.8 C 33.0 C I-65 Chapman Avenue / SR-57 Northbound Ramps 4.6 A 3.9 A I-66 Chapman Avenue / SR-57 Southbound Ramps 40.5 D 51.7 D I-69 Disneyland Drive / I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp 12.2 B 9.7 A Caltrans Peak Hour Ramp Termini Off-Ramp Queuing Analysis Table 5.5 presents the queue determined by for the study area off-ramp termini intersections under 2030 No Project conditions. Detailed queuing analysis worksheets are included in Appendix D-4. The analysis indicates that no Caltrans Ramp intersections are forecast to have a queuing length that is greater than the off-ramp storage length. There is one location, SR-57 Southbound Ramps at Chapman Avenue where, due to intersection delay, improvements were proposed on the off-ramp left turn lane. Those improvements are discussed further in Chapter 6.0. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 61 Table 5.5: 2030 No Project Peak Hour Ramp Termini Off-Ramp Queuing Analysis ID Ramp Termini Intersection Off-Ramp # of Lanes Off-Ramp Storage Length (feet) Off-Ramp Queue Length Control Delay (sec) Deficient Storage Length AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R I - 9 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 1.5 1.5 400 1,280 90 140 150 300 24.7 39.4 28.9 56.1 No I - 10 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps 2 1 1,240 190 130 130 57.7 56.5 No I - 17 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp / Disney Way 1.33 0.33 1.33 940 380 380 210 220 180 190 64.8 67.2 55.4 56.4 No I - 25 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 1.5 1.5 720 720 1,710 100 10 220 110 40 62.2 17.0 94.7 51.5 22.0 No I - 26 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 1.5 3 0.5 1,540 1,060 300 290 600 630 45.4 39.5 104.4 105.1 No I - 32 I-5 HOV Northbound Ramps / Gene Autry Way 1 2 1,510 20 0 30 0 29.5 11.7 44.0 9.0 No I-5 HOV Southbound Ramps / Gene Autry Way 2 1 1,340 290 10 160 0 48.2 29.3 61.2 14.6 No I - 41 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 1.5 1.5 2 1,580 690 690 170 200 140 70 76 170 74.1 69.1 42.0 49.9 47.3 55.1 No I - 42 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps 1.5 0.5 2 2,960 2,190 1,590 30 830 110 70 590 100 18.2 98.5 20.6 20.5 59.9 21.2 No I - 48 Ball Road / SR-57 Northbound Ramps 1.5 1.5 1,030 680 240 240 250 240 46.5 59.2 48.5 59.8 No I - 49 Ball Road / SR-57 Southbound Ramps 1 2 1,290 570 500 380 420 260 46.8 33.3 66.7 40.2 No I - 50 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 1.5 1.5 1,030 590 240 240 200 190 43.4 52.4 49.9 60.1 No I - 51 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 1 2 930 600 250 270 170 230 47.4 48.0 46.5 55.3 No I - 52 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Northbound Ramps 1.5 1.5 650 350 150 210 70 70 43.9 68.1 48.0 52.3 No I - 53 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Southbound Ramps 1.5 1.5 1,050 630 340 250 210 150 290 240 247 97.6 74.4 46.5 166.4 128.6 120.7 No I - 64 I-5 Ramps / Chapman Avenue 2 1 1,080 220 210 40 240 0 30.0 9.4 35.5 5.6 No I - 65 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Chapman Avenue 1 1 1,240 760 60 0 40 0 63.1 15.2 60.9 17.8 No I - 66 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Chapman Avenue 0.5 0.5 1 580 1,000 270 10 130 170 87.4 10.9 50.3 45.2 No I - 69 Disneyland Drive / I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp 3 1 2130 70 70 50 13.7 12.7 No ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 62 Caltrans Peak Hour Freeway Ramp Analysis Table 5.6 summarizes HCM analysis results for the study area ramps for the AM and PM peak hours. Per the Caltrans Highway Design Manual, a 2-lane on or off-ramp should be provided where volumes exceed 1,500 vehicles per hour during either the AM or PM peak hour. None of the freeway ramps exceeds this criteria under the 2030 No Project conditions. Detailed HCM analysis worksheets are included in Appendix E-4. The HCM reports a density based on the post-processed volumes on freeway mainline segments and ramps. According to the analysis, the following freeway ramps are deficient during PM peak hour conditions:  I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from State College Boulevard/Chapman Avenue  I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Anaheim Way/Katella Avenue  I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Way/Orangewood Avenue  I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Katella Avenue  I-5 Northbound HOV On-Ramp from Gene Autry Way  I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Boulevard  I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Harbor Boulevard  I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Harbor Boulevard  I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Ball Road  I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Disneyland Drive  I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Katella Avenue When compared to the 2015 No Project scenario, there are two additional ramps that become deficient as a result of regional traffic growth from 2015 to 2030. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 63 Table 5.6: 2030 No Project Peak Hour Freeway Ramp LOS ID Ramp Segment Ramp # of Lane A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS R-1 I-5 Northbound HOV Off-Ramp to Gene Autry Way / Disney Way 1 13.5 B 17.8 B R-2 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from State College Boulevard/Chapman Avenue 1 19.0 B > Capacity F R-3 I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Anaheim Way/Katella Avenue* 2 22.5 C > Capacity F R-4 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Way/Orangewood Avenue 1 21.2 C > Capacity F R-5 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Katella Avenue 1 22.3 C > Capacity F R-6 I-5 Northbound HOV On-Ramp from Gene Autry Way 1 24.6 C 38.0 E R-7 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Boulevard 1 24.0 C > Capacity F R-8 I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Harbor Boulevard 1 24.3 C > Capacity F R-9 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Harbor Boulevard 1 20.8 C > Capacity F R-10 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Ball Road 1 23.0 C > Capacity F R-11 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Disneyland Drive 1 24.2 C > Capacity F R-12 I-5 Southbound HOV Off-Ramp to Disneyland Drive 1 23.7 C 24.1 C R-13 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to Disneyland Drive/Ball Road 2 27.7 C 27.2 D R-14 I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Disneyland Drive 1 32.5 D 34.5 D R-15 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to Harbor Boulevard 1 29.1 D 30.0 D R-16 I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Harbor Boulevard 1 29.2 D 27.7 C R-17 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to Disney Way/Anaheim Boulevard 1 31.0 D 32.8 D R-18 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue/Orangewood Avenue* 2 26.5 C 30.0 D R-19 I-5 Southbound HOV Off-Ramp to Gene Autry Way 1 25.8 C 24.1 C R-20 I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Boulevard 1 25.6 C 31.6 D R-21 I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Katella Avenue 1 31.0 D 35.1 E R-22 I-5 Southbound HOV On-Ramp from Gene Autry Way 1 20.5 C 23.1 C *Major Diverge Analysis utilized to calculate density pc/mi/ln - Passenger Cars per Mile per Lane Caltrans Freeway Mainline Analysis Table 5.7 summarizes HCS analysis results for the densities and levels of service for study area mainline segments for the AM and PM peak hours. Detailed HCM mainline analysis worksheets are included in Appendix F-4. According to the analysis, the following freeway mainline segments are deficient during peak hour conditions:  I-5 Southbound between Euclid Street and Lincoln Avenue (AM and PM peak hour)  I-5 Northbound between Lincoln Avenue and Harbor Boulevard (PM peak hour)  I-5 Northbound between Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue (PM peak hour)  I-5 Northbound between Katella Avenue and State College Boulevard (PM peak hour)  I-5 Northbound between State College Boulevard and SR-22 (PM peak hour) ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 64 Table 5.7: 2030 No Project Peak Hour Freeway Mainline LOS ID Freeway Segment Northbound / Eastbound Southbound / Westbound A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS F - 1 I-5 between SR-91 and Brookhurst Street 20.4 C 30.4 D 24.8 C 22.6 C F - 2 I-5 between Brookhurst Street and Euclid Street 21.3 C 33.0 D 28.4 D 29.9 D F - 3 I-5 between Euclid Street and Lincoln Avenue 21.3 C 34.8 D 38.2 E 37.5 E F - 4 I-5 between Lincoln Avenue and Harbor Boulevard 21.9 C 40.0 E 26.6 D 27.2 D F - 5 I-5 between Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue 19.6 C 38.3 E 23.2 C 26.3 D F - 6 I-5 between Katella Avenue and State College Boulevard 19.7 C 41.5 E 25.8 C 29.2 D F - 7 I-5 between State College Boulevard and SR-22 19.1 C 37.7 E 28.9 D 26.6 D Caltrans Freeway Weaving Analysis Table 5.8 summarizes HCS analysis results for the weaving areas for the study area weaving segments for the AM and PM peak hours. Detailed HCM mainline analysis worksheets are included in Appendix G-4. Under the 2030 No Project scenario, the following freeway weaving segments are forecast to be deficient during either the AM or PM peak hours:  I-5 Northbound between Lincoln Avenue On-Ramp and Euclid Street Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour)  I-5 Northbound between Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Lincoln Avenue Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour)  I-5 Northbound between Anaheim Boulevard On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour)  I-5 Northbound between State College Boulevard On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour)  I-5 Southbound between Katella Avenue On-Ramp and State College Boulevard Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour)  I-5 Northbound between SR-22 Connector and Chapman Avenue Off-Ramp (PM Peak Hour)  I-5 Southbound between State College Boulevard / Chapman Avenue On-Ramp and SR-22 Connector (AM Peak Hour) ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 65 Table 5.8: 2030 No Project Peak Hour Freeway Weaving LOS ID Weaving Segment Weaving Length (Ft) A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS W - 1 I-5 Northbound between Brookhurst Street On-Ramp and SR-91 Eastbound Off-Ramp 2,980 Not Applicable I-5 Southbound between SR-91 Connector / Magnolia Avenue On-Ramp and Brookhurst Street Off-Ramp 3,390 W - 2 I-5 Northbound between Euclid Street On-Ramp and Brookhurst Street Off-Ramp 2,890 I-5 Southbound between Brookhurst Street On-Ramp and Euclid Street Off-Ramp 2,540 W - 3 I-5 Northbound between Lincoln Avenue On-Ramp and Euclid Street Off-Ramp 2,000 21.9 B 37.3 E W - 4 I-5 Northbound between Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Lincoln Avenue Off-Ramp 1,680 22.9 B > Capacity F I-5 Southbound between Lincoln Avenue On-Ramp and Disneyland Drive Off-Ramp 3,060 Not Applicable W - 5 I-5 Southbound between Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp 1,520 33.1 D 35.2 D W - 6 I-5 Northbound between Anaheim Boulevard On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off- Ramp 2,080 22.6 B > Capacity F I-5 Southbound between Harbor Boulevard On-Ramp and Disney Way Off-Ramp 2,650 Not Applicable W - 7 I-5 Northbound between State College Boulevard On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off- Ramp 2,350 20.9 B > Capacity F I-5 Southbound between Katella Avenue On-Ramp and State College Boulevard Off- Ramp 1,870 31.3 C 36.1 E W - 8 I-5 Northbound between SR-22 Connector and Chapman Avenue Off-Ramp 1,720 24.5 C > Capacity F I-5 Southbound between State College Boulevard / Chapman Avenue On-Ramp and SR-22 Connector 1,510 36.0 E 34.3 D 5.2 2030 GENERAL PLAN, WITH PROJECT The analysis was performed by application of the Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model (ATAM) to develop future traffic forecast volumes throughout the study area. Based on the citywide land use data and regional socioeconomic growth projections, future trip activity is estimated and assigned to the circulation system. Intersection Analysis Table 5.9 presents ICU and LOS results for the study intersections under With Project conditions during the AM peak hour and PM peak hour. Future lane geometrics were assumed in the ICU and LOS analyses. The detailed ICU worksheets for the With Project conditions are presented in Appendix A-5. Under forecast 2030 conditions, with the proposed project, 22 intersections are projected to operate at an unacceptable LOS. Figure 5.2 presents the study intersection locations and LOS under 2030 With Project conditions. Under these conditions, the following intersections operate at an unacceptable LOS, including two intersections located within the City of Orange and one shared intersection between the Cities of Anaheim and Orange:  Euclid Street at Katella Avenue  Ninth Street at Katella Avenue  Disneyland Drive at Ball Road  Disneyland Drive/West Street at Katella Avenue ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 66  Harbor Boulevard at Ball Road  Harbor Boulevard at Katella Avenue  Anaheim Boulevard at Ball Road  Anaheim Boulevard at Cerritos Avenue  Anaheim Boulevard at I-5 Northbound Ramps  Anaheim Boulevard/Haster Street at Katella Avenue  Haster Street at Gene Autry Way  Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) at Katella Avenue  Lewis Street at Cerritos Avenue  Lewis Street at Katella Avenue  State College Boulevard at Katella Avenue  State College Boulevard at Gene Autry Way  State College Boulevard at Orangewood Avenue (Anaheim/Orange)  State College Boulevard/The City Drive at Chapman Avenue (Orange)  Howell Avenue at Katella Avenue  Rampart Street at Orangewood Avenue  Orangewood Avenue at SR-57 Southbound Ramps (Orange)  Douglass Road at Katella Avenue When compared to the No Project scenario, there are two additional intersections that are deficient under With Project conditions:  Disneyland Drive at Ball Road  Anaheim Boulevard/Haster Street at Katella Avenue Additionally, there is one location, State College Boulevard at the I-5 Southbound Ramps that is deficient under No Project conditions and improves under With Project conditions. Mitigation strategies are developed for all deficient locations. Project impacts and mitigation measures are discussed in detail in Chapter 6.0 and Chapter 7.0. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 67 Table 5.9: 2030 With Project Peak Hour Intersection LOS ID Intersection AM Peak Hour Change in V/C Sig. Impact PM Peak Hour Change in V/C Sig. Impact No Project With Project No Project With Project ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS I-1 Euclid Street / Katella Avenue 0.85 D 0.87 D 0.02 No 0.92 E 0.94 E 0.02 Yes I-2 Ninth Street / Katella Avenue 0.93 E 0.95 E 0.02 Yes 0.95 E 0.97 E 0.02 Yes I-3 Walnut Street / Ball Road 0.71 C 0.73 C 0.02 No 0.70 B 0.72 C 0.02 No I-4 Walnut Street / Katella Avenue 0.87 D 0.89 D 0.02 No 0.86 D 0.88 D 0.02 No I-5 Disneyland Drive / Ball Road 0.87 D 0.87 D 0.00 No 0.90 D 0.92 E 0.02 Yes I-6 Disneyland Drive / West Street / Katella Avenue 0.92 E 0.96 E 0.04 Yes 0.92 E 0.94 E 0.02 Yes I-7 Harbor Boulevard / Vermont Avenue 0.75 C 0.75 C 0.00 No 0.77 C 0.78 C 0.01 No I-8 Harbor Boulevard / Ball Road 1.05 F 1.10 F 0.05 Yes 0.93 E 0.96 E 0.03 Yes I-9 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 0.74 C 0.74 C 0.00 No 0.77 C 0.79 C 0.02 No I-10 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps 0.58 A 0.61 B 0.03 No 0.49 A 0.51 A 0.02 No I-11 Harbor Boulevard / Disney Way 0.45 A 0.50 A 0.05 No 0.82 D 0.86 D 0.04 No I-12 Harbor Boulevard / Katella Avenue 0.79 C 0.80 C 0.01 No 0.87 D 0.95 E 0.08 No I-13 Harbor Boulevard / Convention Way 0.59 A 0.60 A 0.02 No 0.76 C 0.81 D 0.05 No I-14 Harbor Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue 0.82 D 0.85 D 0.03 No 0.86 D 0.90 D 0.04 No I-15 Clementine Street / Disney Way 0.55 A 0.57 A 0.02 No 0.56 A 0.57 A 0.01 No I-16 Clementine Street / Katella Avenue 0.65 B 0.66 B 0.01 No 0.88 D 0.90 D 0.02 No I-17 I-5 Southbound Off-ramp / Disney Way 0.48 A 0.52 A 0.04 No 0.50 A 0.53 A 0.03 No I-18 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road 0.88 D 0.88 D 0.00 No 0.99 E 1.01 F 0.02 Yes I-19 Anaheim Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue 0.86 D 0.86 D 0.00 No 1.05 F 1.03 F -0.02 No I-20 Anaheim Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 0.66 B 0.66 B 0.00 No 0.92 E 0.95 E 0.03 Yes I-21 Anaheim Boulevard / Disney Way 0.68 B 0.71 C 0.03 No 0.83 D 0.85 D 0.02 No I-22 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue 0.88 D 0.90 D 0.02 No 0.89 D 0.92 E 0.03 Yes I-23 Haster Street / Gene Autry Way 0.91 E 0.97 E 0.06 Yes 1.10 F 1.17 F 0.07 Yes I-24 Haster Street / Orangewood Avenue 0.74 C 0.79 C 0.05 No 0.82 D 0.83 D 0.01 No I-25 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 0.75 C 0.77 C 0.02 No 0.78 C 0.80 C 0.02 No I-26 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 0.96 E 0.95 E -0.01 No 0.85 D 0.90 D 0.05 No I-27 East Street / Ball Road 0.84 D 0.86 D 0.02 No 0.80 C 0.81 D 0.01 No I-28 Lewis Street / Ball Road 0.77 C 0.79 C 0.02 No 0.89 D 0.90 D 0.01 No I-29 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue 0.85 D 0.85 D 0.00 No 0.91 E 0.95 E 0.04 Yes I-30 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue 0.84 D 0.85 D 0.01 No 1.28 F 1.28 F 0.00 No I-31 Lewis Street / Gene Autry Way 0.63 B 0.64 B 0.01 No 0.79 C 0.84 D 0.05 No I-32 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way 0.54 A 0.53 A -0.01 No 0.73 C 0.76 C 0.03 No I-33 Lewis Street / Orangewood Avenue 0.63 B 0.62 B -0.01 No 0.56 A 0.60 A 0.04 No I-34 Manchester Avenue / Orangewood Avenue 0.73 C 0.76 C 0.03 No 0.80 C 0.81 D 0.01 No I-35 Anaheim Way / Orangewood Avenue 0.72 C 0.75 C 0.03 No 0.62 B 0.66 B 0.04 No I-36 State College Boulevard / Ball Road 0.73 C 0.73 C 0.00 No 0.90 D 0.90 D 0.00 No I-37 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue 0.86 D 0.94 E 0.08 Yes 0.98 E 0.99 E 0.01 Yes I-38 State College Boulevard / Gene Autry Way 0.98 E 1.02 F 0.04 Yes 0.84 D 0.84 D 0.00 No I-39 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue 0.89 D 0.91 E 0.02 Yes 0.97 E 0.97 E 0.00 No I-40 State College Boulevard / Orange Center Drive 0.71 C 0.72 C 0.01 No 0.58 A 0.59 A 0.01 No I-41 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 0.77 C 0.77 C 0.00 No 0.73 C 0.74 C 0.01 No I-42 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps 0.91 E 0.90 D -0.01 No 0.78 C 0.80 C 0.02 No I-43 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue 0.86 D 0.88 D 0.02 No 0.92 E 0.96 E 0.04 Yes I-44 Sunkist Street / Ball Road 0.85 D 0.86 D 0.01 No 0.87 D 0.89 D 0.02 No I-45 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue 0.62 B 0.62 B 0.00 No 0.91 E 0.95 E 0.04 Yes I-46 Rampart Street / Orangewood Avenue 0.73 C 0.78 C 0.05 No 1.05 F 1.13 F 0.08 Yes ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 68 Table 5.9: 2030 With Project Peak Hour Intersection LOS, Continued ID Intersection AM Peak Hour Change in V/C Sig. Impact PM Peak Hour Change in V/C Sig. Impact No Project With Project No Project With Project ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS I-47 Rampart Street / Chapman Avenue 0.66 B 0.73 C 0.07 No 0.83 D 0.84 D 0.01 No I-48 Ball Road / SR-57 Northbound Ramps 0.69 B 0.68 B -0.01 No 0.72 C 0.73 C 0.01 No I-49 Ball Road / SR-57 Southbound Ramps 0.82 D 0.85 D 0.03 No 0.86 D 0.88 D 0.02 No I-50 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 0.67 B 0.68 B 0.01 No 0.73 C 0.73 C 0.00 No I-51 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 0.70 B 0.71 C 0.01 No 0.69 B 0.69 B 0.00 No I-52 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Northbound Ramps 0.76 C 0.78 C 0.02 No 0.79 C 0.81 D 0.02 No I-53 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Southbound Ramps 0.85 D 0.84 D -0.01 No 0.99 E 1.04 F 0.05 Yes I-54 Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road 0.81 D 0.82 D 0.01 No 0.87 D 0.87 D 0.00 No I-55 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue 1.02 F 1.04 F 0.02 Yes 1.09 F 1.09 F 0.00 No I-56 Eckhoff Street / Orangewood Avenue 0.88 D 0.90 D 0.02 No 0.85 D 0.90 D 0.05 No I-57 Main Street / Taft Avenue 0.67 B 0.69 B 0.02 No 0.87 D 0.88 D 0.01 No I-58 Main Street / Katella Avenue 0.77 C 0.80 C 0.03 No 0.78 C 0.81 D 0.03 No I-59 Batavia Street / Taft Avenue 0.83 D 0.88 D 0.05 No 0.86 D 0.86 D 0.00 No I-60 Clementine Street / Gene Autry Way 0.53 A 0.58 A 0.05 No 0.83 D 0.85 D 0.02 No I-61 Clementine Street / Orangewood Avenue 0.54 A 0.61 B 0.07 No 0.76 C 0.76 C 0.00 No I-62 Flower Street / Chapman Avenue 0.56 A 0.56 A 0.00 No 0.80 C 0.78 C -0.02 No I-63 Harbor Boulevard / Chapman Avenue 0.67 B 0.69 B 0.02 No 0.81 D 0.83 D 0.02 No I-64 I-5 Ramps / Chapman Avenue 0.60 A 0.60 A 0.00 No 0.73 C 0.73 C 0.00 No I-65 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Chapman Avenue 0.50 A 0.63 B 0.13 No 0.53 A 0.65 B 0.12 No I-66 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Chapman Avenue 0.73 C 0.78 C 0.05 No 0.82 D 0.83 D 0.01 No I-67 Euclid Street / Ball Road 0.74 C 0.75 C 0.01 No 0.79 C 0.80 C 0.01 No I-68 Walnut Street / Cerritos Avenue 0.73 C 0.74 C 0.01 No 0.53 A 0.53 A 0.00 No I-69 Disneyland Drive / I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp 0.55 A 0.56 A 0.01 No 0.49 A 0.49 A 0.00 No I-70 Disneyland Drive/ Magic Way 0.50 A 0.51 A 0.01 No 0.46 A 0.47 A 0.01 No I-71 Ox Road / Cast Place / Ball Road 0.74 C 0.74 C 0.00 No 0.68 B 0.69 B 0.01 No I-72 Convention Center/ Katella Avenue 0.59 A 0.65 B 0.06 No 0.58 A 0.60 A 0.02 No I-73 Harbor Boulevard / Lincoln Avenue 0.69 B 0.70 B 0.01 No 0.81 D 0.82 D 0.01 No I-74 Harbor Boulevard / Broadway 0.58 A 0.59 A 0.01 No 0.71 C 0.72 C 0.01 No I-75 Harbor Boulevard / Manchester Avenue 0.41 A 0.41 A 0.00 No 0.57 A 0.61 B 0.04 No I-76 Anaheim Boulevard / Lincoln Avenue 0.75 C 0.78 C 0.03 No 0.85 D 0.86 D 0.01 No I-77 Anaheim Boulevard / Broadway 0.70 B 0.72 C 0.02 No 0.67 B 0.70 B 0.03 No I-78 Olive Street / Lincoln Avenue 0.45 A 0.56 A 0.11 No 0.49 A 0.61 B 0.12 No I-79 Flore Street / West Street / Ball Road 0.63 B 0.64 B 0.01 No 0.50 A 0.52 A 0.02 No I-80 West Street / Orangewood Avenue 0.63 B 0.65 B 0.02 No 0.65 B 0.68 B 0.03 No I-81 Struck Avenue / Katella Avenue 0.67 B 0.67 B 0.00 No 0.80 C 0.81 D 0.01 No ---PAGE BREAK--- This page is intentionally kept blank to facilitate double sided printing ---PAGE BREAK--- M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L DISNEYLAND DR OR AN GE C TR DR VERMONT AVE EAST ST MANCHESTER AVE MAGIC WY KATELLA AVE PL 73 74 76 77 78 7 28 27 29 36 44 48 54 57 58 81 55 56 52 53 46 61 33 34 35 38 39 40 41 42 43 47 66 65 62 49 64 45 LEWIS ST WY CHAPMAN AVE PHOENIX CLUB DR SPORTSTOWN GATEWAY CENTER DR MARKET ST RA M P A R T S T BALL RD WEST ST E LINCOLN AVE STATE COLLEGE BLVD NINTH ST HARBOR BLVD EUCLID ST SOUTH ST ANAHEIM BLVD WALNUT ST ORANGEWOOD AVE LEWIS ST CERRITOS AVE N WEST ST HASTER ST WAGNER AVE N HARBOR BLVD MAIN ST NT AVE ECKHOFF ST SUNKIST ST N RIO VISTA ST LVD N SUN GENE AUTRY WY DISNEY WY ANAHEIM WY HOWELL AVE DUPONT DR CONVENTION CERRITOS AVE KATELLA AVE N 71 72 9 69 10 70 12 75 11 6 1 4 68 8 67 5 3 16 50 51 17 20 26 19 79 21 13 25 15 14 24 22 2 102 80 30 37 32 18 ? l GARDEN GROVE ANAHEIM CLEMENTINE WEST ST FLORE ST SANTA ANA RIVER CAST PL 60 23 DOUGLASS RD ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 70 Daily Arterial Segment LOS Analysis Table 5.10 presents average daily traffic (ADT) and LOS for all arterial segments within the study area under 2030 With Project conditions. When compared to the No Project condition, the table indicates that an additional nine arterial segments operate at a deficient LOS under 2030 With Project conditions. The following deficient segments are analyzed under AM and PM peak hour conditions in the following section:  Anaheim Boulevard between I-5 and Cerritos Avenue  Anaheim Boulevard between Cerritos Avenue and Ball Road *  Ball Road between Disneyland Drive and Harbor Boulevard  Ball Road between Harbor Boulevard and Anaheim Boulevard*  Ball Road between Anaheim Boulevard and East Street *  Ball Road between East Street and State College Boulevard *  Ball Road between State College Boulevard and Sunkist Street  Ball Road between Sunkist Street and SR-57  Ball Road between SR-57 and Main Street  Clementine Street between Manchester Avenue and Disney Way  Disneyland Drive between Katella Avenue and Magic Way  Disneyland Drive between Magic Way and Ball Road  Harbor Boulevard between Wilken Way and Orangewood Avenue  Harbor Boulevard between Orangewood Avenue and Convention Way  Harbor Boulevard between Convention Way and Katella Avenue  Harbor Boulevard between Katella Avenue and Disney Way  Harbor Boulevard between Disney Way and Manchester Boulevard  Katella Avenue between Ninth Street and Walnut Street  Katella Avenue between Walnut Street and Disneyland Drive  Katella Avenue between Disneyland Drive and Hotel Way  Katella Avenue between Hotel Way and Harbor Boulevard  Katella Avenue between Manchester Avenue and Anaheim Way  Katella Avenue between Anaheim Way and Lewis Street*  Katella Avenue between Sportstown and Howell Avenue  Katella Avenue between Howell Avenue and SR-57  Katella Avenue between SR-57 and Main Street  Orangewood Avenue between West Street and Harbor Boulevard  Orangewood Avenue between Harbor Boulevard and Clementine Street *  Orangewood Avenue between Clementine Street and Haster Street  Orangewood Avenue between Haster Street and Manchester Avenue  Orangewood Avenue between State College Boulevard and Rampart Street *  Orangewood Avenue between Rampart Street and SR-57 *  State College Boulevard between Katella Avenue and Howell Avenue* * Additional deficient locations under 2030 With Project Conditions ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 71 Table 5.10: 2030 With Project Daily Arterial Segment LOS ID Arterial From To Jurisdiction Mid- Block Lanes Total Capacity No Project With Project ADT V/C LOS ADT V/C LOS A-1 Anaheim Boulevard Katella Avenue I-5 Freeway Anaheim 6D 56,300 30,590 0.54 A 31,080 0.55 A A-2 Anaheim Boulevard I-5 Freeway Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 6D 56,300 53,130 0.94 E 55,320 0.98 E A-3 Anaheim Boulevard Cerritos Avenue Ball Road Anaheim 6D 56,300 43,930 0.78 C 46,190 0.82 D A-4 Ball Road Euclid Street Walnut Street Anaheim 6D 56,300 33,130 0.59 A 34,040 0.60 A A-5 Ball Road Walnut Street Disneyland Drive Anaheim 6D 56,300 40,610 0.72 C 42,390 0.75 C A-6 Ball Road Disneyland Drive Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 6D 56,300 56,710 1.01 F 58,690 1.04 F A-7 Ball Road Harbor Boulevard Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim 6D 56,300 41,900 0.74 C 47,460 0.84 D A-8 Ball Road Anaheim Boulevard East Street Anaheim 6D 56,300 44,140 0.78 C 46,390 0.82 D A-9 Ball Road East Street State College Boulevard Anaheim 6D 56,300 44,720 0.79 C 47,540 0.84 D A-10 Ball Road State College Boulevard Sunkist Street Anaheim 6D 56,300 46,630 0.83 D 48,590 0.86 D A-11 Ball Road Sunkist Street SR-57 Freeway Anaheim 6D 56,300 58,790 1.04 F 61,800 1.10 F A-12 Ball Road SR-57 Freeway Main Street Orange 6D 56,300 59,090 1.05 F 60,250 1.07 F A-13 Clementine Street Manchester Avenue Disney Way Anaheim 4U 25,000 23,110 0.92 E 24,080 0.96 E A-14 Clementine Street Disney Way Katella Avenue Anaheim 4U 25,000 8,470 0.34 A 8,470 0.34 A A-15 Clementine Street Katella Avenue Gene Autry Way Anaheim 4U 25,000 2,660 0.11 A 5,720 0.23 A A-16 Clementine Street Gene Autry Way Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 4U 25,000 7,930 0.32 A 9,010 0.36 A A-17 Convention Way/Gene Autry Way Harbor Boulevard Clementine Street Anaheim 6D 56,300 22,550 0.40 A 24,940 0.44 A A-18 Convention Way/Gene Autry Way Clementine Street Haster Street Anaheim 6D 56,300 27,220 0.48 A 30,800 0.55 A A-19 Convention Way/Gene Autry Way Haster Street I-5 Freeway Anaheim 6D 56,300 32,470 0.58 A 38,780 0.69 B A-20 Disney Way Harbor Boulevard Clementine Street Anaheim 6D 56,300 15,600 0.28 A 17,040 0.30 A A-21 Disney Way Clementine Street Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim 6D 56,300 24,690 0.44 A 26,660 0.47 A A-22 Disneyland Drive Katella Avenue Magic Way Anaheim 4D 37,500 33,960 0.91 E 34,500 0.92 E A-23 Disneyland Drive Magic Way Ball Road Anaheim 4D 37,500 32,760 0.87 D 32,800 0.87 D A-24 Disneyland Drive Ball Road Manchester Avenue Anaheim 6D 56,300 42,530 0.76 C 42,930 0.76 C A-25 Harbor Boulevard Wilken Way Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 6D 56,300 48,890 0.87 D 50,410 0.90 D A-26 Harbor Boulevard Orangewood Avenue Convention Way Anaheim 6D 56,300 47,050 0.84 D 47,600 0.85 D A-27 Harbor Boulevard Convention Way Katella Avenue Anaheim 6D 56,300 50,200 0.89 D 50,570 0.90 D A-28 Harbor Boulevard Katella Avenue Disney Way Anaheim 6D 56,300 55,240 0.98 E 56,950 1.01 F A-29 Harbor Boulevard Disney Way Manchester Avenue Anaheim 6D 56,300 53,660 0.95 E 54,670 0.97 E A-30 Harbor Boulevard I-5 Freeway Ball Road Anaheim 8D 75,000 57,660 0.77 C 59,460 0.79 C A-31 Haster Street Orangewood Avenue Gene Autry Way Anaheim 6D 56,300 37,170 0.66 B 39,830 0.71 C A-32 Haster Street Gene Autry Way Katella Avenue Anaheim 6D 56,300 24,560 0.44 A 25,290 0.45 A A-33 Katella Avenue Ninth Street Walnut Street Anaheim 6D 56,300 47,260 0.84 D 48,170 0.86 D A-34 Katella Avenue Walnut Street Disneyland Drive Anaheim 6D 56,300 55,400 0.98 E 56,930 1.01 F A-35 Katella Avenue Disneyland Drive Hotel Way Anaheim 8D 75,000 65,400 0.87 D 67,110 0.89 D A-36 Katella Avenue Hotel Way Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 8D 75,000 61,020 0.81 D 63,060 0.84 D A-37 Katella Avenue Harbor Boulevard Clementine Street Anaheim 8D 75,000 57,670 0.77 C 59,260 0.79 C A-38 Katella Avenue Clementine Street Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim 8D 75,000 57,690 0.77 C 59,840 0.80 C A-39 Katella Avenue Anaheim Boulevard Manchester Avenue Anaheim 8D 75,000 55,510 0.74 C 57,710 0.77 C A-40a Katella Avenue Manchester Avenue Anaheim Way Anaheim 6D 56,300 46,960 0.83 D 53,740 0.95 E A-40b Katella Avenue Anaheim Way Lewis Street Anaheim 8D 75,000 50,220 0.67 B 61,390 0.82 D A-40c Katella Avenue Lewis Street State College Boulevard Anaheim 8D 75,000 48,820 0.65 B 57,860 0.77 C ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 72 Table 5.10: 2030 With Project Daily Arterial Segment LOS, Continued ID Arterial From To Jurisdiction Mid- Block Lanes Total Capacity No Project With Project ADT V/C LOS ADT V/C LOS A-41 Katella Avenue State College Boulevard Sportstown Anaheim 8D 75,000 47,980 0.64 B 51,920 0.69 B A-42 Katella Avenue Sportstown Howell Avenue Anaheim 6D 56,300 54,380 0.97 E 62,310 1.11 F A-43 Katella Avenue Howell Avenue SR-57 Freeway Anaheim 6D 56,300 60,860 1.08 F 71,190 1.26 F A-44 Katella Avenue SR-57 Freeway Main Street Orange 6D 56,300 54,600 0.97 E 62,900 1.12 F A-45 Manchester Avenue Clementine Street Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 4U 25,000 9,190 0.37 A 10,290 0.41 A A-46 Orangewood Avenue West Street Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 4U 25,000 21,640 0.87 D 22,670 0.91 E A-47 Orangewood Avenue Harbor Boulevard Clementine Street Anaheim 4U 25,000 19,800 0.79 C 21,850 0.87 D A-48 Orangewood Avenue Clementine Street Haster Street Anaheim 4U 25,000 20,130 0.81 D 21,480 0.86 D A-49 Orangewood Avenue Haster Street Manchester Avenue Anaheim 4U 25,000 24,830 0.99 E 25,910 1.04 F A-50 Orangewood Avenue* Manchester Avenue State College Boulevard Anaheim /Orange 6D 56,300 28,530 0.51 A 34,410 0.61 B A-51 Orangewood Avenue State College Boulevard Rampart Street Anaheim 6D 56,300 38,080 0.68 B 50,380 0.89 D A-52 Orangewood Avenue Rampart Street SR-57 Freeway Anaheim /Orange 6D 56,300 40,050 0.71 C 47,660 0.85 D A-53 Orangewood Avenue SR-57 Freeway Eckhoff Street Orange 6D 56,300 44,670 0.79 C 49,090 0.87 D A-54 Orangewood Avenue Eckhoff Street Main Street Orange 6D 56,300 17,750 0.32 A 19,610 0.35 A A-55 Walnut Street Katella Avenue Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 4D 37,500 15,670 0.42 A 16,430 0.44 A A-56 Walnut Street Cerritos Avenue Ball Road Anaheim 4D 37,500 17,310 0.46 A 17,740 0.47 A A-57 West Street Orangewood Avenue Katella Avenue Anaheim 4U 25,000 14,520 0.58 A 15,030 0.60 A A-58 Chapman Avenue State College Boulevard SR-57 Freeway Orange 6D 56,300 37,220 0.66 B 38,400 0.68 B A-59 Chapman Avenue SR-57 Freeway Main Street Orange 6D 56,300 32,610 0.58 A 33,930 0.60 A A-60 State College Boulevard Chapman Avenue I-5 Freeway Orange 8D 75,000 42,370 0.56 A 45,860 0.61 B A-61 State College Boulevard I-5 Freeway Orangewood Avenue Orange 8D 75,000 43,240 0.58 A 48,060 0.64 B A-62 State College Boulevard Orangewood Avenue Gene Autry Way Anaheim 8D 75,000 39,670 0.53 A 46,900 0.63 B A-63 State College Boulevard Gene Autry Way Katella Avenue Anaheim 6D 56,300 31,040 0.55 A 34,920 0.62 B A-64 State College Boulevard Katella Avenue Howell Avenue Anaheim 6D 56,300 39,840 0.71 C 46,470 0.83 D A-65 State College Boulevard Howell Avenue Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 6D 56,300 27,860 0.49 A 31,130 0.55 A A-66 State College Boulevard Cerritos Avenue Ball Road Anaheim 6D 56,300 25,880 0.46 A 28,570 0.51 A Note: *Shared segment capacities are identified by the jurisdiction in which the traffic count was taken ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 73 Peak Hour Arterial Segment LOS Analysis Table 5.11 reports the AM and PM peak hour arterial segment LOS for the deficient arterial segments under 2030 With Project conditions identified above. The table indicates that one segment will require improvements under the 2030 With Project scenario:  Katella Avenue between Manchester Avenue and Anaheim Way When compared to No Project conditions, the two locations that were identified as deficient under No Project conditions, Anaheim Boulevard between the I-5 Freeway and Cerritos Avenue and Harbor Boulevard between Convention Way and Katella Avenue are no longer deficient under peak hour conditions and will not need to be improved. The buildout of the Proposed Project will redistribute traffic so as not to need additional capacity on Anaheim Boulevard and Harbor Boulevard. Table 5.11: 2030 With Project Peak Hour Arterial Segment LOS ID Arterial From To Jurisdiction Traffic Volume Mid- Block Lanes Total Capacity V/C LOS AM Peak Hour A-2 Anaheim Boulevard I-5 Freeway Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 3,320 6 5,586 0.59 A A-3 Anaheim Boulevard Cerritos Avenue Ball Road Anaheim 2,870 6 5,586 0.51 A A-6 Ball Road Disneyland Drive Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 3,780 6 5,389 0.70 B A-7 Ball Road Harbor Boulevard Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim 2,750 6 5,389 0.51 A A-8 Ball Road Anaheim Boulevard East Street Anaheim 3,200 6 4,985 0.64 B A-9 Ball Road East Street State College Boulevard Anaheim 3,310 6 4,646 0.71 C A-10 Ball Road State College Boulevard Sunkist Street Anaheim 3,250 6 4,646 0.70 B A-11 Ball Road Sunkist Street SR-57 Freeway Anaheim 4,520 6 7,296 0.62 B A-12 Ball Road SR-57 Freeway Main Street Orange 4,070 6 8,659 0.47 A A-13 Clementine Street Katella Avenue Manchester Avenue Anaheim 1,730 4 3,800 0.46 A A-22 Disneyland Drive Katella Avenue Magic Way Anaheim 2,270 4 4,042 0.56 A A-23 Disneyland Drive Magic Way Ball Road Anaheim 2,100 4 4,042 0.52 A A-25 Harbor Boulevard Wilken Way Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 2,580 6 3,838 0.67 B A-26 Harbor Boulevard Orangewood Avenue Convention Way Anaheim 2,560 6 5,814 0.44 A A-27 Harbor Boulevard Convention Way Katella Avenue Anaheim 2,730 6 5,814 0.47 A A-28 Harbor Boulevard Katella Avenue Disney Way Anaheim 2,990 6 6,042 0.49 A A-29 Harbor Boulevard Disney Way Manchester Avenue Anaheim 3,140 6 6,042 0.52 A A-33 Katella Avenue Ninth Street Walnut Street Anaheim 2,780 6 6,840 0.41 A A-34 Katella Avenue Walnut Street Disneyland Drive Anaheim 3,730 6 6,954 0.54 A A-35 Katella Avenue Disneyland Drive Hotel Way Anaheim 3,590 8 9,272 0.39 A A-36 Katella Avenue Hotel Way Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 3,360 8 9,282 0.36 A A-40a Katella Avenue Manchester Avenue Anaheim Way Anaheim 5,360 6 5,472 0.98 E A-40b Katella Avenue Anaheim Way Lewis Street Anaheim 5,360 8 8,446 0.63 B A-42 Katella Avenue Sportstown Howell Avenue Anaheim 3,050 6 7,624 0.40 A A-43 Katella Avenue Howell Avenue SR-57 Freeway Anaheim 4,140 6 7,624 0.54 A A-44 Katella Avenue SR-57 Freeway Main Street Orange 3,620 6 9,007 0.40 A A-46 Orangewood Avenue West Street Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 1,950 4 3,458 0.56 A A-47 Orangewood Avenue Harbor Boulevard Clementine Street Anaheim 1,480 4 3,458 0.43 A A-48 Orangewood Avenue Clementine Street Haster Street Anaheim 1,340 4 2,875 0.47 A A-49 Orangewood Avenue Haster Street Manchester Avenue Anaheim 1,680 4 4,236 0.40 A A-51 Orangewood Avenue State College Boulevard Rampart Street Anaheim 2,200 6 4,010 0.55 A ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 74 Table 5.11: 2030 With Project Peak Hour Arterial Segment LOS, Continued ID Arterial From To Jurisdiction Traffic Volume Mid- Block Lanes Total Capacity V/C LOS A-52 Orangewood Avenue Rampart Street SR-57 Freeway Anaheim /Orange 3,140 6 7,040 0.45 A A-64 State College Boulevard Katella Avenue Howell Avenue Anaheim 2,560 6 6,443 0.40 A PM Peak Hour A-2 Anaheim Boulevard I-5 Freeway Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 5,090 6 5,700 0.89 D A-3 Anaheim Boulevard Cerritos Avenue Ball Road Anaheim 4,300 6 4,902 0.88 D A-6 Ball Road Disneyland Drive Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 4,100 6 5,130 0.80 C A-7 Ball Road Harbor Boulevard Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim 3,100 6 4,063 0.76 C A-8 Ball Road Anaheim Boulevard East Street Anaheim 3,550 6 6,091 0.58 A A-9 Ball Road East Street State College Boulevard Anaheim 3,520 6 6,091 0.58 A A-10 Ball Road State College Boulevard Sunkist Street Anaheim 3,800 6 5,700 0.67 B A-11 Ball Road Sunkist Street SR-57 Freeway Anaheim 4,770 6 7,296 0.65 B A-12 Ball Road SR-57 Freeway Main Street Orange 5,020 6 8,165 0.61 B A-13 Clementine Street Katella Avenue Manchester Avenue Anaheim 2,030 4 3,800 0.53 A A-22 Disneyland Drive Katella Avenue Magic Way Anaheim 2,300 4 4,875 0.47 A A-23 Disneyland Drive Magic Way Ball Road Anaheim 2,270 4 4,875 0.47 A A-25 Harbor Boulevard Wilken Way Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 3,410 6 4,395 0.78 C A-26 Harbor Boulevard Orangewood Avenue Convention Way Anaheim 3,260 6 4,446 0.73 C A-27 Harbor Boulevard Convention Way Katella Avenue Anaheim 3,580 6 4,104 0.87 D A-28 Harbor Boulevard Katella Avenue Disney Way Anaheim 3,560 6 4,902 0.73 C A-29 Harbor Boulevard Disney Way Manchester Avenue Anaheim 3,730 6 4,902 0.76 C A-33 Katella Avenue Ninth Street Walnut Street Anaheim 4,260 6 7,980 0.53 A A-34 Katella Avenue Walnut Street Disneyland Drive Anaheim 4,540 6 7,980 0.57 A A-35 Katella Avenue Disneyland Drive Hotel Way Anaheim 5,380 8 7,638 0.70 B A-36 Katella Avenue Hotel Way Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 5,340 8 7,638 0.70 B A-40a Katella Avenue Manchester Avenue Anaheim Way Anaheim 5,360 6 5,586 0.96 E A-40b Katella Avenue Anaheim Way Lewis Street Anaheim 5,360 8 8,570 0.63 B A-42 Katella Avenue Sportstown Howell Avenue Anaheim 4,020 6 7,302 0.55 A A-43 Katella Avenue Howell Avenue SR-57 Freeway Anaheim 4,530 6 7,859 0.58 A A-44 Katella Avenue SR-57 Freeway Main Street Orange 4,320 6 8,208 0.53 A A-46 Orangewood Avenue West Street Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 2,180 4 3,610 0.60 A A-47 Orangewood Avenue Harbor Boulevard Clementine Street Anaheim 1,390 4 2,622 0.53 A A-48 Orangewood Avenue Clementine Street Haster Street Anaheim 1,780 4 2,132 0.84 D A-49 Orangewood Avenue Haster Street Manchester Avenue Anaheim 2,000 4 3,550 0.56 A A-51 Orangewood Avenue State College Boulevard Rampart Street Anaheim 2,610 6 4,022 0.65 B A-52 Orangewood Avenue Rampart Street SR-57 Freeway Anaheim /Orange 3,550 6 5,684 0.62 B A-64 State College Boulevard Katella Avenue Howell Avenue Anaheim 4,260 6 5,581 0.76 C Caltrans Ramp Termini Intersection Analysis Table 5.12 presents the results of peak hour delays and levels of service for the ramp termini intersections under the 2030 With Project conditions. Detailed analysis worksheets are included in Appendix C-5. The table indicates that the following Caltrans ramp intersections operate at an unacceptable LOS in either peak hour: ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 75  Anaheim Boulevard at I-5 Northbound Ramps (PM peak hour)  Manchester Avenue at Katella Avenue (PM peak hour)  Anaheim Way at Katella Avenue (PM peak hour)  Orangewood Avenue at SR-57 Southbound Ramps (PM peak hour) When compared with No Project conditions, there is one additional location, Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) at Katella Avenue, which becomes deficient under With Project conditions. This location has a project impact. Project related significant impacts and improvement strategies for all deficient locations are addressed in Chapter 6.0 and Chapter 7.0. Table 5.12: 2030 With Project Peak Hour Ramp Termini Intersection LOS ID Intersection AM Peak Hour Change in Delay PM Peak Hour Change in Delay No Project With Project No Project With Project Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS I-9 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 11.2 B 11.6 B 0.4 21.9 C 27.8 C 5.9 I-10 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps 9.6 A 9.3 A -0.3 14.5 B 13.6 B -0.9 I-17 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp / Disney Way 22.1 C 23.9 C 1.8 17.3 B 17.6 B 0.3 I-20 Anaheim Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 15.3 B 10.5 B -4.8 75.3 E 83.1 F 7.8 I-21 Anaheim Boulevard / Disney Way 24.3 C 26.4 C 2.1 45.6 D 46.5 D 0.9 I-25 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 42.4 D 41.3 D -1.1 51.1 D 67.4 E 16.3 I-26 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 22.6 C 24.7 C 2.1 71.3 E 89.0 F 17.7 I-32 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way 27.5 C 35.5 D 8.0 18.6 B 18.4 B -0.2 I-41 I-5 Northbound Ramps / State College Boulevard 28.3 C 32.2 C 3.9 26.1 C 27.1 C 1.0 I-42 I-5 Southbound Ramps / State College Boulevard 45.0 D 46.6 D 1.6 22.0 C 24.5 C 2.5 I-48 Ball Road / SR-57 Northbound Ramps 16.5 B 15.6 B -0.9 15.7 B 15.0 B -0.7 I-49 Ball Road / SR-57 Southbound Ramps 24.0 C 24.9 C 0.9 26.7 C 26.7 C 0.0 I-50 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 11.5 B 11.4 B -0.1 11.8 B 12.8 B 1.0 I-51 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 14.8 B 19.9 B 5.1 10.8 B 12.8 B 2.0 I-52 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Northbound Ramps 13.1 B 12.3 B -0.8 9.7 A 9.4 A -0.3 I-53 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Southbound Ramps 33.4 C 30.9 C -2.5 65.0 E 80.9 F 15.9 I-64 Chapman Avenue / I-5 Southbound On-Ramp 27.8 C 27.3 C -0.5 33.0 C 29.6 C -3.4 I-65 Chapman Avenue / SR-57 Northbound Ramps 4.6 A 5.0 A 0.4 3.9 A 4.3 A 0.4 I-66 Chapman Avenue / SR-57 Southbound Ramps 40.5 D 47.6 D 7.1 51.7 D 54.8 D 3.1 I-69 Disneyland Drive / I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp 12.2 B 12.3 B 0.1 9.7 A 9.7 A 0.0 Caltrans Peak Hour Ramp Termini Off-Ramp Queuing Analysis Table 5.13 presents the queue determined by for the study area off-ramp termini intersections under 2030 With Project conditions. Detailed queuing analysis worksheets are included in Appendix D-5. The analysis indicates that no Caltrans ramp intersections are forecast to have a queuing length that is greater than the off-ramp storage length. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 76 Table 5.13: 2030 With Project Peak Hour Ramp Termini Off-Ramp Queuing Analysis ID Ramp Termini Intersection Off-Ramp # of Lanes Off-Ramp Storage Length (feet) Off-Ramp Queue Length Control Delay (sec) Deficient Storage Length AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R I - 9 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 7 1.5 400 1,280 80 120 160 320 23.0 35.6 30.2 60.9 No I - 10 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps 2 1 1,240 190 140 120 58.5 56.9 No I - 17 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp / Disney Way 1.33 0.33 1.33 940 380 380 240 260 200 200 68.1 75.1 63.5 65.4 No I - 25 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 1.5 1.5 720 720 1,710 100 10 200 100 70 68.7 19.1 79.1 41.6 28.7 No I - 26 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 1.5 3 0.5 1,540 1,060 330 320 670 690 48.7 41.2 111.9 111.1 No I - 32 I-5 HOV Northbound Ramps / Gene Autry Way 1 2 1,510 20 0 40 0 29.5 12.6 46.2 8.8 No I-5 HOV Southbound Ramps / Gene Autry Way 2 1 1,340 290 10 170 0 48.2 12.2 67.7 13.4 No I - 41 State College Boulevard / I- 5 Northbound Ramps 1.5 1.5 2 1,580 690 690 230 240 140 80 84 160 103.6 86.0 39.1 54.0 50.4 67.6 No I - 42 State College Boulevard / I- 5 Southbound Ramps 1.5 0.5 2 2,960 2,190 1,590 50 990 110 70 620 100 20.0 156.2 22.0 20.5 66.1 21.2 No I - 48 Ball Road / SR-57 Northbound Ramps 1.5 1.5 1,030 680 240 240 230 220 45.9 58.2 45.0 56.7 No I - 49 Ball Road / SR-57 Southbound Ramps 1 2 1,290 570 540 370 390 230 47.3 29.9 60.5 34.1 No I - 50 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 1.5 1.5 1,030 590 250 250 200 200 41.9 51.3 49.5 59.2 No I - 51 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue 1 2 930 600 240 310 170 240 41.3 48.8 43.9 53.6 No I - 52 Orangewood Avenue / SR- 57 Northbound Ramps 1.5 1.5 650 350 140 210 70 70 39.7 68.0 50.7 60.8 No I - 53 Orangewood Avenue / SR- 57 Southbound Ramps 1.5 1.5 1,050 630 340 240 200 150 310 270 247 91.2 72.5 47.6 162.2 139.5 127.2 No I - 64 I-5 Ramps / Chapman Avenue 2 1 1,080 220 200 60 240 0 27.6 10.0 34.1 5.3 No I - 65 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Chapman Avenue 1 1 1,240 760 70 0 40 0 63.3 14.4 60.9 17.8 No I - 66 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Chapman Avenue 0.5 0.5 1 580 1,000 270 50 130 350 87.4 16.2 50.3 129.4 No I - 69 Disneyland Drive / I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp 3 1 2130 70 70 50 13.8 No ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 77 Caltrans Peak Hour Freeway Ramp Analysis Table 5.14 summarizes HCM analysis results for the study area ramps for the AM and PM peak hours. Per the Caltrans Highway Design Manual, a 2-lane on or off-ramp should be provided where volumes exceed 1,500 vehicles per hour during the AM or PM peak hour. None of the freeway ramps exceeds this criteria under the 2030 With Project conditions. Detailed HCM analysis worksheets are included in Appendix E-5. The HCM reports a density based on the post-processed volumes on freeway mainline segments and ramps. According to the analysis, the following freeway ramps are deficient under PM peak hour conditions:  I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from State College Boulevard/Chapman Avenue  I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Anaheim Way/Katella Avenue  I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Way/Orangewood Avenue  I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Katella Avenue  I-5 Northbound HOV On-Ramp from Gene Autry Way  I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Boulevard  I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Harbor Boulevard  I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Harbor Boulevard  I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Ball Road  I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Disneyland Drive  I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Disneyland Drive  I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Katella Avenue As compared to the No Project scenario, there is one additional deficient ramp under the With Project scenario, the I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Disneyland Drive. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 78 Table 5.14: 2030 With Project Peak Hour Freeway Ramp LOS ID Ramp Segment Ramp # of Lane A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS R-1 I-5 Northbound HOV Off-Ramp to Gene Autry Way / Disney Way 1 13.5 B 18.3 B R-2 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from State College Boulevard/Chapman Avenue 1 19.0 B > Capacity F R-3 I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Anaheim Way/Katella Avenue* 2 22.5 C > Capacity F R-4 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Way/Orangewood Avenue 1 21.3 C > Capacity F R-5 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Katella Avenue 1 22.4 C > Capacity F R-6 I-5 Northbound HOV On-Ramp from Gene Autry Way 1 24.6 C 39.1 E R-7 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Boulevard 1 24.1 C > Capacity F R-8 I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Harbor Boulevard 1 24.3 C > Capacity F R-9 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Harbor Boulevard 1 21.1 C > Capacity F R-10 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Ball Road 1 23.3 C > Capacity F R-11 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Disneyland Drive 1 24.4 C > Capacity F R-12 I-5 Southbound HOV Off-Ramp to Disneyland Drive 1 24.4 C 24.1 C R-13 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to Disneyland Drive/Ball Road 2 27.9 C 31.9 D R-14 I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Disneyland Drive 1 32.6 D > Capacity F R-15 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to Harbor Boulevard 1 29.4 D 32.6 D R-16 I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Harbor Boulevard 1 29.3 D 30.0 D R-17 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to Disney Way/Anaheim Boulevard 1 31.4 D 33.1 D R-18 I-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue/Orangewood Avenue* 2 26.5 C 30.1 D R-19 I-5 Southbound HOV Off-Ramp to Gene Autry Way 1 26.1 C 24.1 C R-20 I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Boulevard 1 25.8 C 31.8 D R-21 I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Katella Avenue 1 31.4 D > Capacity F R-22 I-5 Southbound HOV On-Ramp from Gene Autry Way 1 22.0 C 24.3 C *Major Diverge Analysis utilized to calculate density pc/mi/ln - Passenger Cars per Mile per Lane Caltrans Freeway Mainline Analysis Table 5.15 summarizes HCM analysis results for the densities and levels of service for study area mainline segments for the AM and PM peak hours under 2030 With Project conditions. Detailed HCM worksheets for the 2030 With Project scenario are included in Appendix F-5. According to the analysis, the following freeway mainline segments are deficient under AM or PM peak hour conditions:  I-5 Northbound between Brookhurst Street and Euclid Street (PM peak hour)  I-5 Northbound between Euclid Street and Lincoln Avenue (PM peak hour)  I-5 Southbound between Euclid Street and Lincoln Avenue (AM and PM peak hour)  I-5 Northbound between Lincoln Avenue and Harbor Boulevard (PM peak hour)  I-5 Northbound between Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue (PM peak hour)  I-5 Northbound between Katella Avenue and State College Boulevard (PM peak hour)  I-5 Northbound between State College Boulevard and SR-22 (PM peak hour) ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 79 Between the No Project and With Project scenarios, there are two additional deficiencies under the With Project conditions, I-5 Northbound between Brookhurst Street and Euclid Street, and I-5 Northbound between Euclid Street and Lincoln Avenue. Table 5.15: 2030 With Project Peak Hour Freeway Mainline LOS ID Freeway Segment Northbound / Eastbound Southbound / Westbound A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS F - 1 I-5 between SR-91 and Brookhurst Street 20.4 C 31.6 D 25.2 C 22.6 C F - 2 I-5 between Brookhurst Street and Euclid Street 21.3 C 35.3 E 28.7 D 29.9 D F - 3 I-5 between Euclid Street and Lincoln Avenue 21.3 C 36.7 E 38.3 E 37.5 E F - 4 I-5 between Lincoln Avenue and Harbor Boulevard 21.9 C 41.8 E 26.6 D 29.9 D F - 5 I-5 between Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue 19.6 C 39.8 E 23.2 C 26.3 D F - 6 I-5 between Katella Avenue and State College Boulevard 19.7 C 43.0 E 25.8 C 29.2 D F - 7 I-5 between State College Boulevard and SR-22 19.1 C 39.0 E 28.9 D 28.0 D Caltrans Freeway Weaving Analysis Table 5.16 summarizes HCM analysis results for the study area freeway weaving segments for the AM and PM peak hours. Detailed HCM weaving analysis worksheets are included in Appendix G-5. Under the 2030 With Project scenario, all the freeway segments are forecast to be deficient in the PM peak hour. One segment is also deficient in the AM peak hour, I-5 Southbound between State College Boulevard / Chapman Avenue On-Ramp and SR-22 Connector. When compared to the No Project conditions, there is one additional freeway weaving segment that becomes deficient with traffic from the Proposed Project:.  I-5 Southbound between Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 80 Table 5.16: 2030 With Project Peak Hour Freeway Weaving LOS ID Weaving Segment Weaving Length (Ft) A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS W - 1 I-5 Northbound between Brookhurst Street On-Ramp and SR-91 Eastbound Off-Ramp 2,980 Not Applicable I-5 Southbound between SR-91 Connector / Magnolia Avenue On-Ramp and Brookhurst Street Off-Ramp 3,390 W - 2 I-5 Northbound between Euclid Street On-Ramp and Brookhurst Street Off-Ramp 2,890 I-5 Southbound between Brookhurst Street On-Ramp and Euclid Street Off-Ramp 2,540 W - 3 I-5 Northbound between Lincoln Avenue On-Ramp and Euclid Street Off-Ramp 2,000 21.9 B 39.1 E W - 4 I-5 Northbound between Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Lincoln Avenue Off-Ramp 1,680 23.0 B > Capacity F I-5 Southbound between Lincoln Avenue On-Ramp and Disneyland Drive Off-Ramp 3,060 Not Applicable W - 5 I-5 Southbound between Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp 1,520 32.9 D 38.7 E W - 6 I-5 Northbound between Anaheim Boulevard On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp 2,080 22.6 B > Capacity F I-5 Southbound between Harbor Boulevard On-Ramp and Disney Way Off-Ramp 2,650 Not Applicable W - 7 I-5 Northbound between State College Boulevard On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp 2,350 21.1 B > Capacity F I-5 Southbound between Katella Avenue On-Ramp and State College Boulevard Off-Ramp 1,870 31.7 C 36.7 E W - 8 I-5 Northbound between SR-22 Connector and Chapman Avenue Off-Ramp 1,720 24.6 C > Capacity F I-5 Southbound between State College Boulevard / Chapman Avenue On-Ramp and SR-22 Connector 1,510 36.0 E 36.1 E Summary As demonstrated through the traffic analysis, the circulation system in the study area is forecast to deteriorate under both the 2030 Buildout No Project and With Project scenarios. The increased intensities of the buildout of the Proposed Project contribute to deficiencies when compared to the current General Plan buildout. Under the City of Anaheim’s traffic analysis guidelines, project related significant impacts would require mitigation to an acceptable LOS. Chapter 6.0 identifies project related impacts while Chapter 7.0 demonstrates that the proposed improvements allow the system to operate at an acceptable LOS. Detailed mitigation ICU worksheets and analysis worksheets for intersections are included in Appendix A-6 and Appendix C-6, respectively. ---PAGE BREAK--- This page is intentionally kept blank to facilitate double sided printing ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 81 6.0 PROJECT IMPACTS 6.1 2015 ANALYSIS IMPACTS Deficient intersections within the study area fall under two categories of impacts, project related impacts and cumulative deficiency impacts. Project related impacts in the Interim Year 2015 are determined using the definition of significant impacts for the Interim Year analysis from the City of Anaheim’s Traffic Impact Studies (TIS) guidelines, discussed in Chapter 2.0. Project related impacts for the General Plan Buildout scenarios are governed by the Growth Management Element of the City of Anaheim General Plan and are discussed in Section 6.2. Intersections According to the analysis, there are no intersections with a project related impact under the interim analysis development of Anaheim Resort Specific Plan. Arterial Segments Based on the arterial segment traffic analysis, five arterial segments along Katella Avenue are forecast to have significant impacts in 2015. Table 6.1 displays the deficient arterial segments in Anaheim. These arterial segments will require mitigation to operate at an acceptable LOS in 2015 through upgrading segment classification to the buildout condition to provide additional capacity. Table 6.1: 2015 Project Related Arterial Segment Impacts ID Arterial From To 2008 Existing Count 2015 No Project 2015 With Project Change in V/C between 2015 No Project and With Project ADT V-C Ratio Daily LOS ADT V-C Ratio Daily LOS ADT V-C Ratio Daily LOS A-35 Katella Avenue Disneyland Drive Hotel Way 37,440 0.67 B 46,340 0.82 D 49,583 0.88 D 0.06 A-36 Katella Avenue Hotel Way Harbor Boulevard 37,440 0.67 B 44,810 0.80 C 49,891 0.89 D 0.07 A-37 Katella Avenue Harbor Boulevard Clementine Street 39,100 0.69 B 45,260 0.80 C 48,753 0.87 D 0.06 A-38 Katella Avenue Clementine Street Anaheim Boulevard 38,510 0.68 B 44,860 0.80 C 48,353 0.86 D 0.06 A-39 Katella Avenue Anaheim Boulevard Manchester Avenue 37,830 0.67 B 43,650 0.78 C 46,772 0.83 D 0.06 Ramp Termini Intersections According to the 2015 interim year analysis for the freeway ramp termini facilities, there are no intersections with a project related impact. The criterion for identifying freeway deficiencies has been established by Caltrans and utilizes the HCM methodology. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 82 Caltrans Ramp Termini Off-Ramp Queuing According to the interim analysis, there are no off-ramps where the expected queuing length from the With Project scenario is longer than the ramp capacity, therefore there are no adverse impacts to the mainline as a result of off-ramp intersection queues and no deficiencies requiring mitigation. Peak Hour Freeway Ramps Based on the analysis, there are nine freeway ramps deficient under both the 2015 No Project scenario and the 2015 With Project scenario.  I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from State College Boulevard/Chapman Avenue  I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Anaheim Way/Katella Avenue  I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Way/Orangewood Avenue  I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Katella Avenue  I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Boulevard  I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Harbor Boulevard  I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Harbor Boulevard  I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Ball Road  I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Disneyland Drive The project contributes to freeway ramp traffic at those locations that are deficient under 2015 With Project conditions. None of the ramps has a project impact. Table 6.2 identifies deficiencies on freeway ramps. Freeway Mainline Table 6.3 presents the freeway mainline segments that are forecast to be deficient under the Interim Year 2015 conditions. One segment is forecast to be deficient under 2015 With Project conditions that was not deficient under 2015 No Project conditions:  I-5 Southbound between Euclid Street and Lincoln Avenue Freeway Weaving Segments Table 6.4 identifies deficiencies on freeway weaving segments. No additional weaving segment that is forecast to be deficient under 2015 With Project conditions that was not deficient under 2015 No Project conditions: ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 83 Table 6.2: 2015 Project Related Peak Hour Freeway Ramp Impacts ID Freeway Segment Existing Conditions 2015 No Project 2015 With Project A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS R-2 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from State College Boulevard/Chapman Avenue 19.3 B 30.0 D 19.1 B > Capacity F 19.3 B > Capacity F R-3 I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Anaheim Way/Katella Avenue 21.2 C 32.8 D 20.8 C > Capacity F 21.1 C > Capacity F R-4 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Way/Orangewood Avenue 19.9 B 28.0 C 19.7 B > Capacity F 20.0 B > Capacity F R-5 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Katella Avenue 21.1 C 30.9 D 20.8 C > Capacity F 21.0 C > Capacity F R-7 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Boulevard 22.2 C > Capacity F 22.0 C > Capacity F 22.3 C > Capacity F R-8 I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Harbor Boulevard 23.1 C 33.2 D 22.6 C 38.4 E 22.6 C 38.4 E R-9 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Harbor Boulevard 19.6 B 32.2 D 19.3 B > Capacity F 19.6 B > Capacity F R-10 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Ball Road 20.8 C 32.7 D 21.5 C > Capacity F 21.7 C > Capacity F R-11 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Disneyland Drive 21.9 C 33.9 D 22.6 C > Capacity F 22.8 C > Capacity F Table 6.3: 2015 Project Related Freeway Mainline Impacts ID Freeway Segment Direction Existing Conditions 2015 No Project 2015 With Project A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS F-3 I-5 between Euclid Street and Lincoln Avenue SB/WB 32.9 D 34.1 D 33.4 D 34.7 D 33.4 D 35.1 E F - 4 I-5 between Lincoln Avenue and Harbor Boulevard NB/EB 19.6 C 36.6 E 20.3 C 36.4 E 20.4 C 36.4 E F - 6 I-5 between Katella Avenue and State College Boulevard NB/EB 17.5 B 39.7 E 18.2 C 38.9 E 18.5 C 38.9 E ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 84 Table 6.4: 2015 Project Related Freeway Weaving Impacts ID Weaving Segment Existing Conditions 2015 No Project 2015 With Project A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS W-4 I-5 Northbound between Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Lincoln Avenue Off-Ramp 20.3 B 39.3 E 21.1 B 39.5 E 21.3 B 39.5 E W-6 I-5 Northbound between Anaheim Boulevard On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp 19.1 B > Capacity F 20.6 B > Capacity F 20.6 B > Capacity F W-7 I-5 Northbound between State College Boulevard On- Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp 18.3 B > Capacity F 19.1 B > Capacity F 19.3 B > Capacity F W-8 I-5 Northbound between SR-22 Connector and Chapman Avenue Off-Ramp 20.8 B > Capacity F 22.2 B > Capacity F 22.5 B > Capacity F ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 85 6.2 2030 ANALYSIS IMPACTS Project impacts for the 2030 buildout scenario are determined using the definition of significant impacts from the City of Anaheim’s Growth Management Element in the General Plan, discussed in Chapter 2.0, that states that LOS E or LOS F is unacceptable. Intersections According to the analysis, there are 21 intersections with project related impacts associated with the Proposed Project. The intersections with project impacts are presented in Table 6.5. Table 6.5: 2030 Project Related Intersection Impacts ID Intersection Jurisdiction Existing Conditions 2030 No Project 2030 With Project AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS I – 1 Euclid Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.89 D 1.02 F 0.85 D 0.92 E 0.87 D 0.94 E I – 2 Ninth Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.53 A 0.53 A 0.93 E 0.95 E 0.95 E 0.97 E I – 5 Disneyland Drive / Ball Road Anaheim 0.68 B 0.76 C 0.87 D 0.90 D 0.87 D 0.92 E I – 6 Disneyland Drive / West Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.53 A 0.57 A 0.92 E 0.92 E 0.96 E 0.94 E I – 8 Harbor Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 0.73 C 0.68 B 1.05 F 0.93 E 1.10 F 0.96 E I - 18 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 0.63 B 0.91 E 0.88 D 0.99 E 0.88 D 1.01 F I - 19 Anaheim Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.49 A 0.71 C 0.86 D 1.05 F 0.86 D 1.03 F I - 20 Anaheim Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps Anaheim 0.44 A 0.59 A 0.66 B 0.92 E 0.66 B 0.95 E I – 22 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.47 A 0.58 A 0.88 D 0.89 D 0.90 D 0.92 E I – 23 Haster Street / Gene Autry Way Anaheim Not Applicable 0.91 E 1.10 F 0.97 E 1.17 F I - 26 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.46 A 0.50 A 0.96 E 0.85 D 0.95 E 0.90 D I – 29 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.28 A 0.31 A 0.85 D 0.91 E 0.85 D 0.95 E I – 30 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.48 A 0.62 B 0.84 D 1.28 F 0.85 D 1.28 F I – 37 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.43 A 0.53 A 0.86 D 0.98 E 0.94 E 0.99 E I - 38 State College Boulevard / Gene Autry Way Anaheim 0.30 A 0.29 A 0.98 E 0.84 D 1.02 F 0.84 D I – 39 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim/ Orange 0.46 A 0.47 A 0.89 D 0.97 E 0.91 E 0.97 E I – 43 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue Orange 0.71 C 0.66 B 0.86 D 0.92 E 0.88 D 0.96 E I – 45 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.38 A 0.55 A 0.62 B 0.91 E 0.62 B 0.95 E I – 46 Rampart Street / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 0.51 A 0.44 A 0.73 C 1.05 F 0.78 C 1.13 F I – 53 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Southbound Ramps Orange 0.61 B 0.68 B 0.85 D 0.99 E 0.84 D 1.04 F I – 55 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.41 A 0.49 A 1.02 F 1.09 F 1.04 F 1.09 F Arterial Segments Based on the arterial segment traffic analysis, there is one arterial segment with a significant impact with implementation of the Proposed Project within the City of Anaheim. Table 6.6 displays the ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 86 deficient arterial segment in Anaheim. This arterial segment will require mitigation to operate at an acceptable LOS through upgrading segment classification to provide additional capacity. Table 6.6: 2030 Project Related Arterial Segment Impacts ID Arterial From To Existing Conditions 2030 No Project 2030 With Project ADT V/C LOS ADT V/C LOS ADT V/C LOS A–40a Katella Avenue Manchester Avenue Anaheim Way 30,260 0.54 A 46,960 0.83 D 53,740 0.95 E Ramp Termini Intersections The implementation of the Proposed Project contributes to deficiencies on the freeway ramp facilities within the study area. The criterion for identifying freeway deficiencies has been established by Caltrans and utilizes the HCM methodology. Table 6.7 displays the freeway ramp termini deficiencies under 2030 No Project and 2030 With Project conditions. Three locations, I-20, Anaheim Boulevard at I-5 Northbound Ramps, I-26, Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) at Katella Avenue, and I-53, Orangewood Avenue at SR-57 Southbound Ramps correlate to intersection deficiencies already identified through the ICU analysis. Improvements to these intersections should mitigate the identified deficiencies under both the capacity (ICU) and operational analysis methodology. Additionally, there is one location, I-25, Manchester Avenue (1-5 Southbound Ramps) at Katella Avenue not previously identified as deficient under the ICU analysis but deficient under the HCM analysis. Table 6.7: 2030 Project Related Peak Hour Freeway Ramp Termini Impacts ID Intersection Existing Conditions 2030 No Project 2030 With Project AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS I -20 Anaheim Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 15.4 B 25.8 C 15.3 B 75.3 E 10.5 B 83.1 F I -25 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 27.5 C 15.9 B 42.4 D 51.1 D 41.3 D 67.4 E I -26 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 17.9 B 20.2 C 22.6 C 71.3 E 24.7 C 89.0 F I -53 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Southbound Ramps 19.4 B 28.7 C 33.4 C 65.0 E 30.9 C 80.9 F Caltrans Ramp Termini Off-Ramp Queuing According to the analysis, there are no off-ramps where the expected queuing length from the With Project scenario is longer than the ramp capacity, therefore there are no adverse impacts to the mainline as a result of off-ramp intersection queues and no deficiencies requiring mitigation. There was one location where as a result of ramp termini intersection delay, a mitigation strategy was proposed on the off-ramp itself which did not adversely impact the queue length. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 87 Peak Hour Freeway Ramps Based on the analysis, eleven freeway ramps that are deficient under the 2030 No Project scenario, and twelve freeway ramps are deficient under the 2030 With Project scenario. Thus, when comparing the 2030 With Project and No Project scenarios, one additional ramp becomes deficient under the With Project scenario:  I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Disneyland Drive (PM peak hour) Additionally, the project contributes to cumulative freeway ramp traffic at the location that is deficient under 2030 With Project conditions. Table 6.8 identifies project impacts and cumulative deficiencies on freeway ramps. Freeway Mainline Table 6.9 presents the freeway mainline segments that are deficient under future 2030 conditions. There are two segments that are forecast to be deficient under 2030 With Project conditions that were not deficient under 2030 No Project conditions:  I-5 Northbound between Brookhurst Street and Euclid Street  I-5 Northbound between Euclid Street and Lincoln Avenue Caltrans currently does not have any additional improvements identified or planned for the identified impacted and deficient segments. According to the most current Route Concept Report for I-5 improvements to this facility are contingent on the availability of revenue from regional, state, and federal transportation funding sources. In addition, the City does not have jurisdiction over the State Highway System and, therefore, cannot directly implement mitigation measures associated with project related impacts on mainline segments. The next section will discuss State Highway System impacts and mitigation strategies in further detail, including the potential for inclusion in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. Freeway Weaving Segments Table 6.10 presents the freeway weaving segments that are deficient under 2030 conditions. There is one freeway weaving segment that is deficient under the 2030 With Project scenario that was not deficient under the 2030 No Project scenario:  I-5 Southbound between Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp Thus, this weaving deficiency is a project impact and seven weaving deficiencies are the result of cumulative growth on I-5. Since freeway weaving segment operations are dependent upon mainline and ramp capacities, reducing congestion on these facilities contributes to higher weaving speeds and could lead to an improved weaving LOS. Improving weaving facilities through the addition of auxiliary lanes within the weaving area could provide additional capacity and reduce the weaving density. Operational improvements through improved signage or other ITS measures may also be developed in consultation with Caltrans in order to improve the weaving LOS. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 88 Table 6.8: 2030 Project Related Peak Hour Freeway Ramp Impacts ID Freeway Segment Existing Conditions 2030 No Project 2030 With Project A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS R-2 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from State College Boulevard/Chapman Avenue 19.3 B 30.0 D 19.0 B > Capacity F 19.0 B > Capacity F R-3 I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Anaheim Way/Katella Avenue 21.2 C 32.8 D 22.5 C > Capacity F 22.5 C > Capacity F R-4 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Way/Orangewood Avenue 19.9 B 28.0 C 21.2 C > Capacity F 21.3 C > Capacity F R-5 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Katella Avenue 21.1 C 30.9 D 22.3 C > Capacity F 22.4 C > Capacity F R-6 I-5 Northbound HOV On-Ramp from Gene Autry Way 14.6 B 22.6 C 24.6 C 38.0 E 24.6 C 39.1 E R-7 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Boulevard 22.2 C > Capacity F 24.0 C > Capacity F 24.1 C > Capacity F R-8 I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Harbor Boulevard 23.1 C 33.2 D 24.3 C > Capacity F 24.3 C > Capacity F R-9 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Harbor Boulevard 19.6 B 32.2 D 20.8 C > Capacity F 21.1 C > Capacity F R-10 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Ball Road 20.8 C 32.7 D 23.0 C > Capacity F 23.3 C > Capacity F R-11 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Disneyland Drive 21.9 C 33.9 D 24.2 C > Capacity F 24.4 C > Capacity F R-14 I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Disneyland Drive 27.4 C 33.4 D 32.5 D 34.5 D 32.6 D > Capacity F R-21 I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Katella Avenue 24.0 C 13.1 B 31.0 D 35.1 E 31.4 D > Capacity F Table 6.9: 2030 Project Related Freeway Mainline Impacts ID Freeway Segment Direction Existing Conditions 2030 No Project 2030 With Project A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS F-2 I-5 between Brookhurst Street and Euclid Street NB/EB 20.6 C 31.6 D 21.3 C 33.0 D 21.3 C 35.3 E F-3 I-5 between Euclid Street and Lincoln Avenue NB/EB 19.1 C 32.2 D 21.3 C 34.8 D 21.3 C 36.7 E F-4 I-5 between Lincoln Avenue and Harbor Boulevard NB/EB 19.6 C 36.6 E 21.9 C 40.0 E 21.9 C 41.8 E F-5 I-5 between Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue NB/EB 16.8 B 34.5 D 19.6 C 38.3 E 19.6 C 39.8 E F-6 I-5 between Katella Avenue and State College Boulevard NB/EB 17.5 B 39.7 E 19.7 C 41.5 E 19.7 C 43.0 E F-7 I-5 between State College Boulevard and SR-22 NB/EB 16.2 B 34.0 D 19.1 C 37.7 E 19.1 C 39.0 E F-3 I-5 between Euclid Street and Lincoln Avenue SB/WB 32.9 D 34.1 D 38.2 E 37.5 E 38.3 E 37.5 E ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 89 Table 6.10: 2030 Project Related Peak Hour Freeway Weaving Impacts ID Freeway Segment Existing Conditions 2030 No Project 2030 With Project A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS Density (pc/mi/ln) LOS W-3 I-5 Northbound between Lincoln Avenue On-Ramp and Euclid Street Off-Ramp 19.8 B 34.1 D 21.9 B 37.3 E 21.9 B 39.1 E W-4 I-5 Northbound between Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Lincoln Avenue Off-Ramp 20.3 B 39.3 E 22.9 B > Capacity F 23.0 B > Capacity F W-5 I-5 Southbound between Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp 29.5 C 34.5 D 33.1 D 35.2 D 32.9 D 38.7 E W-6 I-5 Northbound between Anaheim Boulevard On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp 19.1 B > Capacity F 22.6 B > Capacity F 22.6 B > Capacity F W-7 I-5 Northbound between State College Boulevard On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp 18.3 B > Capacity F 20.9 B > Capacity F 21.1 B > Capacity F I-5 Southbound between Katella Avenue On-Ramp and State College Boulevard Off-Ramp 27.9 C 32.1 D 31.3 C 36.1 E 31.7 C 36.7 E W-8 I-5 Northbound between SR-22 Connector and Chapman Avenue Off-Ramp 20.8 B > Capacity F 24.5 C > Capacity F 24.6 C > Capacity F I-5 Southbound between State College Boulevard / Chapman Avenue On-Ramp and SR-22 Connector 29.6 C 32.0 D 36.0 E 34.3 D 36.0 E 36.1 E ---PAGE BREAK--- This page is intentionally kept blank to facilitate double sided printing ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 90 7.0 PROPOSED MITIGATION AND IMPROVEMENT STRATEGIES 7.1 TRAFFIC FEE PROGRAM The City of Anaheim has historically utilized a variety of strategies to provide improvements to the citywide circulation system. The City currently has a traffic fee program in place to fund General Plan improvements assumed under buildout No Project and With Project conditions. The City has a long- standing policy that as development occurs throughout the City, traffic studies are prepared to demonstrate the need for implementation of the improvements identified in the General Plan and developer fees and other local dedicated taxes will contribute to those improvements as needed. The fee, initially developed in 1993 provides a proper nexus between increased development in the City and associated traffic impacts to the citywide circulation system. Developers contribute fees to the City, which uses the fund to implement circulation improvements in the City or as the City of Anaheim’s local match for leveraging funding from OCTA and Caltrans for circulation system improvements. Hence, the improvements assumed in the buildout of the General Plan, prior to the approval of the Proposed Project are expected to be paid for and implemented through the City’s existing traffic impact fee program. The City of Anaheim has applied a fair-share methodology to evaluate the financial responsibility of mitigating Platinum Triangle project impacts. The methodology is consistent with that outlined in the Caltrans Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies. Appendix of the guidelines directs users to apply a formula to calculate equitable share responsibility for the traffic impacts of proposed projects. The fair-share calculation is based on the difference between the Future With Project and Future No Project total intersection entering volumes divided by the total growth entering volume from Existing to Future With Project conditions. The fair-share proportion is based on the value associated with the peak hour for which the deficiency has been identified. A computational example of the fair-share intersection analysis is provided in Table 7.1. Table 7.1: Fair-share Analysis Computational Example Sample Intersection EXISTING NO PROJECT Difference from Existing Difference from No Project Fair- share ICU NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR TOTAL AM 0.53 152 64 71 31 128 35 25 1268 171 76 602 30 2,653 PM 0.53 174 143 61 21 82 37 61 830 209 97 1375 54 3,144 POST-2030 EXISTING GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT AM 0.92 250 70 390 30 140 40 30 2410 250 240 690 30 4,570 1,917 PM 0.88 470 160 410 20 90 40 60 1050 [PHONE REDACTED] 60 5,380 2,236 POST-2030 WITH PROJECT AM 0.95 250 70 390 30 140 40 30 2530 260 260 690 30 4,720 2,067 150 7.3% PM 0.97 550 160 410 20 90 40 60 1070 [PHONE REDACTED] 60 5,610 2,466 230 9.3% ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 91 The example above indicates that the project’s fair-share on the proposed improvement at this intersection is 9.3%. Raw model roadway link difference plots showing the volume differences between the No Project and With Project scenarios are included in Appendix H. It should be noted, however, that fair-shares are calculated based on post-processed volumes, not raw model volumes. It should also be noted that fair-share for ramp segments is based on the ramp volumes. Additionally, the City of Anaheim currently has a Community Facilities District (CFD) in place associated with development in the Platinum Triangle. All projects, regardless of size, are required to contribute to the CFD. The CFD is expected to contribute funds to all infrastructure needs in the Platinum Triangle including transportation. The CFD is programmed to provide funding for improvements in the Platinum Triangle identified previously and the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project traffic study has identified additional improvements that will need to be funded on a fair-share basis. Under this Traffic Study and EIR, the City will provide fair-share funding for all of the intersection improvements in the City of Orange and the additional deficient intersections within the City of Anaheim not currently identified within the CFD, as well as fair-share funding to implement appropriate Caltrans facility improvements. If the costs of identified improvements cannot be covered by the total funding allocation under the existing CFD, other fee programs or update of the existing fee programs may have to be implemented to complete the recommended improvements For locations within the City of Anaheim and Orange, the fair-shares for improvements will dictate the fair-share cost, priorities, and timeframe of the improvements. Many of the deficient intersection and arterial segments identified through this study would fall under the CFD. The City has proposed improvement strategies that return all intersections to an acceptable LOS under the 2030 With Project scenario. The fair-share calculations indicate that the Proposed Project contributes up to 14% of trips to study area intersections in Orange, with some locations in Anaheim an even greater percentage. The Proposed Project would be expected to contribute that percentage toward the costs of the recommended improvements. Intersection and arterial segment improvements in the City of Orange, in addition to State Highway System facility improvements throughout the study area will have fees contributed to them by the Proposed Project, commensurate with the fair-share analysis. Although these improvements will be overridden in the EIR as Anaheim does not have jurisdiction over the facilities, the project will be responsible for contributions for the appropriate fair-share toward the recommended improvements. Those specific improvements and fair-shares for facilities in the City of Orange and Caltrans facilities are discussed later in this chapter. 7.2 INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS Intersection improvements are identified under both the 2015 Interim Year and 2030 Buildout scenarios and are described below. 2015 Interim Year Analysis As noted in the previous chapter, there are no intersection impacts identified in the Interim Year 2015 analysis that require mitigation. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 92 2030 Analysis In summary, throughout the study area 21 intersections are forecast to operate at a deficient LOS under 2030 With Project conditions. Included in the 21 intersections are three Caltrans ramp termini intersections. As a general rule, mitigation measures for arterials or intersections begin with identification of any measures that might have been recommended as part of other traffic studies in the area, particularly those contained in the traffic study prepared for the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project (DSEIR No. 339). These mitigation measures are then applied to determine whether they result in roadway segment or intersection operation within acceptable thresholds. If mitigation measures were not previously identified either as part of a traffic study or planned future improvements, mitigation is achieved by identifying new improvements that will provide adequate capacity for the critical movement for an intersection or for arterial segments. Critical movements are conflicting intersection turning movements that are identified to have the highest ICU for opposing movements; i.e. each of the approaches at a four-legged intersection will contain a critical movement that conflicts with an opposing movement. Since the combination of the ICU values for each critical movement defines the ICU, providing additional through lanes or turning lanes is dependent upon whether the critical movement is a through or turn (left or right) movement. The decision of whether additional lanes should be auxiliary lanes that just add capacity to the intersection without widening the street segment or extended to adjacent intersections is dependent upon the performance, proximity and improvement needs of adjacent intersections. Mitigation measures are further analyzed for feasibility. A preliminary feasibility assessment is reliant upon potential cost-effectiveness and right-of-way acquisition. Right-of-way acquisitions are least preferred as they incur relocation and compensation cost for displaced residences and businesses which are additional burdens to the community, hence wherever feasible additional capacity for through movements or turn movements are facilitated through re-striping or widening, provided the intersection has sufficient receiving lanes as vehicles pass through the intersection. Table 7.2 provides a list of improvements for the deficient intersections within the Cities of Anaheim and Orange. Improvement strategies for locations within the City of Orange will require coordination with the City and a fair-share contribution determined for the City of Anaheim’s share of the cost of the improvements in Orange. Figure 7.1 shows the improvement locations and identified mitigation strategy. Lane geometries for the intersections within the study area including mitigation strategies are included in Appendix B. Table 7.2: Recommended 2030 Intersection Mitigation Strategies ID Intersection Jurisdiction 2030 With Project Scenario Without Mitigation 2030 With Project Scenario With Mitigation Recommended Mitigation Strategy AM PM AM PM ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS I - 1 Euclid Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.87 D 0.94 E 0.87 D 0.89 D Restripe NBR to NBTR, add 400’ NB departure lane (widen) I - 2 Ninth Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.95 E 0.97 E 0.88 D 0.80 C Add 2nd NBL (Restripe #1 SB lane) I - 5 Disneyland Drive / Ball Road Anaheim 0.87 D 0.92 E 0.83 D 0.87 D Restripe NB to 2L, 2T, 1R and SB to 2L, 2T. Add NBL: Remove Split Phase I - 6 Disneyland Drive / West Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.96 E 0.94 E 0.85 D 0.90 D Restripe EBR to EBT, Restripe WBR to WBT and add 4th WB lane to the Simba parking lot entrance ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 93 Table 7.2: Recommended 2030 Intersection Mitigation Strategies, Continued ID Intersection Jurisdiction 2030 With Project Scenario Without Mitigation 2030 With Project Scenario With Mitigation Recommended Mitigation Strategy AM PM AM PM ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS I - 8 Harbor Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 1.10 F 0.96 E 0.90 D 0.90 D Add NBT, SBT, EBT, EBR I - 18 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim 0.88 D 1.01 F 0.82 D 0.90 D Add NBR, EBL, EBR I - 19 Anaheim Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.86 D 1.03 F 0.68 B 0.86 D Add NBL, SBL, WBR, Restripe WB approach to 2L, 1TR, 1R I - 20 Anaheim Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps Anaheim 0.66 B 0.95 E 0.55 A 0.85 D Add SBT (in median) I – 22 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.90 D 0.92 E 0.90 D 0.90 D Add WBR I – 23 Haster Street / Gene Autry Way Anaheim 0.97 E 1.17 F 0.78 C 0.88 D Add WBL, SBL, SBR I - 26 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.95 E 0.90 D 0.82 D 0.78 C Add EBT, WBT I – 29 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 0.85 D 0.95 E 0.85 D 0.89 D Add WBR I – 30 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.85 D 1.28 F 0.70 B 0.83 D Add NBL, NBT, SBL, SBR, WBT; Restripe SB to 2L, 1T, 1TR, 1R I – 37 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.94 E 0.99 E 0.90 D 0.85 D Add WBR, EBR; Restripe SB to 2L, 2T, 2R; EB to 3L, 3T, 1R I - 38 State College Boulevard / Gene Autry Way Anaheim 1.02 F 0.84 D 0.90 D 0.73 C Add SBR I – 39 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim/ Orange 0.91 E 0.97 E 0.88 D 0.90 D Add NBR and WBT I – 43 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue Orange 0.88 D 0.96 E 0.83 D 0.80 C Restripe WBT to WBTR I – 45 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue Anaheim 0.62 B 0.95 E 0.62 B 0.85 D Add WBR I – 46 Rampart Street / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 0.78 C 1.13 F 0.73 C 0.80 C Add NB Free Right, Add SBL I – 53 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Southbound Ramps Orange 0.84 D 1.04 F 0.79 C 0.89 D Add WBL (Restripe) I – 55 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Anaheim 1.04 F 1.09 F 0.84 D 0.87 D Add NBT and SBT; Reconfigure NBTR to NBT, Reconfigure SBTR to SBT; Add EBT and WBT 7.3 ARTERIAL SEGMENT IMPROVEMENTS 2015 Interim Year Analysis Based on the 2015 With Project traffic analysis, five arterial segments along Katella Avenue will need to be improved through upgrading segment classification to the buildout condition to operate at an acceptable LOS. Table 7.3 presents the daily V/C ratio and proposed improvement. For the proposed improvement, Katella Avenue between Disneyland Drive and Manchester Avenue will be widened from six to eight lanes. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 94 Table 7.3: 2015 Arterial Segment Mitigation Strategies ID Arterial From To Jurisdiction 2015 With Project Scenario Without Mitigation 2015 With Project Scenario With Mitigation V/C LOS V/C LOS Mitigation Strategy A-35 Katella Avenue Disneyland Drive Hotel Way Anaheim 0.88 D 0.66 B Upgrade to 8-lane arterial A-36 Katella Avenue Hotel Way Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 0.89 D 0.67 B Upgrade to 8-lane arterial A-37 Katella Avenue Harbor Boulevard Clementine Street Anaheim 0.87 D 0.65 B Upgrade to 8-lane arterial A-38 Katella Avenue Clementine Street Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim 0.86 D 0.64 B Upgrade to 8-lane arterial A-39 Katella Avenue Anaheim Boulevard Manchester Avenue Anaheim 0.83 D 0.62 B Upgrade to 8-lane arterial Source: City of Anaheim 2030 Analysis Based on the 2030 With Project traffic analysis, one additional arterial segment along Katella Avenue will need to be improved to operate at an acceptable LOS. Table 7.4 presents the PM peak hour traffic volume and proposed improvement. For the proposed improvement, the arterial segment of Katella Avenue between Manchester Avenue and Anaheim Way will be widened from six to eight lanes and upgraded to an eight-lane Stadium Smart Street to facilitate traffic operations. Table 7.4: 2030 Arterial Segment Mitigation Strategies ID Arterial From To 2030 With Project Scenario Without Mitigation 2030 With Project Scenario With Mitigation V/C LOS V/C LOS Mitigation Strategy A-40a Katella Avenue Manchester Avenue Anaheim Way 0.96 E 0.72 C Upgrade to 8-lane Stadium Source: City of Anaheim 7.4 PEAK HOUR FREEWAY RAMP TERMINI IMPROVEMENTS 2015 Interim Year Analysis Based on the 2015 With Project traffic analysis, the project has no significant traffic impact to the study intersections, therefore, no mitigation measures needs to be provided. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 95 2030 Analysis Table 7.5 presents the freeway ramp termini intersections with the mitigation measures that have been identified through the ICU analysis. As the intersections operate at an acceptable level of service with the previously identified mitigation measures, no additional mitigation measures are recommended for the deficient ramp termini locations. Table 7.5: 2030 Peak Hour Freeway Ramp Termini Mitigation Strategies ID Intersection 2030 With Project With Proposed Mitigation AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Mitigation Measures Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS I – 20 Anaheim Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps 10.5 B 83.1 F 9.8 A 51.7 D Add 4th SBT I - 25 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 41.3 D 67.4 E 39.2 D 35.3 D Add 4th EBT, Add 4th WBT I – 26 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue 24.7 C 89.0 F 16.0 B 52.0 D Add 4th EBT, Add 5th WBT I - 53 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Southbound Ramps 30.9 C 80.9 F 26.5 C 41.1 D Add WBL (Restripe)* * Consistent with mitigation strategy under ICU analysis ---PAGE BREAK--- ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! DISNEYLAND DR OR AN GE C TR DR VERMONT AVE EAST ST MANCHESTER AVE MAGIC WY KATELLA AVE PL 29 55 56 53 46 38 39 43 45 LEWIS ST WY CHAPMAN AVE PHOENIX CLUB DR SPORTSTOWN GATEWAY CENTER DR MARKET ST RA M P A R T S T - Add WBL, SBL, SBR CMP Intersection (No Mitigation Required) - Restripe NB to 2L, 2T, 1R - Restripe SB to 2L, 2T - Add WBR - Add NBT, SBT, EBT,EBR - Add NBR, EBL, EBR - Add NBL, SBL, WBR - Restripe WB to 2L, 1TR, 1R - Add SBT - Add WBR - Add EBT, WBT - Add NBL, NBT - Add SBL, SBR - Add WBT #37: - Add WBR, EBR - Restripe SB to 2L, 2T, 2R - Restripe EB to 3L, 3T, 1R #38: - Add SBR #39: - Add NBR - Add WBT - Restripe WBT to WBTR - Add NB Free Right - Add SBL - Add WBL - Add NBT; Reconfigure NBTR to NBT - Add SBT; Reconfigure SBTR to SBT - Add EBT - Add WBR - Add WBR BALL RD WEST ST E LINCOLN AVE STATE COLLEGE BLVD NINTH ST HARBOR BLVD EUCLID ST SOUTH ST ANAHEIM BLVD WALNUT ST ORANGEWOOD AVE LEWIS ST CERRITOS AVE N WEST ST HASTER ST WAGNER AVE N HARBOR BLVD MAIN ST NT AVE ECKHOFF ST SUNKIST ST N RIO VISTA ST LVD N SUN GENE AUTRY WY DISNEY WY ANAHEIM WY HOWELL AVE DUPONT DR CONVENTION CERRITOS AVE KATELLA AVE N 12 6 1 8 5 20 26 19 22 2 30 37 18 ? l GARDEN GROVE ANAHEIM CLEMENTINE WEST ST FLORE ST SANTA ANA RIVER CAST PL 23 - Restripe NBR to NBT - Add 4th WBT - Add 2nd NBL - Restripe EBR to 4th EBT - Restripe WBR to 4th WBT - Add WBR DOUGLASS RD ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 97 7.5 CITY OF ORANGE IMPROVEMENTS 2015 Interim Year Analysis As identified in the 2015 traffic analysis, there are no intersections in the City of Orange that are significantly impacted by implementation of the proposed project. 2030 Analysis As set forth above in Table 7.6, the proposed project results in cumulative impacts to three intersections located within the City of Orange or shared intersections between Orange and Anaheim. The identified improvements are not included within the City of Orange development impact fee program. For this study, the fair-share calculations show that the Proposed Project contributes 4% to 14% of trips to Orange intersections. The Cities of Orange and Anaheim will need to enter into a cooperative agreement to determine the implementation of these improvements. The City of Anaheim does not have jurisdiction over the deficient circulation system components in the City of Orange. Nevertheless, the City shall fund appropriate fair-shares of the identified improvements. The City shall endeavor to work with the City of Orange in developing a joint fee program whereby cross-municipal boundary impacts can be mitigated by development that is occurring in the adjoining jurisdiction. However, because the City of Anaheim cannot guarantee that the City of Orange will cooperate in the development of such a fee program or utilize funds collected by the City of Anaheim for City of Orange impacts for the intended purpose of such funds, a Statement of Overriding Considerations will be developed for the deficient City of Orange intersections in the Environmental Documentation. Table 7.6: Potential 2030 Intersection Mitigation and Fair-share for Orange Facilities ID Intersection Jurisdiction 2030 With Project 2030 With Project (Mitigated) Proposed Mitigation Strategy Possible Mitigation Issues Fair-Share Percentage AM PM AM PM ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS I - 39 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim/ Orange 0.91 E 0.97 E 0.88 D 0.90 D Add NBR and WBT Median, Corner business 4% I - 43 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue Orange 0.88 D 0.96 E 0.83 D 0.80 C Restripe WBT to WBTR Within ROW 14% I - 53 Orangewood Avenue / SR- 57 Southbound Ramps Orange 0.84 D 1.04 F 0.79 C 0.89 D Add WBL (Restripe) Within ROW 11% For ramp termini intersections within the City of Orange, the facilities identified in Table 7.7 would require improvements to ensure acceptable operations. However, as the City of Orange did not utilize the HCM methodology in their General Plan, the operational deficiencies described above were not addressed. As these locations operate at an acceptable LOS under the ICU analysis, they should be monitored to determine appropriate strategies toward improving flow through signal timing and coordination. The City of Anaheim does not have jurisdiction over the deficient circulation system components in the City of Orange, thus a Statement of Overriding Considerations will be developed for the deficient Orange locations in the Environmental Documentation. Should the City of Orange decide to improve ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 98 the operational capacity of any of the locations above, the City of Anaheim will be subject to a fair- share contribution towards the improvement cost. Table 7.7: Potential 2030 Ramp Termini Intersection Mitigation and Fair-Share for Orange Facilities ID Intersection 2030 With Project With Proposed Mitigation Fair- Share AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Proposed Mitigation Strategy Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS I - 53 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Southbound Ramps 30.9 C 80.9 E 26.5 C 41.1 C Add WBL (Restripe)* 11% * Consistent with mitigation strategy under ICU analysis 7.6 FREEWAY FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS As identified in the 2015 traffic analysis, there are nine freeway ramps and three freeway mainline segments deficiencies under the 2015 No Project and 2015 With Project scenarios. For the 2030 traffic analysis, there are several additional freeway mainline and ramp deficiencies under the 2030 No Project and 2030 With Project scenarios. For the 2030 With Project scenario, the traffic volume on all freeway segments within the study area increases when compared with Existing Conditions. The future Proposed Project forecast volumes are generally consistent with the No Project scenario forecast volumes, with some segments and ramps experiencing a slight increase in the peak hour. Improvements beyond the planned system improvements will be required to maintain an acceptable LOS for the State Highway System. Potential improvement measures would include the addition of one, two, or three lanes to freeway mainline segments. However, capacity improvements to the freeway mainline are not feasible improvement options. The rationale is that Caltrans has not identified any further improvements through a Corridor Study beyond those already assumed in the buildout analysis for I-5 and the City has no control over State facilities. Additional capacity improvements are infeasible due to physical, right-of-way, and other environmental constraints. For example, the expansion of the identified freeway segments would involve significant right-of-way acquisition, which would involve either the acquisition of residences and/or businesses, or this would involve bringing the freeway facilities close to such residences and businesses. It is not a legal prerogative or policy of the City to support further freeway widening when such widening would have negative impacts on adjacent businesses and residences. State facilities located within the City have been significantly expanded over the past several years and City businesses and areas which were subject to an acquisition or which were located near acquisitions have not fully recovered from the acquisition activities. As an example, remnant residential and commercial parcels exist along I-5 at the Euclid Street exit. Other examples also exist. In addition, bringing State facilities closer to residences and businesses is also not a social or legal prerogative of the City. The City does not desire to further exacerbate these land use and air quality incompatibility issues by encouraging the expansion of freeway facilities adjacent to suburban-style tract houses. As a result of these policy prerogatives and identified constraints, the project is not expected to mitigate the freeway mainline segments to an acceptable LOS. As part of the Proposed Project approval and certification of the EIR, the City will develop a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the capacity improvements of freeway mainlines and freeway ramp facilities. Neither the State or any other agency, such as OCTA, currently has a program in place for construction of the mainline, ramp, and weaving segment improvements at the 2030 time horizon to ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 99 satisfy baseline congested conditions; nor is there currently any mechanism in place that would ensure that funds contributed to Caltrans or to the State to ameliorate impacts on freeway mainlines will be used for their intended purpose. In addition, because I-5 is exclusively controlled by the State, there is no mechanism by which the City can construct or guarantee the construction of any improvements to I-5. Thus, a Statement of Overriding Considerations will be developed for the deficient Caltrans facilities in the Environmental Documentation. Pursuant to Caltrans’ Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies (2002), consultation between the City of Anaheim and Caltrans will be necessary to reach consensus on any potential operational improvement measures that can be implemented in the study area to assist in mitigation of traffic increases related to implementation of the Proposed Project. As identified in the 2015 traffic analysis, there are nine freeway ramps and three freeway mainline segment locations that are deficient under 2015 conditions. All these facilities are also deficient under the 2030 scenarios. Table 7.8 summarizes the proposed improvements for all deficient freeway facilities with either cumulative or project impacts. The shares have been computed per the methodology outlined in the Caltrans Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies, as noted in Section 7.1. Appendix of the guidelines directs users to use a formula to calculate equitable share responsibility for the traffic impacts of proposed projects based on mainline traffic volumes for mainline segments and weaving sections and ramp volumes for ramp segments. The guidelines are not intended to establish a legal standard for determining equitable responsibility, but rather to provide a starting point for discussions with Caltrans to address the traffic mitigation and fair-share responsibilities. The project shares range from 0% to 83% for the following locations that are deficient under the 2030 With Project conditions that were acceptable under the 2030 No Project conditions:  I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Disneyland Drive  I-5 Northbound between Brookhurst Street and Euclid Street  I-5 Northbound between Euclid Street and Lincoln Avenue  I-5 Northbound between Anaheim Boulevard On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp  I-5 Southbound between State College Boulevard/Chapman Avenue On-Ramp and SR-22 Connector Detailed mitigation worksheets for freeway ramps, mainline and weaving segments are included in Appendix E-6, Appendix F-6 and Appendix G-6. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 100 Table 7.8: Potential 2030 Freeway Facility Mitigation Strategies and Fair-Share Percentages ID Intersection 2030 With Project With Proposed Mitigation Impact Proposed Mitigation Strategy Fair- Share AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Freeway Ramp Location R-2 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from State College Boulevard/Chapman Avenue 19.0 B > Capacity F 16.8 B > Capacity F Cumulative Add 1 mixed- flow lane 0% R-3 I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Anaheim Way/Katella Avenue* 22.5 C > Capacity F 18.7 B 41.0 E Cumulative Add 1 mixed- flow lane 23% R-4 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Way/Orangewood Avenue 21.3 C > Capacity F 17.7 B > Capacity F Cumulative Add 1 mixed- flow lane 4% R-5 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Katella Avenue 22.4 C > Capacity F 18.1 B > Capacity F Cumulative Add 1 mixed- flow lane 15% R-6 I-5 Northbound HOV On-Ramp from Gene Autry Way 24.6 C 39.1 E 14.3 B 24.3 C Cumulative Add 1 mixed- flow lane 1% R-7 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Anaheim Boulevard 24.1 C > Capacity F 19.5 B > Capacity F Cumulative Add 1 mixed- flow lane 25% R-8 I-5 Northbound Off-Ramp to Harbor Boulevard 24.3 C > Capacity F 22 C 37.4 E Cumulative Add 1 mixed- flow lane 0% R-9 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Harbor Boulevard 21.1 C > Capacity F 19.3 B > Capacity F Cumulative Add 1 mixed- flow lane 29% R-10 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Ball Road 23.3 C > Capacity F 19 B > Capacity F Cumulative Add 1 mixed- flow lane 45% R-11 I-5 Northbound On-Ramp from Disneyland Drive 24.4 C > Capacity F 19.7 B > Capacity F Cumulative Add 1 mixed- flow lane 20% R-14 I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Disneyland Drive 32.6 D > Capacity F 25.6 C 29.5 D Project Add 1 mixed- flow lane 0% R-21 I-5 Southbound On-Ramp from Katella Avenue 31.4 D > Capacity F 25.4 C 27.7 C Cumulative Add 1 mixed- flow lane 7% Freeway Mainline Segment F -2 I-5 Northbound b/w Brookhurst Street and Euclid Street 21.3 C 35.3 E 17.8 B 29.4 D Project Add 1 mixed- flow lane 35% F -3 I-5 Northbound b/w Euclid Street and Lincoln Avenue 21.3 C 36.7 E 17.8 B 30.5 D Project Add 1 mixed- flow lane 28% F - 4 I-5 Northbound b/w Lincoln Avenue and Harbor Boulevard 21.9 C 41.8 E 18.2 C 34.8 D Cumulative Add 1 mixed- flow lane 17% F - 5 I-5 Northbound b/w Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue 19.6 C 39.8 E 16.3 B 33.1 D Cumulative Add 1 mixed- flow lane 12% F - 6 I-5 Northbound b/w Katella Avenue and State College Boulevard 19.7 C 43.0 E 16.4 B 35.8 E Cumulative Add 1 mixed- flow lane 10% F - 7 I-5 Northbound b/w State College Boulevard and SR-22 19.1 C 39.0 E 16.4 B 33.4 D Cumulative Add 1 mixed- flow lane 10% F - 3 I-5 Southbound b/w Euclid Street and Lincoln Avenue 38.3 E 37.5 E 30.6 D 30.0 D Cumulative Add 1 mixed- flow lane 1% ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 101 Table 7.8: Potential 2030 Freeway Facility Mitigation Strategies and Fair-Share Percentages, Continued ID Intersection 2030 With Project With Proposed Mitigation Impact Proposed Mitigation Strategy Fair- Share AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Freeway Weaving Segment W - 3 I-5 Northbound b/w Lincoln Avenue On-Ramp and Euclid Street Off-Ramp 21.9 B 39.1 E 18.2 B 32.4 D Cumulative Add 1 mixed- flow lane 28% W - 4 I-5 Northbound b/w Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Lincoln Avenue Off-Ramp 23.0 B > Capacity F 19.1 B 38.1 E Cumulative Add 1 mixed- flow lane 17% W - 5 I-5 Southbound b/w Disneyland Drive On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp 32.9 D 38.7 E 27.4 C 32.2 C Project Add 1 mixed- flow lane 83% W - 6 I-5 Northbound b/w Anaheim Boulevard On-Ramp and Harbor Boulevard Off-Ramp 22.6 B > Capacity F 18.9 B > Capacity F Cumulative Add 1 mixed- flow lane 12% W - 7 I-5 Northbound b/w State College Boulevard On-Ramp and Katella Avenue Off-Ramp 21.1 B > Capacity F 17.7 B > Capacity F Cumulative Add 1 mixed- flow lane 10% I-5 Southbound b/w Katella Avenue On-Ramp and State College Boulevard Off-Ramp 31.7 C 36.7 E 26.4 B 30.6 C Cumulative Add 1 mixed- flow lane 0% W - 8 I-5 Northbound b/w SR-22 Connector and Chapman Avenue Off-Ramp 24.6 C > Capacity F 21.4 B > Capacity F Cumulative Add 1 mixed- flow lane 10% I-5 Southbound b/w State College Boulevard / Chapman Avenue On-Ramp and SR-22 Connector 36.0 E 36.1 E 30.2 C 31.0 C Project Add 1 mixed- flow lane 47% The traffic on the State Highway System is regional in nature and the deficiencies are the result of expected regional growth. Caltrans has not entered into an agreement with the City and Caltrans has not adopted a program by which Caltrans can ensure that developer fair-share contributions will assist in the funding of potential capacity or operational improvements on the study area’s State Highway System. Because I-5 is at its Conceptual Buildout, there is no guarantee that impact fees from the Proposed Project will be dedicated to the improvements of the study area’s State Highway System. Standard capacity improvements, through the addition of one or more lanes on the freeway ramps, will not necessarily result in acceptable ramp operations for ramps that are forecast to operate deficiently. The density of the ramps is influenced by both the mainline and ramp volume, therefore, the traffic on the mainline must be reduced or the capacity of the mainline facility must be enhanced through the addition of an auxiliary lane to improve freeway ramp performance. The weaving analysis revealed that several weaving areas operate at deficient levels of service under 2030 With and No Project conditions as a result of high mainline forecast volumes and cumulative growth. Potential improvements include the implementation of an auxiliary lane within the weaving area to improve operations although this does not satisfy the capacity needs of the corresponding and adjacent mainline segment. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 102 7.7 MITIGATION MEASURES In order to address the proposed measures in the previous sections, a series of mitigation measures will be drafted and incorporated into the SEIR. These mitigation measures, once finalized, will apply to any owner or developer of real property within the boundaries of the ARSP. This section will generally describe the mitigation measures that will be developed for the SEIR in regards to transportation and traffic. Project Level Traffic Impact Analysis The mitigation measures previously identified are developed at a program level, which considers the complete buildout of the ARSP, as well as the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan and the General Plans for Anaheim and the City of Orange. It is expected that development will occur over a large period of time throughout the study area. Therefore, for any development expected to generate a significant number of trips, a project level traffic study shall be required. This study is intended to ensure that appropriate transportation improvements are built as necessary. 1. Prior to approval of a Final Site Plan for any project forecast to generate 100 or more peak hour trips, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager utilizing Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model Trip Generation Rates, property owner/developers shall prepare traffic improvement phasing analyses to identify when the improvements identified in this traffic analysis shall be designed and constructed. 2. Prior to Final Building and Zoning Inspection, the property owner/developer shall implement traffic improvements as identified in the project traffic study required by Mitigation Measure 1 to maintain satisfactory levels of service as defined by the City’s General Plan, based on thresholds of significance, performance standards, and methodologies established by the Orange County Congestion Management Program and the City of Anaheim Traffic Study Guidelines. The improvement phasing analyses will specify the timing, funding, construction, and fair-share responsibilities for all traffic improvements necessary to maintain satisfactory levels of service within the City of Anaheim and surrounding jurisdictions. The property owner/developer shall construct, bond for or enter into a funding agreement for necessary circulation system improvements, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager, unless alternative funding sources have been identified. 3. Prior to approval of a Final Site Plan for any project forecast to generate 100 or more peak hour trips, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager utilizing Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model Trip Generation Rates, in conjunction with the preparation of any traffic improvement phasing analyses as required in Mitigation Measure 1, property owners/developers will analyze to determine when the intersection improvements shall be constructed, subject to the conditions identified in Mitigation Measure 1. 4. Prior to approval of a Final Site Plan for any project forecast to generate 100 or more peak hour trips, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager utilizing Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model Trip Generation Rates, in conjunction with the preparation of any traffic improvement phasing analyses as required in Mitigation Measure 1, the following actions shall be taken in cooperation with the City of Orange: ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 103 a. The traffic improvement phasing analysis shall identify any impacts created by the project on facilities within the City of Orange. The fair-share percentage responsibility for mitigating these impacts shall be calculated in this analysis. b. The City of Anaheim shall estimate the cost of the project’s fair-share responsibility in cooperation with the City of Orange. c. The Proposed Project shall pay the City of Anaheim the fair-share cost prior to issuance of a building permit. The City of Anaheim shall hold the amount received in trust, and then, once a mutually agreed upon joint program is executed by both cities, the City of Anaheim shall allocate the fair-share contribution to traffic mitigation programs that result in improved traffic flow at the impacted locations, via an agreement mutually acceptable to both cities. 5. Prior to approval of a Final Site Plan for any project forecast to generate 100 or more peak hour trips, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager utilizing Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model Trip Generation Rates, in conjunction with the preparation of any traffic improvement phasing analyses as required in Mitigation Measure 1, and assuming that a regional transportation agency has not already programmed and funded the warranted improvements to the impacted freeway mainline or freeway ramp locations, property owners/developers and the City will take the following actions in cooperation with Caltrans: a. The traffic study will identify the project’s proportionate impact on the specific freeway mainline and/or freeway ramp locations and its fair-share percentage responsibility for mitigating these impacts based on thresholds of significance, performance standards, and methodologies established in the Orange County Congestion Management Program and the City of Anaheim Traffic Study Guidelines. b. The City shall estimate the cost of the project’s fair-share responsibility in cooperation with Caltrans. 6. Prior to the approval of the final subdivision map or issuance of a Building Permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall pay the identified fair-share responsibility as determined by the City as set forth in Mitigation Measure 4. The City shall allocate the property owners/developers fair-share contribution to traffic mitigation programs that result in improved traffic flow on the impacted mainline and ramp locations, via an agreement mutually acceptable to Caltrans and the City. 7. Prior to approval of the first final subdivision map or issuance of the first building permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall irrevocably offer for dedication (with subordination of easements), including necessary construction easements, the ultimate arterial highway right(s)-of-way adjacent to their property as shown in the Circulation Element of the Anaheim General Plan. Transportation Fee Program Any development in the City of Anaheim is required to pay transportation impact fees per the Anaheim Municipal Code. These fees go towards the funding of the implementation of improvements ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 104 addressed by the City of Anaheim Circulation Element. Nearly all of the recommended improvements to impacted intersections fall under the Platinum Triangle CFD, which will fund infrastructure improvements throughout the Platinum Triangle. As set forth below, the City shall sufficiently fund required Project related improvements. 8. Prior to issuance of the first building permit for each building, the property owner/developer shall pay the appropriate Traffic Signal Assessment Fees and Traffic Impact and Improvement Fees to the City of Anaheim in amounts determined by the City Council Resolution in effect at the time of issuance of the building permit with credit given for City- authorized improvements provided by the property owner/developer; and participate in all applicable reimbursement or benefit districts which have been established. 9. Subsequent to the certification of the FEIR, and prior to the approval of the first Final Site Plan, if the costs of the identified improvements in this traffic study cannot be covered by the total funding allocation under the existing City fee programs and funding sources, an update of the existing City traffic fee program or other fee programs shall be developed by the City of Anaheim to ensure completion of the recommended improvements. Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Program Established as an air quality measure, the Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program objectives are to increase ridesharing and use of alternative modes of transportation by employees, provide a menu of commute alternatives for employees to reduce project-generated trips, and to conduct an annual commuter survey to ascertain project trip generation, trip origin, and average vehicle ridership. Projects with over 250 employees are required to submit annual commuter surveys to the Air Quality Management District. The TDM program is coordinated with the Anaheim Transportation Network (ATN), as all projects requiring a TDM also are required to join ATN. The TDM program will consist of program strategies and elements designed to reduce overall vehicle usage. Each property owner/developer requiring a TDM will work with ATN to develop an approved menu of TDM strategies and elements for both existing and future employee’s commute options. These strategies and elements will be in effect from the first final building and zoning inspection, and will be in effect throughout the project operation. A menu of TDM program strategies and elements will include, but not be limited to, any of the items listed below. 10. Prior to the first final building and zoning inspection for each building, the property owner shall record a covenant on the property requiring that ongoing during project implementation, the property owner/developer shall implement and administer a comprehensive Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program for all employees. The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney’s Office. Objectives of the TDM program shall be:  Increase ridesharing and use of alternative transportation modes by guests.  Provide a menu of commute alternatives for employees to reduce project-generated trips.  Conduct an annual commuter survey to ascertain trip generation, trip origin, and Average Vehicle Ridership. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 105 11. Prior to the first final building and zoning inspection for each building, the property owner/developer shall provide to the City of Anaheim Public Works Department for review and approval a menu of TDM program strategies and elements for both existing and future employees’ commute options, to include, but not be limited to, the list below. The property owner/developer shall also record a covenant on the property requiring that the approved TDM strategies and elements be implemented ongoing during project operation. The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney’s Office prior to recordation. Every property owner and/or lessee shall designate an on-site contact that will be responsible for coordinating with the ATN and implementing all trip mitigation measures. The on-site coordinator shall be the one point of contact representing the project with the ATN. The TDM requirements shall be included in the lease or other agreement with all of the project participants.  On-site services. Provide, as feasible and permitted, on-site services such as food, retail, and other services.  Ridesharing. Develop a commuter listing of all employee members for the purpose of providing a “matching” of employees with other employees who live in the same geographic areas and who could rideshare.  Vanpooling. Develop a commuter listing of all employees for the purpose of matching numbers of employees who live in geographic proximity to one another and could comprise a vanpool or participate in the existing vanpool programs.  Transit Pass. Promote Orange County Transportation Authority (including commuter rail) passes through financial assistance and on-site sales to encourage employees to use the various transit and bus services from throughout the region.  Shuttle Service. Generate a commuter listing of all employees living in proximity to the project, and offer a local shuttle program to encourage employees to travel to work by means other than the automobile.  Bicycling. Develop a Bicycling Program to offer a bicycling alternative to employees. Secure bicycle racks, lockers, and showers should be provided as part of this program. Maps of bicycle routes throughout the area should be provided to inform potential bicyclists of these options.  Guaranteed Ride Home Program. Develop a program to provide employees who rideshare, or use transit or other means of commuting to work, with a prearranged ride home in a taxi, rental car, shuttle, or other vehicle, in the event of emergencies during the work shift.  Target Reduction of Longest Commute Trip. Promote an incentive program for ridesharing and other alternative transportation modes to put highest priority on reduction of longest employee commute trips.  Work Shifts. Stagger work shifts.  Compressed Work Week. Develop a “compressed work week” program, which provides for fewer work days but longer daily shifts as an option for employees. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 106  Telecommuting. Explore the possibility of a “telecommuting” program that would link some employees via electronic means computer with modem).  Parking Management. Develop a parking management program that provides incentives to those who rideshare or use transit means other than single-occupant auto to travel to work.  Access. Provide preferential access to high occupancy vehicles and shuttles.  Financial Incentive for Ridesharing and/or Public Transit. Offer employees financial incentives for ridesharing or using public transportation. Currently, federal law provides tax-free status for up to $65 per month per employee contributions to employees who vanpool or use public transit including commuter rail and/or express bus pools.  Financial Incentive for Bicycling. Offer employees financial incentives for bicycling to work.  Special “Premium” for the Participation and Promotion of Trip Reduction. Offer ticket/passes to special events, vacation, etc. to employees who recruit other employees for vanpool, carpool, or other trip reduction programs.  Incentive Programs. Design incentive programs for carpooling and other alternative transportation modes so as to put highest priority on reduction of longest commute trips. 12. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the property owner/developer shall provide to the City of Anaheim Public Works Department a plan to coordinate rideshare services for construction employees with the Anaheim Transportation Network (ATN) for review and a approval and shall implement ATN recommendations to the extent feasible. 13. Prior to the issuance of each building permit for hotel development that exceeds a density of 100 rooms per gross acre within the Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area 1) with the Convention Center (CC) Medium density category, the property owner shall record a covenant on the property requiring that ongoing during project implementation, the property owner/developer shall implement TDM measures sufficient to reduce the actual trip generation from the development to no more than the trips assumed by the City’s traffic model. The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney’s Office. 14. Ongoing during construction, if the Anaheim Police Department or the Anaheim Traffic Management Center (TMC) personnel are required to provide temporary traffic control services, the property owner/developer shall reimburse the City, on a fair-share basis, if applicable, for reasonable costs associated with such services. Participation in the Anaheim Transportation Network Each building with office and/or commercial uses shall join and financially participate in the ATN in conjunction with the on-going operation of the project. Every property owner and/or lessee shall be a voting member of the ATN, subject to the terms and provisions of the by-laws and association rules of the ATN. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 107 For all projects that are required to be ATN members, every property owner and/or lessee shall participate in ATN coordinated transportation demand management efforts designed to decrease traffic congestion and increase ridesharing. This is described in more detail in the next section. For all projects that are required to be ATN members, every property owner and/or lessee shall financially participate in the operation of a clean fuel shuttle system, if established. It is envisioned that a shuttle service will ultimately be established through this program which shall connect these employment centers with ARTIC. For all projects that are required to be ATN members, every property owner and/or lessee shall designate an on-site contact who shall be responsible for coordinating with the ATN and implementing all trip reduction mitigation measures. This requirement shall be included in the lease or other agreement with all of the project participants. Documentation indicating compliance shall be included in the annual monitoring report ongoing during project operation. The specific mitigation measure with respect to the ATN is as follows: 15. Prior to the first final building and zoning inspection, for each building, the property owner/developer shall join and financially participate in a clean fuel shuttle program, such as the Anaheim Resort Transit system, and shall participate in the Anaheim Transportation Network in conjunction with the on-going operation of the project. The property owner shall also record a covenant on the property that requires participation in the program during project operation. The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney’s Office prior to recordation. Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) Bus Stops Locating a bus stop on the far side of an intersection is preferred as it provides the least impact to traffic flow. But sometimes, the far side location is not feasible due to physical constraints or other mitigating circumstances. In certain instances, a bus turnout may be preferred as well. Bus turnouts should be carefully placed, as when they are too close to an intersection, they serve to actually increase pedestrian crossing time, which negatively affect traffic signal timing as well. Also, buses can have great difficulty leaving a bus turnout on congested streets resulting in poor transit service levels. Property owners will be required to upgrade any adjacent bus stops to meet the minimum standard requirements as set for by the City of Anaheim and the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA). The specific mitigation measure with respect to bus stop(s) is as follows: 16. Prior to the approval of a Final Site Plan, the property owner/developer shall meet with the Traffic and Transportation Manager to determine whether a bus stop(s) is required to be placed adjacent to the property. If a bus stop(s) is required, it shall be placed in a location that least impacts traffic flow and may be designed as a bus turnout or a far side bus stop as required by the Traffic and Transportation Manager and per the approval of the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA). ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 108 Ordinance No. 5454 Traffic Related Measures The following conditions are specific traffic conditions required under Ordinance 5454 that relate to all development activity within the ARSP area. 17. Prior to the recordation of a subdivision map or issuance of the first building permit, whichever occurs first, in the event that a parcel is subdivided and there is a need for common on-site circulation and/or parking, an unsubordinated covenant providing for reciprocal access and/or parking, as appropriate, approved by the Planning Director or Planning Services Manager, shall be recorded with the Office of the Orange County Recorder. A copy of the recorded covenant shall then be submitted to the Planning Division of the Planning Department. If the reciprocal access is across parcel lines or if public rights of way are required for reciprocal access, then Public Works approval would be required. (Ordinance 5454 Measure 30) 18. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the location of any proposed gates across a driveway shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Traffic and Transportation Manager. Gates shall not be installed across any driveway in a manner which may adversely affect vehicular traffic on the adjacent public streets and that installation of any gates shall conform to the current version of Engineering Standard Detail 475. (Ordinance 5454 Measure 34) 19. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, buildings plans shall indicate that all driveways shall be constructed with a minimum fifteen (15) foot radius curb returns as required by the City Engineer, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. (Ordinance 5454 Measure 35) 20. Prior to the issuance of a building permit or final map approval, whichever comes first, security in the form of a bond, certificate of deposit, letter of credit, completion guarantee, or cash, in an amount and form satisfactory to the City of Anaheim, shall be posted with the City to guarantee the satisfactory completion of all engineering requirements of the City of Anaheim, including preparation of improvement plans and installation of all improvements, such as curbs and gutters, sidewalks, water facilities, street grading and pavement, sewer and drainage facilities and other appurtenant work, as required by the City Engineer and in accordance with the specifications on file in the office of the City Engineer, as may be modified by the City Engineer. Installation of the said improvements shall occur prior to final building and zoning inspections. (Ordinance 5454 Measure 36) 7.8 UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS Although every effort was made through site analyses and aerial imagery evaluation to ensure that all recommended improvements are physically feasible, there are improvements identified in this study that may not be feasible due to high project cost, the inability to undertake right-of-way acquisitions as a matter of policy to preserve existing businesses, environmental constraints, or jurisdictional considerations. For these improvements, including several intersections in the City of Anaheim, all intersections and arterial segments in the City of Orange, and all Caltrans facilities, including freeway ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 109 ramps, mainline segments, and weaving segments, a Statement of Overriding Considerations will document why a particular improvement is infeasible as mitigation. With implementation of the improvements presented in Table 7.9, the significant project related or cumulative impacts associated with the Proposed Project would be fully mitigated. However, inasmuch as the primary responsibility for approving and/or completing certain improvements located outside of Anaheim lies with agencies other than the City of Anaheim City of Orange and Caltrans), there is the potential that significant impacts may not be fully mitigated if such improvements are not completed for reasons beyond the City of Anaheim’s control the City of Anaheim cannot undertake or require improvements outside of Anaheim’s jurisdiction or the City cannot construct improvements in the Caltrans right-of-way without Caltrans Approval). Should that occur, the Project’s traffic impact would remain significant. Table 7.9 presents all mitigation strategies identified through analysis of the Proposed Project traffic impacts. Locations that are expected to be overridden in the Environmental Document due to being infeasible or not within Anaheim’s jurisdiction, are noted in the table and discussed in the subsequent pages of this section. City of Anaheim Intersections The following City of Anaheim intersection improvements are likely not feasible due to right-of-way or other constraints.  Intersection I-1: Euclid Street / Katella Avenue — Restripe northbound right turn lane to northbound through/right turn lane, add 400 foot long northbound departure lane by widening Euclid Street The improvement at Euclid Street and Katella Avenue is infeasible due to the presence of a large number of existing and newly constructed businesses including a recently rebuilt mini-mall on the northeast corner of the intersection, which support economic development for the City of Anaheim. The potential right-of-way required for receiving lane on the northeast corner of the intersection would significantly impact the business and parking on the east side of Euclid Street, north of Katella Avenue. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 110 Table 7.9: Project Mitigation Strategies ID Location Jurisdiction Impact Mitigation Strategy Comments Intersections I - 1 Euclid Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim Project Restripe NBR to NBTR, add 400’ NB departure lane (widen) Infeasible I - 2 Ninth Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim Project Add 2nd NBL (Restripe #1 SB lane) I - 5 Disneyland Drive / Ball Road Anaheim Project Add NBL: Restripe NB to 2L, 2T, 1R and SB to 2L, 2T; Remove Split Phase Infeasible I - 6 Disneyland Drive / West Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim Project Restripe EBR to EBT, Restripe WBR to WBT and add 4th WB lane to the Simba parking lot entrance Infeasible I - 8 Harbor Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim Project Add NBT, SBT, EBT, EBR Infeasible I - 18 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road* Anaheim Project Add NBR, EBL, EBR I - 19 Anaheim Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim Project Add NBL, SBL, WBR, Restripe WB approach to 2L, 1TR, 1R I - 20 Anaheim Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps Anaheim Project Add SBT (in median) I - 22 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim Project Add WBR Infeasible I - 23 Haster Street / Gene Autry Way Anaheim Project Add WBL, SBL, SBR I - 26 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue Anaheim Project Add EBT, WBT I - 29 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim Project Add WBR I - 30 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue* Anaheim Project Add NBL, NBT, SBL, SBR, WBT; Restripe SB to 2L, 1T, 1TR, 1R I - 37 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue** Anaheim Project Add WBR, EBR; Restripe SB to 2L, 2T, 2R; EB to 3L, 3T, 1R Partial Infeasible I - 38 State College Boulevard / Gene Autry Way Anaheim Project Add SBR I - 39 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim/ Orange Project Add NBR and WBT Infeasible I - 43 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue Orange Project Restripe WBT to WBTR Outside City’s Jurisdiction I - 45 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue Anaheim Project Add WBR I - 46 Rampart Street / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim Project Add NB Free Right, Add SBL I - 53 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Southbound Ramps Orange Project Add WBL (Restripe) Outside City’s Jurisdiction I - 55 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Anaheim Project Add NBT and SBT; Reconfigure NBTR to NBT, Reconfigure SBTR to SBT; Add EBT and WBT Arterial Segments A-35 Katella Avenue between Disneyland Drive and Hotel Way*** Anaheim Project Upgrade to 8-lane arterial A-36 Katella Avenue between Hotel Way and Harbor Boulevard*** Anaheim Project Upgrade to 8-lane arterial A-37 Katella Avenue between Harbor Boulevard and Clementine St Anaheim Project Upgrade to 8-lane arterial A-38 Katella Avenue between Clementine Street and Anaheim Boulevard*** Anaheim Project Upgrade to 8-lane arterial A-39 Katella Avenue between Anaheim Boulevard and Manchester Avenue*** Anaheim Project Upgrade to 8-lane arterial A-40a Katella Avenue between Manchester Avenue and Anaheim Way Anaheim Project Upgrade to 8-lane Stadium Ramp Termini Intersections I - 20 Anaheim Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps**** Anaheim Project Add 4th SBT I - 25 Manchester Avenue (I-5 Southbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue Anaheim Project Add 4th EBT, Add 5th WBT I - 26 Anaheim Way (I-5 Northbound Ramps) / Katella Avenue**** Anaheim Project Add 4th EBT, Add 5th WBT I - 53 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Southbound Ramps**** Orange Project Add WBL (Restripe) Outside City’s Jurisdiction * Intersection deficient in 2015 but no project related significant impact. The improvements from 2030 should be expedited to 2015 at these locations for the intersection to operate at an acceptable LOS in 2015 with the exception of the improvement at Katella Avenue and Lewis Street, which is infeasible in 2015. Override recommended for restriping one EBT to EBL only Arterial Segment deficient in 2015 Intersection identified as deficient under both ICU and HCM analysis. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 111  Intersection I-5: Disneyland Drive / Ball Road — Add northbound left: Restripe northbound to two left turn lanes, two through lanes and one right turn lane and restripe southbound to two left turn lanes and two through lanes; Remove Split Phase The improvement is infeasible due to the presence of a large number of Anaheim Resort supportive land uses that contribute to the economic development of the City. In order to accommodate the proposed improvement, the intersection would likely need to be expanded, potentially impacting the HOV ramp overpass to the Disneyland Resort. Both the City and Disney have invested heavily in supporting The Anaheim Resort and altering the street system in the area would be a cost prohibitive undertaking and disruptive to the effective operation of The Anaheim Resort.  Intersection I-6: Disneyland Drive / West Street / Katella Avenue — Restripe westbound right turn to westbound through lane and add fourth westbound lane to the Simba parking lot entrance The improvement is infeasible due to the presence of a large number of immediately adjacent Anaheim Resort supportive land uses that contribute to the economic development of the City. This access to the Disneyland Resort has been significantly reconfigured in recent years to accommodate new development at the park and adjacent parking areas. The addition of lane capacity at this intersection would require substantial right-of-way and affect the attractive gateway that the Disneyland Resort has created through extensive landscaping.  Intersection I-8: Harbor Boulevard / Ball Road — Add northbound through lane, southbound through lane, eastbound through lane, and eastbound right turn lane The improvement is infeasible due to the presence of a large number of immediately adjacent Anaheim Resort supportive land uses that contribute to the economic development of the City. To accommodate the proposed improvements, the intersection would have to be substantially expanded impacting the right-of-way of several hotel buildings including the Days Inn Suites and Hotel Menage. Altering the street system in the area would be a cost prohibitive undertaking and disruptive to the effective operation of The Anaheim Resort.  Intersection I-22: Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue — Add westbound right turn lane The City has invested heavily in supporting development in The Anaheim Resort and reconfiguring an intersection in this area would be disruptive to those goals. This improvement also serves a turning movement that could be considered redundant, as most of the vehicles using this movement would be better served using Anaheim Way to the east to access Anaheim Boulevard.  Intersection I-37: State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue — Restripe eastbound to three left turn lanes, three through lanes, and one right turn lane This proposed restripe will reduce the number of through lanes on eastbound Katella Avenue from four lanes to three lanes. This proposed change will negatively affect signal coordination and timing for both streets. Katella Avenue is identified as an eight lane smart street by OCTA. All through lanes must be kept to ensure the higher capacities envisioned by OCTA on its smart street corridors. To add a third eastbound left turn lane without removing a through lane will significantly impact a recently developed residential mixed-use development on the northwest corner and a gas station on the southwest corner. This widening will also make Katella Avenue ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 112 difficult for pedestrians to cross, as with this improvement, pedestrian traffic would have to cross 12 lanes.  Intersection I-39: State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue — Add northbound right turn lane and westbound through lane The improvement is infeasible due to the presence of a large number of immediately adjacent existing structures, including several high-density office buildings within close proximity to the public right of way. Additionally, State College Boulevard is a designated bus rapid transit corridor. Improvements to the circulation system in this area should be consistent with the goals of promoting transit use and limiting increased auto trips to this area. All of these intersections have a project related impact under the 2030 With Project scenario. As set forth above, there are numerous physical constraints associated with the proposed improvements, including private properties, extensive circulation landscaping and mature trees, and a variety of hotels and other businesses that would likely be impacted. These physical constraints limit the ability to ensure that the improvements necessary to mitigate the project impacts at these locations can be mitigated to less than significant levels. City of Orange Facilities The following intersections within the City of Orange have a project related impact under the 2030 With Project scenario. As noted, there are physical constraints associated with the proposed improvements, including impacts to private properties, including businesses and residences, and natural impediments such as the Santa Ana River. These physical constraints limit the ability to ensure that the improvements necessary to mitigate the project traffic impacts at these locations can be mitigated to level of less than significant. Since the City of Anaheim does not control the improvements that the City of Orange chooses to implement in their city, the City of Anaheim will need to enter into or amend an existing an agreement with Orange to contribute a fair-share to the improvements identified within the City of Orange. This fair-share would reflect an appropriate nexus between the additional traffic caused by the Proposed Project and the regional traffic contributing to future deficiencies in Orange. Intersections that are shared between the Cities of Anaheim and Orange will be dealt with in the same fashion.  Intersection I-39: State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue (shared intersection between Anaheim and Orange) — Add northbound right and westbound through lanes As identified above, this improvement would significantly impact the high-density office buildings at the southeast and northwest corners of the intersection. It should be noted that these mitigation measures do not impact any area within the City of Orange.  Intersection I-43: State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue — Restripe westbound through to shared westbound through-right Since the westbound right turn does not have an overlap right turn phase, implementation of this mitigation strategy will not have an adverse impact.  Intersection I-53: Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Southbound Ramps — Restripe intersection to add westbound left The existing curb lines up with the curb of the new bridge that will cross the Santa Ana River. The number 1 lane will become a left turn lane at this intersection, leaving two through lanes ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 113 without an offset. Only signal loops, striping, and timing changes are required at this intersection, and there are no impacts to right of way. The City of Anaheim will continue to work with the City of Orange to develop the most appropriate strategy toward improving the locations impacted by the proposed project. Caltrans Mainline Segments, Ramps, and Weaving Segments State highway facilities within the study area are not within the jurisdiction of the City of Anaheim. Rather, those improvements are planned, funded, and constructed by the State of California through a legislative and political process involving the State Legislature; the California Transportation Commission (CTC); the California Business, Transportation, and Housing Agency; the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans); and OCTA. In California, most State Highway System improvements are programmed through two documents, the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) or the State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP). State and federal fuel taxes generate most of the funds used to pay for these improvements. Funds expected to be available for transportation improvements are identified through a Fund Estimate prepared by Caltrans and adopted by the CTC. These funds, along with other fund sources, are deposited in the State Highway Account to be programmed and allocated to specific project improvements in both the STIP and SHOPP by the CTC. The STIP is developed from Regional Transportation Improvement Programs (RTIPs) proposed by Regional Transportation Planning Agencies (RTPAs/MPOs) throughout California and the Interregional Transportation Improvement Program (ITIP) proposed by Caltrans. Of the funds made available by the CTC for the STIP, 25 percent is made available for Caltrans to propose expansion and capacity-enhancing improvements on the statutorily designated Interregional Road System while 75 percent of the funds are made available to the RTPAs/MPOs to propose all types of improvements on all other State Highway System Roads, other non-State highway roads eligible to use federal funds, and on the Interregional Road System. Transportation funds generally come from a variety of sources including National Highway System funds; State fuel taxes; federal fuel taxes; sales taxes on fuel; truck weight fees; roadway and bridge tolls; user fares; local sales tax measures; development fees, where applicable; bond revenues; and State and local general and matching funds. Improvements to State Highway Systems are deemed to be matters of federal, State, regional, and local concern. On the federal level, the City, through its Congressional delegation, has aggressively sought federal monies for regional roadway improvements. Within the study area, relatively recent projects have provided improvements to the freeway facilities. Interstate 5 within the study area was widened in the late 1990’s under the OCTA Measure M. Additionally, the I-5, SR-57, SR-22 interchange to the south of the study area was recently upgraded to improve flow on all facilities. The State Highway System I-5 freeway and ramps that are cumulatively deficient under 2030 conditions are at their recommended buildout, according to the Route Concept Report (RCR) for the Interstate 5 facility approved by Caltrans in 2000. On I-5, the RCR identifies a concept facility of eight general-purpose lanes and two high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes for the segment between the SR-22/57 interchange, south of the study area, to SR-91, north of the study area. For improvements to the Caltrans facilities, the City of Anaheim, lead agency for this project, will have to decide whether changes, alterations, or mitigation measures are within the responsibility ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 114 and jurisdiction of another public agency such as Caltrans and not the City of Anaheim. It must determine if such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency and/or whether any further mitigation to the impacted State Highway System are feasible, and if not, whether specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the project outweigh the unavoidable cumulative traffic impacts caused by the project. The City of Anaheim has already taken steps to alleviate some of the impacts of increased development within the study area and other fast developing areas of the City of Anaheim such as the Platinum Triangle. The Gene Autry Way Extension Project and recent capacity improvements to State College Boulevard and Katella Avenue are just some of the examples of the City of Anaheim’s commitment to an effective circulation system within the City. The City of Anaheim has an existing traffic fee program that outlines its strategy toward implementing many of the improvements necessitated by increased development in the study area and a Community Facilities District for improvements required within the Platinum Triangle. With completion of the improvements described in the mitigation, the significant impacts associated with the Proposed Project would be fully mitigated with the exception of the intersections identified above in the Cities of Anaheim and Orange and the improvements to State highway facilities. However, inasmuch as the primary responsibility for approving and/or completing certain improvements located outside of Anaheim lies with agencies other than the City of Anaheim City of Orange and Caltrans); there is the potential that significant impacts may not be fully mitigated if such improvements are not completed for reasons beyond the City of Anaheim’s control. Should that occur, the Project’s traffic impact would remain significant. The City is committed to working with the City of Orange and Caltrans to identify the most appropriate improvement strategies for their facilities and acknowledges the fair-share cost of improvements to those facilities, however, the City of Orange and Caltrans have full jurisdiction toward implementing the identified improvements under their jurisdiction. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 115 8.0 CONCLUSION PROJECT RELATED TRAFFIC IMPACTS AND MITIGATION STRATEGIES 2015 Interim Year Impacts Based on the analysis, it is observed that there are no required intersection improvements required under the 2015 Interim Year conditions. There are five arterial segments that will need to be improved to the General Plan buildout configuration by 2015. 2030 Impacts Intersection Impacts The study determined that 21 intersections are significantly impacted by the 2030 buildout of the With Project scenario. Improvements have been proposed for all 21 locations and with the implementation of the mitigation strategies, all intersections within the study area operate at an acceptable LOS. However, seven of the intersection improvements within the City of Anaheim may not be feasible due to potential constraints and will be included in a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Proposed Project. The Statement of Overriding Considerations will also apply to the three intersections identified as deficient within the City of Orange under the ICU analysis methodology. Arterial Segment Impacts Based on the analysis, it is observed that there is one required arterial segment improvements in the City of Anaheim. Caltrans Intersection Impacts Four Caltrans ramp termini intersection deficiencies were identified through peak hour analysis. Of the four locations, three were also identified by the ICU analysis as deficient. Proposed improvements have been compared to those strategies identified through the ICU analysis and improvements applied to both the types of analyses. Additional mitigation strategies have been proposed for the location identified only through the HCM analysis where a project related impact has been identified. Caltrans Mainline and Ramp Improvements Since the major freeway facility within the study area, I-5 has reached its design capacity and the required physical improvements are largely the result of background regional traffic, consultation between the City of Anaheim and Caltrans will be necessary to reach consensus on any potential operational improvement measures. The improvement measures could consist of ITS improvements, enhanced signage, or other operational improvements. The City of Anaheim has no jurisdiction to implement the physical improvements on the Caltrans facilities and a statement of overriding ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 116 considerations will be discussed in the EIR identifying the potential operational improvements to Caltrans facilities. Mitigation Monitoring Program The Mitigation Monitoring Program identifies mitigation measures that have been identified through the analysis of potential impacts caused by implementation of the Proposed Project. The discussion in Chapter 7.0, identifies the mitigation measures and this section combines the various strategies into a proposed monitoring program that will be carried forward into the EIR. 1. Prior to approval of a Final Site Plan for any project forecast to generate 100 or more peak hour trips, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager utilizing Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model Trip Generation Rates, property owner/developers shall prepare traffic improvement phasing analyses to identify when the improvements identified in this traffic analysis shall be designed and constructed. 2. Prior to Final Building and Zoning Inspection, the property owner/developer shall implement traffic improvements as identified in the project traffic study required by Mitigation Measure 1 to maintain satisfactory levels of service as defined by the City’s General Plan, based on thresholds of significance, performance standards, and methodologies established by the Orange County Congestion Management Program and the City of Anaheim Traffic Study Guidelines. The improvement phasing analyses will specify the timing, funding, construction, and fair-share responsibilities for all traffic improvements necessary to maintain satisfactory levels of service within the City of Anaheim and surrounding jurisdictions. The property owner/developer shall construct, bond for or enter into a funding agreement for necessary circulation system improvements, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager, unless alternative funding sources have been identified. 3. Prior to approval of a Final Site Plan for any project forecast to generate 100 or more peak hour trips, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager utilizing Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model Trip Generation Rates, in conjunction with the preparation of any traffic improvement phasing analyses as required in Mitigation Measure 1, property owners/developers will analyze to determine when the intersection improvements shall be constructed, subject to the conditions identified in Mitigation Measure 1. 4. Prior to approval of a Final Site Plan for any project forecast to generate 100 or more peak hour trips, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager utilizing Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model Trip Generation Rates, in conjunction with the preparation of any traffic improvement phasing analyses as required in Mitigation Measure 1, the following actions shall be taken in cooperation with the City of Orange: a. The traffic improvement phasing analysis shall identify any impacts created by the project on facilities within the City of Orange. The fair-share percentage responsibility for mitigating these impacts shall be calculated in this analysis. b. The City of Anaheim shall estimate the cost of the project’s fair-share responsibility in cooperation with the City of Orange. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 117 c. The Proposed Project shall pay the City of Anaheim the fair-share cost prior to issuance of a building permit. The City of Anaheim shall hold the amount received in trust, and then, once a mutually agreed upon joint program is executed by both cities, the City of Anaheim shall allocate the fair-share contribution to traffic mitigation programs that result in improved traffic flow at the impacted locations, via an agreement mutually acceptable to both cities. 5. Prior to approval of a Final Site Plan for any project forecast to generate 100 or more peak hour trips, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager utilizing Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model Trip Generation Rates, in conjunction with the preparation of any traffic improvement phasing analyses as required in Mitigation Measure 1, and assuming that a regional transportation agency has not already programmed and funded the warranted improvements to the impacted freeway mainline or freeway ramp locations, property owners/developers and the City will take the following actions in cooperation with Caltrans: a. The traffic study will identify the project’s proportionate impact on the specific freeway mainline and/or freeway ramp locations and its fair-share percentage responsibility for mitigating these impacts based on thresholds of significance, performance standards, and methodologies established in the Orange County Congestion Management Program and the City of Anaheim Traffic Study Guidelines. b. The City shall estimate the cost of the project’s fair-share responsibility in cooperation with Caltrans. 6. Prior to the approval of the final subdivision map or issuance of a Building Permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall pay the identified fair-share responsibility as determined by the City as set forth in Mitigation Measure 4. The City shall allocate the property owners/developers fair-share contribution to traffic mitigation programs that result in improved traffic flow on the impacted mainline and ramp locations, via an agreement mutually acceptable to Caltrans and the City. 7. Prior to approval of the first final subdivision map or issuance of the first building permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall irrevocably offer for dedication (with subordination of easements), including necessary construction easements, the ultimate arterial highway right(s)-of-way adjacent to their property as shown in the Circulation Element of the Anaheim General Plan. 8. Prior to issuance of the first building permit for each building, the property owner/developer shall pay the appropriate Traffic Signal Assessment Fees and Traffic Impact and Improvement Fees to the City of Anaheim in amounts determined by the City Council Resolution in effect at the time of issuance of the building permit with credit given for City- authorized improvements provided by the property owner/developer; and participate in all applicable reimbursement or benefit districts which have been established. 9. Subsequent to the certification of the FEIR, and prior to the approval of the first Final Site Plan, if the costs of the identified improvements in this traffic study cannot be covered by the total funding allocation under the existing City fee programs and funding sources, an update of the existing City traffic fee program or other fee programs shall ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 118 be developed by the City of Anaheim to ensure completion of the recommended improvements. 10. Prior to the first final building and zoning inspection for each building, the property owner shall record a covenant on the property requiring that ongoing during project implementation, the property owner/developer shall implement and administer a comprehensive TDM program for all employees. The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney’s Office. Objectives of the TDM program shall be:  Increase ridesharing and use of alternative transportation modes by guests.  Provide a menu of commute alternatives for employees to reduce project-generated trips.  Conduct an annual commuter survey to ascertain trip generation, trip origin, and Average Vehicle Ridership. 11. Prior to the first final building and zoning inspection for each building, the property owner/developer shall provide to the City of Anaheim Public Works Department for review and approval a menu of TDM program strategies and elements for both existing and future employees’ commute options, to include, but not be limited to, the list below. The property owner/developer shall also record a covenant on the property requiring that the approved TDM strategies and elements be implemented ongoing during project operation. The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney’s Office prior to recordation. Every property owner and/or lessee shall designate an on-site contact that will be responsible for coordinating with the ATN and implementing all trip mitigation measures. The on-site coordinator shall be the one point of contact representing the project with the ATN. The TDM requirements shall be included in the lease or other agreement with all of the project participants.  On-site services. Provide, as feasible and permitted, on-site services such as food, retail, and other services.  Ridesharing. Develop a commuter listing of all employee members for the purpose of providing a “matching” of employees with other employees who live in the same geographic areas and who could rideshare.  Vanpooling. Develop a commuter listing of all employees for the purpose of matching numbers of employees who live in geographic proximity to one another and could comprise a vanpool or participate in the existing vanpool programs.  Transit Pass. Promote Orange County Transportation Authority (including commuter rail) passes through financial assistance and on-site sales to encourage employees to use the various transit and bus services from throughout the region.  Shuttle Service. Generate a commuter listing of all employees living in proximity to the project, and offer a local shuttle program to encourage employees to travel to work by means other than the automobile.  Bicycling. Develop a Bicycling Program to offer a bicycling alternative to employees. Secure bicycle racks, lockers, and showers should be provided as part of this program. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 119 Maps of bicycle routes throughout the area should be provided to inform potential bicyclists of these options.  Guaranteed Ride Home Program. Develop a program to provide employees who rideshare, or use transit or other means of commuting to work, with a prearranged ride home in a taxi, rental car, shuttle, or other vehicle, in the event of emergencies during the work shift.  Target Reduction of Longest Commute Trip. Promote an incentive program for ridesharing and other alternative transportation modes to put highest priority on reduction of longest employee commute trips.  Work Shifts. Stagger work shifts.  Compressed Work Week. Develop a “compressed work week” program, which provides for fewer work days but longer daily shifts as an option for employees.  Telecommuting. Explore the possibility of a “telecommuting” program that would link some employees via electronic means computer with modem).  Parking Management. Develop a parking management program that provides incentives to those who rideshare or use transit means other than single-occupant auto to travel to work.  Access. Provide preferential access to high occupancy vehicles and shuttles.  Financial Incentive for Ridesharing and/or Public Transit. Offer employees financial incentives for ridesharing or using public transportation. Currently, federal law provides tax-free status for up to $65 per month per employee contributions to employees who vanpool or use public transit including commuter rail and/or express bus pools.  Financial Incentive for Bicycling. Offer employees financial incentives for bicycling to work.  Special “Premium” for the Participation and Promotion of Trip Reduction. Offer ticket/passes to special events, vacation, etc. to employees who recruit other employees for vanpool, carpool, or other trip reduction programs.  Incentive Programs. Design incentive programs for carpooling and other alternative transportation modes so as to put highest priority on reduction of longest commute trips. 12. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the property owner/developer shall provide to the City of Anaheim Public Works Department a plan to coordinate rideshare services for construction employees with the Anaheim Transportation Network (ATN) for review and a approval and shall implement ATN recommendations to the extent feasible. 13. Prior to the issuance of each building permit for hotel development that exceeds a density of 100 rooms per gross acre within the Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area 1) with the Convention Center (CC) Medium density category, the property owner shall record a covenant on the property requiring that ongoing during project implementation, the property owner/developer shall implement TDM measures sufficient to reduce the actual trip generation from the development to no more than the trips assumed by the City’s traffic model. The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney’s Office. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 120 14. Ongoing during construction, if the Anaheim Police Department or the Anaheim Traffic Management Center (TMC) personnel are required to provide temporary traffic control services, the property owner/developer shall reimburse the City, on a fair-share basis, if applicable, for reasonable costs associated with such services. 15. Prior to the first final building and zoning inspection, for each building, the property owner/developer shall join and financially participate in a clean fuel shuttle program, such as the Anaheim Resort Transit system, and shall participate in the Anaheim Transportation Network in conjunction with the on-going operation of the project. The property owner shall also record a covenant on the property that requires participation in the program during project operation. The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney’s Office prior to recordation. 16. Prior to the approval of a Final Site Plan, the property owner/developer shall meet with the Traffic and Transportation Manager to determine whether a bus stop(s) is required to be placed adjacent to the property. If a bus stop(s) is required, it shall be placed in a location that least impacts traffic flow and may be designed as a bus turnout or a far side bus stop as required by the Traffic and Transportation Manager and per the approval of the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA). 17. Prior to the recordation of a subdivision map or issuance of the first building permit, whichever occurs first, in the event that a parcel is subdivided and there is a need for common on-site circulation and/or parking, an unsubordinated covenant providing for reciprocal access and/or parking, as appropriate, approved by the Planning Director or Planning Services Manager, shall be recorded with the Office of the Orange County Recorder. A copy of the recorded covenant shall then be submitted to the Planning Division of the Planning Department. If the reciprocal access is across parcel lines or if public rights of way are required for reciprocal access, then Public Works approval would be required. 18. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the location of any proposed gates across a driveway shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Traffic and Transportation Manager. Gates shall not be installed across any driveway in a manner which may adversely affect vehicular traffic on the adjacent public streets and that installation of any gates shall conform to the current version of Engineering Standard Detail 475. 19. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, buildings plans shall indicate that all driveways shall be constructed with a minimum fifteen (15) foot radius curb returns as required by the City Engineer, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 20. Prior to the issuance of a building permit or final map approval, whichever comes first, security in the form of a bond, certificate of deposit, letter of credit, completion guarantee, or cash, in an amount and form satisfactory to the City of Anaheim, shall be posted with the City to guarantee the satisfactory completion of all engineering requirements of the City of Anaheim, including preparation of improvement plans and installation of all improvements, such as curbs and gutters, sidewalks, water facilities, street grading and pavement, sewer and drainage facilities and other appurtenant work, as required by the City Engineer and in accordance with the specifications on file in the office of the City Engineer, as may be modified by the City Engineer. Installation of the said improvements shall occur prior to final building and zoning inspections. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 121 9.0 REFERENCES City of Anaheim Criteria for Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies. (City of Anaheim, 1996) Traffic Model Consistency Report- Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model (PB, 2003). City of Orange Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines (City of Orange, August 15, 2007) Orange County Subarea Modeling Guidelines Manual (OCTA, July 2005) City of Anaheim General Plan. (City of Anaheim, 2004, and as amended thereafter) City of Orange General Plan Update Traffic Analysis (PB, 2009) Route Concept Report (RCR), Interstate Route 5 San Diego/Santa Ana Freeway. (Caltrans, 2000) City of Bakersfield Panama Lane Shopping Center, Draft EIR. (Michael Brandman Associates, 2003) Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). Transportation Research Board, (TRB, 2000) Colton California-West Valley Specific Plan- Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines Glossary. (Kunzman and Associates, 2008) ---PAGE BREAK--- This page is intentionally kept blank to facilitate double sided printing ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 122 10.0 GLOSSARY OF TRANSPORTATION TERMS COMMON ABBREVIATIONS ADT Average Daily Traffic ATAM Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model ATN Anaheim Transportation Network BRT Bus Rapid Transit Caltrans The California Department of Transportation DU Dwelling Unit FEIR Final Environmental Impact Report HCM Highway Capacity Manual HCS Highway Capacity Software (Software package utilizing the formulae in the Highway Capacity Manual) HOV High Occupancy Vehicle lane ICU Intersection Capacity Utilization LOS Level of Service OCTA Orange County Transportation Authority OCTAM Orange County Transportation Analysis Model STIP State Transportation Improvement Program SHOPP State Highway Operations Protection Program TDM Transportation Demand Management TSF Thousands of Square Feet V/C Volume/Capacity Ratio VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled TERMS ANAHEIM TRAFFIC ANALYSIS MODEL (ATAM): The subarea modeling tool developed for the City of Anaheim that has been determined to be consistent with the Orange County Transportation Analysis Model (OCTAM) for the purposes of forecasting future traffic activity throughout the City for land use and circulation system scenarios. AUXILIARY LANE: A non-capacity enhancing lane that provides operational benefits to the freeway mainline. Typically an auxiliary lane extends between an on-ramp and off-ramp to facilitate the weave movement between the interchange without detrimental effects to the mainline through lanes. AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: The total volume during a year divided by the number of days in a year. Usually only weekdays are included. BANDWIDTH: The number of seconds of green time available for through traffic in a signal progression. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 123 BOTTLENECK: A constriction along a travelway that limits the amount of traffic that can proceed from its location. CAPACITY: The maximum number of vehicles that can be reasonably expected to pass over a given section of a lane or a roadway in a given time period. CHANNELIZATION: The separation or regulation of conflicting traffic movements into definite paths of travel by the use of pavement markings, raised islands, or other suitable means to facilitate the safe and orderly movements of both vehicles and pedestrians. CLEARANCE INTERVAL: Nearly same as yellow time. lf there is an all red interval after the end of a yellow, then that is also added into the clearance interval. COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT (CFD): For Platinum Triangle the District is authorized to incur bonded indebtedness and levy a special tax in accordance with a rate and method of apportionment in order to finance certain public facilities within the Platinum Triangle. The District is expected to contribute funds towards many of the intersection improvements identified in this study. CRITICAL MOVEMENT: Conflicting intersection turning movements that are found to have the highest ICU for opposing movements; i.e. each of the approaches at a four-legged intersection will contain a critical movement that conflicts with an opposing movement. DAILY CAPACITY: The daily volume of traffic that will result in a volume during the peak hour equal to the capacity of the roadway. DELAY: The time consumed while traffic is impeded in its movement by some element over which it has no control, usually expressed in seconds per vehicle. DEMAND RESPONSIVE SIGNAL: Same as traffic-actuated signal. DENSITY: The number of vehicles occupying in a unit length of the through traffic lanes of a roadway at any given instant. Usually expressed in vehicles per mile. DIRECTIONAL SPLIT: The percent of traffic in the peak direction at any point in time. DIVERGE AREA (HCM): The two right shoulder lanes plus the auxiliary lane for 1500 feet from the ramp gore point (location where the ramp intersects with the freeway mainline. DIVERSION: The rerouting of peak hour traffic to avoid congestion. FORCED FLOW: Opposite of free flow. FREE FLOW: Volumes are well below capacity. Vehicles can maneuver freely and travel is unimpeded by other traffic. GAP: Time or distance between successive vehicles in a traffic stream, rear bumper to front bumper. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 124 HEADWAY: Time or distance spacing between successive vehicles in a traffic stream, front bumper to front bumper. HIGH OCCUPANCY VEHICLE (HOV) LANE: A lane restricted for use by vehicles with 2 or more persons. INTERCONNECTED SIGNAL SYSTEM: A number of intersections that are connected to achieve signal progression. LEVEL OF SERVICE: A qualitative measure of a number of factors, which include speed and travel time, traffic interruptions, freedom to maneuver, safety, driving comfort and convenience, and operating costs. LOOP DETECTOR: A vehicle detector consisting of a loop of wire embedded in the roadway, energized by alternating current and producing an output circuit closure when passed over by a vehicle. MERGE AREA (HCM): The two right shoulder lanes plus the auxiliary lane for 1500 feet from the ramp gore point (location where the ramp intersects with the freeway mainline. MINIMUM ACCEPTABLE GAP: Smallest time headway between successive vehicles in a traffic stream into which another vehicle is willing and able to cross or merge. MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT: The practice of allowing more than one type of lane use in a building or set of buildings. In planning terms, this can mean some combination of residential, commercial, industrial, office, institutional, or other land uses. MULTI-MODAL: More than one mode; such as automobile, bus transit, rail rapid transit, and bicycle transportation modes. OFFSET: The time interval in seconds between the beginning of green at one intersection and the beginning of green at an adjacent intersection. PLATOON: A closely grouped component of traffic that is composed of several vehicles moving, or standing ready to move, with clear spaces ahead and behind. ORANGE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS MODEL (OCTAM): The regional model developed and maintained by OCTA that is the parent model to the City of Anaheim subarea model, ATAM. ORIGIN-DESTINATION SURVEY: A survey to determine the point of origin and the point of destination for a given vehicle trip. PASSENGER CAR EQUIVALENTS (PCE): One car is one Passenger car Equivalent. A truck is equal to two or three Passenger car Equivalents in that a truck requires longer to start, goes slower, and accelerates slower. Loaded trucks have a higher Passenger Car Equivalent than empty trucks. PEAK HOUR: The 60 consecutive minutes with the highest number of vehicles. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 125 PEAK HOUR FACTOR: The period during which peak hour traffic volume is at its highest. The peak hour factor is determined by calculating the hourly volume divided by the peak rate of flow within the hour, which is the highest 15 minute interval multiplied by four. PRETIMED SIGNAL: A type of traffic signal that directs traffic to stop and go on a predetermined time schedule without regard to traffic conditions. Also, fixed time signal. PROGRESSION: A term used to describe the progressive movement of traffic through several signalized intersections. SCREEN-LINE: An imaginary line or physical feature across which all trips are counted, normally to verify the validity of mathematical traffic models. SIGNAL CYCLE: The time in seconds required for one complete sequence of signal indications. SIGNAL PHASE: The part of the signal cycle allocated to one or more traffic movements. SIGNIFICANT IMPACT (CEQA): Projects can cause significant impacts by direct physical changes to the environment or by triggering reasonably foreseeable indirect physical changes. Physical changes caused by a project can contribute incrementally to cumulative effects that are significant, even if individual changes resulting from a project are limited. You must determine whether the cumulative impact is significant, as well as whether an individual effect is “cumulatively considerable.” This means “the incremental effects of an individual project are significant when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects” (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(h)(1)). STARTING DELAY: The delay experienced in initiating the movement of queued traffic from a stop to an average running speed through a signalized intersection. A complete software package for modeling, optimizing, managing and simulating traffic systems. implements the HCM methodologies for intersection analysis and is applied for State Highway System ramp termini intersections. TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT: A mixed-use residential or commercial area designed to maximize access to public transport, and often incorporates features to encourage transit ridership. TRIP: The movement of a person or vehicle from one location (origin) to another (destination). For example, from home to store to home are two trips, not one. TRIP-END: One end of a trip at either the origin or destination; i.e. each trip has two trip-ends. A trip-end occurs when a person, object, or message is transferred to or from a vehicle. TRIP GENERATION RATE: The quality of trips produced and/or attracted by a specific land use stated in terms of units such as per dwelling, per acre, and per 1,000 square feet of floor space. TRUCK: A vehicle having dual tires on one or more axles, or having more than two axles. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report 126 UNBALANCED FLOW: Heavier traffic flow in one direction than the other. On a daily basis, most facilities have balanced flow. During the peak hours, flow is seldom balanced in an urban area. VEHICLE MILES OF TRAVEL: A measure of the amount of usage of a section of highway, obtained by multiplying the average daily traffic by length of facility in miles. WEAVING AREA: The area of a freeway where there is cross traffic from either an on or off-ramp or transition to another freeway. Typically weaving segments are formed when merge areas are followed closely by diverge areas (within 2,500 feet) and the two are joined by an auxiliary lane requiring the crossing of two or more traffic streams traveling in the same general direction along a significant length of highway without the aid of traffic control devices. ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No.14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan TRAFFIC STUDY REPORT Technical Appendices Prepared for CITY OF ANAHEIM Prepared by December 2010 ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No.14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report – Technical Appendices List of Appendices Appendix A-1 ICU Worksheets under Existing Conditions Appendix A-2 ICU Worksheets under 2015 No Project Conditions Appendix A-3 ICU Worksheets under 2015 With Project Conditions Appendix A-4 ICU Worksheets under 2030 No Project Conditions Appendix A-5 ICU Worksheets under 2030 With Project Conditions Appendix A-6 ICU Worksheets under 2030 With Project Conditions (Mitigated) Appendix B Intersection Lane Configurations Appendix C-1 Caltrans Ramp Termini Analysis Worksheets under Existing Conditions Appendix C-2 Caltrans Ramp Termini Analysis Worksheets under 2015 No Project Conditions Appendix C-3 Caltrans Ramp Termini Analysis Worksheets under 2015 With Project Conditions Appendix C-4 Caltrans Ramp Termini Analysis Worksheets under 2030 No Project Conditions Appendix C-5 Caltrans Ramp Termini Analysis Worksheets under 2030 With Project Conditions Appendix C-6 Caltrans Ramp Termini Analysis Worksheets under 2030 With Project Conditions (Mitigated) Appendix D-1 Caltrans Ramp Termini Queuing Analysis Worksheets under Existing Conditions Appendix D-2 Caltrans Ramp Termini Queuing Analysis Worksheets 2015 No Project Conditions Appendix D-3 Caltrans Ramp Termini Queuing Analysis Worksheets 2015 With Project Conditions Appendix D-4 Caltrans Ramp Termini Queuing Analysis Worksheets 2030 No Project Conditions Appendix D-5 Caltrans Ramp Termini Queuing Analysis Worksheets 2030 With Project Conditions Appendix E-1 HCS Freeway Ramp Analysis Worksheets under Existing Conditions Appendix E-2 HCS Freeway Ramp Analysis Worksheets under 2015 No Project Conditions Appendix E-3 HCS Freeway Ramp Analysis Worksheets under 2015 With Project Conditions Appendix E-4 HCS Freeway Ramp Analysis Worksheets under 2030 No Project Conditions Appendix E-5 HCS Freeway Ramp Analysis Worksheets under 2030 With Project Conditions Appendix E-6 HCS Freeway Ramp Analysis Worksheets under 2030 With Project Conditions (Mitigated) Appendix F-1 HCS Freeway Mainline Analysis Worksheets under Existing Conditions Appendix F-2 HCS Freeway Mainline Analysis Worksheets under 2015 No Project Conditions Appendix F-3 HCS Freeway Mainline Analysis Worksheets under 2015 With Project Conditions Appendix F-4 HCS Freeway Mainline Analysis Worksheets under 2030 No Project Conditions Appendix F-5 HCS Freeway Mainline Analysis Worksheets under 2030 With Project Conditions Appendix F-6 HCS Freeway Mainline Analysis Worksheets under 2030 With Project Conditions (Mitigated) Appendix G-1 HCS Freeway Weaving Analysis Worksheets under Existing Conditions Appendix G-2 HCS Freeway Weaving Analysis Worksheets under 2015 No Project Conditions Appendix G-3 HCS Freeway Weaving Analysis Worksheets under 2015 With Project Conditions Appendix G-4 HCS Freeway Weaving Analysis Worksheets under 2030 No Project Conditions Appendix G-5 HCS Freeway Weaving Analysis Worksheets under 2030 With Project Conditions Appendix G-6 HCS Freeway Weaving Analysis Worksheets under 2030 With Project Conditions (Mitigated) Appendix H Year 2025 Peak Hour Raw Model Volume Difference With Project vs. No Project ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No.14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report – Technical Appendices Appendix A-1 ICU Worksheets under Existing Conditions ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 1 Euclid Street / Katella Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 110 0.03 * 3400 233 0.07 NBT 2 3400 709 0.26 3400 1,055 0.35 * NBR 0 175 129 SBL 2 3400 133 0.04 3400 206 0.06 * SBT 2 3400 1,036 0.36 * 3400 977 0.30 SBR 0 188 56 EBL 1 1700 142 0.08 1700 240 0.14 * EBT 2 3400 1,039 0.31 * 3400 654 0.19 EBR 1 1700 90 0.05 1700 227 0.13 WBL 1 1700 239 0.14 * 1700 202 0.12 WBT 2 3400 432 0.13 3400 1,441 0.42 * WBR 1 1700 117 0.07 1700 130 0.08 N/S Movements 0.39 0.41 E/W Movements 0.45 0.57 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.89 1.02 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D F Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 2 Ninth Street / Katella Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 152 0.09 * 1700 174 0.10 * NBT 1 1700 64 0.04 1700 143 0.08 NBR 1 1700 71 0.04 1700 61 0.04 SBL 1 1700 31 0.02 1700 21 0.01 SBT 1 1700 128 0.10 * 1700 82 0.07 * SBR 0 35 37 EBL 1 1700 25 0.01 1700 61 0.04 * EBT 3 5100 1,268 0.25 * 5100 830 0.16 EBR 1 1700 171 0.10 1700 209 0.12 WBL 1 1700 76 0.04 * 1700 97 0.06 WBT 3 5100 602 0.12 5100 1,375 0.27 * WBR 1 1700 30 0.02 1700 54 0.03 N/S Movements 0.19 0.17 E/W Movements 0.29 0.31 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.53 0.53 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 3 Walnut Street / Ball Road Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 94 0.06 * 1700 104 0.06 * NBT 1 1700 144 0.08 1700 226 0.13 NBR 1 1700 363 0.21 * 1700 272 0.16 SBL 1 1700 95 0.06 1700 60 0.04 SBT 1 1700 178 0.10 * 1700 262 0.15 * SBR 1 1700 56 0.03 1700 69 0.04 EBL 1 1700 62 0.04 1700 48 0.03 EBT 3 5100 1,115 0.23 * 5100 641 0.14 * EBR 0 76 95 WBL 1 1700 192 0.11 * 1700 246 0.14 * WBT 3 5100 617 0.13 5100 1,147 0.23 WBR 0 45 28 N/S Movements 0.16 0.22 E/W Movements 0.35 0.29 Rt. Turn Component 0.02 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.57 0.55 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 4 Walnut Street / Katella Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 5 6 NBT 1 1700 6 0.01 * 1700 3 0.01 * NBR 0 0 1 SBL 1.5 3354 365 0.11 * 3373 246 0.07 * SBT 0.5 46 5 0.11 27 2 0.07 SBR 1 1700 162 0.10 1700 216 0.13 EBL 1 1700 109 0.06 1700 117 0.07 * EBT 3 5100 1,290 0.25 * 5100 863 0.17 EBR 0 4 6 WBL 1 1700 26 0.02 * 1700 46 0.03 WBT 3 5100 550 0.15 5100 1,270 0.33 * WBR 0 220 400 N/S Movements 0.12 0.08 E/W Movements 0.27 0.40 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.43 0.53 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 5 Disneyland Drive / Ball Road Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 1430 139 0.10 1270 202 0.16 NBT 1 3107 302 0.10 3475 553 0.16 NBR 1.5 2263 220 0.10 2055 327 0.16 SBL 1.5 3187 418 0.13 1730 228 0.13 SBT 2.5 3613 353 0.13 5070 506 0.13 SBR 0 121 162 EBL 2 3400 232 0.07 3400 223 0.07 * EBT 3 5100 1,250 0.25 * 5100 966 0.19 EBR 1 1700 114 0.07 1700 128 0.08 WBL 2 3400 352 0.10 * 3400 434 0.13 WBT 3 5100 689 0.15 5100 1,397 0.30 * WBR 0 64 150 N/S Movements 0.23 0.29 E/W Movements 0.35 0.37 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.10 0.10 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.68 0.76 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B C Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 6 Disneyland Drive / West Street / Katella Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 201 0.06 3400 186 0.05 NBT 2 3400 329 0.10 * 3400 278 0.08 * NBR 1 1700 221 0.13 1700 146 0.09 SBL 2 3400 171 0.05 * 3400 377 0.11 * SBT 2 3400 206 0.06 3400 398 0.12 SBR 1 1700 190 0.11 * 1700 242 0.14 EBL 2 3400 81 0.02 3400 95 0.03 * EBT 3 5100 1,363 0.27 * 5100 847 0.17 EBR 1 1700 168 0.10 1700 148 0.09 WBL 2 3400 142 0.04 * 3400 117 0.03 WBT 3 5100 856 0.17 5100 1,502 0.29 * WBR 1 1700 147 0.09 1700 156 0.09 N/S Movements 0.15 0.19 E/W Movements 0.31 0.32 Rt. Turn Component 0.03 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.53 0.57 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 7 Harbor Boulevard / Vermont Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 45 0.03 * 1700 130 0.08 NBT 2 3400 576 0.17 3400 1,066 0.31 * NBR 1 1700 124 0.07 1700 137 0.08 SBL 1 1700 44 0.03 1700 60 0.04 * SBT 2 3400 920 0.27 * 3400 833 0.25 SBR 0 11 33 EBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 22 0.01 EBT 1 1700 96 0.14 * 1700 52 0.09 * EBR 0 141 94 WBL 1 1700 113 0.07 * 1700 167 0.10 * WBT 1 1700 68 0.06 1700 99 0.09 WBR 0 41 59 N/S Movements 0.30 0.35 E/W Movements 0.21 0.18 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.56 0.58 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 8 Harbor Boulevard / Ball Road Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 626 0.18 * 3400 711 0.21 * NBT 3 5100 657 0.13 5100 875 0.17 NBR 1 1700 279 0.16 1700 315 0.19 SBL 2 3400 156 0.05 3400 151 0.04 SBT 3 5100 1,174 0.23 * 5100 751 0.15 * SBR 1 1700 279 0.16 1700 272 0.16 EBL 2 3400 294 0.09 3400 283 0.08 EBT 3 5100 1,108 0.22 * 5100 981 0.19 * EBR 1 1700 575 0.34 1700 511 0.30 WBL 2 3400 156 0.05 * 3400 261 0.08 * WBT 4 6800 907 0.15 6800 889 0.15 WBR 0 112 110 N/S Movements 0.41 0.36 E/W Movements 0.26 0.27 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.73 0.68 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C B Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 9 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 NB Ramps Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 * 0 NBT 3 5100 827 0.16 5100 995 0.20 * NBR (free) 50 85000 186 0.00 85000 477 0.01 SBL 1 1700 45 0.03 1700 53 0.03 * SBT 4 6800 1,861 0.27 * 6800 1,461 0.21 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * EBR 0 0 0 WBL 1.5 1700 64 0.04 * 1700 90 0.05 * WBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 WBR 1.5 3400 694 0.20 * 3400 839 0.25 * N/S Movements 0.27 0.23 E/W Movements 0.04 0.05 Rt. Turn Component 0.18 0.22 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.54 0.54 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 10 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 SB Ramps Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 59 0.03 * 1700 81 0.05 * NBT 4 6800 776 0.11 6800 1,241 0.18 NBR 0 0 0 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 3 5100 823 0.16 * 5100 864 0.17 * SBR (free) 50 85000 1,056 0.01 85000 712 0.01 EBL 2 3400 248 0.07 * 3400 251 0.07 * EBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 EBR (free) 50 85000 296 0.00 85000 390 0.00 WBL 0 0 0 WBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.20 0.22 E/W Movements 0.07 0.07 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.32 0.34 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 11 Harbor Boulevard / Disney Way Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 169 0.05 * 3400 48 0.01 NBT 3 5100 728 0.15 5100 1,127 0.23 * NBR 0 57 37 SBL 2 3400 124 0.04 3400 157 0.05 * SBT 3 5100 781 0.18 * 5100 1,079 0.22 SBR 0 116 37 EBL 1 1700 8 0.00 * 1700 39 0.02 EBT 3 5100 1 0.00 5100 48 0.01 * EBR 0 9 11 WBL 1 1700 69 0.04 1700 147 0.09 * WBT 3 5100 142 0.05 * 5100 77 0.05 WBR 0 119 173 N/S Movements 0.23 0.27 E/W Movements 0.06 0.10 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.33 0.42 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 12 Harbor Boulevard / Katella Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 115 0.03 * 3400 178 0.05 NBT 3 5100 541 0.11 5100 839 0.16 * NBR 1 1700 153 0.09 1700 219 0.13 SBL 2 3400 58 0.02 3400 196 0.06 * SBT 3 5100 645 0.13 * 5100 532 0.10 SBR 1 1700 121 0.07 1700 220 0.13 EBL 2 3400 159 0.05 3400 227 0.07 * EBT 3 5100 1,473 0.29 * 5100 909 0.18 EBR 1 1700 98 0.06 1700 165 0.10 WBL 2 3400 165 0.05 * 3400 381 0.11 WBT 3 5100 928 0.18 5100 1,485 0.29 * WBR 1 1700 71 0.04 1700 164 0.10 N/S Movements 0.16 0.22 E/W Movements 0.34 0.36 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.55 0.63 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 13 Harbor Boulevard / Convention Way Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 190 0.06 * 3400 116 0.03 * NBT 3 5100 920 0.18 5100 1,060 0.21 NBR 0 4 3 SBL 2 3400 45 0.01 3400 32 0.01 SBT 3 5100 806 0.16 * 5100 1,160 0.23 * SBR 1 1700 222 0.13 1700 120 0.07 EBL 2 3400 92 0.03 * 3400 125 0.04 * EBT 0.5 43 1 0.02 3 0 0.03 EBR 1.5 3358 79 0.02 3397 100 0.03 WBL 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 3 0.00 WBT 0.5 850 2 0.00 * 850 0 0.00 * WBR 1.5 2550 5 0.00 2550 2 0.00 N/S Movements 0.21 0.26 E/W Movements 0.03 0.04 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.29 0.35 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 14 Harbor Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 44 0.03 1700 79 0.05 NBT 3 5100 876 0.20 * 5100 1,016 0.23 * NBR 0 130 169 SBL 1 1700 53 0.03 * 1700 94 0.06 * SBT 3 5100 729 0.15 5100 1,123 0.23 SBR 0 30 53 EBL 1 1700 66 0.04 1700 47 0.03 EBT 2 3400 636 0.21 * 3400 331 0.12 * EBR 0 70 76 WBL 1 1700 103 0.06 * 1700 190 0.11 * WBT 2 3400 231 0.10 3400 566 0.19 WBR 0 113 86 N/S Movements 0.23 0.29 E/W Movements 0.27 0.23 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.55 0.57 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 15 Clementine Street / Disney Way Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 64 0.04 * 1700 75 0.04 * NBT 2 3400 54 0.02 3400 95 0.04 NBR 0 29 49 SBL 2 3400 32 0.01 3400 79 0.02 SBT 2 3400 41 0.02 * 3400 69 0.04 * SBR 0 16 68 EBL 1 1700 16 0.01 * 1700 8 0.00 EBT 3 5100 63 0.01 5100 141 0.03 * EBR 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 65 0.04 WBL 1 1700 114 0.07 1700 108 0.06 * WBT 3 5100 340 0.08 * 5100 214 0.06 WBR 0 58 112 N/S Movements 0.05 0.08 E/W Movements 0.09 0.09 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.19 0.23 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 16 Clementine Street / Katella Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 35 0.02 * 1700 106 0.06 * NBT 1 1700 52 0.03 1700 115 0.07 NBR 1 1700 88 0.05 1700 255 0.15 * SBL 1 1700 22 0.01 1700 58 0.03 SBT 1 1700 138 0.08 * 1700 100 0.06 * SBR 1 1700 62 0.04 1700 107 0.06 EBL 2 3400 42 0.01 3400 65 0.02 * EBT 3 5100 1,502 0.32 * 5100 1,113 0.23 EBR 0 117 68 WBL 2 3400 216 0.06 * 3400 125 0.04 WBT 3 5100 1,046 0.21 5100 1,873 0.37 * WBR 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 80 0.05 N/S Movements 0.10 0.12 E/W Movements 0.38 0.39 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.53 0.60 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 17 I-5 SB Off Ramp / Disney Way Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 18 0.01 * 1700 15 0.01 * NBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 NBR 1 1700 20 0.01 * 1700 37 0.02 * SBL 1.33 3343 300 0.09 3389 322 0.10 SBT 0.34 57 5 0.09 * 11 1 0.09 * SBR 1.33 1700 144 0.08 1700 117 0.07 EBL 0 0 * 0 EBT 3 5100 103 0.02 5100 276 0.06 * EBR 0 12 9 WBL 1 1700 17 0.01 1700 31 0.02 * WBT 3 5100 243 0.05 * 5100 355 0.07 WBR 0 0 0 Split Phase N/S Movements 0.10 0.12 E/W Movements 0.05 0.07 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.20 0.24 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 18 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 125 0.04 3400 182 0.05 NBT 2 3400 473 0.14 * 3400 1,149 0.34 * NBR 1 1700 184 0.11 1700 149 0.09 SBL 2 3400 211 0.06 * 3400 143 0.04 * SBT 3 5100 809 0.16 5100 772 0.15 SBR 1 1700 172 0.10 1700 136 0.08 EBL 1 1700 159 0.09 1700 229 0.13 * EBT 3 5100 1,264 0.28 * 5100 1,467 0.32 EBR 0 154 169 WBL 1 1700 163 0.10 * 1700 147 0.09 WBT 3 5100 930 0.18 5100 1,756 0.34 * WBR 1 1700 68 0.04 1700 164 0.10 N/S Movements 0.20 0.38 E/W Movements 0.37 0.48 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.63 0.91 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B E Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 19 Anaheim Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 87 0.05 1700 64 0.04 NBT 3 5100 731 0.14 * 5100 1,126 0.22 * NBR 1 1700 336 0.20 1700 356 0.21 SBL 1 1700 171 0.10 * 1700 92 0.05 * SBT 3 5100 939 0.19 5100 1,007 0.20 SBR 0 42 38 EBL 1 1700 21 0.01 1700 37 0.02 EBT 1 1700 9 0.02 * 1700 22 0.09 * EBR 0 30 135 WBL 1 1700 199 0.12 * 1700 497 0.29 * WBT 1 1700 12 0.01 1700 87 0.05 WBR 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 289 0.17 * N/S Movements 0.24 0.27 E/W Movements 0.14 0.38 Rt. Turn Component 0.05 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.49 0.71 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A C Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 20 Anaheim Boulevard / I-5 NB Ramps Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 205 0.06 * 3400 185 0.05 * NBT 3 5100 784 0.15 5100 883 0.17 NBR 0 0 0 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 3 5100 1,091 0.21 * 5100 1,290 0.25 * SBR 1 1700 95 0.06 1700 313 0.18 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 EBR 0 0 0 WBL 0.5 995 24 0.02 318 74 0.23 WBT 1 705 17 0.02 1866 434 0.23 WBR 1.5 3400 378 0.11 * 2916 678 0.23 N/S Movements 0.27 0.31 E/W Movements 0.02 0.23 Rt. Turn Component 0.09 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.44 0.59 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 21 Anaheim Boulevard / Disney Way Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 29 0.02 NBT 3 5100 763 0.15 * 5100 821 0.16 * NBR 0 7 8 SBL 2 3400 421 0.12 * 3400 521 0.15 * SBT 3 5100 570 0.12 5100 795 0.16 SBR 0 51 31 EBL 2 3400 269 0.08 * 3400 244 0.07 * EBT 4 6800 62 0.02 6800 113 0.04 EBR 0 102 175 WBL 0 0 0 WBT 3 5100 151 0.03 * 5100 262 0.05 * WBR 0 8 3 N/S Movements 0.27 0.32 E/W Movements 0.11 0.12 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.44 0.49 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 22 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 185 0.05 * 3400 126 0.04 NBT 3 5100 481 0.09 5100 526 0.10 * NBR 1 1700 246 0.14 * 1700 155 0.09 SBL 2 3400 60 0.02 3400 114 0.03 * SBT 3 5100 345 0.07 * 5100 399 0.08 SBR 1 1700 183 0.11 1700 212 0.12 EBL 2 3400 186 0.05 * 3400 212 0.06 * EBT 4 6800 1,336 0.21 6800 1,105 0.18 EBR 0 59 140 WBL 2 3400 113 0.03 3400 316 0.09 WBT 3 5100 966 0.19 * 5100 1,676 0.33 * WBR 1 1700 33 0.02 1700 90 0.05 N/S Movements 0.12 0.14 E/W Movements 0.24 0.39 Rt. Turn Component 0.05 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.47 0.58 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 24 Haster Street / Orangewood Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 38 0.02 1700 88 0.05 * NBT 2 3400 478 0.17 * 3400 606 0.21 NBR 0 87 98 SBL 1 1700 79 0.05 * 1700 64 0.04 SBT 2 3400 438 0.15 3400 638 0.22 * SBR 0 69 110 EBL 1 1700 134 0.08 1700 124 0.07 * EBT 2 3400 704 0.23 * 3400 350 0.12 EBR 0 73 57 WBL 1 1700 86 0.05 * 1700 178 0.10 WBT 2 3400 242 0.10 3400 724 0.26 * WBR 0 92 146 N/S Movements 0.21 0.27 E/W Movements 0.28 0.33 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.54 0.65 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 25 Manchester Avenue / Katella Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 1700 55 0.03 * 1700 38 0.02 * NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBR 1.5 3400 483 0.14 * 3400 158 0.05 SBL 2 3400 22 0.01 3400 25 0.01 SBT 2 3400 91 0.03 * 3400 54 0.02 * SBR 1 1700 16 0.01 1700 2 0.00 EBL 0 0 * 0 * EBT 3 5100 883 0.17 5100 993 0.19 EBR 1 1700 558 0.33 * 1700 552 0.32 * WBL 2 3400 122 0.04 3400 329 0.10 WBT 3 5100 1,247 0.24 * 5100 1,674 0.33 * WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.06 0.04 E/W Movements 0.24 0.33 Rt. Turn Component 0.20 0.11 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.55 0.52 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 26 Anaheim Way / Katella Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 3400 508 0.15 * 2994 659 0.22 NBT 3 3400 361 0.11 5115 1,126 0.22 NBR 0.5 1700 308 0.18 * 391 86 0.22 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 2 3400 39 0.01 3400 39 0.01 EBT 3 5100 1,335 0.26 * 5100 1,150 0.23 * EBR 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBT 3.5 6800 896 0.13 6800 1,430 0.21 WBR 1.5 1700 48 0.03 1700 105 0.06 N/S Movements 0.15 0.22 E/W Movements 0.26 0.23 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.46 0.50 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 27 East Street / Ball Road Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 2 3400 318 0.09 * 3400 239 0.07 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 1 1700 260 0.15 * 1700 226 0.13 EBL 1 1700 168 0.10 * 1700 381 0.22 * EBT 3 5100 917 0.18 5100 1,076 0.21 EBR 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 0 WBT 3 5100 1,198 0.27 * 5100 1,216 0.32 * WBR 0 156 427 N/S Movements 0.09 0.07 E/W Movements 0.36 0.55 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.51 0.67 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 28 Lewis Street / Ball Road Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 35 0.02 1700 86 0.05 * NBT 2 3400 69 0.04 * 3400 9 0.07 NBR 0 81 235 SBL 0 8 * 69 SBT 1 1700 5 0.01 1700 104 0.15 * SBR 0 4 82 EBL 1 1700 59 0.03 1700 10 0.01 EBT 3 5100 968 0.21 * 5100 1,114 0.23 * EBR 0 109 45 WBL 1 1700 178 0.10 * 1700 97 0.06 * WBT 3 5100 1,180 0.24 5100 1,285 0.25 WBR 0 68 6 N/S Movements 0.04 0.20 E/W Movements 0.32 0.28 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.41 0.53 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 29 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 19 0.01 1700 22 0.01 * NBT 2 3400 181 0.05 * 3400 204 0.06 NBR 1 1700 84 0.05 1700 70 0.04 SBL 1 1700 55 0.03 * 1700 23 0.01 SBT 2 3400 146 0.05 3400 227 0.08 * SBR 0 28 55 EBL 1 1700 39 0.02 1700 40 0.02 * EBT 2 3400 336 0.11 * 3400 271 0.09 EBR 0 28 25 WBL 1 1700 57 0.03 * 1700 60 0.04 WBT 2 3400 211 0.07 3400 420 0.14 * WBR 0 38 41 N/S Movements 0.09 0.10 E/W Movements 0.14 0.16 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.28 0.31 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 30 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 26 0.02 NBT 1 1700 40 0.03 * 1700 82 0.07 * NBR 0 10 31 SBL 1 1700 42 0.02 * 1700 62 0.04 * SBT 1 1700 7 0.00 1700 11 0.01 SBR 1 1700 132 0.08 1700 391 0.23 * EBL 1 1700 353 0.21 * 1700 135 0.08 * EBT 3 5100 1,132 0.22 5100 963 0.19 EBR 0 12 19 WBL 1 1700 22 0.01 1700 19 0.01 WBT 3 5100 815 0.17 * 5100 1,318 0.27 * WBR 0 61 55 N/S Movements 0.05 0.10 E/W Movements 0.38 0.35 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.11 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.48 0.62 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 32 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 2 3400 13 0.00 3400 23 0.01 SBL 2 3400 64 0.02 * 3400 22 0.01 * SBT 0 3 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * EBR 0 0 0 WBL 1.5 3060 18 0.01 * 1700 15 0.01 * WBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 WBR 1.5 2040 12 0.01 3400 43 0.01 * N/S Movements 0.02 0.01 E/W Movements 0.01 0.01 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.01 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.07 0.07 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 33 Lewis Street / Orangewood Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 50 0.03 * 1700 157 0.09 * NBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 NBR (free) 50 85000 496 0.01 85000 386 0.00 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 1 0 EBL 1 1700 2 0.00 1700 0 0.00 EBT 2 3400 902 0.29 * 3400 483 0.16 * EBR 0 80 69 WBL 1 1700 275 0.16 * 1700 299 0.18 * WBT 2 3400 350 0.10 3400 1,102 0.33 WBR 0 6 3 N/S Movements 0.03 0.09 E/W Movements 0.45 0.34 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.53 0.48 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 34 Manchester Avenue / Orangewood Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR (free) 0 0 0 SBL 2 3400 604 0.18 * 3400 236 0.07 * SBT 3 5100 374 0.12 5100 127 0.06 SBR 0 262 200 EBL 0 0 0 * EBT 3 5100 978 0.19 * 5100 622 0.12 EBR 1 1700 468 0.28 * 1700 233 0.14 * WBL 2 3400 41 0.01 * 3400 156 0.05 WBT 3 5100 394 0.08 5100 1,219 0.24 * WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.18 0.07 E/W Movements 0.20 0.24 Rt. Turn Component 0.08 0.02 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.52 0.37 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 35 Anaheim Way / Orangewood Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 40 191 NBT 3 5100 60 0.02 * 5100 31 0.04 * NBR 0 13 6 SBL 0 0 * 0 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 2 3400 289 0.09 3400 274 0.08 * EBT 3 5100 1,294 0.25 * 5100 625 0.12 EBR 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 * 0 WBT 3 5100 394 0.08 5100 1,138 0.22 * WBR 1 1700 182 0.11 * 1700 550 0.32 * N/S Movements 0.02 0.04 E/W Movements 0.25 0.30 Rt. Turn Component 0.03 0.10 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.36 0.50 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 36 State College Boulevard / Ball Road Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 98 0.03 * 3400 208 0.06 NBT 3 5100 347 0.07 5100 756 0.15 * NBR 1 1700 99 0.06 1700 152 0.09 SBL 2 3400 283 0.08 3400 236 0.07 * SBT 3 5100 560 0.16 * 5100 442 0.12 SBR 0 231 166 EBL 1 1700 186 0.11 * 1700 181 0.11 * EBT 3 5100 826 0.21 5100 956 0.22 EBR 0 228 171 WBL 1 1700 212 0.12 1700 144 0.08 WBT 3 5100 1,010 0.22 * 5100 1,227 0.28 * WBR 0 137 190 N/S Movements 0.18 0.22 E/W Movements 0.33 0.38 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.57 0.65 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 37 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 75 0.02 3400 110 0.03 NBT 3 5100 447 0.11 * 5100 705 0.18 * NBR 0 139 204 SBL 2 3400 139 0.04 * 3400 102 0.03 * SBT 3 5100 670 0.13 5100 640 0.13 SBR 1 1700 136 0.08 1700 158 0.09 EBL 2 3400 217 0.06 3400 197 0.06 * EBT 2.5 5100 775 0.15 * 5100 682 0.13 EBR 1.5 1700 211 0.12 1700 125 0.07 WBL 2 3400 231 0.07 * 3400 183 0.05 WBT 3 5100 583 0.11 5100 1,097 0.22 * WBR 1 1700 35 0.02 1700 109 0.06 N/S Movements 0.16 0.21 E/W Movements 0.22 0.27 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.43 0.53 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 38 State College Boulevard / Gene Autry Way Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 46 0.01 * 3400 17 0.01 * NBT 3 5100 680 0.14 5100 910 0.18 NBR 0 13 11 SBL 2 3400 3 0.00 3400 2 0.00 SBT 3 5100 931 0.20 * 5100 969 0.20 * SBR 0 110 35 EBL 1.5 2550 48 0.02 2550 59 0.02 EBT 1.5 2550 1 0.02 * 2550 3 0.02 * EBR 0 59 52 WBL 1 1700 7 0.00 * 1700 18 0.01 * WBT 1 1700 3 0.00 1700 9 0.01 WBR 1 1700 2 0.00 1700 10 0.01 N/S Movements 0.22 0.20 E/W Movements 0.03 0.03 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.30 0.29 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 39 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 110 0.03 * 3400 63 0.02 * NBT 4 6800 486 0.09 6800 700 0.12 NBR 0 137 95 SBL 2 3400 148 0.04 3400 105 0.03 SBT 4 6800 717 0.13 * 6800 771 0.14 * SBR 0 156 190 EBL 2 3400 168 0.05 3400 151 0.04 * EBT 3 5100 979 0.20 * 5100 500 0.11 EBR 0 43 50 WBL 2 3400 154 0.05 * 3400 158 0.05 WBT 3 5100 567 0.12 5100 987 0.22 * WBR 0 52 115 N/S Movements 0.16 0.16 E/W Movements 0.25 0.26 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.46 0.47 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 40 State College Boulevard / Orange Center Drive Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 76 0.02 * 3400 48 0.01 * NBT 4 6800 626 0.09 6800 841 0.12 NBR 0 8 6 SBL 2 3400 11 0.00 3400 26 0.01 SBT 4 6800 842 0.13 * 6800 844 0.13 * SBR 0 42 20 EBL 2 3400 8 0.00 * 3400 11 0.00 EBT 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 0 0.00 * EBR 1 1700 21 0.01 1700 42 0.02 * WBL 1 1700 2 0.00 1700 19 0.01 * WBT 1 1700 0 0.00 * 1700 0 0.01 WBR 0 8 11 N/S Movements 0.15 0.14 E/W Movements 0.01 0.01 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.01 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.21 0.21 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 41 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 8 0.00 * 3400 80 0.02 * NBT 4 6800 565 0.08 6800 810 0.12 NBR (free) 50 85,000 191 0.00 85,000 358 0.00 SBL 1 1700 16 0.01 1700 23 0.01 SBT 4 6800 1,433 0.21 * 6800 1,087 0.16 * SBR 1 1700 11 0.01 1700 37 0.02 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 EBR 0 0 0 WBL 1.5 3314 167 0.05 2970 152 0.05 WBT 1.5 1786 90 0.05 2130 109 0.05 WBR 2 3400 259 0.08 * 3400 144 0.04 N/S Movements 0.21 0.18 E/W Movements 0.05 0.05 Rt. Turn Component 0.02 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.33 0.28 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 42 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 * 0 * NBT 5 8500 721 0.09 8500 1,109 0.13 NBR 0 8 27 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 4 6800 1,422 0.21 * 6800 937 0.14 * SBR (free) 50 85000 165 0.00 85,000 293 0.00 EBL 1.5 1700 64 0.04 1700 144 0.08 EBT 0.5 1700 292 0.17 * 1700 160 0.09 * EBR 2 3400 348 0.10 3400 317 0.09 WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.21 0.14 E/W Movements 0.17 0.09 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.43 0.28 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 43 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 123 0.04 * 3400 199 0.06 * NBT 3 5100 386 0.08 5100 902 0.18 NBR 2 3400 297 0.09 3400 511 0.15 SBL 2 3400 143 0.04 3400 152 0.04 SBT 3 5100 1,242 0.24 * 5100 927 0.18 * SBR 1 1700 384 0.23 1700 216 0.13 EBL 2 3400 259 0.08 3400 238 0.07 EBT 3 5100 1,341 0.26 * 5100 1,267 0.25 * EBR 1 1700 140 0.08 1700 134 0.08 WBL 2 3400 408 0.12 * 3400 425 0.13 * WBT 3 5100 887 0.17 5100 1,127 0.22 WBR 1 1700 81 0.05 1700 45 0.03 N/S Movements 0.28 0.24 E/W Movements 0.38 0.37 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.71 0.66 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C B Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 44 Sunkist Street / Ball Road Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 37 0.02 1700 83 0.05 NBT 2 3400 105 0.09 * 3400 594 0.23 * NBR 0 188 198 SBL 1 1700 516 0.30 * 1700 249 0.15 * SBT 2 3400 367 0.18 3400 209 0.10 SBR 0 230 135 EBL 2 3400 111 0.03 * 3400 201 0.06 * EBT 3 5100 970 0.20 5100 1,189 0.24 EBR 0 36 18 WBL 2 3400 352 0.10 3400 251 0.07 WBT 2 3400 1,195 0.35 * 3400 1,023 0.30 * WBR 1 1700 172 0.10 1700 640 0.38 N/S Movements 0.39 0.38 E/W Movements 0.38 0.36 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.82 0.79 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D C Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 45 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 14 0.01 1700 99 0.06 NBT 1 1700 8 0.00 * 1700 29 0.02 * NBR 1 1700 30 0.02 1700 190 0.11 * SBL 2 3400 201 0.06 * 3400 311 0.09 * SBT 0.5 751 34 0.05 476 14 0.03 SBR 0.5 949 43 0.05 1224 36 0.03 EBL 2 3400 46 0.01 * 3400 46 0.01 * EBT 3 5100 886 0.19 5100 988 0.20 EBR 0 66 47 WBL 2 3400 150 0.04 3400 69 0.02 WBT 3 5100 917 0.25 * 5100 1,256 0.30 * WBR 0 358 297 Split Phase N/S Movements 0.07 0.15 E/W Movements 0.26 0.32 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.03 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.38 0.55 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 46 Rampart Street / Orangewood Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 71 0.04 * 1700 80 0.05 * NBT 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 0 0.00 NBR 1 1700 96 0.06 1700 126 0.07 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 1 1700 0 0.00 * 1700 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 EBL 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 0 0.00 * EBT 2 3400 968 0.33 * 3400 680 0.22 EBR 0 144 80 WBL 1 1700 152 0.09 * 1700 143 0.08 WBT 2 3400 729 0.21 3400 1,149 0.34 * WBR 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 0 0.00 N/S Movements 0.04 0.05 E/W Movements 0.42 0.34 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.51 0.44 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 47 Rampart Street / Chapman Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 1 1700 41 0.02 * 1700 53 0.03 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 1 1700 143 0.08 * 1700 136 0.08 * EBL 1 1700 104 0.06 * 1700 60 0.04 * EBT 4 6800 977 0.14 6800 1,066 0.16 EBR 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 0 WBT 4 6800 1,011 0.17 * 6800 1,031 0.18 * WBR 0 167 164 N/S Movements 0.02 0.03 E/W Movements 0.23 0.21 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.01 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.31 0.31 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 48 Ball Road / SR-57 Northbound Ramps Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 376 0.22 * 1700 498 0.29 * NBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 NBR 1 1700 473 0.28 * 1700 173 0.10 * SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 * EBT 3 5100 1,068 0.21 * 5100 867 0.17 EBR (free) 50 85000 483 0.01 85000 605 0.01 WBL 0 0 * 0 WBT 3 5100 643 0.13 5100 1,187 0.23 * WBR (free) 50 85000 295 0.00 85000 337 0.00 N/S Movements 0.22 0.29 E/W Movements 0.21 0.23 Rt. Turn Component 0.06 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.54 0.58 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 49 Ball Road / SR-57 Southbound Ramps Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 0.5 1257 559 0.44 * 1159 313 0.27 * SBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 SBR 1.5 2143 953 0.44 * 2241 605 0.27 * EBL 0 0 0 * EBT 3 5100 1,008 0.20 * 5100 1,132 0.22 EBR (free) 50 85000 633 0.01 85000 527 0.01 WBL 0 0 * 0 WBT 3 5100 781 0.15 5100 1,278 0.25 * WBR (free) 50 85000 222 0.00 85000 407 0.00 N/S Movements 0.44 0.27 E/W Movements 0.20 0.25 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.69 0.57 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 50 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 2792 404 0.14 * 2053 225 0.11 * NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBR 1.5 2308 334 0.14 * 3047 334 0.11 * SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 * EBT 3 5100 859 0.17 * 5100 847 0.17 EBR (free) 50 85000 295 0.00 85000 453 0.01 WBL 0 0 * 0 WBT 3 5100 800 0.16 5100 1,229 0.24 * WBR 1 1700 154 0.09 1700 236 0.14 N/S Movements 0.14 0.11 E/W Movements 0.17 0.24 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.36 0.40 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 51 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 1.5 1904 324 0.17 * 1700 227 0.13 * SBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 SBR 1.5 3196 544 0.17 * 3400 465 0.14 * EBL 0 0 * 0 EBT 3 5100 807 0.16 5100 1,077 0.21 * EBR (free) 50 85000 158 0.00 85000 363 0.00 WBL 0 0 0 * WBT 3 5100 925 0.18 * 5100 976 0.19 WBR (free) 50 85000 235 0.00 85000 459 0.01 N/S Movements 0.17 0.13 E/W Movements 0.18 0.21 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.40 0.40 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 52 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Northbound Ramps Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 1700 118 0.07 * 1700 64 0.04 * NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBR 1.5 3400 512 0.15 * 3400 212 0.06 * SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 * EBT 2 3400 1,086 0.32 * 3400 696 0.20 EBR (free) 50 85000 274 0.00 85000 273 0.00 WBL 0 0 * 0 WBT 2 3400 605 0.18 3400 1,274 0.37 * WBR 1 1700 155 0.09 1700 278 0.16 N/S Movements 0.07 0.04 E/W Movements 0.32 0.37 Rt. Turn Component 0.08 0.02 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.52 0.49 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 53 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Southbound Ramps Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 1.5 2207 306 0.14 * 1719 245 0.14 * SBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 SBR 1.5 2893 401 0.14 * 3381 482 0.14 * EBL 0 0 0 EBT 2 3400 1,116 0.33 * 3400 748 0.22 * EBR 1 1700 41 0.02 1700 113 0.07 WBL 1 1700 163 0.10 * 1700 455 0.27 * WBT 2 3400 495 0.15 3400 881 0.26 WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.14 0.14 E/W Movements 0.42 0.49 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.61 0.68 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B B Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 54 Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.33 1746 19 0.01 * 2311 121 0.05 * NBT 0.34 0 0 0.00 19 1 0.05 NBR 0.33 1654 18 0.01 1070 56 0.05 SBL 1 1700 1 0.00 1700 5 0.00 SBT 1 1700 0 0.00 * 1700 0 0.01 * SBR 0 7 14 EBL 1 1700 18 0.01 1700 31 0.02 * EBT 2 3400 1,364 0.40 * 3400 911 0.27 EBR 1 1700 132 0.08 1700 81 0.05 WBL 1 1700 25 0.01 * 1700 25 0.01 WBT 2 3400 899 0.27 3400 1,521 0.46 * WBR 0 8 31 N/S Movements 0.02 0.06 E/W Movements 0.42 0.47 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.48 0.59 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 55 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 33 0.02 1700 145 0.09 * NBT 1 1700 17 0.01 * 1700 25 0.02 NBR 0 7 15 SBL 1 1700 106 0.06 * 1700 148 0.09 SBT 0.5 638 12 0.02 46 5 0.11 * SBR 1.5 2763 52 0.02 3354 364 0.11 EBL 2 3400 356 0.10 * 3400 119 0.04 * EBT 3 5100 853 0.17 5100 880 0.17 EBR 1 1700 51 0.03 1700 26 0.02 WBL 2 3400 20 0.01 3400 30 0.01 WBT 3 5100 901 0.18 * 5100 1,089 0.21 * WBR 1 1700 95 0.06 1700 159 0.09 N/S Movements 0.08 0.19 E/W Movements 0.28 0.25 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.41 0.49 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 56 Eckhoff Street / Orangewood Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 92 0.05 * 1700 97 0.06 * NBT 1 1700 95 0.07 1700 60 0.05 NBR 0 25 21 SBL 1 1700 8 0.00 1700 49 0.03 SBT 1 1700 41 0.02 * 1700 114 0.07 * SBR 1 1700 279 0.16 1700 645 0.38 * EBL 1 1700 537 0.32 * 1700 234 0.14 * EBT 2 3400 791 0.23 3400 503 0.15 EBR 1 1700 53 0.03 1700 116 0.07 WBL 1 1700 9 0.01 1700 27 0.02 WBT 2 3400 357 0.11 * 3400 638 0.20 * WBR 0 33 37 N/S Movements 0.08 0.12 E/W Movements 0.43 0.34 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.17 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.56 0.69 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 57 Main Street / Taft Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 2852 125 0.04 * 2968 501 0.17 * NBT 0.5 548 24 0.04 432 73 0.17 NBR 1 1700 66 0.04 1700 359 0.21 SBL 1 1700 5 0.00 1700 20 0.01 SBT 1 1700 49 0.07 * 1700 51 0.14 * SBR 0 62 192 EBL 1 1700 103 0.06 1700 60 0.04 EBT 2 3400 865 0.36 * 3400 700 0.27 * EBR 0 374 234 WBL 1 1700 270 0.16 * 1700 165 0.10 * WBT 2 3400 767 0.23 3400 965 0.29 WBR 0 24 5 N/S Movements 0.11 0.31 E/W Movements 0.52 0.37 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.68 0.73 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B C Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 58 Main Street / Katella Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 47 0.01 * 3400 117 0.03 NBT 2 3400 216 0.06 3400 389 0.11 * NBR 1 1700 144 0.08 1700 295 0.17 SBL 1 1700 45 0.03 1700 91 0.05 * SBT 2 3400 418 0.12 * 3400 260 0.08 SBR 1 1700 71 0.04 1700 123 0.07 EBL 1 1700 109 0.06 1700 92 0.05 EBT 3 5100 537 0.11 * 5100 761 0.15 * EBR 1 1700 67 0.04 1700 75 0.04 WBL 1 1700 355 0.21 * 1700 218 0.13 * WBT 3 5100 780 0.17 5100 701 0.16 WBR 0 63 127 N/S Movements 0.14 0.17 E/W Movements 0.31 0.28 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.50 0.50 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 59 Batavia Street / Taft Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 45 0.03 * 1700 133 0.08 * NBT 2 3400 156 0.05 3400 453 0.17 NBR 0 29 113 SBL 1 1700 61 0.04 1700 80 0.05 SBT 2 3400 591 0.24 * 3400 269 0.16 * SBR 0 208 259 EBL 1 1700 226 0.13 * 1700 287 0.17 * EBT 2 3400 583 0.17 3400 586 0.17 EBR 1 1700 194 0.11 1700 120 0.07 WBL 1 1700 177 0.10 1700 92 0.05 WBT 2 3400 701 0.21 * 3400 736 0.22 * WBR 1 1700 42 0.02 1700 45 0.03 N/S Movements 0.26 0.23 E/W Movements 0.34 0.39 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.65 0.67 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B B Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 61 Clementine Street / Orangewood Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 8 * 4 * NBT 1 1700 0 0.02 1700 1 0.01 NBR 0 21 11 SBL 0 32 19 SBT 1 1700 0 0.04 * 1700 3 0.02 * SBR 0 32 20 EBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 36 0.02 * EBT 2 3400 800 0.24 * 3400 520 0.16 EBR 0 7 11 WBL 1 1700 5 0.00 * 1700 17 0.01 WBT 2 3400 333 0.10 3400 782 0.24 * WBR 0 18 29 N/S Movements 0.04 0.02 E/W Movements 0.24 0.26 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.33 0.33 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 62 Flower Street / Chapman Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 143 0.08 * 1700 183 0.11 * NBT 1 1700 13 0.02 1700 10 0.02 NBR 0 24 28 SBL 1 1700 22 0.01 1700 19 0.01 SBT 1 1700 28 0.04 * 1700 35 0.06 * SBR 0 32 63 EBL 1 1700 17 0.01 1700 37 0.02 * EBT 3 5100 944 0.20 * 5100 888 0.20 EBR 0 83 124 WBL 1 1700 17 0.01 * 1700 43 0.03 WBT 3 5100 847 0.17 5100 1,260 0.25 * WBR 0 14 35 N/S Movements 0.12 0.17 E/W Movements 0.21 0.28 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.38 0.49 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 63 Harbor Boulevard / Chapman Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 101 0.03 3400 161 0.05 * NBT 3 5100 768 0.15 * 5100 872 0.17 NBR 1 1700 158 0.09 1700 169 0.10 SBL 2 3400 103 0.03 * 3400 191 0.06 SBT 3 5100 610 0.12 5100 997 0.20 * SBR 1 1700 145 0.09 1700 192 0.11 EBL 2 3400 127 0.04 3400 182 0.05 * EBT 2 3400 1,002 0.29 * 3400 620 0.18 EBR 1 1700 112 0.07 1700 87 0.05 WBL 2 3400 87 0.03 * 3400 143 0.04 WBT 2 3400 404 0.12 3400 909 0.27 * WBR 1 1700 87 0.05 1700 159 0.09 N/S Movements 0.18 0.24 E/W Movements 0.32 0.32 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.55 0.61 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 64 I-5 Southbound Ramps / Chapman Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 609 0.18 * 3400 660 0.19 * NBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 NBR 1 1700 35 0.02 1700 73 0.04 * SBL 2 3400 211 0.06 3400 151 0.04 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 3 0.00 * EBL 0 0 0 EBT 3.5 5100 866 0.17 * 5100 952 0.19 * EBR 1.5 3400 913 0.27 3400 993 0.29 WBL 2 3400 96 0.03 * 3400 113 0.03 * WBT 3 5100 829 0.16 5100 979 0.19 WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.18 0.19 E/W Movements 0.20 0.22 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.43 0.46 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 65 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Chapman Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 42 0.02 * 1700 29 0.02 * NBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 NBR 1 1700 108 0.06 * 1700 151 0.09 * SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 EBL 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 0 0.00 EBT 2 3400 984 0.29 * 3400 851 0.25 * EBR (free) 50 85000 345 0.00 85000 415 0.00 WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBT 3 5100 820 0.16 5100 1,218 0.24 WBR (free) 50 85000 271 0.00 85000 282 0.00 N/S Movements 0.02 0.02 E/W Movements 0.29 0.25 Rt. Turn Component 0.04 0.07 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.40 0.39 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 66 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Chapman Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 17 * 140 NBT 1 1700 5 0.01 1700 31 0.10 * NBR 1 1700 16 0.01 1700 106 0.06 SBL 0 260 160 * SBT 1 1700 59 0.19 * 1700 8 0.10 SBR 1 1700 360 0.21 * 1700 276 0.16 * EBL 1 1700 3 0.00 1700 1 0.00 * EBT 3 5100 1,032 0.23 * 5100 989 0.20 EBR 0 143 19 WBL 1 1700 86 0.05 * 1700 23 0.01 WBT 2 3400 626 0.18 3400 1,053 0.31 * WBR (free) 50 85000 152 0.00 85000 161 0.00 N/S Movements 0.19 0.10 E/W Movements 0.28 0.31 Rt. Turn Component 0.02 0.06 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.54 0.52 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 67 Euclid Street / Ball Road Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 139 0.04 3400 137 0.04 NBT 3 5100 984 0.23 * 5100 1,157 0.25 * NBR 0 197 95 SBL 2 3400 113 0.03 * 3400 381 0.11 * SBT 3 5100 882 0.20 5100 1,083 0.27 SBR 0 124 276 EBL 2 3400 216 0.06 3400 227 0.07 * EBT 3 5100 840 0.19 * 5100 681 0.18 EBR 0 119 254 WBL 2 3400 302 0.09 * 3400 93 0.03 WBT 3 5100 617 0.14 5100 862 0.19 * WBR 0 74 104 N/S Movements 0.26 0.36 E/W Movements 0.28 0.26 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.59 0.66 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 68 Walnut Street / Cerritos Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 107 * 197 * NBT 2 3400 259 0.11 3400 303 0.15 NBR 0 0 0 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 2 3400 384 0.18 * 3400 348 0.19 * SBR 0 244 287 EBL 1 1700 363 0.21 * 1700 286 0.17 * EBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 EBR 1 1700 185 0.11 * 1700 108 0.06 * WBL 0 0 0 WBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.18 