Loading...
PC 2016/04/18 City of Anaheim Planning Commission Agenda Monday, April 18, 2016 Council Chamber, City Hall 200 South Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim, California • Chairman: Michelle Lieberman • Chairman Pro-Tempore: Mitchell Caldwell • Commissioners: Paul Bostwick, Bill Dalati, Grant Henninger, Victoria Ramirez, John Seymour • Call To Order - 5:00 p.m. • Pledge Of Allegiance • Public Comments • Public Hearing Items • Commission Updates • Discussion • Adjournment For record keeping purposes, if you wish to make a statement regarding any item on the agenda, please complete a speaker card in advance and submit it to the secretary. A copy of the staff report may be obtained at the City of Anaheim Planning and Building Department, 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805. A copy of the staff report is also available on the City of Anaheim website www.anaheim.net/planning on Thursday, April 14, 2016, after 5:00 p.m. Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Planning Commission regarding any item on this agenda (other than writings legally exempt from public disclosure) will be made available for public inspection in the Planning and Building Department located at City Hall, 200 S. Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, California, during regular business hours. You may leave a message for the Planning Commission using the following e-mail address: planningcommission@anaheim.net 04/18/2016 Page 2 of 5 APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTIONS Any action taken by the Planning Commission this date regarding Reclassifications, Conditional Use Permits, Variances, Public Convenience or Necessity Determinations, Tentative Tract and Parcel Maps will be final 10 calendar days after Planning Commission action unless a timely appeal is filed during that time. This appeal shall be made in written form to the City Clerk, accompanied by an appeal fee in an amount determined by the City Clerk. The City Clerk, upon filing of said appeal in the Clerk's Office, shall set said petition for public hearing before the City Council at the earliest possible date. You will be notified by the City Clerk of said hearing. If you challenge any one of these City of Anaheim decisions in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in a written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission or City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing. Anaheim Planning Commission Agenda - 5:00 P.M. Public Comments This is an opportunity for members of the public to speak on any item under the jurisdiction of the Anaheim City Planning Commission or public comments on agenda items with the exception of public hearing items. 04/18/2016 Page 3 of 5 Public Hearing Items ITEM NO. 2 SPECIFIC PLAN ADJUSTMENT NO. 2016-00067 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05855 (DEV2016-00007) Location: 8032 East Santa Ana Canyon Road Request: For a specific plan adjustment to conditionally permit the sale of beer and wine for on-site consumption in conjunction with a multi-plex movie cinema in the “SP 90-1” Festival Specific Plan, Development Area “DA-2” (Retail Commercial & Entertainment) Zone; and a conditional use permit to permit a Type 41 (On Sale Beer & Wine – Eating Place) ABC license in conjunction with an existing multi-plex movie cinema which is located within a multi-tenant shopping center. Environmental Determination: The Planning Commission will consider whether to find the project to be Categorically Exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act and Guidelines as a Class 1 (Existing Facilities) Categorical Exemption. Motion Resolution No. ______ Project Planner: Ashley Hefner ahefner@anaheim.net ITEM NO. 3 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2016-00001 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05858 VARIANCE NO. 2016-05060 FINAL SITE PLAN NO. 2016-00001 (DEV2015-00120) Location: 1700 South Harbor Boulevard Request: To construct a 580-room, 8-story hotel with 50,000 square feet of meeting space; 25,600 square feet of restaurant space; 20,188 square feet of concierge lounge space; fewer parking spaces than required by the Code; and, a request to adopt a development agreement between the City of Anaheim and Good Hope International for the proposed hotel project. Environmental Determination: The Planning Commission will consider if an Addendum to the previously-certified Final Environmental Impact Report No. 311 (FEIR 311) and Supplemental Environmental Impact Report No. 340 (SEIR 340) is the appropriate environmental document for this project and that none of the conditions set forth in Sections 15162 or 15163 of the State CEQA Guidelines calling for the preparation of a subsequent environmental impact report or a supplement to FEIR 311 or SEIR 340 have occurred. Resolution No. ______ Project Planner: Elaine Thienprasiddhi ethien@anaheim.net 04/18/2016 Page 4 of 5 ITEM NO. 4 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2013-05678 (DEV2013-00072) Location: 1256 North Magnolia Avenue Request: To permit and retain an existing storage facility to include a temporary modular office trailer, indoor and outdoor storage of recreational and commercial vehicles, automobiles, trucks, trailers, miscellaneous equipment, and auto repair services. Environmental Determination: The Planning Commission will consider whether to find the project to be Categorically Exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act and Guidelines as a Class 1 (Existing Facilities) Categorical Exemption. Resolution No. ______ Project Planner: Nick Taylor njtaylor@anaheim.net Adjourn to Monday, May 2, 2016 at 5:00 p.m. 04/18/2016 Page 5 of 5 CERTIFICATION OF POSTING I hereby certify that a complete copy of this agenda was posted at: 1:00 p.m. April 13, 2016 (TIME) (DATE) LOCATION: COUNCIL CHAMBER DISPLAY CASE AND COUNCIL DISPLAY KIOSK SIGNED: ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION The City of Anaheim wishes to make all of its public meetings and hearings accessible to all members of the public. The City prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin in any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance. If requested, the agenda and backup materials will be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with a disability, as required by Section 202 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 12132), and the federal rules and regulations adopted in implementation thereof. Any person who requires a disability-related modification or accommodation, including auxiliary aids or services, in order to participate in the public meeting may request such modification, accommodation, aid or service by contacting the Planning and Building Department either in person at 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, California, or by telephone at (714) 765-5139, no later than 10:00 a.m. one business day preceding the scheduled meeting. La ciudad de Anaheim desea hacer todas sus reuniones y audiencias públicas accesibles a todos los miembros del público. La Ciudad prohíbe la discriminación por motivos de raza , color u origen nacional en cualquier programa o actividad que reciba asistencia financiera federal. Si se solicita, la agenda y los materiales de copia estarán disponible en formatos alternativos apropiados a las personas con una discapacidad, según lo requiere la Sección 202 del Acta de Americanos con Discapacidades de 1990 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 12132), las normas federales y reglamentos adoptados en aplicación del mismo. Cualquier persona que requiera una modificación relativa a la discapacidad, incluyendo medios auxiliares o servicios, con el fin de participar en la reunión pública podrá solicitar dicha modificación, ayuda o servicio poniéndose en contacto con la Oficina de Secretaria de la Ciudad ya sea en persona en el 200 S Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, California, o por teléfono al (714) 765-5139, antes de las 10:00 de la mañana un día habil antes de la reunión programada. 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Suite #162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Tel: (714) 765-5139 Fax: (714) 765-5280 www.anaheim.net ITEM NO. 2 PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT City of Anaheim PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT DATE: APRIL 18, 2016 SUBJECT: SPECIFIC PLAN ADJUSTMENT NO. 2016-00067 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05855 LOCATION: 8032 East Santa Ana Canyon Road (Edwards Cinema) APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER: The applicant is John Curry representing Edwards Cinemas, Inc.; the agent is Bruce Solomon representing Solomon, Saltsman, & Jamieson; and the property owner is Julia Viskanta representing OTR, an Ohio General Partnership, As Nominee Of The State Teachers Retirement Board Of Ohio. REQUEST: The applicant proposes a specific plan adjustment to the “SP 90-1” Festival Specific Plan, Development Area 2, Retail Commercial & Entertainment zone, to conditionally permit the sale of beer and wine for on-site consumption in conjunction with an existing multi-plex cinema. The applicant also requests approval of a conditional use permit to permit the sale of beer and wine with a “Type 41” On Sale Beer & Wine – Eating Place Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) license, contingent upon approval of the Specific Plan Adjustment. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission take the following actions: 1) Adopt the attached resolution, determining that this request is categorically exempt from further environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (Class 1, Existing Facilities) and approving Conditional Use Permit No. 2016-05855, contingent upon and subject to City Council approval of Specific Plan Adjustment No. 2016-00067; and 2) By motion, recommend that the City Council adopt an ordinance approving Specific Plan Adjustment No. 2016-00067 to the “SP 90-1” Festival Specific Plan. BACKGROUND: In 1998, the Planning Commission approved the “SP 90-1” Festival Specific Plan. The Festival Specific Plan regulates an 84-acre development consisting of a mix of retail, commercial, business and financial services, restaurants, hotels and senior housing uses. The 2.64-acre subject property where the subject cinema exists is located within Development Area 2, Retail Commercial & Entertainment Zone. The General Plan designates the property for Regional Commercial land uses. SPECIFIC PLAN ADJUSTMENT NO. 2016-00067 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05855 April 18, 2016 Page 2 of 5 The property is developed with a 62,676 square foot multi-plex cinema, which is permitted by right in the DA-2 Zone. Surrounding land uses include the Residence Inn hotel and the Anaheim Hills Festival Shopping Center to the north, a 24 Hour Fitness health club to the east, and The Overlook at Anaheim Hills senior apartments to the south and west. The owner of the existing cinema obtained a business license and began operating in October 2001. There are no active code enforcement cases on this property. PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes to add the sale of beer and wine with a “Type 41” On Sale Beer & Wine – Eating Place ABC license for on-premises consumption at the existing multi-plex cinema. A Type 41 license is the same type of license used by restaurants that serve beer and wine in conjunction with bona fide meals, or food service. The primary use of the premises would remain as a cinema, with food service available in conjunction with the service of beer and wine. Beer and wine would be sold and stored in the concession and storage area, shown shaded in the Floor Plan below. No exterior changes to the cinema building are proposed. A designated area for consumption of beer and wine in the cinema is not proposed; however, when it comes to alcohol sales, Edwards Cinemas uses a proactive approach towards training employees and monitoring guests to ensure proper policies and security provisions are being met. Attachment 4 includes detailed operations information from Edwards Cinemas that outlines its policies, security provisions and conditions to ensure that alcohol is consumed in a safe and legal manner. Floor Plan The applicant is further requesting approval of a Specific Plan Adjustment to allow beer and wine service by conditional use permit for the multi-plex cinema because this use is currently not permitted in this Zone. This is the only multi-plex cinema existing and permitted within The Festival shopping center, therefore, the only cinema that would be affected by this change. Before beer and wine service can be approved on this site, an ordinance adjusting the Festival Specific Plan must be adopted by the City Council. SPECIFIC PLAN ADJUSTMENT NO. 2016-00067 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05855 April 18, 2016 Page 3 of 5 FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS: Specific Plan Adjustment: The proposed adjustment would conditionally permit beer and wine service in conjunction with food service at the existing multi-plex cinema located in the DA-2 Zone of the Festival Specific Plan. Staff believes that the proposed adjustment would not compromise the goals and standards of the Festival Specific Plan because: o The use would represent a small portion of the cinema’s sales activity in comparison to food service and ticket sales; o The adjustment would conditionally allow beer and wine sales to ensure compatibility with the surrounding area; o The adjustment would permit beer and wine sales in the one permitted existing multi-plex cinema located in the DA-2 Zone; and o The beer and wine sales would be subject to Police Department-recommended conditions of approval regulating the use. A draft ordinance is included as an attachment to this staff report. Conditional Use Permit: Before the Planning Commission may approve a conditional use permit, it must make a finding of fact that the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions exist: 1) That the proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by this code; 2) That the proposed use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses, or the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located; 3) That the size and shape of the site proposed for the use is adequate to allow the full development of the proposed use, in a manner not detrimental to either the particular area or health and safety; 4) That the traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area; and 5) That the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, if any, will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. While the cinema is permitted by right in the DA-2 Zone, a conditional use permit is required to permit on-sale beer and wine in order to ensure compatibility with surrounding land uses. A determination of public convenience or necessity is not required by the City for a Type 41 ABC license. SPECIFIC PLAN ADJUSTMENT NO. 2016-00067 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05855 April 18, 2016 Page 4 of 5 If the sale of alcohol is approved at this location, it would be the second theater authorized to sell alcohol within the city. The first location was within the Ultralux Cinema in the Anaheim GardenWalk center. Unlike the current proposal, that now-closed theater had a specific area designated for alcohol consumption. However, the model proposed by Edwards is not unique to Anaheim. In fact, there are other theaters in Orange County that provide alcohol sales in a similar arrangement (i.e., without a designated area for consumption). Staff contacted the Brea and Irvine Police Departments, as well as ABC staff, to solicit their input on other Edwards cinemas currently serving beer and wine. Brea Police Department staff confirmed that they have not experienced any issues related to the sale and consumption of beer and wine within an Edwards Cinemas facility. Irvine Police Department staff also confirmed that they have not had any problems with beer and wine sales at the Edwards Cinemas within the Irvine Spectrum Center. Lastly, ABC staff confirmed that operations at existing cinema locations within Orange County have had no issues and that Edwards Cinemas has been a responsible license holder. Based on the input from these three agencies, staff has concluded that beer and wine sales at Edwards Cinemas has not resulted in any issues related to police calls or ABC violations. The number of alcohol licenses allowed in each of the City’s census tracts is regulated by ABC and is based upon population. The property is located within Census Tract No. 219.22, which has a population of 4,834 residents. This population allows for five on-sale licenses and presently there are 11 licenses within the tract. Most of these licenses are for restaurants located within The Festival shopping center but the number of licenses at this location have not been problematic from a policing standpoint. The project site is located within Police Reporting District No. 1244, which has a crime rate that is 114 percent above the city average. The crime rate within ¼ mile of this property has a crime rate that is below the citywide average with calls for service during the past year consisting of 32 petty thefts, 11 automotive burglaries, and 5 thefts from vehicles. The requested conditional use permit is contingent upon City Council’s approval of the Specific Plan Adjustment. The purpose of a conditional use permit is to analyze any potential impacts on adjacent properties and impose conditions of approval to ensure that any operational impacts will be minimal. Staff has evaluated the proposal and believes that, if properly conditioned to address potential impacts, beer and wine service at this location would be appropriate. Staff has provided conditions of approval in the attached resolution to ensure that the use would not have a negative impact on the adjacent businesses in the area, including the Police Department’s recommended conditions intended to regulate the use. These conditions include the following: o Requiring alcoholic beverage training for employees; o Requiring that beer and wine be sold in clear plastic cups that are clearly distinguishable from the other non-alcoholic drinks available for purchase; o Beer and wine sales shall only be made to persons that are present at the register; o Theaters shall be monitored by the employees; o No one under 18 years of age shall be allowed to sell beer and wine. SPECIFIC PLAN ADJUSTMENT NO. 2016-00067 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05855 April 18, 2016 Page 5 of 5 Based on these factors, staff believes that the proposed use would be compatible with the surrounding area and recommends approval of the conditional use permit. Environmental Impact Analysis: Staff recommends the Planning Commission find that the effects of the proposed project are typical of those generated within that class of projects (i.e., Class 1 – Existing Facilities) which consist of the repair, maintenance, and/or minor alteration of existing public or private structures or facilities, involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that existing at the time of this determination, and that, therefore, pursuant to Section 15301 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, the proposed project will not cause a significant effect on the environment and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA. CONCLUSION: Staff supports the requested specific plan adjustment and conditional use permit requests to allow beer and wine sales for on-site consumption in conjunction with an existing multi-plex cinema within a commercial shopping center because the use would be consistent with similar surrounding uses. The recommended conditions of approval would ensure that the beer and wine sales would not have an adverse impact on the surrounding land uses. Staff recommends approval of this request. Prepared by, Submitted by, Ashley Hefner Jonathan E. Borrego Contract Planner, RRM Design Group Planning Services Manager Attachments: 1. Draft Conditional Use Permit Resolution 2. Draft Specific Plan Adjustment Resolution 3. Draft Specific Plan Adjustment Ordinance 4. Applicant’s Request Letter 5. Police Department Memorandum 6. Plans 7. Photographs 9 1 F R E EWAY 9 1 F R E E W A Y E S A N T A A N A C A N Y O N R D E MONTE VISTA RDE B A U E R R D E ALTAIR LN E K E N N E D Y R D E KA I S E R B LV D S A N IS E S T S BASIL ST E C A R N A T I O N W A Y E O L D C A N A L R D E SAFFRON ST S L O G A N B E R R Y S T S R A S P B E R R Y L N S D R E A M S T E SAGEWOOD LN S FESTIVAL DR E C R Y S T A L D R E K E N D R A C T E .S A N T A A NA CANYON R D E . L A P A L M A A V E S.WEIRCANYONRD 8032 East Santa Ana Canyon Road DEV No. 2016-00007 Subject Property Zoning SP 90-1 : Festival Specific Plan APN: 354-451-19 °0 250 500 Feet Aerial Photo:May 2014 SP 90-1 (SC)DA4FOUNTAIN GLEN APTS259 DU SP 90-1 (SC)DA3ANAHEIM HILLSRESIDENCE INNT (S C ) S O U T H E R N C A L I F O R N A E D I S O N C O . E A S E M E N T SP 90-1 (SC)DA2THE FESTIVAL SP 90-1 (SC)DA2THE FESTIVAL SP 90-1 (SC)DA1THE FESTIVAL SP 90-1 (SC)DA1THE FESTIVAL SP 90-1 (SC)DA2THE FESTIVAL SP 90-1 (SC)DA1THE FESTIVAL RS-3 (SC)OPEN SPACE RS-3 (SC)OPEN SPACE RS-3 (SC)SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE RS-3 (SC)OPEN SPACE S F E S T I V A L D R E .S A NTA ANA CAN YON RDE. L A P A L M A A V E S. W EIRCANYONRD 8032 East Santa Ana Canyon Road DEV No. 2016-00007 Subject Property APN: 354-451-19 °0 50 100 Feet Aerial Photo:May 2014 S F E S T I V A L D R E .S A NTA ANA CAN YON RDE. L A P A L M A A V E S. W EIRCANYONRD 8032 East Santa Ana Canyon Road DEV No. 2016-00007 Subject Property APN: 354-451-19 °0 50 100 Feet Aerial Photo:May 2014 [DRAFT] ATTACHMENT NO. 1 - 1 - PC2016-*** RESOLUTION NO. PC2016-*** A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05855 FOR A TYPE 41 ON SALE BEER & WINE – EATING PLACE ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL LICENSE AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH (DEV2016-00007) (8032 EAST SANTA ANA CANYON ROAD) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim (the "Planning Commission") did receive a verified petition for Conditional Use Permit No. 2016-05855 to permit the sale of beer and wine with a Type 41 (On Sale Beer & Wine – Eating Place) license issued by the State of California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (herein referred to as "ABC") for on-premises consumption at an existing multi-plex cinema located at 8032 East Santa Ana Canyon Road in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California (the "Property") within a retail commercial center known as "The Festival" and generally depicted on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference; and WHEREAS, the Property is approximately 2.64 acres in size and is currently developed with a 62,676 square foot multi-plex cinema. The Anaheim General Plan designates the Property for Regional Commercial land uses. The Property is located within The Festival Specific Plan Area described in Specific Plan No. 90-1 for the Festival Regional Shopping Center ("Specific Plan No. 90-1") and more particularly within the Retail Commercial and Entertainment Development Area (Development Area 2) shown as Exhibit 7 to Specific Plan No. 90-1. As such, the Property is subject to the zoning and development standards described in Chapter 18.108 (Festival Specific Plan No. 90-1 (SP 90-1) Zoning and Development Standards) of Title 18 (Zoning) of the Anaheim Municipal Code (the "Code"); and WHEREAS, Conditional Use Permit No. 2016-05855 is proposed in conjunction with a request to amend certain zoning and development standards adopted in connection with Specific Plan No. 90-1, which request is designated as "Specific Plan Adjustment No. 2016- 00067", to conditionally permit the sale of beer and wine for on-premises consumption in connection with food sales at the one multi-plex cinema permitted in the Retail Commercial and Entertainment Development Area (Development Area 2 ) of Specific Plan No. 90-1. Specific Plan Adjustment No. 2016-00067 and Conditional Use Permit No. 2016-05855 shall be referred to herein collectively as the “Proposed Project”; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on April 18, 2016 at 5:00 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 18.60 (Procedures) of the Code, to hear and consider evidence for and against proposed the Proposed Project and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, pursuant to and in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.; herein referred to as “CEQA”), the State of California Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (commencing with Cal. Code Regs. tit. 14, § 15000; herein referred to as the "CEQA Guidelines"), and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual, the City is the - 2 - PC2016-*** "lead agency" for the preparation and consideration of environmental documents for the Proposed Project; and WHEREAS, this Planning Commission finds and determines that the effects of the Proposed Project are typical of those generated within that class of projects (i.e., Class 1 – Existing Facilities) which consist of the operation, repair, maintenance, permitting, leasing, licensing, or minor alteration of existing public or private structures, facilities, mechanical equipment, or topographical features, involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that existing at the time of this determination, and that, therefore, pursuant to Section 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines, the Proposed Project will not cause a significant effect on the environment and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA; and WHEREAS, this Planning Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study made by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing with respect to the Proposed Project and, specifically, with respect to the request for Conditional Use Permit No. 2016-05855, does find and determine the following: 1. The request to allow the sale of beer and wine with a Type 41 (On Sale Beer & Wine – Eating Place) license for on-premises consumption in conjunction with an existing multi-plex cinema building is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized, subject to City Council approval of Specific Plan Adjustment No. 2016-00067. 2. The request to permit the sale of beer and wine for on-premises consumption in conjunction with a multi-plex cinema would not adversely affect the surrounding land uses and the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located because the Property is already developed with a multi-plex cinema building and the proposed use would be compatible with the existing uses within the commercial center and surrounding area. 3. The size and shape of the site is adequate to allow the full development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area nor to the health, safety and general welfare of the public because the Property is already improved with a multi-plex cinema and adjacent shopping center and no expansion to the existing building or use is proposed. 4. The traffic generated by permitting the sale of beer and wine for on-premises consumption in conjunction with a multi-plex cinema would not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area because the number of vehicles entering and exiting the site is consistent with typical businesses that would be permitted as a matter of right within the Retail Commercial and Entertainment Development Area (Development Area 2 ) of Specific Plan No. SP 90-1. 5. The granting of Conditional Use Permit No. 2016-05855 under the conditions imposed will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. WHEREAS, this Planning Commission determines that the evidence in the record constitutes substantial evidence to support the actions taken and the findings made in this Resolution, that the facts stated in this Resolution are supported by substantial evidence in the record, including testimony received at the public hearing, the staff presentations, the staff report and all materials in the Proposed Project files. There is no substantial evidence, nor are there other facts, that detract from the findings made in this Resolution. This Planning Commission expressly declares that it considered all evidence presented and reached these findings after due consideration of all evidence presented to it. - 3 - PC2016-*** NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, based upon the aforesaid findings and determinations, this Planning Commission does hereby approve and adopt Conditional Use Permit No. 2016-05855, contingent upon and subject to (i) the adoption by the City Council of an ordinance authorizing the sale of beer and wine for on-premises consumption in connection with food sales at the one multi-plex cinema permitted in the Retail Commercial and Entertainment Development Area (Development Area 2) of Specific Plan No. 90-1, subject to a conditional use permit under Specific Plan Adjustment No. 2016-00067, now pending, and (ii) the conditions of approval set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, which are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of the Property under Conditional Use Permit No. 2016-05855 in order to preserve the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. Extensions for further time to complete conditions of approval may be granted in accordance with Section 18.60.170 of the Code. Timing for compliance with conditions of approval may be amended by the Planning Director upon a showing of good cause provided (i) equivalent timing is established that satisfies the original intent and purpose of the condition, (ii) the modification complies with the Code, and (iii) the applicant has demonstrated significant progress toward establishment of the use or approved development. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that any amendment, modification or revocation of this permit may be processed in accordance with Chapters 18.60.190 (Amendment to Permit Approval) and 18.60.200 (City-Initiated Revocation or Modification of Permits) of the Code. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Planning Commission does hereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance with each and all of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any part thereof, be declared invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution, and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the Code and any other applicable City, State and Federal regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of April 18, 2016. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60 (Procedures) of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced by a City Council Resolution in the event of an appeal. CHAIR, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ATTEST: SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM - 4 - PC2016-*** STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim held on April 18, 2016, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 18th day of April, 2016. SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM - 5 - PC2016-*** - 6 - PC2016-*** EXHIBIT “B” CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05855 (DEV2016-00007) NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT OPERATIONAL 1. There shall be no exterior advertising or sign of any kind or type, including advertising directed to the exterior from within, promoting or indicating the availability of alcoholic beverages. Police Department 2. The subject alcoholic beverage license shall not be exchanged for a public premise (bar) type license nor shall the establishment be operated as a public premise as defined in Section 23039 of the Business and Professions Code. Police Department 3. At all times when the premise is open for business, the premise shall be maintained as a bona fide restaurant and shall provide a menu containing an assortment of foods normally offered in such restaurant. Police Department 4. Parking lots, driveways, circulation areas, aisles, passageways, recesses and grounds contiguous to buildings, shall be provided with enough lighting to illuminate and make clearly visible the presence of any person on or about the premises during the hours of darkness and provide a safe, secure environment for all persons, property, and vehicles onsite. Police Department 5. Security measures shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Anaheim Police Department and to prevent disturbances to the neighborhood by excessive noise created by patrons entering or leaving the premises. Police Department 6. The business shall not employ or permit any persons to solicit or encourage others, directly or indirectly, to buy them drinks in the licenses premises under any commission, percentage, salary, or other profit-sharing plan, scheme or conspiracy. (Section 24200.5 Alcoholic Beverage Control Act) Police Department 7. Managers / Owners need to call the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control and obtain LEAD (Licensee Education on Alcohol and Drugs Program) Training for themselves and register employees. The contact number is 714-558-4101. Police Department 8. Any Graffiti painted or marked upon the premises or on any adjacent area under the control of the licensee shall be removed or painted over within 24 hours of being applied. Police Department - 7 - PC2016-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT 9. The petitioner(s) shall be responsible for maintaining free of litter the area adjacent to the premises over which they have control, as depicted. Police Department 10. The number of persons shall not exceed the maximum occupancy load as determined by the Anaheim Fire Department. Signs indicating the occupant load shall be posted in a conspicuous place on an approved sign near the main exit from the room. (Section 25.114(a) Uniform Fire Code) Police Department 11. The door(s) shall be kept closed at all times during the operation of the premises except in cases of emergency. Said door(s) not to consist solely of a screen or ventilated security door. Police Department 12. Petitioner(s) shall police the area under their control in an effort to prevent the loitering of persons around the premises. Police Department 13. No person under the age of 18 shall sell or serve alcoholic beverages. Police Department 14. Applicant shall post clearly visible signs that read “No Alcoholic Beverages Beyond This Point” at any exit door that leads outside the main building. Police Department 15. Identification must be shown with each purchase. A patron may not purchase alcohol for other guests unless each person is at the register and has provided proper identification. Police Department 16. Beer and wine are to be sold in clear plastic cups (no glass containers) that are clearly distinguishable from the other non-alcoholic drinks available for purchase. Police Department 17. Sales of alcoholic beverages for consumption off the premises are prohibited. Police Department 18. At all times when the premises is exercising the privileges of their license, an employee of the premises shall enter and monitor the activity within the theaters on a regular basis, but no less than once every 30 minutes. Staff will receive training on guest removal procedures for objectionable or nuisance activity related to the service of alcoholic beverages. Police Department 19. Lighting shall remain at a level sufficient to allow a theater employee to observe patrons who may be consuming alcoholic beverages. Police Department 20. Customers shall not be required to purchase a certain number of drinks. Police Department 21. No distilled spirits are allowed under this license. Police Department - 8 - PC2016-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT GENERAL 22. The Applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City and its officials, officers, employees and agents (collectively referred to individually and collectively as “Indemnitees”) from any and all claims, actions or proceedings brought against Indemnitees to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the decision of the Indemnitees concerning this permit or any of the proceedings, acts or determinations taken, done, or made prior to the decision, or to determine the reasonableness, legality or validity of any condition attached thereto. The Applicant’s indemnification is intended to include, but not be limited to, damages, fees and/or costs awarded against or incurred by Indemnitees and costs of suit, claim or litigation, including without limitation attorneys’ fees and other costs, liabilities and expenses incurred by Indemnitees in connection with such proceeding. Planning and Building Department, Planning Services Division 23. The applicant is responsible for paying all charges related to the processing of this discretionary case application within 30 days of the issuance of the final invoice or prior to the issuance of building permits for the Proposed Project, whichever occurs first. Failure to pay all charges shall result in delays in the issuance of required permits or may result in the revocation of the approval of this application. Planning and Building Department, Planning Services Division 24. The subject Property shall be developed, used and maintained substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitioner and which plans are on file with the Planning Department, and as conditioned herein. Planning and Building Department, Planning Services Division 25. Approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2016-05855 is contingent upon City Council approval of Specific Plan Adjustment No. 2016- 00067. Permits for on-sale beer and wine shall not be issued until after the effective date of the ordinance approving Specific Plan Adjustment No. 2016-00067. Planning and Building Department, Planning Services Division [DRAFT] ATTACHMENT NO. 2 - 1 - RESOLUTION NO. PC2016-*** A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF SPECIFIC PLAN ADJUSTMENT NO. 2016-00067 (DEV2016-00007) (8032 EAST SANTA ANA CANYON ROAD) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim (the "Planning Commission") did receive a verified petition for Specific Plan Adjustment No. 2016-00067, which involves the modification of zoning and development standards adopted in connection with The Festival Specific Plan Area described in Specific Plan No. 90-1 for the Festival Regional Shopping Center ("Specific Plan No. 90-1") to conditionally permit the sale of beer and wine for on-premises consumption in connection with food sales at the one multi-plex cinema permitted in the Retail Commercial and Entertainment Development Area (Development Area 2 ) shown as Exhibit 7 to Specific Plan No. 90-1; and WHEREAS, the one multi-plex cinema permitted in the Retail Commercial and Entertainment Development Area (Development Area 2 ) is located at 8032 East Santa Ana Canyon Road in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California (the "Property") within a retail commercial center known as "The Festival" and generally depicted on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference; and WHEREAS, the Property is approximately 2.64 acres in size. The Anaheim General Plan designates the Property for Regional Commercial land uses. The Property is located within The Festival Specific Plan Area. As such, the Property is subject to the zoning and development standards described in Chapter 18.108 (Festival Specific Plan No. 90-1 (SP 90-1) Zoning and Development Standards) of Title 18 (Zoning) of the Anaheim Municipal Code (the "Code"); and WHEREAS, Specific Plan Adjustment No. 2016-00067 is proposed in conjunction with a request for Conditional Use Permit No. 2016-05855 to permit the sale of beer and wine with a Type 41 (On Sale Beer & Wine – Eating Place) license issued by the State of California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (herein referred to as "ABC") for on-premises consumption at the Property; and WHEREAS, Specific Plan Adjustment No. 2016-00067 and Conditional Use Permit No. 2016-05855 shall be referred to herein collectively as the “Proposed Project”; and WHEREAS, pursuant to and in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.; herein referred to as “CEQA”), the State of California Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (herein referred to as the "CEQA Guidelines"), and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual, the City is the "lead agency" for the preparation and consideration of environmental documents for the Proposed Project; and WHEREAS, by the adoption of a resolution concurrently with, but prior in time to, the adoption of this Resolution and pursuant to the provisions of CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines, and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual, this Planning Commission has found and determined - 2 - that the effects of the Proposed Project are typical of those generated within that class of projects (i.e., Class 1 – Existing Facilities) which consist of the operation, repair, maintenance, permitting, leasing, licensing, or minor alteration of existing public or private structures, facilities, mechanical equipment, or topographical features, involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that existing at the time of this determination, and that, therefore, pursuant to Section 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines, the Proposed Project will not cause a significant effect on the environment and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on April 18, 2016 at 5:00 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 18.60 (Procedures) of the Code, to hear and consider evidence for and against proposed the Proposed Project and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, pursuant to and in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.; herein referred to as “CEQA”), the State of California Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (herein referred to as the "CEQA Guidelines"), and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual, the City is the "lead agency" for the preparation and consideration of environmental documents for the Proposed Project; and WHEREAS, by the adoption of a resolution concurrently with, but prior in time to, the adoption of this Resolution and pursuant to the provisions of CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines, and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual, this Planning Commission has found and determined that the effects of the Proposed Project are typical of those generated within that class of projects (i.e., Class 1 – Existing Facilities) which consist of the operation, repair, maintenance, permitting, leasing, licensing, or minor alteration of existing public or private structures, facilities, mechanical equipment, or topographical features, involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that existing at the time of this determination, and that, therefore, pursuant to Section 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines, the Proposed Project will not cause a significant effect on the environment and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after due consideration, inspection, investigation and study made by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does find and determine that Specific Plan Adjustment No. 2016-00067, which involves the modification of zoning and development standards adopted in connection with The Festival Specific Plan Area described in Specific Plan No. 90-1 to conditionally permit the sale of beer and wine for on-premises consumption in connection with food sales at the Property, is consistent with the surrounding retail and commercial uses of The Festival. WHEREAS, this Planning Commission determines that the evidence in the record constitutes substantial evidence to support the actions taken and the findings made in this Resolution, that the facts stated in this Resolution are supported by substantial evidence in the record, including testimony received at the public hearing, the staff presentations, the staff report and all materials in the project files. There is no substantial evidence, nor are there other facts, that detract from the findings made in this Resolution. This Planning Commission expressly declares that it considered all evidence presented and reached these findings after due consideration of all evidence presented to it. - 3 - NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, on the basis of the above findings and determinations, this Planning Commission does hereby recommend that the City Council approve Specific Plan Adjustment No. 2016-00067 and recommends that the City Council adopt an ordinance amending Section 18.108.040 of Chapter 18.108 of Title 18 of the Code in accordance with Specific Plan Adjustment No. 2016-00067. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution shall not constitute an amendment to Section 18.108.040 of Chapter 18.108 of Title 18 of the Code, or a commitment by the City to amend said Section 18.108.040. Any such amendment shall require an ordinance of the City Council, which shall be a legislative act, which may be approved or denied by the City Council at its sole discretion. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of April 18, 2016. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60 (Procedures) of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced by a City Council Resolution in the event of an appeal. CHAIR, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ATTEST: SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim held on April 18, 2016, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 18th day of April, 2016. SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM REDLINED TO SHOW REVISIONS TO CURRENT MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING SUBSECTIONS .020 AND .040 OF SECTION 18.108.040 OF CHAPTER 18.108 OF TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE, RELATING TO SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 90-1 FOR THE FESTIVAL REGIONAL SHOPPING CENTER, BASED UPON THE FINDING AND DETERMINATION THAT THIS ORDINANCE IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 15301 OF THE STATE CEQA GUIDELINES. (SPECIFIC PLAN ADJUSTMENT NO. 2016-00067) WHEREAS, pursuant to the procedures set forth in former Chapter 18.93 of the Anaheim Municipal Code (herein referred to as the "Code"), the City Council of the City of Anaheim ("City Council") adopted its Resolution No. 90R-86 on March 20, 1990, thereby adopting Specific Plan No. 90-1 for the then proposed Anaheim Hills Festival project (herein referred to as "Specific Plan No. 90-1"), subject to those certain conditions specified in Resolution No. 90R-86; and WHEREAS, the City Council concurrently adopted its Resolution No. 90R-87, thereby requiring that the zoning and development standards relating to Specific Plan No. 90-1 would be subject to those certain conditions specified in Resolution No. 90R-87; and WHEREAS, in order to carry out the action taken by the City Council by its adoption of Resolutions Nos. 90R-86 and 90R-87 and pursuant to the procedures set forth in former Chapter 18.93 of the Code, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 5109 on March 27, 1990, amending the Code to establish the zoning and development standards for Specific Plan No. 90-1, which were then codified as Chapter 18.74 (Specific Plan No. 90-1 (SP 90-1) Zoning and Development Standards) of Title 18 of the Code and are now codified as Chapter 18.108 (Festival Specific Plan No. 90-1 (SP 90-1) Zoning and Development Standards) of Title 18 of the Code; and WHEREAS, the City Council also adopted Ordinance No. 5110 on March 27, 1990 for the purpose of amending the Zoning Map of the City to reclassify certain real property described therein into the "SP 90-1 (Specific Plan 90-1) Zone", subject to those certain conditions specified in Ordinance No. 5110; and WHEREAS, by the adoption of Resolution No. 92R-160 on July 22, 1992 and ATTACHMENT NO. 3 2 Ordinance No. 5324 on July 28, 1992, the City Council amended certain conditions of approval of Specific Plan No. 90-1 and the zoning and development standards relating thereto ("Amendment No. 1); and WHEREAS, by the adoption of Resolution No. 97R-41 on April 1, 1997 and Ordinance No. 5603 on July 22 , 1997, the City Council amended Specific Plan No. 90-1 and the zoning and development standards relating thereto to allow the (1) expansion of the existing theater, (2) revision of the site plan to re-designate 20,000 square feet of area for general retail uses, (3) construction of a 25,000 square foot health club and a 10,000 square foot child care facility with a 15,000 square foot outdoor play area, subject to approval of a conditional use permit, and (4) amendment of Condition No. 9 of Ordinance No. 5110 to permit on-street parking on Festival Drive within the Retail Commercial and Entertainment Development Area (Development Area 2) of Specific Plan No. 90-1 ("Amendment No. 2"); and WHEREAS, by the adoption of Resolution No. 98R-164 on August 11, 1998 and Ordinance No. 5645 on August 18, 1998, the City Council amended Specific Plan No. 90-1 and the zoning and development standards relating thereto to conditionally permit senior citizens' apartments in the Business Commercial Development Area (Development Area 4) of Specific Plan No. 90-1 ("Amendment No. 3"); and WHEREAS, by the adoption of Resolution No. 2002R-39 on February 12, 2002 and Ordinance No. 5806 on February 26, 2002, the City Council amended the Sign Program of Specific Plan No. 90-1 and the zoning and development standards relating thereto to allow additional wall signage for in-line tenants that rear onto Santa Ana Canyon Road and amending the Zoning and Development Standards relating thereto ("Amendment No. 4"); and WHEREAS, by the adoption of Resolutions No. PC2012-102 and PC2012-103 on December 17, 2012 and Ordinance No. 6270 on March 5, 2013, the City Council amended Specific Plan No. 90-1 and the zoning and development standards relating thereto to conditionally permit the sale of beer and wine at service stations ("Amendment No. 5"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has submitted a request to amend certain zoning and development standards adopted in connection with Specific Plan No. 90-1, which request is designated as Specific Plan Adjustment No. 2016-00067, to conditionally permit the sale of beer and wine for on-premises consumption in connection with food sales at the one multi-plex cinema permitted in the Retail Commercial and Entertainment Development Area (Development Area 2 ) of Specific Plan No. 90-1 (herein referred to as the "Proposed Project"); and WHEREAS, pursuant to and in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.; herein referred to as “CEQA”), the State of California Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (commencing with Cal. Code Regs. tit. 14, § 15000; herein referred to as the "CEQA Guidelines"), and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual, the City is the "lead agency" for the preparation and consideration of environmental documents for the 3 Proposed Project; and WHEREAS, this City Council finds and determines that the effects of the Proposed Project are typical of those generated within that class of projects (i.e., Class 1 – Existing Facilities) which consist of, among other things, the operation, repair, maintenance, permitting, leasing, licensing, or minor alteration of existing public or private structures, facilities, mechanical equipment, or topographical features, involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that existing at the time of this determination. The Proposed Project meets the criteria of Section 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines, and will not cause a significant effect on the environment and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA pursuant to Section 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines; and WHEREAS, the City council desires to amend the zoning and development standards in Chapter 18.108 of the Code to conditionally permit the sale of beer and wine for on-premises consumption in connection with food sales at the one multi-plex cinema permitted in the Retail Commercial and Entertainment Development Area (Development Area 2 ) of Specific Plan No. 90-1. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That paragraph "(b) Conditional Uses" of subsection ".020 General Standards" of Section 18.108.040 of Chapter 18.108 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code be, and the same is hereby, amended and restated to read in full as follows: (b) Conditional Uses. The following and substantially similar uses shall be permitted with a conditional use permit: 1. One automobile washing: self-service or automatic, including use of mechanical conveyors, blowers and steam cleaners (hereinafter referred to as "autowash") (on the lower level/north portion of Development Area No. 2); 2. Convenience food stores, with or without the sale of alcoholic beverages for off-premises consumption, in connection with gasoline sales; 3. Day care centers (for children or elderly); 4. Medical/dental labs; 5. Medical emergency care facilities; and 6. Laundry, self-service establishments.; and 4 7. On-premises sales and consumption of beer and wine in conjunction with the one multi-plex cinema permitted in Development Area 2 - Retail Commercial and Entertainment Development Area. SECTION 2 . That subsection ".040 Development Area 2 – Retail Commercial and Entertainment Development Area" of Section 18.108.040 of Chapter 18.108 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code be, and the same is hereby, amended and restated to read in full as follows: .040 Development Area 2 – Retail Commercial and Entertainment Development Area. Development Area 2 is designed to accommodate retail uses, restaurants, financial services, department stores and theaters. In addition to the applicable and non-conflicting portions of subsection 18.108.040.020 and the Zoning Code, the following regulations shall govern this area: (a) Permitted Uses. In addition to the uses permitted in paragraph 18.108.040.020(a), the following uses and substantially similar uses shall be permitted in Development Area 2: 1. Outdoor garden centers (fully screened); 2. Theaters (other than drive-ins): a. One dinner theater; and b. One multi-plex cinema; and 3. Outdoor food carts and small sales kiosks. (b) Conditional Uses. The following uses shall be permitted with a conditional use permit obtained pursuant to Chapter 18.66 (Conditional Use Permits): 1. On-premises sales and consumption of beer and wine in conjunction with the one multi-plex cinema permitted in Development Area 2 - Retail Commercial and Entertainment Development Area. (bc) Building Height. The maximum height shall be thirty-five (35) feet and two (2) stories, excluding architectural projections and properly screened, roof-mounted equipment, which may extend up to five (5) feet, for a total of forty (40) feet. 5 (cd) Setbacks. A minimum building setback of twenty (20) feet along Roosevelt Road shall be provided, measured from the right- of-way to the building. (de) Improvement of Setbacks. Minimum landscaped areas of twenty (20) feet along Roosevelt Road and ten (10) feet along Festival Drive shall be provided. SECTION 3. SEVERABILITY. The City Council of the City of Anaheim hereby declares that should any section, paragraph, sentence, phrase, term or word of this ordinance be declared for any reason to be invalid, it is the intent of the City Council that it would have adopted all other portions of this ordinance independent of the elimination herefrom of any such portion as may be declared invalid. If any section, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance, and each section, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause and phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one (or more) section, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase had been declared invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION 4. CERTIFICATION. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage of this ordinance and shall cause the same to be printed once within fifteen (15) days after its adoption in the Anaheim Bulletin, a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City of Anaheim. SECTION 5. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force thirty (30) days from and after its final passage. /// /// /// /// /// /// /// 6 THE FOREGOING ORDINANCE was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Anaheim held on the ____ day of ______________, 2016, and thereafter passed and adopted at a regular meeting of said City Council held on the ____ day of ______________, 2016, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: CITY OF ANAHEIM By: __________________________________ MAYOR OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ATTEST: ______________________________________ CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM 116222-v2/TJR ATTACHMENT NO. 4 A T T A C H M E N T N O . 5 A T T A C H M E N T N O . 6 3/14/2016 1 Concession Stand Concession Stand ATTACHMENT NO. 7 3/14/2016 2 Entrance Parking Lot 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Suite #162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Tel: (714) 765-5139 Fax: (714) 765-5280 www.anaheim.net City of Anaheim PLANNING DEPARTMENT There is no new correspondence regarding this item. 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Suite #162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Tel: (714) 765-5139 Fax: (714) 765-5280 www.anaheim.net ITEM NO. 3 PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT City of Anaheim PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT DATE: APRIL 18, 2016 SUBJECT: DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2016-00001, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05858, VARIANCE NO. 2016-05060 AND FINAL SITE PLAN NO. 2016-00001 LOCATION: 1700 South Harbor Boulevard APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER: The owner and applicant is Good Hope International, represented by Paul Sanford. The agent representing the applicant is Ted Frattone of Hunsaker and Associates Irvine, Inc. REQUEST: The applicant requests approval of a conditional use permit, variance and final site plan to construct a 580-room, eight-story hotel with fewer parking spaces than required by the Code. The applicant also requests adoption of a development agreement between the City of Anaheim and Good Hope International for the proposed hotel development. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the attached resolution, determining that an Addendum to the previously-certified Final Environmental Impact Report No. 311 (FEIR 311) and Supplemental Environmental Impact Report No. 340 (SEIR 340) is the appropriate environmental document for this request and recommending City Council approval of Development Agreement No. 2016-00001, Conditional Use Permit No. 2016-05858, Variance No. 2016-05060 and Final Site Plan No. 2016-00001. BACKGROUND: This 8.8-acre property consists of two parcels located at the southeast corner of Harbor Boulevard and Disney Way. The property is currently developed with a 300-room hotel and accessory uses which were constructed in the early 1960s. The property is within the boundaries of the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan No. 92-1 (DRSP), District A and the Anaheim GardenWalk Overlay, Area B. The General Plan designates this property for Commercial Recreational land uses. Surrounding uses include The Grand Legacy at the Park Hotel across Disney Way to the north, The Castle Inn & Suites to the south, Anaheim GardenWalk to the east, and The Disneyland Resort across Harbor Boulevard to the west. PROPOSAL: The proposal includes the demolition of the existing hotel buildings and the development of a new eight-story hotel, including 580 hotel rooms with accessory uses including up to 50,000 square feet of meeting space, up to 25,600 square feet of restaurant space, and an at-grade and subterranean parking structure. Development Agreement No. 2016-00001, Conditional Use Permit No. 2016-05858, Variance No. 2016-05060 and Final Site Plan No. 2016-00001 April 18, 2016 Page 2 of 8 Vehicular access to the project site would be provided along Harbor Boulevard at two locations. The main entry drive proposed at the center of the Harbor Boulevard frontage and leads to a circular porte-cochere in front of the hotel lobby. A secondary driveway is proposed at the south end of the site. This driveway would serve as a secondary exit from the parking garage and provides both ingress and egress for delivery and sanitation trucks. An additional service driveway is proposed along Disney Way to provide delivery and sanitation truck access serving the restaurants. The hotel entrance, arrival lobby, and registration area would be located adjacent to the circular drive. Additional common guest areas and amenities are proposed on the second floor, immediately above the arrival lobby on the first floor. These areas include a second floor lobby, a concierge lounge and terrace, two pools, and two fitness rooms. The centralized pool area features landscaping, food and bar service, and lounge chairs to create a resort environment. The pool is surrounded by the hotel building on all four sides. Other amenities for guests include a sun deck on the fourth floor and concierge bar and terrace on eighth floor. The banquet and smaller meeting rooms would be located on first and second floors, along the south side of the hotel. A pedestrian bridge connection to Anaheim GardenWalk to the east is proposed to extend from the lawn area adjacent to the second floor banquet space. Three restaurants and an outdoor dining patio are proposed on the first floor of the hotel, at the corner of Disney Way and Harbor Boulevard. The eight-story building would be built at a maximum height of 96 feet, including all architectural projections. The building is set back from the street in a graduated stepped fashion, to reduce the perceived mass of the overall project. The project is designed with a contemporary palette of materials that includes teak, glass, stone, and metal. The street-facing elevations include a variety of balconies with glass railings and privacy screens. The top of the building includes decorative soffits and horizontal trellises above the upper floor suites. View from Harbor Boulevard Development Agreement No. 2016-00001, Conditional Use Permit No. 2016-05858, Variance No. 2016-05060 and Final Site Plan No. 2016-00001 April 18, 2016 Page 3 of 8 View from Disney Way Proposed landscaping includes a combination of palm trees and evergreen canopy trees to complement the existing parkway and median landscaping along both Harbor Boulevard and Disney Way. New landscaping is proposed within the public right-of-way on Harbor Boulevard, specifically, a new eight-foot wide parkway would be provided behind the sidewalk and would be planted with Tipu trees, a hedge and Daylilies, in accordance with the planting requirements of the DRSP. The setbacks would be planted with Bird of Paradise, Victorian Boxwood and a variety of annual flowering plants to provide additional color. The outdoor dining areas proposed along Harbor Boulevard would be shaded by a combination of canopy trees and large umbrellas. A 272-square foot vertical wall sign is proposed on the north elevation facing Disney Way. No monument sign is proposed at this time, but if the applicant desires to construct one in the future, a location at the main entrance has been reserved for a monument sign in compliance with the DRSP requirements. In addition to the requests being considered by the Planning Commission, the applicant will also request approval of an Operating Covenant Agreement (OCA) to be considered by the City Council, under the City’s Hotel Incentive Program. The program is aimed at encouraging and incentivizing the development, construction and operation of AAA Four Diamond Luxury Hotels. Based on a review by Community and Economic Development Department staff and its outside consultant, Field Paoli, the proposed project exceeds the minimum design standards required under the program criteria. Although the OCA will be considered by the City Council, this element of the project is not under the purview of the Planning Commission. FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS: Following is staff’s analysis and recommendation for each requested action: Development Agreement: The applicant requests City Council adoption of a Development Agreement between the City of Anaheim and Good Hope International to “lock in” the policies, rules and regulations in effect at the time of approval of the Development Agreement. This means that, if the Development Agreement is approved, the property owner would not be required to modify the project in response to any future changes to applicable policies, rules and Development Agreement No. 2016-00001, Conditional Use Permit No. 2016-05858, Variance No. 2016-05060 and Final Site Plan No. 2016-00001 April 18, 2016 Page 4 of 8 regulations following the approval of the Development Agreement. Development Agreements have been approved for previous projects planned or developed in The Anaheim Resort, including The Disneyland Resort and Anaheim GardenWalk projects. Such Agreements are also required for development within the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone. Per locally adopted procedures, in order to be eligible to enter into a Development Agreement, the proposed project must meet one or more of the following criteria: 1) That the project shall occupy at least fifty (50) acres; or 2) That, upon completion, the project shall result in the construction of at least (i) two hundred fifty (250) dwelling units, (ii) two hundred fifty thousand (250,000) square feet of commercial-office space, or two hundred fifty thousand (250,000) square feet of industrial space; or 3) That the project will be constructed in phases over an anticipated period of not less than five (5) years; or 4) A project shall also be eligible if the Planning Director finds that the public health, safety or general welfare of the citizens of Anaheim will best be served by accepting an Application for consideration by the Planning Commission and City Council. The applicant has demonstrated eligibility to enter into the agreement based on the size of the development, which includes the construction of 580 hotel rooms. Together with the accessory uses, the project includes 1,125,800 square feet of hotel, banquet, and restaurant space. The proposed Development Agreement includes a five-year term, which is common for projects of similar size and scope in the Platinum Triangle. As described in the proposed Development Agreement, development of the project will further the goals of the City’s Hotel Incentive Program by providing a new AAA Four Diamond Hotel, in a manner that is consistent with goals of the General Plan and DRSP. Development of the project would also result in a net increase in transient occupancy tax, retail sales tax, and property tax. Additionally, the Development Agreement includes a Public Improvements Commitment for a one-time cash payment to the City, in the amount of $100,000, to fund certain public improvements near the project. The funds would be used at the City’s discretion. Timing for payment to the City would be within one year of recordation of the Agreement or upon issuance of either a demolition or grading permit for the Project. Consideration of a Development Agreement requires that the Planning Commission make a recommendation to the City Council based on whether the proposed agreement is: 1) Consistent with the General Plan of the City of Anaheim and any applicable specific plan; 2) Compatible with the uses authorized in and the regulations prescribed for the applicable zoning district; 3) Compatible with the orderly development of property in the surrounding area; and 4) Is not otherwise detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of Anaheim. Development Agreement No. 2016-00001, Conditional Use Permit No. 2016-05858, Variance No. 2016-05060 and Final Site Plan No. 2016-00001 April 18, 2016 Page 5 of 8 Staff has reviewed the proposed Development Agreement and finds that the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan, specifically the Commercial Recreation land use designation, which is intended to provide for tourist and entertainment-related facilities. The proposed hotel development is permitted in the DRSP and would be compatible with the surrounding area, including the Disneyland Resort, Anaheim GardenWalk and area hotels and restaurants. Therefore, staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend City Council approval of the requested Development Agreement. Conditional Use Permit: The applicant is requesting approval of a conditional use permit to allow two concierge lounges, limited strictly to the use of hotel guests. Concierge lounges are proposed on the second and eighth floors of the hotel. Both areas would be accessed directly from the interior of the hotel and would require guest key cards to enter. The concierge lounges are intended to complement the proposed hotel’s full service AAA Four Diamond inventory of on-site amenities. Food and beverage service would be offered in the concierge lounges and provide a space for hotel guests to gather, relax, and enjoy the outdoor seating with views of the street scene and the surrounding area. Since the concierge lounges would only be available to hotel guests, the use would not generate new traffic trips, additional parking demand, or demand on any City services. A concierge lounge is not a use that is currently listed in the Code. However, other accessory uses that may be permitted for the exclusive use of hotel guests are listed in the Code. These uses include daycare centers, breakfast areas, and small fitness studios. Uses that are for the exclusive use of hotel guests are not factored into determining parking requirements or the maximum allowable development intensity. The DRSP allows uses that are not specifically listed or prohibited to be established by conditional use permit when determined by the Planning Commission to be consistent and compatible with the intended purpose of the specific plan. Staff has reviewed the proposed use and determined that it should be permitted and encouraged in hotels. Before the Planning Commission may approve a conditional use permit, it must make a finding of fact that the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions exist: 1) That the proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by this Zoning Code; 2) That the proposed use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses, or the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located; 3) That the size and shape of the site proposed for the use is adequate to allow the full development of the proposed use, in a manner not detrimental to either the particular area or health and safety; 4) That the traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area; and 5) That the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, if any, will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. Development Agreement No. 2016-00001, Conditional Use Permit No. 2016-05858, Variance No. 2016-05060 and Final Site Plan No. 2016-00001 April 18, 2016 Page 6 of 8 Staff recommends that the Commission determine that the concierge lounge use is compatible with the DRSP and recommend approval of the conditional use permit for this unlisted use. In the near future, staff will be proposing a specific plan adjustment to add “Concierge Lounge” as a permitted hotel accessory use, with the provision that it be limited for use by hotel guests. Parking Variance: The applicant requests a variance to provide fewer parking spaces for the proposed project than required by the Code. A variance shall be granted upon a finding by the Planning Commission or City Council that the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions exist: 1) That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not cause fewer off-street parking spaces to be provided for the proposed use than the number of such spaces necessary to accommodate all vehicles attributable to such use under the normal and reasonably foreseeable conditions of operation of such use; 2) That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use; 3) That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon adjacent private property in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use; 4) That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase traffic congestion within the off-street parking areas or lots provided for the proposed use; and 5) That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not impede vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. The applicant is requesting to provide a minimum of 949 parking spaces for the proposed project. The Code requires 1,094 parking spaces for the hotel, meeting space, and restaurants, based on the following: Use Parking Ratio Size Required Parking Hotel 0.8 space/guest room and 0.25 space per employee 580 rooms/100 employees 489 Meeting space 8 spaces/1,000 square feet 50,000 square feet 400 Full service restaurant 8 spaces/1,000 square feet when accessory to a hotel 25,600 square feet 205 Total 1,094 To justify the number of spaces proposed by the applicant, a reduced parking demand and shared parking analysis was prepared by LSA Associates (see Attachment 6). Based on the project’s proximity to The Disneyland Resort and many other hotels, LSA examined parking studies conducted for nearby uses and found that walking and transit in this area could result in up to a 25 percent reduction in parking demand for the restaurants. The shared parking analysis considered the different hours of operation and varying peak parking periods. Based on the variable parking demand for each of the site’s uses, a maximum parking demand of 549 parking spaces is anticipated when banquet and meeting space is not in use. Demand for up to 949 spaces is anticipated with full utilization of the banquet and meeting space. This parking demand will be Development Agreement No. 2016-00001, Conditional Use Permit No. 2016-05858, Variance No. 2016-05060 and Final Site Plan No. 2016-00001 April 18, 2016 Page 7 of 8 accommodated with 917 standard parking stalls and an additional 32 tandem spaces designated for valet parking. The hotel plans to offer valet service at all times as an amenity for hotel guests. In addition, the use of valet operations has the potential to provide up to 1,021 spaces, if a larger portion of the parking structure were identified for valet parking. Since the project will supply parking to meet and exceed the demand identified in the parking analysis, the proposed project would not increase demand and competition for parking spaces on adjacent properties or on public streets. There is more than adequate queuing on-site to guarantee that parking operations would not impact ingress or egress to adjacent properties. Staff recommends approval of the requested parking variance. Final Site Plan: The applicant requests approval of a final site plan to construct the hotel and accessory uses. The DRSP requires approval of a final site plan for hotels to ensure that the proposed design is appropriate for the site, compatible with surrounding land uses and in compliance with specific plan requirements. Before the Planning Commission may approve the final plans, it must make a finding of fact that the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions exist: 1) The design and layout of the proposed development are consistent with the General Plan, any applicable specific plan, the development standards of the applicable zoning district, and any special area guidelines or policies; 2) The design and layout of the proposed development will not interfere with the use and enjoyment of neighboring existing or future developments, and will not create traffic or pedestrian hazards; 3) The architectural design of the proposed development is compatible with the character of the surrounding neighborhood; 4) The design of the proposed development will provide a desirable environment for its occupants, visiting public, and its neighbors, through the appropriate use of materials, texture and color, and will remain aesthetically appealing and be appropriately maintained; and 5) The proposed development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to the properties or improvements in the vicinity. Staff has reviewed the proposal and has determined that, with the exception of the requested parking variance, the project complies with all applicable provisions of the DRSP. The proposed hotel project is consistent with the goals and policies of the DRSP and consistent with the hotel room and accessory use densities permitted for the site. The architecture, landscaping and materials are of high quality and would be an asset to the area. Staff recommends approval of the proposed final site plan. Correspondence: Staff received the attached email, dated April 7, 2016, opposing the tax incentive component of the project. Staff responded that City Council would consider the tax incentive and that a separate public notice would be provided for that hearing. As described earlier in this staff report, the OCA is not under the purview of the Planning Commission. Development Agreement No. 2016-00001, Conditional Use Permit No. 2016-05858, Variance No. 2016-05060 and Final Site Plan No. 2016-00001 April 18, 2016 Page 8 of 8 CEQA Environmental Determination: An Addendum to FEIR 311 and SEIR 340 has been prepared to evaluate the potential environmental effects of the proposed project see Attachment 11). FEIR 311 was certified in June 1993 for the DRSP and SEIR 340 was certified in December 2012 for Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP. While the proposed project is located within the DRSP, the impacts associated with the development of the site were more recently cumulatively analyzed by SEIR No. 340, which analyzed build-out of the entire Anaheim Resort, including properties within the DRSP. The Addendum prepared for this project analyzed the potential impacts on areas such as traffic, lighting, noise, and air quality. The Addendum concluded that the proposed project would not result in any environmental impacts beyond those that are analyzed and addressed in FEIR 311 and SEIR 340. Several mitigation measures identified in FEIR 311 and SEIR 340 will be implemented as part of this project. A Mitigation Monitoring Plan (MMP) specific to this project is included in the Addendum. These required mitigation measures are also included as conditions of approval within the attached resolution. CONCLUSION: The proposed Four Diamond Luxury Hotel would be located in a key location within The Anaheim Resort, between Disneyland and Anaheim GardenWalk. The proposed hotel would serve an important need to the area in terms of providing needed luxury hotel accommodations and represents a significant positive investment in area. The proposed hotel project is also consistent with the goals and policies of the DRSP aimed at enhancing the visitor experience by providing a wider range of hotel accommodations, restaurants, and event spaces. Additionally, staff anticipates that this development, combined with other recently approved projects in the area will help to invigorate the Anaheim GardenWalk project due to the proposed hotel’s proximity to GardenWalk and the proposed pedestrian bridge that will connect the two developments. Therefore, staff recommends City Council approval of the requested development agreement, conditional use permit, variance, and final site plan. Prepared by, Submitted by, Elaine Thienprasiddhi Jonathan E. Borrego Senior Planner Planning Services Manager Attachments: 1. Development Summary 2. Draft Resolution 3. Draft Development Agreement 4. Letter of Request 5. Conditional Use Permit Justification Letter 6. Parking Analysis 7. Letter of Opposition 8. Final Site Plan Memorandum 9. Development Plans 10. Photos 11. Addendum and MMP SP 92-1DA1ANAHEIM DESERT PALMS HOTEL SP 92-1DA5ANAHEIM PLAZAHOTEL SP 92-1DA5ANAHEIM PLAZAHOTEL S P 9 2 -1 D A 1 C A L I F O R N I A A D V E N T U R E S P 9 2 -1 D A 1 C A L I F O R N I A A D V E N T U R E SP 92-1DA1CANDY CANE INN SP 92-1DA3ASOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON CO. EASEMENT SP 92-2DA1GRAND LECAGY AT THE PARK HOTEL SP 92-1DA3APARKING LOT SP 92-2DA1CASTLE INN& SUITES SP 92-2DA1VACANT SP 92-2DA1SUPER 8MOTEL SP 92-1DA5GARDENWALK PARKING STRUCTURE SP 92-1DA5GARDENWALK SP 92-1DA5GARDENWALK SP 92-1DA3AGARDENWALK PARKING STRUCTURE S H A R B O R B L V D W DISNEY WAY W. KATELLA AVE S . L E W I S S T S . H A R B O R B L V D E. BALL RD W. ORANGEWOOD AVE S . W A L N U T S T S . A N A H E I M B L V D S . N I N T H S T E. KATELLA AVE S . H A S T E R S T E. GENE AUTRY WAYS. C L E M E N T I N E S T 1700 South Harbor Boulevard DEV No. 2015-00120 Subject Property APN: 082-271-10082-271-09 °0 50 100 Feet Aerial Photo:May 2014 S H A R B O R B L V D W DISNEY WAY W. KATELLA AVE S . L E W I S S T S . H A R B O R B L V D E. BALL RD W. ORANGEWOOD AVE S . W A L N U T S T S . A N A H E I M B L V D S . N I N T H S T E. KATELLA AVE S . H A S T E R S T E. GENE AUTRY WAYS. C L E M E N T I N E S T 1700 South Harbor Boulevard DEV No. 2015-00120 Subject Property APN: 082-271-10082-271-09 °0 50 100 Feet Aerial Photo:May 2014 DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY DAG2016-00001 Development Standard Proposed Project DRSP Standards Site Area 8.8 acres --- Density 706 room equivalent 706 rooms allowed Front Landscape Setback – Harbor Boulevard 26 feet 26 feet required Front Landscape Setback – Disney Way 20 feet 20 feet required Front Landscape Tree Density – Harbor Boulevard 7,605 points 7,700 points required Front Landscape Tree Density – Disney Way 6,220 points 6,300 points required Interior Landscape Setbacks 10 feet 10 feet required Building Height 96 feet 107 feet allowed Parking* 917 standard spaces; 1,021 spaces utilizing valet 1,094 spaces required * The applicant requests a variance to permit a fewer parking spaces than required by the Code. ATTACHMENT NO. 1 [DRAFT] ATTACHMENT NO. 2 -1- PC2016-*** RESOLUTION NO. PC2016-*** A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL (1) APPROVE AND ADOPT AN ADDENDUM TO THE PREVIOUSLY-CERTIFIED FINAL SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 340 FOR AMENDMENT NO. 14 TO THE ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLDRSP AN AND FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 311 FOR THE DISNEYLAND RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN AND DETERMINE THAT SAID ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION SERVES AS THE APPROPRIATE ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05858, VARIANCE NO. 2016-05060, FINAL SITE PLAN NO. 2016-00001 AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2016-00001; AND (2) APPROVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05858, VARIANCE NO. 2016-05060, FINAL SITE PLAN NO. 2016- 00001 AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2016-00001. (DEV2015-00120) (1700 SOUTH HARBOR BOULEVARD) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim (hereinafter referred to as the “Planning Commission”) did receive a verified Petition for Conditional Use Permit No. 2016- 05858, Variance No. 2016-05060 and Final Site Plan No. 2016-00001 to permit the construction of a 580-room, eight-story hotel with 50,000 square feet of meeting space, 25,600 square feet of restaurant space, 20,188 square feet of concierge lounge space, and, fewer parking spaces than required by the Anaheim Municipal Code (the "Code") (the"Project) for certain real property located at 1700 South Harbor Boulevard in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, as generally depicted on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference (the “Property”); and WHEREAS, pursuant to the authority set forth in Section 65867 of the California Government Code and the general authority set forth in Section 65864 et seq. of the Government Code (the “Development Agreement Act”), the City’s inherent power as a charter city, and the Development Agreement Act implementing procedures adopted by the City in Resolution No. 82R-565 (the “Procedures Resolution”), the City of Anaheim received a verified petition from Good Hope International, a California corporation (the "Developer"), requesting that the City consider and approve a Development Agreement, designated as Development Agreement No. 2016-00001, in conjunction with the Developer's application for the aforementioned entitlements; and WHEREAS, the Project, Conditional Use Permit No. 2016-05858, Variance No. 2016- 05060, Final Site Plan No. 2016-00001 and Development Agreement No. 2016-00001 shall be referred to herein collectively as the "Proposed Project"; and WHEREAS, the Property, consisting of approximately 8.8 acres, is developed with a 300-room hotel and accessory uses. The Anaheim General Plan designates the Property for Commercial Recreation land uses. The Property is located within the boundaries of both District -2- PC2016-*** A and the Anaheim GardenWalk Overlay of the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan Zone (the "DRSP"). The land use and site development standards for District A of the DRSP permit the Property to be developed with uses set forth in Chapter 18.116 (Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2 (SP 92-2) Zoning and Development Standards) of the Code ("ARSP"). The Project is a permitted primary use and structure on the Property subject to the limitations prescribed in subsection .020 of Section 18.114.095 (Land Use and Site Development Standards – District A) of Chapter 18.114 (Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-1 (SP 92-1) Zoning and Development Standards) of Title 18 (Zoning) of the Code and Section 18.114.105 (Anaheim Gardenwalk Overlay) of said Chapter 18.114; and WHEREAS, in support of the adoption of the DRSP, the City Council certified Final Environmental Impact Report No. 311 (“FEIR No. 311”) by the adoption on June 22, 1993 of its Resolution No. 93R-107; and WHEREAS, on September 20, 1994, the City Council adopted the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan to provide a long-range comprehensive plan for future development of approximately 549.5 acres surrounding The Disneyland Resort and Hotel Circle. The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan includes zoning and development standards, design guidelines, a streetscape program, and a public facilities plan, intended to maximize the area’s potential, guide future development, and ensure a balance between growth and infrastructure. The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan permits the development of hotel, convention, retail, and other visitor-serving uses, as well as the infrastructure improvements that are needed to support future development; and WHEREAS, on September 27, 1994, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 5454 for the purpose of amending the zoning map to reclassify certain real property described therein into the ARSP, subject to certain conditions as specified therein. The City Council concurrently adopted Ordinance No. 5453 for the purpose of establishing zoning and development standards for the ARSP in the form of what was then known as Chapter 18.48 of Title 18 (Zoning) of the Code and is now known as Chapter 18.116 (Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2 (SP 92-2) Zoning and Development Standards) of Title 18 (Zoning) of the Code; and WHEREAS, in support of the adoption of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan, the City Council certified Master Environmental Impact Report (“MEIR No. 313”) by the adoption on September 20, 1994 of its Resolution No. 94R-234; and WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 2012-158, the City Council certified Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report No. 2008-00340 ("SEIR No. 340"), which reevaluated all of the environmental changes that had occurred in and around the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Area since its adoption in 1994 and contained an analysis of the potential environmental impacts of various entitlements and actions referenced therein, including, inter alia, entitlements permitting the maximum build-out of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan, including an increase of to 406,359 square feet of convention center space, 180,000 square feet of commercial development, 900 hotel rooms, and 40,000 square feet of hotel meeting/ballroom space; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on April 18, 2016 at 5:00 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 18.60 of the Code, to hear and consider evidence for and against the Proposed Project, including, specifically, Conditional Use Permit No. 2016-05858, Variance No. 2016-05060, Final Site Plan No. 2016- -3- PC2016-*** 00001 and Development Agreement No. 2016-00001 to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, pursuant to and in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.; herein referred to as “CEQA”), the State of California Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (commencing with Section 15000 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations; herein referred to as the "CEQA Guidelines"), and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual, the City is the "lead agency" for the preparation and consideration of environmental documents for the Proposed Project; and WHEREAS, an Addendum to FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340, dated April 2016 (herein referred to as the "Addendum"), a copy of which is on file in the Planning Department and incorporated herein by this reference as though fully set forth, has been prepared pursuant to the provisions of Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines in order to determine whether any significant environmental impacts which were not identified in FEIR No. 311 and/or SEIR No. 340 would result or whether previously identified significant impacts would be substantially more severe in connection with the Proposed Project. FEIR No. 311, SEIR No. 340, the proposed Addendum and Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 329 ("MMP"), which MMP has been prepared for the Proposed Project, collectively constitute the environmental documentation under and pursuant to CEQA the CEQA Guidelines, and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual relating to the Proposed Project and shall be referred to herein collectively as the "CEQA Documents"; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the CEQA Documentsand finds and determines and recommends that the City Council also find and determine as follows: 1. That the Addendum was prepared for the Proposed Project in compliance with the requirements of CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual. 2. That, based upon the evidence submitted and as demonstrated by the analysis included in the Addendum, none of the conditions described in Sections 15162 or 15163 of the CEQA Guidelines calling for the preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR or negative declaration have occurred; specifically: (a) There have not been any substantial changes in the project described and analyzed under FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340 that require major revisions of those CEQA Documents because of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; (b) There have not been any substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the Proposed Project is undertaken that require major revisions of FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340 due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; and -4- PC2016-*** (c) There is no new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340 were certified as complete and adopted, that shows any of the following: (a) the Proposed Project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in FSEIR No. 339 or the other CEQA Documents; (b) significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in FEIR No. 311 or SEIR No. 340; (c) mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would, in fact, be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Proposed Project, but the Developer declines to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives; or (d) mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340 would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the Developer decline to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives. 3. In connection with the Proposed Project and the Planning Commission’s review of the Addendum, the Planning Commission has independently reviewed all of the CEQA Documents and has exercised its independent judgment in making the findings and determinations set forth herein. 4. Pursuant to the above findings, the Planning Commission determines that FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340, together with the Addendum, satisfy all of the requirements of CEQA and are adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for the Proposed Project and hereby recommends that the City Council approve and adopt the Addendum and Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 329 for the Proposed Project. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission does further find and determine that the request for proposed Conditional Use Permit No. 2016-05858 to allow two concierge lounges, limited strictly to the use of hotel guests, does find and determine the following facts: 1. Pursuant to the authority conferred upon the Planning Commission by Table 116-C (Primary Uses and Structures: C-R District (Development Area 1)) of Section 18.116.070 of Chapter 18.116 (Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2 (SP 92-2) Zoning and Development Standards) of the Code, the proposed two concierge lounges are not expressly permitted or prohibited in the C-R District (Development Area 1) of the ARSP but may be established by conditional use permit when determined by the Planning Commission to be consistent and compatible with the intended purpose of the ARSP; and 2. The proposed two concierge lounges are consistent and compatible with the intended purpose of the ARSP because the use would serve as an additional amenity and complement hotels developments in the area; and 3. The proposed use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses, or the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located because the use is consistent and compatible with existing resort and tourism related uses in the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan Zone; and 4. The size and shape of the site for the use is adequate to allow the full development of the proposed use, in a manner not detrimental to either the particular area or health and safety because the proposed use would be oriented toward the interior of the Project; and -5- PC2016-*** 5. The traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area because the use would be limited to guests of the hotel, such that no additional traffic would be generated; and 6. The granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim as the proposed use would be integrated into the Proposed Project and would not pose a health or safety risk to the citizens of the City of Anaheim or the adjoining City. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission does further find and determine that the request for Variance No. 2014-04970 to permit less parking than required by the Code in conjunction with the Proposed Project with accessory uses should be approved for the following reasons: SECTION NO. 18.42.040.010 Minimum number of parking spaces. (1,097 spaces required; 917 spaces proposed) 1. That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not cause fewer off- street parking spaces to be provided for the proposed use than the number of such spaces necessary to accommodate all vehicles attributable to such use under the normal and reasonably foreseeable conditions of operation of such use based on the analysis conducted by LSA Associates. Shared parking methodology forecasts the maximum parking demand to be 549 parking spaces when banquet and meeting space is not in use, and 949 parking spaces when banquet and meeting space is fully utilized. The project will construct 917 standard parking stalls and 32 tandem parking stalls, which can be used to park a total of at least 949 vehicles through use of a valet operations plan. Therefore, the project will not cause fewer off-street parking spaces to be provided for the proposed use than the number of spaces necessary to accommodate all parked vehicles attributable to the project; and 2. That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use because the on-site parking within the property will adequately accommodate the parking demands of the hotel. Additionally, on-street parking is not permitted on the adjacent public streets; and 3. That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon adjacent private property in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use because the on-site parking will adequately accommodate the parking demands of the proposed hotel. The nearby parking lots consist of an access controlled privately-owned parking lots and structures; and 4. That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase traffic congestion within the off-street parking areas or lots provided for the proposed use because the project site provides adequate ingress and egress points to the property and are designed to allow for adequate on-site circulation; and 5. That the variance, under the conditions imposed, will not impede vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use because the project site has existing ingress or egress access points that are designed to allow adequate on-site circulation. -6- PC2016-*** WHEREAS, the Planning Commission does further find and determine that the request for a Final Site Plan should be approved for the following reasons: 1. Subject to compliance with the conditions of approval attached to this Resolution as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by this reference, the Final Site Plan, including its design and layout, complies with the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan No. SP92-1 and is consistent with the zoning and development standards of said Specific Plan, as described in Chapter 18.114 of the Code, with the exception of the parking variance request, as described herein. 2. The design and layout of the Proposed Project will not interfere with the use and enjoyment of neighboring existing or future developments, and will not create traffic or pedestrian hazards. 3. The architectural design of the Proposed Project is compatible with the character of the surrounding hotels and development located within the land area of the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan and adjacent Anaheim Resort Specific Plan. 4. The design of the Proposed Project will provide a desirable environment for its occupants, the visiting public, and its neighbors, through the appropriate use of materials, texture and color, and will remain aesthetically appealing and be appropriately maintained. 5. The Proposed Project will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to the properties or improvements in the vicinity of the Proposed Project. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission does further find and determine that the proposed project, based on the size of the development, which includes the construction of 580 hotel rooms and 1,125,800 square feet of hotel, meeting and restaurant space, is eligible to enter into a Development Agreement, based on meeting one or more of the following criteria: 1. That the project shall occupy at least fifty (50) acres; or 2. That, upon completion, the project shall result in the construction of at least (i) two hundred fifty (250) dwelling units, (ii) two hundred fifty thousand (250,000) square feet of commercial-office space, or two hundred fifty thousand (250,000) square feet of industrial space; or 3. That the project will be constructed in phases over an anticipated period of not less than five (5) years; or 4. A project shall also be eligible if the Planning Director finds that the public health, safety or general welfare of the citizens of Anaheim will best be served by accepting an Application for consideration by the Planning Commission and City Council. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study made by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of and based upon all of the testimony, evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does find and determine that the proposed Development Agreement No. 2016-00001, in the form presented at this meeting, meets all of the standards and requirements set forth in the Procedures Resolution, that is: -7- PC2016-*** 1. The proposed Development Agreement is consistent with the General Plan and with the goals, policies, programs and objectives specified in the General Plan; 2. The proposed Development Agreement is compatible with the uses authorized in, and the regulations prescribed for, the applicable zoning district(s) in which the Project is and will be located; 3. The proposed Development Agreement is compatible with the orderly development of property in the surrounding area; 4. The proposed Development Agreement No. is not otherwise detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim; and 5. The proposed Development Agreement No. 2016-00001 constitutes a lawful, present exercise of the City’s police power and authority under, is entered into pursuant to, and is in compliance with the City’s charter powers, the requirements of the Development Agreement Act and the Procedures Resolution. WHEREAS, this Planning Commission determines that the evidence in the record constitutes substantial evidence to support the actions taken and the findings made in this Resolution, that the facts stated in this Resolution are supported by substantial evidence in the record, including testimony received at the public hearing, the staff presentation, the staff report and all materials in the project files. There is no substantial evidence, nor are there other facts, that detract from the findings made in this Resolution. This Planning Commission expressly declares that it considered all evidence presented and reached these findings after due consideration of all evidence presented to it. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, based upon the aforesaid findings and determinations and based upon a thorough review of the proposed Addendum, the other CEQA Documents, and the evidence received to date, this Planning Commission does hereby approve and recommend that the City Council of the City of Anaheim take the following action: (1) approve and adopt the Addendum and the MMP for the Project, and (2) approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2016-05858, Variance No. 2016-05060, Final Site Plan No. 2016-00001 and Development Agreement No. 2016-00001 in the form presented at this meeting, and the conditions of approval set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, which are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of the Property in order to preserve the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. Extensions for further time to complete conditions of approval may be granted in accordance with Section 18.60.170 of the Code. Timing for compliance with conditions of approval may be amended by the Planning Director upon a showing of good cause provided (i) equivalent timing is established that satisfies the original intent and purpose of the condition(s), (ii) the modification complies with the Code, and (iii) the applicant has demonstrated significant progress toward establishment of the use or approved development. -8- PC2016-*** THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of April 18, 2016. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60 (Procedures) of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced by a City Council Resolution in the event of an appeal. CHAIR, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ATTEST: SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim held on April 18, 2016, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 18th day of April, 2016. SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM -9- PC2016-*** -10- PC2016-*** EXHIBIT “B” DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2016-00001, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05858, VARIANCE NO. 2016-05060 AND FINAL SITE PLAN NO. 2016-00001 (DEV2015-00120) NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF DEMOLITION PERMITS 1 MM 5.2-4: Prior to issuance of each grading permit (for Import/Export Plan) and prior to issuance of demolition permit (for Demolition Plan), the property owner/developer shall submit Demolition and Import/Export plans. The plans shall include identification of offsite locations for materials export from the project and options for disposal of excess material. These options may include recycling of materials onsite, sale to a soil broker or contractor, sale to a project in the vicinity or transport to an environmentally cleared landfill, with attempts made to move it within Orange County. The property owner/developer shall offer recyclable building materials, such as asphalt or concrete for sale or removal by private firms or public agencies for use in construction of other projects, if not all can be reused on the project site. Planning and Building 2 MM 5.3-1: Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit, grading permit, or building permit, whichever occurs first, a survey for active raptor nests shall be conducted by a qualified Biologist and submitted to the Planning and Building Department 30 days prior to commencement of any demolition or construction activities during the raptor nesting season (February 1 to June 30) and within 500 feet of a fan palm, juniper, or canary island pine. Should an active nest be identified, restrictions defined by a qualified Biologist will be placed on construction activities in the vicinity of any active nest observed until the nest is no longer active, as determined by a qualified Biologist. These restrictions may include a 300- to 500-foot buffer zone designated around a nest to allow construction to proceed while minimizing disturbance to the active nest. Once the nest is no longer active, construction can proceed within the buffer zone. Planning and Building 3 MM 5.3-2: Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit, grading permit, or building permit, whichever occurs first, a letter detailing the proposed schedule for vegetation removal activities shall be submitted to the Planning and Building Department, verifying that removal shall take place between August 1 and February 28 to avoid the bird nesting season. This would ensure that no active nests would be disturbed. If this is not feasible, then a qualified Biologist shall inspect any trees which would be impacted prior to demolition, grading or construction activities to ensure no nesting birds are present. If a nest is present, then appropriate minimization measures shall be developed by the Biologist. Planning and Building -11- PC2016-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT 4 MM 5.7-4: Prior to issuance of the first grading or demolition permit, whichever occurs first the property owner/developer shall submit a plan for review and approval by the Fire Department which details procedures that will be taken if previously unknown USTs, or other unknown hazardous material or waste, is discovered onsite. Fire PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMIT 5 MM 5.4-1: Prior to issuance of each grading permit, the property owner/developer shall submit a letter identifying the certified archaeologist that has been hired to ensure that the following actions are implemented: a. The archaeologist must be present at the pre-grading conference in order to establish procedures for temporarily halting or redirecting work to permit the sampling, identification, and evaluation of artifacts if potentially significant artifacts are uncovered. If artifacts are uncovered and determined to be significant, the archaeological observer shall determine appropriate actions in cooperation with the property owner/developer for exploration and/or salvage. b. Specimens that are collected prior to or during the grading process will be donated to an appropriate educational or research institution. c. Any archaeological work at the site shall be conducted under the direction of the certified archaeologist. If any artifacts are discovered during grading operations when the archaeological monitor is not present, grading shall be diverted around the area until the monitor can survey the area. d. A final report detailing the findings and disposition of the specimens shall be submitted to the City Engineer. Upon completion of the grading, the archaeologist shall notify the City as to when the final report will be submitted. Public Works 6 MM 5.4-2: Prior to issuance of each grading permit, the property owner/developer shall submit a letter identifying the certified paleontologist that has been hired to ensure that the following actions are implemented: a. The paleontologist must be present at the pre-grading conference in order to establish procedures to temporarily halt or redirect work to permit the sampling, identification, and evaluation of fossils if potentially significant paleontological resources are uncovered. If artifacts are uncovered and found to be significant, the paleontological observer shall determine appropriate actions in cooperation with the property owner/developer for exploration and/or salvage. b. Specimens that are collected prior to or during the grading process will be donated to an appropriate educational or research institution. c. Any paleontological work at the site shall be conducted under the direction of the certified paleontologist. If any fossils are discovered Public Works -12- PC2016-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT during grading operations when the paleontological monitor is not present, grading shall be diverted around the area until the monitor can survey the area. 7 MM 5.15-8: Prior to the issuance of the first building permit or grading permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall comply with Rule 15E of the Public Utilities Department Water Rates, Rules, and Regulations. Rule 15E shall be amended to include: a) Construction of a new well with a minimum 1,500 GPM capacity to serve The Anaheim Resort Area (tentative location near Ponderosa Park and Orangewood Avenue); and b) Construction of a new 16-inch water main along Harbor Boulevard from Orangewood to Chapman Avenue. Public Utilities 8 MM 5.16-1: Prior to approval of a final subdivision map or issuance of a grading or building permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall participate in the City’s Master Plan of Sewers and related Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program to assist in mitigating existing and future sanitary sewer system deficiencies as follows: The property owner/developer shall submit a report for review and approval of the City Engineer to assist in determining the following: a) If the development/redevelopment (1) does not discharge into a sewer system that is currently deficient or will become deficient because of that discharge and/or (2) does not increase flows or change points of discharge, then the property owner’s/developer’s responsibility shall be limited to participation in the Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program. b) If the development/redevelopment (1) discharges into a sewer system that is currently deficient or will may become deficient because of that discharge and/or (2) increases flows or changes points of discharge, then the property owner/developer shall be required to develop a Sewer Study to determine the impacts and required improvements to correct those impacts. Property owner/developer shall guarantee mitigation to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney of the impact prior to approval of a final subdivision map or issuance of a grading or building permit whichever occurs first, pursuant to the improvements identified in the individual Sewer Study or the applicable City Master Sewer Plan South Central Area Sewer Deficiency Study. The property owner/developer shall be required to install the sanitary sewer facilities, as recommended by the aforementioned applicable Sewer Study or Plan South Central Area Sewer Deficiency Study, prior to acceptance for maintenance of public improvements by the City or final building and zoning inspections for the building/structure, whichever comes first. Additionally, the property owner/developer shall participate in the Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program, as determined by the City Engineer, which may include fees, credits, reimbursements, or a combination thereof. As part of Public Works -13- PC2016-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT guaranteeing the mitigation of impacts for the sanitary sewer system, the property owner/developer shall submit a sanitary sewer system improvement phasing plan for the project to the City Engineer for review and approval which shall contain, at a minimum, (1) a layout of the complete system, (2) all facility sizes, including support calculations, (3) construction phasing, and (4) construction estimates. The City recognizes that these improvements will serve not only the applicant but also other property owners/developers in the Specific Plan area, the Anaheim Resort, and the service area, each of which should contribute its allocable share of the cost of these improvements. To implement this requirement as it applies to other property owners/developers in the Specific Plan area, the Anaheim Resort, and the service area, the City shall, and shall make appropriate arrangements with other public agencies, if any, to reimburse the applicant to the extent that its contributions for these improvements exceed the applicant's allocable share of the cost. Such arrangements shall include one or more of the following: (1) creation of integrated financing districts; (2) entry into a reimbursement agreement with the applicant; (3) creation of appropriate community facilities districts, assessment districts, and/or use of similar public financing districts and/or mechanisms; and (4) creation of other such mechanisms or districts as may be appropriate to provide for the reimbursement of these costs. The determination of the allocable share of improvement costs attributable to the applicant and other property owners/developers, and reimbursement amounts, shall be based on an apportionment of the costs of such improvements among property owners/developers, including the applicant, in the Specific Plan area, the Anaheim Resort, or otherwise defined service area, as applicable, depending on the area served. The study shall determine the impact of the project sewer flows for total build out of the project and identify local deficiencies for each project component (i.e., each hotel). 9 MM 5.8-1: Prior to issuance of the first grading or building permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall submit a Master Drainage and Runoff Management Plan (MDRMP) for review and approval by the Public Works Department, Development Services Division and Orange County (OC) Public Works/OC Engineering. The Master Plan shall include, but not be limited to, the following items: a. Backbone storm drain layout and pipe size, including supporting hydrology and hydraulic calculations for storms up to and including the 100-year storm; and, b. A delineation of the improvements to be implemented for control of project-generated drainage and runoff. Public Works 10 MM 5.8-2: Prior to issuance of a grading permit for sites that disturb more than one (1) acre of soil, the property owner/developer shall obtain coverage under the NPDES Statewide Industrial Stormwater Permit for General Construction Activities from the State Water Resources Control Public Works -14- PC2016-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT Board. Evidence of attainment shall be submitted to the Public Works Department, Development Services Division. 11 MM 5.12-6: Prior to issuance of each grading permit, the property owner/developer shall submit an emergency fire access plan to the Fire Department for review and approval to ensure that service to the site is in accordance with Fire Department service requirements. Fire 12 MM 5.14-3: Prior to approval of the first final subdivision map or issuance of the first building permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall irrevocably offer for dedication (with subordination of easements), including necessary construction easements, the ultimate arterial highway right(s)-of-way adjacent to their property as shown in the Circulation Element of the Anaheim General Plan. Public Works 13 MM 5.14-5: Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the property owner/developer shall provide to the City of Anaheim Public Works Department a plan to coordinate rideshare services for construction employees with the Anaheim Transportation Network (ATN) for review and a approval and shall implement ATN recommendations to the extent feasible. Public Works 14 MM 5.14-15: Based upon the improvement phasing analysis in the Project traffic study, the property owner/developer shall implement traffic improvements as identified in the Project traffic study to maintain satisfactory levels of service as defined by the City’s General Plan, based on thresholds of significance, performance standards, and methodologies established by the Orange County Congestion Management program and the City of Anaheim Traffic Study Guidelines. The improvement phasing analysis will specify the timing, funding, construction, and fair-share responsibilities for all traffic improvements necessary to maintain satisfactory levels of service within the City of Anaheim and surrounding jurisdictions. The property owner/developer shall construct, bond for or enter into a funding agreement for necessary circulation system improvements, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager, unless alternative funding sources have been identified. Public Works 15 MM 5.14-19: Prior to the approval of the final subdivision map or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall pay the identified fair-share responsibility as determined by the City as set forth in MM 5.14-15. The City shall allocate the property owner/developer’s fair-share contribution to traffic mitigation programs that result in improved traffic flow on the impacted mainline and ramp locations, via an agreement mutually acceptable to Caltrans and the City. Public Works 16 MM 5.18-1: Prior to approval of a final subdivision map, or issuance of a grading or building permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall participate in the City’s Master Plan of Storm Drains and related Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program to assist in mitigating existing and future storm drainage system deficiencies as Public Works -15- PC2016-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT follows: The property owner/developer shall submit a report for review and approval by the City Engineer to assist with determining the following: a. If the specific development/redevelopment does not increase or redirect current or historic storm water quantities/flows, then the property owner/developer’s responsibility shall be limited to participation in the Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program to provide storm drainage facilities in 10- and 25-year storm frequencies and to protect properties/structures for a 100-year storm frequency. b. If the specific development/redevelopment increases or redirects the current or historic storm water quantity/flow, then the property owner/developer shall be required to guarantee mitigation to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and City Attorney’s office of the impact prior to approval of a final subdivision map or issuance of a grading or building permit, whichever occurs first, pursuant to the improvements identified in the Master Plan of Drainage for the South Central Area. The property owner/developer shall be required to install the storm drainage facilities as recommended by the Master Plan of Drainage for the South Central Area to provide storm drainage facilities for 10- and 25-year storm frequencies and to protect properties/structures for a 100-year storm frequency prior to acceptance for maintenance of public improvements by the City or final building and zoning inspection for the building/structure, whichever occurs first. Additionally, the property owner/developer shall participate in the Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program as determined by the City Engineer which could include fees, credits, reimbursements, or a combination thereof. As part of guaranteeing the mitigation of impacts on the storm drainage system, a storm drainage system improvement phasing plan for the project shall be submitted by the property owner/developer to the City Engineer for review and approval and shall contain, at a minimum, (1) a layout of the complete system; (2) all facility sizes, including support calculations; (3) construction phasing; and, (4) construction estimates. 17 MM 5.19-5: Prior to issuance of each grading and building permit, the Property Owner/Developer shall submit to the Planning Director or Planning Services Manager for approval a Construction Waste Management Plan that, at a minimum, specifies that at least 75 percent of non-hazardous construction and demolition debris shall be recycled or salvaged and identifies the materials to be diverted from disposal and whether the materials will be sorted on site or co-mingled. Planning and Building ONGOING DURING PROJECT DEMOLITION AND CONSTRUCTION 18 MM 5.5-5: Ongoing during grading activities, the property owner/developer shall implement standard practices for all applicable codes Planning and Building -16- PC2016-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT and ordinances to prevent erosion to the satisfaction of the Planning and Building Department, Building Services Division. 19 MM 5.7-6: Ongoing during project demolition and construction, in the event that hazardous waste, including asbestos, is discovered during site preparation or construction, the property owner/developer shall ensure that the identified hazardous waste and/or hazardous material are handled and disposed of in the manner specified by the State of California Hazardous Substances Control Law (Health and Safety Code, Division 20, Chapter 6.5), and according to the requirements of the California Administrative Code, Title 30, Chapter 22. Fire PRIOR TO THE PLACEMENT OF BUILDING MATERIALS ON A BUILDING SITE 20 MM 5.12-13: Prior to the placement of building materials on a building site, an all-weather road shall be provided from the roadway system to and on the construction site and for fire hydrants at all times, as required by the Fire Department. Such routes shall be paved or, subject to the approval of the Fire Department, shall otherwise provide adequate emergency access. Every building constructed must be accessible to Fire Department apparatus. The width and radius of the driving surface must meet the requirements of Section 10.204 of the Uniform Fire Code, as adopted by the City of Anaheim. Fire PRIOR TO THE PLACEMENT OF BUILDING MATERIALS ON A BUILDING SITE 21 MM 5.12-5: Prior to commencement of structural framing on each parcel or lot, onsite fire hydrants shall be installed and charged by the property owner/developer as required and approved by the Fire Department. Fire PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS 22 Prior to issuance of building permits for the parking garage, plans shall demonstrate compliance with all City standard details. 23 MM 5.1-2: Prior to issuance of building permits, all plumbing or other similar pipes and fixtures located on the exterior of the building shall be shown on plans as fully screened from view of adjacent public rights-of- way and from adjacent properties by architectural devices and/or appropriate building materials. A note indicating that these improvements will be installed prior to final building and zoning inspections shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. Planning and Building 24 MM 5.1-11: Prior to issuance of each building permits, unless records indicate previous payment, a fee for street tree purposes shall be paid or cause to be paid to the City of Anaheim based on the length of street frontage in an amount as established by City Council resolution or credit against the fee given for City authorized improvements installed by the property owner/developer. Planning and Building 25 MM 5.1-12: Prior to issuance of each building permit, all air conditioning facilities and other roof and ground-mounted equipment shall be shown on plans as shielded from public view and the sound buffered to comply with Planning and Building -17- PC2016-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT City of Anaheim noise ordinances from any adjacent residential or transient-occupied properties. A note indicating that these improvements shall be installed prior to final building and zoning inspections shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 26 MM 5.2-2: Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit evidence that low emission paints and coatings are utilized in the design and construction of buildings, in compliance with SCAQMD regulations. The information shall be denoted on the project plans and specifications. The property owner/developer shall submit an architectural coating schedule and calculations demonstrating that VOC emissions from architectural coating operations would not exceed 75 pounds per day averaged over biweekly periods. The calculations shall show, for each coating, the surface area to be coated, gallons (or liters) of coating per unit surface area, and VOC content per gallon (or liter). The property owner/developer shall also implement the following to limit emissions from architectural coatings and asphalt usage: a. Use non-solvent-based coatings on buildings, wherever appropriate; b. Use solvent-based coatings, where they are necessary. Planning and Building 27 MM 5.2-5: Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall comply with all SCAQMD offset regulations and implementation of Best Available Control Technology (BACT) and Best Available Retrofit Control Technology (BARCT) for any new or modified stationary source. Copies of permits shall be given to the Planning Department. Planning and Building 28 MM 5.2-6: Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall implement, and demonstrate to the City, measures that are being taken to reduce operation-related air quality impacts. These measures may include, but are not limited to the following: a. Improve thermal integrity of structures and reduced thermal load through use of automated time clocks or occupant sensors. b. Incorporate efficient heating and other appliances. c. Incorporate energy conservation measures in site orientation and in building design, such as appropriate passive solar design. d. Use drought-resistant landscaping wherever feasible to reduce energy used in pumping and transporting water. e. To the extent feasible, provide daycare opportunities for employees or participate in a joint development daycare center f. Install facilities for electric vehicle recharging, unless it is demonstrated that the technology for these facilities or availability of the equipment current at the time makes this installation infeasible. Planning and Building 29 MM 5.5-1: Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit to the Planning and Building Department, Planning and Building -18- PC2016-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT Building Services Division for review and approval, detailed foundation design information for the subject building(s), prepared by a civil engineer, based on recommendations by a geotechnical engineer. 30 MM 5.5-2: Prior to issuance of each foundation permit, the property owner/developer shall submit a report prepared by a geotechnical engineer to the Planning and Building Department, Building Services Division for review and approval, which shall investigate the subject foundation excavations to determine if soft layers are present immediately beneath the footing site and to ensure that compressibility does not underlie the footing. Planning and Building 31 MM 5.5-3: Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit plans to the Planning Department, Building Services Division for review and approval showing that the proposed structure has been analyzed for earthquake loading and designed according to the most recent seismic standards in the California Building Code adopted by the City of Anaheim. Planning and Building 32 MM 3.10.7-3: Prior to issuance of the first building permit for development of a facility other than parking in the Future Expansion District, the applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City of Anaheim to pay or cause to be paid its fair share of funding for the following improvements:  The applicable segments of a City sewer replacement or parallel line to an existing 18-inch City sewer line in Orangewood Avenue from the existing 24-inch District trunk sewer line at Ninth Street to a point of west of I-5. This will be necessary for construction of the Future Expansion District or any other developments in the Commercial Recreation Area south of Katella and West of I-5. This mitigation will be readdressed in subsequent environmental review for the Future Expansion District.  A City sewer main replacement or parallel line in Harbor Boulevard from Convention Way to Orangewood Avenue. To implement this mitigation measure, the City has adopted the Sewer Impact and Improvement Fee Program for the South Central City Area. Compliance with this Fee Program by the property owner/developer (per Ordinance No. 5490 and Resolution No. 95R-60 dated April 18, 1995) shall satisfy the requirements of this Mitigation Measure, or the City may enter into alternative financing arrangements with the applicant. Public Works 33 MM 5.10-9: Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall present plans and calculations to the Planning Department, Building Division to demonstrate that noise levels would be less than 65 dBA CNEL for outdoor use areas (including dining patios, pools, playgrounds, or outdoor gathering areas). This requirement can be accomplished through shielding areas behind buildings or the construction of a noise barrier. Planning and Building 34 MM 5.10-10: Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall present plans and calculations to the Planning and Planning and Building -19- PC2016-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT Building Department, Building Division to demonstrate that noise levels from planned mechanical ventilation equipment, loading docks, trash compactors, and other proposed on-site noise sources are designed to meet the City’s 60 dBA Sound Pressure Levels standard at the property line, and not create a noise increase greater than 5 dBA over existing ambient noise at the nearest noise sensitive receptor, whichever is more restrictive. 35 MM 5.10-12: Prior to issuance of each building permit if pile driving and blasting is anticipated during construction, a noise and vibration analysis must be prepared and submitted to the Planning and Building Department, Building Division, to assess and mitigate potential noise and vibration impacts related to these activities. Planning and Building 36 MM 5.12-2: Prior to the issuance of each building permit for a parking structure, the property owner/developer shall submit plans to the Police Department for review and approval indicating the provision of closed circuit television monitoring and recording or other substitute security measures as may be approved by the Police Department. Said measures shall be implemented prior to final building and zoning inspections. Police 37 MM 5.12-4: Prior to issuance of each building permit, the project design shall include parking lots and parking structures with controlled access points to limit ingress and egress if determined to be necessary by the Police Department, and shall be subject to the review and approval of the Police Department. Police 38 MM 5.12-7: Prior to issuance of each building permit; to be implemented prior to the final building and zoning inspection, plans shall indicate that all buildings, exclusive of parking structures, shall have sprinklers installed by the property owner/developer in accordance with the Anaheim Municipal Code. Said sprinklers shall be installed prior to each final building and zoning inspection. Fire 39 MM 5.12-8: Prior to issuance of each building permit, plans shall be submitted to ensure that development is in accordance with the City of Anaheim Fire Department Standards, including: a. Overhead clearance shall not be less than 14 feet for the full width of access roads. b. Bridges and underground structures to be used for Fire Department access shall be designed to support Fire Department vehicles weighing 75,000 pounds. c. All underground tunnels shall have sprinklers. Water supplies are required at all entrances. Standpipes shall also be provided when determined to be necessary by the Fire Department. d. Adequate off-site public fire hydrants contiguous to the Specific Plan area and onsite private fire hydrants shall be provided by the property owner/developer. The precise number, types, and locations of the hydrants shall be determined during building permit review. Hydrants Fire -20- PC2016-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT are to be a maximum of 400 feet apart. e. A minimum residual water pressure of 20 psi shall remain in the water system. Flow rates for public parking facilities shall be set at 1,000 to 1,500 gpm. 40 MM 5.12-9: Prior to issuance of the first building permit, the property owner/developer shall enter into an agreement recorded against the property with the City of Anaheim to pay or cause to be paid their fair share of the funding to accommodate the following, which will serve the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan area: a. One additional fire truck company. b. One additional paramedic company. c. Modifications to existing fire stations to accommodate the additional fire units, additional manpower, equipment and facilities. d. A vehicle equipped with specialty tools and equipment to enable the Fire Department to provide heavy search and rescue response capability. e. A medical triage vehicle/trailer, equipped with sufficient trauma dressings, medical supplies, stretchers, etc., to handle 1,000 injured persons, and an appropriate storage facility. The determination of the allocable share of costs attributable to the property owner/developer shall be based on an apportionment of the costs of such equipment/facilities among property owners/developers in the Hotel Circle Specific Plan Area, the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan Area and the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Area or the otherwise defined service area, as applicable, depending on the area served. Note: To implement this mitigation measure, the City has adopted the Fire Protection Facilities and Paramedic Services Impact Fee Program. Compliance with this Program by the property owner/developer (per Ordinance No. 5496 and Resolution No. 95R-73 dated May 16, 1995) shall satisfy the requirements of this Mitigation Measure, or the City may enter into alternative financing arrangements. Fire 41 MM 5.12-11: Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit a Construction Fire Protection Plan to the Fire Department for review and approval detailing accessibility of emergency fire equipment, fire hydrant location, and any other construction features required by the Fire Marshal. The property owner/developer shall be responsible for securing facilities acceptable to the Fire Department and hydrants shall be operational with required fire flow. Fire 42 MM 5.12-14: Prior to approval of building plans, the property owner/developer shall provide written evidence to the satisfaction of the Fire Department that all lockable pedestrian and/or vehicular access gates Fire -21- PC2016-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT shall be equipped with “knox box” devices as required and approved by the Fire Department. 43 MM 5.12-17: Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall provide proof of compliance with Government Code Section 53080 (Schools). Planning and Building 44 MM 5.12-19: Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the property owner/developer shall comply with the Anaheim Municipal Code, Section 17.08.385, Public Library Facilities Services Areas – Payment of Fees Required. Planning and Building 45 MM 5.14-2: Prior to issuance of the first building permit for each building, the property owner/developer shall pay the appropriate Traffic Signal Assessment Fees and Transportation Impact and Improvement Fees to the City of Anaheim in amounts determined by the City Council Resolution in effect at the time of issuance of the building permit with credit given for City-authorized improvements provided by the property owner/developer. The property owner shall also participate in all applicable reimbursement or benefit districts, which have been established. Public Works 46 MM 5.14-12: Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the location of any proposed gates across a driveway shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer. Gates shall not be installed across any driveway or private street in a manner which may adversely affect vehicular traffic on the adjacent public streets. Installation of any gates shall conform to the current version of Engineering Standard Detail No. 475. Public Works 47 MM 5.14-13: Prior to the issuance of building permits, plans shall show that all driveways shall be constructed with a minimum fifteen (15) foot radius curb returns as required by the City Engineer, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Public Works 48 MM 5.14-14: Prior to the issuance of building permits or final map approval, whichever occurs first, security in the form of a bond, certificate of deposit, letter of credit, completion guarantee, or cash, in an amount and form satisfactory to the City Engineer shall be posted with the City to guarantee the satisfactory completion of all engineering requirements of the City of Anaheim, including preparation of improvement plans and installation of all improvements, such as curbs and gutters, sidewalks, water facilities, street grading and pavement, sewer and drainage facilities and other appurtenant work, as required by the City Engineer and in accordance with the specifications on file in the office of the City Engineer, as may be modified by the City Engineer. Installation of said improvements shall occur prior to final building and zoning inspections. Public Works 49 MM 5.15-1: Prior to issuance of each building permit (to be implemented prior to final building and zoning inspections, and continuing on an on- going basis during project operation), the property owner/ developer shall submit to the Planning Services Division Public Utilities Department plans Planning and Building -22- PC2016-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT for review and approval which shall ensure that water conservation measures are incorporated. The water conservation measures to be shown on the plans and implemented by the property owner/developer, to the extent applicable include, but are not limited to, the following: a) Use of low-flow sprinkler heads in irrigation systems. b) Use of waterway recirculation systems. c) Low-flow fittings, fixtures, and equipment, including low flush toilets and urinals. d) Use of self-closing valves on drinking valves. e) Use of efficient irrigation systems such as drip irrigation and automatic systems which use moisture sensors. f) Use of low-flow shower heads in hotels. g) Water efficient ice-machines, dishwashers, clothes washers and other water- using appliances. h) Use of irrigation systems primarily at night when evaporation rates are lowest. i) Provide information to the public in conspicuous places regarding water conservation. j) Use of water conserving landscape plant materials wherever feasible 50 MM 5.15-2: Prior to issuance of each building permit, all water supply planning for the project will be closely coordinated with, and be subject to the review and final approval of, the Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division and Fire Department. Public Utilities 51 MM 5.15-3: Prior to issuance of each building permit, water pressure greater than 80 pounds per square inch (psi) shall be reduced to 80 psi or less by means of pressure reducing valves installed at the property owner/developer’s service. Planning and Building 52 MM 5.15-4: Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit a landscape and irrigation plan which shall be prepared and certified by a licensed landscape architect. The irrigation plan shall specify methods for monitoring the irrigation system. The system shall ensure that irrigation rates do not exceed the infiltration of local soils, that the application of fertilizers and pesticides do not exceed appropriate levels of frequencies, and that surface runoff and overwatering is minimized. The landscaping and irrigation plans shall include water- conserving features such as low flow irrigation heads, automatic irrigation scheduling equipment, flow sensing controls, rain sensors, soil moisture sensors, and other water-conserving equipment. The landscaping and irrigation plans shall indicate that separate irrigation lines for recycled water shall be constructed and recycled water will be used when it becomes available. All irrigation systems shall be designed so that they will function properly with recycled water. Planning and Building -23- PC2016-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT 53 MM 5.15-6: Prior to issuance of each building permit, unless records indicate previous payment, the appropriate fees for Primary Mains, Secondary Mains and Fire Protection Service shall be paid to the Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division in accordance with Rule 15A, and Rule 20 of the Public Utilities Department Water Rates, Rules and Regulations. Public Utilities 54 MM 5.17-1: Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/develop shall consult with the City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department, Business and Community Programs Division, in order to review energy efficient measures to incorporate into the project design. Prior to the final building and zoning inspection, the property owner developer shall implement these energy efficient measures which may include the following: a. High-efficiency air-conditioning systems with EMS (computer) control b. Variable air volume (VAV) distribution c. Outside air (100%) economizer cycle d. Staged compressors or variable speed drives to flow varying thermal loads e. Isolated HVAC zone control by floors/separable activity areas f. Specification of premium-efficiency electric motors (i.e., compressor motors, air-handling units, and fan-coil units) g. Use of occupancy sensors in appropriate spaces h. Use of compact fluorescent lamps i. Use of cold cathode fluorescent lamps j. Use of light emitting diode (LED) or equivalent energy-efficient lighting for outdoor lighting k. Use of Energy Star® exit lighting or exit signage. l. Use of T-8 lamps and electronic ballasts where applications of standard fluorescent fixtures are identified m. Use of lighting power controllers in association with metal-halide or high-pressure sodium (high intensity discharge) lamps for outdoor lighting and parking lots n. Consideration of thermal energy storage air-conditioning for spaces or facilities that may require air-conditioning during summer, day-peak periods. o. For swimming pools and spas, incorporate solar heating, automatic covers, and efficient pumps and motors, as feasible. p. Consideration for participation in Advantage Services Programs such as: Public Utilities -24- PC2016-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT i. New construction design review, in which the City cost-shares engineering for up to $10,000 for design of energy efficient buildings and systems ii. New Construction – cash incentives ($300 to $400 per kW reduction in load) for efficiency that exceeds Title 24 requirements Green Building Program – offers accelerated plan approval, financial incentives, waived plan check fees and free technical assistance. 55 MM 5.17-3: Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit plans and calculations to the City of Anaheim Planning and Building Department, Building Division, to demonstrate that the energy efficiency of each building will exceed the Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings current at the time of application by at least 10 percent. Planning and Building 56 MM 5.18-3: Prior to the issuance of building permits, the City shall require that building plans indicate that new developments will minimize stormwater and urban runoff into drainage facilities by incorporating design features such as detention basins, on-site water features, and other strategies. Public Works 57 MM 5.19-1: Prior to issuance of each building permit; to be implemented prior to final building and zoning Inspection, the property owner/developer shall submit project plans to the Public Works Department for review and approval to ensure that the plans comply with AB 939, the Solid Waste Reduction Act of 1989, as administered by the City of Anaheim and the County of Orange and City of Anaheim Integrated Waste Management Plans. Prior to final building and zoning inspection, implementation of said plan shall commence and shall remain in full effect. Waste management mitigation measures that shall be taken to reduce solid waste generation include, but are not limited to: a. Detailing the location and design of on-site recycling facilities. b. Providing on-site recycling receptacles to encourage recycling. c. Complying with all Federal, State and City regulation for hazardous material disposal. d. Participating in the City of Anaheim’s “Recycle Anaheim” program or other substitute program as may be developed by the City. In order to meet the requirements of the Solid Waste Reduction Act of 1989 (AB 939), the property owner/developer shall implement numerous solid waste reduction programs, as required by the Public Works Department, including, but not limited to: a. Facilitating recycling by providing chutes or convenient locations for sorting and recycling bins. b. Facilitating cardboard recycling (especially in retail areas) by providing adequate space and centralized locations for collection and storing. Public Works -25- PC2016-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT c. Facilitating glass recycling (especially from restaurants) by providing adequate space for sorting and storing. d. Providing trash compactors for non-recyclable materials whenever feasible to reduce the total volume of solid waste and the number of trips required for collection. e. Prohibiting curbside pick-up. PRIOR TO APPROVAL OF WATER PLANS 58 MM 5.12-15: Prior to approval of on-site water plans, unless each commercial building is initially connected to separate fire services, an unsubordinated covenant satisfactory to the City Attorney’s Office shall be recorded prohibiting any individual sale of buildings until separate fire services are installed in the building(s) subject to the sale. Fire 59 MM 5.12-16: Prior to approval of water improvement plans, the water supply system shall be designed by the property owner/developer to provide sufficient fire flow pressure and storage for the proposed land use and fire protection services in accordance with Fire Department requirements. Fire ONGOING DURING CONSTRUCTION 60 MM 5.2-3: Ongoing during construction, the property owner/developer shall implement measures to reduce construction-related air quality impacts. These measures shall include, but are not limited to: a. Normal wetting procedures (at least twice daily) or other dust palliative measures shall be followed during earth-moving operations to minimize fugitive dust emissions, in compliance with the City of Anaheim Municipal Code including application of chemical soil stabilizers to exposed soils after grading is completed and replacing ground cover in disturbed areas as quickly as practicable. b. For projects where there is excavation for subterranean facilities (such as parking) on-site haul roads shall be watered at least every two hours or the on-site haul roads shall be paved. c. Enclosing, covering, watering twice daily, or applying approved soil binders, according to manufacturer’s specification, to exposed piles. d. Roadways adjacent to the project shall be swept and cleared of any spilled export materials at least twice a day to assist in minimizing fugitive dust; and, haul routes shall be cleared as needed if spills of materials exported from the project site occur. e. Where practicable, heavy duty construction equipment shall be kept onsite when not in operation to minimize exhaust emissions associated with vehicles repetitiously entering and exiting the project site. f. Trucks importing or exporting soil material and/or debris shall be covered prior to entering public streets. Planning and Building -26- PC2016-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT g. Taking preventive measures to ensure that trucks do not carry dirt on tires onto public streets, including treating onsite roads and staging areas. h. Preventing trucks from idling for longer than 2 minutes. i. Manually irrigate or activate irrigation systems necessary to water and maintain the vegetation as soon as planting is completed. j. Reduce Traffic speeds on all unpaved road surfaces to 15 miles per hour or less. k. Suspend all grading operations when wind speeds (as instantaneous gust) exceed 25 miles per hour and during first and second stage smog alerts. l. Comply with SCAQMD Rule 402, which states that no dust impacts offsite are sufficient to be called a nuisance, and SCAQMD Rule 403, which restricts visible emissions from construction. m. Use low emission mobile construction equipment (e.g., tractors, scrapers, dozers, etc.) where practicable. n. Utilize existing power sources (e.g., power poles) or clean-fuel generators rather than temporary power generators, where practicable. o. Maintain construction equipment engines by keeping them properly tuned. p. Use low sulfur fuel for equipment, to the extent practicable. 61 MM 5.10-6: Ongoing during construction and project operation, pressure washing operations for purposes of building repair and maintenance due to graffiti or other aesthetical considerations shall be limited to daytime hours of operation between 7:00 AM and 8:00 PM. Planning and Building 62 MM 5.10-7: Ongoing during construction and project operation, sweeping operations in the parking facilities and private on-site roadways shall be performed utilizing sweeping/scrubbing equipment which operate at a level measured not greater than 60 dBA at the nearest adjacent property line. Planning and Building 63 MM 5.14-7: Ongoing during construction, if the Anaheim Police Department or the Anaheim Traffic Management Center (TMC) personnel are required to provide temporary traffic control services, the property owner/developer shall reimburse the City, on a fair-share basis, if applicable, for reasonable costs associated with such services. Police Public Works PRIOR TO EACH FINAL BUILDING AND ZONING INSPECTION 64 MM 3.12-5: The applicant shall participate in a landscape assessment and maintenance district, if one is established for the City of Anaheim’s Commercial Recreation Area. Planning Public Works 65 MM 5.1-6: Prior to final building and zoning inspections, root and sidewalk barriers shall be provided for trees within seven feet of public sidewalks. Planning and Building -27- PC2016-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT 66 MM 5.1-7 and 5.8-4: Prior to final building and zoning inspections, the property owner/developer shall submit to the Planning and Building Department a letter from a licensed landscape architect certifying that all landscaping and irrigation systems have been installed in accordance with landscaping plans approved in connection with the Final Site Plan. Planning and Building 67 MM 5.5-4: Prior to the final building and zoning inspection for a hotel/motel, the property owner/developer shall submit an earthquake emergency response plan for review and approval by the Fire Department. The plan shall require posted notices in all hotel rooms on earthquake safety procedures and incorporate ongoing earthquake training for hotel staff to the satisfaction of the Fire Department. Fire 68 MM 5.8-5: Prior to final building and zoning inspection, the property owner/developer shall install piping on-site with project water mains so that reclaimed water may be used for landscape irrigation, if and when it becomes available. Public Utilities 69 MM 5.12-10: Prior to each final building and zoning inspection, the property owner/developer shall place emergency telephone service numbers in prominent locations as approved by the Fire Department. Fire 70 MM 5.14-4: Prior to the final building and zoning inspection, the property owner shall join and financially participate in a clean fuel shuttle program such as the Anaheim Resort Transit system, and shall participate in the Anaheim Transportation Network in conjunction with the on-going operation of the project. The property owner shall also record a covenant on the property that requires participation in these programs ongoing during project operation. The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney’s Office prior to recordation. Public Works 71 MM 5.14-8: Prior to the final building and zoning inspection, the property owner shall record a covenant on the property requiring that ongoing during project implementation, the property owner/developer shall implement and administer a comprehensive Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program for all employees. The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney’s Office. Objectives of the TDM program shall be: a. Increase ridesharing and use of alternative transportation modes by guests. b. Provide a menu of commute alternatives for employees to reduce project-generated trips. c. Conduct an annual commuter survey to ascertain trip generation, trip origin, and Average Vehicle Ridership. Public Works 72 MM 5.14-9: Prior to the final building and zoning inspection, the property owner/developer shall provide to the City of Anaheim Public Works Department for review and approval a menu of TDM program strategies and elements for both existing and future employees’ commute options, and incentives for hotel patrons’ transportation options. These options may Public Works -28- PC2016-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT include, but are not limited to, the list below. The property owner shall also record a covenant on the property requiring that the approved TDM strategies and elements be implemented ongoing during project operation. The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney’s Office prior to recordation. a. On-site services. Provide, as feasible and permitted, on-site services such as the food, retail, and other services. b. Ridesharing. Develop a commuter listing of all employee members for the purpose of providing a “matching” of employees with other employees who live in the same geographic areas and who could rideshare. c. Vanpooling. Develop a commuter listing of all employees for the purpose of matching numbers of employees who live in geographic proximity to one another and could comprise a vanpool or participate in the existing vanpool programs. d. Transit Pass. Promote Orange County Transportation Authority (including commuter rail) passes through financial assistance and on- site sales to encourage employees to use the various transit and bus services from throughout the region. e. Shuttle Service. Generate a commuter listing of all employees living in proximity to the project, and offer a local shuttle program to encourage employees to travel to work by means other than the automobile. When appropriate, event shuttle service shall also be made available for guests. f. Bicycling. Develop a Bicycling Program to offer a bicycling alternative to employees. Secure bicycle racks, lockers, and showers should be provided as part of this program. Maps of bicycle routes throughout the area should be provided to inform potential bicyclists of these options. g. Guaranteed Ride Home Program. Develop a program to provide employees who rideshare, or use transit or other means of commuting to work, with a prearranged ride home in a taxi, rental car, shuttle, or other vehicle, in the event of emergencies during the work shift. h. Target Reduction of Longest Commute Trip. Promote an incentive program for ridesharing and other alternative transportation modes to put highest priority on reduction of longest employee commute trips. i. Work Shifts. Stagger work shifts. j. Compressed Work Week. Develop a “compressed work week” program, which provides for fewer work days but longer daily shifts as an option for employees. k. Telecommuting. Explore the possibility of a “telecommuting” program that would link some employees via electronic means (e.g., computer -29- PC2016-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT with modem). l. Parking Management. Develop a parking management program that provides incentives to those who rideshare or use transit means other than single-occupant auto to travel to work. m. Access. Provide preferential access to high occupancy vehicles and shuttles. n. Financial Incentive for Ridesharing and/or Public Transit. Offer employees financial incentives for ridesharing or using public transportation. Currently, federal law provides tax-free status for up to $65 per month per employee contributions to employees who vanpool or use public transit including commuter rail and/or express bus pools. o. Financial Incentive for Bicycling. Offer employees financial incentives for bicycling to work. p. Special “Premium” for the Participation and Promotion of Trip Reduction. Offer ticket/passes to special events, vacations, etc. to employees who recruit other employees for vanpool, carpool, or other trip reduction programs. q. Incentive Programs. Design incentive programs for carpooling and other alternative transportation modes so as to put highest priority on reduction of longest commute trips. 73 MM 5.14-11: Prior to the recordation of a subdivision map or issuance of the first building permit, whichever occurs first, in the event that a parcel is subdivided and there is a need for common on-site circulation and/or parking, prior to recordation of a subdivision map, an unsubordinated covenant providing for reciprocal access and/or parking, as appropriate, approved by the Planning Director or Planning Services Manager, shall be recorded with the Office of the Orange County Recorder. A copy of the recorded covenant shall then be submitted to the Planning Division of the Planning Department. If the reciprocal access is across parcel lines or if public rights of way are required for reciprocal access; Public Works approval shall be required. Planning and Building 74 MM 5.14-21: Prior to the final building and zoning Inspection every property owner and/or lessee shall designate an on-site contact that will be responsible for coordinating with the ATN and implementing all trip mitigation measures. The on-site coordinator shall be the one point of contact representing the project with the ATN. The TDM requirements shall be included in the lease or other agreement with all of the project participants. Public Works 75 MM 5.15-7: Prior to final building and zoning inspections, a separate water meter shall be installed for landscape water on all projects where the landscape area exceeds 2,500 square feet in accordance with Ordinance No. 6160. Planning and Building -30- PC2016-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT 76 MM 5.17-2: Prior to final building and zoning inspection, the property owner/developer shall install an underground electrical service from the Public Utilities Distribution System. The Underground Service will be installed in accordance with the Electric Rules, Rates, Regulations and Electrical Specifications for Underground Systems. Electrical Service Fees and other applicable fees will be assessed in accordance with the Electric Rules, Rates, Regulations and Electrical Specifications for Underground Systems. Public Utilities ONGOING 77 Ongoing, the on-site hotel management shall abide by the approved Internal Operations Plan for the project. Any changes to said plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager. The City Traffic and Transportation Manager shall have the authority to recommend modifications to the plan, once the hotel is in operation. Public Works 78 MM 5.1-3: Ongoing, the property owner/developer shall be responsible for the removal of any on-site graffiti within 24 hours of its application. Planning and Building 79 MM 5.1-8: Ongoing, all on-site non-Public Realm landscaping and irrigation systems, and Public Realm landscaping and irrigation systems, within area in which dedication has not been accepted by the City, shall be maintained by the property owner/developer, in compliance with City standards. Planning and Building 80 MM 5.1-9: Ongoing, any tree planted within the Setback Realm shall be replaced in a timely manner in the event that it is removed, damaged, diseased and/or dead. Planning and Building 81 MM 5.1-10: Ongoing, a licensed arborist shall be hired by the property owner/developer to be responsible for all tree trimming. Planning and Building 82 MM 5.2-1: Ongoing during project operation, the property owner/developer shall implement measures to reduce emissions to the extent practical, schedule goods movements for off-peak traffic hours, and use clean fuel for vehicles and other equipment, as practicable. Planning and Building 83 MM 5.8-3: Ongoing during project operations, the property owner/developer shall provide for the following: cleaning of all paved areas not maintained by the City of Anaheim on a monthly basis, including, but not limited to, private streets and parking lots. The use of water to clean streets, paved areas, parking lots, and other areas and flushing the debris and sediment down the storm drains shall be prohibited. Planning and Building 84 MM 5.12-3: Ongoing during project operation, the property owner/developer shall provide private security on the premises to maintain adequate security for the entire project subject to review and approval of the Police Department. The use of security patrols and electronic security devices (i.e., Police -31- PC2016-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT video monitors) should be considered to reduce the potential for criminal activity in the area. 85 MM 5.12-18: Ongoing, the City will work cooperatively with school districts to identify opportunities for new schools and school expansion. Planning and Building 86 MM 5.15-9: Ongoing, the City shall continue to collaborate with the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD), its member agencies, and the Orange County Water District (OCWD) to ensure that available water supplies meet anticipated demand. If it is forecasted that water demand exceeds available supplies, staff shall recommend to City Council to trigger application of the Water Conservation Ordinance (Anaheim Municipal Code, §10.18), as prescribed, to require mandatory conservation measures as authorized by Sections 10.18.070 through 10.18.090, as appropriate. Public Utilities 87 MM 5.19-2: Ongoing during project operation, the following practices shall be implemented, as feasible, by the property owner/developer: a. Usage of recycled paper products for stationary, letterhead, and packaging. b. Recovery of materials such as aluminum and cardboard. c. Collection of office paper for recycling. d. Collection of polystyrene (foam) cups for recycling. e. Collection of glass, plastics, kitchen grease, laser printer toner cartridges, oil, batteries, and scrap metal for recycling or recovery. Public Works RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND, WHEN RECORDED, RETURN TO: City Clerk City of Anaheim P.O. Box 3222 Anaheim, California 92805 (SPACE ABOVE FOR RECORDER’S USE) DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2016-00001 BETWEEN CITY OF ANAHEIM AND GOOD HOPE INTERNATIONAL ATTACHMENT NO. 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page i 1. DEFINITIONS .................................................................................................................. 3 2. PROPERTY, PURPOSE AND INTENT ......................................................................... 8 2.1 Property Description ............................................................................................. 8 2.2 City Objectives...................................................................................................... 8 2.3 Developer Objectives ............................................................................................ 9 2.4 Mutual Objectives ................................................................................................. 9 3. AGREEMENT AND ASSURANCES ............................................................................. 9 3.1 Agreement and Assurance on the Part of Developer ............................................ 9 3.2 Agreement and Assurances on the Part of the City .............................................. 9 3.2.1 Entitlement to Development ..................................................................... 9 3.2.2 Changes in Applicable Rules .................................................................... 9 3.2.3 Agreed Changes and Other Reserved Powers ........................................ 10 3.2.4 Subsequent Development........................................................................ 10 3.2.5 Effective Development Standards........................................................... 10 3.2.6 Timing, Sequencing and Phasing of Development ................................. 11 3.2.7 Impact Fees; Credit for Developer Installed Facilities ........................... 11 3.3 Processing Fees ................................................................................................... 11 3.3.1 Processing Fees and Charges .................................................................. 11 3.3.2 Extraordinary Processing Consultant ...................................................... 11 3.3.3 Environmental Review............................................................................ 12 4. DEVELOPMENT PLAN................................................................................................ 12 4.1 Vested Right to Develop Property ...................................................................... 12 5. ANNUAL REVIEW; REIMBURSEMENT; DEFAULT; TERMINATION, AMENDMENT OR MODIFICATION; MANDAMUS; SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE ........................................................................................................... 12 5.1 Annual Review.................................................................................................... 12 5.2 Reimbursement of Costs ..................................................................................... 12 5.3 Default by Developer .......................................................................................... 12 5.3.1 Default..................................................................................................... 12 5.3.2 Notice of Default..................................................................................... 13 5.3.3 Termination for Failure to Cure Default ................................................. 13 5.3.4 Specific Performance .............................................................................. 13 5.4 Default by City .................................................................................................... 13 5.4.1 Notice of Default..................................................................................... 13 5.4.2 Specific Performance and Mandamus .................................................... 14 6. PUBLIC BENEFITS ....................................................................................................... 14 6.1 Development of AAA Four Diamond Hotel ....................................................... 14 6.2 Net Increase in Transient Occupancy Tax .......................................................... 14 6.3 Increase in Retail Sales Taxes............................................................................. 15 6.4 Increase in Property Taxes .................................................................................. 15 ii 6.5 Resort Area Traffic Improvements .....................................................................15 6.6 Public Improvements Commitment ....................................................................15 7. GENERAL PROVISIONS ............................................................................................. 15 7.1 Date Agreement Becomes Effective ................................................................... 15 7.2 Term .................................................................................................................... 15 7.2.1 Basic Term .............................................................................................. 15 7.2.2 Early Termination of Agreement ............................................................ 15 7.3 Force Majeure ..................................................................................................... 16 7.4 Applicable Law ................................................................................................... 16 7.5 Amendments ....................................................................................................... 16 7.6 Assignment ......................................................................................................... 16 7.7 Mortgage Rights.................................................................................................. 17 7.7.1 Encumbrances on the Property and this Agreement ............................... 17 7.7.2 Mortgagee Protection .............................................................................. 17 7.7.3 Mortgagee Not Obligated ....................................................................... 17 7.7.4 Notice of Default to Mortgagee .............................................................. 18 7.7.5 Bankruptcy .............................................................................................. 18 7.7.6 Termination Subject to Mortgagee Rights .............................................. 19 7.7.7 No Cancellation ...................................................................................... 19 7.7.8 New Agreement Upon Default by Developer ......................................... 19 7.7.9 Separate Agreement ................................................................................ 19 7.7.10 Material Notices ...................................................................................... 20 7.7.11 Mortgagee Right to Assign ..................................................................... 20 7.8 Covenants ............................................................................................................ 20 7.9 Implementation ................................................................................................... 20 7.10 Relationship of the Parties .................................................................................. 20 7.11 Cooperation in the Event of Third Party Litigation ............................................ 20 7.12 Notices ................................................................................................................ 21 7.13 Recordation ......................................................................................................... 22 7.14 Developer Hold Harmless ................................................................................... 22 7.15 Insurance ............................................................................................................. 22 7.16 Successors and Assigns....................................................................................... 22 7.17 Severability ......................................................................................................... 23 7.18 Waiver ................................................................................................................. 23 7.19 Third Party Beneficiaries .................................................................................... 23 7.20 Expedited Processing .......................................................................................... 23 7.21 Requests for Payment ......................................................................................... 23 7.22 Entire Agreement ................................................................................................ 23 7.23 Conflict of Laws ................................................................................................. 24 7.24 Legal Advice; Neutral Interpretation; Headings and Table of Contents ............ 24 7.25 Counterparts ........................................................................................................ 24 7.26 Organization and Standing of Developer ............................................................ 24 7.27 Authorization and Consents ................................................................................ 24 1 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2016-00001 BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND GOOD HOPE INTERNATIONAL THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2016-00001 (“Agreement”) is made and entered into as of this _____ day of ________ 2016, by and between the CITY OF ANAHEIM, a charter city and a municipal corporation duly organized and existing under the Constitution and the laws of the State of California (“City”), and GOOD HOPE INTERNATIONAL, a California Corporation (“Developer”), pursuant to the authority set forth in Section 65867 of the California Government Code, and the general authority set forth in section 65864 et seq. of the Government Code (the “Development Agreement Act”), the City’s inherent power as a charter city, and the Development Agreement Act implementing procedures adopted by the City in Resolution No. 82R-565 (the “Procedures Resolution”). The definitions contained in Section 1 shall apply to the entire Agreement, including the RECITALS. RECITALS A. Developer represents that it owns the Property in fee. Developer has proposed re- development of the Project, as defined below and depicted on the Site Map (Exhibit A to this Agreement). B. The City and Developer recognize that development of the Project will create significant opportunities for economic growth in the City and the region; and C. The development of the Project by the Developer will provide a new AAA Four Diamond Hotel and associated retail uses in The Disneyland Resort and Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Geographic Area, which will provide new general fund revenues in excess of the incremental City costs associated with such uses and shall, in addition, result in the delivery by the Developer to the City of the "Public Improvements Commitment" (as defined below); and D. The Project will provide development fees and a financing vehicle for improvements to the public infrastructure which will provide area-wide benefits for that area subject to The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan, Anaheim Resort Specific Plan and Hotel Circle Specific Plan, as well as provide infrastructure, parking and other public facilities needed to support the Project; and E. Developer, in consideration of the benefits and opportunities provided to Developer by the Existing Approvals and the cooperation and assistance of the City in connection therewith, will provide assurances to the City that the public infrastructure, amenities and design features of the Project are implemented in a timely manner as set forth in the Existing Approvals; and F. In order to provide certainty and render development of the Project more feasible in light of the large capital investment and time necessary to coordinate and implement the Project, Developer requires assurance from the City that the governmental entitlements to use contained in the Existing Approvals shall, to the extent specified herein, not be amended or supplemented or burdened with fees, burdens and exactions not otherwise permitted by this Agreement; and 2 G. Developer also recognizes and agrees that in extending these benefits to Developer, the City must retain the Reserved Powers; and H. The development of the Property is governed by The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan (SP92-1). The potential environmental impacts of SP92-1 were analyzed in previously certified Final Environmental Impact Report No. 311 (“FEIR No. 311"). The City has evaluated FEIR No. 311 and Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report No. 2008-00340 ("SEIR No. 340") and the addenda thereto, including the Project Addendum (the “Addendum”), which was prepared to evaluate the impacts of the Project. The Addendum concluded that the Project will not result in any new significant environmental impacts or any increase in the severity of previously identified impacts. The entitlements and environmental documents described in this Recital are hereinafter referred to as the “Prior Approvals”; and I. Concurrently with or prior to approval of this Agreement, the City has approved the following other Project Approvals applicable to the Project, which together with the above- referenced Prior Approvals, are hereinafter referred to as the “Existing Approvals: (1) Final Site Plan No. 2016-00001 (FSP2016-00001); (2) Conditional Use Permit No. 2016-05858 (CUP2016-05858); (3) Variance No. 2016-05060 (VAR2016-05060); (4) Operating Covenant Agreement (MIS2016-00628), pursuant to City Council Resolution No. 2015-202; (4) The Conditions of Approval associated with the Existing Approvals; and (5) The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan, Anaheim Resort Specific Plan and Hotel Circle Specific Plan. J. City and Developer desire to enter into this Agreement in order to assure development of the Property in accordance with the Existing Approvals and provide for vesting of same for the Term of the Agreement, to assure the City of installation of the public infrastructure, including parking facilities, amenities and design features of the Project in accordance herewith and as described in the Existing Approvals; and K. On ______________, 2016, the Planning Commission, held a duly noticed public hearing regarding this Agreement and environmental documentation related thereto, and at the conclusion of such hearing, and after consideration of evidence and testimony submitted by City staff, the Developer and all interested parties, adopted a Resolution recommending that the City Council approve the Agreement; and L. The City hereby finds that this Agreement and the Existing Approvals are consistent with the City’s General Plan and The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan as amended, and that the Addendum satisfies all requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and the State CEQA Guidelines with respect to this Agreement and the Project; and 3 M. On ______________, 2016, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing regarding this Agreement and, at the conclusion of the hearing, and after considering the recommendation of the Planning Commission, the evidence and testimony submitted by City staff, the Developer and all other interested parties, introduced Ordinance No. _____ approving this Agreement on ______________, 2016, and adopted Ordinance No. _____ on ______________, 2016 (herein referred to as the "Authorizing Ordinance"); and WHEREAS, for the foregoing reasons, the Parties desire to enter into this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises and mutual promises and covenants herein contained and other valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which are hereby acknowledged, the Parties hereto agree as follows: 1. DEFINITIONS. 1.1 “AAA Four Diamond Hotel” means a Hotel which provides physical features and operational services which meet or exceed, as determined by the City Manager acting in his/her sole and absolute discretion, the rating criteria established for AAA Four Diamond Hotels or higher by the American Automobile Association. 1.2 “Addendum” means the Addendum to FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340, dated April, 2016. 1.3 “Affiliate of Developer” or “Affiliate” means a sole proprietorship, limited liability company, partnership, limited partnership, joint venture, trust, unincorporated organization, association, corporation, institution, or any other entity owned and controlled by the Developer. 1.4 “AMC” means the Anaheim Municipal Code. 1.5 “Anaheim Resort Specific Plan” means the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2, as amended from time to time by the City. 1.6 “Annual Review” means the annual review process as described in Section 5 of this Agreement. 1.7 “Applicable Rules” means (subject only to the qualifications set forth herein with respect to Fees and excluding the Reserved Powers) the rules, regulations, ordinances and officially adopted plans and policies of the City in force as of the Effective Date, including without limitation, The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan and the remainder of the Existing Approvals. Notwithstanding this Section 1.7 or any other provision of this Agreement (i) all duly adopted codes, regulations, specifications and standards regarding the design and construction of public works facilities, if any, shall be those that are in effect at the time the plans for such public works facilities are being processed for approval and/or under construction, and (ii) except as expressly set forth in this Agreement with respect to Impact Fees and Processing Fees and Charges applicable to the Project, Applicable Rules shall mean and include only those Fees in effect as of the Effective Date. 4 1.8 “CEQA” means the California Environmental Quality Act (Cal. Public Resources Code sections 21000 et seq.), the State CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code of Regs., Title 14, section 15000 et seq.) and City CEQA Guidelines. 1.9 “City Agency” means each and every agency, department, board. Commission, authority, employee, and/or official acting under the authority of the City that have permit, entitlement or approval authority or jurisdiction over the Project, including, without limitation, the City Council and the Planning Commission. 1.10 “City Attorney” means the City Attorney of the City. 1.11 “City Council” means the City Council of the City. 1.12 “City Manager” means the City Manager of the City. 1.13 “Commencement of Construction” or “Commence(s) Construction” means commencing vertical development after the completion of foundations. 1.14 “Completion of Construction” or “Complete(s) Construction” means the date on which the Project Architect certifies completion of the respective Project Element. 1.15 “Conditions of Approval” means those conditions of approval for the Project adopted in connection with the granting of the Existing Approvals. 1.16 “Discretionary Action” means an action which requires the exercise of judgment, deliberation or a decision on the part of the City and/or any City Agency in the process of approving or disapproving a particular activity, as distinguished from an activity which merely requires the City and/or any City Agency to determine whether there has been compliance with statutes, ordinances or regulations. Discretionary Actions shall not include any Ministerial Permits and Approvals. 1.17 “Effective Date” means the effective date of the Authorizing Ordinance. 1.18 “Existing Approvals” means those approvals described in Recital I. 1.19 “Extraordinary Processing Consultant” means a consultant selected by the City to coordinate and expedite processing of applications for all or any Ministerial Permits and Approvals and all or any Discretionary Actions applicable to the Project at the expense of Developer. 1.20 “Fees” means any fees or charges imposed or collected by the City as of the Effective Date other than (i) Impact Fees, Processing Fees and Charges and (ii) fees collected and/or imposed by the City for the benefit of public agencies other than the City. 1.21 “General Plan” means the General Plan of the City. 1.22 “Hotel” means any structure or portion thereof, which is occupied by persons for lodging or sleeping purposes for periods of less than thirty consecutive days. 5 1.23 "Hotel Circle Specific Plan" means Hotel Circle Specific Plan No. 93-1, as approved by the City Council and as amended on or before the Effective Date. 1.24 “Hotel Room” means a Hotel guest room or suite as defined in Section 18.114.030.0602 or Section 18.114.030.0603 of Chapter 18.114 (Disneyland Resort Specific Plan No. 92-1 (SP 92-1) Zoning and Development Standards) of Title 18 (Zoning) of the AMC as of the Effective Date and meeting the minimum standards of a AAA Four Diamond Hotel. 1.25 “Impact Fees” means impact fees, linkage fees, exactions, fair share charges or other similar impact fees or charges imposed on and in connection with new development on a city-wide basis by the City pursuant to rules, regulations, ordinances and policies of the City. Impact Fees shall not include Processing Fees and Charges, taxes or special assessments. 1.26 “Inspections” means all field inspections and reviews by City officials during the course of construction of the Project and the processing of certificates of occupancy (permanent or temporary). 1.27 “Institutional Lender” means any of the following institutions having assets or deposits in the aggregate of not less than One Hundred Million Dollars ($100,000,000): a California chartered bank; a bank created and operated under and pursuant to the laws of the United States of America; and “incorporated admitted insurer” (as that term is used in Section 1100.1 of the California Insurance Code); a “foreign (other state) bank” (as that term is defined in Section 1700(1) of the California Financial Code); a federal savings and loan association (Cal. Fin. Code Section 8600); a commercial finance lender (within the meaning of Sections 2600 et seq. of the California Financial Code); a “foreign (other nation) bank” provided it is licensed to maintain an office in California, is licensed or otherwise authorized by another state to maintain an agency or branch office in that state, or maintains a federal agency or federal branch in any state (Section 1716 of the California Financial Code); a bank holding company or a subsidiary of a bank holding company which is not a bank (Section 3707 of the California Financial Code); a trust company, savings and loan association, insurance company, investment banker; college or university; pension or retirement fund or system, either governmental or private, or any pension or retirement fund or system of which any of the foregoing shall be trustee, provided the same be organized under the laws of the United States or of any state thereof; and a Real Estate Investment Trust, as defined in Section 856 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, provided such trust is listed on either the American Stock Exchange or the New York Stock Exchange. 1.28 “Landscaping and Lighting District” means that Anaheim Resort Landscape and Lighting Maintenance District established by the City pursuant to the provisions of the California Streets and Highways Code, for the purpose of funding maintenance costs, above the City’s standard level, for entry monumentation, decorative lighting, bus shelters, enhanced landscaping, benches, kiosks and other street features in public rights-of-way within the Anaheim Resort. 6 1.29 “Lease” means a ground lease having a base term of thirty-five (35) years or longer, not including optional terms or extensions. 1.30 “Legal Description” means the legal description of the Property attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by reference. 1.31 “Litigation” means any lawsuit (including a cross-action) filed against the City and/or Developer which challenges the validity, implementation or enforcement of, or seeks any other remedy directly relating to, all or any party of the Existing Approvals or this Agreement. 1.32 “Ministerial Permits and Approvals” means the nondiscretionary permits, approvals, plans, inspections, certificates, documents and licenses required to be taken, issued or approved by the City in order for Developer to implement, develop and construct the Project and the Mitigation Measures, including without limitation, building permits, and other similar permits and approvals. 1.33 “Mitigation Measures” means those Mitigation Measures set forth in Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 329 for the Project. 1.34 “Mortgage” means an instrument or instruments securing one or more financings by the Developer with respect to the construction, development, use or operation of the Project, and includes whatever security instruments are used in the locale of the Project, including, without limitation, mortgages, deeds of trust, security deeds, and conditional deeds, as well as financing statements, security agreements and other documents required pursuant to the Uniform Commercial Code. 1.35 “Mortgagee” means one or more Institutional Lenders holding a beneficial interest and secured position under any Mortgage which have notified City, in writing, of its request for notice under the provision of Section 7.7 hereof. 1.36 “Parties” means collectively Developer and the City. 1.37 “Party” means any one of Developer or the City. 1.38 “Plaintiff’ means any party seeking relief or compensation through Litigation, whether as plaintiff, petitioner, cross-complainant or otherwise. 1.39 “Planning Commission” means the Planning Commission of the City. 1.40 “Planning Director” means the Planning Director of the City. 1.41 “Processing Fees and Charges” means all processing fees and charges required by the City including, but not limited to, fees and charges for land use applications, Project permits, building applications, building permits, grading permits, encroachment permits, tract or parcel maps, lot line adjustments, air right lots, street vacations, certificates of occupancy and other similar permits. Processing Fees and Charges shall not include Impact Fees. 7 1.42 “Project” means the demolition of the existing buildings at the Property and the development of an eight-story AAA Four Diamond Hotel containing 580 hotel rooms and an additional 75,600 square feet of supporting retail, conference/meeting rooms event space, and restaurants, as more specifically described in the Existing Approvals and as shown on the Site Map. 1.43 “Project Architect” means the architect designated by the Developer as responsible for the design and construction supervision of each Project Element. 1.44 “Property” means that real property owned by Developer and legally described in Exhibit B hereto. 1.45 "Public Improvements Commitment" has the meaning set forth in Section 6.6. 1.46 “Public Improvements” means the facilities, both on- and off-site, to be improved, constructed and dedicated to (and, upon completion in accordance with this Agreement, accepted by) the City by the Developer. Public Improvements include sidewalks, bio-swales and other Storm-water Management Improvements in the public right-of-way, all public utilities within the streets (such as gas, electricity, water, storm drains and sewer lines, but excluding any non-municipal utilities), bicycle lanes and paths in the public right-of-way, off-site intersection improvements (including but not limited to curbs, medians, signaling, traffic controls devices, signage, and striping), transit system improvements, and all other improvements delineated on street improvement plans approved by the City Engineer for the Project during the pendency of the Project. 1.47 “Reserved Powers” means the rights and authority excepted from this Agreement’s restrictions on the City’s police powers which are reserved to the City. The Reserved Powers supersede the Applicable Rules to the extent of any inconsistency and include the power to enact and implement rules, regulations, ordinances and policies after the Effective Date that may be in conflict with the Applicable Rules, which either (1) prevent or remedy conditions which the City has found to be injurious or detrimental to the public health or safety; (2) are Uniform Codes; (3) are necessary to comply with state and federal laws, rules and regulations (whether enacted previous or subsequent to the Effective Date) or to comply with a court order or judgment of a state or federal court; (4) are agreed to or consented to by Developer; (5) involve the formation of assessment districts, Mello-Roos Community Facilities Districts, special districts, maintenance districts or other similar districts formed in accordance with applicable laws provided, however, that Developer shall retain all its rights with respect to such districts pursuant to all applicable laws; or (6) are Processing Fees and Charges or City-wide fees or charges of general applicability. 1.48 “Right(s)-of-Way” means any right(s)-of-way or other real property interest necessary to access, construct, maintain, perform and/or operate any Public Improvements required by the Mitigation Measures in accordance with the Existing Approvals excluding the land required for the Parking Facility. 8 1.49 “Section” means the indicated section or subsection number of this Agreement. 1.50 “Site Map” means the map of the Property which is attached thereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference. 1.51 “Storm-water Management Improvements” means the facilities, both those to remain privately-owned and those to be dedicated to the City, that comprise the infrastructure and landscape system that is intended to manage the storm-water runoff associated with the Project. Storm-water Management Improvements include but are not limited to: (i) swales and bioswales (including plants and soils), (ii) bio-gutters and grates (including plants and soils), (iii) tree wells, (iv) ponds, wetlands, and constructed streams, (v) storm-water cisterns, (vi) permeable paving systems, (vii) storm-water culverts, (viii) trench drains and grates, (ix) storm- water piping, (x) storm-water collection system, and (xi) other facilities performing a storm- water control function. 1.52 “Term” means the period of time during which this Agreement shall be in effect and shall bind the City and Developer as provided in Section 7.2 of this Agreement. 1.53 “The Anaheim Resort” means the area of approximately 1,078 acres in the City which is designated in the General Plan for Commercial Recreation land uses. The Anaheim Resort encompasses that territory subject to The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan No. 92-1, the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2, and Hotel Circle Specific Plan No. 93-1. 1.54 “The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan” or “Specific Plan” means the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan No. 92-1 (including the zoning and development standards set forth in Chapter 18.114 (Disneyland Resort Specific Plan No. 92-1 (SP 92-1) Zoning and Development Standards) of Title 18 (Zoning) of the AMC) as approved by the City and as amended on or before the Effective Date. 1.55 “Uniform Codes” means those building, electrical, mechanical, fire and other similar regulations which are applicable throughout the City, including, but not limited to, the California Building Standards Codes, as adopted by the City Council and codified in Chapter 15.03 (Building Standards Codes and Administrative Provisions Pertaining to Building and Construction) of Title 15 (Buildings and Housing) of the AMC, and the California Fire Code,as adopted by the City Council and codified in Chapter 16.08 (California Fire Code) of Title 16 (Fire) of the AMC, as the same may be amended from time to time by the City. 2. PROPERTY, PURPOSE AND INTENT. 2.1 Property Description. The Property is shown on the Site Map and described in the Legal Description. 2.2 City Objectives. The City desires that the Property be developed as provided for in the Existing Approvals to: (i) create new general fund revenues in excess of the incremental City costs associated with the Project, (ii) provide AAA Four Diamond Hotel Rooms that will expand on existing and planned tourist attractions and theme park uses and will cause Anaheim visitors to extend the length of stays in Anaheim; (iii) provide a fully integrated and 9 coordinated development based on comprehensive planning principles; and (iv) to the extent Developer proceeds with the Project, to assure that the Project will be developed as described in the Existing Approvals. 2.3 Developer Objectives. This Agreement is necessary to assure Developer that the Project will not be (i) reduced in density, intensity or use; and (ii) subjected to new rules, regulations, ordinances or official policies or delays which are not permitted by this Agreement so long as the Developer performs hereunder, including without limitation the delivery by the Developer to the City of the Public Improvements Commitment. 2.4 Mutual Objectives. Development of the Project in accordance with this Agreement will provide the assurances required for the development of the Project in accordance with the goals and objectives set forth in the General Plan and the Specific Plan. Moreover, this Agreement provides additional assurance to the City and Developer that, should Developer proceed with the Project, the installation of necessary improvements will occur in the manner set forth in the Existing Approvals and otherwise achieve the goals and purposes for which the Development Agreement Act was enacted. The Parties believe that such an orderly, coordinated development of the Project will provide many public benefits to the City, including without limitation: delivery by the Developer to the City of the Public Improvements Commitment, development of under-utilized properties and uses, increased tax revenues, increased transient occupancy tax, and job creation. 3. AGREEMENT AND ASSURANCES. 3.1 Agreement and Assurance on the Part of Developer. In consideration for the City entering into this Agreement, and as an inducement for the City to obligate itself to carry out the covenants and conditions set forth in this Agreement, and in order to effectuate the purposes and intentions set forth in Section 2 of this Agreement, should Developer proceed with the Project, Developer hereby agrees to develop the Project, consistent with the Existing Approvals and to deliver to the City the Public Improvements Commitment by the respective times set forth therefor in Section 6.6 of this Agreement. 3.2 Agreement and Assurances on the Part of the City. In consideration for Developer entering into this Agreement and delivery of the Public Improvements Commitment, and as an inducement for Developer to obligate itself to carry out the covenants and conditions set forth in this Agreement, the City hereby agrees during the term as follows: 3.2.1 Entitlement to Development. Developer has a vested right to develop the Project in accordance with the Existing Approvals subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the Applicable Rules and the Reserved Powers. City shall not revoke or modify the Existing Approvals. 3.2.2 Changes in Applicable Rules. 3.2.2.1 Non-Application of Changes in Applicable Rules. Any change in, or addition to, the Applicable Rules, including, without limitation, any change in any applicable general or specific plan, zoning ordinance or building regulation adopted or becoming effective after the Effective Date, including, without limitation, any 10 such change by means or ordinance, City Charter amendment, initiative, referendum, resolution, motion, policy, order or moratorium, initiated or instituted for any reason whatsoever and adopted by the City Council, Planning Commission or City Agency, or by the electorate, as the case may be, which would, absent this Agreement, otherwise be applicable to the Project and which would conflict with the Applicable Rules or this Agreement, shall not be applied to the Project unless such changes represent an exercise of the City’s Reserved Powers or are otherwise expressly allowed by this Agreement or consented to in writing by Developer. 3.2.2.2 Changes in Uniform Code. Notwithstanding any provision of this Agreement to the contrary, construction of the Project shall comply with changes occurring from time to time in the Uniform Codes pursuant to the Reserved Powers. 3.2.2.3 Changes Mandated by Federal or State Law. This Agreement shall not preclude the application to the Project of changes in, or additions to, the Applicable Rules. In the event state or federal laws or regulations prevent or preclude compliance with one or more provisions of this Agreement, such provisions shall be modified or suspended as may be necessary to comply with such state or federal laws or regulations. 3.2.2.4 Special Taxes and Assessments. Developer shall have the right, to the extent permitted by law, to protest, oppose and vote against any and all special taxes, assessments, levies, charges and/or fees imposed with respect to any assessment districts, Mello-Roos Community Facilities Districts, maintenance districts or other similar districts. 3.2.3 Agreed Changes and Other Reserved Powers. This Agreement shall not preclude application to the Project of rules, regulations, ordinances and officially adopted plans and policies otherwise in conflict with the Applicable Rules if (i) agreed to in writing by Developer, or (ii) result from the Reserved Powers. 3.2.4 Subsequent Development. The City shall not require Developer to obtain any approvals or permits for the development of the Project other than those permits or approvals which are required by the Applicable Rules or the Reserved Powers. 3.2.5 Effective Development Standards. The City agrees that with respect to the Project it is bound to permit development of the Project in accordance with the Specific Plan and Existing Approvals including without limitation, the uses, intensity and density as provided for in the Specific Plan, subject to the Applicable Rules, Reserved Powers and this Agreement. Moreover, the City hereby agrees that it will not unreasonably withhold any Discretionary Action which must be issued by the City in order for the Project to proceed, provided that Developer reasonably and satisfactorily complies with all City-wide standard procedures and policies of the City for processing any such Discretionary Action and pays any applicable Processing Fees and Charges. The City shall accept and timely process, in the normal manner for processing such matters as may then be applicable, all applications for further approvals with respect to the Project called for or required under this Agreement, 11 3.2.6 Timing and Sequencing of Development. The Project shall be completed in one construction phase, including all general grading, site preparation, utility lines and infrastructure. The Parties acknowledge that Developer cannot at this time predict when or the rate at which the Property will be developed. Such decisions depend upon numerous factors which are not within the control of Developer, such as market demand, interest rates, competition and other similar factors. Because the California Supreme Court held in Pardee Construction Co. v. City of Camarillo (1984) 37 Cal.3d 455, that the failure of the parties therein to provide for the timing of development resulted in a later adopted initiative restricting the timing of development to prevail over such parties’ agreement, it is the Parties’ intent to cure that deficiency by expressly acknowledging and providing that Developer shall have the right to develop the Property, or to not develop the Property, in such order and such rate and at such time as Developer deems appropriate within the exercise of its subjective business judgment in its sole and absolute discretion; provided, however, that upon commencement of any work related to the development or construction of the Project, or any portion thereof, the Developer shall diligently prosecute the same to completion without substantial interruption in accordance with applicable permits and requirements under this Agreement, subject to Force Majeure. In the event an ordinance, resolution or other measure, referendum, or initiative is enacted, whether by action of the City or otherwise, which relates to the rate, amount, timing, or sequencing of the development or construction of the Project on all or any part of the Property or the implementation or construction of the Mitigation Measures, City agrees, to the maximum extent permitted by law, that such ordinance, resolution or other measure shall not apply to the Project, the Property or this Agreement, unless such changes are adopted pursuant to the City’s exercise of its Reserved Powers or other applicable provisions of this Agreement. 3.2.7 Impact Fees; Credit for Developer Installed Facilities. The Project shall be subject to the Impact Fees and crediting provisions related thereto in force at the time of application and as may be amended from time to time and are not restricted or limited in any way by this Agreement. Nothing contained herein shall be construed to prohibit the City from imposing fees, taxes or assessments on the Property which are unrelated to the approval or implementation of the Project. 3.3 Processing Fees; Extraordinary Processing Consultant Charges and Environmental Review. 3.3.1 Processing Fees and Charges. Developer shall pay all Processing Fees and Charges for Ministerial Permits and Approvals and Inspections at the rate in effect at the time they are sought. 3.3.2 Extraordinary Processing Consultant. Developer may request that the City engage an Extraordinary Processing Consultant to coordinate and expedite the processing of actions required through the Ministerial Permits and Approvals and all Discretionary Actions applicable to the Project. If so requested and the City deems it necessary, in its sole discretion, it will engage such Extraordinary Processing Consultant and the Developer shall reimburse the City for the costs of such Extraordinary Processing Consultant in accordance with the terms of Section 7.22 hereof. 12 3.3.3 Environmental Review. The City has conducted extensive environmental review of the Project and has adopted the Mitigation Measures. The City intends that Ministerial Permits and Approvals are not actions subject to requirements for further environmental review pursuant to CEQA. 4. DEVELOPMENT PLAN. 4.1 Vested Right to Develop Property. Subject to the terms of this Agreement, Developer shall have a vested right to develop the Property in accordance with, and to receive the benefits set forth and provided in, the Existing Approvals. In the absence of a default by Developer, City shall not revoke, rescind, impede or thwart any of Existing Approvals. 5. ANNUAL REVIEW; REIMBURSEMENT; DEFAULT; TERMINATION, AMENDMENT OR MODIFICATION; MANDAMUS; SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE. 5.1 Annual Review. During the Term and so long as this Agreement is in effect, Developer shall initiate and the City shall conduct an Annual Review of Developer’s compliance with this Agreement and the Procedures Resolution. Such Annual Review shall be limited in scope to determining good faith compliance with the provisions of this Agreement. The Annual Review shall be initiated and conducted in accordance with the Procedures Resolution. 5.2 Reimbursement of Costs. Developer shall pay to City in advance, the Application Fee for Annual Review required by the City’s Procedures Resolution on each occasion that Developer submits its evidence for the Annual Review. Developer shall also reimburse the City for its actual costs, reasonably and necessarily incurred or any legal or financing consultant cost necessary to accomplish review of amendments pursuant to Section 7.5 of this Agreement. Such reimbursement shall be due within thirty (30) days after receipt of invoice from the City. 5.3 Default by Developer. 5.3.1 Default. In the event the City reasonably determines that Developer has failed to perform any of its obligations under this Agreement, or that any such obligations are not performed in a timely manner, the City may pursue only those remedies expressly provided for in this Agreement; provided, however, that the City’s right to compel specific performance of the obligations of Developer under this Agreement shall be subject to the limitations set forth in Section 5.3.4. Further, the City shall have no right to monetary damages except as set forth in Section 5.4.2. 5.3.2 Notice of Default. In the event the City reasonably determines that Developer is in default of any of its obligations under this Agreement, the City shall send a notice of such alleged default(s) to Developer in which the allegations of default shall be set forth in sufficient detail to enable Developer to ascertain the specific actions necessary to cure the alleged default(s). Upon receipt of a notice of default, Developer shall promptly commence to cure the identified default(s) at the earliest reasonable time after receipt of such notice but in no event more than thirty (30) days after receipt of notice and shall complete the cure of (i) any 13 monetary default(s) not later than thirty (30) days after the receipt of such notice of default, and (ii) any non-monetary default(s) not later than ninety (90) days after the receipt of such notice of default or such longer period as necessary to cure default as agreed to by City in its sole discretion. The Parties may mutually agree in writing to extend the time periods set forth in this Section. 5.3.3 Termination for Failure to Cure Default. If after the cure period provided for in Section 5.3.2 has lapsed and the Planning Director reasonably finds and determines that Developer remains in default, the Planning Director shall make a report to the City Council concerning such default and the City Council may thereafter proceed to modify or terminate this Agreement in accordance with the Procedures set forth in Sections 7.2 and 7.3 of the Procedures Resolution. 5.3.4 Specific Performance. Except as provided in this Section 5.3.4, the City shall have no right under this Agreement to seek a remedy of specific performance with respect to the Project in the event of an abandonment of the Project after construction has commenced. The City’s right to seek specific performance to compel completion of the Project (including portions of the Project) in the event of such abandonment after construction has commenced shall be specifically limited to (i) compelling Developer, at the election of the City in its sole discretion, to complete or demolish any uncompleted improvements located on public property initiated in connection with the Project with the choice of whether to demolish or complete such improvements and the method of such demolition or completion of such improvements to be selected by the City in its sole discretion, and (ii) compelling Developer, at the election of the City in its sole discretion, to complete or make safe and secure any uncompleted improvements located on the Property with the choice of whether to demolish, complete or secure such improvements and the method of such demolition, completion and securing of such improvements to be selected by Developer in its sole discretion. The City's specific performance remedy shall include the right to require dedication to the City of the improvements located on public property upon completion together with conveyance of real property as contemplated by this Agreement. Prior to Commencement of Construction, Developer shall post a performance bond or other security in an amount and form reasonably satisfactory to the City Attorney to guarantee demolition or securing of such uncompleted improvements located on public property and/or located on the Property. The Developer’s contractor's performance bond from a creditworthy bonding company assigned to the City is a performance bond that will be acceptable to City. Nothing in this Section 5.3.4 shall limit the City’s enforcement of all applicable provisions of the Applicable Rules, Existing Approvals, Mitigation Measures, and Uniform Code for any portion of the Project then or thereafter constructed (e.g., requiring Developer to build sewer laterals required under Applicable Rules to serve the Project actually completed), termination of this Agreement in accordance with the provisions hereof notwithstanding. In addition, nothing in this Section shall limit or restrict in any way the City’s monetary remedies as provided for in Section 5.4.2 hereof. 5.4 Default by City. 5.4.1 Notice of Default. In the event the Developer reasonably determines that the City is in default of any of its obligations under this Agreement, the Developer shall send a notice of such alleged default(s) to the City in which the allegations of 14 default shall be set forth in sufficient detail to enable the City to ascertain the specific actions necessary to cure the alleged default(s). Upon receipt of written notice of default from Developer, the City shall promptly commence to cure the identified default(s) at the earliest reasonable time after receipt of the notice of default and shall complete the cure of such default(s) not later than sixty (60) days after receipt of the notice of default or such longer period as necessary to cure default as agreed to by the Developer in its sole discretion. The Parties may mutually agree in writing to extend the time periods set forth in this Section. 5.4.2 Specific Performance and Mandamus. It is acknowledged by the Parties that the City would not have entered into this Agreement if it were to be liable in damages under or with respect to this Agreement or the application thereof. In addition, the Parties agree that monetary damages are not an adequate remedy for Developer if the City should be determined to be in default under this Agreement. The Parties further agree that specific performance and mandamus shall be Developer’s only remedies under this Agreement and Developer may not seek monetary damages in the event of a default by the City under this Agreement. Developer covenants not to sue for or claim any monetary damages in the event of a default by the City under this Agreement (including without limitation special, incidental or consequential damages) and expressly waives its right to recover damages under this Agreement. The City shall have the right to recover (1) actual damages only (and not consequential, punitive or special damages, each of which is hereby expressly waived) for (a) the Developer’s failure to pay sums to the City as and when due under this Agreement, but subject to any express conditions for such payment set forth in this Agreement, and (b) the Developer’s failure to make payment due under any indemnity in this Agreement, (2) any and all damages relating to the Developer's failure to construct Public Improvements in accordance with City-approved plans and specifications and in accordance with all applicable laws (but only to the extent that the City first collects against any security, including but not limited to bonds, for such Public Improvements), and (3) attorney's fees and costs when awarded by an arbitrator or a court with jurisdiction. For purposes of the foregoing, “actual damages” shall mean the actual amount of the sum due and owing under this Agreement, with interest as provided by law, together with such judgment collection activities as may be ordered by the judgment and no additional sums. Developer may seek specific performance of City’s obligations under this Agreement or a writ of mandate pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure sections 1085 or 1094.5, as applicable, to compel the City to take or refrain from taking any action, or to modify any action taken, that is necessary to effectuate the terms of this Agreement only after serving written notice of the alleged default(s) on City and lapse of the period given for City to cure such default(s), all in accordance with Section 5.4.1, and for so long as City remains in default of its obligations under this Agreement. 6. PUBLIC BENEFITS. 6.1 Development of AAA Four Diamond Hotel. Development of the Project will further the goals of the City’s Hotel Incentive Program by providing a new AAA Four Diamond Hotel, in a manner that is consistent with goals of the General Plan and Specific Plan. 6.2 Net Increase in Transient Occupancy Tax. The Project will provide substantial City benefits from the net increase in transient occupancy tax derived from the construction of the Project. 15 6.3 Increase in Retail Sales Taxes. The Project will provide significant additional net retail sales tax benefits upon Project completion. 6.4 Increase in Property Taxes. The Project will generate significant additional property taxes. 6.5 Resort Area Traffic Improvements. The Project will provide additional Anaheim Resort Area traffic benefits as described in the Mitigation Measures and Existing Approvals. 6.6 Public Improvements Commitment. The Developer shall deliver to the City a cash payment in the amount of One Hundred Thousand and No/100 Dollars ($100,000.00), which payment shall be paid to the City upon the earlier to occur of (a) the issuance of a demolition or grading permit for the Project, whichever occurs first, or (b) the first anniversary of the Effective Date of the Authorizing Ordinance, provided that, with respect to subparagraph "(b)", the Developer has not elected prior to said first anniversary to abandon the Project and terminate this Agreement. Said amount shall be used by the City, in its sole discretion, to fund certain public improvements which may be constructed by the City near the Project. 7. GENERAL PROVISIONS. 7.1 Date Agreement Becomes Effective. This Agreement shall become effective on the Effective Date. 7.2 Term. 7.2.1 Basic Term. The Term of this Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date of this Agreement and shall extend for a period of five (5) years after the Effective Date, unless extended or earlier terminated as provided herein. 7.2.2 Early Termination of Agreement. This Agreement is terminable: (i) by mutual written agreement of the Parties; or (ii) by either Party following an uncured default by the other Party under this Agreement, subject to the procedures and limitations set forth in this Agreement; or (iii) upon the occurrence of the entry of a final judgment or issuance of a final order, after all appeals have been exhausted, directed to the City as a result of any lawsuit filed against the City to set aside, withdraw or abrogate the approval of the City Council of this Agreement; or (iv) if termination occurs pursuant to the provisions of the Procedures Resolution and such termination is so intended thereby. 7.2.3 Following expiration of the Term, this Agreement shall be deemed terminated and of no further force and effect, except for any provisions which, by their express terms, survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement. 7.2.4 If not already terminated by reason of any other provision in this Agreement, or for any other reason, this Agreement shall automatically terminate and be of no further force and effect upon completion of the Project pursuant to the terms of this Agreement 16 and any further amendments thereto and the issuance of all occupancy permits and acceptance by the City of all dedications and improvements as required by the development of the Project. 7.3 Force Majeure: Extension of Time of Performance. In addition to specific provisions of this Agreement, whenever a period of time is designated within which either Party hereto is required to do or complete any act, matter or thing, both the time for the doing or completion thereof and the Term of this Agreement and the specific obligation hereunder shall be extended by a period of time equal to the number of days which such Party is prevented from, or is unreasonably interfered with the doing or completion of such act, matter or thing because of the following causes, which causes are beyond the reasonable control of the Party to be excused including: war, terrorist acts, insurrection; strikes; walk-outs; riots; floods; earthquakes; fires; unavoidable casualties; acts of God; Litigation and administrative proceedings which are brought against the Project by a third party (not including any administrative proceedings contemplated by this Agreement in the normal course of affairs such as the Annual Review); restrictions imposed or mandated by other governmental entities (“Governmental Restrictions”); enactment of conflicting state or federal laws or regulations (“Conflicting Laws”); judicial decisions (“Judicial Decisions”); or similar bases for excused performance which is not within the reasonable control of the Party to be excused (financial inability excepted). This Section shall not be applicable to, bankruptcy or receivership initiated by or on behalf of Developer or, if not dismissed within ninety (90) days, by any third parties against Developer. A Party wishing to invoke this Section shall notify in writing the other Party of that intention within thirty (30) days of the commencement of any such cause for delay and shall, at that time, specify the reasons therefor, the provisions of this Agreement that will be delayed as a result, and the period of such extension, if known, or, if not known, the party’s best estimate thereof. The failure to so notify the other Party within that period as to the cause for delay shall constitute a waiver of any right to later rely upon this Section with respect to that cause. In the event any such extension continues for more than one hundred eighty (180) days, any Party not then in Default of its obligations hereunder, shall be entitled to terminate this Agreement upon written notice to the other and, in that event, the Parties shall have no further obligations hereunder. 7.4 Applicable Law. This Agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California, and the venue for any legal actions brought by any Party with respect to this Agreement shall be the County of Orange, State of California, for state actions, and the Orange County Division of the Central District of California for any federal actions. 7.5 Amendments. This Agreement may be amended from time to time in writing in accordance with Government Code section 65868 and the Procedures Resolution. 7.6 Assignment. The Parties acknowledge and agree that one of the principal inducements to the City in entering into this Agreement is the assurance that, if the Developer proceeds with the Project, the Project will be developed in accordance with the quality standards set forth in the Existing Approvals. In furtherance of these objectives, the Parties agree that except as otherwise provided in this Section 7.6, Developer shall not be entitled to transfer all or any part of its interest in or rights under this Agreement and/or any part of its interest in or rights to the Property, or any part thereof, and or ownership and/or control of Developer, without the prior written consent of the City, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned 17 or delayed. The City shall consent to each transfer if evidence reasonably satisfactory to the City is presented that the entity to which the assignment is proposed (i) is able to demonstrate that it has adequate net worth to construct and operate the Project; (ii) has a demonstrated track record of having developed and operated one or more AAA Four Diamond Hotels of a similar nature to the Project; (iii) has a demonstrated track record of arranging financing (through debt and/or equity) on terms and in amounts similar to the amounts necessary to complete the Project; (iv) is able to demonstrate the capability and experience to successfully manage developments of the size and character of the Project; and (v) has expressly assumed all of Developer’s obligations hereunder and such assignment is being undertaken in accordance with this Section 7.6. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Developer shall have the right to lease space to specialty retail and restaurant tenants, and assign, lease, transfer, convey or hypothecate all or any partial interest in all or any portion of the Property to any Affiliate without the consent of the City; provided, however, that any entitlements or permits required for such uses shall be processed in accordance with the City's ordinances, rules and regulations. Any such assignment, lease, transfer, conveyance, or hypothecation, except a lease to specialty retail and/or restaurant tenants may include all of Developer’s rights, duties and obligations under this Agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, no assignment shall be effective regardless of whether or not the City’s consent is otherwise required, unless and until the proposed assignee accepts and agrees in writing to assume and be bound by the obligations set forth in this Agreement which apply to the Property, the Project, the Project Elements or interest therein being assigned. 7.7 Mortgage Rights. 7.7.1 Encumbrances on the Property and this Agreement. The Parties hereto agree that this Agreement shall not prevent or limit Developer, in any manner, at Developer’s sole and absolute discretion, from encumbering the Property or any portion thereof or any improvements thereon with any Mortgage. Developer is hereby given the express right, in addition to any other rights herein granted, to grant a Mortgage on its interests in this Agreement or any part or parts thereof, under one or more Mortgages and to assign this Agreement as collateral security for any such Mortgage. 7.7.2 Mortgagee Protection. This Agreement shall be superior and senior to the lien of any Mortgage. Notwithstanding the foregoing, no breach of this Agreement shall defeat, render invalid, diminish, or impair the lien of any Mortgage made in good faith and for value, and any acquisition or acceptance of title or any right or interest in or with respect to the Property or any portion thereof, or to this Agreement, by a Mortgagee (whether pursuant to foreclosure, lease termination or otherwise) shall upon written election by the Mortgagee within sixty (60) days after receipt of such right, title or interest, be subject to all of the terms and conditions of this Agreement and any such Mortgagee who takes title to the Property or any portion thereof, or to this Agreement, shall also be entitled to the rights and obligations arising under this Agreement. 7.7.3 Mortgagee Not Obligated. Notwithstanding the provisions of this Section 7.7, a Mortgagee will not have any rights, obligations or duties pursuant to the terms set forth in this Agreement to perform the obligations of Developer or other affirmative covenants of Developer hereunder or to guarantee such performance, unless such Mortgagee expressly assumes the rights and obligations of the Developer and except that (i) the Mortgagee shall upon 18 written election by the Mortgagee within sixty (60) days after receipt of such right, title or interest, have no right to develop the Project without fully complying with the terms of this Agreement, and (ii) to the extent that any covenant to be performed by Developer is a condition to the performance of any covenant by the City, the performance thereof shall continue to be a condition precedent to the City’s performance hereunder. Although not obligated to do so, upon written election by the Mortgagee within sixty (60) days after receipt of such right, title or interest, any Mortgagee may do any act or thing required by Developer hereunder, and do any act or thing which may be necessary and properly done in the performance and observance of the agreements, covenants and conditions hereof to prevent termination of this Agreement in accordance with Section 7.7.4. Any Mortgagee and its agents and contractors shall have full access to the Property for purposes of accomplishing any of the foregoing. Any of the foregoing done by any Mortgagee shall be as effective to prevent a termination of this Agreement as if the same would have been done by the Developer. 