0.19 E/W Movements 0.21 0.17 Rt. Turn Component 0.11 0.06 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.56 0.47 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 69 Disneyland Drive / I-5 Southbound Off Ramp Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 * 0 NBT 2 3400 125 0.04 3400 292 0.09 * NBR (free) 50 85000 718 0.01 85000 758 0.01 SBL 0 0 0 * SBT 2 3400 447 0.13 * 3400 277 0.08 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * EBR 0 0 0 WBL 3 5100 801 0.16 * 5100 645 0.13 * WBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 WBR 1 1700 14 0.01 * 1700 48 0.03 * N/S Movements 0.13 0.09 E/W Movements 0.16 0.13 Rt. Turn Component 0.01 0.03 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.35 0.29 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 70 Disneyland Drive/ Magic Way Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 410 0.12 * 3400 193 0.06 * NBT 2 3400 473 0.14 3400 501 0.15 NBR 0 0 0 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 2 3400 284 0.08 * 3400 368 0.11 * SBR 1 1700 141 0.08 1700 236 0.14 EBL 2 3400 101 0.03 * 3400 288 0.08 * EBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 EBR 2 3400 78 0.02 3400 141 0.04 WBL 0 0 0 WBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.20 0.17 E/W Movements 0.03 0.08 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.28 0.30 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 71 Ox Road / Cast Place / Ball Road Date 12/20/2010 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.33 2746 84 0.03 1730 227 0.13 NBT 0.34 33 1 0.03 38 5 0.13 NBR 1.33 2321 71 0.03 3331 437 0.13 SBL 1.33 2053 32 0.02 1979 28 0.01 SBT 0.34 449 7 0.02 7 0 0.01 SBR 0.33 898 14 0.02 1414 20 0.01 EBL 1 1700 19 0.01 1700 11 0.01 * EBT 3 5100 1,849 0.36 * 5100 1,334 0.26 EBR 1 1700 267 0.16 1700 154 0.09 WBL 2 3400 347 0.10 * 3400 116 0.03 WBT 3 5100 1,390 0.28 5100 1,758 0.35 * WBR 0 22 28 N/S Movements 0.05 0.15 E/W Movements 0.46 0.36 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.56 0.55 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 72 Convention Center/ Katella Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 NBR 0 0 0 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 * EBT 3 5100 1,660 0.33 * 5100 1,173 0.23 EBR 0 23 1 WBL 2 3400 46 0.01 * 3400 6 0.00 WBT 3 5100 785 0.15 5100 1,822 0.36 * WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.00 0.00 E/W Movements 0.34 0.36 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.39 0.41 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 73 Harbor Boulevard / Lincoln Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 89 0.05 1700 186 0.11 NBT 3 5100 605 0.13 * 5100 942 0.21 * NBR 0 81 150 SBL 1 1700 175 0.10 * 1700 146 0.09 * SBT 3 5100 823 0.16 5100 792 0.16 SBR 1 1700 126 0.07 1700 139 0.08 EBL 1 1700 127 0.07 1700 228 0.13 * EBT 2 3400 793 0.25 * 3400 673 0.23 EBR 0 47 122 WBL 1 1700 128 0.08 * 1700 181 0.11 WBT 2 3400 823 0.24 3400 952 0.28 * WBR 1 1700 62 0.04 1700 144 0.08 N/S Movements 0.24 0.30 E/W Movements 0.32 0.41 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.61 0.76 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B C Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 74 Harbor Boulevard / Broadway Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 58 0.03 * 1700 109 0.06 NBT 2 3400 569 0.17 3400 987 0.29 * NBR 1 1700 106 0.06 1700 102 0.06 SBL 1 1700 88 0.05 1700 147 0.09 * SBT 2 3400 773 0.23 * 3400 712 0.21 SBR 1 1700 153 0.09 1700 190 0.11 EBL 1 1700 138 0.08 * 1700 145 0.09 * EBT 2 3400 535 0.16 3400 404 0.12 EBR 1 1700 53 0.03 1700 64 0.04 WBL 2 3400 50 0.01 3400 115 0.03 WBT 2 3400 354 0.10 * 3400 550 0.16 * WBR 1 1700 55 0.03 1700 148 0.09 N/S Movements 0.26 0.38 E/W Movements 0.19 0.25 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.50 0.67 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 75 Harbor Boulevard / Manchester Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 100 0.06 1700 112 0.07 NBT 3 5100 746 0.15 * 5100 1,144 0.23 * NBR 0 35 36 SBL 1 1700 115 0.07 * 1700 80 0.05 * SBT 4 6800 843 0.12 6800 891 0.13 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * EBR 0 0 0 WBL 1 1700 32 0.02 * 1700 43 0.03 * WBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 WBR 1 1700 61 0.04 1700 204 0.12 * N/S Movements 0.22 0.28 E/W Movements 0.02 0.03 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.07 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.29 0.43 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 76 Anaheim Boulevard / Lincoln Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 65 0.04 * 1700 164 0.10 NBT 2 3400 331 0.10 3400 752 0.22 * NBR 1 1700 102 0.06 1700 94 0.06 SBL 1 1700 83 0.05 1700 111 0.07 * SBT 2 3400 517 0.15 * 3400 487 0.14 SBR 1 1700 56 0.03 1700 80 0.05 EBL 1 1700 76 0.04 1700 112 0.07 * EBT 3 5100 567 0.14 * 5100 683 0.15 EBR 0 131 99 WBL 1 1700 156 0.09 * 1700 132 0.08 WBT 3 5100 860 0.18 5100 880 0.20 * WBR 0 69 129 N/S Movements 0.19 0.29 E/W Movements 0.23 0.26 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.47 0.60 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 77 Anaheim Boulevard / Broadway Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 82 0.05 * 1700 122 0.07 * NBT 3 5100 462 0.10 5100 853 0.18 NBR 0 62 62 SBL 1 1700 69 0.04 1700 98 0.06 SBT 2 3400 566 0.18 * 3400 615 0.20 * SBR 0 49 81 EBL 1 1700 103 0.06 1700 139 0.08 * EBT 2 3400 409 0.12 * 3400 363 0.11 EBR 1 1700 115 0.07 1700 89 0.05 WBL 1 1700 95 0.06 * 1700 79 0.05 WBT 2 3400 342 0.10 3400 365 0.11 * WBR 1 1700 67 0.04 1700 90 0.05 N/S Movements 0.23 0.28 E/W Movements 0.18 0.19 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.46 0.52 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 78 Olive Street / Lincoln Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 46 0.03 * 1700 49 0.03 NBT 1 1700 79 0.05 1700 132 0.08 * NBR 1 1700 82 0.05 1700 105 0.06 SBL 1 1700 48 0.03 1700 33 0.02 * SBT 1 1700 83 0.05 * 1700 113 0.07 SBR 1 1700 65 0.04 1700 49 0.03 EBL 1 1700 21 0.01 1700 40 0.02 EBT 2 3400 669 0.20 * 3400 784 0.23 * EBR 1 1700 40 0.02 1700 61 0.04 WBL 1 1700 125 0.07 * 1700 82 0.05 * WBT 3 5100 1,087 0.22 5100 973 0.20 WBR 0 19 63 N/S Movements 0.08 0.10 E/W Movements 0.27 0.28 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.40 0.43 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 79 Flore Street / West Place / Ball Road Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 15 0.01 1700 30 0.02 NBT 1 1700 0 0.05 * 1700 0 0.09 * NBR 0 82 154 SBL 1 1700 48 0.03 * 1700 17 0.01 * SBT 1 1700 5 0.01 1700 2 0.00 SBR 0 7 2 EBL 1 1700 6 0.00 1700 22 0.01 * EBT 3 5100 1,458 0.30 * 5100 973 0.20 EBR 0 57 41 WBL 1 1700 176 0.10 * 1700 143 0.08 WBT 3 5100 693 0.14 5100 1,534 0.31 * WBR 0 15 47 N/S Movements 0.08 0.10 E/W Movements 0.40 0.32 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.53 0.47 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 80 West Street / Orangewood Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 16 0.01 1700 48 0.03 NBT 2 3400 326 0.13 * 3400 428 0.14 * NBR 0 114 64 SBL 1 1700 122 0.07 * 1700 99 0.06 * SBT 2 3400 342 0.10 3400 395 0.14 SBR 0 7 70 EBL 0 29 23 * EBT 1 1700 419 0.27 * 1700 244 0.18 EBR 0 12 34 WBL 0 34 * 89 WBT 1 1700 118 0.09 1700 409 0.29 * WBR 1 1700 155 0.09 1700 153 0.09 N/S Movements 0.20 0.20 Split Phase E/W Movements 0.36 0.47 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.61 0.72 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B C Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 81 Struck Avenue / Katella Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 3106 116 0.04 * 3219 356 0.11 * NBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 NBR 0.5 294 11 0.04 * 181 20 0.11 * SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 * EBT 3 5100 914 0.18 * 5100 861 0.17 EBR 1 1700 264 0.16 1700 208 0.12 WBL 1 1700 23 0.01 * 1700 7 0.00 WBT 3 5100 705 0.14 5100 933 0.18 * WBR 0 4 0 N/S Movements 0.04 0.11 E/W Movements 0.19 0.18 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.28 0.34 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Existing Conditions Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No.14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report – Technical Appendices Appendix A-2 ICU Worksheets under 2015 No Project Conditions ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 1 Euclid Street / Katella Avenue Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 110 0.03 * 3400 270 0.08 NBT 3 5100 770 0.15 5100 1,180 0.23 * NBR 1 1700 180 0.11 1700 130 0.08 SBL 2 3400 210 0.06 3400 230 0.07 * SBT 3 5100 1,160 0.23 * 5100 1,020 0.20 SBR 1 1700 200 0.12 1700 70 0.04 EBL 2 3400 160 0.05 3400 270 0.08 * EBT 3 5100 1,320 0.28 * 5100 710 0.18 EBR 0 120 230 WBL 2 3400 240 0.07 * 3400 210 0.06 WBT 3 5100 440 0.09 5100 1,640 0.32 * WBR 1 1700 130 0.08 1700 200 0.12 N/S Movements 0.26 0.30 E/W Movements 0.35 0.40 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.66 0.75 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B C Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 2 Ninth Street / Katella Avenue Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 180 0.11 * 1700 290 0.17 * NBT 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 150 0.09 NBR 1 1700 160 0.09 1700 160 0.09 SBL 1 1700 30 0.02 1700 20 0.01 SBT 1 1700 130 0.10 * 1700 80 0.07 * SBR 0 40 40 EBL 1 1700 30 0.02 1700 60 0.04 * EBT 3 5100 1,630 0.32 * 5100 910 0.18 EBR 1 1700 200 0.12 1700 230 0.14 WBL 1 1700 140 0.08 * 1700 230 0.14 WBT 3 5100 610 0.12 5100 1,650 0.32 * WBR 1 1700 30 0.02 1700 60 0.04 N/S Movements 0.21 0.24 E/W Movements 0.40 0.36 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.66 0.65 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B B Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 3 Walnut Street / Ball Road Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 100 0.06 * 1700 160 0.09 * NBT 1 1700 150 0.09 1700 250 0.15 NBR 1 1700 380 0.22 * 1700 290 0.17 SBL 1 1700 110 0.06 1700 60 0.04 SBT 1 1700 190 0.11 * 1700 260 0.15 * SBR 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 70 0.04 EBL 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 50 0.03 EBT 3 5100 1,190 0.25 * 5100 680 0.15 * EBR 0 100 100 WBL 1 1700 190 0.11 * 1700 290 0.17 * WBT 3 5100 640 0.14 5100 1,160 0.23 WBR 0 50 30 N/S Movements 0.17 0.25 E/W Movements 0.36 0.32 Rt. Turn Component 0.02 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.61 0.62 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B B Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 4 Walnut Street / Katella Avenue Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 10 10 NBT 1 1700 10 0.01 * 1700 0 0.01 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 1.5 3340 560 0.17 * 3269 250 0.08 * SBT 0.5 60 10 0.17 131 10 0.08 SBR 1 1700 170 0.10 1700 220 0.13 EBL 1 1700 150 0.09 1700 140 0.08 * EBT 3 5100 1,700 0.33 * 5100 960 0.19 EBR 0 0 10 WBL 1 1700 30 0.02 * 1700 50 0.03 WBT 3 5100 600 0.16 5100 1,580 0.42 * WBR 0 220 540 N/S Movements 0.18 0.08 E/W Movements 0.35 0.50 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.58 0.63 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 5 Disneyland Drive / Ball Road Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 1341 140 0.10 1153 200 0.17 NBT 1 2969 310 0.10 3285 570 0.17 NBR 1.5 2490 260 0.10 2363 410 0.17 SBL 1.5 3119 500 0.16 1881 260 0.14 SBT 2.5 3681 470 0.16 4919 520 0.14 SBR 0 120 160 EBL 2 3400 260 0.08 3400 230 0.07 * EBT 3 5100 1,260 0.25 * 5100 990 0.19 EBR 1 1700 120 0.07 1700 130 0.08 WBL 2 3400 420 0.12 * 3400 450 0.13 WBT 3 5100 730 0.16 5100 1,430 0.33 * WBR 0 70 240 N/S Movements 0.26 0.31 E/W Movements 0.37 0.40 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.10 0.10 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.74 0.81 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C D Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 6 Disneyland Drive / West Street / Katella Avenue Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 200 0.06 3400 230 0.07 NBT 2 3400 340 0.10 * 3400 340 0.10 * NBR 1 1700 220 0.13 1700 150 0.09 SBL 2 3400 270 0.08 * 3400 500 0.15 * SBT 2 3400 220 0.06 3400 410 0.12 SBR 1 1700 240 0.14 * 1700 280 0.16 * EBL 2 3400 140 0.04 3400 110 0.03 * EBT 3 5100 1,860 0.36 * 5100 910 0.18 EBR 1 1700 180 0.11 1700 150 0.09 WBL 2 3400 150 0.04 * 3400 120 0.04 WBT 3 5100 880 0.17 5100 1,780 0.35 * WBR 1 1700 260 0.15 1700 280 0.16 N/S Movements 0.18 0.25 E/W Movements 0.41 0.38 Rt. Turn Component 0.02 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.66 0.68 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B B Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 7 Harbor Boulevard / Vermont Avenue Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 60 0.04 * 1700 130 0.08 NBT 2 3400 630 0.19 3400 1,480 0.44 * NBR 1 1700 130 0.08 1700 140 0.08 SBL 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 60 0.04 * SBT 2 3400 1,270 0.38 * 3400 840 0.26 SBR 0 10 30 EBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 20 0.01 EBT 1 1700 110 0.15 * 1700 50 0.09 * EBR 0 140 100 WBL 1 1700 120 0.07 * 1700 170 0.10 * WBT 1 1700 70 0.06 1700 100 0.09 WBR 0 40 60 N/S Movements 0.41 0.47 E/W Movements 0.22 0.19 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.68 0.71 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B C Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 8 Harbor Boulevard / Ball Road Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 640 0.19 * 3400 720 0.21 * NBT 3 5100 720 0.14 5100 1,220 0.24 NBR 1 1700 280 0.16 1700 320 0.19 SBL 2 3400 160 0.05 3400 170 0.05 SBT 3 5100 1,500 0.29 * 5100 910 0.18 * SBR 1 1700 340 0.20 1700 280 0.16 EBL 2 3400 330 0.10 3400 400 0.12 * EBT 3 5100 1,290 0.25 * 5100 1,080 0.21 EBR 1 1700 660 0.39 1700 520 0.31 WBL 2 3400 160 0.05 * 3400 260 0.08 WBT 4 6800 990 0.16 6800 1,070 0.18 * WBR 0 130 120 N/S Movements 0.48 0.39 E/W Movements 0.30 0.29 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.83 0.73 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D C Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 9 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 NB Ramps Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 * 0 NBT 3 5100 840 0.16 5100 1,310 0.26 * NBR (free) 50 85000 190 0.00 85000 520 0.01 SBL 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 60 0.04 * SBT 4 6800 2,260 0.33 * 6800 1,620 0.24 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * EBR 0 0 0 WBL 1.5 1700 70 0.04 * 1700 90 0.05 * WBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 WBR 1.5 3400 710 0.21 * 3400 860 0.25 * N/S Movements 0.33 0.29 E/W Movements 0.04 0.05 Rt. Turn Component 0.18 0.22 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.60 0.61 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 10 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 SB Ramps Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 60 0.04 * 1700 80 0.05 * NBT 4 6800 790 0.12 6800 1,600 0.24 NBR 0 0 0 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 3 5100 1,200 0.24 * 5100 980 0.19 * SBR (free) 50 85000 1,090 0.01 85000 780 0.01 EBL 2 3400 270 0.08 * 3400 270 0.08 * EBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 EBR (free) 50 85000 300 0.00 85000 400 0.00 WBL 0 0 0 WBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.27 0.24 E/W Movements 0.08 0.08 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.40 0.37 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 11 Harbor Boulevard / Disney Way Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 170 0.05 * 3400 50 0.01 NBT 3 5100 740 0.18 5100 1,280 0.26 * NBR 0 170 50 SBL 2 3400 160 0.05 3400 160 0.05 * SBT 3 5100 930 0.21 * 5100 1,140 0.23 SBR 0 120 40 EBL 1 1700 10 0.01 * 1700 40 0.02 EBT 3 5100 0 0.00 5100 50 0.01 * EBR 0 10 10 WBL 1 1700 90 0.05 1700 300 0.18 * WBT 3 5100 140 0.05 * 5100 80 0.06 WBR 0 120 250 N/S Movements 0.26 0.31 E/W Movements 0.06 0.19 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.36 0.55 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 12 Harbor Boulevard / Katella Avenue Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 160 0.05 * 3400 310 0.09 NBT 3 5100 580 0.11 5100 930 0.18 * NBR 1 1700 160 0.09 1700 220 0.13 SBL 2 3400 90 0.03 3400 200 0.06 * SBT 3 5100 750 0.15 * 5100 600 0.12 SBR 1 1700 120 0.07 1700 310 0.18 EBL 2 3400 230 0.07 3400 270 0.08 * EBT 3 5100 1,830 0.36 * 5100 1,090 0.21 EBR 1 1700 100 0.06 1700 170 0.10 WBL 2 3400 200 0.06 * 3400 400 0.12 WBT 3 5100 960 0.19 5100 1,720 0.34 * WBR 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 170 0.10 N/S Movements 0.19 0.24 E/W Movements 0.42 0.42 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.66 0.71 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B C Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 13 Harbor Boulevard / Convention Way Date 11/19/2010 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 169 0.05 3400 123 0.04 * NBT 3 5100 940 0.22 * 5100 1,130 0.25 NBR 0 187 120 SBL 2 3400 105 0.03 * 3400 60 0.02 SBT 3 5100 880 0.17 5100 1,200 0.24 * SBR 1 1700 187 0.11 1700 117 0.07 EBL 2 3400 92 0.03 * 3400 132 0.04 EBT 0.5 2043 130 0.06 1880 130 0.07 * EBR 1.5 1357 86 0.06 1520 105 0.07 WBL 1 1700 40 0.02 1700 130 0.08 * WBT 0.5 850 86 0.10 * 850 50 0.06 WBR 1.5 2550 80 0.03 2550 150 0.06 N/S Movements 0.25 0.27 E/W Movements 0.13 0.15 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.43 0.47 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 14 Harbor Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 130 0.08 * NBT 3 5100 980 0.22 * 5100 1,190 0.27 NBR 0 130 180 SBL 1 1700 60 0.04 * 1700 100 0.06 SBT 3 5100 840 0.17 5100 1,210 0.26 * SBR 0 40 100 EBL 1 1700 120 0.07 1700 70 0.04 * EBT 2 3400 780 0.26 * 3400 370 0.13 EBR 0 110 80 WBL 1 1700 120 0.07 * 1700 210 0.12 WBT 2 3400 260 0.11 3400 700 0.23 * WBR 0 120 90 N/S Movements 0.25 0.33 E/W Movements 0.33 0.27 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.64 0.66 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B B Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 15 Clementine Street / Disney Way Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 80 0.05 NBT 2 3400 60 0.03 * 3400 110 0.05 * NBR 0 30 50 SBL 2 3400 210 0.06 * 3400 240 0.07 * SBT 2 3400 50 0.02 3400 80 0.07 SBR 0 30 150 EBL 1 1700 80 0.05 * 1700 30 0.02 * EBT 3 5100 130 0.03 5100 140 0.03 EBR 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 70 0.04 WBL 1 1700 120 0.07 1700 110 0.06 WBT 3 5100 360 0.11 * 5100 340 0.12 * WBR 0 190 260 N/S Movements 0.09 0.12 E/W Movements 0.15 0.14 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.29 0.30 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 16 Clementine Street / Katella Avenue Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 40 0.02 * 1700 110 0.06 NBT 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 120 0.07 * NBR 1 1700 100 0.06 1700 300 0.18 * SBL 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 130 0.08 * SBT 1 1700 140 0.08 * 1700 110 0.06 SBR 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 110 0.06 EBL 2 3400 50 0.01 3400 70 0.02 * EBT 3 5100 1,880 0.39 * 5100 1,290 0.27 EBR 0 120 70 WBL 2 3400 230 0.07 * 3400 130 0.04 WBT 3 5100 1,130 0.22 5100 2,200 0.43 * WBR 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 80 0.05 N/S Movements 0.11 0.15 E/W Movements 0.46 0.45 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.07 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.62 0.72 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B C Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 17 I-5 SB Off Ramp / Disney Way Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 20 0.01 * 1700 20 0.01 * NBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 NBR 1 1700 30 0.02 1700 60 0.04 * SBL 1.33 3302 360 0.11 3302 360 0.11 SBT 0.34 98 10 0.10 * 98 10 0.10 * SBR 1.33 1700 150 0.09 1700 120 0.07 EBL 0 0 0 * EBT 3 5100 350 0.07 * 5100 370 0.07 EBR 0 10 10 WBL 1 1700 60 0.04 * 1700 50 0.03 WBT 3 5100 400 0.08 5100 640 0.13 * WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.11 0.11 E/W Movements 0.11 0.13 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.27 0.29 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 18 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 150 0.04 * 3400 210 0.06 NBT 2 3400 480 0.14 3400 1,360 0.40 * NBR 1 1700 190 0.11 1700 150 0.09 SBL 2 3400 310 0.09 3400 220 0.06 * SBT 3 5100 1,080 0.21 * 5100 750 0.15 SBR 1 1700 200 0.12 1700 140 0.08 EBL 1 1700 160 0.09 1700 230 0.14 * EBT 3 5100 1,380 0.32 * 5100 1,300 0.29 EBR 0 230 200 WBL 1 1700 170 0.10 * 1700 160 0.09 WBT 3 5100 960 0.19 5100 1,680 0.33 * WBR 1 1700 100 0.06 1700 260 0.15 N/S Movements 0.26 0.46 E/W Movements 0.42 0.46 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.72 0.98 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C E Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 19 Anaheim Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 100 0.06 1700 90 0.05 NBT 3 5100 780 0.15 * 5100 1,360 0.27 * NBR 1 1700 410 0.24 1700 400 0.24 SBL 1 1700 340 0.20 * 1700 170 0.10 * SBT 3 5100 1,170 0.24 5100 1,090 0.22 SBR 0 60 50 EBL 1 1700 30 0.02 1700 50 0.03 EBT 1 1700 20 0.04 * 1700 40 0.11 * EBR 0 40 140 WBL 1 1700 290 0.17 * 1700 560 0.33 * WBT 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 90 0.05 WBR 1 1700 110 0.06 1700 370 0.22 * N/S Movements 0.35 0.37 E/W Movements 0.21 0.44 Rt. Turn Component 0.09 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.70 0.85 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B D Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 20 Anaheim Boulevard / I-5 NB Ramps Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 230 0.07 * 3400 190 0.06 * NBT 3 5100 920 0.18 5100 1,150 0.23 NBR 0 0 0 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 3 5100 1,410 0.28 * 5100 1,540 0.30 * SBR 1 1700 110 0.06 1700 320 0.19 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 EBR 0 0 0 WBL 0.5 1020 30 0.03 276 80 0.29 WBT 1 680 20 0.03 1757 510 0.29 WBR 1.5 3400 390 0.11 * 3067 890 0.29 N/S Movements 0.34 0.36 E/W Movements 0.03 0.29 Rt. Turn Component 0.09 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.51 0.70 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 21 Anaheim Boulevard / Disney Way Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 40 0.02 1700 90 0.05 NBT 3 5100 850 0.17 * 5100 1,040 0.21 * NBR 0 10 10 SBL 2 3400 460 0.14 * 3400 530 0.16 * SBT 3 5100 820 0.18 5100 1,000 0.21 SBR 0 90 90 EBL 2 3400 340 0.10 * 3400 340 0.10 * EBT 4 6800 320 0.06 6800 260 0.06 EBR 0 100 180 WBL 0 0 0 WBT 3 5100 290 0.06 * 5100 440 0.09 * WBR 0 10 0 N/S Movements 0.30 0.36 E/W Movements 0.16 0.19 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.51 0.60 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 22 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 190 0.06 3400 170 0.05 NBT 3 5100 550 0.11 * 5100 720 0.14 * NBR 1 1700 250 0.15 1700 240 0.14 SBL 2 3400 190 0.06 * 3400 210 0.06 * SBT 3 5100 410 0.08 5100 440 0.09 SBR 1 1700 220 0.13 1700 240 0.14 EBL 2 3400 210 0.06 3400 280 0.08 * EBT 4 6800 1,730 0.26 * 6800 1,330 0.22 EBR 0 60 140 WBL 2 3400 260 0.08 * 3400 360 0.11 WBT 3 5100 990 0.19 5100 1,910 0.37 * WBR 1 1700 40 0.02 1700 90 0.05 N/S Movements 0.16 0.20 E/W Movements 0.34 0.46 Rt. Turn Component 0.04 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.59 0.71 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A C Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 23 Haster Street / Gene Autry Way Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 2.5 3400 440 0.13 * 3596 550 0.15 * NBR 0.5 1700 360 0.21 * 1504 230 0.15 SBL 1 1700 150 0.09 * 1700 150 0.09 * SBT 3 5100 380 0.07 5100 390 0.08 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * EBR 0 0 0 WBL 2 3400 190 0.06 * 3400 500 0.15 * WBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 WBR 2 3400 60 0.02 3400 220 0.06 N/S Movements 0.22 0.24 E/W Movements 0.06 0.15 Rt. Turn Component 0.03 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.35 0.44 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 24 Haster Street / Orangewood Avenue Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 130 0.08 NBT 2 3400 750 0.25 * 3400 1,010 0.33 * NBR 0 90 100 SBL 1 1700 110 0.06 * 1700 110 0.06 * SBT 2 3400 710 0.24 3400 920 0.30 SBR 0 120 110 EBL 1 1700 150 0.09 1700 130 0.08 * EBT 2 3400 750 0.24 * 3400 380 0.13 EBR 0 80 60 WBL 1 1700 90 0.05 * 1700 180 0.11 WBT 2 3400 240 0.11 3400 740 0.28 * WBR 0 120 200 N/S Movements 0.31 0.39 E/W Movements 0.30 0.35 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.66 0.79 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B C Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 25 Manchester Avenue / Katella Avenue Date 11/19/2010 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 1700 80 0.05 * 1700 80 0.05 * NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBR 1.5 3400 580 0.17 * 3400 180 0.05 SBL 2 3400 160 0.05 3400 160 0.05 SBT 2 3400 220 0.06 * 3400 80 0.02 * SBR 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 0 0.00 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 3 5100 1,062 0.21 * 5100 1,262 0.25 * EBR 1 1700 814 0.48 * 1700 703 0.41 * WBL 2 3400 240 0.07 * 3400 480 0.14 * WBT 3 5100 1,392 0.27 5100 1,916 0.38 WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.11 0.07 E/W Movements 0.28 0.39 Rt. Turn Component 0.28 0.12 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.72 0.63 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C B Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 26 Anaheim Way / Katella Avenue Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 3400 530 0.16 * 2714 680 0.25 NBT 3 3400 370 0.11 5108 1,280 0.25 NBR 0.5 1700 420 0.25 * 678 170 0.25 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 2 3400 40 0.01 3400 40 0.01 EBT 3 5100 1,750 0.34 * 5100 1,580 0.31 * EBR 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBT 3.5 6800 1,170 0.17 6800 1,870 0.28 WBR 1.5 1700 170 0.10 1700 390 0.23 N/S Movements 0.16 0.25 E/W Movements 0.34 0.31 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.55 0.61 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 27 East Street / Ball Road Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 2 3400 340 0.10 * 3400 240 0.07 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 1 1700 420 0.25 * 1700 280 0.16 EBL 1 1700 190 0.11 * 1700 530 0.31 * EBT 3 5100 1,030 0.20 5100 1,220 0.24 EBR 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 0 WBT 3 5100 1,310 0.29 * 5100 1,380 0.35 * WBR 0 160 430 N/S Movements 0.10 0.07 E/W Movements 0.40 0.67 Rt. Turn Component 0.04 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.59 0.79 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A C Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 28 Lewis Street / Ball Road Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 180 0.11 * NBT 2 3400 70 0.06 * 3400 10 0.14 NBR 0 150 460 SBL 0 10 * 70 SBT 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 110 0.15 * SBR 0 0 80 EBL 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 10 0.01 EBT 3 5100 1,040 0.25 * 5100 1,180 0.26 * EBR 0 230 130 WBL 1 1700 410 0.24 * 1700 220 0.13 * WBT 3 5100 1,230 0.25 5100 1,390 0.27 WBR 0 70 10 N/S Movements 0.06 0.26 E/W Movements 0.49 0.39 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.60 0.70 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 29 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 30 0.02 NBT 2 3400 270 0.08 * 3400 460 0.14 * NBR 1 1700 130 0.08 1700 150 0.09 SBL 1 1700 120 0.07 * 1700 40 0.02 * SBT 2 3400 390 0.14 3400 360 0.14 SBR 0 70 110 EBL 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 70 0.04 * EBT 2 3400 530 0.19 * 3400 440 0.16 EBR 0 100 110 WBL 1 1700 110 0.06 * 1700 110 0.06 WBT 2 3400 320 0.11 3400 690 0.23 * WBR 0 50 90 N/S Movements 0.15 0.16 E/W Movements 0.25 0.27 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.45 0.48 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 30 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 30 0.02 1700 100 0.06 NBT 1 1700 160 0.18 * 1700 270 0.26 * NBR 0 150 180 SBL 1 1700 110 0.06 * 1700 160 0.09 * SBT 1 1700 110 0.06 1700 150 0.09 SBR 1 1700 200 0.12 1700 510 0.30 * EBL 1 1700 410 0.24 * 1700 220 0.13 * EBT 3 5100 1,390 0.28 5100 1,300 0.26 EBR 0 60 50 WBL 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 150 0.09 WBT 3 5100 1,010 0.22 * 5100 1,760 0.36 * WBR 0 90 100 N/S Movements 0.25 0.36 E/W Movements 0.46 0.49 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.08 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.75 0.98 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C E Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 32 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 10 0.01 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 2 3400 30 0.01 3400 50 0.01 SBL 2 3400 280 0.08 * 3400 140 0.04 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 1 1700 20 0.01 * 1700 10 0.01 EBL 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 60 0.04 * EBT 3 5100 300 0.07 * 5100 160 0.04 EBR 0 40 40 WBL 1 1700 40 0.02 * 1700 60 0.04 WBT 3 5100 110 0.04 5100 510 0.15 * WBR 0 70 260 N/S Movements 0.08 0.04 E/W Movements 0.09 0.19 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.22 0.28 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 33 Lewis Street / Orangewood Avenue Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 50 0.03 * 1700 170 0.10 * NBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 NBR (free) 50 85000 500 0.01 85000 400 0.00 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 EBL 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 0 0.00 EBT 2 3400 1,000 0.32 * 3400 540 0.18 * EBR 0 80 70 WBL 1 1700 280 0.16 * 1700 310 0.18 * WBT 2 3400 360 0.11 3400 1,150 0.34 WBR 0 10 0 N/S Movements 0.03 0.10 E/W Movements 0.48 0.36 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.56 0.51 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 34 Manchester Avenue / Orangewood Avenue Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR (free) 0 0 0 SBL 2 3400 680 0.20 * 3400 390 0.11 * SBT 3 5100 590 0.17 5100 330 0.10 SBR 0 270 200 EBL 0 0 0 * EBT 3 5100 1,040 0.20 * 5100 630 0.12 EBR 1 1700 540 0.32 * 1700 360 0.21 * WBL 2 3400 40 0.01 * 3400 290 0.09 WBT 3 5100 400 0.08 5100 1,250 0.25 * WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.20 0.11 E/W Movements 0.22 0.25 Rt. Turn Component 0.11 0.09 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.58 0.50 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 35 Anaheim Way / Orangewood Avenue Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 50 190 NBT 3 5100 190 0.05 * 5100 180 0.07 * NBR 0 20 10 SBL 0 0 * 0 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 2 3400 370 0.11 3400 280 0.08 * EBT 3 5100 1,300 0.25 * 5100 670 0.13 EBR 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 * 0 WBT 3 5100 400 0.08 5100 1,160 0.23 * WBR 1 1700 330 0.19 * 1700 560 0.33 * N/S Movements 0.05 0.07 E/W Movements 0.25 0.31 Rt. Turn Component 0.12 0.10 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.47 0.54 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 36 State College Boulevard / Ball Road Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 100 0.03 * 3400 210 0.06 NBT 3 5100 380 0.07 5100 1,020 0.20 * NBR 1 1700 100 0.06 1700 160 0.09 SBL 2 3400 310 0.09 3400 240 0.07 * SBT 3 5100 860 0.22 * 5100 500 0.13 SBR 0 270 170 EBL 1 1700 190 0.11 1700 200 0.12 * EBT 3 5100 960 0.23 * 5100 1,060 0.24 EBR 0 230 170 WBL 1 1700 220 0.13 * 1700 150 0.09 WBT 3 5100 1,110 0.25 5100 1,380 0.31 * WBR 0 140 210 N/S Movements 0.25 0.27 E/W Movements 0.36 0.43 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.66 0.75 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B C Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 37 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 130 0.04 * 3400 220 0.06 NBT 3 5100 460 0.13 5100 770 0.19 * NBR 0 190 210 SBL 2 3400 210 0.06 3400 170 0.05 * SBT 3 5100 780 0.15 * 5100 650 0.13 SBR 1 1700 370 0.22 1700 380 0.22 EBL 2 3400 380 0.11 3400 410 0.12 * EBT 2.5 5100 990 0.19 * 5100 850 0.17 EBR 1.5 1700 330 0.19 1700 220 0.13 WBL 2 3400 300 0.09 * 3400 280 0.08 WBT 3 5100 590 0.12 5100 1,250 0.25 * WBR 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 170 0.10 N/S Movements 0.19 0.24 E/W Movements 0.28 0.37 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.52 0.66 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 38 State College Boulevard / Gene Autry Way Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 100 0.03 * 3400 150 0.04 * NBT 3 5100 690 0.17 5100 1,060 0.24 NBR 0 180 150 SBL 2 3400 10 0.00 3400 0 0.00 SBT 3 5100 1,030 0.25 * 5100 1,100 0.25 * SBR 0 270 200 EBL 1.5 2550 290 0.11 2550 110 0.04 * EBT 1.5 2550 120 0.21 * 2550 70 0.13 EBR 0 410 260 WBL 1 1700 10 0.01 * 1700 20 0.01 WBT 1 1700 40 0.02 1700 240 0.14 * WBR 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 20 0.01 N/S Movements 0.28 0.30 E/W Movements 0.23 0.27 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.57 0.62 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 39 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 120 0.04 3400 70 0.02 NBT 4 6800 670 0.13 * 6800 1,130 0.18 * NBR 0 190 120 SBL 2 3400 340 0.10 * 3400 270 0.08 * SBT 4 6800 980 0.18 6800 990 0.19 SBR 0 270 280 EBL 2 3400 170 0.05 3400 160 0.05 * EBT 3 5100 1,180 0.24 * 5100 630 0.13 EBR 0 50 50 WBL 2 3400 210 0.06 * 3400 220 0.06 WBT 3 5100 740 0.15 5100 1,250 0.25 * WBR 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 220 0.13 N/S Movements 0.23 0.26 E/W Movements 0.30 0.29 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.58 0.61 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 40 State College Boulevard / Orange Center Drive Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 120 0.04 * 3400 100 0.03 NBT 4 6800 880 0.13 6800 1,220 0.19 * NBR 0 20 50 SBL 2 3400 20 0.01 3400 70 0.02 * SBT 4 6800 1,230 0.20 * 6800 1,100 0.17 SBR 0 100 60 EBL 2 3400 20 0.01 3400 40 0.01 EBT 1 1700 0 0.00 * 1700 0 0.00 EBR 1 1700 140 0.08 * 1700 120 0.07 * WBL 1 1700 50 0.03 * 1700 40 0.02 WBT 1 1700 10 0.02 1700 0 0.01 WBR 0 20 20 N/S Movements 0.23 0.21 E/W Movements 0.03 0.02 Rt. Turn Component 0.05 0.04 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.36 0.32 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 41 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 210 0.06 * 3400 340 0.10 * NBT 4 6800 750 0.11 6800 1,090 0.16 NBR (free) 50 85,000 190 0.00 85,000 370 0.00 SBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 30 0.02 SBT 4 6800 1,780 0.26 * 6800 1,330 0.20 * SBR 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 80 0.05 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 * EBR 0 0 0 WBL 1.5 2416 180 0.07 2942 150 0.05 * WBT 1.5 2684 200 0.07 2158 110 0.05 WBR 2 3400 360 0.11 * 3400 300 0.09 * N/S Movements 0.32 0.30 E/W Movements 0.07 0.05 Rt. Turn Component 0.02 0.02 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.47 0.42 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 42 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 * 0 NBT 5 8500 980 0.12 8500 1,610 0.19 * NBR 0 30 30 SBL 0 0 0 * SBT 4 6800 1,770 0.26 * 6800 1,190 0.18 SBR (free) 50 85000 170 0.00 85,000 300 0.00 EBL 1.5 1700 70 0.04 1700 150 0.09 EBT 0.5 1700 470 0.28 * 1700 330 0.19 * EBR 2 3400 360 0.11 3400 320 0.09 WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.26 0.19 E/W Movements 0.28 0.19 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.59 0.44 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 43 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 130 0.04 * 3400 200 0.06 * NBT 3 5100 450 0.09 5100 1,040 0.20 NBR 2 3400 330 0.10 3400 560 0.16 SBL 2 3400 150 0.04 3400 150 0.04 SBT 3 5100 1,420 0.28 * 5100 1,090 0.21 * SBR 1 1700 470 0.28 1700 220 0.13 EBL 2 3400 260 0.08 3400 310 0.09 EBT 3 5100 1,370 0.27 * 5100 1,290 0.25 * EBR 1 1700 180 0.11 1700 140 0.08 WBL 2 3400 420 0.12 * 3400 430 0.13 * WBT 3 5100 890 0.17 5100 1,150 0.23 WBR 1 1700 200 0.12 1700 280 0.16 N/S Movements 0.32 0.27 E/W Movements 0.39 0.38 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.76 0.70 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C B Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 44 Sunkist Street / Ball Road Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 40 0.02 1700 90 0.05 NBT 2 3400 110 0.09 * 3400 690 0.29 * NBR 0 210 290 SBL 1 1700 530 0.31 * 1700 250 0.15 * SBT 2 3400 500 0.21 3400 210 0.10 SBR 0 230 140 EBL 2 3400 110 0.03 * 3400 200 0.06 * EBT 3 5100 1,170 0.24 5100 1,310 0.26 EBR 0 40 20 WBL 2 3400 410 0.12 3400 320 0.09 WBT 2 3400 1,230 0.36 * 3400 1,260 0.37 * WBR 1 1700 170 0.10 1700 680 0.40 N/S Movements 0.41 0.44 E/W Movements 0.39 0.43 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.85 0.91 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D E Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 45 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 20 0.01 * 1700 110 0.06 NBT 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 50 0.03 * NBR 1 1700 30 0.02 1700 190 0.11 * SBL 2 3400 240 0.07 3400 360 0.11 * SBT 0.5 567 50 0.09 * 567 20 0.04 SBR 0.5 1133 100 0.09 1133 40 0.04 EBL 2 3400 50 0.01 * 3400 60 0.02 * EBT 3 5100 1,250 0.26 5100 1,340 0.27 EBR 0 70 50 WBL 2 3400 160 0.05 3400 80 0.02 WBT 3 5100 1,110 0.30 * 5100 1,680 0.40 * WBR 0 400 370 Split phase N/S Movements 0.10 0.17 E/W Movements 0.31 0.42 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.02 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.46 0.66 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 46 Rampart Street / Orangewood Avenue Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 70 0.04 * 1700 80 0.05 * NBT 1 1700 100 0.06 1700 110 0.06 NBR 1 1700 250 0.15 1700 380 0.22 * SBL 0 50 120 SBT 1 1700 90 0.09 * 1700 140 0.19 * SBR 0 10 70 EBL 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 30 0.02 * EBT 2 3400 1,000 0.34 * 3400 720 0.24 EBR 0 170 80 WBL 1 1700 210 0.12 * 1700 180 0.11 WBT 2 3400 830 0.24 3400 1,310 0.39 * WBR 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 100 0.06 N/S Movements 0.13 0.24 E/W Movements 0.47 0.40 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.65 0.75 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B C Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 47 Rampart Street / Chapman Avenue Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 1 1700 70 0.04 * 1700 70 0.04 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 1 1700 210 0.12 1700 210 0.12 EBL 1 1700 250 0.15 * 1700 290 0.17 * EBT 4 6800 1,010 0.15 6800 1,190 0.18 EBR 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 0 WBT 4 6800 1,030 0.18 * 6800 1,160 0.20 * WBR 0 210 210 N/S Movements 0.04 0.04 E/W Movements 0.33 0.37 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.42 0.46 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 48 Ball Road / SR-57 Northbound Ramps Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 380 0.22 * 1700 520 0.31 * NBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 NBR 1 1700 480 0.28 * 1700 240 0.14 * SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 * EBT 3 5100 1,470 0.29 * 5100 1,160 0.23 EBR (free) 50 85000 490 0.01 85000 620 0.01 WBL 0 0 * 0 WBT 3 5100 800 0.16 5100 1,600 0.31 * WBR (free) 50 85000 330 0.00 85000 520 0.01 N/S Movements 0.22 0.31 E/W Movements 0.29 0.31 Rt. Turn Component 0.06 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.62 0.67 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B B Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 49 Ball Road / SR-57 Southbound Ramps Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 0.5 1299 600 0.46 * 1292 380 0.29 * SBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 SBR 1.5 2101 970 0.46 * 2108 620 0.29 * EBL 0 0 0 * EBT 3 5100 1,270 0.25 * 5100 1,330 0.26 EBR (free) 50 85000 640 0.01 85000 540 0.01 WBL 0 0 * 0 WBT 3 5100 920 0.18 5100 1,690 0.33 * WBR (free) 50 85000 220 0.00 85000 440 0.01 N/S Movements 0.46 0.29 E/W Movements 0.25 0.33 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.76 0.68 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C B Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 50 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 2647 410 0.15 * 2056 250 0.12 * NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBR 1.5 2453 380 0.15 * 3044 370 0.12 * SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 * EBT 3 5100 1,300 0.25 * 5100 1,190 0.23 EBR (free) 50 85000 320 0.00 85000 470 0.01 WBL 0 0 * 0 WBT 3 5100 1,000 0.20 5100 1,710 0.34 * WBR 1 1700 180 0.11 1700 320 0.19 N/S Movements 0.15 0.12 E/W Movements 0.25 0.34 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.46 0.51 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 51 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 1.5 1849 330 0.18 * 1700 230 0.14 * SBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 SBR 1.5 3251 580 0.18 * 3400 490 0.14 * EBL 0 0 0 * EBT 3 5100 1,260 0.25 * 5100 1,440 0.28 EBR (free) 50 85000 170 0.00 85000 410 0.00 WBL 0 0 * 0 WBT 3 5100 1,130 0.22 5100 1,460 0.29 * WBR (free) 50 85000 240 0.00 85000 470 0.01 N/S Movements 0.18 0.14 E/W Movements 0.25 0.29 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.01 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.48 0.48 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 52 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Northbound Ramps Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 1700 130 0.08 * 1700 80 0.05 * NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBR 1.5 3400 520 0.15 * 3400 210 0.06 * SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 * EBT 2 3400 1,340 0.39 * 3400 1,120 0.33 EBR (free) 50 85000 280 0.00 85000 280 0.00 WBL 0 0 * 0 WBT 2 3400 830 0.24 3400 1,600 0.47 * WBR 1 1700 220 0.13 1700 440 0.26 N/S Movements 0.08 0.05 E/W Movements 0.39 0.47 Rt. Turn Component 0.08 0.01 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.60 0.58 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 53 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Southbound Ramps Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 1.5 2312 340 0.15 * 1855 280 0.15 * SBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 SBR 1.5 2788 410 0.15 * 3245 490 0.15 * EBL 0 0 0 EBT 2 3400 1,340 0.39 * 3400 1,030 0.30 * EBR 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 140 0.08 WBL 1 1700 170 0.10 * 1700 470 0.28 * WBT 2 3400 740 0.22 3400 1,140 0.34 WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.15 0.15 E/W Movements 0.49 0.58 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.69 0.78 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B C Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 54 Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.33 1700 40 0.02 * 2084 190 0.09 * NBT 0.34 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBR 0.33 1700 40 0.02 1316 120 0.09 * SBL 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 10 0.01 SBT 1 1700 0 0.01 * 1700 0 0.01 * SBR 0 10 10 EBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 30 0.02 * EBT 2 3400 1,820 0.54 * 3400 1,200 0.35 EBR 1 1700 180 0.11 1700 150 0.09 WBL 1 1700 70 0.04 * 1700 80 0.05 WBT 2 3400 1,070 0.32 3400 2,050 0.61 * WBR 0 10 30 N/S Movements 0.03 0.10 E/W Movements 0.58 0.63 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.66 0.78 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B C Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 55 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 130 0.08 1700 440 0.26 NBT 1 1700 70 0.11 * 1700 220 0.25 * NBR 0 110 200 SBL 1 1700 350 0.21 * 1700 260 0.15 * SBT 0.5 1700 180 0.11 723 100 0.14 SBR 1.5 1700 70 0.04 2677 370 0.14 EBL 2 3400 390 0.11 * 3400 160 0.05 * EBT 3 5100 1,200 0.24 5100 1,070 0.21 EBR 1 1700 210 0.12 1700 180 0.11 WBL 2 3400 200 0.06 3400 210 0.06 WBT 3 5100 1,010 0.20 * 5100 1,440 0.28 * WBR 1 1700 170 0.10 1700 360 0.21 N/S Movements 0.31 0.40 E/W Movements 0.31 0.33 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.67 0.78 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B C Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 56 Eckhoff Street / Orangewood Avenue Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 190 0.11 * 1700 150 0.09 * NBT 1 1700 180 0.12 1700 160 0.11 NBR 0 30 30 SBL 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 50 0.03 SBT 1 1700 130 0.08 * 1700 220 0.13 * SBR 1 1700 390 0.23 1700 740 0.44 * EBL 1 1700 680 0.40 * 1700 360 0.21 * EBT 2 3400 870 0.26 3400 630 0.19 EBR 1 1700 90 0.05 1700 230 0.14 WBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 60 0.04 WBT 2 3400 390 0.13 * 3400 730 0.23 * WBR 0 40 40 N/S Movements 0.19 0.22 E/W Movements 0.53 0.44 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.09 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.76 0.80 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C C Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 57 Main Street / Taft Avenue Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 2763 130 0.05 * 3072 750 0.24 * NBT 0.5 638 30 0.05 328 80 0.24 NBR 1 1700 90 0.05 1700 390 0.23 SBL 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 20 0.01 SBT 1 1700 50 0.06 * 1700 50 0.14 * SBR 0 60 190 EBL 1 1700 110 0.06 1700 60 0.04 EBT 2 3400 960 0.44 * 3400 1,010 0.38 * EBR 0 530 270 WBL 1 1700 270 0.16 * 1700 250 0.15 * WBT 2 3400 860 0.26 3400 1,290 0.38 WBR 0 30 10 N/S Movements 0.11 0.39 E/W Movements 0.60 0.52 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.76 0.96 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C E Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 58 Main Street / Katella Avenue Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 50 0.01 * 3400 130 0.04 NBT 2 3400 410 0.12 3400 520 0.15 * NBR 1 1700 160 0.09 1700 360 0.21 SBL 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 90 0.05 * SBT 2 3400 550 0.16 * 3400 450 0.13 SBR 1 1700 90 0.05 1700 250 0.15 EBL 1 1700 220 0.13 1700 160 0.09 EBT 3 5100 800 0.16 * 5100 1,110 0.22 * EBR 1 1700 90 0.05 1700 110 0.06 WBL 1 1700 360 0.21 * 1700 220 0.13 * WBT 3 5100 1,050 0.22 5100 980 0.22 WBR 0 70 150 N/S Movements 0.18 0.21 E/W Movements 0.37 0.35 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.60 0.60 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 59 Batavia Street / Taft Avenue Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 70 0.04 * 1700 170 0.10 * NBT 2 3400 250 0.10 3400 590 0.23 NBR 0 90 200 SBL 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 80 0.05 SBT 2 3400 720 0.28 * 3400 360 0.19 * SBR 0 220 300 EBL 1 1700 250 0.15 * 1700 290 0.17 * EBT 2 3400 710 0.21 3400 860 0.25 EBR 1 1700 250 0.15 1700 160 0.09 WBL 1 1700 300 0.18 1700 170 0.10 WBT 2 3400 940 0.28 * 3400 900 0.26 * WBR 1 1700 40 0.02 1700 50 0.03 N/S Movements 0.32 0.29 E/W Movements 0.42 0.44 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.79 0.78 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C C Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 61 Clementine Street / Orangewood Avenue Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 10 0 * NBT 1 1700 10 0.05 * 1700 20 0.04 NBR 0 60 40 SBL 0 30 * 60 SBT 1 1700 0 0.04 1700 30 0.17 * SBR 0 40 200 EBL 1 1700 130 0.08 1700 130 0.08 * EBT 2 3400 820 0.24 * 3400 530 0.16 EBR 0 10 10 WBL 1 1700 30 0.02 * 1700 50 0.03 WBT 2 3400 340 0.11 3400 800 0.25 * WBR 0 50 40 N/S Movements 0.05 0.17 E/W Movements 0.26 0.32 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.36 0.54 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 62 Flower Street / Chapman Avenue Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 150 0.09 * 1700 250 0.15 * NBT 1 1700 10 0.03 1700 10 0.02 NBR 0 40 30 SBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 20 0.01 SBT 1 1700 30 0.04 * 1700 40 0.06 * SBR 0 30 70 EBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 40 0.02 * EBT 3 5100 1,130 0.25 * 5100 1,160 0.26 EBR 0 160 160 WBL 1 1700 20 0.01 * 1700 60 0.04 WBT 3 5100 990 0.20 5100 1,520 0.31 * WBR 0 10 40 N/S Movements 0.12 0.21 E/W Movements 0.26 0.33 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.44 0.59 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 63 Harbor Boulevard / Chapman Avenue Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 100 0.03 3400 210 0.06 * NBT 3 5100 890 0.17 * 5100 1,080 0.21 NBR 1 1700 220 0.13 1700 170 0.10 SBL 2 3400 110 0.03 * 3400 190 0.06 SBT 3 5100 740 0.15 5100 1,160 0.23 * SBR 1 1700 150 0.09 1700 190 0.11 EBL 2 3400 130 0.04 3400 180 0.05 * EBT 2 3400 1,030 0.30 * 3400 650 0.19 EBR 1 1700 130 0.08 1700 100 0.06 WBL 2 3400 110 0.03 * 3400 160 0.05 WBT 2 3400 410 0.12 3400 960 0.28 * WBR 1 1700 90 0.05 1700 160 0.09 N/S Movements 0.21 0.29 E/W Movements 0.34 0.34 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.59 0.67 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 64 I-5 Southbound Ramps / Chapman Avenue Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 620 0.18 * 3400 670 0.20 * NBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 NBR 1 1700 110 0.06 * 1700 80 0.05 * SBL 2 3400 480 0.14 3400 400 0.12 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 0 0.00 EBL 0 0 0 * EBT 3.5 5100 890 0.17 * 5100 980 0.19 EBR 1.5 3400 930 0.27 3400 1,010 0.30 WBL 2 3400 100 0.03 * 3400 120 0.04 WBT 3 5100 960 0.19 5100 1,330 0.26 * WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.18 0.20 E/W Movements 0.20 0.26 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.44 0.51 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 65 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Chapman Avenue Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 50 0.03 * 1700 40 0.02 * NBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 NBR 1 1700 110 0.06 * 1700 150 0.09 * SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 EBL 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 0 0.00 EBT 2 3400 1,090 0.32 * 3400 1,000 0.29 * EBR (free) 50 85000 350 0.00 85000 430 0.01 WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBT 3 5100 930 0.18 5100 1,440 0.28 WBR (free) 50 85000 280 0.00 85000 390 0.00 N/S Movements 0.03 0.02 E/W Movements 0.32 0.29 Rt. Turn Component 0.04 0.06 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.44 0.43 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 66 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Chapman Avenue Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 20 * 140 NBT 1 1700 10 0.02 1700 30 0.10 NBR 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 110 0.06 SBL 0 260 160 SBT 1 1700 60 0.19 * 1700 10 0.10 SBR 1 1700 390 0.23 * 1700 320 0.19 * EBL 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 0 0.00 * EBT 3 5100 1,240 0.27 * 5100 1,310 0.26 EBR 0 150 20 WBL 1 1700 90 0.05 * 1700 20 0.01 WBT 2 3400 790 0.23 3400 1,290 0.38 * WBR (free) 50 85000 150 0.00 85000 160 0.00 N/S Movements 0.19 0.10 E/W Movements 0.33 0.38 Rt. Turn Component 0.04 0.09 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.60 0.62 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 67 Euclid Street / Ball Road Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 140 0.04 3400 140 0.04 NBT 3 5100 1,090 0.25 * 5100 1,320 0.28 * NBR 0 200 100 SBL 2 3400 150 0.04 * 3400 390 0.11 * SBT 3 5100 1,000 0.22 5100 1,210 0.29 SBR 0 130 280 EBL 2 3400 220 0.06 3400 230 0.07 * EBT 3 5100 880 0.20 * 5100 710 0.19 EBR 0 130 260 WBL 2 3400 310 0.09 * 3400 100 0.03 WBT 3 5100 630 0.14 5100 880 0.19 * WBR 0 80 110 N/S Movements 0.30 0.39 E/W Movements 0.29 0.26 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.64 0.70 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B B Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 68 Walnut Street / Cerritos Avenue Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 110 * 280 * NBT 2 3400 260 0.11 3400 310 0.17 NBR 0 0 0 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 2 3400 390 0.19 * 3400 360 0.19 * SBR 0 250 290 EBL 1 1700 370 0.22 * 1700 290 0.17 * EBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 EBR 1 1700 260 0.15 * 1700 110 0.06 * WBL 0 0 0 WBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.19 0.19 E/W Movements 0.22 0.17 Rt. Turn Component 0.15 0.06 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.61 0.48 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B A Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 69 Disneyland Drive / I-5 Southbound Off Ramp Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 * 0 NBT 2 3400 130 0.04 3400 490 0.14 * NBR (free) 50 85000 730 0.01 85000 760 0.01 SBL 0 0 0 * SBT 2 3400 650 0.19 * 3400 340 0.10 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * EBR 0 0 0 WBL 3 5100 830 0.16 * 5100 670 0.13 * WBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 WBR 1 1700 10 0.01 * 1700 50 0.03 * N/S Movements 0.19 0.14 E/W Movements 0.16 0.13 Rt. Turn Component 0.01 0.03 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.41 0.35 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 70 Disneyland Drive/ Magic Way Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 420 0.12 * 3400 270 0.08 * NBT 2 3400 500 0.15 3400 660 0.19 NBR 0 0 0 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 2 3400 480 0.14 * 3400 430 0.13 * SBR 1 1700 140 0.08 1700 240 0.14 EBL 2 3400 130 0.04 * 3400 320 0.09 * EBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 EBR 2 3400 100 0.03 3400 140 0.04 WBL 0 0 0 WBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.26 0.21 E/W Movements 0.04 0.09 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.35 0.35 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 71 Ox Road / Cast Place / Ball Road Date 12/16/2010 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.33 2869 90 0.03 * 1725 230 0.13 NBT 0.34 0 0 0.00 75 10 0.13 * NBR 1.33 2231 70 0.03 3300 440 0.13 SBL 1.33 1700 30 0.02 1700 30 0.02 * SBT 0.34 567 10 0.02 * 0 0 0.00 SBR 0.33 1133 20 0.02 1700 30 0.02 * EBL 1 1700 30 0.02 1700 10 0.01 * EBT 3 5100 2,140 0.42 * 5100 1,560 0.31 EBR 1 1700 270 0.16 1700 160 0.09 WBL 2 3400 350 0.10 * 3400 120 0.04 WBT 3 5100 1,480 0.30 5100 1,930 0.39 * WBR 0 30 40 N/S Movements 0.05 0.15 E/W Movements 0.52 0.39 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.62 0.59 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B A Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 72 Convention Center/ Katella Avenue Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 NBR 0 0 0 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 * EBT 3 5100 2,260 0.45 * 5100 1,460 0.29 EBR 0 30 0 WBL 2 3400 50 0.01 * 3400 10 0.00 WBT 3 5100 890 0.17 5100 2,380 0.47 * WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.00 0.00 E/W Movements 0.46 0.47 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.51 0.52 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 73 Harbor Boulevard / Lincoln Avenue Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 110 0.06 * 1700 190 0.11 NBT 3 5100 620 0.14 5100 1,070 0.25 * NBR 0 80 210 SBL 1 1700 180 0.11 1700 150 0.09 * SBT 3 5100 970 0.19 * 5100 800 0.16 SBR 1 1700 130 0.08 1700 150 0.09 EBL 1 1700 130 0.08 1700 230 0.14 * EBT 2 3400 850 0.26 * 3400 720 0.25 EBR 0 50 130 WBL 1 1700 150 0.09 * 1700 200 0.12 WBT 2 3400 840 0.25 3400 1,000 0.29 * WBR 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 150 0.09 N/S Movements 0.25 0.34 E/W Movements 0.35 0.43 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.66 0.82 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B D Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 74 Harbor Boulevard / Broadway Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 60 0.04 * 1700 110 0.06 NBT 2 3400 580 0.17 3400 1,120 0.33 * NBR 1 1700 110 0.06 1700 120 0.07 SBL 1 1700 100 0.06 1700 150 0.09 * SBT 2 3400 890 0.26 * 3400 750 0.22 SBR 1 1700 160 0.09 1700 190 0.11 EBL 1 1700 140 0.08 1700 150 0.09 * EBT 2 3400 550 0.16 3400 410 0.12 EBR 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 70 0.04 WBL 2 3400 90 0.03 3400 120 0.04 WBT 2 3400 360 0.11 3400 560 0.16 * WBR 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 150 0.09 N/S Movements 0.30 0.42 E/W Movements 0.19 0.25 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.54 0.72 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A C Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 75 Harbor Boulevard / Manchester Avenue Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 100 0.06 1700 120 0.07 NBT 3 5100 770 0.16 * 5100 1,160 0.24 * NBR 0 40 40 SBL 1 1700 170 0.10 * 1700 80 0.05 * SBT 4 6800 860 0.13 6800 910 0.13 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * EBR 0 0 0 WBL 1 1700 30 0.02 * 1700 50 0.03 * WBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 WBR 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 270 0.16 * N/S Movements 0.26 0.28 E/W Movements 0.02 0.03 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.11 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.33 0.47 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 76 Anaheim Boulevard / Lincoln Avenue Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 70 0.04 * 1700 170 0.10 NBT 2 3400 340 0.10 3400 890 0.26 * NBR 1 1700 100 0.06 1700 100 0.06 SBL 1 1700 90 0.05 1700 110 0.06 * SBT 2 3400 680 0.20 * 3400 490 0.14 SBR 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 80 0.05 EBL 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 140 0.08 * EBT 3 5100 700 0.16 * 5100 810 0.18 EBR 0 140 120 WBL 1 1700 170 0.10 * 1700 130 0.08 WBT 3 5100 890 0.19 5100 990 0.22 * WBR 0 70 130 N/S Movements 0.24 0.33 E/W Movements 0.26 0.30 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.56 0.68 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 77 Anaheim Boulevard / Broadway Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 90 0.05 * 1700 150 0.09 * NBT 3 5100 470 0.11 5100 1,030 0.21 NBR 0 80 60 SBL 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 100 0.06 SBT 2 3400 790 0.25 * 3400 670 0.22 * SBR 0 60 80 EBL 1 1700 120 0.07 1700 150 0.09 * EBT 2 3400 430 0.13 * 3400 400 0.12 EBR 1 1700 120 0.07 1700 100 0.06 WBL 1 1700 100 0.06 * 1700 120 0.07 WBT 2 3400 380 0.11 3400 400 0.12 * WBR 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 90 0.05 N/S Movements 0.30 0.31 E/W Movements 0.19 0.21 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.54 0.56 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 78 Olive Street / Lincoln Avenue Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 50 0.03 * 1700 50 0.03 NBT 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 130 0.08 NBR 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 110 0.06 SBL 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 40 0.02 SBT 1 1700 90 0.05 * 1700 120 0.07 SBR 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 50 0.03 EBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 40 0.02 EBT 2 3400 830 0.24 * 3400 960 0.28 * EBR 1 1700 40 0.02 1700 60 0.04 WBL 1 1700 130 0.08 * 1700 80 0.05 * WBT 3 5100 1,160 0.23 5100 1,120 0.23 WBR 0 20 70 N/S Movements 0.08 0.10 E/W Movements 0.32 0.33 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.45 0.48 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 79 Flore Street / West Place / Ball Road Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 30 0.02 NBT 1 1700 0 0.05 * 1700 0 0.09 * NBR 0 80 160 SBL 1 1700 50 0.03 * 1700 20 0.01 * SBT 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 0 0.00 SBR 0 10 0 EBL 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 20 0.01 * EBT 3 5100 1,570 0.32 * 5100 1,030 0.21 EBR 0 60 40 WBL 1 1700 190 0.11 * 1700 150 0.09 WBT 3 5100 700 0.14 5100 1,570 0.32 * WBR 0 20 50 N/S Movements 0.08 0.11 E/W Movements 0.43 0.33 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.56 0.49 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 80 West Street / Orangewood Avenue Date 11/21/2010 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 50 0.03 NBT 2 3400 341 0.15 * 3400 476 0.16 * NBR 0 180 80 SBL 1 1700 150 0.09 * 1700 110 0.06 * SBT 2 3400 351 0.11 3400 403 0.14 SBR 0 10 71 EBL 0 31 21 * EBT 1 1700 521 0.33 * 1700 271 0.19 EBR 0 10 40 WBL 0 40 * 150 WBT 1 1700 120 0.09 1700 461 0.36 * WBR 1 1700 171 0.10 1700 260 0.15 N/S Movements 0.24 0.23 Split Phase E/W Movements 0.42 0.55 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.72 0.83 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C D Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 81 Struck Avenue / Katella Avenue Date 11/24/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 3200 160 0.05 * 3249 430 0.13 * NBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 NBR 0.5 200 10 0.05 * 151 20 0.13 * SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 * EBT 3 5100 1,480 0.29 * 5100 1,430 0.28 EBR 1 1700 350 0.21 1700 260 0.15 WBL 1 1700 20 0.01 * 1700 10 0.01 WBT 3 5100 1,090 0.21 5100 1,570 0.31 * WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.05 0.13 E/W Movements 0.30 0.31 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.40 0.49 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No.14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report – Technical Appendices Appendix A-3 ICU Worksheets under 2015 With Project Conditions ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 1 Euclid Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 110 0.03 * 3400 270 0.08 NBT 3 5100 770 0.15 5100 1,180 0.23 * NBR 1 1700 180 0.11 1700 130 0.08 SBL 2 3400 210 0.06 3400 230 0.07 * SBT 3 5100 1,160 0.23 * 5100 1,020 0.20 SBR 1 1700 200 0.12 1700 70 0.04 EBL 2 3400 160 0.05 3400 270 0.08 * EBT 3 5100 1,347 0.29 * 5100 732 0.19 EBR 0 120 230 WBL 2 3400 240 0.07 * 3400 210 0.06 WBT 3 5100 451 0.09 5100 1,669 0.33 * WBR 1 1700 130 0.08 1700 200 0.12 N/S Movements 0.26 0.30 E/W Movements 0.36 0.41 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.67 0.76 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B C Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 2 Ninth Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 180 0.11 * 1700 290 0.17 * NBT 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 150 0.09 NBR 1 1700 160 0.09 1700 160 0.09 SBL 1 1700 30 0.02 1700 20 0.01 SBT 1 1700 130 0.10 * 1700 80 0.07 * SBR 0 40 40 EBL 1 1700 30 0.02 1700 60 0.04 * EBT 3 5100 1,657 0.32 * 5100 932 0.18 EBR 1 1700 200 0.12 1700 230 0.14 WBL 1 1700 140 0.08 * 1700 230 0.14 WBT 3 5100 621 0.12 5100 1,679 0.33 * WBR 1 1700 30 0.02 1700 60 0.04 N/S Movements 0.21 0.24 E/W Movements 0.41 0.36 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.66 0.66 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B B Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 3 Walnut Street / Ball Road Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 100 0.06 * 1700 160 0.09 * NBT 1 1700 150 0.09 1700 250 0.15 NBR 1 1700 380 0.22 * 1700 290 0.17 SBL 1 1700 110 0.06 1700 60 0.04 SBT 1 1700 190 0.11 * 1700 260 0.15 * SBR 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 70 0.04 EBL 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 50 0.03 EBT 3 5100 1,190 0.25 * 5100 680 0.15 * EBR 0 100 100 WBL 1 1700 190 0.11 * 1700 290 0.17 * WBT 3 5100 640 0.14 5100 1,160 0.23 WBR 0 50 30 N/S Movements 0.17 0.25 E/W Movements 0.36 0.32 Rt. Turn Component 0.02 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.61 0.62 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B B Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 4 Walnut Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 10 10 NBT 1 1700 10 0.01 * 1700 0 0.01 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 1.5 3340 560 0.17 * 3269 250 0.08 * SBT 0.5 60 10 0.17 131 10 0.08 SBR 1 1700 170 0.10 1700 220 0.13 EBL 1 1700 150 0.09 1700 140 0.08 * EBT 3 5100 1,727 0.34 * 5100 982 0.19 EBR 0 0 10 WBL 1 1700 30 0.02 * 1700 50 0.03 WBT 3 5100 611 0.16 5100 1,609 0.42 * WBR 0 220 540 N/S Movements 0.18 0.08 E/W Movements 0.36 0.50 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.59 0.64 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 5 Disneyland Drive / Ball Road Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 1341 140 0.10 * 1153 200 0.17 NBT 1 2969 310 0.10 3285 570 0.17 NBR 1.5 2490 260 0.10 2363 410 0.17 SBL 1.5 3006 500 0.17 1818 260 0.14 SBT 2.5 3794 511 0.17 * 4982 553 0.14 SBR 0 120 160 EBL 2 3400 260 0.08 3400 230 0.07 * EBT 3 5100 1,260 0.25 * 5100 990 0.19 EBR 1 1700 120 0.07 1700 130 0.08 WBL 2 3400 420 0.12 * 3400 450 0.13 WBT 3 5100 730 0.16 5100 1,430 0.33 * WBR 0 70 240 N/S Movements 0.27 0.32 E/W Movements 0.37 0.40 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.10 0.10 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.74 0.81 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C D Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 6 Disneyland Drive / West Street / Katella Avenue Date 11/19/2010 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 203 0.06 3400 237 0.07 NBT 2 3400 344 0.10 * 3400 350 0.10 * NBR 1 1700 220 0.13 1700 150 0.09 SBL 2 3400 304 0.09 * 3400 527 0.15 * SBT 2 3400 229 0.07 3400 417 0.12 SBR 1 1700 240 0.14 * 1700 280 0.16 * EBL 2 3400 140 0.04 3400 110 0.03 * EBT 3 5100 1,883 0.37 * 5100 928 0.18 EBR 1 1700 192 0.11 1700 155 0.09 WBL 2 3400 165 0.05 * 3400 125 0.04 WBT 3 5100 889 0.17 5100 1,804 0.35 * WBR 1 1700 260 0.15 1700 281 0.17 N/S Movements 0.19 0.26 E/W Movements 0.42 0.39 Rt. Turn Component 0.01 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.67 0.69 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B B Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 7 Harbor Boulevard / Vermont Avenue Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 60 0.04 * 1700 130 0.08 NBT 2 3400 634 0.19 3400 1,491 0.44 * NBR 1 1700 130 0.08 1700 140 0.08 SBL 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 60 0.04 * SBT 2 3400 1,281 0.38 * 3400 849 0.26 SBR 0 10 30 EBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 20 0.01 EBT 1 1700 110 0.15 * 1700 50 0.09 * EBR 0 140 100 WBL 1 1700 120 0.07 * 1700 170 0.10 * WBT 1 1700 70 0.06 1700 100 0.09 WBR 0 40 60 N/S Movements 0.41 0.47 E/W Movements 0.22 0.19 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.68 0.71 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B C Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 8 Harbor Boulevard / Ball Road Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 640 0.19 * 3400 720 0.21 * NBT 3 5100 724 0.14 5100 1,231 0.24 NBR 1 1700 280 0.16 1700 320 0.19 SBL 2 3400 160 0.05 3400 170 0.05 SBT 3 5100 1,511 0.30 * 5100 919 0.18 * SBR 1 1700 340 0.20 1700 280 0.16 EBL 2 3400 330 0.10 3400 400 0.12 * EBT 3 5100 1,290 0.25 * 5100 1,080 0.21 EBR 1 1700 660 0.39 1700 520 0.31 WBL 2 3400 160 0.05 * 3400 260 0.08 WBT 4 6800 990 0.16 6800 1,070 0.18 * WBR 0 130 120 N/S Movements 0.48 0.39 E/W Movements 0.30 0.29 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.83 0.73 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D C Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 9 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 NB Ramps Date 11/19/2010 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 * 0 NBT 3 5100 847 0.17 5100 1,324 0.26 * NBR (free) 50 85000 232 0.00 85000 628 0.01 SBL 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 60 0.04 * SBT 4 6800 2,272 0.33 * 6800 1,631 0.24 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * EBR 0 0 0 WBL 1.5 1700 70 0.04 * 1700 90 0.05 * WBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 WBR 1.5 3400 710 0.21 * 3400 860 0.25 * N/S Movements 0.33 0.29 E/W Movements 0.04 0.05 Rt. Turn Component 0.18 0.22 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.60 0.62 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 10 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 SB Ramps Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 60 0.04 * 1700 80 0.05 NBT 4 6800 834 0.12 6800 1,718 0.25 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 0 0 0 * SBT 3 5100 1,211 0.24 * 5100 989 0.19 SBR (free) 50 85000 1,090 0.01 85000 780 0.01 EBL 2 3400 270 0.08 * 3400 270 0.08 * EBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 EBR (free) 50 85000 368 0.00 85000 454 0.01 WBL 0 0 0 WBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.27 0.25 E/W Movements 0.08 0.08 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.40 0.38 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 11 Harbor Boulevard / Disney Way Date 11/19/2010 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 170 0.05 * 3400 50 0.01 NBT 3 5100 789 0.19 5100 1,402 0.28 * NBR 0 171 51 SBL 2 3400 160 0.05 3400 160 0.05 * SBT 3 5100 1,012 0.22 * 5100 1,208 0.24 SBR 0 120 40 EBL 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 40 0.02 EBT 3 5100 0 0.00 * 5100 50 0.01 * EBR 0 10 10 WBL 1 1700 104 0.06 * 1700 312 0.18 * WBT 3 5100 140 0.05 5100 80 0.06 WBR 0 120 250 N/S Movements 0.27 0.33 E/W Movements 0.06 0.20 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.39 0.58 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 12 Harbor Boulevard / Katella Avenue Date 11/19/2010 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 169 0.05 * 3400 333 0.10 NBT 3 5100 598 0.12 5100 979 0.19 * NBR 1 1700 178 0.10 1700 265 0.16 SBL 2 3400 90 0.03 3400 200 0.06 * SBT 3 5100 770 0.15 * 5100 627 0.12 SBR 1 1700 187 0.11 1700 364 0.21 * EBL 2 3400 237 0.07 3400 275 0.08 * EBT 3 5100 1,861 0.36 * 5100 1,163 0.23 EBR 1 1700 126 0.07 1700 239 0.14 WBL 2 3400 215 0.06 * 3400 420 0.12 WBT 3 5100 1,036 0.20 5100 1,782 0.35 * WBR 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 170 0.10 N/S Movements 0.20 0.25 E/W Movements 0.43 0.43 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.01 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.68 0.74 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B C Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 13 Harbor Boulevard / Convention Way Date 11/19/2010 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 183 0.05 3400 134 0.04 * NBT 3 5100 940 0.22 * 5100 1,130 0.25 NBR 0 187 120 SBL 2 3400 105 0.03 * 3400 60 0.02 SBT 3 5100 880 0.17 5100 1,200 0.24 * SBR 1 1700 250 0.15 1700 167 0.10 EBL 2 3400 135 0.04 * 3400 247 0.07 EBT 0.5 1994 130 0.07 1772 130 0.07 * EBR 1.5 1406 92 0.07 1628 119 0.07 WBL 1 1700 40 0.02 1700 130 0.08 * WBT 0.5 850 86 0.10 * 850 50 0.06 WBR 1.5 2550 80 0.03 2550 150 0.06 N/S Movements 0.25 0.27 E/W Movements 0.14 0.15 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.44 0.47 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 14 Harbor Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 130 0.08 * NBT 3 5100 994 0.22 * 5100 1,201 0.27 NBR 0 130 180 SBL 1 1700 60 0.04 * 1700 100 0.06 SBT 3 5100 845 0.17 5100 1,224 0.26 * SBR 0 40 100 EBL 1 1700 120 0.07 1700 70 0.04 * EBT 2 3400 780 0.26 * 3400 370 0.13 EBR 0 110 80 WBL 1 1700 120 0.07 * 1700 210 0.12 WBT 2 3400 260 0.11 3400 700 0.23 * WBR 0 120 90 N/S Movements 0.26 0.34 E/W Movements 0.33 0.27 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.64 0.66 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B B Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 15 Clementine Street / Disney Way Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 80 0.05 NBT 2 3400 60 0.03 * 3400 110 0.05 * NBR 0 30 50 SBL 2 3400 210 0.06 * 3400 240 0.07 * SBT 2 3400 50 0.02 3400 80 0.07 SBR 0 30 150 EBL 1 1700 80 0.05 * 1700 30 0.02 * EBT 3 5100 130 0.03 5100 140 0.03 EBR 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 70 0.04 WBL 1 1700 120 0.07 1700 110 0.06 WBT 3 5100 374 0.11 * 5100 351 0.12 * WBR 0 190 260 N/S Movements 0.09 0.12 E/W Movements 0.16 0.14 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.30 0.31 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 16 Clementine Street / Katella Avenue Date 11/19/2010 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 40 0.02 * 1700 110 0.06 NBT 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 120 0.07 * NBR 1 1700 100 0.06 1700 300 0.18 * SBL 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 130 0.08 * SBT 1 1700 140 0.08 * 1700 110 0.06 SBR 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 110 0.06 EBL 2 3400 50 0.01 3400 70 0.02 * EBT 3 5100 1,929 0.40 * 5100 1,408 0.29 EBR 0 120 70 WBL 2 3400 230 0.07 * 3400 130 0.04 WBT 3 5100 1,226 0.24 5100 2,282 0.45 * WBR 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 80 0.05 N/S Movements 0.11 0.15 E/W Movements 0.47 0.47 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.07 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.63 0.73 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B C Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 17 I-5 SB Off Ramp / Disney Way Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 20 0.01 * 1700 20 0.01 * NBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 NBR 1 1700 30 0.02 1700 60 0.04 * SBL 1.33 3302 360 0.11 3302 360 0.11 SBT 0.34 98 10 0.10 * 98 10 0.10 * SBR 1.33 1700 150 0.09 1700 120 0.07 EBL 0 0 0 * EBT 3 5100 350 0.07 * 5100 370 0.07 EBR 0 10 10 WBL 1 1700 60 0.04 * 1700 50 0.03 WBT 3 5100 414 0.08 5100 651 0.13 * WBR 0 0 0 Split Phase N/S Movements 0.13 0.14 E/W Movements 0.11 0.13 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.28 0.32 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 18 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 150 0.04 * 3400 210 0.06 NBT 2 3400 480 0.14 3400 1,360 0.40 * NBR 1 1700 190 0.11 1700 150 0.09 SBL 2 3400 310 0.09 3400 220 0.06 * SBT 3 5100 1,080 0.21 * 5100 750 0.15 SBR 1 1700 200 0.12 1700 140 0.08 EBL 1 1700 160 0.09 1700 230 0.14 * EBT 3 5100 1,380 0.32 * 5100 1,300 0.29 EBR 0 230 200 WBL 1 1700 170 0.10 * 1700 160 0.09 WBT 3 5100 960 0.19 5100 1,680 0.33 * WBR 1 1700 100 0.06 1700 260 0.15 N/S Movements 0.26 0.46 E/W Movements 0.42 0.46 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.72 0.98 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C E Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 19 Anaheim Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 100 0.06 1700 90 0.05 NBT 3 5100 780 0.15 * 5100 1,360 0.27 * NBR 1 1700 410 0.24 1700 400 0.24 SBL 1 1700 340 0.20 * 1700 170 0.10 * SBT 3 5100 1,170 0.24 5100 1,090 0.22 SBR 0 60 50 EBL 1 1700 30 0.02 1700 50 0.03 EBT 1 1700 20 0.04 * 1700 40 0.11 * EBR 0 40 140 WBL 1 1700 290 0.17 * 1700 560 0.33 * WBT 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 90 0.05 WBR 1 1700 110 0.06 1700 370 0.22 * N/S Movements 0.35 0.37 E/W Movements 0.21 0.44 Rt. Turn Component 0.09 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.70 0.85 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B D Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 20 Anaheim Boulevard / I-5 NB Ramps Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 230 0.07 * 3400 190 0.06 * NBT 3 5100 920 0.18 5100 1,150 0.23 NBR 0 0 0 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 3 5100 1,410 0.28 * 5100 1,540 0.30 * SBR 1 1700 110 0.06 1700 320 0.19 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 EBR 0 0 0 WBL 0.5 1020 30 0.03 276 80 0.29 WBT 1 680 20 0.03 1757 510 0.29 WBR 1.5 3400 390 0.11 * 3067 890 0.29 N/S Movements 0.34 0.36 E/W Movements 0.03 0.29 Rt. Turn Component 0.09 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.51 0.70 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 21 Anaheim Boulevard / Disney Way Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 40 0.02 1700 90 0.05 NBT 3 5100 850 0.17 * 5100 1,040 0.21 * NBR 0 10 10 SBL 2 3400 460 0.14 * 3400 530 0.16 * SBT 3 5100 820 0.18 5100 1,000 0.21 SBR 0 90 90 EBL 2 3400 340 0.10 * 3400 340 0.10 * EBT 4 6800 320 0.06 6800 260 0.06 EBR 0 100 180 WBL 0 0 0 WBT 3 5100 304 0.06 * 5100 451 0.09 * WBR 0 10 0 N/S Movements 0.30 0.36 E/W Movements 0.16 0.19 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.52 0.60 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 22 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue Date 11/19/2010 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 193 0.06 3400 174 0.05 NBT 3 5100 550 0.11 * 5100 720 0.14 * NBR 1 1700 250 0.15 1700 240 0.14 SBL 2 3400 190 0.06 * 3400 210 0.06 * SBT 3 5100 410 0.08 5100 440 0.09 SBR 1 1700 220 0.13 1700 240 0.14 EBL 2 3400 210 0.06 3400 280 0.08 * EBT 4 6800 1,771 0.27 * 6800 1,429 0.23 EBR 0 68 159 WBL 2 3400 260 0.08 * 3400 360 0.11 WBT 3 5100 1,083 0.21 5100 1,988 0.39 * WBR 1 1700 40 0.02 1700 90 0.05 N/S Movements 0.16 0.20 E/W Movements 0.35 0.47 Rt. Turn Component 0.04 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.60 0.73 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A C Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 23 Haster Street / Gene Autry Way Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 2.5 3400 440 0.13 * 3596 550 0.15 * NBR 0.5 1700 360 0.21 * 1504 230 0.15 SBL 1 1700 156 0.09 * 1700 167 0.10 * SBT 3 5100 380 0.07 5100 390 0.08 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * EBR 0 0 0 WBL 2 3400 190 0.06 * 3400 500 0.15 * WBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 WBR 2 3400 63 0.02 3400 222 0.07 N/S Movements 0.22 0.25 E/W Movements 0.06 0.15 Rt. Turn Component 0.03 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.35 0.45 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 24 Haster Street / Orangewood Avenue Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 130 0.08 NBT 2 3400 750 0.25 * 3400 1,010 0.33 * NBR 0 90 100 SBL 1 1700 110 0.06 * 1700 110 0.06 * SBT 2 3400 710 0.24 3400 920 0.30 SBR 0 120 110 EBL 1 1700 150 0.09 1700 130 0.08 * EBT 2 3400 750 0.24 * 3400 380 0.13 EBR 0 80 60 WBL 1 1700 90 0.05 * 1700 180 0.11 WBT 2 3400 240 0.11 3400 740 0.28 * WBR 0 120 200 N/S Movements 0.31 0.39 E/W Movements 0.30 0.35 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.66 0.79 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B C Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 25 Manchester Avenue / Katella Avenue Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 1700 80 0.05 * 1569 80 0.05 * NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBR 1.5 3400 580 0.17 * 3400 180 0.05 SBL 2 3400 160 0.05 3400 160 0.05 SBT 2 3400 220 0.06 * 3400 80 0.02 * SBR 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 0 0.00 EBL 0 0 * 0 * EBT 3 5100 1,060 0.21 5100 1,260 0.25 EBR 1 1700 831 0.49 * 1700 757 0.45 * WBL 2 3400 240 0.07 3400 480 0.14 WBT 3 5100 1,480 0.29 * 5100 1,982 0.39 * WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.11 0.07 E/W Movements 0.29 0.39 Rt. Turn Component 0.29 0.15 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.74 0.66 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C B Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 26 Anaheim Way / Katella Avenue Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 3400 530 0.16 * 2714 680 0.25 NBT 3 3400 370 0.11 5108 1,280 0.25 NBR 0.5 1700 420 0.25 * 678 170 0.25 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 2 3400 40 0.01 3400 40 0.01 EBT 3 5100 1,764 0.35 * 5100 1,617 0.32 * EBR 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBT 3.5 6800 1,260 0.19 6800 1,942 0.29 WBR 1.5 1700 170 0.10 1700 390 0.23 N/S Movements 0.16 0.25 E/W Movements 0.35 0.32 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.55 0.62 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 27 East Street / Ball Road Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 2 3400 340 0.10 * 3400 240 0.07 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 1 1700 420 0.25 * 1700 280 0.16 EBL 1 1700 190 0.11 * 1700 530 0.31 * EBT 3 5100 1,030 0.20 5100 1,220 0.24 EBR 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 0 WBT 3 5100 1,310 0.29 * 5100 1,380 0.35 * WBR 0 160 430 N/S Movements 0.10 0.07 E/W Movements 0.40 0.67 Rt. Turn Component 0.04 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.59 0.79 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A C Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 28 Lewis Street / Ball Road Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 180 0.11 * NBT 2 3400 70 0.06 * 3400 10 0.14 NBR 0 150 460 SBL 0 10 * 70 SBT 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 110 0.15 * SBR 0 0 80 EBL 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 10 0.01 EBT 3 5100 1,040 0.25 * 5100 1,180 0.26 * EBR 0 230 130 WBL 1 1700 410 0.24 * 1700 220 0.13 * WBT 3 5100 1,230 0.25 5100 1,390 0.27 WBR 0 70 10 N/S Movements 0.06 0.26 E/W Movements 0.49 0.39 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.60 0.70 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 29 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 30 0.02 NBT 2 3400 270 0.08 * 3400 460 0.14 * NBR 1 1700 130 0.08 1700 150 0.09 SBL 1 1700 120 0.07 * 1700 40 0.02 * SBT 2 3400 390 0.14 3400 360 0.14 SBR 0 70 110 EBL 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 70 0.04 * EBT 2 3400 530 0.19 * 3400 440 0.16 EBR 0 100 110 WBL 1 1700 110 0.06 * 1700 110 0.06 WBT 2 3400 320 0.11 3400 690 0.23 * WBR 0 50 90 N/S Movements 0.15 0.16 E/W Movements 0.25 0.27 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.45 0.48 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 30 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 85 0.05 1700 143 0.08 NBT 1 1700 160 0.18 * 1700 270 0.26 * NBR 0 150 180 SBL 1 1700 110 0.06 * 1700 160 0.09 * SBT 1 1700 110 0.06 1700 150 0.09 SBR 1 1700 200 0.12 1700 510 0.30 * EBL 1 1700 410 0.24 * 1700 220 0.13 * EBT 3 5100 1,404 0.29 5100 1,337 0.27 EBR 0 60 50 WBL 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 150 0.09 WBT 3 5100 1,046 0.22 * 5100 1,788 0.37 * WBR 0 90 100 N/S Movements 0.25 0.36 E/W Movements 0.46 0.50 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.08 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.76 0.98 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C E Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 32 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 13 0.01 1700 12 0.01 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 2 3400 30 0.01 3400 50 0.01 SBL 2 3400 280 0.08 * 3400 140 0.04 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 1 1700 20 0.01 * 1700 10 0.01 EBL 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 60 0.04 * EBT 3 5100 300 0.07 * 5100 160 0.04 EBR 0 46 57 WBL 1 1700 40 0.02 * 1700 60 0.04 WBT 3 5100 110 0.04 5100 510 0.15 * WBR 0 70 260 N/S Movements 0.08 0.04 E/W Movements 0.09 0.19 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.22 0.28 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 33 Lewis Street / Orangewood Avenue Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 50 0.03 * 1700 170 0.10 * NBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 NBR (free) 50 85000 500 0.01 85000 400 0.00 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 EBL 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 0 0.00 EBT 2 3400 1,000 0.32 * 3400 540 0.18 * EBR 0 80 70 WBL 1 1700 280 0.16 * 1700 310 0.18 * WBT 2 3400 360 0.11 3400 1,150 0.34 WBR 0 10 0 N/S Movements 0.03 0.10 E/W Movements 0.48 0.36 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.56 0.51 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 34 Manchester Avenue / Orangewood Avenue Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR (free) 0 0 0 SBL 2 3400 680 0.20 * 3400 390 0.11 * SBT 3 5100 590 0.17 5100 330 0.10 SBR 0 270 200 EBL 0 0 0 * EBT 3 5100 1,040 0.20 * 5100 630 0.12 EBR 1 1700 540 0.32 * 1700 360 0.21 * WBL 2 3400 40 0.01 * 3400 290 0.09 WBT 3 5100 400 0.08 5100 1,250 0.25 * WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.20 0.11 E/W Movements 0.22 0.25 Rt. Turn Component 0.11 0.09 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.58 0.50 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 35 Anaheim Way / Orangewood Avenue Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 50 190 NBT 3 5100 190 0.05 * 5100 180 0.07 * NBR 0 20 10 SBL 0 0 * 0 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 2 3400 370 0.11 3400 280 0.08 * EBT 3 5100 1,300 0.25 * 5100 670 0.13 EBR 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 * 0 WBT 3 5100 400 0.08 5100 1,160 0.23 * WBR 1 1700 330 0.19 * 1700 560 0.33 * N/S Movements 0.05 0.07 E/W Movements 0.25 0.31 Rt. Turn Component 0.12 0.10 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.47 0.54 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 36 State College Boulevard / Ball Road Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 100 0.03 * 3400 210 0.06 NBT 3 5100 380 0.07 5100 1,020 0.20 * NBR 1 1700 100 0.06 1700 160 0.09 SBL 2 3400 310 0.09 3400 240 0.07 * SBT 3 5100 860 0.22 * 5100 500 0.13 SBR 0 270 170 EBL 1 1700 190 0.11 1700 200 0.12 * EBT 3 5100 960 0.23 * 5100 1,060 0.24 EBR 0 230 170 WBL 1 1700 220 0.13 * 1700 150 0.09 WBT 3 5100 1,110 0.25 5100 1,380 0.31 * WBR 0 140 210 N/S Movements 0.25 0.27 E/W Movements 0.36 0.43 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.66 0.75 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B C Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 37 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 130 0.04 * 3400 220 0.06 NBT 3 5100 460 0.13 5100 770 0.19 * NBR 0 190 210 SBL 2 3400 210 0.06 3400 170 0.05 * SBT 3 5100 780 0.15 * 5100 650 0.13 SBR 1 1700 370 0.22 1700 380 0.22 EBL 2 3400 380 0.11 3400 410 0.12 * EBT 2.5 5100 1,004 0.20 * 5100 887 0.17 EBR 1.5 1700 330 0.19 1700 220 0.13 WBL 2 3400 300 0.09 * 3400 280 0.08 WBT 3 5100 626 0.12 5100 1,278 0.25 * WBR 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 170 0.10 N/S Movements 0.19 0.24 E/W Movements 0.29 0.37 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.53 0.66 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 38 State College Boulevard / Gene Autry Way Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 100 0.03 * 3400 150 0.04 * NBT 3 5100 690 0.17 5100 1,060 0.24 NBR 0 180 150 SBL 2 3400 10 0.00 3400 0 0.00 SBT 3 5100 1,030 0.25 * 5100 1,100 0.25 * SBR 0 270 200 EBL 1.5 2550 290 0.11 2550 110 0.04 * EBT 1.5 2550 120 0.21 * 2550 70 0.13 EBR 0 410 260 WBL 1 1700 10 0.01 * 1700 20 0.01 WBT 1 1700 40 0.02 1700 240 0.14 * WBR 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 20 0.01 N/S Movements 0.28 0.30 E/W Movements 0.23 0.27 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.57 0.62 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 39 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 120 0.04 3400 70 0.02 NBT 4 6800 670 0.13 * 6800 1,130 0.18 * NBR 0 190 120 SBL 2 3400 340 0.10 * 3400 270 0.08 * SBT 4 6800 980 0.18 6800 990 0.19 SBR 0 270 280 EBL 2 3400 170 0.05 3400 160 0.05 * EBT 3 5100 1,180 0.24 * 5100 630 0.13 EBR 0 50 50 WBL 2 3400 210 0.06 * 3400 220 0.06 WBT 3 5100 740 0.15 5100 1,250 0.25 * WBR 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 220 0.13 N/S Movements 0.23 0.26 E/W Movements 0.30 0.29 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.58 0.61 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 40 State College Boulevard / Orange Center Drive Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 120 0.04 * 3400 100 0.03 NBT 4 6800 880 0.13 6800 1,220 0.19 * NBR 0 20 50 SBL 2 3400 20 0.01 3400 70 0.02 * SBT 4 6800 1,230 0.20 * 6800 1,100 0.17 SBR 0 100 60 EBL 2 3400 20 0.01 3400 40 0.01 EBT 1 1700 0 0.00 * 1700 0 0.00 EBR 1 1700 140 0.08 * 1700 120 0.07 * WBL 1 1700 50 0.03 * 1700 40 0.02 WBT 1 1700 10 0.02 1700 0 0.01 WBR 0 20 20 N/S Movements 0.23 0.21 E/W Movements 0.03 0.02 Rt. Turn Component 0.05 0.04 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.36 0.32 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 41 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 210 0.06 * 3400 340 0.10 * NBT 4 6800 750 0.11 6800 1,090 0.16 NBR (free) 50 85,000 190 0.00 85,000 370 0.00 SBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 30 0.02 SBT 4 6800 1,780 0.26 * 6800 1,330 0.20 * SBR 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 80 0.05 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 * EBR 0 0 0 WBL 1.5 2416 180 0.07 2942 150 0.05 * WBT 1.5 2684 200 0.07 2158 110 0.05 WBR 2 3400 360 0.11 * 3400 300 0.09 * N/S Movements 0.32 0.30 E/W Movements 0.07 0.05 Rt. Turn Component 0.02 0.02 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.47 0.42 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 42 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 * 0 NBT 5 8500 980 0.12 8500 1,610 0.19 * NBR 0 30 30 SBL 0 0 0 * SBT 4 6800 1,770 0.26 * 6800 1,190 0.18 SBR (free) 50 85000 170 0.00 85,000 300 0.00 EBL 1.5 1700 70 0.04 1700 150 0.09 EBT 0.5 1700 470 0.28 * 1700 330 0.19 * EBR 2 3400 360 0.11 3400 320 0.09 WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.26 0.19 E/W Movements 0.28 0.19 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.59 0.44 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 43 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 130 0.04 * 3400 200 0.06 * NBT 3 5100 450 0.09 5100 1,040 0.20 NBR 2 3400 330 0.10 3400 560 0.16 SBL 2 3400 150 0.04 3400 150 0.04 SBT 3 5100 1,420 0.28 * 5100 1,090 0.21 * SBR 1 1700 470 0.28 1700 220 0.13 EBL 2 3400 260 0.08 3400 310 0.09 EBT 3 5100 1,370 0.27 * 5100 1,290 0.25 * EBR 1 1700 180 0.11 1700 140 0.08 WBL 2 3400 420 0.12 * 3400 430 0.13 * WBT 3 5100 890 0.17 5100 1,150 0.23 WBR 1 1700 200 0.12 1700 280 0.16 N/S Movements 0.32 0.27 E/W Movements 0.39 0.38 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.76 0.70 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C B Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 44 Sunkist Street / Ball Road Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 40 0.02 1700 90 0.05 NBT 2 3400 110 0.09 * 3400 690 0.29 * NBR 0 210 290 SBL 1 1700 530 0.31 * 1700 250 0.15 * SBT 2 3400 500 0.21 3400 210 0.10 SBR 0 230 140 EBL 2 3400 110 0.03 * 3400 200 0.06 * EBT 3 5100 1,170 0.24 5100 1,310 0.26 EBR 0 40 20 WBL 2 3400 410 0.12 3400 320 0.09 WBT 2 3400 1,230 0.36 * 3400 1,260 0.37 * WBR 1 1700 170 0.10 1700 680 0.40 N/S Movements 0.41 0.44 E/W Movements 0.39 0.43 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.85 0.91 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D E Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 45 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 20 0.01 * 1700 110 0.06 NBT 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 50 0.03 * NBR 1 1700 30 0.02 1700 190 0.11 * SBL 2 3400 240 0.07 3400 360 0.11 * SBT 0.5 567 50 0.09 * 567 20 0.04 SBR 0.5 1133 100 0.09 1133 40 0.04 EBL 2 3400 50 0.01 * 3400 60 0.02 * EBT 3 5100 1,264 0.26 5100 1,377 0.28 EBR 0 70 50 WBL 2 3400 160 0.05 3400 80 0.02 WBT 3 5100 1,146 0.30 * 5100 1,708 0.41 * WBR 0 400 370 Split phase N/S Movements 0.10 0.17 E/W Movements 0.32 0.43 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.02 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.47 0.67 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 46 Rampart Street / Orangewood Avenue Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 70 0.04 * 1700 80 0.05 * NBT 1 1700 100 0.06 1700 110 0.06 NBR 1 1700 250 0.15 1700 380 0.22 * SBL 0 50 120 SBT 1 1700 90 0.09 * 1700 140 0.19 * SBR 0 10 70 EBL 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 30 0.02 * EBT 2 3400 1,000 0.34 * 3400 720 0.24 EBR 0 170 80 WBL 1 1700 210 0.12 * 1700 180 0.11 WBT 2 3400 830 0.24 3400 1,310 0.39 * WBR 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 100 0.06 N/S Movements 0.13 0.24 E/W Movements 0.47 0.40 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.65 0.75 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B C Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 47 Rampart Street / Chapman Avenue Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 1 1700 70 0.04 * 1700 70 0.04 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 1 1700 210 0.12 1700 210 0.12 EBL 1 1700 250 0.15 * 1700 290 0.17 * EBT 4 6800 1,010 0.15 6800 1,190 0.18 EBR 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 0 WBT 4 6800 1,030 0.18 * 6800 1,160 0.20 * WBR 0 210 210 N/S Movements 0.04 0.04 E/W Movements 0.33 0.37 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.42 0.46 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 48 Ball Road / SR-57 Northbound Ramps Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 380 0.22 * 1700 520 0.31 * NBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 NBR 1 1700 480 0.28 * 1700 240 0.14 * SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 * EBT 3 5100 1,470 0.29 * 5100 1,160 0.23 EBR (free) 50 85000 490 0.01 85000 620 0.01 WBL 0 0 * 0 WBT 3 5100 800 0.16 5100 1,600 0.31 * WBR (free) 50 85000 330 0.00 85000 520 0.01 N/S Movements 0.22 0.31 E/W Movements 0.29 0.31 Rt. Turn Component 0.06 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.62 0.67 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B B Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 49 Ball Road / SR-57 Southbound Ramps Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 0.5 1299 600 0.46 * 1292 380 0.29 * SBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 SBR 1.5 2101 970 0.46 * 2108 620 0.29 * EBL 0 0 0 * EBT 3 5100 1,270 0.25 * 5100 1,330 0.26 EBR (free) 50 85000 640 0.01 85000 540 0.01 WBL 0 0 * 0 WBT 3 5100 920 0.18 5100 1,690 0.33 * WBR (free) 50 85000 220 0.00 85000 440 0.01 N/S Movements 0.46 0.29 E/W Movements 0.25 0.33 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.76 0.68 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C B Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 50 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 2647 410 0.15 * 2056 250 0.12 * NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBR 1.5 2453 380 0.15 * 3044 370 0.12 * SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 * EBT 3 5100 1,300 0.25 * 5100 1,190 0.23 EBR (free) 50 85000 329 0.00 85000 493 0.01 WBL 0 0 * 0 WBT 3 5100 1,014 0.20 5100 1,721 0.34 * WBR 1 1700 180 0.11 1700 320 0.19 N/S Movements 0.15 0.12 E/W Movements 0.25 0.34 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.46 0.51 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 51 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 1.5 1806 330 0.18 * 1700 230 0.14 * SBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 SBR 1.5 3294 602 0.18 * 3400 507 0.15 * EBL 0 0 0 EBT 3 5100 1,274 0.25 * 5100 1,477 0.29 * EBR (free) 50 85000 170 0.00 85000 410 0.00 WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBT 3 5100 1,144 0.22 5100 1,471 0.29 WBR (free) 50 85000 240 0.00 85000 470 0.01 N/S Movements 0.18 0.14 E/W Movements 0.25 0.29 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.01 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.48 0.49 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 52 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Northbound Ramps Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 1700 130 0.08 * 1700 80 0.05 * NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBR 1.5 3400 520 0.15 * 3400 210 0.06 * SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 * EBT 2 3400 1,340 0.39 * 3400 1,120 0.33 EBR (free) 50 85000 280 0.00 85000 280 0.00 WBL 0 0 * 0 WBT 2 3400 830 0.24 3400 1,600 0.47 * WBR 1 1700 220 0.13 1700 440 0.26 N/S Movements 0.08 0.05 E/W Movements 0.39 0.47 Rt. Turn Component 0.08 0.01 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.60 0.58 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 53 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Southbound Ramps Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 1.5 2312 340 0.15 * 1855 280 0.15 * SBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 SBR 1.5 2788 410 0.15 * 3245 490 0.15 * EBL 0 0 0 EBT 2 3400 1,340 0.39 * 3400 1,030 0.30 * EBR 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 140 0.08 WBL 1 1700 170 0.10 * 1700 470 0.28 * WBT 2 3400 740 0.22 3400 1,140 0.34 WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.15 0.15 E/W Movements 0.49 0.58 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.69 0.78 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B C Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 54 Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.33 1700 40 0.02 * 2084 190 0.09 * NBT 0.34 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBR 0.33 1700 40 0.02 1316 120 0.09 * SBL 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 10 0.01 SBT 1 1700 0 0.01 * 1700 0 0.01 * SBR 0 10 10 EBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 30 0.02 * EBT 2 3400 1,820 0.54 * 3400 1,200 0.35 EBR 1 1700 180 0.11 1700 150 0.09 WBL 1 1700 70 0.04 * 1700 80 0.05 WBT 2 3400 1,070 0.32 3400 2,050 0.61 * WBR 0 10 30 N/S Movements 0.03 0.10 E/W Movements 0.58 0.63 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.66 0.78 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B C Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 55 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 130 0.08 1700 440 0.26 NBT 1 1700 70 0.11 * 1700 220 0.25 * NBR 0 110 200 SBL 1 1700 350 0.21 * 1700 260 0.15 * SBT 0.5 1700 180 0.11 723 100 0.14 SBR 1.5 1700 70 0.04 2677 370 0.14 EBL 2 3400 390 0.11 * 3400 160 0.05 * EBT 3 5100 1,205 0.24 5100 1,084 0.21 EBR 1 1700 210 0.12 1700 180 0.11 WBL 2 3400 200 0.06 3400 210 0.06 WBT 3 5100 1,024 0.20 * 5100 1,451 0.28 * WBR 1 1700 170 0.10 1700 360 0.21 N/S Movements 0.31 0.40 E/W Movements 0.32 0.33 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.68 0.78 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B C Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 56 Eckhoff Street / Orangewood Avenue Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 190 0.11 * 1700 150 0.09 * NBT 1 1700 180 0.12 1700 160 0.11 NBR 0 30 30 SBL 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 50 0.03 SBT 1 1700 130 0.08 * 1700 220 0.13 * SBR 1 1700 390 0.23 1700 740 0.44 * EBL 1 1700 680 0.40 * 1700 360 0.21 * EBT 2 3400 870 0.26 3400 630 0.19 EBR 1 1700 90 0.05 1700 230 0.14 WBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 60 0.04 WBT 2 3400 390 0.13 * 3400 730 0.23 * WBR 0 40 40 N/S Movements 0.19 0.22 E/W Movements 0.53 0.44 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.09 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.76 0.80 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C C Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 57 Main Street / Taft Avenue Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 2763 130 0.05 * 3072 750 0.24 * NBT 0.5 638 30 0.05 328 80 0.24 NBR 1 1700 90 0.05 1700 390 0.23 SBL 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 20 0.01 SBT 1 1700 50 0.06 * 1700 50 0.14 * SBR 0 60 190 EBL 1 1700 110 0.06 1700 60 0.04 EBT 2 3400 960 0.44 * 3400 1,010 0.38 * EBR 0 530 270 WBL 1 1700 270 0.16 * 1700 250 0.15 * WBT 2 3400 860 0.26 3400 1,290 0.38 WBR 0 30 10 N/S Movements 0.11 0.39 E/W Movements 0.60 0.52 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.76 0.96 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C E Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 58 Main Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 50 0.01 * 3400 130 0.04 NBT 2 3400 410 0.12 3400 520 0.15 * NBR 1 1700 160 0.09 1700 360 0.21 SBL 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 90 0.05 * SBT 2 3400 550 0.16 * 3400 450 0.13 SBR 1 1700 90 0.05 1700 250 0.15 EBL 1 1700 220 0.13 1700 160 0.09 EBT 3 5100 805 0.16 * 5100 1,124 0.22 * EBR 1 1700 90 0.05 1700 110 0.06 WBL 1 1700 360 0.21 * 1700 220 0.13 * WBT 3 5100 1,064 0.22 5100 991 0.22 WBR 0 70 150 N/S Movements 0.18 0.21 E/W Movements 0.37 0.35 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.60 0.61 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 59 Batavia Street / Taft Avenue Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 70 0.04 * 1700 170 0.10 * NBT 2 3400 250 0.10 3400 590 0.23 NBR 0 90 200 SBL 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 80 0.05 SBT 2 3400 720 0.28 * 3400 360 0.19 * SBR 0 220 300 EBL 1 1700 250 0.15 * 1700 290 0.17 * EBT 2 3400 710 0.21 3400 860 0.25 EBR 1 1700 250 0.15 1700 160 0.09 WBL 1 1700 300 0.18 1700 170 0.10 WBT 2 3400 940 0.28 * 3400 900 0.26 * WBR 1 1700 40 0.02 1700 50 0.03 N/S Movements 0.32 0.29 E/W Movements 0.42 0.44 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.79 0.78 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C C Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 61 Clementine Street / Orangewood Avenue Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 10 0 * NBT 1 1700 10 0.05 * 1700 20 0.04 NBR 0 60 40 SBL 0 30 * 60 SBT 1 1700 0 0.04 1700 30 0.17 * SBR 0 40 200 EBL 1 1700 130 0.08 1700 130 0.08 * EBT 2 3400 820 0.24 * 3400 530 0.16 EBR 0 10 10 WBL 1 1700 30 0.02 * 1700 50 0.03 WBT 2 3400 340 0.11 3400 800 0.25 * WBR 0 50 40 N/S Movements 0.05 0.17 E/W Movements 0.26 0.32 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.36 0.54 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 62 Flower Street / Chapman Avenue Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 150 0.09 * 1700 250 0.15 * NBT 1 1700 10 0.03 1700 10 0.02 NBR 0 40 30 SBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 20 0.01 SBT 1 1700 30 0.04 * 1700 40 0.06 * SBR 0 30 70 EBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 40 0.02 * EBT 3 5100 1,130 0.25 * 5100 1,160 0.26 EBR 0 160 160 WBL 1 1700 20 0.01 * 1700 60 0.04 WBT 3 5100 990 0.20 5100 1,520 0.31 * WBR 0 10 40 N/S Movements 0.12 0.21 E/W Movements 0.26 0.33 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.44 0.59 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 63 Harbor Boulevard / Chapman Avenue Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 100 0.03 3400 210 0.06 * NBT 3 5100 890 0.17 * 5100 1,080 0.21 NBR 1 1700 220 0.13 1700 170 0.10 SBL 2 3400 110 0.03 * 3400 190 0.06 SBT 3 5100 740 0.15 5100 1,160 0.23 * SBR 1 1700 150 0.09 1700 190 0.11 EBL 2 3400 130 0.04 3400 180 0.05 * EBT 2 3400 1,030 0.30 * 3400 650 0.19 EBR 1 1700 130 0.08 1700 100 0.06 WBL 2 3400 110 0.03 * 3400 160 0.05 WBT 2 3400 410 0.12 3400 960 0.28 * WBR 1 1700 90 0.05 1700 160 0.09 N/S Movements 0.21 0.29 E/W Movements 0.34 0.34 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.59 0.67 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 64 I-5 Southbound Ramps / Chapman Avenue Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 620 0.18 * 3400 670 0.20 * NBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 NBR 1 1700 110 0.06 * 1700 80 0.05 * SBL 2 3400 480 0.14 3400 400 0.12 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 0 0.00 EBL 0 0 0 * EBT 3.5 5100 890 0.17 * 5100 980 0.19 EBR 1.5 3400 930 0.27 3400 1,010 0.30 WBL 2 3400 100 0.03 * 3400 120 0.04 WBT 3 5100 960 0.19 5100 1,330 0.26 * WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.18 0.20 E/W Movements 0.20 0.26 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.44 0.51 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 65 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Chapman Avenue Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 50 0.03 * 1700 40 0.02 * NBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 NBR 1 1700 110 0.06 * 1700 150 0.09 * SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 EBL 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 0 0.00 EBT 2 3400 1,090 0.32 * 3400 1,000 0.29 * EBR (free) 50 85000 350 0.00 85000 430 0.01 WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBT 3 5100 930 0.18 5100 1,440 0.28 WBR (free) 50 85000 280 0.00 85000 390 0.00 N/S Movements 0.03 0.02 E/W Movements 0.32 0.29 Rt. Turn Component 0.04 0.06 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.44 0.43 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 66 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Chapman Avenue Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 20 * 140 NBT 1 1700 10 0.02 1700 30 0.10 NBR 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 110 0.06 SBL 0 260 160 SBT 1 1700 60 0.19 * 1700 10 0.10 SBR 1 1700 390 0.23 * 1700 320 0.19 * EBL 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 0 0.00 * EBT 3 5100 1,240 0.27 * 5100 1,310 0.26 EBR 0 150 20 WBL 1 1700 90 0.05 * 1700 20 0.01 WBT 2 3400 790 0.23 3400 1,290 0.38 * WBR (free) 50 85000 150 0.00 85000 160 0.00 N/S Movements 0.19 0.10 E/W Movements 0.33 0.38 Rt. Turn Component 0.04 0.09 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.60 0.62 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 67 Euclid Street / Ball Road Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 140 0.04 3400 140 0.04 NBT 3 5100 1,090 0.25 * 5100 1,320 0.28 * NBR 0 200 100 SBL 2 3400 150 0.04 * 3400 390 0.11 * SBT 3 5100 1,000 0.22 5100 1,210 0.29 SBR 0 130 280 EBL 2 3400 220 0.06 3400 230 0.07 * EBT 3 5100 880 0.20 * 5100 710 0.19 EBR 0 130 260 WBL 2 3400 310 0.09 * 3400 100 0.03 WBT 3 5100 630 0.14 5100 880 0.19 * WBR 0 80 110 N/S Movements 0.30 0.39 E/W Movements 0.29 0.26 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.64 0.70 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B B Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 68 Walnut Street / Cerritos Avenue Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 110 * 280 * NBT 2 3400 260 0.11 3400 310 0.17 NBR 0 0 0 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 2 3400 390 0.19 * 3400 360 0.19 * SBR 0 250 290 EBL 1 1700 370 0.22 * 1700 290 0.17 * EBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 EBR 1 1700 260 0.15 * 1700 110 0.06 * WBL 0 0 0 WBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.19 0.19 E/W Movements 0.22 0.17 Rt. Turn Component 0.15 0.06 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.61 0.48 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B A Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 69 Disneyland Drive / I-5 Southbound Off Ramp Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 * 0 NBT 2 3400 130 0.04 3400 490 0.14 * NBR (free) 50 85000 733 0.01 85000 769 0.01 SBL 0 0 0 * SBT 2 3400 650 0.19 * 3400 340 0.10 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * EBR 0 0 0 WBL 3 5100 871 0.17 * 5100 703 0.14 * WBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 WBR 1 1700 10 0.01 * 1700 50 0.03 * N/S Movements 0.19 0.14 E/W Movements 0.17 0.14 Rt. Turn Component 0.01 0.03 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.42 0.36 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 70 Disneyland Drive/ Magic Way Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 420 0.12 * 3400 270 0.08 * NBT 2 3400 503 0.15 3400 669 0.20 NBR 0 0 0 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 2 3400 521 0.15 * 3400 463 0.14 * SBR 1 1700 140 0.08 1700 240 0.14 EBL 2 3400 130 0.04 * 3400 320 0.09 * EBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 EBR 2 3400 100 0.03 3400 140 0.04 WBL 0 0 0 WBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.28 0.22 E/W Movements 0.04 0.09 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.37 0.36 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 71 Ox Road / Cast Place / Ball Road Date 12/16/2010 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.33 2869 90 0.03 * 1725 230 0.13 NBT 0.34 0 0 0.00 75 10 0.13 * NBR 1.33 2231 70 0.03 3300 440 0.13 SBL 1.33 1700 30 0.02 1700 30 0.02 * SBT 0.34 567 10 0.02 * 0 0 0.00 SBR 0.33 1133 20 0.02 1700 30 0.02 * EBL 1 1700 30 0.02 1700 10 0.01 * EBT 3 5100 2,140 0.42 * 5100 1,560 0.31 EBR 1 1700 270 0.16 1700 160 0.09 WBL 2 3400 350 0.10 * 3400 120 0.04 WBT 3 5100 1,480 0.30 5100 1,930 0.39 * WBR 0 30 40 N/S Movements 0.05 0.15 E/W Movements 0.52 0.39 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.62 0.59 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B A Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 72 Convention Center/ Katella Avenue Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 NBR 0 0 0 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 * EBT 3 5100 2,260 0.46 * 5100 1,460 0.29 EBR 0 85 43 WBL 2 3400 173 0.05 * 3400 108 0.03 WBT 3 5100 890 0.17 5100 2,380 0.47 * WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.00 0.00 E/W Movements 0.51 0.47 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.56 0.52 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 73 Harbor Boulevard / Lincoln Avenue Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 110 0.06 * 1700 190 0.11 NBT 3 5100 624 0.14 5100 1,081 0.25 * NBR 0 80 210 SBL 1 1700 180 0.11 1700 150 0.09 * SBT 3 5100 981 0.19 * 5100 809 0.16 SBR 1 1700 130 0.08 1700 150 0.09 EBL 1 1700 130 0.08 1700 230 0.14 * EBT 2 3400 850 0.26 * 3400 720 0.25 EBR 0 50 130 WBL 1 1700 150 0.09 * 1700 200 0.12 WBT 2 3400 840 0.25 3400 1,000 0.29 * WBR 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 150 0.09 N/S Movements 0.26 0.34 E/W Movements 0.35 0.43 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.66 0.82 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B D Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 74 Harbor Boulevard / Broadway Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 60 0.04 * 1700 110 0.06 NBT 2 3400 584 0.17 3400 1,131 0.33 * NBR 1 1700 110 0.06 1700 120 0.07 SBL 1 1700 100 0.06 1700 150 0.09 * SBT 2 3400 901 0.26 * 3400 759 0.22 SBR 1 1700 160 0.09 1700 190 0.11 EBL 1 1700 140 0.08 1700 150 0.09 * EBT 2 3400 550 0.16 3400 410 0.12 EBR 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 70 0.04 WBL 2 3400 90 0.03 3400 120 0.04 WBT 2 3400 360 0.11 3400 560 0.16 * WBR 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 150 0.09 N/S Movements 0.30 0.42 E/W Movements 0.19 0.25 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.54 0.72 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A C Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 75 Harbor Boulevard / Manchester Avenue Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 110 0.06 1700 130 0.08 NBT 3 5100 804 0.17 * 5100 1,268 0.26 * NBR 0 40 40 SBL 1 1700 170 0.10 * 1700 80 0.05 * SBT 4 6800 939 0.14 6800 973 0.14 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * EBR 0 0 0 WBL 1 1700 30 0.02 * 1700 50 0.03 * WBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 WBR 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 270 0.16 * N/S Movements 0.27 0.30 E/W Movements 0.02 0.03 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.11 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.33 0.49 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 76 Anaheim Boulevard / Lincoln Avenue Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 70 0.04 * 1700 170 0.10 NBT 2 3400 340 0.10 3400 890 0.26 * NBR 1 1700 100 0.06 1700 100 0.06 SBL 1 1700 90 0.05 1700 110 0.06 * SBT 2 3400 680 0.20 * 3400 490 0.14 SBR 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 80 0.05 EBL 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 140 0.08 * EBT 3 5100 700 0.16 * 5100 810 0.18 EBR 0 140 120 WBL 1 1700 170 0.10 * 1700 130 0.08 WBT 3 5100 890 0.19 5100 990 0.22 * WBR 0 70 130 N/S Movements 0.24 0.33 E/W Movements 0.26 0.30 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.56 0.68 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 77 Anaheim Boulevard / Broadway Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 90 0.05 * 1700 150 0.09 * NBT 3 5100 470 0.11 5100 1,030 0.21 NBR 0 80 60 SBL 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 100 0.06 SBT 2 3400 790 0.25 * 3400 670 0.22 * SBR 0 60 80 EBL 1 1700 120 0.07 1700 150 0.09 * EBT 2 3400 430 0.13 * 3400 400 0.12 EBR 1 1700 120 0.07 1700 100 0.06 WBL 1 1700 100 0.06 * 1700 120 0.07 WBT 2 3400 380 0.11 3400 400 0.12 * WBR 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 90 0.05 N/S Movements 0.30 0.31 E/W Movements 0.19 0.21 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.54 0.56 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 78 Olive Street / Lincoln Avenue Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 50 0.03 * 1700 50 0.03 NBT 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 130 0.08 NBR 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 110 0.06 SBL 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 40 0.02 SBT 1 1700 90 0.05 * 1700 120 0.07 SBR 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 50 0.03 EBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 40 0.02 EBT 2 3400 830 0.24 * 3400 960 0.28 * EBR 1 1700 40 0.02 1700 60 0.04 WBL 1 1700 130 0.08 * 1700 80 0.05 * WBT 3 5100 1,160 0.23 5100 1,120 0.23 WBR 0 20 70 N/S Movements 0.08 0.10 E/W Movements 0.32 0.33 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.45 0.48 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 79 Flore Street / West Place / Ball Road Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 30 0.02 NBT 1 1700 0 0.05 * 1700 0 0.09 * NBR 0 80 160 SBL 1 1700 50 0.03 * 1700 20 0.01 * SBT 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 0 0.00 SBR 0 10 0 EBL 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 20 0.01 * EBT 3 5100 1,570 0.32 * 5100 1,030 0.21 EBR 0 60 40 WBL 1 1700 190 0.11 * 1700 150 0.09 WBT 3 5100 700 0.14 5100 1,570 0.32 * WBR 0 20 50 N/S Movements 0.08 0.11 E/W Movements 0.43 0.33 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.56 0.49 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 80 West Street / Orangewood Avenue Date 11/21/2010 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 50 0.03 NBT 2 3400 347 0.15 * 3400 480 0.16 * NBR 0 180 80 SBL 1 1700 150 0.09 * 1700 110 0.06 * SBT 2 3400 353 0.11 3400 409 0.14 SBR 0 10 71 EBL 0 31 21 * EBT 1 1700 521 0.33 * 1700 271 0.19 EBR 0 10 40 WBL 0 40 * 150 WBT 1 1700 120 0.09 1700 461 0.36 * WBR 1 1700 171 0.10 1700 260 0.15 N/S Movements 0.24 0.23 Split Phase E/W Movements 0.42 0.55 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.72 0.83 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C D Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 81 Struck Avenue / Katella Avenue Date 12/14/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 3200 160 0.05 * 3249 430 0.13 * NBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 NBR 0.5 200 10 0.05 * 151 20 0.13 * SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 * EBT 3 5100 1,485 0.29 * 5100 1,444 0.28 EBR 1 1700 350 0.21 1700 260 0.15 WBL 1 1700 20 0.01 * 1700 10 0.01 WBT 3 5100 1,104 0.22 5100 1,581 0.31 * WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.05 0.13 E/W Movements 0.30 0.31 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.40 0.49 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Interim Year 2015 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No.14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report – Technical Appendices Appendix A-4 ICU Worksheets under 2030 No Project Conditions ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 1 Euclid Street / Katella Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 120 0.04 * 3400 350 0.10 NBT 3 5100 890 0.17 5100 1,450 0.28 * NBR 1 1700 200 0.12 1700 140 0.08 SBL 2 3400 370 0.11 3400 290 0.09 * SBT 3 5100 1,440 0.28 * 5100 1,100 0.22 SBR 1 1700 230 0.14 1700 100 0.06 EBL 2 3400 190 0.06 3400 320 0.09 * EBT 3 5100 1,920 0.41 * 5100 820 0.21 EBR 0 180 240 WBL 2 3400 250 0.07 * 3400 230 0.07 WBT 3 5100 470 0.09 5100 2,060 0.40 * WBR 1 1700 170 0.10 1700 360 0.21 N/S Movements 0.32 0.37 E/W Movements 0.49 0.50 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.85 0.92 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D E Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 2 Ninth Street / Katella Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 230 0.14 * 1700 530 0.31 * NBT 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 150 0.09 NBR 1 1700 360 0.21 1700 360 0.21 SBL 1 1700 30 0.02 1700 20 0.01 SBT 1 1700 140 0.11 * 1700 90 0.08 * SBR 0 40 40 EBL 1 1700 30 0.02 1700 60 0.04 EBT 3 5100 2,390 0.47 * 5100 1,070 0.21 * EBR 1 1700 260 0.15 1700 290 0.17 WBL 1 1700 290 0.17 * 1700 510 0.30 * WBT 3 5100 640 0.13 5100 2,230 0.44 WBR 1 1700 30 0.02 1700 60 0.04 N/S Movements 0.24 0.39 E/W Movements 0.64 0.51 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.93 0.95 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E E Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 3 Walnut Street / Ball Road Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 100 0.06 1700 270 0.16 * NBT 2 3400 150 0.16 * 3400 310 0.19 NBR 0 410 330 SBL 1 1700 140 0.08 * 1700 70 0.04 SBT 2 3400 210 0.08 3400 270 0.10 * SBR 0 60 80 EBL 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 50 0.03 EBT 3 5100 1,360 0.30 * 5100 760 0.17 * EBR 0 150 100 WBL 1 1700 200 0.12 * 1700 380 0.22 * WBT 3 5100 680 0.14 5100 1,180 0.24 WBR 0 50 30 N/S Movements 0.25 0.26 E/W Movements 0.41 0.39 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.71 0.70 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C B Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 4 Walnut Street / Katella Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 10 10 NBT 1 1700 10 0.01 * 1700 0 0.01 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 1.5 3365 970 0.29 * 3274 260 0.08 * SBT 0.5 35 10 0.29 126 10 0.08 SBR 1 1700 180 0.11 1700 230 0.14 EBL 1 1700 230 0.14 1700 200 0.12 * EBT 3 5100 2,580 0.51 * 5100 1,170 0.23 EBR 0 0 10 WBL 1 1700 30 0.02 * 1700 50 0.03 WBT 3 5100 710 0.18 5100 2,240 0.60 * WBR 0 230 840 N/S Movements 0.30 0.09 E/W Movements 0.52 0.72 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.87 0.86 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 5 Disneyland Drive / Ball Road Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 1259 150 0.12 1020 210 0.21 NBT 1 2770 330 0.12 2914 600 0.21 NBR 1.5 2770 330 0.12 2866 590 0.21 SBL 1.5 3003 680 0.23 2202 340 0.15 SBT 2.5 3797 730 0.23 4598 540 0.15 SBR 0 130 170 EBL 2 3400 310 0.09 3400 230 0.07 * EBT 3 5100 1,280 0.25 * 5100 1,030 0.20 EBR 1 1700 130 0.08 1700 130 0.08 WBL 2 3400 580 0.17 * 3400 470 0.14 WBT 3 5100 830 0.18 5100 1,500 0.38 * WBR 0 70 420 N/S Movements 0.35 0.36 E/W Movements 0.42 0.44 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.10 0.10 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.87 0.90 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 6 Disneyland Drive / West Street / Katella Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 210 0.06 3400 320 0.09 NBT 2 3400 360 0.11 * 3400 470 0.14 * NBR 1 1700 230 0.14 1700 150 0.09 SBL 2 3400 470 0.14 * 3400 750 0.22 * SBT 2 3400 250 0.07 3400 430 0.13 SBR 1 1700 340 0.20 * 1700 370 0.22 * EBL 2 3400 270 0.08 3400 140 0.04 * EBT 3 5100 2,920 0.57 * 5100 1,030 0.20 EBR 1 1700 200 0.12 1700 160 0.09 WBL 2 3400 170 0.05 * 3400 120 0.04 WBT 3 5100 920 0.18 5100 2,380 0.47 * WBR 1 1700 490 0.29 1700 530 0.31 N/S Movements 0.24 0.36 E/W Movements 0.62 0.51 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.92 0.92 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E E Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 7 Harbor Boulevard / Vermont Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 80 0.05 * 1700 130 0.08 NBT 3 5100 730 0.17 5100 2,380 0.49 * NBR 0 130 140 SBL 1 1700 90 0.05 1700 60 0.04 * SBT 3 5100 2,030 0.40 * 5100 860 0.17 SBR 0 10 30 EBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 20 0.01 EBT 1 1700 130 0.16 * 1700 50 0.09 * EBR 0 150 100 WBL 1 1700 150 0.09 * 1700 180 0.11 * WBT 1 1700 70 0.06 1700 100 0.09 WBR 0 40 60 N/S Movements 0.45 0.53 E/W Movements 0.25 0.19 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.75 0.77 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C C Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 8 Harbor Boulevard / Ball Road Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 670 0.20 * 3400 730 0.21 * NBT 3 5100 860 0.17 5100 1,950 0.38 NBR 1 1700 290 0.17 1700 340 0.20 SBL 2 3400 160 0.05 3400 200 0.06 SBT 3 5100 2,190 0.43 * 5100 1,250 0.25 * SBR 1 1700 470 0.28 1700 300 0.18 EBL 2 3400 410 0.12 3400 640 0.19 * EBT 3 5100 1,670 0.33 * 5100 1,290 0.25 EBR 1 1700 830 0.49 1700 550 0.32 WBL 2 3400 160 0.05 * 3400 270 0.08 WBT 4 6800 1,160 0.20 6800 1,450 0.23 * WBR 0 170 140 N/S Movements 0.63 0.46 E/W Movements 0.37 0.42 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 1.05 0.93 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) F E Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 9 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 NB Ramps Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 * 0 NBT 3 5100 880 0.17 5100 2,000 0.39 * NBR (free) 50 85000 200 0.00 85000 620 0.01 SBL 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 60 0.04 * SBT 4 6800 3,130 0.46 * 6800 1,960 0.29 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * EBR 0 0 0 WBL 1.5 1700 70 0.04 * 1700 100 0.06 * WBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 WBR 1.5 3400 740 0.22 * 3400 910 0.27 * N/S Movements 0.46 0.43 E/W Movements 0.04 0.06 Rt. Turn Component 0.19 0.23 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.74 0.77 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C C Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 10 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 SB Ramps Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 70 0.04 * 1700 90 0.05 NBT 4 6800 820 0.12 6800 2,370 0.35 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 0 0 0 * SBT 3 5100 2,000 0.39 * 5100 1,220 0.24 SBR (free) 50 85000 1,170 0.01 85000 940 0.01 EBL 2 3400 320 0.09 * 3400 320 0.09 * EBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 EBR (free) 50 85000 320 0.00 85000 420 0.00 WBL 0 0 0 WBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.43 0.35 E/W Movements 0.09 0.09 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.58 0.49 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 11 Harbor Boulevard / Disney Way Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 180 0.05 * 3400 50 0.01 NBT 3 5100 770 0.23 5100 1,610 0.33 * NBR 0 410 90 SBL 2 3400 250 0.07 3400 180 0.05 * SBT 3 5100 1,240 0.27 * 5100 1,260 0.25 SBR 0 120 40 EBL 2 3400 10 0.00 3400 40 0.01 EBT 1.5 1700 10 0.01 * 2833 50 0.02 * EBR 0.5 1700 10 0.01 567 10 0.02 WBL 1 1700 120 0.07 * 1700 620 0.36 * WBT 3 5100 150 0.05 5100 80 0.10 WBR 0 120 430 N/S Movements 0.32 0.39 E/W Movements 0.08 0.38 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.45 0.82 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A D Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 12 Harbor Boulevard / Katella Avenue Date 11/19/2010 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 260 0.08 * 3400 581 0.17 * NBT 3 5100 660 0.13 5100 1,130 0.22 NBR 1 1700 161 0.09 1700 230 0.14 SBL 2 3400 160 0.05 3400 210 0.06 SBT 3 5100 951 0.19 * 5100 747 0.15 * SBR 1 1700 142 0.08 1700 500 0.29 * EBL 2 3400 397 0.12 3400 355 0.10 * EBT 4 6800 2,615 0.40 * 6800 1,474 0.24 EBR 0 101 170 WBL 2 3400 259 0.08 * 3400 439 0.13 WBT 4 6800 1,047 0.16 6800 2,238 0.35 * WBR 0 70 170 N/S Movements 0.26 0.32 E/W Movements 0.48 0.46 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.04 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.79 0.87 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C D Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 13 Harbor Boulevard / Convention Way Date 11/19/2010 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 179 0.05 * 3400 121 0.04 NBT 3 5100 990 0.19 5100 1,280 0.25 * NBR 1 1700 567 0.33 * 1700 360 0.21 SBL 2 3400 205 0.06 3400 130 0.04 * SBT 3 5100 1,050 0.21 * 5100 1,290 0.25 SBR 1 1700 196 0.12 1700 125 0.07 EBL 1 1700 101 0.06 1700 130 0.08 EBT 2 3400 423 0.12 * 3400 403 0.12 * EBR 1 1700 95 0.06 1700 114 0.07 WBL 2 3400 110 0.03 * 3400 410 0.12 * WBT 2 3400 218 0.06 3400 173 0.05 WBR 1 1700 250 0.15 * 1700 460 0.27 * N/S Movements 0.26 0.29 E/W Movements 0.16 0.24 Rt. Turn Component 0.13 0.18 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.59 0.76 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A C Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 14 Harbor Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Date 11/19/2010 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 230 0.14 * NBT 3 5100 1,197 0.26 * 5100 1,560 0.34 NBR 0 140 190 SBL 1 1700 61 0.04 * 1700 101 0.06 SBT 3 5100 1,083 0.23 5100 1,403 0.31 * SBR 0 71 201 EBL 1 1700 230 0.14 1700 121 0.07 * EBT 2 3400 1,090 0.38 * 3400 450 0.16 EBR 0 190 100 WBL 1 1700 170 0.10 * 1700 260 0.15 WBT 2 3400 321 0.09 3400 1,000 0.29 * WBR 1 1700 118 0.07 1700 91 0.05 N/S Movements 0.30 0.45 E/W Movements 0.48 0.37 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.82 0.86 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 15 Clementine Street / Disney Way Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 70 0.02 3400 80 0.02 NBT 2 3400 60 0.03 * 3400 130 0.05 * NBR 0 30 50 SBL 2 3400 600 0.18 * 3400 580 0.17 * SBT 2 3400 80 0.04 3400 110 0.12 SBR 0 60 310 EBL 1 1700 220 0.13 * 1700 90 0.05 * EBT 3 5100 270 0.05 5100 150 0.03 EBR 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 70 0.04 WBL 1 1700 130 0.08 1700 120 0.07 WBT 3 5100 390 0.17 * 5100 610 0.24 * WBR 0 480 590 N/S Movements 0.20 0.22 E/W Movements 0.30 0.29 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.55 0.56 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 16 Clementine Street / Katella Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 50 0.03 * 1700 120 0.07 NBT 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 120 0.07 * NBR 1 1700 110 0.06 1700 400 0.24 * SBL 1 1700 100 0.06 1700 290 0.17 * SBT 1 1700 140 0.08 * 1700 130 0.08 SBR 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 110 0.06 EBL 2 3400 80 0.02 3400 80 0.02 * EBT 4 6800 2,680 0.41 * 6800 1,670 0.26 EBR 0 120 70 WBL 2 3400 260 0.08 * 3400 150 0.04 WBT 4 6800 1,300 0.20 6800 2,910 0.44 * WBR 0 60 80 N/S Movements 0.11 0.24 E/W Movements 0.49 0.46 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.12 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.65 0.88 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B D Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 17 I-5 SB Off Ramp / Disney Way Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 20 0.01 * NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 NBR 1 1700 40 0.02 1700 110 0.06 * SBL 1.33 3323 500 0.15 * 3323 430 0.13 SBT 0.34 77 10 0.13 77 10 0.13 * SBR 1.33 1700 150 0.09 1700 120 0.07 EBL 0 0 0 * EBT 3 5100 890 0.18 * 5100 580 0.12 EBR 0 10 10 WBL 1 1700 140 0.08 * 1700 80 0.05 WBT 3 5100 740 0.15 5100 1,260 0.25 * WBR 0 0 0 Split Phase N/S Movements 0.17 0.19 E/W Movements 0.26 0.25 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.01 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.48 0.50 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 18 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 200 0.06 * 3400 270 0.08 NBT 3 5100 510 0.14 5100 1,800 0.38 * NBR 0 200 160 SBL 2 3400 530 0.16 3400 400 0.12 * SBT 3 5100 1,670 0.33 * 5100 700 0.14 SBR 1 1700 270 0.16 1700 140 0.08 EBL 1 1700 170 0.10 1700 240 0.14 * EBT 3 5100 1,630 0.39 * 5100 930 0.24 EBR 0 380 270 WBL 2 3400 170 0.05 * 3400 180 0.05 WBT 3 5100 1,010 0.20 5100 1,520 0.30 * WBR 1 1700 160 0.09 1700 480 0.28 N/S Movements 0.39 0.50 E/W Movements 0.44 0.44 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.88 0.99 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D E Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 19 Anaheim Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 130 0.08 1700 130 0.08 NBT 3 5100 880 0.17 * 5100 1,850 0.36 * NBR 1 1700 570 0.34 * 1700 490 0.29 SBL 1 1700 690 0.41 * 1700 350 0.21 * SBT 3 5100 1,680 0.35 5100 1,260 0.26 SBR 0 100 80 EBL 1 1700 40 0.02 1700 90 0.05 * EBT 1 1700 40 0.06 * 1700 70 0.14 EBR 0 70 160 WBL 2 3400 470 0.14 * 3400 690 0.20 WBT 1 1700 50 0.15 1700 110 0.38 * WBR 0 210 530 N/S Movements 0.58 0.57 E/W Movements 0.20 0.43 Rt. Turn Component 0.02 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.86 1.05 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D F Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 20 Anaheim Boulevard / I-5 NB Ramps Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 270 0.08 * 3400 190 0.06 * NBT 3 5100 1,210 0.24 5100 1,720 0.34 NBR 0 0 0 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 3 5100 2,100 0.41 * 5100 2,090 0.41 * SBR 1 1700 150 0.09 1700 350 0.21 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 EBR 0 0 0 WBL 0.5 850 30 0.04 196 80 0.41 WBT 1 850 30 0.04 1618 660 0.41 WBR 1.5 3400 420 0.12 * 3286 1,340 0.41 N/S Movements 0.49 0.47 E/W Movements 0.04 0.41 Rt. Turn Component 0.09 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.66 0.92 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B E Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 21 Anaheim Boulevard / Disney Way Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 210 0.12 NBT 3 5100 1,040 0.21 * 5100 1,500 0.30 * NBR 0 10 10 SBL 2 3400 530 0.16 * 3400 560 0.16 * SBT 3 5100 1,350 0.30 5100 1,430 0.33 SBR 0 170 230 EBL 2 3400 480 0.14 * 3400 540 0.16 * EBT 4 6800 870 0.14 6800 590 0.11 EBR 0 110 180 WBL 0 0 0 WBT 3 5100 600 0.12 * 5100 830 0.16 * WBR 0 10 0 N/S Movements 0.36 0.46 E/W Movements 0.26 0.32 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.68 0.83 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B D Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 22 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 200 0.06 3400 260 0.08 NBT 3 5100 690 0.14 * 5100 1,150 0.23 * NBR 1 1700 260 0.15 1700 410 0.24 SBL 2 3400 480 0.14 * 3400 430 0.13 * SBT 3 5100 550 0.11 5100 530 0.10 SBR 1 1700 310 0.18 1700 300 0.18 EBL 2 3400 270 0.08 3400 420 0.12 * EBT 4 6800 2,570 0.39 * 6800 1,820 0.29 EBR 0 60 140 WBL 2 3400 560 0.16 * 3400 450 0.13 WBT 4 6800 1,050 0.16 6800 2,400 0.37 * WBR 0 70 100 N/S Movements 0.28 0.35 E/W Movements 0.55 0.49 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.88 0.89 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 23 Haster Street / Gene Autry Way Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 160 0.09 * 1700 260 0.15 NBT 3 5100 1,030 0.20 5100 1,490 0.29 * NBR 1 1700 480 0.28 1700 390 0.23 SBL 1 1700 100 0.06 1700 230 0.14 * SBT 3 5100 930 0.20 * 5100 970 0.23 SBR 0 100 210 EBL 1 1700 130 0.08 1700 350 0.21 EBT 3 5100 1,030 0.24 * 5100 890 0.21 * EBR 0 210 180 WBL 1 1700 550 0.32 * 1700 710 0.42 * WBT 3 5100 410 0.11 5100 1,150 0.25 WBR 0 150 100 N/S Movements 0.30 0.43 E/W Movements 0.57 0.63 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.91 1.10 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E F Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 24 Haster Street / Orangewood Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 230 0.14 NBT 3 5100 1,320 0.28 * 5100 1,870 0.39 * NBR 0 90 100 SBL 1 1700 170 0.10 * 1700 210 0.12 * SBT 3 5100 1,280 0.25 5100 1,520 0.30 SBR 1 1700 220 0.13 1700 120 0.07 EBL 2 3400 190 0.06 3400 130 0.04 * EBT 2 3400 860 0.29 * 3400 440 0.15 EBR 0 110 80 WBL 2 3400 110 0.03 * 3400 190 0.06 WBT 2 3400 250 0.07 3400 760 0.22 * WBR 1 1700 170 0.10 1700 330 0.19 N/S Movements 0.38 0.51 E/W Movements 0.32 0.26 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.74 0.82 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C D Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 25 Manchester Avenue / Katella Avenue Date 11/19/2010 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 1700 140 0.08 * 2239 180 0.08 NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 * NBR 1.5 3400 790 0.23 * 2861 230 0.08 SBL 2 3400 440 0.13 3400 460 0.14 * SBT 2 3400 490 0.14 * 3400 130 0.04 SBR 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 0 0.00 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 3 5100 1,442 0.28 * 5100 1,842 0.36 * EBR 2 3400 1,364 0.40 * 3400 1,013 0.30 WBL 2 3400 480 0.14 * 3400 810 0.24 * WBT 3 5100 1,692 0.33 5100 2,406 0.47 WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.23 0.14 E/W Movements 0.42 0.60 Rt. Turn Component 0.04 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.75 0.78 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C C Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 26 Anaheim Way / Katella Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 3006 580 0.19 * 2269 710 0.31 NBT 3 3794 390 0.10 5113 1,600 0.31 NBR 0.5 1700 670 0.39 * 1118 350 0.31 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 2 3400 40 0.01 3400 40 0.01 EBT 3 5100 2,650 0.52 * 5100 2,490 0.49 * EBR 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBT 3.5 6800 1,770 0.26 6286 2,810 0.45 WBR 1.5 1700 420 0.25 2214 990 0.45 N/S Movements 0.19 0.31 E/W Movements 0.52 0.49 Rt. Turn Component 0.20 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.96 0.85 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E D Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 27 East Street / Ball Road Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 2 3400 380 0.11 * 3400 250 0.07 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 1 1700 770 0.45 * 1700 380 0.22 EBL 2 3400 240 0.07 * 3400 860 0.25 * EBT 3 5100 1,270 0.25 5100 1,520 0.30 EBR 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 0 WBT 3 5100 1,540 0.33 * 5100 1,730 0.43 * WBR 0 160 440 N/S Movements 0.11 0.07 E/W Movements 0.40 0.68 Rt. Turn Component 0.27 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.84 0.80 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D C Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 28 Lewis Street / Ball Road Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 180 0.11 * 1700 380 0.22 * NBT 2 3400 70 0.11 3400 10 0.28 NBR 0 290 930 SBL 0 10 70 SBT 1 1700 10 0.01 * 1700 110 0.16 * SBR 0 0 90 EBL 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 10 0.01 EBT 3 5100 1,190 0.33 * 5100 1,310 0.32 * EBR 0 490 300 WBL 2 3400 920 0.27 * 3400 490 0.14 * WBT 3 5100 1,350 0.28 5100 1,600 0.32 WBR 0 70 10 N/S Movements 0.12 0.38 E/W Movements 0.60 0.46 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.77 0.89 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C D Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 29 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 30 0.02 * 1700 50 0.03 NBT 2 3400 470 0.14 3400 1,010 0.30 * NBR 1 1700 230 0.14 1700 310 0.18 SBL 1 1700 260 0.15 1700 90 0.05 * SBT 2 3400 900 0.31 * 3400 660 0.26 SBR 0 160 220 EBL 1 1700 110 0.06 1700 140 0.08 * EBT 2 3400 930 0.34 * 3400 790 0.32 EBR 0 240 300 WBL 1 1700 220 0.13 * 1700 210 0.12 WBT 2 3400 550 0.19 3400 1,260 0.43 * WBR 0 80 190 N/S Movements 0.33 0.35 E/W Movements 0.47 0.51 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.85 0.91 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D E Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 30 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 250 0.15 NBT 1 1700 410 0.24 * 1700 660 0.39 * NBR 1 1700 440 0.26 1700 500 0.29 SBL 1 1700 270 0.16 * 1700 380 0.22 * SBT 1 1700 330 0.19 1700 450 0.26 SBR 1 1700 360 0.21 1700 780 0.46 * EBL 2 3400 540 0.16 * 3400 410 0.12 * EBT 4 6800 1,950 0.31 6800 2,020 0.31 EBR 0 150 110 WBL 2 3400 170 0.05 3400 440 0.13 WBT 4 6800 1,420 0.23 * 6800 2,710 0.43 * WBR 0 140 190 N/S Movements 0.40 0.61 E/W Movements 0.39 0.55 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.07 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.84 1.28 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D F Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 31 Lewis Street / Gene Autry Way Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 2 3400 410 0.12 * 3400 500 0.15 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 2 3400 80 0.02 3400 780 0.23 * EBL 1 1700 540 0.32 * 1700 220 0.13 * EBT 3 5100 1,250 0.25 5100 760 0.15 EBR 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 0 WBT 3 5100 520 0.14 * 5100 1,600 0.38 * WBR 0 180 360 N/S Movements 0.12 0.23 E/W Movements 0.45 0.51 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.63 0.79 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B C Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 32 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 30 0.02 1700 40 0.02 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 2 3400 70 0.02 3400 110 0.03 SBL 2 3400 730 0.21 * 3400 390 0.11 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 1 1700 70 0.04 * 1700 40 0.02 EBL 1 1700 30 0.02 1700 180 0.11 * EBT 2.5 4486 950 0.21 * 3984 500 0.13 EBR 0.5 614 130 0.21 1116 140 0.13 WBL 1 1700 100 0.06 * 1700 170 0.10 WBT 2.5 3400 350 0.10 3487 1,600 0.46 * WBR 0.5 1700 190 0.11 1613 740 0.46 N/S Movements 0.21 0.11 E/W Movements 0.27 0.56 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.54 0.73 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A C Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 33 Lewis Street / Orangewood Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 60 0.04 * 1700 190 0.11 * NBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 NBR (free) 50 85000 520 0.01 85000 440 0.01 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 EBL 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 0 0.00 EBT 2 3400 1,200 0.38 * 3400 660 0.21 * EBR 0 80 70 WBL 1 1700 290 0.17 * 1700 320 0.19 * WBT 2 3400 370 0.11 3400 1,240 0.36 WBR 0 10 0 N/S Movements 0.04 0.11 E/W Movements 0.55 0.40 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.63 0.56 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B A Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 34 Manchester Avenue / Orangewood Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 * 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 2 3400 830 0.24 3400 720 0.21 * SBT 3 5100 1,040 0.26 * 5100 780 0.19 SBR 0 290 200 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 3 5100 1,160 0.23 * 5100 660 0.13 * EBR 1 1700 700 0.41 * 1700 620 0.36 * WBL 2 3400 40 0.01 * 3400 580 0.17 * WBT 3 5100 420 0.08 5100 1,320 0.26 WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.26 0.21 E/W Movements 0.24 0.30 Rt. Turn Component 0.18 0.24 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.73 0.80 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C C Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 35 Anaheim Way / Orangewood Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 70 200 NBT 3 5100 480 0.12 * 5100 510 0.14 * NBR 0 40 20 SBL 0 0 * 0 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 2 3400 550 0.16 3400 290 0.09 * EBT 3 5100 1,320 0.26 * 5100 780 0.15 EBR 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 * 0 WBT 3 5100 420 0.08 5100 1,210 0.24 * WBR 1 1700 650 0.38 * 1700 580 0.34 * N/S Movements 0.12 0.14 E/W Movements 0.26 0.32 Rt. Turn Component 0.30 0.10 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.72 0.62 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C B Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 36 State College Boulevard / Ball Road Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 100 0.03 * 3400 220 0.06 NBT 3 5100 440 0.09 5100 1,600 0.31 * NBR 1 1700 100 0.06 1700 170 0.10 SBL 2 3400 360 0.11 3400 250 0.07 * SBT 3 5100 1,490 0.29 * 5100 630 0.12 SBR 1 1700 360 0.21 1700 170 0.10 EBL 2 3400 200 0.06 3400 240 0.07 * EBT 3 5100 1,250 0.29 * 5100 1,290 0.29 EBR 0 240 180 WBL 2 3400 230 0.07 * 3400 150 0.04 WBT 3 5100 1,310 0.28 5100 1,720 0.39 * WBR 0 140 260 N/S Movements 0.32 0.39 E/W Movements 0.36 0.46 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.73 0.90 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C D Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 37 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 250 0.07 * 3400 470 0.14 * NBT 3 5100 480 0.09 5100 900 0.18 NBR 1 1700 290 0.17 1700 210 0.12 SBL 2 3400 360 0.11 3400 320 0.09 SBT 3 5100 1,000 0.20 * 5100 680 0.13 * SBR 1 1700 880 0.52 * 1700 870 0.51 * EBL 2 3400 740 0.22 3400 860 0.25 * EBT 4 6800 1,450 0.30 * 6800 1,220 0.24 EBR 0 600 420 WBL 2 3400 450 0.13 * 3400 500 0.15 WBT 4 6800 620 0.10 6800 1,580 0.28 * WBR 0 70 300 N/S Movements 0.27 0.27 E/W Movements 0.43 0.53 Rt. Turn Component 0.10 0.13 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.86 0.98 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D E Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 38 State College Boulevard / Gene Autry Way Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 210 0.06 * 3400 440 0.13 * NBT 3 5100 720 0.14 5100 1,370 0.27 NBR 1 1700 530 0.31 * 1700 440 0.26 SBL 2 3400 10 0.00 3400 0 0.00 SBT 3 5100 1,250 0.37 * 5100 1,380 0.38 * SBR 0 620 560 EBL 2 3400 810 0.24 * 3400 210 0.06 * EBT 1.5 1700 360 0.21 1700 220 0.13 EBR 1.5 3400 1,170 0.34 * 3400 690 0.20 WBL 2 3400 10 0.00 3400 20 0.01 WBT 3 5100 120 0.02 * 5100 720 0.15 * WBR 0 0 40 N/S Movements 0.43 0.51 E/W Movements 0.26 0.28 Rt. Turn Component 0.24 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.98 0.84 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E D Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 39 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 140 0.04 3400 100 0.03 NBT 4 6800 1,070 0.20 * 6800 2,050 0.33 * NBR 0 290 160 SBL 2 3400 760 0.22 * 3400 630 0.19 * SBT 4 6800 1,530 0.30 6800 1,450 0.28 SBR 0 500 460 EBL 2 3400 180 0.05 3400 190 0.06 * EBT 3 5100 1,600 0.32 * 5100 900 0.19 EBR 0 50 50 WBL 2 3400 320 0.09 * 3400 350 0.10 WBT 3 5100 1,100 0.22 5100 1,820 0.36 * WBR 1 1700 140 0.08 1700 430 0.25 N/S Movements 0.42 0.51 E/W Movements 0.42 0.41 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.89 0.97 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D E Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 40 State College Boulevard / Orange Center Drive Date 3 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 210 0.06 * 3400 210 0.06 NBT 4 6800 1,430 0.22 6800 2,030 0.32 * NBR 0 40 140 SBL 2 3400 40 0.01 3400 150 0.04 * SBT 4 6800 2,050 0.34 * 6800 1,650 0.27 SBR 0 230 160 EBL 2 3400 50 0.01 3400 90 0.03 EBT 1 1700 0 0.00 * 1700 10 0.01 * EBR 1 1700 390 0.23 * 1700 290 0.17 * WBL 1 1700 160 0.09 * 1700 90 0.05 * WBT 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 10 0.01 WBR 1 1700 40 0.02 1700 30 0.02 N/S Movements 0.40 0.36 E/W Movements 0.09 0.06 Rt. Turn Component 0.17 0.10 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.71 0.58 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C A Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 41 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 650 0.19 * 3400 900 0.26 * NBT 4 6800 1,160 0.17 6800 1,700 0.25 NBR (free) 50 85,000 200 0.00 85,000 390 0.00 SBL 1 1700 30 0.02 1700 60 0.04 SBT 4 6800 2,530 0.37 * 6800 1,850 0.27 * SBR 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 160 0.09 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 EBR (free) 0 0 0 WBL 1.5 1726 220 0.13 2914 160 0.05 WBT 1.5 3374 430 0.13 2186 120 0.05 WBR 2 3400 580 0.17 * 3400 620 0.18 * N/S Movements 0.56 0.54 E/W Movements 0.13 0.05 Rt. Turn Component 0.03 0.09 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.77 0.73 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C C Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 42 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 * 0 NBT 5 8500 1,520 0.19 8500 2,690 0.32 * NBR 0 70 50 SBL 0 0 0 * SBT 4 6800 2,500 0.37 * 6800 1,720 0.25 SBR (free) 50 85000 170 0.00 85,000 320 0.00 EBL 1.5 1700 80 0.05 1700 150 0.09 EBT 0.5 1700 840 0.49 * 1700 700 0.41 * EBR 2 3400 380 0.11 3400 340 0.10 WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.37 0.32 E/W Movements 0.49 0.41 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.91 0.78 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E C Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 43 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 130 0.04 * 3400 210 0.06 NBT 3 5100 580 0.11 5100 1,320 0.26 * NBR 2 3400 410 0.12 3400 680 0.20 SBL 2 3400 150 0.04 3400 160 0.05 * SBT 4 6800 1,810 0.27 * 6800 1,440 0.21 SBR 1 1700 660 0.39 * 1700 230 0.14 EBL 2 3400 270 0.08 3400 470 0.14 EBT 3 5100 1,440 0.28 * 5100 1,350 0.26 * EBR 1 1700 270 0.16 1700 140 0.08 WBL 2 3400 440 0.13 * 3400 440 0.13 * WBT 3 5100 910 0.18 5100 1,200 0.24 WBR 1 1700 460 0.27 * 1700 770 0.45 * N/S Movements 0.30 0.31 E/W Movements 0.41 0.39 Rt. Turn Component 0.09 0.17 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.86 0.92 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D E Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 44 Sunkist Street / Ball Road Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 40 0.02 * 1700 90 0.05 NBT 2 3400 110 0.03 3400 890 0.26 * NBR 1 1700 250 0.15 1700 490 0.29 SBL 2 3400 570 0.17 3400 260 0.08 * SBT 2 3400 800 0.31 * 3400 210 0.11 SBR 0 240 160 EBL 2 3400 120 0.04 3400 210 0.06 EBT 3 5100 1,590 0.32 * 5100 1,560 0.31 * EBR 0 40 20 WBL 2 3400 520 0.15 * 3400 480 0.14 * WBT 3 5100 1,310 0.26 5100 1,780 0.35 WBR 1 1700 180 0.11 1700 770 0.45 * N/S Movements 0.33 0.34 E/W Movements 0.47 0.45 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.03 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.85 0.87 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 45 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 120 0.07 NBT 1 1700 20 0.01 * 1700 80 0.05 * NBR 1 1700 40 0.02 1700 200 0.12 * SBL 2 3400 320 0.09 * 3400 460 0.14 * SBT 0.5 850 70 0.08 1133 20 0.02 SBR 1.5 2550 210 0.08 2267 40 0.02 EBL 2 3400 50 0.01 3400 90 0.03 * EBT 3 5100 2,020 0.41 * 5100 2,100 0.43 EBR 0 80 70 WBL 2 3400 180 0.05 * 3400 90 0.03 WBT 3 5100 1,510 0.39 5100 2,580 0.61 * WBR 0 500 540 Split Phase N/S Movements 0.11 0.21 E/W Movements 0.46 0.64 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.02 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.62 0.91 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B E Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 46 Rampart Street / Orangewood Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 80 0.05 NBT 1 1700 310 0.18 * 1700 350 0.21 * NBR 1 1700 570 0.34 1700 930 0.55 * SBL 1 1700 150 0.09 * 1700 380 0.22 * SBT 1 1700 290 0.17 1700 440 0.26 SBR 1 1700 30 0.02 1700 210 0.12 EBL 1 1700 180 0.11 1700 100 0.06 * EBT 3 5100 1,080 0.21 * 5100 800 0.16 EBR 1 1700 220 0.13 1700 80 0.05 WBL 1 1700 340 0.20 * 1700 250 0.15 WBT 3 5100 1,060 0.21 5100 1,640 0.32 * WBR 1 1700 250 0.15 1700 300 0.18 N/S Movements 0.27 0.43 E/W Movements 0.41 0.38 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.19 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.73 1.05 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C F Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 47 Rampart Street / Chapman Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 1 1700 140 0.08 * 1700 120 0.07 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 1 1700 350 0.21 1700 370 0.22 EBL 1 1700 550 0.32 * 1700 770 0.45 * EBT 3 5100 1,090 0.21 5100 1,470 0.29 EBR 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 0 WBT 4 6800 1,080 0.20 * 6800 1,450 0.26 * WBR 0 300 320 N/S Movements 0.08 0.07 E/W Movements 0.53 0.71 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.66 0.83 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B D Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 48 Ball Road / SR-57 Northbound Ramps Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 2242 400 0.18 * 3081 580 0.19 * NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBR 1.5 2858 510 0.18 * 2019 380 0.19 * SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 * EBT 3 5100 2,340 0.46 * 5100 1,790 0.35 EBR (free) 50 85000 520 0.01 85000 650 0.01 WBL 0 0 * 0 WBT 3 5100 1,150 0.23 5100 2,470 0.48 * WBR (free) 50 85000 410 0.00 85000 910 0.01 N/S Movements 0.18 0.19 E/W Movements 0.46 0.48 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.69 0.72 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B C Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 49 Ball Road / SR-57 Southbound Ramps Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 1 1700 700 0.41 * 1700 530 0.31 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 2 3400 1,020 0.30 * 3400 650 0.19 * EBL 0 0 0 * EBT 3 5100 1,840 0.36 * 5100 1,760 0.35 EBR (free) 50 85000 670 0.01 85000 580 0.01 WBL 0 0 * 0 WBT 3 5100 1,210 0.24 5100 2,560 0.50 * WBR (free) 50 85000 230 0.00 85000 500 0.01 N/S Movements 0.41 0.31 E/W Movements 0.36 0.50 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.82 0.86 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 50 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 2384 430 0.18 * 1972 290 0.15 * NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBR 1.5 2716 490 0.18 * 3128 460 0.15 * SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 * EBT 3 5100 2,230 0.44 * 5100 1,910 0.37 EBR (free) 50 85000 380 0.00 85000 500 0.01 WBL 0 0 * 0 WBT 3 5100 1,440 0.28 5100 2,730 0.54 * WBR 1 1700 230 0.14 1700 490 0.29 N/S Movements 0.18 0.15 E/W Movements 0.44 0.54 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.67 0.73 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B C Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 51 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 1 1700 350 0.21 * 1700 240 0.14 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 2 3400 660 0.19 * 3400 530 0.16 * EBL 0 0 0 * EBT 3 5100 2,240 0.44 * 5100 2,220 0.44 EBR (free) 50 85000 180 0.00 85000 500 0.01 WBL 0 0 * 0 WBT 3 5100 1,570 0.31 5100 2,490 0.49 * WBR (free) 50 85000 240 0.00 85000 500 0.01 N/S Movements 0.21 0.14 E/W Movements 0.44 0.49 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.01 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.70 0.69 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B B Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 52 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Northbound Ramps Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 1700 150 0.09 * 1700 110 0.06 * NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBR 1.5 3400 540 0.16 * 3400 220 0.06 * SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 * EBT 2 3400 1,880 0.55 * 3400 2,030 0.60 EBR (free) 50 85000 300 0.00 85000 310 0.00 WBL 0 0 * 0 WBT 2 3400 1,300 0.38 3400 2,300 0.68 * WBR 1 1700 360 0.21 1700 790 0.46 N/S Movements 0.09 0.06 E/W Movements 0.55 0.68 Rt. Turn Component 0.07 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.76 0.79 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C C Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 53 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Southbound Ramps Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 1.5 2489 410 0.16 * 2086 360 0.17 * SBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 SBR 1.5 2611 430 0.16 * 3014 520 0.17 * EBL 0 0 0 EBT 2 3400 1,810 0.53 * 3400 1,630 0.48 * EBR 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 210 0.12 WBL 1 1700 170 0.10 * 1700 490 0.29 * WBT 2 3400 1,250 0.37 3400 1,680 0.49 WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.16 0.17 E/W Movements 0.63 0.77 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.85 0.99 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D E Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 54 Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.33 1700 100 0.06 * 1927 340 0.18 * NBT 0.34 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBR 0.33 1700 100 0.06 1473 260 0.18 * SBL 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 10 0.01 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 10 0.01 EBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 30 0.02 * EBT 3 5100 2,790 0.60 * 5100 1,810 0.42 EBR 0 270 310 WBL 1 1700 180 0.11 * 1700 190 0.11 WBT 3 5100 1,440 0.28 5100 3,170 0.63 * WBR 0 10 30 N/S Movements 0.06 0.18 E/W Movements 0.71 0.65 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.81 0.87 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 55 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 340 0.10 * 3400 1,080 0.32 * NBT 0.5 1219 190 0.16 1700 630 0.37 NBR 1.5 2181 340 0.16 1700 610 0.36 SBL 2 3400 880 0.26 3400 510 0.15 SBT 0.5 1700 540 0.32 * 1506 310 0.21 * SBR 1.5 1700 120 0.07 1894 390 0.21 EBL 2 3400 450 0.13 3400 260 0.08 * EBT 3 5100 1,930 0.38 * 5100 1,480 0.29 EBR 1 1700 560 0.33 1700 510 0.30 WBL 2 3400 600 0.18 * 3400 580 0.17 WBT 4 6800 1,240 0.23 6800 2,180 0.44 * WBR 0 330 800 N/S Movements 0.42 0.52 E/W Movements 0.55 0.51 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 1.02 1.09 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) F F Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 56 Eckhoff Street / Orangewood Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 410 0.24 * 1700 270 0.16 * NBT 1.5 2985 360 0.12 2995 370 0.12 NBR 0.5 415 50 0.12 405 50 0.12 SBL 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 50 0.03 SBT 1 1700 320 0.19 * 1700 450 0.26 * SBR (free) 50 85000 640 0.01 85000 950 0.01 EBL 2 3400 1,000 0.29 * 3400 630 0.19 * EBT 2 3400 1,050 0.31 3400 910 0.27 EBR 1 1700 160 0.09 1700 470 0.28 WBL 2 3400 30 0.01 3400 130 0.04 WBT 3 5100 470 0.10 * 5100 930 0.19 * WBR 0 50 60 N/S Movements 0.43 0.42 E/W Movements 0.40 0.38 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.88 0.85 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 57 Main Street / Taft Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2.5 4144 130 0.03 * 4765 1,280 0.27 * NBT 0.5 956 30 0.03 335 90 0.27 NBR 1 1700 150 0.09 1700 470 0.28 SBL 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 20 0.01 SBT 1 1700 50 0.03 * 1700 50 0.03 * SBR 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 200 0.12 * EBL 2 3400 110 0.03 3400 70 0.02 EBT 3 5100 1,160 0.23 * 5100 1,680 0.33 * EBR 1 1700 870 0.51 * 1700 350 0.21 WBL 2 3400 270 0.08 * 3400 440 0.13 * WBT 3 5100 1,070 0.21 5100 2,000 0.39 WBR 1 1700 30 0.02 1700 10 0.01 N/S Movements 0.06 0.30 E/W Movements 0.31 0.46 Rt. Turn Component 0.25 0.07 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.67 0.87 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B D Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 58 Main Street / Katella Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 70 0.02 * 3400 160 0.05 * NBT 2 3400 810 0.24 3400 810 0.24 NBR 1 1700 190 0.11 1700 490 0.29 SBL 2 3400 80 0.02 3400 100 0.03 SBT 2 3400 830 0.24 * 3400 860 0.25 * SBR 1 1700 140 0.08 1700 530 0.31 EBL 2 3400 460 0.14 * 3400 310 0.09 EBT 3 5100 1,370 0.27 5100 1,870 0.37 * EBR 1 1700 150 0.09 1700 200 0.12 WBL 2 3400 370 0.11 3400 230 0.07 * WBT 3 5100 1,620 0.32 * 5100 1,570 0.31 WBR 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 210 0.12 N/S Movements 0.26 0.30 E/W Movements 0.45 0.43 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.77 0.78 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C C Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 59 Batavia Street / Taft Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 120 0.04 * 3400 240 0.07 NBT 2 3400 450 0.20 3400 880 0.37 * NBR 0 230 380 SBL 1 1700 110 0.06 1700 90 0.05 * SBT 2 3400 990 0.37 * 3400 550 0.27 SBR 0 260 380 EBL 2 3400 300 0.09 * 3400 310 0.09 EBT 3 5100 990 0.19 5100 1,440 0.28 * EBR 1 1700 360 0.21 1700 230 0.14 WBL 2 3400 560 0.16 3400 340 0.10 * WBT 3 5100 1,450 0.28 * 5100 1,260 0.25 WBR 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 70 0.04 N/S Movements 0.40 0.42 E/W Movements 0.37 0.38 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.83 0.86 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 60 Clementine Street / Gene Autry Way Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 30 0.02 1700 10 0.01 NBT 2 3400 60 0.13 * 3400 80 0.20 * NBR 0 390 610 SBL 1 1700 10 0.01 * 1700 30 0.02 * SBT 2 3400 30 0.01 3400 70 0.03 SBR 0 10 30 EBL 1 1700 30 0.02 1700 50 0.03 EBT 3 5100 970 0.19 * 5100 830 0.17 * EBR 0 10 30 WBL 1 1700 250 0.15 * 1700 670 0.39 * WBT 3 5100 480 0.10 5100 950 0.19 WBR 0 50 40 N/S Movements 0.14 0.22 E/W Movements 0.34 0.56 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.53 0.83 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A D Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 61 Clementine Street / Orangewood Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 0 0.00 NBT 1 1700 40 0.11 * 1700 70 0.10 * NBR 0 150 100 SBL 1 1700 30 0.02 * 1700 160 0.09 * SBT 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 80 0.05 SBR 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 590 0.35 * EBL 1 1700 370 0.22 * 1700 340 0.20 * EBT 2 3400 860 0.26 3400 560 0.17 EBR 0 10 10 WBL 1 1700 90 0.05 1700 130 0.08 WBT 2 3400 360 0.14 * 3400 830 0.26 * WBR 0 120 60 N/S Movements 0.13 0.19 E/W Movements 0.36 0.46 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.54 0.76 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A C Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 62 Flower Street / Chapman Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 150 0.09 * 1700 390 0.23 * NBT 1 1700 10 0.05 1700 10 0.03 NBR 0 70 40 SBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 20 0.01 SBT 1 1700 30 0.04 * 1700 40 0.06 * SBR 0 30 70 EBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 40 0.02 EBT 3 5100 1,520 0.36 * 5100 1,740 0.39 * EBR 0 320 250 WBL 1 1700 40 0.02 * 1700 110 0.06 * WBT 3 5100 1,290 0.25 5100 2,080 0.42 WBR 0 10 40 N/S Movements 0.12 0.29 E/W Movements 0.38 0.45 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.56 0.80 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A C Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 63 Harbor Boulevard / Chapman Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 110 0.03 3400 310 0.09 * NBT 3 5100 1,140 0.22 * 5100 1,510 0.30 NBR 1 1700 340 0.20 1700 180 0.11 SBL 2 3400 110 0.03 * 3400 200 0.06 SBT 3 5100 1,020 0.20 5100 1,500 0.29 * SBR 1 1700 150 0.09 1700 200 0.12 EBL 2 3400 130 0.04 3400 190 0.06 * EBT 2 3400 1,100 0.32 * 3400 710 0.21 EBR 1 1700 170 0.10 1700 120 0.07 WBL 2 3400 150 0.04 * 3400 190 0.06 WBT 2 3400 430 0.13 3400 1,080 0.32 * WBR 1 1700 100 0.06 1700 160 0.09 N/S Movements 0.26 0.39 E/W Movements 0.37 0.37 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.67 0.81 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B D Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 64 I-5 Southbound Ramps / Chapman Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 650 0.19 3400 700 0.21 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 1 1700 260 0.15 * 1700 80 0.05 * SBL 2 3400 1,060 0.31 * 3400 940 0.28 * SBT 0 10 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 1 1700 10 0.01 * 1700 0 0.00 EBL 0 0 * 0 * EBT 3.5 5100 940 0.18 5100 1,050 0.21 EBR 1.5 3400 970 0.29 3400 1,040 0.31 WBL 2 3400 100 0.03 3400 130 0.04 WBT 3 5100 1,230 0.24 * 5100 2,070 0.41 * WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.31 0.28 E/W Movements 0.24 0.41 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.60 0.73 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A C Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 65 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Chapman Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 80 0.05 * 1700 50 0.03 * NBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 NBR 1 1700 110 0.06 * 1700 160 0.09 * SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 EBL 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 0 0.00 EBT 2 3400 1,320 0.39 * 3400 1,310 0.39 * EBR (free) 50 85000 370 0.00 85000 450 0.01 WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBT 3 5100 1,160 0.23 5100 1,920 0.38 WBR (free) 50 85000 290 0.00 85000 620 0.01 N/S Movements 0.05 0.03 E/W Movements 0.39 0.39 Rt. Turn Component 0.02 0.06 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.50 0.53 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 66 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Chapman Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 20 * 140 * NBT 1 1700 10 0.02 1700 30 0.10 NBR 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 110 0.06 SBL 0 270 170 SBT 1 1700 60 0.19 * 1700 10 0.11 * SBR 1 1700 460 0.27 * 1700 410 0.24 * EBL 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 10 0.01 * EBT 3 5100 1,700 0.36 * 5100 1,990 0.39 EBR 0 150 20 WBL 1 1700 90 0.05 * 1700 20 0.01 WBT 2 3400 1,130 0.33 3400 1,790 0.53 * WBR (free) 50 85000 160 0.00 85000 170 0.00 N/S Movements 0.19 0.11 E/W Movements 0.42 0.53 Rt. Turn Component 0.07 0.13 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.73 0.82 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C D Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 67 Euclid Street / Ball Road Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 150 0.04 3400 150 0.04 NBT 3 5100 1,320 0.30 * 5100 1,670 0.35 * NBR 0 210 100 SBL 2 3400 230 0.07 * 3400 410 0.12 * SBT 3 5100 1,250 0.27 5100 1,490 0.35 SBR 0 130 300 EBL 2 3400 230 0.07 3400 240 0.07 * EBT 3 5100 960 0.22 * 5100 770 0.20 EBR 0 150 270 WBL 2 3400 340 0.10 * 3400 100 0.03 WBT 3 5100 660 0.15 5100 920 0.21 * WBR 0 80 130 N/S Movements 0.37 0.47 E/W Movements 0.32 0.28 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.74 0.79 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C C Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 68 Walnut Street / Cerritos Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 110 * 460 NBT 2 3400 270 0.11 3400 320 0.23 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 0 0 0 * SBT 2 3400 410 0.20 * 3400 380 0.20 SBR 0 260 310 EBL 1 1700 390 0.23 * 1700 310 0.18 * EBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 EBR 1 1700 430 0.25 * 1700 110 0.06 * WBL 0 0 0 WBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.20 0.23 E/W Movements 0.23 0.18 Rt. Turn Component 0.25 0.06 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.73 0.53 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C A Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 69 Disneyland Drive / I-5 Southbound Off Ramp Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 * 0 NBT 2 3400 130 0.04 3400 910 0.27 * NBR (free) 50 85000 770 0.01 85000 770 0.01 SBL 0 0 0 * SBT 2 3400 1,080 0.32 * 3400 460 0.14 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * EBR 0 0 0 WBL 3 5100 900 0.18 * 5100 720 0.14 * WBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 WBR 1 1700 10 0.01 * 1700 50 0.03 * N/S Movements 0.32 0.27 E/W Movements 0.18 0.14 Rt. Turn Component 0.01 0.03 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.55 0.49 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 70 Disneyland Drive/ Magic Way Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 430 0.13 * 3400 440 0.13 NBT 2 3400 560 0.16 3400 990 0.29 NBR 0 0 0 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 2 3400 900 0.26 * 3400 550 0.16 SBR 1 1700 150 0.09 1700 250 0.15 EBL 2 3400 190 0.06 * 3400 390 0.11 * EBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 EBR 2 3400 160 0.05 3400 150 0.04 WBL 0 0 0 WBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.39 0.29 E/W Movements 0.06 0.11 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.50 0.46 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 71 Ox Road / Cast Place / Ball Road Date 12/16/2010 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 90 0.03 3400 230 0.07 NBT 2 3400 0 0.02 * 3400 10 0.14 * NBR 0 80 450 SBL 2 3400 40 0.01 * 3400 40 0.01 * SBT 0 10 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 60 0.04 * EBL 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 20 0.01 * EBT 3 5100 2,760 0.54 * 5100 2,030 0.40 EBR 1 1700 270 0.16 1700 160 0.09 WBL 2 3400 370 0.11 * 3400 130 0.04 WBT 3 5100 1,670 0.34 5100 2,290 0.46 * WBR 0 40 50 N/S Movements 0.04 0.15 E/W Movements 0.65 0.47 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.01 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.74 0.68 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C B Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 72 Convention Center/ Katella Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 NBR 0 0 0 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 * EBT 4 6800 3,560 0.53 * 6800 2,080 0.31 EBR 0 30 0 WBL 2 3400 50 0.01 * 3400 10 0.00 WBT 4 6800 1,100 0.16 6800 3,590 0.53 * WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.00 0.00 E/W Movements 0.54 0.53 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.59 0.58 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 73 Harbor Boulevard / Lincoln Avenue Date 3/15/2010 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 140 0.04 * 3400 190 0.06 NBT 3 5100 650 0.15 5100 1,340 0.33 * NBR 0 90 350 SBL 2 3400 180 0.05 3400 150 0.04 * SBT 3 5100 1,270 0.27 * 5100 830 0.20 SBR 0 130 180 EBL 1 1700 130 0.08 1700 240 0.14 * EBT 3 5100 980 0.21 * 5100 820 0.19 EBR 0 70 160 WBL 1 1700 200 0.12 * 1700 240 0.14 WBT 3 5100 880 0.19 5100 1,090 0.24 * WBR 0 70 150 N/S Movements 0.32 0.38 E/W Movements 0.32 0.38 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.69 0.81 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B D Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 74 Harbor Boulevard / Broadway Date 3/15/2010 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 60 0.04 * 1700 110 0.06 NBT 3 5100 610 0.14 5100 1,400 0.31 * NBR 0 110 170 SBL 1 1700 120 0.07 1700 150 0.09 * SBT 3 5100 1,140 0.25 * 5100 820 0.20 SBR 0 160 200 EBL 1 1700 140 0.08 1700 150 0.09 * EBT 2 3400 570 0.19 * 3400 430 0.15 EBR 0 60 70 WBL 2 3400 180 0.05 * 3400 140 0.04 WBT 2 3400 380 0.11 3400 590 0.17 * WBR 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 160 0.09 N/S Movements 0.29 0.40 E/W Movements 0.24 0.26 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.58 0.71 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A C Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 75 Harbor Boulevard / Manchester Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 110 0.06 1700 120 0.07 NBT 3 5100 800 0.16 * 5100 1,220 0.25 * NBR 0 40 40 SBL 1 1700 300 0.18 * 1700 80 0.05 * SBT 4 6800 910 0.13 6800 960 0.14 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * EBR 0 0 0 WBL 1 1700 30 0.02 * 1700 50 0.03 * WBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 WBR 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 420 0.25 * N/S Movements 0.34 0.29 E/W Movements 0.02 0.03 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.20 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.41 0.57 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 76 Anaheim Boulevard / Lincoln Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 90 0.05 * 1700 170 0.10 NBT 2 3400 360 0.11 3400 1,180 0.35 * NBR 1 1700 110 0.06 1700 110 0.06 SBL 1 1700 100 0.06 1700 120 0.07 * SBT 2 3400 1,030 0.30 * 3400 500 0.15 SBR 1 1700 90 0.05 1700 80 0.05 EBL 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 190 0.11 * EBT 3 5100 980 0.22 * 5100 1,090 0.24 EBR 0 160 150 WBL 1 1700 200 0.12 * 1700 140 0.08 WBT 3 5100 950 0.20 5100 1,240 0.27 * WBR 0 70 140 N/S Movements 0.36 0.42 E/W Movements 0.34 0.38 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.75 0.85 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C D Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 77 Anaheim Boulevard / Broadway Date 3/15/2010 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 100 0.06 * 1700 210 0.12 * NBT 3 5100 500 0.12 5100 1,420 0.29 NBR 0 110 70 SBL 2 3400 70 0.02 3400 100 0.03 SBT 2 3400 1,260 0.37 * 3400 780 0.23 * SBR 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 90 0.05 EBL 1 1700 150 0.09 * 1700 160 0.09 EBT 2 3400 480 0.14 3400 480 0.14 * EBR 1 1700 120 0.07 1700 120 0.07 WBL 1 1700 120 0.07 1700 210 0.12 * WBT 2 3400 450 0.13 * 3400 490 0.14 WBR 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 90 0.05 N/S Movements 0.43 0.35 E/W Movements 0.22 0.26 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.70 0.67 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B B Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 78 Olive Street / Lincoln Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 50 0.03 * 1700 50 0.03 * NBT 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 140 0.08 NBR 1 1700 90 0.05 1700 110 0.06 SBL 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 40 0.02 SBT 1 1700 90 0.05 * 1700 140 0.08 * SBR 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 50 0.03 EBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 50 0.03 * EBT 3 5100 1,190 0.24 * 5100 1,330 0.27 EBR 0 40 60 WBL 1 1700 130 0.08 * 1700 90 0.05 WBT 3 5100 1,320 0.26 5100 1,450 0.30 * WBR 0 20 70 N/S Movements 0.08 0.11 E/W Movements 0.32 0.33 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.45 0.49 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 79 Flore Street / West Place / Ball Road Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 30 0.02 NBT 1 1700 0 0.05 * 1700 0 0.09 * NBR 0 90 160 SBL 1 1700 50 0.03 * 1700 20 0.01 * SBT 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 0 0.00 SBR 0 10 0 EBL 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 20 0.01 * EBT 3 5100 1,800 0.36 * 5100 1,160 0.24 EBR 0 60 40 WBL 1 1700 220 0.13 * 1700 150 0.09 WBT 3 5100 720 0.15 5100 1,660 0.34 * WBR 0 20 50 N/S Movements 0.08 0.11 E/W Movements 0.49 0.35 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.63 0.50 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B A Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 80 West Street / Orangewood Avenue Date 11/21/2010 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 50 0.03 NBT 2 3400 361 0.20 * 3400 556 0.20 * NBR 0 320 120 SBL 1 1700 220 0.13 * 1700 140 0.08 * SBT 2 3400 371 0.11 3400 423 0.15 SBR 0 10 71 EBL 1 1700 31 0.02 1700 21 0.01 * EBT 2 3400 751 0.22 * 3400 311 0.10 EBR 0 10 40 WBL 1 1700 40 0.02 * 1700 290 0.17 WBT 2 3400 130 0.10 3400 561 0.31 * WBR 0 211 490 N/S Movements 0.33 0.28 E/W Movements 0.25 0.32 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.63 0.65 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B B Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 81 Struck Avenue / Katella Avenue Date 11/23/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 3274 260 0.08 * 3287 580 0.18 * NBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 NBR 0.5 126 10 0.08 * 113 20 0.18 * SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 * EBT 3 5100 2,690 0.53 * 5100 2,640 0.52 EBR 1 1700 530 0.31 1700 360 0.21 WBL 1 1700 20 0.01 * 1700 10 0.01 WBT 3 5100 1,920 0.38 5100 2,920 0.57 * WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.08 0.18 E/W Movements 0.54 0.57 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.67 0.80 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B C Year 2030 No Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No.14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report – Technical Appendices Appendix A-5 ICU Worksheets under 2030 With Project Conditions ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 1 Euclid Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 120 0.04 * 3400 240 0.07 NBT 3 5100 890 0.17 5100 1,450 0.28 * NBR 1 1700 250 0.15 1700 140 0.08 SBL 2 3400 370 0.11 3400 290 0.09 * SBT 3 5100 1,450 0.28 * 5100 1,110 0.22 SBR 1 1700 250 0.15 1700 90 0.05 EBL 2 3400 220 0.06 3400 320 0.09 * EBT 3 5100 2,020 0.43 * 5100 820 0.21 EBR 0 170 240 WBL 2 3400 250 0.07 * 3400 240 0.07 WBT 3 5100 550 0.11 5100 2,160 0.42 * WBR 1 1700 180 0.11 1700 370 0.22 N/S Movements 0.32 0.37 E/W Movements 0.50 0.52 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.87 0.94 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D E Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 2 Ninth Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 250 0.15 * 1700 550 0.32 * NBT 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 160 0.09 NBR 1 1700 390 0.23 * 1700 410 0.24 SBL 1 1700 30 0.02 1700 20 0.01 SBT 1 1700 140 0.11 * 1700 90 0.08 * SBR 0 40 40 EBL 1 1700 30 0.02 1700 60 0.04 EBT 3 5100 2,530 0.50 * 5100 1,070 0.21 * EBR 1 1700 260 0.15 1700 300 0.18 WBL 1 1700 260 0.15 * 1700 520 0.31 * WBT 3 5100 690 0.14 5100 2,330 0.46 WBR 1 1700 30 0.02 1700 60 0.04 N/S Movements 0.25 0.40 E/W Movements 0.65 0.52 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.95 0.97 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E E Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 3 Walnut Street / Ball Road Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 110 0.06 1700 290 0.17 * NBT 2 3400 150 0.17 * 3400 340 0.20 NBR 0 420 330 SBL 1 1700 140 0.08 * 1700 70 0.04 SBT 2 3400 230 0.09 3400 270 0.10 * SBR 0 60 80 EBL 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 50 0.03 EBT 3 5100 1,400 0.30 * 5100 720 0.16 * EBR 0 130 100 WBL 1 1700 220 0.13 * 1700 400 0.24 * WBT 3 5100 660 0.14 5100 1,200 0.24 WBR 0 50 30 N/S Movements 0.25 0.27 E/W Movements 0.43 0.40 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.73 0.72 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C C Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 4 Walnut Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 10 10 NBT 1 1700 10 0.01 * 1700 0 0.01 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 1.5 3365 950 0.28 * 3279 270 0.08 * SBT 0.5 35 10 0.28 121 10 0.08 SBR 1 1700 180 0.11 1700 260 0.15 EBL 1 1700 250 0.15 1700 200 0.12 * EBT 3 5100 2,700 0.53 * 5100 1,200 0.24 EBR 0 0 10 WBL 1 1700 30 0.02 * 1700 50 0.03 WBT 3 5100 770 0.20 5100 2,290 0.62 * WBR 0 230 870 N/S Movements 0.29 0.09 E/W Movements 0.55 0.74 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.89 0.88 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 5 Disneyland Drive / Ball Road Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 1259 150 0.12 1013 210 0.21 NBT 1 2770 330 0.12 2942 610 0.21 NBR 1.5 2770 330 0.12 2845 590 0.21 SBL 1.5 2902 670 0.23 2202 340 0.15 SBT 2.5 3898 770 0.23 4598 540 0.15 SBR 0 130 170 EBL 2 3400 320 0.09 3400 230 0.07 * EBT 3 5100 1,330 0.26 * 5100 1,030 0.20 EBR 1 1700 140 0.08 1700 130 0.08 WBL 2 3400 550 0.16 * 3400 470 0.14 WBT 3 5100 830 0.18 5100 1,500 0.39 * WBR 0 70 490 N/S Movements 0.35 0.36 E/W Movements 0.42 0.46 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.10 0.10 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.87 0.92 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D E Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 6 Disneyland Drive / West Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 230 0.07 3400 360 0.11 NBT 2 3400 410 0.12 * 3400 500 0.15 * NBR 1 1700 230 0.14 1700 150 0.09 SBL 2 3400 500 0.15 * 3400 760 0.22 * SBT 2 3400 270 0.08 3400 430 0.13 SBR 1 1700 330 0.19 * 1700 370 0.22 * EBL 2 3400 290 0.09 3400 160 0.05 * EBT 3 5100 3,000 0.59 * 5100 1,080 0.21 EBR 1 1700 210 0.12 1700 160 0.09 WBL 2 3400 180 0.05 * 3400 130 0.04 WBT 3 5100 920 0.18 5100 2,410 0.47 * WBR 1 1700 500 0.29 1700 550 0.32 N/S Movements 0.27 0.37 E/W Movements 0.64 0.52 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.96 0.94 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E E Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 7 Harbor Boulevard / Vermont Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 80 0.05 * 1700 130 0.08 NBT 3 5100 740 0.17 5100 2,430 0.50 * NBR 0 140 140 SBL 1 1700 100 0.06 1700 60 0.04 * SBT 3 5100 2,070 0.41 * 5100 890 0.18 SBR 0 30 30 EBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 20 0.01 EBT 1 1700 120 0.16 * 1700 50 0.09 * EBR 0 150 100 WBL 1 1700 140 0.08 * 1700 180 0.11 * WBT 1 1700 70 0.06 1700 100 0.09 WBR 0 40 60 N/S Movements 0.46 0.54 E/W Movements 0.24 0.19 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.75 0.78 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C C Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 8 Harbor Boulevard / Ball Road Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 670 0.20 * 3400 790 0.23 * NBT 3 5100 830 0.16 5100 2,020 0.40 NBR 1 1700 300 0.18 1700 340 0.20 SBL 2 3400 200 0.06 3400 230 0.07 SBT 3 5100 2,210 0.43 * 5100 1,230 0.24 * SBR 1 1700 450 0.26 1700 330 0.19 EBL 2 3400 420 0.12 3400 640 0.19 * EBT 3 5100 1,680 0.33 * 5100 1,300 0.25 EBR 1 1700 880 0.52 1700 580 0.34 WBL 2 3400 290 0.09 * 3400 270 0.08 WBT 4 6800 1,170 0.20 6800 1,530 0.25 * WBR 0 180 140 N/S Movements 0.63 0.47 E/W Movements 0.41 0.43 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 1.10 0.96 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) F E Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 9 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 NB Ramps Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 * 0 NBT 3 5100 930 0.18 5100 2,090 0.41 * NBR (free) 50 85000 200 0.00 85000 680 0.01 SBL 1 1700 90 0.05 1700 60 0.04 * SBT 4 6800 3,270 0.48 * 6800 1,930 0.28 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * EBR 0 0 0 WBL 1.5 1700 70 0.04 * 1700 100 0.06 * WBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 WBR 1.5 3400 750 0.22 * 3400 910 0.27 * N/S Movements 0.48 0.45 E/W Movements 0.04 0.06 Rt. Turn Component 0.17 0.23 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.74 0.79 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C C Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 10 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 SB Ramps Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 70 0.04 * 1700 100 0.06 NBT 4 6800 820 0.12 6800 2,550 0.38 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 0 0 0 * SBT 3 5100 2,110 0.41 * 5100 1,250 0.25 SBR (free) 50 85000 1,190 0.01 85000 920 0.01 EBL 2 3400 350 0.10 * 3400 290 0.09 * EBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 EBR (free) 50 85000 350 0.00 85000 410 0.00 WBL 0 0 0 WBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.45 0.38 E/W Movements 0.10 0.09 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.61 0.51 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B A Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 11 Harbor Boulevard / Disney Way Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 180 0.05 3400 50 0.01 NBT 3 5100 770 0.23 * 5100 1,750 0.36 * NBR 0 390 80 SBL 2 3400 380 0.11 * 3400 200 0.06 * SBT 3 5100 1,240 0.27 5100 1,320 0.27 SBR 0 120 40 EBL 2 3400 10 0.00 3400 40 0.01 EBT 1.5 1700 10 0.01 * 2833 50 0.02 * EBR 0.5 1700 10 0.01 567 10 0.02 WBL 1 1700 170 0.10 * 1700 630 0.37 * WBT 3 5100 150 0.05 5100 80 0.09 WBR 0 130 400 N/S Movements 0.34 0.42 E/W Movements 0.11 0.39 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.50 0.86 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A D Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 12 Harbor Boulevard / Katella Avenue Date 11/19/2010 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 320 0.09 * 3400 631 0.19 * NBT 3 5100 660 0.13 5100 1,090 0.21 NBR 1 1700 161 0.09 1700 230 0.14 SBL 2 3400 160 0.05 3400 200 0.06 SBT 3 5100 891 0.17 * 5100 727 0.14 * SBR 1 1700 212 0.12 1700 590 0.35 * EBL 2 3400 477 0.14 3400 515 0.15 * EBT 4 6800 2,605 0.40 * 6800 1,734 0.28 EBR 0 101 170 WBL 2 3400 299 0.09 * 3400 409 0.12 WBT 4 6800 1,207 0.19 6800 2,338 0.37 * WBR 0 80 170 N/S Movements 0.27 0.33 E/W Movements 0.49 0.52 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.80 0.95 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C E Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 13 Harbor Boulevard / Convention Way Date 11/19/2010 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 179 0.05 * 3400 121 0.04 NBT 3 5100 990 0.19 5100 1,270 0.25 * NBR 1 1700 597 0.35 * 1700 350 0.21 SBL 2 3400 185 0.05 3400 160 0.05 * SBT 3 5100 1,030 0.20 * 5100 1,240 0.24 SBR 1 1700 196 0.12 1700 115 0.07 EBL 1 1700 141 0.08 1700 190 0.11 EBT 2 3400 483 0.14 * 3400 633 0.19 * EBR 1 1700 115 0.07 1700 104 0.06 WBL 2 3400 220 0.06 * 3400 480 0.14 * WBT 2 3400 368 0.11 3400 313 0.09 WBR 1 1700 270 0.16 1700 470 0.28 * N/S Movements 0.25 0.30 E/W Movements 0.21 0.33 Rt. Turn Component 0.09 0.14 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.60 0.81 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A D Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 14 Harbor Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 250 0.15 * NBT 3 5100 1,190 0.26 * 5100 1,580 0.35 NBR 0 140 190 SBL 1 1700 60 0.04 * 1700 100 0.06 SBT 3 5100 1,030 0.22 5100 1,400 0.33 * SBR 0 80 290 EBL 1 1700 300 0.18 1700 130 0.08 * EBT 2 3400 1,090 0.39 * 3400 450 0.16 EBR 0 220 110 WBL 1 1700 200 0.12 * 1700 330 0.19 WBT 2 3400 300 0.09 3400 1,000 0.29 * WBR 1 1700 120 0.07 1700 100 0.06 N/S Movements 0.30 0.48 E/W Movements 0.50 0.37 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.85 0.90 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 15 Clementine Street / Disney Way Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 70 0.02 3400 80 0.02 NBT 2 3400 60 0.03 * 3400 130 0.05 * NBR 0 30 50 SBL 2 3400 560 0.16 * 3400 620 0.18 * SBT 2 3400 80 0.04 3400 110 0.12 SBR 0 70 310 EBL 1 1700 220 0.13 * 1700 90 0.05 * EBT 3 5100 370 0.07 5100 150 0.03 EBR 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 70 0.04 WBL 1 1700 140 0.08 1700 130 0.08 WBT 3 5100 490 0.20 * 5100 580 0.23 * WBR 0 520 610 N/S Movements 0.19 0.24 E/W Movements 0.33 0.29 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.57 0.57 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 16 Clementine Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 50 0.03 * 1700 120 0.07 NBT 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 120 0.07 * NBR 1 1700 120 0.07 1700 430 0.25 * SBL 1 1700 110 0.06 1700 300 0.18 * SBT 1 1700 160 0.09 * 1700 140 0.08 SBR 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 110 0.06 EBL 2 3400 90 0.03 3400 90 0.03 * EBT 4 6800 2,630 0.40 * 6800 1,940 0.30 EBR 0 120 70 WBL 2 3400 270 0.08 * 3400 160 0.05 WBT 4 6800 1,480 0.23 6800 2,910 0.44 * WBR 0 60 80 N/S Movements 0.12 0.25 E/W Movements 0.48 0.47 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.14 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.66 0.90 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B D Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 17 I-5 SB Off Ramp / Disney Way Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 20 0.01 * NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 NBR 1 1700 40 0.02 1700 130 0.08 * SBL 1.33 3330 570 0.17 * 3260 450 0.14 SBT 0.34 70 10 0.14 140 20 0.14 * SBR 1.33 1700 150 0.09 1700 120 0.07 EBL 0 0 0 * EBT 3 5100 930 0.18 * 5100 670 0.13 EBR 0 10 10 WBL 1 1700 150 0.09 * 1700 90 0.05 WBT 3 5100 830 0.16 5100 1,250 0.25 * WBR 0 0 0 Split Phase N/S Movements 0.19 0.22 E/W Movements 0.27 0.25 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.01 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.52 0.53 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 18 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 200 0.06 * 3400 300 0.09 NBT 3 5100 510 0.14 5100 1,800 0.38 * NBR 0 210 160 SBL 2 3400 520 0.15 3400 430 0.13 * SBT 3 5100 1,710 0.34 * 5100 880 0.17 SBR 1 1700 330 0.19 1700 140 0.08 EBL 1 1700 170 0.10 1700 240 0.14 * EBT 3 5100 1,640 0.39 * 5100 920 0.24 EBR 0 330 300 WBL 2 3400 180 0.05 * 3400 180 0.05 WBT 3 5100 1,010 0.20 5100 1,550 0.30 * WBR 1 1700 180 0.11 1700 500 0.29 N/S Movements 0.39 0.51 E/W Movements 0.44 0.45 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.88 1.01 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D F Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 19 Anaheim Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 130 0.08 1700 130 0.08 NBT 3 5100 890 0.17 * 5100 1,880 0.37 * NBR 1 1700 590 0.35 * 1700 500 0.29 SBL 1 1700 670 0.39 * 1700 330 0.19 * SBT 3 5100 1,700 0.35 5100 1,280 0.26 SBR 0 100 70 EBL 1 1700 40 0.02 1700 80 0.05 * EBT 1 1700 40 0.07 * 1700 70 0.14 EBR 0 80 170 WBL 2 3400 440 0.13 * 3400 680 0.20 WBT 1 1700 50 0.15 1700 100 0.37 * WBR 0 200 530 N/S Movements 0.57 0.56 E/W Movements 0.20 0.42 Rt. Turn Component 0.04 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.86 1.03 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D F Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 20 Anaheim Boulevard / I-5 NB Ramps Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 260 0.08 * 3400 250 0.07 * NBT 3 5100 1,220 0.24 5100 1,770 0.35 NBR 0 0 0 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 3 5100 2,070 0.41 * 5100 2,080 0.41 * SBR 1 1700 160 0.09 1700 380 0.22 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 EBR 0 0 0 WBL 0.5 1020 30 0.03 191 80 0.42 WBT 1 680 20 0.03 1573 660 0.42 WBR 1.5 3400 420 0.12 * 3336 1,400 0.42 N/S Movements 0.48 0.48 E/W Movements 0.03 0.42 Rt. Turn Component 0.09 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.66 0.95 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B E Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 21 Anaheim Boulevard / Disney Way Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 260 0.15 * NBT 3 5100 1,040 0.21 * 5100 1,540 0.30 NBR 0 10 10 SBL 2 3400 550 0.16 * 3400 560 0.16 SBT 3 5100 1,300 0.30 5100 1,400 0.32 * SBR 0 210 230 EBL 2 3400 520 0.15 * 3400 550 0.16 * EBT 4 6800 1,040 0.16 6800 680 0.13 EBR 0 30 180 WBL 0 0 0 WBT 3 5100 670 0.13 * 5100 840 0.16 * WBR 0 10 0 N/S Movements 0.37 0.47 E/W Movements 0.29 0.33 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.71 0.85 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C D Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 22 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 250 0.07 3400 340 0.10 NBT 3 5100 740 0.15 * 5100 1,160 0.23 * NBR 1 1700 260 0.15 1700 360 0.21 SBL 2 3400 520 0.15 * 3400 430 0.13 * SBT 3 5100 530 0.10 5100 540 0.11 SBR 1 1700 330 0.19 * 1700 300 0.18 EBL 2 3400 270 0.08 3400 490 0.14 * EBT 4 6800 2,560 0.39 * 6800 2,040 0.32 EBR 0 60 150 WBL 2 3400 560 0.16 * 3400 580 0.17 WBT 4 6800 1,220 0.19 6800 2,390 0.37 * WBR 0 100 120 N/S Movements 0.30 0.35 E/W Movements 0.55 0.51 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.90 0.92 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D E Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 23 Haster Street / Gene Autry Way Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 200 0.12 * 1700 260 0.15 NBT 3 5100 1,070 0.21 5100 1,530 0.30 * NBR 1 1700 480 0.28 1700 410 0.24 SBL 1 1700 100 0.06 1700 250 0.15 * SBT 3 5100 930 0.20 * 5100 1,020 0.25 SBR 0 110 250 EBL 1 1700 150 0.09 1700 350 0.21 EBT 3 5100 1,150 0.27 * 5100 1,000 0.24 * EBR 0 230 200 WBL 1 1700 550 0.32 * 1700 740 0.44 * WBT 3 5100 540 0.14 5100 1,170 0.25 WBR 0 150 110 N/S Movements 0.32 0.45 E/W Movements 0.59 0.67 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.97 1.17 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E F Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 24 Haster Street / Orangewood Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 90 0.05 1700 260 0.15 NBT 3 5100 1,440 0.30 * 5100 1,830 0.38 * NBR 0 90 100 SBL 1 1700 180 0.11 * 1700 220 0.13 * SBT 3 5100 1,270 0.25 5100 1,650 0.32 SBR 1 1700 220 0.13 1700 120 0.07 EBL 2 3400 140 0.04 3400 130 0.04 * EBT 2 3400 900 0.30 * 3400 410 0.16 EBR 0 110 120 WBL 2 3400 110 0.03 * 3400 190 0.06 WBT 2 3400 250 0.07 3400 790 0.23 * WBR 1 1700 200 0.12 1700 370 0.22 N/S Movements 0.41 0.51 E/W Movements 0.33 0.27 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.79 0.83 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C D Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 25 Manchester Avenue / Katella Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 1700 130 0.08 * 2488 200 0.08 NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 * NBR 1.5 3400 810 0.24 * 2612 210 0.08 SBL 2 3400 430 0.13 3400 520 0.15 * SBT 2 3400 590 0.17 * 3400 150 0.04 SBR 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 0 0.00 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 3 5100 1,470 0.29 * 5100 1,910 0.37 * EBR 2 3400 1,300 0.38 * 3400 1,110 0.33 WBL 2 3400 520 0.15 * 3400 770 0.23 * WBT 3 5100 1,900 0.37 5100 2,440 0.48 WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.25 0.15 E/W Movements 0.44 0.60 Rt. Turn Component 0.03 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.77 0.80 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C C Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 26 Anaheim Way / Katella Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 3400 700 0.21 * 2521 860 0.34 NBT 3 3400 420 0.12 4924 1,680 0.34 NBR 0.5 1700 630 0.37 * 1055 360 0.34 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 2 3400 40 0.01 3400 50 0.01 EBT 3 5100 2,680 0.53 * 5100 2,580 0.51 * EBR 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBT 3.5 6800 1,920 0.28 6364 2,830 0.44 WBR 1.5 1700 430 0.25 2136 950 0.44 N/S Movements 0.21 0.34 E/W Movements 0.53 0.51 Rt. Turn Component 0.16 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.95 0.90 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E D Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 27 East Street / Ball Road Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 2 3400 440 0.13 * 3400 250 0.07 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 1 1700 800 0.47 * 1700 390 0.23 EBL 2 3400 270 0.08 * 3400 870 0.26 * EBT 3 5100 1,260 0.25 5100 1,560 0.31 EBR 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 0 WBT 3 5100 1,580 0.34 * 5100 1,760 0.44 * WBR 0 160 460 N/S Movements 0.13 0.07 E/W Movements 0.42 0.69 Rt. Turn Component 0.26 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.86 0.81 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 28 Lewis Street / Ball Road Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 190 0.11 * 1700 380 0.22 * NBT 2 3400 70 0.11 3400 10 0.31 NBR 0 310 1,040 SBL 0 10 70 SBT 1 1700 10 0.01 * 1700 110 0.16 * SBR 0 0 90 EBL 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 10 0.01 EBT 3 5100 1,170 0.33 * 5100 1,290 0.32 * EBR 0 500 360 WBL 2 3400 980 0.29 * 3400 500 0.15 * WBT 3 5100 1,350 0.28 5100 1,630 0.32 WBR 0 70 10 N/S Movements 0.12 0.38 E/W Movements 0.62 0.47 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.79 0.90 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C D Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 29 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 30 0.02 * 1700 50 0.03 NBT 2 3400 490 0.14 3400 1,030 0.30 * NBR 1 1700 240 0.14 1700 300 0.18 SBL 1 1700 260 0.15 1700 120 0.07 * SBT 2 3400 960 0.32 * 3400 700 0.27 SBR 0 130 230 EBL 1 1700 110 0.06 1700 180 0.11 * EBT 2 3400 950 0.34 * 3400 830 0.32 EBR 0 210 260 WBL 1 1700 210 0.12 * 1700 240 0.14 WBT 2 3400 530 0.18 3400 1,220 0.42 * WBR 0 80 210 N/S Movements 0.34 0.37 E/W Movements 0.46 0.53 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.85 0.95 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D E Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR . PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 30 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 250 0.15 NBT 1 1700 410 0.24 * 1700 670 0.39 * NBR 1 1700 440 0.26 1700 520 0.31 SBL 1 1700 270 0.16 * 1700 380 0.22 * SBT 1 1700 380 0.22 1700 460 0.27 SBR 1 1700 390 0.23 1700 770 0.45 * EBL 2 3400 530 0.16 * 3400 420 0.12 * EBT 4 6800 1,970 0.31 6800 2,100 0.33 EBR 0 140 110 WBL 2 3400 150 0.04 3400 480 0.14 WBT 4 6800 1,520 0.24 * 6800 2,700 0.43 * WBR 0 140 190 N/S Movements 0.40 0.62 E/W Movements 0.40 0.55 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.06 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.85 1.28 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D F Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 31 Lewis Street / Gene Autry Way Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 2 3400 410 0.12 * 3400 500 0.15 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 2 3400 120 0.04 3400 830 0.24 * EBL 1 1700 540 0.32 * 1700 270 0.16 * EBT 3 5100 1,240 0.24 5100 830 0.16 EBR 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 0 WBT 3 5100 610 0.15 * 5100 1,630 0.39 * WBR 0 180 360 N/S Movements 0.12 0.24 E/W Movements 0.47 0.55 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.64 0.84 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B D Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 32 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 30 0.02 1700 50 0.03 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 2 3400 80 0.02 3400 110 0.03 SBL 2 3400 730 0.21 * 3400 400 0.12 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 1 1700 70 0.04 * 1700 50 0.03 EBL 1 1700 30 0.02 1700 200 0.12 * EBT 2.5 4426 920 0.21 * 4054 620 0.15 EBR 0.5 674 140 0.21 1046 160 0.15 WBL 1 1700 100 0.06 * 1700 170 0.10 WBT 2.5 3696 500 0.14 3549 1,670 0.47 * WBR 0.5 1404 190 0.14 1551 730 0.47 N/S Movements 0.21 0.12 E/W Movements 0.27 0.59 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.53 0.76 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A C Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 33 Lewis Street / Orangewood Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 60 0.04 * 1700 230 0.14 * NBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 NBR (free) 50 85000 520 0.01 85000 450 0.01 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 EBL 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 0 0.00 EBT 2 3400 1,170 0.37 * 3400 690 0.22 EBR 0 80 70 WBL 1 1700 290 0.17 * 1700 320 0.19 WBT 2 3400 400 0.12 3400 1,400 0.41 WBR 0 10 0 N/S Movements 0.04 0.14 E/W Movements 0.54 0.41 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.62 0.60 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B A Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 34 Manchester Avenue / Orangewood Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 * 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 2 3400 800 0.24 3400 730 0.21 * SBT 3 5100 1,110 0.27 * 5100 840 0.20 SBR 0 290 200 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 3 5100 1,150 0.23 * 5100 660 0.13 * EBR 1 1700 720 0.42 * 1700 640 0.38 * WBL 2 3400 40 0.01 * 3400 560 0.16 * WBT 3 5100 420 0.08 5100 1,370 0.27 WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.27 0.21 E/W Movements 0.24 0.29 Rt. Turn Component 0.20 0.25 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.76 0.81 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C D Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 35 Anaheim Way / Orangewood Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 130 200 NBT 3 5100 490 0.13 * 5100 570 0.16 * NBR 0 30 40 SBL 0 0 * 0 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 2 3400 570 0.17 3400 300 0.09 * EBT 3 5100 1,450 0.28 * 5100 820 0.16 EBR 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 * 0 WBT 3 5100 420 0.08 5100 1,210 0.24 * WBR 1 1700 630 0.37 * 1700 610 0.36 * N/S Movements 0.13 0.16 E/W Movements 0.28 0.33 Rt. Turn Component 0.29 0.12 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.75 0.66 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C B Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 36 State College Boulevard / Ball Road Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 100 0.03 * 3400 220 0.06 NBT 3 5100 460 0.09 5100 1,570 0.31 * NBR 1 1700 100 0.06 1700 160 0.09 SBL 2 3400 360 0.11 3400 260 0.08 * SBT 3 5100 1,460 0.29 * 5100 610 0.12 SBR 1 1700 390 0.23 1700 170 0.10 EBL 2 3400 200 0.06 3400 250 0.07 * EBT 3 5100 1,270 0.30 * 5100 1,350 0.30 EBR 0 240 180 WBL 2 3400 220 0.06 * 3400 150 0.04 WBT 3 5100 1,320 0.29 5100 1,760 0.39 * WBR 0 140 250 N/S Movements 0.32 0.38 E/W Movements 0.36 0.47 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.73 0.90 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C D Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 37 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 300 0.09 * 3400 530 0.16 * NBT 3 5100 480 0.09 5100 830 0.16 NBR 1 1700 310 0.18 1700 250 0.15 SBL 2 3400 410 0.12 3400 320 0.09 SBT 3 5100 1,010 0.20 * 5100 680 0.13 * SBR 1 1700 900 0.53 * 1700 820 0.48 * EBL 2 3400 690 0.20 3400 900 0.26 * EBT 4 6800 1,460 0.31 * 6800 1,240 0.24 EBR 0 670 420 WBL 2 3400 540 0.16 * 3400 690 0.20 WBT 4 6800 620 0.10 6800 1,670 0.30 * WBR 0 80 350 N/S Movements 0.29 0.29 E/W Movements 0.47 0.56 Rt. Turn Component 0.13 0.08 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.94 0.99 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E E Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 38 State College Boulevard / Gene Autry Way Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 230 0.07 * 3400 470 0.14 * NBT 3 5100 720 0.14 5100 1,390 0.27 NBR 1 1700 540 0.32 * 1700 420 0.25 SBL 2 3400 10 0.00 3400 0 0.00 SBT 3 5100 1,290 0.38 * 5100 1,380 0.38 * SBR 0 640 560 EBL 2 3400 840 0.25 * 3400 230 0.07 * EBT 1.5 1700 320 0.19 1700 210 0.12 EBR 1.5 3400 1,140 0.34 * 3400 710 0.21 WBL 2 3400 10 0.00 3400 20 0.01 WBT 3 5100 130 0.03 * 5100 700 0.15 * WBR 0 0 40 N/S Movements 0.45 0.52 E/W Movements 0.27 0.27 Rt. Turn Component 0.25 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 1.02 0.84 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) F D Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 39 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 240 0.07 3400 100 0.03 NBT 4 6800 1,190 0.20 * 6800 1,960 0.31 * NBR 0 200 140 SBL 2 3400 800 0.24 * 3400 670 0.20 * SBT 4 6800 1,540 0.30 6800 1,400 0.28 SBR 0 480 520 EBL 2 3400 190 0.06 3400 250 0.07 * EBT 3 5100 1,590 0.32 * 5100 870 0.18 EBR 0 50 50 WBL 2 3400 350 0.10 * 3400 630 0.19 WBT 3 5100 1,020 0.20 5100 1,750 0.34 * WBR 1 1700 180 0.11 1700 390 0.23 N/S Movements 0.44 0.51 E/W Movements 0.42 0.42 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.91 0.97 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) E E Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 40 State College Boulevard / Orange Center Drive Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 200 0.06 * 3400 210 0.06 NBT 4 6800 1,450 0.22 6800 2,000 0.32 * NBR 0 40 150 SBL 2 3400 40 0.01 3400 150 0.04 * SBT 4 6800 2,030 0.34 * 6800 1,630 0.27 SBR 0 270 180 EBL 2 3400 50 0.01 3400 90 0.03 EBT 1 1700 0 0.00 * 1700 20 0.01 * EBR 1 1700 400 0.24 * 1700 310 0.18 * WBL 1 1700 160 0.09 * 1700 100 0.06 * WBT 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 10 0.01 WBR 1 1700 40 0.02 1700 30 0.02 N/S Movements 0.40 0.36 E/W Movements 0.09 0.07 Rt. Turn Component 0.18 0.11 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.72 0.59 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C A Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 41 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 670 0.20 * 3400 930 0.27 * NBT 4 6800 1,170 0.17 6800 1,670 0.25 NBR (free) 50 85,000 200 0.00 85,000 390 0.00 SBL 1 1700 30 0.02 1700 50 0.03 SBT 4 6800 2,510 0.37 * 6800 1,870 0.28 * SBR 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 180 0.11 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 EBR (free) 0 0 0 WBL 1.5 2119 320 0.15 2720 160 0.06 WBT 1.5 2981 450 0.15 2380 140 0.06 WBR 2 3400 580 0.17 * 3400 590 0.17 * N/S Movements 0.57 0.55 E/W Movements 0.15 0.06 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.09 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.77 0.74 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C C Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 42 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 * 0 NBT 5 8500 1,530 0.18 8500 2,680 0.32 * NBR 0 10 80 SBL 0 0 0 * SBT 4 6800 2,170 0.32 * 6800 1,720 0.25 SBR (free) 50 85000 240 0.00 85,000 320 0.00 EBL 1.5 1700 120 0.07 1700 150 0.09 EBT 0.5 1700 910 0.54 * 1700 720 0.42 * EBR 2 3400 380 0.11 3400 340 0.10 WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.32 0.32 E/W Movements 0.54 0.42 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.90 0.80 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D C Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 43 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 130 0.04 * 3400 210 0.06 NBT 3 5100 560 0.11 5100 1,490 0.29 * NBR 2 3400 440 0.13 3400 780 0.23 SBL 2 3400 150 0.04 3400 160 0.05 * SBT 4 6800 1,820 0.27 * 6800 1,520 0.22 SBR 1 1700 700 0.41 * 1700 230 0.14 EBL 2 3400 270 0.08 3400 390 0.11 EBT 3 5100 1,440 0.28 * 5100 1,350 0.26 * EBR 1 1700 270 0.16 1700 140 0.08 WBL 2 3400 440 0.13 * 3400 510 0.15 * WBT 3 5100 950 0.19 5100 1,200 0.24 WBR 1 1700 470 0.28 * 1700 740 0.44 * N/S Movements 0.31 0.34 E/W Movements 0.41 0.41 Rt. Turn Component 0.11 0.15 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.88 0.96 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D E Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 44 Sunkist Street / Ball Road Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 40 0.02 * 1700 90 0.05 NBT 2 3400 110 0.03 3400 990 0.29 * NBR 1 1700 250 0.15 1700 490 0.29 SBL 2 3400 590 0.17 3400 290 0.09 * SBT 2 3400 830 0.31 * 3400 360 0.15 SBR 0 240 140 EBL 2 3400 120 0.04 3400 230 0.07 EBT 3 5100 1,570 0.32 * 5100 1,550 0.31 * EBR 0 40 20 WBL 2 3400 540 0.16 * 3400 480 0.14 * WBT 3 5100 1,300 0.25 5100 1,750 0.34 WBR 1 1700 200 0.12 1700 760 0.45 * N/S Movements 0.34 0.38 E/W Movements 0.47 0.45 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.02 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.86 0.89 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 45 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 130 0.08 NBT 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 90 0.05 * NBR 1 1700 40 0.02 1700 210 0.12 * SBL 2 3400 320 0.09 3400 500 0.15 * SBT 0.5 744 70 0.09 1133 20 0.02 SBR 1.5 2656 250 0.09 2267 40 0.02 EBL 2 3400 50 0.01 3400 160 0.05 * EBT 3 5100 2,030 0.42 * 5100 2,060 0.42 EBR 0 90 70 WBL 2 3400 170 0.05 * 3400 90 0.03 WBT 3 5100 1,600 0.41 5100 2,570 0.61 * WBR 0 510 530 Split phase N/S Movements 0.11 0.22 E/W Movements 0.47 0.65 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.02 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.62 0.95 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B E Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 46 Rampart Street / Orangewood Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 80 0.05 NBT 1 1700 330 0.19 * 1700 350 0.21 * NBR 1 1700 500 0.29 1700 1,000 0.59 * SBL 1 1700 150 0.09 * 1700 420 0.25 * SBT 1 1700 300 0.18 1700 380 0.22 SBR 1 1700 40 0.02 1700 170 0.10 EBL 1 1700 150 0.09 1700 140 0.08 * EBT 3 5100 1,100 0.22 * 5100 860 0.17 EBR 1 1700 220 0.13 1700 80 0.05 WBL 1 1700 390 0.23 * 1700 300 0.18 WBT 3 5100 1,060 0.21 5100 1,740 0.34 * WBR 1 1700 260 0.15 1700 290 0.17 N/S Movements 0.28 0.45 E/W Movements 0.45 0.42 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.21 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.78 1.13 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C F Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 47 Rampart Street / Chapman Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 1 1700 120 0.07 * 1700 150 0.09 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 1 1700 430 0.25 1700 320 0.19 EBL 1 1700 680 0.40 * 1700 750 0.44 * EBT 3 5100 1,060 0.21 5100 1,460 0.29 EBR 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 0 WBT 4 6800 1,080 0.21 * 6800 1,470 0.26 * WBR 0 320 310 N/S Movements 0.07 0.09 E/W Movements 0.61 0.70 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.73 0.84 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C D Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 48 Ball Road / SR-57 Northbound Ramps Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 2242 400 0.18 * 3070 590 0.19 * NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBR 1.5 2858 510 0.18 * 2030 390 0.19 * SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 * EBT 3 5100 2,320 0.45 * 5100 1,790 0.35 EBR (free) 50 85000 520 0.01 85000 650 0.01 WBL 0 0 * 0 WBT 3 5100 1,170 0.23 5100 2,480 0.49 * WBR (free) 50 85000 420 0.00 85000 900 0.01 N/S Movements 0.18 0.19 E/W Movements 0.45 0.49 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.68 0.73 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B C Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 49 Ball Road / SR-57 Southbound Ramps Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 1 1700 750 0.44 * 1700 560 0.33 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 2 3400 1,020 0.30 * 3400 650 0.19 * EBL 0 0 0 * EBT 3 5100 1,810 0.35 * 5100 1,750 0.34 EBR (free) 50 85000 670 0.01 85000 580 0.01 WBL 0 0 * 0 WBT 3 5100 1,260 0.25 5100 2,560 0.50 * WBR (free) 50 85000 240 0.00 85000 520 0.01 N/S Movements 0.44 0.33 E/W Movements 0.35 0.50 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.85 0.88 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 50 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 1893 360 0.19 * 1921 290 0.15 * NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBR 1.5 3207 610 0.19 * 3179 480 0.15 * SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 * EBT 3 5100 2,240 0.44 * 5100 1,850 0.36 EBR (free) 50 85000 400 0.00 85000 500 0.01 WBL 0 0 * 0 WBT 3 5100 1,430 0.28 5100 2,680 0.53 * WBR 1 1700 240 0.14 1700 520 0.31 N/S Movements 0.19 0.15 E/W Movements 0.44 0.53 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.68 0.73 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B C Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 51 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 1 1700 350 0.21 * 1700 240 0.14 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 2 3400 750 0.22 * 3400 560 0.16 * EBL 0 0 0 * EBT 3 5100 2,250 0.44 * 5100 2,190 0.43 EBR (free) 50 85000 180 0.00 85000 510 0.01 WBL 0 0 * 0 WBT 3 5100 1,560 0.31 5100 2,430 0.48 * WBR (free) 50 85000 260 0.00 85000 510 0.01 N/S Movements 0.21 0.14 E/W Movements 0.44 0.48 Rt. Turn Component 0.01 0.02 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.71 0.69 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C B Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 52 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Northbound Ramps Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 1700 140 0.08 * 1700 100 0.06 * NBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBR 1.5 3400 580 0.17 * 3400 220 0.06 * SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 * EBT 2 3400 1,890 0.56 * 3400 2,170 0.64 EBR (free) 50 85000 300 0.00 85000 350 0.00 WBL 0 0 * 0 WBT 2 3400 1,350 0.40 3400 2,350 0.69 * WBR 1 1700 340 0.20 1700 690 0.41 N/S Movements 0.08 0.06 E/W Movements 0.56 0.69 Rt. Turn Component 0.09 0.01 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.78 0.81 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C D Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 53 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Southbound Ramps Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 1.5 2579 440 0.17 * 2248 410 0.18 * SBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 SBR 1.5 2521 430 0.17 * 2852 520 0.18 * EBL 0 0 0 EBT 2 3400 1,760 0.52 * 3400 1,760 0.52 * EBR 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 210 0.12 WBL 1 1700 170 0.10 * 1700 490 0.29 * WBT 2 3400 1,280 0.38 3400 1,720 0.51 WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.17 0.18 E/W Movements 0.62 0.81 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.84 1.04 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D F Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 54 Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.33 1700 100 0.06 * 1895 340 0.18 * NBT 0.34 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 NBR 0.33 1700 100 0.06 1505 270 0.18 * SBL 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 10 0.01 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 10 0.01 EBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 30 0.02 * EBT 3 5100 2,810 0.61 * 5100 1,820 0.42 EBR 0 290 320 WBL 1 1700 180 0.11 * 1700 200 0.12 WBT 3 5100 1,470 0.29 5100 3,150 0.62 * WBR 0 10 30 N/S Movements 0.06 0.18 E/W Movements 0.71 0.64 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.82 0.87 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 55 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 340 0.10 * 3400 1,060 0.31 * NBT 0.5 1242 190 0.15 1602 570 0.36 NBR 1.5 2158 330 0.15 1798 640 0.36 SBL 2 3400 890 0.26 3400 530 0.16 SBT 0.5 1700 540 0.32 * 1506 310 0.21 * SBR 1.5 1700 120 0.07 1894 390 0.21 EBL 2 3400 460 0.14 3400 260 0.08 * EBT 3 5100 1,950 0.38 * 5100 1,500 0.29 EBR 1 1700 550 0.32 1700 500 0.29 WBL 2 3400 630 0.19 * 3400 570 0.17 WBT 4 6800 1,260 0.24 6800 2,210 0.45 * WBR 0 350 840 N/S Movements 0.42 0.52 E/W Movements 0.57 0.53 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 1.04 1.09 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) F F Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 56 Eckhoff Street / Orangewood Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 400 0.24 * 1700 310 0.18 * NBT 1.5 2677 370 0.14 2576 250 0.10 NBR 0.5 723 100 0.14 824 80 0.10 SBL 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 50 0.03 SBT 1 1700 300 0.18 * 1700 450 0.26 * SBR (free) 50 85000 680 0.01 85000 1,020 0.01 EBL 2 3400 1,070 0.31 * 3400 730 0.21 * EBT 2 3400 1,090 0.32 3400 920 0.27 EBR 1 1700 170 0.10 1700 490 0.29 WBL 2 3400 20 0.01 3400 130 0.04 WBT 3 5100 570 0.12 * 5100 900 0.19 * WBR 0 50 60 N/S Movements 0.41 0.45 E/W Movements 0.44 0.40 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.90 0.90 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 57 Main Street / Taft Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2.5 4144 130 0.03 * 4755 1,240 0.26 * NBT 0.5 956 30 0.03 345 90 0.26 NBR 1 1700 200 0.12 * 1700 500 0.29 SBL 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 20 0.01 SBT 1 1700 50 0.03 * 1700 50 0.03 * SBR 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 200 0.12 * EBL 2 3400 110 0.03 3400 70 0.02 EBT 3 5100 1,160 0.23 * 5100 1,680 0.33 * EBR 1 1700 890 0.52 * 1700 400 0.24 WBL 2 3400 290 0.09 * 3400 470 0.14 * WBT 3 5100 1,120 0.22 5100 2,000 0.39 WBR 1 1700 30 0.02 1700 10 0.01 N/S Movements 0.06 0.29 E/W Movements 0.31 0.47 Rt. Turn Component 0.27 0.07 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.69 0.88 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B D Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 58 Main Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 70 0.02 3400 200 0.06 * NBT 2 3400 830 0.24 * 3400 770 0.23 NBR 1 1700 200 0.12 1700 500 0.29 SBL 2 3400 170 0.05 * 3400 100 0.03 SBT 2 3400 820 0.24 3400 890 0.26 * SBR 1 1700 150 0.09 1700 510 0.30 EBL 2 3400 480 0.14 * 3400 320 0.09 EBT 3 5100 1,350 0.26 5100 1,920 0.38 * EBR 1 1700 170 0.10 1700 160 0.09 WBL 2 3400 420 0.12 3400 230 0.07 * WBT 3 5100 1,620 0.32 * 5100 1,600 0.31 WBR 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 190 0.11 N/S Movements 0.29 0.32 E/W Movements 0.46 0.44 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.80 0.81 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C D Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 59 Batavia Street / Taft Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 180 0.05 * 3400 250 0.07 NBT 2 3400 420 0.19 3400 890 0.38 * NBR 0 230 390 SBL 1 1700 110 0.06 1700 90 0.05 * SBT 2 3400 1,040 0.38 * 3400 550 0.28 SBR 0 260 400 EBL 2 3400 340 0.10 3400 310 0.09 EBT 3 5100 1,040 0.20 * 5100 1,420 0.28 * EBR 1 1700 350 0.21 1700 240 0.14 WBL 2 3400 660 0.19 * 3400 340 0.10 * WBT 3 5100 1,510 0.30 5100 1,250 0.25 WBR 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 70 0.04 N/S Movements 0.44 0.43 E/W Movements 0.40 0.38 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.88 0.86 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 60 Clementine Street / Gene Autry Way Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 90 0.05 1700 90 0.05 NBT 2 3400 60 0.17 * 3400 70 0.18 * NBR 0 510 550 SBL 1 1700 10 0.01 * 1700 40 0.02 * SBT 2 3400 30 0.01 3400 80 0.04 SBR 0 10 40 EBL 1 1700 40 0.02 1700 60 0.04 EBT 3 5100 1,020 0.20 * 5100 990 0.20 * EBR 0 10 30 WBL 1 1700 270 0.16 * 1700 670 0.39 * WBT 3 5100 700 0.15 5100 1,060 0.22 WBR 0 60 40 N/S Movements 0.17 0.21 E/W Movements 0.36 0.59 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.58 0.85 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A D Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 61 Clementine Street / Orangewood Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 0 0.00 NBT 1 1700 50 0.11 * 1700 60 0.10 * NBR 0 140 110 SBL 1 1700 30 0.02 * 1700 160 0.09 * SBT 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 70 0.04 SBR 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 590 0.35 * EBL 1 1700 490 0.29 * 1700 330 0.19 * EBT 2 3400 860 0.26 3400 560 0.17 EBR 0 10 10 WBL 1 1700 100 0.06 1700 160 0.09 WBT 2 3400 360 0.14 * 3400 830 0.26 * WBR 0 120 60 N/S Movements 0.13 0.19 E/W Movements 0.43 0.46 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.06 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.61 0.76 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B C Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 62 Flower Street / Chapman Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 150 0.09 * 1700 390 0.23 * NBT 1 1700 10 0.06 1700 10 0.02 NBR 0 100 30 SBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 20 0.01 SBT 1 1700 30 0.04 * 1700 40 0.06 * SBR 0 30 70 EBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 40 0.02 EBT 3 5100 1,490 0.36 * 5100 1,670 0.37 * EBR 0 330 240 WBL 1 1700 50 0.03 * 1700 110 0.06 * WBT 3 5100 1,310 0.26 5100 2,060 0.41 WBR 0 10 40 N/S Movements 0.12 0.29 E/W Movements 0.39 0.44 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.56 0.78 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A C Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 63 Harbor Boulevard / Chapman Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 110 0.03 3400 330 0.10 * NBT 3 5100 1,180 0.23 * 5100 1,500 0.29 NBR 1 1700 330 0.19 1700 190 0.11 SBL 2 3400 110 0.03 * 3400 200 0.06 SBT 3 5100 1,010 0.20 5100 1,500 0.29 * SBR 1 1700 150 0.09 1700 200 0.12 EBL 2 3400 130 0.04 3400 190 0.06 * EBT 2 3400 1,120 0.33 * 3400 740 0.22 EBR 1 1700 170 0.10 1700 120 0.07 WBL 2 3400 150 0.04 * 3400 300 0.09 WBT 2 3400 430 0.13 3400 1,130 0.33 * WBR 1 1700 100 0.06 1700 190 0.11 N/S Movements 0.26 0.39 E/W Movements 0.37 0.39 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.69 0.83 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B D Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 64 I-5 Southbound Ramps / Chapman Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 650 0.19 3400 710 0.21 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 1 1700 290 0.17 * 1700 80 0.05 * SBL 2 3400 1,060 0.31 * 3400 970 0.29 * SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 1 1700 10 0.01 * 1700 10 0.01 * EBL 0 0 0 * EBT 3.5 5100 1,050 0.21 5100 1,070 0.21 EBR 1.5 3400 990 0.29 3400 1,110 0.33 WBL 2 3400 100 0.03 3400 120 0.04 WBT 3 5100 1,200 0.24 5100 2,010 0.39 * WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.31 0.29 E/W Movements 0.24 0.39 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.60 0.73 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A C Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 65 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Chapman Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 90 0.05 * 1700 50 0.03 * NBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 NBR 1 1700 110 0.06 * 1700 160 0.09 * SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 EBL 1 1700 0 0.00 1700 0 0.00 EBT 2 3400 1,740 0.51 * 3400 1,720 0.51 * EBR (free) 50 85000 370 0.00 85000 480 0.01 WBL 0 0 * 0 * WBT 3 5100 1,140 0.22 5100 1,900 0.37 WBR (free) 50 85000 290 0.00 85000 610 0.01 N/S Movements 0.05 0.03 E/W Movements 0.51 0.51 Rt. Turn Component 0.01 0.06 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.63 0.65 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B B Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 66 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Chapman Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 20 * 140 * NBT 1 1700 10 0.02 1700 30 0.10 NBR 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 110 0.06 SBL 0 270 170 SBT 1 1700 60 0.19 * 1700 10 0.11 * SBR 1 1700 510 0.30 * 1700 430 0.25 * EBL 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 10 0.01 * EBT 3 5100 1,800 0.38 * 5100 2,000 0.40 EBR 0 150 20 WBL 1 1700 90 0.05 * 1700 20 0.01 WBT 2 3400 1,120 0.33 3400 1,780 0.52 * WBR (free) 50 85000 160 0.00 85000 170 0.00 N/S Movements 0.19 0.11 E/W Movements 0.44 0.53 Rt. Turn Component 0.10 0.14 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.78 0.83 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C D Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 67 Euclid Street / Ball Road Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 150 0.04 3400 150 0.04 NBT 3 5100 1,320 0.30 * 5100 1,700 0.35 * NBR 0 210 100 SBL 2 3400 240 0.07 * 3400 410 0.12 * SBT 3 5100 1,250 0.27 5100 1,490 0.35 SBR 0 130 300 EBL 2 3400 230 0.07 3400 240 0.07 * EBT 3 5100 960 0.22 * 5100 770 0.20 EBR 0 160 270 WBL 2 3400 360 0.11 * 3400 100 0.03 WBT 3 5100 660 0.15 5100 930 0.21 * WBR 0 80 130 N/S Movements 0.37 0.47 E/W Movements 0.33 0.28 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.75 0.80 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C C Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 68 Walnut Street / Cerritos Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 110 * 470 NBT 2 3400 290 0.12 3400 320 0.23 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 0 0 0 * SBT 2 3400 410 0.20 * 3400 380 0.20 SBR 0 260 310 EBL 1 1700 390 0.23 * 1700 310 0.18 * EBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 EBR 1 1700 440 0.26 * 1700 110 0.06 * WBL 0 0 0 WBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.20 0.23 E/W Movements 0.23 0.18 Rt. Turn Component 0.26 0.06 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.74 0.53 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C A Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 69 Disneyland Drive / I-5 Southbound Off Ramp Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 * 0 NBT 2 3400 130 0.04 3400 910 0.27 * NBR (free) 50 85000 770 0.01 85000 770 0.01 SBL 0 0 0 * SBT 2 3400 1,080 0.32 * 3400 460 0.14 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * EBR 0 0 0 WBL 3 5100 930 0.18 * 5100 720 0.14 * WBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 WBR 1 1700 10 0.01 * 1700 50 0.03 * N/S Movements 0.32 0.27 E/W Movements 0.18 0.14 Rt. Turn Component 0.01 0.03 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.56 0.49 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 70 Disneyland Drive/ Magic Way Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 440 0.13 * 3400 470 0.14 * NBT 2 3400 570 0.17 3400 1,020 0.30 NBR 0 0 0 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 2 3400 920 0.27 * 3400 560 0.16 * SBR 1 1700 150 0.09 1700 250 0.15 EBL 2 3400 200 0.06 * 3400 390 0.11 * EBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 EBR 2 3400 160 0.05 3400 150 0.04 WBL 0 0 0 WBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.40 0.30 E/W Movements 0.06 0.11 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.51 0.47 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 71 Ox Road / Cast Place / Ball Road Date 12/16/2010 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 90 0.03 3400 230 0.07 NBT 2 3400 0 0.02 * 3400 10 0.14 * NBR 0 80 450 SBL 2 3400 40 0.01 * 3400 40 0.01 * SBT 0 10 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 60 0.04 * EBL 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 20 0.01 * EBT 3 5100 2,790 0.55 * 5100 2,030 0.40 EBR 1 1700 270 0.16 1700 160 0.09 WBL 2 3400 370 0.11 * 3400 130 0.04 WBT 3 5100 1,690 0.34 5100 2,340 0.47 * WBR 0 40 50 N/S Movements 0.04 0.15 E/W Movements 0.66 0.48 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.01 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.74 0.69 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C B Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 72 Convention Center/ Katella Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 NBR 0 0 0 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 * EBT 4 6800 3,560 0.55 * 6800 2,090 0.32 EBR 0 180 80 WBL 2 3400 180 0.05 * 3400 140 0.04 WBT 4 6800 1,160 0.17 6800 3,710 0.55 * WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.00 0.00 E/W Movements 0.60 0.55 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.65 0.60 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B A Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 73 Harbor Boulevard / Lincoln Avenue Date 3/15/2010 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 140 0.04 * 3400 200 0.06 NBT 3 5100 650 0.15 5100 1,350 0.33 * NBR 0 100 350 SBL 2 3400 180 0.05 3400 150 0.04 * SBT 3 5100 1,300 0.28 * 5100 830 0.20 SBR 0 130 180 EBL 1 1700 130 0.08 1700 240 0.14 * EBT 3 5100 980 0.21 * 5100 820 0.19 EBR 0 80 160 WBL 1 1700 200 0.12 * 1700 260 0.15 WBT 3 5100 880 0.19 5100 1,150 0.25 * WBR 0 70 150 N/S Movements 0.32 0.38 E/W Movements 0.33 0.40 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.70 0.82 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B D Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 74 Harbor Boulevard / Broadway Date 3/15/2010 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 60 0.04 * 1700 110 0.06 NBT 3 5100 610 0.14 5100 1,400 0.32 * NBR 0 110 210 SBL 1 1700 120 0.07 1700 150 0.09 * SBT 3 5100 1,180 0.26 * 5100 820 0.20 SBR 0 160 200 EBL 1 1700 140 0.08 1700 150 0.09 * EBT 2 3400 570 0.19 * 3400 430 0.15 EBR 0 70 70 WBL 2 3400 180 0.05 * 3400 160 0.05 WBT 2 3400 380 0.11 3400 590 0.17 * WBR 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 160 0.09 N/S Movements 0.30 0.40 E/W Movements 0.24 0.26 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.59 0.72 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A C Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 75 Harbor Boulevard / Manchester Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 110 0.06 1700 120 0.07 NBT 3 5100 800 0.16 * 5100 1,220 0.25 * NBR 0 40 40 SBL 1 1700 310 0.18 * 1700 110 0.06 * SBT 4 6800 910 0.13 6800 960 0.14 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * EBR 0 0 0 WBL 1 1700 30 0.02 * 1700 50 0.03 * WBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 WBR 1 1700 60 0.04 1700 480 0.28 * N/S Movements 0.35 0.31 E/W Movements 0.02 0.03 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.22 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.41 0.61 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 76 Anaheim Boulevard / Lincoln Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 90 0.05 * 1700 170 0.10 NBT 2 3400 360 0.11 3400 1,190 0.35 * NBR 1 1700 110 0.06 1700 110 0.06 SBL 1 1700 140 0.08 1700 120 0.07 * SBT 2 3400 1,030 0.30 * 3400 510 0.15 SBR 1 1700 110 0.06 1700 80 0.05 EBL 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 190 0.11 * EBT 3 5100 980 0.22 * 5100 1,090 0.24 EBR 0 160 150 WBL 1 1700 260 0.15 * 1700 140 0.08 WBT 3 5100 950 0.20 5100 1,300 0.28 * WBR 0 70 140 N/S Movements 0.36 0.42 E/W Movements 0.38 0.39 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.78 0.86 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C D Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 77 Anaheim Boulevard / Broadway Date 3/15/2010 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 110 0.06 * 1700 210 0.12 * NBT 3 5100 500 0.12 5100 1,430 0.30 NBR 0 110 100 SBL 2 3400 70 0.02 3400 100 0.03 SBT 2 3400 1,260 0.37 * 3400 780 0.23 * SBR 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 90 0.05 EBL 1 1700 160 0.09 1700 160 0.09 EBT 2 3400 510 0.15 * 3400 580 0.17 * EBR 1 1700 120 0.07 1700 120 0.07 WBL 1 1700 150 0.09 * 1700 210 0.12 * WBT 2 3400 450 0.13 3400 510 0.15 WBR 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 90 0.05 N/S Movements 0.44 0.35 E/W Movements 0.24 0.29 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.72 0.70 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C B Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 78 Olive Street / Lincoln Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 50 0.03 * 1700 50 0.03 * NBT 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 140 0.08 NBR 1 1700 90 0.05 1700 110 0.06 SBL 1 1700 50 0.03 1700 40 0.02 SBT 1 1700 90 0.05 * 1700 140 0.08 * SBR 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 50 0.03 EBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 50 0.03 EBT 2 3400 1,190 0.35 * 3400 1,330 0.39 * EBR 1 1700 40 0.02 1700 60 0.04 WBL 1 1700 130 0.08 * 1700 90 0.05 * WBT 3 5100 1,360 0.27 5100 1,540 0.32 WBR 0 20 70 N/S Movements 0.08 0.11 E/W Movements 0.43 0.44 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.56 0.61 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 79 Flore Street / West Place / Ball Road Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 40 0.02 NBT 1 1700 0 0.05 * 1700 0 0.11 * NBR 0 90 180 SBL 1 1700 50 0.03 * 1700 20 0.01 * SBT 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 0 0.00 SBR 0 10 0 EBL 1 1700 10 0.01 1700 20 0.01 * EBT 3 5100 1,850 0.38 * 5100 1,160 0.24 EBR 0 70 40 WBL 1 1700 230 0.14 * 1700 160 0.09 WBT 3 5100 750 0.15 5100 1,690 0.34 * WBR 0 20 50 N/S Movements 0.08 0.12 E/W Movements 0.51 0.35 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.64 0.52 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B A Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 80 West Street / Orangewood Avenue Date 3/15/2010 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 50 0.03 NBT 2 3400 350 0.21 * 3400 580 0.21 * NBR 0 350 120 SBL 1 1700 230 0.14 * 1700 150 0.09 * SBT 2 3400 370 0.11 3400 420 0.14 SBR 0 10 70 EBL 1 1700 30 0.02 1700 20 0.01 * EBT 2 3400 800 0.24 * 3400 310 0.10 EBR 0 10 40 WBL 1 1700 40 0.02 * 1700 290 0.17 WBT 2 3400 130 0.10 3400 590 0.32 * WBR 0 210 510 N/S Movements 0.34 0.29 E/W Movements 0.26 0.34 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.65 0.68 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B B Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 81 Struck Avenue / Katella Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 3274 260 0.08 * 3287 580 0.18 * NBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 NBR 0.5 126 10 0.08 * 113 20 0.18 * SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 * EBT 3 5100 2,710 0.53 * 5100 2,670 0.52 EBR 1 1700 540 0.32 1700 360 0.21 WBL 1 1700 20 0.01 * 1700 10 0.01 WBT 3 5100 1,960 0.38 5100 2,970 0.58 * WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.08 0.18 E/W Movements 