7.7.4 Notice of Default to Mortgagee: Right of Mortgagee to Cure. Each Mortgagee shall, upon written request to City be entitled to receive written notice from the City of the result of the Annual review and of any default by Developer of its obligations set forth in this Agreement simultaneously with the delivery of such notices to the Developer. Each Mortgagee shall have the right, but not an obligation, to cure such default within ninety (90) days after receipt of such notice or, if such default can only be remedied or cured by such Mortgagee upon obtaining possession of the Property, such Mortgagee shall have the right to seek or obtain possession with diligence and continuity through a receiver or otherwise, and to remedy or cure such default within ninety (90) days after obtaining possession, and, except in case of emergency or to protect the public health or safety as determined by the City in its reasonable discretion, City may not exercise any of its remedies set forth in this Agreement until expiration of such ninety (90) day period whether commencing upon receipt of notice or upon obtaining possession of the interests covered by a Mortgage, as applicable; provided, however, that in the case of a default which cannot with diligence be remedied or cured or the remedy or cure of which cannot be commenced within such ninety (90) day period, the Mortgagee shall have such additional time as is reasonably necessary to remedy or cure such default. Any notice of termination delivered in violation of this Section 7.7.4 shall be rendered void. In any case where, sixty (60) days after receipt by the Mortgagee of the notice of the Developer’s default, the holder of any Mortgage creating a lien or encumbrance upon the Property, or any part thereof, has not exercised the option to cure, or, if it has exercised the option, is not proceeding diligently with the cure, the City may proceed with termination of this Agreement and any further obligations of City hereunder. 7.7.5 Bankruptcy. Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions of this Section 7.7, if any Mortgagee is prohibited from commencing or prosecuting foreclosure or other appropriate proceedings in the nature thereof by any injunction issued by any court or by reason of any action by any court having jurisdiction of any bankruptcy or insolvency proceeding involving Developer, the times specified in Section 7.7.4 for commencing or prosecuting foreclosure or other proceedings shall be extended for the period of the prohibition. In addition, if this Agreement is rejected or otherwise terminated in connection with any such proceeding, then upon the request of any mortgagee, a new development agreement upon the same terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement may be entered into between such Mortgagee and City. 19 7.7.6 Termination Subject to Mortgagee Rights. All rights of the City to terminate this Agreement, vis-a-vis the Mortgagee, as a result of the occurrence of any default shall be subject to, and conditioned upon, the City having first given to each Mortgagee written notice of the default as required under 7.7.4 above, and all Mortgagees having failed to remedy such default or acquire Developer’s interests hereunder, or having failed to commence foreclosure or other appropriate proceedings in the nature thereof as set forth in Section 7.7.4 above. 7.7.7 No Cancellation. There shall be no cancellation, surrender or modification of this Agreement by joint action of the Parties without a minimum of ninety (90) days prior written notice to each Mortgagee who has requested such notice. 7.7.8 New Agreement Upon Default by Developer. City agrees that in the event of termination of this Agreement by reason of a default by Developer, the City will enter into a new development agreement with the most senior Mortgagee whose Mortgage encumbers this Agreement requesting a new development agreement for the remainder of the term of this Agreement, such new agreement being effective as of the date of such termination, and containing such terms, provisions, covenants and agreements as herein contained, provided: (a) The senior Mortgagee shall make written request upon City for such new development agreement within thirty (30) days after the date of termination; (b) The senior Mortgagee shall pay to the City at the time of the execution and delivery of such new development agreement any and all sums which would, at the time of the execution and delivery thereof, be due and unpaid pursuant to this Agreement but for its termination; including any expenses, attorneys’ fees and costs, to which the City was subjected by reason of such default; (c) The senior Mortgagee shall perform and observe all covenants herein contained on Developer’s part to be performed, and shall further remedy any other conditions which Developer was obligated to perform under the terms of this Agreement, and to the extent that same are curable or may be performed by the senior Mortgagee; and (d) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary expressed or implied elsewhere in this Agreement, any new development agreement made pursuant to this Section shall be superior to any Mortgage to the same extent as this Agreement. 7.7.9 Separate Agreement. The City shall, upon request, execute, acknowledge and deliver to each Mortgagee an agreement prepared at the sole cost and expense of the Developer, (including related legal fees incurred by the City) in form satisfactory to each Mortgagee and City, between City, Developer and the Mortgagee(s), confirming all of the provisions hereof and/or such other documents containing terms and provisions customarily required by Institutional Lenders in connection with such financing, provided, however, the City shall not be obligated to approve any terms that would impair or adversely affect the rights and obligations of the City, or otherwise amend this Agreement and/or the obligations of the Developer as set forth in this Agreement 20 7.7.10 Material Notices. The Developer shall give all Mortgagees notice of any Litigation and the parties hereby consent to intervention in such Litigation by the Mortgagee. In the event any Mortgagee shall not elect to intervene or become a party to the proceedings, such Mortgagee shall be provided notice and a copy of any award or decision made in connection therewith. 7.7.11 Mortgagee Right to Assign. Foreclosure of any Mortgage, or any sale thereunder, whether by judicial proceedings or by virtue of any power contained in the Mortgage, or any conveyance of the interest of Developer hereunder to any Mortgagee or its designee through, or in lieu of, foreclosure or other appropriate proceedings in the nature thereof, shall not require the consent of the City or constitute a breach of any provision of or a default under this Agreement; and upon such foreclosure, sale or conveyance, the City will recognize the purchaser or other transferee in connection therewith as the Developer hereunder provided that such purchaser, assignee or other transferee has a net worth, relevant experience, and evidence of financing sufficient to enable such entity to carry out this function, and otherwise conforms to the requirements of Section 7.6 hereof. 7.8 Covenants. The provisions of this Agreement shall constitute covenants which run with the land comprising the Property for the benefit thereof and as a burden thereon, and, subject to the restrictions on transfer as set forth in Section 7.6, the burdens and benefits hereof shall bind and inure to the benefit of all assignees, transferees and successors to the parties. 7.9 Implementation. Upon satisfactory completion by Developer of all required applications and payment of applicable Processing Fees and Charges, including the fee for processing this Agreement, if Developer proceeds with the Project, the City and Developer shall commence and diligently process all required steps necessary for the implementation of this Agreement and development of the Project in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. Developer shall, in a timely manner, provide the City with all documents, plans and other information necessary for the City to carry out its processing obligations hereunder. 7.10 Relationship of the Parties. It is specifically understood and agreed by and between the Parties hereto that the Project is a private development, that neither Party is acting as the agent of the other in any respect hereunder, and that each Party is an independent contracting entity with respect to the terms, covenants and conditions contained in this Agreement. The only relationship between the City and the Developer is that of a government entity regulating the development of private property and the owner of such private property. Further, the City and Developer hereby renounce the existence of any form of joint venture or partnership between them and agree that nothing herein or in any document executed in connection herewith shall be construed as making the City and Developer joint venturers or partners. 7.11 Cooperation in the Event of Third Party Litigation. In the event legal action is instituted by a third party, including any other governmental entity or official challenging the validity or enforceability of any provision of this Agreement, or the Existing Approvals vested pursuant to this Agreement, other actions taken pursuant to CEQA, or any other action by either Party in properly performing hereunder, the Parties hereby agree to affirmatively cooperate with each other in defending said action and the validity of each 21 provision of this Agreement; provided, however, that Developer agrees to and shall defend, indemnify, save and hold the City and its elected and appointed representatives, boards, commissions, offices, agents, employees, consultants and attorney’s (collectively, the “City” in this section 7.11) harmless from any and all claims, costs and liability, including without limitation, court costs and attorneys’ fees awarded to any party, to the extent they result from any such Litigation, and shall reimburse the City for its actual costs in defense of the action or proceeding, including, but not limited to the time and expenses of the City Attorney's Office and any consultants. As the indemnifying Party and provided that Developer demonstrates to City, to City’s reasonable satisfaction, that Developer has the financial wherewithal to indemnify the City hereunder at the time of any such Litigation, Developer shall at all times retain final authority and control over all documents to be filed in such Litigation and notwithstanding the provisions of this Section 7.11, the City shall be deemed to have waived its rights to be indemnified hereunder if the City settles any Litigation, in whole or in part, or files any documents in such Litigation without Developer’s prior written approval, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. This section shall survive any judgment invalidating all or any part of this Agreement. The Developer shall be entitled to choose legal counsel to defend against any such legal action and shall pay any attorneys' fees awarded against the City or the Developer, or both, resulting from any such legal action. The Developer shall be entitled to any award of attorneys' fees arising out of any such legal action. 7.12 Notices. Any notice or communication required hereunder between the City and Developer must be in writing, and may be given either personally, by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested or by overnight courier. If given by registered or certified mail, the same shall be deemed to have been delivered and received on the first to occur of (i) actual receipt by any of the addresses designated below as the Party to whom notices are to be sent, or (ii) five (5) days after a registered or certified letter containing such notice, properly addressed, with postage prepaid, is deposited in the United States mail. If personally delivered or delivered by courier, a notice shall be deemed to have been delivered when received by the Party to whom it is addressed. Any Party hereby may at any time, by giving ten (10) day’s written notice to the other Party hereto, designate any other address in substitution of the address, or any additional address, to which such notice or communication shall be given. Such notices or communications shall be given to the Parties at their addresses set forth below: If to City: With Copies to: City Clerk City Attorney, City of Anaheim City of Anaheim City of Anaheim 200 South Anaheim Blvd. 200 South Anaheim Blvd., Suite 356 Anaheim, CA 92803 Anaheim, CA 92803 If to Developer: With Copies to: Jeffery Anglada John A. Ramirez, Esq. Good Hope International Rutan & Tucker, LLP 3350 Avenue of the Arts 611 Anton Blvd, 14th Floor Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 22 7.13 Recordation. The City’s Clerk shall record a copy of this Agreement with the Registrar-Recorder of Orange County within ten (10) business days following the later to occur of (i) execution by both parties, or (ii) the Effective Date of the Authorizing Ordinance. To the extent that the Property consists of property under Lease by Developer, this Agreement shall encumber only the leasehold interest and shall not constitute an encumbrance upon the estate in fee. 7.14 Developer Hold Harmless. Developer hereby agrees to and shall indemnify, save, hold harmless and defend the City, and its elected and appointed representatives, boards, commissions, officers, agents, employees, consultants and attorneys (collectively, the “City” in this Section 7.14), from any and all claims, costs, and liability of any kind which may arise, directly or indirectly, from (i) any of Developer's acts or omissions under, related to, or in any respect connected with this Agreement and/or the development, ownership (or possession), and operation of the Property and/or the Project, and/or Developer’s activities on the Property (or the activities of the Developer's employees, contractors, subcontractors, agents, representatives, lessees, licensees, guests, invitees, successors, assigns or independent contractors on the Property), including without limitation the construction of the Project or the use or condition of the Project; (ii) any claim arising from the ownership (or possession), operation or use of the Property and/or the Project, including any claim relating to or arising from the presence on or under, or the escape, seepage, leakage, spillage, discharge, emission, or release on or from the Property and/or the Project of any Hazardous Materials, and any losses and liabilities arising from or related to any governmental requirements applicable to Hazardous Materials located on the Property. Nothing in this Section shall be construed to mean that Developer shall hold the City harmless and/or defend it to the extent that such claims, costs or liability arise from the negligent acts, or negligent failure to act, on the part of the City. City agrees that it shall fully cooperate with Developer in the defense of any matter in which Developer is defending and/or holding the City harmless and at no cost to City. Notwithstanding anything in this Agreement which is or appears to be to the contrary, the obligations set forth herein shall survive the Term, termination or earlier expiration of this Agreement. 7.15 Insurance. Without limiting its obligation to hold the City harmless, Developer shall provide and maintain at its own expense, at all times during the Term the following program of insurance concerning its operations hereunder. The insurance shall be placed with California-admitted insurers that carry a Best’s rating equal to A VII or higher. The program of insurance provided shall specifically identify this Agreement and shall contain express conditions that the City is to be given written notice at least thirty (30) days prior to any modification or termination of coverage. Such insurance shall be primary to and not contributing with any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, shall name the City, its officers, officials, employees, representatives and agents, as additional insureds, shall be written on a comprehensive or commercial general liability insurance form, and shall include coverage for, but not limited to. Completed Operations, Premises/Project Site Operations, Products/Completed Operations, Contractual, Independent Contractors Broad Form Property Damage, and Personal Injury, with a per occurrence limit of not less than two million dollars ($2,000,000) written on an occurrence basis. 7.16 Successors and Assigns. Subject to the limitations on transfer set forth in this Agreement, all of the provisions, agreements, rights, powers, standards, terms, covenants 23 and obligations contained in this Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the Parties, and their respective successors (by merger, consolidation or otherwise), assigns and transferees, and all persons or entities acquiring the Property or any portion thereof or any interest therein, whether by sale, operation of law, or in any manner whatsoever. 7.17 Severability. If any provisions, conditions, or covenants of this Agreement, or the application thereof to any circumstances of either Party, shall be held invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement or the application of such provision, condition, or covenant to persons or circumstances other than those as to whom or which it is held invalid or unenforceable shall not be affected thereby and shall be valid and enforceable to the fullest extent permitted by law. 7.18 Waiver. No waiver of any provision of this Agreement shall be effective unless in writing and signed by the Party against whom enforcement of a waiver is sought and such waiver refers expressly to the Section containing the waived provision. No waiver of any right or remedy in respect of any occurrence or event shall be deemed a waiver of any right or remedy in respect of any other occurrence or event. 7.19 Third Party Beneficiaries. There are no other third party beneficiaries to this Agreement and this Agreement is not intended, and shall not be construed to benefit or be enforceable by any other persons or entities other than the Parties. 7.20 Expedited Processing. Developer and City agree to cooperate in the expedited processing of any legal action seeking mandamus, specific performance, declaratory relief or injunctive relief, to set court dates at the earliest practicable date(s) and not cause delay in the prosecution/defense of the action, provided such cooperation shall not require any Party to waive any rights. 7.21 Requests for Payment. With respect to any requests by the City for payment of amounts due under this Agreement, Developer retains its right to review any invoices or requests for payments submitted by the City pursuant to this Agreement. Developer shall review and reasonably approve such invoices or requests for payment or shall identify any disputed amounts within twenty (20) days after receipt. At Developer’s request, the City shall provide Developer with reasonable information or back-up materials supporting such invoices or requests for payment at City offices, with reasonable notice, during business hours. In the event of any disputed invoices or requests for payment, Developer shall timely pay all amounts not disputed. 7.22 Entire Agreement. This Agreement and the documents, agreements and exhibits referenced herein or attached hereto set forth and contain the entire understandings and agreements of the parties, and there are no oral or written representations, understandings or ancillary covenants, undertakings or agreements which are not contained or expressly referred to herein and no testimony or evidence of any such representations, understandings, or covenants shall be admissible in any proceedings of any kind or nature to interpret or determine the provisions or conditions of this Agreement. 24 7.23 Conflict of Laws. With the exception of the Force Majeure provisions set forth in Section 7.3 hereof, it is agreed by the Parties that the obligations and conditions contained in the Existing Approvals and Mitigation Measures govern the development of the Property. To the extent that any provisions of this Agreement may conflict with any of the obligations, conditions or mitigations imposed on Developer pursuant to the Existing Approvals and Mitigation Measures, the Existing Approvals and Mitigation Measures shall govern. 7.24 Legal Advice; Neutral Interpretation; Headings and Table of Contents. Each Party has received independent legal advice from its attorneys with respect to the advisability of executing this Agreement and the meaning of the provisions hereof. The provisions of this Agreement shall be construed as to their fair meaning, and not for or against any Party based upon any attribution to such Party as the source of the language in question. The headings and table of contents used in this Agreement are for the convenience of reference only and shall not be used in construing this Agreement. 7.25 Counterparts. This Agreement is executed in six duplicate originals, each of which is deemed to be an original. 7.26 Organization and Standing of Developer. Developer is a corporation duly organized, qualified and validly existing and in good standing under the laws of the State of California, and has all requisite power and authority to enter into and perform its obligations under this Agreement. The Developer has provided to the City true and complete copies of all of its governing documents, and the percentage ownership interests reflected therein are accurate as of the date of this Agreement. 7.27 Authorization and Consents. The execution, delivery and performance of this Agreement is consistent with the Developer’s articles of incorporation and bylaws and has been duly authorized by all necessary action of the Developer’s Board of Directors. [Remainder of page intentionally left blank. Signatures appear on next page.] 25 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the date first written below. Dated: "CITY" CITY OF ANAHEIM, a municipal corporation and charter city By: ATTEST: LINDA N. ANDAL, CITY CLERK By: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Theodore J. Reynolds Assistant City Attorney "DEVELOPER" GOOD HOPE INTERNATIONAL, a California Corporation By: Printed Name: Title: 116203-v4/TJR A Notary Public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document. State of California ) County of ) On _________________________, before me, , (insert name and title of the officer) Notary Public, personally appeared , who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature (Seal) A Notary Public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document. State of California ) County of ) On _________________________, before me, , (insert name and title of the officer) Notary Public, personally appeared , who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature (Seal) EXHIBIT "A" SITE MAP EXHIBIT "B" LEGAL DESCRIPTION THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN BELOW IS SITUATED IN THE COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: PARCEL 1: THE EAST 660.00 FEET OF THE WEST 720.00 FEET OF THE NORTH 585.00 FEET OF THE SOUTH 1260 FEET OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 10 WEST, IN THE RANCHO SAN JUAN CAJON DE SANTA ANA, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 51, PAGE 10 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT SOUTH 0° 13' 22" EAST 15.03 FEET FROM THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PROPERTY SAID POINT BEING ON THE EASTERLY LINE OF HARBOR BOULEVARD 120 FEET WIDE; THENCE SOUTH 0° 13' 22" EAST ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE 100.08 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89° 54' 30" EAST PARALLEL TO THE NORTHERLY LINE OF ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL 111.34 FEET; THENCE NORTH 0° 13' 22" WEST, PARALLEL TO THE EASTERLY LINE OF HARBOR BOULEVARD 30.75 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89° 54' 38" EAST 38.66 FEET; THENCE NORTH 0° 13' 22" WEST 84.36 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF FREEDMAN WAY, 60.00 FEET WIDE; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID FREEDMAN WAY, SOUTH 89° 54' 30" WEST 134.97 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 15.00 FEET; THENCE WESTERLY AND SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 90° 07' 52" A LENGTH OF 23.60 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THIS DESCRIPTION. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF SAID LAND DESCRIBED IN THAT GRANT DEED TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM RECORDED FEBRUARY 11, 1999 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 19990101952, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY. 1032/032420-0001 9509292.1 a04/13/16 2 PARCEL 2: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE EASTERLY LINE OF HARBOR BOULEVARD 120.00 FEET WIDE AND 60.00 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTHERLY LINE OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PARCEL: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 10 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, DESIGNATED BY A STAKE MARKED "A", 675 FEET NORTH OF THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 22; THENCE NORTH 645 FEET ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 22, TO A POINT DESIGNATED BY A STAKE MARKED "B" AT THE JUNCTION OF THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 22, WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF LAND FORMERLY OWNED BY H.D. PELHEMUS; THENCE WEST 2640 FEET PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 22, AND AT A UNIFORM DISTANCE THEREFROM OF 1320 FEET TO A POINT DESIGNATED BY A STAKE MARKED "C"; THENCE SOUTH 645 FEET PARALLEL WITH THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 22 AND AT A UNIFORM DISTANCE THEREFROM OF 2640 FEET TO A POINT DESIGNATED BY A STAKE MARKED "D", 675 FEET DISTANT FROM AND NORTH OF THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 22; THENCE EAST 2640 FEET PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 22 AND AT A UNIFORM DISTANCE THEREFROM OF 675 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTINUING SAID DESCRIPTION SOUTH 0° 13' 22" EAST 15.03 FEET ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF HARBOR BOULEVARD TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 0° 13' 22" EAST ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE 100.08 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89° 54' 30" EAST PARALLEL TO THE NORTHERLY LINE OF ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL 111.34 FEET; THENCE NORTH 0° 13' 22" WEST, PARALLEL TO THE EASTERLY LINE OF HARBOR BOULEVARD 30.75 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89° 54' 38" EAST 38.66 FEET; THENCE NORTH 0° 13' 22" WEST 84.36 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF THE NORTHERLY 60.00 FEET OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID NORTHERLY 60.00 FEET SOUTH 89° 54' 30" WEST 134.97 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 15.00 FEET; THENCE WESTERLY AND SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 90° 07' 52" A LENGTH OF 23.60 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THIS DESCRIPTION. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF SAID LAND DESCRIBED IN THAT GRANT DEED TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM RECORDED FEBRUARY 11, 1999 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 19990101952, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY. ATTACHMENT NO. 4 ATTACHMENT NO. 5 4/8/16 «H:\REPORTS\Planning Commission\2016 PC Meetings\04-18-2016 PC Meeting\Item No. 3 DEV2015-00120 (DAG2016-00001)eyt\Attachments\ATT6_Parking Letter_NotFinal.docx» LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. 20 EXECUTIVE PARK, SUITE 200 IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92614 949.553.0666 TEL 949.553.8076 FAX BERKELEY CARLSBAD FRESNO PALM SPRINGS PT. RICHMOND RIVERSIDE ROCKLIN SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING | ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES | DESIGN March 30, 2016 Elaine Thienprasiddhi Associate Planner City of Anaheim 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Suite 162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Subject: 1700 South Harbor Boulevard Reduced Parking Demand and Shared Parking Dear Ms. Thienprasiddhi: LSA Associates Inc. (LSA) is pleased to submit this analysis of shared parking at 1700 South Harbor Boulevard. The Anaheim Plaza Hotel is an existing hotel on 8.8 acres at 1700 South Harbor Boulevard in the City of Anaheim (City). This parcel currently has two driveways on Harbor Boulevard and four driveways on Disney Way. A restaurant and a car rental business are located on the parcel with the hotel. The site currently provides parking along its perimeter. Due to the site’s prominent location along a high-volume pedestrian corridor within the Anaheim Resort, walking is a primary travel mode to the on-site restaurant and for hotel guests to off-site restaurants. As such, this parking analysis takes into account restaurant patrons that do not park a vehicle on site. The project proposes to demolish all existing buildings and construct a new 580-room hotel above a parking structure. Ancillary uses to the hotel would include space for restaurants and conference space consisting of three ballrooms, eight smaller meeting rooms, and two board rooms. In total, the restaurant spaces would be 25,600 square feet (sf) in size. A total of 50,000 sf of meeting space would be provided. Parking would be provided in a three-level garage. The ground floor is anticipated to hold 252 striped parking spaces, the first basement floor would provide 497 striped parking spaces, and the second basement floor is anticipated to hold 168 marked parking spaces. The total parking on site would be 917 spaces. Parking Demand The off-street parking requirements found in Anaheim Municipal Code (AMC) Section 18.42.040 apply to the proposed project. The off-street parking requirements established in AMC Section 18.42.040 state that hotels must provide 0.8 space per guest room, 8 spaces per thousand square feet (TSF) of banquet and meeting space, and 0.25 space per employee in guest room areas. A full-service restaurant integrated into a hotel complex would require eight spaces per TSF. Table A presents the off-street parking spaces required per the AMC. As Table A shows, straight application of the AMC would require 1,094 parking spaces. The project proposes to provide 917 parking spaces, which is a 16.2 percent reduction. During the times the banquet and meeting space is not utilized by groups outside of hotel guests, the AMC would estimate parking demand to be 694 spaces, which would leave 223 vacant spaces in the parking garage. ATTACHMENT NO. 6 4/8/16 «H:\REPORTS\Planning Commission\2016 PC Meetings\04-18-2016 PC Meeting\Item No. 3 DEV2015-00120 (DAG2016-00001)eyt\Attachments\ATT6_Parking Letter_NotFinal.docx» 2 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. Table A: Municipal Code Parking Requirements Land Use Parking Space Rates per Anaheim Municipal Code §18.42.040 Project Parking Requirements Size Unit Required Parking Spaces Hotel – Room 0.8 space/guest room 580 Room 464 Hotel – Employee 0.25 space/employee 100 Employee 25 Hotel – Meeting Space 8 spaces/TSF of banquet/meeting space 50 TSF 400 Restaurant – Full Service (integrated) 8 spaces/TSF 25.6 TSF 205 Retail Sales (integrated) 1 space/TSF 0 TSF 0 TOTAL 1,094 TSF = thousand square feet Parking Variance When seeking a variance from the parking requirements established by AMC Section 18.42.40, the City requires that the following five findings be made. This letter provides data to support these findings. • That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not cause fewer off-street parking spaces to be provided for the proposed use than the number of such spaces necessary to accommodate all vehicles attributable to such use under the normal and reasonably foreseeable conditions of operation of such use; • That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use; • That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon adjacent property in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use (which property is not expressly provided as parking for such use under an agreement in compliance with subsection .030 of Section 18.42.050 [Non-Residential Uses-Shared Parking Arrangements]); • That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase traffic congestion within the off-street parking areas or lots provided for the proposed use; and • That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not impede vehicular ingress or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. Reduced Parking Demand and Shared Parking The project site is at the southeast corner of Harbor Boulevard/Disney Way along a heavily trafficked pedestrian corridor. Some of the customers for the on-site restaurants will be guests at other hotels. Those customers have the option to travel to the project site by walking or by using the Anaheim Resort Transportation network. As such, the parking rate generated by restaurants integrated into the proposed hotel is anticipated to be lower than the parking rate for hotels elsewhere in the City. LSA examined parking studies conducted for nearby uses and found that the use of alternative travel modes (e.g., walking and transit) in this area could result in a 25 percent reduction in parking demand for the restaurants. 4/8/16 «H:\REPORTS\Planning Commission\2016 PC Meetings\04-18-2016 PC Meeting\Item No. 3 DEV2015-00120 (DAG2016-00001)eyt\Attachments\ATT6_Parking Letter_NotFinal.docx» 3 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. It is logical to believe that not all hotel guests will register a vehicle with their room because of the proximity to Disneyland and the anticipated additional cost for overnight parking at the hotel. However, the effect of these factors cannot be quantified at this time and this parking analysis does not account for a reduction in parking demand from hotel rooms. Because of different hours of operation and different offsetting parking activities, not all uses at the site require their full allotment of parking spaces at the same time. LSA used methodologies found in Shared Parking, Second Edition (Urban Land Institute 2005) to identify the daily variations in parking demand for each of the site’s land uses. The time-of-day factors found in Shared Parking are based on empirical studies and results from multiple parking accumulation counts. A detailed table outlining the parking reductions and shared parking analysis (Table B) is provided as an attachment to this report. The variation in parking needs reflects uses that are not fully utilized at the same time. The hotel and restaurants would have sufficient parking throughout the day when the banquet and meeting space is not in use. To test the effects of banquets and meetings and identify times of day when use of the meeting facilities could constrain parking supply, the utilization rates for banquet and meeting space were adjusted to 100 percent between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., when the Shared Parking surveys identified less than full utilization at typical conference centers. Table B, attached, identifies that full utilization of the banquet and meeting space would cause total parking demand to exceed parking supply before 8:00 a.m. or after 6:00 p.m. At those times, a demand of up to 949 parking spaces could be expected while the number of striped parking stalls is 917. The 32 parking space shortfall could be accommodated through the use of a valet strategy, as described below. It bears repeating that a parking shortfall would only exist during full utilization of the banquet and meeting space by users other than hotel guests (i.e., complete utilization by outside groups while the hotel parking is 90 percent occupied). In all other circumstances, the parking demand (i.e., a maximum of 549 parking spaces) could be accommodated within the striped parking spaces in the parking garage. Valet Parking Plan The hotel plans to offer valet service at all times as an amenity for hotel guests. Valet operations provide an opportunity to increase the parking supply through a move-one-to-get-one valet strategy. While plans for the second basement floor indicate 186 standard parking spaces, an additional 32 tandem spaces are proposed to be striped along the eastern side of the garage for valet use. If valet parking operations utilize the eastern row, the second basement floor would provide a total of 218 spaces. Valet use of tandem parking on the second basement floor would increase the total parking supply to 949 parking spaces. Winpark prepared an additional valet operations plan (attached) for the proposed hotel at 1700 South Harbor Boulevard. LSA has reviewed this valet operations plan and concurs with the proposed location of additional valet parking spaces. The proposed configuration of parking allows for flexibility and multiple options for valet parking. On the first basement level, two areas in the southeast corner of the garage could be utilized for valet. As described above, the eastern side of the second basement level is striped for tandem valet parking; further, the entire level could be utilized 4/8/16 «H:\REPORTS\Planning Commission\2016 PC Meetings\04-18-2016 PC Meeting\Item No. 3 DEV2015-00120 (DAG2016-00001)eyt\Attachments\ATT6_Parking Letter_NotFinal.docx» 4 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. for valet operations if there is a higher demand for valet. Doing so would result in a parking supply of up to 1,021 spaces. The valet parking plan provides a buffer should parking demand exceed expectations. Under typical valet operations, the valet would have access to striped parking spaces in the southeast corner of the first basement floor and tandem spaces in the second basement floor, for a total of 949 parking spaces. Findings That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not cause fewer off-street parking spaces to be provided for the proposed use than the number of such spaces necessary to accommodate all vehicles attributable to such use under the normal and reasonably foreseeable conditions of operation of such use. The analysis presented in this letter identified that standard Urban Land Institute shared parking methodology forecasts the maximum parking demand to be 549 parking spaces when banquet and meeting space is not in use, and 949 parking spaces when banquet and meeting space is fully utilized. The project will construct 917 parking stalls and can park 949 vehicles through use of a valet operations plan. Therefore, the project will not cause fewer off-street parking spaces to be provided for the proposed use than the number of spaces necessary to accommodate all parked vehicles attributable to the project. That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. Parking is not permitted on public streets within the immediate vicinity of the project. The analysis presented in this letter identified that maximum parking demand is not anticipated to exceed the parking supply. Therefore, the project will not increase competition for parking spaces on public streets. That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon adjacent property in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use (which property is not expressly provided as parking for such use under an agreement in compliance with subsection .030 of Section 18.42.050 [Non-Residential Uses-Shared Parking Arrangements]). The analysis presented in this letter identified that the maximum parking demand is not anticipated to exceed the parking supply. In addition, both adjacent properties exercise control over parking in the form of paid public parking or private parking controlled by an attendant at the entrance to the parking lot. Therefore, the proposed project is not anticipated to increase demand and competition for parking spaces on adjacent properties. 4/8/16 «H:\REPORTS\Planning Commission\2016 PC Meetings\04-18-2016 PC Meeting\Item No. 3 DEV2015-00120 (DAG2016-00001)eyt\Attachments\ATT6_Parking Letter_NotFinal.docx» 5 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase traffic congestion within the off-street parking areas or lots provided for the proposed use. During typical daily operation, the maximum parking demand is anticipated to be 549 parking spaces, while 917 parking stalls are provided. Finding an available parking space will not be challenging most of the time. During full utilization of the banquet and meeting space, along with 100 percent of all other uses, parking demand would fully utilize the available parking supply. However, valet parking would be available and would reduce the necessity to circle the parking lots in search of parking. Furthermore, the valet operations plan identifies the southeast corner of the parking garage (the portion of the garage with dead-end aisles) for valet parking only. Self-parking vehicles will be limited to the portion of the parking garage with continuous traffic flow. Therefore, the proposed project is not expected to increase traffic congestion within the off-street parking areas for the proposed use. That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not impede vehicular ingress or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. The proposed project will maintain the two existing driveways on Harbor Boulevard and will eliminate two of the four existing driveways on Disney Way. Figure 1, attached, provides a site plan of the project’s ground level. Figure 1 illustrates that the main entrance is located on Harbor Boulevard approximately 300 feet south of Disney Way. The main entrance leads into a porte cochere with designated turnouts for Anaheim Resort Transportation and tour buses. A stand for the valet will be located near the hotel lobby doors approximately 280 feet from the Harbor Boulevard driveway. Beyond that is the gated access to the parking garage. All self-parking customers (i.e., hotel guests, restaurant patrons, or employees) will stop at these gates, press a button to receive a time-stamped ticket, and pass through these gates to the garage. The total distance from the driveway on Harbor Boulevard to the garage gates is approximately 500 feet. LSA conducted a gate stacking analysis (attached) based on the anticipated peak hour inbound traffic volume presented in the traffic report. This analysis estimates a 99th percentile queue of two vehicles (i.e., 44 feet). Therefore, the maximum queue is not anticipated to impede vehicular ingress from Harbor Boulevard. Additionally, the 280 feet from Harbor Boulevard to the valet stand will allow up to 11 vehicles to stack and provides sufficient space to avoid affecting ingress from Harbor Boulevard. The right-in/right-out driveway at the southern end of the property will remain with implementation of the proposed project. That driveway will function as access to a loading dock and trash pickup area as well as an exit for employees and self-parked guests leaving the parking garage. A fire access gate east of the garage exit will close off access to the remainder of the road along the east edge of the property. This second driveway on Harbor Boulevard will primarily serve exiting vehicles, the queue for which would be contained within the property and without interference to traffic on Harbor Boulevard. A second service entrance is planned from Disney Way approximately 390 feet from Harbor Boulevard. This driveway will provide access for deliveries and sanitation vehicles to serve the restaurant tenants. This is a right-in/right-out driveway and will serve a small number of vehicles each day, primarily during off-peak periods. This driveway is not anticipated to cause interference with the traffic on Disney Way. Ta b l e A : 1 7 0 0 S o u t h H a r b o r B o u l e v a r d P a r k i n g R e q u i r em e n t s Pa r k i n g R a t e s La n d U s e Ho t e l - R o o m Ho t e l - M e e t i n g S p a c e Re s t a u r a n t - F u l l S e r v i c e ( i n t e g r a t e d ) Re s t a u r a n t - T a k e O u t ( i n t e g r a t e d ) Re t a i l S a l e s ( i n t e g r a t e d ) In d i v i d u a l U s e P a r k i n g R e q u i r e m e n t s S i z e U n i t AM C R e q u i r e d Pa r k i n g Pa r k i n g De m a n d Ho t e l - R o o m 58 0 R o o m 4 6 4 46 4 0% Ho t e l - E m p l o y e e 1 0 0 E m p 2 5 25 0% Ho t e l - M e e t i n g S p a c e 5 0 T S F 4 0 0 40 0 0% Re s t a u r a n t - F u l l S e r v i c e 2 5 . 6 T S F 2 0 5 15 4 25 % To t a l 1, 0 9 4 1,0 4 3 DU = D w e l l i n g U n i t TS F = T h o u s a n d S q u a r e F e e t Ta b l e B : W e e k d a y T i m e o f D a y w i t h R e d u c e d P a r k i n g 6: 0 0 a . m . 7 : 0 0 a . m . 8 : 0 0 a . m . 9 : 0 0 a . m . 1 0 : 0 0 a . m . 1 1 : 0 0 a . m . 1 2 : 0 0 p . m . 1 : 0 0 p . m . 2 : 0 0 p . m . 3 : 0 0 p . m . 4 : 0 0 p . m . 5: 0 0 p . m . 6 : 0 0 p . m . 7 : 0 0 p . m . 8 : 0 0 p . m . 9 : 0 0 p . m . 1 0 : 0 0 p.m. 1 1 : 0 0 p . m . Ho t e l - L e i s u r e G u e s t 9 5 % 9 5 % 9 0 % 8 0 % 7 0 % 7 0 % 6 5 % 6 5 % 7 0 % 7 0 % 7 5% 8 0 % 8 5 % 8 5 % 9 0 % 9 5 % 9 5 % 1 0 0 % Em p l o y e e 5 % 3 0 % 9 0 % 9 0 % 1 0 0 % 1 0 0 % 1 0 0 % 1 0 0 % 1 0 0 % 1 0 0 % 9 0 % 7 0 % 4 0 % 2 0 % 2 0 % 2 0 % 2 0 % 1 0 % Co n f e r e n c e / B a n q u e t 0 % 0 % 1 0 0 % 1 0 0 % 1 0 0 % 1 0 0 % 1 0 0 % 1 0 0 % 1 0 0 % 1 00 % 1 0 0 % 1 0 0 % 1 0 0 % 1 0 0 % 1 0 0 % 1 0 0 % 5 0 % 0 % Fa m i l y R e s t a u r a n t C u s t o m e r 2 5 % 5 0 % 6 0 % 7 5 % 8 5 % 9 0 % 1 0 0 % 9 0 % 5 0% 4 5 % 4 5 % 7 5 % 8 0 % 8 0 % 8 0 % 6 0 % 5 5 % 5 0 % 50 % 7 5 % 9 0 % 9 0 % 1 0 0 % 1 0 0 % 1 0 0 % 1 0 0 % 1 0 0 % 7 5 % 7 5 % 9 5 % 9 5 % 9 5 % 9 5 % 8 0% 6 5 % 6 5 % To t a l D e m a n d 2 Ho t e l - R o o m 4 6 4 4 4 1 4 4 1 4 1 8 3 7 1 3 2 5 3 2 5 3 0 2 3 0 2 3 2 5 3 2 5 3 4 8 3 7 1 39 4 3 9 4 4 1 8 4 4 1 4 4 1 4 6 4 Ho t e l - E m p l o y e e 2 5 1 8 2 3 2 3 2 5 2 5 2 5 2 5 2 5 2 5 2 3 1 8 1 0 5 5 5 5 3 Ho t e l - M e e t i n g S p a c e 4 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 4 0 0 4 0 0 4 0 0 4 0 0 4 0 0 4 0 0 4 0 0 4 00 4 0 0 4 0 0 4 0 0 4 0 0 4 0 0 2 0 0 0 Re s t a u r a n t 1 5 4 4 4 8 3 9 9 1 1 9 1 3 4 1 4 1 1 5 4 1 4 1 8 8 7 6 7 6 1 2 0 1 2 6 1 2 6 1 2 6 9 7 8 7 8 0 To t a l 48 6 53 1 93 9 91 2 88 4 89 0 88 0 86 7 83 8 82 6 84 7 90 9 93 1 92 6 949 943 733 547 1 T i m e - o f - D a y F a c t o r s r e f e r e n c e d f r o m Sh a r e d P a r k i n g , S e c o n d E d i t i o n , U r b a n L a n d I n s t i t u t e , 2 0 0 5 . 2 P a r k i n g R e q u i r e m e n t s p e r C i t y o f A n a h e i m M u n i c i p a l C o d e 1 8 . 4 2 . 0 4 0 1. 0 s p a c e s p e r T S F Ti m e o f D a y P a r k i n g D e m a n d Em p l o y e e 1 I n s t i t u t e o f T r a n s p o r t a t i o n E n g i n e e r s ( I T E ) Pa r k i n g G e n e r a t i o n ( F o u r t h E d i t i o n ) 17 0 0 S o u t h H a r b o r S h a r e d P a r k i n g R e q u i r e m e n t s Mu n i c i p a l C o d e 0. 8 s p a c e s p e r r o o m p l u s 0 . 2 5 s p a c e s p e r e m p l o y e e 8 s p a c e s p e r T S F o f b a n q u e t / m e e t i n g s p a c e 8 s p a c e s p e r T S F 5. 5 s p a c e s p e r T S F Ti m e o f D a y F a c t o r s 1 Tr a v e l M o d e A d j u s t m e n t s Tr a n s i t : 0 % Tr a n s i t : 0 % Tr a n s i t : 0 % Wa l k i n g a n d T r a n s i t : 2 5 % FIGURE1 I:\AHM1601\G\Site Plan.cdr (3/25/2016) Site Plan 1700 South Harbor FEET 100500 N DISNEY WAY HA R B O R B L VD 390’390’ 30 0 ’ 30 0 ’ 500’500’ 275’275’ 50 ’ 50 ’ LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. Gate Stacking Analysis AM PM AM PM Patrons Entering 1 305 117 N/A 0.38 N/A 44 1 Service Rate is the Design Capacity from Robert Crommelin's Entrance-Exit Design and Control for Major Parking Facilities (1972). Ticket Dispenser with Gate (305 vehicles per hour) 2 Traffic Intensity is the Arrival Rate (peak-hour volume) ÷ Service Rate per the “Reservoir Needs vs. Traffic Intensity” table in the Crommelin report. 3 Number of vehicles indicated in the “Reservoir Needs vs. Traffic Intensity” table. Reservoir required is 22 ft per vehicle. Reservior is measured at 99th Percentile Queue. ft = feet N/A = not applicable Gate No. of Lanes Service Rate1 Arrival Rate (Peak-Hour Volume) Traffic Intensity 2 Reservoir Required (ft)3 P:\AHM1601\gate stacking.xls\Crommelin (3/25/2016) 1001 McKinney | Suite 450 | Houston, Texas 77002 | 866‐Winpark  Page | 1 1700 S. Harbor Hotel Internal Operations Plan Valet Operations Plan Hotel operations contemplate providing valet parking as an amenity for guests at all times. Guests would also have the option to self-park within the 3-level, 917 space parking garage. The lowest level of the parking garage includes 32 marked tandem valet spaces within the northeast portion of the garage. The use of valet operations has the potential to provide up to 1,021 spaces, if specified areas of level B1 and the entire level B2 are used for stacked valet parking. Valet parking begins near the front door at the designated Valet drop zone, shaded in yellow in the diagram below. The area is adjacent to the shuttle pickup point. A podium with lockable key-storage should be placed there and the podium attended by a Valet Supervisor or Podium Attendant. Three or four vehicles may be staged in the area awaiting valet runners. Vehicles are taken into the garage through the garage entry/exit and parked in storage areas on B1 and/or B2 of the garage. When the guest returns, the vehicles are returned through the entry/exit to the staging area as shown in the diagrams below. The plan envisions utilizing the SE corner of level B1 as the primary valet storage area (day to day use). On heavy valet days, valet usage is shown in the plan labeled PK-B2. The purpose of this revision is to consider the contemplated valet layout, as well as the total number of vehicles that could be stored in the event of heavy valet usage. When the entire floor is utilized for valet parking, signs or cones will be placed at the ramp to prevent self-parkers from entering the level. Valet Drop Zone As described above, this is the area where customers and guests leave their cars and are greeted by the Podium Attendant. In the diagram below, the area is shaded in yellow. The dotted route shows the route to park the vehicles in the designate storage areas and the hashed route is how the valets will return the vehicles to the Valet Drop Zone. The area can accommodate three to five cars. During busy times, the cars are stacked awaiting valets to take the cars into the garage. This is also the area where the customer or guest presents the claim check. 1001 McKinney | Suite 450 | Houston, Texas 77002 | 866‐Winpark  Page | 2 No valet parking is planned for Level 1. The valets take the car directly to the ramp and down to the Vehicle Storage areas on B1 and/or B2. B2 Storage Area On heavy valet days, Level PKB-2 may be used as the primary valet parking area and is where vehicles picked up at the valet drop zone near the hotel’s main entrance are stored. Access to the garage is via the two-way drive. When the entire floor will be utilized for valet parking, cones will be placed at the ramp to prevent self-parkers from entering the level. When using Level PKB-2 as an all-valet area, a number of different configurations may be used to fully utilize the existing space. Alternative configurations devised by experienced valet operators allow for parking of 275 or more vehicles on the level. In 1001 McKinney | Suite 450 | Houston, Texas 77002 | 866‐Winpark  Page | 3 addition, it is still possible to use the SE corner of Level PKB-1 as a valet area either for short term valet or as an overflow. If used as the primary valet storage area, the level may be configured as required to meet demand from guests, banquets and dining.  275 total spaces obtainable from 186 stalls.  The area is well-suited for valet storage allowing for the valet storage area to be segregated from self-parking.  The proximity to stairs and elevators allow the valets to quickly return to the valet staging area.  The route to the valet storage area is straightforward and easy to access. 1001 McKinney | Suite 450 | Houston, Texas 77002 | 866‐Winpark  Page | 4  Expanding the valet storage area to include all of Level B2 is easily accomplished and simple to implement with advanced notice of valet-heavy events. Other configurations are possible. Five-vehicle column stacks in the center parking bays of the garage increase capacity by 25%, allowing up to 140 vehicles in an area striped for 112 vehicles. B1 Storage Area If valet demand is low in day to day use, Level B1 has two areas that are easily converted to valet storage. This part of B1 may be considered the primary valet parking area. Below is a diagram showing the Valet Storage areas shaded in yellow and the valet route to the areas. This is the primary Valet Storage area. The storage area is further divided into A and B zones. The stairs that the valets will need to move between L1 and B1 are within the zone meaning that the valets can return more quickly to the Valet Drop Zone upstairs. B1A may be permanently designated as the valet storage area. As noted, it is proximal to the stairs allowing the valets to return as quickly as possible to the valet drop zone. The area is easy to block off with cones or signs. It is critical to keep from mixing self-park vehicles with valet-parked vehicles. 1001 McKinney | Suite 450 | Houston, Texas 77002 | 866‐Winpark  Page | 5 The area takes advantage of circulation stops in the traffic flow that might serve as congestion points to self-parkers. By removing this area from the self-park inventory, the traffic flow on this level is improved. PKB-1 A consists of 42 stalls. Valets may, through judicious parking techniques, park more than 42 vehicles in this area (about 25% more or 53 to 55 vehicles). B1-B holds 33 more vehicles and valet may add 6 to 10 more here (39 to 43 vehicles) If valet utilization by guests is low, this may be the only area necessary to permanently designate as valet. Combined Area B1-A and B1-B result in 75 stalls when using stacked valet parking. Judicious parking will result in additional vehicles in the storage area giving the area storage potential for 94 to 98 vehicles. Pedestrian Attendant at Harbor Drive The Parking Valet Operator shall provide a dedicated staff member to assist and collaborate hotel staff/security with vehicular traffic exiting the project site onto Harbor Boulevard. Hotel staff/security will be responsible for vehicular traffic flow, for the safety of the pedestrians crossing the property entrance, and to collaborate with the dedicated valet staff member in directing traffic flow. All staff involved with this area of the operation shall be trained as required for safe and timely passage of vehicles leaving the parking facilities. A high level of customer service shall be employed consistent with the AAA Four Diamond hotel brand. Should there be issues at the driveway associated with, but not limited to, the pedestrians, the City of Anaheim and the hotel operator will meet to address and resolve the issues. Loading Dock The hotel general manager, shall schedule and manage all service loading and pick up activities related to the Disney Way entrance. In addition, when deliveries or pick-ups are made at times while pedestrian movement restricts, or limits service vehicle access, an employee shall be present prior to stop trucks from exiting the site when pedestrians are crossing the driveway. Courtesy and common sense shall be employed as consistent with the AAA Four Diamond hotel brand. Trucks will not be able to enter and exit the driveway simultaneously. As such, the employee shall ensure that trucks do not stop or queue on Disney Way if there are conflicts at the driveway. The second truck would be required to circle around the site until it may safely enter the loading dock area. 1001 McKinney | Suite 450 | Houston, Texas 77002 | 866‐Winpark  Page | 6 Report Prepared by: Michael Cramer Executive Vice President, Winpark 1 Elaine Thienprasiddhi From:Rey Lee <reylee37@yahoo.com> Sent:Thursday, April 07, 2016 1:48 PM To:Elaine Thienprasiddhi Subject:Anaheim Plaza Hotel's Project Dear Miss Elaine Thienprasiddhi, I would like to bring this attention to you regarding Anaheim plan to give away nearly 400 million dollars in room subsidy to 100% owned foreign Chinese developer. I hope you can bring this matter into your audiences to gather enough opposition voices to kill the Anaheim's ernomous giveaway to already ultra-rich foreign Chinese developer. I understand Anaheim is trying to promote new hotel projects but it only make sense to give hundreds of million dollars to: 1. Local American owner not a foreign owner where the windfall will very likely siphon back to China in this case. 2. Subsidy should given to empty parcel of land, NOT on an existing hotel where it is already collecting room tax anyway !! 3. Since it is an existing hotel, Anaheim city will lose room ax revenue during demolition and construction of new new hotel which can takes about 2 years. 4. Since the foreign Chinese owner is desperate to invest in America, I strongly believe that they will proceed with their original plan of building a new hotel without any room subsidy. ANAHEIM city is planning to give nearly 400 MILLIION DOLLARS away to foreign CHINESE OWNER!! 1. Good Hope International, an affiliate of the Wincome Group is a COMPANY that is 100% OWNED BY FOREIGN CHINESE. 2. MONEY PROFITED FROM NEW HOTEL WILL BE MOST LIKELY SIPHONED BACK TO CHINA. 3. ANAHEIM STANDS TO LOSE nearly 400 MILLION DOLLARS JUST ON SUBSIDY. Truly, Rey ATTACHMENT NO. 7 City of Anaheim PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT Planning Services Division 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Anaheim, California 92805 TEL: 714.765.5139 FAX: 714.765.5280 To: File DEV2015-00120 From: Elaine Thienprasiddhi, Senior Planner Date: April 7, 2016 RE: Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 329, Compliance with Measures Required Prior to Final Site Plan Approval Staff has verified that the applicant has complied with all mitigation measures that are required to be fulfilled prior to approval of the Final Site Plan, as follows: MM 5.12-12: Prior to the approval of each Final Site Plan and prior to the issuance of each building permit, plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Fire Department as being in conformance with the Uniform Fire Code. MM 5.1-14: Prior to Final Site Plan approval, plans shall show that no shuttle/bus/vehicular drop-off areas shall be permitted in hotel/motel or vacation resort front setback area. MM 5.1-13: Prior to Final Site Plan approval, plans shall show that the rear elevations of buildings visible from off-site areas shall be architecturally accented to portray a finished look. MM 5.1-4: Prior to Final Site Plan approval, the location and configuration of all lighting fixtures including ground-mounted lighting fixtures utilized to accent buildings, landscape elements, or to illuminate pedestrian areas shall be shown on all Final Site Plans. All proposed surface parking area lighting fixtures shall be down-lighted with a maximum height of 12 feet adjacent to any residential properties. All lighting fixtures shall be shielded to direct lighting toward the area to be illuminated and away from adjacent residential property lines. MM 5.1-1: Prior to final site plan approval, the property owner/developer shall submit a shade and shadow analysis to the Planning and Building Department for review and approval demonstrating that the proposed structure(s) would avoid creating significant shade and shadow impacts on adjacent land uses to the maximum extent feasible. A significant shade and shadow impact would occur when outdoor active areas (e.g., outdoor eating areas, hotel/motel swimming pools, and residential front and back yards) or structures that include sensitive uses (e.g., residences) have windows that normally receive sunlight are covered by shadows for more than 50 percent of the sunlight hours. ATTACHMENT NO. 8 File DEV2015-00120 April 7, 2016 Page 2 of 2 MM 5.10-2: Prior to approval of each final site plan, the property owner/developer shall submit a noise study prepared by a certified acoustical engineer to the satisfaction of the Building Division Manager identifying whether noise attenuation is required and defining the attenuation measures and specific performance requirements, if warranted, to comply with the Uniform Building Code and Sound Pressure Level Ordinance. Ultimate noise attenuation requirements, if any, shall depend on the final location of such buildings and noise-sensitive uses inside and surrounding the buildings. Attenuation measures shall be implemented by the property owner/developer prior to final building and zoning inspections. MM 5.4-3: Prior to approval of a final site plan for properties that contain a structure over 45 years old, property owners/developers shall submit to the Planning and Building Department, Planning Services Division, documentation to verify the presence/absence of historic resources. On properties where resources are identified, such documentation shall provide a detailed mitigation plan, including a monitoring program and recovery and/or in situ preservation plan, based on the recommendations of a qualified specialist. MM 5.12-1: Prior to the approval of each Final Site Plan and issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit plans to the Police Department for review and approval for safety, accessibility, crime prevention, and security provisions during both the construction and operative phases for the purpose of incorporating safety measures in the project design including the concept of crime prevention through environmental design (e.g., building design, circulation, site planning, and lighting of parking structures and parking areas). MM 5.15-5: Prior to approval of the Final Site Plan and building permits, plans shall specifically show that the water meter and backflow equipment and any other large water system equipment will be installed to the satisfaction of the Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division, aboveground and behind the building setback line in a manner fully screened from all public streets and alleys and in accordance with Ordinance No. 4156. Prior to the final building and zoning inspections, the water meter and backflow equipment and any other large water system equipment shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division, in accordance with the Final Site Plan and the building permit plans. ATTACHMENT NO. 9 HU N S A K E R & A S S O C I A T E S I R I V E , I N C . 3 H u g h e s I r v i n e , C A 9 2 6 1 8 | 9 4 9 . 5 8 3 . 1 0 1 0 '&$(&$')          "  '                                          %                                                                                                         #                     ATTACHMENT NO. 10 HU N S A K E R & A S S O C I A T E S I R I V E , I N C . 3 H u g h e s I r v i n e , C A 9 2 6 1 8 | 9 4 9 . 5 8 3 . 1 0 1 0                                                         HU N S A K E R & A S S O C I A T E S I R I V E , I N C . 3 H u g h e s I r v i n e , C A 9 2 6 1 8 | 9 4 9 . 5 8 3 . 1 0 1 0                                                                 HU N S A K E R & A S S O C I A T E S I R I V E , I N C . 3 H u g h e s I r v i n e , C A 9 2 6 1 8 | 9 4 9 . 5 8 3 . 1 0 1 0                                                      HU N S A K E R & A S S O C I A T E S I R I V E , I N C . 3 H u g h e s I r v i n e , C A 9 2 6 1 8 | 9 4 9 . 5 8 3 . 1 0 1 0                                                        HU N S A K E R & A S S O C I A T E S I R I V E , I N C . 3 H u g h e s I r v i n e , C A 9 2 6 1 8 | 9 4 9 . 5 8 3 . 1 0 1 0                                           HU N S A K E R & A S S O C I A T E S I R I V E , I N C . 3 H u g h e s I r v i n e , C A 9 2 6 1 8 | 9 4 9 . 5 8 3 . 1 0 1 0           !                                         HU N S A K E R & A S S O C I A T E S I R I V E , I N C . 3 H u g h e s I r v i n e , C A 9 2 6 1 8 | 9 4 9 . 5 8 3 . 1 0 1 0           !                                         HU N S A K E R & A S S O C I A T E S I R I V E , I N C . 3 H u g h e s I r v i n e , C A 9 2 6 1 8 | 9 4 9 . 5 8 3 . 1 0 1 0 "!#!"$         %                                                  HU N S A K E R & A S S O C I A T E S I R I V E , I N C . 3 H u g h e s I r v i n e , C A 9 2 6 1 8 | 9 4 9 . 5 8 3 . 1 0 1 0 ! "                                                                 HU N S A K E R & A S S O C I A T E S I R I V E , I N C . 3 H u g h e s I r v i n e , C A 9 2 6 1 8 | 9 4 9 . 5 8 3 . 1 0 1 0                                                               HU N S A K E R & A S S O C I A T E S I R I V E , I N C . 3 H u g h e s I r v i n e , C A 9 2 6 1 8 | 9 4 9 . 5 8 3 . 1 0 1 0                                    HU N S A K E R & A S S O C I A T E S I R I V E , I N C . 3 H u g h e s I r v i n e , C A 9 2 6 1 8 | 9 4 9 . 5 8 3 . 1 0 1 0 ! "          !                                                           HU N S A K E R & A S S O C I A T E S I R I V E , I N C . 3 H u g h e s I r v i n e , C A 9 2 6 1 8 | 9 4 9 . 5 8 3 . 1 0 1 0                                                 HU N S A K E R & A S S O C I A T E S I R I V E , I N C . 3 H u g h e s I r v i n e , C A 9 2 6 1 8 | 9 4 9 . 5 8 3 . 1 0 1 0                                              HU N S A K E R & A S S O C I A T E S I R I V E , I N C . 3 H u g h e s I r v i n e , C A 9 2 6 1 8 | 9 4 9 . 5 8 3 . 1 0 1 0 &%!'%!&(          &)                   !                         "                 #  HU N S A K E R & A S S O C I A T E S I R I V E , I N C . 3 H u g h e s I r v i n e , C A 9 2 6 1 8 | 9 4 9 . 5 8 3 . 1 0 1 0  !         "                                                         April 2016 | Addendum to FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Hotel Project for Good Hope International DEV2015-00120 Prepared for: City of Anaheim Planning Department Contact: Elaine Thienprasiddhi, AICP Senior Planner 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Suite 162 Anaheim, California 92805 Prepared by: PlaceWorks Contact: William Halligan, Esq., 3 MacArthur Place, Suite 1100 Santa Ana, California 92707 714.966.9220 info@placeworks.com www.placeworks.com ATTACHMENT NO. 11 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Table of Contents April 2016 Page i Section Page 1. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 PURPOSE OF ADDENDUM ........................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 CONTENT AND ORGANIZATION OF THIS ADDENDUM ............................................................. 3 1.3 PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION.......................................................................... 3 2. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ......................................................................................................... 5 2.1 PROJECT LOCATION ....................................................................................................................................... 5 2.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ....................................................................................................................... 5 3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION............................................................................................................. 15 3.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................................. 15 3.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................................................... 16 3.3 DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS ........................................................................................................................ 33 4. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST .................................................................................................. 35 4.1 BACKGROUND .................................................................................................................................................. 35 4.2 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED ........................................................... 37 4.3 DETERMINATION (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE LEAD AGENCY) ......................................... 37 4.4 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ................................................................................ 38 5. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS ..................................................................................................... 41 5.1 AESTHETICS ...................................................................................................................................................... 42 5.2 AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES ......................................................................................... 46 5.3 AIR QUALITY ..................................................................................................................................................... 48 5.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES .......................................................................................................................... 58 5.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES ............................................................................................................................... 61 5.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS .................................................................................................................................. 65 5.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ............................................................................................................... 70 5.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ......................................................................................... 79 5.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ................................................................................................... 84 5.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING ...................................................................................................................... 92 5.11 MINERAL RESOURCES .................................................................................................................................. 95 5.12 NOISE .................................................................................................................................................................... 97 5.13 POPULATION AND HOUSING ................................................................................................................ 105 5.14 PUBLIC SERVICES .......................................................................................................................................... 107 5.15 RECREATION .................................................................................................................................................. 114 5.16 TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC .................................................................................................................. 116 5.17 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS ...................................................................................................... 127 5.18 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE .................................................................................. 149 6. LIST OF PREPARERS ................................................................................................................ 151 6.1 CITY OF ANAHEIM ....................................................................................................................................... 151 6.2 PLACEWORKS.................................................................................................................................................. 152 7. REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................. 153 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Table of Contents Page ii PlaceWorks APPENDICES Appendix A Air Quality and GHG Analysis Appendix B Geotechnical Report Appendix C Phase I Site Assessment Appendix D Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan Appendix E Hydrology Analysis Appendix F Exterior Noise Analysis Appendix G Traffic Impact Analysis Appendix H Water Supply Assessment Appendix I Sewer Study 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Table of Contents April 2016 Page iii List of Figures Figure Page Figure 1 Regional Location ................................................................................................................................. 9 Figure 2 The Anaheim Resort Area Boundaries ............................................................................................ 11 Figure 3 Local Vicinity ....................................................................................................................................... 13 Figure 4 Site Plan ................................................................................................................................................ 19 Figure 5 Building Elevations ............................................................................................................................. 21 Figure 6 Building Elevations ............................................................................................................................. 23 Figure 7 Visual Simulation – Harbor Boulevard ........................................................................................... 25 Figure 8 Visual Simulation – Disney Way ...................................................................................................... 27 Figure 9 Landscape Plan .................................................................................................................................... 29 Figure 10 Landscape Street Sections ................................................................................................................. 31 List of Tables Table Page Table 1 Maximum Daily Regional Construction Emissions ...................................................................... 52 Table 2 Maximum Daily Regional Operational Phase Emissions ............................................................. 53 Table 3 Net Change in Operational Phase GHG Emissions ..................................................................... 76 Table 4 Construction Equipment Vibration Levels .................................................................................. 100 Table 5 Construction Equipment Vibration Levels: Potential for Annoyance ..................................... 101 Table 6 Construction Equipment Vibration Levels: Potential for Architectural Damage .................. 102 Table 7 Existing 300 Room Hotel Site Water Use .................................................................................... 129 Table 8 Projected Buildout Hotel Site Water Use ..................................................................................... 129 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Table of Contents Page iv PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. April 2016 Page 1 1. Introduction Good Hope International (Applicant) proposes to demolish the existing Anaheim Plaza hotel and associated uses at 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard in the City of Anaheim and construct a 580-room hotel with accessory uses of up to 50,000 square feet of meeting space, up to 25,600 square feet of ancillary food and beverage retail space, and a parking structure. The proposed hotel project would be located within an area of the City of Anaheim regulated by the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan No. 92-1 (DRSP, SP 92-1). In June 1993, the Anaheim City Council certified Final Environmental Impact Report No. 311 (FEIR No. 311) for the DRSP. The zoning for the project site is DRSP, SP 92-1, District A (Anaheim GardenWalk Overlay, Area B), and zoning and development standards for the DRSP are incorporated into the City’s Zoning Code as Chapter 18.114. The DRSP is part of The Anaheim Resort, which covers three specific plan areas, the 489.7-acre DRSP, the 581.3-acre Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2 (ARSP, SP 92-2), and the 6.8-acre Hotel Circle Specific Plan No. 93-1 (SP 93-1), encompassing a total of 1,078 acres. In September 1994, the Anaheim City Council certified Master Environmental Impact Report No. 313 (MEIR No. 313) for the ARSP. In December 2012, the Anaheim City Council certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report No. 340 (SEIR No. 340) in support of the approval of the Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Project, which reevaluated all of the environmental changes that have occurred in and around The Anaheim Resort since certification of MEIR No. 313. The Hotel Circle Specific Plan No. 93-1 was adopted in 1994 and provided for the development of a total of 969 hotel rooms. This document is an Addendum to both FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340 in The Anaheim Resort. The City of Anaheim is the lead agency responsible for FEIR No. 311, SEIR No. 340, and this Addendum for the proposed 1700 S. Harbor Project. 1.1 PURPOSE OF ADDENDUM 1.1.1 CEQA Requirements According to Section 21166 of CEQA and Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines, when an EIR has been certified or a negative declaration adopted for a project, no subsequent EIR or negative declaration shall be prepared for the project unless the lead agency determines that one or more of the following conditions are met: 1. Substantial project changes are proposed that will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 1. Introduction Page 2 PlaceWorks environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; 2. Substantial changes would occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken that require major revisions to the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or 3. New information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified or the negative declaration was adopted shows any of the following: a. The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration. b. Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than identified in the previous EIR. c. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponent declines to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives. d. Mitigation measures or alternatives that are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponent declines to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives. Preparation of an Addendum to an EIR is appropriate when none of the conditions specified in Section 15162 (above) are present and some minor technical changes to the previously certified EIR are necessary. After careful consideration of the potential environmental impacts of the Proposed Project, the City of Anaheim has determined that 1) none of the conditions requiring preparation of a subsequent or supplement to an EIR have occurred, and 2) the circumstances described in Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines exist. Therefore, an Addendum to the FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340 has been deemed appropriate. 1.1.2 Scope of Analysis in This Addendum In order to implement the Proposed Project, a number of discretionary approvals from the City of Anaheim are required, including a Conditional Use Permit, Variance, and Final Site Plan. The applicant is also requesting approval of a Development Agreement and Operating Covenant Agreement. As lead agency under CEQA, the City of Anaheim is required to evaluate the environmental impacts associated with these discretionary approvals. The scope of the review for project-related impacts for this Addendum is limited to changes between the DRSP and ARSP (Approved Project) and the Proposed Project. The previously certified FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340 and related approved mitigation for impacts associated with the Approved 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 1. Introduction April 2016 Page 3 Project, therefore, effectively serve as the “baseline” for the environmental impact analysis. The baseline mitigation includes all applicable mitigation measures from Mitigation and Monitoring Program (MMP) No. 67 approved in conjunction with FEIR No. 311 and from Modified MMP No. 85C, approved in conjunction with SEIR No. 340. As required by CEQA, this Addendum also addresses changes in circumstances or new information that would potentially involve new environmental impacts. 1.2 CONTENT AND ORGANIZATION OF THIS ADDENDUM This Addendum relies on the City of Anaheim’s CEQA checklist, which addresses environmental issues section by section. The completed checklist is included in Section 5.0, Environmental Analysis. Each environmental topic has the following subheadings:  Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis (including EIR No. 311, SEIR No. 340, and previous CEQA documentation; see description under Subsection 3.1, Project Background, of this Addendum)  Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project (including environmental checklist)  Adopted Mitigation Measures Applicable to the Proposed Project 1.3 PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION For a detailed description of adopted land use planning documents that apply to the DRSP and ARSP and associated environmental documentation, see Section 3.1, Project Background, of this Addendum. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 1. Introduction Page 4 PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. April 2016 Page 5 2. Environmental Setting 2.1 PROJECT LOCATION 2.1.1 Anaheim Resort and Disneyland Resort As shown on Figure 1, the City of Anaheim is located in north Orange County, approximately 35 miles southeast of downtown Los Angeles. The Project Site is located in the City of Anaheim, within the 1,078- acre Anaheim Resort area and the 489.7-acre Disneyland Resort Specific Plan No. 92-1 (DRSP). The 1,078- acre Anaheim Resort is generally west of the Interstate (I-5) 5 corridor, south of Vermont Avenue, east of Walnut Street, and north of Chapman Avenue. The Proposed Project is on property regulated by DRSP. Two other specific plans govern portions of The Anaheim Resort: The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2 (ARSP) and the Hotel Circle Specific Plan No. 93-1, as shown on Figure 2, Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Boundaries. Regional access to the Project Site is provided by I-5 via Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue. 2.1.2 Project Site As shown in Figure 3, the 8.8-acre Project Site is located on the southeast corner of South Harbor Boulevard and Disney Way at 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard. The Project Site is comprised of two parcels, the 8.42-acre parcel 1 (APN 082-271-09) and 0.36-acre parcel 2 (APN 082-271-10). Local access to the Project Site is provided via Harbor Boulevard, Katella Avenue, and Disney Way. 2.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 2.2.1 Landform and Geography The Project Site is relatively flat and is currently occupied by the existing Anaheim Plaza Hotel & Suites. Based on subsurface explorations, the Project Site is underlain by a mantle of undocumented artificial fill materials (Afu) overlying Quaternary-aged young alluvial fan deposits (Qyf). The artificial fill encountered in borings at the explored locations is generally about 5 to 7 feet thick and consists primarily of silty sand and sand. Below the artificial fill, Quaternary-aged young alluvial fan deposits were encountered in the borings to the maximum depth explored (56.5 feet below ground surface). 2.2.2 Existing Land Use The Project Site is currently occupied by the existing Anaheim Plaza Hotel & Suites consisting of 300 hotel rooms and associated accessory retail uses. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Environmental Setting Page 6 PlaceWorks 2.2.3 Surrounding Land Use The Project Site is surrounded by a broad range of uses and development that is representative of The Anaheim Resort’s overall built character. West of the Project Site is Harbor Boulevard and the Disneyland Resort. The Disneyland Resort is an entertainment resort owned and operated by The Walt Disney Company through its Parks and Resorts division. It is home to two theme parks (Disneyland Park and Disney California Adventure); three hotels; and a shopping, dining, and entertainment complex known as Downtown Disney. North of the Project Site is Disney Way and the Grand Legacy at the Park Hotel. East of the Project Site is the Anaheim GardenWalk, a 460,000-square-foot outdoor dining, shopping, and entertainment center. Immediately south of the Project Site is the Castle Inn and Suites. 2.2.4 General Plan and Zoning Anaheim General Plan The General Plan land use designation for the Project Site is Commercial-Recreation, which applies to all of The Anaheim Resort area. This designation is intended to provide for tourist and entertainment-related uses, such as theme parks, hotels, tourist-oriented retail, restaurants, theaters, and other visitor-serving facilities. This designation is implemented by various Specific Plan districts, which further define the maximum development intensities in this area. Zoning The zoning for the Project Site is Disneyland Resort Specific Plan (DRSP), SP 92-1, District A. Zoning and development standards for the DRSP are incorporated into the City’s Zoning Code as Chapter 18.114. Pursuant to the City’s Zoning Code Section 18.114.095.061, the maximum hotel room density permitted within District A is up to 75 hotel rooms per gross acre or 75 hotel rooms per parcel. The Project Site’s 8.42- acre parcel (APN 082-271-09) would allow up to 631.5 hotel rooms, and the 0.35-acre parcel (APN 082-271- 10) would allow up to 75 hotel rooms. Therefore, a maximum hotel density of 706 rooms would be allowed on the Project Site. Additionally, Section 18.114.095.060 of the zoning code allows up to 20 percent of each hotel project’s gross square footage, excluding parking facilities, to be developed with accessory uses, provided that these accessory uses reduce otherwise maximum permitted hotel density at the rate of one hotel room per 600 gross square feet of accessory use area. Therefore, the proposed development of accessory uses up to 50,000 square feet of meeting space and up to 25,600 square feet of ancillary food and beverage retail space would be equivalent to 126 hotel rooms. The site is also located within the Anaheim GardenWalk Overlay, Area B, which allows up to 590,265 square feet of specialty retail, restaurants, and entertainment uses, including movie theaters; 1,628 hotel rooms/suites (including up to 500 vacation ownership resort units) and 278,817 square feet of hotel accessory uses; a transportation center; and 4,800 parking spaces. The Anaheim GardenWalk Overlay encompasses 29.1 acres, including 18.9 acres in Area A and 10.2 acres in Area B. Area B, at the southeast corner of Harbor Boulevard and Disney Way, assumed a high-rise hotel up to 135 feet in height. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Environmental Setting April 2016 Page 7 2.2.5 Environmental Resources The Anaheim Resort area is completely developed and there are no native biological resources within the area. The Project Site contains no historic buildings, housing, scenic resources, mineral resources, notable trees, or water bodies. Additional information regarding environmental resources—or the lack of such resources—on the Project Site can be found in Section 5, Environmental Analysis, of this Addendum under each respective environmental topic. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Environmental Setting Page 8 PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. PlaceWorks Figure 1 - Regional Location 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD EIR ADDENDUMCITY OF ANAHEIM Base Map Source: USGS, NOAA, 2016 2. Environmental Setting 0 Scale (Miles) 3 Site City Boundary 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Environmental Setting Page 10 PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Boundaries Amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Exhibit 3-2 (Rev 04-08-11 WAD) R:\Projects\Anaheim\J050\Graphics\EIR\ex3-2_spec_plan.pdf The Disneyland Resort Anaheim Convention Center BoysenPark Disney WayDi s n e y l a n d D r Wa l n u t S t Orangewood Ave Vermont A v e §¨¦5 San t a A n a R i v e r San t a A n a R i v e r UV22 Eu c l i d S t Ball Rd H a r b o r B l v d Katella Ave Chapman Ave E a s t S t Garden Grove Blvd A n a h e i m B l v d St a t e C o l l e g e B l v d Lincoln Ave T h e C i t y D r M a n c h e s t e r A v e We s t S t ew S t D:\ P r o j e c t s \ A n a h e i m \ J 0 5 0 \ e x _ s p e c _ p l a n _ 0 2 1 0 0 9 . m x d 0.5 0 0.50.25 Miles² Disneyland Resort Specific Plan (SP92-1) Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (SP92-2) Hotel Circle Specific Plan (SP93-1) PlaceWorks Figure 2 - The Anaheim Resort Area Boundaries 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD EIR ADDENDUMCITY OF ANAHEIM Base Map Source: BonTerra Consulting, 2011 2. Environmental Setting 0 Scale (Miles) 0.5 Project Site Boundary The Outlets at Orange 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Environmental Setting Page 12 PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. PlaceWorks Figure 3 - Local Vicinity 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD EIR ADDENDUMCITY OF ANAHEIM Base Map Source: Google Earth Pro, 2016 2. Environmental Setting 0 Scale (Feet) 250Project Boundary The Shops atAnaheim GardenWalk DisneylandCalifornia Adventure Park Grand Legacy Best Western Plus/Anaheim Inn Tony Roma Castle Inn & Suites Commercial RamadaAnaheim Resort HotelIndigo America’sBest Value Inn & Suites Super 8 Katella Ave Ha r b o r B l v d Disney Way Di s n e y W y Candy Cane Inn DisneyTheme Parks Parking 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Environmental Setting Page 14 PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. April 2016 Page 15 3. Project Description 3.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND The Project Site is in the City of Anaheim, within the 1,078-acre Anaheim Resort, which is generally west of the Interstate-5 (I-5) corridor, south of Vermont Avenue, east of Walnut Street, and north of Chapman Avenue. The Proposed Project is on property regulated by the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan No. 92-1 (DRSP, SP 92-1). The DRSP was adopted in 1993, encompasses approximately 489.7 acres of The Anaheim Resort, and provides for the development of an international vacation destination resort (Disneyland Resort) that includes the development of a new theme park (Disney California Adventure), additional hotel and entertainment areas, administrative office facilities, back-of-house facilities, new public and private parking facilities, an internal transportation system, and the ongoing modification of Disneyland. The Anaheim City Council certified Final Environmental Impact Report No. 311 (FEIR No. 311) for the DRSP in June 1993. The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2 (ARSP, SP 92-2) was adopted in 1994 and provides for the development of hotels; motels; convention and conference facilities, including the Anaheim Convention Center; and restaurants and entertainment uses. The associated Master Environmental Impact Report (MEIR) No. 313 (State Clearinghouse No. 91091062) was certified at the time the ARSP was adopted, and since the approval of the ARSP No. 92-2, 14 amendments and 6 adjustments have been made, including the certification of the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report No. 340 (SEIR No. 340) in December 2012. SEIR No. 340 reevaluated all the environmental changes that have occurred in and around The Anaheim Resort since certification of MEIR No. 313 in September 1994, including, but not limited to the increase of ARSP area from 549.5 acres to 581.3 acres, and various amendment to the ARSP to allow for an increase in maximum allowable square footage. The Anaheim City Council adopted findings and a statement of overriding considerations; Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 85C; and a water supply assessment in conjunction with the certification of SEIR No. 340. The Hotel Circle Specific Plan No. 93-1 (SP 93-1) was also adopted in 1994, encompasses approximately 6.8 acres of The Anaheim Resort and provides for the development of a total of 969 hotel rooms. SEIR No. 340 analyzed the cumulative impacts associated with the entire 1,078-acre Anaheim Resort (i.e., SP 92-1, SP 92-2, and SP 93-1) and surrounding area to account for the environmental changes that have occurred in and around The Anaheim Resort since certification of MEIR No. 313 in September 1994. 3.1.1 PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Development of the Project Site has been previously analyzed in two EIRs certified by the City; the DRSP FEIR No. 311 and the ARSP SEIR No. 340. The Project Site is located within District A of the DRSP, which 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 3. Project Description Page 16 PlaceWorks allows up to 75 hotel rooms per acre, or 75 rooms per parcel, whichever is greater (Section 18.114.095.061). Under District A of the DRSP, a total of 706 rooms would be allowed on the 8.8 acre Project Site without any accessory uses. Up to 20 percent of the hotel floor area may be used for accessory hotel uses, provided that the maximum permitted hotel density is utilized at the rate of one hotel room per 600 gross square feet of accessory use area (Section 18.114.095.060). For example, the Proposed Project consists of 580 hotel rooms and 75,600 square feet of accessory uses (i.e., up to 50,000 square feet of meeting space and 25,600 square feet of ancillary food and beverage retail space). Per Section 18.114.095.060, the accessory uses would be equivalent to 126 hotel rooms. When the hotel room equivalent for the accessory uses (126 rooms) is added to the proposed hotel rooms (580 rooms), the Proposed Project is the equivalent of developing a 706- room hotel. Both FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340 assumed the Project Site would be developed with the maximum permitted hotel room density at 706 hotel rooms. Therefore, implementation of the DRSP and the ARSP, which would permit a 706-room hotel on the Project Site, are herein referred to as the “Approved Project.” The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan FEIR No. 311 In June 1993, the City of Anaheim certified FEIR No. 311 for the DRSP. FEIR No. 311 provides for the development of an international vacation destination resort, including the development of a new theme park, additional hotel and entertainment areas, administrative office facilities, back-of-house facilities, new public and private parking facilities, an internal transportation system, and the on-going modification of the Disney Theme Parks. Anaheim Resort Specific Plan SEIR No. 340 In September 1994, the City of Anaheim certified the ARSP MEIR No. 313 (State Clearinghouse No. 91091062) in support of the adoption of The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2 (Anaheim 1994c, 1994b). This MEIR No. 313 evaluated impacts associated with the establishment and implementation of the ARSP and created a Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP No. 85) in order to mitigate impacts associated with Specific Plan development. Since being certified in 1994, two Validation Reports have been prepared (1999 and 2004) to evaluate the continued relevance and accuracy of MEIR 313 and its ability to be used as a MEIR for all projected development within the boundaries of the ARSP. On December 18, 2012, the City of Anaheim certified SEIR No. 340, Amendment No. 14 to the SEIR No. 340 (State Clearinghouse No. 2009021036), in connection with amendments to the documents that govern and regulate development within The Anaheim Resort area. 3.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Proposed Project would include the demolition of the existing buildings at the Project Site and the development of a AAA Four Diamond Hotel, including 580 hotel rooms with accessory uses of up to 50,000 square feet of meeting space, up to 25,600 square feet of ancillary food and beverage retail space, and a parking structure (“Proposed Project”). The combined total of 75,600 square feet of accessory uses is equivalent to 126 hotel rooms under the DRSP District A development standards; therefore, the Proposed Project is equivalent to development of a 706-room hotel (18.114.095.060). A total of 1,139,122 square feet of gross floor area is proposed in two basement levels and eight levels above grade. Room types include 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 3. Project Description April 2016 Page 17 King, Double Queen, Jr. Suites, Two Bedroom Suites, and Presidential Suites and would be provided on Levels 2 through 8. Meeting space would be provided on Levels 1 and 2 and include a business center, three ballrooms, and eight meeting rooms. To activate the street scene and to serve hotel guests, three restaurants, including a three-meal restaurant, is proposed at the corner of Disney Way and Harbor Boulevard. A Site Plan for the project is shown on Figure 4, Site Plan. The hotel entry, lobby, and registration area are located on Level 1. On Level 2, accessed by grand stair, escalator or elevator, are other common guest areas and services including the living room, concierge lounge, two pools, and fitness rooms. The centralized pool area features landscaping, food/bar services, and lounge chairs to create a resort environment enclosed by the hotel structure on four sides. The hotel's meeting space and ballrooms will extend along the southerly wing of the hotel, from Harbor Boulevard to the site’s east boundary, and are oriented to emphasize views of the central pool deck area and to combine uses for pre- function events. Other amenities for guests include a sun deck on Level 4 and concierge bar and terrace on Level 8. The proposed elevations are depicted in Figures 5 and 6, Building Elevations. The 8-story building would be a maximum height of 96 feet including all architectural projections. All roof-mounted equipment would be completely screened by the parapet walls surrounding the roof. Visual simulations of the Proposed Project are shown on Figures 7 and 8. Project Access and Circulation Access to the Project Site would be provided along Harbor Boulevard at two locations:  Main Entry/porte-cochere approximately 300 feet south of Disney Way: Serves as the primary ingress/egress location for visitor and employee trips with right-in/right-out access only.  Service road along the southern property boundary, approximately 500 feet south of Disney Way: Serves as a secondary egress location for visitor and employee trips, as well as the primary ingress/egress location for service and emergency vehicles. Conflict between visitor and employee trips with service vehicle trips will be avoided by use of a gate arm at the exit of the parking garage, as well as prohibiting peak hour service truck trips. Only right-in/right-out access will be available.  Secondary Loading Zone: Access to off-street loading for food and beverage uses on the north side of the project will be provided along Disney Way with ingress and egress for deliveries and trash collection only. The loading area will be gated when not in use and will have restricted hours for loading. An emergency/fire access road is provided along the southern and eastern boundaries of the Project Site. Access east of the garage secondary exit would be restricted to emergency vehicles only. The proposed emergency/fire access road (26 feet wide) shall be paved to be consistent with Anaheim Fire Department access requirements. The entry to the emergency access drive off of Disney Way will include design elements similar to those utilized in The Anaheim Resort for other service/emergency access drives, with a four-inch mountable curb and interlocking pavers as opposed to a driveway apron. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 3. Project Description Page 18 PlaceWorks Pedestrian traffic will also be encouraged and supported by the hotel’s design and circulation, with wide sidewalks in conformance with The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan and linkages to the restaurant spaces and hotel main entrance. In addition, a pedestrian bridge is proposed on the second level to connect the project to Anaheim GardenWalk. Landscaping As shown on Figure 9, Landscape Plan, the applicant proposes to install approximately 70,000 square feet landscaped area. Proposed landscaping would include several different tree species, including shade, flowering, and specimen trees, as well as a variety of shrubs and groundcovers. The tree density requirements of the DRSP would be complied with throughout the property. As shown on Figure 10, Landscape Street Sections, the street setbacks are proposed to be planted with layered landscape consistent with the DRSP. A 26-foot building setback is proposed along Harbor Boulevard, with portions of the setback area paved to activate the street adjacent to the proposed restaurant space, which is encouraged along this segment of Harbor Boulevard. A 20-foot setback is proposed along Disney Way. Additionally, 10-feet of landscaping is proposed on both sides of the emergency/fire access road, along the southern and eastern boundaries of the Project Site. Parking A total of 917 on-site parking spaces would be provided within a two and one-half level parking structure, including the ability to accommodate at least 32 valet spaces through stacking in certain areas of the structure. Levels B1 and B2 (basement) would be subterranean and provide 697 parking stalls. Level 1 would provide an additional 252 parking stalls and be at grade. The Code requires 1,094 parking spaces based on the number of hotel rooms, banquet/meeting space, retail space, and employees. The applicant is requesting approval of a parking variance to provide fewer parking spaces than required by the Code. CASTLE INN & SUITES ANAHEIMGARDENWALK SUPER 8 ANAHEIM HA R B OR B L V D. STOP STOP S T O P S T O P DISNEY WAY H A R B O R B L V D . OBS. BY BUILDING GNV OBS. BY BUILDING OBS. BY BUILDING OBS. BY BUILDING/GNV AREA U/C AREA U/C AREA U/C DIRT DIRT DIRT CONC. CONC. CONC. CONC. ASPH. ASPH. ASPH. ASPH. ASPH. ASPH. ASPH. ASPH. ASPH. TREES TREES TREES TREES TREES TREES TREES TREES TREES TREES TREES TREES TREES TREES TREES TREES TREES TREES TREES TREES TREESTREES TREES TREES TREES TREES TREES TREES TREES TREES TREES SIGN POLE POLE POOL POOL FOUNTAIN C UP UP UP MAIN ENTRY GUEST EXIT ANDFIRE/DELIVERY/SANITATIONENTRY/EXIT MAIN EXIT PORTE COCHERE EL. 140' GARAGEENTRY FIR E L A N E GATE "EX I T O N L Y " PAR K I N G R A M P SHUTTLE BUS PICKUP/DROP OFFEL. 140' PROPERTY LINE ANAHEIMGARDENWALK GRAND LEGACY AT THE PARK SUPER 8 ANAHEIMCASTLE INN & SUITES 4" MOUNTABLE CURBAND INTERLOCKINGPAVER FOR FIREACCESS ONLY PROPOSED TRANSFORMERAND SWITCH BANK PROPOSED TRANSFORMERAND SWITCH BANK PARKING ARM FIREEXIT PROPOSED BACKFLOWPREVENTERS RESTAURANT LOADING DOCK DELIVERY/SANITATIONENTRY/EXIT HOTEL LOADING DOCK TRASH COMPACTOR TRASH COMPACTOR EXISTING FIRE HYDRANT EXISTING FIRE HYDRANT SETBACK LINE EXISTING ROW ULTIMATE ROW S E T B A C K 2 0 ' - 0 " GATE EXISTING STREET LIGHTEXISTING STREET LIGHT EXISTING STREET LIGHTEXISTING STREET LIGHT EXISTING TRAFFIC SIGNAL EXISTING STREET LIGHT EXISTING STREET LIGHT EXISTING STREET LIGHT EXISTING STREET LIGHT POOL DECKEL. 154'-4" BRIDGE TO GARDENWALK MIN CLEAR335' - 0" DISNEY WAY HA R B O R B L V D 2 6 ' - 0 " 1 0 ' - 0 " PROPOSED GAS METER& DIGITAL CONTROL LINE OF FLOOR ABOVE(17'-0" CLEAR HEIGHT) POTENTIAL MONUMENTSIGN LOCATION NO SHUTTLE / BUS /VEHICULAR DROP-OFFAREA SHALL BEPERMITTED IN HOTELFRONT SETBACK AREA NO SHUTTLE / BUS /VEHICULAR DROP-OFFAREA SHALL BEPERMITTED IN HOTELFRONT SETBACK AREA DISNEY'S PUBLIC PARKING LOT 8 ' - 0 " P A R K W A Y 6 ' - 0 " S ID E W A L K SETBACK10' - 0" SETBACK10' - 0" 28' - 0" S E T B A C K 1 0 ' - 0 " SETBACK26' - 0" PARKWAY8' - 0" SIDEWALK8' - 0" PARKWAY8' - 0" O U T D O O R D I N I N G (2 0 0 0 S F ) VALETATTENDANT CENTER LINE OF STREETCENTER LINE OF STREET R.O.W.64' - 0" R .O .W . 5 6 ' - 6 " 0 © 2016 HKS, INC. 5025 100FT Anaheim, California 92802 1700 SOUTH HARBOR BOULEVARD 1923203/29/2016 SITE PLAN A-4 PlaceWorks Base Map Source: HKS, 2016 Figure 4 - Site Plan 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD EIR ADDENDUMCITY OF ANAHEIM 3. Project Description 0 Scale (Feet) 200 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 3. Project Description Page 20 PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. PlaceWorks Base Map Source: HKS, 2016 Figure 5 - Building Elevations 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD EIR ADDENDUMCITY OF ANAHEIM 0 Scale (Feet) 70 North View 3. Project Description West View 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 3. Project Description Page 22 PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. PlaceWorks Figure 6 - Building Elevations 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD EIR ADDENDUMCITY OF ANAHEIM 0 Scale (Feet) 75 South View East View 3. Project Description Base Map Source: HKS, 2016 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 3. Project Description Page 24 PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. 0 © 2016 HKS, INC. 00 0FT Anaheim, California 92802 1700 SOUTH HARBOR BOULEVARD 1923201/12/2016 HARBOR BOULEVARD ARRIVAL A9.01 PlaceWorks Base Map Source: HKS, 2016 Figure 7 - Visual Simulations - Harbor Boulevard 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD EIR ADDENDUMCITY OF ANAHEIM View from Harbor Boulevard looking east. 3. Project Description 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 3. Project Description Page 26 PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. 0 © 2016 HKS, INC. 00 0FT Anaheim, California 92802 1700 SOUTH HARBOR BOULEVARD 1923201/12/2016DISNEY WAY A9.02 PlaceWorks Base Map Source: HKS, 2016 Figure 8 - Visual Simulations - Disney Way 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD EIR ADDENDUMCITY OF ANAHEIM View from Disney Way looking south. 3. Project Description 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 3. Project Description Page 28 PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. PlaceWorks Source: HKS, 2016 Figure 9 - Landscape Plan 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD EIR ADDENDUMCITY OF ANAHEIM 0 Scale (Feet) 120 The Shops at Anaheim GardenWalk (Not A Part) 3. Project Description 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 3. Project Description Page 30 PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. PlaceWorks Base Map Source: HKS, 2016 Figure 10 - Landscape Street Sections 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD EIR ADDENDUMCITY OF ANAHEIM 0 Street Section Scale (Feet) 40 3. Project Description 0 Key Map Scale (Feet) 180 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 3. Project Description Page 32 PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 3. Project Description April 2016 Page 33 3.3 DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS This Addendum to FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340 is intended to serve as the primary environmental document for all future actions associated with the Proposed Project, including all discretionary approvals requested or required to implement the Proposed Project. In addition, this Addendum is the primary reference document for the formulation and implementation of a mitigation monitoring plan (Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 329 for the Proposed Project. All applicable measures from the mitigation and monitoring programs approved in conjunction with FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340 have been incorporated into this document. This document is intended to provide sufficient information to allow the City of Anaheim and any other permitting agencies to evaluate the potential impacts from construction and implementation of the Proposed Project. The following discretionary actions have been requested by the Project Applicant:  Development Agreement (DAG2016-00001). The applicant is requesting approval of a development agreement to memorialize the project’s terms, conditions, and obligations and provide vesting development rights for all of the project components.  Conditional Use Permit (CUP2016-05858). The applicant is requesting approval of a conditional use permit for two Concierge Lounges that would be strictly limited to guests of the hotel. A “Concierge Lounge” is a use that is not specifically listed in the Specific Plan. Uses or activities not specifically listed or prohibited in the Specific Plan may be established by conditional use permit when determined by the Planning Commission to be consistent and compatible with the intended purpose of the Specific Plan.  Variance (VAR2016-05060). The applicant is requesting approval of a parking variance to provide fewer parking spaces than required by the Code.  Final Site Plan (FSP2016-00001). The applicant is requesting approval of final plans for the proposed hotel project to demonstrate compliance with the requirements of the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan, District A.  Operating Covenant Agreement for a AAA Four Diamond Hotel (MIS2016-00628). Pursuant to City Council Resolution No. 2015-202, the applicant is requesting approval of an Operating Covenant Agreement for economic assistance to develop and operate a AAA Four Diamond Hotel. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 3. Project Description Page 34 PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. April 2016 Page 35 4. Environmental Checklist 4.1 BACKGROUND 1. Project Title: 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Hotel Project 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Anaheim Planning and Building Department 200 South Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim, CA 92805 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Elaine Thienprasiddhi, Senior Planner (714) 765-4568 4. Project Location: The 8.8-acre Project Site is located on the southeast corner of South Harbor Boulevard and Disney Way at 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard. Local access to the Project Site is provided via Harbor Boulevard, Katella Avenue, and Disney Way. 5. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address: Good Hope International Jeffery Anglada 2400 E. Katella Avenue, Suite 800 Anaheim, CA 92806 6. General Plan Designation: Commercial Recreation (C-R) 7. Zoning: Disneyland Resort Specific Plan (SP 92-1), District A (Anaheim GardenWalk Overlay, Area B) 8. Description of Project: The Proposed Project would include the demolition of the existing buildings at the site and the development of a AAA Four Diamond Hotel including 580 hotel rooms, accessory uses of up to 50,000 square feet of meeting space and up to 25,600 square feet of ancillary food and beverage retail space, and a parking structure. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The Project Site is surrounded by uses that are representative of The Anaheim Resort’s overall built character. West of the Project Site is Harbor Boulevard and the Disneyland Resort. The Disneyland Resort is an entertainment resort owned and operated by The Walt Disney Company through its Parks 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 4. Environmental Checklist Page 36 PlaceWorks and Resorts Division. It is home to two theme parks (Disneyland Park and Disney California Adventure Park), three hotels, and a shopping, dining, and entertainment complex known as Downtown Disney. North of the Project Site is Disney Way and the Grand Legacy at the Park Hotel. East of the Project Site is the Anaheim GardenWalk, a 460,000 square-foot outdoor dining, shopping and entertainment center. Immediately south of the Project Site is the Castle Inn and Suites. 10. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval Is Required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement): None. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 4. Environmental Checklist April 2016 Page 37 4.2 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that would represent a new significant environmental effect, a substantial increase in the severity of a significant impact previously identified, or new information of substantial importance, as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Aesthetics Agricultural and Forest Resources Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology / Soils Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards & Hazardous Materials Hydrology / Water Quality Land Use / Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population / Housing Public Services Recreation Transportation / Traffic Utilities / Service Systems Mandatory Findings of Significance 4.3 DETERMINATION (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE LEAD AGENCY) On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the Proposed Project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the Proposed Project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the Proposed Project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the Proposed Project MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially significant unless mitigated” impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the Proposed Project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the Proposed Project, nothing further is required. Signature Date Printed Name For 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 4. Environmental Checklist Page 38 PlaceWorks 4.4 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A “No Impact” answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors, as well as general standards (e.g., the project would not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project- specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. “Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more “Potentially Significant Impact” entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) “Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less Than Significant Impact.” The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level. 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analyses Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated,” describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 4. Environmental Checklist April 2016 Page 39 8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project’s environmental effects in whatever format is selected. 9) The explanation of each issue should identify: a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significant. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 4. Environmental Checklist Page 40 PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. April 2016 Page 41 5. Environmental Analysis This section provides evidence that no new significant impacts would occur as a result of either a change to the project or a change in circumstances. In accordance with Section 21166 of CEQA and 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, and relevant case law, the baseline for this determination is the Approved Project. The section will briefly summarize the conclusions of FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340 and then discuss whether or not the Proposed Project is consistent with the findings in those documents. Applicable mitigation measure0s from FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340 are also provided below. As discussed previously, this document is an addendum to both FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340. The Proposed Project is located in the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan (DRSP), which was analyzed as part of FEIR No. 311; however, the impacts associated with the development of the site were more recently cumulatively analyzed by SEIR No. 340, which analyzed build-out of the entire Anaheim Resort, including properties within the DRSP, Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (ARSP), and Hotel Circle Specific Plan (HCSP) and provided updated analysis of the environmental factors that have changed since the certification of MEIR No. 313. Therefore, this document incorporates applicable analysis from both FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340. The mitigation program identified to reduce potential impacts of the proposed project consists of Standard Requirements (SRs) and mitigation measures (MMs). The components of the mitigation program are described below.  Standard Requirements. Existing SRs are based on local, state, or federal regulations or laws that are frequently required independently of CEQA review and also serve to offset or prevent specific impacts. Typical SRs include compliance with the provisions of the California and local building codes, South Coast Air Quality Management District rules, City ordinances, and local agency impact fees, among others.  Mitigation Measures. Where a potentially significant environmental effect has been identified and is not reduced to a level considered less than significant through the application of SRs, mitigation measures have been provided. All applicable measures from the mitigation and monitoring programs approved in conjunction with FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340 have been incorporated into this document. In the instances that mitigation measures identified in SEIR No. 340 are comparable to mitigation measures identified in FEIR No. 311, this document incorporates the more recently adopted measures from SEIR No. 340. These mitigation measures have been incorporated into Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 329 for this Addendum. Any modifications to the mitigation measures from FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340 are shown as strikethrough for deleted text and bold for new, inserted text. The City may substitute, at its discretion, any mitigation measure (and timing thereof) that has:(1) The same or superior result as the original mitigation measure and (2) the same or superior effect on the environment. The 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 42 PlaceWorks City of Anaheim Planning Department, in conjunction with any appropriate agencies or City departments, shall determine the adequacy of any proposed “environmental equivalent timing” and, if deemed necessary, may refer said determination to the Planning Commission. Any costs associated with information required in order to make a determination of equivalency/timing shall be borne by the Property Owner/Developer. 5.1 AESTHETICS 5.1.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan FEIR No. 311 The visual analysis for FEIR No. 311 determined that implementation of DRSP would be visually consistent with the existing land uses. Shade and shadow analyses determined that any impacts related to shade and shadow were insignificant. Anaheim Resort Specific Plan SEIR No. 340 According to SEIR No. 340, the ARSP area does not contain any scenic resources, nor are any scenic vistas visible from the ARSP area; therefore, no impact would occur. Future development and redevelopment associated with buildout of the ARSP area would change the existing visual character of individual areas; however, buildout of the ARSP area would create a more visually cohesive and appealing environment and impacts would be less than significant with implementation of the recommended mitigation program. Buildout of the ARSP could result in potential shade and shadow impacts on properties immediately adjacent to the ARSP area that would be considered significant and unavoidable. The Anaheim City Council adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations with regard to this potential impact. 5.1.2 Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project Would the Proposed Project: Environmental Issues Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circum-stances Requiring Major EIR Revisions New Information Showing New or Increased Significant Effects Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR No Impact a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? x b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? x c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? x 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 43 Environmental Issues Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circum-stances Requiring Major EIR Revisions New Information Showing New or Increased Significant Effects Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR No Impact d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? x The Project Site has limited views of the San Gabriel Mountains to the north and the Santa Ana Mountains to the east. The site also offers views of nearby landmarks, including the Disneyland Resort. The Project Site does not contain unique scenic resources and is not visible from a designated scenic highway. The ARSP is highly urbanized and is currently developed with tourist and entertainment-related uses, such as theme parks, hotels, tourist-oriented retail, restaurants, theaters, and other visitor-serving facilities. Comments: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. The Project Site has limited views of the San Gabriel Mountains to the north and the Santa Ana Mountains to the east. The site also offers views of nearby landmarks, including the Disneyland Resort. The Approved Project allows for a building height of up to 135 feet, which would partially or fully obstruct the aforementioned views. The Proposed Project will be 88 feet in height; therefore, no new impact would occur due to construction of the proposed hotel project. Impacts would remain less than significant and no mitigation measures are necessary. Accordingly, no new significant impacts or impacts of greater severity than those previously identified in DEIR No. 311 or SEIR No. 340 would occur. No changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR. b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? No Impact. The Project Site does not contain scenic resources such as trees, rock outcroppings, or historic buildings. Furthermore, the Project Site is not visible from the nearest state-designated scenic highway, which is approximately five miles to the northeast. Therefore, as under the Approved Project, no impact would occur due to implementation of the Proposed Project, and no mitigation is necessary. Accordingly, no new significant impacts or impacts of greater severity than those previously identified in FEIR No. 311 or SEIR No. 340 would occur. No changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR. c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. The ARSP is highly urbanized and is currently developed with tourist and entertainment-related uses, such as 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 44 PlaceWorks theme parks, hotels, tourist-oriented retail, restaurants, theaters, and other visitor-serving facilities. Consistent with the Approved Project, the Proposed Project would demolish the existing hotel and construct an 8-story, AAA Four Diamond Hotel with associated landscaping, including additional landscaping in the public right- of-way, consistent with the DRSP and ARSP. As a result, implementation of the Proposed Project would improve the overall visual character of the Project Site, consistent with the adopted DRSP and ARSP. No changes proposed by the Proposed Project would result in new impacts to visual character or quality. No impacts of greater severity than those previously identified in FEIR No. 311 or SEIR No. 340 would occur, and no changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR. d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. The Project Site is already developed with an existing hotel and is currently a source of light on the surrounding area. The Proposed Project would comply with the lighting specifications outlined in the DRSP. Therefore, consistent with the conclusions in FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340, the continuation of nighttime illumination features would not represent a new, significant impact with regard to lighting or glare. Although a significant impact was not identified, the Project shall comply with previously approved mitigation measures as identified below. 5.1.3 Adopted Mitigation Measures Applicable to the Proposed Project The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan FEIR No. 311 MM 3.12-5 The applicant shall participate in a landscape assessment and maintenance district, if one is established for the City of Anaheim’s Commercial Recreation Area. Anaheim Resort Specific Plan SEIR No. 340 MM 5.1-2 Prior to issuance of building permits, all plumbing or other similar pipes and fixtures located on the exterior of the building shall be shown on plans as fully screened from view of adjacent public rights-of-way and from adjacent properties by architectural devices and/or appropriate building materials. A note indicating that these improvements will be installed prior to final building and zoning inspections shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. MM 5.1-3 Ongoing, the property owner/developer shall be responsible for the removal of any on-site graffiti within 24 hours of its application. MM 5.1-4 Prior to Final Site Plan approval, the location and configuration of all lighting fixtures including ground-mounted lighting fixtures utilized to accent buildings, landscape elements, or to illuminate pedestrian areas shall be shown on all Final Site Plans. All proposed surface parking area lighting fixtures shall be down-lighted with a maximum height of twelve (12) 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 45 feet adjacent to any residential properties. All lighting fixtures shall be shielded to direct lighting toward the area to be illuminated and away from adjacent residential property lines. MM 5.1-6 Prior to final building and zoning inspections, root and sidewalk barriers shall be provided for trees within seven feet of public sidewalks. MM 5.1-7 Prior to final building and zoning inspections, the property owner/developer shall submit to the Planning Department a letter from a licensed landscape architect certifying that all landscaping and irrigation systems have been installed in accordance with landscaping plans approved in connection with the Final Site Plan. MM 5.1-8 Ongoing, all on-site non-Public Realm, landscaping and irrigation systems, and Public Realm landscaping and irrigation systems, within area in which dedication has not been accepted by the City, shall be maintained by the property owner/developer, in compliance with City standards. MM 5.1-9 Ongoing, any tree planted within the Setback Realm shall be replaced in a timely manner in the event that it is removed, damaged, diseased and/or dead. MM 5.1-10 Ongoing, a licensed arborist shall be hired by the property owner/developer to be responsible for all tree trimming. MM 5.1-11 Prior to issuance of each building permit, unless records indicate previous payment, a fee for street tree purposes shall be paid or cause to be paid to the City of Anaheim based on the length of street frontage in an amount as established by City Council resolution or credit against the fee given for City authorized improvements installed by the property owner/developer. MM 5.1-12 Prior to issuance of each building permit, all air conditioning facilities and other roof and ground-mounted equipment shall be shown on plans as shielded from public view and the sound buffered to comply with City of Anaheim noise ordinances from any adjacent residential or transient-occupied properties. A note indicating that these improvements shall be installed prior to final building and zoning inspections shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. MM 5.1-13 Prior to Final Site Plan approval, plans shall show that the rear elevations of buildings visible from off-site areas shall be architecturally accented to portray a finished look. MM 5.1-14 Prior to Final Site Plan approval, plans shall show that no shuttle/bus/vehicular drop-off areas shall be permitted in hotel/motel or vacation resort front setback area. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 46 PlaceWorks 5.2 AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES 5.2.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan FEIR No. 311 FEIR No. 311 does not specifically address agriculture and forest resources. Anaheim Resort Specific Plan SEIR No. 340 As disclosed in SEIR No. 340, in 1994 the ARSP area contained an approximately 56-acre site located southeast of Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue that was designated “Prime Farmland” and was under a Williamson Act contract set to expire on March 1, 2000. MEIR No. 313 evaluated the loss of the prime agricultural land and identified the impact as significant and unavoidable. Because the impact related to the loss of agricultural land was fully analyzed as part of MEIR No. 313, SEIR No. 340 identified that a new significant impact related to agricultural resources would not occur. Additionally, no land within the ARSP area was found to be under a Williamson Act contract; therefore, implementation of the ARSP would not conflict with a standing Williamson Act contract. In addition, SEIR No. 340 states that there are no zoned or existing forest lands or timberland as defined in Public Resources Code (Sections 12220[g] and 4526, respectively), in the ARSP area. Therefore, the project evaluated in SEIR No. 340 would not result in the conversion of forest land or timberland. Additionally, forest resources were not identified on the Initial Study checklist prepared for SEIR No. 340, because the checklist was updated by the state after circulation of the Initial Study. 5.2.2 Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project Would the project: Environmental Issues Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circum-stances Requiring Major EIR Revisions New Information Showing New or Increased Significant Effects Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR No Impact a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? x b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? x 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 47 Environmental Issues Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circum-stances Requiring Major EIR Revisions New Information Showing New or Increased Significant Effects Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR No Impact c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? x d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? x e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? x Comments: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? No Impact. As indicated above, the Project Site is currently developed and does not contain farmland or other agricultural uses. Like the Approved Project, the Proposed Project would not convert important farmland to nonagricultural use. No impact would occur and no mitigation is necessary. Accordingly, no new significant impacts or impacts of greater severity than those previously identified in FEIR No. 311 or SEIR No. 340 would occur. No changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR. b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? No Impact. The Project Site is not zoned for agricultural use and no active Williamson Act contract applies to land in the ARSP. As under the Approved Project, implementation of the Proposed Project would not conflict with agricultural zones or a Williamson Act contract. No impact would occur and no mitigation is necessary. Accordingly, no new significant impacts or impacts of greater severity than those previously identified in FEIR No. 311 or SEIR No. 340 would occur. No changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR. c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 48 PlaceWorks No Impact. As discussed above, the Project Site is in an urbanized location that contains no forest resources. As with the Approved Project, the Proposed Project would not conflict with zoning for forest land timberland. No impact would occur and no mitigation is necessary. Accordingly, no new significant impacts or impacts of greater severity than those previously identified in FEIR No. 311 or SEIR No. 340 would occur. No changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR. d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? No Impact. Neither the Project Site, nor the ARSP as a whole, contains forest land. As under the Approved Project, implementation of the Proposed Project would not result in the loss of forest land or the conversion of forest land to non-forest uses. No impact would occur and no mitigation is necessary. Accordingly, no new significant impacts or impacts of greater severity than those previously identified in FEIR No. 311 or SEIR No. 340 would occur. No changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR. e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? No Impact. The Project Site and surrounding area contains no farmland or forest land. As under the Approved Project, implementation of the Proposed Project would not result in the loss of forest land or the conversion of forest land to nonforest uses. No impact would occur and no mitigation is necessary. Accordingly, no new significant impacts or impacts of greater severity than those previously identified in FEIR No. 311 or SEIR No. 340 would occur. No changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR. 5.2.3 Adopted Mitigation Measures Applicable to the Proposed Project No mitigation measures related to agricultural resources are applicable to the Proposed Project. 5.3 AIR QUALITY 5.3.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan FEIR No. 311 FEIR No. 311 concluded that maximum daily emissions resulting from construction-related activities of SP 92-1 would exceed South Coast Air Quality Management District’s (SCAQMD) significance thresholds for volatile organic compounds (VOCs) (ROG), nitrogen oxides (NOX), carbon monoxide (CO), and PM10 and would result in a significant adverse impact. Operational emissions, including utility usage, stationary sources, on-site service engines and mobile sources, would also exceed SCAQMDs significance thresholds for VOCs (ROG), NOX, CO, and PM10. The Anaheim City Council adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations with regard to this potential impact. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 49 Anaheim Resort Specific Plan SEIR No. 340 SEIR No. 340 concluded that, with implementation of all identified mitigation measures, mass emissions resulting from construction-related activities would be less than significant. However, because of uncertainties in the timing and magnitude of emissions for possible projects, it was concluded that cumulative emissions from construction would be significant and unavoidable. It was also concluded that local concentrations of particulate matter with a diameter of 10 microns or less (PM10) and fine particulate matter with a diameter of 2.5 microns or less (PM2.5) would exceed the SCAQMD’s California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) significance thresholds for short-term periods when excavation would occur near sensitive receptors; the impact would be significant and unavoidable. The Anaheim City Council adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations with regard to this potential impact. Emissions of criteria pollutants resulting from operation of the full buildout of the ARSP would exceed the SCAQMD applicable thresholds for VOC, NOx, CO, PM10, and PM2.5. Operation would result in direct and cumulative significant and unavoidable impacts. The Anaheim City Council adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations with regard to these potential impacts. Because implementation of the ARSP could result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations, SEIR No. 340 concluded that the ARSP could conflict with or obstruct implementation of the 2007 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), thereby resulting in a significant and unavoidable impact. The Anaheim City Council adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations with regard to this potential impact. Construction and operation of the ARSP would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant toxic air contaminants (TACs); would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial CO local concentrations; and would not create objectionable odors. These impacts would be less than significant. 5.3.2 Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the Proposed Project: Environmental Issues Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circum-stances Requiring Major EIR Revisions New Information Showing New or Increased Significant Effects Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR No Impact a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? x b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? x 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 50 PlaceWorks Environmental Issues Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circum-stances Requiring Major EIR Revisions New Information Showing New or Increased Significant Effects Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR No Impact c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? x d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? x e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? x Methodology Methodology to evaluate air quality impacts under CEQA has been updated since the FEIR No. 311 was certified. SCAQMD has published updates on its website to the Air Quality Analysis Guidance Handbook that provides local governments with guidance for analyzing and mitigating project-specific air quality impacts. SCAQMD’s most recent air quality analysis model, CalEEMod Version 2013.2.2., was utilized to compare the impacts of the Approved Project to the Proposed Project. Resulting operational phase emissions are compared to the significance thresholds adopted by the SCAQMD. Air quality modeling results are included in Appendix A. Comments: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. Air quality in Orange County is regulated by the SCAQMD, which is the agency principally responsible for comprehensive air pollution control in the South Coast Air Basin (SoCAB). The SCAQMD develops rules and regulations; establishes permitting requirements for stationary sources; inspects emissions sources; and enforces such measures through educational programs or fines, when necessary. The SCAQMD is directly responsible for reducing emissions from stationary (area and point), mobile, and indirect sources. It has responded to this requirement by preparing a sequence of AQMPs. On December 7, 2012, the SCAQMD Governing Board adopted the 2012 AQMP, which is a regional and multi-agency effort (SCAQMD, California Air Resources Board [CARB], the Southern California Association of Governments [SCAG], and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency [EPA]). The purpose of the 2012 AQMP is to set forth a comprehensive program that will lead the region into compliance with federal air quality standards for 8-hour ozone (O3) and PM2.5. The 2012 AQMP incorporates the latest scientific and 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 51 technical information and planning assumptions, including the 2012 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS); updated emission inventory methodologies for various source categories; and SCAG’s latest growth forecasts. On December 20, 2012, the 2012 AQMP was submitted to CARB and the EPA for concurrent review and approval for inclusion in the State Implementation Plan (SIP) (SCAQMD 2013). The 2012 AQMP was approved by the CARB on January 25, 2013 (CARB 2014). The two principal criteria for conformance to an AQMP are: 1. Whether the project would result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations; cause or contribute to new violations; or delay timely attainment of air quality standards and 2. Whether the project would exceed the assumptions in the AQMP. With respect to the first criterion, the analyses in responses to 5.3(b) and 5.3(c) below demonstrate that the Proposed Project would not generate short-term or long-term emissions of criteria pollutants that could potentially cause an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations; cause or contribute to new violations; or delay timely attainment of air quality standards beyond those impacts considered in FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340. With respect to the second criterion, the Proposed Project would not increase or modify SCAG’s population, housing, or employment projections beyond what was already anticipated for the area with approval of DRSP and ARSP and certification of FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340. Therefore, the Proposed Project would be consistent with the region’s AQMP. No impacts would occur and no mitigation is required. No new significant impact or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects. b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. The following describes changes in regional impacts from short-term construction activities and long-term operation of the Proposed Project compared to construction and operation of the Approved Project. Construction-Related Impacts Table 1, Maximum Daily Regional Construction Emissions, shows the maximum daily construction emissions identified in FEIR No. 311, as well as the maximum daily construction emissions for the Proposed Project. FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340 identified that criteria air pollutant emissions generated during construction activities would generate emissions that exceeded the SCAQMD thresholds. Mitigation measures were incorporated into the both EIRs to reduce impacts, to the extent feasible. However, despite the application of mitigation measures, regional construction emissions would continue to exceed the SCAQMD thresholds. As stated in Section 5.3.1, Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis, the Anaheim City Council adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations with regard to this potential impact. As shown on Table 1, the highest construction emissions would occur during grading activities, which are anticipated to occur in 2017. Although project-related NOx emissions still exceed SCAQMD’s thresholds, 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 52 PlaceWorks they are significantly below those identified in FEIR No. 311. Other criteria air pollutants, including VOCs, CO, SO2, PM10, and PM2.5, would not be significant for the Proposed Project. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not require major revisions to FEIR No. 311 or SEIR No. 340. Table 1 Maximum Daily Regional Construction Emissions Construction Phase Pollutants (pounds per day) VOC NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Emissions Identified in FEIR No. 311 Grading n/a n/a n/a n/a 2,675 n/a Service Trucks 4 8 32 n/a 2 n/a Construction Equipment 154 1,662 644 n/a 88 n/a Employee Vehicles 150 1,794 1,514 n/a 38 n/a Maximum Daily Emissions 308 1,794 2,190 n/a 2,803 n/a SCAQMD Regional Construction Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55 Significant? Yes Yes Yes n/a Yes n/a Proposed Project1, 2 2017 27 275 253 1 27 14 2018 26 127 155 <1 16 9 2019 12 82 108 <1 12 6 Maximum Daily Emissions 27 275 253 1 27 14 SCAQMD Regional Construction Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55 Significant? No Yes No No No No Net Change Net Change in Maximum Daily Emissions -281 -1,519 -1,937 n/a -2,776 n/a Source: CalEEMod Version 2013.2.2. Notes: Totals may not equal 100 percent due to rounding. 1 Based on the preliminary information provided by the Applicant. 2 Includes implementation of fugitive dust control measures consistent with Mitigation Measure 5.2-3 and as required by SCAQMD under Rule 403, including watering disturbed areas a minimum of two times per day, reducing speed limit to 15 miles per hour on unpaved surfaces, replacing ground cover quickly, and street sweeping with Rule 1186–compliant sweepers. Operation-Related Impacts As noted above, FEIR No. 311 found that operational emissions, including utility usage, stationary sources, on-site service engines and mobile sources, would exceed SCAQMDs significance thresholds for VOCs (ROG), NOX, CO, and PM10. FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340 assumed 706 rooms on the Project Site and a daily traffic volume of 5,742 trips. Long-term air pollutant emissions generated by the Approved Project and Proposed Project were modeled with the CalEEMod 2013.2.2, and are shown in Table 2, Maximum Daily Regional Operational Phase Emissions. The Proposed Project would result in 2,919 trips, a net reduction of 2,823 trips from the Approved Project. As shown in the table, operation of both the Approved Project and the Proposed Project would not exceed the SCAQMD regional significance thresholds. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not require major revisions to FEIR No. 311 or SEIR No. 340. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 53 Table 2 Maximum Daily Regional Operational Phase Emissions Source Criteria Air Pollutants (lbs/day) ROG (VOC) NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Approved Project (706 Hotel Rooms) Area 20 <1 <1 0 0 0 Energy 1 7 5 <1 <1 <1 Mobile 16 32 149 <1 29 8 Total 36 38 154 <1 30 9 Existing Land Use (300 Hotel Rooms and Accessory Retail Uses)1, 2 Area 8 0 <1 0 0 0 Energy <1 4 3 <1 <1 <1 Mobile 3 5 23 <1 5 1 Total 10 9 26 <1 5 2 Net Maximum Daily Emissions 26 30 128 <1 25 7 SCAQMD Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55 Exceeds Threshold? No No No No No No Proposed Project (580 Hotel Rooms and 50,000 SF Meeting Room and 25,600 SF Accessory Retail Uses)2 Area 23 <1 <1 0 0 0 Energy 1 5 4 <1 <1 <1 Mobile 8 16 76 <1 15 4 Total 32 21 80 <1 15 4 Existing Land Use (300 Hotel Rooms and Accessory Retail Uses)1, 2 Area 8 0 <1 0 0 0 Energy <1 4 3 <1 <1 <1 Mobile 3 5 23 <1 5 1 Total 10 9 26 <1 5 2 Net Emissions 22 13 54 <1 10 3 SCAQMD Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55 Exceeds Threshold? No No No No No No Net Change Net Difference Between the Approved and Proposed Project -4 -17 -74 -<1 -15 -4 Source: CalEEMod, Version 2013.2.2. Based on trip generation information provided by Iteris. Note: Totals may not equal 100 percent due to rounding. 1 Assumes average occupancy percentage of 84.7 percent for the existing 300 rooms available as stated in the Traffic Study. 2 Emission calculations were based on trip counts from the Traffic Study 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 54 PlaceWorks c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. Orange County is a nonattainment area for ozone (O3) and PM2.5. As stated in threshold 5.3(b), no increase in regional emissions is anticipated, and the cumulative impact would be less than significant. The Proposed Project would not increase the total amount of development allowed in the DRSP and ARSP areas, including the project site, as evaluated in FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340. Therefore, as discussed under Threshold “b” above, the Proposed Project would not result in a substantial increase in regional construction or operational emissions when compared to the previous analyses. Because direct impacts were previously determined to exceed SCAQMD thresholds, cumulative impacts were determined to be significant and unavoidable. The Proposed Project would not result in any new cumulatively considerable emissions increases or new cumulative air quality impacts, nor would it result in an increase in the severity of any previously identified significant impacts in FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340. SEIR No. 340 found that the increase in nonattainment pollutants could result in cumulatively considerable impacts that would be would be significant and unavoidable. The impacts identified for the Proposed Project would be consistent with what was identified in SEIR No. 340; therefore, the Proposed Project would not create a new significant impact or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects. d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. As discussed under Threshold “b” above, the Proposed Project would not result in any new air quality impacts related to exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations or an increase in the severity of any previously identified significant impacts compared to those identified in FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340. SEIR No. 340 found that short-term localized exposure of persons to PM10 and PM2.5 would be a significant and unavoidable impact. The impacts identified for the Proposed Project would not be greater than what was identified in SEIR No. 340 for the Proposed Project site; therefore, the Proposed Project would not create a new significant impact or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects. e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. According to the SCAQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Handbook (SCAQMD 1993) and as noted in SEIR No. 340, land uses associated with odor complaints typically include agricultural uses, wastewater treatment plants, food processing plants, chemical plants, composting, refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglass molding. The Proposed Project does not include any uses identified by the SCAQMD as being associated with odors and therefore would not produce objectionable odors. As such, the Proposed Project would have no impact related to objectionable odors. This would be consistent with what was identified in SEIR No. 340; therefore, 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 55 the Proposed Project would not create a new significant impact or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects. Overall, the Proposed Project would be consistent with the project as analyzed in FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340. Accordingly, no new significant impacts or impacts of greater severity than those previously identified in FEIR No. 311 or SEIR No. 340 would occur. No changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR. 5.3.3 Adopted Mitigation Measures Applicable to the Proposed Project The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan FEIR No. 311 Because the mitigation measures identified in SEIR No. 340 are comparable to applicable mitigation measures identified in FEIR No. 311, this document incorporates the more recently adopted measures from SEIR No. 340. Anaheim Resort Specific Plan SEIR No. 340 MM 5.2-1 Ongoing during project operation, the property owner/developer shall implement measures to reduce emissions to the extent practical, schedule goods movements for off-peak traffic hours, and use clean fuel for vehicles and other equipment, as practicable. MM 5.2-2 Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit evidence that low emission paints and coatings are utilized in the design and construction of buildings, in compliance with SCAQMD regulations. The information shall be denoted on the project plans and specifications. The property owner/developer shall submit an architectural coating schedule and calculations demonstrating that VOC emissions from architectural coating operations would not exceed 75 pounds per day averaged over biweekly periods. The calculations shall show, for each coating, the surface area to be coated, gallons (or liters) of coating per unit surface area, and VOC content per gallon (or liter). The property owner/developer shall also implement the following to limit emissions from architectural coatings and asphalt usage: a) Use nonsolvent-based coatings on buildings, wherever appropriate; b) Use solvent based coatings, where they are necessary. MM 5.2-3 Ongoing during construction, the property owner/developer shall implement measures to reduce construction-related air quality impacts. These measures shall include, but are not limited to: a) Normal wetting procedures (at least twice daily) or other dust palliative measures shall be followed during earth-moving operations to minimize fugitive dust emissions, in compliance with the City of Anaheim Municipal Code including application of chemical 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 56 PlaceWorks soil stabilizers to exposed soils after grading is completed and replacing ground cover in disturbed areas as quickly as practicable. b) For projects where there is excavation for subterranean facilities (such as parking) on- site haul roads shall be watered at least every two hours or the on- site haul roads shall be paved. c) Enclosing, covering, watering twice daily, or applying approved soil binders, according to manufacturer’s specification, to exposed piles. d) Roadways adjacent to the project shall be swept and cleared of any spilled export materials at least twice a day to assist in minimizing fugitive dust; and, haul routes shall be cleared as needed if spills of materials exported from the project site occur. e) Where practicable, heavy duty construction equipment shall be kept onsite when not in operation to minimize exhaust emissions associated with vehicles repetitiously entering and exiting the project site. f) Trucks importing or exporting soil material and/or debris shall be covered prior to entering public streets. g) Taking preventive measures to ensure that trucks do not carry dirt on tires onto public streets, including treating onsite roads and staging areas. h) Preventing trucks from idling for longer than 2 minutes. i) Manually irrigate or activate irrigation systems necessary to water and maintain the vegetation as soon as planting is completed. j) Reduce Traffic speeds on all unpaved road surfaces to 15 miles per hour or less. k) Suspend all grading operations when wind speeds (as instantaneous gust) exceed 25 miles per hour and during first and second stage smog alerts. l) Comply with SCAQMD Rule 402, which states that no dust impacts offsite are sufficient to be called a nuisance, and SCAQMD Rule 403, which restricts visible emissions from construction. m) Use low emission mobile construction equipment (e.g., tractors, scrapers, dozers, etc.) where practicable. n) Utilize existing power sources (e.g., power poles) or clean-fuel generators rather than temporary power generators, where practicable. o) Maintain construction equipment engines by keeping them properly tuned. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 57 p) Use low sulfur fuel for equipment, to the extent practicable. MM 5.2-4 Prior to issuance of each grading permit (for Import/Export Plan) and prior to issuance of demolition permit (for Demolition Plan), the property owner/developer shall submit Demolition and Import/Export plans. The plans shall include identification of offsite locations for materials export from the project and options for disposal of excess material. These options may include recycling of materials onsite, sale to a soil broker or contractor, sale to a project in the vicinity or transport to an environmentally cleared landfill, with attempts made to move it within Orange County. The property owner/developer shall offer recyclable building materials, such as asphalt or concrete for sale or removal by private firms or public agencies for use in construction of other projects, if not all can be reused on project site. MM 5.2-5 Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall comply with all SCAQMD offset regulations and implementation of Best Available Control Technology (BACT) and Best Available Retrofit Control Technology (BARCT) for any new or modified stationary source. Copies of permits shall be given to the Planning Department. MM 5.2-6 Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall implement, and demonstrate to the City, measures that are being taken to reduce operation- related air quality impacts. These measures may include, but are not limited to the following: a) Improve thermal integrity of structures and reduced thermal load through use of automated time clocks or occupant sensors. b) Incorporate efficient heating and other appliances. c) Incorporate energy conservation measures in site orientation and in building design, such as appropriate passive solar design. d) Use drought-resistant landscaping wherever feasible to reduce energy used in pumping and transporting water. e) To the extent feasible, provide daycare opportunities for employees or participate in a joint development daycare center. f) Install facilities for electric vehicle recharging, unless it is demonstrated that the technology for these facilities or availability of the equipment current at the time makes this installation infeasible. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 58 PlaceWorks 5.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 5.4.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan FEIR No. 311 FEIR No. 311 does not specifically address biological resources. Anaheim Resort Specific Plan SEIR No. 340 SEIR No. 340 identified that the ARSP area is located within an urbanized area of the City with no candidate, sensitive, or special status species as listed in local regional plans, policies, or regulations, or as designated by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). However, mitigation was identified to reduce potential impacts to nesting birds and raptors to less than significant levels. Further, SEIR No. 340 concluded that the ARSP area does not function as a migratory corridor or a native wildlife nursery site and no impact would occur. 5.4.2 Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project Would the Proposed Project: Environmental Issues Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circum-stances Requiring Major EIR Revisions New Information Showing New or Increased Significant Effects Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR No Impact a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? x b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? x c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? x 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 59 Environmental Issues Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circum-stances Requiring Major EIR Revisions New Information Showing New or Increased Significant Effects Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR No Impact d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? x e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? x f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? x The Project Site and the ARSP as a whole are in a highly urbanized portion of Anaheim that contains few biological resources. The Project Site is currently developed with an existing hotel and contains no habitat for sensitive species, natural biological communities, wetlands, wildlife corridors, or nursery sites. The only biological resources on the Project Site are nonnative ornamental street trees and shrubs along Harbor Boulevard and Disney Way, and parking lot landscaping. The Project Site is not located with the plan area of an adopted habitat conservation plan and it is not subject to a local policy or ordinance protecting biological resources. Comments: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? No Impact. The Project Site does not contain habitat for candidate, sensitive, or special status species. Therefore, the Proposed Project would have no impact on these types of species. No impact would occur and no mitigation is necessary. Accordingly, no new significant impacts or impacts of greater severity than those previously identified in SEIR No. 340 would occur. No changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR. b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? No Impact. As analyzed in the SEIR No. 340, the Project Site does not contain riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community. Therefore, the Proposed Project would have no impact on these communities 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 60 PlaceWorks and no mitigation is necessary. Accordingly, no new significant impacts or impacts of greater severity than those previously identified in SEIR No. 340 would occur. No changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR. c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? No Impact. The Project Site does not contain federally protected wetlands as defined by the Clean Water Act. Therefore, as with the Approved Project, implementation of the Proposed Project would not adversely affect wetlands. No impact would occur and no mitigation is necessary. Accordingly, no new significant impacts or impacts of greater severity than those previously identified in SEIR No. 340 would occur. No changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR. d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? No Impact. The Project Site is not located within a movement corridor for native fish or wildlife. Furthermore, it does not contain native wildlife nursery sites. As with the Approved Project, implementation of the Proposed Project would not affect these types of biological resources. No impact would occur and no mitigation is necessary. Accordingly, no new significant impacts or impacts of greater severity than those previously identified in SEIR No. 340 would occur. No changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR. e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? No Impact. The Project Site is not subject to a City tree preservation ordinance or other local regulation protecting biological resources. As with the Approved Project, implementation of the Proposed Project would not conflict with these types of policies or ordinances and no impact would occur. No mitigation is necessary. Accordingly, no new significant impacts or impacts of greater severity than those previously identified in SEIR No. 340 would occur. No changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR. f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? No Impact. The Project Site is not within the plan area of an adopted habitat conservation plan. No impact to habitat conservation plans would occur from implementation of the Proposed Project and no mitigation is necessary. Accordingly, no new significant impacts or impacts of greater severity than those previously identified in SEIR No. 340 would occur. No changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 61 5.4.3 Adopted Mitigation Measures Applicable to the Proposed Project The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan FEIR No. 311 FEIR No. 311 did not identify any mitigation measures related to biological resources. Anaheim Resort Specific Plan SEIR No. 340 The following mitigation measures from Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 85C were adopted as part of SEIR No. 340. The following measures also would be applicable to the Proposed Project. MM 5.3-1 Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit, grading permit, or building permit, whichever occurs first, a survey for active raptor nests shall be conducted by a qualified Biologist and submitted to the Planning Department 30 days prior to commencement of any demolition or construction activities during the raptor nesting season (February 1 to June 30) and within 500 feet of a fan palm, juniper, or canary island pine. Should an active nest be identified, restrictions defined by a qualified Biologist will be placed on construction activities in the vicinity of any active nest observed until the nest is no longer active, as determined by a qualified Biologist. These restrictions may include a 300- to 500-foot buffer zone designated around a nest to allow construction to proceed while minimizing disturbance to the active nest. Once the nest is no longer active, construction can proceed within the buffer zone. MM 5.3-2 Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit, grading permit, or building permit, whichever occurs first, a letter detailing the proposed schedule for vegetation removal activities shall be submitted to the Planning Department, verifying that removal shall take place between August 1 and February 28 to avoid the bird nesting season. This would ensure that no active nests would be disturbed. If this is not feasible, then a qualified Biologist shall inspect any trees which would be impacted prior to demolition, grading or construction activities to ensure no nesting birds are present. If a nest is present, then appropriate minimization measures shall be developed by the Biologist. 5.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES 5.5.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan FEIR No. 311 FEIR No. 311 concluded that no impacts to cultural, historic, or prehistoric resources were expected to occur from development of SP 92-1. However, implementation of the required mitigation measures would ensure that if any cultural resources were discovered during grading or development of the project, potential impacts would be mitigated to a level considered less than significant. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 62 PlaceWorks Anaheim Resort Specific Plan SEIR No. 340 According to SEIR No. 340, no designated historical resources exist within the ARSP area; however, implementation of mitigation providing evidence that any structures aged 45 years or older are not eligible for historical designation would preclude any impacts to unknown historical resources. Further, no resources are anticipated to be discovered in the ARSP area; however, implementation of mitigation would mitigate the potential for disturbing unidentified archaeological or paleontological resources. 5.5.2 Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project Would the Proposed Project: Environmental Issues Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circum-stances Requiring Major EIR Revisions New Information Showing New or Increased Significant Effects Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR No Impact a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in § 15064.5? x b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? x c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? x d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? x The existing Anaheim Plaza Hotel, located at 1700 S. Harbor, is not classified as historic. The City maintains a local inventory of historic structures. None of the historic classifications included in this list identify the Project Site. In addition, the Project Site is not located in any of the City’s local historic districts or National Register Districts. Comments: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in § 15064.5? No Impact. As indicated above, the existing Anaheim Plaza Hotel, located at 1700 S. Harbor, is not classified as historic. In addition, Project Site is not located in any of the City’s local historic districts or National Register Districts. Therefore, no adverse impacts to historic resources would occur due to implementation of the Proposed Project. No changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 63 b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. The Project Site is currently developed and not known to contain important archaeological resources. However, such resources may be present and could be unearthed during development of the Proposed Project. Mitigation measures identified in SEIR No. 340, MM 5.4-1, would address any impacts related to discovery of prehistoric resources during development on the Project Site. Therefore, no changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR. c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. The Project Site is currently developed and not known to contain important paleontological resources. However, such resources may be present and could be unearthed during development of the Proposed Project. Mitigation measures identified in SEIR No. 340, MM 5.4-2, would address any impacts related to discovery of prehistoric resources during development on the Project Site. Therefore, no changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR. d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. The Project Site is currently developed and not expected to contain any human remains. However, consistent with the analysis provided in SEIR No. 340, SR 5.4-1 would ensure no impacts to human remains would occur and implementation of MMs 5.4-1 and 5.4-2 would reduce any potential impacts related to paleontological and archaeological resources to less than significant levels. As a result, the Proposed Project would not create a new significant impact or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects related to cultural resources. 5.5.3 Adopted Mitigation Measures Applicable to the Proposed Project The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan FEIR No. 311 Because the mitigation measures identified in SEIR No. 340 are comparable to applicable mitigation measures identified in FEIR No. 311, this document incorporates the more recently adopted measures from SEIR No. 340. Anaheim Resort Specific Plan SEIR No. 340 The following mitigation measures from Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 85C were adopted in connection with SEIR No. 340. The following measures also would be applicable to the Proposed Project. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 64 PlaceWorks Standard Requirements SR 5.4-1 Before and during construction, if human remains are discovered on-site, no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98 and California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5. Mitigation Measures MM 5.4-1 Prior to issuance of each grading permit, the property owner/developer shall submit a letter identifying the certified archaeologist that has been hired to ensure that the following actions are implemented: a) The archaeologist must be present at the pre-grading conference in order to establish procedures for temporarily halting or redirecting work to permit the sampling, identification, and evaluation of artifacts if potentially significant artifacts are uncovered. If artifacts are uncovered and determined to be significant, the archaeological observer shall determine appropriate actions in cooperation with the property owner/developer for exploration and/or salvage. b) Specimens that are collected prior to or during the grading process will be donated to an appropriate educational or research institution. c) Any archaeological work at the site shall be conducted under the direction of the certified archaeologist. If any artifacts are discovered during grading operations when the archaeological monitor is not present, grading shall be diverted around the area until the monitor can survey the area. d) A final report detailing the findings and disposition of the specimens shall be submitted to the City Engineer. Upon completion of the grading, the archaeologist shall notify the City as to when the final report will be submitted. MM 5.4-2 Prior to issuance of each grading permit, the property owner/developer shall submit a letter identifying the certified paleontologist that has been hired to ensure that the following actions are implemented: a) The paleontologist must be present at the pre-grading conference in order to establish procedures to temporarily halt or redirect work to permit the sampling, identification, and evaluation of fossils if potentially significant paleontological resources are uncovered. If artifacts are uncovered and found to be significant, the paleontological observer shall determine appropriate actions in cooperation with the property owner/developer for exploration and/or salvage. b) Specimens that are collected prior to or during the grading process will be donated to an appropriate educational or research institution. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 65 c) Any paleontological work at the site shall be conducted under the direction of the certified paleontologist. If any fossils are discovered during grading operations when the paleontological monitor is not present, grading shall be diverted around the area until the monitor can survey the area. 5.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS 5.6.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan FEIR No. 311 Analysis of potential impacts related to earth resources in FEIR No. 311 revealed that the project would expose people to seismic risk typical of Southern California. Such a risk was considered less than significant with implementation of project mitigation measures. Anaheim Resort Specific Plan SEIR No. 340 SEIR No. 340 identified active and potentially active faults in the region that could result in seismic-related impacts to future development projects associated with the buildout of the ARSP. Seismic events along these faults have the potential to result in strong ground motion. SEIR No. 340 concluded that potential impacts related to seismic ground shaking would be reduced to less than significant levels with implementation of the identified mitigation measures; conformance with the applicable requirements listed in the Anaheim Municipal Code; and conformance to the California Building Code. As noted in SEIR No. 340, the ARSP area is located in a relatively flat area with minimal potential for erosion impacts due to the high amount of urban development and low amount of bare ground. However, during demolition and construction activities when areas are exposed to erosion and loss of topsoil, adherence to the following would ensure that impacts would be less than significant: local and State codes and requirements for erosion control and grading; compliance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit and the subsequent development of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan. Additionally, expansive soils are known to exist in the ARSP area; however, implementation of mitigation requiring adherence to measures requiring detailed foundation design and preparation of a report to analyze foundation excavations would reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels. 5.6.2 Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project Would the Proposed Project: 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 66 PlaceWorks Environmental Issues Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circum-stances Requiring Major EIR Revisions New Information Showing New or Increased Significant Effects Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR No Impact a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map, issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. x ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? x iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? x iv) Landslides? x b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? x c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? x d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (2013), creating substantial risks to life or property? x e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? x No Alquist-Priolo Zones are located within the ARSP. Known regional active faults that could produce significant ground shaking at the site include the Puente Hills (thrust), San Joaquin Hills (thrust), Elsinore (strike-slip) and Newport-Inglewood (strike-slip) faults. Historic earthquakes that have caused substantial ground shaking in the ARSP include the 1857 Fort Tejon earthquake (magnitude 7.9) on the San Andreas Fault, the 1933 Long Beach earthquake (magnitude 6.3) along the Newport Inglewood Fault Zone, the 1987 Whittier Narrow earthquake (magnitude 5.9) on the Elysian Thrust Fault, and the 1992 Yucca Valley earthquake (magnitude 7.4). In addition, the 1994 Northridge earthquake (magnitude 6.6) caused substantial ground shaking in Anaheim and resulted in damage to nearby Angel Stadium. Liquefaction occurs when loose, cohesionless, water-saturated soils (generally fine-grained sands) are subjected to strong seismic ground motion of significant duration. Liquefied soils may behave like liquids losing load bearing strength; however, they generally maintain some residual strength during and immediately 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 67 after liquefaction. Structures located on liquefiable soils such as silt or sand may experience significant damage during an earthquake due to the instability of structural foundations and the moving earth. Liquefaction more often occurs in earthquake-prone areas underlain by young alluvium where the groundwater table is less than 50 feet below the ground surface. The magnitude and nature of settlement due to liquefaction depends on many factors, including the homogeneity of the liquefiable layers, the depth to the liquefiable layer, the magnitude of the triggering event, and the duration of the shaking. As shown on Figure 5.5-3 of EIR No. 330, the ARSP is not located within a zone of potential liquefaction. Like most of the ARSP, the Project Site is flat and is not subject to landslides or substantial erosion. A geotechnical study has been completed for the Proposed Project and is included as Appendix B. Comments: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning map, issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. No Impact. As analyzed in FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340, the ARSP is not within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault zone. There are no known faults that traverse the site, and fault rupture is not expected to impact the Project Site or other areas of the ARSP. No impact would occur and no changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. As disclosed in FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340, the principal seismic hazard to the site is ground shaking resulting from an earthquake occurring along any of several major active and potentially active faults in southern California. Known regional active faults that could produce significant ground shaking at the site include the Puente Hills (thrust), San Joaquin Hills (thrust), Elsinore (strike-slip) and Newport- Inglewood (strike-slip) faults. The active Puente Hills and San Joaquin Hills blind thrust faults are located in the subsurface approximately 4.5 and 7.7 miles, respectively, from the site. The active Elsinore and Newport-Inglewood faults are located approximately 9.2 and 10.0 miles, respectively, from the Project Site. Mitigation measures identified in SEIR No. 340, including MM 5.5-1 through MM 5.5-4, would address any impacts related to seismic ground shaking. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts with respect to ground shaking compared to the Approved Project. iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. Review of the Seismic Hazards Zones Map for the Anaheim Quadrangle (CGS, 1998) indicates the 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 68 PlaceWorks subject site is not located within an area that has been identified by the State of California as being potentially susceptible to the occurrence of liquefaction. Therefore the potential for liquefaction at the site is low. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts with respect to liquefaction compared to the Approved Project. iv) Landslides? No Impact. The potential for seismically-induced landsliding is considered low due to the absence of slopes at the site. Additionally, review of the Seismic Hazard Zones Map for the Anaheim Quadrangle (CGS, 1998) indicates the subject site is not located within an area that has been identified by the State of California as being potentially susceptible to the occurrence of seismically-induced landsliding. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts with respect to landslides compared to the Approved Project. b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. Due to the location of the Project Site within a relatively flat and developed area, the Proposed Project is not anticipated to result in substantial erosion or loss of topsoil. The Project Site is currently developed and covered with impervious surfaces, including buildings, concrete, and paving. Once construction is complete, the project site shall comply with best management practices (BMPs) identified in the preliminary water quality management plan prepared for the Proposed Project to reduce erosion effects to less than significant levels, as discussed in Section 5.9, Hydrology and Water Quality. Furthermore, construction activities would be performed pursuant to the current National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit requirements. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts with respect to soil erosion compared to the Approved Project. c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse. Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. Consistent with the findings of FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340, the Project Site is not located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable. As identified in Section 2.4.2 of SEIR No. 340, geologic hazard maps show that the Project Site is not within an area susceptible to landslides, liquefaction, or other potentially unstable conditions. According to the Geotechnical Report prepared for the Proposed Project, the site is underlain by a mantle of undocumented artificial fill materials (Afu) overlying Quaternary-aged young alluvial fan deposits (Qyf). The artificial fill encountered in our borings at the explored locations is generally about 5 to 7 feet in thickness and consists primarily of silty sand and sand. Below the artificial fill, Quaternary-aged young alluvial fan deposits were encountered in the borings to the maximum depth explored at 56.5 feet below ground surface. (Leighton 2016). Groundwater was not encountered within subsurface explorations to the maximum depth explored of 75 feet. Based on review of the California Geological Survey Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the Anaheim Quadrangle (CGS 1997), the historically highest groundwater level at the project site is greater than 50 feet below ground surface. Based on these project site conditions, potential impacts related to 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 69 ground stability would be less than significant. Since the project site is not located near unstable slopes, mitigation of landslide hazards is not necessary for the site. This impact is consistent with what was identified in FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340, and mitigation measures were previously adopted to address potential geotechnical impacts (see MM 5.5-1 through MM 5.5-6, below). Therefore, the Proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts with respect to unstable soils compared to the Approved Project. d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 19-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (2013), creating substantial risks to life or property? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. As noted in SEIR No. 340, the City of Anaheim contains soils that range from having “low” to “high” expansion potential; therefore, the Proposed Project site may be in an area considered to have expansive soils. According to the Geotechnical Report prepared for the project, the results of the Expansion Index (EI) test indicates that the near-surface sample has “very low” expansion potential (Leighton 2016). Implementation of current codes and regulations identified in the Anaheim Municipal Code would ensure that potential impacts related to expansive soils would be less than significant. This impact is consistent with that identified in SEIR No. 340 related to buildout of the ARSP. The Proposed Project would not create a new significant impact or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects. e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? No Impact. As under the Approved Project, implementation of the Proposed Project would not involve the construction or use of septic tanks or other alternative wastewater disposal system. No impact would occur and no changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR. 5.6.3 Adopted Mitigation Measures Applicable to the Proposed Project The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan FEIR No. 311 Because the mitigation measures identified in SEIR No. 340 are comparable to applicable mitigation measures identified in FEIR No. 311, this document incorporates the more recently adopted measures from SEIR No. 340. Anaheim Resort Specific Plan SEIR No. 340 The following mitigation measures from Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 85C were adopted in connection with SEIR No. 340. The following measures also would be applicable to the Proposed Project. Standard Requirements SR 5.5-1 All grading operations will be conducted in conformance with the Anaheim Municipal Code, Title 17, Land Development and Resources, and the most recent version of the California Building Code. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 70 PlaceWorks Mitigation Measures MM 5.5-1 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit to the Planning Department, Building Services Division for review and approval, detailed foundation design information for the subject building(s), prepared by a civil engineer, based on recommendations by a geotechnical engineer. MM 5.5-2 Prior to issuance of each foundation permit, the property owner/developer shall submit a report prepared by a geotechnical engineer to the Planning Department, Building Services Division for review and approval, which shall investigate the subject foundation excavations to determine if soft layers are present immediately beneath the footing site and to ensure that compressibility does not underlie the footing. MM 5.5-3 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit plans to the Planning Department, Building Services Division for review and approval showing that the proposed structure has been analyzed for earthquake loading and designed according to the most recent seismic standards in the California Building Code adopted by the City of Anaheim. MM 5.5-4 Prior to the final building and zoning inspection for a hotel/motel, the property owner/developer shall submit an earthquake emergency response plan for review and approval by the Fire Department. The plan shall require posted notices in all hotel rooms on earthquake safety procedures and incorporate ongoing earthquake training for hotel staff to the satisfaction of the Fire Department. MM 5.5-5 Ongoing during grading activities, the property owner/developer shall implement standard practices for all applicable codes and ordinances to prevent erosion to the satisfaction of the Planning Department, Building Services Division. MM 5.5-6 Prior to issuance of building or grading permits, the property owner/developer shall submit to the Planning Department, Building Services Division geologic and geotechnical investigations in areas of potential seismic or geologic hazards and provide a note on plans that all grading operations will be conducted in conformance with the recommendations contained in the applicable geotechnical investigation. 5.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS 5.7.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan FEIR No. 311 FEIR No. 311 did not analyze greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions because it was certified prior to the adoption of Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32) and the Senate Bill 97 (SB 97) amendments (adopted December 30, 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 71 2009, effective March 18, 2010) to the CEQA Guidelines. However, as discussed in Section 5.3, Air Quality, air quality impacts were analyzed in FEIR No. 311 and determined to be significant and unavoidable. The information provided in this section includes the most current scientific data on GHG and global climate change, but does not change the conclusions of FEIR No. 311. Current information on GHG emissions and global climate change do not trigger the need for preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR pursuant to Public Resources Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. The current scientific information does not demonstrate that the Proposed Project would result in new or substantially greater significant impacts than those that would have resulted from implementation of the Approved Project. Anaheim Resort Specific Plan SEIR No. 340 SEIR No. 340 concluded that although the Proposed Project would not conflict with applicable regulations and policies adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions, and although feasible mitigation measures would be incorporated into the Proposed Project, the magnitude of the increase in GHG emissions would remain cumulatively considerable and the impact to GHG emissions would be significant and unavoidable. The Anaheim City Council adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations with regard to these potential impacts. 5.7.2 Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project Greenhouse Gases and Climate Change Scientists have concluded that human activities are contributing to global climate change by adding large amounts of heat-trapping gases, known as GHG, to the atmosphere. The primary source of these GHG is fossil fuel use. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has identified four major GHG— water vapor, CO2, methane (CH4), and O3—that are the likely cause of an increase in global average temperatures observed in the 20th and 21st centuries. Other GHG identified by the IPCC that contribute to global warming to a lesser extent include nitrous oxide (N2O), sulfur hexafluoride (SF6), hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and chlorofluorocarbons (IPCC 2001).1,2 Regulatory Setting The regulatory settings for the Proposed Project have changed since the certification of FEIR No. 311. The following discussion is provided to update conditions relative to development of the Proposed Project. 1 Water vapor (H2O) is the strongest GHG and the most variable in its phases (vapor, cloud droplets, ice crystals). However, water vapor is not considered a pollutant. 2 Black carbon is the most strongly light-absorbing component of PM emitted from burning fuels. Black carbon contributes to climate change both directly, by absorbing sunlight, and indirectly, by depositing on snow (making it melt faster) and by interacting with clouds and affecting cloud formation. Reducing black carbon emissions globally can have immediate economic, climate, and public health benefits. California has been an international leader in reducing emissions of black carbon, with close to 95 percent control expected by 2020 due to existing programs that target reducing PM from diesel engines and burning activities (CARB 2013). 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 72 PlaceWorks Federal Laws The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced on December 7, 2009, that GHG emissions threaten the public health and welfare of the American people and that GHG emissions from on-road vehicles contribute to that threat. The EPA’s final findings respond to the 2007 U.S. Supreme Court decision that GHG emissions fit within the Clean Air Act definition of air pollutants. The findings do not in and of themselves impose any emission reduction requirements, but allow the EPA to finalize the GHG standards proposed in 2009 for new light-duty vehicles as part of the joint rulemaking with the Department of Transportation (EPA 2009). The EPA’s endangerment finding covers emissions of six key GHGs—CO2, CH4, N2O, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and SF6—that have been the subject of scrutiny and intense analysis for decades by scientists in the United States and around the world (the first three are applicable to the Proposed Project). In response to the endangerment finding, the EPA issued the Mandatory Reporting of GHG Rule that requires substantial emitters of GHG emissions (large stationary sources, etc.) to report GHG emissions data. Facilities that emit 25,000 metric tons (MT) or more of CO2 per year are required to submit an annual report. State Laws Current State of California guidance and goals for reductions in GHG emissions are generally embodied in Executive Order S-03-05, Executive Order B-30-15, AB 32, and Senate Bill 375 (SB 375). Executive Order S-03-05 Executive Order S-3-05, signed June 1, 2005, set the following GHG reduction targets for the state:  2000 levels by 2010  1990 levels by 2020  80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050 Executive Order B-30-15 Executive Order B-30-15, signed April 29, 2015, sets a goal of reducing GHG emissions within the state to 40 percent of 1990 levels by year 2030. Executive Order B-30-15 also directs California Air Resources Board (CARB) to update the Scoping Plan to quantify the 2030 GHG reduction goal for the State and requires state agencies to implement measures to meet the interim 2030 goal of Executive Order B-30-15 as well as the long-term goal for 2050 in Executive Order S-03-5. It also requires the Natural Resources Agency to conduct triennial updates the California adaption strategy, Safeguarding California, in order to ensure climate change is accounted for in State planning and investment decisions. Assembly Bill 32, The Global Warming Solutions Act (2006) Current State of California guidance and goals for reductions in GHG emissions are generally embodied in AB 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act. AB 32 was passed by the California state legislature on August 31, 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 73 2006, to place the state on a course toward reducing its contribution of GHG emissions. AB 32 follows the 2020 tier of emissions reduction targets established in Executive Order S-3-05. The final Scoping Plan was adopted by the CARB, on December 11, 2008. Based on the GHG emissions inventory conducted for the Scoping Plan, GHG emissions in California by 2020 are anticipated to be approximately 596 million metric tons of CO2 equivalents (MMTCO2e). In December 2007, CARB approved a 2020 emissions limit of 427 MMTCO2e (471 million tons) for the state. The 2020 target requires a total emissions reduction of 169 MMTCO2e, 28.5 percent from the projected emissions of the business-as-usual (BAU) scenario for the year 2020 (i.e., 28.5 percent of 596 MMTCO2e) (CARB 2008).3 2014 Scoping Plan Update CARB recently completed a five-year update to the 2008 Scoping Plan, as required by AB 32. The final Update to the Scoping Plan was released in May, and CARB adopted it at the May 22, 2014, board hearing. The Update to the Scoping Plan defines CARB’s climate change priorities for the next five years and lays the groundwork to reach post-2020 goals in Executive Orders S-3-05 and B-16-2012. The update includes the latest scientific findings related to climate change and its impacts, including short-lived climate pollutants. The GHG target identified in the 2008 Scoping Plan is based on IPCC’s GWPs identified in the Second and Third Assessment Reports. IPCC’s Fourth and Fifth Assessment Reports identified more recent GWP values based on the latest available science. CARB recalculated the 1990 GHG emission levels with the updated GWPs in the Fourth Assessment Report, and the 427 MMTCO2e 1990 emissions level and 2020 GHG emissions limit, established in response to AB 32, is slightly higher, at 431 MMTCO2e (CARB 2014d). The update highlights California’s progress toward meeting the near-term 2020 GHG emission reduction goals defined in the original 2008 Scoping Plan. As identified in the Update to the Scoping Plan, California is on track to meeting the goals of AB 32. However, the Update to the Scoping Plan also addresses the state’s longer-term GHG goals within a post-2020 element. The post-2020 element provides a high level view of a long-term strategy for meeting the 2050 GHG goals, including a recommendation for the state to adopt a mid-term target. According to the Update to the Scoping Plan, local government reduction targets should chart a reduction trajectory that is consistent with, or exceeds, the trajectory created by statewide goals (CARB 2014b). According to the Update to the Scoping Plan, reducing emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels will require a fundamental shift to efficient, clean energy in every sector of the economy. Progressing toward California’s 2050 climate targets will require significant acceleration of GHG reduction rates. Emissions from 2020 to 2050 will have to decline several times faster than the rate needed to reach the 2020 emissions limit (CARB 2014b). 3 CARB defines BAU in its Scoping Plan as emissions levels that would occur if California continued to grow and add new GHG emissions but did not adopt any measures to reduce emissions. Projections for each emission-generating sector were compiled and used to estimate emissions for 2020 based on 2002–2004 emissions intensities. Under CARB’s definition of BAU, new growth is assumed to have the same carbon intensities as was typical from 2002 through 2004. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 74 PlaceWorks The new Executive Order B-30-15 requires CARB to prepare another update to the Scoping Plan to address the 2030 target for the State. It is anticipated the Scoping Plan will be updated within the next five years to address the new 2030 interim target to achieve a 40 percent reduction below 1990 levels by 2030. Senate Bill 375, The Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act (2008) In 2008, SB 375, the Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act, was adopted to connect the GHG emissions reductions targets established in the Scoping Plan for the transportation sector to local land use decisions that affect travel behavior. Its intent is to reduce GHG emissions from light-duty trucks and automobiles (excludes emissions associated with goods movement) by aligning regional long-range transportation plans, investments, and housing allocations to local land use planning to reduce VMT and vehicle trips. Specifically, SB 375 required CARB to establish GHG emissions reduction targets for each of the 17 regions in California managed by a metropolitan planning organization (MPO). SCAG is the MPO for the southern California region, which includes the counties of Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside, Ventura, and Imperial. SB 375 requires the MPOs to prepare a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) in their regional transportation plan. For the SCAG region, the 2012 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) was adopted in April 2012 (SCAG 2012). The SCS outlines a development pattern for the region, which, when integrated with the transportation network and other transportation measures and policies, would reduce GHG emissions from transportation (excluding goods movement). The SCS is meant to provide growth strategies that will achieve the regional GHG emissions reduction targets. However, the SCS does not require that local general plans, specific plans, or zoning be consistent with the SCS, but provides incentives for consistency for governments and developers. Methodology SCAQMD Thresholds SCAQMD has adopted a significance threshold of 10,000 MTCO2e per year for permitted (stationary) sources of GHG emissions for which SCAQMD is the designated lead agency. To provide guidance to local lead agencies on determining significance for GHG emissions in their CEQA documents, SCAQMD has convened a GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Working Group (Working Group). Based on the last Working Group meeting, held in September 2010 (Meeting No. 15), SCAQMD has proposed a tiered approach for evaluating GHG emissions for development projects where SCAQMD is not the lead agency:  Tier 1. If a project is exempt from CEQA, project-level and cumulative GHG emissions are less than significant.  Tier 2. If the project complies with a GHG emissions reduction plan or mitigation program that avoids or substantially reduces GHG emissions in the project’s geographic area (i.e., city or county), project-level and cumulative GHG emissions are less than significant. For projects that are not exempt or where no qualifying GHG reduction plans are directly applicable, SCAQMD requires an assessment of GHG emissions. SCAQMD has proposed a “bright-line” screening- 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 75 level threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e annually for all land use types or the following land-use-specific thresholds: 1,400 MTCO2e for commercial projects, 3,500 MTCO2e for residential projects, or 3,000 MTCO2e for mixed- use projects. This bright-line threshold is based on a review of the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research database of CEQA projects. Based on their review of 711 CEQA projects, 90 percent of CEQA projects would exceed the bright-line thresholds identified above. Therefore, projects that do not exceed the bright-line threshold would have a nominal, and therefore, less than cumulatively considerable impact on GHG emissions:  Tier 3. If GHG emissions are less than the screening-level threshold, project-level and cumulative GHG emissions are less than significant.  Tier 4. If emissions exceed the screening threshold, a more detailed review of the project’s GHG emissions is warranted. SCAQMD has proposed an efficiency target for projects that exceed the screening threshold. The current recommended approach is per capita efficiency targets. SCAQMD is not recommending use of a percent emissions reduction target. Instead, SCAQMD proposes a 2020 efficiency target of 4.8 MTCO2e per year per service population (MTCO2e/year/SP) for project-level analyses and 6.6 MTCO2e/year/SP for plan level projects (e.g., program-level projects such as general plans). The per capita efficiency targets are based on the AB 32 GHG reduction target and 2020 GHG emissions inventory prepared for CARB’s 2008 Scoping Plan.4 SCAQMD’s efficiency targets have been adjusted based on the long-term GHG reduction targets of Executive Order B-30-15, which set a goal of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2035, and Executive Order S- 03-05, which set a goal of 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. Based on these long-term targets, project emissions are compared to the SCAQMD’s project-level efficiency threshold of 2.4 MTCO2e/year/SP, for year 2035. If projects exceed this per capita efficiency target, GHG emissions would be considered potentially significant in the absence of mitigation measures. Modeling Methodology SCAQMD’s most recent air quality analysis model, CalEEMod Version 2013.2.2., was utilized to compare the impacts of the existing entitlements (Approved Project) to the Proposed Project. Resulting operational phase emissions are compared to the significance thresholds adopted by the SCAQMD. Air quality modeling sheets are included in Appendix A. Would the Proposed Project: 4 SCAQMD took the 2020 statewide GHG reduction target for land-use-only GHG emissions sectors and divided it by the 2020 statewide employment for the land use sectors to derive a per capita GHG efficiency metric that coincides with the GHG reduction targets of AB 32 for year 2020. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 76 PlaceWorks Environmental Issues Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circum-stances Requiring Major EIR Revisions New Information Showing New or Increased Significant Effects Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR No Impact a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? x b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? x Comments: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. A project does not generate enough GHG emissions on its own to influence global climate change; therefore, GHG emissions impacts are a measure of a project’s contribution to the cumulative environmental impact. The Proposed Project would contribute to global climate change through direct emissions of GHG from onsite area sources and vehicle trips generated by the Project, and indirectly through offsite energy production required for onsite activities, water use/wastewater generation, and waste disposal. Annual GHG emissions were calculated for operation of both the Approved Project and Proposed Project (see Appendix A). The total and net increases in GHG emissions associated with the Proposed Project are shown in Table 3, Net Change in Operational Phase GHG Emissions. Table 3 Net Change in Operational Phase GHG Emissions Source GHG Emissions MTCO2e1 Percent Change Approved Project (706 Hotel Rooms) Area 0 0% Energy1 6,874 56% Mobile2 4,932 40% Solid Waste 164 1% Water 134 1% Construction-Amortized3 210 2% Total All Sectors 12,315 100% Existing Land Use (300 Hotel Rooms and Accessory Retail Uses) Area 0 0% Energy4 3,270 78% Mobile2 775 19% 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 77 Table 3 Net Change in Operational Phase GHG Emissions Source GHG Emissions MTCO2e1 Percent Change Solid Waste 64 2% Water 64 2% Construction-Amortized n/a n/a Total All Sector 4,173 100% Total Net Emissions 8,142 n/a Proposed SCAQMD Bright-Line Threshold 3,000 MTCO2e n/a Exceeds Threshold? Yes n/a Proposed Project (580 Hotel Rooms and 50,000 SF Meeting Space and 25,600 SF Accessory Retail Uses) Area 0 0% Energy1 6,852 70% Mobile2 2,412 25% Solid Waste 157 2% Water 140 1% Construction-Amortized3 210 2% Total All Sectors 9,771 100% Existing Land Use (300 Hotel Rooms) Area 0 0% Energy4 3,270 78% Mobile2 775 19% Solid Waste 64 2% Water 64 2% Construction-Amortized3 n/a n/a Total All Sector 4,173 100% Total Net Emissions 5,598 n/a Proposed SCAQMD Bright-Line Threshold 3,000 MTCO2e n/a Exceeds Threshold? Yes n/a Net Change Net Difference between the Approved Project and Proposed Project -2,544 n/a Source: CalEEMod, Version 2013.2.2. Note: Totals may not equal 100 percent due to rounding. 1 Buildings constructed after January 1, 2017 are required to meet the 2016 Building and Energy Efficiency Standards. The 2016 Standards are 5% more energy efficient for non-residential buildings than the 2013 Building and Energy Efficiency Standards. The 2013 Standards are 30% more efficient than 2008 Standards. This analysis assumes new buildings of all land use types exceed the 2008 standards by 34 percent. Includes applicable water efficiency improvements required under CALGreen. 2 Based on year 2018 emission rates. 3 Construction emissions are amortized over a 30-year project lifetime per recommended SCAQMD methodology. 4 Assumes structures comply with the 2005 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. GHG emissions of the Approved Project and Proposed Project are compared to SCAQMD’s GHG efficiency metric. As shown in this table, GHG emissions associated with both the Approved Project and the Proposed Project would exceed the efficiency metric of 2.4 MTCO2e/SP/yr. GHG associated with both the Approved Project and the Proposed Project would be significant. The primary source of GHG emissions 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 78 PlaceWorks associated with both the Approved Project and the Proposed Project would be from mobile sources. However, the Proposed Project would slightly improve GHG emissions on a per capita basis compared to the Approved Project. SEIR No. 340 found that the increase in greenhouse gas emissions could result in cumulatively considerable impacts that would be would be significant and unavoidable. The impacts identified for the Proposed Project would be consistent with what was identified in SEIR No. 340; therefore, the Proposed Project would not create a new significant impact or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects. b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. There are numerous state plans, policies, and regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. The principal overall state plan and policy is AB 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. The quantitative goal of AB 32 is to reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. Statewide plans and regulations such as GHG emissions standards for vehicles (AB 1493), the Low Carbon Fuel Standard, and regulations requiring an increasing fraction of electricity to be generated from renewable sources are being implemented at the statewide level; as such, compliance at the project level is not addressed. Therefore, the Proposed Project does not conflict with those plans and regulations. Implementation of the mitigation measures from Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 85C for the Proposed Project, as described in the Mitigation section below, would provide GHG emission reductions through reduced vehicle miles traveled, reduced water use, and improved energy efficiency. Thus, the Proposed Project would be consistent with AB 32, and it can be concluded that the Proposed Project would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation of State, regional, or local agencies. This impact is less than significant. This impact identified for the Proposed Project would be consistent with what was identified in SEIR No. 340; therefore, the Proposed Project would not create a new significant impact or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects. 5.7.3 Adopted Mitigation Measures Applicable to the Proposed Project The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan FEIR No. 311 No mitigation measures related to greenhouse gas emissions were identified in the FEIR No. 311. Mitigation Measures identified in the SEIR No. 340 related to air quality (see Section 5.3.3 of this Addendum) would reduce GHG emissions impacts of the Proposed Project. Anaheim Resort Specific Plan SEIR No. 340 SEIR No. 340 identified a number of mitigation measures covering a variety of environmental topics which have been restated in the appropriate sections of this document. The following mitigation measures would be applicable to the Proposed Project: Air Quality: 5.2-1, 5.2-4, 5.2-5, 5.2-6; Hazards and Hazardous Materials: 5.8-5; Public Services: 5.14-4, 5.14-5, 5.14-8, 5.14-9, 5.14-20, 5.14-21; Recreation: 5.15-1, 5.15-4; Water: 5.17-1, 5.17-3, 5.17-4; and Electricity: 5.19-1, 5.19-2, 5.19-4, and 5.19-5. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 79 5.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 5.8.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan FEIR No. 311 FEIR No. 311 concluded that impacts associated with the potential release of hazardous materials would be reduced to a level considered less than significant with implementation of the recommended mitigation measures. Anaheim Resort Specific Plan SEIR No. 340 According to SEIR No. 340, buildout of the ARSP would have the potential to disturb lead-based paints and asbestos-containing materials, depending on the age of existing structures in the ARSP area. Additionally, given the presence of underground storage tanks, including ones which have been identified as having leaked, buildout of the ARSP would have the potential to disturb hazardous materials. With implementation of mitigation, including compliance with the State of California Hazardous Substances Control Law, potential impacts related to hazardous material on or near the ARSP area would be reduced to less than significant levels. 5.8.2 Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project Would the Proposed Project: Environmental Issues Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circum-stances Requiring Major EIR Revisions New Information Showing New or Increased Significant Effects Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR No Impact a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? x b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? x c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? x 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 80 PlaceWorks Environmental Issues Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circum-stances Requiring Major EIR Revisions New Information Showing New or Increased Significant Effects Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR No Impact d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? x e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? x f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? x g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? x h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? x A Phase I Site Assessment was prepared for the Project Site and is included as Appendix C. The results of the historical investigation indicated no significant environmentally hazardous activities at the Project Site and its vicinity. There were no land use records that indicate storage or use of environmentally hazardous material at the Project Site or its adjoining neighbors. Based on the investigation, there appears to be no recognized environmental concerns at the Project Site or at its immediate neighbors or that a release of any significant quantity of contaminant could have taken place. (ACS 2014) The Project Site and other portions of the ARSP remain outside of an adopted Airport Land Use Plan and outside of zones classified as having high wildland fire risks. Comments: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials? See response under Section 5.8(b), below. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 81 b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. The Project Site is currently developed with a 300-room hotel. Because the existing structures were built prior to 1978, before issuance of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) asbestos and lead standards for the workplace, there is risk of exposure to asbestos-containing materials or lead-based paint. This impact is consistent with what was identified in FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340, and mitigation measures were previously adopted to address potential geotechnical impacts (see SR 5.7-1 through SR 5.7-3 and MM 5.7-3 and MM 5.7-6, below). Therefore, the Proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts with respect to hazardous materials, as compared to the Approved Project. During construction and operational activities associated with the Proposed Project, there is expected to be incidental use of materials categorized as “hazardous.” These include paints, solvents, certain cleaners, and other corrosive materials which are common cleaners and detergents. The use, transport, and storage of these materials would comply with all regulations governing their use. Construction and operational activities associated with the Proposed Project would be in compliance with all applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations regarding hazardous waste, including the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, the California Hazardous Waste Control Act, and the California Accidental Release Prevention Program. Adherence to previously adopted mitigation measures SR 5.7-1 and SR 5.7-3 from SEIR No. 340, identified below, would ensure that no significant impacts would occur. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not create a new significant impact or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects. c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. The Proposed Project is located within ¼-mile of an existing school; specifically, the nearest school is Paul Revere Elementary School located northeast of the Project Site at 140 West Guinida Lane. However, as noted above, the Proposed Project would not involve the storage, handling or transport of hazardous materials beyond those associated with typical construction and operational activities such as common cleaners and detergents. The handling and transport of these materials would be conducted in compliance with all applicable federal, State, and local laws and regulations regarding hazardous waste. The Proposed Project would not create a new significant impact or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects. d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. A computerized government Environmental Record Search was conducted as part of the Phase I Site Assessment. The record search was performed to aid the identification of companies or facilities within a 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 82 PlaceWorks one-mile radius to the Project Site that might pose a potential threat to the surface environment at the Project Site. The Environmental Record Search report listed no (0) National Priority List sites, and no (0) Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Information System (CERCLIS) sites. Eleven (11) facilities within the one-half-mile survey radius of the Project Site were identified in the Environmental Record Search to have leaking underground storage tanks (LUST), per California State records. The facilities and others identified in the record search appear to be not in the vicinity of the Project Site, and are unlikely to cause any environmental concern. According to the Phase 1 Site Assessment and according to the analysis presented in FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340, no new hazardous materials sites were identified within the boundaries of the Project Site (ACS 2014). Of the hazardous materials sites identified in the project vicinity, none of the identified sites pose a hazard to the project site. Further, implementation of MMs 5.7-4 and 5.7-6 identified in SEIR No. 340 and as listed below would ensure that any unforeseen impacts related to hazardous materials would be less than significant. No new impacts related to hazardous materials sites are anticipated and no additional mitigation is required. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles or a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? No Impact. As under the Approved Project, the Project Site is not located within two miles of a public airport or public use airport. Furthermore, the Project Site is not located within the plan area of an adopted airport land use plan. The Project Site is also not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip. No impact would occur and no changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR. g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? No Impact. According to the City of Anaheim General Plan’s Safety Element (May 2004), the City has an emergency preparedness plan that complies with state law and that interfaces with other cities and counties in Southern California. Construction activity would be confined to the Project Site and would not interfere with vehicle movement or emergency access along Harbor Boulevard or Disney Way. As detailed in Section 5.16, Transportation/Traffic, any impacts related to the addition of project-related traffic would be less than significant; therefore, the Proposed Project would not interfere with the movement of emergency vehicles along local roadways. The Proposed Project would not create a new significant impact or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 83 h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? No Impact. The Project Site is within a heavily urbanized portion of Orange County that is outside fire hazard severity zones designated by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Prevention. No impact would occur and no changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR. 5.8.3 Adopted Mitigation Measures Applicable to the Proposed Project The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan FEIR No. 311 Because the mitigation measures identified in SEIR No. 340 are comparable to applicable mitigation measures identified in FEIR No. 311, this document incorporates the more recently adopted measures from SEIR No. 340. Anaheim Resort Specific Plan SEIR No. 340 The following mitigation measures from Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 85C were adopted in connection with SEIR No. 340. The following measures also would be applicable to the Proposed Project. Standard Requirements SR 5.7-1 All construction activities, including demolition and renovation of the existing facilities and installation of the new facilities, shall be performed in compliance with all CalOSHA standards (California Code of Regulations, Title 8) to protect worker health and safety. SR 5.7-2 The removal and disposal of all lead-based paint (LBP) encountered on site during project implementation, shall be performed by an LBP Abatement Contractor that is licensed and registered in California pursuant to California Code of Regulations Title 17. SR 5.7-3 All transport and transfer of hazardous materials shall be performed by a licensed hauler in compliance with all applicable State and federal requirements, including the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act. Mitigation Measures MM 5.7-4 Prior to issuance of the first grading demolition permit, whichever occurs first the property owner/developer shall submit a plan for review and approval of the Fire Department which details procedures that will be taken if previously unknown USTs, or other unknown hazardous material or waste, is discovered onsite. MM 5.7-6 Ongoing during project demolition and construction, in the event that hazardous waste, including asbestos, is discovered during site preparation or construction, the property owner/developer shall ensure that the identified hazardous waste and/or hazardous material are handled and disposed of in the manner specified by the State of California Hazardous 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 84 PlaceWorks Substances Control Law (Health and Safety Code, Division 20, Chapter 6.5), and according to the requirements of the California Administrative Code, Title 30, Chapter 22. 5.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 5.9.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan FEIR No. 311 FEIR No. 311 determined that despite stormwater runoff increases related to the development of SP 92-1, compliance with NPDES permit requirements and implementation of best management practices would reduce any impacts to groundwater and surface hydrology to less-than-significant levels. Additionally, the project site was found to be located outside the 100-year floodplain. No significant impacts were projected with implementation of mitigation measures. Anaheim Resort Specific Plan SEIR No. 340 According to SEIR No. 340, implementation of the ARSP project would result in short-term construction- related and long-term operational potential for water quality impacts. However, implementation of mitigation measures and compliance with the standard requirements reduces these impacts to a level considered less than significant. Although direct impacts to the underlying groundwater resources would not occur, indirect impacts associated with the anticipated increase in long-term demand for domestic water, landscape irrigation, and maintenance activities would be significant. Implementation of the proposed mitigation would reduce demand for groundwater resources, and potential impacts would be mitigated to less than significant levels. As identified in SEIR No. 340, implementation of the ARSP project would result in site-specific changes to drainage patterns on development sites, but would not adversely impact regional hydrology or drainage flows in the surrounding area. It was found that potential increases in impervious surfaces could increase runoff rates and volumes. Additionally, the ARSP project has the potential to increase runoff volumes and rates to exacerbate existing deficiencies, potentially leading to localized street flooding. However, implementation of the mitigation measures and compliance with standard requirements would reduce impacts to less than significant levels. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 85 5.9.2 Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project Would the Proposed Project: Environmental Issues Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circum-stances Requiring Major EIR Revisions New Information Showing New or Increased Significant Effects Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR No Impact a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? x b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)?? x c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner, which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? x d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on- or off-site? x e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? x f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? x g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? x h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? x i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? x 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 86 PlaceWorks Environmental Issues Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circum-stances Requiring Major EIR Revisions New Information Showing New or Increased Significant Effects Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR No Impact j) Expose people or structures to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? x k) Substantially degrade water quality by contributing pollutants from areas of material storage, vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle or equipment maintenance (including washing), waste handling, hazardous materials handling, or storage, delivery areas, loading docks or other outdoor work areas? x l) Substantially degrade water quality by discharge which affects the beneficial uses (i.e., swimming, fishing, etc.) of the receiving waters? x Comments: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. A Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (PWQMP) was prepared for the Proposed Project and is included in Appendix D, Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan, to this Addendum. The Project Site is in the Anaheim Bay – Huntington Harbor Watershed, in the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board’s jurisdiction. There is no Watershed Infiltration and Hydromodification Management Plan for the watershed. Although the project’s receiving waters are considered impaired under Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act, there are currently no total maximum daily loads established for the project’s receiving waters. Section 303(d) listed impairments for Bolsa Chica Channel include ammonia, indicator bacteria, and pH, and for Anaheim Bay include sediment toxicity, PCBs, nickel, and dieldrin. According to the PWQMP, the Proposed Project would decrease the impervious area of the Project Site from 7.74 acres to 7.66 acres, from 88 percent of the site to 87 percent. Moreover, according to the hydrologic conditions of concern analysis performed as part of the PWQMP, the Proposed Project would discharge to fully improved storm drain systems that are not susceptible to hydromodifcation impact. The potential stormwater pollutants expected from the Proposed Project include the following:  Suspended-solid/ sediment: Potential sources of sediment include proposed planters and parkway landscaping areas.  Nutrients: Potential sources include fertilizers, sediment and trash/debris. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 87  Heavy Metals: Potential sources include vehicles and automotive fluids.  Pathogens (Bacteria/Virus): Potential sources include pets, food wastes and landscaping areas.  Pesticides: Potential sources include landscaping areas.  Oil and Grease: Potential source is parked vehicles.  Toxic Organic Compounds: Potential sources include automobiles and other motor vehicles and streets.  Trash and Debris: Potential sources include common litter and trash cans from guests and facility users. However, the Proposed Project is required to comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) MS4 Permit (Order No. R8-2009-0030) and NPDES Permit No. CAS618030, as amended by Order No. R8-2010-0062 and implement best management practices to ensure that water quality of receiving waters is protected. The PWQMP specifies BMPs and low impact development (LID) measures that would minimize the effects of the project on regional hydrology, runoff flow rates and/or velocities, and pollutant loads. Mitigation Measures 5.8-2 and 5.8-3 of SEIR 340 also require the Proposed Project to take coverage under the NPDES permit and ongoing operational measures to reduce waste discharge downstream. Therefore, drainage and surface water discharges from the Proposed Project would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirement. The Proposed Project would not create a new significant impact or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects. b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. The ARSP area, including the Project Site, is considered highly urbanized and would have similar impacts to groundwater and surface hydrology as assumed in FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340. A hydrology study has been prepared for the Proposed Project and is included in Appendix E of this Addendum. The Proposed Project would increase the pervious area of the Project Site from 1.06 acres to 1.14 acres, from 12 percent to 13 percent. In addition, the Project Site is not a significant groundwater recharge area, and such a slight increase in impervious area would not substantially impact groundwater volumes. The Proposed Project would not create a new significant impact or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 88 PlaceWorks c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner, which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? No Impact. The Project Site is currently developed and covered with impervious surfaces, including buildings, concrete, and paving. The 8.8-acre Project Site is currently 88 percent (7.74 acres) impervious and 12 percent (1.06 acres) pervious. The Proposed Project would decrease the impervious area of the Project Site from 7.74 acres to 7.66 acres, and increase pervious area from 1.06 acres to 1.14 acres. In the pre- development condition, runoff from a small portion of the northern project site is conveyed northerly as sheet flow prior to discharging to the existing gutter and storm drain system in Disney Way. Runoff is then conveyed westerly to the existing storm drain system in South Harbor Boulevard. Runoff from the remaining portions of the site is conveyed southerly and westerly prior to discharging to the existing storm drain system in South Harbor Boulevard. All runoff is then conveyed southerly to Katella Avenue and then westerly prior to discharging to the Anaheim-Barber City Channel (County Facility No. C03), which is tributary to the Bolsa Chica Channel (County Facility No. C02), Anaheim Bay, and the Pacific Ocean. In general, post-development drainage area and flow direction would be consistent with pre-project conditions. Runoff from the rooftops of each tower and development area would be conveyed to area drains and conveyed downward to the proposed storm drain system. Runoff from the northern project area would be conveyed north to the existing storm drain system in Disney Way via the project’s proposed storm drain system. Runoff from the remaining portions of the site would be conveyed westerly via proposed storm drain improvements prior to discharging to the existing storm drain system in South Harbor Boulevard. All runoff is then conveyed southerly and westerly to the Anaheim-Barber City Channel, as in pre-project conditions. To satisfy the project requirements for LID and address runoff pollutants of concern, the Proposed Project would retain water quality flows (non-storm water flows and the Design Capture Volume [DCV]) from each of the project’s onsite Drainage Management Areas (DMAs). The Proposed Project’s LID DCV is 20,364 cubic feet (cu-ft) of runoff. Runoff generated from roof areas as well as the project’s other exposed areas (courtyards, drive aisles, walkways, etc.) would be conveyed to subsurface detention facilities (oversized pipe or vaults) located in the northern-central, western-central and southwestern areas of the Project Site for storage prior to discharging to proprietary biotreatment units for pre-treatment and an infiltration well for infiltration (DMAs 1, 2 and 3). The LID BMPs from DMAs 1 would result in 2,972 cu-ft of DCV, 9,393 cu-ft from DMA 2, and 7,845 cu-ft. from DMA 3. Runoff generated from the remaining Project Site adjacent to Disney Way and South Harbor Boulevard (parkway area) would be conveyed to proposed and existing landscaping areas for filtration, incidental infiltration, and evapotranspiration to address potential runoff pollutants (DMA 4), resulting in 1,426 cu-ft of DCV. Therefore, the Proposed Project would retain more runoff (i.e., 21,636 cu-ft) than determined as the project’s LID DCV of 20,364 cu-ft. Additionally, as with SEIR No. 340, Mitigation Measures 5.8-4 and 5.8-5 would be implemented to ensure that required drainage and irrigation systems per the approved plans are provided. The Proposed Project would not result in increased runoff or flooding condition compared to the pre-project conditions, and no new significant impact or a substantial increase the severity of previously identified effect related to drainage or storm drain capacity would occur. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 89 d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on- or off-site? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. See Response to 5.9(c). e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. See Response to 5.9(a). f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. See Response to 5.9(a). g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? No Impact. The Project Site is designed as Zone X (ID# 06059C0141J), which refers to areas of 0.2 percent annual chance flood; areas of 1 percent annual chance flood with average depths of less than one foot or with drainage areas less than one square mile; and areas protected by levees from 1 percent annual chance flood. The Proposed Project does not involve any housing development within a 100-year flood hazard area. The Proposed Project would not create a new significant impact or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects. h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. The Project Site is designed as Zone X (ID# 06059C0141J), which refers to areas of 0.2 percent annual chance flood; areas of 1 percent annual chance flood with average depths of less than one foot or with drainage areas less than one square mile; and areas protected by levees from 1 percent annual chance flood. Furthermore, the Proposed Project would not result in a greater flooding impact than previously analyzed in FEIR No. 311 or SEIR No. 340. The Proposed Project would not create a new significant impact or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects. i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. The project site is in the inundation zone for Prado Dam (Anaheim 2004a), which is on the Santa Ana River and approximately 15.5 miles east from the project site. However, due to the length of time required for water to reach the project area if the Prado Dam were to fail, and the lack of appreciable amounts of water behind the Prado Dam, implementation of the project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death in the case of dam failure, and impacts are considered to be less than significant. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 90 PlaceWorks The Proposed Project would not create a new significant impact or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects. j) Expose people or structures to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? No Impact. The Project Site is located approximately 10 miles northeast of the Pacific Ocean. Therefore, there would be no threat of inundation by tsunami to new land uses on the site. The project also exhibits flat topography and is therefore not subject to mudflows. Lastly, there are no water bodies in the Anaheim Resort—such as lakes or reservoirs—that could produce a seiche during a seismic event. No impact would occur and no changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR. k) Substantially degrade water quality by contributing pollutants from areas of material storage, vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle or equipment maintenance (including washing), waste handling, hazardous materials handling, or storage, delivery areas, loading docks or other outdoor work areas? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. See Response to 5.9(a). l) Substantially degrade water quality by discharge which affects the beneficial uses (i.e., swimming, fishing, etc.) of the receiving waters? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. See Response to 5.9(a). 5.9.3 Adopted Mitigation Measures Applicable to the Proposed Project The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan FEIR No. 311 Because the mitigation measures identified in SEIR No. 340 are comparable to applicable mitigation measures identified in FEIR No. 311, this document incorporates the more recently adopted measures from SEIR No. 340. Anaheim Resort Specific Plan SEIR No. 340 The following mitigation measures from Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 85C were adopted in connection with SEIR No. 340. The following measures also would be applicable to the Proposed Project. Standard Requirements SR 5.8-1 Development projects that will result in soil disturbance of one (1) or more acres of land shall comply with the State’s Construction General Permit by filing a Notice of Intent (NOI) with the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and implementing a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Prior to the issuance of preliminary or precise grading permits, the property owner/developer shall provide the City Engineer with evidence that an NOI has been filed with the SWRCB by providing a copy of the NOI invoice and the assigned Waste Discharger Identification (WDID) No. for the project. The SWPPP shall 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 91 include Best Management Practices (BMPs) designed with a goal of preventing a net sediment load increase in storm water discharges relative to preconstruction levels and shall prohibit during the construction period discharges of storm water or nonstorm water at levels which would cause or contribute to an exceedance of applicable water quality standards contained in the Basin Plan. The BMPs shall address erosion control, sediment control, wind erosion control, tracking control, non-stormwater management and waste management and materials pollution control during all phases of construction, including a sampling and analysis plan for sediment and non-visible storm water pollutants. The property owner/developer shall be responsible for proper implementation of the SWPPP. SR 5.8-2 Prior to issuance of the precise grading permit, the property owner/developer shall prepare Water Quality Management Plans (WQMPs) for review and approval by the Public Works, Development Services. The WQMP shall identify permanent site design, source control and treatment control Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used on the site to control predictable pollutant runoff. The WQMP shall also describe the long-term operation and maintenance requirements for the treatment control BMPs and the mechanism for funding the BMPs. The WQMP shall be recorded against the property to ensure long-term compliance. SR 5.8-3 Prior to issuance of the first building permit, the property owner/developer shall pay the Storm Drain Impact Fees which would go toward future storm drain improvements within The Anaheim Resort area and South Central City area. SR 5.8-4 Chapter 10.09 of the Anaheim Municipal Code is the City’s NPDES Ordinance, which provides regulations to comply with the CWA, the California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, and the City’s NPDES permit. This ordinance prohibits the discharge of specific pollutants into the storm water; regulates illicit connections to the storm drain system; requires development projects to implement permanent BMPs on individual sites to reduce pollutants in the storm water; and requires local discharge permits for non-storm water discharges into the storm drain system. SR 5.8-5 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the property owner/developer of individual developments shall provide written proof to the Public Works Department, Development Services Division of a water quality certification and/or waste discharge requirement (WDR) as well as a plan for compliance with the discharge prohibitions, TMDLs, and various programs of the Santa Ana RWQCB. The Santa Ana RWQCB implements the Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin through the through issuance of individual WDRs; discharge prohibitions; water quality certifications; programs for salt management, non-point sources, and storm water; and monitoring and regulatory enforcement actions, as necessary. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 92 PlaceWorks Mitigation Measures MM 5.8-1 Prior to issuance of the first grading or building permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall submit a Master Drainage and Runoff Management Plan (MDRMP) for review and approval by the Public Works Department, Development Services Division and Orange County Environmental Management Agency. The Master Plan shall include, but not be limited to, the following items: a) Backbone storm drain layout and pipe size, including supporting hydrology and hydraulic calculations for storms up to and including the 100-year storm; and, b) A delineation of the improvements to be implemented for control of project- generated drainage and runoff. MM 5.8-2 Prior to issuance of a grading permit for sites that disturb more than one (1) acre of soil, the property owner/developer shall obtain coverage under the NPDES Statewide Industrial Stormwater Permit for General Construction Activities from the State Water Resources Control Board. Evidence of attainment shall be submitted to the Planning Department, Building Services Division. MM 5.8-3 Ongoing during project operations, the property owner/developer shall provide for the following: cleaning of all paved areas not maintained by the City of Anaheim on a monthly basis, including, but not limited to, private streets and parking lots. The use of water to clean streets, paved areas, parking lots, and other areas and flushing the debris and sediment down the storm drains shall be prohibited. MM 5.8-4 Prior to each final building and zoning inspection, the property owner/developer shall submit a letter from a licensed landscape architect to the City certifying that the landscape installation and irrigation systems have been installed as specified in the approved landscaping and irrigation plans. MM 5.8-5 Prior to final building and zoning inspection, the property owner/developer shall install piping on-site with project water mains so that reclaimed water may be used for landscape irrigation, if and when it becomes available. 5.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING 5.10.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan FEIR No. 311 Land Use-Related Plans and Policies The analysis of The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan in FEIR No. 311 determined that the project would require an amendment to the Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways. This was not considered a 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 93 significant impact. Additionally, the project would be consistent with all other land use plans and policies, therefore resulting in no significant impacts as long as implementation of project mitigation measures would occur. Land Use Compatibility According to FEIR No. 311, SP92-1 would allow for the replacement of on-site uses with similar land uses, thus resulting in no significant impact with implementation of project mitigation measures. Anaheim Resort Specific Plan SEIR No. 340 SEIR No. 340 concluded that build out of the ARSP would be consistent with the respective goals and policies of local and regional regulatory and planning documents. Specifically, the ARSP buildout was found to be consistent with and supportive of the three key principles set forth in the 2012–2035 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy: mobility, economy, and sustainability. Additionally, SEIR No. 340 provided a consistency analysis with all relevant goals and policies identified in the City of Anaheim General Plan. 5.10.2 Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project Would the Proposed Project: Environmental Issues Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circum-stances Requiring Major EIR Revisions New Information Showing New or Increased Significant Effects Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR No Impact a) Physically divide an established community? x b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? x c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? x Comments: a) Physically divide an established community? No Impact. The Project Site is currently developed as a 300-room hotel with retail, and the Proposed Project would demolish the existing hotel and redevelop the site with a 580-room hotel with supporting uses. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 94 PlaceWorks The FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340 both assumed a 706-room hotel would be developed on-site. No change in land use would occur and the Proposed Project would not physically divide a community. No impact is anticipated. b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. The Project Site is located within District A of the DRSP, which allows up to 75 hotel/motel rooms per acre, or 75 rooms per parcel, whichever is greater (Section 18.114.095.061), and up to 20 percent of the hotel floor area to be used for accessory hotel uses, provided that the accessory uses reduce the maximum permitted hotel density by one hotel room per 600 gross square feet of accessory use area (Section 18.114.095.060). Therefore, a total of 706 rooms would be allowed on the 8.8-acre Project Site without any accessory uses. The Proposed Project includes accessory uses up to 50,000 square feet of meeting space and 25,600 square feet of ancillary food and beverage retail space, which would be equivalent to 126 hotel rooms under Section 18.114.095.060. The Project Site is also located within the Anaheim GardenWalk Overlay, which allows up to 590,265 sq. ft. of specialty retail, restaurants, and entertainment uses, including movie theaters; 1,628 hotel rooms/suites (including up to 500 vacation ownership resort units) and 278,817 sq. ft. of hotel accessory uses; a transportation center; and 4,800 parking spaces. The Anaheim GardenWalk Overlay encompasses 29.1 acres, including 18.9 acres in Area A and 10.2 acres in Area B. Area B at the southeast corner of Harbor Boulevard and Disney Way assumed a high-rise hotel up to 135 feet in height. As indicated in Chapter 3, Project Description, the Proposed Project would construct an 8-story, 580-room hotel with accessory uses of up to 50,000 square feet meeting space, up to 25,600 square feet of ancillary food and beverage retail space, and a parking structure. The Proposed Project would not require any zoning, Specific Plan, or General Plan amendments, and no conflict with any of the applicable land use plan or policy would occur. A Conditional Use Permit is requested in order to permit two Concierge Lounges that would be strictly limited to guest access. A Concierge Lounge is a use not specifically listed or prohibited in the ARSP and may be established by conditional use permit when determined by the Planning Commission to be consistent and compatible with the intended purpose of the Specific Plan. Although a Variance (VAR2016-05060) would be necessary allow the project to provide fewer parking spaces than required by the Code, approval of such parking variance would not result in any significant environmental effect. In addition, both FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340 assumed the Project Site would be developed with 706-room hotel; therefore, the Proposed Project would not increase the severity of the land use intensity analyzed under the Approved Project. The Proposed Project would not create a new significant impact or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 95 c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? No Impact. The Proposed Project would not change the location previously analyzed under the FEIR No. 311 for the DRSP. The Project Site is fully developed as a 300-room hotel and accessory retail uses, and no habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan provisions are applicable. No impact would occur and no changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR. 5.10.3 Adopted Mitigation Measures Applicable to the Proposed Project No mitigation measures related to land use and planning were identified in FEIR No. 311 or SEIR No. 340. 5.11 MINERAL RESOURCES 5.11.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan FEIR No. 311 FEIR No. 311 does not specifically address mineral resources. Anaheim Resort Specific Plan SEIR No. 340 According to SEIR No. 340, the ARSP area is not located in an area designated as a Mineral Resource Zone (MRZ) or Regionally Significant Aggregate Resources Area. Because no additional excavation beyond what was previously evaluated would occur, the Proposed Project would not result in the loss of any mineral resource. 5.11.2 Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project Would the Proposed Project: Environmental Issues Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circum-stances Requiring Major EIR Revisions New Information Showing New or Increased Significant Effects Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR No Impact a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be a value to the region and the residents of the state? x b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? x 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 96 PlaceWorks For the purpose of CEQA analysis, mineral resources refer to aggregate resources that consist of sand, gravel, and crushed rock. Aggregate resources provide bulk and strength in construction materials such as portland cement and asphaltic concrete. Other nonfuel mineral resources include metals such as gold, silver, iron, and copper and industrial metals such as boron compounds, rare-earth elements, clays, limestone, gypsum, salt, and dimension stone. The California Geological Survey (CGS) classifies the regional significance of mineral resources in accordance with the California Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) of 1975. The State Geologist is responsible for classifying areas within California that are subject to urban expansion or other irreversible land uses. SMARA also allowed the State Mining and Geology Board (SMGB), after receiving classification information from the State Geologist, to designate lands containing mineral deposits of regional or statewide significance. Classification into MRZ is completed by the State Geologist in accordance with the SMGB’s priority list and according to the presence or absence of significant mineral resources. Of the four MRZ categories, lands classified as MRZ-2 are of the greatest importance. Such areas are underlain by demonstrated mineral resources or are located where geologic data indicate that significant measured or indicated resources are present. MRZ-2 areas are designated by SMGB as being “regionally significant.” Such designations require that a lead agency’s land use decisions involving designated areas be made in accordance with its mineral resource management policies (if any exist) and that it consider the importance of the mineral resource to the region or the state as a whole, not just to the lead agency’s jurisdiction. The MRZ-1 zone depicts areas where adequate geologic information indicates that no significant mineral deposits are present, or where it is judged that little likelihood exists for their presence. MRZ-3 indicates areas of undetermined mineral resource significance. Figure G-3, Mineral Resource Map, of the Anaheim General Plan Green Element shows that much of northeast Anaheim is classified as MRZ-2. However, this classification does not extend to the ARSP or the Project Site. Comments: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be a value to the region and the residents of the state? No Impact. The Project Site and the DRSP as a whole do not contain known mineral resources of any value to the region or the residents of California. As shown in Figure G-3 of the Anaheim General Plan Green Element, the Project Site does not contain regionally significant aggregate resources. The nearest regionally significant aggregate resources are approximately five miles to the northeast in the Anaheim Canyon area. No impact would occur and no changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR. b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? No Impact. The Project Site and the DRSP as a whole do not contain mineral resources of local important as identified on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan. No impact would occur and no changes or new information would require preparation of a subsequent EIR. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 97 5.11.3 Adopted Mitigation Measures Applicable to the Proposed Project No mitigation measures related to mineral resources were identified in FEIR No. 311 or SEIR No. 340. 5.12 NOISE 5.12.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan FEIR No. 311 FEIR No. 311 determined that implementation of the recommended mitigation measures would reduce any potential noise impacts from fireworks and the proposed amphitheater to a level considered less than significant. Traffic-related noise impacts were within the limits of the Noise Ordinance and therefore would be considered less than significant. Anaheim Resort Specific Plan SEIR No. 340 SEIR No. 340 determined that construction activities associated with the ARSP have the potential to significantly impact noise-sensitive receptors. Adherence to the standard requirements and implementation of the recommended mitigation measures would reduce potential impacts; however, these impacts may remain significant and unavoidable. The Anaheim City Council adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations with regard to these potential short-term, construction-related deficiencies. Construction in the ARSP area would have the potential to cause vibration levels that would be noticeable for short periods. With implementation of recommended mitigation measures, vibration impacts during construction would be less than significant. Development associated with the ARSP would create long-term land use compatibility issues related to noise and would expose receptors to noise levels in excess of established standards, thereby resulting in potentially significant impacts. However, it was determined that adherence to the standard requirements and implementation of the recommended mitigation measures would reduce long-term, operational impacts to less than significant levels. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 98 PlaceWorks 5.12.2 Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project Would the Proposed Project result in: Environmental Issues Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circum-stances Requiring Major EIR Revisions New Information Showing New or Increased Significant Effects Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR No Impact a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? x b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? x c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? x d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? x e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? x f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? x Comments: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. As with the Approved Project, the Proposed Project would consist of the development a hotel within the DRSP. The Approved Project included a 706-room hotel as part of the project, while the Proposed Project is a 580-room hotel with accessory uses of up to 50,000 square feet of meeting space, up to 25,600 square feet of ancillary food and beverage retail, and a parking structure. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 99 Mobile Source Impacts The Approved Project was projected to generate 5,742 average daily trips (ADT), while the Proposed Project would generate only 2,919 ADT. According to SEIR No. 340, traffic noise increases at buildout of the ARSP, including the Approved Project, would be less than significant for interim year 2015 and buildout year 2030. Since the Proposed Project would result in fewer daily trips than the Approved Project, traffic noise increases resulting from implementation of the Proposed Project would also be less than significant. The Proposed Project would not create a new significant impact or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects. Stationary Noise Impacts The Proposed Project would have the same stationary noise sources as the hotel under the Approved Project (HVAC, parking lot activity). As with the Approved Project, stationary noise sources would be required to comply with the Anaheim Municipal Code. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not create a new significant impact or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects. Exterior Noise Compatibility The Noise Compatibility Guidelines show that, for transient lodging-motels and hotels, an ambient noise level of up to 65 dBA CNEL is normally acceptable, an ambient noise level from 60 to 70 is conditionally acceptable, and an ambient noise level from 70 to 80 is normally unacceptable. The Project would primarily be affected by traffic on Harbor Boulevard, which borders the Project Site to the west. The nearest rooms of the hotel to Harbor Boulevard are approximately 100 feet from the centerline. Disney Way and Interstate 5 also contribute to traffic noise at the Project Site, but to a lesser degree. Operations at nearby commercial uses would not substantially increase overall noise levels at the Project Site, as compared to the noise from ongoing traffic flows on nearby roadways. According to the traffic noise level analysis presented in SEIR No. 340, the exterior noise levels at the rooms facing Harbor Boulevard would be greater than 70 dBA CNEL. These noise levels would exceed the City’s exterior noise standard of 70 dBA CNEL, which is considered conditionally acceptable for hotel uses. As such, a detailed analysis of noise reduction requirements must be made and needed insulation features must be included in the design, as required by SR 5.10-2, MM 5.10-2, and MM 5.10-9. The Proposed Project would not create a new significant impact or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects. Interior Noise Compatibility The City’s interior noise standard for Residential uses is 45 dBA CNEL in habitable rooms, but there are no similar standards for commercial developments or hotels. Standard windows and doors in a warm-weather climate typically achieve a minimum of 12 dB of noise reduction with windows open and a minimum of 24 dB of noise reduction with windows closed (USEPA 1978). The interior noise level is the exterior noise level at the building façade, minus the exterior-to-interior noise reduction provided by building insulation. Assuming that the exterior noise levels at the nearest building facades oriented towards Harbor Boulevard are in the range of 70 to 75 dBA CNEL, standard building construction materials and techniques would be 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 100 PlaceWorks expected to result in interior environments of approximately 46 to 51 dBA CNEL. This applies to a windows-closed configuration (including provisions for appropriate fresh air supply systems). A windows- open configuration would be approximately 12 dB louder. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not expose people to or generate noise levels in excess of local standards, and impacts would be less than significant. The Proposed Project would not create a new significant impact or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects. b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. SEIR No. 340 addresses construction vibration impacts to residential buildings outside of the ARSP. SEIR No. 340 determined that construction activities for buildout of the Specific Plan could result in vibration impacts at residential uses, and incorporated appropriate mitigation to reduce impacts to less-than-significant levels. To determine the potential impacts of the Proposed Project alone, a project-level analysis of construction vibration for the Proposed Project is presented below. Noise modeling data is presented in Appendix F of this Addendum. The Project would not include any long-term vibration sources during ongoing operations. Project construction, however, can generate varying degrees of ground vibration depending on the type of construction and equipment. Construction equipment generates vibrations that spread through the ground and diminish in amplitude with distance from the source. The effect on buildings near the construction site varies depending on soil type, ground strata, and receptor building construction. Vibration can result in no perceptible effects at the lowest levels, to low rumbling sounds and perceptible vibrations at moderate levels, to slight building damage at the highest levels. Ground vibration from construction activities rarely reaches levels that can significantly damage structures, but it can achieve the audible and perceptible ranges in buildings close to a construction site. Groundborne vibration is usually highest during the demolition and grading phases of construction, when the heaviest equipment is utilized. Table 4, Construction Equipment Vibration Levels, lists vibration levels for different types of construction equipment. Table 4 Construction Equipment Vibration Levels Equipment Approximate RMS1 Velocity Level at 25 Feet (VdB) Approximate PPV Velocity at 25 Feet (in/sec) Vibratory Roller 94 0.210 Large Bulldozer 87 0.089 Caisson Drilling 87 0.089 Loaded Trucks 86 0.076 Jackhammer 79 0.035 Small Bulldozer 58 0.003 FTA Criteria – Annoyance 78 — FTA Criteria – Architectural Damage — 0.200 for Wood-Framed 0.500 for Reinforced Masonry Source: FTA 2006. 1 RMS velocity calculated from vibration level (VdB) using the reference of 1 microinch/second and a crest factor of 4. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 101 Section 18.20.160 of the Anaheim Municipal Code states that “No use, activity or process shall produce continual vibrations or noxious odors that are perceptible, without instruments, by the average person at the property lines of the site, or within the interior of residential units on the site.” Since the Municipal Code does not specify any quantitative limits, the FTA standards for annoyance and architectural damage will be used in this analysis. Vibration Annoyance Vibration is typically noticed nearby when objects in a building generate noise from rattling windows or picture frames. It is typically not perceptible outdoors, and therefore impacts are normally based on the distance to the nearest building (FTA 2006). Although the maximum vibration levels5 associated with certain construction activities could be perceptible in certain instances, the impact would be limited because those activities would not occur frequently throughout the day. Construction would occur in the daytime when people are least sensitive to vibration levels, and annoyance would only occur for a very limited duration when equipment would be working in close proximity. Further, construction activities are typically distributed throughout the project site. Therefore, vibration annoyance impacts are based on average vibration levels (levels that would be experienced by sensitive receptors the majority of the time) that exceed the FTA’s significance threshold for vibration-induced annoyance of 78 VdB for residential land uses (including hotels). Table 5, Construction Equipment Vibration Levels: Potential for Annoyance, lists the average vibration levels for construction equipment anticipated to be used at the project site as measured to the nearest vibration- sensitive receptors. Table 5 Construction Equipment Vibration Levels: Potential for Annoyance Vibration-Sensitive Use Vibration Level (VdB)1 Castle Inn & Suites (330 ft.) Super 8 Anaheim (450 ft.) Ramada Maingate (510 ft.) Ramada Plaza (700 ft.) Candy Cane Inn (710 ft.) Vibratory Roller 72 69 68 65 65 Large Bulldozer 65 62 61 58 58 Caisson Drilling 65 62 61 58 58 Loaded Trucks 64 61 60 57 57 Jackhammer 57 54 53 50 50 Small Bulldozer 36 33 32 29 29 Significance Threshold (VdB) 78 Source: FTA 2006. 1 Distance measured from center of general construction area to nearest structure. As shown in Table 5, construction activity at the nearest sensitive receptors would not have the potential to exceed the vibration annoyance threshold of 78 VdB for residential/hotel uses. More-distant sensitive receptors would experience still lower levels of vibration. Therefore, vibration annoyance impacts due to 5 Maximum vibration is based on construction equipment operating directly adjacent to the property line. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 102 PlaceWorks construction of the Proposed Project would be less than significant and no mitigation measures are necessary. Vibration-Induced Architectural Damage In addition to vibration-induced annoyance, project-related construction vibration was evaluated for its potential to cause structural damage based on FTA’s architectural damage criteria. The FTA threshold of 0.200 PPV inch per second is the point at which there is a risk of architectural damage6 to normal houses with plastered walls and ceilings. Typically, only construction equipment generating extremely high levels of vibration, such as pile drivers, has the potential for vibration-induced structural damage. No pile driving is expected to be required during construction. Table 6, Construction Equipment Vibration Levels: Potential for Architectural Damage, shows the potential vibration levels (in PPV in inches/sec) that can be generated by heavy construction equipment at the nearest off-site sensitive receptors. The nearest building to the project site is Castle Inn & Suites, which is less than 10 feet from the edge of the construction site. The criteria for architectural damage would be exceeded if a vibratory roller is operated within 30 feet of the building, or if large equipment (e.g. large bulldozers, loaded trucks) is operated within 15 feet. Table 6 Construction Equipment Vibration Levels: Potential for Architectural Damage Equipment Vibration Levels (PPV) Castle Inn & Suites (<10 ft.) Super 8 Anaheim (45 ft.) The Shops at Anaheim (125 ft.) Vibratory Roller >0.830 0.087 0.019 Large Bulldozer >0.352 0.037 0.008 Caisson Drilling >0.352 0.037 0.008 Loaded Trucks >0.300 0.031 0.007 Jackhammer >0.138 0.014 0.003 Small Bulldozer >0.012 0.001 0.000 FTA Architectural Damage Criteria1 0.200 Source: FTA 2006. Note: Bold indicates value(s) that exceed threshold. Other nearby buildings are at least 45 feet from the Project Site boundary. As shown above in Table 6, vibration levels from standard construction equipment would not exceed the 0.200 in/sec PPV level for architectural damage at these distances. 6 The term architectural damage is typically used to describe effects such as cracked plaster, cracks in drywall seams, sticking doors or windows, loosened baseboard/crown moldings, and the like. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 103 SEIR No. 340 included mitigation that prohibited the operation of large bulldozers and vibratory rollers within 25 feet of existing residential structures. With the incorporation of existing mitigation measures, the maximum construction-related vibration level would be below the 0.2 PPV in/sec criteria for vibration- induced architectural damage at all nearby structures, and architectural-damage vibration impacts from construction would be less than significant. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not create a new significant impact or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects. c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. See response to Section 5.12.2(a), above. d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. Project construction would occur between the hours of 7:00 AM and 7:00 PM on any day, except on Sundays or City-recognized holidays, when no noise-generating construction activities are permitted in accordance with Section 6.70.010 of the City of Anaheim Municipal Code (SR 5.10-1). Construction noise during the specified hours is exempt from the quantitative noise level limits of the Municipal Code. As described in SEIR No. 340, except for pile driving and blasting, maximum noise levels measured at a distance of 50 feet from an individual piece of typical construction equipment can reach 90 dBA Lmax. The Proposed Project would implement MMs 5.10-1 through 5.10-12 to ensure that a significant construction-related noise impact would not occur. Therefore, impacts related to construction noise would be the same or less than those identified in FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340; therefore, the Proposed Project would not create a new significant impact or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No Impact. Similar to the conditions evaluated in FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340, there are no public airports, public use airports, heliports, or private airstrips in the Proposed Project site vicinity. The Proposed Project would not expose people residing or working in the area to excessive levels of aircraft- or airport- related noise. The Proposed Project would not create a new significant impact or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects. Overall, the Proposed Project would be consistent with the Approved Project as analyzed in FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340. The Proposed Project would not create a new significant impact or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 104 PlaceWorks 5.12.3 Adopted Mitigation Measures Applicable to the Proposed Project The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan FEIR No. 311 Because the mitigation measures identified in SEIR No. 340 are comparable to applicable mitigation measures identified in FEIR No. 311, this document incorporates the more recently adopted measures from SEIR No. 340. Anaheim Resort Specific Plan SEIR No. 340 The following mitigation measures from Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 85C were adopted in connection with SEIR No. 340. The following measures also would be applicable to the Proposed Project. Standard Requirements SR 5.10-1 Prior to issuance of grading and/or building permits, contractor specifications shall include a note indicating that noise-generating construction activities which produce a sound pressure level at any point along the property line in excess of 60 dBA shall be limited to between the hours of 7:00 AM to 7:00 PM on any day, except on Sundays or a City- recognized holiday when no noise-generating construction activities shall be permitted. This requirement is identified in Section 6.70.010 of the City of Anaheim’s Noise Ordinance. Additional work hours may be permitted if deemed necessary by and on approval of the Director of Public Works or Building Official. SR 5.10-2 Development shall comply with Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, also known as the California Building Standards Code, which establishes building standards applicable to all occupancies throughout the state. Title 24 requires that new hotels, motels, and multi- family residences be designed to prevent the intrusion of exterior noise so that the interior noise, attributable to exterior sources, shall not exceed the 45 dBA Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) in any habitable room with windows closed. SR 5.10-3 No commercial use shall produce noise associated with continual loading or unloading of heavy trucks at the site between the hours of 8:00 PM and 6:00 AM (Municipal Code Section 18.32.130). Mitigation Measures MM 5.10-1 Ongoing during construction, the property owner/developer shall ensure that all internal combustion engines on construction equipment and trucks are fitted with properly maintained mufflers. MM 5.10-2 Prior to final site plan approval of each final site plan, the property owner/developer shall submit a noise study prepared by a certified acoustical engineer to the satisfaction of the Building Division Manager identifying whether noise attenuation is required and defining the attenuation measures and specific performance requirements, if warranted, to comply with 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 105 the Uniform Building Code and Sound Pressure Level Ordinance. Ultimate noise attenuation shall depend on the final location of such buildings and noise- sensitive uses inside and surrounding the buildings. Attenuation measures shall be implemented by the property owner/developer prior to final building and zoning inspections. MM 5.10-6 Ongoing during construction and project operation, pressure washing operations for purposes of building repair and maintenance due to graffiti or other aesthetical considerations shall be limited to daytime hours of operation between 7:00 AM and 8:00 PM. MM 5.10-7 Ongoing during construction and project operation, sweeping operations in the parking facilities and private on-site roadways shall be performed utilizing sweeping/scrubbing equipment which operate at a level measured not greater than 60 dBA at the nearest adjacent property line. MM 5.10-9 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall present plans and calculations to the Planning Department, Building Division to demonstrate that noise levels would be less than 65 dBA CNEL for outdoor use areas (including dining patios, pools, playgrounds, or outdoor gathering areas). This requirement can be accomplished through shielding areas behind buildings or the construction of a noise barrier. MM 5.10-10 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall present plans and calculations to the Planning Department, Building Division to demonstrate that noise levels from planned mechanical ventilation equipment, loading docks, trash compactors, and other proposed on-site noise sources are designed to meet the City’s 60 dBA Sound Pressure Levels standard at the property line, and not create a noise increase greater than 5 dBA over existing ambient noise at the nearest noise sensitive receptor, whichever is more restrictive. MM 5.10-12 Prior to issuance of each building permit if pile driving and blasting is anticipated during construction, a noise and vibration analysis must be prepared and submitted to the Planning Department, Building Division, to assess and mitigate and vibration impacts related to these activities. 5.13 POPULATION AND HOUSING 5.13.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan FEIR No. 311 FEIR No. 311 determined that SP92-1 would result in minimal growth within the city, and would not create a significant impact to employment, population, or housing with implementation of mitigation measures. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 106 PlaceWorks Anaheim Resort Specific Plan SEIR No. 340 According to SEIR No. 340, buildout of the ARSP has the potential to increase population by approximately 9,099 residents and result in a demand for 2,757 housing units in the City of Anaheim. However, it was identified that the increases related to population and housing would be well within City of Anaheim projections and represent a less than significant impact. Additionally, the creation of 2,757 new households, was assumed in the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) prepared by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). 5.13.2 Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project Would the Proposed Project: Environmental Issues Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circum-stances Requiring Major EIR Revisions New Information Showing New or Increased Significant Effects Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR No Impact a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? x b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? x c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? x Comments: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. The Proposed Project includes 580 hotel rooms, up to 50,000 square feet of meeting space, and up to 25,600 square feet of ancillary food and beverage retail space, which is equivalent to the 706 hotel rooms analyzed by SEIR No. 340. Based on a generation factor of 1.11 employees per hotel or motel room used in SEIR No. 340, implementation of the Proposed Project would generate approximately 311 employment positions. The Proposed Project would not include development of dwelling units; therefore, the project would not result in a direct increase in population. The generation of new employment positions has the potential to indirectly result in new households, thereby indirectly increasing population. Based on a figure identified in SEIR No. 340 that approximately 13.3 percent of new hotel and motel employees would choose to relocate to the City 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 107 of Anaheim, approximately 41 employees would move their residences to Anaheim, resulting in a need for 41 dwelling units. Assuming 1 employee per household and an average of 3.1 persons per household, the new households would result in 127 new residents. Consistent with the findings in SEIR No. 340, the increase in housing demand and population generation is well within the projections for the City and county. A significant impact related to population or housing would not occur and no mitigation is required. b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact. The Project Site is currently developed with a 300-room hotel. The site itself does not serve as housing; therefore, development of the Proposed Project would not displace any residents and would not necessitate construction of replacement housing. As a result, the Proposed Project would not create a new significant impact or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects. c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact. The Project Site is currently developed with a 300-room hotel and does not contain any permanent residents. Therefore, development of the Proposed Project would not displace any residents and would not necessitate construction of replacement housing. As a result, the Proposed Project would not create a new significant impact or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects. 5.13.3 Adopted Mitigation Measures Applicable to the Proposed Project No mitigation measures related to population and housing were identified in FEIR No. 311 or SEIR No. 340. 5.14 PUBLIC SERVICES 5.14.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan FEIR No. 311 Fire Protection FEIR No. 311 reported that SP 92-1 would increase the demand for fire protection services, thus increasing response times; the number of service call responses; and the number of search, rescue, and disaster responses. However, this increased demand would be satisfied with implementation of project mitigation measures to include an additional inspector and plan checker in combination with roadway and intersection improvements. Police Protection According to FEIR No. 311, development of SP 92-1 would increase the volume of calls for police services. However, implementation of the recommended mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a level considered less than significant. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 108 PlaceWorks Schools FEIR No. 311 determined that development of SP 92-1 would not create any direct impacts to local schools because the Specific Plan does not allow for the construction of new dwelling units. However, school-aged children of project employees would create a potential indirect impact from development of SP92-1 that would be mitigated through payment of state-mandated Development Fees. Thus, the potential impacts would be reduced to a level considered less than significant. Parks FEIR No. 311 determined that development of SP 92-1 would result in increased use of ball fields by project cast (employees). Implementation of adopted mitigation measures would reduce this impact to a level considered less than significant. The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan SEIR No. 340 According to SEIR No. 340, buildout of the ARSP would create additional demand for police services and fire and/or emergency rescue services. Additionally, buildout of the ARSP would generate new school-aged students and would introduce new borrowers to the Anaheim Public Library service area. Potential impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels through implementation of MMs 5.12-1 through 5.12-19. 5.14.2 Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project Would the Proposed Project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Environmental Issues Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circum-stances Requiring Major EIR Revisions New Information Showing New or Increased Significant Effects Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR No Impact a) Fire protection? x b) Police protection? x c) Schools? x d) Parks? x e) Libraries or local daycare facilities? x 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 109 Comments: a) Fire protection? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. Consistent with the analysis provided in FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340, development of the project site with proposed uses would incrementally increase the number of service calls and required responses, creating new demands on fire protection personnel and resources. Based on consultation with the City of Anaheim Fire Department (AFD), the Proposed Project would be located in The Anaheim Resort area and as such, would be subject to Fire Protection Facilities and Paramedic Services development impact fees. All fees collected would be used to mitigate potential fire impacts due to new development within The Anaheim Resort Area. Based on a generation rate of 0.06 annual service calls per room for hotel uses, development of the proposed 580-room hotel with accessory uses of up to 50,000 square feet of meeting space, up to 25,600 square feet of ancillary food and beverage retail space, and a parking structure, which is equivalent to the 706 hotel rooms analyzed by the SEIR No. 340, would generate an estimated 17 new service calls for fire protection or paramedic service per year. Although a significant impact was not identified, the Proposed Project shall comply with applicable standard requirements (SR 5.12-1) and mitigation measures (refer to MMs 5.12-5 through 5.12-16) from SEIR No. 340. The Proposed Project would not create a new significant impact or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects. b) Police protection? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. As discussed in FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340, the Anaheim Police Department (APD) provides all law enforcement services to the project area. SEIR No. 340 indicated that buildout of the ARSP would require in excess of 20,036 calls for service per year. The funding for new personnel needed to maintain acceptable service levels would come from the City of Anaheim’s General Fund. Property taxes and other fees assessed for the property would contribute to the General Fund revenues. To mitigate cumulative impacts on the APD, the project shall comply with applicable mitigation measures from SEIR No. 340 (refer to MMs 5.12-1 through 5.12-4). Since the Proposed Project is consistent with the amount of development analyzed for the Project Site, the Proposed Project would not create a new significant impact or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects. c) Schools? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. As stated previously, the Proposed Project does not involve the construction of new dwelling units. Therefore, direct impacts on the Anaheim City School District (ACSD) or the Anaheim Union High School District (AUHSD) are not expected to occur as a result of the project. However, development of the project could produce an indirect impact. SEIR No. 340 calculated that buildout of the ARSP would indirectly generate 1,188 new students within the ACSD and AUHSD. To mitigate cumulative impacts on the ACSD and AUHSD, the project shall comply with applicable mitigation measures from SEIR No. 340 (refer to MMs 5.12-17 and 5.12-18). Since the Proposed Project is consistent with the amount of development analyzed for 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 110 PlaceWorks the Project Site, the Proposed Project would not create a new significant impact or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects. d) Parks? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. One of the key features of the City’s Green Plan (Figure G-1 of the City’s General Plan Green Element) is the identification of Park Deficiency Areas. Park Deficiency Areas reflect those areas that, due to population pressures and limited park opportunities, are underserved by recreational facilities and include residential areas that are located outside of a one-half-mile radius of Neighborhood and Community Parks or one- quarter-mile radius of a Mini Park. Community Parks have a service radius of two miles and also serve Neighborhood Park functions within a one-half-mile radius. These areas are based on needs established in the last update of the General Plan Green Element, demographic changes since the last update, and future land use and employment trends described in the Land Use Element. The project site is not located in an identified Park Deficiency Area. Consistent with the findings of SEIR No. 340, no direct increase in demand for City parklands or recreational facilities would result from project implementation because the project would function primarily as a visitor- serving use. While the project has the potential to indirectly increase the residential base of the City (as detailed in Section 5.13, Population and Housing), the number of potential new residents associated with the increase in employment positions would be so minor that related impacts to recreational facilities would be less than significant. Further, it is impossible to determine wherein the City new residents would choose to live. No new impact would occur and no mitigation would be required. e) Library services or local daycare facilities? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. Local public services include libraries, daycare facilities, post offices, and hospitals. The Proposed Project would result in an incrementally higher demand for such services; however, these increases would not represent a significant impact. Although no impact would occur, adherence to previously approved MM 5.12- 19 from SEIR No. 340, identified below, would ensure that an impact would not occur. 5.14.3 Adopted Mitigation Measures Applicable to the Proposed Project The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan FEIR No. 311 Because the mitigation measures identified in SEIR No. 340 are comparable to applicable mitigation measures identified in FEIR No. 311, this document incorporates the more recently adopted measures from SEIR No. 340. Anaheim Resort Specific Plan SEIR No. 340 The following mitigation measures from Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 85C were adopted in connection with SEIR No. 340. The following measures also would be applicable to the Proposed Project. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 111 Standard Requirements SR 5.12-1 Prior to the final building and zoning inspection, the property owner/developer shall provide evidence to the Planning Director/Planning Services Manager of full payment of applicable fire facilities fees as deemed appropriate by the Fire Department. Mitigation Measures MM 5.12-1 Prior to the approval of each Final Site Plan and issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit plans to the Police Department for review and approval for safety, accessibility, crime prevention, and security provisions during both the construction and operative phases for the purpose of incorporating safety measures in the project design including the concept of crime prevention through environmental design (e.g., building design, circulation, site planning, and lighting of parking structures and parking areas). MM 5.12-2 Prior to the issuance of each building permit for a parking structure, the property owner/developer shall submit plans to the Police Department for review and approval indicating the provision of closed circuit television monitoring and recording or other substitute security measures as may be approved by the Police Department. Said measures shall be implemented prior to final building and zoning inspections. MM 5.12-3 Ongoing during project operation, the property owner/developer shall provide private security on the premises to maintain adequate security for the entire project subject to review and approval of the Police Department. The use of security patrols and electronic security devices (i.e., video monitors) should be considered to reduce the potential for criminal activity in the area. MM 5.12-4 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the project design shall include parking lots and parking structures with controlled access points to limit ingress and egress if determined to be necessary by the Police Department, and shall be subject to the review and approval of the Police Department. MM 5.12-5 Prior to commencement of structural framing on each parcel or lot, onsite fire hydrants shall be installed and charged by the property owner/developer as required and approved by the Fire Department. MM 5.12-6 Prior to issuance of each grading permit, the property owner/developer shall submit an emergency fire access plan to the Fire Department for review and approval to ensure that service to the site is in accordance with Fire Department service requirements. MM 5.12-7 Prior to issuance of each building permit; to be implemented prior to the final building and zoning inspection, plans shall indicate that all buildings, exclusive of parking structures, shall have sprinklers installed by the property owner/developer in accordance with the Anaheim 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 112 PlaceWorks Municipal Code. Said sprinklers shall be installed prior to each final building and zoning inspection. MM 5.12-8 Prior to issuance of each building permit, plans shall be submitted to ensure that development is in accordance with the City of Anaheim Fire Department Standards, including: a) Overhead clearance shall not be less than 14 feet for the full width of access roads. b) Bridges and underground structures to be used for Fire Department access shall be designed to support Fire Department vehicles weighing 75,000 pounds. c) All underground tunnels shall have sprinklers. Water supplies are required at all entrances. Standpipes shall also be provided when determined to be necessary by the Fire Department. d) Adequate off-site public fire hydrants contiguous to the Specific Plan area and onsite private fire hydrants shall be provided by the property owner/developer. The precise number, types, and locations of the hydrants shall be determined during building permit review. Hydrants are to be a maximum of 400 feet apart. e) A minimum residual water pressure of 20 psi shall remain in the water system. Flow rates for public parking facilities shall be set at 1,000 to 1,500 gpm. MM 5.12-9 Prior to issuance of the first building permit, the property owner/developer shall enter into an agreement recorded against the property with the City of Anaheim to pay or cause to be paid their fair share of the funding to accommodate the following, which will serve The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan area: a) One additional fire truck company. b) One additional paramedic company. c) Modifications to existing fire stations to accommodate the additional fire units, additional manpower, equipment and facilities. d) A vehicle equipped with specialty tools and equipment to enable the Fire Department to provide heavy search and rescue response capability. e) A medical triage vehicle/trailer, equipped with sufficient trauma dressings, medical supplies, stretchers, etc., to handle 1,000 injured persons, and an appropriate storage facility. The determination of the allocable share of costs attributable to the property owner/developer shall be based on an apportionment of the costs of such equipment/facilities among property owners/developers in the Hotel Circle Specific Plan 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 113 Area, The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan Area and The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Area or the otherwise defined service area, as applicable, depending on the area served. (Note: To implement this mitigation measure, the City has adopted the Fire Protection Facilities and Paramedic Services Impact Fee Program. Compliance with this Program by the property owner/developer (per Ordinance No. 5496 and Resolution No. 95R-73 dated May 16, 1995) shall satisfy the requirements of this Mitigation Measure, or the City may enter into alternative financing arrangements.) MM 5.12-10 Prior to each final building and zoning inspection, the property owner/developer shall place emergency telephone service numbers in prominent locations as approved by the Fire Department. MM 5.12-11 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit a Construction Fire Protection Plan to the Fire Department for review and approval detailing accessibility of emergency fire equipment, fire hydrant location, and any other construction features required by the Fire Marshal. The property owner/developer shall be responsible for securing facilities acceptable to the Fire Department and hydrants shall be operational with required fire flow. MM 5.12-12 Prior to the approval of each Final Site Plan and prior to the issuance of each building permit, plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Fire Department as being in conformance with the Uniform Fire Code. MM 5.12-13 Prior to the placement of building materials on a building site, an all-weather road shall be provided from the roadway system to and on the construction site and for fire hydrants at all times, as required by the Fire Department. Such routes shall be paved or, subject to the approval of the Fire Department, shall otherwise provide adequate emergency access. Every building constructed must be accessible to Fire Department apparatus. The width and radius of the driving surface must meet the requirements of Section 10.204 of the Uniform Fire Code, as adopted by the City of Anaheim. MM 5.12-14 Prior to approval of building plans, the property owner/developer shall provide written evidence to the satisfaction of the Fire Department that all lockable pedestrian and/or vehicular access gates shall be equipped with “knox box” devices as required and approved by the Fire Department. MM 5.12-15 Prior to approval of on-site water plans, unless each commercial building is initially connected to separate fire services, an unsubordinated covenant satisfactory to the City Attorney’s Office shall be recorded prohibiting any individual sale of buildings until separate fire services are installed in the building(s) subject to the sale. MM 5.12-16 Prior to approval of water improvement plans, the water supply system shall be designed by the property owner/developer to provide sufficient fire flow pressure and storage for the 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 114 PlaceWorks proposed land use and fire protection services in accordance with Fire Department requirements. MM 5.12-17 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall provide proof of compliance with Government Code Section 53080 (Schools). MM 5.12-18 Ongoing, the City will work cooperatively with school districts to identify opportunities for new schools and school expansion. MM 5.12-19 Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the property owner/developer shall comply with the Anaheim Municipal Code, Section 17.08.385, Public Library Facilities Services Areas – Payment of Fees Required. 5.15 RECREATION 5.15.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan FEIR No. 311 FEIR No. 311 does not specifically address recreation; however, as addressed previously in Section 5.14, Public Services and Utilities, FEIR No. 311 did address impacts to parks. As discussed previously, FEIR No. 311 determined that development of SP 92-1 would result in increased use of ball fields by project cast (employees). Implementation of adopted mitigation measures would reduce this impact to a level considered less than significant. Anaheim Resort Specific Plan SEIR No. 340 According to SEIR No. 340, full buildout or implementation of the ARSP would indirectly increase population by approximately 9,099 residents. Because this increase was identified to take place over the next 20 years and because the ARSP area is not located in a designated Park Deficiency Area, impacts related to the construction or expansion of recreational uses were identified as less than significant. Additionally, SEIR No. 340 concluded that any residential development project within the Residential Overlay Zone would be subject to the Quimby Act, which requires the provision of parkland and/or the payment of fees, thereby ensuring that a significant impact would not occur. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 115 5.15.2 Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project Environmental Issues Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circum-stances Requiring Major EIR Revisions New Information Showing New or Increased Significant Effects Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR No Impact a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? x b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? x Comments: a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities, such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? No Impact. As discussed above in Section 5.14, Public Services, no direct increase in demand for City parklands or recreational facilities would result from project implementation because the project would function primarily as a visitor-serving use. While the project has the potential to indirectly increase the residential base of the city (as detailed in Section 5.13, Population and Housing), the number of potential new residents associated with the increase in employment positions would be so minor that related impacts to recreational facilities would be less than significant. Further, it is impossible to determine wherein the City new residents would choose to live. The Proposed Project would not create a new significant impact or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects. b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? No Impact. The Proposed Project consists of a AAA Four Diamond Hotel. No public recreational facilities are proposed, although the project includes recreational amenities for hotel visitors. Recreational amenities include a fitness center and two pools. Since recreational amenities to serve future hotel visitors, no construction or expansion of off-site recreational facilities is considered necessary. The Proposed Project would not create a new significant impact or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 116 PlaceWorks 5.15.3 Adopted Mitigation Measures Applicable to the Proposed Project No mitigation measures related to recreation were identified in FEIR No. 311 or SEIR No. 340 except for the following standard requirements. The following standard requirement was derived from existing regulations, requirements, and standard practices set forth by regional and local agencies. Standard Requirements SR 5.13-1 Prior to issuance of building permits, property owners/developers shall comply with Anaheim Municipal Code, Section 17.08.250, which requires the provision of parkland and/or the payment of fees, consistent with the Quimby Act. 5.16 TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC 5.16.1 Summary of Impacts Identified in the Program EIR The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan FEIR No. 311 The evaluation of traffic impacts associated with development of the SP 92-1 in FEIR No. 311 determined that prior to implementation of mitigation, four intersections (Euclid Avenue/Ball Road, Euclid Avenue/Katella Avenue, Harbor Boulevard/Katella Avenue, and Haster Street/ Katella Avenue) would become deficient with a level of service (LOS) E condition in the year 2010. It was determined that implementation of project design features and mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a level considered less than significant. FEIR No. 311 also concluded that significant deficiencies in levels of service would occur if future background traffic growth was not mitigated, or if planned improvements were not implemented. However, the Anaheim City Council adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations with regard to these potential deficiencies. Anaheim Resort Specific Plan SEIR No. 340 As evaluated in SEIR No. 340, traffic impacts associated with buildout of the ARSP would result in significant impacts at 21 area intersections, 1 arterial segment, and 3 freeway ramp termini intersections. However, after implementation of the identified mitigation measures, these impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels at all but nine intersections (Euclid Street/Katella Avenue, Disneyland Drive/Ball Road, Disneyland Drive/West Street/Katella Avenue, Harbor Boulevard/Ball Road, Anaheim Boulevard/Haster Street/Katella Avenue, State College Boulevard/Katella Avenue, State College Boulevard/Orangewood Avenue, State College Boulevard/The City Drive/Chapman Avenue, Orangewood Avenue/State Route [SR] 57 Southbound Ramps) and one ramp termini intersection (Orangewood Avenue/SR-57 Southbound Ramps). It was identified that these intersections would remain significant and unavoidable because of the infeasibility of mitigation measures due to high project cost or the inability to undertake right-of-way acquisitions as a matter of policy to preserve existing businesses, environmental constraints, or jurisdictional considerations. The Anaheim City Council adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations with regard to these potential deficiencies. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 117 Additionally, SEIR No. 340 indicated no impacts would occur on intersections identified in the Congestion Management Program (CMP) for Orange County. 5.16.2 Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project Would the Proposed Project: Environmental Issues Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circum-stances Requiring Major EIR Revisions New Information Showing New or Increased Significant Effects Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR No Impact a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? x b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? x c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? x d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? x e) Result in inadequate emergency access? x f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? x A traffic report was prepared for the Proposed Project and is included in its entirety as Appendix G to this Addendum. The traffic study follows guidelines provided by the City of Anaheim Transportation Section of the Department of Public Works. The FEIR No. 311 for DRSP analyzed traffic impacts associated with the 706-room hotel development; the Proposed Project is a 580-room hotel with up to 50,000 square feet of 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 118 PlaceWorks meeting space and up to 25,600 square feet of retail, and a parking structure, which are equivalent to the 706- room hotel. Therefore, the Proposed Project is consistent with what was analyzed in the DRSP and does not require further review under CEQA. However, the Traffic Impact Analysis (included as Appendix G) and the following analysis were prepared for the Proposed Project to meet the City’s requirements and to confirm the consistency with the Approved Project. Comments: a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. The results of the traffic analysis indicate the proposed project would not create any project-level significant impact to the surrounding roadway system during the existing or opening year (2019) conditions. As documented in this analysis, the Proposed Project would not result in new significant impacts and is consistent with FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340. Intersections Existing Conditions Plus Project Traffic generated by the Proposed Project is not forecast to result in any significant impacts during existing conditions, and no mitigation measures are required. Opening Year 2019 Conditions With Project The opening year 2019 traffic conditions “With Project” were addressed in the Traffic Study (see Appendix G), which assumed 1 percent per year ambient growth rate in the traffic study area and the cumulative projects list current as of 1/13/2016 from The Anaheim Resort Development Status document. Opening year With Project traffic operations were compared to opening year conditions without the Project and determined that all of the intersections are forecast to operate at LOS D or better (see Tables 29 and 30 in the Traffic Study), and the traffic generated by the Proposed Project would not exceed the threshold of significance. All freeway ramp intersections are also forecast to operate at LOS D or better, and no significant impacts would occur. Therefore, no mitigation measures would be required. Arterial Segments No significant arterial segment impacts were identified and no mitigation measures would be required to address arterial segment impacts. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 119 b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. The Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) adopted the Congestion Management Program (CMP) for Orange County, which provides a mechanism for coordinating land use and transportation decisions on major freeways, highways, and roadways within the County. The CMP Highway System (CMPHS) consists of the Orange County smart street network plus the state highway system. The CMPHS includes two streets within the study area for this project:  Harbor Boulevard; and  Katella Avenue. The CMP also includes five intersections that are included in the Project traffic study area:  Harbor Boulevard at I-5 Northbound Ramps;  Harbor Boulevard at I-5 Southbound Ramps;  Harbor Boulevard at Katella Avenue;  I-5 Southbound Ramps at Katella Avenue; and  I-5 Northbound Ramps at Katella Avenue. The CMP establishes a LOS E or better for CMP roadways and intersections. An increase in V/C ratio greater than 0.10 over the base condition at roadways and intersections that operate or are forecast to operate at LOS F are considered not in compliance with the CMP’s LOS objectives and require mitigation or a deficiency plan. The traffic study indicated that no traffic study intersections are expected to exceed the threshold of significance, and no mitigation measures are required. Therefore, no new or increased impact would occur. c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? No Impact. The Proposed Project would not change air traffic patterns or change the location of development areas where persons would dwell and work, which would result in a substantial safety risk. The Project Site is not located within any land use compatibility zone for any public or private airport. No new or increased impact would occur. d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. Access to the Project Site would be provided along Harbor Boulevard at two locations: 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 120 PlaceWorks  Main Entry/porte-cochere approximately 300 feet south of Disney Way: Serves as the primary ingress/egress location for visitor and employee trips with right-in/right-out access only.  Service road along the southern property boundary, approximately 500 feet south of Disney Way: Serves as a secondary egress location for visitor and employee trips, as well as the primary ingress/egress location for service and emergency vehicles. Conflict between visitor and employee trips with service vehicle trips will be avoided by use of a temporary gate at the exit, as well as by prohibiting peak hour service truck trips. Only right-in/right-out access will be available.  Secondary Loading Zone: Access to off-street loading for food and beverage uses on the north side of the project will be provided along Disney Way, with ingress and egress for deliveries and trash collection only. The loading area will be gated when not in use and have restricted hours for loading. An emergency/fire access road is provided along the southern and eastern boundaries of the Project Site. Access east of the garage secondary exit would be restricted to emergency vehicles only. The proposed emergency/fire access road (26 feet wide) shall be paved to be consistent for Anaheim Fire Department access requirements. The entry to the emergency access drive off of Disney Way will include design elements similar to those utilized in The Anaheim Resort for other service/emergency access drives, with a 4-inch mountable curb and interlocking pavers as opposed to a driveway apron. All internal drive aisle widths, project driveway widths, and parking stall widths are designed to comply with the City’s minimum requirements. No new impact would occur related to increased hazards or incompatible uses and no mitigation is required. e) Result in inadequate emergency access? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. According to the City of Anaheim General Plan’s Safety Element (May 2004), the City has an emergency preparedness plan that complies with state law and that interfaces with other cities and counties in Southern California. Construction activity would be confined to the Project Site and would not interfere with vehicle movement or emergency access along Harbor Boulevard or Disney Way. As detailed in Section 5.16, Transportation/Traffic, any impacts related to the addition of project-related traffic would be less than significant; therefore, the Proposed Project would not interfere with the movement of emergency vehicles along local roadways. The Proposed Project would not create a new significant impact or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects. f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. The Proposed Project would be located near various alternative transportation modes and routes, including transit stops and pedestrian facilities. Existing transit service in the project area is provided by the OCTA and Anaheim Resort Transit (ART). 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 121 OCTA Route 83 is located in the vicinity of the project site and provides service from Anaheim to Laguna Hills via the I-5 freeway and Main Street. Bravo Route 543 provides service from the Fullerton Transportation Center to Santa Ana via Harbor Boulevard. OCTA Route 430 provides service from the Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center (ARTIC) to The Anaheim Resort Area via Katella Avenue and Harbor Boulevard/Ball Road. OCTA Route 47 provides service from Fullerton to Newport Beach via Anaheim Boulevard. All routes provide service to The Anaheim Resort Area, the Anaheim Convention Center, Disneyland, the Disneyland Hotel, and the Anaheim Garden Walk. ART is a fixed-route transportation system providing frequent service for residents, employees, and guests of the City of Anaheim and the greater Anaheim Resort area, including the cities of Anaheim, Garden Grove, and Orange. The Hotel Circle Clementine Line (ART Routes 6, 7, and 8) provides service along Disney Way in the project vicinity. This route also includes stops at the Disneyland Main Transportation Center area, which offers transfers to all ART routes. The proposed hotel would be required to participate in the Anaheim Transportation Network (ATN), including provision of an ATN bus loading/unloading zone, such that ART buses could stop on the property. Pedestrian access to visitor-serving venues—including the Anaheim Convention Center, The Disneyland Resort, and areas throughout The Anaheim Resort—is available via walkways and sidewalks along Disney Way, which connect to other pedestrian-friendly walkways throughout The Anaheim Resort area and the Disneyland Resort. It is anticipated that hotel guests and employees would utilize these alternative transportation modes and routes, thereby supporting adopted plans or policies related to alternative transportation. No new impact would occur and no mitigation is required. 5.16.3 Adopted Mitigation Measures Applicable to the Proposed Project The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan FEIR No. 311 Because the mitigation measures identified in SEIR No. 340 are comparable to applicable mitigation measures identified in FEIR No. 311, this document incorporates the more recently adopted measures from SEIR No. 340. Anaheim Resort Specific Plan SEIR No. 340 The following mitigation measures from Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 85C were adopted in connection with SEIR No. 340. Although no significant project impacts have been identified, the following measures also would be applicable to the Proposed Project to address potential cumulative impacts. MM 5.14-1 Prior to approval of a Final Site Plan for any project forecast to generate 100 or more peak hour trips, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager utilizing Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model Trip Generation Rates, the property owner/developer shall prepare traffic improvement phasing analyses to identify when the improvements identified in this traffic analysis shall be designed and constructed. MM 5.14-2 Prior to issuance of the first building permit for each building, the property owner/developer shall pay the appropriate Traffic Signal Assessment Fees and Transportation Impact and Improvement Fees to the City of Anaheim in amounts 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 122 PlaceWorks determined by the City Council Resolution in effect at the time of issuance of the building permit with credit given for City-authorized improvements provided by the property owner/developer. The property owner shall also participate in all applicable reimbursement or benefit districts, which have been established. MM 5.14-3 Prior to approval of the first final subdivision map or issuance of the first building permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall irrevocably offer for dedication (with subordination of easements), including necessary construction easements, the ultimate arterial highway right(s)-of-way adjacent to their property as shown in the Circulation Element of the Anaheim General Plan. MM 5.14-4 Prior to the final building and zoning inspection, the property owner shall join and financially participate in a clean fuel shuttle program such as The Anaheim Resort Transit system, and shall participate in the Anaheim Transportation Network in conjunction with the on-going operation of the project. The property owner shall also record a covenant on the property that requires participation in these programs ongoing during project operation. The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney’s Office prior to recordation. MM 5.14-5 Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the property owner/developer shall provide to the City of Anaheim Public Works Department a plan to coordinate rideshare services for construction employees with the Anaheim Transportation Network (ATN) for review and approval and shall implement ATN recommendations to the extent feasible. MM 5.14-7 Ongoing during construction, if the Anaheim Police Department or the Anaheim Traffic Management Center (TMC) personnel are required to provide temporary traffic control services, the property owner/developer shall reimburse the City, on a fair-share basis, if applicable, for reasonable costs associated with such services. MM 5.14-8 Prior to the final building and zoning inspection, the property owner shall record a covenant on the property requiring that ongoing during project implementation, the property owner/developer shall implement and administer a comprehensive Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program for all employees. The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney’s Office. Objectives of the TDM program shall be: a) Increase ridesharing and use of alternative transportation modes by guests. b) Provide a menu of commute alternatives for employees to reduce project- generated trips. c) Conduct an annual commuter survey to ascertain trip generation, trip origin, and Average Vehicle Ridership. MM 5.14-9 Prior to the final building and zoning inspection, the property owner/developer shall provide to the City of Anaheim Public Works Department for review and approval a menu 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 123 of TDM program strategies and elements for both existing and future employees’ commute options, and incentives for hotel patrons transportation options, to include, but not be limited to, the list below. The property owner shall also record a covenant on the property requiring that the approved TDM strategies and elements be implemented ongoing during project operation. The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney’s Office prior to recordation. a) On-site services. Provide, as feasible and permitted, on-site services such as the food, retail, and other services. b) Ridesharing. Develop a commuter listing of all employee members for the purpose of providing a “matching” of employees with other employees who live in the same geographic areas and who could rideshare. c) Vanpooling. Develop a commuter listing of all employees for the purpose of matching numbers of employees who live in geographic proximity to one another and could comprise a vanpool or participate in the existing vanpool programs. d) Transit Pass. Promote Orange County Transportation Authority (including commuter rail) passes through financial assistance and on-site sales to encourage employees to use the various transit and bus services from throughout the region. e) Shuttle Service. Generate a commuter listing of all employees living in proximity to the project, and offer a local shuttle program to encourage employees to travel to work by means other than the automobile. When appropriate, event shuttle service shall also be made available for guests. f) Bicycling. Develop a Bicycling Program to offer a bicycling alternative to employees. Secure bicycle racks, lockers, and showers should be provided as part of this program. Maps of bicycle routes throughout the area should be provided to inform potential bicyclists of these options. g) Guaranteed Ride Home Program. Develop a program to provide employees who rideshare, or use transit or other means of commuting to work, with a prearranged ride home in a taxi, rental car, shuttle, or other vehicle, in the event of emergencies during the work shift. h) Target Reduction of Longest Commute Trip. Promote an incentive program for ridesharing and other alternative transportation modes to put highest priority on reduction of longest employee commute trips. i) Work Shifts. Stagger work shifts. j) Compressed Work Week. Develop a “compressed work week” program, which provides for fewer work days but longer daily shifts as an option for employees. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 124 PlaceWorks k) Telecommuting. Explore the possibility of a “telecommuting” program that would link some employees via electronic means (e.g., computer with modem). l) Parking Management. Develop a parking management program that provides incentives to those who rideshare or use transit means other than single- occupant auto to travel to work. m) Access. Provide preferential access to high occupancy vehicles and shuttles. n) Financial Incentive for Ridesharing and/or Public Transit. Offer employees financial incentives for ridesharing or using public transportation. Currently, federal law provides tax-free status for up to $65 per month per employee contributions to employees who vanpool or use public transit including commuter rail and/or express bus pools. o) Financial Incentive for Bicycling. Offer employees financial incentives for bicycling to work. p) Special “Premium” for the Participation and Promotion of Trip Reduction. Offer ticket/passes to special events, vacations, etc. to employees who recruit other employees for vanpool, carpool, or other trip reduction programs. q) Incentive Programs. Design incentive programs for carpooling and other alternative transportation modes so as to put highest priority on reduction of longest commute trips. MM 5.14-10 Prior to approval of each tentative tract or parcel map, the following Street Design Elements shall be shown on each tentative tract or parcel map: a) Street cross-sections, including dimensions, labels, circulation designation (i.e., Resort Secondary) and whether public or private. b) Street grades and vertical alignment c) Horizontal alignment, including radii, and cul-de-sac radii. MM 5.14-11 Prior to the recordation of a subdivision map or issuance of the first building permit, whichever occurs first, in the event that a parcel is subdivided and there is a need for common on-site circulation and/or parking, prior to recordation of a subdivision map, an unsubordinated covenant providing for reciprocal access and/or parking, as appropriate, approved by the Planning Director or Planning Services Manager, shall be recorded with the Office of the Orange County Recorder. A copy of the recorded covenant shall then be submitted to the Planning Division of the Planning Department. If the reciprocal access is across parcel lines or if public rights of way are required for reciprocal access; Public Works approval shall be required. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 125 MM 5.14-12 Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the location of any proposed gates across a driveway shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer. Gates shall not be installed across any driveway or private street in a manner which may adversely affect vehicular traffic on the adjacent public streets. Installation of any gates shall conform to the current version of Engineering Standard Detail No. 475. MM 5.14-13 Prior to the issuance of building permits, plans shall show that all driveways shall be constructed with a minimum fifteen (15) foot radius curb returns as required by the City Engineer, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. MM 5.14-14 Prior to the issuance of building permits or final map approval, whichever occurs first, security in the form of a bond, certificate of deposit, letter of credit, completion guarantee, or cash, in an amount and form satisfactory to the City Engineer shall be posted with the City to guarantee the satisfactory completion of all engineering requirements of the City of Anaheim, including preparation of improvement plans and installation of all improvements, such as curbs and gutters, sidewalks, water facilities, street grading and pavement, sewer and drainage facilities and other appurtenant work, as required by the City Engineer and in accordance with the specifications on file in the office of the City Engineer, as may be modified by the City Engineer. Installation of said improvements shall occur prior to final building and zoning inspections. MM 5.14-15 Based upon the improvement phasing analysis in the Project traffic study, the property owner/developer shall implement traffic improvements as identified in the Project traffic study to maintain satisfactory levels of service as defined by the City’s General Plan, based on thresholds of significance, performance standards, and methodologies established by the Orange County Congestion Management program and the City of Anaheim Traffic Study Guidelines. The improvement phasing analysis will specify the timing, funding, construction, and fair-share responsibilities for all traffic improvements necessary to maintain satisfactory levels of service within the City of Anaheim and surrounding jurisdictions. The property owner/developer shall construct, bond for or enter into a funding agreement for necessary circulation system improvements, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager, unless alternative funding sources have been identified. MM 5.14-16 Prior to approval of a Final Site Plan for any project forecast to generate 100 or more peak hour trips, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager utilizing Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model Trip Generation Rates, in conjunction with the preparation of any traffic improvement phasing analyses as required in MM 5.14-1, property owners/developers will determine when the intersection improvements shall be constructed, subject to the conditions identified in MM 5.14-1. MM 5.14-17 Prior to approval of a Final Site Plan for any project forecast to generate 100 or more peak hour trips, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager utilizing Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model Trip Generation Rates, in conjunction with the preparation of any 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 126 PlaceWorks traffic improvement phasing analyses as required in MM 5.14-1, following actions shall be taken in cooperation with the City of Orange: a) The traffic improvement phasing analysis shall identify any impacts created by the Project on facilities within the City of Orange. The fair-share percentage responsibility for mitigating these impacts shall be calculated in this analysis. b) The City of Anaheim shall estimate the cost of the Project’s fair-share responsibility in cooperation with the City of Orange. c) The property owner/developer shall pay the City of Anaheim the fair-share cost prior to issuance of a building permit. The City of Anaheim shall hold the amount received in trust, and then, once a mutually agreed upon joint program is executed by both cities, the City of Anaheim shall allocate the fair-share contribution to traffic mitigation programs that result in improved traffic flow at the impacted locations, via an agreement mutually acceptable to both cities. MM 5.14-18 Prior to approval of a Final Site Plan for any project forecast to generate 100 or more peak hour trips, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager utilizing Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model Trip Generation Rates, in conjunction with the preparation of any traffic improvement phasing analyses as required in MM 5.14-1, and funded the warranted improvements to the impacted freeway mainline or freeway ramp locations, property owners/developers and the City will take the following actions in cooperation with Caltrans: a) The traffic study will identify the Project’s proportionate impact on the specific freeway mainline and/or freeway ramp locations and its fair-share percentage responsibility for mitigating these impacts based on thresholds of significance, performance standards, and methodologies established in the Orange County Congestion Management Program and the City of Anaheim Traffic Study Guidelines. b) The City shall estimate the cost of the Project’s fair-share responsibility in cooperation with Caltrans. MM 5.14-19 Prior to the approval of the final subdivision map or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall pay the identified fair- share responsibility as determined by the City as set forth in 5.14-15. The City shall allocate the property owner/developer’s fair-share contribution to traffic mitigation programs that result in improved traffic flow on the impacted mainline and ramp locations, via an agreement mutually acceptable to Caltrans and the City. MM 5.14-20 Prior to the approval of a Final Site Plan, the property owner/developer shall meet with the Traffic and Transportation Manager to determine whether a bus stop(s) is required to be placed adjacent to the property. If a bus stop(s) is required, it shall be placed in a location that least impacts traffic flow and may be designed as a bus turnout or a far side bus stop as 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 127 required by the Traffic and Transportation Manager and per the approval of the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA). MM 5.14-21 Prior to the first final building and zoning Inspection every property owner and/or lessee shall designate an on-site contact that will be responsible for coordinating with the ATN and implementing all trip mitigation measures. The on-site coordinator shall be the one point of contact representing the project with the ATN. The TDM requirements shall be included in the lease or other agreement with all of the project participants. MM 5.14-22 Subsequent to the certification of Final EIR No. 340, and prior to the approval of the first Final Site Plan, if the costs of the identified improvements in the Traffic Study Report for Amendment No. 14 to The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan cannot be covered by the total funding allocation under the existing City fee programs and funding sources, an update of the existing City traffic fee program or other fee programs shall be developed by the City of Anaheim to ensure completion of the recommended improvements. 5.17 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS 5.17.1 Water 5.17.1.1 SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan FEIR No. 311 The analysis of water service impacts in FEIR No. 311 concluded that the capacity of the existing water supply system would be exceeded, resulting in a significant impact. With implementation of the project design features and the recommended mitigation measures, this impact would be reduced to a level considered less than significant. Anaheim Resort Specific Plan SEIR No. 340 SEIR No. 340 identified that buildout of the ARSP would exceed capacities of existing water facilities; however, this impact would be mitigated to less than significant level. Further, the projected water demand associated with buildout of the ARSP would be accommodated through existing and projected supplies. Implementation of identified mitigation measures would ensure water conservation measures would be incorporated into future development to ensure that water supplies remain reliable into the future. 5.17.1.2 IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED PROJECT Would the Proposed Project: 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 128 PlaceWorks Environmental Issues Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circum-stances Requiring Major EIR Revisions New Information Showing New or Increased Significant Effects Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR No Impact b) Require or result in the construction of new water or waste water treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? x d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources or are new or expanded entitlements needed? x Comments: b) Require or result in the construction of new water or waste water treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. SEIR No. 340 identified that buildout of the ARSP would exceed capacities of existing water facilities; however, this impact would be mitigated to less than significant level. The existing hotel is served by existing water lines in Disney Way and Harbor Boulevard. These existing water lines would also provide water service to the Proposed Project through a new 8-inch water line to be constructed in the service road along the southern and eastern boundaries of the Project Site. Like the Approved Project, the Proposed Project would require construction of new on-site water lines. However, the scale and location of these infrastructure improvements would be similar to those required for the Approved Project. Therefore, there would be no additional impacts related to construction of water improvements required to serve the Proposed Project. d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. As discussed previously, the Proposed Project would be consistent with the DRSP and ARSP and all assumptions for development of the Project Site pursuant to the DRSP. As a result, the Proposed Project has been considered in all of the City’s water supply planning. However, since the Proposed Project consists of over 500 hotel rooms, a water supply assessment (WSA) pursuant to SB 610/221 has been prepared and is included as Appendix H to this Addendum. The existing water demands for the Proposed Project were compiled by City staff from meter-read data over a recent 24-month period, with the detailed data included in the WSA. The resulting average annual water use for the existing 300-room hotel site is summarized in Table 7, Existing 300 Room Hotel Site Water Use. As 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 129 shown in the table, an allowance of 4.5 percent was added to the meter-read data to account for water system losses or non-revenue water. This 4.5 percent figure is from the non-revenue water reported in the City’s 2010 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP). Table 7 Existing 300 Room Hotel Site Water Use Anaheim Plaza Hotel – Water Meter No. 001497N06002 733 days 33,815 HCF 25,293,620 gallons 34,507 gallons/day 38.6 Acre feet/year (AFY) Non-revenue Water (4.5%) 1.7 AFY Total 40.4 AFY Using water demand factors from the Resort Area Water Supply Assessment and the Proposed Project statistical data (presented in Table 3.1 of the WSA), the estimated water use for the proposed 580 room hotel are shown in Table 8, Projected Buildout Hotel Site Water Use. Table 8 Projected Buildout Hotel Site Water Use Rooms Area (sf) Demand Factor1 Units Demand (gpd) Demand (AFY) Hotel Rooms 580 125 gpd/room 72,500 81.2 Restaurant 25,600 1,000 gpd/ksf 25,600 28.7 Ballroom/Meeting Space 50,000 350 gpd/ksf 17,500 19.6 Pool 6,477 49.2 inches/yr 541 0.6 Subtotal Potable Water 116,141 130.1 Landscaping2 67,498 3,742 4.2 Subtotal 119,883 134.3 Non-revenue Water (4.5%)3 5,395 6.0 TOTAL 125,278 140.3 1 Demand factors per Anaheim Resort Area Specific Plan and Convention Center Expansion Water Supply Assessment, July 2009, Psomas. 2 Landscaping irrigation demand is proposed to be served from future recycled water system which would allow up to 1.0 times the Evapotranspiration Rate (ETo). However, demand is based on proposed mix of plant factors (PF) and irrigation efficiencies (IE) per draft landscaping and irrigation plan (see Appendix) and ETo for Anaheim area of 49.2 inches per year. 3 Non-Revenue allowance to account for water losses at 4.5% per 2010 City of Anaheim UWMP, June 2011, Malcolm Pirnie/Arcadis. Including an allowance for non-revenue water from system losses, the total supply needed for the Proposed Project, as shown on Table 8, would be 140.3 acre feet/year (AFY). However, since the water use from the existing 300 room hotel to be demolished was included in the existing supply and demand figures reported in the 2010 UWMP, the supply required to serve the existing hotel can be subtracted from the total supply 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 130 PlaceWorks estimated to be required for the Proposed Project, resulting in a net supply requirement for the Proposed Project of 99.9 AFY (140.3-40.4). The analysis provided in the WSA concludes that water supply projections for the City demonstrate that projected supplies will meet demands through fiscal year 2040. These projections consider water development programs and projects as well as water conservation, as described in the City’s 2010 UWMP and Section 5 of the WSA. The City’s groundwater and imported water supplies are anticipated to remain stable based on studies and reports from Orange County Water District (OCWD) and Metropolitan, respectively. The City’s long-term water supply projection is based on up to 66 percent groundwater, based on an expected average long-term Basin Production Percentage (BPP), and its share of imported water confirmed reliable by Metropolitan. Since preparation of the City’s 2010 UWMP, OCWD’s Board of Directors adopted Resolution No. 13-1-6, setting a goal of achieving and maintaining a 75 percent BPP. The buffer between the maximum BPP utilized in this WSA and the 75 percent BPP goal provides added reliability to Anaheim’s water supply. Analysis of normal, single-dry, and multiple-dry year scenarios demonstrates the City’s ability to meet or exceed demand during the 20-year planning period. Additionally, if extraordinary circumstances require, the City can meet its water demand by (1) increasing production of groundwater beyond the BPP up to the basin safe yield, and/or (2) decreasing demand through water conservation measures. Reliability of future water supplies to the region will be ensured through continued implementation of the OCWD Groundwater Management Plan, OCWD’s Long Term Facilities Plan, local agency programs, and the combined efforts and programs among member and cooperative agencies of Metropolitan. These agencies include all water wholesalers and retailers, the Orange County Sanitation District, the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board, and the Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority. These programs are described in the City’s 2010 UWMP and supplemented in Section 5 of the WSA. Collectively, the information included in the WSA identifies a sufficient and reliable water supply for the City, now and into the future, including a sufficient water supply for the Proposed Project demands plus the proposed intensification of land use within the ACSP. These supplies are also sufficient to provide (and account) for growth projected in the 2010 UWMP. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not create a new significant impact or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects. 5.17.1.3 ADOPTED MITIGATION MEASURES APPLICABLE TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan FEIR No. 311 Because the mitigation measures identified in SEIR No. 340 are comparable to applicable mitigation measures identified in FEIR No. 311, this document incorporates the more recently adopted measures from SEIR No. 340. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 131 Anaheim Resort Specific Plan SEIR No. 340 The following mitigation measures from Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 85C were adopted in connection with SEIR No. 340. The following measures also would be applicable to the Proposed Project. Standard Requirement SR 5.15-1 Prior to the issue of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall be required to prepare and submit to the City for review and approval (1) a Landscape Documentation Package and (2) landscape and irrigation plans with appropriate water use calculations in accordance with the requirements of Anaheim Municipal Code Chapter 10.19, Landscape Water Efficiency. Mitigation Measures MM 5.15-1 Prior to issuance of each building permit (to be implemented prior to final building and zoning inspections, and continuing on an on-going basis during project operation), the property owner/ developer shall submit to the Planning Services Division Public Utilities Department plans for review and approval which shall ensure that water conservation measures are incorporated. The water conservation measures to be shown on the plans and implemented by the property owner/developer, to the extent applicable include, but are not limited to, the following: a) Use of low-flow sprinkler heads in irrigation systems. b) Use of waterway recirculation systems. c) Low-flow fittings, fixtures, and equipment, including low flush toilets and urinals. d) Use of self-closing valves on drinking valves. e) Use of efficient irrigation systems such as drip irrigation and automatic systems which use moisture sensors. f) Use of low-flow shower heads in hotels. g) Water efficient ice-machines, dishwashers, clothes washers and other water- using appliances. h) Use of irrigation systems primarily at night when evaporation rates are lowest. i) Provide information to the public in conspicuous places regarding water conservation. j) Use of water conserving landscape plant materials wherever feasible. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 132 PlaceWorks MM 5.15-2 Prior to issuance of each building permit, all water supply planning for the project will be closely coordinated with, and be subject to the review and final approval of, the Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division and Fire Department. MM 5.15-3 Prior to issuance of each building permit, water pressure greater than 80 pounds per square inch (psi) shall be reduced to 80 psi or less by means of pressure reducing valves installed at the property owner/developer’s service. MM 5.15-4 Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit a landscape and irrigation plan which shall be prepared and certified by a licensed landscape architect. The irrigation plan shall specify methods for monitoring the irrigation system. The system shall ensure that irrigation rates do not exceed the infiltration of local soils, that the application of fertilizers and pesticides do not exceed appropriate levels of frequencies, and that surface runoff and overwatering is minimized. The landscaping and irrigation plans shall include water-conserving features such as low flow irrigation heads, automatic irrigation scheduling equipment, flow sensing controls, rain sensors, soil moisture sensors, and other water-conserving equipment. The landscaping and irrigation plans shall indicate that separate irrigation lines for recycled water shall be constructed and recycled water will be used when it becomes available. All irrigation systems shall be designed so that they will function properly with recycled water. MM 5.15-5 Prior to approval of the Final Site Plan and building permits, plans shall specifically show that the water meter and backflow equipment and any other large water system equipment will be installed to the satisfaction of the Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division, aboveground and behind the building setback line in a manner fully screened from all public streets and alleys and in accordance with Ordinance No. 4156. Prior to the final building and zoning inspections, the water meter and backflow equipment and any other large water system equipment shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division, in accordance with the Final Site Plan and the building permit plans. MM 5.15-6 Prior to issuance of each building permit, unless records indicate previous payment, the appropriate fees for Primary Mains, Secondary Mains and Fire Protection Service shall be paid to the Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division in accordance with Rule 15A, and Rule 20 of the Public Utilities Department Water Rates, Rules and Regulations. MM 5.15-7 Prior to final building and zoning inspections, a separate water meter shall be installed for landscape water on all projects where the landscape area exceeds 2,500 square feet in accordance with Ordinance No. 5349. MM 5.15-8 Prior to the issuance of the first building permit or grading permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall comply with Rule 15E of the Public Utilities Department Water Rates, Rules, and Regulations. Rule 15E shall be amended to include: 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 133 a) Construction of a new well with a minimum 1,500 GPM capacity to serve The Anaheim Resort Area (tentative location near Ponderosa Park and Orangewood Avenue); and b) Construction of a new 16-inch water main along Harbor Boulevard from Orangewood to Chapman Avenue. MM 5.15-9 Ongoing, the City shall continue to collaborate with the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD), its member agencies, and the Orange County Water District (OCWD) to ensure that available water supplies meet anticipated demand. If it is forecasted that water demand exceeds available supplies, staff shall recommend to City Council to trigger application of the Water Conservation Ordinance (Anaheim Municipal Code, §10.18), as prescribed, to require mandatory conservation measures as authorized by Sections 10.18.070 through 10.18.090, as appropriate. 5.17.2 Sewer 5.17.2.1 SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan FEIR No. 311 FEIR No. 311 reported that the existing wastewater/sewer facilities in the area were at capacity and local improvements would be required to accommodate project-related volume increases. Implementation of the recommended improvements in the City’s South Central Area Sewer Deficiency Study would also be required to accommodate the development of SP 92-1 in the future. However, the County Sanitation District of Orange County was determined to have adequate treatment plant capacity to serve the project. Implementation of the recommended mitigation outlined in FEIR No. 311 would reduce all impacts to a level considered less than significant. Anaheim Resort Specific Plan SEIR No. 340 According to SEIR No. 340, the wastewater treatment requirements of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) would not be exceeded by buildout of the ARSP. SEIR No. 340 identified that buildout of the ARSP would increase sewage flows in existing sewer lines and trunks serving the area, resulting in several sewer lines becoming deficient; however, this impact would be mitigated to a less than significant level. Additionally, it was determined that buildout of the ARSP evaluated in SEIR No. 340 would increase sewage flows by approximately 323,656 gallons per day (gpd) in the PR District and 2.1 million gallons per day (mgd) in the C-R District and that these increases in sewage flow would be accommodated by available capacity at Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) Treatment Plant No. 1. 5.17.2.2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Would the Proposed Project: 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 134 PlaceWorks Environmental Issues Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circum-stances Requiring Major EIR Revisions New Information Showing New or Increased Significant Effects Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR No Impact a) Exceed waste water treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? x b) Require or result in the construction of new water or waste water treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? x e) Result in a determination by the waste water treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? x Comments: a) Exceed waste water treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? e) Result in a determination by the waste water treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. The City of Anaheim, including the Project Site, is served by a comprehensive sanitary sewer system, and no wastewater is discharged that would impact the quality of surface water or groundwater resources. As noted previously, the Project Site is being developed as a visitor-serving use. The sewage and wastewater from this use would be discharged into the City’s sewer system and conveyed to Reclamation Plant No. 1 in Fountain Valley. No pre-treatment is required for the wastewater from the Proposed Project since the proposed land uses would not (1) process any industrial wastewater; (2) involve dewatering or groundwater clean-up; (3) directly discharge sewage effluent; or (4) engage in other activities that would generate wastewater requiring treatment beyond what is provided at OCSD Treatment Plant No. 1. Land uses or activities that may generate wastewater requiring special treatment shall comply with OCSD’s Wastewater Discharge Regulations. Therefore, implementation of the project would not exceed the RWQCB wastewater treatment requirements, and related impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not create a new significant impact or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 135 b) Require or result in the construction of new water or waste water treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. As discussed previously, the Proposed Project would be consistent with the DRSP and ARSP and all assumptions for development of the Project Site pursuant to the DRSP. Therefore, the Proposed Project has been included in the Combined Central Anaheim Area Master Plan of Sanitary Sewers – Amendment to The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (CH2M Hill, August 2009). As discussed in this document, buildout of the project area would increase sewage flows in existing sewer lines and trunks serving the area as part of Models 1, 13, 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 22, 40, and 51. Results of the modeling indicate that several sewer lines would become deficient or that future development under the amended ARSP would contribute to existing deficiencies in Models 1, 13, 15, 16, and 40. The Proposed Project is located within Model 15. Improvements needed to eliminate the existing and projected sewer system deficiencies anticipated with buildout of the ARSP area are described below. Model 15: 8,095 linear feet of sewer pipe are recommended for replacement along Haster Street, Katella Avenue, Clementine Street, and Harbor Boulevard in order to accommodate proposed [ARSP] buildout. The existing sewers range from 8 inches to 24 inches in diameter and are recommended for replacement with 10- inch to 30-inch diameter sewers. Development of the Proposed Project has the potential to contribute to this identified deficiency and subsequent need for improvement, resulting in a potentially significant impact. Implementation of MM 5.16- 1 (which requires participation in the City’s Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program and/or construction of the needed sewer line upgrades in order to avoid the exacerbation of existing deficiencies and to ensure that adequate facilities are available to provide sewer services to each development project) would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. In addition, compliance with this measure would ensure that sewer improvement plans are designed and constructed to the City Engineer’s satisfaction. While implementation of these improvements would reduce the significance of anticipated impacts, adherence to the previously approved SRs 5.16-1 through 5.16-3 and MM 5.16-1 from FEIR No. 311 and MM 3.10.7-3 from SEIR No. 340, identified below, would further reduce potential impacts related to water infrastructure. 5.17.2.3 ADOPTED MITIGATION MEASURES APPLICABLE TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan FEIR No. 311 The following mitigation measure from Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 67 was adopted in connection with FEIR No. 311. This measure also would be applicable to the Proposed Project. 3.10.7-3 Prior to issuance of the first building permit for development of a facility other than parking in the Future Expansion District, the applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City of Anaheim to pay or cause to be paid its fair share of funding for the following improvements: 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 136 PlaceWorks  The applicable segments of a City sewer replacement or parallel line to an existing 18- inch City sewer line in Orangewood Avenue from the existing 24-inch District trunk sewer line at Ninth Street to a point of west of I-5. This will be necessary for construction of the Future Expansion District or any other developments in the Commercial Recreation Area south of Katella and West of I-5. This mitigation will be readdressed in subsequent environmental review for the Future Expansion District.  A City sewer main replacement or parallel line in Harbor Boulevard from Convention Way to Orangewood Avenue. To implement this mitigation measure, the City has adopted the Sewer Impact and Improvement Fee Program for the South Central City Area. Compliance with this Fee Program by the property owner/developer (per Ordinance No. 5490 and Resolution No. 95R-60 dated April 18, 1995) shall satisfy the requirements of this Mitigation Measure, or the City may enter into alternative financing arrangements with the applicant. Anaheim Resort Specific Plan SEIR No. 340 The following mitigation measures from Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 85C were adopted in connection with SEIR No. 340. The following measures also would be applicable to the Proposed Project. Standard Requirements SR 5.16-1 Prior to issuance of building permits, the property owner/developer shall provide evidence to the Planning Director/Planning Services Manager that all sewage and wastewater disposal into the sewer system shall comply with OCSD’s Wastewater Discharge Regulations, including the procurement of the necessary permits by food service establishments that would be developed in the ARSP area. SR 5.16-2 Prior to issuance of building permits, the property owner/developer shall provide proof of payment to the Planning Director/Planning Services Manager for a sanitary sewer service charge to OCSD. SR 5.16-3 Prior to issuance of building permits, the property owner/developer shall provide proof of payment to the Planning Director/Planning Services Manager for a capital facilities connection charge to OCSD. Mitigation Measures MM 5.16-1 Prior to approval of a final subdivision map or issuance of a grading or building permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall participate in the City’s Master Plan of Sewers and related Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program to assist in mitigating existing and future sanitary sewer system deficiencies as follows: 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 137 The property owner/developer shall submit a report for review and approval of the City Engineer to assist in determining the following: a) If the development/redevelopment (1) does not discharge into a sewer system that is currently deficient or will become deficient because of that discharge and/or (2) does not increase flows or change points of discharge, then the property owner’s/developer’s responsibility shall be limited to participation in the Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program. b) If the development/redevelopment (1) discharges into a sewer system that is currently deficient or will may become deficient because of that discharge and/or (2) increases flows or changes points of discharge, then the property owner/developer shall be required to develop a Sewer Study to determine the impacts and required improvements to correct those impacts. Property owner/developer shall guarantee mitigation to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney of the impact prior to approval of a final subdivision map or issuance of a grading or building permit whichever occurs first, pursuant to the improvements identified in the individual Sewer Study or the applicable City Master Sewer Plan South Central Area Sewer Deficiency Study. The property owner/developer shall be required to install the sanitary sewer facilities, as recommended by the aforementioned applicable Sewer Study or Plan South Central Area Sewer Deficiency Study, prior to acceptance for maintenance of public improvements by the City or final building and zoning inspections for the building/structure, whichever comes first. Additionally, the property owner/developer shall participate in the Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program, as determined by the City Engineer, which may include fees, credits, reimbursements, or a combination thereof. As part of guaranteeing the mitigation of impacts for the sanitary sewer system, the property owner/developer shall submit a sanitary sewer system improvement phasing plan for the project to the City Engineer for review and approval which shall contain, at a minimum, (1) a layout of the complete system, (2) all facility sizes, including support calculations, (3) construction phasing, and (4) construction estimates. The City recognizes that these improvements will serve not only the applicant but also other property owners/developers in the Specific Plan area, The Anaheim Resort, and the service area, each of which should contribute its allocable share of the cost of these improvements. To implement this requirement as it applies to other property owners/developers in the Specific Plan area, The Anaheim Resort, and the service area, the City shall, and shall make appropriate arrangements with other public agencies, if any, to reimburse the applicant to the extent that its contributions for these improvements exceed the applicant's allocable share of the cost. Such arrangements shall include one or more of the following: (1) creation of integrated financing districts; (2) entry into a reimbursement agreement with the applicant; (3) creation of appropriate community facilities districts, assessment districts, and/or use of similar public financing districts and/or mechanisms; and (4) creation of other such 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 138 PlaceWorks mechanisms or districts as may be appropriate to provide for the reimbursement of these costs. The determination of the allocable share of improvement costs attributable to the applicant and other property owners/developers, and reimbursement amounts, shall be based on an apportionment of the costs of such improvements among property owners/developers, including the applicant, in the Specific Plan area, The Anaheim Resort, or otherwise defined service area, as applicable, depending on the area served. The study shall determine the impact of the project sewer flows for total build out of the project and identify local deficiencies for each project component (i.e., each hotel). 5.17.3 Electricity 5.17.3.1 SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan FEIR No. 311 FEIR No. 311 determined that existing electrical facilities were inadequate to accommodate the increased demand for electricity that development of land uses in the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan would generate. It was identified that a new substation in addition to other mitigation measures would be required to reduce impacts to a level considered less than significant. Anaheim Resort Specific Plan SEIR No. 340 According to SEIR No. 340, buildout of the ARSP area would result in an increased demand for electricity. Compliance with the standard requirements and implementation of the proposed mitigation measures would reduce anticipated demand through conservation efforts. It is expected that the existing electrical distribution system and future planned improvements would adequately accommodate the anticipated demand, thus resulting in a less than significant impact with mitigation. 5.17.3.2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Would the Proposed Project: Environmental Issues Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circum-stances Requiring Major EIR Revisions New Information Showing New or Increased Significant Effects Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR No Impact h) Would increase demand for other public services or utilities? x 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 139 Comments: h) Would increase demand for other public services or utilities? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. Table 5.17-1 in SEIR No. 340 projected that the 21,813 hotel rooms in the ARSP at buildout would consume approximately 504,273 kWh of electricity per day. The Proposed Project is consistent with the buildout assumptions for the Project Site. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not create a new significant impact or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects. 5.17.3.3 ADOPTED MITIGATION MEASURES APPLICABLE TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan FEIR No. 311 Because the mitigation measures identified in SEIR No. 340 are comparable to applicable mitigation measures identified in FEIR No. 311, this document incorporates the more recently adopted measures from SEIR No. 340. Anaheim Resort Specific Plan SEIR No. 340 The following mitigation measures from Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 85C were adopted in connection with SEIR No. 340. The following measures also would be applicable to the Proposed Project. Standard Requirements SR 5.17-1 Prior to issuance of building permits, the property owner/developer shall be required to demonstrate to the Planning Department, Building Division that building plans meet the applicable Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings (24 CCR 6). These standards are updated, nominally every three years, to incorporate improved energy efficiency technologies and methods. The 2016 standards, which will be applicable January 1, 2017, are approximately 28 percent more energy efficient than the 2013 Building and Energy Efficiency Standards. SR 5.17-2 Prior to issuance of building permits, the property owner/developer shall be required to demonstrate to the Planning Department, Building Division that building plans meet the applicable California Green Building Standards (24 CCR 11). Mitigation Measures MM 5.17-1 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/develop shall consult with the City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department, Business and Community Programs Division in order to review energy efficient measures to incorporate into the project design. Prior to the final building and zoning inspection, the property owner developer shall implement these energy efficient measures which may include the following: 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 140 PlaceWorks a) High-efficiency air-conditioning systems with EMS (computer) control b) Variable air volume (VAV) distribution c) Outside air (100%) economizer cycle d) Staged compressors or variable speed drives to flow varying thermal loads e) Isolated HVAC zone control by floors/separable activity areas f) Specification of premium-efficiency electric motors (i.e., compressor motors, air- handling units, and fan-coil units) g) Use of occupancy sensors in appropriate spaces h) Use of compact fluorescent lamps i) Use of cold cathode fluorescent lamps j) Use of light emitting diode (LED) or equivalent energy-efficient lighting for outdoor lighting k) Use of Energy Star® exit lighting or exit signage. l) Use of T-8 lamps and electronic ballasts where applications of standard fluorescent fixtures are identified m) Use of lighting power controllers in association with metal-halide or high- pressure sodium (high intensity discharge) lamps for outdoor lighting and parking lots n) Consideration of thermal energy storage air-conditioning for spaces or facilities that may require air-conditioning during summer, day-peak periods. o) For swimming pools and spas, incorporate solar heating, automatic covers, and efficient pumps and motors, as feasible. p) Consideration for participation in Advantage Services Programs such as: • New construction design review, in which the City cost-shares engineering for up to $10,000 for design of energy efficient buildings and systems • New Construction – cash incentives ($300 to $400 per kW reduction in load) for efficiency that exceeds Title 24 requirements • Green Building Program – offers accelerated plan approval, financial incentives, waived plan check fees and free technical assistance. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 141 MM 5.17-2 Prior to final building and zoning inspection, the property owner/developer shall install an underground electrical service from the Public Utilities Distribution System. The Underground Service will be installed in accordance with the Electric Rules, Rates, Regulations and Electrical Specifications for Underground Systems. Electrical Service Fees and other applicable fees will be assessed in accordance with the Electric Rules, Rates, Regulations and Electrical Specifications for Underground Systems. MM 5.17-3 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit plans and calculations to the City of Anaheim Planning Department, Building Division, to demonstrate that the energy efficiency of each building will exceed the Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings current at the time of application by at least 10 percent. MM 5.17-4 Prior to approval of a Final Site Plan, the property owner/developer shall coordinate with the Public Utilities Department to incorporate feasible renewable energy generation measures into the project. These measures may include but not be limited to use of solar and small wind turbine sources on new and existing facilities and the use of solar powered lighting in parking areas. 5.17.4 Stormwater 5.17.4.1 SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan FEIR No. 311 FEIR No. 311 concluded that storm drain facilities within the project site would not be sufficient to handle increased drainage runoff flows. Implementation of project design features and mitigation measures outlined in FEIR No. 311 would reduce impacts to storm drain facilities to a level considered less than significant. Anaheim Resort Specific Plan SEIR No. 340 According to SEIR No. 340, buildout of the ARSP has the potential to worsen several existing deficiencies in the City’s storm drain system. However, participation in the City’s Master Plan of Storm Drains and related Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program would assist in mitigating existing and future storm drainage system deficiencies. Additionally, implementation of the identified mitigation would ensure that impacts to regional flood control facilities associated with buildout of the ARSP would be reduced to less than significant levels. As discussed in SEIR No. 340, although all new growth within the ARSP area would occur in compliance with identified mitigation, the City has no control over the growth and storm water contributions of areas outside of its jurisdiction. It was determined that any addition of storm water to the regional storm water system may be cumulatively considerable when combined with potential storm water flow increases from surrounding jurisdictions, and the potential cumulative impact could be significant and unavoidable if development in the surrounding jurisdictions occurs without upgrades to the storm water infrastructure. The 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 142 PlaceWorks Anaheim City Council adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations with regard to this potential impact. 5.17.4.2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Would the Proposed Project: Environmental Issues Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circum-stances Requiring Major EIR Revisions New Information Showing New or Increased Significant Effects Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR No Impact c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? x Comments: c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. As discussed in Section 5.9, Hydrology and Water Quality, generally, post-development drainage area and flow direction would be consistent with pre-project conditions (Hunsaker 2016). Therefore, implementation of the Proposed Project would not exceed the capacity of the local or regional storm drain systems. As a result, the Proposed Project would not create a new significant impact or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects related to storm drain capacity. Although no impact would occur, adherence to previously approved MMs 5.18-1 and 5.18-3 from SEIR No. 340, identified below, would ensure that an impact would not occur. 5.17.4.3 ADOPTED MITIGATION MEASURES APPLICABLE TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan FEIR No. 311 Because the mitigation measures identified in SEIR No. 340 are comparable to applicable mitigation measures identified in FEIR No. 311, this document incorporates the more recently adopted measures from SEIR No. 340. Anaheim Resort Specific Plan SEIR No. 340 The following mitigation measures from Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 85C were adopted in connection with SEIR No. 340. The following measures also would be applicable to the Proposed Project. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 143 MM 5.18-1 Prior to approval of a final subdivision map, or issuance of a grading or building permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall participate in the City’s Master Plan of Storm Drains and related Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program to assist in mitigating existing and future storm drainage system deficiencies as follows: The property owner/developer shall submit a report for review and approval by the City Engineer to assist with determining the following: a) If the specific development/redevelopment does not increase or redirect current or historic storm water quantities/flows, then the property owner/developer’s responsibility shall be limited to participation in the Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program to provide storm drainage facilities in 10- and 25-year storm frequencies and to protect properties/structures for a 100-year storm frequency. b) If the specific development/redevelopment increases or redirects the current or historic storm water quantity/flow, then the property owner/developer shall be required to guarantee mitigation to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and City Attorney’s office of the impact prior to approval of a final subdivision map or issuance of a grading or building permit, whichever occurs first, pursuant to the improvements identified in the Master Plan of Drainage for the South Central Area. The property owner/developer shall be required to install the storm drainage facilities as recommended by the Master Plan of Drainage for the South Central Area to provide storm drainage facilities for 10- and 25-year storm frequencies and to protect properties/structures for a 100-year storm frequency prior to acceptance for maintenance of public improvements by the City or final building and zoning inspection for the building/structure, whichever occurs first. Additionally, the property owner/developer shall participate in the Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program as determined by the City Engineer which could include fees, credits, reimbursements, or a combination thereof. As part of guaranteeing the mitigation of impacts on the storm drainage system, a storm drainage system improvement phasing plan for the project shall be submitted by the property owner/developer to the City Engineer for review and approval and shall contain, at a minimum, (1) a layout of the complete system; (2) all facility sizes, including support calculations; (3) construction phasing; and, (4) construction estimates. MM 5.18-3 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the City shall require that building plans indicate that new developments will minimize stormwater and urban runoff into drainage facilities by incorporating design features such as detention basins, on- site water features, and other strategies. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 144 PlaceWorks 5.17.5 Public Utilities 5.17.5.1 SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan FEIR No. 311 Natural Gas Service According to FEIR No. 311, Southern California Gas would be able to meet the demand for natural gas created by DRSP area. Solid Waste In the analysis of impacts related to solid waste, FEIR No. 311 identified that the Olinda-Alpha landfill had limited available capacity. For this reason, development of SP 92-1 would create a significant, unavoidable project and cumulative impact. The Anaheim City Council adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations which addressed this impact. Telephone Service FEIR No. 311 indicated that Pacific Bell would accommodate all increased demand for telephone services associated with development of DRSP without disrupting existing service. Television Service/Reception It was identified in FEIR No. 311 that cable television service would be accommodated without creating a significant impact. Television reception of residents and businesses without cable television might be impacted by construction of DRSP. However, implementation of the recommended mitigation measure would reduce potential impacts to less than significant. Anaheim Resort Specific Plan SEIR No. 340 Natural Gas According to SEIR No. 340, Southern California Gas Company (SCGC) indicated that natural gas service to the ARSP can be provided from an existing gas main that is accessible from various locations in the ARSP area. The service would be provided in accordance with the SCGC’s policies and extension rules on file with the California Public Utilities Commission. Therefore, the ARSP would be served by existing facilities, and no new systems or substantial alterations would be required. Solid Waste Buildout of the ARSP would generate an estimated 109,514 pounds of solid waste per day or approximately 19,986 tons of solid waste annually. Buildout of the ARSP would add approximately 19,986 tons of solid waste annually to existing solid waste facilities and capacity, which would impact the landfill system. However, the buildout of the ARSP could be accommodated within the permitted capacity of the County’s landfill 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 145 capacity. In addition, once the Alpha Olinda Landfill closes in 2021, capacity would exist for buildout of the ARSP in the Frank R. Bowerman Landfill. No significant impacts would occur, and no mitigation is required; however, implementation of the proposed mitigation would further ensure that adequate solid waste services are provided and that solid waste generation would be minimized. Telephone and Cable Television AT&T would serve the ARSP area. According to SEIR No. 340, it was determined that AT&T can provide telephone, digital cable, and high-speed internet services, and that the ARSP area can be served by Time Warner Cable with the existing cable resources available to the site. The infrastructure capacity for telephone service typically expands with new development. Facilities needed to connect the Proposed Project to the existing telephone system may include new conduit, fiber, and copper facilities. These improvements would be implemented in accordance with applicable State and local regulations. According to SEIR No. 340, the impact related to additional demand for telephone service is less than significant. 5.17.5.2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Would the Proposed Project: Environmental Issues Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circum-stances Requiring Major EIR Revisions New Information Showing New or Increased Significant Effects Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR No Impact f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs? x g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? x h) Increase demand for other public services or utilities? x Comments: f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. SEIR No. 340 estimated that buildout of the ARSP would generate approximately 109,514 pounds of solid waste per day. The Proposed Project would generate additional solid waste during construction and operation of the Proposed Project. Based on a generation factor of 4 pounds per room per day, the Proposed Project is expected to generate approximately 2,320 pounds per day (lbs/day), for an increase of 1,120 pounds per day. OC Waste & Recycling has indicated that adequate capacity is available within the Orange County landfill 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 146 PlaceWorks system to serve the Proposed Project (Arnau 2015). Although a significant impact would not occur, implementation of previously approved MMs 5.19-1 through 5.19-5 from SEIR No. 340 identified below would further reduce the volume of solid waste to be disposed of in the landfill system. Therefore, no significant impact related to landfill capacity would result from implementation of the Proposed Project. g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. Solid waste practices in California are governed by multiple federal, state, and local agencies that enforce legislation and regulations to ensure landfill operations minimize impacts to public health and safety and the environment. OC Waste & Recycling is obligated to obtain a Solid Waste Facilities Permit, a Stormwater Discharge Permit, and a permit to construct and operate gas management systems and meet Waste Discharge Requirements. The Local Enforcement Agency, the SCAQMD, and the California Water Resources Control Board enforce landfill regulations related to health, air quality, and water quality, respectively. The Proposed Project would not inhibit OC Waste & Recycling’s compliance with the requirements of each of these governing bodies and no new impact would occur. h) Increase demand for other public services or utilities? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. Natural Gas SCGC currently provides natural gas service to the City of Anaheim, including the project site (SCGC 2015). Service would be provided in accordance with SCGS’s policies and extension rules on file with the California Public Utilities Commission. Therefore, no new impacts related to the need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations related to natural gas would occur. Telephone AT&T currently provides telephone service to the City of Anaheim, including the project site. Development of the Proposed Project would create an increase in the demand on the telephone service system. Within the project site, telephone conduits would be installed in joint trenches. Joint trench design would be provided by the telephone service provider once specific development plans become available. The Proposed Project would not create a new significant impact or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects. Cable Time Warner Cable currently provides cable television, high speed internet, and digital telephone service to the project area. Development of the Proposed Project would create an increase in the demand on these services. Based on the company’s service area, the project site is located within the company’s Los Angeles South Division; therefore, the project site could be served by Time Warner Cable. The Proposed Project would not create a new significant impact or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 147 5.17.5.3 ADOPTED MITIGATION MEASURES APPLICABLE TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan FEIR No. 311 Because the mitigation measures identified in SEIR No. 340 are comparable to applicable mitigation measures identified in FEIR No. 311, this document incorporates the more recently adopted measures from SEIR No. 340. Anaheim Resort Specific Plan SEIR No. 340 The following mitigation measures from Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 85C were adopted in connection with SEIR No. 340. The following measures also would be applicable to the Proposed Project. MM 5.19-1 Prior to issuance of each building permit; to be implemented prior to final building and zoning Inspection, the property owner/developer shall submit project plans to the Public Works Department for review and approval to ensure that the plans comply with AB 939, the Solid Waste Reduction Act of 1989, as administered by the City of Anaheim and the County of Orange and City of Anaheim Integrated Waste Management Plans. Prior to final building and zoning inspection, implementation of said plan shall commence and shall remain in full effect. Waste management mitigation measures that shall be taken to reduce solid waste generation include, but are not limited to: a) Detailing the location and design of on-site recycling facilities. b) Providing on-site recycling receptacles to encourage recycling. c) Complying with all Federal, State and City regulation for hazardous material disposal. d) Participating in the City of Anaheim’s “Recycle Anaheim” program or other substitute program as may be developed by the City. In order to meet the requirements of the Solid Waste Reduction Act of 1989 (AB 939), the property owner/developer shall implement numerous solid waste reduction programs, as required by the Public Works Department, including, but not limited to: a) Facilitating recycling by providing chutes or convenient locations for sorting and recycling bins. b) Facilitating cardboard recycling (especially in retail areas) by providing adequate space and centralized locations for collection and storing. c) Facilitating glass recycling (especially from restaurants) by providing adequate space for sorting and storing. d) Providing trash compactors for non-recyclable materials whenever feasible to reduce the total volume of solid waste and the number of trips required for collection. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 148 PlaceWorks e) Prohibiting curbside pick-up. MM 5.19-2 Ongoing during project operation, the following practices shall be implemented, as feasible by the property owner/developer: a) Usage of recycled paper products for stationary, letterhead, and packaging. b) Recovery of materials such as aluminum and cardboard. c) Collection of office paper for recycling. d) Collection of polystyrene (foam) cups for recycling. e) e. Collection of glass, plastics, kitchen grease, laser printer toner cartridges, oil, batteries, and scrap metal for recycling or recovery. MM 5.19-3 Prior to issuance of building permits, plans shall show that trash storage areas shall be provided and maintained in a location acceptable to the City of Anaheim Department of Public Works, Operations Division. On an ongoing basis, trash storage areas shall be provided and maintained in accordance with approved plans on file with said Department. MM 5.19-4 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the Property Owner/Developer shall demonstrate that the plans include provisions for the installation of trash and recycle receptacles near all benches and near high traffic areas such as plazas, transit stops and retail and dining establishments. MM 5.19-5 Prior to issuance of each grading and building permit, the Property Owner/Developer shall submit to the Planning Director or Planning Services Manager for approval a Construction Waste Management Plan that, at a minimum, specifies that at least 75 percent of non- hazardous construction and demolition debris shall be recycled or salvaged and identifies the materials to be diverted from disposal and whether the materials will be sorted on site or co- mingled. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM April 2016 Page 149 5.18 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Environmental Issues Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circum-stances Requiring Major EIR Revisions New Information Showing New or Increased Significant Effects Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR No Impact a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? x b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) x c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? x Comments: a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. The ARSP, including the Project Site, does not contain any significant biological resources. As demonstrated in this Addendum, the Proposed Project would not result in new significant impacts to biological or cultural resources, nor would it substantially increase the severity of impacts evaluated and determined in FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340. Because the Proposed Project would not meet any of the criteria identified in Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines requiring preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR, an Addendum to FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340 is the appropriate document type for the Proposed Project. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis Page 150 PlaceWorks b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. The Proposed Project is consistent with the amount of development planned for the Project Site in both FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340. Therefore, the Proposed Project will not result in any new cumulatively considerable impacts or substantially increase the severity of the cumulative effects previously disclosed in FEIR No. 311 or SEIR No. 340. As demonstrated in this Addendum, the Proposed Project would not result in new significant impacts, nor would it substantially increase the severity of impacts evaluated and determined in FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340. Because the Proposed Project would not meet any of the criteria identified in Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines requiring preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR, an Addendum to FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340 is the appropriate document type for the Proposed Project. c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. As demonstrated in this Addendum, the Proposed Project would not result in new significant impacts, nor would it substantially increase the severity of impacts evaluated and determined in FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340. Because the Proposed Project would not meet any of the criteria identified in Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines requiring preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR, an Addendum to FEIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340 is the appropriate document type for the Proposed Project. April 2016 Page 151 6. List of Preparers 6.1 CITY OF ANAHEIM Planning and Building Department David Belmer Director of Planning and Building Jonathan E. Borrego , AICP Planning Services Manager Susan Kim, AICP Principal Planner Elaine Thienprasiddhi, AICP Senior Planner Christine Saunders Associate Planner Public Works Department Natalie Meeks, PE Director of Public Works David Kennedy, PE Associate Transportation Planner Rafael Cobian, PE, LEED GA Associate Traffic Engineer Shawn Azarhoosh Associate Engineer Leticia Mercado Sanitation Contract Specialist Community Services Pamela Galera Principal Project Planner Cynthia Hicks Supervising Librarian Police Department Matthew Budds Police Officer Anaheim Fire & Rescue Todd Rudaitis Senior Fire Safety Specialist Community Development David Gottlieb Community Investment Manager 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 6. List of Preparers Page 152 PlaceWorks Public Utilities Michael LeBlanc Senior Power Systems Planning Engineer Aladdin Shaikh Principal Civil Engineer Manny Soto Senior Electrical Systems Designer Philip Bogdanoff Principal Civil Engineer 6.2 PLACEWORKS William Halligan, Esq. Principal, Environmental Services Nicole Vermilion Manager, Air Quality, Greenhouse Gases, and Noise Elizabeth Kim Associate Michael Milroy Project Planner John Vang Project Planner Natalie Foley Planner Gina Froelich Senior Editor Cary Nakama Graphic Artist April 2016 Page 153 7. References ASC Associates. 2014, June. Phase I Environmental Assessment Report for 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard, Anaheim. Prepared for Pyrovest Corporation. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2013. Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process. E 1527-13. ———. 2006. Standard Practice for Limited Environmental Due Diligence: Transaction Screen Process. E 1528-06. Anaheim, City of. 1993, June 29 (adopted). The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan (SP 92-1). ———. 1994a, August 9. Hotel Circle Final Specific Plan (SP 93-01). ———.1994b, August. The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Draft EIR No. 313 with Addendum. ———. 1994c, September. The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2. ———. 2004a, May 25. Anaheim General Plan (and as amended thereafter). ———. 2004b, May. Anaheim General Plan/Zoning Code Update EIR. ———. 2010 (adopted). City of Anaheim Municipal Code. Anaheim Fire & Rescue. 2014. Anaheim Fire & Rescue Strategic Plan 2012–2018. http://www.anaheim.net/images/section/73/AFR_Strategic_Plan.pdf. BonTerra Consulting. 2012, September 14. Draft Environmental Impact Report 340, Amendment No. 14, to The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan. California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2014a. Air Pollution Data Monitoring Cards (2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2012). Accessed January 2014. http://www.arb.ca.gov/adam/topfour/topfour1.php. ———. 2014b, February 10. Proposed First Update to the Climate Change Scoping: Building on the Framework. http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/2013_update/discussion_draft.pdf. ———. 2013a, April 1. Area Designations Maps/State and National. http://www.arb.ca.gov/desig/adm/adm.htm. ———. 2013b, June 4. Ambient Air Quality Standards. http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/aaqs/aaqs2.pdf. ———. 2013c, October 23. Proposed 2013 Amendments to Area Designations for State Ambient Air Quality Standards. http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2013/area13/area13isor.pdf. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 7. References Page 154 PlaceWorks ———. 2012a, April. California Greenhouse Gas Inventory for 2000–2009. By Category as Defined by the Scoping Plan. ———. 2012b. Status of Scoping Plan Recommended Measures. http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/status_of_scoping_plan_measures.pdf. ———. 2010, August. Proposed Regional Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Targets for Automobiles and Light Trucks Pursuant to Senate Bill 375. Staff Report. ———. 2008, October. Climate Change Proposed Scoping Plan: A Framework for Change. ———. 2005, April. Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective. ———. 1999, December. Update to the Toxic Air Contaminant List. Final Staff Report. California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 1997, December. Transportation Project-Level Carbon Monoxide Protocol. UCD-ITS-RR-97-21. Prepared by Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California, Davis. ———. 2014. Scenic Highway Program. http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/scenic/faq.htm. California Department of Water Resources (CDWR). 1967. “Progress Report on Ground Water Geology of the Coastal Plain of Orange County, July 1967.” California Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG). 2000, August. “A General Location Guide for Ultramafic Rocks in California: Areas More Likely to Contain Natural Occurring Asbestos.” Open- File Report 2000-19. California Employment Development Department (EDD). 2014. Labor Market Info, LMI by Geography, Cities and Census Designated Areas, Orange County. 2014. Monthly Labor Force Data for Cities and Census Designated Placed (CDP), January 2014 – Preliminary, Data not Seasonally Adjusted. California Energy Commission (CEC). 2008. The Future Is Now: An Update on Climate Change Science, Impacts, and Response Options for California. CEC-500-2008-0077. ———. 2006a, December. Inventory of California Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks 1990 to 2004. Report CEC-600-2006-013-SF. ———. 2006b. Our Changing Climate: Assessing the Risks to California. 2006 Biennial Report. CEC-500- 2006-077. California Geological Survey (CGS). 2014. A Glossary of Rock and Mineral Terminology. http://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/minerals/Pages/mineral_glossary.aspx. ———. 2008, September 11 (revised). Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California. Special Publication 117A. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 7. References April 2016 Page 155 California Geological Survey (formerly the California Division of Mines and Geology). April 15, 1998. State of California Seismic Hazard Zones, Orange Quadrangle Official Map. ———. 1997. Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the Orange 7.5-Minute Quadrangle, Orange County, California. Center for Demographic Research. 2012, January. Orange County Projections 2010 Modified. Climate Action Team (CAT). 2006, March. Climate Action Team Report to Governor Schwarzenegger and the Legislature. Hunsaker & Associates Irvine. 2016a, February. Preliminary Hydrology Analysis for Anaheim Plaza Hotel. Prepared for Wincome Group. ———. 2016b, January. Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan, 1700 South Harbor Boulevard. Prepared for Good Hope International. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2001. 2001 IPCC Third Assessment Report: Climate Change 2001. Iteris. 2016, March 31. Draft City of Anaheim, Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis. Jennings, C. W., and W. A. Bryant. 2010. 2010 Fault Activity Map of California. California Geological Survey Geologic Data Map No. 6, scale 1:750,000. Leighton Consulting. 2016, January. Geotechnical Exploration Report, Proposed Anaheim Plaza Hotel, 1700 South Harbor Boulevard. Prepared for Good Hope International. Michael Bradman Associates. 1992, November 12. Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Disneyland Resort #311. Psomas. 2016, March. 1700 S. Harbor Water Supply Assessment. South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2013. California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod). Version 2013.2.2. ———. 2012a, May 4. Final 2012 Lead State Implementation Plan: Los Angeles County. http://www3.aqmd.gov/hb/attachments/2011-2015/2012May/2012-May4-030.pdf. ———. 2012b. Air Quality Analysis Handbook. Updates to CEQA Air Quality Handbook. http://www.aqmd.gov/home/regulations/ceqa/air-quality-analysis-handbook. ———. 2012c. Final 2012 Air Quality Management Plan. http://www.aqmd.gov/home/library/clean-air- plans/air-quality-mgt-plan/final-2012-air-quality-management-plan. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM 7. References Page 156 PlaceWorks ———. 2011, March (revised). SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds. http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/scaqmd-air-quality-significance- thresholds.pdf?sfvrsn=2. ———. 2010, September 28. Greenhouse Gases (GHG) CEQA Significance Thresholds Working Group Meeting 15. http://www.aqmd.gov/ceqa/handbook/GHG/2010/sept28mtg/sept29.html. ———. 2008a, September. Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study in the South Coast Air Basin (MATES III). ———. 2008b, September. Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study III Model Estimated Carcinogenic Risk. Accessed January 2014. http://www3.aqmd.gov/webappl/matesiii/. ———. 2008c, June. Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology. ———. 2005, May. Guidance Document for Addressing Air Quality Issues in General Plans and Local Planning. ———. 1993. California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality Handbook. Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). 2012, April 4. Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy 2012–2035. http://rtpscs.scag.ca.gov/Pages/default.aspx. ———. 2011. Inland Empire Railroad Main Line Study, Final Report. Prepared by R. C. Leachman (Leachman and Associates), G. V. Hicks (Gill V. Hicks & Associates), G. R. Fetty (George R. Fetty & Associates), and M. Rieger (Weston Solutions). Los Angeles, CA. Thalheimer, E. 2000. “Construction Noise Control Program and Mitigation Strategy at the Central Artery/Tunnel Project.” Noise Control Engineering Journal 48 no. 5(Sep–Oct). Indianapolis, IN: Institute of Noise Control Engineering. US Census Bureau. 2013. American FacFinder: Community Facts, Anaheim City, California. http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/community_facts.xhtml. US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2012a, April 20. What are the Six Common Air Pollutants? http://www.epa.gov/airquality/urbanair. ———. 2012b. Greenhouse Gas Emissions. http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/gases.html. US Geological Survey (USGS). 2012. Orange, California Quadrangles. 7.5-minute topographic series, scale 1:24,000. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Appendix April 2016 Appendix A Air Quality and GHG Analysis 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Appendix PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Appendix April 2016 Appendix B Geotechnical Report 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Appendix PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Appendix April 2016 Appendix C Phase I Site Assessment 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Appendix PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Appendix April 2016 Appendix D Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Appendix PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Appendix April 2016 Appendix E Hydrology Analysis 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Appendix PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Appendix April 2016 Appendix F Exterior Noise Analysis 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Appendix PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Appendix April 2016 Appendix G Traffic Impact Analysis 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Appendix PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Appendix April 2016 Appendix H Water Supply Assessment 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Appendix PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Appendix April 2016 Appendix I Sewer Study 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Appendix PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. 1 ADDENDUM TO FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 311 AND SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 340, 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT, MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN NO. 329 Terms and Definitions: 1. Property Owner/Developer – Good Hope International. 2. Environmental Equivalent/Timing – Any Mitigation Measure and timing thereof, subject to the approval of the City, which will have the same or superior result and will have the same or superior effect on the environment. The Planning Department, in conjunction with any appropriate agencies or City departments, shall determine the adequacy of any proposed “environmental equivalent/timing” and, if determined necessary, may refer said determination to the Planning Commission. Any costs associated with information required in order to make a determination of environmental equivalency/timing shall be borne by the property owner/developer. Staff time for reviews will be charged on a time and materials basis at the rate in the City’s adopted fee schedule. 3. Timing – This is the point where a mitigation measure must be monitored for compliance. In the case where multiple action items are indicated, it is the first point where compliance associated with the mitigation measure must be monitored. Once the initial action item has been complied with, no additional monitoring pursuant to the Mitigation Monitoring Program will occur because routine City practices and procedures will ensure that the intent of the measure has been complied with. For example, if the timing is “to be shown on approved building plans” subsequent to issuance of the building permit consistent with the approved plans will be final building and zoning inspections pursuant to the building permit to ensure compliance. 4. Responsibility for Monitoring – Shall mean that compliance with the subject mitigation measure(s) shall be reviewed and determined adequate by all departments listed for each mitigation measure. 5. Ongoing Mitigation Measures – The mitigation measures that are designated to occur on an ongoing basis as part of this mitigation monitoring program will be monitored in the form of an annual letter from the property owner/developer in January of each year stating how compliance with the subject measures(s) has been achieved. When compliance with a measure has been demonstrated for a period of one year, monitoring of the measure will be deemed to be satisfied and no further monitoring will occur. For measures that are to be monitored “Ongoing During Construction,” the annual letter will review those measures only while construction is occurring. Monitoring will be discontinued after construction is completed. 6. Building Permit – For purposes of this mitigation monitoring program, a building permit shall be defined as any permit issued for construction of a new building or structural expansion or modification of any existing building but shall not include any permits required for interior tenant improvements or minor additions to an existing structure or building. 2 Timing Mitigation Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion AESTHETICS Prior to issuance of building permit MM 3.12-5 The applicant shall participate in a landscape assessment and maintenance district, if one is established for the City of Anaheim’s Commercial Recreation Area. Planning Department/Building Division Prior to issuance of building permit MM 5.1-2 Prior to issuance of building permits, all plumbing or other similar pipes and fixtures located on the exterior of the building shall be shown on plans as fully screened from view of adjacent public rights-of-way and from adjacent properties by architectural devices and/or appropriate building materials. A note indicating that these improvements will be installed prior to final building and zoning inspections shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. Planning Department/Building Division Ongoing MM 5.1-3 Ongoing, the property owner/developer shall be responsible for the removal of any on- site graffiti within 24 hours of its application. Planning Department/Building Division Prior to Final Site Plan approval MM 5.1-4 Prior to Final Site Plan approval, the location and configuration of all lighting fixtures including ground-mounted lighting fixtures utilized to accent buildings, landscape elements, or to illuminate pedestrian areas shall be shown on all Final Site Plans. All proposed surface parking area lighting fixtures shall be down-lighted with a maximum height of twelve (12) feet adjacent to any residential properties. All lighting fixtures shall be shielded to direct lighting toward the area to be illuminated and away from adjacent residential property lines. Planning Department/Building Division Prior to final building and zoning inspections MM 5.1-6 Prior to final building and zoning inspections, root and sidewalk barriers shall be provided for trees within seven feet of public sidewalks. Planning Department/Building Division Prior to final building and zoning inspections MM 5.1-7 Prior to final building and zoning inspections, the property owner/developer shall submit to the Planning Department a letter from a licensed landscape architect certifying that all landscaping and irrigation systems have been installed in accordance with landscaping plans approved in connection with the Final Site Plan. Planning Department/Building Division Ongoing MM 5.1-8 Ongoing, all on-site non-Public Realm, landscaping and irrigation systems, and Public Realm landscaping and irrigation systems, within area in which dedication has not been accepted by the City, shall be maintained by the property owner/developer, in compliance with City standards. Planning Department/Building Division Ongoing MM 5.1-9 Ongoing, any tree planted within the Setback Realm shall be replaced in a timely manner in the event that it is removed, damaged, diseased and/or dead. Planning Department/Building Division Ongoing MM 5.1-10 Ongoing, a licensed arborist shall be hired by the property owner/developer to be responsible for all tree trimming. Planning Department/Building Division Prior to issuance of building permit MM 5.1-11 Prior to issuance of each building permit, unless records indicate previous payment, a fee for street tree purposes shall be paid or cause to be paid to the City of Anaheim based on the length of street frontage in an amount as established by City Council resolution or credit against the fee given for City authorized improvements installed by the property owner/developer. Planning Department/Building Division 3 Timing Mitigation Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion Prior to issuance of building permit MM 5.1-12 Prior to issuance of each building permit, all air conditioning facilities and other roof and ground-mounted equipment shall be shown on plans as shielded from public view and the sound buffered to comply with City of Anaheim noise ordinances from any adjacent residential or transient-occupied properties. A note indicating that these improvements shall be installed prior to final building and zoning inspections shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. Planning Department/Building Division Prior to Final Site Plan approval MM 5.1-13 Prior to Final Site Plan approval, plans shall show that the rear elevations of buildings visible from off-site areas shall be architecturally accented to portray a finished look. Planning Department/Building Division Prior to Final Site Plan approval MM 5.1-14 Prior to Final Site Plan approval, plans shall show that no shuttle/bus/vehicular drop-off areas shall be permitted in hotel/motel or vacation resort front setback area. Planning Department/Building Division AIR QUALITY Ongoing during project operation MM 5.2-1 Ongoing during project operation, the property owner/developer shall implement measures to reduce emissions to the extent practical, schedule goods movements for off-peak traffic hours, and use clean fuel for vehicles and other equipment, as practicable. Planning Department/Building Division Prior to issuance of building permit MM 5.2-2 Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit evidence that low emission paints and coatings are utilized in the design and construction of buildings, in compliance with SCAQMD regulations. The information shall be denoted on the project plans and specifications. The property owner/developer shall submit an architectural coating schedule and calculations demonstrating that VOC emissions from architectural coating operations would not exceed 75 pounds per day averaged over biweekly periods. The calculations shall show, for each coating, the surface area to be coated, gallons (or liters) of coating per unit surface area, and VOC content per gallon (or liter). The property owner/developer shall also implement the following to limit emissions from architectural coatings and asphalt usage: a) Use nonsolvent-based coatings on buildings, wherever appropriate; b) Use solvent based coatings, where they are necessary. Planning Department/Building Division Ongoing during construction MM 5.2-3 Ongoing during construction, the property owner/developer shall implement measures to reduce construction-related air quality impacts. These measures shall include, but are not limited to: a) Normal wetting procedures (at least twice daily) or other dust palliative measures shall be followed during earth-moving operations to minimize fugitive dust emissions, in compliance with the City of Anaheim Municipal Code including application of chemical soil stabilizers to exposed soils after grading is completed and replacing ground cover in disturbed areas as quickly as practicable. b) For projects where there is excavation for subterranean facilities (such as parking) on-site haul roads shall be watered at least every two hours or the on- site haul roads shall be paved. c) Enclosing, covering, watering twice daily, or applying approved soil binders, according to manufacturer’s specification, to exposed piles. Planning Department/Building Division 4 Timing Mitigation Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion d) Roadways adjacent to the project shall be swept and cleared of any spilled export materials at least twice a day to assist in minimizing fugitive dust; and, haul routes shall be cleared as needed if spills of materials exported from the project site occur. e) Where practicable, heavy duty construction equipment shall be kept onsite when not in operation to minimize exhaust emissions associated with vehicles repetitiously entering and exiting the project site. f) Trucks importing or exporting soil material and/or debris shall be covered prior to entering public streets. g) Taking preventive measures to ensure that trucks do not carry dirt on tires onto public streets, including treating onsite roads and staging areas. h) Preventing trucks from idling for longer than 2 minutes. i) Manually irrigate or activate irrigation systems necessary to water and maintain the vegetation as soon as planting is completed. j) Reduce Traffic speeds on all unpaved road surfaces to 15 miles per hour or less. k) Suspend all grading operations when wind speeds (as instantaneous gust) exceed 25 miles per hour and during first and second stage smog alerts. l) Comply with SCAQMD Rule 402, which states that no dust impacts offsite are sufficient to be called a nuisance, and SCAQMD Rule 403, which restricts visible emissions from construction. m) Use low emission mobile construction equipment (e.g., tractors, scrapers, dozers, etc.) where practicable. n) Utilize existing power sources (e.g., power poles) or clean-fuel generators rather than temporary power generators, where practicable. o) Maintain construction equipment engines by keeping them properly tuned. p) Use low sulfur fuel for equipment, to the extent practicable. Prior to issuance of each grading permit (for Import/Export Plan) and prior to issuance of demolition permit (for Demolition Plan) MM 5.2-4 Prior to issuance of each grading permit (for Import/Export Plan) and prior to issuance of demolition permit (for Demolition Plan), the property owner/developer shall submit Demolition and Import/Export plans. The plans shall include identification of offsite locations for materials export from the project and options for disposal of excess material. These options may include recycling of materials onsite, sale to a soil broker or contractor, sale to a project in the vicinity or transport to an environmentally cleared landfill, with attempts made to move it within Orange County. The property owner/developer shall offer recyclable building materials, such as asphalt or concrete for sale or removal by private firms or public agencies for use in construction of other projects, if not all can be reused on project site. Planning Department/Building Division Prior to issuance of building permit MM 5.2-5 Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall comply with all SCAQMD offset regulations and implementation of Best Available Control Technology (BACT) and Best Available Retrofit Control Technology (BARCT) for any new or modified stationary source. Copies of permits shall be given to the Planning Department. Planning Department/Building Division 5 Timing Mitigation Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion Prior to issuance of building permit MM 5.2-6 Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall implement, and demonstrate to the City, measures that are being taken to reduce operation-related air quality impacts. These measures may include, but are not limited to the following: a) Improve thermal integrity of structures and reduced thermal load through use of automated time clocks or occupant sensors. b) Incorporate efficient heating and other appliances. c) Incorporate energy conservation measures in site orientation and in building design, such as appropriate passive solar design. d) Use drought-resistant landscaping wherever feasible to reduce energy used in pumping and transporting water. e) To the extent feasible, provide daycare opportunities for employees or participate in a joint development daycare center. f) Install facilities for electric vehicle recharging, unless it is demonstrated that the technology for these facilities or availability of the equipment current at the time makes this installation infeasible. Planning Department/Building Division BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Prior to issuance of a demolition permit, grading permit, or building permit, whichever occurs first MM 5.3-1 Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit, grading permit, or building permit, whichever occurs first, a survey for active raptor nests shall be conducted by a qualified Biologist and submitted to the Planning Department 30 days prior to commencement of any demolition or construction activities during the raptor nesting season (February 1 to June 30) and within 500 feet of a fan palm, juniper, or canary island pine. Should an active nest be identified, restrictions defined by a qualified Biologist will be placed on construction activities in the vicinity of any active nest observed until the nest is no longer active, as determined by a qualified Biologist. These restrictions may include a 300- to 500-foot buffer zone designated around a nest to allow construction to proceed while minimizing disturbance to the active nest. Once the nest is no longer active, construction can proceed within the buffer zone. Planning Department/Building Division Prior to issuance of a demolition permit, grading permit, or building permit, whichever occurs first MM 5.3-2 Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit, grading permit, or building permit, whichever occurs first, a letter detailing the proposed schedule for vegetation removal activities shall be submitted to the Planning Department, verifying that removal shall take place between August 1 and February 28 to avoid the bird nesting season. This would ensure that no active nests would be disturbed. If this is not feasible, then a qualified Biologist shall inspect any trees which would be impacted prior to demolition, grading or construction activities to ensure no nesting birds are present. If a nest is present, then appropriate minimization measures shall be developed by the Biologist. Planning Department/Building Division 6 Timing Mitigation Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion CULTURAL RESOURCES Prior to issuance of grading permit MM 5.4-1 Prior to issuance of each grading permit, the property owner/developer shall submit a letter identifying the certified archaeologist that has been hired to ensure that the following actions are implemented: a) The archaeologist must be present at the pre-grading conference in order to establish procedures for temporarily halting or redirecting work to permit the sampling, identification, and evaluation of artifacts if potentially significant artifacts are uncovered. If artifacts are uncovered and determined to be significant, the archaeological observer shall determine appropriate actions in cooperation with the property owner/developer for exploration and/or salvage. b) Specimens that are collected prior to or during the grading process will be donated to an appropriate educational or research institution. c) Any archaeological work at the site shall be conducted under the direction of the certified archaeologist. If any artifacts are discovered during grading operations when the archaeological monitor is not present, grading shall be diverted around the area until the monitor can survey the area. d) A final report detailing the findings and disposition of the specimens shall be submitted to the City Engineer. Upon completion of the grading, the archaeologist shall notify the City as to when the final report will be submitted. Planning Department/Building Division Prior to issuance of grading permit MM 5.4-2 Prior to issuance of each grading permit, the property owner/developer shall submit a letter identifying the certified paleontologist that has been hired to ensure that the following actions are implemented: a) The paleontologist must be present at the pre-grading conference in order to establish procedures to temporarily halt or redirect work to permit the sampling, identification, and evaluation of fossils if potentially significant paleontological resources are uncovered. If artifacts are uncovered and found to be significant, the paleontological observer shall determine appropriate actions in cooperation with the property owner/developer for exploration and/or salvage. b) Specimens that are collected prior to or during the grading process will be donated to an appropriate educational or research institution. c) Any paleontological work at the site shall be conducted under the direction of the certified paleontologist. If any fossils are discovered during grading operations when the paleontological monitor is not present, grading shall be diverted around the area until the monitor can survey the area. Planning Department/Building Division GEOLOGY AND SOILS Prior to issuance of building permit MM 5.5-1 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit to the Planning Department, Building Services Division for review and approval, detailed foundation design information for the subject building(s), prepared by a civil engineer, based on recommendations by a geotechnical engineer. Planning Department/Building Division 7 Timing Mitigation Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion Prior to issuance of foundation permit MM 5.5-2 Prior to issuance of each foundation permit, the property owner/developer shall submit a report prepared by a geotechnical engineer to the Planning Department, Building Services Division for review and approval, which shall investigate the subject foundation excavations to determine if soft layers are present immediately beneath the footing site and to ensure that compressibility does not underlie the footing. Planning Department/Building Division Prior to issuance of building permit MM 5.5-3 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit plans to the Planning Department, Building Services Division for review and approval showing that the proposed structure has been analyzed for earthquake loading and designed according to the most recent seismic standards in the California Building Code adopted by the City of Anaheim. Planning Department/Building Division Prior to the final building and zoning inspection for a hotel/motel MM 5.5-4 Prior to the final building and zoning inspection for a hotel/motel, the property owner/developer shall submit an earthquake emergency response plan for review and approval by the Fire Department. The plan shall require posted notices in all hotel rooms on earthquake safety procedures and incorporate ongoing earthquake training for hotel staff to the satisfaction of the Fire Department. Fire Department Ongoing during grading activities MM 5.5-5 Ongoing during grading activities, the property owner/developer shall implement standard practices for all applicable codes and ordinances to prevent erosion to the satisfaction of the Planning Department, Building Services Division. Planning Department/Building Division Prior to issuance of building or grading permit MM 5.5-6 Prior to issuance of building or grading permits, the property owner/developer shall submit to the Planning Department, Building Services Division geologic and geotechnical investigations in areas of potential seismic or geologic hazards and provide a note on plans that all grading operations will be conducted in conformance with the recommendations contained in the applicable geotechnical investigation. Planning Department/Building Division HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Prior to issuance of the first grading or demolition permit, whichever occurs first MM 5.7-4 Prior to issuance of the first grading or demolition permit, whichever occurs first the property owner/developer shall submit a plan for review and approval of the Fire Department which details procedures that will be taken if previously unknown USTs, or other unknown hazardous material or waste, is discovered onsite. Fire Department Ongoing during project demolition and construction MM 5.7-6 Ongoing during project demolition and construction, in the event that hazardous waste, including asbestos, is discovered during site preparation or construction, the property owner/developer shall ensure that the identified hazardous waste and/or hazardous material are handled and disposed of in the manner specified by the State of California Hazardous Substances Control Law (Health and Safety Code, Division 20, Chapter 6.5), and according to the requirements of the California Administrative Code, Title 30, Chapter 22. Fire Department 8 Timing Mitigation Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Prior to issuance of the first grading or building permit, whichever occurs first MM 5.8-1 Prior to issuance of the first grading or building permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall submit a Master Drainage and Runoff Management Plan (MDRMP) for review and approval by the Public Works Department, Development Services Division and Orange County Environmental Management Agency. The Master Plan shall include, but not be limited to, the following items: a) Backbone storm drain layout and pipe size, including supporting hydrology and hydraulic calculations for storms up to and including the 100-year storm; and, b) A delineation of the improvements to be implemented for control of project- generated drainage and runoff. Public Works Department Prior to issuance of grading permit MM 5.8-2 Prior to issuance of a grading permit for sites that disturb more than one (1) acre of soil, the property owner/developer shall obtain coverage under the NPDES Statewide Industrial Stormwater Permit for General Construction Activities from the State Water Resources Control Board. Evidence of attainment shall be submitted to the Planning Department, Building Services Division. Planning Department/Building Division Ongoing during project operation MM 5.8-3 Ongoing during project operations, the property owner/developer shall provide for the following: cleaning of all paved areas not maintained by the City of Anaheim on a monthly basis, including, but not limited to, private streets and parking lots. The use of water to clean streets, paved areas, parking lots, and other areas and flushing the debris and sediment down the storm drains shall be prohibited. Planning Department/Building Division Prior to final building and zoning inspection MM 5.8-4 Prior to each final building and zoning inspection, the property owner/developer shall submit a letter from a licensed landscape architect to the City certifying that the landscape installation and irrigation systems have been installed as specified in the approved landscaping and irrigation plans. Planning Department/Building Division Prior to final building and zoning inspection MM 5.8-5 Prior to final building and zoning inspection, the property owner/developer shall install piping on-site with project water mains so that reclaimed water may be used for landscape irrigation, if and when it becomes available. Public Utilities Department NOISE Ongoing during construction MM 5.10-1 Ongoing during construction, the property owner/developer shall ensure that all internal combustion engines on construction equipment and trucks are fitted with properly maintained mufflers. Planning Department/Building Division Prior to approval of final site plan MM 5.10-2 Prior to final site plan approval of each final site plan, the property owner/developer shall submit a noise study prepared by a certified acoustical engineer to the satisfaction of the Building Division Manager identifying whether noise attenuation is required and defining the attenuation measures and specific performance requirements, if warranted, to comply with the Uniform Building Code and Sound Pressure Level Ordinance. Ultimate noise attenuation shall depend on the final location of such buildings and noise- sensitive uses inside and surrounding the buildings. Attenuation measures shall be implemented by the property owner/developer prior to final building and zoning inspections. Planning Department/Building Division 9 Timing Mitigation Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion Ongoing during construction and project operation MM 5.10-6 Ongoing during construction and project operation, pressure washing operations for purposes of building repair and maintenance due to graffiti or other aesthetical considerations shall be limited to daytime hours of operation between 7:00 AM and 8:00 PM. Planning Department/Building Division Ongoing during construction and project operation MM 5.10-7 Ongoing during construction and project operation, sweeping operations in the parking facilities and private on-site roadways shall be performed utilizing sweeping/scrubbing equipment which operate at a level measured not greater than 60 dBA at the nearest adjacent property line. Planning Department/Building Division Prior to issuance of building permit MM 5.10-9 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall present plans and calculations to the Planning Department, Building Division to demonstrate that noise levels would be less than 65 dBA CNEL for outdoor use areas (including dining patios, pools, playgrounds, or outdoor gathering areas). This requirement can be accomplished through shielding areas behind buildings or the construction of a noise barrier. Planning Department/Building Division Prior to issuance of building permit MM 5.10-10 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall present plans and calculations to the Planning Department, Building Division to demonstrate that noise levels from planned mechanical ventilation equipment, loading docks, trash compactors, and other proposed on-site noise sources are designed to meet the City’s 60 dBA Sound Pressure Levels standard at the property line, and not create a noise increase greater than 5 dBA over existing ambient noise at the nearest noise sensitive receptor, whichever is more restrictive. Planning Department/Building Division Prior to issuance of building permit if pile driving and blasting is anticipated during construction MM 5.10-12 Prior to issuance of each building permit if pile driving and blasting is anticipated during construction, a noise and vibration analysis must be prepared and submitted to the Planning Department, Building Division, to assess and mitigate and vibration impacts related to these activities. Planning Department/Building Division PUBLIC SERVICES Prior to approval of Final Site Plan and issuance of building permit MM 5.12-1 Prior to the approval of each Final Site Plan and issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit plans to the Police Department for review and approval for safety, accessibility, crime prevention, and security provisions during both the construction and operative phases for the purpose of incorporating safety measures in the project design including the concept of crime prevention through environmental design (e.g., building design, circulation, site planning, and lighting of parking structures and parking areas). Police Department Prior to issuance of building permit for parking structure MM 5.12-2 Prior to the issuance of each building permit for a parking structure, the property owner/developer shall submit plans to the Police Department for review and approval indicating the provision of closed circuit television monitoring and recording or other substitute security measures as may be approved by the Police Department. Said measures shall be implemented prior to final building and zoning inspections. Police Department 10 Timing Mitigation Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion Ongoing during project operation MM 5.12-3 Ongoing during project operation, the property owner/developer shall provide private security on the premises to maintain adequate security for the entire project subject to review and approval of the Police Department. The use of security patrols and electronic security devices (i.e., video monitors) should be considered to reduce the potential for criminal activity in the area. Police Department Prior to issuance of building permit MM 5.12-4 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the project design shall include parking lots and parking structures with controlled access points to limit ingress and egress if determined to be necessary by the Police Department, and shall be subject to the review and approval of the Police Department. Police Department Prior to commencement of structural framing MM 5.12-5 Prior to commencement of structural framing on each parcel or lot, onsite fire hydrants shall be installed and charged by the property owner/developer as required and approved by the Fire Department. Police Department Prior to issuance of grading permit MM 5.12-6 Prior to issuance of each grading permit, the property owner/developer shall submit an emergency fire access plan to the Fire Department for review and approval to ensure that service to the site is in accordance with Fire Department service requirements. Police Department Prior to issuance of each building permit; to be implemented prior to the final building and zoning inspection MM 5.12-7 Prior to issuance of each building permit; to be implemented prior to the final building and zoning inspection, plans shall indicate that all buildings, exclusive of parking structures, shall have sprinklers installed by the property owner/developer in accordance with the Anaheim Municipal Code. Said sprinklers shall be installed prior to each final building and zoning inspection. Fire Department Prior to issuance of building permit MM 5.12-8 Prior to issuance of each building permit, plans shall be submitted to ensure that development is in accordance with the City of Anaheim Fire Department Standards, including: a) Overhead clearance shall not be less than 14 feet for the full width of access roads. b) Bridges and underground structures to be used for Fire Department access shall be designed to support Fire Department vehicles weighing 75,000 pounds. c) All underground tunnels shall have sprinklers. Water supplies are required at all entrances. Standpipes shall also be provided when determined to be necessary by the Fire Department. d) Adequate off-site public fire hydrants contiguous to the Specific Plan area and onsite private fire hydrants shall be provided by the property owner/developer. The precise number, types, and locations of the hydrants shall be determined during building permit review. Hydrants are to be a maximum of 400 feet apart. e) A minimum residual water pressure of 20 psi shall remain in the water system. Flow rates for public parking facilities shall be set at 1,000 to 1,500 gpm. Fire Department 11 Timing Mitigation Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion Prior to issuance of building permit MM 5.12-9 Prior to issuance of the first building permit, the property owner/developer shall enter into an agreement recorded against the property with the City of Anaheim to pay or cause to be paid their fair share of the funding to accommodate the following, which will serve the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan area: a) One additional fire truck company. b) One additional paramedic company. c) Modifications to existing fire stations to accommodate the additional fire units, additional manpower, equipment and facilities. d) A vehicle equipped with specialty tools and equipment to enable the Fire Department to provide heavy search and rescue response capability. e) A medical triage vehicle/trailer, equipped with sufficient trauma dressings, medical supplies, stretchers, etc., to handle 1,000 injured persons, and an appropriate storage facility. The determination of the allocable share of costs attributable to the property owner/developer shall be based on an apportionment of the costs of such equipment/facilities among property owners/developers in the Hotel Circle Specific Plan Area, The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan Area and the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Area or the otherwise defined service area, as applicable, depending on the area served. (Note: To implement this mitigation measure, the City has adopted the Fire Protection Facilities and Paramedic Services Impact Fee Program. Compliance with this Program by the property owner/developer (per Ordinance No. 5496 and Resolution No. 95R-73 dated May 16, 1995) shall satisfy the requirements of this Mitigation Measure, or the City may enter into alternative financing arrangements.) Fire Department Prior to each final building and zoning inspection MM 5.12-10 Prior to each final building and zoning inspection, the property owner/developer shall place emergency telephone service numbers in prominent locations as approved by the Fire Department. Fire Department Prior to issuance of building permit MM 5.12-11 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit a Construction Fire Protection Plan to the Fire Department for review and approval detailing accessibility of emergency fire equipment, fire hydrant location, and any other construction features required by the Fire Marshal. The property owner/developer shall be responsible for securing facilities acceptable to the Fire Department and hydrants shall be operational with required fire flow. Fire Department Prior to approval of Final Site Plan and issuance of building permit MM 5.12-12 Prior to the approval of each Final Site Plan and prior to the issuance of each building permit, plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Fire Department as being in conformance with the Uniform Fire Code. Fire Department Prior to placement of building materials on a building site MM 5.12-13 Prior to the placement of building materials on a building site, an all-weather road shall be provided from the roadway system to and on the construction site and for fire hydrants at all times, as required by the Fire Department. Such routes shall be paved or, subject to the approval of the Fire Department, shall otherwise provide adequate emergency access. Every building constructed must be accessible to Fire Department apparatus. The width and radius of the driving surface must meet the requirements of Section 10.204 of the Uniform Fire Code, as adopted by the City of Anaheim. Fire Department 12 Timing Mitigation Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion Prior to approval of building plans MM 5.12-14 Prior to approval of building plans, the property owner/developer shall provide written evidence to the satisfaction of the Fire Department that all lockable pedestrian and/or vehicular access gates shall be equipped with “knox box” devices as required and approved by the Fire Department. Fire Department Prior to approval of on- site water plans MM 5.12-15 Prior to approval of on-site water plans, unless each commercial building is initially connected to separate fire services, an unsubordinated covenant satisfactory to the City Attorney’s Office shall be recorded prohibiting any individual sale of buildings until separate fire services are installed in the building(s) subject to the sale. Fire Department Prior to approval of water improvement plans MM 5.12-16 Prior to approval of water improvement plans, the water supply system shall be designed by the property owner/developer to provide sufficient fire flow pressure and storage for the proposed land use and fire protection services in accordance with Fire Department requirements. Fire Department Prior to issuance of building permit MM 5.12-17 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall provide proof of compliance with Government Code Section 53080 (Schools). Planning Department/Building Division Ongoing MM 5.12-18 Ongoing, the City will work cooperatively with school districts to identify opportunities for new schools and school expansion. Planning Department/Building Division Prior to issuance of building permit MM 5.12-19 Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the property owner/developer shall comply with the Anaheim Municipal Code, Section 17.08.385, Public Library Facilities Services Areas – Payment of Fees Required. Planning Department/Building Division TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION Prior to issuance of building permits for any project forecast to generate 100 or more peak hour trips MM 5.14-1 Prior to approval of a Final Site Plan for any project forecast to generate 100 or more peak hour trips, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager utilizing Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model Trip Generation Rates, the property owner/developer shall prepare traffic improvement phasing analyses to identify when the improvements identified in this traffic analysis shall be designed and constructed. Public Works Department/Traffic and Transportation Division Prior to the issuance of building permit for each building MM 5.14-2 Prior to issuance of the first building permit for each building, the property owner/developer shall pay the appropriate Traffic Signal Assessment Fees and Transportation Impact and Improvement Fees to the City of Anaheim in amounts determined by the City Council Resolution in effect at the time of issuance of the building permit with credit given for City-authorized improvements provided by the property owner/developer. The property owner shall also participate in all applicable reimbursement or benefit districts, which have been established. Public Works Department/Traffic and Transportation Division Prior to issuance of building permit MM 5.14-3 Prior to approval of the first final subdivision map or issuance of the first building permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall irrevocably offer for dedication (with subordination of easements), including necessary construction easements, the ultimate arterial highway right(s)-of-way adjacent to their property as shown in the Circulation Element of the Anaheim General Plan. Public Works Department/Traffic and Transportation Division 13 Timing Mitigation Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion Prior to the final building and zoning inspection MM 5.14-4 Prior to the final building and zoning inspection, the property owner shall join and financially participate in a clean fuel shuttle program such as the Anaheim Resort Transit system, and shall participate in the Anaheim Transportation Network in conjunction with the on-going operation of the project. The property owner shall also record a covenant on the property that requires participation in these programs ongoing during project operation. The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney’s Office prior to recordation. Public Works Department/Traffic and Transportation Division Prior to issuance of grading permit MM 5.14-5 Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the property owner/developer shall provide to the City of Anaheim Public Works Department a plan to coordinate rideshare services for construction employees with the Anaheim Transportation Network (ATN) for review and approval and shall implement ATN recommendations to the extent feasible. Public Works Department/Traffic and Transportation Division Ongoing during construction MM 5.14-7 Ongoing during construction, if the Anaheim Police Department or the Anaheim Traffic Management Center (TMC) personnel are required to provide temporary traffic control services, the property owner/developer shall reimburse the City, on a fair-share basis, if applicable, for reasonable costs associated with such services. Police Department Public Works Department/Traffic and Transportation Division Prior to the final building and zoning inspection MM 5.14-8 Prior to the final building and zoning inspection, the property owner shall record a covenant on the property requiring that ongoing during project implementation, the property owner/developer shall implement and administer a comprehensive Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program for all employees. The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney’s Office. Objectives of the TDM program shall be: a) Increase ridesharing and use of alternative transportation modes by guests. b) Provide a menu of commute alternatives for employees to reduce project- generated trips. c) Conduct an annual commuter survey to ascertain trip generation, trip origin, and Average Vehicle Ridership. Public Works Department/Traffic and Transportation Division Prior to the final building and zoning inspection MM 5.14-9 Prior to the final building and zoning inspection, the property owner/developer shall provide to the City of Anaheim Public Works Department for review and approval a menu of TDM program strategies and elements for both existing and future employees’ commute options, and incentives for hotel patrons transportation options, to include, but not be limited to, the list below. The property owner shall also record a covenant on the property requiring that the approved TDM strategies and elements be implemented ongoing during project operation. The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney’s Office prior to recordation. Increase ridesharing and use of alternative transportation modes by guests. a) On-site services. Provide, as feasible and permitted, on-site services such as the food, retail, and other services. b) Ridesharing. Develop a commuter listing of all employee members for the purpose of providing a “matching” of employees with other employees who live in the same geographic areas and who could rideshare. Public Works Department/Traffic and Transportation Division 14 Timing Mitigation Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion c) Vanpooling. Develop a commuter listing of all employees for the purpose of matching numbers of employees who live in geographic proximity to one another and could comprise a vanpool or participate in the existing vanpool programs. d) Transit Pass. Promote Orange County Transportation Authority (including commuter rail) passes through financial assistance and on-site sales to encourage employees to use the various transit and bus services from throughout the region. e) Shuttle Service. Generate a commuter listing of all employees living in proximity to the project, and offer a local shuttle program to encourage employees to travel to work by means other than the automobile. When appropriate, event shuttle service shall also be made available for guests. i) Work Shifts. Stagger work shifts. j) Compressed Work Week. Develop a “compressed work week” program, which provides for fewer work days but longer daily shifts as an option for employees. k) Telecommuting. Explore the possibility of a “telecommuting” program that would link some employees via electronic means (e.g., computer with modem). l) Parking Management. Develop a parking management program that provides incentives to those who rideshare or use transit means other than single- occupant auto to travel to work. m) Access. Provide preferential access to high occupancy vehicles and shuttles. n) Financial Incentive for Ridesharing and/or Public Transit. Offer employees financial incentives for ridesharing or using public transportation. Currently, federal law provides tax-free status for up to $65 per month per employee contributions to employees who vanpool or use public transit including commuter rail and/or express bus pools. o) Financial Incentive for Bicycling. Offer employees financial incentives for bicycling to work. p) Special “Premium” for the Participation and Promotion of Trip Reduction. Offer ticket/passes to special events, vacations, etc. to employees who recruit other employees for vanpool, carpool, or other trip reduction programs. q) Incentive Programs. Design incentive programs for carpooling and other alternative transportation modes so as to put highest priority on reduction of longest commute trips. Prior to approval of tentative tract or parcel map MM 5.14-10 Prior to approval of each tentative tract or parcel map, the following Street Design Elements shall be shown on each tentative tract or parcel map: a) Street cross-sections, including dimensions, labels, circulation designation (i.e., Resort Secondary) and whether public or private. b) Street grades and vertical alignment c) Horizontal alignment, including radii, and cul-de-sac radii. Public Works Department/Traffic and Transportation Division 15 Timing Mitigation Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion Prior to recordation of a subdivision map or issuance of the first building permit, whichever occurs first MM 5.14-11 Prior to the recordation of a subdivision map or issuance of the first building permit, whichever occurs first, in the event that a parcel is subdivided and there is a need for common on-site circulation and/or parking, prior to recordation of a subdivision map, an unsubordinated covenant providing for reciprocal access and/or parking, as appropriate, approved by the Planning Director or Planning Services Manager, shall be recorded with the Office of the Orange County Recorder. A copy of the recorded covenant shall then be submitted to the Planning Division of the Planning Department. If the reciprocal access is across parcel lines or if public rights of way are required for reciprocal access; Public Works approval shall be required. Planning Department/Building Division Prior to issuance of building permit MM 5.14-12 Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the location of any proposed gates across a driveway shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer. Gates shall not be installed across any driveway or private street in a manner which may adversely affect vehicular traffic on the adjacent public streets. Installation of any gates shall conform to the current version of Engineering Standard Detail No. 475. Public Works Department/Traffic and Transportation Division Prior to issuance of building permit MM 5.14-13 Prior to the issuance of building permits, plans shall show that all driveways shall be constructed with a minimum fifteen (15) foot radius curb returns as required by the City Engineer, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Public Works Department/Traffic and Transportation Division Prior to issuance of building permit or final map approval, whichever occurs first MM 5.14-14 Prior to the issuance of building permits or final map approval, whichever occurs first, security in the form of a bond, certificate of deposit, letter of credit, completion guarantee, or cash, in an amount and form satisfactory to the City Engineer shall be posted with the City to guarantee the satisfactory completion of all engineering requirements of the City of Anaheim, including preparation of improvement plans and installation of all improvements, such as curbs and gutters, sidewalks, water facilities, street grading and pavement, sewer and drainage facilities and other appurtenant work, as required by the City Engineer and in accordance with the specifications on file in the office of the City Engineer, as may be modified by the City Engineer. Installation of said improvements shall occur prior to final building and zoning inspections. Public Works Department/Traffic and Transportation Division Prior to issuance of building permits for any project forecast to generate 100 or more peak hour trips MM 5.14-15 Based upon the improvement phasing analysis in the Project traffic study, the property owner/developer shall implement traffic improvements as identified in the Project traffic study to maintain satisfactory levels of service as defined by the City’s General Plan, based on thresholds of significance, performance standards, and methodologies established by the Orange County Congestion Management program and the City of Anaheim Traffic Study Guidelines. The improvement phasing analysis will specify the timing, funding, construction, and fair-share responsibilities for all traffic improvements necessary to maintain satisfactory levels of service within the City of Anaheim and surrounding jurisdictions. The property owner/developer shall construct, bond for or enter into a funding agreement for necessary circulation system improvements, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager, unless alternative funding sources have been identified. Public Works Department/Traffic and Transportation Division 16 Timing Mitigation Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion Prior to approval of a Final Site Plan MM 5.14-16 Prior to approval of a Final Site Plan for any project forecast to generate 100 or more peak hour trips, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager utilizing Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model Trip Generation Rates, in conjunction with the preparation of any traffic improvement phasing analyses as required in MM 5.14-1, property owners/developers will determine when the intersection improvements shall be constructed, subject to the conditions identified in MM 5.14-1. Public Works Department/Traffic and Transportation Division Prior to approval of a Final Site Plan MM 5.14-17 Prior to approval of a Final Site Plan for any project forecast to generate 100 or more peak hour trips, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager utilizing Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model Trip Generation Rates, in conjunction with the preparation of any traffic improvement phasing analyses as required in MM 5.14-1, following actions shall be taken in cooperation with the City of Orange: a) The traffic improvement phasing analysis shall identify any impacts created by the Project on facilities within the City of Orange. The fair-share percentage responsibility for mitigating these impacts shall be calculated in this analysis. b) The City of Anaheim shall estimate the cost of the Project’s fair-share responsibility in cooperation with the City of Orange. c) The property owner/developer shall pay the City of Anaheim the fair-share cost prior to issuance of a building permit. The City of Anaheim shall hold the amount received in trust, and then, once a mutually agreed upon joint program is executed by both cities, the City of Anaheim shall allocate the fair-share contribution to traffic mitigation programs that result in improved traffic flow at the impacted locations, via an agreement mutually acceptable to both cities. Public Works Department/Traffic and Transportation Division Prior to approval of a Final Site Plan MM 5.14-18 Prior to approval of a Final Site Plan for any project forecast to generate 100 or more peak hour trips, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager utilizing Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model Trip Generation Rates, in conjunction with the preparation of any traffic improvement phasing analyses as required in MM 5.14-1, and funded the warranted improvements to the impacted freeway mainline or freeway ramp locations, property owners/developers and the City will take the following actions in cooperation with Caltrans: a) The traffic improvement phasing analysis shall identify any impacts created by the Project on facilities within the City of Orange. The fair-share percentage responsibility for mitigating these impacts shall be calculated in this analysis. b) The City of Anaheim shall estimate the cost of the Project’s fair-share responsibility in cooperation with the City of Orange. Public Works Department/Traffic and Transportation Division Prior to the approval of the final subdivision map or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first MM 5.14-19 Prior to the approval of the final subdivision map or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall pay the identified fair- share responsibility as determined by the City as set forth in 5.14-15. The City shall allocate the property owner/developer’s fair-share contribution to traffic mitigation programs that result in improved traffic flow on the impacted mainline and ramp locations, via an agreement mutually acceptable to Caltrans and the City. Public Works Department/Traffic and Transportation Division 17 Timing Mitigation Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion Prior to the approval of a Final Site Plan MM 5.14-20 Prior to the approval of a Final Site Plan, the property owner/developer shall meet with the Traffic and Transportation Manager to determine whether a bus stop(s) is required to be placed adjacent to the property. If a bus stop(s) is required, it shall be placed in a location that least impacts traffic flow and may be designed as a bus turnout or a far side bus stop as required by the Traffic and Transportation Manager and per the approval of the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA). Public Works Department/Traffic and Transportation Division Prior to the first final building and zoning Inspection MM 5.14-21 Prior to the first final building and zoning Inspection every property owner and/or lessee shall designate an on-site contact that will be responsible for coordinating with the ATN and implementing all trip mitigation measures. The on-site coordinator shall be the one point of contact representing the project with the ATN. The TDM requirements shall be included in the lease or other agreement with all of the project participants. Public Works Department/Traffic and Transportation Division Prior to the approval of a Final Site Plan MM 5.14-22 Subsequent to the certification of Final EIR No. 340, and prior to the approval of the first Final Site Plan, if the costs of the identified improvements in the Traffic Study Report for Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan cannot be covered by the total funding allocation under the existing City fee programs and funding sources, an update of the existing City traffic fee program or other fee programs shall be developed by the City of Anaheim to ensure completion of the recommended improvements. Public Works Department/Traffic and Transportation Division UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Water Prior to issuance of building permit MM 5.15-1 Prior to issuance of each building permit (to be implemented prior to final building and zoning inspections, and continuing on an on-going basis during project operation), the property owner/ developer shall submit to the Planning Services Division Public Utilities Department plans for review and approval which shall ensure that water conservation measures are incorporated. The water conservation measures to be shown on the plans and implemented by the property owner/developer, to the extent applicable include, but are not limited to, the following: a) Use of low-flow sprinkler heads in irrigation systems. b) Use of waterway recirculation systems. c) Low-flow fittings, fixtures, and equipment, including low flush toilets and urinals. d) Use of self-closing valves on drinking valves. e) Use of efficient irrigation systems such as drip irrigation and automatic systems which use moisture sensors. f) Use of low-flow shower heads in hotels. g) Water efficient ice-machines, dishwashers, clothes washers and other water- using appliances. h) Use of irrigation systems primarily at night when evaporation rates are lowest. i) Provide information to the public in conspicuous places regarding water conservation. j) Use of water conserving landscape plant materials wherever feasible. Planning Department/Building Division 18 Timing Mitigation Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion Prior to issuance of building permit MM 5.15-2 Prior to issuance of each building permit, all water supply planning for the project will be closely coordinated with, and be subject to the review and final approval of, the Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division and Fire Department. Public Utilities Department Prior to issuance of building permit MM 5.15-3 Prior to issuance of each building permit, water pressure greater than 80 pounds per square inch (psi) shall be reduced to 80 psi or less by means of pressure reducing valves installed at the property owner/developer’s service. Planning Department/Building Division Prior to issuance of building permit MM 5.15-4 Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit a landscape and irrigation plan which shall be prepared and certified by a licensed landscape architect. The irrigation plan shall specify methods for monitoring the irrigation system. The system shall ensure that irrigation rates do not exceed the infiltration of local soils, that the application of fertilizers and pesticides do not exceed appropriate levels of frequencies, and that surface runoff and overwatering is minimized. The landscaping and irrigation plans shall include water-conserving features such as low flow irrigation heads, automatic irrigation scheduling equipment, flow sensing controls, rain sensors, soil moisture sensors, and other water-conserving equipment. The landscaping and irrigation plans shall indicate that separate irrigation lines for recycled water shall be constructed and recycled water will be used when it becomes available. All irrigation systems shall be designed so that they will function properly with recycled water. Planning Department/Building Division Prior to approval of the Final Site Plan and building permits MM 5.15-5 Prior to approval of the Final Site Plan and building permits, plans shall specifically show that the water meter and backflow equipment and any other large water system equipment will be installed to the satisfaction of the Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division, aboveground and behind the building setback line in a manner fully screened from all public streets and alleys and in accordance with Ordinance No. 4156. Prior to the final building and zoning inspections, the water meter and backflow equipment and any other large water system equipment shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division, in accordance with the Final Site Plan and the building permit plans. Public Utilities Department Prior to issuance of building permit MM 5.15-6 Prior to issuance of each building permit, unless records indicate previous payment, the appropriate fees for Primary Mains, Secondary Mains and Fire Protection Service shall be paid to the Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division in accordance with Rule 15A, and Rule 20 of the Public Utilities Department Water Rates, Rules and Regulations. Public Utilities Department Prior to final building and zoning inspections MM 5.15-7 Prior to final building and zoning inspections, a separate water meter shall be installed for landscape water on all projects where the landscape area exceeds 2,500 square feet in accordance with Ordinance No. 5349. Planning Department/Building Division 19 Timing Mitigation Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion Prior to the issuance of the first building permit or grading permit, whichever occurs first MM 5.15-8 Prior to the issuance of the first building permit or grading permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall comply with Rule 15E of the Public Utilities Department Water Rates, Rules, and Regulations. Rule 15E shall be amended to include: a) Construction of a new well with a minimum 1,500 GPM capacity to serve The Anaheim Resort Area (tentative location near Ponderosa Park and Orangewood Avenue); and b) Construction of a new 16-inch water main along Harbor Boulevard from Orangewood to Chapman Avenue. Public Utilities Department Ongoing MM 5.15-9 Ongoing, the City shall continue to collaborate with the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD), its member agencies, and the Orange County Water District (OCWD) to ensure that available water supplies meet anticipated demand. If it is forecasted that water demand exceeds available supplies, staff shall recommend to City Council to trigger application of the Water Conservation Ordinance (Anaheim Municipal Code, §10.18), as prescribed, to require mandatory conservation measures as authorized by Sections 10.18.070 through 10.18.090, as appropriate. Public Utilities Department Sewer Prior to issuance of the first building permit for development of a facility other than parking 3.10.7-3 Prior to issuance of the first building permit for development of a facility other than parking in the Future Expansion District, the applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City of Anaheim to pay or cause to be paid its fair share of funding for the following improvements:  The applicable segments of a City sewer replacement or parallel line to an existing 18-inch City sewer line in Orangewood Avenue from the existing 24-inch District trunk sewer line at Ninth Street to a point of west of I-5. This will be necessary for construction of the Future Expansion District or any other developments in the Commercial Recreation Area south of Katella and West of I- 5. This mitigation will be readdressed in subsequent environmental review for the Future Expansion District.  