0.54 0.58 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.67 0.81 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B D Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No.14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report – Technical Appendices Appendix A-6 ICU Worksheets under 2030 With Project Conditions (Mitigated) ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 1 Euclid Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 120 0.04 * 3400 240 0.07 NBT 4 6800 890 0.17 6800 1,450 0.23 * NBR 0 250 140 SBL 2 3400 370 0.11 3400 290 0.09 * SBT 3 5100 1,450 0.28 * 5100 1,110 0.22 SBR 1 1700 250 0.15 1700 90 0.05 EBL 2 3400 220 0.06 3400 320 0.09 * EBT 3 5100 2,020 0.43 * 5100 820 0.21 EBR 0 170 240 WBL 2 3400 250 0.07 * 3400 240 0.07 WBT 3 5100 550 0.11 5100 2,160 0.42 * WBR 1 1700 180 0.11 1700 370 0.22 N/S Movements 0.32 0.32 E/W Movements 0.50 0.52 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.87 0.89 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Year 2030 With Project Scenario - MITIGATED Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 2 Ninth Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 250 0.07 * 3400 550 0.16 * NBT 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 160 0.09 NBR 1 1700 390 0.23 * 1700 410 0.24 SBL 1 1700 30 0.02 1700 20 0.01 SBT 1 1700 140 0.11 * 1700 90 0.08 * SBR 0 40 40 EBL 1 1700 30 0.02 1700 60 0.04 EBT 3 5100 2,530 0.50 * 5100 1,070 0.21 * EBR 1 1700 260 0.15 1700 300 0.18 WBL 1 1700 260 0.15 * 1700 520 0.31 * WBT 3 5100 690 0.14 5100 2,330 0.46 WBR 1 1700 30 0.02 1700 60 0.04 N/S Movements 0.18 0.24 E/W Movements 0.65 0.52 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.88 0.80 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D C Year 2030 With Project Scenario - MITIGATED Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 5 Disneyland Drive / Ball Road Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 150 0.04 * 3400 210 0.06 NBT 2 3400 330 0.10 3400 610 0.18 * NBR 1 1700 330 0.19 1700 590 0.35 * SBL 2 3400 670 0.20 3400 340 0.10 * SBT 2 3400 770 0.26 * 3400 540 0.21 SBR 0 130 170 EBL 2 3400 320 0.09 3400 230 0.07 * EBT 3 5100 1,330 0.26 * 5100 1,030 0.20 EBR 1 1700 140 0.08 1700 130 0.08 WBL 2 3400 550 0.16 * 3400 470 0.14 WBT 3 5100 830 0.18 5100 1,500 0.39 * WBR 0 70 490 N/S Movements 0.31 0.28 E/W Movements 0.42 0.46 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.03 Yellow Clearance 0.10 0.10 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.83 0.87 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Year 2030 With Project Scenario - MITIGATED Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 6 Disneyland Drive / West Street / Katella Avenue Date 11/19/2010 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 231 0.07 3400 361 0.11 NBT 2 3400 410 0.12 * 3400 501 0.15 * NBR 1 1700 230 0.14 1700 150 0.09 SBL 2 3400 501 0.15 * 3400 761 0.22 * SBT 2 3400 271 0.08 3400 431 0.13 SBR 1 1700 330 0.19 * 1700 370 0.22 * EBL 2 3400 290 0.09 3400 160 0.05 * EBT 4 6800 3,001 0.47 * 6800 1,081 0.18 EBR 0 216 161 WBL 2 3400 195 0.06 * 3400 135 0.04 WBT 4 6800 921 0.21 6800 2,411 0.44 * WBR 0 500 551 N/S Movements 0.27 0.37 E/W Movements 0.53 0.48 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.85 0.90 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Year 2030 With Project Scenario - MITIGATED Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 8 Harbor Boulevard / Ball Road Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 670 0.20 * 3400 790 0.23 * NBT 4 6800 830 0.12 6800 2,020 0.30 NBR 1 1700 300 0.18 1700 340 0.20 SBL 2 3400 200 0.06 3400 230 0.07 SBT 4 6800 2,210 0.33 * 6800 1,230 0.18 * SBR 1 1700 450 0.26 1700 330 0.19 EBL 2 3400 420 0.12 3400 640 0.19 * EBT 4 6800 1,680 0.25 * 6800 1,300 0.19 EBR 2 3400 880 0.26 3400 580 0.17 WBL 2 3400 290 0.09 * 3400 270 0.08 WBT 4 6800 1,170 0.20 6800 1,530 0.25 * WBR 0 180 140 N/S Movements 0.52 0.41 E/W Movements 0.33 0.43 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.90 0.90 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Year 2030 With Project Scenario - MITIGATED Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 12 Harbor Boulevard / Katella Avenue Date 11/19/2010 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 320 0.09 * 3400 631 0.19 * NBT 3 5100 660 0.13 5100 1,090 0.21 NBR 1 1700 161 0.09 1700 230 0.14 SBL 2 3400 160 0.05 3400 200 0.06 SBT 3 5100 891 0.17 * 5100 727 0.14 * SBR 1 1700 212 0.12 1700 590 0.35 * EBL 2 3400 477 0.14 3400 515 0.15 * EBT 4 6800 2,605 0.40 * 6800 1,734 0.28 EBR 0 101 170 WBL 2 3400 299 0.09 * 3400 409 0.12 WBT 4 6800 1,207 0.19 6800 2,338 0.37 * WBR 0 80 170 N/S Movements 0.27 0.33 E/W Movements 0.49 0.52 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.80 0.95 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C E Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 18 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 200 0.06 * 3400 300 0.09 NBT 3 5100 510 0.10 5100 1,800 0.35 * NBR 1 1700 210 0.12 1700 160 0.09 SBL 2 3400 520 0.15 3400 430 0.13 * SBT 3 5100 1,710 0.34 * 5100 880 0.17 SBR 1 1700 330 0.19 1700 140 0.08 EBL 2 3400 170 0.05 3400 240 0.07 * EBT 3 5100 1,640 0.32 * 5100 920 0.18 EBR 1 1700 330 0.19 1700 300 0.18 WBL 2 3400 180 0.05 * 3400 180 0.05 WBT 3 5100 1,010 0.20 5100 1,550 0.30 * WBR 1 1700 180 0.11 1700 500 0.29 N/S Movements 0.39 0.48 E/W Movements 0.37 0.37 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.82 0.90 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 19 Anaheim Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 130 0.04 * 3400 130 0.04 NBT 3 5100 890 0.17 5100 1,880 0.37 * NBR 1 1700 590 0.35 * 1700 500 0.29 SBL 2 3400 670 0.20 3400 330 0.10 * SBT 3 5100 1,700 0.35 * 5100 1,280 0.26 SBR 0 100 70 EBL 1 1700 40 0.02 1700 80 0.05 EBT 1 1700 40 0.07 * 1700 70 0.14 * EBR 0 80 170 WBL 2 3400 440 0.13 * 3400 680 0.20 * WBT 0.5 680 50 0.07 540 100 0.19 WBR 1.5 2720 200 0.07 2860 530 0.19 N/S Movements 0.39 0.47 E/W Movements 0.20 0.34 Rt. Turn Component 0.04 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.68 0.86 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B D Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 20 Anaheim Boulevard / I-5 NB Ramps Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 260 0.08 * 3400 250 0.07 * NBT 3 5100 1,220 0.24 5100 1,770 0.35 NBR 0 0 0 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 4 6800 2,070 0.30 * 6800 2,080 0.31 * SBR 1 1700 160 0.09 1700 380 0.22 EBL 0 0 0 EBT 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 EBR 0 0 0 WBL 0.5 1020 30 0.03 191 80 0.42 WBT 1 680 20 0.03 1573 660 0.42 WBR 1.5 3400 420 0.12 * 3336 1,400 0.42 N/S Movements 0.38 0.38 E/W Movements 0.03 0.42 Rt. Turn Component 0.09 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.55 0.85 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A D Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 22 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 250 0.07 3400 340 0.10 NBT 3 5100 740 0.15 * 5100 1,160 0.23 * NBR 1 1700 260 0.15 1700 360 0.21 SBL 2 3400 520 0.15 * 3400 430 0.13 * SBT 3 5100 530 0.10 5100 540 0.11 SBR 1 1700 330 0.19 * 1700 300 0.18 EBL 2 3400 270 0.08 3400 490 0.14 * EBT 4 6800 2,560 0.39 * 6800 2,040 0.32 EBR 0 60 150 WBL 2 3400 560 0.16 * 3400 580 0.17 WBT 4 6800 1,220 0.18 6800 2,390 0.35 * WBR 1 1700 100 0.06 1700 120 0.07 N/S Movements 0.30 0.35 E/W Movements 0.55 0.50 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.90 0.90 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 23 Haster Street / Gene Autry Way Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 200 0.12 * 1700 260 0.15 NBT 3 5100 1,070 0.21 5100 1,530 0.30 * NBR 1 1700 480 0.28 1700 410 0.24 SBL 2 3400 100 0.03 3400 250 0.07 * SBT 3 5100 930 0.18 * 5100 1,020 0.20 SBR 1 1700 110 0.06 1700 250 0.15 EBL 1 1700 150 0.09 1700 350 0.21 * EBT 3 5100 1,150 0.27 * 5100 1,000 0.24 EBR 0 230 200 WBL 2 3400 550 0.16 * 3400 740 0.22 WBT 3 5100 540 0.14 5100 1,170 0.25 * WBR 0 150 110 N/S Movements 0.30 0.37 E/W Movements 0.43 0.46 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.78 0.88 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C D Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 26 Anaheim Way / Katella Avenue Date 11/19/2010 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 3400 701 0.21 * 2529 864 0.34 NBT 3 3400 420 0.12 4918 1,680 0.34 NBR 0.5 1700 630 0.37 * 1054 360 0.34 SBL 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 SBR 0 0 0 EBL 2 3400 40 0.01 3400 50 0.01 * EBT 4 6800 2,682 0.39 * 6800 2,582 0.38 EBR 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 * 0 WBT 4.5 8334 1,921 0.23 7638 2,832 0.37 * WBR 1.5 1866 430 0.23 2562 950 0.37 N/S Movements 0.21 0.34 E/W Movements 0.39 0.39 Rt. Turn Component 0.16 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.82 0.78 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D C Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 29 Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 30 0.02 * 1700 50 0.03 NBT 2 3400 490 0.14 3400 1,030 0.30 * NBR 1 1700 240 0.14 1700 300 0.18 SBL 1 1700 260 0.15 1700 120 0.07 * SBT 2 3400 960 0.32 * 3400 700 0.27 SBR 0 130 230 EBL 1 1700 110 0.06 1700 180 0.11 * EBT 2 3400 950 0.34 * 3400 830 0.32 EBR 0 210 260 WBL 1 1700 210 0.12 * 1700 240 0.14 WBT 2 3400 530 0.16 3400 1,220 0.36 * WBR 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 210 0.12 N/S Movements 0.34 0.37 E/W Movements 0.46 0.46 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.85 0.89 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 30 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 70 0.02 3400 250 0.07 * NBT 2 3400 410 0.12 * 3400 670 0.20 NBR 1 1700 440 0.26 * 1700 520 0.31 SBL 2 3400 270 0.08 * 3400 380 0.11 SBT 1.5 2517 380 0.15 1907 460 0.24 * SBR 1.5 2583 390 0.15 3193 770 0.24 EBL 2 3400 530 0.16 3400 420 0.12 EBT 4 6800 1,970 0.31 * 6800 2,100 0.33 * EBR 0 140 110 WBL 2 3400 150 0.04 * 3400 480 0.14 * WBT 5 8500 1,520 0.20 8500 2,700 0.34 WBR 0 140 190 N/S Movements 0.20 0.31 E/W Movements 0.35 0.47 Rt. Turn Component 0.09 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.70 0.83 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B D Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 37 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 300 0.09 * 3400 530 0.16 * NBT 3 5100 480 0.09 5100 830 0.16 NBR 1 1700 310 0.18 1700 250 0.15 SBL 2 3400 410 0.12 3400 320 0.09 SBT 2 3400 1,010 0.30 * 3400 680 0.20 * SBR 2 3400 900 0.26 3400 820 0.24 EBL 3 5100 690 0.14 5100 900 0.18 EBT 3 5100 1,460 0.29 * 5100 1,240 0.24 * EBR 1 1700 670 0.39 * 1700 420 0.25 WBL 2 3400 540 0.16 * 3400 690 0.20 * WBT 4 6800 620 0.09 6800 1,670 0.25 WBR 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 350 0.21 N/S Movements 0.39 0.36 E/W Movements 0.45 0.45 Rt. Turn Component 0.02 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.90 0.85 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 38 State College Boulevard / Gene Autry Way Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 230 0.07 * 3400 470 0.14 * NBT 3 5100 720 0.14 5100 1,390 0.27 NBR 1 1700 540 0.32 * 1700 420 0.25 SBL 2 3400 10 0.00 3400 0 0.00 SBT 3 5100 1,290 0.25 * 5100 1,380 0.27 * SBR 1 1700 640 0.38 1700 560 0.33 EBL 2 3400 840 0.25 * 3400 230 0.07 * EBT 1.5 1700 320 0.19 1700 210 0.12 EBR 1.5 3400 1,140 0.34 * 3400 710 0.21 WBL 2 3400 10 0.00 3400 20 0.01 WBT 3 5100 130 0.03 * 5100 700 0.15 * WBR 0 0 40 N/S Movements 0.32 0.41 E/W Movements 0.27 0.27 Rt. Turn Component 0.25 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.90 0.73 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D C Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 39 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 240 0.07 3400 100 0.03 NBT 4 6800 1,190 0.18 * 6800 1,960 0.29 * NBR 1 1700 200 0.12 1700 140 0.08 SBL 2 3400 800 0.24 * 3400 670 0.20 * SBT 4 6800 1,540 0.30 6800 1,400 0.28 SBR 0 480 520 EBL 2 3400 190 0.06 3400 250 0.07 EBT 3 5100 1,590 0.32 * 5100 870 0.18 * EBR 0 50 50 WBL 2 3400 350 0.10 * 3400 630 0.19 * WBT 4 6800 1,020 0.15 6800 1,750 0.26 WBR 1 1700 180 0.11 1700 390 0.23 N/S Movements 0.41 0.49 E/W Movements 0.42 0.37 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.88 0.90 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 43 State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 130 0.04 * 3400 210 0.06 NBT 3 5100 560 0.11 5100 1,490 0.29 * NBR 2 3400 440 0.13 3400 780 0.23 SBL 2 3400 150 0.04 3400 160 0.05 * SBT 4 6800 1,820 0.27 * 6800 1,520 0.22 SBR 1 1700 700 0.41 * 1700 230 0.14 EBL 2 3400 270 0.08 3400 390 0.11 EBT 3 5100 1,440 0.28 * 5100 1,350 0.26 * EBR 1 1700 270 0.16 1700 140 0.08 WBL 2 3400 440 0.13 * 3400 510 0.15 * WBT 2.5 4549 950 0.21 4206 1,200 0.29 WBR 1.5 2251 470 0.21 2594 740 0.29 N/S Movements 0.31 0.34 E/W Movements 0.41 0.41 Rt. Turn Component 0.06 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.83 0.80 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D C Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 45 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 130 0.08 NBT 1 1700 20 0.01 1700 90 0.05 * NBR 1 1700 40 0.02 1700 210 0.12 * SBL 2 3400 320 0.09 3400 500 0.15 * SBT 0.5 744 70 0.09 1133 20 0.02 SBR 1.5 2656 250 0.09 2267 40 0.02 EBL 2 3400 50 0.01 3400 160 0.05 * EBT 3 5100 2,030 0.42 * 5100 2,060 0.42 EBR 0 90 70 WBL 2 3400 170 0.05 * 3400 90 0.03 WBT 3 5100 1,600 0.31 5100 2,570 0.50 * WBR 1 1700 510 0.30 1700 530 0.31 Split phase N/S Movements 0.11 0.22 E/W Movements 0.47 0.55 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.02 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.62 0.85 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B D Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 46 Rampart Street / Orangewood Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1 1700 70 0.04 1700 80 0.05 NBT 1 1700 330 0.19 * 1700 350 0.21 * NBR (free) 50 85000 500 0.01 85000 1,000 0.01 SBL 2 3400 150 0.04 * 3400 420 0.12 * SBT 1 1700 300 0.18 1700 380 0.22 SBR 1 1700 40 0.02 1700 170 0.10 EBL 1 1700 150 0.09 1700 140 0.08 * EBT 3 5100 1,100 0.22 * 5100 860 0.17 EBR 1 1700 220 0.13 1700 80 0.05 WBL 1 1700 390 0.23 * 1700 300 0.18 WBT 3 5100 1,060 0.21 5100 1,740 0.34 * WBR 1 1700 260 0.15 1700 290 0.17 N/S Movements 0.24 0.33 E/W Movements 0.45 0.42 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.73 0.80 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C C Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 53 Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Southbound Ramps Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * NBR 0 0 0 SBL 1.5 2579 440 0.17 * 2248 410 0.18 * SBT 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 SBR 1.5 2521 430 0.17 * 2852 520 0.18 * EBL 0 0 0 EBT 2 3400 1,760 0.52 * 3400 1,760 0.52 * EBR 1 1700 80 0.05 1700 210 0.12 WBL 2 3400 170 0.05 * 3400 490 0.14 * WBT 2 3400 1,280 0.38 3400 1,720 0.51 WBR 0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.17 0.18 E/W Movements 0.57 0.66 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.79 0.89 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) C D Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT: ANALYSIS CONDITION: INTERSECTION: 55 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Date 12/11/2009 MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2 3400 340 0.10 3400 1,060 0.31 * NBT 2 3400 190 0.06 * 3400 570 0.17 NBR 1 1700 330 0.19 1700 640 0.38 * SBL 2 3400 890 0.26 * 3400 530 0.16 SBT 2 3400 540 0.16 3400 310 0.09 * SBR 1 1700 120 0.07 1700 390 0.23 * EBL 2 3400 460 0.14 3400 260 0.08 * EBT 4 6800 1,950 0.29 * 6800 1,500 0.22 EBR 1 1700 550 0.32 1700 500 0.29 WBL 2 3400 630 0.19 * 3400 570 0.17 WBT 4 6800 1,260 0.19 6800 2,210 0.33 * WBR 1 1700 350 0.21 1700 840 0.49 * N/S Movements 0.32 0.40 E/W Movements 0.47 0.40 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.01 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.84 0.87 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D D Year 2030 With Project Scenario Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No.14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report – Technical Appendices Appendix B Intersection Lane Configurations ---PAGE BREAK--- L T R L T R L T R L T R Euclid Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim Existing Conditions 2 2 0 2 2 0 1 2 1 1 2 1 2015-Interim Year 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 0 2 3 1 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 0 2 3 1 2030 Buildout 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 0 2 3 1 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 2 4 0 2 3 1 2 3 0 2 3 1 Ninth Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim Existing Conditions 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 3 1 1 3 1 2015-Interim Year 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 3 1 1 3 1 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 3 1 1 3 1 2030 Buildout 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 3 1 1 3 1 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 2 1 1 1 1 0 1 3 1 1 3 1 Walnut Street / Ball Road Anaheim Existing Conditions 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 0 1 3 0 2015-Interim Year 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 0 1 3 0 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 0 1 3 0 2030 Buildout 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 3 0 1 3 0 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 3 0 1 3 0 Walnut Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim Existing Conditions 0 1 0 1.5 0.5 1 1 3 0 1 3 0 2015-Interim Year 0 1 0 1.5 0.5 1 1 3 0 1 3 0 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 0 1 0 1.5 0.5 1 1 3 0 1 3 0 2030 Buildout 0 1 0 1.5 0.5 1 1 3 0 1 3 0 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 0 1 0 1.5 0.5 1 1 3 0 1 3 0 Disneyland Drive / Ball Road Anaheim Existing Conditions 1.5 1 1.5 1.5 2.5 0 2 3 1 2 3 0 2015-Interim Year 1.5 1 1.5 1.5 2.5 0 2 3 1 2 3 0 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 1.5 1 1.5 1.5 2.5 0 2 3 1 2 3 0 2030 Buildout 1.5 1 1.5 1.5 2.5 0 2 3 1 2 3 0 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 2 2 1 2 2 0 2 3 1 2 3 0 Disneyland Drive / West Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim Existing Conditions 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2015-Interim Year 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2030 Buildout 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 4 0 2 4 0 Harbor Boulevard / Vermont Avenue Anaheim Existing Conditions 1 2 1 1 2 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 2015-Interim Year 1 2 1 1 2 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 1 2 1 1 2 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 2030 Buildout 1 3 0 1 3 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 1 3 0 1 3 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 Harbor Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim Existing Conditions 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 4 0 2015-Interim Year 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 4 0 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 4 0 2030 Buildout 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 4 0 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 2 4 1 2 4 1 2 4 2 2 4 0 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 NB Ramps Anaheim Existing Conditions 0 3 F 1 4 0 0 0 0 1.5 0 1.5 2015-Interim Year 0 3 F 1 4 0 0 0 0 1.5 0 1.5 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 0 3 F 1 4 0 0 0 0 1.5 0 1.5 2030 Buildout 0 3 F 1 4 0 0 0 0 1.5 0 1.5 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 0 3 F 1 4 0 0 0 0 1.5 0 1.5 Harbor Boulevard / I-5 SB Ramps Anaheim Existing Conditions 1 4 0 0 3 F 2 0 F 0 0 0 2015-Interim Year 1 4 0 0 3 F 2 0 F 0 0 0 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 1 4 0 0 3 F 2 0 F 0 0 0 2030 Buildout 1 4 0 0 3 F 2 0 F 0 0 0 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 1 4 0 0 3 F 2 0 F 0 0 0 Harbor Boulevard / Disney Way Anaheim Existing Conditions 2 3 0 2 3 0 1 3 0 1 3 0 2015-Interim Year 2 3 0 2 3 0 1 3 0 1 3 0 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 2 3 0 2 3 0 1 3 0 1 3 0 2030 Buildout 2 3 0 2 3 0 2 1.5 0.5 1 3 0 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 2 3 0 2 3 0 2 1.5 0.5 1 3 0 Harbor Boulevard / Katella Avenue Anaheim Existing Conditions 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2015-Interim Year 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2030 Buildout 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 4 0 2 4 0 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 4 0 2 4 0 Harbor Boulevard / Convention Way Anaheim Existing Conditions 2 3 0 2 3 1 2 0.5 1.5 1 0.5 1.5 2015-Interim Year 2 3 0 2 3 1 2 0.5 1.5 1 0.5 1.5 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 2 3 0 2 3 1 2 0.5 1.5 1 0.5 1.5 2030 Buildout 2 3 1 2 3 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 2 3 1 2 3 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 Harbor Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim Existing Conditions 1 3 0 1 3 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 2015-Interim Year 1 3 0 1 3 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 1 3 0 1 3 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 2030 Buildout 1 3 0 1 3 0 1 2 0 1 2 1 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 1 3 0 1 3 0 1 2 0 1 2 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 Eastbound 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Westbound ID Intersection 7 Jurisdiction Northbound Southbound ---PAGE BREAK--- L T R L T R L T R L T R Eastbound Westbound ID Intersection Jurisdiction Northbound Southbound Clementine Street / Disney Way Anaheim Existing Conditions 1 2 0 2 2 0 1 3 1 1 3 0 2015-Interim Year 1 2 0 2 2 0 1 3 1 1 3 0 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 1 2 0 2 2 0 1 3 1 1 3 0 2030 Buildout 2 2 0 2 2 0 1 3 1 1 3 0 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 2 2 0 2 2 0 1 3 1 1 3 0 Clementine Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim Existing Conditions 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 0 2 3 1 2015-Interim Year 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 0 2 3 1 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 0 2 3 1 2030 Buildout 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 4 0 2 4 0 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 4 0 2 4 0 I-5 SB Off Ramp / Disney Way Anaheim Existing Conditions 1 0 1 1.33 0.34 1.33 0 3 0 1 3 0 2015-Interim Year 1 0 1 1.33 0.34 1.33 0 3 0 1 3 0 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 1 0 1 1.33 0.34 1.33 0 3 0 1 3 0 2030 Buildout 1 0 1 1.33 0.34 1.33 0 3 0 1 3 0 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 1 0 1 1.33 0.34 1.33 0 3 0 1 3 0 Anaheim Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim Existing Conditions 2 2 1 2 3 1 1 3 0 1 3 1 2015-Interim Year 2 2 1 2 3 1 1 3 0 1 3 1 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 2 3 0 2 3 1 1 3 0 1 3 1 2030 Buildout 2 3 0 2 3 1 1 3 0 2 3 1 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 Anaheim Boulevard / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim Existing Conditions 1 3 1 1 3 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 2015-Interim Year 1 3 1 1 3 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 1 3 1 1 3 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 2030 Buildout 1 3 1 1 3 0 1 1 0 2 1 0 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 2 3 1 2 3 0 1 1 0 2 0.5 1.5 Anaheim Boulevard / I-5 NB Ramps Anaheim Existing Conditions 2 3 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0.5 1 1.5 2015-Interim Year 2 3 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0.5 1 1.5 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 2 3 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0.5 1 1.5 2030 Buildout 2 3 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0.5 1 1.5 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 2 3 0 0 4 1 0 0 0 0.5 1 1.5 Anaheim Boulevard / Disney Way Anaheim Existing Conditions 1 3 0 2 3 0 2 4 0 0 3 0 2015-Interim Year 1 3 0 2 3 0 2 4 0 0 3 0 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 1 3 0 2 3 0 2 4 0 0 3 0 2030 Buildout 1 3 0 2 3 0 2 4 0 0 3 0 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 1 3 0 2 3 0 2 4 0 0 3 0 Anaheim Boulevard / Haster Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim Existing Conditions 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 4 0 2 3 1 2015-Interim Year 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 4 0 2 3 1 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 4 0 2 3 1 2030 Buildout 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 4 0 2 4 0 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 4 0 2 4 1 Haster Street / Gene Autry Way Anaheim Existing Conditions 2015-Interim Year 0 2.5 0.5 1 3 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 0 2.5 0.5 1 3 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 2030 Buildout 1 3 1 1 3 0 1 3 0 1 3 0 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 1 3 1 2 3 1 1 3 0 2 3 0 Haster Street / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim Existing Conditions 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 2015-Interim Year 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 2030 Buildout 1 3 0 1 3 1 2 2 0 2 2 1 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 1 3 0 1 3 1 2 2 0 2 2 1 Manchester Avenue (I-5 SB Ramps) / Katella Avenue Anaheim Existing Conditions 1.5 0 1.5 2 2 1 0 3 1 2 3 0 2015-Interim Year 1.5 0 1.5 2 2 1 0 3 1 2 3 0 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 1.5 0 1.5 2 2 1 0 3 1 2 3 0 2030 Buildout 1.5 0 1.5 2 2 1 0 3 2 2 3 0 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 1.5 0 1.5 2 2 1 0 3 2 2 3 0 Anaheim Way (I-5 NB Ramps) / Katella Avenue Anaheim Existing Conditions 1.5 3 0.5 0 0 0 2 3 0 0 3.5 1.5 2015-Interim Year 1.5 3 0.5 0 0 0 2 3 0 0 3.5 1.5 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 1.5 3 0.5 0 0 0 2 3 0 0 3.5 1.5 2030 Buildout 1.5 3 0.5 0 0 0 2 3 0 0 3.5 1.5 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 1.5 3 0.5 0 0 0 2 4 0 0 4.5 1.5 East Street / Ball Road Anaheim Existing Conditions 0 0 0 2 0 1 1 3 0 0 3 0 2015-Interim Year 0 0 0 2 0 1 1 3 0 0 3 0 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 0 0 0 2 0 1 1 3 0 0 3 0 2030 Buildout 0 0 0 2 0 1 2 3 0 0 3 0 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 0 0 0 2 0 1 2 3 0 0 3 0 Lewis Street / Ball Road Anaheim Existing Conditions 1 2 0 0 1 0 1 3 0 1 3 0 2015-Interim Year 1 2 0 0 1 0 1 3 0 1 3 0 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 1 2 0 0 1 0 1 3 0 1 3 0 2030 Buildout 1 2 0 0 1 0 1 3 0 2 3 0 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 1 2 0 0 1 0 1 3 0 2 3 0 26 27 28 16 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 17 15 Not Applicable ---PAGE BREAK--- L T R L T R L T R L T R Eastbound Westbound ID Intersection Jurisdiction Northbound Southbound Lewis Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim Existing Conditions 1 2 1 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 2015-Interim Year 1 2 1 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 1 2 1 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 2030 Buildout 1 2 1 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 1 2 1 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 1 Lewis Street / Katella Avenue Anaheim Existing Conditions 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 3 0 1 3 0 2015-Interim Year 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 3 0 1 3 0 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 0 1 3 0 2030 Buildout 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 4 0 2 4 0 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 2 2 1 2 1.5 1.5 2 4 0 2 5 0 Lewis Street / Gene Autry Way Anaheim Existing Conditions 2015-Interim Year 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 2030 Buildout 0 0 0 2 0 2 1 3 0 0 3 0 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 0 0 0 2 0 2 1 3 0 0 3 0 I-5 HOV Ramps / Gene Autry Way Anaheim Existing Conditions 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 1.5 0 1.5 2015-Interim Year 1 0 2 2 0 1 1 3 0 1 3 0 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 1 0 2 2 0 1 1 3 0 1 3 0 2030 Buildout 1 0 2 2 0 1 1 2.5 0.5 1 2.5 0.5 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 1 0 2 2 0 1 1 2.5 0.5 1 2.5 0.5 Lewis Street / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim Existing Conditions 1 0 F 0 0 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 2015-Interim Year 1 0 F 0 0 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 1 0 F 0 0 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 2030 Buildout 1 0 F 0 0 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 1 0 F 0 0 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 Manchester Avenue / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim/ Existing Conditions Orange 0 0 F 2 3 0 0 3 1 2 3 0 2015-Interim Year 0 0 F 2 3 0 0 3 1 2 3 0 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 0 0 F 2 3 0 0 3 1 2 3 0 2030 Buildout 0 0 0 2 3 0 0 3 1 2 3 0 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 0 0 0 2 3 0 0 3 1 2 3 0 Anaheim Way / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim/ Existing Conditions Orange 0 3 0 0 0 0 2 3 0 0 3 1 2015-Interim Year 0 3 0 0 0 0 2 3 0 0 3 1 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 0 3 0 0 0 0 2 3 0 0 3 1 2030 Buildout 0 3 0 0 0 0 2 3 0 0 3 1 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 0 3 0 0 0 0 2 3 0 0 3 1 State College Boulevard / Ball Road Anaheim Existing Conditions 2 3 1 2 3 0 1 3 0 1 3 0 2015-Interim Year 2 3 1 2 3 0 1 3 0 1 3 0 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 2 3 1 2 3 0 1 3 0 1 3 0 2030 Buildout 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 0 2 3 0 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 0 2 3 0 State College Boulevard / Katella Avenue Anaheim Existing Conditions 2 3 0 2 3 1 2 2.5 1.5 2 3 1 2015-Interim Year 2 3 0 2 3 1 2 2.5 1.5 2 3 1 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 2 3 0 2 3 1 2 2.5 1.5 2 3 1 2030 Buildout 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 4 0 2 4 0 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 2 3 1 2 2 2 3 3 1 2 4 1 State College Boulevard / Gene Autry Way Anaheim Existing Conditions 2 3 0 2 3 0 1.5 1.5 0 1 1 1 2015-Interim Year 2 3 0 2 3 0 1.5 1.5 0 1 1 1 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 2 3 0 2 3 0 1.5 1.5 0 1 1 1 2030 Buildout 2 3 1 2 3 0 2 1.5 1.5 2 3 0 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 1.5 1.5 2 3 0 State College Boulevard / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim/ Existing Conditions Orange 2 4 0 2 4 0 2 3 0 2 3 0 2015-Interim Year 2 4 0 2 4 0 2 3 0 2 3 1 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 2 4 0 2 4 0 2 3 0 2 3 1 2030 Buildout 2 4 0 2 4 0 2 3 0 2 3 1 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 2 4 1 2 4 0 2 3 0 2 4 1 State College Boulevard / Orange Center Drive Anaheim/ Existing Conditions Orange 2 4 0 2 4 0 2 1 1 1 1 0 2015-Interim Year 2 4 0 2 4 0 2 1 1 1 1 0 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 2 4 0 2 4 0 2 1 1 1 1 0 2030 Buildout 2 4 0 2 4 0 2 1 1 1 1 1 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 2 4 0 2 4 0 2 1 1 1 1 1 State College Boulevard / I-5 Northbound Ramps Orange Existing Conditions 2 4 F 1 4 1 0 0 0 1.5 1.5 2 2015-Interim Year 2 4 F 1 4 1 0 0 0 1.5 1.5 2 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 2 4 F 1 4 1 0 0 0 1.5 1.5 2 2030 Buildout 2 4 F 1 4 1 0 0 F 1.5 1.5 2 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 2 4 F 1 4 1 0 0 F 1.5 1.5 2 State College Boulevard / I-5 Southbound Ramps Orange Existing Conditions 0 5 0 0 4 F 1.5 0.5 2 0 0 0 2015-Interim Year 0 5 0 0 4 F 1.5 0.5 2 0 0 0 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 0 5 0 0 4 F 1.5 0.5 2 0 0 0 2030 Buildout 0 5 0 0 4 F 1.5 0.5 2 0 0 0 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 0 5 0 0 4 F 1.5 0.5 2 0 0 0 32 33 38 40 41 42 39 34 35 36 37 30 31 29 Not Applicable ---PAGE BREAK--- L T R L T R L T R L T R Eastbound Westbound ID Intersection Jurisdiction Northbound Southbound State College Boulevard / The City Drive / Chapman Avenue Orange Existing Conditions 2 3 2 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2015-Interim Year 2 3 2 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 2 3 2 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2030 Buildout 2 3 2 2 4 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 2 3 2 2 4 1 2 3 1 2 2.5 1.5 Sunkist Street / Ball Road Anaheim Existing Conditions 1 2 0 1 2 0 2 3 0 2 2 1 2015-Interim Year 1 2 0 1 2 0 2 3 0 2 2 1 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 1 2 1 1 2 0 2 3 0 2 2 1 2030 Buildout 1 2 1 2 2 0 2 3 0 2 3 1 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 1 2 1 2 2 0 2 3 0 2 3 1 Howell Avenue / Katella Avenue Anaheim Existing Conditions 1 1 1 2 0.5 1.5 2 3 0 2 3 0 2015-Interim Year 1 1 1 2 0.5 0.5 2 3 0 2 3 0 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 1 1 1 2 0.5 0.5 2 3 0 2 3 0 2030 Buildout 1 1 1 2 0.5 1.5 2 3 0 2 3 0 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 1 1 1 2 0.5 1.5 2 3 0 2 3 1 Rampart Street / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim/ Existing Conditions Orange 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 2 0 1 2 1 2015-Interim Year 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 2 0 1 2 1 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 2 0 1 2 1 2030 Buildout 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 3 1 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 1 1 F 2 1 1 1 3 1 1 3 1 Rampart Street / Chapman Avenue Orange Existing Conditions 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 4 0 0 4 0 2015-Interim Year 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 4 0 0 4 0 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 4 0 0 4 0 2030 Buildout 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 3 0 0 4 0 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 3 0 0 4 0 Ball Road / SR-57 Northbound Ramps Anaheim Existing Conditions 1.5 0 1.5 0 0 0 0 3 F 0 3 F 2015-Interim Year 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 F 0 3 F 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 F 0 3 F 2030 Buildout 1.5 0 1.5 0 0 0 0 3 F 0 3 F 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 1.5 0 1.5 0 0 0 0 3 F 0 3 F Ball Road / SR-57 Southbound Ramps Anaheim Existing Conditions 0 0 0 0.5 0 1.5 0 3 F 0 3 F 2015-Interim Year 0 0 0 0.5 0 1.5 0 3 F 0 3 F 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 0 0 0 0.5 0 1.5 0 3 F 0 3 F 2030 Buildout 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 3 F 0 3 F 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 3 F 0 3 F SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Anaheim Existing Conditions 1.5 0 1.5 0 0 0 0 3 F 0 3 1 2015-Interim Year 1.5 0 1.5 0 0 0 0 3 F 0 3 1 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 1.5 0 1.5 0 0 0 0 3 F 0 3 1 2030 Buildout 1.5 0 1.5 0 0 0 0 3 F 0 3 1 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 1.5 0 1.5 0 0 0 0 3 F 0 3 1 SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Katella Avenue Anaheim Existing Conditions 0 0 0 1.5 0 1.5 0 3 F 0 3 F 2015-Interim Year 0 0 0 1.5 0 1.5 0 3 F 0 3 F 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 0 0 0 1.5 0 1.5 0 3 F 0 3 F 2030 Buildout 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 3 F 0 3 F 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 3 F 0 3 F Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Northbound Ramps Orange Existing Conditions 1.5 0 1.5 0 0 0 0 2 F 0 2 F 2015-Interim Year 1.5 0 1.5 0 0 0 0 2 F 0 2 F 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 1.5 0 1.5 0 0 0 0 2 F 0 2 F 2030 Buildout 1.5 0 1.5 0 0 0 0 2 F 0 2 F 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 1.5 0 1.5 0 0 0 0 2 F 0 2 F Orangewood Avenue / SR-57 Southbound Ramps Orange Existing Conditions 0 0 0 1.5 0 1.5 0 2 1 1 2 0 2015-Interim Year 0 0 0 1.5 0 1.5 0 2 1 1 2 0 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 0 0 0 1.5 0 1.5 0 2 1 1 2 0 2030 Buildout 0 0 0 1.5 0 1.5 0 2 1 1 2 0 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 0 0 0 1.5 0 1.5 0 2 1 2 2 0 Phoenix Club Drive / Ball Road Anaheim Existing Conditions 1.33 0.34 0.33 1 1 0 1 2 1 1 2 0 2015-Interim Year 1.33 0.34 0.33 1 1 0 1 2 1 1 2 0 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 1.33 0.34 0.33 1 1 0 1 2 1 1 2 0 2030 Buildout 1.33 0.34 0.33 1 0 1 1 3 0 1 3 0 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 1.33 0.34 0.33 1 0 1 1 3 0 1 3 0 Douglass Road / Katella Avenue Anaheim Existing Conditions 1 1 0 1 0.5 1.5 2 3 1 2 3 1 2015-Interim Year 1 1 0 1 0.5 1.5 2 3 1 2 3 1 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 1 1 0 1 0.5 1.5 2 3 1 2 3 1 2030 Buildout 2 0.5 1.5 2 0.5 1.5 2 3 1 2 4 0 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 4 1 2 4 1 Eckhoff Street / Orangewood Avenue Orange Existing Conditions 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 0 2015-Interim Year 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 0 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 0 2030 Buildout 1 1.5 0.5 1 1 F 2 2 1 2 3 0 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 1 1.5 0.5 1 1 F 2 2 1 2 3 0 56 46 47 48 49 50 52 53 54 55 51 43 44 45 ---PAGE BREAK--- L T R L T R L T R L T R Eastbound Westbound ID Intersection Jurisdiction Northbound Southbound Main Street / Taft Avenue Orange Existing Conditions 1.5 0.5 1 1 1 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 2015-Interim Year 1.5 0.5 1 1 1 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 1.5 0.5 1 1 1 1 1 2 0 1 2 0 2030 Buildout 2.5 0.5 1 1 1 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 2.5 0.5 1 1 1 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 Main Street / Katella Avenue Orange Existing Conditions 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 3 1 1 3 0 2015-Interim Year 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 3 1 1 3 0 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 3 1 1 3 0 2030 Buildout 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 Batavia Street / Taft Avenue Orange Existing Conditions 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 1 1 2 1 2015-Interim Year 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 1 1 2 1 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 1 1 2 1 2030 Buildout 2 2 0 1 2 0 2 3 1 2 3 1 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 2 2 0 1 2 0 2 3 1 2 3 1 Clementine Street / Gene Autry Way Anaheim Existing Conditions 2015-Interim Year 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 2030 Buildout 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 3 0 1 3 0 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 3 0 1 3 0 Clementine Street / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim Existing Conditions 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 2015-Interim Year 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 2030 Buildout 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 2 0 1 2 0 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 2 0 1 2 0 Flower Street / Chapman Avenue Orange Existing Conditions 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 3 0 1 3 0 2015-Interim Year 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 3 0 1 3 0 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 3 0 1 3 0 2030 Buildout 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 3 0 1 3 0 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 3 0 1 3 0 Harbor Boulevard / Chapman Avenue Anaheim Existing Conditions 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 2015-Interim Year 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 2030 Buildout 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 I-5 Southbound Ramps / Chapman Avenue Orange Existing Conditions 2 0 1 2 0 1 0 3.5 1.5 2 3 0 2015-Interim Year 2 0 1 2 0 1 0 3.5 1.5 2 3 0 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 2 0 1 2 0 1 0 3.5 1.5 2 3 0 2030 Buildout 2 0 1 2 0 1 0 3.5 1.5 2 3 0 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 2 0 1 2 0 1 0 3.5 1.5 2 3 0 SR-57 Northbound Ramps / Chapman Avenue Orange Existing Conditions 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 2 F 0 3 F 2015-Interim Year 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 2 F 0 3 F 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 2 F 0 3 F 2030 Buildout 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 2 F 0 3 F 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 2 F 0 3 F SR-57 Southbound Ramps / Chapman Avenue Orange Existing Conditions 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 3 0 1 2 F 2015-Interim Year 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 3 0 1 2 F 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 3 0 1 2 F 2030 Buildout 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 3 0 1 2 F 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 3 0 1 2 F Euclid Street / Ball Road Anaheim Existing Conditions 2 3 0 2 3 0 2 3 0 2 3 0 2015-Interim Year 2 3 0 2 3 0 2 3 0 2 3 0 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 2 3 0 2 3 0 2 3 0 2 3 0 2030 Buildout 2 3 0 2 3 0 2 3 0 2 3 0 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 2 3 0 2 3 0 2 3 0 2 3 0 Walnut Street / Cerritos Avenue Anaheim Existing Conditions 0 2 0 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 2015-Interim Year 0 2 0 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 0 2 0 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 2030 Buildout 0 2 0 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 0 2 0 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 Disneyland Drive / I-5 Southbound Off Ramp Anaheim Existing Conditions 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 3 0 1 2015-Interim Year 0 2 F 0 2 0 0 0 0 3 0 1 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 0 2 F 0 2 0 0 0 0 3 0 1 2030 Buildout 0 2 F 0 2 0 0 0 0 3 0 1 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 0 2 F 0 2 0 0 0 0 3 0 1 Disneyland Drive/ Magic Way Anaheim Existing Conditions 2 2 0 0 2 1 2 0 2 0 0 0 2015-Interim Year 2 2 0 0 2 1 2 0 2 0 0 0 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 2 2 0 0 2 1 2 0 2 0 0 0 2030 Buildout 2 2 0 0 2 1 2 0 2 0 0 0 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 2 2 0 0 2 1 2 0 2 0 0 0 69 58 59 60 61 62 64 65 66 67 68 57 70 63 Not Applicable ---PAGE BREAK--- L T R L T R L T R L T R Eastbound Westbound ID Intersection Jurisdiction Northbound Southbound Ox Road / Global Way (Cast) / Ball Road Anaheim Existing Conditions 2 2 0 2 0 1 1 3 1 2 3 0 2015-Interim Year 1.33 0.34 1.33 1.33 0.34 0.33 1 3 1 2 3 0 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 1.33 0.34 1.33 1.33 0.34 0.33 1 3 1 2 3 0 2030 Buildout 2 2 0 2 0 1 1 3 1 2 3 0 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 2 2 0 2 0 1 1 3 1 2 3 0 Convention Center/ Katella Avenue Anaheim Existing Conditions 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 2 3 0 2015-Interim Year 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 2 3 0 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 2 3 0 2030 Buildout 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 2 4 0 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 2 4 0 Harbor Boulevard / Lincoln Avenue Anaheim Existing Conditions 1 3 0 1 3 1 1 2 0 1 2 1 2015-Interim Year 1 3 0 1 3 1 1 2 0 1 2 1 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 1 3 0 1 3 1 1 2 0 1 2 1 2030 Buildout 1 3 0 1 3 1 1 2 0 1 2 1 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 1 3 1 1 3 1 1 2 0 1 2 1 Harbor Boulevard / Broadway Anaheim Existing Conditions 1 2 1 1 2 0 1 2 1 2 2 1 2015-Interim Year 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 2030 Buildout 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 Harbor Boulevard / Manchester Avenue Anaheim Existing Conditions 1 3 0 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2015-Interim Year 1 3 0 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 1 3 0 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2030 Buildout 1 3 0 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 1 3 0 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 Anaheim Boulevard / Lincoln Avenue Anaheim Existing Conditions 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 3 0 1 3 0 2015-Interim Year 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 3 0 1 3 0 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 3 0 1 3 0 2030 Buildout 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 3 0 1 3 0 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 3 0 1 3 0 Anaheim Boulevard / Broadway Anaheim Existing Conditions 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 2015-Interim Year 1 3 0 1 2 0 1 2 1 1 2 1 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 0 2 3 1 2030 Buildout 1 3 0 1 2 0 1 2 1 1 2 1 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 1 3 0 1 2 0 1 2 1 1 2 1 Olive Street / Lincoln Avenue Anaheim Existing Conditions 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 0 1 3 0 2015-Interim Year 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 3 0 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 3 0 2030 Buildout 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 3 0 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 3 0 Flore Street / West Street / Ball Road Anaheim Existing Conditions 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 3 0 1 3 0 2015-Interim Year 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 3 0 1 3 0 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 3 0 1 3 0 2030 Buildout 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 3 0 1 3 0 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 3 0 1 3 0 West Street / Orangewood Avenue Anaheim Existing Conditions 1 2 0 1 2 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 2015-Interim Year 1 2 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 1 2 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 2030 Buildout 1 2 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 1 2 0 1 2 0 0 2 0 1 1 1 Struck Avenue / Katella Avenue Orange Existing Conditions 1.5 0 0.5 0 0 0 0 3 1 1 3 0 2015-Interim Year 1.5 0 0.5 0 0 0 0 3 1 1 3 0 2015-Interim Year With Mitigation 1.5 0 0.5 0 0 0 0 3 1 1 3 0 2030 Buildout 1.5 0 0.5 0 0 0 0 3 1 1 3 0 2030 Buildout With Mitigation 1.5 0 0.5 0 0 0 0 3 1 1 3 0 Source: City of Anaheim F - Free right-turn lane 76 77 78 79 80 81 71 72 73 74 75 ---PAGE BREAK--- ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Summary of Roadway Classification for Arterial Segments Existing 2015 No Project 2015 With Project 2030 No Project 2030 With Project A-1 Anaheim Boulevard Katella Avenue I-5 Freeway Anaheim 6D 6D 6D 6D 6D A-2 Anaheim Boulevard I-5 Freeway Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 6D 6D 6D 6D 6D A-3 Anaheim Boulevard Cerritos Avenue Ball Road Anaheim 4D 4D 4D 6D 6D A-4 Ball Road Euclid Street Walnut Street Anaheim 6D 6D 6D 6D 6D A-5 Ball Road Walnut Street Disneyland Drive Anaheim 6D 6D 6D 6D 6D A-6 Ball Road Disneyland Drive Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 6D 6D 6D 6D 6D A-7 Ball Road Harbor Boulevard Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim 6D 6D 6D 6D 6D A-8 Ball Road Anaheim Boulevard East Street Anaheim 6D 6D 6D 6D 6D A-9 Ball Road East Street State College Boulevard Anaheim 6D 6D 6D 6D 6D A-10 Ball Road State College Boulevard Sunkist Street Anaheim 4D 4D 4D 6D 6D A-11 Ball Road Sunkist Street SR-57 Freeway Anaheim 6D 6D 6D 6D 6D A-12 Ball Road SR-57 Freeway Main Street Orange 6D 6D 6D 6D 6D A-13 Clementine Street Manchester Avenue Disney Way Anaheim 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U A-14 Clementine Street Disney Way Katella Avenue Anaheim 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U A-15 Clementine Street Katella Avenue Gene Autry Way Anaheim NA NA NA 4U 4U A-16 Clementine Street Gene Autry Way Orangewood Avenue Anaheim NA NA NA 4U 4U A-17 Convention Way/Gene Autry Harbor Boulevard Clementine Street Anaheim NA NA NA 6D 6D A-18 Convention Way/Gene Autry Clementine Street Haster Street Anaheim NA NA NA 6D 6D A-19 Convention Way/Gene Autry Haster Street I-5 Freeway Anaheim NA 6D 6D 6D 6D A-20 Disney Way Harbor Boulevard Clementine Street Anaheim 6D 6D 6D 6D 6D A-21 Disney Way Clementine Street Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim 6D 6D 6D 6D 6D A-22 Disneyland Drive Katella Avenue Magic Way Anaheim 4D 4D 4D 4D 4D A-23 Disneyland Drive Magic Way Ball Road Anaheim 4D 4D 4D 4D 4D A-24 Disneyland Drive Ball Road Manchester Avenue Anaheim 6D 6D 6D 6D 6D A-25 Harbor Boulevard Wilken Way Orangewood Avenue Anaheim 6D 6D 6D 6D 6D A-26 Harbor Boulevard Orangewood Avenue Convention Way Anaheim 6D 6D 6D 6D 6D A-27 Harbor Boulevard Convention Way Katella Avenue Anaheim 6D 6D 6D 6D 6D A-28 Harbor Boulevard Katella Avenue Disney Way Anaheim 6D 6D 6D 6D 6D A-29 Harbor Boulevard Disney Way Manchester Avenue Anaheim 6D 6D 6D 6D 6D A-30 Harbor Boulevard I-5 Freeway Ball Road Anaheim 8D 8D 8D 8D 8D A-31 Haster Street Orangewood Avenue Gene Autry Way Anaheim 4U 4U 4U 6D 6D A-32 Haster Street Gene Autry Way Katella Avenue Anaheim 4U 4U 4U 6D 6D A-33 Katella Avenue Ninth Street Walnut Street Anaheim 6D 6D 6D 6D 6D A-34 Katella Avenue Walnut Street Disneyland Drive Anaheim 6D 6D 6D 6D 6D A-35 Katella Avenue Disneyland Drive Hotel Way Anaheim 6D 6D 6D 8D 8D A-36 Katella Avenue Hotel Way Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 6D 6D 6D 8D 8D A-37 Katella Avenue Harbor Boulevard Clementine Street Anaheim 6D 6D 6D 8D 8D A-38 Katella Avenue Clementine Street Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim 6D 6D 6D 8D 8D A-39 Katella Avenue Anaheim Boulevard Manchester Avenue Anaheim 6D 6D 6D 8D 8D A-40a Katella Avenue Manchester Avenue Anaheim Way Anaheim 6D 6D 6D 6D 6D A-40b Katella Avenue Anaheim Way Lewis Street Anaheim 6D 6D 6D 8D 8D A-40c Katella Avenue Lewis Street State College Boulevard Anaheim 6D 6D 6D 8D 8D A-41 Katella Avenue State College Boulevard Sportstown Anaheim 6D 6D 6D 8D 8D A-42 Katella Avenue Sportstown Howell Avenue Anaheim 6D 6D 6D 6D 6D A-43 Katella Avenue Howell Avenue SR-57 Freeway Anaheim 6D 6D 6D 6D 6D A-44 Katella Avenue SR-57 Freeway Main Street Orange 6D 6D 6D 6D 6D A-45 Manchester Avenue Clementine Street Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 2U 2U 2U 4U 4U A-46 Orangewood Avenue West Street Harbor Boulevard Anaheim 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U A-47 Orangewood Avenue Harbor Boulevard Clementine Street Anaheim 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U A-48 Orangewood Avenue Clementine Street Haster Street Anaheim 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U A-49 Orangewood Avenue Haster Street Manchester Avenue Anaheim 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U A-50 Orangewood Avenue Manchester Avenue State College Boulevard Anaheim/orange 6D 6D 6D 6D 6D A-51 Orangewood Avenue State College Boulevard Rampart Street Anaheim 4U 4U 4U 6D 6D A-52 Orangewood Avenue Rampart Street SR-57 Freeway Anaheim/orange 4U 4U 4U 6D 6D A-53 Orangewood Avenue SR-57 Freeway Eckhoff Street Orange 4D 4D 4D 6D 6D A-54 Orangewood Avenue Eckhoff Street Main Street Orange 4D 4D 4D 6D 6D A-55 Walnut Street Katella Avenue Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 4D 4D 4D 4D 4D A-56 Walnut Street Cerritos Avenue Ball Road Anaheim 4D 4D 4D 4D 4D A-57 West Street Orangewood Avenue Katella Avenue Anaheim 4U 4U 4U 4U 4U A-58 Chapman Avenue State College Boulevard SR-57 Freeway Orange 6D 6D 6D 6D 6D A-59 Chapman Avenue SR-57 Freeway Main Street Orange 6D 6D 6D 6D 6D A-60 State College Boulevard Chapman Avenue I-5 Freeway Orange 8D 8D 8D 8D 8D A-61 State College Boulevard I-5 Freeway Orangewood Avenue Orange 8D 8D 8D 8D 8D A-62 State College Boulevard Orangewood Avenue Gene Autry Way Anaheim 6D 6D 6D 8D 8D A-63 State College Boulevard Gene Autry Way Katella Avenue Anaheim 6D 6D 6D 6D 6D A-64 State College Boulevard Katella Avenue Howell Avenue Anaheim 6D 6D 6D 6D 6D A-65 State College Boulevard Howell Avenue Cerritos Avenue Anaheim 6D 6D 6D 6D 6D A-66 State College Boulevard Cerritos Avenue Ball Road Anaheim 6D 6D 6D 6D 6D U - Undivided D - Divided ID Arterial From To Roadway Classification Jurisdiction ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No.14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report – Technical Appendices Appendix C-1 Caltrans Ramp Termini Analysis Worksheets under Existing Conditions ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 9: I-5 NB Ramps & Harbor Boulevard Existing - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 2 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 64 694 827 0 45 1861 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.5 5.5 5.0 4.7 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.86 Frt 0.87 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3013 1386 4893 1703 6166 Flt Permitted 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3013 1386 4893 1703 6166 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 0.98 0.98 0.96 0.96 Adj. Flow (vph) 68 738 844 0 47 1939 RTOR Reduction (vph) 295 295 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 142 74 844 0 47 1939 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type custom Prot Protected Phases 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 Actuated Green, G 8.8 8.8 41.5 4.5 50.7 Effective Green, g 8.8 8.8 41.5 4.5 50.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.13 0.59 0.06 0.72 Clearance Time 5.5 5.5 5.0 4.7 5.0 Vehicle Extension 2.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 109 4466 v/s Ratio Prot 0.17 0.03 c0.31 v/s Ratio Perm 0.05 c0.05 v/c Ratio 0.38 0.43 0.29 0.43 0.43 Uniform Delay, d1 28.1 28.3 7.0 31.5 3.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.09 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 0.6 0.3 1.0 0.3 Delay 28.3 28.9 7.9 32.5 4.2 Level of Service C C A C A Approach Delay 28.6 7.9 4.9 Approach LOS C A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 10.8 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.43 Actuated Cycle Length 70.0 Sum of lost time 10.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 10: I-5 SB Ramps & Harbor Boulevard Existing - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 3 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 248 296 59 776 823 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.5 4.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.86 0.91 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 1524 1703 6166 4893 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 1524 1703 6166 4893 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.98 0.98 0.97 0.97 Adj. Flow (vph) 261 312 60 792 848 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 261 312 60 792 848 0 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Free Prot Protected Phases 4 5 2 6 Permitted Phases Free Actuated Green, G 9.9 70.0 4.9 49.6 40.5 Effective Green, g 9.9 70.0 4.9 49.6 40.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 1.00 0.07 0.71 0.58 Clearance Time 5.5 4.2 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 2.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 467 1524 119 4369 2831 v/s Ratio Prot c0.08 c0.04 0.13 c0.17 v/s Ratio Perm 0.20 v/c Ratio 0.56 0.20 0.50 0.18 0.30 Uniform Delay, d1 28.0 0.0 31.4 3.4 7.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.86 Incremental Delay, d2 0.8 0.3 1.2 0.1 0.3 Delay 28.8 0.3 32.6 3.5 6.7 Level of Service C A C A A Approach Delay 13.3 5.6 6.7 Approach LOS B A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 7.9 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.36 Actuated Cycle Length 70.0 Sum of lost time 14.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 40.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 17: Disney Way & I-5 SB Ramps Existing - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 5 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 103 12 17 243 0 18 0 20 300 5 144 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.91 0.95 Frt 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4819 1703 4893 1703 1524 1618 1541 1447 Flt Permitted 1.00 0.67 1.00 0.66 1.00 0.95 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4819 1195 4893 1175 1524 1618 1541 1447 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.87 0.87 0.87 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 116 13 21 304 0 25 0 28 345 6 166 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 0 4 122 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 124 0 21 304 0 25 0 2 186 178 27 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm custom custom Split Perm Protected Phases 2 6 4 4 Permitted Phases 6 3 3 4 Actuated Green, G 52.7 52.7 52.7 6.1 6.1 16.2 16.2 16.2 Effective Green, g 52.7 52.7 52.7 6.1 6.1 16.2 16.2 16.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.59 0.59 0.59 0.07 0.07 0.18 0.18 0.18 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2822 700 2865 80 103 291 277 260 v/s Ratio Prot 0.03 c0.06 0.11 c0.12 v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 c0.02 0.00 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.04 0.03 0.11 0.31 0.02 0.64 0.64 0.10 Uniform Delay, d1 7.9 7.9 8.2 40.0 39.2 34.2 34.2 30.8 Progression Factor 1.30 1.60 1.66 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.2 0.1 4.6 5.0 0.2 Delay 10.3 12.6 13.7 42.2 39.2 38.8 39.2 31.0 Level of Service B B B D D D D C Approach Delay 10.3 13.6 40.6 36.7 Approach LOS B B D D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 26.2 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.24 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 39.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 20: I-5 NB Ramps & Anaheim Boulevard Existing - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 7 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 0 0 24 17 378 205 784 0 0 1091 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.91 0.91 Frt 0.88 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 2845 1386 3303 4893 4893 Flt Permitted 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 2845 1386 3303 4893 4893 Peak-hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.93 0.93 0.93 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 29 20 450 216 825 0 0 1173 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 154 154 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 0 120 71 216 825 0 0 1173 0 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Protected Phases 8 5 2 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 Actuated Green, G 10.6 10.6 19.8 69.4 45.4 Effective Green, g 10.6 10.6 19.8 69.4 45.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.12 0.22 0.77 0.50 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 2.2 2.2 2.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 335 [PHONE REDACTED] 2468 v/s Ratio Prot c0.07 0.17 c0.24 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 c0.05 v/c Ratio 0.36 0.44 0.30 0.22 0.48 Uniform Delay, d1 36.6 36.9 29.3 2.8 14.5 Progression Factor 0.60 0.61 0.97 2.68 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 0.9 0.1 0.1 0.7 Delay 22.3 23.6 28.4 7.7 15.2 Level of Service C C C A B Approach Delay 0.0 22.9 12.0 15.2 Approach LOS A C B B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 15.4 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.42 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 14.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 44.6% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 21: Disney Way & Anaheim Boulevard Existing - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 8 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 269 139 25 0 151 8 20 763 7 421 570 51 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.2 5.0 5.0 4.7 6.0 5.2 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.86 0.91 1.00 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 0.98 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 6023 4858 1703 4887 3303 4833 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 6023 4858 1703 4887 3303 4833 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.93 0.93 0.93 Adj. Flow (vph) 274 142 26 0 176 9 21 812 7 453 613 55 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 18 0 0 6 0 0 1 0 0 9 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 274 150 0 0 179 0 21 818 0 453 659 0 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Prot Prot Prot Protected Phases 7 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G 11.8 26.0 10.0 3.0 21.1 26.7 45.3 Effective Green, g 11.8 26.0 10.0 3.0 21.1 26.7 45.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.29 0.11 0.03 0.23 0.30 0.50 Clearance Time 4.2 5.0 5.0 4.7 6.0 5.2 6.0 Vehicle Extension 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.5 4.0 2.2 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 433 1740 540 57 1146 980 2433 v/s Ratio Prot c0.08 0.02 c0.04 0.01 c0.17 c0.14 0.14 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 0.63 0.09 0.33 0.37 0.71 0.46 0.27 Uniform Delay, d1 37.0 23.3 36.9 42.6 31.7 25.8 12.9 Progression Factor 0.67 0.89 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.67 2.31 Incremental Delay, d2 2.1 0.0 0.1 2.9 3.8 0.2 0.2 Delay 27.0 20.8 36.7 45.5 35.5 43.2 29.9 Level of Service C C D D D D C Approach Delay 24.7 36.7 35.7 35.3 Approach LOS C D D D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 33.7 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.55 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 20.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 59.9% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 25: Katella Avenue & Manchester Avenue Existing - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 10 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 883 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 55 0 483 22 91 16 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.97 0.91 0.95 0.91 0.95 0.97 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 1524 3303 4893 1618 1390 1447 3303 3406 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 1524 3303 4893 1618 1387 1447 3303 3406 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.84 0.84 0.84 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 920 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 74 0 653 26 108 19 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 414 0 0 0 0 181 200 0 0 12 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 920 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 67 153 126 26 108 7 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Prot Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 3 8 7 4 Permitted Phases 2 8 4 Actuated Green, G 28.7 28.7 10.8 43.7 5.9 44.6 38.7 2.8 35.6 35.6 Effective Green, g 28.7 28.7 10.8 43.7 5.9 44.6 38.7 2.8 35.6 35.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.29 0.29 0.11 0.44 0.06 0.45 0.39 0.03 0.36 0.36 Clearance Time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1404 [PHONE REDACTED] 95 619 560 92 1213 543 v/s Ratio Prot 0.19 0.04 c0.27 c0.04 c0.01 0.01 0.03 v/s Ratio Perm 0.11 c0.10 0.09 0.00 v/c Ratio 0.66 0.38 0.36 0.61 0.71 0.25 0.23 0.28 0.09 0.01 Uniform Delay, d1 31.3 28.5 41.4 21.6 46.2 17.2 20.6 47.6 21.4 20.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.4 2.5 0.2 1.3 17.6 0.1 0.1 1.7 0.0 0.0 Delay 33.7 31.1 41.6 22.9 63.8 17.3 20.7 49.3 21.4 20.8 Level of Service C C D C E B C D C C Approach Delay 32.7 24.5 23.1 26.1 Approach LOS C C C C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 27.5 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.47 Actuated Cycle Length 100.0 Sum of lost time 14.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.3% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 26: Katella Avenue & Anaheim Way Existing - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 11 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 39 1335 0 0 896 48 508 361 308 0 0 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.95 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 4893 5803 1234 1379 5442 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 4893 5803 1234 1379 5442 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.91 0.91 0.91 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 41 1405 0 0 933 50 558 397 338 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 1 29 0 6 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 41 1405 0 0 937 16 279 1008 0 0 0 0 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Prot Perm Perm Protected Phases 5 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 6 8 Actuated Green, G 3.2 38.0 31.1 31.1 40.0 40.0 Effective Green, g 3.2 38.0 31.1 31.1 40.0 40.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.04 0.42 0.35 0.35 0.44 0.44 Clearance Time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension 2.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 2.2 2.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 117 2066 2005 [PHONE REDACTED] v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 c0.29 0.16 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 c0.20 0.19 v/c Ratio 0.35 0.68 0.47 0.04 0.46 0.42 Uniform Delay, d1 42.4 21.1 23.0 19.5 17.4 17.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.39 0.13 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.7 1.8 0.7 0.1 2.4 0.5 Delay 43.0 22.9 9.7 2.7 19.8 17.6 Level of Service D C A A B B Approach Delay 23.5 9.3 18.1 0.0 Approach LOS C A B A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 17.9 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.56 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 50.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 32: Gene Autry Way & I-5 HOV Ramps Existing - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 13 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 18 12 0 13 64 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.88 0.97 Frt 0.98 0.85 0.85 1.00 Flt Protected 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (prot) 3461 1470 2842 3502 Flt Permitted 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (perm) 3461 1470 2842 3502 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.72 0.72 1.00 0.64 0.79 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 25 17 0 20 81 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 4 12 0 16 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 25 1 0 4 81 0 Heavy Vehicles 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type Perm custom custom Protected Phases 3 Permitted Phases 3 2 2 Actuated Green, G 1.3 1.3 3.4 3.4 Effective Green, g 1.3 1.3 3.4 3.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.08 0.08 0.20 0.20 Clearance Time 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 269 114 579 713 v/s Ratio Prot c0.01 v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 0.00 c0.02 v/c Ratio 0.09 0.01 0.01 0.11 Uniform Delay, d1 7.2 7.1 5.3 5.4 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.1 Delay 7.4 7.1 5.3 5.5 Level of Service A A A A Approach Delay 7.3 5.3 5.5 Approach LOS A A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 6.0 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.11 Actuated Cycle Length 16.7 Sum of lost time 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 20.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 41: Anaheim Way & State College Boulevard Existing - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 15 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 0 0 167 90 259 8 565 0 16 1433 11 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.88 0.97 0.86 1.00 0.86 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1550 3186 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1550 3186 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 180 97 278 8 589 0 17 1508 12 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 244 0 0 0 0 0 4 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 90 187 34 8 589 0 17 1508 8 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Prot Perm Protected Phases 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 6 Actuated Green, G 13.3 13.3 13.3 1.3 73.3 4.7 76.9 76.9 Effective Green, g 13.3 13.3 13.3 1.3 73.3 4.7 76.9 76.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.01 0.67 0.04 0.70 0.70 Clearance Time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 187 385 324 39 4109 73 4311 1065 v/s Ratio Prot 0.00 0.10 c0.01 c0.24 v/s Ratio Perm 0.06 0.06 0.01 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.48 0.49 0.10 0.21 0.14 0.23 0.35 0.01 Uniform Delay, d1 45.1 45.2 43.0 53.8 6.8 50.9 6.6 5.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.80 0.33 1.05 0.64 0.25 Incremental Delay, d2 1.9 1.0 0.1 2.6 0.1 1.6 0.2 0.0 Delay 47.1 46.1 43.2 45.7 2.3 55.3 4.5 1.3 Level of Service D D D D A E A A Approach Delay 0.0 44.8 2.9 5.0 Approach LOS A D A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 12.8 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.38 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 18.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 36.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 42: I-5 SB Ramps & State College Boulevard Existing - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 16 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 64 292 348 0 0 0 0 721 8 0 1422 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.88 0.81 0.86 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1618 1701 2682 7248 6166 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1618 1701 2682 7248 6166 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.97 0.97 0.97 Adj. Flow (vph) 71 324 387 0 0 0 0 751 8 0 1466 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 15 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 64 331 372 0 0 0 0 758 0 0 1466 0 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 Actuated Green, G 28.5 28.5 28.5 65.5 65.5 Effective Green, g 28.5 28.5 28.5 65.5 65.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.60 0.60 Clearance Time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Vehicle Extension 2.5 2.5 2.5 4.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 419 [PHONE REDACTED] 3672 v/s Ratio Prot 0.10 c0.24 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 0.19 0.14 v/c Ratio 0.15 0.75 0.54 0.18 0.40 Uniform Delay, d1 31.4 37.5 35.1 10.1 11.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.32 0.66 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 6.7 0.6 0.1 0.3 Delay 31.6 44.2 35.7 13.3 8.1 Level of Service C D D B A Approach Delay 38.9 0.0 13.3 8.1 Approach LOS D A B A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 17.4 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.51 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 46.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 48: Ball Road & SR-57 NB Ramps Existing - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 22 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 1068 0 0 643 376 473 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1703 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1703 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Adj. Flow (vph) 1148 0 0 684 400 503 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 23 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1148 0 0 684 400 480 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 48.2 48.2 32.2 32.2 Effective Green, g 48.2 48.2 32.2 32.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.54 0.54 0.36 0.36 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Vehicle Extension 3.5 3.5 1.5 1.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2620 2620 609 545 v/s Ratio Prot c0.23 0.14 0.23 v/s Ratio Perm c0.31 v/c Ratio 0.44 0.26 0.66 0.88 Uniform Delay, d1 12.7 11.3 24.3 27.1 Progression Factor 0.87 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 0.2 2.0 14.9 Delay 11.4 11.5 26.2 42.0 Level of Service B B C D Approach Delay 11.4 11.5 35.0 Approach LOS B B D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 19.3 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.62 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 9.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 57.9% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 49: Ball Road & SR-57 SB Ramps Existing - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 23 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1008 781 0 559 953 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.96 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1656 1447 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1656 1447 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.95 0.95 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1039 822 0 608 1036 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 17 18 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1039 822 0 840 769 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 31.0 31.0 49.4 49.4 Effective Green, g 31.0 31.0 49.4 49.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.34 0.34 0.55 0.55 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Vehicle Extension 3.5 3.5 1.5 1.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1685 1685 909 794 v/s Ratio Prot c0.21 0.17 0.51 v/s Ratio Perm c0.53 v/c Ratio 0.62 0.49 0.92 0.97 Uniform Delay, d1 24.6 23.2 18.6 19.6 Progression Factor 1.25 0.88 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 1.0 14.5 24.1 Delay 30.9 21.4 33.1 43.7 Level of Service C C C D Approach Delay 30.9 21.4 38.2 Approach LOS C C D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 32.1 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.83 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 9.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 77.9% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 50: Katella Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Existing - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 24 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 859 0 0 954 334 404 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.81 0.86 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 7259 6166 3196 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 7259 6166 3196 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 886 0 0 984 363 439 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 49 49 Lane Group Flow (vph) 886 0 0 984 498 206 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 27.8 27.8 12.2 12.2 Effective Green, g 27.8 27.8 12.2 12.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.56 0.56 0.24 0.24 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 1.5 1.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 4036 3428 780 338 v/s Ratio Prot 0.12 c0.16 c0.16 v/s Ratio Perm 0.15 v/c Ratio 0.22 0.29 0.64 0.61 Uniform Delay, d1 5.6 5.9 16.9 16.8 Progression Factor 1.40 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.2 1.3 2.1 Delay 8.0 6.1 18.2 18.9 Level of Service A A B B Approach Delay 8.0 6.1 18.4 Approach LOS A A B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 10.4 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.39 Actuated Cycle Length 50.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 35.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 51: Katella Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Existing - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 25 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 807 925 0 324 544 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.93 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 3155 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 3155 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.98 0.98 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 823 964 0 338 567 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 43 43 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 823 964 0 573 246 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 7 Permitted Phases 7 Actuated Green, G 27.0 27.0 13.0 13.0 Effective Green, g 27.0 27.0 13.0 13.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.54 0.54 0.26 0.26 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 1.2 1.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2642 2642 820 360 v/s Ratio Prot 0.17 c0.20 c0.18 v/s Ratio Perm 0.18 v/c Ratio 0.31 0.36 0.70 0.68 Uniform Delay, d1 6.4 6.6 16.7 16.6 Progression Factor 1.00 1.10 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 0.4 2.1 4.2 Delay 6.7 7.6 18.8 20.9 Level of Service A A B C Approach Delay 6.7 7.6 19.5 Approach LOS A A B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 11.3 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.47 Actuated Cycle Length 50.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 48.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 52: Orangewood Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Existing - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 26 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 1086 0 0 760 118 512 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3406 4893 3072 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3406 4893 3072 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.89 0.89 0.83 0.83 0.88 0.88 Adj. Flow (vph) 1220 0 0 916 134 582 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 46 46 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1220 0 0 916 379 245 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type custom Protected Phases 2 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 Actuated Green, G 84.2 84.2 25.8 25.8 Effective Green, g 84.2 84.2 25.8 25.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.70 0.70 0.22 0.22 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2390 3433 660 298 v/s Ratio Prot c0.36 0.19 v/s Ratio Perm 0.12 c0.18 v/c Ratio 0.51 0.27 0.57 0.82 Uniform Delay, d1 8.3 6.6 42.2 44.9 Progression Factor 0.57 0.33 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.6 0.2 0.8 15.7 Delay 5.3 2.3 42.9 60.6 Level of Service A A D E Approach Delay 5.3 2.3 50.1 Approach LOS A A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 15.6 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.58 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 59.5% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 53: Orangewood Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Existing - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 27 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1116 41 163 495 0 0 0 0 306 0 401 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.91 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.89 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.99 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3260 1386 1703 3406 1618 1432 1447 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.99 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3260 1386 1703 3406 1618 1432 1447 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.89 0.89 0.89 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.91 0.91 0.91 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1240 46 183 556 0 0 0 0 336 0 441 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 90 201 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1245 26 183 556 0 0 0 0 269 167 50 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Prot Perm Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 4 Permitted Phases 2 4 4 Actuated Green, G 61.9 61.9 19.8 85.9 24.1 24.1 24.1 Effective Green, g 61.9 61.9 19.8 85.9 24.1 24.1 24.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.52 0.52 0.16 0.72 0.20 0.20 0.20 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 1.7 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1682 [PHONE REDACTED] 325 288 291 v/s Ratio Prot c0.38 c0.11 0.16 v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 c0.17 0.12 0.03 v/c Ratio 0.74 0.04 0.65 0.23 0.83 0.58 0.17 Uniform Delay, d1 22.8 14.3 46.9 5.8 46.0 43.4 39.7 Progression Factor 0.13 0.00 0.90 0.61 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.7 0.1 4.0 0.2 15.1 1.9 0.1 Delay 4.6 0.1 46.3 3.7 61.0 45.3 39.8 Level of Service A A D A E D D Approach Delay 4.5 14.3 0.0 49.0 Approach LOS A B A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 19.4 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.74 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 14.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 64.7% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 64: Chapman Avenue & Frontage Road Existing - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 32 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 866 913 96 829 0 609 0 35 211 0 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.81 0.81 0.97 0.91 0.97 1.00 0.97 Frt 0.95 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (prot) 5507 1234 3303 4893 3303 1524 3303 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (perm) 5507 1234 3303 4893 3303 1524 3303 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.94 0.94 0.94 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 884 932 102 882 0 634 0 36 224 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 77 211 0 0 0 0 0 27 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1273 255 102 882 0 634 0 9 224 0 0 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Prot custom custom custom custom Protected Phases 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 2 8 8 4 4 Actuated Green, G 60.3 60.3 8.1 73.4 26.6 26.6 26.6 Effective Green, g 60.3 60.3 8.1 73.4 26.6 26.6 26.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.55 0.55 0.07 0.67 0.24 0.24 0.24 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3019 [PHONE REDACTED] 799 369 799 v/s Ratio Prot c0.23 c0.03 0.18 v/s Ratio Perm 0.21 c0.19 0.01 0.07 v/c Ratio 0.42 0.38 0.42 0.27 0.79 0.02 0.28 Uniform Delay, d1 14.6 14.2 48.7 7.4 39.1 31.8 33.9 Progression Factor 1.96 10.01 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.96 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 1.1 1.2 0.2 5.4 0.0 0.2 Delay 28.9 142.9 49.9 7.6 44.6 31.8 32.7 Level of Service C F D A D C C Approach Delay 58.1 12.0 43.9 32.7 Approach LOS E B D C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 41.7 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.53 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 50.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 65: Chapman Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Existing - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 33 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 984 0 0 1091 0 42 0 108 0 0 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.91 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3406 4893 1703 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3406 4893 1703 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.88 0.88 0.88 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1070 0 0 1125 0 48 0 123 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 60 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1070 0 0 1125 0 48 0 63 0 0 0 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Prot custom custom custom custom Protected Phases 7 4 8 Permitted Phases 2 2 6 6 Actuated Green, G 39.8 39.8 51.2 51.2 Effective Green, g 39.8 39.8 51.2 51.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.40 0.40 0.51 0.51 Clearance Time 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1356 1947 872 780 v/s Ratio Prot c0.31 0.23 v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 c0.04 v/c Ratio 0.79 0.58 0.06 0.08 Uniform Delay, d1 26.4 23.5 12.3 12.4 Progression Factor 0.53 0.97 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.2 0.3 0.1 0.2 Delay 16.1 23.0 12.4 12.6 Level of Service B C B B Approach Delay 16.1 23.0 12.6 0.0 Approach LOS B C B A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 19.1 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.39 Actuated Cycle Length 100.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 41.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 66: Chapman Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Existing - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 34 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 3 1032 143 86 626 0 17 5 16 260 59 360 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.0 4.5 4.0 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1703 4804 1703 3406 1725 1524 1722 1524 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1703 4804 1703 3406 1725 1524 1722 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.84 0.84 0.84 Adj. Flow (vph) 3 1147 159 92 673 0 25 7 23 310 70 429 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 0 0 203 Lane Group Flow (vph) 3 1288 0 92 673 0 0 32 2 0 380 227 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Prot Prot Split Perm Split Perm Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 8 8 7 7 Permitted Phases 8 7 Actuated Green, G 1.0 35.1 7.4 41.5 7.5 7.5 32.5 32.5 Effective Green, g 1.0 35.1 7.4 41.5 7.5 7.5 32.5 32.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.01 0.35 0.07 0.42 0.08 0.08 0.32 0.32 Clearance Time 4.0 4.5 4.0 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 4.0 1.5 4.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 17 1686 126 1413 129 114 560 495 v/s Ratio Prot 0.00 c0.27 c0.05 0.20 c0.02 c0.22 v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 0.15 v/c Ratio 0.18 0.76 0.73 0.48 0.25 0.02 0.68 0.46 Uniform Delay, d1 49.1 28.8 45.3 21.3 43.6 42.8 29.2 26.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.02 2.06 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 4.9 3.4 15.3 1.0 4.5 0.2 6.5 3.0 Delay 54.0 32.1 61.7 44.9 48.1 43.1 35.7 29.8 Level of Service D C E D D D D C Approach Delay 32.2 46.9 46.0 32.6 Approach LOS C D D C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 36.4 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.68 Actuated Cycle Length 100.0 Sum of lost time 17.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 62.9% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 69: I-5 SB Off-ramp & Disneyland Drive Existing - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 35 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 801 14 125 0 0 447 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.6 5.6 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.94 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4802 1524 3406 3406 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4802 1524 3406 3406 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 843 15 132 0 0 471 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 10 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 843 5 132 0 0 471 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 4 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G 12.2 12.2 12.4 12.4 Effective Green, g 12.2 12.2 12.4 12.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.35 0.35 0.36 0.36 Clearance Time 5.6 5.6 4.6 4.6 Vehicle Extension 2.5 2.5 4.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1683 534 1214 1214 v/s Ratio Prot c0.18 0.04 c0.14 v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 v/c Ratio 0.50 0.01 0.11 0.39 Uniform Delay, d1 8.9 7.4 7.5 8.4 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.3 Delay 9.1 7.4 7.6 8.6 Level of Service A A A A Approach Delay 9.0 7.6 8.6 Approach LOS A A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 8.8 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.44 Actuated Cycle Length 34.8 Sum of lost time 10.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 69.1% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 9: I-5 NB Ramps & Harbor Boulevard Existing - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 2 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 90 839 995 0 53 1461 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.5 5.5 5.0 4.7 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.86 Frt 0.88 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3021 1386 4893 1703 6166 Flt Permitted 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3021 1386 4893 1703 6166 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 0.98 0.98 0.96 0.96 Adj. Flow (vph) 96 893 1015 0 55 1522 RTOR Reduction (vph) 259 259 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 0 55 1522 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type custom Prot Protected Phases 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 Actuated Green, G 12.1 12.1 37.9 4.8 47.4 Effective Green, g 12.1 12.1 37.9 4.8 47.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 0.17 0.54 0.07 0.68 Clearance Time 5.5 5.5 5.0 4.7 5.0 Vehicle Extension 2.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 117 4175 v/s Ratio Prot 0.21 0.03 c0.25 v/s Ratio Perm 0.09 c0.13 v/c Ratio 0.86dr 0.78 0.38 0.47 0.36 Uniform Delay, d1 26.4 27.7 9.3 31.4 4.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.6 13.5 0.4 1.1 0.2 Delay 27.1 41.2 8.9 32.5 5.1 Level of Service C D A C A Approach Delay 33.4 8.9 6.0 Approach LOS C A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 14.4 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.45 Actuated Cycle Length 70.0 Sum of lost time 10.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 62.6% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 dr Defacto Right Lane. Recode with 1 though lane as a right lane. c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 10: I-5 SB Ramps & Harbor Boulevard Existing - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 3 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 251 390 81 1241 864 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.5 4.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.86 0.91 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 1524 1703 6166 4893 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 1524 1703 6166 4893 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.98 0.98 0.97 0.97 Adj. Flow (vph) 264 411 83 1266 891 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 264 411 83 1266 891 0 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Free Prot Protected Phases 4 5 2 6 Permitted Phases Free Actuated Green, G 10.0 70.0 6.9 49.5 38.4 Effective Green, g 10.0 70.0 6.9 49.5 38.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 1.00 0.10 0.71 0.55 Clearance Time 5.5 4.2 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 2.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 472 1524 168 4360 2684 v/s Ratio Prot c0.08 c0.05 0.21 c0.18 v/s Ratio Perm 0.27 v/c Ratio 0.56 0.27 0.49 0.29 0.33 Uniform Delay, d1 27.9 0.0 29.9 3.8 8.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.79 Incremental Delay, d2 0.8 0.4 0.8 0.2 0.3 Delay 28.8 0.4 30.7 3.9 7.2 Level of Service C A C A A Approach Delay 11.5 5.6 7.2 Approach LOS B A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 7.5 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.39 Actuated Cycle Length 70.0 Sum of lost time 14.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 40.6% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 17: Disney Way & I-5 SB Ramps Existing - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 5 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 276 9 31 354 0 15 0 36 322 1 117 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.91 0.95 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4870 1703 4893 1703 1524 1618 1543 1447 Flt Permitted 1.00 0.55 1.00 0.63 1.00 0.95 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4870 987 4893 1122 1524 1618 1543 1447 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.87 0.87 0.87 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 310 10 39 442 0 21 0 50 370 1 134 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 47 0 3 101 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 319 0 39 442 0 21 0 3 192 190 20 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm custom custom Split Perm Protected Phases 2 6 4 4 Permitted Phases 6 3 3 4 Actuated Green, G 76.8 76.8 76.8 8.2 8.2 20.0 20.0 20.0 Effective Green, g 76.8 76.8 76.8 8.2 8.2 20.0 20.0 20.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.07 0.07 0.17 0.17 0.17 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3117 632 3132 77 104 270 257 241 v/s Ratio Prot 0.07 c0.09 0.12 c0.12 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 c0.02 0.00 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.10 0.06 0.14 0.27 0.03 0.71 0.74 0.08 Uniform Delay, d1 8.3 8.1 8.5 53.1 52.2 47.3 47.5 42.3 Progression Factor 1.00 0.36 0.39 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.0 0.0 1.9 0.1 8.5 10.5 0.1 Delay 8.4 3.0 3.4 55.0 52.3 55.8 58.0 42.4 Level of Service A A A D D E E D Approach Delay 8.4 3.4 53.1 53.4 Approach LOS A A D D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 25.5 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.26 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 41.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 20: I-5 NB Ramps & Anaheim Boulevard Existing - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 7 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 0 0 74 434 678 185 883 0 0 1290 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.91 0.91 Frt 0.94 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3065 1386 3303 4893 4893 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3065 1386 3303 4893 4893 Peak-hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.93 0.93 0.93 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 88 517 807 195 929 0 0 1387 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 62 62 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 0 906 382 195 929 0 0 1387 0 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Protected Phases 8 5 2 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 Actuated Green, G 43.0 43.0 10.8 67.0 52.0 Effective Green, g 43.0 43.0 10.8 67.0 52.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.36 0.36 0.09 0.56 0.43 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 2.2 2.2 2.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1098 [PHONE REDACTED] 2120 v/s Ratio Prot c0.06 0.19 c0.28 v/s Ratio Perm 0.30 0.28 v/c Ratio 0.82 0.77 0.66 0.34 0.65 Uniform Delay, d1 35.1 34.1 52.8 14.4 26.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.96 0.30 0.76 Incremental Delay, d2 5.0 6.5 3.4 0.3 0.9 Delay 40.0 40.6 54.3 4.6 21.2 Level of Service D D D A C Approach Delay 0.0 40.2 13.2 21.2 Approach LOS A D B C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 25.8 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.72 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 14.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 64.0% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 21: Disney Way & Anaheim Boulevard Existing - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 8 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 244 113 175 0 262 3 29 821 8 521 795 31 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.2 5.0 5.0 4.7 6.0 5.2 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.86 0.91 1.00 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 5603 4886 1703 4886 3303 4866 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 5603 4886 1703 4886 3303 4866 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.93 0.93 0.93 Adj. Flow (vph) 249 115 179 0 305 3 31 873 9 560 855 33 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 135 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 3 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 249 159 0 0 307 0 31 881 0 560 885 0 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Prot Prot Prot Protected Phases 7 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G 13.4 29.7 12.1 4.7 39.4 34.7 69.9 Effective Green, g 13.4 29.7 12.1 4.7 39.4 34.7 69.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.25 0.10 0.04 0.33 0.29 0.58 Clearance Time 4.2 5.0 5.0 4.7 6.0 5.2 6.0 Vehicle Extension 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.5 4.0 2.2 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 369 1387 493 67 1604 955 2834 v/s Ratio Prot c0.08 0.03 c0.06 0.02 c0.18 c0.17 0.18 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 0.67 0.11 0.62 0.46 0.55 0.59 0.31 Uniform Delay, d1 51.2 35.0 51.8 56.4 33.0 36.5 12.8 Progression Factor 0.73 0.40 1.00 0.78 0.37 0.49 0.62 Incremental Delay, d2 3.7 0.0 1.8 3.4 1.3 0.5 0.2 Delay 41.3 13.9 53.5 47.3 13.5 18.2 8.1 Level of Service D B D D B B A Approach Delay 26.4 53.5 14.7 12.0 Approach LOS C D B B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 19.2 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.59 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 20.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 63.2% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 25: Katella Avenue & Manchester Avenue Existing - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 10 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 993 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 38 0 158 25 54 2 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.97 0.91 0.95 0.91 0.95 0.97 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.86 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 1524 3303 4893 1618 1394 1447 3303 3406 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 1524 3303 4893 1618 1396 1447 3303 3406 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.84 0.84 0.84 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1034 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 51 0 214 30 64 2 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 251 0 0 0 0 87 98 0 0 2 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1034 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 46 23 11 30 64 0 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Prot Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 3 8 7 4 Permitted Phases 2 8 4 Actuated Green, G 67.6 67.6 16.7 88.5 8.9 21.0 12.1 4.6 7.8 7.8 Effective Green, g 67.6 67.6 16.7 88.5 8.9 21.0 12.1 4.6 7.8 7.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.56 0.56 0.14 0.74 0.07 0.18 0.10 0.04 0.06 0.06 Clearance Time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2756 [PHONE REDACTED] 120 244 146 127 221 99 v/s Ratio Prot 0.21 c0.10 c0.36 c0.03 0.01 0.01 c0.02 v/s Ratio Perm 0.21 0.01 0.01 0.00 v/c Ratio 0.38 0.38 0.75 0.48 0.38 0.10 0.08 0.24 0.29 0.00 Uniform Delay, d1 14.5 14.5 49.6 6.4 52.9 41.5 48.9 56.0 53.5 52.5 Progression Factor 0.24 1.59 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.72 0.57 0.43 Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 1.2 5.7 0.5 0.7 0.1 0.1 0.9 0.7 0.0 Delay 3.9 24.2 55.3 6.9 53.7 41.6 49.0 41.0 30.9 22.3 Level of Service A C E A D D D D C C Approach Delay 11.2 14.8 46.7 33.9 Approach LOS B B D C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 15.9 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.49 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 13.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 60.6% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 26: Katella Avenue & Anaheim Way Existing - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 11 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 39 1150 0 0 1430 [PHONE REDACTED] 86 0 0 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 4893 5801 1234 1379 5702 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 4893 5801 1234 1379 5702 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.91 0.91 0.91 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 41 1211 0 0 1490 [PHONE REDACTED] 95 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 1 48 0 9 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 41 1211 0 0 1500 50 398 1649 0 0 0 0 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Prot Perm Perm Protected Phases 5 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 6 8 Actuated Green, G 3.2 38.0 31.1 31.1 40.0 40.0 Effective Green, g 3.2 38.0 31.1 31.1 40.0 40.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.04 0.42 0.35 0.35 0.44 0.44 Clearance Time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension 2.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 2.2 2.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 117 2066 2005 [PHONE REDACTED] v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 c0.25 c0.26 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 0.29 0.29 v/c Ratio 0.35 0.59 0.75 0.12 0.65 0.65 Uniform Delay, d1 42.4 20.0 26.0 20.1 19.5 19.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.61 0.18 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.7 1.2 2.0 0.4 5.3 1.3 Delay 43.0 21.2 18.0 4.0 24.8 20.9 Level of Service D C B A C C Approach Delay 21.9 17.1 21.6 0.0 Approach LOS C B C A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 20.2 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.72 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 17.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 54.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 32: Gene Autry Way & I-5 HOV Ramps Existing - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 13 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 15 43 0 23 22 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.88 0.97 Frt 0.91 0.85 0.85 1.00 Flt Protected 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (prot) 3293 1470 2842 3502 Flt Permitted 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (perm) 3293 1470 2842 3502 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.72 0.72 1.00 0.64 0.79 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 21 60 0 36 28 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 25 25 0 30 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 26 5 0 6 28 0 Heavy Vehicles 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type Perm custom custom Protected Phases 3 Permitted Phases 3 2 2 Actuated Green, G 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Effective Green, g 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 Clearance Time 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 549 245 474 584 v/s Ratio Prot c0.01 v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 0.00 c0.01 v/c Ratio 0.05 0.02 0.01 0.05 Uniform Delay, d1 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3 Level of Service A A A A Approach Delay 6.3 6.3 6.3 Approach LOS A A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 6.3 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.05 Actuated Cycle Length 18.0 Sum of lost time 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 20.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 41: Anaheim Way & State College Boulevard Existing - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 15 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 0 0 152 109 144 80 810 0 23 1087 37 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.88 0.97 0.86 1.00 0.86 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1550 3201 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1550 3201 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 163 117 155 83 844 0 24 1144 39 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 137 0 0 0 0 0 14 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 91 189 18 83 844 0 24 1144 25 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Prot Perm Protected Phases 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 6 Actuated Green, G 12.8 12.8 12.8 6.9 73.7 4.8 71.8 71.8 Effective Green, g 12.8 12.8 12.8 6.9 73.7 4.8 71.8 71.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.06 0.67 0.04 0.65 0.65 Clearance Time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 180 372 [PHONE REDACTED] 74 4025 995 v/s Ratio Prot c0.03 0.14 0.01 c0.19 v/s Ratio Perm 0.06 0.06 0.01 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.51 0.51 0.06 0.40 0.20 0.32 0.28 0.03 Uniform Delay, d1 45.6 45.6 43.2 49.6 6.9 51.0 8.1 6.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.28 1.32 0.48 0.06 Incremental Delay, d2 2.2 1.1 0.1 1.3 0.1 2.5 0.2 0.0 Delay 47.9 46.7 43.3 50.5 2.0 69.9 4.1 0.5 Level of Service D D D D A E A A Approach Delay 0.0 45.8 6.4 5.3 Approach LOS A D A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 12.5 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.32 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 18.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 39.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 42: I-5 SB Ramps & State College Boulevard Existing - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 16 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 144 160 317 0 0 0 0 1109 27 0 937 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.88 0.81 0.86 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1618 1696 2682 7234 6166 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1618 1696 2682 7234 6166 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.97 0.97 0.97 Adj. Flow (vph) 160 178 352 0 0 0 0 1155 28 0 966 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 96 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 144 194 256 0 0 0 0 1181 0 0 966 0 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 Actuated Green, G 19.1 19.1 19.1 74.9 74.9 Effective Green, g 19.1 19.1 19.1 74.9 74.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.68 0.68 Clearance Time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Vehicle Extension 2.5 2.5 2.5 4.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 281 [PHONE REDACTED] 4198 v/s Ratio Prot c0.16 0.16 v/s Ratio Perm 0.09 0.11 0.10 v/c Ratio 0.51 0.66 0.55 0.24 0.23 Uniform Delay, d1 41.2 42.4 41.5 6.7 6.6 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.06 0.71 Incremental Delay, d2 1.2 4.7 1.1 0.1 0.1 Delay 42.4 47.1 42.6 0.5 4.9 Level of Service D D D A A Approach Delay 43.8 0.0 0.5 4.9 Approach LOS D A A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 12.5 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.32 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 62.5% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 48: Ball Road & SR-57 NB Ramps Existing - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 22 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 867 0 0 1187 498 173 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1703 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1703 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Adj. Flow (vph) 932 0 0 1263 530 184 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 72 Lane Group Flow (vph) 932 0 0 1263 530 112 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 50.2 50.2 30.2 30.2 Effective Green, g 50.2 50.2 30.2 30.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.56 0.56 0.34 0.34 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Vehicle Extension 3.5 3.5 1.5 1.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2729 2729 571 511 v/s Ratio Prot 0.19 c0.26 c0.31 v/s Ratio Perm 0.07 v/c Ratio 0.34 0.46 0.93 0.22 Uniform Delay, d1 10.9 11.9 28.9 21.4 Progression Factor 1.56 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 0.6 21.1 0.1 Delay 17.3 12.4 50.0 21.5 Level of Service B B D C Approach Delay 17.3 12.4 42.6 Approach LOS B B D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 21.4 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.64 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 9.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.5% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 49: Ball Road & SR-57 SB Ramps Existing - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 23 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1132 1278 0 313 605 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1646 1447 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1646 1447 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.95 0.95 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1167 1345 0 340 658 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 15 15 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1167 1345 0 503 465 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 48.1 48.1 32.3 32.3 Effective Green, g 48.1 48.1 32.3 32.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.53 0.53 0.36 0.36 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Vehicle Extension 3.5 3.5 1.5 1.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2615 2615 591 519 v/s Ratio Prot 0.24 c0.27 0.31 v/s Ratio Perm c0.32 v/c Ratio 0.45 0.51 0.85 0.90 Uniform Delay, d1 12.8 13.5 26.6 27.3 Progression Factor 0.54 0.65 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.6 10.9 17.4 Delay 7.1 9.3 37.5 44.6 Level of Service A A D D Approach Delay 7.1 9.3 40.9 Approach LOS A A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 17.6 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.67 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 9.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 62.4% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 50: Katella Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Existing - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 24 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 847 0 0 1465 225 334 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.81 0.86 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.94 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 7259 6166 3170 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 7259 6166 3170 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 873 0 0 1510 245 363 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 55 55 Lane Group Flow (vph) 873 0 0 1510 361 137 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 30.2 30.2 9.8 9.8 Effective Green, g 30.2 30.2 9.8 9.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.60 0.60 0.20 0.20 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 1.5 1.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 4384 3724 621 272 v/s Ratio Prot 0.12 c0.24 c0.11 v/s Ratio Perm 0.10 v/c Ratio 0.20 0.41 0.58 0.50 Uniform Delay, d1 4.5 5.2 18.2 17.9 Progression Factor 0.78 0.93 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.3 0.9 0.5 Delay 3.6 5.1 19.1 18.5 Level of Service A A B B Approach Delay 3.6 5.1 18.9 Approach LOS A A B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 7.5 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.45 Actuated Cycle Length 50.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 39.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 51: Katella Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Existing - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 25 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1077 976 0 227 465 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.92 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 3136 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 3136 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.98 0.98 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1099 1017 0 236 484 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 38 38 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1099 1017 0 440 204 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 7 Permitted Phases 7 Actuated Green, G 28.6 28.6 11.4 11.4 Effective Green, g 28.6 28.6 11.4 11.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.57 0.57 0.23 0.23 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 1.2 1.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2799 2799 715 316 v/s Ratio Prot c0.22 0.21 0.14 v/s Ratio Perm c0.15 v/c Ratio 0.39 0.36 0.62 0.65 Uniform Delay, d1 5.9 5.8 17.3 17.5 Progression Factor 1.00 0.50 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 0.3 1.1 3.4 Delay 6.3 3.2 18.4 20.9 Level of Service A A B C Approach Delay 6.3 3.2 19.3 Approach LOS A A B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 8.5 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.46 Actuated Cycle Length 50.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 46.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 52: Orangewood Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Existing - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 26 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 696 0 0 1552 64 212 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.91 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3406 4893 3094 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3406 4893 3094 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.89 0.89 0.83 0.83 0.88 0.88 Adj. Flow (vph) 782 0 0 1870 73 241 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 111 111 Lane Group Flow (vph) 782 0 0 1870 83 9 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type custom Protected Phases 2 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 Actuated Green, G 72.9 72.9 7.1 7.1 Effective Green, g 72.9 72.9 7.1 7.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.81 0.81 0.08 0.08 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2759 3963 244 109 v/s Ratio Prot 0.23 c0.38 v/s Ratio Perm c0.03 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.28 0.47 0.34 0.09 Uniform Delay, d1 2.1 2.6 39.2 38.4 Progression Factor 2.23 1.61 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.1 Delay 4.9 4.5 39.5 38.6 Level of Service A A D D Approach Delay 4.9 4.5 39.2 Approach LOS A A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 8.3 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.46 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 42.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 53: Orangewood Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Existing - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 27 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 748 113 455 881 0 0 0 0 245 0 482 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.91 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.86 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3255 1386 1703 3406 1618 1403 1447 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3255 1386 1703 3406 1618 1403 1447 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.89 0.89 0.89 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.91 0.91 0.91 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 831 126 511 990 0 0 0 0 269 0 530 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 1 78 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 146 146 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 843 35 511 990 0 0 0 0 242 135 130 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Prot Perm Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 4 Permitted Phases 2 4 4 Actuated Green, G 27.8 27.8 32.7 64.7 15.3 15.3 15.3 Effective Green, g 27.8 27.8 32.7 64.7 15.3 15.3 15.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.31 0.31 0.36 0.72 0.17 0.17 0.17 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 1.7 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1005 [PHONE REDACTED] 275 239 246 v/s Ratio Prot c0.26 c0.30 0.29 v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 c0.15 0.10 0.09 v/c Ratio 0.84 0.08 0.83 0.40 0.88 0.56 0.53 Uniform Delay, d1 29.0 22.0 26.1 5.0 36.5 34.3 34.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.01 1.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 8.3 0.4 7.9 0.5 25.5 1.8 0.9 Delay 37.3 22.4 34.2 7.1 62.0 36.1 35.0 Level of Service D C C A E D D Approach Delay 35.6 16.3 0.0 43.6 Approach LOS D B A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 28.7 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.84 Actuated Cycle Length 90.0 Sum of lost time 14.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.6% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 64: Chapman Avenue & Frontage Road Existing - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 32 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 952 993 113 979 0 660 0 73 151 0 3 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.81 0.81 0.97 0.91 0.97 1.00 0.97 1.00 Frt 0.95 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 5509 1234 3303 4893 3303 1524 3303 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 5509 1234 3303 4893 3303 1524 3303 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.94 0.94 0.94 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 971 1013 120 1041 0 688 0 76 161 0 3 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 78 238 0 0 0 0 0 56 0 0 2 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1400 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 688 0 20 161 0 1 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Prot custom custom custom custom Protected Phases 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 2 8 8 4 4 Actuated Green, G 58.2 58.2 8.5 71.7 28.3 28.3 28.3 28.3 Effective Green, g 58.2 58.2 8.5 71.7 28.3 28.3 28.3 28.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.53 0.53 0.08 0.65 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2915 [PHONE REDACTED] 850 392 850 392 v/s Ratio Prot c0.25 c0.04 0.21 v/s Ratio Perm 0.22 c0.21 0.01 0.05 0.00 v/c Ratio 0.48 0.41 0.47 0.33 0.81 0.05 0.19 0.00 Uniform Delay, d1 16.4 15.6 48.6 8.5 38.3 30.7 31.9 30.4 Progression Factor 1.92 9.12 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.02 0.53 Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 1.4 1.4 0.3 5.7 0.1 0.1 0.0 Delay 31.8 143.5 50.0 8.7 44.1 30.8 32.6 16.1 Level of Service C F D A D C C B Approach Delay 60.3 13.0 42.7 32.3 Approach LOS E B D C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 42.4 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.58 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 54.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 65: Chapman Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Existing - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 33 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 851 0 0 1500 0 29 0 151 0 0 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.91 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3406 4893 1703 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3406 4893 1703 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.88 0.88 0.88 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 925 0 0 1546 0 33 0 172 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 83 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 925 0 0 1546 0 33 0 89 0 0 0 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Prot custom custom custom custom Protected Phases 7 4 8 Permitted Phases 2 2 6 6 Actuated Green, G 39.3 39.3 51.7 51.7 Effective Green, g 39.3 39.3 51.7 51.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.39 0.39 0.52 0.52 Clearance Time 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1339 1923 880 788 v/s Ratio Prot 0.27 c0.32 v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 c0.06 v/c Ratio 0.69 0.80 0.04 0.11 Uniform Delay, d1 25.3 26.9 11.9 12.4 Progression Factor 0.60 0.76 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.1 2.1 0.1 0.3 Delay 16.4 22.6 12.0 12.7 Level of Service B C B B Approach Delay 16.4 22.6 12.6 0.0 Approach LOS B C B A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 19.7 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.41 Actuated Cycle Length 100.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 40.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 66: Chapman Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Existing - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 34 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 1 989 19 23 1053 0 140 31 106 160 8 276 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.0 4.5 4.0 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1703 4880 1703 3406 1722 1524 1711 1524 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1703 4880 1703 3406 1722 1524 1711 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.84 0.84 0.84 Adj. Flow (vph) 1 1099 21 25 1132 0 203 45 154 190 10 329 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 112 0 0 146 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1 1118 0 25 1132 0 0 248 42 0 200 183 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Prot Prot Split Perm Split Perm Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 8 8 7 7 Permitted Phases 8 7 Actuated Green, G 1.0 43.1 2.4 44.5 18.5 18.5 18.5 18.5 Effective Green, g 1.0 43.1 2.4 44.5 18.5 18.5 18.5 18.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.01 0.43 0.02 0.44 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 Clearance Time 4.0 4.5 4.0 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 4.0 1.5 4.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 17 2103 41 1516 319 282 317 282 v/s Ratio Prot 0.00 0.23 c0.01 c0.33 c0.14 0.12 v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 c0.12 v/c Ratio 0.06 0.53 0.61 0.75 0.78 0.15 0.63 0.65 Uniform Delay, d1 49.0 21.0 48.3 23.1 38.8 34.2 37.6 37.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.61 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.5 1.0 12.3 2.5 16.9 1.1 9.2 11.0 Delay 50.5 22.0 58.2 39.7 55.7 35.3 46.8 48.8 Level of Service D C E D E D D D Approach Delay 22.0 40.1 47.9 48.0 Approach LOS C D D D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 36.1 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.70 Actuated Cycle Length 100.0 Sum of lost time 13.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 66.8% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 69: I-5 SB Off-ramp & Disneyland Drive Existing - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 35 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 645 48 292 0 0 277 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.94 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4802 1524 3406 3406 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4802 1524 3406 3406 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 679 51 307 0 0 292 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 32 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 679 19 307 0 0 292 Heavy Vehicles 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 11.7 11.7 10.5 10.5 Effective Green, g 11.7 11.7 10.5 10.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.37 0.37 0.33 0.33 Clearance Time 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 Vehicle Extension 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1789 568 1139 1139 v/s Ratio Prot c0.14 c0.09 0.09 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.38 0.03 0.27 0.26 Uniform Delay, d1 7.2 6.3 7.6 7.6 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.1 Delay 7.4 6.3 7.8 7.7 Level of Service A A A A Approach Delay 7.3 7.8 7.7 Approach LOS A A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 7.5 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.33 Actuated Cycle Length 31.4 Sum of lost time 9.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 62.9% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No.14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report – Technical Appendices Appendix C-2 Caltrans Ramp Termini Analysis Worksheets under 2015 No Project Conditions ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 9: I-5 NB Ramps & Harbor Boulevard Year 2015 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 2 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 70 710 840 0 50 2260 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.5 5.5 5.0 4.7 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.86 Frt 0.87 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3017 1386 4893 1703 6166 Flt Permitted 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3017 1386 4893 1703 6166 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 74 747 884 0 53 2379 RTOR Reduction (vph) 211 211 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 237 162 884 0 53 2379 Turn Type custom Prot Protected Phases 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 Actuated Green, G 19.7 19.7 77.1 8.0 89.8 Effective Green, g 19.7 19.7 77.1 8.0 89.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.64 0.07 0.75 Clearance Time 5.5 5.5 5.0 4.7 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 114 4614 v/s Ratio Prot 0.18 0.03 c0.39 v/s Ratio Perm 0.08 c0.12 v/c Ratio 0.48 0.71 0.28 0.46 0.52 Uniform Delay, d1 45.5 47.4 9.4 53.9 6.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.37 0.72 2.50 Incremental Delay, d2 0.7 9.7 0.2 1.1 0.1 Delay 46.2 57.1 3.7 40.0 15.6 Level of Service D E A D B Approach Delay 51.2 3.7 16.2 Approach LOS D A B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 20.4 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.55 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 10.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 54.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 10: I-5 SB Ramps & Harbor Boulevard Year 2015 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 3 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 270 300 60 790 1200 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.5 4.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.86 0.91 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 1524 1703 6166 4893 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 1524 1703 6166 4893 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 284 316 63 832 1263 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 284 316 63 832 1263 0 Turn Type Free Prot Protected Phases 4 5 2 6 Permitted Phases Free Actuated Green, G 15.6 120.0 8.6 93.9 81.1 Effective Green, g 15.6 120.0 8.6 93.9 81.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 1.00 0.07 0.78 0.68 Clearance Time 5.5 4.2 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 429 1524 122 4825 3307 v/s Ratio Prot c0.09 c0.04 0.13 c0.26 v/s Ratio Perm 0.21 v/c Ratio 0.66 0.21 0.52 0.17 0.38 Uniform Delay, d1 49.7 0.0 53.7 3.3 8.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.82 0.31 0.27 Incremental Delay, d2 3.8 0.3 3.5 0.1 0.3 Delay 53.5 0.3 47.7 1.1 2.6 Level of Service D A D A A Approach Delay 25.5 4.4 2.6 Approach LOS C A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 8.1 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.43 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 14.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 47.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 17: Disney Way & I-5 SB Ramps Year 2015 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 350 10 60 400 0 20 0 30 360 10 150 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.91 0.95 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4872 1703 4893 1703 1524 1618 1545 1447 Flt Permitted 1.00 0.52 1.00 0.62 1.00 0.95 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4872 930 4893 1112 1524 1618 1545 1447 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 368 11 63 421 0 21 0 32 379 11 158 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 30 0 3 116 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 377 0 63 421 0 21 0 2 205 198 26 Turn Type Perm custom custom Split Perm Protected Phases 2 6 4 4 Permitted Phases 6 3 3 4 Actuated Green, G 74.8 74.8 74.8 8.2 8.2 22.0 22.0 22.0 Effective Green, g 74.8 74.8 74.8 8.2 8.2 22.0 22.0 22.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.07 0.07 0.18 0.18 0.18 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3037 580 3050 76 104 297 283 265 v/s Ratio Prot 0.08 c0.09 0.13 c0.13 v/s Ratio Perm 0.07 c0.02 0.00 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.12 0.11 0.14 0.28 0.02 0.69 0.70 0.10 Uniform Delay, d1 9.2 9.1 9.3 53.1 52.2 45.8 45.9 40.8 Progression Factor 0.40 0.40 0.40 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.1 0.0 2.0 0.1 6.7 7.3 0.2 Delay 3.8 3.7 3.7 55.1 52.2 52.6 53.2 40.9 Level of Service A A A E D D D D Approach Delay 3.8 3.7 53.4 49.8 Approach LOS A A D D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 22.8 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.27 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 42.6% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 20: I-5 NB Ramps & Anaheim Boulevard Year 2015 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 4 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 0 0 30 20 390 230 920 0 0 1411 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.91 0.91 Frt 0.88 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 2855 1386 3303 4893 4893 Flt Permitted 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 2855 1386 3303 4893 4893 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 32 21 411 242 968 0 0 1485 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 142 142 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 0 117 63 242 968 0 0 1485 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Protected Phases 8 5 2 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 Actuated Green, G 12.2 12.2 14.1 97.8 79.5 Effective Green, g 12.2 12.2 14.1 97.8 79.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.10 0.10 0.12 0.82 0.66 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 290 [PHONE REDACTED] 3242 v/s Ratio Prot c0.07 0.20 c0.30 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 c0.05 v/c Ratio 0.40 0.45 0.62 0.24 0.46 Uniform Delay, d1 50.5 50.7 50.4 2.6 9.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.01 0.43 0.36 Incremental Delay, d2 0.9 2.3 2.7 0.1 0.4 Delay 51.4 53.0 53.5 1.2 4.0 Level of Service D D D A A Approach Delay 0.0 52.1 11.7 4.0 Approach LOS A D B A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 14.0 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.48 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 14.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 51.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 21: Disney Way & Anaheim Boulevard Year 2015 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 5 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 340 320 100 0 290 10 40 850 10 460 820 91 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.2 5.0 5.0 4.7 6.0 5.2 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.86 0.91 1.00 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 0.96 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 5946 4868 1703 4884 3303 4820 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 5946 4868 1703 4884 3303 4820 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 358 337 105 0 305 11 42 895 11 484 863 96 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 51 0 0 4 0 0 1 0 0 10 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 358 391 0 0 312 0 42 905 0 484 949 0 Turn Type Prot Prot Prot Protected Phases 7 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G 18.0 35.2 13.0 6.4 45.1 23.5 62.7 Effective Green, g 18.0 35.2 13.0 6.4 45.1 23.5 62.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 0.29 0.11 0.05 0.38 0.20 0.52 Clearance Time 4.2 5.0 5.0 4.7 6.0 5.2 6.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 495 1744 527 91 1836 647 2518 v/s Ratio Prot c0.11 0.07 c0.06 0.02 c0.19 c0.15 0.20 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 0.72 0.22 0.59 0.46 0.49 0.75 0.38 Uniform Delay, d1 48.6 32.1 51.0 55.1 28.7 45.5 17.0 Progression Factor 0.93 0.82 1.00 0.82 0.44 0.56 0.38 Incremental Delay, d2 5.1 0.1 1.8 3.4 0.9 4.3 0.4 Delay 50.2 26.2 52.8 48.8 13.6 29.9 6.9 Level of Service D C D D B C A Approach Delay 36.9 52.8 15.2 14.6 Approach LOS D D B B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 23.3 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.61 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 20.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 64.8% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 25: Katella Avenue & Manchester Avenue Year 2015 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 8 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1060 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 80 0 580 160 220 20 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.88 0.97 0.91 0.95 0.91 0.95 0.97 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 2682 3303 4893 1618 1391 1447 3303 3406 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 2682 3303 4893 1618 1393 1447 3303 3406 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1116 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 84 0 611 168 232 21 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 441 0 0 0 0 260 271 0 0 18 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1116 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 76 47 41 168 232 3 Turn Type Perm Prot Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 3 8 7 4 Permitted Phases 2 8 4 Actuated Green, G 58.3 58.3 13.8 76.3 9.5 15.7 15.7 13.2 19.4 19.4 Effective Green, g 58.3 58.3 13.8 76.3 9.5 15.7 15.7 13.2 19.4 19.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.49 0.49 0.12 0.64 0.08 0.13 0.13 0.11 0.16 0.16 Clearance Time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2377 1303 380 3111 128 182 189 363 551 246 v/s Ratio Prot 0.23 c0.08 c0.30 c0.05 0.02 0.05 c0.07 v/s Ratio Perm 0.16 0.01 0.03 0.00 v/c Ratio 0.47 0.32 0.67 0.47 0.59 0.26 0.22 0.46 0.42 0.01 Uniform Delay, d1 20.5 18.8 50.9 11.4 53.4 46.9 46.6 50.1 45.2 42.3 Progression Factor 0.03 0.79 0.91 0.86 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.54 0.48 0.60 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.1 4.3 0.5 7.2 0.8 0.6 0.8 0.5 0.0 Delay 0.7 14.8 50.4 10.3 60.6 47.7 47.2 27.8 22.4 25.3 Level of Service A B D B E D D C C C Approach Delay 6.8 16.2 48.9 24.7 Approach LOS A B D C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 17.8 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.51 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 19.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 62.8% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 26: Katella Avenue & Anaheim Way Year 2015 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 9 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 40 1752 0 0 1171 170 531 370 420 0 0 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.94 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 4893 5795 1234 1379 5392 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 4893 5795 1234 1379 5392 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 42 1844 0 0 1233 179 559 389 442 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 2 86 0 6 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 42 1844 0 0 1249 75 285 1099 0 0 0 0 Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Protected Phases 5 2 6 3 8 Permitted Phases 6 Actuated Green, G 4.2 64.0 56.1 56.1 46.0 46.0 Effective Green, g 4.2 64.0 56.1 56.1 46.0 46.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.04 0.53 0.47 0.47 0.38 0.38 Clearance Time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 116 2610 2709 [PHONE REDACTED] v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 c0.38 0.22 c0.21 0.20 v/s Ratio Perm 0.06 v/c Ratio 0.36 0.71 0.46 0.13 0.54 0.53 Uniform Delay, d1 56.6 21.0 21.7 18.1 28.8 28.7 Progression Factor 0.75 0.55 0.49 0.11 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.8 1.6 0.5 0.4 1.1 0.3 Delay 44.2 13.1 11.1 2.4 29.8 28.9 Level of Service D B B A C C Approach Delay 13.8 10.1 29.1 0.0 Approach LOS B B C A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 17.2 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.64 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 60.3% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 32: Gene Autry Way & I-5 HOV Ramps Year 2015 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 14 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 10 300 40 40 110 70 10 0 30 280 0 20 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 4.5 6.0 6.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.88 0.97 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.94 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 5096 1805 4884 1805 2842 3502 1615 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1805 5096 1805 4884 1805 2842 3502 1615 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 11 316 42 42 116 74 11 0 32 295 0 21 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 7 0 0 22 0 0 0 30 0 0 20 Lane Group Flow (vph) 11 351 0 42 168 0 11 0 2 295 0 1 Heavy Vehicles 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type Prot Prot Prot Over Prot Over Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 3 1 7 5 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G 4.2 79.2 8.2 84.2 17.1 8.2 15.6 4.2 Effective Green, g 4.2 79.2 8.2 84.2 17.1 8.2 15.6 4.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.04 0.66 0.07 0.70 0.14 0.07 0.13 0.04 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 4.5 6.0 6.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 63 3363 123 3427 257 194 455 57 v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 c0.07 c0.02 c0.03 0.01 0.00 c0.08 0.00 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 0.17 0.10 0.34 0.05 0.04 0.01 0.65 0.01 Uniform Delay, d1 56.2 7.4 53.3 5.5 44.4 52.1 49.6 55.9 Progression Factor 0.85 1.52 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.3 0.1 1.7 0.0 0.1 0.0 3.2 0.1 Delay 48.9 11.4 55.0 5.6 44.5 52.1 52.8 56.0 Level of Service D B D A D D D E Approach Delay 12.5 14.5 50.2 53.0 Approach LOS B B D D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 28.0 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.21 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 22.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 35.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 41: Anaheim Way & State College Boulevard Year 2015 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 16 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 0 0 180 200 360 210 750 0 20 1780 20 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.88 0.97 0.86 1.00 0.86 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1550 3227 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1550 3227 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 189 211 379 221 789 0 21 1874 21 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 321 0 0 0 0 0 9 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 130 270 58 221 789 0 21 1874 12 Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Prot Perm Protected Phases 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 6 Actuated Green, G 16.8 16.8 16.8 12.6 71.4 3.1 62.1 62.1 Effective Green, g 16.8 16.8 16.8 12.6 71.4 3.1 62.1 62.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.11 0.65 0.03 0.56 0.56 Clearance Time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 237 493 [PHONE REDACTED] 48 3481 860 v/s Ratio Prot c0.07 0.13 0.01 c0.30 v/s Ratio Perm c0.08 0.08 0.02 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.55 0.55 0.14 0.58 0.20 0.44 0.54 0.01 Uniform Delay, d1 43.1 43.1 40.4 46.2 7.8 52.6 15.0 10.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.54 1.24 0.55 0.22 Incremental Delay, d2 2.6 1.2 0.2 2.3 0.1 6.1 0.6 0.0 Delay 45.7 44.3 40.5 48.5 4.3 71.5 8.9 2.4 Level of Service D D D D A E A A Approach Delay 0.0 42.7 14.0 9.5 Approach LOS A D B A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 17.7 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.55 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 18.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 54.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 42: I-5 SB Ramps & State College Boulevard Year 2015 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 17 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 70 470 360 0 0 0 0 980 30 0 1770 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.88 0.81 0.86 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1618 1702 2682 7227 6166 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1618 1702 2682 7227 6166 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 74 495 379 0 0 0 0 1032 32 0 1863 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 67 502 377 0 0 0 0 1060 0 0 1863 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 Actuated Green, G 40.3 40.3 40.3 53.7 53.7 Effective Green, g 40.3 40.3 40.3 53.7 53.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.49 0.49 Clearance Time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 593 [PHONE REDACTED] 3010 v/s Ratio Prot 0.15 c0.30 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 0.30 0.14 v/c Ratio 0.11 0.80 0.38 0.30 0.62 Uniform Delay, d1 23.0 31.3 25.7 16.9 20.6 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.47 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 7.4 0.3 0.2 0.8 Delay 23.1 38.8 25.9 16.2 10.5 Level of Service C D C B B Approach Delay 32.5 0.0 16.2 10.5 Approach LOS C A B B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 17.5 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.70 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 48: Ball Road & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2015 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 23 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 1470 0 0 800 380 480 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 3190 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 3190 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 1547 0 0 842 400 505 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 15 15 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1547 0 0 842 602 273 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 79.4 79.4 31.0 31.0 Effective Green, g 79.4 79.4 31.0 31.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.66 0.66 0.26 0.26 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3238 3238 824 358 v/s Ratio Prot c0.32 0.17 0.19 v/s Ratio Perm c0.20 v/c Ratio 0.48 0.26 0.73 0.76 Uniform Delay, d1 10.0 8.3 40.7 41.1 Progression Factor 0.42 0.92 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 0.2 3.4 9.3 Delay 4.6 7.9 44.0 50.4 Level of Service A A D D Approach Delay 4.6 7.9 46.1 Approach LOS A A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 16.8 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.56 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 56.2% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 49: Ball Road & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2015 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 24 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1270 920 0 600 970 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.88 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1337 968 0 632 1021 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 34 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1337 968 0 632 987 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G 55.4 55.4 55.6 55.6 Effective Green, g 55.4 55.4 55.6 55.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2259 2259 789 1243 v/s Ratio Prot c0.27 0.20 c0.37 v/s Ratio Perm 0.37 v/c Ratio 0.59 0.43 0.80 0.79 Uniform Delay, d1 23.9 21.7 27.5 27.3 Progression Factor 0.86 0.93 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.7 0.6 5.9 3.6 Delay 21.3 20.8 33.3 30.9 Level of Service C C C C Approach Delay 21.3 20.8 31.8 Approach LOS C C C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 25.6 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.70 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 65.3% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 50: Katella Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2015 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 25 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 1300 0 0 1180 410 380 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.81 0.86 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.96 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 7259 6166 3228 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 7259 6166 3228 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 1368 0 0 1242 432 400 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 12 12 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1368 0 0 1242 560 248 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 80.7 80.7 29.3 29.3 Effective Green, g 80.7 80.7 29.3 29.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.67 0.67 0.24 0.24 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 4882 4147 788 338 v/s Ratio Prot 0.19 c0.20 0.17 v/s Ratio Perm c0.18 v/c Ratio 0.28 0.30 0.71 0.73 Uniform Delay, d1 7.9 8.1 41.5 41.8 Progression Factor 0.59 0.50 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.2 3.0 8.0 Delay 4.8 4.2 44.5 49.8 Level of Service A A D D Approach Delay 4.8 4.2 46.1 Approach LOS A A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 14.6 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.41 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 41.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 51: Katella Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2015 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 26 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1260 1130 0 330 580 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.88 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1326 1189 0 347 611 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 54 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1326 1189 0 347 557 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G 78.8 78.8 32.2 32.2 Effective Green, g 78.8 78.8 32.2 32.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.66 0.66 0.27 0.27 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3213 3213 457 720 v/s Ratio Prot c0.27 0.24 0.20 v/s Ratio Perm c0.21 v/c Ratio 0.41 0.37 0.76 0.77 Uniform Delay, d1 9.7 9.3 40.3 40.5 Progression Factor 0.59 0.93 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 0.3 7.1 5.2 Delay 6.1 9.0 47.5 45.7 Level of Service A A D D Approach Delay 6.1 9.0 46.3 Approach LOS A A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 18.2 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.52 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 50.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 52: Orangewood Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2015 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 27 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 1340 0 0 1050 130 520 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3406 4893 3078 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3406 4893 3078 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 1411 0 0 1105 137 547 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 34 34 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1411 0 0 1105 377 239 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 67.6 67.6 22.4 22.4 Effective Green, g 67.6 67.6 22.4 22.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.68 0.68 0.22 0.22 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2302 3308 689 310 v/s Ratio Prot c0.41 0.23 0.12 v/s Ratio Perm c0.17 v/c Ratio 0.61 0.33 0.55 0.77 Uniform Delay, d1 9.0 6.8 34.3 36.4 Progression Factor 0.27 0.49 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.7 0.3 0.9 11.2 Delay 3.1 3.6 35.2 47.6 Level of Service A A D D Approach Delay 3.1 3.6 40.2 Approach LOS A A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 11.2 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.65 Actuated Cycle Length 100.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 66.8% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 53: Orangewood Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2015 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1340 50 170 740 0 0 0 0 340 0 410 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.91 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3261 1386 1703 3406 1618 1440 1447 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3261 1386 1703 3406 1618 1440 1447 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1411 53 179 779 0 0 0 0 358 0 432 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 81 195 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1416 29 179 779 0 0 0 0 276 182 56 Turn Type Perm Prot Perm Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 4 Permitted Phases 2 4 4 Actuated Green, G 50.5 50.5 14.8 69.5 20.5 20.5 20.5 Effective Green, g 50.5 50.5 14.8 69.5 20.5 20.5 20.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.50 0.50 0.15 0.70 0.20 0.20 0.20 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1647 [PHONE REDACTED] 332 295 297 v/s Ratio Prot c0.43 c0.11 0.23 v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 c0.17 0.13 0.04 v/c Ratio 0.86 0.04 0.71 0.33 0.83 0.62 0.19 Uniform Delay, d1 21.7 12.5 40.6 6.0 38.1 36.2 32.9 Progression Factor 0.35 0.08 0.81 0.43 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 5.4 0.1 8.8 0.4 16.1 3.8 0.3 Delay 13.0 1.1 41.8 3.0 54.1 40.0 33.2 Level of Service B A D A D D C Approach Delay 12.6 10.2 0.0 42.8 Approach LOS B B A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 19.3 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.83 Actuated Cycle Length 100.0 Sum of lost time 14.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 72.4% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 64: Chapman Avenue & Frontage Road Year 2015 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 33 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 890 930 100 960 0 620 0 110 480 0 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.81 0.81 0.97 0.91 0.97 1.00 0.97 Frt 0.95 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (prot) 5508 1234 3303 4893 3303 1524 3303 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (perm) 5508 1234 3303 4893 3303 1524 3303 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 937 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 653 0 116 505 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 76 220 0 0 0 0 0 87 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1351 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 653 0 29 505 0 0 Turn Type Perm Prot custom custom custom custom Protected Phases 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 2 8 8 4 4 Actuated Green, G 60.5 60.5 7.0 72.5 27.5 27.5 27.5 Effective Green, g 60.5 60.5 7.0 72.5 27.5 27.5 27.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.55 0.55 0.06 0.66 0.25 0.25 0.25 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3029 [PHONE REDACTED] 826 381 826 v/s Ratio Prot c0.25 c0.03 0.21 v/s Ratio Perm 0.22 c0.20 0.02 0.15 v/c Ratio 0.45 0.40 0.50 0.31 0.79 0.08 0.61 Uniform Delay, d1 14.8 14.2 49.8 8.1 38.6 31.5 36.5 Progression Factor 2.40 11.56 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.45 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 1.1 1.9 0.3 5.2 0.1 1.0 Delay 35.7 165.7 51.7 8.3 43.8 31.6 17.4 Level of Service D F D A D C B Approach Delay 68.9 12.4 41.9 17.4 Approach LOS E B D B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 43.4 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.55 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 51.6% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 65: Chapman Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2015 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 34 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1090 0 0 1210 0 50 0 110 0 0 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.91 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3406 4893 1703 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3406 4893 1703 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1147 0 0 1274 0 53 0 116 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 107 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1147 0 0 1274 0 53 0 9 0 0 0 Turn Type Prot custom custom custom custom Protected Phases 5 2 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 4 4 Actuated Green, G 92.2 92.2 8.8 8.8 Effective Green, g 92.2 92.2 8.8 8.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.84 0.84 0.08 0.08 Clearance Time 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2855 4101 136 122 v/s Ratio Prot c0.34 0.26 v/s Ratio Perm c0.03 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.40 0.31 0.39 0.08 Uniform Delay, d1 2.2 1.9 48.1 46.8 Progression Factor 0.03 0.54 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 0.2 1.8 0.3 Delay 0.3 1.2 49.9 47.1 Level of Service A A D D Approach Delay 0.3 1.2 48.0 0.0 Approach LOS A A D A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 3.9 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.40 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 44.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 66: Chapman Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2015 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 35 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 10 1240 150 90 790 0 20 10 20 260 60 390 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.5 4.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1703 4814 1703 3406 1736 1524 1722 1524 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1703 4814 1703 3406 1736 1524 1722 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 11 1305 158 95 832 0 21 11 21 274 63 411 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 0 0 314 Lane Group Flow (vph) 11 1449 0 95 832 0 0 32 3 0 337 97 Turn Type Prot Prot Split Perm Split Perm Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 8 8 7 7 Permitted Phases 8 7 Actuated Green, G 3.4 40.8 8.7 45.6 16.0 16.0 26.0 26.0 Effective Green, g 3.4 40.8 8.7 45.6 16.0 16.0 26.0 26.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.03 0.37 0.08 0.41 0.15 0.15 0.24 0.24 Clearance Time 4.5 4.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 53 1786 135 1412 253 222 407 360 v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 c0.30 c0.06 0.24 c0.02 c0.20 v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 0.06 v/c Ratio 0.21 0.81 0.70 0.59 0.13 0.01 0.83 0.27 Uniform Delay, d1 52.0 31.1 49.4 24.9 40.9 40.2 39.9 34.3 Progression Factor 0.93 0.93 1.16 0.83 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.9 4.1 14.9 1.8 1.0 0.1 17.4 1.8 Delay 50.1 33.0 72.2 22.5 41.9 40.4 57.3 36.1 Level of Service D C E C D D E D Approach Delay 33.2 27.6 41.3 45.6 Approach LOS C C D D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 34.6 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.69 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 18.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.2% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 69: I-5 SB Off-ramp & Disneyland Drive Year 2015 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 36 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 830 10 130 0 0 650 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.94 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4802 1524 3406 3406 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4802 1524 3406 3406 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 874 11 137 0 0 684 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 7 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 874 4 137 0 0 684 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 12.5 12.5 13.7 13.7 Effective Green, g 12.5 12.5 13.7 13.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.35 0.35 0.38 0.38 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1658 526 1289 1289 v/s Ratio Prot c0.18 0.04 c0.20 v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 v/c Ratio 0.53 0.01 0.11 0.53 Uniform Delay, d1 9.5 7.8 7.3 8.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.4 Delay 9.8 7.8 7.3 9.2 Level of Service A A A A Approach Delay 9.8 7.3 9.2 Approach LOS A A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 9.3 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.53 Actuated Cycle Length 36.2 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 75.6% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 9: I-5 NB Ramps & Harbor Boulevard Year 2015 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 2 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 90 860 1310 0 60 1620 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.5 5.5 5.0 4.7 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.86 Frt 0.88 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3020 1386 4893 1703 6166 Flt Permitted 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3020 1386 4893 1703 6166 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 95 905 1379 0 63 1705 RTOR Reduction (vph) 149 149 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 0 63 1705 Turn Type custom Prot Protected Phases 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 Actuated Green, G 32.0 32.0 64.8 8.0 77.5 Effective Green, g 32.0 32.0 64.8 8.0 77.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.27 0.27 0.54 0.07 0.65 Clearance Time 5.5 5.5 5.0 4.7 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 114 3982 v/s Ratio Prot c0.28 c0.04 0.28 v/s Ratio Perm 0.13 c0.22 v/c Ratio 0.50 0.82 0.52 0.55 0.43 Uniform Delay, d1 37.2 41.3 17.7 54.3 10.4 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.87 1.10 1.21 Incremental Delay, d2 0.5 13.2 0.7 3.4 0.2 Delay 37.7 54.5 16.1 63.1 12.8 Level of Service D D B E B Approach Delay 45.3 16.1 14.6 Approach LOS D B B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 22.5 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.62 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 15.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 69.6% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 10: I-5 SB Ramps & Harbor Boulevard Year 2015 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 3 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 270 400 80 1600 980 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.5 4.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.86 0.91 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 1524 1703 6166 4893 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 1524 1703 6166 4893 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 284 421 84 1684 1032 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 284 421 84 1684 1032 0 Turn Type Free Prot Protected Phases 4 5 2 6 Permitted Phases Free Actuated Green, G 15.6 120.0 9.9 93.9 79.8 Effective Green, g 15.6 120.0 9.9 93.9 79.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 1.00 0.08 0.78 0.66 Clearance Time 5.5 4.2 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 429 1524 140 4825 3254 v/s Ratio Prot c0.09 c0.05 c0.27 0.21 v/s Ratio Perm 0.28 v/c Ratio 0.66 0.28 0.60 0.35 0.32 Uniform Delay, d1 49.7 0.0 53.1 3.9 8.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.25 0.38 0.23 Incremental Delay, d2 3.8 0.5 6.8 0.2 0.2 Delay 53.5 0.5 73.2 1.7 2.2 Level of Service D A E A A Approach Delay 21.8 5.1 2.2 Approach LOS C A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 7.6 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.41 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 43.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 17: Disney Way & I-5 SB Ramps Year 2015 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 370 10 50 640 0 20 0 60 360 0 120 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.91 0.95 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4873 1703 4893 1703 1524 1618 1543 1447 Flt Permitted 1.00 0.51 1.00 0.62 1.00 0.95 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4873 910 4893 1119 1524 1618 1543 1447 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 389 11 53 674 0 21 0 63 379 0 126 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 59 0 2 93 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 399 0 53 674 0 21 0 4 197 193 20 Turn Type Perm custom custom Split Perm Protected Phases 2 6 4 4 Permitted Phases 6 8 8 4 Actuated Green, G 75.5 75.5 75.5 8.2 8.2 21.3 21.3 21.3 Effective Green, g 75.5 75.5 75.5 8.2 8.2 21.3 21.3 21.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.07 0.07 0.18 0.18 0.18 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3066 573 3079 76 104 287 274 257 v/s Ratio Prot 0.08 c0.14 0.12 c0.12 v/s Ratio Perm 0.06 c0.02 0.00 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.13 0.09 0.22 0.28 0.04 0.69 0.70 0.08 Uniform Delay, d1 9.0 8.8 9.6 53.1 52.2 46.2 46.4 41.2 Progression Factor 0.41 0.31 0.30 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.1 0.0 2.0 0.2 6.7 7.9 0.1 Delay 3.8 2.8 2.9 55.1 52.4 52.9 54.3 41.3 Level of Service A A A E D D D D Approach Delay 3.8 2.9 53.1 50.8 Approach LOS A A D D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 19.7 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.32 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 42.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 20: I-5 NB Ramps & Anaheim Boulevard Year 2015 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 4 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 0 0 80 510 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 1540 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.91 0.91 Frt 0.94 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3045 1386 3303 4893 4893 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3045 1386 3303 4893 4893 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 84 537 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 1621 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 29 29 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 0 1042 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 1621 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Protected Phases 8 5 2 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 Actuated Green, G 47.0 47.0 9.7 63.0 49.1 Effective Green, g 47.0 47.0 9.7 63.0 49.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.39 0.39 0.08 0.52 0.41 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1193 [PHONE REDACTED] 2002 v/s Ratio Prot c0.06 0.25 c0.33 v/s Ratio Perm 0.34 0.33 v/c Ratio 0.87 0.84 0.75 0.47 0.81 Uniform Delay, d1 33.8 33.2 54.0 18.0 31.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.05 0.87 0.58 Incremental Delay, d2 7.3 11.5 8.4 0.5 3.0 Delay 41.1 44.7 64.9 16.2 21.0 Level of Service D D E B C Approach Delay 0.0 42.2 23.1 21.0 Approach LOS A D C C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 28.8 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.83 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 14.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 73.3% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 21: Disney Way & Anaheim Boulevard Year 2015 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 5 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 340 260 180 0 440 0 90 1040 10 530 1000 90 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.2 5.0 5.0 4.7 6.0 5.2 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.86 0.91 1.00 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 5788 4893 1703 4886 3303 4833 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 5788 4893 1703 4886 3303 4833 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 358 274 189 0 463 0 95 1095 11 558 1053 95 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 108 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 8 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 358 355 0 0 463 0 95 1105 0 558 1140 0 Turn Type Prot Prot Prot Protected Phases 7 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G 17.3 36.8 15.3 11.2 42.1 24.9 56.3 Effective Green, g 17.3 36.8 15.3 11.2 42.1 24.9 56.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.31 0.13 0.09 0.35 0.21 0.47 Clearance Time 4.2 5.0 5.0 4.7 6.0 5.2 6.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 476 1775 [PHONE REDACTED] 685 2267 v/s Ratio Prot c0.11 0.06 c0.09 0.06 c0.23 c0.17 0.24 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 0.75 0.20 0.74 0.60 0.64 0.81 0.50 Uniform Delay, d1 49.3 30.7 50.4 52.2 32.7 45.3 22.1 Progression Factor 0.85 0.89 1.00 0.82 0.45 0.31 0.12 Incremental Delay, d2 6.5 0.1 4.7 4.6 1.4 4.3 0.4 Delay 48.6 27.5 55.2 47.2 16.2 18.2 3.2 Level of Service D C E D B B A Approach Delay 36.7 55.2 18.7 8.1 Approach LOS D E B A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 21.9 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.72 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 20.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.6% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 25: Katella Avenue & Manchester Avenue Year 2015 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 8 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1262 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 80 0 180 160 80 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.88 0.97 0.91 0.95 0.91 0.95 0.97 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.86 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 2682 3303 4893 1618 1401 1447 3303 3406 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 2682 3303 4893 1618 1406 1447 3303 3406 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1328 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 84 0 189 168 84 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 373 0 0 0 0 71 88 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1328 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 76 28 10 168 84 0 Turn Type Perm Prot Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 3 8 7 4 Permitted Phases 2 8 4 Actuated Green, G 57.1 57.1 18.8 80.1 14.0 26.7 12.7 12.4 11.1 Effective Green, g 57.1 57.1 18.8 80.1 14.0 26.7 12.7 12.4 11.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.48 0.48 0.16 0.67 0.12 0.22 0.11 0.10 0.09 Clearance Time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2328 1276 517 3266 189 312 153 341 315 v/s Ratio Prot 0.27 c0.15 c0.41 0.05 0.01 c0.05 c0.02 v/s Ratio Perm 0.14 0.01 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.57 0.29 0.98 0.62 0.40 0.09 0.07 0.49 0.27 Uniform Delay, d1 22.6 19.1 50.4 11.3 49.1 37.0 48.3 50.8 50.7 Progression Factor 0.45 0.29 0.91 0.60 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.54 0.68 Incremental Delay, d2 0.8 0.4 30.3 0.7 1.4 0.1 0.2 0.9 0.4 Delay 11.0 6.0 75.9 7.5 50.5 37.1 48.5 28.3 34.8 Level of Service B A E A D D D C C Approach Delay 9.3 21.2 44.9 30.5 Approach LOS A C D C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 18.1 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.64 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 19.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.4% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 26: Katella Avenue & Anaheim Way Year 2015 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 9 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 40 1582 0 0 1872 [PHONE REDACTED] 170 0 0 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 4893 5790 1234 1379 5677 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 4893 5790 1234 1379 5677 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 42 1665 0 0 1971 [PHONE REDACTED] 179 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 2 20 0 6 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 42 1665 0 0 2010 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Protected Phases 5 2 6 3 8 Permitted Phases 6 Actuated Green, G 4.2 59.0 51.1 51.1 51.0 51.0 Effective Green, g 4.2 59.0 51.1 51.1 51.0 51.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.04 0.49 0.43 0.43 0.42 0.42 Clearance Time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 116 2406 2466 [PHONE REDACTED] v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 c0.34 c0.35 c0.32 0.32 v/s Ratio Perm 0.28 v/c Ratio 0.36 0.69 0.81 0.67 0.75 0.75 Uniform Delay, d1 56.6 23.5 30.3 27.6 29.1 29.1 Progression Factor 0.96 1.00 0.59 0.54 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.9 1.6 2.4 5.0 5.2 1.3 Delay 56.1 25.1 20.2 20.1 34.3 30.3 Level of Service E C C C C C Approach Delay 25.9 20.2 31.1 0.0 Approach LOS C C C A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 25.6 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.75 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 66.0% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 32: Gene Autry Way & I-5 HOV Ramps Year 2015 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 14 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 60 160 40 60 510 260 10 0 50 140 0 10 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 4.5 6.0 6.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.88 0.97 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1719 4792 1719 4690 1719 2707 3335 1538 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1719 4792 1719 4690 1719 2707 3335 1538 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 63 168 42 63 537 274 11 0 53 147 0 11 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 13 0 0 72 0 0 0 49 0 0 8 Lane Group Flow (vph) 63 197 0 63 739 0 11 0 4 147 0 3 Heavy Vehicles 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% Turn Type Prot Prot Prot Over Prot Over Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 3 1 7 5 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G 32.3 82.8 9.0 60.5 12.7 9.0 11.2 32.3 Effective Green, g 32.3 82.8 9.0 60.5 12.7 9.0 11.2 32.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.27 0.69 0.08 0.50 0.11 0.08 0.09 0.27 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 4.5 6.0 6.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 463 3306 129 2365 182 203 311 414 v/s Ratio Prot c0.04 0.04 c0.04 c0.16 0.01 0.00 c0.04 0.00 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 0.14 0.06 0.49 0.31 0.06 0.02 0.47 0.01 Uniform Delay, d1 33.3 6.0 53.3 17.5 48.3 51.4 51.6 32.1 Progression Factor 0.99 0.86 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.0 2.9 0.3 0.1 0.0 1.1 0.0 Delay 33.0 5.2 56.2 17.9 48.4 51.5 52.7 32.1 Level of Service C A E B D D D C Approach Delay 11.6 20.6 50.9 51.3 Approach LOS B C D D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 23.8 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.28 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 17.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 40.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 41: Anaheim Way & State College Boulevard Year 2015 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 16 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 0 0 150 110 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 30 1330 80 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.88 0.97 0.86 1.00 0.86 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1550 3203 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1550 3203 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 158 116 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 32 1400 84 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 279 0 0 0 0 0 36 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 90 184 37 358 1147 0 32 1400 48 Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Prot Perm Protected Phases 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 6 Actuated Green, G 14.0 14.0 14.0 18.3 81.4 5.9 69.2 69.2 Effective Green, g 14.0 14.0 14.0 18.3 81.4 5.9 69.2 69.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.15 0.68 0.05 0.58 0.58 Clearance Time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 181 374 [PHONE REDACTED] 84 3556 879 v/s Ratio Prot c0.11 0.19 0.02 c0.23 v/s Ratio Perm c0.06 0.06 0.01 0.03 v/c Ratio 0.50 0.49 0.12 0.71 0.27 0.38 0.39 0.06 Uniform Delay, d1 49.7 49.7 47.5 48.3 7.6 55.3 13.9 11.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.73 0.32 0.84 0.50 0.08 Incremental Delay, d2 2.1 1.0 0.2 4.1 0.1 2.8 0.3 0.1 Delay 51.8 50.7 47.6 39.6 2.6 49.0 7.2 1.0 Level of Service D D D D A D A A Approach Delay 0.0 49.2 11.4 7.8 Approach LOS A D B A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 16.0 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.47 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 18.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 49.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 42: I-5 SB Ramps & State College Boulevard Year 2015 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 17 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 150 330 320 0 0 0 0 1610 30 0 1190 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.88 0.81 0.86 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1618 1699 2682 7239 6166 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1618 1699 2682 7239 6166 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 158 347 337 0 0 0 0 1695 32 0 1253 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 142 363 323 0 0 0 0 1722 0 0 1253 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 Actuated Green, G 18.3 18.3 18.3 25.7 25.7 Effective Green, g 18.3 18.3 18.3 25.7 25.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.43 0.43 Clearance Time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 493 [PHONE REDACTED] 2641 v/s Ratio Prot c0.24 0.20 v/s Ratio Perm 0.09 0.21 0.12 v/c Ratio 0.29 0.70 0.39 0.56 0.47 Uniform Delay, d1 15.9 18.4 16.5 12.9 12.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.44 0.63 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 4.3 0.3 0.5 0.6 Delay 16.2 22.7 16.8 6.1 8.3 Level of Service B C B A A Approach Delay 19.2 0.0 6.1 8.3 Approach LOS B A A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 9.7 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.62 Actuated Cycle Length 60.0 Sum of lost time 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 65.8% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 48: Ball Road & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2015 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 23 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 1160 0 0 1600 520 240 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 3297 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 3297 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 1221 0 0 1684 547 253 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 4 28 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1221 0 0 1684 568 200 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 74.9 74.9 25.5 25.5 Effective Green, g 74.9 74.9 25.5 25.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.68 0.68 0.23 0.23 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3332 3332 764 321 v/s Ratio Prot 0.25 c0.34 c0.17 v/s Ratio Perm 0.14 v/c Ratio 0.37 0.51 0.74 0.62 Uniform Delay, d1 7.5 8.5 39.2 37.9 Progression Factor 0.42 1.17 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 0.4 3.9 3.8 Delay 3.4 10.4 43.2 41.7 Level of Service A B D D Approach Delay 3.4 10.4 42.7 Approach LOS A B D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 15.1 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.57 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 9.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 56.3% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 49: Ball Road & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2015 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 24 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1330 1690 0 380 620 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.88 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1400 1779 0 400 653 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 12 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1400 1779 0 400 641 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G 67.4 67.4 33.6 33.6 Effective Green, g 67.4 67.4 33.6 33.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.61 0.61 0.31 0.31 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2998 2998 520 819 v/s Ratio Prot 0.29 c0.36 0.23 v/s Ratio Perm c0.24 v/c Ratio 0.47 0.59 0.77 0.78 Uniform Delay, d1 11.6 13.0 34.7 34.9 Progression Factor 0.66 0.41 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 0.8 6.8 4.9 Delay 7.9 6.1 41.4 39.8 Level of Service A A D D Approach Delay 7.9 6.1 40.4 Approach LOS A A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 15.3 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.66 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.8% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 50: Katella Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2015 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 25 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 1190 0 0 2030 250 370 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.81 0.86 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.94 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 7259 6166 3170 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 7259 6166 3170 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 1253 0 0 2137 263 389 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 55 55 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1253 0 0 2137 391 151 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 71.9 71.9 18.1 18.1 Effective Green, g 71.9 71.9 18.1 18.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.72 0.72 0.18 0.18 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 5219 4433 574 251 v/s Ratio Prot 0.17 c0.35 c0.12 v/s Ratio Perm 0.11 v/c Ratio 0.24 0.48 0.68 0.60 Uniform Delay, d1 4.8 6.0 38.3 37.6 Progression Factor 1.24 1.38 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.2 3.3 4.0 Delay 6.0 8.6 41.6 41.7 Level of Service A A D D Approach Delay 6.0 8.6 41.6 Approach LOS A A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 13.1 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.52 Actuated Cycle Length 100.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 48.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 51: Katella Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2015 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 26 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1440 1460 0 230 490 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.88 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1516 1537 0 242 516 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 36 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1516 1537 0 242 480 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G 67.2 67.2 23.8 23.8 Effective Green, g 67.2 67.2 23.8 23.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.67 0.67 0.24 0.24 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3288 3288 405 638 v/s Ratio Prot 0.31 c0.31 0.14 v/s Ratio Perm c0.18 v/c Ratio 0.46 0.47 0.60 0.75 Uniform Delay, d1 7.8 7.8 33.8 35.4 Progression Factor 1.14 0.53 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 0.4 2.4 5.0 Delay 9.2 4.6 36.2 40.4 Level of Service A A D D Approach Delay 9.2 4.6 39.0 Approach LOS A A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 13.3 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.54 Actuated Cycle Length 100.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 52.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 52: Orangewood Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2015 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 27 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 1120 0 0 2040 80 210 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.91 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3406 4893 3113 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3406 4893 3113 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 1179 0 0 2147 84 221 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 102 101 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1179 0 0 2147 93 9 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 81.7 81.7 8.3 8.3 Effective Green, g 81.7 81.7 8.3 8.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.82 0.82 0.08 0.08 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2783 3998 258 115 v/s Ratio Prot 0.35 c0.44 c0.03 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.42 0.54 0.36 0.08 Uniform Delay, d1 2.6 3.0 43.3 42.3 Progression Factor 0.15 1.10 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 0.5 0.9 0.3 Delay 0.7 3.8 44.2 42.6 Level of Service A A D D Approach Delay 0.7 3.8 43.6 Approach LOS A A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 6.1 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.52 Actuated Cycle Length 100.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 52.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 53: Orangewood Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2015 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1030 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 280 0 490 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.91 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.87 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.99 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3256 1386 1703 3406 1618 1406 1447 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.99 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3256 1386 1703 3406 1618 1406 1447 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1084 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 295 0 516 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 1 72 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 99 99 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1098 60 495 1200 0 0 0 0 265 174 174 Turn Type Perm Prot Perm Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 4 Permitted Phases 2 4 4 Actuated Green, G 36.2 36.2 31.8 72.2 17.8 17.8 17.8 Effective Green, g 36.2 36.2 31.8 72.2 17.8 17.8 17.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.36 0.36 0.32 0.72 0.18 0.18 0.18 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1179 [PHONE REDACTED] 288 250 258 v/s Ratio Prot c0.34 c0.29 0.35 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 c0.16 0.12 0.12 v/c Ratio 0.93 0.12 0.91 0.49 0.92 0.69 0.67 Uniform Delay, d1 30.7 21.3 32.8 6.0 40.4 38.5 38.4 Progression Factor 0.48 0.18 0.89 0.44 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 13.0 0.4 17.7 0.6 32.8 8.1 6.7 Delay 27.8 4.2 47.0 3.2 73.2 46.6 45.1 Level of Service C A D A E D D Approach Delay 25.3 16.0 0.0 54.8 Approach LOS C B A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 27.5 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.92 Actuated Cycle Length 100.0 Sum of lost time 14.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 80.6% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 64: Chapman Avenue & Frontage Road Year 2015 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 33 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 980 1010 120 1330 0 670 0 80 400 0 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.81 0.81 0.97 0.91 0.97 1.00 0.97 Frt 0.95 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (prot) 5511 1234 3303 4893 3303 1524 3303 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (perm) 5511 1234 3303 4893 3303 1524 3303 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1032 1063 126 1400 0 705 0 84 421 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 70 245 0 0 0 0 0 62 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1494 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 705 0 22 421 0 0 Turn Type Perm Prot custom custom custom custom Protected Phases 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 2 8 8 4 4 Actuated Green, G 64.7 64.7 9.2 78.9 31.1 31.1 31.1 Effective Green, g 64.7 64.7 9.2 78.9 31.1 31.1 31.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.54 0.54 0.08 0.66 0.26 0.26 0.26 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2971 [PHONE REDACTED] 856 395 856 v/s Ratio Prot c0.27 0.04 c0.29 v/s Ratio Perm 0.23 c0.21 0.01 0.13 v/c Ratio 0.50 0.43 0.50 0.44 0.82 0.06 0.49 Uniform Delay, d1 17.5 16.6 53.2 9.9 41.9 33.4 37.7 Progression Factor 1.77 7.79 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 1.3 1.5 0.4 6.5 0.1 0.4 Delay 31.3 130.5 54.7 10.3 48.3 33.5 40.0 Level of Service C F D B D C D Approach Delay 56.5 14.0 46.7 40.0 Approach LOS E B D D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 40.0 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.60 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 54.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 65: Chapman Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2015 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 34 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1000 0 0 1830 0 40 0 150 0 0 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.91 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3406 4893 1703 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3406 4893 1703 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1053 0 0 1926 0 42 0 158 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 147 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1053 0 0 1926 0 42 0 11 0 0 0 Turn Type Prot custom custom custom custom Protected Phases 5 2 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 4 4 Actuated Green, G 102.3 102.3 8.7 8.7 Effective Green, g 102.3 102.3 8.7 8.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.85 0.85 0.07 0.07 Clearance Time 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2904 4171 123 110 v/s Ratio Prot 0.31 c0.39 v/s Ratio Perm c0.02 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.36 0.46 0.34 0.10 Uniform Delay, d1 1.9 2.2 52.9 52.0 Progression Factor 0.52 0.55 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 0.3 1.7 0.4 Delay 1.3 1.5 54.6 52.4 Level of Service A A D D Approach Delay 1.3 1.5 52.9 0.0 Approach LOS A A D A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 4.6 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.45 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 45.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 66: Chapman Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2015 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 35 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1310 20 20 1290 0 140 30 110 160 10 320 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4882 1703 3406 1722 1524 1712 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4882 1703 3406 1722 1524 1712 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1379 21 21 1358 0 147 32 116 168 11 337 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 97 0 0 254 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1399 0 21 1358 0 0 179 19 0 179 83 Turn Type Prot Prot Split Perm Split Perm Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 8 8 7 7 Permitted Phases 8 7 Actuated Green, G 59.1 2.4 65.5 16.0 16.0 24.0 24.0 Effective Green, g 59.1 2.4 65.5 16.0 16.0 24.0 24.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.49 0.02 0.55 0.13 0.13 0.20 0.20 Clearance Time 4.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2404 34 1859 230 203 342 305 v/s Ratio Prot 0.29 0.01 c0.40 c0.10 c0.10 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 0.05 v/c Ratio 0.58 0.62 0.73 0.78 0.09 0.52 0.27 Uniform Delay, d1 21.7 58.3 20.6 50.3 45.6 42.9 40.6 Progression Factor 0.91 0.68 0.40 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.0 26.6 2.3 22.4 0.9 5.6 2.2 Delay 20.8 66.3 10.6 72.7 46.5 48.5 42.8 Level of Service C E B E D D D Approach Delay 20.8 11.5 62.4 44.8 Approach LOS C B E D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 24.1 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.69 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 14.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 76.9% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 69: I-5 SB Off-ramp & Disneyland Drive Year 2015 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 36 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 670 50 490 0 0 340 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.94 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4802 1524 3406 3406 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4802 1524 3406 3406 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 705 53 516 0 0 358 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 35 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 705 18 516 0 0 358 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 10.5 10.5 10.9 10.9 Effective Green, g 10.5 10.5 10.9 10.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.33 0.33 0.35 0.35 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1606 510 1182 1182 v/s Ratio Prot c0.15 c0.15 0.11 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.44 0.03 0.44 0.30 Uniform Delay, d1 8.2 7.0 7.9 7.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 0.0 0.3 0.1 Delay 8.3 7.1 8.1 7.6 Level of Service A A A A Approach Delay 8.3 8.1 7.6 Approach LOS A A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 8.1 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.44 Actuated Cycle Length 31.4 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 34.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No.14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report – Technical Appendices Appendix C-3 Caltrans Ramp Termini Analysis Worksheets under 2015 With Project Conditions ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 9: I-5 NB Ramps & Harbor Boulevard Year 2015 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 2 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 70 710 844 0 50 2271 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.5 5.5 5.0 4.7 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.86 Frt 0.87 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3017 1386 4893 1703 6166 Flt Permitted 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3017 1386 4893 1703 6166 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 74 747 888 0 53 2391 RTOR Reduction (vph) 212 212 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 236 161 888 0 53 2391 Turn Type custom Prot Protected Phases 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 Actuated Green, G 19.6 19.6 77.2 8.0 89.9 Effective Green, g 19.6 19.6 77.2 8.0 89.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.64 0.07 0.75 Clearance Time 5.5 5.5 5.0 4.7 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 114 4619 v/s Ratio Prot 0.18 0.03 c0.39 v/s Ratio Perm 0.08 c0.12 v/c Ratio 0.48 0.71 0.28 0.46 0.52 Uniform Delay, d1 45.6 47.5 9.3 53.9 6.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.10 0.73 2.71 Incremental Delay, d2 0.7 10.2 0.2 1.1 0.1 Delay 46.3 57.7 1.2 40.5 16.9 Level of Service D E A D B Approach Delay 51.5 1.2 17.4 Approach LOS D A B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 20.7 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.55 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 10.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 54.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 10: I-5 SB Ramps & Harbor Boulevard Year 2015 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 3 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 270 368 60 834 1211 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.5 4.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.86 0.91 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 1524 1703 6166 4893 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 1524 1703 6166 4893 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 284 387 63 878 1275 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 284 387 63 878 1275 0 Turn Type Free Prot Protected Phases 4 5 2 6 Permitted Phases Free Actuated Green, G 15.6 120.0 12.6 93.9 77.1 Effective Green, g 15.6 120.0 12.6 93.9 77.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 1.00 0.10 0.78 0.64 Clearance Time 5.5 4.2 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 429 1524 179 4825 3144 v/s Ratio Prot c0.09 c0.04 0.14 c0.26 v/s Ratio Perm 0.25 v/c Ratio 0.66 0.25 0.35 0.18 0.41 Uniform Delay, d1 49.7 0.0 49.9 3.3 10.4 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.60 2.88 0.52 Incremental Delay, d2 3.8 0.4 1.2 0.1 0.3 Delay 53.5 0.4 80.9 9.6 5.8 Level of Service D A F A A Approach Delay 22.9 14.4 5.8 Approach LOS C B A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 12.6 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.44 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 14.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 47.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 17: Disney Way & I-5 SB Ramps Year 2015 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 350 10 60 414 0 20 0 30 360 10 150 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.91 0.95 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4872 1703 4893 1703 1524 1618 1545 1447 Flt Permitted 1.00 0.52 1.00 0.62 1.00 0.95 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4872 930 4893 1112 1524 1618 1545 1447 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 368 11 63 436 0 21 0 32 379 11 158 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 30 0 3 116 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 377 0 63 436 0 21 0 2 205 198 26 Turn Type Perm custom custom Split Perm Protected Phases 2 6 4 4 Permitted Phases 6 8 8 4 Actuated Green, G 74.8 74.8 74.8 8.2 8.2 22.0 22.0 22.0 Effective Green, g 74.8 74.8 74.8 8.2 8.2 22.0 22.0 22.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.07 0.07 0.18 0.18 0.18 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3037 580 3050 76 104 297 283 265 v/s Ratio Prot 0.08 c0.09 0.13 c0.13 v/s Ratio Perm 0.07 c0.02 0.00 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.12 0.11 0.14 0.28 0.02 0.69 0.70 0.10 Uniform Delay, d1 9.2 9.1 9.3 53.1 52.2 45.8 45.9 40.8 Progression Factor 0.42 0.40 0.39 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.1 0.0 2.0 0.1 6.7 7.3 0.2 Delay 3.9 3.8 3.7 55.1 52.2 52.6 53.2 40.9 Level of Service A A A E D D D D Approach Delay 3.9 3.7 53.4 49.8 Approach LOS A A D D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 22.6 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.27 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 42.6% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 20: I-5 NB Ramps & Anaheim Boulevard Year 2015 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 4 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 0 0 30 20 390 230 921 0 0 1411 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.91 0.91 Frt 0.88 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 2855 1386 3303 4893 4893 Flt Permitted 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 2855 1386 3303 4893 4893 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 32 21 411 242 969 0 0 1485 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 142 142 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 0 117 63 242 969 0 0 1485 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Protected Phases 8 5 2 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 Actuated Green, G 12.2 12.2 14.1 97.8 79.5 Effective Green, g 12.2 12.2 14.1 97.8 79.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.10 0.10 0.12 0.82 0.66 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 290 [PHONE REDACTED] 3242 v/s Ratio Prot c0.07 0.20 c0.30 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 c0.05 v/c Ratio 0.40 0.45 0.62 0.24 0.46 Uniform Delay, d1 50.5 50.7 50.4 2.6 9.8 Progression Factor 1.09 1.34 1.03 0.52 0.35 Incremental Delay, d2 0.9 2.2 2.7 0.1 0.4 Delay 56.0 70.2 54.7 1.5 3.8 Level of Service E E D A A Approach Delay 0.0 62.3 12.1 3.8 Approach LOS A E B A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 15.6 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.48 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 14.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 51.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 21: Disney Way & Anaheim Boulevard Year 2015 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 5 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 340 320 100 0 304 10 40 850 10 460 820 91 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.2 5.0 5.0 4.7 6.0 5.2 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.86 0.91 1.00 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 5946 4869 1703 4884 3303 4820 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 5946 4869 1703 4884 3303 4820 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 358 337 105 0 320 11 42 895 11 484 863 96 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 51 0 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 10 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 358 391 0 0 328 0 42 905 0 484 949 0 Turn Type Prot Prot Prot Protected Phases 7 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G 18.0 35.5 13.3 6.4 44.8 23.5 62.4 Effective Green, g 18.0 35.5 13.3 6.4 44.8 23.5 62.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 0.30 0.11 0.05 0.37 0.20 0.52 Clearance Time 4.2 5.0 5.0 4.7 6.0 5.2 6.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 495 1759 540 91 1823 647 2506 v/s Ratio Prot c0.11 0.07 c0.07 0.02 c0.19 c0.15 0.20 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 0.72 0.22 0.61 0.46 0.50 0.75 0.38 Uniform Delay, d1 48.6 31.8 50.9 55.1 28.9 45.5 17.2 Progression Factor 0.90 0.85 0.91 0.88 0.47 0.57 0.38 Incremental Delay, d2 5.1 0.1 1.8 3.4 0.9 4.3 0.4 Delay 48.8 27.0 48.0 51.7 14.6 30.0 7.0 Level of Service D C D D B C A Approach Delay 36.8 48.0 16.2 14.7 Approach LOS D D B B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 23.2 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.61 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 20.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 64.8% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 25: Katella Avenue & Manchester Avenue Year 2015 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 8 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1062 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 80 0 580 160 220 20 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.88 0.97 0.91 0.95 0.91 0.95 0.97 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 2682 3303 4893 1618 1391 1447 3303 3406 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 2682 3303 4893 1618 1392 1447 3303 3406 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1118 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 84 0 611 168 232 21 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 449 0 0 0 0 227 271 0 0 18 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1118 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 76 80 41 168 232 3 Turn Type Perm Prot Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 3 8 7 4 Permitted Phases 2 8 4 Actuated Green, G 58.4 58.4 13.8 76.4 13.3 29.0 15.7 13.1 15.5 15.5 Effective Green, g 58.4 58.4 13.8 76.4 13.3 29.0 15.7 13.1 15.5 15.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.49 0.49 0.12 0.64 0.11 0.24 0.13 0.11 0.13 0.13 Clearance Time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2381 1305 380 3115 179 336 189 361 440 197 v/s Ratio Prot 0.23 c0.08 c0.32 0.05 0.03 c0.05 c0.07 v/s Ratio Perm 0.16 0.03 0.03 0.00 v/c Ratio 0.47 0.33 0.67 0.50 0.42 0.24 0.22 0.47 0.53 0.01 Uniform Delay, d1 20.5 18.8 50.9 11.6 49.8 36.6 46.6 50.2 48.8 45.6 Progression Factor 0.31 0.14 0.86 0.77 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.74 0.48 0.46 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 0.3 4.3 0.6 1.6 0.4 0.6 0.9 1.0 0.0 Delay 6.6 3.0 47.8 9.5 51.4 37.0 47.2 37.7 24.3 21.1 Level of Service A A D A D D D D C C Approach Delay 5.0 14.9 43.2 29.5 Approach LOS A B D C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 16.1 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.51 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 14.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 62.9% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 26: Katella Avenue & Anaheim Way Year 2015 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 9 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 40 1766 0 0 1261 170 531 370 420 0 0 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.94 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 4893 5796 1234 1379 5392 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 4893 5796 1234 1379 5392 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 42 1859 0 0 1327 179 559 389 442 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 2 86 0 6 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 42 1859 0 0 1343 75 285 1099 0 0 0 0 Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Protected Phases 5 2 6 3 8 Permitted Phases 6 Actuated Green, G 4.2 64.0 56.1 56.1 46.0 46.0 Effective Green, g 4.2 64.0 56.1 56.1 46.0 46.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.04 0.53 0.47 0.47 0.38 0.38 Clearance Time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 116 2610 2710 [PHONE REDACTED] v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 c0.38 0.23 c0.21 0.20 v/s Ratio Perm 0.06 v/c Ratio 0.36 0.71 0.50 0.13 0.54 0.53 Uniform Delay, d1 56.6 21.1 22.1 18.1 28.8 28.7 Progression Factor 0.93 0.76 0.36 0.14 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.8 1.6 0.6 0.4 1.1 0.3 Delay 54.5 17.5 8.7 3.0 29.8 28.9 Level of Service D B A A C C Approach Delay 18.4 8.1 29.1 0.0 Approach LOS B A C A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 18.2 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.64 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 60.5% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 32: Gene Autry Way & I-5 HOV Ramps Year 2015 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 14 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 10 300 46 40 110 70 13 0 30 280 0 20 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 4.5 6.0 6.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.88 0.97 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.94 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 5084 1805 4884 1805 2842 3502 1615 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1805 5084 1805 4884 1805 2842 3502 1615 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 11 316 48 42 116 74 14 0 32 295 0 21 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 8 0 0 32 0 0 0 30 0 0 17 Lane Group Flow (vph) 11 356 0 42 158 0 14 0 2 295 0 4 Heavy Vehicles 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type Prot Prot Prot Over Prot Over Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 3 1 7 5 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G 21.2 79.3 8.2 67.3 17.0 8.2 15.5 21.2 Effective Green, g 21.2 79.3 8.2 67.3 17.0 8.2 15.5 21.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.18 0.66 0.07 0.56 0.14 0.07 0.13 0.18 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 4.5 6.0 6.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 319 3360 123 2739 256 194 452 285 v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 c0.07 c0.02 0.03 0.01 0.00 c0.08 0.00 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 0.03 0.11 0.34 0.06 0.05 0.01 0.65 0.01 Uniform Delay, d1 40.9 7.4 53.3 12.0 44.5 52.1 49.7 40.8 Progression Factor 1.10 1.23 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.0 0.1 1.7 0.0 0.1 0.0 3.4 0.0 Delay 45.2 9.2 55.0 12.0 44.6 52.1 53.1 40.8 Level of Service D A D B D D D D Approach Delay 10.2 19.8 49.9 52.2 Approach LOS B B D D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 28.1 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.21 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 17.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 35.6% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 41: Anaheim Way & State College Boulevard Year 2015 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 16 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 0 0 180 200 360 210 750 0 20 1780 20 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.88 0.97 0.86 1.00 0.86 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1550 3227 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1550 3227 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 189 211 379 221 789 0 21 1874 21 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 321 0 0 0 0 0 9 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 130 270 58 221 789 0 21 1874 12 Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Prot Perm Protected Phases 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 6 Actuated Green, G 16.8 16.8 16.8 12.6 71.4 3.1 62.1 62.1 Effective Green, g 16.8 16.8 16.8 12.6 71.4 3.1 62.1 62.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.11 0.65 0.03 0.56 0.56 Clearance Time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 237 493 [PHONE REDACTED] 48 3481 860 v/s Ratio Prot c0.07 0.13 0.01 c0.30 v/s Ratio Perm c0.08 0.08 0.02 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.55 0.55 0.14 0.58 0.20 0.44 0.54 0.01 Uniform Delay, d1 43.1 43.1 40.4 46.2 7.8 52.6 15.0 10.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.54 1.24 0.55 0.22 Incremental Delay, d2 2.6 1.2 0.2 2.3 0.1 6.1 0.6 0.0 Delay 45.7 44.3 40.5 48.5 4.3 71.5 8.9 2.4 Level of Service D D D D A E A A Approach Delay 0.0 42.7 14.0 9.5 Approach LOS A D B A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 17.7 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.55 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 18.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 54.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 42: I-5 SB Ramps & State College Boulevard Year 2015 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 17 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 70 470 360 0 0 0 0 980 30 0 1770 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.88 0.81 0.86 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1618 1702 2682 7227 6166 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1618 1702 2682 7227 6166 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 74 495 379 0 0 0 0 1032 32 0 1863 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 67 502 377 0 0 0 0 1060 0 0 1863 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 Actuated Green, G 40.3 40.3 40.3 53.7 53.7 Effective Green, g 40.3 40.3 40.3 53.7 53.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.49 0.49 Clearance Time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 593 [PHONE REDACTED] 3010 v/s Ratio Prot 0.15 c0.30 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 0.30 0.14 v/c Ratio 0.11 0.80 0.38 0.30 0.62 Uniform Delay, d1 23.0 31.3 25.7 16.9 20.6 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.47 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 7.4 0.3 0.2 0.8 Delay 23.1 38.8 25.9 16.2 10.5 Level of Service C D C B B Approach Delay 32.5 0.0 16.2 10.5 Approach LOS C A B B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 17.5 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.70 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 48: Ball Road & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2015 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 23 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 1470 0 0 800 380 480 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 3190 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 3190 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 1547 0 0 842 400 505 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 15 15 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1547 0 0 842 602 273 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 79.4 79.4 31.0 31.0 Effective Green, g 79.4 79.4 31.0 31.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.66 0.66 0.26 0.26 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3238 3238 824 358 v/s Ratio Prot c0.32 0.17 0.19 v/s Ratio Perm c0.20 v/c Ratio 0.48 0.26 0.73 0.76 Uniform Delay, d1 10.0 8.3 40.7 41.1 Progression Factor 0.54 1.22 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 0.2 3.4 9.3 Delay 5.8 10.3 44.0 50.4 Level of Service A B D D Approach Delay 5.8 10.3 46.1 Approach LOS A B D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 18.0 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.56 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 56.2% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 49: Ball Road & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2015 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 24 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1270 920 0 600 970 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.88 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1337 968 0 632 1021 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 34 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1337 968 0 632 987 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G 55.4 55.4 55.6 55.6 Effective Green, g 55.4 55.4 55.6 55.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2259 2259 789 1243 v/s Ratio Prot c0.27 0.20 c0.37 v/s Ratio Perm 0.37 v/c Ratio 0.59 0.43 0.80 0.79 Uniform Delay, d1 23.9 21.7 27.5 27.3 Progression Factor 1.50 0.59 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.7 0.6 5.9 3.6 Delay 36.6 13.4 33.3 30.9 Level of Service D B C C Approach Delay 36.6 13.4 31.8 Approach LOS D B C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 28.9 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.70 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 65.3% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 50: Katella Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2015 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 25 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 1300 0 0 1194 410 380 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.81 0.86 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.96 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 7259 6166 3228 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 7259 6166 3228 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 1368 0 0 1257 432 400 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 13 13 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1368 0 0 1257 559 247 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 80.8 80.8 29.2 29.2 Effective Green, g 80.8 80.8 29.2 29.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.67 0.67 0.24 0.24 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 4888 4152 785 337 v/s Ratio Prot 0.19 c0.20 0.17 v/s Ratio Perm c0.18 v/c Ratio 0.28 0.30 0.71 0.73 Uniform Delay, d1 7.9 8.0 41.6 41.8 Progression Factor 0.61 1.47 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.2 3.1 8.0 Delay 4.9 12.0 44.6 49.8 Level of Service A B D D Approach Delay 4.9 12.0 46.3 Approach LOS A B D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 17.4 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.42 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 41.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 51: Katella Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2015 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 26 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1274 1144 0 330 602 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.88 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1341 1204 0 347 634 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 51 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1341 1204 0 347 583 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G 77.9 77.9 33.1 33.1 Effective Green, g 77.9 77.9 33.1 33.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.65 0.65 0.28 0.28 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3176 3176 470 740 v/s Ratio Prot c0.27 0.25 0.20 v/s Ratio Perm c0.22 v/c Ratio 0.42 0.38 0.74 0.79 Uniform Delay, d1 10.2 9.8 39.5 40.2 Progression Factor 1.72 0.69 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 0.3 6.0 5.5 Delay 17.9 7.1 45.5 45.7 Level of Service B A D D Approach Delay 17.9 7.1 45.7 Approach LOS B A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 21.9 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.53 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 50.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 52: Orangewood Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2015 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 27 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 1340 0 0 1050 130 520 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3406 4893 3078 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3406 4893 3078 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 1411 0 0 1105 137 547 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 34 34 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1411 0 0 1105 377 239 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 67.6 67.6 22.4 22.4 Effective Green, g 67.6 67.6 22.4 22.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.68 0.68 0.22 0.22 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2302 3308 689 310 v/s Ratio Prot c0.41 0.23 0.12 v/s Ratio Perm c0.17 v/c Ratio 0.61 0.33 0.55 0.77 Uniform Delay, d1 9.0 6.8 34.3 36.4 Progression Factor 0.27 0.49 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.7 0.3 0.9 11.2 Delay 3.1 3.6 35.2 47.6 Level of Service A A D D Approach Delay 3.1 3.6 40.2 Approach LOS A A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 11.2 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.65 Actuated Cycle Length 100.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 66.8% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 53: Orangewood Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2015 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1340 50 170 740 0 0 0 0 340 0 410 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.91 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3261 1386 1703 3406 1618 1440 1447 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3261 1386 1703 3406 1618 1440 1447 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1411 53 179 779 0 0 0 0 358 0 432 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 81 195 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1416 29 179 779 0 0 0 0 276 182 56 Turn Type Perm Prot Perm Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 4 Permitted Phases 2 4 4 Actuated Green, G 50.5 50.5 14.8 69.5 20.5 20.5 20.5 Effective Green, g 50.5 50.5 14.8 69.5 20.5 20.5 20.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.50 0.50 0.15 0.70 0.20 0.20 0.20 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1647 [PHONE REDACTED] 332 295 297 v/s Ratio Prot c0.43 c0.11 0.23 v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 c0.17 0.13 0.04 v/c Ratio 0.86 0.04 0.71 0.33 0.83 0.62 0.19 Uniform Delay, d1 21.7 12.5 40.6 6.0 38.1 36.2 32.9 Progression Factor 0.35 0.08 0.81 0.43 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 5.4 0.1 8.8 0.4 16.1 3.8 0.3 Delay 13.0 1.1 41.8 3.0 54.1 40.0 33.2 Level of Service B A D A D D C Approach Delay 12.6 10.2 0.0 42.8 Approach LOS B B A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 19.3 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.83 Actuated Cycle Length 100.0 Sum of lost time 14.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 72.4% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 64: Chapman Avenue & Frontage Road Year 2015 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 33 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 890 930 100 960 0 620 0 110 480 0 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.81 0.81 0.97 0.91 0.97 1.00 0.97 Frt 0.95 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (prot) 5508 1234 3303 4893 3303 1524 3303 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (perm) 5508 1234 3303 4893 3303 1524 3303 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 937 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 653 0 116 505 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 76 220 0 0 0 0 0 87 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1351 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 653 0 29 505 0 0 Turn Type Perm Prot custom custom custom custom Protected Phases 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 2 8 8 4 4 Actuated Green, G 60.5 60.5 7.0 72.5 27.5 27.5 27.5 Effective Green, g 60.5 60.5 7.0 72.5 27.5 27.5 27.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.55 0.55 0.06 0.66 0.25 0.25 0.25 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3029 [PHONE REDACTED] 826 381 826 v/s Ratio Prot c0.25 c0.03 0.21 v/s Ratio Perm 0.22 c0.20 0.02 0.15 v/c Ratio 0.45 0.40 0.50 0.31 0.79 0.08 0.61 Uniform Delay, d1 14.8 14.2 49.8 8.1 38.6 31.5 36.5 Progression Factor 2.40 11.56 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.45 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 1.1 1.9 0.3 5.2 0.1 1.0 Delay 35.7 165.7 51.7 8.3 43.8 31.6 17.4 Level of Service D F D A D C B Approach Delay 68.9 12.4 41.9 17.4 Approach LOS E B D B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 43.4 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.55 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 51.6% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 65: Chapman Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2015 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 34 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1090 0 0 1210 0 50 0 110 0 0 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.91 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3406 4893 1703 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3406 4893 1703 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1147 0 0 1274 0 53 0 116 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 107 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1147 0 0 1274 0 53 0 9 0 0 0 Turn Type Prot custom custom custom custom Protected Phases 5 2 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 4 4 Actuated Green, G 92.2 92.2 8.8 8.8 Effective Green, g 92.2 92.2 8.8 8.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.84 0.84 0.08 0.08 Clearance Time 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2855 4101 136 122 v/s Ratio Prot c0.34 0.26 v/s Ratio Perm c0.03 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.40 0.31 0.39 0.08 Uniform Delay, d1 2.2 1.9 48.1 46.8 Progression Factor 0.02 0.81 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 0.2 1.8 0.3 Delay 0.3 1.8 49.9 47.1 Level of Service A A D D Approach Delay 0.3 1.8 48.0 0.0 Approach LOS A A D A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 4.1 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.40 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 44.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 66: Chapman Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2015 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 35 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 10 1240 150 90 790 0 20 10 20 260 60 390 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.5 4.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1703 4814 1703 3406 1736 1524 1722 1524 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1703 4814 1703 3406 1736 1524 1722 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 11 1305 158 95 832 0 21 11 21 274 63 411 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 0 0 314 Lane Group Flow (vph) 11 1449 0 95 832 0 0 32 3 0 337 97 Turn Type Prot Prot Split Perm Split Perm Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 8 8 7 7 Permitted Phases 8 7 Actuated Green, G 3.4 40.8 8.7 45.6 16.0 16.0 26.0 26.0 Effective Green, g 3.4 40.8 8.7 45.6 16.0 16.0 26.0 26.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.03 0.37 0.08 0.41 0.15 0.15 0.24 0.24 Clearance Time 4.5 4.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 53 1786 135 1412 253 222 407 360 v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 c0.30 c0.06 0.24 c0.02 c0.20 v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 0.06 v/c Ratio 0.21 0.81 0.70 0.59 0.13 0.01 0.83 0.27 Uniform Delay, d1 52.0 31.1 49.4 24.9 40.9 40.2 39.9 34.3 Progression Factor 0.92 0.92 0.86 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.9 4.1 14.9 1.8 1.0 0.1 17.4 1.8 Delay 49.6 32.7 57.4 26.8 41.9 40.4 57.3 36.1 Level of Service D C E C D D E D Approach Delay 32.9 30.0 41.3 45.6 Approach LOS C C D D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 35.1 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.69 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 18.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.2% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 69: I-5 SB Off-ramp & Disneyland Drive Year 2015 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 36 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 871 10 130 0 0 650 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.94 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4802 1524 3406 3406 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4802 1524 3406 3406 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 917 11 137 0 0 684 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 7 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 917 4 137 0 0 684 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 12.8 12.8 13.8 13.8 Effective Green, g 12.8 12.8 13.8 13.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.35 0.35 0.38 0.38 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1679 533 1284 1284 v/s Ratio Prot c0.19 0.04 c0.20 v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 v/c Ratio 0.55 0.01 0.11 0.53 Uniform Delay, d1 9.6 7.8 7.4 8.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.4 Delay 9.9 7.8 7.4 9.3 Level of Service A A A A Approach Delay 9.9 7.4 9.3 Approach LOS A A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 9.5 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.54 Actuated Cycle Length 36.6 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 76.5% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 9: I-5 NB Ramps & Harbor Boulevard Year 2015 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 2 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 90 860 1321 0 60 1629 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.5 5.5 5.0 4.7 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.86 Frt 0.88 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3020 1386 4893 1703 6166 Flt Permitted 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3020 1386 4893 1703 6166 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 95 905 1391 0 63 1715 RTOR Reduction (vph) 161 161 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 0 63 1715 Turn Type custom Prot Protected Phases 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 Actuated Green, G 31.3 31.3 64.9 8.6 78.2 Effective Green, g 31.3 31.3 64.9 8.6 78.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.26 0.26 0.54 0.07 0.65 Clearance Time 5.5 5.5 5.0 4.7 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 122 4018 v/s Ratio Prot c0.28 0.04 c0.28 v/s Ratio Perm 0.13 c0.21 v/c Ratio 0.49 0.80 0.53 0.52 0.43 Uniform Delay, d1 37.6 41.5 17.7 53.7 10.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.82 1.09 1.30 Incremental Delay, d2 0.5 12.2 0.7 2.2 0.2 Delay 38.1 53.6 15.3 60.5 13.3 Level of Service D D B E B Approach Delay 45.1 15.3 15.0 Approach LOS D B B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 22.3 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.61 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 15.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 69.8% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 10: I-5 SB Ramps & Harbor Boulevard Year 2015 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 3 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 270 454 80 1718 989 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.5 4.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.86 0.91 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 1524 1703 6166 4893 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 1524 1703 6166 4893 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 284 478 84 1808 1041 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 284 478 84 1808 1041 0 Turn Type Free Prot Protected Phases 4 5 2 6 Permitted Phases Free Actuated Green, G 15.6 120.0 9.9 93.9 79.8 Effective Green, g 15.6 120.0 9.9 93.9 79.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 1.00 0.08 0.78 0.66 Clearance Time 5.5 4.2 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 429 1524 140 4825 3254 v/s Ratio Prot c0.09 c0.05 c0.29 0.21 v/s Ratio Perm 0.31 v/c Ratio 0.66 0.31 0.60 0.37 0.32 Uniform Delay, d1 49.7 0.0 53.1 4.0 8.6 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.10 0.43 0.14 Incremental Delay, d2 3.8 0.5 6.8 0.2 0.2 Delay 53.5 0.5 65.3 1.9 1.4 Level of Service D A E A A Approach Delay 20.3 4.8 1.4 Approach LOS C A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 7.0 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.43 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 43.