A City sewer main replacement or parallel line in Harbor Boulevard from Convention Way to Orangewood Avenue. To implement this mitigation measure, the City has adopted the Sewer Impact and Improvement Fee Program for the South Central City Area. Compliance with this Fee Program by the property owner/developer (per Ordinance No. 5490 and Resolution No. 95R-60 dated April 18, 1995) shall satisfy the requirements of this Mitigation Measure, or the City may enter into alternative financing arrangements with the applicant. Public Works Department/Engineering Division 20 Timing Mitigation Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion Prior to approval of a final subdivision map or issuance of a grading or building permit, whichever occurs first MM 5.16-1 Prior to approval of a final subdivision map or issuance of a grading or building permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall participate in the City’s Master Plan of Sewers and related Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program to assist in mitigating existing and future sanitary sewer system deficiencies as follows: The property owner/developer shall submit a report for review and approval of the City Engineer to assist in determining the following: a) If the development/redevelopment (1) does not discharge into a sewer system that is currently deficient or will become deficient because of that discharge and/or (2) does not increase flows or change points of discharge, then the property owner’s/developer’s responsibility shall be limited to participation in the Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program. b) If the development/redevelopment (1) discharges into a sewer system that is currently deficient or will may become deficient because of that discharge and/or (2) increases flows or changes points of discharge, then the property owner/developer shall be required to develop a Sewer Study to determine the impacts and required improvements to correct those impacts. Property owner/developer shall guarantee mitigation to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney of the impact prior to approval of a final subdivision map or issuance of a grading or building permit whichever occurs first, pursuant to the improvements identified in the individual Sewer Study or the applicable City Master Sewer Plan South Central Area Sewer Deficiency Study. The property owner/developer shall be required to install the sanitary sewer facilities, as recommended by the aforementioned applicable Sewer Study or Plan South Central Area Sewer Deficiency Study, prior to acceptance for maintenance of public improvements by the City or final building and zoning inspections for the building/structure, whichever comes first. Additionally, the property owner/developer shall participate in the Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program, as determined by the City Engineer, which may include fees, credits, reimbursements, or a combination thereof. As part of guaranteeing the mitigation of impacts for the sanitary sewer system, the property owner/developer shall submit a sanitary sewer system improvement phasing plan for the project to the City Engineer for review and approval which shall contain, at a minimum, (1) a layout of the complete system, (2) all facility sizes, including support calculations, (3) construction phasing, and (4) construction estimates. The City recognizes that these improvements will serve not only the applicant but also other property owners/developers in the Specific Plan area, the Anaheim Resort, and the service area, each of which should contribute its allocable share of the cost of these improvements. To implement this requirement as it applies to other property owners/developers in the Specific Plan area, the Anaheim Resort, and the service area, the City shall, and shall make appropriate arrangements with other public agencies, if any, to reimburse the applicant to the extent that its Public Works Department/Engineering Division 21 Timing Mitigation Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion contributions for these improvements exceed the applicant's allocable share of the cost. Such arrangements shall include one or more of the following: (1) creation of integrated financing districts; (2) entry into a reimbursement agreement with the applicant; (3) creation of appropriate community facilities districts, assessment districts, and/or use of similar public financing districts and/or mechanisms; and (4) creation of other such mechanisms or districts as may be appropriate to provide for the reimbursement of these costs. The determination of the allocable share of improvement costs attributable to the applicant and other property owners/developers, and reimbursement amounts, shall be based on an apportionment of the costs of such improvements among property owners/developers, including the applicant, in the Specific Plan area, the Anaheim Resort, or otherwise defined service area, as applicable, depending on the area served. The study shall determine the impact of the project sewer flows for total build out of the project and identify local deficiencies for each project component (i.e., each hotel). Electricity Prior to issuance of building permit MM 5.17-1 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/develop shall consult with the City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department, Business and Community Programs Division in order to review energy efficient measures to incorporate into the project design. Prior to the final building and zoning inspection, the property owner developer shall implement these energy efficient measures which may include the following: a) High-efficiency air-conditioning systems with EMS (computer) control b) Variable air volume (VAV) distribution c) Outside air (100%) economizer cycle d) Staged compressors or variable speed drives to flow varying thermal loads e) Isolated HVAC zone control by floors/separable activity areas f) Specification of premium-efficiency electric motors (i.e., compressor motors, air- handling units, and fan-coil units) g) Use of occupancy sensors in appropriate spaces h) Use of compact fluorescent lamps i) Use of cold cathode fluorescent lamps j) Use of light emitting diode (LED) or equivalent energy-efficient lighting for outdoor lighting k) Use of Energy Star® exit lighting or exit signage. l) Use of T-8 lamps and electronic ballasts where applications of standard fluorescent fixtures are identified m) Use of lighting power controllers in association with metal-halide or high- pressure sodium (high intensity discharge) lamps for outdoor lighting and parking lots n) Consideration of thermal energy storage air-conditioning for spaces or facilities that may require air-conditioning during summer, day-peak periods. Public Utilities Department 22 Timing Mitigation Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion o) For swimming pools and spas, incorporate solar heating, automatic covers, and efficient pumps and motors, as feasible. p) Consideration for participation in Advantage Services Programs such as:  New construction design review, in which the City cost-shares engineering for up to $10,000 for design of energy efficient buildings and systems  New Construction – cash incentives ($300 to $400 per kW reduction in load) for efficiency that exceeds Title 24 requirements  Green Building Program – offers accelerated plan approval, financial incentives, waived plan check fees and free technical assistance. Prior to final building and zoning inspection MM 5.17-2 Prior to final building and zoning inspection, the property owner/developer shall install an underground electrical service from the Public Utilities Distribution System. The Underground Service will be installed in accordance with the Electric Rules, Rates, Regulations and Electrical Specifications for Underground Systems. Electrical Service Fees and other applicable fees will be assessed in accordance with the Electric Rules, Rates, Regulations and Electrical Specifications for Underground Systems. Public Utilities Department Prior to issuance of building permit MM 5.17-3 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit plans and calculations to the City of Anaheim Planning Department, Building Division, to demonstrate that the energy efficiency of each building will exceed the Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings current at the time of application by at least 10 percent. Planning Department/Building Division Prior to approval of a Final Site Plan MM 5.17-4 Prior to approval of a Final Site Plan, the property owner/developer shall coordinate with the Public Utilities Department to incorporate feasible renewable energy generation measures into the project. These measures may include but not be limited to use of solar and small wind turbine sources on new and existing facilities and the use of solar powered lighting in parking areas. Public Utilities Department Stormwater Prior to approval of a final subdivision map, or issuance of a grading or building permit, whichever occurs first MM 5.18-1 Prior to approval of a final subdivision map, or issuance of a grading or building permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall participate in the City’s Master Plan of Storm Drains and related Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program to assist in mitigating existing and future storm drainage system deficiencies as follows: The property owner/developer shall submit a report for review and approval by the City Engineer to assist with determining the following: a) If the specific development/redevelopment does not increase or redirect current or historic storm water quantities/flows, then the property owner/developer’s responsibility shall be limited to participation in the Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program to provide storm drainage facilities in 10- and 25-year storm frequencies and to protect properties/structures for a 100-year storm frequency. Public Works Department/Engineering Division 23 Timing Mitigation Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion b) If the specific development/redevelopment increases or redirects the current or historic storm water quantity/flow, then the property owner/developer shall be required to guarantee mitigation to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and City Attorney’s office of the impact prior to approval of a final subdivision map or issuance of a grading or building permit, whichever occurs first, pursuant to the improvements identified in the Master Plan of Drainage for the South Central Area. The property owner/developer shall be required to install the storm drainage facilities as recommended by the Master Plan of Drainage for the South Central Area to provide storm drainage facilities for 10- and 25-year storm frequencies and to protect properties/structures for a 100-year storm frequency prior to acceptance for maintenance of public improvements by the City or final building and zoning inspection for the building/structure, whichever occurs first. Additionally, the property owner/developer shall participate in the Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program as determined by the City Engineer which could include fees, credits, reimbursements, or a combination thereof. As part of guaranteeing the mitigation of impacts on the storm drainage system, a storm drainage system improvement phasing plan for the project shall be submitted by the property owner/developer to the City Engineer for review and approval and shall contain, at a minimum, (1) a layout of the complete system; (2) all facility sizes, including support calculations; (3) construction phasing; and, (4) construction estimates. Prior to the issuance of building permits MM 5.18-3 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the City shall require that building plans indicate that new developments will minimize stormwater and urban runoff into drainage facilities by incorporating design features such as detention basins, on- site water features, and other strategies. Public Works Department/Engineering Division Public Utilities Prior to issuance of building permit MM 5.19-1 Prior to issuance of each building permit; to be implemented prior to final building and zoning Inspection, the property owner/developer shall submit project plans to the Public Works Department for review and approval to ensure that the plans comply with AB 939, the Solid Waste Reduction Act of 1989, as administered by the City of Anaheim and the County of Orange and City of Anaheim Integrated Waste Management Plans. Prior to final building and zoning inspection, implementation of said plan shall commence and shall remain in full effect. Waste management mitigation measures that shall be taken to reduce solid waste generation include, but are not limited to: a) Detailing the location and design of on-site recycling facilities. b) Providing on-site recycling receptacles to encourage recycling. c) Complying with all Federal, State and City regulation for hazardous material disposal. d) Participating in the City of Anaheim’s “Recycle Anaheim” program or other substitute program as may be developed by the City. Public Works Department/Engineering Division 24 Timing Mitigation Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion In order to meet the requirements of the Solid Waste Reduction Act of 1989 (AB 939), the property owner/developer shall implement numerous solid waste reduction programs, as required by the Public Works Department, including, but not limited to: a) Facilitating recycling by providing chutes or convenient locations for sorting and recycling bins. b) Facilitating cardboard recycling (especially in retail areas) by providing adequate space and centralized locations for collection and storing. c) Facilitating glass recycling (especially from restaurants) by providing adequate space for sorting and storing. d) Providing trash compactors for non-recyclable materials whenever feasible to reduce the total volume of solid waste and the number of trips required for collection. e) Prohibiting curbside pick-up. Ongoing during project operation MM 5.19-2 Ongoing during project operation, the following practices shall be implemented, as feasible by the property owner/developer: a) Usage of recycled paper products for stationary, letterhead, and packaging. b) Recovery of materials such as aluminum and cardboard. c) Collection of office paper for recycling. d) Collection of polystyrene (foam) cups for recycling. e) Collection of glass, plastics, kitchen grease, laser printer toner cartridges, oil, batteries, and scrap metal for recycling or recovery. Public Works Department/Engineering Division 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Appendix April 2016 Appendix A Air Quality and GHG Analysis 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Appendix PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. Regional Construction Emissions Worksheet - Unmitigated Building Demolition ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Onsite 2017 Off-Road 0.4947 8.187 8.8709 0.0155 0.354 0.3422 Total 0.4947 8.187 8.8709 0.0155 0.354 0.3422 Offsite Hauling 0 0 0 0 0 0 Vendor 0.0357 0.322 0.4662 0.00086 0.0283 0.0113 Worker 0.0266 0.0358 0.3762 0.00103 0.083 0.0226 Total 0.0622 0.3578 0.8424 0.00189 0.1114 0.0338 TOTAL 0.5569 8.5448 9.7133 0.0174 0.4654 0.3760 Building Demolition Debris Haul ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Onsite 2017 Fugitive Dust 2.287 0.3463 Off-Road 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0 0 0 2.287 0.3463 Offsite Hauling 0.4543 6.4688 5.4586 0.0182 0.4959 0.1974 Vendor 0 0 0 0 0 0 Worker 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0.4543 6.4688 5.4586 0.0182 0.4959 0.1974 TOTAL 0.4543 6.4688 5.4586 0.0182 2.7829 0.5437 Bdg Demo+Bldg Demo Haul 1.0112 15.0136 15.1719 0.0356 3.2483 0.9197 Asphalt Demolition ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Onsite 2017 Off-Road 0.2326 3.7914 2.8181 0.00634 0.1343 0.1296 Total 0.2326 3.7914 2.8181 0.00634 0.1343 0.1296 Offsite Hauling 0 0 0 0 0 0 Vendor 0.0357 0.322 0.4662 0.00086 0.0283 0.0113 Worker 0.00996 0.0134 0.1411 0.00039 0.0311 0.00846 Total 0.0456 0.3355 0.6073 0.00125 0.0595 0.0197 TOTAL 0.2782 4.1269 3.4254 0.0076 0.1938 0.1493 Asphalt Demolition Debris Haul ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Onsite 2017 Fugitive Dust 4.574 0.6926 Off-Road 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0 0 0 4.574 0.6926 Offsite Hauling 1.2963 21.8826 13.6456 0.0627 1.7292 0.6874 Vendor 0 0 0 0 0 0 Worker 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 1.2963 21.8826 13.6456 0.0627 1.7292 0.6874 TOTAL 1.2963 21.8826 13.6456 0.0627 6.3032 1.3800 A-1 Site Preparation ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Onsite 2017 Fugitive Dust 0 0 Off-Road 0.2326 3.7914 2.8181 0.00634 0.1343 0.1296 Total 0.2326 3.7914 2.8181 0.00634 0.1343 0.1296 Offsite Hauling 0 0 0 0 0 0 Vendor 0.0357 0.322 0.4662 0.00086 0.0283 0.0113 Worker 0.00996 0.0134 0.1411 0.00039 0.0311 0.00846 Total 0.0456 0.3355 0.6073 0.00125 0.0595 0.0197 TOTAL 0.2782 4.1269 3.4254 0.0076 0.1938 0.1493 Bdg Demo+Asphalt Demo+Asphalt Demo Haul+ 2.1314 34.5543 26.7843 0.0877 6.9624 1.9053 Bdg Demo+Site Prep 0.8351 12.6717 13.1387 0.0250 0.6592 0.5253 Building Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Onsite 2017 Off-Road 10.1369 75.1297 59.0687 0.0976 4.9776 4.8952 Total 10.1369 75.1297 59.0687 0.0976 4.9776 4.8952 Offsite Hauling 0 0 0 0 0 0 Vendor 2.193 19.8046 28.6694 0.0528 1.7408 0.6928 Worker 2.0885 2.8153 29.5811 0.0808 6.5287 1.7739 Total 4.2814 22.62 58.2505 0.1336 8.2695 2.4667 TOTAL 14.4183 97.7497 117.3192 0.2312 13.2471 7.3619 Site Prep + Bldg Const 14.6965 101.8766 120.7446 0.2388 13.4409 7.5112 Onsite 2018 Off-Road 9.0023 68.2917 57.9616 0.0976 4.3043 4.2358 Total 9.0023 68.2917 57.9616 0.0976 4.3043 4.2358 Offsite Hauling 0 0 0 0 0 0 Vendor 2.0452 18.1711 27.432 0.0527 1.723 0.6765 Worker 1.9034 2.5687 27.006 0.0808 6.5281 1.7735 Total 3.9487 20.7398 54.438 0.1335 8.2511 2.45 TOTAL 12.9510 89.0315 112.3996 0.2311 12.5554 6.6858 Onsite 2019 Off-Road 8.009 62.4733 57.0797 0.0976 3.7159 3.6565 Total 8.009 62.4733 57.0797 0.0976 3.7159 3.6565 Offsite Hauling 0 0 0 0 0 0 Vendor 1.908 16.8459 26.2137 0.0528 1.7039 0.6589 Worker 1.7791 2.3805 25.1452 0.0811 6.5285 1.7739 Total 3.6871 19.2264 51.3589 0.1339 8.2324 2.4328 TOTAL 11.6961 81.6997 108.4386 0.2315 11.9483 6.0893 A-2 Rough Grading ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Onsite 2017 Fugitive Dust 0.6801 0.0734 Off-Road 1.2902 17.9137 14.9681 0.021 0.7944 0.7508 Total 1.2902 17.9137 14.9681 0.021 1.4744 0.8242 Offsite Hauling 0 0 0 0 0 0 Vendor 0.0357 0.322 0.4662 0.00086 0.0283 0.0113 Worker 0.0266 0.0358 0.3762 0.00103 0.083 0.0226 Total 0.0622 0.3578 0.8424 0.00189 0.1114 0.0338 TOTAL 1.3524 18.2715 15.8105 0.0229 1.5858 0.8580 Site Prep + Bldg Const+RG 16.0489 120.1481 136.5551 0.2617 15.0267 8.3692 Utility Trenching ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Onsite 2017 Off-Road 1.4218 14.9214 10.2662 0.0168 0.9396 0.8738 Total 1.4218 14.9214 10.2662 0.0168 0.9396 0.8738 Offsite Hauling 0 0 0 0 0 0 Vendor 0 0 0 0 0 0 Worker 0.0266 0.0358 0.3762 0.00103 0.083 0.0226 Total 0.0266 0.0358 0.3762 0.00103 0.083 0.0226 TOTAL 1.4484 14.9572 10.6424 0.0178 1.0226 0.8964 BC+RG+Trenching 17.2191 130.9784 143.7721 0.2719 15.8555 9.1163 Rough Grading Soil Haul ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Onsite 2017 Fugitive Dust 0.1288 0.0195 Off-Road 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0 0 0 0.1288 0.0195 Offsite Hauling 9.3147 142.8978 106.1448 0.4049 11.1087 4.4192 Vendor 0 0 0 0 0 0 Worker 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 9.3147 142.8978 106.1448 0.4049 11.1087 4.4192 TOTAL 9.3147 142.8978 106.1448 0.4049 11.2375 4.4387 BC+RG+Trenching+RGH 26.5338 273.8762 249.9169 0.6768 27.0930 13.5550 BC+Trenching+RGH 25.1814 255.6047 234.1064 0.6539 25.5072 12.6970 Fine Grading ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Onsite 2017 Fugitive Dust 0.2267 0.0245 Off-Road 0.3489 6.2628 8.5608 0.0114 0.3887 0.3832 Total 0.3489 6.2628 8.5608 0.0114 0.6153 0.4077 Offsite Hauling 0 0 0 0 0 0 Vendor 0.0357 0.322 0.4662 0.00086 0.0283 0.0113 Worker 0.0266 0.0358 0.3762 0.00103 0.083 0.0226 Total 0.0622 0.3578 0.8424 0.00189 0.1114 0.0338 TOTAL 0.4111 6.6206 9.4032 0.0133 0.7267 0.4415 A-3 Fine Grading Soil Haul ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Onsite 2017 Fugitive Dust 0.0118 0.00179 Off-Road 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0 0 0 0.0118 0.00179 Offsite Hauling 0.8519 13.0691 9.7078 0.037 1.016 0.4042 Vendor 0 0 0 0 0 0 Worker 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0.8519 13.0691 9.7078 0.037 1.016 0.4042 TOTAL 0.8519 13.0691 9.7078 0.0370 1.0278 0.4060 BC+UT+RGH+FG+FGH 26.4444 275.2944 253.2174 0.7042 27.2617 13.5445 BC+UT+FG+FGH 17.1297 132.3966 147.0726 0.2993 16.0242 9.1058 BC+UT+FG 16.2778 119.3275 137.3648 0.2623 14.9964 8.6998 BC+UT+FG 15.8667 112.7069 127.9616 0.2490 14.2697 8.2583 Paving ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Onsite 2017 Off-Road 0.7319 11.3798 8.5863 0.015 0.6023 0.5835 Paving 0.3537 0 0 Total 1.0856 11.3798 8.5863 0.015 0.6023 0.5835 Offsite Hauling 0 0 0 0 0 0 Vendor 0 0 0 0 0 0 Worker 0.0432 0.0582 0.6114 0.00167 0.1349 0.0367 Total 0.0432 0.0582 0.6114 0.00167 0.1349 0.0367 TOTAL 1.1288 11.4380 9.1977 0.0167 0.7372 0.6202 Architectural Coating ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Onsite 2017 Architectural Coating 7.8579 0 0 Paving 2.9627 22.5203 21.7345 0.0342 1.5646 1.5504 Total 10.8206 22.5203 21.7345 0.0342 1.5646 1.5504 Offsite Hauling 0 0 0 0 0 0 Vendor 0 0 0 0 0 0 Worker 0.4184 0.564 5.9256 0.0162 1.3078 0.3554 Total 0.4184 0.564 5.9256 0.0162 1.3078 0.3554 TOTAL 11.2390 23.0843 27.6601 0.0504 2.8724 1.9058 BC+AP+AC 26.7861 132.2720 154.1770 0.2983 16.8567 9.8879 2017 BC+AC 25.6573 120.8340 144.9793 0.2816 16.1195 9.2677 Onsite 2018 Architectural Coating 7.8579 0 0 Paving 2.649 20.4462 21.5863 0.0342 1.3261 1.3164 Total 10.5069 20.4462 21.5863 0.0342 1.3261 1.3164 Offsite Hauling 0 0 0 0 0 0 Vendor 0 0 0 0 0 0 Worker 0.3813 0.5146 5.4098 0.0162 1.3077 0.3553 Total 0.3813 0.5146 5.4098 0.0162 1.3077 0.3553 TOTAL 10.8882 20.9608 26.9961 0.0504 2.6338 1.6717 2018 BC+AC 23.8392 109.9923 139.3957 0.2815 15.1892 8.3575 A-4 Finishing/Landscaping ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Onsite 2018 Off-Road 1.6256 16.4149 14.3197 0.0201 1.045 0.9668 Total 1.6256 16.4149 14.3197 0.0201 1.045 0.9668 Offsite Hauling 0 0 0 0 0 0 Vendor 0 0 0 0 0 0 Worker 0.0696 0.0939 0.9875 0.00295 0.2387 0.0649 Total 0.0696 0.0939 0.9875 0.00295 0.2387 0.0649 TOTAL 1.6952 16.5088 15.3072 0.0231 1.2837 1.0317 BC+AC+FL 25.5344 126.5011 154.7029 0.3046 16.4729 9.3892 MAX DAILY 26.79 275.29 253.22 0.70 27.26 13.56 Regional Thresholds 75 100 550 150 150 55 Exceeds Thresholds?No Yes No No No No A-5 Localized Construction Emissions Worksheet - Unmitigated Building Demolition NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Onsite 2017 Off-Road 8.187 8.8709 0.354 0.3422 Total 8.187 8.8709 0.354 0.3422 TOTAL 8.1870 8.8709 0.3540 0.3422 1.00-Acre LSTs 81.00 484.93 185.34 102.58 Exceeds LSTs?No No No No Building Demolition Debris Haul NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Onsite 2017 Fugitive Dust 2.287 0.3463 Off-Road 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0 2.287 0.3463 TOTAL 0.0000 0.0000 2.2870 0.3463 Bdg Demo+Bldg Demo Haul 8.1870 8.8709 2.6410 0.6885 1.00-Acre LSTs 81.00 484.93 185.34 102.58 Exceeds LSTs?No No No No Asphalt Demolition NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Onsite 2017 Off-Road 3.7914 2.8181 0.1343 0.1296 Total 3.7914 2.8181 0.1343 0.1296 TOTAL 3.7914 2.8181 0.1343 0.1296 Asphalt Demolition Debris Haul NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Onsite 2017 Fugitive Dust 4.574 0.6926 Off-Road 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0 4.574 0.6926 TOTAL 0.0000 0.0000 4.5740 0.6926 Site Preparation NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Onsite 2017 Fugitive Dust 0 0 Off-Road 3.7914 2.8181 0.1343 0.1296 Total 3.7914 2.8181 0.1343 0.1296 TOTAL 3.7914 2.8181 0.1343 0.1296 11.9784 11.6890 5.0623 1.1644 2.00-Acre LSTs 115.00 714.92 193.34 110.69 Exceeds LSTs?No No No No Bdg Demo+Site Prep 11.9784 11.6890 0.4883 0.4718 1.50-Acre LSTs 98.00 599.92 189.34 106.63 Exceeds LSTs?No No No No Building Construction NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Onsite 2017 Off-Road 75.1297 59.0687 4.9776 4.8952 Total 75.1297 59.0687 4.9776 4.8952 TOTAL 75.1297 59.0687 4.9776 4.8952 Bdg Demo+Asphalt Demo+Asphalt Demo Haul+Site Prep A-6 Site Prep + Bldg Const 78.9211 61.8868 5.1119 5.0248 0.50-Acre LSTs 81.00 484.93 185.34 102.58 Exceeds LSTs?No No No No Onsite 2018 Off-Road 68.2917 57.9616 4.3043 4.2358 Total 68.2917 57.9616 4.3043 4.2358 TOTAL 68.2917 57.9616 4.3043 4.2358 <1-Acre LSTs 81.00 484.93 185.34 102.58 Exceeds LSTs?No No No No Onsite 2019 Off-Road 62.4733 57.0797 3.7159 3.6565 Total 62.4733 57.0797 3.7159 3.6565 TOTAL 62.4733 57.0797 3.7159 3.6565 <1-Acre LSTs 81.00 484.93 185.34 102.58 Exceeds LSTs?No No No No Rough Grading NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Onsite 2017 Fugitive Dust 0.6801 0.0734 Off-Road 17.9137 14.9681 0.7944 0.7508 Total 17.9137 14.9681 1.4744 0.8242 TOTAL 17.9137 14.9681 1.4744 0.8242 Site Prep + Bldg Const+RG 96.8348 76.8549 6.5863 5.8490 2.00-Acre LSTs 115.00 714.92 193.34 110.69 Exceeds LSTs?No No No No Utility Trenching NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Onsite 2017 Off-Road 14.9214 10.2662 0.9396 0.8738 Total 14.9214 10.2662 0.9396 0.8738 TOTAL 14.9214 10.2662 0.9396 0.8738 BC+RG+Trenching 107.9648 84.3030 7.3916 6.5932 2.00-Acre LSTs 115.00 714.92 193.34 110.69 Exceeds LSTs?No No No No Rough Grading Soil Haul NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Onsite 2017 Fugitive Dust 0.1288 0.0195 Off-Road 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0 0.1288 0.0195 TOTAL 0.0000 0.0000 0.1288 0.0195 BC+RG+Trenching+RGH 107.9648 84.3030 7.5204 6.6127 2.00-Acre LSTs 115.00 714.92 193.34 110.69 Exceeds LSTs?No No No No BC+Trenching+RGH 90.0511 69.3349 6.0460 5.7885 0.50-Acre LSTs 81.00 484.93 185.34 102.58 Exceeds LSTs?Yes No No No A-7 Fine Grading NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Onsite 2017 Fugitive Dust 0.2267 0.0245 Off-Road 6.2628 8.5608 0.3887 0.3832 Total 6.2628 8.5608 0.6153 0.4077 TOTAL 6.2628 8.5608 0.6153 0.4077 Fine Grading Soil Haul NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Onsite 2017 Fugitive Dust 0.0118 0.00179 Off-Road 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0 0.0118 0.00179 TOTAL 0.0000 0.0000 0.0118 0.0018 BC+UT+RGH+FG+FGH 96.3139 77.8957 6.6731 6.1980 1.50-Acre LSTs 98.00 599.92 189.34 106.63 Exceeds LSTs?No No No No BC+UT+FG+FGH 96.3139 77.8957 6.5443 6.1785 1.50-Acre LSTs 98.00 599.92 189.34 106.63 Exceeds LSTs?No No No No BC+UT+FG 96.3139 77.8957 6.5325 6.1767 1.50-Acre LSTs 98.00 599.92 189.34 106.63 Exceeds LSTs?No No No No BC+FG 81.3925 67.6295 5.5929 5.3029 1.00-Acre LSTs 81.00 484.93 185.34 102.58 Exceeds LSTs?Yes No No No Paving NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Onsite 2017 Off-Road 11.3798 8.5863 0.6023 0.5835 Paving 0 0 Total 11.3798 8.5863 0.6023 0.5835 TOTAL 11.3798 8.5863 0.6023 0.5835 A-8 Architectural Coating NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Onsite 2017 Architectural Coating 0 0 Paving 22.5203 21.7345 1.5646 1.5504 Total 22.5203 21.7345 1.5646 1.5504 TOTAL 22.5203 21.7345 1.5646 1.5504 BC+AP+AC 109.0298 89.3895 7.1445 7.0291 0.50-Acre LSTs 81.00 484.93 185.34 102.58 Exceeds LSTs?Yes No No No 2017 BC+AC 97.6500 80.8032 6.5422 6.4456 0-Acre LSTs 81.00 484.93 185.34 102.58 Exceeds LSTs?Yes No No No Onsite 2018 Architectural Coating 0 0 Paving 20.4462 21.5863 1.3261 1.3164 Total 20.4462 21.5863 1.3261 1.3164 TOTAL 20.4462 21.5863 1.3261 1.3164 2018 BC+AC 88.7379 79.5479 5.6304 5.5522 0-Acre LSTs 81.00 484.93 185.34 102.58 Exceeds LSTs?Yes No No No Finishing/Landscaping NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Onsite 2018 Off-Road 16.4149 14.3197 1.045 0.9668 Total 16.4149 14.3197 1.045 0.9668 TOTAL 16.4149 14.3197 1.0450 0.9668 BC+AC+FL 105.1528 93.8676 6.6754 6.5190 2.50-Acre LSTs 126.33 804.58 197.10 113.99 Exceeds LSTs?No No No No A-9 Localized Construction Emissions Worksheet - Mitigated Building Demolition NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Onsite 2017 Off-Road 8.187 8.8709 0.354 0.3422 Total 8.187 8.8709 0.354 0.3422 TOTAL 8.1870 8.8709 0.3540 0.3422 1.00-Acre LSTs 81.00 484.93 185.34 102.58 Exceeds LSTs?No No No No Building Demolition Debris Haul NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Onsite 2017 Fugitive Dust 2.287 0.3463 Off-Road 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0 2.287 0.3463 TOTAL 0.0000 0.0000 2.2870 0.3463 Bdg Demo+Bldg Demo Haul 8.1870 8.8709 2.6410 0.6885 1.00-Acre LSTs 81.00 484.93 185.34 102.58 Exceeds LSTs?No No No No Asphalt Demolition NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Onsite 2017 Off-Road 3.7914 2.8181 0.1343 0.1296 Total 3.7914 2.8181 0.1343 0.1296 TOTAL 3.7914 2.8181 0.1343 0.1296 Asphalt Demolition Debris Haul NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Onsite 2017 Fugitive Dust 4.574 0.6926 Off-Road 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0 4.574 0.6926 TOTAL 0.0000 0.0000 4.5740 0.6926 Site Preparation NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Onsite 2017 Fugitive Dust 0 0 Off-Road 3.7914 2.8181 0.1343 0.1296 Total 3.7914 2.8181 0.1343 0.1296 TOTAL 3.7914 2.8181 0.1343 0.1296 Bdg Demo+Asphalt Demo+Asphalt Demo Haul+ 11.9784 11.6890 5.0623 1.1644 2.00-Acre LSTs 115.00 714.92 193.34 110.69 Exceeds LSTs?No No No No Bdg Demo+Site Prep 11.9784 11.6890 0.4883 0.4718 1.50-Acre LSTs 98.00 599.92 189.34 106.63 Exceeds LSTs?No No No No Building Construction NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Onsite 2017 Off-Road 47.2716 60.7492 3.1236 3.1236 Total 47.2716 60.7492 3.1236 3.1236 TOTAL 47.2716 60.7492 3.1236 3.1236 A-10 Site Prep + Bldg Const 51.0630 63.5673 3.2579 3.2532 0.50-Acre LSTs 81.00 484.93 185.34 102.58 Exceeds LSTs?No No No No Onsite 2018 Off-Road 47.0983 60.5917 3.0813 3.0813 Total 47.0983 60.5917 3.0813 3.0813 TOTAL 47.0983 60.5917 3.0813 3.0813 <1-Acre LSTs 81.00 484.93 185.34 102.58 Exceeds LSTs?No No No No Onsite 2019 Off-Road 46.929 60.4396 3.0403 3.0403 Total 46.929 60.4396 3.0403 3.0403 TOTAL 46.9290 60.4396 3.0403 3.0403 <1-Acre LSTs 81.00 484.93 185.34 102.58 Exceeds LSTs?No No No No Rough Grading NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Onsite 2017 Fugitive Dust 0.6801 0.0734 Off-Road 17.9137 14.9681 0.7944 0.7508 Total 17.9137 14.9681 1.4744 0.8242 TOTAL 17.9137 14.9681 1.4744 0.8242 Site Prep + Bldg Const+RG 68.9767 78.5354 4.7323 4.0774 2.00-Acre LSTs 115.00 714.92 193.34 110.69 Exceeds LSTs?No No No No Utility Trenching NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Onsite 2017 Off-Road 14.9214 10.2662 0.9396 0.8738 Total 14.9214 10.2662 0.9396 0.8738 TOTAL 14.9214 10.2662 0.9396 0.8738 BC+RG+Trenching 80.1067 85.9835 5.5376 4.8216 2.00-Acre LSTs 115.00 714.92 193.34 110.69 Exceeds LSTs?No No No No Rough Grading Soil Haul NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Onsite 2017 Fugitive Dust 0.1288 0.0195 Off-Road 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0 0.1288 0.0195 TOTAL 0.0000 0.0000 0.1288 0.0195 BC+RG+Trenching+RGH 80.1067 85.9835 5.6664 4.8411 2.00-Acre LSTs 115.00 714.92 193.34 110.69 Exceeds LSTs?No No No No BC+Trenching+RGH 62.1930 71.0154 4.1920 4.0169 0.50-Acre LSTs 81.00 484.93 185.34 102.58 Exceeds LSTs?No No No No A-11 Fine Grading NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Onsite 2017 Fugitive Dust 0.2267 0.0245 Off-Road 6.2628 8.5608 0.3887 0.3832 Total 6.2628 8.5608 0.6153 0.4077 TOTAL 6.2628 8.5608 0.6153 0.4077 Fine Grading Soil Haul NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Onsite 2017 Fugitive Dust 0.0118 0.00179 Off-Road 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0 0.0118 0.00179 TOTAL 0.0000 0.0000 0.0118 0.0018 BC+UT+RGH+FG+FGH 68.4558 79.5762 4.8191 4.4264 1.50-Acre LSTs 98.00 599.92 189.34 106.63 Exceeds LSTs?No No No No BC+UT+FG+FGH 68.4558 79.5762 4.6903 4.4069 1.50-Acre LSTs 98.00 599.92 189.34 106.63 Exceeds LSTs?No No No No BC+UT+FG 68.4558 79.5762 4.6785 4.4051 1.50-Acre LSTs 98.00 599.92 189.34 106.63 Exceeds LSTs?No No No No BC+FG 53.5344 69.3100 3.7389 3.5313 1.00-Acre LSTs 81.00 484.93 185.34 102.58 Exceeds LSTs?No No No No Paving NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Onsite 2017 Off-Road 10.2626 10.4883 0.6602 0.632 Paving 0 0 Total 10.2626 10.4883 0.6602 0.632 TOTAL 10.2626 10.4883 0.6602 0.6320 A-12 Architectural Coating NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Onsite 2017 Architectural Coating 0 0 Paving 16.6983 22.5488 1.1701 1.1701 Total 16.6983 22.5488 1.1701 1.1701 TOTAL 16.6983 22.5488 1.1701 1.1701 BC+AP+AC 74.2325 93.7863 4.9539 4.9257 0.50-Acre LSTs 81.00 484.93 185.34 102.58 Exceeds LSTs?No No No No 2017 BC+AC 63.9699 83.2980 4.2937 4.2937 0-Acre LSTs 81.00 484.93 185.34 102.58 Exceeds LSTs?No No No No Onsite 2018 Architectural Coating 0 0 Paving 16.6983 22.5488 1.1701 1.1701 Total 16.6983 22.5488 1.1701 1.1701 TOTAL 16.6983 22.5488 1.1701 1.1701 2018 BC+AC 63.7966 83.1405 4.2514 4.2514 0-Acre LSTs 81.00 484.93 185.34 102.58 Exceeds LSTs?No No No No Finishing/Landscaping NOx CO PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Onsite 2018 Off-Road 16.4149 14.3197 1.045 0.9668 Total 16.4149 14.3197 1.045 0.9668 TOTAL 16.4149 14.3197 1.0450 0.9668 BC+AC+FL 80.2115 97.4602 5.2964 5.2182 2.50-Acre LSTs 126.33 804.58 197.10 113.99 Exceeds LSTs?No No No No A-13 Regional Operational Emissions Worksheet Approved Project Summer ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Area 19.561 0.001 0.068 0.000 0.000 0.000 Energy 0.718 6.528 5.483 0.039 0.496 0.496 Mobile 14.970 30.056 146.963 0.408 29.387 8.127 Total 35.249 36.584 152.514 0.447 29.883 8.624 Winter ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Area 19.561 0.001 0.068 0.000 0.000 0.000 Energy 0.718 6.528 5.483 0.039 0.496 0.496 Mobile 15.903 31.667 148.601 0.390 29.389 8.129 Total 36.182 38.195 154.152 0.429 29.886 8.626 Max Daily ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Area 19.561 0.001 0.068 0.000 0.000 0.000 Energy 0.718 6.528 5.483 0.039 0.496 0.496 Mobile 15.903 31.667 148.601 0.408 29.389 8.129 Total 36.182 38.195 154.152 0.447 29.886 8.626 Existing Summer ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Area 7.595 0.000 0.026 0.000 0.000 0.000 Energy 0.397 3.604 3.028 0.022 0.274 0.274 Mobile 2.354 4.725 23.104 0.064 4.620 1.278 Total 10.345 8.330 26.158 0.086 4.894 1.552 Winter ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Area 7.595 0.000 0.026 0.000 0.000 0.000 Energy 0.397 3.604 3.028 0.022 0.274 0.274 Mobile 2.500 4.978 23.362 0.061 4.620 1.278 Total 10.491 8.583 26.415 0.083 4.894 1.552 Max Daily ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Area 7.595 0.000 0.026 0.000 0.000 0.000 Energy 0.397 3.604 3.028 0.022 0.274 0.274 Mobile 2.500 4.978 23.362 0.064 4.620 1.278 Total 10.491 8.583 26.415 0.086 4.894 1.552 A-14 Net Approved Project Max Daily ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Area 11.966 0.000 0.042 0.000 0.000 0.000 Energy 0.322 2.924 2.456 0.018 0.222 0.222 Mobile 13.403 26.688 125.239 0.344 24.769 6.851Total25.691 29.612 127.737 0.361 24.991 7.074 Regional Thresholds 55 55 550 150 150 550 Exceeds Thresholds?No No No No No No Modified Project Summer ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Area 23.253 0.001 0.100 0.000 0.000 0.000 Energy 0.563 5.118 4.299 0.031 0.389 0.389 Mobile 7.711 15.244 74.655 0.206 14.820 4.099 Total 31.528 20.363 79.055 0.237 15.209 4.488 Winter ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Area 23.253 0.001 0.100 0.000 0.000 0.000 Energy 0.563 5.118 4.299 0.031 0.389 0.389 Mobile 8.197 16.058 75.640 0.197 14.821 4.100 Total 32.013 21.177 80.039 0.227 15.210 4.489 Max Daily ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Area 23.253 0.001 0.100 0.000 0.000 0.000 Energy 0.563 5.118 4.299 0.031 0.389 0.389 Mobile 8.197 16.058 75.640 0.206 14.821 4.100 Total 32.013 21.177 80.039 0.237 15.210 4.489 Existing Summer ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Area 7.595 0.000 0.026 0.000 0.000 0.000 Energy 0.397 3.604 3.028 0.022 0.274 0.274 Mobile 2.354 4.725 23.104 0.064 4.620 1.278 Total 10.345 8.330 26.158 0.086 4.894 1.552 Winter ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Area 7.595 0.000 0.026 0.000 0.000 0.000 Energy 0.397 3.604 3.028 0.022 0.274 0.274 Mobile 2.500 4.978 23.362 0.061 4.620 1.278 Total 10.491 8.583 26.415 0.083 4.894 1.552 Max Daily ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Area 7.595 0.000 0.026 0.000 0.000 0.000 Energy 0.397 3.604 3.028 0.022 0.274 0.274 Mobile 2.500 4.978 23.362 0.064 4.620 1.278 A-15 Total 10.491 8.583 26.415 0.086 4.894 1.552 Net Modified Project Max Daily ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Area 15.659 0.001 0.074 0.000 0.000 0.000 Energy 0.167 1.514 1.272 0.009 0.115 0.115 Mobile 5.697 11.080 52.278 0.142 10.201 2.822Total21.522 12.594 53.624 0.151 10.316 2.937 Regional Thresholds 55 55 550 150 150 550 Exceeds Thresholds?No No No No No No Net Change Max Daily ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Area 3.692 0.000 0.032 0.000 0.000 0.000 Energy -0.155 -1.410 -1.184 -0.009 -0.107 -0.107 Mobile -7.706 -15.609 -72.961 -0.202 -14.568 -4.029 Total -4.169 -17.018 -74.113 -0.210 -14.675 -4.136 Regional Thresholds 55 55 550 150 150 550 Exceeds Thresholds?No No No No No No A-16 GHG Emissions Worksheet Proposed Project Buildout MTons Total Total Construction 6302.1595 Modified Project Source Buildout MTCO2e/Year Percent of Project Total Buildout MTCO2e/Year Percent of Project Total Buildout MTCO2e/Year Percent of Project TotalArea00%0 0%0 0%Energy 6,852 70%3,270 78%3,582 64%Mobile 2,412 25%775 19%1,637 29%Waste 157 2%64 2%93 2%Water 140 1%64 2%76 1%Amortized Construction Emissions2 210 2%0 0%210 4%Total All Sectors 9,771 100%4,173 100%5,598 100%SCAQMD Bright-Line Screening Threshold 3,000 Exceed Threshold?Yes Approved Project Source Buildout MTCO2e/Year Percent of Project Total Buildout MTCO2e/Year Percent of Project Total Buildout MTCO2e/Year Percent of Project TotalArea00%0 0%0 0%Energy 6,874 56%3,270 78%3,604 44%Mobile1 4,932 40%775 19%4,157 51%Waste 164 1%64 2%101 1%Water 134 1%64 2%70 1%Amortized Construction Emissions2 210 2%0 0%210 3%Total All Sectors 12,315 100%4,173 100%8,142 100%SCAQMD Bright-Line Screening Threshold 3,000 Exceed Threshold?Yes Net Change Modified Project Approved Project Net Change Source Buildout MTCO2e/Year Buildout MTCO2e/Year Buildout MTCO2e/YearArea000Energy3,582 3,604 -22Mobile1,637 4,157 -2,520Waste93101-8Water76705Amortized Construction Emissions2 210 210 0Total All Sectors 5,598 8,142 -2,544SCAQMD Bright-Line Screening Threshold 3,000 Exceed Threshold?No 1 Based on year 2018 emission rates. Existing Land Use Net Change Existing Land Use Net Change 2 Total construction emissions are amortized over 30 years per SCAQMD methodology; SCAQMD. 2010, September 28. Greenhouse Gases (GHG) CEQA Significance Thresholds Working Group Meeting 15. http://www.aqmd.gov/ceqa/handbook/GHG/2010/sept28mtg/sept29.html. A-17 CalEEMod Land Use Inputs: Existing Land Use Type Land Use Type Land Use Unit Amount Land Use Size Metric Lot Acreage Land Use Square FeetHotelHotel255.0 Units 8.90 210,000RetailRetail0.00 1000bsf 0.00 0Enclosed Parking structure Enclosed parking structure 0 1000bsf 0.00 0Internal Circulation Other Asphalt 0.00 acre 0.00 0 8.90 acres Project Location:Orange CountyClimate Zone:8Operation Year 2018Land Use Setting UrbanUtility Company Anaheim Public UtilitiesSource Receptor Area:17 Trip Generation Total Daily Weekday Trips* Weekday Trip Rate (trips/room) Total Daily Weekend Trips Weekend Trip Rate (trips/room)903 3.54 677 2.65 *Iteris. 2016, February 10. Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Draft Report. Water Use CalEEMod Defaults* CalEEMod Inputs Land Use Indoor Outdoor TotalHotel6,468,526 718,725 7,187,252 *CalEEMod default values Solid Waste* CalEEMod Default Values Hotel 139.61 tons/year *CalEEMod default values Energy (Buildings) Anaheim Public Utilities District Emission Factors* MTon/MWH Ton/MWH lbs/MWHCO20.649 0.715399836 1430.800CH40.000013 1.433E-05 0.029N2O0.000003 3.30693E-06 0.007 1 ton=0.907185 metric ton (MTon)1 ton=2000 pounds Assumes existing buildings are in compliance with the 2005 Building Energy Efficiency Standards and historical rates in the CalEEMod program are used. *Anaheim, Public Utilities Department. 2013, February 12. Mandip Kaur Samra, Integrated Resources Planner. A-18 CalEEMod Land Use Inputs: Approved Project Type Land Use Type Land Use Unit Amount Land Use Size Metric Lot Acreage Land Use Square FeetHotelHotel660Units8.90 0 8.90 acres Project Location:Orange CountyClimate Zone:8Operation Year 2018Land Use Setting UrbanUtility Company Anaheim Public UtilitiesSource Receptor Area:17 Trip Generation Hotel:5,742 ADT Total Weekday Trips*Weekday Trip Rate Adjusted Weekend Trip Rate Total Weekend Trips5,742 8.70 6.54 4,315 Weekday Trip Rate (trips/room)** Weekend Trip Rate (trips/room)** Weekday to Weekend Trip Adjustment3.54 2.66 75% *Based on 1992 Disneyland Resort DEIR. **Iteris. 2016, February 10. Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Draft Report. Water Use CalEEMod Defaults* CalEEMod Inputs Land Use Indoor Outdoor TotalHotel16,742,068 1,860,230 18,602,298 *CalEEMod default values Solid Waste* CalEEMod Default Values Hotel 361.35 tons/year *CalEEMod default values Energy (Buildings) Energy Efficiency:34% Anaheim Public Utilities District Emission Factors* MTon/MWH Ton/MWH lbs/MWHCO20.649 0.715399836 1430.800CH40.000013 1.433E-05 0.029N2O0.000003 3.30693E-06 0.007 1 ton=0.907185 metric ton (MTon)1 ton=2000 pounds *Anaheim, Public Utilities Department. 2013, February 12. Mandip Kaur Samra, Integrated Resources Planner. Buildings constructed after January 1, 2017 are required to meet the 2016 Building and Energy Efficiency Standards. The 2016 Standards are 5% more energy efficient for non-residential buildings than the 2013 Building and Energy Efficiency Standards. The 2013 Standards are 30% more efficient than 2008 Standards. A-19 CalEEMod Land Use Inputs: Proposed Type Land Use Type Land Use Unit Amount Land Use Size Metric Lot Acreage Land Use Square FeetHotelHotel580.0 Units 5.23 749,670RetailRetail25.600 1000bsf 0.00 25,600Enclosed Parking structure Enclosed parking structure 363.852 1000bsf 3.40 363,852Internal Circulation Other Asphalt 0.27 acre 0.27 0 8.90 acres Project Location:Orange CountyClimate Zone:8Operation Year 2018Land Use Setting UrbanUtility Company Anaheim Public UtilitiesSource Receptor Area:17 Land Uses/Development Buildings Hotel* Units:580 units Level 01 109,781 BSF Level 02 165,234 BSF Level 03 161,673 BSF Level 04 75,348 BSF Level 05 75,348 BSF Level 06 75,348 Level 07 75,348 Level 08 37,190 BSF Total 775,270 BSF (includes units, hallways, storage rooms, etc…) Hotel Parking Garage Level B:215,836 BSF Level 1:**148,016 BSF Total 363,852 BSF Retail 25,600 BSFNet Hotel 749,670 BSF Other* Surface Parking:0 square feet Other Asphalt Surface:11,865 square feet Hardscape:71,036 square feet Landscaping:32,719 square feet *Based on information provided by the Applicant. **As measured usring Google Earth Pro, Version 7.1.2.2041, based on the site plan. A-20 Trip Generation Weekday (ADT)* Weekend (ADT)*Hotel:2,055 1,541Meeting Rooms:514 138Retail:350 409Total2,919 2,088 Type Land Use Type Land Use Unit Amount (Units) Total Weekday ADT Adjusted Weekday Trip Rate (Trip/Unit) Total Weekend ADT Adjusted Weekend Trip Rate (Trip/Unit)Hotel+Meeting Rooms Hotel 580 2,569 4.43 1,679 2.89RetailStrip Mall Retail 25.60 350 13.67 409 15.98 *Iteris. 2016, February 10. Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Draft Report. Water Use CalEEMod Defaults* CalEEMod Inputs Land Use Indoor Outdoor TotalHotel14,712,726.60 1,634,747.40 16,347,474Retail1,896,256.55 1,162,221.76 3,058,478 *CalEEMod default values based on land use Solid Waste* CalEEMod Default Values Hotel 317.55 tons/year Retail 26.88 tons/year *CalEEMod default values based on land use A-21 Energy (Buildings) Energy Efficiency:34% Anaheim Public Utilities District Emission Factors* MTon/MWH Ton/MWH lbs/MWHCO20.649 0.715399836 1430.800CH40.000013 1.433E-05 0.0287N2O0.000003 3.30693E-06 0.00661 1 ton=0.907185 metric ton (MTon)1 ton=2000 pounds *Anaheim, Public Utilities Department. 2013, February 12. Mandip Kaur Samra, Integrated Resources Planner. Demolition* Building Demolition Debris Amount:3,000 tons One-Way Haul Trip Distance:20 milesDebris Haul Truck Capacity:20 tons Asphalt Demolition Debris Amount:5,000 tons One-Way Haul Trip Distance:35 miles Debris Haul Truck Capacity:20 tons *Based in information provided by the Applicant. Soil Haul* Construction Activities Import Volume (CY) Total Import Haul Trips (One- Way)Export Volume (CY) Total Export Haul Trips (One-Way) Total Haul Trips (One- Way) No. of total one-way haul (trip ends/day)Total Days Rough Grading 12,966 2,162 53,621 8,936 11,098 60 80Fine Grading 2,441 406 0 0 406 15 10 Import Haul Travel Distance:25 miles Export Haul Travel Distance:25 miles Haul Truck Capacity:12 cubic yards *Based in information provided by the Applicant. Buildings constructed after January 1, 2017 are required to meet the 2016 Building and Energy Efficiency Standards. The 2016 Standards are 5% more energy efficient for non-residential buildings than the 2013 Building and Energy Efficiency Standards. The 2013 Standards are 30% more efficient than 2008 Standards. A-22 Architectural Coating Non-Residential Interior Paint VOC content:*85%grams per literNon-Residential Exterior Paing VOC content:*15%grams per liter Interior Paint VOC content:*35 grams per litter Exterior Paint VOC content:*40 grams per litter *Based on information provided by the Applicant. Land Use Land Use Amount (BSF) CalEEMod Paintable Surface Area Multiplier**Total Paintable Surface Area (BSF) Total Paintable Interior Surface Area (BSF)** Total Paintable Exterior Surface Area (BSF)**Hotel 749,670 2.0 1,499,340 955,829 56,225Retail25,600 2.0 51,200 32,640 1,920Enclosed Parking structure 363,852 2.0 727,704 463,911 27,289 Total:1,452,381 85,434 *Based on CalEEMod methodology in calculating the paintable surface areas for a nonresidential building. Modeling Adjustments for Non-Residential Operational Architectural Coating Adjusted Exterior Paintable Surface Area:85,434 Default Exterior Paintable Surface Area:569,561 Reduction in Percent:15.0% Anticipated Exterior Paint VOC content:40 Default Exterior Paint VOC Content:250Reduction in Percent:16% Proportion of Paint VOC:2.40% Adjusted Exterior Paint VOC Content:*6 g/L *Value input for operation exterior paint of the CalEEMod mitigation tab for area sources. Adjustment made due to modeling software limitation. A-23 Construction Activities and Schedule Assumptions* *Based on information provided by Applicant. Construction Activities Start Date End Date Duration (Workday) Worker Trips/Day Vender Trips/DayBuilding Demolition 02/03/17 03/30/17 40 1 1Building Demo Debris Haul (if applicable)02/05/17 02/21/17 12 1 15Asphalt Demolition 03/15/17 03/28/17 10 1 1Asphalt Demo Debris Haul (if applicable)03/15/17 03/28/17 10 1 15Site Preparation 03/15/17 05/09/17 40 1 1Building Construction 04/15/17 04/12/19 520 1 2Rough Grading 05/04/17 06/07/17 25 1 1Utility Trenching 05/15/17 07/07/17 40 1 1Rough Grading Soil Haul (if applicable)06/01/17 07/05/17 25 1 1Fine Grading 06/17/17 08/11/17 40 1 1Fine Grading Soil Haul (if applicable)06/25/17 07/07/17 10 1 10Asphalt Paving 09/15/17 09/18/17 2 na naArchitectural Coating 09/15/17 12/06/18 320 1 1Finishing/Landscaping 06/18/18 10/05/18 80 1 1 Construction Schedule A-24 Construction Equipment Mix* *Based on information provided by the Applicant. Commercial - General Office Bldg Pieces of Equipment Hrs Op HP LF Tier Rating Total Days Worker Trips/ Day CalEEMod Vendor Trips Demolition - Building Default+4 DefaultExcavator183500.38 3 40Skid Steer Loader 2 8 64 0.37 40Water Truck**1 4 Demolition - Asphalt Default+4 DefaultTractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8 200 0.37 3 10Water Truck**1 4 Site Preparation Default+4 DefaultTractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8 200 0.37 3 20 4Water Truck**1 Rough Grading Default+4 DefaultGraders181500.41 3 20Rollers181000.38 3 20Scraper183000.48 3 20Water Truck**1 4 Utility Trenching Default+4 DefaultTractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8 310 0.37 80 4Trencher280 Fine Grading Default+4 DefaultGraders181500.41 3 40Rollers181000.38 3 40Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8 85 0.37 3 40Water Truck**1 4 Building Construction Default DefaultCranes282260.29 500Forklifts28850.20 250Air Compressors 2 8 78 0.48 100Industrial Saws 10 8 81 0.73 300Welders38450.45 80Cement and Mortar Mixers 3 8 9 0.56 120Manlift28620.31 460 Site Paving Default DefaultSelf propelled 1 8 185 0.36 2Roller181000.38 3 2Roller28450.38 4 2Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8 85 0.37 3 2 Architectural Coating Default DefaultAir Compressors 6 8 78 0.48 100Lift68650.31 150 Finishing/Landscaping Default DefaultSkid Steer Loader 4 8 85 0.38Trenchers28800.50Plate Compactors 2 8 8 0.43Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8 40 0.37 **Four water truck trips per day are assumed for purposes of this analysis. Emissions accounted for in the vendor trips assigned. A-25 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data Project Characteristics - *Anaheim, Public Utilities Department. 2013, February 12. Mandip Kaur Samra, Integrated Resources Planner. Land Use - Based on the project description and information provided. Construction Phase - Derived from information provided. Off-road Equipment - Based on information provided. Off-road Equipment - Based on information provided. CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 1430.8 CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.029 N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.007 30 Climate Zone 8 Operational Year 2014 Utility Company Anaheim Public Utilities 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s)2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) Strip Mall 25.60 1000sqft 0.00 25,600.00 0 Hotel 580.00 Room 5.23 749,670.00 0 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.27 Acre 0.27 0.00 0 Population Enclosed Parking with Elevator 363.85 1000sqft 3.40 363,852.00 0 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Page 1 of 1 Date: 2/18/2016 10:25 AM Construction Orange County, Winter 1.0 Project Characteristics A-26 tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 5.00 tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 1.00 tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00 tblAreaCoating Area_Nonresidential_Interior 1708683 2254458 tblConstDustMitigation CleanPavedRoadPercentReduction 0 9 tblArchitecturalCoating EF_Nonresidential_Exterior 250.00 40.00 tblArchitecturalCoating EF_Nonresidential_Interior 250.00 35.00 tblArchitecturalCoating ConstArea_Nonresidential_Exterior 569,561.00 85,434.00 tblArchitecturalCoating ConstArea_Nonresidential_Interior 1,708,683.00 1,452,381.00 Trips and VMT - Based on information provided. Assumes water truck as 4 vendor trips. Demolition - Grading - Architectural Coating - Based on information provided. Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - SCAQMD Rules 403 and 1186. Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value Off-road Equipment - No equipment assumed. Placeholder only. Off-road Equipment - Based on information provided. Off-road Equipment - Based on information provided. Off-road Equipment - No equipment assumed. Placeholder only. Off-road Equipment - Based on information provided. Off-road Equipment - Based on information provided. Off-road Equipment - No equipment assumed. Placeholder only. Off-road Equipment - Based on information provided. Off-road Equipment - No equipment assumed. Placeholder only. Off-road Equipment - Based on information provided. Off-road Equipment - Based on information provided. Off-road Equipment - Based on information provided. A-27 tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 5/23/2017 5/9/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 8/11/2017 7/5/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 7/11/2017 9/18/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 8/25/2017 7/7/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 5/17/2019 6/7/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 4/11/2017 3/28/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 8/30/2017 8/11/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 4/17/2017 2/21/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 3/7/2017 3/28/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 12/10/2018 12/6/2018 tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 5/7/2019 4/12/2019 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 2.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 10.00 40.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 25.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 25.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 40.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 10.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 10.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 10.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 40.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 12.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 320.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 230.00 520.00 tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3 tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3 tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3 tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3 tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 4.00 A-28 tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 174.00 150.00 tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 89.00 85.00 tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 174.00 150.00 tblLandUse LotAcreage 0.59 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 162.00 350.00 tblLandUse LotAcreage 8.35 3.40 tblLandUse LotAcreage 19.33 5.23 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 11,761.20 0.00 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 842,160.00 749,670.00 tblGrading MaterialImported 0.00 12,966.00 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 363,850.00 363,852.00 tblGrading MaterialExported 0.00 53,621.00 tblGrading MaterialImported 0.00 2,441.00 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 12/7/2018 6/18/2018 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 6/8/2017 5/15/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 7/8/2017 9/15/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 3/29/2017 3/15/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 4/13/2019 5/4/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 7/8/2017 6/1/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 7/6/2017 6/17/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 8/12/2017 6/25/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 2/22/2017 3/15/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 3/29/2017 3/15/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 5/10/2017 4/15/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 3/31/2017 2/5/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 8/2/2017 7/7/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 9/19/2017 9/15/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 3/28/2019 10/5/2018 A-29 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 1.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 2.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 6.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 97.00 200.00 tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 97.00 310.00 tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 97.00 85.00 tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 97.00 40.00 tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 361.00 300.00 tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 64.00 85.00 tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 80.00 100.00 tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 80.00 100.00 tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 46.00 45.00 tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 62.00 65.00 tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 97.00 85.00 tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 97.00 200.00 tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 80.00 100.00 tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 80.00 45.00 tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 130.00 185.00 A-30 tblProjectCharacteristics CO2IntensityFactor 1543.28 1430.8 tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 7.00 8.00 tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 7.00 8.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 3.00 tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 6.00 8.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 4.00 1.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 1.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 2.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 2.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 2.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 2.00 1.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 2.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 2.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 2.00 1.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 2.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00 A-31 0.0000 115,528.6 348 115,528.63 48 7.3393 0.0000 115,682.7 590 39.1322 20.7636 59.8957 10.3994 20.0301 30.2979Total65.1373 493.4231 515.6134 1.2402 0.0000 20,273.90 02 20,273.900 2 1.4621 0.0000 20,304.60 32 8.5685 4.0309 12.5993 2.3025 3.9466 6.2491201911.6961 81.6997 108.4386 0.2315 0.0000 27,340.46 02 27,340.460 2 2.7542 0.0000 27,398.29 73 10.2338 7.0347 17.2685 2.7442 6.8459 9.5901201825.6553 126.5243 154.9114 0.3045 0.0000 67,914.27 45 67,914.274 5 3.1231 0.0000 67,979.85 86 20.3299 9.6980 30.0279 5.3527 9.2377 14.4587201727.7859 285.1991 252.2634 0.7042 CH4 N2O CO2e Year lb/day lb/day Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripNumber 476.00 629.00 2.0 Emissions Summary 2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission) tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripNumber 0.00 4.00 tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripNumber 95.00 126.00 tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripNumber 0.00 4.00 tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripNumber 187.00 246.00 tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripNumber 0.00 4.00 tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripNumber 0.00 4.00 tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripNumber 8,323.00 11,098.00 tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripNumber 0.00 4.00 tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripLength 20.00 25.00 tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripNumber 305.00 406.00 tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripLength 20.00 25.00 tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripLength 20.00 35.00 tblProjectCharacteristics N2OIntensityFactor 0.006 0.007 A-32 40 6 Building Construction Building Construction 4/15/2017 4/12/2019 5 520 5 Site Preparation Site Preparation 3/15/2017 5/9/2017 5 10 4 Asphalt Demo Haul Demolition 3/15/2017 3/28/2017 5 10 3 Asphalt Demo Demolition 3/15/2017 3/28/2017 5 40 2 Bldg Demo Haul Demolition 2/5/2017 2/21/2017 5 12 End Date Num Days Week Num Days Phase Description 1 Demolition - Building Demolition 2/3/2017 3/30/2017 5 3.0 Construction Detail Construction Phase Phase Number Phase Name Phase Type Start Date 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.008.84 2.60 7.03 7.25 2.31 4.17 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 1.72 2.01 -0.14 0.00 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive PM10 0.0000 115,528.6 348 115,528.63 48 7.3393 0.0000 115,682.7 590 35.6716 20.2245 55.6827 9.6460 19.5674 29.0334Total64.0164 483.4952 516.3589 1.2402 0.0000 20,273.90 02 20,273.900 2 1.4621 0.0000 20,304.60 32 7.9174 4.0309 11.9483 2.1427 3.9466 6.0893201911.6961 81.6997 108.4386 0.2315 0.0000 27,340.46 01 27,340.460 1 2.7542 0.0000 27,398.29 73 9.4524 7.0205 16.4729 2.5524 6.8367 9.3891201825.5343 126.5011 154.7029 0.3045 0.0000 67,914.27 45 67,914.274 5 3.1231 0.0000 67,979.85 85 18.3018 9.1732 27.2616 4.9509 8.7842 13.5550201726.7860 275.2944 253.2174 0.7042 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-33 Asphalt Demo Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 200 0.37 Asphalt Demo Rubber Tired Dozers 0 8.00 255 0.40 Asphalt Demo Excavators 0 8.00 162 0.38 Asphalt Demo Concrete/Industrial Saws 0 8.00 81 0.73 Bldg Demo Haul Rubber Tired Dozers 0 8.00 255 0.40 Bldg Demo Haul Excavators 0 8.00 162 0.38 Bldg Demo Haul Concrete/Industrial Saws 0 8.00 81 0.73 Demolition - Building Skid Steer Loaders 2 8.00 64 0.37 Demolition - Building Rubber Tired Dozers 0 8.00 255 0.40 Demolition - Building Excavators 1 8.00 350 0.38 Load Factor Demolition - Building Concrete/Industrial Saws 0 8.00 81 0.73 Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 0 Acres of Paving: 0 Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 1,452,381; Non-Residential Outdoor: 85,434 (Architectural Coating OffRoad Equipment Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power 320 14 Finishing/Landscaping Trenching 6/18/2018 10/5/2018 5 80 13 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 9/15/2017 12/6/2018 5 10 12 Asphalt Paving Paving 9/15/2017 9/18/2017 5 2 11 Fine Grading Haul Grading 6/25/2017 7/7/2017 5 25 10 Fine Grading Grading 6/17/2017 8/11/2017 5 40 9 Rough Grading Soil Haul Grading 6/1/2017 7/5/2017 5 25 8 Utility Trenching Trenching 5/15/2017 7/7/2017 5 40 7 Rough Grading Grading 5/4/2017 6/7/2017 5 A-34 Fine Grading Graders 1 8.00 150 0.41 Fine Grading Excavators 0 8.00 162 0.38 Rough Grading Soil Haul Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 0 8.00 97 0.37 Rough Grading Soil Haul Rubber Tired Dozers 0 8.00 255 0.40 Rough Grading Soil Haul Graders 0 8.00 174 0.41 Rough Grading Soil Haul Excavators 0 8.00 162 0.38 Utility Trenching Trenchers 2 8.00 80 0.50 Utility Trenching Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 310 0.37 Rough Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 0 8.00 97 0.37 Rough Grading Scrapers 1 8.00 300 0.48 Rough Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 0 8.00 255 0.40 Rough Grading Rollers 1 8.00 100 0.38 Rough Grading Graders 1 8.00 150 0.41 Rough Grading Excavators 0 8.00 162 0.38 Building Construction Welders 3 8.00 45 0.45 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 0 8.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Generator Sets 0 8.00 84 0.74 Building Construction Forklifts 2 8.00 85 0.20 Building Construction Cranes 2 8.00 226 0.29 Building Construction Concrete/Industrial Saws 10 8.00 81 0.73 Building Construction Cement and Mortar Mixers 3 8.00 9 0.56 Building Construction Air Compressors 2 8.00 78 0.48 Building Construction Aerial Lifts 2 8.00 62 0.31 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 200 0.37 Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 0 8.00 255 0.40 Asphalt Demo Haul Rubber Tired Dozers 0 8.00 255 0.40 Asphalt Demo Haul Excavators 0 8.00 162 0.38 Asphalt Demo Haul Concrete/Industrial Saws 0 8.00 81 0.73 A-35 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDTSite Preparation 1 3.00 4.00 0.00 14.70 14.70 6.90 35.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Asphalt Demo Haul 0 0.00 0.00 494.00 Asphalt Demo 1 3.00 4.00 0.00 14.70 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Bldg Demo Haul 0 0.00 0.00 297.00 Demolition - Building 3 8.00 4.00 0.00 14.70 Worker Trip Length Vendor Trip Length Hauling Trip Length Worker Vehicle Class Vendor Vehicle Class Hauling Vehicle Class Trips and VMT Phase Name Offroad Equipment Count Worker Trip Number Vendor Trip Number Hauling Trip Number Finishing/Landscaping Trenchers 2 8.00 80 0.50 Finishing/Landscaping Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 40 0.37 Finishing/Landscaping Skid Steer Loaders 4 8.00 85 0.37 Finishing/Landscaping Plate Compactors 2 8.00 8 0.43 Architectural Coating Air Compressors 6 8.00 78 0.48 Architectural Coating Aerial Lifts 6 8.00 65 0.31 Asphalt Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 85 0.37 Asphalt Paving Rollers 2 8.00 45 0.38 Asphalt Paving Rollers 1 8.00 100 0.38 Asphalt Paving Paving Equipment 1 8.00 185 0.36 Asphalt Paving Pavers 0 8.00 125 0.42 Fine Grading Haul Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 0 8.00 97 0.37 Fine Grading Haul Rubber Tired Dozers 0 8.00 255 0.40 Fine Grading Haul Graders 0 8.00 174 0.41 Fine Grading Haul Excavators 0 8.00 162 0.38 Fine Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 85 0.37 Fine Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 0 8.00 255 0.40 Fine Grading Rollers 1 8.00 100 0.38 A-36 1,581.620 9 1,581.6209 0.4846 1,591.797 6 0.3377 0.3377 0.3107 0.3107Total0.6819 8.6260 5.5834 0.0155 1,581.620 9 1,581.6209 0.4846 1,591.797 6 0.3377 0.3377 0.3107 0.3107Off-Road 0.6819 8.6260 5.5834 0.0155 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 3.2 Demolition - Building - 2017 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction Use Cleaner Engines for Construction Equipment Replace Ground Cover Water Exposed Area Reduce Vehicle Speed on Unpaved Roads Clean Paved Roads 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Finishing/Landscaping 9 23.00 0.00 0.00 Architectural Coating 12 126.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT 6.90 25.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Asphalt Paving 5 13.00 0.00 0.00 Fine Grading Haul 0 0.00 0.00 406.00 14.70 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT 6.90 25.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Fine Grading 3 8.00 4.00 0.00 Rough Grading Soil Haul 0 0.00 0.00 11,098.00 14.70 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Utility Trenching 3 8.00 0.00 0.00 Rough Grading 3 8.00 4.00 0.00 14.70 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDTBuilding Construction 24 629.00 246.00 0.00 A-37 0.0000 1,581.620 9 1,581.6209 0.4846 1,591.797 6 0.3540 0.3540 0.3422 0.3422Total0.4947 8.1870 8.8709 0.0155 0.0000 1,581.620 9 1,581.6209 0.4846 1,591.797 6 0.3540 0.3540 0.3422 0.3422Off-Road 0.4947 8.1870 8.8709 0.0155 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 167.2480 167.2480 4.5800e- 003 167.34410.1144 5.5500e- 003 0.1200 0.0308 5.1100e- 003 0.0360Total0.0622 0.3578 0.8424 1.8900e- 003 82.6376 82.6376 3.9600e- 003 82.72080.0894 6.1000e- 004 0.0900 0.0237 5.6000e- 004 0.0243Worker0.0266 0.0358 0.3762 1.0300e- 003 84.6104 84.6104 6.2000e- 004 84.62330.0250 4.9400e- 003 0.0300 7.1200e- 003 4.5500e- 003 0.0117Vendor0.0357 0.3220 0.4662 8.6000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-38 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00005.3498 0.0000 5.3498 0.8100 0.0000 0.8100Total0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Off-Road 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00005.3498 0.0000 5.3498 0.8100 0.0000 0.8100Fugitive Dust Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 3.3 Bldg Demo Haul - 2017 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 167.2480 167.2480 4.5800e- 003 167.34410.1058 5.5500e- 003 0.1114 0.0287 5.1100e- 003 0.0338Total0.0622 0.3578 0.8424 1.8900e- 003 82.6376 82.6376 3.9600e- 003 82.72080.0824 6.1000e- 004 0.0830 0.0220 5.6000e- 004 0.0226Worker0.0266 0.0358 0.3762 1.0300e- 003 84.6104 84.6104 6.2000e- 004 84.62330.0234 4.9400e- 003 0.0283 6.7200e- 003 4.5500e- 003 0.0113Vendor0.0357 0.3220 0.4662 8.6000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-39 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00002.2870 0.0000 2.2870 0.3463 0.0000 0.3463Total0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Off-Road 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00002.2870 0.0000 2.2870 0.3463 0.0000 0.3463Fugitive Dust Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 1,800.236 2 1,800.2362 0.0130 1,800.508 6 0.4312 0.0941 0.5253 0.1181 0.0865 0.2046Total0.4543 6.4688 5.4586 0.0182 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Worker0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Vendor0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1,800.236 2 1,800.2362 0.0130 1,800.508 6 0.4312 0.0941 0.5253 0.1181 0.0865 0.2046Hauling0.4543 6.4688 5.4586 0.0182 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-40 648.4504 648.4504 0.1987 652.62280.1721 0.1721 0.1583 0.1583Total0.3801 5.2736 1.7015 6.3400e- 003 648.4504 648.4504 0.1987 652.62280.1721 0.1721 0.1583 0.1583Off-Road 0.3801 5.2736 1.7015 6.3400e- 003 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 3.4 Asphalt Demo - 2017 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 1,800.236 2 1,800.2362 0.0130 1,800.508 6 0.4018 0.0941 0.4959 0.1109 0.0865 0.1974Total0.4543 6.4688 5.4586 0.0182 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Worker0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Vendor0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1,800.236 2 1,800.2362 0.0130 1,800.508 6 0.4018 0.0941 0.4959 0.1109 0.0865 0.1974Hauling0.4543 6.4688 5.4586 0.0182 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-41 0.0000 648.4504 648.4504 0.1987 652.62280.1343 0.1343 0.1296 0.1296Total0.2326 3.7914 2.8181 6.3400e- 003 0.0000 648.4504 648.4504 0.1987 652.62280.1343 0.1343 0.1296 0.1296Off-Road 0.2326 3.7914 2.8181 6.3400e- 003 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 115.5995 115.5995 2.1100e- 003 115.64360.0585 5.1700e- 003 0.0637 0.0160 4.7600e- 003 0.0208Total0.0456 0.3355 0.6073 1.2500e- 003 30.9891 30.9891 1.4900e- 003 31.02030.0335 2.3000e- 004 0.0338 8.8900e- 003 2.1000e- 004 9.1000e- 003 Worker 9.9600e- 003 0.0134 0.1411 3.9000e- 004 84.6104 84.6104 6.2000e- 004 84.62330.0250 4.9400e- 003 0.0300 7.1200e- 003 4.5500e- 003 0.0117Vendor0.0357 0.3220 0.4662 8.6000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-42 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000010.6995 0.0000 10.6995 1.6200 0.0000 1.6200Total0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Off-Road 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000010.6995 0.0000 10.6995 1.6200 0.0000 1.6200Fugitive Dust Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 3.5 Asphalt Demo Haul - 2017 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 115.5995 115.5995 2.1100e- 003 115.64360.0543 5.1700e- 003 0.0595 0.0150 4.7600e- 003 0.0197Total0.0456 0.3355 0.6073 1.2500e- 003 30.9891 30.9891 1.4900e- 003 31.02030.0309 2.3000e- 004 0.0311 8.2500e- 003 2.1000e- 004 8.4600e- 003 Worker 9.9600e- 003 0.0134 0.1411 3.9000e- 004 84.6104 84.6104 6.2000e- 004 84.62330.0234 4.9400e- 003 0.0283 6.7200e- 003 4.5500e- 003 0.0113Vendor0.0357 0.3220 0.4662 8.6000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-43 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00004.5740 0.0000 4.5740 0.6926 0.0000 0.6926Total0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Off-Road 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00004.5740 0.0000 4.5740 0.6926 0.0000 0.6926Fugitive Dust Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 6,228.241 1 6,228.2411 0.0431 6,229.146 4 1.5054 0.3266 1.8320 0.4122 0.3004 0.7126Total1.2963 21.8826 13.6456 0.0627 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Worker0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Vendor0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 6,228.241 1 6,228.2411 0.0431 6,229.146 4 1.5054 0.3266 1.8320 0.4122 0.3004 0.7126Hauling1.2963 21.8826 13.6456 0.0627 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-44 648.4504 648.4504 0.1987 652.62280.0000 0.1721 0.1721 0.0000 0.1583 0.1583Total0.3801 5.2736 1.7015 6.3400e- 003 648.4504 648.4504 0.1987 652.62280.1721 0.1721 0.1583 0.1583Off-Road 0.3801 5.2736 1.7015 6.3400e- 003 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Fugitive Dust Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 3.6 Site Preparation - 2017 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 6,228.241 1 6,228.2411 0.0431 6,229.146 4 1.4026 0.3266 1.7292 0.3869 0.3004 0.6874Total1.2963 21.8826 13.6456 0.0627 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Worker0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Vendor0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 6,228.241 1 6,228.2411 0.0431 6,229.146 4 1.4026 0.3266 1.7292 0.3869 0.3004 0.6874Hauling1.2963 21.8826 13.6456 0.0627 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-45 0.0000 648.4504 648.4504 0.1987 652.62280.0000 0.1343 0.1343 0.0000 0.1296 0.1296Total0.2326 3.7914 2.8181 6.3400e- 003 0.0000 648.4504 648.4504 0.1987 652.62280.1343 0.1343 0.1296 0.1296Off-Road 0.2326 3.7914 2.8181 6.3400e- 003 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Fugitive Dust Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 115.5995 115.5995 2.1100e- 003 115.64360.0585 5.1700e- 003 0.0637 0.0160 4.7600e- 003 0.0208Total0.0456 0.3355 0.6073 1.2500e- 003 30.9891 30.9891 1.4900e- 003 31.02030.0335 2.3000e- 004 0.0338 8.8900e- 003 2.1000e- 004 9.1000e- 003 Worker 9.9600e- 003 0.0134 0.1411 3.9000e- 004 84.6104 84.6104 6.2000e- 004 84.62330.0250 4.9400e- 003 0.0300 7.1200e- 003 4.5500e- 003 0.0117Vendor0.0357 0.3220 0.4662 8.6000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-46 9,228.424 9 9,228.4249 1.2969 9,255.659 7 4.9776 4.9776 4.8952 4.8952Total10.1369 75.1297 59.0687 0.0976 9,228.424 9 9,228.4249 1.2969 9,255.659 7 4.9776 4.9776 4.8952 4.8952Off-Road 10.1369 75.1297 59.0687 0.0976 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 3.7 Building Construction - 2017 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 115.5995 115.5995 2.1100e- 003 115.64360.0543 5.1700e- 003 0.0595 0.0150 4.7600e- 003 0.0197Total0.0456 0.3355 0.6073 1.2500e- 003 30.9891 30.9891 1.4900e- 003 31.02030.0309 2.3000e- 004 0.0311 8.2500e- 003 2.1000e- 004 8.4600e- 003 Worker 9.9600e- 003 0.0134 0.1411 3.9000e- 004 84.6104 84.6104 6.2000e- 004 84.62330.0234 4.9400e- 003 0.0283 6.7200e- 003 4.5500e- 003 0.0113Vendor0.0357 0.3220 0.4662 8.6000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-47 0.0000 9,228.424 9 9,228.4249 1.2969 9,255.659 7 4.9776 4.9776 4.8952 4.8952Total10.1369 75.1297 59.0687 0.0976 0.0000 9,228.424 9 9,228.4249 1.2969 9,255.659 7 4.9776 4.9776 4.8952 4.8952Off-Road 10.1369 75.1297 59.0687 0.0976 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 11,700.92 12 11,700.921 2 0.3493 11,708.25 61 8.5685 0.3521 8.9206 2.3026 0.3240 2.6265Total4.2814 22.6200 58.2505 0.1336 6,497.383 6 6,497.3836 0.3114 6,503.923 8 7.0307 0.0480 7.0788 1.8646 0.0444 1.9090Worker2.0885 2.8153 29.5811 0.0808 5,203.537 6 5,203.5376 0.0378 5,204.332 3 1.5377 0.3041 1.8418 0.4380 0.2796 0.7176Vendor2.1930 19.8046 28.6694 0.0528 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-48 9,199.964 7 9,199.9647 1.2113 9,225.402 9 4.3043 4.3043 4.2358 4.2358Total9.0023 68.2917 57.9616 0.0976 9,199.964 7 9,199.9647 1.2113 9,225.402 9 4.3043 4.3043 4.2358 4.2358Off-Road 9.0023 68.2917 57.9616 0.0976 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 3.7 Building Construction - 2018 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 11,700.92 12 11,700.921 2 0.3493 11,708.25 61 7.9174 0.3521 8.2695 2.1427 0.3240 2.4667Total4.2814 22.6200 58.2505 0.1336 6,497.383 6 6,497.3836 0.3114 6,503.923 8 6.4806 0.0480 6.5287 1.7296 0.0444 1.7739Worker2.0885 2.8153 29.5811 0.0808 5,203.537 6 5,203.5376 0.0378 5,204.332 3 1.4368 0.3041 1.7408 0.4132 0.2796 0.6928Vendor2.1930 19.8046 28.6694 0.0528 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-49 0.0000 9,199.964 7 9,199.9647 1.2113 9,225.402 9 4.3043 4.3043 4.2358 4.2358Total9.0023 68.2917 57.9616 0.0976 0.0000 9,199.964 7 9,199.9647 1.2113 9,225.402 9 4.3043 4.3043 4.2358 4.2358Off-Road 9.0023 68.2917 57.9616 0.0976 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 11,368.77 13 11,368.771 3 0.3283 11,375.66 60 8.5684 0.3339 8.9022 2.3025 0.3074 2.6098Total3.9487 20.7398 54.4380 0.1335 6,253.678 9 6,253.6789 0.2906 6,259.782 4 7.0307 0.0475 7.0782 1.8646 0.0440 1.9085Worker1.9034 2.5687 27.0060 0.0808 5,115.092 4 5,115.0924 0.0377 5,115.883 5 1.5376 0.2864 1.8240 0.4379 0.2634 0.7013Vendor2.0452 18.1711 27.4320 0.0527 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-50 9,171.558 3 9,171.5583 1.1467 9,195.638 1 3.7159 3.7159 3.6565 3.6565Total8.0090 62.4733 57.0797 0.0976 9,171.558 3 9,171.5583 1.1467 9,195.638 1 3.7159 3.7159 3.6565 3.6565Off-Road 8.0090 62.4733 57.0797 0.0976 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 3.7 Building Construction - 2019 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 11,368.77 13 11,368.771 3 0.3283 11,375.66 60 7.9173 0.3339 8.2511 2.1427 0.3074 2.4500Total3.9487 20.7398 54.4380 0.1335 6,253.678 9 6,253.6789 0.2906 6,259.782 4 6.4806 0.0475 6.5281 1.7296 0.0440 1.7735Worker1.9034 2.5687 27.0060 0.0808 5,115.092 4 5,115.0924 0.0377 5,115.883 5 1.4366 0.2864 1.7230 0.4131 0.2634 0.6765Vendor2.0452 18.1711 27.4320 0.0527 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-51 0.0000 9,171.558 3 9,171.5583 1.1467 9,195.638 1 3.7159 3.7159 3.6565 3.6565Total8.0090 62.4733 57.0797 0.0976 0.0000 9,171.558 3 9,171.5583 1.1467 9,195.638 1 3.7159 3.7159 3.6565 3.6565Off-Road 8.0090 62.4733 57.0797 0.0976 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 11,102.34 19 11,102.341 9 0.3154 11,108.96 50 8.5685 0.3150 8.8834 2.3025 0.2901 2.5926Total3.6871 19.2264 51.3589 0.1339 6,058.312 5 6,058.3125 0.2774 6,064.138 8 7.0307 0.0479 7.0786 1.8646 0.0444 1.9090Worker1.7791 2.3805 25.1452 0.0811 5,044.029 3 5,044.0293 0.0380 5,044.826 2 1.5377 0.2671 1.8048 0.4380 0.2457 0.6836Vendor1.9080 16.8459 26.2137 0.0528 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-52 2,150.805 3 2,150.8053 0.6590 2,164.644 4 1.5908 1.2738 2.8646 0.1718 1.1719 1.3437Total2.2894 25.4991 15.1344 0.0210 2,150.805 3 2,150.8053 0.6590 2,164.644 4 1.2738 1.2738 1.1719 1.1719Off-Road 2.2894 25.4991 15.1344 0.0210 0.0000 0.00001.5908 0.0000 1.5908 0.1718 0.0000 0.1718Fugitive Dust Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 3.8 Rough Grading - 2017 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 11,102.34 19 11,102.341 9 0.3154 11,108.96 50 7.9174 0.3150 8.2324 2.1427 0.2901 2.4328Total3.6871 19.2264 51.3589 0.1339 6,058.312 5 6,058.3125 0.2774 6,064.138 8 6.4806 0.0479 6.5285 1.7296 0.0444 1.7739Worker1.7791 2.3805 25.1452 0.0811 5,044.029 3 5,044.0293 0.0380 5,044.826 2 1.4368 0.2671 1.7039 0.4132 0.2457 0.6589Vendor1.9080 16.8459 26.2137 0.0528 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-53 0.0000 2,150.805 3 2,150.8053 0.6590 2,164.644 4 0.6801 0.7944 1.4744 0.0734 0.7508 0.8242Total1.2902 17.9137 14.9681 0.0210 0.0000 2,150.805 3 2,150.8053 0.6590 2,164.644 4 0.7944 0.7944 0.7508 0.7508Off-Road 1.2902 17.9137 14.9681 0.0210 0.0000 0.00000.6801 0.0000 0.6801 0.0734 0.0000 0.0734Fugitive Dust Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 167.2480 167.2480 4.5800e- 003 167.34410.1144 5.5500e- 003 0.1200 0.0308 5.1100e- 003 0.0360Total0.0622 0.3578 0.8424 1.8900e- 003 82.6376 82.6376 3.9600e- 003 82.72080.0894 6.1000e- 004 0.0900 0.0237 5.6000e- 004 0.0243Worker0.0266 0.0358 0.3762 1.0300e- 003 84.6104 84.6104 6.2000e- 004 84.62330.0250 4.9400e- 003 0.0300 7.1200e- 003 4.5500e- 003 0.0117Vendor0.0357 0.3220 0.4662 8.6000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-54 1,713.929 7 1,713.9297 0.5251 1,724.957 7 0.9850 0.9850 0.9062 0.9062Total1.6247 16.4834 9.1160 0.0168 1,713.929 7 1,713.9297 0.5251 1,724.957 7 0.9850 0.9850 0.9062 0.9062Off-Road 1.6247 16.4834 9.1160 0.0168 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 3.9 Utility Trenching - 2017 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 167.2480 167.2480 4.5800e- 003 167.34410.1058 5.5500e- 003 0.1114 0.0287 5.1100e- 003 0.0338Total0.0622 0.3578 0.8424 1.8900e- 003 82.6376 82.6376 3.9600e- 003 82.72080.0824 6.1000e- 004 0.0830 0.0220 5.6000e- 004 0.0226Worker0.0266 0.0358 0.3762 1.0300e- 003 84.6104 84.6104 6.2000e- 004 84.62330.0234 4.9400e- 003 0.0283 6.7200e- 003 4.5500e- 003 0.0113Vendor0.0357 0.3220 0.4662 8.6000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-55 0.0000 1,713.929 7 1,713.9297 0.5251 1,724.957 7 0.9396 0.9396 0.8738 0.8738Total1.4218 14.9214 10.2662 0.0168 0.0000 1,713.929 7 1,713.9297 0.5251 1,724.957 7 0.9396 0.9396 0.8738 0.8738Off-Road 1.4218 14.9214 10.2662 0.0168 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 82.6376 82.6376 3.9600e- 003 82.72080.0894 6.1000e- 004 0.0900 0.0237 5.6000e- 004 0.0243Total0.0266 0.0358 0.3762 1.0300e- 003 82.6376 82.6376 3.9600e- 003 82.72080.0894 6.1000e- 004 0.0900 0.0237 5.6000e- 004 0.0243Worker0.0266 0.0358 0.3762 1.0300e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Vendor0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-56 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.3012 0.0000 0.3012 0.0456 0.0000 0.0456Total0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Off-Road 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.3012 0.0000 0.3012 0.0456 0.0000 0.0456Fugitive Dust Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 3.10 Rough Grading Soil Haul - 2017 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 82.6376 82.6376 3.9600e- 003 82.72080.0824 6.1000e- 004 0.0830 0.0220 5.6000e- 004 0.0226Total0.0266 0.0358 0.3762 1.0300e- 003 82.6376 82.6376 3.9600e- 003 82.72080.0824 6.1000e- 004 0.0830 0.0220 5.6000e- 004 0.0226Worker0.0266 0.0358 0.3762 1.0300e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Vendor0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-57 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.1288 0.0000 0.1288 0.0195 0.0000 0.0195Total0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Off-Road 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.1288 0.0000 0.1288 0.0195 0.0000 0.0195Fugitive Dust Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 40,182.36 44 40,182.364 4 0.2842 40,188.33 25 9.6656 2.1033 11.7689 2.6465 1.9347 4.5812Total9.3147 142.8978 106.1448 0.4049 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Worker0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Vendor0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 40,182.36 44 40,182.364 4 0.2842 40,188.33 25 9.6656 2.1033 11.7689 2.6465 1.9347 4.5812Hauling9.3147 142.8978 106.1448 0.4049 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-58 1,163.753 2 1,163.7532 0.3566 1,171.241 2 0.5303 0.9302 1.4605 0.0573 0.8558 0.9131Total1.4874 14.6055 8.7570 0.0114 1,163.753 2 1,163.7532 0.3566 1,171.241 2 0.9302 0.9302 0.8558 0.8558Off-Road 1.4874 14.6055 8.7570 0.0114 0.0000 0.00000.5303 0.0000 0.5303 0.0573 0.0000 0.0573Fugitive Dust Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 3.11 Fine Grading - 2017 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 40,182.36 44 40,182.364 4 0.2842 40,188.33 25 9.0053 2.1033 11.1087 2.4845 1.9347 4.4192Total9.3147 142.8978 106.1448 0.4049 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Worker0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Vendor0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 40,182.36 44 40,182.364 4 0.2842 40,188.33 25 9.0053 2.1033 11.1087 2.4845 1.9347 4.4192Hauling9.3147 142.8978 106.1448 0.4049 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-59 0.0000 1,163.753 2 1,163.7532 0.3566 1,171.241 2 0.2267 0.3887 0.6153 0.0245 0.3832 0.4077Total0.3489 6.2628 8.5608 0.0114 0.0000 1,163.753 2 1,163.7532 0.3566 1,171.241 2 0.3887 0.3887 0.3832 0.3832Off-Road 0.3489 6.2628 8.5608 0.0114 0.0000 0.00000.2267 0.0000 0.2267 0.0245 0.0000 0.0245Fugitive Dust Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 167.2480 167.2480 4.5800e- 003 167.34410.1144 5.5500e- 003 0.1200 0.0308 5.1100e- 003 0.0360Total0.0622 0.3578 0.8424 1.8900e- 003 82.6376 82.6376 3.9600e- 003 82.72080.0894 6.1000e- 004 0.0900 0.0237 5.6000e- 004 0.0243Worker0.0266 0.0358 0.3762 1.0300e- 003 84.6104 84.6104 6.2000e- 004 84.62330.0250 4.9400e- 003 0.0300 7.1200e- 003 4.5500e- 003 0.0117Vendor0.0357 0.3220 0.4662 8.6000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-60 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0276 0.0000 0.0276 4.1800e- 003 0.0000 4.1800e- 003 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Off-Road 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0276 0.0000 0.0276 4.1800e- 003 0.0000 4.1800e- 003 Fugitive Dust Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 3.12 Fine Grading Haul - 2017 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 167.2480 167.2480 4.5800e- 003 167.34410.1058 5.5500e- 003 0.1114 0.0287 5.1100e- 003 0.0338Total0.0622 0.3578 0.8424 1.8900e- 003 82.6376 82.6376 3.9600e- 003 82.72080.0824 6.1000e- 004 0.0830 0.0220 5.6000e- 004 0.0226Worker0.0266 0.0358 0.3762 1.0300e- 003 84.6104 84.6104 6.2000e- 004 84.62330.0234 4.9400e- 003 0.0283 6.7200e- 003 4.5500e- 003 0.0113Vendor0.0357 0.3220 0.4662 8.6000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-61 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0118 0.0000 0.0118 1.7900e- 003 0.0000 1.7900e- 003 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Off-Road 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0118 0.0000 0.0118 1.7900e- 003 0.0000 1.7900e- 003 Fugitive Dust Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 3,674.995 5 3,674.9955 0.0260 3,675.541 3 0.8840 0.1924 1.0764 0.2421 0.1769 0.4190Total0.8519 13.0691 9.7078 0.0370 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Worker0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Vendor0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 3,674.995 5 3,674.9955 0.0260 3,675.541 3 0.8840 0.1924 1.0764 0.2421 0.1769 0.4190Hauling0.8519 13.0691 9.7078 0.0370 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-62 1,534.698 8 1,534.6988 0.4702 1,544.573 6 0.8923 0.8923 0.8210 0.8210Total2.0806 14.2097 9.2568 0.0150 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Paving0.3537 1,534.698 8 1,534.6988 0.4702 1,544.573 6 0.8923 0.8923 0.8210 0.8210Off-Road 1.7269 14.2097 9.2568 0.0150 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 3.13 Asphalt Paving - 2017 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 3,674.995 5 3,674.9955 0.0260 3,675.541 3 0.8236 0.1924 1.0160 0.2272 0.1769 0.4042Total0.8519 13.0691 9.7078 0.0370 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Worker0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Vendor0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 3,674.995 5 3,674.9955 0.0260 3,675.541 3 0.8236 0.1924 1.0160 0.2272 0.1769 0.4042Hauling0.8519 13.0691 9.7078 0.0370 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-63 0.0000 1,534.698 8 1,534.6988 0.4702 1,544.573 6 0.6023 0.6023 0.5835 0.5835Total1.0856 11.3798 8.5863 0.0150 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Paving0.3537 0.0000 1,534.698 8 1,534.6988 0.4702 1,544.573 6 0.6023 0.6023 0.5835 0.5835Off-Road 0.7319 11.3798 8.5863 0.0150 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 134.2862 134.2862 6.4400e- 003 134.42130.1453 9.9000e- 004 0.1463 0.0385 9.2000e- 004 0.0395Total0.0432 0.0582 0.6114 1.6700e- 003 134.2862 134.2862 6.4400e- 003 134.42130.1453 9.9000e- 004 0.1463 0.0385 9.2000e- 004 0.0395Worker0.0432 0.0582 0.6114 1.6700e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Vendor0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-64 3,314.206 2 3,314.2062 0.5633 3,326.035 5 1.5646 1.5646 1.5504 1.5504Total10.8206 22.5203 21.7345 0.0342 3,314.206 2 3,314.2062 0.5633 3,326.035 5 1.5646 1.5646 1.5504 1.5504Off-Road 2.9627 22.5203 21.7345 0.0342 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Archit. Coating 7.8579 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 3.14 Architectural Coating - 2017 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 134.2862 134.2862 6.4400e- 003 134.42130.1339 9.9000e- 004 0.1349 0.0358 9.2000e- 004 0.0367Total0.0432 0.0582 0.6114 1.6700e- 003 134.2862 134.2862 6.4400e- 003 134.42130.1339 9.9000e- 004 0.1349 0.0358 9.2000e- 004 0.0367Worker0.0432 0.0582 0.6114 1.6700e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Vendor0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-65 0.0000 3,314.206 1 3,314.2061 0.5633 3,326.035 5 1.5646 1.5646 1.5504 1.5504Total10.8206 22.5203 21.7345 0.0342 0.0000 3,314.206 1 3,314.2061 0.5633 3,326.035 5 1.5646 1.5646 1.5504 1.5504Off-Road 2.9627 22.5203 21.7345 0.0342 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Archit. Coating 7.8579 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 1,301.542 7 1,301.5427 0.0624 1,302.852 8 1.4084 9.6200e- 003 1.4180 0.3735 8.8900e- 003 0.3824Total0.4184 0.5640 5.9256 0.0162 1,301.542 7 1,301.5427 0.0624 1,302.852 8 1.4084 9.6200e- 003 1.4180 0.3735 8.8900e- 003 0.3824Worker0.4184 0.5640 5.9256 0.0162 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Vendor0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-66 3,297.431 9 3,297.4319 0.5395 3,308.762 0 1.3261 1.3261 1.3164 1.3164Total10.5069 20.4462 21.5863 0.0342 3,297.431 9 3,297.4319 0.5395 3,308.762 0 1.3261 1.3261 1.3164 1.3164Off-Road 2.6490 20.4462 21.5863 0.0342 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Archit. Coating 7.8579 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 3.14 Architectural Coating - 2018 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 1,301.542 7 1,301.5427 0.0624 1,302.852 8 1.2982 9.6200e- 003 1.3078 0.3465 8.8900e- 003 0.3554Total0.4184 0.5640 5.9256 0.0162 1,301.542 7 1,301.5427 0.0624 1,302.852 8 1.2982 9.6200e- 003 1.3078 0.3465 8.8900e- 003 0.3554Worker0.4184 0.5640 5.9256 0.0162 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Vendor0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-67 0.0000 3,297.431 9 3,297.4319 0.5395 3,308.762 0 1.3261 1.3261 1.3164 1.3164Total10.5069 20.4462 21.5863 0.0342 0.0000 3,297.431 9 3,297.4319 0.5395 3,308.762 0 1.3261 1.3261 1.3164 1.3164Off-Road 2.6490 20.4462 21.5863 0.0342 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Archit. Coating 7.8579 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 1,252.724 2 1,252.7242 0.0582 1,253.946 9 1.4084 9.5100e- 003 1.4179 0.3735 8.8000e- 003 0.3823Total0.3813 0.5146 5.4098 0.0162 1,252.724 2 1,252.7242 0.0582 1,253.946 9 1.4084 9.5100e- 003 1.4179 0.3735 8.8000e- 003 0.3823Worker0.3813 0.5146 5.4098 0.0162 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Vendor0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-68 1,992.896 2 1,992.8962 0.6061 2,005.624 4 1.0592 1.0592 0.9760 0.9760Total1.7465 16.4380 14.5282 0.0201 1,992.896 2 1,992.8962 0.6061 2,005.624 4 1.0592 1.0592 0.9760 0.9760Off-Road 1.7465 16.4380 14.5282 0.0201 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 3.15 Finishing/Landscaping - 2018 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 1,252.724 2 1,252.7242 0.0582 1,253.946 9 1.2982 9.5100e- 003 1.3077 0.3465 8.8000e- 003 0.3553Total0.3813 0.5146 5.4098 0.0162 1,252.724 2 1,252.7242 0.0582 1,253.946 9 1.2982 9.5100e- 003 1.3077 0.3465 8.8000e- 003 0.3553Worker0.3813 0.5146 5.4098 0.0162 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Vendor0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-69 0.0000 1,992.896 2 1,992.8962 0.6061 2,005.624 4 1.0450 1.0450 0.9668 0.9668Total1.6256 16.4149 14.3197 0.0201 0.0000 1,992.896 2 1,992.8962 0.6061 2,005.624 4 1.0450 1.0450 0.9668 0.9668Off-Road 1.6256 16.4149 14.3197 0.0201 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 228.6719 228.6719 0.0106 228.89510.2571 1.7400e- 003 0.2588 0.0682 1.6100e- 003 0.0698Total0.0696 0.0939 0.9875 2.9500e- 003 228.6719 228.6719 0.0106 228.89510.2571 1.7400e- 003 0.2588 0.0682 1.6100e- 003 0.0698Worker0.0696 0.0939 0.9875 2.9500e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Vendor0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-70 228.6719 228.6719 0.0106 228.89510.2370 1.7400e- 003 0.2387 0.0632 1.6100e- 003 0.0649Total0.0696 0.0939 0.9875 2.9500e- 003 228.6719 228.6719 0.0106 228.89510.2370 1.7400e- 003 0.2387 0.0632 1.6100e- 003 0.0649Worker0.0696 0.0939 0.9875 2.9500e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Vendor0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-71 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data Project Characteristics - *Anaheim, Public Utilities Department. 2013, February 12. Mandip Kaur Samra, Integrated Resources Planner. Land Use - Based on the project description and information provided. Construction Phase - Derived from information provided. Off-road Equipment - Based on information provided. Off-road Equipment - Based on information provided. CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 1430.8 CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.029 N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.007 30 Climate Zone 8 Operational Year 2014 Utility Company Anaheim Public Utilities 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s)2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) Strip Mall 25.60 1000sqft 0.00 25,600.00 0 Hotel 580.00 Room 5.23 749,670.00 0 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.27 Acre 0.27 0.00 0 Population Enclosed Parking with Elevator 363.85 1000sqft 3.40 363,852.00 0 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Page 1 of 1 Date: 2/18/2016 10:24 AM Construction Orange County, Annual 1.0 Project Characteristics A-72 tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 5.00 tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 1.00 tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00 tblAreaCoating Area_Nonresidential_Interior 1708683 2254458 tblConstDustMitigation CleanPavedRoadPercentReduction 0 9 tblArchitecturalCoating EF_Nonresidential_Exterior 250.00 40.00 tblArchitecturalCoating EF_Nonresidential_Interior 250.00 35.00 tblArchitecturalCoating ConstArea_Nonresidential_Exterior 569,561.00 85,434.00 tblArchitecturalCoating ConstArea_Nonresidential_Interior 1,708,683.00 1,452,381.00 Trips and VMT - Based on information provided. Assumes water truck as 4 vendor trips. Demolition - Grading - Architectural Coating - Based on information provided. Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - SCAQMD Rules 403 and 1186. Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value Off-road Equipment - No equipment assumed. Placeholder only. Off-road Equipment - Based on information provided. Off-road Equipment - Based on information provided. Off-road Equipment - No equipment assumed. Placeholder only. Off-road Equipment - Based on information provided. Off-road Equipment - Based on information provided. Off-road Equipment - No equipment assumed. Placeholder only. Off-road Equipment - Based on information provided. Off-road Equipment - No equipment assumed. Placeholder only. Off-road Equipment - Based on information provided. Off-road Equipment - Based on information provided. Off-road Equipment - Based on information provided. A-73 tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 5/23/2017 5/9/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 8/11/2017 7/5/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 7/11/2017 9/18/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 8/25/2017 7/7/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 5/17/2019 6/7/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 4/11/2017 3/28/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 8/30/2017 8/11/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 4/17/2017 2/21/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 3/7/2017 3/28/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 12/10/2018 12/6/2018 tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 5/7/2019 4/12/2019 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 2.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 10.00 40.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 25.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 25.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 40.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 10.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 10.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 10.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 40.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 12.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 320.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 230.00 520.00 tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3 tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3 tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3 tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3 tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 4.00 A-74 tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 174.00 150.00 tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 89.00 85.00 tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 174.00 150.00 tblLandUse LotAcreage 0.59 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 162.00 350.00 tblLandUse LotAcreage 8.35 3.40 tblLandUse LotAcreage 19.33 5.23 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 11,761.20 0.00 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 842,160.00 749,670.00 tblGrading MaterialImported 0.00 12,966.00 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 363,850.00 363,852.00 tblGrading MaterialExported 0.00 53,621.00 tblGrading MaterialImported 0.00 2,441.00 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 12/7/2018 6/18/2018 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 6/8/2017 5/15/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 7/8/2017 9/15/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 3/29/2017 3/15/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 4/13/2019 5/4/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 7/8/2017 6/1/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 7/6/2017 6/17/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 8/12/2017 6/25/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 2/22/2017 3/15/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 3/29/2017 3/15/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 5/10/2017 4/15/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 3/31/2017 2/5/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 8/2/2017 7/7/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 9/19/2017 9/15/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 3/28/2019 10/5/2018 A-75 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 1.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 2.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 6.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 97.00 200.00 tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 97.00 310.00 tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 97.00 85.00 tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 97.00 40.00 tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 361.00 300.00 tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 64.00 85.00 tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 80.00 100.00 tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 80.00 100.00 tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 46.00 45.00 tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 62.00 65.00 tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 97.00 85.00 tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 97.00 200.00 tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 80.00 100.00 tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 80.00 45.00 tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 130.00 185.00 A-76 tblProjectCharacteristics CO2IntensityFactor 1543.28 1430.8 tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 7.00 8.00 tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 7.00 8.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 3.00 tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 6.00 8.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 4.00 1.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 1.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 2.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 2.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 2.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 2.00 1.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 2.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 2.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 2.00 1.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 2.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00 A-77 0.0000 6,291.227 9 6,291.2279 0.5206 0.0000 6,302.159 5 2.6830 1.6082 4.2912 0.7065 1.5696 2.2762Total5.4769 31.2165 36.5711 0.0767 0.0000 684.4237 684.4237 0.0491 0.0000 685.45380.3115 0.1491 0.4606 0.0838 0.1460 0.229820190.4261 3.0375 3.9883 8.6200e- 003 0.0000 3,035.682 3 3,035.6823 0.2707 0.0000 3,041.367 6 1.2776 0.8105 2.0881 0.3432 0.7935 1.136720183.0624 14.8944 18.5170 0.0375 0.0000 2,571.121 9 2,571.1219 0.2008 0.0000 2,575.338 1 1.0939 0.6487 1.7426 0.2795 0.6302 0.909720171.9883 13.2846 14.0658 0.0306 CH4 N2O CO2e Year tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripNumber 476.00 629.00 2.0 Emissions Summary 2.1 Overall Construction tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripNumber 0.00 4.00 tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripNumber 95.00 126.00 tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripNumber 0.00 4.00 tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripNumber 187.00 246.00 tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripNumber 0.00 4.00 tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripNumber 0.00 4.00 tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripNumber 8,323.00 11,098.00 tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripNumber 0.00 4.00 tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripLength 20.00 25.00 tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripNumber 305.00 406.00 tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripLength 20.00 25.00 tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripLength 20.00 35.00 tblProjectCharacteristics N2OIntensityFactor 0.006 0.007 A-78 40 6 Building Construction Building Construction 4/15/2017 4/12/2019 5 520 5 Site Preparation Site Preparation 3/15/2017 5/9/2017 5 10 4 Asphalt Demo Haul Demolition 3/15/2017 3/28/2017 5 10 3 Asphalt Demo Demolition 3/15/2017 3/28/2017 5 40 2 Bldg Demo Haul Demolition 2/5/2017 2/21/2017 5 12 End Date Num Days Week Num Days Phase Description 1 Demolition - Building Demolition 2/3/2017 3/30/2017 5 3.0 Construction Detail Construction Phase Phase Number Phase Name Phase Type Start Date 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.009.78 1.19 6.56 8.09 1.02 3.22 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.96 1.10 -0.28 0.00 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive PM10 0.0000 6,291.224 5 6,291.2245 0.5206 0.0000 6,302.156 1 2.4207 1.5890 4.0097 0.6493 1.5536 2.2029Total5.4243 30.8740 36.6727 0.0767 0.0000 684.4233 684.4233 0.0491 0.0000 685.45340.2879 0.1491 0.4370 0.0781 0.1460 0.224020190.4261 3.0375 3.9882 8.6200e- 003 0.0000 3,035.680 4 3,035.6804 0.2707 0.0000 3,041.365 8 1.1805 0.8099 1.9903 0.3194 0.7931 1.112520183.0576 14.8935 18.5087 0.0375 0.0000 2,571.120 7 2,571.1207 0.2008 0.0000 2,575.336 9 0.9523 0.6300 1.5824 0.2519 0.6145 0.866520171.9406 12.9430 14.1758 0.0306 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-79 Asphalt Demo Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 200 0.37 Asphalt Demo Rubber Tired Dozers 0 8.00 255 0.40 Asphalt Demo Excavators 0 8.00 162 0.38 Asphalt Demo Concrete/Industrial Saws 0 8.00 81 0.73 Bldg Demo Haul Rubber Tired Dozers 0 8.00 255 0.40 Bldg Demo Haul Excavators 0 8.00 162 0.38 Bldg Demo Haul Concrete/Industrial Saws 0 8.00 81 0.73 Demolition - Building Skid Steer Loaders 2 8.00 64 0.37 Demolition - Building Rubber Tired Dozers 0 8.00 255 0.40 Demolition - Building Excavators 1 8.00 350 0.38 Load Factor Demolition - Building Concrete/Industrial Saws 0 8.00 81 0.73 Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 0 Acres of Paving: 0 Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 1,452,381; Non-Residential Outdoor: 85,434 (Architectural Coating OffRoad Equipment Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power 320 14 Finishing/Landscaping Trenching 6/18/2018 10/5/2018 5 80 13 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 9/15/2017 12/6/2018 5 10 12 Asphalt Paving Paving 9/15/2017 9/18/2017 5 2 11 Fine Grading Haul Grading 6/25/2017 7/7/2017 5 25 10 Fine Grading Grading 6/17/2017 8/11/2017 5 40 9 Rough Grading Soil Haul Grading 6/1/2017 7/5/2017 5 25 8 Utility Trenching Trenching 5/15/2017 7/7/2017 5 40 7 Rough Grading Grading 5/4/2017 6/7/2017 5 A-80 Fine Grading Graders 1 8.00 150 0.41 Fine Grading Excavators 0 8.00 162 0.38 Rough Grading Soil Haul Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 0 8.00 97 0.37 Rough Grading Soil Haul Rubber Tired Dozers 0 8.00 255 0.40 Rough Grading Soil Haul Graders 0 8.00 174 0.41 Rough Grading Soil Haul Excavators 0 8.00 162 0.38 Utility Trenching Trenchers 2 8.00 80 0.50 Utility Trenching Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 310 0.37 Rough Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 0 8.00 97 0.37 Rough Grading Scrapers 1 8.00 300 0.48 Rough Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 0 8.00 255 0.40 Rough Grading Rollers 1 8.00 100 0.38 Rough Grading Graders 1 8.00 150 0.41 Rough Grading Excavators 0 8.00 162 0.38 Building Construction Welders 3 8.00 45 0.45 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 0 8.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Generator Sets 0 8.00 84 0.74 Building Construction Forklifts 2 8.00 85 0.20 Building Construction Cranes 2 8.00 226 0.29 Building Construction Concrete/Industrial Saws 10 8.00 81 0.73 Building Construction Cement and Mortar Mixers 3 8.00 9 0.56 Building Construction Air Compressors 2 8.00 78 0.48 Building Construction Aerial Lifts 2 8.00 62 0.31 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 200 0.37 Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 0 8.00 255 0.40 Asphalt Demo Haul Rubber Tired Dozers 0 8.00 255 0.40 Asphalt Demo Haul Excavators 0 8.00 162 0.38 Asphalt Demo Haul Concrete/Industrial Saws 0 8.00 81 0.73 A-81 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDTSite Preparation 1 3.00 4.00 0.00 14.70 14.70 6.90 35.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Asphalt Demo Haul 0 0.00 0.00 494.00 Asphalt Demo 1 3.00 4.00 0.00 14.70 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Bldg Demo Haul 0 0.00 0.00 297.00 Demolition - Building 3 8.00 4.00 0.00 14.70 Worker Trip Length Vendor Trip Length Hauling Trip Length Worker Vehicle Class Vendor Vehicle Class Hauling Vehicle Class Trips and VMT Phase Name Offroad Equipment Count Worker Trip Number Vendor Trip Number Hauling Trip Number Finishing/Landscaping Trenchers 2 8.00 80 0.50 Finishing/Landscaping Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 40 0.37 Finishing/Landscaping Skid Steer Loaders 4 8.00 85 0.37 Finishing/Landscaping Plate Compactors 2 8.00 8 0.43 Architectural Coating Air Compressors 6 8.00 78 0.48 Architectural Coating Aerial Lifts 6 8.00 65 0.31 Asphalt Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 85 0.37 Asphalt Paving Rollers 2 8.00 45 0.38 Asphalt Paving Rollers 1 8.00 100 0.38 Asphalt Paving Paving Equipment 1 8.00 185 0.36 Asphalt Paving Pavers 0 8.00 125 0.42 Fine Grading Haul Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 0 8.00 97 0.37 Fine Grading Haul Rubber Tired Dozers 0 8.00 255 0.40 Fine Grading Haul Graders 0 8.00 174 0.41 Fine Grading Haul Excavators 0 8.00 162 0.38 Fine Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 85 0.37 Fine Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 0 8.00 255 0.40 Fine Grading Rollers 1 8.00 100 0.38 A-82 0.0000 28.6965 28.6965 8.7900e- 003 0.0000 28.88116.7500e- 003 6.7500e- 003 6.2100e- 003 6.2100e- 003 Total 0.0136 0.1725 0.1117 3.1000e- 004 0.0000 28.6965 28.6965 8.7900e- 003 0.0000 28.88116.7500e- 003 6.7500e- 003 6.2100e- 003 6.2100e- 003 Off-Road 0.0136 0.1725 0.1117 3.1000e- 004 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 3.2 Demolition - Building - 2017 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction Use Cleaner Engines for Construction Equipment Replace Ground Cover Water Exposed Area Reduce Vehicle Speed on Unpaved Roads Clean Paved Roads 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Finishing/Landscaping 9 23.00 0.00 0.00 Architectural Coating 12 126.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT 6.90 25.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Asphalt Paving 5 13.00 0.00 0.00 Fine Grading Haul 0 0.00 0.00 406.00 14.70 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT 6.90 25.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Fine Grading 3 8.00 4.00 0.00 Rough Grading Soil Haul 0 0.00 0.00 11,098.00 14.70 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Utility Trenching 3 8.00 0.00 0.00 Rough Grading 3 8.00 4.00 0.00 14.70 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDTBuilding Construction 24 629.00 246.00 0.00 A-83 0.0000 28.6964 28.6964 8.7900e- 003 0.0000 28.88117.0800e- 003 7.0800e- 003 6.8400e- 003 6.8400e- 003 Total 9.8900e- 003 0.1637 0.1774 3.1000e- 004 0.0000 28.6964 28.6964 8.7900e- 003 0.0000 28.88117.0800e- 003 7.0800e- 003 6.8400e- 003 6.8400e- 003 Off-Road 9.8900e- 003 0.1637 0.1774 3.1000e- 004 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 3.0647 3.0647 8.0000e- 005 0.0000 3.06642.2500e- 003 1.1000e- 004 2.3600e- 003 6.1000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 7.1000e- 004 Total 1.1900e- 003 7.3100e- 003 0.0166 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.5220 1.5220 7.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.52351.7600e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.7700e- 003 4.7000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 4.8000e- 004 Worker 5.0000e- 004 7.4000e- 004 7.6900e- 003 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.5427 1.5427 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.54304.9000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 5.9000e- 004 1.4000e- 004 9.0000e- 005 2.3000e- 004 Vendor 6.9000e- 004 6.5700e- 003 8.9300e- 003 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-84 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0321 0.0000 0.0321 4.8600e- 003 0.0000 4.8600e- 003 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Off-Road 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0321 0.0000 0.0321 4.8600e- 003 0.0000 4.8600e- 003 Fugitive Dust Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 3.3 Bldg Demo Haul - 2017 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 3.0647 3.0647 8.0000e- 005 0.0000 3.06642.0800e- 003 1.1000e- 004 2.1900e- 003 5.6000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 6.6000e- 004 Total 1.1900e- 003 7.3100e- 003 0.0166 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.5220 1.5220 7.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.52351.6200e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.6300e- 003 4.3000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 4.4000e- 004 Worker 5.0000e- 004 7.4000e- 004 7.6900e- 003 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.5427 1.5427 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.54304.6000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 5.6000e- 004 1.3000e- 004 9.0000e- 005 2.2000e- 004 Vendor 6.9000e- 004 6.5700e- 003 8.9300e- 003 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-85 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0137 0.0000 0.0137 2.0800e- 003 0.0000 2.0800e- 003 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Off-Road 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0137 0.0000 0.0137 2.0800e- 003 0.0000 2.0800e- 003 Fugitive Dust Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 9.8125 9.8125 7.0000e- 005 0.0000 9.81392.5500e- 003 5.6000e- 004 3.1100e- 003 7.0000e- 004 5.2000e- 004 1.2200e- 003 Total 2.6700e- 003 0.0395 0.0317 1.1000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Worker0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Vendor0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 9.8125 9.8125 7.0000e- 005 0.0000 9.81392.5500e- 003 5.6000e- 004 3.1100e- 003 7.0000e- 004 5.2000e- 004 1.2200e- 003 Hauling 2.6700e- 003 0.0395 0.0317 1.1000e- 004 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-86 0.0000 2.9413 2.9413 9.0000e- 004 0.0000 2.96038.6000e- 004 8.6000e- 004 7.9000e- 004 7.9000e- 004 Total 1.9000e- 003 0.0264 8.5100e- 003 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 2.9413 2.9413 9.0000e- 004 0.0000 2.96038.6000e- 004 8.6000e- 004 7.9000e- 004 7.9000e- 004 Off-Road 1.9000e- 003 0.0264 8.5100e- 003 3.0000e- 005 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 3.4 Asphalt Demo - 2017 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 9.8125 9.8125 7.0000e- 005 0.0000 9.81392.3700e- 003 5.6000e- 004 2.9400e- 003 6.6000e- 004 5.2000e- 004 1.1700e- 003 Total 2.6700e- 003 0.0395 0.0317 1.1000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Worker0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Vendor0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 9.8125 9.8125 7.0000e- 005 0.0000 9.81392.3700e- 003 5.6000e- 004 2.9400e- 003 6.6000e- 004 5.2000e- 004 1.1700e- 003 Hauling 2.6700e- 003 0.0395 0.0317 1.1000e- 004 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-87 0.0000 2.9413 2.9413 9.0000e- 004 0.0000 2.96026.7000e- 004 6.7000e- 004 6.5000e- 004 6.5000e- 004 Total 1.1600e- 003 0.0190 0.0141 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 2.9413 2.9413 9.0000e- 004 0.0000 2.96026.7000e- 004 6.7000e- 004 6.5000e- 004 6.5000e- 004 Off-Road 1.1600e- 003 0.0190 0.0141 3.0000e- 005 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 0.5284 0.5284 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.52862.8000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 3.2000e- 004 8.0000e- 005 2.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 004 Total 2.2000e- 004 1.7100e- 003 2.9500e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.1427 0.1427 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.14281.6000e- 004 0.0000 1.7000e- 004 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 4.0000e- 005 Worker 5.0000e- 005 7.0000e- 005 7.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.3857 0.3857 0.0000 0.0000 0.38571.2000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 1.5000e- 004 4.0000e- 005 2.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 Vendor 1.7000e- 004 1.6400e- 003 2.2300e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-88 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0535 0.0000 0.0535 8.1000e- 003 0.0000 8.1000e- 003 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Off-Road 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0535 0.0000 0.0535 8.1000e- 003 0.0000 8.1000e- 003 Fugitive Dust Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 3.5 Asphalt Demo Haul - 2017 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 0.5284 0.5284 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.52862.7000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 2.9000e- 004 7.0000e- 005 2.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 004 Total 2.2000e- 004 1.7100e- 003 2.9500e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.1427 0.1427 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.14281.5000e- 004 0.0000 1.5000e- 004 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 4.0000e- 005 Worker 5.0000e- 005 7.0000e- 005 7.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.3857 0.3857 0.0000 0.0000 0.38571.2000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 1.4000e- 004 3.0000e- 005 2.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 Vendor 1.7000e- 004 1.6400e- 003 2.2300e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-89 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0229 0.0000 0.0229 3.4600e- 003 0.0000 3.4600e- 003 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Off-Road 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0229 0.0000 0.0229 3.4600e- 003 0.0000 3.4600e- 003 Fugitive Dust Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 28.2734 28.2734 1.9000e- 004 0.0000 28.27757.4100e- 003 1.6300e- 003 9.0400e- 003 2.0300e- 003 1.5000e- 003 3.5300e- 003 Total 6.3900e- 003 0.1113 0.0666 3.1000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Worker0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Vendor0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 28.2734 28.2734 1.9000e- 004 0.0000 28.27757.4100e- 003 1.6300e- 003 9.0400e- 003 2.0300e- 003 1.5000e- 003 3.5300e- 003 Hauling 6.3900e- 003 0.1113 0.0666 3.1000e- 004 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-90 0.0000 11.7653 11.7653 3.6000e- 003 0.0000 11.84100.0000 3.4400e- 003 3.4400e- 003 0.0000 3.1700e- 003 3.1700e- 003 Total 7.6000e- 003 0.1055 0.0340 1.3000e- 004 0.0000 11.7653 11.7653 3.6000e- 003 0.0000 11.84103.4400e- 003 3.4400e- 003 3.1700e- 003 3.1700e- 003 Off-Road 7.6000e- 003 0.1055 0.0340 1.3000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Fugitive Dust Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 3.6 Site Preparation - 2017 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 28.2734 28.2734 1.9000e- 004 0.0000 28.27756.9100e- 003 1.6300e- 003 8.5400e- 003 1.9100e- 003 1.5000e- 003 3.4100e- 003 Total 6.3900e- 003 0.1113 0.0666 3.1000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Worker0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Vendor0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 28.2734 28.2734 1.9000e- 004 0.0000 28.27756.9100e- 003 1.6300e- 003 8.5400e- 003 1.9100e- 003 1.5000e- 003 3.4100e- 003 Hauling 6.3900e- 003 0.1113 0.0666 3.1000e- 004 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-91 0.0000 11.7653 11.7653 3.6000e- 003 0.0000 11.84100.0000 2.6900e- 003 2.6900e- 003 0.0000 2.5900e- 003 2.5900e- 003 Total 4.6500e- 003 0.0758 0.0564 1.3000e- 004 0.0000 11.7653 11.7653 3.6000e- 003 0.0000 11.84102.6900e- 003 2.6900e- 003 2.5900e- 003 2.5900e- 003 Off-Road 4.6500e- 003 0.0758 0.0564 1.3000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Fugitive Dust Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 2.1135 2.1135 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 2.11431.1500e- 003 1.0000e- 004 1.2500e- 003 3.1000e- 004 9.0000e- 005 4.1000e- 004 Total 8.8000e- 004 6.8500e- 003 0.0118 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.5707 0.5707 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.57136.6000e- 004 0.0000 6.6000e- 004 1.7000e- 004 0.0000 1.8000e- 004 Worker 1.9000e- 004 2.8000e- 004 2.8800e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.5427 1.5427 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.54304.9000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 5.9000e- 004 1.4000e- 004 9.0000e- 005 2.3000e- 004 Vendor 6.9000e- 004 6.5700e- 003 8.9300e- 003 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-92 0.0000 774.3995 774.3995 0.1088 0.0000 776.68490.4604 0.4604 0.4528 0.4528Total0.9377 6.9495 5.4639 9.0300e- 003 0.0000 774.3995 774.3995 0.1088 0.0000 776.68490.4604 0.4604 0.4528 0.4528Off-Road 0.9377 6.9495 5.4639 9.0300e- 003 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 3.7 Building Construction - 2017 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 2.1135 2.1135 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 2.11431.0700e- 003 1.0000e- 004 1.1700e- 003 2.9000e- 004 9.0000e- 005 3.9000e- 004 Total 8.8000e- 004 6.8500e- 003 0.0118 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.5707 0.5707 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.57136.1000e- 004 0.0000 6.1000e- 004 1.6000e- 004 0.0000 1.7000e- 004 Worker 1.9000e- 004 2.8000e- 004 2.8800e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.5427 1.5427 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.54304.6000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 5.6000e- 004 1.3000e- 004 9.0000e- 005 2.2000e- 004 Vendor 6.9000e- 004 6.5700e- 003 8.9300e- 003 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-93 0.0000 774.3986 774.3986 0.1088 0.0000 776.68400.4604 0.4604 0.4528 0.4528Total0.9377 6.9495 5.4639 9.0300e- 003 0.0000 774.3986 774.3986 0.1088 0.0000 776.68400.4604 0.4604 0.4528 0.4528Off-Road 0.9377 6.9495 5.4639 9.0300e- 003 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 992.2560 992.2560 0.0293 0.0000 992.87030.7788 0.0324 0.8112 0.2096 0.0298 0.2394Total0.3763 2.1353 5.3346 0.0125 0.0000 553.4442 553.4442 0.0261 0.0000 553.99300.6387 4.4400e- 003 0.6432 0.1696 4.1000e- 003 0.1737Worker0.1806 0.2674 2.7947 7.5900e- 003 0.0000 438.8118 438.8118 3.1200e- 003 0.0000 438.87730.1401 0.0280 0.1681 0.0400 0.0257 0.0657Vendor0.1957 1.8679 2.5399 4.9000e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-94 0.0000 1,089.161 8 1,089.1618 0.1434 0.0000 1,092.173 4 0.5617 0.5617 0.5528 0.5528Total1.1748 8.9121 7.5640 0.0127 0.0000 1,089.161 8 1,089.1618 0.1434 0.0000 1,092.173 4 0.5617 0.5617 0.5528 0.5528Off-Road 1.1748 8.9121 7.5640 0.0127 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 3.7 Building Construction - 2018 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 992.2560 992.2560 0.0293 0.0000 992.87030.7199 0.0324 0.7523 0.1951 0.0298 0.2250Total0.3763 2.1353 5.3346 0.0125 0.0000 553.4442 553.4442 0.0261 0.0000 553.99300.5889 4.4400e- 003 0.5933 0.1574 4.1000e- 003 0.1615Worker0.1806 0.2674 2.7947 7.5900e- 003 0.0000 438.8118 438.8118 3.1200e- 003 0.0000 438.87730.1310 0.0280 0.1589 0.0377 0.0257 0.0635Vendor0.1957 1.8679 2.5399 4.9000e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-95 0.0000 1,089.160 5 1,089.1605 0.1434 0.0000 1,092.172 1 0.5617 0.5617 0.5528 0.5528Total1.1748 8.9121 7.5640 0.0127 0.0000 1,089.160 5 1,089.1605 0.1434 0.0000 1,092.172 1 0.5617 0.5617 0.5528 0.5528Off-Road 1.1748 8.9121 7.5640 0.0127 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 1,360.093 0 1,360.0930 0.0388 0.0000 1,360.907 5 1.0988 0.0434 1.1421 0.2957 0.0399 0.3356Total0.4899 2.7621 7.0234 0.0176 0.0000 751.5281 751.5281 0.0344 0.0000 752.25070.9011 6.1900e- 003 0.9073 0.2393 5.7400e- 003 0.2450Worker0.2320 0.3442 3.6022 0.0107 0.0000 608.5649 608.5649 4.3800e- 003 0.0000 608.65680.1977 0.0372 0.2348 0.0564 0.0342 0.0906Vendor0.2578 2.4178 3.4212 6.9100e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-96 0.0000 307.8510 307.8510 0.0385 0.0000 308.65930.1375 0.1375 0.1353 0.1353Total0.2963 2.3115 2.1120 3.6100e- 003 0.0000 307.8510 307.8510 0.0385 0.0000 308.65930.1375 0.1375 0.1353 0.1353Off-Road 0.2963 2.3115 2.1120 3.6100e- 003 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 3.7 Building Construction - 2019 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 1,360.093 0 1,360.0930 0.0388 0.0000 1,360.907 5 1.0156 0.0434 1.0589 0.2753 0.0399 0.3152Total0.4899 2.7621 7.0234 0.0176 0.0000 751.5281 751.5281 0.0344 0.0000 752.25070.8308 6.1900e- 003 0.8370 0.2221 5.7400e- 003 0.2278Worker0.2320 0.3442 3.6022 0.0107 0.0000 608.5649 608.5649 4.3800e- 003 0.0000 608.65680.1847 0.0372 0.2219 0.0532 0.0342 0.0874Vendor0.2578 2.4178 3.4212 6.9100e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-97 0.0000 307.8507 307.8507 0.0385 0.0000 308.65890.1375 0.1375 0.1353 0.1353Total0.2963 2.3115 2.1120 3.6100e- 003 0.0000 307.8507 307.8507 0.0385 0.0000 308.65890.1375 0.1375 0.1353 0.1353Off-Road 0.2963 2.3115 2.1120 3.6100e- 003 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 376.5727 376.5727 0.0106 0.0000 376.79450.3115 0.0116 0.3231 0.0838 0.0107 0.0945Total0.1298 0.7260 1.8763 5.0100e- 003 0.0000 206.4274 206.4274 9.3100e- 003 0.0000 206.62300.2555 1.7700e- 003 0.2573 0.0679 1.6400e- 003 0.0695Worker0.0615 0.0905 0.9515 3.0500e- 003 0.0000 170.1453 170.1453 1.2500e- 003 0.0000 170.17150.0560 9.8300e- 003 0.0659 0.0160 9.0400e- 003 0.0250Vendor0.0683 0.6355 0.9248 1.9600e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-98 0.0000 24.3897 24.3897 7.4700e- 003 0.0000 24.54670.0199 0.0159 0.0358 2.1500e- 003 0.0147 0.0168Total0.0286 0.3187 0.1892 2.6000e- 004 0.0000 24.3897 24.3897 7.4700e- 003 0.0000 24.54670.0159 0.0159 0.0147 0.0147Off-Road 0.0286 0.3187 0.1892 2.6000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0199 0.0000 0.0199 2.1500e- 003 0.0000 2.1500e- 003 Fugitive Dust Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 3.8 Rough Grading - 2017 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 376.5727 376.5727 0.0106 0.0000 376.79450.2879 0.0116 0.2995 0.0781 0.0107 0.0887Total0.1298 0.7260 1.8763 5.0100e- 003 0.0000 206.4274 206.4274 9.3100e- 003 0.0000 206.62300.2356 1.7700e- 003 0.2373 0.0630 1.6400e- 003 0.0646Worker0.0615 0.0905 0.9515 3.0500e- 003 0.0000 170.1453 170.1453 1.2500e- 003 0.0000 170.17150.0524 9.8300e- 003 0.0622 0.0151 9.0400e- 003 0.0241Vendor0.0683 0.6355 0.9248 1.9600e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-99 0.0000 24.3897 24.3897 7.4700e- 003 0.0000 24.54668.5000e- 003 9.9300e- 003 0.0184 9.2000e- 004 9.3900e- 003 0.0103Total0.0161 0.2239 0.1871 2.6000e- 004 0.0000 24.3897 24.3897 7.4700e- 003 0.0000 24.54669.9300e- 003 9.9300e- 003 9.3900e- 003 9.3900e- 003 Off-Road 0.0161 0.2239 0.1871 2.6000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00008.5000e- 003 0.0000 8.5000e- 003 9.2000e- 004 0.0000 9.2000e- 004 Fugitive Dust Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 1.9154 1.9154 5.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.91651.4100e- 003 7.0000e- 005 1.4800e- 003 3.8000e- 004 7.0000e- 005 4.4000e- 004 Total 7.4000e- 004 4.5600e- 003 0.0104 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.9512 0.9512 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.95221.1000e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.1100e- 003 2.9000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 3.0000e- 004 Worker 3.1000e- 004 4.6000e- 004 4.8000e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.9642 0.9642 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.96443.1000e- 004 6.0000e- 005 3.7000e- 004 9.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 1.4000e- 004 Vendor 4.3000e- 004 4.1000e- 003 5.5800e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-100 0.0000 31.0970 31.0970 9.5300e- 003 0.0000 31.29710.0197 0.0197 0.0181 0.0181Total0.0325 0.3297 0.1823 3.4000e- 004 0.0000 31.0970 31.0970 9.5300e- 003 0.0000 31.29710.0197 0.0197 0.0181 0.0181Off-Road 0.0325 0.3297 0.1823 3.4000e- 004 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 3.9 Utility Trenching - 2017 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 1.9154 1.9154 5.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.91651.3000e- 003 7.0000e- 005 1.3700e- 003 3.5000e- 004 7.0000e- 005 4.2000e- 004 Total 7.4000e- 004 4.5600e- 003 0.0104 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.9512 0.9512 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.95221.0100e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.0200e- 003 2.7000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 2.8000e- 004 Worker 3.1000e- 004 4.6000e- 004 4.8000e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.9642 0.9642 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.96442.9000e- 004 6.0000e- 005 3.5000e- 004 8.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 1.4000e- 004 Vendor 4.3000e- 004 4.1000e- 003 5.5800e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-101 0.0000 31.0970 31.0970 9.5300e- 003 0.0000 31.29710.0188 0.0188 0.0175 0.0175Total0.0284 0.2984 0.2053 3.4000e- 004 0.0000 31.0970 31.0970 9.5300e- 003 0.0000 31.29710.0188 0.0188 0.0175 0.0175Off-Road 0.0284 0.2984 0.2053 3.4000e- 004 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 1.5220 1.5220 7.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.52351.7600e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.7700e- 003 4.7000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 4.8000e- 004 Total 5.0000e- 004 7.4000e- 004 7.6900e- 003 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.5220 1.5220 7.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.52351.7600e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.7700e- 003 4.7000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 4.8000e- 004 Worker 5.0000e- 004 7.4000e- 004 7.6900e- 003 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Vendor0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-102 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00003.7700e- 003 0.0000 3.7700e- 003 5.7000e- 004 0.0000 5.7000e- 004 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Off-Road 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00003.7700e- 003 0.0000 3.7700e- 003 5.7000e- 004 0.0000 5.7000e- 004 Fugitive Dust Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 3.10 Rough Grading Soil Haul - 2017 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 1.5220 1.5220 7.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.52351.6200e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.6300e- 003 4.3000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 4.4000e- 004 Total 5.0000e- 004 7.4000e- 004 7.6900e- 003 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.5220 1.5220 7.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.52351.6200e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.6300e- 003 4.3000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 4.4000e- 004 Worker 5.0000e- 004 7.4000e- 004 7.6900e- 003 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Vendor0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-103 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00001.6100e- 003 0.0000 1.6100e- 003 2.4000e- 004 0.0000 2.4000e- 004 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Off-Road 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00001.6100e- 003 0.0000 1.6100e- 003 2.4000e- 004 0.0000 2.4000e- 004 Fugitive Dust Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 456.1682 456.1682 3.2000e- 003 0.0000 456.23550.1189 0.0263 0.1452 0.0326 0.0242 0.0568Total0.1143 1.8172 1.2892 5.0700e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Worker0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Vendor0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 456.1682 456.1682 3.2000e- 003 0.0000 456.23550.1189 0.0263 0.1452 0.0326 0.0242 0.0568Hauling0.1143 1.8172 1.2892 5.0700e- 003 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-104 0.0000 21.1148 21.1148 6.4700e- 003 0.0000 21.25060.0106 0.0186 0.0292 1.1500e- 003 0.0171 0.0183Total0.0298 0.2921 0.1751 2.3000e- 004 0.0000 21.1148 21.1148 6.4700e- 003 0.0000 21.25060.0186 0.0186 0.0171 0.0171Off-Road 0.0298 0.2921 0.1751 2.3000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0106 0.0000 0.0106 1.1500e- 003 0.0000 1.1500e- 003 Fugitive Dust Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 3.11 Fine Grading - 2017 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 456.1682 456.1682 3.2000e- 003 0.0000 456.23550.1109 0.0263 0.1371 0.0306 0.0242 0.0548Total0.1143 1.8172 1.2892 5.0700e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Worker0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Vendor0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 456.1682 456.1682 3.2000e- 003 0.0000 456.23550.1109 0.0263 0.1371 0.0306 0.0242 0.0548Hauling0.1143 1.8172 1.2892 5.0700e- 003 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-105 0.0000 21.1148 21.1148 6.4700e- 003 0.0000 21.25064.5300e- 003 7.7700e- 003 0.0123 4.9000e- 004 7.6600e- 003 8.1500e- 003 Total 6.9800e- 003 0.1253 0.1712 2.3000e- 004 0.0000 21.1148 21.1148 6.4700e- 003 0.0000 21.25067.7700e- 003 7.7700e- 003 7.6600e- 003 7.6600e- 003 Off-Road 6.9800e- 003 0.1253 0.1712 2.3000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00004.5300e- 003 0.0000 4.5300e- 003 4.9000e- 004 0.0000 4.9000e- 004 Fugitive Dust Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 3.0647 3.0647 8.0000e- 005 0.0000 3.06642.2500e- 003 1.1000e- 004 2.3600e- 003 6.1000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 7.1000e- 004 Total 1.1900e- 003 7.3100e- 003 0.0166 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.5220 1.5220 7.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.52351.7600e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.7700e- 003 4.7000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 4.8000e- 004 Worker 5.0000e- 004 7.4000e- 004 7.6900e- 003 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.5427 1.5427 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.54304.9000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 5.9000e- 004 1.4000e- 004 9.0000e- 005 2.3000e- 004 Vendor 6.9000e- 004 6.5700e- 003 8.9300e- 003 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-106 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00001.4000e- 004 0.0000 1.4000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 2.0000e- 005 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Off-Road 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00001.4000e- 004 0.0000 1.4000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 2.0000e- 005 Fugitive Dust Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 3.12 Fine Grading Haul - 2017 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 3.0647 3.0647 8.0000e- 005 0.0000 3.06642.0800e- 003 1.1000e- 004 2.1900e- 003 5.6000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 6.6000e- 004 Total 1.1900e- 003 7.3100e- 003 0.0166 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.5220 1.5220 7.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.52351.6200e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.6300e- 003 4.3000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 4.4000e- 004 Worker 5.0000e- 004 7.4000e- 004 7.6900e- 003 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.5427 1.5427 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.54304.6000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 5.6000e- 004 1.3000e- 004 9.0000e- 005 2.2000e- 004 Vendor 6.9000e- 004 6.5700e- 003 8.9300e- 003 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-107 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00006.0000e- 005 0.0000 6.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Off-Road 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00006.0000e- 005 0.0000 6.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 Fugitive Dust Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 16.6881 16.6881 1.2000e- 004 0.0000 16.69054.3500e- 003 9.6000e- 004 5.3100e- 003 1.1900e- 003 8.8000e- 004 2.0800e- 003 Total 4.1800e- 003 0.0665 0.0472 1.9000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Worker0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Vendor0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 16.6881 16.6881 1.2000e- 004 0.0000 16.69054.3500e- 003 9.6000e- 004 5.3100e- 003 1.1900e- 003 8.8000e- 004 2.0800e- 003 Hauling 4.1800e- 003 0.0665 0.0472 1.9000e- 004 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-108 0.0000 1.3923 1.3923 4.3000e- 004 0.0000 1.40128.9000e- 004 8.9000e- 004 8.2000e- 004 8.2000e- 004 Total 2.0800e- 003 0.0142 9.2600e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Paving3.5000e- 004 0.0000 1.3923 1.3923 4.3000e- 004 0.0000 1.40128.9000e- 004 8.9000e- 004 8.2000e- 004 8.2000e- 004 Off-Road 1.7300e- 003 0.0142 9.2600e- 003 1.0000e- 005 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 3.13 Asphalt Paving - 2017 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 16.6881 16.6881 1.2000e- 004 0.0000 16.69054.0600e- 003 9.6000e- 004 5.0200e- 003 1.1200e- 003 8.8000e- 004 2.0000e- 003 Total 4.1800e- 003 0.0665 0.0472 1.9000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Worker0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Vendor0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 16.6881 16.6881 1.2000e- 004 0.0000 16.69054.0600e- 003 9.6000e- 004 5.0200e- 003 1.1200e- 003 8.8000e- 004 2.0000e- 003 Hauling 4.1800e- 003 0.0665 0.0472 1.9000e- 004 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-109 0.0000 1.3923 1.3923 4.3000e- 004 0.0000 1.40126.0000e- 004 6.0000e- 004 5.8000e- 004 5.8000e- 004 Total 1.0800e- 003 0.0114 8.5900e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Paving3.5000e- 004 0.0000 1.3923 1.3923 4.3000e- 004 0.0000 1.40126.0000e- 004 6.0000e- 004 5.8000e- 004 5.8000e- 004 Off-Road 7.3000e- 004 0.0114 8.5900e- 003 1.0000e- 005 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 0.1237 0.1237 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.12381.4000e- 004 0.0000 1.4000e- 004 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 4.0000e- 005 Total 4.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 6.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.1237 0.1237 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.12381.4000e- 004 0.0000 1.4000e- 004 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 4.0000e- 005 Worker 4.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 6.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Vendor0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-110 0.0000 114.2507 114.2507 0.0194 0.0000 114.65850.0595 0.0595 0.0589 0.0589Total0.4112 0.8558 0.8259 1.3000e- 003 0.0000 114.2507 114.2507 0.0194 0.0000 114.65850.0595 0.0595 0.0589 0.0589Off-Road 0.1126 0.8558 0.8259 1.3000e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Archit. Coating 0.2986 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 3.14 Architectural Coating - 2017 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 0.1237 0.1237 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.12381.3000e- 004 0.0000 1.3000e- 004 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 4.0000e- 005 Total 4.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 6.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.1237 0.1237 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.12381.3000e- 004 0.0000 1.3000e- 004 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 4.0000e- 005 Worker 4.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 6.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Vendor0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-111 0.0000 114.2506 114.2506 0.0194 0.0000 114.65840.0595 0.0595 0.0589 0.0589Total0.4112 0.8558 0.8259 1.3000e- 003 0.0000 114.2506 114.2506 0.0194 0.0000 114.65840.0595 0.0595 0.0589 0.0589Off-Road 0.1126 0.8558 0.8259 1.3000e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Archit. Coating 0.2986 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 45.5445 45.5445 2.1500e- 003 0.0000 45.58960.0526 3.7000e- 004 0.0529 0.0140 3.4000e- 004 0.0143Total0.0149 0.0220 0.2300 6.2000e- 004 0.0000 45.5445 45.5445 2.1500e- 003 0.0000 45.58960.0526 3.7000e- 004 0.0529 0.0140 3.4000e- 004 0.0143Worker0.0149 0.0220 0.2300 6.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Vendor0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-112 0.0000 364.9483 364.9483 0.0597 0.0000 366.20230.1618 0.1618 0.1606 0.1606Total1.2818 2.4944 2.6335 4.1700e- 003 0.0000 364.9483 364.9483 0.0597 0.0000 366.20230.1618 0.1618 0.1606 0.1606Off-Road 0.3232 2.4944 2.6335 4.1700e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Archit. Coating 0.9587 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 3.14 Architectural Coating - 2018 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 45.5445 45.5445 2.1500e- 003 0.0000 45.58960.0485 3.7000e- 004 0.0488 0.0130 3.4000e- 004 0.0133Total0.0149 0.0220 0.2300 6.2000e- 004 0.0000 45.5445 45.5445 2.1500e- 003 0.0000 45.58960.0485 3.7000e- 004 0.0488 0.0130 3.4000e- 004 0.0133Worker0.0149 0.0220 0.2300 6.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Vendor0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-113 0.0000 364.9479 364.9479 0.0597 0.0000 366.20190.1618 0.1618 0.1606 0.1606Total1.2818 2.4944 2.6335 4.1700e- 003 0.0000 364.9479 364.9479 0.0597 0.0000 366.20190.1618 0.1618 0.1606 0.1606Off-Road 0.3232 2.4944 2.6335 4.1700e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Archit. Coating 0.9587 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 140.7390 140.7390 6.4400e- 003 0.0000 140.87430.1688 1.1600e- 003 0.1699 0.0448 1.0700e- 003 0.0459Total0.0435 0.0645 0.6746 2.0000e- 003 0.0000 140.7390 140.7390 6.4400e- 003 0.0000 140.87430.1688 1.1600e- 003 0.1699 0.0448 1.0700e- 003 0.0459Worker0.0435 0.0645 0.6746 2.0000e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Vendor0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-114 0.0000 72.3170 72.3170 0.0220 0.0000 72.77890.0424 0.0424 0.0390 0.0390Total0.0699 0.6575 0.5811 8.0000e- 004 0.0000 72.3170 72.3170 0.0220 0.0000 72.77890.0424 0.0424 0.0390 0.0390Off-Road 0.0699 0.6575 0.5811 8.0000e- 004 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 3.15 Finishing/Landscaping - 2018 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 140.7390 140.7390 6.4400e- 003 0.0000 140.87430.1556 1.1600e- 003 0.1568 0.0416 1.0700e- 003 0.0427Total0.0435 0.0645 0.6746 2.0000e- 003 0.0000 140.7390 140.7390 6.4400e- 003 0.0000 140.87430.1556 1.1600e- 003 0.1568 0.0416 1.0700e- 003 0.0427Worker0.0435 0.0645 0.6746 2.0000e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Vendor0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-115 0.0000 72.3169 72.3169 0.0220 0.0000 72.77880.0418 0.0418 0.0387 0.0387Total0.0650 0.6566 0.5728 8.0000e- 004 0.0000 72.3169 72.3169 0.0220 0.0000 72.77880.0418 0.0418 0.0387 0.0387Off-Road 0.0650 0.6566 0.5728 8.0000e- 004 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 8.4231 8.4231 3.9000e- 004 0.0000 8.43120.0101 7.0000e- 005 0.0102 2.6800e- 003 6.0000e- 005 2.7500e- 003 Total 2.6000e- 003 3.8600e- 003 0.0404 1.2000e- 004 0.0000 8.4231 8.4231 3.9000e- 004 0.0000 8.43120.0101 7.0000e- 005 0.0102 2.6800e- 003 6.0000e- 005 2.7500e- 003 Worker 2.6000e- 003 3.8600e- 003 0.0404 1.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Vendor0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-116 0.0000 8.4231 8.4231 3.9000e- 004 0.0000 8.43129.3100e- 003 7.0000e- 005 9.3800e- 003 2.4900e- 003 6.0000e- 005 2.5500e- 003 Total 2.6000e- 003 3.8600e- 003 0.0404 1.2000e- 004 0.0000 8.4231 8.4231 3.9000e- 004 0.0000 8.43129.3100e- 003 7.0000e- 005 9.3800e- 003 2.4900e- 003 6.0000e- 005 2.5500e- 003 Worker 2.6000e- 003 3.8600e- 003 0.0404 1.2000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Vendor0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-117 0.00 0.000.05 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Utility Trenching 0.12 0.09 -0.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 Site Preparation 0.35 0.26 -0.49 0.00 0.21 0.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Rough Grading Soil Haul 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Rough Grading 0.43 0.29 0.01 0.00 0.37 0.36 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Finishing/Landscaping 0.07 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 Fine Grading Haul 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.58 0.55 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Fine Grading 0.74 0.56 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 Demolition - Building 0.25 0.05 -0.51 0.00 -0.05 -0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Building Construction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Bldg Demo Haul 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.33 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Asphalt Paving 0.47 0.20 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 Asphalt Demo Haul 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.22 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Asphalt Demo 0.35 0.26 -0.49 0.00 CO2e Percent Reduction Architectural Coating 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2OPhaseROGNOxCOSO2 Exhaust PM10 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Page 1 of 1 Date: 2/18/2016 10:26 AM Construction Orange County, Mitigation Report Construction Mitigation Summary A-118 0.00WeldersDieselNo Change 0 3 No Change 0.00 Trenchers Diesel No Change 0 4 No Change 0.00 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes Diesel Tier 3 4 6 No Change 0.00 Skid Steer Loaders Diesel No Change 0 6 No Change 0.00 Scrapers Diesel No Change 0 1 No Change 0.00 Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel No Change 0 0 No Change 0.00 Rollers Diesel Tier 3 5 5 No Change 0.00 Plate Compactors Diesel No Change 0 2 No Change 0.00 Paving Equipment Diesel No Change 0 1 No Change 0.00 Pavers Diesel No Change 0 0 No Change 0.00 Graders Diesel Tier 3 2 2 No Change 0.00 Generator Sets Diesel No Change 0 0 No Change 0.00 Forklifts Diesel No Change 0 2 No Change 0.00 Excavators Diesel Tier 3 1 1 No Change 0.00 Cranes Diesel No Change 0 2 No Change 0.00 Concrete/Industrial Saws Diesel No Change 0 10 No Change 0.00 Cement and Mortar Mixers Diesel No Change 0 3 No Change 0.00 Air Compressors Diesel No Change 0 8 No Change 0.00 Aerial Lifts Diesel No Change 0 8 No Change OFFROAD Equipment Mitigation Equipment Type Fuel Type Tier Number Mitigated Total Number of Equipment DPF Oxidation Catalyst A-119 1.44215E+0028.90000E-002 0.00000E+000 1.43621E+002 1.43621E+002 2.83000E-002 0.00000E+000 3.81292E+001 1.18100E-002 0.00000E+000 3.83771E+001 Welders 3.46990E-001 1.29309E+000 1.42745E+000 1.95000E-003 8.90000E-002 4.36232E+001 Trenchers 5.86300E-002 5.22320E-001 3.29540E-001 4.10000E-004 4.01600E-002 3.69500E-002 0.00000E+000 3.81292E+001 1.58600E-002 0.00000E+000 4.33438E+001 4.33438E+001 1.33100E-002 0.00000E+000 4.70106E+001 1.46000E-002 0.00000E+000 4.73172E+001 Tractors/Loaders/B ackhoes 3.67000E-002 3.78800E-001 2.12370E-001 4.70000E-004 1.72400E-002 1.44479E+001 Skid Steer Loaders 2.34200E-002 3.08720E-001 3.46720E-001 5.10000E-004 1.53600E-002 1.41300E-002 0.00000E+000 4.70106E+001 6.26000E-003 0.00000E+000 1.43556E+001 1.43556E+001 4.40000E-003 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 Scrapers 1.34900E-002 1.69510E-001 1.05940E-001 1.50000E-004 6.80000E-003 1.05583E+001 Rubber Tired Dozers 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 8.34000E-003 0.00000E+000 1.04908E+001 1.04908E+001 3.21000E-003 0.00000E+000 2.50234E+000 2.60000E-004 0.00000E+000 2.50779E+000 Rollers 1.37400E-002 1.24570E-001 8.64700E-002 1.10000E-004 9.07000E-003 5.34870E-001 Plate Compactors 3.21000E-003 2.01000E-002 1.68400E-002 4.00000E-005 7.80000E-004 7.80000E-004 0.00000E+000 2.50234E+000 1.50000E-004 0.00000E+000 5.31450E-001 5.31450E-001 1.60000E-004 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 Paving Equipment 3.40000E-004 4.84000E-003 1.57000E-003 1.00000E-005 1.70000E-004 1.63101E+001 Pavers 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.39600E-002 0.00000E+000 1.62058E+001 1.62058E+001 4.97000E-003 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 Graders 2.66900E-002 2.70120E-001 1.35550E-001 1.70000E-004 1.51700E-002 6.99768E+001 Generator Sets 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 6.05000E-002 0.00000E+000 6.95239E+001 6.95239E+001 2.15700E-002 0.00000E+000 2.11442E+001 6.48000E-003 0.00000E+000 2.12803E+001 Forklifts 9.29800E-002 8.16120E-001 6.07020E-001 7.60000E-004 6.57600E-002 2.70641E+002 Excavators 9.37000E-003 1.17620E-001 5.62300E-002 2.30000E-004 3.80000E-003 3.50000E-003 0.00000E+000 2.11442E+001 1.44690E-001 0.00000E+000 2.68889E+002 2.68889E+002 8.34200E-002 0.00000E+000 1.39791E+003 1.12080E-001 0.00000E+000 1.40026E+003 Cranes 3.02110E-001 3.59979E+000 1.31989E+000 2.93000E-003 1.57270E-001 3.58235E+001 Concrete/Industrial Saws 1.38601E+000 1.03784E+001 9.69772E+000 1.62700E-002 7.16900E-001 7.16900E-001 0.00000E+000 1.39791E+003 1.13400E-002 0.00000E+000 3.57456E+001 3.57456E+001 3.71000E-003 0.00000E+000 5.03843E+002 4.90900E-002 0.00000E+000 5.04874E+002 Cement and Mortar Mixers 4.58300E-002 2.87260E-001 2.40520E-001 5.50000E-004 1.13400E-002 2.32588E+002 Air Compressors 6.04670E-001 4.03992E+000 3.66533E+000 5.86000E-003 3.07490E-001 3.07490E-001 0.00000E+000 5.03843E+002 3.04500E-002 0.00000E+000 2.31083E+002 2.31083E+002 7.16800E-002 0.00000E+000Aerial Lifts 6.59800E-002 1.10874E+000 1.64131E+000 2.52000E-003 3.31000E-002 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Unmitigated tons/yr Unmitigated mt/yr Equipment Type ROG NOx CO SO2 Exhaust PM10 Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 A-120 1.44215E+0028.90000E-002 0.00000E+000 1.43620E+002 1.43620E+002 2.83000E-002 0.00000E+000 3.81292E+001 1.18100E-002 0.00000E+000 3.83771E+001 Welders 3.46990E-001 1.29309E+000 1.42745E+000 1.95000E-003 8.90000E-002 4.36232E+001 Trenchers 5.86300E-002 5.22320E-001 3.29540E-001 4.10000E-004 4.01600E-002 3.69500E-002 0.00000E+000 3.81292E+001 1.30400E-002 0.00000E+000 4.33438E+001 4.33438E+001 1.33100E-002 0.00000E+000 4.70106E+001 1.46000E-002 0.00000E+000 4.73171E+001 Tractors/Loaders/Bac khoes 2.11900E-002 2.93670E-001 2.54320E-001 4.70000E-004 1.35100E-002 1.44479E+001 Skid Steer Loaders 2.34200E-002 3.08720E-001 3.46720E-001 5.10000E-004 1.53600E-002 1.41300E-002 0.00000E+000 4.70106E+001 6.26000E-003 0.00000E+000 1.43556E+001 1.43556E+001 4.40000E-003 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 Scrapers 1.34900E-002 1.69510E-001 1.05940E-001 1.50000E-004 6.80000E-003 1.05583E+001 Rubber Tired Dozers 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 4.48000E-003 0.00000E+000 1.04908E+001 1.04908E+001 3.21000E-003 0.00000E+000 2.50234E+000 2.60000E-004 0.00000E+000 2.50779E+000 Rollers 2.87000E-003 6.43100E-002 8.55400E-002 1.10000E-004 4.48000E-003 5.34870E-001 Plate Compactors 3.21000E-003 2.01000E-002 1.68400E-002 4.00000E-005 7.80000E-004 7.80000E-004 0.00000E+000 2.50234E+000 1.50000E-004 0.00000E+000 5.31450E-001 5.31450E-001 1.60000E-004 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 Paving Equipment 3.40000E-004 4.84000E-003 1.57000E-003 1.00000E-005 1.70000E-004 1.63101E+001 Pavers 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 3.95000E-003 0.00000E+000 1.62058E+001 1.62058E+001 4.97000E-003 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 Graders 4.23000E-003 8.17800E-002 1.30430E-001 1.70000E-004 3.95000E-003 6.99768E+001 Generator Sets 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 6.05000E-002 0.00000E+000 6.95238E+001 6.95238E+001 2.15700E-002 0.00000E+000 2.11442E+001 6.48000E-003 0.00000E+000 2.12803E+001 Forklifts 9.29800E-002 8.16120E-001 6.07020E-001 7.60000E-004 6.57600E-002 2.70641E+002 Excavators 5.63000E-003 1.08840E-001 1.21980E-001 2.30000E-004 4.13000E-003 4.13000E-003 0.00000E+000 2.11442E+001 1.44690E-001 0.00000E+000 2.68889E+002 2.68889E+002 8.34200E-002 0.00000E+000 1.39791E+003 1.12080E-001 0.00000E+000 1.40026E+003 Cranes 3.02110E-001 3.59979E+000 1.31989E+000 2.93000E-003 1.57270E-001 3.58234E+001 Concrete/Industrial Saws 1.38600E+000 1.03784E+001 9.69771E+000 1.62700E-002 7.16900E-001 7.16900E-001 0.00000E+000 1.39791E+003 1.13400E-002 0.00000E+000 3.57455E+001 3.57455E+001 3.71000E-003 0.00000E+000 5.03842E+002 4.90900E-002 0.00000E+000 5.04873E+002 Cement and Mortar Mixers 4.58300E-002 2.87260E-001 2.40520E-001 5.50000E-004 1.13400E-002 2.32588E+002 Air Compressors 6.04670E-001 4.03992E+000 3.66532E+000 5.86000E-003 3.07490E-001 3.07490E-001 0.00000E+000 5.03842E+002 3.04500E-002 0.00000E+000 2.31082E+002 2.31082E+002 7.16800E-002 0.00000E+000Aerial Lifts 6.59800E-002 1.10874E+000 1.64131E+000 2.52000E-003 3.31000E-002 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Mitigated tons/yr Mitigated mt/yr Equipment Type ROG NOx CO SO2 Exhaust PM10 Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 A-121 0.00000E+000 1.17880E-0060.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.18367E-006 1.18367E-006 0.00000E+000 1.04907E-006 1.04907E-006 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.30286E-006 Welders 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.14618E-006 Trenchers 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 2.16357E-001 1.77806E-001 0.00000E+000 1.38428E-006 1.38428E-006 0.00000E+000 1.27631E-006 1.27631E-006 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.05670E-006 Tractors/Loaders/Bac khoes 4.22616E-001 2.24736E-001 -1.97533E-001 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 6.92141E-007 Skid Steer Loaders 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 6.96594E-007 6.96594E-007 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 Scrapers 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 9.47121E-007 Rubber Tired Dozers 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 5.06064E-001 4.62830E-001 0.00000E+000 9.53215E-007 9.53215E-007 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 Rollers 7.91121E-001 4.83744E-001 1.07552E-002 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 Plate Compactors 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 Paving Equipment 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.22624E-006 Pavers 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 7.39618E-001 7.17049E-001 0.00000E+000 1.23413E-006 1.23413E-006 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 Graders 8.41514E-001 6.97246E-001 3.77720E-002 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.14324E-006 Generator Sets 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.29452E-006 1.29452E-006 0.00000E+000 9.45885E-007 9.45885E-007 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 9.39838E-007 Forklifts 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.18238E-006 Excavators 3.99146E-001 7.46472E-002 -1.16930E+000 0.00000E+000 -8.68421E-002 -1.80000E-001 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.19008E-006 1.19008E-006 0.00000E+000 1.19464E-006 1.19464E-006 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.18549E-006 Cranes 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.11659E-006 Concrete/Industrial Saws 7.21496E-006 1.92708E-006 1.03117E-006 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.11902E-006 1.11902E-006 0.00000E+000 1.19085E-006 1.19085E-006 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.18842E-006 Cement and Mortar Mixers 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.16085E-006 Air Compressors 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 2.72827E-006 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.21169E-006 1.21169E-006 0.00000E+000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Percent Reduction Aerial Lifts 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 Equipment Type ROG NOx CO SO2 Exhaust PM10 Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 A-122 0.08 0.07 Demolition - Building Fugitive Dust 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Building Construction Roads 2.19 0.59 2.02 0.55 0.07 0.06 Building Construction Fugitive Dust 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Bldg Demo Haul Roads 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.00 Bldg Demo Haul Fugitive Dust 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.57 0.57 Asphalt Paving Roads 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.06 Asphalt Paving Fugitive Dust 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Asphalt Demo Haul Roads 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.04 0.13 Asphalt Demo Haul Fugitive Dust 0.05 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.57 0.57 Asphalt Demo Roads 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.07 Asphalt Demo Fugitive Dust 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Architectural Coating Roads 0.22 0.06 0.20 0.05 PM10 PM2.5 Architectural Coating Fugitive Dust 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Phase Source PM10 PM2.5 PM10 PM2.5 Unmitigated Mitigated Percent Reduction Yes Clean Paved Road % PM Reduction 9.00 Frequency (per day) 2.00 No Unpaved Road Mitigation Moisture Content % 0.00 Vehicle Speed (mph) 15.00 Yes Water Exposed Area PM10 Reduction 55.00 PM2.5 Reduction 55.00 Yes Replace Ground Cover of Area Disturbed PM10 Reduction 5.00 PM2.5 Reduction 5.00 No Soil Stabilizer for unpaved Roads PM10 Reduction 0.00 PM2.5 Reduction 0.00 Fugitive Dust Mitigation Mitigation InputYes/No Mitigation Measure Mitigation Input Mitigation Input A-123 0.08 0.09Utility Trenching Roads 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.06 Utility Trenching Fugitive Dust 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Site Preparation Roads 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.06 Site Preparation Fugitive Dust 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Rough Grading Soil Haul Roads 0.12 0.03 0.11 0.03 0.08 0.08 Rough Grading Soil Haul Fugitive Dust 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.57 0.58 Rough Grading Roads 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.07 Rough Grading Fugitive Dust 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.57 0.57 Finishing/Landscaping Roads 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.07 0.06 Finishing/Landscaping Fugitive Dust 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Fine Grading Haul Roads 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 Fine Grading Haul Fugitive Dust 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.57 0.50 Fine Grading Roads 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 Fine Grading Fugitive Dust 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.57 0.57 Demolition - Building Roads 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 A-124 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 Water Outdoor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Water Indoor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Natural Gas 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Mobile 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Landscaping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hearth 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Electricity 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Consumer Products 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Percent Reduction Architectural Coating 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Operational Percent Reduction Summary Category ROG NOx CO SO2 Exhaust PM10 Exhaust PM2.5 A-125 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data Project Characteristics - *Anaheim, Public Utilities Department. 2013, February 12. Mandip Kaur Samra, Integrated Resources Planner. Land Use - Based on the project description and information provided. Construction Phase - Derived from information provided. Off-road Equipment - Based on information provided. Off-road Equipment - Based on information provided. CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 1430.8 CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.029 N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.007 30 Climate Zone 8 Operational Year 2014 Utility Company Anaheim Public Utilities 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s)2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) Strip Mall 25.60 1000sqft 0.00 25,600.00 0 Hotel 580.00 Room 5.23 749,670.00 0 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.27 Acre 0.27 0.00 0 Population Enclosed Parking with Elevator 363.85 1000sqft 3.40 363,852.00 0 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Page 1 of 1 Date: 2/18/2016 10:33 AM Construction Orange County, Winter 1.0 Project Characteristics A-126 tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3 tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3 tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3 tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3 tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 1.00 tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3 tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 1.00 tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 1.00 tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00 tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00 tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 8.00 tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 10.00 tblConstDustMitigation CleanPavedRoadPercentReduction 0 9 tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 8.00 tblArchitecturalCoating EF_Nonresidential_Interior 250.00 35.00 tblAreaCoating Area_Nonresidential_Interior 1708683 2254458 tblArchitecturalCoating ConstArea_Nonresidential_Interior 1,708,683.00 1,452,381.00 tblArchitecturalCoating EF_Nonresidential_Exterior 250.00 40.00 Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - SCAQMD Rules 403 and 1186. Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value tblArchitecturalCoating ConstArea_Nonresidential_Exterior 569,561.00 85,434.00 Off-road Equipment - Based on information provided. Off-road Equipment - Based on information provided. Trips and VMT - Based on information provided. Assumes water truck as 4 vendor trips. Demolition - Grading - Architectural Coating - Based on information provided. A-127 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 2.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 2.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 2.00 tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 97.00 85.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 6.00 tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 46.00 45.00 tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 62.00 65.00 tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 80.00 100.00 tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 80.00 45.00 tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 89.00 85.00 tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 130.00 185.00 tblLandUse LotAcreage 19.33 5.23 tblLandUse LotAcreage 0.59 0.00 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 842,160.00 749,670.00 tblLandUse LotAcreage 8.35 3.40 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 363,850.00 363,852.00 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 11,761.20 0.00 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 9/19/2017 9/15/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 4/13/2019 9/15/2017 tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 12/10/2018 12/6/2018 tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 4/16/2019 9/18/2017 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 230.00 520.00 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 2.00 tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 320.00 tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3 tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3 A-128 0.0000 72,606.87 22 72,606.872 2 6.3480 0.0000 72,740.18 00 28.6674 17.8019 46.4692 7.6931 17.4151 25.1083Total63.3162 326.7938 402.6818 0.8112 0.0000 20,273.90 02 20,273.900 2 1.4621 0.0000 20,304.60 32 8.5685 4.0309 12.5993 2.3025 3.9466 6.2491201911.6961 81.6997 108.4386 0.2315 0.0000 25,118.89 21 25,118.892 1 2.1374 0.0000 25,163.77 78 9.9767 5.9738 15.9505 2.6760 5.8683 8.5443201823.8391 109.9923 139.3957 0.2814 0.0000 27,214.07 99 27,214.079 9 2.7485 0.0000 27,271.79 90 10.1222 7.7972 17.9194 2.7146 7.6003 10.3149201727.7810 135.1018 154.8475 0.2982 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year lb/day lb/day Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 2.0 Emissions Summary 2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission) Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripNumber 476.00 629.00 tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripNumber 95.00 126.00 tblProjectCharacteristics N2OIntensityFactor 0.006 0.007 tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripNumber 187.00 246.00 tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 7.00 8.00 tblProjectCharacteristics CO2IntensityFactor 1543.28 1430.8 tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 6.00 8.00 tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 7.00 8.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 0.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 3.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 2.00 1.00 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 2.00 1.00 A-129 320 Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 0 3 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 9/15/2017 12/6/2018 5 520 2 Asphalt Paving Paving 9/15/2017 9/18/2017 5 2 End Date Num Days Week Num Days Phase Description 1 Building Construction Building Construction 4/15/2017 4/12/2019 5 3.0 Construction Detail Construction Phase Phase Number Phase Name Phase Type Start Date 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.007.62 25.48 14.46 6.97 24.45 19.09 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 34.81 23.90 -2.65 0.00 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive PM10 0.0000 72,606.87 21 72,606.872 1 6.3480 0.0000 72,740.17 99 26.4823 13.2667 39.7491 7.1568 13.1575 20.3143Total41.2759 248.6810 413.3606 0.8112 0.0000 20,273.90 02 20,273.900 2 1.4621 0.0000 20,304.60 32 7.9174 3.3553 11.2727 2.1427 3.3304 5.473120196.8344 66.1554 111.7984 0.2315 0.0000 25,118.89 21 25,118.892 1 2.1374 0.0000 25,163.77 78 9.2154 4.5948 13.8102 2.4891 4.5676 7.0567201816.2325 85.0510 142.9883 0.2814 0.0000 27,214.07 99 27,214.079 9 2.7485 0.0000 27,271.79 90 9.3495 5.3166 14.6661 2.5249 5.2595 7.7845201718.2090 97.4746 158.5739 0.2982 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-130 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDTArchitectural Coating 12 126.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Asphalt Paving 5 13.00 0.00 0.00 Building Construction 24 629.00 246.00 0.00 14.70 Worker Trip Length Vendor Trip Length Hauling Trip Length Worker Vehicle Class Vendor Vehicle Class Hauling Vehicle Class Trips and VMT Phase Name Offroad Equipment Count Worker Trip Number Vendor Trip Number Hauling Trip Number Architectural Coating Air Compressors 6 8.00 78 0.48 Architectural Coating Aerial Lifts 6 8.00 65 0.31 Asphalt Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 85 0.37 Asphalt Paving Rollers 2 8.00 45 0.38 Asphalt Paving Rollers 1 8.00 100 0.38 Asphalt Paving Paving Equipment 1 8.00 185 0.36 Asphalt Paving Pavers 0 8.00 125 0.42 Building Construction Welders 3 8.00 45 0.45 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 0 8.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Generator Sets 0 8.00 84 0.74 Building Construction Forklifts 2 8.00 85 0.20 Building Construction Cranes 2 8.00 226 0.29 Building Construction Concrete/Industrial Saws 10 8.00 81 0.73 Building Construction Cement and Mortar Mixers 3 8.00 9 0.56 Building Construction Air Compressors 2 8.00 78 0.48 Load Factor Building Construction Aerial Lifts 2 8.00 62 0.31 OffRoad Equipment Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Acres of Paving: 0 Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 1,452,381; Non-Residential Outdoor: 85,434 (Architectural Coating A-131 11,700.92 12 11,700.921 2 0.3493 11,708.25 61 8.5685 0.3521 8.9206 2.3026 0.3240 2.6265Total4.2814 22.6200 58.2505 0.1336 6,497.383 6 6,497.3836 0.3114 6,503.923 8 7.0307 0.0480 7.0788 1.8646 0.0444 1.9090Worker2.0885 2.8153 29.5811 0.0808 5,203.537 6 5,203.5376 0.0378 5,204.332 3 1.5377 0.3041 1.8418 0.4380 0.2796 0.7176Vendor2.1930 19.8046 28.6694 0.0528 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 9,228.424 9 9,228.4249 1.2969 9,255.659 7 4.9776 4.9776 4.8952 4.8952Total10.1369 75.1297 59.0687 0.0976 9,228.424 9 9,228.4249 1.2969 9,255.659 7 4.9776 4.9776 4.8952 4.8952Off-Road 10.1369 75.1297 59.0687 0.0976 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Use Cleaner Engines for Construction Equipment Replace Ground Cover Water Exposed Area Reduce Vehicle Speed on Unpaved Roads Clean Paved Roads 3.2 Building Construction - 2017 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction A-132 11,700.92 12 11,700.921 2 0.3493 11,708.25 61 7.9174 0.3521 8.2695 2.1427 0.3240 2.4667Total4.2814 22.6200 58.2505 0.1336 6,497.383 6 6,497.3836 0.3114 6,503.923 8 6.4806 0.0480 6.5287 1.7296 0.0444 1.7739Worker2.0885 2.8153 29.5811 0.0808 5,203.537 6 5,203.5376 0.0378 5,204.332 3 1.4368 0.3041 1.7408 0.4132 0.2796 0.6928Vendor2.1930 19.8046 28.6694 0.0528 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 9,228.424 9 9,228.4249 1.2969 9,255.659 7 3.1236 3.1236 3.1236 3.1236Total3.4870 47.2716 60.7492 0.0976 0.0000 9,228.424 9 9,228.4249 1.2969 9,255.659 7 3.1236 3.1236 3.1236 3.1236Off-Road 3.4870 47.2716 60.7492 0.0976 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-133 11,368.77 13 11,368.771 3 0.3283 11,375.66 60 8.5684 0.3339 8.9022 2.3025 0.3074 2.6098Total3.9487 20.7398 54.4380 0.1335 6,253.678 9 6,253.6789 0.2906 6,259.782 4 7.0307 0.0475 7.0782 1.8646 0.0440 1.9085Worker1.9034 2.5687 27.0060 0.0808 5,115.092 4 5,115.0924 0.0377 5,115.883 5 1.5376 0.2864 1.8240 0.4379 0.2634 0.7013Vendor2.0452 18.1711 27.4320 0.0527 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 9,199.964 7 9,199.9647 1.2113 9,225.402 9 4.3043 4.3043 4.2358 4.2358Total9.0023 68.2917 57.9616 0.0976 9,199.964 7 9,199.9647 1.2113 9,225.402 9 4.3043 4.3043 4.2358 4.2358Off-Road 9.0023 68.2917 57.9616 0.0976 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 3.2 Building Construction - 2018 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-134 11,368.77 13 11,368.771 3 0.3283 11,375.66 60 7.9173 0.3339 8.2511 2.1427 0.3074 2.4500Total3.9487 20.7398 54.4380 0.1335 6,253.678 9 6,253.6789 0.2906 6,259.782 4 6.4806 0.0475 6.5281 1.7296 0.0440 1.7735Worker1.9034 2.5687 27.0060 0.0808 5,115.092 4 5,115.0924 0.0377 5,115.883 5 1.4366 0.2864 1.7230 0.4131 0.2634 0.6765Vendor2.0452 18.1711 27.4320 0.0527 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 9,199.964 7 9,199.9647 1.2113 9,225.402 9 3.0813 3.0813 3.0813 3.0813Total3.3134 47.0983 60.5917 0.0976 0.0000 9,199.964 7 9,199.9647 1.2113 9,225.402 9 3.0813 3.0813 3.0813 3.0813Off-Road 3.3134 47.0983 60.5917 0.0976 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-135 11,102.34 19 11,102.341 9 0.3154 11,108.96 50 8.5685 0.3150 8.8834 2.3025 0.2901 2.5926Total3.6871 19.2264 51.3589 0.1339 6,058.312 5 6,058.3125 0.2774 6,064.138 8 7.0307 0.0479 7.0786 1.8646 0.0444 1.9090Worker1.7791 2.3805 25.1452 0.0811 5,044.029 3 5,044.0293 0.0380 5,044.826 2 1.5377 0.2671 1.8048 0.4380 0.2457 0.6836Vendor1.9080 16.8459 26.2137 0.0528 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 9,171.558 3 9,171.5583 1.1467 9,195.638 1 3.7159 3.7159 3.6565 3.6565Total8.0090 62.4733 57.0797 0.0976 9,171.558 3 9,171.5583 1.1467 9,195.638 1 3.7159 3.7159 3.6565 3.6565Off-Road 8.0090 62.4733 57.0797 0.0976 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 3.2 Building Construction - 2019 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-136 11,102.34 19 11,102.341 9 0.3154 11,108.96 50 7.9174 0.3150 8.2324 2.1427 0.2901 2.4328Total3.6871 19.2264 51.3589 0.1339 6,058.312 5 6,058.3125 0.2774 6,064.138 8 6.4806 0.0479 6.5285 1.7296 0.0444 1.7739Worker1.7791 2.3805 25.1452 0.0811 5,044.029 3 5,044.0293 0.0380 5,044.826 2 1.4368 0.2671 1.7039 0.4132 0.2457 0.6589Vendor1.9080 16.8459 26.2137 0.0528 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 9,171.558 3 9,171.5583 1.1467 9,195.638 1 3.0403 3.0403 3.0403 3.0403Total3.1473 46.9290 60.4396 0.0976 0.0000 9,171.558 3 9,171.5583 1.1467 9,195.638 1 3.0403 3.0403 3.0403 3.0403Off-Road 3.1473 46.9290 60.4396 0.0976 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-137 134.2862 134.2862 6.4400e- 003 134.42130.1453 9.9000e- 004 0.1463 0.0385 9.2000e- 004 0.0395Total0.0432 0.0582 0.6114 1.6700e- 003 134.2862 134.2862 6.4400e- 003 134.42130.1453 9.9000e- 004 0.1463 0.0385 9.2000e- 004 0.0395Worker0.0432 0.0582 0.6114 1.6700e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Vendor0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 1,534.698 8 1,534.6988 0.4702 1,544.573 6 0.8923 0.8923 0.8210 0.8210Total2.0806 14.2097 9.2568 0.0150 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Paving0.3537 1,534.698 8 1,534.6988 0.4702 1,544.573 6 0.8923 0.8923 0.8210 0.8210Off-Road 1.7269 14.2097 9.2568 0.0150 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 3.3 Asphalt Paving - 2017 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-138 134.2862 134.2862 6.4400e- 003 134.42130.1339 9.9000e- 004 0.1349 0.0358 9.2000e- 004 0.0367Total0.0432 0.0582 0.6114 1.6700e- 003 134.2862 134.2862 6.4400e- 003 134.42130.1339 9.9000e- 004 0.1349 0.0358 9.2000e- 004 0.0367Worker0.0432 0.0582 0.6114 1.6700e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Vendor0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 1,534.698 8 1,534.6988 0.4702 1,544.573 6 0.6602 0.6602 0.6320 0.6320Total1.3899 10.2626 10.4883 0.0150 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Paving0.3537 0.0000 1,534.698 8 1,534.6988 0.4702 1,544.573 6 0.6602 0.6602 0.6320 0.6320Off-Road 1.0362 10.2626 10.4883 0.0150 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-139 1,301.542 7 1,301.5427 0.0624 1,302.852 8 1.4084 9.6200e- 003 1.4180 0.3735 8.8900e- 003 0.3824Total0.4184 0.5640 5.9256 0.0162 1,301.542 7 1,301.5427 0.0624 1,302.852 8 1.4084 9.6200e- 003 1.4180 0.3735 8.8900e- 003 0.3824Worker0.4184 0.5640 5.9256 0.0162 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Vendor0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 3,314.206 2 3,314.2062 0.5633 3,326.035 5 1.5646 1.5646 1.5504 1.5504Total10.8206 22.5203 21.7345 0.0342 3,314.206 2 3,314.2062 0.5633 3,326.035 5 1.5646 1.5646 1.5504 1.5504Off-Road 2.9627 22.5203 21.7345 0.0342 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Archit. Coating 7.8579 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 3.4 Architectural Coating - 2017 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-140 1,301.542 7 1,301.5427 0.0624 1,302.852 8 1.2982 9.6200e- 003 1.3078 0.3465 8.8900e- 003 0.3554Total0.4184 0.5640 5.9256 0.0162 1,301.542 7 1,301.5427 0.0624 1,302.852 8 1.2982 9.6200e- 003 1.3078 0.3465 8.8900e- 003 0.3554Worker0.4184 0.5640 5.9256 0.0162 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Vendor0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 3,314.206 1 3,314.2061 0.5633 3,326.035 5 1.1701 1.1701 1.1701 1.1701Total8.5892 16.6983 22.5488 0.0342 0.0000 3,314.206 1 3,314.2061 0.5633 3,326.035 5 1.1701 1.1701 1.1701 1.1701Off-Road 0.7313 16.6983 22.5488 0.0342 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Archit. Coating 7.8579 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-141 1,252.724 2 1,252.7242 0.0582 1,253.946 9 1.4084 9.5100e- 003 1.4179 0.3735 8.8000e- 003 0.3823Total0.3813 0.5146 5.4098 0.0162 1,252.724 2 1,252.7242 0.0582 1,253.946 9 1.4084 9.5100e- 003 1.4179 0.3735 8.8000e- 003 0.3823Worker0.3813 0.5146 5.4098 0.0162 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Vendor0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 3,297.431 9 3,297.4319 0.5395 3,308.762 0 1.3261 1.3261 1.3164 1.3164Total10.5069 20.4462 21.5863 0.0342 3,297.431 9 3,297.4319 0.5395 3,308.762 0 1.3261 1.3261 1.3164 1.3164Off-Road 2.6490 20.4462 21.5863 0.0342 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Archit. Coating 7.8579 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 3.4 Architectural Coating - 2018 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-142 1,252.724 2 1,252.7242 0.0582 1,253.946 9 1.2982 9.5100e- 003 1.3077 0.3465 8.8000e- 003 0.3553Total0.3813 0.5146 5.4098 0.0162 1,252.724 2 1,252.7242 0.0582 1,253.946 9 1.2982 9.5100e- 003 1.3077 0.3465 8.8000e- 003 0.3553Worker0.3813 0.5146 5.4098 0.0162 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Vendor0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 3,297.431 9 3,297.4319 0.5395 3,308.762 0 1.1701 1.1701 1.1701 1.1701Total8.5892 16.6983 22.5488 0.0342 0.0000 3,297.431 9 3,297.4319 0.5395 3,308.762 0 1.1701 1.1701 1.1701 1.1701Off-Road 0.7313 16.6983 22.5488 0.0342 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Archit. Coating 7.8579 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-143 0.00WeldersDieselNo Change 0 3 No Change 0.00 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes Diesel Tier 3 1 1 No Change 0.00 Rollers Diesel Tier 3 1 3 No Change 0.00 Paving Equipment Diesel Tier 3 1 1 No Change 0.00 Pavers Diesel No Change 0 0 No Change 0.00 Generator Sets Diesel No Change 0 0 No Change 0.00 Forklifts Diesel Tier 3 2 2 No Change 0.00 Cranes Diesel Tier 3 2 2 No Change 0.00 Concrete/Industrial Saws Diesel Tier 3 10 10 No Change 0.00 Cement and Mortar Mixers Diesel No Change 0 3 No Change 0.00 Air Compressors Diesel Tier 3 8 8 No Change Oxidation Catalyst Aerial Lifts Diesel Tier 3 8 8 No Change 0.00 Equipment Type Fuel Type Tier Number Mitigated Total Number of Equipment DPF 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OFFROAD Equipment Mitigation 0.00 0.00 Building Construction 0.45 0.25 -0.02 0.00 0.29 0.28 0.00 0.26 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Asphalt Paving 0.33 0.28 -0.12 0.00 CO2e Percent Reduction Architectural Coating 0.18 0.20 -0.03 0.00 0.15 0.15 0.00 Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2OPhaseROGNOxCOSO2 Exhaust PM10 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Page 1 of 1 Date: 2/18/2016 10:34 AM Construction Orange County, Mitigation Report Construction Mitigation Summary A-144 6.11710E-0014.20000E-004 0.00000E+000 6.07800E-001 6.07800E-001 1.90000E-004 0.00000E+000 5.31450E-001 1.60000E-004 0.00000E+000 5.34870E-001 Rollers 8.30000E-004 6.02000E-003 5.38000E-003 1.00000E-005 4.50000E-004 0.00000E+000 Paving Equipment 1.40000E-004 2.73000E-003 3.05000E-003 1.00000E-005 1.00000E-004 1.00000E-004 0.00000E+000 5.31450E-001 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 Pavers 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 6.99768E+001 Generator Sets 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 2.99300E-002 0.00000E+000 6.95238E+001 6.95238E+001 2.15700E-002 0.00000E+000 2.68889E+002 8.34200E-002 0.00000E+000 2.70641E+002 Forklifts 1.87100E-002 4.27200E-001 5.76870E-001 7.60000E-004 2.99300E-002 1.40026E+003 Cranes 7.21300E-002 1.39451E+000 1.56281E+000 2.93000E-003 5.29000E-002 5.29000E-002 0.00000E+000 2.68889E+002 5.20600E-001 0.00000E+000 1.39791E+003 1.39791E+003 1.12080E-001 0.00000E+000 3.57455E+001 3.71000E-003 0.00000E+000 3.58234E+001 Concrete/Industrial Saws 3.25380E-001 7.42943E+000 1.00324E+001 1.62700E-002 5.20600E-001 5.04873E+002 Cement and Mortar Mixers 4.58300E-002 2.87260E-001 2.40520E-001 5.50000E-004 1.13400E-002 1.13400E-002 0.00000E+000 3.57455E+001 1.87640E-001 0.00000E+000 5.03842E+002 5.03842E+002 4.90900E-002 0.00000E+000Air Compressors 1.17270E-001 2.67776E+000 3.61595E+000 5.86000E-003 1.87640E-001 0.00000E+000 2.31082E+002 2.31082E+002 7.16800E-002 0.00000E+000 2.32588E+002 CO2e Mitigated tons/yr Mitigated mt/yr Aerial Lifts 6.20900E-002 1.41779E+000 1.91453E+000 2.52000E-003 9.93500E-002 9.93500E-002 Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O 1.43621E+002 2.83000E-002 0.00000E+000 1.44215E+002 Equipment Type ROG NOx CO SO2 Exhaust PM10 2.54630E-001 Welders 3.46990E-001 1.29309E+000 1.42745E+000 1.95000E-003 8.90000E-002 8.90000E-002 0.00000E+000 1.43621E+002 1.80000E-004 0.00000E+000 2.53010E-001 2.53010E-001 8.00000E-005 0.00000E+000 6.07800E-001 1.90000E-004 0.00000E+000 6.11710E-001 Tractors/Loaders/B ackhoes 2.80000E-004 2.67000E-003 2.10000E-003 0.00000E+000 2.00000E-004 5.34870E-001 Rollers 1.11000E-003 6.70000E-003 5.59000E-003 1.00000E-005 5.30000E-004 4.80000E-004 0.00000E+000 6.07800E-001 1.50000E-004 0.00000E+000 5.31450E-001 5.31450E-001 1.60000E-004 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 Paving Equipment 3.40000E-004 4.84000E-003 1.57000E-003 1.00000E-005 1.70000E-004 0.00000E+000 Pavers 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 6.95239E+001 2.15700E-002 0.00000E+000 6.99768E+001 Generator Sets 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 2.70641E+002 Forklifts 9.29800E-002 8.16120E-001 6.07020E-001 7.60000E-004 6.57600E-002 6.05000E-002 0.00000E+000 6.95239E+001 1.44690E-001 0.00000E+000 2.68889E+002 2.68889E+002 8.34200E-002 0.00000E+000 1.39791E+003 1.12080E-001 0.00000E+000 1.40026E+003 Cranes 3.02110E-001 3.59979E+000 1.31989E+000 2.93000E-003 1.57270E-001 3.58235E+001 Concrete/Industrial Saws 1.38601E+000 1.03784E+001 9.69772E+000 1.62700E-002 7.16900E-001 7.16900E-001 0.00000E+000 1.39791E+003 1.13400E-002 0.00000E+000 3.57456E+001 3.57456E+001 3.71000E-003 0.00000E+000 5.03843E+002 4.90900E-002 0.00000E+000 5.04874E+002 Cement and Mortar Mixers 4.58300E-002 2.87260E-001 2.40520E-001 5.50000E-004 1.13400E-002 2.32588E+002 Air Compressors 6.04670E-001 4.03992E+000 3.66533E+000 5.86000E-003 3.07490E-001 3.07490E-001 0.00000E+000 5.03843E+002 3.04500E-002 0.00000E+000 2.31083E+002 2.31083E+002 7.16800E-002 0.00000E+000Aerial Lifts 6.59800E-002 1.10874E+000 1.64131E+000 2.52000E-003 3.31000E-002 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Unmitigated tons/yr Unmitigated mt/yr Equipment Type ROG NOx CO SO2 Exhaust PM10 Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 A-145 Yes Clean Paved Road % PM Reduction 9.00 No Unpaved Road Mitigation Moisture Content % 0.00 Vehicle Speed (mph) 15.00 Yes Water Exposed Area PM10 Reduction 55.00 PM2.5 Reduction 55.00 Frequency (per day) 2.00 0.00 Yes Replace Ground Cover of Area Disturbed PM10 Reduction 5.00 PM2.5 Reduction 5.00 Mitigation InputYes/No Mitigation Measure Mitigation Input Mitigation Input No Soil Stabilizer for unpaved Roads PM10 Reduction 0.00 PM2.5 Reduction 1.18367E-006 1.18367E-006 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.17880E-006 Fugitive Dust Mitigation 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 Welders 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 4.50000E-001 3.88889E-001 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 Tractors/Loaders/Bac khoes 7.50000E-001 4.30712E-001 2.38095E-002 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 Rollers 2.52252E-001 1.01493E-001 3.75671E-002 0.00000E+000 1.50943E-001 1.25000E-001 0.00000E+000 4.11765E-001 3.33333E-001 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 Paving Equipment 5.88235E-001 4.35950E-001 -9.42675E-001 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 Pavers 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.29452E-006 1.29452E-006 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.14324E-006 Generator Sets 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.18238E-006 Forklifts 7.98774E-001 4.76548E-001 4.96689E-002 0.00000E+000 5.44860E-001 5.05289E-001 0.00000E+000 6.63636E-001 6.34391E-001 0.00000E+000 1.19008E-006 1.19008E-006 0.00000E+000 1.19464E-006 1.19464E-006 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.18549E-006 Cranes 7.61246E-001 6.12614E-001 -1.84046E-001 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.11659E-006 Concrete/Industrial Saws 7.65240E-001 2.84143E-001 -3.45153E-002 0.00000E+000 2.73818E-001 2.73818E-001 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.11902E-006 1.11902E-006 0.00000E+000 1.19085E-006 1.19085E-006 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.18842E-006 Cement and Mortar Mixers 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.16085E-006 Air Compressors 8.06060E-001 3.37175E-001 1.34722E-002 0.00000E+000 3.89769E-001 3.89769E-001 0.00000E+000 -2.00151E+000 -2.26273E+000 0.00000E+000 1.21169E-006 1.21169E-006 0.00000E+000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Percent Reduction Aerial Lifts 5.89573E-002 -2.78740E-001 -1.66465E-001 0.00000E+000 1.44215E+002 Equipment Type ROG NOx CO SO2 Exhaust PM10 Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 8.90000E-002 0.00000E+000 1.43620E+002 1.43620E+002 2.83000E-002 0.00000E+000 2.53010E-001 8.00000E-005 0.00000E+000 2.54630E-001 Welders 3.46990E-001 1.29309E+000 1.42745E+000 1.95000E-003 8.90000E-002 Tractors/Loaders/Bac khoes 7.00000E-005 1.52000E-003 2.05000E-003 0.00000E+000 1.10000E-004 1.10000E-004 0.00000E+000 2.53010E-001 A-146 0.00 0.00 Building Construction Roads 2.19 0.59 2.02 0.55 0.08 0.07 Building Construction Fugitive Dust 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Asphalt Paving Roads 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.00 Asphalt Paving Fugitive Dust 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Architectural Coating Roads 0.22 0.06 0.20 0.05 0.08 0.07 PM2.5 PM10 PM2.5 Architectural Coating Fugitive Dust 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Unmitigated Mitigated Percent Reduction Phase Source PM10 PM2.5 PM10 A-147 Water And Wastewater - Assumes 100% aerobic. Area Mitigation - Based on information provided. Energy Mitigation - 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data Project Characteristics - Anaheim, Public Utilities Department. 2013, February 12. Mandip Kaur Samra, Integrated Resources Planner. Land Use - Based on information provided. Based on traffic study assumed occupancy of 84.7%. Vehicle Trips - Based on information provided by Iteris. Area Coating - Based on information provided. Energy Use - Assumes existing structures built to meet 2005 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 1430.8 CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.029 N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.007 30 Climate Zone 8 Operational Year 2018 Utility Company Anaheim Public Utilities 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s)2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) Population Hotel 255.00 Room 8.50 370,260.00 0 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Page 1 of 1 Date: 2/18/2016 10:13 AM Operation-Existing Orange County, Winter 1.0 Project Characteristics A-148 9,319.031 8 9,319.0318 0.2777 0.0793 9,349.444 0 4.5513 0.3430 4.8943 1.2144 0.3376 1.5520Total12.5812 8.5827 26.4154 0.0829 4,994.005 0 4,994.0050 0.1947 4,998.092 9 4.5513 0.0690 4.6203 1.2144 0.0636 1.2780Mobile2.5001 4.9783 23.3615 0.0612 4,324.971 0 4,324.9710 0.0829 0.0793 4,351.292 0 0.2739 0.2739 0.2739 0.2739Energy0.3965 3.6041 3.0275 0.0216 0.0558 0.0558 1.5000e- 004 0.05901.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 Area 9.6846 2.5000e- 004 0.0264 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 2.2 Overall Operational Unmitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00 2.0 Emissions Summary tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 100.00 tblWater AnaerobicandFacultativeLagoonsPerce nt 2.21 0.00 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.95 2.66 tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 8.17 3.54 tblProjectCharacteristics OperationalYear 2014 2018 tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 8.19 2.66 tblProjectCharacteristics CO2IntensityFactor 1543.28 1430.8 tblProjectCharacteristics N2OIntensityFactor 0.006 0.007 tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintNonresidentialExterio rValue 250 6 tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintNonresidentialInterior Value 250 35 Water Mitigation - Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value A-149 4,994.005 0 4,994.0050 0.1947 4,998.092 9 4.5513 0.0690 4.6203 1.2144 0.0636 1.2780Unmitigated2.5001 4.9783 23.3615 0.0612 4,994.005 0 4,994.0050 0.1947 4,998.092 9 4.5513 0.0690 4.6203 1.2144 0.0636 1.2780Mitigated2.5001 4.9783 23.3615 0.0612 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 16.61 0.00 0.00 0.00 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive PM10 9,319.031 8 9,319.0318 0.2777 0.0793 9,349.444 0 4.5513 0.3430 4.8943 1.2144 0.3376 1.5520Total10.4912 8.5827 26.4154 0.0829 4,994.005 0 4,994.0050 0.1947 4,998.092 9 4.5513 0.0690 4.6203 1.2144 0.0636 1.2780Mobile2.5001 4.9783 23.3615 0.0612 4,324.971 0 4,324.9710 0.0829 0.0793 4,351.292 0 0.2739 0.2739 0.2739 0.2739Energy0.3965 3.6041 3.0275 0.0216 0.0558 0.0558 1.5000e- 004 0.05901.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 Area 7.5946 2.5000e- 004 0.0264 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-150 4,324.971 0 4,324.9710 0.0829 0.0793 4,351.292 0 0.2739 0.2739 0.2739 0.2739NaturalGas Unmitigated 0.3965 3.6041 3.0275 0.0216 4,324.971 0 4,324.9710 0.0829 0.0793 4,351.292 0 0.2739 0.2739 0.2739 0.2739NaturalGas Mitigated 0.3965 3.6041 3.0275 0.0216 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 4.4 Fleet Mix Historical Energy Use: Y 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 0.001440 0.002149 0.004721 0.000504 0.002262 5.0 Energy Detail SBUS MH 0.510011 0.056836 0.192178 0.151564 0.041643 0.005905 0.015642 0.015146 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY 61.60 19.00 58 38 4 LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Hotel 16.60 8.40 6.90 19.40 4.3 Trip Type Information Miles Trip %Trip Purpose % Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C- W Total 902.70 678.30 678.30 2,001,009 2,001,009 Annual VMT Hotel 902.70 678.30 678.30 2,001,009 2,001,009 4.2 Trip Summary Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT A-151 0.05901.0000e- 004 0.0558 0.0558 1.5000e- 004 0.0000 1.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 0.0558 0.0558 1.5000e- 004 0.0590 Unmitigated 9.6846 2.5000e- 004 0.0264 1.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 Category lb/day lb/day Mitigated 7.5946 2.5000e- 004 0.0264 0.0000 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2eFugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total 6.0 Area Detail 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area Use Low VOC Paint - Non-Residential Interior Use Low VOC Paint - Non-Residential Exterior ROG NOx CO SO2 4,324.9710 4,324.971 0 0.0829 0.0793 4,351.292 0 0.2739 0.2739 0.2739 0.2739Total0.3965 3.6041 3.0275 0.0216 4,324.9710 4,324.971 0 0.0829 0.0793 4,351.292 0 0.2739 0.2739 0.2739 0.2739Hotel36.7623 0.3965 3.6041 3.0275 0.0216 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 4,324.9710 4,324.971 0 0.0829 0.0793 4,351.292 0 0.2739 0.2739 0.2739 0.2739Total0.3965 3.6041 3.0275 0.0216 4,324.9710 4,324.971 0 0.0829 0.0793 4,351.292 0 0.2739 0.2739 0.2739 0.2739Hotel36762.3 0.3965 3.6041 3.0275 0.0216 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas Unmitigated NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-152 0.0558 0.0558 1.5000e- 004 0.05901.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 Total 7.5946 2.5000e- 004 0.0264 0.0000 0.0558 0.0558 1.5000e- 004 0.05901.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 Landscaping 2.5200e- 003 2.5000e- 004 0.0264 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Consumer Products 7.3312 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Architectural Coating 0.2610 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0558 0.0558 1.5000e- 004 0.05901.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 Total 9.6846 2.5000e- 004 0.0264 0.0000 0.0558 0.0558 1.5000e- 004 0.05901.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 Landscaping 2.5200e- 003 2.5000e- 004 0.0264 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Consumer Products 7.3312 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Architectural Coating 2.3509 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 6.2 Area by SubCategory Unmitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 A-153 Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type 10.0 Vegetation 7.0 Water Detail 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water 8.0 Waste Detail 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste 9.0 Operational Offroad Equipment Type Number A-154 Water And Wastewater - Assumes 100% aerobic. Area Mitigation - Based on information provided. Energy Mitigation - 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data Project Characteristics - Anaheim, Public Utilities Department. 2013, February 12. Mandip Kaur Samra, Integrated Resources Planner. Land Use - Based on information provided. Based on traffic study assumed occupancy of 84.7%. Vehicle Trips - Based on information provided by Iteris. Area Coating - Based on information provided. Energy Use - Assumes existing structures built to meet 2005 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 1430.8 CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.029 N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.007 30 Climate Zone 8 Operational Year 2018 Utility Company Anaheim Public Utilities 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s)2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) Population Hotel 255.00 Room 8.50 370,260.00 0 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Page 1 of 1 Date: 2/18/2016 10:12 AM Operation-Existing Orange County, Summer 1.0 Project Characteristics A-155 9,545.261 0 9,545.2610 0.2776 0.0793 9,575.670 2 4.5513 0.3427 4.8939 1.2144 0.3373 1.5517Total12.4345 8.3295 26.1579 0.0857 5,220.234 2 5,220.2342 0.1945 5,224.319 2 4.5513 0.0687 4.6199 1.2144 0.0633 1.2777Mobile2.3535 4.7251 23.1040 0.0641 4,324.971 0 4,324.9710 0.0829 0.0793 4,351.292 0 0.2739 0.2739 0.2739 0.2739Energy0.3965 3.6041 3.0275 0.0216 0.0558 0.0558 1.5000e- 004 0.05901.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 Area 9.6846 2.5000e- 004 0.0264 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 2.2 Overall Operational Unmitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00 2.0 Emissions Summary tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 100.00 tblWater AnaerobicandFacultativeLagoonsPerce nt 2.21 0.00 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.95 2.66 tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 8.17 3.54 tblProjectCharacteristics OperationalYear 2014 2018 tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 8.19 2.66 tblProjectCharacteristics CO2IntensityFactor 1543.28 1430.8 tblProjectCharacteristics N2OIntensityFactor 0.006 0.007 tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintNonresidentialExterio rValue 250 6 tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintNonresidentialInterior Value 250 35 Water Mitigation - Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value A-156 5,220.234 2 5,220.2342 0.1945 5,224.319 2 4.5513 0.0687 4.6199 1.2144 0.0633 1.2777Unmitigated2.3535 4.7251 23.1040 0.0641 5,220.234 2 5,220.2342 0.1945 5,224.319 2 4.5513 0.0687 4.6199 1.2144 0.0633 1.2777Mitigated2.3535 4.7251 23.1040 0.0641 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 16.81 0.00 0.00 0.00 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive PM10 9,545.261 0 9,545.2610 0.2776 0.0793 9,575.670 2 4.5513 0.3427 4.8939 1.2144 0.3373 1.5517Total10.3445 8.3295 26.1579 0.0857 5,220.234 2 5,220.2342 0.1945 5,224.319 2 4.5513 0.0687 4.6199 1.2144 0.0633 1.2777Mobile2.3535 4.7251 23.1040 0.0641 4,324.971 0 4,324.9710 0.0829 0.0793 4,351.292 0 0.2739 0.2739 0.2739 0.2739Energy0.3965 3.6041 3.0275 0.0216 0.0558 0.0558 1.5000e- 004 0.05901.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 Area 7.5946 2.5000e- 004 0.0264 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-157 4,324.971 0 4,324.9710 0.0829 0.0793 4,351.292 0 0.2739 0.2739 0.2739 0.2739NaturalGas Unmitigated 0.3965 3.6041 3.0275 0.0216 4,324.971 0 4,324.9710 0.0829 0.0793 4,351.292 0 0.2739 0.2739 0.2739 0.2739NaturalGas Mitigated 0.3965 3.6041 3.0275 0.0216 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 4.4 Fleet Mix Historical Energy Use: Y 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 0.001440 0.002149 0.004721 0.000504 0.002262 5.0 Energy Detail SBUS MH 0.510011 0.056836 0.192178 0.151564 0.041643 0.005905 0.015642 0.015146 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY 61.60 19.00 58 38 4 LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Hotel 16.60 8.40 6.90 19.40 4.3 Trip Type Information Miles Trip %Trip Purpose % Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C- W Total 902.70 678.30 678.30 2,001,009 2,001,009 Annual VMT Hotel 902.70 678.30 678.30 2,001,009 2,001,009 4.2 Trip Summary Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT A-158 0.05901.0000e- 004 0.0558 0.0558 1.5000e- 004 0.0000 1.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 0.0558 0.0558 1.5000e- 004 0.0590 Unmitigated 9.6846 2.5000e- 004 0.0264 1.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 Category lb/day lb/day Mitigated 7.5946 2.5000e- 004 0.0264 0.0000 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2eFugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total 6.0 Area Detail 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area Use Low VOC Paint - Non-Residential Interior Use Low VOC Paint - Non-Residential Exterior ROG NOx CO SO2 4,324.9710 4,324.971 0 0.0829 0.0793 4,351.292 0 0.2739 0.2739 0.2739 0.2739Total0.3965 3.6041 3.0275 0.0216 4,324.9710 4,324.971 0 0.0829 0.0793 4,351.292 0 0.2739 0.2739 0.2739 0.2739Hotel36.7623 0.3965 3.6041 3.0275 0.0216 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 4,324.9710 4,324.971 0 0.0829 0.0793 4,351.292 0 0.2739 0.2739 0.2739 0.2739Total0.3965 3.6041 3.0275 0.0216 4,324.9710 4,324.971 0 0.0829 0.0793 4,351.292 0 0.2739 0.2739 0.2739 0.2739Hotel36762.3 0.3965 3.6041 3.0275 0.0216 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas Unmitigated NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-159 0.0558 0.0558 1.5000e- 004 0.05901.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 Total 7.5946 2.5000e- 004 0.0264 0.0000 0.0558 0.0558 1.5000e- 004 0.05901.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 Landscaping 2.5200e- 003 2.5000e- 004 0.0264 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Consumer Products 7.3312 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Architectural Coating 0.2610 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0558 0.0558 1.5000e- 004 0.05901.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 Total 9.6846 2.5000e- 004 0.0264 0.0000 0.0558 0.0558 1.5000e- 004 0.05901.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 004 Landscaping 2.5200e- 003 2.5000e- 004 0.0264 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Consumer Products 7.3312 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Architectural Coating 2.3509 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 6.2 Area by SubCategory Unmitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 A-160 Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type 10.0 Vegetation 7.0 Water Detail 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water 8.0 Waste Detail 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste 9.0 Operational Offroad Equipment Type Number A-161 Water And Wastewater - Assumes 100% aerobic. Area Mitigation - Based on information provided. Energy Mitigation - 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data Project Characteristics - Anaheim, Public Utilities Department. 2013, February 12. Mandip Kaur Samra, Integrated Resources Planner. Land Use - Based on information provided. Based on traffic study assumed occupancy of 84.7%. Vehicle Trips - Based on information provided by Iteris. Area Coating - Based on information provided. Energy Use - Assumes existing structures built to meet 2005 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 1430.8 CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.029 N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.007 30 Climate Zone 8 Operational Year 2018 Utility Company Anaheim Public Utilities 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s)2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) Population Hotel 255.00 Room 8.50 370,260.00 0 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Page 1 of 1 Date: 2/18/2016 10:10 AM Operation-Existing Orange County, Annual 1.0 Project Characteristics A-162 30.6281 4,095.329 2 4,125.9574 1.7790 0.0309 4,172.879 8 0.7559 0.0616 0.8175 0.2020 0.0607 0.2627Total2.2369 1.5152 4.5130 0.0144 2.2886 59.8454 62.1340 9.0900e- 003 5.2700e- 003 63.95850.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Water 28.3396 0.0000 28.3396 1.6748 0.0000 63.51080.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Waste 0.0000 774.6665 774.6665 0.0298 0.0000 775.29250.7559 0.0116 0.7675 0.2020 0.0107 0.2127Mobile0.3972 0.8574 3.9572 0.0105 0.0000 3,260.811 0 3,260.8110 0.0653 0.0256 3,270.111 3 0.0500 0.0500 0.0500 0.0500Energy0.0724 0.6578 0.5525 3.9500e- 003 0.0000 6.3300e- 003 6.3300e- 003 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 6.6900e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 Area 1.7673 3.0000e- 005 3.3000e- 003 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 2.2 Overall Operational Unmitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00 2.0 Emissions Summary tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 100.00 tblWater AnaerobicandFacultativeLagoonsPerce nt 2.21 0.00 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.95 2.66 tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 8.17 3.54 tblProjectCharacteristics OperationalYear 2014 2018 tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 8.19 2.66 tblProjectCharacteristics CO2IntensityFactor 1543.28 1430.8 tblProjectCharacteristics N2OIntensityFactor 0.006 0.007 tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintNonresidentialExterio rValue 250 6 tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintNonresidentialInterior Value 250 35 Water Mitigation - Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value A-163 0.0000 2.5533 2.5533 2.4000e- 004 0.0000 2.55841.5100e- 003 1.5100e- 003 1.5100e- 003 1.5100e- 003 Total 4.2934 0.0201 0.0185 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 2.5533 2.5533 2.4000e- 004 0.0000 2.55841.5100e- 003 1.5100e- 003 1.5100e- 003 1.5100e- 003 Off-Road 2.9900e- 003 0.0201 0.0185 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Archit. Coating 4.2904 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 3.7 Architectural Coating - 2018 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 17.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive PM10 30.6281 4,095.329 2 4,125.9574 1.7790 0.0308 4,172.875 7 0.7559 0.0616 0.8175 0.2020 0.0607 0.2627Total1.8554 1.5152 4.5130 0.0144 2.2886 59.8454 62.1340 9.0500e- 003 5.2600e- 003 63.95440.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Water 28.3396 0.0000 28.3396 1.6748 0.0000 63.51080.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Waste 0.0000 774.6665 774.6665 0.0298 0.0000 775.29250.7559 0.0116 0.7675 0.2020 0.0107 0.2127Mobile0.3972 0.8574 3.9572 0.0105 0.0000 3,260.811 0 3,260.8110 0.0653 0.0256 3,270.111 3 0.0500 0.0500 0.0500 0.0500Energy0.0724 0.6578 0.5525 3.9500e- 003 0.0000 6.3300e- 003 6.3300e- 003 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 6.6900e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 Area 1.3859 3.0000e- 005 3.3000e- 003 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-164 0.0000 2.5533 2.5533 2.4000e- 004 0.0000 2.55841.5100e- 003 1.5100e- 003 1.5100e- 003 1.5100e- 003 Total 4.2934 0.0201 0.0185 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 2.5533 2.5533 2.4000e- 004 0.0000 2.55841.5100e- 003 1.5100e- 003 1.5100e- 003 1.5100e- 003 Off-Road 2.9900e- 003 0.0201 0.0185 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Archit. Coating 4.2904 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 2.8382 2.8382 1.3000e- 004 0.0000 2.84103.4000e- 003 2.0000e- 005 3.4300e- 003 9.0000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 9.3000e- 004 Total 8.8000e- 004 1.3000e- 003 0.0136 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 2.8382 2.8382 1.3000e- 004 0.0000 2.84103.4000e- 003 2.0000e- 005 3.4300e- 003 9.0000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 9.3000e- 004 Worker 8.8000e- 004 1.3000e- 003 0.0136 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Vendor0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-165 4.2 Trip Summary Information 0.0000 774.6665 774.6665 0.0298 0.0000 775.29250.7559 0.0116 0.7675 0.2020 0.0107 0.2127Unmitigated0.3972 0.8574 3.9572 0.0105 0.0000 774.6665 774.6665 0.0298 0.0000 775.29250.7559 0.0116 0.7675 0.2020 0.0107 0.2127Mitigated0.3972 0.8574 3.9572 0.0105 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 0.0000 2.8382 2.8382 1.3000e- 004 0.0000 2.84103.4000e- 003 2.0000e- 005 3.4300e- 003 9.0000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 9.3000e- 004 Total 8.8000e- 004 1.3000e- 003 0.0136 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 2.8382 2.8382 1.3000e- 004 0.0000 2.84103.4000e- 003 2.0000e- 005 3.4300e- 003 9.0000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 9.3000e- 004 Worker 8.8000e- 004 1.3000e- 003 0.0136 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Vendor0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-166 0.0000 716.0475 716.0475 0.0137 0.0131 720.40520.0500 0.0500 0.0500 0.0500NaturalGas Unmitigated 0.0724 0.6578 0.5525 3.9500e- 003 0.0000 716.0475 716.0475 0.0137 0.0131 720.40520.0500 0.0500 0.0500 0.0500NaturalGas Mitigated 0.0724 0.6578 0.5525 3.9500e- 003 0.0000 2,544.763 5 2,544.7635 0.0516 0.0125 2,549.706 1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Electricity Unmitigated 0.0000 2,544.763 5 2,544.7635 0.0516 0.0125 2,549.706 1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Electricity Mitigated NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 4.4 Fleet Mix Historical Energy Use: Y 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 0.001440 0.002149 0.004721 0.000504 0.002262 5.0 Energy Detail SBUS MH 0.510011 0.056836 0.192178 0.151564 0.041643 0.005905 0.015642 0.015146 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY 61.60 19.00 58 38 4 LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Hotel 16.60 8.40 6.90 19.40 4.3 Trip Type Information Miles Trip %Trip Purpose % Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C- W Total 902.70 678.30 678.30 2,001,009 2,001,009 Annual VMT Hotel 902.70 678.30 678.30 2,001,009 2,001,009 Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT A-167 716.0475 716.0475 0.0137 0.0131 720.40520.0500 0.0500 0.0500 0.0500 0.0000 0.0131 720.4052 Total 0.0724 0.6578 0.5525 3.9500e- 003 0.0500 0.0500 0.0000 716.0475 716.0475 0.01370.5525 3.9500e- 003 0.0500 0.0500 CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr Hotel 1.34182e+ 007 0.0724 0.6578 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2OSO2Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO 716.0475 0.0137 0.0131 720.4052 Mitigated 0.0500 0.0500 0.0500 0.0000 716.0475 720.4052 Total 0.0724 0.6578 0.5525 3.9500e- 003 0.0500 0.0500 0.0000 716.0475 716.0475 0.0137 0.01313.9500e- 003 0.0500 0.0500 0.0500Hotel1.34182e+ 007 0.0724 0.6578 0.5525 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas Unmitigated NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 A-168 2,549.706 1 Total 2,544.7635 0.0516 0.0125 2,549.706 1 Land Use kWh/yr t o n MT/yr Hotel 3.92105e+ 006 2,544.7635 0.0516 0.0125 Mitigated Electricity Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e 2,549.706 1 Total 2,544.7635 0.0516 0.0125 2,549.706 1 Land Use kWh/yr t o n MT/yr Hotel 3.92105e+ 006 2,544.7635 0.0516 0.0125 Unmitigated Electricity Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e 5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity A-169 0.0000 6.3300e- 003 6.3300e- 003 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 6.6900e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 Total 1.7673 3.0000e- 005 3.3000e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 6.3300e- 003 6.3300e- 003 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 6.6900e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 Landscaping 3.2000e- 004 3.0000e- 005 3.3000e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Consumer Products 1.3379 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Architectural Coating 0.4290 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 6.6900e- 003 6.2 Area by SubCategory Unmitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 6.3300e- 003 6.3300e- 003 2.0000e- 005 0.00000.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 6.3300e- 003 6.3300e- 003 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 6.6900e- 003 Unmitigated 1.7673 3.0000e- 005 3.3000e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 Category tons/yr MT/yr Mitigated 1.3859 3.0000e- 005 3.3000e- 003 0.0000 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2eFugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total 6.0 Area Detail 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area Use Low VOC Paint - Non-Residential Interior Use Low VOC Paint - Non-Residential Exterior ROG NOx CO SO2 A-170 Unmitigated 62.1340 9.0900e- 003 5.2700e- 003 63.9585 Category t o n MT/yr Mitigated 62.1340 9.0500e- 003 5.2600e- 003 63.9544 7.0 Water Detail 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e 0.0000 6.3300e- 003 6.3300e- 003 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 6.6900e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 Total 1.3859 3.0000e- 005 3.3000e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 6.3300e- 003 6.3300e- 003 2.0000e- 005 0.0000 6.6900e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 Landscaping 3.2000e- 004 3.0000e- 005 3.3000e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Consumer Products 1.3379 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Architectural Coating 0.0476 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-171 63.9544 Total 62.1340 9.0500e- 003 5.2600e- 003 63.9544 Land Use Mgal t o n MT/yr Hotel 6.46853 / 0.718725 62.1340 9.0500e- 003 5.2600e- 003 Mitigated Indoor/Out door Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e 63.9585 Total 62.1340 9.0900e- 003 5.2700e- 003 63.9585 Land Use Mgal t o n MT/yr Hotel 6.46853 / 0.718725 62.1340 9.0900e- 003 5.2700e- 003 7.2 Water by Land Use Unmitigated Indoor/Out door Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e A-172 63.5108 Total 28.3396 1.6748 0.0000 63.5108 Land Use tons t o n MT/yr Hotel 139.61 28.3396 1.6748 0.0000 8.2 Waste by Land Use Unmitigated Waste Disposed Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Unmitigated 28.3396 1.6748 0.0000 63.5108 t o n MT/yr Mitigated 28.3396 1.6748 0.0000 63.5108 8.0 Waste Detail 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste Category/Year Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e A-173 Load Factor Fuel Type 10.0 Vegetation 9.0 Operational Offroad Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power 63.5108 Total 28.3396 1.6748 0.0000 63.5108 Land Use tons t o n MT/yr Hotel 139.61 28.3396 1.6748 0.0000 Mitigated Waste Disposed Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e A-174 No Land Use Increase Transit Accessibility 0.25 No Land Use Improve Destination Accessibility 0.00 No Land Use Improve Walkability Design 0.00 No Land Use Increase Diversity -0.01 0.13 Input Value 3 No Land Use Increase Density 0.00 Mitigation Selected Category Measure % Reduction Input Value 1 Input Value 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Operational Mobile Mitigation Project Setting: 0.01 Water Outdoor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.44 0.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Water Indoor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Natural Gas 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Mobile 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Landscaping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hearth 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Electricity 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Consumer Products 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Percent Reduction Architectural Coating 88.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Operational Percent Reduction Summary Category ROG NOx CO SO2 Exhaust PM10 Exhaust PM2.5 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Page 1 of 1 Date: 2/18/2016 10:15 AM Operation-Existing Orange County, Mitigation Report A-175 Total VMT Reduction 0.00 No School Trip Implement School Bus Program 0.00 Commute Commute Subtotal 0.00 No Commute Provide Ride Sharing Program No Commute Employee Vanpool/Shuttle 0.00 2.00 No Commute Market Commute Trip Reduction Option 0.00 No Commute Encourage Telecommuting and Alternative Work Schedules 0.00 No Commute Workplace Parking Charge No Commute Implement Employee Parking "Cash Out" No Commute Transit Subsidy No Commute Implement Trip Reduction Program Land Use and Site Enhancement Subtotal 0.00 Transit Improvements Transit Improvements Subtotal 0.00 No Transit Improvements Increase Transit Frequency 0.00 No Transit Improvements Expand Transit Network 0.00 No Transit Improvements Provide BRT System 0.00 Parking Policy Pricing Parking Policy Pricing Subtotal 0.00 No Parking Policy Pricing On-street Market Pricing 0.00 No Parking Policy Pricing Unbundle Parking Costs 0.00 No Parking Policy Pricing Limit Parking Supply 0.00 Neighborhood Enhancements Neighborhood Enhancements Subtotal 0.00 No Neighborhood Enhancements Implement NEV Network 0.00 No Neighborhood Enhancements Provide Traffic Calming Measures No Neighborhood Enhancements Improve Pedestrian Network Land Use Land Use SubTotal 0.00 No Land Use Integrate Below Market Rate Housing 0.00 A-176 Fan 50.00 Refrigerator 15.00 ClothWasher 30.00 DishWasher 15.00 No On-site Renewable Appliance Type Land Use Subtype % Improvement No Exceed Title 24 No Install High Efficiency Lighting No % Electric Chainsaw 0.00 Energy Mitigation Measures Measure Implemented Mitigation Measure Input Value 1 Input Value 2 No % Electric Lawnmower 0.00 No % Electric Leafblower 0.00 Yes Use Low VOC Paint (Non-residential Interior)35.00 Yes Use Low VOC Paint (Non-residential Exterior)6.00 No Use Low VOC Paint (Residential Interior)50.00 No Use Low VOC Paint (Residential Exterior)100.00 No No Hearth No Use Low VOC Cleaning Supplies Area Mitigation Measure Implemented Mitigation Measure Input Value No Only Natural Gas Hearth A-177 Institute Recycling and Composting Services Percent Reduction in Waste Disposed No Water Efficient Landscape 0.00 0.00 Solid Waste Mitigation Mitigation Measures Input Value No Turf Reduction 0.00 No Use Water Efficient Irrigation Systems 6.10 No Install low-flow Toilet 20.00 No Install low-flow Shower 20.00 No Install low-flow bathroom faucet 32.00 No Install low-flow Kitchen faucet 18.00 No Use Reclaimed Water 0.00 0.00 No Use Grey Water 0.00 Water Mitigation Measures Measure Implemented Mitigation Measure Input Value 1 Input Value 2 No Apply Water Conservation on Strategy 0.00 0.00 A-178 Water And Wastewater - Assumes 100% aerobic. Area Mitigation - Based on information provided. Energy Mitigation - 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data Project Characteristics - Anaheim, Public Utilities Department. 2013, February 12. Mandip Kaur Samra, Integrated Resources Planner. Land Use - Based on provided information. Vehicle Trips - Based on 1993 EIR. Area Coating - Based on information provided. Energy Use - CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 1430.8 CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.029 N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.007 30 Climate Zone 8 Operational Year 2018 Utility Company Anaheim Public Utilities 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s)2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) Population Hotel 660.00 Room 8.90 958,320.00 0 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Page 1 of 1 Date: 2/18/2016 9:46 AM Operation-Approved Orange County, Winter 1.0 Project Characteristics A-179 42,815.46 28 42,815.462 8 1.4504 0.2026 42,908.71 58 28.9501 1.1390 30.0891 7.7245 1.1048 8.8293Total41.2974 40.8747 156.4030 0.4448 31,766.45 25 31,766.452 5 1.2382 31,792.45 56 28.9501 0.4390 29.3891 7.7245 0.4048 8.1293Mobile15.9032 31.6666 148.6005 0.3896 11,048.86 59 11,048.865 9 0.2118 0.2026 11,116.10 74 0.6998 0.6998 0.6998 0.6998Energy1.0128 9.2074 7.7342 0.0552 0.1444 0.1444 4.0000e- 004 0.15282.5000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 Area 24.3814 6.4000e- 004 0.0683 1.0000e- 005 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 2.2 Overall Operational Unmitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00 2.0 Emissions Summary tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 100.00 tblWater AnaerobicandFacultativeLagoonsPerce 2.21 0.00 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.95 6.54 tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 8.17 8.70 tblProjectCharacteristics OperationalYear 2014 2018 tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 8.19 6.54 tblProjectCharacteristics CO2IntensityFactor 1543.28 1430.8 tblProjectCharacteristics N2OIntensityFactor 0.006 0.007 tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintNonresidentialInterior Value 250 35 tblLandUse LotAcreage 22.00 8.90 tblAreaCoating Area_Nonresidential_Interior 1437480 1221858 tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintNonresidentialExterio rValue 250 6 Water Mitigation - Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value A-180 31,766.45 25 31,766.452 5 1.2382 31,792.45 56 28.9501 0.4390 29.3891 7.7245 0.4048 8.1293Unmitigated15.9032 31.6666 148.6005 0.3896 31,766.45 25 31,766.452 5 1.2382 31,792.45 56 28.9501 0.4390 29.3891 7.7245 0.4048 8.1293Mitigated15.9032 31.6666 148.6005 0.3896 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 0.00 7.51 7.51 4.25 29.10 7.540.00 17.88 0.68 0.00 18.43 2.31 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 12.39 6.56 1.44 3.61 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive PM10 39,599.70 85 39,599.708 5 1.3888 0.1436 39,673.39 09 28.9501 0.9354 29.8855 7.7245 0.9011 8.6257Total36.1821 38.1949 154.1520 0.4287 31,766.45 25 31,766.452 5 1.2382 31,792.45 56 28.9501 0.4390 29.3891 7.7245 0.4048 8.1293Mobile15.9032 31.6666 148.6005 0.3896 7,833.111 5 7,833.1115 0.1501 0.1436 7,880.782 6 0.4961 0.4961 0.4961 0.4961Energy0.7180 6.5276 5.4832 0.0392 0.1444 0.1444 4.0000e- 004 0.15282.5000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 Area 19.5608 6.4000e- 004 0.0683 1.0000e- 005 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-181 11,116.10 74 0.6998 11,048.86 59 11,048.865 9 0.2118 0.20260.0552 0.6998 0.6998 0.6998 7,833.111 5 7,833.1115 0.1501 0.1436 7,880.782 6 NaturalGas Unmitigated 1.0128 9.2074 7.7342 0.4961 0.4961 0.4961 0.4961 Category lb/day lb/day NaturalGas Mitigated 0.7180 6.5276 5.4832 0.0392 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2eFugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total 4.4 Fleet Mix Historical Energy Use: N 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy Exceed Title 24 ROG NOx CO SO2 0.001440 0.002149 0.004721 0.000504 0.002262 5.0 Energy Detail SBUS MH 0.510011 0.056836 0.192178 0.151564 0.041643 0.005905 0.015642 0.015146 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY 61.60 19.00 58 38 4 LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Hotel 16.60 8.40 6.90 19.40 4.3 Trip Type Information Miles Trip %Trip Purpose % Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C- W Total 5,742.00 4,316.40 4,316.40 12,729,473 12,729,473 Annual VMT Hotel 5,742.00 4,316.40 4316.40 12,729,473 12,729,473 4.2 Trip Summary Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT A-182 7,833.1115 7,833.111 5 0.1501 0.1436 7,880.782 6 0.4961 0.4961 0.4961 0.4961Total0.7180 6.5276 5.4832 0.0392 7,833.1115 7,833.111 5 0.1501 0.1436 7,880.782 6 0.4961 0.4961 0.4961 0.4961Hotel66.5814 0.7180 6.5276 5.4832 0.0392 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 11,048.865 9 11,048.86 59 0.2118 0.2026 11,116.10 74 0.6998 0.6998 0.6998 0.6998Total1.0128 9.2074 7.7342 0.0552 11,048.865 9 11,048.86 59 0.2118 0.2026 11,116.10 74 0.6998 0.6998 0.6998 0.6998Hotel93915.4 1.0128 9.2074 7.7342 0.0552 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas Unmitigated NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 A-183 0.1444 0.1444 4.0000e- 004 0.15282.5000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 Total 24.3814 6.4000e- 004 0.0683 1.0000e- 005 0.1444 0.1444 4.0000e- 004 0.15282.5000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 Landscaping 6.5300e- 003 6.4000e- 004 0.0683 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Consumer Products 18.9747 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Architectural Coating 5.4002 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 0.1528 6.2 Area by SubCategory Unmitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 2.5000e- 004 0.1444 0.1444 4.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 2.5000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 0.1444 0.1444 4.0000e- 004 0.1528 Unmitigated 24.3814 6.4000e- 004 0.0683 2.5000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 Category lb/day lb/day Mitigated 19.5608 6.4000e- 004 0.0683 1.0000e- 005 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2eFugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total 6.0 Area Detail 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area Use Low VOC Paint - Non-Residential Interior Use Low VOC Paint - Non-Residential Exterior ROG NOx CO SO2 A-184 Use Water Efficient Irrigation System 8.0 Waste Detail 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste 9.0 Operational Offroad 7.0 Water Detail 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water Install Low Flow Bathroom Faucet Install Low Flow Kitchen Faucet Install Low Flow Toilet Install Low Flow Shower 0.1444 0.1444 4.0000e- 004 0.15282.5000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 Total 19.5608 6.4000e- 004 0.0683 1.0000e- 005 0.1444 0.1444 4.0000e- 004 0.15282.5000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 Landscaping 6.5300e- 003 6.4000e- 004 0.0683 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Consumer Products 18.9747 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Architectural Coating 0.5796 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-185 Fuel Type 10.0 Vegetation Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor A-186 Water And Wastewater - Assumes 100% aerobic. Area Mitigation - Based on information provided. Energy Mitigation - 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data Project Characteristics - Anaheim, Public Utilities Department. 2013, February 12. Mandip Kaur Samra, Integrated Resources Planner. Land Use - Based on provided information. Vehicle Trips - Based on 1993 EIR. Area Coating - Based on information provided. Energy Use - CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 1430.8 CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.029 N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.007 30 Climate Zone 8 Operational Year 2018 Utility Company Anaheim Public Utilities 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s)2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) Population Hotel 660.00 Room 8.90 958,320.00 0 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Page 1 of 1 Date: 2/18/2016 9:45 AM Operation-Approved Orange County, Summer 1.0 Project Characteristics A-187 tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00 tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 100.00 tblWater AnaerobicandFacultativeLagoonsPerce nt 2.21 0.00 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.95 6.54 tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 8.17 8.70 tblProjectCharacteristics OperationalYear 2014 2018 tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 8.19 6.54 tblProjectCharacteristics CO2IntensityFactor 1543.28 1430.8 tblProjectCharacteristics N2OIntensityFactor 0.006 0.007 tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintNonresidentialInterior Value 250 35 tblLandUse LotAcreage 22.00 8.90 tblAreaCoating Area_Nonresidential_Interior 1437480 1221858 tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintNonresidentialExterio rValue 250 6 Water Mitigation - Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value A-188 41,038.73 37 41,038.733 7 1.3879 0.1436 41,112.39 72 28.9501 0.9333 29.8834 7.7245 0.8992 8.6237Total35.2490 36.5841 152.5141 0.4470 33,205.47 77 33,205.477 7 1.2373 33,231.46 18 28.9501 0.4369 29.3870 7.7245 0.4028 8.1274Mobile14.9701 30.0559 146.9626 0.4078 7,833.111 5 7,833.1115 0.1501 0.1436 7,880.782 6 0.4961 0.4961 0.4961 0.4961Energy0.7180 6.5276 5.4832 0.0392 0.1444 0.1444 4.0000e- 004 0.15282.5000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 Area 19.5608 6.4000e- 004 0.0683 1.0000e- 005 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 44,254.48 80 44,254.488 0 1.4495 0.2026 44,347.72 20 28.9501 1.1369 30.0870 7.7245 1.1028 8.8274Total40.3643 39.2639 154.7651 0.4630 33,205.47 77 33,205.477 7 1.2373 33,231.46 18 28.9501 0.4369 29.3870 7.7245 0.4028 8.1274Mobile14.9701 30.0559 146.9626 0.4078 11,048.86 59 11,048.865 9 0.2118 0.2026 11,116.10 74 0.6998 0.6998 0.6998 0.6998Energy1.0128 9.2074 7.7342 0.0552 0.1444 0.1444 4.0000e- 004 0.15282.5000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 Area 24.3814 6.4000e- 004 0.0683 1.0000e- 005 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 2.2 Overall Operational Unmitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 2.0 Emissions Summary A-189 61.60 19.00 58 38 4 H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Hotel 16.60 8.40 6.90 19.40 4.3 Trip Type Information Miles Trip %Trip Purpose % Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C- W Total 5,742.00 4,316.40 4,316.40 12,729,473 12,729,473 Annual VMT Hotel 5,742.00 4,316.40 4316.40 12,729,473 12,729,473 4.2 Trip Summary Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT 33,205.47 77 33,205.477 7 1.2373 33,231.46 18 28.9501 0.4369 29.3870 7.7245 0.4028 8.1274Unmitigated14.9701 30.0559 146.9626 0.4078 33,205.47 77 33,205.477 7 1.2373 33,231.46 18 28.9501 0.4369 29.3870 7.7245 0.4028 8.1274Mitigated14.9701 30.0559 146.9626 0.4078 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 0.00 7.27 7.27 4.25 29.10 7.300.00 17.91 0.68 0.00 18.47 2.31 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 12.67 6.83 1.45 3.47 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive PM10 A-190 11,048.865 9 11,048.86 59 0.2118 0.2026 11,116.10 74 0.6998 0.6998 0.6998 0.6998Total1.0128 9.2074 7.7342 0.0552 11,048.865 9 11,048.86 59 0.2118 0.2026 11,116.10 74 0.6998 0.6998 0.6998 0.6998Hotel93915.4 1.0128 9.2074 7.7342 0.0552 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 11,116.10 74 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas Unmitigated NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 0.6998 11,048.86 59 11,048.865 9 0.2118 0.20260.0552 0.6998 0.6998 0.6998 7,833.111 5 7,833.1115 0.1501 0.1436 7,880.782 6 NaturalGas Unmitigated 1.0128 9.2074 7.7342 0.4961 0.4961 0.4961 0.4961 Category lb/day lb/day NaturalGas Mitigated 0.7180 6.5276 5.4832 0.0392 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2eFugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total 4.4 Fleet Mix Historical Energy Use: N 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy Exceed Title 24 ROG NOx CO SO2 0.001440 0.002149 0.004721 0.000504 0.002262 5.0 Energy Detail SBUS MH 0.510011 0.056836 0.192178 0.151564 0.041643 0.005905 0.015642 0.015146 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCYLDALDT1LDT2MDVLHD1 A-191 0.15282.5000e- 004 0.1444 0.1444 4.0000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 2.5000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 0.1444 0.1444 4.0000e- 004 0.1528 Unmitigated 24.3814 6.4000e- 004 0.0683 2.5000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 Category lb/day lb/day Mitigated 19.5608 6.4000e- 004 0.0683 1.0000e- 005 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2eFugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total 6.0 Area Detail 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area Use Low VOC Paint - Non-Residential Interior Use Low VOC Paint - Non-Residential Exterior ROG NOx CO SO2 7,833.1115 7,833.111 5 0.1501 0.1436 7,880.782 6 0.4961 0.4961 0.4961 0.4961Total0.7180 6.5276 5.4832 0.0392 7,833.1115 7,833.111 5 0.1501 0.1436 7,880.782 6 0.4961 0.4961 0.4961 0.4961Hotel66.5814 0.7180 6.5276 5.4832 0.0392 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-192 0.1444 0.1444 4.0000e- 004 0.15282.5000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 Total 19.5608 6.4000e- 004 0.0683 1.0000e- 005 0.1444 0.1444 4.0000e- 004 0.15282.5000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 Landscaping 6.5300e- 003 6.4000e- 004 0.0683 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Consumer Products 18.9747 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Architectural Coating 0.5796 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.1444 0.1444 4.0000e- 004 0.15282.5000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 Total 24.3814 6.4000e- 004 0.0683 1.0000e- 005 0.1444 0.1444 4.0000e- 004 0.15282.5000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 2.5000e- 004 Landscaping 6.5300e- 003 6.4000e- 004 0.0683 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Consumer Products 18.9747 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Architectural Coating 5.4002 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 6.2 Area by SubCategory Unmitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 A-193 Fuel Type 10.0 Vegetation Use Water Efficient Irrigation System 8.0 Waste Detail 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste 9.0 Operational Offroad Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor 7.0 Water Detail 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water Install Low Flow Bathroom Faucet Install Low Flow Kitchen Faucet Install Low Flow Toilet Install Low Flow Shower A-194 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Page 1 of 1 Date: 2/18/2016 9:42 AM Operation-Approved Orange County, Annual 1.0 Project Characteristics 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Hotel 660.00 Room 8.90 958,320.00 0 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s)2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days)30 Climate Zone 8 Operational Year 2018 Utility Company Anaheim Public Utilities CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 1430.8 CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.029 N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.007 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data Project Characteristics - Anaheim, Public Utilities Department. 2013, February 12. Mandip Kaur Samra, Integrated Resources Planner. Land Use - Based on provided information. Vehicle Trips - Based on 1993 EIR. Area Coating - Based on information provided. Energy Use - Water And Wastewater - Assumes 100% aerobic. Area Mitigation - Based on information provided. Energy Mitigation - A-195 Water Mitigation - Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value tblAreaCoating Area_Nonresidential_Interior 1437480 1221858 tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintNonresidentialExterio rValue 250 6 tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintNonresidentialInterior Value 250 35 tblLandUse LotAcreage 22.00 8.90 tblProjectCharacteristics CO2IntensityFactor 1543.28 1430.8 tblProjectCharacteristics N2OIntensityFactor 0.006 0.007 tblProjectCharacteristics OperationalYear 2014 2018 tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 8.19 6.54 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.95 6.54 tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 8.17 8.70 tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 100.00 tblWater AnaerobicandFacultativeLagoonsPerce nt 2.21 0.00 tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00 2.0 Emissions Summary SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 2.2 Overall Operational Unmitigated Operational ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Area 4.4492 8.0000e- 005 8.5400e- 003 0.0000 3.0000e- 005 3.0000e- 005 3.0000e- 005 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0164 0.0164 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0173 Energy 0.1848 1.6804 1.4115 0.0101 0.1277 0.1277 0.1277 0.1277 0.0000 8,104.735 6 8,104.7356 0.1623 0.0642 8,128.056 8 A-196 Mobile 2.5269 5.4547 25.1737 0.0666 4.8087 0.0739 4.8827 1.2849 0.0682 1.3531 0.0000 4,928.062 0 4,928.0620 0.1896 0.0000 4,932.044 4 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 73.3508 0.0000 73.3508 4.3349 0.0000 164.3838 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 5.9234 154.8940 160.8174 0.0235 0.0136 165.5396 Total 7.1610 7.1351 26.5938 0.0767 4.7104 0.0779 13,390.04 19 4.8087 0.2017 5.0104 1.2849 0.1959 1.4808 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 79.2742 13,187.70 80 13,266.982 1 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Operational ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Area 3.5695 8.0000e- 005 8.5400e- 003 0.0000 3.0000e- 005 3.0000e- 005 3.0000e- 005 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0164 0.0164 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0173 Energy 0.1310 1.1913 1.0007 7.1500e- 003 0.0905 0.0905 0.0905 0.0905 0.0000 6,855.472 2 6,855.4722 0.1375 0.0510 6,874.161 0 Mobile 2.5269 5.4547 25.1737 0.0666 4.8087 0.0739 4.8827 1.2849 0.0682 1.3531 0.0000 4,928.062 0 4,928.0620 0.1896 0.0000 4,932.044 4 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 73.3508 0.0000 73.3508 4.3349 0.0000 164.3838 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4.7387 125.7796 130.5183 0.0188 0.0109 134.2912 Total 6.2275 6.6460 26.1830 0.0738 4.8087 0.1645 4.9732 1.2849 0.1587 1.4437 78.0895 11,909.33 02 11,987.419 7 4.6809 0.0619 12,104.89 77 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 13.04 6.85 1.54 3.82 0.00 18.43 0.74 0.00 18.97 2.51 1.49 9.69 9.64 0.63 20.56 9.60 A-197 CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile ROG NOx NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Mitigated 2.5269 5.4547 25.1737 0.0666 4.8087 0.0739 4.8827 1.2849 0.0682 1.3531 0.0000 4,928.062 0 4,928.0620 0.1896 0.0000 4,932.044 4 Unmitigated 2.5269 5.4547 25.1737 0.0666 4.8087 0.0739 4.8827 1.2849 0.0682 1.3531 0.0000 4,928.062 0 4,928.0620 0.1896 0.0000 4,932.044 4 4.2 Trip Summary Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT Hotel 5,742.00 4,316.40 4316.40 12,729,473 12,729,473 Total 5,742.00 4,316.40 4,316.40 12,729,473 12,729,473 4.3 Trip Type Information Miles Trip %Trip Purpose % Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C- W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Hotel 16.60 8.40 6.90 19.40 61.60 19.00 58 38 4 LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH 0.510011 0.056836 0.192178 0.151564 0.041643 0.005905 0.015642 0.015146 0.001440 0.002149 0.004721 0.000504 0.002262 A-198 5.0 Energy Detail 4.4 Fleet Mix Historical Energy Use: N 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy Exceed Title 24 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Electricity Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 5,558.612 8 5,558.6128 0.1127 0.0272 5,569.409 1 Electricity Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 6,275.471 9 6,275.4719 0.1272 0.0307 6,287.660 6 NaturalGas Mitigated 0.1310 1.1913 1.0007 7.1500e- 003 0.0905 0.0905 0.0905 0.0905 0.0000 1,296.859 5 1,296.8595 0.0249 0.0238 1,304.751 9 NaturalGas Unmitigated 0.1848 1.6804 1.4115 0.0101 0.0351 0.0335 1,840.396 3 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas 0.1277 0.1277 0.1277 0.1277 0.0000 CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 1,829.263 7 1,829.2637 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Hotel 3.42791e+ 007 0.1848 1.6804 1.4115 0.0351 0.03350.0101 0.1277 0.1277 0.1277 0.1277 0.1277 0.0000 1,829.2637 1,829.263 7 0.0000 1,829.2637 1,840.396 3 Total 0.1848 1.6804 1.4115 0.0101 1,829.263 7 0.0351 0.0335 1,840.396 3 0.1277 0.1277 0.1277 A-199 Mitigated NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr Hotel 2.43022e+ 007 0.1310 1.1913 1,296.859 5 0.02491.0007 7.1500e- 003 0.0905 0.0905 7.1500e- 003 0.0905 0.0905 0.0000 1,296.8595 0.0905 0.0000 0.0238 1,304.751 9 Total 0.1310 1.1913 1.0007 1,296.8595 1,296.859 5 0.0249 0.0238 1,304.751 9 5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity 0.0905 0.0905 0.0905 Unmitigated Electricity Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kWh/yr t o n MT/yr Hotel 9.66945e+ 006 6,275.4719 0.1272 0.0307 6,287.660 6 Total 6,275.4719 0.1272 0.0307 6,287.660 6 Mitigated Electricity Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kWh/yr t o n MT/yr Hotel 8.56489e+ 006 5,558.6128 0.1127 0.0272 5,569.409 1 Total 5,558.6128 0.1127 0.0272 5,569.409 1 A-200 6.0 Area Detail 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area Use Low VOC Paint - Non-Residential Interior Use Low VOC Paint - Non-Residential Exterior ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Mitigated 3.5695 8.0000e- 005 8.5400e- 003 0.0000 3.0000e- 005 3.0000e- 005 3.0000e- 005 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0164 0.0164 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0173 Unmitigated 4.4492 8.0000e- 005 8.5400e- 003 0.0164 0.0164 4.0000e- 005 0.00000.0000 3.0000e- 005 3.0000e- 005 3.0000e- 005 NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 0.0173 6.2 Area by SubCategory Unmitigated ROG NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Architectural Coating 0.9855 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 3.4629 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 8.2000e- 004 8.0000e- 005 8.5400e- 003 0.0000 3.0000e- 005 3.0000e- 005 3.0000e- 005 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0164 0.0164 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0173 Total 4.4492 8.0000e- 005 8.5400e- 003 0.0000 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.01733.0000e- 005 3.0000e- 005 3.0000e- 005 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0164 0.0164 A-201 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Architectural Coating 0.1058 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 3.4629 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 8.2000e- 004 8.0000e- 005 8.5400e- 003 0.0000 3.0000e- 005 3.0000e- 005 3.0000e- 005 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0164 0.0164 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0173 Total 3.5695 8.0000e- 005 8.5400e- 003 0.0000 3.0000e- 005 3.0000e- 005 3.0000e- 005 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0164 0.0164 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0173 7.0 Water Detail 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water Install Low Flow Bathroom Faucet Install Low Flow Kitchen Faucet Install Low Flow Toilet Install Low Flow Shower Use Water Efficient Irrigation System Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category t o n MT/yr Mitigated 130.5183 0.0188 0.0109 134.2912 Unmitigated 160.8174 0.0235 0.0136 165.5396 A-202 7.2 Water by Land Use Unmitigated Indoor/Out door Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use Mgal t o n MT/yr Hotel 16.7421 / 1.86023 160.8174 0.0235 0.0136 165.5396 Total 160.8174 0.0235 0.0136 165.5396 Mitigated Indoor/Out door Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use Mgal t o n MT/yr Hotel 13.3937 / 1.74676 130.5183 0.0188 0.0109 134.2912 Total 130.5183 0.0188 0.0109 134.2912 A-203 8.0 Waste Detail 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste Category/Year Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e t o n MT/yr Mitigated 73.3508 4.3349 0.0000 164.3838 Unmitigated 73.3508 4.3349 0.0000 164.3838 8.2 Waste by Land Use Unmitigated Waste Disposed Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use tons t o n MT/yr Hotel 361.35 73.3508 4.3349 0.0000 164.3838 Total 73.3508 4.3349 0.0000 164.3838 A-204 Mitigated Waste Disposed Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use tons t o n MT/yr Hotel 361.35 73.3508 4.3349 0.0000 164.3838 Total 73.3508 4.3349 0.0000 164.3838 Load Factor Fuel Type 10.0 Vegetation 9.0 Operational Offroad Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power A-205 No Land Use Increase Transit Accessibility 0.25 No Land Use Improve Destination Accessibility 0.00 No Land Use Improve Walkability Design 0.00 No Land Use Increase Diversity -0.01 0.13 Input Value 3 No Land Use Increase Density 0.00 Mitigation Selected Category Measure % Reduction Input Value 1 Input Value 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Operational Mobile Mitigation Project Setting: 18.88 Water Outdoor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 20.00 18.80 18.84 20.23 20.09 29.10 29.09 29.10 29.10 Water Indoor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Natural Gas 29.11 29.10 29.10 29.07 29.11 29.11 0.00 29.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Mobile 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Landscaping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.42 11.42 11.43 11.42 Hearth 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Electricity 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.42 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Consumer Products 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Percent Reduction Architectural Coating 89.27 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Operational Percent Reduction Summary Category ROG NOx CO SO2 Exhaust PM10 Exhaust PM2.5 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Page 1 of 1 Date: 2/18/2016 9:48 AM Operation-Approved Orange County, Mitigation Report A-206 Total VMT Reduction 0.00 No School Trip Implement School Bus Program 0.00 Commute Commute Subtotal 0.00 No Commute Provide Ride Sharing Program No Commute Employee Vanpool/Shuttle 0.00 2.00 No Commute Market Commute Trip Reduction Option 0.00 No Commute Encourage Telecommuting and Alternative Work Schedules 0.00 No Commute Workplace Parking Charge No Commute Implement Employee Parking "Cash Out" No Commute Transit Subsidy No Commute Implement Trip Reduction Program Land Use and Site Enhancement Subtotal 0.00 Transit Improvements Transit Improvements Subtotal 0.00 No Transit Improvements Increase Transit Frequency 0.00 No Transit Improvements Expand Transit Network 0.00 No Transit Improvements Provide BRT System 0.00 Parking Policy Pricing Parking Policy Pricing Subtotal 0.00 No Parking Policy Pricing On-street Market Pricing 0.00 No Parking Policy Pricing Unbundle Parking Costs 0.00 No Parking Policy Pricing Limit Parking Supply 0.00 Neighborhood Enhancements Neighborhood Enhancements Subtotal 0.00 No Neighborhood Enhancements Implement NEV Network 0.00 No Neighborhood Enhancements Provide Traffic Calming Measures No Neighborhood Enhancements Improve Pedestrian Network Land Use Land Use SubTotal 0.00 No Land Use Integrate Below Market Rate Housing 0.00 A-207 Fan 50.00 Refrigerator 15.00 ClothWasher 30.00 DishWasher 15.00 No On-site Renewable Appliance Type Land Use Subtype % Improvement Yes Exceed Title 24 34.00 No Install High Efficiency Lighting No % Electric Chainsaw 0.00 Energy Mitigation Measures Measure Implemented Mitigation Measure Input Value 1 Input Value 2 No % Electric Lawnmower 0.00 No % Electric Leafblower 0.00 Yes Use Low VOC Paint (Non-residential Interior)35.00 Yes Use Low VOC Paint (Non-residential Exterior)6.00 No Use Low VOC Paint (Residential Interior)50.00 No Use Low VOC Paint (Residential Exterior)100.00 No No Hearth No Use Low VOC Cleaning Supplies Area Mitigation Measure Implemented Mitigation Measure Input Value No Only Natural Gas Hearth A-208 Institute Recycling and Composting Services Percent Reduction in Waste Disposed No Water Efficient Landscape 0.00 0.00 Solid Waste Mitigation Mitigation Measures Input Value No Turf Reduction 0.00 Yes Use Water Efficient Irrigation Systems 6.10 Yes Install low-flow Toilet 20.00 Yes Install low-flow Shower 20.00 Yes Install low-flow bathroom faucet 32.00 Yes Install low-flow Kitchen faucet 18.00 No Use Reclaimed Water 0.00 0.00 No Use Grey Water 0.00 Water Mitigation Measures Measure Implemented Mitigation Measure Input Value 1 Input Value 2 No Apply Water Conservation on Strategy 0.00 0.00 A-209 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data Project Characteristics - Anaheim, Public Utilities Department. 2013, February 12. Mandip Kaur Samra, Integrated Resources Planner. Land Use - Based on provided information. Meeting rooms square footages are assumed in hotel total. Vehicle Trips - Based on information provided by Iteris. Area Coating - Based on information provided. Energy Use - CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 1430.8 CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.029 N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.007 30 Climate Zone 8 Operational Year 2018 Utility Company Anaheim Public Utilities 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s)2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) Strip Mall 25.60 1000sqft 0.00 25,600.00 0 Hotel 580.00 Room 5.23 749,670.00 0 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.27 Acre 0.27 0.00 0 Population Enclosed Parking with Elevator 363.85 1000sqft 3.40 363,852.00 0 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Page 1 of 1 Date: 2/18/2016 9:53 AM Operation-Modified Orange County, Winter 1.0 Project Characteristics A-210 tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00 tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00 tblWater AnaerobicandFacultativeLagoonsPerce nt 2.21 0.00 tblWater AnaerobicandFacultativeLagoonsPerce nt 2.21 0.00 tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 100.00 tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 100.00 tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 8.17 4.43 tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 44.32 13.67 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.95 2.89 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 20.43 15.98 tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 8.19 2.89 tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 42.04 15.98 tblProjectCharacteristics N2OIntensityFactor 0.006 0.007 tblProjectCharacteristics OperationalYear 2014 2018 tblLandUse LotAcreage 0.59 0.00 tblProjectCharacteristics CO2IntensityFactor 1543.28 1430.8 tblLandUse LotAcreage 8.35 3.40 tblLandUse LotAcreage 19.33 5.23 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 11,761.20 0.00 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 842,160.00 749,670.00 tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintNonresidentialInterior Value 250 35 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 363,850.00 363,852.00 tblAreaCoating Area_Nonresidential_Interior 1708683 1452381 tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintNonresidentialExterio rValue 250 6 Water And Wastewater - Assumes 100% aerobic. Area Mitigation - Based on information provided. Energy Mitigation - Water Mitigation - Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value A-211 0.00 10.20 10.20 6.09 29.08 10.230.00 20.69 1.04 0.00 21.17 3.43 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 15.70 9.02 2.16 5.25 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive PM10 22,177.18 29 22,177.182 9 0.7447 0.1126 22,227.72 67 14.5990 0.6114 15.2104 3.8953 0.5941 4.4894Total32.0129 21.1771 80.0393 0.2274 16,035.21 16 16,035.211 6 0.6264 16,048.36 55 14.5990 0.2220 14.8210 3.8953 0.2047 4.1001Mobile8.1968 16.0581 75.6397 0.1966 6,141.759 1 6,141.7591 0.1177 0.1126 6,179.136 8 0.3890 0.3890 0.3890 0.3890Energy0.5630 5.1181 4.2992 0.0307 0.2122 0.2122 5.8000e- 004 0.22453.6000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 Area 23.2531 9.4000e- 004 0.1004 1.0000e- 005 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 24,695.59 34 24,695.593 4 0.7929 0.1588 24,761.46 38 14.5990 0.7709 15.3699 3.8953 0.7536 4.6489Total37.9739 23.2758 81.8022 0.2400 16,035.21 16 16,035.211 6 0.6264 16,048.36 55 14.5990 0.2220 14.8210 3.8953 0.2047 4.1001Mobile8.1968 16.0581 75.6397 0.1966 8,660.169 5 8,660.1695 0.1660 0.1588 8,712.873 9 0.5485 0.5485 0.5485 0.5485Energy0.7939 7.2168 6.0621 0.0433 0.2122 0.2122 5.8000e- 004 0.22453.6000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 Area 28.9832 9.4000e- 004 0.1004 1.0000e- 005 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 2.2 Overall Operational Unmitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 2.0 Emissions Summary A-212 0.001440 0.002149 0.004721 0.000504 0.002262 SBUS MH 0.510011 0.056836 0.192178 0.151564 0.041643 0.005905 0.015642 0.015146 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY 64.40 19.00 45 40 15 LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 Strip Mall 16.60 8.40 6.90 16.60 61.60 19.00 58 38 4 Other Asphalt Surfaces 16.60 8.40 6.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 Hotel 16.60 8.40 6.90 19.40 H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Enclosed Parking with Elevator 16.60 8.40 6.90 0.00 4.3 Trip Type Information Miles Trip %Trip Purpose % Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C- W Total 2,919.35 2,085.29 2,085.29 6,220,040 6,220,040 Strip Mall 349.95 409.09 409.09 697,963 697,963 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hotel 2,569.40 1,676.20 1676.20 5,522,077 5,522,077 Annual VMT Enclosed Parking with Elevator 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.2 Trip Summary Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT 16,035.21 16 16,035.211 6 0.6264 16,048.36 55 14.5990 0.2220 14.8210 3.8953 0.2047 4.1001Unmitigated8.1968 16.0581 75.6397 0.1966 16,035.21 16 16,035.211 6 0.6264 16,048.36 55 14.5990 0.2220 14.8210 3.8953 0.2047 4.1001Mitigated8.1968 16.0581 75.6397 0.1966 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 A-213 8,660.1695 8,660.169 5 0.1660 0.1588 8,712.873 9 0.5485 0.5485 0.5485 0.5485Total0.7939 7.2168 6.0621 0.0433 16.9154 16.9154 3.2000e- 004 3.1000e- 004 17.01831.0700e- 003 1.0700e- 003 1.0700e- 003 1.0700e- 003 Strip Mall 143.781 1.5500e- 003 0.0141 0.0118 8.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 8,643.2541 8,643.254 1 0.1657 0.1585 8,695.855 5 0.5474 0.5474 0.5474 0.5474Hotel73467.7 0.7923 7.2027 6.0503 0.0432 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Enclosed Parking with Elevator 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 8,712.873 9 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas Unmitigated NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 0.5485 8,660.169 5 8,660.1695 0.1660 0.15880.0433 0.5485 0.5485 0.5485 6,141.759 1 6,141.7591 0.1177 0.1126 6,179.136 8 NaturalGas Unmitigated 0.7939 7.2168 6.0621 0.3890 0.3890 0.3890 0.3890 Category lb/day lb/day NaturalGas Mitigated 0.5630 5.1181 4.2992 0.0307 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2eFugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total 4.4 Fleet Mix Historical Energy Use: N 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy Exceed Title 24 ROG NOx CO SO2 5.0 Energy Detail A-214 0.22453.6000e- 004 0.2122 0.2122 5.8000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 3.6000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 0.2122 0.2122 5.8000e- 004 0.2245 Unmitigated 28.9832 9.4000e- 004 0.1004 3.6000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 Category lb/day lb/day Mitigated 23.2531 9.4000e- 004 0.1004 1.0000e- 005 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2eFugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total 6.0 Area Detail 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area Use Low VOC Paint - Non-Residential Interior Use Low VOC Paint - Non-Residential Exterior ROG NOx CO SO2 6,141.7591 6,141.759 1 0.1177 0.1126 6,179.136 8 0.3890 0.3890 0.3890 0.3890Total0.5630 5.1181 4.2992 0.0307 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Enclosed Parking with Elevator 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 14.1099 14.1099 2.7000e- 004 2.6000e- 004 14.19588.9000e- 004 8.9000e- 004 8.9000e- 004 8.9000e- 004 Strip Mall 0.119934 1.2900e- 003 0.0118 9.8800e- 003 7.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 6,127.6491 6,127.649 1 0.1175 0.1123 6,164.941 0 0.3881 0.3881 0.3881 0.3881Hotel52.085 0.5617 5.1064 4.2894 0.0306 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-215 0.2122 0.2122 5.8000e- 004 0.22453.6000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 Total 23.2531 9.4000e- 004 0.1004 1.0000e- 005 0.2122 0.2122 5.8000e- 004 0.22453.6000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 Landscaping 9.5900e- 003 9.4000e- 004 0.1004 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Consumer Products 22.5546 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Architectural Coating 0.6889 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.2122 0.2122 5.8000e- 004 0.22453.6000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 Total 28.9832 9.4000e- 004 0.1004 1.0000e- 005 0.2122 0.2122 5.8000e- 004 0.22453.6000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 Landscaping 9.5900e- 003 9.4000e- 004 0.1004 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Consumer Products 22.5546 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Architectural Coating 6.4190 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 6.2 Area by SubCategory Unmitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 A-216 Fuel Type 10.0 Vegetation Use Water Efficient Irrigation System 8.0 Waste Detail 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste 9.0 Operational Offroad Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor 7.0 Water Detail 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water Install Low Flow Bathroom Faucet Install Low Flow Kitchen Faucet Install Low Flow Toilet Install Low Flow Shower A-217 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data Project Characteristics - Anaheim, Public Utilities Department. 2013, February 12. Mandip Kaur Samra, Integrated Resources Planner. Land Use - Based on provided information. Meeting rooms square footages are assumed in hotel total. Vehicle Trips - Based on information provided by Iteris. Area Coating - Based on information provided. Energy Use - CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 1430.8 CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.029 N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.007 30 Climate Zone 8 Operational Year 2018 Utility Company Anaheim Public Utilities 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s)2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) Strip Mall 25.60 1000sqft 0.00 25,600.00 0 Hotel 580.00 Room 5.23 749,670.00 0 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.27 Acre 0.27 0.00 0 Population Enclosed Parking with Elevator 363.85 1000sqft 3.40 363,852.00 0 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Page 1 of 1 Date: 2/18/2016 9:52 AM Operation-Modified Orange County, Summer 1.0 Project Characteristics A-218 tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00 tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00 tblWater AnaerobicandFacultativeLagoonsPerce nt 2.21 0.00 tblWater AnaerobicandFacultativeLagoonsPerce nt 2.21 0.00 tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 100.00 tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 100.00 tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 8.17 4.43 tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 44.32 13.67 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.95 2.89 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 20.43 15.98 tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 8.19 2.89 tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 42.04 15.98 tblProjectCharacteristics N2OIntensityFactor 0.006 0.007 tblProjectCharacteristics OperationalYear 2014 2018 tblLandUse LotAcreage 0.59 0.00 tblProjectCharacteristics CO2IntensityFactor 1543.28 1430.8 tblLandUse LotAcreage 8.35 3.40 tblLandUse LotAcreage 19.33 5.23 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 11,761.20 0.00 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 842,160.00 749,670.00 tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintNonresidentialInterior Value 250 35 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 363,850.00 363,852.00 tblAreaCoating Area_Nonresidential_Interior 1708683 1452381 tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintNonresidentialExterio rValue 250 6 Water And Wastewater - Assumes 100% aerobic. Area Mitigation - Based on information provided. Energy Mitigation - Water Mitigation - Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value A-219 0.00 9.91 9.91 6.09 29.08 9.940.00 20.72 1.04 0.00 21.19 3.43 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 15.90 9.34 2.18 5.05 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive PM10 22,903.33 82 22,903.338 2 0.7442 0.1126 22,953.87 22 14.5990 0.6103 15.2093 3.8953 0.5930 4.4884Total31.5275 20.3633 79.0545 0.2366 16,761.36 69 16,761.366 9 0.6259 16,774.51 09 14.5990 0.2209 14.8199 3.8953 0.2037 4.0990Mobile7.7114 15.2442 74.6549 0.2058 6,141.759 1 6,141.7591 0.1177 0.1126 6,179.136 8 0.3890 0.3890 0.3890 0.3890Energy0.5630 5.1181 4.2992 0.0307 0.2122 0.2122 5.8000e- 004 0.22453.6000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 Area 23.2531 9.4000e- 004 0.1004 1.0000e- 005 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 25,421.74 86 25,421.748 6 0.7925 0.1588 25,487.60 93 14.5990 0.7698 15.3688 3.8953 0.7525 4.6479Total37.4884 22.4620 80.8174 0.2492 16,761.36 69 16,761.366 9 0.6259 16,774.51 09 14.5990 0.2209 14.8199 3.8953 0.2037 4.0990Mobile7.7114 15.2442 74.6549 0.2058 8,660.169 5 8,660.1695 0.1660 0.1588 8,712.873 9 0.5485 0.5485 0.5485 0.5485Energy0.7939 7.2168 6.0621 0.0433 0.2122 0.2122 5.8000e- 004 0.22453.6000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 Area 28.9832 9.4000e- 004 0.1004 1.0000e- 005 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 2.2 Overall Operational Unmitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 2.0 Emissions Summary A-220 0.001440 0.002149 0.004721 0.000504 0.002262 SBUS MH 0.510011 0.056836 0.192178 0.151564 0.041643 0.005905 0.015642 0.015146 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY 64.40 19.00 45 40 15 LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 Strip Mall 16.60 8.40 6.90 16.60 61.60 19.00 58 38 4 Other Asphalt Surfaces 16.60 8.40 6.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 Hotel 16.60 8.40 6.90 19.40 H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Enclosed Parking with Elevator 16.60 8.40 6.90 0.00 4.3 Trip Type Information Miles Trip %Trip Purpose % Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C- W Total 2,919.35 2,085.29 2,085.29 6,220,040 6,220,040 Strip Mall 349.95 409.09 409.09 697,963 697,963 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hotel 2,569.40 1,676.20 1676.20 5,522,077 5,522,077 Annual VMT Enclosed Parking with Elevator 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.2 Trip Summary Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT 16,761.36 69 16,761.366 9 0.6259 16,774.51 09 14.5990 0.2209 14.8199 3.8953 0.2037 4.0990Unmitigated7.7114 15.2442 74.6549 0.2058 16,761.36 69 16,761.366 9 0.6259 16,774.51 09 14.5990 0.2209 14.8199 3.8953 0.2037 4.0990Mitigated7.7114 15.2442 74.6549 0.2058 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 A-221 8,660.1695 8,660.169 5 0.1660 0.1588 8,712.873 9 0.5485 0.5485 0.5485 0.5485Total0.7939 7.2168 6.0621 0.0433 16.9154 16.9154 3.2000e- 004 3.1000e- 004 17.01831.0700e- 003 1.0700e- 003 1.0700e- 003 1.0700e- 003 Strip Mall 143.781 1.5500e- 003 0.0141 0.0118 8.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 8,643.2541 8,643.254 1 0.1657 0.1585 8,695.855 5 0.5474 0.5474 0.5474 0.5474Hotel73467.7 0.7923 7.2027 6.0503 0.0432 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Enclosed Parking with Elevator 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 8,712.873 9 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas Unmitigated NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 0.5485 8,660.169 5 8,660.1695 0.1660 0.15880.0433 0.5485 0.5485 0.5485 6,141.759 1 6,141.7591 0.1177 0.1126 6,179.136 8 NaturalGas Unmitigated 0.7939 7.2168 6.0621 0.3890 0.3890 0.3890 0.3890 Category lb/day lb/day NaturalGas Mitigated 0.5630 5.1181 4.2992 0.0307 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2eFugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total 4.4 Fleet Mix Historical Energy Use: N 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy Exceed Title 24 ROG NOx CO SO2 5.0 Energy Detail A-222 0.22453.6000e- 004 0.2122 0.2122 5.8000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 3.6000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 0.2122 0.2122 5.8000e- 004 0.2245 Unmitigated 28.9832 9.4000e- 004 0.1004 3.6000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 Category lb/day lb/day Mitigated 23.2531 9.4000e- 004 0.1004 1.0000e- 005 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2eFugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total 6.0 Area Detail 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area Use Low VOC Paint - Non-Residential Interior Use Low VOC Paint - Non-Residential Exterior ROG NOx CO SO2 6,141.7591 6,141.759 1 0.1177 0.1126 6,179.136 8 0.3890 0.3890 0.3890 0.3890Total0.5630 5.1181 4.2992 0.0307 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Enclosed Parking with Elevator 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 14.1099 14.1099 2.7000e- 004 2.6000e- 004 14.19588.9000e- 004 8.9000e- 004 8.9000e- 004 8.9000e- 004 Strip Mall 0.119934 1.2900e- 003 0.0118 9.8800e- 003 7.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 6,127.6491 6,127.649 1 0.1175 0.1123 6,164.941 0 0.3881 0.3881 0.3881 0.3881Hotel52.085 0.5617 5.1064 4.2894 0.0306 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-223 0.2122 0.2122 5.8000e- 004 0.22453.6000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 Total 23.2531 9.4000e- 004 0.1004 1.0000e- 005 0.2122 0.2122 5.8000e- 004 0.22453.6000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 Landscaping 9.5900e- 003 9.4000e- 004 0.1004 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Consumer Products 22.5546 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Architectural Coating 0.6889 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.2122 0.2122 5.8000e- 004 0.22453.6000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 Total 28.9832 9.4000e- 004 0.1004 1.0000e- 005 0.2122 0.2122 5.8000e- 004 0.22453.6000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 3.6000e- 004 Landscaping 9.5900e- 003 9.4000e- 004 0.1004 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Consumer Products 22.5546 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Architectural Coating 6.4190 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 6.2 Area by SubCategory Unmitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 A-224 Fuel Type 10.0 Vegetation Use Water Efficient Irrigation System 8.0 Waste Detail 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste 9.0 Operational Offroad Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor 7.0 Water Detail 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water Install Low Flow Bathroom Faucet Install Low Flow Kitchen Faucet Install Low Flow Toilet Install Low Flow Shower A-225 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data Project Characteristics - Anaheim, Public Utilities Department. 2013, February 12. Mandip Kaur Samra, Integrated Resources Planner. Land Use - Based on provided information. Meeting rooms square footages are assumed in hotel total. Vehicle Trips - Based on information provided by Iteris. Area Coating - Based on information provided. Energy Use - CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 1430.8 CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.029 N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.007 30 Climate Zone 8 Operational Year 2018 Utility Company Anaheim Public Utilities 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s)2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) Strip Mall 25.60 1000sqft 0.00 25,600.00 0 Hotel 580.00 Room 5.23 749,670.00 0 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.27 Acre 0.27 0.00 0 Population Enclosed Parking with Elevator 363.85 1000sqft 3.40 363,852.00 0 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Page 1 of 1 Date: 2/18/2016 9:52 AM Operation-Modified Orange County, Annual 1.0 Project Characteristics A-226 tblWater AnaerobicandFacultativeLagoonsPerc ent 2.21 0.00 tblWater AnaerobicandFacultativeLagoonsPerc ent 2.21 0.00 tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 100.00 tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 100.00 tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 8.17 4.43 tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 44.32 13.67 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.95 2.89 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 20.43 15.98 tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 8.19 2.89 tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 42.04 15.98 tblProjectCharacteristics N2OIntensityFactor 0.006 0.007 tblProjectCharacteristics OperationalYear 2014 2018 tblLandUse LotAcreage 0.59 0.00 tblProjectCharacteristics CO2IntensityFactor 1543.28 1430.8 tblLandUse LotAcreage 8.35 3.40 tblLandUse LotAcreage 19.33 5.23 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 11,761.20 0.00 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 842,160.00 749,670.00 tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintNonresidentialInterio rValue 250 35 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 363,850.00 363,852.00 tblAreaCoating Area_Nonresidential_Interior 1708683 1452381 tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintNonresidentialExteri orValue 250 6 Water And Wastewater - Assumes 100% aerobic. Area Mitigation - Based on information provided. Energy Mitigation - Water Mitigation - Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value A-227 75.7925 10,718.14 83 10,793.94 08 4.4120 0.0727 10,909.12 76 2.3497 0.1364 2.4861 0.6279 0.1336 0.7614Total6.6951 3.9972 13.5290 0.0405 5.8763 160.5236 166.3999 0.0235 0.0136 171.09790.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Water 69.9162 0.0000 69.9162 4.1319 0.0000 156.68670.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Waste 0.0000 2,410.418 8 2,410.418 8 0.0930 0.0000 2,412.370 7 2.3497 0.0362 2.3859 0.6279 0.0334 0.6613Mobile1.2613 2.6800 12.4101 0.0326 0.0000 8,147.181 9 8,147.181 9 0.1636 0.0591 8,168.946 9 0.1001 0.1001 0.1001 0.1001Energy0.1449 1.3171 1.1063 7.9000e- 003 0.0000 0.0241 0.0241 7.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.02555.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 Area 5.2889 1.2000e- 004 0.0126 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 2.2 Overall Operational Unmitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 2.0 Emissions Summary tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00 tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00 A-228 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 95.00 0.00 0.00 Paving 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Building Construction 9 476.00 187.00 0.00 Grading 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Site Preparation 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 Demolition 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 Worker Trip Length Vendor Trip Length Hauling Trip Length Worker Vehicle Class Vendor Vehicle Class Hauling Vehicle Class Trips and VMT Phase Name Offroad Equipment Count Worker Trip Number Vendor Trip Number Hauling Trip Number 1.55 12.52 12.44 0.70 20.29 12.360.00 21.34 1.17 0.00 21.80 3.82 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 16.25 9.58 2.38 5.68 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive PM10 74.6172 9,376.164 3 9,450.781 5 4.3811 0.0579 9,560.748 4 2.3497 0.1073 2.4570 0.6279 0.1044 0.7323Total5.6072 3.6141 13.2073 0.0382 4.7010 131.2221 135.9231 0.0188 0.0108 139.67860.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Water 69.9162 0.0000 69.9162 4.1319 0.0000 156.68670.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Waste 0.0000 2,410.418 8 2,410.418 8 0.0930 0.0000 2,412.370 7 2.3497 0.0362 2.3859 0.6279 0.0334 0.6613Mobile1.2613 2.6800 12.4101 0.0326 0.0000 6,834.499 3 6,834.499 3 0.1374 0.0471 6,851.987 1 0.0710 0.0710 0.0710 0.0710Energy0.1028 0.9341 0.7846 5.6000e- 003 0.0000 0.0241 0.0241 7.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.02555.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 Area 4.2431 1.2000e- 004 0.0126 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-229 64.40 19.00 45 40 15 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 Strip Mall 16.60 8.40 6.90 16.60 61.60 19.00 58 38 4 Other Asphalt Surfaces 16.60 8.40 6.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 Hotel 16.60 8.40 6.90 19.40 H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Enclosed Parking with Elevator 16.60 8.40 6.90 0.00 4.3 Trip Type Information Miles Trip %Trip Purpose % Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C- W Total 2,919.35 2,085.29 2,085.29 6,220,040 6,220,040 Strip Mall 349.95 409.09 409.09 697,963 697,963 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hotel 2,569.40 1,676.20 1676.20 5,522,077 5,522,077 Annual VMT Enclosed Parking with Elevator 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.2 Trip Summary Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT 0.0000 2,410.418 8 2,410.418 8 0.0930 0.0000 2,412.370 7 2.3497 0.0362 2.3859 0.6279 0.0334 0.6613Unmitigated1.2613 2.6800 12.4101 0.0326 0.0000 2,410.418 8 2,410.418 8 0.0930 0.0000 2,412.370 7 2.3497 0.0362 2.3859 0.6279 0.0334 0.6613Mitigated1.2613 2.6800 12.4101 0.0326 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 A-230 1,433.788 2 1,433.788 2 0.0275 0.0263 1,442.514 0 0.1001 0.1001 0.1001 0.1001 0.0000 0.0195 0.0186 1,023.025 4 NaturalGas Unmitigated 0.1449 1.3171 1.1063 7.9000e- 003 0.0710 0.0710 0.0000 1,016.837 1 1,016.837 1 6,726.432 9 NaturalGas Mitigated 0.1028 0.9341 0.7846 5.6000e- 003 0.0710 0.0710 0.0000 0.0000 6,713.393 7 6,713.393 7 0.1361 0.03280.0000 0.0000 0.0000 5,817.662 2 5,817.662 2 0.1179 0.0285 5,828.961 7 Electricity Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Category tons/yr MT/yr Electricity Mitigated Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2eFugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total 4.4 Fleet Mix Historical Energy Use: N 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy Exceed Title 24 ROG NOx CO SO2 0.001440 0.002149 0.004721 0.000504 0.002262 5.0 Energy Detail SBUS MH 0.510011 0.056836 0.192178 0.151564 0.041643 0.005905 0.015642 0.015146 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCYLDALDT1LDT2MDVLHD1 A-231 1,023.025 4 0.0710 0.0000 1,016.837 1 1,016.837 1 0.0195 0.01865.6000e- 003 0.0710 0.0710 0.0710 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.1028 0.9341 0.7846 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.3503 Enclosed Parking with Elevator 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.6000e- 004 0.0000 2.3361 2.3361 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.6000e- 004 1.6000e- 004 1.6000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Strip Mall 43776 2.4000e- 004 2.1500e- 003 1.8000e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1,020.675 1 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0708 0.0000 1,014.501 0 1,014.501 0 0.0194 0.01865.5900e- 003 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr Hotel 1.9011e+0 07 0.1025 0.9319 0.7828 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2eFugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total 1,442.514 0 Mitigated NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 0.1001 0.0000 1,433.788 2 1,433.788 2 0.0275 0.02637.9100e- 003 0.1001 0.1001 0.1001 2.8005 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 2.8176 Total 0.1449 1.3171 1.1063 2.0000e- 004 2.0000e- 004 2.0000e- 004 0.0000 2.8005 0.0000 Strip Mall 52480 2.8000e- 004 2.5700e- 003 2.1600e- 003 2.0000e- 005 2.0000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1,430.987 7 0.0274 0.0262 1,439.696 4 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0999 0.0999 0.0999 0.0000 1,430.987 7 0.0000 Hotel 2.68157e+ 007 0.1446 1.3145 1.1042 7.8900e- 003 0.0999 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Enclosed Parking with Elevator 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas A-232 5,828.961 7 Total 5,817.662 2 0.1179 0.0285 0.0000 Strip Mall 296520 192.4413 3.9000e- 003 9.4000e- 004 192.8150 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1,279.335 9 Hotel 6.7001e+0 06 4,348.365 1 0.0881 0.0213 4,356.810 8 Land Use kWh/yr t o n MT/yr Enclosed Parking with Elevator 1.96742e+ 006 1,276.855 9 0.0259 6.2500e- 003 6,726.432 9 Mitigated Electricity Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Total 6,713.393 7 0.1361 0.0329 0.0000 Strip Mall 327680 212.6643 4.3100e- 003 1.0400e- 003 213.0774 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1,594.674 4 Hotel 7.56417e+ 006 4,909.146 2 0.0995 0.0240 4,918.681 1 Land Use kWh/yr t o n MT/yr Enclosed Parking with Elevator 2.45236e+ 006 1,591.583 2 0.0323 7.7900e- 003 5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity Unmitigated Electricity Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e A-233 0.0000 0.0241 0.0241 7.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.02555.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 Total 5.2889 1.2000e- 004 0.0126 0.0000 0.0000 0.0241 0.0241 7.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.02555.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 Landscaping 1.2000e- 003 1.2000e- 004 0.0126 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Consumer Products 4.1162 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Architectural Coating 1.1715 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 6.2 Area by SubCategory Unmitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 0.0241 0.0241 7.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.02555.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 Unmitigated 5.2889 1.2000e- 004 0.0126 0.0000 0.0000 0.0241 0.0241 7.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.02555.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Mitigated 4.2431 1.2000e- 004 0.0126 0.0000 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2OSO2Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 6.0 Area Detail 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area Use Low VOC Paint - Non-Residential Interior Use Low VOC Paint - Non-Residential Exterior ROG NOx CO A-234 Category t o n MT/yr Mitigated 135.9231 0.0188 0.0108 139.6786 Use Water Efficient Irrigation System Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e 7.0 Water Detail 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water Install Low Flow Bathroom Faucet Install Low Flow Kitchen Faucet Install Low Flow Toilet Install Low Flow Shower 0.0000 0.0241 0.0241 7.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.02555.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 Total 4.2432 1.2000e- 004 0.0126 0.0000 0.0000 0.0241 0.0241 7.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.02555.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 Landscaping 1.2000e- 003 1.2000e- 004 0.0126 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Consumer Products 4.1162 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Architectural Coating 0.1257 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 A-235 0.0000 Strip Mall 1.51701 / 1.09133 21.2253 2.2600e- 003 1.2700e- 003 21.6651 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hotel 11.7702 / 1.53503 114.6979 0.0165 9.5800e- 003 118.0135 Land Use Mgal t o n MT/yr Enclosed Parking with Elevator 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 171.0979 Mitigated Indoor/Out door Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Total 166.3999 0.0235 0.0136 0.0000 Strip Mall 1.89626 / 1.16222 25.0755 2.8000e- 003 1.5800e- 003 25.6237 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hotel 14.7127 / 1.63475 141.3243 0.0207 0.0120 145.4742 Land Use Mgal t o n MT/yr Enclosed Parking with Elevator 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 7.2 Water by Land Use Unmitigated Indoor/Out door Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Unmitigated 166.3999 0.0235 0.0136 171.0979 A-236 0.0000 Strip Mall 26.88 5.4564 0.3225 0.0000 12.2281 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hotel 317.55 64.4598 3.8095 0.0000 144.4585 Land Use tons t o n MT/yr Enclosed Parking with Elevator 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 8.2 Waste by Land Use Unmitigated Waste Disposed Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Unmitigated 69.9162 4.1319 0.0000 156.6867 t o n MT/yr Mitigated 69.9162 4.1319 0.0000 156.6867 139.6786 8.0 Waste Detail 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste Category/Year Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Total 135.9231 0.0188 0.0109 A-237 Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type 10.0 Vegetation 156.6867 9.0 Operational Offroad Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Total 69.9162 4.1319 0.0000 0.0000 Strip Mall 26.88 5.4564 0.3225 0.0000 12.2281 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hotel 317.55 64.4598 3.8095 0.0000 144.4585 Land Use tons t o n MT/yr Enclosed Parking with Elevator 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 156.6867 Mitigated Waste Disposed Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Total 69.9162 4.1319 0.0000 A-238 No Land Use Increase Transit Accessibility 0.25 No Land Use Improve Destination Accessibility 0.00 No Land Use Improve Walkability Design 0.00 No Land Use Increase Diversity 0.09 0.30 Input Value 3 No Land Use Increase Density 0.00 Mitigation Selected Category Measure % Reduction Input Value 1 Input Value 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Operational Mobile Mitigation Project Setting: 18.36 Water Outdoor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 20.00 18.25 18.32 20.10 20.04 29.08 29.11 29.07 29.08 Water Indoor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Natural Gas 29.07 29.08 29.08 29.20 29.08 29.08 0.00 29.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Mobile 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Landscaping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 13.34 13.35 13.36 13.34 Hearth 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Electricity 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 13.34 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Consumer Products 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Percent Reduction Architectural Coating 89.27 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Operational Percent Reduction Summary Category ROG NOx CO SO2 Exhaust PM10 Exhaust PM2.5 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Page 1 of 1 Date: 2/18/2016 9:54 AM Operation-Modified Orange County, Mitigation Report A-239 Total VMT Reduction 0.00 No School Trip Implement School Bus Program 0.00 Commute Commute Subtotal 0.00 No Commute Provide Ride Sharing Program No Commute Employee Vanpool/Shuttle 0.00 2.00 No Commute Market Commute Trip Reduction Option 0.00 No Commute Encourage Telecommuting and Alternative Work Schedules 0.00 No Commute Workplace Parking Charge No Commute Implement Employee Parking "Cash Out" No Commute Transit Subsidy No Commute Implement Trip Reduction Program Land Use and Site Enhancement Subtotal 0.00 Transit Improvements Transit Improvements Subtotal 0.00 No Transit Improvements Increase Transit Frequency 0.00 No Transit Improvements Expand Transit Network 0.00 No Transit Improvements Provide BRT System 0.00 Parking Policy Pricing Parking Policy Pricing Subtotal 0.00 No Parking Policy Pricing On-street Market Pricing 0.00 No Parking Policy Pricing Unbundle Parking Costs 0.00 No Parking Policy Pricing Limit Parking Supply 0.00 Neighborhood Enhancements Neighborhood Enhancements Subtotal 0.00 No Neighborhood Enhancements Implement NEV Network 0.00 No Neighborhood Enhancements Provide Traffic Calming Measures No Neighborhood Enhancements Improve Pedestrian Network Land Use Land Use SubTotal 0.00 No Land Use Integrate Below Market Rate Housing 0.00 A-240 Fan 50.00 Refrigerator 15.00 ClothWasher 30.00 DishWasher 15.00 No On-site Renewable Appliance Type Land Use Subtype % Improvement Yes Exceed Title 24 34.00 No Install High Efficiency Lighting No % Electric Chainsaw 0.00 Energy Mitigation Measures Measure Implemented Mitigation Measure Input Value 1 Input Value 2 No % Electric Lawnmower 0.00 No % Electric Leafblower 0.00 Yes Use Low VOC Paint (Non-residential Interior)35.00 Yes Use Low VOC Paint (Non-residential Exterior)6.00 No Use Low VOC Paint (Residential Interior)50.00 No Use Low VOC Paint (Residential Exterior)100.00 No No Hearth No Use Low VOC Cleaning Supplies Area Mitigation Measure Implemented Mitigation Measure Input Value No Only Natural Gas Hearth A-241 Institute Recycling and Composting Services Percent Reduction in Waste Disposed No Water Efficient Landscape 0.00 0.00 Solid Waste Mitigation Mitigation Measures Input Value No Turf Reduction 0.00 Yes Use Water Efficient Irrigation Systems 6.10 Yes Install low-flow Toilet 20.00 Yes Install low-flow Shower 20.00 Yes Install low-flow bathroom faucet 32.00 Yes Install low-flow Kitchen faucet 18.00 No Use Reclaimed Water 0.00 0.00 No Use Grey Water 0.00 Water Mitigation Measures Measure Implemented Mitigation Measure Input Value 1 Input Value 2 No Apply Water Conservation on Strategy 0.00 0.00 A-242 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Appendix April 2016 Appendix B Geotechnical Report 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Appendix PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION REPORT PROPOSED ANAHEIM PLAZA HOTEL 1700 SOUTH HARBOR BOULEVARD CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA Prepared for: GOOD HOPE INTERNATIONAL 3350 Avenue of the Arts Costa Mesa, California 92626 Project No. 11206.001 January 20, 2016 B-1 January 20, 2016 Project No. 11206.001 Good Hope International 3350 Avenue of the Arts Costa Mesa, California 92626 Attention: Mr. Mark Chan Subject: Geotechnical Exploration Report Proposed Anaheim Plaza Hotel 1700 South Harbor Boulevard City of Anaheim, California In response to your request and authorization, Leighton Consulting, Inc. (Leighton) has prepared this geotechnical exploration report for the subject project. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the subsurface conditions at the site, identify potential geologic and seismic hazards, and provide geotechnical recommendations for design and construction. Based on our review of the conceptual site plan for the project (HKS, Inc., 2016), the planned improvements include a new hotel that will be 8 stories in height with one level of partial-subterranean parking. Ancillary improvements include a guest arrival area, roof-top pool, associated utility infrastructure, landscaping, and asphalt parking and driveways. Based on the results of our field exploration, undocumented artificial fill soils consisting predominantly of silty sand and sand were encountered to a depth of approximately 5 to 7 feet below the existing ground surface. The fill is underlain by interbedded young alluvial fan deposits consisting mainly of loose to dense sand and silty sand and stiff to very stiff silt, sandy silt and clay. B-2 11206.001 - 2 - Based on the results of our exploration and analyses, the proposed improvements are considered feasible from a geotechnical standpoint. The existing fill is undocumented and not suitable for support of foundations. With the recommended site preparation as described herein, the proposed improvements may be supported by spread footings established in engineered fill. Shoring may be required for excavations immediately adjacent to existing structures and improvements. We appreciate the opportunity to work with you on this project. If you have any questions or if we can be of further service, please contact us at (866) LEIGHTON; specifically at the phone extensions or e-mail as listed below. Respectfully submitted, LEIGHTON CONSULTING, INC. Jeffrey M. Pflueger, PG, CEG 2499 Associate Geologist Extension 4257, jpflueger@leightongroup.com Carl C. Kim, PE, GE 2620 Senior Principal Engineer Extension: 4262, ckim@leightongroup.com JMP/CCK/lr Distribution: (1) Addressee B-3 11206.001 - i - TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Site Location and Proposed Improvements ............................................... 1 1.2 Purpose and Scope ................................................................................... 1 2.0 FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING ..................................... 3 2.1 Soil Borings ................................................................................................ 3 2.2 Cone Penetration Test (CPT) Soundings................................................... 4 2.3 Laboratory Testing ..................................................................................... 4 2.4 Infiltration Testing ...................................................................................... 5 3.0 GEOTECHNICAL FINDINGS ............................................................................... 6 3.1 Geologic Setting ........................................................................................ 6 3.2 Surficial Geology ........................................................................................ 6 3.3 Subsurface Soil and Groundwater Conditions ........................................... 7 3.3.1 Expansive Soil Characteristics ........................................................ 8 3.3.2 Soil Corrosivity ................................................................................ 8 3.3.3 Soil Collapse Potential .................................................................... 8 3.3.4 Soil Compressibility ......................................................................... 9 3.3.5 Shear Strength ................................................................................ 9 3.3.6 Infiltration Rate ................................................................................ 9 3.4 Faulting and Seismicity ............................................................................ 11 3.4.1 Surface Fault Rupture ................................................................... 11 3.4.2 Strong Ground Shaking ................................................................. 11 3.4.3 Historic Seismicity ......................................................................... 12 3.5 Secondary Seismic Hazards .................................................................... 13 3.5.1 Liquefaction Potential .................................................................... 13 3.5.2 Seismically-Induced Settlement .................................................... 14 3.5.3 Lateral Spreading or Flow Failure ................................................. 14 3.5.4 Seismically-Induced Landslides .................................................... 14 3.5.5 Ground Lurching ........................................................................... 14 3.5.6 Earthquake-Induced Flooding ....................................................... 15 3.5.7 Seiches and Tsunamis .................................................................. 15 3.6 Flood Hazard ........................................................................................... 15 B-4 11206.001 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) - ii - 4.0 GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................... 16 4.1 Earthwork and Grading ............................................................................ 16 4.2 Foundation Design Parameters ............................................................... 18 4.3 Slabs-on-Grade ....................................................................................... 19 4.4 Seismic Design Parameters ..................................................................... 20 4.5 Lateral Earth Pressures ........................................................................... 21 4.6 Pavement Design .................................................................................... 22 4.7 Cement Type and Corrosion Protection ................................................... 23 4.8 Temporary Excavations and Shoring Design ........................................... 23 4.9 Trench Backfill ......................................................................................... 25 4.10 Infiltration BMP Design Considerations.................................................... 25 4.11 Additional Geotechnical Services ............................................................ 26 5.0 LIMITATIONS ..................................................................................................... 27 6.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................................... 28 ATTACHMENTS Important Information About Your Geotechnical Engineering Report Rear of Text Figure 1 – Site Location Map Rear of Text Figure 2 – Exploration Location Map Rear of Text Figure 3 – Regional Geology Map Rear of Text Figure 4 – Historical Groundwater Level Data (Well No. 04S10W27C002S) Rear of Text Figure 5 – Regional Fault Map Rear of Text Figure 6 – Historic Seismicity Map Rear of Text Figure 7 – Seismic Hazard Map Rear of Text Figure 8 – Dam Inundation Map Rear of Text Figure 9 – Flood Hazard Zone Map Rear of Text Figure 10 – Retaining Wall Backfill and Subdrain Detail Rear of Text Appendix A – Geotechnical Boring and CPT Logs Appendix B – Laboratory Test Results Appendix C – Percolation Test Results Appendix D – Seismicity Data Appendix E – Earthwork and Grading Guide Specifications B-5 11206.001 - 1 - 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Site Location and Proposed Improvements The proposed Anaheim Plaza Hotel is located at 1700 South Harbor Boulevard in the city of Anaheim, California. The site location (latitude 33.8060°, longitude - 117.9141°) and immediate vicinity are shown on Figure 1, Site Location Map. The project site is relatively flat and is currently occupied by the existing Anaheim Plaza Hotel & Suites. Based on review of available historical aerial photographs, the site has been occupied by the existing hotel since at least 1963 (NETR, 2015). In approximately 1953, the site was occupied by citrus groves, as was much of the surrounding area at this time (NETR, 2015). Per Hunsaker & Associates, Inc. (2016), the ground surface at the site ranges from approximately Elevation +135 to +138 feet mean sea level (MSL). Based on our understanding of the project and review of the conceptual site plan (HKS, Inc., 2015), the planned improvements include a new hotel that will be 8 stories in height with one level of partial-subterranean parking. Structural load information for the proposed structures was not available at the time of geotechnical analysis. Ancillary improvements include a guest arrival area, roof- top pool, associated utility infrastructure, landscaping, and asphalt parking and driveways. In addition, we understand that the conceptual stormwater management plan will consist of a combination of improvements, including infiltration wells and bio-swales. Invert elevations of the infiltration devices were not available at the time of this writing. 1.2 Purpose and Scope The purpose of our study was to evaluate subsurface conditions of the site relative to the proposed improvements and provide geotechnical recommendations to aid in the design and construction for the project as currently planned. Presented in this report is a discussion of site aspects to be considered in developing project plans and specifications and specific recommendations for design and construction. The scope of this geotechnical study included the following tasks: • Reviewed available geotechnical reports and geologic data in our in-house library pertinent to the site. References reviewed in preparation of this document are provided in Section 6.0, References. B-6 11206.001 - 2 - • Scheduled subcontracted exploration contractors and obtained clearance of underground utilities from Underground Service Alert (USA) prior to commencement of our field exploration. • Performed subsurface exploration that included drilling, logging, and sampling of four (4) hollow-stem auger borings (LB-1 through LB-4) to depths ranging from approximately 41.5 to 56.5 feet below the existing ground surface (bgs). Soil samples were collected at selected depth intervals from the borings and transported to our laboratory for testing. • Performed six (6) Cone Penetrometer Test (CPT) soundings (CPT-1 through CPT-6) to depths ranging from approximately 50 to 75 feet bgs. • Performed laboratory testing of selected soil samples to evaluate geotechnical engineering characteristics of the encountered earth materials within the exploration depths. • Performed geotechnical evaluation of collected data and relevant engineering analyses. • Prepared this report to summarize our geotechnical findings, conclusions, and recommendations for the project as currently planned. B-7 11206.001 - 3 - 2.0 FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING Prior to field exploration, a geologist from our firm performed a site reconnaissance to identify and evaluate the planned boring locations with respect to access for exploration equipment and subsurface structures. Underground Service Alert was then notified of the boring locations for utility clearance. 2.1 Soil Borings Subsurface exploration consisted of four (4) hollow-stem auger soil borings (LB-1 through LB-4) advanced by a conventional truck-mounted drilling rig using 3¼- inch diameter (I.D.) hollow stem augers. The borings were extended to depths ranging from approximately 41½ to 56½ feet bgs. The approximate locations of the borings are shown on Figure 2, Exploration Location Map. Soil sampling was performed by the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) in accordance with ASTM D1586 procedures. In addition, relatively undisturbed samples were collected by ASTM D3550 procedures. Samples were collected at either 2½- or 5-foot intervals throughout the depth of exploration. In both test methods, the sampler is driven below the bottom of the borehole by a 140-pound weight (hammer) free-falling 30 inches. The drilling rig was equipped with an automatic hammer to provide greater consistency in the drop height and striking frequency. The number of blows to drive the sampler the final 12 inches of the 18-inch drive interval is termed the “blowcount” or SPT N-value. The N-values provide a measure of relative density in granular (non-cohesive) soils and comparative consistency in cohesive soils. Bulk samples were also obtained from the borings for laboratory analysis. Each soil sample collected was reviewed in the field and its description was entered in the boring logs in general conformance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) pursuant to ASTM D2488. All samples were sealed and packaged for transport to our laboratory. After completion of drilling, the borings were backfilled with soil cuttings and capped with cold-mix asphalt concrete where the existing pavement was penetrated. The logs of the test borings are included in Appendix A, Geotechnical Boring and CPT Logs. B-8 11206.001 - 4 - 2.2 Cone Penetration Test (CPT) Soundings Six (6) Cone Penetration Test soundings (CPT-1 through CPT-6) were performed to depths ranging from approximately 50 to 75 feet bgs as a part of the field exploration program. The soundings were performed in accordance with ASTM D5778 advanced by a 30-ton CPT rig in which a standard Cone equipped with a 15 cm2 tip was advanced at a constant rate of approximately 1 inch per second. The CPT provides a continuous record of the subsurface stratigraphy via data regarding tip and sleeve resistance which is continuously recorded electronically as the probe is advanced through the subsurface stratigraphy. The recorded data is processed yielding interpretations of soil type based upon the anticipated engineering behavior of the various soil strata though which the probe penetrates. Graphical logs of the interpreted soil conditions at the CPT sounding locations are included in Appendix A. 2.3 Laboratory Testing Laboratory tests were performed on representative soil samples to verify the field classification of the samples and to determine the geotechnical properties of the subsurface materials. The following tests were performed: • In-situ moisture content and density; • Consolidation; • Collapse Potential; • Direct Shear; • Expansion Index; • Atterberg Limits; • Maximum Dry Density & Optimum Moisture Content; • R-Value test; • Water-soluble sulfate concentration; and • Resistivity, pH, chloride content. All laboratory tests were performed in general conformance with ASTM or Caltrans procedures. The results of the in-situ moisture and density tests are B-9 11206.001 - 5 - presented on the geotechnical boring logs in Appendix B. The results of other laboratory tests are presented in Appendix B, Laboratory Test Results. 2.4 Infiltration Testing After completion of drilling, three (3) of the soil borings (LB-1, LB-2 and LB-3) were converted to temporary percolation test wells for infiltration testing. Each well consisted of a 2-inch-diameter, slotted (0.020 in.) PVC pipe placed in the approximate center of the borehole within the zone to be tested. The annulus was then filled with a filter pack material consisting of relatively uniform sized pea gravel. Solid PVC pipe was placed above the test zone to the ground surface. In-situ percolation testing was performed in general accordance with the County of Orange Technical Guidance Document (TGD) for the Preparation of Conceptual/Preliminary and/or Project Water Quality Management Plans (OCPW, 2013). Upon completion of the well installations, the test wells were pre-soaked by filling the test zone with water prior to beginning the field testing. Testing consisted of measuring the water drop in each test well at selected time intervals using a manual water sounder. At the end of each time interval, the wells were refilled to the approximate water level at the beginning of each interval. Testing was continued until the infiltration rate generally stabilized. Field data and measured infiltration rate for each test well is presented in Appendix C, Percolation Test Results. After the conclusion of percolation testing, the PVC pipes were removed from the bore holes and the borings were backfilled with the soil cuttings. The borings were capped with cold-mix asphalt concrete where the existing pavement was penetrated. A discussion of the infiltration testing results is presented in Section 3.3.6. B-10 11206.001 - 6 - 3.0 GEOTECHNICAL FINDINGS 3.1 Geologic Setting The project site is located on the lowest reach of the Santa Ana River basin within the Peninsular Ranges geomorphic province. The Peninsular Ranges geomorphic province extends southward from the Los Angeles Basin to the tip of Baja California (Yerkes et al., 1965) and is characterized by elongated northwest- trending mountain ranges separated by sediment-floored valleys. The most dominant structural features of the province are the northwest trending fault zones, most of which die out, merge with, or are terminated by the steep reverse faults at the southern margin of the Transverse Ranges geomorphic province. East of the site are the northwest-trending Santa Ana Mountains, a large range which has been uplifted on its eastern side along the Whittier-Elsinore Fault Zone, producing a tilted, irregular highland that slopes westward toward the sea. The area south and west of the Santa Ana Mountains is generally characterized as a broad, complex, alluvial fan which receives sediments from the Santa Ana River and its tributaries draining the Santa Ana and San Bernardino Mountains. These sediments are comprised of relatively flat-lying, unconsolidated to loosely consolidated clastic deposits that are approximately 3,000 feet thick beneath the site (Sprotte et al., 1980, and Real, 1985). 3.2 Surficial Geology The surficial deposits at the site and in the vicinity consist of Quaternary age, youthful alluvial fan deposits (alluvium) deposited by the Santa Ana River and tributaries (Morton and Miller, 2006). A map showing the mapped geologic units in the vicinity of the project site is presented as Figure 3, Regional Geology Map. These unconsolidated alluvial sediments are comprised of generally flat-lying, non-marine deposits of sand and minor amount of silt (Sprotte et al., 1980; and Morton and Miller, 2006). These sandy deposits are geologically youthful (Holocene age or less than 11,000 years old) and are reported to be approximately 130 feet thick beneath the site (Sprotte et al., 1980; and Real, 1985). Beneath the Holocene-aged sediments are the older semi-consolidated deposits of Pleistocene-age (11,000 to 1.6 million years) which are approximately 3,000 feet thick beneath the site (Sprotte et al., 1980; and Real, 1985). B-11 11206.001 - 7 - 3.3 Subsurface Soil and Groundwater Conditions Based on our subsurface explorations, the site is underlain by a mantle of undocumented artificial fill materials (Afu) overlying Quaternary-aged young alluvial fan deposits (Qyf). The artificial fill encountered in our borings at the explored locations is generally about 5 to 7 feet in thickness and consists primarily of silty sand and sand. Below the artificial fill, Quaternary-aged young alluvial fan deposits were encountered in the borings to the maximum depth explored (56½ feet bgs). The alluvium generally consists of interbedded loose to medium dense sand and silty sand with minor amounts of interbedded sandy silt to a depth of roughly 25 feet bgs. Between roughly 25 feet to 40 feet bgs, the alluvium consists predominantly of stiff to very stiff silt, sandy silt and clay with minor amounts of interbedded silty sand. Below roughly 40 feet, the alluvium generally consists of medium dense to dense sand and silty sand. Detailed descriptions of the subsurface soils encountered in the borings and CPTs is presented on the boring and CPT logs (Appendix A). Some of the engineering properties of these soils are described in the following sections. The locations of the borings are shown on Figure 2, Exploration Location Map. Groundwater was not encountered within our subsurface explorations to the maximum depth explored of 75 feet. Based on review of the California Geological Survey Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the Anaheim Quadrangle (CGS, 1997), the historically highest groundwater level at the project site is greater than 50 feet bgs. However, based on review of historical groundwater level data available from the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) Water Data Library, for a well located approximately 1,300 feet to the southwest of the project site (State Well No. 04S10W27C002S), the shallowest recorded groundwater level between 1969 and 2010 was 60.89 feet bgs (June 2007) as shown on Figure 4. In addition, several other State of California groundwater level monitoring wells within a mile of the project site (State Well Nos. 04S10W27A001S, 04S10W22G001S, 04S10W26C001S, 04S10W22N001S and 04S10W22E001S) also indicate historical groundwater levels deeper than 70 feet below existing ground surface. Fluctuations of the groundwater level, localized zones of perched water including water due to nearby landscaping, and an increase in soil moisture should be anticipated during and following locally intense rainfall or stormwater runoff. B-12 11206.001 - 8 - 3.3.1 Expansive Soil Characteristics Expansive soils contain significant amounts of clay particles that swell considerably when wetted and which shrink when dried. Foundations constructed on these soils are subject to uplifting forces caused by the swelling. Without proper mitigation measures, heaving and cracking of both building foundations and slabs-on-grade could result. The laboratory test results for expansion index (EI) of representative near surface samples from borings LB-3 and LB-4 indicate “very low” expansion potential (EI < 20) in accordance with ASTM D 4829. The EI test results are included in Appendix B. Variance in expansion potential of onsite soil is anticipated; therefore, additional testing is recommended upon completion of site grading to confirm the expansion potential presented in this report. 3.3.2 Soil Corrosivity Bulk soil samples from borings LB-3 and LB-4 were tested for corrosivity to assess corrosion potential to buried concrete. The chemical analysis test results for the onsite soil from our geotechnical exploration are included in Appendix B of this report. The test results indicate soluble sulfate concentrations of 189 and 193 ppm, chloride contents of 52 and 20 ppm, pH values of 7.4 and 7.7, and minimum resistivity values of 1,334 and 2,098 ohm-cm. The results of the resistivity tests indicate that the underlying soil is corrosive to buried ferrous metals per ASTM STP 1013. Based on the measured water-soluble sulfate contents from the soil samples, concrete in contact with the soil is expected to have negligible exposure to sulfate attack per ACI 318-11. The samples tested for water-soluble chloride content indicate a low potential for corrosion of steel in concrete due to the chloride content of the soil. 3.3.3 Soil Collapse Potential Representative samples of the onsite soils were subjected to collapse testing to evaluate the potential for settlement due to water infiltration as B-13 11206.001 - 9 - this may occur with landscape irrigation. The results of testing indicated the tested soils did not exhibit a significant collapse potential. The results of testing are presented in Appendix B. 3.3.4 Soil Compressibility Several samples of the onsite soils recovered from the borings were subjected to consolidation testing to evaluate the compressibility of these materials under loads representative of anticipated structural bearing stresses. The results of testing indicate these soils did not exhibit a significant compressibility potential. The results of testing are presented in Appendix B. 3.3.5 Shear Strength Evaluation of the shear strength characteristics of the soils included laboratory Direct Shear testing. The results of testing are included in Appendix B as well composite summary graphs that provide values of angle of internal friction (ø) and cohesion (c) for use in geotechnical analysis. 3.3.6 Infiltration Rate The measured infiltration rate (Table 1) for each test was calculated by dividing the rate of discharge (i.e., cubic inches per hour) by the infiltration surface area, or flow area (i.e., square inches). The volume of discharge was calculated by adding the total volume of water that dropped within the PVC pipe and annulus incorporating a porosity reduction factor to account for the filter pack material. The flow area was based on the average water height within the slotted pipe section of the test well only. Detailed results of the field testing data and measured infiltration rate for each test well are presented in Appendix C, Percolation Test Results. B-14 11206.001 - 10 - Table 1 – Measured Infiltration Rates Boring-Percolation Test Well Designation Approximate Depth of Test Zone Below Ground Surface (feet) Measured Infiltration Rate (inches per hour) LB-1 20 to 25 2.27 LB-2 40 to 45 5.23 LB-3 30 to 35 0.75 The unfactored test results indicate a variance in infiltration rates across the site and at the tested locations and depths. Based on our current subsurface exploration, the site is underlain by sand and silty sand to a depth of generally 25 feet bgs and below 40 feet bgs. Between 25 feet to 40 feet bgs, the alluvium consists predominantly of silt, sandy silt and clay. Silt and clay are generally less permeable, and are therefore not ideal for percolation. However, the sand layers in the subsurface are generally more permeable and provide some infiltration potential. Percolation test well locations LB-1 and LB-2 (Figure 2) indicate a generally favorable potential for infiltration with measured infiltration rates of 2.27 inches per hour (LB-1 at 20 to 25 feet bgs) and 5.23 inches per hour (LB-2 at 40 to 45 feet bgs). Although it still meets the minimum requirement for infiltration feasibility, percolation test well location LB-3 (Figure 2) indicates less permeable material over the tested zone with a measured infiltration rate of 0.75 inch per hour (LB-3 at 30 to 35 feet bgs). The variance in measured infiltration rates can be attributed to varying, and non-continuous stratigraphy across the site. Lower infiltration rates are generally attributed to the presence of fine-grained soils such as silts and clays, or clayey sands. Based on a review of our current subsurface explorations, isolated lenses of fine grained cohesive materials, i.e. silt and clay, generally exist between approximately 25 and 40 feet bgs throughout the site. The actual infiltration could vary significantly as indicated by the results of the tests conducted at project site. At the test locations, the screened intervals (and tests) were conducted within predominantly sandy soils but the corresponding infiltration rates vary significantly. This difference may be due to the depth at which the tests were conducted and subtle differences in the composition/gradation of soils within the test zones. B-15 11206.001 - 11 - Therefore, care must be used in the selection of infiltration rate for use in design and the potential for variances in soil conditions that could significantly affect field performance. 3.4 Faulting and Seismicity The potential for hazards associated with faulting and seismicity, or ground shaking, at the site is discussed below. 3.4.1 Surface Fault Rupture Our review of available in-house literature indicates that no active faults are mapped or known to cross the site, and the site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone (Bryant and Hart, 2007). Based on the current geologic framework, the potential for surface fault rupture at the site is expected to be low. The locations of the closest active faults to the site were generated using the United States Geological Survey (USGS, 2008b) earthquake hazard program. The closest active fault to the site that has a potential for surface fault rupture is the Elsinore fault located approximately 9.2 miles to the east of the site. Major regional faults with surface expression in proximity to the site are shown on Figure 5, Regional Fault Map. 3.4.2 Strong Ground Shaking The principal seismic hazard to the site is ground shaking resulting from an earthquake occurring along any of several major active and potentially active faults in southern California. Known regional active faults that could produce significant ground shaking at the site include the Puente Hills (thrust), San Joaquin Hills (thrust), Elsinore (strike-slip) and Newport- Inglewood (strike-slip) faults. The active Puente Hills and San Joaquin Hills blind thrust faults are located in the subsurface approximately 4.5 and 7.7 miles, respectively, from the site. The active Elsinore and Newport- Inglewood faults are located approximately 9.2 and 10.0 miles, respectively, from the site. A Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis (PSHA) was performed using the deaggregation program provided by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) National Seismic Hazard Mapping Program (2008a). The analysis was based upon an estimated average shear wave velocity in the B-16 11206.001 - 12 - upper 30 meters (VS30) of 900 feet per second (274 meters per second). The analysis was conducted for a 2 percent probability of exceedance in 50 years (average return period of 2,475 years). The probabilistic hazard evaluation was performed using three attenuation relationships to estimate ground motions at the site: Boore-Atkinson 2008, Campbell-Bozorgnia 2008, and Chiou-Youngs 2008. The results of the probabilistic seismic hazard analysis indicate the modal seismic event is Moment Magnitude (Mw) 7.1 at a distance of 8.8 miles (14.5 km) and a PGA of 0.59g; the results are provided in Appendix D, Seismicity Data. 3.4.3 Historic Seismicity Early descriptions of earthquakes were rarely specific enough to allow an association with any particular fault zone. It is also not possible to locate epicenters of earthquakes that have occurred prior to the twentieth century precisely. A search of historical earthquakes was performed (Blake, 2000) for the time period between 1800 and January 29, 2015. The results are provided in Appendix D, Seismicity Data. Within that time frame, 540 earthquakes (>Mo 4) were found within a 100- kilometer (62-mile) radius of the site. As plotted on Figure 6, Historical Seismicity Map, of these earthquakes, the closest was located 0.9 miles (1.5 km) southeast of the site and occurred on June 22, 1902. Although not precisely located, its epicenter (33.8000° latitude, -117.9000° longitude) is approximately located within the alluvium and recorded an earthquake magnitude of 4.3Mw. A summary of the historical earthquake search is provided in the table below: B-17 11206.001 - 13 - Table 2 – Historic Seismic Summary Time Period (1800 to 2015) 216+ years Maximum Magnitude 7.0 Maximum Historical Site Acceleration (g)1 0.176 Approximate Distance to Closest Historical Earthquake 1.5 km Total Number of Events within the 100 km Search Area 540 (1) Historical site acceleration is based on the EQSearch 3.0 database events of known magnitude and distance and the attenuation relationship from Boore et al. (1997) Horiz. - NEHRP D (250). Review of additional data publically available from the Center for Engineering Strong Motion Data (CESMD) website (http://strongmotioncenter.org/) for a station in the vicinity of the project site indicates that the highest recorded peak ground acceleration was 0.175g for a location approximately 1.2 miles to the southwest of the site from a magnitude 5.4Mw earthquake on July 29, 2008 located in Chino Hills. 3.5 Secondary Seismic Hazards Secondary seismic hazards in the region could include soil liquefaction and associated surface manifestation, lateral spreading or flow failure, seismically- induced landsliding, ground lurching, flooding, seiches, and tsunamis. The potential for these seismic hazards at the site is discussed below. 3.5.1 Liquefaction Potential Liquefaction is the loss of soil strength or stiffness due to a buildup of pore-water pressure during severe ground shaking. Liquefaction is associated primarily with loose (low density), saturated, fine-to-medium grained, cohesionless soils. As the shaking action of an earthquake progresses, the soil grains are rearranged and the soil densifies within a short period of time. Rapid densification of the soil results in a buildup of pore-water pressure. When the pore-water pressure approaches the overburden pressure, the soil reduces greatly in strength and temporarily behaves similarly to a fluid. Effects of liquefaction can include sand boils, settlement, and bearing capacity failures below structural foundations. B-18 11206.001 - 14 - Review of the Seismic Hazards Zones Map for the Anaheim Quadrangle (CGS, 1998) indicates the subject site is not located within an area that has been identified by the State of California as being potentially susceptible to the occurrence of liquefaction (see Figure 7, Seismic Hazard Map). Therefore the potential for liquefaction at the site is low. 3.5.2 Seismically-Induced Settlement Seismically-induced settlement consists of dry dynamic settlement (above groundwater) and liquefaction-induced settlement (below groundwater). In the absence of liquefaction-induced settlement at the site, dry settlements occur primarily within loose to medium dense sandy soil due to reduction in volume during, and shortly after, an earthquake event. The settlement of these strata are estimated to be less than 1 inch. 3.5.3 Lateral Spreading or Flow Failure For lateral spreading or flow failure to occur, a continuous, laterally unconstrained liquefiable zone must be free to move along gently sloping ground toward an unconfined area. The site is relatively flat, therefore, the potential for lateral spreading flow failure is considered low. 3.5.4 Seismically-Induced Landslides The potential for seismically-induced landsliding is considered low due to the absence of slopes at the site. Additionally, review of the Seismic Hazard Zones Map for the Anaheim Quadrangle (CGS, 1998) indicates the subject site is not located within an area that has been identified by the State of California as being potentially susceptible to the occurrence of seismically-induced landsliding (see Figure 7, Seismic Hazard Map). Proposed slopes, if any, should be engineered and constructed at a gradient of 2:1 (horizontal:vertical) or flatter. 3.5.5 Ground Lurching Ground lurching is defined as movement of low density soil materials on a bluff, steep slope, or embankment due to earthquake shaking. Since there are no significant slopes at the site, it is our opinion that the potential for ground lurching as a result of nearby or distant seismic events is low. B-19 11206.001 - 15 - 3.5.6 Earthquake-Induced Flooding Earthquake-induced flooding can be caused by failure of dams or other water-retaining structures as a result of earthquakes. According to the City of Anaheim General Plan – Safety Element, the project site is located within a flood impact zone associated with the Prado Dam (City of Anaheim, 2004), as indicated in Figure 8, Dam Inundation Map. However, due to the distance of the site from Prado Dam, the potential for earthquake-induced flooding to occur due to a failure of this dam is considered low. In addition, catastrophic failure of this dam is expected to be a very unlikely event in that dam safety regulations exist and are enforced by the Division of Safety of Dams, Army Corp of Engineers and Department of Water Resources. Inspectors may require dam owners to perform work, maintenance or implement controls if issues are found with the safety of the dam. 3.5.7 Seiches and Tsunamis Seiches are large waves generated in enclosed bodies of water in response to ground shaking. Tsunamis are waves generated in large bodies of water by fault displacement or major ground movement. Based on the absence of an enclosed water body near the site and the inland location of the site, seiche and tsunami risks at the site are considered negligible. 3.6 Flood Hazard As indicated in Figure 9, Flood Hazard Zone Map, the site is mapped within a 500-year flood hazard zone. Based on review of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood insurance rate map (FEMA, 2008), the site is mapped within “Zone X”. Properties located within a “Zone X” are within areas of a 0.2 percent annual chance floodplain, areas with 1 percent chance flood with an average depth of less than 1 foot or with a drainage area of less than 1 square mile, or areas protected by levees from the 1 percent chance annual flood. According to the City of Anaheim General Plan – Safety Element, the project site is located within a 100-year (with flooding below one foot) to 500-year flood zone (City of Anaheim, 2004). B-20 11206.001 - 16 - 4.0 GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS Based upon this study, we conclude that the proposed development for the subject site is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint, provided that the recommendations presented in this report are properly incorporated in design and construction. The proposed structures may be supported on shallow spread-type foundations and floor slabs supported on grade. All existing undocumented fill should be removed and replaced with engineered fill. Higher bearing values may be obtained if foundations are underlain by at least 3 feet of engineered fill. However, due to the planned partial basement, shoring will probably have to be installed to accommodate the required overexcavation. The recommendations below are based upon the exhibited geotechnical engineering properties of the soils and their anticipated response both during and after construction. The recommendations are also based upon proper field observation and testing during construction. The project geotechnical engineer should be notified of suspected variances in field conditions to determine the effect upon the recommendations subsequently presented. These recommendations are considered minimal and may be superseded by more restrictive requirements of the civil and structural engineers, the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, and other governing agencies. Leighton should review the grading plan and specifications as they become available to verify that the recommendations presented in this report have been incorporated into the plans for this project. 4.1 Earthwork and Grading We recommend all earthwork should be performed in accordance with the following recommendations, applicable building and local codes, future grading plan reviews and the Earthwork and Grading Guide Specifications presented in Appendix E. In case of conflict the following recommendations shall supersede those provided in Appendix E. Site Preparation – Prior to construction, the site should be cleared of any vegetation, trash and/or debris within the area of proposed grading. These materials should be removed from the site. Footings of the existing adjacent buildings, retaining walls, and other improvements to remain in place should be properly protected. Efforts should be made to locate any existing utility lines and underground obstructions within the proposed construction area. Those lines or B-21 11206.001 - 17 - obstructions should be removed or rerouted if they interfere with the proposed construction and the resulting cavities should be properly backfilled and compacted. After the site is cleared, the soils should be carefully observed by a representative of the geotechnical engineer for the removal of all unsuitable deposits. All unsuitable deposits and undocumented fill soils should be excavated and removed from within the proposed structure footprints prior to fill placement. Overexcavation and Recompaction – To provide a uniform support and reduce the potential for differential settlement, all undocumented fill (encountered to a depth of approximately 5 to 7 feet bgs) should be removed under the proposed improvements to expose suitable bearing soils and replaced as engineered fill. These removal depths are preliminary and should be verified during grading as local conditions may be encountered that may require additional removals. The exact extent of removals can best be determined during grading when direct observation and evaluation of materials are possible. After completion of the overexcavation and prior to fill placement, the exposed soils should be scarified to a minimum depth of 12 inches, moisture conditioned and compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction based on ASTM Test Method D 1557. Any soft or unsuitable earth materials encountered at the bottom of the excavations should be removed and replaced with compacted fill. Excavation Adjacent to Existing Foundations – Excavations near existing footings should be performed with care so that the existing footings are not undermined and the subgrade supporting the footings is not disturbed. Excavation adjacent to existing foundations that extend below bearing elevation may require slot- cutting techniques or shoring to perform the excavation and protect the foundations. These methods should be used adjacent to the existing foundations for the structure located along the southern portion of the project site. If the slot cut method is selected to be used for construction of the new foundations located immediately adjacent to the existing foundations, the initial cut along the excavation should not be steeper than 1½ H to 1V (horizontal to vertical). The maximum width and height of the slots should not exceed 6 feet. Fill Placement and Compaction – Fill soils should be placed in loose lifts not exceeding 8 inches, moisture-conditioned to at least 2 to 4 percent above optimum moisture content, and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM Test Method D 1557. B-22 11206.001 - 18 - Material for Fill – Onsite soils, free of organics, debris and/or oversized material (greater-than 3 inches in largest dimension) are suitable for use as fill. Clay soils should not be used within 2 feet below concrete slabs and walks. Imported fill material should be predominantly granular with an Expansion Index (EI) of 30 or less. Soils to be placed as fill, whether onsite or imported material, should be reviewed and possibly tested by Leighton Consulting, Inc. Subgrade Moisture Content –The subgrade soils should be evaluated by the geotechnical engineer at the time of construction to verify adequate moisture conditioning has been performed and maintained throughout earthwork construction. 4.2 Foundation Design Parameters Spread Footings – Spread footings established on engineered fill or undisturbed natural soils may be used to support the proposed structures. Footings should have a minimum embedment depth of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent grade and have a minimum width of 12 inches for continuous footings and 18 inches for isolated footings. Footings for the hotel building and parking structure may be designed to impose an allowable bearing pressure of 3,000 pounds per square feet (psf). A one-third increase in the bearing value for short duration loading, such as wind or seismic forces may be used. The ultimate bearing capacity can be taken as 9,000 psf, which does not incorporate a factor of safety. A resistance factor of 0.5 should be used for initial bearing capacity evaluation with factored loads. If foundations are established over at least 3 feet of engineered fill, the allowable bearing pressure may be increased to 4,000 psf. A one-third increase in the bearing value for short duration loading, such as wind or seismic forces may be used. The ultimate bearing capacity can be taken as 12,000 psf, which does not incorporate a factor of safety. A resistance factor of 0.5 should be used for initial bearing capacity evaluation with factored loads. Footings for the ancillary structures established on undisturbed natural soils or engineered fill may be designed to impose an allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 psf. A one-third increase in the bearing value for short duration loading, such as wind or seismic forces may be used. The ultimate bearing capacity can be taken B-23 11206.001 - 19 - as 6,000 psf, which does not incorporate a factor of safety. A resistance factor of 0.5 should be used for initial bearing capacity evaluation with factored loads. The recommended bearing values are net value, and the weight of concrete in the footings can be taken as 50 pounds per cubic foot (pcf); the weight of soil backfill can be neglected when determining the downward loads. The estimated total settlement of the structures supported on spread footings as recommended above is less than 1 inch. The differential settlement between adjacent columns is estimated to be less than ½ inch over a horizontal distance of 30 feet. Lateral Load Resistance – Lateral loads can be resisted by soil friction and by the passive resistance of the soils. A coefficient of friction of 0.35 can be used between the footings and the floor slab and the supporting soils. The ultimate passive resistance of undisturbed natural soils or engineered fill soils can be assumed to be equal to the pressure developed by a fluid with a density of 300 pounds per cubic foot (pcf). The friction resistance and the passive resistance of the soils can be combined without reduction in determining the total lateral resistance. The above values do not contain an appreciable factor of safety, so the structural engineer should apply the applicable factors of safety and/or load factors during design. 4.3 Slabs-on-Grade Concrete slabs may be designed using a modulus of subgrade reaction of 100 pci provided the subgrade is prepared as described in Section 4.1. From a geotechnical standpoint, we recommend slab-on-grade be a minimum 5 inches thick with No. 3 rebar placed at the center of the slab at 24 inches on center in each direction. The structural engineer should design the actual thickness and reinforcement based on anticipated loading conditions. Where moisture- sensitive floor coverings or equipment is planned, the slabs should be protected by a minimum 10-mil-thick vapor barrier between the slab and subgrade. A coefficient of friction of 0.35 can be used between the floor slab and the vapor barrier. Minor cracking of concrete after curing due to drying and shrinkage is normal and should be expected; however, concrete is often aggravated by a high water/cement ration, high concrete temperature at the time of placement, small nominal aggregate size, and rapid moisture loss due to hot, dry, and/or windy B-24 11206.001 - 20 - weather conditions during placement and curing. Cracking due to temperature and moisture fluctuations can also be expected. The use of low-slump concrete or low water/cement ratios can reduce the potential for shrinkage cracking. Additionally, our experience indicates that the use of reinforcement in slabs and foundations can generally reduce the potential but not eliminate for concrete cracking. To reduce the potential for excessive cracking, concrete slabs-on-grade should be provided with construction or weakened plane joints at frequent intervals. Joints should be laid out to form approximately square panels. 4.4 Seismic Design Parameters To accommodate effects of ground shaking produced by regional seismic events, seismic design can, at the discretion of the designing Structural Engineer, be performed in accordance with the 2013 edition of the California Building Code (CBC). The United States Geological Survey Seismic Design Map Tool (USGS, 2013) was used to determine the code-based seismic design parameters. Table 3, 2013 CBC Seismic Design Parameters (Mapped Values), lists code-based seismic design parameters obtained from the referenced USGS program. Table 3 - 2013 CBC Seismic Design Parameters (Mapped Values) Categorization/Coefficient Design Value Site Latitude 33.8060N Site Longitude -117.9141W Site Class D Mapped spectral response acceleration parameter at short period, SS 1.500g Mapped spectral response acceleration parameter at a period of 1 sec, S1 0.547g Short Period (0.2 sec) Site Coefficient, Fa 1.0 Long Period (1.0 sec) Site Coefficient, Fv 1.5 Adjusted spectral response acceleration parameter at short period, SMS 1.500g Adjusted spectral response acceleration parameter at a period of 1 sec, SM1 0.820g Design spectral response acceleration parameter at short period, SDS 1.000g Design spectral response acceleration parameter at a period of 1 sec, SD1 0.547g B-25 11206.001 - 21 - 4.5 Lateral Earth Pressures Recommended lateral earth pressures are provided as equivalent fluid unit weights, in psf/ft. or pcf. Table 4 – Lateral Earth Pressures Condition Equivalent Fluid Unit Weight for Level Backfill (psf/ft) Active 35 Seismic Increment 20 At-Rest 55 Passive 300 Coefficient of Friction 0.35 The above passive resistance values do not contain an appreciable factor of safety, so the structural engineer should apply the applicable factors of safety and/or load factors during design. Cantilever walls that are designed for a deflection at the top of the wall of at least 0.001H, where H is equal to the wall height, may be designed using the active earth pressure condition. Rigid walls that are not free to rotate, walls that are braced at the top, and walls that provide indirect support for foundations should be designed using the at-rest condition. The seismic increment of earth pressure should be combined with the active earth pressure to evaluate seismic loading. The above lateral earth pressures are based on fully drained conditions. Infiltrating surface water may build-up behind proposed basement walls. Therefore, walls below grade should be designed to resist hydrostatic pressures (equivalent fluid pressure of 62.4 pounds per cubic foot) or be provided with positive drainage behind the wall as shown on Figure 10, Retaining Wall Backfill and Subdrain Detail. Lateral load resistance will be provided by the sliding resistance at the base of the foundation and the passive pressure developed along the front of the foundation. A frictional resistance coefficient of 0.35 may be used at the concrete and soil interface. B-26 11206.001 - 22 - In addition to the above lateral forces due to retained earth, surcharge due to improvements, such as an adjacent structure, should be considered in the design of the retaining wall. Loads applied within a 1:1 projection from the surcharging structure on the stem of the wall shall be considered as lateral surcharge. For lateral surcharge conditions, we recommend utilizing a horizontal load equal to 50 percent of the vertical load, as a minimum. This horizontal load should be applied below the 1:1 projection plane. To minimize the surcharge load from an adjacent building, deepened building footings may be considered. 4.6 Pavement Design Driveways and fire access road can be constructed using conventional asphalt concrete (AC) over aggregate base (AB). In preparation of design, we have collected representative soil samples and performed R-value testing of near surface soil. The test results are attached and indicate R-values of 53 and 68. Confirmation R-value testing of representative near surface soils should be performed at the end of grading. We have designed the pavement sections using the R-value of 40 for different Traffic Indices (TI) and the minimum pavement section is presented Table 5 below. These pavement sections are preliminary and may change depending on confirmation R-value testing. The pavement design was performed using the method in the California Highway Design Manual. Table 5 - Pavement Sections Traffic Index Flexible Pavement (inches) AC AB 5 3 4 6 4 6 7 4 8 All pavement construction should be performed in accordance with the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction. Field inspection and periodic testing, as needed during placement of the base course materials, should be undertaken to ensure that the requirements of the standard specifications are fulfilled. Prior to placement of aggregate base, the subgrade soil should be processed to a minimum depth of 8 inches, moisture-conditioned, as necessary, and recompacted to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction. B-27 11206.001 - 23 - If wet and pumping soils are encountered, a layer of geofabric (Mirafi HP570 or equivalent) may be placed to stabilize the subgrade and provide a firm working surface for placement of compacted fill and aggregate base. Localized areas of loose soils may be encountered that require deeper removal and recompaction. The actual extent of the removal depth will be best determined during construction when direct observation of the subgrade soils can be made. Aggregate base should be moisture conditioned, as necessary, and compacted to a minimum of 95 percent relative compaction. Aggregate base and asphalt materials should conform to Sections 200-2 and 203, respectively, of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction. PCC should conform to Section 201 of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction. 4.7 Cement Type and Corrosion Protection Based on the results of laboratory testing, concrete structures in contact with the onsite soil are expected to have negligible exposure to water-soluble sulfates in the soil. Common Type II cement may be used for concrete construction onsite and the concrete should be designed in accordance with CBC 2013 requirements. However, concrete exposed to recycled water should be designed using Type V cement. Based on our laboratory testing, the onsite soil is considered corrosive to ferrous metals. Ferrous pipe should be avoided by using high-density polyethylene (HDPE) or other non-ferrous pipe when possible. Ferrous pipe, if used, should be protected by polyethylene bags, tap or coatings, di-electric fittings or other means to separate the pipe from onsite soils. 4.8 Temporary Excavations and Shoring Design All temporary excavations, including footings, utility trenches, retaining wall excavations and dry wells should be performed in accordance with project plans, specifications, and all Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) requirements. Temporary excavations should be treated in accordance with the State of California version of OSHA excavation regulations, Construction Safety Orders B-28 11206.001 - 24 - for Excavation General Requirements, Article 6, Section 1541, effective October 1, 1995. The sides of excavations should be shored or sloped in accordance with OSHA regulations. OSHA allows the sides of unbraced excavations, up to a maximum height of 20 feet, to be cut to a ¾H:1V (horizontal:vertical) slope for Type A soils, 1H:1V for Type B soils, and 1½H:1V for Type C soils. Onsite sandy soils are to be considered Type C soils which are subject to collapse in shallow unbraced excavations (i.e. approximately 3-feet in vertical height). During construction, the soil conditions should be regularly evaluated to verify that conditions are as anticipated. The contractor shall be responsible for providing the “competent person” required by OSHA standards to evaluate soil conditions. Close coordination between the competent person and the geotechnical engineer should be maintained to facilitate construction while providing safe excavations. OSHA regulations are applicable in areas with no restriction of surrounding ground deformations. Shoring should be designed for areas with deformation restrictions. The soil type should be verified or revised based on geotechnical observation and testing during construction, as soil classifications may vary over short horizontal distances. Typical cantilever shoring should be designed based on an active fluid pressure of 38 pcf, assuming level ground above the shoring. If excavations are braced at the top and at specific design intervals, the active pressure may then be approximated by a rectangular soil pressure distribution with the pressure per foot of width equal to 25H psf, where H is equal to the depth of the excavation being shored. Heavy construction loads, such as those resulting from stockpiles and heavy machinery, should be kept a minimum distance equivalent to the excavation height or 5 feet, whichever is greater, from the excavation unless the excavation is shored and these surcharges are considered in the design of the shoring system. Excavations that extend below an imaginary plane inclined at 45 degrees below the edge of any adjacent existing site foundation should be properly shored to maintain support of the adjacent structures. B-29 11206.001 - 25 - 4.9 Trench Backfill Utility trenches should be backfilled with compacted fill in accordance with Sections 306-1.2 and 306-1.3 of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, (“Greenbook”), 2012 Edition. Utility trenches can be backfilled with onsite sandy material free of rubble, debris, organic and oversized material up to (≤) 3-inches in largest dimension. Prior to backfilling trenches, pipes should be bedded in and covered with either: (1) Sand: A uniform, sand material that has a Sand Equivalent (SE) greater-than- or-equal-to (≥) 30, passing the No. 4 U.S. Standard Sieve (or as specified by the pipe manufacturer), water densified in place, or (2) CLSM: Controlled Low Strength Material (CLSM) conforming to Section 201-6 of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, (“Greenbook”), 2012 Edition. CLSM is preferred under the building footprint, to reduce the potential for water infiltration under the building. Pipe bedding should extend at least 4 inches below the pipeline invert and at least 12 inches over the top of the pipeline. Native and clean fill soils can be used as backfill over the pipe bedding zone, and should be placed in thin lifts, moisture conditioned above optimum, and mechanically compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction, relative to the ASTM D 1557 laboratory maximum density. 4.10 Infiltration BMP Design Considerations It should be noted that the measured infiltration rates presented in Section 3.3.6 may degrade over time due to complete saturation of underlying soils, and fines build-up and plugging if pretreatment of the storm water is not performed. As such, a reduction of the measured infiltration rates using a factor of safety of 2 or more should be considered to establish a conservative infiltration rate for the service life of the system. In general, a vast majority of geotechnical distress issues are related to improper drainage. Distress in the form of foundation movement could occur. Direct infiltration to the subsurface is not recommended adjacent to curb and gutter and public pavements as soil saturation could lead to a loss of soil support, settlement or collapse, and internal erosion (piping). Additionally, infiltration water will migrate along pipe backfill (typically sand or gravel bedding) affecting B-30 11206.001 - 26 - improvements far from the point of infiltration. Proposed direct open bottom infiltration systems, should be located as far away from existing or proposed foundations, rigid improvements and utilities as is practical in order to reduce the geotechnical distress issues related to water. Where sufficient distance from improvements cannot be achieved, additional recommendations may be warranted and can be provided during plan review. Prior to construction of any infiltration device intended for the site, the plans should be reviewed by the geotechnical consultant to verify that our geotechnical recommendations have been appropriately incorporated into the plans and not compromised by the addition of an infiltration system to the site. The designer of any infiltration system should contact the geotechnical consultant for geotechnical input during the design process as they feel necessary. Proper compaction oversight during construction is required to ensure the bottoms of infiltration facilities are not overly compacted. Facilities that do not have proper compaction oversight should have more restrictive safety factors applied. This factor should not be less than 2, but may be higher at the discretion of the design engineer. 4.11 Additional Geotechnical Services Leighton should review the grading plans, foundation plans, and specifications when they are available to verify that the recommendations presented in this report have been properly interpreted and incorporated. Geotechnical observation and testing should be provided during the following activities: • Grading and excavation of the site; • Shoring installation; • Subgrade Preparation; • Compaction of all fill materials; • Utility trench backfilling and compaction; • Footing excavation and slab-on-grade preparation; • Pavement subgrade and base preparation; • Placement of asphalt concrete and/or concrete; and • When any unusual conditions are encountered. B-31 11206.001 - 27 - 5.0 LIMITATIONS This geotechnical exploration does not address the potential for encountering hazardous soil at this site. In addition, this report was necessarily based in part upon data obtained from a limited number of observances, site visits, soil samples, tests, analyses, histories of occurrences, spaced subsurface explorations and limited information on historical events and observations. Such information is, by necessity, incomplete. Please also refer ASFE’s Important Information About Your Geotechnical Report (included at the rear of the text), presenting additional information and limitations regarding geotechnical engineering studies and reports. The nature of many sites is such that differing soil or geologic conditions can be present within small distances and under varying climatic conditions. Changes in subsurface conditions can and do occur over time. Therefore, the findings, conclusions, and recommendations presented in this report are only valid if Leighton Consulting, Inc. has the opportunity to observe subsurface conditions during grading and construction, to confirm that our data are representative for the site. Leighton Consulting, Inc. should also review the construction plans and project specifications, when available, to comment on the geotechnical aspects. This report was prepared using the degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable geotechnical consultants practicing at this time in Orange County. We do not make any warranty, either expressed or implied. B-32 11206.001 - 28 - 6.0 REFERENCES American Concrete Institute (ACI), 2011, Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-11) and Commentary, 2011. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), 2013, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, ASCE/SEI 7-10, Third Printing, Errata Incorporated through March 15. Blake, T. F., 2000, EQSEARCH, Windows 3.00a Version. Boore, D.M. and Atkinson, G.M., 2008, Ground-Motion Prediction equations for the Average Horizontal Component of PGA, PGV, and 5%-damped PSA at Spectral Periods Between 0.01s and 10.0 s, Earthquake Spectra, 24 (1), pp. 99-138. Bryant, W.A., and Hart, E.W., 2007, Fault Rupture Hazard Zones in California, Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act with Index to Earthquake Zones Maps, Department of Conservation, California Geological Survey, Special Publication 42, 2007 Interim Revision. California Building Standards Commission, 2013, 2013 California Building Code, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 2, Volume 2 of 2, Based on 2012 International Building Code, Effective January 1, 2014. California Department of Water Resources (DWR), 1957, The California Water Plan: Bulletin 3, 246 p. _____, Dams within the Jurisdiction of the State of California, http://www.water.ca.gov/damsafety/damlisting/index.cfm. _____, Interactive Website, Water Data Library, http://www.water.ca.gov/waterdatalibrary California Geological Survey (CGS; formally California Division of Mines and Geology), 1997, Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the Anaheim and Newport Beach 7.5- Minute Quadrangles, Orange County, California, Seismic Hazard Zone Report No. 03. , 1998, State of California Seismic Hazards Zones Map, Anaheim Quadrangle, map scale 1:24,000, released April 15, 1998. B-33 11206.001 - 29 - , 2000, CD-ROM containing digital images of Official Maps of Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones that affect the Southern Region, DMG CD 2000-003 2000. ______, 2004 Special Publication 118, Recommended Criteria for Delineating Seismic Hazard Zones in California, dated May 1992, revised April 2004. ______, 2008, Special Publication 117, Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California; originally adopted March 13, 1997 by the State Mining and Geology Board in Accordance with the Seismic Hazards Mapping Act of 1990, Revised and Re-Adopted September 11, 2008. Campbell, K.W. and Bozorgnia, Y., 2008, NGA Ground Motion Model for the Geometric Mean Horizontal Component of PGA, PGV, PGD and 5% Damped Linear Elastic Response Spectra for Periods Ranging from 0.01 to 10 s, Earthquake Spectra, 24 (1) pp. 139-171. Cao, T., Bryant, W.A., Rowshandel, B., Branum, D., and Wills, C.J., 2003, The Revised 2002 California Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Maps, dated June 2003, 11p. Accessible at http://www.consrv.ca.gov/cgs/rghm/psha/index.htm. Chiou, B.S. and Youngs, R.R., 2008, An NGA Model for the Average Horizontal Component of Peak Ground Motion and Response Spectra, Earthquake Spectra, 24 (1), pp 173-215. City of Anaheim, 2004, City of Anaheim General Plan, Safety Element, dated May 2004. Eckmanm E.C., Strahorn, A.T., Holmes, L.C., and Guersney, J.E., 1919, Soils Map of the Anaheim Area, California: United States Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Soils, in cooperation with the University of California, Agricultural Experiment Station, scale 1:62,000. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), 2008, Map Number 06059C0141J, Effective Date September 26, 2008, Scale 1” = 1000’ web site (https://hazards.fema.gov/femaportal/wps/portal/). HKS, Inc., 2016, Final Site Entitlement Submittal, 1700 South Harbor Boulevard, Anaheim, California 92802, Project No. 19232, dated January 12, 2016. Hunsaker & Associates, 2016, 1700 South Harbor Boulevard Hotel Redevelopment, Existing Conditions Map (Sheet C-1), Preliminary Grading Plan (Sheet C-2) and B-34 11206.001 - 30 - Preliminary Utility Plan (Sheet C-3), City of Anaheim, , W.O. 4098-1, dated January 12, 2016. Morton D.M., and Miller, F.K., 2006, Geologic Map of the San Bernardino and Santa Ana, 30’ x 60’ Quadrangles, California, USGS Open File Report 2006-1217. Nationwide Environmental Title Research, LLC (NETR), 2015, Historic Aerials by NETR Online, website: http://www.historicaerials.com, accessed December 9, 2015. Orange County Public Works (OCPW), 2013, Technical Guidance Document (TGD) for the Preparation of Conceptual/Preliminary and/or Project Water Quality Management Plans (WQMPs), dated December 20, 2013. Tokimatsu, K., Seed, H. B., 1987, Evaluation of Settlements in Sands Due to Earthquake Shaking, Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering, American Society of Civil Engineers, Vol. 113, No. 8, pp. 861-878. Real, C.R., 1985, Introduction, in Sherburne, R.W., Fuller, D.R., Cole, J.W., Greenwood, R.B., Mumm, H.A., and Real, C.R. (editors), Classification and Mapping of Quaternary Sedimentary Deposits for Purposes of Seismic Zonation, South Coastal Los Angeles Basin, Orange County, California; California Division Of Mines And Geology Open File Report 81-10LA, pp. 1.1-1.7. Sprotte, E.C., Fuller, D.R., Greenwood, R.B., Mumm, H.A., Real, C.R., and Sherburne, R.W., 1980, Annual Technical Report Text and Plates, Classification and Mapping of Quaternary Sedimentary Deposits for Purposes of Seismic Zonation, South Coastal Los Angeles Basin, Orange County, California: California Division Of Mines And Geology Open File Report 80-19LA, 268 p. Troxell, H.C., 1942, Floods of March 1938 in Southern California, Federal Emergency Administration of Public Works and Works Progress Administration, United States Department of the Interior. United Sates geological Survey (USGS), 1965 (Photorevised 1972), Anaheim 7.5 Minute Series Quadrangle, California, Scale 1:24,000. ______, 2008a, Interactive Deaggregations, Based on the 2008 update source and attenuation models of the NSHMP (Peterson and others, 2008), USGS website, <https://geohazards.usgs.gov/deaggint/2008/> B-35 11206.001 - 31 - ______, 2008b, National Seismic Hazard Maps – Fault Parameters, http://geohazards.usgs.gov/cfusion/hazfaults_search/hf_search_main.cfm ______, 2013, U.S. Seismic Design Maps, http://earthquake.usgs.gov/designmaps/us/application.php Yerkes, R.F., McCulloh, T.H., Schoellhamer, J.E. and Vedder, J.G., 1965, Geology of the Los Angeles Basin, California -- An Introduction: U. S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 420-A, 57 p. Youd, T.L, Idriss, I.M., Andrus, R.D., Arango, I., Castro, G., Christian, J.T., Dobry, R., Finn, L., Harder, L.F., Hynes, M.E., Ishihara, K., Koester, J.P., Liao, S.C., Marcuson, W.F. III, Martin, G.R., Mitchell, J.K., Moriwaki, Y., Power, M.S., Robertson, P.K., Seed, R.B., Stokoe, K.H. II, 2001, Liquefaction Resistance of Soils: Summary Report from the 1996 NCEER and 1998 NCEER/NSF Workshops on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance of Soils, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, , Vol. 127, No. 10, October 2001. B-36 Geotechnical-Engineering Report Geotechnical Services Are Performed for Specific Purposes, Persons, and ProjectsGeotechnical engineers structure their services to meet the specific needs of their clients. A geotechnical-engineering study conducted for a civil engineer may not fulfill the needs of a constructor — a construction contractor — or even another civil engineer. Because each geotechnical- engineering study is unique, each geotechnical-engineering report is unique, prepared solely for the client. No one except you should rely on this geotechnical-engineering report without first conferring with the geotechnical engineer who prepared it. And no one — not even you — should apply this report for any purpose or project except the one originally contemplated. Read the Full ReportSerious problems have occurred because those relying on a geotechnical-engineering report did not read it all. Do not rely on an executive summary. Do not read selected elements only. Geotechnical Engineers Base Each Report on a Unique Set of Project-Specific FactorsGeotechnical engineers consider many unique, project-specific factors when establishing the scope of a study. Typical factors include: the client’s goals, objectives, and risk-management preferences; the general nature of the structure involved, its size, and configuration; the location of the structure on the site; and other planned or existing site improvements, such as access roads, parking lots, and underground utilities. Unless the geotechnical engineer who conducted the study specifically indicates otherwise, do not rely on a geotechnical-engineering report that was:• not prepared for you;• not prepared for your project;• not prepared for the specific site explored; or• completed before important project changes were made. Typical changes that can erode the reliability of an existing geotechnical-engineering report include those that affect: • the function of the proposed structure, as when it’s changed from a parking garage to an office building, or from a light-industrial plant to a refrigerated warehouse;• the elevation, configuration, location, orientation, or weight of the proposed structure;• the composition of the design team; or• project ownership. As a general rule, always inform your geotechnical engineer of project changes—even minor ones—and request an assessment of their impact. Geotechnical engineers cannot accept responsibility or liability for problems that occur because their reports do not consider developments of which they were not informed. Subsurface Conditions Can ChangeA geotechnical-engineering report is based on conditions that existed at the time the geotechnical engineer performed the study. Do not rely on a geotechnical-engineering report whose adequacy may have been affected by: the passage of time; man-made events, such as construction on or adjacent to the site; or natural events, such as floods, droughts, earthquakes, or groundwater fluctuations. Contact the geotechnical engineer before applying this report to determine if it is still reliable. A minor amount of additional testing or analysis could prevent major problems. Most Geotechnical Findings Are Professional OpinionsSite exploration identifies subsurface conditions only at those points where subsurface tests are conducted or samples are taken. Geotechnical engineers review field and laboratory data and then apply their professional judgment to render an opinion about subsurface conditions throughout the site. Actual subsurface conditions may differ — sometimes significantly — from those indicated in your report. Retaining the geotechnical engineer who developed your report to provide geotechnical-construction observation is the most effective method of managing the risks associated with unanticipated conditions. A Report’s Recommendations Are Not FinalDo not overrely on the confirmation-dependent recommendations included in your report. Confirmation-dependent recommendations are not final, because geotechnical engineers develop them principally from judgment and opinion. Geotechnical engineers can finalize their recommendations only by observing actual subsurface conditions revealed during construction. The geotechnical engineer who developed your report cannot assume responsibility or liability for the report’s confirmation-dependent recommendations if that engineer does not perform the geotechnical-construction observation required to confirm the recommendations’ applicability. A Geotechnical-Engineering Report Is Subject to MisinterpretationOther design-team members’ misinterpretation of geotechnical-engineering reports has resulted in costly Important Information about This Subsurface problems are a principal cause of construction delays, cost overruns, claims, and disputes. While you cannot eliminate all such risks, you can manage them. The following information is provided to help. B-37 problems. Confront that risk by having your geo technical engineer confer with appropriate members of the design team after submitting the report. Also retain your geotechnical engineer to review pertinent elements of the design team’s plans and specifications. Constructors can also misinterpret a geotechnical-engineering report. Confront that risk by having your geotechnical engineer participate in prebid and preconstruction conferences, and by providing geotechnical construction observation. Do Not Redraw the Engineer’s LogsGeotechnical engineers prepare final boring and testing logs based upon their interpretation of field logs and laboratory data. To prevent errors or omissions, the logs included in a geotechnical-engineering report should never be redrawn for inclusion in architectural or other design drawings. Only photographic or electronic reproduction is acceptable, but recognize that separating logs from the report can elevate risk. Give Constructors a Complete Report and GuidanceSome owners and design professionals mistakenly believe they can make constructors liable for unanticipated subsurface conditions by limiting what they provide for bid preparation. To help prevent costly problems, give constructors the complete geotechnical-engineering report, but preface it with a clearly written letter of transmittal. In that letter, advise constructors that the report was not prepared for purposes of bid development and that the report’s accuracy is limited; encourage them to confer with the geotechnical engineer who prepared the report (a modest fee may be required) and/or to conduct additional study to obtain the specific types of information they need or prefer. A prebid conference can also be valuable. Be sure constructors have sufficient time to perform additional study. Only then might you be in a position to give constructors the best information available to you, while requiring them to at least share some of the financial responsibilities stemming from unanticipated conditions. Read Responsibility Provisions CloselySome clients, design professionals, and constructors fail to recognize that geotechnical engineering is far less exact than other engineering disciplines. This lack of understanding has created unrealistic expectations that have led to disappointments, claims, and disputes. To help reduce the risk of such outcomes, geotechnical engineers commonly include a variety of explanatory provisions in their reports. Sometimes labeled “limitations,” many of these provisions indicate where geotechnical engineers’ responsibilities begin and end, to help others recognize their own responsibilities and risks. Read these provisions closely. Ask questions. Your geotechnical engineer should respond fully and frankly. Environmental Concerns Are Not Covered The equipment, techniques, and personnel used to perform an environmental study differ significantly from those used to perform a geotechnical study. For that reason, a geotechnical-engineering report does not usually relate any environmental findings, conclusions, or recommendations; e.g., about the likelihood of encountering underground storage tanks or regulated contaminants. Unanticipated environmental problems have led to numerous project failures. If you have not yet obtained your own environmental information, ask your geotechnical consultant for risk-management guidance. Do not rely on an environmental report prepared for someone else. Obtain Professional Assistance To Deal with MoldDiverse strategies can be applied during building design, construction, operation, and maintenance to prevent significant amounts of mold from growing on indoor surfaces. To be effective, all such strategies should be devised for the express purpose of mold prevention, integrated into a comprehensive plan, and executed with diligent oversight by a professional mold-prevention consultant. Because just a small amount of water or moisture can lead to the development of severe mold infestations, many mold- prevention strategies focus on keeping building surfaces dry. While groundwater, water infiltration, and similar issues may have been addressed as part of the geotechnical- engineering study whose findings are conveyed in this report, the geotechnical engineer in charge of this project is not a mold prevention consultant; none of the services performed in connection with the geotechnical engineer’s study were designed or conducted for the purpose of mold prevention. Proper implementation of the recommendations conveyed in this report will not of itself be sufficient to prevent mold from growing in or on the structure involved. Rely, on Your GBC-Member Geotechnical Engineer for Additional AssistanceMembership in the Geotechnical Business Council of the Geoprofessional Business Association exposes geotechnical engineers to a wide array of risk-confrontation techniques that can be of genuine benefit for everyone involved with a construction project. Confer with you GBC-Member geotechnical engineer for more information. 8811 Colesville Road/Suite G106, Silver Spring, MD 20910 Telephone: 301/565-2733 Facsimile: 301/589-2017 e-mail: info@geoprofessional.org www.geoprofessional.org Copyright 2015 by Geoprofessional Business Association (GBA). Duplication, reproduction, or copying of this document, or its contents, in whole or in part, by any means whatsoever, is strictly prohibited, except with GBA’s specific written permission. Excerpting, quoting, or otherwise extracting wording from this document is permitted only with the express written permission of GBA, and only for purposes of scholarly research or book review. Only members of GBA may use this document as a complement to or as an element of a geotechnical-engineering report. Any other firm, individual, or other entity that so uses this document without being a GBA member could be commiting negligent or intentional (fraudulent) misrepresentation. B-38 Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/AirbusDS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, andthe GIS User Community, Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors ³ 0 2,000 4,000 Feet Figure 1 Scale: Leighton Base Map: ESRI ArcGIS Online 2016 Thematic Information: Leighton 1 " = 2,000 ' Project: 11206.001 Eng/Geol:CCK/JMP Map Saved as V:\Drafting\11206\001\Maps\11206_001_F01_SLM_2016_1_4.mxd on 1/4/2016 12:27:20 PM Author: Leighton Geomatics (asakowicz) Date: January 2016 SITE LOCATION MAP Anaheim Plaza Hotel 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard, City of Anaheim, California ApproximateSite Location B-39 &?!, !, &? !, !,&<!, !, &? T.D . 7 5 ' T.D . 5 0 ' T.D . 4 1 . 5 ' T.D . 5 0 ' T.D.51.5'T.D.50' T. D . 5 0 ' T.D.51.5' CP T - 1 CP T - 2 LB - 1 CP T - 3 LB-4CPT-5 CP T - 6 LB-3 Ma p S a v e d a s V : \ D r a f t i n g \ 1 1 2 0 6 \ 0 0 1 \ M a p s \ 1 1 2 0 6 _ 0 0 1 _ F 0 1 _ A L T _ E L M _ 2 n d _ b a s e B _ 2 0 1 6 _ 1 _ 4 . m x d o n 1 / 8 / 2 0 1 6 9 : 3 5 : 1 6 A M EX P L O R A T I O N L O C A T I O N M A P An a h e i m P l a z a H o t e l 17 0 0 S . H a r b o r B o u l e v a r d , C i t y o f A n a h e i m , C a l i f o r n i a Figure 2 Leighton ³08 01 6 0 Fe e t Sc a l e : Ba s e M a p : E n c u m b r a n c e M a p ( W . O . 4 0 9 8 - 1 ) Hu n s a k e r & A s s o c i a t e s , J . V a l d e z / R . W h e e l e r Ir v i n e , C A 9 2 6 1 8 Th e m a t i c I n f o r m a t i o n : L e i g h t o n 1 " = 8 0 ' Pr o j e c t : 1 1 2 0 6 . 0 0 1 En g / G e o l : C C K / J M P Au t h o r : L e i g h t o n G e o m a t i c s ( a s a k o w i c z ) Da t e : J a n u a r y 2 0 1 6 Inf.Test@30'-35' In f . T e s t @ 4 0 ' - 4 5 ' In f . T e s t @ 2 0 ' - 2 5 ' LB - 2 T.D . 5 6 . 5 ' CPT-4 T.D.75' Le g e n d &?!, Ap p r o x i m a t e L o c a t i o n o f C o n e Pe n e t r a t i o n T e s t ( C P T ) sh o w i n g t o t a l D e p t h . Ap p r o x i m a t e L o c a t i o n o f H o l l o w - St e m A u g e r B o r i n g S h o w i n g to t a l d e p t h a n d a n d z o n e o f In f i l t r a t i o n t e s t i n g . &< Ap p r o x i m a t e L o c a t i o n o f Ho l l o w - S t e m A u g e r b o r i n g . Sh o w i n g t o t a l d e p t h . CP T - 6 T. D . 5 0 ' LB - 3 T. D . 5 6 . 5 ' In f . T e s t @ 3 0 ' - 3 5 ' LB - 4 T. D . 5 1 . 5 ' B- 4 0 Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed, Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors ³ 0 4,000 8,000 Feet Figure 3 Scale: Leighton Base Map: ESRI ArcGIS Online 2016 Thematic Information: Leighton, USGS 1 " = 4,000 ' Project: 11206.001 Eng/Geol:CCK/JMP Map Saved as V:\Drafting\11206\001\Maps\11206_001_F03_RGM_2016_1_4.mxd on 1/11/2016 12:12:46 PM Author: Leighton Geomatics (asakowicz) Date: January 2016 REGIONAL GEOLOGY MAP Anaheim Plaza Hotel 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard, City of Anaheim, California Approximate Site Location Legend Qw - Alluvial WashDeposits !!!!!!! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !Qya - Young Alluvial Valley Deposits Qyf - Young Alluvial FanDeposits Qof - Old Alluvial FanDeposits Qyf Qyf Qyf Qyf Qyf Qyf Qyf Qyf Qyf Qw Qw Qw Qyf Qof Qof Qya Qyf B-41 0 20 40 60 80 10 0 12 0 14 0 J u n ‐ 6 8 J a n ‐ 7 2 S e p ‐ 7 5 A p r ‐ 7 9 D e c ‐ 8 2 A u g ‐ 8 6 M a r ‐ 9 0 N o v ‐ 9 3 J u n ‐ 9 7 F e b ‐ 0 1 S e p ‐ 0 4 M a y ‐ 0 8 Dec‐11 Hi s t o r i c a l  Gr o u n d w a t e r  Le v e l  Da t a Groundwater  Depth St a t e  We l l  No . 0 4 S 1 0 W 2 7 C 0 0 2 S Da t e D e p t h   ( f e e t ) Project  No. 11206.001 FIGURE  4 B- 4 2 P elic a n Hill fa ult S a n J o s e f a u l t Peralt aHillsfa u l tElModenofault W a l n u t C r e e k f a u l t Los Al a mitos fault Central Avenuefaul t THU MS-Huntington Beach Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/AirbusDS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, andthe GIS User Community, Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors ³ 048 Miles Figure 5 Scale: Leighton Base Map: ESRI ArcGIS Online 2016 Thematic Information: Leighton, CGS, Bryant 2010 1 " = 4 miles Project: 11206.001 Eng/Geol:CCK/JMP Map Saved as V:\Drafting\11206\001\Maps\11206_001_F05_RFM_2016_1_4.mxd on 1/11/2016 12:14:48 PM Author: Leighton Geomatics (asakowicz) Date: January 2016 REGIONAL FAULT MAP Anaheim Plaza Hotel 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard, City of Anaheim, California Approximate Site Location Legend Historic (<200 years) Holocene (<10K years) Quaternary (<1.6M years) Pre-Quaternary (>1.6M years) B-43 Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/AirbusDS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, andthe GIS User Community, Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors ³ 01020 Miles Figure 6 Scale: Leighton Base Map: ESRI ArcGIS Online 2016 Thematic Information: Leighton, USGS, SCEC 1 " = 20 miles Project: 11206.001 Eng/Geol:CCK/JMP Map Saved as V:\Drafting\11206\001\Maps\11206_001_F06_HSM_2016_1_4.mxd on 1/11/2016 12:16:15 PM Author: Leighton Geomatics (asakowicz) Date: January 2016 HISTORIC SEISMICITY MAP Anaheim Plaza Hotel 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard, City of Anaheim, California ApproximateSite Location Legend Earthquakes 1769-2014 Moment Magnitude Range ! 4 - 5 ! 5 - 6 ! 6 - 7 ! 7 - 8 ^ B-44 Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed, Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors ³ 0 4,000 8,000 Feet Figure 7 Scale: Leighton Base Map: ESRI ArcGIS Online 2016 Thematic Information: Leighton, CGS 1 " = 4,000 ' Project: 11206.001 Eng/Geol:CCK/JMP Map Saved as V:\Drafting\11206\001\Maps\11206_001_F07_SHM_2016_1_4.mxd on 1/11/2016 12:19:17 PM Author: Leighton Geomatics (asakowicz) Date: January 2016 SEISMIC HAZARD MAP Anaheim Plaza Hotel 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard, City of Anaheim, California Approximate Site Location Legend Liquefaction Susceptibility Zone B-45 OLIVE HILLSRESERVOIR BREA Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/AirbusDS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, andthe GIS User Community, Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors ³ 0 7,900 15,800 Feet Figure 8 Scale: Leighton Base Map: ESRI ArcGIS Online 2016 Thematic Information: Leighton, CA DWR, FEMA 1 " = 8,000 ' Project: 11206.001 Eng/Geol:CCK/JMP Map Saved as V:\Drafting\11206\001\Maps\11206_001_F08_Dam_2016_1_4.mxd on 1/11/2016 12:20:36 PM Author: Leighton Geomatics (asakowicz) Date: January 2016 DAM INUNDATION MAP Anaheim Plaza Hotel 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard, City of Anaheim, California Approximate Site Location Legend Dam Locations Dam Inundation Areas Brea Prado Fullerton Olive Hills Reservoir Fullerton B-46 Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/AirbusDS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, andthe GIS User Community, Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society,i-cubed, Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMapcontributors ³ 0 4,000 8,000 Feet Figure 9 Scale: Leighton Base Map: ESRI ArcGIS Online 2016 Thematic Information: Leighton, CA DWR, FEMA 1 " = 4,000 ' Project: 11206.001 Eng/Geol:CCK/JMP Map Saved as V:\Drafting\11206\001\Maps\11206_001_F09_FHM_2016_1_4.mxd on 1/11/2016 12:21:55 PM Author: Leighton Geomatics (asakowicz) Date: January 2016 FLOOD HAZARD ZONE MAP Anaheim Plaza Hotel 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard, City of Anaheim, California ApproximateSite Location Legend 500 Year Flood Plain 100 Year Flood Plain B-47 B-48 APPENDIX A GEOTECHNICAL BORING AND CPT LOGS B-49 @Surface: 4" asphalt concrete (AC), no baseArtificial Fill, undocumented (Afu)@0.3': Silty SAND to SAND, light brown to brown,moist, fine to medium sand @5': Same as above, medium dense, some ACdebris Quaternary Young Alluvial Fan Deposits (Qyf)@7.5': SAND, light brown, moist, medium dense,fine sand @10': Silty SAND, brown, moist, medium dense,fine sand @12.5': Same as above, loose @15': SAND, light brown, slightly moist, mediumdense, fine to medium sand @17.5': SAND to Silty SAND, light brown, slightlymoist, loose, fine sand @20': Same as above, medium dense @22.5': SAND, light brown, slightly moist,medium dense, fine to medium sand @25': SILT, brown, moist, stiff @30': SILT to Silty SAND, brown, moist, very stiff,medium dense, fine sand @32.5': SILT, brown, moist, stiff, trace fine sand 2" Solid PVCCasing at 0'-20' Pea Gravel FilterPack at 19'-25' 2" Slotted PVCCasing at 20'-25' Bentonite Seal at25'-26' Backfilled withExcess SoilCuttings at26'-41.5' BB-1 R-1 S-1 R-2 S-2 R-3 S-3 R-4 S-4 R-5 S-5 R-6 S-6 SP/SM SP SM SP SP/SM SP ML ML/SM ML 7911 234 367 345 71217 345 8714 71013 11912 346 81313 135 4 2 8 5 2 4 6 2 20 20 12 20 113 114 106 110 109 118 This Soil Description applies only to a location of theexploration at the time of sampling. Subsurfaceconditions may differ at other locations and may changewith time. The description is a simplification of the actualconditions encountered. Transitions between soil typesmay be gradual. SOIL DESCRIPTION 135 130 125 120 115 110 105 100 Fe e t S Lo g Ty p e o f T e s t s Gr a p h i c N Fe e t Hollow Stem Auger - 140lb - Autohammer - 30" Drop Martini Drilling Corporation Location Starting Drill Date Drilling Co.Drilling Co. Project Project No. See Figure 2 - Exploration Location Map Anaheim Plaza Hotel WELL DIAGRAM 11206.001 Drilling Method BULK SAMPLECORE SAMPLEGRAB SAMPLERING SAMPLESPLIT SPOON SAMPLETUBE SAMPLE BCGRST SAMPLE TYPES:TYPE OF TESTS:-200ALCNCOCRCU % FINES PASSINGATTERBERG LIMITSCONSOLIDATIONCOLLAPSECORROSIONUNDRAINED TRIAXIAL Sa m p l e N o . DSEIHMDPPRV DIRECT SHEAREXPANSION INDEXHYDROMETERMAXIMUM DENSITYPOCKET PENETROMETERR VALUE SASESGUC SIEVE ANALYSISSAND EQUIVALENTSPECIFIC GRAVITYUNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH De p t h 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 El e v a t i o n Page 1 of 2 Ending Drill Date Hole Diameter Ground Elevation GEOTECHNICAL BORING AND MONITORING WELL LOG LB-1 Logged / Inspected By 12-21-15 (U . S . C . S . ) So i l C l a s s . Co n t e n t , % Mo i s t u r e pc f Dr y D e n s i t y Pe r 6 I n c h e s Bl o w s * * * This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. * * * 12-21-15 8" 135' JMP / JMP B-50 @37.5': Interlayered SILT and Silty SAND, lightbrown to brown, moist, stiff/medium dense,fine sand Total depth of boring: 41.5 feet bgs.Boring hand-augered to 5 feet bgs.No groundwater encountered during drilling.Boring completed with temporary percolation testwell upon completion of drilling.Percolation test well casing removed and boringbackfilled with soil cuttings upon completion ofpercolation testing. R-7 S-7 R-8 ML/SM 369 349 71021 19 23 16 106 107 This Soil Description applies only to a location of theexploration at the time of sampling. Subsurfaceconditions may differ at other locations and may changewith time. The description is a simplification of the actualconditions encountered. Transitions between soil typesmay be gradual. SOIL DESCRIPTION 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 Fe e t S Lo g Ty p e o f T e s t s Gr a p h i c N Fe e t Hollow Stem Auger - 140lb - Autohammer - 30" Drop Martini Drilling Corporation Location Starting Drill Date Drilling Co.Drilling Co. Project Project No. See Figure 2 - Exploration Location Map Anaheim Plaza Hotel WELL DIAGRAM 11206.001 Drilling Method BULK SAMPLECORE SAMPLEGRAB SAMPLERING SAMPLESPLIT SPOON SAMPLETUBE SAMPLE BCGRST SAMPLE TYPES:TYPE OF TESTS:-200ALCNCOCRCU % FINES PASSINGATTERBERG LIMITSCONSOLIDATIONCOLLAPSECORROSIONUNDRAINED TRIAXIAL Sa m p l e N o . DSEIHMDPPRV DIRECT SHEAREXPANSION INDEXHYDROMETERMAXIMUM DENSITYPOCKET PENETROMETERR VALUE SASESGUC SIEVE ANALYSISSAND EQUIVALENTSPECIFIC GRAVITYUNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH De p t h 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 El e v a t i o n Page 2 of 2 Ending Drill Date Hole Diameter Ground Elevation GEOTECHNICAL BORING AND MONITORING WELL LOG LB-1 Logged / Inspected By 12-21-15 (U . S . C . S . ) So i l C l a s s . Co n t e n t , % Mo i s t u r e pc f Dr y D e n s i t y Pe r 6 I n c h e s Bl o w s * * * This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. * * * 12-21-15 8" 135' JMP / JMP B-51 @Surface: 2.5" asphalt concrete (AC) over 4.5"aggregate base (AB) Artificial Fill, undocumented (Afu)@0.6': SAND to Silty SAND, light brown to brown,slighlty moist, fine sand @ 5': Same as above, loose, fine sand,interlayered Quaternary Young Alluvial Fan Deposits (Qyf) @10': SAND, light brown, dry to slightly moist,loose, medium to coarse sand @15': Interlayered SAND and SILT, light brown tobrown, slightly moist to moist, mediumdense/stiff @20': Silty CLAY, light brown, slightly moist, stiff,fine sand, micaceous @25': CLAY, brown, moist, stiff, trace fine sand,micaceous 2" Solid PVCCasing at 0'-40' BB-1 S-1 R-1 S-2 R-2 S-3 R-3 DS DS, CN AL, CN SP/SM SP SP/ML CL 122 588 246 6615 355 5710 5 18 12 This Soil Description applies only to a location of theexploration at the time of sampling. Subsurfaceconditions may differ at other locations and may changewith time. The description is a simplification of the actualconditions encountered. Transitions between soil typesmay be gradual. SOIL DESCRIPTION 135 130 125 120 115 110 105 Fe e t S Lo g Ty p e o f T e s t s Gr a p h i c N Fe e t Hollow Stem Auger - 140lb - Autohammer - 30" Drop Martini Drilling Corporation Location Starting Drill Date Drilling Co.Drilling Co. Project Project No. See Figure 2 - Exploration Location Map Anaheim Plaza Hotel WELL DIAGRAM 11206.001 Drilling Method BULK SAMPLECORE SAMPLEGRAB SAMPLERING SAMPLESPLIT SPOON SAMPLETUBE SAMPLE BCGRST SAMPLE TYPES:TYPE OF TESTS:-200ALCNCOCRCU % FINES PASSINGATTERBERG LIMITSCONSOLIDATIONCOLLAPSECORROSIONUNDRAINED TRIAXIAL Sa m p l e N o . DSEIHMDPPRV DIRECT SHEAREXPANSION INDEXHYDROMETERMAXIMUM DENSITYPOCKET PENETROMETERR VALUE SASESGUC SIEVE ANALYSISSAND EQUIVALENTSPECIFIC GRAVITYUNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH De p t h 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 El e v a t i o n Page 1 of 2 Ending Drill Date Hole Diameter Ground Elevation GEOTECHNICAL BORING AND MONITORING WELL LOG LB-2 Logged / Inspected By 12-21-15 (U . S . C . S . ) So i l C l a s s . Co n t e n t , % Mo i s t u r e pc f Dr y D e n s i t y Pe r 6 I n c h e s Bl o w s * * * This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. * * * 12-21-15 8" 137' JMP / JMP B-52 @35': Same as above, trace fine sand @40': SAND, light brown, slightly moist, mediumdense, fine to medium sand @42.5': SAND to Silty SAND, light brown, slighlymoist, medium dense, fine to medium sand @47.5': SAND, light brown, slightly moist,medium dense, fine to medium sand @50': Same as above, dense @52.5': SAND to Silty SAND, light brown, slightlymoist, dense, fine to medium sand Total depth of boring: 56.5 feet bgs.Boring hand-augered to 5 feet bgs.No groundwater encountered during drilling.Boring completed with temporary percolation testwell upon completion of drilling.Percolation test well casing removed and boringbackfilled with soil cuttings upon completion ofpercolation testing. Pea Gravel FilterPack at 39'-45' 2" Slotted PVCCasing at 40'-45' Bentonite Seal at45'-46' Backfilled withExcess SoilCuttings at46'-56.5' S-4 R-4 S-5 R-5 S-6 R-6 S-7 R-7 SP SP/SM SP SP/SM 346 101528 81215 111737 61215 132033 91418 81524 16 3 6 3 4 3 5 3 100 107 102 96 This Soil Description applies only to a location of theexploration at the time of sampling. Subsurfaceconditions may differ at other locations and may changewith time. The description is a simplification of the actualconditions encountered. Transitions between soil typesmay be gradual. SOIL DESCRIPTION 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 Fe e t S Lo g Ty p e o f T e s t s Gr a p h i c N Fe e t Hollow Stem Auger - 140lb - Autohammer - 30" Drop Martini Drilling Corporation Location Starting Drill Date Drilling Co.Drilling Co. Project Project No. See Figure 2 - Exploration Location Map Anaheim Plaza Hotel WELL DIAGRAM 11206.001 Drilling Method BULK SAMPLECORE SAMPLEGRAB SAMPLERING SAMPLESPLIT SPOON SAMPLETUBE SAMPLE BCGRST SAMPLE TYPES:TYPE OF TESTS:-200ALCNCOCRCU % FINES PASSINGATTERBERG LIMITSCONSOLIDATIONCOLLAPSECORROSIONUNDRAINED TRIAXIAL Sa m p l e N o . DSEIHMDPPRV DIRECT SHEAREXPANSION INDEXHYDROMETERMAXIMUM DENSITYPOCKET PENETROMETERR VALUE SASESGUC SIEVE ANALYSISSAND EQUIVALENTSPECIFIC GRAVITYUNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH De p t h 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 El e v a t i o n Page 2 of 2 Ending Drill Date Hole Diameter Ground Elevation GEOTECHNICAL BORING AND MONITORING WELL LOG LB-2 Logged / Inspected By 12-21-15 (U . S . C . S . ) So i l C l a s s . Co n t e n t , % Mo i s t u r e pc f Dr y D e n s i t y Pe r 6 I n c h e s Bl o w s * * * This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. * * * 12-21-15 8" 137' JMP / JMP B-53 @Surface: 3.5" asphalt concrete (AC) over 3"aggregate base (AB) Artificial Fill, undocumented (Afu)@0.5': Silty SAND, light brown, dry to slightlymoist, loose, fine to medium sand, tracecoarse sand Quaternary Young Alluvial Fan Deposits (Qyf)@5': SAND (SP), light brown, dry to slightly moist,loose, fine to medium sand, trace coarse sand @10': Interlayered SAND and Silty SAND, lightbrown to brown, slightly moist, loose, fine tomedium sand @15': SAND, light brown, dry to slightly moist,medium dense, fine to medium sand @20': Same as above, loose @22.5': Interlayered SAND and Silty SAND, lightbrown to brown, moist to slightly moist, loose @25': SILT, brown, moist, medium stiff @27.5': Sandy SILT, brown, moist, very stiff,trace coarse sand @30': SAND to Silty SAND, light brown, moist,medium dense, fine to medium sand @32.5': Silty SAND, brown, moist, loose, fine tomedium sand 2" Solid PVCCasing at 0'-30' 2" Slotted PVCCasing at 30'-35' BB-1 R-1 S-1 R-2 S-2 R-3 S-3 R-4 S-4 R-5 MD, DS,CN, EI,RV, CRSM SP SP/SM SP SP/SM ML SP/SM SM 469 122 7911 236 868 223 4927 71112 967 1 8 2 3 9 23 18 5 8 101 94 107 116 99 This Soil Description applies only to a location of theexploration at the time of sampling. Subsurfaceconditions may differ at other locations and may changewith time. The description is a simplification of the actualconditions encountered. Transitions between soil typesmay be gradual. SOIL DESCRIPTION 135 130 125 120 115 110 105 Fe e t S Lo g Ty p e o f T e s t s Gr a p h i c N Fe e t Hollow Stem Auger - 140lb - Autohammer - 30" Drop Martini Drilling Corporation Location Starting Drill Date Drilling Co.Drilling Co. Project Project No. See Figure 2 - Exploration Location Map Anaheim Plaza Hotel WELL DIAGRAM 11206.001 Drilling Method BULK SAMPLECORE SAMPLEGRAB SAMPLERING SAMPLESPLIT SPOON SAMPLETUBE SAMPLE BCGRST SAMPLE TYPES:TYPE OF TESTS:-200ALCNCOCRCU % FINES PASSINGATTERBERG LIMITSCONSOLIDATIONCOLLAPSECORROSIONUNDRAINED TRIAXIAL Sa m p l e N o . DSEIHMDPPRV DIRECT SHEAREXPANSION INDEXHYDROMETERMAXIMUM DENSITYPOCKET PENETROMETERR VALUE SASESGUC SIEVE ANALYSISSAND EQUIVALENTSPECIFIC GRAVITYUNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH De p t h 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 El e v a t i o n Page 1 of 2 Ending Drill Date Hole Diameter Ground Elevation GEOTECHNICAL BORING AND MONITORING WELL LOG LB-3 Logged / Inspected By 12-21-15 (U . S . C . S . ) So i l C l a s s . Co n t e n t , % Mo i s t u r e pc f Dr y D e n s i t y Pe r 6 I n c h e s Bl o w s * * * This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. * * * 12-21-15 8" 137' JMP / JMP B-54 @35': SILT, brown, moist, stiff @ 37.5': SIlty sandy CLAY, brown, very moist,stiff @40': Silty SAND to SAND, light brown, slightlymoist, medium dense, fine to medium sand @42.5': Same as above, dense @45': Same as above, medium dense @47.5': SAND, light brown, slightly moist, dense,fine to coarse sand, few fine gravels Total depth of boring: 51.5 feet bgs.Boring hand-augered to 5 feet bgs.No groundwater encountered during drilling.Boring completed with temporary percolation testwell upon completion of drilling.Percolation test well casing removed and boringbackfilled with soil cuttings upon completion ofpercolation testing. Bentonite Seal at35'-36' Pea Gravel FilterPack at 29'-35' Backfilled withExcess SoilCuttings at36'-51.5' S-5 R-6 S-6 R-7 S-7 R-8 S-8 ML CL SP/SM SP 235 2414 5910 162640 91013 172450 81419 24 21 3 2 9 3 2 105 105 109 This Soil Description applies only to a location of theexploration at the time of sampling. Subsurfaceconditions may differ at other locations and may changewith time. The description is a simplification of the actualconditions encountered. Transitions between soil typesmay be gradual. SOIL DESCRIPTION 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 Fe e t S Lo g Ty p e o f T e s t s Gr a p h i c N Fe e t Hollow Stem Auger - 140lb - Autohammer - 30" Drop Martini Drilling Corporation Location Starting Drill Date Drilling Co.Drilling Co. Project Project No. See Figure 2 - Exploration Location Map Anaheim Plaza Hotel WELL DIAGRAM 11206.001 Drilling Method BULK SAMPLECORE SAMPLEGRAB SAMPLERING SAMPLESPLIT SPOON SAMPLETUBE SAMPLE BCGRST SAMPLE TYPES:TYPE OF TESTS:-200ALCNCOCRCU % FINES PASSINGATTERBERG LIMITSCONSOLIDATIONCOLLAPSECORROSIONUNDRAINED TRIAXIAL Sa m p l e N o . DSEIHMDPPRV DIRECT SHEAREXPANSION INDEXHYDROMETERMAXIMUM DENSITYPOCKET PENETROMETERR VALUE SASESGUC SIEVE ANALYSISSAND EQUIVALENTSPECIFIC GRAVITYUNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH De p t h 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 El e v a t i o n Page 2 of 2 Ending Drill Date Hole Diameter Ground Elevation GEOTECHNICAL BORING AND MONITORING WELL LOG LB-3 Logged / Inspected By 12-21-15 (U . S . C . S . ) So i l C l a s s . Co n t e n t , % Mo i s t u r e pc f Dr y D e n s i t y Pe r 6 I n c h e s Bl o w s * * * This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. * * * 12-21-15 8" 137' JMP / JMP B-55 @Surface: 2" asphalt concrete (AC) over 8"aggregate base (AB) Artificial Fill, undocumented (Afu)@0.8': Silty SAND, light brown to brown, moist @5': Interlayered SAND and SILT, light brown tobrown, moist, loose/soft Quaternary Young Alluvial Fan Deposits (Qyf)@7.5': SAND with silt, light brown, slightly moistto moist, medium dense, fine to medium sand @10': Same as above, loose @12.5': Same as above, medium dense @25': Sandy SILT to SILT, brown, moist,stiff/medium dense @27.5': CLAY, brown, moist, stiff @30': Sandy SILT to Silty SAND, brown, moist,medium stiff/loose, fine sand BB-1 S-1 R-1 S-2 R-2 S-3 R-3 S-4 R-4 S-5 R-5 S-6 MD, DS,CN, EI,RV, CR DS DS AL, CN SM SP/ML SP-SM SM/ML CL SM/ML 122 3710 245 71218 367 71119 367 101524 776 388 245 14 4 3 3 3 3 12 15 101 101 This Soil Description applies only to a location of theexploration at the time of sampling. Subsurfaceconditions may differ at other locations and may changewith time. The description is a simplification of the actualconditions encountered. Transitions between soil typesmay be gradual. SOIL DESCRIPTION 135 130 125 120 115 110 105 Fe e t S Lo g Ty p e o f T e s t s Gr a p h i c N Fe e t Hollow Stem Auger - 140lb - Autohammer - 30" Drop Martini Drilling Corporation Location Starting Drill Date Drilling Co.Drilling Co. Project Project No. See Figure 2 - Exploration Location Map Anaheim Plaza Hotel WELL DIAGRAM 11206.001 Drilling Method BULK SAMPLECORE SAMPLEGRAB SAMPLERING SAMPLESPLIT SPOON SAMPLETUBE SAMPLE BCGRST SAMPLE TYPES:TYPE OF TESTS:-200ALCNCOCRCU % FINES PASSINGATTERBERG LIMITSCONSOLIDATIONCOLLAPSECORROSIONUNDRAINED TRIAXIAL Sa m p l e N o . DSEIHMDPPRV DIRECT SHEAREXPANSION INDEXHYDROMETERMAXIMUM DENSITYPOCKET PENETROMETERR VALUE SASESGUC SIEVE ANALYSISSAND EQUIVALENTSPECIFIC GRAVITYUNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH De p t h 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 El e v a t i o n Page 1 of 2 Ending Drill Date Hole Diameter Ground Elevation GEOTECHNICAL BORING AND MONITORING WELL LOG LB-4 Logged / Inspected By 12-21-15 (U . S . C . S . ) So i l C l a s s . Co n t e n t , % Mo i s t u r e pc f Dr y D e n s i t y Pe r 6 I n c h e s Bl o w s * * * This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. * * * 12-21-15 8" 136' JMP / JMP B-56 @35': Same as above, stiff/medium dense @40': CLAY, brown, moist to very moist, soft @45': SAND, light brown, slightly moist, dense,fine to medium sand @50': Silty SAND to SAND, light brown, slightlymoist to moist, medium dense, fine to mediumsand Total depth of boring: 51.5 feet bgs.Boring hand-augered to 5 feet bgs.No groundwater encountered during drilling.Boring completed with temporary percolation testwell upon completion of drilling.Percolation test well casing removed and boringbackfilled with soil cuttings upon completion ofpercolation testing. R-6 S-7 R-7 S-8 CN ALCL SP SP/SM 4813 111 132333 61215 2 3 104 This Soil Description applies only to a location of theexploration at the time of sampling. Subsurfaceconditions may differ at other locations and may changewith time. The description is a simplification of the actualconditions encountered. Transitions between soil typesmay be gradual. SOIL DESCRIPTION 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 Fe e t S Lo g Ty p e o f T e s t s Gr a p h i c N Fe e t Hollow Stem Auger - 140lb - Autohammer - 30" Drop Martini Drilling Corporation Location Starting Drill Date Drilling Co.Drilling Co. Project Project No. See Figure 2 - Exploration Location Map Anaheim Plaza Hotel WELL DIAGRAM 11206.001 Drilling Method BULK SAMPLECORE SAMPLEGRAB SAMPLERING SAMPLESPLIT SPOON SAMPLETUBE SAMPLE BCGRST SAMPLE TYPES:TYPE OF TESTS:-200ALCNCOCRCU % FINES PASSINGATTERBERG LIMITSCONSOLIDATIONCOLLAPSECORROSIONUNDRAINED TRIAXIAL Sa m p l e N o . DSEIHMDPPRV DIRECT SHEAREXPANSION INDEXHYDROMETERMAXIMUM DENSITYPOCKET PENETROMETERR VALUE SASESGUC SIEVE ANALYSISSAND EQUIVALENTSPECIFIC GRAVITYUNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH De p t h 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 El e v a t i o n Page 2 of 2 Ending Drill Date Hole Diameter Ground Elevation GEOTECHNICAL BORING AND MONITORING WELL LOG LB-4 Logged / Inspected By 12-21-15 (U . S . C . S . ) So i l C l a s s . Co n t e n t , % Mo i s t u r e pc f Dr y D e n s i t y Pe r 6 I n c h e s Bl o w s * * * This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. * * * 12-21-15 8" 136' JMP / JMP B-57 B-58 B-59 B-60 B-61 B-62 B-63 B-64 B-65 B-66 B-67 B-68 B-69 B-70 APPENDIX B LABORATORY TEST RESULTS B-71 Tested By:O. Figueroa Date:01/04/16 Input By: J. Ward Date:01/05/16 B-3 Depth (ft.):0-5 X Moist Mechanical Ram Dry Manual Ram Mold Volume (ft³)0.03340 Ram Weight = 10 lb.; Drop = 18 in. 123456 3911 3997 3919 1851 1851 1851 2060 2146 2068 410.2 419.6 430.9 387.6 388.3 390.5 39.1 39.4 39.0 6.48 8.97 11.49 136.0 141.6 136.5 127.7 130.0 122.4 130.5 8.5 PROCEDURE USED X Procedure A Soil Passing No. 4 (4.75 mm) Sieve Mold : 4 in. (101.6 mm) diameter Layers : 5 (Five) Blows per layer : 25 (twenty-five) May be used if +#4 is 20% or less Procedure B Soil Passing 3/8 in. (9.5 mm) Sieve Mold : 4 in. (101.6 mm) diameter Layers : 5 (Five) Blows per layer : 25 (twenty-five) Use if +#4 is >20% and +3/8 in. is 20% or less Procedure C Soil Passing 3/4 in. (19.0 mm) Sieve Mold : 6 in. (152.4 mm) diameter Layers : 5 (Five) Blows per layer : 56 (fifty-six) Use if +3/8 in. is >20% and +¾ in. is <30% Particle-Size Distribution: GR:SA:FIAtterberg Limits: LL,PL,PI Optimum Moisture Content (%) Maximum Dry Density (pcf) Net Weight of Soil (g) Wet Density (pcf) Dry Density (pcf) Moisture Content (%) Wet Weight of Soil + Cont. (g) Dry Weight of Soil + Cont. (g) Weight of Container (g) Weight of Mold (g) Anaheim Plaza Hotel Preparation Method: Wt. Compacted Soil + Mold (g) BB-1 11206.001 TEST NO. Soil Identification: Project Name: Sample No.: Dark olive brown silty sand (SM) MODIFIED PROCTOR COMPACTION TEST ASTM D 1557 Project No.: Boring No.: 115.0 120.0 125.0 130.0 135.0 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20. Dr y D e n s i t y ( p c f ) Moisture Content (%) SP. GR. = 2.65 SP. GR. = 2.70 SP. GR. = 2.75 XX MX B-3, BB-1 @ 0-5 B-72 Tested By:O. Figueroa Date:01/04/16 Input By: J. Ward Date:01/05/16 B-4 Depth (ft.):0-5 X Moist Mechanical Ram Dry Manual Ram Mold Volume (ft³)0.03340 Ram Weight = 10 lb.; Drop = 18 in. 123456 3828 3922 3916 1851 1851 1851 1977 2071 2065 395.8 416.7 436.6 371.5 383.0 393.7 38.8 38.6 38.8 7.30 9.79 12.09 130.5 136.7 136.3 121.6 124.5 121.6 124.5 9.5 PROCEDURE USED X Procedure A Soil Passing No. 4 (4.75 mm) Sieve Mold : 4 in. (101.6 mm) diameter Layers : 5 (Five) Blows per layer : 25 (twenty-five) May be used if +#4 is 20% or less Procedure B Soil Passing 3/8 in. (9.5 mm) Sieve Mold : 4 in. (101.6 mm) diameter Layers : 5 (Five) Blows per layer : 25 (twenty-five) Use if +#4 is >20% and +3/8 in. is 20% or less Procedure C Soil Passing 3/4 in. (19.0 mm) Sieve Mold : 6 in. (152.4 mm) diameter Layers : 5 (Five) Blows per layer : 56 (fifty-six) Use if +3/8 in. is >20% and +¾ in. is <30% Particle-Size Distribution: GR:SA:FIAtterberg Limits: LL,PL,PI Sample No.: Olive brown sandy silt s(ML) MODIFIED PROCTOR COMPACTION TEST ASTM D 1557 Project No.: Boring No.: Weight of Container (g) Weight of Mold (g) Anaheim Plaza Hotel Preparation Method: Wt. Compacted Soil + Mold (g) BB-1 11206.001 TEST NO. Soil Identification: Project Name: Optimum Moisture Content (%) Maximum Dry Density (pcf) Net Weight of Soil (g) Wet Density (pcf) Dry Density (pcf) Moisture Content (%) Wet Weight of Soil + Cont. (g) Dry Weight of Soil + Cont. (g) 115.0 120.0 125.0 130.0 135.0 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20. Dr y D e n s i t y ( p c f ) Moisture Content (%) SP. GR. = 2.65 SP. GR. = 2.70 SP. GR. = 2.75 XX MX B-4, BB-1 @ 0-5 B-73 Tested By:G. Berdy Date:01/05/16 Checked By:J. Ward Date:01/16/16 Depth (ft.): Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) Wt. of Container No. (g) Dry Wt. of Soil (g) Weight Soil Retained on #4 Sieve Percent Passing # 4 SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate < 0.0002 in./h 1304 Expansion Index (EI meas) = ((Final Rdg - Initial Rdg) / Initial Thick.) x 1000 5 1.0 0.0780 01/06/16 8:20 1.0 1372 0.0780 01/06/16 7:12 1.0 Add Distilled Water to the Specimen 01/05/16 9:50 1.0 22 0.0755 10 01/05/16 9:18 1.0 0 0.0730 0.073001/05/16 9:28 Degree of Saturation (%) [ S meas]49.5 81.0 Date Time Pressure (psi) Elapsed Time (min.) Dial Readings (in.) Total Porosity 0.296 0.299 Pore Volume (cc) 61.3 62.3 Dry Density (pcf) 118.7 118.1 Void Ratio 0.420 0.427 Moisture Content (%) 7.70 12.83 Wet Density (pcf) 127.8 133.3 Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g)789.20 601.89 Wt. of Container (g)0.00 208.40 Container No.OO Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g)850.00 652.36 Wt. of Mold (g)208.40 0.00 Specific Gravity (Assumed) 2.70 2.70 Specimen Height (in.) 1.0000 1.0050 Wt. Comp. Soil + Mold (g)632.20 443.96 Specimen Diameter (in.) 4.01 4.01 100.00 MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test 1000.00 0.00 1000.00 0.00 0-5 Sample No.:BB-1 Soil Identification:Dark olive brown silty sand (SM) Project No.:11206.001 Boring No.: EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS ASTM D 4829 Project Name:Anaheim Plaza Hotel B-3 B-74 Tested By:G. Berdy Date:01/05/16 Checked By:J. Ward Date:01/16/16 Depth (ft.): Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) Wt. of Container No. (g) Dry Wt. of Soil (g) Weight Soil Retained on #4 Sieve Percent Passing # 4 SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate < 0.0002 in./h 1343 Expansion Index (EI meas) = ((Final Rdg - Initial Rdg) / Initial Thick.) x 1000 15 1.0 0.1330 01/06/16 8:16 1.0 1404 0.1330 01/06/16 7:15 1.0 Add Distilled Water to the Specimen 01/05/16 9:20 1.0 28 0.1305 10 01/05/16 8:42 1.0 0 0.1190 0.118501/05/16 8:52 Degree of Saturation (%) [ S meas]49.1 84.1 Date Time Pressure (psi) Elapsed Time (min.) Dial Readings (in.) Total Porosity 0.336 0.345 Pore Volume (cc) 69.6 72.5 Dry Density (pcf) 111.9 110.4 Void Ratio 0.506 0.527 Moisture Content (%) 9.20 16.43 Wet Density (pcf) 122.2 128.5 Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g)746.50 552.06 Wt. of Container (g)0.00 181.00 Container No.OO Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g)815.20 613.03 Wt. of Mold (g)181.00 0.00 Specific Gravity (Assumed) 2.70 2.70 Specimen Height (in.) 1.0000 1.0140 Wt. Comp. Soil + Mold (g)586.20 432.03 Specimen Diameter (in.) 4.01 4.01 100.00 MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test 1000.00 0.00 1000.00 0.00 0-5 Sample No.:BB-1 Soil Identification:Olive brown sandy silt s(ML) Project No.:11206.001 Boring No.: EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS ASTM D 4829 Project Name:Anaheim Plaza Hotel B-4 B-75 Project Name:Tested By:G. Bathala Date:01/09/16 Project No. :Input By:J. Ward Date:01/16/16 Boring No.:Checked By:J. Ward Sample No.:Depth (ft.) Soil Identification: 1212 21 22 Trial 1 =28 20.88 18.91 27.35 27.00 Trial 2 =28 19.40 17.76 24.25 23.98 Ave. LL =28 11.50 11.66 13.55 13.53 (see equation below) 18.73 18.85 28.97 28.90 28 19 9 CL PI at "A" - Line = 0.73(LL-20) 5.84 One - Point Liquid Limit Calculation LL =Wn(N/25) (Wn = water content, N = number of blows) PROCEDURES USED Wet Preparation Multipoint - Wet X Dry Preparation One-point Procedure A Multipoint Test X Procedure B One-point Test Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) Wt. of Container (g) Moisture Content (%) [Wn] Liquid Limit Plastic Limit Plasticity Index Classification Number of Blows [N] Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) LIQUID LIMIT PLASTIC LIMIT Olive brown lean clay (CL) TEST NO. ATTERBERG LIMITS ASTM D 4318 Anaheim Plaza Hotel 11206.001 B-4 R-5 27.5 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 10203040506070809010 Pl a s t i c i t y I n d e x ( P I ) Liquid Limit (LL) 0.121 CL or OL ML or OL MH or OH For classification of fine-grained soils and fine-grained fraction of coarse-grained soils "A" Line 74 CH or OH CL- ML 27 28 29 30 10 100 Mo i s t u r e C o n t e n t ( % ) Number of Blows 20 25 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 B-76 Project Name:Tested By:S. Felter Date:01/12/16 Project No. :Input By:J. Ward Date:01/16/16 Boring No.:Checked By:J. Ward Sample No.:Depth (ft.) Soil Identification: 121234 34 25 19 23.56 24.50 34.23 35.35 35.96 22.00 22.80 28.80 29.24 29.50 13.53 13.65 13.59 13.59 13.51 18.42 18.58 35.70 39.04 40.40 39 18 21 CL PI at "A" - Line = 0.73(LL-20) 13.87 One - Point Liquid Limit Calculation LL =Wn(N/25) PROCEDURES USED Wet Preparation Multipoint - Wet X Dry Preparation Multipoint - Dry X Procedure A Multipoint Test Procedure B One-point Test ATTERBERG LIMITS ASTM D 4318 Anaheim Plaza Hotel 11206.001 B-2 R-3 30.0 Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) Wt. of Container (g) Moisture Content (%) [Wn] Light olive brown lean clay (CL) TEST NO. Liquid Limit Plastic Limit Plasticity Index Classification Number of Blows [N] Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) LIQUID LIMIT PLASTIC LIMIT 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 102030405060708090100 Pl a s t i c i t y I n d e x ( P I ) Liquid Limit (LL) 0.121 CL or OL ML or OL MH or OH For classification of fine-grained soils and fine-grained fraction of coarse- grained soils "A" Line 74 CH or OH CL- ML 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 10 100 Mo i s t u r e C o n t e n t ( % ) Number of Blows 20 25 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 B-77 Project Name:Tested By:S. Felter Date:01/11/16 Project No. :Input By:J. Ward Date:01/16/16 Boring No.:Checked By:J. Ward Sample No.:Depth (ft.) Soil Identification: 121234 33 24 19 22.69 22.78 35.37 34.01 35.04 20.88 20.94 28.54 27.38 28.05 11.50 11.66 13.61 13.55 13.53 19.30 19.83 45.75 47.94 48.14 47 20 27 CL PI at "A" - Line = 0.73(LL-20) 19.71 One - Point Liquid Limit Calculation LL =Wn(N/25) PROCEDURES USED Wet Preparation Multipoint - Wet X Dry Preparation Multipoint - Dry X Procedure A Multipoint Test Procedure B One-point Test ATTERBERG LIMITS ASTM D 4318 Anaheim Plaza Hotel 11206.001 B-4 S-7 40.0 Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) Wt. of Container (g) Moisture Content (%) [Wn] Olive brown lean clay (CL) TEST NO. Liquid Limit Plastic Limit Plasticity Index Classification Number of Blows [N] Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) LIQUID LIMIT PLASTIC LIMIT 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 102030405060708090100 Pl a s t i c i t y I n d e x ( P I ) Liquid Limit (LL) 0.121 CL or OL ML or OL MH or OH For classification of fine-grained soils and fine-grained fraction of coarse- grained soils "A" Line 74 CH or OH CL- ML 45 46 47 48 49 10 100 Mo i s t u r e C o n t e n t ( % ) Number of Blows 20 25 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 B-78 Project Name:Tested By:G. Bathala Date:01/05/16 Project No.:Checked By:J. Ward Date:01/16/16 Boring No.:Depth (ft.): Sample No.:Sample Type:Ring Soil Identification: 2.415 1.000 182.33 43.34 0.9756 138.99 103.17 0.00 34.7 85.8 97 0.3407 220.61 185.28 38.77 34.24 87.9 100 0.3131 2.71 62.43 0.10 0.3398 0.9991 0.00 0.09 0.970 0.09 0.25 0.3323 0.9916 0.06 0.84 0.956 0.78 0.50 0.3285 0.9878 0.16 1.22 0.951 1.06 1.00 0.3211 0.9804 0.31 1.96 0.939 1.65 2.00 0.3127 0.9720 0.47 2.80 0.926 2.33 2.00 0.3172 0.9765 0.47 2.35 0.935 1.88 4.00 0.3096 0.9689 0.64 3.11 0.923 2.47 8.00 0.2916 0.9509 0.81 4.92 0.891 4.11 16.00 0.2607 0.9200 1.00 8.00 0.834 7.00 4.00 0.2729 0.9322 0.79 6.79 0.854 6.00 1.00 0.2947 0.9540 0.55 4.60 0.892 4.05 0.25 0.3131 0.9724 0.32 2.76 0.924 2.44 Anaheim Plaza Hotel ONE-DIMENSIONAL CONSOLIDATION PROPERTIES of SOILS ASTM D 2435 Light olive brown silty clay (CL-ML) 20.0 R-2 11206.001 B-2 Weight of Container (g) Final Moisture Content (%) Water Density (pcf) Final Dry Density (pcf) Final Saturation (%) Final Vertical Reading (in.) Specific Gravity (assumed) Initial Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pcf) Initial Saturation (%) Initial Vertical Reading (in.) Wt.of Wet Sample+Cont. (g) Wt. of Dry Sample+Cont. (g) Sample Diameter (in.) Sample Thickness (in.) Wt. of Sample + Ring (g) Weight of Ring (g) After Test Height after consol. (in.) Wt.Wet Sample+Cont. (g) Wt.of Dry Sample+Cont. (g) Weight of Container (g) Before Test Corrected Deforma- tion (%) No Time Readings Date Time Elapsed Time (min) Square Root of Time Dial Rdgs. (in.) Pressure (p) (ksf) Final Reading (in.) Apparent Thickness (in.) Load Compliance (%) Deformation % of Sample Thickness Void Ratio 0.820 0.840 0.860 0.880 0.900 0.920 0.940 0.960 0.980 0.10 1.00 10.00 100. Vo i d R a t i o Pressure, p (ksf) Inundate with Tap water B-79 Initial Final Initial Final Initial Final Initial Final Boring No. Sample No. Depth (ft.) Moisture Content (%) ONE-DIMENSIONAL CONSOLIDATION PROPERTIES of SOILS ASTM D 2435 34.2 87.9B-2 R-2 34.7 Soil Identification: Light olive brown silty clay (CL-ML) Project No.: Anaheim Plaza Hotel 01-16 11206.001 No Time Readings 0.924 97 10085.8 Degree of Saturation (%)Dry Density (pcf) 0.972 Void Ratio 20.0 0.2960 0.3460 0.3960 0.4460 0.4960 0.5460 0.5960 0.1 1.0 De f o r m a t i o n D i a l R e a d i n g ( i n . ) Log of Time (min.) 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.000.10 1.00 10.00 100.00 De f o r m a t i o n ( % ) Pressure, p (ksf) 0.0000 0.0500 0.1000 0.1500 0.2000 0.2500 0.3000 0.3500 0.4000 0.4500 0.5000 0.5500 0.0 10.0 Square Root of Time (min.1/2) Inundate with Tap water B-80 Project Name:Tested By:G. Bathala Date:01/05/16 Project No.:Checked By:J. Ward Date:01/16/16 Boring No.:Depth (ft.): Sample No.:Sample Type:Ring Soil Identification: 2.415 1.000 192.34 43.18 0.9545 334.63 274.65 38.80 25.4 98.9 97 0.3294 229.79 204.21 39.36 21.02 106.0 96 0.2799 2.70 62.43 0.10 0.3288 0.9994 0.00 0.06 0.703 0.06 1/8/16 8:15:00 0.0 0.0 0.2993 0.25 0.3236 0.9942 0.04 0.59 0.695 0.55 1/8/16 8:15:06 0.1 0.3 0.2930 0.50 0.3186 0.9892 0.14 1.08 0.688 0.94 1/8/16 8:15:15 0.2 0.5 0.2925 1.00 0.3098 0.9804 0.28 1.96 0.676 1.68 1/8/16 8:15:30 0.5 0.7 0.2920 2.00 0.2992 0.9698 0.47 3.03 0.661 2.56 1/8/16 8:16:00 1.0 1.0 0.2916 2.00 0.2993 0.9699 0.47 3.02 0.661 2.55 1/8/16 8:17:00 2.0 1.4 0.2912 4.00 0.2882 0.9588 0.67 4.13 0.645 3.46 1/8/16 8:19:00 4.0 2.0 0.2908 8.00 0.2696 0.9402 0.90 5.99 0.618 5.09 1/8/16 8:23:00 8.0 2.8 0.2904 16.00 0.2484 0.9190 1.18 8.10 0.586 6.92 1/8/16 8:30:00 15.0 3.9 0.2902 4.00 0.2562 0.9268 0.88 7.32 0.595 6.44 1/8/16 8:45:00 30.0 5.5 0.2899 1.00 0.2696 0.9402 0.63 5.98 0.613 5.35 1/8/16 9:15:00 60.0 7.7 0.2896 0.25 0.2799 0.9505 0.40 4.95 0.627 4.55 1/8/16 10:15:00 120.0 11.0 0.2892 1/8/16 12:15:00 240.0 15.5 0.2890 1/8/16 16:15:00 480.0 21.9 0.2887 1/9/16 8:15:00 1440.0 37.9 0.2882 1/9/16 9:01:00 1486.0 38.5 0.2882 Pressure (p) (ksf) Final Reading (in.) Apparent Thickness (in.) Load Compliance (%) Deformation % of Sample Thickness Void Ratio Corrected Deforma- tion (%) Time Readings @ 4.0 ksf Date Time Elapsed Time (min) Square Root of Time Dial Rdgs. (in.) Sample Diameter (in.) Sample Thickness (in.) Wt. of Sample + Ring (g) Weight of Ring (g) After Test Height after consol. (in.) Wt.Wet Sample+Cont. (g) Wt.of Dry Sample+Cont. (g) Weight of Container (g) Before Test Initial Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pcf) Initial Saturation (%) Initial Vertical Reading (in.) Wt.of Wet Sample+Cont. (g) Wt. of Dry Sample+Cont. (g) Weight of Container (g) Final Moisture Content (%) Water Density (pcf) Final Dry Density (pcf) Final Saturation (%) Final Vertical Reading (in.) Specific Gravity (assumed) Anaheim Plaza Hotel ONE-DIMENSIONAL CONSOLIDATION PROPERTIES of SOILS ASTM D 2435 Light olive brown lean clay (CL) 30.0 R-3 11206.001 B-2 0.560 0.580 0.600 0.620 0.640 0.660 0.680 0.700 0.720 0.10 1.00 10.00 100. Vo i d R a t i o Pressure, p (ksf) Inundate with Tap water B-81 Initial Final Initial Final Initial Final Initial Final Time Readings @ 4.0 ksf 0.627 97 9698.9 Degree of Saturation (%)Dry Density (pcf) 0.704 Void Ratio 30.0 25.4 Soil Identification: Light olive brown lean clay (CL) Project No.: Anaheim Plaza Hotel 01-16 11206.001 Boring No. Sample No. Depth (ft.) Moisture Content (%) ONE-DIMENSIONAL CONSOLIDATION PROPERTIES of SOILS ASTM D 2435 21.0 106.0B-2 R-3 0.2860 0.2880 0.2900 0.2920 0.2940 0.2960 0.2980 0.3000 0.1 1.0 10.0 100.0 1000.0 10000.0 De f o r m a t i o n D i a l R e a d i n g ( i n . ) Log of Time (min.) 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.000.10 1.00 10.00 100.00 De f o r m a t i o n ( % ) Pressure, p (ksf) 0.2860 0.2880 0.2900 0.2920 0.2940 0.2960 0.2980 0.3000 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 Square Root of Time (min.1/2) Inundate with Tap water B-82 Project Name:Tested By:G. Bathala Date:01/05/16 Project No.:Checked By:J. Ward Date:01/16/16 Boring No.:Depth (ft.): Sample No.:Sample Type: Soil Identification: 2.415 1.000 204.72 43.16 0.9856 169.35 159.41 39.27 8.3 124.1 62 0.3008 248.28 231.48 39.33 11.28 125.7 89 0.2838 2.70 62.43 0.10 0.2998 0.9990 0.00 0.10 0.357 0.10 0.25 0.2970 0.9962 0.04 0.39 0.354 0.35 0.50 0.2943 0.9935 0.14 0.65 0.351 0.51 1.00 0.2903 0.9895 0.24 1.06 0.347 0.82 2.00 0.2859 0.9851 0.34 1.49 0.343 1.15 2.00 0.2857 0.9849 0.34 1.51 0.342 1.17 4.00 0.2813 0.9805 0.45 1.95 0.338 1.50 8.00 0.2752 0.9744 0.61 2.56 0.332 1.95 16.00 0.2678 0.9670 0.78 3.30 0.324 2.52 4.00 0.2725 0.9717 0.56 2.84 0.327 2.28 1.00 0.2782 0.9774 0.40 2.26 0.333 1.86 0.25 0.2838 0.9830 0.26 1.70 0.339 1.44 Dial Rdgs. (in.) Pressure (p) (ksf) Final Reading (in.) Apparent Thickness (in.) Load Compliance (%) Deformation % of Sample Thickness Void Ratio Wt.Wet Sample+Cont. (g) Wt.of Dry Sample+Cont. (g) Weight of Container (g) Before Test Corrected Deforma- tion (%) No Time Readings Date Time Elapsed Time (min) Square Root of Time Initial Saturation (%) Initial Vertical Reading (in.) Wt.of Wet Sample+Cont. (g) Wt. of Dry Sample+Cont. (g) Sample Diameter (in.) Sample Thickness (in.) Wt. of Sample + Ring (g) Weight of Ring (g) After Test Height after consol. (in.) Weight of Container (g) Final Moisture Content (%) Water Density (pcf) Final Dry Density (pcf) Final Saturation (%) Final Vertical Reading (in.) Specific Gravity (assumed) Initial Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pcf) 95% Remold Anaheim Plaza Hotel ONE-DIMENSIONAL CONSOLIDATION PROPERTIES of SOILS ASTM D 2435 Dark olive brown silty sand (SM) 0-5 BB-1 11206.001 B-3 0.320 0.325 0.330 0.335 0.340 0.345 0.350 0.355 0.360 0.10 1.00 10.00 100. Vo i d R a t i o Pressure, p (ksf) Inundate with Tap water B-83 Initial Final Initial Final Initial Final Initial Final No Time Readings 0.339 62 89124.1 Degree of Saturation (%)Dry Density (pcf) 0.358 Void Ratio 0-5 8.3 Soil Identification: Dark olive brown silty sand (SM) Project No.: Anaheim Plaza Hotel 01-16 11206.001 Boring No. Sample No. Depth (ft.) Moisture Content (%) ONE-DIMENSIONAL CONSOLIDATION PROPERTIES of SOILS ASTM D 2435 11.3 125.7B-3 BB-1 0.2960 0.3460 0.3960 0.4460 0.4960 0.5460 0.5960 0.1 1.0 De f o r m a t i o n D i a l R e a d i n g ( i n . ) Log of Time (min.) 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.000.10 1.00 10.00 100.00 De f o r m a t i o n ( % ) Pressure, p (ksf) 0.0000 0.0500 0.1000 0.1500 0.2000 0.2500 0.3000 0.3500 0.4000 0.4500 0.5000 0.5500 0.0 10.0 Square Root of Time (min.1/2) Inundate with Tap water B-84 Project Name:Tested By:G. Bathala Date:01/05/16 Project No.:Checked By:J. Ward Date:01/16/16 Boring No.:Depth (ft.): Sample No.:Sample Type: Soil Identification: 2.415 1.000 191.27 43.53 0.9866 220.42 205.88 51.05 9.4 112.3 51 0.3019 238.67 216.65 38.14 16.31 113.8 92 0.2849 2.70 62.43 0.10 0.3014 0.9995 0.00 0.05 0.500 0.05 0.25 0.2992 0.9973 0.04 0.27 0.497 0.23 0.50 0.2967 0.9948 0.11 0.52 0.495 0.41 1.00 0.2930 0.9911 0.23 0.89 0.491 0.66 2.00 0.2890 0.9871 0.38 1.29 0.487 0.91 2.00 0.2893 0.9874 0.38 1.27 0.487 0.89 4.00 0.2847 0.9828 0.57 1.73 0.483 1.16 8.00 0.2776 0.9757 0.79 2.44 0.476 1.65 16.00 0.2657 0.9638 1.06 3.62 0.462 2.56 4.00 0.2703 0.9684 0.75 3.16 0.465 2.41 1.00 0.2776 0.9757 0.51 2.43 0.472 1.92 0.25 0.2849 0.9830 0.36 1.71 0.481 1.35 Dial Rdgs. (in.) Pressure (p) (ksf) Final Reading (in.) Apparent Thickness (in.) Load Compliance (%) Deformation % of Sample Thickness Void Ratio Wt.Wet Sample+Cont. (g) Wt.of Dry Sample+Cont. (g) Weight of Container (g) Before Test Corrected Deforma- tion (%) No Time Readings Date Time Elapsed Time (min) Square Root of Time Initial Saturation (%) Initial Vertical Reading (in.) Wt.of Wet Sample+Cont. (g) Wt. of Dry Sample+Cont. (g) Sample Diameter (in.) Sample Thickness (in.) Wt. of Sample + Ring (g) Weight of Ring (g) After Test Height after consol. (in.) Weight of Container (g) Final Moisture Content (%) Water Density (pcf) Final Dry Density (pcf) Final Saturation (%) Final Vertical Reading (in.) Specific Gravity (assumed) Initial Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pcf) 90% Remold Anaheim Plaza Hotel ONE-DIMENSIONAL CONSOLIDATION PROPERTIES of SOILS ASTM D 2435 Olive brown sandy silt s(ML) 0-5 BB-1 11206.001 B-4 0.460 0.465 0.470 0.475 0.480 0.485 0.490 0.495 0.500 0.505 0.10 1.00 10.00 100. Vo i d R a t i o Pressure, p (ksf) Inundate with Tap water B-85 Initial Final Initial Final Initial Final Initial Final No Time Readings 0.481 51 92112.3 Degree of Saturation (%)Dry Density (pcf) 0.501 Void Ratio 0-5 9.4 Soil Identification: Olive brown sandy silt s(ML) Project No.: Anaheim Plaza Hotel 01-16 11206.001 Boring No. Sample No. Depth (ft.) Moisture Content (%) ONE-DIMENSIONAL CONSOLIDATION PROPERTIES of SOILS ASTM D 2435 16.3 113.8B-4 BB-1 0.2960 0.3460 0.3960 0.4460 0.4960 0.5460 0.5960 0.1 1.0 De f o r m a t i o n D i a l R e a d i n g ( i n . ) Log of Time (min.) 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.000.10 1.00 10.00 100.00 De f o r m a t i o n ( % ) Pressure, p (ksf) 0.0000 0.0500 0.1000 0.1500 0.2000 0.2500 0.3000 0.3500 0.4000 0.4500 0.5000 0.5500 0.0 10.0 Square Root of Time (min.1/2) Inundate with Tap water B-86 Project Name:Tested By:G. Bathala Date:01/05/16 Project No.:Checked By:J. Ward Date:01/16/16 Boring No.:Depth (ft.): Sample No.:Sample Type:Ring Soil Identification: 2.415 1.000 187.55 37.88 0.9722 353.33 307.30 39.06 17.2 106.2 79 0.3438 226.73 204.74 38.76 17.17 109.6 86 0.3130 2.70 62.43 0.10 0.3434 0.9996 0.00 0.05 0.586 0.05 1/8/16 8:25:00 0.0 0.0 0.3251 0.25 0.3399 0.9961 0.03 0.39 0.581 0.36 1/8/16 8:25:06 0.1 0.3 0.3220 0.50 0.3365 0.9927 0.12 0.73 0.577 0.61 1/8/16 8:25:15 0.2 0.5 0.3217 1.00 0.3313 0.9875 0.24 1.25 0.571 1.01 1/8/16 8:25:30 0.5 0.7 0.3214 2.00 0.3256 0.9818 0.37 1.82 0.564 1.45 1/8/16 8:26:00 1.0 1.0 0.3213 2.00 0.3251 0.9813 0.37 1.87 0.563 1.50 1/8/16 8:27:00 2.0 1.4 0.3210 4.00 0.3193 0.9755 0.53 2.46 0.556 1.93 1/8/16 8:29:00 4.0 2.0 0.3207 8.00 0.3090 0.9652 0.73 3.48 0.543 2.75 1/8/16 8:33:00 8.0 2.8 0.3205 16.00 0.2943 0.9505 0.92 4.95 0.523 4.03 1/8/16 8:40:00 15.0 3.9 0.3204 4.00 0.2997 0.9559 0.69 4.41 0.528 3.72 1/8/16 8:55:00 30.0 5.5 0.3201 1.00 0.3061 0.9623 0.47 3.77 0.534 3.30 1/8/16 9:30:00 65.0 8.1 0.3200 0.25 0.3130 0.9692 0.30 3.09 0.542 2.79 1/8/16 10:40:00 135.0 11.6 0.3198 1/8/16 12:25:00 240.0 15.5 0.3197 1/8/16 16:25:00 480.0 21.9 0.3195 1/9/16 8:25:00 1440.0 37.9 0.3193 1/9/16 9:05:00 1480.0 38.5 0.3193 Pressure (p) (ksf) Final Reading (in.) Apparent Thickness (in.) Load Compliance (%) Deformation % of Sample Thickness Void Ratio Corrected Deforma- tion (%) Time Readings @ 4.0 ksf Date Time Elapsed Time (min) Square Root of Time Dial Rdgs. (in.) Sample Diameter (in.) Sample Thickness (in.) Wt. of Sample + Ring (g) Weight of Ring (g) After Test Height after consol. (in.) Wt.Wet Sample+Cont. (g) Wt.of Dry Sample+Cont. (g) Weight of Container (g) Before Test Initial Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pcf) Initial Saturation (%) Initial Vertical Reading (in.) Wt.of Wet Sample+Cont. (g) Wt. of Dry Sample+Cont. (g) Weight of Container (g) Final Moisture Content (%) Water Density (pcf) Final Dry Density (pcf) Final Saturation (%) Final Vertical Reading (in.) Specific Gravity (assumed) Anaheim Plaza Hotel ONE-DIMENSIONAL CONSOLIDATION PROPERTIES of SOILS ASTM D 2435 Olive brown lean clay (CL) 27.5 R-5 11206.001 B-4 0.520 0.530 0.540 0.550 0.560 0.570 0.580 0.590 0.10 1.00 10.00 100. Vo i d R a t i o Pressure, p (ksf) Inundate with Tap water B-87 Initial Final Initial Final Initial Final Initial Final Time Readings @ 4.0 ksf 0.542 79 86106.2 Degree of Saturation (%)Dry Density (pcf) 0.587 Void Ratio 27.5 17.2 Soil Identification: Olive brown lean clay (CL) Project No.: Anaheim Plaza Hotel 01-16 11206.001 Boring No. Sample No. Depth (ft.) Moisture Content (%) ONE-DIMENSIONAL CONSOLIDATION PROPERTIES of SOILS ASTM D 2435 17.2 109.6B-4 R-5 0.3180 0.3190 0.3200 0.3210 0.3220 0.3230 0.3240 0.3250 0.3260 0.1 1.0 10.0 100.0 1000.0 10000.0 De f o r m a t i o n D i a l R e a d i n g ( i n . ) Log of Time (min.) 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.500.10 1.00 10.00 100.00 De f o r m a t i o n ( % ) Pressure, p (ksf) 0.3180 0.3190 0.3200 0.3210 0.3220 0.3230 0.3240 0.3250 0.3260 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 Square Root of Time (min.1/2) Inundate with Tap water B-88 Project Name:Tested By:G. Bathala Date:01/05/16 Project No.:Checked By:J. Ward Date:01/16/16 Boring No.:Depth (ft.): Sample No.:Sample Type:Ring Soil Identification: 2.415 1.000 179.45 41.47 0.9791 196.68 179.18 38.76 12.5 102.0 52 0.3252 226.83 201.50 38.49 20.84 103.2 89 0.3023 2.70 62.43 0.10 0.3250 0.9998 0.00 0.02 0.652 0.02 1/8/16 8:20:00 0.0 0.0 0.3057 0.25 0.3231 0.9979 0.07 0.21 0.650 0.14 1/8/16 8:20:06 0.1 0.3 0.3009 0.50 0.3202 0.9950 0.13 0.51 0.646 0.38 1/8/16 8:20:15 0.2 0.5 0.3006 1.00 0.3167 0.9915 0.21 0.86 0.641 0.65 1/8/16 8:20:30 0.5 0.7 0.3003 2.00 0.3116 0.9864 0.31 1.36 0.635 1.05 1/8/16 8:21:00 1.0 1.0 0.3001 4.00 0.3063 0.9811 0.43 1.89 0.628 1.46 1/8/16 8:22:00 2.0 1.4 0.2998 4.00 0.3057 0.9805 0.43 1.96 0.627 1.53 1/8/16 8:24:00 4.0 2.0 0.2997 8.00 0.2983 0.9731 0.60 2.69 0.617 2.09 1/8/16 8:28:00 8.0 2.8 0.2995 16.00 0.2850 0.9598 0.86 4.02 0.600 3.16 1/8/16 8:35:00 15.0 3.9 0.2994 4.00 0.2897 0.9645 0.53 3.56 0.602 3.03 1/8/16 8:50:00 30.0 5.5 0.2992 1.00 0.2955 0.9703 0.36 2.97 0.609 2.61 1/8/16 9:20:00 60.0 7.7 0.2991 0.25 0.3023 0.9771 0.20 2.30 0.617 2.10 1/8/16 10:20:00 120.0 11.0 0.2989 1/8/16 12:20:00 240.0 15.5 0.2987 1/8/16 16:20:00 480.0 21.9 0.2985 1/9/16 8:20:00 1440.0 37.9 0.2983 1/9/16 9:03:00 1483.0 38.5 0.2983 Anaheim Plaza Hotel ONE-DIMENSIONAL CONSOLIDATION PROPERTIES of SOILS ASTM D 2435 Olive brown silt with sand (ML)s 35.0 R-6 11206.001 B-4 Weight of Container (g) Final Moisture Content (%) Water Density (pcf) Final Dry Density (pcf) Final Saturation (%) Final Vertical Reading (in.) Specific Gravity (assumed) Initial Moisture Content (%) Initial Dry Density (pcf) Initial Saturation (%) Initial Vertical Reading (in.) Wt.of Wet Sample+Cont. (g) Wt. of Dry Sample+Cont. (g) Sample Diameter (in.) Sample Thickness (in.) Wt. of Sample + Ring (g) Weight of Ring (g) After Test Height after consol. (in.) Wt.Wet Sample+Cont. (g) Wt.of Dry Sample+Cont. (g) Weight of Container (g) Before Test Corrected Deforma- tion (%) Time Readings @ 8.0 ksf Date Time Elapsed Time (min) Square Root of Time Dial Rdgs. (in.) Pressure (p) (ksf) Final Reading (in.) Apparent Thickness (in.) Load Compliance (%) Deformation % of Sample Thickness Void Ratio 0.590 0.600 0.610 0.620 0.630 0.640 0.650 0.660 0.10 1.00 10.00 100. Vo i d R a t i o Pressure, p (ksf) Inundate with Tap water B-89 Initial Final Initial Final Initial Final Initial Final Boring No. Sample No. Depth (ft.) Moisture Content (%) ONE-DIMENSIONAL CONSOLIDATION PROPERTIES of SOILS ASTM D 2435 20.8 103.2B-4 R-6 12.5 Soil Identification: Olive brown silt with sand (ML)s Project No.: Anaheim Plaza Hotel 01-16 11206.001 Time Readings @ 8.0 ksf 0.617 52 89102.0 Degree of Saturation (%)Dry Density (pcf) 0.652 Void Ratio 35.0 0.2960 0.2980 0.3000 0.3020 0.3040 0.3060 0.3080 0.1 1.0 10.0 100.0 1000.0 10000.0 De f o r m a t i o n D i a l R e a d i n g ( i n . ) Log of Time (min.) 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.500.10 1.00 10.00 100.00 De f o r m a t i o n ( % ) Pressure, p (ksf) 0.2960 0.2980 0.3000 0.3020 0.3040 0.3060 0.3080 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 Square Root of Time (min.1/2) Inundate with Tap water B-90 Project Name:Anaheim Plaza Hotel Tested By:G. Bathala Date:01/05/16 Project No.:11206.001 Checked By:J. Ward Boring No.:Sample Type:Ring Sample No.:Depth (ft.):10.0 Soil Identification: 2.415 2.415 2.415 1.000 1.000 1.000 168.78 173.15 176.84 42.82 45.66 44.75 Before Shearing 239.21 239.21 239.21 237.71 237.71 237.71 38.76 38.76 38.76 0.0000 0.2662 0.2887 -0.0082 0.2791 0.3199 After Shearing 193.94 184.11 185.27 171.58 161.34 165.49 50.44 38.18 38.49 2.70 2.70 2.70 62.43 62.43 62.43 Vertical Rdg.(in): Final Vertical Rdg.(in): Initial DIRECT SHEAR TEST Consolidated Undrained Sample Thickness(in.): Weight of Sample + ring(gm): R-1 B-2 Light yellowish brown poorly-graded sand (SP) Sample Diameter(in): Water Density(pcf): Specific Gravity (Assumed): Weight of Container(gm): Weight of Dry Sample+Cont.(gm): Weight of Ring(gm): Weight of Container(gm): Weight of Dry Sample+Cont.(gm): Weight of Wet Sample+Cont.(gm): Weight of Wet Sample+Cont.(gm): DS B-2, R-1 @ 10 B-91 Normal Stress (kip/ft²) Peak Shear Stress (kip/ft²) Shear Stress @ End of Test (ksf) Deformation Rate (in./min.) Initial Sample Height (in.) Diameter (in.) Initial Moisture Content (%) Dry Density (pcf) Saturation (%) Soil Height Before Shearing (in.) Final Moisture Content (%) 01-16 Project No.:11206.001 Sample Type: Ring Light yellowish brown poorly- graded sand (SP)3.3 0.9918 18.5 Anaheim Plaza HotelDIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS Consolidated Undrained 3.7 0.9688 15.6 1.000 0.946 0.692 0.0500 1.000 2.415 1.000 2.415 3.000 2.647 1.977 0.0500 6.000 4.951 4.125 0.0500 3.4 0.9871 18.5 Soil Identification:0.75 105.2 0.75 104.0 109.0 1.000 2.415 0.75 Boring No. Sample No. Depth (ft) B-2 R-1 10 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 Sh e a r S t r e s s ( k s f ) Horizontal Deformation (in.) 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 9.00 10.00 11.00 12.00 Sh e a r S t r e s s ( k s f ) Normal Stress (ksf) DS B-2, R-1 @ 10 B-92 Normal Stress (kip/ft²) Peak Shear Stress (kip/ft²) Shear Stress @ End of Test (ksf) Sample Type: Ring Deformation Rate (in./min.) Initial Sample Height (in.) Diameter (in.) Initial Moisture Content (%) Strength Parameters Dry Density (pcf) C (psf) (o)Saturation (%) Peak 186.7 38.6 Soil Height Before Shearing (in.) Ultimate -31.7 34.6 Final Moisture Content (%) 2.647 1.977 Light yellowish brown poorly- graded sand (SP) Boring No. Sample No. Depth (ft) B-2 R-1 10 3.4 0.75 105.2 0.0500 6.000 4.951 4.125 0.0500 3.7 3.000 0.9688 0.75 15.6 1.000 2.415 0.9871 18.5 109.0 1.000 2.415 DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS Consolidated Undrained 1.000 0.946 0.692 0.0500 0.75 104.0 2.415 Soil Identification: 01-16 Project No.:11206.001 3.3 0.9918 1.000 18.5 Anaheim Plaza Hotel 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 Sh e a r S t r e s s ( k s f ) Horizontal Deformation (in.) 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 Sh e a r S t r e s s ( k s f ) Normal Stress (ksf) DS B-2, R-1 @ 10 B-93 Project Name:Anaheim Plaza Hotel Tested By:G. Bathala Date:12/30/15 Project No.:11206.001 Checked By:J. Ward Boring No.:Sample Type:Ring Sample No.:Depth (ft.):20.0 Soil Identification: 2.415 2.415 2.415 1.000 1.000 1.000 180.93 184.40 190.76 41.94 43.59 42.40 Before Shearing 138.99 140.81 148.36 104.67 106.36 123.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0000 0.2385 0.0000 -0.0113 0.2622 -0.0284 After Shearing 191.88 189.22 188.11 155.73 156.81 161.81 51.06 50.45 38.77 2.70 2.70 2.70 62.43 62.43 62.43 Sample Diameter(in): Water Density(pcf): Specific Gravity (Assumed): Weight of Container(gm): Weight of Dry Sample+Cont.(gm): Weight of Ring(gm): Weight of Container(gm): Weight of Dry Sample+Cont.(gm): Weight of Wet Sample+Cont.(gm): Weight of Wet Sample+Cont.(gm): Vertical Rdg.(in): Final Vertical Rdg.(in): Initial DIRECT SHEAR TEST Consolidated Drained - ASTM D 3080 Sample Thickness(in.): Weight of Sample + ring(gm): R-2 B-2 Light olive brown silty clay (CL-ML) DS B-2, R-2 @ 20 B-94 Normal Stress (kip/ft²) Peak Shear Stress (kip/ft²) Shear Stress @ End of Test (ksf) Deformation Rate (in./min.) Initial Sample Height (in.) Diameter (in.) Initial Moisture Content (%) Dry Density (pcf) Saturation (%) Soil Height Before Shearing (in.) Final Moisture Content (%) 102.3 1.000 2.415 20.58 Boring No. Sample No. Depth (ft) B-2 R-2 20 96.6 0.9763 30.5 Soil Identification:32.39 88.5 32.79 87.0 2.144 0.0017 8.000 5.920 4.580 0.0017 2.000 1.258 0.890 0.0017 1.000 2.415 1.000 2.415 4.000 2.298 94.5 0.9887 34.5 Anaheim Plaza HotelDIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS Consolidated Drained - ASTM D 3080 85.8 0.9716 21.4 12-15 Project No.:11206.001 Sample Type: Ring Light olive brown silty clay (CL-ML) 0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 Sh e a r S t r e s s ( k s f ) Horizontal Deformation (in.) 0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 Sh e a r S t r e s s ( k s f ) Normal Stress (ksf) DS B-2, R-2 @ 20 B-95 Normal Stress (kip/ft²) Peak Shear Stress (kip/ft²) Shear Stress @ End of Test (ksf) Sample Type: Ring Deformation Rate (in./min.) Initial Sample Height (in.) Diameter (in.) Initial Moisture Content (%) Strength Parameters Dry Density (pcf) C (psf) (o)Saturation (%) Peak -553.0 38.5 Soil Height Before Shearing (in.) Ultimate -328.0 31.6 Final Moisture Content (%) 12-15 Project No.:11206.001 94.5 0.9887 1.000 34.5 Anaheim Plaza HotelDIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS Consolidated Drained - ASTM D 3080 2.000 1.258 0.890 0.0017 32.79 87.0 2.415 Soil Identification: 0.9716 20.58 21.4 1.000 2.415 0.9763 30.5 102.3 1.000 2.415 96.6 32.39 88.5 0.0017 8.000 5.920 4.580 0.0017 85.8 4.000 Light olive brown silty clay (CL- ML) Boring No. Sample No. Depth (ft) B-2 R-2 20 2.298 2.144 0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 Sh e a r S t r e s s ( k s f ) Horizontal Deformation (in.) 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 Sh e a r S t r e s s ( k s f ) Normal Stress (ksf) DS B-2, R-2 @ 20 B-96 Project Name:Anaheim Plaza Hotel Tested By:G. Bathala Date:01/06/16 Project No.:11206.001 Checked By:J. Ward Boring No.:Sample Type:95% Remold Sample No.:Depth (ft.):0-5 Soil Identification: 2.415 2.415 2.415 1.000 1.000 1.000 204.34 204.50 204.01 43.20 43.46 42.97 Before Shearing 260.52 260.52 260.52 244.52 244.52 244.52 51.06 51.06 51.06 0.2424 0.2683 0.0000 0.2462 0.2833 -0.0196 After Shearing 204.60 204.23 214.75 186.91 187.02 198.31 39.31 39.26 51.05 2.70 2.70 2.70 62.43 62.43 62.43 Vertical Rdg.(in): Final Vertical Rdg.(in): Initial DIRECT SHEAR TEST Consolidated Drained - ASTM D 3080 Sample Thickness(in.): Weight of Sample + ring(gm): BB-1 B-3 Dark olive brown silty sand (SM) Sample Diameter(in): Water Density(pcf): Specific Gravity (Assumed): Weight of Container(gm): Weight of Dry Sample+Cont.(gm): Weight of Ring(gm): Weight of Container(gm): Weight of Dry Sample+Cont.(gm): Weight of Wet Sample+Cont.(gm): Weight of Wet Sample+Cont.(gm): DS B-3, BB-1 @ 0-5 B-97 Normal Stress (kip/ft²) Peak Shear Stress (kip/ft²) Shear Stress @ End of Test (ksf) Deformation Rate (in./min.) Initial Sample Height (in.) Diameter (in.) Initial Moisture Content (%) Dry Density (pcf) Saturation (%) Soil Height Before Shearing (in.) Final Moisture Content (%) 01-16 Project No.:11206.001 Sample Type: 95% Remold Dark olive brown silty sand (SM)61.7 0.9962 12.0 Anaheim Plaza HotelDIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS Consolidated Drained - ASTM D 3080 61.6 0.9804 11.2 1.000 1.261 0.701 0.0033 1.000 2.415 1.000 2.415 4.000 3.326 2.738 0.0033 8.000 5.970 5.558 0.0033 61.6 0.9850 11.6 Soil Identification:8.27 123.7 8.27 123.8 123.7 1.000 2.415 8.27 Boring No. Sample No. Depth (ft) B-3 BB-1 0-5 0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 Sh e a r S t r e s s ( k s f ) Horizontal Deformation (in.) 0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 Sh e a r S t r e s s ( k s f ) Normal Stress (ksf) DS B-3, BB-1 @ 0-5 B-98 Normal Stress (kip/ft²) Peak Shear Stress (kip/ft²) Shear Stress @ End of Test (ksf) Sample Type: 95% Remold Deformation Rate (in./min.) Initial Sample Height (in.) Diameter (in.) Initial Moisture Content (%) Strength Parameters Dry Density (pcf) C (psf) (o)Saturation (%) Peak 606.6 33.9 Soil Height Before Shearing (in.) Ultimate -10.3 34.8 Final Moisture Content (%) 3.326 2.738 Dark olive brown silty sand (SM) Boring No. Sample No. Depth (ft) B-3 BB-1 0-5 61.6 8.27 123.7 0.0033 8.000 5.970 5.558 0.0033 61.6 4.000 0.9804 8.27 11.2 1.000 2.415 0.9850 11.6 123.7 1.000 2.415 DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS Consolidated Drained - ASTM D 3080 1.000 1.261 0.701 0.0033 8.27 123.8 2.415 Soil Identification: 01-16 Project No.:11206.001 61.7 0.9962 1.000 12.0 Anaheim Plaza Hotel 0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 Sh e a r S t r e s s ( k s f ) Horizontal Deformation (in.) 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 Sh e a r S t r e s s ( k s f ) Normal Stress (ksf) DS B-3, BB-1 @ 0-5 B-99 Project Name:Anaheim Plaza Hotel Tested By:G. Bathala Date:01/06/16 Project No.:11206.001 Checked By:J. Ward Boring No.:Sample Type:90% Remold Sample No.:Depth (ft.):0-5 Soil Identification: 2.415 2.415 2.415 1.000 1.000 1.000 190.88 191.10 190.64 43.20 43.50 42.97 Before Shearing 280.41 280.41 280.41 259.86 259.86 259.86 39.30 39.30 39.30 0.0000 0.2423 0.0000 -0.0042 0.2596 -0.0297 After Shearing 194.95 193.74 203.76 172.75 172.50 183.94 38.77 38.48 50.45 2.70 2.70 2.70 62.43 62.43 62.43 Vertical Rdg.(in): Final Vertical Rdg.(in): Initial DIRECT SHEAR TEST Consolidated Drained - ASTM D 3080 Sample Thickness(in.): Weight of Sample + ring(gm): BB-1 B-4 Olive brown sandy silt s(ML) Sample Diameter(in): Water Density(pcf): Specific Gravity (Assumed): Weight of Container(gm): Weight of Dry Sample+Cont.(gm): Weight of Ring(gm): Weight of Container(gm): Weight of Dry Sample+Cont.(gm): Weight of Wet Sample+Cont.(gm): Weight of Wet Sample+Cont.(gm): DS B-4, BB-1 @ 0-5 B-100 Normal Stress (kip/ft²) Peak Shear Stress (kip/ft²) Shear Stress @ End of Test (ksf) Deformation Rate (in./min.) Initial Sample Height (in.) Diameter (in.) Initial Moisture Content (%) Dry Density (pcf) Saturation (%) Soil Height Before Shearing (in.) Final Moisture Content (%) 01-16 Project No.:11206.001 Sample Type: 90% Remold Olive brown sandy silt s(ML) 50.3 0.9958 16.6 Anaheim Plaza HotelDIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS Consolidated Drained - ASTM D 3080 50.3 0.9703 14.8 1.000 0.902 0.682 0.0017 1.000 2.415 1.000 2.415 4.000 3.059 2.814 0.0017 8.000 5.656 5.335 0.0017 50.2 0.9827 15.8 Soil Identification:9.32 112.3 9.32 112.4 112.3 1.000 2.415 9.32 Boring No. Sample No. Depth (ft) B-4 BB-1 0-5 0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 Sh e a r S t r e s s ( k s f ) Horizontal Deformation (in.) 0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 Sh e a r S t r e s s ( k s f ) Normal Stress (ksf) DS B-4, BB-1 @ 0-5 B-101 Normal Stress (kip/ft²) Peak Shear Stress (kip/ft²) Shear Stress @ End of Test (ksf) Sample Type: 90% Remold Deformation Rate (in./min.) Initial Sample Height (in.) Diameter (in.) Initial Moisture Content (%) Strength Parameters Dry Density (pcf) C (psf) (o)Saturation (%) Peak 269.7 34.1 Soil Height Before Shearing (in.) Ultimate 71.3 33.5 Final Moisture Content (%) 3.059 2.814 Olive brown sandy silt s(ML) Boring No. Sample No. Depth (ft) B-4 BB-1 0-5 50.2 9.32 112.3 0.0017 8.000 5.656 5.335 0.0017 50.3 4.000 0.9703 9.32 14.8 1.000 2.415 0.9827 15.8 112.3 1.000 2.415 DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS Consolidated Drained - ASTM D 3080 1.000 0.902 0.682 0.0017 9.32 112.4 2.415 Soil Identification: 01-16 Project No.:11206.001 50.3 0.9958 1.000 16.6 Anaheim Plaza Hotel 0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 Sh e a r S t r e s s ( k s f ) Horizontal Deformation (in.) 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 Sh e a r S t r e s s ( k s f ) Normal Stress (ksf) DS B-4, BB-1 @ 0-5 B-102 Project Name:Anaheim Plaza Hotel Tested By:G. Bathala Date:12/30/15 Project No.:11206.001 Checked By:J. Ward Boring No.:Sample Type:Ring Sample No.:Depth (ft.):7.5 Soil Identification: 2.415 2.415 2.415 1.000 1.000 1.000 163.31 167.04 168.54 43.76 43.37 42.82 Before Shearing 165.81 165.81 165.81 161.69 161.69 161.69 39.26 39.26 39.26 0.2723 0.2432 0.2191 0.2780 0.2552 0.2358 After Shearing 174.48 175.12 177.09 150.40 153.27 155.55 38.48 38.15 38.80 2.70 2.70 2.70 62.43 62.43 62.43 Vertical Rdg.(in): Final Vertical Rdg.(in): Initial DIRECT SHEAR TEST Consolidated Undrained Sample Thickness(in.): Weight of Sample + ring(gm): R-1 B-4 Olive brown poorly-graded sand with silt (SP-SM) Sample Diameter(in): Water Density(pcf): Specific Gravity (Assumed): Weight of Container(gm): Weight of Dry Sample+Cont.(gm): Weight of Ring(gm): Weight of Container(gm): Weight of Dry Sample+Cont.(gm): Weight of Wet Sample+Cont.(gm): Weight of Wet Sample+Cont.(gm): DS B-4, R-1 @ 7.5 B-103 Normal Stress (kip/ft²) Peak Shear Stress (kip/ft²) Shear Stress @ End of Test (ksf) Deformation Rate (in./min.) Initial Sample Height (in.) Diameter (in.) Initial Moisture Content (%) Dry Density (pcf) Saturation (%) Soil Height Before Shearing (in.) Final Moisture Content (%) 12-15 Project No.:11206.001 Sample Type: Ring Olive brown poorly-graded sand with silt (SP-SM)12.1 0.9943 21.5 Anaheim Plaza HotelDIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS Consolidated Undrained 13.6 0.9833 18.4 1.000 0.909 0.651 0.0500 1.000 2.415 1.000 2.415 2.000 1.694 1.349 0.0500 4.000 3.040 2.666 0.0500 13.1 0.9880 19.0 Soil Identification:3.37 99.5 3.37 96.2 101.2 1.000 2.415 3.37 Boring No. Sample No. Depth (ft) B-4 R-1 7.5 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 Sh e a r S t r e s s ( k s f ) Horizontal Deformation (in.) 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 Sh e a r S t r e s s ( k s f ) Normal Stress (ksf) DS B-4, R-1 @ 7.5 B-104 Normal Stress (kip/ft²) Peak Shear Stress (kip/ft²) Shear Stress @ End of Test (ksf) Sample Type: Ring Deformation Rate (in./min.) Initial Sample Height (in.) Diameter (in.) Initial Moisture Content (%) Strength Parameters Dry Density (pcf) C (psf) (o)Saturation (%) Peak 236.0 35.2 Soil Height Before Shearing (in.) Ultimate -7.5 33.8 Final Moisture Content (%) 1.694 1.349 Olive brown poorly-graded sand with silt (SP-SM) Boring No. Sample No. Depth (ft) B-4 R-1 7.5 13.1 3.37 99.5 0.0500 4.000 3.040 2.666 0.0500 13.6 2.000 0.9833 3.37 18.4 1.000 2.415 0.9880 19.0 101.2 1.000 2.415 DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS Consolidated Undrained 1.000 0.909 0.651 0.0500 3.37 96.2 2.415 Soil Identification: 12-15 Project No.:11206.001 12.1 0.9943 1.000 21.5 Anaheim Plaza Hotel 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 Sh e a r S t r e s s ( k s f ) Horizontal Deformation (in.) 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 Sh e a r S t r e s s ( k s f ) Normal Stress (ksf) DS B-4, R-1 @ 7.5 B-105 Project Name:Anaheim Plaza Hotel Tested By:G. Bathala Date:12/30/15 Project No.:11206.001 Checked By:J. Ward Boring No.:Sample Type:Ring Sample No.:Depth (ft.):17.5 Soil Identification: 2.415 2.415 2.415 1.000 1.000 1.000 171.49 168.08 167.40 46.04 42.46 44.24 Before Shearing 170.67 170.67 170.67 165.61 165.61 165.61 39.01 39.01 39.01 0.2600 0.2611 0.0000 0.2724 0.2763 -0.0303 After Shearing 179.07 175.65 176.45 156.39 152.84 155.33 39.20 38.76 39.25 2.70 2.70 2.70 62.43 62.43 62.43 Vertical Rdg.(in): Final Vertical Rdg.(in): Initial DIRECT SHEAR TEST Consolidated Undrained Sample Thickness(in.): Weight of Sample + ring(gm): R-3 B-4 Light olive brown poorly-graded sand with silt (SP-SM) Sample Diameter(in): Water Density(pcf): Specific Gravity (Assumed): Weight of Container(gm): Weight of Dry Sample+Cont.(gm): Weight of Ring(gm): Weight of Container(gm): Weight of Dry Sample+Cont.(gm): Weight of Wet Sample+Cont.(gm): Weight of Wet Sample+Cont.(gm): DS B-4, R-3 @ 17.5 B-106 Normal Stress (kip/ft²) Peak Shear Stress (kip/ft²) Shear Stress @ End of Test (ksf) Deformation Rate (in./min.) Initial Sample Height (in.) Diameter (in.) Initial Moisture Content (%) Dry Density (pcf) Saturation (%) Soil Height Before Shearing (in.) Final Moisture Content (%) 12-15 Project No.:11206.001 Sample Type: Ring Light olive brown poorly- graded sand with silt (SP- SM)15.9 0.9876 19.4 Anaheim Plaza HotelDIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS Consolidated Undrained 15.2 0.9697 18.2 2.000 1.716 1.446 0.0500 1.000 2.415 1.000 2.415 4.000 3.442 2.559 0.0500 8.000 5.172 4.958 0.0500 15.9 0.9848 20.0 Soil Identification:4.00 100.5 4.00 100.3 98.5 1.000 2.415 4.00 Boring No. Sample No. Depth (ft) B-4 R-3 17.5 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 Sh e a r S t r e s s ( k s f ) Horizontal Deformation (in.) 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 9.00 10.00 11.00 12.00 Sh e a r S t r e s s ( k s f ) Normal Stress (ksf) DS B-4, R-3 @ 17.5 B-107 Normal Stress (kip/ft²) Peak Shear Stress (kip/ft²) Shear Stress @ End of Test (ksf) Sample Type: Ring Deformation Rate (in./min.) Initial Sample Height (in.) Diameter (in.) Initial Moisture Content (%) Strength Parameters Dry Density (pcf) C (psf) (o)Saturation (%) Peak 851.0 29.1 Soil Height Before Shearing (in.) Ultimate 246.5 30.4 Final Moisture Content (%) 3.442 2.559 Light olive brown poorly- graded sand with silt (SP-SM) Boring No. Sample No. Depth (ft) B-4 R-3 17.5 15.9 4.00 100.5 0.0500 8.000 5.172 4.958 0.0500 15.2 4.000 0.9697 4.00 18.2 1.000 2.415 0.9848 20.0 98.5 1.000 2.415 DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS Consolidated Undrained 2.000 1.716 1.446 0.0500 4.00 100.3 2.415 Soil Identification: 12-15 Project No.:11206.001 15.9 0.9876 1.000 19.4 Anaheim Plaza Hotel 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 Sh e a r S t r e s s ( k s f ) Horizontal Deformation (in.) 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 Sh e a r S t r e s s ( k s f ) Normal Stress (ksf) DS B-4, R-3 @ 17.5 B-108 Project Name:Anaheim Plaza Hotel Tested By :G. Berdy Date:01/04/16 Project No. :11206.001 Data Input By:J. Ward Date:01/16/16 Boring No.B-3 B-4 Sample No.BB-1 BB-1 Sample Depth (ft)0-5 0-5 129.88 125.64 127.18 124.21 59.26 57.25 3.98 2.14 100.38 100.27 30 0 15 4 860 860 10:00/10:40 10:00/10:40 40 40 20.3312 21.0595 20.3268 21.0549 0.0044 0.0046 181.06 189.29 189 193 ml of Extract For Titration (B)30 15 ml of AgNO3 Soln. Used in Titration (C)0.7 0.3 PPM of Chloride (C -0.2) * 100 * 30 / B 50 20 PPM of Chloride, Dry Wt. Basis 52 20 7.37 7.72 20.8 20.9 Wt. of Crucible (g) Wt. of Residue (g) (A) Beaker No. Crucible No. Furnace Temperature (°C) PPM of Sulfate (A) x 41150 PPM of Sulfate, Dry Weight Basis Dark olive brown SM Wt. of Crucible + Residue (g) Wet Weight of Soil + Container (g) Dry Weight of Soil + Container (g) Weight of Container (g) Duration of Combustion (min) Olive brown s(ML) pH TEST, DOT California Test 643 CHLORIDE CONTENT, DOT California Test 422 Time In / Time Out Weight of Soaked Soil (g) Temperature °C pH Value TESTS for SULFATE CONTENT CHLORIDE CONTENT and pH of SOILS SULFATE CONTENT, DOT California Test 417, Part II Soil Identification: Moisture Content (%) B-109 Project Name:Tested By : G. Berdy Date: Project No. :Data Input By: J. Ward Date: Boring No.:Depth (ft.) : Sample No. : BB-1 Container No. Initial Soil Wt. (g) (Wt) Box Constant14501450 Dark olive brown SM Resistance Reading (ohm) 27.95 Soil Resistivity (ohm-cm) Anaheim Plaza Hotel 01/08/16 01/16/16 0-5 11206.001 B-3 SOIL RESISTIVITY TEST DOT CA TEST 643 Temp. (°C)pH Soil pH 1350 1350 127.18 59.26 MC =(((1+Mci/100)x(Wa/Wt+1))-1)x100 1334 31.6 189 52 7.37 20.8 4 30 40 50 130.123135035.94 1350 5 Min. Resistivity DOT CA Test 643DOT CA Test 417 Part II DOT CA Test 422 (%)(ppm)(ppm) DOT CA Test 643 1.000 Chloride Content (ohm-cm) 43.93 Moisture Content Sulfate Content Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g)Specimen No. 1 2 Water Added (ml) (Wa) 20 Adjusted Moisture Content (MC)Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) 1500 Soil Identification:* *California Test 643 requires soil specimens to consist only of portions of samples passing through the No. 8 US Standard Sieve before resistivity testing. Therefore, this test method may not be representative for coarser materials. Wt. of Container (g)19.96 1500 3.98 129.88 Moisture Content (%) (MCi) 1300 1350 1400 1450 1500 1550 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0 45.0 50.0 So i l R e s i s t i v i t y ( o h m - c m ) Moisture Content (%) B-110 Project Name:Tested By : G. Berdy Date: Project No. :Data Input By: J. Ward Date: Boring No.:Depth (ft.) : Sample No. : Olive brown s(ML) 40 50 41.39 Chloride Content (ohm-cm)(%)(ppm)(ppm) Min. Resistivity Moisture Content 5 2200 Container No.210033.54 MC =(((1+Mci/100)x(Wa/Wt+1))-1)x100 4 Specimen No. 1 2 3 230025.69 2300 Resistance Reading (ohm) Adjusted Moisture Content (MC) Water Added (ml) (Wa) 2098 34.2 193 20 7.72 DOT CA Test 643DOT CA Test 417 Part II DOT CA Test 422DOT CA Test 643 SOIL RESISTIVITY TEST DOT CA TEST 643 Temp. (°C)pH Soil pH 1.000 130.11 2100 2200 124.21 57.25 20.9 Soil Resistivity (ohm-cm) Box Constant Initial Soil Wt. (g) (Wt) Sulfate Content Anaheim Plaza Hotel 01/08/16 01/16/16 0-5 11206.001 B-4 BB-1 Moisture Content (%) (MCi) Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) 30 Soil Identification:* Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) Wt. of Container (g) *California Test 643 requires soil specimens to consist only of portions of samples passing through the No. 8 US Standard Sieve before resistivity testing. Therefore, this test method may not be representative for coarser materials. 2.14 125.64 2000 2050 2100 2150 2200 2250 2300 2350 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0 45.0 So i l R e s i s t i v i t y ( o h m - c m ) Moisture Content (%) B-111 R-VALUE TEST RESULTS DOT CA Test 301 PROJECT NAME: Anaheim Plaza Hotel PROJECT NUMBER: 11206.001 BORING NUMBER: B-3 DEPTH (FT.): 0-5 SAMPLE NUMBER: BB-1 TECHNICIAN: S. Felter SAMPLE DESCRIPTION: Dark olive brown silty sand (SM) DATE COMPLETED: 1/11/2016 TEST SPECIMEN a b c MOISTURE AT COMPACTION % 9.6 10.5 10.9 HEIGHT OF SAMPLE, Inches 2.42 2.52 2.50 DRY DENSITY, pcf 126.1 125.8 120.9 COMPACTOR PRESSURE, psi 250 150 100 EXUDATION PRESSURE, psi 554 309 182 EXPANSION, Inches x 10exp-4 12 7 0 STABILITY Ph 2,000 lbs (160 psi) 21 30 36 TURNS DISPLACEMENT 4.77 4.93 5.29 R-VALUE UNCORRECTED 78 69 62 R-VALUE CORRECTED 77 69 62 DESIGN CALCULATION DATA a b c GRAVEL EQUIVALENT FACTOR 1.0 1.0 1.0 TRAFFIC INDEX 5.0 5.0 5.0 STABILOMETER THICKNESS, ft. 0.37 0.50 0.61 EXPANSION PRESSURE THICKNESS, ft. 0.40 0.23 0.00 EXPANSION PRESSURE CHART EXUDATION PRESSURE CHART R-VALUE BY EXPANSION:76 R-VALUE BY EXUDATION:68 EQUILIBRIUM R-VALUE:68 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 CO V E R T H I C K N E S S B Y S T A B I L O M E T E R i n f e e t COVER THICKNESS BY EXPANSION in feet 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 0100200300400500600700800 R- V A L U E EXUDATION PRESSURE (psi) B-112 R-VALUE TEST RESULTS DOT CA Test 301 PROJECT NAME: Anaheim Plaza Hotel PROJECT NUMBER: 11206.001 BORING NUMBER: B-4 DEPTH (FT.): 0-5 SAMPLE NUMBER: BB-1 TECHNICIAN: S. Felter SAMPLE DESCRIPTION: Olive brown sandy silt s(ML) DATE COMPLETED: 1/11/2016 TEST SPECIMEN a b c MOISTURE AT COMPACTION % 12.5 12.7 13.0 HEIGHT OF SAMPLE, Inches 2.51 2.41 2.51 DRY DENSITY, pcf 117.9 120.3 119.5 COMPACTOR PRESSURE, psi 250 200 125 EXUDATION PRESSURE, psi 574 408 264 EXPANSION, Inches x 10exp-4 44 32 25 STABILITY Ph 2,000 lbs (160 psi) 30 33 44 TURNS DISPLACEMENT 4.72 4.94 5.20 R-VALUE UNCORRECTED 70 66 56 R-VALUE CORRECTED 70 64 56 DESIGN CALCULATION DATA a b c GRAVEL EQUIVALENT FACTOR 1.0 1.0 1.0 TRAFFIC INDEX 5.0 5.0 5.0 STABILOMETER THICKNESS, ft. 0.48 0.58 0.70 EXPANSION PRESSURE THICKNESS, ft. 1.47 1.07 0.83 EXPANSION PRESSURE CHART EXUDATION PRESSURE CHART R-VALUE BY EXPANSION:53 R-VALUE BY EXUDATION:58 EQUILIBRIUM R-VALUE:53 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 CO V E R T H I C K N E S S B Y S T A B I L O M E T E R i n f e e t COVER THICKNESS BY EXPANSION in feet 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 0100200300400500600700800 R- V A L U E EXUDATION PRESSURE (psi) B-113 APPENDIX C PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS B-114 Project Number:11206.001 Test Hole Number:LB‐1 Project Name:Anaheim Plaza Hotel Date Excavated: Earth Description:Alluvium Date Tested: Liquid Description:Tap water Depth of Test Well (ft):25 Tested By:  JMP Diameter of boring (in):8 Time Interval Standard Diameter of casing (in):2 Start Time for Pre‐Soak:Length of slotted of casing (ft):5 Start Time for Standard:Depth to Initial Water Depth (ft): 20 Porosity of Annulus Material, n :0.35 10 Bentonite Plug at Bottom:Yes Reading Time Time Interval,  Δt (min.) Initial/Final  Depth to  Water (ft.) Initial/Final  Water Height,  H0/Hf             (in.) Total Water  Drop, Δd (in.) Percolation  Rate (min./in.) Infiltration  Rate (in./hr.) 8:14 20.00 60.0 8:39 23.22 21.4 8:42 20.00 60.0 9:07 23.19 21.7 9:08 20.00 60.0 9:18 22.06 35.3 9:20 20.00 60.0 9:30 22.09 34.9 9:32 20.00 60.0 9:42 22.03 35.6 9:43 20.00 60.0 9:53 21.98 36.2 9:54 20.00 60.0 10:04 21.98 36.2 10:05 20.00 60.0 10:15 21.91 37.1 10:16 20.00 60.0 10:26 21.95 36.6 Infiltration Rate, I (Last Reading) = 2.27 in./hr. 12/21/2015 12/23/2016 Infiltration Rate (I) = Flow Volume/Flow Area/Δt 2 25 38.3 0.65 1.76 Percolation Data 1 25 38.6 0.65 9 10 23.4 0.43 2.27 7 10 23.8 0.42 2.31 8 10 22.9 0.44 2.21 5 10 24.4 0.41 2.39 6 10 23.8 0.42 2.31 3 10 24.7 0.40 2.43 4 10 25.1 0.40 2.48 Boring Percolation Test Data Sheet 12/21/15 9:30 AM 12/23/15 8:14 AM Standard Time Interval  Between Readings, mins: 1.78 B-115 Project Number:11206.001 Test Hole Number:LB‐2 Project Name:Anaheim Plaza Hotel Date Excavated: Earth Description:Alluvium Date Tested: Liquid Description:Tap water Depth of Test Well (ft):45 Tested By:  JMP Diameter of boring (in):8 Time Interval Standard Diameter of casing (in):2 Start Time for Pre‐Soak:Length of slotted of casing (ft):5 Start Time for Standard:Depth to Initial Water Depth (ft): 40 Porosity of Annulus Material, n :0.35 10 Bentonite Plug at Bottom:Yes Reading Time Time Interval,  Δt (min.) Initial/Final  Depth to  Water (ft.) Initial/Final  Water Height,  H0/Hf             (in.) Total Water  Drop, Δd (in.) Percolation  Rate (min./in.) Infiltration  Rate (in./hr.) 10:51 40.00 60.0 11:01 44.35 7.8 11:03 40.50 54.0 11:13 44.16 10.1 11:15 40.00 60.0 11:25 44.08 11.0 11:26 40.00 60.0 11:36 43.95 12.6 11:37 40.00 60.0 11:47 43.92 13.0 11:49 40.00 60.0 11:59 43.76 14.9 12:01 40.00 60.0 12:11 43.59 16.9 12:13 40.00 60.0 12:23 43.58 17.0 Infiltration Rate, I (Last Reading) = 5.23 in./hr. 12/23/15 10:51 AM Boring Percolation Test Data Sheet 12/21/2015 12/23/2016 12/21/15 10:30 AM Standard Time Interval  Between Readings, mins: Percolation Data 1 10 52.2 0.19 7.22 2 10 43.9 0.23 6.43 3 10 49.0 0.20 6.46 4 10 47.4 0.21 6.12 5 10 47.0 0.21 6.04 6 10 45.1 0.22 5.65 5.23 7 10 43.1 0.23 5.25 Infiltration Rate (I) = Flow Volume/Flow Area/Δt 8 10 43.0 0.23 B-116 Project Number:11206.001 Test Hole Number:LB‐3 Project Name:Anaheim Plaza Hotel Date Excavated: Earth Description:Alluvium Date Tested: Liquid Description:Tap water Depth of Test Well (ft):35 Tested By:  AAR Diameter of boring (in):8 Time Interval Standard Diameter of casing (in):2 Start Time for Pre‐Soak:Length of slotted of casing (ft):5 Start Time for Standard:Depth to Initial Water Depth (ft): 30 Porosity of Annulus Material, n :0.35 10 Bentonite Plug at Bottom:Yes Reading Time Time Interval,  Δt (min.) Initial/Final  Depth to  Water (ft.) Initial/Final  Water Height,  H0/Hf             (in.) Total Water  Drop, Δd (in.) Percolation  Rate (min./in.) Infiltration  Rate (in./hr.) 8:06 30.00 60.0 8:31 31.61 40.7 8:44 30.00 60.0 9:09 31.42 43.0 9:12 30.00 60.0 9:22 30.72 51.4 9:23 30.00 60.0 9:33 30.74 51.1 9:35 30.00 60.0 9:45 30.71 51.5 9:47 30.00 60.0 9:57 30.65 52.2 9:58 30.00 60.0 10:08 30.69 51.7 10:09 30.00 60.0 10:19 30.75 51.0 10:20 30.00 60.0 10:30 30.74 51.1 Infiltration Rate, I (Last Reading) = 0.75 in./hr. 12/23/15 8:06 AM Boring Percolation Test Data Sheet 12/21/2015 12/23/2016 12/21/15 12:00 AM Standard Time Interval  Between Readings, mins: Percolation Data 1 25 19.3 1.29 0.72 2 25 17.0 1.47 0.62 3 10 8.6 1.16 0.73 4 10 8.9 1.13 0.75 5 10 8.5 1.17 0.72 6 10 7.8 1.28 0.65 7 10 8.3 1.21 0.69 0.75 8 10 9.0 1.11 0.76 Infiltration Rate (I) = Flow Volume/Flow Area/Δt 9 10 8.9 1.13 B-117 APPENDIX D SEISMICITY DATA B-118 0 1 0 2 0 3 0 4 0 5 0 6 0 7 0 8 0 C l o s e s t D i s t a n c e , R c d ( k m ) 0 1 0 2 0 3 0 4 0 5 0 6 0 70 80 C l o s e s t D i s t a n c e , R c d ( k m ) 5 . 0 5 . 5 6 . 0 6 . 5 7 . 0 7 . 5 8 . 0 M A G N I T U D E ( M w ) 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.07.58.0 MAGNITUDE (Mw) 2 4 6 8 1 0 % C o n t r i b u t i o n t o H a z a r d PS H D e a g g r e g a t i o n o n N E H R P D s o i l 11 2 0 6 . 0 0 1 1 1 7 . 9 1 4 o W , 3 3 . 8 0 6 N . Pe a k H o r i z . G r o u n d A c c e l . > = 0 . 5 9 8 5 g An n . E x c e e d a n c e R a t e . 4 0 7 E - 0 3 . M e a n R e t u r n T i m e 2 4 7 5 y e a r s Me a n ( R , M , 0 ) 1 5 . 4 k m , 6 . 4 9 , 1 . 3 9 Mo d a l ( R , M , 0 ) = 1 4 . 5 k m , 7 . 0 1 , 1 . 3 7 ( f r o m p e a k R , M b i n ) Mo d a l ( R , M , *) = 7 . 4 k m , 6 . 5 8 , 1 t o 2 s i g m a ( f r o m p e a k R , M , bin) Bi n n i n g : D e l t a R 1 0 . k m , d e l t a M = 0 . 2 , D e l t a =1 . 0 20 0 9 1 0 U P D A T E 0 < - 2 -2 < 0 < - 1 -1 < 0 < - 0 . 5 -0 . 5 < 0 < 0 0 < 0 < 0 . 5 0. 5 < 0 < 1 1 < 0 < 2 2 < 0 < 3 Pr o b . S A , P G A <m e d i a n ( R , M ) > m e d i a n GM T 20 1 5 D e c 1 5 2 1 : 1 2 : 1 3 Di s t a n c e ( R ) , m a g n i t u d e ( M ) , e p s i l o n ( E 0 , E ) d e a g g r e g a t i o n f o r a s i t e o n s o i l w i t h a v e r a g e v s = 2 7 4 . m / s t o p 3 0 m . U S G S C G H T P S H A 2 0 0 8 U P D A T E B i n s w i t h l t 0 . 0 5 % c o n t r i b . o m i t t e d B- 1 1 9 11206.001_EQSearch_Boore ************************* * * * E Q S E A R C H * * * * Version 3.00 * * * ************************* ESTIMATION OF PEAK ACCELERATION FROM CALIFORNIA EARTHQUAKE CATALOGS JOB NUMBER: 11206.001 DATE: 12-15-2015 JOB NAME: Anaheim Plaza EARTHQUAKE-CATALOG-FILE NAME: ALLQUAKE.DAT MAGNITUDE RANGE: MINIMUM MAGNITUDE: 4.00 MAXIMUM MAGNITUDE: 9.00 SITE COORDINATES: SITE LATITUDE: 33.8060 SITE LONGITUDE: 117.9141 SEARCH DATES: START DATE: 1800 END DATE: 2015 SEARCH RADIUS: 62.0 mi 99.8 km ATTENUATION RELATION: 3) Boore et al. (1997) Horiz. - NEHRP D (250) UNCERTAINTY (M=Median, S=Sigma): M Number of Sigmas: 0.0 ASSUMED SOURCE TYPE: DS [SS=Strike-slip, DS=Reverse-slip, BT=Blind-thrust] SCOND: 0 Depth Source: A Basement Depth: 5.00 km Campbell SSR: 0 Campbell SHR: 0 COMPUTE PEAK HORIZONTAL ACCELERATION MINIMUM DEPTH VALUE (km): 0.0 Page 1 B-120 11206.001_EQSearch_Boore ------------------------- EARTHQUAKE SEARCH RESULTS ------------------------- Page 1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | | | TIME | | | SITE |SITE| APPROX. FILE| LAT. | LONG. | DATE | (UTC) |DEPTH|QUAKE| ACC. | MM | DISTANCE CODE| NORTH | WEST | | H M Sec| (km)| MAG.| g |INT.| mi [km] ----+-------+--------+----------+--------+-----+-----+-------+----+------------ MGI |33.8000|117.9000|05/22/1902| 740 0.0| 0.0| 4.30| 0.176 |VIII| 0.9( 1.5) DMG |33.8000|118.0000|10/21/1913| 938 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.100 | VII| 4.9( 8.0) DMG |33.7670|117.8170|08/22/1936| 521 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.088 | VII| 6.2( 10.0 ) DMG |33.7500|118.0000|11/16/1934|2126 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.088 | VII| 6.3( 10.1) MGI |33.8000|117.8000|11/04/1926|2238 0.0| 0.0| 4.60| 0.117 | VII| 6.6( 10.5) MGI |33.8000|117.8000|11/07/1926|1948 0.0| 0.0| 4.60| 0.117 | VII| 6.6( 10.5) MGI |33.8000|117.8000|11/09/1926|1535 0.0| 0.0| 4.60| 0.117 | VII| 6.6( 10.5) MGI |33.8000|117.8000|05/19/1917| 719 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.085 | VII| 6.6( 10.5) MGI |33.8000|117.8000|05/20/1917| 945 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.085 | VII| 6.6( 10.5) MGI |33.8000|117.8000|11/10/1926|1723 0.0| 0.0| 4.60| 0.117 | VII| 6.6( 10.5) MGI |33.8000|117.8000|05/19/1917| 635 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.085 | VII| 6.6( 10.5) MGI |33.7000|117.9000|07/08/1902| 945 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.079 | VII| 7.4( 11.8) GSG |33.9325|117.9172|03/29/2014|040942.3| 4.8| 5.10| 0.127 |VIII| 8.7( 14.1) GSP |33.9040|117.7910|08/08/2012|163322.1| 10.0| 4.50| 0.086 | VII| 9.8( 15.7) GSP |33.9050|117.7920|08/08/2012|062334.1| 10.0| 4.50| 0.085 | VII| 9.8( 15.7) DMG |33.6800|117.9930|11/20/1961| 85334.7| 4.4| 4.00| 0.066 | VI | 9.8( 15.8) DMG |33.8540|117.7520|10/04/1961| 22131.6| 4.3| 4.10| 0.069 | VI | 9.9( 15.9) GSP |33.9090|117.7920|06/14/2012|031715.7| 9.0| 4.00| 0.065 | VI | 10.0( 16.1) GSP |33.9070|117.7880|08/29/2012|203100.3| 9.0| 4.10| 0.068 | VI | 10.0( 16.2) DMG |33.6650|117.9790|10/20/1961|214240.7| 7.2| 4.00| 0.063 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933| 611 0.0| 0.0| 4.40| 0.078 | VII| 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933| 555 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.063 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/19/1933|2123 0.0| 0.0| 4.20| 0.070 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933| 635 0.0| 0.0| 4.20| 0.070 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/30/1933|1225 0.0| 0.0| 4.40| 0.078 | VII| 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933| 8 8 0.0| 0.0| 4.50| 0.082 | VII| 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933|11 0 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.063 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933| 618 0.0| 0.0| 4.20| 0.070 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933|1129 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.063 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933|1138 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.063 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933|1141 0.0| 0.0| 4.20| 0.070 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/12/1933|2128 0.0| 0.0| 4.10| 0.066 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/14/1933|1219 0.0| 0.0| 4.50| 0.082 | VII| 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933|1944 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.063 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933|1956 0.0| 0.0| 4.20| 0.070 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933|22 0 0.0| 0.0| 4.40| 0.078 | VII| 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933|2231 0.0| 0.0| 4.40| 0.078 | VII| 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/17/1933|1651 0.0| 0.0| 4.10| 0.066 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933|2240 0.0| 0.0| 4.40| 0.078 | VII| 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933| 751 0.0| 0.0| 4.20| 0.070 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/12/1933| 027 0.0| 0.0| 4.40| 0.078 | VII| 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933| 759 0.0| 0.0| 4.10| 0.066 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) Page 2 B-121 11206.001_EQSearch_Boore DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933| 832 0.0| 0.0| 4.20| 0.070 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933| 837 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.063 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/12/1933| 6 1 0.0| 0.0| 4.20| 0.070 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/12/1933| 616 0.0| 0.0| 4.60| 0.086 | VII| 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933| 910 0.0| 0.0| 5.10| 0.112 | VII| 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933|23 5 0.0| 0.0| 4.20| 0.070 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933| 553 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.063 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/12/1933|1651 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.063 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/12/1933|1738 0.0| 0.0| 4.50| 0.082 | VII| 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/12/1933|1825 0.0| 0.0| 4.10| 0.066 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933| 259 0.0| 0.0| 4.60| 0.086 | VII| 10.4( 16.8) ------------------------- EARTHQUAKE SEARCH RESULTS ------------------------- Page 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | | | TIME | | | SITE |SITE| APPROX. FILE| LAT. | LONG. | DATE | (UTC) |DEPTH|QUAKE| ACC. | MM | DISTANCE CODE| NORTH | WEST | | H M Sec| (km)| MAG.| g |INT.| mi [km] ----+-------+--------+----------+--------+-----+-----+-------+----+------------ DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/12/1933|2354 0.0| 0.0| 4.50| 0.082 | VII| 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/13/1933| 343 0.0| 0.0| 4.10| 0.066 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/13/1933| 432 0.0| 0.0| 4.70| 0.091 | VII| 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933|1147 0.0| 0.0| 4.40| 0.078 | VII| 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/13/1933| 617 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.063 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/12/1933| 448 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.063 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/12/1933| 546 0.0| 0.0| 4.40| 0.078 | VII| 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/14/1933| 036 0.0| 0.0| 4.20| 0.070 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933|1357 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.063 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933| 440 0.0| 0.0| 4.70| 0.091 | VII| 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/14/1933|2242 0.0| 0.0| 4.10| 0.066 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933|1653 0.0| 0.0| 4.80| 0.096 | VII| 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/15/1933| 432 0.0| 0.0| 4.10| 0.066 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/15/1933| 540 0.0| 0.0| 4.20| 0.070 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933| 524 0.0| 0.0| 4.20| 0.070 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/16/1933|1456 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.063 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/16/1933|1529 0.0| 0.0| 4.20| 0.070 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/16/1933|1530 0.0| 0.0| 4.10| 0.066 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933|2232 0.0| 0.0| 4.10| 0.066 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/18/1933|2052 0.0| 0.0| 4.20| 0.070 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933| 2 9 0.0| 0.0| 5.00| 0.106 | VII| 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/20/1933|1358 0.0| 0.0| 4.10| 0.066 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/21/1933| 326 0.0| 0.0| 4.10| 0.066 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/23/1933| 840 0.0| 0.0| 4.10| 0.066 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/23/1933|1831 0.0| 0.0| 4.10| 0.066 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/25/1933|1346 0.0| 0.0| 4.10| 0.066 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933| 227 0.0| 0.0| 4.60| 0.086 | VII| 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/31/1933|1049 0.0| 0.0| 4.10| 0.066 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933| 911 0.0| 0.0| 4.40| 0.078 | VII| 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933| 926 0.0| 0.0| 4.10| 0.066 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933|1025 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.063 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933|1045 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.063 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|04/02/1933|1536 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.063 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933| 3 5 0.0| 0.0| 4.20| 0.070 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933| 3 9 0.0| 0.0| 4.40| 0.078 | VII| 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933| 311 0.0| 0.0| 4.20| 0.070 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933| 323 0.0| 0.0| 5.00| 0.106 | VII| 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933| 2 4 0.0| 0.0| 4.90| 0.101 | VII| 10.4( 16.8) Page 3 B-122 11206.001_EQSearch_Boore DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/13/1933|131828.0| 0.0| 5.30| 0.125 | VII| 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/13/1933|1532 0.0| 0.0| 4.10| 0.066 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/13/1933|1929 0.0| 0.0| 4.20| 0.070 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933| 439 0.0| 0.0| 4.90| 0.101 | VII| 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933| 436 0.0| 0.0| 4.60| 0.086 | VII| 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933| 521 0.0| 0.0| 4.40| 0.078 | VII| 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933| 513 0.0| 0.0| 4.70| 0.091 | VII| 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/15/1933| 2 8 0.0| 0.0| 4.10| 0.066 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933|1547 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.063 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933| 211 0.0| 0.0| 4.40| 0.078 | VII| 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933| 258 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.063 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|04/02/1933| 8 0 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.063 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/12/1933|15 2 0.0| 0.0| 4.20| 0.070 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933| 257 0.0| 0.0| 4.20| 0.070 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933| 2 5 0.0| 0.0| 4.30| 0.074 | VII| 10.4( 16.8) ------------------------- EARTHQUAKE SEARCH RESULTS ------------------------- Page 3 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | | | TIME | | | SITE |SITE| APPROX. FILE| LAT. | LONG. | DATE | (UTC) |DEPTH|QUAKE| ACC. | MM | DISTANCE CODE| NORTH | WEST | | H M Sec| (km)| MAG.| g |INT.| mi [km] ----+-------+--------+----------+--------+-----+-----+-------+----+------------ DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/12/1933| 740 0.0| 0.0| 4.20| 0.070 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933| 210 0.0| 0.0| 4.60| 0.086 | VII| 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933| 515 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.063 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933| 216 0.0| 0.0| 4.80| 0.096 | VII| 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/12/1933| 034 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.063 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933| 222 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.063 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/12/1933| 835 0.0| 0.0| 4.20| 0.070 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933| 230 0.0| 0.0| 5.10| 0.112 | VII| 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933| 339 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.063 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933| 252 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.063 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|04/01/1933| 642 0.0| 0.0| 4.20| 0.070 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933| 347 0.0| 0.0| 4.10| 0.066 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) DMG |33.7500|118.0830|03/11/1933| 336 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.063 | VI | 10.4( 16.8) GSG |33.9613|117.8923|03/29/2014|213245.9| 9.4| 4.14| 0.066 | VI | 10.8( 17.4) DMG |33.6590|117.9810|10/20/1961|20 714.5| 6.1| 4.00| 0.061 | VI | 10.8( 17.5) DMG |33.6710|118.0120|10/20/1961|223534.2| 5.6| 4.10| 0.064 | VI | 10.9( 17.5) GSP |33.9170|117.7760|09/03/2002|070851.9| 12.0| 4.80| 0.092 | VII| 11.0( 17.7) PAS |33.9650|117.8860|01/01/1976|172012.9| 6.2| 4.20| 0.067 | VI | 11.1( 17.8) GSP |33.8060|117.7150|03/07/2000|002028.2| 11.0| 4.00| 0.059 | VI | 11.4( 18.4) DMG |33.7000|118.0670|03/11/1933| 85457.0| 0.0| 5.10| 0.105 | VII| 11.4( 18.4) DMG |33.7000|118.0670|03/11/1933| 51022.0| 0.0| 5.10| 0.105 | VII| 11.4( 18.4) DMG |33.7000|118.0670|02/08/1940|165617.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.059 | VI | 11.4( 18.4) DMG |33.7000|118.0670|07/20/1940| 4 113.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.059 | VI | 11.4( 18.4) DMG |33.6540|117.9940|10/20/1961|194950.5| 4.6| 4.30| 0.069 | VI | 11.4( 18.4) DMG |33.6830|118.0500|03/11/1933|1250 0.0| 0.0| 4.40| 0.072 | VII| 11.5( 18.6) DMG |33.6830|118.0500|03/11/1933| 658 3.0| 0.0| 5.50| 0.129 |VIII| 11.5( 18.6) DMG |33.7330|118.1000|03/11/1933|15 9 0.0| 0.0| 4.40| 0.071 | VI | 11.8( 19.0) DMG |33.7330|118.1000|03/11/1933|1350 0.0| 0.0| 4.40| 0.071 | VI | 11.8( 19.0) DMG |33.7330|118.1000|03/11/1933|1447 0.0| 0.0| 4.40| 0.071 | VI | 11.8( 19.0) DMG |33.7670|118.1170|11/04/1939|2141 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.057 | VI | 11.9( 19.2) DMG |33.9000|118.1000|07/08/1929|1646 6.7| 13.0| 4.70| 0.080 | VII| 12.5( 20.1) DMG |33.7830|118.1330|11/20/1933|1032 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.055 | VI | 12.7( 20.4) DMG |33.7830|118.1330|01/13/1940| 749 7.