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 17: Disney Way & I-5 SB Ramps Year 2015 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 370 10 50 651 0 20 0 60 360 0 120 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.91 0.95 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4873 1703 4893 1703 1524 1618 1543 1447 Flt Permitted 1.00 0.51 1.00 0.62 1.00 0.95 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4873 910 4893 1119 1524 1618 1543 1447 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 389 11 53 685 0 21 0 63 379 0 126 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 59 0 2 93 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 399 0 53 685 0 21 0 4 197 193 20 Turn Type Perm custom custom Split Perm Protected Phases 2 6 4 4 Permitted Phases 6 8 8 4 Actuated Green, G 75.5 75.5 75.5 8.2 8.2 21.3 21.3 21.3 Effective Green, g 75.5 75.5 75.5 8.2 8.2 21.3 21.3 21.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.07 0.07 0.18 0.18 0.18 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3066 573 3079 76 104 287 274 257 v/s Ratio Prot 0.08 c0.14 0.12 c0.12 v/s Ratio Perm 0.06 c0.02 0.00 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.13 0.09 0.22 0.28 0.04 0.69 0.70 0.08 Uniform Delay, d1 9.0 8.8 9.6 53.1 52.2 46.2 46.4 41.2 Progression Factor 0.40 0.29 0.30 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.1 0.0 2.0 0.2 6.7 7.9 0.1 Delay 3.7 2.6 2.9 55.1 52.4 52.9 54.3 41.3 Level of Service A A A E D D D D Approach Delay 3.7 2.9 53.1 50.8 Approach LOS A A D D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 19.5 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.32 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 42.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 20: I-5 NB Ramps & Anaheim Boulevard Year 2015 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 4 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 0 0 80 510 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 1541 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.91 0.91 Frt 0.94 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3045 1386 3303 4893 4893 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3045 1386 3303 4893 4893 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 84 537 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 1622 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 32 32 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 0 1039 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 1622 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Protected Phases 8 5 2 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 Actuated Green, G 45.5 45.5 11.1 64.5 49.2 Effective Green, g 45.5 45.5 11.1 64.5 49.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.38 0.38 0.09 0.54 0.41 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1155 [PHONE REDACTED] 2006 v/s Ratio Prot c0.06 0.25 c0.33 v/s Ratio Perm 0.34 0.33 v/c Ratio 0.90 0.86 0.65 0.46 0.81 Uniform Delay, d1 35.1 34.4 52.6 17.1 31.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.04 0.81 0.56 Incremental Delay, d2 9.5 13.8 3.7 0.4 2.9 Delay 44.6 48.2 58.4 14.2 20.4 Level of Service D D E B C Approach Delay 0.0 45.7 20.4 20.4 Approach LOS A D C C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 29.0 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.83 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 14.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 73.4% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 21: Disney Way & Anaheim Boulevard Year 2015 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 5 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 340 260 180 0 451 0 90 1040 10 530 1000 91 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.2 5.0 5.0 4.7 6.0 5.2 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.86 0.91 1.00 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 5788 4893 1703 4886 3303 4832 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 5788 4893 1703 4886 3303 4832 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 358 274 189 0 475 0 95 1095 11 558 1053 96 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 108 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 9 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 358 355 0 0 475 0 95 1105 0 558 1140 0 Turn Type Prot Prot Prot Protected Phases 7 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G 17.3 37.1 15.6 11.2 41.8 24.9 56.0 Effective Green, g 17.3 37.1 15.6 11.2 41.8 24.9 56.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.31 0.13 0.09 0.35 0.21 0.47 Clearance Time 4.2 5.0 5.0 4.7 6.0 5.2 6.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 476 1789 [PHONE REDACTED] 685 2255 v/s Ratio Prot c0.11 0.06 c0.10 0.06 c0.23 c0.17 0.24 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 0.75 0.20 0.75 0.60 0.65 0.81 0.51 Uniform Delay, d1 49.3 30.5 50.3 52.2 32.9 45.3 22.3 Progression Factor 0.87 0.89 1.00 0.85 0.51 0.33 0.09 Incremental Delay, d2 6.5 0.1 4.8 4.4 1.4 4.2 0.5 Delay 49.2 27.2 55.1 48.7 18.2 19.3 2.5 Level of Service D C E D B B A Approach Delay 36.8 55.1 20.6 8.0 Approach LOS D E C A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 22.5 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.72 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 20.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.8% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 25: Katella Avenue & Manchester Avenue Year 2015 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 8 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1262 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 80 0 180 160 80 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.88 0.97 0.91 0.95 0.91 0.95 0.97 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.86 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 2682 3303 4893 1618 1401 1447 3303 3406 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 2682 3303 4893 1618 1406 1447 3303 3406 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1328 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 84 0 189 168 84 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 405 0 0 0 0 71 88 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1328 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 76 28 10 168 84 0 Turn Type Perm Prot Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 3 8 7 4 Permitted Phases 2 8 4 Actuated Green, G 57.1 57.1 18.8 80.1 14.0 26.7 12.7 12.4 11.1 Effective Green, g 57.1 57.1 18.8 80.1 14.0 26.7 12.7 12.4 11.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.48 0.48 0.16 0.67 0.12 0.22 0.11 0.10 0.09 Clearance Time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2328 1276 517 3266 189 312 153 341 315 v/s Ratio Prot 0.27 c0.15 c0.43 0.05 0.01 c0.05 c0.02 v/s Ratio Perm 0.15 0.01 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.57 0.31 0.98 0.64 0.40 0.09 0.07 0.49 0.27 Uniform Delay, d1 22.6 19.3 50.4 11.6 49.1 37.0 48.3 50.8 50.7 Progression Factor 0.37 0.22 0.92 1.09 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.55 0.63 Incremental Delay, d2 0.7 0.4 29.6 0.8 1.4 0.1 0.2 0.9 0.4 Delay 9.0 4.7 76.0 13.4 50.5 37.1 48.5 29.1 32.4 Level of Service A A E B D D D C C Approach Delay 7.4 25.6 44.9 30.2 Approach LOS A C D C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 19.4 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.65 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 19.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.4% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 26: Katella Avenue & Anaheim Way Year 2015 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 9 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 40 1619 0 0 1942 [PHONE REDACTED] 170 0 0 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 4893 5790 1234 1379 5677 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 4893 5790 1234 1379 5677 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 42 1704 0 0 2044 [PHONE REDACTED] 179 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 2 59 0 9 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 42 1704 0 0 2083 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Protected Phases 5 2 6 3 8 Permitted Phases 6 Actuated Green, G 8.2 64.0 52.1 52.1 46.0 46.0 Effective Green, g 8.2 64.0 52.1 52.1 46.0 46.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.07 0.53 0.43 0.43 0.38 0.38 Clearance Time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 226 2610 2514 [PHONE REDACTED] v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 c0.35 c0.36 c0.32 0.32 v/s Ratio Perm 0.25 v/c Ratio 0.19 0.65 0.83 0.58 0.83 0.83 Uniform Delay, d1 52.8 20.0 30.0 25.7 33.5 33.4 Progression Factor 0.96 0.81 0.56 0.40 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 1.2 2.5 3.4 10.4 2.7 Delay 51.0 17.4 19.3 13.6 43.9 36.1 Level of Service D B B B D D Approach Delay 18.2 18.4 37.6 0.0 Approach LOS B B D A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 25.1 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.79 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 66.7% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 32: Gene Autry Way & I-5 HOV Ramps Year 2015 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 14 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 60 160 57 60 510 260 12 0 50 140 0 10 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 4.5 6.0 6.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.88 0.97 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 4982 1805 4924 1805 2842 3502 1615 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1805 4982 1805 4924 1805 2842 3502 1615 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 63 168 60 63 537 274 13 0 53 147 0 11 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 19 0 0 73 0 0 0 49 0 0 8 Lane Group Flow (vph) 63 210 0 63 738 0 13 0 4 147 0 3 Heavy Vehicles 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type Prot Prot Prot Over Prot Over Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 3 1 7 5 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G 32.9 83.0 8.9 60.0 12.6 8.9 11.1 32.9 Effective Green, g 32.9 83.0 8.9 60.0 12.6 8.9 11.1 32.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.27 0.69 0.07 0.50 0.10 0.07 0.09 0.27 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 4.5 6.0 6.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 495 3446 134 2462 190 211 324 443 v/s Ratio Prot c0.03 0.04 c0.03 c0.15 0.01 0.00 c0.04 0.00 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 0.13 0.06 0.47 0.30 0.07 0.02 0.45 0.01 Uniform Delay, d1 32.8 6.0 53.3 17.6 48.4 51.5 51.6 31.7 Progression Factor 1.12 1.09 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.0 2.6 0.3 0.2 0.0 1.0 0.0 Delay 36.8 6.5 55.9 18.0 48.6 51.5 52.6 31.7 Level of Service D A E B D D D C Approach Delay 13.1 20.7 51.0 51.1 Approach LOS B C D D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 24.0 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.27 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 17.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 40.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 41: Anaheim Way & State College Boulevard Year 2015 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 16 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 0 0 150 110 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 30 1330 80 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.88 0.97 0.86 1.00 0.86 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1550 3203 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1550 3203 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 158 116 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 32 1400 84 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 279 0 0 0 0 0 36 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 90 184 37 358 1147 0 32 1400 48 Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Prot Perm Protected Phases 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 6 Actuated Green, G 14.0 14.0 14.0 18.3 81.9 5.4 69.2 69.2 Effective Green, g 14.0 14.0 14.0 18.3 81.9 5.4 69.2 69.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.15 0.68 0.05 0.58 0.58 Clearance Time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 181 374 [PHONE REDACTED] 77 3556 879 v/s Ratio Prot c0.11 0.19 0.02 c0.23 v/s Ratio Perm c0.06 0.06 0.01 0.03 v/c Ratio 0.50 0.49 0.12 0.71 0.27 0.42 0.39 0.06 Uniform Delay, d1 49.7 49.7 47.5 48.3 7.4 55.8 13.9 11.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.78 1.57 1.12 0.58 0.20 Incremental Delay, d2 2.1 1.0 0.2 4.4 0.2 3.5 0.3 0.1 Delay 51.8 50.7 47.6 42.3 11.8 66.0 8.4 2.3 Level of Service D D D D B E A A Approach Delay 0.0 49.2 19.1 9.3 Approach LOS A D B A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 19.9 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.47 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 18.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 49.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 42: I-5 SB Ramps & State College Boulevard Year 2015 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 17 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 150 330 320 0 0 0 0 1610 30 0 1190 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.88 0.81 0.86 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1618 1699 2682 7239 6166 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1618 1699 2682 7239 6166 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 158 347 337 0 0 0 0 1695 32 0 1253 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 26 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 142 363 311 0 0 0 0 1725 0 0 1253 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 Actuated Green, G 34.3 34.3 34.3 69.7 69.7 Effective Green, g 34.3 34.3 34.3 69.7 69.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.58 0.58 Clearance Time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 462 [PHONE REDACTED] 3581 v/s Ratio Prot c0.24 0.20 v/s Ratio Perm 0.09 0.21 0.12 v/c Ratio 0.31 0.75 0.41 0.41 0.35 Uniform Delay, d1 33.5 38.9 34.6 13.8 13.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.57 0.64 Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 6.2 0.4 0.2 0.3 Delay 33.9 45.1 35.0 8.1 8.8 Level of Service C D C A A Approach Delay 39.2 0.0 8.1 8.8 Approach LOS D A A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 15.1 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.52 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 65.8% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 48: Ball Road & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2015 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 23 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 1160 0 0 1600 520 240 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 3297 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 3297 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 1221 0 0 1684 547 253 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 3 53 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1221 0 0 1684 569 175 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 75.4 75.4 25.0 25.0 Effective Green, g 75.4 75.4 25.0 25.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.69 0.69 0.23 0.23 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3354 3354 749 315 v/s Ratio Prot 0.25 c0.34 c0.17 v/s Ratio Perm 0.13 v/c Ratio 0.36 0.50 0.76 0.55 Uniform Delay, d1 7.3 8.3 39.7 37.6 Progression Factor 0.77 1.06 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 0.4 4.4 2.1 Delay 5.8 9.2 44.1 39.7 Level of Service A A D D Approach Delay 5.8 9.2 42.9 Approach LOS A A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 15.3 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.57 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 9.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 56.3% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 49: Ball Road & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2015 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 24 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1330 1690 0 380 620 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.88 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1400 1779 0 400 653 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 23 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1400 1779 0 400 630 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G 69.5 69.5 31.5 31.5 Effective Green, g 69.5 69.5 31.5 31.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.63 0.63 0.29 0.29 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3091 3091 488 768 v/s Ratio Prot 0.29 c0.36 0.23 v/s Ratio Perm c0.24 v/c Ratio 0.45 0.58 0.82 0.82 Uniform Delay, d1 10.4 11.7 36.6 36.6 Progression Factor 1.75 0.33 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 0.7 10.3 7.0 Delay 18.6 4.5 47.0 43.6 Level of Service B A D D Approach Delay 18.6 4.5 44.9 Approach LOS B A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 19.2 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.65 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.8% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 50: Katella Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2015 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 25 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 1190 0 0 2041 250 370 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.81 0.86 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.94 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 7259 6166 3170 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 7259 6166 3170 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 1253 0 0 2148 263 389 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 55 55 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1253 0 0 2148 391 151 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 71.9 71.9 18.1 18.1 Effective Green, g 71.9 71.9 18.1 18.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.72 0.72 0.18 0.18 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 5219 4433 574 251 v/s Ratio Prot 0.17 c0.35 c0.12 v/s Ratio Perm 0.11 v/c Ratio 0.24 0.48 0.68 0.60 Uniform Delay, d1 4.8 6.1 38.3 37.6 Progression Factor 1.28 1.38 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.2 3.3 4.0 Delay 6.2 8.6 41.6 41.7 Level of Service A A D D Approach Delay 6.2 8.6 41.6 Approach LOS A A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 13.2 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.52 Actuated Cycle Length 100.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 48.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 51: Katella Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2015 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 26 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1477 1471 0 230 507 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.88 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1555 1548 0 242 534 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 34 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1555 1548 0 242 500 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G 66.5 66.5 24.5 24.5 Effective Green, g 66.5 66.5 24.5 24.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.66 0.66 0.24 0.24 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3254 3254 417 657 v/s Ratio Prot c0.32 0.32 0.14 v/s Ratio Perm c0.19 v/c Ratio 0.48 0.48 0.58 0.76 Uniform Delay, d1 8.2 8.2 33.2 35.0 Progression Factor 1.10 0.53 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 0.4 2.1 5.2 Delay 9.5 4.8 35.3 40.2 Level of Service A A D D Approach Delay 9.5 4.8 38.7 Approach LOS A A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 13.4 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.55 Actuated Cycle Length 100.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 52: Orangewood Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2015 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 27 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 1120 0 0 2040 80 210 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.91 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3406 4893 3113 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3406 4893 3113 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 1179 0 0 2147 84 221 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 102 101 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1179 0 0 2147 93 9 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 81.7 81.7 8.3 8.3 Effective Green, g 81.7 81.7 8.3 8.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.82 0.82 0.08 0.08 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2783 3998 258 115 v/s Ratio Prot 0.35 c0.44 c0.03 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.42 0.54 0.36 0.08 Uniform Delay, d1 2.6 3.0 43.3 42.3 Progression Factor 0.11 1.54 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 0.5 0.9 0.3 Delay 0.6 5.1 44.2 42.6 Level of Service A A D D Approach Delay 0.6 5.1 43.6 Approach LOS A A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 6.9 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.52 Actuated Cycle Length 100.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 52.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 53: Orangewood Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2015 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1030 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 280 0 490 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.91 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.87 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.99 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3256 1386 1703 3406 1618 1406 1447 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.99 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3256 1386 1703 3406 1618 1406 1447 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1084 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 295 0 516 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 1 72 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 99 99 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1098 60 495 1200 0 0 0 0 265 174 174 Turn Type Perm Prot Perm Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 4 Permitted Phases 2 4 4 Actuated Green, G 36.2 36.2 31.8 72.2 17.8 17.8 17.8 Effective Green, g 36.2 36.2 31.8 72.2 17.8 17.8 17.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.36 0.36 0.32 0.72 0.18 0.18 0.18 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1179 [PHONE REDACTED] 288 250 258 v/s Ratio Prot c0.34 c0.29 0.35 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 c0.16 0.12 0.12 v/c Ratio 0.93 0.12 0.91 0.49 0.92 0.69 0.67 Uniform Delay, d1 30.7 21.3 32.8 6.0 40.4 38.5 38.4 Progression Factor 0.48 0.19 0.91 0.43 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 13.0 0.4 17.7 0.6 32.8 8.1 6.7 Delay 27.6 4.5 47.6 3.2 73.2 46.6 45.1 Level of Service C A D A E D D Approach Delay 25.1 16.2 0.0 54.8 Approach LOS C B A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 27.5 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.92 Actuated Cycle Length 100.0 Sum of lost time 14.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 80.6% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 64: Chapman Avenue & Frontage Road Year 2015 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 33 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 980 1010 120 1330 0 670 0 80 400 0 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.81 0.81 0.97 0.91 0.97 1.00 0.97 Frt 0.95 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (prot) 5511 1234 3303 4893 3303 1524 3303 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (perm) 5511 1234 3303 4893 3303 1524 3303 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1032 1063 126 1400 0 705 0 84 421 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 70 245 0 0 0 0 0 62 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1494 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 705 0 22 421 0 0 Turn Type Perm Prot custom custom custom custom Protected Phases 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 2 8 8 4 4 Actuated Green, G 64.7 64.7 9.2 78.9 31.1 31.1 31.1 Effective Green, g 64.7 64.7 9.2 78.9 31.1 31.1 31.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.54 0.54 0.08 0.66 0.26 0.26 0.26 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2971 [PHONE REDACTED] 856 395 856 v/s Ratio Prot c0.27 0.04 c0.29 v/s Ratio Perm 0.23 c0.21 0.01 0.13 v/c Ratio 0.50 0.43 0.50 0.44 0.82 0.06 0.49 Uniform Delay, d1 17.5 16.6 53.2 9.9 41.9 33.4 37.7 Progression Factor 1.82 8.14 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.81 Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 1.3 1.5 0.4 6.5 0.1 0.4 Delay 32.2 136.4 54.7 10.3 48.3 33.5 30.9 Level of Service C F D B D C C Approach Delay 58.6 14.0 46.7 30.9 Approach LOS E B D C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 40.2 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.60 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 54.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 65: Chapman Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2015 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 34 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1000 0 0 1830 0 40 0 150 0 0 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.91 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3406 4893 1703 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3406 4893 1703 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1053 0 0 1926 0 42 0 158 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 147 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1053 0 0 1926 0 42 0 11 0 0 0 Turn Type Prot custom custom custom custom Protected Phases 5 2 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 4 4 Actuated Green, G 102.3 102.3 8.7 8.7 Effective Green, g 102.3 102.3 8.7 8.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.85 0.85 0.07 0.07 Clearance Time 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2904 4171 123 110 v/s Ratio Prot 0.31 c0.39 v/s Ratio Perm c0.02 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.36 0.46 0.34 0.10 Uniform Delay, d1 1.9 2.2 52.9 52.0 Progression Factor 0.42 0.43 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 0.3 1.7 0.4 Delay 1.1 1.2 54.6 52.4 Level of Service A A D D Approach Delay 1.1 1.2 52.9 0.0 Approach LOS A A D A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 4.4 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.45 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 45.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 66: Chapman Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2015 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 35 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1310 20 20 1290 0 140 30 110 160 10 320 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4882 1703 3406 1722 1524 1712 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4882 1703 3406 1722 1524 1712 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1379 21 21 1358 0 147 32 116 168 11 337 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 97 0 0 254 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1399 0 21 1358 0 0 179 19 0 179 83 Turn Type Prot Prot Split Perm Split Perm Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 8 8 7 7 Permitted Phases 8 7 Actuated Green, G 59.1 2.4 65.5 16.0 16.0 24.0 24.0 Effective Green, g 59.1 2.4 65.5 16.0 16.0 24.0 24.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.49 0.02 0.55 0.13 0.13 0.20 0.20 Clearance Time 4.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2404 34 1859 230 203 342 305 v/s Ratio Prot 0.29 0.01 c0.40 c0.10 c0.10 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 0.05 v/c Ratio 0.58 0.62 0.73 0.78 0.09 0.52 0.27 Uniform Delay, d1 21.7 58.3 20.6 50.3 45.6 42.9 40.6 Progression Factor 0.87 0.72 0.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.0 26.6 2.3 22.4 0.9 5.6 2.2 Delay 19.9 68.7 12.6 72.7 46.5 48.5 42.8 Level of Service B E B E D D D Approach Delay 19.9 13.4 62.4 44.8 Approach LOS B B E D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 24.5 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.69 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 14.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 76.9% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 69: I-5 SB Off-ramp & Disneyland Drive Year 2015 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 36 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 703 50 490 0 0 340 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.94 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4802 1524 3406 3406 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4802 1524 3406 3406 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 740 53 516 0 0 358 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 35 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 740 18 516 0 0 358 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 10.8 10.8 10.9 10.9 Effective Green, g 10.8 10.8 10.9 10.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1636 519 1171 1171 v/s Ratio Prot c0.15 c0.15 0.11 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.45 0.03 0.44 0.31 Uniform Delay, d1 8.1 7.0 8.0 7.6 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 0.0 0.3 0.1 Delay 8.3 7.0 8.3 7.8 Level of Service A A A A Approach Delay 8.3 8.3 7.8 Approach LOS A A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 8.2 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.45 Actuated Cycle Length 31.7 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 66.2% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No.14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report – Technical Appendices Appendix C-4 Caltrans Ramp Termini Analysis Worksheets under 2030 No Project Conditions ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 9: I-5 NB Ramps & Harbor Boulevard Year 2030 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 2 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 70 740 880 0 50 3130 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.5 5.5 5.0 4.7 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.86 Frt 0.87 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3015 1386 4893 1703 6166 Flt Permitted 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3015 1386 4893 1703 6166 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 74 779 926 0 53 3295 RTOR Reduction (vph) 183 183 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 281 206 926 0 53 3295 Turn Type custom Prot Protected Phases 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 Actuated Green, G 22.6 22.6 74.8 7.4 86.9 Effective Green, g 22.6 22.6 74.8 7.4 86.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.19 0.19 0.62 0.06 0.72 Clearance Time 5.5 5.5 5.0 4.7 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 105 4465 v/s Ratio Prot 0.19 0.03 c0.53 v/s Ratio Perm 0.09 c0.15 v/c Ratio 0.50 0.79 0.30 0.50 0.74 Uniform Delay, d1 43.6 46.4 10.5 54.5 9.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.26 0.69 0.24 Incremental Delay, d2 0.7 15.0 0.2 0.3 0.1 Delay 44.3 61.4 2.9 37.9 2.5 Level of Service D E A D A Approach Delay 52.1 2.9 3.0 Approach LOS D A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 11.2 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.75 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 10.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 63.9% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 10: I-5 SB Ramps & Harbor Boulevard Year 2030 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 3 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 320 320 70 820 2000 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.5 4.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.86 0.91 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 1524 1703 6166 4893 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 1524 1703 6166 4893 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 337 337 74 863 2105 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 337 337 74 863 2105 0 Turn Type Free Prot Protected Phases 4 5 2 6 Permitted Phases Free Actuated Green, G 17.1 120.0 8.0 92.4 80.2 Effective Green, g 17.1 120.0 8.0 92.4 80.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 1.00 0.07 0.77 0.67 Clearance Time 5.5 4.2 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 471 1524 114 4748 3270 v/s Ratio Prot c0.10 c0.04 0.14 c0.43 v/s Ratio Perm 0.22 v/c Ratio 0.72 0.22 0.65 0.18 0.64 Uniform Delay, d1 49.1 0.0 54.6 3.7 11.6 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.89 0.41 0.41 Incremental Delay, d2 5.1 0.3 11.4 0.1 0.7 Delay 54.2 0.3 60.2 1.6 5.4 Level of Service D A E A A Approach Delay 27.3 6.2 5.4 Approach LOS C A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 9.6 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.66 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 14.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 64.2% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 17: Disney Way & I-5 SB Ramps Year 2030 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 890 10 140 740 0 20 0 40 500 10 150 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.91 0.95 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4885 1703 4893 1703 1524 1618 1547 1447 Flt Permitted 1.00 0.26 1.00 0.58 1.00 0.95 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4885 471 4893 1033 1524 1618 1547 1447 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 937 11 147 779 0 21 0 42 526 11 158 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 39 0 2 112 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 947 0 147 779 0 21 0 3 279 272 30 Turn Type Perm custom custom Split Perm Protected Phases 2 6 4 4 Permitted Phases 6 8 8 4 Actuated Green, G 71.5 71.5 71.5 8.3 8.3 25.2 25.2 25.2 Effective Green, g 71.5 71.5 71.5 8.3 8.3 25.2 25.2 25.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.07 0.07 0.21 0.21 0.21 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2911 281 2915 71 105 340 325 304 v/s Ratio Prot 0.19 0.16 0.17 c0.18 v/s Ratio Perm c0.31 c0.02 0.00 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.33 0.52 0.27 0.30 0.03 0.82 0.84 0.10 Uniform Delay, d1 12.2 14.2 11.7 53.1 52.1 45.2 45.4 38.2 Progression Factor 0.77 0.71 0.52 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 1.0 0.0 2.3 0.1 14.6 16.9 0.1 Delay 9.7 11.1 6.0 55.4 52.2 59.8 62.4 38.4 Level of Service A B A E D E E D Approach Delay 9.7 6.8 53.3 56.5 Approach LOS A A D E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 22.1 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.58 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 60.0% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 20: I-5 NB Ramps & Anaheim Boulevard Year 2030 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 4 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 0 0 30 30 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 2100 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.91 0.91 Frt 0.88 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 2867 1386 3303 4893 4893 Flt Permitted 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 2867 1386 3303 4893 4893 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 32 32 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 2211 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 81 81 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 0 204 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 2211 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Protected Phases 8 5 2 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 Actuated Green, G 17.6 17.6 13.9 92.4 74.3 Effective Green, g 17.6 17.6 13.9 92.4 74.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 0.15 0.12 0.77 0.62 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 420 [PHONE REDACTED] 3030 v/s Ratio Prot c0.09 0.26 c0.45 v/s Ratio Perm 0.07 c0.10 v/c Ratio 0.49 0.69 0.74 0.34 0.73 Uniform Delay, d1 47.0 48.6 51.3 4.3 15.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.96 0.03 0.60 Incremental Delay, d2 0.9 9.4 4.8 0.2 0.9 Delay 47.9 58.0 54.3 0.3 10.5 Level of Service D E D A B Approach Delay 0.0 52.3 10.1 10.5 Approach LOS A D B B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 15.3 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.72 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 14.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 66.3% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 21: Disney Way & Anaheim Boulevard Year 2030 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 5 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 480 870 110 0 600 10 70 1040 10 530 1350 170 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.2 5.0 5.0 4.7 6.0 5.2 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.86 0.91 1.00 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 6062 4881 1703 4886 3303 4811 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 6062 4881 1703 4886 3303 4811 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 505 916 116 0 632 11 74 1095 11 558 1421 179 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 19 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 13 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 505 1013 0 0 641 0 74 1105 0 558 1587 0 Turn Type Prot Prot Prot Protected Phases 7 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G 21.1 43.0 17.7 6.7 35.6 25.2 54.6 Effective Green, g 21.1 43.0 17.7 6.7 35.6 25.2 54.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.18 0.36 0.15 0.06 0.30 0.21 0.46 Clearance Time 4.2 5.0 5.0 4.7 6.0 5.2 6.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 581 2172 720 95 1450 694 2189 v/s Ratio Prot c0.15 0.17 c0.13 0.04 c0.23 c0.17 0.33 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 0.87 0.47 0.89 0.78 0.76 0.80 0.72 Uniform Delay, d1 48.1 29.7 50.2 55.9 38.4 45.1 26.6 Progression Factor 0.66 0.52 1.00 0.89 0.37 0.54 0.27 Incremental Delay, d2 12.0 0.1 13.2 27.0 3.1 4.6 1.4 Delay 44.0 15.6 63.4 76.7 17.2 29.1 8.7 Level of Service D B E E B C A Approach Delay 24.9 63.4 20.9 14.0 Approach LOS C E C B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 24.3 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.82 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 20.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 77.9% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 25: Katella Avenue & Manchester Avenue Year 2030 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 8 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1442 1364 480 1692 0 140 0 790 440 490 20 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.88 0.97 0.91 0.95 0.91 0.95 0.97 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.86 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 2682 3303 4893 1618 1393 1447 3303 3406 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 2682 3303 4893 1618 1385 1447 3303 3406 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1518 1436 505 1781 0 147 0 832 463 516 21 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 345 0 0 0 0 298 191 0 0 17 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1518 1091 505 1781 0 132 125 233 463 516 4 Turn Type Perm Prot Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 3 8 7 4 Permitted Phases 2 8 4 Actuated Green, G 46.2 46.2 14.8 65.2 15.9 32.4 16.5 23.5 24.1 24.1 Effective Green, g 46.2 46.2 14.8 65.2 15.9 32.4 16.5 23.5 24.1 24.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.38 0.38 0.12 0.54 0.13 0.27 0.14 0.20 0.20 0.20 Clearance Time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1884 1033 407 2659 214 375 199 647 684 306 v/s Ratio Prot 0.31 c0.15 0.36 0.08 0.04 c0.14 c0.15 v/s Ratio Perm c0.41 0.05 c0.16 0.00 v/c Ratio 0.81 1.06 1.24 0.67 0.62 0.33 1.17 0.72 0.75 0.01 Uniform Delay, d1 32.9 36.9 52.6 19.7 49.2 35.1 51.8 45.1 45.2 38.4 Progression Factor 0.26 0.39 0.77 0.52 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.53 0.76 0.74 Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 27.9 126.3 1.3 5.2 0.5 118.2 3.1 3.9 0.0 Delay 8.9 42.4 166.8 11.5 54.4 35.7 169.9 26.9 38.2 28.5 Level of Service A D F B D D F C D C Approach Delay 25.2 45.8 96.3 32.8 Approach LOS C D F C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 42.4 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.98 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 14.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 87.0% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 26: Katella Avenue & Anaheim Way Year 2030 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 9 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 40 2652 0 0 1770 420 580 390 670 0 0 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.92 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 4893 5787 1234 1379 5310 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 4893 5787 1234 1379 5310 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 42 2792 0 0 1863 442 611 411 705 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 2 113 0 1 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 42 2792 0 0 1905 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Protected Phases 5 2 6 3 8 Permitted Phases 6 Actuated Green, G 4.2 68.0 60.1 60.1 42.0 42.0 Effective Green, g 4.2 68.0 60.1 60.1 42.0 42.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.04 0.57 0.50 0.50 0.35 0.35 Clearance Time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 116 2773 2898 [PHONE REDACTED] v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 c0.57 0.33 c0.26 0.26 v/s Ratio Perm 0.23 v/c Ratio 0.36 1.01 0.66 0.46 0.75 1.46dr Uniform Delay, d1 56.6 26.0 22.3 19.4 34.3 34.1 Progression Factor 0.68 0.38 0.43 0.04 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.1 14.8 0.9 1.8 6.2 1.5 Delay 39.7 24.7 10.4 2.6 40.5 35.7 Level of Service D C B A D D Approach Delay 24.9 9.1 36.7 0.0 Approach LOS C A D A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 22.6 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.91 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 81.9% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 dr Defacto Right Lane. Recode with 1 though lane as a right lane. c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 32: Gene Autry Way & I-5 HOV Ramps Year 2030 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 15 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 30 950 130 100 350 190 30 0 70 730 0 70 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 4.5 6.0 6.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.88 0.97 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 5093 1805 4913 1805 2842 3502 1615 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1805 5093 1805 4913 1805 2842 3502 1615 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 32 1000 137 105 368 200 32 0 74 768 0 74 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 12 0 0 64 0 0 0 66 0 0 53 Lane Group Flow (vph) 32 1125 0 105 504 0 32 0 8 768 0 21 Heavy Vehicles 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type Prot Prot Prot Over Prot Over Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 3 1 7 5 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G 6.8 56.9 13.7 64.8 33.9 13.7 32.4 6.8 Effective Green, g 6.8 56.9 13.7 64.8 33.9 13.7 32.4 6.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.06 0.47 0.11 0.54 0.28 0.11 0.27 0.06 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 4.5 6.0 6.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 102 2415 206 2653 510 324 946 92 v/s Ratio Prot 0.02 c0.22 c0.06 0.10 0.02 0.00 c0.22 0.01 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 0.31 0.47 0.51 0.19 0.06 0.03 0.81 0.23 Uniform Delay, d1 54.4 21.3 50.0 14.1 31.4 47.2 41.0 54.1 Progression Factor 0.64 0.79 1.09 0.74 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 0.2 1.7 0.1 0.1 0.0 5.4 1.3 Delay 35.5 17.0 56.2 10.7 31.5 47.3 46.3 55.4 Level of Service D B E B C D D E Approach Delay 17.5 17.8 42.5 47.1 Approach LOS B B D D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 27.5 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.58 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 17.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 64.6% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 41: Anaheim Way & State College Boulevard Year 2030 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 17 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 0 0 220 430 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 30 2530 50 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.88 0.97 0.86 1.00 0.86 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1550 3254 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1550 3254 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 232 453 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 32 2663 53 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 245 0 0 0 0 0 11 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 209 476 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 32 2663 42 Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Prot Perm Protected Phases 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 6 Actuated Green, G 19.7 19.7 19.7 28.4 77.6 4.0 53.4 53.4 Effective Green, g 19.7 19.7 19.7 28.4 77.6 4.0 53.4 53.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.24 0.65 0.03 0.44 0.44 Clearance Time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 254 534 [PHONE REDACTED] 57 2744 678 v/s Ratio Prot c0.21 0.20 0.02 c0.43 v/s Ratio Perm 0.13 0.15 0.14 0.03 v/c Ratio 0.82 0.89 0.83 0.87 0.31 0.56 0.97 0.06 Uniform Delay, d1 48.5 49.1 48.5 44.1 9.3 57.1 32.5 19.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.58 0.65 0.95 0.39 0.36 Incremental Delay, d2 18.9 16.9 12.6 9.9 0.2 5.7 6.6 0.1 Delay 67.4 66.0 61.2 35.4 6.3 60.2 19.2 6.9 Level of Service E E E D A E B A Approach Delay 0.0 64.0 16.7 19.5 Approach LOS A E B B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 28.3 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.93 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 18.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 82.8% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 42: I-5 SB Ramps & State College Boulevard Year 2030 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 18 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 80 840 380 0 0 0 0 1520 70 0 2500 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.88 0.81 0.86 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.99 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1618 1702 2682 7211 6166 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1618 1702 2682 7211 6166 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 84 884 400 0 0 0 0 1600 74 0 2632 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 76 892 400 0 0 0 0 1667 0 0 2632 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 Actuated Green, G 56.5 56.5 56.5 47.5 47.5 Effective Green, g 56.5 56.5 56.5 47.5 47.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.40 0.40 Clearance Time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 2854 2441 v/s Ratio Prot 0.23 c0.43 v/s Ratio Perm 0.05 0.52 0.15 v/c Ratio 0.10 1.11 0.32 0.58 1.08 Uniform Delay, d1 17.6 31.8 19.7 28.5 36.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.58 0.27 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 67.7 0.1 0.8 38.7 Delay 17.7 99.5 19.9 17.4 48.6 Level of Service B F B B D Approach Delay 71.7 0.0 17.4 48.6 Approach LOS E A B D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 45.0 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.10 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 73.9% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 48: Ball Road & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2030 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 24 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 2340 0 0 1150 400 510 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 3190 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 3190 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 2463 0 0 1211 421 537 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 3 3 Lane Group Flow (vph) 2463 0 0 1211 649 303 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 78.6 78.6 31.8 31.8 Effective Green, g 78.6 78.6 31.8 31.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.65 0.65 0.26 0.26 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3205 3205 845 367 v/s Ratio Prot c0.50 0.25 0.20 v/s Ratio Perm c0.22 v/c Ratio 0.77 0.38 0.77 0.83 Uniform Delay, d1 14.4 9.5 40.7 41.5 Progression Factor 0.49 0.85 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.1 0.3 4.2 14.0 Delay 8.2 8.4 44.9 55.5 Level of Service A A D E Approach Delay 8.2 8.4 48.3 Approach LOS A A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 16.5 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.78 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 74.3% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 49: Ball Road & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2030 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 25 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1840 1210 0 700 1020 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.88 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1937 1274 0 737 1074 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 18 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1937 1274 0 737 1056 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G 54.4 54.4 56.6 56.6 Effective Green, g 54.4 54.4 56.6 56.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.45 0.45 0.47 0.47 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2218 2218 803 1265 v/s Ratio Prot c0.40 0.26 c0.43 v/s Ratio Perm 0.39 v/c Ratio 0.87 0.57 0.92 0.83 Uniform Delay, d1 29.7 24.2 29.5 27.6 Progression Factor 0.28 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.2 1.0 15.2 4.9 Delay 10.5 25.2 44.7 32.5 Level of Service B C D C Approach Delay 10.5 25.2 37.5 Approach LOS B C D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 24.0 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.90 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 81.8% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 50: Katella Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2030 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 26 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 2230 0 0 1670 430 490 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.81 0.86 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 7259 6166 3202 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 7259 6166 3202 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 2347 0 0 1758 453 516 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 1 1 Lane Group Flow (vph) 2347 0 0 1758 664 303 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 76.1 76.1 33.9 33.9 Effective Green, g 76.1 76.1 33.9 33.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.63 0.63 0.28 0.28 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 4603 3910 905 392 v/s Ratio Prot c0.32 0.29 0.21 v/s Ratio Perm c0.22 v/c Ratio 0.51 0.45 0.73 0.77 Uniform Delay, d1 11.9 11.2 39.0 39.5 Progression Factor 0.40 0.17 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 0.2 3.1 9.2 Delay 5.0 2.1 42.1 48.7 Level of Service A A D D Approach Delay 5.0 2.1 44.2 Approach LOS A A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 11.5 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.59 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 54.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 51: Katella Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2030 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 27 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 2240 1570 0 350 660 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.88 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 2358 1653 0 368 695 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 30 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 2358 1653 0 368 665 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G 75.9 75.9 35.1 35.1 Effective Green, g 75.9 75.9 35.1 35.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.63 0.63 0.29 0.29 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3095 3095 498 784 v/s Ratio Prot c0.48 0.34 0.22 v/s Ratio Perm c0.25 v/c Ratio 0.76 0.53 0.74 0.85 Uniform Delay, d1 15.6 12.2 38.3 39.9 Progression Factor 0.25 0.59 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.3 0.6 5.7 8.5 Delay 5.2 7.9 44.0 48.4 Level of Service A A D D Approach Delay 5.2 7.9 46.9 Approach LOS A A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 14.8 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.79 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.2% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 52: Orangewood Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2030 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 28 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 1880 0 0 1660 150 540 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3406 4893 3087 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3406 4893 3087 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 1979 0 0 1747 158 568 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 15 15 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1979 0 0 1747 427 269 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 83.2 83.2 26.8 26.8 Effective Green, g 83.2 83.2 26.8 26.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.69 0.69 0.22 0.22 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2361 3392 689 310 v/s Ratio Prot c0.58 0.36 0.14 v/s Ratio Perm c0.19 v/c Ratio 0.84 0.52 0.62 0.87 Uniform Delay, d1 13.5 8.8 42.0 44.9 Progression Factor 0.32 0.54 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.2 0.4 1.7 21.8 Delay 5.6 5.2 43.7 66.7 Level of Service A A D E Approach Delay 5.6 5.2 52.7 Approach LOS A A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 13.1 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.85 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 82.6% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 53: Orangewood Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2030 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 29 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1810 80 170 1250 0 0 0 0 410 0 430 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.91 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.91 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3406 1524 1703 3406 1618 1459 1447 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3406 1524 1703 3406 1618 1459 1447 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1905 84 179 1316 0 0 0 0 432 0 453 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41 79 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1905 62 179 1316 0 0 0 0 307 256 202 Turn Type Perm Prot Perm Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 4 Permitted Phases 2 4 4 Actuated Green, G 71.0 71.0 11.8 87.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 Effective Green, g 71.0 71.0 11.8 87.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.59 0.59 0.10 0.72 0.19 0.19 0.19 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2015 [PHONE REDACTED] 310 280 277 v/s Ratio Prot c0.56 c0.11 0.39 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 c0.19 0.18 0.14 v/c Ratio 0.95 0.07 1.07 0.53 0.99 0.91 0.73 Uniform Delay, d1 22.7 10.4 54.1 7.4 48.4 47.5 45.6 Progression Factor 0.74 0.05 0.91 0.49 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 8.0 0.1 86.2 0.7 48.3 31.9 9.2 Delay 24.7 0.6 135.5 4.3 96.7 79.4 54.8 Level of Service C A F A F E D Approach Delay 23.7 20.0 0.0 77.6 Approach LOS C C A E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 33.4 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.97 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 14.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 87.0% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 64: Chapman Avenue & Frontage Road Year 2030 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 34 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 940 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 650 0 260 1060 0 10 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.81 0.81 0.97 0.91 0.97 1.00 0.97 1.00 Frt 0.95 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 5511 1234 3303 4893 3303 1524 3303 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 5511 1234 3303 4893 3303 1524 3303 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 989 1021 105 1295 0 684 0 274 1116 0 11 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 74 294 0 0 0 0 0 117 0 0 7 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1426 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 684 0 157 1116 0 4 Turn Type Perm Prot custom custom custom custom Protected Phases 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 2 8 8 4 4 Actuated Green, G 50.8 50.8 8.0 63.8 46.2 46.2 46.2 46.2 Effective Green, g 50.8 50.8 8.0 63.8 46.2 46.2 46.2 46.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.42 0.42 0.07 0.53 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2333 [PHONE REDACTED] 1272 587 1272 587 v/s Ratio Prot c0.26 0.03 c0.26 v/s Ratio Perm 0.17 0.21 0.10 c0.34 0.00 v/c Ratio 0.61 0.41 0.48 0.50 0.54 0.27 0.88 0.01 Uniform Delay, d1 26.9 24.2 54.0 17.9 28.6 25.3 34.3 22.8 Progression Factor 0.71 1.81 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.03 1.01 Incremental Delay, d2 0.7 1.4 1.6 0.7 0.4 0.2 3.0 0.0 Delay 19.9 45.3 55.6 18.6 29.1 25.5 38.2 23.1 Level of Service B D E B C C D C Approach Delay 26.4 21.4 28.1 38.1 Approach LOS C C C D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 27.8 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.73 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 77.0% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 65: Chapman Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2030 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 35 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1320 0 0 1450 0 80 0 110 0 0 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.91 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3406 4893 1703 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3406 4893 1703 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1389 0 0 1526 0 84 0 116 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 105 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1389 0 0 1526 0 84 0 11 0 0 0 Turn Type Prot custom custom custom custom Protected Phases 5 2 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 4 4 Actuated Green, G 99.8 99.8 11.2 11.2 Effective Green, g 99.8 99.8 11.2 11.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.83 0.83 0.09 0.09 Clearance Time 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2833 4069 159 142 v/s Ratio Prot c0.41 0.31 v/s Ratio Perm c0.05 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.49 0.38 0.53 0.08 Uniform Delay, d1 2.9 2.5 51.9 49.7 Progression Factor 0.22 0.58 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 0.2 3.1 0.2 Delay 0.9 1.7 55.0 49.9 Level of Service A A E D Approach Delay 0.9 1.7 52.1 0.0 Approach LOS A A D A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 4.6 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.49 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 50.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 66: Chapman Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2030 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 36 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 10 1700 150 90 1130 0 20 10 20 270 60 460 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.5 4.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1703 4834 1703 3406 1736 1524 1722 1524 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1703 4834 1703 3406 1736 1524 1722 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 11 1789 158 95 1189 0 21 11 21 284 63 484 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 0 0 368 Lane Group Flow (vph) 11 1938 0 95 1189 0 0 32 3 0 347 116 Turn Type Prot Prot Split Perm Split Perm Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 8 8 7 7 Permitted Phases 8 7 Actuated Green, G 3.0 49.9 10.6 57.0 16.0 16.0 25.0 25.0 Effective Green, g 3.0 49.9 10.6 57.0 16.0 16.0 25.0 25.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.02 0.42 0.09 0.48 0.13 0.13 0.21 0.21 Clearance Time 4.5 4.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 43 2010 150 1618 231 203 359 318 v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 c0.40 0.06 c0.35 c0.02 c0.20 v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 0.08 v/c Ratio 0.26 0.96 0.63 0.73 0.14 0.01 0.97 0.36 Uniform Delay, d1 57.4 34.2 52.8 25.4 45.9 45.1 47.1 40.7 Progression Factor 1.07 0.87 0.84 0.69 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 3.1 13.1 8.1 2.9 1.2 0.1 39.8 3.2 Delay 64.6 42.9 52.6 20.3 47.2 45.3 86.9 43.9 Level of Service E D D C D D F D Approach Delay 43.0 22.7 46.4 61.8 Approach LOS D C D E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 40.5 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.79 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 14.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 80.2% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 69: I-5 SB Off-ramp & Disneyland Drive Year 2030 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 37 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 900 10 130 0 0 1080 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.94 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4802 1524 3406 3406 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4802 1524 3406 3406 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 947 11 137 0 0 1137 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 7 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 947 4 137 0 0 1137 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 13.6 13.6 18.0 18.0 Effective Green, g 13.6 13.6 18.0 18.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.33 0.33 0.43 0.43 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1570 498 1474 1474 v/s Ratio Prot c0.20 0.04 c0.33 v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 v/c Ratio 0.60 0.01 0.09 0.77 Uniform Delay, d1 11.7 9.4 7.0 10.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.7 0.0 0.0 2.6 Delay 12.4 9.5 7.0 12.6 Level of Service B A A B Approach Delay 12.4 7.0 12.6 Approach LOS B A B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 12.2 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.70 Actuated Cycle Length 41.6 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 90.4% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 9: I-5 NB Ramps & Harbor Boulevard Year 2030 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 2 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Volume (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 0 60 1960 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.5 5.5 5.0 4.7 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.86 Frt 0.88 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3022 1386 4893 1703 6166 Flt Permitted 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3022 1386 4893 1703 6166 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 0 63 2063 RTOR Reduction (vph) 83 83 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 0 63 2063 Turn Type custom Prot Protected Phases 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 Actuated Green, G 37.2 37.2 61.8 5.8 72.3 Effective Green, g 37.2 37.2 61.8 5.8 72.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.31 0.31 0.52 0.05 0.60 Clearance Time 5.5 5.5 5.0 4.7 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 82 3715 v/s Ratio Prot c0.43 0.04 c0.33 v/s Ratio Perm 0.17 c0.29 v/c Ratio 0.86dr 0.92 0.84 0.77 0.56 Uniform Delay, d1 34.2 40.0 24.8 56.4 14.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.88 0.71 0.28 Incremental Delay, d2 0.6 24.5 3.0 19.8 0.3 Delay 34.8 64.4 24.9 59.9 4.3 Level of Service C E C E A Approach Delay 48.2 24.9 6.0 Approach LOS D C A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 21.9 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.82 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 10.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 85.0% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 dr Defacto Right Lane. Recode with 1 though lane as a right lane. c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 10: I-5 SB Ramps & Harbor Boulevard Year 2030 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 3 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 320 420 90 2370 1220 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.5 4.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.86 0.91 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 1524 1703 6166 4893 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 1524 1703 6166 4893 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 337 442 95 2495 1284 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 337 442 95 2495 1284 0 Turn Type Free Prot Protected Phases 4 5 2 6 Permitted Phases Free Actuated Green, G 17.5 120.0 18.8 92.0 69.0 Effective Green, g 17.5 120.0 18.8 92.0 69.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 1.00 0.16 0.77 0.57 Clearance Time 5.5 4.2 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 482 1524 267 4727 2813 v/s Ratio Prot c0.10 0.06 c0.40 0.26 v/s Ratio Perm 0.29 v/c Ratio 0.70 0.29 0.36 0.53 0.46 Uniform Delay, d1 48.7 0.0 45.2 5.5 14.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.79 1.76 Incremental Delay, d2 4.4 0.5 0.8 0.4 0.5 Delay 53.2 0.5 39.1 4.7 26.4 Level of Service D A D A C Approach Delay 23.3 6.0 26.4 Approach LOS C A C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 14.5 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.56 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 10.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 52.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 17: Disney Way & I-5 SB Ramps Year 2030 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 580 10 80 1260 0 20 0 110 430 10 120 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.91 0.95 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4880 1703 4893 1703 1524 1618 1548 1447 Flt Permitted 1.00 0.39 1.00 0.60 1.00 0.95 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4880 702 4893 1072 1524 1618 1548 1447 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 611 11 84 1326 0 21 0 116 453 11 126 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 106 0 2 90 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 621 0 84 1326 0 21 0 10 240 235 23 Turn Type Perm custom custom Split Perm Protected Phases 2 6 4 4 Permitted Phases 6 8 8 4 Actuated Green, G 69.7 69.7 69.7 10.4 10.4 24.9 24.9 24.9 Effective Green, g 69.7 69.7 69.7 10.4 10.4 24.9 24.9 24.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.09 0.09 0.21 0.21 0.21 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2834 408 2842 93 132 336 321 300 v/s Ratio Prot 0.13 c0.27 0.15 c0.15 v/s Ratio Perm 0.12 c0.02 0.01 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.22 0.21 0.47 0.23 0.08 0.71 0.73 0.08 Uniform Delay, d1 12.1 12.0 14.5 51.0 50.4 44.2 44.4 38.3 Progression Factor 0.20 0.50 0.49 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 0.1 0.0 1.2 0.2 7.0 8.3 0.1 Delay 2.6 6.1 7.2 52.3 50.6 51.3 52.7 38.4 Level of Service A A A D D D D D Approach Delay 2.6 7.1 50.9 49.4 Approach LOS A A D D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 17.3 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.51 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 52.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 20: I-5 NB Ramps & Anaheim Boulevard Year 2030 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 4 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 0 0 80 660 1340 190 1720 0 0 2090 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.91 0.91 Frt 0.93 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3021 1386 3303 4893 4893 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3021 1386 3303 4893 4893 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 84 695 1411 200 1811 0 0 2200 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 0 1481 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 2200 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Protected Phases 8 5 2 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 Actuated Green, G 51.0 51.0 7.8 59.0 47.0 Effective Green, g 51.0 51.0 7.8 59.0 47.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.42 0.42 0.06 0.49 0.39 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1284 [PHONE REDACTED] 1916 v/s Ratio Prot c0.06 0.37 c0.45 v/s Ratio Perm 0.49 c0.51 v/c Ratio 1.15 1.19 0.93 0.75 1.15 Uniform Delay, d1 34.5 34.5 55.8 24.6 36.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.29 0.05 0.54 Incremental Delay, d2 78.3 101.7 7.2 0.2 71.4 Delay 112.8 136.2 79.0 1.4 91.0 Level of Service F F E A F Approach Delay 0.0 120.3 9.1 91.0 Approach LOS A F A F Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 75.3 HCM Level of Service E HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.15 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 14.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 96.9% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 21: Disney Way & Anaheim Boulevard Year 2030 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 5 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 540 590 180 0 830 0 210 1500 10 560 1430 230 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.2 5.0 5.0 4.7 6.0 5.2 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.86 0.91 1.00 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 5950 4893 1703 4888 3303 4792 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 5950 4893 1703 4888 3303 4792 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 568 621 189 0 874 0 221 1579 11 589 1505 242 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 46 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 18 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 568 764 0 0 874 0 221 1589 0 589 1729 0 Turn Type Prot Prot Prot Protected Phases 7 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G 19.8 45.0 21.0 15.3 37.2 21.6 44.0 Effective Green, g 19.8 45.0 21.0 15.3 37.2 21.6 44.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.38 0.18 0.13 0.31 0.18 0.37 Clearance Time 4.2 5.0 5.0 4.7 6.0 5.2 6.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 545 2231 [PHONE REDACTED] 595 1757 v/s Ratio Prot c0.17 0.13 c0.18 0.13 c0.33 0.18 c0.36 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 1.04 0.34 1.02 1.02 1.05 0.99 0.98 Uniform Delay, d1 50.1 26.9 49.5 52.4 41.4 49.1 37.6 Progression Factor 0.97 0.88 1.00 0.97 0.76 0.38 0.22 Incremental Delay, d2 49.6 0.1 36.2 23.1 24.2 8.8 3.7 Delay 98.4 23.7 85.7 74.1 55.6 27.5 11.9 Level of Service F C F E E C B Approach Delay 54.5 85.7 57.9 15.8 Approach LOS D F E B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 45.6 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.99 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 15.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 93.6% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 25: Katella Avenue & Manchester Avenue Year 2030 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 8 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1842 1013 810 2406 0 180 0 230 460 130 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.88 0.97 0.91 0.95 0.91 0.95 0.97 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.89 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 2682 3303 4893 1618 1435 1447 3303 3406 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 2682 3303 4893 1618 0 1447 3303 3406 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1939 1066 853 2533 0 189 0 242 484 137 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 406 0 0 0 0 73 128 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1939 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 149 71 10 484 137 0 Turn Type Perm Prot Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 3 8 7 4 Permitted Phases 2 8 4 Actuated Green, G 50.1 50.1 19.8 74.1 20.9 20.9 8.3 22.8 10.2 Effective Green, g 50.1 50.1 19.8 74.1 20.9 20.9 8.3 22.8 10.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.42 0.42 0.16 0.62 0.17 0.17 0.07 0.19 0.08 Clearance Time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2043 1120 545 3021 282 250 100 628 290 v/s Ratio Prot c0.40 c0.26 0.52 c0.09 0.05 c0.15 0.04 v/s Ratio Perm 0.25 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.95 0.59 1.57 0.84 0.53 0.28 0.10 0.77 0.47 Uniform Delay, d1 33.7 27.0 50.1 18.2 45.1 43.0 52.3 46.1 52.3 Progression Factor 0.31 0.14 0.95 1.04 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.39 0.99 Incremental Delay, d2 5.3 0.9 255.1 0.3 1.8 0.6 0.4 4.4 0.9 Delay 15.6 4.7 302.8 19.2 46.9 43.7 52.7 22.4 52.5 Level of Service B A F B D D D C D Approach Delay 11.7 90.6 47.7 29.0 Approach LOS B F D C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 51.1 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.97 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 14.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 95.0% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 26: Katella Avenue & Anaheim Way Year 2030 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 9 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 40 2492 0 0 2812 [PHONE REDACTED] 350 0 0 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.85 1.00 0.98 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 4893 5719 1234 1379 5640 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 4893 5719 1234 1379 5640 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 42 2623 0 0 2960 1042 752 1684 368 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 14 19 0 1 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 42 2623 0 0 3279 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Protected Phases 5 2 6 3 8 Permitted Phases 6 Actuated Green, G 4.2 66.0 58.1 58.1 44.0 44.0 Effective Green, g 4.2 66.0 58.1 58.1 44.0 44.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.04 0.55 0.48 0.48 0.37 0.37 Clearance Time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 116 2691 2769 [PHONE REDACTED] v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 c0.54 c0.57 c0.40 0.40 v/s Ratio Perm 0.56 v/c Ratio 0.36 0.97 1.18 1.16 1.10 1.09 Uniform Delay, d1 56.6 26.2 31.0 31.0 38.0 38.0 Progression Factor 1.18 0.37 0.38 0.38 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.1 8.4 83.2 72.0 69.7 47.9 Delay 68.1 18.1 94.9 83.7 107.7 85.9 Level of Service E B F F F F Approach Delay 18.9 92.9 90.2 0.0 Approach LOS B F F A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 71.3 HCM Level of Service E HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.18 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 90.1% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 32: Gene Autry Way & I-5 HOV Ramps Year 2030 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 15 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 180 500 [PHONE REDACTED] 740 40 0 110 390 0 40 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 4.5 6.0 6.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.88 0.97 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 5017 1805 4941 1805 2842 3502 1615 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1805 5017 1805 4941 1805 2842 3502 1615 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 189 526 [PHONE REDACTED] 779 42 0 116 411 0 42 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 38 0 0 68 0 0 0 100 0 0 36 Lane Group Flow (vph) 189 635 0 179 2395 0 42 0 16 411 0 6 Heavy Vehicles 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type Prot Prot Prot Over Prot Over Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 3 1 7 5 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G 18.3 68.8 16.4 67.9 19.3 16.4 17.8 18.3 Effective Green, g 18.3 68.8 16.4 67.9 19.3 16.4 17.8 18.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 0.57 0.14 0.57 0.16 0.14 0.15 0.15 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 4.5 6.0 6.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 275 2876 247 2796 290 388 519 246 v/s Ratio Prot c0.10 0.13 0.10 c0.48 0.02 0.01 c0.12 0.00 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 0.69 0.22 0.72 0.86 0.14 0.04 0.79 0.03 Uniform Delay, d1 48.1 12.5 49.6 21.9 43.3 45.0 49.3 43.3 Progression Factor 0.74 0.53 1.22 0.29 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.7 0.0 5.8 2.1 0.2 0.0 8.1 0.0 Delay 36.5 6.6 66.2 8.5 43.5 45.0 57.4 43.3 Level of Service D A E A D D E D Approach Delay 13.1 12.4 44.6 56.1 Approach LOS B B D E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 18.6 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.82 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 81.9% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 41: Anaheim Way & State College Boulevard Year 2030 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 17 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 0 0 160 120 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 60 1850 160 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.88 0.97 0.86 1.00 0.86 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1550 3204 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1550 3204 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 168 126 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 63 1947 168 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 241 0 0 0 0 0 81 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 96 198 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 63 1947 87 Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Prot Perm Protected Phases 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 6 Actuated Green, G 19.5 19.5 19.5 38.6 74.1 7.7 43.4 43.4 Effective Green, g 19.5 19.5 19.5 38.6 74.1 7.7 43.4 43.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.32 0.62 0.06 0.36 0.36 Clearance Time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 252 [PHONE REDACTED] 3808 109 2230 551 v/s Ratio Prot c0.29 0.29 0.04 c0.32 v/s Ratio Perm 0.06 0.06 c0.15 0.06 v/c Ratio 0.38 0.38 0.94 0.89 0.47 0.58 0.87 0.16 Uniform Delay, d1 44.9 44.9 49.7 38.7 12.4 54.6 35.7 25.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.32 0.13 0.82 0.76 0.79 Incremental Delay, d2 1.0 0.5 29.3 4.8 0.2 6.1 4.3 0.5 Delay 45.8 45.3 79.0 17.2 1.9 50.8 31.6 21.0 Level of Service D D E B A D C C Approach Delay 0.0 68.6 7.2 31.4 Approach LOS A E A C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 26.1 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.89 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 18.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 73.2% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 42: I-5 SB Ramps & State College Boulevard Year 2030 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 18 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 150 700 340 0 0 0 0 2690 50 0 1720 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.88 0.81 0.86 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1618 1701 2682 7239 6166 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1618 1701 2682 7239 6166 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 158 737 358 0 0 0 0 2832 53 0 1811 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 142 753 356 0 0 0 0 2883 0 0 1811 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 Actuated Green, G 54.4 54.4 54.4 49.6 49.6 Effective Green, g 54.4 54.4 54.4 49.6 49.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.41 0.41 Clearance Time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 2992 2549 v/s Ratio Prot c0.40 0.29 v/s Ratio Perm 0.09 0.44 0.13 v/c Ratio 0.19 0.98 0.29 0.96 0.71 Uniform Delay, d1 19.7 32.2 20.7 34.3 29.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.57 0.28 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 26.4 0.1 1.3 1.0 Delay 19.8 58.6 20.8 20.8 9.1 Level of Service B E C C A Approach Delay 43.4 0.0 20.8 9.1 Approach LOS D A C A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 22.0 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.97 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 96.0% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 48: Ball Road & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2030 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 24 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 1790 0 0 2470 580 380 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 3271 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 3271 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 1884 0 0 2600 611 400 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 10 13 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1884 0 0 2600 685 303 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 79.2 79.2 31.2 31.2 Effective Green, g 79.2 79.2 31.2 31.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.66 0.66 0.26 0.26 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3229 3229 850 360 v/s Ratio Prot 0.39 c0.53 0.21 v/s Ratio Perm c0.22 v/c Ratio 0.58 0.81 0.81 0.84 Uniform Delay, d1 11.3 14.8 41.6 42.0 Progression Factor 1.20 0.21 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.6 0.2 5.6 16.0 Delay 14.1 3.3 47.2 58.1 Level of Service B A D E Approach Delay 14.1 3.3 50.6 Approach LOS B A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 15.7 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.81 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 76.2% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 49: Ball Road & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2030 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 25 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1760 2560 0 530 650 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.88 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1853 2695 0 558 684 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 2 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1853 2695 0 558 682 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G 69.8 69.8 41.2 41.2 Effective Green, g 69.8 69.8 41.2 41.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.58 0.58 0.34 0.34 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2846 2846 585 921 v/s Ratio Prot 0.38 c0.55 c0.33 v/s Ratio Perm 0.25 v/c Ratio 0.65 0.95 0.95 0.74 Uniform Delay, d1 16.9 23.4 38.5 34.7 Progression Factor 0.46 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 5.5 26.0 3.2 Delay 8.1 28.8 64.5 37.9 Level of Service A C E D Approach Delay 8.1 28.8 49.8 Approach LOS A C D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 26.7 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.95 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 86.3% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 50: Katella Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2030 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 26 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 1910 0 0 3220 290 460 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.81 0.86 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.94 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 7259 6166 3162 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 7259 6166 3162 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 2011 0 0 3389 305 484 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 13 13 Lane Group Flow (vph) 2011 0 0 3389 524 239 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 83.8 83.8 26.2 26.2 Effective Green, g 83.8 83.8 26.2 26.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.70 0.70 0.22 0.22 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 5069 4306 690 303 v/s Ratio Prot 0.28 c0.55 0.17 v/s Ratio Perm c0.17 v/c Ratio 0.40 0.79 0.76 0.79 Uniform Delay, d1 7.6 12.1 44.0 44.3 Progression Factor 1.59 0.18 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 0.1 4.9 13.1 Delay 12.2 2.3 48.9 57.4 Level of Service B A D E Approach Delay 12.2 2.3 51.6 Approach LOS B A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 11.8 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.79 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 68.1% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 51: Katella Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2030 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 27 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 2220 2490 0 240 530 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.88 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 2337 2621 0 253 558 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 5 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 2337 2621 0 253 553 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G 81.8 81.8 29.2 29.2 Effective Green, g 81.8 81.8 29.2 29.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.68 0.68 0.24 0.24 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3335 3335 414 653 v/s Ratio Prot 0.48 c0.54 0.15 v/s Ratio Perm c0.21 v/c Ratio 0.70 0.79 0.61 0.85 Uniform Delay, d1 11.6 13.1 40.4 43.3 Progression Factor 0.29 0.26 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.6 1.2 2.7 9.9 Delay 4.0 4.7 43.0 53.2 Level of Service A A D D Approach Delay 4.0 4.7 50.0 Approach LOS A A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 10.8 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.80 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 74.2% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 52: Orangewood Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2030 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 28 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 2030 0 0 3090 110 220 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.92 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3406 4893 3138 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3406 4893 3138 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 2137 0 0 3253 116 232 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 23 23 Lane Group Flow (vph) 2137 0 0 3253 209 93 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 87.6 87.6 12.4 12.4 Effective Green, g 87.6 87.6 12.4 12.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.80 0.80 0.11 0.11 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2712 3897 354 156 v/s Ratio Prot 0.63 c0.66 0.07 v/s Ratio Perm c0.07 v/c Ratio 0.79 0.83 0.59 0.60 Uniform Delay, d1 6.1 6.8 46.4 46.4 Progression Factor 0.09 1.27 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.3 1.8 2.6 6.0 Delay 1.8 10.5 49.0 52.4 Level of Service A B D D Approach Delay 1.8 10.5 50.1 Approach LOS A B D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 9.7 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.81 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 73.5% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 53: Orangewood Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2030 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 29 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1630 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 360 0 520 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.91 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.88 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.99 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3406 1524 1703 3406 1618 1419 1447 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.99 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3406 1524 1703 3406 1618 1419 1447 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1716 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 379 0 547 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 72 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 38 38 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1716 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 322 265 263 Turn Type Perm Prot Perm Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 4 Permitted Phases 2 4 4 Actuated Green, G 50.0 50.0 27.8 82.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 Effective Green, g 50.0 50.0 27.8 82.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.45 0.45 0.25 0.75 0.16 0.16 0.16 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1548 [PHONE REDACTED] 265 232 237 v/s Ratio Prot c0.50 c0.30 0.52 v/s Ratio Perm 0.10 c0.20 0.19 0.18 v/c Ratio 1.11 0.22 1.20 0.70 1.22 1.14 1.11 Uniform Delay, d1 30.0 18.1 41.1 7.4 46.0 46.0 46.0 Progression Factor 0.50 0.34 0.80 0.32 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 52.5 0.2 102.0 0.9 126.2 103.4 91.5 Delay 67.4 6.4 135.0 3.2 172.2 149.4 137.5 Level of Service E A F A F F F Approach Delay 60.5 33.0 0.0 153.5 Approach LOS E C A F Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 65.0 HCM Level of Service E HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.15 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 14.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 99.3% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 64: Chapman Avenue & Frontage Road Year 2030 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 34 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1050 1040 130 2070 0 700 0 80 940 0 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.81 0.81 0.97 0.91 0.97 1.00 0.97 Frt 0.95 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (prot) 5519 1234 3303 4893 3303 1524 3303 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (perm) 5519 1234 3303 4893 3303 1524 3303 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1105 1095 137 2179 0 737 0 84 989 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 70 299 0 0 0 0 0 55 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1583 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 737 0 29 989 0 0 Turn Type Perm Prot custom custom custom custom Protected Phases 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 2 8 8 4 4 Actuated Green, G 54.5 54.5 9.0 68.5 41.5 41.5 41.5 Effective Green, g 54.5 54.5 9.0 68.5 41.5 41.5 41.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.45 0.45 0.08 0.57 0.35 0.35 0.35 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2507 [PHONE REDACTED] 1142 527 1142 v/s Ratio Prot 0.29 0.04 c0.45 v/s Ratio Perm 0.20 0.22 0.02 c0.30 v/c Ratio 0.63 0.44 0.55 0.78 0.65 0.06 0.87 Uniform Delay, d1 25.1 22.4 53.6 19.9 33.1 26.2 36.7 Progression Factor 1.05 4.89 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.42 Incremental Delay, d2 0.7 1.4 2.7 2.2 1.3 0.0 4.4 Delay 27.1 110.8 56.2 22.2 34.3 26.2 19.9 Level of Service C F E C C C B Approach Delay 47.9 24.2 33.5 19.9 Approach LOS D C C B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 33.0 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.81 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 75.1% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 65: Chapman Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2030 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 35 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1310 0 0 2540 0 50 0 160 0 0 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.91 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3406 4893 1703 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3406 4893 1703 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1379 0 0 2674 0 53 0 168 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 155 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1379 0 0 2674 0 53 0 13 0 0 0 Turn Type Prot custom custom custom custom Protected Phases 5 2 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 4 4 Actuated Green, G 101.8 101.8 9.2 9.2 Effective Green, g 101.8 101.8 9.2 9.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.85 0.85 0.08 0.08 Clearance Time 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2889 4151 131 117 v/s Ratio Prot 0.40 c0.55 v/s Ratio Perm c0.03 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.48 0.64 0.40 0.11 Uniform Delay, d1 2.3 3.0 52.8 51.6 Progression Factor 0.67 0.18 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 0.3 2.0 0.4 Delay 1.9 0.9 54.8 52.0 Level of Service A A D D Approach Delay 1.9 0.9 52.7 0.0 Approach LOS A A D A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 3.9 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.62 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 59.5% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 66: Chapman Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2030 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 36 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 10 1990 20 20 1790 0 140 30 110 170 10 410 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.5 4.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1703 4886 1703 3406 1722 1524 1712 1524 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1703 4886 1703 3406 1722 1524 1712 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 11 2095 21 21 1884 0 147 32 116 179 11 432 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 97 0 0 177 Lane Group Flow (vph) 11 2115 0 21 1884 0 0 179 19 0 190 255 Turn Type Prot Prot Split Perm Split Perm Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 8 8 7 7 Permitted Phases 8 7 Actuated Green, G 3.0 63.1 2.4 62.0 12.0 12.0 24.0 24.0 Effective Green, g 3.0 63.1 2.4 62.0 12.0 12.0 24.0 24.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.02 0.53 0.02 0.52 0.10 0.10 0.20 0.20 Clearance Time 4.5 4.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 43 2569 34 1760 172 152 342 305 v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 0.43 c0.01 c0.55 c0.10 0.11 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 c0.17 v/c Ratio 0.26 0.82 0.62 1.07 1.04 0.12 0.56 0.84 Uniform Delay, d1 57.4 23.8 58.3 29.0 54.0 49.2 43.2 46.1 Progression Factor 0.91 1.07 0.98 0.86 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 3.0 3.0 23.1 41.0 79.8 1.7 6.4 23.0 Delay 55.3 28.5 80.5 66.0 133.8 50.9 49.6 69.1 Level of Service E C F E F D D E Approach Delay 28.6 66.1 101.2 63.2 Approach LOS C E F E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 51.7 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.99 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 18.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 96.3% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 69: I-5 SB Off-ramp & Disneyland Drive Year 2030 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 37 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 720 50 910 0 0 460 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.94 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4802 1524 3406 3406 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4802 1524 3406 3406 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 758 53 958 0 0 484 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 36 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 758 17 958 0 0 484 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 11.9 11.9 16.6 16.6 Effective Green, g 11.9 11.9 16.6 16.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.31 0.31 0.43 0.43 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1484 471 1469 1469 v/s Ratio Prot c0.16 c0.28 0.14 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.51 0.04 0.65 0.33 Uniform Delay, d1 10.9 9.3 8.7 7.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 0.0 1.0 0.1 Delay 11.2 9.3 9.7 7.4 Level of Service B A A A Approach Delay 11.1 9.7 7.4 Approach LOS B A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 9.7 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.59 Actuated Cycle Length 38.5 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.4% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No.14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report – Technical Appendices Appendix C-5 Caltrans Ramp Termini Analysis Worksheets under 2030 With Project Conditions ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 9: I-5 NB Ramps & Harbor Boulevard Year 2030 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 2 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 70 750 930 0 90 3270 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.5 5.5 5.0 4.7 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.86 Frt 0.87 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3014 1386 4893 1703 6166 Flt Permitted 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3014 1386 4893 1703 6166 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 74 789 979 0 95 3442 RTOR Reduction (vph) 216 216 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 253 178 979 0 95 3442 Turn Type custom Prot Protected Phases 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 Actuated Green, G 20.4 20.4 71.1 13.3 89.1 Effective Green, g 20.4 20.4 71.1 13.3 89.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 0.17 0.59 0.11 0.74 Clearance Time 5.5 5.5 5.0 4.7 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 189 4578 v/s Ratio Prot 0.20 0.06 c0.56 v/s Ratio Perm 0.08 c0.13 v/c Ratio 0.49 0.76 0.34 0.50 0.75 Uniform Delay, d1 45.1 47.4 12.5 50.2 9.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.55 0.66 0.20 Incremental Delay, d2 0.8 12.8 0.3 0.2 0.1 Delay 45.9 60.3 7.2 33.5 1.9 Level of Service D E A C A Approach Delay 52.4 7.2 2.8 Approach LOS D A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 11.6 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.75 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 10.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 66.1% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 10: I-5 SB Ramps & Harbor Boulevard Year 2030 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 3 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 350 350 70 820 2110 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.5 4.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.86 0.91 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 1524 1703 6166 4893 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 1524 1703 6166 4893 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 368 368 74 863 2221 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 368 368 74 863 2221 0 Turn Type Free Prot Protected Phases 4 5 2 6 Permitted Phases Free Actuated Green, G 17.9 120.0 9.3 91.6 78.1 Effective Green, g 17.9 120.0 9.3 91.6 78.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 1.00 0.08 0.76 0.65 Clearance Time 5.5 4.2 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 493 1524 132 4707 3185 v/s Ratio Prot c0.11 c0.04 0.14 c0.45 v/s Ratio Perm 0.24 v/c Ratio 0.75 0.24 0.56 0.18 0.70 Uniform Delay, d1 48.9 0.0 53.4 3.9 13.4 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.57 0.08 0.23 Incremental Delay, d2 6.1 0.4 5.1 0.1 0.8 Delay 55.0 0.4 88.9 0.4 4.0 Level of Service D A F A A Approach Delay 27.7 7.4 4.0 Approach LOS C A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 9.3 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.69 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 14.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 67.2% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 17: Disney Way & I-5 SB Ramps Year 2030 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 930 10 150 830 0 20 0 40 570 10 150 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.91 0.95 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4885 1703 4893 1703 1524 1618 1548 1447 Flt Permitted 1.00 0.25 1.00 0.55 1.00 0.95 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4885 443 4893 992 1524 1618 1548 1447 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 979 11 158 874 0 21 0 42 600 11 158 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 39 0 2 110 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 989 0 158 874 0 21 0 3 312 313 32 Turn Type Perm custom custom Split Perm Protected Phases 2 6 4 4 Permitted Phases 6 8 8 4 Actuated Green, G 69.9 69.9 69.9 8.3 8.3 26.8 26.8 26.8 Effective Green, g 69.9 69.9 69.9 8.3 8.3 26.8 26.8 26.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.07 0.07 0.22 0.22 0.22 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2846 258 2850 69 105 361 346 323 v/s Ratio Prot 0.20 0.18 0.19 c0.20 v/s Ratio Perm c0.36 c0.02 0.00 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.35 0.61 0.31 0.30 0.03 0.86 0.91 0.10 Uniform Delay, d1 13.1 16.3 12.7 53.1 52.1 44.8 45.4 37.0 Progression Factor 0.65 0.73 0.56 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 2.3 0.0 2.5 0.1 18.8 26.0 0.1 Delay 8.9 14.1 7.2 55.6 52.2 63.7 71.4 37.1 Level of Service A B A E D E E D Approach Delay 8.9 8.2 53.3 62.0 Approach LOS A A D E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 23.9 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.66 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 63.2% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 20: I-5 NB Ramps & Anaheim Boulevard Year 2030 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 4 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 0 0 30 20 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 2070 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.91 0.91 Frt 0.88 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 2851 1386 3303 4893 4893 Flt Permitted 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 2851 1386 3303 4893 4893 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 32 21 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 2179 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 79 79 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 0 195 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 2179 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Protected Phases 8 5 2 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 Actuated Green, G 17.7 17.7 13.8 92.3 74.3 Effective Green, g 17.7 17.7 13.8 92.3 74.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 0.15 0.12 0.77 0.62 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 421 [PHONE REDACTED] 3030 v/s Ratio Prot c0.08 0.26 c0.45 v/s Ratio Perm 0.07 c0.10 v/c Ratio 0.46 0.69 0.72 0.34 0.72 Uniform Delay, d1 46.8 48.6 51.2 4.3 15.7 Progression Factor 0.97 0.97 0.87 0.01 0.14 Incremental Delay, d2 0.8 9.7 3.6 0.1 0.4 Delay 46.1 56.8 48.3 0.2 2.6 Level of Service D E D A A Approach Delay 0.0 50.9 8.6 2.6 Approach LOS A D A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 10.5 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.72 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 14.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 65.2% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 21: Disney Way & Anaheim Boulevard Year 2030 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 5 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 520 1040 30 0 670 10 70 1040 10 550 1300 210 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.2 5.0 5.0 4.7 6.0 5.2 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.86 0.91 1.00 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 6140 4882 1703 4886 3303 4791 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 6140 4882 1703 4886 3303 4791 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 547 1095 32 0 705 11 74 1095 11 579 1368 221 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 3 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 18 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 547 1124 0 0 714 0 74 1105 0 579 1571 0 Turn Type Prot Prot Prot Protected Phases 7 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G 22.2 46.0 19.6 7.2 33.5 24.3 51.1 Effective Green, g 22.2 46.0 19.6 7.2 33.5 24.3 51.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.18 0.38 0.16 0.06 0.28 0.20 0.43 Clearance Time 4.2 5.0 5.0 4.7 6.0 5.2 6.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 611 2354 [PHONE REDACTED] 669 2040 v/s Ratio Prot c0.17 0.18 c0.15 0.04 c0.23 c0.18 0.33 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 0.90 0.48 0.90 0.73 0.81 0.87 0.77 Uniform Delay, d1 47.8 27.9 49.2 55.4 40.3 46.3 29.4 Progression Factor 0.74 0.57 0.96 0.80 0.39 0.56 0.31 Incremental Delay, d2 14.0 0.1 12.6 16.8 3.9 8.1 2.0 Delay 49.1 16.1 60.0 61.1 19.6 33.9 11.1 Level of Service D B E E B C B Approach Delay 26.9 60.0 22.2 17.2 Approach LOS C E C B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 26.4 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.86 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 20.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 81.0% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 25: Katella Avenue & Manchester Avenue Year 2030 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 8 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1472 1304 520 1902 0 130 0 810 430 590 20 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.88 0.97 0.91 0.95 0.91 0.95 0.97 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 2682 3303 4893 1618 1392 1447 3303 3406 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.86 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 2682 3303 4893 1618 1195 1447 3303 3406 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1549 1373 547 2002 0 137 0 853 453 621 21 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 329 0 0 0 0 313 216 0 0 16 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1549 1044 547 2002 0 123 119 219 453 621 5 Turn Type Perm Prot Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 3 8 7 4 Permitted Phases 2 8 4 Actuated Green, G 43.1 43.1 16.8 64.1 13.7 30.2 16.5 24.6 27.4 27.4 Effective Green, g 43.1 43.1 16.8 64.1 13.7 30.2 16.5 24.6 27.4 27.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.36 0.36 0.14 0.53 0.11 0.25 0.14 0.20 0.23 0.23 Clearance Time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1757 [PHONE REDACTED] 185 323 199 677 778 348 v/s Ratio Prot 0.32 c0.17 0.41 0.08 0.04 c0.14 c0.18 v/s Ratio Perm c0.39 0.05 c0.15 0.00 v/c Ratio 0.88 1.08 1.18 0.77 0.66 0.37 1.10 0.67 0.80 0.01 Uniform Delay, d1 36.1 38.4 51.6 22.0 50.9 37.0 51.8 44.0 43.7 35.8 Progression Factor 0.33 0.28 0.75 0.51 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.59 0.64 0.47 Incremental Delay, d2 0.7 40.0 100.7 1.9 8.7 0.7 93.9 2.1 4.7 0.0 Delay 12.6 50.7 139.6 13.2 59.6 37.8 145.6 27.9 32.5 17.0 Level of Service B D F B E D F C C B Approach Delay 30.5 40.3 87.9 30.3 Approach LOS C D F C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 41.3 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.97 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 14.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 90.5% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 26: Katella Avenue & Anaheim Way Year 2030 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 9 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 40 2682 0 0 1920 430 700 420 630 0 0 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.93 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 4893 5789 1234 1379 5347 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 4893 5789 1234 1379 5347 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 42 2823 0 0 2021 453 737 442 663 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 2 102 0 1 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 42 2823 0 0 2064 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Protected Phases 5 2 6 3 8 Permitted Phases 6 Actuated Green, G 4.2 68.0 60.1 60.1 42.0 42.0 Effective Green, g 4.2 68.0 60.1 60.1 42.0 42.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.04 0.57 0.50 0.50 0.35 0.35 Clearance Time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 116 2773 2899 [PHONE REDACTED] v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 c0.58 0.36 c0.28 0.27 v/s Ratio Perm 0.25 v/c Ratio 0.36 1.02 0.71 0.50 0.79 1.37dr Uniform Delay, d1 56.6 26.0 23.2 19.9 35.1 34.9 Progression Factor 0.66 0.41 0.45 0.04 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.1 17.5 1.0 1.9 8.7 2.1 Delay 38.4 28.3 11.6 2.7 43.8 37.0 Level of Service D C B A D D Approach Delay 28.4 10.1 38.4 0.0 Approach LOS C B D A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 24.7 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.93 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 83.7% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 dr Defacto Right Lane. Recode with 1 though lane as a right lane. c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 32: Gene Autry Way & I-5 HOV Ramps Year 2030 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 15 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 30 920 140 100 500 190 30 0 80 730 0 70 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 4.5 6.0 6.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.88 0.97 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 5084 1805 4973 1805 2842 3502 1615 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1805 5084 1805 4973 1805 2842 3502 1615 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 32 968 147 105 526 200 32 0 84 768 0 74 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 13 0 0 64 0 0 0 71 0 0 41 Lane Group Flow (vph) 32 1102 0 105 662 0 32 0 13 768 0 33 Heavy Vehicles 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type Prot Prot Prot Over Prot Over Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 3 1 7 5 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G 31.1 57.8 12.8 40.5 33.9 12.8 32.4 31.1 Effective Green, g 31.1 57.8 12.8 40.5 33.9 12.8 32.4 31.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.26 0.48 0.11 0.34 0.28 0.11 0.27 0.26 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 4.5 6.0 6.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 468 2449 193 1678 510 303 946 419 v/s Ratio Prot 0.02 c0.22 c0.06 0.13 0.02 0.00 c0.22 0.02 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 0.07 0.45 0.54 0.39 0.06 0.04 0.81 0.08 Uniform Delay, d1 33.5 20.6 50.8 30.4 31.4 48.1 41.0 33.6 Progression Factor 1.34 1.45 0.70 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.0 0.1 2.6 0.6 0.1 0.1 5.4 0.1 Delay 44.8 29.9 38.3 30.6 31.5 48.2 46.3 33.7 Level of Service D C D C C D D C Approach Delay 30.4 31.6 43.6 45.2 Approach LOS C C D D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 35.5 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.58 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 17.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 64.2% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 41: Anaheim Way & State College Boulevard Year 2030 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 17 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 0 0 320 450 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 30 2510 50 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.88 0.97 0.86 1.00 0.86 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1550 3240 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1550 3240 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 337 474 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 32 2642 53 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 244 0 0 0 0 0 11 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 263 548 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 32 2642 42 Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Prot Perm Protected Phases 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 6 Actuated Green, G 20.5 20.5 20.5 28.7 76.8 4.0 52.3 52.3 Effective Green, g 20.5 20.5 20.5 28.7 76.8 4.0 52.3 52.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.24 0.64 0.03 0.44 0.44 Clearance Time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 265 554 [PHONE REDACTED] 57 2687 664 v/s Ratio Prot c0.21 0.20 0.02 c0.43 v/s Ratio Perm c0.17 0.17 0.14 0.03 v/c Ratio 0.99 0.99 0.80 0.89 0.31 0.56 0.98 0.06 Uniform Delay, d1 49.7 49.6 47.8 44.2 9.7 57.1 33.4 19.6 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.55 0.33 1.39 0.38 0.23 Incremental Delay, d2 53.0 35.1 9.7 11.6 0.2 5.3 8.1 0.1 Delay 102.6 84.7 57.5 35.9 3.4 84.9 20.8 4.7 Level of Service F F E D A F C A Approach Delay 0.0 76.3 15.2 21.3 Approach LOS A E B C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 32.2 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.96 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 18.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 85.4% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 42: I-5 SB Ramps & State College Boulevard Year 2030 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 18 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 120 910 380 0 0 0 0 1530 10 0 2470 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.88 0.81 0.86 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1618 1702 2682 7252 6166 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1618 1702 2682 7252 6166 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 126 958 400 0 0 0 0 1611 11 0 2600 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 113 971 400 0 0 0 0 1621 0 0 2600 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 Actuated Green, G 54.5 54.5 54.5 49.5 49.5 Effective Green, g 54.5 54.5 54.5 49.5 49.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.41 0.41 Clearance Time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 2991 2543 v/s Ratio Prot 0.22 c0.42 v/s Ratio Perm 0.07 0.57 0.15 v/c Ratio 0.15 1.26 0.33 0.54 1.02 Uniform Delay, d1 19.2 32.8 21.0 26.7 35.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.59 0.34 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 125.7 0.2 0.6 16.5 Delay 19.3 158.5 21.2 16.5 28.6 Level of Service B F C B C Approach Delay 110.9 0.0 16.5 28.6 Approach LOS F A B C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 46.6 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.14 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 97.6% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 48: Ball Road & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2030 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 24 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 2320 0 0 1170 400 510 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 3190 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 3190 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 2442 0 0 1232 421 537 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 2 2 Lane Group Flow (vph) 2442 0 0 1232 650 304 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 78.3 78.3 32.1 32.1 Effective Green, g 78.3 78.3 32.1 32.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.65 0.65 0.27 0.27 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3193 3193 853 371 v/s Ratio Prot c0.50 0.25 0.20 v/s Ratio Perm c0.22 v/c Ratio 0.76 0.39 0.76 0.82 Uniform Delay, d1 14.5 9.7 40.4 41.2 Progression Factor 0.39 0.84 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.0 0.3 4.1 13.1 Delay 6.7 8.5 44.5 54.4 Level of Service A A D D Approach Delay 6.7 8.5 47.6 Approach LOS A A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 15.6 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.78 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 73.9% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 49: Ball Road & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2030 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 25 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1810 1260 0 750 1020 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.88 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1905 1326 0 789 1074 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 13 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1905 1326 0 789 1061 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G 51.4 51.4 59.6 59.6 Effective Green, g 51.4 51.4 59.6 59.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.43 0.43 0.50 0.50 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2096 2096 846 1332 v/s Ratio Prot c0.39 0.27 c0.46 v/s Ratio Perm 0.40 v/c Ratio 0.91 0.63 0.93 0.80 Uniform Delay, d1 32.1 26.9 28.3 25.2 Progression Factor 0.29 0.99 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 3.1 1.3 16.8 3.4 Delay 12.4 27.9 45.1 28.6 Level of Service B C D C Approach Delay 12.4 27.9 35.6 Approach LOS B C D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 24.9 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.92 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 84.0% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 50: Katella Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2030 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 26 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 2240 0 0 1670 360 610 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.81 0.86 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.93 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 7259 6166 3154 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 7259 6166 3154 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 2358 0 0 1758 379 642 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 1 1 Lane Group Flow (vph) 2358 0 0 1758 693 326 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 74.1 74.1 35.9 35.9 Effective Green, g 74.1 74.1 35.9 35.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.62 0.62 0.30 0.30 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 4482 3808 944 415 v/s Ratio Prot c0.32 0.29 0.22 v/s Ratio Perm c0.24 v/c Ratio 0.53 0.46 0.73 0.79 Uniform Delay, d1 13.0 12.3 37.8 38.5 Progression Factor 0.36 0.13 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 0.2 3.0 9.5 Delay 5.0 1.8 40.8 48.0 Level of Service A A D D Approach Delay 5.0 1.8 43.1 Approach LOS A A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 11.4 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.61 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 59.5% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 51: Katella Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2030 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 27 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 2250 1560 0 350 750 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.88 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 2368 1642 0 368 789 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 27 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 2368 1642 0 368 762 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G 72.3 72.3 38.7 38.7 Effective Green, g 72.3 72.3 38.7 38.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.60 0.60 0.32 0.32 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2948 2948 549 865 v/s Ratio Prot c0.48 0.34 0.22 v/s Ratio Perm c0.28 v/c Ratio 0.80 0.56 0.67 0.88 Uniform Delay, d1 18.4 14.3 35.1 38.5 Progression Factor 0.37 1.23 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.7 0.7 3.2 10.4 Delay 8.5 18.3 38.3 48.9 Level of Service A B D D Approach Delay 8.5 18.3 45.5 Approach LOS A B D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 19.9 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.83 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.4% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 52: Orangewood Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2030 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 28 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 1890 0 0 1690 140 580 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3406 4893 3075 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3406 4893 3075 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 1989 0 0 1779 147 611 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 13 13 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1989 0 0 1779 440 292 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 74.1 74.1 25.9 25.9 Effective Green, g 74.1 74.1 25.9 25.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.67 0.67 0.24 0.24 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2294 3296 724 326 v/s Ratio Prot c0.58 0.36 0.14 v/s Ratio Perm c0.21 v/c Ratio 0.87 0.54 0.61 0.90 Uniform Delay, d1 14.1 9.2 37.5 40.7 Progression Factor 0.22 0.52 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.2 0.4 1.5 25.4 Delay 4.3 5.2 39.0 66.1 Level of Service A A D E Approach Delay 4.3 5.2 49.9 Approach LOS A A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 12.3 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.87 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 84.5% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 53: Orangewood Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2030 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 29 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1760 80 170 1280 0 0 0 0 440 0 430 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.91 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.92 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3406 1524 1703 3406 1618 1467 1447 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3406 1524 1703 3406 1618 1467 1447 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1853 84 179 1347 0 0 0 0 463 0 453 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 37 70 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1853 59 179 1347 0 0 0 0 319 270 220 Turn Type Perm Prot Perm Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 4 Permitted Phases 2 4 4 Actuated Green, G 60.0 60.0 13.8 78.0 22.0 22.0 22.0 Effective Green, g 60.0 60.0 13.8 78.0 22.0 22.0 22.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.55 0.55 0.13 0.71 0.20 0.20 0.20 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1858 [PHONE REDACTED] 324 293 289 v/s Ratio Prot c0.54 c0.11 0.40 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 c0.20 0.18 0.15 v/c Ratio 1.00 0.07 0.84 0.56 0.98 0.92 0.76 Uniform Delay, d1 24.9 11.8 47.0 7.7 43.8 43.2 41.5 Progression Factor 0.45 0.12 0.87 0.46 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 16.3 0.1 21.3 0.8 45.5 32.8 11.3 Delay 27.6 1.5 62.3 4.3 89.3 75.9 52.8 Level of Service C A E A F E D Approach Delay 26.5 11.1 0.0 73.3 Approach LOS C B A E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 30.9 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.97 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 14.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 86.5% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 64: Chapman Avenue & Frontage Road Year 2030 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 34 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1050 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 650 0 290 1060 0 10 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.81 0.81 0.97 0.91 0.97 1.00 0.97 1.00 Frt 0.95 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 5528 1234 3303 4893 3303 1524 3303 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 5528 1234 3303 4893 3303 1524 3303 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1105 1042 105 1263 0 684 0 305 1116 0 11 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 64 314 0 0 0 0 0 113 0 0 7 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1562 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 684 0 192 1116 0 4 Turn Type Perm Prot custom custom custom custom Protected Phases 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 2 8 8 4 4 Actuated Green, G 47.7 47.7 8.6 61.3 48.7 48.7 48.7 48.7 Effective Green, g 47.7 47.7 8.6 61.3 48.7 48.7 48.7 48.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.40 0.40 0.07 0.51 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2197 [PHONE REDACTED] 1340 618 1340 618 v/s Ratio Prot c0.28 0.03 c0.26 v/s Ratio Perm 0.17 0.21 0.13 c0.34 0.00 v/c Ratio 0.71 0.42 0.44 0.51 0.51 0.31 0.83 0.01 Uniform Delay, d1 30.4 26.2 53.4 19.4 26.7 24.2 32.0 21.2 Progression Factor 0.45 1.40 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.44 2.27 Incremental Delay, d2 1.2 1.6 1.3 0.7 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.0 Delay 14.7 38.3 54.7 20.1 27.0 24.5 46.6 48.2 Level of Service B D D C C C D D Approach Delay 20.4 22.7 26.3 46.7 Approach LOS C C C D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 27.3 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.76 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 80.6% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 65: Chapman Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2030 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 35 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1740 0 0 1430 0 90 0 110 0 0 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.91 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3406 4893 1703 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3406 4893 1703 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1832 0 0 1505 0 95 0 116 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 104 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1832 0 0 1505 0 95 0 12 0 0 0 Turn Type Prot custom custom custom custom Protected Phases 5 2 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 4 4 Actuated Green, G 99.0 99.0 12.0 12.0 Effective Green, g 99.0 99.0 12.0 12.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.82 0.82 0.10 0.10 Clearance Time 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2810 4037 170 152 v/s Ratio Prot c0.54 0.31 v/s Ratio Perm c0.06 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.65 0.37 0.56 0.08 Uniform Delay, d1 4.0 2.7 51.5 49.0 Progression Factor 0.58 0.34 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 0.2 3.9 0.2 Delay 2.7 1.1 55.4 49.2 Level of Service A A E D Approach Delay 2.7 1.1 52.0 0.0 Approach LOS A A D A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 5.0 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.64 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 62.4% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 66: Chapman Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2030 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 36 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 10 1800 150 90 1120 0 20 10 20 270 60 510 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.5 4.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1703 4837 1703 3406 1736 1524 1722 1524 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1703 4837 1703 3406 1736 1524 1722 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 11 1895 158 95 1179 0 21 11 21 284 63 537 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 0 0 369 Lane Group Flow (vph) 11 2045 0 95 1179 0 0 32 3 0 347 168 Turn Type Prot Prot Split Perm Split Perm Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 8 8 7 7 Permitted Phases 8 7 Actuated Green, G 3.0 49.9 10.6 57.0 16.0 16.0 25.0 25.0 Effective Green, g 3.0 49.9 10.6 57.0 16.0 16.0 25.0 25.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.02 0.42 0.09 0.48 0.13 0.13 0.21 0.21 Clearance Time 4.5 4.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 43 2011 150 1618 231 203 359 318 v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 c0.42 0.06 c0.35 c0.02 c0.20 v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 0.11 v/c Ratio 0.26 1.02 0.63 0.73 0.14 0.01 0.97 0.53 Uniform Delay, d1 57.4 35.1 52.8 25.3 45.9 45.1 47.1 42.3 Progression Factor 1.08 0.89 0.86 0.73 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 3.1 24.3 8.1 2.8 1.2 0.1 39.8 6.2 Delay 64.9 55.6 53.6 21.3 47.2 45.3 86.9 48.4 Level of Service E E D C D D F D Approach Delay 55.7 23.7 46.4 63.5 Approach LOS E C D E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 47.6 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.82 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 14.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 79.9% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 69: I-5 SB Off-ramp & Disneyland Drive Year 2030 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 37 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 930 10 130 0 0 1080 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.94 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4802 1524 3406 3406 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4802 1524 3406 3406 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 979 11 137 0 0 1137 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 7 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 979 4 137 0 0 1137 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 13.9 13.9 18.0 18.0 Effective Green, g 13.9 13.9 18.0 18.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.33 0.33 0.43 0.43 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1593 506 1463 1463 v/s Ratio Prot c0.20 0.04 c0.33 v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 v/c Ratio 0.61 0.01 0.09 0.78 Uniform Delay, d1 11.8 9.4 7.1 10.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.7 0.0 0.0 2.7 Delay 12.5 9.4 7.1 12.9 Level of Service B A A B Approach Delay 12.4 7.1 12.9 Approach LOS B A B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 12.3 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.71 Actuated Cycle Length 41.9 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 91.0% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 9: I-5 NB Ramps & Harbor Boulevard Year 2030 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 2 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Volume (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 0 60 1930 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.5 5.5 5.0 4.7 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.86 Frt 0.88 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3022 1386 4893 1703 6166 Flt Permitted 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3022 1386 4893 1703 6166 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 0 63 2032 RTOR Reduction (vph) 71 71 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 0 63 2032 Turn Type custom Prot Protected Phases 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 Actuated Green, G 37.6 37.6 62.2 5.0 71.9 Effective Green, g 37.6 37.6 62.2 5.0 71.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.31 0.31 0.52 0.04 0.60 Clearance Time 5.5 5.5 5.0 4.7 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 71 3694 v/s Ratio Prot c0.45 c0.04 0.33 v/s Ratio Perm 0.17 c0.29 v/c Ratio 0.87dr 0.94 0.87 0.89 0.55 Uniform Delay, d1 34.1 40.1 25.3 57.2 14.4 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.22 0.76 0.49 Incremental Delay, d2 0.6 28.7 3.7 37.4 0.2 Delay 34.7 68.8 34.6 80.6 7.2 Level of Service C E C F A Approach Delay 50.1 34.6 9.4 Approach LOS D C A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 27.8 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.89 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 15.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 86.7% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 dr Defacto Right Lane. Recode with 1 though lane as a right lane. c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 10: I-5 SB Ramps & Harbor Boulevard Year 2030 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 3 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 290 [PHONE REDACTED] 1250 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.5 4.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.86 0.91 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 1524 1703 6166 4893 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 1524 1703 6166 4893 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 305 [PHONE REDACTED] 1316 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 305 [PHONE REDACTED] 1316 0 Turn Type Free Prot Protected Phases 4 5 2 6 Permitted Phases Free Actuated Green, G 16.3 120.0 20.8 93.2 68.2 Effective Green, g 16.3 120.0 20.8 93.2 68.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 1.00 0.17 0.78 0.57 Clearance Time 5.5 4.2 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 449 1524 295 4789 2781 v/s Ratio Prot c0.09 0.06 c0.44 0.27 v/s Ratio Perm 0.28 v/c Ratio 0.68 0.28 0.36 0.56 0.47 Uniform Delay, d1 49.4 0.0 43.7 5.3 15.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.03 1.42 1.12 Incremental Delay, d2 4.1 0.5 0.7 0.5 0.5 Delay 53.4 0.5 45.7 8.0 17.6 Level of Service D A D A B Approach Delay 22.4 9.4 17.6 Approach LOS C A B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 13.6 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.58 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 10.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 54.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 17: Disney Way & I-5 SB Ramps Year 2030 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 670 10 90 1250 0 20 0 130 450 20 120 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.91 0.95 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4882 1703 4893 1703 1524 1618 1551 1447 Flt Permitted 1.00 0.35 1.00 0.59 1.00 0.95 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4882 627 4893 1056 1524 1618 1551 1447 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 705 11 95 1316 0 21 0 137 474 21 126 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 124 0 2 90 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 715 0 95 1316 0 21 0 13 256 250 23 Turn Type Perm custom custom Split Perm Protected Phases 2 6 4 4 Permitted Phases 6 8 8 4 Actuated Green, G 70.6 70.6 70.6 10.5 10.5 23.9 23.9 23.9 Effective Green, g 70.6 70.6 70.6 10.5 10.5 23.9 23.9 23.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.59 0.59 0.59 0.09 0.09 0.20 0.20 0.20 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2872 369 2879 92 133 322 309 288 v/s Ratio Prot 0.15 c0.27 0.16 c0.16 v/s Ratio Perm 0.15 c0.02 0.01 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.25 0.26 0.46 0.23 0.10 0.80 0.81 0.08 Uniform Delay, d1 11.9 12.0 13.9 51.0 50.4 45.7 45.9 39.1 Progression Factor 0.12 0.36 0.38 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.3 12.7 14.8 0.1 Delay 1.6 4.3 5.3 52.2 50.7 58.4 60.7 39.2 Level of Service A A A D D E E D Approach Delay 1.6 5.2 50.9 55.8 Approach LOS A A D E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 17.6 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.51 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 15.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 20: I-5 NB Ramps & Anaheim Boulevard Year 2030 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 4 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 0 0 80 660 1400 250 1770 0 0 2080 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.91 0.91 Frt 0.93 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3016 1386 3303 4893 4893 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3016 1386 3303 4893 4893 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 84 695 1474 263 1863 0 0 2189 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 0 1513 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 2189 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Protected Phases 8 5 2 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 Actuated Green, G 52.0 52.0 7.8 58.0 46.0 Effective Green, g 52.0 52.0 7.8 58.0 46.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.43 0.43 0.06 0.48 0.38 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1307 [PHONE REDACTED] 1876 v/s Ratio Prot c0.08 0.38 c0.45 v/s Ratio Perm 0.50 c0.53 v/c Ratio 1.16 1.22 1.22 0.79 1.17 Uniform Delay, d1 34.0 34.0 56.1 25.9 37.0 Progression Factor 1.05 1.05 1.35 0.33 0.54 Incremental Delay, d2 71.9 101.2 104.4 0.3 79.4 Delay 107.7 137.0 180.1 8.9 99.5 Level of Service F F F A F Approach Delay 0.0 117.3 30.0 99.5 Approach LOS A F C F Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 83.1 HCM Level of Service F HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.20 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 14.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 100.3% ICU Level of Service G Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 21: Disney Way & Anaheim Boulevard Year 2030 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 5 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 550 680 180 0 840 0 260 1540 10 560 1400 230 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.2 5.0 5.0 4.7 6.0 5.2 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.86 0.91 1.00 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 5973 4893 1703 4888 3303 4790 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 5973 4893 1703 4888 3303 4790 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 579 716 189 0 884 0 274 1621 11 589 1474 242 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 40 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 19 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 579 865 0 0 884 0 274 1631 0 589 1697 0 Turn Type Prot Prot Prot Protected Phases 7 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G 19.8 44.0 20.0 18.3 38.4 21.4 42.0 Effective Green, g 19.8 44.0 20.0 18.3 38.4 21.4 42.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.37 0.17 0.15 0.32 0.18 0.35 Clearance Time 4.2 5.0 5.0 4.7 6.0 5.2 6.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 545 2190 [PHONE REDACTED] 589 1677 v/s Ratio Prot c0.18 0.14 c0.18 0.16 c0.33 0.18 c0.35 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 1.06 0.40 1.08 1.05 1.04 1.00 1.01 Uniform Delay, d1 50.1 28.1 50.0 50.8 40.8 49.3 39.0 Progression Factor 0.91 1.16 1.03 0.77 0.29 0.40 0.27 Incremental Delay, d2 55.1 0.1 51.1 33.1 21.6 11.1 9.9 Delay 100.8 32.8 102.6 72.2 33.3 31.1 20.3 Level of Service F C F E C C C Approach Delay 59.3 102.6 38.9 23.1 Approach LOS E F D C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 46.5 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.08 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 21.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 95.1% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 25: Katella Avenue & Manchester Avenue Year 2030 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 8 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1912 1113 770 2446 0 200 0 210 520 150 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.88 0.97 0.91 0.95 0.91 0.95 0.97 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.91 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 2682 3303 4893 1618 1459 1447 3303 3406 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.89 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 2682 3303 4893 1618 1319 1447 3303 3406 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 2013 1172 811 2575 0 211 0 221 547 158 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 493 0 0 0 0 30 120 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 2013 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 150 115 17 547 158 0 Turn Type Perm Prot Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 3 8 7 4 Permitted Phases 2 8 4 Actuated Green, G 39.9 39.9 21.8 65.9 28.4 42.9 14.5 24.8 10.9 Effective Green, g 39.9 39.9 21.8 65.9 28.4 42.9 14.5 24.8 10.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.33 0.33 0.18 0.55 0.24 0.36 0.12 0.21 0.09 Clearance Time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1627 [PHONE REDACTED] 383 505 175 683 309 v/s Ratio Prot c0.41 c0.25 0.53 0.09 c0.05 c0.17 c0.05 v/s Ratio Perm 0.25 0.03 0.01 v/c Ratio 1.24 0.76 1.35 0.96 0.39 0.23 0.09 0.80 0.51 Uniform Delay, d1 40.0 35.8 49.1 25.7 38.5 27.0 46.9 45.3 52.0 Progression Factor 0.44 0.22 0.85 0.76 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.59 0.90 Incremental Delay, d2 107.3 0.6 159.3 1.3 0.7 0.2 0.2 5.0 1.1 Delay 125.1 8.3 200.8 20.9 39.2 27.2 47.1 31.9 48.1 Level of Service F A F C D C D C D Approach Delay 82.1 64.0 37.7 35.5 Approach LOS F E D D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 67.4 HCM Level of Service E HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.09 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 24.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 97.3% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 26: Katella Avenue & Anaheim Way Year 2030 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 9 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 50 2580 0 0 2832 [PHONE REDACTED] 360 0 0 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.85 1.00 0.98 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 4893 5730 1234 1379 5638 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 4893 5730 1234 1379 5638 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 53 2716 0 0 2981 1000 905 1768 379 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 11 11 0 1 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 53 2716 0 0 3260 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Protected Phases 5 2 6 3 8 Permitted Phases 6 Actuated Green, G 4.2 63.0 55.1 55.1 47.0 47.0 Effective Green, g 4.2 63.0 55.1 55.1 47.0 47.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.04 0.52 0.46 0.46 0.39 0.39 Clearance Time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 116 2569 2631 [PHONE REDACTED] v/s Ratio Prot 0.02 c0.56 c0.57 c0.44 0.43 v/s Ratio Perm 0.57 v/c Ratio 0.46 1.06 1.24 1.23 1.12 1.11 Uniform Delay, d1 56.8 28.5 32.4 32.4 36.5 36.5 Progression Factor 0.60 0.32 0.39 0.37 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 26.9 107.9 106.4 76.9 55.7 Delay 34.6 35.9 120.7 118.5 113.4 92.2 Level of Service C D F F F F Approach Delay 35.9 120.3 96.4 0.0 Approach LOS D F F A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 89.0 HCM Level of Service F HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.14 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 94.6% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 32: Gene Autry Way & I-5 HOV Ramps Year 2030 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 15 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 200 620 [PHONE REDACTED] 730 50 0 110 400 0 50 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 4.5 6.0 6.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.88 0.97 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 5028 1805 4950 1805 2842 3502 1615 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1805 5028 1805 4950 1805 2842 3502 1615 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 211 653 [PHONE REDACTED] 768 53 0 116 421 0 53 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 36 0 0 63 0 0 0 99 0 0 45 Lane Group Flow (vph) 211 785 0 179 2463 0 53 0 17 421 0 8 Heavy Vehicles 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type Prot Prot Prot Over Prot Over Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 3 1 7 5 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G 17.4 68.1 18.0 69.7 18.4 18.0 16.9 17.4 Effective Green, g 17.4 68.1 18.0 69.7 18.4 18.0 16.9 17.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.57 0.15 0.58 0.15 0.15 0.14 0.14 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 4.5 6.0 6.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 262 2853 271 2875 277 426 493 234 v/s Ratio Prot c0.12 0.16 0.10 c0.50 0.03 0.01 c0.12 0.00 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 0.81 0.28 0.66 0.86 0.19 0.04 0.85 0.03 Uniform Delay, d1 49.7 13.3 48.1 21.0 44.3 43.6 50.3 44.1 Progression Factor 0.96 0.56 0.99 0.26 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.7 0.0 2.9 1.8 0.3 0.0 13.5 0.1 Delay 49.5 7.4 50.5 7.3 44.6 43.7 63.8 44.1 Level of Service D A D A D D E D Approach Delay 16.0 10.2 44.0 61.6 Approach LOS B B D E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 18.4 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.85 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 84.4% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 41: Anaheim Way & State College Boulevard Year 2030 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 17 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 0 0 160 140 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 50 1870 180 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.88 0.97 0.86 1.00 0.86 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1550 3212 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1550 3212 2682 3303 6166 1703 6166 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 168 147 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 53 1968 189 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 232 0 0 0 0 0 68 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 102 213 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 53 1968 121 Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Prot Perm Protected Phases 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 6 Actuated Green, G 17.5 17.5 17.5 40.6 76.6 7.2 43.4 43.4 Effective Green, g 17.5 17.5 17.5 40.6 76.6 7.2 43.4 43.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.34 0.64 0.06 0.36 0.36 Clearance Time 6.5 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.2 6.5 6.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 226 [PHONE REDACTED] 3936 102 2230 551 v/s Ratio Prot c0.30 0.29 0.03 c0.32 v/s Ratio Perm 0.07 0.07 c0.14 0.08 v/c Ratio 0.45 0.46 0.99 0.88 0.45 0.52 0.88 0.22 Uniform Delay, d1 46.9 46.9 51.2 37.3 11.0 54.7 35.9 26.6 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.29 0.14 0.83 0.75 0.57 Incremental Delay, d2 1.4 0.7 43.7 3.8 0.2 3.6 4.6 0.8 Delay 48.3 47.6 94.9 14.6 1.7 49.3 31.7 15.9 Level of Service D D F B A D C B Approach Delay 0.0 79.0 6.3 30.8 Approach LOS A E A C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 27.1 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.90 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 18.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 74.7% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 42: I-5 SB Ramps & State College Boulevard Year 2030 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 18 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 150 720 340 0 0 0 0 2680 80 0 1720 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.88 0.81 0.86 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1618 1701 2682 7228 6166 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1618 1701 2682 7228 6166 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 158 758 358 0 0 0 0 2821 84 0 1811 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 142 774 356 0 0 0 0 2901 0 0 1811 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 Actuated Green, G 54.5 54.5 54.5 49.5 49.5 Effective Green, g 54.5 54.5 54.5 49.5 49.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.41 0.41 Clearance Time 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 2982 2543 v/s Ratio Prot c0.40 0.29 v/s Ratio Perm 0.09 0.46 0.13 v/c Ratio 0.19 1.00 0.29 0.97 0.71 Uniform Delay, d1 19.6 32.8 20.6 34.6 29.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.61 0.33 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 32.7 0.1 1.7 0.9 Delay 19.7 65.4 20.7 22.8 10.7 Level of Service B E C C B Approach Delay 47.8 0.0 22.8 10.7 Approach LOS D A C B Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 24.5 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.99 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 96.8% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 48: Ball Road & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2030 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 24 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 1790 0 0 2480 590 390 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 3269 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 3269 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 1884 0 0 2611 621 411 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 11 13 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1884 0 0 2611 700 308 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 71.3 71.3 29.1 29.1 Effective Green, g 71.3 71.3 29.1 29.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.65 0.65 0.26 0.26 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3172 3172 865 367 v/s Ratio Prot 0.39 c0.53 0.21 v/s Ratio Perm c0.22 v/c Ratio 0.59 0.82 0.81 0.84 Uniform Delay, d1 11.1 14.6 37.9 38.3 Progression Factor 0.97 0.34 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.6 0.2 5.6 15.8 Delay 11.3 5.2 43.5 54.0 Level of Service B A D D Approach Delay 11.3 5.2 46.8 Approach LOS B A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 15.0 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.83 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 9.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 76.8% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 49: Ball Road & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2030 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 25 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1750 2560 0 560 650 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.88 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1842 2695 0 589 684 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 1 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1842 2695 0 589 683 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G 61.0 61.0 40.0 40.0 Effective Green, g 61.0 61.0 40.0 40.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.55 0.55 0.36 0.36 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2713 2713 619 975 v/s Ratio Prot 0.38 c0.55 c0.35 v/s Ratio Perm 0.25 v/c Ratio 0.68 0.99 0.95 0.70 Uniform Delay, d1 17.5 24.3 34.1 29.9 Progression Factor 0.67 0.70 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 11.6 24.7 2.3 Delay 11.8 28.5 58.7 32.2 Level of Service B C E C Approach Delay 11.8 28.5 44.5 Approach LOS B C D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 26.7 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.98 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 88.0% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 50: Katella Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2030 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 26 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 1850 0 0 3200 290 480 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.81 0.86 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.93 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 7259 6166 3157 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 7259 6166 3157 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 1947 0 0 3368 305 505 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 13 13 Lane Group Flow (vph) 1947 0 0 3368 539 245 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 83.2 83.2 26.8 26.8 Effective Green, g 83.2 83.2 26.8 26.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.69 0.69 0.22 0.22 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 5033 4275 705 310 v/s Ratio Prot 0.27 c0.55 0.17 v/s Ratio Perm c0.18 v/c Ratio 0.39 0.79 0.76 0.79 Uniform Delay, d1 7.7 12.4 43.6 43.9 Progression Factor 1.69 0.26 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 0.1 4.9 12.5 Delay 13.2 3.4 48.6 56.5 Level of Service B A D E Approach Delay 13.2 3.4 51.1 Approach LOS B A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 12.8 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.79 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 68.0% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 51: Katella Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2030 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 27 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 2190 2430 0 240 560 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.88 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4893 4893 1703 2682 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 2305 2558 0 253 589 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 5 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 2305 2558 0 253 584 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G 80.1 80.1 30.9 30.9 Effective Green, g 80.1 80.1 30.9 30.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.67 0.67 0.26 0.26 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3266 3266 439 691 v/s Ratio Prot 0.47 c0.52 0.15 v/s Ratio Perm c0.22 v/c Ratio 0.71 0.78 0.58 0.84 Uniform Delay, d1 12.5 13.9 38.8 42.3 Progression Factor 0.17 0.64 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.6 1.2 1.8 9.3 Delay 2.7 10.1 40.7 51.6 Level of Service A B D D Approach Delay 2.7 10.1 48.3 Approach LOS A B D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 12.8 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.80 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 74.0% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 52: Orangewood Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2030 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 28 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 2170 0 0 3040 100 220 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.91 0.97 0.91 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.92 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3406 4893 3129 1386 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3406 4893 3129 1386 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 2284 0 0 3200 105 232 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 19 19 Lane Group Flow (vph) 2284 0 0 3200 202 97 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 88.3 88.3 11.7 11.7 Effective Green, g 88.3 88.3 11.7 11.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.80 0.80 0.11 0.11 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2734 3928 333 147 v/s Ratio Prot c0.67 0.65 0.06 v/s Ratio Perm c0.07 v/c Ratio 0.84 0.81 0.61 0.66 Uniform Delay, d1 6.5 6.2 47.0 47.2 Progression Factor 0.15 1.37 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.4 1.5 3.1 10.6 Delay 2.3 10.0 50.1 57.9 Level of Service A A D E Approach Delay 2.3 10.0 52.8 Approach LOS A A D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 9.4 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.81 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 77.4% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 53: Orangewood Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2030 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 29 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1760 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 410 0 520 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.91 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.89 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.99 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3406 1524 1703 3406 1618 1437 1447 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.99 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3406 1524 1703 3406 1618 1437 1447 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1853 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 432 0 547 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 67 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 33 33 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1853 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 337 292 284 Turn Type Perm Prot Perm Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 4 Permitted Phases 2 4 4 Actuated Green, G 50.0 50.0 26.8 81.0 19.0 19.0 19.0 Effective Green, g 50.0 50.0 26.8 81.0 19.0 19.0 19.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.45 0.45 0.24 0.74 0.17 0.17 0.17 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1548 [PHONE REDACTED] 279 248 250 v/s Ratio Prot c0.54 c0.30 0.53 v/s Ratio Perm 0.10 c0.21 0.20 0.20 v/c Ratio 1.20 0.22 1.24 0.72 1.21 1.18 1.14 Uniform Delay, d1 30.0 18.2 41.6 8.2 45.5 45.5 45.5 Progression Factor 0.47 0.28 0.85 0.42 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 89.3 0.1 120.9 1.0 122.2 113.5 98.4 Delay 103.5 5.3 156.0 4.5 167.7 159.0 143.9 Level of Service F A F A F F F Approach Delay 93.1 38.1 0.0 157.1 Approach LOS F D A F Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 80.9 HCM Level of Service F HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.21 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 14.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 104.3% ICU Level of Service G Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 64: Chapman Avenue & Frontage Road Year 2030 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 34 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1070 1110 120 2010 0 710 0 80 970 0 10 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.81 0.81 0.97 0.91 0.97 1.00 0.97 1.00 Frt 0.95 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 5510 1234 3303 4893 3303 1524 3303 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 5510 1234 3303 4893 3303 1524 3303 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1126 1168 126 2116 0 747 0 84 1021 0 11 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 73 326 0 0 0 0 0 54 0 0 3 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1637 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 747 0 30 1021 0 8 Turn Type Perm Prot custom custom custom custom Protected Phases 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 2 8 8 4 4 Actuated Green, G 53.0 53.0 9.0 67.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 Effective Green, g 53.0 53.0 9.0 67.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.44 0.44 0.08 0.56 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2434 [PHONE REDACTED] 1184 546 1184 546 v/s Ratio Prot 0.30 0.04 c0.43 v/s Ratio Perm 0.21 0.23 0.02 c0.31 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.67 0.47 0.51 0.77 0.63 0.06 0.86 0.02 Uniform Delay, d1 26.6 23.6 53.4 20.6 31.9 25.2 35.8 24.8 Progression Factor 0.80 2.77 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.73 0.82 Incremental Delay, d2 0.7 1.5 1.6 2.2 1.1 0.0 3.8 0.0 Delay 21.9 67.0 55.0 22.8 33.0 25.2 29.9 20.3 Level of Service C E E C C C C C Approach Delay 33.4 24.6 32.2 29.8 Approach LOS C C C C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 29.6 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.81 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 74.8% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 65: Chapman Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2030 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 35 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1720 0 0 2510 0 50 0 160 0 0 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.91 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3406 4893 1703 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3406 4893 1703 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1811 0 0 2642 0 53 0 168 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 155 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1811 0 0 2642 0 53 0 13 0 0 0 Turn Type Prot custom custom custom custom Protected Phases 5 2 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 4 4 Actuated Green, G 101.8 101.8 9.2 9.2 Effective Green, g 101.8 101.8 9.2 9.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.85 0.85 0.08 0.08 Clearance Time 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2889 4151 131 117 v/s Ratio Prot 0.53 c0.54 v/s Ratio Perm c0.03 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.63 0.64 0.40 0.11 Uniform Delay, d1 2.9 3.0 52.8 51.6 Progression Factor 0.92 0.18 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.7 0.3 2.0 0.4 Delay 3.4 0.9 54.8 52.0 Level of Service A A D D Approach Delay 3.4 0.9 52.7 0.0 Approach LOS A A D A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 4.3 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.62 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 65.0% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 66: Chapman Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2030 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 36 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 10 2000 20 20 1780 0 140 30 110 170 10 430 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.5 4.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1703 4886 1703 3406 1722 1524 1712 1524 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1703 4886 1703 3406 1722 1524 1712 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 11 2105 21 21 1874 0 147 32 116 179 11 453 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 97 0 0 177 Lane Group Flow (vph) 11 2125 0 21 1874 0 0 179 19 0 190 276 Turn Type Prot Prot Split Perm Split Perm Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 8 8 7 7 Permitted Phases 8 7 Actuated Green, G 3.0 63.1 2.4 62.0 12.0 12.0 24.0 24.0 Effective Green, g 3.0 63.1 2.4 62.0 12.0 12.0 24.0 24.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.02 0.53 0.02 0.52 0.10 0.10 0.20 0.20 Clearance Time 4.5 4.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 43 2569 34 1760 172 152 342 305 v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 0.43 c0.01 c0.55 c0.10 0.11 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 c0.18 v/c Ratio 0.26 0.83 0.62 1.06 1.04 0.12 0.56 0.91 Uniform Delay, d1 57.4 23.9 58.3 29.0 54.0 49.2 43.2 46.9 Progression Factor 0.89 1.11 0.98 1.08 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 3.0 3.1 23.4 39.0 79.8 1.7 6.4 32.2 Delay 54.1 29.6 80.4 70.4 133.8 50.9 49.6 79.1 Level of Service D C F E F D D E Approach Delay 29.8 70.5 101.2 70.4 Approach LOS C E F E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 54.8 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.00 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 18.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 97.2% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 69: I-5 SB Off-ramp & Disneyland Drive Year 2030 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 37 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 720 50 910 0 0 460 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.94 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 4802 1524 3406 3406 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 4802 1524 3406 3406 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 758 53 958 0 0 484 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 36 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 758 17 958 0 0 484 Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 8 Actuated Green, G 11.9 11.9 16.6 16.6 Effective Green, g 11.9 11.9 16.6 16.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.31 0.31 0.43 0.43 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1484 471 1469 1469 v/s Ratio Prot c0.16 c0.28 0.14 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.51 0.04 0.65 0.33 Uniform Delay, d1 10.9 9.3 8.7 7.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 0.0 1.0 0.1 Delay 11.2 9.3 9.7 7.4 Level of Service B A A A Approach Delay 11.1 9.7 7.4 Approach LOS B A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 9.7 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.59 Actuated Cycle Length 38.5 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 47.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No.14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report – Technical Appendices Appendix C-6 Caltrans Ramp Termini Analysis Worksheets under 2030 With Project Conditions (Mitigated) ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 20: I-5 NB Ramps & Anaheim Boulevard Year 2030 With Project With Mitigation - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 4 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 0 0 30 20 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 2070 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.91 0.86 Frt 0.88 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 2851 1386 3303 4893 6166 Flt Permitted 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 2851 1386 3303 4893 6166 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 32 21 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 2179 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 74 74 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 0 200 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 2179 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Protected Phases 8 5 2 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 Actuated Green, G 18.4 18.4 14.9 91.6 72.5 Effective Green, g 18.4 18.4 14.9 91.6 72.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 0.15 0.12 0.76 0.60 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 437 [PHONE REDACTED] 3725 v/s Ratio Prot c0.08 0.26 c0.35 v/s Ratio Perm 0.07 c0.11 v/c Ratio 0.46 0.69 0.67 0.34 0.58 Uniform Delay, d1 46.3 48.1 50.2 4.6 14.5 Progression Factor 0.95 0.94 0.80 0.01 0.16 Incremental Delay, d2 0.8 9.2 2.2 0.1 0.2 Delay 44.5 54.4 42.4 0.2 2.5 Level of Service D D D A A Approach Delay 0.0 48.9 7.6 2.5 Approach LOS A D A A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 9.8 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.62 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 14.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 55.2% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 25: Katella Avenue & Manchester Avenue Year 2030 With Project With Mitigation - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 8 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1472 1304 520 1902 0 130 0 810 430 590 20 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.86 0.88 0.97 0.86 0.95 0.91 0.95 0.97 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 6166 2682 3303 6166 1618 1392 1447 3303 3406 1524 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.86 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 6166 2682 3303 6166 1618 1195 1447 3303 3406 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1549 1373 547 2002 0 137 0 853 453 621 21 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 329 0 0 0 0 313 216 0 0 16 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1549 1044 547 2002 0 123 119 219 453 621 5 Turn Type Perm Prot Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 3 8 7 4 Permitted Phases 2 8 4 Actuated Green, G 43.1 43.1 16.8 64.1 13.7 30.2 16.5 24.6 27.4 27.4 Effective Green, g 43.1 43.1 16.8 64.1 13.7 30.2 16.5 24.6 27.4 27.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.36 0.36 0.14 0.53 0.11 0.25 0.14 0.20 0.23 0.23 Clearance Time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2215 [PHONE REDACTED] 185 323 199 677 778 348 v/s Ratio Prot 0.25 c0.17 0.32 0.08 0.04 c0.14 c0.18 v/s Ratio Perm c0.39 0.05 c0.15 0.00 v/c Ratio 0.70 1.08 1.18 0.61 0.66 0.37 1.10 0.67 0.80 0.01 Uniform Delay, d1 32.9 38.4 51.6 19.3 50.9 37.0 51.8 44.0 43.7 35.8 Progression Factor 0.30 0.27 0.74 0.51 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.52 0.46 0.26 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 40.0 101.1 0.8 8.7 0.7 93.9 2.1 4.7 0.0 Delay 10.1 50.3 139.1 10.6 59.6 37.8 145.6 25.0 25.0 9.5 Level of Service B D F B E D F C C A Approach Delay 29.0 38.2 87.9 24.7 Approach LOS C D F C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 39.2 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.97 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 14.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 88.8% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 26: Katella Avenue & Anaheim Way Year 2030 With Project With Mitigation - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 9 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 40 2680 0 0 1920 430 700 420 630 0 0 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.86 0.76 0.76 0.81 0.81 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.85 1.00 0.93 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 6166 6767 1158 1379 5347 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 6166 6767 1158 1379 5347 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 42 2821 0 0 2021 453 737 442 663 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 6 125 0 1 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 42 2821 0 0 2106 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Protected Phases 5 2 6 3 8 Permitted Phases 6 Actuated Green, G 4.2 64.0 56.1 56.1 46.0 46.0 Effective Green, g 4.2 64.0 56.1 56.1 46.0 46.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.04 0.53 0.47 0.47 0.38 0.38 Clearance Time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 116 3289 3164 [PHONE REDACTED] v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 c0.46 0.31 c0.28 0.27 v/s Ratio Perm 0.21 v/c Ratio 0.36 0.86 0.67 0.44 0.72 1.25dr Uniform Delay, d1 56.6 24.1 24.7 21.4 31.6 31.4 Progression Factor 0.68 0.34 0.38 0.03 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.3 2.2 0.8 1.7 4.9 1.2 Delay 39.9 10.4 10.2 2.4 36.5 32.6 Level of Service D B B A D C Approach Delay 10.8 9.1 33.4 0.0 Approach LOS B A C A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 16.0 HCM Level of Service B HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.80 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 10.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.7% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 dr Defacto Right Lane. Recode with 1 though lane as a right lane. c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 53: Orangewood Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2030 With Project With Mitigation - AM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 29 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1760 80 170 1280 0 0 0 0 440 0 430 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 0.97 0.95 0.95 0.91 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.92 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3406 1524 3303 3406 1618 1467 1447 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.98 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3406 1524 3303 3406 1618 1467 1447 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1853 84 179 1347 0 0 0 0 463 0 453 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 34 64 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1853 61 179 1347 0 0 0 0 319 273 226 Turn Type Perm Prot Perm Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 4 Permitted Phases 2 4 4 Actuated Green, G 71.9 71.9 7.8 83.9 26.1 26.1 26.1 Effective Green, g 71.9 71.9 7.8 83.9 26.1 26.1 26.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.60 0.60 0.06 0.70 0.22 0.22 0.22 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2041 [PHONE REDACTED] 352 319 315 v/s Ratio Prot c0.54 c0.05 0.40 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 c0.20 0.19 0.16 v/c Ratio 0.91 0.07 0.83 0.57 0.91 0.85 0.72 Uniform Delay, d1 21.1 10.0 55.5 9.0 45.8 45.1 43.5 Progression Factor 0.84 0.02 0.77 0.31 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 5.0 0.1 20.9 0.9 25.8 19.4 7.6 Delay 22.9 0.3 63.6 3.6 71.5 64.5 51.1 Level of Service C A E A E E D Approach Delay 21.9 10.6 0.0 62.7 Approach LOS C B A E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 26.5 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.90 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 14.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 81.9% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 20: I-5 NB Ramps & Anaheim Boulevard Year 2030 With Project With Mitigation - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 4 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 0 0 80 660 1400 250 1770 0 0 2080 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.91 0.86 Frt 0.93 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3016 1386 3303 4893 6166 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3016 1386 3303 4893 6166 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 0 84 695 1474 263 1863 0 0 2189 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 0 1514 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 2189 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Prot Protected Phases 8 5 2 6 Permitted Phases 8 8 Actuated Green, G 57.0 57.0 8.8 53.0 40.0 Effective Green, g 57.0 57.0 8.8 53.0 40.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.48 0.48 0.07 0.44 0.33 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1433 [PHONE REDACTED] 2055 v/s Ratio Prot c0.08 0.38 c0.36 v/s Ratio Perm 0.50 c0.53 v/c Ratio 1.06 1.12 1.09 0.86 1.07 Uniform Delay, d1 31.5 31.5 55.6 30.2 40.0 Progression Factor 1.08 1.08 1.39 0.30 0.61 Incremental Delay, d2 27.5 55.2 46.1 0.5 35.3 Delay 61.7 89.4 123.3 9.5 59.5 Level of Service E F F A E Approach Delay 0.0 70.7 23.6 59.5 Approach LOS A E C E Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 51.7 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.09 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 14.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 100.3% ICU Level of Service G Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 25: Katella Avenue & Manchester Avenue Year 2030 With Project With Mitigation - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 8 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1912 1113 770 2446 0 200 0 210 520 150 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.86 0.88 0.97 0.86 0.95 0.91 0.95 0.97 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.91 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 6166 2682 3303 6166 1618 1459 1447 3303 3406 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.89 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 6166 2682 3303 6166 1618 1319 1447 3303 3406 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 2013 1172 811 2575 0 211 0 221 547 158 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 528 0 0 0 0 30 120 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 2013 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 150 115 17 547 158 0 Turn Type Perm Prot Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 3 8 7 4 Permitted Phases 2 8 4 Actuated Green, G 38.9 38.9 22.8 65.9 28.4 42.9 14.5 24.8 10.9 Effective Green, g 38.9 38.9 22.8 65.9 28.4 42.9 14.5 24.8 10.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.32 0.32 0.19 0.55 0.24 0.36 0.12 0.21 0.09 Clearance Time 5.3 5.3 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1999 [PHONE REDACTED] 383 505 175 683 309 v/s Ratio Prot c0.33 c0.25 0.42 0.09 c0.05 c0.17 c0.05 v/s Ratio Perm 0.24 0.03 0.01 v/c Ratio 1.01 0.74 1.29 0.76 0.39 0.23 0.09 0.80 0.51 Uniform Delay, d1 40.6 36.1 48.6 20.9 38.5 27.0 46.9 45.3 52.0 Progression Factor 0.40 0.25 0.74 0.62 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.69 0.67 Incremental Delay, d2 7.8 0.5 132.3 0.2 0.7 0.2 0.2 5.0 1.1 Delay 24.1 9.6 168.5 13.1 39.2 27.2 47.1 36.4 35.9 Level of Service C A F B D C D D D Approach Delay 18.7 50.3 37.7 36.3 Approach LOS B D D D Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 35.3 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.98 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 24.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 88.0% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 26: Katella Avenue & Anaheim Way Year 2030 With Project With Mitigation - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 9 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 50 2580 0 0 2830 [PHONE REDACTED] 360 0 0 0 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.86 0.76 0.76 0.81 0.81 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.85 1.00 0.98 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (prot) 3303 6166 6688 1158 1379 5638 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (perm) 3303 6166 6688 1158 1379 5638 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 53 2716 0 0 2979 1000 905 1768 379 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 3 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 53 2716 0 0 3386 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Protected Phases 5 2 6 3 8 Permitted Phases 6 Actuated Green, G 2.6 62.0 55.7 55.7 48.0 48.0 Effective Green, g 2.6 62.0 55.7 55.7 48.0 48.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.02 0.52 0.46 0.46 0.40 0.40 Clearance Time 4.7 6.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 72 3186 3104 [PHONE REDACTED] v/s Ratio Prot 0.02 c0.44 0.51 c0.44 0.43 v/s Ratio Perm c0.51 v/c Ratio 0.74 0.85 1.09 1.09 1.10 1.08 Uniform Delay, d1 58.4 25.0 32.2 32.2 36.0 36.0 Progression Factor 0.50 0.31 0.40 0.39 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 15.3 1.4 41.5 44.6 67.8 46.4 Delay 44.4 9.2 54.3 57.0 103.8 82.4 Level of Service D A D E F F Approach Delay 9.8 54.7 86.6 0.0 Approach LOS A D F A Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 52.0 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.05 Actuated Cycle Length 120.0 Sum of lost time 9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 90.4% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 53: Orangewood Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2030 With Project With Mitigation - PM Peak Hour HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7 - Report Page 29 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (vph) 0 1760 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 410 0 520 Ideal Flow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 0.97 0.95 0.95 0.91 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.89 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.99 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3406 1524 3303 3406 1618 1437 1447 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.99 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3406 1524 3303 3406 1618 1437 1447 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 1853 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 432 0 547 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 67 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 29 29 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1853 [PHONE REDACTED] 0 0 0 0 337 296 288 Turn Type Perm Prot Perm Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 4 Permitted Phases 2 4 4 Actuated Green, G 58.0 58.0 16.8 79.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 Effective Green, g 58.0 58.0 16.8 79.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.53 0.53 0.15 0.72 0.19 0.19 0.19 Clearance Time 5.0 5.0 4.2 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1796 [PHONE REDACTED] 309 274 276 v/s Ratio Prot c0.54 c0.16 0.53 v/s Ratio Perm 0.10 c0.21 0.21 0.20 v/c Ratio 1.03 0.19 1.02 0.74 1.09 1.08 1.04 Uniform Delay, d1 26.0 13.7 46.6 9.3 44.5 44.5 44.5 Progression Factor 0.43 0.25 0.88 0.63 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 16.8 0.0 36.4 1.2 77.6 77.2 65.8 Delay 27.8 3.4 77.5 7.1 122.1 121.7 110.3 Level of Service C A E A F F F Approach Delay 25.2 22.7 0.0 118.2 Approach LOS C C A F Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 41.1 HCM Level of Service D HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.04 Actuated Cycle Length 110.0 Sum of lost time 14.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 91.1% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No.14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report – Technical Appendices Appendix D-1 Caltrans Ramp Termini Queuing Analysis Worksheets under Existing Conditions ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 9: I-5 NB Ramps & Harbor Boulevard Existing - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 2 Lane Group WBL WBR NBT SBL SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 437 369 844 47 1939 v/c Ratio 0.65 0.79 0.28 0.28 0.43 Control Delay 12.2 18.5 8.5 33.1 4.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 12.2 18.5 8.5 33.1 4.5 Queue Length 50th (ft) 21 14 84 19 66 Queue Length 95th (ft) 57 #134 127 47 111 Internal Link Dist (ft) 422 17 580 Turn Bay Length (ft) 150 200 Base Capacity (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 251 4464 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.56 0.72 0.28 0.19 0.43 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 10: I-5 SB Ramps & Harbor Boulevard Existing - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 3 Lane Group EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 261 312 60 792 848 v/c Ratio 0.56 0.20 0.35 0.18 0.29 Control Delay 32.3 0.3 34.3 3.8 7.4 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 32.3 0.3 34.3 3.8 7.4 Queue Length 50th (ft) 55 0 25 26 57 Queue Length 95th (ft) 85 0 56 42 74 Internal Link Dist (ft) 365 636 27 Turn Bay Length (ft) 190 Base Capacity (vph) 873 1524 360 4366 2944 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.30 0.20 0.17 0.18 0.29 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 17: Disney Way & I-5 SB Ramps Existing - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 5 Lane Group EBT WBL WBT NBL NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 129 21 304 25 28 186 182 149 v/c Ratio 0.04 0.03 0.10 0.19 0.14 0.64 0.65 0.39 Control Delay 12.0 18.6 16.1 40.0 15.8 43.5 43.3 8.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 12.0 18.6 16.1 40.0 15.8 43.5 43.3 8.2 Queue Length 50th (ft) 13 9 45 13 0 104 103 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 24 22 57 29 17 156 159 44 Internal Link Dist (ft) 778 526 386 Turn Bay Length (ft) 145 Base Capacity (vph) 2935 727 2975 209 294 396 380 466 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.04 0.03 0.10 0.12 0.10 0.47 0.48 0.32 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 25: Katella Avenue & Manchester Avenue Existing - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 10 Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 920 [PHONE REDACTED] 67 334 326 26 108 19 v/c Ratio 0.59 0.66 0.36 0.57 0.57 0.86 0.43 0.12 0.09 0.04 Control Delay 30.6 6.4 44.5 20.6 64.0 27.4 4.9 45.2 24.5 10.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 30.6 6.4 44.5 20.6 64.0 27.4 4.9 45.2 24.5 10.7 Queue Length 50th (ft) 179 0 39 212 44 4 0 8 25 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 224 85 68 257 74 36 22 20 43 15 Internal Link Dist (ft) 645 727 541 959 Turn Bay Length (ft) 240 380 Base Capacity (vph) 1551 [PHONE REDACTED] 121 390 [PHONE REDACTED] 523 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.59 0.66 0.36 0.57 0.55 0.86 0.43 0.03 0.09 0.04 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 26: Katella Avenue & Anaheim Way Existing - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 11 Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR NBL NBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 41 1405 938 45 279 1014 v/c Ratio 0.21 0.68 0.44 0.09 0.46 0.42 Control Delay 43.3 23.2 9.3 1.3 20.4 17.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 43.3 23.2 9.3 1.3 20.4 17.5 Queue Length 50th (ft) 11 230 84 0 132 116 Queue Length 95th (ft) 28 282 104 m0 218 145 Internal Link Dist (ft) 108 976 845 Turn Bay Length (ft) 110 220 Base Capacity (vph) 195 2066 2128 [PHONE REDACTED] Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.21 0.68 0.44 0.09 0.46 0.42 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 32: Gene Autry Way & I-5 HOV Ramps Existing - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 13 Lane Group WBL WBR NBR SBL Lane Group Flow (vph) 29 13 20 81 v/c Ratio 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.05 Control Delay 5.0 4.0 0.0 4.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 5.0 4.0 0.0 4.9 Queue Length 50th (ft) 0 0 0 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 4 4 0 10 Internal Link Dist (ft) 358 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 1868 798 2688 2918 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.03 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 41: Anaheim Way & State College Boulevard Existing - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 15 Lane Group WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 90 187 278 8 589 17 1508 12 v/c Ratio 0.48 0.49 0.49 0.05 0.14 0.16 0.33 0.01 Control Delay 52.7 48.6 7.9 40.0 2.2 53.8 4.0 0.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 52.7 48.6 7.9 40.0 2.2 53.8 4.0 0.9 Queue Length 50th (ft) 67 69 0 3 6 12 30 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 116 100 39 12 20 36 180 2 Internal Link Dist (ft) 432 25 513 Turn Bay Length (ft) 190 Base Capacity (vph) 359 739 [PHONE REDACTED] 167 4560 1130 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.25 0.25 0.33 0.04 0.14 0.10 0.33 0.01 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 42: I-5 SB Ramps & State College Boulevard Existing - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 16 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR NBT SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 64 331 [PHONE REDACTED] v/c Ratio 0.15 0.75 0.55 0.18 0.40 Control Delay 29.3 47.5 35.1 14.5 8.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 29.3 47.5 35.1 14.5 8.8 Queue Length 50th (ft) 36 227 127 54 171 Queue Length 95th (ft) 64 292 156 73 86 Internal Link Dist (ft) 297 600 30 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 4315 3672 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.10 0.47 0.35 0.18 0.40 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 48: Ball Road & SR-57 NB Ramps Existing - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 22 Lane Group EBT WBT NBL NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1148 684 400 503 v/c Ratio 0.44 0.26 0.66 0.89 Control Delay 12.5 12.6 28.9 42.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 12.5 12.6 28.9 42.7 Queue Length 50th (ft) 111 74 184 243 Queue Length 95th (ft) m145 113 250 340 Internal Link Dist (ft) 328 112 507 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 2622 2622 746 687 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.44 0.26 0.54 0.73 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 49: Ball Road & SR-57 SB Ramps Existing - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 23 Lane Group EBT WBT SBL SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1039 822 857 787 v/c Ratio 0.62 0.49 0.93 0.97 Control Delay 31.5 21.8 35.3 45.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 31.5 21.8 35.3 45.0 Queue Length 50th (ft) 160 109 394 400 Queue Length 95th (ft) m166 179 #679 #693 Internal Link Dist (ft) 144 389 451 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 1683 1683 943 827 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.62 0.49 0.91 0.95 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 50: Katella Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Existing - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 24 Lane Group EBT WBT NBL NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 886 984 547 255 v/c Ratio 0.22 0.29 0.66 0.66 Control Delay 8.9 6.8 18.4 20.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 8.9 6.8 18.4 20.5 Queue Length 50th (ft) 23 37 65 53 Queue Length 95th (ft) 71 70 88 102 Internal Link Dist (ft) 94 489 532 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 4042 3433 1256 567 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.22 0.29 0.44 0.45 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 51: Katella Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Existing - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 25 Lane Group EBT WBT SBL SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 823 964 616 289 v/c Ratio 0.31 0.37 0.71 0.72 Control Delay 7.5 8.6 19.5 23.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 7.5 8.6 19.5 23.1 Queue Length 50th (ft) 42 35 76 67 Queue Length 95th (ft) 79 116 102 120 Internal Link Dist (ft) 185 185 274 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 2640 2640 1172 536 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.31 0.37 0.53 0.54 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 52: Orangewood Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Existing - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 26 Lane Group EBT WBT NBL NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1220 916 425 291 v/c Ratio 0.51 0.27 0.60 0.85 Control Delay 6.1 2.6 38.9 56.4 Queue Delay 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 6.2 2.6 38.9 56.4 Queue Length 50th (ft) 82 33 132 194 Queue Length 95th (ft) 186 35 159 270 Internal Link Dist (ft) 1 692 407 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 2390 3433 1138 535 Starvation Cap Reductn 359 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.60 0.27 0.37 0.54 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 53: Orangewood Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Existing - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 27 Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1245 41 183 556 269 257 251 v/c Ratio 0.74 0.06 0.65 0.23 0.83 0.68 0.51 Control Delay 4.8 0.1 54.0 4.1 66.3 33.4 8.4 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 4.8 0.1 54.0 4.1 66.3 33.4 8.4 Queue Length 50th (ft) 46 0 138 53 209 114 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) m50 m0 213 67 303 208 71 Internal Link Dist (ft) 718 236 426 Turn Bay Length (ft) 200 270 Base Capacity (vph) 1681 [PHONE REDACTED] 391 431 540 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.74 0.06 0.65 0.23 0.69 0.60 0.46 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 64: Chapman Avenue & Frontage Road Existing - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 32 Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR SBL Lane Group Flow (vph) 1350 466 102 882 634 36 224 v/c Ratio 0.44 0.53 0.42 0.27 0.79 0.09 0.28 Control Delay 26.4 17.7 53.9 8.1 46.7 9.8 32.4 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 26.4 17.7 53.9 8.1 46.7 9.8 32.4 Queue Length 50th (ft) 280 219 36 83 218 0 47 Queue Length 95th (ft) m292 m325 64 124 262 24 13 Internal Link Dist (ft) 595 661 Turn Bay Length (ft) 320 350 Base Capacity (vph) 3094 [PHONE REDACTED] 991 482 991 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.44 0.53 0.40 0.27 0.64 0.07 0.23 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 65: Chapman Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Existing - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 33 Lane Group EBT WBT NBL NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1070 1125 48 123 v/c Ratio 0.79 0.58 0.06 0.15 Control Delay 17.2 23.5 14.8 3.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 17.2 23.5 14.8 3.5 Queue Length 50th (ft) 106 218 15 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 106 253 38 30 Internal Link Dist (ft) 139 584 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 1720 2081 872 840 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.62 0.54 0.06 0.15 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 66: Chapman Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Existing - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 34 Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBT NBR SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 3 1306 92 673 32 23 380 429 v/c Ratio 0.04 0.75 0.65 0.44 0.25 0.17 0.68 0.61 Control Delay 46.3 31.6 63.8 41.7 48.7 20.2 36.5 12.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 46.3 31.6 63.8 41.7 48.7 20.2 36.5 12.7 Queue Length 50th (ft) 2 271 63 200 20 0 208 60 Queue Length 95th (ft) 11 333 116 298 38 15 284 133 Internal Link Dist (ft) 297 173 232 220 Turn Bay Length (ft) 140 120 100 Base Capacity (vph) 85 1744 170 1523 129 136 560 698 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.04 0.75 0.54 0.44 0.25 0.17 0.68 0.61 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 69: I-5 SB Off-ramp & Disneyland Drive Existing - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 35 Lane Group WBL WBR NBT SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 843 15 132 471 v/c Ratio 0.50 0.03 0.11 0.39 Control Delay 10.6 5.1 8.1 9.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 10.6 5.1 8.1 9.7 Queue Length 50th (ft) 40 0 7 32 Queue Length 95th (ft) 79 8 22 66 Internal Link Dist (ft) 555 201 964 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 4613 1465 3157 3157 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.18 0.01 0.04 0.15 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 9: I-5 NB Ramps & Harbor Boulevard Existing - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 2 Lane Group WBL WBR NBT SBL SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 55 1522 v/c Ratio 0.86dr 0.90 0.36 0.31 0.36 Control Delay 15.9 31.7 9.6 33.5 5.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 15.9 31.7 9.6 33.5 5.5 Queue Length 50th (ft) 44 56 115 23 77 Queue Length 95th (ft) 90 #231 159 53 96 Internal Link Dist (ft) 422 17 580 Turn Bay Length (ft) 150 200 Base Capacity (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 251 4177 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.62 0.83 0.36 0.22 0.36 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. dr Defacto Right Lane. Recode with 1 though lane as a right lane. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 10: I-5 SB Ramps & Harbor Boulevard Existing - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 3 Lane Group EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 264 411 83 1266 891 v/c Ratio 0.56 0.27 0.43 0.29 0.32 Control Delay 32.3 0.4 35.1 4.2 8.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 32.3 0.4 35.1 4.2 8.0 Queue Length 50th (ft) 55 0 34 46 54 Queue Length 95th (ft) 85 0 70 71 73 Internal Link Dist (ft) 365 636 27 Turn Bay Length (ft) 190 Base Capacity (vph) 873 1524 360 4360 2742 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.30 0.27 0.23 0.29 0.32 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 17: Disney Way & I-5 SB Ramps Existing - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 5 Lane Group EBT WBL WBT NBL NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 320 39 442 21 50 192 192 121 v/c Ratio 0.10 0.06 0.14 0.22 0.29 0.71 0.74 0.35 Control Delay 9.3 4.1 3.8 56.9 18.4 61.2 63.0 9.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 9.3 4.1 3.8 56.9 18.4 61.2 63.0 9.9 Queue Length 50th (ft) 34 4 17 16 0 148 153 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 54 9 22 34 23 213 223 47 Internal Link Dist (ft) 778 526 386 Turn Bay Length (ft) 145 Base Capacity (vph) 3158 639 3173 393 566 351 337 408 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.10 0.06 0.14 0.05 0.09 0.55 0.57 0.30 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 25: Katella Avenue & Manchester Avenue Existing - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 10 Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1034 [PHONE REDACTED] 46 110 109 30 64 2 v/c Ratio 0.36 0.51 0.75 0.47 0.37 0.59 0.45 0.16 0.29 0.02 Control Delay 4.0 3.9 59.7 6.8 60.9 23.9 15.6 39.7 32.9 15.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 4.0 4.4 59.7 6.8 60.9 23.9 15.6 39.7 32.9 15.5 Queue Length 50th (ft) 30 230 133 184 35 4 0 12 24 1 Queue Length 95th (ft) 45 381 176 236 62 37 31 m22 m41 m2 Internal Link Dist (ft) 645 727 541 959 Turn Bay Length (ft) 240 380 Base Capacity (vph) 2838 1125 553 3691 131 188 254 826 937 421 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 224 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.36 0.64 0.62 0.47 0.35 0.59 0.43 0.04 0.07 0.00 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 26: Katella Avenue & Anaheim Way Existing - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 11 Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR NBL NBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 41 1211 1501 98 398 1658 v/c Ratio 0.21 0.59 0.71 0.20 0.65 0.65 Control Delay 43.3 21.4 17.2 2.1 25.6 20.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 43.3 21.4 17.2 2.1 25.6 20.9 Queue Length 50th (ft) 11 188 245 8 211 218 Queue Length 95th (ft) 28 233 205 m4 339 260 Internal Link Dist (ft) 108 976 845 Turn Bay Length (ft) 110 220 Base Capacity (vph) 195 2066 2128 [PHONE REDACTED] Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.21 0.59 0.71 0.20 0.65 0.65 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 32: Gene Autry Way & I-5 HOV Ramps Existing - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 13 Lane Group WBL WBR NBR SBL Lane Group Flow (vph) 51 30 36 28 v/c Ratio 0.03 0.04 0.02 0.02 Control Delay 4.6 4.0 0.0 6.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 4.6 4.0 0.0 6.7 Queue Length 50th (ft) 0 0 0 1 Queue Length 95th (ft) 5 6 0 5 Internal Link Dist (ft) 358 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 1676 756 2639 2728 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.03 0.04 0.01 0.01 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 41: Anaheim Way & State College Boulevard Existing - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 15 Lane Group WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 91 189 155 83 844 24 1144 39 v/c Ratio 0.51 0.51 0.35 0.34 0.20 0.22 0.28 0.04 Control Delay 54.5 49.8 8.7 51.4 2.1 68.3 4.4 0.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 54.5 49.8 8.7 51.4 2.1 68.3 4.4 0.3 Queue Length 50th (ft) 68 70 0 29 25 17 31 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 118 102 31 55 32 46 49 1 Internal Link Dist (ft) 432 25 513 Turn Bay Length (ft) 190 Base Capacity (vph) 373 771 [PHONE REDACTED] 198 4086 1023 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.24 0.25 0.20 0.19 0.20 0.12 0.28 0.04 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 42: I-5 SB Ramps & State College Boulevard Existing - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 16 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR NBT SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 144 [PHONE REDACTED] 966 v/c Ratio 0.51 0.66 0.63 0.24 0.23 Control Delay 46.4 52.3 32.1 0.5 5.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 46.4 52.3 32.1 0.5 5.3 Queue Length 50th (ft) 98 136 88 1 50 Queue Length 95th (ft) 150 197 128 5 59 Internal Link Dist (ft) 297 600 30 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 4928 4201 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.23 0.29 0.31 0.24 0.23 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 48: Ball Road & SR-57 NB Ramps Existing - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 22 Lane Group EBT WBT NBL NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 932 1263 530 184 v/c Ratio 0.34 0.46 0.93 0.32 Control Delay 18.1 13.0 53.0 10.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 18.1 13.0 53.0 10.7 Queue Length 50th (ft) 134 156 276 29 Queue Length 95th (ft) 151 192 #462 77 Internal Link Dist (ft) 328 112 507 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 2729 2729 613 618 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.34 0.46 0.86 0.30 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 49: Ball Road & SR-57 SB Ramps Existing - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 23 Lane Group EBT WBT SBL SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1167 1345 518 480 v/c Ratio 0.45 0.51 0.86 0.90 Control Delay 7.6 10.0 39.5 46.4 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 7.6 10.0 39.5 46.4 Queue Length 50th (ft) 71 112 249 248 Queue Length 95th (ft) m77 159 360 #405 Internal Link Dist (ft) 144 389 451 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 2617 2617 698 615 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.45 0.51 0.74 0.78 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 50: Katella Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Existing - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 24 Lane Group EBT WBT NBL NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 873 1510 416 192 v/c Ratio 0.20 0.41 0.62 0.59 Control Delay 4.0 5.5 18.8 19.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 4.0 5.5 18.8 19.1 Queue Length 50th (ft) 11 55 47 36 Queue Length 95th (ft) 16 59 72 80 Internal Link Dist (ft) 94 489 532 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 4384 3724 1246 569 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.20 0.41 0.33 0.34 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 51: Katella Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Existing - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 25 Lane Group EBT WBT SBL SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1099 1017 478 242 v/c Ratio 0.39 0.36 0.63 0.68 Control Delay 7.2 3.5 18.8 23.4 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 7.2 3.5 18.8 23.4 Queue Length 50th (ft) 53 20 58 57 Queue Length 95th (ft) 105 27 80 104 Internal Link Dist (ft) 185 185 274 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 2797 2797 1160 530 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.39 0.36 0.41 0.46 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 52: Orangewood Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Existing - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 26 Lane Group EBT WBT NBL NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 782 1870 194 120 v/c Ratio 0.28 0.47 0.54 0.55 Control Delay 5.3 4.9 21.9 17.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 5.3 4.9 21.9 17.2 Queue Length 50th (ft) 97 160 20 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) m131 227 49 51 Internal Link Dist (ft) 1 692 407 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 2758 3962 683 359 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.28 0.47 0.28 0.33 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 53: Orangewood Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Existing - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 27 Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 844 113 511 990 242 281 276 v/c Ratio 0.84 0.22 0.83 0.40 0.88 0.73 0.70 Control Delay 38.2 6.0 38.9 7.4 68.5 26.0 23.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 38.2 6.0 38.9 7.4 68.5 26.0 23.9 Queue Length 50th (ft) 246 0 218 93 142 59 53 Queue Length 95th (ft) #354 41 #408 197 #276 #181 #148 Internal Link Dist (ft) 718 236 426 Turn Bay Length (ft) 200 270 Base Capacity (vph) 1008 [PHONE REDACTED] 288 394 402 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.84 0.22 0.83 0.40 0.84 0.71 0.69 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 64: Chapman Avenue & Frontage Road Existing - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 32 Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR SBL SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1478 [PHONE REDACTED] 688 76 161 3 v/c Ratio 0.49 0.57 0.47 0.33 0.81 0.17 0.19 0.01 Control Delay 29.6 17.3 54.7 9.3 46.0 7.4 31.9 9.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 29.6 17.3 54.7 9.3 46.0 7.4 31.9 9.7 Queue Length 50th (ft) 262 201 42 110 233 0 32 1 Queue Length 95th (ft) 291 m346 73 155 283 34 31 m1 Internal Link Dist (ft) 595 661 Turn Bay Length (ft) 320 350 Base Capacity (vph) 2989 [PHONE REDACTED] 1021 524 1021 473 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.49 0.57 0.45 0.33 0.67 0.15 0.16 0.01 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 65: Chapman Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Existing - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 33 Lane Group EBT WBT NBL NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 925 1546 33 172 v/c Ratio 0.69 0.80 0.04 0.20 Control Delay 17.7 23.5 13.8 3.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 17.7 23.5 13.8 3.0 Queue Length 50th (ft) 266 328 10 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 98 315 28 33 Internal Link Dist (ft) 139 584 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 1788 2104 880 871 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.52 0.73 0.04 0.20 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 66: Chapman Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Existing - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 34 Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBT NBR SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1 1120 25 1132 248 154 200 329 v/c Ratio 0.01 0.50 0.27 0.70 0.78 0.39 0.63 0.77 Control Delay 46.0 21.0 48.5 36.5 56.8 11.4 47.6 30.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 46.0 21.0 48.5 36.5 56.8 11.4 47.6 30.7 Queue Length 50th (ft) 1 164 18 270 152 9 119 91 Queue Length 95th (ft) 6 246 m26 393 174 29 180 170 Internal Link Dist (ft) 297 173 232 220 Turn Bay Length (ft) 140 120 100 Base Capacity (vph) 85 2222 102 1625 319 394 317 428 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.01 0.50 0.25 0.70 0.78 0.39 0.63 0.77 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 69: I-5 SB Off-ramp & Disneyland Drive Existing - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 35 Lane Group WBL WBR NBT SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 679 51 307 292 v/c Ratio 0.38 0.09 0.27 0.26 Control Delay 7.9 3.0 9.0 8.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 7.9 3.0 9.0 8.9 Queue Length 50th (ft) 25 0 17 16 Queue Length 95th (ft) 47 11 42 41 Internal Link Dist (ft) 807 201 466 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 4699 1492 3406 3406 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.14 0.03 0.09 0.09 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No.14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report – Technical Appendices Appendix D-2 Caltrans Ramp Termini Queuing Analysis Worksheets 2015 No Project Conditions ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 9: I-5 NB Ramps & Harbor Boulevard Year 2015 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 2 Lane Group WBL WBR NBT SBL SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 448 373 884 53 2379 v/c Ratio 0.63 0.85 0.28 0.41 0.52 Control Delay 22.5 32.7 4.5 40.9 18.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 Total Delay 22.5 32.7 4.5 40.9 19.3 Queue Length 50th (ft) 71 103 54 35 438 Queue Length 95th (ft) 106 206 232 m41 m508 Internal Link Dist (ft) 418 17 580 Turn Bay Length (ft) 150 200 Base Capacity (vph) 1278 673 3185 164 4616 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 1426 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.35 0.55 0.28 0.32 0.75 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 10: I-5 SB Ramps & Harbor Boulevard Year 2015 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 3 Lane Group EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 284 316 63 832 1263 v/c Ratio 0.66 0.21 0.45 0.17 0.38 Control Delay 57.1 0.3 52.6 1.1 2.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 57.1 0.3 52.6 1.1 2.8 Queue Length 50th (ft) 109 0 30 3 95 Queue Length 95th (ft) 150 0 47 11 9 Internal Link Dist (ft) 363 636 27 Turn Bay Length (ft) 190 Base Capacity (vph) 729 1524 224 4825 3341 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.39 0.21 0.28 0.17 0.38 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 17: Disney Way & I-5 SB Ramps Year 2015 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 5 Lane Group EBT WBL WBT NBL NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 379 63 421 21 32 205 201 142 v/c Ratio 0.12 0.11 0.14 0.22 0.20 0.69 0.70 0.37 Control Delay 4.3 5.1 4.3 57.0 19.8 57.1 57.3 8.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 4.3 5.1 4.3 57.0 19.8 57.1 57.3 8.7 Queue Length 50th (ft) 18 4 10 16 0 157 159 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 26 18 28 42 32 223 227 52 Internal Link Dist (ft) 778 526 386 Turn Bay Length (ft) 150 Base Capacity (vph) 3081 588 3092 204 306 620 595 642 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.12 0.11 0.14 0.10 0.10 0.33 0.34 0.22 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 25: Katella Avenue & Manchester Avenue Year 2015 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 11 Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1116 [PHONE REDACTED] 76 307 312 168 232 21 v/c Ratio 0.46 0.49 0.67 0.46 0.52 0.80 0.68 0.50 0.42 0.08 Control Delay 5.9 0.7 55.3 10.8 63.9 22.3 12.8 32.0 24.0 10.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 5.9 0.7 55.3 10.8 63.9 22.3 12.8 32.0 24.0 10.1 Queue Length 50th (ft) 56 2 96 187 60 6 0 65 82 5 Queue Length 95th (ft) m64 m2 135 268 111 110 88 88 94 m17 Internal Link Dist (ft) 645 727 541 959 Turn Bay Length (ft) 320 240 380 Base Capacity (vph) 2416 1756 380 3149 196 385 [PHONE REDACTED] 484 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.46 0.49 0.67 0.46 0.39 0.80 0.61 0.20 0.22 0.04 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 26: Katella Avenue & Anaheim Way Year 2015 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 12 Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR NBL NBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 42 1842 1250 [PHONE REDACTED] v/c Ratio 0.29 0.71 0.45 0.24 0.54 0.56 Control Delay 48.4 13.4 11.0 1.1 33.4 31.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 48.4 13.4 11.0 1.1 33.4 31.3 Queue Length 50th (ft) 15 203 84 0 209 206 Queue Length 95th (ft) m31 251 100 7 319 245 Internal Link Dist (ft) 108 976 845 Turn Bay Length (ft) 110 220 Base Capacity (vph) 146 2610 2755 [PHONE REDACTED] Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.29 0.71 0.45 0.24 0.54 0.56 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 32: Gene Autry Way & I-5 HOV Ramps Year 2015 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 14 Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBR SBL SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 11 358 42 190 11 32 295 21 v/c Ratio 0.11 0.10 0.27 0.05 0.04 0.12 0.65 0.20 Control Delay 47.9 11.7 56.1 4.0 42.8 17.6 56.2 25.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 47.9 11.7 56.1 4.0 42.8 17.6 56.2 25.0 Queue Length 50th (ft) 9 48 31 9 7 0 113 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) m25 73 68 20 24 17 154 26 Internal Link Dist (ft) 849 797 Turn Bay Length (ft) 200 200 200 200 Base Capacity (vph) 256 3420 361 3534 [PHONE REDACTED] 247 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.04 0.10 0.12 0.05 0.02 0.05 0.23 0.09 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 41: Anaheim Way & State College Boulevard Year 2015 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 16 Lane Group WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 130 270 379 221 789 21 1874 21 v/c Ratio 0.55 0.55 0.52 0.58 0.19 0.20 0.54 0.02 Control Delay 51.0 46.6 6.6 52.0 4.3 65.0 9.5 1.4 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 51.0 46.6 6.6 52.0 4.3 65.0 9.5 1.4 Queue Length 50th (ft) 94 97 0 82 26 16 97 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 156 136 43 125 39 m42 261 m1 Internal Link Dist (ft) 432 25 513 Turn Bay Length (ft) 190 200 Base Capacity (vph) 303 631 [PHONE REDACTED] 121 3477 868 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.43 0.43 0.46 0.45 0.19 0.17 0.54 0.02 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 42: I-5 SB Ramps & State College Boulevard Year 2015 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 17 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR NBT SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 67 [PHONE REDACTED] 1863 v/c Ratio 0.11 0.81 0.39 0.30 0.62 Control Delay 21.1 41.3 25.7 17.1 11.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 21.1 41.3 25.7 17.1 11.1 Queue Length 50th (ft) 31 326 107 79 298 Queue Length 95th (ft) 57 417 135 107 194 Internal Link Dist (ft) 297 600 30 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 3530 3010 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.09 0.67 0.32 0.30 0.62 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 48: Ball Road & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2015 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 23 Lane Group EBT WBT NBL NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1547 842 617 288 v/c Ratio 0.48 0.26 0.73 0.77 Control Delay 5.1 8.7 44.2 51.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 5.1 8.7 44.2 51.5 Queue Length 50th (ft) 109 84 221 215 Queue Length 95th (ft) 135 114 251 292 Internal Link Dist (ft) 328 112 507 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 3236 3236 1273 560 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.48 0.26 0.48 0.51 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 49: Ball Road & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2015 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 24 Lane Group EBT WBT SBL SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1337 [PHONE REDACTED] v/c Ratio 0.59 0.43 0.80 0.80 Control Delay 22.6 22.0 35.3 30.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 22.6 22.0 35.3 30.3 Queue Length 50th (ft) 326 159 401 348 Queue Length 95th (ft) m394 251 482 381 Internal Link Dist (ft) 144 389 451 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 2260 2260 922 1482 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.59 0.43 0.69 0.69 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 50: Katella Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2015 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 25 Lane Group EBT WBT NBL NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1368 1242 572 260 v/c Ratio 0.28 0.30 0.71 0.74 Control Delay 5.2 4.6 44.8 51.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 5.2 4.6 44.8 51.3 Queue Length 50th (ft) 53 39 206 195 Queue Length 95th (ft) 83 82 234 267 Internal Link Dist (ft) 94 489 532 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 4879 4145 1542 667 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.28 0.30 0.37 0.39 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 51: Katella Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2015 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 26 Lane Group EBT WBT SBL SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1326 1189 347 611 v/c Ratio 0.41 0.37 0.76 0.79 Control Delay 6.6 9.8 50.6 42.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 6.6 9.8 50.6 42.8 Queue Length 50th (ft) 67 131 249 223 Queue Length 95th (ft) 79 208 318 264 Internal Link Dist (ft) 185 185 274 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 3212 3212 738 1204 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.41 0.37 0.47 0.51 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 52: Orangewood Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2015 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 27 Lane Group EBT WBT NBL NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1411 1105 411 273 v/c Ratio 0.61 0.33 0.57 0.79 Control Delay 3.5 4.0 32.8 46.5 Queue Delay 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 3.8 4.0 32.8 46.5 Queue Length 50th (ft) 111 46 107 153 Queue Length 95th (ft) 137 97 138 230 Internal Link Dist (ft) 1 692 407 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 2304 3310 985 460 Starvation Cap Reductn 297 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.70 0.33 0.42 0.59 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 53: Orangewood Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2015 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 28 Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1411 53 179 779 276 263 251 v/c Ratio 0.82 0.07 0.71 0.33 0.83 0.70 0.51 Control Delay 11.5 0.6 49.4 3.1 59.7 32.6 8.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 11.5 0.6 49.4 3.1 59.7 32.6 8.8 Queue Length 50th (ft) 125 0 115 49 174 102 3 Queue Length 95th (ft) 124 m1 #211 55 #306 202 71 Internal Link Dist (ft) 718 236 426 Turn Bay Length (ft) 200 270 Base Capacity (vph) 1720 [PHONE REDACTED] 356 397 509 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.82 0.07 0.71 0.33 0.78 0.66 0.49 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 64: Chapman Avenue & Frontage Road Year 2015 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 33 Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR SBL Lane Group Flow (vph) 1427 [PHONE REDACTED] 653 116 505 v/c Ratio 0.46 0.54 0.50 0.31 0.79 0.25 0.61 Control Delay 32.8 19.7 58.5 8.9 45.7 6.7 18.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 32.8 19.7 58.5 8.9 45.7 6.7 18.7 Queue Length 50th (ft) 274 235 37 103 222 0 43 Queue Length 95th (ft) 311 m314 66 150 266 41 70 Internal Link Dist (ft) 595 661 Turn Bay Length (ft) 320 350 200 Base Capacity (vph) 3104 [PHONE REDACTED] 1021 551 1021 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.46 0.54 0.50 0.31 0.64 0.21 0.49 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 65: Chapman Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2015 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 34 Lane Group EBT WBT NBL NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1147 1274 53 116 v/c Ratio 0.40 0.31 0.39 0.51 Control Delay 0.3 1.3 55.4 16.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 0.3 1.3 55.4 16.7 Queue Length 50th (ft) 1 37 36 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 5 35 75 53 Internal Link Dist (ft) 139 584 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 2855 4101 255 327 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.40 0.31 0.21 0.35 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 66: Chapman Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2015 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 35 Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBT NBR SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 11 1463 95 832 32 21 337 411 v/c Ratio 0.05 0.81 0.71 0.55 0.13 0.09 0.83 0.61 Control Delay 38.1 32.9 84.0 21.7 42.5 17.4 58.2 7.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 38.1 32.9 84.0 21.7 42.5 17.4 58.2 7.8 Queue Length 50th (ft) 7 339 62 167 20 0 227 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 24 400 #136 #291 49 23 #376 84 Internal Link Dist (ft) 297 173 232 220 Turn Bay Length (ft) 140 120 100 Base Capacity (vph) 263 1801 139 1524 252 240 407 674 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.04 0.81 0.68 0.55 0.13 0.09 0.83 0.61 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 69: I-5 SB Off-ramp & Disneyland Drive Year 2015 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 36 Lane Group WBL WBR NBT SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 874 11 137 684 v/c Ratio 0.53 0.02 0.11 0.54 Control Delay 11.5 5.9 7.9 10.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 11.5 5.9 7.9 10.8 Queue Length 50th (ft) 47 0 8 51 Queue Length 95th (ft) 88 7 22 98 Internal Link Dist (ft) 573 240 341 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 2181 698 1838 1838 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.40 0.02 0.07 0.37 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 9: I-5 NB Ramps & Harbor Boulevard Year 2015 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 2 Lane Group WBL WBR NBT SBL SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 63 1705 v/c Ratio 0.57 0.87 0.51 0.48 0.43 Control Delay 24.3 39.3 18.5 65.4 14.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 24.3 39.3 18.5 65.4 14.7 Queue Length 50th (ft) 117 215 284 52 150 Queue Length 95th (ft) 143 315 405 m61 m361 Internal Link Dist (ft) 418 17 580 Turn Bay Length (ft) 150 200 Base Capacity (vph) 1318 671 2680 151 3983 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.42 0.67 0.51 0.42 0.43 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 10: I-5 SB Ramps & Harbor Boulevard Year 2015 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 3 Lane Group EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 284 421 84 1684 1032 v/c Ratio 0.66 0.28 0.53 0.35 0.31 Control Delay 56.9 0.5 75.2 1.8 2.4 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 56.9 0.5 75.2 1.8 2.4 Queue Length 50th (ft) 109 0 60 24 23 Queue Length 95th (ft) 150 0 119 50 28 Internal Link Dist (ft) 363 636 27 Turn Bay Length (ft) 190 Base Capacity (vph) 784 1524 295 4823 3286 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.36 0.28 0.28 0.35 0.31 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 17: Disney Way & I-5 SB Ramps Year 2015 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 5 Lane Group EBT WBL WBT NBL NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 400 53 674 21 63 197 195 113 v/c Ratio 0.13 0.09 0.22 0.22 0.34 0.69 0.71 0.32 Control Delay 4.3 4.0 3.4 57.1 17.7 57.7 58.8 9.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 4.3 4.0 3.4 57.1 17.7 57.7 58.8 9.3 Queue Length 50th (ft) 21 4 20 16 0 151 154 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 32 m9 29 42 44 216 224 48 Internal Link Dist (ft) 778 526 386 Turn Bay Length (ft) 145 Base Capacity (vph) 3110 581 3121 205 331 553 529 569 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.13 0.09 0.22 0.10 0.19 0.36 0.37 0.20 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 25: Katella Avenue & Manchester Avenue Year 2015 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 11 Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 1326 [PHONE REDACTED] 76 99 98 168 84 v/c Ratio 0.56 0.44 0.98 0.61 0.37 0.41 0.41 0.53 0.27 Control Delay 11.2 1.2 77.4 7.8 50.9 15.8 14.4 32.9 37.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 11.2 1.2 77.4 7.8 50.9 15.8 14.4 32.9 37.2 Queue Length 50th (ft) 116 3 212 191 54 5 0 63 25 Queue Length 95th (ft) 148 10 m#320 221 104 59 52 m87 m36 Internal Link Dist (ft) 645 727 541 959 Turn Bay Length (ft) 320 240 380 Base Capacity (vph) 2367 1665 517 3304 241 243 283 826 908 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.56 0.44 0.98 0.61 0.32 0.41 0.35 0.20 0.09 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 26: Katella Avenue & Anaheim Way Year 2015 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 12 Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR NBL NBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 42 1663 2009 [PHONE REDACTED] v/c Ratio 0.29 0.69 0.80 0.67 0.75 0.78 Control Delay 58.1 25.3 19.9 18.9 38.5 33.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 58.1 25.3 19.9 18.9 38.5 33.5 Queue Length 50th (ft) 14 291 176 107 345 366 Queue Length 95th (ft) m30 333 257 211 514 417 Internal Link Dist (ft) 108 976 845 Turn Bay Length (ft) 110 220 Base Capacity (vph) 146 2406 2511 [PHONE REDACTED] Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.29 0.69 0.80 0.67 0.75 0.78 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 32: Gene Autry Way & I-5 HOV Ramps Year 2015 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 14 Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBR SBL SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 63 210 63 811 11 53 147 11 v/c Ratio 0.13 0.06 0.40 0.32 0.06 0.18 0.47 0.02 Control Delay 25.1 4.7 58.9 19.7 48.1 14.5 56.4 9.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 25.1 4.7 58.9 19.7 48.1 14.5 56.4 9.9 Queue Length 50th (ft) 20 10 47 156 8 0 56 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) m54 m10 92 190 26 21 88 12 Internal Link Dist (ft) 849 797 Turn Bay Length (ft) 200 200 200 200 Base Capacity (vph) 594 3366 344 2939 365 584 667 539 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.11 0.06 0.18 0.28 0.03 0.09 0.22 0.02 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 41: Anaheim Way & State College Boulevard Year 2015 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 16 Lane Group WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 90 184 [PHONE REDACTED] 32 1400 84 v/c Ratio 0.50 0.49 0.53 0.71 0.27 0.27 0.39 0.09 Control Delay 58.2 53.4 8.4 42.5 2.7 49.3 7.7 0.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 58.2 53.4 8.4 42.5 2.7 49.3 7.7 0.5 Queue Length 50th (ft) 73 75 0 84 23 24 51 1 Queue Length 95th (ft) 126 107 43 138 27 56 240 0 Internal Link Dist (ft) 432 25 513 Turn Bay Length (ft) 190 200 Base Capacity (vph) 278 574 [PHONE REDACTED] 139 3560 915 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.32 0.32 0.43 0.46 0.27 0.23 0.39 0.09 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 42: I-5 SB Ramps & State College Boulevard Year 2015 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 17 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR NBT SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 142 [PHONE REDACTED] 1253 v/c Ratio 0.29 0.70 0.41 0.56 0.47 Control Delay 16.3 25.7 16.3 6.3 8.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 16.3 25.7 16.3 6.3 8.7 Queue Length 50th (ft) 38 114 48 89 94 Queue Length 95th (ft) 75 190 77 124 115 Internal Link Dist (ft) 297 600 30 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 580 [PHONE REDACTED] 2643 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.24 0.60 0.35 0.56 0.47 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 48: Ball Road & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2015 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 23 Lane Group EBT WBT NBL NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1221 1684 572 228 v/c Ratio 0.37 0.51 0.75 0.65 Control Delay 3.7 11.3 44.8 40.4 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 3.7 11.3 44.8 40.4 Queue Length 50th (ft) 26 343 192 135 Queue Length 95th (ft) 82 330 232 210 Internal Link Dist (ft) 328 112 507 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 3332 3332 1422 618 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.37 0.51 0.40 0.37 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 49: Ball Road & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2015 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 24 Lane Group EBT WBT SBL SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1400 1779 400 653 v/c Ratio 0.47 0.59 0.77 0.79 Control Delay 8.6 6.6 44.5 40.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 8.6 6.6 44.5 40.8 Queue Length 50th (ft) 79 145 255 232 Queue Length 95th (ft) m141 163 329 273 Internal Link Dist (ft) 144 389 451 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 3000 3000 681 1083 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.47 0.59 0.59 0.60 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 50: Katella Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2015 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 25 Lane Group EBT WBT NBL NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1253 2137 446 206 v/c Ratio 0.24 0.48 0.71 0.67 Control Delay 6.5 9.3 38.4 35.