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.055 | VI | 12.7( 20.4) DMG |33.7830|118.1330|10/02/1933| 91017.6| 0.0| 5.40| 0.114 | VII| 12.7( 20.4) Page 4 B-123 11206.001_EQSearch_Boore GSP |33.6200|117.9000|04/07/1989|200730.2| 13.0| 4.50| 0.070 | VI | 12.9( 20.7) DMG |33.7500|118.1330|03/11/1933|11 4 0.0| 0.0| 4.60| 0.073 | VII| 13.1( 21.1) DMG |33.6170|117.9670|03/11/1933| 154 7.8| 0.0| 6.30| 0.176 |VIII| 13.4( 21.6) GSG |33.9530|117.7610|07/29/2008|184215.7| 14.0| 5.30| 0.104 | VII| 13.4( 21.6) DMG |33.9670|118.0500|01/30/1941| 13446.9| 0.0| 4.10| 0.055 | VI | 13.6( 21.8) DMG |33.9960|117.9750|06/15/1967| 458 5.5| 10.0| 4.10| 0.055 | VI | 13.6( 21.8) GSP |33.9550|117.7460|12/14/2001|120135.5| 13.0| 4.00| 0.051 | VI | 14.1( 22.7) MGI |34.0000|118.0000|05/05/1929| 735 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.050 | VI | 14.3( 23.0) MGI |34.0000|118.0000|12/25/1903|1745 0.0| 0.0| 5.00| 0.085 | VII| 14.3( 23.0) MGI |34.0000|118.0000|05/05/1929| 1 7 0.0| 0.0| 4.60| 0.069 | VI | 14.3( 23.0) DMG |33.6170|118.0170|10/02/1933|1326 1.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.050 | VI | 14.3( 23.0) DMG |33.6170|118.0170|03/14/1933|19 150.0| 0.0| 5.10| 0.089 | VII| 14.3( 23.0) DMG |33.6170|118.0170|03/15/1933|111332.0| 0.0| 4.90| 0.080 | VII| 14.3( 23.0) DMG |33.6170|118.0330|05/21/1938| 944 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.049 | VI | 14.7( 23.7) DMG |33.7500|118.1670|05/16/1933|205855.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.048 | VI | 15.0( 24.2) DMG |33.6000|118.0000|03/11/1933| 217 0.0| 0.0| 4.50| 0.063 | VI | 15.0( 24.2) DMG |33.6000|118.0000|03/11/1933| 231 0.0| 0.0| 4.40| 0.059 | VI | 15.0( 24.2) DMG |33.6000|118.0170|12/25/1935|1715 0.0| 0.0| 4.50| 0.062 | VI | 15.4( 24.8) GSP |33.9510|117.7090|01/05/1998|181406.5| 11.0| 4.30| 0.055 | VI | 15.4( 24.8) ------------------------- EARTHQUAKE SEARCH RESULTS ------------------------- Page 4 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | | | TIME | | | SITE |SITE| APPROX. FILE| LAT. | LONG. | DATE | (UTC) |DEPTH|QUAKE| ACC. | MM | DISTANCE CODE| NORTH | WEST | | H M Sec| (km)| MAG.| g |INT.| mi [km] ----+-------+--------+----------+--------+-----+-----+-------+----+------------ DMG |33.7500|118.1830|08/04/1933| 41748.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.046 | VI | 15.9( 25.6) DMG |33.9500|118.1330|10/25/1933| 7 046.0| 0.0| 4.30| 0.054 | VI | 16.0( 25.8) GSP |33.9920|118.0820|03/16/2010|110400.2| 18.0| 4.40| 0.057 | VI | 16.0( 25.8) DMG |33.5750|117.9830|03/11/1933| 518 4.0| 0.0| 5.20| 0.085 | VII| 16.4( 26.4) DMG |33.7830|118.2000|12/27/1939|192849.0| 0.0| 4.70| 0.065 | VI | 16.5( 26.5) DMG |33.8670|118.2000|11/13/1933|2128 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.044 | VI | 16.9( 27.2) DMG |33.5670|117.9830|07/07/1937|1112 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.044 | VI | 17.0( 27.3) DMG |33.5670|117.9830|04/17/1934|1833 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.044 | VI | 17.0( 27.3) PAS |34.0060|117.7390|02/18/1989| 717 4.8| 3.3| 4.30| 0.051 | VI | 17.1( 27.5) DMG |33.8170|118.2170|10/22/1941| 65718.5| 0.0| 4.90| 0.070 | VI | 17.4( 28.0) DMG |33.6170|118.1170|01/20/1934|2117 0.0| 0.0| 4.50| 0.056 | VI | 17.5( 28.1) MGI |33.9000|118.2000|10/08/1927|1914 0.0| 0.0| 4.60| 0.059 | VI | 17.6( 28.4) DMG |33.8670|118.2170|06/19/1944| 0 333.0| 0.0| 4.50| 0.055 | VI | 17.9( 28.8) DMG |33.8670|118.2170|06/19/1944| 3 6 7.0| 0.0| 4.40| 0.052 | VI | 17.9( 28.8) MGI |33.8000|117.6000|04/22/1918|2115 0.0| 0.0| 5.00| 0.071 | VI | 18.0( 29.0) DMG |33.8000|117.6000|09/16/1903|1210 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.042 | VI | 18.0( 29.0) MGI |34.0000|117.7000|12/03/1929| 9 5 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.042 | VI | 18.2( 29.2) DMG |33.5610|118.0580|01/15/1937|183547.0| 10.0| 4.00| 0.041 | V | 18.8( 30.3) DMG |33.9390|118.2050|01/11/1950|214135.0| 0.4| 4.10| 0.043 | VI | 19.0( 30.6) DMG |33.5450|117.8070|10/27/1969|1316 2.3| 6.5| 4.50| 0.053 | VI | 19.0( 30.6) DMG |33.7830|118.2500|11/14/1941| 84136.3| 0.0| 5.40| 0.084 | VII| 19.3( 31.1) PAS |34.0500|118.0870|10/01/1987|155953.5| 10.4| 4.00| 0.040 | V | 19.5( 31.4) DMG |33.7590|118.2530|08/31/1938| 31814.2| 10.0| 4.50| 0.051 | VI | 19.7( 31.7) PAS |34.0520|118.0900|10/01/1987|151231.8| 10.8| 4.70| 0.057 | VI | 19.7( 31.8) PAS |34.0490|118.1010|10/01/1987|144541.5| 13.6| 4.70| 0.057 | VI | 19.9( 32.0) PAS |34.0610|118.0790|10/01/1987|144220.0| 9.5| 5.90| 0.106 | VII| 20.0( 32.1) PAS |34.0770|118.0470|02/11/1988|152555.7| 12.5| 4.70| 0.056 | VI | 20.2( 32.5) DMG |33.6330|118.2000|11/01/1940|20 046.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.039 | V | 20.3( 32.7) DMG |33.6300|118.2000|09/13/1929|132338.2| 0.0| 4.00| 0.038 | V | 20.4( 32.9) DMG |33.8500|118.2670|03/11/1933|1425 0.0| 0.0| 5.00| 0.065 | VI | 20.5( 32.9) Page 5 B-124 11206.001_EQSearch_Boore DMG |33.8500|118.2670|03/11/1933| 629 0.0| 0.0| 4.40| 0.047 | VI | 20.5( 32.9) PAS |34.0600|118.1000|10/01/1987|1449 5.9| 11.7| 4.70| 0.055 | VI | 20.5( 33.0) MGI |34.1000|118.0000|01/27/1930|2026 0.0| 0.0| 4.60| 0.052 | VI | 20.9( 33.6) MGI |34.0000|118.2000|06/26/1917|2130 0.0| 0.0| 4.60| 0.051 | VI | 21.2( 34.0) MGI |34.0000|118.2000|06/26/1917|2115 0.0| 0.0| 4.60| 0.051 | VI | 21.2( 34.0) MGI |34.0000|118.2000|02/13/1917|13 5 0.0| 0.0| 4.60| 0.051 | VI | 21.2( 34.0) MGI |34.0000|118.2000|06/26/1917| 424 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.037 | V | 21.2( 34.0) MGI |34.0000|118.2000|06/26/1917|2120 0.0| 0.0| 4.60| 0.051 | VI | 21.2( 34.0) PAS |34.0760|118.0900|10/01/1987|1448 3.1| 11.7| 4.10| 0.039 | V | 21.2( 34.1) GSP |34.0200|118.1800|06/12/1989|172225.5| 16.0| 4.10| 0.039 | V | 21.2( 34.1) PAS |34.0730|118.0980|10/04/1987|105938.2| 8.2| 5.30| 0.074 | VII| 21.2( 34.2) DMG |34.1000|117.8000|03/31/1931|2033 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.037 | V | 21.3( 34.3) DMG |33.9500|117.5830|04/11/1941| 12024.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.037 | V | 21.4( 34.5) GSP |34.0300|118.1800|06/12/1989|165718.4| 16.0| 4.40| 0.045 | VI | 21.7( 34.9) GSP |33.9220|118.2700|10/28/2001|162745.6| 21.0| 4.00| 0.036 | V | 21.9( 35.3) MGI |33.8000|118.3000|12/31/1928|1045 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.036 | V | 22.1( 35.6) DMG |33.8000|118.3000|11/03/1931|16 5 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.036 | V | 22.1( 35.6) DMG |33.6820|117.5530|07/05/1938|18 655.7| 10.0| 4.50| 0.046 | VI | 22.4( 36.1) PAS |33.5080|118.0710|11/20/1988| 53928.7| 6.0| 4.50| 0.046 | VI | 22.5( 36.1) DMG |33.5170|118.1000|03/22/1941| 82240.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.035 | V | 22.6( 36.4) MGI |34.1000|118.1000|07/11/1855| 415 0.0| 0.0| 6.30| 0.118 | VII| 22.9( 36.9) T-A |34.0000|118.2500|09/23/1827| 0 0 0.0| 0.0| 5.00| 0.058 | VI | 23.4( 37.7) T-A |34.0000|118.2500|05/04/1857| 6 0 0.0| 0.0| 4.30| 0.040 | V | 23.4( 37.7) ------------------------- EARTHQUAKE SEARCH RESULTS ------------------------- Page 5 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | | | TIME | | | SITE |SITE| APPROX. FILE| LAT. | LONG. | DATE | (UTC) |DEPTH|QUAKE| ACC. | MM | DISTANCE CODE| NORTH | WEST | | H M Sec| (km)| MAG.| g |INT.| mi [km] ----+-------+--------+----------+--------+-----+-----+-------+----+------------ T-A |34.0000|118.2500|05/02/1856| 810 0.0| 0.0| 4.30| 0.040 | V | 23.4( 37.7) T-A |34.0000|118.2500|01/10/1856| 0 0 0.0| 0.0| 5.00| 0.058 | VI | 23.4( 37.7) T-A |34.0000|118.2500|03/26/1860| 0 0 0.0| 0.0| 5.00| 0.058 | VI | 23.4( 37.7) T-A |34.0000|118.2500|01/17/1857| 1 0 0.0| 0.0| 4.30| 0.040 | V | 23.4( 37.7) T-A |34.0000|118.2500|03/21/1880|1425 0.0| 0.0| 4.30| 0.040 | V | 23.4( 37.7) DMG |33.7170|117.5170|06/19/1935|1117 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.034 | V | 23.6( 38.0) DMG |33.8830|118.3170|03/11/1933|1457 0.0| 0.0| 4.90| 0.055 | VI | 23.7( 38.1) GSP |34.1100|117.7200|04/17/1990|223227.2| 4.0| 4.60| 0.047 | VI | 23.7( 38.2) DMG |33.7170|117.5070|08/06/1938|22 056.0| 10.0| 4.00| 0.034 | V | 24.2( 38.9) DMG |34.1000|117.6830|01/09/1934|1410 0.0| 0.0| 4.50| 0.044 | VI | 24.2( 39.0) DMG |34.1000|117.6830|01/18/1934| 214 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.034 | V | 24.2( 39.0) DMG |33.6990|117.5110|05/31/1938| 83455.4| 10.0| 5.50| 0.074 | VII| 24.3( 39.1) DMG |33.7250|117.4980|01/03/1956| 02548.9| 13.7| 4.70| 0.048 | VI | 24.5( 39.5) PAS |33.4710|118.0610|02/27/1984|101815.0| 6.0| 4.00| 0.033 | V | 24.6( 39.6) PAS |33.5380|118.2070|05/25/1982|134430.3| 13.7| 4.10| 0.035 | V | 25.0( 40.2) DMG |33.9830|118.3000|02/11/1940|192410.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.033 | V | 25.3( 40.7) DMG |33.7480|117.4790|06/22/1971|104119.0| 8.0| 4.20| 0.036 | V | 25.3( 40.7) GSP |34.1300|117.7000|03/01/1990|003457.1| 4.0| 4.00| 0.032 | V | 25.5( 41.0) PAS |34.1360|117.7090|06/26/1988|15 458.5| 7.9| 4.60| 0.044 | VI | 25.6( 41.2) GSP |33.9380|118.3360|05/18/2009|033936.3| 13.0| 4.70| 0.046 | VI | 25.8( 41.6) MGI |34.0000|118.3000|06/30/1920| 350 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.032 | V | 25.9( 41.6) MGI |34.0000|118.3000|06/22/1920|2035 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.032 | V | 25.9( 41.6) MGI |34.0000|118.3000|09/03/1905| 540 0.0| 0.0| 5.30| 0.064 | VI | 25.9( 41.6) MGI |34.1000|118.2000|05/02/1916|1432 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.032 | V | 26.1( 42.0) MGI |34.1000|118.2000|04/21/1921|1538 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.032 | V | 26.1( 42.0) MGI |34.1000|118.2000|01/27/1860| 830 0.0| 0.0| 4.30| 0.037 | V | 26.1( 42.0) Page 6 B-125 11206.001_EQSearch_Boore GSP |34.1400|117.7000|02/28/1990|234336.6| 5.0| 5.20| 0.060 | VI | 26.1( 42.0) DMG |33.7330|117.4670|10/26/1954|162226.0| 0.0| 4.10| 0.033 | V | 26.1( 42.1) GSP |33.7330|117.4660|09/02/2007|172914.0| 2.0| 4.70| 0.046 | VI | 26.2( 42.2) GSP |34.1500|117.7200|03/01/1990|032303.0| 11.0| 4.70| 0.046 | VI | 26.2( 42.2) GSP |34.1400|117.6900|03/02/1990|172625.4| 6.0| 4.60| 0.043 | VI | 26.4( 42.5) PAS |34.1490|118.1350|12/03/1988|113826.4| 13.3| 4.90| 0.050 | VI | 26.8( 43.2) DMG |34.2000|117.9000|08/28/1889| 215 0.0| 0.0| 5.50| 0.068 | VI | 27.2( 43.8) DMG |34.2000|117.9000|07/13/1935|105416.5| 0.0| 4.70| 0.045 | VI | 27.2( 43.8) MGI |34.0000|117.5000|12/16/1858|10 0 0.0| 0.0| 7.00| 0.150 |VIII| 27.2( 43.8) DMG |34.0000|117.5000|07/03/1908|1255 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.031 | V | 27.2( 43.8) MGI |34.0800|118.2600|07/16/1920|18 8 0.0| 0.0| 5.00| 0.052 | VI | 27.4( 44.1) MGI |34.2000|118.0000|01/09/1921| 530 0.0| 0.0| 4.60| 0.042 | VI | 27.6( 44.5) GSG |33.6580|118.3720|05/15/2013|200006.2| 1.2| 4.00| 0.030 | V | 28.2( 45.4) GSG |33.6583|118.3722|05/15/2013|200006.2| 1.2| 4.00| 0.030 | V | 28.2( 45.4) DMG |33.5000|118.2500|06/18/1920|10 8 0.0| 0.0| 4.50| 0.039 | V | 28.6( 46.0) DMG |33.7830|118.4170|11/02/1940| 25826.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.029 | V | 28.9( 46.5) DMG |33.7830|118.4170|11/01/1940| 725 3.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.029 | V | 28.9( 46.5) DMG |33.7830|118.4170|10/12/1940| 024 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.029 | V | 28.9( 46.5) DMG |33.7830|118.4170|10/14/1940|205111.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.029 | V | 28.9( 46.5) T-A |34.1700|118.1700|03/07/1888|1554 0.0| 0.0| 4.30| 0.034 | V | 29.1( 46.8) DMG |33.8330|117.4000|06/05/1940| 82727.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.029 | V | 29.5( 47.5) MGI |34.1000|118.3000|07/16/1920|2127 0.0| 0.0| 4.60| 0.039 | V | 30.0( 48.3) MGI |34.1000|118.3000|07/26/1920|1215 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.029 | V | 30.0( 48.3) MGI |34.1000|118.3000|07/16/1920|2130 0.0| 0.0| 4.60| 0.039 | V | 30.0( 48.3) MGI |34.1000|118.3000|07/16/1920|2022 0.0| 0.0| 4.60| 0.039 | V | 30.0( 48.3) DMG |33.6630|118.4130|01/08/1967| 738 5.3| 17.7| 4.00| 0.028 | V | 30.3( 48.8) DMG |33.6330|118.4000|10/17/1934| 938 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.028 | V | 30.3( 48.8) ------------------------- EARTHQUAKE SEARCH RESULTS ------------------------- Page 6 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | | | TIME | | | SITE |SITE| APPROX. FILE| LAT. | LONG. | DATE | (UTC) |DEPTH|QUAKE| ACC. | MM | DISTANCE CODE| NORTH | WEST | | H M Sec| (km)| MAG.| g |INT.| mi [km] ----+-------+--------+----------+--------+-----+-----+-------+----+------------ DMG |33.9030|118.4310|11/29/1938|192115.8| 10.0| 4.00| 0.028 | V | 30.4( 48.9) DMG |33.7000|117.4000|04/11/1910| 757 0.0| 0.0| 5.00| 0.048 | VI | 30.4( 48.9) DMG |33.7000|117.4000|05/13/1910| 620 0.0| 0.0| 5.00| 0.048 | VI | 30.4( 48.9) DMG |33.7000|117.4000|05/15/1910|1547 0.0| 0.0| 6.00| 0.081 | VII| 30.4( 48.9) DMG |33.5430|118.3400|09/14/1963| 35116.2| 2.2| 4.20| 0.031 | V | 30.5( 49.0) DMG |33.7670|118.4500|10/11/1940| 55712.3| 0.0| 4.70| 0.040 | V | 30.9( 49.7) MGI |34.0000|118.4000|01/29/1927|2324 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.028 | V | 30.9( 49.7) MGI |34.0000|118.4000|02/07/1927| 429 0.0| 0.0| 4.60| 0.038 | V | 30.9( 49.7) MGI |34.0000|118.4000|10/01/1930| 040 0.0| 0.0| 4.60| 0.038 | V | 30.9( 49.7) MGI |34.0000|118.4000|02/22/1920|1610 0.0| 0.0| 4.60| 0.038 | V | 30.9( 49.7) GSP |34.2500|117.9900|06/28/1991|170055.5| 9.0| 4.30| 0.033 | V | 31.0( 49.8) T-A |34.0000|117.4200|04/12/1888|1315 0.0| 0.0| 4.30| 0.032 | V | 31.3( 50.4) T-A |34.0000|117.4200|09/10/1920|1415 0.0| 0.0| 4.30| 0.032 | V | 31.3( 50.4) DMG |34.1270|117.5210|12/27/1938|10 928.6| 10.0| 4.00| 0.027 | V | 31.6( 50.8) DMG |34.0000|118.4170|12/07/1938| 338 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.027 | V | 31.8( 51.1) GSP |34.2620|118.0020|06/28/1991|144354.5| 11.0| 5.40| 0.057 | VI | 31.9( 51.3) DMG |34.1830|117.5830|10/03/1948| 24628.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.027 | V | 32.2( 51.8) GSP |34.0590|118.3870|09/09/2001|235918.0| 4.0| 4.20| 0.030 | V | 32.2( 51.9) MGI |34.0000|117.4000|05/22/1907| 652 0.0| 0.0| 4.60| 0.037 | V | 32.4( 52.1) DMG |34.1400|117.5150|01/01/1965| 8 418.0| 5.9| 4.40| 0.033 | V | 32.5( 52.2) DMG |33.9330|117.3670|10/24/1943| 02921.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.027 | V | 32.6( 52.4) DMG |33.7700|118.4800|04/24/1931|182754.8| 0.0| 4.40| 0.033 | V | 32.6( 52.4) Page 7 B-126 11206.001_EQSearch_Boore DMG |34.1160|117.4750|06/28/1960|20 048.0| 12.0| 4.10| 0.028 | V | 33.0( 53.1) DMG |34.1670|117.5330|03/01/1948| 81213.0| 0.0| 4.70| 0.038 | V | 33.1( 53.3) DMG |34.1240|117.4800|05/15/1955|17 326.0| 7.6| 4.00| 0.026 | V | 33.2( 53.4) DMG |33.3670|118.1500|04/16/1942| 72833.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.026 | V | 33.2( 53.4) DMG |34.1830|117.5480|09/01/1937|163533.5| 10.0| 4.50| 0.034 | V | 33.4( 53.8) MGI |33.8000|118.5000|06/18/1915|15 5 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.026 | V | 33.6( 54.1) DMG |33.6320|118.4670|01/08/1967| 73730.4| 11.4| 4.00| 0.026 | V | 33.9( 54.6) GSP |34.1390|117.4650|03/09/2008|092232.1| 3.0| 4.00| 0.026 | V | 34.5( 55.5) DMG |34.1120|117.4260|03/19/1937| 12338.4| 10.0| 4.00| 0.025 | V | 35.0( 56.4) PAS |34.1350|117.4480|01/08/1983| 71930.4| 4.6| 4.10| 0.027 | V | 35.0( 56.4) GSP |34.1250|117.4380|01/06/2005|143527.7| 4.0| 4.40| 0.031 | V | 35.0( 56.4) PAS |34.2110|117.5300|10/19/1979|122237.8| 4.9| 4.10| 0.026 | V | 35.6( 57.2) DMG |34.2110|117.5300|09/01/1937|1348 8.2| 10.0| 4.50| 0.033 | V | 35.6( 57.2) GSG |34.1430|117.4425|01/15/2014|093518.9| 3.6| 4.43| 0.031 | V | 35.6( 57.4) DMG |34.1320|117.4260|04/15/1965|20 833.3| 5.5| 4.50| 0.032 | V | 35.9( 57.7) DMG |34.0330|117.3500|04/18/1940|184343.9| 0.0| 4.40| 0.031 | V | 35.9( 57.8) DMG |34.2000|117.5000|06/14/1892|1325 0.0| 0.0| 4.90| 0.040 | V | 36.1( 58.1) DMG |34.0000|118.5000|03/06/1918|1820 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.025 | V | 36.1( 58.2) DMG |34.0000|118.5000|08/04/1927|1224 0.0| 0.0| 5.00| 0.042 | VI | 36.1( 58.2) MGI |34.0000|118.5000|06/23/1920|1220 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.025 | V | 36.1( 58.2) MGI |34.0000|118.5000|11/19/1918|2018 0.0| 0.0| 5.00| 0.042 | VI | 36.1( 58.2) DMG |34.0000|118.5000|11/08/1914|1140 0.0| 0.0| 4.50| 0.032 | V | 36.1( 58.2) DMG |34.0000|118.5000|06/22/1920| 248 0.0| 0.0| 4.90| 0.040 | V | 36.1( 58.2) MGI |34.0000|118.5000|03/08/1918|1230 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.025 | V | 36.1( 58.2) DMG |34.0330|117.3170|09/03/1935| 647 0.0| 0.0| 4.50| 0.031 | V | 37.6( 60.5) USG |34.1390|117.3860|02/21/1987|231530.1| 2.6| 4.07| 0.025 | V | 38.0( 61.1) DMG |34.2170|117.4670|03/25/1941|234341.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.024 | IV | 38.2( 61.5) DMG |34.2700|117.5400|09/12/1970|143053.0| 8.0| 5.40| 0.049 | VI | 38.5( 62.0) DMG |34.3000|117.6000|07/30/1894| 512 0.0| 0.0| 6.00| 0.068 | VI | 38.5( 62.0) DMG |34.0000|117.2830|11/07/1939|1852 8.4| 0.0| 4.70| 0.034 | V | 38.6( 62.1) GSG |34.0958|118.4912|06/02/2014|023643.9| 4.4| 4.16| 0.026 | V | 38.6( 62.2) ------------------------- EARTHQUAKE SEARCH RESULTS ------------------------- Page 7 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | | | TIME | | | SITE |SITE| APPROX. FILE| LAT. | LONG. | DATE | (UTC) |DEPTH|QUAKE| ACC. | MM | DISTANCE CODE| NORTH | WEST | | H M Sec| (km)| MAG.| g |INT.| mi [km] ----+-------+--------+----------+--------+-----+-----+-------+----+------------ DMG |34.2810|117.5520|09/13/1970| 44748.6| 8.0| 4.40| 0.029 | V | 38.8( 62.4) DMG |34.2670|117.5180|09/12/1970|141011.2| 8.0| 4.10| 0.025 | V | 39.1( 62.9) DMG |33.9960|117.2700|02/17/1952|123658.3| 16.0| 4.50| 0.030 | V | 39.2( 63.0) DMG |34.1180|117.3410|09/22/1951| 82239.1| 11.9| 4.30| 0.027 | V | 39.3( 63.2) DMG |34.3040|117.5700|05/05/1969|16 2 9.6| 8.8| 4.40| 0.029 | V | 39.6( 63.8) DMG |34.1270|117.3380|02/23/1936|222042.7| 10.0| 4.50| 0.030 | V | 39.7( 64.0) GSG |34.1347|118.4858|03/17/2014|132536.9| 9.9| 4.39| 0.028 | V | 39.8( 64.1) GSP |34.1900|117.3900|12/28/1989|094108.1| 15.0| 4.50| 0.030 | V | 40.0( 64.4) DMG |34.2000|117.4000|07/22/1899| 046 0.0| 0.0| 5.50| 0.050 | VI | 40.1( 64.5) DMG |34.1400|117.3390|02/26/1936| 93327.6| 10.0| 4.00| 0.023 | IV | 40.2( 64.7) DMG |34.0000|117.2500|07/23/1923| 73026.0| 0.0| 6.25| 0.075 | VII| 40.3( 64.9) DMG |34.0000|117.2500|11/01/1932| 445 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.023 | IV | 40.3( 64.9) MGI |34.1000|117.3000|12/27/1901|11 0 0.0| 0.0| 4.60| 0.031 | V | 40.6( 65.3) DMG |34.1000|117.3000|02/16/1931|1327 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.023 | IV | 40.6( 65.3) MGI |34.1000|117.3000|11/22/1911| 257 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.023 | IV | 40.6( 65.3) MGI |34.1000|117.3000|07/15/1905|2041 0.0| 0.0| 5.30| 0.045 | VI | 40.6( 65.3) GSP |34.1070|117.3040|01/09/2009|034946.3| 14.0| 4.50| 0.029 | V | 40.6( 65.4) PAS |34.0230|117.2450|10/02/1985|234412.4| 15.2| 4.80| 0.034 | V | 41.2( 66.2) Page 8 B-127 11206.001_EQSearch_Boore GSP |34.0470|117.2550|02/21/2000|134943.1| 15.0| 4.50| 0.029 | V | 41.3( 66.4) GSP |34.1680|117.3370|06/28/1997|214525.1| 9.0| 4.20| 0.025 | V | 41.4( 66.7) DMG |33.9000|117.2000|12/19/1880| 0 0 0.0| 0.0| 6.00| 0.064 | VI | 41.5( 66.7) DMG |34.3000|117.5000|07/22/1899|2032 0.0| 0.0| 6.50| 0.083 | VII| 41.5( 66.8) DMG |34.4000|117.8000|02/24/1946| 6 752.0| 0.0| 4.10| 0.023 | IV | 41.5( 66.8) PAS |33.9190|118.6270|01/19/1989| 65328.8| 11.9| 5.00| 0.038 | V | 41.6( 67.0) DMG |34.3700|117.6500|12/08/1812|15 0 0.0| 0.0| 7.00| 0.108 | VII| 41.8( 67.2) GSP |34.0240|117.2300|03/11/1998|121851.8| 14.0| 4.50| 0.029 | V | 42.0( 67.6) DMG |33.7380|117.1870|04/27/1962| 91232.1| 5.7| 4.10| 0.023 | IV | 42.0( 67.6) GSP |34.3740|117.6490|08/20/1998|234958.4| 9.0| 4.40| 0.027 | V | 42.0( 67.7) T-A |34.1700|117.3200|12/02/1859|2210 0.0| 0.0| 4.30| 0.026 | V | 42.3( 68.0) DMG |33.9500|118.6320|08/31/1930| 04036.0| 0.0| 5.20| 0.041 | V | 42.3( 68.1) T-A |34.0800|117.2500|10/07/1869| 0 0 0.0| 0.0| 4.30| 0.026 | V | 42.5( 68.4) DMG |34.0430|117.2280|04/03/1939| 25044.7| 10.0| 4.00| 0.022 | IV | 42.6( 68.5) GSP |34.3850|117.6350|10/16/2007|085344.1| 8.0| 4.20| 0.024 | V | 43.0( 69.3) GSP |34.2930|118.3890|12/06/1994|034834.5| 9.0| 4.50| 0.028 | V | 43.2( 69.6) GSP |34.2840|118.4040|01/14/2001|022614.1| 8.0| 4.30| 0.025 | V | 43.3( 69.7) GSP |34.2310|118.4750|03/20/1994|212012.3| 13.0| 5.30| 0.043 | VI | 43.5( 70.0) GSP |34.2890|118.4030|01/14/2001|025053.7| 8.0| 4.00| 0.021 | IV | 43.5( 70.0) DMG |34.3350|118.3310|02/09/1971|155820.7| 14.2| 4.80| 0.033 | V | 43.6( 70.2) DMG |34.3390|118.3320|02/09/1971|141612.9| 11.1| 4.10| 0.022 | IV | 43.9( 70.6) GSP |34.2450|118.4710|01/18/1994|155144.9| 12.0| 4.00| 0.021 | IV | 44.0( 70.8) DMG |34.2680|118.4450|08/30/1964|225737.1| 15.4| 4.00| 0.021 | IV | 44.0( 70.9) PAS |33.9330|118.6690|10/17/1979|205237.3| 5.5| 4.20| 0.024 | IV | 44.2( 71.1) GSP |34.0050|117.1800|02/13/2010|213906.6| 8.0| 4.10| 0.022 | IV | 44.2( 71.2) GSP |34.2150|118.5100|01/19/1994|140914.8| 17.0| 4.50| 0.028 | V | 44.3( 71.3) DMG |34.3610|118.3060|02/09/1971|141021.5| 5.0| 4.70| 0.031 | V | 44.4( 71.4) GSP |34.3120|118.3930|05/25/1994|125657.1| 7.0| 4.40| 0.026 | V | 44.4( 71.4) MGI |34.2000|117.3000|04/13/1913|1045 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.021 | IV | 44.4( 71.5) GSP |34.3110|118.3980|06/15/1994|055948.6| 7.0| 4.20| 0.023 | IV | 44.5( 71.6) DMG |34.3700|118.3020|02/10/1971| 31212.0| 0.8| 4.00| 0.021 | IV | 44.8( 72.1) GSB |34.2990|118.4280|01/23/1994|085508.7| 6.0| 4.20| 0.023 | IV | 45.0( 72.4) PAS |33.9440|118.6810|01/01/1979|231438.9| 11.3| 5.00| 0.035 | V | 45.0( 72.4) DMG |34.3680|118.3140|04/25/1971|1448 6.5| -2.0| 4.00| 0.021 | IV | 45.0( 72.5) GSP |34.2990|118.4390|02/03/1994|162335.4| 8.0| 4.20| 0.023 | IV | 45.4( 73.0) ------------------------- EARTHQUAKE SEARCH RESULTS ------------------------- Page 8 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | | | TIME | | | SITE |SITE| APPROX. FILE| LAT. | LONG. | DATE | (UTC) |DEPTH|QUAKE| ACC. | MM | DISTANCE CODE| NORTH | WEST | | H M Sec| (km)| MAG.| g |INT.| mi [km] ----+-------+--------+----------+--------+-----+-----+-------+----+------------ GSP |34.2130|118.5370|01/17/1994|123055.4| 18.0| 6.70| 0.086 | VII| 45.4( 73.0) MGI |34.1000|117.2000|04/23/1923|2113 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.021 | IV | 45.7( 73.5) GSP |34.2870|118.4660|01/19/1994|071406.2| 11.0| 4.00| 0.021 | IV | 45.8( 73.7) GSP |34.3010|118.4520|01/21/1994|185244.2| 7.0| 4.30| 0.024 | V | 46.0( 74.0) GSP |34.2970|118.4580|01/21/1994|185344.6| 7.0| 4.30| 0.024 | V | 46.0( 74.0) GSP |34.2920|118.4660|01/19/1994|144635.2| 6.0| 4.00| 0.021 | IV | 46.1( 74.1) DMG |34.2960|118.4640|03/30/1971| 85443.3| 2.6| 4.10| 0.022 | IV | 46.2( 74.3) GSP |34.2910|118.4760|02/06/1994|131926.9| 11.0| 4.10| 0.022 | IV | 46.4( 74.7) DMG |34.3080|118.4540|02/09/1971|144346.7| 6.2| 5.20| 0.038 | V | 46.4( 74.7) GSB |34.3000|118.4660|01/21/1994|183915.3| 10.0| 4.70| 0.030 | V | 46.5( 74.8) GSP |34.3110|118.4560|01/17/1994|193534.3| 2.0| 4.00| 0.020 | IV | 46.6( 75.1) GSP |34.3170|118.4550|01/17/1994|132644.7| 2.0| 4.70| 0.029 | V | 46.9( 75.5) GSP |34.3040|118.4730|01/17/1994|150703.2| 2.0| 4.20| 0.022 | IV | 46.9( 75.6) GSP |34.3310|118.4420|01/17/1994|141430.3| 1.0| 4.50| 0.026 | V | 47.2( 75.9) Page 9 B-128 11206.001_EQSearch_Boore GSB |34.3100|118.4740|01/21/1994|184228.8| 7.0| 4.20| 0.022 | IV | 47.3( 76.1) DMG |33.7000|117.1000|06/11/1902| 245 0.0| 0.0| 4.50| 0.026 | V | 47.3( 76.1) DMG |34.3570|118.4060|02/09/1971|141950.2| 11.8| 4.00| 0.020 | IV | 47.3( 76.1) GSP |34.2610|118.5340|01/17/1994|123939.8| 14.0| 4.50| 0.026 | V | 47.4( 76.2) GSP |34.2540|118.5450|01/17/1994|130627.9| 0.0| 4.60| 0.028 | V | 47.5( 76.5) GSP |34.2280|118.5730|01/17/1994|175608.2| 19.0| 4.60| 0.027 | V | 47.6( 76.7) DMG |34.3870|118.3640|02/09/1971|143917.8| -1.6| 4.00| 0.020 | IV | 47.6( 76.7) DMG |34.2860|118.5150|03/31/1971|145222.5| 2.1| 4.60| 0.027 | V | 47.7( 76.8) DMG |34.2730|118.5320|06/21/1971|16 1 8.5| 4.1| 4.00| 0.020 | IV | 47.8( 77.0) DMG |34.4110|118.3290|02/10/1971| 5 636.0| 4.7| 4.30| 0.023 | IV | 48.0( 77.3) DMG |34.2840|118.5280|04/02/1971| 54025.0| 3.0| 4.00| 0.020 | IV | 48.2( 77.6) DMG |34.3960|118.3660|02/10/1971|173855.1| 6.2| 4.20| 0.022 | IV | 48.2( 77.6) GSP |34.2180|118.6070|01/18/1994|113509.9| 12.0| 4.20| 0.022 | IV | 48.8( 78.5) GSP |34.3390|118.4750|09/01/2011|204708.0| 7.0| 4.20| 0.022 | IV | 48.8( 78.6) DMG |34.3530|118.4560|03/07/1971| 13340.5| 3.3| 4.50| 0.026 | V | 48.9( 78.6) GSG |34.3340|118.4840|01/17/1994|223152.1| 10.0| 4.20| 0.022 | IV | 48.9( 78.7) GSP |33.9530|117.0760|09/14/2011|144451.0| 16.0| 4.10| 0.021 | IV | 49.1( 79.0) GSP |34.2740|118.5630|01/27/1994|171958.8| 14.0| 4.60| 0.027 | V | 49.2( 79.2) DMG |34.2650|118.5770|04/15/1971|111432.0| 4.2| 4.20| 0.022 | IV | 49.4( 79.5) GSP |34.2690|118.5760|01/17/1994|125546.8| 16.0| 4.10| 0.020 | IV | 49.6( 79.7) DMG |34.3560|118.4740|03/25/1971|2254 9.9| 4.6| 4.20| 0.022 | IV | 49.7( 79.9) GSP |34.3570|118.4800|02/25/1994|125912.6| 1.0| 4.10| 0.020 | IV | 49.9( 80.4) DMG |34.3920|118.4270|02/21/1971| 71511.7| 7.2| 4.50| 0.025 | V | 50.0( 80.4) DMG |34.3990|118.4190|02/10/1971|134953.7| 9.7| 4.30| 0.023 | IV | 50.1( 80.6) DMG |34.4110|118.4010|02/09/1971|14 231.0| 8.0| 4.70| 0.028 | V | 50.2( 80.8) DMG |34.4110|118.4010|02/09/1971|14 346.0| 8.0| 4.10| 0.020 | IV | 50.2( 80.8) DMG |34.4110|118.4010|02/09/1971|14 230.0| 8.0| 4.30| 0.023 | IV | 50.2( 80.8) DMG |34.4110|118.4010|02/09/1971|14 325.0| 8.0| 4.40| 0.024 | IV | 50.2( 80.8) DMG |34.4110|118.4010|02/09/1971|14 150.0| 8.0| 4.50| 0.025 | V | 50.2( 80.8) DMG |34.4110|118.4010|02/09/1971|14 2 3.0| 8.0| 4.10| 0.020 | IV | 50.2( 80.8) DMG |34.4110|118.4010|02/09/1971|14 8 4.0| 8.0| 4.00| 0.019 | IV | 50.2( 80.8) DMG |34.4110|118.4010|02/09/1971|14 745.0| 8.0| 4.50| 0.025 | V | 50.2( 80.8) DMG |34.4110|118.4010|02/09/1971|14 710.0| 8.0| 4.00| 0.019 | IV | 50.2( 80.8) DMG |34.4110|118.4010|02/09/1971|14 244.0| 8.0| 5.80| 0.050 | VI | 50.2( 80.8) DMG |34.4110|118.4010|02/09/1971|14 853.0| 8.0| 4.60| 0.026 | V | 50.2( 80.8) DMG |34.4110|118.4010|02/09/1971|14 838.0| 8.0| 4.50| 0.025 | V | 50.2( 80.8) DMG |34.4110|118.4010|02/09/1971|14 541.0| 8.0| 4.10| 0.020 | IV | 50.2( 80.8) DMG |34.4110|118.4010|02/09/1971|14 550.0| 8.0| 4.10| 0.020 | IV | 50.2( 80.8) DMG |34.4110|118.4010|02/09/1971|14 154.0| 8.0| 4.20| 0.021 | IV | 50.2( 80.8) ------------------------- EARTHQUAKE SEARCH RESULTS ------------------------- Page 9 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | | | TIME | | | SITE |SITE| APPROX. FILE| LAT. | LONG. | DATE | (UTC) |DEPTH|QUAKE| ACC. | MM | DISTANCE CODE| NORTH | WEST | | H M Sec| (km)| MAG.| g |INT.| mi [km] ----+-------+--------+----------+--------+-----+-----+-------+----+------------ DMG |34.4110|118.4010|02/09/1971|14 8 7.0| 8.0| 4.20| 0.021 | IV | 50.2( 80.8) DMG |34.4110|118.4010|02/09/1971|14 041.8| 8.4| 6.40| 0.068 | VI | 50.2( 80.8) DMG |34.4110|118.4010|02/09/1971|14 4 7.0| 8.0| 4.10| 0.020 | IV | 50.2( 80.8) DMG |34.4110|118.4010|02/09/1971|14 159.0| 8.0| 4.10| 0.020 | IV | 50.2( 80.8) DMG |34.4110|118.4010|02/09/1971|14 133.0| 8.0| 4.20| 0.021 | IV | 50.2( 80.8) DMG |34.4110|118.4010|02/09/1971|14 140.0| 8.0| 4.10| 0.020 | IV | 50.2( 80.8) DMG |34.4110|118.4010|02/09/1971|14 444.0| 8.0| 4.10| 0.020 | IV | 50.2( 80.8) DMG |34.4110|118.4010|02/09/1971|14 1 8.0| 8.0| 5.80| 0.050 | VI | 50.2( 80.8) DMG |34.4110|118.4010|02/09/1971|14 434.0| 8.0| 4.20| 0.021 | IV | 50.2( 80.8) DMG |34.4110|118.4010|02/09/1971|14 730.0| 8.0| 4.00| 0.019 | IV | 50.2( 80.8) Page 10 B-129 11206.001_EQSearch_Boore DMG |34.4110|118.4010|02/09/1971|14 446.0| 8.0| 4.20| 0.021 | IV | 50.2( 80.8) DMG |34.4110|118.4010|02/09/1971|141028.0| 8.0| 5.30| 0.038 | V | 50.2( 80.8) DMG |34.4110|118.4010|02/09/1971|14 439.0| 8.0| 4.10| 0.020 | IV | 50.2( 80.8) DMG |34.4310|118.3690|08/14/1974|144555.2| 8.2| 4.20| 0.021 | IV | 50.4( 81.1) PAS |34.3800|118.4590|08/12/1977| 21926.1| 9.5| 4.50| 0.025 | V | 50.4( 81.1) DMG |34.3610|118.4870|02/10/1971|143526.7| 4.4| 4.20| 0.021 | IV | 50.4( 81.1) DMG |34.3840|118.4550|02/10/1971|113134.6| 6.0| 4.20| 0.021 | IV | 50.5( 81.2) GSB |34.3010|118.5650|01/17/1994|204602.4| 9.0| 5.20| 0.036 | V | 50.5( 81.3) DMG |34.3970|118.4390|02/21/1971| 55052.6| 6.9| 4.70| 0.028 | V | 50.6( 81.5) GSB |34.3190|118.5580|01/18/1994|132444.1| 1.0| 4.50| 0.025 | V | 51.1( 82.2) GSP |34.3050|118.5790|01/29/1994|112036.0| 1.0| 5.10| 0.034 | V | 51.3( 82.6) DMG |34.4330|118.3980|02/09/1971|144017.4| -2.0| 4.10| 0.020 | IV | 51.4( 82.7) GSP |34.3740|118.4950|01/28/1994|200953.4| 0.0| 4.20| 0.021 | IV | 51.4( 82.7) DMG |34.4260|118.4140|02/10/1971| 518 7.2| 5.8| 4.50| 0.025 | V | 51.5( 82.8) GSP |34.2780|118.6110|01/29/1994|121656.4| 2.0| 4.30| 0.022 | IV | 51.5( 82.9) DMG |34.4280|118.4130|04/01/1971|15 3 3.6| 8.0| 4.10| 0.020 | IV | 51.5( 83.0) DMG |34.0170|117.0500|02/19/1940|12 655.7| 0.0| 4.60| 0.026 | V | 51.6( 83.1) GSP |33.9320|117.0230|01/16/2010|120325.7| 13.0| 4.30| 0.022 | IV | 51.8( 83.4) DMG |34.5190|118.1980|08/23/1952|10 9 7.1| 13.1| 5.00| 0.032 | V | 51.8( 83.4) DMG |34.3990|118.4730|03/09/1974| 05431.9| 24.4| 4.70| 0.027 | V | 51.9( 83.6) DMG |34.3000|118.6000|04/04/1893|1940 0.0| 0.0| 6.00| 0.054 | VI | 52.0( 83.7) GSB |34.3450|118.5520|01/24/1994|041518.8| 6.0| 4.80| 0.028 | V | 52.1( 83.9) GSB |34.2850|118.6240|01/17/1994|135602.4| 19.0| 4.70| 0.027 | V | 52.4( 84.3) DMG |33.8000|117.0000|12/25/1899|1225 0.0| 0.0| 6.40| 0.066 | VI | 52.4( 84.4) DMG |33.7500|117.0000|06/06/1918|2232 0.0| 0.0| 5.00| 0.031 | V | 52.6( 84.6) DMG |33.7500|117.0000|04/21/1918|223225.0| 0.0| 6.80| 0.081 | VII| 52.6( 84.6) GSP |34.3000|118.6200|08/09/2007|075849.0| 4.0| 4.40| 0.023 | IV | 52.9( 85.1) T-A |33.5000|117.0700|12/29/1880| 7 0 0.0| 0.0| 4.30| 0.022 | IV | 52.9( 85.1) DMG |34.4460|118.4360|02/10/1971|185441.7| 8.1| 4.20| 0.020 | IV | 53.3( 85.8) PAS |33.0330|117.9440|02/22/1983| 21830.4| 10.0| 4.30| 0.021 | IV | 53.4( 85.9) PAS |34.4630|118.4090|09/24/1977|212824.3| 5.0| 4.20| 0.020 | IV | 53.5( 86.0) GSP |34.0540|117.0300|06/27/2005|221733.6| 12.0| 4.00| 0.018 | IV | 53.5( 86.0) GSB |34.3600|118.5710|01/19/1994|044048.0| 2.0| 4.50| 0.024 | IV | 53.6( 86.3) DMG |34.5650|118.1130|02/28/1969| 45612.4| 5.3| 4.30| 0.021 | IV | 53.6( 86.3) DMG |34.4570|118.4270|02/09/1971|161926.5| -1.0| 4.20| 0.020 | IV | 53.7( 86.3) GSP |34.1920|117.0950|04/06/1994|190104.1| 7.0| 4.80| 0.028 | V | 53.9( 86.8) DMG |34.2000|117.1000|09/20/1907| 154 0.0| 0.0| 6.00| 0.052 | VI | 54.0( 86.8) DMG |34.0000|117.0000|06/30/1923| 022 0.0| 0.0| 4.50| 0.024 | IV | 54.1( 87.0) GSP |34.3790|118.5610|01/18/1994|152346.9| 7.0| 4.80| 0.028 | V | 54.2( 87.2) GSP |34.3790|118.5630|01/18/1994|003935.0| 7.0| 4.40| 0.022 | IV | 54.2( 87.3) GSB |34.3330|118.6230|01/18/1994|072356.0| 14.0| 4.30| 0.021 | IV | 54.5( 87.7) GSP |34.0580|117.0100|06/16/2005|205326.0| 11.0| 4.90| 0.029 | V | 54.6( 87.9) DMG |34.1000|118.8000|05/10/1911|1340 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.018 | IV | 54.6( 87.9) ------------------------- EARTHQUAKE SEARCH RESULTS ------------------------- Page 10 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | | | TIME | | | SITE |SITE| APPROX. FILE| LAT. | LONG. | DATE | (UTC) |DEPTH|QUAKE| ACC. | MM | DISTANCE CODE| NORTH | WEST | | H M Sec| (km)| MAG.| g |INT.| mi [km] ----+-------+--------+----------+--------+-----+-----+-------+----+------------ USG |33.0170|117.8170|07/14/1986| 11112.6| 10.0| 4.12| 0.019 | IV | 54.8( 88.1) USG |33.0170|117.8170|07/16/1986|1247 3.7| 10.0| 4.11| 0.019 | IV | 54.8( 88.1) GSP |34.3620|118.6150|03/20/1996|073759.8| 13.0| 4.10| 0.019 | IV | 55.5( 89.3) DMG |34.3440|118.6360|02/09/1971|143436.1| -2.0| 4.90| 0.029 | V | 55.5( 89.4) GSG |34.4080|118.5590|01/17/1994|200205.4| 0.0| 4.00| 0.018 | IV | 55.6( 89.4) GSB |34.3580|118.6220|01/18/1994|040126.8| 1.0| 4.50| 0.023 | IV | 55.6( 89.5) Page 11 B-130 11206.001_EQSearch_Boore GSP |34.3590|118.6290|01/24/1994|055024.3| 12.0| 4.30| 0.021 | IV | 55.9( 90.0) GSP |34.3630|118.6270|01/24/1994|055421.1| 10.0| 4.20| 0.020 | IV | 56.0( 90.2) GSP |34.0970|116.9960|12/05/1997|170438.9| 4.0| 4.10| 0.019 | IV | 56.3( 90.6) GSP |34.3740|118.6220|01/17/1994|155410.8| 12.0| 4.80| 0.027 | V | 56.4( 90.7) GSP |34.0850|116.9890|06/30/1992|214900.3| 3.0| 4.40| 0.022 | IV | 56.4( 90.7) GSP |34.3780|118.6180|01/19/1994|211144.9| 11.0| 5.10| 0.031 | V | 56.4( 90.7) PAS |32.9900|117.8490|07/13/1986|14 133.0| 12.0| 4.60| 0.024 | V | 56.5( 90.9) PAS |34.3470|118.6560|04/08/1976|152138.1| 14.5| 4.60| 0.024 | V | 56.5( 91.0) DMG |33.5000|117.0000|08/08/1925|1013 0.0| 0.0| 4.50| 0.023 | IV | 56.6( 91.1) DMG |34.3800|118.6230|10/29/1936|223536.1| 10.0| 4.00| 0.017 | IV | 56.7( 91.2) GSP |34.3680|118.6370|01/17/1994|194353.4| 13.0| 4.10| 0.018 | IV | 56.7( 91.2) PAS |32.9860|117.8440|10/01/1986|201218.6| 6.0| 4.00| 0.017 | IV | 56.8( 91.3) GSP |34.1200|116.9980|06/29/1992|144126.0| 4.0| 4.40| 0.022 | IV | 56.8( 91.3) GSB |34.3430|118.6660|01/17/1994|234925.4| 8.0| 4.30| 0.020 | IV | 56.8( 91.4) GSP |34.3970|118.6090|07/22/1999|095724.0| 11.0| 4.00| 0.017 | IV | 56.9( 91.6) GSP |32.9850|117.8180|06/21/1995|211736.2| 6.0| 4.30| 0.020 | IV | 57.0( 91.7) DMG |33.7100|116.9250|09/23/1963|144152.6| 16.5| 5.00| 0.029 | V | 57.2( 92.0) GSP |34.3610|118.6570|01/29/2002|055328.9| 14.0| 4.20| 0.019 | IV | 57.2( 92.1) GSP |34.1800|117.0200|12/04/1991|081703.5| 11.0| 4.00| 0.017 | IV | 57.3( 92.2) GSP |34.3260|118.6980|01/17/1994|233330.7| 9.0| 5.60| 0.040 | V | 57.4( 92.4) GSP |34.0840|116.9680|10/02/2008|094149.3| 12.0| 4.10| 0.018 | IV | 57.5( 92.5) GSG |34.3040|118.7220|01/17/1994|221922.3| 10.0| 4.00| 0.017 | IV | 57.6( 92.7) GSP |34.3770|118.6490|04/27/1997|110928.4| 15.0| 4.80| 0.026 | V | 57.6( 92.7) PAS |32.9710|117.8700|07/13/1986|1347 8.2| 6.0| 5.30| 0.034 | V | 57.7( 92.9) GSP |32.9700|117.8100|04/04/1990|085439.3| 6.0| 4.00| 0.017 | IV | 58.0( 93.4) PAS |32.9700|117.8030|07/14/1986| 03246.2| 10.0| 4.00| 0.017 | IV | 58.1( 93.5) MGI |33.8000|116.9000|04/23/1918|1415 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.017 | IV | 58.2( 93.6) MGI |33.8000|116.9000|06/14/1918|1024 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.017 | IV | 58.2( 93.6) MGI |33.8000|116.9000|04/29/1918| 2 0 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.017 | IV | 58.2( 93.6) MGI |33.8000|116.9000|12/18/1920|1726 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.017 | IV | 58.2( 93.6) GSP |34.3690|118.6720|04/26/1997|103730.7| 16.0| 5.10| 0.031 | V | 58.2( 93.7) GSP |34.3040|118.7370|01/19/1994|091310.9| 13.0| 4.10| 0.018 | IV | 58.3( 93.8) DMG |34.4850|118.5210|07/16/1965| 74622.4| 15.1| 4.00| 0.017 | IV | 58.3( 93.8) GSP |34.0690|118.8820|05/02/2009|011113.7| 14.0| 4.40| 0.021 | IV | 58.3( 93.9) DMG |34.1670|116.9830|10/16/1951|1241 5.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.017 | IV | 58.8( 94.7) GSP |34.1570|116.9760|12/19/2007|121409.0| 7.0| 4.00| 0.017 | IV | 58.9( 94.8) GSP |34.3540|118.7040|05/01/1996|194956.4| 14.0| 4.10| 0.018 | IV | 58.9( 94.8) PAS |34.1510|116.9720|11/20/1978| 655 9.5| 6.1| 4.30| 0.020 | IV | 59.0( 94.9) GSP |34.3940|118.6690|06/26/1995|084028.9| 13.0| 5.00| 0.029 | V | 59.2( 95.3) GSP |34.3650|118.7080|01/19/1994|044314.5| 12.0| 4.10| 0.018 | IV | 59.6( 95.9) PAS |32.9450|117.8310|07/29/1986| 81741.8| 10.0| 4.10| 0.018 | IV | 59.6( 96.0) DMG |34.1330|116.9500|06/10/1938|1440 0.0| 0.0| 4.00| 0.017 | IV | 59.6( 96.0) GSP |34.3770|118.6980|01/18/1994|004308.9| 11.0| 5.20| 0.032 | V | 59.7( 96.1) GSP |34.0490|118.9150|02/19/1995|212418.1| 15.0| 4.30| 0.020 | IV | 59.7( 96.1) PAS |32.9450|117.8060|09/07/1984|11 313.4| 6.0| 4.30| 0.020 | IV | 59.8( 96.2) PAS |32.9470|117.7360|01/15/1989|153955.2| 6.0| 4.20| 0.019 | IV | 60.2( 96.9) DMG |33.9680|116.8820|06/27/1959|162211.1| 13.8| 4.00| 0.017 | IV | 60.2( 96.9) ------------------------- EARTHQUAKE SEARCH RESULTS ------------------------- Page 11 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | | | TIME | | | SITE |SITE| APPROX. FILE| LAT. | LONG. | DATE | (UTC) |DEPTH|QUAKE| ACC. | MM | DISTANCE CODE| NORTH | WEST | | H M Sec| (km)| MAG.| g |INT.| mi [km] ----+-------+--------+----------+--------+-----+-----+-------+----+------------ GSB |34.3790|118.7110|01/19/1994|210928.6| 14.0| 5.50| 0.037 | V | 60.3( 97.1) GSG |34.2800|117.0278|07/05/2014|165934.1| 8.7| 4.58| 0.023 | IV | 60.3( 97.1) Page 12 B-131 11206.001_EQSearch_Boore PAS |32.9330|117.8410|07/29/1986| 81741.6| 10.0| 4.30| 0.020 | IV | 60.4( 97.2) GSP |34.5000|118.5600|07/05/1991|174157.1| 11.0| 4.10| 0.018 | IV | 60.5( 97.3) GSP |34.1210|116.9280|08/16/1998|133440.2| 6.0| 4.70| 0.024 | V | 60.5( 97.4) GSP |33.9660|116.8760|01/12/2010|023608.4| 10.0| 4.30| 0.019 | IV | 60.5( 97.4) GSP |34.1120|116.9200|10/01/1998|181816.0| 4.0| 4.70| 0.024 | V | 60.7( 97.7) PAS |34.1980|116.9590|04/01/1978|105227.4| 8.0| 4.00| 0.017 | IV | 61.0( 98.2) DMG |33.5000|116.9170|11/04/1935| 355 0.0| 0.0| 4.50| 0.021 | IV | 61.1( 98.3) DMG |33.9500|116.8500|09/28/1946| 719 9.0| 0.0| 5.00| 0.028 | V | 61.8( 99.4) ******************************************************************************* -END OF SEARCH- 540 EARTHQUAKES FOUND WITHIN THE SPECIFIED SEARCH AREA. TIME PERIOD OF SEARCH: 1800 TO 2015 LENGTH OF SEARCH TIME: 216 years THE EARTHQUAKE CLOSEST TO THE SITE IS ABOUT 0.9 MILES (1.5 km) AWAY. LARGEST EARTHQUAKE MAGNITUDE FOUND IN THE SEARCH RADIUS: 7.0 LARGEST EARTHQUAKE SITE ACCELERATION FROM THIS SEARCH: 0.176 g COEFFICIENTS FOR GUTENBERG & RICHTER RECURRENCE RELATION: a-value= 3.590 b-value= 0.807 beta-value= 1.858 ------------------------------------ TABLE OF MAGNITUDES AND EXCEEDANCES: ------------------------------------ Earthquake | Number of Times | Cumulative Magnitude | Exceeded | No. / Year -----------+-----------------+------------ 4.0 | 540 | 2.51163 4.5 | 201 | 0.93488 5.0 | 71 | 0.33023 5.5 | 24 | 0.11163 6.0 | 15 | 0.06977 6.5 | 5 | 0.02326 7.0 | 2 | 0.00930 Page 13 B-132 Design Maps Detailed Report From Figure 22-1 [1] From Figure 22-2 [2] ASCE 7-10 Standard (33.806°N, 117.9141°W) Site Class D – “Stiff Soil”, Risk Category I/II/III Section 11.4.1 — Mapped Acceleration Parameters Note: Ground motion values provided below are for the direction of maximum horizontal spectral response acceleration. They have been converted from corresponding geometric mean ground motions computed by the USGS by applying factors of 1.1 (to obtain SS) and 1.3 (to obtain S1). Maps in the 2010 ASCE-7 Standard are provided for Site Class B. Adjustments for other Site Classes are made, as needed, in Section 11.4.3. SS = 1.500 g S1 = 0.547 g Section 11.4.2 — Site Class The authority having jurisdiction (not the USGS), site-specific geotechnical data, and/or the default has classified the site as Site Class D, based on the site soil properties in accordance with Chapter 20. Table 20.3–1 Site Classification Site Class vS N or Nch su A. Hard Rock >5,000 ft/s N/A N/A B. Rock 2,500 to 5,000 ft/s N/A N/A C. Very dense soil and soft rock 1,200 to 2,500 ft/s >50 >2,000 psf D. Stiff Soil 600 to 1,200 ft/s 15 to 50 1,000 to 2,000 psf E. Soft clay soil <600 ft/s <15 <1,000 psf Any profile with more than 10 ft of soil having the characteristics: • Plasticity index PI > 20, • Moisture content w ≥ 40%, and • Undrained shear strength su < 500 psf F. Soils requiring site response analysis in accordance with Section 21.1 See Section 20.3.1 For SI: 1ft/s = 0.3048 m/s 1lb/ft² = 0.0479 kN/m² Page 1 of 6Design Maps Detailed Report 12/15/2015http://ehp2-earthquake.wr.usgs.gov/designmaps/us/report.php?template=minimal&latitud... B-133 Section 11.4.3 — Site Coefficients and Risk–Targeted Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCER) Spectral Response Acceleration Parameters Table 11.4–1: Site Coefficient Fa Site Class Mapped MCE R Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter at Short Period SS ≤ 0.25 SS = 0.50 SS = 0.75 SS = 1.00 SS ≥ 1.25 A 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 B 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 C 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.0 1.0 D 1.6 1.4 1.2 1.1 1.0 E 2.5 1.7 1.2 0.9 0.9 F See Section 11.4.7 of ASCE 7 Note: Use straight–line interpolation for intermediate values of SS For Site Class = D and SS = 1.500 g, Fa = 1.000 Table 11.4–2: Site Coefficient Fv Site Class Mapped MCE R Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter at 1–s Period S1 ≤ 0.10 S1 = 0.20 S1 = 0.30 S1 = 0.40 S1 ≥ 0.50 A 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 B 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 C 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.3 D 2.4 2.0 1.8 1.6 1.5 E 3.5 3.2 2.8 2.4 2.4 F See Section 11.4.7 of ASCE 7 Note: Use straight–line interpolation for intermediate values of S1 For Site Class = D and S1 = 0.547 g, Fv = 1.500 Page 2 of 6Design Maps Detailed Report 12/15/2015http://ehp2-earthquake.wr.usgs.gov/designmaps/us/report.php?template=minimal&latitud... B-134 Equation (11.4–1): Equation (11.4–2): Equation (11.4–3): Equation (11.4–4): From Figure 22-12 [3] SMS = FaSS = 1.000 x 1.500 = 1.500 g SM1 = FvS1 = 1.500 x 0.547 = 0.820 g Section 11.4.4 — Design Spectral Acceleration Parameters SDS = ⅔ SMS = ⅔ x 1.500 = 1.000 g SD1 = ⅔ SM1 = ⅔ x 0.820 = 0.547 g Section 11.4.5 — Design Response Spectrum TL = 8 seconds Figure 11.4–1: Design Response Spectrum Page 3 of 6Design Maps Detailed Report 12/15/2015http://ehp2-earthquake.wr.usgs.gov/designmaps/us/report.php?template=minimal&latitud... B-135 Section 11.4.6 — Risk-Targeted Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCER) Response Spectrum The MCER Response Spectrum is determined by multiplying the design response spectrum above by 1.5. Page 4 of 6Design Maps Detailed Report 12/15/2015http://ehp2-earthquake.wr.usgs.gov/designmaps/us/report.php?template=minimal&latitud... B-136 From Figure 22-7 [4] Equation (11.8–1): From Figure 22-17 [5] From Figure 22-18 [6] Section 11.8.3 — Additional Geotechnical Investigation Report Requirements for Seismic Design Categories D through F PGA = 0.500 PGAM = FPGAPGA = 1.000 x 0.500 = 0.5 g Table 11.8–1: Site Coefficient FPGA Site Class Mapped MCE Geometric Mean Peak Ground Acceleration, PGA PGA ≤ 0.10 PGA = 0.20 PGA = 0.30 PGA = 0.40 PGA ≥ 0.50 A 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 B 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 C 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.0 1.0 D 1.6 1.4 1.2 1.1 1.0 E 2.5 1.7 1.2 0.9 0.9 F See Section 11.4.7 of ASCE 7 Note: Use straight–line interpolation for intermediate values of PGA For Site Class = D and PGA = 0.500 g, FPGA = 1.000 Section 21.2.1.1 — Method 1 (from Chapter 21 – Site-Specific Ground Motion Procedures for Seismic Design) CRS = 1.034 CR1 = 1.069 Page 5 of 6Design Maps Detailed Report 12/15/2015http://ehp2-earthquake.wr.usgs.gov/designmaps/us/report.php?template=minimal&latitud... B-137 Section 11.6 — Seismic Design Category Table 11.6-1 Seismic Design Category Based on Short Period Response Acceleration Parameter VALUE OF SDS RISK CATEGORY I or II III IV SDS < 0.167g AAA 0.167g ≤ SDS < 0.33g BBC 0.33g ≤ SDS < 0.50g CCD 0.50g ≤ SDS DDD For Risk Category = I and SDS = 1.000 g, Seismic Design Category = D Table 11.6-2 Seismic Design Category Based on 1-S Period Response Acceleration Parameter VALUE OF SD1 RISK CATEGORY I or II III IV SD1 < 0.067g AAA 0.067g ≤ SD1 < 0.133g BBC 0.133g ≤ SD1 < 0.20g CCD 0.20g ≤ SD1 DDD For Risk Category = I and SD1 = 0.547 g, Seismic Design Category = D Note: When S1 is greater than or equal to 0.75g, the Seismic Design Category is E for buildings in Risk Categories I, II, and III, and F for those in Risk Category IV, irrespective of the above. Seismic Design Category ≡ “the more severe design category in accordance with Table 11.6-1 or 11.6-2” = D Note: See Section 11.6 for alternative approaches to calculating Seismic Design Category. References 1.Figure 22-1: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/downloads/pdfs/2010_ASCE-7_Figure_22-1.pdf 2.Figure 22-2: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/downloads/pdfs/2010_ASCE-7_Figure_22-2.pdf 3.Figure 22-12: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/downloads/pdfs/2010_ASCE-7_Figure_22- 12.pdf 4.Figure 22-7: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/downloads/pdfs/2010_ASCE-7_Figure_22-7.pdf 5.Figure 22-17: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/downloads/pdfs/2010_ASCE-7_Figure_22- 17.pdf 6.Figure 22-18: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/downloads/pdfs/2010_ASCE-7_Figure_22- 18.pdf Page 6 of 6Design Maps Detailed Report 12/15/2015http://ehp2-earthquake.wr.usgs.gov/designmaps/us/report.php?template=minimal&latitud... B-138 APPENDIX E EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDE SPECIFICATIONS B-139 APPENDIX E LEIGHTON CONSULTING, INC. EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDE SPECIFICATIONS TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Appendix E Page E-1.0 GENERAL ........................................................................................................... 1 E-1.1 Intent ............................................................................................................. 1 E-1.2 Role of Leighton Consulting, Inc. ................................................................... 1 E-1.3 The Earthwork Contractor ............................................................................. 1 E-2.0 PREPARATION OF AREAS TO BE FILLED ..................................................... 2 E-2.1 Clearing and Grubbing .................................................................................. 2 E-2.2 Processing ..................................................................................................... 3 E-2.3 Overexcavation ............................................................................................. 3 E-2.4 Benching ....................................................................................................... 3 E-2.5 Evaluation/Acceptance of Fill Areas .............................................................. 3 E-3.0 FILL MATERIAL ................................................................................................. 4 E-3.1 Fill Quality ...................................................................................................... 4 E-3.2 Oversize ........................................................................................................ 4 E-3.3 Import ............................................................................................................ 4 E-4.0 FILL PLACEMENT AND COMPACTION ........................................................... 4 E-4.1 Fill Layers ...................................................................................................... 4 E-4.2 Fill Moisture Conditioning .............................................................................. 5 E-4.3 Compaction of Fill .......................................................................................... 5 E-4.4 Compaction of Fill Slopes .............................................................................. 5 E-4.5 Compaction Testing ...................................................................................... 5 E-4.6 Compaction Test Locations ........................................................................... 5 E-5.0 EXCAVATION ..................................................................................................... 6 E-6.0 TRENCH BACKFILLS ........................................................................................ 6 E-6.1 Safety ............................................................................................................ 6 E-6.2 Bedding and Backfill ...................................................................................... 6 E-6.3 Lift Thickness ................................................................................................ 7 B-140 E-1 E -1.0 GENERAL E-1.1 Intent These Earthwork and Grading Guide Specifications are for grading and earthwork shown on the current, approved grading plan(s) and/or indicated in the Leighton Consulting, Inc. geotechnical report(s). These Guide Specifications are a part of the recommendations contained in the geotechnical report(s). In case of conflict, the project-specific recommendations in the geotechnical report shall supersede these Guide Specifications. Leighton Consulting, Inc. shall provide geotechnical observation and testing during earthwork and grading. Based on these observations and tests, Leighton Consulting, Inc. may provide new or revised recommendations that could supersede these specifications or the recommendations in the geotechnical report(s). E-1.2 Role of Leighton Consulting, Inc. Prior to commencement of earthwork and grading, Leighton Consulting, Inc. shall meet with the earthwork contractor to review the earthwork contractor’s work plan, to schedule sufficient personnel to perform the appropriate level of observation, mapping and compaction testing. During earthwork and grading, Leighton Consulting, Inc. shall observe, map, and document subsurface exposures to verify geotechnical design assumptions. If observed conditions are found to be significantly different than the interpreted assumptions during the design phase, Leighton Consulting, Inc. shall inform the owner, recommend appropriate changes in design to accommodate these observed conditions, and notify the review agency where required. Subsurface areas to be geotechnically observed, mapped, elevations recorded, and/or tested include (1) natural ground after clearing to receiving fill but before fill is placed, (2) bottoms of all "remedial removal" areas, (3) all key bottoms, and (4) benches made on sloping ground to receive fill. Leighton Consulting, Inc. shall observe moisture-conditioning and processing of the subgrade and fill materials, and perform relative compaction testing of fill to determine the attained relative compaction. Leighton Consulting, Inc. shall provide Daily Field Reports to the owner and the Contractor on a routine and frequent basis. E-1.3 The Earthwork Contractor The earthwork contractor (Contractor) shall be qualified, experienced and knowledgeable in earthwork logistics, preparation and processing of ground to receive fill, moisture-conditioning and processing of fill, and compacting fill. The Contractor shall review and accept the plans, geotechnical report(s), and these Guide B-141 Leighton Consulting, Inc. Earthwork and Grading Guide Specifications E-2 Specifications prior to commencement of grading. The Contractor shall be solely responsible for performing grading and backfilling in accordance with the current, approved plans and specifications. The Contractor shall inform the owner and Leighton Consulting, Inc. of changes in work schedules at least one working day in advance of such changes so that appropriate observations and tests can be planned and accomplished. The Contractor shall not assume that Leighton Consulting, Inc. is aware of all grading operations. The Contractor shall have the sole responsibility to provide adequate equipment and methods to accomplish earthwork and grading in accordance with the applicable grading codes and agency ordinances, these Guide Specifications, and recommendations in the approved geotechnical report(s) and grading plan(s). If, in the opinion of Leighton Consulting, Inc., unsatisfactory conditions, such as unsuitable soil, improper moisture condition, inadequate compaction, adverse weather, etc., are resulting in a quality of work less than required in these specifications, Leighton Consulting, Inc. shall reject the work and may recommend to the owner that earthwork and grading be stopped until unsatisfactory condition(s) are rectified. E -2.0 PREPARATION OF AREAS TO BE FILLED E-2.1 Clearing and Grubbing Vegetation, such as brush, grass, roots and other deleterious material shall be sufficiently removed and properly disposed of in a method acceptable to the owner, governing agencies and Leighton Consulting, Inc.. Care should be taken not to encroach upon or otherwise damage native and/or historic trees designated by the Owner or appropriate agencies to remain. Pavements, flatwork or other construction should not extend under the “drip line” of designated trees to remain. Leighton Consulting, Inc. shall evaluate the extent of these removals depending on specific site conditions. Earth fill material shall not contain more than 3 percent of organic materials (by dry weight: ASTM D 2974). Nesting of the organic materials shall not be allowed. If potentially hazardous materials are encountered, the Contractor shall stop work in the affected area, and a hazardous material specialist shall be informed immediately for proper evaluation and handling of these materials prior to continuing to work in that area. As presently defined by the State of California, most refined petroleum products (gasoline, diesel fuel, motor oil, grease, coolant, etc.) have chemical constituents that B-142 Leighton Consulting, Inc. Earthwork and Grading Guide Specifications E-3 are considered to be hazardous waste. As such, the indiscriminate dumping or spillage of these fluids onto the ground may constitute a misdemeanor, punishable by fines and/or imprisonment, and shall not be allowed. E-2.2 Processing Existing ground that has been declared satisfactory for support of fill, by Leighton Consulting, Inc., shall be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches (15 cm). Existing ground that is not satisfactory shall be over-excavated as specified in the following Section D-2.3. Scarification shall continue until soils are broken down and free of large clay lumps or clods and the working surface is reasonably uniform, flat, and free of uneven features that would inhibit uniform compaction. E-2.3 Overexcavation In addition to removals and over-excavations recommended in the approved geotechnical report(s) and the grading plan, soft, loose, dry, saturated, spongy, organic- rich, highly fractured or otherwise unsuitable ground shall be over-excavated to competent ground as evaluated by Leighton Consulting, Inc. during grading. All undocumented fill soils under proposed structure footprints should be excavated E-2.4 Benching Where fills are to be placed on ground with slopes steeper than 5:1 (horizontal to vertical units), (>20 percent grade) the ground shall be stepped or benched. The lowest bench or key shall be a minimum of 15 feet (4.5 m) wide and at least 2 feet (0.6 m) deep, into competent material as evaluated by Leighton Consulting, Inc.. Other benches shall be excavated a minimum height of 4 feet (1.2 m) into competent material or as otherwise recommended by Leighton Consulting, Inc.. Fill placed on ground sloping flatter than 5:1 (horizontal to vertical units), (<20 percent grade) shall also be benched or otherwise over-excavated to provide a flat subgrade for the fill. E-2.5 Evaluation/Acceptance of Fill Areas All areas to receive fill, including removal and processed areas, key bottoms, and benches, shall be observed, mapped, elevations recorded, and/or tested prior to being accepted by Leighton Consulting, Inc. as suitable to receive fill. The Contractor shall obtain a written acceptance (Daily Field Report) from Leighton Consulting, Inc. prior to fill placement. A licensed surveyor shall provide the survey control for determining elevations of processed areas, keys and benches. B-143 Leighton Consulting, Inc. Earthwork and Grading Guide Specifications E-4 E -3.0 FILL MATERIAL E-3.1 Fill Quality Material to be used as fill shall be essentially free of organic matter and other deleterious substances evaluated and accepted by Leighton Consulting, Inc. prior to placement. Soils of poor quality, such as those with unacceptable gradation, high expansion potential, or low strength shall be placed in areas acceptable to Leighton Consulting, Inc. or mixed with other soils to achieve satisfactory fill material. E-3.2 Oversize Oversize material defined as rock, or other irreducible material with a maximum dimension greater than 6 inches (15 cm), shall not be buried or placed in fill unless location, materials and placement methods are specifically accepted by Leighton Consulting, Inc.. Placement operations shall be such that nesting of oversized material does not occur and such that oversize material is completely surrounded by compacted or densified fill. Oversize material shall not be placed within 10 feet (3 m) measured vertically from finish grade, or within 2 feet (0.61 m) of future utilities or underground construction. E-3.3 Import If importing of fill material is required for grading, proposed import material shall meet the requirements of Section D-3.1, and be free of hazardous materials (“contaminants”) and rock larger than 3-inches (8 cm) in largest dimension. All import soils shall have an Expansion Index (EI) of 20 or less and a sulfate content no greater than (≤) 500 parts- per-million (ppm). A representative sample of a potential import source shall be given to Leighton Consulting, Inc. at least four full working days before importing begins, so that suitability of this import material can be determined and appropriate tests performed. E -4.0 FILL PLACEMENT AND COMPACTION E-4.1 Fill Layers Approved fill material shall be placed in areas prepared to receive fill, as described in Section D-2.0, above, in near-horizontal layers not exceeding 8 inches (20 cm) in loose thickness. Leighton Consulting, Inc. may accept thicker layers if testing indicates the grading procedures can adequately compact the thicker layers, and only if the building officials with the appropriate jurisdiction approve. Each layer shall be spread evenly and mixed thoroughly to attain relative uniformity of material and moisture throughout. B-144 Leighton Consulting, Inc. Earthwork and Grading Guide Specifications E-5 E-4.2 Fill Moisture Conditioning Fill soils shall be watered, dried back, blended and/or mixed, as necessary to attain a relatively uniform moisture content at or slightly over optimum. Maximum density and optimum soil moisture content tests shall be performed in accordance with the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) Test Method D 1557. E-4.3 Compaction of Fill After each layer has been moisture-conditioned, mixed, and evenly spread, each layer shall be uniformly compacted to not-less-than (≥) 90 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM Test Method D 1557. In some cases, structural fill may be specified (see project-specific geotechnical report) to be uniformly compacted to at- least (≥) 95 percent of the ASTM D 1557 modified Proctor laboratory maximum dry density. For fills thicker than (>) 15 feet (4.5 m), the portion of fill deeper than 15 feet below proposed finish grade shall be compacted to 95 percent of the ASTM D 1557 laboratory maximum density. Compaction equipment shall be adequately sized and be either specifically designed for soil compaction or of proven reliability to efficiently achieve the specified level of compaction with uniformity. E-4.4 Compaction of Fill Slopes In addition to normal compaction procedures specified above, compaction of slopes shall be accomplished by back rolling of slopes with sheepsfoot rollers at increments of 3 to 4 feet (1 to 1.2 m) in fill elevation, or by other methods producing satisfactory results acceptable to Leighton Consulting, Inc.. Upon completion of grading, relative compaction of the fill, out to the slope face, shall be at least 90 percent of the ASTM D 1557 laboratory maximum density. E-4.5 Compaction Testing Field-tests for moisture content and relative compaction of the fill soils shall be performed by Leighton Consulting, Inc.. Location and frequency of tests shall be at our field representative(s) discretion based on field conditions encountered. Compaction test locations will not necessarily be selected on a random basis. Test locations shall be selected to verify adequacy of compaction levels in areas that are judged to be prone to inadequate compaction (such as close to slope faces and at the fill/bedrock benches). E-4.6 Compaction Test Locations Leighton Consulting, Inc. shall document the approximate elevation and horizontal coordinates of each density test location. The Contractor shall coordinate with the project surveyor to assure that sufficient grade stakes are established so that Leighton B-145 Leighton Consulting, Inc. Earthwork and Grading Guide Specifications E-6 Consulting, Inc. can determine the test locations with sufficient accuracy. Adequate grade stakes shall be provided. E -5.0 EXCAVATION Excavations, as well as over-excavation for remedial purposes, shall be evaluated by Leighton Consulting, Inc. during grading. Remedial removal depths shown on geotechnical plans are estimates only. The actual extent of removal shall be determined by Leighton Consulting, Inc. based on the field evaluation of exposed conditions during grading. Where fill-over-cut slopes are to be graded, the cut portion of the slope shall be made, then observed and reviewed by Leighton Consulting, Inc. prior to placement of materials for construction of the fill portion of the slope, unless otherwise recommended by Leighton Consulting, Inc.. E -6.0 TRENCH BACKFILLS E-6.1 Safety The Contractor shall follow all OSHA and Cal/OSHA requirements for safety of trench excavations. Work should be performed in accordance with Article 6 of the California Construction Safety Orders, 2009 Edition or more current (see also: http://www.dir.ca.gov/title8/sb4a6.html ). E-6.2 Bedding and Backfill All utility trench bedding and backfill shall be performed in accordance with applicable provisions of the 2015 Edition of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (Green Book). Bedding material shall have a Sand Equivalent greater than 30 (SE>30). Bedding shall be placed to 1-foot (0.3 m) over the top of the conduit, and densified by jetting in areas of granular soils, if allowed by the permitting agency. Otherwise, the pipe-bedding zone should be backfilled with Controlled Low Strength Material (CLSM) consisting of at least one sack of Portland cement per cubic-yard of sand, and conforming to Section 201-6 of the 2015 Edition of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (Green Book). Backfill over the bedding zone shall be placed and densified mechanically to a minimum of 90 percent of relative compaction (ASTM D 1557) from 1 foot (0.3 m) above the top of the conduit to the surface. Backfill above the pipe zone shall not be jetted. Jetting of the bedding around the conduits shall be observed by Leighton Consulting, Inc. and backfill above the pipe zone (bedding) shall be observed and tested by Leighton Consulting, Inc.. B-146 Leighton Consulting, Inc. Earthwork and Grading Guide Specifications E-7 E-6.3 Lift Thickness Lift thickness of trench backfill shall not exceed those allowed in the Standard Specifications of Public Works Construction unless the Contractor can demonstrate to Leighton Consulting, Inc. that the fill lift can be compacted to the minimum relative compaction by his alternative equipment and method, and only if the building officials with the appropriate jurisdiction approve. B-147 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Appendix April 2016 Appendix C Phase I Site Assessment 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Appendix PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Anaheim, CA 92802 [Anaheim Plaza Hotel & Suites] Prepared for: Pyrovest Corporation, California c/o Asia Pacific Capital Company 350 S. Figueroa Street, Ste. 115 Los Angeles, CA 90071 Prepared by: ACS Associates 4255 Campus Drive, #4258 Irvine, CA 92616 File No. 060314 June 3, 2014 COPYRIGHT©2014 C-1 1700 S Harbor-P1 © 2014 ACS Asso. 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. INTRODUCTION 3 1.1 Purpose 3 1.2 Scope of Work 3 1.3 User Reliance 4 II. SITE DESCRIPTION 5 2.1 Location 5 2.2 Topography and Plan View 5 III. HYDROGEOLOGIC SETTING 6 3.1 Hydrology and Geology 6 3.2 Ground water 6 IV. SITE RECONNAISSANCE 7 4.1 The Property 7 4.2 The Adjacent Areas 7 V. USER PROVIDED INFORMATION 8 5.1 Title Reports 8 5.2 Environmental Liens or Activity and Use Limitations 8 5.3 Special Knowledge 8 5.4 Valuation Reduction for Environmental Issues 8 5.5 Owner, Property Manager, and Occupant Information 8 5.6 Reason for Performing Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 8 5.7 Other User Provided Information 8 VI. PERMITS AND GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCH 9 6.1 Building Permits and Government Records 9 6.2 Environmental Database Search 9 6.3 Historical Investigation 16 6.4 Summary 17 VII. INTERVIEW 18 7.1 Interview with the Owner 18 7.2 Interview with SITE Manager 18 7.3 Interview with Local Government Officials 18 7.4 Interview with Others 18 VIII. DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSIONS 19 8.1 Data Gaps 19 8.2 Business Environmental Risks 19 8.3 Discussions and Conclusions 20 IX. LIMITATIONS 21 C-2 1700 S Harbor-P1 © 2014 ACS Asso. 2 LIST OF ENCLOSURES ENCLOSURE I — A-1~A-5 Figure 1-1. SITE LOCATION MAP A-2 Figure 1-2. SITE PLAN MAP A-3 Figure 1-3. SITE PHOTOGRAPHS A-4 Figure 1-4. SITE AERIAL PHOTOGRPH A-5 ENCLOSURE II — ENVIRONMENTAL RECORD SEARCH B-1~B-123 ENCLOSURE III — BUILDING PERMITS RECORDS, HISTORICAL C-1~C-17 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS, SANBORN MAPS, CITY DIRECTORY ABSTRACT, INTERVIEW FORM ENCLOSURE IV — GROUND WATER and LUFT DATA D-1~D-3 ENCLOSURE V — QUALIFICATION S E-1 C-3 1700 S Harbor-P1 © 2014 ACS Asso. 3 I. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose A Phase I environmental assessment was conducted for 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard, Anaheim, California 92802 (SITE), in June 2014 by ACS Associates (ACS). Asia Pacific Capital Company ordered this report in connection with a prospective real estate transaction. Field investigation of the SITE by ACS personnel took place on June 3, 2014. The purpose of this due diligence investigation was to assess the subject property for evidence of hazardous waste contamination and the possibility of underground storage tanks, in an effort to minimize the subject property owner’s exposure to liability pursuant to Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) known generally as the “Innocent Landowner Defense”. A site reconnaissance survey was conducted. Sampling or analyses of soil, ground water, air, or building materials were not conducted as a part of this study. This Report was prepared in a manner that is in conformance with guidelines, specifications and practice as set forth by the American Society for Testing & Materials (ASTM) Standard Practice E 1527-05, "Standard Practice of Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process." 1.2 Scope of Work The environmental assessment included the following scope of work: • A literature and record search on the hydrogeologic setting of the area. • A SITE reconnaissance investigation of the property for potentially hazardous materials, including building materials, storage materials, etc. • An investigation of the adjacent land uses and determination of any current nearby operations, which would potentially impact the subject SITE. • A review of user provided information. • A government document search of records compiled by various government agencies for on-site or nearby operations (past and present) to aid in the identification of any potential contamination sources. • A review of local building department permits and a tenant check to identify any past on-site operations, which could have environmental implications. • A review of available historical tenant reports, historical aerial photographs and topographic maps covering the SITE. • Interviews with various available persons, including the SITE owner, SITE manager and local government officials, to determine historical usage of the subject SITE. C-4 1700 S Harbor-P1 © 2014 ACS Asso. 4 • Discussion and conclusions, including any data gaps, business environmental risks such as asbestos, lead-based paint, mold, wetlands and vapor Intrusion. The property surveyed includes the subject SITE and the adjacent area. Enclosure I presents the SITE Location Map (Figure 1-1), the SITE Plan Map (Figure 1-2), SITE Photograph and Aerial Photograph (Figure 1-3 and 1-4, respectively). Enclosure II presents the results of an environmental record search of government files. Enclosure III contains copies of available building permits or records, including historical aerial photographs, Sanborn maps, city directory abstract and interview forms. Enclosure IV contains pertinent leaking underground fuel tank (LUFT) information and ground water data. Enclosure V contains the qualifications of the environmental professionals that author this report. 1.3 User Reliance This report is prepared for the exclusive use of the client, and its contents are considered to be privileged and confidential. Acceptance of this report constitutes an agreement by the client to assume liability for the information contained herein. The report is strictly for the sole use and interpretation of the client, and is not to be reproduced or distributed to other third parties without written consent of ACS. C-5 1700 S Harbor-P1 © 2014 ACS Asso. 5 II. SITE DESCRIPTION 2.1 Location The SITE consists of the Anaheim Hotel and Suites, a hotel complex in Anaheim, California (Figure 1-1, Enclosure I). It is under the jurisdiction of Anaheim (the City), Orange County (the County). The County tax assessor (the ASSESSOR) identifies the property as part of Assessor Parcel Numbers (APNs) 082-271-09 and 82-271-10. The complex was initially built in the 1960s. The total lot size is about 8.8 acres. The total building size is about 160,000 sq ft, per County property information. It is irregular in shape and is zoned as commercial. Topography and Plan View The property is shown in the parcel/plat map (Enclosure III). The SITE is topographically flat, and its elevation is about 135 feet above sea level. The plan view of the buildings and the streets is shown in the Plan Map, Figure 1-2, Enclosure I. C-6 1700 S Harbor-P1 © 2014 ACS Asso. 6 III. HYDROGEOLOGIC SETTING 3.1 Hydrogeology and Geology The subject SITE is located in the Santa Ana River basin and Orange County coastal plain. The area is typically characterized by alluvium and associated deposits, which mainly belong to the Recent Alluvium, the Older Alluvium, and other formation of Recent to Pleistocene age. This alluvium is typically characterized by sedimentary deposits ranging in grain size from sand to silt and clay. The uppermost aquifer in the immediate area consists predominantly of fluvial sand. The local ground water is usually found between about 30 feet and 300 feet below ground surface, per U. S. Geological Survey Report. 3.2 Ground Water A state EPA monitoring well indicated that the local ground water is located about 70 feet below ground surface, according to a monitoring well about 0.3 miles west of the SITE. Ground water is expected to flow to the southwest, according to the topography. Ground water elevations and direction of flow can be affected by factors including precipitation, stream flow, irrigation practices, and ground water pumping. The pertinent ground water data, if any, is included in Enclosure IV. C-7 1700 S Harbor-P1 © 2014 ACS Asso. 7 IV. SITE RECONNAISSANCE The field survey included two parts: 1) investigation of the property for potential hazardous materials. 2) adjacent land uses survey. Investigation of the potentially hazardous materials at the SITE included building materials, storage materials, soil, and paving materials. 4.1 The Property The SITE is located at the southeast corner of Harbor Boulevard and Disney Way, near the entrance of Disneyland, in an area with other commercial entities. It is a hotel complex, which consists of about 300 guestrooms, a number of event rooms, lobby, offices, a restaurant/bar, gift shops, a swimming pool, paved parking areas, and other ancillary structures. There are eight major buildings, which are one to two stories high. It is doing business as “The Anaheim Plaza Hotel & Suites”. The current owner is Pyrovest Corporation, California. The property is leased to a tenant, and is professionally managed. The SITE uses no dry-cleaning fluids. The tenants and the owner store no significant quantities of hazardous material on SITE. An inspection of the SITE revealed no evidence of vent pipes or product delivery pipes for underground storage tanks. Transformers at the SITE appeared to be in good conditions. No leaking Polychlorinated Biphenols (PCBs) bearing transformers or lighting apparatus were present at the SITE. The entire parcel of land is covered with the hotel buildings, paved parking areas, a swimming pool, other ancillary structures, and landscaping. The vegetation on or near the SITE appeared to be healthy, as they show no signs of discoloration, wilting or others indicative of stress. There appeared to be no significant quantity of potentially hazardous waste and material containers present at the SITE and its surrounding during the SITE visit. 4.2 The Adjacent Areas The SITE faces Harbor Boulevard to the west and Disney Way to the north. The neighbor to the east is Anaheim Garden Walk, a commercial development recently completed. The neighbor to the north, across Disney Way is a vacant lot, which used to be power lines right of way. Beyond the vacant lot is a motel. The south neighbor is the Castle Inn Motel. The west neighbor is Disneyland. All of the neighboring buildings are low- rise buildings. The neighboring properties are well maintained. The ground surface, including the soil, does not show any sign of surface stains or discoloration that might indicate chemicals or hazardous material has been discharged into the ground. C-8 1700 S Harbor-P1 © 2014 ACS Asso. 8 V. USER PROVIDED INFORMATION 5.1 Title Reports A Preliminary Title Report was provided by the client. 5.2 Environmental Liens or Activity and Use Limitations No information regarding the Environmental Liens or Activity and Use Limitations have been provided by the clients. ACS researched the property information at the County Recorder, and found out that there are not any environmental liens in connection with the SITE. 5.3 Special Knowledge The client has provided no special knowledge information regarding the SITE. 5.4 Valuation Reduction for Environmental Issues No information has been provided which indicates that the subject property is being sold or was purchased at a significantly reduce price due to outstanding environmental issues. 5.5 Owner, Property Manager, and Occupant Information Information provided by the owner, property manager, and occupants of the SITE are included in Section 4.1 of this report. 5.6 Reason for Performing Phase I Environmental Site Assessment The reason for performing this Phase I Environmental Site Assessment is to satisfy commercial real estate requirements, to provide due diligence information concerning the historical uses and current condition of the SITE in connection with a real estate transaction and/or loan application. 5.7 Other User Provided Information No other information concerning the subject property has been provided by the client. C-9 1700 S Harbor-P1 © 2014 ACS Asso. 9 VI. PERMITS AND GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCH 6.1 Building Permits and Government Records Building permits and other records available at the office of the City and the County, including the City Fire Dept, and City Building Department, were examined by ACS personnel. Copies of the available plat map and other pertinent documents or information are enclosed in Enclosure III. City and County Department of Public Works hazardous material and underground tank records did not show any presence of underground tank at the SITE. City records, per Fire Department Specialist, Maribel Lara. The City and the County records show no current outstanding violations or any environmental liens in connection with the SITE (Enclosure III). The building permits at the City indicated that the oldest building permits were issued in 1959. The earliest tenant, based on City permits, was a hotel in the early 1960s. The SITE has been connected to the City sewer since its original construction, and has no known septic tanks or leach field. A check of the database file at the California Water Quality Control Board indicated that there was no violation by the subject SITE. State Dept. of Toxic Substance Control records indicated that the SITE has no current outstanding violations. The pertinent documents, if available, were included in Enclosure III. The South Coast Air Quality Management District records also showed no outstanding violations at the SITE. State Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources maps indicated that the SITE is not currently or historically part of an oil and gas production field. In summary, according to the governmental records, the previous tenants or owners were not known to engage in activities such as the handling and storage of significant quantities of hazardous material. 6.2 Environmental Database Search A computerized government Environmental Record Search was conducted. The record search was performed to aid the identification of companies or facilities, located within a one-mile radius to the subject property, which might pose a potential threat to the surface environment at the SITE. The results of this search SITE. The results of this search and the plotted sites are included in Enclosure II. The Environmental Record Search report listed no (0) National Priority List site, and no (0) Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Information System (CERCLIS) sites. Eleven (11) facilities within the one-half mile survey radius of the SITE were identified in the Environmental Record Search to have leaking underground storage tanks (LUST), per California State records. The facilities and others identified in the record search appear to be not in the vicinity of the SITE, and are unlikely to cause any environmental concern. The databases reviewed and the identified sites are described in the following: • NPL This database includes Proposed Sites, Final Sites and Deleted NPL Sites. The Superfund Program, C-10 1700 S Harbor-P1 © 2014 ACS Asso. 10 administered under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) is an EPA Program to locate, investigate, and clean up the worst hazardous waste sites throughout the United States. The NPL (National Priorities List) is the list of national priorities among the known releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants throughout the United States and its territories. The NPL is intended primarily to guide the EPA in determining which sites warrant further investigation. The boundaries of an NPL site are not tied to the boundaries of the property on which a facility is located. The release may be contained with a single property's boundaries or may extend across property boundaries onto other properties. The boundaries can, and often do change as further information on the extent and degree of contamination is obtained. A review of the NPL report indicates that there are no NPL sites on or adjacent to the SITE. • CERCLIS List The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) investigates known or suspected uncontrolled or abandoned hazardous substance facilities under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). EPA maintains a comprehensive list of these facilities in a database known as the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Information System (CERCLIS). These sites have either been investigated or are currently under investigation by the EPA for release or threatened release of hazardous substances. Once a site is placed in CERCLIS, it may be subjected to several levels of review and evaluation and ultimately placed on the National Priority List (NPL). CERCLIS sites designated as "No Further Remedial Action Planned" (NFRAP) have been removed from CERCLIS. NFRAP sites may be sites where, following an intitial investigation, no contamination was found, contamination was removed quickly without the need for the site to be placed on the NPL, or the contamination was not serious enough to require Federal Superfund Action or NPL consideration. A review of the CERCLIS report indicates that there are no CERCLIS sites on or adjacent to the SITE. • CERCLIS NFRAP As of February 1995, CERCLIS sites designated "No Further Remedial Action Planned" NFRAP have been removed from CERCLIS. NFRAP sites may be sites where, following an initial investigation, no contamination was found, contamination was removed quickly without the site being placed on the NPL, or the contamination was not serious enough to require Federal Superfund action or NPL consideration. EPA has removed these NFRAP sites from CERCLIS to lift unintended barriers to the redevelopment of these properties. This policy change is part of EPA’s Brownfield Redevelopment Program to help cities, states, private investors and affected citizens promote economic redevelopment of unproductive urban sites. A review of the CERCLIS report indicates that there are no CERCLIS NFRAP sites on or adjacent to the SITE. • RCRA CORRACTS Facilities The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulates hazardous waste under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The EPA maintains the Corrective Action Report (CORRACTS) database of Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) facilities that are undergoing "corrective action." A "corrective action order" is issued pursuant to RCRA Section 3008(h) when there has been a release of hazardous waste or constituents into the environment from a RCRA facility. Corrective actions may be required beyond the facility’s boundary and can be required regardless of when the release occurred, even if it predated RCRA. A review of the RCRA CORRACTS report indicates that there are no RCRA CORRACTS sites on or adjacent to the SITE. C-11 1700 S Harbor-P1 © 2014 ACS Asso. 11 • RCRA non-CORRACTS TSD Facilities The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulates hazardous waste under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The EPA’s RCRA Program identifies and tracks hazardous waste from the point of generation to the point of disposal. The RCRA Facilities database is a compilation by the EPA of facilities that report generation, storage, transportation, treatment, or disposal of hazardous waste. RCRA Permitted Treatment, Storage, Disposal Facilities (RCRA-TSD) are facilities which treat, store and/or dispose of hazardous waste. A review of the RCRA non-CORRACTS TSD report indicates that there are no RCRA non-CORRACTS TSD sites on or adjacent to the SITE. • Emergency Response Notification System (ERNS) The Emergency Response Notification System (ERNS) is a national computer database used to store information on unauthorized releases of oil and hazardous substances. The program is a cooperative effort of the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Transportation Research and Special Program Administration’s John Volpe National Transportation System Center and the National Response Center. There are primarily five Federal statutes that require release reporting: the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) section 103; the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) Title III Section 304; the Clean Water Act of 1972 (CWA) section 311(b)(3); and the Hazardous Material Transportation Act of 1974 (HMTA section 1808 (b). A review of the ERNS report indicates that there are no ERNS sites on or adjacent to the SITE. • US Toxic Release Inventory The Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) is a publicly available EPA database that contains information on toxic chemical releases and other waste management activities reported annually by certain covered industry groups as well as federal facilities. TRI reporters for all reporting years are provided in the file. A review of the TRI report indicates that there are eight TRI sites at within 1 mile to the SITE. The closest ones are listed below. 0.76 mi NE of the SITE SIEMENS INFORMATION SYSTEMS INCORPORATED 240 E. PALAIS RD, ANAHEIM, CA 0.76 mi NE of the SITE RYVEC INC 251 E. PALAIS RD, ANAHEIM, CA The facilities identified above are not within ¼ miles of the SITE. They are unlikely to cause significant environmental concerns for the SITE based on the evaluation of the local hydrogeological and environmental conditions. • US RCRA Generators (CESQG, SQG, LQG) The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulates hazardous waste under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). EPA maintains a database of facilities, which generate hazardous waste or treat, store, and/or dispose of hazardous wastes. • Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generators (CESQG) generate 100 kilograms or less per month of hazardous waste, or 1 kilogram or less per month of acutely hazardous waste. • Small Quantity Generators (SQG) generate more than 100 kilograms, but less than 1,000 kilograms, of hazardous waste per month. C-12 1700 S Harbor-P1 © 2014 ACS Asso. 12 • Large Quantity Generators (LQG) generate 1,000 kilograms per month or more of hazardous waste, or more than 1 kilogram per month of acutely hazardous waste. A review of the US RCRA Generators report indicates that there are eight US RCRA Generators sites at within ½ miles to the SITE. The closest ones are listed below. 0.28 mi S of the SITE CHEVRON STATION 95321 1801 S HARBOR BLVD, ANAHEIM, CA 0.3 mi N of the SITE DISNEYLAND RESORT 1313 HARBOR BOULEVARD, ANAHEIM, CA The facilities identified above are not within ¼ miles of the SITE. They are unlikely to cause significant environmental concerns for the SITE based on the evaluation of the local hydrogeological and environmental conditions. • US ACRES (Brownfields) Brownfields are real property, the expansion, redevelopment, or reuse of which may be complicated by the presence or potential presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant. Cleaning up and reinvesting in these properties protects the environment, reduces blight, and takes development pressures off green spaces and working lands. The Assessment, Cleanup and Redevelopment Exchange System (ACRES) is an online database for Brownfield’s Grantees to electronically submit data directly to The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). A review of the US ACRES (Brownfields) report indicates that there are no US ACRES (Brownfields) sites on or adjacent to the SITE. • US NPDES The NPDES module of the Compliance Information System (ICIS) tracks surface water permits issued under the Clean Water Act. Under NPDES, all facilities that discharge pollutants from any point source into waters of the United States are required to obtain a permit. The permit will likely contain limits on what can be discharged, impose monitoring and reporting requirements, and include other provisions to ensure that the discharge does not adversely affect water quality. A review of the US NPDES report indicates that there is one US NPDES site at within ½ miles to the SITE. 0.3 mi N of the SITE DISNEYLAND RESORT 1313 HARBOR BOULEVARD, ANAHEIM, CA The facility identified above is not within ¼ miles of the SITE. It is unlikely to cause significant environmental concerns for the SITE based on the evaluation of the local hydrogeological and environmental conditions. • CA Registered Underground Storage Tanks Underground storage tanks containing hazardous or petroleum substances are regulated under Subtitle I of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The State Water Resources Control Board’s GeoTracker database provides the list of permitted Underground Storage Tanks (UST). A review of the CA Registered Underground Storage Tanks report indicates that there are C-13 1700 S Harbor-P1 © 2014 ACS Asso. 13 three CA Registered Underground Storage Tanks sites at within ¼ miles to the SITE. The closest ones are listed below. 0.18 mi S of the SITE UNOCAL #4227 1779 S HARBOR BLVD # 4227, ANAHEIM, CA 0.25 mi S of the SITE MOBIL STATION (18-106) 1800 S HARBOR BLVD, ANAHEIM, CA 0.25 mi S of the SITE MIKE FLYNN CHEVRON STATION 1801 S HARBOR BLVD, ANAHEIM, CA The facilities identified above, although are located within ¼ miles of the SITE, appeared to be unlikely to cause significant environmental concerns for the SITE based on the evaluation of the local hydrogeological and environmental conditions. • CA Leaking Underground Storage Tanks Information on leaking underground storage tanks containing hazardous or petroleum substances is maintained in the State Water Resources Control Board’s GeoTracker database. A review of the CA Leaking Underground Storage Tanks report indicates that there are two CA Leaking Underground Storage Tanks sites at within ¼ miles to the SITE. 0.18 mi S of the SITE UNOCAL 1779 HARBOR ANAHEIM, ANAHEIM, CA 0.24 mi SW of the SITE NATIONAL CAR RENTAL FAC. 711 W KATELLA AVE, ANAHEIM, CA The facilities identified above, although are located within ¼ miles of the SITE, appeared to be unlikely to cause significant environmental concerns for the SITE based on the evaluation of the local hydrogeological and environmental conditions. • CA CERCLIS Equivalent The Department of Toxic Substances Controls (DTSC) Site Mitigation and Brownfield’s Reuse Program (SMBRP) EnviroStor database identifies CERCLIS equivalent sites as "State Response". These are sites known or suspected to contain uncontrolled or abandoned hazardous substance facilities. A review of the CA CERCLIS Equivalent report indicates that there are no CA CERCLIS Equivalent sites on or adjacent to the SITE. • CA NPL Equivalent The Department of Toxic Substances Controls (DTSC) Site Mitigation and Brownfield’s Reuse Program (SMBRP) EnviroStor database identifies sites on the National Priority List (NPL). This is the equivalent of the Federal NPL identifying facilities and study areas with known contamination that are given priority for remedial action. C-14 1700 S Harbor-P1 © 2014 ACS Asso. 14 A review of the CA NPL Equivalent report indicates that there are no CA NPL Equivalent sites on or adjacent to the SITE. • CA Hazardous Waste Sites The Department of Toxic Substances Controls (DTSC) Site Mitigation and Brownfield’s Reuse Program (SMBRP) EnviroStor database identifies Hazardous Waste Sites. These include... All hazardous waste facilities subject to corrective action pursuant to Section 25187.5 of the Health and Safety Code. All land designated as hazardous waste property or border zone property pursuant to Article 11 (commencing with Section 25220) of Chapter 6.5 of Division 20 of the Health and Safety Code. All information received by the Department of Toxic Substances Control pursuant to Section 25242 of the Health and Safety Code on hazardous waste disposals on public land. All sites listed pursuant to Section 25356 of the Health and Safety Code. All sites included in the Abandoned Site Assessment Program. A review of the CA Hazardous Waste Sites report indicates that there are four CA Hazardous Waste sites at within 1 mile to the SITE. The closest ones are listed below. 0.65 mi NE of the SITE HERITAGE SCHOOL Cypress Street/Anaheim Boulevard, ANAHEIM, CA 0.65 mi NE of the SITE PONDEROSA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL Mountain View Avenue/Wilken Way, Anaheim, CA The facilities identified above are not within ¼ miles of the SITE. They are unlikely to cause significant environmental concerns for the SITE based on the evaluation of the local hydrogeological and environmental conditions. • CA Activity Use Restrictions Activity and Use Limitations (AULs), also known as Environmental Land-Use Controls (LUCs) – An AUL is a restriction, covenant or notice concerning the use of real property, which is imposed on real property. AULs and LUCs are further categorized as Institutional Controls (ICs) and Engineering Controls (ECs). An IC is a legal or regulatory restriction on the use of a property, limiting the use of groundwater and excavations or preventing such businesses as day care centers or schools on the property. An EC involves physical means of restricting site access or use in order to prevent the spreading or exposure of a contaminant. Frequently implemented engineering controls include requiring black top on the surface, building of structures to prevent exposure or even notices to the public that are posted on the grounds warning of contaminants. A review of the CA Activity Use Restrictions report indicates that there are no CA Activity Use Restrictions sites on or adjacent to the SITE. • CA Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanups The Spills, Leaks, Investigation & Cleanup (SLIC) Program is responsible for site investigation and corrective action involving sites not overseen by the Underground Tank Program and the Well Investigation Program. This program is not restricted to particular pollutants or environments; rather, the program covers all types of pollutants (such as solvents, petroleum fuels, and heavy metals) and all environments (including surface and water, groundwater, and the vadose zone). Upon confirming that C-15 1700 S Harbor-P1 © 2014 ACS Asso. 15 an unauthorized discharge is polluting or threatens to pollute regional water bodies, the Regional Board oversees site investigation and corrective action. Statutory authority for the program is derived from the California Water Code, Division 7, Section 13304. Guidelines for site investigation and remediation are promulgated in State Board Resolution No. 92-49 entitled Policies and Procedures for Investigation and Cleanup and Abatement of Discharges under Water Code Section 13304. A review of the CA Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanups report indicates that there are two CA Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanups sites at within 1/4 miles to the SITE. 0.18 mi S of the SITE UNOCAL 1779 HARBOR ANAHEIM, ANAHEIM, CA 0.24 mi SW of the SITE NATIONAL CAR RENTAL FAC. 711 W KATELLA AVE, ANAHEIM, CA The facilities identified above, although are located within ¼ miles of the SITE, appeared to be unlikely to cause significant environmental concerns for the SITE based on the evaluation of the local hydrogeological and environmental conditions. • CA Solid Waste Landfills The Solid Waste Landfill List (SWLF) database is provided by the California Solid Waste Information System (SWIS) and consists of both open as well as closed inactive solid waste disposal facilities and transfer stations pursuant to the Solid Waste Management and Resource Recovery Act of 1972. A review of the CA Solid Waste Landfills report indicates that there are no CA Solid Waste Landfills sites on or adjacent to the SITE. • CA Oil and Gas Wells The California Department of Conservation, Division of Oil, Gas and Thermal Resources (DOGGR) was created to serve the needs of the state, local governments, and industry by regulating statewide oil and gas activities with uniform laws and regulations. The DOGGR supervises the drilling, operation, maintenance, and plugging and abandonment of onshore and offshore oil, gas, and geothermal wells, preventing damage to: (1) life, health, property, and natural resources; (2) underground and surface waters suitable for irrigation or domestic use; and (3) oil, gas and geothermal reservoirs. A review of the CA Oil and Gas Wells report indicates that there are five Oil and Gas Wells sites at within 1 mile to the SITE. The closest ones are listed below. 0.65 mi NE of the SITE Sun Oil Co. 0.67 mi NE of the SITE McVicar-Rood-Hall The facilities identified above are not within ¼ miles of the SITE. They are unlikely to cause significant environmental concerns for the SITE based on the evaluation of the local hydrogeological and environmental conditions. • CA Voluntary Cleanup Sites The Department of Toxic Substances Controls (DTSC) Site Mitigation and Brownfield’s Reuse Program (SMBRP) EnviroStor database identifies Voluntary Cleanup sites. These sites include low threat level properties with confirmed or unconfirmed releases. The responsible parties have requested C-16 1700 S Harbor-P1 © 2014 ACS Asso. 16 that DTSC oversee investigation and/or cleanup activities and agreed to offset DTSC expenses. A review of the CA Voluntary Cleanup report indicates that there are no CA Voluntary Cleanup sites on or adjacent to the SITE. 6.3 Historical Investigation • Historical Aerial Photographs and historical topographic maps Historical aerial photographs and historical topographic maps were reviewed. The reviewed aerial photographs are dated 2005, 2004, 2003, 1998, 1980, 1972, 1964, and 1953. The pertinent ones are included in Enclosure III. The 1953 photograph indicated that the SITE and all its neighbors were farms and not developed. Its west neighbor, the Disneyland, was developed in the mid 1950s. The 1972 photograph indicated that all of the neighbors were developed. The east neighbor was demolished and the redevelopment started in the past ten years. The reviewed historical topographic maps near the SITE are dated between 1922 and 1983. All of these maps indicated that some its neighbors were developed before the 1950s. Prior to the 1950s, the area was farmland with very few streets. These maps and photographs indicated no significant environmentally hazardous land usage. In summary, the review of historical aerial photographs and topographic maps concluded that there has been no land use that indicate storage or use of hazardous material at the SITE and its vicinity. • Historical Sanborn Maps Fire insurance maps are large-scale maps that depict the commercial, industrial and residential sections of some twelve thousand cities and towns in the United States. These specialized maps were first prepared for the exclusive use of fire insurance companies and underwriters to provide accurate, current and detailed information about the buildings they were insuring. Information relied upon in place of personal examinations of property. The maps show the size, shape and construction of dwellings, commercial buildings and factories, as well as indicate widths and names of streets, property boundaries, and house and block numbers. No Fire Insurance Maps are available for the area surrounding the subject site. Lack of coverage of the site indicates an area of little commercial development prior to 1950. • Historical City Directory Abstract Historical tenant reports, based on government data files, historical City directory abstract, and telephone company criss-cross directories, were also reviewed. The data from 1957 to 1972 are listed in Enclosure III. The data reviewed indicated that the tenants at the SITE were offices and hotels. No data was available prior to 1957. • Historical Gas Station C-17 1700 S Harbor-P1 © 2014 ACS Asso. 17 Although to the north of the SITE, the neighbor is currently a vacant lot, the telephone directory indicated that a gas station briefly existed somewhat north of Disney Way at 1660 S. Harbor Boulevard, north of the formerly power line right of way (Figure 1-2). The existence of the gas station probably was between mid 1960s and early 1980s. This gas station is not an immediate neighbor of the SITE. The City Fire Department and County Health Department were contacted regarding the neighboring gas station. City Fire Department indicated that the gas station at 1656 S. Harbor Boulevard applied for tank removal permits in 1982. The removal did take place according to the applicable environmental laws and regulation. Based on the aforementioned information and consideration of the relatively long distance involved, this former gas station is not a recognized environmental concern (REC) for the subject SITE. It is considered a historical environmental concern (HREC). 6.4 Summary The results of the historical investigation indicated no significant environmentally hazardous land usage at the SITE and its vicinity. There were no land use records that indicate storage or use of environmentally hazardous material at the SITE or its adjoining neighbors. Based on the investigation, there appears to be no recognized environmental concerns at the SITE and its immediate neighbors that release of significant quantity of contaminant could have taken place. C-18 1700 S Harbor-P1 © 2014 ACS Asso. 18 VII. INTERVIEWS 7.1 Interview with Owner Mr. Jeff Kok, a representative of the owner, was interviewed. He is not aware of any underground storage tanks or environmental concerns at the SITE. 7.2 Interview with SITE Manager Ms. Cece Tio, the representative of the site manager was interviewed. She indicated that there were no underground storage tanks at the SITE. The owner has owned the property since about 1996. Ms. Tio also filled out the Owner Interview form (Enclosure III). 7.3 Interview with Local Government Officials The County of Orange, Department of Public Works personnel was interviewed. The review results indicated that there are no code violations, fines, liens or fees due on this property. City of Anaheim Assessor and Anaheim Building Department personnel were contacted. The officers indicated that currently there are no code violations, fines, liens or fees due on this property. City of Anaheim Fire Department personnel were interviewed. They indicated that the SITE currently has no outstanding records of underground storage tanks. 7.4 Interview with Others No other people were available for interview. C-19 1700 S Harbor-P1 © 2014 ACS Asso. 19 VIII. DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSIONS 8.1 Data Gaps The following items summarize the data gaps: a. no historical chain of titles of the previous owners b. no detailed information regarding historical release, use, and storage of hazardous material at neighboring properties. The aforementioned data gaps do not affect our ability for forming an opinion. The gaps appeared to have no significant effect on the conclusions of the report. 8.2 Business Environmental Risks Asbestos The buildings and structures at the SITE were built before 1978, when the government banned the use of asbestos in most building material. There are some concerns that asbestos building material might be a significant concern at the SITE. The business environmental risk for asbestos in the building materials is not part of this investigation. Lead-based paint The issue of lead-based paint also is correlated with government banning the use of lead-based paint in 1978. The buildings and structures at the SITE were constructed before1978. There are some concerns of lead-based paint at this location. The business environmental risk for lead-based paint in the building materials is not part of this investigation. Radon The US EPA, 1993 map of radon zones California, September 1993 indicated that the SITE and its vicinity is in a zone with very low radon emission, at about 4 picocuries/Liter. Radon is not a business environmental risk for the subject SITE and the immediate surrounding area. Mold The buildings and structures are well-maintained. Investigation of the buildings by ACS personnel revealed no mold issue. For the subject SITE, the buildings and structures have no significant business environmental risk in regard to mold. Wetlands Topographically the SITE is in a well drained flat area, and as such wetland situation does not exist even in a micro scale. The area is very well drained and is located in a semi-arid region. Wetlands are not a business environmental risk for the subject SITE and the immediate surrounding area. C-20 1700 S Harbor-P1 © 2014 ACS Asso. 20 Vapor intrusion The subject SITE is not in an oil-gas production area and also is not known for other natural out-gassing of other hazardous vapors, including methane, radon, vapors. Vapor intrusion is not a business environmental risk for the subject SITE and the immediate surrounding area. 8.3 Discussions and Conclusions The subject SITE consists of a hotel complex with about 300 guest units. It is located in Anaheim, Orange County, California in a commercial area. The results of our research and reconnaissance, based on the government and other available records, indicated that the SITE was built in about 1959. The earliest tenant, based on City permits, was a hotel in the early 1960s. Since the development, the known tenants were hotels. This SITE investigation revealed no significant concerns with respect to the potential for hazardous waste or products impacting the subsurface soil or ground water conditions beneath the SITE. There was no recognized evidence of hazardous material and waste-containing facility at the SITE, based on ACS's SITE visits, and governmental document search in connection with the SITE. There appears to be no environmental problems or concerns caused by the practices of the tenants or owners at the SITE and its immediate neighbors. In conclusion, ACS has performed a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment in conformance with the scope and limitations of ASTM Practice E 1527 of the SITE, at 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard, Anaheim, California 92802. Any exceptions to, or deletions from, this practice are described in Section 8.1 and 8.2 of this report. This assessment has revealed no evidence of recognized environmental conditions (RECs) in connection with the property. Based on the results of this investigation, the risk of contamination at the property is so minimal that no further investigation is warranted. C-21 1700 S Harbor-P1 © 2014 ACS Asso. 21 IX. LIMITATIONS The opinion expressed herein is based on the information collected during our study, our present understanding of the SITE conditions, and our professional judgment in light of such information at the time of preparation of this opinion. We are not responsible for the inaccuracy of the data supplied to us, which are used by others or us in connection with the preparation of this opinion. The information in this report is furnished in good faith and was obtained from sources and databases considered to be reliable. Nothing in the report should be construed as a promise or guarantee that the subject property is free of environmental hazards. The report relies on regulatory database information provided by federal, state and local governmental agencies. The database information used in this report consists of the most recently released records; however, it may not reflect the actual current status of the case. This report is based upon field and other conditions discovered at the time of preparation of site assessment. Visual observations referenced in this report are intended only to represent conditions at the time of the reconnaissance. ACS would not be aware of site contamination, such as dumping and/or accidental spillage that occurred subsequent to the reconnaissance conducted by ACS personnel. This site assessment is not intended to represent a complete soil or groundwater characterization, nor define the depth or extent of soil or groundwater contamination. If additional assessment activities are considered for the Property and if other entities are retained to provide such services, ACS cannot be held responsible for any and all claims arising from or resulting from the performance of such services by other persons or entities. ACS can also not be held responsible from any and all claims arising or resulting from clarifications, adjustments, modifications, discrepancies or other changes necessary to reflect changed field or other conditions. The report is an opinion work, and no warranty is expressed, implied, or made as to the conclusions, advice, and recommendations offered in this report. Our liability is limited to the cost of the project (i.e., the Report). Per AAI guidelines, this report has a shelf life of one hundred and eighty days, as with all Phase I Environmental Assessment Report. Report respectfully prepared by: Chi Huang, Ph.D., Registered Professional Geologist, California C-22 ENCLOSURE I — SITE LOCATION MAP, SITE PLAN MAP, SITE PHOTOGRAPHS AND SITE AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH A-1 C-23 A – 2 © 2014 ACS Asso. Figure 1-1. SITE Location Map North Project: 1700 S. Harbor Blvd, Anaheim, CA 92802 SITE C-24 A - 3 © 2014 ACS Asso. Figure 1-2. SITE Plan Map North Project: 1700 S. Harbor Blvd, Anaheim, CA 92802 This is a sketch, not to scale Neighbor, Castle Inn Hotel N ei g h bo r, Di s n e y l a n d Neighbor, Hotel Ha r b o r B o u l e v a r d Neighbor, Anaheim Garden Walk Vacant Lots, Power Lines Disney Way Parkin g lots Swimming pool Parkin g lots Parking lots SITE C-25 Figure 1-3. SITE Photographs Project: 1700 S. Harbor Blvd, Anaheim, CA 92802 1] view looking south at the SITE, showing the front portion of the SITE 2] view looking northeast showing the front portion of the SITE 3] view looking east at the east portion of the SITE 4] view looking east at the northwest portion of the SITE, enclosed the trash bins area 5] view looking east at the swimming pool 6] interior view - lobby 7] interior view - guest room 4 5 A - 4 © 2014 ACS Asso. 1 3 7 2 6 C-26 A - 5 © 2014 ACS Asso. Figure 1-4. SITE Aerial Photograph Project: 1700 S. Harbor Blvd, Anaheim, CA 92802 SITE C-27 ENCLOSURE II — ENVIRONMENTAL RECORD SEARCH B-1 C-28 Online HAzmat Records Access Search for Public Hazardous Materials Records for: 1700 S. Harbor Blvd, Anaheim, CA 92802 Latitude: 33.8068, Longitude: -117.9152 June 3, 2014 IMPORTANT: This report is based on public information data files provided by the various public agencies identified within. It has been generated by a computerized search service designed to meet the specifications of ASTM Standard E1527-05. ACS Environmental Consulting maintains accurate copies of these data files, and updates the files regularly as new editions are released, but cannot be responsible for errors and/or omissions in the data. Lack of appearance in this report does not constitute direct evidence that no contamination exists at a site. This report is intended to be used as one tool, along with additional site review and analysis by a qualified environmental professional, to assist in making that determination. ©2014 ACS Environmental Consulting B - 2 C-29 Harbor Blvd, Anaheim 1700 S HARBOR BLVD, ANAHEIM, CA 92802 Prepared for: ACS Environmental Radius Report B -3 June 03, 2014 Ref: Hotel C-30 Summary Aerial Views 2005, 2004, 2003, 1980, 1972, 1953 Flood Zones Hazard Map Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) National Wetlands Map Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS) < 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1 National Priorities List (NPL) CERCLIS List CERCLIS NFRAP RCRA CORRACTS Facilities RCRA non-CORRACTS TSD Facilities Federal Institutional Control / Engineering Control Registry Emergency Response Notification System (ERNS) US Toxic Release Inventory 8 US RCRA Generators (CESQG, SQG, LQG)8 48 US ACRES (Brownfields) US NPDES 1 CA Registered Underground Storage Tanks 3 9 42 CA Leaking Underground Storage Tanks 2 9 39 CA CERCLIS Equivalent CA NPL Equivalent CA Hazardous Waste Sites 4 CA Activity Use Restrictions CA Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanups 2 9 40 CA Solid Waste Landfills CA Oil and Gas Wells 5 CA Voluntary Cleanup Sites B -4 C-31 Flood Hazard Zones Map B -5 C-32 National Wetlands Map B -6 C-33 National Priorities List (NPL) This database returned no results for your area. The Superfund Program, administered under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) is an EPA Program to locate, investigate, and clean up the worst hazardous waste sites throughout the United States. The NPL (National Priorities List) is the list of national priorities among the known releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants throughout the United States and its territories. The NPL is intended primarily to guide the EPA in determining which sites warrant further investigation. The boundaries of an NPL site are not tied to the boundaries of the property on which a facility is located. The release may be contained with a single property's boundaries or may extend across property boundaries onto other properties. The boundaries can, and often do change as further information on the extent and degree of contamination is obtained. B -7 C-34 CERCLIS List This database returned no results for your area. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) investigates known or suspected uncontrolled or abandoned hazardous substance facilities under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). EPA maintains a comprehensive list of these facilities in a database known as the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Information System (CERCLIS). These sites have either been investigated or are currently under investigation by the EPA for release or threatened release of hazardous substances. Once a site is placed in CERCLIS, it may be subjected to several levels of review and evaluation and ultimately placed on the National Priority List (NPL). CERCLIS sites designated as "No Further Remedial Action Planned" (NFRAP) have been removed from CERCLIS. NFRAP sites may be sites where, following an intitial investigation, no contamination was found, contamination was removed quickly without the need for the site to be placed on the NPL, or the contamination was not serious enough to require Federal Superfund Action or NPL consideration. B -8 C-35 CERCLIS NFRAP This database returned no results for your area. As of February 1995, CERCLIS sites designated "No Further Remedial Action Planned" NFRAP have been removed from CERCLIS. NFRAP sites may be sites where, following an initial investigation, no contamination was found, contamination was removed quickly without the site being placed on the NPL, or the contamination was not serious enough to require Federal Superfund action or NPL consideration. EPA has removed these NFRAP sites from CERCLIS to lift unintended barriers to the redevelopment of these properties. This policy change is part of EPA"s Brownfields Redevelopment Program to help cities, states, private investors and affected citizens promote economic redevelopment of unproductive urban sites. B -9 C-36 RCRA CORRACTS Facilities This database returned no results for your area. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulates hazardous waste under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The EPA maintains the Corrective Action Report (CORRACTS) database of Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) facilities that are undergoing "corrective action." A "corrective action order" is issued pursuant to RCRA Section 3008(h) when there has been a release of hazardous waste or constituents into the environment from a RCRA facility. Corrective actions may be required beyond the facility"s boundary and can be required regardless of when the release occurred, even if it predated RCRA. B -10 C-37 RCRA non-CORRACTS TSD Facilities This database returned no results for your area. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulates hazardous waste under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The EPA"s RCRA Program identifies and tracks hazardous waste from the point of generation to the point of disposal. The RCRA Facilites database is a compilation by the EPA of facilities that report generation, storage, transportation, treatment, or disposal of hazardous waste. RCRA Permitted Treatment, Storage, Disposal Facilities (RCRA-TSD) are facilities which treat, store and/or dispose of hazardous waste. B -11 C-38 Federal Institutional Control / Engineering Control Registry This database returned no results for your area. Federal Institutional Control / Engineering Control Registry B -12 C-39 Emergency Response Notification System (ERNS) This database returned no results for your area. The Emergency Response Notification System (ERNS) is a national computer database used to store information on unauthorized releases of oil and hazardous substances. The program is a cooperative effort of the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Transportation Research and Special Program Administration"s John Volpe National Transportation System Center and the National Response Center. There are primarily five Federal statutes that require release reporting: the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) section 103; the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act(SARA) Title III Section 304; the Clean Water Act of 1972(CWA) section 311(b)(3); and the Hazardous Material Transportation Act of 1974(HMTA section 1808(b). B -13 C-40 US Toxic Release Inventory This database returned 8 results for your area. The Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) is a publicly available EPA database that contains information on toxic chemical releases and other waste management activities reported annually by certain covered industry groups as well as federal facilities. TRI reporters for all reporting years are provided in the file. B -14 C-41 US Toxic Release Inventory Location 33.81359, -117.9048 Distance to site 4017 ft / 0.76 mi NE Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110002145287 EPA Identifier 110002145287 Primary Name SIEMENS INFORMATION SYSTEMS INCORPORATED Address 240 E. PALAIS RD. City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92805 NAICS Codes 334000 SIC Codes 3571, 3577 SIC Descriptions COMPUTER PERIPHERAL EQUIPMENT, NOT ELSEWHERE CLASSIFIED Programs TRIS Program Interests TRI REPORTER Updated On 23-FEB-01 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 Location 33.81359, -117.9047 Distance to site 4032 ft / 0.76 mi NE Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110000480943 EPA Identifier 110000480943 Primary Name RYVEC INC Address 251 E. PALAIS RD. City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92805 NAICS Codes 311611, 325132 SIC Codes 2011, 2865 SIC Descriptions MEAT PACKING PLANTS Programs EIS, NEI, TRIS Program Interests CRITERIA AND HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANT INVENTORY, TRI REPORTER Updated On 30-NOV-12 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 NAICS Descriptions ANIMAL (EXCEPT POULTRY) SLAUGHTERING., SYNTHETIC ORGANIC DYE AND PIGMENT MANUFACTURING. B -15 C-42 US Toxic Release Inventory Location 33.8106, -117.902 Distance to site 4236 ft / 0.8 mi E Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110000480934 EPA Identifier 110000480934 Primary Name ORANGE COUNTY COLOR GRAPHICS Address 501 E. CERRITOS AVE. City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92805 NAICS Codes 323122 SIC Codes 2752, 2791 SIC Descriptions COMMERCIAL PRINTING, LITHOGRAPHIC, TYPESETTING Programs EIS, NEI, TRIS Program Interests CRITERIA AND HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANT INVENTORY, TRI REPORTER Updated On 30-NOV-12 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 NAICS Descriptions PREPRESS SERVICES. Location 33.81338, -117.9022 Distance to site 4631 ft / 0.88 mi NE Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110015582751 EPA Identifier 110015582751 Primary Name TRI-STAR ELECTRONICS INTEDRNATIONAL INC Address 705 E. DEBRA LN. City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92805 NAICS Codes 335931 SIC Codes 3643 Programs TRIS Program Interests TRI REPORTER Updated On 04-NOV-11 Recorded On 07-AUG-03 NAICS Descriptions CURRENT-CARRYING WIRING DEVICE MANUFACTURING. B -16 C-43 US Toxic Release Inventory Location 33.81634, -117.9049 Distance to site 4680 ft / 0.89 mi NE Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110001188456 EPA Identifier 110001188456 Primary Name TEXTURE DESIGN FURNITURE INCORPORATED Address 1303 SOUTH CLAUDINA STREET City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92805-6235 NAICS Codes 337122, 337215 SIC Codes 2511, 3469 SIC Descriptions METAL STAMPINGS, NOT ELSEWHERE CLASSIFIED, WOOD HOUSEHOLD FURNITURE, EXCEPT UPHOLSTERED Programs AIRS/AFS, EIS, HWTS-DATAMART, NEI, RCRAINFO, TRIS Program Interests AIR MAJOR, CRITERIA AND HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANT INVENTORY, SQG, STATE MASTER, TRI REPORTER Updated On 30-NOV-12 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 NAICS Descriptions NONUPHOLSTERED WOOD HOUSEHOLD FURNITURE MANUFACTURING., SHOWCASE, PARTITION, SHELVING, AND LOCKER MANUFACTURING. Location 33.81636, -117.9049 Distance to site 4685 ft / 0.89 mi NE Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110002145269 EPA Identifier 110002145269 Primary Name AEROSCIENTIFIC CORPORATION Address 1244 S. CLAUDINA ST. City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92805 NAICS Codes 334412 SIC Codes 3672 SIC Descriptions PRINTED CIRCUIT BOARDS Programs EIS, NEI, RCRAINFO, TRIS Program Interests CRITERIA AND HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANT INVENTORY, SQG, TRI REPORTER Updated On 30-NOV-12 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 NAICS Descriptions BARE PRINTED CIRCUIT BOARD MANUFACTURING. B -17 C-44 US Toxic Release Inventory Location 33.81567, -117.9023 Distance to site 5072 ft / 0.96 mi NE Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110002145250 EPA Identifier 110002145250 Primary Name COLBY PLASTIC CONVERTERS INCORPORATED Address 1335 S. ALLEC ST. City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92805 NAICS Codes 326199 SIC Codes 3089, 5162 SIC Descriptions PLASTICS MATERIALS AND BASIC FORMS AND SHAPES, PLASTICS PRODUCTS, NOT ELSEWHERE CLASSIFIED Programs TRIS Program Interests TRI REPORTER Updated On 23-FEB-01 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 NAICS Descriptions ALL OTHER PLASTICS PRODUCT MANUFACTURING. Location 33.81297, -117.9001 Distance to site 5115 ft / 0.97 mi E Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110000480925 EPA Identifier 110000480925 Primary Name MCGRAW MANUFACTURING INC Address 1415 S ALLEC ST City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92805 NAICS Codes 331525 SIC Codes 3366 Programs TRIS Program Interests TRI REPORTER Updated On 04-NOV-11 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 NAICS Descriptions COPPER FOUNDRIES (EXCEPT DIE-CASTING). B -18 C-45 US RCRA Generators (CESQG, SQG, LQG) This database returned 56 results for your area. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulates hazardous waste under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). EPA maintains a database of facilities, which generate hazardous waste or treat, store, and/or dispose of hazardous wastes. Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generators (CESQG) generate 100 kilograms or less per month of hazardous waste, or 1 kilogram or less per month of acutely hazardous waste. Small Quantity Generators (SQG) generate more than 100 kilograms, but less than 1,000 kilograms, of hazardous waste per month. Large Quantity Generators (LQG) generate 1,000 kilograms per month or more of hazardous waste, or more than 1 kilogram per month of acutely hazardous waste. B -19 C-46 US RCRA Generators (CESQG, SQG, LQG) Location 33.80274, -117.9154 Distance to site 1470 ft / 0.28 mi S Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110002878164 EPA Identifier 110002878164 Primary Name CHEVRON STATION 95321 Address 1801 S HARBOR BLVD City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 928023509 Programs HWTS-DATAMART, RCRAINFO Program Interests SQG, STATE MASTER Updated On 26-JAN-12 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 Location 33.81106, -117.9154 Distance to site 1570 ft / 0.3 mi N Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110017405887 EPA Identifier 110017405887 Primary Name DISNEYLAND RESORT Address 1313 HARBOR BOULEVARD City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92802-2309 NAICS Codes 713110 SIC Codes 7996 SIC Descriptions AMUSEMENT PARKS Programs AIRS/AFS, BR, EIS, HWTS-DATAMART, NCDB, NEI, NPDES, PCS, RBLC, RCRAINFO Program Interests AIR MAJOR, COMPLIANCE ACTIVITY, CRITERIA AND HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANT INVENTORY, HAZARDOUS WASTE BIENNIAL REPORTER, ICIS-NPDES NON-MAJOR, LQG, NPDES NON-MAJOR, STATE MASTER, UNSPECIFIED UNIVERSE Updated On 07-FEB-13 Recorded On 12-APR-04 NAICS Descriptions AMUSEMENT AND THEME PARKS. B -20 C-47 US RCRA Generators (CESQG, SQG, LQG) Location 33.81106, -117.9154 Distance to site 1570 ft / 0.3 mi N Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110002916729 EPA Identifier 110002916729 Primary Name SPECTRUM PHOTOGRAPHIC AND IMAGING Address 1313 S HARBOR BLVD City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 928033232 Programs RCRAINFO Program Interests SQG, UNSPECIFIED UNIVERSE Updated On 26-JAN-12 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 Location 33.80505, -117.91 Distance to site 1680 ft / 0.32 mi E Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110002910832 EPA Identifier 110002910832 Primary Name SATELLITE CLEANERS INC Address 1730 S CLEMENTIME ST City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92802-2902 Programs HWTS-DATAMART, RCRAINFO Program Interests SQG, STATE MASTER Updated On 26-JAN-12 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 Location 33.805, -117.91 Distance to site 1687 ft / 0.32 mi E Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110002690678 EPA Identifier 110002690678 Primary Name FLOUROCARBON CO Address 1754 S CLEMENTINE ST City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92802 Programs RCRAINFO Program Interests SQG Updated On 12-AUG-10 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 B -21 C-48 US RCRA Generators (CESQG, SQG, LQG) Location 33.80325, -117.9188 Distance to site 1692 ft / 0.32 mi SW Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110002418330 EPA Identifier 110002418330 Primary Name ANAHEIM CITY, CONVENTION CTR Address 800 W KATELLA AVE City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92802-3415 Programs HWTS-DATAMART, RCRAINFO Program Interests SQG, STATE MASTER Updated On 08-AUG-10 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 Location 33.80932, -117.9097 Distance to site 1897 ft / 0.36 mi NE Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110002676480 EPA Identifier 110002676480 Primary Name ODETICS INC Address 1515 MANCHESTER AVE City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92802-2917 NAICS Codes 335129 SIC Codes 3699 SIC Descriptions ELECTRICAL MACHINERY, EQUIPMENT, AND SUPPLIES, NOT ELSEWHERE CLASSIFIED Programs NEI, RCRAINFO Program Interests CRITERIA AND HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANT INVENTORY, SQG Updated On 27-SEP-10 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 NAICS Descriptions OTHER LIGHTING EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURING. B -22 C-49 US RCRA Generators (CESQG, SQG, LQG) Location 33.79972, -117.9151 Distance to site 2570 ft / 0.49 mi S Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110039564931 EPA Identifier 110039564931 Primary Name DISNEYLAND RESORT (REMOTE SITE) Address 1900 S. HARBOR BLVD. City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92802 Programs BR, RCRAINFO Program Interests HAZARDOUS WASTE BIENNIAL REPORTER, LQG Updated On 17-DEC-10 Recorded On 23-OCT-09 Location 33.80568, -117.9063 Distance to site 2736 ft / 0.52 mi E Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110002792568 EPA Identifier 110002792568 Primary Name CRUISE AMERICA Address 1710 S ANAHEIM City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92805 Programs RCRAINFO Program Interests SQG Updated On 08-AUG-10 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 B -23 C-50 US RCRA Generators (CESQG, SQG, LQG) Location 33.80844, -117.924 Distance to site 2743 ft / 0.52 mi W Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110015672057 EPA Identifier 110015672057 Primary Name SEPHORA STORE 30 ANAHEIM DISNEYLAND Address 1570 SOUTH DISNEYLAND DRIVE City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92802-2321 NAICS Codes 452111 SIC Codes 5311 Programs HWTS-DATAMART, RCRAINFO Program Interests SQG, STATE MASTER Updated On 26-JAN-12 Recorded On 23-SEP-03 NAICS Descriptions DEPARTMENT STORES (EXCEPT DISCOUNT DEPARTMENT STORES). Location 33.79976, -117.9193 Distance to site 2848 ft / 0.54 mi SW Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110009546946 EPA Identifier 110009546946 Primary Name BUCHNER AND YOUNG DBA FASTER FOTO Address 777 CONVENTION WAY City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92802-3425 Programs HWTS-DATAMART, RCRAINFO Program Interests SQG, STATE MASTER Updated On 08-AUG-10 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 B -24 C-51 US RCRA Generators (CESQG, SQG, LQG) Location 33.80828, -117.9059 Distance to site 2863 ft / 0.54 mi E Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110002944002 EPA Identifier 110002944002 Primary Name SHERWIN-WILLIAMS CO Address 1550 S ANAHEIM BLVD, SUITE A City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92805-6218 Programs RCRAINFO Program Interests SQG Updated On 08-AUG-10 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 Location 33.8083, -117.9059 Distance to site 2866 ft / 0.54 mi E Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110002917247 EPA Identifier 110002917247 Primary Name CAL DEPT OF TRANSPORTAION Address 1628 S ANAHEIM BLVD City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92805 Programs RCRAINFO Program Interests SQG Updated On 26-JAN-12 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 Location 33.80845, -117.9059 Distance to site 2878 ft / 0.55 mi E Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110002916916 EPA Identifier 110002916916 Primary Name DNR INDUSTRIES Address 1562 S ANAHEIM BLVD STE B City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92805 Programs HWTS-DATAMART, RCRAINFO Program Interests SQG, STATE MASTER Updated On 26-JAN-12 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 B -25 C-52 US RCRA Generators (CESQG, SQG, LQG) Location 33.80846, -117.9059 Distance to site 2879 ft / 0.55 mi E Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110006481182 EPA Identifier 110006481182 Primary Name VEGAS TRANSMISSIONS Address 1558 S ANAHEIM BLVD City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92805 NAICS Codes 811113 SIC Codes 7537 Programs RCRAINFO Program Interests SQG Updated On 08-AUG-10 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 NAICS Descriptions AUTOMOTIVE TRANSMISSION REPAIR. Location 33.80326, -117.9066 Distance to site 2902 ft / 0.55 mi E Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110006187937 EPA Identifier 110006187937 Primary Name ALS TEXACO Address 100 W KATELLA City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92802 Programs RCRAINFO Program Interests SQG Updated On 26-JAN-12 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 B -26 C-53 US RCRA Generators (CESQG, SQG, LQG) Location 33.80326, -117.9066 Distance to site 2902 ft / 0.55 mi E Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110002715287 EPA Identifier 110002715287 Primary Name CHEVRON 302222 Address 100 E KATELLA City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92802 Programs RCRAINFO Program Interests LQG Updated On 26-JAN-12 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 Location 33.80271, -117.9066 Distance to site 2999 ft / 0.57 mi SE Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110002631331 EPA Identifier 110002631331 Primary Name CORCORAN MFG CO INC Address 1745 S HASTER ST City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92802 Programs RCRAINFO Program Interests SQG Updated On 08-AUG-10 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 Location 33.80249, -117.9066 Distance to site 3041 ft / 0.58 mi SE Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110002854439 EPA Identifier 110002854439 Primary Name COWBOY AUTO Address 1763 HASTER City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92802 Programs RCRAINFO Program Interests SQG Updated On 08-AUG-10 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 B -27 C-54 US RCRA Generators (CESQG, SQG, LQG) Location 33.81027, -117.9059 Distance to site 3103 ft / 0.59 mi E Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110002854411 EPA Identifier 110002854411 Primary Name ALJO ENTERPRISES INC Address 1558 A S ANAHEIM BLVD City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92805-6222 NAICS Codes 333319 Programs RCRAINFO Program Interests SQG Updated On 08-AUG-10 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 NAICS Descriptions OTHER COMMERCIAL AND SERVICE INDUSTRY MACHINERY MANUFACTURING. Location 33.81282, -117.9064 Distance to site 3462 ft / 0.66 mi NE Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110002897731 EPA Identifier 110002897731 Primary Name SUPER SHUTTLE Address 1430 S ANAHEIM BLVD City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92805 Programs RCRAINFO Program Interests SQG Updated On 26-JAN-12 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 B -28 C-55 US RCRA Generators (CESQG, SQG, LQG) Location 33.81461, -117.9068 Distance to site 3829 ft / 0.73 mi NE Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110002945500 EPA Identifier 110002945500 Primary Name KOCH, H & SONS Address 1360 S. ANAHEIM BLVD. City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92805 Programs RCRAINFO Program Interests SQG Updated On 08-AUG-10 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 Location 33.81462, -117.9068 Distance to site 3831 ft / 0.73 mi NE Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110002754733 EPA Identifier 110002754733 Primary Name QUALITY MOTORCARS Address 1354 S ANAHEIM BLVD City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92805 Programs RCRAINFO Program Interests SQG Updated On 08-AUG-10 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 Location 33.79597, -117.9149 Distance to site 3938 ft / 0.75 mi S Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110012229613 EPA Identifier 110012229613 Primary Name SHELL SERVICE STATION Address 2100 S HARBOR City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92802-3516 Programs HWTS-DATAMART, RCRAINFO Program Interests SQG, STATE MASTER Updated On 26-JAN-12 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 B -29 C-56 US RCRA Generators (CESQG, SQG, LQG) Location 33.81264, -117.9264 Distance to site 4019 ft / 0.76 mi NW Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110018990270 EPA Identifier 110018990270 Primary Name DISNEYLAND HOTEL Address 1150 W MAGIC WAY City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 928020000 NAICS Codes 721120 SIC Codes 7011 SIC Descriptions HOTELS AND MOTELS Programs BR, HWTS-DATAMART, NEI, RCRAINFO Program Interests CRITERIA AND HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANT INVENTORY, HAZARDOUS WASTE BIENNIAL REPORTER, SQG, STATE MASTER Updated On 14-SEP-10 Recorded On 18-NOV-04 NAICS Descriptions CASINO HOTELS. Location 33.79574, -117.9152 Distance to site 4023 ft / 0.76 mi S Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110012202179 EPA Identifier 110012202179 Primary Name ARCO FACILITY NO 09727 Address 2101 S HARBOR BLVD City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92802-3515 Programs HWTS-DATAMART, RCRAINFO Program Interests SQG, STATE MASTER Updated On 26-JAN-12 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 B -30 C-57 US RCRA Generators (CESQG, SQG, LQG) Location 33.80973, -117.9284 Distance to site 4137 ft / 0.78 mi W Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110001186396 EPA Identifier 110001186396 Primary Name CENTRAL PLANTS INCORPORATED Address 1600 SOUTH WALNUT STREET City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92802 NAICS Codes 221330 SIC Codes 4961 SIC Descriptions STEAM AND AIR-CONDITIONING SUPPLY Programs AIRS/AFS, HWTS-DATAMART, NEI, RCRAINFO Program Interests AIR MAJOR, CRITERIA AND HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANT INVENTORY, SQG, STATE MASTER Updated On 08-AUG-10 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 NAICS Descriptions STEAM AND AIR-CONDITIONING SUPPLY. Location 33.80706, -117.9015 Distance to site 4156 ft / 0.79 mi E Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110002897713 EPA Identifier 110002897713 Primary Name SUNSET BUS AND EQUIPMENT Address 16555 S CLAUDINA WY City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92801 Programs RCRAINFO Program Interests SQG Updated On 26-JAN-12 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 B -31 C-58 US RCRA Generators (CESQG, SQG, LQG) Location 33.80725, -117.9015 Distance to site 4156 ft / 0.79 mi E Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110002735416 EPA Identifier 110002735416 Primary Name ROLANDS EQUIPMENT CO INC Address 1631 S CLAUDINA WAY City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92805 Programs RCRAINFO Program Interests SQG Updated On 08-AUG-10 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 Location 33.81818, -117.9148 Distance to site 4168 ft / 0.79 mi N Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110002851334 EPA Identifier 110002851334 Primary Name TEXACO KHALS Address 519 W BALL RD City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92805 Programs RCRAINFO Program Interests SQG Updated On 08-AUG-10 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 Location 33.80547, -117.9013 Distance to site 4248 ft / 0.8 mi E Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110002909657 EPA Identifier 110002909657 Primary Name FRIAR TUX SHOP Address 1711 S CLAUDIANA City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92805-6544 Programs HWTS-DATAMART, RCRAINFO Program Interests SQG, STATE MASTER Updated On 26-JAN-12 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 B -32 C-59 US RCRA Generators (CESQG, SQG, LQG) Location 33.80198, -117.9023 Distance to site 4284 ft / 0.81 mi E Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110002703067 EPA Identifier 110002703067 Primary Name DEWEY PEST CONTROL Address 1813 S MANCHESTER BLVD City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92802 Programs RCRAINFO Program Interests SQG Updated On 12-AUG-10 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 Location 33.80186, -117.9019 Distance to site 4413 ft / 0.84 mi E Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110002758481 EPA Identifier 110002758481 Primary Name SATELLITE CLEANERS Address 1831 S MANCHESTER City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92802 Programs RCRAINFO Program Interests SQG Updated On 06-AUG-10 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 Location 33.81815, -117.9099 Distance to site 4459 ft / 0.84 mi NE Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110002756535 EPA Identifier 110002756535 Primary Name PERTH CLEANERS Address 135 W BALL RD City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92805 Programs RCRAINFO Program Interests SQG Updated On 06-AUG-10 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 B -33 C-60 US RCRA Generators (CESQG, SQG, LQG) Location 33.81544, -117.9046 Distance to site 4502 ft / 0.85 mi NE Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110002417171 EPA Identifier 110002417171 Primary Name KANSTUL MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS IN Address 1332 S CLAUDINA ST City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92805 NAICS Codes 339992 SIC Codes 3931 SIC Descriptions MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS Programs EIS, HWTS-DATAMART, NEI, RCRAINFO Program Interests CRITERIA AND HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANT INVENTORY, SQG, STATE MASTER, UNSPECIFIED UNIVERSE Updated On 30-NOV-12 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 NAICS Descriptions MUSICAL INSTRUMENT MANUFACTURING. Location 33.8106, -117.9008 Distance to site 4580 ft / 0.87 mi E Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110002714028 EPA Identifier 110002714028 Primary Name SILGAN PLASTICS CORPORATION Address 611 E. CERRITOS AVE City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92805-6324 NAICS Codes 326199 Programs HWTS-DATAMART, RCRAINFO Program Interests SQG, STATE MASTER Updated On 08-AUG-10 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 NAICS Descriptions ALL OTHER PLASTICS PRODUCT MANUFACTURING. B -34 C-61 US RCRA Generators (CESQG, SQG, LQG) Location 33.81338, -117.9022 Distance to site 4631 ft / 0.88 mi NE Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110002895840 EPA Identifier 110002895840 Primary Name LA VICTORIA RACING Address 705 E DEBRA City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92805 Programs RCRAINFO Program Interests SQG Updated On 26-JAN-12 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 Location 33.81634, -117.9049 Distance to site 4680 ft / 0.89 mi NE Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110001188456 EPA Identifier 110001188456 Primary Name TEXTURE DESIGN FURNITURE INCORPORATED Address 1303 SOUTH CLAUDINA STREET City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92805-6235 NAICS Codes 337122, 337215 SIC Codes 2511, 3469 SIC Descriptions METAL STAMPINGS, NOT ELSEWHERE CLASSIFIED, WOOD HOUSEHOLD FURNITURE, EXCEPT UPHOLSTERED Programs AIRS/AFS, EIS, HWTS-DATAMART, NEI, RCRAINFO, TRIS Program Interests AIR MAJOR, CRITERIA AND HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANT INVENTORY, SQG, STATE MASTER, TRI REPORTER Updated On 30-NOV-12 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 NAICS Descriptions NONUPHOLSTERED WOOD HOUSEHOLD FURNITURE MANUFACTURING., SHOWCASE, PARTITION, SHELVING, AND LOCKER MANUFACTURING. B -35 C-62 US RCRA Generators (CESQG, SQG, LQG) Location 33.81636, -117.9049 Distance to site 4685 ft / 0.89 mi NE Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110002145269 EPA Identifier 110002145269 Primary Name AEROSCIENTIFIC CORPORATION Address 1244 S. CLAUDINA ST. City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92805 NAICS Codes 334412 SIC Codes 3672 SIC Descriptions PRINTED CIRCUIT BOARDS Programs EIS, NEI, RCRAINFO, TRIS Program Interests CRITERIA AND HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANT INVENTORY, SQG, TRI REPORTER Updated On 30-NOV-12 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 NAICS Descriptions BARE PRINTED CIRCUIT BOARD MANUFACTURING. Location 33.81338, -117.9016 Distance to site 4768 ft / 0.9 mi NE Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110002917871 EPA Identifier 110002917871 Primary Name BROOKS ALUMINUM RODS Address 735 E DEBRA LN City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92805 Programs RCRAINFO Program Interests SQG Updated On 26-JAN-12 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 B -36 C-63 US RCRA Generators (CESQG, SQG, LQG) Location 33.80335, -117.8998 Distance to site 4814 ft / 0.91 mi E Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110002848438 EPA Identifier 110002848438 Primary Name ORANGE COUNTY AUTO Address 620 E KATELLA City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92805 Programs RCRAINFO Program Interests SQG Updated On 08-AUG-10 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 Location 33.8106, -117.8999 Distance to site 4854 ft / 0.92 mi E Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110002747207 EPA Identifier 110002747207 Primary Name MOELLER MFG AND SUPPLY INC Address 805 E CERRITOS AVE City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92805 NAICS Codes 334515 SIC Codes 3825 Programs HWTS-DATAMART, RCRAINFO Program Interests SQG, STATE MASTER Updated On 08-AUG-10 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 NAICS Descriptions INSTRUMENT MANUFACTURING FOR MEASURING AND TESTING ELECTRICITY AND ELECTRICAL SIGNALS. B -37 C-64 US RCRA Generators (CESQG, SQG, LQG) Location 33.81808, -117.9063 Distance to site 4933 ft / 0.93 mi NE Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110002639495 EPA Identifier 110002639495 Primary Name ORANGE COUNTY LIFT TRUCK, INC Address 235 E BALL RD City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92805 Programs RCRAINFO Program Interests SQG Updated On 05-AUG-10 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 Location 33.82041, -117.915 Distance to site 4980 ft / 0.94 mi N Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110002628229 EPA Identifier 110002628229 Primary Name ORANGE CO DEPT OF AGRI Address 1010 SOUTH HARBOR BLVD City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92805-5531 Programs NCDB, RCRAINFO Program Interests COMPLIANCE ACTIVITY, SQG Updated On 08-AUG-10 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 B -38 C-65 US RCRA Generators (CESQG, SQG, LQG) Location 33.80064, -117.9005 Distance to site 4983 ft / 0.94 mi SE Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110002693817 EPA Identifier 110002693817 Primary Name DUNN-EDWARDS CORPORATION Address 1901 SOUTH MANCHESTER AVE City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92802-3802 NAICS Codes 325612 SIC Codes 2842 Programs RCRAINFO Program Interests SQG Updated On 08-AUG-10 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 NAICS Descriptions POLISH AND OTHER SANITATION GOOD MANUFACTURING. Location 33.80335, -117.8993 Distance to site 4986 ft / 0.94 mi E Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110002915301 EPA Identifier 110002915301 Primary Name LOS ANGELES TRUCK CENTERS LLC Address 700 E KATELLA City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92805 Programs RCRAINFO Program Interests SQG Updated On 26-JAN-12 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 B -39 C-66 US RCRA Generators (CESQG, SQG, LQG) Location 33.81931, -117.9085 Distance to site 5008 ft / 0.95 mi NE Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110002851290 EPA Identifier 110002851290 Primary Name ANAHEIM SUZUKI Address 1125 S ANAHEIM BLVD City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92805 NAICS Codes 441221 SIC Codes 5571 Programs RCRAINFO Program Interests SQG Updated On 08-AUG-10 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 NAICS Descriptions MOTORCYCLE DEALERS. Location 33.81232, -117.9001 Distance to site 5014 ft / 0.95 mi E Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110002851192 EPA Identifier 110002851192 Primary Name COPIER SVC INC Address 1422 S ALLEC STE G City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92805-6315 Programs RCRAINFO Program Interests SQG Updated On 08-AUG-10 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 B -40 C-67 US RCRA Generators (CESQG, SQG, LQG) Location 33.81281, -117.9001 Distance to site 5090 ft / 0.96 mi E Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110002844717 EPA Identifier 110002844717 Primary Name PENHALL CO Address 1420 S ALLEC ST City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92805 Programs RCRAINFO Program Interests SQG Updated On 08-AUG-10 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 Location 33.81567, -117.9019 Distance to site 5174 ft / 0.98 mi NE Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110002779823 EPA Identifier 110002779823 Primary Name TECHNO COATINGS INC Address 1339 ALLEC ST City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92805 Programs RCRAINFO Program Interests SQG Updated On 26-JAN-12 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 B -41 C-68 US RCRA Generators (CESQG, SQG, LQG) Location 33.81911, -117.9066 Distance to site 5201 ft / 0.99 mi NE Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110021008880 EPA Identifier 110021008880 Primary Name TRANSLINE TECHNOLOGY INC Address 1106 S. TECHNOLOGY CIRCLE City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92805-6329 NAICS Codes 334412 SIC Codes 3672 Programs BR, RCRAINFO Program Interests CESQG, HAZARDOUS WASTE BIENNIAL REPORTER Updated On 26-JAN-12 Recorded On 05-MAY-05 NAICS Descriptions BARE PRINTED CIRCUIT BOARD MANUFACTURING. Location 33.81809, -117.9046 Distance to site 5224 ft / 0.99 mi NE Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110002648662 EPA Identifier 110002648662 Primary Name DICO COMPANY Address 323 EAST BALL RD City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92805-6313 Programs ICIS, RCRAINFO Program Interests FORMAL ENFORCEMENT ACTION, SQG Updated On 07-FEB-13 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 B -42 C-69 US RCRA Generators (CESQG, SQG, LQG) Location 33.81059, -117.8986 Distance to site 5231 ft / 0.99 mi E Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110009537830 EPA Identifier 110009537830 Primary Name NORCO DELIVERY SERVICES Address 851 E CERRITOS AVE City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92805 Programs RCRAINFO Program Interests SQG Updated On 26-JAN-12 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 Location 33.80727, -117.8979 Distance to site 5232 ft / 0.99 mi E Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110002844780 EPA Identifier 110002844780 Primary Name COORS DISTRIBUTING CO Address 1625 S LEWIS City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92805-6437 Programs RCRAINFO Program Interests SQG Updated On 08-AUG-10 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 B -43 C-70 US RCRA Generators (CESQG, SQG, LQG) Location 33.82007, -117.9088 Distance to site 5232 ft / 0.99 mi NE Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110013861810 EPA Identifier 110013861810 Primary Name UNITED WESTERN MEDICAL CENTER Address 1025 SOUTH ANAHEIM BOULEVARD City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92805-5806 NAICS Codes 622110 SIC Codes 8062 SIC Descriptions GENERAL MEDICAL AND SURGICAL HOSPITALS Programs EIS, NEI, RCRAINFO Program Interests CRITERIA AND HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANT INVENTORY, SQG Updated On 30-NOV-12 Recorded On 03-APR-03 NAICS Descriptions GENERAL MEDICAL AND SURGICAL HOSPITALS. Location 33.80538, -117.8979 Distance to site 5257 ft / 1 mi E Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110009545233 EPA Identifier 110009545233 Primary Name FREEDOM COMMUNICATIONS INCORPORATED Address 1701 SOUTH LEWIS STREET City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92805-6439 NAICS Codes 323110, 516110 SIC Codes 2711 SIC Descriptions NEWSPAPERS: PUBLISHING, OR PUBLISHING AND PRINTING Programs EIS, HWTS-DATAMART, NEI, RCRAINFO Program Interests CRITERIA AND HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANT INVENTORY, SQG, STATE MASTER Updated On 30-NOV-12 Recorded On 01-MAR-00 NAICS Descriptions COMMERCIAL LITHOGRAPHIC PRINTING., INTERNET PUBLISHING AND BROADCASTING. B -44 C-71 US ACRES (Brownfields) This database returned no results for your area. Brownfields are real property, the expansion, redevelopment, or reuse of which may be complicated by the presence or potential presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant. Cleaning up and reinvesting in these properties protects the environment, reduces blight, and takes development pressures off greenspaces and working lands. The Assessment, Cleanup and Redevelopment Exchange System (ACRES) is an online database for Brownfields Grantees to electronically submit data directly to The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) B -45 C-72 US NPDES This database returned 1 results for your area. The NPDES module of the Compliance Information System (ICIS) tracks surface water permits issued under the Clean Water Act. Under NPDES, all facilities that discharge pollutants from any point source into waters of the United States are required to obtain a permit. The permit will likely contain limits on what can be discharged, impose monitoring and reporting requirements, and include other provisions to ensure that the discharge does not adversely affect water quality. B -46 C-73 US NPDES Location 33.81106, -117.9154 Distance to site 1570 ft / 0.3 mi N Info URL http://iaspub.epa.gov/enviro/fii_query_detail.disp_program_facility?p_registr y_id=110017405887 EPA Identifier 110017405887 Primary Name DISNEYLAND RESORT Address 1313 HARBOR BOULEVARD City ANAHEIM County ORANGE State CA Zipcode 92802-2309 NAICS Codes 713110 SIC Codes 7996 SIC Descriptions AMUSEMENT PARKS Programs AIRS/AFS, BR, EIS, HWTS-DATAMART, NCDB, NEI, NPDES, PCS, RBLC, RCRAINFO Program Interests AIR MAJOR, COMPLIANCE ACTIVITY, CRITERIA AND HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANT INVENTORY, HAZARDOUS WASTE BIENNIAL REPORTER, ICIS-NPDES NON-MAJOR, LQG, NPDES NON-MAJOR, STATE MASTER, UNSPECIFIED UNIVERSE Updated On 07-FEB-13 Recorded On 12-APR-04 NAICS Descriptions AMUSEMENT AND THEME PARKS. B -47 C-74 CA Registered Underground Storage Tanks This database returned 54 results for your area. Underground storage tanks containing hazardous or petroleum substances are regulated under Subtitle I of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The State Water Resources Control Board"s GeoTracker database provides the list of permitted Underground Storage Tanks (UST). B -48 C-75 CA Registered Underground Storage Tanks Location 33.80419, -117.9154 Distance to site 941 ft / 0.18 mi S Site Name UNOCAL #4227 Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 1779 S HARBOR BLVD # 4227 City ANAHEIM Zip 92802 County Orange Location 33.80318, -117.9152 Distance to site 1307 ft / 0.25 mi S Site Name MOBIL STATION (18-106) Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 1800 S HARBOR BLVD City ANAHEIM Zip 92802 County Orange Location 33.80318, -117.9154 Distance to site 1309 ft / 0.25 mi S Site Name MIKE FLYNN CHEVRON STATION #9-5321 Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 1801 S HARBOR BLVD City ANAHEIM Zip 92802 County Orange Location 33.8034, -117.9181 Distance to site 1505 ft / 0.28 mi SW Site Name NATIONAL CAR RENTAL SYSTEM Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 711 W KATELLA AVE City ANAHEIM Zip 92802 County Orange Location 33.80641, -117.91 Distance to site 1562 ft / 0.3 mi E Site Name ANAHEIM RESORT PUMP HOUSE #55 Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 1713 S CLEMENTINE ST # 55 City ANAHEIM Zip 92802 County Orange B -49 C-76 CA Registered Underground Storage Tanks Location 33.80322, -117.9193 Distance to site 1796 ft / 0.34 mi SW Site Name ANAHEIM CONVENTION CENTER Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 800 W KATELLA AVE City ANAHEIM Zip 92802 County Orange Location 33.81233, -117.9153 Distance to site 2031 ft / 0.38 mi N Site Name AVIS RENT A CAR Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 1400 S HARBOR BLVD City ANAHEIM Zip 92802 County Orange Location 33.81234, -117.9154 Distance to site 2037 ft / 0.39 mi N Site Name DISNEYLAND Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 1313 S HARBOR BLVD City ANAHEIM Zip 92802 County Orange Location 33.80323, -117.9094 Distance to site 2176 ft / 0.41 mi SE Site Name EAGLE CAR WASH Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 350 W KATELLA AVE City ANAHEIM Zip 92802 County Orange Location 33.80343, -117.9088 Distance to site 2289 ft / 0.43 mi SE Site Name DAVES USED CARS Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 231 W KATELLA AVE City ANAHEIM Zip 92802 County Orange B -50 C-77 CA Registered Underground Storage Tanks Location 33.80343, -117.9086 Distance to site 2328 ft / 0.44 mi SE Site Name HERTZ CORPORATION Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 221 W KATELLA AVE City ANAHEIM Zip 92802 County Orange Location 33.80323, -117.9077 Distance to site 2600 ft / 0.49 mi SE Site Name AVIS RENT A CAR Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 200 W KATELLA AVE City ANAHEIM Zip 92802 County Orange Location 33.8071, -117.924 Distance to site 2670 ft / 0.51 mi W Site Name HOTLINE CLEANING SYSTEMS Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 542 CENTRAL PARK E City ANAHEIM Zip 92802 County Orange Location 33.8071, -117.924 Distance to site 2670 ft / 0.51 mi W Site Name DISNEYLAND PACIFIC HOTEL Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 1717 SOUTHWEST ST City ANAHEIM Zip 92802 County Orange Location 33.80506, -117.9066 Distance to site 2685 ft / 0.51 mi E Site Name STEINER CORP Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 1755 S HASTER ST City ANAHEIM Zip 92802 County Orange B -51 C-78 CA Registered Underground Storage Tanks Location 33.80481, -117.9066 Distance to site 2696 ft / 0.51 mi E Site Name ACCURATE AUTOMOTIVE Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 1763 S HASTER ST City ANAHEIM Zip 92802 County Orange Location 33.79961, -117.9176 Distance to site 2709 ft / 0.51 mi S Site Name ANAHEIM MARRIOTT HOTEL Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 700 W CONVENTION WAY City ANAHEIM Zip 92802 County Orange Location 33.80323, -117.9064 Distance to site 2946 ft / 0.56 mi E Site Name SATELLITE MOBIL Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 100 E KATELLA AVE City ANAHEIM Zip 92802 County Orange Location 33.81082, -117.9062 Distance to site 3108 ft / 0.59 mi NE Site Name LEAVERTON COMPANY Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 1562 S ANAHEIM BLVD City ANAHEIM Zip 92805 County Orange Location 33.81056, -117.9059 Distance to site 3127 ft / 0.59 mi E Site Name SAV-ON OSCO DRUGS Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 1500 S ANAHEIM BLVD City ANAHEIM Zip 92805 County Orange B -52 C-79 CA Registered Underground Storage Tanks Location 33.81144, -117.9061 Distance to site 3245 ft / 0.61 mi NE Site Name ANIK STOP Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 1460 S ANAHEIM BLVD City ANAHEIM Zip 92805 County Orange Location 33.80335, -117.9273 Distance to site 3866 ft / 0.73 mi W Site Name SHELL (0222-1400) Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 1101 W KATELLA AVE City ANAHEIM Zip 92802 County Orange Location 33.81363, -117.9051 Distance to site 3948 ft / 0.75 mi NE Site Name JOHN PIERRE APPARELL Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 251 E PALAIS RD City ANAHEIM Zip 92805 County Orange Location 33.81061, -117.9029 Distance to site 3991 ft / 0.76 mi E Site Name DOLLAR RENT A CAR SYSTEM Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 421 E CERRITOS AVE City ANAHEIM Zip 92805 County Orange Location 33.79573, -117.9155 Distance to site 4026 ft / 0.76 mi S Site Name ARCO (AM/PM MINI MRKT.) #9727 Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 2101 S HARBOR BLVD # 9727 City ANAHEIM Zip 92802 County Orange B -53 C-80 CA Registered Underground Storage Tanks Location 33.79573, -117.9151 Distance to site 4026 ft / 0.76 mi S Site Name TARGET STATION 82 Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 2101 S HARBOR BLVD City ANAHEIM Zip 92802 County Orange Location 33.79573, -117.9151 Distance to site 4026 ft / 0.76 mi S Site Name SHELL (0222-28) Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 2100 S HARBOR BLVD City ANAHEIM Zip 92802 County Orange Location 33.81788, -117.9153 Distance to site 4057 ft / 0.77 mi N Site Name HARBOR SERVICE CENTER Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 1200 S HARBOR BLVD City ANAHEIM Zip 92805 County Orange Location 33.81788, -117.9153 Distance to site 4057 ft / 0.77 mi N Site Name G & M OIL #8 Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 1200 HARBOR S City ANAHEIM Zip 92805 County Orange Location 33.81817, -117.9147 Distance to site 4165 ft / 0.79 mi N Site Name KHALS SERVICE CENTER Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 519 W BALL RD City ANAHEIM Zip 92805 County Orange B -54 C-81 CA Registered Underground Storage Tanks Location 33.81819, -117.9155 Distance to site 4172 ft / 0.79 mi N Site Name JINS HARBOR SHELL Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 601 W BALL RD City ANAHEIM Zip 92805 County Orange Location 33.80603, -117.9012 Distance to site 4242 ft / 0.8 mi E Site Name MASTER TILE INC Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 1705 S CLAUDINA WAY City ANAHEIM Zip 92805 County Orange Location 33.79494, -117.915 Distance to site 4314 ft / 0.82 mi S Site Name DOLLAR RENT A CAR SYSTEMS Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 2132 S HARBOR BLVD City ANAHEIM Zip 92802 County Orange Location 33.81508, -117.9045 Distance to site 4442 ft / 0.84 mi NE Site Name PRECISION FRAMERS Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 1346 S CLAUDINA ST City ANAHEIM Zip 92805 County Orange Location 33.81815, -117.921 Distance to site 4509 ft / 0.85 mi NW Site Name SHERATON HOTEL Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 1015 W BALL RD City ANAHEIM Zip 92802 County Orange B -55 C-82 CA Registered Underground Storage Tanks Location 33.80344, -117.9007 Distance to site 4562 ft / 0.86 mi E Site Name SIOUX BEE HONEY Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 511 E KATELLA AVE City ANAHEIM Zip 92805 County Orange Location 33.81581, -117.9047 Distance to site 4575 ft / 0.87 mi NE Site Name BELL INDUSTRIES INC Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 1304 S CLAUDINA ST City ANAHEIM Zip 92805 County Orange Location 33.81814, -117.9216 Distance to site 4581 ft / 0.87 mi NW Site Name ARCO-ANAHEIM RESORT CENTER Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 1037 W BALL RD City ANAHEIM Zip 92802 County Orange Location 33.81058, -117.9006 Distance to site 4624 ft / 0.88 mi E Site Name HOMESTEAD HOUSE INC Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 530 E CERRITOS AVE City ANAHEIM Zip 92805 County Orange Location 33.81818, -117.9085 Distance to site 4630 ft / 0.88 mi NE Site Name 7-ELEVEN STORE Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 107 W BALL RD City ANAHEIM Zip 92805 County Orange B -56 C-83 CA Registered Underground Storage Tanks Location 33.80122, -117.9011 Distance to site 4717 ft / 0.89 mi E Site Name CULLIGAN WATER Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 1911 S MANCHESTER AVE City ANAHEIM Zip 92802 County Orange Location 33.81686, -117.9051 Distance to site 4792 ft / 0.91 mi NE Site Name AEROSCIENTIFIC CORP Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 1244 S CLAUDINA ST City ANAHEIM Zip 92805 County Orange Location 33.81059, -117.8998 Distance to site 4873 ft / 0.92 mi E Site Name WEYERHAEUSER CO Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 710 E CERRITOS AVE City ANAHEIM Zip 92805 County Orange Location 33.81893, -117.9083 Distance to site 4909 ft / 0.93 mi NE Site Name ANAHEIM DODGE Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 1120 S ANAHEIM BLVD City ANAHEIM Zip 92805 County Orange Location 33.81819, -117.9065 Distance to site 4934 ft / 0.93 mi NE Site Name BELL PIPE AND SUPPLY CO Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 215 E BALL RD City ANAHEIM Zip 92805 County Orange B -57 C-84 CA Registered Underground Storage Tanks Location 33.81802, -117.9243 Distance to site 4953 ft / 0.94 mi NW Site Name MIKES EXXON (EXXON 7-3724) Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 1100 W BALL RD City ANAHEIM Zip 92802 County Orange Location 33.81224, -117.9001 Distance to site 4998 ft / 0.95 mi E Site Name STEVE CASADA CONSTRUCTION CO Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 1426 S ALLEC ST City ANAHEIM Zip 92805 County Orange Location 33.81236, -117.9001 Distance to site 5015 ft / 0.95 mi E Site Name INTERSTATE RECOVERY SERVICE Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 1424 S ALLEC ST City ANAHEIM Zip 92805 County Orange Location 33.81259, -117.9001 Distance to site 5050 ft / 0.96 mi E Site Name POWER BREAKING INC Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 1420 S ALLEC ST City ANAHEIM Zip 92805 County Orange Location 33.81058, -117.8991 Distance to site 5083 ft / 0.96 mi E Site Name CITY OF ANAHEIM SUBSTATION Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 826 E CERRITOS AVE City ANAHEIM Zip 92805 County Orange B -58 C-85 CA Registered Underground Storage Tanks Location 33.81061, -117.899 Distance to site 5099 ft / 0.97 mi E Site Name NORCO DELIVERY SYSTEMS Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 851 E CERRITOS AVE City ANAHEIM Zip 92805 County Orange Location 33.80729, -117.898 Distance to site 5227 ft / 0.99 mi E Site Name COORS DISTRIBUTING CO. Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 1625 S LEWIS ST # B City ANAHEIM Zip 92805 County Orange Location 33.80579, -117.8979 Distance to site 5252 ft / 0.99 mi E Site Name GEORGIA PACIFIC CORP D C #74 Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 1700 S LEWIS ST City ANAHEIM Zip 92805 County Orange Location 33.81819, -117.9046 Distance to site 5271 ft / 1 mi NE Site Name DYCORP Permitting Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Address 323 E BALL RD City ANAHEIM Zip 92805 County Orange B -59 C-86 CA Leaking Underground Storage Tanks This database returned 50 results for your area. Information on Leaking underground storage tanks containing hazardous or petroleum substances is maintained in the State Water Resources Control Board"s GeoTracker database. B -60 C-87 CA Leaking Underground Storage Tanks Location 33.80413, -117.9154 Distance to site 961 ft / 0.18 mi S Site Name UNOCAL Site Street Number 1779 Site Street Name HARBOR Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1986-06-23 Lead Agency ORANGE COUNTY LOP Local Agency ORANGE COUNTY LOP File Location Local Agency Contaminant Gasoline Location 33.8035, -117.9168 Distance to site 1293 ft / 0.24 mi SW Site Name NATIONAL CAR RENTAL FAC. Site Street Number 711 Site Street Name W KATELLA AVE Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1996-12-19 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Soil B -61 C-88 CA Leaking Underground Storage Tanks Location 33.80312, -117.9155 Distance to site 1331 ft / 0.25 mi S Site Name CHEVRON #9-5321 Site Street Number 1801 Site Street Name S HARBOR BLVD Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1999-10-11 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Soil Location 33.8031, -117.915 Distance to site 1336 ft / 0.25 mi S Site Name MOBIL #18-106 Site Street Number 1800 Site Street Name S HARBOR BLVD Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1998-02-09 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Aquifer used for drinking water supply Location 33.80907, -117.919 Distance to site 1427 ft / 0.27 mi NW Site Name DISNEYLAND ROUNDHOUSE FACILITY Site Street Number 1313 Site Street Name SOUTH HARBOR Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 2002-03-05 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Diesel B -62 C-89 CA Leaking Underground Storage Tanks Location 33.8059, -117.9099 Distance to site 1625 ft / 0.31 mi E Site Name ANAHEIM FIRE STATION #3, FRMER Site Street Number 1680 Site Street Name S CLEMENTINE ST Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1998-08-26 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Diesel Contaminated Medium Soil Location 33.80227, -117.9184 Distance to site 1903 ft / 0.36 mi SW Site Name ANAHEIM CONVENTION CENTER Site Street Number 800 Site Street Name KATELLA Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92804 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1989-11-21 Lead Agency ORANGE COUNTY LOP Local Agency ORANGE COUNTY LOP File Location Local Agency Contaminant Diesel B -63 C-90 CA Leaking Underground Storage Tanks Location 33.80313, -117.9103 Distance to site 1998 ft / 0.38 mi SE Site Name KATELLA CAR WASH (FORMER) Site Street Number 350 Site Street Name W KATELLA AVE Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1996-09-23 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Soil Location 33.80361, -117.9093 Distance to site 2119 ft / 0.4 mi SE Site Name HERTZ RENT-A-CAR Site Street Number 221 Site Street Name KATELLA AVE., W. Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 2004-07-26 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline, Fuel Oxygenates Contaminated Medium Soil B -64 C-91 CA Leaking Underground Storage Tanks Location 33.81357, -117.9152 Distance to site 2484 ft / 0.47 mi N Site Name AVIS RENT - A - CAR SYSTEM Site Street Number 1400 Site Street Name S HARBOR BLVD Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1996-03-13 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Diesel Contaminated Medium Soil Location 33.81389, -117.9155 Distance to site 2604 ft / 0.49 mi N Site Name DISNEYLAND - ROUNDHOUSE Site Street Number 1313 Site Street Name W HARBOR BLVD. Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 2002-03-05 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Diesel Contaminated Medium Soil B -65 C-92 CA Leaking Underground Storage Tanks Location 33.79954, -117.9174 Distance to site 2717 ft / 0.51 mi S Site Name ANAHEIM MARRIOT Site Street Number 700 Site Street Name W CONVENTION WAY Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1997-07-18 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Diesel Contaminated Medium Soil Location 33.80499, -117.9242 Distance to site 2814 ft / 0.53 mi W Site Name PAN PACIFIC HOTEL Site Street Number 1717 Site Street Name S WEST ST Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1995-05-15 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Diesel Contaminated Medium Aquifer used for drinking water supply B -66 C-93 CA Leaking Underground Storage Tanks Location 33.80326, -117.9066 Distance to site 2900 ft / 0.55 mi E Site Name STEINER CORPORATION Site Street Number 1755 Site Street Name HASTER Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92805 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1991-02-13 Lead Agency ORANGE COUNTY LOP Local Agency ORANGE COUNTY LOP File Location Local Agency Contaminant Gasoline Location 33.80315, -117.9066 Distance to site 2912 ft / 0.55 mi SE Site Name TEXACO SERVICE STATION Site Street Number 100 Site Street Name W KATELLA AVE Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 2006-10-30 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Aquifer used for drinking water supply B -67 C-94 CA Leaking Underground Storage Tanks Location 33.80315, -117.9065 Distance to site 2940 ft / 0.56 mi SE Site Name MEDDOCK MOBIL Site Street Number 100 Site Street Name E KATELLA AVE Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1999-10-18 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Aquifer used for drinking water supply Location 33.80347, -117.9241 Distance to site 2960 ft / 0.56 mi W Site Name SHELL OIL Site Street Number 1101 Site Street Name KATELLA Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1987-03-06 Lead Agency ORANGE COUNTY LOP Local Agency ORANGE COUNTY LOP File Location Local Agency Contaminant Gasoline B -68 C-95 CA Leaking Underground Storage Tanks Location 33.81498, -117.9156 Distance to site 3002 ft / 0.57 mi N Site Name DISNEYLAND, FUEL STATION Site Street Number 1313 Site Street Name S HARBOR BLVD Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1996-10-24 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Diesel Contaminated Medium Soil Location 33.81498, -117.9156 Distance to site 3002 ft / 0.57 mi N Site Name DISNEYLAND TOMORROWLAND RR ST. Site Street Number 1313 Site Street Name S HARBOR BLVD Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 2000-02-23 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Diesel Contaminated Medium Soil B -69 C-96 CA Leaking Underground Storage Tanks Location 33.81498, -117.9156 Distance to site 3002 ft / 0.57 mi N Site Name DISNEYLAND - MATERHORN Site Street Number 1313 Site Street Name S HARBOR BLVD Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92803 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1994-11-10 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Waste Oil / Motor / Hydraulic / Lubricating Contaminated Medium Soil Location 33.8101, -117.9061 Distance to site 3009 ft / 0.57 mi E Site Name WONDRIES TOYOTA OF ANAHEIM Site Street Number 1601 Site Street Name S ANAHEIM BLVD Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92805 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1992-03-25 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Waste Oil / Motor / Hydraulic / Lubricating Contaminated Medium Soil B -70 C-97 CA Leaking Underground Storage Tanks Location 33.80617, -117.9052 Distance to site 3025 ft / 0.57 mi E Site Name RYDER TRUCK RENTAL Site Street Number 1730 Site Street Name S ANAHEIM BLVD Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92805 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1997-12-10 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Waste Oil / Motor / Hydraulic / Lubricating Contaminated Medium Soil Location 33.80617, -117.9052 Distance to site 3025 ft / 0.57 mi E Site Name RYDER TRUCK RENTAL-CAL TRANS Site Street Number 1730 Site Street Name S ANAHEIM BLVD Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92805 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1998-05-12 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Soil B -71 C-98 CA Leaking Underground Storage Tanks Location 33.80326, -117.9243 Distance to site 3035 ft / 0.57 mi W Site Name SHELL #1101 Site Street Number 1101 Site Street Name W KATELLA AVE Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1997-08-01 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Soil Location 33.8121, -117.9062 Distance to site 3361 ft / 0.64 mi NE Site Name ANIK STOP Site Street Number 1460 Site Street Name S ANAHEIM BLVD Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92805 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1991-02-01 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Soil B -72 C-99 CA Leaking Underground Storage Tanks Location 33.79601, -117.9153 Distance to site 3923 ft / 0.74 mi S Site Name THRIFTY OIL #359 Site Street Number 2101 Site Street Name S HARBOR BLVD Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 2005-09-15 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Aquifer used for drinking water supply Location 33.8137, -117.9053 Distance to site 3930 ft / 0.74 mi NE Site Name JOHN PIERRE APPAREL Site Street Number 251 Site Street Name PALAIS Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92805 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1990-04-30 Lead Agency ORANGE COUNTY LOP Local Agency ORANGE COUNTY LOP File Location Local Agency Contaminant Gasoline B -73 C-100 CA Leaking Underground Storage Tanks Location 33.79597, -117.9149 Distance to site 3938 ft / 0.75 mi S Site Name SHELL #2100 Site Street Number 2100 Site Street Name S HARBOR BLVD Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1996-07-23 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Soil Location 33.8083, -117.9283 Distance to site 4016 ft / 0.76 mi W Site Name CENTRAL PLANTS, INC. Site Street Number 1600 Site Street Name S WALNUT ST Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1998-02-02 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Diesel Contaminated Medium Soil B -74 C-101 CA Leaking Underground Storage Tanks Location 33.81796, -117.9152 Distance to site 4084 ft / 0.77 mi N Site Name G & M OIL #8 (AKA Hoyer Chevron) Site Street Number 1200 Site Street Name S HARBOR BLVD Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92805 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 2002-12-11 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Soil Location 33.81585, -117.9071 Distance to site 4120 ft / 0.78 mi NE Site Name HARDIN OLDS/HONDA Site Street Number 1300 Site Street Name ANAHEIM Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92805 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1990-09-05 Lead Agency ORANGE COUNTY LOP Local Agency ORANGE COUNTY LOP File Location Local Agency Contaminant Xylene, Waste Oil / Motor / Hydraulic / Lubricating, * Solvents B -75 C-102 CA Leaking Underground Storage Tanks Location 33.81812, -117.9158 Distance to site 4147 ft / 0.79 mi N Site Name GANAHL LUMBER Site Street Number 1220 Site Street Name BALL Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92805 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1991-02-13 Lead Agency ORANGE COUNTY LOP Local Agency ORANGE COUNTY LOP File Location Local Agency Contaminant Diesel Location 33.81829, -117.9153 Distance to site 4206 ft / 0.8 mi N Site Name HARBOR AUTO CARE FACILITY Site Street Number 519 Site Street Name W BALL RD Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92805 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 2002-03-26 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Soil B -76 C-103 CA Leaking Underground Storage Tanks Location 33.8162, -117.9066 Distance to site 4310 ft / 0.82 mi NE Site Name HARDIN OLDSMOBILE Site Street Number 1300 Site Street Name ANAHEIM Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92805 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1988-08-04 Lead Agency ORANGE COUNTY LOP Local Agency ORANGE COUNTY LOP File Location Local Agency Contaminant Waste Oil / Motor / Hydraulic / Lubricating Location 33.8186, -117.916 Distance to site 4326 ft / 0.82 mi N Site Name SHELL OIL PRODUCTS US Site Street Number 601 Site Street Name BALL RD. W. Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92805 Site County Orange Status Open - Site Assessment Status Date 2009-03-27 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Soil B -77 C-104 CA Leaking Underground Storage Tanks Location 33.81817, -117.9214 Distance to site 4571 ft / 0.87 mi NW Site Name ANAHEIM SHERATON Site Street Number 1015 Site Street Name BALL Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1991-01-31 Lead Agency ORANGE COUNTY LOP Local Agency ORANGE COUNTY LOP File Location Local Agency Contaminant Diesel Location 33.81575, -117.9046 Distance to site 4579 ft / 0.87 mi NE Site Name BELL INDUSTRIES Site Street Number 1304 Site Street Name CLAUDINA Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92805 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1990-02-07 Lead Agency ORANGE COUNTY LOP Local Agency ORANGE COUNTY LOP File Location Local Agency Contaminant Gasoline B -78 C-105 CA Leaking Underground Storage Tanks Location 33.80336, -117.93 Distance to site 4662 ft / 0.88 mi W Site Name DISNEYLAND-AUTOPIA Site Street Number 1313 Site Street Name S HARBOR BLVD Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Open - Assessment & Interim Remedial Action Status Date 2009-03-27 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Other Groundwater (uses other than drinking water) Location 33.81821, -117.9083 Distance to site 4672 ft / 0.88 mi NE Site Name 7 - ELEVEN STORE Site Street Number 107 Site Street Name W BALL RD Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92805 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1997-07-28 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Soil B -79 C-106 CA Leaking Underground Storage Tanks Location 33.81815, -117.9223 Distance to site 4679 ft / 0.89 mi NW Site Name ARCO #0072 Site Street Number 1037 Site Street Name W BALL RD Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1995-07-25 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Soil Location 33.81847, -117.9087 Distance to site 4698 ft / 0.89 mi NE Site Name 7-ELEVEN STORE #26216 Site Street Number 107 Site Street Name W. BALL RD Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92806 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 2008-08-15 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Soil B -80 C-107 CA Leaking Underground Storage Tanks Location 33.80322, -117.9003 Distance to site 4700 ft / 0.89 mi E Site Name WESTSIDE MATERIALS Site Street Number 700 Site Street Name E KATELLA AVE Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92805 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1991-02-08 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Diesel Contaminated Medium Soil Location 33.80178, -117.9006 Distance to site 4775 ft / 0.9 mi E Site Name JOHN DAVID INTERNATIONAL Site Street Number 1858 Site Street Name S ANAHEIM BLVD Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92805 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1995-02-02 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Soil B -81 C-108 CA Leaking Underground Storage Tanks Location 33.81709, -117.9051 Distance to site 4854 ft / 0.92 mi NE Site Name AEROSCIENTIFIC CORPORATION II Site Street Number 1244 Site Street Name S CLAUDINA ST Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92805 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1986-07-09 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Soil Location 33.81789, -117.9242 Distance to site 4899 ft / 0.93 mi NW Site Name EXXON SERVICE STATION #3724 Site Street Number 1100 Site Street Name W BALL RD Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1994-09-15 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Soil B -82 C-109 CA Leaking Underground Storage Tanks Location 33.80056, -117.9006 Distance to site 4959 ft / 0.94 mi SE Site Name DANA EDWARDS Site Street Number 1901 Site Street Name MANCHESTER Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1986-07-11 Lead Agency ORANGE COUNTY LOP Local Agency ORANGE COUNTY LOP File Location Local Agency Contaminant Stoddard solvent / Mineral Spriits / Distillates Location 33.80314, -117.899 Distance to site 5093 ft / 0.96 mi E Site Name TEXACO SERVICE STATION Site Street Number 818 Site Street Name E KATELLA AVE Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92801 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1998-08-19 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Soil B -83 C-110 CA Leaking Underground Storage Tanks Location 33.81069, -117.899 Distance to site 5101 ft / 0.97 mi E Site Name SEQUA CORPORATION Site Street Number 851 Site Street Name E CERRITOS AVE Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92805 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1991-05-13 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Soil Location 33.8182, -117.9052 Distance to site 5155 ft / 0.98 mi NE Site Name GRUBBS, DAVID Site Street Number 315 Site Street Name E BALL RD Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92805 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1992-05-15 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Soil B -84 C-111 CA Leaking Underground Storage Tanks Location 33.80704, -117.898 Distance to site 5222 ft / 0.99 mi E Site Name COORS DISRIBUTING COMPANY Site Street Number 1625 Site Street Name W LEWIS ST., S. Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 2002-08-05 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline, Diesel Contaminated Medium Soil B -85 C-112 CA CERCLIS Equivalent This database returned no results for your area. The Department of Toxic Substances Controls (DTSC) Site Mitigation and Brownfields Reuse Program (SMBRP) EnviroStor database identifies CERCLIS equivalent sites as "State Response". These are sites known or suspected to contain uncontrolled or abandoned hazardous substance facilities. B -86 C-113 CA NPL Equivalent This database returned no results for your area. The Department of Toxic Substances Controls (DTSC) Site Mitigation and Brownfields Reuse Program (SMBRP) EnviroStor database identifies sites on the National Priority List (NPL). This is the equivalent of the Federal NPL identifying facilities and study areas with known contamination that are given priority for remedial action. B -87 C-114 CA Hazardous Waste Sites This database returned 4 results for your area. B -88 C-115 The Department of Toxic Substances Controls (DTSC) Site Mitigation and Brownfields Reuse Program (SMBRP) EnviroStor database identifies Hazardous Waste Sites. These include... All hazardous waste facilities subject to corrective action pursuant to Section 25187.5 of the Health and Safety Code. All land designated as hazardous waste property or border zone property pursuant to Article 11 (commencing with Section 25220) of Chapter 6.5 of Division 20 of the Health and Safety Code. All information received by the Department of Toxic Substances Control pursuant to Section 25242 of the Health and Safety Code on hazardous waste disposals on public land. All sites listed pursuant to Section 25356 of the Health and Safety Code. All sites included in the Abandoned Site Assessment Program. B -89 C-116 CA Hazardous Waste Sites Location 33.8131, -117.9069 Distance to site 3416 ft / 0.65 mi NE Site Name HERITAGE SCHOOL Site Type School Investigation Site Type 2 School Project Supervisor * Rebecca Chou Envirostor ID 30590002 Status Inactive - Needs Evaluation Status Date 2002-09-10 00:00:00 Past Uses * RETIAL - MISC. Contaminant NONE SPECIFIED Funding Source School District Address Cypress Street/Anaheim Boulevard City Anaheim State CA Zip Code 92805 County ORANGE Location 33.8131, -117.9069 Distance to site 3416 ft / 0.65 mi NE Site Name PONDEROSA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL Site Type School Investigation Site Type 2 School Site Area (acres)14.06 Project Manager TAWFIQ DEEK Project Supervisor Shahir Haddad Envirostor ID 30880003 Status No Further Action Status Date 2003-08-07 00:00:00 Past Uses RESIDENTIAL AREA Contaminant SOIL Funding Source School District Address Mountain View Avenue/Wilken Way City Anaheim State CA Zip Code 92805 County ORANGE B -90 C-117 CA Hazardous Waste Sites Location 33.81419, -117.9072 Distance to site 3636 ft / 0.69 mi NE Site Name 1400 Site Type School Investigation Site Type 2 School Site Area (acres)2 Project Manager GREG NEAL Project Supervisor Javier Hinojosa Envirostor ID 30880005 Status No Further Action Status Date 2004-08-04 00:00:00 Past Uses RESIDENTIAL AREA Contaminant NMA Funding Source School District Address 126/132/138/144/150 West Guinida Lane City Anaheim State CA Zip Code 92805 County ORANGE Location 33.81164, -117.901 Distance to site 4656 ft / 0.88 mi E Site Name SILGAN PLASTICS CORPORATION Site Type Evaluation Site Type 2 Evaluation Project Supervisor Referred - Not Assigned Envirostor ID 30300130 Status Refer: 1248 Local Agency Status Date 2001-03-02 00:00:00 Past Uses NONE SPECIFIED Contaminant NONE SPECIFIED Funding Source Not Applicable Address 611 EAST CERRITOS AVENUE City ANAHEIM State CA Zip Code 92805 County ORANGE B -91 C-118 CA Activity Use Restrictions This database returned no results for your area. Activity and Use Limitations (AULs), also known as Environmental Land-Use Controls (LUCs) – An AUL is a restriction, covenant or notice concerning the use of real property, which is imposed on real property. AULs and LUCs are further categorized as Institutional Controls (ICs) and Engineering Controls (ECs). An IC is a legal or regulatory restriction on the use of a property, limiting the use of groundwater and excavations or preventing such businesses as day care centers or schools on the property. An EC involves physical means of restricting site access or use in order to prevent the spreading or exposure of a contaminant. Frequently implemented engineering controls include requiring black top on the surface, building of structures to prevent exposure or even notices to the public that are posted on the grounds warning of contaminants. B -92 C-119 CA Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanups This database returned 51 results for your area. The Spills, Leaks, Investigation & Cleanup (SLIC) Program is responsible for site investigation and corrective action involving sites not overseen by the Underground Tank Program and the Well Investigation Program. This program is not restricted to particular pollutants or environments; rather, the program covers all types of pollutants (such as solvents, petroleum fuels, and heavy metals) and all environments (including surface and water, groundwater, and the vadose zone). Upon confirming that an unauthorized discharge is polluting or threatens to pollute regional water bodies, the Regional Board oversees site investigation and corrective action. Statutory authority for the program is derived from the California Water Code, Division 7, Section 13304. Guidelines for site investigation and remediation are promulgated in State Board Resolution No. 92-49 entitled Policies and Procedures for Investigation and Cleanup and Abatement of Discharges under Water Code Section 13304. B -93 C-120 CA Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanups Location 33.80413, -117.9154 Distance to site 961 ft / 0.18 mi S Site Name UNOCAL Site Street Number 1779 Site Street Name HARBOR Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1986-06-23 Lead Agency ORANGE COUNTY LOP Local Agency ORANGE COUNTY LOP File Location Local Agency Contaminant Gasoline Location 33.8035, -117.9168 Distance to site 1293 ft / 0.24 mi SW Site Name NATIONAL CAR RENTAL FAC. Site Street Number 711 Site Street Name W KATELLA AVE Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1996-12-19 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Soil B -94 C-121 CA Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanups Location 33.80312, -117.9155 Distance to site 1331 ft / 0.25 mi S Site Name CHEVRON #9-5321 Site Street Number 1801 Site Street Name S HARBOR BLVD Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1999-10-11 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Soil Location 33.8031, -117.915 Distance to site 1336 ft / 0.25 mi S Site Name MOBIL #18-106 Site Street Number 1800 Site Street Name S HARBOR BLVD Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1998-02-09 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Aquifer used for drinking water supply Location 33.80907, -117.919 Distance to site 1427 ft / 0.27 mi NW Site Name DISNEYLAND ROUNDHOUSE FACILITY Site Street Number 1313 Site Street Name SOUTH HARBOR Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 2002-03-05 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Diesel B -95 C-122 CA Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanups Location 33.8059, -117.9099 Distance to site 1625 ft / 0.31 mi E Site Name ANAHEIM FIRE STATION #3, FRMER Site Street Number 1680 Site Street Name S CLEMENTINE ST Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1998-08-26 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Diesel Contaminated Medium Soil Location 33.80227, -117.9184 Distance to site 1903 ft / 0.36 mi SW Site Name ANAHEIM CONVENTION CENTER Site Street Number 800 Site Street Name KATELLA Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92804 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1989-11-21 Lead Agency ORANGE COUNTY LOP Local Agency ORANGE COUNTY LOP File Location Local Agency Contaminant Diesel B -96 C-123 CA Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanups Location 33.80313, -117.9103 Distance to site 1998 ft / 0.38 mi SE Site Name KATELLA CAR WASH (FORMER) Site Street Number 350 Site Street Name W KATELLA AVE Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1996-09-23 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Soil Location 33.80361, -117.9093 Distance to site 2119 ft / 0.4 mi SE Site Name HERTZ RENT-A-CAR Site Street Number 221 Site Street Name KATELLA AVE., W. Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 2004-07-26 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline, Fuel Oxygenates Contaminated Medium Soil B -97 C-124 CA Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanups Location 33.81357, -117.9152 Distance to site 2484 ft / 0.47 mi N Site Name AVIS RENT - A - CAR SYSTEM Site Street Number 1400 Site Street Name S HARBOR BLVD Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1996-03-13 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Diesel Contaminated Medium Soil Location 33.81389, -117.9155 Distance to site 2604 ft / 0.49 mi N Site Name DISNEYLAND - ROUNDHOUSE Site Street Number 1313 Site Street Name W HARBOR BLVD. Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 2002-03-05 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Diesel Contaminated Medium Soil B -98 C-125 CA Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanups Location 33.79954, -117.9174 Distance to site 2717 ft / 0.51 mi S Site Name ANAHEIM MARRIOT Site Street Number 700 Site Street Name W CONVENTION WAY Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1997-07-18 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Diesel Contaminated Medium Soil Location 33.80499, -117.9242 Distance to site 2814 ft / 0.53 mi W Site Name PAN PACIFIC HOTEL Site Street Number 1717 Site Street Name S WEST ST Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1995-05-15 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Diesel Contaminated Medium Aquifer used for drinking water supply B -99 C-126 CA Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanups Location 33.80326, -117.9066 Distance to site 2900 ft / 0.55 mi E Site Name STEINER CORPORATION Site Street Number 1755 Site Street Name HASTER Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92805 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1991-02-13 Lead Agency ORANGE COUNTY LOP Local Agency ORANGE COUNTY LOP File Location Local Agency Contaminant Gasoline Location 33.80315, -117.9066 Distance to site 2912 ft / 0.55 mi SE Site Name TEXACO SERVICE STATION Site Street Number 100 Site Street Name W KATELLA AVE Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 2006-10-30 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Aquifer used for drinking water supply B -100 C-127 CA Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanups Location 33.80315, -117.9065 Distance to site 2940 ft / 0.56 mi SE Site Name MEDDOCK MOBIL Site Street Number 100 Site Street Name E KATELLA AVE Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1999-10-18 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Aquifer used for drinking water supply Location 33.80347, -117.9241 Distance to site 2960 ft / 0.56 mi W Site Name SHELL OIL Site Street Number 1101 Site Street Name KATELLA Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1987-03-06 Lead Agency ORANGE COUNTY LOP Local Agency ORANGE COUNTY LOP File Location Local Agency Contaminant Gasoline B -101 C-128 CA Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanups Location 33.81498, -117.9156 Distance to site 3002 ft / 0.57 mi N Site Name DISNEYLAND, FUEL STATION Site Street Number 1313 Site Street Name S HARBOR BLVD Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1996-10-24 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Diesel Contaminated Medium Soil Location 33.81498, -117.9156 Distance to site 3002 ft / 0.57 mi N Site Name DISNEYLAND - MATERHORN Site Street Number 1313 Site Street Name S HARBOR BLVD Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92803 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1994-11-10 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Waste Oil / Motor / Hydraulic / Lubricating Contaminated Medium Soil B -102 C-129 CA Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanups Location 33.81498, -117.9156 Distance to site 3002 ft / 0.57 mi N Site Name DISNEYLAND TOMORROWLAND RR ST. Site Street Number 1313 Site Street Name S HARBOR BLVD Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 2000-02-23 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Diesel Contaminated Medium Soil Location 33.8101, -117.9061 Distance to site 3009 ft / 0.57 mi E Site Name WONDRIES TOYOTA OF ANAHEIM Site Street Number 1601 Site Street Name S ANAHEIM BLVD Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92805 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1992-03-25 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Waste Oil / Motor / Hydraulic / Lubricating Contaminated Medium Soil Location 33.81503, -117.9145 Distance to site 3022 ft / 0.57 mi N Site Name DISNEYLAND, Evaporation Pond #1 Site Street Number 1313 Site Street Name HARBOR Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site County Orange Status Open - Site Assessment Status Date 1988-06-06 Lead Agency SANTA ANA RWQCB (REGION 8) B -103 C-130 CA Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanups Location 33.80617, -117.9052 Distance to site 3025 ft / 0.57 mi E Site Name RYDER TRUCK RENTAL-CAL TRANS Site Street Number 1730 Site Street Name S ANAHEIM BLVD Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92805 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1998-05-12 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Soil Location 33.80617, -117.9052 Distance to site 3025 ft / 0.57 mi E Site Name RYDER TRUCK RENTAL Site Street Number 1730 Site Street Name S ANAHEIM BLVD Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92805 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1997-12-10 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Waste Oil / Motor / Hydraulic / Lubricating Contaminated Medium Soil B -104 C-131 CA Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanups Location 33.80326, -117.9243 Distance to site 3035 ft / 0.57 mi W Site Name SHELL #1101 Site Street Number 1101 Site Street Name W KATELLA AVE Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1997-08-01 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Soil Location 33.8121, -117.9062 Distance to site 3361 ft / 0.64 mi NE Site Name ANIK STOP Site Street Number 1460 Site Street Name S ANAHEIM BLVD Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92805 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1991-02-01 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Soil B -105 C-132 CA Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanups Location 33.79601, -117.9153 Distance to site 3923 ft / 0.74 mi S Site Name THRIFTY OIL #359 Site Street Number 2101 Site Street Name S HARBOR BLVD Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 2005-09-15 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Aquifer used for drinking water supply Location 33.8137, -117.9053 Distance to site 3930 ft / 0.74 mi NE Site Name JOHN PIERRE APPAREL Site Street Number 251 Site Street Name PALAIS Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92805 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1990-04-30 Lead Agency ORANGE COUNTY LOP Local Agency ORANGE COUNTY LOP File Location Local Agency Contaminant Gasoline B -106 C-133 CA Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanups Location 33.79597, -117.9149 Distance to site 3938 ft / 0.75 mi S Site Name SHELL #2100 Site Street Number 2100 Site Street Name S HARBOR BLVD Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1996-07-23 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Soil Location 33.8083, -117.9283 Distance to site 4016 ft / 0.76 mi W Site Name CENTRAL PLANTS, INC. Site Street Number 1600 Site Street Name S WALNUT ST Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1998-02-02 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Diesel Contaminated Medium Soil B -107 C-134 CA Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanups Location 33.81796, -117.9152 Distance to site 4084 ft / 0.77 mi N Site Name G & M OIL #8 (AKA Hoyer Chevron) Site Street Number 1200 Site Street Name S HARBOR BLVD Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92805 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 2002-12-11 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Soil Location 33.81585, -117.9071 Distance to site 4120 ft / 0.78 mi NE Site Name HARDIN OLDS/HONDA Site Street Number 1300 Site Street Name ANAHEIM Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92805 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1990-09-05 Lead Agency ORANGE COUNTY LOP Local Agency ORANGE COUNTY LOP File Location Local Agency Contaminant Xylene, Waste Oil / Motor / Hydraulic / Lubricating, * Solvents B -108 C-135 CA Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanups Location 33.81812, -117.9158 Distance to site 4147 ft / 0.79 mi N Site Name GANAHL LUMBER Site Street Number 1220 Site Street Name BALL Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92805 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1991-02-13 Lead Agency ORANGE COUNTY LOP Local Agency ORANGE COUNTY LOP File Location Local Agency Contaminant Diesel Location 33.81829, -117.9153 Distance to site 4206 ft / 0.8 mi N Site Name HARBOR AUTO CARE FACILITY Site Street Number 519 Site Street Name W BALL RD Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92805 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 2002-03-26 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Soil B -109 C-136 CA Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanups Location 33.8162, -117.9066 Distance to site 4310 ft / 0.82 mi NE Site Name HARDIN OLDSMOBILE Site Street Number 1300 Site Street Name ANAHEIM Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92805 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1988-08-04 Lead Agency ORANGE COUNTY LOP Local Agency ORANGE COUNTY LOP File Location Local Agency Contaminant Waste Oil / Motor / Hydraulic / Lubricating Location 33.8186, -117.916 Distance to site 4326 ft / 0.82 mi N Site Name SHELL OIL PRODUCTS US Site Street Number 601 Site Street Name BALL RD. W. Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92805 Site County Orange Status Open - Site Assessment Status Date 2009-03-27 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Soil B -110 C-137 CA Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanups Location 33.81817, -117.9214 Distance to site 4571 ft / 0.87 mi NW Site Name ANAHEIM SHERATON Site Street Number 1015 Site Street Name BALL Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1991-01-31 Lead Agency ORANGE COUNTY LOP Local Agency ORANGE COUNTY LOP File Location Local Agency Contaminant Diesel Location 33.81575, -117.9046 Distance to site 4579 ft / 0.87 mi NE Site Name BELL INDUSTRIES Site Street Number 1304 Site Street Name CLAUDINA Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92805 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1990-02-07 Lead Agency ORANGE COUNTY LOP Local Agency ORANGE COUNTY LOP File Location Local Agency Contaminant Gasoline B -111 C-138 CA Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanups Location 33.80336, -117.93 Distance to site 4662 ft / 0.88 mi W Site Name DISNEYLAND-AUTOPIA Site Street Number 1313 Site Street Name S HARBOR BLVD Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Open - Assessment & Interim Remedial Action Status Date 2009-03-27 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Other Groundwater (uses other than drinking water) Location 33.81821, -117.9083 Distance to site 4672 ft / 0.88 mi NE Site Name 7 - ELEVEN STORE Site Street Number 107 Site Street Name W BALL RD Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92805 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1997-07-28 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Soil B -112 C-139 CA Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanups Location 33.81815, -117.9223 Distance to site 4679 ft / 0.89 mi NW Site Name ARCO #0072 Site Street Number 1037 Site Street Name W BALL RD Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1995-07-25 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Soil Location 33.81847, -117.9087 Distance to site 4698 ft / 0.89 mi NE Site Name 7-ELEVEN STORE #26216 Site Street Number 107 Site Street Name W. BALL RD Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92806 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 2008-08-15 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Soil B -113 C-140 CA Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanups Location 33.80322, -117.9003 Distance to site 4700 ft / 0.89 mi E Site Name WESTSIDE MATERIALS Site Street Number 700 Site Street Name E KATELLA AVE Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92805 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1991-02-08 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Diesel Contaminated Medium Soil Location 33.80178, -117.9006 Distance to site 4775 ft / 0.9 mi E Site Name JOHN DAVID INTERNATIONAL Site Street Number 1858 Site Street Name S ANAHEIM BLVD Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92805 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1995-02-02 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Soil B -114 C-141 CA Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanups Location 33.81709, -117.9051 Distance to site 4854 ft / 0.92 mi NE Site Name AEROSCIENTIFIC CORPORATION II Site Street Number 1244 Site Street Name S CLAUDINA ST Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92805 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1986-07-09 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Soil Location 33.81789, -117.9242 Distance to site 4899 ft / 0.93 mi NW Site Name EXXON SERVICE STATION #3724 Site Street Number 1100 Site Street Name W BALL RD Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1994-09-15 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Soil B -115 C-142 CA Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanups Location 33.80056, -117.9006 Distance to site 4959 ft / 0.94 mi SE Site Name DANA EDWARDS Site Street Number 1901 Site Street Name MANCHESTER Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1986-07-11 Lead Agency ORANGE COUNTY LOP Local Agency ORANGE COUNTY LOP File Location Local Agency Contaminant Stoddard solvent / Mineral Spriits / Distillates Location 33.80314, -117.899 Distance to site 5093 ft / 0.96 mi E Site Name TEXACO SERVICE STATION Site Street Number 818 Site Street Name E KATELLA AVE Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92801 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1998-08-19 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Soil B -116 C-143 CA Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanups Location 33.81069, -117.899 Distance to site 5101 ft / 0.97 mi E Site Name SEQUA CORPORATION Site Street Number 851 Site Street Name E CERRITOS AVE Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92805 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1991-05-13 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Soil Location 33.8182, -117.9052 Distance to site 5155 ft / 0.98 mi NE Site Name GRUBBS, DAVID Site Street Number 315 Site Street Name E BALL RD Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92805 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 1992-05-15 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline Contaminated Medium Soil B -117 C-144 CA Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanups Location 33.80704, -117.898 Distance to site 5222 ft / 0.99 mi E Site Name COORS DISRIBUTING COMPANY Site Street Number 1625 Site Street Name W LEWIS ST., S. Site City ANAHEIM Site State CA Site Zip 92802 Site County Orange Status Completed - Case Closed Status Date 2002-08-05 Lead Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Local Agency ANAHEIM, CITY OF Contaminant Gasoline, Diesel Contaminated Medium Soil B -118 C-145 CA Solid Waste Landfills This database returned no results for your area. The Solid Waste Landfill List (SWLF) database is provided by the California Solid Waste Information System (SWIS) and consists of both open as well as closed inactive solid waste disposal facilities and transfer stations pursuant to the Solid Waste Management and Resource Recovery Act of 1972. B -119 C-146 CA Oil and Gas Wells This database returned 5 results for your area. The California Department of Conservation, Division of Oil, Gas and Thermal Resources (DOGGR) was created to serve the needs of the state, local governments, and industry by regulating statewide oil and gas activities with uniform laws and regulations. The DOGGR supervises the drilling, operation, maintenance, and plugging and abandonment of onshore and offshore oil, gas, and geothermal wells, preventing damage to: (1) life, health, property, and natural resources; (2) underground and surface waters suitable for irrigation or domestic use; and (3) oil, gas and geothermal reservoirs. B -120 C-147 CA Oil and Gas Wells Location 33.81469, -117.9092 Distance to site 3418 ft / 0.65 mi NE API Number 05900430 Operator Sun Oil Co. Section 22.000 Township 4S Range 10W Lease Name Foiles Well Number 1 Field Name ANAHEIM Baseline Meridian SB Spud Date 0000/00/00 Abandonment Date 0000/00/00 Location 33.81563, -117.9103 Distance to site 3556 ft / 0.67 mi NE API Number 05900429 Operator McVicar-Rood-Hall Section 22.000 Township 4S Range 10W Lease Name Holsinger Well Number 1 Field Name ANAHEIM Baseline Meridian SB Spud Date 0000/00/00 Abandonment Date 0000/00/00 Location 33.79534, -117.9098 Distance to site 4474 ft / 0.85 mi SE API Number 05900869 Operator Lawrence Barker, Jr. & Roy Naftzger, Jr. Section 27.000 Township 4S Range 10W Lease Name Reed-Burbank Well Number 1 Field Name ORANGE COUNTY Baseline Meridian SB Spud Date 0000/00/00 Abandonment Date 0000/00/00 B -121 C-148 CA Oil and Gas Wells Location 33.79543, -117.9253 Distance to site 5142 ft / 0.97 mi SW API Number 05901226 Operator The Superior Oil Co. Section 28.000 Township 4S Range 10W Lease Name Garden Grove Unit Well Number 1-1 Field Name ORANGE COUNTY Baseline Meridian SB Spud Date 0000/00/00 Abandonment Date 0000/00/00 Location 33.81777, -117.9044 Distance to site 5173 ft / 0.98 mi NE Section 23.000 Township 4S Range 10W Well Number 1 Field Name Orange County Baseline Meridian SB Spud Date 0000/00/00 Abandonment Date 0000/00/00 B -122 C-149 CA Voluntary Cleanup Sites This database returned no results for your area. The Department of Toxic Substances Controls (DTSC) Site Mitigation and Brownfields Reuse Program (SMBRP) EnviroStor database identifies Voluntary Cleanup sites. These sites include low threat level properties with confirmed or unconfirmed releases. The responsible parties have requested that DTSC oversee investigation and/or cleanup activities and agreed to offset DTSC expenses. B -123 C-150 ENCLOSURE III — BUILDING PERMITS AND RECORDS C-1 C-151 C – 2 © 2014 ACS Asso. A LIST OF DOCUMENTS IN ENCLOSURE III Page Date Document Source C - 3 N/A Plat/parcel Map County C - 4 2003 Historical Aerial Photograph US Geol. Survey C - 5 1980 Historical Aerial Photograph US Geol. Survey C - 6 1972 Historical Aerial Photograph US Geol. Survey C - 7 1964 Historical Aerial Photograph US Geol. Survey C - 8 1953 Historical Aerial Photograph US Geol. Survey C - 8 ~ C - 15 Varies Building Permit Documents City/County C - 16 Current Owner Interview Form Owner C - 17 Varies Historical Tenant Report Criss-Cross Directories Note - N/A: not applicable C-152 C - 3 © 2014 ACS Asso. SITE SITE Plat Map Project: 1700 S. Harbor Blvd, Anaheim, CA 92802 APNs: 082-271-09, 82-271-10 C-153 Historical Aerial Photograph, dated 2003 Project: 1700 S. Harbor Blvd, Anaheim, CA 92802 C - 4 ACS Asso. © 2014 SITE C-154 Historical Aerial Photograph, dated 1980 Project: 1700 S. Harbor Blvd, Anaheim, CA 92802 C - 5 ACS Asso. © 2014 SITE C-155 Historical Aerial Photograph, dated 1972 Project: 1700 S. Harbor Blvd, Anaheim, CA 92802 C - 6 ACS Asso. © 2014 SITE C-156 Historical Aerial Photograph, dated 1964 Project: 1700 S. Harbor Blvd, Anaheim, CA 92802 C - 7 ACS Asso. © 2014 SITE C-157 Historical Aerial Photograph, dated 1953 Project: 1700 S. Harbor Blvd, Anaheim, CA 92802 C - 8 ACS Asso. © 2014 SITE C-158 C-159 C-160 C-161 C-162 C-163 C-164 C-165 C - 16 C-166 City Directory Abstract - HISTORICAL TENANT REPORT Target Property: 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92802 This report compiles information b y geocoding the subject properties (that is, plotting the latitude and longitude for such subject properties and obtaining data concerning properties within 1/16th of a mile of the subject properties). There is no warranty or guarantee that geocoding will report or list all properties within the specified radius of the subject properties and any such warranty or guarantee is expressly disclaimed. Accordingly, some properties within the aforementioned radius and the information concerning those properties may not be referenced in this report. S. Harbor Boulevard 1957 1964 1972 1610 Denny’s Restaurant Denny’s Restaurant 1640 Anaheim Hyatt House Hotel, Hyatt House Gifts, Hyatt House Swim Club, Hyatt House Liquor, KNOB Radio Broadcast Lancers Restaurant Lancers Restaurant 1650 Tickertron Saga Hotel Saga Motel 1656 Golf World 1660 Duda Chevron Standard Stations 1700* NSN Charter House Hotel 1717 Cosmetic Motel 1731 Casa Escobar Victors Inn Restaurant 1734 Fantasy Motel Fantasy Motel Fantasy Motel Notes: * subject SITE; Blank: no information; NSN: no such number; [Sources: Polk; Haines Criss-Cross Directory] C - 17 © 2014 ACS Asso. C-167 ENCLOSURE IV — GROUND WATER DATA D-1 C-168 D - 2 © 2014 ACS Asso. SITE Map Showing Active and Closed Leaking Underground Fuel Tanks (LUFT) and Other Cases Near the SITE Project: 1700 S. Harbor Blvd, Anaheim, CA 92802 C-169 100 W Katella Ave Anaheim, CA 90802 FIELD POINT NAME MIN DEPTH TO WATER MW10 Remediation/Groundwater Monitoring Well 70.89 This well is 0.3 miles west of subject SITE D - 3 © ACS Asso. 2014 Depth to ground water information for the SITE and its vicinity Project: 1700 S. Harbor Blvd, Anaheim, CA 92802 C-170 E-1 ENCLOSURE V –QUALIFICATION His qualifications include the following certificates with State of California: OSHA 29 CFR 1910.120 (Hazardous Waste) Certificate; EPA lead Inspection Certificate; EPA Radon Technology for Mitigators Certificate;Caltrans Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan(SWPPP) Certificate. He is a founder of ACS Associates, a consulting firm in California that mange nation-wideprojects for environmental assessment, investigation, remediation and environmental impact reports (EIR). His duties includes proposals writing for private and government contracts including soil vacuum regulatory agency interfaces;water quality and flow modeling, compliance;litigation supportand expert witness. Dr. Huang earned a Ph.D. degree in Geochemistry; a M.S. degree and a B.S. degree. extraction systems, underground storage tanks removal; marketing, client contacts and Dr. Chris (Chi-I) Huang is a Registered Professional Geologist in the State of California and in the State of Arizona, a Registered Environmental Manager in the State of Nevada. © 2014 ACS Asso. C-171 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Appendix April 2016 Appendix D Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Appendix PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. W.O. 4098-1X PRELIMINARY WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN “1700 SOUTH HARBOR BOULEVARD” PERMIT NO. TBD Project Address: 1700 South Harbor Boulevard Anaheim, CA 92802 Prepared for: GGGOOOOOODDD HHHOOOPPPEEE IIINNNTTTEEERRRNNNAAATTTIIIOOONNNAAALLL 2400 E. Katella Avenue, Suite 800 Anaheim, CA 92806 (714) 627-2507 Prepared by: Hunsaker & Associates Irvine, Inc. 3 Hughes Irvine, CA 92618 (949) 583-1010 WQMP Preparation Date: January 12, 2016 D-1 W.O. 4098-1X P R E L I M I N A R Y W A T E R Q U A L I T Y M A N A G E M E N T P L A N “ 1 7 0 0 S O U T H H A R B O R B O U L E V A R D ” C i t y o f A n a h e i m , C A D-2 PRELIMINARY WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN (WQMP) “1700 SOUTH HARBOR BOULEVARD REDEVELOPMENT” PERMIT NO. TBD Project Address: 1700 South Harbor Boulevard Anaheim, CA 92802 Prepared for: GGGOOOOOODDD HHHOOOPPPEEE IIINNNTTTEEERRRNNNAAATTTIIIOOONNNAAALLL 2400 E. Katella Avenue, Suite 800 Anaheim, CA 92806 Phone: (714) 627-2507 Prepared by: Hunsaker & Associates, Irvine, Inc. Engineer: Ed Mandich PE Registration No. 59089 3 Hughes Irvine, CA 92618 (949) 583-1010 Prepared: January 12, 2016 D-3 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Certification Project Owner’s Certification Permit/Application No. TBD Grading Permit No. N/A Tract/Parcel Map No. TBD Building Permit No. N/A CUP, SUP, and/or APN (Specify Lot Numbers if Portions of Tract) APN 082-271-09, 082-271-10 This Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) has been prepared for Good Hope International by Hunsaker and Associates Irvine, Inc. The WQMP is intended to comply with the requirements of the local NPDES Stormwater Program requiring the preparation of the plan. The undersigned, while it owns the subject property, is responsible for the implementation of the provisions of this plan and will ensure that this plan is amended as appropriate to reflect up-to-date conditions on the site consistent with the current Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP) and the intent of the non-point source NPDES Permit for Waste Discharge Requirements for the County of Orange, Orange County Flood Control District and the incorporated Cities of Orange County within the Santa Ana Region. Once the undersigned transfers its interest in the property, its successors-in-interest shall bear the aforementioned responsibility to implement and amend the WQMP. An appropriate number of approved and signed copies of this document shall be available on the subject site in perpetuity. Owner: Good Hope International Name/Title Jeffrey Anglada Company Good Hope International Address 2400 E. Katella Avenue, Suite 800 Anaheim, CA 92806 Email jeffreya@wincomegroup.com Telephone # (310) 498-9004 I understand my responsibility to implement the provisions of this WQMP including the ongoing operation and maintenance of the best management practices (BMPs) described herein. Signature Date D-4 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Certification Preparer (Engineer): Ed Mandich Title Project Manager PE Registration # 59089 Company Hunsaker and Associates Irvine, Inc. Address 3 Hughes, Irvine, CA 92618 Email emandich@hunsaker.com Telephone # (949) 583-1010 I hereby certify that this Water Quality Management Plan is in compliance with, and meets the requirements set forth in, Order No. R8-2009-0030/NPDES No. CAS618030, of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board. Preparer Signature Date Place Stamp Here D-5 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Table of Contents Contents Page No. Section I Discretionary Permit(s) and Water Quality Conditions ......................................... 1 Section II Project Description ......................................................................................... 2 II.1 Project Description ................................................................................................2 II.2 Potential Stormwater Pollutants ..............................................................................4 II.3 Hydrologic Conditions of Concern ........................................................................5 II.4 Post Development Drainage Characteristics ...........................................................7 II.5 Property Ownership/Management .........................................................................7 Section III Site Description ............................................................................................. 8 III.1 Physical Setting .....................................................................................................8 III.2 Site Characteristics ...............................................................................................9 III.3 Watershed Description ....................................................................................... 10 Section IV Best Management Practices (BMPs)................................................................. 11 IV. 1 Project Performance Criteria .............................................................................. 11 IV.2 Site Design and Drainage Plan ........................................................................... 12 IV.3 LID BMP Selection and Project Conformance Analysis ......................................... 13 IV.4 Alternative Compliance Plan (If Applicable) ......................................................... 21 Section V Inspection/Maintenance Responsibility for BMPs ............................................... 21 Section VI Site Plan and Drainage Plan .......................................................................... 27 Section VII Educational Materials ................................................................................... 28 Attachments Attachment A .... ................................................................................ Educational Materials Attachment B .... .............................................................................................. O & M Plan Attachment C .... ..................................................................... BMP Calculations and Details Attachment D .... ................................................... WQMP Notice of Transfer of Responsibility Attachment E .... .......................................................................... Geotechnical Investigation D-6 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Section I Page 1 Section I Discretionary Permit(s) and Water Quality Conditions The project’s discretionary permit and water quality information are provided in the following: Project Infomation Permit/Application No. (If applicable) TBD Grading or Building Permit No. (If applicable) N/A Address of Project Site (or Tract Map and Lot Number if no address and APN) Address: 1700 South Harbor Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92802 APN: 082-271-09, 082-271-10 Water Quality Conditions of Approval or Issuance Water Quality Conditions of Approval or Issuance applied to this project. (Please list verbatim) Per City of Anaheim Municipal Code Title 10, Chapter 09, Section 030.010, project is subject to the requirements of New Development and Significant Redevelopment projects to control urban runoff, in accordance County of Orange Drainage Area Management Plan. There are currently no site-specific water quality conditions available for this project. Once the conditions have been provided by the City, they will be incorporated into this WQMP. Conceptual WQMP Was a Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan previously approved for this project? No. A conceptual WQMP was not previously approved for this project. Watershed-Based Plan Conditions Provide applicable conditions from watershed - based plans including WIHMPs and TMDLS. The project is located within the Anaheim Bay – Huntington Harbour Watershed. Currently, there is no approved WIHMP for the watershed. Although the project’s receiving waters are considered impaired under Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act, there are currently no TMDL’s established for the project’s receiving waters. D-7 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Section II Page 2 Section II Project Description II.1 Project Description Description of Proposed Project Development Category (Verbatim from WQMP): Priority Project, Category 1 – New development projects that create 10,000 square feet or more of impervious surface. This category includes commercial, industrial, residential housing subdivisions, mixed-use, and public projects on private or public property that falls under the planning and building authority or the Permittees. Priority Project, Category 3 – Restaurants where the land area of development is 5,000 square feet or more including parking area. This category is defined as facilities that sell prepared foods and drinks for consumption, including stationary lunch counters and refreshments stands selling prepared foods and drinks for immediate consumption (SIC Code 5812). Parking lots of 5,000 square feet or more including associated drive aisle, and potentially exposed to urban stormwater runoff. A parking lot is defined as a land area or facility for the temporary parking or storage of motor vehicles used personally, for business or for commerce. Project Area (ft2): 383,328 ft2 (8.8 AC) Number of Dwelling Units: 580 Units SIC Code: 5812, 7011 and miscellaneous retail use Project Area Pervious Impervious Area (acres or sq ft) Percentage Area (acres or sq ft) Percentage Pre-Project Conditions 1.06 18% 7.74 82% Post-Project Conditions 1.14 13% 7.66 87% Drainage Patterns/Connections In the pre-development condition, runoff from a small portion of the northern project site is conveyed northerly as sheet flow prior to discharging to the existing gutter and storm drain system in Disney Way. Runoff is then conveyed westerly to the existing storm drain system in South Harbor Boulevard. Runoff from the remaining portions of the site is conveyed southerly and westerly prior to discharging to the existing storm drain system in South Harbor Boulevard. All runoff is then conveyed southerly to Katella Avenue and then westerly prior to discharging to the Anaheim-Barber City Channel (County Facility No. C03), which is tributary to the Bolsa Chica Channel (County Facility No. C02), Anaheim Bay and the Pacific Ocean. D-8 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Section II Page 3 Narrative Project Description: The proposed project, “1700 South Harbor Boulevard Redevelopment” (The Project), consists of an 8.8-acre a rectangular-shaped parcel of land located just southeast of the intersection of South Harbor Boulevard and Disney Way, in the City of Anaheim, California. Specifically, the project site consists of 1700 South Harbor Boulevard and is bound to the north by Disney Way and existing hotel resorts beyond; to the east by The Shops at Anaheim Garden Walk mall and South Clementine Street beyond; to the south by Katella Avenue and existing hotel resorts beyond; and to the west by South Harbor Boulevard and Disney California Adventure theme park beyond. Two entrances into the project site will be provided via South Harbor Boulevard to the west. The project proposes a multi-level, mixed-use development consisting of commercial use – retail, restaurants and hotel uses. Additional improvements include drive aisles (main entry drive and southerly service road), courtyard improvements, landscaping, walkways, curb, gutter and storm drain improvements, and related backbone infrastructure improvements (wet and dry utilities). Parking will primarily be provided via a ground level parking structure located within the eastern portion of the project site. Approximately 877 spaces are proposed for hotel guests and retail patrons. Project parking is consistent with the City’s parking requirements. Maximum height for Lot 1 towers is 80’. Maximum height for Lot 2 towers is 350’. Proposed open space/landscaping will consist of parkway and setback area landscaping, and planters located throughout the project site. Total landscaping is anticipated to consist of approximately 13% of the project site, or 1.14 acres. Paved and other impervious areas of the site include the project’s walkways, drive aisles, hotel towers and other building or paved structure areas. Total impervious area is anticipated to consist of approximately 87% of the project site, or 7.66 acres. Proposed hotel amenities include a new AAA Four Diamond Luxury Hotel with 580 hotel rooms, 50,000 square feet of meeting space, a central pool deck/amenity area and 25,600 square feet of retail space. Additional improvements include covered loading areas to support the project’s retail/commercial, food services and hotel components. Activities typical of hotel/resort and retail/commercial developments can be anticipated for the project. These are anticipated to include day to day D-9 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Section II Page 4 activities such as recreation, lounging, dining, working and other activities typical of mixed-use facilities. Typical wastes from restaurant and commercial uses are anticipated to be generated daily from the project. These include food wastes, paper products and recyclable materials. Designated trash enclosure areas will be provided onsite guest uses. The enclosures shall be covered and precluded from wind, rain, storm water run-on and designed to prevent discharge of any leaks or spills from the enclosure area. Trash shall be removed on a weekly basis, or as needed, by the local waste management company. Locations of the enclosures have not been determined at this time. All proposed improvements are shown in the WQMP Site Plan in Section VI of this WQMP. Areas currently not identified will be provided as project planning progresses. II.2 Potential Stormwater Pollutants Table 2.1, Anticipated and Potential Pollutants Generated by Land Use Type from the Technical Guidance Document (December 2013) lists the following Pollutants of Concern (POC’s) associated with the project: Pollutants of Concern Pollutant E=Expected to be of concern N=Not Expected to be of concern Additional Information and Comments Suspended-Solid/ Sediment E Potential sources of sediment include proposed planters and parkway landscaping areas. Nutrients E Potential sources of nutrients include fertilizers, sediment and trash/debris. Heavy Metals E Potential sources include vehicles and automotive fluids. Pathogens (Bacteria/Virus) E Potential sources of pathogens include pets, food wastes and landscaping areas. Pesticides E Potential sources of pesticides include landscaping areas. Oil and Grease E Potential source of oil and grease is parked vehicles. Toxic Organic Compounds E Potential sources include automobiles and other motor vehicles and streets. Trash and Debris E Potential sources include common litter and trash cans from guests and facility users. D-10 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Section II Page 5 II.3 Hydrologic Conditions of Concern The purpose of this section is to identify any hydrologic conditions of concern (HCOC) with respect to downstream flooding, erosion potential of natural channels downstream, impacts of increased flows on natural habitat, etc. As specified in Section 2.3.3 of the 2013 Model WQMP, projects must identify and mitigate any HCOCs. A HCOC is a combination of upland hydrologic conditions and stream biological and physical conditions that presents a condition of concern for physical and/or biological degradation of streams. In the North Orange County permit area, HCOCs are considered to exist if any streams located downstream from the project are determined to be potentially susceptible to hydromodification impacts and either of the following conditions exists: • Post-development runoff volume for the 2-yr, 24-hr storm exceeds the pre-development runoff volume for the 2-yr, 24-hr storm by more than 5 percent. or • Time of concentration (Tc) of post-development runoff for the 2-yr, 24-hr storm event is less than the time of concentration of the pre-development condition for the 2-yr, 24-hr storm event by more than 5 percent. If these conditions do not exist or streams are not potentially susceptible to hydromodification impacts, an HCOC does not exist and hydromodification does not need to be considered further. In the North Orange County permit area, downstream channels are considered not susceptible to hydromodification, and therefore do not have the potential for a HCOC, if all downstream conveyance channels that will receive runoff from the project are engineered, hardened, and regularly maintained to ensure design flow capacity, and no sensitive habitat areas will be affected. Is the proposed project potentially susceptible to hydromodification impacts? No – Show map Yes - Describe applicable hydrology conditions of concern below. Based on County’s current hydromodification susceptibility map (provided on the following page), the project is not subject to the specific 2-year criteria noted above, as the project discharges to fully improved storm drain systems that are not susceptible to hydromodification impacts. D-11 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Section II Page 6 Source: OC Land Records GIS PROJECT SITE HCOC AREA D-12 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Section II Page 7 II.4 Post Development Drainage Characteristics In general, post-development drainage area and flow direction will be consistent with pre-project conditions. Runoff from the rooftops of each tower and development area will be conveyed to area drains and conveyed downward to the proposed storm drain system. Runoff from the northern project area will be conveyed north to the existing storm drain system in Disney Way via the project’s proposed storm drain system. Runoff from the remaining portions of the site will be conveyed westerly via proposed storm drain improvements prior to discharging to the existing storm drain system in South Harbor Boulevard. All runoff is then conveyed southerly and westerly to the Anaheim-Barber City Channel, as in pre-project conditions. Low Impact Development To satisfy the project requirements for Low Impact Development (LID) and addressing runoff pollutants of concern, the project proposes to retain water quality flows (non-storm water flows and the Design Capture Volume) from each of the project’s onsite Drainage Management Areas (DMAs). Runoff generated from roof areas as well as the project’s other exposed areas (courtyards, drive aisles, walkways, etc.) will be conveyed to subsurface detention facilities (oversized pipe or vaults) located in the northern-central, western-central and southwestern areas of the project site for storage prior to discharging to proprietary biotreatment units for pre-treatment and an infiltration well for infiltration (DMAs 1, 2 and 3). Runoff generated from the remaining project areas adjacent to Disney Way and South Harbor Boulevard (parkway area) will be conveyed to proposed and existing landscaping areas for filtration, incidental infiltration and evapotranspiration to address potential runoff pollutants (DMA 4). II.5 Property Ownership/Management The property owner, Good Hope International, shall assume all BMP maintenance and inspection responsibilities for the project site until all site responsibilities have been transferred to the Property Owners’ Association (POA). Inspection and maintenance activities are provided in Section V of this WQMP. D-13 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Section III Page 8 Section III Site Description III.1 Physical Setting General descriptions of the project area are provided below: Name of Planned Community/Planning Area (if applicable) Community Name: To be determined Planning Area: Disneyland Resort Specific Plan 92-1 Location/Address 1700 South Harbor Boulevard, City of Anaheim, California. Project Area Description The proposed project is located just southeast of the intersection of Disney Way and South Harbor Boulevard, within District A (Development Area 5) of the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan. The site is bound to north by Disney Way and hotel resorts beyond; to the east by The Shops at Anaheim Garden Walk mall and South Clementine Street beyond; to the south by Katella Avenue and existing hotel resorts beyond; and to the west by South Harbor Boulevard and Disney California Adventure theme park beyond. The pre-project site consists of a 300-room hotel and associated retail space known as the Anaheim Plaza Hotel. Surrounding land uses consist of the Anaheim Garden Walk (a regional retail center with shops, restaurants and entertainment venues) to the east, hospitality to the north and south and theme park to the west. General Plan Land Use Designation Existing: Specific Plan 92-1 Proposed: Specific Plan 92-1 Zoning Existing: Disneyland Resort Proposed: Disneyland Resort Acreage of Project Site 8.8 acres Predominant Soil Type Based on the County’s most recent data, subsurface soils consist primary of HSG Type B soils, with Type A soils within a small portion of the northern project area. D-14 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Section III Page 9 III.2 Site Characteristics The following table summarizes general characteristics of the project site: Precipitation Zone 0.85 in. Topography In general, the subject site is relatively flat and gently slopes to the southwest. Onsite elevations range from 138.2 feet above mean sea level (MSL) in the northeast to approximately 134.0 feet above MSL to the southwest. Drainage Patterns/Connections In the pre-development condition, runoff from a small portion of the northern project site is conveyed northerly as sheet flow prior to discharging to the existing gutter and storm drain system in Disney Way. Runoff is then conveyed westerly to the existing storm drain system in South Harbor Boulevard. Runoff from the remaining portions of the site is conveyed southerly and westerly prior to discharging to the existing storm drain system in South Harbor Boulevard. All runoff is then conveyed southerly to Katella Avenue and then westerly prior to discharging to the Anaheim-Barber City Channel (County Facility No. C03), which is tributary to the Bolsa Chica Channel (County Facility No. C02), Anaheim Bay and the Pacific Ocean. Soil Type, Geology, and Infiltration Properties The site is situated within the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province of California, more specifically at the eastern boundary of the Los Angeles Sedimentary Basin. The Los Angeles Basin is a northwest-plunging synclinal sedimentary deposit that is bound near the subject site by the broadly uplifted coastal mesa of Newport Beach. The local Santa Ana River System deeply incised the hills to the northeast of the subject site and deposited alluvial sediments in the area of the subject site. The river deposited widely dispersed sheet deposits prior to construction of the upstream Prado Dam and channelization. A channelized portion of the Santa Ana River passes east of the site, trending roughly south. The primary geologic units underlying the site are the Quaternary fan and alluvial deposits, which generally consist of layered sandy silts, sand and silty sand with stiff clays. These soils are considered as HSG A and B soils, which are favorable for infiltration. Hydrogeologic (Groundwater) Conditions Based on Figure XVI-2d of the TGD and data obtained from geotechnical investigations conducted in adjacent areas, groundwater is anticipated to be greater than 50’ below existing surface. Geotechnical Conditions (relevant to infiltration) Based on the project’s geotechnical information and available regional soils data, infiltration of runoff is feasible for the project. Off-Site Drainage The project does not receive offsite run-on from adjacent properties. Utility and Infrastructure Information Wet and dry utilities are proposed for the project and will connect to existing facilities located in South Harbor Boulevard. D-15 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Section III Page 10 III.3 Watershed Description The following table includes descriptions of the project’s receiving waters: Receiving Waters Anaheim-Barber City Channel, Bolsa Chica Channel, Anaheim Bay, Pacific Ocean. 