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 6.5 9.3 38.4 35.9 Queue Length 50th (ft) 90 260 119 91 Queue Length 95th (ft) 69 336 156 163 Internal Link Dist (ft) 94 489 532 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 5216 4431 997 463 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.24 0.48 0.45 0.44 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 51: Katella Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2015 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 26 Lane Group EBT WBT SBL SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1516 1537 242 516 v/c Ratio 0.46 0.47 0.60 0.77 Control Delay 10.1 5.0 39.3 39.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 10.1 5.0 39.3 39.5 Queue Length 50th (ft) 90 75 137 159 Queue Length 95th (ft) 252 105 197 202 Internal Link Dist (ft) 185 185 274 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 3287 3287 596 969 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.46 0.47 0.41 0.53 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 52: Orangewood Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2015 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 27 Lane Group EBT WBT NBL NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1179 2147 195 110 v/c Ratio 0.42 0.54 0.54 0.51 Control Delay 0.7 4.0 25.0 17.0 Queue Delay 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 1.1 4.0 25.0 17.0 Queue Length 50th (ft) 3 226 26 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) m12 73 59 56 Internal Link Dist (ft) 1 692 407 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 2782 3997 562 301 Starvation Cap Reductn 967 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.65 0.54 0.35 0.37 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 53: Orangewood Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2015 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 28 Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1084 [PHONE REDACTED] 265 273 273 v/c Ratio 0.88 0.23 0.91 0.49 0.92 0.78 0.76 Control Delay 23.4 1.7 50.8 3.3 78.3 38.5 36.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 23.4 1.7 50.8 3.4 78.3 38.5 36.8 Queue Length 50th (ft) 146 1 306 57 175 103 97 Queue Length 95th (ft) #462 14 #503 80 #333 #241 #226 Internal Link Dist (ft) 718 236 426 Turn Bay Length (ft) 200 270 Base Capacity (vph) 1234 [PHONE REDACTED] 291 352 360 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 219 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.88 0.23 0.91 0.54 0.91 0.78 0.76 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 64: Chapman Avenue & Frontage Road Year 2015 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 33 Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR SBL Lane Group Flow (vph) 1564 [PHONE REDACTED] 705 84 421 v/c Ratio 0.51 0.58 0.50 0.43 0.82 0.18 0.49 Control Delay 29.4 14.5 60.2 10.8 50.4 7.4 40.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 29.4 14.6 60.2 10.8 50.4 7.4 40.8 Queue Length 50th (ft) 257 164 48 177 264 0 131 Queue Length 95th (ft) 326 m280 81 239 315 37 162 Internal Link Dist (ft) 595 661 Turn Bay Length (ft) 320 350 200 Base Capacity (vph) 3045 [PHONE REDACTED] 1018 528 1018 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 22 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.51 0.60 0.48 0.43 0.69 0.16 0.41 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 65: Chapman Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2015 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 34 Lane Group EBT WBT NBL NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1053 1926 42 158 v/c Ratio 0.36 0.46 0.34 0.61 Control Delay 1.4 1.6 59.2 18.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 1.4 1.8 59.2 18.6 Queue Length 50th (ft) 34 30 32 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 47 47 67 64 Internal Link Dist (ft) 139 584 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 2904 4172 234 346 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 1195 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.36 0.65 0.18 0.46 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 66: Chapman Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2015 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 35 Lane Group EBT WBL WBT NBT NBR SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1400 21 1358 179 116 179 337 v/c Ratio 0.56 0.25 0.73 0.78 0.39 0.52 0.60 Control Delay 19.9 44.1 10.8 73.4 13.4 49.2 10.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 19.9 44.1 10.8 73.4 13.4 49.2 10.9 Queue Length 50th (ft) 224 16 131 136 3 125 13 Queue Length 95th (ft) 290 m33 131 #250 58 200 101 Internal Link Dist (ft) 297 173 232 220 Turn Bay Length (ft) 120 100 Base Capacity (vph) 2504 85 1859 230 300 342 558 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.56 0.25 0.73 0.78 0.39 0.52 0.60 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 69: I-5 SB Off-ramp & Disneyland Drive Year 2015 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 36 Lane Group WBL WBR NBT SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 705 53 516 358 v/c Ratio 0.44 0.10 0.44 0.31 Control Delay 9.6 3.9 9.6 8.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 9.6 3.9 9.6 8.7 Queue Length 50th (ft) 30 0 32 21 Queue Length 95th (ft) 64 15 71 49 Internal Link Dist (ft) 573 240 341 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 2509 822 2113 2113 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.28 0.06 0.24 0.17 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No.14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report – Technical Appendices Appendix D-3 Caltrans Ramp Termini Queuing Analysis Worksheets 2015 With Project Conditions ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 9: I-5 NB Ramps & Harbor Boulevard Year 2015 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 2 Lane Group WBL WBR NBT SBL SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 448 373 888 53 2391 v/c Ratio 0.64 0.85 0.28 0.41 0.52 Control Delay 22.6 32.9 1.4 41.4 20.4 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 Total Delay 22.6 32.9 1.4 41.4 20.8 Queue Length 50th (ft) 71 103 7 36 441 Queue Length 95th (ft) 107 207 59 m42 m519 Internal Link Dist (ft) 418 17 580 Turn Bay Length (ft) 150 200 Base Capacity (vph) 1232 654 3187 164 4619 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 1450 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.36 0.57 0.28 0.32 0.75 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 10: I-5 SB Ramps & Harbor Boulevard Year 2015 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 3 Lane Group EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 284 387 63 878 1275 v/c Ratio 0.66 0.25 0.32 0.18 0.40 Control Delay 57.1 0.4 80.6 10.2 6.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 57.1 0.4 80.6 10.2 6.3 Queue Length 50th (ft) 109 0 52 132 193 Queue Length 95th (ft) 150 0 97 169 10 Internal Link Dist (ft) 363 636 27 Turn Bay Length (ft) 190 Base Capacity (vph) 729 1524 224 4825 3176 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.39 0.25 0.28 0.18 0.40 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 17: Disney Way & I-5 SB Ramps Year 2015 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 5 Lane Group EBT WBL WBT NBL NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 379 63 436 21 32 205 201 142 v/c Ratio 0.12 0.11 0.14 0.22 0.20 0.69 0.70 0.37 Control Delay 4.4 5.2 4.2 57.0 19.8 57.1 57.3 8.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 4.4 5.2 4.2 57.0 19.8 57.1 57.3 8.7 Queue Length 50th (ft) 18 5 12 16 0 157 159 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 25 17 29 42 32 223 227 52 Internal Link Dist (ft) 778 526 386 Turn Bay Length (ft) 150 Base Capacity (vph) 3081 588 3092 204 306 620 595 642 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.12 0.11 0.14 0.10 0.10 0.33 0.34 0.22 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 25: Katella Avenue & Manchester Avenue Year 2015 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 11 Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1116 [PHONE REDACTED] 76 307 312 168 232 21 v/c Ratio 0.46 0.50 0.67 0.49 0.38 0.73 0.68 0.50 0.53 0.10 Control Delay 6.9 0.7 52.7 10.1 52.3 16.7 12.8 42.0 27.5 8.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 6.9 0.7 52.7 10.1 52.3 16.7 12.8 42.0 27.5 8.9 Queue Length 50th (ft) 52 2 95 193 54 5 0 71 86 5 Queue Length 95th (ft) m61 m2 135 253 106 105 88 108 102 m15 Internal Link Dist (ft) 645 727 541 959 Turn Bay Length (ft) 320 240 380 Base Capacity (vph) 2416 1767 380 3149 234 421 [PHONE REDACTED] 484 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.46 0.50 0.67 0.49 0.32 0.73 0.61 0.20 0.22 0.04 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 26: Katella Avenue & Anaheim Way Year 2015 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 12 Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR NBL NBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 42 1857 1344 [PHONE REDACTED] v/c Ratio 0.29 0.71 0.49 0.24 0.54 0.56 Control Delay 56.6 17.7 8.6 1.2 33.4 31.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 56.6 17.7 8.6 1.2 33.4 31.3 Queue Length 50th (ft) 17 387 114 0 209 206 Queue Length 95th (ft) m34 492 76 2 319 245 Internal Link Dist (ft) 108 976 845 Turn Bay Length (ft) 110 220 Base Capacity (vph) 146 2610 2755 [PHONE REDACTED] Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.29 0.71 0.49 0.24 0.54 0.56 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 32: Gene Autry Way & I-5 HOV Ramps Year 2015 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 14 Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBR SBL SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 11 364 42 190 14 32 295 21 v/c Ratio 0.03 0.11 0.27 0.07 0.05 0.12 0.65 0.06 Control Delay 28.2 9.3 56.1 13.6 43.2 17.6 56.3 7.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 28.2 9.3 56.1 13.6 43.2 17.6 56.3 7.8 Queue Length 50th (ft) 8 32 31 6 10 0 113 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) m12 63 68 45 28 17 154 15 Internal Link Dist (ft) 849 797 Turn Bay Length (ft) 200 200 200 200 Base Capacity (vph) 473 3415 361 3093 [PHONE REDACTED] 438 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.02 0.11 0.12 0.06 0.02 0.05 0.24 0.05 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 41: Anaheim Way & State College Boulevard Year 2015 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 16 Lane Group WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 130 270 379 221 789 21 1874 21 v/c Ratio 0.55 0.55 0.52 0.58 0.19 0.20 0.54 0.02 Control Delay 51.0 46.6 6.6 52.0 4.3 65.0 9.5 1.4 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 51.0 46.6 6.6 52.0 4.3 65.0 9.5 1.4 Queue Length 50th (ft) 94 97 0 82 26 16 97 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 156 136 43 125 39 m42 261 m1 Internal Link Dist (ft) 432 25 513 Turn Bay Length (ft) 190 200 Base Capacity (vph) 303 631 [PHONE REDACTED] 121 3477 868 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.43 0.43 0.46 0.45 0.19 0.17 0.54 0.02 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 42: I-5 SB Ramps & State College Boulevard Year 2015 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 17 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR NBT SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 67 [PHONE REDACTED] 1863 v/c Ratio 0.11 0.81 0.39 0.30 0.62 Control Delay 21.1 41.3 25.7 17.1 11.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 21.1 41.3 25.7 17.1 11.1 Queue Length 50th (ft) 31 326 107 79 298 Queue Length 95th (ft) 57 417 135 107 194 Internal Link Dist (ft) 297 600 30 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 3530 3010 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.09 0.67 0.32 0.30 0.62 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 48: Ball Road & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2015 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 23 Lane Group EBT WBT NBL NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1547 842 617 288 v/c Ratio 0.48 0.26 0.73 0.77 Control Delay 6.4 11.3 44.2 51.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 6.4 11.3 44.2 51.5 Queue Length 50th (ft) 116 107 221 215 Queue Length 95th (ft) 136 196 251 292 Internal Link Dist (ft) 328 112 507 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 3236 3236 1273 560 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.48 0.26 0.48 0.51 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 49: Ball Road & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2015 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 24 Lane Group EBT WBT SBL SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1337 [PHONE REDACTED] v/c Ratio 0.59 0.43 0.80 0.80 Control Delay 38.8 14.2 35.3 30.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 38.8 14.2 35.3 30.3 Queue Length 50th (ft) 390 150 401 348 Queue Length 95th (ft) m441 153 482 381 Internal Link Dist (ft) 144 389 451 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 2260 2260 922 1482 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.59 0.43 0.69 0.69 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 50: Katella Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2015 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 25 Lane Group EBT WBT NBL NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1368 1257 572 260 v/c Ratio 0.28 0.30 0.72 0.74 Control Delay 5.3 13.1 44.9 51.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 5.3 13.1 44.9 51.3 Queue Length 50th (ft) 73 205 206 194 Queue Length 95th (ft) 43 273 235 267 Internal Link Dist (ft) 94 489 532 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 4887 4151 1515 656 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.28 0.30 0.38 0.40 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 51: Katella Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2015 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 26 Lane Group EBT WBT SBL SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1341 1204 347 634 v/c Ratio 0.42 0.38 0.74 0.80 Control Delay 19.4 7.7 48.6 43.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 19.4 7.7 48.6 43.2 Queue Length 50th (ft) 214 127 245 233 Queue Length 95th (ft) 426 146 317 277 Internal Link Dist (ft) 185 185 274 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 3175 3175 738 1202 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.42 0.38 0.47 0.53 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 52: Orangewood Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2015 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 27 Lane Group EBT WBT NBL NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1411 1105 411 273 v/c Ratio 0.61 0.33 0.57 0.79 Control Delay 3.5 4.0 32.8 46.5 Queue Delay 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 3.8 4.0 32.8 46.5 Queue Length 50th (ft) 111 46 107 153 Queue Length 95th (ft) 137 97 138 230 Internal Link Dist (ft) 1 692 407 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 2304 3310 985 460 Starvation Cap Reductn 297 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.70 0.33 0.42 0.59 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 53: Orangewood Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2015 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 28 Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1411 53 179 779 276 263 251 v/c Ratio 0.82 0.07 0.71 0.33 0.83 0.70 0.51 Control Delay 11.5 0.6 49.4 3.1 59.7 32.6 8.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 11.5 0.6 49.4 3.1 59.7 32.6 8.8 Queue Length 50th (ft) 125 0 115 49 174 102 3 Queue Length 95th (ft) 124 m1 #211 55 #306 202 71 Internal Link Dist (ft) 718 236 426 Turn Bay Length (ft) 200 270 Base Capacity (vph) 1720 [PHONE REDACTED] 356 397 509 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.82 0.07 0.71 0.33 0.78 0.66 0.49 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 64: Chapman Avenue & Frontage Road Year 2015 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 33 Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR SBL Lane Group Flow (vph) 1427 [PHONE REDACTED] 653 116 505 v/c Ratio 0.46 0.54 0.50 0.31 0.79 0.25 0.61 Control Delay 32.8 19.7 58.5 8.9 45.7 6.7 18.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 32.8 19.7 58.5 8.9 45.7 6.7 18.7 Queue Length 50th (ft) 274 235 37 103 222 0 43 Queue Length 95th (ft) 311 m314 66 150 266 41 70 Internal Link Dist (ft) 595 661 Turn Bay Length (ft) 320 350 200 Base Capacity (vph) 3104 [PHONE REDACTED] 1021 551 1021 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.46 0.54 0.50 0.31 0.64 0.21 0.49 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 65: Chapman Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2015 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 34 Lane Group EBT WBT NBL NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1147 1274 53 116 v/c Ratio 0.40 0.31 0.39 0.51 Control Delay 0.3 1.9 55.4 16.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 0.3 1.9 55.4 16.7 Queue Length 50th (ft) 1 42 36 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 64 75 53 Internal Link Dist (ft) 139 584 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 2855 4101 255 327 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.40 0.31 0.21 0.35 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 66: Chapman Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2015 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 35 Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBT NBR SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 11 1463 95 832 32 21 337 411 v/c Ratio 0.05 0.81 0.71 0.55 0.13 0.09 0.83 0.61 Control Delay 37.8 32.6 69.9 25.7 42.5 17.4 58.2 7.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 37.8 32.6 69.9 25.7 42.5 17.4 58.2 7.8 Queue Length 50th (ft) 7 339 68 220 20 0 227 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 21 400 #144 #389 49 23 #376 84 Internal Link Dist (ft) 297 173 232 220 Turn Bay Length (ft) 140 120 100 Base Capacity (vph) 263 1801 139 1524 252 240 407 674 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.04 0.81 0.68 0.55 0.13 0.09 0.83 0.61 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 69: I-5 SB Off-ramp & Disneyland Drive Year 2015 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 36 Lane Group WBL WBR NBT SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 917 11 137 684 v/c Ratio 0.55 0.02 0.11 0.54 Control Delay 11.6 5.9 8.0 11.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 11.6 5.9 8.0 11.0 Queue Length 50th (ft) 50 0 8 52 Queue Length 95th (ft) 93 7 22 98 Internal Link Dist (ft) 573 240 341 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 2161 692 1820 1820 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.42 0.02 0.08 0.38 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 9: I-5 NB Ramps & Harbor Boulevard Year 2015 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 2 Lane Group WBL WBR NBT SBL SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 63 1715 v/c Ratio 0.58 0.87 0.52 0.45 0.43 Control Delay 23.5 37.2 17.8 62.4 15.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 23.5 37.2 17.8 62.4 15.5 Queue Length 50th (ft) 112 202 283 51 160 Queue Length 95th (ft) 137 300 422 m56 m375 Internal Link Dist (ft) 418 17 580 Turn Bay Length (ft) 150 200 Base Capacity (vph) 1443 729 2686 159 4020 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.38 0.62 0.52 0.40 0.43 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 10: I-5 SB Ramps & Harbor Boulevard Year 2015 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 3 Lane Group EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 284 478 84 1808 1041 v/c Ratio 0.66 0.31 0.53 0.37 0.32 Control Delay 56.9 0.5 67.6 2.0 1.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 56.9 0.5 67.6 2.0 1.5 Queue Length 50th (ft) 109 0 52 24 14 Queue Length 95th (ft) 150 0 109 46 18 Internal Link Dist (ft) 363 636 27 Turn Bay Length (ft) 190 Base Capacity (vph) 784 1524 295 4823 3286 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.36 0.31 0.28 0.37 0.32 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 17: Disney Way & I-5 SB Ramps Year 2015 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 5 Lane Group EBT WBL WBT NBL NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 400 53 685 21 63 197 195 113 v/c Ratio 0.13 0.09 0.22 0.22 0.34 0.69 0.71 0.32 Control Delay 4.1 3.7 3.3 57.1 17.7 57.7 58.8 9.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 4.1 3.7 3.3 57.1 17.7 57.7 58.8 9.3 Queue Length 50th (ft) 21 4 18 16 0 151 154 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 29 m8 27 42 44 216 224 48 Internal Link Dist (ft) 778 526 386 Turn Bay Length (ft) 150 Base Capacity (vph) 3110 581 3121 205 331 553 529 569 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.13 0.09 0.22 0.10 0.19 0.36 0.37 0.20 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 25: Katella Avenue & Manchester Avenue Year 2015 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 11 Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 1326 [PHONE REDACTED] 76 99 98 168 84 v/c Ratio 0.56 0.47 0.98 0.63 0.37 0.41 0.41 0.53 0.27 Control Delay 9.2 1.1 77.5 14.0 50.9 15.8 14.4 33.8 34.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 9.2 1.1 77.5 14.0 50.9 15.8 14.4 33.8 34.7 Queue Length 50th (ft) 94 3 188 287 54 5 0 64 26 Queue Length 95th (ft) 108 9 m#297 374 104 59 52 m93 m37 Internal Link Dist (ft) 645 727 541 959 Turn Bay Length (ft) 320 240 380 Base Capacity (vph) 2367 1695 517 3304 241 243 283 826 908 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.56 0.47 0.98 0.63 0.32 0.41 0.35 0.20 0.09 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 26: Katella Avenue & Anaheim Way Year 2015 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 12 Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR NBL NBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 42 1702 2085 [PHONE REDACTED] v/c Ratio 0.16 0.65 0.81 0.61 0.83 0.86 Control Delay 50.4 17.6 19.2 11.2 48.3 40.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 50.4 17.6 19.2 11.2 48.3 40.3 Queue Length 50th (ft) 16 383 284 58 372 393 Queue Length 95th (ft) m33 435 236 137 #595 448 Internal Link Dist (ft) 108 976 845 Turn Bay Length (ft) 110 220 Base Capacity (vph) 284 2610 2559 [PHONE REDACTED] Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.15 0.65 0.81 0.61 0.83 0.86 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 32: Gene Autry Way & I-5 HOV Ramps Year 2015 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 14 Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBR SBL SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 63 228 63 811 13 53 147 11 v/c Ratio 0.12 0.06 0.39 0.31 0.07 0.17 0.46 0.02 Control Delay 27.8 5.4 58.2 19.8 48.5 14.5 56.1 9.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 27.8 5.4 58.2 19.8 48.5 14.5 56.1 9.6 Queue Length 50th (ft) 27 5 47 156 9 0 56 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 82 32 92 189 29 22 88 12 Internal Link Dist (ft) 849 797 Turn Bay Length (ft) 200 200 200 200 Base Capacity (vph) 633 3519 361 3083 384 611 700 573 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.10 0.06 0.17 0.26 0.03 0.09 0.21 0.02 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 41: Anaheim Way & State College Boulevard Year 2015 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 16 Lane Group WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 90 184 [PHONE REDACTED] 32 1400 84 v/c Ratio 0.50 0.49 0.53 0.71 0.27 0.29 0.39 0.09 Control Delay 58.2 53.4 8.4 45.4 12.5 65.6 8.9 0.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 58.2 53.4 8.4 45.4 12.5 65.6 8.9 0.8 Queue Length 50th (ft) 73 75 0 138 79 26 72 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 126 107 43 201 230 60 101 6 Internal Link Dist (ft) 432 25 513 Turn Bay Length (ft) 190 200 Base Capacity (vph) 278 574 [PHONE REDACTED] 141 3560 915 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.32 0.32 0.43 0.46 0.27 0.23 0.39 0.09 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 42: I-5 SB Ramps & State College Boulevard Year 2015 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 17 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR NBT SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 142 [PHONE REDACTED] 1253 v/c Ratio 0.31 0.75 0.43 0.41 0.35 Control Delay 33.4 47.8 31.3 8.7 9.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 33.4 47.8 31.3 8.7 9.5 Queue Length 50th (ft) 90 268 107 121 180 Queue Length 95th (ft) 129 334 133 302 249 Internal Link Dist (ft) 297 600 30 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 4206 3581 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.20 0.49 0.28 0.41 0.35 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 48: Ball Road & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2015 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 23 Lane Group EBT WBT NBL NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1221 1684 572 228 v/c Ratio 0.36 0.50 0.76 0.62 Control Delay 6.2 9.8 46.1 33.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 6.2 9.8 46.1 33.2 Queue Length 50th (ft) 93 330 193 110 Queue Length 95th (ft) 110 252 236 187 Internal Link Dist (ft) 328 112 507 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 3355 3355 1063 493 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.36 0.50 0.54 0.46 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 49: Ball Road & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2015 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 24 Lane Group EBT WBT SBL SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1400 1779 400 653 v/c Ratio 0.45 0.58 0.82 0.83 Control Delay 19.6 4.8 50.8 44.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 19.6 4.8 50.8 44.2 Queue Length 50th (ft) 265 113 260 230 Queue Length 95th (ft) m304 121 362 294 Internal Link Dist (ft) 144 389 451 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 3093 3093 557 899 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.45 0.58 0.72 0.73 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 50: Katella Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2015 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 25 Lane Group EBT WBT NBL NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1253 2148 446 206 v/c Ratio 0.24 0.48 0.71 0.67 Control Delay 6.7 9.4 38.4 35.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 6.7 9.4 38.4 35.9 Queue Length 50th (ft) 88 263 119 91 Queue Length 95th (ft) 73 338 156 163 Internal Link Dist (ft) 94 489 532 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 5216 4431 997 463 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.24 0.48 0.45 0.44 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 51: Katella Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2015 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 26 Lane Group EBT WBT SBL SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1555 1548 242 534 v/c Ratio 0.48 0.48 0.58 0.77 Control Delay 10.3 5.2 38.1 39.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 10.3 5.2 38.1 39.5 Queue Length 50th (ft) 91 79 136 165 Queue Length 95th (ft) 269 108 194 209 Internal Link Dist (ft) 185 185 274 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 3252 3252 596 968 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.48 0.48 0.41 0.55 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 52: Orangewood Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2015 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 27 Lane Group EBT WBT NBL NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1179 2147 195 110 v/c Ratio 0.42 0.54 0.54 0.51 Control Delay 0.6 5.5 25.0 17.0 Queue Delay 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 1.0 5.5 25.0 17.0 Queue Length 50th (ft) 3 249 26 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) m5 73 59 56 Internal Link Dist (ft) 1 692 407 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 2782 3997 562 301 Starvation Cap Reductn 943 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.64 0.54 0.35 0.37 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 53: Orangewood Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2015 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 28 Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1084 [PHONE REDACTED] 265 273 273 v/c Ratio 0.88 0.23 0.91 0.49 0.92 0.78 0.76 Control Delay 23.1 1.8 51.4 3.2 78.3 38.5 36.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 23.1 1.8 51.4 3.3 78.3 38.5 36.8 Queue Length 50th (ft) 135 1 313 48 175 103 97 Queue Length 95th (ft) #463 14 #503 68 #333 #241 #226 Internal Link Dist (ft) 718 236 426 Turn Bay Length (ft) 200 270 Base Capacity (vph) 1234 [PHONE REDACTED] 291 352 360 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 219 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.88 0.23 0.91 0.54 0.91 0.78 0.76 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 64: Chapman Avenue & Frontage Road Year 2015 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 33 Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR SBL Lane Group Flow (vph) 1564 [PHONE REDACTED] 705 84 421 v/c Ratio 0.51 0.58 0.50 0.43 0.82 0.18 0.49 Control Delay 30.2 15.1 60.2 10.8 50.4 7.4 31.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 30.2 15.2 60.2 10.8 50.4 7.4 31.9 Queue Length 50th (ft) 265 170 48 177 264 0 72 Queue Length 95th (ft) 334 m293 81 239 315 37 99 Internal Link Dist (ft) 595 661 Turn Bay Length (ft) 320 350 200 Base Capacity (vph) 3045 [PHONE REDACTED] 1018 528 1018 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 22 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.51 0.60 0.48 0.43 0.69 0.16 0.41 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 65: Chapman Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2015 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 34 Lane Group EBT WBT NBL NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1053 1926 42 158 v/c Ratio 0.36 0.46 0.34 0.61 Control Delay 1.2 1.3 59.2 18.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 1.2 1.5 59.2 18.6 Queue Length 50th (ft) 27 43 32 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 41 49 67 64 Internal Link Dist (ft) 139 584 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 2904 4172 234 346 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 1061 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.36 0.62 0.18 0.46 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 66: Chapman Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2015 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 35 Lane Group EBT WBL WBT NBT NBR SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1400 21 1358 179 116 179 337 v/c Ratio 0.56 0.25 0.73 0.78 0.39 0.52 0.60 Control Delay 19.1 46.4 12.8 73.4 13.4 49.2 10.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 19.1 46.4 12.8 73.4 13.4 49.2 10.9 Queue Length 50th (ft) 202 16 144 136 3 125 13 Queue Length 95th (ft) 264 m32 195 #250 58 200 101 Internal Link Dist (ft) 297 173 232 220 Turn Bay Length (ft) 120 100 Base Capacity (vph) 2504 85 1859 230 300 342 558 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.56 0.25 0.73 0.78 0.39 0.52 0.60 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 69: I-5 SB Off-ramp & Disneyland Drive Year 2015 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 36 Lane Group WBL WBR NBT SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 740 53 516 358 v/c Ratio 0.46 0.10 0.44 0.31 Control Delay 9.7 3.8 9.8 8.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 9.7 3.8 9.8 8.8 Queue Length 50th (ft) 32 0 33 21 Queue Length 95th (ft) 68 15 72 50 Internal Link Dist (ft) 573 240 341 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 2487 814 2094 2094 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.30 0.07 0.25 0.17 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No.14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report – Technical Appendices Appendix D-4 Caltrans Ramp Termini Queuing Analysis Worksheets 2030 No Project Conditions ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 9: I-5 NB Ramps & Harbor Boulevard Year 2030 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 2 Lane Group WBL WBR NBT SBL SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 464 389 926 53 3295 v/c Ratio 0.62 0.88 0.30 0.43 0.74 Control Delay 24.7 39.4 3.4 37.8 2.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 Total Delay 24.7 39.4 3.4 37.8 3.2 Queue Length 50th (ft) 86 143 57 40 102 Queue Length 95th (ft) 123 257 97 m31 m126 Internal Link Dist (ft) 418 17 580 Turn Bay Length (ft) 150 200 Base Capacity (vph) 1027 559 3086 132 4464 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 490 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.45 0.70 0.30 0.40 0.83 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 10: I-5 SB Ramps & Harbor Boulevard Year 2030 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 3 Lane Group EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 337 337 74 863 2105 v/c Ratio 0.71 0.22 0.56 0.18 0.64 Control Delay 57.7 0.3 63.0 1.7 5.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 Total Delay 57.7 0.3 63.0 1.7 5.8 Queue Length 50th (ft) 129 0 29 4 72 Queue Length 95th (ft) 175 0 79 11 116 Internal Link Dist (ft) 363 636 27 Turn Bay Length (ft) 190 Base Capacity (vph) 564 1524 144 4746 3302 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 212 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.60 0.22 0.51 0.18 0.68 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 17: Disney Way & I-5 SB Ramps Year 2030 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 5 Lane Group EBT WBL WBT NBL NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 948 147 779 21 42 279 274 142 v/c Ratio 0.32 0.52 0.26 0.24 0.25 0.82 0.84 0.34 Control Delay 10.3 16.7 6.5 57.9 18.9 64.8 67.2 8.4 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 10.3 16.7 6.5 57.9 18.9 64.8 67.2 8.4 Queue Length 50th (ft) 179 34 56 16 0 211 216 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 218 m49 m66 42 35 #334 #352 54 Internal Link Dist (ft) 778 526 386 Turn Bay Length (ft) 150 Base Capacity (vph) 2953 285 2958 138 240 378 363 447 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.32 0.52 0.26 0.15 0.17 0.74 0.75 0.32 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 25: Katella Avenue & Manchester Avenue Year 2030 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 11 Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1516 1432 505 1779 132 423 424 463 516 21 v/c Ratio 0.80 1.04 1.24 0.67 0.61 0.79 1.09 0.72 0.76 0.07 Control Delay 10.2 32.8 162.2 12.0 62.2 17.0 94.7 29.0 40.3 10.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 10.2 32.8 162.2 12.0 62.2 17.0 94.7 29.0 40.3 10.3 Queue Length 50th (ft) 96 ~539 ~254 199 104 10 ~223 147 180 2 Queue Length 95th (ft) m78 m31 #360 249 174 #150 #438 m187 197 m4 Internal Link Dist (ft) 645 727 541 959 Turn Bay Length (ft) 240 380 Base Capacity (vph) 1885 1378 407 2659 215 538 390 826 908 422 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.80 1.04 1.24 0.67 0.61 0.79 1.09 0.56 0.57 0.05 Intersection Summary ~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 26: Katella Avenue & Anaheim Way Year 2030 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 12 Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR NBL NBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 42 2789 1907 [PHONE REDACTED] v/c Ratio 0.29 1.01 0.65 0.54 0.75 1.46dr Control Delay 41.1 26.0 10.3 2.4 45.4 39.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 41.1 26.0 10.3 2.4 45.4 39.5 Queue Length 50th (ft) 15 ~336 195 0 301 291 Queue Length 95th (ft) m20 m#861 m199 m0 451 340 Internal Link Dist (ft) 108 976 845 Turn Bay Length (ft) 110 220 Base Capacity (vph) 146 2773 2945 [PHONE REDACTED] Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.29 1.01 0.65 0.54 0.75 0.77 Intersection Summary ~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. dr Defacto Right Lane. Recode with 1 though lane as a right lane. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 32: Gene Autry Way & I-5 HOV Ramps Year 2030 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 15 Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBR SBL SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 32 1137 105 568 32 74 768 74 v/c Ratio 0.27 0.46 0.55 0.21 0.06 0.20 0.81 0.47 Control Delay 35.2 17.1 64.3 8.8 29.5 11.7 48.2 29.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 35.2 17.1 64.3 8.8 29.5 11.7 48.2 29.3 Queue Length 50th (ft) 19 278 86 109 18 0 285 13 Queue Length 95th (ft) m25 m278 m139 176 40 24 332 61 Internal Link Dist (ft) 849 797 Turn Bay Length (ft) 200 200 200 200 Base Capacity (vph) 181 2469 256 2758 [PHONE REDACTED] 212 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.18 0.46 0.41 0.21 0.05 0.16 0.61 0.35 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 41: Anaheim Way & State College Boulevard Year 2030 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 17 Lane Group WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 209 476 [PHONE REDACTED] 32 2663 53 v/c Ratio 0.82 0.89 0.89 0.94 0.30 0.35 0.93 0.07 Control Delay 74.1 69.1 42.0 49.2 6.0 57.6 16.1 4.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 Total Delay 74.1 69.1 42.0 49.2 6.0 57.6 16.8 4.6 Queue Length 50th (ft) 174 201 144 284 61 26 157 1 Queue Length 95th (ft) #317 #302 #260 #395 81 m29 215 m4 Internal Link Dist (ft) 432 25 513 Turn Bay Length (ft) 190 200 Base Capacity (vph) 255 534 [PHONE REDACTED] 94 2852 716 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 51 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.82 0.89 0.89 0.94 0.30 0.34 0.95 0.07 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 42: I-5 SB Ramps & State College Boulevard Year 2030 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 18 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR NBT SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 76 [PHONE REDACTED] 2632 v/c Ratio 0.10 1.11 0.32 0.59 1.08 Control Delay 18.2 98.5 20.6 17.4 51.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.1 Total Delay 18.2 98.5 20.6 17.4 53.8 Queue Length 50th (ft) 33 ~833 106 135 ~644 Queue Length 95th (ft) 64 #1092 147 156 #713 Internal Link Dist (ft) 297 600 30 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 2860 2441 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 21 0 11 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.10 1.11 0.32 0.59 1.08 Intersection Summary ~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 48: Ball Road & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2030 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 24 Lane Group EBT WBT NBL NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 2463 1211 652 306 v/c Ratio 0.77 0.38 0.77 0.83 Control Delay 8.8 8.9 46.5 59.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 8.8 8.9 46.5 59.2 Queue Length 50th (ft) 232 136 238 241 Queue Length 95th (ft) 266 132 284 341 Internal Link Dist (ft) 328 112 507 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 3207 3207 1024 446 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.77 0.38 0.64 0.69 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 49: Ball Road & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2030 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 25 Lane Group EBT WBT SBL SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1937 1274 737 1074 v/c Ratio 0.87 0.57 0.92 0.84 Control Delay 11.3 25.9 46.8 33.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 11.3 25.9 46.8 33.3 Queue Length 50th (ft) 186 243 497 375 Queue Length 95th (ft) m183 313 #750 478 Internal Link Dist (ft) 144 389 451 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 2216 2216 837 1336 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.87 0.57 0.88 0.80 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 50: Katella Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2030 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 26 Lane Group EBT WBT NBL NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 2347 1758 665 304 v/c Ratio 0.51 0.45 0.74 0.78 Control Delay 5.4 2.3 43.4 52.4 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 5.4 2.3 43.4 52.4 Queue Length 50th (ft) 78 17 242 239 Queue Length 95th (ft) 132 m86 267 312 Internal Link Dist (ft) 94 489 532 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 4606 3912 1334 578 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.51 0.45 0.50 0.53 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 51: Katella Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2030 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 27 Lane Group EBT WBT SBL SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 2358 1653 368 695 v/c Ratio 0.76 0.53 0.74 0.85 Control Delay 5.4 8.3 47.4 48.0 Queue Delay 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 5.5 8.3 47.4 48.0 Queue Length 50th (ft) 110 133 253 268 Queue Length 95th (ft) 123 238 351 337 Internal Link Dist (ft) 185 185 274 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 3094 3094 568 923 Starvation Cap Reductn 95 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.79 0.53 0.65 0.75 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 52: Orangewood Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2030 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 28 Lane Group EBT WBT NBL NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1979 1747 442 284 v/c Ratio 0.84 0.52 0.63 0.87 Control Delay 6.2 5.5 43.9 68.1 Queue Delay 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 7.4 5.5 43.9 68.1 Queue Length 50th (ft) 203 255 148 213 Queue Length 95th (ft) m213 m149 202 #362 Internal Link Dist (ft) 1 692 407 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 2361 3392 786 361 Starvation Cap Reductn 190 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.91 0.52 0.56 0.79 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 53: Orangewood Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2030 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 29 Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1905 84 179 1316 307 297 281 v/c Ratio 0.95 0.09 1.07 0.53 0.99 0.93 0.79 Control Delay 25.5 0.3 133.7 4.4 97.6 74.4 46.5 Queue Delay 1.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 27.4 0.3 133.7 4.4 97.6 74.4 46.5 Queue Length 50th (ft) 343 2 ~154 96 252 212 146 Queue Length 95th (ft) #463 m1 #304 109 #447 #402 #289 Internal Link Dist (ft) 718 236 426 Turn Bay Length (ft) 200 270 Base Capacity (vph) 2015 [PHONE REDACTED] 310 321 357 Starvation Cap Reductn 45 0 0 87 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 47 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.97 0.09 1.07 0.55 0.99 0.93 0.79 Intersection Summary ~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 64: Chapman Avenue & Frontage Road Year 2030 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 34 Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR SBL SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1500 [PHONE REDACTED] [PHONE REDACTED] 11 v/c Ratio 0.62 0.62 0.48 0.50 0.54 0.39 0.88 0.02 Control Delay 18.8 6.5 61.5 19.2 30.0 9.4 38.9 10.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 18.8 6.7 61.5 19.2 30.0 9.4 38.9 10.3 Queue Length 50th (ft) 120 18 40 230 206 41 465 2 Queue Length 95th (ft) m157 m75 71 285 253 103 m435 m4 Internal Link Dist (ft) 595 661 Turn Bay Length (ft) 320 350 200 Base Capacity (vph) 2409 [PHONE REDACTED] 1376 746 1376 641 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 30 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.62 0.65 0.46 0.50 0.50 0.37 0.81 0.02 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 65: Chapman Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2030 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 35 Lane Group EBT WBT NBL NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1389 1526 84 116 v/c Ratio 0.49 0.38 0.53 0.47 Control Delay 0.9 1.8 63.1 15.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 0.9 1.8 63.1 15.2 Queue Length 50th (ft) 28 51 63 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) m55 57 112 55 Internal Link Dist (ft) 139 584 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 2833 4069 234 310 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.49 0.38 0.36 0.37 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 66: Chapman Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2030 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 36 Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBT NBR SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 11 1947 95 1189 32 21 347 484 v/c Ratio 0.05 0.90 0.96 0.69 0.14 0.10 0.97 0.71 Control Delay 50.4 33.4 127.7 19.4 47.7 18.6 87.4 10.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 50.4 33.4 127.7 19.4 47.7 18.6 87.4 10.9 Queue Length 50th (ft) 8 415 76 232 22 0 269 12 Queue Length 95th (ft) m28 454 #190 #605 53 24 #459 122 Internal Link Dist (ft) 297 173 232 220 Turn Bay Length (ft) 140 120 100 Base Capacity (vph) 241 2164 99 1720 231 221 359 686 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.05 0.90 0.96 0.69 0.14 0.10 0.97 0.71 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 69: I-5 SB Off-ramp & Disneyland Drive Year 2030 No Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 37 Lane Group WBL WBR NBT SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 947 11 137 1137 v/c Ratio 0.61 0.02 0.09 0.77 Control Delay 13.7 6.0 7.8 15.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 13.7 6.0 7.8 15.5 Queue Length 50th (ft) 66 0 9 113 Queue Length 95th (ft) 96 7 22 #197 Internal Link Dist (ft) 573 240 341 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 1864 598 1570 1570 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.51 0.02 0.09 0.72 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 9: I-5 NB Ramps & Harbor Boulevard Year 2030 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 2 Lane Group WBL WBR NBT SBL SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 63 2063 v/c Ratio 0.86dr 0.93 0.82 0.62 0.56 Control Delay 28.9 56.1 25.8 54.7 4.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 28.9 56.1 25.8 54.7 4.5 Queue Length 50th (ft) 147 298 564 50 109 Queue Length 95th (ft) 204 #519 425 m61 m110 Internal Link Dist (ft) 418 17 580 Turn Bay Length (ft) 150 200 Base Capacity (vph) 1100 548 2556 104 3715 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 15 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.53 0.87 0.83 0.61 0.56 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. dr Defacto Right Lane. Recode with 1 though lane as a right lane. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 10: I-5 SB Ramps & Harbor Boulevard Year 2030 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 3 Lane Group EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 337 442 95 2495 1284 v/c Ratio 0.70 0.29 0.36 0.53 0.46 Control Delay 56.5 0.5 42.4 5.0 27.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 56.5 0.5 42.4 5.0 27.3 Queue Length 50th (ft) 129 0 67 145 290 Queue Length 95th (ft) 172 0 m103 174 341 Internal Link Dist (ft) 363 636 27 Turn Bay Length (ft) 190 Base Capacity (vph) 729 1524 267 4727 2813 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.46 0.29 0.36 0.53 0.46 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 17: Disney Way & I-5 SB Ramps Year 2030 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 5 Lane Group EBT WBL WBT NBL NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 622 84 1326 21 116 240 237 113 v/c Ratio 0.22 0.21 0.47 0.23 0.49 0.71 0.73 0.29 Control Delay 2.8 7.7 7.9 57.1 16.6 55.4 56.4 8.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 2.8 7.7 7.9 57.1 16.6 55.4 56.4 8.1 Queue Length 50th (ft) 12 16 101 16 0 184 187 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 72 m21 m123 42 57 252 260 46 Internal Link Dist (ft) 778 526 386 Turn Bay Length (ft) 150 Base Capacity (vph) 2837 408 2844 161 327 593 570 602 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.22 0.21 0.47 0.13 0.35 0.40 0.42 0.19 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 25: Katella Avenue & Manchester Avenue Year 2030 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 11 Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 1937 1063 853 2526 149 144 138 484 137 v/c Ratio 0.95 0.70 1.57 0.84 0.53 0.45 0.61 0.77 0.47 Control Delay 18.7 2.4 288.4 20.5 51.5 22.0 20.1 24.6 55.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 18.7 2.4 288.4 20.5 51.5 22.0 20.1 24.6 55.3 Queue Length 50th (ft) 195 10 ~478 414 113 41 0 126 49 Queue Length 95th (ft) m#647 m36 m#394 m368 172 103 64 m145 m62 Internal Link Dist (ft) 645 727 541 959 Turn Bay Length (ft) 240 380 Base Capacity (vph) 2044 1525 545 3022 282 323 318 826 908 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.95 0.70 1.57 0.84 0.53 0.45 0.43 0.59 0.15 Intersection Summary ~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 26: Katella Avenue & Anaheim Way Year 2030 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 12 Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR NBL NBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 42 2621 3291 [PHONE REDACTED] v/c Ratio 0.29 0.97 1.16 1.13 1.09 1.14 Control Delay 68.9 19.2 90.6 78.5 104.4 105.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 68.9 19.2 90.6 78.5 104.4 105.1 Queue Length 50th (ft) 18 198 ~983 ~811 ~597 ~628 Queue Length 95th (ft) m22 m#340 m142 m106 #867 #709 Internal Link Dist (ft) 108 976 845 Turn Bay Length (ft) 110 220 Base Capacity (vph) 146 2691 2827 [PHONE REDACTED] Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.29 0.97 1.16 1.13 1.09 1.14 Intersection Summary ~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 32: Gene Autry Way & I-5 HOV Ramps Year 2030 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 15 Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBR SBL SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 189 [PHONE REDACTED] 42 116 411 42 v/c Ratio 0.69 0.23 0.72 0.86 0.14 0.24 0.79 0.15 Control Delay 38.0 6.0 69.7 8.2 44.0 9.0 61.2 14.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 38.0 6.0 69.7 8.2 44.0 9.0 61.2 14.6 Queue Length 50th (ft) 143 38 130 161 28 0 158 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) m152 m44 m151 197 62 28 214 33 Internal Link Dist (ft) 849 797 Turn Bay Length (ft) 200 200 200 200 Base Capacity (vph) 275 2914 301 2867 308 570 554 282 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.69 0.23 0.59 0.86 0.14 0.20 0.74 0.15 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 41: Anaheim Way & State College Boulevard Year 2030 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 17 Lane Group WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 96 198 [PHONE REDACTED] 63 1947 168 v/c Ratio 0.38 0.38 0.96 0.92 0.46 0.50 0.85 0.26 Control Delay 49.9 47.3 55.1 21.5 1.9 55.1 30.3 6.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 49.9 47.3 55.1 21.5 1.9 55.1 30.3 6.9 Queue Length 50th (ft) 73 76 171 289 25 48 426 56 Queue Length 95th (ft) 134 116 #305 m304 m27 m74 495 41 Internal Link Dist (ft) 432 25 513 Turn Bay Length (ft) 190 200 Base Capacity (vph) 252 [PHONE REDACTED] 3862 145 2287 645 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.38 0.38 0.96 0.92 0.46 0.43 0.85 0.26 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 42: I-5 SB Ramps & State College Boulevard Year 2030 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 18 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR NBT SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 142 [PHONE REDACTED] 1811 v/c Ratio 0.19 0.98 0.29 0.96 0.71 Control Delay 20.5 59.9 21.2 21.5 9.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 20.5 59.9 21.2 21.5 9.1 Queue Length 50th (ft) 67 588 96 351 260 Queue Length 95th (ft) 112 #871 134 m317 211 Internal Link Dist (ft) 297 600 30 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 2993 2547 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.19 0.97 0.29 0.96 0.71 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 48: Ball Road & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2030 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 24 Lane Group EBT WBT NBL NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1884 2600 695 316 v/c Ratio 0.58 0.81 0.81 0.84 Control Delay 14.9 3.6 48.5 59.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 14.9 3.9 48.5 59.8 Queue Length 50th (ft) 394 72 250 237 Queue Length 95th (ft) m476 m64 312 #363 Internal Link Dist (ft) 328 112 507 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 3229 3229 974 422 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 190 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.58 0.86 0.71 0.75 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 49: Ball Road & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2030 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 25 Lane Group EBT WBT SBL SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1853 2695 558 684 v/c Ratio 0.65 0.95 0.96 0.74 Control Delay 8.2 29.3 66.7 40.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 8.2 29.3 66.7 40.2 Queue Length 50th (ft) 171 714 415 259 Queue Length 95th (ft) m158 #859 #638 339 Internal Link Dist (ft) 144 389 451 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 2847 2847 596 941 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.65 0.95 0.94 0.73 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 50: Katella Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2030 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 26 Lane Group EBT WBT NBL NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 2011 3389 537 252 v/c Ratio 0.40 0.79 0.77 0.80 Control Delay 12.9 2.5 49.9 60.1 Queue Delay 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 12.9 4.5 49.9 60.1 Queue Length 50th (ft) 238 84 195 191 Queue Length 95th (ft) 252 m57 243 285 Internal Link Dist (ft) 94 489 532 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 5072 4308 854 381 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 730 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.40 0.95 0.63 0.66 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 51: Katella Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2030 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 27 Lane Group EBT WBT SBL SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 2337 2621 253 558 v/c Ratio 0.70 0.79 0.61 0.85 Control Delay 4.2 4.9 46.5 55.3 Queue Delay 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 4.4 4.9 46.5 55.3 Queue Length 50th (ft) 71 158 172 228 Queue Length 95th (ft) 137 127 253 296 Internal Link Dist (ft) 185 185 274 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 3335 3335 468 743 Starvation Cap Reductn 253 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.76 0.79 0.54 0.75 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 52: Orangewood Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2030 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 28 Lane Group EBT WBT NBL NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 2137 3253 232 116 v/c Ratio 0.79 0.84 0.61 0.64 Control Delay 1.9 11.5 48.0 52.3 Queue Delay 1.6 0.1 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 3.5 11.6 48.0 52.3 Queue Length 50th (ft) 21 330 72 67 Queue Length 95th (ft) m19 m393 110 131 Internal Link Dist (ft) 1 692 407 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 2711 3895 451 211 Starvation Cap Reductn 378 88 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.92 0.85 0.51 0.55 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 53: Orangewood Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2030 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 29 Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1716 [PHONE REDACTED] 322 303 301 v/c Ratio 1.11 0.29 1.20 0.70 1.22 1.12 1.10 Control Delay 70.4 2.9 133.7 3.3 166.4 128.6 120.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 70.4 2.9 133.7 3.7 166.4 128.6 120.7 Queue Length 50th (ft) ~743 20 ~442 101 ~293 ~241 ~224 Queue Length 95th (ft) m#728 m0 m#599 37 #480 #434 #409 Internal Link Dist (ft) 718 236 426 Turn Bay Length (ft) 200 270 Base Capacity (vph) 1548 [PHONE REDACTED] 265 270 274 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 298 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 1.11 0.29 1.20 0.79 1.22 1.12 1.10 Intersection Summary ~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 64: Chapman Avenue & Frontage Road Year 2030 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 34 Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR SBL Lane Group Flow (vph) 1653 [PHONE REDACTED] 737 84 989 v/c Ratio 0.64 0.64 0.55 0.78 0.64 0.14 0.87 Control Delay 25.8 12.5 62.5 23.2 35.5 5.6 20.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 25.8 12.6 62.5 23.2 35.5 5.6 20.9 Queue Length 50th (ft) 347 195 53 467 242 0 229 Queue Length 95th (ft) m372 m292 87 571 293 33 m215 Internal Link Dist (ft) 595 661 Turn Bay Length (ft) 320 350 200 Base Capacity (vph) 2574 [PHONE REDACTED] 1266 636 1266 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 24 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.64 0.66 0.55 0.78 0.58 0.13 0.78 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 65: Chapman Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2030 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 35 Lane Group EBT WBT NBL NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1379 2674 53 168 v/c Ratio 0.48 0.64 0.40 0.62 Control Delay 2.1 0.9 60.9 17.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 2.1 1.0 60.9 17.9 Queue Length 50th (ft) 38 6 40 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 117 m35 80 66 Internal Link Dist (ft) 139 584 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 2888 4149 234 354 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 132 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 84 0 0 4 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.49 0.67 0.23 0.48 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 66: Chapman Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2030 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 36 Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBT NBR SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 11 2116 21 1884 179 116 190 432 v/c Ratio 0.05 0.79 0.25 1.01 1.04 0.46 0.56 0.90 Control Delay 42.9 27.0 60.0 45.7 132.2 17.6 50.3 45.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 42.9 27.0 60.0 45.7 132.2 17.6 50.3 45.2 Queue Length 50th (ft) 8 460 16 426 ~150 6 134 171 Queue Length 95th (ft) m21 619 m26 #1128 #296 63 212 #364 Internal Link Dist (ft) 297 173 232 220 Turn Bay Length (ft) 140 120 100 Base Capacity (vph) 241 2669 85 1862 172 250 342 482 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.05 0.79 0.25 1.01 1.04 0.46 0.56 0.90 Intersection Summary ~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 69: I-5 SB Off-ramp & Disneyland Drive Year 2030 No Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 37 Lane Group WBL WBR NBT SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 758 53 958 484 v/c Ratio 0.52 0.11 0.66 0.33 Control Delay 12.7 4.5 11.7 8.4 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 12.7 4.5 11.7 8.4 Queue Length 50th (ft) 51 0 80 33 Queue Length 95th (ft) 75 16 148 67 Internal Link Dist (ft) 573 240 341 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 2035 676 1714 1714 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.37 0.08 0.56 0.28 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No.14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report – Technical Appendices Appendix D-5 Caltrans Ramp Termini Queuing Analysis Worksheets 2030 With Project Conditions ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 9: I-5 NB Ramps & Harbor Boulevard Year 2030 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 2 Lane Group WBL WBR NBT SBL SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 469 394 979 95 3442 v/c Ratio 0.65 0.87 0.34 0.50 0.75 Control Delay 23.0 35.6 7.9 34.6 2.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 Total Delay 23.0 35.6 7.9 34.6 2.6 Queue Length 50th (ft) 76 117 51 67 80 Queue Length 95th (ft) 115 235 158 m49 m110 Internal Link Dist (ft) 418 17 580 Turn Bay Length (ft) 150 200 Base Capacity (vph) 1006 565 2901 189 4580 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 424 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.47 0.70 0.34 0.50 0.83 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 10: I-5 SB Ramps & Harbor Boulevard Year 2030 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 3 Lane Group EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 368 368 74 863 2221 v/c Ratio 0.74 0.24 0.49 0.18 0.69 Control Delay 58.5 0.4 91.3 0.4 4.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 Total Delay 58.5 0.4 91.3 0.4 4.3 Queue Length 50th (ft) 141 0 62 4 143 Queue Length 95th (ft) 191 0 110 4 84 Internal Link Dist (ft) 363 636 27 Turn Bay Length (ft) 190 Base Capacity (vph) 564 1524 238 4705 3219 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 185 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.65 0.24 0.31 0.18 0.73 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 17: Disney Way & I-5 SB Ramps Year 2030 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 5 Lane Group EBT WBL WBT NBL NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 990 158 874 21 42 312 315 142 v/c Ratio 0.34 0.61 0.30 0.24 0.25 0.86 0.91 0.33 Control Delay 9.2 20.4 7.6 58.4 18.8 68.1 75.1 8.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 9.2 20.4 7.6 58.4 18.8 68.1 75.1 8.2 Queue Length 50th (ft) 164 37 68 16 0 243 258 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 198 m50 m79 42 35 #398 #437 54 Internal Link Dist (ft) 778 526 386 Turn Bay Length (ft) 150 Base Capacity (vph) 2886 261 2890 132 240 378 363 447 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.34 0.61 0.30 0.16 0.17 0.83 0.87 0.32 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 25: Katella Avenue & Manchester Avenue Year 2030 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 11 Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1547 1368 547 2000 123 432 435 453 621 21 v/c Ratio 0.88 1.06 1.18 0.77 0.66 0.82 1.05 0.67 0.80 0.06 Control Delay 15.1 40.3 136.7 13.8 68.7 19.1 79.1 29.7 34.4 6.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 15.1 40.3 136.7 13.8 68.7 19.1 79.1 29.7 34.4 6.3 Queue Length 50th (ft) 113 ~442 ~267 232 96 10 ~197 163 175 1 Queue Length 95th (ft) m118 m39 m#371 343 #174 #175 #414 m200 210 m3 Internal Link Dist (ft) 645 727 541 959 Turn Bay Length (ft) 320 240 380 Base Capacity (vph) 1757 1291 462 2613 199 529 415 826 908 422 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.88 1.06 1.18 0.77 0.62 0.82 1.05 0.55 0.68 0.05 Intersection Summary ~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 26: Katella Avenue & Anaheim Way Year 2030 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 12 Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR NBL NBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 42 2821 2066 [PHONE REDACTED] v/c Ratio 0.29 1.02 0.70 0.56 0.79 1.37dr Control Delay 39.5 29.8 11.5 2.5 48.7 41.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 39.5 29.8 11.5 2.5 48.7 41.2 Queue Length 50th (ft) 15 ~350 318 0 327 317 Queue Length 95th (ft) m19 m#886 m302 m0 #520 369 Internal Link Dist (ft) 108 976 845 Turn Bay Length (ft) 110 220 Base Capacity (vph) 146 2773 2945 [PHONE REDACTED] Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.29 1.02 0.70 0.56 0.79 0.82 Intersection Summary ~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. dr Defacto Right Lane. Recode with 1 though lane as a right lane. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 32: Gene Autry Way & I-5 HOV Ramps Year 2030 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 15 Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBR SBL SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 32 1115 105 726 32 84 768 74 v/c Ratio 0.07 0.45 0.55 0.41 0.06 0.22 0.81 0.16 Control Delay 39.5 31.0 44.5 29.6 29.5 12.6 48.2 12.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 39.5 31.0 44.5 29.6 29.5 12.6 48.2 12.2 Queue Length 50th (ft) 23 287 85 188 18 1 285 9 Queue Length 95th (ft) m24 m271 m129 235 40 27 332 48 Internal Link Dist (ft) 849 797 Turn Bay Length (ft) 200 200 200 200 Base Capacity (vph) 503 2465 271 2370 [PHONE REDACTED] 491 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.06 0.45 0.39 0.31 0.05 0.17 0.61 0.15 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 41: Anaheim Way & State College Boulevard Year 2030 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 17 Lane Group WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 263 548 [PHONE REDACTED] 32 2642 53 v/c Ratio 0.99 0.99 0.87 0.96 0.30 0.35 0.95 0.08 Control Delay 103.6 86.0 39.1 51.4 3.3 81.5 16.7 3.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 0.0 Total Delay 103.6 86.0 39.1 51.4 3.3 81.5 17.9 3.2 Queue Length 50th (ft) 226 235 142 288 36 25 136 1 Queue Length 95th (ft) #417 #359 #251 #408 41 m28 233 m2 Internal Link Dist (ft) 432 25 513 Turn Bay Length (ft) 190 200 Base Capacity (vph) 265 553 [PHONE REDACTED] 94 2795 701 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 53 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.99 0.99 0.87 0.96 0.30 0.34 0.96 0.08 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 42: I-5 SB Ramps & State College Boulevard Year 2030 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 18 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR NBT SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 113 [PHONE REDACTED] 2600 v/c Ratio 0.15 1.26 0.33 0.54 1.02 Control Delay 20.0 156.2 22.0 16.5 30.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.1 Total Delay 20.0 156.2 22.0 16.5 33.7 Queue Length 50th (ft) 52 ~992 110 129 ~641 Queue Length 95th (ft) 92 #1256 152 159 m#706 Internal Link Dist (ft) 297 600 30 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 2992 2543 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 13 0 22 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.15 1.26 0.33 0.54 1.03 Intersection Summary ~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 48: Ball Road & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2030 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 24 Lane Group EBT WBT NBL NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 2442 1232 652 306 v/c Ratio 0.76 0.39 0.76 0.82 Control Delay 7.2 9.1 45.9 58.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 7.2 9.1 45.9 58.2 Queue Length 50th (ft) 198 140 238 241 Queue Length 95th (ft) 235 134 280 338 Internal Link Dist (ft) 328 112 507 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 3193 3193 1050 457 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.76 0.39 0.62 0.67 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 49: Ball Road & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2030 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 25 Lane Group EBT WBT SBL SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1905 1326 789 1074 v/c Ratio 0.91 0.63 0.93 0.80 Control Delay 13.3 28.4 47.3 29.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 13.3 28.4 47.3 29.9 Queue Length 50th (ft) 188 266 542 365 Queue Length 95th (ft) m183 323 #814 465 Internal Link Dist (ft) 144 389 451 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 2098 2098 866 1376 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.91 0.63 0.91 0.78 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 50: Katella Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2030 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 26 Lane Group EBT WBT NBL NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 2358 1758 694 327 v/c Ratio 0.53 0.46 0.73 0.79 Control Delay 5.4 1.9 41.9 51.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 5.4 1.9 41.9 51.3 Queue Length 50th (ft) 71 13 247 253 Queue Length 95th (ft) 154 m106 273 329 Internal Link Dist (ft) 94 489 532 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 4480 3805 1341 590 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.53 0.46 0.52 0.55 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 51: Katella Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2030 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 27 Lane Group EBT WBT SBL SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 2368 1642 368 789 v/c Ratio 0.80 0.56 0.67 0.88 Control Delay 8.8 19.0 41.3 48.8 Queue Delay 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 9.0 19.0 41.3 48.8 Queue Length 50th (ft) 297 252 239 306 Queue Length 95th (ft) 140 304 341 390 Internal Link Dist (ft) 185 185 274 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 2946 2946 596 965 Starvation Cap Reductn 83 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.83 0.56 0.62 0.82 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 52: Orangewood Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2030 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 28 Lane Group EBT WBT NBL NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1989 1779 453 305 v/c Ratio 0.87 0.54 0.62 0.90 Control Delay 5.0 5.4 39.7 68.0 Queue Delay 1.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 6.9 5.4 39.7 68.0 Queue Length 50th (ft) 180 260 138 213 Queue Length 95th (ft) m182 m76 191 #378 Internal Link Dist (ft) 1 692 407 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 2295 3298 796 365 Starvation Cap Reductn 172 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.94 0.54 0.57 0.84 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 53: Orangewood Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2030 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 29 Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1853 84 179 1347 319 307 290 v/c Ratio 1.00 0.10 0.84 0.56 0.98 0.93 0.81 Control Delay 29.5 0.7 69.9 4.4 91.2 72.5 47.6 Queue Delay 7.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 36.7 0.7 69.9 4.4 91.2 72.5 47.6 Queue Length 50th (ft) 220 0 127 91 237 204 147 Queue Length 95th (ft) #880 m5 #250 104 #428 #393 #294 Internal Link Dist (ft) 718 236 426 Turn Bay Length (ft) 200 270 Base Capacity (vph) 1858 [PHONE REDACTED] 324 330 359 Starvation Cap Reductn 21 0 0 49 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 47 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 1.02 0.10 0.84 0.57 0.98 0.93 0.81 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 64: Chapman Avenue & Frontage Road Year 2030 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 34 Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR SBL SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1626 [PHONE REDACTED] [PHONE REDACTED] 11 v/c Ratio 0.72 0.65 0.44 0.51 0.51 0.42 0.83 0.02 Control Delay 14.4 6.3 59.2 21.1 27.6 10.0 46.2 19.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 14.4 6.8 59.2 21.1 27.6 10.0 46.2 19.9 Queue Length 50th (ft) 216 1 40 230 200 56 357 3 Queue Length 95th (ft) m407 m374 70 306 229 114 m252 m3 Internal Link Dist (ft) 595 661 Turn Bay Length (ft) 320 350 200 Base Capacity (vph) 2261 [PHONE REDACTED] 1569 824 1569 730 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 64 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.72 0.70 0.43 0.51 0.44 0.37 0.71 0.02 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 65: Chapman Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2030 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 35 Lane Group EBT WBT NBL NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1832 1505 95 116 v/c Ratio 0.65 0.37 0.56 0.45 Control Delay 3.0 1.2 63.3 14.4 Queue Delay 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 3.5 1.2 63.3 14.4 Queue Length 50th (ft) 53 52 71 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) m58 18 124 54 Internal Link Dist (ft) 139 584 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 2810 4037 234 310 Starvation Cap Reductn 475 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.78 0.37 0.41 0.37 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 66: Chapman Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2030 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 36 Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBT NBR SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 11 2053 95 1179 32 21 347 537 v/c Ratio 0.05 0.95 0.96 0.69 0.14 0.10 0.97 0.78 Control Delay 50.6 39.3 128.6 20.2 47.7 18.6 87.4 16.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 50.6 39.3 128.6 20.2 47.7 18.6 87.4 16.2 Queue Length 50th (ft) 8 553 76 230 22 0 269 46 Queue Length 95th (ft) m27 #510 #183 #570 53 24 #459 192 Internal Link Dist (ft) 297 173 232 220 Turn Bay Length (ft) 140 120 100 Base Capacity (vph) 241 2163 99 1720 231 221 359 686 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.05 0.95 0.96 0.69 0.14 0.10 0.97 0.78 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 69: I-5 SB Off-ramp & Disneyland Drive Year 2030 With Project Condition - AM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 37 Lane Group WBL WBR NBT SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 979 11 137 1137 v/c Ratio 0.62 0.02 0.09 0.78 Control Delay 13.8 6.0 7.9 15.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 13.8 6.0 7.9 15.8 Queue Length 50th (ft) 69 0 10 121 Queue Length 95th (ft) 100 7 22 #197 Internal Link Dist (ft) 690 259 719 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 1846 593 1555 1555 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.53 0.02 0.09 0.73 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 9: I-5 NB Ramps & Harbor Boulevard Year 2030 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 2 Lane Group WBL WBR NBT SBL SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 63 2032 v/c Ratio 0.87dr 0.95 0.86 0.71 0.55 Control Delay 30.2 60.9 35.1 61.6 7.4 Queue Delay 0.0 1.1 2.9 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 30.2 62.1 38.1 61.6 7.4 Queue Length 50th (ft) 156 319 616 50 150 Queue Length 95th (ft) 214 #550 685 m60 m147 Internal Link Dist (ft) 418 17 580 Turn Bay Length (ft) 150 200 Base Capacity (vph) 1064 525 2573 89 3695 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 195 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 4 7 270 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.55 0.92 0.96 0.71 0.55 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. dr Defacto Right Lane. Recode with 1 though lane as a right lane. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 10: I-5 SB Ramps & Harbor Boulevard Year 2030 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 3 Lane Group EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 305 [PHONE REDACTED] 1316 v/c Ratio 0.68 0.28 0.36 0.56 0.47 Control Delay 56.9 0.5 48.9 8.5 18.1 Queue Delay 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 Total Delay 57.9 0.5 48.9 8.6 18.1 Queue Length 50th (ft) 117 0 62 177 313 Queue Length 95th (ft) 158 0 m126 451 404 Internal Link Dist (ft) 363 636 27 Turn Bay Length (ft) 190 Base Capacity (vph) 674 1524 295 4788 2780 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 654 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 172 0 0 109 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.61 0.28 0.36 0.65 0.47 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 17: Disney Way & I-5 SB Ramps Year 2030 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 5 Lane Group EBT WBL WBT NBL NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 716 95 1316 21 137 256 252 113 v/c Ratio 0.25 0.26 0.46 0.23 0.53 0.80 0.81 0.30 Control Delay 1.7 5.2 5.6 56.9 16.6 63.5 65.4 9.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 1.7 5.2 5.6 56.9 16.6 63.5 65.4 9.0 Queue Length 50th (ft) 13 8 39 16 1 196 202 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 17 m8 m38 42 61 291 301 49 Internal Link Dist (ft) 778 526 386 Turn Bay Length (ft) 145 Base Capacity (vph) 2876 369 2880 158 344 378 364 424 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.25 0.26 0.46 0.13 0.40 0.68 0.69 0.27 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 25: Katella Avenue & Manchester Avenue Year 2030 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 11 Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 2011 1168 811 2568 150 145 137 547 158 v/c Ratio 1.24 0.84 1.35 0.96 0.39 0.38 0.46 0.80 0.51 Control Delay 128.6 4.5 193.5 22.1 41.6 28.7 13.5 33.8 51.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 128.6 4.5 193.5 22.1 41.6 28.7 13.5 33.8 51.0 Queue Length 50th (ft) ~687 31 ~419 370 103 69 0 231 55 Queue Length 95th (ft) m#636 m24 m#306 m308 167 135 62 m254 m71 Internal Link Dist (ft) 645 727 541 959 Turn Bay Length (ft) 320 225 200 Base Capacity (vph) 1625 1383 600 2685 383 380 295 826 908 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 1.24 0.84 1.35 0.96 0.39 0.38 0.46 0.66 0.17 Intersection Summary ~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 26: Katella Avenue & Anaheim Way Year 2030 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 12 Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR NBL NBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 53 2716 3279 [PHONE REDACTED] v/c Ratio 0.36 1.06 1.22 1.19 1.12 1.16 Control Delay 34.4 38.7 117.9 106.8 111.9 111.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 34.4 38.7 117.9 106.8 111.9 111.1 Queue Length 50th (ft) 22 ~872 ~1012 ~839 ~669 ~693 Queue Length 95th (ft) m23 m189 m151 m125 #945 #772 Internal Link Dist (ft) 108 976 845 Turn Bay Length (ft) 110 215 Base Capacity (vph) 146 2569 2683 [PHONE REDACTED] Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.36 1.06 1.22 1.19 1.12 1.16 Intersection Summary ~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 32: Gene Autry Way & I-5 HOV Ramps Year 2030 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 15 Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBR SBL SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 211 [PHONE REDACTED] 53 116 421 53 v/c Ratio 0.81 0.28 0.66 0.86 0.19 0.22 0.85 0.19 Control Delay 50.4 6.9 53.4 7.2 46.2 8.8 67.7 13.4 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 50.4 6.9 53.4 7.2 46.2 8.8 67.7 13.4 Queue Length 50th (ft) 171 60 144 168 36 0 165 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) m154 m61 m165 195 75 28 #246 37 Internal Link Dist (ft) 849 797 Turn Bay Length (ft) 200 200 200 200 Base Capacity (vph) 286 2888 301 2939 281 570 502 300 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.74 0.28 0.59 0.86 0.19 0.20 0.84 0.18 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 41: Anaheim Way & State College Boulevard Year 2030 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 17 Lane Group WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 102 213 [PHONE REDACTED] 53 1968 189 v/c Ratio 0.45 0.45 1.00 0.90 0.44 0.45 0.86 0.30 Control Delay 54.0 50.4 64.4 18.2 1.7 54.6 30.3 7.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 3.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 54.0 50.4 67.6 18.2 1.7 54.6 30.3 7.8 Queue Length 50th (ft) 80 84 164 255 24 41 433 72 Queue Length 95th (ft) 143 126 #303 m269 m25 m61 497 44 Internal Link Dist (ft) 432 25 513 Turn Bay Length (ft) 190 200 Base Capacity (vph) 226 [PHONE REDACTED] 3991 135 2287 632 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.45 0.45 1.01 0.90 0.44 0.39 0.86 0.30 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 42: I-5 SB Ramps & State College Boulevard Year 2030 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 18 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR NBT SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 142 [PHONE REDACTED] 1811 v/c Ratio 0.19 1.00 0.29 0.97 0.71 Control Delay 20.5 66.1 21.2 23.4 10.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 20.5 66.1 21.2 23.4 10.8 Queue Length 50th (ft) 67 ~620 96 340 400 Queue Length 95th (ft) 112 #910 134 m300 308 Internal Link Dist (ft) 297 600 30 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) [PHONE REDACTED] 2986 2543 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.19 1.00 0.29 0.97 0.71 Intersection Summary ~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 48: Ball Road & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2030 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 24 Lane Group EBT WBT NBL NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1884 2611 711 321 v/c Ratio 0.59 0.82 0.81 0.85 Control Delay 11.9 5.5 45.0 56.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 11.9 5.5 45.0 56.7 Queue Length 50th (ft) 279 67 230 217 Queue Length 95th (ft) m347 m59 296 #363 Internal Link Dist (ft) 328 112 507 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 3173 3173 973 420 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.59 0.82 0.73 0.76 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 49: Ball Road & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2030 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 25 Lane Group EBT WBT SBL SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1842 2695 589 684 v/c Ratio 0.68 0.99 0.95 0.70 Control Delay 12.1 30.0 60.5 34.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 12.1 30.0 60.5 34.1 Queue Length 50th (ft) 203 ~635 394 227 Queue Length 95th (ft) m167 #819 #615 301 Internal Link Dist (ft) 144 389 451 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 2712 2712 635 1001 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.68 0.99 0.93 0.68 Intersection Summary ~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 50: Katella Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2030 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 26 Lane Group EBT WBT NBL NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1947 3368 552 258 v/c Ratio 0.39 0.79 0.77 0.80 Control Delay 13.9 3.7 49.5 59.2 Queue Delay 0.0 2.2 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 13.9 5.9 49.5 59.2 Queue Length 50th (ft) 251 77 201 195 Queue Length 95th (ft) 286 m69 248 289 Internal Link Dist (ft) 94 489 532 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 5035 4277 881 393 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 739 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.39 0.95 0.63 0.66 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 51: Katella Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2030 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 27 Lane Group EBT WBT SBL SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 2305 2558 253 589 v/c Ratio 0.71 0.78 0.58 0.85 Control Delay 2.9 10.7 43.9 53.6 Queue Delay 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 3.1 10.7 43.9 53.6 Queue Length 50th (ft) 76 341 170 241 Queue Length 95th (ft) 131 527 247 307 Internal Link Dist (ft) 185 185 274 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 3266 3266 497 787 Starvation Cap Reductn 254 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.77 0.78 0.51 0.75 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 52: Orangewood Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2030 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 28 Lane Group EBT WBT NBL NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 2284 3200 221 116 v/c Ratio 0.84 0.81 0.63 0.70 Control Delay 2.4 10.7 50.7 60.8 Queue Delay 2.8 0.2 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 5.2 10.8 50.7 60.8 Queue Length 50th (ft) 22 341 69 71 Queue Length 95th (ft) m16 m348 109 #152 Internal Link Dist (ft) 1 692 407 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 2735 3929 388 182 Starvation Cap Reductn 334 130 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 1 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.95 0.84 0.57 0.64 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 53: Orangewood Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2030 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 29 Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1853 [PHONE REDACTED] 337 325 317 v/c Ratio 1.20 0.29 1.24 0.72 1.21 1.16 1.12 Control Delay 107.5 2.5 153.4 4.6 162.2 139.5 127.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 107.5 2.5 153.4 5.0 162.2 139.5 127.2 Queue Length 50th (ft) ~834 20 ~458 155 ~306 ~271 ~246 Queue Length 95th (ft) m#755 m20 m#639 154 #494 #471 #435 Internal Link Dist (ft) 718 236 426 Turn Bay Length (ft) 200 270 Base Capacity (vph) 1548 [PHONE REDACTED] 279 281 283 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 264 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 1.20 0.29 1.24 0.81 1.21 1.16 1.12 Intersection Summary ~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 64: Chapman Avenue & Frontage Road Year 2030 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 34 Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR SBL SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1710 [PHONE REDACTED] 747 84 1021 11 v/c Ratio 0.68 0.67 0.51 0.77 0.63 0.14 0.86 0.02 Control Delay 20.9 8.3 61.0 23.9 34.1 5.3 30.8 14.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 20.9 8.6 61.0 23.9 34.1 5.3 30.8 14.8 Queue Length 50th (ft) 322 245 49 455 242 0 247 1 Queue Length 95th (ft) m369 m283 81 563 289 32 m201 m3 Internal Link Dist (ft) 595 661 Turn Bay Length (ft) 320 200 200 Base Capacity (vph) 2507 [PHONE REDACTED] 1321 660 1321 612 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 43 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.68 0.71 0.51 0.77 0.57 0.13 0.77 0.02 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 65: Chapman Avenue & SR-57 NB Ramps Year 2030 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 35 Lane Group EBT WBT NBL NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 1811 2642 53 168 v/c Ratio 0.63 0.64 0.40 0.62 Control Delay 3.7 1.0 60.9 17.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 3.7 1.0 60.9 17.8 Queue Length 50th (ft) 48 6 40 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 77 m34 80 66 Internal Link Dist (ft) 139 584 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 2888 4149 234 354 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 139 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 66 0 0 3 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.64 0.66 0.23 0.48 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 66: Chapman Avenue & SR-57 SB Ramps Year 2030 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 36 Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBT NBR SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 11 2126 21 1874 179 116 190 453 v/c Ratio 0.05 0.80 0.25 1.01 1.04 0.46 0.56 0.94 Control Delay 41.9 28.0 59.7 49.4 132.2 17.6 50.3 53.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 41.9 28.0 59.7 49.4 132.2 17.6 50.3 53.2 Queue Length 50th (ft) 8 475 17 533 ~150 6 134 193 Queue Length 95th (ft) m21 635 m28 #1119 #296 63 212 #404 Internal Link Dist (ft) 297 173 232 220 Turn Bay Length (ft) 200 120 100 Base Capacity (vph) 241 2669 85 1862 172 250 342 482 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.05 0.80 0.25 1.01 1.04 0.46 0.56 0.94 Intersection Summary ~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Resort-SEIR 69: I-5 SB Off-ramp & Disneyland Drive Year 2030 With Project Condition - PM Peak Hour Queues 7 - Report Page 37 Lane Group WBL WBR NBT SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 758 53 958 484 v/c Ratio 0.52 0.11 0.66 0.33 Control Delay 12.7 4.5 11.7 8.4 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 12.7 4.5 11.7 8.4 Queue Length 50th (ft) 51 0 80 33 Queue Length 95th (ft) 75 16 148 67 Internal Link Dist (ft) 872 267 745 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 2035 676 1714 1714 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.37 0.08 0.56 0.28 Intersection Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No.14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report – Technical Appendices Appendix E-1 HCS Freeway Ramp Analysis Worksheets under Existing Conditions ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: HOV Off-Ramp at Gene Autry Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 710 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 10 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent ramp vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp Distance to adjacent ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 710 10 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 197 3 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 789 11 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 789 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 789 4800 No Fi F v = v - v 778 4800 No FO F R v 11 2000 No R v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 789 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 789 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 6.5 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence A Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.429 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 58.0 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 58.0 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: HOV Off-Ramp at Gene Autry Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 1170 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 20 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent ramp vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp Distance to adjacent ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 1170 20 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 308 5 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 1232 21 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 1232 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 1232 4800 No Fi F v = v - v 1211 4800 No FO F R v 21 2000 No R v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 1232 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 1232 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 10.3 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.430 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 58.0 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 58.0 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at State College Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5580 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 210 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 520 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1350 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5580 210 520 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1550 58 144 v Trucks and buses 7 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.966 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 6417 240 595 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.188 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 916 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 5117 9600 No FO v v 1980 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 1950 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 1950 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 19.3 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.321 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 61.0 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 66.5 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 64.1 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at State College Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 8990 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 380 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 410 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1350 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 8990 380 410 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2497 106 114 v Trucks and buses 7 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.966 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 10338 435 469 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.163 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1281 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 8273 9600 No FO v v 3278 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3135 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3135 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 30.0 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.425 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 58.1 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 63.2 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 60.9 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Avenue Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5190 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 2 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 710 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane 500 ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 230 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1970 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5190 710 230 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1442 197 64 v Trucks and buses 7 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.966 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 5968 813 263 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.260 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 1921 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 5073 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 4260 9600 No FO F R v 813 3800 No R v v 1576 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2029 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2029 4400 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 8.2 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence A Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.501 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.0 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 74.8 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 65.9 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Avenue Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 8030 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 2 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1120 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane 500 ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 320 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1970 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 8030 1120 320 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2231 311 84 v Trucks and buses 7 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.966 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 9234 1282 347 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.260 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 2870 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 7388 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 6106 9600 No FO F R v 1282 3800 No R v v 2259 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2955 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2955 4400 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 16.2 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.543 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 54.8 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 72.0 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 64.0 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Orangwood Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 4480 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 230 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 710 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1970 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 4480 230 710 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1244 64 197 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 5202 263 813 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.185 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 962 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 5465 9600 No FO v v 2120 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2080 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2080 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 19.9 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.320 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 61.1 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 66.2 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.9 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Orangwood Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6910 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 320 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 1120 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1970 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6910 320 1120 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1818 84 295 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7601 347 1214 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.174 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1326 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 7948 9600 No FO v v 3137 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3040 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3040 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 28.0- pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.394 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 59.0 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 63.6 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.5 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 4710 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 200 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 230 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1400 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 4710 200 230 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1308 56 64 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 5469 229 263 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.189 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1035 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 5698 9600 No FO v v 2217 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2187 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2187 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 21.1 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.330 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 60.8 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 65.9 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.6 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7230 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 280 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 320 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1400 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7230 280 320 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2008 78 89 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 8395 320 366 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.178 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1493 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 8715 9600 No FO v v 3451 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3358 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3358 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 30.9 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.440 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 57.7 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 62.2 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 60.2 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: HOV On-Ramp at Gene Autry Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 1400 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 10 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent Ramp vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp Distance to adjacent Ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 1400 10 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 389 3 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 1556 11 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FM v = v (P ) = 1556 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 1567 4800 No FO v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 1556 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 1556 4600 No R12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 14.6 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.305 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 61.5 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.5 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: HOV On-Ramp at Gene Autry Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 2300 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 40 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent Ramp vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp Distance to adjacent Ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 2300 40 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 639 11 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 2556 44 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FM v = v (P ) = 2556 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 2600 4800 No FO v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2556 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2556 4600 No R12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 22.6 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.339 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 60.5 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 60.5 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Anaheim Boulevard Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 4910 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 320 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 200 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1570 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 4910 320 200 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1364 89 56 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 5701 366 229 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.172 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 981 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 6067 9600 No FO v v 2360 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2280 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2280 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 22.2 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.334 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 60.6 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 65.6 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.4 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Anaheim Boulevard Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7510 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 930 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 280 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1570 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7510 930 280 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2086 258 78 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 8720 1064 320 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.085 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 739 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 9784 9600 Yes FO v v 3990 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3488 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3488 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 36.7 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.649 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 51.8 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 61.6 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 56.6 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Harbor Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5160 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 760 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 230 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1330 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5160 760 230 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1433 211 64 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 5991 870 263 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 2711 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 5093 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 4223 9600 No FO F R v 870 2000 No R v v 1191 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2711 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2711 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 23.1 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.506 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 55.8 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 76.0 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.8 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Harbor Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 8120 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 930 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 530 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1330 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 8120 930 530 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2256 258 147 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 9428 1064 607 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3889 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 7543 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 6479 9600 No FO F R v 1064 2000 No R v v 1827 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3889 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3889 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 33.2 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.524 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 55.3 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 73.6 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 62.9 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Harbor Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 4400 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 230 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 760 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1330 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 4400 230 760 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1222 64 211 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 5109 263 870 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.185 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 945 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 5372 9600 No FO v v 2082 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2043 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2043 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 19.6 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.318 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 61.1 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 66.3 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.9 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Harbor Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7190 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 530 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 930 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1330 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7190 530 930 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1997 147 258 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 8348 607 1064 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.142 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1185 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 8955 9600 No FO v v 3581 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3339 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3339 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 32.2 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.481 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.5 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 62.2 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 59.6 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Ball Road Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 4630 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 400 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 230 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1250 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 4630 400 230 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1218 105 61 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 5093 434 249 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.164 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 833 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 5527 9600 No FO v v 2130 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2037 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2037 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 20.8 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.325 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 60.9 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 66.3 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.8 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Ball Road Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7720 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 560 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 530 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1250 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7720 560 530 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2032 147 139 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 8492 607 575 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.142 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1205 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 9099 9600 No FO v v 3643 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3396 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3396 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 32.7 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.493 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.2 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 62.0 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 59.3 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Disneyland Drive Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5040 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 280 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 400 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 2850 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5040 280 400 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1326 74 111 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 5544 304 458 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.180 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 997 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 5848 9600 No FO v v 2273 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2217 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2217 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 21.9 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.335 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 60.6 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 65.8 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.5 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Disneyland Drive Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 8280 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 390 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 560 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 2850 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 8280 390 560 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2179 103 156 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 9108 423 641 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.165 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1502 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 9531 9600 No FO v v 3803 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3643 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3643 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 33.9 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.513 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 55.6 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 60.9 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 58.5 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: HOV On-Ramp at Disneyland Dr Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 1160 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 120 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent ramp vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp Distance to adjacent ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 1160 120 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 305 32 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 1221 126 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 1221 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 1221 4800 No Fi F v = v - v 1095 4800 No FO F R v 126 2000 No R v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 1221 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 1221 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 10.3 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.439 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 57.7 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 57.7 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: HOV On-Ramp at Disneyland Dr Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 920 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 160 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent ramp vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp Distance to adjacent ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 920 160 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 242 42 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 968 168 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 968 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 968 4800 No Fi F v = v - v 800 4800 No FO F R v 168 2000 No R v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 968 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 968 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 8.1 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence A Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.443 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 57.6 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 57.6 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Disneyland Drive Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6260 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 2 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 480 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane 500 ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 650 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 2700 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6260 480 650 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1647 126 181 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 6886 520 744 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.260 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 1907 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 5854 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 5334 9600 No FO F R v 520 3800 No R v v 1973 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2341 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2341 4400 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 10.9 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.475 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.7 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 73.8 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 65.9 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Disneyland Drive Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7650 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 2 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 670 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane 500 ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 900 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 2700 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7650 670 900 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2013 176 250 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 8415 726 1030 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.260 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 2288 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 6732 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 6006 9600 No FO F R v 726 3800 No R v v 2222 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2692 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2692 4400 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 13.9 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.493 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.2 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 72.8 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 65.1 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: On-Ramp at Disneyland Drive Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5780 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 650 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 540 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1400 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5780 650 540 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1521 171 150 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 6358 705 618 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.130 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 824 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 7063 9600 No FO v v 2767 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2543 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2543 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 27.4 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.386 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 59.2 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 64.9 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 62.2 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: On-Ramp at Disneyland Drive Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6970 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 900 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 640 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1400 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6970 900 640 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1834 237 178 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7667 976 732 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.096 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 734 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 8643 9600 No FO v v 3466 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3066 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3066 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 33.4 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.508 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 55.8 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 63.5 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 59.6 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Harbor Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6420 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 540 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 1120 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1300 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6420 540 1120 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1783 150 311 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7454 618 1282 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 2949 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 5964 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 5346 9600 No FO F R v 618 2000 No R v v 1507 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2949 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2949 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 25.1 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.484 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.5 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 74.8 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 64.5 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Harbor Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7880 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 640 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 790 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1300 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7880 640 790 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2189 178 219 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 9150 732 904 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3604 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 7320 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 6588 9600 No FO F R v 732 2000 No R v v 1858 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3604 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3604 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 30.7 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.494 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.2 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 73.4 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.8 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: On-Ramp at Harbor Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5880 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1120 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 540 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1300 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5880 1120 540 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1633 311 150 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 6827 1282 618 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.058 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 393 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 8109 9600 No FO v v 3217 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2730 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2730 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 32.4 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.495 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.2 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 64.4 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 60.0 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: On-Ramp at Harbor Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7240 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 790 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 640 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1300 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7240 790 640 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2011 219 178 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 8406 904 732 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.105 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 881 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 9310 9600 No FO v v 3762 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3362 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3362 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 34.6 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.557 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 54.4 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 62.1 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 58.3 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Disney Way Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7000 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 450 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 540 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp Off Distance to adjacent ramp 1130 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7000 450 540 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1944 125 150 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 8128 515 618 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3126 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 6503 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 5988 9600 No FO F R v 515 2000 No R v v 1688 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3126 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3126 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 26.6 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.474 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.7 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 74.1 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 64.6 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Disney Way Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 8030 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 440 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 200 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp Off Distance to adjacent ramp 1130 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 8030 440 200 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2231 122 56 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 9324 504 229 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3537 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 7460 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 6956 9600 No FO F R v 504 2000 No R v v 1961 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3537 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3537 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 30.2 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.473 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.7 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 73.0 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 64.3 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5590 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 2 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 540 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 700 ft Length of second accel/decel lane 700 ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 450 vph Position of adjacent ramp Upstream Type of adjacent ramp Off Distance to adjacent ramp 1130 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5590 540 450 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1553 150 125 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 6491 618 515 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.260 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 1892 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 5518 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 4900 9600 No FO F R v 618 3800 No R v v 1813 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2207 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2207 4400 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 4.3 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence A Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.484 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.5 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 74.2 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 65.9 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6930 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 2 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 200 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 700 ft Length of second accel/decel lane 700 ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 440 vph Position of adjacent ramp Upstream Type of adjacent ramp Off Distance to adjacent ramp 1130 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6930 200 440 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1925 56 122 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 8047 229 504 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.260 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 1843 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 6438 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 6209 9600 No FO F R v 229 3800 No R v v 2297 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2575 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2575 4400 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 7.5 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence A Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.449 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 57.4 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 73.2 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 65.9 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: HOV Off-Ramp at Gene Autry Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 1090 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 70 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent ramp vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp Distance to adjacent ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 1090 70 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 303 19 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 1211 78 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 1211 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 1211 4800 No Fi F v = v - v 1133 4800 No FO F R v 78 2000 No R v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 1211 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 1211 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 10.2 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.435 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 57.8 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 57.8 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: HOV Off-Ramp at Gene Autry Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 630 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 20 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent ramp vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp Distance to adjacent ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 630 20 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 175 6 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 700 22 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 700 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 700 4800 No Fi F v = v - v 678 4800 No FO F R v 22 2000 No R v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 700 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 700 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 5.8 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence A Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.430 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 58.0 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 58.0 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: On-Ramp at Anaheim Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5050 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 380 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 540 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1630 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5050 380 540 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1403 106 150 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 5864 435 618 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.163 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 958 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 6299 9600 No FO v v 2453 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2345 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2345 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 23.2 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.342 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 60.4 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 65.5 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.1 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: On-Ramp at Anaheim Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6730 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 530 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 200 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1630 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6730 530 200 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1869 147 56 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7814 607 229 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.142 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1109 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 8421 9600 No FO v v 3352 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3125 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3125 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 30.5 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.442 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 57.6 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 63.2 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 60.6 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: On-Ramp at Katella Avenue Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5430 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 310 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 380 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1260 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5430 310 380 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1508 86 106 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 6305 355 435 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.173 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1093 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 6660 9600 No FO v v 2606 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2522 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2522 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 24.0 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.348 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 60.2 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 65.0 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 62.9 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: On-Ramp at Katella Avenue Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7260 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 370 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 530 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1260 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7260 370 530 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2017 103 147 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 8430 423 607 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.165 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1390 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 8853 9600 No FO v v 3520 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3372 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3372 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 31.1 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.452 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 57.3 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 62.1 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 60.0 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: HOV On-Ramp at Gene Autry Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 2040 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 20 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent Ramp vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp Distance to adjacent Ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 2040 20 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 567 6 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 2267 22 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FM v = v (P ) = 2267 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 2289 4800 No FO v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2267 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2267 4600 No R12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 20.2 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.324 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 60.9 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 60.9 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: HOV On-Ramp at Gene Autry Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 1220 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 20 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent Ramp vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp Distance to adjacent Ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 1220 20 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 339 6 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 1356 22 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FM v = v (P ) = 1356 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 1378 4800 No FO v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 1356 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 1356 4600 No R12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 13.1 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.301 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 61.6 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.6 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- SCENARIO: Existing Conditions ROUTE: I-5 Northbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2008 ANALYSIS PERIOD: AM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 5,190 6,026 0.9 Max Upstream Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v > Max No 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of Lanes, N 5 1.2 21.2 0.957 Level of Service, LOS C 1.00 Level 6,026 FREEWAY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Peak Hour Factor, PHF Flow Rate, VF % Recreation Vehicles Trucks and Buses PCE, ET Density, D Driver Population Factor, fp Recreational Vehicle PCE, ER Heavy Vehicle Adjustment, fHV Terrain Type % Trucks and Buses Upstream Mainline Volume, V Flow Rate, Vp ---PAGE BREAK--- SCENARIO: Existing Conditions ROUTE: I-5 Northbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2008 ANALYSIS PERIOD: PM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 8,030 9,324 0.9 Max Upstream Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v > Max No 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of Lanes, N 5 1.2 32.8 0.957 Level of Service, LOS D 1.00 Level 9,324 FREEWAY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and Buses Upstream Mainline Volume, V Flow Rate, Vp Flow Rate, VF % Recreation Vehicles Trucks and Buses PCE, ET Density, D Driver Population Factor, fp Recreational Vehicle PCE, ER Heavy Vehicle Adjustment, fHV Terrain Type ---PAGE BREAK--- SCENARIO: Existing Conditions ROUTE: I-5 Southbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2008 ANALYSIS PERIOD: AM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 5,590 6,491 0.9 Max Upstream Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v > Max No 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of Lanes, N 5 1.2 22.8 0.957 Level of Service, LOS C 1.00 Level 6,491 FREEWAY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and Buses Upstream Mainline Volume, V Flow Rate, Vp Flow Rate, VF % Recreation Vehicles Trucks and Buses PCE, ET Density, D Driver Population Factor, fp Recreational Vehicle PCE, ER Heavy Vehicle Adjustment, fHV Terrain Type ---PAGE BREAK--- SCENARIO: Existing Conditions ROUTE: I-5 Southbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2008 ANALYSIS PERIOD: PM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 6,930 8,047 0.9 Max Upstream Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v > Max No 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of Lanes, N 5 1.2 28.3 0.957 Level of Service, LOS D 1.00 Level 8,047 FREEWAY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Peak Hour Factor, PHF Flow Rate, VF % Recreation Vehicles Trucks and Buses PCE, ET Density, D Driver Population Factor, fp Recreational Vehicle PCE, ER Heavy Vehicle Adjustment, fHV Terrain Type % Trucks and Buses Upstream Mainline Volume, V Flow Rate, Vp ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No.14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report – Technical Appendices Appendix E-2 HCS Freeway Ramp Analysis Worksheets under 2015 No Project Conditions ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: HOV Off-Ramp at Gene Autry Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 960 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 40 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent ramp vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp Distance to adjacent ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 960 40 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 253 11 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 1011 42 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 1011 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 1011 4800 No Fi F v = v - v 969 4800 No FO F R v 42 2000 No R v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 1011 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 1011 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 8.4 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence A Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.432 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 57.9 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 57.9 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: HOV Off-Ramp at Gene Autry Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 1430 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 60 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent ramp vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp Distance to adjacent ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 1430 60 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 376 16 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 1505 63 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 1505 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 1505 4800 No Fi F v = v - v 1442 4800 No FO F R v 63 2000 No R v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 1505 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 1505 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 12.7 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.434 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 57.9 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 57.9 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at State College Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6090 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 210 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent Ramp vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp Distance to adjacent Ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6090 210 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1603 55 v Trucks and buses 7 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.966 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 6635 228 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.189 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 917 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 5072 9600 No FO v v 1963 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 1937 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 1937 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 19.1 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.320 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 61.0 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 66.6 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 64.1 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at State College Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 11830 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 400 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent Ramp vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp Distance to adjacent Ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 11830 400 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 3113 105 v Trucks and buses 7 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.966 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 12888 434 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.164 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1699 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 10822 9600 Yes FO v v 4344 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4155 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4155 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 37.9 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.670 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 51.2 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 58.6 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 55.2 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Avenue Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5390 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 2 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 790 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane 500 ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 280 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1970 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5390 790 280 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1418 208 74 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 5929 857 304 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.260 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 1945 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 5040 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 4183 9600 No FO F R v 857 3800 No R v v 1547 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2016 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2016 4400 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 8.1 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence A Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.505 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 55.9 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 74.8 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 65.9 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Avenue Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 11480 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 2 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1280 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane 500 ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 400 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1970 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 11480 1280 400 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 3021 337 105 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 12628 1388 434 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.260 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3654 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 10103 9600 Yes Fi F v = v - v 8715 9600 No FO F R v 1388 3800 No R v v 3224 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4703 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4703 4400 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 31.2 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.553 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 54.5 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 70.2 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.9 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Orangwood Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 4600 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 270 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 790 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1970 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 4600 270 790 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1211 71 208 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 5060 293 857 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.181 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 917 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 5353 9600 No FO v v 2071 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2024 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2024 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 19.7 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.319 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 61.1 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 66.3 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 64.0 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Orangwood Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 10200 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 400 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 1280 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1970 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 10200 400 1280 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2684 105 337 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 11220 434 1388 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.164 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1835 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 11654 9600 Yes FO v v 4692 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4488 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4488 4600 Yes 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 39.9 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.814 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 47.2 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 57.1 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 52.4 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 4870 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 220 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 280 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1400 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 4870 220 280 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1282 58 74 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 5357 239 304 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.188 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1007 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 5596 9600 No FO v v 2175 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2142 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2142 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 20.8 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.328 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 60.8 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 66.0 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.7 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 10600 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 320 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 400 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1400 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 10600 320 400 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2789 84 105 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 11660 347 434 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.174 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 2034 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 12007 9600 Yes FO v v 4813 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4664 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4664 4600 Yes 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 41.3 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.871 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 45.6 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 56.3 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 51.3 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: HOV On-Ramp at Gene Autry Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 1740 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 80 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent Ramp vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp Distance to adjacent Ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 1740 80 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 458 21 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 1832 84 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FM v = v (P ) = 1832 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 1916 4800 No FO v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 1832 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 1832 4600 No R12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 17.2 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.312 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 61.3 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.3 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: HOV On-Ramp at Gene Autry Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 2680 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 320 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent Ramp vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp Distance to adjacent Ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 2680 320 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 705 84 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 2821 337 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FM v = v (P ) = 2821 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 3158 4800 No FO v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2821 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2821 4600 No R12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 26.8 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.378 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 59.4 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 59.4 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Anaheim Boulevard Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5090 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 360 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 220 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1570 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5090 360 220 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1339 95 58 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 5599 390 239 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.169 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 947 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 5989 9600 No FO v v 2326 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2239 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2239 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 22.0 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.333 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 60.7 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 65.8 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.4 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Anaheim Boulevard Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 10920 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1020 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 320 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1570 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 10920 1020 320 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2874 268 84 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 12012 1106 347 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.080 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 956 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 13118 9600 Yes FO v v 5528 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4804 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4804 4600 Yes 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 47.3 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, M = 1.717 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 21.9 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 55.6 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 32.9 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Harbor Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5360 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 780 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 240 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1330 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5360 780 240 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1411 205 63 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 5896 846 260 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 2662 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 5012 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 4166 9600 No FO F R v 846 2000 No R v v 1175 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2662 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2662 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 22.6 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.504 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 55.9 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 76.1 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.8 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Harbor Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 10190 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 950 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 580 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1330 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 10190 950 580 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2682 250 153 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 11209 1030 629 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 4491 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 8968 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 7938 9600 No FO F R v 1030 2000 No R v v 2238 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4491 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4491 4400 Yes 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 38.4 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence E Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.521 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 55.4 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 72.0 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 62.6 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Harbor Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 4580 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 240 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 780 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1330 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 4580 240 780 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1205 63 205 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 5038 260 846 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.185 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 934 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 5298 9600 No FO v v 2052 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2015 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2015 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 19.3 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.317 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 61.1 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 66.4 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 64.0 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Harbor Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 9240 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 580 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 950 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1330 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 9240 580 950 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2432 153 250 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 10164 629 1030 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.139 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1415 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 10793 9600 Yes FO v v 4374 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4065 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4065 4600 Yes 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 38.0 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.705 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 50.3 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 59.0 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 54.8 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Ball Road Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 4820 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 410 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 240 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1250 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 4820 410 240 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1268 108 63 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 5302 445 260 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.162 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 860 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 5747 9600 No FO v v 2221 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2120 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2120 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 21.5 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.330 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 60.8 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 66.1 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.6 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Ball Road Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 9820 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 580 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 580 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1250 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 9820 580 580 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2584 153 153 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 10802 629 629 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.139 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1503 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 11431 9600 Yes FO v v 4649 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4320 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4320 4600 Yes 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 40.0 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.829 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 46.8 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 57.8 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 52.5 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Disneyland Drive Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5230 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 290 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 410 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 2850 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5230 290 410 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1376 76 108 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 5753 314 445 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.179 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1027 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 6067 9600 No FO v v 2363 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2301 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2301 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 22.6 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.339 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 60.5 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 65.6 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.3 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Disneyland Drive Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 10400 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 410 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 5800 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 2580 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 10400 410 5800 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2737 108 1526 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 11440 445 6288 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.162 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1855 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 11885 9600 Yes FO v v 4792 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4576 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4576 4600 Yes 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 41.3 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.877 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 45.4 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 56.7 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 51.3 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: HOV On-Ramp at Disneyland Dr Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 1630 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 190 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent ramp vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp Distance to adjacent ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 1630 190 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 429 50 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 1716 200 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 1716 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 1716 4800 No Fi F v = v - v 1516 4800 No FO F R v 200 2000 No R v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 1716 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 1716 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 14.5 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.446 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 57.5 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 57.5 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: HOV On-Ramp at Disneyland Dr Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 1480 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 240 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent ramp vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp Distance to adjacent ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 1480 240 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 389 63 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 1558 253 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 1558 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 1558 4800 No Fi F v = v - v 1305 4800 No FO F R v 253 2000 No R v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 1558 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 1558 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 13.2 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.451 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 57.4 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 57.4 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Disneyland Drive Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6700 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 2 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 490 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane 500 ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 680 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 2700 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6700 490 680 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1763 129 179 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7370 531 737 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.260 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 1926 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 5896 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 5365 9600 No FO F R v 531 3800 No R v v 1985 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2358 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2358 4400 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 11.0 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.476 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.7 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 73.8 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 65.8 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Disneyland Drive Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7690 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 2 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 700 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane 500 ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 950 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 2700 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7690 700 950 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2024 184 264 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 8459 759 1087 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.260 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 2321 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 6768 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 6009 9600 No FO F R v 759 3800 No R v v 2223 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2707 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2707 4400 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 14.0 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.496 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.1 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 72.8 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 65.0 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: On-Ramp at Disneyland Drive Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6210 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 670 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 570 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1400 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6210 670 570 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1634 176 150 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 6831 726 618 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.127 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 868 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 7557 9600 No FO v v 2981 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2732 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2732 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 29.0 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.410 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 58.5 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 64.4 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.6 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: On-Ramp at Disneyland Drive Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6990 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 940 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 670 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1400 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6990 940 670 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1839 247 176 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7689 1019 726 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.090 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 695 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 8708 9600 No FO v v 3497 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3075 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3075 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 33.8 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.520 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 55.4 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 63.4 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 59.4 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Harbor Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6880 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 570 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 1150 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1300 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6880 570 1150 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1811 150 303 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7568 618 1247 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 2989 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 6055 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 5437 9600 No FO F R v 618 2000 No R v v 1533 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2989 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2989 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 25.5 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.484 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.5 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 74.7 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 64.4 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Harbor Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7930 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 670 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 860 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1300 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7930 670 860 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2087 176 226 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 8723 726 932 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3452 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 6979 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 6253 9600 No FO F R v 726 2000 No R v v 1763 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3452 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3452 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 29.4 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.493 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.2 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 73.8 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.9 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: On-Ramp at Harbor Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6310 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1150 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 570 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1300 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6310 1150 570 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1661 303 150 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 6941 1247 618 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.062 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 430 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 8188 9600 No FO v v 3255 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2776 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2776 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 32.5 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.497 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.1 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 64.3 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 60.0 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: On-Ramp at Harbor Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7260 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 860 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 670 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1300 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7260 860 670 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1911 226 176 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7986 932 726 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.101 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 809 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 8918 9600 No FO v v 3588 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3194 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3194 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 33.5 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.521 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 55.4 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 62.9 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 59.2 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Disney Way Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7460 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 520 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 660 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp Off Distance to adjacent ramp 1130 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7460 520 660 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1963 137 174 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 8206 564 716 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3180 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 6565 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 6001 9600 No FO F R v 564 2000 No R v v 1692 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3180 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3180 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 27.1 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.479 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.6 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 74.1 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 64.4 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Disney Way Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 8370 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 410 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 260 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp Off Distance to adjacent ramp 1130 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 8370 410 260 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2203 108 68 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 9207 445 282 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3463 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 7366 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 6921 9600 No FO F R v 445 2000 No R v v 1951 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3463 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3463 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 29.5 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.468 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.9 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 73.1 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 64.5 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6380 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 2 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 660 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 700 ft Length of second accel/decel lane 700 ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 520 vph Position of adjacent ramp Upstream Type of adjacent ramp Off Distance to adjacent ramp 1130 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6380 660 520 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1679 174 137 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7018 716 564 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.260 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 1990 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 5615 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 4899 9600 No FO F R v 716 3800 No R v v 1812 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2246 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2246 4400 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 4.7 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence A Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.492 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.2 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 74.1 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 65.7 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7190 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 2 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 260 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 700 ft Length of second accel/decel lane 700 ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 410 vph Position of adjacent ramp Upstream Type of adjacent ramp Off Distance to adjacent ramp 1130 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7190 260 410 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1892 68 108 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7909 282 445 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.260 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 1854 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 6328 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 6046 9600 No FO F R v 282 3800 No R v v 2237 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2531 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2531 4400 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 7.1 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence A Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.453 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 57.3 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 73.3 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 65.9 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: HOV Off-Ramp at Gene Autry Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 1660 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 300 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent ramp vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp Distance to adjacent ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 1660 300 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 437 79 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 1747 316 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 1747 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 1747 4800 No Fi F v = v - v 1431 4800 No FO F R v 316 2000 No R v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 1747 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 1747 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 14.8 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.456 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 57.2 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 57.2 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: HOV Off-Ramp at Gene Autry Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 1300 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 150 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent ramp vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp Distance to adjacent ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 1300 150 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 342 39 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 1368 158 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 1368 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 1368 4800 No Fi F v = v - v 1210 4800 No FO F R v 158 2000 No R v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 1368 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 1368 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 11.5 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.442 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 57.6 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 57.6 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 07/30/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: On-Ramp at Anaheim Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5720 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 400 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 510 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1520 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5720 400 510 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1505 105 134 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 6292 434 553 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.164 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1029 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 6726 9600 No FO v v 2631 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2516 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2516 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 24.5 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.354 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 60.1 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 65.0 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 62.8 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: On-Ramp at Anaheim Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6930 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 540 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 500 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1520 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6930 540 500 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1824 142 132 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7623 585 542 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.145 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1103 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 8208 9600 No FO v v 3260 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3049 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3049 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 29.8 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.427 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 58.1 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 63.6 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.0 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: On-Ramp at Katella Avenue Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6120 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 510 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 400 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1520 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6120 510 400 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1611 134 105 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 6732 553 434 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.149 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1001 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 7285 9600 No FO v v 2865 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2692 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2692 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 26.8 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.379 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 59.4 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 64.5 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 62.1 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: On-Ramp at Katella Avenue Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7470 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 500 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 540 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1520 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7470 500 540 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1966 132 142 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 8217 542 585 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.150 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1233 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 8759 9600 No FO v v 3492 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3286 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3286 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 31.3 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.458 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 57.2 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 62.5 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 60.0 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: HOV On-Ramp at Gene Autry Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 1330 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 80 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent Ramp vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp Distance to adjacent Ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 1330 80 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 350 21 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 1400 84 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FM v = v (P ) = 1400 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 1484 4800 No FO v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 1400 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 1400 4600 No R12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 13.9 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.303 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 61.5 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.5 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: HOV On-Ramp at Gene Autry Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 1140 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 100 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent Ramp vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp Distance to adjacent Ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 1140 100 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 300 26 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 1200 105 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FM v = v (P ) = 1200 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 1305 4800 No FO v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 1200 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 1200 4600 No R12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 12.5 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.300 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 61.6 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.6 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- SCENARIO: No Project Conditions ROUTE: I-5 Northbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2015 ANALYSIS PERIOD: AM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 5,390 5,929 0.95 Max Upstream Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v > Max No 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of Lanes, N 5 1.2 20.8 0.957 Level of Service, LOS C 1.00 Level 5,929 Heavy Vehicle Adjustment, fHV Terrain Type Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and Buses Upstream Mainline Volume, V Flow Rate, Vp FREEWAY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Flow Rate, VF % Recreation Vehicles Trucks and Buses PCE, ET Density, D Driver Population Factor, fp Recreational Vehicle PCE, ER ---PAGE BREAK--- SCENARIO: No Project Conditions ROUTE: I-5 Northbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2015 ANALYSIS PERIOD: PM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 11,480 12,628 0.95 Max Upstream Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v > Max Yes 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of Lanes, N 5 1.2 N/A 0.957 Level of Service, LOS F 1.00 Level 12,628 * N/A: outside the limitation of the formula FREEWAY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and Buses Upstream Mainline Volume, V Flow Rate, Vp Flow Rate, VF % Recreation Vehicles Trucks and Buses PCE, ET Density, D Driver Population Factor, fp Recreational Vehicle PCE, ER Heavy Vehicle Adjustment, fHV Terrain Type ---PAGE BREAK--- SCENARIO: No Project Conditions ROUTE: I-5 Southbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2015 ANALYSIS PERIOD: AM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 6,380 7,018 0.95 Max Upstream Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v > Max No 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of Lanes, N 5 1.2 24.7 0.957 Level of Service, LOS C 1.00 Level 7,018 FREEWAY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and Buses Upstream Mainline Volume, V Flow Rate, Vp Flow Rate, VF % Recreation Vehicles Trucks and Buses PCE, ET Density, D Driver Population Factor, fp Recreational Vehicle PCE, ER Heavy Vehicle Adjustment, fHV Terrain Type ---PAGE BREAK--- SCENARIO: No Project Conditions ROUTE: I-5 Southbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2015 ANALYSIS PERIOD: PM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 7,190 7,909 0.95 Max Upstream Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v > Max No 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of Lanes, N 5 1.2 27.8 0.957 Level of Service, LOS C 1.00 Level 7,909 Heavy Vehicle Adjustment, fHV Terrain Type Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and Buses Upstream Mainline Volume, V Flow Rate, Vp FREEWAY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Flow Rate, VF % Recreation Vehicles Trucks and Buses PCE, ET Density, D Driver Population Factor, fp Recreational Vehicle PCE, ER ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No.14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report – Technical Appendices Appendix E-3 HCS Freeway Ramp Analysis Worksheets under 2015 With Project Conditions ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: HOV Off-Ramp at Gene Autry Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 960 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 43 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent ramp vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp Distance to adjacent ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 960 43 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 253 11 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 1011 45 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 1011 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 1011 4800 No Fi F v = v - v 966 4800 No FO F R v 45 2000 No R v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 1011 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 1011 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 8.4 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence A Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.432 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 57.9 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 57.9 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: HOV Off-Ramp at Gene Autry Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 1430 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 62 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent ramp vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp Distance to adjacent ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 1430 62 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 376 16 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 1505 65 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 1505 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 1505 4800 No Fi F v = v - v 1440 4800 No FO F R v 65 2000 No R v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 1505 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 1505 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 12.7 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.434 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 57.9 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 57.9 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at State College Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6161 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 210 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent Ramp vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp Distance to adjacent Ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6161 210 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1621 55 v Trucks and buses 7 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.966 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 6712 228 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.189 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 928 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 5128 9600 No FO v v 1986 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 1960 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 1960 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 19.3 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.321 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 61.0 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 66.5 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 64.0 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at State College Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 11830 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 400 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent Ramp vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp Distance to adjacent Ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 11830 400 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 3113 105 v Trucks and buses 7 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.966 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 12888 434 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.164 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1699 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 10822 9600 Yes FO v v 4344 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4155 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4155 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 37.9 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.670 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 51.2 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 58.6 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 55.2 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Avenue Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5460 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 2 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 790 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane 500 ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 280 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1970 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5460 790 280 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1437 208 74 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 6006 857 304 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.260 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 1962 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 5106 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 4249 9600 No FO F R v 857 3800 No R v v 1572 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2042 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2042 4400 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 8.3 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence A Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.505 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 55.9 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 74.7 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 65.8 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Avenue Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 11530 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 2 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1280 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane 500 ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 400 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1970 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 11530 1280 400 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 3034 337 105 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 12683 1388 434 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.260 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3665 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 10147 9600 Yes Fi F v = v - v 8759 9600 No FO F R v 1388 3800 No R v v 3241 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4747 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4747 4400 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 31.6 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.553 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 54.5 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 70.2 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.9 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Orangwood Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 4670 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 270 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 790 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1970 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 4670 270 790 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1229 71 208 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 5137 293 857 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.181 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 931 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 5430 9600 No FO v v 2103 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2054 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2054 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 19.9 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.320 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 61.0 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 66.3 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.9 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Orangwood Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 10250 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 400 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 1280 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1970 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 10250 400 1280 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2697 105 337 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 11275 434 1388 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.164 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1844 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 11709 9600 Yes FO v v 4715 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4510 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4510 4600 Yes 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 40.1 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.826 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 46.9 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 57.0 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 52.2 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 4940 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 220 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 280 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1400 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 4940 220 280 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1300 58 74 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 5434 239 304 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.188 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1021 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 5673 9600 No FO v v 2206 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2173 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2173 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 21.0 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.330 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 60.8 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 65.9 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.6 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 10650 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 320 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 400 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1400 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 10650 320 400 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2803 84 105 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 11715 347 434 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.174 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 2043 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 12062 9600 Yes FO v v 4836 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4686 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4686 4600 Yes 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 41.4 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.884 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 45.2 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 56.2 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 51.0 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: HOV On-Ramp at Gene Autry Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 1740 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 80 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent Ramp vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp Distance to adjacent Ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 1740 80 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 458 21 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 1832 84 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FM v = v (P ) = 1832 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 1916 4800 No FO v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 1832 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 1832 4600 No R12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 17.2 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.312 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 61.3 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.3 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: HOV On-Ramp at Gene Autry Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 2680 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 320 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent Ramp vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp Distance to adjacent Ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 2680 320 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 705 84 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 2821 337 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FM v = v (P ) = 2821 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 3158 4800 No FO v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2821 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2821 4600 No R12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 26.8 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.378 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 59.4 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 59.4 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Anaheim Boulevard Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5160 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 360 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 220 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1570 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5160 360 220 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1358 95 58 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 5676 390 239 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.169 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 960 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 6066 9600 No FO v v 2358 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2270 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2270 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 22.3 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.335 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 60.6 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 65.7 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.4 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Anaheim Boulevard Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 10970 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1020 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 320 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1570 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 10970 1020 320 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2887 268 84 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 12067 1106 347 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.080 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 960 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 13173 9600 Yes FO v v 5553 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4826 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4826 4600 Yes 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 47.5 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, M = 1.749 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 21.0 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 55.5 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 31.9 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Harbor Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5360 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 780 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 279 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1330 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5360 780 279 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1411 205 73 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 5896 846 302 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 2662 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 5012 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 4166 9600 No FO F R v 846 2000 No R v v 1175 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2662 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2662 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 22.6 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.504 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 55.9 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 76.1 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.8 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Harbor Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 10190 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 950 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 686 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1330 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 10190 950 686 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2682 250 181 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 11209 1030 744 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 4491 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 8968 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 7938 9600 No FO F R v 1030 2000 No R v v 2238 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4491 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4491 4400 Yes 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 38.4 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence E Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.521 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 55.4 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 72.0 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 62.6 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Harbor Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 4580 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 279 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 780 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1330 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 4580 279 780 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1205 73 205 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 5038 302 846 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.180 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 907 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 5340 9600 No FO v v 2065 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2015 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2015 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 19.6 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.319 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 61.1 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 66.4 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 64.0 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Harbor Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 9240 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 686 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 950 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1330 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 9240 686 950 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2432 181 250 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 10164 744 1030 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.125 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1268 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 10908 9600 Yes FO v v 4448 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4065 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4065 4600 Yes 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 38.9 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.757 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 48.8 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 59.0 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 54.0 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Ball Road Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 4859 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 410 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 279 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1250 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 4859 410 279 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1279 108 73 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 5345 445 302 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.162 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 867 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 5790 9600 No FO v v 2239 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2138 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2138 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 21.7 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.331 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 60.7 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 66.0 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.6 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Ball Road Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 9926 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 580 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 686 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1250 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 9926 580 686 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2612 153 181 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 10919 629 744 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.139 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1520 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 11548 9600 Yes FO v v 4699 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4367 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4367 4600 Yes 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 40.4 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.856 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 46.0 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 57.6 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 52.0 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Disneyland Drive Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5269 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 298 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 410 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 2850 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5269 298 410 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1387 78 108 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 5796 323 445 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.177 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1028 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 6119 9600 No FO v v 2384 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2318 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2318 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 22.8 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.341 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 60.5 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 65.5 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.2 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Disneyland Drive Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 10506 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 417 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 580 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 2850 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 10506 417 580 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2765 110 153 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 11557 452 629 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.161 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1864 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 12009 9600 Yes FO v v 4846 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4622 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4622 4600 Yes 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 41.7 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.909 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 44.5 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 56.5 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 50.7 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: HOV On-Ramp at Disneyland Dr Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 1630 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 190 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent ramp vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp Distance to adjacent ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 1630 190 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 429 50 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 1716 200 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 1716 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 1716 4800 No Fi F v = v - v 1516 4800 No FO F R v 200 2000 No R v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 1716 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 1716 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 14.5 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.446 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 57.5 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 57.5 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: HOV On-Ramp at Disneyland Dr Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 1480 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 240 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent ramp vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp Distance to adjacent ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 1480 240 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 389 63 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 1558 253 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 1558 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 1558 4800 No Fi F v = v - v 1305 4800 No FO F R v 253 2000 No R v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 1558 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 1558 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 13.2 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.451 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 57.4 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 57.4 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Disneyland Drive Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6811 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 2 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 531 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane 500 ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 680 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 2700 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6811 531 680 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1792 140 179 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7492 576 737 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.260 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 1985 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 5994 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 5418 9600 No FO F R v 576 3800 No R v v 2004 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2397 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2397 4400 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 11.4 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.480 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.6 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 73.7 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 65.7 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Disneyland Drive Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7773 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 2 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 733 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane 500 ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 950 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 2700 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7773 733 950 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2046 193 250 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 8550 795 1030 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.260 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 2367 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 6840 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 6045 9600 No FO F R v 795 3800 No R v v 2236 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2736 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2736 4400 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 14.3 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.500 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.0 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 72.7 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 65.0 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: On-Ramp at Disneyland Drive Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6280 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 670 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 638 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1400 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6280 670 638 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1653 176 168 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 6908 726 692 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.127 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 878 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 7634 9600 No FO v v 3015 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2763 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2763 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 29.2 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.414 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 58.4 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 64.3 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.5 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: On-Ramp at Disneyland Drive Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7040 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 940 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 724 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1400 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7040 940 724 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1853 247 191 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7744 1019 785 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.090 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 700 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 8763 9600 No FO v v 3522 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3097 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3097 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 34.0 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.525 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 55.3 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 63.3 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 59.3 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Harbor Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6950 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 638 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 1150 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1300 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6950 638 1150 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1829 168 303 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7645 692 1247 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3057 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 6116 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 5424 9600 No FO F R v 692 2000 No R v v 1529 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3057 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3057 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 26.0 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.490 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.3 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 74.7 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 64.2 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Harbor Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7980 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 724 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 860 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1300 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7980 724 860 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2100 191 226 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 8778 785 932 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3505 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 7023 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 6238 9600 No FO F R v 785 2000 No R v v 1759 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3505 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3505 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 29.9 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.499 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.0 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 73.8 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.7 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: On-Ramp at Harbor Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6312 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1150 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 638 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1300 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6312 1150 638 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1661 303 168 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 6943 1247 692 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.062 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 430 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 8190 9600 No FO v v 3256 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2777 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2777 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 32.5 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.497 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.1 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 64.3 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 60.0 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: On-Ramp at Harbor Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7256 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 860 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 724 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1300 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7256 860 724 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1909 226 191 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7982 932 785 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.101 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 809 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 8914 9600 No FO v v 3586 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3192 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3192 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 33.5 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.520 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 55.4 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 62.9 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 59.2 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Disney Way Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7462 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 520 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 660 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp Off Distance to adjacent ramp 1130 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7462 520 660 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1964 137 174 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 8208 564 716 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3181 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 6567 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 6003 9600 No FO F R v 564 2000 No R v v 1693 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3181 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3181 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 27.1 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.479 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.6 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 74.1 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 64.4 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Disney Way Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 8366 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 480 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 260 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp Off Distance to adjacent ramp 1130 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 8366 480 260 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2202 126 68 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 9203 520 282 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3504 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 7363 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 6843 9600 No FO F R v 520 2000 No R v v 1929 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3504 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3504 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 29.9 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.475 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.7 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 73.2 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 64.3 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6380 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 2 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 660 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 700 ft Length of second accel/decel lane 700 ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 520 vph Position of adjacent ramp Upstream Type of adjacent ramp Off Distance to adjacent ramp 1130 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6380 660 520 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1679 174 137 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7018 716 564 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.260 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 1990 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 5615 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 4899 9600 No FO F R v 716 3800 No R v v 1812 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2246 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2246 4400 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 4.7 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence A Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.492 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.2 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 74.1 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 65.7 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7190 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 2 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 260 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 700 ft Length of second accel/decel lane 700 ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 480 vph Position of adjacent ramp Upstream Type of adjacent ramp Off Distance to adjacent ramp 1130 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7190 260 480 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1892 68 126 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7909 282 520 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.260 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 1854 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 6328 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 6046 9600 No FO F R v 282 3800 No R v v 2237 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2531 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2531 4400 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 7.1 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence A Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.453 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 57.3 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 73.3 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 65.9 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: HOV Off-Ramp at Gene Autry Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 1660 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 300 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent ramp vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp Distance to adjacent ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 1660 300 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 437 79 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 1747 316 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 1747 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 1747 4800 No Fi F v = v - v 1431 4800 No FO F R v 316 2000 No R v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 1747 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 1747 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 14.8 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.456 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 57.2 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 57.2 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: HOV Off-Ramp at Gene Autry Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 1300 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 150 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent ramp vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp Distance to adjacent ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 1300 150 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 342 39 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 1368 158 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 1368 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 1368 4800 No Fi F v = v - v 1210 4800 No FO F R v 158 2000 No R v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 1368 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 1368 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 11.5 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.442 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 57.6 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 57.6 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: On-Ramp at Anaheim Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5720 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 400 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 520 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1520 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5720 400 520 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1505 105 137 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 6292 434 564 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.164 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1029 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 6726 9600 No FO v v 2631 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2516 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2516 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 24.5 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.354 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 60.1 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 65.0 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 62.8 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: On-Ramp at Anaheim Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6930 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 540 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 530 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1520 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6930 540 530 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1824 142 139 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7623 585 575 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.145 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1103 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 8208 9600 No FO v v 3260 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3049 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3049 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 29.8 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.427 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 58.1 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 63.6 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.0 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: On-Ramp at Katella Avenue Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6120 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 520 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 400 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1520 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6120 520 400 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1611 137 105 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 6732 564 434 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.147 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 992 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 7296 9600 No FO v v 2870 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2692 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2692 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 26.9 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.380 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 59.4 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 64.5 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 62.1 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: On-Ramp at Katella Avenue Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7470 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 530 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 540 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1520 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7470 530 540 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1966 139 142 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 8217 575 585 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.146 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1199 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 8792 9600 No FO v v 3509 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3286 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3286 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 31.6 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.464 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 57.0 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 62.5 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 59.9 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: HOV On-Ramp at Gene Autry Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 1330 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 86 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent Ramp vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp Distance to adjacent Ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 1330 86 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 350 23 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 1400 91 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FM v = v (P ) = 1400 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 1491 4800 No FO v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 1400 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 1400 4600 No R12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 13.9 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.303 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 61.5 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.5 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: HOV On-Ramp at Gene Autry Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 1140 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 117 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent Ramp vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp Distance to adjacent Ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 1140 117 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 300 31 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 1200 123 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FM v = v (P ) = 1200 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 1323 4800 No FO v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 1200 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 1200 4600 No R12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 12.6 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.301 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 61.6 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.6 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- SCENARIO: With Project Conditions ROUTE: I-5 Northbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2015 ANALYSIS PERIOD: AM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 5,460 6,006 0.95 Max Upstream Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v > Max No 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of Lanes, N 5 1.2 21.1 0.957 Level of Service, LOS C 1.00 Level 6,006 % Trucks and Buses Volume, V Flow Rate, Vp FREEWAY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Peak Hour Factor, PHF Flow Rate, VF % Recreation Vehicles Trucks and Buses PCE, ET Density, D Driver Population Factor, fp Recreational Vehicle PCE, ER Heavy Vehicle Adjustment, fHV Terrain Type ---PAGE BREAK--- SCENARIO: With Project Conditions ROUTE: I-5 Northbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2015 ANALYSIS PERIOD: PM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 11,530 12,683 0.95 Max Upstream Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v > Max Yes 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of Lanes, N 5 1.2 N/A 0.957 Level of Service, LOS F 1.00 Level 12,683 * N/A: outside the limitation of the formula Recreational Vehicle PCE, ER Heavy Vehicle Adjustment, fHV Terrain Type FREEWAY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and Buses Volume, V Flow Rate, Vp Flow Rate, VF % Recreation Vehicles Trucks and Buses PCE, ET Density, D Driver Population Factor, fp ---PAGE BREAK--- SCENARIO: With Project Conditions ROUTE: I-5 Southbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2015 ANALYSIS PERIOD: AM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 6,380 7,018 0.95 Max Upstream Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v > Max No 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of Lanes, N 5 1.2 24.7 0.957 Level of Service, LOS C 1.00 Level 7,018 Recreational Vehicle PCE, ER Heavy Vehicle Adjustment, fHV Terrain Type FREEWAY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and Buses Volume, V Flow Rate, Vp Flow Rate, VF % Recreation Vehicles Trucks and Buses PCE, ET Density, D Driver Population Factor, fp ---PAGE BREAK--- SCENARIO: With Project Conditions ROUTE: I-5 Southbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2015 ANALYSIS PERIOD: PM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 7,190 7,909 0.95 Max Upstream Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v > Max No 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of Lanes, N 5 1.2 27.8 0.957 Level of Service, LOS C 1.00 Level 7,909 % Trucks and Buses Volume, V Flow Rate, Vp FREEWAY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Peak Hour Factor, PHF Flow Rate, VF % Recreation Vehicles Trucks and Buses PCE, ET Density, D Driver Population Factor, fp Recreational Vehicle PCE, ER Heavy Vehicle Adjustment, fHV Terrain Type ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No.14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report – Technical Appendices Appendix E-4 HCS Freeway Ramp Analysis Worksheets under 2030 No Project Conditions ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: HOV Off-Ramp at Gene Autry Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project Scenario Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 1520 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 230 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent ramp vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp Distance to adjacent ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 1520 230 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 400 61 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 1600 242 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 1600 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 1600 4800 No Fi F v = v - v 1358 4800 No FO F R v 242 2000 No R v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 1600 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 1600 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 13.5 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.450 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 57.4 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 57.4 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: HOV Off-Ramp at Gene Autry Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project Scenario Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 1990 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 270 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent ramp vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp Distance to adjacent ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 1990 270 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 524 71 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 2095 284 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 2095 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 2095 4800 No Fi F v = v - v 1811 4800 No FO F R v 284 2000 No R v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2095 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2095 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 17.8 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.454 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 57.3 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 57.3 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at State College Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5700 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 230 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent Ramp vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp Distance to adjacent Ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5700 230 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1500 61 v Trucks and buses 9 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 6270 249 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.187 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 890 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 5015 9600 No FO v v 1938 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 1906 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 1906 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 19.0 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.320 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 61.0 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 66.7 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 64.1 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at State College Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 13050 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 440 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent Ramp vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp Distance to adjacent Ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 13050 440 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 3434 116 v Trucks and buses 9 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 14355 477 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.158 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1875 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 12332 9600 Yes FO v v 4990 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4742 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4742 4600 Yes 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 42.8 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, M = 1.007 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 41.8 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 55.9 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 48.9 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Avenue Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project Scenario Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5810 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 2 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 980 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane 500 ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 380 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1970 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5810 980 380 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1529 258 100 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 6391 1063 412 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.260 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 2199 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 5433 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 4370 9600 No FO F R v 1063 3800 No R v v 1617 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2199 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2199 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 9.7 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence A Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.524 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 55.3 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 74.4 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 65.3 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Avenue Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project Scenario Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 12250 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 2 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1600 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane 500 ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 560 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1970 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 12250 1600 560 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 3224 421 147 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 13475 1735 607 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.260 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 4087 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 10780 9600 Yes Fi F v = v - v 9045 9600 No FO F R v 1735 3800 No R v v 3346 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 5380 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 5380 4400 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 37.0 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.584 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 53.6 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 70.2 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 60.8 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Orangwood Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 4830 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 370 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 980 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1970 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 4830 370 980 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1271 97 258 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 5313 401 1063 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.168 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 891 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 5714 9600 No FO v v 2211 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2125 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2125 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 21.2 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.328 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 60.8 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 66.1 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.6 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Orangwood Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 10650 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 560 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 1600 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1970 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 10650 560 1600 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2803 147 421 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 11715 607 1735 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.142 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1663 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 12322 9600 Yes FO v v 5026 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4686 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4686 4600 Yes 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 42.7 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, M = 1.055 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 40.5 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 56.2 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 48.1 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5210 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 260 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 380 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1400 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5210 260 380 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1371 68 100 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 5731 282 412 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.183 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1046 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 6013 9600 No FO v v 2342 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2292 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2292 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 22.3 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.337 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 60.6 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 65.6 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.3 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 11210 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 390 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 560 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1400 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 11210 390 560 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2950 103 147 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 12331 423 607 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.165 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 2034 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 12754 9600 Yes FO v v 5148 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 6931 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 6931 4600 Yes 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 59.5 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, M = 6.379 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = -108.6 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 61.1 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 615.5 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: HOV On-Ramp at Gene Autry Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 2500 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 220 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent Ramp vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp Distance to adjacent Ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 2500 220 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 658 58 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 2632 232 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FM v = v (P ) = 2632 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 2864 4800 No FO v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2632 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2632 4600 No R12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 24.6 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.354 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 60.1 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 60.1 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: HOV On-Ramp at Gene Autry Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 3480 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 920 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent Ramp vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp Distance to adjacent Ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 3480 920 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 916 242 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 3663 968 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FM v = v (P ) = 3663 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 4631 4800 No FO v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3663 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3663 4600 Yes R12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 38.0 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence E Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.686 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 50.8 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 50.8 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Anaheim Boulevard Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5480 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 440 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 270 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1570 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5480 440 270 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1442 116 71 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 6028 477 293 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.158 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 953 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 6505 9600 No FO v v 2537 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2411 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2411 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 24.0 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.349 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 60.2 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 65.3 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 62.9 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Anaheim Boulevard Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 11600 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1200 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 390 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1570 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 11600 1200 390 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 3053 316 103 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 12760 1301 423 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.055 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 704 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 14061 9600 Yes FO v v 6028 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 5104 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 5104 4600 Yes 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 51.1 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, M = 2.638 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = -3.9 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 54.3 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Harbor Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project Scenario Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5780 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 810 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 250 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1330 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5780 810 250 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1521 213 66 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 6358 878 271 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 2852 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 5405 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 4527 9600 No FO F R v 878 2000 No R v v 1276 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2852 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2852 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 24.3 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.507 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 55.8 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 75.7 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.7 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Harbor Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project Scenario Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 11330 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1010 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 680 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1330 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 11330 1010 680 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2982 266 179 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 12463 1095 737 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 4965 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 9971 9600 Yes Fi F v = v - v 8876 9600 No FO F R v 1095 2000 No R v v 2503 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4965 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4965 4400 Yes 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 42.5 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.527 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 55.3 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 70.9 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 62.2 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Harbor Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 4970 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 250 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 810 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1330 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 4970 250 810 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1308 66 213 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 5467 271 878 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.184 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1006 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 5738 9600 No FO v v 2230 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2186 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2186 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 20.8 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.325 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 60.9 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 65.9 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.7 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Harbor Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 10320 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 680 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 1010 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1330 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 10320 680 1010 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2716 179 266 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 11352 737 1095 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.126 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1427 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 12089 9600 Yes FO v v 4962 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4540 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4540 4600 Yes 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 42.5 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, M = 1.043 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 40.8 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 56.8 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 48.5 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Ball Road Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5220 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 420 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 250 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1330 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5220 420 250 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1374 111 66 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 5742 455 271 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.161 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 924 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 6197 9600 No FO v v 2409 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2296 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2296 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 23.0 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.340 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 60.5 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 65.6 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.2 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Ball Road Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 11000 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 620 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 620 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1330 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 11000 620 620 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2895 163 163 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 12100 672 672 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.134 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1619 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 12772 9600 Yes FO v v 5240 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4840 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4840 4600 Yes 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 44.4 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, M = 1.245 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 35.1 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 55.5 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 44.4 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Disneyland Drive Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5640 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 310 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 420 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 2850 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5640 310 420 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1484 82 111 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 6204 336 455 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.176 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1091 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 6540 9600 No FO v v 2556 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2481 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2481 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 24.2 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.351 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 60.2 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 65.1 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 62.9 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Disneyland Drive Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 11620 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 470 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 620 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 2850 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 11620 470 620 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 3058 124 163 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 12782 510 672 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.154 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1969 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 13292 9600 Yes FO v v 5406 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 7382 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 7382 4600 Yes 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 63.7 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, M = 10.722 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = -230.2 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 61.1 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 245.5 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: HOV On-Ramp at Disneyland Dr Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project Scenario Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 2640 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 340 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent ramp vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp Distance to adjacent ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 2640 340 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 695 89 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 2779 358 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 2779 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 2779 4800 No Fi F v = v - v 2421 4800 No FO F R v 358 2000 No R v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2779 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2779 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 23.7 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.460 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 57.1 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 57.1 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: HOV On-Ramp at Disneyland Dr Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project Scenario Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 2690 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 420 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent ramp vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp Distance to adjacent ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 2690 420 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 708 111 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 2832 442 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 2832 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 2832 4800 No Fi F v = v - v 2390 4800 No FO F R v 442 2000 No R v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2832 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2832 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 24.1 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.468 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.9 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 56.9 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Disneyland Drive Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project Scenario Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7640 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 520 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 740 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 2700 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7640 520 740 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2011 137 206 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 8404 564 847 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3250 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 6724 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 6160 9600 No FO F R v 564 2000 No R v v 1737 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3250 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3250 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 27.7 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.479 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.6 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 73.9 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 64.4 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Disneyland Drive Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project Scenario Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7740 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 750 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 1050 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 2700 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7740 750 1050 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2037 197 292 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 8514 813 1202 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3429 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 6812 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 5999 9600 No FO F R v 813 2000 No R v v 1691 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3429 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3429 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 29.2 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.501 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.0 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 74.1 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.7 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: On-Ramp at Disneyland Drive Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7120 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 720 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 640 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1400 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7120 720 640 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1874 189 168 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7832 781 694 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.120 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 941 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 8613 9600 No FO v v 3445 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3132 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3132 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 32.5 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.481 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.5 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 63.2 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 60.0 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: On-Ramp at Disneyland Drive Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6990 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1030 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 750 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1400 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6990 1030 750 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1839 271 197 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7689 1117 813 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.078 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 601 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 8806 9600 No FO v v 3544 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3075 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3075 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 34.5 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.544 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 54.8 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 63.4 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 59.0 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Harbor Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project Scenario Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7860 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 640 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 1240 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1300 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7860 640 1240 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2068 168 326 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 8646 694 1344 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3407 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 6917 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 6223 9600 No FO F R v 694 2000 No R v v 1755 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3407 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3407 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 29.1 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.490 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.3 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 73.8 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 64.0 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Harbor Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project Scenario Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 8040 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 700 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 1020 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1300 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 8040 700 1020 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2116 184 268 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 8844 759 1106 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3513 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 7076 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 6317 9600 No FO F R v 759 2000 No R v v 1781 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3513 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3513 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 30.0 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.496 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.1 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 73.7 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.8 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: On-Ramp at Harbor Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7170 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1240 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 640 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1300 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7170 1240 640 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1887 326 168 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7887 1344 694 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.050 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 281 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 6984 9600 No FO v v 2679 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2256 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2256 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 29.2 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.422 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 58.2 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 65.7 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.6 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: On-Ramp at Harbor Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7300 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1020 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 740 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1300 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7300 1020 740 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1921 268 195 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 8030 1106 802 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.080 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 457 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 6848 9600 No FO v v 2642 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2296 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2296 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 27.7 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.396 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 58.9 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 65.6 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 62.1 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Disney Way Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project Scenario Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 8430 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 660 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 930 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp Off Distance to adjacent ramp 1130 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 8430 660 930 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2218 174 245 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 9273 716 1008 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3639 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 7419 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 6703 9600 No FO F R v 716 2000 No R v v 1890 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3639 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3639 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 31.0 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.492 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.2 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 73.3 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.8 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Disney Way Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project Scenario Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 9120 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 560 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 410 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp Off Distance to adjacent ramp 1130 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 9120 560 410 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2400 147 108 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 10032 607 445 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3842 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 8026 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 7419 9600 No FO F R v 607 2000 No R v v 2092 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3842 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3842 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 32.8 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.483 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.5 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 72.5 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.8 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project Scenario Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6860 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 2 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 930 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 700 ft Length of second accel/decel lane 700 ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 660 vph Position of adjacent ramp Upstream Type of adjacent ramp Off Distance to adjacent ramp 1130 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6860 930 660 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1805 245 174 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7546 1008 716 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.260 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 2316 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 6037 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 5029 9600 No FO F R v 1008 3800 No R v v 1860 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2414 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2414 4400 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 6.1 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence A Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.519 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 55.5 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 73.6 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 65.1 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project Scenario Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7760 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 2 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 410 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 700 ft Length of second accel/decel lane 700 ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 560 vph Position of adjacent ramp Upstream Type of adjacent ramp Off Distance to adjacent ramp 1130 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7760 410 560 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2042 108 147 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 8536 445 607 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.260 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 2105 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 6829 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 6384 9600 No FO F R v 445 3800 No R v v 2362 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2731 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2731 4400 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 8.8 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence A Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.468 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.9 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 72.7 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 65.4 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: HOV Off-Ramp at Gene Autry Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project Scenario Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 2880 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 800 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent ramp vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp Distance to adjacent ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 2880 800 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 758 211 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 3032 842 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3032 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 3032 4800 No Fi F v = v - v 2190 4800 No FO F R v 842 2000 No R v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3032 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3032 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 25.8 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.504 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 55.9 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 55.9 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: HOV Off-Ramp at Gene Autry Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project Scenario Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 2690 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 430 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent ramp vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp Distance to adjacent ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 2690 430 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 708 113 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 2832 453 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 2832 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 2832 4800 No Fi F v = v - v 2379 4800 No FO F R v 453 2000 No R v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2832 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2832 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 24.1 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.469 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.9 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 56.9 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: On-Ramp at Anaheim Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5930 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 440 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 930 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1520 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5930 440 930 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1561 116 245 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 6523 477 1008 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.158 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1032 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 7000 9600 No FO v v 2745 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2609 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2609 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 25.6 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.364 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 59.8 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 64.8 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 62.5 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: On-Ramp at Anaheim Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7350 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 580 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 780 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1520 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7350 580 780 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1934 153 205 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 8085 629 846 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.139 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1125 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 8714 9600 No FO v v 3480 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3234 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3234 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 31.6 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.465 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 57.0 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 62.7 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 60.0 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: On-Ramp at Katella Avenue Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6370 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 930 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 440 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1520 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6370 930 440 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1676 245 116 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7007 1008 477 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.092 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 643 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 8015 9600 No FO v v 3182 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2802 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2802 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 31.0 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.455 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 57.3 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 64.2 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 60.7 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: On-Ramp at Katella Avenue Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7930 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 780 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 580 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1520 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7930 780 580 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2087 205 153 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 8723 846 629 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.112 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 977 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 9569 9600 No FO v v 3873 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3489 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3489 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 35.1 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence E Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.577 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 53.9 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 61.6 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 57.8 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: HOV On-Ramp at Gene Autry Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 1990 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 230 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent Ramp vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp Distance to adjacent Ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 1990 230 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 524 61 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 2095 242 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FM v = v (P ) = 2095 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 2337 4800 No FO v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2095 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2095 4600 No R12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 20.5 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.326 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 60.9 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 60.9 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: HOV On-Ramp at Gene Autry Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 2240 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 310 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent Ramp vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp Distance to adjacent Ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 2240 310 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 589 82 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 2358 326 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FM v = v (P ) = 2358 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 2684 4800 No FO v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2358 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2358 4600 No R12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 23.1 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.343 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 60.4 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 60.4 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- SCENARIO: No Project Conditions ROUTE: I-5 Northbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2030 ANALYSIS PERIOD: AM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 5,810 6,391 0.95 Max Upstream Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v > Max No 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of Lanes, N 5 1.2 22.5 0.957 Level of Service, LOS C 1.00 Level 6,391 % Trucks and Buses Upstream Mainline Volume, V Flow Rate, Vp FREEWAY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Flow Rate, VF % Recreation Vehicles Trucks and Buses PCE, ET Density, D Driver Population Factor, fp Recreational Vehicle PCE, ER Heavy Vehicle Adjustment, fHV Terrain Type Peak Hour Factor, PHF ---PAGE BREAK--- SCENARIO: No Project Conditions ROUTE: I-5 Northbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2030 ANALYSIS PERIOD: PM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 12,250 13,475 0.95 Max Upstream Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v > Max Yes 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of Lanes, N 5 1.2 N/A 0.957 Level of Service, LOS F 1.00 Level 13,475 * N/A: outside the limitation of the formula Recreational Vehicle PCE, ER Heavy Vehicle Adjustment, fHV Terrain Type FREEWAY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and Buses Upstream Mainline Volume, V Flow Rate, Vp Flow Rate, VF % Recreation Vehicles Trucks and Buses PCE, ET Density, D Driver Population Factor, fp ---PAGE BREAK--- SCENARIO: No Project Conditions ROUTE: I-5 Southbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2030 ANALYSIS PERIOD: AM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 6,860 7,546 0.95 Max Upstream Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v > Max No 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of Lanes, N 5 1.2 26.5 0.957 Level of Service, LOS C 1.00 Level 7,546 Recreational Vehicle PCE, ER Heavy Vehicle Adjustment, fHV Terrain Type FREEWAY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and Buses Upstream Mainline Volume, V Flow Rate, Vp Flow Rate, VF % Recreation Vehicles Trucks and Buses PCE, ET Density, D Driver Population Factor, fp ---PAGE BREAK--- SCENARIO: No Project Conditions ROUTE: I-5 Southbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2030 ANALYSIS PERIOD: PM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 7,760 8,536 0.95 Max Upstream Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v > Max No 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of Lanes, N 5 1.2 30.0 0.957 Level of Service, LOS D 1.00 Level 8,536 % Trucks and Buses Upstream Mainline Volume, V Flow Rate, Vp FREEWAY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Flow Rate, VF % Recreation Vehicles Trucks and Buses PCE, ET Density, D Driver Population Factor, fp Recreational Vehicle PCE, ER Heavy Vehicle Adjustment, fHV Terrain Type Peak Hour Factor, PHF ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No.14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report – Technical Appendices Appendix E-5 HCS Freeway Ramp Analysis Worksheets under 2030 With Project Conditions ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: HOV Off-Ramp at Gene Autry Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project Scenario Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 1520 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 110 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent ramp vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp Distance to adjacent ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 1520 110 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 400 29 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 1600 116 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 1600 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 1600 4800 No Fi F v = v - v 1484 4800 No FO F R v 116 2000 No R v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 1600 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 1600 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 13.5 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.438 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 57.7 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 57.7 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: HOV Off-Ramp at Gene Autry Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project Scenario Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 2050 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 160 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent ramp vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp Distance to adjacent ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 2050 160 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 539 42 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 2158 168 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 2158 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 2158 4800 No Fi F v = v - v 1990 4800 No FO F R v 168 2000 No R v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2158 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2158 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 18.3 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.443 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 57.6 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 57.6 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at State College Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5700 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 230 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 1130 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1350 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5700 230 1130 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1500 61 297 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 6270 249 1225 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.187 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 890 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 5015 9600 No FO v v 1938 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 1906 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 1906 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 19.0 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.320 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 61.0 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 66.7 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 64.1 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at State College Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 13060 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 440 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 840 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1350 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 13060 440 840 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 3437 116 221 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 14366 477 911 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.158 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1877 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 12343 9600 Yes FO v v 4994 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4746 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4746 4600 Yes 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 42.9 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, M = 1.009 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 41.7 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 55.9 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 48.9 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Avenue Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project Scenario Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5810 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 2 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1050 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane 500 ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 340 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1970 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5810 1050 340 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1529 276 89 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 6391 1138 369 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.260 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 2255 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 5433 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 4295 9600 No FO F R v 1138 3800 No R v v 1589 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2255 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2255 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 10.1 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.530 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 55.1 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 74.5 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 65.0 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Avenue Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project Scenario Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 12710 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 2 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1740 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane 500 ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 570 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1970 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 12710 1740 570 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 3345 458 150 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 13981 1887 618 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.260 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 4304 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 11185 9600 Yes Fi F v = v - v 9298 9600 No FO F R v 1887 3800 No R v v 3440 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 5785 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 5785 4400 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 40.5 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.598 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 53.3 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 70.2 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 60.3 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Orangwood Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 4860 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 370 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 1050 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1970 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 4860 370 1050 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1279 97 276 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 5346 401 1138 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.168 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 896 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 5747 9600 No FO v v 2225 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2138 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2138 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 21.3 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.328 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 60.8 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 66.0 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.6 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Orangwood Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 11000 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 570 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 1740 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1970 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 11000 570 1740 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2895 150 458 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 12100 618 1887 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.141 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1701 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 12718 9600 Yes FO v v 5199 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4840 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4840 4600 Yes 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 44.0 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, M = 1.194 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 36.6 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 55.5 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 45.4 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5230 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 260 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 340 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1400 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5230 260 340 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1376 68 89 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 5753 282 369 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.183 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1050 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 6035 9600 No FO v v 2351 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2301 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2301 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 22.4 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.338 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 60.5 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 65.6 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.3 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 11540 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 410 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 570 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1400 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 11540 410 570 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 3037 108 150 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 12694 445 618 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.162 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 2059 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 13139 9600 Yes FO v v 5317 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 7294 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 7294 4600 Yes 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 62.5 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, M = 9.241 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = -188.8 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 61.1 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 277.1 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: HOV On-Ramp at Gene Autry Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 2500 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 220 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent Ramp vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp Distance to adjacent Ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 2500 220 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 658 58 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 2632 232 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FM v = v (P ) = 2632 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 2864 4800 No FO v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2632 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2632 4600 No R12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 24.6 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.354 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 60.1 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 60.1 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: HOV On-Ramp at Gene Autry Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 3600 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 930 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent Ramp vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp Distance to adjacent Ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 3600 930 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 947 245 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 3789 979 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FM v = v (P ) = 3789 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 4768 4800 No FO v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3789 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3789 4600 Yes R12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 39.1 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence E Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.745 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 49.1 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 49.1 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Anaheim Boulevard Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5490 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 440 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 260 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1570 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5490 440 260 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1445 116 68 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 6039 477 282 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.158 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 955 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 6516 9600 No FO v v 2542 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2415 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2415 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 24.1 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.349 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 60.2 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 65.3 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 62.9 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Anaheim Boulevard Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 11950 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1290 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 410 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1570 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 11950 1290 410 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 3145 339 108 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 13145 1399 445 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.043 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 564 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 14544 9600 Yes FO v v 6290 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 5258 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 5258 4600 Yes 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 53.0 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, M = 3.314 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = -22.8 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 53.6 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Harbor Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project Scenario Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5780 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 820 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 290 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1330 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5780 820 290 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1521 216 76 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 6358 889 314 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 2858 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 5405 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 4516 9600 No FO F R v 889 2000 No R v v 1273 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2858 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2858 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 24.3 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.508 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 55.8 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 75.7 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.7 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Harbor Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project Scenario Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 11750 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1010 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 740 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1330 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 11750 1010 740 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 3092 266 195 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 12925 1095 802 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 5126 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 10340 9600 Yes Fi F v = v - v 9245 9600 No FO F R v 1095 2000 No R v v 2607 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 5126 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 5126 4400 Yes 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 43.8 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.527 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 55.3 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 70.5 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 62.0 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Harbor Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 4980 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 290 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 820 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1330 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 4980 290 820 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1311 76 216 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 5478 314 889 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.179 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 978 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 5792 9600 No FO v v 2250 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2191 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2191 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 21.1 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.327 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 60.9 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 65.9 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.6 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Harbor Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 10740 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 740 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 1010 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1330 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 10740 740 1010 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2826 195 266 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 11814 802 1095 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.118 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1389 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 12616 9600 Yes FO v v 5212 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4725 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4725 4600 Yes 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 44.5 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, M = 1.259 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 34.7 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 56.0 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 44.2 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Ball Road Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5250 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 450 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 290 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1330 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5250 450 290 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1382 118 76 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 5775 488 314 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.157 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 906 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 6263 9600 No FO v v 2434 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2310 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2310 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 23.3 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.343 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 60.4 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 65.6 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.2 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Ball Road Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 11480 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 670 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 740 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1330 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 11480 670 740 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 3021 176 195 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 12628 726 802 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.127 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1604 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 13354 9600 Yes FO v v 5512 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 5051 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 5051 4600 Yes 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 46.4 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, M = 1.538 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 26.9 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 54.5 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 37.8 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Disneyland Drive Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5700 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 310 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 450 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 2850 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5700 310 450 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1500 82 118 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 6270 336 488 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.176 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1102 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 6606 9600 No FO v v 2584 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2508 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2508 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 24.4 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.353 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 60.1 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 65.0 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 62.8 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Disneyland Drive Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 12150 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 490 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 670 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 2850 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 12150 490 670 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 3197 129 176 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 13365 531 726 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.151 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 2024 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 13896 9600 Yes FO v v 5670 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 7965 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 7965 4600 Yes 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 68.4 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, M = 19.377 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = -472.6 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 61.1 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 197.3 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: HOV On-Ramp at Disneyland Dr Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project Scenario Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 2720 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 360 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent ramp vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp Distance to adjacent ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 2720 360 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 716 95 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 2863 379 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 2863 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 2863 4800 No Fi F v = v - v 2484 4800 No FO F R v 379 2000 No R v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2863 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2863 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 24.4 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.462 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 57.1 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 57.1 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: HOV On-Ramp at Disneyland Dr Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project Scenario Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 2690 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 430 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent ramp vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp Distance to adjacent ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 2690 430 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 708 113 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 2832 453 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 2832 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 2832 4800 No Fi F v = v - v 2379 4800 No FO F R v 453 2000 No R v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2832 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2832 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 24.1 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.469 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.9 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 56.9 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Disneyland Drive Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project Scenario Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7680 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 540 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 720 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 2700 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7680 540 720 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2021 142 189 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 8448 585 781 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3277 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 6759 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 6174 9600 No FO F R v 585 2000 No R v v 1741 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3277 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3277 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 27.9 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.481 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.5 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 73.9 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 64.3 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Disneyland Drive Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project Scenario Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 8550 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 750 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 1030 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 2700 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 8550 750 1030 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2250 197 271 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 9405 813 1117 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3739 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 7524 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 6711 9600 No FO F R v 813 2000 No R v v 1892 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3739 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3739 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 31.9 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.501 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.0 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 73.3 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.5 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: On-Ramp at Disneyland Drive Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7140 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 720 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 700 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1400 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7140 720 700 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1879 189 184 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7854 781 759 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.120 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 944 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 8635 9600 No FO v v 3455 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3141 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3141 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 32.6 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.483 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.5 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 63.1 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 59.9 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: On-Ramp at Disneyland Drive Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7800 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1030 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 700 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1400 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7800 1030 700 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2053 271 184 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 8580 1117 759 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.078 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 671 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 9697 9600 Yes FO v v 3954 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3432 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3432 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 37.3 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.655 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 51.7 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 61.8 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 56.6 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Harbor Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project Scenario Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7870 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 700 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 1260 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1300 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7870 700 1260 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2071 184 332 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 8657 759 1366 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3448 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 6926 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 6167 9600 No FO F R v 759 2000 No R v v 1739 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3448 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3448 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 29.4 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.496 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.1 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 73.9 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.8 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Harbor Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project Scenario Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 8830 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 700 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 1020 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1300 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 8830 700 1020 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2324 184 268 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 9713 759 1106 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3816 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 7771 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 7012 9600 No FO F R v 759 2000 No R v v 1977 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3816 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3816 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 32.6 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.496 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.1 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 73.0 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.6 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: On-Ramp at Harbor Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7170 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1260 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 700 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1300 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7170 1260 700 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1887 332 184 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7887 1366 759 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.047 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 265 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 7006 9600 No FO v v 2687 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2256 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2256 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 29.3 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.425 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 58.1 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 65.7 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.5 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: On-Ramp at Harbor Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 8140 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1020 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 700 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1300 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 8140 1020 700 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2142 268 184 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 8954 1106 759 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.080 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 513 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 7560 9600 No FO v v 2970 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2581 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2581 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 30.0 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.435 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 57.8 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 64.8 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.2 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Disney Way Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project Scenario Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 8430 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 730 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 940 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp Off Distance to adjacent ramp 1130 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 8430 730 940 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2218 192 247 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 9273 791 1019 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3681 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 7419 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 6628 9600 No FO F R v 791 2000 No R v v 1869 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3681 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3681 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 31.4 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.499 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.0 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 73.4 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.6 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Disney Way Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project Scenario Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 9150 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 590 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 410 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp Off Distance to adjacent ramp 1130 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 9150 590 410 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2408 155 108 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 10065 640 445 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3872 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 8052 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 7412 9600 No FO F R v 640 2000 No R v v 2090 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3872 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3872 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 33.1 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.486 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.4 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 72.5 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.8 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project Scenario Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6860 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 2 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 940 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 700 ft Length of second accel/decel lane 700 ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 730 vph Position of adjacent ramp Upstream Type of adjacent ramp Off Distance to adjacent ramp 1130 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6860 940 730 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1805 247 192 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7546 1019 791 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.260 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 2324 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 6037 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 5018 9600 No FO F R v 1019 3800 No R v v 1856 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2414 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2414 4400 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 6.1 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence A Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.520 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 55.4 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 73.6 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 65.1 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: Off-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project Scenario Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7770 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 2 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 410 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 700 ft Length of second accel/decel lane 700 ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 590 vph Position of adjacent ramp Upstream Type of adjacent ramp Off Distance to adjacent ramp 1130 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7770 410 590 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2045 108 155 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 8547 445 640 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.260 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 2107 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 6838 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 6393 9600 No FO F R v 445 3800 No R v v 2365 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2735 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2735 4400 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 8.9 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence A Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.468 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.9 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 72.7 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 65.4 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: HOV Off-Ramp at Gene Autry Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project Scenario Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 2910 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 800 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent ramp vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp Distance to adjacent ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 2910 800 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 766 211 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 3063 842 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 3063 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 3063 4800 No Fi F v = v - v 2221 4800 No FO F R v 842 2000 No R v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3063 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3063 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 26.1 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.504 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 55.9 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 55.9 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: HOV Off-Ramp at Gene Autry Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project Scenario Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 2690 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 450 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent ramp vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp Distance to adjacent ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 2690 450 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 708 118 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 2832 474 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 2832 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 2832 4800 No Fi F v = v - v 2358 4800 No FO F R v 474 2000 No R v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2832 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2832 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 24.1 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.471 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.8 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 56.8 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: On-Ramp at Anaheim Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5990 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 440 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 960 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1520 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5990 440 960 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1576 116 253 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 6589 477 1041 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.158 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1042 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 7066 9600 No FO v v 2773 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2635 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2635 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 25.8 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.367 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 59.7 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 64.7 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 62.4 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: On-Ramp at Anaheim Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7410 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 590 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 810 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1520 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7410 590 810 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1950 155 213 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 8151 640 878 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.138 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1123 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 8791 9600 No FO v v 3514 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3260 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3260 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 31.8 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.472 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 56.8 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 62.6 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 59.9 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: On-Ramp at Katella Avenue Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6420 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 960 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 440 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1520 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6420 960 440 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1689 253 116 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7062 1041 477 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.088 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 619 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 8103 9600 No FO v v 3221 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2824 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2824 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 31.4 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.465 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 57.0 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 64.2 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 60.5 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: On-Ramp at Katella Avenue Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 4 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7970 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 810 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 590 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1260 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7970 810 590 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2097 213 155 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 8767 878 640 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.108 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 947 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 9645 9600 Yes FO v v 3910 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3506 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3506 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 35.5 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.592 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 53.4 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 61.5 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 57.5 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: HOV On-Ramp at Gene Autry Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 2170 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 240 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent Ramp vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp Distance to adjacent Ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 2170 240 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 571 63 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 2284 253 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FM v = v (P ) = 2284 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 2537 4800 No FO v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2284 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2284 4600 No R12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 22.0 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.335 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 60.6 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 60.6 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: HOV On-Ramp at Gene Autry Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project Scenario Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 2370 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 330 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent Ramp vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp Distance to adjacent Ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 2370 330 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 624 87 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 2495 347 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FM v = v (P ) = 2495 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 2842 4800 No FO v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2495 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2495 4600 No R12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 24.3 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.353 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 60.1 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 60.1 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- SCENARIO: With Project Conditions ROUTE: I-5 Northbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2030 ANALYSIS PERIOD: AM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 5,810 6,391 0.95 Max Upstream Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v > Max No 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of Lanes, N 5 1.2 22.5 0.957 Level of Service, LOS C 1.00 Level 6,391 Flow Rate, VF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and Buses Volume, V Terrain Type Density, D Driver Population Factor, fp Recreational Vehicle PCE, ER Heavy Vehicle Adjustment, fHV Flow Rate, Vp FREEWAY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE ANALYSIS WORKSHEET % Recreation Vehicles Trucks and Buses PCE, ET ---PAGE BREAK--- SCENARIO: With Project Conditions ROUTE: I-5 Northbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2030 ANALYSIS PERIOD: PM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 12,710 13,981 0.95 Max Upstream Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v > Max Yes 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of Lanes, N 5 1.2 N/A 0.957 Level of Service, LOS F 1.00 Level 13,981 * N/A: outside the limitation of the formula Recreational Vehicle PCE, ER Heavy Vehicle Adjustment, fHV Terrain Type FREEWAY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and Buses Volume, V Flow Rate, Vp Flow Rate, VF % Recreation Vehicles Trucks and Buses PCE, ET Density, D Driver Population Factor, fp ---PAGE BREAK--- SCENARIO: With Project Conditions ROUTE: I-5 Southbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2030 ANALYSIS PERIOD: AM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 6,860 7,546 0.95 Max Upstream Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v > Max No 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of Lanes, N 5 1.2 26.5 0.957 Level of Service, LOS C 1.00 Level 7,546 Recreational Vehicle PCE, ER Heavy Vehicle Adjustment, fHV Terrain Type FREEWAY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and Buses Volume, V Flow Rate, Vp Flow Rate, VF % Recreation Vehicles Trucks and Buses PCE, ET Density, D Driver Population Factor, fp ---PAGE BREAK--- SCENARIO: With Project Conditions ROUTE: I-5 Southbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2030 ANALYSIS PERIOD: PM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 7,770 8,547 0.95 Max Upstream Flow, VF1 11,750 9 If overcapacity (v > Max No 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of Lanes, N 5 1.2 30.1 0.957 Level of Service, LOS D 1.00 Level 8,547 % Trucks and Buses Volume, V Flow Rate, Vp FREEWAY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Flow Rate, VF % Recreation Vehicles Trucks and Buses PCE, ET Density, D Driver Population Factor, fp Recreational Vehicle PCE, ER Heavy Vehicle Adjustment, fHV Terrain Type Peak Hour Factor, PHF ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No.14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report – Technical Appendices Appendix E-6 HCS Freeway Ramp Analysis Worksheets under 2030 With Project Conditions (Mitigated) ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at State College Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project With Mitigation Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 4750 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 230 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 1350 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1350 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 4750 230 1350 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1250 61 355 v Trucks and buses 7 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.966 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 5175 249 1464 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.187 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 754 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 4286 9600 No FO v v 1641 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 1614 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 1614 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 16.8 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.311 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 61.3 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 67.4 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 64.6 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at State College Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project With Mitigation Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 10880 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 440 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 890 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1350 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 10880 440 890 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2863 116 234 v Trucks and buses 7 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.966 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 11853 477 965 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.158 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1479 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 9830 9600 Yes FO v v 3937 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3741 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3741 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 35.0 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.551 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 54.6 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 60.4 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 57.8 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- SCENARIO: With Project Conditions - With Mitigation ROUTE: I-5 Northbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2030 ANALYSIS PERIOD: AM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 5,810 6,391 0.95 Max Upstream Flow, VF1 14,100 9 If overcapacity (v > Max No 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of Lanes, N 6 1.2 18.7 0.957 Level of Service, LOS B 1.00 Level 6,391 FREEWAY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE ANALYSIS WORKSHEET % Recreation Vehicles Trucks and Buses PCE, ET Flow Rate, VF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and Buses Volume, V Terrain Type Density, D Driver Population Factor, fp Recreational Vehicle PCE, ER Heavy Vehicle Adjustment, fHV Flow Rate, Vp ---PAGE BREAK--- SCENARIO: With Project Conditions - With Mitigation ROUTE: I-5 Northbound RAMP: Off-Ramp to Katella Avenue FORECAST YEAR: 2030 ANALYSIS PERIOD: PM Peak Hour Flow Inputs and Adjustments LOS and Performance Measures 12,710 13,981 0.95 Max Upstream Flow, VF1 14,100 9 If overcapacity (v > Max No 0 Density Factor 0.01758 1.5 Number of Lanes, N 6 1.2 41.0 0.957 Level of Service, LOS E 1.00 Level 13,981 Flow Rate, VF % Recreation Vehicles Trucks and Buses PCE, ET Density, D Driver Population Factor, fp Recreational Vehicle PCE, ER Heavy Vehicle Adjustment, fHV Terrain Type FREEWAY RAMP MAJOR DIVERGE ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and Buses Volume, V Flow Rate, Vp ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Orangwood Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project With Mitigation Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 4860 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 370 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 1050 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1970 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 4860 370 1050 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1279 97 276 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 5346 401 1138 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.168 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 699 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 4571 9600 No FO v v 1735 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 1668 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 1668 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 17.7 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.310 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 61.3 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 67.3 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 64.5 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Orangwood Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project With Mitigation Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 11000 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 570 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 1740 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1970 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 11000 570 1740 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2895 150 458 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 12100 618 1887 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.141 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1349 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 10218 9600 Yes FO v v 4125 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3840 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3840 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 36.8 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.623 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 52.6 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 60.0 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 56.5 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project With Mitigation Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5230 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 260 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 370 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1400 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5230 260 370 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1376 68 97 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 5753 282 401 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.183 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 798 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 4655 9600 No FO v v 1787 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 1749 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 1749 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 18.1 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.316 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 61.2 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 67.1 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 64.4 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Katella Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project With Mitigation Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 11540 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 410 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 570 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1400 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 11540 410 570 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 3037 108 150 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 12694 445 618 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.162 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1653 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 10639 9600 Yes FO v v 4270 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4077 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4077 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 37.4 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.645 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 51.9 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 58.9 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 55.7 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: HOV On-Ramp at Gene Autry Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project With Mitigation Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 1250 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 220 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent Ramp vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp Distance to adjacent Ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 1250 220 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 329 58 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 1316 232 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FM v = v (P ) = 1316 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 1548 4800 No FO v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 1316 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 1316 4600 No R12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 14.3 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.304 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 61.5 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.5 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: HOV On-Ramp at Gene Autry Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project With Mitigation Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 2 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 1800 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 930 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? No Volume on adjacent Ramp vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp Distance to adjacent Ramp ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 1800 930 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 474 245 v Trucks and buses 0 0 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 1.000 1.000 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 1895 979 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 1.000 Using Equation 0 FM v = v (P ) = 1895 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 2874 4800 No FO v v 0 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 1895 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 1895 4600 No R12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 24.3 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.355 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 60.1 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = N/A mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 60.1 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Anaheim Boulevard Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project With Mitigation Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5490 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 440 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 260 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1570 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5490 440 260 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1445 116 68 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 6039 477 282 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.158 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 726 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 5067 9600 No FO v v 1932 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 1836 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 1836 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 19.5 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.318 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 61.1 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 66.8 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 64.1 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Anaheim Boulevard Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project With Mitigation Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 11950 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1290 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 410 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1570 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 11950 1290 410 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 3145 339 108 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 13145 1399 445 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.043 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 457 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 12044 9600 Yes FO v v 5094 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4258 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4258 4600 Yes 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 45.2 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, M = 1.396 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 30.9 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 58.1 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 41.1 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Harbor Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project With Mitigation Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 4820 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 820 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 290 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1330 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 4820 820 290 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1268 216 76 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 5302 889 314 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 2582 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 4772 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 3883 9600 No FO F R v 889 2000 No R v v 1095 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2582 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2582 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 22.0 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.508 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 55.8 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 76.4 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 63.7 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: Off-Ramp at Harbor Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project With Mitigation Type of analysis Diverge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 9790 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-Flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1010 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent ramp 740 vph Position of adjacent ramp Type of adjacent ramp On Distance to adjacent ramp 1330 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 9790 1010 740 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2576 266 195 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % Length 0.00 mi 0.00 mi 0.00 mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 10769 1095 802 pcph of V12 Diverge L = (Equation 25-8 or 25-9) EQ P = 0.436 Using Equation 8 FD v = v + (v - v ) P = 4374 pc/h 12 R F R FD Actual Maximum LOS F? v = v 8616 9600 No Fi F v = v - v 7521 9600 No FO F R v 1095 2000 No R v v 2121 pc/h (Equation 25-15 or 25-16) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 No 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4374 (Equation 25-18) 12A Entering Diverge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4374 4400 No 12 of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 4.252 + 0.0086 v - 0.009 L = 37.4 pc/mi/ln R 12 D Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence E Intermediate speed variable, D = 0.527 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 55.3 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 72.4 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 62.6 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Harbor Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project With Mitigation Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 4980 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 290 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 820 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1330 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 4980 290 820 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1311 76 216 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 5478 314 889 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.179 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 763 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 4587 9600 No FO v v 1755 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 1709 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 1709 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 17.3 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.308 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 61.4 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 67.2 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 64.5 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Harbor Blvd Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project With Mitigation Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 10740 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 740 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 1010 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1330 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 10740 740 1010 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2826 195 266 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 11814 802 1095 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.118 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1095 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 10116 9600 Yes FO v v 4109 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 3725 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 3725 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 36.7 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.640 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 52.1 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 60.5 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 56.4 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Ball Road Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project With Mitigation Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5250 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 450 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 290 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1330 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5250 450 290 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1382 118 76 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 5775 488 314 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.157 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 688 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 4878 9600 No FO v v 1851 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 1756 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 1756 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 19.0 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.316 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 61.2 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 67.1 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 64.2 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Ball Road Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project With Mitigation Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 11480 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 670 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 740 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1330 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 11480 670 740 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 3021 176 195 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 12628 726 802 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.127 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1287 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 10854 9600 Yes FO v v 4420 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4051 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4051 4600 Yes 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 38.6 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.742 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 49.2 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 59.0 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 54.3 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Disneyland Drive Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project With Mitigation Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 5700 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 310 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 450 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 2850 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 5700 310 450 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1500 82 118 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 6270 336 488 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.176 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 838 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 5102 9600 No FO v v 1964 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 1906 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 1906 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 19.7 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence B Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.323 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 61.0 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 66.7 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 64.0 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Junction: On-Ramp at Disneyland Drive Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project With Mitigation Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 12150 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 490 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 670 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 2850 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 12150 490 670 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 3197 129 176 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 13365 531 726 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.151 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 1645 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 11396 9600 Yes FO v v 4610 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 4346 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 4346 4600 Yes 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 40.1 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence F Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.798 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 47.7 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 57.7 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 52.9 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: On-Ramp at Disneyland Drive Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project With Mitigation Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7140 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 720 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 700 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1400 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7140 720 700 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1879 189 184 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7854 781 759 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.120 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 675 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 6397 9600 No FO v v 2470 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2246 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2246 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 25.6 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.366 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 59.7 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 65.7 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 62.8 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/22/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: On-Ramp at Disneyland Drive Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project With Mitigation Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7800 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 1030 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 500 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 700 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Type of adjacent Ramp Off Distance to adjacent Ramp 1400 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7800 1030 700 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2053 271 184 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 8580 1117 759 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.078 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 475 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 7197 9600 No FO v v 2802 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2432 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2432 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 29.5 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence D Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.422 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 58.2 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 65.2 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 61.6 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: On-Ramp at Katella Avenue Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project With Mitigation Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 6420 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 960 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 440 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1260 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 6420 960 440 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1689 253 116 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 7062 1041 477 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.088 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 452 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 6197 9600 No FO v v 2352 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? No 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2062 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2062 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 25.4 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.366 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 59.8 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 66.2 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 62.8 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date performed: 10/29/10 Analysis time period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Junction: On-Ramp at Katella Avenue Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project With Mitigation Type of analysis Merge Number of lanes in freeway 5 Free-flow speed on freeway 70.0 mph Volume on freeway 7970 vph Ramp Side of freeway Right Number of lanes in ramp 1 Free-flow speed on ramp 35.0 mph Volume on ramp 810 vph Length of first accel/decel lane 600 ft Length of second accel/decel lane ft Ramp Data (if one Does adjacent ramp exist? Yes Volume on adjacent Ramp 590 vph Position of adjacent Ramp Upstream Type of adjacent Ramp On Distance to adjacent Ramp 1260 ft to pc/h Under Base Junction Components Freeway Ramp Adjacent Ramp Volume, V (vph) 7970 810 590 vph Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2097 213 155 v Trucks and buses 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 % Terrain type: Level Level Level Grade % % % Length mi mi mi Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population factor, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, vp 8767 878 640 pcph of V12 Merge L = (Equation 25-2 or 25-3) EQ P = 0.108 Using Equation 4 FM v = v (P ) = 677 pc/h 12 F FM Actual Maximum LOS F? v 7145 9600 No FO v v 2795 pc/h (Equation 25-4 or 25-5) 3 or av34 Is v v > 2700 pc/h? Yes 3 or av34 Is v v > 1.5 v /2 Yes 3 or av34 12 If yes, v = 2506 (Equation 25-8) 12A Entering Merge Influence Actual Max Desirable Violation? v 2506 4600 No 12A of Service Determination (if not Density, D = 5.475 + 0.00734 v + 0.0078 v - 0.00627 L = 27.7 pc/mi/ln R R 12 A Level of service for ramp-freeway junction areas of influence C Intermediate speed variable, M = 0.394 S Space mean speed in ramp influence area, S = 59.0 mph R Space mean speed in outer lanes, S = 65.0 mph 0 Space mean speed for all vehicles, S = 62.0 mph ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No.14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report – Technical Appendices Appendix F-1 HCS Freeway Mainline Analysis Worksheets under Existing Conditions ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Northbound SEGMENT: 1 - SR-91 to Brookhurst Street ANALYSIS YEAR: Existing 5,370 7,800 5 5 0.90 0.90 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,247 1,811 66.2 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 62.0 18.8 29.2 C D ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 1 - SR-91 to Brookhurst Street ANALYSIS YEAR: Existing 5,530 7,460 6 6 0.90 0.90 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,070 1,444 52.4 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 66.0 20.4 21.9 C C ROUTE: I-5 Northbound SEGMENT: 2 - Brookhurst Street to Euclid Street ANALYSIS YEAR: Existing Volume, V (veh/hr) 5,630 8,560 Number of mainline lanes, N 5 5 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 % Trucks and buses 9 9 % RVs 0 0 Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 Driver population factor, fp 1.00 1.00 Terrain type Level Level 1,307 1,988 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 63.5 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 63.0 Density, D (pc/mi/ln) 20.6 31.6 Level of Service C D % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN TRAFFIC STUDY AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Level of Service Level of Service Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Level of Service Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % RVs AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\Anaheim Resort SEIR\FwyAnalysis\Oct 2010\Existing-y08\Mainline\ARSP-Existing- FwyMainline LOS Worksheet-102110.xls 11/15/2010 ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 2 - Brookhurst Street to Euclid Street ANALYSIS YEAR: Existing 6,120 7,890 5 5 0.90 0.90 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,421 1,832 56.4 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 68.7 25.2 26.7 C D ROUTE: I-5 Northbound SEGMENT: 3 - Euclid Street to Lincoln Avenue ANALYSIS YEAR: Existing 5,630 8,890 5 5 0.90 0.9 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,307 2,064 68.3 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 64.0 19.1 32.2 C D ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 3 - Euclid Street to Lincoln Avenue ANALYSIS YEAR: Existing Volume, V (veh/hr) 6,370 7,910 Number of mainline lanes, N 4 4 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.9 % Trucks and buses 9 9 % RVs 0 0 Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 Driver population factor, fp 1.00 1.00 Terrain type Level Level 1,849 2,296 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 56.3 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 67.3 Density, D (pc/mi/ln) 32.9 34.1 Level of Service D D Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Level of Service Level of Service AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Level of Service Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN TRAFFIC STUDY AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\Anaheim Resort SEIR\FwyAnalysis\Oct 2010\Existing-y08\Mainline\ARSP-Existing- FwyMainline LOS Worksheet-102110.xls 11/15/2010 ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Northbound SEGMENT: 4- Lincoln Avenue to Harbor Boulevard ANALYSIS YEAR: Existing 5,780 9,200 5 5 0.90 0.9 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,342 2,136 68.5 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 58.3 19.6 36.6 C E ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 4- Lincoln Avenue to Harbor Boulevard ANALYSIS YEAR: Existing 6,420 7,880 5 5 0.90 0.9 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,491 1,830 60.4 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 67.7 24.7 27.0 C D ROUTE: I-5 Northbound SEGMENT: 5 - Harbor Boulevard to Katella Avenue ANALYSIS YEAR: Existing Volume, V (veh/hr) 5,160 8,120 Number of mainline lanes, N 5 5 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.9 % Trucks and buses 9 9 % RVs 0 0 Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 Driver population factor, fp 1.00 1.00 Terrain type Level Level 1,198 1,886 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 71.5 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 54.6 Density, D (pc/mi/ln) 16.8 34.5 Level of Service B D Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Level of Service Level of Service AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Level of Service Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN TRAFFIC STUDY AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\Anaheim Resort SEIR\FwyAnalysis\Oct 2010\Existing-y08\Mainline\ARSP-Existing- FwyMainline LOS Worksheet-102110.xls 11/15/2010 ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 5 - Harbor Boulevard to Katella Avenue ANALYSIS YEAR: Existing 5,590 6,930 5 5 0.90 0.9 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,298 1,609 59.0 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 64.6 22.0 24.9 C C ROUTE: I-5 Northbound SEGMENT: 6 - Katella Avenue to State College Boulevard ANALYSIS YEAR: Existing 5,190 8,030 5 5 0.90 0.9 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,205 1,865 68.9 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 46.9 17.5 39.7 B E ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 6 - Katella Avenue to State College Boulevard ANALYSIS YEAR: Existing Volume, V (veh/hr) 6,060 7,720 Number of mainline lanes, N 5 5 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.9 % Trucks and buses 9 9 % RVs 0 0 Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 Driver population factor, fp 1.00 1.00 Terrain type Level Level 1,407 1,793 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 55.2 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 66.3 Density, D (pc/mi/ln) 25.5 27.0 Level of Service C D Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Level of Service Level of Service AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Level of Service Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN TRAFFIC STUDY AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\Anaheim Resort SEIR\FwyAnalysis\Oct 2010\Existing-y08\Mainline\ARSP-Existing- FwyMainline LOS Worksheet-102110.xls 11/15/2010 ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Northbound SEGMENT: 7 - State College Boulevard to SR-22 ANALYSIS YEAR: Existing 6,100 9,400 6 6 0.90 0.9 7 7 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.966 0.966 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,169 1,802 72.0 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 52.9 16.2 34.0 B D ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 7 - State College Boulevard to SR-22 ANALYSIS YEAR: Existing 7,000 8,940 6 6 0.90 0.9 7 7 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.966 0.966 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,342 1,714 50.6 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 69.0 26.5 24.8 D C Level of Service Level of Service Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Level of Service Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN TRAFFIC STUDY AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\Anaheim Resort SEIR\FwyAnalysis\Oct 2010\Existing-y08\Mainline\ARSP-Existing- FwyMainline LOS Worksheet-102110.xls 11/15/2010 ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No.14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report – Technical Appendices Appendix F-2 HCS Freeway Mainline Analysis Worksheets under 2015 No Project Conditions ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Northbound SEGMENT: 1 - SR-91 to Brookhurst Street ANALYSIS YEAR: 2015 No Project 5,580 8,400 5 5 0.95 0.95 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,228 1,848 65.0 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 70 18.9 26.4 C D ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 1 - SR-91 to Brookhurst Street ANALYSIS YEAR: 2015 No Project 7,480 7,640 6 6 0.95 0.95 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,371 1,401 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 21.1 21.5 C C ROUTE: I-5 Northbound SEGMENT: 2 - Brookhurst Street to Euclid Street ANALYSIS YEAR: 2015 No Project Volume, V (veh/hr) 5,840 8,940 Number of mainline lanes, N 5 5 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 % Trucks and buses 9 9 % RVs 0 0 Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 Driver population factor, fp 1.00 1.00 Terrain type Level Level 1,285 1,967 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Density, D (pc/mi/ln) 19.8 30.3 Level of Service C D Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN TRAFFIC STUDY AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Level of Service Level of Service Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Level of Service Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % RVs Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\Anaheim Resort SEIR\FwyAnalysis\Oct 2010\NoProject-y15\Mainline\ARSP-y15-NoProj- FwyMainline LOS Worksheet-102110.xlsx 11/15/2010 ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 2 - Brookhurst Street to Euclid Street ANALYSIS YEAR: 2015 No Project 7,480 8,190 5 5 0.95 0.95 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,646 1,802 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 25.3 27.7 C D ROUTE: I-5 Northbound SEGMENT: 3 - Euclid Street to Lincoln Avenue ANALYSIS YEAR: 2015 No Project 5,840 9,330 5 5 0.95 0.95 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,285 2,053 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 19.8 31.6 C D ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 3 - Euclid Street to Lincoln Avenue ANALYSIS YEAR: 2015 No Project Volume, V (veh/hr) 7,890 8,210 Number of mainline lanes, N 4 4 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 % Trucks and buses 9 9 % RVs 0 0 Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 Driver population factor, fp 1.00 1.00 Terrain type Level Level 2,170 2,258 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Density, D (pc/mi/ln) 33.4 34.7 Level of Service D D Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Level of Service Level of Service AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Level of Service Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN TRAFFIC STUDY AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\Anaheim Resort SEIR\FwyAnalysis\Oct 2010\NoProject-y15\Mainline\ARSP-y15-NoProj- FwyMainline LOS Worksheet-102110.xlsx 11/15/2010 ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Northbound SEGMENT: 4- Lincoln Avenue to Harbor Boulevard ANALYSIS YEAR: 2015 No Project 6,000 10,750 5 5 0.95 0.95 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,320 2,365 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 20.3 36.4 C E ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 4- Lincoln Avenue to Harbor Boulevard ANALYSIS YEAR: 2015 No Project 6,880 7,930 5 5 0.95 0.95 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,514 1,745 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 23.3 26.8 C D ROUTE: I-5 Northbound SEGMENT: 5 - Harbor Boulevard to Katella Avenue ANALYSIS YEAR: 2015 No Project Volume, V (veh/hr) 5,360 10,190 Number of mainline lanes, N 5 5 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 % Trucks and buses 9 9 % RVs 0 0 Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 Driver population factor, fp 1.00 1.00 Terrain type Level Level 1,179 2,242 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Density, D (pc/mi/ln) 18.1 34.5 Level of Service C D Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Level of Service Level of Service AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Level of Service Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN TRAFFIC STUDY AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\Anaheim Resort SEIR\FwyAnalysis\Oct 2010\NoProject-y15\Mainline\ARSP-y15-NoProj- FwyMainline LOS Worksheet-102110.xlsx 11/15/2010 ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 5 - Harbor Boulevard to Katella Avenue ANALYSIS YEAR: 2015 No Project 6,380 7,190 5 5 0.95 0.95 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,404 1,582 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 21.6 24.3 C C ROUTE: I-5 Northbound SEGMENT: 6 - Katella Avenue to State College Boulevard ANALYSIS YEAR: 2015 No Project 5,390 11,480 5 5 0.95 0.95 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,186 2,526 65.0 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 18.2 38.9 C E ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 6 - Katella Avenue to State College Boulevard ANALYSIS YEAR: 2015 No Project Volume, V (veh/hr) 7,290 8,010 Number of mainline lanes, N 5 5 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 % Trucks and buses 9 9 % RVs 0 0 Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 Driver population factor, fp 1.00 1.00 Terrain type Level Level 1,604 1,762 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Density, D (pc/mi/ln) 24.7 27.1 Level of Service C D Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Level of Service Level of Service AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Level of Service Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN TRAFFIC STUDY AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\Anaheim Resort SEIR\FwyAnalysis\Oct 2010\NoProject-y15\Mainline\ARSP-y15-NoProj- FwyMainline LOS Worksheet-102110.xlsx 11/15/2010 ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Northbound SEGMENT: 7 - State College Boulevard to SR-22 ANALYSIS YEAR: 2015 No Project 6,330 12,170 6 6 0.95 0.95 7 7 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.966 0.966 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,149 2,210 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 17.7 34.0 B D ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 7 - State College Boulevard to SR-22 ANALYSIS YEAR: 2015 No Project 9,420 9,120 6 6 0.95 0.95 7 7 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.966 0.966 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,710 1,656 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 26.3 25.5 D C Level of Service Level of Service Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Level of Service Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN TRAFFIC STUDY AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\Anaheim Resort SEIR\FwyAnalysis\Oct 2010\NoProject-y15\Mainline\ARSP-y15-NoProj- FwyMainline LOS Worksheet-102110.xlsx 11/15/2010 ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No.14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report – Technical Appendices Appendix F-3 HCS Freeway Mainline Analysis Worksheets under 2015 With Project Conditions ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Northbound SEGMENT: 1 - SR-91 to Brookhurst Street ANALYSIS YEAR: 2015 With Project 5,620 8,400 5 5 0.95 0.95 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,236 1,848 65.0 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 70 19.0 26.4 C D ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 1 - SR-91 to Brookhurst Street ANALYSIS YEAR: 2015 With Project 7,480 7,730 6 6 0.95 0.95 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,371 1,417 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 21.1 21.8 C C ROUTE: I-5 Northbound SEGMENT: 2 - Brookhurst Street to Euclid Street ANALYSIS YEAR: 2015 With Project Volume, V (veh/hr) 5,880 8,940 Number of mainline lanes, N 5 5 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 % Trucks and buses 9 9 % RVs 0 0 Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 Driver population factor, fp 1.00 1.00 Terrain type Level Level 1,294 1,967 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Density, D (pc/mi/ln) 19.9 30.3 Level of Service C D Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN TRAFFIC STUDY AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Level of Service Level of Service Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Level of Service Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % RVs Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\Anaheim Resort SEIR\FwyAnalysis\Oct 2010\wProject-y15\Mainline\ARSP-y15-wProj- FwyMainline LOS Worksheet-102110.xlsx 11/15/2010 ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 2 - Brookhurst Street to Euclid Street ANALYSIS YEAR: 2015 With Project 7,480 8,280 5 5 0.95 0.95 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,646 1,822 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 25.3 28.0 C D ROUTE: I-5 Northbound SEGMENT: 3 - Euclid Street to Lincoln Avenue ANALYSIS YEAR: 2015 With Project 5,880 9,330 5 5 0.95 0.95 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,294 2,053 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 19.9 31.6 C D ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 3 - Euclid Street to Lincoln Avenue ANALYSIS YEAR: 2015 With Project Volume, V (veh/hr) 7,890 8,300 Number of mainline lanes, N 4 4 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 % Trucks and buses 9 9 % RVs 0 0 Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 Driver population factor, fp 1.00 1.00 Terrain type Level Level 2,170 2,283 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Density, D (pc/mi/ln) 33.4 35.1 Level of Service D E Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Level of Service Level of Service AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Level of Service Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN TRAFFIC STUDY AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\Anaheim Resort SEIR\FwyAnalysis\Oct 2010\wProject-y15\Mainline\ARSP-y15-wProj- FwyMainline LOS Worksheet-102110.xlsx 11/15/2010 ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Northbound SEGMENT: 4- Lincoln Avenue to Harbor Boulevard ANALYSIS YEAR: 2015 With Project 6,040 10,750 5 5 0.95 0.95 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,329 2,365 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 20.4 36.4 C E ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 4- Lincoln Avenue to Harbor Boulevard ANALYSIS YEAR: 2015 With Project 6,890 7,980 5 5 0.95 0.95 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,516 1,756 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 23.3 27.0 C D ROUTE: I-5 Northbound SEGMENT: 5 - Harbor Boulevard to Katella Avenue ANALYSIS YEAR: 2015 With Project Volume, V (veh/hr) 5,360 10,190 Number of mainline lanes, N 5 5 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 % Trucks and buses 9 9 % RVs 0 0 Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 Driver population factor, fp 1.00 1.00 Terrain type Level Level 1,179 2,242 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Density, D (pc/mi/ln) 18.1 34.5 Level of Service C D Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Level of Service Level of Service AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Level of Service Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN TRAFFIC STUDY AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\Anaheim Resort SEIR\FwyAnalysis\Oct 2010\wProject-y15\Mainline\ARSP-y15-wProj- FwyMainline LOS Worksheet-102110.xlsx 11/15/2010 ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 5 - Harbor Boulevard to Katella Avenue ANALYSIS YEAR: 2015 With Project 6,380 7,190 5 5 0.95 0.95 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,404 1,582 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 21.6 24.3 C C ROUTE: I-5 Northbound SEGMENT: 6 - Katella Avenue to State College Boulevard ANALYSIS YEAR: 2015 With Project 5,460 11,480 5 5 0.95 0.95 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,201 2,526 65.0 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 18.5 38.9 C E ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 6 - Katella Avenue to State College Boulevard ANALYSIS YEAR: 2015 With Project Volume, V (veh/hr) 7,290 8,080 Number of mainline lanes, N 5 5 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 % Trucks and buses 9 9 % RVs 0 0 Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 Driver population factor, fp 1.00 1.00 Terrain type Level Level 1,604 1,778 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Density, D (pc/mi/ln) 24.7 27.3 Level of Service C D Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Level of Service Level of Service AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Level of Service Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN TRAFFIC STUDY AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\Anaheim Resort SEIR\FwyAnalysis\Oct 2010\wProject-y15\Mainline\ARSP-y15-wProj- FwyMainline LOS Worksheet-102110.xlsx 11/15/2010 ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Northbound SEGMENT: 7 - State College Boulevard to SR-22 ANALYSIS YEAR: 2015 With Project 6,410 12,170 6 6 0.95 0.95 7 7 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.966 0.966 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,164 2,210 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 17.9 34.0 B D ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 7 - State College Boulevard to SR-22 ANALYSIS YEAR: 2015 With Project 9,420 9,200 6 6 0.95 0.95 7 7 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.966 0.966 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,710 1,671 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 26.3 25.7 D C Level of Service Level of Service Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Level of Service Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN TRAFFIC STUDY AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\Anaheim Resort SEIR\FwyAnalysis\Oct 2010\wProject-y15\Mainline\ARSP-y15-wProj- FwyMainline LOS Worksheet-102110.xlsx 11/15/2010 ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No.14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report – Technical Appendices Appendix F-4 HCS Freeway Mainline Analysis Worksheets under 2030 No Project Conditions ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Northbound SEGMENT: 1 - SR-91 to Brookhurst Street ANALYSIS YEAR: 2030 6,020 9,670 5 5 0.95 0.95 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,324 2,127 65.0 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 70 20.4 30.4 C D ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 1 - SR-91 to Brookhurst Street ANALYSIS YEAR: 2030 8,810 8,010 6 6 0.95 0.95 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,615 1,469 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 24.8 22.6 C C ROUTE: I-5 Northbound SEGMENT: 2 - Brookhurst Street to Euclid Street ANALYSIS YEAR: 2030 Volume, V (veh/hr) 6,300 9,760 Number of mainline lanes, N 5 5 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 % Trucks and buses 9 9 % RVs 0 0 Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 Driver population factor, fp 1.00 1.00 Terrain type Level Level 1,386 2,147 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Density, D (pc/mi/ln) 21.3 33.0 Level of Service C D Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % RVs AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Level of Service Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N Terrain type Terrain type Level of Service Level of Service Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN TRAFFIC STUDY AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\Anaheim Resort SEIR\FwyAnalysis\Oct 2010\NoProject-y30\Mainline\ARSP-y30-NoProj- FwyMainline LOS Worksheet-102110.xlsx 11/15/2010 ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 2 - Brookhurst Street to Euclid Street ANALYSIS YEAR: 2030 8,400 8,840 5 5 0.95 0.95 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,848 1,945 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 28.4 29.9 D D ROUTE: I-5 Northbound SEGMENT: 3 - Euclid Street to Lincoln Avenue ANALYSIS YEAR: 2030 6,300 10,280 5 5 0.95 0.95 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,386 2,262 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 21.3 34.8 C D ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 3 - Euclid Street to Lincoln Avenue ANALYSIS YEAR: 2030 Volume, V (veh/hr) 9,020 8,860 Number of mainline lanes, N 4 4 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 % Trucks and buses 9 9 % RVs 0 0 Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 Driver population factor, fp 1.00 1.00 Terrain type Level Level 2,481 2,437 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Density, D (pc/mi/ln) 38.2 37.5 Level of Service E E Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN TRAFFIC STUDY AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Level of Service Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Level of Service Level of Service AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\Anaheim Resort SEIR\FwyAnalysis\Oct 2010\NoProject-y30\Mainline\ARSP-y30-NoProj- FwyMainline LOS Worksheet-102110.xlsx 11/15/2010 ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Northbound SEGMENT: 4- Lincoln Avenue to Harbor Boulevard ANALYSIS YEAR: 2030 6,470 11,810 5 5 0.95 0.95 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,423 2,598 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 21.9 40.0 C E ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 4- Lincoln Avenue to Harbor Boulevard ANALYSIS YEAR: 2030 7,860 8,040 5 5 0.95 0.95 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,729 1,769 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 26.6 27.2 D D ROUTE: I-5 Northbound SEGMENT: 5 - Harbor Boulevard to Katella Avenue ANALYSIS YEAR: 2030 Volume, V (veh/hr) 5,780 11,330 Number of mainline lanes, N 5 5 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 % Trucks and buses 9 9 % RVs 0 0 Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 Driver population factor, fp 1.00 1.00 Terrain type Level Level 1,272 2,493 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Density, D (pc/mi/ln) 19.6 38.3 Level of Service C E Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN TRAFFIC STUDY AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Level of Service Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Level of Service Level of Service AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\Anaheim Resort SEIR\FwyAnalysis\Oct 2010\NoProject-y30\Mainline\ARSP-y30-NoProj- FwyMainline LOS Worksheet-102110.xlsx 11/15/2010 ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 5 - Harbor Boulevard to Katella Avenue ANALYSIS YEAR: 2030 6,860 7,770 5 5 0.95 0.95 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,509 1,709 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 23.2 26.3 C D ROUTE: I-5 Northbound SEGMENT: 6 - Katella Avenue to State College Boulevard ANALYSIS YEAR: 2030 5,810 12,250 5 5 0.95 0.95 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,278 2,695 65.0 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 19.7 41.5 C E ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 6 - Katella Avenue to State College Boulevard ANALYSIS YEAR: 2030 Volume, V (veh/hr) 7,620 8,640 Number of mainline lanes, N 5 5 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 % Trucks and buses 9 9 % RVs 0 0 Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 Driver population factor, fp 1.00 1.00 Terrain type Level Level 1,676 1,901 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Density, D (pc/mi/ln) 25.8 29.2 Level of Service C D Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN TRAFFIC STUDY AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Level of Service Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Level of Service Level of Service AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\Anaheim Resort SEIR\FwyAnalysis\Oct 2010\NoProject-y30\Mainline\ARSP-y30-NoProj- FwyMainline LOS Worksheet-102110.xlsx 11/15/2010 ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Northbound SEGMENT: 7 - State College Boulevard to SR-22 ANALYSIS YEAR: 2030 6,830 13,510 6 6 0.95 0.95 7 7 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.966 0.966 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,240 2,453 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 19.1 37.7 C E ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 7 - State College Boulevard to SR-22 ANALYSIS YEAR: 2030 10,330 9,520 6 6 0.95 0.95 7 7 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.966 0.966 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,876 1,729 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 28.9 26.6 D D Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN TRAFFIC STUDY AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Level of Service Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Level of Service Level of Service Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\Anaheim Resort SEIR\FwyAnalysis\Oct 2010\NoProject-y30\Mainline\ARSP-y30-NoProj- FwyMainline LOS Worksheet-102110.xlsx 11/15/2010 ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No.14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report – Technical Appendices Appendix F-5 HCS Freeway Mainline Analysis Worksheets under 2030 With Project Conditions ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Northbound SEGMENT: 1 - SR-91 to Brookhurst Street ANALYSIS YEAR: 2030 With Project 6,020 10,040 5 5 0.95 0.95 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,324 2,209 65.0 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 70 20.4 31.6 C D ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 1 - SR-91 to Brookhurst Street ANALYSIS YEAR: 2030 With Project 8,940 8,010 6 6 0.95 0.95 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,639 1,469 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 25.2 22.6 C C ROUTE: I-5 Northbound SEGMENT: 2 - Brookhurst Street to Euclid Street ANALYSIS YEAR: 2030 With Project Volume, V (veh/hr) 6,300 10,420 Number of mainline lanes, N 5 5 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 % Trucks and buses 9 9 % RVs 0 0 Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 Driver population factor, fp 1.00 1.00 Terrain type Level Level 1,386 2,292 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Density, D (pc/mi/ln) 21.3 35.3 Level of Service C E Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN TRAFFIC STUDY AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Level of Service Level of Service Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Level of Service Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % RVs Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\Anaheim Resort SEIR\FwyAnalysis\Oct 2010\wProject-y30\Mainline\ARSP-y30-wProj- FwyMainline LOS Worksheet-102110.xlsx 11/15/2010 ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 2 - Brookhurst Street to Euclid Street ANALYSIS YEAR: 2030 With Project 8,470 8,840 5 5 0.95 0.95 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,863 1,945 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 28.7 29.9 D D ROUTE: I-5 Northbound SEGMENT: 3 - Euclid Street to Lincoln Avenue ANALYSIS YEAR: 2030 With Project 6,300 10,830 5 5 0.95 0.95 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,386 2,383 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 21.3 36.7 C E ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 3 - Euclid Street to Lincoln Avenue ANALYSIS YEAR: 2030 With Project Volume, V (veh/hr) 9,050 8,860 Number of mainline lanes, N 4 4 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 % Trucks and buses 9 9 % RVs 0 0 Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 Driver population factor, fp 1.00 1.00 Terrain type Level Level 2,489 2,437 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Density, D (pc/mi/ln) 38.3 37.5 Level of Service E E Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Level of Service Level of Service AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Level of Service Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN TRAFFIC STUDY AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\Anaheim Resort SEIR\FwyAnalysis\Oct 2010\wProject-y30\Mainline\ARSP-y30-wProj- FwyMainline LOS Worksheet-102110.xlsx 11/15/2010 ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Northbound SEGMENT: 4- Lincoln Avenue to Harbor Boulevard ANALYSIS YEAR: 2030 With Project 6,470 12,350 5 5 0.95 0.95 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,423 2,717 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 21.9 41.8 C E ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 4- Lincoln Avenue to Harbor Boulevard ANALYSIS YEAR: 2030 With Project 7,860 8,830 5 5 0.95 0.95 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,729 1,943 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 26.6 29.9 D D ROUTE: I-5 Northbound SEGMENT: 5 - Harbor Boulevard to Katella Avenue ANALYSIS YEAR: 2030 With Project Volume, V (veh/hr) 5,780 11,750 Number of mainline lanes, N 5 5 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 % Trucks and buses 9 9 % RVs 0 0 Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 Driver population factor, fp 1.00 1.00 Terrain type Level Level 1,272 2,585 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Density, D (pc/mi/ln) 19.6 39.8 Level of Service C E Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Level of Service Level of Service AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Level of Service Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN TRAFFIC STUDY AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\Anaheim Resort SEIR\FwyAnalysis\Oct 2010\wProject-y30\Mainline\ARSP-y30-wProj- FwyMainline LOS Worksheet-102110.xlsx 11/15/2010 ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 5 - Harbor Boulevard to Katella Avenue ANALYSIS YEAR: 2030 With Project 6,860 7,760 5 5 0.95 0.95 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,509 1,707 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 23.2 26.3 C D ROUTE: I-5 Northbound SEGMENT: 6 - Katella Avenue to State College Boulevard ANALYSIS YEAR: 2030 With Project 5,810 12,710 5 5 0.95 0.95 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,278 2,796 65.0 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 19.7 43.0 C E ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 6 - Katella Avenue to State College Boulevard ANALYSIS YEAR: 2030 With Project Volume, V (veh/hr) 7,620 8,640 Number of mainline lanes, N 5 5 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 % Trucks and buses 9 9 % RVs 0 0 Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 Driver population factor, fp 1.00 1.00 Terrain type Level Level 1,676 1,901 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Density, D (pc/mi/ln) 25.8 29.2 Level of Service C D Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Level of Service Level of Service AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Level of Service Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN TRAFFIC STUDY AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\Anaheim Resort SEIR\FwyAnalysis\Oct 2010\wProject-y30\Mainline\ARSP-y30-wProj- FwyMainline LOS Worksheet-102110.xlsx 11/15/2010 ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Northbound SEGMENT: 7 - State College Boulevard to SR-22 ANALYSIS YEAR: 2030 With Project 6,830 13,950 6 6 0.95 0.95 7 7 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.966 0.966 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,240 2,533 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 19.1 39.0 C E ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 7 - State College Boulevard to SR-22 ANALYSIS YEAR: 2030 With Project 10,330 10,010 6 6 0.95 0.95 7 7 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.966 0.966 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,876 1,818 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 28.9 28.0 D D Level of Service Level of Service Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Level of Service Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN TRAFFIC STUDY AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\Anaheim Resort SEIR\FwyAnalysis\Oct 2010\wProject-y30\Mainline\ARSP-y30-wProj- FwyMainline LOS Worksheet-102110.xlsx 11/15/2010 ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No.14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report – Technical Appendices Appendix F-6 HCS Freeway Mainline Analysis Worksheets under 2030 With Project Conditions (Mitigated) ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Northbound SEGMENT: 2 - Brookhurst Street to Euclid Street ANALYSIS YEAR: 2030 With Project - With Mitigation Volume, V (veh/hr) 6,300 10,420 Number of mainline lanes, N 6 6 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 % Trucks and buses 9 9 % RVs 0 0 Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 Driver population factor, fp 1.00 1.00 Terrain type Level Level 1,155 1,910 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Density, D (pc/mi/ln) 17.8 29.4 Level of Service B D Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % RVs AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\Anaheim Resort SEIR\FwyAnalysis\Oct 2010\wProject-y30\Mainline\ARSP-y30-wProj- FwyMainline LOS Worksheet-Mitigation-102510.xlsx 12/31/2010 ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Northbound SEGMENT: 3 - Euclid Street to Lincoln Avenue ANALYSIS YEAR: 2030 With Project - With Mitigation 6,300 10,830 6 6 0.95 0.95 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,155 1,986 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 17.8 30.5 B D AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Level of Service Level of Service V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\Anaheim Resort SEIR\FwyAnalysis\Oct 2010\wProject-y30\Mainline\ARSP-y30-wProj- FwyMainline LOS Worksheet-Mitigation-102510.xlsx 12/31/2010 ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Northbound SEGMENT: 4- Lincoln Avenue to Harbor Boulevard ANALYSIS YEAR: 2030 With Project - With Mitigation 6,470 12,350 6 6 0.95 0.95 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,186 2,264 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 18.2 34.8 C D Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN TRAFFIC STUDY AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Level of Service V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\Anaheim Resort SEIR\FwyAnalysis\Oct 2010\wProject-y30\Mainline\ARSP-y30-wProj- FwyMainline LOS Worksheet-Mitigation-102510.xlsx 12/31/2010 ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Northbound SEGMENT: 5 - Harbor Boulevard to Katella Avenue ANALYSIS YEAR: 2030 With Project - With Mitigation Volume, V (veh/hr) 5,780 11,750 Number of mainline lanes, N 6 6 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 % Trucks and buses 9 9 % RVs 0 0 Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 Driver population factor, fp 1.00 1.00 Terrain type Level Level 1,060 2,154 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Density, D (pc/mi/ln) 16.3 33.1 Level of Service B D Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\Anaheim Resort SEIR\FwyAnalysis\Oct 2010\wProject-y30\Mainline\ARSP-y30-wProj- FwyMainline LOS Worksheet-Mitigation-102510.xlsx 12/31/2010 ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Northbound SEGMENT: 6 - Katella Avenue to State College Boulevard ANALYSIS YEAR: 2030 With Project - With Mitigation 5,810 12,710 6 6 0.95 0.95 9 9 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.957 0.957 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,065 2,330 65.0 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 16.4 35.8 B E AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Level of Service Level of Service V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\Anaheim Resort SEIR\FwyAnalysis\Oct 2010\wProject-y30\Mainline\ARSP-y30-wProj- FwyMainline LOS Worksheet-Mitigation-102510.xlsx 12/31/2010 ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Northbound SEGMENT: 7 - State College Boulevard to SR-22 ANALYSIS YEAR: 2030 With Project - With Mitigation 6,830 13,950 7 7 0.95 0.95 7 7 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.966 0.966 1.00 1.00 Level Level 1,063 2,171 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 16.4 33.4 B D Number of mainline lanes, N Number of mainline lanes, N AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Volume, V (veh/hr) Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Trucks and buses % RVs % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV Driver population factor, fp Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Level of Service V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\Anaheim Resort SEIR\FwyAnalysis\Oct 2010\wProject-y30\Mainline\ARSP-y30-wProj- FwyMainline LOS Worksheet-Mitigation-102510.xlsx 12/31/2010 ---PAGE BREAK--- ROUTE: I-5 Southbound SEGMENT: 3 - Euclid Street to Lincoln Avenue ANALYSIS YEAR: 2030 With Project - With Mitigation Volume, V (veh/hr) 9,050 8,860 Number of mainline lanes, N 5 5 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 % Trucks and buses 9 9 % RVs 0 0 Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 Driver population factor, fp 1.00 1.00 Terrain type Level Level 1,991 1,949 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Average passenger-car speed (mi/h) 65 Density, D (pc/mi/ln) 30.6 30.0 Level of Service D D Driver population factor, fp Terrain type Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) Density, D (pc/mi/ln) Level of Service Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Volume, V (veh/hr) Number of mainline lanes, N Peak Hour Factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % RVs Trucks and buses PCE, ET Recreational vehicle PCE, ER Flow rate, VF (pc/h/ln) V:\11944-AnaheimPlanningServices\Anaheim Resort SEIR\FwyAnalysis\Oct 2010\wProject-y30\Mainline\ARSP-y30-wProj- FwyMainline LOS Worksheet-Mitigation-102510.xlsx 12/31/2010 ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No.14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report – Technical Appendices Appendix G-1 HCS Freeway Weaving Analysis Worksheets under Existing Conditions ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/29/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: Lincoln On to Euclid Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 68 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 2000 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.11 Weaving ratio, R 0.33 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 4980 10 430 210 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1383 3 119 58 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 5782 11 492 240 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.34 0.11 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 58.19 67.23 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.59 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 66.08 mph Weaving segment density, D 19.75 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 11825 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11316 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10184 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 732 4000 a Average flow rate 1305 2380 b Volume ratio, VR 0.11 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.33 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2000 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/29/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: Lincoln On to Euclid Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 64 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 2000 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.10 Weaving ratio, R 0.33 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 7990 20 590 290 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2219 6 164 81 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 9277 23 675 331 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.46 0.16 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 52.02 61.50 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.50 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 60.43 mph Weaving segment density, D 34.11 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS D Capacity of base condition, cb 11700 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11196 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10076 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1006 4000 a Average flow rate 2061 2340 b Volume ratio, VR 0.10 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.33 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2000 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/29/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: Disneyland On to Lincoln Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 69 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1680 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.12 Weaving ratio, R 0.39 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5070 10 430 270 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1408 3 119 75 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 5886 11 492 309 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.39 0.13 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 57.55 67.27 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.67 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 65.94 mph Weaving segment density, D 20.32 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 11835 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11325 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10192 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 801 4000 a Average flow rate 1339 2390 b Volume ratio, VR 0.12 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.39 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1680 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/29/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: Disneyland On to Lincoln Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 58 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1680 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.10 Weaving ratio, R 0.38 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 8210 20 600 370 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2281 6 167 103 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 9532 23 686 423 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.52 0.19 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 46.60 55.39 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.70 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 54.32 mph Weaving segment density, D 39.26 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS E Capacity of base condition, cb 11327 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10839 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9755 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1109 4000 a Average flow rate 2132 2280 b Volume ratio, VR 0.10 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.38 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1680 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/29/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: Disneyland On to Harbor Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 60 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1520 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.17 Weaving ratio, R 0.45 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5260 30 620 510 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1461 8 172 142 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6107 34 709 583 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 1.69 0.21 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 33.56 56.41 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.44 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 50.44 mph Weaving segment density, D 29.47 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 10016 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 9585 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 8626 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1292 2800 a Average flow rate 1486 2300 b Volume ratio, VR 0.17 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.45 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1520 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/29/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: Disneyland On to Harbor Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 68 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1520 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.18 Weaving ratio, R 0.41 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 6390 50 850 590 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1775 14 236 164 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 7419 58 972 675 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 2.09 0.28 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 33.76 60.42 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.45 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 52.88 mph Weaving segment density, D 34.51 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS D Capacity of base condition, cb 10763 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10300 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9270 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1647 2800 a Average flow rate 1824 2380 b Volume ratio, VR 0.18 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.41 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1520 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/29/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: Anaheim On to Harbor Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 72 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 2080 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.20 Weaving ratio, R 0.29 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 4100 20 740 300 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1139 6 206 83 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 4760 23 846 343 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 1.12 0.13 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 44.29 69.66 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.50 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 62.53 mph Weaving segment density, D 19.10 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 11523 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11027 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9924 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1189 2800 a Average flow rate 1194 2400 b Volume ratio, VR 0.20 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.29 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2080 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/29/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: Anaheim On to Harbor Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 55 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 2080 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.21 Weaving ratio, R 0.50 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 6310 50 880 880 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1753 14 244 244 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 7326 58 1007 1007 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 1.78 0.25 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 31.17 50.86 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.81 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 44.80 mph Weaving segment density, D 41.96 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS F Capacity of base condition, cb 9703 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 9285 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 8356 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 2014 2800 a Average flow rate 1879 2250 b Volume ratio, VR 0.21 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.50 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2080 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/29/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: St College On to Katella Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 69 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 2350 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.17 Weaving ratio, R 0.22 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 4280 10 700 200 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1189 3 194 56 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 4969 11 801 228 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.33 0.13 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 59.21 67.30 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.80 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 65.77 mph Weaving segment density, D 18.27 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 11850 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11340 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10206 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1029 4000 a Average flow rate 1201 2390 b Volume ratio, VR 0.17 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.22 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2350 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/29/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: St College On to Katella Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 47 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 2350 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.18 Weaving ratio, R 0.25 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 6550 20 1100 360 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1819 6 306 100 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 7605 23 1258 412 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.46 0.21 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 40.32 45.66 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.08 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 44.60 mph Weaving segment density, D 41.69 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS F Capacity of base condition, cb 10748 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10285 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9256 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1670 4000 a Average flow rate 1859 b Volume ratio, VR 0.18 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.25 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2350 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/29/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: Katella On to St College Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 55 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1830 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.12 Weaving ratio, R 0.41 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5330 20 420 290 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1481 6 117 81 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6188 23 480 331 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.15 0.0035 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.53 0.24 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 44.43 51.31 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.19 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 50.41 mph Weaving segment density, D 27.86 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 10035 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 9603 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 8643 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 811 2800 a Average flow rate 1404 2250 b Volume ratio, VR 0.12 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.41 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1830 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/29/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: Katella On to St College Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 66 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1830 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.12 Weaving ratio, R 0.37 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 6750 20 600 350 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1875 6 167 97 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 7837 23 686 400 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.15 0.0035 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.68 0.33 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 48.39 56.96 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.18 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 55.76 mph Weaving segment density, D 32.09 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS D Capacity of base condition, cb 11255 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10770 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9693 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1086 2800 a Average flow rate 1789 2360 b Volume ratio, VR 0.12 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.37 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1830 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: Parsons Brinckerhoff Agency/Co.: PB Date Performed: 10/29/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: SR-22 to Chapman Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 72 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1720 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type C Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.35 Weaving ratio, R 0.10 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 3330 90 1710 180 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 925 25 475 50 v Trucks and buses 7 7 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.966 0.966 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 3829 103 1957 206 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.30 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 1.10 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.60 0.60 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.54 0.35 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 55.21 60.88 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 2.80 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.00 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 58.74 mph Weaving segment density, D 20.75 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 9449 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 9129 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 8216 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 2163 3500 a Average flow rate 1219 2400 b Volume ratio, VR 0.35 0.50 c Weaving ratio, R 0.10 0.40 d Weaving length (ft) 1720 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: Parsons Brinckerhoff Agency/Co.: PB Date Performed: 10/29/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: SR-22 to Chapman Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 53 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1720 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type C Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.32 Weaving ratio, R 0.09 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5380 130 2390 240 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1494 36 664 67 v Trucks and buses 7 7 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.966 0.966 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6186 149 2735 274 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.30 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 1.10 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.60 0.60 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.72 0.49 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 39.99 43.95 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 2.84 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.00 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 42.59 mph Weaving segment density, D 43.88 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS F Capacity of base condition, cb 9386 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 9069 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 8162 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 3009 3500 a Average flow rate 1868 b Volume ratio, VR 0.32 0.50 c Weaving ratio, R 0.09 0.40 d Weaving length (ft) 1720 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/29/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: St College On to SR22 Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 51 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1510 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.17 Weaving ratio, R 0.16 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 4830 10 830 160 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1342 3 231 44 v Trucks and buses 7 7 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.966 0.966 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 5554 11 949 183 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 1.52 0.18 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 31.24 49.77 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.48 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 45.24 mph Weaving segment density, D 29.61 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 9506 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 9185 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 8266 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1132 2800 a Average flow rate 1339 b Volume ratio, VR 0.17 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.16 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1510 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/29/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: St College On to SR22 Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2008 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - Existing Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 69 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1510 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.19 Weaving ratio, R 0.19 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5990 10 1170 280 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1664 3 325 78 v Trucks and buses 7 7 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.966 0.966 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6888 11 1339 320 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 2.03 0.27 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 34.50 61.53 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.49 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 53.42 mph Weaving segment density, D 32.04 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS D Capacity of base condition, cb 10754 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10390 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9351 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1659 2800 a Average flow rate 1711 2390 b Volume ratio, VR 0.19 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.19 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1510 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No.14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report – Technical Appendices Appendix G-2 HCS Freeway Weaving Analysis Worksheets under 2015 No Project Conditions ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: Lincoln On to Euclid Off Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 2000 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.11 Weaving ratio, R 0.33 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5170 10 440 220 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1361 3 116 58 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 5687 11 477 238 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.34 0.11 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 56.10 64.63 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.64 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 63.55 mph Weaving segment density, D 20.18 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 11750 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11244 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10682 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 715 4000 a Average flow rate 1282 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.11 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.33 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2000 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: Lincoln On to Euclid Off Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 2000 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.10 Weaving ratio, R 0.32 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 8410 20 610 290 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2213 5 161 76 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 9251 22 661 314 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.45 0.16 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 52.81 62.49 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.48 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 61.42 mph Weaving segment density, D 33.37 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS D Capacity of base condition, cb 11750 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11244 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10682 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 975 4000 a Average flow rate 2049 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.10 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.32 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2000 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: Disneyland On to Lincoln Off Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1680 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.12 Weaving ratio, R 0.37 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5240 10 470 280 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1379 3 124 74 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 5764 11 509 303 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.38 0.13 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 54.72 63.71 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.75 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 62.44 mph Weaving segment density, D 21.10 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 11720 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11215 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10654 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 812 4000 a Average flow rate 1317 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.12 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.37 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1680 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: Disneyland On to Lincoln Off Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1680 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.09 Weaving ratio, R 0.39 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 9710 20 620 400 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2555 5 163 105 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 10681 22 672 433 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.55 0.20 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 50.58 60.94 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.52 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 59.80 mph Weaving segment density, D 39.49 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS E Capacity of base condition, cb 11750 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11244 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10682 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1105 4000 a Average flow rate 2361 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.09 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.39 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1680 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: Disneyland On to Harbor Off Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1520 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.17 Weaving ratio, R 0.46 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5670 30 640 540 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1492 