303(d) Listed Impairments Bolsa Chica Channel – Ammonia, Indicator Bacteria, pH Anaheim Bay – Sediment Toxicity, PCBs, Nickel, Dieldrin Applicable TMDLs TMDLs for the project’s receiving waters are currently under development. As such, there are currently no established TMDLs for the project’s 303(d) List pollutant. Pollutants of Concern for the Project Pollutants of Concern: Suspended Solids/Sediment, Nutrients, Heavy Metals, Pathogens, Pesticides, Oil and Grease, Toxic Organic Compounds, Trash and Debris. Primary Pollutants of Concern: Pathogens, Heavy Metals, Pesticides, Toxic Organic Compounds Environmentally Sensitive and Special Biological Significant Areas There are no Areas of Special Biological Significance (ASBS) or ESA’s within the project site. D-16 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Section IV Page 11 Section IV Best Management Practices (BMPs) IV. 1 Project Performance Criteria Project Performance Criteria (NOC Permit Area only) Is there an approved WIHMP or equivalent for the project area that includes more stringent LID feasibility criteria or if there are opportunities identified for implementing LID on regional or sub-regional basis? YES NO If yes, describe WIHMP feasibility criteria or regional/sub-regional LID opportunities. A WIHMP has not been approved for the watershed. If HCOC exists, list applicable hydromodification control performance criteria Based on the County’s most recent HCOC Susceptibility Map, HCOC do not exist for the project (Refer to Section II.3). List applicable LID performance criteria (Section 7.II-2.4.3 from MWQMP) The applicable LID performance criteria are as follows (the project’s selected LID performance criteria is provided in bold below): • Retain, onsite (infiltrate, harvest and use, or evapotranspire) stormwater runoff as feasible up to the Design Capture Volume, and • Recover (i.e.) drawdown the storage volume as soon as possible after a storm event, and, if necessary • Biotreat, onsite, additional runoff, as feasible, up to 80 percent average annual capture efficiency, and, if necessary • Retain or biotreat, in a regional facility, the remaining runoff up to 80 percent average annual capture efficiency, and, if necessary • Fulfill alternative compliance obligations for runoff volume not retained or biotreated up to 80 percent average annual capture efficiency using treatment controls or other alternative approaches. List applicable LID performance criteria (Section 7.II-2.4.3 from MWQMP) N/A. Project proposes the use of LID BMPs to address the project’s design capture volume. List applicable treatment control BMP performance criteria (Section 7.II-3.2.2 from MWQMP) Project’s LID DCV has been determined using the following equation: DCV = C x D x A x 43560 sf/ac x 1ft/12in, where: DCV = design storm capture volume, cu-ft = 20,364 cu-ft C = runoff coefficient = (0.75 x imp + 0.15) = 0.75 Imp = impervious fraction of drainage area (ranges from 0 to 1) = 0.80 D = storm depth (inches) = 0.85” A = tributary area (acres) = 8.8 acres* *Property limits is 8.8 acres. For DCV based on DMA limits, see Section IV. 2.2. D-17 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Section IV Page 12 IV.2 Site Design and Drainage Plan The primary goal of site design principles and techniques is to reduce land development impacts on water quality and downstream hydrologic conditions. Benefits of site design include reductions in the size of downstream BMPs, conveyance systems, pollutant loading and hydromodification impacts. IV.2.1 Site Design BMPs The following section describes the site design BMPs that have been incorporated into this project. Minimize Impervious Area The project will minimize impervious area by providing all multi-level structures and incorporating landscaping within the project’s exposed areas, thereby reducing runoff generated during rain events. Maximize Natural Infiltration Capacity The project will take advantage of the unconsolidated sand and gravel soils onsite and employ the use of Infiltration Wells to infiltrate the project’s DCV. Preserve Existing Drainage Patterns and Time of Concentration The proposed drainage pattern is consistent with existing drainage patterns, with all flows conveyed south Anaheim-Barber City Channel. Time of concentration for the project’s runoff is anticipated to increase (longer duration to reach peak runoff flow) slightly slight due to the longer routing for the developed condition (developed condition would require lateral flow and vertical flow). Disconnect Impervious Areas Landscaping will be provided adjacent to walkways and other onsite areas to break up the project’s impervious areas. Protect Existing Vegetation and Sensitive Areas, and Revegetate Disturbed Areas The pre-project site consists of a hotel resort and retail shops. There are no vegetation and sensitive areas to preserve. All disturbed areas will be paved or landscaped. Xeriscape Landscaping Native and/or tolerant landscaping will be incorporated into the site design consistent with City guidelines. IV.2.2 Drainage Management Areas Per the TGD, the project site has been divided into Drainage Management Areas (DMAs) to be utilized for defining drainage areas tributary to the project’s BMPs. DMA limits have been delineated based on the tributary drainage area for each BMP. The design capture volume (DCV) and design flow rate utilizing the “Simple Method” and the “Capture Efficiency Method” described in the TGD Section III.3.1 and III.3.3 are provided below. Locations of DMAs and associated treatment BMPs are provided on the exhibits in Section VI. Additional calculations and TGD Worksheets are provided in Attachment C of this WQMP. D-18 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Section IV Page 13 DMA Tributary Drainage Area (Ac.) Imp. C-value Design Storm Depth (in.) Simple Method DCV (cu-ft) Tc (min) Intensity (in/hr) QBMP (cfs) 1 1.07 1.0 0.90 0.85 2,972 7.5 0.24 0.23 2 3.69 0.90 0.825 0.85 9,393 10 0.225 0.68 3 3.39 0.80 0.75 0.85 7,845 10 0.225 0.57 4 1.08 0.37 0.428 0.85 1,426 5 0.26 0.12 IV.3 LID BMP Selection and Project Conformance Analysis Per the 4th Term MS4 Storm Water Permit (Order No. R8-2009-0030, as amended by Order No. R8- 2010-0062), Low Impact Development (LID) BMPs must be incorporated into design features and source controls to reduce project related storm water pollutants. The incorporation of LID BMPs into project design requires evaluation of LID measures in the following BMP hierarchy: infiltration, evapotranspiration, harvest/reuse and biotreatment. The project proposes the use of infiltration BMPs to address the projects runoff pollutants. IV.3.1 Hydrologic Source Controls (HSCs) Hydrologic source controls (HSCs) can be considered to be an integration of site design practices and LID BMPs. The goal of HSCs is to reduce runoff volume for a given drainage area without reducing the site’s true impervious area. Name Included? Localized on-lot infiltration Impervious area dispersion (e.g. roof top disconnection) Street trees (canopy interception) Residential rain barrels (not actively managed) Green roofs/Brown roofs Blue roofs Impervious area reduction (e.g. permeable pavers, site design) The following HSC BMP has been selected for use on this project: HSC-2 Impervious Area Dispersion Runoff from walkways will be directed to adjacent landscaping areas where feasible to allow for some retention of runoff (via infiltration and evapotranspiration), thus providing some volume reduction of the project’s DCV. HSC-3 Street Trees Trees will be planted within courtyards, planters and other onsite areas to intercept rainfall and provide some volume reduction benefits for the project. D-19 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Section IV Page 14 Summary of the project’s HSC BMP credits for the proposed project is provided in the following table: DMA BMP System DCV (ft3) HSC System Ratio DHSC 4 HSC-2 Impervious Area Dispersion 1,426 0.68 acres landscaping to 0.40 acres impervious 1.7:1 1.0” IV.3.2 Infiltration BMPs Infiltration BMPs are LID BMPs that capture, store and infiltrate storm water runoff. These BMPs are engineered to store a specified volume of water and have no design surface discharge (underdrain or outlet structure) until this volume is exceeded. Examples of infiltration BMPs include infiltration trenches, bioretention without underdrains, Infiltration Wells, permeable pavement, and underground infiltration galleries. Based to the project’s predominant soil type (Type “A”), the project proposes the use of infiltration wells to address pollutants from project-related runoff. Supporting calculations are provided in Attachment C of this WQMP. Name Included? Bioretention without underdrains Rain gardens Porous landscaping Infiltration planters Retention swales Infiltration trenches Infiltration basins Infiltration Wells Subsurface infiltration galleries French drains Permeable asphalt Permeable concrete Permeable concrete pavers Other: D-20 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Section IV Page 15 BMP Sizing The proposed BMPs will be sized accordingly its tributary drainage area, as provided in the following table: INFILTRATION BMP SUMMARY DMA BMP System DCV Storage System Infiltration Well System1 1 Subsurface Detention, Pre-treatment via Proprietary Filtration (or biofiltration), INF-5 Infiltration Well 2,972 100’x12’x2.5’ One (1) 4’ well 2 9,393 80’x18’x6.75’ Two (2) 4’ well 3 7,845 100’x12’x6.75’ Two (2) – 4’ well Infiltration well assumed to consist of 40’ shaft with 40’ infiltration depth and design infiltration rate of 2.5’/hr (per infiltration tests conducted for developments within project area. 48-hr drawdown for 4’ and 5’ shafts are 5,024 ft3 and 6,280 ft3, respectively. The storage volumes provided for the proposed Infiltration Well systems will consist of an underground storage system (Vault) capable of detaining the DMA’s DCV, which will then receive pre-treatment via proprietary filtration (or biofiltration) units prior to discharging to the infiltration well system. IV.3.3 Evapotranspiration, Rainwater Harvesting BMPs Name Included? EVAPOTRANSPIRATION All HSCs; See Section IV.3.1 Surface-based infiltration BMPs Biotreatment BMPs HARVEST & REUSE/ RAINWATER HARVESTING Above-ground cisterns and basins Underground detention Other: Evapotranspiration Evapotranspiration BMPs are a class of retention BMPs that discharges stored volume predominately to ET, through some infiltration may occur. ET includes both evaporation and transpiration, and ET BMPs may incorporate one or more of these processes. BMPs must be designed to achieve the maximum feasible ET, where required to demonstrate that the maximum amount of water has been retained on-site. Since ET is not the sole process in the proposed BMPs, specific design and sizing criteria have not been developed for ET-based BMPs. Harvest and Reuse Harvest and Reuse (aka. Rainwater Harvesting) BMPs are LID BMPs that capture and store storm water runoff for later use. These BMPs are engineered to store a specified volume of water and have no design surface discharge until this volume is exceeded. Harvest and use BMPs include both above-ground and D-21 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Section IV Page 16 below-ground cisterns. Examples of uses for harvested water include irrigation, toilet and urinal flushing, vehicle washing, evaporative cooling, industrial processes and other non-potable uses. The project does not propose the use of harvesting BMPs, as the project has selected the use of infiltration BMPs to meet the project’s onsite LID requirements. IV.3.4 Biotreatment BMPs Biotreatment BMPs are a class of structural LID BMPs that treat suspended solids and dissolved pollutants in storm water using mechanisms characteristic of biologically active systems. These BMPs are considered treat and release facilities and include treatment mechanisms that employ soil microbes and plants. Additional benefits of these BMPs may include aesthetic enjoyment, recreational use, wildlife habitat and reduction in storm water volume. The project does not propose the use of biotreatment BMPs, as the project has selected the use of infiltration BMPs to meet the project’s onsite LID requirements. BIOTREATMENT ID Name Included? BIO-1 Bioretention with underdrains Stormwater planter boxes with underdrains Rain gardens with underdrains BIO-5 Constructed wetlands BIO-2 Vegetated swales BIO-3 Vegetated filter strips BIO-7 Proprietary vegetated biotreatment systems BIO-4 Wet extended detention basin BIO-6 Dry extended detention basins IV.3.5 Hydromodification Control BMPs Not applicable. Per discussion in Section II.3 of this WQMP, the project does not have hydrologic conditions of concern. IV.3.6 Regional/Sub-Regional LID BMPs Not applicable. The project is able to meet LID requirements onsite. IV.3.7 Treatment Control BMPs Not applicable. The project is able to meet LID requirements onsite. D-22 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Section IV Page 17 IV.3.8 Non-structural Source Control BMPs The Table below indicates all Non-Structural Source Control BMPs to be utilized in the project. Discussions of the selected BMPs are provided in the BMP Inspection and Maintenance Responsibility Matrix provided in Section V of this WQMP. Non-Structural Source Control BMPs Identifier Name Check One If not applicable, state brief reason Included Not Applicable N1 Education for Property Owners, Tenants and Occupants N2 Activity Restrictions N3 Common Area Landscape Management N4 BMP Maintenance N5 Title 22 CCR Compliance (How development will comply) Proposed facility will not generate waste subject to Title 22 CCR Compliance. N6 Local Industrial Permit Compliance Project is not industrial. N7 Spill Contingency Plan Proposed facilities will not generate waste or store materials subject to the requirements of Chapter 6.95 of the CA Health and Safety Code. N8 Underground Storage Tank Compliance None proposed. N9 Hazardous Materials Disclosure Compliance Proposed project will not store or generate hazardous materials subject to agency requirements. N10 Uniform Fire Code Implementation Proposed facility does not propose to store toxic or highly toxic compressed gases. N11 Common Area Litter Control N12 Employee Training N13 Housekeeping of Loading Docks D-23 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Section IV Page 18 Non-Structural Source Control BMPs Identifier Name Check One If not applicable, state brief reason Included Not Applicable N14 Common Area Catch Basin Inspection N15 Street Sweeping Private Streets and Parking Lots N16 Retail Gasoline Outlets Not in project scope. A discussion of each selected Non-Structural Source Control BMP is provided in the following section. The implementation of each BMP is described in the Inspection and Maintenance Responsibility Matrix provided in Section V of this WQMP as well as the Operation and Maintenance Plan provided in Attachment B. N1 Education for Property Owners, Tenants and Occupants – Educational materials will be provided to commercial tenants by owner and periodically thereafter by the POA to inform them of their potential impacts to downstream water quality. Materials include those described in Section VII of this WQMP and provided in the Final WQMP. N2 Activity Restrictions – Activity restrictions to minimize potential impacts to water quality and with the purpose of protecting water quality will be prescribed lease agreements (retail tenants) or other equally effective measure. N3 Common Area Landscape Management – Maintenance activities for landscape areas shall be consistent with City, County and manufacturer guidelines for fertilizer and pesticide use (OC DAMP Section 5.5). Maintenance includes trimming, weeding and debris removal and vegetation planting and replacement. Stockpiled materials during maintenance activities shall be placed away from drain inlets and runoff conveyance devices. Wastes shall be properly disposed of or recycled. N4 BMP Maintenance – Responsibility for implementation, inspection and maintenance of all BMPs (structural and non-structural) shall be consistent with the BMP Inspection and Maintenance Responsibilities Matrix provided in Section V of this WQMP, with documented records of inspections and maintenance activities completed. N11 Common Area Litter Control – Litter control onsite will include the use of litter patrols, violation reporting and clean up during landscaping maintenance activities and as needed to ensure good housekeeping of the project’s common areas. N12 Employee Training – All employees, contractors and subcontractors of the resort and POA shall be trained on the proper use and staging of landscaping and other materials with the potential to impact runoff and proper clean up of spills and materials. N13 Housekeeping of Loading Docks – The proposed loading docks and loading areas shall be inspected with use, with area kept in an orderly manner, following good housekeeping practices. Pills, debris and other waste materials shall be cleaned up and property disposed. Area shall be precluded from run-on and runoff as necessary. D-24 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Section IV Page 19 N14 Common Area Catch Basin – As required by the TGD, at least 80% of the project’s private drainage facilities shall be inspected, cleaned/maintained annually, with 100% of facilities inspected and maintained within a two-year period. Cleaning should take place in the late summer/early fall, prior to the start of the wet season. Records shall be kept to document annual compliance. N15 Street Sweeping Private Streets and Parking Lots – The project’s private drives and parking areas shall be swept, at minimum, on a weekly basis. IV.3.9 Structural Source Control BMPs The Table below indicates all Structural Source Control BMPs to be utilized in the project. Discussions of the selected BMPs are provided in text following the table below and in the BMP Inspection and Maintenance Responsibility Matrix provided in Section V of this WQMP. Structural Source Control BMPs Identifier Name Check One If not applicable, state brief reason Included Not Applicable S1 Provide storm drain system stenciling and signage S2 Design and construct outdoor material storage areas to reduce pollution introduction No outdoor material storage areas proposed for project use. S3 Design and construct trash and waste storage areas to reduce pollution introduction S4 Use efficient irrigation systems & landscape design, water conservation, smart controllers, and source control S5 Protect slopes and channels and provide energy dissipation Not applicable. No large slopes (hillside landscaping) proposed. Incorporate requirements applicable to individual priority project categories (from SDRWQCB NPDES Permit) Not applicable. Project resides in SARWQCB. S6 Dock areas None proposed. S7 Maintenance bays None proposed. S8 Vehicle wash areas None proposed. S9 Outdoor processing areas None proposed. S10 Equipment wash areas None proposed. D-25 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Section IV Page 20 Structural Source Control BMPs Identifier Name Check One If not applicable, state brief reason Included Not Applicable S11 Fueling areas None proposed. S12 Hillside landscaping None proposed. S13 Wash water control for food preparation areas S14 Community car wash racks None proposed. A discussion of each selected Structural Source Control BMP is provided in the following section. The implementation of each BMP and the responsible party are described in the Inspection and Maintenance Responsibility Matrix provided in Section V of this WQMP as well as the Operation and Maintenance Plan provided in Attachment B. S1 Storm Drain Stenciling – Storm drain stencils or signage prohibiting dumping and discharge of materials (“No Dumping – Drains to Ocean”) shall be provided adjacent to each of the project’s proposed inlets. The stencils shall be inspected and restenciled as needed to maintain legibility. S3 Designated Trash Enclosure – Designated trash enclosure areas shall be covered and designed to preclude trash and pad area from run-on, run-off and wind. Any drains within area shall be connected to the sanitary sewer system, with proper approval from the sewer company. Site shall be inspected with use to ensure all materials are disposed of properly. S4 (SD-10, SD-12) Use Efficient Irrigation Systems and Landscape Design – In conjunction with routine landscaping maintenance activities, inspect irrigation for signs of leaks, overspray and repair or adjust accordingly. Adjust system cycle to accommodate seasonal fluctuations in water demand and temperatures. Ensure use of native or drought tolerant/non-invasive plant species to minimize water consumption. S6 Dock Areas – Loading areas shall be kept in an orderly manner and designed to prevent the discharge of runoff. Area shall be inspected with use and cleaned up as soon as possible following any spills or waste accumulation. If wash-down of the area is employed, all wash water shall be prevented from entering the storm drain system. S13 Wash Water Control for Food Preparation Areas – All proposed food service facilities will be equipped with indoor sinks and contained areas for disposal of wash waters containing food wastes. These facilities shall be connected to the sanitary sewer system. D-26 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Section IV Page 21 IV.4 Alternative Compliance Plan (If Applicable) IV.4.1 Water Quality Credits The project does not propose the use of water quality credits as it is able to meet LID requirements onsite. Description of Proposed Project Project Types that Qualify for Water Quality Credits (Select all that apply): Redevelopment projects that reduce the overall impervious footprint of the project site. Brownfield redevelopment, meaning redevelopment, expansion, or reuse of real property which may be complicated by the presence or potential presence of hazardous substances, pollutants or contaminants, and which have the potential to contribute to adverse ground or surface WQ if not redeveloped. Higher density development projects which include two distinct categories (credits can only be taken for one category): those with more than seven units per acre of development (lower credit allowance); vertical density developments, for example, those with a Floor to Area Ratio (FAR) of 2 or those having more than 18 units per acre (greater credit allowance). Mixed use development, such as a combination of residential, commercial, industrial, office, institutional, or other land uses which incorporate design principles that can demonstrate environmental benefits that would not be realized through single use projects (e.g. reduced vehicle trip traffic with the potential to reduce sources of water or air pollution). Transit-oriented developments, such as a mixed use residential or commercial area designed to maximize access to public transportation; similar to above criterion, but where the development center is within one half mile of a mass transit center (e.g. bus, rail, light rail or commuter train station). Such projects would not be able to take credit for both categories, but may have greater credit assigned Redevelopment projects in an established historic district, historic preservation area, or similar significant city area including core City Center areas (to be defined through mapping). Developments with dedication of undeveloped portions to parks, preservation areas and other pervious uses. Developments in a city center area. Developments in historic districts or historic preservation areas. Live-work developments, a variety of developments designed to support residential and vocational needs together – similar to criteria to mixed use development; would not be able to take credit for both categories. In-fill projects, the conversion of empty lots and other underused spaces into more beneficially used spaces, such as residential or commercial areas. Calculation of Water Quality Credits (if applicable) Not applicable to project. IV.4.2 Alternative Compliance Plan Information Not applicable. The project is able to meet LID BMP requirements onsite to address pollutants in project related storm water runoff. D-27 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Section V Page 22 Section V Inspection/Maintenance Responsibility for BMPs Refer to the BMP inspection and maintenance responsibility matrix below. Inspection and maintenance records must be kept for a minimum of five years for inspection by the regulatory agencies. A Homeowners’ association (HOA) shall be established for this project. The HOA shall be responsible the long-term funding, inspection and maintenance of all BMPs prescribed in this WQMP. Until the project’s HOA has been established, all responsibilities pertaining to this WQMP shall be that of the project developer, SIC Acquisitions LLC. Contact for the interim responsible party is as follows: Responsible Party: Good Hope International Contact Name: Jeffrey Anglada Address: 2400 E. Katella Avenue, Suite 800 Anaheim, CA 92806 Phone: (310) 498-9004 Email: jeffreya@wincomegroup.com Inspection and maintenance activities, frequencies and responsibilities for the project’s selected BMPs are provided in the following BMP matrix. Inspection and maintenance records must be kept for a minimum of five years for inspection by the regulatory agencies. BMP INSPECTION & MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITIES MATRIX BMP Inspection/ Maintenance Activities Required Minimum Frequency Reponsible Party(s) HYDROLOGIC SOURCE CONTROL BMPs HSC-2 Impervious Area Dispersion Inspect for standing water and that water infiltrates into underlying soil or evaporates completely. After significant storm events and monthly with landscaping Owner/POA HSC-3 Street Trees Inspect for overall plant health. Trim vegetation as needed. Replace trees as needed. Monthly with landscaping Owner/POA D-28 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Section V Page 23 BMP INSPECTION & MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITIES MATRIX BMP Inspection/ Maintenance Activities Required Minimum Frequency Reponsible Party(s) INFILTRATION BMPs INF-5 Infiltration Well Inspect for standing water inside Infiltration Well shaft and that water infiltrates into underlying soil completely. Inspect and remove accumulated sediment and debris in pre-treatment chamber as needed. After significant storm events, semi-annual and as needed. Owner/POA BIOTREATMENT BMPs BIO-7 Proprietary Biotreatment (Modular Wetland System or approved equivalent) Inspect unit for accumulated debris and sediment and plant health; remove trash from screening device and separation chamber; trim vegetation. Remove sediment from pre-chamber, replace pre-filter cartridge media and drain down filter media. Replace wetland media. Annually 20 years Owner/POA NON-STRUCTURAL SOURCE CONTROL BMPs N1 Education for Property Owners, Tenants and Occupants Educational materials will be provided to retail tenants commercial tenants by the owner and thereafter on an annual basis by the POA. Materials shall include those provided in Attachment A of this WQMP and any updated materials. Close of escrow, lease and annually Owner/POA N2 Activity Restrictions The Owner will prescribe activity restrictions to protect surface water quality through lease agreements or other equally effective measure, for the property. Upon takeover of site responsibilities by the POA, the POA shall be responsible for ensuring residents and tenant compliance. Ongoing Owner/POA D-29 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Section V Page 24 BMP INSPECTION & MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITIES MATRIX BMP Inspection/ Maintenance Activities Required Minimum Frequency Reponsible Party(s) N3 Common Area Landscape Management Maintenance shall be consistent with County requirements, plus fertilizer and/or pesticide usages shall be consistent with City, County and manufacturer guidelines for use of fertilizers and pesticides (OC DAMP Section 5.5). Maintenance includes mowing, weeding, and debris removal on a monthly basis. Trimming, replanting and replacement of mulch shall be performed on an as-needed basis. Trimmings, clippings, and other waste shall be properly disposed of off-site in accordance with local regulations. Materials temporarily stockpiled during maintenance activities shall be placed away from water courses and drain inlets. Monthly Owner/POA N4 BMP Maintenance Maintenance of BMPs implemented at the project site shall be performed at the frequency prescribed in this WQMP. Records of inspections and BMP maintenance shall be maintained by the responsible party and documented with the WQMP, and shall be available for review upon request. Ongoing Owner/POA N11 Common Area Litter control Litter patrol, violations investigation, reporting and other litter control activities shall be performed in conjunction with maintenance activities. Littler collection and removal shall be performed on a weekly basis. Ongoing patrols. Weekly (minimum) pick up and removal Owner/POA D-30 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Section V Page 25 BMP INSPECTION & MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITIES MATRIX BMP Inspection/ Maintenance Activities Required Minimum Frequency Reponsible Party(s) N12 Employee Training All employees, contractors and subcontractors of the POA shall receive training regarding the potential impacts of their actions on downstream water quality, proper material use and staging (for landscaping and other materials) and proper clean up material Annually and as needed Owner/POA N13 Housekeeping of Loading Docks The proposed loading docks and loading areas shall be inspected with use, with area kept in an orderly manner, following good housekeeping practices. Pills, debris and other waste materials shall be cleaned up and property disposed. Area shall be precluded from run-on and runoff as necessary. Daily with Use Owner/POA N14 Common Area Catch Basin Inspection Catch basin inlets, area drains, swales, curb-and-gutter systems and other drainage systems shall be inspected prior to October 1st of each year and after large storm events. If necessary, drains shall be cleaned prior to any succeeding rain events. 80% of facilities shall be inspected and cleaned annually, with 100% of facilities inspected and maintained Annually Owner/POA N15 Street Sweeping Private Streets Streets shall be swept on a weekly basis. Weekly Owner/POA STRUCTURAL SOURCE CONTROL BMPs S1 SD-13 Provide storm drain system stencilling and signage Storm drain stencils shall be inspected for legibility, at minimum, once prior to the storm season, no later than October 1st each year. Those determined to be illegible will be re-stenciled as soon as possible. Annually Owner/POA D-31 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Section V Page 26 BMP INSPECTION & MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITIES MATRIX BMP Inspection/ Maintenance Activities Required Minimum Frequency Reponsible Party(s) S3 SD-32 Designated Trash Enclosure Designated trash enclosure areas shall be covered and designed to preclude trash and pad area from run-on, run-off and wind. Any drains within area shall be connected to the sanitary sewer system, with proper approval from the sewer company. Site shall be inspected with use to ensure all materials are disposed of properly. Daily with Use Owner/POA S4 SD-12 Use efficient irrigation systems & landscape design, water conservation, smart controllers, and source control In conjunction with routine maintenance activities, verify that landscape design continues to function properly by adjusting properly to eliminate overspray to hardscape areas, and to verify that irrigation timing and cycle lengths are adjusted in accordance with water demands, given time of year, weather, day or night time temperatures based on system specifications and local climate patterns. Monthly Owner/POA S6 Dock Areas Loading areas shall be kept in an orderly manner and designed to prevent the discharge of runoff. Area shall be inspected with use and cleaned up as soon as possible following any spills or waste accumulation. If wash-down of the area is employed, all wash water shall be prevented from entering the storm drain system. Daily with Use Owner/POA S13 Wash Water Controls for Food Preparation Areas All proposed food service facilities will be equipped with indoor sinks and contained areas for disposal of wash waters containing food wastes. These facilities shall be connected to the sanitary sewer system. Daily with Use Owner/POA D-32 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Section VI Page 27 Section VI Site Plan and Drainage Plan The exhibits provided in this section are to illustrate the post construction BMPs prescribed within this WQMP. Drainage flow information of the proposed project, such as general surface flow lines, concrete or other surface drainage conveyances, and storm drain facilities are also depicted. All structural source control and treatment control BMPs are shown as well. Exhibits • Vicinity Map • Preliminary WQMP Site Plan D-33 PREPARED BY:PREPARED FOR:DRAWN BY: TIH DATE: 01/12/16 W.O.: 4098-1X 2400 E. KATELLA AVENUE, SUITE 800 ANAHEIM, CA 92806 "1700 SOUTH HARBOR BOULEVARD" SOUTHEAST OF DISNEY WAY AND SOUTH HARBOR BOULEVARD CITY OF ANAHEIM, CA(714) 627-2507 D-34 2400 E. KATELLA AVENUE, SUITE 800ANAHEIM, CA 92806 "1700 SOUTH HARBOR BOULEVARD" SOUTHEAST OF DISNEY WAY AND SOUTH HARBOR BOULEVARD CITY OF ANAHEIM, CA PREPARED BY:PREPARED FOR:DRAWN BY: TIH DATE: 01/12/2016 W.O.: 4098-1X PRELIMINARY WQMP SITE PLAN LEGEND ACRE DMA (714) 627-2507 1.07 DMA1 3.69 DMA2 3.39 DMA3 1.08 DMA4 D-35 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Section VII Page 28 Section VII Educational Materials Education Materials Residential Material (http://www.ocwatersheds.com) Check If Applicable Business Material (http://www.ocwatersheds.com) Check If Applicable The Ocean Begins at Your Front Door Tips for the Automotive Industry Tips for Car Wash Fund-raisers Tips for Using Concrete and Mortar Tips for the Home Mechanic Tips for the Food Service Industry Homeowners Guide for Sustainable Water Use Proper Maintenance Practices for Your Business Household Tips Other Material Check If Attached Proper Disposal of Household Hazardous Waste Recycle at Your Local Used Oil Collection Center (North County) Recycle at Your Local Used Oil Collection Center (Central County) Recycle at Your Local Used Oil Collection Center (South County) Tips for Maintaining a Septic Tank System Responsible Pest Control Sewer Spill Tips for the Home Improvement Projects Tips for Horse Care Tips for Landscaping and Gardening Tips for Pet Care Tips for Pool Maintenance Tips for Residential Pool, Landscape and Hardscape Drains Tips for Projects Using Paint D-36 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Attachment Attachment A Educational Materials (Educational materials to be provided in Final WQMP) D-37 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Attachment Attachment B O & M Plan D-38 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Operation and Maintenance Plan Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Plan Water Quality Management Plan for 1700 South Harbor Boulevard City of Anaheim, CA D-39 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Operation and Maintenance Plan BMP Applicable? Yes/No BMP Name and BMP Implementation, Maintenance and Inspection Procedures Implementation, Maintenance, and Inspection Frequency and Schedule Person or Entity with Operation & Maintenance Responsibility Non-Structural Source Control BMPs Yes N1. Education for Property Owners, Tenants and Occupants Educational materials will be provided to commercial tenants by the owner and thereafter on an annual basis by the POA. Materials shall include those provided in Attachment A of this WQMP and any updated materials. At lease signing and annually thereafter. Owner/POA Yes N2. Activity Restrictions The Owner will prescribe activity restrictions to protect surface water quality, through, lease agreements or other equally effective measure, for the property. Upon takeover of site responsibilities by the POA, the POA shall be responsible for ensuring residents and tenant compliance. Ongoing Owner/POA Yes N3. Common Area Landscape Management Maintenance shall be consistent with County requirements, plus fertilizer and/or pesticide usages shall be consistent with County guidelines for use of fertilizers and pesticides (OC DAMP Section 5.5). Maintenance includes mowing, weeding, and debris removal on a weekly basis. Trimming, replanting and replacement of mulch shall be performed on an as- needed basis. Trimmings, clippings, and other waste shall be properly disposed of off-site in accordance with local regulations. Materials temporarily stockpiled during maintenance activities shall be placed away from water courses and drain inlets. Monthly Owner/POA D-40 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Operation and Maintenance Plan BMP Applicable? Yes/No BMP Name and BMP Implementation, Maintenance and Inspection Procedures Implementation, Maintenance, and Inspection Frequency and Schedule Person or Entity with Operation & Maintenance Responsibility Yes N4. BMP Maintenance Maintenance of BMPs implemented at the project site shall be performed at the frequency prescribed in this WQMP. Records of inspections and BMP maintenance shall be maintained by the responsible party and documented with the WQMP, and shall be available for review upon request. Ongoing, as prescribed per WQMP. Owner/POA No N5. Title 22 CCR Compliance Not applicable to residential projects. No N6. Local Water Quality Permit Compliance Not applicable. No local water quality permits are required for the operation of the project. No N7. Spill Contingency Plan Not applicable to residential projects. No N8. Underground Storage Tank Compliance Not applicable. None onsite. No N9. Hazardous Materials Disclosure Compliance Not applicable to residential projects. No N10. Uniform Fire Code Implementation Not applicable to residential projects. Yes N11. Common Area Litter Control Litter patrol, violations investigation, reporting and other litter control activities shall be performed in conjunction with landscape maintenance activities. Ongoing patrols. Weekly (minimum) pick up and removal. Monthly inspections with landscaping maintenance. Owner/POA D-41 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Operation and Maintenance Plan BMP Applicable? Yes/No BMP Name and BMP Implementation, Maintenance and Inspection Procedures Implementation, Maintenance, and Inspection Frequency and Schedule Person or Entity with Operation & Maintenance Responsibility Yes N12. Employee Training All employees, contractors and subcontractors of the resort and POA shall receive training regarding the potential impacts of their actions on downstream water quality, proper material use and staging (for landscaping and other materials) and proper clean up material Annually and as needed Owner/POA Yes N13. Housekeeping of Loading Docks The proposed loading docks and loading areas shall be inspected with use, with area kept in an orderly manner, following good housekeeping practices. Pills, debris and other waste materials shall be cleaned up and property disposed. Area shall be precluded from run-on and runoff as necessary. Daily with use Owner/POA and Tenants Yes N14. Common Area Catch Basin Inspection Catch basin inlets, area drains, swales, curb-and- gutter systems and other drainage systems shall be inspected prior to October 1st of each year and after large storm events. If necessary, drains shall be cleaned prior to any succeeding rain events. 80% of facilities shall be inspected and cleaned annually, with 100% of facilities inspected and maintained Annually Owner/POA Yes N15. Street Sweeping Private Streets and Parking Lots Streets must be swept at minimum, on a weekly and as needed basis. Weekly and as needed Owner/POA D-42 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Operation and Maintenance Plan BMP Applicable? Yes/No BMP Name and BMP Implementation, Maintenance and Inspection Procedures Implementation, Maintenance, and Inspection Frequency and Schedule Person or Entity with Operation & Maintenance Responsibility Structural Source Control BMPs Yes S1. Provide Storm Drain System Stenciling and Signage Storm drain stencils shall be inspected for legibility, at minimum, once prior to the storm season, no later than October 1st each year. Those determined to be illegible will be re-stenciled as soon as possible. Annually Owner/POA No S2. Design Outdoor Hazardous Material Storage Areas to Reduce Pollutant Introduction Not applicable. No outdoor storage of hazardous materials onsite. Yes S3. Design Trash Enclosures to Reduce Pollutant Introduction Designated trash enclosure areas shall be covered and designed to preclude trash and pad area from run-on, run-off and wind. Any drains within area shall be connected to the sanitary sewer system, with proper approval from the sewer company. Site shall be inspected with use to ensure all materials are disposed of properly. Daily with use Owner/POA and Tenants Yes S4. Use Efficient Irrigation Systems and Landscape Design In conjunction with routine maintenance activities, verify that landscape design continues to function properly by adjusting properly to eliminate overspray to hardscape areas, and to verify that irrigation timing and cycle lengths are adjusted in accordance with water demands, given time of year, weather, day or night time temperatures based on system specifications and local climate patterns. Monthly Owner/POA D-43 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Operation and Maintenance Plan BMP Applicable? Yes/No BMP Name and BMP Implementation, Maintenance and Inspection Procedures Implementation, Maintenance, and Inspection Frequency and Schedule Person or Entity with Operation & Maintenance Responsibility No S5. Protect Slopes and Channels Not applicable. Site is flat. Yes S6. Loading Dock Areas Loading areas shall be kept in an orderly manner and designed to prevent the discharge of runoff. Area shall be inspected with use and cleaned up as soon as possible following any spills or waste accumulation. If wash-down of the area is employed, all wash water shall be prevented from entering the storm drain system. Daily with Use Owner/POA and Tenants No S7. Maintenance Bays and Docks Not applicable. None proposed. No S8. Vehicle Wash Areas Not applicable. None proposed. No S9. Outdoor Processing Areas Not applicable. No outdoor processing onsite. No S10. Equipment Wash Areas Not applicable. No wash areas onsite. No S11. Fueling Areas Not applicable. No fueling areas onsite. No S12. Site Design and Landscape Planning (Hillside Landscaping) Not applicable. Project is not hillside development. D-44 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Operation and Maintenance Plan BMP Applicable? Yes/No BMP Name and BMP Implementation, Maintenance and Inspection Procedures Implementation, Maintenance, and Inspection Frequency and Schedule Person or Entity with Operation & Maintenance Responsibility Yes S13. Wash Water Controls for Food Preparation Areas All proposed food service facilities will be equipped with indoor sinks and contained areas for disposal of wash waters containing food wastes. These facilities shall be connected to the sanitary sewer system. Daily with Use Owner/POA and Tenants No S14. Community Car Wash Racks Not applicable. No community car wash areas onsite. Low Impact Development BMPs Hydrologic Source Control #1 HSC-2 Impervious Area Dispersion – Inspect dispersion area for signs of scouring, standing water, saturated conditions and dead/dying vegetation. Repair and replace as necessary. Mow/trim dispersion area as needed. Hydrologic Source Control #2 HSC-3 Street Trees – Inspect tree for overall plant health. Replace dead or dying vegetation and trim as necessary. Monthly Owner/POA D-45 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Operation and Maintenance Plan BMP Applicable? Yes/No BMP Name and BMP Implementation, Maintenance and Inspection Procedures Implementation, Maintenance, and Inspection Frequency and Schedule Person or Entity with Operation & Maintenance Responsibility Infiltration BMP #1 BIO-7 Proprietary Biotreatment (Modular Wetland System or approved equivalent) – Inspect unit for accumulated debris and sediment and plant health; remove trash from screening device and separation chamber; trim vegetation. Remove sediment from pre- chamber, replace pre-filter cartridge media and drain down filter media. Replace wetland media. INF-5 Infiltration Wells (Maxwell System by Torrent Resources) – Inspect for standing water after storm events. Clean out pre-treatment area as needed for sediment and trash/debris. Annually 20 years After significant storm events, semi-annual and as needed. Owner/POA D-46 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Operation and Maintenance Plan Required Permits No additional permits are necessary for the operation and maintenane of the proposed BMPs. Forms to Record BMP Implementation, Maintenance, and Inspection The form that will be used to record implementation, maintenance, and inspection of BMPs is attached. Recordkeeping All records must be maintained for at least five (5) years and must be made available for review upon request. D-47 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Operation and Maintenance Plan Today’s Date: Name of Person Performing Activity (Printed): Signature: BMP Name (As Shown in O&M Plan) Brief Description of Implementation, Maintenance, and Inspection Activity Performed D-48 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Operation and Maintenance Plan MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT D-49 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Attachment Attachment C BMP Calculations and Details D-50 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Attachment BMP Calculations D-51 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Attachment Worksheet A: Hydrologic Source Control Calculation Form Drainage area ID DMA 4 Total drainage area 1.08 acres Total drainage area Impervious Area (IAtotal) 0.40 acres HSC ID HSC Type/ Description/ Reference BMP Fact Sheet Effect of individual HSCi per criteria in BMP Fact Sheets (XIV.1) (dHSCi)1 Impervious Area Tributary to HSCi (IAi) di × IAi Landscape HSC-2 Impervious area dispersion. Paved areas and walkways to adjacent landscaping areas. Pervious/impervious ratio = 0.68 acres to 0.40acres Perv/Imp = 1.7:1 dhsc = 0.85 0.40 0.34 Box 1: ∑ di × IAi = 0.34 Box 2: IAtotal = 0.40 [Box 1]/[Box 2]: dHSC total = 0.85” Percent Capture Provided by HSCs (Table III.1) 80% D-52 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Attachment Worksheet A: Hydrologic Source Control Calculation Form D-53 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD SIC Acquisitions LLC Attachment North OC Priority WQMP Template December 11, 2014 Worksheet B: Simple Design Capture Volume Sizing Method – Step 1: Determine the design capture storm depth used for calculating volume 1 Enter design capture storm depth from Figure III.1, d (inches) d= 0.85 inches 2 Enter the effect of provided HSCs, dHSC (inches) (Worksheet A) dHSC= TBD inches 3 Calculate the remainder of the design capture storm depth, dremainder (inches) (Line 1 – Line 2) dremainder= inches Step 2: Calculate the DCV 1 Enter Project area tributary to BMP (s), A (acres) A= See table acres 2 Enter Project Imperviousness, imp (unitless) imp= 3 Calculate runoff coefficient, C= (0.75 x imp) + 0.15 C= 4 Calculate runoff volume, Vdesign= (C x dremainder x A x 43560 x (1/12)) Vdesign= cu-ft Step 3: Design BMPs to ensure full retention of the DCV Step 3a: Determine design infiltration rate 1 Enter measured infiltration rate, Kmeasured (in/hr) (Appendix VII) Kmeasured= TBD (assume 2.5”/hr) In/hr 2 Enter combined safety factor from Worksheet H, Sfinal (unitless) Sfinal= 3 Calculate design infiltration rate, Kdesign = Kmeasured / Sfinal Kdesign= In/hr Step 3b: Determine minimum BMP footprint 4 Enter drawdown time, T (max 48 hours) T= 48 Hours 5 Calculate max retention depth that can be drawn down within the drawdown time (feet), Dmax = Kdesign x T x (1/12) Dmax= TBD feet 6 Calculate minimum area required for BMP (sq-ft), Amin = Vdesign/ dmax Amin= sq-ft Calculations: DMA Tributary Drainage Area (Ac.) Imp. C-value Design Storm Depth (in.) Simple Method DCV (cu-ft) 1 1.07 1.0 0.90 0.85 2,972 2 3.69 0.90 0.825 0.85 9,393 3 3.39 0.80 0.75 0.85 7,845 4 1.08 0.37 0.428 0.85 1,426 D-54 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD SIC Acquisitions LLC Attachment North OC Priority WQMP Template December 11, 2014 Worksheet D: Capture Efficiency Method for Flow-Based BMPs – Step 1: Determine the design capture storm depth used for calculating volume 1 Enter the time of concentration, Tc (min) (See Appendix IV.2) Tc= See Table Below 2 Using Figure III.4, determine the design intensity at which the estimated time of concentration (Tc) achieves 80% capture efficiency, I1 I1= in/hr 3 Enter the effect depth of provided HSCs upstream, dHSC (inches) (Worksheet A) dHSC= 0 inches 4 Enter capture efficiency corresponding to dHSC, Y2 (Worksheet A) Y2= 0 % 5 Using Figure III.4, determine the design intensity at which the time of concentration (Tc) achieves the upstream capture efficiency(Y2), I2 I2= 0 6 Determine the design intensity that must be provided by BMP Idesign= I1-I2 Idesign= See Table Below Step 2: Calculate the design flowrate 1 Enter Project area tributary to BMP (s), A (acres) A= See Table Below acres 2 Enter Project Imperviousness, imp (unitless) imp= 3 Calculate runoff coefficient, C= (0.75 x imp) + 0.15 C= 4 Calculate design flow rate, Qdesign= (C x idesign x A) Qdesign= cfs Supporting Calculations Describe system: Runoff will be conveyed as sheet flow, gutter flow and pipe flow to infiltration wells for retention. DMA Tributary Area (Ac.) % Imp. C- value Tc (Min) Design Intensity (in/hr) Design Flowrate (cfs) 1 1.07 1.0 0.90 7.5 0.24 0.23 2 3.69 0.90 0.825 10 0.225 0.68 3 3.39 0.80 0.75 10 0.225 0.57 4 1.08 0.37 0.428 5 0.26 0.12 Provide time of concentration assumptions: Tc for infiltration wells determined based on slope and flow length to proposed infiltration well. D-55 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD SIC Acquisitions LLC Attachment North OC Priority WQMP Template December 11, 2014 Worksheet D: Capture Efficiency Method for Flow-Based BMPs – Graphical Operations D-56 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD SIC Acquisitions LLC Attachment North OC Priority WQMP Template December 11, 2014 Worksheet H: Factor of Safety and Design Infiltration Rate Worksheet Factor Category Factor Description Assigned Weight (w) Factor Value (v) Product (p) p = w x v A Suitability Assessment Soil assessment methods 0.25 TBD TBD Predominant soil texture 0.25 Site soil variability 0.25 Depth to groundwater / impervious layer 0.25 1 0.25 Suitability Assessment Safety Factor, SA = Σp B Design Tributary area size 0.25 1 0.25 Level of pretreatment/ expected sediment loads 0.25 1 0.25 Redundancy 0.25 3 0.75 Compaction during construction 0.25 1 0.25 Design Safety Factor, SB = Σp 1.50 Combined Safety Factor, STOT= SA x SB TBD. Current design assumes infiltration rate of 2.5”/hr. Measured Infiltration Rate, inch/hr, KM (corrected for test-specific bias) Design Infiltration Rate, in/hr, KDESIGN = KM / STOT Supporting Data Infiltration testing has not yet been conducted for the project. D-57 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD SIC Acquisitions LLC Attachment North OC Priority WQMP Template December 11, 2014 Feasibility Worksheets D-58 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Attachment Table 2.7: Infiltration BMP Feasibility Worksheet Infeasibility Criteria Yes No 1 Would Infiltration BMPs pose significant risk for groundwater related concerns? Refer to Appendix VII (Worksheet I) for guidance on groundwater-related infiltration feasibility criteria. X Provide basis: Based on TGD and Count of Orange GIS data, there are no restrictions for infiltration. 2 Would Infiltration BMPs pose significant risk of increasing risk of geotechnical hazards that cannot be mitigated to an acceptable level? (Yes if the answer to any of the following questions is yes, as established by a geotechnical expert): The BMP can only be located less than 50 feet away from slopes steeper than 15 percent. The BMP can only be located less than eight feet from building foundations or an alternative setback. A study prepared by a geotechnical professional or an available watershed study substantiates that stormwater infiltration would potentially result in significantly increased risks of geotechnical hazards that cannot be mitigated to an acceptable level. X Provide basis: Per TGD, site is not located in plume or contamination area. No restrictions placed by geotechnical engineer. 3 Would infiltration of the DCV from drainage area violate downstream water rights? X Provide basis: No restrictions on water rights for project site. Partial Infeasibility Criteria Yes No 4 Is proposed infiltration facility located on HSG D soils or the site geotechnical investigation identifies presence of soil characteristics which support categorization as D soils? X Provide basis: Per NRCS Web Soil Survey data, site resides on HSG Group A soils, Soil type also confirmed by geotechnical reports. Awaiting infiltration testing and boring assessments. 5 Is measured infiltration rate below proposed facility less than 0.3 inches per hour? This calculation shall be based on the methods described in Appendix VII. X Provide basis: Based on available information from adjacent project, infiltration is anticipated to be greater than 5 in/hr. D-59 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Attachment Table 2.7: Infiltration BMP Feasibility Worksheet Infeasibility Criteria Yes No 6 Would reduction of over pre-developed conditions cause impairments to downstream beneficial uses, such as change of seasonality of ephemeral washes or increased discharge of contaminated groundwater to surface waters? X Provide citation to applicable study and summarize findings relative to the amount of infiltration that is permissible: Project discharges to storm drains and channels that are not ephemeral. 7 Would an increase in infiltration over pre-developed conditions cause impairments to downstream beneficial uses, such as change of seasonality of ephemeral washes or increased discharge of contaminated groundwater to surface waters? X Provide citation to applicable study and summarize findings relative to the amount of infiltration that is permissible: Based on TGD and county GIS records, no restrictions on infiltration due to groundwater concerns. Infiltration Screening Results (check box corresponding to result): 8 Is there substantial evidence that infiltration from the project would result in a significant increase in I&I to the sanitary sewer that cannot be sufficiently mitigated? (See Appendix XVII) Provide narrative discussion and supporting evidence: Per TGD and County of Orange GIS data, project is not located in an area where increase in I&I to the sanitary sewer is of concern. X 9 If any answer from row 1-3 is yes: infiltration of any volume is not feasible within the DMA or equivalent. Provide basis: Answers to all questions are “no”. 10 If any answer from row 4-7 is yes, infiltration is permissible but is not presumed to be feasible for the entire DCV. Criteria for designing biotreatment BMPs to achieve the maximum feasible infiltration and ET shall apply. Provide basis: Answer to items are “no”. 11 If all answers to rows 1 through 11 are no, infiltration of the full DCV is potentially feasible, BMPs must be designed to infiltrate the full DCV to the maximum extent practicable. Provide basis: Project will infiltrate DCV. D-60 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Attachment BMP Details D-61 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Attachment Hydrologic Source Controls (HSC) D-62 TECHNICAL GUIDANCE DOCUMENT APPENDICES XIV-5 December 20, 2013 HSC-2: Impervious Area Dispersion Impervious area dispersion refers to the practice of routing runoff from impervious areas, such as rooftops, walkways, and patios onto the surface of adjacent pervious areas. Runoff is dispersed uniformly via splash block or dispersion trench and soaks into the ground as it move slowly across the surface of pervious areas. Minor ponding may occur, but it is not the intent of this practice to actively promote localized on-lot storage (See HSC-1: Localized On-Lot Infiltration). Feasibility Screening Considerations  Impervious area dispersion can be used where infiltration would otherwise be infeasible, however dispersion depth over landscaped areas should be limited by site-specific conditions to prevent standing water or geotechnical issues. Opportunity Criteria  Rooftops and other low traffic impervious surface present in drainage area.  Soils are adequate for infiltration. If not, soils can be amended to improve capacity to absorb dispersed water (see MISC-2: Amended Soils).  Significant pervious area present in drainage area with shallow slope  Overflow from pervious area can be safely managed. OC-Specific Design Criteria and Considerations □ Soils should be preserved from their natural condition or restored via soil amendments to meet minimum criteria described in Section . □ A minimum of 1 part pervious area capable of receiving flow should be provided for every 2 parts of impervious area disconnected. □ The pervious area receiving flow should have a slope ≤ 2 percent and path lengths of ≥ 20 feet per 1000 sf of impervious area. □ Dispersion areas should be maintained to remove trash and debris, loose vegetation, and protect any areas of bare soil from erosion. □ Velocity of dispersed flow should not be greater than 0.5 ft per second to avoid scour. Calculating HSC Retention Volume  The retention volume provided by downspout dispersion is a function of the ratio of impervious to pervious area and the condition of soils in the pervious area.  Determine flow patterns in pervious area and estimate footprint of pervious area receiving dispersed flow. Calculate the ratio of pervious to impervious area.  Check soil conditions using the soil condition design criteria below; amend if necessary.  Look up the storm retention depth, dHSC from the chart below. Simple Downspout Dispersion Source: toronto.ca/environment/water.htm Also known as: Downspout disconnection Impervious area disconnection Sheet flow dispersion  D-63 TECHNICAL GUIDANCE DOCUMENT APPENDICES XIV-6 December 20, 2013  The max dHSC is equal to the design storm depth for the project site. Soil Condition Design Criteria □ Maximum slope of 2 percent □ Well-established lawn or landscaping □ Minimum soil amendments per criteria in MISC-2: Amended Soils. Configuration for Use in a Treatment Train  Impervious area disconnection is an HSC that may be used as the first element in any treatment train  The use of impervious area disconnection reduces the sizing requirement for downstream LID and/or treatment control BMPs Additional References for Design Guidance  SMC LID Manual (pp 131) http://www.lowimpactdevelopment.org/guest75/pub/All_Projects/SoCal_LID_Manual/SoCalL ID_Manual_FINAL_040910.pdf  City of Portland Bureau of Environmental Services. 2010. How to manage stormwater – Disconnect Downspouts. http://www.portlandonline.com/bes/index.cfm?c=43081&a=177702  Seattle Public Utility: http://www.cityofseattle.org/util/stellent/groups/public/@spu/@usm/documents/webcontent/sp u01_006395.pdf  Thurston County, Washington State (pp 10): http://www.co.thurston.wa.us/stormwater/manual/docs-faqs/DG-5-Roof-Runoff- Control_Rev11Jan24.pdf 1 Pervious area used in calculation should only include the pervious area receiving flow, not pervious area receiving only direct rainfall or upslope pervious drainage. D-64 TECHNICAL GUIDANCE DOCUMENT APPENDICES XIV-7 December 20, 2013 HSC-3: Street Trees By intercepting rainfall, trees can provide several aesthetic and stormwater benefits including peak flow control, increased infiltration and ET, and runoff temperature reduction. The volume of precipitation intercepted by the canopy reduces the treatment volume required for downstream treatment BMPs. Shading reduces the heat island effect as well as the temperature of adjacent impervious surfaces, over which stormwater flows, and thus reduces the heat transferred to downstream receiving waters. Tree roots also strengthen the soil structure and provide infiltrative pathways, simultaneously reducing erosion potential and enhancing infiltration. Feasibility Screening Considerations  Not applicable Opportunity Criteria  Street trees can be incorporated in green streets designs along sidewalks, streets, parking lots, or driveways.  Street trees can be used in combination with bioretention systems along medians or in traffic calming bays.  There must be sufficient space available to accommodate both the tree canopy and root system. OC-Specific Design Criteria and Considerations □ Mature tree canopy, height, and root system should not interfere with subsurface utilities, suspended powerlines, buildings and foundations, or other existing or planned structures. Required setbacks should be adhered to. □ Depending on space constarints, a 20 to 30 foot diameter canopy (at maturity) is recommended for stormwater mitigation. □ Native, drought-tolerant species should be selected in order to minimize irrigation requirements and improve the long-term viability of trees. □ Trees should not impede pedstrian or vehicle sight lines. □ Planting locations should receive adequate sunlight and wind protection; other environmental factors should be considered prior to planting. □ Frequency and degree of vegetation management and maintenance should be considered with respect to owner capabilities (e.g., staffing, funding, etc.). □ Soils should be preserved in their natural condition (if appropriate for planting) or restored via soil amendments to meet minimum criteria described in MISC-2: Amended Soils. If necessary, a landscape architect or plant biologist should be consulted. □ A street tree selection guide, such as that specific to the City of Los Angeles, may need to be consulted to select species appropriate for the site design constraints (e.g., parkway size, tree height, canopy spread, etc.) □ Infiltration should not cause geotechnical hazards related to adjacent structures (buildings, Also known as: Canopy interception Street trees Source: Geosyntec Consultants D-65 TECHNICAL GUIDANCE DOCUMENT APPENDICES XIV-8 December 20, 2013 roadways, sidewalks, utilities, etc.) Calculating HSC Retention Volume  The retention volume provided by streets trees via canopy interception is dependent on the tree species, time of the year, and maturity.  To compute the retention depth, the expected impervious area covered by the full tree canopy after 4 years of growth must be computed (IAHSC). The maximum retention depth credit for canopy interception (dHSC) is 0.05 inches over the area covered by the canopy at 4 years of growth. Configuration for Use in a Treatment Train  As a HSC, street trees would serve as the first step in a treatment train by reducing the treatment volume and flow rate of a downstream treatment BMP. Additional References for Design Guidance  California Stormwater BMP Handbook. http://www.cabmphandbooks.com/Documents/Development/Section_3.pdf  City of Los Angeles, Street Tree Division - Street Tree Selection Guide. http://bss.lacity.org/UrbanForestryDivision/StreetTreeSelectionGuide.htm  Portland Stormwater Management Manual. http://www.portlandonline.com/bes/index.cfm?c=35122&a=55791  San Diego County – Low Impact Development Fact Sheets. http://www.sdcounty.ca.gov/dplu/docs/LID-Appendices.pdf D-66 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Attachment INF-5 Infiltration Well D-67 TECHNICAL GUIDANCE DOCUMENT APPENDICES XIV-36 December 20, 2013 INF-5: Drywell Drywells are similar to infiltration trenches in their design and function, but generally have a greater depth to footprint area ratio and can be installed at relatively large depths. A drywell is a subsurface storage facility designed to temporarily store and infiltrate runoff, primarily from rooftops or other impervious areas with low pollutant loading. A drywell may be either a small excavated pit filled with aggregate or a prefabricated storage chamber or pipe segment. Drywells can be used to reduce the volume of runoff from roofs and other relatively clean surfaces. While roofs are generally not a significant source of stormwater pollutants, they can be a major contributor of runoff volumes. Therefore, drywells can indirectly enhance water quality by reducing the water quality design volume that must be treated by other, downstream stormwater management facilities. Note: A drywell is considered a "Class V Injection Wells" under the federal Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program regulated in California by U.S. EPA Region 9. A UIC permit may be required (for details see http://www.epa.gov/region9/water/groundwater/uic-classv.html). Feasibility Screening Considerations  Drywells shall pass infiltration infeasibility screening criteria (TGD Section 2.4.2.4) to be considered for use.  Dry wells provide a more direct pathway for stormwater to groundwater, therefore pose a greater risk to groundwater quality than surface infiltration systems. Opportunity Criteria  Drywells may be used to infiltrate roof runoff, either directly or from the overflow from a cistern.  Soils are adequate for infiltration or can be amended to provide an adequate infiltration rate.  Space available for pretreatment (biotreatment or treatment control BMP as described below).  The drywell must be located in native soil; over-excavated by at least one foot in depth and replaced uniformly without compaction.  Potential for groundwater contamination can be mitigated through isolation of pollutant sources, pretreatment of inflow, and/or demonstration of adequate treatment capacity of underlying soils.  Infiltration is into native soil, or depth of engineered fill is ≤ 5 feet from the bottom of the facility to native material and infiltration into fill is approved by a geotechnical professional. OC-Specific Design Criteria and Considerations □ Must comply with local, state, and federal UIC regulations; a permit may be required. □ Minimum set-backs from foundations and slopes should be observed Also known as: Soakaway Pits Infiltration Sumps Rock Sumps Underground Injection Controls Drywell Source: K&A Enterprises D-68 TECHNICAL GUIDANCE DOCUMENT APPENDICES XIV-37 December 20, 2013 □ Infiltration should not cause geotechnical concerns related to slope stability, liquefaction, or erosion. □ Minimum separation to mounded seasonally high groundwater of 10 feet shall be observed. □ Drywells should not receive untreated stormwater runoff, except rooftop runoff. Pretreatment of runoff from other surfaces is necessary to prevent premature failure that results from clogging with fine sediment, and to prevent potential groundwater contamination due to nutrients, salts, and hydrocarbons. □ Design infiltration rate should be determined with an infiltration test at each drywell location. □ Drywell should be encased by 1 foot of coarse (3/4” to 2 ½”), round river rock on sides and bottom of facility. □ Maximum facility depth is 25 feet with the approval of a geotechnical professional; preferred depth less than 10 feet does not require geotechnical approval. □ If inlet is an underground pipe, a fine mesh screen should be installed to prevent coarse solids from entering drywell. □ An overflow route must be installed for flows that overtop facility. Sizing Criteria for Drywells Drywell sizing is highly site-specific. Sizing calculations shall demonstrate via the methods described in Appendix III or via project-specific methods that the system captures and fully discharges the DCV within 48 hours following the end of precipitation, or captures and infiltrates 80 percent of average annual runoff volume. Configuration for Use in a Treatment Train  Drywells may be preceded in a treatment train by HSCs in the drainage area, which would reduce the required volume of the drywell.  Drywells treating any areas other than roof tops must be preceded by a robust biotreatment or conventional treatment capable of addressing all potentially generated pollutants.  Drywells may be used in conjunction with other infiltration BMPs to increase the infiltration capacity of the entire treatment train system. Additional References for Design Guidance  Stormwater Management in Western Washington (Volume III: Hydrologic Analysis and Flow Control Design BMPs) http://www.ecy.wa.gov/pubs/0510031.pdf  Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) Stormwater Technical Manual, Chapter 4: http://www.laschools.org/employee/design/fs-studies-and- reports/download/white_paper_report_material/Storm_Water_Technical_Manual_2009-opt- red.pdf?version_id=76975850  City of Portland Stormwater Management Manual (Drywell, page 2-87) http://www.portlandonline.com/bes/index.cfm?c=47954&a=202883  San Diego County LID Handbook Appendix 4 (Factsheet 25): http://www.sdcounty.ca.gov/dplu/docs/LID-Appendices.pdf  City of Santa Barbara Storm Water BMP Guidance Manual, Chapter 6: http://www.santabarbaraca.gov/NR/rdonlyres/91D1FA75-C185-491E-A882- 49EE17789DF8/0/Manual_071008_Final.pdf D-69 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Attachment BIO-7 Proprietary Biotreatment D-70 TECHNICAL GUIDANCE DOCUMENT APPENDICES XIV-69 December 20, 2013 BIO-7: Proprietary Biotreatment Proprietary biotreatment devices are devices that are manufactured to mimic natural systems such as bioretention areas by incorporating plants, soil, and microbes engineered to provide treatment at higher flow rates or volumes and with smaller footprints than their natural counterparts. Incoming flows are typically filtered through a planting media (mulch, compost, soil, plants, microbes, etc.) and either infiltrated or collected by an underdrain and delivered to the storm water conveyance system. Tree box filters are an increasingly common type of proprietary biotreatment device that are installed at curb level and filled with a bioretention type soil. For low to moderate flows they operate similarly to bioretention systems and are bypassed during high flows. Tree box filters are highly adaptable solutions that can be used in all types of development and in all types of soils but are especially applicable to dense urban parking lots, street, and roadways. Feasibility Screening Considerations  Proprietary biotreatment devices that are unlined may cause incidental infiltration. Therefore, an evaluation of site conditions should be conducted to evaluate whether the BMP should include an impermeable liner to avoid infiltration into the subsurface. Opportunity Criteria  Drainage areas of 0.25 to 1.0 acres.  Land use may include commercial, residential, mixed use, institutional, and subdivisions. Proprietary biotreatment facilities may also be applied in parking lot islands, traffic circles, road shoulders, and road medians.  Must not adversely affect the level of flood protection provided by the drainage system. OC-Specific Design Criteria and Considerations □ Frequent maintenance and the use of screens and grates to keep trash out may decrease the likelihood of clogging and prevent obstruction and bypass of incoming flows. □ Consult proprietors for specific criteria concerning the design and performance. □ Proprietary biotreatment may include specific media to address pollutants of concern. However, for proprietary device to be considered a biotreatment device the media must be capable of supporting rigorous growth of vegetation. □ Proprietary systems must be acceptable to the reviewing agency. Reviewing agencies shall have the discretion to request performance information. Reviewing agencies shall have the discretion to deny the use of a proprietary BMP on the grounds of performance, maintenance considerations, or other relevant factors. Also known as: Catch basin planter box Bioretention vault Tree box filter Proprietary biotreatment Source: http://www.americastusa.com /index.php/filterra/ D-71 TECHNICAL GUIDANCE DOCUMENT APPENDICES XIV-70 December 20, 2013 □ In right of way areas, plant selection should not impair traffic lines of site. Local jurisdictions may also limit plant selection in keeping with landscaping themes. Computing Sizing Criteria for Proprietary Biotreatment Device  Proprietary biotreatment devices can be volume based or flow-based BMPs.  Volume-based proprietary devices should be sized using the Simple Design Capture Volume Sizing Method described in Appendix III.3.1 or the Capture Efficiency Method for Volume-Based, Constant Drawdown BMPs described in Appendix III.3.2.  The required design flowrate for flow-based proprietary devices should be computed using the Capture Efficiency Method for Flow-based BMPs described in Appendix III.3.3). In South Orange County, the provided ponding plus pore volume must be checked to demonstrate that it is greater than 0.75 of the remaining DCV that this BMP is designed to address. Many propretary biotreatment BMPs will not be able to meet the definition of “biofiltration” that applies in South Orange County. See Section III.7 and Worksheet SOC-1. Additional References for Design Guidance  Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) Stormwater Technical Manual, Chapter 4: http://www.laschools.org/employee/design/fs-studies-and- reports/download/white_paper_report_material/Storm_Water_Technical_Manual_2009-opt- red.pdf?version_id=76975850  Los Angeles County Stormwater BMP Design and Maintenance Manual, Chapter 9: http://dpw.lacounty.gov/DES/design_manuals/StormwaterBMPDesignandMaintenance.pdf  Santa Barbara BMP Guidance Manual, Chapter 6: http://www.santabarbaraca.gov/NR/rdonlyres/91D1FA75-C185-491E-A882- 49EE17789DF8/0/Manual_071008_Final.pdf D-72 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Attachment Attachment D WQMP Notice of Transfer of Responsibility D-73 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Attachment Water Quality Management Plan Notice of Transfer of Responsibility Tracking No. Assigned by the City of Anaheim: ___________________________ Submission of this Notice of Transfer of Responsibility constitutes notice to the City of Anaheim that responsibility for the Water Quality Management Plan (“WQMP”) for the subject property identified below, and implementation of that plan, is being transferred from the Previous Owner (and his/her agent) of the site (or a portion thereof) to the New Owner, as further discussed. I. Previous Owner/Previous Responsible Party Information Company/Individual Name: Good Hope International Contact Person: Jeffrey Anglada Title: Street Address: 2400 E. Katella Avenue, Suite 800 City: Anaheim State: CA City: 92806 Phone: (310) 498-9004 II. Information about Site Transferred Name of Project (if applicable): 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Contact Person: Jeffrey Anglada Title of WQMP applicable to Site: Preliminary WQMP for 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Planning Area (PA) and/or Tract Number(s) for Site Lot Numbers (if Site is a portion of a tract): TBD Date WQMP Prepared (and revised if applicable): January 12, 2016 Street Address of Site: 1700 South Harbor Boulevard City: Anaheim State: CA Zip: 92806 Phone: (310) 498-9004 III. New Owner/New Responsible Party Information Company/Individual Name: Contact Person: Title: Street Address: City: State: Zip: Phone: IV. Ownership Transfer Information General Description of Site Transferred to New Owner: General Description of Portion of Project/Parcel Subject to WQMP Retained by Owner (if any): Lot/Tract Numbers of Site Transferred to New Owner: Remaining Lot/Tract Numbers Subject to WQMP Still Held by Owner (if any): Date of Ownership Transfer: D-74 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Attachment Note: When the Previous Owner is transferring a site that is a portion of a larger project/parcel addressed by the WQMP, as opposed to the entire project/parcel addressed by the WQMP, the General Description of the Site transferred and the remainder of the project/parcel not transferred shall be set forth as maps attached to this notice. These maps shall show those portions of a project/parcel addressed by the WQMP that are transferred to the New Owner (the Transferred Site), those portions retained by the Previous Owner, and those portions previously transferred by Previous Owner. Those portions retained by Previous Owner shall be labeled “Previous Owner,” and those portions previously transferred by Previous Owner shall be labeled as “Previously Transferred.” V. Purpose of Transfer The purpose of this Notice of Transfer of Responsibility are: 1) to track transfer of responsibility for implementation and amendment of the WQMP when property to which the WQMP is transferred from the Previous Owner to the New Owner, and 2) to facilitate notification to a transferee of property subject to a WQMP that such New Owner is now the Responsible Party of record for the WQMP for those portions of the site that it owns. VI. Certifications A. Previous Owner I Certify under penalty of law that I am no longer the owner of the Transferred Site as described in Section II above. I have provided the New Owner with a copy of the WQMP applicable to the Transferred Site that the New Owner is acquiring from the Previous Owner. Printed Name of Previous Owner Representative: Title: Signature of Previous Owner Representative: Date: B. New Owner I Certify under penalty of law that I am the owner of the Transferred Site, as described in Section II above, that I have been provided a copy of the WQMP, and that I have informed myself and understand the New Owner’s responsibilities related to the WQMP, its implementation, and Best Management Practices associated with it. I understand that by signing this notice, the New Owner is accepting all ongoing responsibilities for implementation and amendment of the WQMP for the Transferred Site, which the New Owner has acquired from the Previous Owner. Printed Name of New Owner Representative: Title: Signature of New Owner Representative: Date: D-75 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Permit No. TBD Good Hope International Attachment Attachment E Geotechnical Investigation (To be provided when available) D-76 W.O. 4098-1X D-77 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Appendix April 2016 Appendix E Hydrology Analysis 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Appendix PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. E-1 E-2 E-3 E-4 E-5 E-6 E-7 E-8 E-9 E-10 E-11 E-12 E-13 E-14 E-15 E-16 E-17 E-18 E-19 E-20 E-21 E-22 E-23 E-24 E-25 E-26 E-27 E-28 E-29 E-30 E-31 E-32 E-33 E-34 E-35 E-36 E-37 E-38 E-39 E-40 E-41 E-42 E-43 E-44 E-45 E-46 E-47 UP UP PESERVICEELEVATOR 5% 5% SIGNATUREDINING PURCHASE /RECORD /HOLDING TRASH &RECYCLE MTG 1 MTG 2 MTG 3 MTG 4 BANQUESTSTORAGE MTG 5 SE R V I C E EL E V A T O R SECURITY BANQUESTSTORAGE MEN PR E - F U N C T I O N B PRE-FUNCTIONA ELEVATORVESTIBULE HOTELLOBBY EMPLOYEEMENS FRONT OFFICE GU E S T EL E V A T O R RECEPTIONLOBBY STAGING ST A G I N G RESTAURANTBOH SUPPORT UNIFORM TEMPSTORAGE WOMEN EXIT STAIR ?MEN HOUSEKEEPING NURSE HR / MTG GUESTACCESS TOLOBBY EMERGENCYGENERATOR22' HIGH PARTITION AV EVENTRECEPTION HOTELENTRY EXIT STAIR LUGGAGESTORAGE ELEC EMERGENCYGENERATOR22' HIGH EXIT STAIRST-1 MEP (ELEC) SERVICEELEVATOR PARKING +/-430 STALLS EX I T S T A I R EXIT STAIR VESTIBULE EMPLOYEEWOMEN BRIDGE TO GARDENWALK ABOVE LINE OF FLOOR ABOVE PROPOSEDMONUMENT SIGN "RIGHT TURN ONLY" SIGN "STOP" SIGN "STOP" SIGN "STOP" SIGN RAMP DOWNTO B1 E-48 E-49 E-50 E-51 E-52 E-53 E-54 E-55 E-56 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Appendix April 2016 Appendix F Exterior Noise Analysis 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Appendix PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. Reference Levels: Construction Noise at 50 Feet (dBA Leq)1 Construction Phase Distance: Receptor to center of activity Average Level (dBA Leq)2 Distance: Receptor to border of site Maximum Level (dBA Lmax)3 Drop Off hard=0; soft=0.5 Building Demo 50 84 50 84 0 Building Demo + Asphalt Demo 84 84 Site Prep 80 84Building Construction + Rough Grading 88 85 Building Construction + Utility Trenching 88 84Building Construction + Fine Grading 88 85 Building Construction + Paving 87 84Building Construction 86 84Architectural Coating 82 78Finishing / Landscaping 85 83 Construction Noise at Castle Inn & Suites Construction Phase Distance: Receptor to center of activity Average Level (dBA Leq)2 Distance: Receptor to border of site Maximum Level (dBA Lmax)3 Building Demo 330 68 10 98 Building Demo + Asphalt Demo 68 98Site Prep 64 98 Building Construction + Rough Grading 72 99 Building Construction + Utility Trenching 71 98 Building Construction + Fine Grading 71 99 Building Construction + Paving 70 98 Building Construction 70 98 Architectural Coating 65 92 Finishing / Landscaping 68 97 Construction Noise at Super 8 Anaheim Construction Phase Distance: Receptor to center of activity Average Level (dBA Leq)2 Distance: Receptor to border of site Maximum Level (dBA Lmax)3 Building Demo 450 65 45 85 Building Demo + Asphalt Demo 65 85Site Prep 61 85 Building Construction + Rough Grading 69 86Building Construction + Utility Trenching 69 85 Building Construction + Fine Grading 69 86 Building Construction + Paving 68 85 Building Construction 67 85 Architectural Coating 62 79 Finishing / Landscaping 66 84 Construction Noise at Ramada Maingate Construction Phase Distance: Receptor to center of activity Average Level (dBA Leq)2 Distance: Receptor to border of site Maximum Level (dBA Lmax)3 Building Demo 510 64 240 70 Building Demo + Asphalt Demo 64 70Site Prep 60 70 Building Construction + Rough Grading 68 71Building Construction + Utility Trenching 68 70 Building Construction + Fine Grading 67 71Building Construction + Paving 67 70 Building Construction 66 70 Noise Levels During Construction F-1 Architectural Coating 61 64 Finishing / Landscaping 65 70 Construction Noise at Ramada Plaza Construction Phase Distance: Receptor to center of activity Average Level (dBA Leq)2 Distance: Receptor to border of site Maximum Level (dBA Lmax)3 Building Demo 700 61 380 66Building Demo + Asphalt Demo 61 66Site Prep 57 66Building Construction + Rough Grading 65 67Building Construction + Utility Trenching 65 66 Building Construction + Fine Grading 65 67Building Construction + Paving 64 66 Building Construction 63 66Architectural Coating 59 60 Finishing / Landscaping 62 66 Construction Noise at Candy Cane Inn Construction Phase Distance: Receptor to center of activity Average Level (dBA Leq)2 Distance: Receptor to border of site Maximum Level (dBA Lmax)3 Building Demo 710 61 280 69Building Demo + Asphalt Demo 61 69Site Prep 57 69Building Construction + Rough Grading 65 70Building Construction + Utility Trenching 65 69Building Construction + Fine Grading 65 70Building Construction + Paving 64 69Building Construction 63 69Architectural Coating 58 63 Finishing / Landscaping 62 68 Construction Noise at Residence Inn Anaheim Maingate Construction Phase Distance: Receptor to center of activity Average Level (dBA Leq)2 Distance: Receptor to border of site Maximum Level (dBA Lmax)3 Building Demo 1280 56 980 58Building Demo + Asphalt Demo 56 58Site Prep 52 58Building Construction + Rough Grading 60 59Building Construction + Utility Trenching 60 58Building Construction + Fine Grading 59 59Building Construction + Paving 59 58Building Construction 58 58Architectural Coating 53 52Finishing / Landscaping 57 57 1 Calculations based on the Roadway Construction Noise Model with the construction information provided by the applicant.2 Average daily noise level including all equipment in use simultaneously considering utilization factors. 3 Maximum instanteneous noise level from the loudest equipment used during the construction phase. F-2 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Appendix April 2016 Appendix G Traffic Impact Analysis 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Appendix PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report ``````    March 29, 2016 Submitted to:  17J16‐1781 | Prepared by Iteris, Inc.  G-1 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | ii TABLE OF CONTENTS   1.0 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... 5  1.1 Project Description ........................................................................................................ 5  1.2 Study Area .................................................................................................................... 6   1.3 Orange County Congestion Management Program ..................................................... 7 1.4 Study Periods ............................................................................................................... 8  1.5 Previous Environmental Analyses .............................................................................. 11  2.0 TRAFFIC OPERATIONS ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY .................................................................. 13  2.1 Intersection Analysis Methodology ............................................................................. 13  2.1.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Methodology ............................................................. 13 2.1.2 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) Methodology ................................................................... 14  2.2 Roadway Segment Analysis Methodology ................................................................. 16  3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS ........................................................................................................... 17  3.1 Roadway Configurations ............................................................................................. 17 3.2 Transit Operations ...................................................................................................... 17 3.3 Existing Traffic Volumes ............................................................................................. 19  3.3.1 Count Data ............................................................................................................................ 19 3.3.2 PM Peak Hour to ADT “K” Factor .......................................................................................... 22  3.4 Intersection Level-of-Service ...................................................................................... 22 3.4.1 ICU LOS ................................................................................................................................ 23 3.4.2 HCM LOS .............................................................................................................................. 25 3.4.3 Weekend HCM LOS .............................................................................................................. 25 3.5 Roadway Segment Level-of-Service .......................................................................... 26  4.0 ANAHEIM RESORT HOTEL TRIP GENERATION RATE ................................................................ 27  4.1 Methodology ............................................................................................................... 27 4.2 Determination ............................................................................................................. 28 4.3 Project Trip Generation ............................................................................................... 30  4.3.1 Pedestrian Trip Generation ................................................................................................... 31 4.4 Project Trip Distribution .............................................................................................. 31  5.0 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS .................................................................................... 36  5.1 Intersection Level-of-Service ...................................................................................... 39 5.1.1 ICU LOS ................................................................................................................................ 39  5.1.2 HCM LOS .............................................................................................................................. 40 5.1.3 Weekend LOS ....................................................................................................................... 41  5.2 Roadway Segment Level-of-Service .......................................................................... 42  6.0 OPENING YEAR 2019 CONDITIONS ......................................................................................... 44  6.1 Ambient Growth .......................................................................................................... 44 6.2 Cumulative Projects .................................................................................................... 44  6.3 Intersection Level-of-Service ...................................................................................... 49  6.3.1 ICU LOS ................................................................................................................................ 49 6.3.2 HCM LOS .............................................................................................................................. 50  6.3.3 Weekend LOS ....................................................................................................................... 50 6.4 Roadway Segment Level-of-Service .......................................................................... 51  7.0 OPENING YEAR 2019 PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS .................................................................. 53  G-2 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | iii 7.1 Intersection Level-of-Service ...................................................................................... 56 7.1.1 ICU LOS ................................................................................................................................ 56  7.1.2 HCM LOS .............................................................................................................................. 58 7.1.3 Weekend LOS ....................................................................................................................... 59  7.2 Roadway Segment Level-of-Service .......................................................................... 59  8.0 SUMMARY OF RESULTS ......................................................................................................... 61  8.1 Intersections ............................................................................................................... 61 8.2 Arterial Segments ....................................................................................................... 61  9.0 APPLICABLE MITIGATION MEASURES ..................................................................................... 61  9.1 FEIR No. 311 .............................................................................................................. 61 9.2 FSEIR No. 340 ............................................................................................................ 61  10.0 CONCLUSIONS ....................................................................................................................... 66    LIST OF TABLES   Table 1: Intersection Level‐of‐Service V/C Definitions ............................................................................... 13  Table 2: City of Anaheim Intersection Significant Impact Criteria .............................................................. 14  Table 3: Intersection Level‐of‐Service Delay Definitions ............................................................................ 15  Table 4: Arterial Segment Daily Capacity .................................................................................................... 16  Table 5: PM Peak Hour to ADT K‐Factor ..................................................................................................... 22  Table 6: Existing Intersection ICU LOS ........................................................................................................ 23  Table 7: Existing Intersection ICU LOS Compared With Disneyland Resort Specific Plan (FEIR No. 311) and  Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (FSEIR No. 340) ................................................................................... 24  Table 8: Existing Intersection HCM LOS ...................................................................................................... 25  Table 9: Existing Weekend Intersection HCM LOS ...................................................................................... 26  Table 10: Existing Arterial Segment ADT LOS ............................................................................................. 26  Table 11: Hotel Square Footage Comparison ............................................................................................. 28  Table 12: Resort Hotel Weekday Trip Generation Rates ............................................................................ 28  Table 13: Resort Hotel Weekend Trip Generation Rates ............................................................................ 29  Table 14: ITE Trip Generation Weekday Trip Generation Rates ................................................................. 29  Table 15: ITE Trip Generation Weekend Trip Generation Rates ................................................................. 29  Table 16: Proposed Project Trip Generation .............................................................................................. 30  Table 17: Proposed Project Weekend Trip Generation .............................................................................. 30  Table 18: Proposed Project Pedestrian Trip Generation ............................................................................ 31  Table 19: Existing Plus Project Intersection ICU LOS .................................................................................. 39  Table 20: Existing Plus Project Intersection HCM LOS ................................................................................ 41  Table 21: Existing Plus Project Weekend Intersection HCM LOS ................................................................ 42  Table 22: Existing Plus Project Arterial Segment ADT LOS ......................................................................... 42  Table 23: Cumulative Project Trip Generation ........................................................................................... 45  Table 24: Cumulative Project Weekend Trip Generation ........................................................................... 46  Table 25: Opening Year 2019 Intersection ICU LOS .................................................................................... 49  Table 26: Opening Year 2019 Intersection HCM LOS .................................................................................. 50  Table 27: Opening Year 2019 Weekend Intersection HCM LOS ................................................................. 51  Table 28: Opening Year 2019 Arterial Segment ADT LOS ........................................................................... 51  G-3 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | iv Table 29: Opening Year 2019 Plus Project Intersection ICU LOS ................................................................ 56  Table 30: Opening Year 2019 Plus Project Intersection HCM LOS .............................................................. 58  Table 31: Opening Year 2019 Plus Project Weekend Intersection HCM LOS ............................................. 59  Table 32: Opening Year 2019 Plus Project Arterial Segment ADT LOS ....................................................... 60    LIST OF FIGURES   Figure 1: Proposed Project Site Plan ............................................................................................................. 6  Figure 2: Study Area ...................................................................................................................................... 9  Figure 3: Existing Intersection Geometry.................................................................................................... 10  Figure 4: Existing Weekday Peak Hour Intersection and Arterial ADT Volumes ........................................ 20  Figure 5: Existing Weekend Peak Hour Intersection Volumes .................................................................... 21  Figure 6: Weekday Project Trip Distribution Percentages .......................................................................... 32  Figure 7: Weekend Project Trip Distribution Percentages ......................................................................... 33  Figure 8: Weekday Net Project Only Peak Hour and Daily Trip Assignment Volumes ............................... 34  Figure 9: Weekend Net Project Only Peak Hour Trip Assignment Volumes ............................................... 35  Figure 10: Existing Plus Project Weekday Peak Hour Intersection and Arterial ADT Volumes .................. 37  Figure 11: Existing Plus Project Weekend Peak Hour Intersection Volumes .............................................. 38  Figure 12: Opening Year 2019 Weekday Peak Hour Intersection and Arterial ADT Volumes .................... 47  Figure 13: Opening Year 2019 Weekend Peak Hour Intersection Volumes ............................................... 48  Figure 14: Opening Year 2019 Plus Project Weekday Peak Hour Intersection and Arterial ADT Volumes 54  Figure 15: Opening Year 2019 Plus Project Weekend Peak Hour Intersection Volumes ........................... 55  APPENDICES   Appendix A – Traffic Counts  Appendix B – LOS Calculation Sheets  Appendix C – ADT Calculation Sheets  Appendix D – Resort Hotel Trip Generation  Appendix E – Opening Year Cumulative Projects     G-4 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 5 1.0 INTRODUCTION   This report presents the methodology and results of a traffic impact analysis for the proposed Anaheim  Plaza Hotel in the City of Anaheim. The report follows the Criteria for Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies  provided by the City of Anaheim.  1.1 Project Description   The proposed project consists of demolishing an existing 300 room hotel and replacing the existing hotel  with a planned 580 room high‐quality, four diamond full‐service resort hotel located at 1700 South Harbor  Boulevard. The estimated opening date of the proposed hotel is May 2019. The project site is located at  the southeast corner of the South Harbor Boulevard and Disney Way intersection, and is bounded by  Anaheim GardenWalk on the east and the Castle Inn and Suites and the Super 8 Anaheim Hotel on the  south. Access to the site would be provided at two locations along Harbor Boulevard and at one location  on Disney Way:       Main Entry/porte‐cochere on Harbor Boulevard approximately 300 feet south of Disney Way:  Serves as the primary ingress/egress location for visitor and employee trips with right‐in/right‐ out access only.   Service road along the southern property boundary on Harbor Boulevard approximately 500  feet south of Disney Way: Serves as a secondary egress location for visitor and employee trips,  as well as the primary ingress/egress location for service and emergency vehicles.  Conflict  between visitor and employee trips with service vehicle trips will be avoided by use of a  temporary gate at the parking structure exit, as well as prohibiting peak hour service truck  deliveries.  Only right‐in/right‐out access will be available.   A secondary service entrance on Disney Way approximately 335 feet east of Harbor  Boulevard:  Serves as a secondary ingress/egress location for delivery vehicles only.  Only right‐ in/right‐out access will be available.      Figure 1 shows the proposed site plan.       G-5 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 6 Figure 1: Proposed Project Site Plan        1.2 Study Area   In conjunction with City of Anaheim staff, the following thirteen (13) intersections and fifteen (15)  roadway segments were identified and analyzed.  In addition to the thirteen intersections below, the  north and south driveways of the hotel were analyzed for both a.m. and p.m. peak hour weekday and  peak weekend conditions.    Intersections  1. Harbor Boulevard at I‐5 Northbound Ramps;  2. Harbor Boulevard at I‐5 Southbound Ramps;  3. Harbor Boulevard at Manchester Avenue;  4. Harbor Boulevard at Disney Way;  5. Harbor Boulevard at Katella Avenue;  6. Anaheim GardenWalk at Disney Way;  7. Clementine Street at Disney Way;  8. Clementine Street at Katella Avenue;  9. I‐5 Southbound Off‐ramp at Disney Way;  G-6 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 7 10. Anaheim Boulevard at Disney Way;  11. Anaheim Boulevard at Katella Avenue;  12. I‐5 Southbound Ramps at Katella Avenue; and  13. I‐5 Northbound Ramps at Katella Avenue.     Roadway segments  1. Harbor Boulevard between I‐5 Southbound and Northbound Ramps;   2. Harbor Boulevard between Manchester Avenue and I‐5 Southbound Ramps;  3. Harbor Boulevard between Disney Way and Manchester Avenue;  4. Harbor Boulevard between Katella Avenue and Disney Way;  5. Disney Way between Harbor Boulevard and Anaheim GardenWalk;  6. Disney Way between Anaheim GardenWalk and Clementine Street;  7. Disney Way between Clementine Street and I‐5 Southbound Off‐Ramp;  8. Disney Way between I‐5 Southbound Off‐Ramp and Anaheim Boulevard;  9. Clementine Street between Katella Avenue and Disney Way;  10. Anaheim Boulevard between Katella Avenue and Disney Way;  11. Katella Avenue between Harbor Boulevard and Clementine Street;  12. Katella Avenue between Clementine Street and Anaheim Boulevard;  13. Katella Avenue between Anaheim Boulevard and I‐5 Southbound Ramps;  14. Katella Avenue between I‐5 Southbound and Northbound Ramps; and  15. Manchester Way between Anaheim Boulevard and Katella Avenue.    Figure 2 illustrates the study area including the locations of the study intersections and roadway segments  analyzed in this report. The existing lane configurations of the study intersections are illustrated in Figure 3.     1.3 Orange County Congestion Management Program The Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) adopted the Congestion Management Program  (CMP) for Orange County, which provides a mechanism for coordinating land use and transportation  decisions on major freeways, highways, and roadways within the County. In June 1990, Proposition 111  was passed, making additional funding available for transportation projects throughout Orange County.   OCTA is Orange County’s designated Congestion Management Agency (CMA), and is responsible for  monitoring and updating the Orange County CMP.    The CMP Highway System (CMPHS) consists of the Orange County smart street network plus the state  highway system.  The CMPHS includes two streets within the study area for this project:       Harbor Boulevard; and    Katella Avenue.      The CMP also includes five intersections which are included in this study:     Harbor Boulevard at I‐5 Northbound Ramps;   Harbor Boulevard at I‐5 Southbound Ramps;   Harbor Boulevard at Katella Avenue;  G-7 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 8  I‐5 Southbound Ramps at Katella Avenue; and   I‐5 Northbound Ramps at Katella Avenue.     1.4 Study Periods Traffic operations are evaluated for each of the following scenarios during the weekday a.m. peak hour  and p.m. peak hour:     Existing Conditions;   Existing Plus Project Conditions;   Opening Year 2019 Conditions; and    Opening Year 2019 Plus Project Conditions.   A forecast year (2035) conditions analysis is not required per City of Anaheim Criteria for Preparation of  Traffic Impact Studies, because the project is consistent with what was previously analyzed in Final  Supplemental Environmental Impact Report No. 340, Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific  Plan (FSEIR No. 340).    G-8 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 9 Figure 2: Study Area  G-9 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 10 Figure 3: Existing Intersection Geometry    G-10 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 11 1.5 Previous Environmental Analyses   Development of the proposed project has been previously analyzed in two certified Environmental Impact  Reports (EIRs); the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan EIR (FEIR No. 311) (completed in 1993) for The  Disneyland Resort Specific Plan SP 92‐1 and the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (FSEIR  No. 340) (completed in 2012) for the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan SP 92‐2. The proposed project is located  within District A of The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan (DRSP) which allows up to 75 hotel/motel rooms  per acre. If developed under the DRSP, a total of 660 rooms would be allowed on the 8.8‐acre project site.  Retail uses would be limited to 20 percent of the hotel floor area and can be utilized for either retail and/or  dining. Both FEIR No. 311 and FSEIR No. 340 assumed the proposed project would be developed with 660  hotel rooms and associated retail and meeting space. The traffic impacts identified in each EIR are  summarized below.    Disneyland Resort Specific Plan FEIR No. 311  In June 1993, the City of Anaheim certified the Final Environmental Impact Report No. 311 (FEIR No. 311)  for The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan. FEIR No. 311, as subsequently amended, provides for the  development of an international vacation destination resort, including the development of a new theme  park, additional hotel and entertainment areas, administrative office facilities, back‐of‐house facilities,  new public and private parking facilities, an internal transportation system, and the on‐going modification  of the Disney Theme Parks.    The evaluation of traffic impacts associated with the development of SP92‐1 in FEIR No. 311 determined  that prior to implementation of mitigation, four intersections (Euclid Avenue at Ball Road, Euclid Avenue  at Katella Avenue, Harbor Boulevard at Katella Avenue, and Haster Street at Katella Avenue) would  become deficient with a level‐of‐service (LOS) E condition in the year 2010. It was determined that  implementation of project design features and mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a level  considered less than significant. FEIR No. 311 also concluded that significant deficiencies in levels‐of‐ service would occur if future background traffic growth was not mitigated, or if planned improvements  were not implemented. However, the Anaheim City Council adopted a Statement of Overriding  Considerations with regard to these potential deficiencies.    Anaheim Resort Specific Plan FSEIR No. 340    In September 1994, the City of Anaheim certified the Master Environmental Impact Report No. 313 (MEIR  No. 313) (State Clearinghouse No. 91091062) in support of the adoption of SP 92‐2 (Anaheim 1994b,  1994a). MEIR No. 313 evaluated impacts associated with the establishment and implementation of the  ARSP and created a Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP No. 0085) in order to mitigate impacts  associated with Specific Plan developments. Since being certified in 1994, two validation reports have  been prepared (1999 and 2004) to evaluate the continued relevance and accuracy of MEIR No. 313 and  its ability to be used as a Master EIR for all projected development within the boundaries of the ARSP  area. On December 18, 2012, the City of Anaheim certified in connection with the amendments to the  documents that govern and regulate development within the ARSP area.    G-11 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 12 As evaluated in FSEIR No. 340, traffic impacts associated with buildout of the ARSP would result in  significant impacts at 21 area intersections, 1 arterial segment, and 3 freeway ramp termini intersections  by forecast year 2030. However, after implementation of the identified mitigation measures, these  impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels for all but nine intersections (Euclid Street at  Katella Avenue, Disneyland Drive at Ball Road, Disneyland Drive/West Street at Katella Avenue, Harbor  Boulevard at Ball Road, Anaheim Boulevard/Haster Street at Katella Avenue, State College Boulevard at  Katella Avenue, State College Boulevard at Orangewood Avenue, State College Boulevard/The City Drive  at Chapman Avenue, Orangewood Avenue at State Route [SR] 57 Southbound Ramps) and one ramp  termini intersection (Orangewood Avenue at SR 57 Southbound Ramps). It was identified that the impacts  at these intersections would remain significant and unavoidable because of the infeasibility of mitigation  measures due to high project costs, the inability to undertake right‐of‐way acquisitions as a matter of  policy to preserve existing businesses, environmental constraints, or jurisdictional considerations.  Additionally, FEIR No. 340 stated that if improvements outside of the City are not completed for reasons  beyond the City of Anaheim’s control (e.g., the City of Anaheim cannot undertake or require  improvements outside of Anaheim’s jurisdiction or the City cannot construct improvements in the  Caltrans right‐of‐way without Caltrans approval), traffic impacts on these facilities would remain  significant and unavoidable. The Anaheim City Council adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations  with regard to these potential deficiencies.    FEIR No. 311 and FSEIR No. 340 assumed 660 rooms on the Project Site and a daily traffic volume of 5,742  trips.  Additionally, FSEIR No. 340 indicated no impacts would occur on intersections identified in the  Congestion Management Program (CMP) for Orange County.      G-12 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 13 2.0 TRAFFIC OPERATIONS ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY   Traffic operations analyses have been documented for both intersections and roadway segments  consistent with the Criteria for Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies provided by the City of Anaheim  Transportation Section of the Department of Public Works.    2.1 Intersection Analysis Methodology   Intersections are analyzed using either or both ICU and HCM methodologies, and impact criteria was  established separately for City of Anaheim, OCTA CMP, and Caltrans intersections. The efficiency of traffic  operations on a facility can be described in terms of Level‐of‐Service (LOS). The LOS concept is a measure  of average operating conditions at an intersection during an hour. Levels range from A to F, with A  representing excellent (free‐flow) conditions and F representing extreme congestion.  2.1.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Methodology  All of the intersections were evaluated using Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) methodology, which  defines the LOS by the volume‐to‐capacity (V/C) ratio for the turning movements and intersection  characteristics at the signalized intersections. The ICU value was determined by summing the V/C ratio of  the critical movements, plus a factor for a yellow signal time, and was calculated using a spreadsheet tool.  Table 1 presents the V/C ratio associated with each LOS grade as well as a qualitative description of  intersection operations at that grade.      Table 1: Intersection Level‐of‐Service V/C Definitions    LEVEL   OF  SERVICE  DESCRIPTION  SIGNALIZED  INTERSECTION  VOLUME‐TO‐CAPACITY  RATIO (V/C)  A ‐ Free flowing, virtually no delay.   ‐ Minimal traffic. < 0.600  B  ‐ Free flow and choice of lanes.   ‐ Delays are minimal.   ‐ All cars clear intersection easily.  >0.600 to 0.699  C ‐ Good operation.   ‐ Delays starting to become a factor but still within acceptable limits. >0.700 to 0.799  D  ‐ Approaching unstable flow.   ‐ Queues at intersection are quite long but most cars clear intersection on their green signal.   ‐ Occasionally, several vehicles must wait for a second green signal.   ‐ Congestion is moderate.  >0.800 to 0.899  E  ‐ Severe congestion and delay.   ‐ Most of the available capacity is used.   ‐ Many cars must wait through a complete signal cycle to clear the intersection.  >0.900 to 0.999  F  ‐ Excessive delay and congestion.   ‐ Most cars must wait through more than one on one signal cycle.   ‐ Queues are very long and drivers are obviously irritated.  > 1.000  Source: City of Anaheim General Plan Circulation Element     G-13 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 14 City of Anaheim Criteria    According to City of Anaheim guidelines, a signalized intersection is deemed significantly impacted  requiring mitigation based on an increase in V/C ratio as shown in Table 2. Per City of Anaheim Traffic  Impact Studies Criteria, a volume/capacity ratio of 0.90 (LOS D) shall be the lowest acceptable Service  Level at intersections and arterial highway links should be maintained at LOS C or better.      Table 2: City of Anaheim Intersection Significant Impact Criteria    WITH PROJECT CONDITIONS PROJECT‐RELATED INCREASE IN V/C RATIO LOS V/C RATIO  C 0.701 – 0.800 Equal to or greater than 0.050  D 0.801 – 0.900 Equal to or greater than 0.030  E, F > 0.900 Equal to or greater than 0.010  Source: City of Anaheim Criteria for Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies      Congestion Management Plan Criteria    The OCTA CMP establishes a target Level of Service of LOS E or better for CMP intersections.  An increase  in V/C ratio greater than 0.10 over the base condition at intersections that operate or are forecast to  operate at LOS F are considered not in compliance with CMP LOS objectives and require a mitigation or a  deficiency plan.  2.1.2 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) Methodology    Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 2010 methodology defines the LOS by the average vehicle delay  experienced by all vehicles traveling through the intersection.  Traffic operation analysis for HCM analysis  was completed using Synchro software. Current signal timing plans for each intersection were provided  by the City of Anaheim and were applied to the HCM analysis for both with and without project scenarios.  Table 3 presents the average delay associated with each LOS grade as well as a qualitative description of  intersection operations at that grade.      G-14 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 15 Table 3: Intersection Level‐of‐Service Delay Definitions    LEVEL   OF  SERVICE  DESCRIPTION SIGNALIZED  INTERSECTION  DELAY (SECONDS)1  UNSIGNALIZED  INTERSECTION  DELAY  (SECONDS)1  A ‐ Free flowing, virtually no delay.   ‐ Minimal traffic. < 10 < 10  B  ‐ Free flow and choice of lanes.   ‐ Delays are minimal.   ‐ All cars clear intersection easily.  >10 and < 20 >10 and < 15  C ‐ Good operation.   ‐ Delays starting to become a factor but still within acceptable limits. >20 and < 35 >15 and < 25  D  ‐ Approaching unstable flow.   ‐ Queues at intersection are quite long but most cars clear intersection on  their green signal.   ‐ Occasionally, several vehicles must wait for a second green signal.   ‐ Congestion is moderate.  >35 and < 55 >25 and < 35  E  ‐ Severe congestion and delay.   ‐ Most of the available capacity is used.   ‐ Many cars must wait through a complete signal cycle to clear the  intersection.  >55 and < 80 >35 and < 50  F  ‐ Excessive delay and congestion.   ‐ Most cars must wait through more than one on one signal cycle.   ‐ Queues are very long and drivers are obviously irritated.  > 80 > 50  Note:   1Highway Capacity Manual 2010    Caltrans Criteria  All Caltrans intersections (freeway ramp terminals) were evaluated using HCM methodology per Caltrans  requirements.  Lane configurations and various other parameters (such as signal timing) were based on  current operating characteristics.  Caltrans intersection delay and LOS standards are shown in Table 3  (signalized intersection delay).   The Caltrans Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies (written  by the State of California Department of Transportation and dated December 2002) states under Section  6 (Mitigation Measures) that “a level of insignificance is the standard pursuant to CEQA and National  Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)”.  This means that CEQA guidelines are to be used for Caltrans Criteria.   However, the 2016 California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Statute and Guidelines states under  Section 15064.7 (Thresholds of Significance) that “each public agency is encouraged to develop and  publish thresholds of significance that the agency uses in the determination of significance of  environmental effects.”  The City of Anaheim does not maintain any significance impact criteria for HCM  analysis (based on delay), and thus no criteria was established for this project.      This methodology is consistent to the methodology used in the  previously analyzed Final Supplemental  Environmental Impact Report No. 340, Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (FSEIR No.  340).  G-15 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 16 City of Anaheim Criteria    The project driveways and the intersections of Harbor Boulevard at Disney Way and Harbor Boulevard at  Katella Avenue were evaluated using the HCM methodology.  HCM analysis for arterial intersections  (Harbor Boulevard at Disney Way and Harbor Boulevard at Katella Avenue) were evaluated to include  pedestrian activity, and the high expectation for southbound U‐turns at the intersection of Harbor  Boulevard and Katella Avenue.     The City of Anaheim does not have any criteria for HCM analysis for signalized or un‐signalized  intersections.      2.2 Roadway Segment Analysis Methodology   The roadway segment analysis methodology utilizes the volume‐to‐capacity (V/C) ratio based on average  daily traffic (ADT) and arterial segment daily capacity.  Table 4 presents the daily capacity assumptions by  roadway facility type.     Table 4: Arterial Segment Daily Capacity    FACILITY TYPE DAILY CAPACITY (VEHICLES/DAY)  8‐lane Divided 75,000  6‐lane Divided 56,300  4‐lane Divided 37,500  4‐lane Undivided 25,000  2‐lane Divided 18,750  Source: City of Anaheim  City of Anaheim Criteria    The current performance standard adopted by the City of Anaheim for the study area roadway segments  is LOS C or better (V/C < 0.80).  Congestion Management Plan Criteria    The CMP establishes a target Level of Service of LOS E or better for CMP roadways.  An increase in V/C  ratio greater than 0.10 over the base condition at roadways that operate or are forecast to operate at LOS  F are considered not in compliance with CMP LOS objectives and require a mitigation or a deficiency plan.  G-16 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 17 3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS   This section presents an overview of the existing roadway system within the study area and the  methodology used to determine existing traffic volumes.    3.1 Roadway Configurations   The existing configurations of the roadways within the study area are described below:     Harbor Boulevard, oriented in a north‐south direction, consists of a six‐lane divided roadway  providing local access to the project site as well as regional access through its connection to the I‐5  and SR‐22 freeways. On‐street parking is prohibited along Harbor Boulevard in the study area.  Harbor Boulevard provides right‐in/right‐out access for northbound traffic to/from the project site.   Harbor Boulevard currently provides secondary ingress/egress access to the existing Anaheim  Plaza Hotel just north of the Castle Inn and Suites.     Disney Way, oriented in an east‐west direction, is a six‐lane divided roadway terminating at  Harbor Boulevard on the west end as an access point to Disneyland. On‐street parking is  prohibited along Disney Way in the study area. Disney Way currently provides primary  ingress/egress access to the existing Anaheim Plaza Hotel, including an emergency vehicle access  point adjacent to Anaheim GardenWalk.     Katella Avenue, oriented in an east‐west direction, is a six‐lane divided roadway providing regional  access through its connection to the I‐5 freeway. On‐street parking is prohibited along Katella Avenue.    Clementine Street, oriented in a north‐south direction, is a four‐lane divided roadway terminating  at Katella Avenue on the south end, and providing direct access to Manchester Avenue on the  north end. On‐street parking is prohibited along Clementine Street.    3.2 Transit Operations   The Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA), Los Angeles Transit Authority (Metro), and Anaheim  Resort Transportation (ART) all operate bus lines within the area of the project site. A description of the  transit service follows:    Metro Lines:    Line 460 – This line operates between downtown Los Angeles and Disneyland. Within the study area, the  line travels north‐south along Harbor Boulevard, and along Disney Way. Service is provided at 20 minute  headways during peak periods on weekdays. Weekends and holiday service is also provided.    G-17 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 18 OCTA Lines:    Line 43 – This line operates between Fullerton and Costa Mesa. Within the study area, the line travels  north‐south along Harbor Boulevard. Service is provided at 20 minute headways during weekdays.  Weekends and holiday service is also provided.    Line 50 – This line operates between Long Beach and Orange. Within the study area, the line travels east‐ west along Katella Avenue. Service is provided at 25 minute headways during weekdays. Weekends and  holiday service is also provided.    Line 83 – This line operates between Anaheim and Laguna Hills. Within the study area, the line travels  from Harbor Boulevard to Disneyland Drive via Ball Road, looping around Katella Avenue back to Harbor  Boulevard. Service is provided at 40 minute headways during peak periods on weekdays. Weekends and  holiday service is also provided.    Line 430 – This line operates between the Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center (ARTIC)  and the Anaheim Resort Area. Within the study area, the line travels east‐west on Katella Avenue, and  along Harbor Boulevard between Katella Avenue and Disneyland Drive. Service is provided at 30 minute  headways solely during weekday peak periods.    Line 543 – This line operates between the Fullerton Transportation Center and Santa Ana. Within the study  area, the line travels north‐south along Harbor Boulevard. Service is provided at 15 minute headways  during peak periods on weekdays. Weekdays and holiday service is also provided.    ART Lines:    Lines 1, 2 – These lines operate between the Disneyland Transportation Center and the Target on  Chapman Avenue. Within the study area, the lines travel north‐south along Harbor Boulevard. Service is  provided at 20 minute headways during weekdays and weekends.    Lines 3, 4, 5 – These lines operate between the Disneyland Transportation Center and the Anaheim  Convention Center. Within the study area, the lines travel north‐south along Harbor Boulevard. Service is  provided at 20 minute headways during weekdays and weekends.  Lines 6, 7, 8 – These lines operate between the Disneyland Transportation Center and the hotels along the  GardenWalk. Within the study area, these lines travel from Harbor Boulevard to Disney Way, looping  around Katella Avenue back to Harbor Boulevard. Service is provided at 20 minute headways during  weekdays and weekends.    Line 9 – This line operates between the Disneyland Transportation Center and hotels along Katella Avenue.  Service is provided at 20 minute headways during weekdays and weekends.  Line 10 – This line operates between the Disneyland Transportation Center and downtown Anaheim.  Within the study area, the line travels north and south along Harbor Boulevard, and Katella Avenue  between Harbor Boulevard and Clementine Street. Service is provided at 30 minute headways during  weekdays and weekends.    G-18 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 19 Line 11 – This line operates between the Disneyland Transportation Center, hotels along Ball Road, and  the Ball Road at Cast Place OCTA bus stop. Within the study area, the line travels north‐south along Harbor  Boulevard between the main crosswalk to Disneyland Entrance and Ball Road. Service is provided at 30  minute headways during weekdays and weekends.    Line 12 – This line operates between the Disneyland Transportation Center and the Holiday Inn Anaheim  on Manchester Avenue. Within the study area, the line travels north‐south on Harbor Boulevard, along  Disney Way, and Katella Avenue between Harbor Boulevard and Hester Street. Service is provided at 20  minute headways during weekdays and weekends.     Lines 14, 15 – These lines operate between the Disneyland Transportation Center and the Embassy Suites  on Glassell Street. Within the study area, these lines travel east‐west on Katella Avenue, and Harbor  Boulevard between Disney Way and Chapman Avenue. Service is provided at 20 minute headways during  weekdays and weekends.    Line 18 – This line operates between the Disneyland Transportation Center and Knott’s Berry Farm. Within  the study area, the line travels north‐south along Harbor Boulevard. Service is provided at 60 minute  headways during weekdays and weekends.    Line 19 – This line operates between the Disneyland Transportation Center and downtown Santa Ana.  Within the study area, the line travels north‐south along Harbor Boulevard. Service is provided at 120  minute headways during weekdays and weekends.    3.3 Existing Traffic Volumes   Existing intersection turning movement count data was obtained for weekday conditions during the  month of September, 2015. Data was collected during the a.m. and p.m. peak periods, as well as a  weekend peak period. The intersection turning movement data was then used in conjunction with the  OCTA ADT map for 2013/2014 to determine the existing roadway segment ADT using “K” factor  methodology.  3.3.1 Count Data    Weekday vehicle turning counts at the study intersections are shown in Figure 4 for the a.m. and p.m.  peak hours. A weekend peak hour analysis was determined using 24‐hour tube counts on northbound  Harbor Boulevard south of Disney Way. Tube counts at this location showed that northbound Harbor  Boulevard had a mid‐day peak at 10:30 to 11:30 a.m. A determination was made to use 10:00 to 11:00  a.m. as the weekend peak hour to account for a combination of peak hotel and peak roadway trips. Figure  5 shows the existing weekend peak hour volumes at the intersection of Harbor Boulevard and Disney Way.    Weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour pedestrian counts were collected for the intersections of Harbor  Boulevard at Katella Avenue and Harbor Boulevard at Disney Way to apply to HCM analysis. Weekend  pedestrian counts were not collected. The higher of the a.m. and p.m. peak hour weekday pedestrian  counts were assumed and applied for weekend HCM analysis. Detailed traffic count sheets are provided  in Appendix A for weekdays and weekends.  G-19 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 20 Figure 4: Existing Weekday Peak Hour Intersection and Arterial ADT Volumes  G-20 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 21 Figure 5: Existing Weekend Peak Hour Intersection Volumes    G-21 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 22 3.3.2 PM Peak Hour to ADT “K” Factor    The existing ADT volumes were obtained by factoring peak hour counts by a determined “K” factor, which  represents the percent of average daily traffic that travels a roadway during the peak hour. The “K” factor  was obtained from existing average daily vehicle volumes published in the OCTA 2013/2014 Traffic Flow  Map, and grown to 2015 using an estimated one percent annual growth. Two intersections (with four  approaches each) were used to determine the PM peak hour to ADT “K” factor to be used in ADT  calculations. Table 5 summarizes the intersection approach volumes, OCTA ADT, and “K” factor for the  study area.    Table 5: PM Peak Hour to ADT K‐Factor    INTERSECTION LEG  PM PEAK  HOUR  COUNT1 OCTA ADT2 OCTA YEAR2  2015 ADT  (GROWTH  FROM OCTA)  APPROACH  PERCENT  Harbor Boulevard  at Katella Avenue  west 2,693 37,000 2011 38,500 7.0%  east 3,044 43,000 2011 44,500 6.8%  south 2,506 39,000 2011 40,500 6.2%  north 1,958 41,000 2009 43,500 4.5%  Anaheim  Boulevard at  Katella Avenue  west 3,049 43,000 2011 44,500 6.9%  east 2,802 39,000 2011 40,500 6.9%  south 2,122 20,000 2009 21,000 10.1%  north 2,071 19,000 2009 20,000 10.4%  1PM Peak Hour Counts discussed in Section 3.3.1 of this report, and included in Appendix A.  2Source:  OCTA ADT obtained from the OCTA 2013/2104 Traffic Flow Map found on the OCTA Annual Traffic Volume  Maps website:  http://www.octa.net/Freeways‐and‐Streets/Streets/Master‐Road‐Plan/Annual‐Traffic‐Volume‐ Maps/?terms=traffic%20counts     The average “K” factor for the eight study area approaches results in approximately 8% percentage of  peak hour to ADT. An 8% peak hour to ADT percentage results in a “K” factor of 12.5 (1.0 / 8% = 12.5).    The “K” factor was applied to each of the intersection legs using the following formula:    ܲܯ ܲ݁ܽ݇ ܪ݋ݑݎ ሺܣ݌݌ݎ݋݄ܽܿ ൅ ܧݔ݅ݐ ܸ݋݈ݑ݉݁ሻ ∗ ሺܭ ܨܽܿݐ݋ݎሻ ൌ ܮ݁݃ ܸ݋݈ݑ݉݁      3.4 Intersection Level-of-Service   LOS analyses were conducted to evaluate existing intersection operations during the weekday a.m. and  p.m. peak hours. All intersections were analyzed using ICU methodology, and additional HCM analyses  were completed at the intersections of Harbor Boulevard at Disney Way and Harbor Boulevard at Katella  Avenue, as well as at all freeway ramp terminals.     A peak weekend analysis was also completed at the intersections of Harbor Boulevard at Disney Way and  Harbor Boulevard at Katella Avenue, as well as at the project driveways, using HCM methodology.  G-22 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 23   Figures 4 and 5 show the existing weekday and weekend peak hour volumes used for LOS analysis at each  of the intersections.  3.4.1 ICU LOS    The City of Anaheim General Plan utilizes the ICU methodology for LOS. All of the study intersections were  evaluated using ICU methodology, with two agencies governing significant impact criteria:  The City of  Anaheim, and the OCTA CMP.  The CMP criteria guidelines take precedence over the City of Anaheim  guidelines at all CMP identified intersections.  Table 6 summarizes the existing V/C ratio and LOS using  the ICU methodology at all of the study intersections. Detailed ICU LOS calculation worksheets are  included in Appendix B. As shown in Table 6, all of the study intersections are currently operating at LOS  B or better.    Table 6: Existing Intersection ICU LOS    INTERSECTION TRAFFIC  CONTROL CRITERIA USED1  AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR  ICU  V/C LOS ICU  V/C LOS  12 Harbor Boulevard at I‐5 Northbound  Ramps Signalized CMP 0.52 A 0.64 B  22 Harbor Boulevard at I‐5 Southbound  Ramps Signalized CMP 0.41 A 0.41 A  3 Harbor Boulevard at Manchester  Avenue Signalized City of Anaheim 0.35 A 0.48 A  4 Harbor Boulevard at Disney Way Signalized City of Anaheim 0.25 A 0.35 A  52 Harbor Boulevard at Katella Avenue Signalized CMP 0.44 A 0.51 A  6 Anaheim GardenWalk at Disney Way Signalized City of Anaheim 0.12 A 0.19 A  7 Clementine Street at Disney Way Signalized City of Anaheim 0.21 A 0.31 A  8 Clementine Street at Katella Avenue Signalized City of Anaheim 0.44 A 0.59 A  9 I‐5 Southbound Off‐ramp at Disney  Way Signalized City of Anaheim 0.27 A 0.33 A  10 Anaheim Boulevard at Disney Way Signalized City of Anaheim 0.48 A 0.56 A  11 Anaheim Boulevard at Katella Avenue Signalized City of Anaheim 0.41 A 0.56 A  122 I‐5 Southbound Ramps at Katella  Avenue Signalized CMP 0.43 A 0.57 A  132 I‐5 Northbound Ramps at Katella  Avenue Signalized CMP 0.38 A 0.51 A  N Harbor Boulevard at North Driveway Does Not Exist3 Not Applicable4 Not Analyzed4 S Harbor Boulevard at South Driveway Does Not Exist3 Not Applicable4  Notes:  ICU = Intersection Capacity Utilization Methodology, V/C = Volume to Capacity Ratio, LOS = Level‐of‐service  1All intersections were evaluated using City of Anaheim or CMP intersection criteria guidelines per Section 2.1.1.    2CMP Note:  Included in the Orange County Congestion Management Program.  3The project driveways exist under project scenario only. There are no existing driveways.  4The project driveways are unsignalized intersections, and not included covered by ICU methodology.  Project driveways are  only analyzed using HCM methodologies.      G-23 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 24 A summary of the PM peak hour existing intersection LOS using ICU methodology compared to previous  environmental documents is included in Table 7. The comparison of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan  (FSEIR No. 340) forecast for 2015 shows the existing conditions in 2015 are operating at the same or better  LOS than predicted.     Table 7: Existing Intersection ICU LOS Compared With Disneyland Resort Specific Plan (FEIR No. 311)  and Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (FSEIR No. 340)    INTERSECTION TRAFFIC  CONTROL  DISNEYLAND RESORT  SPECIFIC PLAN   (FEIR NO. 311)  FORECAST YEAR (2010)4 ANAHEIM RESORT  SPECIFIC PLAN  INTERIM YEAR (2015)5  ANAHEIM PLAZA  HOTEL TIA EXISTING  CONDITIONS   (2015)  PM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR  ICU  V/C LOS ICU  V/C LOS ICU  V/C LOS  11 Harbor Boulevard at I‐5 Northbound  Ramps Signalized 0.59 A 0.62 B 0.64 B  21 Harbor Boulevard at I‐5 Southbound  Ramps Signalized N/A N/A 0.38 A 0.41 A  3 Harbor Boulevard at Manchester  Avenue Signalized 0.61 B 0.49 A 0.48 A  4 Harbor Boulevard at Disney Way Signalized N/A N/A 0.58 A 0.35 A  51 Harbor Boulevard at Katella Avenue Signalized 1.00 F 0.74 C 0.51 A  6 Anaheim GardenWalk at Disney  Way Signalized N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.19 A  7 Clementine Street at Disney Way Signalized N/A N/A 0.31 A 0.31 A  8 Clementine Street at Katella Avenue Signalized 0.69 B 0.73 C 0.59 A  9 I‐5 Southbound Off‐ramp at Disney  Way Signalized N/A N/A 0.32 A 0.33 A  10 Anaheim Boulevard at Disney Way Signalized N/A N/A 0.60 A 0.56 A  11 Anaheim Boulevard at Katella  Avenue Signalized 0.90 D 0.73 C 0.56 A  121 I‐5 Southbound Ramps at Katella  Avenue Signalized N/A N/A 0.66 B 0.57 A  131 I‐5 Northbound Ramps at Katella  Avenue Signalized 0.80 D 0.62 B 0.51 A  N Harbor Boulevard at North Driveway Does Not  Exist3 Not Analyzed Not Analyzed Not Analyzed  S Harbor Boulevard at South Driveway Does Not  Exist3  Notes:  ICU = Intersection Capacity Utilization Methodology, V/C = Volume to Capacity Ratio, LOS = Level‐of‐service   1CMP Note:  Included in the Orange County Congestion Management Program.  3The project driveways exist under project scenario only. There are no existing driveways.  4Disneyland Resort Specific Plan forecasts represent the year 2010 future intersection performance “With the Disneyland  Resort” without roadway improvements as shown in Table 3.3‐12 of FEIR No. 311.  5Anaheim Resort Specific Plan forecasts represent the year 2015 interim intersection performance “with the Anaheim Resort”  project as shown in Table 4.9 of FSEIR No. 340).    G-24 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 25 3.4.2 HCM LOS    All Caltrans intersections (freeway ramp terminals), project driveways, and the intersections of Harbor  Boulevard at Disney Way and Harbor Boulevard at Katella Avenue were evaluated using HCM  methodologies.   Table 8 summarizes the existing LOS at the ramp terminals and the intersections of  Harbor Boulevard at Disney Way and Harbor Boulevard at Katella Avenue.     The two project driveways are not included in the analysis, because they do not currently exist.  LOS  calculation worksheets are included in Appendix B. As shown in Table 8, all study intersections are  currently operating at LOS D or better. Table 8: Existing Intersection HCM LOS    INTERSECTION TRAFFIC  CONTROL CRITERIA USED1  AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR  DELAY  (SEC/VEH) LOS DELAY  (SEC/VEH) LOS  12 Harbor Boulevard at I‐5 Northbound Ramps Signalized Caltrans/CMP 11.2 B 15.5 B  22 Harbor Boulevard at I‐5 Southbound Ramps Signalized Caltrans/CMP 5.0 A 8.6 A  4 Harbor Boulevard at Disney Way Signalized City of Anaheim 23.1 C 25.5 C  52 Harbor Boulevard at Katella Avenue Signalized CMP 34.1 C 40.9 D  9 I‐5 Southbound Off‐ramp at Disney Way Signalized Caltrans 31.1 C 34.0 C  10 Anaheim Boulevard at Disney Way Signalized Caltrans 36.1 D 43.5 D  122 I‐5 Southbound Ramps at Katella Avenue Signalized CMP 27.0 C 32.9 C  132 I‐5 Northbound Ramps at Katella Avenue Signalized Caltrans/CMP 22.3 C 31.4 C  N Harbor Boulevard at North Driveway Does Not  Exist3 City of Anaheim  Not Analyzed3  S Harbor Boulevard at South Driveway Does Not  Exist3 City of Anaheim  Notes:  HCM = Highway Capacity Manual, LOS = Level‐of‐service, Delay = Average Vehicle Delay (Seconds/Vehicle)  1All intersections were evaluated using City of Anaheim, Caltrans, or CMP intersection criteria guidelines per Section 2.1.2.    2CMP Note:  Included in the Orange County Congestion Management Program.  3The project driveways exist under project scenario only. There are no existing driveways.    3.4.3 Weekend HCM LOS    A weekend analysis was conducted at the Harbor Boulevard and Disney Way intersection, Harbor  Boulevard and Katella Avenue intersection, and the two project driveways on northbound Harbor  Boulevard. Table 9 summarizes the weekend LOS for existing conditions.  The intersections of Disney Way  and Katella Avenue at Harbor Boulevard were analyzed using HCM methodology due to a high amount of  pedestrian activity at these locations. As shown in Table 9, during weekend peak hour, these two arterial  intersections are currently operating at LOS E or better.    G-25 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 26 Table 9: Existing Weekend Intersection HCM LOS    INTERSECTION TRAFFIC  CONTROL1 CRITERIA USED1 WEEKEND MID‐DAY PEAK HOUR  DELAY (SEC/VEH) LOS  4 Harbor Boulevard at Disney Way Signalized City of Anaheim 59.4 E  52 Harbor Boulevard at Katella Avenue Signalized CMP 37.9 D  N Harbor Boulevard at North Driveway Does Not Exist3 City of Anaheim Not Analyzed3 S Harbor Boulevard at South Driveway Does Not Exist3 City of Anaheim  Notes:  HCM = Highway Capacity Manual, LOS = Level‐of‐service, Delay = Average Vehicle Delay (Seconds/Vehicle)  1All intersections were evaluated using City of Anaheim, Caltrans, or CMP intersection criteria guidelines per Section 2.1.2.    2CMP Note:  Included in the Orange County Congestion Management Program.  3The project driveways exist under project scenario only. There are no existing driveways. 3.5 Roadway Segment Level-of-Service   Roadway segment LOS analysis was completed for the ADT for existing conditions, with two agencies  governing significant impact criteria:  The City of Anaheim, and the CMP. Roadway segment ADT  calculations are summarized in Appendix C. Table 10 summarizes the roadway segment ADT volume,  segment configuration, segment capacity, volume‐to‐capacity (V/C) ratio, and daily LOS. As shown in  Table 10, all roadway segments are currently operating at LOS B or better.   Table 10: Existing Arterial Segment ADT LOS    ROADWAY SEGMENT CRITERIA USED1 ADT  MID‐ BLOCK  LANES  TOTAL  CAPACITY V/C LOS  12 Harbor Boulevard between I‐5 Southbound and  Northbound Ramps  CMP 35,800 8 Divided 75,000 0.477 A  22 Harbor Boulevard between Manchester Avenue and I‐5  Southbound Ramps  CMP 30,200 7 Divided 65,700 0.460 A  32 Harbor Boulevard between Disney Way and Manchester  Avenue  CMP 28,700 6 Divided 56,300 0.510 A  42 Harbor Boulevard between Katella Avenue and Disney  Way  CMP 25,100 6 Divided 56,300 0.446 A  5 Disney Way between Harbor Boulevard and Anaheim  GardenWalk  City of Anaheim 8,300 6 Divided 56,300 0.147 A  6 Disney Way between Anaheim GardenWalk and  Clementine Street  City of Anaheim 11,600 6 Divided 56,300 0.206 A  7 Disney Way between Clementine Street and I‐5  Southbound Off‐Ramp  City of Anaheim 11,200 6 Divided 56,300 0.199 A  8 Manchester Way between Disney Way and Anaheim  Boulevard  City of Anaheim 13,800 6 Divided 56,300 0.245 A  9 Clementine Street between Katella Avenue and Disney  Way  City of Anaheim 9,200 4 Divided 37,500 0.245 A  10 Anaheim Boulevard between Katella Avenue and Disney  Way  City of Anaheim 26,200 6 Divided 56,300 0.465 A  G-26 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 27 ROADWAY SEGMENT CRITERIA USED1 ADT  MID‐ BLOCK  LANES  TOTAL  CAPACITY V/C LOS  112 Katella Avenue between Harbor Boulevard and  Clementine Street  CMP 38,400 6 Divided 56,300 0.682 B  122 Katella Avenue between Clementine Street and  Anaheim Boulevard  CMP 38,200 6 Divided 56,300 0.679 B  132 Katella Avenue between Haster Street and I‐5  Southbound Ramps  CMP 35,200 6 Divided 56,300 0.625 B  142 Katella Avenue between I‐5 Southbound and  Northbound Ramps  CMP 35,800 6 Divided 56,300 0.636 B  15 Manchester Way between Anaheim Boulevard and  Katella Avenue  City of Anaheim 1,100 3 Divided 14,100 0.078 A  Notes:    ADT = Average Daily Traffic, V/C = Volume to Capacity Ratio, LOS = Level‐of‐Service  1All intersections were evaluated using City of Anaheim or CMP intersection criteria guidelines per Section 2.2.    2CMP Note: Included in the Orange County Congestion Management Program.    4.0 ANAHEIM RESORT HOTEL TRIP GENERATION RATE Empirical resort hotel trip generation rates in the Anaheim Resort District were determined for this project,  rather than applying Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) trip generation rates based on nationwide  data. Calculating a resort specific rate based on local data provides rates more specific to the Anaheim Resort  hotels, rather than relying on data obtained for resort areas which may have different trip characteristics.    4.1 Methodology   Trip generation for a resort hotel was determined based on 7‐day, 24‐hour tube counts collected at the  driveways for two similar hotels in The Anaheim Resort. The two hotels are Fairfield Hotel (located at 1460  S. Harbor) and Sheraton Inn (located at 1855 S. Harbor). The two similar resort hotels are summarized  below by rooms and square footage of meeting, retail, and restaurant space.     Fairfield Inn Marriott has 467 rooms and 1,369 square feet of meeting space, and    Sheraton Park has 490 rooms, 28,000 square feet of meeting space, and 8,000 square feet of  restaurant.    Using the collected count data, an empirical resort trip generation rate was developed for weekday and  weekend peak time periods. The City of Anaheim has an allowance for 20 percent of the square footage  of hotel rooms to be used for meeting and retail space. Any additional square footage of space requires  the addition of ancillary trips to the site. Table 11 summarizes the Anaheim Plaza Hotel and two similar  resort hotels square footage of rooms, and meeting and retail space.     G-27 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 28 Table 11: Hotel Square Footage Comparison    HOTEL NAME NUMBER OF ROOMS  SQUARE FOOTAGE OF  ROOMS (ASSUMING  450 SQ. FT. PER  ROOM)  AVAILABLE SQUARE  FOOTAGE FOR  ANCILLARY USES   (20 PERCENT)  ADDITIONAL SQUARE  FOOTAGE OF  ANCILLARY USES  Anaheim Plaza Hotel  580 261,000 52,200 23,400  Fairfield Inn Marriott 467 210,150 42,030 0  Sheraton Park 490 220,500 44,100 0      Because the square footage of meeting and retail space exceeds the 20 percent allotment for resort hotel  trip generation, additional trips need to be added to the resulting trip determination. As consistent with  the General Plan, it is estimated that each hotel room averages 450 square feet.  Using that assumption,  the Anaheim Plaza Hotel results in a total room square footage of 261,000 (450*580) square feet.  Assuming 20 percent of that is allowable for meeting and retail space, results in 52,200 square feet of  meeting and retail space being allowed under the trip generation rates for the empirical Anaheim Resort  Hotel trip generation rate. The remaining 23,400 square feet (75,600‐52,200) of space was used to  calculate additional site trips.    4.2 Determination   Trip generation rates for weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours and weekend peak hour were calculated  using the available hotel driveway counts. Weekend traffic volumes for the study area are typically highest  on Saturdays. This is consistent with ITE weekend trip generation rates for similar land use. Weekend rates  for Anaheim Resort hotels were calculated using count data collected on a Saturday. Resort trip  generation rates methodology and data are summarized in Appendix D. All of the rates developed for The  Anaheim Resort hotels are lower than the ITE trip generation rates, resulting in fewer vehicle trips  potentially impacting traffic operations in The Resort Area. This is consistent with the “park once”  philosophy of The Anaheim Resort, combined with frequent ART service connecting hotels with major  activity centers.    A summary of resort trip generation rates is summarized in Tables 12 (weekday rates) and 13 (weekend  rates).     Table 12: Resort Hotel Weekday Trip Generation Rates    TRIP GENERATION   UNIT  TRIP RATES  WEEKDAY AM WEEKDAY PM WEEKDAY  DAILY IN OUT TOTAL IN OUT TOTAL  Anaheim Resort Hotel Rooms 0.15 0.13 0.28 0.13 0.11 0.24 3.54      G-28 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 29 Table 13: Resort Hotel Weekend Trip Generation Rates    TRIP GENERATION   UNIT2  TRIP RATES  WEEKEND PEAK HOUR3 DAILY IN OUT TOTAL  Anaheim Resort Hotel Rooms 0.15 0.37 0.52 2.66  Note:  Weekend time period is 10:00 to 11:00 a.m. per Section 3.3.1 of this report.  ITE Trip generation rates were adopted for Project retail and meeting rooms as well as for all cumulative  project hotels. A summary of ITE trip generation rates for weekday and weekend are summarized in Tables  14 and 15, respectively.     Table 14: ITE Trip Generation Weekday Trip Generation Rates    ITE TRIP GENERATION  LAND USE UNIT2 ITE   CODE  ITE TRIP RATES  WEEKDAY AM WEEKDAY PM WEEKDAY DAILY IN OUT TOTAL IN OUT TOTAL  Resort Hotel1 Rooms 330 0.22 0.09 0.31 0.18 0.24 0.42 N/A  Hotel Rooms 310 0.31 0.22 0.53 0.31 0.29 0.60 8.17  Retail TSF 820 0.60 0.36 0.96 1.78 1.93 3.71 42.70  Meeting Rooms TSF 495 1.35 0.70 2.05 1.34 1.40 2.74 33.82  Notes:  1 ITE Land Use 330 (Resort Hotel) does not contain data for weekday daily trips and weekend trip rates, ITE Land Use 300 (Hotel) rates were  utilized.  2 Rooms = number of hotel rooms, TSF = Thousand Square Feet      Table 15: ITE Trip Generation Weekend Trip Generation Rates    ITE TRIP GENERATION  LAND USE UNIT2 ITE   CODE  ITE TRIP RATES  WEEKEND PEAK HOUR3 DAILY IN OUT TOTAL  Resort Hotel1 Rooms 330 N/A N/A N/A N/A  Hotel Rooms 310 0.40 0.32 0.72 8.19  Retail TSF 820 2.51 2.31 4.82 49.97  Meeting Rooms TSF 495 0.58 0.49 1.07 9.10  Notes:   1 ITE Land Use 330 (Resort Hotel) does not contain data for weekday daily trips and weekend trip rates, ITE Land Use 300 (Hotel) rates were  utilized.  2 Rooms = number of hotel rooms, TSF = Thousand Square Feet  3 For Land Use of which both Saturday and Sunday trip generation rates are available, the weekend day with the higher trip rates were  utilized.  G-29 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 30 4.3 Project Trip Generation   Project trip generation was developed using rates presented in Section 4.0 of this report. Tables 16 and  17 summarize the trip generation for the Anaheim Plaza Hotel. Table 16 summarizes weekday a.m. and  p.m. trips, and Table 17 summarizes weekend trips. As shown in Table 16, the proposed project is forecast  to generate 201 new a.m. peak hour trips, 211 new p.m. peak hour trips, and 2,919 new weekday daily  trips. Table 17 shows that the project is expected to generate 360 new weekend peak hour trips and 2,088  new weekend daily trips.    Table 16: Proposed Project Trip Generation     LAND USE QUANTITY UNIT2  TRIPS ENDS GENERATED  WEEKDAY AM WEEKDAY PM WEEKDAY DAILY IN OUT TOTAL IN OUT TOTAL  Existing Hotel 300 Rooms ‐44 ‐39 ‐83 ‐39 ‐32 ‐71 ‐1,063  Proposed Hotel 580 Rooms 85 76 161 75 63 138 2,055  Proposed Retail1,3 8.19 TSF 5 3 8 15 16 31 350  Proposed Meeting Rooms1,3 15.21 TSF 21 11 32 21 21 42 514  Total Proposed Hotel Trips Generated 111 90 201 111 100 211 2,919  Net Project Trips Generated4 67 51 118 72 68 140 1,856  Notes:  TSF = Thousand Square Feet   1 ITE rates (9th Edition) for Retail (820) and Meeting rooms (495). Empirical data for existing and proposed hotel.  2 Rooms = number of hotel rooms  3 Square footage derived using retail to meeting room ratio and applying to the additional 23,400 square feet of ancillary uses  4 Net Project Trips Generated = Total Proposed Hotel Trips Generated – Existing Hotel Trips     Table 17: Proposed Project Weekend Trip Generation    LAND USE QUANTITY UNIT2  TRIPS ENDS GENERATED  WEEKEND PEAK HOUR DAILY IN OUT TOTAL  Existing Hotel 300 Rooms ‐45 ‐112 ‐157 ‐797  Proposed Hotel 580 Rooms 87 217 304 1,541  Proposed Retail1,3 8.19 TSF 21 19 40 409  Proposed Meeting  Rooms1,3 15.21 TSF 9 7 16 138  Total Proposed Hotel Trips Generated 117 243 360 2,088  Net Project Trips Generated4 72 131 203 1,291  Notes:   Weekend time period is 10:00 to 11:00 a.m. per Section 3.3.1 of this report.  TSF = Thousand Square Feet   1 ITE rates (9th Edition) for Retail (820) and Meeting rooms (495). Empirical data for existing and proposed hotel.  2 Rooms = number of hotel rooms  3 Square footage derived using retail to meeting room ratio and applying to the additional 23,400 square feet of ancillary uses  4 Net Project Trips Generated = Total Proposed Hotel Trips Generated – Existing Hotel Trips   G-30 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 31 4.3.1 Pedestrian Trip Generation    Intersections at Harbor Boulevard and Disney Way and Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue experience  high pedestrian activities due to their proximity to the resort parks and convention center. Project  pedestrian trip generation was estimated using existing weekday pedestrian counts at the two  aforementioned intersections and the approximated number of hotel rooms located within walking  distance of the intersections. Table 18 summarizes the pedestrian trip generation at the two study  intersections. Detailed trip generation calculation is included in Appendix D.     Table 18: Proposed Project Pedestrian Trip Generation    PROJECT PEDESTRIAN TRIPS HARBOR BLVD / DISNEY WAY HARBOR BLVD / KATELLA AVE  AM PEAK PM PEAK AM PEAK PM PEAK  Existing Hotel ‐50 ‐32 ‐24 ‐29  Proposed Hotel 97 62 46 56  Net Project Generated Pedestrian Trips 47 30 22 27      4.4 Project Trip Distribution   Trip distribution documents the origin and destination of new vehicle trips associated with the project.  Trip distribution for the project was developed using the Anaheim Transportation Analysis Model (ATAM)  for a.m., p.m., and mid‐day time periods. An ATAM model run was conducted assuming the proposed  project on the site. Using a “select‐zone” methodology that isolates all trips originating from and destined  to a specific zone across the network, the percent distribution for the project was derived. The ATAM  model does not have the ability to forecast weekend conditions, thus an assumption was made that the  mid‐day time period for weekday conditions was representative trip distribution for the weekend peak  hour. The distribution patterns developed for the project are shown in Figures 6 and 7 for the weekday  and weekend, respectively. Figures 8 and 9 show the net project trip assignments for weekday and  weekend time periods, respectively.   G-31 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 32 Figure 6: Weekday Project Trip Distribution Percentages      G-32 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 33 Figure 7: Weekend Project Trip Distribution Percentages      G-33 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 34 Figure 8: Weekday Net Project Only Peak Hour and Daily Trip Assignment Volumes        G-34 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 35 Figure 9: Weekend Net Project Only Peak Hour Trip Assignment Volumes    G-35 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 36 5.0 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS   Trips generated by the project, as shown in Tables 15 and 16, were assigned to the surrounding roadway  system based on the distribution patterns to forecast the project related peak‐hour traffic at each of the  study intersections. Figures 10 and 11 illustrate the weekday and weekend existing plus project peak hour  volumes, respectively.        G-36 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 37 Figure 10: Existing Plus Project Weekday Peak Hour Intersection and Arterial ADT Volumes       G-37 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 38 Figure 11: Existing Plus Project Weekend Peak Hour Intersection Volumes    G-38 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 39 5.1 Intersection Level-of-Service   LOS analyses were conducted to evaluate existing plus project intersection operations during the weekday  a.m. and p.m. peak hours. All intersections were analyzed using ICU methodology, and additional HCM  analyses were completed at the intersections of Harbor Boulevard at Disney Way and Harbor Boulevard  at Katella Avenue, as well as at all freeway ramp terminals and project driveways.     Existing “plus project” traffic operations were compared to existing conditions without the project in order  to assess any significant traffic impacts of the project.   5.1.1 ICU LOS    The City of Anaheim General Plan utilizes the ICU methodology for LOS. All of the study intersections were  evaluated using ICU methodology, with two agencies governing significant impact criteria:  The City of  Anaheim, and the OCTA CMP.  The OCTA CMP criteria guidelines take precedence over the City of Anaheim  guidelines at all CMP identified intersections.  Table 19 summarizes the existing plus project LOS using the  ICU methodology at all of the study intersections. Detailed ICU LOS calculation worksheets are included  in Appendix B. As shown in Table 19, all of the study intersections are currently operating at LOS B or  better, and the traffic generated by the proposed project is not expected to exceed the threshold of  significance.    Table 19: Existing Plus Project Intersection ICU LOS    INTERSECTION TRAFFIC  CONTROL  CRITERIA  USED1  EXISTING EXISTING PLUS  PROJECT  SIGNIFICANT IMPACT  DETERMINATION  AM PM AM PM CHANGE IN V/C IMPACT? ICU  V/C LOS ICU  V/C LOS ICU  V/C LOS ICU  V/C LOS AM PM  12 Harbor Boulevard  at I‐5 NB Ramps Signalized CMP 0.52 A 0.64 B 0.52 A 0.64 B 0.00 0.00 No  22 Harbor Boulevard  at I‐5 SB Ramps Signalized CMP 0.41 A 0.41 A 0.41 A 0.41 A 0.00 0.00 No  3  Harbor Boulevard  at  Manchester  Avenue  Signalized City of  Anaheim 0.35 A 0.48 A 0.35 A 0.48 A 0.00 0.00 No  4 Harbor Boulevard  at Disney Way Signalized City of  Anaheim 0.25 A 0.35 A 0.26 A 0.36 A 0.01 0.01 No  52 Harbor Boulevard  at Katella Avenue  Signalized CMP 0.44 A 0.51 A 0.44 A 0.52 A 0.00 0.01 No  6  Anaheim  GardenWalk at   Disney Way  Signalized City of  Anaheim 0.12 A 0.19 A 0.12 A 0.19 A 0.00 0.01 No  7  Clementine  Street at Disney  Way  Signalized City of  Anaheim 0.21 A 0.31 A 0.22 A 0.31 A 0.00 0.00 No  8  Clementine  Street at Katella  Avenue   Signalized City of  Anaheim 0.44 A 0.59 A 0.45 A 0.59 A 0.00 0.01 No  G-39 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 40 INTERSECTION TRAFFIC  CONTROL  CRITERIA  USED1  EXISTING EXISTING PLUS  PROJECT  SIGNIFICANT IMPACT  DETERMINATION  AM PM AM PM CHANGE IN V/C IMPACT? ICU  V/C LOS ICU  V/C LOS ICU  V/C LOS ICU  V/C LOS AM PM  9 I‐5 SB Off‐ramp at   Disney Way Signalized City of  Anaheim 0.27 A 0.33 A 0.27 A 0.34 A 0.00 0.01 No  10  Anaheim  Boulevard at  Disney Way  Signalized City of  Anaheim 0.48 A 0.56 A 0.48 A 0.56 A 0.00 0.00 No  11  Anaheim  Boulevard at  Katella Avenue   Signalized City of  Anaheim 0.41 A 0.56 A 0.41 A 0.57 A 0.00 0.01 No  122 I‐5 SB Ramps at   Katella Avenue  Signalized CMP 0.43 A 0.57 A 0.43 A 0.58 A 0.00 0.00 No  132 I‐5 NB Ramps at   Katella Avenue Signalized CMP 0.38 A 0.51 A 0.39 A 0.51 A 0.01 0.00 No  N  Harbor Boulevard  at North  Driveway  Un‐ signalized  Not  Applicable4 Does Not Exist3  Not Analyzed Not Analyzed4 Not  Analyzed4 S  Harbor Boulevard  at South  Driveway  Un‐ signalized  Not  Applicable4 Notes:  ICU = Intersection Capacity Utilization Methodology, V/C = Volume to Capacity Ratio, LOS = Level‐of‐service  1All intersections were evaluated using City of Anaheim or CMP intersection criteria guidelines per Section 2.1.1.    2CMP Note:  Included in the Orange County Congestion Management Program.  3The project driveways exist under project scenario only. There are no existing driveways.  4The project driveways are unsignalized intersections, and not included covered by ICU methodology.  Project driveways are  only analyzed using HCM methodologies.      5.1.2 HCM LOS    All Caltrans intersections (freeway ramp terminals), project driveways, and the intersections of Harbor  Boulevard at Disney Way and Harbor Boulevard at Katella Avenue were evaluated using HCM  methodologies.   Table 20 summarizes the existing plus project LOS at the ramp terminals and the  intersections of Harbor Boulevard at Disney Way and Harbor Boulevard at Katella Avenue.  The two  project driveways are included in the analysis, although no formal HCM criteria has been established by  the City of Anaheim.  LOS calculation worksheets are included in Appendix B. As shown in Table 20, all  study intersections are projected operate at LOS D or better.     G-40 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 41 Table 20: Existing Plus Project Intersection HCM LOS    INTERSECTION TRAFFIC  CONTROL  CRITERIA  USED1  EXISTING EXISTING PLUS  PROJECT LOS  DEFICIENT?4AM PM AM PM  DELAY LOS DELAY LOS DELAY LOS DELAY LOS  12 Harbor Boulevard at I‐5 NB  Ramps Signalized Caltrans/CMP 11.2 B 15.5 B 11.2 B 15.5 B No  22 Harbor Boulevard at I‐5 SB  Ramps Signalized Caltrans/CMP 5.0 A 8.6 A 5.0 A 8.6 A No  4 Harbor Boulevard at Disney  Way Signalized City of  Anaheim 23.1 C 25.5 C 23.9 C 26.4 C No  52 Harbor Boulevard at Katella  Avenue Signalized CMP 34.1 C 40.9 D 34.4 C 41.0 D No  9 I‐5 SB Off‐ramp at  Disney  Way Signalized Caltrans 31.1 C 34.0 C 31.2 C 34.8 C No  10 Anaheim Boulevard at  Disney Way Signalized Caltrans 36.1 D 43.5 D 36.2 D 43.9 D No  122 I‐5 SB Ramps at  Katella  Avenue Signalized CMP 27.0 C 32.9 C 26.9 C 33.0 C No  132 I‐5 NB Ramps at  Katella  Avenue  Signalized Caltrans/CMP 22.3 C 31.4 C 22.4 C 31.8 C No  N Harbor Boulevard at North  Driveway  Un‐ signalized  City of  Anaheim Not Analyzed3  12.9 B 16.1 C No  S Harbor Boulevard at South  Driveway  Un‐ signalized  City of  Anaheim 12.2 B 14.7 B No  Notes:  HCM = Highway Capacity Manual, LOS = Level‐of‐service, Delay = Average Vehicle Delay (Seconds/Vehicle)  1All intersections were evaluated using City of Anaheim, Caltrans, or CMP intersection criteria guidelines per Section 2.1.2.    2CMP Note:  Included in the Orange County Congestion Management Program.  3The project driveways exist under project scenario only. There are no existing driveways.  4No City or CMP significant impact criteria has been established for HCM intersection analysis.   5.1.3 Weekend LOS    A weekend analysis was concluded at Disney Way and Harbor Boulevard, Katella Avenue and Harbor  Boulevard and the two project driveways on northbound Harbor Boulevard.  Table 21 summarizes the  weekend LOS for existing plus project conditions.     As shown in Table 21, the intersections of Harbor Boulevard at Disney Way and Harbor Boulevard at Katella  Avenue are both expected to operate at LOS E or better in the weekend peak hour.  The two driveways are  expected to operate at LOS C or better, with no potential deficiencies identified.    G-41 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 42 Table 21: Existing Plus Project Weekend Intersection HCM LOS    INTERSECTION TRAFFIC  CONTROL1 CRITERIA USED1 EXISTING  EXISTING PLUS PROJECT LOS DEFICIENT?4 DELAY  LOS DELAY  LOS  4 Harbor Boulevard at  Disney Way Signal City of Anaheim 59.4 E 59.0 E Project reduces  delay5  52 Harbor Boulevard at  Katella Avenue Signal CMP 37.9 D 38.3 D No  N6 Harbor Boulevard at  North Driveway  Un‐ signalized City of Anaheim Does Not Exist3  Not Analyzed  16.9 C No  S6 Harbor Boulevard at  South Driveway  Un‐ signalized City of Anaheim 13.5 B No  Notes:   Weekend time period is 10:00 to 11:00 a.m. per Section 3.3.1 of this report.  Delay = Average Vehicle Delay (Seconds/Vehicle), LOS = Level‐of‐service  1All intersections were evaluated using City of Anaheim, Caltrans, or CMP intersection criteria guidelines per Section 2.1.2.    2CMP Note:  Included in the Orange County Congestion Management Program.  3The project driveways exist under project scenario only. There are no existing driveways.  4No City or CMP significant impact criteria has been established for HCM intersection analysis.   5Average delay at intersection decreases with project when compared with existing conditions.  6For unsignalized intersections, LOS of worst movement is reported.        5.2 Roadway Segment Level-of-Service   Roadway segment LOS analysis was completed for the ADT for existing plus project conditions, with two  agencies governing significant impact criteria:  The City of Anaheim, and the CMP. Roadway segment ADT  calculations are summarized in Appendix C. Table 22 summarizes the roadway segment ADT volume,  segment configuration, segment capacity, volume‐to‐capacity (V/C) ratio, and daily LOS. As shown in  Table 22, all roadway segments are projected to operate at LOS B or better, and no significant impacts  were identified.    Table 22: Existing Plus Project Arterial Segment ADT LOS    ROADWAY SEGMENT CRITERIA  USED1  EXISTING EXISTING PLUS PROJECT  SIGNIFICANT  IMPACT  DETERMINATION V/C  RATIO LOS ADT  MID‐ BLOCK  LANES  TOTAL  CAPACITY  V/C  RATIO LOS ∆ IN  V/C3  IMPACT ?  12  Harbor Boulevard  between I‐5 SB and NB  Ramps  CMP 0.477 A 36,100 8  Divided 75,000 0.481 A 0.004 No  22  Harbor Boulevard  between Manchester  Avenue and I‐5 SB Ramps CMP 0.460 A 30,600 7  Divided 65,700 0.466 A 0.006 No  32  Harbor Boulevard  between Disney Way and  Manchester Avenue   CMP 0.510 A 29,100 6  Divided 56,300 0.517 A 0.007 No  G-42 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 43 ROADWAY SEGMENT CRITERIA  USED1  EXISTING EXISTING PLUS PROJECT  SIGNIFICANT  IMPACT  DETERMINATION V/C  RATIO LOS ADT  MID‐ BLOCK  LANES  TOTAL  CAPACITY  V/C  RATIO LOS ∆ IN  V/C3  IMPACT ?  42  Harbor Boulevard  between Katella Avenue  and Disney Way  CMP 0.446 A 26,200 6  Divided 56,300 0.465 A 0.020 No  5  Disney Way between  Harbor Boulevard and  Anaheim GardenWalk  City of  Anaheim 0.147 A 8,700 6  Divided 56,300 0.155 A 0.007 No  6  Disney Way between  Anaheim GardenWalk  and Clementine Street  City of  Anaheim 0.206 A 12,000 6  Divided 56,300 0.213 A 0.007 No  7  Disney Way between  Clementine Street and I‐ 5 SB Off‐Ramp  City of  Anaheim 0.199 A 11,600 6  Divided 56,300 0.206 A 0.007 No  8  Manchester Way  between Disney Way and  Anaheim Boulevard  City of  Anaheim 0.245 A 14,200 6  Divided 56,300 0.252 A 0.007 No  9  Clementine Street  between Katella Avenue  and Disney Way  City of  Anaheim 0.245 A 9,200 4  Divided 37,500 0.245 A 0.000 No  10  Anaheim Boulevard  between Katella Avenue  and Disney Way  City of  Anaheim 0.465 A 26,300 6  Divided 56,300 0.467 A 0.002 No  112  Katella Avenue between  Harbor Boulevard and  Clementine Street  CMP 0.682 B 39,200 6  Divided 56,300 0.696 B 0.014 No  122  Katella Avenue between  Clementine Street and  Anaheim Boulevard  CMP 0.679 B 38,700 6  Divided 56,300 0.687 B 0.009 No  132  Katella Avenue between  Haster St and I‐5 SB  Ramps  CMP 0.625 B 35,600 6  Divided 56,300 0.632 B 0.007 No  142 Katella Avenue between  I‐5 SB and NB Ramps CMP 0.636 B 36,200 6  Divided 56,300 0.643 B 0.007 No  15  Manchester Way  between Anaheim  Boulevard and Katella  Avenue   City of  Anaheim 0.078 A 1,100 3  Divided 14,100 0.078 A 0.000 No  Note:    ADT = Average Daily Traffic, V/C = Volume to Capacity Ratio, LOS = Level‐of‐Service  1All intersections were evaluated using City of Anaheim or CMP intersection criteria guidelines per Section 2.2.    2CMP Note: Included in the Orange County Congestion Management Program.  3Change in V/C is calculated using un‐rounded V/C ratios, and may not add up to expected difference due to rounding.      G-43 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 44 6.0 OPENING YEAR 2019 CONDITIONS   The project opening year is 2019. Therefore, this section analyzes opening year 2019 traffic conditions  without the proposed project.     6.1 Ambient Growth Ambient traffic growth is the traffic growth that will occur in the study area due to general employment  growth, housing growth and growth in regional through trips in Southern California. An ambient growth  rate of one percent per year in the study area was assigned to both vehicular and pedestrian traffic,  consistent with City direction.   6.2 Cumulative Projects   In addition to ambient growth assumed for the study area, the opening year (2019) traffic forecast is based  on known cumulative projects. The cumulative projects included were obtained from the Anaheim Resort  Development Status document, provided by the City of Anaheim, and dated 1/13/2016.  The Anaheim  Resort Development Status is documented in Appendix E, including a figure showing the location of all  Anaheim Resort projects currently under development. The cumulative projects are summarized as  follows:     Staybridge Suites:  126‐room hotel, located at 1050 West Ball Road, anticipated occupancy on  August 2016.     Holiday Inn Express:  96‐room hotel, located at 1411 South Manchester Avenue, anticipated  occupancy early 2016.   Park Vue Inn:  Replace an existing 86‐room hotel with a 180‐room hotel with 10,654 square feet  of restaurant and retail, located at 1570 South Harbor Boulevard, anticipated occupancy early  2017.    ‐ The square footage of restaurant and retail fall within the 20 percent allotment for resort  hotel trip generation, and will not be added as additional trips to the resulting trip  determination.   Ramada Maingate:  Remodel existing hotel to include the addition of 13 rooms, located at 1650  South Harbor Boulevard, anticipated occupancy early 2016.   Country Inn and Suites:  174‐room hotel, located at 1650 South Clementine Street, anticipated  occupancy July 2016.   GardenWalk – JW Marriott:  466‐room hotel with meeting rooms, restaurant, and spa, located  at 1775 South Clementine Street, anticipated occupancy Fall 2018.   The Anabella Hotel Redevelopment:  Replace an existing 358‐room hotel with a 634‐room  luxury hotel with meeting rooms, restaurants, and retail, located at 1030 West Katella Avenue,  anticipated occupancy Fall 2018.  ‐ The current development plans call for an additional 7,060 square foot of meeting and retail  space beyond the 20 percent allotment for resort hotel trip generation.  Additional trips were  added per ITE trip generation rates.    G-44 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 45  Anaheim Convention Center Expansion:  200,000 square feet of expansion, located at 800 West  Katella Avenue, Phase 1 anticipated April 2016, and Phase 2 anticipated May 2017.    ‐ While included as a cumulative project, the expansion to the Anaheim Convention Center is  anticipated to support existing facilities.  The Anaheim Traffic Analysis model assumes a  small convention at the Anaheim Convention Center as representative traffic conditions.  The  expansion planned for 2016/2017 is assumed to not change typical day traffic, therefore,  there will be no cumulative trips assumed with the Anaheim Convention Center Expansion.    Residence Inn Marriott:  294‐room hotel, located at 640 West Katella Avenue, anticipated  occupancy May 2016.   Hyatt House:  252‐room hotel, including a Walgreen’s pharmacy, located at 1800 South Harbor  Boulevard, anticipated occupancy June 2016.   ‐ The square footage of the Walgreen’s pharmacy falls within the 20 percent allotment for  resort hotel trip generation, and will not be added as additional trips to the resulting trip  determination.    Cumulative project trip generation was developed using ITE trip generation rates.  Tables 23 and 24  summarize the trip generation for the cumulative projects. Table 23 summarizes weekday a.m. and p.m.  peak hour trips, and Table 24 summarizes peak weekend trips.     Table 23: Cumulative Project Trip Generation    PROJECT NAME (THE ANAHEIM  RESORT DEVELOPMENT  NUMBER1)  LAND USE2 QUANTITY UNIT4 TRIPS ENDS GENERATED  WEEKDAY AM WEEKDAY PM DAILY IN OUT TOTAL IN OUT TOTAL Staybridge Suites (3) Proposed Hotel 126 Rooms 28 11 39 23 30 53 1,029  Holiday Inn Express (7) Proposed Hotel 96 Rooms 21 9 30 17 23 40 784  Park Vue Inn (9)  Existing Hotel  (To be demolished) 86 Rooms ‐19 ‐8 ‐27 ‐16 ‐20 ‐36 ‐703  Proposed Hotel 180 Rooms 40 16 56 33 43 76 1,471  Ramada Maingate (10) Proposed Hotel 13 Rooms 3 1 4 2 3 5 106  Country Inn and Suites (11) Proposed Hotel 174 Rooms 39 15 54 31 42 73 1,422  Garden Walk – JW Marriott (15)5 Proposed Hotel 466 Rooms 104 40 144 66 15 81 3,807  Anabella Hotel3 (16)  Existing Hotel  (To be demolished) 358 Rooms ‐80 ‐31 ‐111 ‐65 ‐85 ‐150 ‐2,925  Proposed Hotel 634 Rooms 142 55 197 115 151 266 5,180  Proposed Retail 4.38 TSF 2 2 4 8 8 16 187  Proposed Meeting  Room 2.68 TSF 3 3 6 4 3 7 91  Residence Inn Marriott (18) Proposed Hotel 294 Rooms 66 25 91 53 70 123 2,402  Hyatt House (20) Proposed Hotel 252 Rooms 56 22 78 46 60 106 2,059  Total Trip Ends Generated by Cumulative Projects 405 160 565 317 343 660 14,910 Notes: TSF = Thousand Square Feet  1 Source: City of Anaheim, The Anaheim Resort Development Status.  1/13/16 (Appendix E)  2 ITE rates (9th Edition) for Hotel (310), Resort Hotel (330), Retail (820) and Meeting rooms (495)  3 Square footage derived using retail to meeting room ratio and applying to the additional 7,060 sq. ft. of ancillary uses  4 Room = Number of hotel rooms, TSF = Thousand Square Feet  5 PM trip generation obtained from the Anaheim GardenWalk Traffic Impact Study Update for the JW Marriott Hotel trip redistribution  completed on November 12, 2015.  G-45 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 46 Table 24: Cumulative Project Weekend Trip Generation    PROJECT NAME (THE ANAHEIM  RESORT DEVELOPMENT  NUMBER1)  LAND USE2 QUANTITY UNIT4  TRIPS ENDS GENERATED  WEEKEND AM DAILY IN OUT TOTAL  Staybridge Suites (3) Proposed Hotel 126 Rooms 51 40 91 1,032  Holiday Inn Express (7) Proposed Hotel 96 Rooms 39 30 69 786  Park Vue Inn (9)  Existing Hotel   (To Be Demolished) 86 Rooms ‐35 ‐27 ‐62 ‐704  Proposed Hotel 180 Rooms 73 57 130 1,474  Ramada Maingate (10) Proposed Hotel 13 Rooms 5 4 9 106  Country Inn and Suites (11) Proposed Hotel 174 Rooms 70 55 125 1,425  Garden Walk – JW Marriott (15) Proposed Hotel 466 Rooms 188 148 336 3,817  Anabella Hotel3 (16)  Existing Hotel   (To Be Demolished) 358 Rooms ‐144 ‐114 ‐258 ‐2,932  Proposed Hotel 634 Rooms 256 200 456 5,192  Proposed Retail 4.38 TSF 11 10 21 219  Proposed Meeting  Room 2.68 TSF 2 1 3 24  Residence Inn Marriott (18) Proposed Hotel 294 Rooms 119 93 212 2,408  Hyatt House (20) Proposed Hotel 252 Rooms 102 79 181 2,064  Total Trip Ends Generated by Cumulative Projects 737 576 1,313 14,911  Notes:  Weekend time period is 10:00 to 11:00 a.m. per Section 3.3.1 of this report.  TSF = Thousand Square Feet  1 Source: City of Anaheim, The Anaheim Resort Development Status.  1/13/16 (Appendix E)  2 ITE rates (9th Edition) for Hotel (310), Resort Hotel (330), Retail (820) and Meeting rooms (495)  3 Square footage derived using retail to meeting room ratio and applying to the additional 7,060 sq. ft. of ancillary uses  4 Room = Number of hotel rooms      Figures 12 and 13 illustrate the weekday and weekend peak hour opening year intersection turning  movements, respectively. Trip distribution for cumulative projects is documented in Appendix E.     G-46 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 47 Figure 12: Opening Year 2019 Weekday Peak Hour Intersection and Arterial ADT Volumes       G-47 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 48 Figure 13: Opening Year 2019 Weekend Peak Hour Intersection Volumes      G-48 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 49 6.3 Intersection Level-of-Service   LOS analyses were conducted to evaluate existing intersection operations during the weekday a.m. and  p.m. peak hours. All intersections were analyzed using ICU methodology, and additional HCM analyses  were completed at the intersections of Harbor Boulevard at Disney Way and Harbor Boulevard at Katella  Avenue, as well as at all freeway ramp terminals.     Figures 10 and 11 shows the opening year without project weekday and weekend peak hour volumes  used for LOS analysis at each of the intersections.  6.3.1 ICU LOS    The City of Anaheim General Plan utilizes the ICU methodology for LOS. All of the study intersections were  evaluated using ICU methodology, with two agencies governing significant impact criteria:  The City of  Anaheim, and the CMP.  The CMP criteria guidelines take precedence over the City of Anaheim guidelines  at all CMP identified intersections.  Table 25 summarizes the opening year without project LOS using the  ICU methodology at all of the study intersections. Detailed ICU LOS calculation worksheets are included  in Appendix B. As shown in Table 25, all study intersections are forecast to operate at LOS B or better.    Table 25: Opening Year 2019 Intersection ICU LOS  INTERSECTION TRAFFIC  CONTROL CRITERIA USED1 AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR  ICU  V/C LOS ICU  V/C LOS  12 Harbor Boulevard at I‐5 Northbound Ramps Signalized CMP 0.55 A 0.68 B  22 Harbor Boulevard at I‐5 Southbound Ramps Signalized CMP 0.43 A 0.44 A  3 Harbor Boulevard at Manchester Avenue Signalized City of Anaheim 0.38 A 0.54 A  4 Harbor Boulevard at Disney Way Signalized City of Anaheim 0.27 A 0.37 A  52 Harbor Boulevard at Katella Avenue Signalized CMP 0.48 A 0.55 A  6 Anaheim GardenWalk at Disney Way Signalized City of Anaheim 0.12 A 0.20 A  7 Clementine Street at Disney Way Signalized City of Anaheim 0.24 A 0.33 A  8 Clementine Street at Katella Avenue Signalized City of Anaheim 0.47 A 0.64 B  9 I‐5 Southbound Off‐ramp at Disney Way Signalized City of Anaheim 0.30 A 0.36 A  10 Anaheim Boulevard at Disney Way Signalized City of Anaheim 0.50 A 0.58 A  11 Anaheim Boulevard at Katella Avenue Signalized City of Anaheim 0.45 A 0.60 A  122 I‐5 Southbound Ramps at Katella Avenue Signalized CMP 0.48 A 0.64 B  132 I‐5 Northbound Ramps at Katella Avenue Signalized CMP 0.45 A 0.54 A  N Harbor Boulevard at North Driveway Does Not Exist3 Not Applicable4 Not Analyzed4 S Harbor Boulevard at South Driveway Does Not Exist3 Not Applicable4 Notes:  ICU = Intersection Capacity Utilization Methodology, V/C = Volume to Capacity Ratio, LOS = Level‐of‐service  1All intersections were evaluated using City of Anaheim or CMP intersection criteria guidelines per Section 2.1.1.    2CMP Note:  Included in the Orange County Congestion Management Program.  3The project driveways exist under project scenario only. There are no existing driveways.  4The project driveways are unsignalized intersections, and not included covered by ICU methodology. Project driveways are only  analyzed using HCM methodologies.     G-49 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 50 Opening year (2019) conditions are not comparable to a forecast year scenario in either the Disneyland  Resort Specific Plan (FEIR No. 311) or the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (FSEIR No. 340) environmental  documents.  The forecast year for the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan (FEIR No. 311) is 2010, and the  forecast year for the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (FSEIR No. 340) is 2030.     6.3.2 HCM LOS    All Caltrans intersections (freeway ramp terminals), project driveways, and the intersections of Harbor  Boulevard at Disney Way and Harbor Boulevard at Katella Avenue were evaluated using HCM  methodologies.   Table 26 summarizes the opening year LOS at the ramp terminals and the intersections  of Harbor Boulevard at Disney Way and Harbor Boulevard at Katella Avenue.     The two project driveways are not included in the analysis, because they do not exist in the opening year  without project analysis.  LOS calculation worksheets are included in Appendix B. As shown in Table 26,  all study intersections are expected to operate at LOS D or better in the opening year.   Table 26: Opening Year 2019 Intersection HCM LOS  INTERSECTION TRAFFIC  CONTROL CRITERIA USED1 AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR  DELAY  (SEC/VEH) LOS DELAY  (SEC/VEH) LOS  12 Harbor Boulevard at I‐5 Northbound  Ramps Signalized Caltrans/CMP 12.3 B 18.5 B  22 Harbor Boulevard at I‐5 Southbound  Ramps Signalized Caltrans/CMP 5.3 A 8.9 A  4 Harbor Boulevard at Disney Way Signalized City of Anaheim 23.4 C 26.4 C  52 Harbor Boulevard at Katella Avenue Signalized CMP 39.2 C 47.5 D  9 I‐5 Southbound Off‐ramp at Disney Way Signalized Caltrans 32.5 C 36.7 D  10 Anaheim Boulevard at Disney Way Signalized Caltrans 38.6 D 46.7 D  122 I‐5 Southbound Ramps at Katella Avenue Signalized CMP 27.7 C 34.7 C  132 I‐5 Northbound Ramps at Katella Avenue Signalized Caltrans/CMP 23.5 C 41.8 D  N Harbor Boulevard at North Driveway Does Not Exist3 City of Anaheim Not Analyzed3 S Harbor Boulevard at South Driveway Does Not Exist3 City of Anaheim Notes:  HCM = Highway Capacity Manual, LOS = Level‐of‐service, Delay = Average Vehicle Delay (Seconds/Vehicle)  1All intersections were evaluated using City of Anaheim, Caltrans, or CMP intersection criteria guidelines per Section 2.1.2.    2CMP Note:  Included in the Orange County Congestion Management Program.  3The project driveways exist under project scenario only. There are no existing driveways.    6.3.3 Weekend LOS    A weekend analysis was conducted at the intersections of Harbor Boulevard and Disney Way, Harbor  Boulevard and Katella Avenue, and the two project driveways on northbound Harbor Boulevard. Table 27  summarizes the weekend LOS for opening year without project conditions.  As shown in Table 27, the  intersection of Harbor Boulevard and Disney Way is forecast to operate at LOS E in the weekend peak  G-50 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 51 hour, and the intersection of Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue is forecast to operate at LOS D in the  weekend peak hour.     Table 27: Opening Year 2019 Weekend Intersection HCM LOS    INTERSECTION TRAFFIC  CONTROL1 CRITERIA USED1 WEEKEND MID‐DAY PEAK HOUR  DELAY (SEC/VEH) LOS  4 Harbor Boulevard at Disney Way Signalized City of Anaheim 62.7 E  52 Harbor Boulevard at Katella Avenue Signalized CMP 45.5 D  N Harbor Boulevard at North Driveway Does Not Exist3 City of Anaheim Not Analyzed3 S Harbor Boulevard at South Driveway Does Not Exist3 City of Anaheim  Notes:  HCM = Highway Capacity Manual, LOS = Level‐of‐service, Delay = Average Vehicle Delay (Seconds/Vehicle)  1All intersections were evaluated using City of Anaheim, Caltrans, or CMP intersection criteria guidelines per Section 2.1.2.    2CMP Note:  Included in the Orange County Congestion Management Program.  3The project driveways exist under project scenario only. There are no existing driveways.     6.4 Roadway Segment Level-of-Service   Roadway segment LOS analysis was completed for the ADT for opening conditions, with two agencies  governing significant impact criteria:  The City of Anaheim, and the CMP. Roadway segment ADT  calculations are summarized in Appendix C. Table 28 summarizes the roadway segment ADT volume,  segment configuration, segment capacity, volume‐to‐capacity (V/C) ratio, and daily LOS. As shown in  Table 28, all roadway segments are forecast to operate at LOS D or better. Table 28: Opening Year 2019 Arterial Segment ADT LOS    ROADWAY SEGMENT CRITERIA  USED1 ADT  MID‐ BLOCK  LANES  TOTAL  CAPACITY V/C LOS  12 Harbor Boulevard between I‐5 Southbound and  Northbound Ramps CMP 35,800 8 Divided 75,000 0.529 A  22 Harbor Boulevard between Manchester Avenue and I‐5  Southbound Ramps CMP 30,200 7 Divided 65,700 0.531 A  32 Harbor Boulevard between Disney Way and Manchester  Avenue CMP 28,700 6 Divided 56,300 0.574 A  42 Harbor Boulevard between Katella Avenue and Disney  Way CMP 25,100 6 Divided 56,300 0.501 A  5 Disney Way between Harbor Boulevard and Anaheim  GardenWalk  City of  Anaheim 8,300 6 Divided 56,300 0.158 A  6 Disney Way between Anaheim GardenWalk and  Clementine Street  City of  Anaheim 11,600 6 Divided 56,300 0.218 A  7 Disney Way between Clementine Street and I‐5  Southbound Off‐Ramp  City of  Anaheim 11,200 6 Divided 56,300 0.236 A  8 Manchester Way between Disney Way and Anaheim  Boulevard  City of  Anaheim 13,800 6 Divided 56,300 0.286 A  9 Clementine Street between Katella Avenue and Disney  Way  City of  Anaheim 9,200 4 Divided 37,500 0.331 A  G-51 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 52 ROADWAY SEGMENT CRITERIA  USED1 ADT  MID‐ BLOCK  LANES  TOTAL  CAPACITY V/C LOS  10 Anaheim Boulevard between Katella Avenue and Disney  Way  City of  Anaheim 26,200 6 Divided 56,300 0.488 A  112 Katella Avenue between Harbor Boulevard and  Clementine Street CMP 38,400 6 Divided 56,300 0.805 D  122 Katella Avenue between Clementine Street and Anaheim  Boulevard CMP 38,200 6 Divided 56,300 0.799 C  132 Katella Avenue between Haster Street and I‐5  Southbound Ramps CMP 35,200 6 Divided 56,300 0.742 C  142 Katella Avenue between I‐5 Southbound and Northbound  Ramps CMP 35,800 6 Divided 56,300 0.728 C  15 Manchester Way between Anaheim Boulevard and  Katella Avenue  City of  Anaheim 1,100 3 Divided 14,100 0.078 A  Notes:    ADT = Average Daily Traffic, V/C = Volume to Capacity Ratio, LOS = Level‐of‐Service  1All intersections were evaluated using City of Anaheim or CMP intersection criteria guidelines per Section 2.2.    2CMP Note: Included in the Orange County Congestion Management Program.        G-52 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 53 7.0 OPENING YEAR 2019 PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS   Trips generated by the project, as shown in Tables 16 and 17, were assigned to the surrounding roadway  system based on the distribution patterns to estimate the project related peak‐hour traffic at each of the  study intersections. Figures 14 and 15 illustrate the weekday and weekend opening year 2019 plus project  peak hour volumes, respectively.      G-53 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 54 Figure 14: Opening Year 2019 Plus Project Weekday Peak Hour Intersection and Arterial ADT Volumes      G-54 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 55 Figure 15: Opening Year 2019 Plus Project Weekend Peak Hour Intersection Volumes    G-55 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 56 7.1 Intersection Level-of-Service   LOS analyses were conducted to evaluate opening year plus project intersection operations during the  weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours. All intersections were analyzed using ICU methodology, and additional  HCM analyses were completed at the intersections of Harbor Boulevard at Disney Way and Harbor  Boulevard at Katella Avenue, as well as at all freeway ramp terminals and project driveways.     Opening year "plus project” traffic operations were compared to opening year conditions without the  project in order to assess any significant traffic impacts of the project.   7.1.1 ICU LOS    The City of Anaheim General Plan utilizes the ICU methodology for LOS. All of the study intersections were  evaluated using ICU methodology, with two agencies governing significant impact criteria:  The City of  Anaheim, and the CMP.  The CMP criteria guidelines take precedence over the City of Anaheim guidelines  at all CMP identified intersections.  Table 29 summarizes the opening year plus project LOS using the ICU  methodology at all of the study intersections. Detailed ICU LOS calculation worksheets are included in  Appendix B. As shown in Table 29, all of the study intersections are forecast to operate at LOS B or better,  and the traffic generated by the proposed project is not expected to exceed the threshold of significance.    Table 29: Opening Year 2019 Plus Project Intersection ICU LOS     INTERSECTION TRAFFIC  CONTROL  CRITERIA  USED1  OPENING YEAR OPENING YEAR   PLUS PROJECT  SIGNIFICANT IMPACT  DETERMINATION  AM PM AM PM CHANGE IN  V/C IMPACT?ICU  V/C LOS ICU  V/C LOS ICU  V/C LOS ICU  V/C LOS AM PM  12  Harbor  Boulevard at I‐5  NB Ramps  Signalized CMP 0.55 A 0.68 B 0.55 A 0.68 B 0.00 0.00 No  22  Harbor  Boulevard at I‐5  SB Ramps  Signalized CMP 0.43 A 0.44 A 0.43 A 0.44 A 0.00 0.00 No  3  Harbor  Boulevard at   Manchester  Avenue  Signalized City of  Anaheim 0.38 A 0.54 A 0.38 A 0.54 A 0.00 0.00 No  4  Harbor  Boulevard at  Disney Way  Signalized City of  Anaheim 0.27 A 0.37 A 0.28 A 0.38 A 0.01 0.01 No  52  Harbor  Boulevard at  Katella Avenue   Signalized CMP 0.48 A 0.55 A 0.48 A 0.56 A 0.00 0.01 No  6  Anaheim  GardenWalk at   Disney Way  Signalized City of  Anaheim 0.12 A 0.20 A 0.13 A 0.20 A 0.00 0.01 No  G-56 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 57 INTERSECTION TRAFFIC  CONTROL  CRITERIA  USED1  OPENING YEAR OPENING YEAR   PLUS PROJECT  SIGNIFICANT IMPACT  DETERMINATION  AM PM AM PM CHANGE IN  V/C IMPACT?ICU  V/C LOS ICU  V/C LOS ICU  V/C LOS ICU  V/C LOS AM PM  7  Clementine  Street at Disney  Way  Signalized City of  Anaheim 0.24 A 0.33 A 0.24 A 0.33 A 0.00 0.00 No  8  Clementine  Street at Katella  Avenue   Signalized City of  Anaheim 0.47 A 0.64 B 0.47 A 0.64 B 0.00 0.01 No  9 I‐5 SB Off‐ramp  at  Disney Way Signalized City of  Anaheim 0.30 A 0.36 A 0.30 A 0.36 A 0.02 0.01 No  10  Anaheim  Boulevard at  Disney Way  Signalized City of  Anaheim 0.50 A 0.58 A 0.50 A 0.59 A 0.00 0.00 No  11  Anaheim  Boulevard at  Katella Avenue   Signalized City of  Anaheim 0.45 A 0.60 A 0.46 A 0.61 B 0.00 0.01 No  122 I‐5 SB Ramps at   Katella Avenue  Signalized CMP 0.48 A 0.64 B 0.48 A 0.64 B 0.00 0.00 No  132 I‐5 NB Ramps at   Katella Avenue  Signalized CMP 0.45 A 0.54 A 0.46 A 0.55 A 0.01 0.01 No  N  Harbor  Boulevard at  North Driveway  Un‐ signalized  Not  Applicable4 Does Not Exist3  Not Analyzed Not Analyzed4 Not  Analyzed4 S  Harbor  Boulevard at  South Driveway  Un‐ signalized  Not  Applicable4  Notes:  ICU = Intersection Capacity Utilization Methodology, V/C = Volume to Capacity Ratio, LOS = Level‐of‐service  1All intersections were evaluated using City of Anaheim or CMP intersection criteria guidelines per Section 2.1.1.    2CMP Note:  Included in the Orange County Congestion Management Program.  3The project driveways exist under project scenario only. There are no existing driveways.  4The project driveways are unsignalized intersections, and not included covered by ICU methodology.  Project driveways are  only analyzed using HCM methodologies.    G-57 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 58 7.1.2 HCM LOS    All Caltrans intersections (freeway ramp terminals), project driveways, and the intersections of Harbor  Boulevard at Disney Way and Harbor Boulevard at Katella Avenue were evaluated using HCM  methodologies.   Table 30 summarizes the opening year plus project LOS at the ramp terminals and the  intersections of Harbor Boulevard at Disney Way and Harbor Boulevard at Katella Avenue.  The two  project driveways are included in the analysis, although no formal HCM criteria has been established by  the City of Anaheim.  LOS calculation worksheets are included in Appendix B. As shown in Table 30, all  study intersections are projected operate at LOS D or better.     Table 30: Opening Year 2019 Plus Project Intersection HCM LOS     INTERSECTION TRAFFIC  CONTROL  CRITERIA  USED1  OPENING YEAR OPENING YEAR   PLUS PROJECT LOS  DEFICIENT?4 AM PM AM PM  DELAY LOS DELAY LOS DELAY LOS DELAY LOS  12 Harbor Boulevard at I‐5 NB  Ramps Signalized Caltrans/CMP 12.3 B 18.5 B 12.3 B 18.5 B No  22 Harbor Boulevard at I‐5 SB  Ramps Signalized Caltrans/CMP 5.3 A 8.9 A 5.3 A 8.9 A No  4 Harbor Boulevard at Disney  Way Signalized City of  Anaheim 23.4 C 26.4 C 24.2 C 27.3 C No  52 Harbor Boulevard at Katella  Avenue Signalized CMP 39.2 C 47.5 D 39.6 C 47.7 D No  9 I‐5 SB Off‐ramp at  Disney  Way Signalized Caltrans 32.5 C 36.7 D 32.6 C 38.1 D No  10 Anaheim Boulevard at Disney  Way Signalized Caltrans 38.6 D 46.7 D 38.6 D 47.1 D No  122 I‐5 SB Ramps at  Katella  Avenue Signalized CMP 27.7 C 34.7 C 27.8 C 34.8 C No  132 I‐5 NB Ramps at  Katella  Avenue  Signalized Caltrans/CMP 23.5 C 41.8 D 23.7 C 43.5 D No  N Harbor Boulevard at North  Driveway  Un‐ signalized  City of  Anaheim Not Analyzed3  13.4 B 17.1 C No  S Harbor Boulevard at South  Driveway  Un‐ signalized  City of  Anaheim 12.6 B 15.4 C No  Notes:  HCM = Highway Capacity Manual, LOS = Level‐of‐service, Delay = Average Vehicle Delay (Seconds/Vehicle)  1All intersections were evaluated using City of Anaheim, Caltrans, or CMP intersection criteria guidelines per Section 2.1.2.    2CMP Note:  Included in the Orange County Congestion Management Program.  3The project driveways exist under project scenario only. There are no existing driveways.  4No City or CMP significant impact criteria has been established for HCM intersection analysis.    G-58 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 59 7.1.3 Weekend LOS    A weekend analysis was conducted at Disney Way and Harbor Boulevard, Katella Avenue and Harbor  Boulevard and the two project driveways on northbound Harbor Boulevard.  Table 31 summarizes the  weekend LOS for opening year 2019 plus project conditions.     As shown in Table 31, both signalized intersections are expected to operate at LOS E or better in the  weekend peak hour.  The two driveways are expected to operate at LOS C or better, with no potential  deficiencies identified.   Table 31: Opening Year 2019 Plus Project Weekend Intersection HCM LOS    INTERSECTION TRAFFIC  CONTROL1 CRITERIA USED1  OPENING YEAR  OPENING YEAR PLUS  PROJECT  LOS  DEFICIENT?4 DELAY  (SEC/VEH) LOS DELAY  (SEC/VEH) LOS  4 Harbor Boulevard at  Disney Way Signalized City of Anaheim 62.7 E 62.6 E Project  reduces delay5  52 Harbor Boulevard at  Katella Avenue Signalized CMP 45.5 D 46.7 D No  N6 Harbor Boulevard at  North Driveway  Un‐ signalized City of Anaheim Does Not Exist3  Not Analyzed  18.8 C No  S6 Harbor Boulevard at  South Driveway  Un‐ signalized City of Anaheim 14.5 B No  Notes:   Weekend time period is 10:00 to 11:00 a.m. per Section 3.3.1 of this report.  Delay = Average Vehicle Delay (Seconds/Vehicle), LOS = Level‐of‐service  1All intersections were evaluated using City of Anaheim, Caltrans, or CMP intersection criteria guidelines per Section 2.1.2.    2CMP Note:  Included in the Orange County Congestion Management Program.  3The project driveways exist under project scenario only. There are no existing driveways.  4No City or CMP significant impact criteria has been established for HCM intersection analysis.   5Average delay at intersection decreases with project when compared with opening year no project conditions.  6For unsignalized intersections, LOS of worst movement is reported.      7.2 Roadway Segment Level-of-Service   Roadway segment LOS analysis was completed for the ADT for opening year plus project conditions, with  two agencies governing significant impact criteria:  The City of Anaheim, and the CMP. Roadway segment  ADT calculations are summarized in Appendix C. Table 32 summarizes the roadway segment ADT volume,  segment configuration, segment capacity, volume‐to‐capacity (V/C) ratio, and daily LOS. As shown in  Table 32, all roadway segments are projected to operate at LOS D or better, and no significant impacts  were identified.    G-59 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 60 Table 32: Opening Year 2019 Plus Project Arterial Segment ADT LOS    ROADWAY SEGMENT CRITERIA  USED1  OPENING  YEAR OPENING YEAR PLUS PROJECT  SIGNIFICANT  IMPACT  DETERMINATION V/C  RATIO LOS ADT  MID‐ BLOCK  LANES  TOTAL  CAPACITY V/C  RATIO LOS ∆ IN  V/C3  IMPACT ?  12 Harbor Boulevard between I‐5  SB and NB Ramps CMP 0.529 A 40,000 8  Divided 75,000 0.533 A 0.056 No  22  Harbor Boulevard between  Manchester Avenue and I‐5 SB  Ramps  CMP 0.531 A 35,300 7  Divided 65,700 0.537 A 0.078 No  32  Harbor Boulevard between  Disney Way and Manchester  Avenue   CMP 0.574 A 32,700 6  Divided 56,300 0.581 A 0.071 No  42 Harbor Boulevard between  Katella Avenue and Disney Way CMP 0.501 A 29,300 6  Divided 56,300 0.520 A 0.075 No  5  Disney Way between Harbor  Boulevard and Anaheim  GardenWalk  City of  Anaheim 0.158 A 9,300 6  Divided 56,300 0.165 A 0.018 No  6  Disney Way between Anaheim  GardenWalk and Clementine  Street  City of  Anaheim 0.218 A 12,700 6  Divided 56,300 0.226 A 0.020 No  7  Disney Way between  Clementine Street and I‐5 SB  Off‐Ramp  City of  Anaheim 0.236 A 13,700 6  Divided 56,300 0.243 A 0.044 No  8  Manchester Way between  Disney Way and Anaheim  Boulevard  City of  Anaheim 0.286 A 16,500 6  Divided 56,300 0.293 A 0.048 No  9 Clementine Street between  Katella Avenue and Disney Way  City of  Anaheim 0.331 A 12,400 4  Divided 37,500 0.331 A 0.085 No  10 Anaheim Boulevard between  Katella Avenue and Disney Way  City of  Anaheim 0.488 A 27,600 6  Divided 56,300 0.490 A 0.025 No  112  Katella Avenue between  Harbor Boulevard and  Clementine Street  CMP 0.805 D 46,100 6  Divided 56,300 0.819 D 0.137 No  122  Katella Avenue between  Clementine Street and  Anaheim Boulevard  CMP 0.799 C 45,500 6  Divided 56,300 0.808 D 0.130 No  132 Katella Avenue between Haster  St and I‐5 SB Ramps CMP 0.742 C 42,200 6  Divided 56,300 0.750 C 0.124 No  142 Katella Avenue between I‐5 SB  and NB Ramps CMP 0.728 C 41,400 6  Divided 56,300 0.735 C 0.099 No  15  Manchester Way between  Anaheim Boulevard and Katella  Avenue   City of  Anaheim 0.078 A 1,100 3  Divided 14,100 0.078 A 0.000 No  Note:    ADT = Average Daily Traffic, V/C = Volume to Capacity Ratio, LOS = Level‐of‐Service  1All intersections were evaluated using City of Anaheim or CMP intersection criteria guidelines per Section 2.2.    2CMP Note: Included in the Orange County Congestion Management Program.  3Change in V/C is calculated using un‐rounded V/C ratios, and may not add up to expected difference due to rounding.    G-60 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 61 8.0 SUMMARY OF RESULTS   The results of the traffic analysis indicate the proposed project would not create any project‐level  significant impact to the surrounding roadway system during the existing or opening year (2019)  conditions. As documented in this analysis, the proposed project would not result in new significant impacts,  and is consistent with FEIR No. 311 and FSEIR No. 340.   8.1 Intersections   No significant impacts were identified for the study intersections; therefore, no mitigation measures  would be required to address intersection impacts.     8.2 Arterial Segments   No significant impacts were identified for the study arterial roadway segments; therefore, no mitigation  measures would be required to address arterial segment impacts.   9.0 APPLICABLE MITIGATION MEASURES Although no significant impacts or mitigation measures were identified for this project, mitigation measures  from FEIR No. 311 and FSEIR No. 340 were included in this section of the report, as they are applicable  measures developed to resolve cumulative impacts.    9.1 FEIR No. 311   The transportation improvements identified in FEIR No. 311 have all been completed. Other mitigation  measures identified in FEIR No. 311 have been updated through certification of FSEIR No. 340, as identified  below.    9.2 FSEIR No. 340 The following mitigation measures from Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 85C were adopted in connection  with FSEIR No. 340. The following measures also would be applicable to the proposed project.    MM 5.14‐2 Prior to issuance of the first building permit for each building, the property owner/developer  shall pay the appropriate Traffic Signal Assessment Fees and Transportation Impact and  Improvement Fees to the City of Anaheim in amounts determined by the City Council  Resolution in effect at the time of issuance of the building permit with credit given for City‐ authorized improvements provided by the property owner/developer. The property owner  shall also participate in all applicable reimbursement or benefit districts, which have been  established.    MM 5.14‐3 Prior to approval of the first final subdivision map or issuance of the first building permit,  whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall irrevocably offer for dedication  G-61 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 62 (with subordination of easements), including necessary construction easements, the ultimate  arterial highway right(s)‐of‐way adjacent to their property as shown in the Circulation Element  of the Anaheim General Plan.    MM 5.14‐4  Prior to the final building and zoning inspection, the property owner shall join and financially  participate in a clean fuel shuttle program such as the Anaheim Resort Transit system, and shall  participate in the Anaheim Transportation Network in conjunction with the on‐going operation  of the project. The property owner shall also record a covenant on the property that requires  participation in these programs ongoing during project operation. The form of the covenant  shall be approved by the City Attorney’s Office prior to recordation.    MM 5.14‐5  Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the property owner/developer shall provide to the  City of Anaheim Public Works Department a plan to coordinate rideshare services for  construction employees with the Anaheim Transportation Network (ATN) for review and  approval and shall implement ATN recommendations to the extent feasible.    MM 5.14‐7  Ongoing during construction, if the Anaheim Police Department or the Anaheim Traffic  Management Center (TMC) personnel are required to provide temporary traffic control  services, the property owner/developer shall reimburse the City, on a fair‐share basis, if  applicable, for reasonable costs associated with such services.    MM 5.14‐8  Prior to the final building and zoning inspection, the property owner shall record a covenant  on the property requiring that ongoing during project implementation, the property  owner/developer shall implement and administer a comprehensive Transportation Demand  Management (TDM) program for all employees. The form of the covenant shall be approved  by the City Attorney’s Office. Objectives of the TDM program shall be:    a. Increase ridesharing and use of alternative transportation modes by guests.  b. Provide a menu of commute alternatives for employees to reduce project generated  trips.  c. Conduct an annual commuter survey to ascertain trip generation, trip origin, and  Average Vehicle Ridership.  MM 5.14‐9  Prior to the final building and zoning inspection, the property owner/developer shall provide  to the City of Anaheim Public Works Department for review and approval a menu of TDM  program strategies and elements for both existing and future employees’ commute options,  and incentives for hotel patrons transportation options, to include, but not be limited to, the  list below. The property owner shall also record a covenant on the property requiring that the  approved TDM strategies and elements be implemented ongoing during project operation.  The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney’s Office prior to recordation.     a. On‐site services. Provide, as feasible and permitted, on‐site services such as the food,  retail, and other services.  G-62 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 63 b. Ridesharing. Develop a commuter listing of all employee members for the purpose of  providing a “matching” of employees with other employees who live in the same  geographic areas and who could rideshare.  c. Vanpooling. Develop a commuter listing of all employees for the purpose of matching  numbers of employees who live in geographic proximity to one another and could  comprise a vanpool or participate in the existing vanpool programs.  d. Transit Pass. Promote Orange County Transportation Authority (including commuter rail)  passes through financial assistance and on‐site sales to encourage employees to use the  various transit and bus services from throughout the region.  e. Shuttle Service. Generate a commuter listing of all employees living in proximity to the  project, and offer a local shuttle program to encourage employees to travel to work by  means other than the automobile. When appropriate, event shuttle service shall also be  made available for guests.  f. Bicycling. Develop a Bicycling Program to offer a bicycling alternative to employees.  Secure bicycle racks, lockers, and showers should be provided as part of this program.  Maps of bicycle routes throughout the area should be provided to inform potential  bicyclists of these options.  g. Guaranteed Ride Home Program. Develop a program to provide employees who  rideshare, or use transit or other means of commuting to work, with a prearranged ride  home in a taxi, rental car, shuttle, or other vehicle, in the event of emergencies during  the work shift.  h. Target Reduction of Longest Commute Trip. Promote an incentive program for  ridesharing and other alternative transportation modes to put highest priority on  reduction of longest employee commute trips.  i. Work Shifts. Stagger work shifts.  j. Compressed Work Week. Develop a “compressed work week” program, which provides  for fewer work days but longer daily shifts as an option for employees.  k. Telecommuting. Explore the possibility of a “telecommuting” program that would link  some employees via electronic means (e.g., computer with modem).  l. Parking Management. Develop a parking management program that provides incentives  to those who rideshare or use transit means other than single occupant auto to travel to  work.  m. Access. Provide preferential access to high occupancy vehicles and shuttles.  n. Financial Incentive for Ridesharing and/or Public Transit. Offer employees financial  incentives for ridesharing or using public transportation. Currently, federal law provides  tax‐free status for up to $65 per month per employee contributions to employees who  vanpool or use public transit including commuter rail and/or express bus pools.  o. Financial Incentive for Bicycling. Offer employees financial incentives for bicycling to  work.  G-63 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 64 p. Special “Premium” for the Participation and Promotion of Trip Reduction. Offer  ticket/passes to special events, vacations, etc. to employees who recruit other  employees for vanpool, carpool, or other trip reduction programs.  q. Incentive Programs. Design incentive programs for carpooling and other alternative  transportation modes so as to put highest priority on reduction of longest commute  trips.  MM 5.14‐11  Prior to the recordation of a subdivision map or issuance of the first building permit, whichever  occurs first, in the event that a parcel is subdivided and there is a need for common on‐site  circulation and/or parking, prior to recordation of a subdivision map, an unsubordinated  covenant providing for reciprocal access and/or parking, as appropriate, approved by the  Planning Director or Planning Services Manager, shall be recorded with the Office of the  Orange County Recorder. A copy of the recorded covenant shall then be submitted to the  Planning Division of the Planning Department. If the reciprocal access is across parcel lines or  if public rights of way are required for reciprocal access; Public Works approval shall be  required.    MM 5.14‐12  Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the location of any proposed gates across a  driveway shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer. Gates shall not be  installed across any driveway or private street in a manner which may adversely affect  vehicular traffic on the adjacent public streets. Installation of any gates shall conform to the  current version of Engineering Standard Detail No. 475.    MM 5.14‐13  Prior to the issuance of building permits, plans shall show that all driveways shall be  constructed with a minimum fifteen (15) foot radius curb returns as required by the City  Engineer, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer.    MM 5.14‐14  Prior to the issuance of building permits or final map approval, whichever occurs first, security  in the form of a bond, certificate of deposit, letter of credit, completion guarantee, or cash, in  an amount and form satisfactory to the City Engineer shall be posted with the City to guarantee  the satisfactory completion of all engineering requirements of the City of Anaheim, including  preparation of improvement plans and installation of all improvements, such as curbs and  gutters, sidewalks, water facilities, street grading and pavement, sewer and drainage facilities  and other appurtenant work, as required by the City Engineer and in accordance with the  specifications on file in the office of the City Engineer, as may be modified by the City Engineer.  Installation of said improvements shall occur prior to final building and zoning inspections.    MM 5.14‐19  Prior to the approval of the final subdivision map or issuance of building permits, whichever  occurs first, the property owner/developer shall pay the identified fair share responsibility as  determined by the City as set forth in MM 5.14‐15. The City shall allocate the property  owner/developer’s fair‐share contribution to traffic mitigation programs that result in  improved traffic flow on the impacted mainline and ramp locations, via an agreement mutually  acceptable to Caltrans and the City.    MM 5.14‐20  Prior to the approval of a Final Site Plan, the property owner/developer shall meet with the  Traffic and Transportation Manager to determine whether a bus stop(s) is required to be  G-64 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 65 placed adjacent to the property. If a bus stop(s) is required, it shall be placed in a location that  least impacts traffic flow and may be designed as a bus turnout or a far side bus stop as  required by the Traffic and Transportation Manager and per the approval of the Orange County  Transportation Authority (OCTA).    MM 5.14‐21  Prior to the first final building and zoning Inspection every property owner and/or lessee shall  designate an on‐site contact that will be responsible for coordinating with the ATN and  implementing all trip mitigation measures. The on‐site coordinator shall be the one point of  contact representing the project with the ATN. The TDM requirements shall be included in the  lease or other agreement with all of the project participants.    MM 5.14‐22  Subsequent to the certification of FSEIR No. 340, and prior to the approval of the first Final Site  Plan, if the costs of the identified improvements in the Traffic Study Report for Amendment  No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan cannot be covered by the total funding allocation  under the existing City fee programs and funding sources, an update of the existing City traffic  fee program or other fee programs shall be developed by the City of Anaheim to ensure  completion of the recommended improvements.  G-65 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report       City of Anaheim   Page | 66 10.0 CONCLUSIONS   The proposed project consists of demolishing of an existing 300 room hotel to be replaced with a planned  580 room high‐quality, four diamond full‐service resort hotel located at 1700 South Harbor Boulevard.  The estimated opening date of the proposed hotel is May 2019. The project site is located at the southeast  corner of the South Harbor Boulevard and Disney Way intersection, and is bounded by The GardenWalk  on the east and the Castle Inn and Suite and the Super 8 Anaheim hotels on the south. Access to the site  would be provided at three locations along Harbor Boulevard and at one location on Disney Way:      Main Entry/porte‐cochere on Harbor Boulevard approximately 300 feet south of Disney Way:  Serves as the primary ingress/egress location for visitor and employee trips with right‐in/right‐ out access only.   Service road along the southern property boundary on Harbor Boulevard approximately 500  feet south of Disney Way: Serves as a secondary egress location for visitor and employee trips,  as well as the primary ingress/egress location for service and emergency vehicles.  Conflict  between visitor and employee trips with service vehicle trips will be avoided by use of a  temporary gate at the parking structure exit, as well as prohibiting peak hour service truck  deliveries.  Only right‐in/right‐out access will be available.   A secondary service entrance on Disney Way approximately 300 feet east of Harbor  Boulevard:  Serves as a secondary ingress/egress location for delivery vehicles only.  Only right‐ in/right‐out access will be available.      All study intersections are currently operating at acceptable LOS under ICU analysis. The intersection at  Harbor Boulevard and Disney Way is currently operating at LOS E during weekends only when evaluated  with HCM methodology and accounting for pedestrian activities.     Based on rates developed for Anaheim Resort hotels and the ITE trip generation rates, the proposed  project is forecast to generate 201 new a.m. peak hour trips, 211 new p.m. peak hour trips, 2,919 new  weekday daily trips, 360 new weekend peak hour trips, and 2,088 new weekend daily trips.    