8 168 142 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6237 33 693 585 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.15 0.0035 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.73 0.36 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 46.78 55.30 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.38 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 53.65 mph Weaving segment density, D 28.14 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 10559 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10104 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9599 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1278 2800 a Average flow rate 1509 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.17 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.46 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1520 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: Disneyland On to Harbor Off Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1520 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.19 Weaving ratio, R 0.41 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 6380 50 890 610 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1679 13 234 161 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 7018 55 964 661 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 2.02 0.27 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 33.21 58.45 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.50 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 51.18 mph Weaving segment density, D 33.99 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS D Capacity of base condition, cb 10433 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 9984 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9485 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1625 2800 a Average flow rate 1739 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.19 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.41 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1520 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: Anaheim On to Harbor Off Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 2080 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.20 Weaving ratio, R 0.31 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 4240 20 760 340 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1116 5 200 89 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 4664 22 824 368 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 1.11 0.13 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 41.10 63.53 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.57 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 57.20 mph Weaving segment density, D 20.55 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 10813 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10347 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9830 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1192 2800 a Average flow rate 1175 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.20 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.31 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2080 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: Anaheim On to Harbor Off Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 2080 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.18 Weaving ratio, R 0.48 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 8260 50 970 910 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2174 13 255 239 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 9086 55 1051 986 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 1.99 0.29 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 33.41 57.74 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.58 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 50.98 mph Weaving segment density, D 43.86 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS F Capacity of base condition, cb 10941 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10470 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9946 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 2037 2800 a Average flow rate 2235 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.18 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.48 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2080 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: St College On to Katella Off Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 2350 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.18 Weaving ratio, R 0.21 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 4380 10 790 210 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1153 3 208 55 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 4818 11 856 227 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.34 0.13 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 56.10 63.51 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.90 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 62.01 mph Weaving segment density, D 19.07 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 11750 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11244 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10682 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1083 4000 a Average flow rate 1182 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.18 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.21 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2350 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: St College On to Katella Off Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 2350 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.14 Weaving ratio, R 0.23 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 9830 20 1250 380 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2587 5 329 100 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 10813 22 1355 412 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.53 0.23 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 50.96 59.77 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.62 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 58.35 mph Weaving segment density, D 43.19 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS F Capacity of base condition, cb 11750 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11244 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10682 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1767 4000 a Average flow rate 2520 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.14 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.23 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2350 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: Katella On to St College Off Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1870 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.13 Weaving ratio, R 0.49 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 6320 30 480 460 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1663 8 126 121 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6952 33 520 498 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.15 0.0035 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.60 0.29 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 49.29 57.61 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.21 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 56.39 mph Weaving segment density, D 28.38 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 11175 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10694 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10159 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1018 2800 a Average flow rate 1600 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.13 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.49 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1870 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: Katella On to St College Off Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1870 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.14 Weaving ratio, R 0.42 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 6850 30 660 470 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1803 8 174 124 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 7535 33 715 509 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.15 0.0035 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.68 0.34 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 47.79 55.95 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.29 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 54.65 mph Weaving segment density, D 32.17 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS D Capacity of base condition, cb 11088 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10611 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10080 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1224 2800 a Average flow rate 1758 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.14 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.42 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1870 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: SR-22 to Chapman Off Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1720 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type C Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.36 Weaving ratio, R 0.10 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 3440 90 1780 200 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 905 24 468 53 v Trucks and buses 7 7 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.966 0.966 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 3747 98 1929 216 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.30 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 1.10 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.60 0.60 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.54 0.35 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 50.78 55.75 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 2.82 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.00 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 53.86 mph Weaving segment density, D 22.24 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 9560 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 9237 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 8775 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 2145 3500 a Average flow rate 1198 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.36 0.50 c Weaving ratio, R 0.10 0.40 d Weaving length (ft) 1720 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: SR-22 to Chapman Off Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1720 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type C Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.26 Weaving ratio, R 0.10 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 7610 130 2460 260 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2003 34 647 68 v Trucks and buses 7 7 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.966 0.966 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 8290 141 2667 281 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.30 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 1.10 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.60 0.60 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.75 0.45 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 46.35 52.94 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 2.76 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.00 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 51.06 mph Weaving segment density, D 44.57 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS F Capacity of base condition, cb 11008 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10636 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10104 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 2948 3500 a Average flow rate 2275 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.26 0.50 c Weaving ratio, R 0.10 0.40 d Weaving length (ft) 1720 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: St College On to SR22 Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1510 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.13 Weaving ratio, R 0.17 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 6790 10 870 180 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1787 3 229 47 v Trucks and buses 7 7 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.966 0.966 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 7397 10 943 195 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.15 0.0035 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.77 0.38 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 46.02 54.86 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.21 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 53.49 mph Weaving segment density, D 31.95 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 10810 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10444 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9922 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1138 2800 a Average flow rate 1709 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.13 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.17 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1510 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: St College On to SR22 Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - No Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1510 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.19 Weaving ratio, R 0.19 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 6100 20 1200 280 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1605 5 316 74 v Trucks and buses 7 7 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.966 0.966 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6645 21 1301 303 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 1.96 0.26 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 33.58 58.78 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.52 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 51.31 mph Weaving segment density, D 32.24 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS D Capacity of base condition, cb 10372 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10021 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9520 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1604 2800 a Average flow rate 1654 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.19 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.19 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1510 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No.14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report – Technical Appendices Appendix G-3 HCS Freeway Weaving Analysis Worksheets under 2015 With Project Conditions ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: Lincoln On to Euclid Off Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 2000 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.11 Weaving ratio, R 0.33 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5210 10 440 220 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1371 3 116 58 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 5731 11 477 238 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.34 0.11 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 56.06 64.62 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.63 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 63.55 mph Weaving segment density, D 20.32 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 11750 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11244 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10682 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 715 4000 a Average flow rate 1291 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.11 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.33 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2000 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: Lincoln On to Euclid Off Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 2000 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.10 Weaving ratio, R 0.32 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 8410 20 610 290 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2213 5 161 76 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 9251 22 661 314 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.45 0.16 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 52.81 62.49 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.48 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 61.42 mph Weaving segment density, D 33.37 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS D Capacity of base condition, cb 11750 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11244 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10682 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 975 4000 a Average flow rate 2049 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.10 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.32 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2000 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: Disneyland On to Lincoln Off Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1680 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.12 Weaving ratio, R 0.38 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5280 10 460 280 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1389 3 121 74 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 5808 11 498 303 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.38 0.13 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 54.73 63.75 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.74 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 62.50 mph Weaving segment density, D 21.18 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 11723 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11218 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10657 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 801 4000 a Average flow rate 1324 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.12 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.38 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1680 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: Disneyland On to Lincoln Off Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1680 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.09 Weaving ratio, R 0.39 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 9710 20 620 400 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2555 5 163 105 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 10681 22 672 433 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.55 0.20 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 50.58 60.94 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.52 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 59.80 mph Weaving segment density, D 39.49 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS E Capacity of base condition, cb 11750 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11244 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10682 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1105 4000 a Average flow rate 2361 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.09 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.39 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1680 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: Disneyland On to Harbor Off Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1520 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.18 Weaving ratio, R 0.49 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5600 30 640 610 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1474 8 168 161 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6160 33 693 661 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 1.74 0.22 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 35.10 60.24 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.43 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 53.38 mph Weaving segment density, D 28.28 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 10486 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10034 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9532 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1354 2800 a Average flow rate 1509 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.18 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.49 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1520 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: Disneyland On to Harbor Off Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1520 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.19 Weaving ratio, R 0.43 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 6370 50 890 670 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1676 13 234 176 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 7007 55 964 726 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 2.06 0.27 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 32.99 58.18 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.53 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 50.70 mph Weaving segment density, D 34.52 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS D Capacity of base condition, cb 10387 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 9940 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9443 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1690 2800 a Average flow rate 1750 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.19 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.43 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1520 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: Anaheim On to Harbor Off Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 2080 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.20 Weaving ratio, R 0.31 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 4240 20 760 340 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1116 5 200 89 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 4664 22 824 368 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 1.11 0.13 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 41.10 63.53 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.57 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 57.20 mph Weaving segment density, D 20.55 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 10813 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10347 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9830 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1192 2800 a Average flow rate 1175 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.20 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.31 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2080 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: Anaheim On to Harbor Off Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 2080 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.18 Weaving ratio, R 0.48 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 8270 50 970 900 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2176 13 255 237 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 9097 55 1051 975 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 1.98 0.29 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 33.43 57.77 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.58 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 51.04 mph Weaving segment density, D 43.80 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS F Capacity of base condition, cb 10948 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10477 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9953 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 2026 2800 a Average flow rate 2235 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.18 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.48 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2080 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: St College On to Katella Off Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 2350 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.18 Weaving ratio, R 0.20 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 4468 10 780 200 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1176 3 205 53 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 4914 11 845 216 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.34 0.13 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 56.12 63.61 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.87 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 62.14 mph Weaving segment density, D 19.27 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 11750 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11244 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10682 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1061 4000 a Average flow rate 1197 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.18 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.20 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2350 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: St College On to Katella Off Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 2350 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.14 Weaving ratio, R 0.23 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 9820 20 1260 380 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2584 5 332 100 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 10802 22 1366 412 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.53 0.23 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 50.94 59.73 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.63 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 58.31 mph Weaving segment density, D 43.22 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS F Capacity of base condition, cb 11750 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11244 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10682 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1778 4000 a Average flow rate 2520 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.14 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.23 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2350 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: Katella On to St College Off Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1870 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.13 Weaving ratio, R 0.48 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 6310 30 490 460 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1661 8 129 121 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6941 33 531 498 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.15 0.0035 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.61 0.29 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 49.25 57.56 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.21 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 56.34 mph Weaving segment density, D 28.41 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 11165 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10684 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10150 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1029 2800 a Average flow rate 1600 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.13 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.48 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1870 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: Katella On to St College Off Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1870 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.14 Weaving ratio, R 0.43 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 6895 30 660 500 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1814 8 174 132 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 7584 33 715 542 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.15 0.0035 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.69 0.35 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 47.61 55.74 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.30 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 54.42 mph Weaving segment density, D 32.61 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS D Capacity of base condition, cb 11070 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10593 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10063 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1257 2800 a Average flow rate 1774 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.14 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.43 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1870 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: SR-22 to Chapman Off Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1720 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type C Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.35 Weaving ratio, R 0.10 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 3510 90 1780 200 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 924 24 468 53 v Trucks and buses 7 7 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.966 0.966 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 3824 98 1929 216 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.30 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 1.10 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.60 0.60 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.54 0.35 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 50.74 55.82 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 2.82 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.00 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 53.91 mph Weaving segment density, D 22.51 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 9648 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 9322 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 8856 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 2145 3500 a Average flow rate 1213 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.35 0.50 c Weaving ratio, R 0.10 0.40 d Weaving length (ft) 1720 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: SR-22 to Chapman Off Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1720 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type C Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.26 Weaving ratio, R 0.10 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 7620 130 2460 260 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2005 34 647 68 v Trucks and buses 7 7 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.966 0.966 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 8301 141 2667 281 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.30 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 1.10 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.60 0.60 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.75 0.45 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 46.35 52.94 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 2.75 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.00 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 51.06 mph Weaving segment density, D 44.61 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS F Capacity of base condition, cb 11010 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10638 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10106 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 2948 3500 a Average flow rate 2278 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.26 0.50 c Weaving ratio, R 0.10 0.40 d Weaving length (ft) 1720 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: St College On to SR22 Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1510 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.13 Weaving ratio, R 0.17 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 6790 10 870 180 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1787 3 229 47 v Trucks and buses 7 7 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.966 0.966 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 7397 10 943 195 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.15 0.0035 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.77 0.38 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 46.02 54.86 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.21 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 53.49 mph Weaving segment density, D 31.95 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 10810 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10444 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9922 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1138 2800 a Average flow rate 1709 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.13 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.17 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1510 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: St College On to SR22 Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2015 Description: ARSP Traffic Study / Interim Analysis - With Project Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1510 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.19 Weaving ratio, R 0.19 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 6160 20 1200 280 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1621 5 316 74 v Trucks and buses 7 7 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.966 0.966 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6711 21 1301 303 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 1.97 0.26 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 33.52 58.73 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.51 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 51.31 mph Weaving segment density, D 32.49 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS D Capacity of base condition, cb 10383 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10032 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9530 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1604 2800 a Average flow rate 1667 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.19 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.19 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1510 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No.14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report – Technical Appendices Appendix G-4 HCS Freeway Weaving Analysis Worksheets under 2030 No Project Conditions ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: Lincoln On to Euclid Off Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project with Extensions Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 2000 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.11 Weaving ratio, R 0.33 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5600 10 460 230 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1474 3 121 61 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6160 11 498 249 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.35 0.11 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 55.61 64.35 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.61 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 63.28 mph Weaving segment density, D 21.87 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 11750 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11244 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10682 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 747 4000 a Average flow rate 1383 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.11 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.33 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2000 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: Lincoln On to Euclid Off Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project with Extensions Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 2000 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.09 Weaving ratio, R 0.34 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 9310 20 650 330 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2450 5 171 87 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 10241 22 704 357 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.49 0.17 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 52.01 61.87 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.45 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 60.79 mph Weaving segment density, D 37.25 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS E Capacity of base condition, cb 11750 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11244 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10682 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1061 4000 a Average flow rate 2264 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.09 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.34 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2000 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: Disneyland On to Lincoln Off Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project with Extensions Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1680 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.13 Weaving ratio, R 0.35 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5630 20 530 290 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1482 5 139 76 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6193 22 574 314 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.41 0.14 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 54.09 63.22 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.74 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 61.92 mph Weaving segment density, D 22.94 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 11718 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11213 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10652 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 888 4000 a Average flow rate 1420 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.13 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.35 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1680 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: Disneyland On to Lincoln Off Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project with Extensions Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1680 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.09 Weaving ratio, R 0.41 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 10680 20 660 450 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2811 5 174 118 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 11748 22 715 487 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.58 0.22 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 49.77 60.25 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.51 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 59.10 mph Weaving segment density, D 43.90 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS F Capacity of base condition, cb 11750 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11244 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10682 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1202 4000 a Average flow rate 2594 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.09 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.41 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1680 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: Disneyland On to Harbor Off Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project with Extensions Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1520 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.16 Weaving ratio, R 0.47 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 6540 40 680 600 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1721 11 179 158 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 7194 44 737 650 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.15 0.0035 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.82 0.42 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 45.25 53.70 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.36 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 52.13 mph Weaving segment density, D 33.09 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS D Capacity of base condition, cb 10620 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10163 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9655 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1387 2800 a Average flow rate 1725 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.16 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.47 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1520 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: Disneyland On to Harbor Off Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project with Extensions Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1520 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.20 Weaving ratio, R 0.40 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 6360 50 980 650 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1674 13 258 171 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6996 55 1062 704 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 2.10 0.28 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 32.75 57.86 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.56 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 50.16 mph Weaving segment density, D 35.16 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS D Capacity of base condition, cb 10338 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 9893 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9398 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1766 2800 a Average flow rate 1763 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.20 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.40 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1520 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: Anaheim On to Harbor Off Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project with Extensions Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 2080 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.21 Weaving ratio, R 0.35 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 4550 20 790 420 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1197 5 208 111 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 5005 22 856 455 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 1.20 0.15 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 40.00 62.87 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.60 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 56.22 mph Weaving segment density, D 22.55 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 10813 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10347 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9830 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1311 2800 a Average flow rate 1267 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.21 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.35 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2080 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: Anaheim On to Harbor Off Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project with Extensions Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 2080 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.18 Weaving ratio, R 0.45 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 9180 60 1140 950 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2416 16 300 250 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 10098 66 1236 1030 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 2.20 0.33 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 32.16 56.38 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.61 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 49.57 mph Weaving segment density, D 50.15 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS F Capacity of base condition, cb 10940 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10469 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9946 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 2266 2800 a Average flow rate 2486 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.18 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.45 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2080 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: St College On to Katella Off Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project with Extensions Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 2350 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.20 Weaving ratio, R 0.18 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 4610 10 970 220 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1213 3 255 58 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 5071 11 1051 238 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.37 0.16 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 55.17 62.46 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.98 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 60.84 mph Weaving segment density, D 20.94 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 11735 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11230 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10668 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1289 4000 a Average flow rate 1274 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.20 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.18 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2350 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: St College On to Katella Off Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project with Extensions Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 2350 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.16 Weaving ratio, R 0.21 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 10230 20 1580 420 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2692 5 416 111 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 11253 22 1713 455 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.58 0.27 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 49.88 58.24 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.74 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 56.71 mph Weaving segment density, D 47.41 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS F Capacity of base condition, cb 11750 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11244 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10682 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 2168 4000 a Average flow rate 2688 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.16 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.21 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2350 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: Katella On to St College Off Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project with Extensions Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1870 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.19 Weaving ratio, R 0.39 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 6130 50 880 560 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1613 13 232 147 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6743 55 954 607 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 1.65 0.22 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 35.78 60.23 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.53 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 53.41 mph Weaving segment density, D 31.30 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 10742 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10279 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9765 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1561 2800 a Average flow rate 1671 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.19 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.39 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1870 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: Katella On to St College Off Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project with Extensions Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1870 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.18 Weaving ratio, R 0.48 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 7060 40 800 740 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1858 11 211 195 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 7766 44 867 802 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 1.82 0.25 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 34.48 59.16 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.50 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 52.54 mph Weaving segment density, D 36.09 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS E Capacity of base condition, cb 10820 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10354 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9836 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1669 2800 a Average flow rate 1895 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.18 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.48 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1870 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: SR-22 to Chapman Off Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project with Extensions Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1720 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type C Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.36 Weaving ratio, R 0.11 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 3720 100 1920 230 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 979 26 505 61 v Trucks and buses 7 7 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.966 0.966 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 4052 108 2081 249 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.30 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 1.10 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.60 0.60 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.57 0.38 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 49.95 54.76 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 2.82 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.00 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 52.93 mph Weaving segment density, D 24.52 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 9542 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 9219 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 8758 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 2330 3500 a Average flow rate 1298 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.36 0.50 c Weaving ratio, R 0.11 0.40 d Weaving length (ft) 1720 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: SR-22 to Chapman Off Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project with Extensions Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1720 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type C Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.25 Weaving ratio, R 0.10 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 8580 140 2610 280 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2258 37 687 74 v Trucks and buses 7 7 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.966 0.966 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 9347 152 2829 303 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.30 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 1.10 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.60 0.60 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.80 0.48 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 45.50 52.21 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 2.75 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.00 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 50.36 mph Weaving segment density, D 50.16 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS F Capacity of base condition, cb 11096 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10721 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10185 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 3132 3500 a Average flow rate 2526 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.25 0.50 c Weaving ratio, R 0.10 0.40 d Weaving length (ft) 1720 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: St College On to SR22 Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project with Extensions Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1510 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.14 Weaving ratio, R 0.20 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 7430 10 940 230 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1955 3 247 61 v Trucks and buses 7 7 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.966 0.966 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 8094 10 1019 249 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.15 0.0035 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.85 0.43 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 44.75 53.42 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.24 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 52.06 mph Weaving segment density, D 36.01 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS E Capacity of base condition, cb 10795 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10430 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9908 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1268 2800 a Average flow rate 1874 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.14 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.20 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1510 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/22/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: St College On to SR22 Jurisdiction: City of Anaheim Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - No Project with Extensions Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1510 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.20 Weaving ratio, R 0.19 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 6310 20 1300 300 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1661 5 342 79 v Trucks and buses 7 7 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.966 0.966 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6874 21 1409 325 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 2.07 0.28 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 32.92 58.06 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.56 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 50.34 mph Weaving segment density, D 34.29 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS D Capacity of base condition, cb 10329 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 9980 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9481 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1734 2800 a Average flow rate 1725 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.20 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.19 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1510 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No.14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report – Technical Appendices Appendix G-5 HCS Freeway Weaving Analysis Worksheets under 2030 With Project Conditions ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/29/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: Lincoln On to Euclid Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project with Extensions Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 2000 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.11 Weaving ratio, R 0.33 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5600 10 460 230 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1474 3 121 61 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6160 11 498 249 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.35 0.11 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 55.61 64.35 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.61 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 63.28 mph Weaving segment density, D 21.87 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 11750 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11244 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10682 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 747 4000 a Average flow rate 1383 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.11 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.33 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2000 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/29/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: Lincoln On to Euclid Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project with Extensions Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 2000 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.09 Weaving ratio, R 0.32 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 9860 20 650 300 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2595 5 171 79 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 10846 22 704 325 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.50 0.18 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 51.77 61.81 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.41 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 60.79 mph Weaving segment density, D 39.14 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS E Capacity of base condition, cb 11750 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11244 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10682 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1029 4000 a Average flow rate 2379 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.09 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.32 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2000 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/29/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: Disneyland On to Lincoln Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project with Extensions Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1680 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.13 Weaving ratio, R 0.35 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5620 20 540 290 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1479 5 142 76 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6182 22 585 314 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.41 0.14 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 54.05 63.17 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.75 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 61.85 mph Weaving segment density, D 22.97 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 11716 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11211 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10650 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 899 4000 a Average flow rate 1420 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.13 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.35 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1680 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/29/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: Disneyland On to Lincoln Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project with Extensions Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1680 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.09 Weaving ratio, R 0.41 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 11180 20 680 470 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2942 5 179 124 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 12298 22 737 509 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.60 0.22 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 49.38 59.92 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.50 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 58.77 mph Weaving segment density, D 46.17 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS F Capacity of base condition, cb 11750 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11244 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10682 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1246 4000 a Average flow rate 2713 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.09 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.41 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1680 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/29/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: Disneyland On to Harbor Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project with Extensions Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1520 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.17 Weaving ratio, R 0.49 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 6490 40 680 660 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1708 11 179 174 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 7139 44 737 715 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 1.94 0.25 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 33.72 59.10 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 52.46 mph Weaving segment density, D 32.92 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS D Capacity of base condition, cb 10567 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10112 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9606 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1452 2800 a Average flow rate 1727 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.17 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.49 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1520 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/29/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: Disneyland On to Harbor Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project with Extensions Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1520 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.18 Weaving ratio, R 0.40 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 7150 50 980 650 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1882 13 258 171 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 7865 55 1062 704 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 2.22 0.30 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 32.06 57.27 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.49 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 50.09 mph Weaving segment density, D 38.68 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS E Capacity of base condition, cb 10465 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10014 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9513 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1766 2800 a Average flow rate 1937 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.18 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.40 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1520 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/29/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: Anaheim On to Harbor Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project with Extensions Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 2080 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.21 Weaving ratio, R 0.34 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 4540 20 800 420 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1195 5 211 111 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 4994 22 867 455 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 1.20 0.15 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 39.96 62.84 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.61 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 56.13 mph Weaving segment density, D 22.58 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 10813 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10347 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9830 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1322 2800 a Average flow rate 1267 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.21 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.34 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2080 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/29/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: Anaheim On to Harbor Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project with Extensions Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 2080 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.18 Weaving ratio, R 0.44 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 9510 60 1230 950 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2503 16 324 250 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 10461 66 1333 1030 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 2.29 0.35 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 31.73 55.85 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.62 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 49.02 mph Weaving segment density, D 52.59 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS F Capacity of base condition, cb 10933 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10462 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9939 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 2363 2800 a Average flow rate 2578 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.18 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.44 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2080 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/29/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: St College On to Katella Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project with Extensions Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 2350 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.21 Weaving ratio, R 0.17 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 4540 10 1040 220 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1195 3 274 58 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 4994 11 1127 238 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.38 0.17 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 54.93 62.07 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.04 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 60.39 mph Weaving segment density, D 21.10 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 11657 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11155 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10597 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1365 4000 a Average flow rate 1274 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.21 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.17 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2350 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/29/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: St College On to Katella Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project with Extensions Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 2350 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.17 Weaving ratio, R 0.20 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 10550 20 1720 420 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2776 5 453 111 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 11605 22 1864 455 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.60 0.29 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 49.43 57.65 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.77 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 56.10 mph Weaving segment density, D 49.72 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS F Capacity of base condition, cb 11750 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11244 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10682 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 2319 4000 a Average flow rate 2789 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.17 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.20 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2350 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/29/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: Katella On to St College Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project with Extensions Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1830 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.19 Weaving ratio, R 0.39 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 6070 50 910 590 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1597 13 239 155 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6677 55 986 639 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 1.70 0.23 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 35.38 59.88 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.56 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 52.78 mph Weaving segment density, D 31.67 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 10651 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10192 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9682 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1625 2800 a Average flow rate 1671 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.19 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.39 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1830 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/29/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: Katella On to St College Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project with Extensions Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1830 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.19 Weaving ratio, R 0.48 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 6980 20 850 790 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1837 5 224 208 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 7678 22 921 856 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 1.90 0.26 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 34.00 58.68 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.55 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 51.65 mph Weaving segment density, D 36.70 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS E Capacity of base condition, cb 10701 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10240 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9728 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1777 2800 a Average flow rate 1895 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.19 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.48 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1830 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: Parsons Brinckerhoff Agency/Co.: PB Date Performed: 10/29/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: SR-22 to Chapman Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project with Extensions Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1720 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type C Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.36 Weaving ratio, R 0.11 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 3720 100 1920 240 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 979 26 505 63 v Trucks and buses 7 7 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.966 0.966 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 4052 108 2081 260 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.30 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 1.10 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.60 0.60 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.58 0.39 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 49.91 54.68 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 2.82 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.00 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 52.86 mph Weaving segment density, D 24.60 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 9521 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 9199 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 8739 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 2341 3500 a Average flow rate 1300 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.36 0.50 c Weaving ratio, R 0.11 0.40 d Weaving length (ft) 1720 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: Parsons Brinckerhoff Agency/Co.: PB Date Performed: 10/29/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: SR-22 to Chapman Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project with Extensions Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1720 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type C Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.24 Weaving ratio, R 0.10 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 8900 140 2660 280 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2342 37 700 74 v Trucks and buses 7 7 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.966 0.966 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 9696 152 2884 303 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.30 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 1.10 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.60 0.60 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.82 0.49 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 45.24 51.99 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 2.75 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.00 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 50.16 mph Weaving segment density, D 51.97 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS F Capacity of base condition, cb 11124 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10748 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10211 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 3187 3500 a Average flow rate 2607 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.24 0.50 c Weaving ratio, R 0.10 0.40 d Weaving length (ft) 1720 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/29/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: St College On to SR22 Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project with Extensions Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1510 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.14 Weaving ratio, R 0.20 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 7430 10 940 230 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1955 3 247 61 v Trucks and buses 7 7 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.966 0.966 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 8094 10 1019 249 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.15 0.0035 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.85 0.43 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 44.75 53.42 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.24 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 52.06 mph Weaving segment density, D 36.01 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS E Capacity of base condition, cb 10795 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10430 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9908 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1268 2800 a Average flow rate 1874 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.14 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.20 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1510 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 10/29/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: St College On to SR22 Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP Traffic Study - With Project with Extensions Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1510 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.19 Weaving ratio, R 0.19 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 6730 20 1300 300 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1771 5 342 79 v Trucks and buses 7 7 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.966 0.966 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 7332 21 1409 325 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 2.14 0.29 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 32.54 57.74 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.52 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 50.31 mph Weaving segment density, D 36.12 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS E Capacity of base condition, cb 10395 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10043 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9541 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1734 2800 a Average flow rate 1817 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.19 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.19 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1510 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No.14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report – Technical Appendices Appendix G-6 HCS Freeway Weaving Analysis Worksheets under 2030 With Project Conditions (Mitigated) ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 07/21/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: Lincoln On to Euclid Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP - With Project with Extensions WIth Mitigation Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 2000 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.13 Weaving ratio, R 0.33 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 4550 10 460 230 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1197 3 121 61 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 5 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.976 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 5005 11 498 248 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.33 0.11 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 56.51 64.68 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.73 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 63.49 mph Weaving segment density, D 18.15 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 11750 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11244 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10682 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 746 4000 a Average flow rate 1152 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.13 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.33 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2000 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 07/21/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: Lincoln On to Euclid Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP - With Project with Extensions WIth Mitigation Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 2000 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.10 Weaving ratio, R 0.32 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 8060 20 650 300 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2121 5 171 79 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 8866 22 704 325 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.45 0.16 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 52.88 62.40 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.52 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 61.25 mph Weaving segment density, D 32.38 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS D Capacity of base condition, cb 11750 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11244 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10682 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1029 4000 a Average flow rate 1983 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.10 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.32 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2000 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 07/21/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: Disneyland On to Lincoln Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP - With Project with Extensions WIth Mitigation Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1680 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.15 Weaving ratio, R 0.35 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 4540 20 540 290 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1195 5 142 76 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 4994 22 585 314 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.38 0.13 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 54.93 63.46 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.89 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 62.00 mph Weaving segment density, D 19.08 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 11683 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11180 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10621 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 899 4000 a Average flow rate 1183 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.15 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.35 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1680 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 07/21/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: Disneyland On to Lincoln Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP - With Project with Extensions WIth Mitigation Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1680 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.11 Weaving ratio, R 0.41 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 9120 20 680 470 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2400 5 179 124 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 10032 22 737 509 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.55 0.21 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 50.55 60.58 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.61 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 59.29 mph Weaving segment density, D 38.12 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS E Capacity of base condition, cb 11737 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11232 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10670 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1246 4000 a Average flow rate 2260 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.11 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.41 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1680 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 07/21/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: Disneyland On to Harbor Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP - With Project with Extensions WIth Mitigation Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1520 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.20 Weaving ratio, R 0.49 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5180 40 680 660 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1363 11 179 174 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 5698 44 737 715 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 1.73 0.22 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 35.16 60.14 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.53 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 52.60 mph Weaving segment density, D 27.35 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 10338 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 9893 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9398 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1452 2800 a Average flow rate 1438 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.20 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.49 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1520 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 07/21/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: Disneyland On to Harbor Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP - With Project with Extensions WIth Mitigation Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1520 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.22 Weaving ratio, R 0.40 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5680 50 980 650 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1495 13 258 171 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6248 55 1062 704 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 1.99 0.27 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 33.38 58.36 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.63 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 50.15 mph Weaving segment density, D 32.18 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS D Capacity of base condition, cb 10338 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 9893 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9398 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1766 2800 a Average flow rate 1613 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.22 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.40 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1520 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 09/29/09 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: Anaheim On to Harbor Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP - With Project with Extensions WIth Mitigation Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 2080 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.25 Weaving ratio, R 0.34 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 3580 20 800 420 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 942 5 211 111 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 3938 22 867 455 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 1.09 0.14 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 41.36 63.44 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.77 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 55.96 mph Weaving segment density, D 18.88 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 10813 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10347 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9830 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1322 2800 a Average flow rate 1056 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.25 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.34 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2080 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 07/21/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: Anaheim On to Harbor Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP - With Project with Extensions WIth Mitigation Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 2080 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.22 Weaving ratio, R 0.44 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 7550 60 1230 950 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1987 16 324 250 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 8305 66 1333 1030 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 2.05 0.31 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 33.04 57.03 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.77 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 49.17 mph Weaving segment density, D 43.66 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS F Capacity of base condition, cb 10813 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10347 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9830 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 2363 2800 a Average flow rate 2146 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.22 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.44 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2080 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 07/21/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: St College On to Katella Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP - With Project with Extensions WIth Mitigation Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 2350 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.26 Weaving ratio, R 0.17 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 3570 10 1040 220 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 939 3 274 58 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 3927 11 1127 238 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.36 0.17 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 55.49 61.89 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.25 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 60.11 mph Weaving segment density, D 17.65 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 11376 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10886 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10342 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1365 4000 a Average flow rate 1060 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.26 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.17 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2350 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 07/21/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: St College On to Katella Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP - With Project with Extensions WIth Mitigation Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 2350 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type B Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.20 Weaving ratio, R 0.20 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 8432 20 1720 420 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 2219 5 453 111 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 9275 22 1864 455 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.70 1.00 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.50 0.50 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.56 0.29 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 50.27 57.78 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 0.95 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.50 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 56.11 mph Weaving segment density, D 41.41 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS F Capacity of base condition, cb 11750 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 11244 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 10682 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 2319 4000 a Average flow rate 2323 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.20 0.80 c Weaving ratio, R 0.20 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 2350 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 07/21/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: Katella On to St College Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP - With Project with Extensions WIth Mitigation Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1830 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.23 Weaving ratio, R 0.39 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 4800 50 910 590 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1263 13 239 155 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 5280 55 986 639 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 1.53 0.20 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 36.76 60.76 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.71 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 52.72 mph Weaving segment density, D 26.40 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 10610 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10153 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9645 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1625 2800 a Average flow rate 1392 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.23 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.39 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1830 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 07/21/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: Katella On to St College Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP - With Project with Extensions WIth Mitigation Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1830 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.22 Weaving ratio, R 0.48 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5540 40 850 790 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1458 11 224 208 v Trucks and buses 9 9 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.957 0.957 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6094 44 921 856 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 1.70 0.23 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 35.35 59.65 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.70 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 51.67 mph Weaving segment density, D 30.64 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 10610 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10153 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9645 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1777 2800 a Average flow rate 1583 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.22 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.48 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1830 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 07/21/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: SR-22 to Chapman Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP - With Project with Extensions WIth Mitigation Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1720 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type C Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.42 Weaving ratio, R 0.11 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 2870 100 1920 240 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 755 26 505 63 v Trucks and buses 7 7 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.966 0.966 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 3126 108 2081 260 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.30 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 1.10 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.60 0.60 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.56 0.42 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 50.21 53.68 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 2.87 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.00 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 52.17 mph Weaving segment density, D 21.37 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS B Capacity of base condition, cb 8402 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 8118 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 7712 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 2341 3500 a Average flow rate 1115 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.42 0.50 c Weaving ratio, R 0.11 0.40 d Weaving length (ft) 1720 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 07/21/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 NB Weaving Location: SR-22 to Chapman Off Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP - With Project with Extensions WIth Mitigation Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1720 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type C Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.29 Weaving ratio, R 0.10 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 7190 140 2660 280 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1892 37 700 74 v Trucks and buses 7 7 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.966 0.966 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 7833 152 2884 303 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.08 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.30 6.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 1.10 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.60 0.60 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.78 0.50 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 45.91 51.70 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 2.78 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 3.00 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 49.90 mph Weaving segment density, D 44.77 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS F Capacity of base condition, cb 10800 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10435 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9913 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 3187 3500 a Average flow rate 2234 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.29 0.50 c Weaving ratio, R 0.10 0.40 d Weaving length (ft) 1720 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 07/21/10 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: St College On to SR22 Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP - With Project with Extensions WIth Mitigation Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1510 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.16 Weaving ratio, R 0.20 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 6200 10 940 230 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1632 3 247 61 v Trucks and buses 7 7 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.966 0.966 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6754 10 1019 249 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.15 0.0035 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 0.76 0.38 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 46.19 54.80 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.33 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Unconstrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 53.23 mph Weaving segment density, D 30.18 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 10632 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 10272 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9758 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1268 2800 a Average flow rate 1606 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.16 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.20 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1510 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Analyst: PB Agency/Co.: Parsons Brinckerhoff Date Performed: 07/21/10 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Hour Freeway/Dir of Travel: I-5 SB Weaving Location: St College On to SR22 Jurisdiction: Analysis Year: 2030 Description: ARSP - With Project with Extensions WIth Mitigation Freeway free-flow speed, SFF 65 mph Weaving number of lanes, N 5 Weaving segment length, L 1510 ft Terrain type Level Grade % Length mi Weaving type A Multilane or C-D Volume ratio, VR 0.22 Weaving ratio, R 0.19 to pc/h Under Base Non-Weaving Weaving V V V V o1 o2 w1 w2 Volume, V 5540 20 1300 300 veh/h Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Peak 15-min volume, v15 1458 5 342 79 v Trucks and buses 7 7 6 6 % Recreational vehicles 0 0 0 0 % Trucks and buses PCE, ET 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Recreational vehicle PCE, ER 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Heavy vehicle adjustment, fHV 0.966 0.966 0.971 0.971 Driver population adjustment, fP 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow rate, v 6035 21 1409 325 pc/h and Non-Weaving Weaving Non-Weaving a (Exhibit 24-6) 0.35 0.0020 b (Exhibit 24-6) 2.20 4.00 c (Exhibit 24-6) 0.97 1.30 d (Exhibit 24-6) 0.80 0.75 Weaving intensity factor, Wi 1.95 0.26 Weaving and non-weaving speeds, Si 33.65 58.62 Number of lanes required for unconstrained operation, Nw (Exhibit 24-7) 1.64 Maximum number of lanes, Nw (max) (Exhibit 24-7) 1.40 Type of operation is Constrained _________Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service and Capacity_________ Weaving segment speed, S 50.31 mph Weaving segment density, D 30.97 pc/mi/ln Level of service, LOS C Capacity of base condition, cb 10329 pc/h Capacity as a 15-minute flow rate, c 9980 pc/h Capacity as a full-hour volume, ch 9481 pc/h on Weaving If Max Exceeded See Note Analyzed Maximum Note Weaving flow rate, Vw 1734 2800 a Average flow rate 1558 2350 b Volume ratio, VR 0.22 0.20 c Weaving ratio, R 0.19 N/A d Weaving length (ft) 1510 2500 e Notes: a. Weaving segments longer than 2500 ft. are treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 25, "Ramps and Ramp Junctions". b. Capacity constrained by basic freeway capacity. c. Capacity occurs under constrained operating conditions. d. Three-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.45. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. e. Four-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.35. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. f. Capacity constrained by maximum allowable weaving flow rate: 2,800 pc/h (Type 4,000 (Type 3,500 (Type g. Five-lane Type A segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.20. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. h. Type B weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.80. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. i. Type C weaving segments do not operate well at volume ratios greater than 0.50. Poor operations and some local queuing are expected in such cases. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment No.14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Traffic Study Report – Technical Appendices Appendix H Year 2025 Peak Hour Raw Model Volume Difference With Project vs. No Project ---PAGE BREAK--- 88 79 35 17 -26 12 -26 12 -34 16 12 0 -19 1 0 20 -19 1 -2 -41 -25 -16 0 7 0 7 2 15 0 7 -2 11 20 1 1 -2 34 77 77 39 44 47 44 47 21 7 50 35 49 50 25 -21 25 -21 17 108 15 112 56 13 1 -2 -2 -21 31 -23 31 -26 7 -32 14 -55 73 -38 72 7 -21 53 23 20 0 17 0 50 -1 50 -3 -21 31 -25 28 0 2 3 0 3 1 0 -3 -3 -3 -9 15 -7 5 -5 14 -2 15 0 0 5 -27 1 5 23 6 32 10 -19 100 -10 6 -7 2 -41 53 -24 24 24 -27 -3 19 17 0 46 121 46 117 28 5 26 -1 28 3 28 5 -25 113 113 -27 5 21 21 7 29 29 21 68 -40 103 -40 151 89 42 -44 48 48 -19 -9 76 80 -19 -25 2 -34 2 -55 -16 1 12 -60 -21 -21 -5 -5 -1 18 12 3 5 6 -26 -12 12 -12 12 -5 62 123 24 132 24 50 35 -18 -5 -23 -9 24 -14 29 -17 -3 20 16 6 5 -27 6 -27 37 115 115 37 -47 10 -50 -3 48 23 0 0 2 -5 12 -34 -35 68 46 -2 0 -2 0 -1 0 -10 12 13 -10 -3 -2 -19 102 -1 2 -1 -16 3 -9 -9 3 -10 -2 -2 -10 2 4 2 -7 -12 0 -27 2 10 4 27 108 21 111 0 -1 0 -3 -5 -1 -1 -2 -3 0 1 -2 2 3 -4 5 -9 13 42 13 25 42 0 1 -4 2 -55 -16 37 17 37 17 -10 -1 -10 13 1 -16 -16 1 -19 12 -16 1 -29 -8 -15 6 42 69 47 59 6 -35 -31 20 -39 53 24 -2 24 -1 9 21 4 20 -18 5 10 -14 73 -4 73 -7 -25 21 -25 -24 90 -14 78 4 56 -36 -17 -17 -32 -2 -52 -1 -47 -24 4 -15 4 -16 14 -16 23 40 40 137 3 -3 -6 -2 -2 -8 -11 36 37 -20 -3 -11 1 -2 2 3 20 -3 7 -27 -6 -5 94 154 -40 160 -12 -73 145 -73 38 -12 -52 4 20 126 9 46 46 -13 57 90 -94 120 6 -48 -84 -49 18 2 48 -24 -49 -134 0 57 -76 -39 -76 -19 -64 -65 -88 28 26 42 36 5 -61 -76 -54 6 6 94 -3 -101 30 -32 -20 -19 20 -14 26 10 26 -5 -23 -45 -18 1 24 -10 -17 -7 -16 -7 5 13 25 -2 -16 -111 -67 -122 -2 -67 -122 -8 -84 -23 -1 28 96 75 39 -13 4 -69 -50 16 -31 -68 -38 -84 -45 -15 37 -106 5 -8 -26 -21 -63 -20 30 -179 0 80 -65 0 5 6 -89 -112 0 -3 30 -36 27 36 56 75 -21 -29 38 1 4 22 -3 -55 26 68 66 82 121 -21 62 -3 -3 62 67 -1 -14 82 5 66 73 -77 -74 -19 66 73 1 20 -3 70 66 105 2 66 -126 56 107 8 29 26 115 58 7 -1 21 -24 50 0 0 58 7 66 -122 -53 -68 -53 -45 8 8 -1 -44 -1 -49 92 -2 10 -48 -68 -19 10 -9 10 -101 91 -2 -12 -134 -134 8 20 -1 -67 -67 6 6 1 -67 -2 -8 -15 -51 -51 -99 1 12 36 0 10 -19 12 10 31 16 34 -82 19 13 10 33 13 12 0 33 -26 29 -19 3 0 29 -17 15 -29 -30 120 -46 9 8 11 -3 27 17 7 -28 20 -2 -3 11 19 3 -2 18 14 -30 37 7 16 0 -40 -10 -1 56 22 3 37 -7 6 0 -120 -17 48 151 37 21 -13 -1 146 65 -1 -29 -24 6 -83 26 41 -9 30 17 0 15 56 5 18 -2 -24 -8 -2 -1 -22 27 -31 35 4 -90 -27 -135 0 -16 -2 82 -91 96 75 48 151 -16 69 -3 -60 -208 -151 -46 61 -63 44 39 26 26 32 2 -25 2 -23 39 -5 22 3 -46 3 51 -3 -1 60 93 5 34 7 50 87 39 17 -27 -7 32 70 38 -8 7 8 9 24 43 -13 16 -15 18 8 130 130 44 47 59 44 81 -41 -71 -54 -65 -36 -70 36 56 51 1 -6 -8 8 -5 -1 -2 -19 -18 -33 17 -25 10 22 17 -22 11 7 -1 5 9 1 25 -19 42 -1 13 -1 27 0 9 -3 -2 -10 -2 -10 -9 -6 15 -29 38 84 11 23 5 5 -2 - -6 46 -57 -7 0 0 -30 21 -38 26 33 155 74 -29 37 2 -7 -14 41 -22 1 -25 20 0 -22 -47 21 -52 28 -21 -14 1 10 33 13 49 -17 -32 -5 -5 -32 22 4 24 -21 -6 -4 -171 9 -177 8 -25 100 170 200 -19 -29 -22 150 -22 160 131 -8 180 204 21 3 57 203 -14 150 147 -6 7 -23 105 46 -4 -12 -25 2 16 6 9 28 0 31 23 20 2 6 17 0 0 24 0 -8 6 3 8 4 11 -31 37 0 7 6 -22 75 151 7 1 1 -10 3 -126 -12 78 43 153 -21 141 -26 -13 -22 3 -32 -64 5 -19 -27 -16 23 -13 29 -1 -7 11 3 9 1 21 -2 18 129 18 129 8 39 18 29 -4 10 -34 16 -34 42 39 -20 -3 -38 46 -39 54 13 14 13 12 26 14 -2 12 37 -1 24 -6 -19 12 9 -1 8 -5 52 29 -8 0 -1 4 10 -18 0 10 -3 -8 23 2 8 9 5 17 25 2 3 7 0 0 32 19 20 32 8 -22 5 24 28 -42 10 1 77 34 47 85 1 25 39 -3 10 -27 7 -1 7 -1 -12 38 33 -14 95 -10 139 -40 134 -43 102 -30 89 -13 1 4 4 1 4 -2 27 5 -5 20 45 35 -9 43 4 37 41 44 6 -82 18 8 0 -86 23 0 2 -5 16 -35 -9 -27 111 108 -28 2 -32 0 -6 1 -1 37 4 131 258 4 37 -20 41 -22 25 10 -2 5 27 8 10 7 14 25 12 49 95 19 -16 4 -48 -2 -28 -2 -18 37 -34 34 22 -6 -6 22 4 14 -4 10 -21 -34 -25 -38 -21 50 -26 7 41 18 36 23 9 1 -1 1 0 2 0 2 -22 -22 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 -107 -67 -12 21 9 -67 109 -101 91 -6 19 15 32 4 5 -25 101 0 36 -25 45 -93 17 74 12 28 -76 83 -45 21 -6 27 -19 127 122 6 158 2 2 6 37 37 15 57 -15 37 139 19 32 27 17 5 101 117 88 8 -24 11 20 28 -19 1 65 12 31 31 -32 87 28 -44 49 -6 -13 -43 21 0 109 -117 -9 -2 0 3 65 1 4 9 -35 9 10 1 -7 10 -35 -6 -109 -1 20 -7 -3 34 215 6 21 10 18 -44 151 8 -3 10 8 -14 -1 21 3 45 35 73 -55 -17 202 7 82 59 200 34 17 40 -31 25 12 16 12 5 5 2 18 -5 28 42 141 11 133 45 10 44 121 73 68 200 104 259 50 207 8 -7 4 46 -10 -9 176 85 -36 170 27 -2 168 -4 12 30 17 -69 11 67 -26 7 10 62 34 13 42 42 25 -7 24 6 87 -19 12 -19 12 23 -11 46 -2 -27 26 0 -12 -12 7 -3 -39 31 -52 60 -22 -11 26 24 43 -5 5 16 12 1 -8 102 237 -3 20 -54 41 84 -17 -2 -4 8 -2 -8 -12 -10 63 57 -99 35 0 31 -107 11 -112 8 -5 ---PAGE BREAK--- 134 79 45 17 -44 29 -44 29 -47 31 2 -3 4 77 -77 8 4 77 -13 -110 31 -1 3 0 2 5 3 5 2 5 4 7 0 5 -1 7 -47 -62 -62 -47 35 31 35 31 15 23 -25 29 -14 40 -7 -36 -7 -36 82 46 82 50 59 -2 -1 0 2 20 13 17 10 4 21 2 21 106 39 84 39 35 5 33 5 0 24 -2 20 1 25 3 24 20 13 19 13 -1 43 43 2 -2 4 -6 -19 -7 -19 0 -5 -3 -7 1 -5 0 -2 9 5 20 -1 -12 4 -7 69 -5 55 74 81 -1 7 4 -3 51 56 46 13 3 46 27 12 9 31 15 71 15 56 21 81 16 85 19 85 21 81 111 -36 -35 110 26 5 5 30 134 67 71 142 254 21 254 15 16 -17 68 25 25 65 150 -27 -15 140 -3 8 4 8 -35 -27 -21 -10 61 87 64 28 22 60 115 -24 68 5 9 28 -25 8 -25 8 -26 -2 69 83 91 83 -25 29 21 1 20 -3 -3 8 -1 10 -46 7 5 -44 -50 -37 -55 -37 141 10 10 141 -11 53 -11 59 33 6 0 0 4 -9 35 -14 8 48 -4 -7 7 -7 7 -7 8 31 18 18 31 -1 -1 74 81 -1 -56 -48 -21 3 0 0 3 -3 3 3 -3 -1 1 2 1 -3 2 -3 8 14 2 72 51 60 52 4 -2 -3 15 2 9 11 -1 4 0 -1 -1 0 0 -6 -11 32 25 -10 23 -15 -46 28 28 39 35 -35 -27 -26 -1 -26 -1 6 16 31 18 -9 -5 -5 -9 32 34 -5 -9 -6 1 -7 4 -6 22 -1 33 -147 27 -80 -25 83 -36 8 3 7 5 -46 23 -45 22 -6 -26 -24 -5 -14 65 -8 65 -10 21 -13 23 8 43 3 44 59 -7 11 3 -6 -9 -33 -10 -13 -28 -35 -31 -34 -15 -35 -15 -34 97 98 91 98 -4 -9 -6 4 4 1 23 -18 -4 27 -1 -10 -1 -1 0 0 7 -46 11 -35 3 -3 -73 31 -42 385 -185 -166 435 -166 27 12 4 5 430 10 -30 -79 -27 -44 -47 432 -2 37 14 -5 49 -21 -6 15 58 16 -4 24 36 302 36 26 312 350 27 24 -85 72 -9 -29 419 -26 405 0 -8 5 -1 -146 -20 431 3 2 8 73 10 37 10 111 -33 503 12 34 -6 8 -12 8 -10 13 -29 9 18 -7 51 100 -28 -91 -15 -28 -91 -6 -82 -20 1 23 5 15 3 -10 21 -42 2 20 9 10 -21 -44 -21 -18 6 -81 4 18 -15 -32 -55 -15 6 -5 5 -10 -52 1 5 7 -28 -33 1 -23 -38 9 -67 9 -22 12 -17 -38 27 12 -20 27 41 -50 13 -87 -12 -62 -43 17 -18 66 66 -18 -12 1 6 -62 -1 -8 -56 23 36 -98 26 -8 -56 28 41 -24 -84 -8 -44 -7 -8 150 -5 -51 154 -9 4 103 30 13 -5 13 8 42 0 0 30 13 -12 -39 -42 3 -42 -14 28 -13 -1 -13 10 5 6 4 -28 -1 23 3 26 -28 12 -28 -140 130 -7 12 -4 -4 -4 154 12 6 -23 -23 33 33 28 -23 -7 9 -4 -17 -11 -11 63 2 -1 24 -47 31 -47 27 31 35 48 30 -65 23 -16 31 -16 8 7 24 -3 14 8 13 -7 10 3 23 18 -17 -48 -6 9 3 -35 -37 -12 27 -34 -9 -2 7 6 2 -2 2 14 6 21 5 28 2 -1 0 25 12 30 13 -2 22 21 34 -5 13 17 -61 46 -23 45 -26 -17 36 88 -53 -40 3 0 10 46 -60 -44 29 10 16 13 76 32 15 6 47 46 7 35 13 36 -19 35 10 -247 -132 -259 -147 0 203 271 -39 -47 5 15 46 -23 14 -65 39 -26 119 38 73 -63 -45 -37 41 -35 -33 40 -59 -39 -29 4 3 30 3 14 5 -42 1 25 15 27 9 46 52 26 0 -30 35 -38 8 -5 -22 33 22 -13 -39 -9 -9 24 39 -67 17 -65 16 100 56 56 121 -1 33 7 -34 17 22 -133 36 17 19 -9 53 29 -16 -6 -4 4 -5 -8 -5 -9 -11 -13 -6 -10 -8 3 -14 -9 -11 0 -11 3 5 29 1 63 16 -14 -3 28 0 -9 -1 -3 -3 -95 10 -95 10 16 22 -84 17 8 -34 119 8 -5 -2 - -6 -3 -77 -19 1 0 37 -43 7 -39 49 77 -50 29 -4 -30 -3 17 -38 4 0 25 53 0 5 29 52 4 24 -57 8 4 -19 -12 -7 1 56 -32 35 35 -32 6 -23 22 -8 4 -2 80 27 78 35 143 79 38 71 153 73 277 2 277 10 -117 -22 41 74 3 17 161 112 -3 -83 -83 -4 4 141 72 3 32 12 -4 -12 9 35 -5 -38 26 11 47 4 -6 11 33 3 5 -6 12 36 -3 32 -22 7 32 38 -31 11 5 -1 -5 58 41 7 3 32 207 263 13 -57 65 -11 -3 98 8 101 18 -3 31 -91 -101 19 151 67 32 40 30 46 -48 8 -47 22 -49 14 11 33 14 -3 14 -3 -7 66 -31 46 -4 10 7 15 69 -7 -25 -30 73 2 65 -9 7 -8 44 -15 55 -17 47 2 -6 21 9 -52 32 34 6 1 4 -5 73 -15 -27 34 5 1 9 -20 0 24 -2 0 6 -1 -9 -9 -34 -27 -26 4 -4 -8 1 0 57 64 64 56 -3 -33 8 -10 23 38 0 6 44 -29 85 -11 29 1 4 27 21 -35 -32 6 -32 6 20 4 1 18 -3 62 -5 75 -1 76 33 78 42 77 53 20 20 53 -1 39 -2 0 34 8 -53 29 16 7 26 52 80 42 33 -83 14 6 46 -75 14 1 16 84 -1 16 108 -34 -31 114 8 18 10 -31 -20 9 52 26 436 230 26 52 30 4 48 13 -43 20 37 34 32 45 9 9 8 20 37 63 -37 -15 -10 -28 54 2 84 3 54 -3 35 -22 -86 -71 -71 -86 30 54 30 40 -23 31 -32 29 67 15 -33 -57 1 0 4 6 5 -1 6 -2 1 0 -2 0 3 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 33 30 -23 7 15 7 -23 -10 -140 130 10 23 -5 -14 21 13 123 72 0 -7 10 21 14 -39 69 10 16 -26 19 503 9 10 4 -2 -8 -12 0 454 -21 -2 -11 6 24 -4 109 460 -6 -14 20 1 14 65 124 0 73 -19 -6 -6 8 16 -23 31 -20 5 8 6 6 -4 89 24 68 29 2 -19 1 15 -1 -10 -57 12 8 -1 8 95 0 -10 -24 -34 -24 -2 -3 9 -28 -36 -6 94 6 12 9 39 90 9 9 39 20 29 250 15 32 14 45 32 -9 22 3 17 27 31 39 106 0 248 -19 342 362 237 10 33 10 8 8 20 19 59 35 51 17 -1 16 84 -30 -6 72 189 51 124 80 115 417 237 393 217 116 100 8 26 67 -4 56 158 85 78 158 63 49 85 -16 45 43 60 63 27 33 43 24 -68 -86 19 54 23 -10 -46 -15 -18 -42 -33 -1 32 34 32 34 5 4 9 -47 -4 -44 -2 -60 -16 28 -7 124 63 97 49 -53 -38 10 24 39 -3 26 19 59 45 -25 350 214 -13 -27 27 -50 43 0 -4 86 32 37 -12 -4 56 8 -81 63 -3 11 -24 -131 5 -144 48 101 ---PAGE BREAK--- APPENDIX I WATER TECHNICAL APPENDICES Water Supply Assessment Water Facility Assessment Project Water Demand and Regional Supply Update ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- AMENDMENT TO THE ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT November 2009 Prepared for: CITY OF ANAHEIM Prepared by: 3 Hutton Centre Drive Suite 200 Santa Ana, CA 92707 Project No. 2ANA012900 ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive 1 1.0 2.0 2.1 SB 610 – Costa – Water Supply Planning 3.0 Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific 3.1 Project 3.2 ARSP Project Water Demands 4.0 City of Anaheim Water Demand and 4.1 Overview of Supply and 4.2 Groundwater 4.3 Imported Water (Surface Water) 4.4 Recycled 5.0 Reliability of Water 5.1 Metropolitan Water 5.1.1 State Water Project 5.1.2 Colorado River Aqueduct 5.1.3 Water Transfer and Exchange Programs 5.1.4 Supply Management 5.2 Orange County Water District 5.2.1 OCWD Long Term Facilities Plan (LTFP) 5.2.2 OCWD Groundwater Management Plan 5.2.3 OCWD 2020 Water Master Plan Report (MPR) 5.3 Anaheim Public Utilities Department (APUD or 5.3.1 Water 5.3.2 Past and Current 5.3.3 Huntington Beach Sea Water Desalination Facility 5.4 Dry Year Reliability 6.0 Possible Water Supply Shortage 7.0 Conclusion 8.0 November 2009 i ---PAGE BREAK--- TABLES Table 3.1 Proposed Increase in ARSP Development Table 3.2 Proposed ARSP Water Demand Table 4.1 Water Service Area Population – Past, Current and Table 4.2 City of Anaheim Historical Water Sales by Customer Class Table 4.3 City of Anaheim Historical Production by Source (AF) Table 4.4 Projected Water Demand and Supply City of Anaheim, including the Proposed Project Table 4.5 Groundwater Pumping by Well (AF) Table 4.6 Estimated Pumping by Well to 2015 (AF) Table 4.7 Total Retail Water Demand in Metropolitan’s Service Area for Orange County - Includes Municipal and Industrial, and Agriculture (AF) Table 5.1 SWP Deliveries to Metropolitan Table 5.2 Historical Imported Water Use (AFY) Table 5.3 Metropolitan Regional Imported Water Supply Reliability Projections Table 5.4 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Normal Year.........5-29 Table 5.5 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Single Dry Year....5-30 Table 5.6 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Multiple Dry Water Years Table 5.7 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Multiple Dry Water Years Table 5.8 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Multiple Dry Water Years Table 5.9 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Multiple Dry Water Years Table 5.10 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Multiple Dry Water Years Table 6.1 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Under Temporary 35% Metropolitan SWP Water Supply Shortage Normal Year Table 6.2 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Under Temporary 35% Metropolitan SWP Water Supply Shortage Single Dry Table 6.3 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Under Temporary 35% Metropolitan SWP Water Supply Shortage Multiple Dry Years 2006-2010 Table 6.4 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Under Temporary 35% Metropolitan SWP Water Supply Shortage Multiple Dry Years 2011-2015 Table 6.5 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Under Temporary 35% Metropolitan SWP Water Supply Shortage Multiple Dry Years 2016-2020 Table 6.6 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Under Temporary 35% Metropolitan SWP Water Supply Shortage Multiple Dry Years 2021-2025 Table 6.7 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Under Temporary 35% Metropolitan SWP Water Supply Shortage Multiple Dry Years 2026-2030 Table 6.8 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Under Temporary 40% Metropolitan SWP Water Supply Shortage Normal Year Table 6.9 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Under Temporary 40% Metropolitan SWP Water Supply Shortage Single Dry November 2009 ii ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 6.10 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Under Temporary 40% Metropolitan SWP Water Supply Shortage Multiple Dry Years 2006-2010 6-13 Table 6.11 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Under Temporary 40% Metropolitan SWP Water Supply Shortage Multiple Dry Years 2011-2015 6-14 Table 6.12 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Under Temporary 40% Metropolitan SWP Water Supply Shortage Multiple Dry Years 2016-2020 6-15 Table 6.13 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Under Temporary 40% Metropolitan SWP Water Supply Shortage Multiple Dry Years 2021-2025 6-16 Table 6.14 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Under Temporary 40% Metropolitan SWP Water Supply Shortage Multiple Dry Years 2026-2030 6-17 FIGURES Figure 3.1 Regional Location of Figure 3.2 Proposed Development Area Plan for the ARSP Figure 5.1 Anaheim Public Utilities Major Facilities & Service APPENDICES Appendix A Water Demand Factor Support Data Appendix B Metropolitan Water Supply Support Data Appendix C Anaheim Water Conservation Support Data Appendix D Metropolitan Water Supply Allocation Plan Percentages November 2009 iii ---PAGE BREAK--- ABBREVIATIONS/ACRONYMS AB Assembly Bill AF Acre-feet AFY Acre-feet per year APUD, Department City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department ARSP Anaheim Resort Specific Plan ARTIC Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center ARTIC Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center BEA Basin Equity Assessment BPP Basin Production Percentage CAWCD Central Arizona Water Conservation District CEQA California Environmental Quality Act City, Anaheim City of Anaheim CRA Colorado River Aqueduct CREED Citizens for Responsible Equitable Environmental Development CVP Central Valley Project CVWD Coachella Valley Water District DPH California Department of Public Health DSEIR Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report DWA, Desert Desert Water Agency DWR California Department of Water Resources EIR Environmental Impact Report ESA Endangered Species Act FEIR Final Environmental Impact Report FSEIR Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report GIS Geographic Information System GMP Groundwater Management Plan gpd Gallons per day GWRS Groundwater Replenishment System HGL Hydraulic grade line IID Imperial Irrigation District IRP Integrated Resources Planning IRWD Irvine Ranch Water District KPMC Kaiser Permanente Medical Center ksf Thousand square feet LACDPW Los Angeles County Department of Public Works LRP Local Resources Program LTFP Long Term Facilities Plan MAF Million acre-feet Metropolitan, MWD Metropolitan Water District of Southern California MG Million gallons November 2009 iv ---PAGE BREAK--- MGD Million gallons per day MWDOC Municipal Water District of Orange County OCCORD Orange County Communities Organized for Responsible Development OCP Orange County Projections OCSD Orange County Sanitation District OCWD Orange County Water District PTMU Platinum Triangle Mixed Use PVID Palo Verde Irrigation District QSA Quantification Settlement Agreement RA Replenishment Assessment RUWMP Regional Urban Water Management Plan SAR Santa Ana River SB Senate Bill SDCWA San Diego County Water Authority sf Square feet SNWA Southern Nevada Water Authority SSS Seasonal Shift Storage SWP State Water Project State Water Resources Control Board UBC Uniform Building Code UWMP Urban Water Management Plan WCR Walnut Canyon Reservoir WRD Water Replenishment District WSA Water Supply Assessment YCWA Yuba County Water Agency November 2009 v ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDMENT TO THE ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Water Supply Assessment (WSA) has been prepared for the proposed Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (ARSP) in accordance with applicable sections of the Public Resources Code and California Water Code as referenced in Senate Bill 610. This WSA will provide information to verify that there is sufficient water supply to the City of Anaheim to provide for the proposed project now and into the future. The project area is located in the City of Anaheim, generally west of the Interstate 5 (I-5) corridor, south of Vermont Avenue, east of Walnut Street, and north of Orangewood Avenue. The project area encompasses 581.3 gross acres and includes all properties within the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (hereinafter referred to as the “ARSP area” or “project area”). The 581.3 acre ARSP area is divided into two development areas: Development Area 1 and Development Area 2. Development Area 1 is also known as the Commercial-Recreation (CR) District and encompasses approximately 518.5 acres. Development Area 2, encompassing 62.8 acres, is also known as the Public-Recreation (PR) District. The proposed project consists of two components: the build-out of development within Development Area 1, the Commercial-Recreation (CR) District; and the expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center within Development Area 2, the Public- Recreation (PR) District. The purpose of this WSA is to provide information to verify that there is sufficient water supply to the City of Anaheim to provide for the ARSP now and into the future. This WSA develops the additional water demands that will need to be served by the City as a result of the proposed project. This intensification is consistent with the land use being addressed in the Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (DSEIR No. 340) and these higher water demands require the preparation of a new Water Supply Assessment (WSA) in conjunction with the subject DSEIR. Water Demand In 2007/08, the City’s water demand was approximately 74,000 acre-feet per year (AFY) including unaccounted for water, which is tracking over 5,000 AFY less than projected in the 2005 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP). In essence, this means that City businesses and residents are using less water than was originally forecast, which is likely due to the fact that the previous UWMP conservatively over-estimated water demand, and (ii) water demand is being reduced due to effective conservation efforts being undertaken by the City and increased water efficiencies resulting from more stringent November 2009 1 ---PAGE BREAK--- building codes and more efficient appliances tankless water heaters, high-efficiency clothes washing machines, etc.). At the end of the 20-year planning period for this WSA, as required by SB 610, City water demand for 2029/30 is projected to be approximately 88,510 AFY. This projection includes future demands from the City based on the overall growth rate projected in the 2005 UWMP as well as added demands from the Proposed Project, The Platinum Triangle Project intensification, and Kaiser Permanente Medical Center Project, all of which have been addressed in other WSAs prepared since the 2005 UWMP. Supply Projections The City’s sources of supply consist of groundwater and imported surface water. In 2007/08, the City received approximately 79 percent of its water supply from groundwater and 21 percent from imported water. Analysis of water supply projections for the City demonstrates that projected supplies will exceed demand through fiscal year 2029/30. These projections consider water development programs and projects as well as water conservation, as described in the City’s 2005 UWMP and Section 5 of this WSA. The City’s groundwater and imported water supplies are anticipated to remain stable based on studies and reports of the Orange County Water District (OCWD) and the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (Metropolitan), respectively. Statewide water planning is also considering current dry conditions and various Bay Delta pumping scenarios, which are also discussed in Section 5. Based on the expected long-term average Basin Production Percentage (BPP), the City’s water supply projection assumes that up to 67 percent will be groundwater, and 33 percent will be imported, which has been confirmed as reliable by Metropolitan. Additionally, analyses of normal, single-dry, and multiple-dry year scenarios also demonstrate the City’s ability to meet demand during the 20-year analysis period. Finally, an analysis was conducted utilizing assumed temporary shortages in Metropolitan’s water supply, which demonstrates the City’s ability to meet demand under reasonably foreseeable temporary allocations to deal with cutbacks in SWP deliveries due to Delta smelt and other environmental issues, were such issues to materialize in any near term or future years. Moreover, should extraordinary circumstances require it, the City can meet its water demand by increasing production of groundwater beyond the BPP up to the basin safe yield, increasing imported water purchases from available storage programs, and/or decreasing demand through water conservation measures. Reliability of future water supplies to the region will be ensured through continued implementation of the OCWD Groundwater Management Plan, OCWD’s Long Term November 2009 2 ---PAGE BREAK--- Facilities Plan, local agency programs, and the combined efforts and programs among member and cooperative agencies of Metropolitan. These agencies include all water wholesalers and retailers, the Orange County Sanitation District, the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board, and the Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority. The plans are described in the City’s 2005 UWMP and Section 5 of this WSA. Conclusion The information included in this water supply assessment identifies a sufficient and reliable water supply for the City, now and into the future, including a sufficient water supply for the ARSP (the Proposed Project). These supplies are also sufficient to provide for overall City-wide growth at the rate projected in the most recent Orange County Projections (OCP - 2006 Population and Housing Projections), published in 2008 by the Center for Demographic Research at California State University, Fullerton, which develops higher growth projections than those used in the 2005 UWMP (both of which include the Mountain Park development) plus additional water demands within the City resulting from development proposed after the UWMP was adopted. These added demands include the Proposed Project, demands analyzed by the May 2007 WSA for the Kaiser Permanente Medical Center (KPMC), and demands associated with The Platinum Triangle intensification project, which are being analyzed in a separate WSA November 2009 3 ---PAGE BREAK--- 1.0 INTRODUCTION Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (ARSP) area is located in the City of Anaheim, 35 miles southeast of downtown Los Angeles and 7 miles northwest of Santa Ana, in central Orange County. The Project Site is located generally west of the Interstate 5 (I-5) corridor, south of Vermont Avenue, east of Walnut Street, and north of Orangewood Avenue. The City of Anaheim is the Lead Agency responsible for preparing a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) for the ARSP. In September 1994, the City of Anaheim certified EIR No. 313 (State Clearinghouse No. 91091062) in support of the adoption of The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2 (Anaheim 1994b, 1994a). This EIR evaluated impacts associated with the establishment and implementation of the ARSP and created a mitigation monitoring program (MMP No. 0085) in order to mitigate any such impacts. Since being certified in 1994, two Validation Reports have been prepared (1999 and 2004) to evaluate the continued relevance and accuracy of the Master EIR and its ability to be used as a project EIR for all projected development within the boundaries of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan area. As the Master EIR will be 15 years old at the time of the next required validation, the City has elected to prepare a Supplemental EIR to reevaluate all the environmental changes that have occurred in and around the Anaheim Resort. The purpose of this supplement is to update the environmental conditions of the ARSP area since certification of the original Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Master EIR (EIR No. 313) in August 1994. This process will also serve to evaluate the potential environmental impacts associated with a proposed expansion to the Anaheim Convention Center, including additional exhibit space, ballrooms, meeting and office space, up to 900 hotel rooms, and associated specialty retail, restaurant and entertainment uses. At the time of adoption, the ARSP area encompassed approximately 549.5 acres. Since certification of EIR No. 313, modifications to the ARSP have included 12 amendments and 4 adjustments, which have increased the total ARSP area to 581.3 acres. The most significant of these modifications is Amendment No. 5 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan which was approved in June 2004 in conjunction with a comprehensive update of the City’s General Plan and Zoning Code. Amendment No. 5 expanded the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan to the southern City limits by incorporating approximately 26.4 acres, located along Harbor Boulevard, south of Orangewood Avenue. The 581.3-acre ARSP area is divided into two Development Areas. Development Area 1 is known as the Commercial-Recreation (CR) District and encompasses approximately 518.5 acres. Development Area 2 is known as the Public Recreational (PR) District and encompasses approximately 62.8 acres. November 2009 1-1 ---PAGE BREAK--- Permitted development in the CR District includes hotels, motels, restaurants and other visitor-serving uses integrated with hotel/motel developments, such as travel agencies, automobile rental agencies, and specialty retail shops. The CR District also includes three properties totaling approximately 31.5 acres that have a Mobile Home Park Overlay zone designation. Additionally, a Residential Overlay zone totaling 59.3 acres allows for residential uses in conjunction with visitor-serving uses within two designated areas. The PR District includes City-owned land such as the 1.7 million square foot (sf) Anaheim Convention Center (Convention Center) and the 1,600-room Anaheim Hilton Hotel. Other allowed uses within the PR District include accessory uses such as concession stands, restaurants, and shops. Purpose of this WSA The purpose of this WSA is to provide information to verify that there is sufficient water supply to the City to provide for the Proposed Project now and into the future. This WSA develops the additional water demands that will need to be served by the City as a result of the proposed intensification of development in the ARSP. This intensification is consistent with the land use being addressed in the current Supplemental EIR and these higher water demands require the preparation of a new Water Supply Assessment (WSA) in conjunction with the subject EIR. November 2009 1-2 ---PAGE BREAK--- 2.0 LEGISLATION Because of the size of the Proposed Project, the State of California, through Senate Bill (SB) 610, requires that a Water Supply Assessment be completed to evaluate the potential affect of the proposed development on current and future water supplies. While the Proposed Project will be implemented by numerous individual development projects that may have fewer than the threshold of 500 units (or a water use equivalent of commercial or office square footage) that triggers the preparation of a Water Supply Assessment, collectively the total project exceeds the threshold. Thus, the City has caused this Water Supply Assessment to be prepared. The following outlines the requirements of SB 610. 2.1 SB 610 – Costa – Water Supply Planning SB 610 was chaptered into law on October 9, 2001. SB 610 requires a city or county that determines a project subject to CEQA to identify any public water system that may supply water for the project and to request those public water systems to prepare a specified water supply assessment. The assessment is to include the following: 1. Discussion with regard to whether the public water system’s total projected water supplies available during normal, single dry, and multiple dry water years during a 20-year projection will meet the projected water demand associated with the proposed project, in addition to the public water system’s existing and planned future uses, including agricultural and manufacturing. 2. Identification of existing water supply entitlements, water rights, or water service contracts relevant to the identified water supply for the proposed project and water received in prior years pursuant to those entitlements, rights, and contracts. 3. Description of the quantities of water received in prior years by the public water system under the existing water supply entitlements, water rights or water service contracts. 4. Water supply entitlements, water rights or water service contracts shall be demonstrated by the following: a. Written contracts or other proof of entitlement to an identified water supply. b. Copies of capital outlay program for financing the delivery of a water supply that has been adopted by the public water system. c. Federal, state, and local permits for construction of necessary infrastructure associated with delivering the water supply. d. Any necessary regulatory approvals that are required in order to be able to convey or deliver the water supply. 5. Identification of other public water systems or water service contract holders that receive a water supply or have existing water supply entitlements, water rights, or water service contracts, to the same source of water as the public water system. 2-1 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- 6. If groundwater is included for the supply for a proposed project, the following additional information is required: a. Review of any information contained in the Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) relevant to the identified water supply for the proposed project. b. Description of any groundwater basin(s) from which the proposed project will be supplied. Adjudicated basins must have a copy of the court order or decree adopted and a description of the amount of groundwater the public water system has the legal right to pump. For non-adjudicated basins, information on whether the DWR has identified the basin as over-drafted or has projected that the basin will become over-drafted if present management conditions continue, in the most current bulletin of DWR that characterizes the condition of the basin, and a detailed description of the efforts being undertaken in the basin to eliminate the long-term overdraft condition. c. Description and analysis of the amount and location of groundwater pumped by the public water system for the past 5 years from any groundwater basin which the proposed project will be supplied. Analysis should be based on information that is reasonably available, including, but not limited to, historic use records. d. Description and analysis of the amount and location of groundwater projected to be pumped by the public water system from any groundwater basin which the proposed project will be supplied. Analysis should be based on information that is reasonably available, including, but not limited to, historic use records. e. Analysis of sufficiency of the groundwater from the basin(s) from which the proposed project will be supplied. f. The water supply assessment shall be included in any environmental document prepared for the project. g. The assessment may include an evaluation of any information included in that environmental document. A determination shall be made whether the projected water supplies will be sufficient to satisfy the demands of the project, in addition to existing and planned future uses. Additionally, SB 610 requires new information to be included as part of an UWMP if groundwater is identified as a source of water available to the supplier. Information must include a description of all water supply projects and programs that may be undertaken to meet total projected water use. SB 610 prohibits eligibility for funds from specified bond acts until the plan is submitted to the State. 2-2 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- 3.0 AMENDMENT TO THE ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN 3.1 Project Description The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (ARSP) project area is located in the City of Anaheim, generally west of the Interstate 5 (I-5) corridor, south of Vermont Avenue, east of Walnut Street, and north of Orangewood Avenue. Figure 3-1 shows the project’s regional location. The ARSP area encompasses 581.3 gross acres. The Project Site is currently developed with the Anaheim Convention Center and is primarily developed with a mix of hotels, retail stores, restaurants and other visitor-serving uses. There are also small industrial and office uses, mobile home parks, an elementary school, as well as land used for agricultural purposes. Surrounding land uses include the Disneyland Resort, Anaheim Garden Walk, and hotels and visitor-serving uses within the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan and the Hotel Circle Specific Plan. Other surrounding land uses include a mix of commercial, retail, residential, and visitor-serving uses. The proposed project consists of two components: the build-out of development within Development Area 1, the Commercial-Recreation (CR) District; and the expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center within Development Area 2, the Public- Recreation (PR) District. The 581.3 acre ARSP area is divided into two development areas: Development Area 1 and Development Area 2. Development Area 1 is also known as the Commercial- Recreation (CR) District and encompasses approximately 518.5 acres. Permitted development includes restaurants, hotels, motels, and other visitor-serving uses within hotel/motel developments. All of the development within Development Area 1, with the exception of an additional 3,638 equivalent hotel rooms, is consistent with the City’s 2004 General Plan Update. The number of hotel rooms previously included in the 2004 General Plan for Development Area 1 was 28,862 and the corresponding water demand for that development was therefore included in the City’s 2005 Urban Water Management Plan. This area is currently planned for development of up to 32,500 total hotel room equivalents, or a total of up to 3,638 additional hotel room equivalents for which water demand was not included in the City’s 2005 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP). The resulting additional water demand will be analyzed in this WSA. Development Area 2, encompassing 62.8 acres, is also known as the Public-Recreation (PR) District and includes City-owned uses such as the 1.7 million square foot Anaheim Convention Center and the 1,600-room Anaheim Hilton Hotel. The proposed project includes further expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center, as described below, and the resulting water demand not included in the City’s 2005 UWMP and whose additional 3-1 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- Figure 3.1 Regional Location of Project 3-2 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- water demand will be analyzed in this WSA. Development Area 2 consists of a mix of meeting, ballroom, office, exhibit hall, restaurant and retail space as well as a mix of hotel and hotel related space. Table 3.1 below shows the proposed increase in development intensities above what was included in the City’s 2004 General Plan Update and 2005 UWMP for both Development Areas 1 and 2. Figure 3.2 below shows the location of the two Development Areas within the ARSP. Table 3.1 Proposed Increase in ARSP Development Intensity Development Area 1 - Commercial Recreational (CR) District Additional Hotel Development Units Equivalent Hotel Rooms 3,638 rooms Development Area 2 - Public Recreational (PR) District Convention Center Expansion Units Flexible Meeting Space 265,000 s.f. Ballroom Space 50,000 s.f. Meeting and Office Space 43,914 s.f. Exhibit Hall Space 20,295 s.f. Bridge/Skyway 27,150 s.f. Restaurant Space 80,000 s.f. Specialty Retail Space 45,000 s.f. Hotel Development Units Two Hotels 900 rooms Spa Facilities 15,000 s.f. Restaurant Space 15,000 s.f. Retail Space 10,000 s.f. Meeting Space 30,000 s.f. Ballroom Space 10,000 s.f. Bar/Night Club Space 15,000 s.f. 3-3 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- Figure 3.2 Proposed Development Area Plan for the ARSP 3-4 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- 3.2 ARSP Project Water Demands Using water duty factors for each land use category that are documented below, the total water demand projection for the increase in land use intensification that was not included in the 2005 UWMP is 0.876 million gallons per day or 980.6 acre-feet per year (AFY). The detailed land use statistics and concurrent water demand increase for the proposed Project by Development Area or District, which needs to be added to the demands of the 2005 UWMP are detailed in Table 3.2. Table 3.2 Proposed ARSP Water Demand Increase Development Area 1 - Commercial Recreational (CR) District Demand Units Demand Factor (gpd) AFY Additional Equivalent Hotel Rooms 3,638 rooms 125 gpd/room 454,750 509.4 3.8% Losses 17,281 19.4 Total CR District 472,031 528.8 Development Area 2 - Public Recreational (PR) District Demand Units Demand Factor (gpd) AFY Convention Center Expansion Flexible Meeting Space 265,000 s.f. 350 gpd/ksf 92,750 103.9 Ballroom Space 50,000 s.f. 350 gpd/ksf 17,500 19.6 Meeting and Office Space 43,914 s.f. 350 gpd/ksf 15,370 17.2 Exhibit Hall Space 20,295 s.f. 350 gpd/ksf 7,103 8.0 Bridge/Skyway1 27,150 s.f. 350 gpd/ksf 9,503 10.6 Restaurant Space 80,000 s.f. 1,000 gpd/ksf 80,000 89.6 Specialty Retail Space 45,000 s.f. 195 gpd/ksf 8,775 9.8 Subtotal 231,001 258.8 Hotel Development Two Hotels 900 rooms 125 gpd/room 112,500 126.0 Spa Facilities 15,000 s.f. 600 gpd/ksf 9,000 10.1 Restaurant Space 15,000 s.f. 1,000 gpd/ksf 15,000 16.8 Retail Space 10,000 s.f. 195 gpd/ksf 1,950 2.2 Meeting Space 30,000 s.f. 350 gpd/ksf 10,500 11.8 Ballroom Space 10,000 s.f. 350 gpd/ksf 3,500 3.9 Bar/Night Club Space 15,000 s.f. 350 gpd/ksf 5,250 5.9 Subtotal 157,700 176.7 Subtotal PR District 388,701 435.4 3.8% Losses 14,771 16.5 Total PR District 403,471 452.0 Grand Total ARSP 875,502 980.8 1) Based on assumption that this space could be used as exhibit, meeting or commercial space 3-5 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- The following assumptions were utilized in preparing these estimated additional average annual water demand projections that will be generated by the Project. 1. Outside (irrigation) water usage would remain unchanged due to the intensification as it would have been included with the acreage already accounted for in the water duty factors for the original Resort Area Specific Plan. In other words, the land uses within the same area are just becoming more intensified and no additional landscape irrigation demand is projected beyond that projected in the 2005 UWMP based on the 2004 GP Update land use plan. 2. Inside water usage within the area will be increased based on the additional hotel rooms, meeting, office, retail, ballroom, restaurant, and other building square footages shown in Table 3.2, above. 3. Inside hotel water usage will be estimated based on the number of hotel rooms times 125 gallons per room per day (gpd/room). This factor is from the Los Angeles County Sanitation District’s sewer flow loadings. The City of Anaheim uses an average water demand of 180 gpd/room in their Design Guidelines but this factor is inclusive of ancillary uses such as restaurants and meeting space as well as landscaping. Since detailed statistics are available for the proposed uses in the PR District, we will project these demands separately rather than use the more general Anaheim Design Guideline factor. However, City staff compiled water use meter records on two hotels, the Anaheim Hilton and the Clarion, for a two-year period from 2006 to 2008 and generated total water use per room values of 198 and 179 gpd/room, respectively. Psomas compiled meeting room statistics for these two hotels and estimated restaurant/lounge space based on information provided on the hotels’ websites and projected these ancillary demands separately using LA County Sanitation District factors for these uses. When the non-room related demands were subtracted, the resultant demand for the Hilton and Clarion was 125 gpd/room and 111 gpd/room, respectively. Therefore, the methodology and factors used by LA County Sanitation District for projecting demands separately and Anaheim’s Design Guidelines projecting combined demands proved to be comparable. This methodology is also appropriate for hotel rooms in the CR District, where no details are available for the specific restaurants, meeting space and other ancillary hotel related space, since the number of rooms is based on an equivalency such that any of this hotel related space will be deducted from the allowable hotel rooms at 600 square feet per hotel room. 4. Based on the discussion in 3, above, the LA County Sanitation District flow factors by land use class were used to project the demands in Table 3.2. 5. Lastly, a 3.8% allowance was added to the net new demand to account for system losses in the water system. This is based on the average system losses experienced by the City over the past six-year period. 3-6 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- Project phasing for the PR District portion of the ARSP or the Convention Center Expansion and Hotel Development is based on that portion of the Project being completed by Year 5. Assuming that Year 0 commences in Fiscal Year 2008/09 (FY 2009) and occupancy and, in turn, water demands will not occur until build-out in FY 2014 (Year Phasing for the CR District portion of the ARSP is assumed to be over the entire 20-year WSA planning period so that each year will generate an additional water demand equal to 5% (one-twentieth) of the demand for that area or approximately 26.4 acre-feet added each year (528.8 x 0.05). 3-7 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- 4-1 November 2009 4.0 CITY OF ANAHEIM WATER DEMAND AND SUPPLIES 4.1 Overview of Supply and Demand The City currently obtains water from the following primary water sources: 1) naturally and artificially recharged local groundwater and 2) imported water. In addition, the Department maintains 17 interconnections with adjacent water purveyors that are temporarily utilized from time to time, on an as-needed or emergency basis. In 2007/08, the City received approximately 79 percent of its water supply from its groundwater wells that access the Orange County Groundwater Basin and 21 percent imported water from the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (Metropolitan). The Orange County Groundwater Basin is managed by the Orange County Water District (OCWD). Current and planned improvements, as discussed in Section 4.4 of the City’s 2005 UWMP, will increase the efficient and reliable use of both water sources. Each of the sources of water for the City are briefly discussed in this section and more fully discussed in the subsequent subsections. Demographics According to the State of California, Department of Finance, Anaheim is the 10th most populated city in California. The City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department (APUD) currently serves water to an area of approximately 48.2 square miles and to approximately 353,000 people1. The population in Anaheim was approximately 1,500 in 1900 and by 1950, the population was approximately 14,500. In 1955 and 1966, Disneyland and Anaheim Stadium were opened, respectively. These facilities, along with others, prompted a population increase to approximately 166,000 by 1970. Based on the City’s 2005 UWMP, Anaheim’s water service area population was projected to increase to approximately 401,000 by the year 2030. As described below, current projections have increased this 2030 population projection to over 426,000. Much of the growth will likely be attributed to higher population densities throughout Anaheim, including The Platinum Triangle and the proposed Mountain Park single and multi-family residential development in Anaheim Hills. Some population growth will also occur in the redevelopment areas. Since the 2005 UWMP, the Center for Demographic Research at California State University, Fullerton has prepared the 2006 Orange County Projections (OCP - 2006) published in December of 2008. These projections include population and housing unit projections for all of the cities in Orange County. The approved housing units within The Platinum Triangle of 10,266 were included in the OCP – 2006. However, the additional housing units in the Proposed Project were not included in the OCP projections. When 1 Center for Demographic Research at California State University, Fullerton. ---PAGE BREAK--- those units are included, the new total projected housing units within The Platinum Triangle are 18,909. There are also approximately 9,000 additional people who currently reside outside Anaheim’s City limits, but are served by APUD. This figure is anticipated to increase to 10,000 people by 2035. Table 4.1, below, shows the most recent data from OCP – 2006 in the first three rows, with the fourth, fifth and sixth rows of the table reflecting the additional population outside the City but within the APUD water service area. In order to generate a baseline citywide housing unit growth rate, the housing units within The Platinum Triangle are subtracted out since the increase in water demand for these units is being accounted for separately and is addressed in a separate WSA. Since there are no new housing units projected in the ARSP, no adjustment is necessary for the Proposed Project. The water service area housing units, excluding The Platinum Triangle, are then calculated by subtracting the approved Platinum Triangle housing units from the total service area housing units. A baseline citywide housing unit growth rate (excluding The Platinum Triangle) is then calculated using 2005 as a base year. For example, housing units within the APUD service area (excluding The Platinum Triangle) are anticipated to increase by 9.7% in 2020 over 2005 and by 13.7% in 2030. 4-2 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 4.1 Water Service Area Population – Past, Current and Projected Year 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 City of Anaheim Housing Units1 100,672 105,920 111,060 115,861 120,705 123,219 126,692 Persons per Housing Unit1 3.38 3.46 3.49 3.47 3.44 3.46 3.47 City of Anaheim Population 340,284 366,351 387,951 402,301 415,496 426,162 439,635 Population Outside City but within Water Service Area2 9,000 9,167 9,333 9,500 9,667 9,833 10,000 Housing Units Outside City2 2,663 2,650 2,672 2,736 2,808 2,843 2,882 Total Service Area Housing Units 103,335 108,570 113,732 118,597 123,513 126,062 129,574 Platinum Triangle Absorption (HU)3 - 1,820 3,509 5,198 6,888 8,577 10,266 Service Area Housing Units (excl. The Platinum Triangle) 103,335 106,750 110,223 113,399 116,626 117,485 119,308 % Growth in Housing Units (excl. The Platinum Triangle) Base Year 3.3% 6.7% 9.7% 12.9% 13.7% 15.5% Water Demand Growth (0.75 x HU %)4,5 2.5% 5.0% 7.3% 9.6% 10.3% 11.6% 1) Population and Housing Unit projections were based on the Orange County Projection - 2006 (OCP - 2006), prepared by the Center for Demographic Research at California State University, Fullerton and released in Dec. 2008. Population and Housing Unit projections include the Mountain Park development and the previously approved Platinum Triangle project. 2) Population outside City limits but within the Water Service Area provided by the City of Anaheim Planning Department. Housing Units Outside City calculated by dividing population by persons per housing unit shown on second row of table. 3) The Platinum Triangle (TPT) Housing Unit (HU) absorption, or phasing, assumes The Platinum Triangle approved dwelling units were included in the OCP - 2006 with a buildout by 2035. The 2010 dwelling units of 1,820 is based on the Existing Land Use statistics provided by the City of Anaheim Planning Department as of July 2008 plus the assumption that all units under construction as of that date will be occupied by 2010. Dwelling unit absorption is pro-rated equally between 2010 and 2035. 4) Water Demand Growth is estimated to be 75% of housing unit growth due to the fact that new units will use less water inside the home as they will be equipped with modern water conserving fixtures and also use less water outside the home because they will tend to have less landscaping due to higher densification as well as having more drought tolerant landscaping and more efficient irrigation systems. 5) Water Demand Growth also includes non-residential water demand growth since existing demand is increased by this percentage to obtain demand projection for each 5-year period and existing demand includes non- residential water use as well as residential water use. 4-3 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- Water Demand The growth rate in housing units developed in Table 4.1 above was used to project growth in citywide water demand at a somewhat lower rate than housing unit growth. A growth rate in water demand equal to 75% of the growth rate in housing units, exclusive of The Platinum Triangle, was used to project citywide water demand increases. This is based on the fact that new residential, commercial, industrial and institutional developments will have newer, water conserving fixtures inside, more efficient irrigation systems outside, and less landscaping due to increased densities. What landscape there is will also tend to be more drought-tolerant with lower water use than existing developments. The water demand growth rates generated in Table 4.1, while tied to residential housing unit growth, also include other non-residential water demand increases such as commercial, industrial and institutional as these demands are assumed to increase proportional to the ratio of the existing residential and non-residential demands. Table 4.2 shows the historical water sales by customer class and Table 4.3 shows historic water production by source for the past six years. This demand is satisfied from groundwater and imported water. Table 4.3 also shows the City’s annual water demand, that is, the total volume of water entering the City’s system (Total Water Into System). Water into the system is determined based on the water supply quantities (Total Water Supply) and adjusted for changes in system storage and water transfers. Table 4.2 City of Anaheim Historical Water Sales by Customer Class (AF) Customer Class 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 Single Family 27,197 27,987 26,201 26,785 28,775 27,674 Multi-Family 15,473 15,652 14,837 14,620 14,646 14,197 Commercial and Industrial 28,766 29,637 28,240 28,838 30,450 29,174 Total Water Sales 71,436 73,276 69,277 70,243 73,871 71,046 4-4 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- 4-5 November Table 4.3 City of Anaheim Historical Production by Source (AF) Source 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 Groundwater 50,852 51,831 43,642 41,858 51,637 58,172 Imported Water 23,943 25,066 28,030 31,256 24,696 15,272 Total Water Supply 74,795 76,897 71,672 73,114 76,333 73,445 Total Water Into System (Water Demand) 74,541 76,900 71,108 72,798 76,687 74,212 Equal to water supply adjusted for changes in storage and water transfers. The variance between the Water Into the System and Water Sales by Customer Class is the result of system losses or unaccounted-for-water. The City has an unaccounted-for- water loss of about 3.8 percent based on the average system losses experienced by the City over the past six-year period. Demand and Supply Comparison Table 4-4 shows the projected water demand and supply for the City of Anaheim, including additional demand the Proposed Project will require through Fiscal Year 2029/30. Demand and supply projections consider land use, in addition to water development programs and projects. It should be noted that the demand projections for a previously approved Water Supply Assessment since the 2005 UWMP (Kaiser Permanente Medical Center, dated May 2007) and a concurrent WSA (The Platinum Triangle) are also included in the demand projections and listed separately in Table 4-4. A supply surplus is indicated demonstrating a sufficient water supply for the City and the proposed projects through the 20-year planning period. 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 4.4 Projected Water Demand and Supply City of Anaheim, including the Proposed Project (AFY – rounded to the nearest 10 AFY) Water Sources 2009/10 2014/15 2019/20 2024/25 2029/2030 SUPPLY CAPACITY Imported1 29,090 30,430 29,560 29,640 29,640 Groundwater – City2 52,110 54,500 56,460 58,360 59,310 Total Potable Supply 81,200 84,930 86,020 88,000 88,950 DEMAND Total City Demand without Proposed Project, KPMC and Platinum Triangle3 76,170 78,040 79,760 81,500 81,960 Existing plus Approved Platinum Triangle Demand4 1,440 1,940 2,450 2,950 3,450 Additional Platinum Triangle Demand 5 90 540 990 1,440 1,800 Additional Kaiser Medical Center Demand6 40 210 330 330 330 Additional Proposed Project Demand7 30 610 740 880 980 Total Demand 77,770 81,340 84,270 87,100 88,520 SUPPLY SURPLUS 3,430 3,590 1,750 900 430 Supply Assumptions: 1. Imported: Imported water supply is the result of the “MWD Average Year Supply” times the Level 10, (1.18%) allocation percentage for the City of Anaheim from MWD’s 2009 Water Supply Allocation Model (5/6/09 email from MWD included in Appendix The “MWD Average Year Supply” that was taken from the MWD 2006 IRP Implementation Report includes a 22% reduction in SWP supply based on 2007 MWD IRP Implementation Report, October 2007 1-8). This 22% reduction in SWP supply is the amount of SWP water MWD has forecast would be reduced for delivery to MWD and its customers due to pumping restrictions that may be imposed to protect the Delta smelt and due to potential future impacts from climate change. Thus, the imported supply numbers included in this water supply assessment include the potential for a reduction in total SWP deliveries to MWD as a result of judicial and regulatory actions designed to protect Delta smelt as well as account for future climate change impacts. 4-6 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- 4-7 November 2009 4. Existing plus Approved Platinum Triangle: This demand includes the additional demand for The Platinum Triangle addressed previously in the February 2005 WSA (2,656 AFY at buildout) as well as existing landscape irrigation demand (551 AFY) and existing demands for the Arena (Honda Center) and Angel Stadium of Anaheim (238 AFY) that were not specifically addressed in the February 2005 WSA, except within the overall existing Citywide demands as they were to remain unchanged by any land use intensification. 7. Additional Proposed Project Demand: Additional project demands based on increase in land use intensification proposed in this ARSP WSA that was not included in the 2005 UWMP. The Level 10 allocation percentage for the City of Anaheim was obtained from MWD (5/6/09 email from MWD included in Appendix This allocation percentage, which is based on MWD’s Water Supply Allocation Model, corresponds to a 50% reduction in regional supply. This is conservative in that the proposed allocation for Year 2009/10, which is the first year MWD has enforced an allocation program, is set at Level 2, corresponding to a 10% reduction in regional supply. MWD’s Allocation Plan is discussed in more detail in Section 5 of this WSA. 3. Total City Demand (without Proposed Project, KPMC, and Platinum Triangle): Demand projections are consistent with the OCP - 2006 housing and population projections released in December 2008, adjusted to reflect current (2006-2008) water demand data provided by the City and excludes the Additional Proposed Project Demand. The demand includes unaccounted for water. 5. The Additional Platinum Triangle Demand: This demand includes the additional demand for The Platinum Triangle based on the increase in land use intensification proposed in The Platinum Triangle WSA being processed concurrently with this WSA. 6. Kaiser Permanente Medical Center (KPMC) Demand: Project demand assumptions and phasing are from May 2007 WSA. 2. Groundwater – City: Groundwater supply is estimated to equal 67% of total demand. Demand Assumptions: ---PAGE BREAK--- 4-8 November 2009 4.2 Groundwater Groundwater The information in this section is intended to furnish the information required by Water Code section 10910(f). The primary source of water for the City is the Orange County Groundwater Basin (Basin). The Basin underlies the north half of Orange County beneath broad lowlands. A description of the Coastal Plain of the Basin or DWR’s Groundwater Basin Number 8- 1, dated September 2001, states that the Basin underlies a coastal alluvial plain in the northwestern portion of Orange County. The Basin covers an area of approximately 350 square miles, bordered by the Coyote and Chino Hills to the north, the Santa Ana Mountains to the northeast, the Pacific Ocean to the southwest, and terminates at the Orange County line to the northwest, where its aquifer systems continue into the Central Basin of Los Angeles County.2 The Basin is dominated by a deep structural depression containing a thick accumulation of fresh water-bearing imbedded marine and continental sand, silt and clay deposits. The sediments containing easily recoverable fresh water extend to approximately 2,000 feet in depth. Although water bearing aquifers exist below that level, reduced water quality and pumping make these materials economically unviable at present. Upper, middle and lower aquifer systems are recognized in the Basin with well production yields ranging from 500 to 4,500 gallons per minute, but are generally 2,000 to 3,000 gallons per minute.3 The aquifers comprising the Basin form a complex series of interconnected sand and gravel deposits. The Basin holds millions of acre feet of water, of which about 1.25 to 1.5 million AF is available for use.4 To ensure that the Basin is not overdrawn, OCWD recharges the Basin with local and imported water. Groundwater conditions in the Basin are influenced by the natural hydrologic conditions. The Basin is recharged primarily by four sources: local rainfall, which varies due to the extent of the annual seasonal precipitation; storm and base flows from the Santa Ana River, which includes recycled wastewater from treatment plants in Riverside and San Bernardino Counties; imported water; and highly treated recycled wastewater. The Basin generally operates as a reservoir in which the net amount of water stored is increased in wet years to allow for manageable overdrafts in dry years. According to OCWD’s Engineer’s Report for fiscal year 2006-2007, total groundwater production from the Basin in 2 DWR’s Bulletin 118-1 Basin Description for Coastal Plain of Orange County Groundwater Basin Number 8-1. September 5, 2001. 3 DWR’s Bulletin 118-1 Basin Description for Coastal Plain of Orange County Groundwater Basin Number 8-1. September 5, 2001. 4 Orange County Water District 2020 Master Plan Report. Chapter 3, Orange County Groundwater Basin Hydrology. 2000. ---PAGE BREAK--- 4-9 November 2009 OCWD's jurisdiction was 349,858 AF. The production capability of the Basin has increased as a result of increased wastewater reclamation and the blending of waters of different qualities to produce high-quality potable water for public distribution.5 The most recent example of a highly successful OCWD wastewater reclamation project is the construction and operation of OCWD’s new $500 million water-purification plant, which is designed to turn wastewater into drinking water. This new Groundwater Replenishment System (GWRS) project, dubbed “toilet to tap” in the media, has been lauded by the environmental community because of the fact that these types of projects reduce the amount of energy needed to transport water from the northern part of the state to the southern part of the state, thereby also reducing greenhouse gas emissions. OCWD’s GWRS program is being emulated throughout the State and in other parts of the country. This OCWD GWRS currently treats and recharges up to 70 million gallons per day of wastewater back into the Basin for future potable use. This equates to the recycling of over 72,000 AFY of wastewater back into the Basin for future extraction and potable use. An already CEQA-approved treatment plant expansion of 30 million gallons per day is currently in the design process by OCWD that will increase the recharge capacity of the GWRS to 90,000 AFY, and the treatment system is being laid out so that it could eventually be expanded to 130 million gallons per day. As stated, the OCWD groundwater basin is managed by the OCWD, a special district created by the State Legislature in 1933 pursuant to the OCWD Act, an un-codified statutory scheme set forth in the State’s Water Code. The Basin is unadjudicated. All pumpers within the basin are permitted to pump from the Basin, but OCWD is charged with managing the groundwater basin. OCWD manages the Basin largely through the Basin Production Percentage (BPP) that it establishes each water year. The BPP is set based on groundwater conditions, availability of imported water supplies, ideal precipitation, Santa Ana River runoff, and basin management objectives. In essence, the BPP represents a set percentage identifying the amount of groundwater all pumpers in the basin can pump without paying a high “pumping tax” or Basin Equity Assessment to OCWD (described below). Thus, for example, if OCWD establishes a BPP of 65%, all pumpers within the Basin, including the City, can supply 65% of their water needs from groundwater supplies at a cost significantly less than the cost of imported water. The BPP is a major factor for the City in determining the cost of groundwater production. Groundwater production equal to or less than the BPP pays a replenishment assessment (RA). Funds collected by OCWD through RA payments made by all producers in the basin are used to fund groundwater replenishment and recharge programs aimed at ensuring the long-term viability and stability of the Basin. If groundwater production greater than the BPP occurs, a Basin Equity Assessment (BEA) is assessed against the producer of that amount of groundwater produced in excess of the BPP. The BEA is an additional fee a higher “pumping tax”) paid on each AF 5 MWDOC. Regional Water Management Plan Update. 2000 ---PAGE BREAK--- 4-10 November 2009 of water pumped above the BPP, making the total cost of that water to Anaheim equal to the cost of Tier 2 imported water from Metropolitan.6 Thus, the BPP creates pricing incentives to ensure that groundwater producers pump within the framework established by the BPP. Like funds collected by OCWD through the RA, funds collected by OCWD through the BEA are also used to fund groundwater replenishment, and recharge and recycling programs aimed at ensuring the long-term viability and stability of the Basin. The programs funded by the RA and the BEA include all of the groundwater replenishment, recharge, and recycling programs discussed above. Basin recharge occurs largely in the following recharge basins: Warner Basin, a 50- foot deep recharge basin located next to the Santa Ana River (SAR) at the intersection of the 55 and 91 freeways; (ii) Burris Pit, located between Lincoln Avenue and Ball Road; (iii) Kraemer Basin, located adjacent to Burris Pit, and (iv) Santiago Creek. All of these recharge facilities are located in or adjacent to the City of Anaheim. A large portion of the recharge of the OCWD groundwater basin comes from water flowing in the Santa Ana River (SAR) south of the Prado Dam, which is located in San Bernardino County, just east of the Orange County jurisdictional boundary. With the exception of contractual rights conveyed to Bryant Ranch landowners in east Yorba Linda which have contractual rights to approximately 2,800 AFY of SAR water, OCWD has the legal rights to all of the SAR flow south of the Prado Dam. (See OCWD v. City of Chino, et al, (Civ. Case No. 117628), Judgment and Settlement Documents.) As set forth in DWR Bulletin 118 and in the 2006-2007 OCWD Engineer’s Report, the Orange County Groundwater Basin is a managed basin and not in a state of overdraft. The Orange County Groundwater Basin is one of the richest and most plentiful sources of groundwater in the entire State, containing approximately 1.25 to 1.5 million AF of water available for use at the present time, and millions of acre-feet that could possibly be produced in the future.7 As part of its Basin management function, OCWD operates an extensive groundwater monitoring program whereby OCWD routinely tests all groundwater production wells located within the Basin in compliance with Title 22 of the California Administrative Code. OCWD maintains a multi-million dollar laboratory whereby chemists test the well water for traces of pollution, hydrocarbons, pesticides, and other chemical components. OCWD’s laboratories process tens of thousands of samples a year, and perform hundreds of thousands of analyses a year. As part of its monitoring and management duties, OCWD has developed and adopted a Groundwater Management Plan which is a program to increase water supplies and increase monitoring and groundwater contamination clean up. 6 Metropolitan charges a Tier 1 water rate to recover the cost of maintaining a reliable amount of supply and a Tier 2 rate to include the cost of developing additional supply to encourage efficient use of local resources. As an example, Metropolitan’s Tier 1 rate for treated water as of January 1, 2009 is $579 per acre-foot and the Tier 2 rate for treated water is $695 per acre-foot. 7 Orange County Water District 2020 Master Plan Report. Chapter 3, Orange County Groundwater Basin Hydrology. 2000. ---PAGE BREAK--- 4-11 November 2009 In 2007/2008, the City of Anaheim produced groundwater for potable use from 20 existing wells located throughout the City as set forth in Section 5 (Figure 5.1). Groundwater extracted by the City at these pumping locations is generally extracted from depths of approximately 100 feet to 150 feet below ground level, based on June 2008 static water levels8. Groundwater produced at these wells is easily accessible to City water distribution and storage facilities. Because of the location of many of the City’s wells adjacent to the SAR and in the northeast part of the groundwater basin, especially the six wells near Anaheim Lake, City wells are ideally located within the Groundwater Basin. From a hydro-geological standpoint, the City’s wells pump from geological structures which are relatively high up and geologically differentiated from other parts of the OCWD groundwater basin. In addition, because the City’s wells are located relatively near to the Prado Dam outlet to the SAR, particularly as compared to the well locations of other producers in the Basin, the City’s well fields draw water from easily accessible groundwater tables that are recharged on a naturally-occurring priority basis due to the location of OCWD recharge basins in or adjacent to the City, and (ii) the City’s wells’ location in or near the upper reaches of the SAR. In essence, SAR water has the natural effect of recharging the portion of the OCWD Basin that provides groundwater to City wells prior to such SAR water reaching the lower portions of the SAR. Thus, City wells are ideally located within the OCWD Groundwater Basin. In addition, because the City’s well produce groundwater from areas within the groundwater basin as described above, the groundwater production in Anaheim does not generally affect the production of groundwater production wells operated by other producers located in other portions of the Basin. Table 4.5, below, sets forth all of the water (defined in AFY) produced by the City during the past five years from each of the City’s wells. For the location of each of these wells, refer to Section 5, Figure 5.1. 8 Water Facilities Data Sheet, City of Anaheim, Fiscal Year 2007 - 2008 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 4.5 Groundwater Pumping by Well (AF) Well No. 2003 - 04 2004 - 05 2005 - 06 2006 - 07 2007 - 08 12 36.7 - - - 14 628.5 502.4 477.4 539.8 509.1 18 362.9 376.7 92.0 - - 19 65.0 - - - - 20 802.1 665.0 409.0 - - 22 2,005.6 551.1 - - - *24A* 332.0 231.6 214.7 251.6 296.9 25 591.6 408.2 505.5 484.8 544.9 26 1,233.9 347.6 - - - 27 997.6 803.4 984.0 1,383.4 234.6 28 1,027.3 818.6 780.2 988.8 580.9 29 573.8 226.4 394.2 - - 34 1,091.4 1,272.8 743.1 409.5 - 36 2,254.4 1,829.1 1,358.3 1,077.2 934.3 39 831.8 959.4 1,019.3 1,722.4 615.3 40 1,513.2 2,156.1 2,155.1 2,396.7 1,849.9 41 5,884.4 4,951.2 5,048.7 5,957.0 5,612.7 42 4,453.5 3,738.5 3,658.3 4,302.4 4,267.6 43 4,650.0 4,521.6 4,373.1 4,520.8 4,402.8 44 4,309.3 3,887.3 3,541.8 4,346.2 4,034.0 45 3,643.7 2,840.2 2,299.8 4,077.2 5,319.3 46 4,486.1 2,609.3 2,090.6 2,869.9 3,354.1 47 2,012.2 2,045.6 3,327.8 4,022.0 5,195.5 49 2,920.4 3,009.8 2,664.5 3,396.0 6,174.4 51 2,477.8 1,759.4 1,626.6 1,595.6 2,571.3 55 2,237.5 2,322.6 1,272.1 2,581.9 4,865.4 48 - - - - 1,080.0 52 - - - - 2,130.1 105 0.0 0.0 - - - 112 408.7 314.1 - - - 53 - 493.9 2,821.1 4,965.0 3,896.2 Total 51,831.4 43,641.9 41,857.2 51,888.2 58,469.3 PotableTotal1 51,499.4 43,410.3 41,642.5 51,636.6 58,172.4 1) Potable Total excludes pumping from Well No. 24A, which is an irrigation well serving Dad Miller Golf Course. 4-12 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- Based on past trends and based on the anticipated BPP, Table 4.6, below, sets forth the amount of groundwater, in acre-feet, the City anticipates producing from each of its wells through 2015 during a normal water year, assuming Well Nos. 25 and 39 are taken out of operation. Table 4.6 Estimated Pumping by Well to 2015 (AF) Well No. 2009 - 10 2010 - 11 2011 - 12 2012 - 13 2013 - 14 2014 - 15 12 14 466 470 475 479 483 488 18 19 20 22 *24A* 272 275 277 280 282 285 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 27 215 217 219 221 223 225 28 532 537 542 546 551 556 29 34 36 855 863 870 878 886 894 39 0 0 0 0 0 0 40 1,691 1,707 1,722 1,738 1,753 1,769 41 5,129 5,176 5,223 5,270 5,317 5,365 42 3,900 3,936 3,972 4,008 4,043 4,079 43 4,024 4,061 4,098 4,135 4,171 4,208 44 3,687 3,721 3,755 3,788 3,822 3,856 45 4,861 4,906 4,950 4,995 5,040 5,084 46 3,066 3,094 3,122 3,150 3,178 3,206 47 4,748 4,792 4,835 4,879 4,922 4,966 49 5,642 5,694 5,746 5,798 5,849 5,901 51 2,350 2,372 2,394 2,415 2,437 2,458 55 4,447 4,487 4,528 4,569 4,610 4,650 48 988 997 1,006 1,015 1,024 1,033 52 1,947 1,965 1,983 2,001 2,019 2,037 105 112 53 3,561 3,594 3,626 3,659 3,691 3,724 Total 52,382 52,863 53,343 53,824 54,304 54,785 Potable Total1 52,110 52,588 53,066 53,544 54,022 54,500 1) Potable Total excludes pumping from Well No. 24A, which is an irrigation well serving Dad Miller Golf Course. 4-13 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- 4-14 November 2009 Section 5 of this WSA sets forth various groundwater production scenarios as required by the Water Code (Single Dry Year, Multiple Dry Years, and reduced allocation due to Delta Smelt issues), and these latter tables and accompanying text should be reviewed for an understanding of how groundwater production by the City may be affected by hypothetical future conditions. This additional information set forth in Section 5 will furnish some of the additional information pertaining to the sufficiency of the groundwater basin in various pumping scenarios as required by Water Code section 10910(f)(5). 4.3 Imported Water (Surface Water) The information in this section is intended to furnish the information required by Water Code section 10910(d). Metropolitan provides imported water supplies to the City. Metropolitan is the wholesale water agency that serves supplemental imported water from northern California through the State Water Project (SWP) and the Colorado River to 26 member agencies located in portions of Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego, and Ventura Counties. The construction of the SWP was authorized by the State Legislature in 1951. Eight years later, the Legislature passed the Burns-Porter Act, which provided a mechanism for bonds to be issued to pay for the construction of certain portions of the SWP facilities. The DWR has entered into contracts with water districts and regional agencies (SWP Contractors) specifying the amount of SWP water to be delivered to each SWP Contractor. Each SWP Contractor was provided with a contract amount (Table A Amount) and capacity rights to the SWP aqueduct and storage system in return for payments intended to cover operation and maintenance, bondholder obligations, and repayment of moneys loaned from the California Water Fund. DWR water supply contracts contemplate that the SWP would deliver 4.2 million AFY to 29 SWP Contractors. Although the SWP is not fully constructed and cannot yet deliver the full 4.2 million AFY in all years, since the end of the six-year drought in 1992, the SWP has fully met SWP Contractors’ water needs twelve out of the next 16 years, except the dry years of 1994, 2001, 2007 and 2008. Of SWP water deliveries, about 70 percent is delivered to SWP urban contractors and about 30 percent is delivered to SWP agricultural contractors. Kern County Water Agency and Metropolitan are the largest Contractors with DWR for SWP water.9 From a statewide perspective, the maximum capacity of the overall SWP transportation system is generally limited by the capacity of the system pumps. The capacity of the California Aqueduct is 10,300 cubic feet per second (cfs) at its northern end, and 4,480 cfs below the Edmonston pumping plant (1,000 cfs equates to approximately 82.6 acre- feet per hour, 1,980 acre-feet per day and 725,000 AFY). If these transportation rates 9 See, generally Bulletin No. 132-06 and latter supplements to Bulletin No. 132. ---PAGE BREAK--- 4-15 November 2009 were maintained for a full year, they would result in the transport of approximately 7.2 million acre-feet near the Delta and 3.2 million acre-feet to users in Southern California.10 Demand can have a significant effect upon the reliability of a water system. For example, if the demand occurs only three months in the summer, a water system with a sufficient annual supply but insufficient water storage may not be able to reliably meet the demand. If, however, the same amount of demand is distributed over the year, the system could more easily meet the demand because the need for water storage is reduced. Because the City of Anaheim overlies the Orange County Groundwater Basin and can utilize the Basin to smooth out seasonal peaks, its imported water reliability is enhanced. The City of Anaheim is one of only three retail member agencies of Metropolitan in Orange County. As a member agency, pursuant to the Metropolitan Act, the City has preferential rights to a certain percentage of water delivered to Metropolitan each year primarily from the State Water Project and/or the Colorado River Aqueduct as well as other Metropolitan storage programs. Being a member agency of Metropolitan puts the City in a better position relative to receiving water directly from Metropolitan, as opposed to other agencies in Orange County which obtain their imported Metropolitan water through Municipal Water District of Orange County (MWDOC). Metropolitan’s SWP imported water is stored at Castaic Lake on the western side of their service area and at Silverwood Lake near San Bernardino. Metropolitan water imported from the Colorado River via the Colorado River Aqueduct (CRA) is stored at Diamond Valley Lake and Lake Mathews in Riverside County. Through the 1996 Integrated Resources Plan and subsequent updates, Metropolitan has worked toward identifying and developing water supplies to provide 100 percent reliability. Due to competing needs and uses for all of the water sources and regional water operation issues, Metropolitan undertook a number of planning processes: the Integrated Resources Planning (IRP) Process, the Water Surplus and Drought Management (WSDM) Plan, the Strategic Planning Process, the Regional Urban Water Management Plan, and most recently, the Report on Metropolitan Water Supplies: A Blueprint for Water Reliability. Combined, these documents provide a framework and guidelines for optimum water planning into the future. Reliability of Metropolitan’s supply is further discussed in Section 5.0, Reliability of Water Supplies. Metropolitan member agencies receive imported water at various delivery points along their system, and pay for it at tiered and/or uniform rates established by the Board depending on the class of service. Recently, Metropolitan has increased its ability to supply water, particularly in dry years, through implementation of storage and transfer programs. Metropolitan supplies approximately 50 percent of all water demands in its service area 100 percent of the time.11 10 DWR, Bulletin No. 132-05, December 2006. 11 Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, Regional Urban Water Management Plan, November 2005. ---PAGE BREAK--- 4-16 November 2009 Historical water demands in the Metropolitan service area increased from 3.1 million acre feet (MAF) in 1980 to 3.9 MAF in 1990. Total water use is projected to grow from 3.98 MAF in 2000 to a projected 4.6 MAF in 2020.12 For the Orange County service area, according to Metropolitan, demands are projected to increase approximately 6 percent between 2000 and 2020.13 Table 4.7 shows the historic and projected total retail water demands for Metropolitan’s Orange County service area. The water demand forecasts account for water savings resulting from plumbing codes, price effects, and actual and projected implementation of water conservation Best Management Practices.14 Table 4.7 Total Retail Water Demand in Metropolitan’s Service Area for Orange County - Includes Municipal and Industrial, and Agriculture (AF) Reported Projected County 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 Orange 651,500 587,900 694,500 672,700 713,900 721,900 735,400 748,600 761,000 Source: The Regional Urban Water Management Plan for the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, Appendix A.1 Demand Forecast. November 2005. The City purchases both treated potable and untreated non-potable water from Metropolitan. The treated water is delivered through five major feeders, East Orange County Feeder No. 2, Orange County Feeder, Second Lower Feeder, West Orange County Feeder, and Allen-McColloch Pipeline, through MWD connections A-01 through A-07. All of these infrastructure programs are in place, and no further regulatory permits are required to permit Metropolitan to convey imported water to these facilities for use by the City. Untreated Metropolitan water is delivered to the City's Walnut Canyon Reservoir (WCR), through MWD Connection A-08, via the Santiago Lateral of the Lower Feeder System. WCR has a total capacity of 2,823 AF (920 MG). This water is treated by the City's August F. Lenain Water Treatment Plant (Lenain). Lenain utilizes a conventional treatment process that includes coagulation and flocculation, sedimentation, deep bed monomedia (anthracite coal) filtration, and ozone disinfection. The facility also includes a water system operation center and fully equipped water quality laboratory. Together, the WCR and Lenain form a receiving, storage, and treatment facility. All of these infrastructure programs are in place, and no further regulatory permits are required to permit Metropolitan to convey imported water to these facilities for use by the City. 12 Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, Regional Urban Water Management Plan, November 2005. 13 Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, Regional Urban Water Management Plan, November 2005. 14 Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, Regional Urban Water Management Plan, November 2005. ---PAGE BREAK--- 4-17 November 2009 A description of the amount of Metropolitan water delivered to the City in the past and anticipated to be delivered to the City in the future under a variety of scenarios is set forth in Section 5 and 6 of this WSA. 4.4 Recycled Water The City does not currently utilize recycled water. However, the City produced about 79 percent of its water supply from the Orange County Groundwater Basin in 2007/08 and production averaged about 66 percent of its water supply from the Orange County Groundwater Basin over that past five years. OCWD utilizes recycled water generated from the Orange County Sanitation District’s (OCSD) treatment facilities for regional recycled water projects, and groundwater recharge, which is the most immediate potential use for recycled water. In 1991, the City conducted a Water Reclamation Feasibility Study. A Water Reclamation Steering Committee was formed to interview and collect information on developing and implementing water reclamation systems, and the potential use of recycled water in Anaheim, including alternate routings and cost analysis of distribution systems. The committee concluded that a recycled water treatment and distribution system in Anaheim was not economically feasible at that time. The committee did recommend continued work with OCWD and OCSD in regional recycled water projects, including groundwater recharge. Although a formal Recycled Water Optimization Plan has not been completed for the City, the Department requires separate irrigation services for any new landscaped area larger than 2,500 square feet in the City including the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan, the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan, and The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan, which will enable easy conversion to recycled water if and when it becomes available. Mitigation monitoring requirements include installation of separate irrigation meters and systems in the current Anaheim Resort Specific Plan and these requirements will be made a part of the proposed Anaheim Resort and Convention Center Expansion project as well. Without separating the irrigation services from the domestic, conversion to recycled water becomes overly expensive, making it problematic to convert in the future. Thus, projects located within The Proposed Project will be required to construct separate systems to accommodate water supply in the future. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5.0 RELIABILITY OF WATER SUPPLIES This section provides a description of Metropolitan’s, OCWD’s, and City of Anaheim’s efforts in securing adequate water supply as well as reliability of the region and City’s normal, single dry year, and multiple dry year supplies. Section 6 describes a possible water supply shortage scenario resulting from a higher reduction in SWP deliveries The Southern California region faces a challenge in satisfying its water requirements and securing its firm water supplies. Increased environmental regulations and the competition for water from outside the region have resulted in reduced supplies of imported water. Continued population and economic growth correspond to increased water demands within the region, putting an even larger burden on local supplies. Reliability is a measure of a water system's expected success in managing water shortages. Reliability planning requires information about the following: expected frequency and severity of shortages; how additional water management measures are likely to affect the frequency and severity of shortages; and how available contingency measures can reduce the impact of shortages when they occur. The reliability of the City’s water supply is currently dependent on the reliability of both groundwater and imported water supplies, which are managed and delivered by OCWD and Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (Metropolitan), respectively. Despite the ongoing water supply challenges within the region, the goal and statutory mission of these agencies are to identify and develop projects to meet the water demands in the region. Sections 5.1 and 5.2 discuss these agencies, their roles in water supply reliability, and the near and long-term efforts they are involved with to ensure future reliability of water supplies to the City and the region as a whole. State funding has been made available, through California voters’ approval, to increase reliability of state water supplies. In March 2000, California voters approved Proposition 13, which authorized the State to issue $1.97 billion of its general obligation bonds for water projects. Additionally, California voters approved Proposition 50 in November 2002 and Proposition 84 in November 2006, which authorized the issuance by the State of $3.4 billion and $5.4 billion, respectively, of its general obligation bonds for water projects. Types of water projects eligible for funding under Propositions 13, 50, and 84 include water conservation, groundwater storage, water treatment, water quality, water security and Colorado River water management projects, many of which are within the scope of the California Plan. 5.1 Metropolitan Water District Metropolitan was formed in the late 1920's. Collectively, charter members recognized the limited water supplies available within the region, and realized that continued prosperity and economic development of Southern California depended upon the acquisition and careful management of an adequate supplemental water supply. This foresight made the continued development of Southern California possible. 5-1 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- 5-2 November 2009 Metropolitan acquires water from Northern California via the State Water Project (SWP) and from the Colorado River to supply water to most of Southern California. As a wholesaler, Metropolitan has no retail customers, and distributes treated and untreated water directly to its 26 member agencies. One such member agency is the City of Anaheim. Through the 1996 Integrated Resources Plan and subsequent updates, Metropolitan has worked toward identifying and developing water supplies to provide 100 percent reliability. Due to competing needs and uses for all of the water sources and regional water operational issues, Metropolitan undertook a number of planning processes: the Integrated Resources Planning (IRP) Process, the Water Surplus and Drought Management (WSDM) Plan, the Strategic Planning Process, the Regional Urban Water Management Plan, and most recently, the Report on Metropolitan Water Supplies: A Blueprint for Water Reliability. Combined, these documents provide a framework and guidelines for optimum water planning into the future. The reliability and operational issues related to Metropolitan’s various sources of supply are discussed in detail by major source in the subsequent sections. It should be noted that some of the recent issues surrounding operational limitations in supply related to species protection and Delta issues are considered by Metropolitan to be somewhat short-term in nature and are not affecting the overall 20-year planning period that is being considered in this WSA document. 5.1.1 State Water Project The SWP is owned and operated by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR). The reliability of the SWP impacts Metropolitan’s member agencies’ ability to plan for future growth and supply. On an annual basis, each of the 29 SWP contractors, including Metropolitan, request an amount of SWP water based on their anticipated yearly demand. In most cases, Metropolitan’s requested supply is equivalent to its full Table A Amount15, currently at 1,911,500 AFY. The full Table A amount is defined as the maximum amount of imported water to be delivered and is specified in the contract between the DWR and the contractor. After receiving the requests, DWR assesses the amount of water supply available based on precipitation, snow pack on northern California watersheds, volume of water in storage, projected carry over storage, and Sacramento-San Joaquin Bay Delta regulatory requirements. Due to the uncertainty in water supply, contractors are not typically guaranteed their full Table A Amount, but instead a percentage of that amount based on the available supply. Table 5-1 lists the 15 Two types of deliveries are assumed for the SWP contractors: Table A and Article 21. Table A Amount is the contractual amount of allocated SWP supply, set by percentage amount annually by DWR; it is scheduled and uninterruptible. Article 21 water refers to the SWP contract provision defining this supply as water that may be made available by DWR when excess flows area available in the Delta Delta outflow requirements have been met, SWP storage south of the Delta is full, and conveyance capacity is available beyond that being used for SWP operations and delivery of allocated and scheduled Table A supplies). Article 21 water is made available on an unscheduled and interruptible basis and is typically available only in average to wet years, generally only for a limited time in the later winter. ---PAGE BREAK--- historical SWP deliveries to Metropolitan and the delivery’s percentage compared to the full Table A amount. Once the percentage is set early in the water year, the agency can count on that amount of supply or more in the coming year. The percentage is typically set conservative and then held or adjusted upwards later in the year based on a reassessment of precipitation, snow pack, etc. 5-3 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 5.1 SWP Deliveries to Metropolitan (AF) Year SWP Delivery % of Full Table A Amount 1981 826,951 43% 1982 856,996 45% 1983 385,308 20% 1984 501,682 26% 1985 740,410 39% 1986 756,142 40% 1987 769,603 40% 1988 957,276 50% 1989 1,215,139 64% 1990 1,457,676 76% 1991 624,861 33% 1992 746,991 39% 1993 663,390 35% 1994 845,305 44% 1995 451,305 24% 1996 642,871 34% 1997 724,393 38% 1998 521,255 27% 1999 790,538 41% 2000 1,442,615 75% 2001 1,119,408 59% 2002 1,413,745 74% 2003 1,560,569 82% 2004 1,792,246 94% 2005 1,720,350 90% 2006 1,911,500 100% 2007 1,146,900 60% 2008 669,025 35% 2009 764,600 40% Source: Metropolitan’s November 2005 Regional UWMP and DWR Website. 2009 data represents the initial allocation of 15% plus the March notice to SWP Contractors increasing the allocation to 20%, an April 16, 2009 press release increasing it to 30%, and a May 20, 2009 notice increasing it to 40%. Metropolitan’s full Table A amount is 1,911,500 AFY. 5-4 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- Litigation filed by several environmental interest groups (NRDC v. Kempthorne (Case No. 05CV01207-OWW-GSA); Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations v. Gutierrez (Case No. 06CV00245-OWW)) has alleged that certain biological opinions and incidental take permits issued by state and federal agencies inadequately analyzed impacts on species listed as endangered under the Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA). In 2007, Federal District Judge Wanger issued a decision, finding the United States Fish and Wildlife Service’s biological opinion for Delta smelt to be invalid. Judge Wanger issued an Interim Remedial Order and Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law requiring that the SWP and Central Valley Project (CVP) operate according to certain specified criteria until a new biological opinion for the Delta smelt was issued by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. Recently DWR conducted simulations to evaluate current (2007) SWP delivery reliability in light of possible long term cut backs due to Delta smelt protective orders and possible impacts from climate change and reduced snow pack. To this end, these SWP delivery reliability simulations incorporated actions to protect Delta smelt defined by the 2007 Interim Remedial Order (NRDC v. Kempthorne) and a range of possible climate change impacts to hydrology in the Central Valley (DWR, 2007). These protective actions and the simulations resulted in reduced SWP water deliveries. In December 2007, the DWR submitted a Draft State Water Project Delivery Reliability Report 2007. The report estimates future deliveries to decrease in 93 percent of future years in comparison to their 2005 SWP Delivery Reliability Report. A number of significant areas affecting the uncertainty for delivery reliability are discussed below. Major sources of uncertainty include Delta pumping restrictions, organism decline, climate change and sea level rise, and levee vulnerability associated with floods and earthquakes. The estimated current SWP delivery reliability assumed that the SWP and CVP operate to meet Old and Middle River flow targets specified in the 2007 federal court ruling on interim measures to protect Delta smelt. The DWR has altered the operations of the SWP to accommodate species of fish listed under the Federal and California Endangered Species Acts (ESAs). These changes in project operations have influenced the manner in which water is diverted from the Bay- Delta and SWP deliveries to the southern part of the State. Restrictions on Bay-Delta pumping beginning in 2008 under the Interim Remedial Order in NRDC v. Kempthorne have resulted in reduced deliveries of SWP water to Metropolitan. Based on initial estimates supplied by the DWR and considering the Interim Remedial Order, Metropolitan staff was estimating that it could lose up to 30 percent of its SWP supplies in 2008. The DWR considered these estimated losses in setting Metropolitan’s and every other agency’s 2008 SWP allocation. Actual curtailments of SWP water to Metropolitan in 2008 were based on fish abundance, weather, flow conditions in the Bay-Delta, numbers of fish salvaged at the project pumps, and how curtailments were to be divided between the SWP and CVP. Metropolitan’s current measures to address potential water supply shortages and interruptions include calling for extraordinary conservation, cutting groundwater replenishment and agricultural water deliveries, maximizing groundwater production, acquiring additional supplies, and drawing from dry-year storage programs. Based on these issues, MWD’s 2007 IRP (which was adopted in 2008) includes a 5-5 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- 5-6 November 2009 forecast 22 percent reduction in SWP deliveries. (Section 6 of this WSA sets forth additional analyses, which evaluate a reduction in SWP deliveries of 35 and 40 percent.) Based on DWR estimates of SWP deliveries under the Interim Remedial Order, and assuming an equal division of curtailments between the SWP and CVP,16 Metropolitan planned to meet firm demands in calendar years 2008, 2009 and 2010. However, Metropolitan has been withdrawing supplies from surface and groundwater storage to meet current demands. Anticipating that storage could be significantly reduced by the end of 2010, Metropolitan and its member agencies are calling for voluntary water conservation to lower demands and reduce drawdowns from water storage. In fact on April 14, 2009, Metropolitan adopted a Level 2 Allocation, which equates to a 10 percent reduction in regional water supplies. If necessary, mandatory water allocations could be imposed in the future to cause further reductions in water use and reduce drawdowns from water storage reserves. Metropolitan’s member agencies and retail water suppliers in Metropolitan’s service area also have the ability to implement water conservation and allocation programs, and some of the retail suppliers in Metropolitan’s service area have initiated conservation measures. The City of Anaheim has had a successful track record in implementing water conservation programs. For example, in 1991 the City adopted Municipal Code section 10.18, the City’s Water Conservation Ordinance. In response to this ordinance, which resulted in over 13 percent reduction in water use in 1991 as compared to the previous year (see discussion later in this report and documentation in Appendix Additionally, a new Water Conservation Ordinance to address the current water supply situation was adopted by the City Council on April 14, 2009, a copy of which is attached as Appendix D. These water conservation ordinances are recommended by MWD and serve as an effective tool to deal with future water reliability issues. The City’s Water Conservation Ordinance provides the City with the tools to reduce City water demands if the needs arise in the future. For example, section 10.18.080 of the ordinance authorizes the City Council to prohibit specified water uses in the event of a Catastrophic Water Reduction Condition. Because of uncertainties related to SWP deliveries to Metropolitan based on Delta smelt and other issues, Section 6 of this WSA analyzes an additional 13 to 18 percent loss of SWP supply above and beyond the 22 percent MWD has already factored into MWD supply calculations (for a total of a 35 and 40 percent reduction in SWP deliveries). Thus, Section 6 of this WSA analyzes these potential SWP reliability issues on City water supply now and out into the future. In order to create a systemic solution to the issue facing the Delta (which have existed since the 1970’s), Governor Schwarzenegger created the Delta Vision process, which is aimed at identifying long-term solutions to the conflicts in the Bay-Delta, including 16 Assuming an equal division of curtailments between the SWP and the CVP is conservative and may have the effect of overstating the amount of SWP curtailment. As an example, in January the Bureau of Reclamation, which operates the CVP, provided notice to agricultural customers that it intended to not provide any water deliveries to agricultural customers in 2009. Thus, in the short term it appears as though agricultural users which receive water through the CVP may suffer deeper water cuts as compared to water purveyors which receive water from the SWP. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5-7 November 2009 natural resource, infrastructure, land use and governance issues. The Delta Vision Blue Ribbon Task Force presented findings and recommendations for a sustainable Delta as a healthy ecosystem and water supply source on January 17, 2008. In addition, state and federal resource agencies and various environmental and water user entities are currently engaged in the development of the Bay-Delta Conservation Plan, which is aimed at addressing ecosystem needs and securing long-term operating permits for the SWP. The Bay-Delta Conservation Plan process is scheduled for completion during the third quarter of 2009, with acquisition of appropriate permits and completion of the associated environmental impact statement/impact report. Recently, statewide officials have expressed support for the construction of the peripheral canal, which would alleviate some of the delta species considerations by transferring river water south before it reaches the Bay Delta. The issues, such as the recent decline of some fish species in the Delta and surrounding regions and certain operational actions in the Delta, may impact Metropolitan’s water supply from the Delta. SWP operational requirements may be further modified through the consultation process for new biological opinions for listed species under the Federal ESA or from the California Department of Fish and Game’s actions regarding the California ESA. Decisions in current or future litigation, listings of additional species (such as the longfin smelt), or new regulatory requirements could adversely affect SWP operations in the future by requiring additional export reductions, releases of additional water from storage, or other operational changes impacting water supply operations. However, based on information provided by DWR and Metropolitan, a 22 to 30 percent cutback in SWP deliveries to the south could be foreseeable in the future years until statewide systemic solutions are provided.17 The inclusion of 35 and 40 percent cut back scenarios in this WSA over a long term time horizon therefore analyzes a true worst case scenario that will likely not materialize, at least in the timeframe out to 2030. 5.1.2 Colorado River Aqueduct The Colorado River was Metropolitan’s original source of water after Metropolitan’s establishment in 1928. Metropolitan has a legal entitlement to receive water from the Colorado River under a permanent service contract with the Secretary of the Interior. Water from the Colorado River or its tributaries is also available to other users in California, as well as to users in the states of Arizona, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming (the “Colorado River Basin States”), resulting in both competition and the need for cooperation among these holders of Colorado River entitlements. In addition, under a 1944 treaty, Mexico has an allotment of 1.5 million acre-feet of Colorado River water annually, except in the event of extraordinary drought or serious accident to the delivery system in the United States, when the water allotted to Mexico would be curtailed. Mexico also can schedule delivery of an additional 200,000 acre-feet of Colorado River water per year if water is available in excess of the requirements in the United States and the 1.5 million acre-feet allotted to Mexico. 17 Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, 2007 IRP, October 2007, and Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, Appendix A, Water Revenue Refunding Bonds 2008, Series C, July 10, 2008. ---PAGE BREAK--- The Colorado River Aqueduct, which is owned and operated by Metropolitan, transports water from the Colorado River approximately 242 miles to its terminus at Lake Mathews in Riverside County. After deducting for conveyance losses and considering maintenance requirements, up to 1.2 million acre-feet of water a year may be conveyed through the Colorado River Aqueduct to Metropolitan’s member agencies, subject to availability of Colorado River water for delivery to Metropolitan as described below. California is apportioned the use of 4.4 million acre-feet of water from the Colorado River each year plus one-half of any surplus that may be available for use collectively in Arizona, California and Nevada. In addition, California has historically been allowed to use Colorado River water apportioned to, but not used by, Arizona and Nevada when such supplies have been requested for use in California. Under the 1931 priority system that has formed the basis for the distribution of Colorado River water made available to California, Metropolitan holds the fourth priority right to 550,000 acre-feet per year. This is the last priority within California’s basic apportionment of 4.4 million acre-feet. In addition, Metropolitan holds the fifth priority right to 662,000 acre-feet of water, which is in excess of California’s basic apportionment. Until 2002, Metropolitan had been able to take full advantage of its fifth priority right as a result of the availability of surplus water and apportioned but unused water. However, Arizona and Nevada increased their use of water from the Colorado River, leaving no unused apportionment available for California since the late 1990s. In addition, a severe drought in the Colorado River Basin has reduced storage in system reservoirs, resulting in no surplus water being available since 2002. Prior to 2002, Metropolitan could divert over 1.2 million acre-feet in any year, but since that time, Metropolitan’s deliveries of Colorado River water varied from a low of 633,000 acre-feet in 2006 to a high of 897,000 acre-feet in 2005. In 2007, Metropolitan received approximately 713,500 acre-feet of Colorado River water. Metropolitan has taken steps to augment its share of Colorado River water through agreements with other agencies that have rights to use such water. Under a 1988 water conservation agreement (the “1988 Conservation Agreement”) between Metropolitan and the Imperial Irrigation District (IID), IID has constructed and is operating a number of conservation projects that are currently conserving 105,000 acre-feet of water per year. In 2007, the conserved water augmented the amount of water available to Metropolitan by 85,000 acre-feet and, by prior agreement, to the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) by 20,000 acre-feet. In 1992, Metropolitan entered into an agreement with the Central Arizona Water Conservation District (CAWCD) to demonstrate the feasibility of CAWCD storing Colorado River water in central Arizona for the benefit of an entity outside of the State of Arizona. Pursuant to this agreement, CAWCD created 80,909 acre-feet of long-term storage credits that may be recovered by CAWCD for Metropolitan. Metropolitan, the Arizona Water Banking Authority, and CAWCD executed an amended agreement for recovery of these storage credits in December 2007. In 2007, 16,804 acre-feet were recovered. Metropolitan has requested that 25,000 acre-feet be recovered in 2008, and 5-8 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- expects to request the balance of the storage credits over the next several years. Water recovered by CAWCD under the terms of the 1992 agreement allows CAWCD to reduce its use of Colorado River water, resulting in Arizona having an unused apportionment. The Secretary of the Interior is making this unused apportionment available to Metropolitan under its Colorado River water delivery contract In April 2008, Metropolitan’s Board authorized the expenditure of $28.7 million to join the CAWCD and the Southern Nevada Water Authority (SNWA) in funding the construction of a new 8,000 acre-foot off-stream regulating reservoir near Drop 2 of the All-American Canal in Imperial County. The reservoir will be constructed by the Bureau of Reclamation and is anticipated to be completed in late 2010. The Drop 2 Reservoir is expected to save up to 70,000 acre-feet of water per year by capturing and storing water that would otherwise be lost. In return for its funding, Metropolitan received 100,000 acre-feet of water that is stored in Lake Mead until recovered, with annual delivery of up to 34,000 acre-feet of water through 2010 and up to 25,000 acre-feet between 2011 and 2036. Besides the additional water supply, the new reservoir will add to the flexibility of Colorado River operations. Metropolitan and the Palo Verde Irrigation District (PVID) signed the program agreement for a Land Management, Crop Rotation and Water Supply Program in August 2004. This program provides up to 118,000 acre-feet of water available to Metropolitan in certain years. The term of the program is 35 years. Fallowing of approximately 20,000 acres of land began on January 1, 2005. In 2005, 2006 and 2007, approximately 108,700 acre-feet, 105,500, and 72,300 acre-feet, respectively, of water were saved. Metropolitan’s fallowing call is estimated to save 82,000 acre-feet in 2008. With Arizona’s and Nevada’s increasing use of their respective apportionments and the uncertainty of continued Colorado River surpluses, in 1997 the Colorado River Board of California, in consultation with Metropolitan, IID, PVID, CVWD, the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power and the San Diego County Water Authority (SDCWA), embarked on the development of a plan for reducing California’s use of Colorado River water to its basic apportionment of 4.4 million acre-feet when use of that basic allotment is necessary (California Plan). In 1999, IID, CVWD, Metropolitan and the State of California agreed to a set of Key Terms aimed at managing California’s Colorado River supply. These Key Terms were incorporated into the Colorado River Board’s May 2000 California Plan that proposed to optimize the use of the available Colorado River supply through water conservation, transfers from higher priority agricultural users to Metropolitan’s service area and storage programs. To implement these plans, a number of agreements have been executed. One such agreement, the Quantification Settlement Agreement (QSA), is a landmark agreement signed by the four California Colorado River water use agencies and the U.S. Secretary of the Interior, which will guide reasonable and fair use of the Colorado River by California through the year 2037. The QSA was authorized in October 2003 and defined Colorado River water deliveries to the four California agencies as well as facilitated transfers from agricultural agencies to urban users. The QSA is a critical component of the California’s Colorado River Water Use Plan. 5-9 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- 5.1.3 Water Transfer and Exchange Programs California’s agricultural activities consume approximately 34 million acre-feet of water annually, which is 80 percent of the total water used for agricultural and urban uses and 40 percent of the water used for all consumptive uses. Voluntary water transfers and exchanges can make a portion of this agricultural water supply available to support the State’s urban areas. Such existing and potential water transfers and exchanges are an important element for improving the water supply reliability within Metropolitan’s service area and accomplishing the reliability goal set by Metropolitan’s Board of Directors. Metropolitan is currently pursuing voluntary water transfer and exchange programs with state, federal, public and private water districts and individuals. The following are summary descriptions of some of these programs. Arvin-Edison/Metropolitan Water Management Program. In December 1997, Metropolitan entered into an agreement with the Arvin-Edison Water Storage District (Arvin-Edison), an irrigation agency located southeast of Bakersfield, California. Under the program, Arvin-Edison stores water on behalf of Metropolitan. Up to 350,000 acre- feet of Metropolitan’s water may be stored and Arvin-Edison is obligated to return up to 70,000 acre-feet of stored water in any year to Metropolitan, upon request. The agreement will terminate in 2035 unless extended. Semitropic/Metropolitan Groundwater Storage and Exchange Program. In 1994 Metropolitan entered into an agreement with the Semitropic Water Storage District (Semitropic), located adjacent to the California Aqueduct north of Bakersfield, to store water in the groundwater basin underlying land within Semitropic. The minimum annual yield available to Metropolitan from the program is 31,500 acre-feet of water and the maximum annual yield is 223,000 acre-feet of water depending on the available unused capacity and the SWP allocation. California Aqueduct Dry-Year Transfer Program. Metropolitan has entered into agreements with the Kern Delta Water District, the Mojave Water Agency (Demonstration Water Exchange Program) and the San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District to ensure against regulatory and operational uncertainties in the SWP system that could impact the reliability of existing supplies. The total potential yield for the three agreements is approximately 115,000 acre-feet of water per year. Other Water Purchase, Storage and Exchange Programs in the San Joaquin and Sacramento Valleys. Metropolitan has been negotiating water purchase, storage and exchange programs with other agencies in the Sacramento and San Joaquin Valleys. These programs will involve the storage of both SWP supplies and water purchased from other sources to enhance Metropolitan’s dry-year supplies and the exchange of normal year supplies to enhance Metropolitan’s water reliability and water quality, in view of dry conditions and potential impacts from the ESA cases discussed above. Metropolitan has entered into agreements to purchase water transfer supplies for 2008 totaling 41,743 acre- feet from Western Canal Water District, Richvale Irrigation District, South Feather Water and Power Agency and South Sutter Water District. In addition, Metropolitan is pursuing water quality exchange partnerships with San Joaquin Valley agricultural districts, 5-10 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- 5-11 November 2009 including the Friant Water Users Authority. The purpose of these partnerships is to improve the quality of water that Metropolitan receives via the California Aqueduct. Yuba River Accord. Metropolitan entered into an agreement with the Department of Water Resources in December 2007 to purchase a portion of the water released by the Yuba County Water Agency (YCWA). YCWA was involved in a proceeding in which it was required to increase Yuba River fishery flows. Metropolitan and other SWP contractors entered into agreements with the Department of Water Resources for purchase of portions of the water made available. Metropolitan’s agreement allows Metropolitan to purchase 13,750 acre-feet to 35,000 acre-feet per year of water supplies in dry years through 2025. Metropolitan/Coachella/Desert Water Agency Exchange and Advance Delivery Agreement. Metropolitan has agreements with the CVWD and the Desert Water Agency (Desert) that require Metropolitan to exchange its Colorado River water for those agencies’ SWP entitlement water on an annual basis. Because Desert and Coachella do not have a physical connection to the SWP, Metropolitan takes delivery of Desert’s and CVWD’s SWP supplies and delivers a like amount of Colorado River water to the agencies. In accordance with an advance delivery agreement executed by Metropolitan, CVWD and Desert, Metropolitan delivers Colorado River water in advance to these agencies for storage in the Upper Coachella Valley groundwater basin. In years when supplies are needed to meet local demands, Metropolitan has the option to receive the water supply and must pay the associated SWP transportation costs and CVWD and Desert may use the stored water. Historical imported water use by the City delivered by Metropolitan over the past five years is shown on Table 5.2, below. Table 5.2 Historical Imported Water Use (AFY) 2003 - 04 2004 - 05 2005 - 06 2006 - 07 2007 - 08 25,066.1 28,029.6 31,255.8 24,696.0 15,272.1 5.1.4 Supply Management Strategies On the regional level, Metropolitan has taken a number of actions to secure a reliable water source for its member agencies. Metropolitan recently adopted a water supply allocation plan for dealing with potential shortages that takes into consideration the impact on retail customers and the economy, changes and losses in local supplies, the investment in and development of local resources, and conservation achievements.18 Additional actions taken by Metropolitan during the first half of 2008 include the 18 Metropolitan Water District Press Release dated February 12, 2008. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5-12 November 2009 adoption of a $1.9 billion spending plan, increased rates and charges,19 and the funding of a new reservoir to benefit Colorado River supply capabilities.20 The $1.9 billion spending plan for 2008-09 includes spending for the improvement of water conveyance facilities, water transfers, and providing financial assistance to member agency’s local conservation, recycling, and groundwater clean-up efforts. 5.2 Orange County Water District As has been discussed previously throughout this WSA, the primary source of water for the City is the Orange County Groundwater Basin (Basin). OCWD is responsible for the protection of water rights to the Santa Ana River in Orange County as well as the management and replenishment of the Basin.21 OCWD replenishes and maintains the Basin at safe levels while significantly increasing the Basin’s annual yield by utilization of the best available technology. Other than recycled water, OCWD primarily recharges the Basin with water from the Santa Ana River and to a lesser extent with imported raw water purchased from Metropolitan. According to the OCWD’s Draft Groundwater Management Plan Update 2009 dated May 8, 2009, natural recharge accounted for 69,000 acre-feet and artificial recycled water injection and recharge accounted for 272,000 acre-feet in 2008. As of January 2008, OCWD began recharging recycled water from the Groundwater Replenishment System (GWRS). The GWRS, the largest water purification project of its kind in the world, can currently produce up to 72,000 acre-feet per year of recycled water, and has increased Orange County’s water independence by providing a locally controlled, drought-proof supply of safe, high-quality water. The EIR has been completed for a GWRS Expansion Project to increase production to over 90,000 acre-feet per year. Other processes such as recycling of wastewater, conservation and water use efficiency programs, and creative water purchases have aided in replenishing the basin to desired levels to meet required demands. As discussed previously, OCWD establishes the Basin Production Percentage (BPP) each water year. The BPP is set based on groundwater conditions, availability of imported water supplies, ideal precipitation, Santa Ana River runoff, and basin management objectives. The BPP was initially established in 1969 and has generally ranged from 60 to 80 percent. The average BPP for the past twenty years is 72.9 percent. Based on discussions with OCWD and background analysis provided for the January 7, 2009 OCWD Board of Directors meeting on annual water budget and water replenishment, an average projected BPP between 65 and 69 percent was documented. This projected BPP would increase by approximately 4 percent as a result of the GWRS Expansion Project discussed above. 19 Metropolitan Water District Board Meeting, March 11, 2008, and Press Release of same date, regarding spending plan and adoption of rates and charges. 20 Metropolitan Water District Board Meeting, April 8, 2008, and Press Release of same date, regarding new reservoir. 21 OCWD Groundwater Management Plan, 2004. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5-13 November 2009 As discussed previously, the BPP is a major factor for the City in determining the cost of groundwater production. For groundwater production equal to or less than the BPP, groundwater producers including Anaheim pay a replenishment assessment. If groundwater production greater than the BPP occurs, a Basin Equity Assessment (BEA) will be assessed. The BEA is an additional fee paid on each acre foot (AF) of water pumped above the BPP, making the total cost of that water to Anaheim equal to the cost of Tier 2 imported water from Metropolitan. Total water demand within Orange County Water District (OCWD) was 502,746 AF for the 2006-07 water year (beginning July 1, 2006 and ending June 30, 2007). In the same period, groundwater production (including In-lieu Program water, but excluding groundwater production used to supply the Talbert Barrier) for the water year totaled 349,858 AF. For the water year, a total of 52,219 AF of supplemental water was used for the purpose of groundwater replenishment and barrier maintenance to prevent seawater intrusion from occurring in areas of the groundwater basin adjacent to the Pacific Ocean in Huntington Beach, Costa Mesa, and Fountain Valley. For the water year, which ended June 30, 2007, the annual basin storage decrease without supplemental replenishment water was 166,000 AF. Precipitation within the basin was 20 percent of normal during the water year, totaling 2.75 inches. Based on the groundwater basin conditions for the water year ending June 30, 2007, OCWD may purchase up to 84,000 AF for groundwater basin replenishment during the ensuing water year, beginning July 1, 2008, pursuant to the District Act. Since the formation of OCWD in 1933, OCWD has made substantial investment in facilities, basin management and water rights protection, resulting in the elimination and prevention of adverse long-term “mining” overdraft conditions. OCWD continues to develop new replenishment supplies, recharge capacity and basin protection measures to meet projected production from the basin during average/normal rainfall and drought periods.22 OCWD has invested in seawater intrusion control (injection barriers), recharge facilities, laboratories and basin monitoring to effectively manage the basin. Some of these programs include: Recharge Facilities - OCWD currently owns and operates approximately 1,000 acres of recharge spreading facilities located in cities of Anaheim and Orange adjacent to the SAR and Santiago Creek. OCWD has built a recharge system that provides the majority of water supplied by the District. The 17 major facilities in the Anaheim/Orange area are grouped into four major components: the Main River System, the Off-River System, the Deep Basin System, and the Burris Pit/Santiago System. Each system has a series of percolation spreading basins, either shallow or deep, whose sidewalls and bottoms allow for percolation into the underlying aquifer. Seawater Intrusion Barriers - OCWD’s Talbert Barrier is composed of a series of injection wells that span the 2.5-mile-wide Talbert Gap between the Newport and 22 Orange County Water District, 2006-2007 Engineer’s Report on Groundwater Conditions, Water Supply and Basin Utilization in the Orange County Water District, February 2008. ---PAGE BREAK--- Huntington mesas. The Talbert Barrier wells can inject approximately 42 mgd of water into four aquifer zones. Injecting water through the wells forms a hydraulic barrier to seawater that would otherwise migrate inland toward areas of groundwater production. The Alamitos seawater intrusion barrier is composed of a series of injection wells that span the Los Angeles/Orange County line in the Seal Beach-Long Beach area. It is operated by the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (LACDPW) in cooperation with OCWD and the Water Replenishment District (WRD). The source of this water is a blend of purified wastewater from WRD and potable supplies from Metropolitan. Also, the Alamitos Barrier System includes four extraction wells located seaward of the injection barrier to create a pumping trough to remove the degraded brackish groundwater. Groundwater Monitoring – OCWD has one of the most sophisticated groundwater monitoring programs in the country. The District runs more than 350,000 analyses of water from more than 650 wells every year. OCWD performs nearly 50 percent more water quality tests than it is required to do in order to ensure the highest water quality possible. In 2004, OCWD completed a 10-year, $10 million Santa Ana River Water Quality and Health Effects Study, which demonstrated the safety of SAR water as a source for recharging the groundwater basin. A panel of nationally recognized experts provided an independent review of the study and validated its positive results. 5.2.1 OCWD Long Term Facilities Plan (LTFP) OCWD has prepared a draft LTFP to evaluate potential basin and water quality enhancement projects that may be implemented in the 20-year planning period. The LTFP is proposed to do the following: • Evaluate projects to cost effectively increase the amount of sustainable basin production and protect water quality • Develop an implementation program for the recommended projects • Establish the basin’s future maximum (target) annual production amount and correspondingly how much new recharge capacity would be required • Estimate impacts to potential future RA rates and long-term BPPs • Evaluate potential annexations The draft LTFP and subsequent EIR were stalled due to difficulties related to the annexation of new lands. As a result, annexation has been removed from the document, and the revised LTFP will examine a five year window for new projects. The LTFP has been adopted by the OCWD Board as a planning document. The LTFP utilizes information recently developed in OCWD’s Groundwater Management Plan and Recharge Development Study. The LTFP includes a master list of developed and proposed projects. The various projects are grouped into five categories: recharge facilities, water source facilities, basin management facilities, 5-14 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- 5-15 November 2009 water quality management facilities, and operational improvements facilities. Each project is evaluated using criteria such as technical feasibility, cost, institutional support, functional feasibility, and environmental compliance. The LTFP will include an implementation plan for the 28 recommended projects over the 20 year planning period. 5.2.2 OCWD Groundwater Management Plan (GMP) OCWD finalized its GMP in March 2004. The latest GMP updated earlier versions prepared in 1989 and 1990. The GMP complies with SB 1938, passed in 2002, which includes a list of items to be included in a GMP. The GMP’s objectives include protecting and enhancing groundwater quality, and cost-effectively protecting and increasing the basin’s sustainable yield.23 Various programs, policies, goals, and projects are defined in the GMP to assist OCWD staff meet these objectives. The potential projects described in the GMP are discussed in further detail in the LTFP. The GMP describes the following: • the background and purpose of the GMP • the hydrogeology of the basin • the range of activities and management programs, including groundwater monitoring, groundwater quality management, production management, recharge water supply, and improvement projects • the historical and future water demands and integrated demand/supply management strategies • the financial management programs • the recommendations for continued proactive basin management 5.2.3 OCWD 2020 Water Master Plan Report (MPR) OCWD’s 2020 Water Master Plan Report (MPR) describes local water supplies and estimates their availability extending to the year 2020. Specifically, OCWD states in their 2020 Water MPR that significant water supply sources will be available in the future for potable, non-potable, and recharge purposes. The 2020 Water MPR discusses source waters such as imported water from Metropolitan, base flows from the Santa Ana River, treated wastewater through the OCWD/OCSD GWRS program, and possibly desalinated ocean water. The local supplies’ availability and projections from the 2020 Water MPR have been revised and are being pursued with the LTFP. 23 Orange County Water District, Groundwater Management Plan, 2004. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5-16 Novem 5.3 Anaheim Public Utilities Department (APUD or Department) 5.3.1 Water System The City's Water Service Area consists of virtually the entire area within the limits of the City; however, the Service Area excludes areas inside City limits serviced by other water purveyors and includes areas outside of City limits serviced by the Department. Figure 5.1 shows the Anaheim Water Service Area including these described areas. The City’s basic water services include single family residential, multi-family residential and general services commercial, industrial, municipal, and institutional consumers). As the City has developed, the Department has increased its number of connections to imported water supplies, increased the number and quality of wells, built a series of reservoirs, and greatly expanded the transmission and distribution system in order to meet the water service requirements of a growing number of customers. The Department's Water Service Area population as of 2008 was approximately 353,000 and is expected to increase to approximately 436,000 by the year 2030.24 The current major water system facilities consist of 8 purchased water connections to Metropolitan (one untreated and seven treated water connections), 18 active wells, one 920 MG reservoir for untreated water, one 15 MGD water treatment plant, 12 treated water reservoirs with 28.75 MG of total storage capacity, permanent chlorination facilities at various sites, and 9 booster pump stations. Figure 5.1 depicts the location of the City’s major water supply, treatment and storage facilities mentioned above. The water system service area has elevations ranging from less than 60 feet to over 1,200 feet above sea level. In order to provide appropriate operation pressures for such a wide range of elevations, the water system is divided into 19 pressure zones. The lowest pressure zone operates at a static hydraulic grade line (HGL) elevation of 220 feet above sea level and the highest pressure zone having a static HGL elevation of 1,320 feet above sea level. The Department's water distribution system is generally divided into two main geographic areas: the "Flatland Area" (i.e. 555 HGL elevation and below) and the "Hill and Canyon Area" (i.e. the 585 HGL elevation and above). The Flatland Area is approximately 21,000 acres, situated generally north and west of the Santa Ana River (SAR), and is almost entirely served by groundwater (with Metropolitan imported water supplemented, as necessary). The Hill and Canyon Area is approximately 11,000 acres, situated generally south and east of the SAR, and served primarily by imported water from Metropolitan. 25 24 OCP – 2006 Population and Housing Projections prepared by California State University, Fullerton published December 2008 and information provided by Anaheim Planning Dept., April 2009. 25 City of Anaheim Urban Water Management Plan. December 2005. ber 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- November 2009 5-17 N Figure 5.1 Anaheim Public Utilities Major Facilities & Service Area ---PAGE BREAK--- 5.3.2 Past and Current Efforts Reliability is a measure of a water system's expected success in managing water shortages. The City has strategies to manage water demand with respect to frequency and magnitude of supply deficiencies. On February 16, 1991, the City adopted Ordinance No. 5204 (which is now codified as Anaheim Municipal Code section 10.18.010 et seq.,), relating to water shortages. This Ordinance consists of three Water Shortage Plans that can be implemented during declared water shortages. This Ordinance was a result of the severe drought the City experienced initiating in 1987. In response, on March 19, 1991, the Anaheim City Council adopted Resolution No. 91R-65, in which the City Council determined that a Water Shortage existed and ordered implementation of Water Shortage Plan II, in accordance with Ordinance No. 5204. Effective April 1, 1992, City Council adopted Resolution No. 92R-65, and discontinued Water Shortage Plan II and ordered Water Shortage Plan I and reduced Anaheim’s target of water conservation from 15 percent to 10 percent. On September 16, 2008, the City Council approved guidelines asking residents and businesses for voluntary reduction in water use and stretch water supplies. Plumbing repairs, sprinkler system adjustments, reduced landscape watering, runoff and evaporation management are some of the smart practices the City urges its customer to adopt. On April 14, 2009, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 6138 (included as Appendix D) in response to Metropolitan’s request to its member agencies to adopt more stringent conservation ordinances that would put into effect different levels of conservation related to Metropolitan’s Water Supply Allocation Plan levels. Another method of water reliability is Metropolitan's Long-Term In Lieu Groundwater Storage Program, which the City has consistently participated in when this water has been made available by Metropolitan. The major goals of this program include the following: achievement of greater water supply reliability through increased conjunctive use of imported and local water supplies; and reduction of member agencies' dependence on deliveries from Metropolitan during times of shortage. The Long-Term Storage credits apply to water that is imported in lieu of groundwater pumping. For each acre-foot of Long-Term Storage water claimed, the Department is provided discounts from Metropolitan and OCWD, resulting in a unit cost of Long-Term Storage water approximately equivalent to the unit cost. But, this provides significant benefits to the Orange County Groundwater Basin as overall water levels are increased, thus enhancing regional water supply reliability. The Department has the ability to certify for Groundwater Seasonal Shift Storage (SSS), Direct Reservoir Seasonal Storage Service (for Walnut Canyon Reservoir), and Groundwater Long-Term Storage credits. The following describes the SSS programs the Department participates in: • Groundwater Seasonal Shift Storage credits are received when the Department pumps additional groundwater during the summer months (May through 5-18 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- September) and, correspondingly, imports from Metropolitan an identical quantity during the winter months (October through April), within a 12-month period. Metropolitan charges the Department a discounted unit cost for the "shifted" imported quantity. • Direct Reservoir Seasonal Storage Service credits for the Department are calculated as the net gain in Walnut Canyon Reservoir during a period that such service is available (typically during October through April). Metropolitan charges the Department a discounted unit cost for this "net gain." • The Long-Term Storage credit applies to water that is imported in lieu of groundwater pumping. For each acre-foot of Long-Term Storage water claimed, the Department is provided discounts from Metropolitan and OCWD, resulting in a unit cost of Long-Term Storage water approximately equivalent to the unit cost of pumped groundwater. Although the Long-Term Storage Program is essentially cost-neutral for the Department, it provides the following benefits: water is imported when Metropolitan has an abundant supply; and groundwater resources are conserved (i.e. the long-term import quantity would have been pumped from the groundwater if the Department did not participate). As previously stated, groundwater is currently the most reliable and least expensive water resource for the City. The Department has scheduled the drilling of one new well every three years. The new wells replace existing shallow and deteriorated wells and provide additional production capacity. Additional groundwater pumping capacity will add to the reliability of the system by: meeting peak demands during the summer months; providing a contingency for wells that are temporarily out of service; and providing availability for any additional pumping requests from OCWD. Due to the geographic location of the City, groundwater production wells are scattered throughout the water distribution system in the Flatland Area. Typically, well capacity exceeds demand in the Flatland Area. In order to maximize the use of groundwater, the Department continues to investigate the feasibility of increasing booster station capacities. These booster stations would move additional groundwater from the Flatland Area (555 pressure zone and below) to the Hill and Canyon Area (585 pressure zone and above). The ability to supply the Hill and Canyon Area with additional groundwater above and beyond what the Hill and Canyon Area already receives will help ensure the Department's ability to minimize water supply peaking charges and increase water supply reliability. Additionally, in order to enhance reliability of the water system and minimize the risk of losing wells to contamination, the Department operates its own water quality laboratory to test wells the City operates, in addition to the tests conducted by OCWD’s laboratories. The water quality laboratory conducts more than 30,000 tests annually and routinely files results with DPH. Metropolitan and OCWD also monitor the Department’s imported and groundwater supplies, respectively. The Department consistently delivers high quality water that meets or surpasses all federal and state drinking water regulations. 5-19 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- The City's long-term plans to assure a reliable water supply include, but are not limited to, the following: • Reduction of water demand through aggressive water use efficiency programs, with a goal to reduce demand by 15% by 2020, compared to 1993. • Groundwater production capacity and distribution ability to meet 100 percent of the water service area demands. • Cooperation with OCWD to maximize conservation activities throughout Orange County and increase groundwater recharge capabilities. As discussed earlier, the reliability of the City's water supply is currently dependent on the reliability of both groundwater and, to a lesser extent, imported water supplies, which are managed and delivered by OCWD and Metropolitan, respectively. 5.3.3 Huntington Beach Sea Water Desalination Facility As technology progresses, additional water supplies and facilities are being brought on line to further assure water supply reliability well into the future. One recent example is the proposal by Poseidon Resources, Inc. to build a 50-million- gallon-per-day (50 MGD) (56,000 AFY) seawater desalination project in Huntington Beach called the Huntington Beach Sea Water Desalination Facility. Poseidon Resources Corporation is working with local and state agencies to obtain the required permits to ensure proper safeguards to the community and environment. The Environmental Impact Report was certified in September 2005 by the Huntington Beach City Council. The City Council also approved the Coastal Development Plan, Conditional Use Permit, and Owner’s Participation Agreement for the facility in February 2006. Construction could begin in 2009 and the facility could be operational in 2011. The City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department has signed a letter of intent regarding a potential water purchase agreement with Poseidon Resources. The letter sets forth certain non-binding understandings between the City and Poseidon relating to an interest in discussing the potential purchase of desalinated water from the seawater desalination plant to be built by Poseidon at its site in Huntington Beach. Anaheim and Poseidon intend to begin good faith negotiations of a definitive water purchase agreement. Again, this is just one example of a new project and new technology ensuring water reliability into the future. Another example includes OCWD’s Groundwater Replenishment System discussed above. 5-20 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- 5-21 November 2009 5.4 Dry Year Reliability Comparison Metropolitan Supplies and Demands As previously noted, the Anaheim Public Utilities Department is a direct member agency of Metropolitan. In its 2005 Regional UWMP (RUWMP) and more recently its 2006 Integrated Water Resources Plan Implementation Report (IRP Implementation Report),26 Metropolitan chose the year 1977 as the single driest year since 1922 and the years 1990- 1992 as the multiple driest years over that same period. These years were selected because they represent the timing of the least amount of available water resources from the SWP, a major source of Metropolitan’s supply. Metropolitan’s 2006 IRP Implementation Report provided an update to the water supply projections presented in the Metropolitan’s 2005 RUWMP. Subsequently, MWD developed its 2007 IRP Implementation Report dated October 2007. In reliance on data received from DWR staff, the 2007 IRP Implementation Report states that “[b]ased on initial estimates, Metropolitan could see as much as up to 22 percent reduction, on average, of its SWP supplies in 2008 and beyond.” However, Metropolitan’s 2007 IRP Implementation Report did not include revised water supply projections as did the previous versions. Importantly, it should be noted that the 2007 SWP Delivery Reliability Report (which was adopted by DWR in August 2008) does not reflect reductions in SWP deliveries to MWD as high as 22 percent. Nevertheless, this WSA utilizes the 22 percent reduction of SWP supplies set forth in the 2007 MWD IRP Implementation Report. Additionally, in Section 6, this WSA includes analyes of 35 and 40 percent reduction in SWP deliveries to MWD. Thus, this WSA takes a very conservative approach and utilizes a truly worst case scenario (in Section 6) that may not materialize. Thus, this WSA directly addresses the assertion made by CREED and OCCORD in the previous 2008 lawsuit that the previous WSA did not analyze new information in the form of Delta smelt and other issues in the WSA’s analysis of future water reliability. Based on the 2006 IRP Implementation Report, over the 20-year period beginning in 2010 and ending in 2030, Metropolitan projects a 2.0 percent increase in overall available supply during an average year, a 4.9 percent increase during a single dry year, and a 1.9 percent increase during the third year of the multiple dry year period. The increased available supplies during drought year scenarios are primarily due to increased contract allotments of in-basin storage as well as a number of supplies under development. For example, in a single dry year or multiple dry year period, Metropolitan anticipates accessing water stored in a variety of the storage programs discussed above. In its 2005 RUWMP, Metropolitan projects an increase in member agency demands. Specifically, they project a 10 percent increase over the same 20-year period in the 26 Metropolitan develops Integrated Resource Plans (IRPs), which lay out how Metropolitan will secure and provide water to its customer base. These IRPs utilize hydrological and other data provided by DWR and are updated periodically through IRP Implementation Reports to reflect changing conditions. ---PAGE BREAK--- average demand, a 6.9 percent increase during the single dry year scenario, and a 7.8 percent increase during the multiple dry year scenario. However, in all cases, the projected regional increase in demands by member agencies are offset by available surpluses in the Metropolitan supply. Table 5.3 summarizes Metropolitan’s current imported supply availability projections for average year, single dry year, and multiple dry years over the 20-year period beginning in 2010 and ending in 2030. These supply projections are based on the most recent data available from their 2006 IRP Implementation Report with an additional 22 percent reduction in SWP supplies based on Metropolitan’s 2007 IRP Implementation Report, as discussed above. Appendix B includes the water supply tables from Metropolitan’s 2006 IRP Implementation Report and the calculated Metropolitan supply with a 22 percent reduction in SWP supply. Based on these projections, Metropolitan will be able to meet all of its projected average year, single dry year, and multiple dry year service area demands through the year 2030. Metropolitan regional water demand data is based on its 2005 RUWMP. MWD has had a long and successful track record in implementing resource management actions and measures to allow for consistency in available water supply in dry years. Some of these programs, segregated by category, have included the following: 1. Conservation • Incentives to facilitate the installation of water conserving devices. • Water savings through legislative measures. • Pursuing specific implementation strategies outlined in Metropolitan’s Conservation Strategy Plan, jointly developed with its member agencies. • Total incentive payments for FY 2006/07 were $15.4 million, which created 112,000 AF of conserved water savings. 2. Local Resources (LRP) • Incentives of up to $250 per acre-foot to expand water recycling and groundwater recovery programs. • Eighty-six participating water recycling and groundwater recovery projects are expected to collectively produce about 363,000 AF per year once fully implemented. • Since inception of the LRP in 1982, Metropolitan has provided more than $244 million for the production of about 1.3 MAF of recycled water and recovered groundwater. 3. In-Basin Groundwater Storage • Metropolitan’s dry-year conjunctive use programs with member and retail agencies provide more than 415,000 AF of additional storage within the service area with a contractual yield of more than 115,000 AF during dry conditions. Metropolitan has allocated $52.4 million to these programs to date. • Metropolitan has about 63,000 AF in supplemental storage locally through agreements with several member agencies. 5-22 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- 4. In-Basin Surface Water Storage Metropolitan Reservoirs – Diamond Valley Lake, Lake Mathews and Lake Skinner Flexible Storage in DWR reservoirs – Castaic Lake, and Lake Perris 5. Colorado River Aqueduct • Metropolitan has implemented water management and transfer programs: o Quantification Settlement Agreement – agreement allowing for agricultural conservation, water transfers, and potential surplus water availability (60,000 AF in FY 2006/07) o Imperial Irrigation District/Metropolitan Conservation Program (83,000 AF in FY 2006/07. o Palo Verde Irrigation District Land Management Program (86,000 AF in FY 2006/07) 6. State Water Project • In June 2007 Metropolitan adopted the Delta Action Plan that sets a direction for Metropolitan to respond to the ongoing problems of the Bay-Delta ecosystem in a systematic approach to restore reliability to the SWP. • Metropolitan manages five existing SWP storage programs located outside of its service area: o Semitropic/Metropolitan Water Banking and Exchange Program (yield between 31,500 and 223,000 AFY) o Arvin-Edison Water Management Program (yield up to 75,00 AFY) o San Bernardino/Metropolitan Coordinated Operating Agreement (annual purchase of up to 20,000 AF and carryover storage of 50,000 AF) o Kern Delta/Metropolitan Water Management Program (storage up to 250,000 AF and return up to 50,000 AFY) o Mojave/Metropolitan Demonstration Water Exchange Program In its 2007 IRP, MWD has identified and stated that it intends to continue implementing many of these same programs and has also identified additional resource management actions. Some of these programs include the following: 1. Conservation • Program refinements: more options, streamlined administrative processes, upgraded and new incentives and more standardization across programs to increase program participation. • Expanded incentives: new incentives added to facilitate installation of water conserving devices, grants and like funding from other agencies help expand incentives programs. • New Programs: novel programs similar to Public Sector Water Efficiency Partnership Demonstration Program. 5-23 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- 2. Local Resources (LRP) • Metropolitan’s pursuit of the development of seawater desalination through regional facilitation and funding. • Updated policies allowing an open process to accept and review project applications on a continuous basis, with a goal of development of an additional 174,000 acre-feet per year of local water resources. 3. In-Basin Groundwater Storage • Completion of the Groundwater Basin Assessment Study provides new information and a baseline for discussions focusing on how to move forward to meet goals for dry-year groundwater yield. Key findings indicate that as much as 3.2 million acre-feet of storage may be available in groundwater basins within the Metropolitan service area; however, much of this space is not currently utilized due to a number of factors including institutional disagreements and uncertainties, need for significant capital investments in conveyance, recharge, and/or extraction facilities, water quality considerations, etc. 4. Colorado River Aqueduct • Metropolitan has begun negotiations with the Bureau of Reclamation for a long- term Intentionally Created Surplus program that will allow Metropolitan to store water in Lake Mead for delivery via the Aqueduct in dry years. 5. State Water Project • Metropolitan is actively engaged in all proceedings regarding Delta operations to evaluate options to address Delta smelt impacts and other environmental concerns, the Delta Vision process and the Bay-Delta Conservation Plan process. 5-24 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 5.3 Metropolitan Regional Imported Water Supply Reliability Projections Region Wide Projections 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 Supply Information Projected Supply During an Average Year[1] 2,465,140 2,579,140 2,505,040 2,512,040 2,512,040 Projected Supply During a Single Dry Year[1] 3,253,640 3,438,180 3,486,560 3,439,560 3,390,560 Projected Supply During Year 3 of Multiple Dry Year Period[1] 2,599,760 2,653,060 2,685,580 2,677,580 2,660,580 Demand Information Projected Demand During an Average Year[2] 2,063,000 1,985,000 2,029,000 2,141,000 2,269,000 Projected Demand During a Single Dry Year[2] 2,348,000 2,234,000 2,275,000 2,388,000 2,511,000 Projected Demand During Year 3 of Multiple Dry Year Period[2] 2,420,000 2,341,000 2,355,000 2,479,000 2,609,000 Surplus Information Projected Surplus During an Average Year 402,140 594,140 476,040 371,040 243,040 Projected Surplus During a Single Dry Year 905,640 1,204,180 1,211,560 1,051,560 879,560 Projected Surplus During Year 3 of Multiple Dry Year Period 179,760 312,060 330,580 198,580 51,580 Projected supplies include current supplies and supplies under development. This data was obtained from Metropolitan’s 2006 IRP Implementation Report supply projections and includes a 22% reduction in SWP deliveries based on Metropolitan’s 2007 IRP Implementation Report (page 1-8). Demand data obtained from Metropolitan’s 2005 RUWMP demand projections. 5-25 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- Anaheim Public Utilities Department The City’s water demand in fiscal year 2007/08 was 74,242 AF including unaccounted- for-water. By the year 2029/30, the City’s projected water demand is 86,340 AFY, including approximately 5,249 AFY for the total Proposed Project, of which 1,804 AFY of demand is associated with increased intensification in The Platinum Triangle (see Table 3.3) over and above that which was included in the City’s adopted 2005 UWMP. More current information than what was included in the City’s 2005 UWMP, in terms of existing City-wide water use and future growth projections, was utilized to project future demands. The City’s 2005 UWMP used a 2000/2004 average APUD demand of 73,209 AF (based on customer sales, not production) to estimate water demand for the year 2005. For purposes of developing an updated existing water usage, the 2005 water demand of 69,277 AF was excluded from the 2000/04 average due to the unusually heavy rainfall which occurred during 2005. However, the 2005/06 sales of 70,243 AF, which was not a wet year, indicates the 2005 UWMP projections were conservative, which may be due to water conservation causing a permanent reduction in City-wide demands. To reiterate, the water demand projections contained in the City’s UWMP appear to overstate future demand when one analyzes actual demand versus the demand that was predicted. This is likely due to the success of the City’s water conservation programs and is also a likely result of water customers utilizing less water in response to price increases. To reflect the reduced growth in water demand that has occurred since the UWMP, updated water sales for 2006/07 of 73,871 AF (excluding unaccounted for water) and a total water demand of 76,687 AF (including unaccounted for water) was used as an estimate of existing (2008) water demand. Water demand for 2006/07 was used to estimate current use because that year experienced the highest water sales volume over the past seven years and is considered the most conservative estimate utilization of this year would overestimate the amount of water to be used). Projected water demands were calculated using the percentage growth rates developed in Table 4.1, using the updated 2008 estimated water demand as a starting point. As discussed in Section 4, this WSA uses a water demand growth rate equal to approximately 75 percent of the projected housing unit growth rate. Water demand is projected to increase at this reduced rate versus housing unit growth rate because much of the new development growth is occurring from increased densities in redevelopment areas that have existing water demands. In addition, new growth will tend to have newer, water conserving fixtures such as high efficiency clothes washers as well as more drought tolerant landscaping and more efficient irrigation systems. It should also be noted that the growth projections, and hence the water demand increases, include the proposed Mountain Park development. Past hydrologic data and their effect on historic water demand were considered to determine factors for single-dry and multiple-dry years, which is consistent with the City’s 2005 UWMP. The single-dry year for the City is estimated to increase 5 percent from the normal water year, and multiple-dry year demands (three-year period) are 5-26 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- 5-27 November 2009 estimated to increase 6, 3, and 5 percent from the normal water year demand, respectively. The OCWD Basin Production Percentage (BPP) is calculated by dividing groundwater basin pumping by total water demands. For fiscal year 2008-09 the BPP was established at 69 percent. The average BPP for the past twenty years is 72.9 percent. Based on discussions with OCWD staff and background analysis provided for the January 7, 2009 OCWD Board of Directors meeting on annual water budget and water replenishment, an average projected BPP between 65 percent and 69 percent was documented. An average BPP of 67 percent is assumed to be a reasonable estimate for long-term planning purposes and is used in this WSA to project groundwater supply. OCWD staff have confirmed that the use of this BPP estimate is a reasonable assumption for this WSA. Importantly, and as has been stated above, the City or any producer can always produce groundwater above the BPP. If this occurs, the producer pays the BEA pump tax which is a higher payment as compared to the RA that is paid by a producer for groundwater produced within the BPP limits Imported water supply to the City as set forth in Tables 5-4 through 5-10 is calculated as 1.18 percent of Metropolitan’s available water supply (Table 5.3 above) based on Anaheim's share of allocation from MWD's 2009 Water Supply Allocation Plan. In February of 2008 Metropolitan’s Board adopted a Water Supply Allocation Plan (WSAP) that sets out a formula for allocating water to its member agencies due to uncertain conditions related to Delta pumping operations, climate change and current dry conditions. Each year, Metropolitan updates their Water Supply Allocation Plan spreadsheet to reflect the current demand and supply situation and in April adopts an allocation level, if shortages in regional supply dictate. This Water Supply Allocation Plan analyzes available water supply resources.27 The City’s allocation of water from Metropolitan varies based on water supply availability. For example, on April 14, 2009, Metropolitan adopted a Level 2 Water Supply Allocation, which equates to a 10 percent loss of regional supply. This allocation will go into effect commencing on July 1, 2009. Using the latest information from Metropolitan (5/6/09 email included in Appendix Anaheim’s allocation percentage is 1.29 percent corresponding to a Level 2 Allocation (adopted for 2009) and 1.18 percent corresponding to a Level 10 Allocation. The percentage used (1.18 percent) to determine the City’s share of Metropolitan water in this WSA is the most conservative (lowest) allocation percentage provided by Metropolitan for the City. This percentage equates to a Level 10 Water Supply Allocation or a 50 percent loss of regional supply to Metropolitan and is the most severe allocation level Metropolitan has. All other scenarios call for a percentage higher than the 1.18 percent. Thus, this WSA is highly conservative insofar as it assumes possible extremely reduced supplies in the future year scenarios. Analysis shows that long-term groundwater and 27 MWD has a created a “Water Supply Allocation Plan”. This Water Supply Allocation Plan is essentially a water rationing plan. The Water Supply Allocation Plan contains Allocation Levels 1 through 10. Level 1 is the least severe Allocation Plan and Level 10 is the most severe Allocation Plan. Each Allocation Level represents a 5% reduction in water supplies otherwise made available to a jurisdiction in a non-allocation year Level 1 Allocation = 5% reduction, Level 2 Allocation = 10% reduction, etc.). This WSA’s use of a Level 10 Allocation represents the truly worst case scenario that will likely not materialize ---PAGE BREAK--- imported water in the above quantities are anticipated to remain stable to the City, based on studies and reports of OCWD and Metropolitan, respectively. Table 5-4 presents future normal year water demands based on growth factors developed in Section 4 of this WSA. Table 5-5 shows single dry water year supply and demand projections under normal groundwater supply conditions. Tables 5-6 through 5-10 show the multiple dry water years projected supply and demand projections. Demand values are adjusted to reflect additional water demands within the City resulting from proposed development since the UWMP was adopted. These added demands include the Proposed Project, demands analyzed by the May 2007 WSA for the Kaiser Permanente Medical Center (KPMC), and demands associated with The Platinum Triangle Project being concurrently analyzed in a separate WSA. The demand data includes unaccounted-for- water of 3.8% based on average water losses over the past six years as discussed in Section 4.1 of this WSA. In light of MWD’s successful, decades long track record of providing reliable water supplies to MWD customers, the City’s imported water demands should continue to be met, as shown on the following tables. In addition, the following tables show that under reduced water supply conditions from Metropolitan, available supply continues to exceed demand in normal, single and multiple dry years. Finally, it should be noted that the supply conditions set forth in the following tables utilize a Level 10 Water Supply Allocation Percentage which, as has been discussed above represents the lowest Allocation percentage of Metropolitan supplies that would be available to the City during an Allocation year and (ii) include a 22 percent reduction in SWP supplies to deal with potential SWP cutbacks due to Delta smelt and other concerns. Thus, the water supply tables set forth below are predicated on the assumption that Metropolitan supply will be constrained in the future. It is certainly possible in future years that a more favorable Water Supply Allocation will be applied to the City and it is also possible that SWP supplies will not be reduced by as much as 22 percent. In these circumstances, imported water supplies available to the City will be significantly higher than the supply projections shown in this WSA. This analysis was completed for the end of the 20-year planning period. 5-28 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 5.4 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Normal Year (AFY – All projections rounded to nearest 10 AF) Water Sources 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 Supply Normal Water Years Imported[1] 29,090 30,430 29,560 29,640 29,640 Local (Groundwater)[2] 52,110 54,500 56,460 58,360 59,310 Total Supply 81,200 84,930 86,020 88,000 88,950 Demand Total Demand without Proposed Project, KPMC and Platinum Triangle[3] 76,170 78,040 79,760 81,500 81,960 Existing + Approved Platinum Triangle Demand[4] 1,440 1,940 2,450 2,950 3,450 Additional Platinum Triangle Demand[5] 90 540 990 1,440 1,800 Additional KPMC Demand[6] 40 210 330 330 330 Additional Proposed Project Demand[7] 30 610 740 880 980 Total Demand 77,770 81,340 84,270 87,100 88,520 Supply/ Demand Difference 3,430 3,590 1,750 900 430 Difference as % of Supply 4.2 4.2 2.0 1.0 0.5 Difference as % of Demand 4.4 4.4 2.1 1.0 0.5 This figure represents Average Year Supply under extreme conditions consistent with the preceding Metropolitan WSAP discussion. MWD's Average Year Supply set forth in MWD's 2006 IRP Implementation Report has been reduced by 22% pursuant to the 2007 IRP Implementation Report (page 1-8). See Appendix B tables for calculation of reduction. MWD Average Year Supply 2,465,140 2,579,140 2,505,040 2,512,040 2,512,040 This figure represents 67% of total Anaheim Water Demand based on the anticipated BPP forecasts as discussed previously in this WSA. This figure represents normal year demand based on the City of Anaheim's 2005 UWMP and updated to reflect recent (up to 2008) water use data, current growth projections, and excludes the Additional Proposed Project Demand. This figure includes additional demand for The Platinum Triangle addressed previously in the February 2005 WSA (2,656 AFY at buildout) as well as existing landscape irrigation demand and existing demands for the Arena (Honda Center) and Angel Stadium of Anaheim that were also included in the February 2005 WSA as part of the overall existing Citywide demands as they were to remain unchanged by any land use intensification. This figure represents additional demand based on increase in land use intensification proposed in a WSA being processed concurrently by the City. Based on demands from May 2007 WSA. This figure represents the additional demand based on increase in land use intensification as a result of the Proposed Project that was not included in the 2005 UWMP. 5-29 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 5.5 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Single Dry Year (AFY – All projections rounded to nearest 10 AF) Water Sources 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 Supply Single Dry Years Imported[1] 38,390 40,570 41,140 40,590 40,010 Local (Groundwater)[2] 54,970 57,500 59,560 61,570 62,570 Total Supply 93,360 98,070 100,700 102,160 102,580 Demand Total Demand without Proposed Project, KPMC and Platinum Triangle[3] 80,360 82,340 84,140 85,980 86,470 Existing + Approved Platinum Triangle Demand[4] 1,520 2,050 2,580 3,110 3,640 Additional Platinum Triangle Demand[5] 90 570 1,040 1,520 1,900 Additional KPMC Demand[6] 40 220 350 350 350 Additional Proposed Project Demand[7] 30 640 780 930 1,030 % of Normal Year Demand 105.5 105.5 105.5 105.5 105.5 Total Single Dry Year Demand 82,040 85,820 88,890 91,890 93,390 Supply/ Demand Difference 11,320 12,250 11,810 10,270 9,190 Difference as % of Supply 12.1 12.5 11.7 10.1 9.0 Difference as % of Demand 13.8 14.3 13.3 11.2 9.8 This figure represents Single Dry Year Supply under extreme conditions consistent with the preceding Metropolitan WSAP discussion. MWD's Single Dry Year Supply set forth in MWD's 2006 IRP Implementation Report has been reduced by 22% pursuant to the 2007 IRP Implementation Report (page 1-8). See Appendix B tables for calculation of reduction. MWD Single Dry Year Supply 3,253,640 3,438,180 3,486,560 3,439,560 3,390,560 This figure represents 67% of total Anaheim Water Demand based on the anticipated BPP forecasts as discussed previously in this WSA. This figure represents normal year demand based on the City of Anaheim's 2005 UWMP and updated to reflect recent (up to 2008) water use data, current growth projections, and excludes the Additional Proposed Project Demand. This figure includes additional demand for The Platinum Triangle addressed previously in the February 2005 WSA (2,656 AFY at buildout) as well as existing landscape irrigation demand and existing demands for the Arena (Honda Center) and Angel Stadium of Anaheim that were also included in the February 2005 WSA as part of the overall existing Citywide demands as they were to remain unchanged by any land use intensification. This figure represents additional demand based on increase in land use intensification proposed in a WSA being processed concurrently by the City. Based on demands from May 2007 WSA. This figure represents the additional demand based on increase in land use intensification as a result of the Proposed Project that was not included in the 2005 UWMP. 5-30 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- It should be noted that imported water supplies are increased in single and multiple dry years consistent with Metropolitan’s RUWMP and IRP Reports due to the fact that in dry years Metropolitan draws water from surface and groundwater storage programs. These withdrawals from storage are illustrated, numerically, in Appendix B, which are extracted from Metropolitan’s 2006 IRP. 5-31 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 5.6 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Multiple Dry Water Years 2006-2010 (AFY – All projections rounded to nearest 10 AF) Water Sources 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Supply Normal Years Dry Years[8] Imported[1] 29,090 29,090 30,680 30,680 30,680 Local (Groundwater)[2] 50,890 51,130 54,820 53,630 54,970 Total Supply 79,980 80,220 85,500 84,310 85,650 Demand Total Demand without Proposed Project, KPMC and Platinum Triangle[3] 74,690 75,060 80,480 78,600 80,360 Existing + Approved Platinum Triangle Demand[4] 1,260 1,260 1,340 1,400 1,520 Additional Platinum Triangle Demand[5] 0 0 0 0 90 Additional KPMC Demand[6] 0 0 0 40 40 Additional Proposed Project Demand[7] 0 0 0 0 30 % of Normal Year Demand 100.0 100.0 106.7 103.7 105.5 Total Multiple Year Demand 75,950 76,320 81,820 80,040 82,040 Supply/ Demand Difference 4,030 3,900 3,680 4,270 3,610 Difference as % of Supply 5.0 4.9 4.3 5.1 4.2 Difference as % of Demand 5.3 5.1 4.5 5.3 4.4 This figure represents Multiple Dry Year Supply under extreme conditions consistent with the preceding Metropolitan WSAP discussion. MWD's Multiple Dry Year Supply set forth in MWD's 2006 IRP Implementation Report has been reduced by 22% pursuant to the 2007 IRP Implementation Report (page 1-8). See Appendix B tables for calculation of reduction. MWD Multi Dry Year Supply 2,465,140 2,465,140 2,599,760 2,599,760 2,599,760 This figure represents 67% of total Anaheim Water Demand based on the anticipated BPP forecasts as discussed previously in this WSA. This figure represents normal year demand based on the City of Anaheim's 2005 UWMP and updated to reflect recent (up to 2008) water use data, current growth projections, and excludes the Additional Proposed Project Demand. This figure includes additional demand for The Platinum Triangle addressed previously in the February 2005 WSA (2,656 AFY at buildout) as well as existing landscape irrigation demand and existing demands for the Arena (Honda Center) and Angel Stadium of Anaheim that were also included in the February 2005 WSA as part of the overall existing Citywide demands as they were to remain unchanged by any land use intensification. This figure represents additional demand based on increase in land use intensification proposed in a WSA being processed concurrently by the City. Based on demands from May 2007 WSA. This figure represents the additional demand based on increase in land use intensification as a result of the Proposed Project that was not included in the 2005 UWMP. Multi dry year demand = (normal year demand) x (106.7%, 103.7%, and 105.5% for years 1, 2, and 3 multiple dry year demand factors developed by MWDOC). 5-32 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 5.7 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Multiple Dry Water Years 2011-2015 (AFY – All projections rounded to nearest 10 AF) Water Sources 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Supply Normal Years Dry Years[8] Imported[1] 30,430 30,430 31,310 31,310 31,310 Local (Groundwater)[2] 51,460 51,800 55,730 54,830 56,130 Total Supply 81,890 82,230 87,040 86,140 87,440 Demand Total Demand without Proposed Project, KPMC and Platinum Triangle[3] 76,540 76,920 82,470 80,540 82,340 Existing + Approved Platinum Triangle Demand[4] 1,540 1,640 1,860 1,910 2,050 Additional Platinum Triangle Demand[5] 180 270 380 470 570 Additional KPMC Demand[6] 40 40 220 220 220 Additional Proposed Project Demand[7] 50 80 110 610 640 % of Normal Year Demand 100.0 100.0 106.7 103.7 105.5 Total Multiple Year Demand 76,810 77,310 83,180 81,840 83,770 Supply/ Demand Difference 5,080 4,920 3,860 4,300 3,670 Difference as % of Supply 6.2 6.0 4.4 5.0 4.2 Difference as % of Demand 6.6 6.4 4.6 5.3 4.4 This figure represents Multiple Dry Year Supply under extreme conditions consistent with the preceding Metropolitan WSAP discussion. MWD's Multiple Dry Year Supply set forth in MWD's 2006 IRP Implementation Report has been reduced by 22% pursuant to the 2007 IRP Implementation Report (page 1-8). See Appendix B tables for calculation of reduction. MWD Multi Dry Year Supply 2,579,140 2,579,140 2,653,060 2,653,060 2,653,060 This figure represents 67% of total Anaheim Water Demand based on the anticipated BPP forecasts as discussed previously in this WSA. This figure represents normal year demand based on the City of Anaheim's 2005 UWMP and updated to reflect recent (up to 2008) water use data, current growth projections, and excludes the Additional Proposed Project Demand. This figure includes additional demand for The Platinum Triangle addressed previously in the February 2005 WSA (2,656 AFY at buildout) as well as existing landscape irrigation demand and existing demands for the Arena (Honda Center) and Angel Stadium of Anaheim that were also included in the February 2005 WSA as part of the overall existing Citywide demands as they were to remain unchanged by any land use intensification. This figure represents additional demand based on increase in land use intensification proposed in a WSA being processed concurrently by the City. Based on demands from May 2007 WSA. This figure represents the additional demand based on increase in land use intensification as a result of the Proposed Project that was not included in the 2005 UWMP. Multi dry year demand = (normal year demand) x (106.7%, 103.7%, and 105.5% for years 1, 2, and 3 multiple dry year demand factors developed by MWDOC). 5-33 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 5.8 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Multiple Dry Water Years 2016-2020 (AFY – All projections rounded to nearest 10 AF) Water Sources 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Supply Normal Years Dry Years[8] Imported[1] 29,560 29,560 31,690 31,690 31,690 Local (Groundwater)[2] 53,510 53,810 57,750 56,450 57,830 Total Supply 83,070 83,370 89,440 88,140 89,520 Demand Total Demand without Proposed Project, KPMC and Platinum Triangle[3] 78,390 78,730 84,370 82,350 84,140 Existing + Approved Platinum Triangle Demand[4] 2,050 2,150 2,400 2,430 2,580 Additional Platinum Triangle Demand[5] 630 720 870 940 1,050 Additional KPMC Demand[6] 210 210 220 220 350 Additional Proposed Project Demand[7] 640 660 740 740 780 % of Normal Year Demand 100.0 100.0 106.7 103.7 105.5 Total Multiple Year Demand 79,870 80,320 86,200 84,250 86,320 Supply/ Demand Difference 3,200 3,050 3,240 3,890 3,200 Difference as % of Supply 3.9 3.7 3.6 4.4 3.6 Difference as % of Demand 4.0 3.8 3.8 4.6 3.7 This figure represents Multiple Dry Year Supply under extreme conditions consistent with the preceding Metropolitan WSAP discussion. MWD's Multiple Dry Year Supply set forth in MWD's 2006 IRP Implementation Report has been reduced by 22% pursuant to the 2007 IRP Implementation Report (page 1-8). See Appendix B tables for calculation of reduction. MWD Multi Dry Year Supply 2,505,040 2,505,040 2,685,580 2,685,580 2,685,580 This figure represents 67% of total Anaheim Water Demand based on the anticipated BPP forecasts as discussed previously in this WSA. This figure represents normal year demand based on the City of Anaheim's 2005 UWMP and updated to reflect recent (up to 2008) water use data, current growth projections, and excludes the Additional Proposed Project Demand. This figure includes additional demand for The Platinum Triangle addressed previously in the February 2005 WSA (2,656 AFY at buildout) as well as existing landscape irrigation demand and existing demands for the Arena (Honda Center) and Angel Stadium of Anaheim that were also included in the February 2005 WSA as part of the overall existing Citywide demands as they were to remain unchanged by any land use intensification. This figure represents additional demand based on increase in land use intensification proposed in a WSA being processed concurrently by the City. Based on demands from May 2007 WSA. This figure represents the additional demand based on increase in land use intensification as a result of the Proposed Project that was not included in the 2005 UWMP. Multi dry year demand = (normal year demand) x (106.7%, 103.7%, and 105.5% for years 1, 2, and 3 multiple dry year demand factors developed by MWDOC). 5-34 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 5.9 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Multiple Dry Water Years 2021-2025 (AFY – All projections rounded to nearest 10 AF) Water Sources 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Supply Normal Years Dry Years[8] Imported[1] 29,640 29,640 31,600 31,600 31,600 Local (Groundwater)[2] 55,130 55,440 59,490 58,140 59,480 Total Supply 84,770 85,080 91,090 89,740 91,080 Demand Total Demand without Proposed Project, KPMC and Platinum Triangle[3] 80,100 80,450 86,210 84,150 85,980 Existing + Approved Platinum Triangle Demand[4] 2,550 2,650 2,930 2,950 3,110 Additional Platinum Triangle Demand[5] 1,080 1,170 1,350 1,400 1,520 Additional KPMC Demand[6] 330 330 350 340 350 Additional Proposed Project Demand[7] 770 800 880 880 920 % of Normal Year Demand 100.0 100.0 106.7 103.7 105.5 Total Multiple Year Demand 82,280 82,750 88,790 86,770 88,770 Supply/ Demand Difference 2,490 2,330 2,300 2,970 2,310 Difference as % of Supply 2.9 2.7 2.5 3.3 2.5 Difference as % of Demand 3.0 2.8 2.6 3.4 2.6 This figure represents Multiple Dry Year Supply under extreme conditions consistent with the preceding Metropolitan WSAP discussion. MWD's Multiple Dry Year Supply set forth in MWD's 2006 IRP Implementation Report has been reduced by 22% pursuant to the 2007 IRP Implementation Report (page 1-8). See Appendix B tables for calculation of reduction. MWD Multi Dry Year Supply 2,512,040 2,512,040 2,677,580 2,677,580 2,677,580 This figure represents 67% of total Anaheim Water Demand based on the anticipated BPP forecasts as discussed previously in this WSA. This figure represents normal year demand based on the City of Anaheim's 2005 UWMP and updated to reflect recent (up to 2008) water use data, current growth projections, and excludes the Additional Proposed Project Demand. This figure includes additional demand for The Platinum Triangle addressed previously in the February 2005 WSA (2,656 AFY at buildout) as well as existing landscape irrigation demand and existing demands for the Arena (Honda Center) and Angel Stadium of Anaheim that were also included in the February 2005 WSA as part of the overall existing Citywide demands as they were to remain unchanged by any land use intensification. This figure represents additional demand based on increase in land use intensification proposed in a WSA being processed concurrently by the City. Based on demands from May 2007 WSA. This figure represents the additional demand based on increase in land use intensification as a result of the Proposed Project that was not included in the 2005 UWMP. Multi dry year demand = (normal year demand) x (106.7%, 103.7%, and 105.5% for years 1, 2, and 3 multiple dry year demand factors developed by MWDOC). 5-35 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 5.10 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Multiple Dry Water Years 2026-2030 (AFY – All projections rounded to nearest 10 AF) Water Sources 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 Supply Normal Years Dry Years[8] Imported[1] 29,640 29,640 31,390 31,390 31,390 Local (Groundwater)[2] 56,510 56,660 60,600 59,050 60,130 Total Supply 86,150 86,300 91,990 90,440 91,520 Demand Total Demand without Proposed Project, KPMC and Platinum Triangle[3] 81,590 81,680 87,250 84,900 86,470 Existing + Approved Platinum Triangle Demand[4] 3,050 3,150 3,470 3,470 3,640 Additional Platinum Triangle Demand[5] 1,530 1,620 1,830 1,870 1,900 Additional KPMC Demand[6] 330 330 350 340 350 Additional Proposed Project Demand[7] 900 930 1,020 1,020 1,030 % of Normal Year Demand 100.0 100.0 106.7 103.7 105.5 Total Multiple Year Demand 84,350 84,560 90,450 88,130 89,750 Supply/ Demand Difference 1,800 1,740 1,540 2,310 1,770 Difference as % of Supply 2.1 2.0 1.7 2.6 1.9 Difference as % of Demand 2.1 2.1 1.7 2.6 2.0 This figure represents Multiple Dry Year Supply under extreme conditions consistent with the preceding Metropolitan WSAP discussion. MWD's Multiple Dry Year Supply set forth in MWD's 2006 IRP Implementation Report has been reduced by 22% pursuant to the 2007 IRP Implementation Report (page 1-8). See Appendix B tables for calculation of reduction. MWD Multi Dry Year Supply 2,512,040 2,512,040 2,660,580 2,660,580 2,660,580 This figure represents 67% of total Anaheim Water Demand based on the anticipated BPP forecasts as discussed previously in this WSA. This figure represents normal year demand based on the City of Anaheim's 2005 UWMP and updated to reflect recent (up to 2008) water use data, current growth projections, and excludes any of the Proposed Project Demand. This figure includes additional demand for The Platinum Triangle addressed previously in the February 2005 WSA (2,656 AFY at buildout) as well as existing landscape irrigation demand and existing demands for the Arena (Honda Center) and Angel Stadium of Anaheim that were also included in the February 2005 WSA as part of the overall existing Citywide demands as they were to remain unchanged by any land use intensification. This figure represents additional demand based on increase in land use intensification proposed in a WSA being processed concurrently by the City. Based on demands from May 2007 WSA. This figure represents the additional demand based on increase in land use intensification as a result of the Proposed Project that was not included in the 2005 UWMP. Multi dry year demand = (normal year demand) x (106.7%, 103.7%, and 105.5% for years 1, 2, and 3 multiple dry year demand factors developed by MWDOC). 5-36 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- November 2009 6-1 6.0 POSSIBLE WATER SUPPLY SHORTAGE As stated previously throughout this WSA, the past couple of years introduced a number of water supply challenges for Metropolitan and its service area. Critical dry conditions affected all of Metropolitan’s main supply sources. In addition, as discussed above, a ruling in the Federal Courts in August 2007 required protective measures for the Delta Smelt in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta which raised uncertainty about future pumping operations from the SWP. This uncertainty, along with the impacts of recent dry conditions, raised the possibility that Metropolitan would not have access to the supplies necessary to meet total firm demands and would have to allocate shortages in supplies to its member agencies. Several relatively recent news articles based on Metropolitan press releases have estimated a 30 percent or perhaps greater reduction in water supply from the SWP for the coming year and possibly into the future dependent on weather conditions in the SWP tributary area. In fact on April 14, 2009, Metropolitan adopted a Level 2 Allocation, which equates to a 10 percent reduction in regional water supplies. As set forth above, this WSA has already included the use of a Level 10 Allocation percentage for calculation Anaheim’s share of water supplies in future years (the lowest water allocation scenario possible) and (ii) a 22 percent reduction in SWP supplies to account for Delta smelt and other possible systemic supply limitations on the SWP. The utilization of these two factors in this WSA already accommodates possible future supply reductions due to Delta smelt and reduced snow pack possibilities. However, in order to ensure that this WSA also included a worse-case scenario, this Section 6 includes analyses based on the assumption that SWP deliveries will be reduced by both 35 and 40 percent. Thus, this Section 6 analyses includes assumed 35 and 40 percent reductions in SWP supplies under normal year, single dry year, and multiple dry year scenarios. Section 5.4 above addresses these same scenarios (Tables 5.4 through 5.10) based on supply conditions projected in Metropolitan’s 2006 and 2007 IRP Implementation Reports. The following analysis, while potentially beyond the scope and requirements of a SB 610 analysis addressing a three-year drought scenario, was deemed necessary in light of the recent drought and environmental issues in the Delta. In Tables 5.4 through 5.10 preceding, Metropolitan supplies were projected based on their 2006 IRP Implementation Report with SWP supplies reduced by 22 percent based on Metropolitan’s 2007 IRP Implementation Report (Appendix Tables 6.1 through 6.14 following present the same normal year, single dry year, and multiple dry year scenarios with two additional reductions in SWP supplies, over and above the 22 percent reduction from Section 5. The first set of additional scenarios, presented in Tables 6.1 through 6.7, analyzes an additional 13 percent reduction in SWP supplies or a total reduction in SWP supplies of 35 percent and the second set, presented in Tables 6.8 through 6.14, analyzes an additional 18 percent or a total reduction in SWP supplies of 40 percent (see Appendix B for the calculation of these various Metropolitan SWP supply shortages). ---PAGE BREAK--- Under the 35 percent SWP shortage scenarios, supply deficiencies occur during the normal water year demand conditions (Table 6.1) in year 2020 and beyond, but by definition, these supply shortage conditions are not really “normal year” scenarios. Shortages are also shown during the multiple dry year scenarios for years 2016 to 2020 (only in one year and by only 50 AFY) (Table 6.5), 2021 to 2025 (Table 6.6), and years 2026 to 2030 (Table 6.7). The 40 percent reduction scenarios show shortages during normal water year demand conditions (Table 6.8) in year 2010 and beyond, but again these are really not “normal year” scenarios. Shortages are also shown during the multiple dry year scenarios for the same years as the 35 percent reduction scenarios, but more exaggerated. From Tables 6.1 through 6.7 (35 percent SWP supply reduction), the most significant shortage of 2,660 acre-feet occurs during year 2030 under normal water year conditions (Table 6.1). The “normal year” supply and demand condition represents the worst case scenario because under normal conditions Metropolitan does not draw supply from storage as they typically would during times of shortage. In Table 6.1, it is assumed there is a 35 percent reduction in SWP supply with no supplemental water from Metropolitan’s storage programs. Even so, the 2,660 acre-feet shortage can be met by a 3.0 percent reduction in demand through conservation or alternatively by increased groundwater pumping. Similarly, from Tables 6.8 through 6.14 (40 percent SWP supply reduction), the most significant shortage is 3,850 acre-feet and corresponds to a 4.3 percent reduction in demand or increased groundwater pumping. Under temporary Metropolitan allocation shortages, the City would trigger its Conservation Ordinance and call for at least a 10% reduction in usage by all customer classes with rate penalties if users exceed 90 percent of their previous year’s water use. A 10 percent reduction in demand is included in the above tables as necessary (Tables 6.1, 6.5, 6.6, and 6.7) which would eliminate any supply deficiencies. This small level of conservation reduction in demand should be easily achievable as demonstrated during past severe drought conditions in Anaheim and throughout other areas in southern California. Based on historical consumption data provided by the City of Anaheim (Appendix during drought conditions in 1991, when the City last implemented its Conservation Ordinance, consumption was reduced by over 13 percent from the previous year. Based on consumption records from 1986 through 1996, an average increase in consumption of 2 percent per year is calculated excluding the year 1991 (Conservation Ordinance Year). It could be assumed that under normal conditions the consumption in 1991 would have increased by 2 percent to account for average growth, as well. The 13 percent actual reduction in water use in 1991 when combined with the typical 2 percent increase under normal conditions would equate to approximately a 15 percent reduction in water consumption for that year. In addition, the City could order a mandatory reduction or cut in landscaping irrigation through its Water Conservation Ordinance. If this were to occur, it is estimated that the City could easily achieve a water reduction of 20 percent, which would equate to between 15,000 and 20,000 AFY at current or 2030 timeframes, respectively. 6-2 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- In addition to water conservation, any future water supply deficiencies during shortage conditions could alternatively be met by additional groundwater pumping in excess of OCWD’s assumed Basin Production Percentage of 67 percent. It should be noted that additional supplies would trigger higher rates via OCWD’s Basin Equity Assessment. Higher groundwater rates would likely be offset by penalties charged to the few customers that don’t achieve their individual conservation goal and exceed 90 percent of their previous year’s usage. The highest shortages experienced in these scenarios is 2,660 AF and 3,850 AF for the 35 and 40 percent reduction scenarios, respectively, in 2030 under a normal year condition and this is without any conservation. If necessary, this additional quantity of water could easily be produced from the City’s wells in the Anaheim Lake area (see Figure 5.1) without overtaxing any of these wells or adversely impacting the Basin or any other wells located within the Basin. Thus, extracting up to 3,850 AF from the groundwater basin from existing Anaheim wells would not cause any significant environmental effects. It should be noted that Metropolitan actually shows less supply being available during normal years than single and multiple dry years since they plan to pull water from their various storage programs during these dry periods as shown on the supply tables from their IRP in Appendix B. As set forth in this Section 6, even under the extreme assumption of a 35 percent SWP cutback and the use of a Level 10 Allocation percentage, it is anticipated that water supplies will remain stable in normal, single-dry year, and multiple-dry year scenarios through 2030 with the exception of scenarios identified, where demand exceeds supply ranging from a low of 1,350 AF in year 2020, to 2,660 AF in year 2030 for the 35 percent reduction scenarios and a low of 740 AF in year 2010, to 3,850 AF in year 2030 for the 40 percent reduction scenarios. Again, it is unlikely that the severe assumptions contained in this Section 6 will materialize. In addition, as set forth above, it is anticipated that the utilization of the City’s Water Conservation Ordinance if needed, including the mandatory cuts authorized by section 10.18.070 of the Ordinance, could easily achieve water use savings in an amount sufficient to make up for the identified shortfalls set forth in the tables. Moreover, even assuming water conservation somehow does not achieve the necessary water use savings, the identified hypothetical shortfalls could easily be met through groundwater production from City wells. Extracting 2,660 to 3,850 AF from the groundwater basin from existing Anaheim wells would not cause any significant environmental effects. Thus, this WSA does not envision any significant impacts with respect to water resources resulting from approval of the Proposed Project. Nevertheless, in order to be conservative, recommended mitigation measures have been developed and are presented in Section 7, Conclusions. As set forth above, this WSA does not envision any significant impact resulting from approval of the Proposed Project; thus no significant impacts were identified that require mitigation. Nevertheless, because of the programmatic nature of the proposed project, these mitigation measures have been recommended in order to ensure that future water supplies are in fact available to serve future specific proposed projects. 6-3 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 6.1 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Under Temporary 35% Metropolitan SWP Water Supply Shortage Normal Year (AFY – All projections rounded to nearest 10 AF) Water Sources 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 Supply Normal Water Years Imported[1] 26,080 27,420 26,460 26,550 26,550 Local (Groundwater)[2] 52,110 54,500 56,460 58,360 59,310 Total Supply 78,190 81,920 82,920 84,910 85,860 Demand Total Demand without Proposed Project, KPMC and Platinum Triangle[3] 76,170 78,040 79,760 81,500 81,960 Existing + Approved Platinum Triangle Demand[4] 1,440 1,940 2,450 2,950 3,450 Additional Platinum Triangle Demand[5] 90 540 990 1,440 1,800 Additional KPMC Demand[6] 40 210 330 330 330 Additional Proposed Project Demand[7] 30 610 740 880 980 Total Demand 77,770 81,340 84,270 87,100 88,520 Supply/Demand Difference 420 580 -1,350 -2,190 -2,660 Percent Conservation Required - - 1.6% 2.5% 3.0% This figure represents Average Year Supply under extreme conditions consistent with the preceding Metropolitan WSAP discussion. MWD's Average Year Supply set forth in MWD's 2006 IRP Implementation Report with 35% reduction in SWP supply. See Appendix B tables for calculation of reduction. MWD Average Year Supply 2,209,950 2,323,950 2,242,700 2,249,700 2,249,700 This figure represents 67% of total Anaheim Water Demand based on the anticipated BPP forecasts as discussed previously in this WSA. This figure represents normal year demand updated to reflect recent (up to 2008) water use data, current growth projections, and excludes the Additional Proposed Project Demand. This figure includes additional demand for The Platinum Triangle addressed previously in the February 2005 WSA (2,656 AFY at buildout) as well as existing landscape irrigation demand and existing demands for the Arena (Honda Center) and Angel Stadium of Anaheim that were also included in the February 2005 WSA as part of the overall existing Citywide demands as they were to remain unchanged by any land use intensification. This figure represents additional demand based on increase in land use intensification proposed in a WSA being processed concurrently by the City. Based on demands from May 2007 WSA. This figure represents the additional demand based on increase in land use intensification as a result of the Proposed Project that was not included in the 2005 UWMP. 6-4 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 6.2 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Under Temporary 35% Metropolitan SWP Water Supply Shortage Single Dry Year (AFY – All projections rounded to nearest 10 AF) Water Sources 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 Supply Single Dry Years Imported[1] 36,650 38,760 39,140 38,590 38,010 Local (Groundwater)[2] 54,970 57,500 59,560 61,570 62,570 Total Supply 91,620 96,260 98,700 100,160 100,580 Demand Total Demand without Proposed Project, KPMC and Platinum Triangle[3] 80,360 82,340 84,140 85,980 86,470 Existing + Approved Platinum Triangle Demand[4] 1,520 2,050 2,580 3,110 3,640 Additional Platinum Triangle Demand[5] 90 570 1,040 1,520 1,900 Additional KPMC Demand[6] 40 220 350 350 350 Additional Proposed Project Demand[7] 30 640 780 930 1,030 % of Normal Year Demand 105.5 105.5 105.5 105.5 105.5 Total Single Dry Year Demand 82,040 85,820 88,890 91,890 93,390 Supply/Demand Difference 9,580 10,440 9,810 8,270 7,190 This figure represents Single Dry Year Supply under extreme conditions consistent with the preceding Metropolitan WSAP discussion. MWD's Single Dry Year Supply set forth in MWD's 2006 IRP Implementation Report with 35% reduction in SWP supply. See Appendix B tables for calculation of reduction. MWD Single Dry Year Supply 3,105,700 3,284,650 3,317,300 3,270,300 3,221,300 This figure represents 67% of total Anaheim Water Demand based on the anticipated BPP forecasts as discussed previously in this WSA. This figure represents normal year demand updated to reflect recent (up to 2008) water use data, current growth projections, and excludes the Additional Proposed Project Demand. This figure includes additional demand for The Platinum Triangle addressed previously in the February 2005 WSA (2,656 AFY at buildout) as well as existing landscape irrigation demand and existing demands for the Arena (Honda Center) and Angel Stadium of Anaheim that were also included in the February 2005 WSA as part of the overall existing Citywide demands as they were to remain unchanged by any land use intensification. This figure represents additional demand based on increase in land use intensification proposed in a WSA being processed concurrently by the City. Based on demands from May 2007 WSA. This figure represents the additional demand based on increase in land use intensification as a result of the Proposed Project that was not included in the 2005 UWMP. 6-5 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 6.3 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Under Temporary 35% Metropolitan SWP Water Supply Shortage Multiple Dry Years 2006-2010 (AFY – All projections rounded to nearest 10 AF) Water Sources 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Supply Normal Years Dry Years[8] Imported[1] 26,080 26,080 28,770 28,770 28,770 Local (Groundwater)[2] 50,890 51,130 54,820 53,630 54,970 Total Supply 76,970 77,210 83,590 82,400 83,740 Demand Total Demand without Proposed Project, KPMC and Platinum Triangle[3] 74,690 75,060 80,480 78,600 80,360 Existing + Approved Platinum Triangle Demand[4] 1,260 1,260 1,340 1,400 1,520 Additional Platinum Triangle Demand[5] 0 0 0 0 90 Additional KPMC Demand[6] 0 0 0 40 40 Additional Proposed Project Demand[7] 0 0 0 0 30 % of Normal Year Demand 100.0 100.0 106.7 103.7 105.5 Total Multiple Year Demand 75,950 76,320 81,820 80,040 82,040 Supply/Demand Difference 1,020 890 1,770 2,360 1,700 This figure represents Multiple Dry Year Supply under extreme conditions consistent with the preceding Metropolitan WSAP discussion. MWD's Multiple Dry Year Supply set forth in MWD's 2006 IRP Implementation Report with 35% reduction in SWP supply. See Appendix B tables for calculation of reduction. MWD Multi Dry Year Supply 2,209,950 2,209,950 2,438,300 2,438,300 2,438,300 This figure represents 67% of total Anaheim Water Demand based on the anticipated BPP forecasts as discussed previously in this WSA. This figure represents normal year demand updated to reflect recent (up to 2008) water use data, current growth projections, and excludes the Additional Proposed Project Demand. This figure includes additional demand for The Platinum Triangle addressed previously in the February 2005 WSA (2,656 AFY at buildout) as well as existing landscape irrigation demand and existing demands for the Arena (Honda Center) and Angel Stadium of Anaheim that were also included in the February 2005 WSA as part of the overall existing Citywide demands as they were to remain unchanged by any land use intensification. This figure represents additional demand based on increase in land use intensification proposed in a WSA being processed concurrently by the City. Based on demands from May 2007 WSA. This figure represents the additional demand based on increase in land use intensification as a result of the Proposed Project that was not included in the 2005 UWMP. Multi dry year demand = (normal year demand) x (106.7%, 103.7%, and 105.5% for years 1, 2, and 3 multiple dry year demand factors developed by MWDOC). 6-6 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 6.4 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Under Temporary 35% Metropolitan SWP Water Supply Shortage Multiple Dry Years 2011-2015 (AFY – All projections rounded to nearest 10 AF) Water Sources 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Supply Normal Years Dry Years[8] Imported[1] 27,420 27,420 29,580 29,580 29,580 Local (Groundwater)[2] 51,460 51,800 55,730 54,830 56,130 Total Supply 78,880 79,220 85,310 84,410 85,710 Demand Total Demand without Proposed Project, KPMC and Platinum Triangle[3] 76,540 76,920 82,470 80,540 82,340 Existing + Approved Platinum Triangle Demand[4] 1,540 1,640 1,860 1,910 2,050 Additional Platinum Triangle Demand[5] 180 270 380 470 570 Additional KPMC Demand[6] 40 40 220 220 220 Additional Proposed Project Demand[7] 50 80 110 610 640 % of Normal Year Demand 100.0 100.0 106.7 103.7 105.5 Total Multiple Year Demand 76,810 77,310 83,180 81,840 83,770 Supply/Demand Difference 2,070 1,910 2,130 2,570 1,940 This figure represents Multiple Dry Year Supply under extreme conditions consistent with the preceding Metropolitan WSAP discussion. MWD's Multiple Dry Year Supply set forth in MWD's 2006 IRP Implementation Report with 35% reduction in SWP supply. See Appendix B tables for calculation of reduction. MWD Multi Dry Year Supply 2,323,950 2,323,950 2,506,550 2,506,550 2,506,550 This figure represents 67% of total Anaheim Water Demand based on the anticipated BPP forecasts as discussed previously in this WSA. This figure represents normal year demand updated to reflect recent (up to 2008) water use data, current growth projections, and excludes the Additional Proposed Project Demand. This figure includes additional demand for The Platinum Triangle addressed previously in the February 2005 WSA (2,656 AFY at buildout) as well as existing landscape irrigation demand and existing demands for the Arena (Honda Center) and Angel Stadium of Anaheim that were also included in the February 2005 WSA as part of the overall existing Citywide demands as they were to remain unchanged by any land use intensification. This figure represents additional demand based on increase in land use intensification proposed in a WSA being processed concurrently by the City. Based on demands from May 2007 WSA. This figure represents the additional demand based on increase in land use intensification as a result of the Proposed Project that was not included in the 2005 UWMP. Multi dry year demand = (normal year demand) x (106.7%, 103.7%, and 105.5% for years 1, 2, and 3 multiple dry year demand factors developed by MWDOC). 6-7 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 6.5 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Under Temporary 35% Metropolitan SWP Water Supply Shortage Multiple Dry Years 2016-2020 (AFY – All projections rounded to nearest 10 AF) Water Sources 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Supply Normal Years Dry Years[8] Imported[1] 26,460 26,460 29,830 29,830 29,830 Local (Groundwater)[2] 53,510 53,810 57,750 56,450 57,830 Total Supply 79,970 80,270 87,580 86,280 87,660 Demand Total Demand without Proposed Project, KPMC and Platinum Triangle[3] 78,390 78,730 84,370 82,350 84,140 Existing + Approved Platinum Triangle Demand[4] 2,050 2,150 2,400 2,430 2,580 Additional Platinum Triangle Demand[5] 630 720 870 940 1,050 Additional KPMC Demand[6] 210 210 220 220 350 Additional Proposed Project Demand[7] 640 660 740 740 780 % of Normal Year Demand 100.0 100.0 106.7 103.7 105.5 Total Multiple Year Demand 79,870 80,320 86,200 84,250 86,320 Supply/Demand Difference 100 -50 1,380 2,030 1,340 Percent Conservation Required - 0.1% - - - This figure represents Multiple Dry Year Supply under extreme conditions consistent with the preceding Metropolitan WSAP discussion. MWD's Multiple Dry Year Supply set forth in MWD's 2006 IRP Implementation Report with 35% reduction in SWP supply. See Appendix B tables for calculation of reduction. MWD Multi Dry Year Supply 2,242,700 2,242,700 2,528,150 2,528,150 2,528,150 This figure represents 67% of total Anaheim Water Demand based on the anticipated BPP forecasts as discussed previously in this WSA. This figure represents normal year demand updated to reflect recent (up to 2008) water use data, current growth projections, and excludes the Additional Proposed Project Demand. This figure includes additional demand for The Platinum Triangle addressed previously in the February 2005 WSA (2,656 AFY at buildout) as well as existing landscape irrigation demand and existing demands for the Arena (Honda Center) and Angel Stadium of Anaheim that were also included in the February 2005 WSA as part of the overall existing Citywide demands as they were to remain unchanged by any land use intensification. This figure represents additional demand based on increase in land use intensification proposed in a WSA being processed concurrently by the City. Based on demands from May 2007 WSA. This figure represents the additional demand based on increase in land use intensification as a result of the Proposed Project that was not included in the 2005 UWMP. Multi dry year demand = (normal year demand) x (106.7%, 103.7%, and 105.5% for years 1, 2, and 3 multiple dry year demand factors developed by MWDOC). 6-8 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 6.6 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Under Temporary 35% Metropolitan SWP Water Supply Shortage Multiple Dry Years 2021-2025 (AFY – All projections rounded to nearest 10 AF) Water Sources 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Supply Normal Years Dry Years[8] Imported[1] 26,550 26,550 29,740 29,740 29,740 Local (Groundwater)[2] 55,130 55,440 59,490 58,140 59,480 Total Supply 81,680 81,990 89,230 87,880 89,220 Demand Total Demand without Proposed Project, KPMC and Platinum Triangle[3] 80,100 80,450 86,210 84,150 85,980 Existing + Approved Platinum Triangle Demand[4] 2,550 2,650 2,930 2,950 3,110 Additional Platinum Triangle Demand[5] 1,080 1,170 1,350 1,400 1,520 Additional KPMC Demand[6] 330 330 350 340 350 Additional Proposed Project Demand[7] 770 800 880 880 920 % of Normal Year Demand 100.0 100.0 106.7 103.7 105.5 Total Multiple Year Demand 82,280 82,750 88,790 86,770 88,770 Supply/Demand Difference -600 -760 440 1,110 450 Percent Conservation Required 0.7% 0.9% - - - This figure represents Multiple Dry Year Supply under extreme conditions consistent with the preceding Metropolitan WSAP discussion. MWD's Multiple Dry Year Supply set forth in MWD's 2006 IRP Implementation Report with 35% reduction in SWP supply. See Appendix B tables for calculation of reduction. MWD Multi Dry Year Supply 2,249,700 2,249,700 2,520,150 2,520,150 2,520,150 This figure represents 67% of total Anaheim Water Demand based on the anticipated BPP forecasts as discussed previously in this WSA. This figure represents normal year demand updated to reflect recent (up to 2008) water use data, current growth projections, and excludes the Additional Proposed Project Demand. This figure includes additional demand for The Platinum Triangle addressed previously in the February 2005 WSA (2,656 AFY at buildout) as well as existing landscape irrigation demand and existing demands for the Arena (Honda Center) and Angel Stadium of Anaheim that were also included in the February 2005 WSA as part of the overall existing Citywide demands as they were to remain unchanged by any land use intensification. This figure represents additional demand based on increase in land use intensification proposed in a WSA being processed concurrently by the City. Based on demands from May 2007 WSA. This figure represents the additional demand based on increase in land use intensification as a result of the Proposed Project that was not included in the 2005 UWMP. Multi dry year demand = (normal year demand) x (106.7%, 103.7%, and 105.5% for years 1, 2, and 3 multiple dry year demand factors developed by MWDOC). 6-9 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 6.7 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Under Temporary 35% Metropolitan SWP Water Supply Shortage Multiple Dry Years 2026-2030 (AFY – All projections rounded to nearest 10 AF) Water Sources 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 Supply Normal Years Dry Years[8] Imported[1] 26,550 26,550 29,540 29,540 29,540 Local (Groundwater)[2] 56,510 56,660 60,600 59,050 60,130 Total Supply 83,060 83,210 90,140 88,590 89,670 Demand Total Demand without Proposed Project, KPMC and Platinum Triangle[3] 81,590 81,680 87,250 84,900 86,470 Existing + Approved Platinum Triangle Demand[4] 3,050 3,150 3,470 3,470 3,640 Additional Platinum Triangle Demand[5] 1,530 1,620 1,830 1,870 1,900 Additional KPMC Demand[6] 330 330 350 340 350 Additional Proposed Project Demand[7] 900 930 1,020 1,020 1,030 % of Normal Year Demand 100.0 100.0 106.7 103.7 105.5 Total Multiple Year Demand 84,350 84,560 90,450 88,130 89,750 Supply/Demand Difference -1,290 -1,350 -310 460 -80 Percent Conservation Required 1.5% 1.6% 0.3% - 0.1% This figure represents Multiple Dry Year Supply under extreme conditions consistent with the preceding Metropolitan WSAP discussion. MWD's Multiple Dry Year Supply set forth in MWD's 2006 IRP Implementation Report with 35% reduction in SWP supply. See Appendix B tables for calculation of reduction. MWD Multi Dry Year Supply 2,249,700 2,249,700 2,503,150 2,503,150 2,503,150 This figure represents 67% of total Anaheim Water Demand based on the anticipated BPP forecasts as discussed previously in this WSA. This figure represents normal year demand updated to reflect recent (up to 2008) water use data, current growth projections, and excludes the Additional Proposed Project Demand. This figure includes additional demand for The Platinum Triangle addressed previously in the February 2005 WSA (2,656 AFY at buildout) as well as existing landscape irrigation demand and existing demands for the Arena (Honda Center) and Angel Stadium of Anaheim that were also included in the February 2005 WSA as part of the overall existing Citywide demands as they were to remain unchanged by any land use intensification. This figure represents additional demand based on increase in land use intensification proposed in a WSA being processed concurrently by the City. Based on demands from May 2007 WSA. This figure represents the additional demand based on increase in land use intensification as a result of the Proposed Project that was not included in the 2005 UWMP. Multi dry year demand = (normal year demand) x (106.7%, 103.7%, and 105.5% for years 1, 2, and 3 multiple dry year demand factors developed by MWDOC). 6-10 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 6.8 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Under Temporary 40% Metropolitan SWP Water Supply Shortage Normal Year (AFY – All projections rounded to nearest 10 AF) Water Sources 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 Supply Normal Water Years Imported[1] 24,920 26,260 25,270 25,360 25,360 Local (Groundwater)[2] 52,110 54,500 56,460 58,360 59,310 Total Supply 77,030 80,760 81,730 83,720 84,670 Demand Total Demand without Proposed Project, KPMC and Platinum Triangle[3] 76,170 78,040 79,760 81,500 81,960 Existing + Approved Platinum Triangle Demand[4] 1,440 1,940 2,450 2,950 3,450 Additional Platinum Triangle Demand[5] 90 540 990 1,440 1,800 Additional KPMC Demand[6] 40 210 330 330 330 Additional Proposed Project Demand[7] 30 610 740 880 980 Total Demand 77,770 81,340 84,270 87,100 88,520 Supply/Demand Difference -740 -580 -2,540 -3,380 -3,850 Percent Conservation Required 1.0% 0.7% 3.0% 3.9% 4.3% This figure represents Average Year Supply under extreme conditions consistent with the preceding Metropolitan WSAP discussion. MWD's Average Year Supply set forth in MWD's 2006 IRP Implementation Report with 40% reduction in SWP supply. MWD Average Year Supply 2,111,800 2,225,800 2,141,800 2,148,800 2,148,800 This figure represents 67% of total Anaheim Water Demand based on the anticipated BPP forecasts as discussed previously in this WSA. This figure represents normal year demand updated to reflect recent (up to 2008) water use data, current growth projections, and excludes the Additional Proposed Project Demand. This figure includes additional demand for The Platinum Triangle addressed previously in the February 2005 WSA (2,656 AFY at buildout) as well as existing landscape irrigation demand and existing demands for the Arena (Honda Center) and Angel Stadium of Anaheim that were also included in the February 2005 WSA as part of the overall existing Citywide demands as they were to remain unchanged by any land use intensification. This figure represents additional demand based on increase in land use intensification proposed in a WSA being processed concurrently by the City. Based on demands from May 2007 WSA. This figure represents the additional demand based on increase in land use intensification as a result of the Proposed Project that was not included in the 2005 UWMP. 6-11 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 6.9 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Under Temporary 40% Metropolitan SWP Water Supply Shortage Single Dry Year (AFY – All projections rounded to nearest 10 AF) Water Sources 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 Supply Single Dry Years Imported[1] 35,980 38,060 38,380 37,820 37,240 Local (Groundwater)[2] 54,970 57,500 59,560 61,570 62,570 Total Supply 90,950 95,560 97,940 99,390 99,810 Demand Total Demand without Proposed Project, KPMC and Platinum Triangle[3] 80,360 82,340 84,140 85,980 86,470 Existing + Approved Platinum Triangle Demand[4] 1,520 2,050 2,580 3,110 3,640 Additional Platinum Triangle Demand[5] 90 570 1,040 1,520 1,900 Additional KPMC Demand[6] 40 220 350 350 350 Additional Proposed Project Demand[7] 30 640 780 930 1,030 % of Normal Year Demand 105.5 105.5 105.5 105.5 105.5 Total Single Dry Year Demand 82,040 85,820 88,890 91,890 93,390 Supply/Demand Difference 8,910 9,740 9,050 7,500 6,420 This figure represents Single Dry Year Supply under extreme conditions consistent with the preceding Metropolitan WSAP discussion. MWD's Single Dry Year Supply set forth in MWD's 2006 IRP Implementation Report with 40% reduction in SWP supply. MWD Single Dry Year Supply 3,048,800 3,225,600 3,252,200 3,205,200 3,156,200 This figure represents 67% of total Anaheim Water Demand based on the anticipated BPP forecasts as discussed previously in this WSA. This figure represents normal year demand updated to reflect recent (up to 2008) water use data, current growth projections, and excludes the Additional Proposed Project Demand. This figure includes additional demand for The Platinum Triangle addressed previously in the February 2005 WSA (2,656 AFY at buildout) as well as existing landscape irrigation demand and existing demands for the Arena (Honda Center) and Angel Stadium of Anaheim that were also included in the February 2005 WSA as part of the overall existing Citywide demands as they were to remain unchanged by any land use intensification. This figure represents additional demand based on increase in land use intensification proposed in a WSA being processed concurrently by the City. Based on demands from May 2007 WSA. This figure represents the additional demand based on increase in land use intensification as a result of the Proposed Project that was not included in the 2005 UWMP. 6-12 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 6.10 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Under Temporary 40% Metropolitan SWP Water Supply Shortage Multiple Dry Years 2006-2010 (AFY – All projections rounded to nearest 10 AF) Water Sources 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Supply Normal Years Dry Years[8] Imported[1] 24,920 24,920 28,040 28,040 28,040 Local (Groundwater)[2] 50,890 51,130 54,820 53,630 54,970 Total Supply 75,810 76,050 82,860 81,670 83,010 Demand Total Demand without Proposed Project, KPMC and Platinum Triangle[3] 74,690 75,060 80,480 78,600 80,360 Existing + Approved Platinum Triangle Demand[4] 1,260 1,260 1,340 1,400 1,520 Additional Platinum Triangle Demand[5] 0 0 0 0 90 Additional KPMC Demand[6] 0 0 0 40 40 Additional Proposed Project Demand[7] 0 0 0 0 30 % of Normal Year Demand 100.0 100.0 106.7 103.7 105.5 Total Multiple Year Demand 75,950 76,320 81,820 80,040 82,040 Supply/Demand Difference -140 -270 1,040 1,630 970 Percent Conservation Required 0.2% 0.4% - - - This figure represents Multiple Dry Year Supply under extreme conditions consistent with the preceding Metropolitan WSAP discussion. MWD's Multiple Dry Year Supply set forth in MWD's 2006 IRP Implementation Report with 40% reduction in SWP supply. MWD Multi Dry Year Supply 2,111,800 2,111,800 2,376,200 2,376,200 2,376,200 This figure represents 67% of total Anaheim Water Demand based on the anticipated BPP forecasts as discussed previously in this WSA. This figure represents normal year demand updated to reflect recent (up to 2008) water use data, current growth projections, and excludes the Additional Proposed Project Demand. This figure includes additional demand for The Platinum Triangle addressed previously in the February 2005 WSA (2,656 AFY at buildout) as well as existing landscape irrigation demand and existing demands for the Arena (Honda Center) and Angel Stadium of Anaheim that were also included in the February 2005 WSA as part of the overall existing Citywide demands as they were to remain unchanged by any land use intensification. This figure represents additional demand based on increase in land use intensification proposed in a WSA being processed concurrently by the City. Based on demands from May 2007 WSA. This figure represents the additional demand based on increase in land use intensification as a result of the Proposed Project that was not included in the 2005 UWMP. Multi dry year demand = (normal year demand) x (106.7%, 103.7%, and 105.5% for years 1, 2, and 3 multiple dry year demand factors developed by MWDOC). 6-13 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 6.11 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Under Temporary 40% Metropolitan SWP Water Supply Shortage Multiple Dry Years 2011-2015 (AFY – All projections rounded to nearest 10 AF) Water Sources 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Supply Normal Years Dry Years[8] Imported[1] 26,260 26,260 28,910 28,910 28,910 Local (Groundwater)[2] 51,460 51,800 55,730 54,830 56,130 Total Supply 77,720 78,060 84,640 83,740 85,040 Demand Total Demand without Proposed Project, KPMC and Platinum Triangle[3] 76,540 76,920 82,470 80,540 82,340 Existing + Approved Platinum Triangle Demand[4] 1,540 1,640 1,860 1,910 2,050 Additional Platinum Triangle Demand[5] 180 270 380 470 570 Additional KPMC Demand[6] 40 40 220 220 220 Additional Proposed Project Demand[7] 50 80 110 610 640 % of Normal Year Demand 100.0 100.0 106.7 103.7 105.5 Total Multiple Year Demand 76,810 77,310 83,180 81,840 83,770 Supply/Demand Difference 910 750 1,460 1,900 1,270 This figure represents Multiple Dry Year Supply under extreme conditions consistent with the preceding Metropolitan WSAP discussion. MWD's Multiple Dry Year Supply set forth in MWD's 2006 IRP Implementation Report with 40% reduction in SWP supply. MWD Multi Dry Year Supply 2,225,800 2,225,800 2,450,200 2,450,200 2,450,200 This figure represents 67% of total Anaheim Water Demand based on the anticipated BPP forecasts as discussed previously in this WSA. This figure represents normal year demand updated to reflect recent (up to 2008) water use data, current growth projections, and excludes the Additional Proposed Project Demand. This figure includes additional demand for The Platinum Triangle addressed previously in the February 2005 WSA (2,656 AFY at buildout) as well as existing landscape irrigation demand and existing demands for the Arena (Honda Center) and Angel Stadium of Anaheim that were also included in the February 2005 WSA as part of the overall existing Citywide demands as they were to remain unchanged by any land use intensification. This figure represents additional demand based on increase in land use intensification proposed in a WSA being processed concurrently by the City. Based on demands from May 2007 WSA. This figure represents the additional demand based on increase in land use intensification as a result of the Proposed Project that was not included in the 2005 UWMP. Multi dry year demand = (normal year demand) x (106.7%, 103.7%, and 105.5% for years 1, 2, and 3 multiple dry year demand factors developed by MWDOC). 6-14 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 6.12 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Under Temporary 40% Metropolitan SWP Water Supply Shortage Multiple Dry Years 2016-2020 (AFY – All projections rounded to nearest 10 AF) Water Sources 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Supply Normal Years Dry Years[8] Imported[1] 25,270 25,270 29,120 29,120 29,120 Local (Groundwater)[2] 53,510 53,810 57,750 56,450 57,830 Total Supply 78,780 79,080 86,870 85,570 86,950 Demand Total Demand without Proposed Project, KPMC and Platinum Triangle[3] 78,390 78,730 84,370 82,350 84,140 Existing + Approved Platinum Triangle Demand[4] 2,050 2,150 2,400 2,430 2,580 Additional Platinum Triangle Demand[5] 630 720 870 940 1,050 Additional KPMC Demand[6] 210 210 220 220 350 Additional Proposed Project Demand[7] 640 660 740 740 780 % of Normal Year Demand 100.0 100.0 106.7 103.7 105.5 Total Multiple Year Demand 79,870 80,320 86,200 84,250 86,320 Supply/Demand Difference -1,090 -1,240 670 1,320 630 Percent Conservation Required 1.4% 1.5% - - - This figure represents Multiple Dry Year Supply under extreme conditions consistent with the preceding Metropolitan WSAP discussion. MWD's Multiple Dry Year Supply set forth in MWD's 2006 IRP Implementation Report with 40% reduction in SWP supply. MWD Multi Dry Year Supply 2,141,800 2,141,800 2,467,600 2,467,600 2,467,600 This figure represents 67% of total Anaheim Water Demand based on the anticipated BPP forecasts as discussed previously in this WSA. This figure represents normal year demand updated to reflect recent (up to 2008) water use data, current growth projections, and excludes the Additional Proposed Project Demand. This figure includes additional demand for The Platinum Triangle addressed previously in the February 2005 WSA (2,656 AFY at buildout) as well as existing landscape irrigation demand and existing demands for the Arena (Honda Center) and Angel Stadium of Anaheim that were also included in the February 2005 WSA as part of the overall existing Citywide demands as they were to remain unchanged by any land use intensification. This figure represents additional demand based on increase in land use intensification proposed in a WSA being processed concurrently by the City. Based on demands from May 2007 WSA. This figure represents the additional demand based on increase in land use intensification as a result of the Proposed Project that was not included in the 2005 UWMP. Multi dry year demand = (normal year demand) x (106.7%, 103.7%, and 105.5% for years 1, 2, and 3 multiple dry year demand factors developed by MWDOC). 6-15 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 6.13 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Under Temporary 40% Metropolitan SWP Water Supply Shortage Multiple Dry Years 2021-2025 (AFY – All projections rounded to nearest 10 AF) Water Sources 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Supply Normal Years Dry Years[8] Imported[1] 25,360 25,360 29,020 29,020 29,020 Local (Groundwater)[2] 55,130 55,440 59,490 58,140 59,480 Total Supply 80,490 80,800 88,510 87,160 88,500 Demand Total Demand without Proposed Project, KPMC and Platinum Triangle[3] 80,100 80,450 86,210 84,150 85,980 Existing + Approved Platinum Triangle Demand[4] 2,550 2,650 2,930 2,950 3,110 Additional Platinum Triangle Demand[5] 1,080 1,170 1,350 1,400 1,520 Additional KPMC Demand[6] 330 330 350 340 350 Additional Proposed Project Demand[7] 770 800 880 880 920 % of Normal Year Demand 100.0 100.0 106.7 103.7 105.5 Total Multiple Year Demand 82,280 82,750 88,790 86,770 88,770 Supply/Demand Difference -1,790 -1,950 -280 390 -270 Percent Conservation Required 2.2% 2.4% 0.3% - 0.3% This figure represents Multiple Dry Year Supply under extreme conditions consistent with the preceding Metropolitan WSAP discussion. MWD's Multiple Dry Year Supply set forth in MWD's 2006 IRP Implementation Report with 40% reduction in SWP supply. MWD Multi Dry Year Supply 2,148,800 2,148,800 2,459,600 2,459,600 2,459,600 This figure represents 67% of total Anaheim Water Demand based on the anticipated BPP forecasts as discussed previously in this WSA. This figure represents normal year demand updated to reflect recent (up to 2008) water use data, current growth projections, and excludes the Additional Proposed Project Demand. This figure includes additional demand for The Platinum Triangle addressed previously in the February 2005 WSA (2,656 AFY at buildout) as well as existing landscape irrigation demand and existing demands for the Arena (Honda Center) and Angel Stadium of Anaheim that were also included in the February 2005 WSA as part of the overall existing Citywide demands as they were to remain unchanged by any land use intensification. This figure represents additional demand based on increase in land use intensification proposed in a WSA being processed concurrently by the City. Based on demands from May 2007 WSA. This figure represents the additional demand based on increase in land use intensification as a result of the Proposed Project that was not included in the 2005 UWMP. Multi dry year demand = (normal year demand) x (106.7%, 103.7%, and 105.5% for years 1, 2, and 3 multiple dry year demand factors developed by MWDOC). 6-16 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 6.14 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Under Temporary 40% Metropolitan SWP Water Supply Shortage Multiple Dry Years 2026-2030 (AFY – All projections rounded to nearest 10 AF) Water Sources 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 Supply Normal Years Dry Years[8] Imported[1] 25,360 25,360 28,820 28,820 28,820 Local (Groundwater)[2] 56,510 56,660 60,600 59,050 60,130 Total Supply 81,870 82,020 89,420 87,870 88,950 Demand Total Demand without Proposed Project, KPMC and Platinum Triangle[3] 81,590 81,680 87,250 84,900 86,470 Existing + Approved Platinum Triangle Demand[4] 3,050 3,150 3,470 3,470 3,640 Additional Platinum Triangle Demand[5] 1,530 1,620 1,830 1,870 1,900 Additional KPMC Demand[6] 330 330 350 340 350 Additional Proposed Project Demand[7] 900 930 1,020 1,020 1,030 % of Normal Year Demand 100.0 100.0 106.7 103.7 105.5 Total Multiple Year Demand 84,350 84,560 90,450 88,130 89,750 Supply/Demand Difference -2,480 -2,540 -1,030 -260 -800 Percent Conservation Required 2.9% 3.0% 1.1% 0.3% 0.9% This figure represents Multiple Dry Year Supply under extreme conditions consistent with the preceding Metropolitan WSAP discussion. MWD's Multiple Dry Year Supply set forth in MWD's 2006 IRP Implementation Report with 40% reduction in SWP supply. MWD Multi Dry Year Supply 2,148,800 2,148,800 2,442,600 2,442,600 2,442,600 This figure represents 67% of total Anaheim Water Demand based on the anticipated BPP forecasts as discussed previously in this WSA. This figure represents normal year demand updated to reflect recent (up to 2008) water use data, current growth projections, and excludes the Additional Proposed Project Demand. This figure includes additional demand for The Platinum Triangle addressed previously in the February 2005 WSA (2,656 AFY at buildout) as well as existing landscape irrigation demand and existing demands for the Arena (Honda Center) and Angel Stadium of Anaheim that were also included in the February 2005 WSA as part of the overall existing Citywide demands as they were to remain unchanged by any land use intensification. This figure represents additional demand based on increase in land use intensification proposed in a WSA being processed concurrently by the City. Based on demands from May 2007 WSA. This figure represents the additional demand based on increase in land use intensification as a result of the Proposed Project that was not included in the 2005 UWMP. Multi dry year demand = (normal year demand) x (106.7%, 103.7%, and 105.5% for years 1, 2, and 3 multiple dry year demand factors developed by MWDOC). 6-17 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- 7.0 CONCLUSION Water Demand The City’s current average water demand is approximately 76,690 acre-feet per year (AFY) as developed in Section 5.4. The 20-year planning period from the time of this WSA projects City water demand by 2029/30 to be approximately 88,520 AFY. This projection is consistent with the City’s 2005 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) water demand increase projections to include overall City growth. The demand projections from the 2005 UWMP were adjusted to account for lower current water demand based on recent water purchases and sales data provided by the City. The 2005 UWMP projections for future demand were also adjusted upwards to reflect the recent OCP – 2006 Population Projections released in December of 2008. This demand projection also includes the added demands from the Proposed Project, The Platinum Triangle Project intensification, and Kaiser Permanente Medical Center Project. The proposed ARSP expansion project would increase water demand by approximately 980 AFY. The build out of the entire ARSP is estimated to occur consistent within the 20-year time horizon typically associated with the General Plan; however total build out of the Proposed Project will likely extend beyond the 20-year period. While groundwater supply is expected to remain relatively stable throughout the forecast period, the development phasing plan also allows for the potential to have water demands met from sources that are currently being planned, developed and implemented within the region, including additional conservation programs, recycled water, and desalted water. Supply Projections Analysis of water supply projections for the City demonstrates that projected supplies will exceed demands through fiscal year 2029/30. These projections consider water development programs and projects as well as water conservation, as described in the City’s 2005 UWMP. The City’s groundwater and imported water supplies are anticipated to remain stable based on studies and reports from OCWD and Metropolitan, respectively. The City’s water supply projection is based on up to 67 percent groundwater, based on an expected average long-term Basin Production Percentage (BPP), and its share of imported water confirmed reliable by Metropolitan. Additionally, analysis of normal, single-dry, and multiple-dry year scenarios also demonstrate the City’s ability to meet or exceed demand during the 20-year planning period, even under reduced imported water supply conditions. Additionally, if extraordinary circumstances require, the City can meet its water demand by increasing production of groundwater beyond the BPP up to the basin safe yield, 7-1 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- increasing imported water purchases, and/or decreasing demand through water conservation measures. The City’s 2005 UWMP used an existing demand for 2004/05 of 73,772 AFY, which was based on the average of the previous five years exclusive of the actual 2004/05 sales (thrown out because it was such a wet year). To illustrate the effectiveness of conservation, the actual 2007/08 sales were 71,046 AF and if the existing demand from the 2004/05 based demand utilized in the 2005 UWMP is projected out to 2007/08 using the incremental growth rate assumed in the 2005 UWMP (6.3 percent from 2005 to 2010) it would be approximately 76,520 AF. Therefore, the City is more than 5,000 AFY below the demands projected in the 2005 UWMP just three years ago. This is almost entirely due to conservation efforts of residents, businesses, and City staff. To reflect the reduced growth in water demand that has occurred since the UWMP, updated water sales for 2006/07 of 73,871 AF (excluding unaccounted for water) and a total water demand of 76,687 AF (including unaccounted for water) was used as an estimate of existing (2008) water demand. Water demand for 2006/07 was used to estimate current use because that year experienced the highest water sales volume over the past seven years and is considered the most conservative estimate. Projected water demands were calculated using the recently released OCP – 2006 Population and Housing Projections and a water demand increase of 75 percent of projected housing unit growth using the updated 2008 estimated water demand as a starting point. Reliability of future water supplies to the region will be ensured through continued implementation of the OCWD Groundwater Management Plan, OCWD’s Long Term Facilities Plan, local agency programs, and the combined efforts and programs among member and cooperative agencies of Metropolitan. These agencies include all water wholesalers and retailers, the Orange County Sanitation District, the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board, and the Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority. These programs are described in the City’s 2005 UWMP and supplemented in Section 5 of this water supply assessment. Collectively, the information included in this water supply assessment identifies a sufficient and reliable water supply for the City, now and into the future, including a sufficient water supply for the ARSP. These supplies are also sufficient to provide (and account) for growth projected in the 2005 UWMP, the previously approved May 2007 WSA for the Kaiser Permanente Medical Center, and The Platinum Triangle Project being processed concurrently with this WSA by the City. As set forth in Section 6, even under the extreme assumption of a 35 percent SWP cutback and the use of a Level 10 Allocation percentage, it is anticipated that water supplies will remain stable in normal, single-dry year, and multiple-dry year scenarios through 2030 with the exception of scenarios identified, where demand exceeds supply ranging from a low of 1,350 AF in year 2020, to 2,660 AF in year 2030 for the 35 percent reduction scenarios and a low of 740 AF in year 2010, to 3,850 AF in year 2030 for the 40 percent reduction scenarios. Again, it is unlikely that the severe 7-2 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- assumptions contained in Section 6 will materialize. In addition, as set forth above, it is anticipated that the utilization of the City’s Water Conservation Ordinance if needed, including the mandatory cuts authorized by section 10.18.070 of the Ordinance, could easily achieve water use savings in an amount sufficient to make up for the identified shortfalls set forth in the Section 6 tables. Moreover, even assuming water conservation somehow does not achieve the necessary water use savings, the identified hypothetical shortfalls could easily be met through groundwater production from City wells. Extracting 2,660 to 3,850 AF from the groundwater basin from existing Anaheim wells would not cause any significant environmental effects. Thus, this WSA does not envision any significant impacts with respect to water resources resulting from approval of the proposed Platinum Triangle project. Nevertheless, in order to be conservative, the Mitigation Measures set forth below are recommended. It should be noted that impacts are less than significant even without the implementation of these mitigation measures. However, the implementation of these mitigation measures will assist the City in ensuring that water supplies remain reliable into the future. Mitigation Measure No. 1: City shall continue to collaborate with Metropolitan, its member agencies, and OCWD to ensure that available water supplies meet anticipated demand. If it is forecast that water demand exceeds available supplies, the City shall trigger application of its Water Conservation Ordinance, Municipal Code section 10.18, as prescribed, to require mandatory conservation measures as authorized by section 10.18.070 through 10.18090, as appropriate. Mitigation Measure No. 2: All landscaping for projects located within the Proposed Project shall utilize drought tolerant plant materials with a plant factor of 0.5 or less pursuant to the publication entitled “Water Use Classification of Landscape Species” by the U. C. Cooperative Extension, August 2000. Mitigation Measure No. 3: All new development within the Proposed Project shall include water efficient design features including, but not limited to (as applicable to the type of development at issue) waterless water heaters, waterless urinals, automatic on and off water facets, and water efficient appliances. Mitigation Measure No. 4: All new development within the Proposed Project shall construct separate irrigation lines for recycled water. All irrigation systems shall be designed so that they will function properly with recycled water. Mitigation Measure No. 5: In accordance with existing law, City shall require that all future projects exceeding the statutory thresholds set forth in SB 610 and SB 221 demonstrate that adequate water supply exists to serve the proposed project prior to approval. If it cannot be demonstrated that adequate water exists to serve the specific project, the project shall not be approved. 7-3 November 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- 8.0 REFERENCES The following documents were used, in conjunction with discussions with the City of Anaheim, in preparing this water supply assessment: American Water Works Association Website, Available: http://www.drinktap.org/consumerdnn/Home/WaterInformation/Conservation/Water UseStatistics/tabid/85/Default.aspx. December 2008 Center for Demographic Research, Orange County Facts and Figures, Available: http://www.fullerton.edu/cdr/countyfacts.pdf. City of Anaheim, Draft Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP SEIR No. 334, 2008. City of Anaheim, Initial Study for The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan and Associated Actions, December 2004. City of Anaheim, Master Land Use Plan, The Platinum Triangle, October 25, 2005. City of Anaheim, Public Utilities Department, The Platinum Triangle Water Supply Assessment, February 2005. City of Anaheim, Public Utilities Department, The Platinum Triangle Water Supply Assessment Amendment, February 2007. City of Anaheim, Public Utilities Department, The Platinum Triangle and Kaiser Permanente Medical Center Water Supply Assessment, May 2007. City of Anaheim, Public Utilities Department, Urban Water Management Plan, December 2005. Department of Water Resources (DWR), Bulletin 118-1 Basin Description for Coastal Plain of Orange County Groundwater Basin Number 8-1, September 5, 2001. Department of Water Resources (DWR), State Water Project Delivery Reliability Report, 2002. Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD), Water Revenue Refunding Bonds, 2008 Series C, Appendix A, July 2008. Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD), The Regional Urban Water Management Plan for the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, November 2005. November 2009 8-1 ---PAGE BREAK--- 8-2 November 2009 Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD), Integrated Water Resources Plan Update, July 2004. Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD), 2006 Integrated Water Resources Plan Implementation Report, October 2006. Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD), 2007 Integrated Water Resources Plan Implementation Report, October 2007. Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD), 2009 Water Supply Allocation Plan – Allocation Model, 2009. Municipal Water District of Orange County (MWDOC), Regional Urban Water Management Plan, 2005. Municipal Water District of Orange County (MWDOC), South Orange County Water Reliability Study: Phase 2 System Reliability Plan, September 2004. Municipal Water District of Orange County (MWDOC) Website, Available: http://www.mwdoc.com. 2002. Office of the Secretary of State. Annexation No. 10 to State of California, December 11, 1961. Orange County Water District (OCWD), Orange County Water District 2020 Master Plan Report, 2000. Orange County Water District (OCWD), Engineer’s Report, 2006-2007. Orange County Water District (OCWD), Water Resource Report. Orange County Board Meeting and Public Hearing, January 21, 2009. Orange County Water District (OCWD), Annual Water Budget and Water Replenishment Fund Balance. Orange County Board Meeting and Public Hearing, January 7, 2009. Orange County Water District (OCWD), The OCWD Act. Orange County Water District (OCWD), OCWD v. City of Chino, et al, (Civ. Case No. 117628), Judgment and Settlement Documents. Orange County Water District (OCWD), Draft Groundwater Management Plan Update 2009, May 8, 2009. University of California Cooperative Extension, Water Use Classification of Landscape Species, August 2000. ---PAGE BREAK--- APPENDIX A WATER DEMAND FACTOR SUPPORT DATA ---PAGE BREAK--- AWWA Home Search  Water Information Conservation Conservation at Home Conservation Outside Straight Talk on Conservation Drought Fact Sheet Water Use Statistics People Behind the Water Your Water Utility Home > Water Information > Conservation > Water Use Statistics Water Use Statistics Daily indoor per capita water use in the typical single family home is 69.3 gallons. Here is how it breaks down: Use Gallons per Capita Percentage of Total Daily Use Showers 11.6 16.8% Clothes Washers 15.0 21.7% Dishwashers 1.0 1.4% Toilets 18.5 26.7% Baths 1.2 1.7% Leaks 9.5 13.7% Faucets 10.9 15.7% Other Domestic Uses 1.6 2.2% By installing more efficient water fixtures and regularly checking for leaks, households can reduce daily per capita water use by about 35% to about 45.2 gallons per day Here's how it breaks down for households using conservation measures: Use Gallons per Capita Percentage of Total Daily Use Showers 8.8 19.5% Clothes Washers 10.0 22.1% Toilets 8.2 18.0% Dishwashers 0.7 1.5% Baths 1.2 2.7% Leaks 4.0 8.8% Faucets 10.8 23.9% Other Domestic Uses 1.6 3.4% Source: Handbook of Water Use and Conservation, Amy Vickers ---PAGE BREAK--- If all U.S. households installed water-saving features, water use would decrease by 30 percent, saving an estimated 5.4 billion gallons per day. This would result in dollar-volume savings of $11.3 million per day or more than $4 billion per year. ƒ Water-conserving fixtures installed in U.S. households in 1998 alone save 44 million gallons of water every day, resulting in total dollar-value savings of more than $33.6 million per year. ƒ Average household water use annually: 127,400 gallons ƒ Average daily household water use : 350 gallons  Residential End Uses of Water (Denver, Colo.: AWWARF, 1999). Login Here Register 11/25/2008 ---PAGE BREAK--- IRWD Annual Recycled Water and Domestic Water Use for Dual-Plumbed Buildings (Building Use Only) Site Address Description No. of Floors Approx. Building SF Annual RW CCF RW gpd per ksf Annual Potable CCF Potable gpd/ksf Total Use gpd/ksf Percent Savings #3 Park Plaza Jamboree Center 19 400,000 10477 54 5118 26 80 67.2% #4 Park Plaza Jamboree Center 19 400,000 10913 56 5695 29 85 65.7% 15600 Sand Canyon IRWD Headquarters 2 50,000 197 8 128 5 13 60.6% 3512 Michelson IRWD Operations-Admin 2 50,000 342 14 0 14 100.0% 2020 Main Street Sun Microsystems Bldg. 12 282,000 3040 22 370 3 25 89.1% 1900 Main Street California Bank & Trust Bldg. 8 178,000 3246 37 1777 20 58 64.6% 18191 Von Karman Northwestern Mutual Bldg. 5 128,000 2157 35 1198 19 54 64.3% 18111 Von Karman Ernst & Young Bldg. 10 237,000 5093 44 1666 14 58 75.4% 1901 Main Street Smith & Barney 8 178,000 6648 77 3295 38 114 66.9% 7895 Gateway Ford Product Development Bldg. 2 77,000 5669 151 3446 92 243 62.2% 7905 Gateway Ford Motor Co. Bldg. 5 176,000 6420 75 5237 61 136 55.1% 2040 Main Street Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear Bldg. 14 300,000 8866 61 151 1 62 98.3% 17872 Gillette Avenue Washington Mutual 4 87,000 2139 50 25 1 51 98.8% Totals 2,543,000 65207 53 17165 14 66 79.2% ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF ANAHEIM BUILDING WATER USE OFFICE/COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS Address # of stories Total Area (sf) Average Water Use (gpd)* Avg. Water Use per 1000 sf (gpd/ksf) CITY HALL EAST 200 S. Anaheim 6 130,350 9,327 72 CITY HALL WEST 201 S. Anaheim 11 219,274 12,002 55 RESOURCE ASSET MANAGMENT; CO LLC/Bank of America 200 Harbor 10 105,280 5,465 52 ARDEN REALTY FINANCE LP/WellsFargo 222 Harbor 10 195,000 7,845 40 TAORMINA, WILLIAM COSMO; TR 201 E. Center St. 6 28,103 2,112 75 GRE STADIUM CENTRE LLC/BALLY TOTAL FITNESS #60418 2099 State College 6 128,130 11,069 86 2401 KATELLA LLC 2401 Katella 6 112,800 8,356 74 918,937 Average 65 Weighted Avg. 61 APARTMENTS Address # of units Average Water Use (gpd)* Use per Unit (gpd/unit) ANAHEIM MEMORIAL MANOR 275 E. Center St. 75 9,044 121 VILLAGE CENTER APARTMENTS 200 E. Lincoln 100 13,669 137 Average 129 Weighted Avg. 129.79 *data collected from meter readings dated from 2005 to 2007 ---PAGE BREAK--- Water Resources Master Plan 3-5 7/16/03 C:\Arcdata\WRMP2002\Ch3\chapter3wsa0716.fm Water Use Factors Land Use Local Demands Irrigation Demands Code Land Use description Agency Average Density Local Interior Local Exterior Total % Irrigated Area Irrigation Factor 1100 Residential DU/Ac Gal/DU/Day Gal/Ac/Day 1111 Res - Rural Density Orange 0.30 300 750 1,050 5 2,800 1121 Res - Estate Density Orange 1.20 300 300 600 8 2,900 1131 Res - Low Density Orange 4.00 300 300 600 15 2,900 1141 Res - Low-Medium Density Orange 10.50 200 100 300 22 3,300 1161 Res - Medium Density Orange 19.50 225 185 410 17 3,100 1122 Res - Estate Density Irvine 0.50 300 600 900 7 2,800 1132 Res - Low Density Irvine 3.00 225 180 405 16 3,000 1162 Res - Medium Density Irvine 7.50 200 110 310 20 3,100 1172 Res - Medium-High Density Irvine 17.50 165 15 180 25 3,600 1182 Res - High Density Irvine 32.50 180 20 200 20 3,300 1192 Res - High-Rise Density Irvine 40 180 20 200 20 3,300 1133 Res - Low Density Newport Beach 1.00 250 190 440 17 3,100 1153 Res - Medium-Low Density Newport Beach 2.75 250 200 450 10 2,800 1163 Res - Medium Density Newport Beach 5.00 190 60 250 22 3,300 1183 Res - High Density Newport Beach 12.25 155 20 175 25 3,600 1134 Res - Low Density PC Tustin 4.50 225 185 410 17 3,100 1164 Res - Medium Density PC Tustin 11.80 155 15 170 25 3,600 1184 Res - High Density PC Tustin 17.40 135 15 150 15 3,700 1115 Res - Rural Density County 0.26 300 750 1,050 5 2,800 1135 Res - Suburban Density County 9.25 225 180 405 16 3,000 1175 Res - Urban Density County 29.00 165 15 180 25 3,600 1126 Res - Estate Density Lake Forest 0.50 300 600 900 7 2,800 1136 Res - Low Density Lake Forest 3.00 225 180 405 16 3,000 1166 Res - Medium Density Lake Forest 7.50 200 110 310 20 3,100 1176 Res - Medium-High Density Lake Forest 17.50 165 15 180 25 3,600 1186 Res - High Density Lake Forest 32.50 180 20 200 20 3,300 1200 Commercial KSF/Ac Gal/KSF/Day Gal/Ac/Day 1210 Comm - General Office 25.00 56 4 60 30 4,000 1221 Comm - Community 9.09 209 11 220 30 3,500 1222 Comm - Regional 10.53 180.5 9.5 190 20 5,000 1230 Comm - Recreation 8.33 54 6 60 30 4,500 1240 Comm - Institutional 8.88 39.38 5.62 45 50 2,750 1244 Comm - Hospital 8.70 218.50 11.50 230 25 2,850 1260 Comm - School 13.33 14.25 0.75 15 50 2,500 1273 Comm - Military Air Field 1300 Industrial KSF/Ac Gal/KSF/Day Gal/Ac/Day 1310 Industrial - Light 25.00 56 4 60 25 4,000 1320 Industrial - Heavy 25.00 4,500 500 5,000 25 4,000 Open Space & Other Gal/Ac/Day 1820 Park - Community 90 3,400 1830 Park - Regional 85 2,100 2100 AG - Low-Irrigated 100 1,800 2110 AG - Low-Irrigated (TIC) 100 1,800 2200 AG - High-Irrigated 100 3,100 2210 AG - High-Irrigated (TIC) 100 3,100 Note: The database includes the following land use codes that do not use set factors or do not generate water demands: 0 = area not served by IRWD; 1411 = Airports; 1413 = Freeway and Major Roads; 1850 = Park-Wildlife Preserve; 1880 = Park-Open Space (Rec); 1900 = Vacant; 4100 = Water Body; 9100-9199 = Mixed Use (uses a combination of factors) Table 3-1 Land Use and Water Use Factors ---PAGE BREAK--- 8-2 November 2009 APPENDIX B METROPOLITAN WATER SUPPLY SUPPORT DATA ---PAGE BREAK--- Multiple Dry Single Dry Average Hydrology Years Year Year (1990-92) (1977) (1922-2004) Current Programs Metropolitan Surface Storage 244,000 733,000 0 (DVL, Mathews, Skinner) Flexible Storage in Castaic & Perris 73,000 219,000 0 Groundwater Conjunctive-use Long Term Replenishment and Cyclic Storage 86,000 86,000 0 North Las Posas Storage 47,000 47,000 0 Proposition 13 Storage 65,000 65,000 0 Subtotal of Current Programs 515,000 1,150,000 0 Programs Under Development Groundwater Conjunctive-use Raymond Basin 22,000 22,000 0 Prop 13 Storage Programs 4,000 4,000 0 Walnut Park CUP 500 500 0 Additional Programs1 55,000 55,000 0 Subtotal of Proposed Programs 82,000 82,000 0 Maximum Supply Capability 597,000 1,232,000 0 1 Includes expansions of existing programs In Basin Storage Activities Program Capabilities Year 2010 (acre-feet per year) 1-34 ---PAGE BREAK--- Multiple Dry Single Dry Average Hydrology Years Year Year (1990-92) (1977) (1922-2004) Current Programs Metropolitan Surface Storage 248,000 745,000 0 (DVL, Mathews, Skinner) Flexible Storage in Castaic & Perris 73,000 219,000 0 Groundwater Conjunctive-use Long Term Replenishment and Cyclic Storage 86,000 86,000 0 North Las Posas Storage 47,000 47,000 0 Proposition 13 Storage 65,000 65,000 0 Subtotal of Current Programs 519,000 1,162,000 0 Programs Under Development Groundwater Conjunctive-use Raymond Basin 22,000 22,000 0 Prop 13 Storage Programs 4,000 4,000 0 Walnut Park CUP 500 500 0 Additional Programs1 80,000 80,000 0 Subtotal of Proposed Programs 107,000 107,000 0 Maximum Supply Capability 626,000 1,269,000 0 1 Includes expansions of existing programs In Basin Storage Activities Program Capabilities Year 2015 (acre-feet per year) 1-35 ---PAGE BREAK--- Multiple Dry Single Dry Average Hydrology Years Year Year (1990-92) (1977) (1922-2004) Current Programs Metropolitan Surface Storage 232,000 697,000 0 (DVL, Mathews, Skinner) Flexible Storage in Castaic & Perris 73,000 219,000 0 Groundwater Conjunctive-use Long Term Replenishment and Cyclic Storage 86,000 86,000 0 North Las Posas Storage 47,000 47,000 0 Proposition 13 Storage 65,000 65,000 0 Subtotal of Current Programs 503,000 1,114,000 0 Programs Under Development Groundwater Conjunctive-use Raymond Basin 22,000 22,000 0 Prop 13 Storage Programs 4,000 4,000 0 Walnut Park CUP 500 500 0 Additional Programs1 80,000 80,000 0 Subtotal of Proposed Programs 107,000 107,000 0 Maximum Supply Capability 610,000 1,221,000 0 1 Includes expansions of existing programs In Basin Storage Activities Program Capabilities Year 2020 (acre-feet per year) 1-36 ---PAGE BREAK--- Multiple Dry Single Dry Average Hydrology Years Year Year (1990-92) (1977) (1922-2004) Current Programs Metropolitan Surface Storage 217,000 650,000 0 (DVL, Mathews, Skinner) Flexible Storage in Castaic & Perris 73,000 219,000 0 Groundwater Conjunctive-use Long Term Replenishment and Cyclic Storage 86,000 86,000 0 North Las Posas Storage 47,000 47,000 0 Proposition 13 Storage 65,000 65,000 0 Subtotal of Current Programs 488,000 1,067,000 0 Programs Under Development Groundwater Conjunctive-use Raymond Basin 22,000 22,000 0 Prop 13 Storage Programs 4,000 4,000 0 Walnut Park CUP 500 500 0 Additional Programs1 80,000 80,000 0 Subtotal of Proposed Programs 107,000 107,000 0 Maximum Supply Capability 595,000 1,174,000 0 1 Includes expansions of existing programs In Basin Storage Activities Program Capabilities Year 2025 (acre-feet per year) 1-37 ---PAGE BREAK--- Multiple Dry Single Dry Average Hydrology Years Year Year (1990-92) (1977) (1922-2004) Current Programs Metropolitan Surface Storage 200,000 601,000 0 (DVL, Mathews, Skinner) Flexible Storage in Castaic & Perris 73,000 219,000 0 Groundwater Conjunctive-use Long Term Replenishment and Cyclic Storage 86,000 86,000 0 North Las Posas Storage 47,000 47,000 0 Proposition 13 Storage 65,000 65,000 0 Subtotal of Current Programs 471,000 1,018,000 0 Programs Under Development Groundwater Conjunctive-use Raymond Basin 22,000 22,000 0 Prop 13 Storage Programs 4,000 4,000 0 Walnut Park CUP 500 500 0 Additional Programs1 80,000 80,000 0 Subtotal of Proposed Programs 107,000 107,000 0 Maximum Supply Capability 578,000 1,125,000 0 1 Includes expansions of existing programs In Basin Storage Activities Program Capabilities Year 2030 (acre-feet per year) 1-38 ---PAGE BREAK--- Multiple Dry Single Dry Average Hydrology Years Year Year (1990-92) (1977) (1922-2004) Current Programs SWP Deliveries 1,2 509,000 175,000 1,472,000 San Luis Carryover 3 93,000 285,550 285,550 SWP Call-back of DWCV Table A Transfer 26,000 5,000 0 Central Valley Storage and Transfers Semitropic Program 107,000 107,000 0 Arvin Edison Program 90,000 90,000 0 San Bernardino Valley MWD Program 37,000 70,000 20,000 Kern Delta Program 50,000 50,000 0 Subtotal of Current Programs 912,000 783,000 1,778,000 Programs Under Development Delta Improvements 4 55,000 55,000 185,000 Market Transfer Options 150,000 200,000 0 Central Valley Transfers/Purchases 125,000 100,000 0 Mojave Program 0 0 0 IRP SWP Target 5 0 0 0 Subtotal of Proposed Programs 330,000 355,000 185,000 Maximum Supply Capability 1,242,000 1,138,000 1,963,000 2 Multiple and Single Dry year figures include DWCV Table A supplies 3 Includes DWCV carryover 4 Includes Phase 8 and increased pumping capacity 5 Remaining supply needed to meet IRP target 1 Single Dry-year figure includes 76 TAF of additional SWP supplies in 1977 per DWR 2005 State Water Project Delivery Reliability Report, which assumes 150 TAF of SWP carryover in San Luis Reservoir in addition to contractors' carryover California Aqueduct Program Capabilities Year 2010 (acre-feet per year) 1-39 ---PAGE BREAK--- Multiple Dry Single Dry Average Hydrology Years Year Year (1990-92) (1977) (1922-2004) Current Programs SWP Deliveries1,2 509,000 175,000 1,472,000 San Luis Carryover3 93,000 285,550 285,550 SWP Call-back of DWCV Table A Transfer 26,000 5,000 0 Central Valley Storage and Transfers Semitropic Program 107,000 107,000 0 Arvin Edison Program 90,000 90,000 0 San Bernardino Valley MWD Program 37,000 70,000 20,000 Kern Delta Program 50,000 50,000 0 Subtotal of Current Programs 912,000 783,000 1,778,000 Programs Under Development Delta Improvements4 55,000 55,000 185,000 Market Transfer Options 0 200,000 0 Central Valley Transfers/Purchases 125,000 100,000 0 Mojave Program 35,000 35,000 0 IRP SWP Target 0 8,450 0 Subtotal of Proposed Programs 215,000 398,000 185,000 Maximum Supply Capability 1,127,000 1,181,000 1,963,000 2 Multiple and Single Dry year figures include DWCV Table A supplies 3 Includes DWCV carryover 4 Includes Phase 8 and increased pumping capacity 1 Single Dry-year figure includes 76 TAF of additional SWP supplies in 1977 per DWR 2005 State Water Project Delivery Reliability Report, which assumes 150 TAF of SWP carryover in San Luis Reservoir in addition to contractors' carryover California Aqueduct Program Capabilities Year 2015 (acre-feet per year) 1-40 ---PAGE BREAK--- Multiple Dry Single Dry Average Hydrology Years Year Year (1990-92) (1977) (1922-2004) Current Programs SWP Deliveries1,2 509,000 175,000 1,472,000 San Luis Carryover3 93,000 285,550 285,550 SWP Call-back of DWCV Table A Transfer 26,000 5,000 Central Valley Storage and Transfers Semitropic Program 107,000 107,000 0 Arvin Edison Program 90,000 90,000 0 San Bernardino Valley MWD Program 37,000 70,000 20,000 Kern Delta Program 50,000 50,000 0 Subtotal of Current Programs 912,000 783,000 1,778,000 Programs Under Development Delta Improvements4 110,000 110,000 240,000 Market Transfer Options 0 200,000 0 Central Valley Transfers/Purchases 125,000 100,000 0 Mojave Program 35,000 35,000 0 IRP SWP Target 29,000 74,450 0 Subtotal of Proposed Programs 299,000 519,000 240,000 Maximum Supply Capability 1,211,000 1,302,000 2,018,000 2 Multiple and Single Dry year figures include DWCV Table A supplies 3 Includes DWCV carryover 4 Includes Phase 8 and increased pumping capacity 1 Single Dry-year figure includes 76 TAF of additional SWP supplies in 1977 per DWR 2005 State Water Project Delivery Reliability Report, which assumes 150 TAF of SWP carryover in San Luis Reservoir in addition to contractors' carryover California Aqueduct Program Capabilities Year 2020 (acre-feet per year) 1-41 ---PAGE BREAK--- Multiple Dry Single Dry Average Hydrology Years Year Year (1990-92) (1977) (1922-2004) Current Programs SWP Deliveries1,2 509,000 175,000 1,472,000 San Luis Carryover3 93,000 285,550 285,550 SWP Call-back of DWCV Table A Transfer 26,000 5,000 0 Central Valley Storage and Transfers Semitropic Program 107,000 107,000 0 Arvin Edison Program 90,000 90,000 0 San Bernardino Valley MWD Program 37,000 70,000 20,000 Kern Delta Program 50,000 50,000 0 Subtotal of Current Programs 912,000 783,000 1,778,000 Programs Under Development Delta Improvements4 110,000 110,000 240,000 Market Transfer Options 0 200,000 0 Central Valley Transfers/Purchases 125,000 100,000 0 Mojave Program 35,000 35,000 0 IRP SWP Target 29,000 74,450 0 Subtotal of Proposed Programs 299,000 519,000 240,000 Maximum Supply Capability 1,211,000 1,302,000 2,018,000 2 Multiple and Single Dry year figures include DWCV Table A supplies 3 Includes DWCV carryover 4 Includes Phase 8 and increased pumping capacity 1 Single Dry-year figure includes 76 TAF of additional SWP supplies in 1977 per DWR 2005 State Water Project Delivery Reliability Report, which assumes 150 TAF of SWP carryover in San Luis Reservoir in addition to contractors' carryover California Aqueduct Program Capabilities Year 2025 (acre-feet per year) 1-42 ---PAGE BREAK--- Multiple Dry Single Dry Average Hydrology Years Year Year (1990-92) (1977) (1922-2004) Current Programs SWP Deliveries1,2 509,000 175,000 1,472,000 San Luis Carryover3 93,000 285,550 285,550 SWP Call-back of DWCV Table A Transfer 26,000 5,000 0 Central Valley Storage and Transfers Semitropic Program 107,000 107,000 0 Arvin Edison Program 90,000 90,000 0 San Bernardino Valley MWD Program 37,000 70,000 20,000 Kern Delta Program 50,000 50,000 0 Subtotal of Current Programs 912,000 783,000 1,778,000 Programs Under Development Delta Improvements4 110,000 110,000 240,000 Market Transfer Options 0 200,000 0 Central Valley Transfers/Purchases 125,000 100,000 0 Mojave Program 35,000 35,000 0 IRP SWP Target 29,000 74,450 0 Subtotal of Proposed Programs 299,000 519,000 240,000 Maximum Supply Capability 1,211,000 1,302,000 2,018,000 3 Includes DWCV carryover 4 Includes Phase 8 and increased pumping capacity 1 Single Dry-year figure includes 76 TAF of additional SWP supplies in 1977 per DWR 2005 State Water Project Delivery Reliability Report, which assumes 150 TAF of SWP carryover in San Luis Reservoir in addition to contractors' carryover 2 Multiple and Single Dry year figures include DWCV Table A supplies California Aqueduct Program Capabilities Year 2030 (acre-feet per year) 1-43 ---PAGE BREAK--- Multiple Dry Single Dry Average Hydrology Years Year Year (1990-92) (1977) (1922-2004) Current Programs Base Apportionment – Priority 4 550,000 550,000 550,000 IID/MWD Conservation Program 85,000 85,000 85,000 Priority 5 Apportionment (Surplus) 0 0 0 PVID Land Management Program 111,000 111,000 111,000 Less: Coachella SWP/QSA Transfer (35,000) (35,000) (35,000) Forbearance for present perfected rights (36,000) (36,000) (36,000) Subtotal of Current Programs 675,000 675,000 675,000 Programs Under Development Lake Mead Storage Program 100,000 200,000 0 Salton Sea Restoration Transfer 95,000 95,000 95,000 Subtotal of Proposed Programs 195,000 295,000 95,000 Maximum Metropolitan Supply Capability 870,000 970,000 770,000 Additional Non-Metropolitan CRA Supplies SDCWA/IID Transfer 70,000 70,000 70,000 Coachella & All-American Canal Lining 94,000 94,000 94,000 Maximum CRA Supply Capability 1 1,034,000 1,134,000 934,000 Maximum Expected CRA Deliveries 1,034,000 1,134,000 934,000 1 Colorado River Aqueduct deliveries limited to 1.250 MAF annually Colorado River Aqueduct Program Capabilities Year 2010 (acre-feet per year) 1-44 ---PAGE BREAK--- Multiple Dry Single Dry Average Hydrology Years Year Year (1990-92) (1977) (1922-2004) Current Programs Base Apportionment – Priority 4 550,000 550,000 550,000 IID/MWD Conservation Program 80,000 80,000 80,000 Priority 5 Apportionment 0 0 0 PVID Land Management Program 111,000 111,000 111,000 Less: Coachella SWP/QSA Transfer (35,000) (35,000) (35,000) Forbearance for present perfected rights (62,000) (62,000) (62,000) Subtotal of Current Programs 644,000 644,000 644,000 Programs Under Development Lake Mead Storage Program 100,000 200,000 0 Salton Sea Restoration Transfer 210,000 210,000 210,000 Subtotal of Proposed Programs 310,000 410,000 210,000 Maximum Metropolitan Supply Capability 954,000 1,054,000 854,000 Additional Non-Metropolitan CRA Supplies SDCWA/IID Transfer 100,000 100,000 100,000 Coachella & All-American Canal Lining 94,000 94,000 94,000 Maximum CRA Supply Capability 1 1,148,000 1,248,000 1,048,000 Maximum Expected CRA Deliveries 1,148,000 1,248,000 1,048,000 1 Colorado River Aqueduct deliveries limited to 1.250 MAF annually Colorado River Aqueduct Program Capabilities Year 2015 (acre-feet per year) 1-45 ---PAGE BREAK--- Multiple Dry Single Dry Average Hydrology Years Year Year (1990-92) (1977) (1922-2004) Current Programs Base Apportionment – Priority 4 550,000 550,000 550,000 IID/MWD Conservation Program 80,000 80,000 80,000 Priority 5 Apportionment 0 0 0 PVID Land Management Program 111,000 111,000 111,000 Less: Coachella SWP/QSA Transfer (35,000) (35,000) (35,000) Forbearance for present perfected rights (62,000) (62,000) (62,000) Subtotal of Current Programs 644,000 644,000 644,000 Programs Under Development Lake Mead Storage Program 200,000 400,000 0 Salton Sea Restoration Transfer 0 0 0 Subtotal of Proposed Programs 200,000 400,000 0 Maximum Metropolitan Supply Capability 844,000 1,044,000 644,000 Additional Non-Metropolitan CRA Supplies SDCWA/IID Transfer 193,000 193,000 193,000 Coachella & All-American Canal Lining 94,000 94,000 94,000 Maximum CRA Supply Capability 1 1,131,000 1,331,000 931,000 Maximum Expected CRA Deliveries 1,131,000 1,250,000 931,000 1 Colorado River Aqueduct deliveries limited to 1.250 MAF annually Colorado River Aqueduct Program Capabilities Year 2020 (acre-feet per year) 1-46 ---PAGE BREAK--- Multiple Dry Single Dry Average Hydrology Years Year Year (1990-92) (1977) (1922-2004) Current Programs Base Apportionment – Priority 4 550,000 550,000 550,000 IID/MWD Conservation Program 80,000 80,000 80,000 Priority 5 Apportionment 0 0 0 PVID Land Management Program 111,000 111,000 111,000 Less: Coachella SWP/QSA Transfer (35,000) (35,000) (35,000) Forbearance for present perfected rights (62,000) (62,000) (62,000) Subtotal of Current Programs 644,000 644,000 644,000 Programs Under Development Lake Mead Storage Program 200,000 400,000 0 Salton Sea Restoration Transfer 0 0 0 Subtotal of Proposed Programs 200,000 400,000 0 Maximum Metropolitan Supply Capability 844,000 1,044,000 644,000 Additional Non-Metropolitan CRA Supplies SDCWA/IID Transfer 200,000 200,000 200,000 Coachella & All-American Canal Lining 94,000 94,000 94,000 Maximum CRA Supply Capability 1 1,138,000 1,338,000 938,000 Maximum Expected CRA Deliveries 1,138,000 1,250,000 938,000 1 Colorado River Aqueduct deliveries limited to 1.250 MAF annually Colorado River Aqueduct Program Capabilities Year 2025 (acre-feet per year) 1-47 ---PAGE BREAK--- Multiple Dry Single Dry Average Hydrology Years Year Year (1990-92) (1977) (1922-2004) Current Programs Base Apportionment – Priority 4 550,000 550,000 550,000 IID/MWD Conservation Program 80,000 80,000 80,000 Priority 5 Apportionment 0 0 0 PVID Land Management Program 111,000 111,000 111,000 Less: Coachella SWP/QSA Transfer (35,000) (35,000) (35,000) Forbearance for present perfected rights (62,000) (62,000) (62,000) Subtotal of Current Programs 644,000 644,000 644,000 Programs Under Development Lake Mead Storage Program 200,000 400,000 0 Salton Sea Restoration Transfer 0 0 0 Subtotal of Proposed Programs 200,000 400,000 0 Maximum Metropolitan Supply Capability 844,000 1,044,000 644,000 Additional Non-Metropolitan CRA Supplies SDCWA/IID Transfer 200,000 200,000 200,000 Coachella & All-American Canal Lining 94,000 94,000 94,000 Maximum CRA Supply Capability 1 1,138,000 1,338,000 938,000 Maximum Expected CRA Deliveries 1,138,000 1,250,000 938,000 1 Colorado River Aqueduct deliveries limited to 1.250 MAF annually Colorado River Aqueduct Program Capabilities Year 2030 (acre-feet per year) 1-48 ---PAGE BREAK--- Metropolitan's 2006 IRP Implementation Report 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 Average Year In-Basin Storage Activities 0 0 0 0 0 California Aqueduct (SWP) 1,963,000 1,963,000 2,018,000 2,018,000 2,018,000 Colorado River Aqueduct 934,000 1,048,000 931,000 938,000 938,000 Total Average Year 2,897,000 3,011,000 2,949,000 2,956,000 2,956,000 Single Dry Year In-Basin Storage Activities 1,232,000 1,269,000 1,221,000 1,174,000 1,125,000 California Aqueduct (SWP) 1,138,000 1,181,000 1,302,000 1,302,000 1,302,000 Colorado River Aqueduct 1,134,000 1,248,000 1,250,000 1,250,000 1,250,000 Total Single Dry Year 3,504,000 3,698,000 3,773,000 3,726,000 3,677,000 Multiple Dry Years In-Basin Storage Activities 597,000 626,000 610,000 595,000 578,000 California Aqueduct (SWP) 1,242,000 1,127,000 1,211,000 1,211,000 1,211,000 Colorado River Aqueduct 1,034,000 1,148,000 1,131,000 1,138,000 1,138,000 Total Multiple Dry Years 2,873,000 2,901,000 2,952,000 2,944,000 2,927,000 22% Reduction in SWP Supplies 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 Average Year In-Basin Storage Activities 0 0 0 0 0 California Aqueduct (SWP) 1,531,140 1,531,140 1,574,040 1,574,040 1,574,040 Colorado River Aqueduct 934,000 1,048,000 931,000 938,000 938,000 Total Average Year 2,465,140 2,579,140 2,505,040 2,512,040 2,512,040 Single Dry Year In-Basin Storage Activities 1,232,000 1,269,000 1,221,000 1,174,000 1,125,000 California Aqueduct (SWP) 887,640 921,180 1,015,560 1,015,560 1,015,560 Colorado River Aqueduct 1,134,000 1,248,000 1,250,000 1,250,000 1,250,000 Total Single Dry Year 3,253,640 3,438,180 3,486,560 3,439,560 3,390,560 Multiple Dry Years In-Basin Storage Activities 597,000 626,000 610,000 595,000 578,000 California Aqueduct (SWP) 968,760 879,060 944,580 944,580 944,580 Colorado River Aqueduct 1,034,000 1,148,000 1,131,000 1,138,000 1,138,000 Total Multiple Dry Years 2,599,760 2,653,060 2,685,580 2,677,580 2,660,580 ---PAGE BREAK--- 35% Reduction in SWP Supplies 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 Average Year In-Basin Storage Activities 0 0 0 0 0 California Aqueduct (SWP) 1,275,950 1,275,950 1,311,700 1,311,700 1,311,700 Colorado River Aqueduct 934,000 1,048,000 931,000 938,000 938,000 Total Average Year 2,209,950 2,323,950 2,242,700 2,249,700 2,249,700 Single Dry Year In-Basin Storage Activities 1,232,000 1,269,000 1,221,000 1,174,000 1,125,000 California Aqueduct (SWP) 739,700 767,650 846,300 846,300 846,300 Colorado River Aqueduct 1,134,000 1,248,000 1,250,000 1,250,000 1,250,000 Total Single Dry Year 3,105,700 3,284,650 3,317,300 3,270,300 3,221,300 Multiple Dry Years In-Basin Storage Activities 597,000 626,000 610,000 595,000 578,000 California Aqueduct (SWP) 807,300 732,550 787,150 787,150 787,150 Colorado River Aqueduct 1,034,000 1,148,000 1,131,000 1,138,000 1,138,000 Total Multiple Dry Years 2,438,300 2,506,550 2,528,150 2,520,150 2,503,150 40% Reduction in SWP Supplies 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 Average Year In-Basin Storage Activities 0 0 0 0 0 California Aqueduct (SWP) 1,177,800 1,177,800 1,210,800 1,210,800 1,210,800 Colorado River Aqueduct 934,000 1,048,000 931,000 938,000 938,000 Total Average Year 2,111,800 2,225,800 2,141,800 2,148,800 2,148,800 Single Dry Year In-Basin Storage Activities 1,232,000 1,269,000 1,221,000 1,174,000 1,125,000 California Aqueduct (SWP) 682,800 708,600 781,200 781,200 781,200 Colorado River Aqueduct 1,134,000 1,248,000 1,250,000 1,250,000 1,250,000 Total Single Dry Year 3,048,800 3,225,600 3,252,200 3,205,200 3,156,200 Multiple Dry Years In-Basin Storage Activities 597,000 626,000 610,000 595,000 578,000 California Aqueduct (SWP) 745,200 676,200 726,600 726,600 726,600 Colorado River Aqueduct 1,034,000 1,148,000 1,131,000 1,138,000 1,138,000 Total Multiple Dry Years 2,376,200 2,450,200 2,467,600 2,459,600 2,442,600 ---PAGE BREAK--- 8-3 November 2009 APPENDIX C ANAHEIM WATER CONSERVATION SUPPORT DATA ---PAGE BREAK--- HISTORICAL CONSUMPTION (Sales) (HCF) CALENDAR YEAR 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 January 2,012,095 1,989,264 1,758,337 1,933,232 2,074,204 2,125,754 1,793,151 1,660,208 2,031,044 2,012,339 1,364,684 February 1,635,977 1,884,612 1,750,481 1,660,246 1,941,303 1,998,315 1,757,654 1,549,265 1,694,351 1,574,466 1,659,047 March 1,684,289 1,888,108 2,183,680 2,009,293 2,001,856 1,629,555 1,720,599 1,710,285 2,278,878 1,703,315 1,819,261 April 2,047,240 2,208,571 2,398,406 2,167,820 2,189,766 1,793,758 1,795,128 2,028,608 1,686,304 1,716,979 1,969,854 May 2,123,561 2,336,319 2,186,507 2,344,395 2,254,893 2,059,189 1,925,149 2,965,975 2,011,218 2,251,388 2,472,034 June 2,889,981 2,977,345 3,059,665 2,991,763 2,705,559 2,310,628 2,619,005 1,831,399 2,370,859 2,681,214 3,010,301 July 2,846,155 2,923,400 3,084,881 2,744,188 2,861,876 2,211,973 2,356,509 2,699,159 2,935,878 2,695,705 3,814,356 August 3,387,792 3,034,186 3,424,907 3,447,633 3,392,390 2,808,794 3,358,935 3,058,840 3,061,952 2,849,822 3,105,719 September 2,740,845 2,756,403 2,709,382 2,674,639 2,415,629 2,154,980 2,740,442 2,996,497 3,224,357 3,222,442 2,718,948 October 2,914,551 3,251,635 2,789,725 3,204,562 3,338,208 2,753,114 3,081,756 2,471,236 2,551,591 2,811,880 3,440,028 November 1,836,233 1,745,874 1,926,692 1,895,616 2,360,007 1,659,256 1,799,529 2,094,737 2,451,512 2,420,035 1,813,334 December 2,383,194 2,160,572 2,294,229 2,657,420 2,378,347 2,396,544 2,410,024 2,391,226 2,021,652 2,982,883 2,484,741 TOTAL (HCF) 28,501,913 29,156,289 29,566,892 29,730,807 29,914,038 25,901,860 27,357,881 27,457,435 28,319,596 28,922,468 29,672,307 TOTAL (AF) 65,426 66,928 67,871 68,247 68,668 59,458 62,800 63,029 65,008 66,392 68,113 HISTORICAL CONSUMPTION GROWTH RATE Annual % Inc. 2.30% 1.41% 0.55% 0.62% -13.41% 5.62% 0.36% 3.14% 2.13% 2.59% Avg. excl. 1991 2.08% 1991 at avg. increase (af) 70,096 Adjusted % -15.49% ---PAGE BREAK--- TOTAL HISTORICAL CONSUMPTION (AF/CALENDAR YEAR) 65,426 68,668 59,458 63,029 65,008 66,392 68,113 66,928 67,871 68,247 62,800 54,000 56,000 58,000 60,000 62,000 64,000 66,000 68,000 70,000 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 HISTORICAL CONSUMPTION GROWTH RATE ---PAGE BREAK--- 8-4 November 2009 APPENDIX D METROPOLITAN WATER SUPPLY ALLOCATION PLAN PERCENTAGES ---PAGE BREAK--- APPENDIX D From: Nevills,Jennifer C [mailto:[EMAIL REDACTED]] Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2009 3:37 PM To: Mike Swan Cc: Aladdin Shaikh Subject: FW: Allocation Model Mike and Al, Here’s the full set of updated percentages. Not much change from the previous, +0.01% across the board. WSAP Level 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Anaheim % of Total 1.29% 1.29% 1.27% 1.26% 1.27% 1.26% 1.25% 1.23% 1.21% 1.18% ‐Jennifer From: Nevills,Jennifer C Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2009 9:03 AM To: 'Aladdin Shaikh' Subject: RE: Allocation Model Hi Al, Here are the percentages of the total allocation that goes to Anaheim at the different WSAP levels. This is based on the assumption that there are no allocation year losses of local supplies for other agencies. WSAP Level 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Anaheim % of Total 1.28% 1.28% 1.26% 1.25% 1.26% 1.25% 1.24% 1.22% 1.20% 1.17% Hope this helps, Jennifer From: Aladdin Shaikh [mailto:[EMAIL REDACTED]] Sent: Monday, March 16, 2009 9:22 AM To: Nevills,Jennifer C Subject: RE: Allocation Model Jennifer, Could you please send me a copy of the Allocation Model that includes all member agencies. I need to figure out what percent of the total Allocation will go to Anaheim, and for that I need the total Allocation to all member agencies. Thank you, Al 714‐765‐5268 ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- WATER FACILITIES ASSESSMENT for the CITY OF ANAHEIM ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE/ANAHEIM CONVENTION CENTER EXPANSION CITY OF ANAHEIM PUBLIC UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER ENGINEERING DIVISION November 4, 2009 201 S. ANAHEIM BLVD. ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA 92805 [PHONE REDACTED] ---PAGE BREAK--- Water Facilities Assessment for the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Update/Anaheim Convention Center Expansion November 4, 2009 Page 1 of 5 PURPOSE The City of Anaheim is preparing a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) for the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Update/Anaheim Convention Center Expansion (ARSP Update). In September 1994, the City of Anaheim certified EIR No. 313 (State Clearinghouse No. 91091062) in support of the adoption of The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2 (Anaheim 1994b, 1994a). This EIR evaluated impacts associated with the establishment and implementation of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (ARSP) and created a mitigation monitoring program (MMP No. 0085) in order to mitigate any such impacts. Since being certified in 1994, two Validation Reports have been prepared (1999 and 2004) to evaluate the continued relevance and accuracy of the Master EIR and its ability to be used as a project EIR for all projected development within the boundaries of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Area. The ARSP Update project includes amendments and adjustments to EIR No. 313, the expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center, and amendments to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan and the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan (SP92-1) to accommodate the construction of three pedestrian over crossings, two of which would be located within the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan area and one of which would be located within the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan area. These over crossings are in addition to the three that are currently identified within The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan. As a result of the proposed intensification of development described in the ARSP Update project, an updated water facilities assessment is necessary. Therefore, the purpose of this report is to: 1. Quantify the required net increase in water demand as a result of the proposed intensification of development in the ARSP Update. 2. Evaluate the adequacy of the existing water distribution system to accommodate the added demands and identify any necessary improvements. 3. Prepare project cost estimates for the improvements required to the existing water distribution system. SUMMARY This report provides an estimate of the water demands and water system improvements required to serve the proposed development intensity changes described in SEIR No. 313. A demand assessment was conducted and the resulting net increase from the ARSP Update was approximately 0.843 million gallons per day (MGD), or 866 gallons per minute (GPM) during maximum-day-demand condition. Meeting the added demand under the extreme maximum day, peak hour condition (including a 3.8% system loss factor) will require the addition of a 1,500 GPM capacity well. Hydraulic modeling of the water distribution system showed that additional water main improvements would be required to meet the maximum day plus fire flow condition for the ARSP Update. Below is a table showing the location and the type of main improvement required. ---PAGE BREAK--- Water Facilities Assessment for the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Update/Anaheim Convention Center Expansion November 4, 2009 Page 2 of 5 Location New Pipe Required Harbor Boulevard: from Orangewood to Chapman Avenue 16-inch diameter 2,700 feet - paralleling existing 10-inch main BACKGROUND The ARSP area is located in the City of Anaheim, 35 miles southeast of downtown Los Angeles and 7 miles northwest of Santa Ana, in central Orange County. The project site is located generally west of the Interstate 5 (I-5) corridor, south of Vermont Avenue, east of Walnut Street, and north of Orangewood Avenue. At the time the ARSP was adopted, the ARSP area encompassed approximately 549.5 acres. Since certification of EIR No. 313, proposed modifications to the ARSP have included twelve amendments and four adjustments, which have increased the total ARSP area to 581.3 acres. The ARSP area is within an urban, developed area of the City of Anaheim and is developed with the Anaheim Convention Center, a mix of commercial, retail, and visitor-serving uses, and land used for agricultural purposes. Surrounding land uses include the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan and the Hotel Circle Specific Plan. Other surrounding land uses including a mix of commercial, retail, residential, and visitor-serving uses. The 581.3 acre ARSP area is divided into two Development Areas: Development Area 1 and Development Area 2. Development Area 1 is also known as the Commercial Recreation (CR) District. All of the development within Development Area 1, with the exception of an additional 3,638 equivalent hotel rooms, is consistent with the City’s 2004 General Plan Update. The number of hotel rooms previously included in the 2004 General Plan for Development Area 1 was 28,862 and the corresponding water demand for that development was therefore included in the City’s 2005 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP). This area is currently planned for development of up to 32,500 total hotel room equivalents, for a total of up to 3,638 additional hotel room equivalents for which water demand was not included in the City’s 2005 UWMP. The water system facilities required to serve the additional water demand resulting from the increase in hotel room equivalents will be analyzed in this report. Development Area 2, encompassing 62.8 acres, is also known as the Public Recreation (PR) District and includes City-owned uses such as the 1.7 million square foot Anaheim Convention Center, the 1,600-room Anaheim Hilton Hotel and 412 additional hotel rooms for this area. The proposed project includes further expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center, as described below, which will also generate water demand not included in the City’s 2005 UWMP. The water system facilities required to serve the additional water demand resulting from the further expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center will also be analyzed in this report. Development Area 2 consists of a mix of meeting, ballroom, office, exhibit hall, restaurant and retail space as well as a mix of hotel and hotel related space. ---PAGE BREAK--- Water Facilities Assessment for the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Update/Anaheim Convention Center Expansion November 4, 2009 Page 3 of 5 PREVIOUS CONDITIONS AND WATER DEMAND PROJECTION Statistical information provided by the City of Anaheim Planning Department, the Water Supply Assessment for the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan and Convention Center Expansion (Psomas, September 2009) and Rule 15E of Anaheim’s Water Rates, Rules and Regulations were used and assumptions were made to project the additional water demand resulting from the ARSP Update project. The following table summarizes the changes in projected water demands as a result of the ARSP Update project. TOTAL (NET) LAND USE ADDITIONS PER SEIR 313 ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE CR - DISTRICT Average Day Demand Maximum Day Demand Land Use Quantity Consumption Rate (per day) MGD GPM GPM - Equiv Hotel Rooms 3,638 125 gpd/rm 0.455 316 467 Net Total Land Use Additions Demand Total – CR DISTRICT 0.455 316 467 TOTAL (NET) LAND USE ADDITIONS PER SEIR 313 ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE PR - DISTRICT Average Day Demand Maximum Day Demand - Hotel Rooms 900 125 gpd/rm 0.113 78 116 - Convention Center sq. ft. 387,445 350 gpd/ksf 0.136 94 139 - Restaurant sq. ft. 95,000 1,000 gpd/ksf 0.095 66 98 - Retail sq. ft. 55,000 195 gpd/ksf 0.011 7 10 - Spa Facilities sq. ft. 15,000 600 gpd/ksf 0.009 6 9 - Meeting Space, etc. sq. ft. 73,914 350 gpd/ksf 0.026 18 27 Net Total Land Use Additions Demand Total – PR DISTRICT 0.388 269 399 Net Total Land Use Additions Demand Total CR + PR DISTRICTS 0.843 585 866 MODELING ANALYSIS Hydraulic modeling analyses were conducted to analyze the effect the ARSP Update’s increased water demand would have on the water distribution system. In the hydraulic model, all distribution pipeline upgrades and the well specified in Rule 15E were assumed to be completed and in operation. The ARSP Update’s increased water demand was loaded into the model, along with a new 1,500 GPM water well (tentative location assumed to be near Orangewood and Ponderosa Park). The results showed that the City’s ultimate water distribution system with the new 1,500 GPM well and the Rule 15E upgrades was sufficient to meet the added demand under the extreme maximum day, peak hour condition (including the 3.8% system loss factor); however, under the maximum-day plus fire flow condition, the model revealed insufficient capacity in the existing water main in Harbor Boulevard between Orangewood and Chapman Avenues. During fire flow modeling runs, the area bordering the east side of Harbor Boulevard showed insufficient pressures, and the Harbor main showed high velocities and headlosses. In addition to the insufficient pressures being unacceptable, high velocities, over time, can be detrimental to pipeline integrity. To eliminate these problems and add fire flow capacity and ---PAGE BREAK--- Water Facilities Assessment for the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Update/Anaheim Convention Center Expansion November 4, 2009 Page 4 of 5 redundancy to the area along Harbor Boulevard south of Orangewood Avenue, a new parallel 16-inch main is proposed. REQUIRED WATER FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS TO MEET ADDITIONAL WATER DEMANDS To meet the projected increase in water demand for the ARSP Update, City staff determined that drilling a new well near or within the project site (tentative location is planned to be near Ponderosa Park and Orangewood Avenue) would be required. In addition, due to the increase in development intensities, the distribution main within Harbor Boulevard must be upsized to provide adequate maximum-day plus fire flows. The required improvement is to parallel the existing 10-inch diameter main in Harbor Boulevard with a new 16-inch diameter main from Orangewood to Chapman Avenue. WATER FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS PER RULE 15E Rule 15E of Anaheim’s Water Rules, Rates and Regulations (Plan No. W2791A and W2792A) specifies the water facility improvements required to accommodate the previously adopted projected land use water demands as well as the applicable Land Use Development Area Fee. Prior to SEIR No. 313, Rule 15E specified water facility improvements for the area around the Anaheim Resort Area, including construction of a new 3,500 gallons per minute well (Well No. 55) and upsizing distribution pipelines. With the changes in land use projections in SEIR No. 313, Rule 15E must be updated to meet the projected additional water demand, which will require additional water facilities, including another new well and pipeline upgrade. PROJECT COST ESTIMATE From the results of the water demand assessment and hydraulic modeling analysis, water distribution system improvements will be needed to accommodate the additional water demand from the ARSP Update. Improvements include construction of a new well and upsizing the distribution main in Harbor Boulevard. Water Planning staff estimated the total construction costs for the proposed ARSP Update to be $4,626,112. The estimate includes ten percent construction contingency and fifteen percent engineering and administration costs. However, the estimate does not include the cost to acquire land for the new well site. Description Limits Footage [LF] Estimated Cost Harbor Blvd 16” Transmission Main Orangewood to Chapman 2,700 $1,207,696 Construct New Well Orangewood & Ponderosa Park (Tentative) N/A $3,418,416 Total Project Cost* $4,626,112 * Includes 10% construction contingency and 15% engineering and contract administration. Amount does not include cost of land acquisition for new well. ---PAGE BREAK--- Water Facilities Assessment for the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Update/Anaheim Convention Center Expansion November 4, 2009 Page 5 of 5 CONCLUSION The projected net water demand increase for the ARSP Update is 0.843 million gallons per day (MGD), or 866 gallons per minute (GPM) during the maximum day demand condition. City staff determined that meeting the additional demand under the extreme peak hour maximum day condition would require construction of a new 1,500 GPM capacity well. By performing hydraulic modeling analyses with the new demands and the well improvements, the results indicated that water main improvements were required in Harbor Boulevard to provide adequate fire flows. Fire flow runs resulted in insufficient pressure along the east side of Harbor Boulevard and high velocities and headlosses in the existing pipeline at the previously mentioned location. To improve fire flows, it was determined that the following main improvement would be required: parallel the existing 10-inch diameter main in Harbor Boulevard with a new 16- inch diameter main from Orangewood to Chapman Avenue, approximately 2,700 feet. As a result of the proposed increase in development intensities in the ARSP Update, additional water system improvements will be required and Rule 15E of the City’s Water Rates, Rules and Regulations must be updated. Upon adoption of SEIR No. 313, Rule 15E will be updated to include the additional water system improvements and a new Land Use Development Area Fee will be calculated to reflect the increased development intensities and additional water system improvements. ---PAGE BREAK--- MEMORANDUM To: Susan Kim, City of Anaheim From: Michael D. Swan, PE Date: November 29, 2010 Subject: Project Water Demand and Regional Supply Update Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Water Supply Assessment, City of Anaheim Project Demand Update As a result of a project the City is currently processing, the Anaheim Convention Center (ACC) Grand Plaza, the statistics and water demand included in the subject WSA need to be modified. This ACC Grand Plaza will result in the creation of a pedestrian plaza with up to 100,000 squre feet of outdoor programmable space added to the ACC in the PR District. The ACC Grand Plaza will feature landscaping, walkways, hardscape/pavers, water features, street furniture, lighting features, and associated infrastructure and utilities necessary to support programs and events related to the Convention Center. The plaza will also provide for pedestrian circulation, vendor/concession opportunities, and passive recreational areas. In order to include the statistics and water demand from this separate project in the maximum amount of development analyzed in the PR District, Table 3.2, Proposed ARSP Water Demand Increase, of the November 2009 WSA should be modified as shown at the end of this memorandum. The additional water demand attributable to the ACC Grand Plaza is highlighted in this revised table. It was assumed that approximately 15 percent of the area will be landscaped by utilizing planters and pots/containers. The irrigation demand was determined using the average evapotranspiration rate from the closest California Irrigation Management Information System station (Station #75 in Irvine) of 49.63 inches, a plant factor of 0.6 and an irrigation efficiency of 90 percent (assuming primarily drip irrigation or bubblers). Using these assumptions, the additional water demand for the ACC Grand Plaza is 848 gallons per day (0.95 acre-feet per year (AFY)) as reflected on the revised Table 3.2 and the total demand for the ARSP is therefore increased from 980.8 AFY to 981.7 AFY, an increase of 0.1 percent (one- tenth of one percent). This small increase in the WSA water demand becomes insignificant in the 80,000 to 90,000 AFY demands projected citywide over the 20-year WSA analysis period, which is illustrated by the fact that the demand and supply comparison tables in the WSA are rounded off to the nearest 10 AFY. Regional Water Supply Update The subject Water Supply Assessment (WSA) dated November 2009 relied on the latest regional water supply projections available at the time. Some of these sources included information from the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) and Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (Metropolitan). Because Metropolitan’s supply projections from their 2005 ---PAGE BREAK--- Susan Kim Page 2 of 2 November 29, 2010 2ANA012900 Regional Urban Water Management Plan and 2007 Integrated Resources Plan Implementation Report (IRP) were somewhat dated, the WSA made certain assumptions regarding imported water supply available to Metropolitan, primarily from the State Water Project (SWP). Based on preliminary information regarding the SWP supply, Metroplitan’s 2007 IRP estimated that SWP supplies could be reduced by up to a 22 percent. And as a result, the WSA assumed these supplies were reduced by that percentage. In order to evaluate more stringent reductions in the SWP supply due to unforeseen conditions, the WSA also evaluated alternative scenarios where SWP supplies were reduced by 35 percent and 40 percent. In all scenarios, the supply for the City including the proposed Anaheim Resort Specific Plan project was deemed reliable. Since the preparation of the WSA, DWR has finalized their State Water Project Delivery Reliability Report 2009, dated August 2010, and Metropolitan’s Board of Directors has approved their draft 2010 Regional Urban Water Management Plan (RUWMP). The DWR SWP Delivery Reliability Report includes the latest assumptions on environmental species restrictions and climate change and Metropolitan’s 2010 RUWMP reflects this information as well as updates all of their other supply source information and regional demand projections within their service area. The 2010 Metropolitan RUWMP reflects surplus water supply out to 2035 for all normal, single dry and multiple dry year scenarios. Using the supply assumptions included in Metropolitan’s RUWMP and the projected demands from the WSA for the City including the Proposed Project, as well as a more conservative assumption for the Basin Plan Percentage as currently recommended by Orange County Water District, the supply available to the City is within the ranges assumed in the November 2009 WSA, so the conclusions of a reliable water supply are still valid. Additionally, current Citywide demands have been significantly below those projected in the WSA. Actual demands in 2009/10 were 86 percent of those projected in the WSA for 2009/10, which were used going forward to develop 2015, 2020, 2025 and 2030 projections. It is recognized that perhaps not all of the current conservation within the City is “permanent” and is due to Metropolitan’s Water Allocation Plan which went into effect in 2009/10. However, it is highly likely that a good portion of this conservation will become permanent as hardware such as low and ultra-low flush toilets has been installed, landscape has been altered and irrigation systems retrofitted, etc. Lifestyles have also been altered due to the heightened awareness to conserve water as well. Therefore, the demand projections included in the WSA are overstated and conservative, making the conclusion of a reliable water supply even more positive. 2 ---PAGE BREAK--- (gpd) AFY 3,638 rooms 125 gpd/room 454,750 509.4 17,281 19.4 472,031 528.8 (gpd) AFY Flexible Meeting Space 265,000 s.f. 350 gpd/ksf 92,750 103.9 Ballroom Space 50,000 s.f. 350 gpd/ksf 17,500 19.6 Meeting and Office Space 43,914 s.f. 350 gpd/ksf 15,370 17.2 Exhibit Hall Space 20,295 s.f. 350 gpd/ksf 7,103 8.0 Bridge/Skyway1 27,150 s.f. 350 gpd/ksf 9,503 10.6 ACC Grand Plaza2 100,000 s.f. 57 gpd/ksf 3 848 0.9 (2.76 ft/year) Restaurant Space 80,000 s.f. 1,000 gpd/ksf 80,000 89.6 Specialty Retail Space 45,000 s.f. 195 gpd/ksf 8,775 9.8 231,849 259.7 Two Hotels 900 rooms 125 gpd/room 112,500 126.0 Spa Facilities 15,000 s.f. 600 gpd/ksf 9,000 10.1 Restaurant Space 15,000 s.f. 1,000 gpd/ksf 15,000 16.8 Retail Space 10,000 s.f. 195 gpd/ksf 1,950 2.2 Meeting Space 30,000 s.f. 350 gpd/ksf 10,500 11.8 Ballroom Space 10,000 s.f. 350 gpd/ksf 3,500 3.9 Bar/Night Club Space 15,000 s.f. 350 gpd/ksf 5,250 5.9 157,700 176.7 389,549 436.4 14,803 16.6 404,351 453.0 876,382 981.7 3) Factor is on irrigated area only, or 15% of 100,000 s.f. Grand Total ARSP 1) Based on assumption that this space could be used as exhibit, meeting or commercial space 2) Outdoor programmable space with 15% landscaped and irrigated (planters and potted plant materials) Subtotal Subtotal PR District 3.8% Losses Total PR District Subtotal Hotel Development Units Demand Factor Convention Center Expansion 3.8% Losses Total CR District Development Area 2 - Public Recreational (PR) District Demand Units Demand Factor Additional Equivalent Hotel Rooms Table 3.2 Proposed ARSP Water Demand Increase (Revised) Development Area 1 - Commercial Recreational (CR) District Demand November 29, 2010 ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- APPENDIX J SEWER TECHNICAL APPENDICES Revision to the Technical Memorandum for the Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Combined Central Anaheim Area Master Plan of Sanitary Sewers – Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- TECHMEMO_ACC GRAND PLAZA_12-21-10.DOC 1 T E C H N I C A L M E M O R A N D U M Revision to the Technical Memorandum for the Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (ARSP) PREPARED FOR: Khanh Chu/City of Anaheim PREPARED BY: CH2M HILL DATE: December 21, 2010 Introduction CH2M HILL was retained by the City of Anaheim to revise the attached August 2009 Technical Memorandum (TM) for the Amendment to the ARSP to reflect the incorporation of the proposed Anaheim Convention Center (ACC) Grand Plaza. The ACC Grand Plaza is a pedestrian plaza with up to 100,000 square feet of outdoor space for the ACC. We reanalyzed the build-out condition Model 15 of the Combined Central Anaheim Area Master Plan of Sanitary Sewers (CCAAMPSS) affected by the proposed ACC Grand Plaza. Model 15 was reanalyzed following the same sanitary sewer flow modeling methodology used in the CCAAMPSS. Modeling Results The build-out condition Model 15 that includes the ARSP and ACC expansion was reanalyzed to account for the proposed ACC Grand Plaza and to determine the effect on the sewer system. As discussed, the ACC Grand Plaza is more like an “outdoor” ballroom than an “open space” (such as parks). Therefore, the subcategories of “meeting rooms/office, exhibit hall, ballrooms, and bridge/skyway” in the TM (identified as 350 gallons per 1,000 square feet) was used for the ACC Grand Plaza. The resulting flow added to Model 15 was 35,000 gpd. Original d/D Criteria With the additional flow from the ACC Grand Plaza and using the original criteria of maximum d/D for pipe capacity, there are no changes to the sewer improvements for Model 15 as previously described in the August 2009 TM for the Amendment to the ARSP. The buildout sewer improvements for the Amendment to the ARSP remain the same as recommended in the previous TM: - 8,095 linear feet of sewer pipe are recommended for replacement in Model 15, within the C-R and PR Districts, along Haster Street, Katella Avenue, Clementine Street, and Harbor Boulevard, to accommodate build-out of the Proposed Project. The existing sewers range from 8-inch to 24-inch in diameter and are recommended for replacement with 10-inch to 30-inch diameter sewers. - 1,064 linear feet of sewer pipe is recommended for replacement in Model 15, along Howell Avenue, to accommodate build-out of the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project. The existing sewers are 8-inch in diameter and are recommended for replacement with 10-inch diameter sewers. These improvements do not create ---PAGE BREAK--- TECHMEMO_ACC GRAND PLAZA_12-21-10.DOC 2 cumulative impacts to the 8,095 linear feet of sewer pipe improvements located west of the I-5 freeway. New d/D Criteria However, per the new d/D criteria for new pipe construction as discussed, there are changes to the sewer improvements for Model 15. The changes are additional sewer improvements and increased pipe diameters as described below: - 14,087 linear feet of existing 8-inch to 24-inch diameter sewer pipe along Haster Street, Katella Avenue, Clementine Street, and Harbor Boulevard are recommended for replacement with 10-inch to 33-inch diameter sewers. - The recommended replacement sewer for the 161 linear feet of existing 8-inch sewer pipe along Harbor Boulevard increased from 10-inch to 12-inch sewer. - The 1,064 linear feet of existing 8-inch diameter sewer pipe along Howell Avenue are recommended for replacement with 12-inch diameter sewers. These improvements do not create cumulative impacts to the 14,250 linear feet of sewer pipe improvements above located west of the I-5 freeway. The attached Exhibit 1 shows the build-out sewer improvements in Model 15 per the original d/D criteria. The attached Exhibit 2 shows the new build-out sewer improvements in Model 15 per the new d/D criteria. The updated cost table for sewer improvements in Model 15 per the new d/D criteria is also attached. With the additional flow from the ACC Grand Plaza, the d/D ratios of the sewers immediately of the ACC Grand Plaza ranged from 0.69 to 1.00. This is similar to the d/D ratios from 0.68 to 1.00 for the same sewers in the previous TM. But, with the new recommended sewer improvements of the ACC Grand Plaza, the d/D ratios reduced to a range from 0.4 to 0.6. In the previous TM, the d/D ratios ranged from 0.56 to 0.75 for the previous recommended sewer improvements located of the proposed ACC Grand Plaza. Conclusion Using the original maximum d/D criteria for pipe capacity, the proposed ACC Grand Plaza does not change the number of recommended sewer improvements in Model 15 described in the August 2009 TM for the Amendment to the ARSP. The results of the TM for the Amendment to the ARSP remain the same even with the incorporation of the proposed ACC Grand Plaza. However, per the new d/D criteria for new pipe construction and not due to the flow from the ACC Grand Plaza, there are changes to the sewer improvements for Model 15. The changes are additional sewer improvements and increased pipe diameters as shown in the attached Exhibit 2. ---PAGE BREAK--- TECHMEMO_ACC GRAND PLAZA_12-21-10.DOC 3 Attachment 1 1) Map of Recommended Build-Out Sewer Improvements in Model 15 per the Original d/D Criteria 2) Map of Recommended Build-Out Sewer Improvements in Model 15 per the New d/D Criteria 3) Updated Cost Table for Recommended Build-Out Sewer Improvements in Model 15 per the New d/D Criteria ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- 15 21 13 1 22 40 17 16 51 21 21 20 20 21 22 INTERSTATE HWY 5 DISNEYLAND DR LEWIS ST HASTER ST THE CITY DR HARBOR BLVD CHAPMAN AVE KATELLA AVE STATE COLLEGE BLVD WEST ST HOWELL AVE ORANGEWOOD AVE CHAPMAN AVE STATE COLLEGE BLVD BALL RD WALNUT ST NINTH ST CERRITOS AVE Exhibit 1 Recommended Build Out Sewer Improvements for the Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Model 15 LEGEND ! Manhole Sewer Lines Build Out Sewer Improvements 10 Inches 12 Inches 15 Inches 18 Inches 21 Inches 24 Inches 27 Inches 30 Inches OCSD Trunk Sewer Central Sewer Study Area Anaheim City Limits Models Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Combined Central Anaheim Area Master Plan of Sanitary Sewers 1 inch equals 1300 feet 0 650 1,300 Feet ³ December 2010 \\GALT\PROJ\CITYOFANAHEIM\360985\MAPFILES\11X17_ANAHEIMRESORT_V2_(EXHIBIT1).MXD KWILSON4 12/20/2010 18:26:45 15 Original Criteria for Max d/D: 0.67 = d/D for pipe with diameters less than 12 inches 0.75 = d/D for pipe with diameters equal to or greater than 12 inches ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- 15 21 13 1 22 40 17 16 51 21 21 20 20 21 22 INTERSTATE HWY 5 DISNEYLAND DR LEWIS ST HASTER ST THE CITY DR HARBOR BLVD CHAPMAN AVE KATELLA AVE STATE COLLEGE BLVD WEST ST HOWELL AVE ORANGEWOOD AVE CHAPMAN AVE STATE COLLEGE BLVD BALL RD WALNUT ST NINTH ST CERRITOS AVE Exhibit 2 Recommended Build Out Sewer Improvements for the Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Model 15 LEGEND ! Manhole Sewer Lines Build Out Sewer Improvements 10 Inches 12 Inches 15 Inches 18 Inches 21 Inches 24 Inches 27 Inches 30 Inches 33 Inches OCSD Trunk Sewer Central Sewer Study Area Anaheim City Limits Models Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Combined Central Anaheim Area Master Plan of Sanitary Sewers 1 inch equals 1300 feet 0 650 1,300 Feet ³ December 2010 \\GALT\PROJ\CITYOFANAHEIM\360985\MAPFILES\11X17_ANAHEIMRESORT_V2_(EXHIBIT2).MXD KWILSON4 12/20/2010 15:35:44 15 New Criteria for Max d/D: 0.50 = d/D for pipe with diameters less than or equal to 12 inches 0.60 = d/D for pipe with diameters greater than 12 inches ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Combined Central Anaheim Area Master Plan of Sanitary Sewers RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS ADDITIONAL BUILD-OUT CONDITION SEWER NEEDS DUE TO THE UPDATED ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN AND CONVENTION CENTER EXPANSION (AUGUST 2009) AND THE ADDITIONAL ACC GRAND PLAZA INSIDE MODEL 15 (DECEMBER 2010) PER THE NEW d/D CRITERIA FOR NEW PIPE CONSTRUCTION Model No. Upstream - Manhole Pipe Length (ft) Existing Pipe Capacity (d/D)1 Existing Diameter (in) Parallel/ Replace No. of Manholes Cost for Manholes Estimated 2006 Cost Estimated 2010 Cost4 incl. Eng, Contract, & CM Subtotal Location 15 088204-088203 176 0.75 8 R 12 2 $10,000 $100,036 $163,256 HASTER ST (Additional Sewer Needs) 088203-088202 174 0.87 8 R 12 1 $5,000 $94,064 $153,510 HASTER ST 088202-088201 351 1.00 8 R 12 1 $5,000 $180,086 $293,896 HASTER ST 088201-097310 302 1.00 8 R 12 1 $5,000 $156,272 $255,032 HASTER ST 087218-087401 196 0.76 12 R 15 2 $10,000 $127,396 $207,907 CLEMENTINE ST 087401-087402 413 0.82 12 R 15 1 $5,000 $247,388 $403,731 CLEMENTINE ST 087402-087406 386 0.82 12 R 15 1 $5,000 $231,836 $378,351 CLEMENTINE ST 087406-087410 396 0.86 12 R 15 1 $5,000 $237,596 $387,751 CLEMENTINE ST 087410-087412 36 0.56 12 R 15 1 $5,000 $30,236 $49,344 CLEMENTINE ST 087412-087411 15 0.38 12 R 15 1 $5,000 $18,140 $29,604 CLEMENTINE ST 087412-087416 24 0.24 12 R 15 1 $5,000 $23,324 $38,064 CLEMENTINE ST 076432-076431 43 0.63 21 R 24 2 $10,000 $19,976 $32,600 KATELLA AVE 076431-076430 23 0.23 21 R 24 1 $5,000 $12,402 $20,239 KATELLA AVE 076430-076429 273 0.73 21 R 24 1 $5,000 $43,948 $71,723 KATELLA AVE 076429-076428 262 0.67 21 R 24 1 $5,000 $42,467 $69,304 KATELLA AVE 076428-076427 36 0.43 21 R 24 1 $5,000 $14,065 $22,954 KATELLA AVE 076427-076417 453 0.70 21 R 24 1 $5,000 $66,564 $108,631 KATELLA AVE 076417-076312 377 0.71 21 R 24 1 $5,000 $57,017 $93,051 KATELLA AVE 076312-076311 370 0.72 21 R 24 1 $5,000 $56,115 $91,578 KATELLA AVE 076311-076310 253 0.74 21 R 24 1 $5,000 $41,333 $67,454 KATELLA AVE 076310-076309 250 0.73 21 R 24 1 $5,000 $41,001 $66,913 KATELLA AVE 076309-066430 262 0.72 21 R 24 1 $5,000 $42,470 $69,311 KATELLA AVE 097311-097310 313 0.87 21 R 27 2 $10,000 $233,563 $381,168 KATELLA AVE 097310-087420 317 0.54 21 R 27 1 $5,000 $231,745 $378,202 KATELLA AVE 087420-087419 153 0.62 21 R 27 1 $5,000 $116,753 $190,538 KATELLA AVE 087419-087418 181 0.63 21 R 27 1 $5,000 $136,395 $222,593 KATELLA AVE 087418-087417 34 0.67 21 R 27 1 $5,000 $33,005 $53,863 KATELLA AVE 087417-087416 57 0.75 21 R 27 1 $5,000 $49,247 $80,369 KATELLA AVE Selected Diam2,3 (in) Notes: 1. See below for the City's NEW criteria of max d/D for pipe construction. 2. Selected Diameter is not recommended by sewer modeling, but based on the City's criteria of recommending pipe improvements: Recommend pipe replacement instead of parallel system for existing small diameter 10", and 12") pipes. Either recommend pipe replacement or parallel system for existing 15" diameter pipes, on a case-by-case basis. Generally, recommend parallel system for existing 18" diameter pipes and larger. For pipe diameter 12" and larger, only downsizing by ONE pipe size is allowed. For pipe diameters 8" and 10", no downsizing is allowed. For gaps in the sewer design requirements when there is no sewer need in the sewer section being considered, but there is a sewer need on either or both sides of the sewer section, criteria through applies. Replace all 6" diameter pipes with 8" or larger 3. Selected Diameter is larger than the diameter recommended by the sewer modeling based on the following assumption: Maintain continuity of pipe diameter to match upstream and pipe diameters. Increase pipe diameter to provide better transition between upstream and pipe diameters. 4. 2010 Cost based on 3% escalation per year from 2006 to 2010. 087417 087416 57 0.75 21 R 27 1 $5,000 $49,247 $80,369 KATELLA AVE 087416-087415 16 0.77 21 R 27 1 $5,000 $20,716 $33,808 KATELLA AVE 087415-087414 147 0.79 21 R 27 1 $5,000 $112,547 $183,674 KATELLA AVE 087414-087413 103 0.85 21 R 27 1 $5,000 $81,703 $133,337 KATELLA AVE 087413-087317 329 0.87 21 R 27 1 $5,000 $240,129 $391,885 KATELLA AVE 087317-087315 125 0.90 21 R 27 1 $5,000 $97,125 $158,506 KATELLA AVE 087315-087318 93 0.85 21 R 27 1 $5,000 $74,693 $121,897 KATELLA AVE 087318-087313 115 1.00 21 R 27 1 $5,000 $90,115 $147,065 KATELLA AVE 087313-087311 128 0.90 21 R 27 1 $5,000 $99,228 $161,938 KATELLA AVE 087311-087309 212 1.00 21 R 27 1 $5,000 $158,112 $258,035 KATELLA AVE 087309-087307 319 1.00 21 R 27 1 $5,000 $233,119 $380,444 KATELLA AVE 087307-076411 59 1.00 21 R 27 1 $5,000 $50,859 $83,001 KATELLA AVE 076411-076424 55 1.00 24 R 33 1 $5,000 $50,805 $82,912 KATELLA AVE 076424-076410 285 0.62 24 R 30 1 $5,000 $216,199 $352,832 KATELLA AVE 076410-076409 160 0.64 24 R 27 1 $5,000 $121,499 $198,283 KATELLA AVE 076409-076408 149 0.62 24 R 27 1 $5,000 $114,292 $186,522 KATELLA AVE 076408-076407 66 0.75 24 R 27 1 $5,000 $55,857 $91,157 KATELLA AVE 076407-076405 320 0.68 24 R 27 1 $5,000 $233,610 $381,245 KATELLA AVE 076405-076433 56 0.74 24 R 33 1 $5,000 $51,556 $84,138 KATELLA AVE 076433-076308 373 0.74 24 R 33 1 $5,000 $289,623 $472,657 KATELLA AVE 076308-076307 173 0.68 24 R 30 1 $5,000 $135,301 $220,808 KATELLA AVE 076307-076306 201 0.74 24 R 30 1 $5,000 $155,157 $253,213 KATELLA AVE 076306-076305 113 0.72 24 R 30 1 $5,000 $91,371 $149,115 KATELLA AVE 076305-076304 262 0.71 24 R 30 1 $5,000 $200,053 $326,482 KATELLA AVE 076304-076303 110 0.74 24 R 30 1 $5,000 $89,556 $146,153 KATELLA AVE 076303-076302 280 0.74 24 R 30 1 $5,000 $212,911 $347,465 KATELLA AVE 076302-066417 53 0.53 24 R 30 1 $5,000 $48,218 $78,690 KATELLA AVE 066417-066422 277 1.00 24 R 30 1 $5,000 $210,602 $343,697 KATELLA AVE 066422-066421 329 0.75 24 R 30 1 $5,000 $248,354 $405,308 KATELLA AVE 066421-066420 249 0.78 24 R 30 1 $5,000 $190,274 $310,522 KATELLA AVE 066420-066419 79 0.72 24 R 30 1 $5,000 $66,854 $109,104 KATELLA AVE 066419-066418 339 0.78 24 R 30 1 $5,000 $255,614 $417,156 KATELLA AVE 066418-066328 329 0.77 24 R 30 1 $5,000 $248,354 $405,308 KATELLA AVE 066328-066327 330 0.78 24 R 30 1 $5,000 $249,080 $406,492 KATELLA AVE 066327-066325 331 0.78 24 R 30 1 $5,000 $249,806 $407,677 KATELLA AVE 066325-066324 299 0.75 24 R 30 1 $5,000 $226,814 $370,154 KATELLA AVE 066324-057444 41 0.75 24 R 30 1 $5,000 $39,114 $63,832 KATELLA AVE 077401-077212 351 0.66 8 R 10 2 $10,000 $164,064 $267,749 HARBOR BLVD 077212-077210 350 0.66 8 R 10 1 $5,000 $158,685 $258,970 HARBOR BLVD 077210-077208 150 0.63 8 R 10 1 $5,000 $73,468 $119,898 HARBOR BLVD 077208-088103 80 0.66 8 R 10 1 $5,000 $43,576 $71,115 HARBOR BLVD 088103-077202 125 0.69 8 R 10 1 $5,000 $62,763 $102,427 HARBOR BLVD $13,865,611 Revised Model 15 Grand Plaza and New Criteria.xls Page 1 of 2 12/22/2010 ---PAGE BREAK--- Combined Central Anaheim Area Master Plan of Sanitary Sewers RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS ADDITIONAL BUILD-OUT CONDITION SEWER NEEDS DUE TO THE UPDATED ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN AND CONVENTION CENTER EXPANSION (AUGUST 2009) AND THE ADDITIONAL ACC GRAND PLAZA INSIDE MODEL 15 (DECEMBER 2010) PER THE NEW d/D CRITERIA FOR NEW PIPE CONSTRUCTION Model No. Upstream - Manhole Pipe Length (ft) Existing Pipe Capacity (d/D)1 Existing Diameter (in) Parallel/ Replace No. of Manholes Cost for Manholes Estimated 2006 Cost Estimated 2010 Cost4 incl. Eng, Contract, & CM Subtotal Location Selected Diam2,3 (in) Notes: 1. See below for the City's NEW criteria of max d/D for pipe construction. 2. Selected Diameter is not recommended by sewer modeling, but based on the City's criteria of recommending pipe improvements: Recommend pipe replacement instead of parallel system for existing small diameter 10", and 12") pipes. Either recommend pipe replacement or parallel system for existing 15" diameter pipes, on a case-by-case basis. Generally, recommend parallel system for existing 18" diameter pipes and larger. For pipe diameter 12" and larger, only downsizing by ONE pipe size is allowed. For pipe diameters 8" and 10", no downsizing is allowed. For gaps in the sewer design requirements when there is no sewer need in the sewer section being considered, but there is a sewer need on either or both sides of the sewer section, criteria through applies. Replace all 6" diameter pipes with 8" or larger 3. Selected Diameter is larger than the diameter recommended by the sewer modeling based on the following assumption: Maintain continuity of pipe diameter to match upstream and pipe diameters. Increase pipe diameter to provide better transition between upstream and pipe diameters. 4. 2010 Cost based on 3% escalation per year from 2006 to 2010. 15 077202-077201 161 1.00 8 R 12 2 $10,000 $92,600 $151,121 HARBOR BLVD (Increased Diameter) $151,121 TOTAL 14,248 $14,016,732 Engineering costs 8% - City of Anaheim's criteria of max d/D are as follows: Construction Mgmt (75% of Eng.) 7% 0.50 = d/D for pipe with diameters less than or equal to 12 in d = Depth of flow (in) 0.60 = d/D for pipe with diameters greater than 12 in D = Diameter of the pipe (in) Revised Model 15 Grand Plaza and New Criteria.xls Page 2 of 2 12/22/2010 ---PAGE BREAK--- TECHMEMO_ACC GRAND PLAZA_12-21-10.DOC 4 Attachment 2 August 2009 Technical Memorandum for the Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (ARSP) ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- TECHMEMO_AMENDMENT ARSP_AUGUST2009.DOC 1 T E C H N I C A L M E M O R A N D U M Combined Central Anaheim Area Master Plan of Sanitary Sewers – Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan PREPARED FOR: Khanh Chu/City of Anaheim Ted White/City of Anaheim PREPARED BY: CH2M HILL DATE: August 2009 Introduction CH2M HILL has been retained by the City of Anaheim to analyze the build-out condition modeling of the Combined Central Anaheim Area Master Plan of Sanitary Sewers (CCAAMPSS1) for the Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (the “Proposed Project”). The Initial Study for the Proposed Project describes the Proposed Project involving two components: the build-out of development within the Commercial Recreation (C-R) District; and an increase in the maximum permitted development in the Public Recreational (PR) District to provide for the expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center. The build-out of development within the C-R District consists of increase in hotel rooms based on hotel room equivalents as follows: Increase in Hotel Rooms District (Development Area) Existing Hotel Rooms Existing Hotel Room Equivalents Build-out Hotel Rooms Increase in Hotel Rooms (from Hotel Room Equivalents) C-R (DA1) 10,888 11,587 32,500 20,913 PR (DA2) 1,600 1,600 2,500 900 Total 12,488 13,187 35,000 21,813 From the Initial Study of the Proposed Project, existing commercial uses within the C-R District are converted into hotel room equivalents to establish a baseline from which to measure the increase in hotel rooms and to accurately gauge the amount of growth anticipated. The increase in the maximum permitted development in the PR District to provide for the expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center also consists of increase in hotel rooms as shown above, plus other additional components as listed below: 1 The CCAAMPSS evaluates the sewer system within the Central City of Anaheim generally located east of Euclid Street and west of the Santa Ana River. The CCAAMPSS identifies sewer system improvements for the existing and build-out land-use conditions. The CCAAMPSS was adopted in December 2006 by the City Resolution No. 2006-255. An addendum to the CCAAMPSS was completed in May 2007 to update the analysis of alternative sewer alignments and the total cost of build-out condition sewer improvements. ---PAGE BREAK--- TECHMEMO_AMENDMENT ARSP_AUGUST2009.DOC 2 Convention Center Development: • 406,359 square feet (sf) of Convention Center space (including exhibit halls, ballrooms, flexible meeting space, office and meeting rooms, and an interior bridge/skyway) and • 125,000 sf of commercial space (including, but not limited to, retail stores and restaurants) Hotel Development: • 40,000 sf of meeting and ballroom space • 55,000 sf of commercial space (including retail stores, spa facilities, bars and and restaurants) This would increase the maximum permitted development in the PR District to a total of 2,158,363 square feet of Convention Center/meeting space, 2,500 hotel rooms, and 180,000 square feet of commercial space. This technical memorandum summarizes the results of the modeling and outlines the sewer improvements that are recommended to accommodate the build-out of the Proposed Project. Analysis Per the project information provided by the City and shown in Attachment 1, the parcels affected by the Proposed Project are located within the build-out condition Models 1, 13, 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 22, 40, and 51 of the CCAAMPSS. Attachment 1 details the breakdown and distribution of the increase in hotel rooms associated with the Proposed Project. Using the maximum build-out data, as shown in Attachment 1, the ten models described above were reanalyzed following the sanitary flow modeling methodology2 of the CCAAMPSS. All of the updated parcels due to the Proposed Project were grouped within the corresponding model and analyzed collectively in the model. Since the completion of the CCAAMPSS, build-out sewer improvements recommended in the CCAAMPSS have been constructed in Models 13, 21, 40, and 51. The improved sewer systems for Models 13, 21, 40, and 51 were used in the modeling for the Proposed Project. The proposed development intensities for the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project (DSEIR No. 339) were incorporated into Model 15 to obtain the cumulative impact to Model 15 from the proposed development intensities for the Revised Platinum Triangle and the build-out of the Proposed Project. Through discussions with the City, this study used for the PR District the water demand/generation rates as shown in Table 1 below, with the exception of using the demand rate of 350 gallons per 1,000 square foot for the sub-categories of “meeting rooms/office, exhibit hall, ballrooms, and bridge/skyway.” 2 The sanitary flow modeling methodology of the CCAAMPSS is based on using diurnal curves, rather than using the traditional peaking factor method. Overall, the diurnal curve method better represent the pattern of sanitary wastewater flows generated by a type of land use over a 24-hour period. Additional details can found in the CCAAMPSS. ---PAGE BREAK--- TECHMEMO_AMENDMENT ARSP_AUGUST2009.DOC 3 Source: Water Demands for the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Convention Center Expansion Water Supply Assessment – Draft Technical Memorandum, Psomas, December 10, 2008. It was determined that 80 percent of the water demand rate was appropriate for the sewer rate in the remodeling for the Proposed Project. This percentage is typical in the industry of determining equivalent sewer flow rate based on water demand rate. Results Existing and build-out conditions sewer improvements that were recommended within the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan per the CCAAMPSS are detailed in Attachment 2. Attachment 3 details the sewer improvements that are recommended to accommodate build-out of the Proposed Project. A total of 19,962 linear feet of sewer pipe are recommended to be upsized to accommodate the Proposed Project in Models 1, 13, 15, 16, and 40. There are no new improvements proposed for Models 17, 20, 21, 22, and 51 due to the Proposed Project. Details of the recommended sewer improvements are summarized in the following sections. A map of ---PAGE BREAK--- TECHMEMO_AMENDMENT ARSP_AUGUST2009.DOC 4 the recommended sewer improvements to accommodate build-out of the Proposed Project is included in Attachment 3. Model 1 1,085 linear feet of sewer pipe is recommended for replacement in Model 1 within the C-R District, along Hampstead Street, Pepperwood, and an alley, to accommodate build-out of the Proposed Project. The existing sewers range are 8-inch to 10-inch in diameter and are recommended for replacement with 12-inch diameter sewers. Model 13 6,310 linear feet of sewer pipe is recommended for replacement in Model 13 within the C-R District, along Orangewood Avenue , Jacalene Lane, and an easement, to accommodate build- out of the Proposed Project. The existing sewers are 8-inch to 18-inch in diameter and are recommended to be upsized with 10-inch to 27-inch diameter sewers. Model 15 8,095 linear feet of sewer pipe are recommended for replacement in Model 15, within the C-R and PR Districts, along Haster Street, Katella Avenue, Clementine Street, and Harbor Boulevard, to accommodate build-out of the Proposed Project. The existing sewers range from 8-inch to 24-inch in diameter and are recommended for replacement with 10-inch to 30-inch diameter sewers. 1,064 linear feet of sewer pipe is recommended for replacement in Model 15, along Howell Avenue, to accommodate build-out of the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project. The existing sewers are 8-inch in diameter and are recommended for replacement with 10-inch diameter sewers. These improvements do not create cumulative impacts to the 8,095 linear feet of sewer pipe improvements located west of the I-5 freeway. Model 16 917 linear feet of sewer pipe is recommended for replacement in Model 16, along Disneyland Drive, within the Disneyland Resort to accommodate build-out of the Proposed Project. The existing sewers are 10-inch in diameter and are recommended for replacement with 12-inch diameter sewers. Model 40 2,266 linear feet of sewer pipe is recommended for replacement in Model 40 within the C-R District, along Wilken Way, Harbor Boulevard, and Chapman Avenue, to accommodate build- out of the Proposed Project. The existing sewers are 12-inch to 15-inch in diameter and are recommended for replacement with 21-inch diameter sewers. Conclusion The build-out of development within the C-R District and the increase of maximum permitted development in the PR District to provide for the expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center ---PAGE BREAK--- TECHMEMO_AMENDMENT ARSP_AUGUST2009.DOC 5 have resulted in additional build-out sewer improvements and/or increased pipe diameters for Models 1, 13, 15, 16, and 40 in the CCAAMPSS. There are no new sewer improvements in Models 17, 20, 21, 22, and 51 due to the Proposed Project. A total of 19,962 linear feet of sewer improvements are recommended for replacement to accommodate full build-out of the Proposed Project in Models 1, 13, 15, 16, and 40. Details and the map of the recommended build-out sewer improvements due to the Proposed Project are provided in Attachment 3. Following a sewer study is typically the design level. At this level, the recommended sewer improvements described herein can be prioritized, analyzed using information specific for that project, and implemented for construction. ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- TECHMEMO_AMENDMENT ARSP_AUGUST2009.DOC Attachment 1 Project Information of the Parcels Affected by the Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- BUILDOUT MAXIMUM HOTEL ROOMS FOR THE C-R AND PR DISTRICTS SPECIFIC PLAN - CR/PR APN Primary Use Max. Rms/ Acre Analysis Acres BUILDOUT Max. # of Rooms Sewer Basin CR 03624102 Motel 50 1.29 75 20 CR 03624108 Gas Station 50 .37 75 20 CR 03624109 Hotel 50 1.88 94 20 244.00 CR 03610212 Office building 50 3.78 189 21 CR 03624213 50 1.64 82 21 CR 03624214 Hotel 50 6.03 301 21 CR 03624311 Motel 50 1.46 75 22 CR 03624312 50 0.65 75 22 CR 03624313 50 0.73 75 21 797 CR 12928104 Gas Station 50 0.51 75 1 CR 12928106 Retail Sales 50 2.01 100 1 CR 12928107 Hotel 50 5.80 442 1 617 CR 12929106 Vacant 50 0.52 75 21 CR 12929107 Motel 50 0.43 75 21 150 CR 12944117 Hotel 50 4.48 489 15 CR 12944118 50 0.67 75 16 4,139 1 MARCH 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- BUILDOUT MAXIMUM HOTEL ROOMS FOR THE C-R AND PR DISTRICTS SPECIFIC PLAN - CR/PR APN Primary Use Max. Rms/ Acre Analysis Acres BUILDOUT Max. # of Rooms Sewer Basin CR 09025115 Commercial Center 75 1.01 75 15 CR 09025121 Motel 75 1.98 148 15 CR 09025122 Restaurant 75 .47 75 15 CR 09025212 Motel 75 1.14 85 15 CR 09025221 Motel 75 .72 75 15 CR 09025222 Motel 75 1.21 90 15 CR 09025223 Motel 75 3.47 280 15 CR 09025224 Restaurant 75 .57 75 15 903 CR 08211201 Motel 50 0.51 75 21 CR 08211202 Restaurant 50 .48 75 21 CR 08211203 50 .9 75 22 CR 08211204 Motel 50 .66 75 21 CR 08211205 Motel 50 .51 75 21 375 CR 13701113 125 0.49 75 15 CR 13701114 125 0.44 75 15 CR 13701115 Motel 125 0.49 75 15 CR 13701119 Restaurant 125 0.50 75 15 CR 13701120 Motel 125 6.54 817 15 1,117 PR 13701107 Convention Center 0 9.26 15 PR 13702102 Convention Center 0 9.56 13 PR 13702105 Convention Center 0 8.27 13 PR 13703108 Convention Center 0 15.69 13 PR 13715101 Convention Center 0 0.83 13 PR 13715104 Conv Ctr Expansion 125 9.10 900 15 PR 13715105 Anaheim Hilton Hotel 125 8.50 1,600 15 2,500 CR 13716108 Hotel 125 11.02 1,377 13 CR 13716111 Gas Station 125 0.64 80 15 CR 13716113 Hotel 125 3.35 418 15 CR 13716114 Hotel 125 1.53 191 15 15.96 2,066.00 2 MARCH 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- BUILDOUT MAXIMUM HOTEL ROOMS FOR THE C-R AND PR DISTRICTS SPECIFIC PLAN - CR/PR APN Primary Use Max. Rms/ Acre Analysis Acres BUILDOUT Max. # of Rooms Sewer Basin CR 13703110 125 3.38 422 13 CR 13714110 Marriott Hotel 125 10.36 1,295 13 13.74 1,717.00 CR 13713239 Hotel 125 5.52 690 13 CR 13713240 Hotel 125 2.41 301 13 CR 13713241 Restaurant 125 1.10 137 13 CR 13714113 Vacant 125 0.39 75 13 CR 13714114 125 1.32 165 13 CR 13714115 Motel 125 1.57 196 15 CR 13714116 Hotel 125 3.39 423 15 1,987 CR 25104106 Motel 50 0.53 75 22 CR 25104107 Retail 50 0.29 75 22 CR 25104108 Restaurant 50 0.42 75 21 CR 25104111 50 4.76 238 21 CR 25104112 Restaurant 50 1.17 75 21 CR 25104116 Motel 50 1.23 93 21 CR 25104120 Gas Station 50 0.45 75 21 CR 25104121 Motel 50 1.24 82 21 CR 25104124 Motel 50 0.80 75 21 863 CR 08211105 Hotel 75 4.88 366 21 CR 25104208 School 50 0.94 75 21 CR 25104209 Vacant 50 0.26 75 21 CR 25104210 Vacant 50 0.06 75 21 CR 25104211 Retail Sales 50 0.33 75 21 CR 25105139 School 50 10.95 547 21 CR 25106116 RV Park 50 9.03 451 21 1,298 CR 08217042 Fast Food 75 1.39 104 15 CR 08217055 Hotel 75 4.38 467 15 CR 08217056 Restaurant/Parking 75 3.48 261 15 CR 08241017 Hotel 75 5.74 430 15 3 MARCH 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- BUILDOUT MAXIMUM HOTEL ROOMS FOR THE C-R AND PR DISTRICTS SPECIFIC PLAN - CR/PR APN Primary Use Max. Rms/ Acre Analysis Acres BUILDOUT Max. # of Rooms Sewer Basin 1,262 CR 08221108 Hotel (partial) 75 1.09 81 15 CR 08221109 Hotel (partial) 75 2.41 180 15 CR 08221110 Hotel 75 1.20 90 15 CR 08221111 Restaurant 75 .62 75 15 CR 08221113 Hotel 75 0.63 75 15 CR 08221114 Hotel 75 1.20 90 15 CR 08221115 Hotel 75 1.68 126 15 CR 08221116 Restaurant 75 .67 75 15 CR 08221117 Hotel 75 2.33 174 15 CR 08221118 Hotel 75 2.35 176 15 CR 08221119 Hotel 75 1.21 128 15 CR 08221120 Hotel 75 1.35 121 15 1,391 CR 08221204 Vacant 75 0.34 75 15 CR 08217035 Hotel 75 2.94 220 15 CR 08217039 Vacant/Remnant 75 0.10 75 15 CR 08217041 Office 75 2.13 159 15 CR 08221101 Office/Manufacturing 75 13.81 1,035 15 CR 08221102 Office/Manufacturing 75 4.37 327 15 1,891 CR 08227102 Hotel 75 2.84 213 15 CR 08227103 Hotel 75 0.87 75 15 CR 08227104 Hotel 75 .71 99 15 CR 08227105 Hotel 75 1.04 78 15 CR 08227106 Shopping Center 75 1.17 87 15 CR 08227107 Vacant 75 2.21 165 15 CR 08227108 Hotel 75 2.22 202 15 919 CR 08227201 Hotel 100 7.19 719 15 CR 08227204 Hotel 100 3.16 316 15 CR 08227205 Right of Way 100 0.02 75 15 CR 08243117 Rental Car 100 .33 75 15 CR 08243118 Rental Car 100 .29 75 15 CR 08243119 Rental Car 100 .63 75 15 4 MARCH 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- BUILDOUT MAXIMUM HOTEL ROOMS FOR THE C-R AND PR DISTRICTS SPECIFIC PLAN - CR/PR APN Primary Use Max. Rms/ Acre Analysis Acres BUILDOUT Max. # of Rooms Sewer Basin CR 08243123 Cleaners 100 0.71 75 15 CR 08243201 Industrial Use 100 0.85 85 15 CR 08243214 Retail Sales 100 .87 87 15 CR 08243215 Small Shops 100 0.15 75 15 CR 08243218 Small Shops 100 .3 75 15 CR 08243222 Industrial Use 100 1.29 129 15 CR 08243223 Auto Repair 100 0.24 75 15 2,905 CR 08223072 Restaurant 100 1.3 130 15 CR 08223073 Vacant/Parking 100 0.55 75 15 CR 08223077 Commercial 100 5.2 520 15 725 CR 13717125 Restaurant 75 .64 75 15 CR 13717126 75 2.03 152 15 CR 13717127 Hotel 75 0.88 75 13 CR 13718111 75 0.58 75 13 CR 13718114 75 1.08 81 13 458 CR 13717119 Vacant 75 0.03 75 15 CR 13717123 Hotel 75 .31 75 15 CR 13717124 Hotel 75 1.4 125 15 CR 13717128 Hotel 75 0.35 75 15 CR 13717129 Hotel 75 .71 127 15 CR 13717130 Hotel 75 .61 75 15 CR 13717131 Vacant 75 .48 125 15 CR 13731113 Office 75 .35 75 15 CR 13731116 Vacant 75 .44 75 15 CR 13731118 Motel 75 1.74 130 15 * Future Expansion District allows for up to 5100 parking spaces 957 CR 13718113 Vacant 75 0.56 See note 13 CR 13718109 Vacant 75 3.46 13 CR 13718112 Parking/Vacant 75 36.33 13 CR 13729104 Vacant 75 20.08 13 * Reflects maximum build-out of Disney-owned parcels minus right of way fo 3,608 as reflected in the Third Gate Initial Study dated April 2001 5 MARCH 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- BUILDOUT MAXIMUM HOTEL ROOMS FOR THE C-R AND PR DISTRICTS SPECIFIC PLAN - CR/PR APN Primary Use Max. Rms/ Acre Analysis Acres BUILDOUT Max. # of Rooms Sewer Basin CR 13711214 50 0.46 75 40 CR 13711215 50 0.35 75 40 CR 13711216 50 0.28 75 40 CR 13711310 50 1.97 128 40 CR 13711311 50 0.61 75 40 CR 13712409 50 0.65 75 40 CR 13712410 50 0.68 94 40 CR 13712414 50 0.53 75 40 CR 13712423 50 0.54 75 40 CR 13712427 50 0.71 75 40 CR 13712429 50 0.99 75 40 897 CR 23303101 50 0.47 75 40 CR 23303102 50 0.18 75 40 CR 23303103 50 0.92 75 40 CR 23303106 50 0.49 75 40 CR 23303107 50 0.10 75 40 CR 23303112 50 0.61 75 40 CR 23304101 50 0.66 75 40 CR 23304103 50 0.51 75 40 CR 23304104 50 0.16 75 40 CR 23304105 50 0.15 75 40 750 CR 23304406 50 1.09 75 40 CR 23304408 50 0.71 75 40 CR 23305103 50 1.28 75 40 CR 23305104 50 0.08 75 40 CR 23305106 50 0.32 75 40 CR 23305107 50 0.22 75 40 CR 23305108 50 4.72 236 40 CR 23306202 50 0.36 75 40 CR 23306205 50 0.74 75 40 CR 23306208 50 1.78 89 40 CR 23306209 50 2.53 126 40 CR 23306210 50 0.55 75 40 6 MARCH 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- BUILDOUT MAXIMUM HOTEL ROOMS FOR THE C-R AND PR DISTRICTS SPECIFIC PLAN - CR/PR APN Primary Use Max. Rms/ Acre Analysis Acres BUILDOUT Max. # of Rooms Sewer Basin 14 1,126 CR 13732133 Office 75 0.87 75 15 CR 13732134 Machine Shop 75 .29 75 15 CR 13732137 MPH 75 0.21 75 15 CR 13732140 MPH 75 0.25 75 15 CR 13732148 75 0.30 75 15 CR 13732152 Parking Lot 75 0.51 75 15 CR 13732161 MPH 75 0.12 75 15 CR 13732162 MPH 75 0.38 75 15 CR 13732185 MPH 75 9.11 683 13 CR 13732190 Hotel 75 2.01 150 15 CR 13732192 Hotel 75 5.00 375 15 CR 13732193 75 0.79 75 15 CR 13732194 Office/MHP 75 13.25 993 15 CR 13732195 15 * Includes a reduction of approx. 3.8 combined acres of ROW fo 32.80 2,876.00 CR 13719125 75 .66 75 13 CR 13719126 75 1.43 107 13 CR 13719127 Hotel 75 1.43 110 13 CR 13719128 Hotel 75 4.67 350 13 642 7 MARCH 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- TECHMEMO_AMENDMENT ARSP_AUGUST2009.DOC Attachment 2 1) Recommended Existing and Build-Out Sewer Improvements for the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (per CCAAMPSS December 2006), and 2) Map of Recommended Existing and Build-Out Sewer Improvements for the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Combined Central Anaheim Area Master Plan of Sanitary Sewers RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS RECOMMENDED EXISTING SEWER IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN (CCAAMPSS DECEMBER 2006) Model No. Upstream - Manhole Pipe Length (ft) Capacity (d/D)1 Existing Diameter (in) Parallel/ Replace No. of Manholes4 Estimated 2009 Cost5 incl. Eng, Contract, & CM Subtotal Location 1 066103-066130 216 1.00 8 R 10 2 $168,905 ALLEY 066108-066103 256 1.00 8 R 10 1 $187,577 ALLEY 066130-065313 28 0.63 8 R 10 1 $33,749 ALLEY $390,230 13 067318-058436 301 0.81 18 P 15 1 $280,059 ORANGEWOOD AVE 067320-067626 267 1.00 18 P 15 1 $250,325 ORANGEWOOD AVE 067322-067627 260 1.00 18 P 15 1 $244,208 ORANGEWOOD AVE 067409-067414 312 0.72 8 R 10 2 $233,820 JACALENE LN 067414-067416 305 0.63 8 R 10 1 $221,217 JACALENE LN 067416-067421 200 0.60 8 R 10 1 $149,710 JACALENE LN 067421-067420 23 0.18 8 R 10 1 $30,881 JACALENE LN 067420-067629 276 1.00 18 P 15 1 $258,320 ORANGEWOOD AVE 067422-067420 295 1.00 18 P 15 1 $275,031 ORANGEWOOD AVE 067624-067628 263 1.00 18 P 15 1 $246,813 ORANGEWOOD AVE 067626-067318 13 0.48 18 P 15 1 $26,135 ORANGEWOOD AVE 067627-067320 28 0.60 18 P 15 1 $39,596 ORANGEWOOD AVE 067628-067322 24 0.60 18 P 15 1 $35,993 ORANGEWOOD AVE 067629-067624 26 1.00 18 P 15 1 $37,878 ORANGEWOOD AVE $2,329,985 40 089122-089121 360 1.00 12 R 15 2 $351,273 WILKEN WAY 089121-089120 364 1.00 12 R 15 1 $346,827 WILKEN WAY 089120-089301 412 1.00 15 P 8 1 $240,755 HARBOR BLVD 089301-089302 338 1.00 15 P 8 1 $200,574 HARBOR BLVD 089302-089305 371 1.00 15 P 8 1 $218,635 HARBOR BLVD 089305-089373 118 1.00 15 P 8 1 $79,694 HARBOR BLVD 089373-089374 32 0.00 15 P 8 1 $32,595 HARBOR BLVD 089374-089378 193 1.00 15 P 8 1 $120,905 HARBOR BLVD 089378-089308 21 1.00 10 P 15 1 $33,951 HARBOR BLVD 089308-END 57 1.00 12 R 15 1 $66,619 CHAPMAN AVE $1,691,828 TOTAL 5,358 $4,412,043 Engineering costs 8% - City of Anaheim's capacity criteria of max d/D are as follows: Construction Mgmt (75% of Eng.) 7% 0.67 = d/D for pipe with diameters less than 12 in d = Depth of flow (in) 0.75 = d/D for pipe with diameters equal or greater than 12 in D = Diameter of the pipe (in) - City of Anaheim's design criteria of max d/D are as follows: 0.50 = d/D for pipe with diameters less than or equal to 12 in 0.60 = d/D for pipe with diameters greater than 12 in Selected Diam2,3 (in) Notes: 1. Capacity as a result of the Proposed Project. See below for the City's criteria of max d/D. 2. Selected Diameter is not recommended by sewer modeling, but based on the City's criteria of recommending pipe improvements: Recommend pipe replacement instead of parallel system for existing small diameter 10", and 12") pipes. Either recommend pipe replacement or parallel system for existing 15" diameter pipes, on a case-by-case basis. Generally, recommend parallel system for existing 18" diameter pipes and larger. For pipe diameter 12" and larger, only downsizing by ONE pipe size is allowed. For pipe diameters 8" and 10", no downsizing is allowed. For gaps in the sewer design requirements when there is no sewer need in the sewer section being considered, but there is a sewer need on either or both sides of the sewer section, criteria through applies. Replace all 6" diameter pipes with 8" or larger 3. Selected Diameter is larger than the diameter recommended by the sewer modeling based on the following assumption: Maintain continuity of pipe diameter to match upstream and pipe diameters. Increase pipe diameter to provide better transition between upstream and pipe diameters. 4. Unit cost of manholes is $5,000/manhole. 5. Estimated 2009 Cost based on 3% escalation per year from 2006 to 2009. Existing Improvements ARSP Original Conditions_AUG2009.xls Page 1 of 1 AUGUST 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- Combined Central Anaheim Area Master Plan of Sanitary Sewers RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS RECOMMENDED BUILD-OUT SEWER IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN (CCAAMPSS DECEMBER 2006) Model No. Upstream - Manhole Pipe Length (ft) Capacity (d/D)1 Existing Diameter (in) Parallel/ Replace No. of Manholes4 Estimated 2009 Cost5 incl. Eng, Contract, & CM Subtotal Location 1 066103-066130 216 1.00 8 R 10 2 $168,905 ALLEY 066108-066103 256 1.00 8 R 12 1 $211,876 ALLEY 066130-065313 28 0.63 8 R 12 1 $36,383 ALLEY $417,163 13 067318-058436 301 0.81 18 R 21 1 $375,385 ORANGEWOOD AVE 067320-067626 267 1.00 18 R 21 1 $334,955 ORANGEWOOD AVE 067322-067627 260 1.00 18 P 21 1 $318,396 ORANGEWOOD AVE 067409-067414 312 0.72 8 R 10 2 $233,820 JACALENE LN 067414-067416 305 0.63 8 R 10 1 $221,217 JACALENE LN 067416-067421 200 0.60 8 R 10 1 $149,710 JACALENE LN 067421-067420 23 0.18 8 R 10 1 $30,881 JACALENE LN 067420-067629 276 1.00 18 P 15 1 $258,320 ORANGEWOOD AVE 067422-067420 295 1.00 18 P 15 1 $275,031 ORANGEWOOD AVE 067424-067422 286 1.00 18 P 15 1 $266,939 ORANGEWOOD AVE 067426-067424 298 1.00 18 P 15 2 $285,402 ORANGEWOOD AVE 067624-067628 263 1.00 18 P 18 1 $288,497 ORANGEWOOD AVE 067626-067318 13 0.48 18 P 21 1 $29,723 ORANGEWOOD AVE 067627-067320 28 0.60 18 P 21 1 $47,541 ORANGEWOOD AVE 067628-067322 24 0.60 18 P 18 1 $39,759 ORANGEWOOD AVE 067629-067624 26 1.00 18 P 15 1 $37,878 ORANGEWOOD AVE 077332-077335 120 0.81 8 R 10 2 $103,710 EASEMENT 077335-067429 134 0.62 15 R 18 1 $158,525 ORANGEWOOD AVE 077337-077335 342 0.72 15 R 18 1 $380,830 ORANGEWOOD AVE 077339-077337 359 0.74 15 R 18 1 $399,574 ORANGEWOOD AVE 077341-077339 343 0.80 15 R 18 2 $390,627 ORANGEWOOD AVE $4,626,718 15 077202-077201 160.7 0.75 8 R 10 2 $131,443 HARBOR BLVD $131,443 40 089122-089121 360 1.00 12 R 15 2 $351,273 WILKEN WAY 089121-089120 364 1.00 12 R 15 1 $346,827 WILKEN WAY 089120-089301 412 1.00 15 P 15 1 $377,742 HARBOR BLVD 089301-089302 338 1.00 15 P 15 1 $313,174 HARBOR BLVD 089302-089305 371 1.00 15 P 15 1 $342,196 HARBOR BLVD 089305-089373 118 1.00 15 P 15 1 $118,927 HARBOR BLVD 089373-089374 32 0.00 15 P 15 1 $43,243 HARBOR BLVD 089374-089378 193 1.00 15 P 15 1 $185,151 HARBOR BLVD 089378-089308 21 1.00 10 P 18 1 $37,350 HARBOR BLVD 089308-END 57 1.00 12 R 18 1 $75,571 CHAPMAN AVE $2,191,455 TOTAL 7,400 $7,366,780 Engineering costs 8% - City of Anaheim's capacity criteria of max d/D are as follows: Construction Mgmt (75% of Eng.) 7% 0.67 = d/D for pipe with diameters less than 12 in d = Depth of flow (in) 0.75 = d/D for pipe with diameters equal or greater than 12 in D = Diameter of the pipe (in) - City of Anaheim's design criteria of max d/D are as follows: 0.50 = d/D for pipe with diameters less than or equal to 12 in 0.60 = d/D for pipe with diameters greater than 12 in Selected Diam2,3 (in) Notes: 1. Capacity as a result of the Proposed Project. See below for the City's criteria of max d/D. 2. Selected Diameter is not recommended by sewer modeling, but based on the City's criteria of recommending pipe improvements: Recommend pipe replacement instead of parallel system for existing small diameter 10", and 12") pipes. Either recommend pipe replacement or parallel system for existing 15" diameter pipes, on a case-by-case basis. Generally, recommend parallel system for existing 18" diameter pipes and larger. For pipe diameter 12" and larger, only downsizing by ONE pipe size is allowed. For pipe diameters 8" and 10", no downsizing is allowed. For gaps in the sewer design requirements when there is no sewer need in the sewer section being considered, but there is a sewer need on either or both sides of the sewer section, criteria through applies. Replace all 6" diameter pipes with 8" or larger 3. Selected Diameter is larger than the diameter recommended by the sewer modeling based on the following assumption: Maintain continuity of pipe diameter to match upstream and pipe diameters. Increase pipe diameter to provide better transition between upstream and pipe diameters. 4. Unit cost of manholes is $5,000/manhole. 5. Estimated 2009 Cost based on 3% escalation per year from 2006 to 2009. Build-Out Improvements ARSP Original Conditions_AUG2009.xls Page 1 of 1 AUGUST 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- 15 21 13 1 22 40 17 16 51 21 21 20 20 21 22 INTERSTATE HWY 5 * * * DISNEYLAND DR LEWIS ST HASTER ST THE CITY DR HARBOR BLVD CHAPMAN AVE KATELLA AVE STATE COLLEGE BLVD WEST ST HOWELL AVE ORANGEWOOD AVE CHAPMAN AVE STATE COLLEGE BLVD BALL RD WALNUT ST NINTH ST CERRITOS AVE Exhibit 1 Recommended Existing Sewer Improvements for the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan LEGEND Manhole Sewer Lines Existing Sewer Improvements 8 Inches 10 Inches 15 Inches OCSD Trunk Sewer Central Sewer Study Area Anaheim City Limits Models Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Combined Central Anaheim Area Master Plan of Sanitary Sewers 1 inch equals 1300 feet 0 650 1,300 Feet Notes: * - Existing sewer improvements outside Anaheim city limits August 2009 SCO \\GALT\PROJ\CITYOFANAHEIM\360985\MAPFILES\11X17_ANAHEIMRESORTEXISTING_V1.MXD RANHORN 8/28/2009 13:10:41 15 ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- 15 21 13 1 22 40 17 16 51 21 21 20 20 21 22 INTERSTATE HWY 5 * * * DISNEYLAND DR LEWIS ST HASTER ST THE CITY DR HARBOR BLVD CHAPMAN AVE KATELLA AVE STATE COLLEGE BLVD WEST ST HOWELL AVE ORANGEWOOD AVE CHAPMAN AVE STATE COLLEGE BLVD BALL RD WALNUT ST NINTH ST CERRITOS AVE Exhibit 2 Recommended Build Out Sewer Improvements for the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan LEGEND Manhole Sewer Lines Build Out Sewer Improvements 10 Inches 12 Inches 15 Inches 18 Inches 21 Inches OCSD Trunk Sewer Central Sewer Study Area Anaheim City Limits Models Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Combined Central Anaheim Area Master Plan of Sanitary Sewers 1 inch equals 1300 feet 0 650 1,300 Feet Notes: * - Build out sewer improvements outside Anaheim city limits August 2009 SCO \\GALT\PROJ\CITYOFANAHEIM\360985\MAPFILES\11X17_ANAHEIMRESORTORIGINAL_V1.MXD RANHORN 8/28/2009 13:12:14 15 ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- TECHMEMO_AMENDMENT ARSP_AUGUST2009.DOC Attachment 3 1) Recommended Build-Out Sewer Improvements for the Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan, and 2) Map of Recommended Build-Out Sewer Improvements for the Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Combined Central Anaheim Area Master Plan of Sanitary Sewers RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS RECOMMENDED BUILD-OUT SEWER IMPROVEMENTS FOR ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN DUE TO AMENDMENT TO THE ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN Model No. Upstream - Manhole Pipe Length (ft) Capacity (d/D)1 Existing Diameter (in) Parallel/ Replace No. of Manholes4 Estimated 2009 Cost5 incl. Eng, Contract, & CM Subtotal Location 1 066103-066130 216 1.00 8 R 10 2 $168,905 ALLEY 066108-066103 256 1.00 8 R 12 1 $211,876 ALLEY 066130-065313 28 0.63 8 R 12 1 $36,383 ALLEY 065118-065123 290 0.75 8 R 12 2 $246,288 S HAMPSTEAD ST 065123-065129 295 0.78 8 R 12 1 $242,216 S HAMPSTEAD ST 065308-065309 226 0.70 10 R 12 2 $197,005 PEPPERWOOD $1,102,671 13 088306-077416 100 1.00 15 R 18 1 $122,161 ORANGEWOOD AVE 077416-077413 377 1.00 15 R 18 1 $418,854 ORANGEWOOD AVE 077413-077411 385 1.00 15 R 18 1 $427,422 ORANGEWOOD AVE 077411-077410 378 1.00 15 R 18 1 $419,925 ORANGEWOOD AVE 077410-077341 289 0.83 15 R 18 1 $324,598 ORANGEWOOD AVE 077341-077339 343 0.80 15 R 18 1 $382,705 ORANGEWOOD AVE 077339-077337 359 1.00 15 R 18 1 $399,574 ORANGEWOOD AVE 077337-077335 342 1.00 15 R 18 1 $381,365 ORANGEWOOD AVE 077332-077335 120 0.81 8 R 10 1 $95,787 EASEMENT 077335-067429 134 0.74 15 R 18 1 $158,579 ORANGEWOOD AVE 067429-067426 305 0.80 18 R 21 1 $380,396 ORANGEWOOD AVE 067426-067424 298 1.00 18 P 18 1 $324,794 ORANGEWOOD AVE 067424-067422 286 1.00 18 P 18 1 $312,321 ORANGEWOOD AVE 067422-067420 295 1.00 18 P 18 1 $321,676 ORANGEWOOD AVE 067420-067629 276 1.00 18 P 18 1 $301,927 ORANGEWOOD AVE 067629-067624 26 1.00 18 P 18 1 $42,077 ORANGEWOOD AVE 067624-067628 263 1.00 18 P 21 1 $321,752 ORANGEWOOD AVE 067628-067322 24 0.68 18 P 21 1 $43,040 ORANGEWOOD AVE 067322-067627 260 1.00 18 P 24 1 $355,330 ORANGEWOOD AVE 067627-067320 28 0.68 18 P 24 1 $51,698 ORANGEWOOD AVE 067320-067626 267 1.00 18 R 27 1 $411,026 ORANGEWOOD AVE 067626-067318 13 0.53 18 P 24 1 $32,066 ORANGEWOOD AVE 067318-058436 301 1.00 18 R 24 1 $418,527 ORANGEWOOD AVE 067409-067414 312 0.72 8 R 10 2 $233,820 JACALENE LN 067414-067416 305 0.63 8 R 10 1 $221,217 JACALENE LN 067416-067421 200 0.60 8 R 10 1 $149,710 JACALENE LN 067421-067420 23 0.18 8 R 10 1 $30,881 JACALENE LN $7,083,228 15 107111-107110 358 0.73 8 R 10 2 $264,617 HOWELL AVE 107110-107109 342 0.74 8 R 10 1 $245,895 HOWELL AVE 107109-107108 364 0.65 8 R 10 1 $260,744 HOWELL AVE 088204-088203 176 0.75 8 R 10 2 $141,771 HASTER ST 088203-088202 174 0.87 8 R 10 1 $132,498 HASTER ST 088202-088201 351 1.00 8 R 10 1 $251,969 HASTER ST 088201-097310 302 1.00 8 R 10 1 $218,896 HASTER ST 097311-097310 312 0.84 21 R 24 1 $433,272 KATELLA AVE 087218-087401 196 0.76 12 R 15 2 $201,853 CLEMENTINE ST 087401-087402 413 0.82 12 R 15 1 $391,975 CLEMENTINE ST 087402-087406 386 0.81 12 R 15 1 $367,334 CLEMENTINE ST 087406-087410 396 0.86 12 R 15 1 $376,460 CLEMENTINE ST 087415-087414 147 0.77 21 R 24 2 $220,020 KATELLA AVE 087414-087413 103 0.83 21 R 24 1 $153,118 KATELLA AVE 087413-087317 329 0.85 21 R 24 1 $456,060 KATELLA AVE 087317-087315 125 0.88 21 R 24 1 $182,608 KATELLA AVE 087315-087318 93 0.83 21 R 24 1 $139,714 KATELLA AVE 087318-087313 115 1.00 21 R 24 1 $169,204 KATELLA AVE Selected Diam2,3 (in) Notes: 1. Capacity as a result of the Proposed Project. See below for the City's criteria of max d/D. 2. Selected Diameter is not recommended by sewer modeling, but based on the City's criteria of recommending pipe improvements: Recommend pipe replacement instead of parallel system for existing small diameter 10", and 12") pipes. Either recommend pipe replacement or parallel system for existing 15" diameter pipes, on a case-by-case basis. Generally, recommend parallel system for existing 18" diameter pipes and larger. For pipe diameter 12" and larger, only downsizing by ONE pipe size is allowed. For pipe diameters 8" and 10", no downsizing is allowed. For gaps in the sewer design requirements when there is no sewer need in the sewer section being considered, but there is a sewer need on either or both sides of the sewer section, criteria through applies. Replace all 6" diameter pipes with 8" or larger 3. Selected Diameter is larger than the diameter recommended by the sewer modeling based on the following assumption: Maintain continuity of pipe diameter to match upstream and pipe diameters. Increase pipe diameter to provide better transition between upstream and pipe diameters. 4. Unit cost of manholes is $5,000/manhole. 5. Estimated 2009 Cost based on 3% escalation per year from 2006 to 2009. Revised BO Imprv due to Amendment to ARSP_AUG2009_.xls Page 1 of 2 AUGUST 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- Combined Central Anaheim Area Master Plan of Sanitary Sewers RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS RECOMMENDED BUILD-OUT SEWER IMPROVEMENTS FOR ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN DUE TO AMENDMENT TO THE ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN Model No. Upstream - Manhole Pipe Length (ft) Capacity (d/D)1 Existing Diameter (in) Parallel/ Replace No. of Manholes4 Estimated 2009 Cost5 incl. Eng, Contract, & CM Subtotal Location Selected Diam2,3 (in) Notes: 1. Capacity as a result of the Proposed Project. See below for the City's criteria of max d/D. 2. Selected Diameter is not recommended by sewer modeling, but based on the City's criteria of recommending pipe improvements: Recommend pipe replacement instead of parallel system for existing small diameter 10", and 12") pipes. Either recommend pipe replacement or parallel system for existing 15" diameter pipes, on a case-by-case basis. Generally, recommend parallel system for existing 18" diameter pipes and larger. For pipe diameter 12" and larger, only downsizing by ONE pipe size is allowed. For pipe diameters 8" and 10", no downsizing is allowed. For gaps in the sewer design requirements when there is no sewer need in the sewer section being considered, but there is a sewer need on either or both sides of the sewer section, criteria through applies. Replace all 6" diameter pipes with 8" or larger 3. Selected Diameter is larger than the diameter recommended by the sewer modeling based on the following assumption: Maintain continuity of pipe diameter to match upstream and pipe diameters. Increase pipe diameter to provide better transition between upstream and pipe diameters. 4. Unit cost of manholes is $5,000/manhole. 5. Estimated 2009 Cost based on 3% escalation per year from 2006 to 2009. 087313-087311 128 0.89 21 R 24 1 $186,630 KATELLA AVE 087311-087309 212 0.91 21 R 24 1 $299,227 KATELLA AVE 087309-087307 319 0.90 21 R 24 1 $442,655 KATELLA AVE 087307-076411 59 0.90 21 R 24 1 $94,139 KATELLA AVE 076411-076424 55 1.00 24 R 30 1 $92,096 KATELLA AVE 088103-077202 125 0.68 8 R 10 2 $107,347 HARBOR BLVD 077202-077201 161 1.00 8 R 10 1 $123,724 HARBOR BLVD 076408-076407 66 0.75 24 R 27 2 $120,856 KATELLA AVE 076407-076405 320 0.68 24 R 27 1 $489,628 KATELLA AVE 076405-076433 56 0.74 24 R 27 1 $98,103 KATELLA AVE 076433-076308 373 0.74 24 R 27 1 $568,230 KATELLA AVE 066417-066422 277 1.00 24 R 27 2 $433,779 KATELLA AVE 066422-066421 329 0.75 24 R 27 1 $502,975 KATELLA AVE 066421-066420 249 0.78 24 R 27 1 $384,332 KATELLA AVE 066420-066419 79 0.72 24 R 27 1 $132,213 KATELLA AVE 066419-066418 339 0.78 24 R 27 1 $517,806 KATELLA AVE 066418-066328 329 0.77 24 R 27 1 $502,975 KATELLA AVE 066328-066327 330 0.78 24 R 27 1 $504,459 KATELLA AVE 066327-066325 331 0.78 24 R 27 1 $505,942 KATELLA AVE 066325-066324 299 0.75 24 R 27 1 $458,484 KATELLA AVE 066324-057444 41 0.75 24 R 27 1 $75,857 KATELLA AVE $11,249,464 16 076103-076102 281 0.79 10 R 12 2 $239,357 DISNEYLAND DR 076102-076101 281 0.82 10 R 12 1 $231,435 DISNEYLAND DR 076101-066213 355 1.00 10 R 12 1 $288,418 DISNEYLAND DR $759,210 40 089122-089121 360 1.00 12 R 15 2 $351,273 WILKEN WAY 089121-089120 364 1.00 12 R 15 1 $346,827 WILKEN WAY 089120-089301 412 1.00 15 P 10 1 $279,894 HARBOR BLVD 089301-089302 338 1.00 15 P 12 1 $264,917 HARBOR BLVD 089302-089305 371 1.00 15 P 12 1 $289,241 HARBOR BLVD 089305-089373 118 1.00 15 P 12 1 $102,113 HARBOR BLVD 089373-089374 32 0.00 15 P 12 1 $38,680 HARBOR BLVD 089374-089378 193 1.00 15 P 12 1 $157,617 HARBOR BLVD 089378-089308 21 1.00 10 P 12 1 $30,892 HARBOR BLVD 089308-END 57 1.00 12 R 18 1 $75,571 CHAPMAN AVE $1,937,025 TOTAL 19,962 $22,131,598 Engineering costs 8% - City of Anaheim's capacity criteria of max d/D are as follows: Construction Mgmt (75% of Eng.) 7% 0.67 = d/D for pipe with diameters less than 12 in d = Depth of flow (in) 0.75 = d/D for pipe with diameters equal or greater than 12 in D = Diameter of the pipe (in) - City of Anaheim's design criteria of max d/D are as follows: 0.50 = d/D for pipe with diameters less than or equal to 12 in 0.60 = d/D for pipe with diameters greater than 12 in Revised BO Imprv due to Amendment to ARSP_AUG2009_.xls Page 2 of 2 AUGUST 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- 15 21 13 1 22 40 17 16 51 21 21 20 20 21 22 INTERSTATE HWY 5 * * * DISNEYLAND DR LEWIS ST HASTER ST THE CITY DR HARBOR BLVD CHAPMAN AVE KATELLA AVE STATE COLLEGE BLVD WEST ST HOWELL AVE ORANGEWOOD AVE CHAPMAN AVE STATE COLLEGE BLVD BALL RD WALNUT ST NINTH ST CERRITOS AVE Exhibit 3 Recommended Build Out Sewer Improvements for the Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan LEGEND Manhole Sewer Lines Build Out Sewer Improvements 10 Inches 12 Inches 15 Inches 18 Inches 21 Inches 24 Inches 27 Inches 30 Inches OCSD Trunk Sewer Central Sewer Study Area Anaheim City Limits Models Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Combined Central Anaheim Area Master Plan of Sanitary Sewers 1 inch equals 1300 feet 0 650 1,300 Feet Notes: * - Build out sewer improvements outside Anaheim city limits August 2009 SCO \\GALT\PROJ\CITYOFANAHEIM\360985\MAPFILES\11X17_ANAHEIMRESORT_V1.MXD RANHORN 8/20/2009 15:42:49 15 ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- TECHMEMO_AMENDMENT ARSP_AUGUST2009.DOC References 1. Final Initial Study for an Amendment to the Anaheim resort Specific Plan, Project Description, City of Anaheim, February 2009. 2. Combined Central Anaheim Area Master Plan of Sanitary Sewers, City of Anaheim, December 2006. 3. Draft Technical Memorandum, Water Demands for the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Convention Center Expansion Water Supply Assessment, Psomas, December 10, 2008 4. City of Anaheim General Plan, Land Use Element, May 2004. ---PAGE BREAK---