The results of the traffic analysis indicate the proposed project would not create any project‐level  significant impact to the surrounding roadway system during the existing or opening year (2019)  conditions. As documented in this analysis, the proposed project would not result in new significant impacts,  and is consistent with FEIR No. 311 and FSEIR No. 340. G-66 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report City of Anaheim Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Page | Appendix APPENDIX A TRAFFIC COUNTS G-67 Weekday a.m. and p.m. Peak Period Counts  G-68 File Name : ANAHA5NAMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 1 City of AnaheimN/S: Harbor BoulevardE/W: Interstate 5 Northbound RampsWeather: Clear Groups Printed- Total VolumeHarbor BlvdSouthbound Interstate 5 Northbound RampsWestbound Harbor BlvdNorthboundStart Time Left Thru U-Turns App. Total Left Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. Total07:00 AM 6 360 0 366 6 103 0 109 115 58 0 173 64807:15 AM 4 374 0 378 7 172 0 179 139 58 0 197 754 07:30 AM 3 382 0 385 9 169 0 178 142 60 0 202 76507:45 AM 5 360 0 365 8 168 0 176 157 60 0 217 758Total1814760149430612064255323607892925 08:00 AM 4 352 0 356 9 147 0 156 164 55 0 219 73108:15 AM 5 376 0 381 5 155 0 160 177 57 0 234 77508:30 AM 8 307 0 315 9 175 0 184 179 59 0 238 73708:45 AM 6 304 0 310 6 145 0 151 212 65 0 277 738 Total 23 1339 0 1362 29 622 0 651 732 236 0 968 2981 Grand Total 41 2815 0 2856 59 1234 0 1293 1285 472 0 1757 5906Apprch %1.4 98.6 0 4.6 95.4 0 73.1 26.9 0 Total %0.7 47.7 0 48.4 1 20.9 0 21.9 21.8 8 0 29.7 Harbor BlvdSouthbound Interstate 5 Northbound RampsWestbound Harbor BlvdNorthboundStart Time Left Thru U-Turns App. Total Left Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07:30 AM07:30 AM 3 382 0 385 9 169 0 178 142 60 0 202 76507:45 AM 5 360 0 365 8 168 0 176 157 60 0 217 758 08:00 AM 4 352 0 356 9 147 0 156 164 55 0 219 73108:15 AM 5 376 0 381 5 155 0 160 177 57 0 234 775Total Volume 17 1470 0 1487 31 639 0 670 640 232 0 872 3029% App. Total 1.1 98.9 0 4.6 95.4 0 73.4 26.6 0 PHF .850 .962 .000 .966 .861 .945 .000 .941 .904 .967 .000 .932 .977 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-69 File Name : ANAHA5NAMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 2 City of AnaheimN/S: Harbor BoulevardE/W: Interstate 5 Northbound RampsWeather: Clear Harbor Blvd I n t e r s t a t e 5 N o r t h b o u n d R a m p s Harbor Blvd Thru1470 Left17 U-Turns0 InOut Total1279 1487 2766 R i g h t 6 3 9 L e f t 3 1 U - T u r n s 0 O u t T o t a l I n 2 4 9 6 7 0 9 1 9 Thru640 Right232 U-Turns0 Out TotalIn1501 872 2373 Peak Hour Begins at 07:30 AM Total Volume Peak Hour Data North Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at: 07:00 AM 07:15 AM 08:00 AM+0 mins.6 360 0 366 7 172 0 179 164 55 0 219 +15 mins.4 374 0 378 9 169 0 178 177 57 0 234+30 mins.3 382 0 385 8 168 0 176 179 59 0 238+45 mins.5 360 0 365 9 147 0 156 212 65 0 277 Total Volume 18 1476 0 1494 33 656 0 689 732 236 0 968% App. Total 1.2 98.8 0 4.8 95.2 0 75.6 24.4 0 PHF .750 .966 .000 .970 .917 .953 .000 .962 .863 .908 .000 .874 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-70 File Name : ANAHA5NPMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 1 City of AnaheimN/S: Harbor BoulevardE/W: Interstate 5 Northbound RampsWeather: Clear Groups Printed- Total VolumeHarbor BlvdSouthbound Interstate 5 Northbound RampsWestbound Harbor BlvdNorthboundStart Time Left Thru U-Turns App. Total Left Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. Total04:00 PM 14 275 0 289 7 169 0 176 275 135 2 412 87704:15 PM 19 293 1 313 11 179 0 190 254 138 0 392 895 04:30 PM 19 269 0 288 5 141 0 146 277 138 0 415 84904:45 PM 13 283 0 296 3 149 0 152 286 109 0 395 843Total651120111862663806641092520216143464 05:00 PM 9 343 0 352 8 154 0 162 277 94 0 371 88505:15 PM 15 297 0 312 4 171 0 175 312 108 0 420 90705:30 PM 6 339 0 345 13 187 0 200 269 98 0 367 91205:45 PM 13 263 0 276 7 161 0 168 315 101 0 416 860 Total 43 1242 0 1285 32 673 0 705 1173 401 0 1574 3564 Grand Total 108 2362 1 2471 58 1311 0 1369 2265 921 2 3188 7028Apprch %4.4 95.6 0 4.2 95.8 0 71 28.9 0.1 Total %1.5 33.6 0 35.2 0.8 18.7 0 19.5 32.2 13.1 0 45.4 Harbor BlvdSouthbound Interstate 5 Northbound RampsWestbound Harbor BlvdNorthboundStart Time Left Thru U-Turns App. Total Left Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 05:00 PM05:00 PM 9 343 0 352 8 154 0 162 277 94 0 371 88505:15 PM 15 297 0 312 4 171 0 175 312 108 0 420 907 05:30 PM 6 339 0 345 13 187 0 200 269 98 0 367 91205:45 PM 13 263 0 276 7 161 0 168 315 101 0 416 860Total Volume 43 1242 0 1285 32 673 0 705 1173 401 0 1574 3564% App. Total 3.3 96.7 0 4.5 95.5 0 74.5 25.5 0 PHF .717 .905 .000 .913 .615 .900 .000 .881 .931 .928 .000 .937 .977 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-71 File Name : ANAHA5NPMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 2 City of AnaheimN/S: Harbor BoulevardE/W: Interstate 5 Northbound RampsWeather: Clear Harbor Blvd I n t e r s t a t e 5 N o r t h b o u n d R a m p s Harbor Blvd Thru1242 Left43 U-Turns0 InOut Total1846 1285 3131 R i g h t 6 7 3 L e f t 3 2 U - T u r n s 0 O u t T o t a l I n 4 4 4 7 0 5 1 1 4 9 Thru1173 Right401 U-Turns0 Out TotalIn1274 1574 2848 Peak Hour Begins at 05:00 PM Total Volume Peak Hour Data North Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at: 04:45 PM 05:00 PM 04:00 PM+0 mins.13 283 0 296 8 154 0 162 275 135 2 412 +15 mins.9 343 0 352 4 171 0 175 254 138 0 392+30 mins.15 297 0 312 13 187 0 200 277 138 0 415+45 mins.6 339 0 345 7 161 0 168 286 109 0 395 Total Volume 43 1262 0 1305 32 673 0 705 1092 520 2 1614% App. Total 3.3 96.7 0 4.5 95.5 0 67.7 32.2 0.1 PHF .717 .920 .000 .927 .615 .900 .000 .881 .955 .942 .250 .972 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-72 File Name : ANAHA5SAMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 1 City of AnaheimN/S: Harbor BoulevardE/W: Interstate 5 Southbound RampsWeather: Clear Groups Printed- Total VolumeHarbor BlvdSouthbound Harbor BlvdNorthbound Interstate 5 Southbound RampsEastboundStart Time Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru U-Turns App. Total Left Right U-Turns App. Total Int. Total07:00 AM 174 181 0 355 6 121 0 127 30 48 0 78 56007:15 AM 208 203 0 411 9 146 0 155 32 65 0 97 663 07:30 AM 206 196 0 402 6 179 0 185 31 65 0 96 68307:45 AM 210 164 0 374 9 151 0 160 35 75 0 110 644Total7987440154230597062712825303812550 08:00 AM 207 160 0 367 3 168 0 171 50 61 0 111 64908:15 AM 228 147 0 375 5 174 0 179 48 84 0 132 68608:30 AM 201 114 0 315 11 213 0 224 58 70 0 128 66708:45 AM 198 111 0 309 7 185 1 193 67 85 0 152 654 Total 834 532 0 1366 26 740 1 767 223 300 0 523 2656 Grand Total 1632 1276 0 2908 56 1337 1 1394 351 553 0 904 5206Apprch %56.1 43.9 0 4 95.9 0.1 38.8 61.2 0 Total %31.3 24.5 0 55.9 1.1 25.7 0 26.8 6.7 10.6 0 17.4 Harbor BlvdSouthbound Harbor BlvdNorthbound Interstate 5 Southbound RampsEastboundStart Time Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru U-Turns App. Total Left Right U-Turns App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07:30 AM07:30 AM 206 196 0 402 6 179 0 185 31 65 0 96 68307:45 AM 210 164 0 374 9 151 0 160 35 75 0 110 644 08:00 AM 207 160 0 367 3 168 0 171 50 61 0 111 64908:15 AM 228 147 0 375 5 174 0 179 48 84 0 132 686Total Volume 851 667 0 1518 23 672 0 695 164 285 0 449 2662% App. Total 56.1 43.9 0 3.3 96.7 0 36.5 63.5 0 PHF .933 .851 .000 .944 .639 .939 .000 .939 .820 .848 .000 .850 .970 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-73 File Name : ANAHA5SAMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 2 City of AnaheimN/S: Harbor BoulevardE/W: Interstate 5 Southbound RampsWeather: Clear Harbor Blvd I n t e r s t a t e 5 S o u t h b o u n d R a m p s Harbor Blvd Right667 Thru851 U-Turns0 InOut Total836 1518 2354 Left23 Thru672 U-Turns0 Out TotalIn1136 695 1831 Le f t 16 4 Rig h t 28 5 U- T u r n s 0 To t a l Ou t In 69 0 44 9 11 3 9 Peak Hour Begins at 07:30 AM Total Volume Peak Hour Data North Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at: 07:15 AM 08:00 AM 08:00 AM+0 mins.208 203 0 411 3 168 0 171 50 61 0 111 +15 mins.206 196 0 402 5 174 0 179 48 84 0 132+30 mins.210 164 0 374 11 213 0 224 58 70 0 128+45 mins.207 160 0 367 7 185 1 193 67 85 0 152 Total Volume 831 723 0 1554 26 740 1 767 223 300 0 523% App. Total 53.5 46.5 0 3.4 96.5 0.1 42.6 57.4 0 PHF .989 .890 .000 .945 .591 .869 .250 .856 .832 .882 .000 .860 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-74 File Name : ANAHA5SPMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 1 City of AnaheimN/S: Harbor BoulevardE/W: Interstate 5 Southbound RampsWeather: Clear Groups Printed- Total VolumeHarbor BlvdSouthbound Harbor BlvdNorthbound Interstate 5 Southbound RampsEastboundStart Time Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru U-Turns App. Total Left Right U-Turns App. Total Int. Total04:00 PM 147 140 0 287 11 367 0 378 67 85 0 152 81704:15 PM 151 158 1 310 19 294 0 313 76 90 0 166 789 04:30 PM 149 139 0 288 23 353 1 377 68 73 0 141 80604:45 PM 162 142 0 304 11 310 0 321 66 89 0 155 780Total609579111896413241138927733706143192 05:00 PM 167 173 0 340 18 320 0 338 73 73 0 146 82405:15 PM 172 144 0 316 22 381 0 403 45 65 0 110 82905:30 PM 185 149 0 334 12 293 0 305 51 84 0 135 77405:45 PM 148 134 0 282 8 330 0 338 70 63 0 133 753 Total 672 600 0 1272 60 1324 0 1384 239 285 0 524 3180 Grand Total 1281 1179 1 2461 124 2648 1 2773 516 622 0 1138 6372Apprch %52.1 47.9 0 4.5 95.5 0 45.3 54.7 0 Total %20.1 18.5 0 38.6 1.9 41.6 0 43.5 8.1 9.8 0 17.9 Harbor BlvdSouthbound Harbor BlvdNorthbound Interstate 5 Southbound RampsEastboundStart Time Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru U-Turns App. Total Left Right U-Turns App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:30 PM04:30 PM 149 139 0 288 23 353 1 377 68 73 0 141 80604:45 PM 162 142 0 304 11 310 0 321 66 89 0 155 780 05:00 PM 167 173 0 340 18 320 0 338 73 73 0 146 82405:15 PM 172 144 0 316 22 381 0 403 45 65 0 110 829Total Volume 650 598 0 1248 74 1364 1 1439 252 300 0 552 3239% App. Total 52.1 47.9 0 5.1 94.8 0.1 45.7 54.3 0 PHF .945 .864 .000 .918 .804 .895 .250 .893 .863 .843 .000 .890 .977 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-75 File Name : ANAHA5SPMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 2 City of AnaheimN/S: Harbor BoulevardE/W: Interstate 5 Southbound RampsWeather: Clear Harbor Blvd I n t e r s t a t e 5 S o u t h b o u n d R a m p s Harbor Blvd Right598 Thru650 U-Turns0 InOut Total1616 1248 2864 Left74 Thru1364 U-Turns1 Out TotalIn950 1439 2389 Le f t 25 2 Rig h t 30 0 U- T u r n s 0 To t a l Ou t In 67 2 55 2 12 2 4 Peak Hour Begins at 04:30 PM Total Volume Peak Hour Data North Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at: 04:45 PM 04:30 PM 04:00 PM+0 mins.162 142 0 304 23 353 1 377 67 85 0 152 +15 mins.167 173 0 340 11 310 0 321 76 90 0 166+30 mins.172 144 0 316 18 320 0 338 68 73 0 141+45 mins.185 149 0 334 22 381 0 403 66 89 0 155 Total Volume 686 608 0 1294 74 1364 1 1439 277 337 0 614% App. Total 53 47 0 5.1 94.8 0.1 45.1 54.9 0 PHF .927 .879 .000 .951 .804 .895 .250 .893 .911 .936 .000 .925 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-76 File Name : ANAHAMAAMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 1 City of AnaheimN/S: Harbor BoulevardE/W: Manchester AvenueWeather: Clear Groups Printed- Total VolumeHarbor BlvdSouthbound Manchester AveWestbound Harbor BlvdNorthboundStart Time Left Thru U-Turns App. Total Left Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. Total07:00 AM 39 183 2 224 5 7 0 12 113 4 10 127 36307:15 AM 59 197 2 258 1 19 0 20 136 8 7 151 429 07:30 AM 44 216 1 261 4 16 0 20 169 8 10 187 46807:45 AM 64 210 1 275 4 20 0 24 139 9 6 154 453Total20680661018146207655729336191713 08:00 AM 54 202 1 257 3 15 0 18 159 10 14 183 45808:15 AM 60 220 3 283 7 9 1 17 165 18 9 192 49208:30 AM 56 234 5 295 2 18 0 20 200 15 16 231 54608:45 AM 48 241 4 293 9 25 2 36 172 12 27 211 540 Total 218 897 13 1128 21 67 3 91 696 55 66 817 2036 Grand Total 424 1703 19 2146 35 129 3 167 1253 84 99 1436 3749Apprch %19.8 79.4 0.9 21 77.2 1.8 87.3 5.8 6.9 Total %11.3 45.4 0.5 57.2 0.9 3.4 0.1 4.5 33.4 2.2 2.6 38.3 Harbor BlvdSouthbound Manchester AveWestbound Harbor BlvdNorthboundStart Time Left Thru U-Turns App. Total Left Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 08:00 AM08:00 AM 54 202 1 257 3 15 0 18 159 10 14 183 45808:15 AM 60 220 3 283 7 9 1 17 165 18 9 192 492 08:30 AM 56 234 5 295 2 18 0 20 200 15 16 231 54608:45 AM 48 241 4 293 9 25 2 36 172 12 27 211 540Total Volume 218 897 13 1128 21 67 3 91 696 55 66 817 2036% App. Total 19.3 79.5 1.2 23.1 73.6 3.3 85.2 6.7 8.1 PHF .908 .930 .650 .956 .583 .670 .375 .632 .870 .764 .611 .884 .932 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-77 File Name : ANAHAMAAMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 2 City of AnaheimN/S: Harbor BoulevardE/W: Manchester AvenueWeather: Clear Harbor Blvd M a n c h e s t e r A v e Harbor Blvd Thru897 Left218 U-Turns13 InOut Total763 1128 1891 R i g h t 6 7 L e f t 2 1 U - T u r n s 3 O u t T o t a l I n 2 7 3 9 1 3 6 4 Thru696 Right55 U-Turns66 Out TotalIn918 817 1735 Peak Hour Begins at 08:00 AM Total Volume Peak Hour Data North Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at: 08:00 AM 08:00 AM 08:00 AM+0 mins.54 202 1 257 3 15 0 18 159 10 14 183 +15 mins.60 220 3 283 7 9 1 17 165 18 9 192+30 mins.56 234 5 295 2 18 0 20 200 15 16 231+45 mins.48 241 4 293 9 25 2 36 172 12 27 211 Total Volume 218 897 13 1128 21 67 3 91 696 55 66 817% App. Total 19.3 79.5 1.2 23.1 73.6 3.3 85.2 6.7 8.1 PHF .908 .930 .650 .956 .583 .670 .375 .632 .870 .764 .611 .884 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-78 File Name : ANAHAMAPMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 1 City of AnaheimN/S: Harbor BoulevardE/W: Manchester AvenueWeather: Clear Groups Printed- Total VolumeHarbor BlvdSouthbound Manchester AveWestbound Harbor BlvdNorthboundStart Time Left Thru U-Turns App. Total Left Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. Total04:00 PM 21 209 6 236 18 51 0 69 324 21 19 364 66904:15 PM 24 208 2 234 11 48 0 59 273 13 29 315 608 04:30 PM 24 198 2 224 15 66 0 81 327 21 27 375 68004:45 PM 23 226 1 250 17 48 0 65 273 18 23 314 629Total92841119446121302741197739813682586 05:00 PM 29 202 4 235 19 55 0 74 289 25 12 326 63505:15 PM 35 209 2 246 16 62 0 78 338 14 23 375 69905:30 PM 33 220 5 258 10 38 0 48 269 18 10 297 60305:45 PM 26 183 3 212 15 35 0 50 311 12 28 351 613 Total 123 814 14 951 60 190 0 250 1207 69 73 1349 2550 Grand Total 215 1655 25 1895 121 403 0 524 2404 142 171 2717 5136Apprch %11.3 87.3 1.3 23.1 76.9 0 88.5 5.2 6.3 Total %4.2 32.2 0.5 36.9 2.4 7.8 0 10.2 46.8 2.8 3.3 52.9 Harbor BlvdSouthbound Manchester AveWestbound Harbor BlvdNorthboundStart Time Left Thru U-Turns App. Total Left Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:30 PM04:30 PM 24 198 2 224 15 66 0 81 327 21 27 375 68004:45 PM 23 226 1 250 17 48 0 65 273 18 23 314 629 05:00 PM 29 202 4 235 19 55 0 74 289 25 12 326 63505:15 PM 35 209 2 246 16 62 0 78 338 14 23 375 699Total Volume 111 835 9 955 67 231 0 298 1227 78 85 1390 2643% App. Total 11.6 87.4 0.9 22.5 77.5 0 88.3 5.6 6.1 PHF .793 .924 .563 .955 .882 .875 .000 .920 .908 .780 .787 .927 .945 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-79 File Name : ANAHAMAPMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 2 City of AnaheimN/S: Harbor BoulevardE/W: Manchester AvenueWeather: Clear Harbor Blvd M a n c h e s t e r A v e Harbor Blvd Thru835 Left111 U-Turns9 InOut Total1458 955 2413 R i g h t 2 3 1 L e f t 6 7 U - T u r n s 0 O u t T o t a l I n 1 8 9 2 9 8 4 8 7 Thru1227 Right78 U-Turns85 Out TotalIn902 1390 2292 Peak Hour Begins at 04:30 PM Total Volume Peak Hour Data North Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at: 04:45 PM 04:30 PM 04:30 PM+0 mins.23 226 1 250 15 66 0 81 327 21 27 375 +15 mins.29 202 4 235 17 48 0 65 273 18 23 314+30 mins.35 209 2 246 19 55 0 74 289 25 12 326+45 mins.33 220 5 258 16 62 0 78 338 14 23 375 Total Volume 120 857 12 989 67 231 0 298 1227 78 85 1390% App. Total 12.1 86.7 1.2 22.5 77.5 0 88.3 5.6 6.1 PHF .857 .948 .600 .958 .882 .875 .000 .920 .908 .780 .787 .927 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-80 File Name : ANAHADIAMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 1 City of AnaheimN/S: Harbor BoulevardE/W: Disney WayWeather: Clear Groups Printed- Total VolumeHarbor BlvdSouthbound Disney WayWestbound Harbor BlvdNorthbound Disney WayEastbound Start Time Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. Total07:00 AM 31 141 0 0 172 10 1 20 0 31 2 101 9 0 112 0 1 0 0 1 31607:15 AM 24 180 0 0 204 16 0 24 0 40 4 143 12 0 159 0 0 0 0 0 403 07:30 AM 27 197 0 0 224 14 0 27 0 41 3 131 6 0 140 0 0 0 0 0 40507:45 AM 44 173 1 0 218 13 1 29 0 43 6 159 18 0 183 0 0 1 0 1 445Total12669110818532100015515534450594011021569 08:00 AM 36 210 1 0 247 10 0 35 0 45 7 129 10 0 146 0 1 0 0 1 43908:15 AM 43 175 0 0 218 17 0 44 0 61 2 151 17 0 170 0 0 0 0 0 44908:30 AM 38 193 0 0 231 27 0 33 0 60 10 160 23 0 193 0 0 0 0 0 48408:45 AM 48 207 2 0 257 22 0 49 0 71 5 164 17 0 186 1 0 0 0 1 515 Total 165 785 3 0 953 76 0 161 0 237 24 604 67 0 695 1 1 0 0 2 1887 Grand Total 291 1476 4 0 1771 129 2 261 0 392 39 1138 112 0 1289 1 2 1 0 4 3456Apprch %16.4 83.3 0.2 0 32.9 0.5 66.6 0 3 88.3 8.7 0 25 50 25 0 Total %8.4 42.7 0.1 0 51.2 3.7 0.1 7.6 0 11.3 1.1 32.9 3.2 0 37.3 0 0.1 0 0 0.1 Harbor BlvdSouthbound Disney WayWestbound Harbor BlvdNorthbound Disney WayEastboundStart Time Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. TotalPeak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 08:00 AM08:00 AM 36 210 1 0 247 10 0 35 0 45 7 129 10 0 146 0 1 0 0 1 43908:15 AM 43 175 0 0 218 17 0 44 0 61 2 151 17 0 170 0 0 0 0 0 44908:30 AM 38 193 0 0 231 27 0 33 0 60 10 160 23 0 193 0 0 0 0 0 484 08:45 AM 48 207 2 0 257 22 0 49 0 71 5 164 17 0 186 1 0 0 0 1 515 Total Volume 165 785 3 0 953 76 0 161 0 237 24 604 67 0 695 1 1 0 0 2 1887 % App. Total 17.3 82.4 0.3 0 32.1 0 67.9 0 3.5 86.9 9.6 0 50 50 0 0 PHF .859 .935 .375 .000 .927 .704 .000 .821 .000 .835 .600 .921 .728 .000 .900 .250 .250 .000 .000 .500 .916 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-81 File Name : ANAHADIAMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 2 City of AnaheimN/S: Harbor BoulevardE/W: Disney WayWeather: Clear Harbor Blvd D i s n e y W a y D i s n e y W a y Harbor Blvd Right3 Thru785 Left165 U-Turns0 InOut Total766 953 1719 R i g h t 1 6 1 T h r u 0 L e f t 7 6 U - T u r n s 0 O u t T o t a l I n 2 3 3 2 3 7 4 7 0 Left24 Thru604 Right67 U-Turns0 Out TotalIn861 695 1556 Le f t 1 Th r u 1 Ri g h t 0 U- T u r n s 0 To t a l Ou t In 27 2 29 Peak Hour Begins at 08:00 AM Total Volume Peak Hour Data North Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at: 08:00 AM 08:00 AM 08:00 AM 07:00 AM+0 mins.36 210 1 0 247 10 0 35 0 45 7 129 10 0 146 0 1 0 0 1 +15 mins.43 175 0 0 218 17 0 44 0 61 2 151 17 0 170 0 0 0 0 0+30 mins.38 193 0 0 231 27 0 33 0 60 10 160 23 0 193 0 0 0 0 0+45 mins.48 207 2 0 257 22 0 49 0 71 5 164 17 0 186 0 0 1 0 1 Total Volume 165 785 3 0 953 76 0 161 0 237 24 604 67 0 695 0 1 1 0 2 % App. Total 17.3 82.4 0.3 0 32.1 0 67.9 0 3.5 86.9 9.6 0 0 50 50 0 PHF .859 .935 .375 .000 .927 .704 .000 .821 .000 .835 .600 .921 .728 .000 .900 .000 .250 .250 .000 .500 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-82 File Name : ANAHADIPMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 1 City of AnaheimN/S: Harbor BoulevardE/W: Disney WayWeather: Clear Groups Printed- Total VolumeHarbor BlvdSouthbound Disney WayWestbound Harbor BlvdNorthbound Disney WayEastbound Start Time Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. Total04:00 PM 51 203 1 0 255 27 7 54 0 88 4 302 25 0 331 0 7 2 0 9 68304:15 PM 29 174 0 0 203 32 5 48 0 85 5 184 20 0 209 0 5 1 0 6 503 04:30 PM 44 194 0 0 238 37 4 60 0 101 6 283 24 0 313 0 4 1 0 5 65704:45 PM 38 217 2 0 257 30 5 57 0 92 12 180 17 0 209 0 5 0 0 5 563Total1627883095312621219036627949860106202140252406 05:00 PM 43 202 2 0 247 45 4 55 0 104 17 228 18 0 263 0 8 1 0 9 62305:15 PM 38 185 1 0 224 33 2 65 0 100 11 249 18 0 278 2 6 1 0 9 61105:30 PM 56 167 0 0 223 39 2 56 0 97 22 233 14 0 269 1 5 4 0 10 59905:45 PM 48 180 1 0 229 30 1 72 0 103 12 220 34 0 266 2 4 2 0 8 606 Total 185 734 4 0 923 147 9 248 0 404 62 930 84 0 1076 5 23 8 0 36 2439 Grand Total 347 1522 7 0 1876 273 30 467 0 770 89 1879 170 0 2138 5 44 12 0 61 4845Apprch %18.5 81.1 0.4 0 35.5 3.9 60.6 0 4.2 87.9 8 0 8.2 72.1 19.7 0 Total %7.2 31.4 0.1 0 38.7 5.6 0.6 9.6 0 15.9 1.8 38.8 3.5 0 44.1 0.1 0.9 0.2 0 1.3 Harbor BlvdSouthbound Disney WayWestbound Harbor BlvdNorthbound Disney WayEastboundStart Time Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. TotalPeak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:30 PM04:30 PM 44 194 0 0 238 37 4 60 0 101 6 283 24 0 313 0 4 1 0 5 65704:45 PM 38 217 2 0 257 30 5 57 0 92 12 180 17 0 209 0 5 0 0 5 56305:00 PM 43 202 2 0 247 45 4 55 0 104 17 228 18 0 263 0 8 1 0 9 623 05:15 PM 38 185 1 0 224 33 2 65 0 100 11 249 18 0 278 2 6 1 0 9 611 Total Volume 163 798 5 0 966 145 15 237 0 397 46 940 77 0 1063 2 23 3 0 28 2454 % App. Total 16.9 82.6 0.5 0 36.5 3.8 59.7 0 4.3 88.4 7.2 0 7.1 82.1 10.7 0 PHF .926 .919 .625 .000 .940 .806 .750 .912 .000 .954 .676 .830 .802 .000 .849 .250 .719 .750 .000 .778 .934 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-83 File Name : ANAHADIPMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 2 City of AnaheimN/S: Harbor BoulevardE/W: Disney WayWeather: Clear Harbor Blvd D i s n e y W a y D i s n e y W a y Harbor Blvd Right5 Thru798 Left163 U-Turns0 InOut Total1179 966 2145 R i g h t 2 3 7 T h r u 1 5 L e f t 1 4 5 U - T u r n s 0 O u t T o t a l I n 2 6 3 3 9 7 6 6 0 Left46 Thru940 Right77 U-Turns0 Out TotalIn946 1063 2009 Le f t 2 Th r u 23 Ri g h t 3 U- T u r n s 0 To t a l Ou t In 66 28 94 Peak Hour Begins at 04:30 PM Total Volume Peak Hour Data North Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at: 04:30 PM 05:00 PM 05:00 PM 05:00 PM+0 mins.44 194 0 0 238 45 4 55 0 104 17 228 18 0 263 0 8 1 0 9 +15 mins.38 217 2 0 257 33 2 65 0 100 11 249 18 0 278 2 6 1 0 9+30 mins.43 202 2 0 247 39 2 56 0 97 22 233 14 0 269 1 5 4 0 10+45 mins.38 185 1 0 224 30 1 72 0 103 12 220 34 0 266 2 4 2 0 8 Total Volume 163 798 5 0 966 147 9 248 0 404 62 930 84 0 1076 5 23 8 0 36 % App. Total 16.9 82.6 0.5 0 36.4 2.2 61.4 0 5.8 86.4 7.8 0 13.9 63.9 22.2 0 PHF .926 .919 .625 .000 .940 .817 .563 .861 .000 .971 .705 .934 .618 .000 .968 .625 .719 .500 .000 .900 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-84 Location: Site Code: 042‐15000 N/S: Date: 9/17/2015 E/W:Weather: Clear North Leg East Leg South Leg West Leg Harbor Boulevard Disney Way Harbor Boulevard Disney Way TOTAL 1 13 3 17 34 6 13 1 16 36 10 26 3 16 55 7 18 4 22 51 17 43 10 66 136 24 74 45 127 270 36 54 71 147 308 51 86 92 229 458 152 327 229 640 1348 North Leg East Leg South Leg West Leg Harbor Boulevard Disney Way Harbor Boulevard Disney Way TOTAL 7 321873130 24 30 21 61 136 30 56 31 109 226 22 44 12 46 124 26 38 60 119 243 11 39 27 80 157 14 33 29 83 159 37 44 34 91 206 171 316 232 662 1381 4:30 PM 5:30 PM TOTAL VOLUMES: 5:45 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM 5:15 PM Anaheim Harbor Boulevard Disney Way 4:15 PM 7:30 AM 8:30 AM 8:45 AM TOTAL VOLUMES: 4:00 PM PEDESTRIANS 7:00 AM 7:45 AM 8:00 AM 8:15 AM 7:15 AM Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178 Corona, CA 92878 951‐268‐6268G-85 File Name : ANAHAKAAMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 1 City of AnaheimN/S: Harbor BoulevardE/W: Katella AvenueWeather: Clear Groups Printed- Total VolumeHarbor BlvdSouthbound Katella AveWestbound Harbor BlvdNorthbound Katella AveEastbound Start Time Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. Total07:00 AM 12 118 24 4 158 47 101 15 3 166 23 122 49 1 195 2 202 22 0 226 74507:15 AM 14 162 30 3 209 48 120 10 2 180 16 119 70 0 205 1 188 36 0 225 819 07:30 AM 18 142 25 3 188 55 142 14 3 214 20 113 75 0 208 0 236 36 0 272 88207:45 AM 19 193 21 5 238 64 117 15 3 199 27 164 83 1 275 3 197 25 0 225 937Total63615100157932144805411759865182772883682311909483383 08:00 AM 16 129 26 4 175 51 137 21 5 214 19 108 50 1 178 2 240 45 0 287 85408:15 AM 8 164 23 5 200 62 160 24 4 250 38 128 59 0 225 4 205 36 0 245 92008:30 AM 12 158 43 7 220 49 155 28 1 233 33 158 72 1 264 3 190 45 1 239 95608:45 AM 15 181 53 5 254 50 156 27 0 233 32 132 63 1 228 7 188 36 1 232 947 Total 51 632 145 21 849 212 608 100 10 930 122 526 244 3 895 16 823 162 2 1003 3677 Grand Total 114 1247 245 36 1642 426 1088 154 21 1689 208 1044 521 5 1778 22 1646 281 2 1951 7060Apprch %6.9 75.9 14.9 2.2 25.2 64.4 9.1 1.2 11.7 58.7 29.3 0.3 1.1 84.4 14.4 0.1 Total %1.6 17.7 3.5 0.5 23.3 6 15.4 2.2 0.3 23.9 2.9 14.8 7.4 0.1 25.2 0.3 23.3 4 0 27.6 Harbor BlvdSouthbound Katella AveWestbound Harbor BlvdNorthbound Katella AveEastboundStart Time Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. TotalPeak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 08:00 AM08:00 AM 16 129 26 4 175 51 137 21 5 214 19 108 50 1 178 2 240 45 0 287 85408:15 AM 8 164 23 5 200 62 160 24 4 250 38 128 59 0 225 4 205 36 0 245 92008:30 AM 12 158 43 7 220 49 155 28 1 233 33 158 72 1 264 3 190 45 1 239 95608:45 AM 15 181 53 5 254 50 156 27 0 233 32 132 63 1 228 7 188 36 1 232 947 Total Volume 51 632 145 21 849 212 608 100 10 930 122 526 244 3 895 16 823 162 2 1003 3677 % App. Total 6 74.4 17.1 2.5 22.8 65.4 10.8 1.1 13.6 58.8 27.3 0.3 1.6 82.1 16.2 0.2 PHF .797 .873 .684 .750 .836 .855 .950 .893 .500 .930 .803 .832 .847 .750 .848 .571 .857 .900 .500 .874 .962 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-86 File Name : ANAHAKAAMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 2 City of AnaheimN/S: Harbor BoulevardE/W: Katella AvenueWeather: Clear Harbor Blvd K a t e l l a A v e K a t e l l a A v e Harbor Blvd Right145 Thru632 Left51 U-Turns21 InOut Total642 849 1491 R i g h t 1 0 0 T h r u 6 0 8 L e f t 2 1 2 U - T u r n s 1 0 O u t T o t a l I n 1 1 1 8 9 3 0 2 0 4 8 Left122 Thru526 Right244 U-Turns3 Out TotalIn1006 895 1901 Le f t 16 Th r u82 3 Ri g h t 16 2 U- T u r n s 2 To t a l Ou t In 87 5 10 0 3 18 7 8 Peak Hour Begins at 08:00 AM Total Volume Peak Hour Data North Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at: 08:00 AM 08:00 AM 07:45 AM 07:30 AM+0 mins.16 129 26 4 175 51 137 21 5 214 27 164 83 1 275 0 236 36 0 272 +15 mins.8 164 23 5 200 62 160 24 4 250 19 108 50 1 178 3 197 25 0 225+30 mins.12 158 43 7 220 49 155 28 1 233 38 128 59 0 225 2 240 45 0 287+45 mins.15 181 53 5 254 50 156 27 0 233 33 158 72 1 264 4 205 36 0 245 Total Volume 51 632 145 21 849 212 608 100 10 930 117 558 264 3 942 9 878 142 0 1029 % App. Total 6 74.4 17.1 2.5 22.8 65.4 10.8 1.1 12.4 59.2 28 0.3 0.9 85.3 13.8 0 PHF .797 .873 .684 .750 .836 .855 .950 .893 .500 .930 .770 .851 .795 .750 .856 .563 .915 .789 .000 .896 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-87 File Name : ANAHAKAPMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 1 City of AnaheimN/S: Harbor BoulevardE/W: Katella AvenueWeather: Clear Groups Printed- Total VolumeHarbor BlvdSouthbound Katella AveWestbound Harbor BlvdNorthbound Katella AveEastbound Start Time Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. Total04:00 PM 11 149 43 3 206 61 267 35 8 371 42 236 79 3 360 0 223 35 0 258 119504:15 PM 17 136 50 3 206 64 322 29 2 417 50 200 83 3 336 3 221 58 0 282 1241 04:30 PM 19 155 41 10 225 61 313 35 8 417 42 227 81 8 358 6 224 46 0 276 127604:45 PM 21 202 46 8 277 75 306 22 5 408 24 188 94 2 308 4 233 47 0 284 1277Total6864218024914261120812123161315885133716136213901186011004989 05:00 PM 22 169 40 3 234 66 312 35 7 420 36 232 94 9 371 0 206 50 0 256 128105:15 PM 12 177 37 3 229 75 361 32 3 471 26 209 71 1 307 3 251 39 0 293 130005:30 PM 16 140 60 4 220 60 295 32 7 394 27 235 81 1 344 1 217 59 0 277 123505:45 PM 11 169 38 6 224 73 335 39 5 452 50 223 67 4 344 0 252 41 0 293 1313 Total 61 655 175 16 907 274 1303 138 22 1737 139 899 313 15 1366 4 926 189 0 1119 5129 Grand Total 129 1297 355 40 1821 535 2511 259 45 3350 297 1750 650 31 2728 17 1827 375 0 2219 10118Apprch %7.1 71.2 19.5 2.2 16 75 7.7 1.3 10.9 64.1 23.8 1.1 0.8 82.3 16.9 0 Total %1.3 12.8 3.5 0.4 18 5.3 24.8 2.6 0.4 33.1 2.9 17.3 6.4 0.3 27 0.2 18.1 3.7 0 21.9 Harbor BlvdSouthbound Katella AveWestbound Harbor BlvdNorthbound Katella AveEastboundStart Time Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. TotalPeak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:30 PM04:30 PM 19 155 41 10 225 61 313 35 8 417 42 227 81 8 358 6 224 46 0 276 127604:45 PM 21 202 46 8 277 75 306 22 5 408 24 188 94 2 308 4 233 47 0 284 127705:00 PM 22 169 40 3 234 66 312 35 7 420 36 232 94 9 371 0 206 50 0 256 1281 05:15 PM 12 177 37 3 229 75 361 32 3 471 26 209 71 1 307 3 251 39 0 293 1300 Total Volume 74 703 164 24 965 277 1292 124 23 1716 128 856 340 20 1344 13 914 182 0 1109 5134 % App. Total 7.7 72.8 17 2.5 16.1 75.3 7.2 1.3 9.5 63.7 25.3 1.5 1.2 82.4 16.4 0 PHF .841 .870 .891 .600 .871 .923 .895 .886 .719 .911 .762 .922 .904 .556 .906 .542 .910 .910 .000 .946 .987 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-88 File Name : ANAHAKAPMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 2 City of AnaheimN/S: Harbor BoulevardE/W: Katella AvenueWeather: Clear Harbor Blvd K a t e l l a A v e K a t e l l a A v e Harbor Blvd Right164 Thru703 Left74 U-Turns24 InOut Total993 965 1958 R i g h t 1 2 4 T h r u 1 2 9 2 L e f t 2 7 7 U - T u r n s 2 3 O u t T o t a l I n 1 3 2 8 1 7 1 6 3 0 4 4 Left128 Thru856 Right340 U-Turns20 Out TotalIn1162 1344 2506 Le f t 13 Th r u91 4 Ri g h t 18 2 U- T u r n s 0 To t a l Ou t In 15 8 4 11 0 9 26 9 3 Peak Hour Begins at 04:30 PM Total Volume Peak Hour Data North Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at: 04:30 PM 05:00 PM 04:15 PM 05:00 PM+0 mins.19 155 41 10 225 66 312 35 7 420 50 200 83 3 336 0 206 50 0 256 +15 mins.21 202 46 8 277 75 361 32 3 471 42 227 81 8 358 3 251 39 0 293+30 mins.22 169 40 3 234 60 295 32 7 394 24 188 94 2 308 1 217 59 0 277+45 mins.12 177 37 3 229 73 335 39 5 452 36 232 94 9 371 0 252 41 0 293 Total Volume 74 703 164 24 965 274 1303 138 22 1737 152 847 352 22 1373 4 926 189 0 1119 % App. Total 7.7 72.8 17 2.5 15.8 75 7.9 1.3 11.1 61.7 25.6 1.6 0.4 82.8 16.9 0 PHF .841 .870 .891 .600 .871 .913 .902 .885 .786 .922 .760 .913 .936 .611 .925 .333 .919 .801 .000 .955 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-89 Start: End: AM 7:00 9:00 N/S Street:NOON 12:00 14:00 PM 16:15 18:15 DAY: AM 59 50 AM NOON 42 42 NOON PM 68 29 PM AM NOON PM AM NOON PM 66 29 36 43 55 110 121 80 94 57 80 136 AM NOON PM AM NOON PM AM 79 86 AM NOON 82 37 NOON PM 159 47 PM S O U T H L E G PROJECT#: 14-1305-003 E/W Street: DATE: 11/19/2014 W E S T L E G E A S T L E G N O R T H L E G PREPARED BY NATIONAL DATA & SURVEYING SERVICES Pedestrian Count Peak Hour CITY: Harbor Blvd Katella Ave Wednesday Anaheim G-90 File Name : ANAAGDIAMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 1 City of AnaheimN/S: Anaheim GardenwalkE/W: Disney WayWeather: Clear Groups Printed- Total VolumeDisney WayWestbound Anaheim GardenwalkNorthbound Disney WayEastboundStart Time Left Thru U-Turns App. Total Left Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. Total07:00 AM 3 23 0 26 7 6 0 13 26 3 1 30 6907:15 AM 6 37 2 45 4 4 0 8 32 4 0 36 89 07:30 AM 8 36 1 45 2 2 0 4 22 6 0 28 7707:45 AM 5 41 4 50 4 4 0 8 38 10 0 48 106Total2213771661716033118231142341 08:00 AM 9 39 0 48 7 10 0 17 26 3 1 30 9508:15 AM 11 51 2 64 4 7 0 11 27 5 4 36 11108:30 AM 8 51 0 59 5 6 0 11 47 5 0 52 12208:45 AM 8 71 1 80 4 6 0 10 48 8 1 57 147 Total 36 212 3 251 20 29 0 49 148 21 6 175 475 Grand Total 58 349 10 417 37 45 0 82 266 44 7 317 816Apprch %13.9 83.7 2.4 45.1 54.9 0 83.9 13.9 2.2 Total %7.1 42.8 1.2 51.1 4.5 5.5 0 10 32.6 5.4 0.9 38.8 Disney WayWestbound Anaheim GardenwalkNorthbound Disney WayEastboundStart Time Left Thru U-Turns App. Total Left Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 08:00 AM08:00 AM 9 39 0 48 7 10 0 17 26 3 1 30 9508:15 AM 11 51 2 64 4 7 0 11 27 5 4 36 111 08:30 AM 8 51 0 59 5 6 0 11 47 5 0 52 12208:45 AM 8 71 1 80 4 6 0 10 48 8 1 57 147Total Volume 36 212 3 251 20 29 0 49 148 21 6 175 475% App. Total 14.3 84.5 1.2 40.8 59.2 0 84.6 12 3.4 PHF .818 .746 .375 .784 .714 .725 .000 .721 .771 .656 .375 .768 .808 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-91 File Name : ANAAGDIAMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 2 City of AnaheimN/S: Anaheim GardenwalkE/W: Disney WayWeather: Clear D i s n e y W a y D i s n e y W a y Anaheim Gardenwalk T h r u 2 1 2 L e f t 3 6 U - T u r n s 3 O u t T o t a l I n 1 7 7 2 5 1 4 2 8 Left20 Right29 U-Turns0 Out TotalIn57 49 106 Th r u14 8 Rig h t 21 U- T u r n s 6 To t a l Ou t In 23 2 17 5 40 7 Peak Hour Begins at 08:00 AM Total Volume Peak Hour Data North Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at: 08:00 AM 08:00 AM 08:00 AM+0 mins.9 39 0 48 7 10 0 17 26 3 1 30 +15 mins.11 51 2 64 4 7 0 11 27 5 4 36+30 mins.8 51 0 59 5 6 0 11 47 5 0 52+45 mins.8 71 1 80 4 6 0 10 48 8 1 57 Total Volume 36 212 3 251 20 29 0 49 148 21 6 175% App. Total 14.3 84.5 1.2 40.8 59.2 0 84.6 12 3.4 PHF .818 .746 .375 .784 .714 .725 .000 .721 .771 .656 .375 .768 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-92 File Name : ANAAGDIPMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 1 City of AnaheimN/S: Anaheim GardenwalkE/W: Disney WayWeather: Clear Groups Printed- Total VolumeDisney WayWestbound Anaheim GardenwalkNorthbound Disney WayEastboundStart Time Left Thru Peds App. Total Left Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. Total04:00 PM 17 74 11 102 11 17 0 28 50 11 0 61 19104:15 PM 24 77 15 116 4 21 0 25 38 8 0 46 187 04:30 PM 8 94 23 125 8 20 0 28 52 8 0 60 21304:45 PM 17 101 17 135 3 17 0 20 40 3 0 43 198Total663466647826750101180300210789 05:00 PM 16 88 22 126 9 18 0 27 51 9 1 61 21405:15 PM 19 88 13 120 9 13 0 22 40 6 0 46 18805:30 PM 10 93 26 129 9 9 0 18 38 6 2 46 19305:45 PM 21 86 29 136 12 23 0 35 35 3 0 38 209 Total 66 355 90 511 39 63 0 102 164 24 3 191 804 Grand Total 132 701 156 989 65 138 0 203 344 54 3 401 1593Apprch %13.3 70.9 15.8 32 68 0 85.8 13.5 0.7 Total %8.3 44 9.8 62.1 4.1 8.7 0 12.7 21.6 3.4 0.2 25.2 Disney WayWestbound Anaheim GardenwalkNorthbound Disney WayEastboundStart Time Left Thru Peds App. Total Left Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:30 PM04:30 PM 8 94 23 125 8 20 0 28 52 8 0 60 21304:45 PM 17 101 17 135 3 17 0 20 40 3 0 43 198 05:00 PM 16 88 22 126 9 18 0 27 51 9 1 61 21405:15 PM 19 88 13 120 9 13 0 22 40 6 0 46 188Total Volume 60 371 75 506 29 68 0 97 183 26 1 210 813% App. Total 11.9 73.3 14.8 29.9 70.1 0 87.1 12.4 0.5 PHF .789 .918 .815 .937 .806 .850 .000 .866 .880 .722 .250 .861 .950 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-93 File Name : ANAAGDIPMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 2 City of AnaheimN/S: Anaheim GardenwalkE/W: Disney WayWeather: Clear D i s n e y W a y D i s n e y W a y Anaheim Gardenwalk T h r u 3 7 1 L e f t 6 0 P e d s 7 5 O u t T o t a l I n 2 5 1 5 0 6 7 5 7 Left29 Right68 U-Turns0 Out TotalIn86 97 183 Th r u18 3 Rig h t 26 U- T u r n s 1 To t a l Ou t In 40 0 21 0 61 0 Peak Hour Begins at 04:30 PM Total Volume Peak Hour Data North Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at: 05:00 PM 05:00 PM 04:00 PM+0 mins.16 88 22 126 9 18 0 27 50 11 0 61 +15 mins.19 88 13 120 9 13 0 22 38 8 0 46+30 mins.10 93 26 129 9 9 0 18 52 8 0 60+45 mins.21 86 29 136 12 23 0 35 40 3 0 43 Total Volume 66 355 90 511 39 63 0 102 180 30 0 210% App. Total 12.9 69.5 17.6 38.2 61.8 0 85.7 14.3 0 PHF .786 .954 .776 .939 .813 .685 .000 .729 .865 .682 .000 .861 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-94 File Name : ANACLDIAMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 1 City of AnaheimN/S: Clementine StreetE/W: Disney WayWeather: Clear Groups Printed- Total VolumeClementine StreetSouthbound Disney WayWestbound Clementine StreetNorthbound Disney WayEastbound Start Time Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. Total07:00 AM 7 9 3 0 19 17 17 35 0 69 9 8 6 0 23 3 12 14 0 29 14007:15 AM 7 14 5 0 26 22 27 26 0 75 14 13 7 0 34 7 20 12 0 39 174 07:30 AM 7 22 4 0 33 11 18 40 0 69 18 17 5 0 40 4 12 11 0 27 16907:45 AM 9 21 1 0 31 24 37 47 1 109 7 15 12 0 34 7 19 18 0 44 218Total30661301097499148132248533001312163550139701 08:00 AM 14 22 4 0 40 20 29 31 0 80 17 20 17 0 54 7 18 14 0 39 21308:15 AM 11 22 5 0 38 25 51 36 0 112 15 18 8 0 41 4 20 13 0 37 22808:30 AM 10 24 2 0 36 45 33 29 0 107 15 26 13 0 54 18 18 12 0 48 24508:45 AM 15 19 3 0 37 42 61 41 0 144 17 31 9 0 57 10 26 23 0 59 297 Total 50 87 14 0 151 132 174 137 0 443 64 95 47 0 206 39 82 62 0 183 983 Grand Total 80 153 27 0 260 206 273 285 1 765 112 148 77 0 337 60 145 117 0 322 1684Apprch %30.8 58.8 10.4 0 26.9 35.7 37.3 0.1 33.2 43.9 22.8 0 18.6 45 36.3 0 Total %4.8 9.1 1.6 0 15.4 12.2 16.2 16.9 0.1 45.4 6.7 8.8 4.6 0 20 3.6 8.6 6.9 0 19.1 Clementine StreetSouthbound Disney WayWestbound Clementine StreetNorthbound Disney WayEastboundStart Time Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. TotalPeak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 08:00 AM08:00 AM 14 22 4 0 40 20 29 31 0 80 17 20 17 0 54 7 18 14 0 39 21308:15 AM 11 22 5 0 38 25 51 36 0 112 15 18 8 0 41 4 20 13 0 37 22808:30 AM 10 24 2 0 36 45 33 29 0 107 15 26 13 0 54 18 18 12 0 48 245 08:45 AM 15 19 3 0 37 42 61 41 0 144 17 31 9 0 57 10 26 23 0 59 297 Total Volume 50 87 14 0 151 132 174 137 0 443 64 95 47 0 206 39 82 62 0 183 983 % App. Total 33.1 57.6 9.3 0 29.8 39.3 30.9 0 31.1 46.1 22.8 0 21.3 44.8 33.9 0 PHF .833 .906 .700 .000 .944 .733 .713 .835 .000 .769 .941 .766 .691 .000 .904 .542 .788 .674 .000 .775 .827 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-95 File Name : ANACLDIAMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 2 City of AnaheimN/S: Clementine StreetE/W: Disney WayWeather: Clear Clementine Street D i s n e y W a y D i s n e y W a y Clementine Street Right14 Thru87 Left50 U-Turns0 InOut Total271 151 422 R i g h t 1 3 7 T h r u 1 7 4 L e f t 1 3 2 U - T u r n s 0 O u t T o t a l I n 1 7 9 4 4 3 6 2 2 Left64 Thru95 Right47 U-Turns0 Out TotalIn281 206 487 Le f t 39 Th r u 82 Ri g h t 62 U- T u r n s 0 To t a l Ou t In 25 2 18 3 43 5 Peak Hour Begins at 08:00 AM Total Volume Peak Hour Data North Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at: 08:00 AM 08:00 AM 08:00 AM 08:00 AM+0 mins.14 22 4 0 40 20 29 31 0 80 17 20 17 0 54 7 18 14 0 39 +15 mins.11 22 5 0 38 25 51 36 0 112 15 18 8 0 41 4 20 13 0 37+30 mins.10 24 2 0 36 45 33 29 0 107 15 26 13 0 54 18 18 12 0 48+45 mins.15 19 3 0 37 42 61 41 0 144 17 31 9 0 57 10 26 23 0 59 Total Volume 50 87 14 0 151 132 174 137 0 443 64 95 47 0 206 39 82 62 0 183 % App. Total 33.1 57.6 9.3 0 29.8 39.3 30.9 0 31.1 46.1 22.8 0 21.3 44.8 33.9 0 PHF .833 .906 .700 .000 .944 .733 .713 .835 .000 .769 .941 .766 .691 .000 .904 .542 .788 .674 .000 .775 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-96 File Name : ANACLDIPMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 1 City of AnaheimN/S: Clementine StreetE/W: Disney WayWeather: Clear Groups Printed- Total VolumeClementine StreetSouthbound Disney WayWestbound Clementine StreetNorthbound Disney WayEastbound Start Time Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. Total04:00 PM 10 28 15 0 53 7 59 23 0 89 26 18 4 0 48 22 58 23 0 103 29304:15 PM 17 27 13 0 57 8 44 15 0 67 28 25 2 0 55 21 69 24 0 114 293 04:30 PM 12 31 16 0 59 8 71 16 0 95 43 26 4 0 73 36 67 20 0 123 35004:45 PM 19 26 17 0 62 5 50 23 0 78 22 19 2 0 43 40 80 25 0 145 328Total5811261023128224770329119881202191192749204851264 05:00 PM 13 35 15 0 63 4 71 16 0 91 25 29 1 0 55 35 68 29 0 132 34105:15 PM 12 33 18 0 63 6 40 14 0 60 20 19 0 0 39 26 63 26 0 115 27705:30 PM 18 37 16 0 71 7 50 15 0 72 22 24 2 0 48 29 60 21 0 110 30105:45 PM 13 28 22 0 63 5 62 19 0 86 13 20 0 0 33 26 75 18 0 119 301 Total 56 133 71 0 260 22 223 64 0 309 80 92 3 0 175 116 266 94 0 476 1220 Grand Total 114 245 132 0 491 50 447 141 0 638 199 180 15 0 394 235 540 186 0 961 2484Apprch %23.2 49.9 26.9 0 7.8 70.1 22.1 0 50.5 45.7 3.8 0 24.5 56.2 19.4 0 Total %4.6 9.9 5.3 0 19.8 2 18 5.7 0 25.7 8 7.2 0.6 0 15.9 9.5 21.7 7.5 0 38.7 Clementine StreetSouthbound Disney WayWestbound Clementine StreetNorthbound Disney WayEastboundStart Time Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. TotalPeak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:15 PM04:15 PM 17 27 13 0 57 8 44 15 0 67 28 25 2 0 55 21 69 24 0 114 29304:30 PM 12 31 16 0 59 8 71 16 0 95 43 26 4 0 73 36 67 20 0 123 35004:45 PM 19 26 17 0 62 5 50 23 0 78 22 19 2 0 43 40 80 25 0 145 328 05:00 PM 13 35 15 0 63 4 71 16 0 91 25 29 1 0 55 35 68 29 0 132 341 Total Volume 61 119 61 0 241 25 236 70 0 331 118 99 9 0 226 132 284 98 0 514 1312 % App. Total 25.3 49.4 25.3 0 7.6 71.3 21.1 0 52.2 43.8 4 0 25.7 55.3 19.1 0 PHF .803 .850 .897 .000 .956 .781 .831 .761 .000 .871 .686 .853 .563 .000 .774 .825 .888 .845 .000 .886 .937 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-97 File Name : ANACLDIPMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 2 City of AnaheimN/S: Clementine StreetE/W: Disney WayWeather: Clear Clementine Street D i s n e y W a y D i s n e y W a y Clementine Street Right61 Thru119 Left61 U-Turns0 InOut Total301 241 542 R i g h t 7 0 T h r u 2 3 6 L e f t 2 5 U - T u r n s 0 O u t T o t a l I n 3 5 4 3 3 1 6 8 5 Left118 Thru99 Right9 U-Turns0 Out TotalIn242 226 468 Le f t 13 2 Th r u28 4 Ri g h t 98 U- T u r n s 0 To t a l Ou t In 41 5 51 4 92 9 Peak Hour Begins at 04:15 PM Total Volume Peak Hour Data North Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at: 05:00 PM 04:15 PM 04:15 PM 04:30 PM+0 mins.13 35 15 0 63 8 44 15 0 67 28 25 2 0 55 36 67 20 0 123 +15 mins.12 33 18 0 63 8 71 16 0 95 43 26 4 0 73 40 80 25 0 145+30 mins.18 37 16 0 71 5 50 23 0 78 22 19 2 0 43 35 68 29 0 132+45 mins.13 28 22 0 63 4 71 16 0 91 25 29 1 0 55 26 63 26 0 115 Total Volume 56 133 71 0 260 25 236 70 0 331 118 99 9 0 226 137 278 100 0 515 % App. Total 21.5 51.2 27.3 0 7.6 71.3 21.1 0 52.2 43.8 4 0 26.6 54 19.4 0 PHF .778 .899 .807 .000 .915 .781 .831 .761 .000 .871 .686 .853 .563 .000 .774 .856 .869 .862 .000 .888 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-98 File Name : ANACLKAAMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 1 City of AnaheimN/S: Clementine StreetE/W: Katella AvenueWeather: Clear Groups Printed- Total VolumeClementine StreetSouthbound Katella AveWestbound Parking Lot DrivewayNorthbound Katella AveEastbound Start Time Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. Total07:00 AM 3 30 11 0 44 28 152 9 2 191 1 6 0 0 7 12 203 23 14 252 49407:15 AM 7 31 9 1 48 45 166 14 4 229 4 13 24 0 41 16 217 18 7 258 576 07:30 AM 6 27 7 3 43 30 237 17 1 285 2 8 10 0 20 14 259 33 16 322 67007:45 AM 6 43 22 4 75 38 162 5 6 211 10 17 16 0 43 9 235 32 17 293 622Total2213149821014171745139161744500111519141065411252362 08:00 AM 2 40 14 2 58 64 212 17 7 300 8 11 17 0 36 24 226 23 21 294 68808:15 AM 10 43 13 1 67 58 205 12 5 280 7 10 20 0 37 15 209 26 27 277 66108:30 AM 3 52 14 1 70 69 178 12 4 263 7 12 21 0 40 23 202 44 16 285 65808:45 AM 11 55 35 3 104 55 212 18 8 293 9 16 37 0 62 21 182 33 28 264 723 Total 26 190 76 7 299 246 807 59 24 1136 31 49 95 0 175 83 819 126 92 1120 2730 Grand Total 48 321 125 15 509 387 1524 104 37 2052 48 93 145 0 286 134 1733 232 146 2245 5092Apprch %9.4 63.1 24.6 2.9 18.9 74.3 5.1 1.8 16.8 32.5 50.7 0 6 77.2 10.3 6.5 Total %0.9 6.3 2.5 0.3 10 7.6 29.9 2 0.7 40.3 0.9 1.8 2.8 0 5.6 2.6 34 4.6 2.9 44.1 Clementine StreetSouthbound Katella AveWestbound Parking Lot DrivewayNorthbound Katella AveEastboundStart Time Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. TotalPeak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 08:00 AM08:00 AM 2 40 14 2 58 64 212 17 7 300 8 11 17 0 36 24 226 23 21 294 68808:15 AM 10 43 13 1 67 58 205 12 5 280 7 10 20 0 37 15 209 26 27 277 66108:30 AM 3 52 14 1 70 69 178 12 4 263 7 12 21 0 40 23 202 44 16 285 658 08:45 AM 11 55 35 3 104 55 212 18 8 293 9 16 37 0 62 21 182 33 28 264 723 Total Volume 26 190 76 7 299 246 807 59 24 1136 31 49 95 0 175 83 819 126 92 1120 2730 % App. Total 8.7 63.5 25.4 2.3 21.7 71 5.2 2.1 17.7 28 54.3 0 7.4 73.1 11.2 8.2 PHF .591 .864 .543 .583 .719 .891 .952 .819 .750 .947 .861 .766 .642 .000 .706 .865 .906 .716 .821 .952 .944 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-99 File Name : ANACLKAAMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 2 City of AnaheimN/S: Clementine StreetE/W: Katella AvenueWeather: Clear Clementine Street K a t e l l a A v e K a t e l l a A v e Parking Lot Driveway Right76 Thru190 Left26 U-Turns7 InOut Total191 299 490 R i g h t 5 9 T h r u 8 0 7 L e f t 2 4 6 U - T u r n s 2 4 O u t T o t a l I n 9 4 0 1 1 3 6 2 0 7 6 Left31 Thru49 Right95 U-Turns0 Out TotalIn562 175 737 Le f t 83 Th r u81 9 Ri g h t 12 6 U- T u r n s 92 To t a l Ou t In 91 4 11 2 0 20 3 4 Peak Hour Begins at 08:00 AM Total Volume Peak Hour Data North Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at: 08:00 AM 08:00 AM 08:00 AM 07:30 AM+0 mins.2 40 14 2 58 64 212 17 7 300 8 11 17 0 36 14 259 33 16 322 +15 mins.10 43 13 1 67 58 205 12 5 280 7 10 20 0 37 9 235 32 17 293+30 mins.3 52 14 1 70 69 178 12 4 263 7 12 21 0 40 24 226 23 21 294+45 mins.11 55 35 3 104 55 212 18 8 293 9 16 37 0 62 15 209 26 27 277 Total Volume 26 190 76 7 299 246 807 59 24 1136 31 49 95 0 175 62 929 114 81 1186 % App. Total 8.7 63.5 25.4 2.3 21.7 71 5.2 2.1 17.7 28 54.3 0 5.2 78.3 9.6 6.8 PHF .591 .864 .543 .583 .719 .891 .952 .819 .750 .947 .861 .766 .642 .000 .706 .646 .897 .864 .750 .921 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-100 File Name : ANACLKAPMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 1 City of AnaheimN/S: Clementine StreetE/W: Katella AvenueWeather: Clear Groups Printed- Total VolumeClementine StreetSouthbound Katella AveWestbound Parking Lot DrivewayNorthbound Katella AveEastbound Start Time Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. Total04:00 PM 7 34 26 1 68 48 328 17 5 398 21 27 46 0 94 22 264 17 27 330 89004:15 PM 7 29 26 3 65 35 351 12 9 407 17 24 48 0 89 26 260 21 36 343 904 04:30 PM 8 47 33 2 90 29 325 19 7 380 24 26 55 0 105 16 289 10 26 341 91604:45 PM 12 49 38 0 99 34 360 22 5 421 17 27 44 0 88 19 263 20 24 326 934Total3415912363221461364702616067910419303768310766811313403644 05:00 PM 12 38 29 1 80 54 300 18 10 382 30 37 74 0 141 20 235 23 43 321 92405:15 PM 8 27 27 2 64 55 418 22 5 500 31 31 64 0 126 22 254 11 41 328 101805:30 PM 10 32 31 1 74 25 322 22 7 376 29 27 73 0 129 24 260 15 35 334 91305:45 PM 9 30 34 0 73 24 382 30 8 444 24 21 48 0 93 19 273 8 32 332 942 Total 39 127 121 4 291 158 1422 92 30 1702 114 116 259 0 489 85 1022 57 151 1315 3797 Grand Total 73 286 244 10 613 304 2786 162 56 3308 193 220 452 0 865 168 2098 125 264 2655 7441Apprch %11.9 46.7 39.8 1.6 9.2 84.2 4.9 1.7 22.3 25.4 52.3 0 6.3 79 4.7 9.9 Total %1 3.8 3.3 0.1 8.2 4.1 37.4 2.2 0.8 44.5 2.6 3 6.1 0 11.6 2.3 28.2 1.7 3.5 35.7 Clementine StreetSouthbound Katella AveWestbound Parking Lot DrivewayNorthbound Katella AveEastboundStart Time Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. TotalPeak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 05:00 PM05:00 PM 12 38 29 1 80 54 300 18 10 382 30 37 74 0 141 20 235 23 43 321 92405:15 PM 8 27 27 2 64 55 418 22 5 500 31 31 64 0 126 22 254 11 41 328 101805:30 PM 10 32 31 1 74 25 322 22 7 376 29 27 73 0 129 24 260 15 35 334 913 05:45 PM 9 30 34 0 73 24 382 30 8 444 24 21 48 0 93 19 273 8 32 332 942 Total Volume 39 127 121 4 291 158 1422 92 30 1702 114 116 259 0 489 85 1022 57 151 1315 3797 % App. Total 13.4 43.6 41.6 1.4 9.3 83.5 5.4 1.8 23.3 23.7 53 0 6.5 77.7 4.3 11.5 PHF .813 .836 .890 .500 .909 .718 .850 .767 .750 .851 .919 .784 .875 .000 .867 .885 .936 .620 .878 .984 .932 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-101 File Name : ANACLKAPMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 2 City of AnaheimN/S: Clementine StreetE/W: Katella AvenueWeather: Clear Clementine Street K a t e l l a A v e K a t e l l a A v e Parking Lot Driveway Right121 Thru127 Left39 U-Turns4 InOut Total293 291 584 R i g h t 9 2 T h r u 1 4 2 2 L e f t 1 5 8 U - T u r n s 3 0 O u t T o t a l I n 1 3 2 0 1 7 0 2 3 0 2 2 Left114 Thru116 Right259 U-Turns0 Out TotalIn342 489 831 Le f t 85 Th r u 10 2 2 Ri g h t 57 U- T u r n s 15 1 To t a l Ou t In 16 5 7 13 1 5 29 7 2 Peak Hour Begins at 05:00 PM Total Volume Peak Hour Data North Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at: 04:15 PM 05:00 PM 05:00 PM 04:00 PM+0 mins.7 29 26 3 65 54 300 18 10 382 30 37 74 0 141 22 264 17 27 330 +15 mins.8 47 33 2 90 55 418 22 5 500 31 31 64 0 126 26 260 21 36 343+30 mins.12 49 38 0 99 25 322 22 7 376 29 27 73 0 129 16 289 10 26 341+45 mins.12 38 29 1 80 24 382 30 8 444 24 21 48 0 93 19 263 20 24 326 Total Volume 39 163 126 6 334 158 1422 92 30 1702 114 116 259 0 489 83 1076 68 113 1340 % App. Total 11.7 48.8 37.7 1.8 9.3 83.5 5.4 1.8 23.3 23.7 53 0 6.2 80.3 5.1 8.4 PHF .813 .832 .829 .500 .843 .718 .850 .767 .750 .851 .919 .784 .875 .000 .867 .798 .931 .810 .785 .977 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-102 File Name : ANA5SDIAM Site Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015 Page No : 1 City of Anaheim N/S: Interstate 5 Southbound OfframpE/W: Disney Way Weather: Clear Groups Printed- Total VolumeInterstate 5 SouthboundOfframpSouthbound Disney WayWestbound Zeyn StreetNorthbound Disney WayEastbound Start Time Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. Total07:00 AM 35 4 17 0 56 2 52 0 0 54 0 0 6 0 6 0 20 3 0 23 13907:15 AM 34 1 25 0 60 2 48 0 0 50 2 0 9 0 11 0 34 1 0 35 156 07:30 AM 45 4 22 0 71 5 51 0 0 56 0 0 6 0 6 0 23 0 0 23 15607:45 AM 73 3 31 0 107 5 76 0 2 83 1 0 13 0 14 0 35 2 0 37 241Total1871295029414227022433034037011260118692 08:00 AM 63 3 18 0 84 3 57 0 0 60 3 0 7 0 10 0 47 3 0 50 20408:15 AM 68 4 35 0 107 4 69 0 1 74 6 0 2 0 8 0 39 1 0 40 22908:30 AM 73 5 41 0 119 2 67 0 2 71 7 0 14 0 21 0 36 4 0 40 25108:45 AM 69 6 47 0 122 4 95 0 0 99 3 0 11 0 14 0 45 2 0 47 282 Total 273 18 141 0 432 13 288 0 3 304 19 0 34 0 53 0 167 10 0 177 966 Grand Total 460 30 236 0 726 27 515 0 5 547 22 0 68 0 90 0 279 16 0 295 1658Apprch %63.4 4.1 32.5 0 4.9 94.1 0 0.9 24.4 0 75.6 0 0 94.6 5.4 0 Total %27.7 1.8 14.2 0 43.8 1.6 31.1 0 0.3 33 1.3 0 4.1 0 5.4 0 16.8 1 0 17.8 Interstate 5 SouthboundOfframpSouthbound Disney WayWestbound Zeyn StreetNorthbound Disney WayEastbound Start Time Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. TotalPeak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 08:00 AM08:00 AM 63 3 18 0 84 3 57 0 0 60 3 0 7 0 10 0 47 3 0 50 204 08:15 AM 68 4 35 0 107 4 69 0 1 74 6 0 2 0 8 0 39 1 0 40 22908:30 AM 73 5 41 0 119 2 67 0 2 71 7 0 14 0 21 0 36 4 0 40 25108:45 AM 69 6 47 0 122 4 95 0 0 99 3 0 11 0 14 0 45 2 0 47 282 Total Volume 273 18 141 0 432 13 288 0 3 304 19 0 34 0 53 0 167 10 0 177 966 % App. Total 63.2 4.2 32.6 0 4.3 94.7 0 1 35.8 0 64.2 0 0 94.4 5.6 0 PHF .935 .750 .750 .000 .885 .813 .758 .000 .375 .768 .679 .000 .607 .000 .631 .000 .888 .625 .000 .885 .856 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-103 File Name : ANA5SDIAM Site Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015 Page No : 2 City of Anaheim N/S: Interstate 5 Southbound OfframpE/W: Disney Way Weather: Clear Interstate 5 Southbound Offramp D i s n e y W a y D i s n e y W a y Zeyn Street Right141 Thru18 Left273 U-Turns0 InOut Total0 432 432 R i g h t 0 T h r u 2 8 8 L e f t 1 3 U - T u r n s 3 O u t T o t a l I n 4 7 4 3 0 4 7 7 8 Left19 Thru0 Right34 U-Turns0 Out TotalIn41 53 94 Le f t 0 Th r u 16 7 Ri g h t 10 U- T u r n s 0 To t a l Ou t In 44 8 17 7 62 5 Peak Hour Begins at 08:00 AM Total Volume Peak Hour Data North Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at: 08:00 AM 08:00 AM 07:45 AM 08:00 AM+0 mins.63 3 18 0 84 3 57 0 0 60 1 0 13 0 14 0 47 3 0 50 +15 mins.68 4 35 0 107 4 69 0 1 74 3 0 7 0 10 0 39 1 0 40+30 mins.73 5 41 0 119 2 67 0 2 71 6 0 2 0 8 0 36 4 0 40+45 mins.69 6 47 0 122 4 95 0 0 99 7 0 14 0 21 0 45 2 0 47 Total Volume 273 18 141 0 432 13 288 0 3 304 17 0 36 0 53 0 167 10 0 177 % App. Total 63.2 4.2 32.6 0 4.3 94.7 0 1 32.1 0 67.9 0 0 94.4 5.6 0 PHF .935 .750 .750 .000 .885 .813 .758 .000 .375 .768 .607 .000 .643 .000 .631 .000 .888 .625 .000 .885 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-104 File Name : ANA5SDIPM Site Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015 Page No : 1 City of Anaheim N/S: Interstate 5 Southbound OfframpE/W: Disney Way Weather: Clear Groups Printed- Total VolumeInterstate 5 SouthboundOfframpSouthbound Disney WayWestbound Zeyn StreetNorthbound Disney WayEastbound Start Time Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. Total04:00 PM 71 3 39 0 113 2 65 0 2 69 0 0 13 0 13 0 97 2 0 99 29404:15 PM 71 3 39 0 113 3 80 0 0 83 1 0 11 0 12 0 78 4 0 82 290 04:30 PM 90 4 34 0 128 7 82 0 2 91 1 0 28 0 29 0 105 4 0 109 35704:45 PM 59 3 41 0 103 5 101 0 1 107 2 0 13 0 15 0 87 2 0 89 314Total2911315304571732805350406506903671203791255 05:00 PM 62 3 36 0 101 3 85 0 1 89 0 0 10 0 10 0 107 5 0 112 31205:15 PM 50 4 37 0 91 2 86 0 0 88 1 0 7 0 8 0 83 1 0 84 27105:30 PM 69 2 22 0 93 4 81 0 0 85 2 0 13 0 15 0 86 6 0 92 28505:45 PM 66 6 29 0 101 3 94 0 5 102 2 0 11 0 13 0 98 5 0 103 319 Total 247 15 124 0 386 12 346 0 6 364 5 0 41 0 46 0 374 17 0 391 1187 Grand Total 538 28 277 0 843 29 674 0 11 714 9 0 106 0 115 0 741 29 0 770 2442Apprch %63.8 3.3 32.9 0 4.1 94.4 0 1.5 7.8 0 92.2 0 0 96.2 3.8 0 Total %22 1.1 11.3 0 34.5 1.2 27.6 0 0.5 29.2 0.4 0 4.3 0 4.7 0 30.3 1.2 0 31.5 Interstate 5 SouthboundOfframpSouthbound Disney WayWestbound Zeyn StreetNorthbound Disney WayEastbound Start Time Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. TotalPeak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:15 PM04:15 PM 71 3 39 0 113 3 80 0 0 83 1 0 11 0 12 0 78 4 0 82 290 04:30 PM 90 4 34 0 128 7 82 0 2 91 1 0 28 0 29 0 105 4 0 109 35704:45 PM 59 3 41 0 103 5 101 0 1 107 2 0 13 0 15 0 87 2 0 89 31405:00 PM 62 3 36 0 101 3 85 0 1 89 0 0 10 0 10 0 107 5 0 112 312 Total Volume 282 13 150 0 445 18 348 0 4 370 4 0 62 0 66 0 377 15 0 392 1273 % App. Total 63.4 2.9 33.7 0 4.9 94.1 0 1.1 6.1 0 93.9 0 0 96.2 3.8 0 PHF .783 .813 .915 .000 .869 .643 .861 .000 .500 .864 .500 .000 .554 .000 .569 .000 .881 .750 .000 .875 .891 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-105 File Name : ANA5SDIPM Site Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015 Page No : 2 City of Anaheim N/S: Interstate 5 Southbound OfframpE/W: Disney Way Weather: Clear Interstate 5 Southbound Offramp D i s n e y W a y D i s n e y W a y Zeyn Street Right150 Thru13 Left282 U-Turns0 InOut Total0 445 445 R i g h t 0 T h r u 3 4 8 L e f t 1 8 U - T u r n s 4 O u t T o t a l I n 7 2 1 3 7 0 1 0 9 1 Left4 Thru0 Right62 U-Turns0 Out TotalIn46 66 112 Le f t 0 Th r u 37 7 Ri g h t 15 U- T u r n s 0 To t a l Ou t In 50 2 39 2 89 4 Peak Hour Begins at 04:15 PM Total Volume Peak Hour Data North Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at: 04:00 PM 04:30 PM 04:00 PM 04:30 PM+0 mins.71 3 39 0 113 7 82 0 2 91 0 0 13 0 13 0 105 4 0 109 +15 mins.71 3 39 0 113 5 101 0 1 107 1 0 11 0 12 0 87 2 0 89+30 mins.90 4 34 0 128 3 85 0 1 89 1 0 28 0 29 0 107 5 0 112+45 mins.59 3 41 0 103 2 86 0 0 88 2 0 13 0 15 0 83 1 0 84 Total Volume 291 13 153 0 457 17 354 0 4 375 4 0 65 0 69 0 382 12 0 394 % App. Total 63.7 2.8 33.5 0 4.5 94.4 0 1.1 5.8 0 94.2 0 0 97 3 0 PHF .808 .813 .933 .000 .893 .607 .876 .000 .500 .876 .500 .000 .580 .000 .595 .000 .893 .600 .000 .879 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-106 File Name : ANAANDIAMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 1 City of AnaheimN/S: Anaheim BoulevardE/W: Disney WayWeather: Clear Groups Printed- Total VolumeAnaheim BlvdSouthbound Manchester AveWestbound Anaheim BlvdNorthbound Disney WayEastbound Start Time Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. Total07:00 AM 142 135 25 2 304 0 23 0 0 23 6 141 2 3 152 36 12 13 0 61 54007:15 AM 141 135 17 1 294 0 28 0 0 28 5 142 2 0 149 39 20 19 0 78 549 07:30 AM 153 182 30 2 367 0 24 0 0 24 2 219 1 1 223 35 21 18 0 74 68807:45 AM 156 173 26 1 356 0 43 0 0 43 9 227 6 3 245 64 33 24 0 121 765Total592625986132101180011822729117769174867403342542 08:00 AM 112 171 31 1 315 0 26 1 0 27 4 236 1 0 241 77 16 25 0 118 70108:15 AM 123 178 27 0 328 0 39 0 0 39 7 178 3 2 190 72 23 15 0 110 66708:30 AM 98 157 20 0 275 0 48 0 0 48 4 174 1 1 180 69 29 24 0 122 62508:45 AM 100 135 34 0 269 0 58 0 0 58 7 176 2 1 186 67 30 28 1 126 639 Total 433 641 112 1 1187 0 171 1 0 172 22 764 7 4 797 285 98 92 1 476 2632 Grand Total 1025 1266 210 7 2508 0 289 1 0 290 44 1493 18 11 1566 459 184 166 1 810 5174Apprch %40.9 50.5 8.4 0.3 0 99.7 0.3 0 2.8 95.3 1.1 0.7 56.7 22.7 20.5 0.1 Total %19.8 24.5 4.1 0.1 48.5 0 5.6 0 0 5.6 0.9 28.9 0.3 0.2 30.3 8.9 3.6 3.2 0 15.7 Anaheim BlvdSouthbound Manchester AveWestbound Anaheim BlvdNorthbound Disney WayEastboundStart Time Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. TotalPeak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07:30 AM07:30 AM 153 182 30 2 367 0 24 0 0 24 2 219 1 1 223 35 21 18 0 74 68807:45 AM 156 173 26 1 356 0 43 0 0 43 9 227 6 3 245 64 33 24 0 121 76508:00 AM 112 171 31 1 315 0 26 1 0 27 4 236 1 0 241 77 16 25 0 118 701 08:15 AM 123 178 27 0 328 0 39 0 0 39 7 178 3 2 190 72 23 15 0 110 667 Total Volume 544 704 114 4 1366 0 132 1 0 133 22 860 11 6 899 248 93 82 0 423 2821 % App. Total 39.8 51.5 8.3 0.3 0 99.2 0.8 0 2.4 95.7 1.2 0.7 58.6 22 19.4 0 PHF .872 .967 .919 .500 .931 .000 .767 .250 .000 .773 .611 .911 .458 .500 .917 .805 .705 .820 .000 .874 .922 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-107 File Name : ANAANDIAMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 2 City of AnaheimN/S: Anaheim BoulevardE/W: Disney WayWeather: Clear Anaheim Blvd D i s n e y W a y M a n c h e s t e r A v e Anaheim Blvd Right114 Thru704 Left544 U-Turns4 InOut Total1109 1366 2475 R i g h t 1 T h r u 1 3 2 L e f t 0 U - T u r n s 0 O u t T o t a l I n 6 4 8 1 3 3 7 8 1 Left22 Thru860 Right11 U-Turns6 Out TotalIn786 899 1685 Le f t 24 8 Th r u 93 Ri g h t 82 U- T u r n s 0 To t a l Ou t In 26 8 42 3 69 1 Peak Hour Begins at 07:30 AM Total Volume Peak Hour Data North Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at: 07:30 AM 08:00 AM 07:30 AM 08:00 AM+0 mins.153 182 30 2 367 0 26 1 0 27 2 219 1 1 223 77 16 25 0 118 +15 mins.156 173 26 1 356 0 39 0 0 39 9 227 6 3 245 72 23 15 0 110+30 mins.112 171 31 1 315 0 48 0 0 48 4 236 1 0 241 69 29 24 0 122+45 mins.123 178 27 0 328 0 58 0 0 58 7 178 3 2 190 67 30 28 1 126 Total Volume 544 704 114 4 1366 0 171 1 0 172 22 860 11 6 899 285 98 92 1 476 % App. Total 39.8 51.5 8.3 0.3 0 99.4 0.6 0 2.4 95.7 1.2 0.7 59.9 20.6 19.3 0.2 PHF .872 .967 .919 .500 .931 .000 .737 .250 .000 .741 .611 .911 .458 .500 .917 .925 .817 .821 .250 .944 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-108 File Name : ANAANDIPMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 1 City of AnaheimN/S: Anaheim BoulevardE/W: Disney WayWeather: Clear Groups Printed- Total VolumeAnaheim BlvdSouthbound Manchester AveWestbound Anaheim BlvdNorthbound Disney WayEastbound Start Time Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. Total04:00 PM 139 143 19 1 302 0 52 2 0 54 5 239 2 2 248 74 53 29 0 156 76004:15 PM 120 182 28 3 333 0 52 2 0 54 6 214 1 1 222 75 36 53 0 164 773 04:30 PM 147 168 18 3 336 0 63 1 0 64 6 238 0 1 245 97 57 64 0 218 86304:45 PM 128 220 18 0 366 0 78 0 0 78 8 270 2 2 282 93 54 49 0 196 922Total5347138371337024550250259615699733920019507343318 05:00 PM 139 182 20 1 342 0 65 0 0 65 8 224 3 2 237 65 52 53 0 170 81405:15 PM 138 210 22 1 371 0 62 2 0 64 9 298 1 4 312 62 40 35 0 137 88405:30 PM 138 165 17 3 323 0 59 1 0 60 4 229 3 4 240 65 40 40 0 145 76805:45 PM 126 166 21 1 314 0 66 0 0 66 10 269 4 3 286 93 53 38 0 184 850 Total 541 723 80 6 1350 0 252 3 0 255 31 1020 11 13 1075 285 185 166 0 636 3316 Grand Total 1075 1436 163 13 2687 0 497 8 0 505 56 1981 16 19 2072 624 385 361 0 1370 6634Apprch %40 53.4 6.1 0.5 0 98.4 1.6 0 2.7 95.6 0.8 0.9 45.5 28.1 26.4 0 Total %16.2 21.6 2.5 0.2 40.5 0 7.5 0.1 0 7.6 0.8 29.9 0.2 0.3 31.2 9.4 5.8 5.4 0 20.7 Anaheim BlvdSouthbound Manchester AveWestbound Anaheim BlvdNorthbound Disney WayEastboundStart Time Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. TotalPeak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:30 PM04:30 PM 147 168 18 3 336 0 63 1 0 64 6 238 0 1 245 97 57 64 0 218 86304:45 PM 128 220 18 0 366 0 78 0 0 78 8 270 2 2 282 93 54 49 0 196 92205:00 PM 139 182 20 1 342 0 65 0 0 65 8 224 3 2 237 65 52 53 0 170 814 05:15 PM 138 210 22 1 371 0 62 2 0 64 9 298 1 4 312 62 40 35 0 137 884 Total Volume 552 780 78 5 1415 0 268 3 0 271 31 1030 6 9 1076 317 203 201 0 721 3483 % App. Total 39 55.1 5.5 0.4 0 98.9 1.1 0 2.9 95.7 0.6 0.8 44 28.2 27.9 0 PHF .939 .886 .886 .417 .954 .000 .859 .375 .000 .869 .861 .864 .500 .563 .862 .817 .890 .785 .000 .827 .944 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-109 File Name : ANAANDIPMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 2 City of AnaheimN/S: Anaheim BoulevardE/W: Disney WayWeather: Clear Anaheim Blvd D i s n e y W a y M a n c h e s t e r A v e Anaheim Blvd Right78 Thru780 Left552 U-Turns5 InOut Total1350 1415 2765 R i g h t 3 T h r u 2 6 8 L e f t 0 U - T u r n s 0 O u t T o t a l I n 7 6 1 2 7 1 1 0 3 2 Left31 Thru1030 Right6 U-Turns9 Out TotalIn981 1076 2057 Le f t 31 7 Th r u20 3 Ri g h t 20 1 U- T u r n s 0 To t a l Ou t In 37 7 72 1 10 9 8 Peak Hour Begins at 04:30 PM Total Volume Peak Hour Data North Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at: 04:30 PM 04:30 PM 04:30 PM 04:15 PM+0 mins.147 168 18 3 336 0 63 1 0 64 6 238 0 1 245 75 36 53 0 164 +15 mins.128 220 18 0 366 0 78 0 0 78 8 270 2 2 282 97 57 64 0 218+30 mins.139 182 20 1 342 0 65 0 0 65 8 224 3 2 237 93 54 49 0 196+45 mins.138 210 22 1 371 0 62 2 0 64 9 298 1 4 312 65 52 53 0 170 Total Volume 552 780 78 5 1415 0 268 3 0 271 31 1030 6 9 1076 330 199 219 0 748 % App. Total 39 55.1 5.5 0.4 0 98.9 1.1 0 2.9 95.7 0.6 0.8 44.1 26.6 29.3 0 PHF .939 .886 .886 .417 .954 .000 .859 .375 .000 .869 .861 .864 .500 .563 .862 .851 .873 .855 .000 .858 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-110 File Name : ANAANKAAMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 1 City of AnaheimN/S: Anaheim BoulevardE/W: Katella AvenueWeather: Clear Groups Printed- Total VolumeAnaheim BlvdSouthbound Katella AveWestbound Haster StreetNorthbound Katella AveEastbound Start Time Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. Total07:00 AM 21 101 16 1 139 24 155 8 10 197 22 117 39 0 178 22 180 7 2 211 72507:15 AM 15 131 30 0 176 19 167 5 8 199 26 108 29 1 164 26 215 9 4 254 793 07:30 AM 16 141 45 1 203 18 196 11 4 229 28 221 37 1 287 34 220 12 6 272 99107:45 AM 20 132 37 2 191 16 158 6 10 190 28 187 35 0 250 29 233 12 2 276 907Total7250512847097767630328151046331402879111848401410133416 08:00 AM 9 157 49 0 215 20 181 2 7 210 30 201 42 0 273 37 185 12 5 239 93708:15 AM 16 129 35 2 182 22 227 10 9 268 26 146 26 1 199 27 198 12 5 242 89108:30 AM 14 145 28 2 189 19 184 6 11 220 42 137 21 0 200 27 188 17 4 236 84508:45 AM 18 132 39 3 192 17 218 5 15 255 30 134 28 4 196 29 176 16 3 224 867 Total 57 563 151 7 778 78 810 23 42 953 128 618 117 5 868 120 747 57 17 941 3540 Grand Total 129 1068 279 11 1487 155 1486 53 74 1768 232 1251 257 7 1747 231 1595 97 31 1954 6956Apprch %8.7 71.8 18.8 0.7 8.8 84 3 4.2 13.3 71.6 14.7 0.4 11.8 81.6 5 1.6 Total %1.9 15.4 4 0.2 21.4 2.2 21.4 0.8 1.1 25.4 3.3 18 3.7 0.1 25.1 3.3 22.9 1.4 0.4 28.1 Anaheim BlvdSouthbound Katella AveWestbound Haster StreetNorthbound Katella AveEastboundStart Time Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. TotalPeak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07:30 AM07:30 AM 16 141 45 1 203 18 196 11 4 229 28 221 37 1 287 34 220 12 6 272 99107:45 AM 20 132 37 2 191 16 158 6 10 190 28 187 35 0 250 29 233 12 2 276 90708:00 AM 9 157 49 0 215 20 181 2 7 210 30 201 42 0 273 37 185 12 5 239 937 08:15 AM 16 129 35 2 182 22 227 10 9 268 26 146 26 1 199 27 198 12 5 242 891 Total Volume 61 559 166 5 791 76 762 29 30 897 112 755 140 2 1009 127 836 48 18 1029 3726 % App. Total 7.7 70.7 21 0.6 8.5 84.9 3.2 3.3 11.1 74.8 13.9 0.2 12.3 81.2 4.7 1.7 PHF .763 .890 .847 .625 .920 .864 .839 .659 .750 .837 .933 .854 .833 .500 .879 .858 .897 1.00 .750 .932 .940 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-111 File Name : ANAANKAAMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 2 City of AnaheimN/S: Anaheim BoulevardE/W: Katella AvenueWeather: Clear Anaheim Blvd K a t e l l a A v e K a t e l l a A v e Haster Street Right166 Thru559 Left61 U-Turns5 InOut Total911 791 1702 R i g h t 2 9 T h r u 7 6 2 L e f t 7 6 U - T u r n s 3 0 O u t T o t a l I n 1 0 3 7 8 9 7 1 9 3 4 Left112 Thru755 Right140 U-Turns2 Out TotalIn683 1009 1692 Le f t 12 7 Th r u83 6 Ri g h t 48 U- T u r n s 18 To t a l Ou t In 10 4 0 10 2 9 20 6 9 Peak Hour Begins at 07:30 AM Total Volume Peak Hour Data North Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at: 07:30 AM 08:00 AM 07:30 AM 07:15 AM+0 mins.16 141 45 1 203 20 181 2 7 210 28 221 37 1 287 26 215 9 4 254 +15 mins.20 132 37 2 191 22 227 10 9 268 28 187 35 0 250 34 220 12 6 272+30 mins.9 157 49 0 215 19 184 6 11 220 30 201 42 0 273 29 233 12 2 276+45 mins.16 129 35 2 182 17 218 5 15 255 26 146 26 1 199 37 185 12 5 239 Total Volume 61 559 166 5 791 78 810 23 42 953 112 755 140 2 1009 126 853 45 17 1041 % App. Total 7.7 70.7 21 0.6 8.2 85 2.4 4.4 11.1 74.8 13.9 0.2 12.1 81.9 4.3 1.6 PHF .763 .890 .847 .625 .920 .886 .892 .575 .700 .889 .933 .854 .833 .500 .879 .851 .915 .938 .708 .943 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-112 File Name : ANAANKAPMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 1 City of AnaheimN/S: Anaheim BoulevardE/W: Katella AvenueWeather: Clear Groups Printed- Total VolumeAnaheim BlvdSouthbound Katella AveWestbound Haster StreetNorthbound Katella AveEastbound Start Time Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. Total04:00 PM 13 136 36 2 187 42 324 10 9 385 39 172 32 0 243 29 287 36 3 355 117004:15 PM 20 174 42 1 237 31 319 15 3 368 33 152 22 2 209 39 247 27 2 315 1129 04:30 PM 15 183 39 4 241 36 321 10 10 377 34 198 31 1 264 33 249 25 3 310 119204:45 PM 9 189 56 3 257 33 339 14 7 393 44 226 26 1 297 37 291 29 9 366 1313Total57682173109221421303492915231507481114101313810741171713464804 05:00 PM 18 174 39 2 233 34 350 14 4 402 37 194 25 3 259 54 250 40 6 350 124405:15 PM 18 202 51 2 273 27 358 19 3 407 40 240 28 1 309 28 263 21 3 315 130405:30 PM 21 121 43 4 189 38 319 12 7 376 38 169 39 1 247 62 260 22 9 353 116505:45 PM 21 155 45 2 223 32 318 20 12 382 42 215 30 0 287 46 241 22 9 318 1210 Total 78 652 178 10 918 131 1345 65 26 1567 157 818 122 5 1102 190 1014 105 27 1336 4923 Grand Total 135 1334 351 20 1840 273 2648 114 55 3090 307 1566 233 9 2115 328 2088 222 44 2682 9727Apprch %7.3 72.5 19.1 1.1 8.8 85.7 3.7 1.8 14.5 74 11 0.4 12.2 77.9 8.3 1.6 Total %1.4 13.7 3.6 0.2 18.9 2.8 27.2 1.2 0.6 31.8 3.2 16.1 2.4 0.1 21.7 3.4 21.5 2.3 0.5 27.6 Anaheim BlvdSouthbound Katella AveWestbound Haster StreetNorthbound Katella AveEastboundStart Time Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. TotalPeak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:30 PM04:30 PM 15 183 39 4 241 36 321 10 10 377 34 198 31 1 264 33 249 25 3 310 119204:45 PM 9 189 56 3 257 33 339 14 7 393 44 226 26 1 297 37 291 29 9 366 131305:00 PM 18 174 39 2 233 34 350 14 4 402 37 194 25 3 259 54 250 40 6 350 1244 05:15 PM 18 202 51 2 273 27 358 19 3 407 40 240 28 1 309 28 263 21 3 315 1304 Total Volume 60 748 185 11 1004 130 1368 57 24 1579 155 858 110 6 1129 152 1053 115 21 1341 5053 % App. Total 6 74.5 18.4 1.1 8.2 86.6 3.6 1.5 13.7 76 9.7 0.5 11.3 78.5 8.6 1.6 PHF .833 .926 .826 .688 .919 .903 .955 .750 .600 .970 .881 .894 .887 .500 .913 .704 .905 .719 .583 .916 .962 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-113 File Name : ANAANKAPMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 2 City of AnaheimN/S: Anaheim BoulevardE/W: Katella AvenueWeather: Clear Anaheim Blvd K a t e l l a A v e K a t e l l a A v e Haster Street Right185 Thru748 Left60 U-Turns11 InOut Total1067 1004 2071 R i g h t 5 7 T h r u 1 3 6 8 L e f t 1 3 0 U - T u r n s 2 4 O u t T o t a l I n 1 2 2 3 1 5 7 9 2 8 0 2 Left155 Thru858 Right110 U-Turns6 Out TotalIn993 1129 2122 Le f t 15 2 Th r u 10 5 3 Ri g h t 11 5 U- T u r n s 21 To t a l Ou t In 17 0 8 13 4 1 30 4 9 Peak Hour Begins at 04:30 PM Total Volume Peak Hour Data North Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at: 04:30 PM 04:30 PM 04:30 PM 04:45 PM+0 mins.15 183 39 4 241 36 321 10 10 377 34 198 31 1 264 37 291 29 9 366 +15 mins.9 189 56 3 257 33 339 14 7 393 44 226 26 1 297 54 250 40 6 350+30 mins.18 174 39 2 233 34 350 14 4 402 37 194 25 3 259 28 263 21 3 315+45 mins.18 202 51 2 273 27 358 19 3 407 40 240 28 1 309 62 260 22 9 353 Total Volume 60 748 185 11 1004 130 1368 57 24 1579 155 858 110 6 1129 181 1064 112 27 1384 % App. Total 6 74.5 18.4 1.1 8.2 86.6 3.6 1.5 13.7 76 9.7 0.5 13.1 76.9 8.1 2 PHF .833 .926 .826 .688 .919 .903 .955 .750 .600 .970 .881 .894 .887 .500 .913 .730 .914 .700 .750 .945 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-114 File Name : ANA5SKAAMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 1 City of AnaheimN/S: Interstate 5 Southbound RampsE/W: Katella AvenueWeather: Clear Groups Printed- Total Volume Manchester BlvdSouthbound Katella AveWestbound Interstate 5 SouthboundRampsNorthbound Katella AveEastbound Start Time Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. Total07:00 AM 5 16 3 0 24 34 184 0 0 218 4 0 77 0 81 0 111 85 0 196 51907:15 AM 8 25 4 0 37 30 195 0 0 225 4 0 73 0 77 0 162 90 0 252 59107:30 AM 5 28 0 0 33 40 215 0 0 255 7 0 105 0 112 0 145 86 0 231 63107:45 AM 3 21 0 0 24 34 164 0 1 199 7 0 124 0 131 0 191 72 0 263 617 Total 21 90 7 0 118 138 758 0 1 897 22 0 379 0 401 0 609 333 0 942 2358 08:00 AM 7 27 2 0 36 21 219 0 0 240 10 0 95 0 105 0 135 75 0 210 59108:15 AM 7 23 0 0 30 30 211 0 1 242 7 0 84 0 91 0 141 65 0 206 569 08:30 AM 3 24 2 0 29 29 210 0 1 240 10 0 101 0 111 0 134 74 0 208 58808:45 AM 9 13 2 0 24 32 179 0 0 211 9 0 89 0 98 0 167 68 0 235 568Total268760119112819029333603690405057728208592316 Grand Total 47 177 13 0 237 250 1577 0 3 1830 58 0 748 0 806 0 1186 615 0 1801 4674Apprch %19.8 74.7 5.5 0 13.7 86.2 0 0.2 7.2 0 92.8 0 0 65.9 34.1 0 Total %1 3.8 0.3 0 5.1 5.3 33.7 0 0.1 39.2 1.2 0 16 0 17.2 0 25.4 13.2 0 38.5 Manchester Blvd Southbound Katella Ave Westbound Interstate 5 Southbound Ramps Northbound Katella Ave EastboundStart Time Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. TotalPeak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07:15 AM07:15 AM 8 25 4 0 37 30 195 0 0 225 4 0 73 0 77 0 162 90 0 252 591 07:30 AM 5 28 0 0 33 40 215 0 0 255 7 0 105 0 112 0 145 86 0 231 63107:45 AM 3 21 0 0 24 34 164 0 1 199 7 0 124 0 131 0 191 72 0 263 61708:00 AM 7 27 2 0 36 21 219 0 0 240 10 0 95 0 105 0 135 75 0 210 591 Total Volume 23 101 6 0 130 125 793 0 1 919 28 0 397 0 425 0 633 323 0 956 2430 % App. Total 17.7 77.7 4.6 0 13.6 86.3 0 0.1 6.6 0 93.4 0 0 66.2 33.8 0 PHF .719 .902 .375 .000 .878 .781 .905 .000 .250 .901 .700 .000 .800 .000 .811 .000 .829 .897 .000 .909 .963 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-115 File Name : ANA5SKAAMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 2 City of AnaheimN/S: Interstate 5 Southbound RampsE/W: Katella AvenueWeather: Clear Manchester Blvd K a t e l l a A v e K a t e l l a A v e Interstate 5 Southbound Ramps Right6 Thru101 Left23 U-Turns0 InOut Total0 130 130 R i g h t 0 T h r u 7 9 3 L e f t 1 2 5 U - T u r n s 1 O u t T o t a l I n 1 0 5 3 9 1 9 1 9 7 2 Left28 Thru0 Right397 U-Turns0 Out TotalIn549 425 974 Le f t 0 Th r u63 3 Ri g h t 32 3 U- T u r n s 0 To t a l Ou t In 82 7 95 6 17 8 3 Peak Hour Begins at 07:15 AM Total Volume Peak Hour Data North Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at: 07:15 AM 07:30 AM 07:30 AM 07:15 AM+0 mins.8 25 4 0 37 40 215 0 0 255 7 0 105 0 112 0 162 90 0 252 +15 mins.5 28 0 0 33 34 164 0 1 199 7 0 124 0 131 0 145 86 0 231+30 mins.3 21 0 0 24 21 219 0 0 240 10 0 95 0 105 0 191 72 0 263+45 mins.7 27 2 0 36 30 211 0 1 242 7 0 84 0 91 0 135 75 0 210 Total Volume 23 101 6 0 130 125 809 0 2 936 31 0 408 0 439 0 633 323 0 956 % App. Total 17.7 77.7 4.6 0 13.4 86.4 0 0.2 7.1 0 92.9 0 0 66.2 33.8 0 PHF .719 .902 .375 .000 .878 .781 .924 .000 .500 .918 .775 .000 .823 .000 .838 .000 .829 .897 .000 .909 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-116 File Name : ANA5SKAPMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 1 City of AnaheimN/S: Interstate 5 Southbound RampsE/W: Katella AvenueWeather: Clear Groups Printed- Total Volume Manchester BlvdSouthbound Katella AveWestbound Interstate 5 SouthboundRampsNorthbound Katella AveEastbound Start Time Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. Total04:00 PM 10 17 1 0 28 67 389 0 0 456 16 0 76 0 92 0 170 147 0 317 89304:15 PM 2 10 1 0 13 56 345 0 1 402 9 0 60 0 69 0 148 120 0 268 75204:30 PM 13 13 0 0 26 79 350 0 1 430 10 0 83 0 93 0 149 138 0 287 83604:45 PM 4 17 0 0 21 67 352 0 0 419 12 0 87 0 99 0 136 138 0 274 813 Total 29 57 2 0 88 269 1436 0 2 1707 47 0 306 0 353 0 603 543 0 1146 3294 05:00 PM 7 16 4 0 27 71 371 0 0 442 14 0 63 0 77 0 142 115 0 257 80305:15 PM 2 9 1 0 12 78 393 0 0 471 10 0 70 0 80 0 159 126 0 285 848 05:30 PM 11 20 4 0 35 60 356 0 0 416 9 0 67 0 76 0 154 110 0 264 79105:45 PM 7 20 0 0 27 70 348 0 0 418 4 0 80 0 84 0 210 108 1 319 848Total276590101279146800174737028003170665459111253290 Grand Total 56 122 11 0 189 548 2904 0 2 3454 84 0 586 0 670 0 1268 1002 1 2271 6584Apprch %29.6 64.6 5.8 0 15.9 84.1 0 0.1 12.5 0 87.5 0 0 55.8 44.1 0 Total %0.9 1.9 0.2 0 2.9 8.3 44.1 0 0 52.5 1.3 0 8.9 0 10.2 0 19.3 15.2 0 34.5 Manchester Blvd Southbound Katella Ave Westbound Interstate 5 Southbound Ramps Northbound Katella Ave EastboundStart Time Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. TotalPeak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:30 PM04:30 PM 13 13 0 0 26 79 350 0 1 430 10 0 83 0 93 0 149 138 0 287 836 04:45 PM 4 17 0 0 21 67 352 0 0 419 12 0 87 0 99 0 136 138 0 274 81305:00 PM 7 16 4 0 27 71 371 0 0 442 14 0 63 0 77 0 142 115 0 257 80305:15 PM 2 9 1 0 12 78 393 0 0 471 10 0 70 0 80 0 159 126 0 285 848 Total Volume 26 55 5 0 86 295 1466 0 1 1762 46 0 303 0 349 0 586 517 0 1103 3300 % App. Total 30.2 64 5.8 0 16.7 83.2 0 0.1 13.2 0 86.8 0 0 53.1 46.9 0 PHF .500 .809 .313 .000 .796 .934 .933 .000 .250 .935 .821 .000 .871 .000 .881 .000 .921 .937 .000 .961 .973 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-117 File Name : ANA5SKAPMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 2 City of AnaheimN/S: Interstate 5 Southbound RampsE/W: Katella AvenueWeather: Clear Manchester Blvd K a t e l l a A v e K a t e l l a A v e Interstate 5 Southbound Ramps Right5 Thru55 Left26 U-Turns0 InOut Total0 86 86 R i g h t 0 T h r u 1 4 6 6 L e f t 2 9 5 U - T u r n s 1 O u t T o t a l I n 9 1 5 1 7 6 2 2 6 7 7 Left46 Thru0 Right303 U-Turns0 Out TotalIn867 349 1216 Le f t 0 Th r u58 6 Ri g h t 51 7 U- T u r n s 0 To t a l Ou t In 15 1 7 11 0 3 26 2 0 Peak Hour Begins at 04:30 PM Total Volume Peak Hour Data North Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at: 05:00 PM 04:30 PM 04:00 PM 04:00 PM+0 mins.7 16 4 0 27 79 350 0 1 430 16 0 76 0 92 0 170 147 0 317 +15 mins.2 9 1 0 12 67 352 0 0 419 9 0 60 0 69 0 148 120 0 268+30 mins.11 20 4 0 35 71 371 0 0 442 10 0 83 0 93 0 149 138 0 287+45 mins.7 20 0 0 27 78 393 0 0 471 12 0 87 0 99 0 136 138 0 274 Total Volume 27 65 9 0 101 295 1466 0 1 1762 47 0 306 0 353 0 603 543 0 1146 % App. Total 26.7 64.4 8.9 0 16.7 83.2 0 0.1 13.3 0 86.7 0 0 52.6 47.4 0 PHF .614 .813 .563 .000 .721 .934 .933 .000 .250 .935 .734 .000 .879 .000 .891 .000 .887 .923 .000 .904 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-118 File Name : ANA5NKAAMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 1 City of AnaheimN/S: Interstate 5 Northbound RampsE/W: Katella AvenueWeather: Clear Groups Printed- Total Volume Anaheim WaySouthbound Katella AveWestbound Anaheim Way/I-5Northbound OfframpNorthbound Katella AveEastbound Start Time Left Thru Right Peds App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. Total07:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 162 15 0 177 83 95 53 0 231 9 155 0 1 165 57307:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 200 8 0 208 89 86 30 0 205 9 215 0 2 226 63907:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 196 10 0 206 100 89 29 0 218 7 251 0 1 259 68307:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 162 15 0 177 60 123 55 0 238 6 305 0 5 316 731 Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 720 48 0 768 332 393 167 0 892 31 926 0 9 966 2626 08:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 160 16 0 176 93 103 41 0 237 4 243 0 4 251 66408:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 173 8 0 181 99 91 38 0 228 10 219 0 6 235 644 08:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 215 12 0 227 93 115 40 0 248 7 225 0 10 242 71708:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 194 22 0 216 107 74 26 0 207 11 236 0 13 260 683Total0000007425808003923831450920329230339882708 Grand Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 1462 106 0 1568 724 776 312 0 1812 63 1849 0 42 1954 5334Apprch %0 0 0 0 0 93.2 6.8 0 40 42.8 17.2 0 3.2 94.6 0 2.1 Total %0 0 0 0 0 0 27.4 2 0 29.4 13.6 14.5 5.8 0 34 1.2 34.7 0 0.8 36.6 Anaheim WaySouthbound Katella AveWestbound Anaheim Way/I-5 Northbound OfframpNorthbound Katella AveEastbound Start Time Left Thru Right Peds App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. TotalPeak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07:45 AM07:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 162 15 0 177 60 123 55 0 238 6 305 0 5 316 73108:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 160 16 0 176 93 103 41 0 237 4 243 0 4 251 664 08:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 173 8 0 181 99 91 38 0 228 10 219 0 6 235 64408:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 215 12 0 227 93 115 40 0 248 7 225 0 10 242 717 Total Volume 0 0 0 0 0 0 710 51 0 761 345 432 174 0 951 27 992 0 25 1044 2756 % App. Total 0 0 0 0 0 93.3 6.7 0 36.3 45.4 18.3 0 2.6 95 0 2.4 PHF .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .826 .797 .000 .838 .871 .878 .791 .000 .959 .675 .813 .000 .625 .826 .943 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-119 File Name : ANA5NKAAMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 2 City of AnaheimN/S: Interstate 5 Northbound RampsE/W: Katella AvenueWeather: Clear Anaheim Way K a t e l l a A v e K a t e l l a A v e Anaheim Way/I-5 Northbound Offramp Right0 Thru0 Left0 Peds0 InOut Total510 0 510 R i g h t 5 1 T h r u 7 1 0 L e f t 0 U - T u r n s 0 O u t T o t a l I n 1 1 6 6 7 6 1 1 9 2 7 Left345 Thru432 Right174 U-Turns0 Out TotalIn0 951 951 Le f t 27 Th r u99 2 Ri g h t 0 U- T u r n s 25 To t a l Ou t In 10 5 5 10 4 4 20 9 9 Peak Hour Begins at 07:45 AM Total Volume Peak Hour Data North Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at: 07:00 AM 08:00 AM 07:45 AM 07:30 AM+0 mins.0 0 0 0 0 0 160 16 0 176 60 123 55 0 238 7 251 0 1 259 +15 mins.0 0 0 0 0 0 173 8 0 181 93 103 41 0 237 6 305 0 5 316+30 mins.0 0 0 0 0 0 215 12 0 227 99 91 38 0 228 4 243 0 4 251+45 mins.0 0 0 0 0 0 194 22 0 216 93 115 40 0 248 10 219 0 6 235 Total Volume 0 0 0 0 0 0 742 58 0 800 345 432 174 0 951 27 1018 0 16 1061 % App. Total 0 0 0 0 0 92.8 7.2 0 36.3 45.4 18.3 0 2.5 95.9 0 1.5 PHF .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .863 .659 .000 .881 .871 .878 .791 .000 .959 .675 .834 .000 .667 .839 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-120 File Name : ANA5NKAPMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 1 City of AnaheimN/S: Interstate 5 Northbound RampsE/W: Katella AvenueWeather: Clear Groups Printed- Total Volume Anaheim WaySouthbound Katella AveWestbound Anaheim Way/I-5Northbound OfframpNorthbound Katella AveEastbound Start Time Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right Peds App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. Total04:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 388 23 0 411 146 175 17 0 338 10 205 0 24 239 98804:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 380 29 0 409 113 225 15 0 353 9 184 0 16 209 97104:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 374 17 0 391 123 236 10 0 369 8 212 0 17 237 99704:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 372 23 0 395 98 252 11 0 361 15 233 0 17 265 1021 Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 1514 92 0 1606 480 888 53 0 1421 42 834 0 74 950 3977 05:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 380 17 0 397 123 305 10 0 438 9 175 0 16 200 103505:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 414 24 0 438 81 310 8 0 399 6 242 0 15 263 1100 05:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 347 19 0 366 127 307 10 0 444 5 167 0 24 196 100605:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 346 33 0 379 67 220 12 0 299 17 221 0 20 258 936Total0000001487930158039811424001580378050759174077 Grand Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 3001 185 0 3186 878 2030 93 0 3001 79 1639 0 149 1867 8054Apprch %0 0 0 0 0 94.2 5.8 0 29.3 67.6 3.1 0 4.2 87.8 0 8 Total %0 0 0 0 0 0 37.3 2.3 0 39.6 10.9 25.2 1.2 0 37.3 1 20.4 0 1.9 23.2 Anaheim WaySouthbound Katella AveWestbound Anaheim Way/I-5 Northbound OfframpNorthbound Katella AveEastbound Start Time Left Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right Peds App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Thru Right U-Turns App. Total Int. TotalPeak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:45 PM04:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 372 23 0 395 98 252 11 0 361 15 233 0 17 265 102105:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 380 17 0 397 123 305 10 0 438 9 175 0 16 200 1035 05:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 414 24 0 438 81 310 8 0 399 6 242 0 15 263 110005:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 347 19 0 366 127 307 10 0 444 5 167 0 24 196 1006 Total Volume 0 0 0 0 0 0 1513 83 0 1596 429 1174 39 0 1642 35 817 0 72 924 4162 % App. Total 0 0 0 0 0 94.8 5.2 0 26.1 71.5 2.4 0 3.8 88.4 0 7.8 PHF .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .914 .865 .000 .911 .844 .947 .886 .000 .925 .583 .844 .000 .750 .872 .946 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-121 File Name : ANA5NKAPMSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 9/17/2015Page No : 2 City of AnaheimN/S: Interstate 5 Northbound RampsE/W: Katella AvenueWeather: Clear Anaheim Way K a t e l l a A v e K a t e l l a A v e Anaheim Way/I-5 Northbound Offramp Right0 Thru0 Left0 U-Turns0 InOut Total1292 0 1292 R i g h t 8 3 T h r u 1 5 1 3 L e f t 0 P e d s 0 O u t T o t a l I n 8 5 6 1 5 9 6 2 4 5 2 Left429 Thru1174 Right39 U-Turns0 Out TotalIn0 1642 1642 Le f t 35 Th r u81 7 Ri g h t 0 U- T u r n s 72 To t a l Ou t In 19 4 2 92 4 28 6 6 Peak Hour Begins at 04:45 PM Total Volume Peak Hour Data North Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at: 04:00 PM 04:30 PM 04:45 PM 04:30 PM+0 mins.0 0 0 0 0 0 374 17 0 391 98 252 11 0 361 8 212 0 17 237 +15 mins.0 0 0 0 0 0 372 23 0 395 123 305 10 0 438 15 233 0 17 265+30 mins.0 0 0 0 0 0 380 17 0 397 81 310 8 0 399 9 175 0 16 200+45 mins.0 0 0 0 0 0 414 24 0 438 127 307 10 0 444 6 242 0 15 263 Total Volume 0 0 0 0 0 0 1540 81 0 1621 429 1174 39 0 1642 38 862 0 65 965 % App. Total 0 0 0 0 0 95 5 0 26.1 71.5 2.4 0 3.9 89.3 0 6.7 PHF .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .930 .844 .000 .925 .844 .947 .886 .000 .925 .633 .890 .000 .956 .910 Counts Unlimited, Inc.PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878951-268-6268 G-122 Weekend Counts  G-123 Page 1 City of AnaheimHarbor Boulevafd S/ Disney Way24 Hour Directional Volume Count ANAHASDISite Code: 042-15521 Counts Unlimited, Inc PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878Phone: 951-268-6268email: counts@countsunlimited.com Start 26-Sep-15 Northbound Hour Totals Southbound Hour Totals Combined TotalsTimeSatMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoon12:00 185 256 129 216 12:15 141 169 119 22412:30 151 173 125 17912:45 155 188 632 786 125 243 498 862 1130 164801:00 73 157 108 194 01:15 78 198 94 24701:30 62 187 76 24001:45 54 177 267 719 50 283 328 964 595 168302:00 43 195 55 25202:15 36 165 44 28002:30 44 219 40 28002:45 21 176 144 755 33 309 172 1121 316 1876 03:00 28 180 23 290 03:15 28 236 30 282 03:30 14 211 29 28203:45 20 243 90 870 18 263 100 1117 190 1987 04:00 17 206 31 22004:15 14 199 28 25304:30 23 239 33 26104:45 26 187 80 831 38 243 130 977 210 1808 05:00 31 229 49 20605:15 26 228 51 25405:30 38 222 48 28805:45 41 283 136 962 62 310 210 1058 346 2020 06:00 42 229 60 23206:15 55 221 69 29206:30 80 209 81 26206:45 80 183 257 842 137 281 347 1067 604 190907:00 97 237 121 28507:15 133 221 141 24307:30 112 209 210 25707:45 170 227 512 894 225 221 697 1006 1209 190008:00 172 191 188 237 08:15 177 226 183 23608:30 189 220 192 23708:45 193 215 731 852 136 224 699 934 1430 178609:00 193 226 201 203 09:15 177 201 192 20709:30 219 211 268 194 09:45 218 275 807 913 211 211 872 815 1679 172810:00 228 242 212 209 10:15 226 287 207 195 10:30 201 240 182 21010:45 206 264 861 1033 229 210 830 824 1691 1857 11:00 229 290 263 17211:15 208 250 246 163 11:30 234 235 213 159 11:45 160 209 831 984 238 168 960 662 1791 1646Total 5348 10441 5348 10441 5843 11407 5843 11407 11191 21848CombinedTotal 15789 15789 17250 17250 33039 AM Peak - 09:30 --- 11:00 -----Vol.- 891 --- 960 -----P.H.F. 0.977 0.913 PM Peak -- 10:15 --- 02:45 ---- Vol.-- 1081 --- 1163 ----P.H.F. 0.932 0.941 Percentag e 33.9% 66.1% 33.9% 66.1% G-124 Page 2 City of AnaheimHarbor Boulevafd S/ Disney Way24 Hour Directional Volume Count ANAHASDISite Code: 042-15521 Counts Unlimited, Inc PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878Phone: 951-268-6268email: counts@countsunlimited.com Start 27-Sep-15 Northbound Hour Totals Southbound Hour Totals Combined TotalsTimeSunMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoon12:00 196 216 125 223 12:15 210 234 138 25412:30 166 231 131 24412:45 116 222 688 903 113 229 507 950 1195 185301:00 112 209 62 225 01:15 72 192 70 25801:30 58 198 66 282 01:45 51 234 293 833 49 375 247 1140 540 197302:00 60 180 54 308 02:15 42 243 52 31702:30 32 229 45 24502:45 34 190 168 842 24 237 175 1107 343 1949 03:00 24 227 18 27203:15 19 217 20 23503:30 22 221 22 304 03:45 15 287 80 952 29 262 89 1073 169 202504:00 31 219 22 223 04:15 17 253 22 225 04:30 19 261 21 23304:45 25 221 92 954 33 279 98 960 190 191405:00 26 249 27 26805:15 15 243 43 27405:30 36 252 46 27705:45 32 244 109 988 65 240 181 1059 290 204706:00 39 194 35 22406:15 42 233 53 18406:30 79 239 80 237 06:45 76 224 236 890 79 194 247 839 483 172907:00 74 236 103 23207:15 107 211 142 22807:30 118 231 160 205 07:45 152 227 451 905 192 214 597 879 1048 178408:00 159 231 208 17408:15 166 222 181 18008:30 160 209 188 181 08:45 194 172 679 834 133 151 710 686 1389 152009:00 176 193 183 16909:15 216 172 207 15109:30 179 188 166 154 09:45 213 177 784 730 201 141 757 615 1541 134510:00 234 172 209 16810:15 231 262 185 143 10:30 259 183 226 18010:45 234 164 958 781 223 128 843 619 1801 1400 11:00 240 155 232 11411:15 254 150 223 117 11:30 199 151 220 101 11:45 241 108 934 564 264 121 939 453 1873 1017Total 5472 10176 5472 10176 5390 10380 5390 10380 10862 20556CombinedTotal 15648 15648 15770 15770 31418 AM Peak - 10:30 --- 11:00 -----Vol.- 987 --- 939 -----P.H.F. 0.953 0.889 PM Peak -- 03:45 --- 01:30 ---- Vol.-- 1020 --- 1282 ----P.H.F. 0.889 0.855 Percentag e 35.0% 65.0% 34.2% 65.8% ADT/AADT ADT 32,228 AADT 32,228 G-125 File Name : ANAHADI SatSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 10/10/2015 Page No : 1 City of AnaheimN/S: Harbor BoulevardE/W: Disney Way Weather: Clear Groups Printed- Total VolumeHarbor BoulevardSouthbound Disney WayWestbound Harbor BoulevardNorthbound Disney WayEastbound Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total10:00 AM 63 238 0 301 17 4 44 65 13 183 10 206 0 136 1 137 70910:15 AM 44 136 6 186 24 9 43 76 10 198 23 231 1 220 0 221 71410:30 AM 58 240 5 303 34 7 41 82 9 195 20 224 1 27 0 28 63710:45 AM 85 188 1 274 50 11 43 104 12 161 17 190 1 39 1 41 609Total250802121064125311713274473770851342224272669 11:00 AM 61 188 2 251 46 13 47 106 7 221 32 260 0 26 0 26 64311:15 AM 59 176 2 237 45 9 46 100 10 165 21 196 0 35 1 36 56911:30 AM 55 216 1 272 26 17 41 84 10 192 19 221 0 88 2 90 66711:45 AM 63 182 0 245 36 10 48 94 16 177 23 216 0 71 38 109 664Total238762510051534918238443755958930220412612543 Grand Total 488 1564 17 2069 278 80 353 711 87 1492 165 1744 3 642 43 688 5212Apprch %23.6 75.6 0.8 39.1 11.3 49.6 5 85.6 9.5 0.4 93.3 6.2 Total %9.4 30 0.3 39.7 5.3 1.5 6.8 13.6 1.7 28.6 3.2 33.5 0.1 12.3 0.8 13.2 Harbor BoulevardSouthbound Disney WayWestbound Harbor BoulevardNorthbound Disney WayEastboundStart Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. TotalPeak Hour Analysis From 10:00 AM to 11:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 10:00 AM10:00 AM 63 238 0 301 17 4 44 65 13 183 10 206 0 136 1 137 70910:15 AM 44 136 6 186 24 9 43 76 10 198 23 231 1 220 0 221 71410:30 AM 58 240 5 303 34 7 41 82 9 195 20 224 1 27 0 28 63710:45 AM 85 188 1 274 50 11 43 104 12 161 17 190 1 39 1 41 609 Total Volume 250 802 12 1064 125 31 171 327 44 737 70 851 3 422 2 427 2669 % App. Total 23.5 75.4 1.1 38.2 9.5 52.3 5.2 86.6 8.2 0.7 98.8 0.5 PHF .735 .835 .500 .878 .625 .705 .972 .786 .846 .931 .761 .921 .750 .480 .500 .483 .935 Counts UnlimitedPO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878(951) 268-6268 G-126 File Name : ANAHADI SatSite Code : 04215511Start Date : 10/10/2015 Page No : 2 City of AnaheimN/S: Harbor BoulevardE/W: Disney Way Weather: Clear Harbor Boulevard D i s n e y W a y D i s n e y W a y Harbor Boulevard Right12 Thru802 Left250 InOut Total911 1064 1975 R i g h t 1 7 1 T h r u 3 1 L e f t 1 2 5 O u t T o t a l I n 7 4 2 3 2 7 1 0 6 9 Left44 Thru737 Right70 Out TotalIn929 851 1780 Le f t 3 Th r u42 2 Rig h t 2 To t a l Ou t In 87 42 7 51 4 Peak Hour Begins at 10:00 AM Total Volume Peak Hour Data North Peak Hour Analysis From 10:00 AM to 11:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at: 10:30 AM 10:45 AM 10:15 AM 10:00 AM+0 mins.58 240 5 303 50 11 43 104 10 198 23 231 0 136 1 137+15 mins.85 188 1 274 46 13 47 106 9 195 20 224 1 220 0 221+30 mins.61 188 2 251 45 9 46 100 12 161 17 190 1 27 0 28+45 mins.59 176 2 237 26 17 41 84 7 221 32 260 1 39 1 41 Total Volume 263 792 10 1065 167 50 177 394 38 775 92 905 3 422 2 427 % App. Total 24.7 74.4 0.9 42.4 12.7 44.9 4.2 85.6 10.2 0.7 98.8 0.5 PHF .774 .825 .500 .879 .835 .735 .941 .929 .792 .877 .719 .870 .750 .480 .500 .483 Counts UnlimitedPO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878(951) 268-6268 G-127 Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Day: Date: NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES:231231231231 12:30 PM 44 108 43 24 148 62 83 191 50 75 215 21 106412:45 PM 55 102 44 30 152 89 65 190 56 70 242 22 11171:00 PM 50 137 47 33 160 75 54 226 47 76 232 29 1166 1:15 PM 48 144 54 21 164 71 46 194 45 48 199 33 1067 1:30 PM 56 115 52 24 149 69 62 209 54 79 208 27 1104 1:45 PM 52 154 55 21 187 66 71 210 43 71 199 33 1162 2:00 PM 46 148 54 26 161 76 84 212 40 94 226 29 1196 2:15 PM 46 131 58 19 156 51 71 244 41 63 257 42 1179 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES :397 1039 407 198 1277 559 536 1676 376 576 1778 236 9055 APPROACH %'s :21.54% 56.38% 22.08% 9.73% 62.78% 27.48% 20.71% 64.76% 14.53% 22.24% 68.65% 9.11% nb a nb d sb a sb d eb a eb d wb a nb d PEAK HR START TIME :130 PM TOTAL PEAK HR VOL :200 548 219 90 653 262 288 875 178 307 890 131 4641 PEAK HR FACTOR :0.970 CONTROL : 0.917 WESTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND 0.917 Signalized Katella AveNS/EW Streets:Katella Ave NOON Harbor Blvd Harbor Blvd 0.9420.926 Project ID:14-1305-003 City:Anaheim 11/15/2014 Saturday G-128 ITM Peak Hour Summary Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Lanes 132 City: AM 000 AM NOON 262 653 90 NOON PM 000 PM AM NOON PM AM NOON PM Lanes 0 131 0 1 0 890 0 3 2 0 288 0 0 307 0 2 3 0 875 0 1 0 178 0 Lanes AM NOON PM AM NOON PM AM 000AM NOON 200 548 219 NOON PM 000PM 231Lanes AM AM NOON NOON PM PM AM NOON PM AM NOON PM 0 1352 0 0 1328 0 0 1341 0 0 1184 0 AM NOON PM AM NOON PM AM AM NOON NOON PM PM 00 0 0 0 1005 South Leg 00 2693 East Leg North Leg 0 0 0 2105 South Leg East Leg 0 1138 967 00 West Leg 2512 West Leg 0 End Total Ins & Outs North Leg 0 1138 0 Northbound Approach 2:30 PM 0 1972 0 967 Total Volume Per Leg Count Periods AM Start 14-1305-003 NOON Peak Hour NOON PM 12:30 PM Day: E a s t b o u n d A p p r o a c h Harbor Blvd and Katella Ave , Anaheim PM Peak Hour 0 0 967 0 Signalized CONTROL 0 1352 0 Ha r b o r B l v d AM Peak Hour Saturday We s t b o u n d A p p r o a c h Anaheim Date: 0 1184 130 PM Peak Hour Summary Southbound Approach Project #:11/15/2014 Katella Ave G-129 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report City of Anaheim Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Page | Appendix APPENDIX B LOS CALCULATION SHEETS G-130 Existing ICU LOS G-131 PROJECT:Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO:ExistingINTERSECTION:153 Harbor Blvd / I-5 NB Ramps AM PEAK HOURMOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0.0 0 * 0 NBT 3.0 5,100 640 0.17 5,100 1,173 0.31 *NBR Free 232 401 SBL 1.0 1,700 17 0.01 1,700 43 0.03 *SBT 4.0 6,800 1,470 0.22 * 6,800 1,242 0.18 SBR 0.0 0 0 EBL 0.0 0 0 EBT 0.0 00.00* 00.00*EBR 0.0 0 0 WBL 1.5 2,550 31 0.01 * 2,550 32 0.01 *WBT 0.0 00.00 00.00 WBR 1.5 2,550 639 0.25 * 2,550 673 0.26 * N/S Movements 0.22 0.33E/W Movements 0.01 0.01Rt. Turn Component 0.24 0.24Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.52 0.64LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A B PROJECT: Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO: ExistingINTERSECTION: 154 Harbor Blvd / I-5 SB Ramps MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.0 1,700 23 0.01 * 1,700 75 0.04 *NBT 4.0 6,800 672 0.10 6,800 1,364 0.20 NBR 0.0 0 0 SBL 0.0 0 0 SBT 3.0 5,100 851 0.30 * 5,100 650 0.24 *SBR Free 667 598 EBL 2.0 3,400 164 0.05 * 3,400 252 0.07 *EBT 0.0 00.00 00.00 EBR Free 285 300 WBL 0.0 0 0 WBT 0.0 00.00* 00.00*WBR 0.0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.31 0.29E/W Movements 0.05 0.07Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.41 0.41LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A A AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR G-132 PROJECT:Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO:ExistingINTERSECTION:155 Harbor Blvd / Manchester Ave MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.0 1,700 66 0.04 1,700 85 0.05 NBT 3.0 5,100 696 0.15 * 5,100 1,227 0.26 *NBR 0.0 55 78 SBL 1.0 1,700 231 0.14 * 1,700 120 0.07 *SBT 4.0 6,800 897 0.13 6,800 835 0.12 SBR 0.0 0 0 EBL 0.0 0 0 EBT 0.0 00.00* 00.00*EBR 0.0 0 0 WBL 1.0 1,700 24 0.01 * 1,700 67 0.04 *WBT 0.0 00.00 00.00 WBR 1.0 1,700 67 0.04 1,700 231 0.14 * N/S Movements 0.28 0.33E/W Movements 0.01 0.04Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.07Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.35 0.48LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A A PROJECT: Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO: ExistingINTERSECTION: 157 Harbor Blvd / Disney Way MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.0 1,700 24 0.01 1,700 46 0.03 NBT 3.0 5,100 604 0.13 * 5,100 940 0.20 *NBR 0.0 67 77 SBL 2.0 3,400 165 0.05 * 3,400 163 0.05 *SBT 3.0 5,100 785 0.15 5,100 798 0.16 SBR 0.0 3 5 EBL 0.0 1 2 EBT 2.0 3,400 1 0.00 * 3,400 23 0.01 *EBR 0.0 0 3 WBL 2.0 3,400 76 0.02 * 3,400 145 0.04 *WBT 1.0 1,700 0 0.00 1,700 15 0.01 WBR 1.0 1,700 161 0.09 * 1,700 237 0.14 * N/S Movements 0.18 0.25E/W Movements 0.02 0.05Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.25 0.35LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A A AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR G-133 PROJECT:Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO:ExistingINTERSECTION:158 Harbor Blvd / Katella Ave MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2.0 3,400 125 0.04 * 3,400 148 0.04 NBT 3.0 5,100 526 0.10 5,100 856 0.17 *NBR 1.0 1,700 244 0.14 1,700 340 0.20 SBL 2.0 3,400 72 0.02 3,400 98 0.03 *SBT 3.0 5,100 632 0.12 * 5,100 703 0.14 SBR 1.0 1,700 145 0.09 1,700 164 0.10 EBL 2.0 3,400 18 0.01 3,400 13 0.00 EBT 3.0 5,100 823 0.16 * 5,100 914 0.18 *EBR 1.0 1,700 162 0.10 1,700 182 0.11 WBL 2.0 3,400 222 0.07 * 3,400 300 0.09 *WBT 3.0 5,100 608 0.12 5,100 1,292 0.25 WBR 1.0 1,700 100 0.06 1,700 124 0.07 N/S Movements 0.16 0.20E/W Movements 0.23 0.27Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.44 0.51LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A A PROJECT: Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO: ExistingINTERSECTION: 476 Anaheim GardenWalk / Disney Way MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.0 1,700 20 0.01 * 1,700 29 0.02 *NBT 0.0 00.00 00.00 NBR 1.0 1,700 29 0.02 1,700 68 0.04 SBL 0.0 0 0 SBT 0.0 00.00* 00.00*SBR 0.0 0 0 EBL 0.0 6 1 EBT 3.0 5,100 148 0.03 * 5,100 183 0.04 *EBR 0.0 21 26 WBL 1.0 1,700 39 0.02 * 1,700 135 0.08 *WBT 3.0 5,100 212 0.04 5,100 371 0.07 WBR 0.0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.01 0.02E/W Movements 0.06 0.12Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.12 0.19LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A A AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR G-134 PROJECT:Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO:ExistingINTERSECTION:173 Clementine St / Disney Way MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.0 1,700 64 0.04 * 1,700 118 0.07 *NBT 2.0 3,400 95 0.04 3,400 99 0.03 NBR 0.0 47 9 SBL 2.0 3,400 50 0.01 3,400 61 0.02 SBT 2.0 3,400 87 0.03 * 3,400 119 0.05 *SBR 0.0 14 61 EBL 1.0 1,700 39 0.02 1,700 132 0.08 *EBT 3.0 5,100 82 0.02 * 5,100 284 0.06 EBR 1.0 1,700 62 0.04 1,700 98 0.06 WBL 1.0 1,700 132 0.08 * 1,700 25 0.01 WBT 3.0 5,100 174 0.06 5,100 236 0.06 *WBR 0.0 137 70 N/S Movements 0.07 0.12E/W Movements 0.09 0.14Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.21 0.31LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A A PROJECT: Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO: ExistingINTERSECTION: 174 Clementine St / Katella Ave MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.0 1,700 31 0.02 * 1,700 114 0.07 *NBT 1.0 1,700 49 0.03 1,700 116 0.07 NBR 1.0 1,700 95 0.06 1,700 259 0.15 * SBL 1.0 1,700 33 0.02 1,700 43 0.03 SBT 1.0 1,700 190 0.11 * 1,700 127 0.07 *SBR 1.0 1,700 76 0.04 1,700 121 0.07 EBL 2.0 3,400 175 0.05 3,400 236 0.07 *EBT 3.0 5,100 819 0.19 * 5,100 1,022 0.21 EBR 0.0 126 57 WBL 2.0 3,400 270 0.08 * 3,400 188 0.06 WBT 3.0 5,100 807 0.17 5,100 1,422 0.30 *WBR 0.0 59 92 N/S Movements 0.13 0.14E/W Movements 0.26 0.37Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.03Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.44 0.59LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A A AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR G-135 PROJECT:Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO:ExistingINTERSECTION:196 I-5 SB Off Ramp / Disney Way MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.0 1,700 19 0.01 1,700 4 0.00 NBT 0.0 00.00* 00.00*NBR 1.0 1,700 34 0.02 * 1,700 62 0.04 * SBL 1.3 2,210 273 0.12 * 2,210 282 0.13 *SBT 0.3 510 18 0.04 510 13 0.03 SBR 1.3 2,210 141 0.06 * 2,210 150 0.07 * EBL 0.0 0 * 0 EBT 3.0 5,100 167 0.03 5,100 377 0.08 *EBR 0.0 10 15 WBL 1.0 1,700 16 0.01 1,700 22 0.01 WBT 3.0 5,100 288 0.06 * 5,100 348 0.07 *WBR 0.0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.12 0.13E/W Movements 0.06 0.09Rt. Turn Component 0.04 0.07Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.27 0.33LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A A PROJECT: Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO: ExistingINTERSECTION: 195 Anaheim Blvd / I-5 SB Ramps AM PEAK HOURMOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2.0 3,400 28 0.01 3,400 40 0.01 NBT 3.0 5,100 860 0.17 * 5,100 1,030 0.20 *NBR 0.0 11 6 SBL 2.0 3,400 548 0.16 * 3,400 557 0.16 *SBT 3.0 5,100 704 0.16 5,100 780 0.17 SBR 0.0 114 78 EBL 2.0 3,400 248 0.07 * 3,400 317 0.09 *EBT 4.0 6,800 93 0.03 6,800 203 0.06 EBR 0.0 82 201 WBL 0.0 0 0 WBT 3.0 5,100 132 0.03 * 5,100 268 0.05 *WBR 0.0 1 3 N/S Movements 0.33 0.37E/W Movements 0.10 0.15Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.48 0.56LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A A PM PEAK HOUR AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR G-136 PROJECT:Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO:ExistingINTERSECTION:197 Anaheim Blvd / Katella Ave MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2.0 3,400 114 0.03 3,400 161 0.05 *NBT 3.0 5,100 755 0.15 * 5,100 858 0.17 NBR 1.0 1,700 140 0.08 1,700 110 0.06 SBL 2.0 3,400 66 0.02 * 3,400 71 0.02 SBT 3.0 5,100 559 0.11 5,100 748 0.15 *SBR 1.0 1,700 166 0.10 1,700 185 0.11 EBL 2.0 3,400 145 0.04 * 3,400 173 0.05 *EBT 4.0 6,800 836 0.13 6,800 1,053 0.17 EBR 0.0 48 115 WBL 2.0 3,400 106 0.03 3,400 154 0.05 WBT 3.0 5,100 762 0.15 * 5,100 1,368 0.27 *WBR 1.0 1,700 29 0.02 1,700 57 0.03 N/S Movements 0.17 0.19E/W Movements 0.19 0.32Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.41 0.56LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A A PROJECT: Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO: ExistingINTERSECTION: 210 Manchester Ave/I-5 SB Ramps / Katella Ave MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 2,550 28 0.01 * 2,550 46 0.02 *NBT 0.0 00.00 00.00 NBR 1.5 2,550 397 0.16 * 2,550 303 0.12 * SBL 2.0 3,400 23 0.01 3,400 26 0.01 SBT 2.0 3,400 101 0.03 * 3,400 55 0.02 *SBR 1.0 1,700 6 0.00 1,700 5 0.00 EBL 0.0 0 0 *EBT 3.0 5,100 633 0.12 * 5,100 586 0.11 EBR 1.0 1,700 323 0.19 * 1,700 517 0.30 * WBL 2.0 3,400 126 0.04 * 3,400 296 0.09 WBT 3.0 5,100 793 0.16 5,100 1,466 0.29 *WBR 0.0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.04 0.03E/W Movements 0.16 0.29Rt. Turn Component 0.17 0.20Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.43 0.57LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A A PM PEAK HOURAM PEAK HOUR AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR G-137 PROJECT:Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO:ExistingINTERSECTION:211 Anaheim Way/I-5 NB Ramps / Katella Ave MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 2,550 345 0.14 * 2,550 429 0.17 NBT 3.5 5,950 432 0.10 5,950 1,174 0.20 *NBR 0.0 174 39 SBL 0.0 0 0 *SBT 0.0 00.00* 00.00 SBR 0.0 0 0 EBL 2.0 3,400 52 0.02 3,400 107 0.03 *EBT 3.0 5,100 992 0.19 * 5,100 817 0.16 EBR 0.0 0 0 WBL 0.0 0 * 0 WBT 4.0 6,800 710 0.10 6,800 1,513 0.22 *WBR 1.0 1,700 51 0.03 1,700 83 0.05 N/S Movements 0.14 0.20E/W Movements 0.19 0.25Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.38 0.51LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A A AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR G-138 Existing HCM LOS G-139 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 1: Harbor Blvd & I-5 NB Ramps 3/18/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING AM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 1 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 31 639 640 232 17 1470 Future Volume (veh/h) 31 639 640 232 17 1470 Number 3 18 2 12 1 6 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 33 680 688 0 18 1515 Adj No. of Lanes 123114 Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.93 0.93 0.97 0.97 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000 Cap, veh/h 451 805 2325 703 149 3718 Arrive On Green 0.28 0.28 1.00 0.00 0.09 0.64 Sat Flow, veh/h 1619 2890 4794 1445 1619 6086 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 33 680 688 0 18 1515Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1619 1445 1547 1445 1619 1462Q Serve(g_s), s 1.1 15.5 0.0 0.0 0.7 8.9Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.1 15.5 0.0 0.0 0.7 8.9Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 451 805 2325 703 149 3718V/C Ratio(X)0.07 0.84 0.30 0.00 0.12 0.41Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 451 805 2325 703 409 3718HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 18.6 23.8 0.0 0.0 29.2 6.3Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 7.8 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.3Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.5 7.1 0.1 0.0 0.3 3.7LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 18.6 31.6 0.3 0.0 29.3 6.6LnGrp LOS B C A C A Approach Vol, veh/h 713 688 1533Approach Delay, s/veh 31.0 0.3 6.9Approach LOS C A A Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.4 38.1 47.5 22.5Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 4.7 5.0 5.0 5.5Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 16 21.8 42.5 17.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.7 2.0 10.9 17.5Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 14.8 20.8 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 11.2HCM 2010 LOS B Notes G-140 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 2: Harbor Blvd & I-5 SB Ramps 3/18/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING AM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 3 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 164 285 23 672 851 667 Future Volume (veh/h) 164 285 23 672 851 667 Number 7 14 5 2 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 193 0 24 715 905 0 Adj No. of Lanes 211431 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000 Cap, veh/h 901 414 169 3669 2263 684 Arrive On Green 0.29 0.00 0.10 0.63 0.98 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 3141 1445 1619 6086 4794 1445 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 193 0 24 715 905 0Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1570 1445 1619 1462 1547 1445Q Serve(g_s), s 3.3 0.0 0.9 3.6 0.6 0.0Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.3 0.0 0.9 3.6 0.6 0.0Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 901 414 169 3669 2263 684V/C Ratio(X)0.21 0.00 0.14 0.19 0.40 0.00Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 942 434 386 3669 2263 684HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.92 0.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 19.0 0.0 28.5 5.5 0.5 0.0Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.4 0.0 0.4 1.5 0.3 0.0LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 19.0 0.0 28.7 5.7 0.9 0.0LnGrp LOS B C A A Approach Vol, veh/h 193 739 905Approach Delay, s/veh 19.0 6.4 0.9Approach LOS B A A Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 46.9 23.1 9.8 37.1Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.5 * 4.2 5.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 41.0 18.5 * 15 21.8Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.6 5.3 2.9 2.6Green Ext Time (p_c), s 15.0 0.4 0.0 11.0 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 5.0HCM 2010 LOS A Notes G-141 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 4: Harbor Blvd & Disney Way 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING AM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 1 1 0 76 0 161 24 604 67 165 785 3 Future Volume (veh/h) 1 1 0 76 0 161 24 604 67 165 785 3 Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.88 1.00 1.00 0.88 1.00 0.80 1.00 0.77 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 2 2 0 90 0 192 27 671 74 177 844 3 Adj No. of Lanes 020211130230 Peak Hour Factor 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.93 0.93 0.93 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000000000 Cap, veh/h 290 386 0 188 551 401 54 2148 232 255 2706 10 Arrive On Green 0.24 0.24 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.32 0.03 0.52 0.51 0.08 0.57 0.56 Sat Flow, veh/h 974 1687 0 3141 1700 1269 1619 4135 446 3141 4768 17 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 2 2 0 90 0 192 27 498 247 177 547 300Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1114 1470 0 1570 1700 1269 1619 1547 1487 1570 1547 1691Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.1 0.0 3.3 0.0 14.6 2.0 11.1 11.5 6.6 11.2 11.2Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.1 0.1 0.0 3.3 0.0 14.6 2.0 11.1 11.5 6.6 11.2 11.2Prop In Lane 0.89 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.30 1.00 0.01Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 324 352 0 188 551 401 54 1607 773 255 1756 960V/C Ratio(X)0.01 0.00 0.00 0.48 0.00 0.48 0.50 0.31 0.32 0.69 0.31 0.31Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 324 352 0 445 666 487 229 1607 773 445 1756 960HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 34.7 34.7 0.0 54.6 0.0 33.1 57.0 16.5 16.7 53.7 13.6 13.6Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.9 8.6 0.5 1.1 1.3 0.5 0.8Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.0 5.2 1.0 4.8 5.0 2.9 4.8 5.4LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 34.7 34.7 0.0 55.3 0.0 34.0 65.6 17.0 17.8 55.0 14.1 14.5LnGrp LOS C C E C E B B D B B Approach Vol, veh/h 4 282 772 1024Approach Delay, s/veh 34.7 40.8 19.0 21.3Approach LOS C D B C Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 123456 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 12.7 65.3 10.2 31.8 7.0 71.1 41.9Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.0 45.0 15.0 25.0 16.0 45.0 45.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.6 13.5 5.3 2.1 4.0 13.2 16.6Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 8.3 0.1 0.9 0.0 8.3 0.9 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 23.1HCM 2010 LOS C Notes G-142 Volume 4: Harbor Blvd & Disney Way 3/24/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING AM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 3 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Traffic Volume (vph)1 1 0 76 0 161 24 604 67 165 785 3 Future Volume (vph)1 1 0 76 0 161 24 604 67 165 785 3 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 218 128 569 257 Confl. Bikes (#/hr) Peak Hour Factor 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.93 0.93 0.93 Growth Factor 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Bus Blockages (#/hr)000000000000 Parking (#/hr) Mid-Block Traffic (%)0%0%0%0% Adj. Flow (vph)2 2 0 90 0 192 27 671 74 177 844 3 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 2 2 0 90 0 192 27 745 0 177 847 0 Intersection Summary G-143 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 5: Harbor Blvd & Katella Ave 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING AM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 18 823 162 222 608 100 125 526 244 72 632 145 Future Volume (veh/h) 18 823 162 222 608 100 125 526 244 72 632 145 Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.86 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.81 1.00 0.91 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 21 946 186 239 654 108 147 619 287 86 752 173 Adj No. of Lanes 231231231231 Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.84 0.84 0.84 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000000000 Cap, veh/h 419 1720 458 393 1720 483 248 1408 352 314 1507 421 Arrive On Green 0.13 0.37 0.37 0.12 0.37 0.37 0.08 0.30 0.30 0.10 0.32 0.32 Sat Flow, veh/h 3141 4692 1250 3141 4692 1316 3141 4692 1175 3141 4692 1310 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 21 946 186 239 654 108 147 619 287 86 752 173Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1570 1564 1250 1570 1564 1316 1570 1564 1175 1570 1564 1310Q Serve(g_s), s 0.7 19.2 13.3 8.6 12.3 6.8 5.4 12.8 19.1 3.0 15.5 8.4Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.7 19.2 13.3 8.6 12.3 6.8 5.4 12.8 19.1 3.0 15.5 8.4Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 419 1720 458 393 1720 483 248 1408 352 314 1507 421V/C Ratio(X)0.05 0.55 0.41 0.61 0.38 0.22 0.59 0.44 0.81 0.27 0.50 0.41Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 419 1720 458 393 1720 483 340 1408 352 340 1507 421HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 45.4 30.1 28.3 49.7 28.0 26.2 53.4 33.9 19.2 50.0 32.9 14.8Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 1.3 2.7 2.7 0.6 1.1 0.8 1.0 18.4 0.2 1.2 3.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.3 8.5 4.9 3.9 5.4 2.6 2.4 5.6 7.9 1.3 6.8 3.4LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 45.4 31.4 30.9 52.4 28.6 27.3 54.2 34.9 37.6 50.1 34.1 17.7LnGrp LOS DCCDCCDCDDCB Approach Vol, veh/h 1153 1001 1053 1011Approach Delay, s/veh 31.6 34.2 38.3 32.7Approach LOS CCDC Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 12345678Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 15.0 39.0 18.0 48.0 12.5 41.5 19.0 47.0Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 6.0 * 6 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.0 34.0 12.0 * 42 11.0 34.0 12.0 42.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.0 21.1 10.6 21.2 7.4 17.5 2.7 14.3Green Ext Time (p_c), s 1.7 2.4 0.1 5.7 0.1 2.7 3.9 3.7 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 34.1HCM 2010 LOS C Notes G-144 Volume 5: Harbor Blvd & Katella Ave 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING AM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 1 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Traffic Volume (vph)18 823 162 222 608 100 125 526 244 72 632 145 Future Volume (vph)18 823 162 222 608 100 125 526 244 72 632 145 Confl. Peds. (#/hr)165 109 187 100 Confl. Bikes (#/hr) Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.84 0.84 0.84 Growth Factor 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Bus Blockages (#/hr)000000000000 Parking (#/hr) Mid-Block Traffic (%)0%0%0%0% Adj. Flow (vph)21 946 186 239 654 108 147 619 287 86 752 173 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 21 946 186 239 654 108 147 619 287 86 752 173 Intersection Summary G-145 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 9: Zeyn St/I-5 SB Off Ramp & Disney Way/Manchester Ave 3/21/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING AM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)0 167 10 16 288 0 19 0 34 273 18 141 Future Volume (vph)0 167 10 16 288 0 19 0 34 273 18 141 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Total Lost time (s)4.7 5.1 5.1 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.91 0.95 Frt 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot)4603 1615 4641 1615 1445 1534 1467 1373 Flt Permitted 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm)4603 1615 4641 1615 1445 1534 1467 1373 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.77 0.77 0.77 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.89 0.89 0.89Adj. Flow (vph) 0 188 11 21 374 0 30 0 54 307 20 158RTOR Reduction (vph)080000004105107Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 191 0 21 374 0 30 0 14 172 167 36 Turn Type NA Split NA Prot Perm Split NA PermProtected Phases 4 3 3 2 6 6Permitted Phases 26Actuated Green, G (s) 10.7 9.5 9.5 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0Effective Green, g (s)10.7 9.5 9.5 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.12 0.12 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25Clearance Time (s)4.7 5.1 5.1 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0Vehicle Extension (s)2.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph)615 191 551 403 361 383 366 343v/s Ratio Prot c0.04 0.01 c0.08 c0.02 0.11 c0.11v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 0.03v/c Ratio 0.31 0.11 0.68 0.07 0.04 0.45 0.45 0.10Uniform Delay, d1 31.3 31.5 33.8 22.9 22.7 25.3 25.4 23.1Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Incremental Delay, d2 1.3 0.1 2.6 0.4 0.2 3.8 4.0 0.6Delay (s)32.6 31.6 36.4 23.3 22.9 29.1 29.4 23.7Level of Service C C D C CCCCApproach Delay (s)32.6 36.1 23.0 27.6Approach LOS CDCC Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 31.1 HCM 2000 Level of Service CHCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.34Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s)19.8Intersection Capacity Utilization 41.4% ICU Level of Service AAnalysis Period (min)15c Critical Lane Group G-146 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 10: Anaheim Blvd & Manchester Ave/Manchester Ave/I-5 SB On 3/18/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING AM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 9 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 248 93 82 0 132 1 28 860 11 548 704 114 Future Volume (veh/h) 248 93 82 0 132 1 28 860 11 548 704 114 Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 0 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 285 107 94 0 171 1 30 935 12 589 757 123 Adj No. of Lanes 240030130230 Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.77 0.77 0.77 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.93 0.93 0.93 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000000000 Cap, veh/h 334 986 325 0 397 2 60 2126 27 623 2482 400 Arrive On Green 0.11 0.22 0.22 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.04 0.45 0.45 0.20 0.62 0.62 Sat Flow, veh/h 3141 4386 1445 0 4914 28 1619 4723 61 3141 4030 649 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 285 107 94 0 111 61 30 612 335 589 580 300Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1570 1462 1445 0 1547 1695 1619 1547 1689 1570 1547 1585Q Serve(g_s), s 10.7 2.3 6.5 0.0 4.1 4.1 2.2 16.3 16.3 22.2 10.6 10.8Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 10.7 2.3 6.5 0.0 4.1 4.1 2.2 16.3 16.3 22.2 10.6 10.8Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.02 1.00 0.04 1.00 0.41Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 334 986 325 0 258 141 60 1393 761 623 1906 976V/C Ratio(X)0.85 0.11 0.29 0.00 0.43 0.43 0.50 0.44 0.44 0.95 0.30 0.31Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 361 1864 614 0 851 466 152 1393 761 623 1906 976HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 52.7 37.0 38.6 0.0 52.3 52.3 56.7 22.6 22.6 47.5 10.9 10.9Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 14.8 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.4 0.8 4.8 1.0 1.8 23.3 0.4 0.8Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 5.3 0.9 2.6 0.0 1.8 2.0 1.1 7.2 8.0 11.7 4.6 4.9LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 67.5 37.0 39.0 0.0 52.7 53.1 61.5 23.6 24.5 70.7 11.3 11.7LnGrp LOS E D D D D E C C E B B Approach Vol, veh/h 486 172 977 1469Approach Delay, s/veh 55.3 52.8 25.1 35.2Approach LOS E D C D Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 1 2 45678Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 29.0 59.0 32.0 9.1 78.9 17.0 15.0Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 5.2 5.0 5.0 * 4.7 5.0 * 4.2 5.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 24 30.0 51.0 * 11 43.0 * 14 33.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 24.2 18.3 8.5 4.2 12.8 12.7 6.1Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 9.4 1.9 0.0 19.4 0.1 1.8 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 36.1HCM 2010 LOS D Notes G-147 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 12: I-5 SB Ramps & Katella Ave 3/21/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING AM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)0 633 323 126 793 0 28 0 397 23 101 6 Future Volume (vph)0 633 323 126 793 0 28 0 397 23 101 6 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Total Lost time (s)5.3 4.5 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.6 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.97 0.91 0.95 0.91 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot)4641 1445 3133 4641 1534 1318 1373 1615 3230 1445 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm)4641 1445 3133 4641 1534 1318 1373 1615 3230 1445 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.88 0.88 0.88Adj. Flow (vph) 0 696 355 140 881 0 35 0 490 26 115 7RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 308 0000212212005Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 696 47 140 881 0 31 37 33 26 115 2 Turn Type NA Over Prot NA Split NA Perm Split NA PermProtected Phases 2716 77 88Permitted Phases 78Actuated Green, G (s) 25.2 12.0 12.6 42.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 21.6 21.6 21.6Effective Green, g (s)25.2 12.0 12.6 42.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 21.6 21.6 21.6Actuated g/C Ratio 0.28 0.13 0.14 0.47 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.24 0.24 0.24Clearance Time (s)5.3 4.5 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.6 4.6 4.6Vehicle Extension (s)4.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph)1299 192 438 2165 204 175 183 387 775 346v/s Ratio Prot c0.15 c0.03 0.04 c0.19 0.02 0.03 0.02 c0.04v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 0.00v/c Ratio 0.54 0.25 0.32 0.41 0.15 0.21 0.18 0.07 0.15 0.00Uniform Delay, d1 27.4 34.9 34.8 15.8 34.5 34.8 34.6 26.4 27.0 26.0Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.43 0.70 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Incremental Delay, d2 1.6 3.0 0.1 0.2 1.6 2.7 2.1 0.0 0.0 0.0Delay (s)29.0 38.0 50.1 11.3 36.1 37.5 36.7 26.4 27.0 26.0Level of Service C D D B DDDCCCApproach Delay (s)32.1 16.6 37.1 26.8Approach LOS C B D C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 27.0 HCM 2000 Level of Service CHCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.36Actuated Cycle Length (s) 90.0 Sum of lost time (s)18.6Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.9% ICU Level of Service CAnalysis Period (min)15c Critical Lane Group G-148 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 13: I-5 NB Ramps & Katella Ave 3/21/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING AM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)52 992 0 0 710 51 345 432 174 0 0 0 Future Volume (vph)52 992 0 0 710 51 345 432 174 0 0 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Total Lost time (s)4.7 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.86 1.00 0.81 0.81 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.97 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (prot)3133 4641 5848 1445 1308 5266 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (perm)3133 4641 5848 1445 1308 5266 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.96 0.96 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00Adj. Flow (vph) 63 1195 0 0 845 61 359 450 181 0 0 0RTOR Reduction (vph)00000360160000Lane Group Flow (vph) 63 1195 0 0 845 25 197 777 0000 Turn Type Prot NA NA Perm Split NAProtected Phases 5 2 6 8 8Permitted Phases 6Actuated Green, G (s) 9.6 50.6 36.3 36.3 27.4 27.4Effective Green, g (s) 9.6 50.6 36.3 36.3 27.4 27.4Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.56 0.40 0.40 0.30 0.30Clearance Time (s)4.7 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.2 2.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 334 2609 2358 582 398 1603v/s Ratio Prot 0.02 c0.26 0.14 c0.15 0.15v/s Ratio Perm 0.02v/c Ratio 0.19 0.46 0.36 0.04 0.49 0.48Uniform Delay, d1 36.6 11.6 18.7 16.3 25.6 25.5Progression Factor 0.99 1.77 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.5 0.4 0.1 0.5 0.1Delay (s)36.5 21.1 19.2 16.4 26.1 25.7Level of Service D C B B C CApproach Delay (s)21.9 19.0 25.8 0.0Approach LOS C B C A Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 22.3 HCM 2000 Level of Service CHCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.50Actuated Cycle Length (s) 90.0 Sum of lost time (s)16.7Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.9% ICU Level of Service BAnalysis Period (min)15c Critical Lane Group G-149 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 1: Harbor Blvd & I-5 NB Ramps 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING PM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 1 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 32 673 1173 401 43 1242 Future Volume (veh/h) 32 673 1173 401 43 1242 Number 3 18 2 12 1 6 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 36 765 1248 0 47 1365 Adj No. of Lanes 123114 Peak Hour Factor 0.88 0.88 0.94 0.94 0.91 0.91 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000 Cap, veh/h 439 784 2076 626 247 3759 Arrive On Green 0.27 0.27 0.89 0.00 0.15 0.64 Sat Flow, veh/h 1619 2890 4794 1445 1619 6086 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 36 765 1248 0 47 1365Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1619 1445 1547 1445 1619 1462Q Serve(g_s), s 1.2 18.4 4.3 0.0 1.8 7.6Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.2 18.4 4.3 0.0 1.8 7.6Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 439 784 2076 626 247 3759V/C Ratio(X)0.08 0.98 0.60 0.00 0.19 0.36Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 439 784 2076 626 393 3759HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.92 0.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 19.0 25.3 2.3 0.0 25.9 5.8Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 25.9 1.2 0.0 0.1 0.3Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.5 10.0 1.6 0.0 0.8 3.1LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 19.0 51.2 3.5 0.0 26.0 6.1LnGrp LOS B D A C A Approach Vol, veh/h 801 1248 1412Approach Delay, s/veh 49.7 3.5 6.8Approach LOS D A A Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 13.7 34.3 48.0 22.0Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 4.7 5.0 5.0 5.5Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 15 23.0 15.0 16.5Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.8 6.3 9.6 20.4Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 14.2 5.0 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 15.5HCM 2010 LOS B Notes G-150 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 2: Harbor Blvd & I-5 SB Ramps 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING PM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 3 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 252 300 75 1364 650 598 Future Volume (veh/h) 252 300 75 1364 650 598 Number 7 14 5 2 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 283 0 84 1533 707 0 Adj No. of Lanes 211431 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000 Cap, veh/h 917 422 319 3640 1810 543 Arrive On Green 0.29 0.00 0.20 0.62 0.78 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 3141 1445 1619 6086 4794 1445 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 283 0 84 1533 707 0Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1570 1445 1619 1462 1547 1445Q Serve(g_s), s 4.9 0.0 3.1 9.4 3.4 0.0Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.9 0.0 3.1 9.4 3.4 0.0Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 917 422 319 3640 1810 543V/C Ratio(X)0.31 0.00 0.26 0.42 0.39 0.00Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 942 434 386 3640 1810 543HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.94 0.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 19.3 0.0 23.8 6.8 5.1 0.0Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.1 0.0 1.4 3.8 1.4 0.0LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 19.4 0.0 24.0 7.1 5.7 0.0LnGrp LOS B C A A Approach Vol, veh/h 283 1617 707Approach Delay, s/veh 19.4 8.0 5.7Approach LOS B A A Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 46.6 23.4 16.3 30.3Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.5 * 4.2 5.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 41.0 18.5 * 15 21.8Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 11.4 6.9 5.1 5.4Green Ext Time (p_c), s 20.2 0.6 0.1 12.9 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 8.6HCM 2010 LOS A Notes G-151 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 4: Harbor Blvd & Disney Way 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING PM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 2 23 3 145 15 237 46 940 77 163 798 5 Future Volume (veh/h) 2 23 3 145 15 237 46 940 77 163 798 5 Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.92 0.82 1.00 0.92 1.00 0.81 1.00 0.82 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 3 29 4 153 16 249 54 1106 91 173 849 5 Adj No. of Lanes 020211130230 Peak Hour Factor 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000000000 Cap, veh/h 69 556 73 256 557 423 81 2218 182 251 2602 15 Arrive On Green 0.22 0.22 0.21 0.08 0.33 0.32 0.05 0.52 0.51 0.08 0.55 0.54 Sat Flow, veh/h 156 2517 330 3141 1700 1324 1619 4284 352 3141 4754 28 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 19 0 17 153 16 249 54 798 399 173 552 302Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1601 0 1402 1570 1700 1324 1619 1547 1542 1570 1547 1688Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 1.2 5.6 0.8 18.9 3.9 20.1 20.3 6.4 11.8 11.8Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.1 0.0 1.2 5.6 0.8 18.9 3.9 20.1 20.3 6.4 11.8 11.8Prop In Lane 0.16 0.24 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.23 1.00 0.02Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 388 0 310 256 557 423 81 1602 798 251 1693 924V/C Ratio(X)0.05 0.00 0.05 0.60 0.03 0.59 0.66 0.50 0.50 0.69 0.33 0.33Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 395 0 315 445 666 508 229 1602 798 445 1693 924HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 36.8 0.0 37.0 53.2 27.4 34.3 56.0 18.8 18.9 53.8 15.0 15.0Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.8 0.0 1.3 10.7 1.1 2.2 1.3 0.5 0.9Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.5 0.0 0.5 2.5 0.4 7.0 2.0 8.8 9.0 2.8 5.2 5.8LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 36.9 0.0 37.0 54.0 27.4 35.6 66.7 19.9 21.1 55.0 15.5 15.9LnGrp LOS D DDCDEBCEBB Approach Vol, veh/h 36 418 1251 1027Approach Delay, s/veh 36.9 42.0 22.3 22.3Approach LOS DDCC Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 123456 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 12.6 65.1 12.8 29.5 9.0 68.7 42.3Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.0 45.0 15.0 25.0 16.0 45.0 45.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.4 22.3 7.6 3.2 5.9 13.8 20.9Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 10.5 0.2 1.3 0.1 11.9 1.4 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 25.5HCM 2010 LOS C Notes G-152 Volume 4: Harbor Blvd & Disney Way 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING PM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 3 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Traffic Volume (vph)2 23 3 145 15 237 46 940 77 163 798 5 Future Volume (vph)2 23 3 145 15 237 46 940 77 163 798 5 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 130 89 354 177 Confl. Bikes (#/hr)33 Peak Hour Factor 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.94 0.94 0.94 Growth Factor 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Bus Blockages (#/hr)000000000000 Parking (#/hr) Mid-Block Traffic (%)0%0%0%0% Adj. Flow (vph)3 29 4 153 16 249 54 1106 91 173 849 5 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 3 33 0 153 16 249 54 1197 0 173 854 0 Intersection Summary G-153 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 5: Harbor Blvd & Katella Ave 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING PM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 7 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 13 914 182 300 1292 124 148 856 340 98 703 164 Future Volume (veh/h) 13 914 182 300 1292 124 148 856 340 98 703 164 Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.81 1.00 0.92 1.00 0.87 1.00 0.79 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 14 962 192 330 1420 136 163 941 374 113 808 189 Adj No. of Lanes 231231231231 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.87 0.87 0.87 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000000000 Cap, veh/h 320 1525 380 451 1720 488 265 1408 377 413 1628 395 Arrive On Green 0.10 0.32 0.32 0.14 0.37 0.37 0.08 0.30 0.30 0.13 0.35 0.35 Sat Flow, veh/h 3141 4692 1170 3141 4692 1330 3141 4692 1257 3141 4692 1138 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 14 962 192 330 1420 136 163 941 374 113 808 189Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1570 1564 1170 1570 1564 1330 1570 1564 1257 1570 1564 1138Q Serve(g_s), s 0.5 20.9 11.9 12.1 33.0 8.7 6.0 21.1 35.6 3.9 16.3 11.2Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.5 20.9 11.9 12.1 33.0 8.7 6.0 21.1 35.6 3.9 16.3 11.2Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 320 1525 380 451 1720 488 265 1408 377 413 1628 395V/C Ratio(X)0.04 0.63 0.50 0.73 0.83 0.28 0.61 0.67 0.99 0.27 0.50 0.48Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 340 1525 380 471 1720 488 393 1408 377 413 1628 395HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 48.6 34.4 18.5 49.2 34.5 26.8 53.0 36.8 41.9 46.9 30.9 15.7Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 2.0 4.7 5.5 4.7 1.4 0.9 2.5 44.3 0.1 1.1 4.1Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.2 9.3 4.3 5.6 14.9 3.4 2.6 9.4 17.0 1.7 7.2 3.9LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 48.7 36.4 23.2 54.7 39.2 28.2 53.9 39.3 86.2 47.1 32.0 19.9LnGrp LOS DDCDDCDDFDCB Approach Vol, veh/h 1168 1886 1478 1110Approach Delay, s/veh 34.4 41.1 52.8 31.5Approach LOS CDDC Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 12345678Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 18.8 39.0 20.2 42.0 13.1 44.6 15.2 47.0Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.0 34.0 15.0 37.0 13.0 34.0 10.0 42.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.9 37.6 14.1 22.9 8.0 18.3 2.5 35.0Green Ext Time (p_c), s 1.8 0.0 0.2 5.0 0.2 3.1 0.9 4.2 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 40.9HCM 2010 LOS D G-154 Volume 5: Harbor Blvd & Katella Ave 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING PM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 4 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Traffic Volume (vph)13 914 182 300 1292 124 148 856 340 98 703 164 Future Volume (vph)13 914 182 300 1292 124 148 856 340 98 703 164 Confl. Peds. (#/hr)206 97 130 246 Confl. Bikes (#/hr) Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.87 0.87 0.87 Growth Factor 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Bus Blockages (#/hr)000000000000 Parking (#/hr) Mid-Block Traffic (%)0%0%0%0% Adj. Flow (vph)14 962 192 330 1420 136 163 941 374 113 808 189 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 14 962 192 330 1420 136 163 941 374 113 808 189 Intersection Summary G-155 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 9: Zeyn St/I-5 SB Off Ramp & Disney Way/Manchester Ave 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING PM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)0 377 15 22 348 0 4 0 62 282 13 150 Future Volume (vph)0 377 15 22 348 0 4 0 62 282 13 150 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Total Lost time (s)4.7 5.1 5.1 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.91 0.95 Frt 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot)4614 1615 4641 1615 1445 1534 1465 1373 Flt Permitted 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm)4614 1615 4641 1615 1445 1534 1465 1373 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.87 0.87 0.87Adj. Flow (vph) 0 428 17 26 405 0 7 0 109 324 15 172RTOR Reduction (vph)050000008205116Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 440 0 26 405 0 7 0 27 178 174 39 Turn Type NA Split NA Prot Perm Split NA PermProtected Phases 4 3 3 2 6 6Permitted Phases 26Actuated Green, G (s) 10.6 9.6 9.6 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0Effective Green, g (s)10.6 9.6 9.6 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.12 0.12 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25Clearance Time (s)4.7 5.1 5.1 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0Vehicle Extension (s)2.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph)611 193 556 403 361 383 366 343v/s Ratio Prot c0.10 0.02 c0.09 0.00 0.12 c0.12v/s Ratio Perm c0.02 0.03v/c Ratio 0.72 0.13 0.73 0.02 0.08 0.46 0.47 0.11Uniform Delay, d1 33.3 31.5 33.9 22.6 22.9 25.5 25.5 23.2Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Incremental Delay, d2 7.2 0.1 4.0 0.1 0.4 4.0 4.4 0.7Delay (s)40.4 31.6 38.0 22.7 23.3 29.5 29.9 23.8Level of Service D C D C CCCCApproach Delay (s)40.4 37.6 23.3 27.9Approach LOS DDCC Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 34.0 HCM 2000 Level of Service CHCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.43Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s)19.8Intersection Capacity Utilization 45.8% ICU Level of Service AAnalysis Period (min)15c Critical Lane Group G-156 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 10: Anaheim Blvd & Manchester Ave/Manchester Ave/I-5 SB On 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING PM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 8 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 317 203 201 0 268 3 40 1030 6 557 780 78 Future Volume (veh/h) 317 203 201 0 268 3 40 1030 6 557 780 78 Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 0 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 382 245 242 0 308 3 47 1198 7 586 821 82 Adj No. of Lanes 240030130230 Peak Hour Factor 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000000000 Cap, veh/h 361 1160 382 0 543 5 75 1955 11 623 2433 242 Arrive On Green 0.12 0.26 0.26 0.00 0.11 0.11 0.05 0.41 0.41 0.20 0.57 0.57 Sat Flow, veh/h 3141 4386 1445 0 4893 46 1619 4761 28 3141 4292 427 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 382 245 242 0 201 110 47 778 427 586 591 312Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1570 1462 1445 0 1547 1692 1619 1547 1695 1570 1547 1625Q Serve(g_s), s 13.8 5.2 17.8 0.0 7.4 7.4 3.4 23.8 23.8 22.1 12.3 12.4Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 13.8 5.2 17.8 0.0 7.4 7.4 3.4 23.8 23.8 22.1 12.3 12.4Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.03 1.00 0.02 1.00 0.26Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 361 1160 382 0 354 194 75 1270 696 623 1754 921V/C Ratio(X)1.06 0.21 0.63 0.00 0.57 0.57 0.63 0.61 0.61 0.94 0.34 0.34Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 361 1864 614 0 851 465 152 1270 696 623 1754 921HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 53.1 34.4 39.0 0.0 50.3 50.3 56.2 27.9 27.9 47.4 13.9 13.9Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 57.9 0.1 1.4 0.0 0.5 1.0 6.3 2.2 4.0 22.3 0.5 1.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 8.9 2.1 7.2 0.0 3.2 3.5 1.7 10.6 11.9 11.5 5.4 5.8LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 111.0 34.4 40.4 0.0 50.8 51.3 62.5 30.1 31.9 69.7 14.4 14.9LnGrp LOS F C D D D E C C E B B Approach Vol, veh/h 869 311 1252 1489Approach Delay, s/veh 69.8 51.0 31.9 36.3Approach LOS E D C D Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 1 2 45678Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 29.0 54.3 36.7 10.2 73.0 18.0 18.7Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 5.2 5.0 5.0 * 4.7 5.0 * 4.2 5.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 24 30.0 51.0 * 11 43.0 * 14 33.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 24.1 25.8 19.8 5.4 14.4 15.8 9.4Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 3.9 4.6 0.0 21.3 0.0 4.3 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 43.5HCM 2010 LOS D Notes G-157 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 12: I-5 SB Ramps & Katella Ave 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING PM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)0 586 517 296 1466 0 46 0 303 26 55 5 Future Volume (vph)0 586 517 296 1466 0 46 0 303 26 55 5 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Total Lost time (s)5.3 4.5 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.6 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.97 0.91 0.95 0.91 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot)4641 1445 3133 4641 1534 1320 1373 1615 3230 1445 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm)4641 1445 3133 4641 1534 1320 1373 1615 3230 1445 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.80 0.80 0.80Adj. Flow (vph) 0 610 539 315 1560 0 52 0 344 32 69 6RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 467 0000146152005Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 610 72 315 1560 0 47 28 23 33 69 1 Turn Type NA Over Prot NA Split NA Perm Split NA PermProtected Phases 2716 77 88Permitted Phases 78Actuated Green, G (s) 25.2 12.0 12.6 42.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 21.6 21.6 21.6Effective Green, g (s)25.2 12.0 12.6 42.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 21.6 21.6 21.6Actuated g/C Ratio 0.28 0.13 0.14 0.47 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.24 0.24 0.24Clearance Time (s)5.3 4.5 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.6 4.6 4.6Vehicle Extension (s)4.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph)1299 192 438 2165 204 176 183 387 775 346v/s Ratio Prot 0.13 c0.05 0.10 c0.34 0.03 0.02 0.02 c0.02v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 0.00v/c Ratio 0.47 0.37 0.72 0.72 0.23 0.16 0.13 0.09 0.09 0.00Uniform Delay, d1 26.9 35.6 37.0 19.3 34.9 34.5 34.4 26.5 26.6 26.0Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.22 1.46 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Incremental Delay, d2 1.2 5.5 2.2 0.6 2.6 1.9 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0Delay (s)28.1 41.1 47.3 28.7 37.5 36.4 35.8 26.6 26.6 26.0Level of Service CDDC DDDCCCApproach Delay (s) 34.2 31.9 36.3 26.5Approach LOS CCDC Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 32.9 HCM 2000 Level of Service CHCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.51Actuated Cycle Length (s) 90.0 Sum of lost time (s)18.6Intersection Capacity Utilization 84.4% ICU Level of Service EAnalysis Period (min)15c Critical Lane Group G-158 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 13: I-5 NB Ramps & Katella Ave 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING PM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 107 817 0 0 1513 83 429 1174 39 0 0 0 Future Volume (vph) 107 817 0 0 1513 83 429 1174 39 0 0 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Total Lost time (s)4.7 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.86 1.00 0.81 0.81 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot)3133 4641 5848 1445 1308 5461 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm)3133 4641 5848 1445 1308 5461 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.93 0.93 0.93 1.00 1.00 1.00Adj. Flow (vph) 123 939 0 0 1663 91 461 1262 42 0 0 0RTOR Reduction (vph)0000064050000Lane Group Flow (vph) 123 939 0 0 1663 27 341 1419 0000 Turn Type Prot NA NA Perm Split NAProtected Phases 5 2 6 8 8Permitted Phases 6Actuated Green, G (s) 12.0 43.8 27.1 27.1 34.2 34.2Effective Green, g (s) 12.0 43.8 27.1 27.1 34.2 34.2Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.49 0.30 0.30 0.38 0.38Clearance Time (s)4.7 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.2 2.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 417 2258 1760 435 497 2075v/s Ratio Prot 0.04 c0.20 c0.28 c0.26 0.26v/s Ratio Perm 0.02v/c Ratio 0.29 0.42 0.94 0.06 0.69 0.68Uniform Delay, d1 35.2 14.9 30.7 22.4 23.4 23.4Progression Factor 1.19 1.55 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.5 11.9 0.3 3.3 0.8Delay (s)42.1 23.5 42.6 22.7 26.7 24.2Level of Service D C DCCCApproach Delay (s)25.7 41.5 24.7 0.0Approach LOS C D C A Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 31.4 HCM 2000 Level of Service CHCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.75Actuated Cycle Length (s) 90.0 Sum of lost time (s)16.7Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.9% ICU Level of Service CAnalysis Period (min)15c Critical Lane Group G-159 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 4: Harbor Blvd & Disney Way 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING WEEKEND Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 3 422 2 125 31 171 44 737 70 250 802 12 Future Volume (veh/h) 3 422 2 125 31 171 44 737 70 250 802 12 Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.88 0.71 1.00 0.88 1.00 0.77 1.00 0.74 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 6 879 4 158 39 216 48 801 76 284 911 14 Adj No. of Lanes 020211130230 Peak Hour Factor 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.88 0.88 0.88 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000000000 Cap, veh/h 32 722 3 261 566 414 74 2002 187 360 2557 39 Arrive On Green 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.08 0.33 0.32 0.05 0.48 0.47 0.11 0.55 0.54 Sat Flow, veh/h 8 3209 15 3141 1700 1274 1619 4194 392 3141 4681 72 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 466 0 423 158 39 216 48 588 289 284 602 323Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1694 0 1537 1570 1700 1274 1619 1547 1493 1570 1547 1658Q Serve(g_s), s 10.1 0.0 27.0 5.8 1.9 16.5 3.5 14.7 15.1 10.6 13.1 13.2Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 27.0 0.0 27.0 5.8 1.9 16.5 3.5 14.7 15.1 10.6 13.1 13.2Prop In Lane 0.01 0.01 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.26 1.00 0.04Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 412 0 346 261 566 414 74 1477 712 360 1691 906V/C Ratio(X)1.13 0.00 1.22 0.60 0.07 0.52 0.65 0.40 0.41 0.79 0.36 0.36Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 412 0 346 445 666 488 229 1477 712 445 1691 906HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 47.5 0.0 46.5 53.1 27.3 32.9 56.3 20.2 20.4 51.7 15.3 15.4Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 85.8 0.0 123.1 0.8 0.1 1.0 11.2 0.8 1.7 5.9 0.6 1.1Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 23.4 0.0 23.3 2.6 0.9 5.9 1.8 6.5 6.5 4.9 5.7 6.3LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 133.2 0.0 169.6 53.9 27.4 34.0 67.5 21.0 22.2 57.6 15.9 16.4LnGrp LOS F F D C C E C C E B B Approach Vol, veh/h 889 413 925 1209Approach Delay, s/veh 150.5 41.0 23.8 25.8Approach LOS F D C C Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 123456 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 16.8 60.3 13.0 30.0 8.5 68.6 43.0Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.0 45.0 15.0 25.0 16.0 45.0 45.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 12.6 17.1 7.8 29.0 5.5 15.2 18.5Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 9.6 0.2 0.0 0.1 9.8 5.2 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 59.4HCM 2010 LOS E Notes G-160 Volume 4: Harbor Blvd & Disney Way 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING WEEKEND Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 1 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Traffic Volume (vph)3 422 2 125 31 171 44 737 70 250 802 12 Future Volume (vph)3 422 2 125 31 171 44 737 70 250 802 12 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 218 128 569 257 Confl. Bikes (#/hr)33 Peak Hour Factor 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.88 0.88 0.88 Growth Factor 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Bus Blockages (#/hr)000000000000 Parking (#/hr) Mid-Block Traffic (%)0%0%0%0% Adj. Flow (vph)6 879 4 158 39 216 48 801 76 284 911 14 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 6 883 0 158 39 216 48 877 0 284 925 0 Intersection Summary G-161 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 5: Harbor Blvd & Katella Ave 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING WEEKEND Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 288 875 178 307 890 131 200 548 219 90 653 262 Future Volume (veh/h) 288 875 178 307 890 131 200 548 219 90 653 262 Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.81 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.88 1.00 0.78 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 306 931 189 334 967 142 215 589 235 98 710 285 Adj No. of Lanes 231231231231 Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000000000 Cap, veh/h 419 1525 380 419 1525 428 314 1564 425 340 1604 387 Arrive On Green 0.13 0.32 0.32 0.13 0.32 0.32 0.10 0.33 0.33 0.11 0.34 0.34 Sat Flow, veh/h 3141 4692 1170 3141 4692 1316 3141 4692 1276 3141 4692 1133 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 306 931 189 334 967 142 215 589 235 98 710 285Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1570 1564 1170 1570 1564 1316 1570 1564 1276 1570 1564 1133Q Serve(g_s), s 11.2 20.1 11.4 12.4 21.0 9.8 7.9 11.5 18.1 3.4 14.1 17.8Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 11.2 20.1 11.4 12.4 21.0 9.8 7.9 11.5 18.1 3.4 14.1 17.8Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 419 1525 380 419 1525 428 314 1564 425 340 1604 387V/C Ratio(X)0.73 0.61 0.50 0.80 0.63 0.33 0.69 0.38 0.55 0.29 0.44 0.74Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 419 1525 380 419 1525 428 340 1564 425 340 1604 387HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 49.9 34.1 17.3 50.4 34.4 30.6 52.2 30.5 32.7 49.2 30.6 15.6Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 6.4 1.8 4.6 10.4 2.0 2.1 3.9 0.7 5.1 0.2 0.9 11.8Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 5.3 8.9 4.2 6.0 9.3 3.8 3.6 5.1 6.9 1.5 6.2 6.8LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 56.3 35.9 21.9 60.8 36.5 32.7 56.1 31.2 37.8 49.4 31.5 27.4LnGrp LOS E D C E D C E CDDCC Approach Vol, veh/h 1426 1443 1039 1093Approach Delay, s/veh 38.5 41.7 37.8 32.1Approach LOS DDDC Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 12345678Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 16.0 43.0 19.0 42.0 15.0 44.0 19.0 42.0Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.0 38.0 13.0 37.0 11.0 38.0 13.0 37.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.4 20.1 14.4 22.1 9.9 19.8 13.2 23.0Green Ext Time (p_c), s 1.9 2.2 0.0 5.0 0.1 3.2 0.0 4.6 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 37.9HCM 2010 LOS D G-162 Volume 5: Harbor Blvd & Katella Ave 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING WEEKEND Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 2 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Traffic Volume (vph) 288 875 178 307 890 131 200 548 219 90 653 262 Future Volume (vph) 288 875 178 307 890 131 200 548 219 90 653 262 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 206 97 130 246 Confl. Bikes (#/hr) Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.92 0.92 0.92 Growth Factor 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Bus Blockages (#/hr)000000000000 Parking (#/hr) Mid-Block Traffic (%)0%0%0%0% Adj. Flow (vph)306 931 189 334 967 142 215 589 235 98 710 285 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 306 931 189 334 967 142 215 589 235 98 710 285 Intersection Summary G-163 Existing Plus Project ICU LOS G-164 PROJECT:Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO:Existing Plus PrINTERSECTION:153 Harbor Blvd / I-5 NB Ramps AM PEAK HOURMOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0.0 0 * 0 NBT 3.0 5,100 649 0.17 5,100 1,179 0.31 *NBR Free 232 412 SBL 1.0 1,700 17 0.01 1,700 43 0.03 *SBT 4.0 6,800 1,472 0.22 * 6,800 1,247 0.18 SBR 0.0 0 0 EBL 0.0 0 0 EBT 0.0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 *EBR 0.0 0 0 WBL 1.5 2,550 32 0.01 * 2,550 33 0.01 * WBT 0.0 0 0.00 0 0.00 WBR 1.5 2,550 639 0.25 * 2,550 673 0.26 * N/S Movements 0.22 0.34E/W Movements 0.01 0.01 Rt. Turn Component 0.24 0.24Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.52 0.64LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A B PROJECT: Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO: Existing Plus PrINTERSECTION:154 Harbor Blvd / I-5 SB Ramps MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.0 1,700 23 0.01 * 1,700 75 0.04 *NBT 4.0 6,800 681 0.10 6,800 1,381 0.20 NBR 0.0 0 0 SBL 0.0 0 0 SBT 3.0 5,100 854 0.30 * 5,100 655 0.25 *SBR Free 667 598 EBL 2.0 3,400 164 0.05 * 3,400 252 0.07 *EBT 0.0 0 0.00 0 0.00 EBR Free 300 311 WBL 0.0 0 0 WBT 0.0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 *WBR 0.0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.31 0.29E/W Movements 0.05 0.07Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.41 0.41LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A A PM PEAK HOUR AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR G-165 PROJECT:Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO:Existing Plus ProjINTERSECTION:155 Harbor Blvd / Manchester Ave MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.0 1,700 66 0.04 1,700 85 0.05 NBT 3.0 5,100 705 0.15 * 5,100 1,244 0.26 *NBR 0.0 55 78 SBL 1.0 1,700 231 0.14 * 1,700 120 0.07 *SBT 4.0 6,800 915 0.13 6,800 851 0.13 SBR 0.0 0 0 EBL 0.0 0 0 EBT 0.0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 *EBR 0.0 0 0 WBL 1.0 1,700 24 0.01 * 1,700 67 0.04 * WBT 0.0 0 0.00 0 0.00 WBR 1.0 1,700 67 0.04 1,700 231 0.14 * N/S Movements 0.28 0.33E/W Movements 0.01 0.04 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.07Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.35 0.48LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A A PROJECT: Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO: Existing Plus ProjINTERSECTION:157 Harbor Blvd / Disney Way MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.0 1,700 45 0.03 1,700 68 0.04 NBT 3.0 5,100 613 0.14 * 5,100 957 0.21 *NBR 0.0 88 106 SBL 2.0 3,400 165 0.05 * 3,400 163 0.05 * SBT 3.0 5,100 803 0.16 5,100 814 0.16 SBR 0.0 3 5 EBL 0.0 1 2 EBT 2.0 3,400 1 0.00 * 3,400 23 0.01 * EBR 0.0 0 3 WBL 2.0 3,400 76 0.02 * 3,400 145 0.04 *WBT 1.0 1,700 0 0.00 1,700 15 0.01 WBR 1.0 1,700 161 0.09 * 1,700 237 0.14 * N/S Movements 0.19 0.26E/W Movements 0.02 0.05Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.26 0.36LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A A AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR G-166 PROJECT:Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO:Existing Plus PrINTERSECTION:158 Harbor Blvd / Katella Ave MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2.0 3,400 125 0.04 * 3,400 148 0.04 NBT 3.0 5,100 537 0.11 5,100 867 0.17 *NBR 1.0 1,700 244 0.14 1,700 340 0.20 SBL 2.0 3,400 96 0.03 3,400 121 0.04 *SBT 3.0 5,100 641 0.13 * 5,100 711 0.14 SBR 1.0 1,700 151 0.09 1,700 171 0.10 EBL 2.0 3,400 24 0.01 3,400 22 0.01 EBT 3.0 5,100 823 0.16 * 5,100 914 0.18 *EBR 1.0 1,700 162 0.10 1,700 182 0.11 WBL 2.0 3,400 222 0.07 * 3,400 300 0.09 * WBT 3.0 5,100 608 0.12 5,100 1,292 0.25 WBR 1.0 1,700 132 0.08 1,700 161 0.09 N/S Movements 0.16 0.21E/W Movements 0.23 0.27 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.44 0.52LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A A PROJECT: Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO: Existing Plus PrINTERSECTION:173 Clementine St / Disney Way MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.0 1,700 64 0.04 * 1,700 118 0.07 *NBT 2.0 3,400 95 0.04 3,400 99 0.03 NBR 0.0 47 9 SBL 2.0 3,400 50 0.01 3,400 61 0.02 SBT 2.0 3,400 87 0.03 * 3,400 119 0.05 *SBR 0.0 14 61 EBL 1.0 1,700 39 0.02 1,700 132 0.08 *EBT 3.0 5,100 103 0.02 * 5,100 311 0.06 EBR 1.0 1,700 62 0.04 1,700 100 0.06 WBL 1.0 1,700 132 0.08 * 1,700 25 0.01 WBT 3.0 5,100 174 0.06 5,100 236 0.06 *WBR 0.0 137 70 N/S Movements 0.07 0.12E/W Movements 0.10 0.14Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.22 0.31LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A A AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR G-167 PROJECT:Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO:Existing Plus ProjINTERSECTION:174 Clementine St / Katella Ave MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.0 1,700 31 0.02 * 1,700 114 0.07 *NBT 1.0 1,700 49 0.03 1,700 116 0.07 NBR 1.0 1,700 95 0.06 1,700 259 0.15 * SBL 1.0 1,700 33 0.02 1,700 43 0.03 SBT 1.0 1,700 190 0.11 * 1,700 127 0.07 *SBR 1.0 1,700 77 0.05 1,700 123 0.07 EBL 2.0 3,400 175 0.05 3,400 236 0.07 *EBT 3.0 5,100 825 0.19 * 5,100 1,029 0.21 EBR 0.0 126 57 WBL 2.0 3,400 270 0.08 * 3,400 188 0.06 WBT 3.0 5,100 838 0.18 5,100 1,457 0.30 *WBR 0.0 59 92 N/S Movements 0.13 0.14E/W Movements 0.27 0.37 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.03Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.45 0.59LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A A PROJECT: Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO: Existing Plus ProjINTERSECTION:195 Anaheim Blvd / I-5 SB Ramps AM PEAK HOURMOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2.0 3,400 28 0.01 3,400 40 0.01 NBT 3.0 5,100 860 0.17 * 5,100 1,030 0.20 *NBR 0.0 11 6 SBL 2.0 3,400 548 0.16 * 3,400 557 0.16 * SBT 3.0 5,100 707 0.16 5,100 785 0.17 SBR 0.0 114 78 EBL 2.0 3,400 251 0.07 * 3,400 321 0.09 *EBT 4.0 6,800 111 0.03 6,800 224 0.06 EBR 0.0 82 203 WBL 0.0 0 0 WBT 3.0 5,100 132 0.03 * 5,100 268 0.05 *WBR 0.0 1 3 N/S Movements 0.33 0.37E/W Movements 0.10 0.15Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.48 0.56LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A A PM PEAK HOURAM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR G-168 PROJECT:Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO:Existing Plus PrINTERSECTION:196 I-5 SB Off Ramp / Disney Way MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.0 1,700 19 0.01 1,700 4 0.00 NBT 0.0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 *NBR 1.0 1,700 34 0.02 * 1,700 62 0.04 * SBL 1.3 2,210 273 0.12 * 2,210 282 0.13 *SBT 0.3 510 18 0.04 510 13 0.03 SBR 1.3 2,210 141 0.06 * 2,210 150 0.07 * EBL 0.0 0 * 0 EBT 3.0 5,100 188 0.04 5,100 404 0.08 *EBR 0.0 10 15 WBL 1.0 1,700 16 0.01 1,700 22 0.01 WBT 3.0 5,100 288 0.06 * 5,100 348 0.07 *WBR 0.0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.12 0.13E/W Movements 0.06 0.10 Rt. Turn Component 0.04 0.07Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.27 0.34LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A A PROJECT: Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO: Existing Plus PrINTERSECTION:197 Anaheim Blvd / Katella Ave MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2.0 3,400 117 0.03 3,400 166 0.05 *NBT 3.0 5,100 755 0.15 * 5,100 858 0.17 NBR 1.0 1,700 140 0.08 1,700 110 0.06 SBL 2.0 3,400 66 0.02 * 3,400 71 0.02 SBT 3.0 5,100 559 0.11 5,100 748 0.15 *SBR 1.0 1,700 169 0.10 1,700 190 0.11 EBL 2.0 3,400 145 0.04 * 3,400 173 0.05 *EBT 4.0 6,800 842 0.13 6,800 1,060 0.17 EBR 0.0 48 115 WBL 2.0 3,400 106 0.03 3,400 154 0.05 WBT 3.0 5,100 787 0.15 * 5,100 1,393 0.27 *WBR 1.0 1,700 29 0.02 1,700 57 0.03 N/S Movements 0.17 0.20E/W Movements 0.20 0.32Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.41 0.57LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A A AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOURAM PEAK HOUR G-169 PROJECT:Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO:Existing Plus ProjINTERSECTION:210 Manchester Ave/I-5 SB Ramps / Katella Ave MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 2,550 28 0.01 * 2,550 46 0.02 *NBT 0.0 0 0.00 0 0.00 NBR 1.5 2,550 397 0.16 * 2,550 303 0.12 * SBL 2.0 3,400 23 0.01 3,400 26 0.01 SBT 2.0 3,400 101 0.03 * 3,400 55 0.02 *SBR 1.0 1,700 6 0.00 1,700 5 0.00 EBL 0.0 0 0 *EBT 3.0 5,100 639 0.13 * 5,100 593 0.12 EBR 1.0 1,700 323 0.19 * 1,700 517 0.30 * WBL 2.0 3,400 126 0.04 * 3,400 296 0.09 WBT 3.0 5,100 818 0.16 5,100 1,491 0.29 *WBR 0.0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.04 0.03E/W Movements 0.16 0.29 Rt. Turn Component 0.17 0.20Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.43 0.58LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A A PROJECT: Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO: Existing Plus ProjINTERSECTION:211 Anaheim Way/I-5 NB Ramps / Katella Ave MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 2,550 370 0.15 * 2,550 454 0.18 NBT 3.5 5,950 432 0.10 5,950 1,174 0.20 *NBR 0.0 174 39 SBL 0.0 0 0 * SBT 0.0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 SBR 0.0 0 0 EBL 2.0 3,400 58 0.02 3,400 114 0.03 *EBT 3.0 5,100 992 0.19 * 5,100 817 0.16 EBR 0.0 0 0 WBL 0.0 0 * 0 WBT 4.0 6,800 710 0.10 6,800 1,513 0.22 *WBR 1.0 1,700 51 0.03 1,700 83 0.05 N/S Movements 0.15 0.20E/W Movements 0.19 0.26Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.39 0.51LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A A PM PEAK HOURAM PEAK HOUR AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR G-170 PROJECT:Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO:Existing Plus PrINTERSECTION:476 Anaheim GardenWalk / Disney Way MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.0 1,700 20 0.01 * 1,700 29 0.02 *NBT 0.0 0 0.00 0 0.00 NBR 1.0 1,700 29 0.02 1,700 68 0.04 SBL 0.0 0 0 SBT 0.0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 *SBR 0.0 0 0 EBL 0.0 6 1 EBT 3.0 5,100 169 0.04 * 5,100 212 0.05 *EBR 0.0 21 26 WBL 1.0 1,700 39 0.02 * 1,700 135 0.08 * WBT 3.0 5,100 212 0.04 5,100 371 0.07 WBR 0.0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.01 0.02E/W Movements 0.06 0.13 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.12 0.19LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A A PM PEAK HOURAM PEAK HOUR G-171 Existing Plus Project HCM LOS G-172 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 1: Harbor Blvd & I-5 NB Ramps 3/18/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT AM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 1 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 32 639 649 232 17 1472 Future Volume (veh/h) 32 639 649 232 17 1472 Number 3 18 2 12 1 6 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 34 680 698 0 18 1518 Adj No. of Lanes 123114 Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.93 0.93 0.97 0.97 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000 Cap, veh/h 451 805 2325 703 149 3718 Arrive On Green 0.28 0.28 1.00 0.00 0.09 0.64 Sat Flow, veh/h 1619 2890 4794 1445 1619 6086 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 34 680 698 0 18 1518Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1619 1445 1547 1445 1619 1462Q Serve(g_s), s 1.1 15.5 0.0 0.0 0.7 8.9Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.1 15.5 0.0 0.0 0.7 8.9Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 451 805 2325 703 149 3718V/C Ratio(X)0.08 0.84 0.30 0.00 0.12 0.41Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 451 805 2325 703 409 3718HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 18.6 23.8 0.0 0.0 29.2 6.3Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 7.8 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.3Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.5 7.1 0.1 0.0 0.3 3.7LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 18.6 31.6 0.3 0.0 29.3 6.6LnGrp LOS B C A C A Approach Vol, veh/h 714 698 1536Approach Delay, s/veh 31.0 0.3 6.9Approach LOS C A A Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.4 38.1 47.5 22.5Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 4.7 5.0 5.0 5.5Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 16 21.8 42.5 17.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.7 2.0 10.9 17.5Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 14.9 20.9 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 11.2HCM 2010 LOS B Notes G-173 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 2: Harbor Blvd & I-5 SB Ramps 3/18/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT AM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 3 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 164 300 23 681 854 667 Future Volume (veh/h) 164 300 23 681 854 667 Number 7 14 5 2 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 193 0 24 724 909 0 Adj No. of Lanes 211431 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000 Cap, veh/h 901 414 169 3669 2263 684 Arrive On Green 0.29 0.00 0.10 0.63 0.98 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 3141 1445 1619 6086 4794 1445 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 193 0 24 724 909 0Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1570 1445 1619 1462 1547 1445Q Serve(g_s), s 3.3 0.0 0.9 3.7 0.6 0.0Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.3 0.0 0.9 3.7 0.6 0.0Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 901 414 169 3669 2263 684V/C Ratio(X)0.21 0.00 0.14 0.20 0.40 0.00Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 942 434 386 3669 2263 684HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.92 0.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 19.0 0.0 28.5 5.5 0.5 0.0Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.4 0.0 0.4 1.5 0.3 0.0LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 19.0 0.0 28.7 5.7 0.9 0.0LnGrp LOS B C A A Approach Vol, veh/h 193 748 909Approach Delay, s/veh 19.0 6.4 0.9Approach LOS B A A Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 46.9 23.1 9.8 37.1Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.5 * 4.2 5.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 41.0 18.5 * 15 21.8Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.7 5.3 2.9 2.6Green Ext Time (p_c), s 15.1 0.4 0.0 11.0 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 5.0HCM 2010 LOS A Notes G-174 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 4: Harbor Blvd & Disney Way 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT AM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 1 1 0 76 0 161 45 613 88 165 803 3 Future Volume (veh/h) 1 1 0 76 0 161 45 613 88 165 803 3 Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.87 1.00 1.00 0.87 1.00 0.79 1.00 0.76 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 2 2 0 90 0 192 50 681 98 177 863 3 Adj No. of Lanes 020211130230 Peak Hour Factor 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.93 0.93 0.93 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000000000 Cap, veh/h 289 386 0 188 552 399 76 2062 289 255 2639 9 Arrive On Green 0.24 0.24 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.32 0.05 0.52 0.51 0.08 0.55 0.55 Sat Flow, veh/h 969 1686 0 3141 1700 1263 1619 3970 556 3141 4768 17 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 2 2 0 90 0 192 50 527 252 177 560 306Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1109 1470 0 1570 1700 1263 1619 1547 1432 1570 1547 1691Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.1 0.0 3.3 0.0 14.7 3.6 11.8 12.4 6.6 11.8 11.9Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.1 0.1 0.0 3.3 0.0 14.7 3.6 11.8 12.4 6.6 11.8 11.9Prop In Lane 0.89 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.39 1.00 0.01Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 322 352 0 188 552 399 76 1607 744 255 1712 936V/C Ratio(X)0.01 0.00 0.00 0.48 0.00 0.48 0.66 0.33 0.34 0.69 0.33 0.33Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 322 352 0 445 666 484 229 1607 744 445 1712 936HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 34.7 34.7 0.0 54.6 0.0 33.1 56.2 16.7 17.0 53.7 14.6 14.6Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.9 11.0 0.5 1.2 1.3 0.5 0.9Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.0 5.2 1.9 5.2 5.1 2.9 5.2 5.8LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 34.7 34.7 0.0 55.3 0.0 34.0 67.2 17.2 18.2 55.0 15.1 15.5LnGrp LOS C C E C E B B D B B Approach Vol, veh/h 4 282 829 1043Approach Delay, s/veh 34.7 40.8 20.5 22.0Approach LOS CDCC Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 123456 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 12.7 65.3 10.2 31.8 8.6 69.4 41.9Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.0 45.0 15.0 25.0 16.0 45.0 45.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.6 14.4 5.3 2.1 5.6 13.9 16.7Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 8.7 0.1 0.9 0.1 8.8 0.9 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 23.9HCM 2010 LOS C Notes G-175 Volume 4: Harbor Blvd & Disney Way 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT AM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 3 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Traffic Volume (vph)1 1 0 76 0 161 45 613 88 165 803 3 Future Volume (vph)1 1 0 76 0 161 45 613 88 165 803 3 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 227 133 592 267 Confl. Bikes (#/hr) Peak Hour Factor 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.93 0.93 0.93 Growth Factor 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Bus Blockages (#/hr)000000000000 Parking (#/hr) Mid-Block Traffic (%)0%0%0%0% Adj. Flow (vph)2 2 0 90 0 192 50 681 98 177 863 3 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 2 2 0 90 0 192 50 779 0 177 866 0 Intersection Summary G-176 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 5: Harbor Blvd & Katella Ave 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT AM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 24 823 162 222 608 132 125 537 244 96 641 151 Future Volume (veh/h) 24 823 162 222 608 132 125 537 244 96 641 151 Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.86 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.81 1.00 0.90 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 28 946 186 239 654 142 147 632 287 114 763 180 Adj No. of Lanes 231231231231 Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.84 0.84 0.84 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000000000 Cap, veh/h 419 1720 456 393 1720 481 248 1408 349 314 1507 419 Arrive On Green 0.13 0.37 0.37 0.12 0.37 0.37 0.08 0.30 0.30 0.10 0.32 0.32 Sat Flow, veh/h 3141 4692 1243 3141 4692 1311 3141 4692 1165 3141 4692 1305 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 28 946 186 239 654 142 147 632 287 114 763 180Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1570 1564 1243 1570 1564 1311 1570 1564 1165 1570 1564 1305Q Serve(g_s), s 0.9 19.2 13.4 8.6 12.3 9.2 5.4 13.1 19.3 4.1 15.8 8.9Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.9 19.2 13.4 8.6 12.3 9.2 5.4 13.1 19.3 4.1 15.8 8.9Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 419 1720 456 393 1720 481 248 1408 349 314 1507 419V/C Ratio(X)0.07 0.55 0.41 0.61 0.38 0.30 0.59 0.45 0.82 0.36 0.51 0.43Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 419 1720 456 393 1720 481 340 1408 349 340 1507 419HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 45.5 30.1 28.3 49.7 28.0 27.0 53.4 34.0 19.2 50.4 33.0 14.9Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 1.3 2.7 2.7 0.6 1.6 0.8 1.0 19.1 0.3 1.2 3.2Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.4 8.5 4.9 3.9 5.4 3.6 2.4 5.8 8.0 1.8 7.0 3.5LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 45.5 31.4 31.0 52.4 28.6 28.6 54.2 35.0 38.4 50.7 34.2 18.1LnGrp LOS DCCDCCDDDDCB Approach Vol, veh/h 1160 1035 1066 1057Approach Delay, s/veh 31.7 34.1 38.6 33.3Approach LOS CCDC Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 12345678Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 15.0 39.0 18.0 48.0 12.5 41.5 19.0 47.0Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 6.0 * 6 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.0 34.0 12.0 * 42 11.0 34.0 12.0 42.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.1 21.3 10.6 21.2 7.4 17.8 2.9 14.3Green Ext Time (p_c), s 1.6 2.4 0.1 5.8 0.1 2.8 3.9 3.9 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 34.4HCM 2010 LOS C Notes G-177 Volume 5: Harbor Blvd & Katella Ave 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT AM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 4 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Traffic Volume (vph)24 823 162 222 608 132 125 537 244 96 641 151 Future Volume (vph)24 823 162 222 608 132 125 537 244 96 641 151 Confl. Peds. (#/hr)171 113 194 104 Confl. Bikes (#/hr) Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.84 0.84 0.84 Growth Factor 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Bus Blockages (#/hr)000000000000 Parking (#/hr) Mid-Block Traffic (%)0%0%0%0% Adj. Flow (vph)28 946 186 239 654 142 147 632 287 114 763 180 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 28 946 186 239 654 142 147 632 287 114 763 180 Intersection Summary G-178 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 9: Zeyn St/I-5 SB Off Ramp & Disney Way/Manchester Ave 3/21/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT AM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)0 188 10 16 288 0 19 0 34 273 18 141 Future Volume (vph)0 188 10 16 288 0 19 0 34 273 18 141 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Total Lost time (s)4.7 5.1 5.1 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.91 0.95 Frt 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot)4607 1615 4641 1615 1445 1534 1467 1373 Flt Permitted 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm)4607 1615 4641 1615 1445 1534 1467 1373 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.77 0.77 0.77 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.89 0.89 0.89Adj. Flow (vph) 0 211 11 21 374 0 30 0 54 307 20 158RTOR Reduction (vph)070000004105107Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 215 0 21 374 0 30 0 14 172 167 36 Turn Type NA Split NA Prot Perm Split NA PermProtected Phases 4 3 3 2 6 6Permitted Phases 26Actuated Green, G (s) 10.7 9.5 9.5 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0Effective Green, g (s)10.7 9.5 9.5 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.12 0.12 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25Clearance Time (s)4.7 5.1 5.1 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0Vehicle Extension (s)2.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph)616 191 551 403 361 383 366 343v/s Ratio Prot c0.05 0.01 c0.08 c0.02 0.11 c0.11v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 0.03v/c Ratio 0.35 0.11 0.68 0.07 0.04 0.45 0.45 0.10Uniform Delay, d1 31.5 31.5 33.8 22.9 22.7 25.3 25.4 23.1Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Incremental Delay, d2 1.6 0.1 2.6 0.4 0.2 3.8 4.0 0.6Delay (s)33.0 31.6 36.4 23.3 22.9 29.1 29.4 23.7Level of Service C C D C CCCCApproach Delay (s)33.0 36.1 23.0 27.6Approach LOS CDCC Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 31.2 HCM 2000 Level of Service CHCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.34Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s)19.8Intersection Capacity Utilization 41.6% ICU Level of Service AAnalysis Period (min)15c Critical Lane Group G-179 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 10: Anaheim Blvd & Manchester Ave/Manchester Ave/I-5 SB On 3/18/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT AM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 9 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 251 111 82 0 132 1 28 860 11 548 707 114 Future Volume (veh/h) 251 111 82 0 132 1 28 860 11 548 707 114 Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 0 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 289 128 94 0 171 1 30 935 12 589 760 123 Adj No. of Lanes 240030130230 Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.77 0.77 0.77 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.93 0.93 0.93 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000000000 Cap, veh/h 338 991 326 0 397 2 60 2121 27 623 2479 398 Arrive On Green 0.11 0.23 0.23 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.04 0.45 0.45 0.20 0.61 0.61 Sat Flow, veh/h 3141 4386 1445 0 4914 28 1619 4723 61 3141 4032 647 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 289 128 94 0 111 61 30 612 335 589 582 301Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1570 1462 1445 0 1547 1695 1619 1547 1689 1570 1547 1586Q Serve(g_s), s 10.9 2.8 6.5 0.0 4.1 4.1 2.2 16.3 16.3 22.2 10.7 10.8Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 10.9 2.8 6.5 0.0 4.1 4.1 2.2 16.3 16.3 22.2 10.7 10.8Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.02 1.00 0.04 1.00 0.41Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 338 991 326 0 258 141 60 1389 759 623 1902 975V/C Ratio(X)0.86 0.13 0.29 0.00 0.43 0.43 0.50 0.44 0.44 0.95 0.31 0.31Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 361 1864 614 0 851 466 152 1389 759 623 1902 975HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 52.6 37.0 38.5 0.0 52.3 52.3 56.7 22.7 22.7 47.5 11.0 11.0Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 15.2 0.1 0.5 0.0 0.4 0.8 4.8 1.0 1.9 23.3 0.4 0.8Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 5.4 1.1 2.6 0.0 1.8 2.0 1.1 7.2 8.0 11.7 4.6 4.9LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 67.8 37.1 38.9 0.0 52.7 53.1 61.5 23.7 24.6 70.7 11.4 11.8LnGrp LOS E D D D D E C C E B B Approach Vol, veh/h 511 172 977 1472Approach Delay, s/veh 54.8 52.8 25.2 35.2Approach LOS DDCD Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 1 2 45678Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 29.0 58.9 32.1 9.1 78.8 17.1 15.0Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 5.2 5.0 5.0 * 4.7 5.0 * 4.2 5.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 24 30.0 51.0 * 11 43.0 * 14 33.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 24.2 18.3 8.5 4.2 12.8 12.9 6.1Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 9.3 2.1 0.0 19.4 0.1 2.0 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 36.2HCM 2010 LOS D Notes G-180 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 12: I-5 SB Ramps & Katella Ave 3/21/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT AM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)0 639 323 126 818 0 28 0 397 23 101 6 Future Volume (vph)0 639 323 126 818 0 28 0 397 23 101 6 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Total Lost time (s)5.3 4.5 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.6 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.97 0.91 0.95 0.91 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot)4641 1445 3133 4641 1534 1318 1373 1615 3230 1445 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm)4641 1445 3133 4641 1534 1318 1373 1615 3230 1445 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.88 0.88 0.88Adj. Flow (vph) 0 702 355 140 909 0 35 0 490 26 115 7RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 308 0000212212005Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 702 47 140 909 0 31 37 33 26 115 2 Turn Type NA Over Prot NA Split NA Perm Split NA PermProtected Phases 2716 77 88Permitted Phases 78Actuated Green, G (s) 25.2 12.0 12.6 42.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 21.6 21.6 21.6Effective Green, g (s)25.2 12.0 12.6 42.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 21.6 21.6 21.6Actuated g/C Ratio 0.28 0.13 0.14 0.47 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.24 0.24 0.24Clearance Time (s)5.3 4.5 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.6 4.6 4.6Vehicle Extension (s)4.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph)1299 192 438 2165 204 175 183 387 775 346v/s Ratio Prot c0.15 c0.03 0.04 c0.20 0.02 0.03 0.02 c0.04v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 0.00v/c Ratio 0.54 0.25 0.32 0.42 0.15 0.21 0.18 0.07 0.15 0.00Uniform Delay, d1 27.5 34.9 34.8 15.9 34.5 34.8 34.6 26.4 27.0 26.0Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.41 0.71 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Incremental Delay, d2 1.6 3.0 0.1 0.2 1.6 2.7 2.1 0.0 0.0 0.0Delay (s)29.1 38.0 49.3 11.5 36.1 37.5 36.7 26.4 27.0 26.0Level of Service C D D B DDDCCCApproach Delay (s)32.1 16.6 37.1 26.8Approach LOS C B D C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 26.9 HCM 2000 Level of Service CHCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.36Actuated Cycle Length (s) 90.0 Sum of lost time (s)18.6Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.9% ICU Level of Service CAnalysis Period (min)15c Critical Lane Group G-181 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 13: I-5 NB Ramps & Katella Ave 3/21/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT AM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)58 992 0 0 710 51 370 432 174 0 0 0 Future Volume (vph)58 992 0 0 710 51 370 432 174 0 0 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Total Lost time (s)4.7 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.86 1.00 0.81 0.81 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.97 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (prot)3133 4641 5848 1445 1308 5265 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (perm)3133 4641 5848 1445 1308 5265 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.96 0.96 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00Adj. Flow (vph) 70 1195 0 0 845 61 385 450 181 0 0 0RTOR Reduction (vph)00000370160000Lane Group Flow (vph) 70 1195 0 0 845 24 204 796 0000 Turn Type Prot NA NA Perm Split NAProtected Phases 5 2 6 8 8Permitted Phases 6Actuated Green, G (s) 9.6 50.4 36.1 36.1 27.6 27.6Effective Green, g (s) 9.6 50.4 36.1 36.1 27.6 27.6Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.56 0.40 0.40 0.31 0.31Clearance Time (s)4.7 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.2 2.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 334 2598 2345 579 401 1614v/s Ratio Prot 0.02 c0.26 0.14 c0.16 0.15v/s Ratio Perm 0.02v/c Ratio 0.21 0.46 0.36 0.04 0.51 0.49Uniform Delay, d1 36.7 11.7 18.9 16.4 25.6 25.5Progression Factor 1.00 1.77 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.5 0.4 0.1 0.5 0.1Delay (s)36.9 21.3 19.3 16.6 26.2 25.6Level of Service D C B B C CApproach Delay (s)22.1 19.1 25.7 0.0Approach LOS C B C A Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 22.4 HCM 2000 Level of Service CHCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.51Actuated Cycle Length (s) 90.0 Sum of lost time (s)16.7Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.9% ICU Level of Service BAnalysis Period (min)15c Critical Lane Group G-182 HCM 2010 TWSC 14: Harbor Blvd & North Driveway 3/21/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT AM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.5 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 63 683 111 0 879Future Vol, veh/h 0 63 683 111 0 879Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free FreeRT Channelized - None - None - NoneStorage Length - 0 - -- -Veh in Median Storage, # 0 -0 -- 0Grade, %0 -0 -- 0Peak Hour Factor 100 100 100 100 100 100Heavy Vehicles, %0 0 0 0 0 0Mvmt Flow 0 63 683 111 0 879 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1091 397 0 0 794 0 Stage 1 739 -- -- - Stage 2 352 -- -- -Critical Hdwy 5.7 7.1 - - 5.3 -Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.6 -- -- -Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6 -- -- -Follow-up Hdwy 3.8 3.9 - - 3.1 -Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 284 519 - - 498 - Stage 1 352 -- -- - Stage 2 631 -- -- -Platoon blocked, %- --Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 284 519 - - 498 -Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 284 -- -- - Stage 1 352 -- -- - Stage 2 631 -- -- - Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 12.9 0 0HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h)- - 519 498 -HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.121 - -HCM Control Delay (s) - - 12.9 0 -HCM Lane LOS - - B A -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.4 0 - G-183 HCM 2010 TWSC 15: Harbor Blvd & South Driveway 3/21/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT AM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 2 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.2 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 27 771 0 0 879Future Vol, veh/h 0 27 771 0 0 879Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free FreeRT Channelized - None - None - NoneStorage Length - 0 - -- -Veh in Median Storage, # 0 -0 -- 0Grade, %0 -0 -- 0Peak Hour Factor 100 100 100 100 100 100Heavy Vehicles, %0 0 0 0 0 0Mvmt Flow 0 27 771 0 0 879 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1123 386 0 0 771 0 Stage 1 771 -- -- - Stage 2 352 -- -- -Critical Hdwy 5.7 7.1 - - 5.3 -Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.6 -- -- -Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6 -- -- -Follow-up Hdwy 3.8 3.9 - - 3.1 -Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 273 528 - - 511 - Stage 1 337 -- -- - Stage 2 631 -- -- -Platoon blocked, %- --Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 273 528 - - 511 -Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 273 -- -- - Stage 1 337 -- -- - Stage 2 631 -- -- - Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 12.2 0 0HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h)- - 528 511 -HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.051 - -HCM Control Delay (s) - - 12.2 0 -HCM Lane LOS - - B A -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.2 0 - G-184 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 1: Harbor Blvd & I-5 NB Ramps 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT PM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 1 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 33 673 1179 412 43 1247 Future Volume (veh/h) 33 673 1179 412 43 1247 Number 3 18 2 12 1 6 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 38 765 1254 0 47 1370 Adj No. of Lanes 123114 Peak Hour Factor 0.88 0.88 0.94 0.94 0.91 0.91 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000 Cap, veh/h 439 784 2076 626 247 3759 Arrive On Green 0.27 0.27 0.89 0.00 0.15 0.64 Sat Flow, veh/h 1619 2890 4794 1445 1619 6086 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 38 765 1254 0 47 1370Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1619 1445 1547 1445 1619 1462Q Serve(g_s), s 1.2 18.4 4.3 0.0 1.8 7.6Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.2 18.4 4.3 0.0 1.8 7.6Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 439 784 2076 626 247 3759V/C Ratio(X)0.09 0.98 0.60 0.00 0.19 0.36Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 439 784 2076 626 393 3759HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.92 0.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 19.0 25.3 2.3 0.0 25.9 5.8Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 25.9 1.2 0.0 0.1 0.3Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.6 10.0 1.6 0.0 0.8 3.1LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 19.1 51.2 3.5 0.0 26.0 6.1LnGrp LOS B D A C A Approach Vol, veh/h 803 1254 1417Approach Delay, s/veh 49.7 3.5 6.8Approach LOS D A A Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 13.7 34.3 48.0 22.0Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 4.7 5.0 5.0 5.5Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 15 23.0 15.0 16.5Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.8 6.3 9.6 20.4Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 14.2 5.0 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 15.5HCM 2010 LOS B Notes G-185 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 2: Harbor Blvd & I-5 SB Ramps 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT PM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 3 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 252 311 75 1381 655 598 Future Volume (veh/h) 252 311 75 1381 655 598 Number 7 14 5 2 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 283 0 84 1552 712 0 Adj No. of Lanes 211431 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000 Cap, veh/h 917 422 319 3640 1810 543 Arrive On Green 0.29 0.00 0.20 0.62 0.78 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 3141 1445 1619 6086 4794 1445 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 283 0 84 1552 712 0Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1570 1445 1619 1462 1547 1445Q Serve(g_s), s 4.9 0.0 3.1 9.5 3.4 0.0Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.9 0.0 3.1 9.5 3.4 0.0Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 917 422 319 3640 1810 543V/C Ratio(X)0.31 0.00 0.26 0.43 0.39 0.00Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 942 434 386 3640 1810 543HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.94 0.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 19.3 0.0 23.8 6.8 5.1 0.0Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.1 0.0 1.4 3.9 1.4 0.0LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 19.4 0.0 24.0 7.2 5.7 0.0LnGrp LOS B C A A Approach Vol, veh/h 283 1636 712Approach Delay, s/veh 19.4 8.0 5.7Approach LOS B A A Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 46.6 23.4 16.3 30.3Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.5 * 4.2 5.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 41.0 18.5 * 15 21.8Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 11.5 6.9 5.1 5.4Green Ext Time (p_c), s 20.4 0.6 0.1 13.0 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 8.6HCM 2010 LOS A Notes G-186 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 4: Harbor Blvd & Disney Way 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT PM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 2 23 3 145 15 237 68 957 106 163 814 5 Future Volume (veh/h) 2 23 3 145 15 237 68 957 106 163 814 5 Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.91 0.81 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.81 1.00 0.80 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 3 29 4 153 16 249 80 1126 125 173 866 5 Adj No. of Lanes 020211130230 Peak Hour Factor 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000000000 Cap, veh/h 69 557 73 256 558 422 113 2135 237 251 2505 14 Arrive On Green 0.22 0.22 0.21 0.08 0.33 0.32 0.07 0.52 0.51 0.08 0.53 0.52 Sat Flow, veh/h 156 2513 329 3141 1700 1319 1619 4129 458 3141 4754 27 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 19 0 17 153 16 249 80 843 408 173 563 308Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1600 0 1398 1570 1700 1319 1619 1547 1493 1570 1547 1687Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 1.2 5.6 0.8 19.0 5.8 21.7 21.9 6.4 12.6 12.7Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.1 0.0 1.2 5.6 0.8 19.0 5.8 21.7 21.9 6.4 12.6 12.7Prop In Lane 0.16 0.24 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.31 1.00 0.02Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 389 0 310 256 558 422 113 1600 772 251 1631 889V/C Ratio(X)0.05 0.00 0.05 0.60 0.03 0.59 0.71 0.53 0.53 0.69 0.35 0.35Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 394 0 315 445 666 506 229 1600 772 445 1631 889HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 36.8 0.0 36.9 53.2 27.3 34.2 54.6 19.2 19.4 53.8 16.4 16.4Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.8 0.0 1.3 9.3 1.2 2.6 1.3 0.6 1.1Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.5 0.0 0.5 2.5 0.4 7.0 2.9 9.5 9.5 2.8 5.5 6.2LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 36.8 0.0 37.0 54.0 27.4 35.5 63.9 20.5 22.0 55.0 17.0 17.5LnGrp LOS D DDCDECCEBB Approach Vol, veh/h 36 418 1331 1044Approach Delay, s/veh 36.9 42.0 23.5 23.4Approach LOS DDCC Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 123456 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 12.6 65.1 12.8 29.6 11.4 66.2 42.4Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.0 45.0 15.0 25.0 16.0 45.0 45.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.4 23.9 7.6 3.2 7.8 14.7 21.0Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 10.6 0.2 1.3 0.1 12.5 1.4 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 26.4HCM 2010 LOS C Notes G-187 Volume 4: Harbor Blvd & Disney Way 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT PM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 3 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Traffic Volume (vph)2 23 3 145 15 237 68 957 106 163 814 5 Future Volume (vph)2 23 3 145 15 237 68 957 106 163 814 5 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 135 93 368 184 Confl. Bikes (#/hr)33 Peak Hour Factor 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.94 0.94 0.94 Growth Factor 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Bus Blockages (#/hr)000000000000 Parking (#/hr) Mid-Block Traffic (%)0%0%0%0% Adj. Flow (vph)3 29 4 153 16 249 80 1126 125 173 866 5 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 3 33 0 153 16 249 80 1251 0 173 871 0 Intersection Summary G-188 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 5: Harbor Blvd & Katella Ave 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT PM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 7 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 22 914 182 300 1292 161 148 867 340 121 711 171 Future Volume (veh/h) 22 914 182 300 1292 161 148 867 340 121 711 171 Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.80 1.00 0.92 1.00 0.87 1.00 0.78 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 23 962 192 330 1420 177 163 953 374 139 817 197 Adj No. of Lanes 231231231231 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.87 0.87 0.87 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000000000 Cap, veh/h 320 1525 377 451 1720 490 265 1408 375 413 1628 390 Arrive On Green 0.10 0.32 0.32 0.14 0.37 0.37 0.08 0.30 0.30 0.13 0.35 0.35 Sat Flow, veh/h 3141 4692 1160 3141 4692 1335 3141 4692 1250 3141 4692 1125 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 23 962 192 330 1420 177 163 953 374 139 817 197Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1570 1564 1160 1570 1564 1335 1570 1564 1250 1570 1564 1125Q Serve(g_s), s 0.8 20.9 12.1 12.1 33.0 11.6 6.0 21.4 35.9 4.8 16.5 11.9Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.8 20.9 12.1 12.1 33.0 11.6 6.0 21.4 35.9 4.8 16.5 11.9Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 320 1525 377 451 1720 490 265 1408 375 413 1628 390V/C Ratio(X)0.07 0.63 0.51 0.73 0.83 0.36 0.61 0.68 1.00 0.34 0.50 0.50Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 340 1525 377 471 1720 490 393 1408 375 413 1628 390HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 48.8 34.4 18.5 49.2 34.5 27.7 53.0 36.9 42.0 47.4 31.0 15.9Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 2.0 4.9 5.5 4.7 2.1 0.9 2.6 45.8 0.2 1.1 4.6Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.3 9.3 4.3 5.6 14.9 4.6 2.6 9.6 17.1 2.1 7.3 4.2LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 48.8 36.4 23.4 54.7 39.2 29.8 53.9 39.5 87.8 47.5 32.1 20.5LnGrp LOS DDCDDCDDFDCC Approach Vol, veh/h 1177 1927 1490 1153Approach Delay, s/veh 34.5 41.0 53.2 32.0Approach LOS CDDC Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 12345678Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 18.8 39.0 20.2 42.0 13.1 44.6 15.2 47.0Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.0 34.0 15.0 37.0 13.0 34.0 10.0 42.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.8 37.9 14.1 22.9 8.0 18.5 2.8 35.0Green Ext Time (p_c), s 1.4 0.0 0.2 5.0 0.2 3.2 0.9 4.3 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 41.0HCM 2010 LOS D G-189 Volume 5: Harbor Blvd & Katella Ave 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT PM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 4 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Traffic Volume (vph)22 914 182 300 1292 161 148 867 340 121 711 171 Future Volume (vph)22 914 182 300 1292 161 148 867 340 121 711 171 Confl. Peds. (#/hr)214 93 135 256 Confl. Bikes (#/hr) Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.87 0.87 0.87 Growth Factor 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Bus Blockages (#/hr)000000000000 Parking (#/hr) Mid-Block Traffic (%)0%0%0%0% Adj. Flow (vph)23 962 192 330 1420 177 163 953 374 139 817 197 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 23 962 192 330 1420 177 163 953 374 139 817 197 Intersection Summary G-190 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 9: Zeyn St/I-5 SB Off Ramp & Disney Way/Manchester Ave 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT PM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)0 404 15 22 348 0 4 0 62 282 13 150 Future Volume (vph)0 404 15 22 348 0 4 0 62 282 13 150 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Total Lost time (s)4.7 5.1 5.1 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.91 0.95 Frt 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot)4616 1615 4641 1615 1445 1534 1465 1373 Flt Permitted 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm)4616 1615 4641 1615 1445 1534 1465 1373 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.87 0.87 0.87Adj. Flow (vph) 0 459 17 26 405 0 7 0 109 324 15 172RTOR Reduction (vph)050000008205116Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 471 0 26 405 0 7 0 27 178 174 39 Turn Type NA Split NA Prot Perm Split NA PermProtected Phases 4 3 3 2 6 6Permitted Phases 26Actuated Green, G (s) 10.6 9.6 9.6 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0Effective Green, g (s)10.6 9.6 9.6 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.12 0.12 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25Clearance Time (s)4.7 5.1 5.1 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0Vehicle Extension (s)2.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph)611 193 556 403 361 383 366 343v/s Ratio Prot c0.10 0.02 c0.09 0.00 0.12 c0.12v/s Ratio Perm c0.02 0.03v/c Ratio 0.77 0.13 0.73 0.02 0.08 0.46 0.47 0.11Uniform Delay, d1 33.5 31.5 33.9 22.6 22.9 25.5 25.5 23.2Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Incremental Delay, d2 9.1 0.1 4.0 0.1 0.4 4.0 4.4 0.7Delay (s)42.6 31.6 38.0 22.7 23.3 29.5 29.9 23.8Level of Service D C D C CCCCApproach Delay (s)42.6 37.6 23.3 27.9Approach LOS DDCC Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 34.8 HCM 2000 Level of Service CHCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.43Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s)19.8Intersection Capacity Utilization 46.3% ICU Level of Service AAnalysis Period (min)15c Critical Lane Group G-191 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 10: Anaheim Blvd & Manchester Ave/Manchester Ave/I-5 SB On 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT PM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 8 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 321 224 203 0 268 3 40 1030 6 557 785 78 Future Volume (veh/h) 321 224 203 0 268 3 40 1030 6 557 785 78 Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 0 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 387 270 245 0 308 3 47 1198 7 586 826 82 Adj No. of Lanes 240030130230 Peak Hour Factor 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000000000 Cap, veh/h 361 1167 384 0 550 5 75 1947 11 623 2428 240 Arrive On Green 0.12 0.27 0.27 0.00 0.12 0.12 0.05 0.41 0.41 0.20 0.57 0.57 Sat Flow, veh/h 3141 4386 1445 0 4893 46 1619 4761 28 3141 4295 424 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 387 270 245 0 201 110 47 778 427 586 594 314Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1570 1462 1445 0 1547 1692 1619 1547 1695 1570 1547 1625Q Serve(g_s), s 13.8 5.8 18.0 0.0 7.4 7.4 3.4 23.8 23.8 22.1 12.4 12.5Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 13.8 5.8 18.0 0.0 7.4 7.4 3.4 23.8 23.8 22.1 12.4 12.5Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.03 1.00 0.02 1.00 0.26Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 361 1167 384 0 359 196 75 1265 693 623 1749 919V/C Ratio(X)1.07 0.23 0.64 0.00 0.56 0.56 0.63 0.62 0.62 0.94 0.34 0.34Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 361 1864 614 0 851 465 152 1265 693 623 1749 919HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 53.1 34.4 38.9 0.0 50.1 50.1 56.2 28.0 28.0 47.4 14.0 14.1Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 61.3 0.1 1.3 0.0 0.5 0.9 6.3 2.2 4.1 22.3 0.5 1.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 9.0 2.3 7.3 0.0 3.2 3.5 1.7 10.6 11.9 11.5 5.4 5.8LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 114.4 34.5 40.2 0.0 50.6 51.1 62.5 30.3 32.1 69.7 14.6 15.1LnGrp LOS F C D D D E C C E B B Approach Vol, veh/h 902 311 1252 1494Approach Delay, s/veh 70.3 50.8 32.1 36.3Approach LOS E D C D Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 1 2 45678Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 29.0 54.1 36.9 10.2 72.8 18.0 18.9Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 5.2 5.0 5.0 * 4.7 5.0 * 4.2 5.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 24 30.0 51.0 * 11 43.0 * 14 33.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 24.1 25.8 20.0 5.4 14.5 15.8 9.4Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 3.8 4.8 0.0 21.3 0.0 4.5 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 43.9HCM 2010 LOS D Notes G-192 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 12: I-5 SB Ramps & Katella Ave 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT PM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)0 593 517 296 1491 0 46 0 303 26 55 5 Future Volume (vph)0 593 517 296 1491 0 46 0 303 26 55 5 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Total Lost time (s)5.3 4.5 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.6 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.97 0.91 0.95 0.91 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot)4641 1445 3133 4641 1534 1320 1373 1615 3230 1445 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm)4641 1445 3133 4641 1534 1320 1373 1615 3230 1445 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.80 0.80 0.80Adj. Flow (vph) 0 618 539 315 1586 0 52 0 344 32 69 6RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 467 0000146152005Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 618 72 315 1586 0 47 28 23 33 69 1 Turn Type NA Over Prot NA Split NA Perm Split NA PermProtected Phases 2716 77 88Permitted Phases 78Actuated Green, G (s) 25.2 12.0 12.6 42.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 21.6 21.6 21.6Effective Green, g (s)25.2 12.0 12.6 42.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 21.6 21.6 21.6Actuated g/C Ratio 0.28 0.13 0.14 0.47 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.24 0.24 0.24Clearance Time (s)5.3 4.5 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.6 4.6 4.6Vehicle Extension (s)4.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph)1299 192 438 2165 204 176 183 387 775 346v/s Ratio Prot 0.13 c0.05 0.10 c0.34 0.03 0.02 0.02 c0.02v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 0.00v/c Ratio 0.48 0.37 0.72 0.73 0.23 0.16 0.13 0.09 0.09 0.00Uniform Delay, d1 26.9 35.6 37.0 19.4 34.9 34.5 34.4 26.5 26.6 26.0Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.21 1.46 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Incremental Delay, d2 1.3 5.5 2.2 0.7 2.6 1.9 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0Delay (s)28.2 41.1 46.9 29.1 37.5 36.4 35.8 26.6 26.6 26.0Level of Service CDDC DDDCCCApproach Delay (s) 34.2 32.0 36.3 26.5Approach LOS CCDC Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 33.0 HCM 2000 Level of Service CHCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.52Actuated Cycle Length (s) 90.0 Sum of lost time (s)18.6Intersection Capacity Utilization 84.4% ICU Level of Service EAnalysis Period (min)15c Critical Lane Group G-193 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 13: I-5 NB Ramps & Katella Ave 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT PM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 114 817 0 0 1513 83 454 1174 39 0 0 0 Future Volume (vph) 114 817 0 0 1513 83 454 1174 39 0 0 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Total Lost time (s)4.7 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.86 1.00 0.81 0.81 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot)3133 4641 5848 1445 1308 5457 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm)3133 4641 5848 1445 1308 5457 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.93 0.93 0.93 1.00 1.00 1.00Adj. Flow (vph) 131 939 0 0 1663 91 488 1262 42 0 0 0RTOR Reduction (vph)0000064040000Lane Group Flow (vph) 131 939 0 0 1663 27 346 1442 0000 Turn Type Prot NA NA Perm Split NAProtected Phases 5 2 6 8 8Permitted Phases 6Actuated Green, G (s) 12.0 43.6 26.9 26.9 34.4 34.4Effective Green, g (s) 12.0 43.6 26.9 26.9 34.4 34.4Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.48 0.30 0.30 0.38 0.38Clearance Time (s)4.7 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.2 2.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 417 2248 1747 431 499 2085v/s Ratio Prot 0.04 c0.20 c0.28 c0.26 0.26v/s Ratio Perm 0.02v/c Ratio 0.31 0.42 0.95 0.06 0.69 0.69Uniform Delay, d1 35.3 15.0 30.9 22.5 23.4 23.3Progression Factor 1.20 1.55 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.5 12.8 0.3 3.5 0.9Delay (s)42.4 23.8 43.7 22.8 26.9 24.2Level of Service D C DCCCApproach Delay (s)26.0 42.6 24.7 0.0Approach LOS C D C A Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 31.8 HCM 2000 Level of Service CHCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.75Actuated Cycle Length (s) 90.0 Sum of lost time (s)16.7Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.9% ICU Level of Service CAnalysis Period (min)15c Critical Lane Group G-194 HCM 2010 TWSC 14: Harbor Blvd & North Driveway 3/21/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT PM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.5 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 70 1061 111 0 962Future Vol, veh/h 0 70 1061 111 0 962Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free FreeRT Channelized - None - None - NoneStorage Length - 0 - -- -Veh in Median Storage, # 0 -0 -- 0Grade, %0 -0 -- 0Peak Hour Factor 100 100 100 100 100 100Heavy Vehicles, %0 0 0 0 0 0Mvmt Flow 0 70 1061 111 0 962 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1502 586 0 0 1172 0 Stage 1 1117 -- -- - Stage 2 385 -- -- -Critical Hdwy 5.7 7.1 - - 5.3 -Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.6 -- -- -Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6 -- -- -Follow-up Hdwy 3.8 3.9 - - 3.1 -Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 175 393 - - 328 - Stage 1 208 -- -- - Stage 2 607 -- -- -Platoon blocked, %- --Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 175 393 - - 328 -Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 175 -- -- - Stage 1 208 -- -- - Stage 2 607 -- -- - Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 16.1 0 0HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h)- - 393 328 -HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.178 - -HCM Control Delay (s) - - 16.1 0 -HCM Lane LOS - - C A -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.6 0 - G-195 HCM 2010 TWSC 15: Harbor Blvd & South Driveway 3/21/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT PM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 2 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.2 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 30 1142 0 0 962Future Vol, veh/h 0 30 1142 0 0 962Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free FreeRT Channelized - None - None - NoneStorage Length - 0 - -- -Veh in Median Storage, # 0 -0 -- 0Grade, %0 -0 -- 0Peak Hour Factor 100 100 100 100 100 100Heavy Vehicles, %0 0 0 0 0 0Mvmt Flow 0 30 1142 0 0 962 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1527 571 0 0 1142 0 Stage 1 1142 -- -- - Stage 2 385 -- -- -Critical Hdwy 5.7 7.1 - - 5.3 -Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.6 -- -- -Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6 -- -- -Follow-up Hdwy 3.8 3.9 - - 3.1 -Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 170 401 - - 340 - Stage 1 201 -- -- - Stage 2 607 -- -- -Platoon blocked, %- --Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 170 401 - - 340 -Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 170 -- -- - Stage 1 201 -- -- - Stage 2 607 -- -- - Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 14.7 0 0HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h)- - 401 340 -HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.075 - -HCM Control Delay (s) - - 14.7 0 -HCM Lane LOS - - B A -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.2 0 - G-196 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 4: Harbor Blvd & Disney Way 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT WEEKEND Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 3 422 2 125 31 171 86 770 126 250 820 12 Future Volume (veh/h) 3 422 2 125 31 171 86 770 126 250 820 12 Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.88 0.71 1.00 0.88 1.00 0.77 1.00 0.72 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 6 879 4 158 39 216 93 837 137 284 932 14 Adj No. of Lanes 020211130230 Peak Hour Factor 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.88 0.88 0.88 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000000000 Cap, veh/h 32 722 3 261 566 424 128 1835 295 360 2399 36 Arrive On Green 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.08 0.33 0.33 0.08 0.48 0.47 0.11 0.51 0.50 Sat Flow, veh/h 8 3209 15 3141 1700 1272 1619 3845 618 3141 4679 70 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 466 0 423 158 39 216 93 671 303 284 616 330Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1694 0 1537 1570 1700 1272 1619 1547 1369 1570 1547 1655Q Serve(g_s), s 10.1 0.0 27.0 5.8 1.9 16.4 6.7 17.4 17.9 10.6 14.5 14.6Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 27.0 0.0 27.0 5.8 1.9 16.4 6.7 17.4 17.9 10.6 14.5 14.6Prop In Lane 0.01 0.01 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.45 1.00 0.04Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 412 0 346 261 566 424 128 1477 653 360 1586 849V/C Ratio(X)1.13 0.00 1.22 0.60 0.07 0.51 0.73 0.45 0.46 0.79 0.39 0.39Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 412 0 346 445 666 498 229 1477 653 445 1586 849HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 47.5 0.0 46.5 53.1 27.3 32.1 54.0 20.9 21.2 51.7 17.8 17.8Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 85.8 0.0 123.1 0.8 0.1 0.9 9.1 1.0 2.4 5.9 0.7 1.3Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 23.4 0.0 23.3 2.6 0.9 5.9 3.3 7.6 7.2 4.9 6.3 6.9LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 133.3 0.0 169.6 53.9 27.4 33.1 63.0 21.9 23.6 57.6 18.5 19.2LnGrp LOS F F D C C E C C E B B Approach Vol, veh/h 889 413 1067 1230Approach Delay, s/veh 150.6 40.5 26.0 27.7Approach LOS F D C C Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 123456 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 16.8 60.3 13.0 30.0 12.5 64.5 43.0Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.0 45.0 15.0 25.0 16.0 45.0 45.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 12.6 19.9 7.8 29.0 8.7 16.6 18.4Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 10.3 0.2 0.0 0.2 10.8 5.2 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 59.0HCM 2010 LOS E Notes G-197 Volume 4: Harbor Blvd & Disney Way 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT WEEKEND Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 3 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Traffic Volume (vph)3 422 2 125 31 171 86 770 126 250 820 12 Future Volume (vph)3 422 2 125 31 171 86 770 126 250 820 12 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 227 133 592 267 Confl. Bikes (#/hr)33 Peak Hour Factor 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.88 0.88 0.88 Growth Factor 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Bus Blockages (#/hr)000000000000 Parking (#/hr) Mid-Block Traffic (%)0%0%0%0% Adj. Flow (vph)6 879 4 158 39 216 93 837 137 284 932 14 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 6 883 0 158 39 216 93 974 0 284 946 0 Intersection Summary G-198 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 5: Harbor Blvd & Katella Ave 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT WEEKEND Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 297 875 178 307 890 167 200 558 219 120 668 277 Future Volume (veh/h) 297 875 178 307 890 167 200 558 219 120 668 277 Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.80 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.88 1.00 0.78 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 316 931 189 334 967 182 215 600 235 130 726 301 Adj No. of Lanes 231231231231 Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000000000 Cap, veh/h 419 1525 377 419 1525 426 314 1564 423 340 1604 383 Arrive On Green 0.13 0.32 0.32 0.13 0.32 0.32 0.10 0.33 0.33 0.11 0.34 0.34 Sat Flow, veh/h 3141 4692 1160 3141 4692 1310 3141 4692 1269 3141 4692 1120 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 316 931 189 334 967 182 215 600 235 130 726 301Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1570 1564 1160 1570 1564 1310 1570 1564 1269 1570 1564 1120Q Serve(g_s), s 11.6 20.1 11.5 12.4 21.0 13.1 7.9 11.7 18.2 4.6 14.5 19.5Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 11.6 20.1 11.5 12.4 21.0 13.1 7.9 11.7 18.2 4.6 14.5 19.5Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 419 1525 377 419 1525 426 314 1564 423 340 1604 383V/C Ratio(X)0.75 0.61 0.50 0.80 0.63 0.43 0.69 0.38 0.56 0.38 0.45 0.79Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 419 1525 377 419 1525 426 340 1564 423 340 1604 383HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 50.1 34.1 17.3 50.4 34.4 31.7 52.2 30.6 32.7 49.8 30.8 16.0Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 7.6 1.8 4.7 10.4 2.0 3.1 3.9 0.7 5.2 0.3 0.9 15.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 5.5 8.9 4.2 6.0 9.3 5.1 3.6 5.2 6.9 2.0 6.4 7.6LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 57.7 35.9 22.0 60.8 36.5 34.9 56.1 31.3 37.9 50.0 31.7 31.0LnGrp LOS E D C E D C E CDDCC Approach Vol, veh/h 1436 1483 1050 1157Approach Delay, s/veh 38.9 41.7 37.9 33.6Approach LOS DDDC Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 12345678Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 16.0 43.0 19.0 42.0 15.0 44.0 19.0 42.0Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.0 38.0 13.0 37.0 11.0 38.0 13.0 37.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.6 20.2 14.4 22.1 9.9 21.5 13.6 23.0Green Ext Time (p_c), s 1.7 2.3 0.0 5.0 0.1 3.4 0.0 4.8 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 38.3HCM 2010 LOS D G-199 Volume 5: Harbor Blvd & Katella Ave 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT WEEKEND Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 4 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Traffic Volume (vph) 297 875 178 307 890 167 200 558 219 120 668 277 Future Volume (vph) 297 875 178 307 890 167 200 558 219 120 668 277 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 214 101 135 256 Confl. Bikes (#/hr) Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.92 0.92 0.92 Growth Factor 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Bus Blockages (#/hr)000000000000 Parking (#/hr) Mid-Block Traffic (%)0%0%0%0% Adj. Flow (vph)316 931 189 334 967 182 215 600 235 130 726 301 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 316 931 189 334 967 182 215 600 235 130 726 301 Intersection Summary G-200 HCM 2010 TWSC 14: Harbor Blvd & North Driveway 3/21/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT WEEKEND Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.4 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 170 812 117 0 947Future Vol, veh/h 0 170 812 117 0 947Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free FreeRT Channelized - None - None - NoneStorage Length - 0 - -- -Veh in Median Storage, # 0 -0 -- 0Grade, %0 -0 -- 0Peak Hour Factor 100 100 100 100 100 100Heavy Vehicles, %0 0 0 0 0 0Mvmt Flow 0 170 812 117 0 947 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1250 465 0 0 929 0 Stage 1 871 -- -- - Stage 2 379 -- -- -Critical Hdwy 5.7 7.1 - - 5.3 -Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.6 -- -- -Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6 -- -- -Follow-up Hdwy 3.8 3.9 - - 3.1 -Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 236 470 - - 430 - Stage 1 293 -- -- - Stage 2 611 -- -- -Platoon blocked, %- --Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 236 470 - - 430 -Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 236 -- -- - Stage 1 293 -- -- - Stage 2 611 -- -- - Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 16.9 0 0HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h)- - 470 430 -HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.362 - -HCM Control Delay (s) - - 16.9 0 -HCM Lane LOS - - C A -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 1.6 0 - G-201 HCM 2010 TWSC 15: Harbor Blvd & South Driveway 3/21/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT WEEKEND Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 2 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.5 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 73 856 0 0 947Future Vol, veh/h 0 73 856 0 0 947Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free FreeRT Channelized - None - None - NoneStorage Length - 0 - -- -Veh in Median Storage, # 0 -0 -- 0Grade, %0 -0 -- 0Peak Hour Factor 100 100 100 100 100 100Heavy Vehicles, %0 0 0 0 0 0Mvmt Flow 0 73 856 0 0 947 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1235 428 0 0 856 0 Stage 1 856 -- -- - Stage 2 379 -- -- -Critical Hdwy 5.7 7.1 - - 5.3 -Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.6 -- -- -Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6 -- -- -Follow-up Hdwy 3.8 3.9 - - 3.1 -Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 240 496 - - 465 - Stage 1 300 -- -- - Stage 2 611 -- -- -Platoon blocked, %- --Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 240 496 - - 465 -Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 240 -- -- - Stage 1 300 -- -- - Stage 2 611 -- -- - Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 13.5 0 0HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h)- - 496 465 -HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.147 - -HCM Control Delay (s) - - 13.5 0 -HCM Lane LOS - - B A -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.5 0 - G-202 Opening Year (2019) Without Project ICU LOS G-203 PROJECT:Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO:Year 2019INTERSECTION: 153 Harbor Blvd / I-5 NB Ramps AM PEAK HOURMOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0.0 0 * 0 NBT 3.0 5,100 706 0.19 5,100 1,261 0.34 *NBR Free 247 451 SBL 1.0 1,700 18 0.01 1,700 45 0.03 *SBT 4.0 6,800 1,557 0.23 * 6,800 1,319 0.19 SBR 0.0 0 0 EBL 0.0 0 0 EBT 0.0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 *EBR 0.0 0 0 WBL 1.5 2,550 44 0.02 * 2,550 41 0.02 * WBT 0.0 0 0.00 0 0.00 WBR 1.5 2,550 676 0.27 * 2,550 708 0.28 * N/S Movements 0.23 0.36E/W Movements 0.02 0.02 Rt. Turn Component 0.25 0.25Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.55 0.68LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A B PROJECT: Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO:Year 2019INTERSECTION: 154 Harbor Blvd / I-5 SB Ramps MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.0 1,700 26 0.02 * 1,700 82 0.05 *NBT 4.0 6,800 745 0.11 6,800 1,493 0.22 NBR 0.0 0 0 SBL 0.0 0 0 SBT 3.0 5,100 925 0.32 * 5,100 711 0.26 *SBR Free 694 622 EBL 2.0 3,400 171 0.05 * 3,400 262 0.08 *EBT 0.0 0 0.00 0 0.00 EBR Free 348 347 WBL 0.0 0 0 WBT 0.0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 *WBR 0.0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.33 0.31E/W Movements 0.05 0.08Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.43 0.44LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A A AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR G-204 PROJECT:Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO:Year 2019INTERSECTION: 155 Harbor Blvd / Manchester Ave MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.0 1,700 69 0.04 1,700 88 0.05 NBT 3.0 5,100 755 0.16 * 5,100 1,330 0.28 *NBR 0.0 62 85 SBL 1.0 1,700 257 0.15 * 1,700 139 0.08 *SBT 4.0 6,800 993 0.15 6,800 914 0.13 SBR 0.0 0 0 EBL 0.0 0 0 EBT 0.0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 *EBR 0.0 0 0 WBL 1.0 1,700 27 0.02 * 1,700 75 0.04 * WBT 0.0 0 0.00 0 0.00 WBR 1.0 1,700 91 0.05 1,700 283 0.17 * N/S Movements 0.31 0.36E/W Movements 0.02 0.04 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.08Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.38 0.54LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A A PROJECT: Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO:Year 2019INTERSECTION: 157 Harbor Blvd / Disney Way MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.0 1,700 25 0.01 1,700 48 0.03 NBT 3.0 5,100 668 0.14 * 5,100 1,023 0.22 *NBR 0.0 70 80 SBL 2.0 3,400 179 0.05 * 3,400 182 0.05 * SBT 3.0 5,100 866 0.17 5,100 873 0.17 SBR 0.0 3 5 EBL 0.0 1 2 EBT 2.0 3,400 1 0.00 * 3,400 24 0.01 * EBR 0.0 0 3 WBL 2.0 3,400 79 0.02 * 3,400 151 0.04 *WBT 1.0 1,700 0 0.00 1,700 16 0.01 WBR 1.0 1,700 168 0.10 * 1,700 247 0.15 * N/S Movements 0.20 0.27E/W Movements 0.02 0.05Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.27 0.37LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A A AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR G-205 PROJECT:Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO:Year 2019INTERSECTION: 158 Harbor Blvd / Katella Ave MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2.0 3,400 155 0.05 * 3,400 171 0.05 NBT 3.0 5,100 555 0.11 5,100 898 0.18 *NBR 1.0 1,700 317 0.19 * 1,700 404 0.24 SBL 2.0 3,400 91 0.03 3,400 116 0.03 *SBT 3.0 5,100 661 0.13 * 5,100 741 0.15 SBR 1.0 1,700 180 0.11 1,700 192 0.11 EBL 2.0 3,400 39 0.01 3,400 40 0.01 EBT 3.0 5,100 901 0.18 * 5,100 1,007 0.20 *EBR 1.0 1,700 175 0.10 1,700 205 0.12 WBL 2.0 3,400 245 0.07 * 3,400 327 0.10 * WBT 3.0 5,100 686 0.13 5,100 1,381 0.27 WBR 1.0 1,700 115 0.07 1,700 142 0.08 N/S Movements 0.18 0.21E/W Movements 0.25 0.29 Rt. Turn Component 0.01 0.00Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.48 0.55LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A A PROJECT: Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO:Year 2019INTERSECTION: 173 Clementine St / Disney Way MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.0 1,700 67 0.04 * 1,700 123 0.07 *NBT 2.0 3,400 116 0.05 3,400 113 0.04 NBR 0.0 65 14 SBL 2.0 3,400 54 0.02 3,400 67 0.02 SBT 2.0 3,400 96 0.03 * 3,400 133 0.06 *SBR 0.0 15 63 EBL 1.0 1,700 41 0.02 1,700 137 0.08 *EBT 3.0 5,100 88 0.02 * 5,100 304 0.06 EBR 1.0 1,700 69 0.04 1,700 106 0.06 WBL 1.0 1,700 165 0.10 * 1,700 43 0.03 WBT 3.0 5,100 181 0.07 5,100 246 0.07 *WBR 0.0 170 93 N/S Movements 0.07 0.13E/W Movements 0.11 0.15Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.24 0.33LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A A AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR G-206 PROJECT:Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO:Year 2019INTERSECTION: 174 Clementine St / Katella Ave MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.0 1,700 32 0.02 * 1,700 119 0.07 *NBT 1.0 1,700 51 0.03 1,700 121 0.07 NBR 1.0 1,700 99 0.06 1,700 270 0.16 * SBL 1.0 1,700 46 0.03 1,700 49 0.03 SBT 1.0 1,700 198 0.12 * 1,700 132 0.08 *SBR 1.0 1,700 88 0.05 1,700 139 0.08 EBL 2.0 3,400 228 0.07 3,400 279 0.08 *EBT 3.0 5,100 893 0.20 * 5,100 1,140 0.24 EBR 0.0 131 59 WBL 2.0 3,400 281 0.08 * 3,400 196 0.06 WBT 3.0 5,100 942 0.21 5,100 1,551 0.33 *WBR 0.0 106 122 N/S Movements 0.14 0.15E/W Movements 0.28 0.41 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.03Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.47 0.64LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A B PROJECT: Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO:Year 2019INTERSECTION: 195 Anaheim Blvd / I-5 SB Ramps AM PEAK HOURMOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2.0 3,400 46 0.01 3,400 54 0.02 NBT 3.0 5,100 895 0.18 * 5,100 1,072 0.21 *NBR 0.0 11 6 SBL 2.0 3,400 570 0.17 * 3,400 580 0.17 * SBT 3.0 5,100 733 0.17 5,100 812 0.18 SBR 0.0 126 87 EBL 2.0 3,400 260 0.08 * 3,400 331 0.10 *EBT 4.0 6,800 121 0.03 6,800 241 0.07 EBR 0.0 85 209 WBL 0.0 0 0 WBT 3.0 5,100 137 0.03 * 5,100 279 0.06 *WBR 0.0 1 3 N/S Movements 0.35 0.38E/W Movements 0.10 0.15Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.50 0.58LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A A PM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOURAM PEAK HOUR G-207 PROJECT:Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO:Year 2019INTERSECTION: 196 I-5 SB Off Ramp / Disney Way MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.0 1,700 20 0.01 1,700 4 0.00 NBT 0.0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 *NBR 1.0 1,700 35 0.02 * 1,700 65 0.04 * SBL 1.3 2,210 307 0.14 * 2,210 306 0.14 *SBT 0.3 510 19 0.04 510 14 0.03 SBR 1.3 2,210 156 0.07 * 2,210 162 0.07 * EBL 0.0 0 * 0 EBT 3.0 5,100 201 0.04 5,100 423 0.09 *EBR 0.0 10 16 WBL 1.0 1,700 17 0.01 1,700 23 0.01 WBT 3.0 5,100 324 0.06 * 5,100 380 0.07 *WBR 0.0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.14 0.14E/W Movements 0.06 0.10 Rt. Turn Component 0.04 0.07Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.30 0.36LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A A PROJECT: Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO:Year 2019INTERSECTION: 197 Anaheim Blvd / Katella Ave MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2.0 3,400 128 0.04 3,400 176 0.05 *NBT 3.0 5,100 788 0.15 * 5,100 895 0.18 NBR 1.0 1,700 146 0.09 1,700 114 0.07 SBL 2.0 3,400 69 0.02 * 3,400 74 0.02 SBT 3.0 5,100 582 0.11 5,100 778 0.15 *SBR 1.0 1,700 173 0.10 1,700 193 0.11 EBL 2.0 3,400 151 0.04 * 3,400 180 0.05 *EBT 4.0 6,800 916 0.14 6,800 1,177 0.19 EBR 0.0 50 120 WBL 2.0 3,400 110 0.03 3,400 160 0.05 WBT 3.0 5,100 931 0.18 * 5,100 1,514 0.30 *WBR 1.0 1,700 45 0.03 1,700 70 0.04 N/S Movements 0.17 0.20E/W Movements 0.23 0.35Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.45 0.60LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A A AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOURAM PEAK HOUR G-208 PROJECT:Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO:Year 2019INTERSECTION: 210 Manchester Ave/I-5 SB Ramps / Katella Ave MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 2,550 35 0.01 * 2,550 52 0.02 *NBT 0.0 0 0.00 0 0.00 NBR 1.5 2,550 413 0.16 * 2,550 315 0.12 * SBL 2.0 3,400 24 0.01 3,400 27 0.01 SBT 2.0 3,400 105 0.03 * 3,400 57 0.02 *SBR 1.0 1,700 6 0.00 1,700 5 0.00 EBL 0.0 0 * 0 *EBT 3.0 5,100 673 0.13 5,100 643 0.13 EBR 1.0 1,700 368 0.22 * 1,700 585 0.34 * WBL 2.0 3,400 131 0.04 3,400 308 0.09 WBT 3.0 5,100 971 0.19 * 5,100 1,622 0.32 *WBR 0.0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.04 0.04E/W Movements 0.19 0.32 Rt. Turn Component 0.19 0.23Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.48 0.64LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A B PROJECT: Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO:Year 2019INTERSECTION: 211 Anaheim Way/I-5 NB Ramps / Katella Ave MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 2,550 500 0.20 * 2,550 538 0.21 NBT 3.5 5,950 450 0.11 5,950 1,222 0.21 *NBR 0.0 181 41 SBL 0.0 0 0 * SBT 0.0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 SBR 0.0 0 0 EBL 2.0 3,400 68 0.02 3,400 144 0.04 *EBT 3.0 5,100 1,032 0.20 * 5,100 850 0.17 EBR 0.0 0 0 WBL 0.0 0 * 0 WBT 4.0 6,800 739 0.11 6,800 1,574 0.23 *WBR 1.0 1,700 53 0.03 1,700 86 0.05 N/S Movements 0.20 0.21E/W Movements 0.20 0.27Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.45 0.54LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A A AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR G-209 PROJECT:Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO:Year 2019INTERSECTION: 476 Anaheim GardenWalk / Disney Way MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.0 1,700 21 0.01 * 1,700 30 0.02 *NBT 0.0 0 0.00 0 0.00 NBR 1.0 1,700 30 0.02 1,700 71 0.04 SBL 0.0 0 0 SBT 0.0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 *SBR 0.0 0 0 EBL 0.0 6 1 EBT 3.0 5,100 161 0.04 * 5,100 202 0.05 *EBR 0.0 22 27 WBL 1.0 1,700 41 0.02 * 1,700 140 0.08 * WBT 3.0 5,100 221 0.04 5,100 386 0.08 WBR 0.0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.01 0.02E/W Movements 0.06 0.13 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.12 0.20LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A A PM PEAK HOURAM PEAK HOUR G-210 Opening Year (2019) Without Project HCM LOS G-211 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 1: Harbor Blvd & I-5 NB Ramps 3/18/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 AM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 1 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 44 676 706 247 18 1557 Future Volume (veh/h) 44 676 706 247 18 1557 Number 3 18 2 12 1 6 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 47 719 759 0 19 1605 Adj No. of Lanes 123114 Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.93 0.93 0.97 0.97 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000 Cap, veh/h 451 805 2311 699 154 3718 Arrive On Green 0.28 0.28 1.00 0.00 0.09 0.64 Sat Flow, veh/h 1619 2890 4794 1445 1619 6086 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 47 719 759 0 19 1605Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1619 1445 1547 1445 1619 1462Q Serve(g_s), s 1.5 16.7 0.1 0.0 0.8 9.6Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.5 16.7 0.1 0.0 0.8 9.6Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 451 805 2311 699 154 3718V/C Ratio(X)0.10 0.89 0.33 0.00 0.12 0.43Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 451 805 2311 699 409 3718HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 18.8 24.2 0.1 0.0 29.0 6.4Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 12.0 0.4 0.0 0.1 0.4Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.7 8.0 0.1 0.0 0.3 3.9LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 18.8 36.3 0.4 0.0 29.1 6.8LnGrp LOS B D A C A Approach Vol, veh/h 766 759 1624Approach Delay, s/veh 35.2 0.4 7.0Approach LOS D A A Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.6 37.9 47.5 22.5Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 4.7 5.0 5.0 5.5Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 16 21.8 42.5 17.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.8 2.1 11.6 18.7Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 15.5 21.9 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 12.3HCM 2010 LOS B Notes G-212 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 2: Harbor Blvd & I-5 SB Ramps 3/18/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 AM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 3 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 171 348 26 745 925 694 Future Volume (veh/h) 171 348 26 745 925 694 Number 7 14 5 2 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 201 0 28 793 984 0 Adj No. of Lanes 211431 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000 Cap, veh/h 904 416 185 3664 2212 668 Arrive On Green 0.29 0.00 0.11 0.63 0.95 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 3141 1445 1619 6086 4794 1445 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 201 0 28 793 984 0Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1570 1445 1619 1462 1547 1445Q Serve(g_s), s 3.4 0.0 1.1 4.1 1.2 0.0Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.4 0.0 1.1 4.1 1.2 0.0Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 904 416 185 3664 2212 668V/C Ratio(X)0.22 0.00 0.15 0.22 0.44 0.00Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 942 434 386 3664 2212 668HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.91 0.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 19.0 0.0 27.9 5.6 0.9 0.0Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.6 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.5 0.0 0.5 1.7 0.5 0.0LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 19.0 0.0 28.1 5.8 1.5 0.0LnGrp LOS B C A A Approach Vol, veh/h 201 821 984Approach Delay, s/veh 19.0 6.5 1.5Approach LOS B A A Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 46.9 23.1 10.5 36.4Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.5 * 4.2 5.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 41.0 18.5 * 15 21.8Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.1 5.4 3.1 3.2Green Ext Time (p_c), s 16.8 0.4 0.0 11.7 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 5.3HCM 2010 LOS A Notes G-213 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 4: Harbor Blvd & Disney Way 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 AM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 1 1 0 79 0 168 25 668 70 179 866 3 Future Volume (veh/h) 1 1 0 79 0 168 25 668 70 179 866 3 Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.87 1.00 1.00 0.87 1.00 0.79 1.00 0.76 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 2 2 0 94 0 200 28 742 78 192 931 3 Adj No. of Lanes 020211130230 Peak Hour Factor 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.93 0.93 0.93 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000000000 Cap, veh/h 286 383 0 192 552 399 54 2139 221 270 2704 9 Arrive On Green 0.24 0.24 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.32 0.03 0.51 0.51 0.09 0.57 0.56 Sat Flow, veh/h 963 1686 0 3141 1700 1263 1619 4156 429 3141 4770 15 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 2 2 0 94 0 200 28 549 271 192 604 330Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1102 1470 0 1570 1700 1263 1619 1547 1491 1570 1547 1692Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.1 0.0 3.5 0.0 15.4 2.0 12.6 13.0 7.1 12.6 12.6Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.1 0.1 0.0 3.5 0.0 15.4 2.0 12.6 13.0 7.1 12.6 12.6Prop In Lane 0.89 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.29 1.00 0.01Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 319 350 0 192 552 399 54 1592 767 270 1754 959V/C Ratio(X)0.01 0.00 0.00 0.49 0.00 0.50 0.51 0.34 0.35 0.71 0.34 0.34Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 319 350 0 445 666 484 229 1592 767 445 1754 959HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 34.9 34.9 0.0 54.5 0.0 33.3 57.0 17.2 17.4 53.4 14.0 14.0Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 1.0 8.8 0.6 1.3 1.3 0.5 1.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.0 5.5 1.1 5.5 5.6 3.1 5.5 6.1LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 34.9 34.9 0.0 55.2 0.0 34.3 65.8 17.8 18.6 54.7 14.5 15.0LnGrp LOS C C E C E B B D B B Approach Vol, veh/h 4 294 848 1126Approach Delay, s/veh 34.9 41.0 19.6 21.5Approach LOS C D B C Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 123456 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 13.3 64.8 10.3 31.6 7.0 71.0 41.9Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.0 45.0 15.0 25.0 16.0 45.0 45.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 9.1 15.0 5.5 2.1 4.0 14.6 17.4Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 9.4 0.1 0.9 0.0 9.4 1.0 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 23.4HCM 2010 LOS C Notes G-214 Volume 4: Harbor Blvd & Disney Way 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 AM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 3 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Traffic Volume (vph)1 1 0 79 0 168 25 668 70 179 866 3 Future Volume (vph)1 1 0 79 0 168 25 668 70 179 866 3 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 227 133 592 267 Confl. Bikes (#/hr) Peak Hour Factor 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.93 0.93 0.93 Growth Factor 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Bus Blockages (#/hr)000000000000 Parking (#/hr) Mid-Block Traffic (%)0%0%0%0% Adj. Flow (vph)2 2 0 94 0 200 28 742 78 192 931 3 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 2 2 0 94 0 200 28 820 0 192 934 0 Intersection Summary G-215 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 5: Harbor Blvd & Katella Ave 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 AM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 39 901 175 245 686 115 155 555 317 91 661 180 Future Volume (veh/h) 39 901 175 245 686 115 155 555 317 91 661 180 Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.86 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.81 1.00 0.90 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 45 1036 201 263 738 124 182 653 373 108 787 214 Adj No. of Lanes 231231231231 Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.84 0.84 0.84 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000000000 Cap, veh/h 419 1720 455 393 1720 481 282 1408 349 314 1455 403 Arrive On Green 0.13 0.37 0.37 0.12 0.37 0.37 0.09 0.30 0.30 0.10 0.31 0.31 Sat Flow, veh/h 3141 4692 1242 3141 4692 1311 3141 4692 1165 3141 4692 1300 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 45 1036 201 263 738 124 182 653 373 108 787 214Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1570 1564 1242 1570 1564 1311 1570 1564 1165 1570 1564 1300Q Serve(g_s), s 1.5 21.5 14.7 9.6 14.2 7.9 6.7 13.6 25.3 3.8 16.7 11.2Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.5 21.5 14.7 9.6 14.2 7.9 6.7 13.6 25.3 3.8 16.7 11.2Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 419 1720 455 393 1720 481 282 1408 349 314 1455 403V/C Ratio(X)0.11 0.60 0.44 0.67 0.43 0.26 0.64 0.46 1.07 0.34 0.54 0.53Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 419 1720 455 393 1720 481 340 1408 349 340 1455 403HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 45.7 30.9 28.7 50.1 28.6 26.6 52.8 34.2 20.7 50.3 34.3 16.1Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 1.6 3.1 4.4 0.8 1.3 1.7 1.1 67.2 0.2 1.4 4.9Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.7 9.6 5.4 4.4 6.2 3.0 3.0 6.0 14.6 1.7 7.4 4.5LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 45.8 32.5 31.8 54.5 29.3 27.9 54.4 35.3 87.9 50.6 35.8 21.0LnGrp LOS DCCDCCDDFDDC Approach Vol, veh/h 1282 1125 1208 1109Approach Delay, s/veh 32.8 35.1 54.4 34.4Approach LOS CDDC Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 12345678Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 15.0 39.0 18.0 48.0 13.8 40.2 19.0 47.0Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 6.0 * 6 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.0 34.0 12.0 * 42 11.0 34.0 12.0 42.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.8 27.3 11.6 23.5 8.7 18.7 3.5 16.2Green Ext Time (p_c), s 1.7 2.1 0.0 6.2 0.1 2.9 4.1 4.2 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 39.2HCM 2010 LOS D Notes G-216 Volume 5: Harbor Blvd & Katella Ave 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 AM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 4 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Traffic Volume (vph)39 901 175 245 686 115 155 555 317 91 661 180 Future Volume (vph)39 901 175 245 686 115 155 555 317 91 661 180 Confl. Peds. (#/hr)172 113 194 104 Confl. Bikes (#/hr) Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.84 0.84 0.84 Growth Factor 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Bus Blockages (#/hr)000000000000 Parking (#/hr) Mid-Block Traffic (%)0%0%0%0% Adj. Flow (vph)45 1036 201 263 738 124 182 653 373 108 787 214 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 45 1036 201 263 738 124 182 653 373 108 787 214 Intersection Summary G-217 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 9: Zeyn St/I-5 SB Off Ramp & Disney Way/Manchester Ave 3/21/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 AM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)0 201 10 17 324 0 20 0 35 307 19 156 Future Volume (vph)0 201 10 17 324 0 20 0 35 307 19 156 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Total Lost time (s)4.7 5.1 5.1 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.91 0.95 Frt 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot)4609 1615 4641 1615 1445 1534 1467 1373 Flt Permitted 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm)4609 1615 4641 1615 1445 1534 1467 1373 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.77 0.77 0.77 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.89 0.89 0.89Adj. Flow (vph) 0 226 11 22 421 0 32 0 56 345 21 175RTOR Reduction (vph)060000004205118Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 231 0 22 421 0 32 0 14 193 187 39 Turn Type NA Split NA Prot Perm Split NA PermProtected Phases 4 3 3 2 6 6Permitted Phases 26Actuated Green, G (s) 10.5 9.7 9.7 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0Effective Green, g (s)10.5 9.7 9.7 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.12 0.12 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25Clearance Time (s)4.7 5.1 5.1 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0Vehicle Extension (s)2.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph)604 195 562 403 361 383 366 343v/s Ratio Prot c0.05 0.01 c0.09 c0.02 0.13 c0.13v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 0.03v/c Ratio 0.38 0.11 0.75 0.08 0.04 0.50 0.51 0.11Uniform Delay, d1 31.8 31.3 34.0 23.0 22.7 25.7 25.8 23.2Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Incremental Delay, d2 1.8 0.1 4.8 0.4 0.2 4.7 5.0 0.7Delay (s)33.6 31.4 38.7 23.3 22.9 30.4 30.8 23.8Level of Service C C D C CCCCApproach Delay (s)33.6 38.4 23.1 28.6Approach LOS CDCC Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 32.5 HCM 2000 Level of Service CHCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.38Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s)19.8Intersection Capacity Utilization 41.8% ICU Level of Service AAnalysis Period (min)15c Critical Lane Group G-218 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 10: Anaheim Blvd & Manchester Ave/Manchester Ave/I-5 SB On 3/18/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 AM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 9 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 260 121 85 0 137 1 46 895 11 570 733 126 Future Volume (veh/h) 260 121 85 0 137 1 46 895 11 570 733 126 Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 0 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 299 139 98 0 178 1 50 973 12 613 788 135 Adj No. of Lanes 240030130230 Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.77 0.77 0.77 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.93 0.93 0.93 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000000000 Cap, veh/h 347 1004 331 0 397 2 77 2108 26 623 2402 408 Arrive On Green 0.11 0.23 0.23 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.05 0.45 0.45 0.20 0.60 0.60 Sat Flow, veh/h 3141 4386 1445 0 4916 27 1619 4725 58 3141 3995 679 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 299 139 98 0 116 63 50 637 348 613 609 314Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1570 1462 1445 0 1547 1695 1619 1547 1690 1570 1547 1580Q Serve(g_s), s 11.2 3.0 6.7 0.0 4.3 4.3 3.6 17.2 17.2 23.3 11.7 11.9Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 11.2 3.0 6.7 0.0 4.3 4.3 3.6 17.2 17.2 23.3 11.7 11.9Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.02 1.00 0.03 1.00 0.43Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 347 1004 331 0 258 141 77 1380 754 623 1860 950V/C Ratio(X)0.86 0.14 0.30 0.00 0.45 0.45 0.65 0.46 0.46 0.98 0.33 0.33Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 361 1864 614 0 851 466 152 1380 754 623 1860 950HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 52.5 36.8 38.3 0.0 52.4 52.4 56.2 23.2 23.2 47.9 11.9 11.9Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 16.1 0.1 0.5 0.0 0.5 0.8 6.8 1.1 2.0 31.8 0.5 0.9Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 5.6 1.2 2.7 0.0 1.8 2.0 1.8 7.6 8.5 12.9 5.1 5.4LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 68.5 36.9 38.7 0.0 52.8 53.2 63.0 24.3 25.2 79.8 12.3 12.8LnGrp LOS E D D D D E C C E B B Approach Vol, veh/h 536 179 1035 1536Approach Delay, s/veh 54.9 53.0 26.5 39.4Approach LOS DDCD Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 1 2 45678Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 29.0 58.5 32.5 10.4 77.2 17.5 15.0Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 5.2 5.0 5.0 * 4.7 5.0 * 4.2 5.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 24 30.0 51.0 * 11 43.0 * 14 33.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 25.3 19.2 8.7 5.6 13.9 13.2 6.3Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 8.9 2.2 0.0 19.8 0.0 2.1 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 38.6HCM 2010 LOS D Notes G-219 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 12: I-5 SB Ramps & Katella Ave 3/21/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 AM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)0 673 368 131 971 0 35 0 413 24 105 6 Future Volume (vph)0 673 368 131 971 0 35 0 413 24 105 6 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Total Lost time (s)5.3 4.5 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.6 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.97 0.91 0.95 0.91 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot)4641 1445 3133 4641 1534 1318 1373 1615 3230 1445 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm)4641 1445 3133 4641 1534 1318 1373 1615 3230 1445 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.88 0.88 0.88Adj. Flow (vph) 0 740 404 146 1079 0 43 0 510 27 119 7RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 350 0000221221005Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 740 54 146 1079 0 39 38 34 27 119 2 Turn Type NA Over Prot NA Split NA Perm Split NA PermProtected Phases 2716 77 88Permitted Phases 78Actuated Green, G (s) 25.2 12.0 12.6 42.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 21.6 21.6 21.6Effective Green, g (s)25.2 12.0 12.6 42.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 21.6 21.6 21.6Actuated g/C Ratio 0.28 0.13 0.14 0.47 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.24 0.24 0.24Clearance Time (s)5.3 4.5 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.6 4.6 4.6Vehicle Extension (s)4.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph)1299 192 438 2165 204 175 183 387 775 346v/s Ratio Prot c0.16 c0.04 0.05 c0.23 0.03 0.03 0.02 c0.04v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 0.00v/c Ratio 0.57 0.28 0.33 0.50 0.19 0.22 0.19 0.07 0.15 0.00Uniform Delay, d1 27.8 35.1 34.9 16.7 34.7 34.8 34.7 26.4 27.0 26.0Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.29 0.89 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Incremental Delay, d2 1.8 3.6 0.2 0.2 2.1 2.8 2.2 0.0 0.0 0.0Delay (s)29.6 38.7 45.2 15.1 36.8 37.6 36.9 26.5 27.0 26.0Level of Service C D D B DDDCCCApproach Delay (s)32.8 18.7 37.2 26.9Approach LOS C B D C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 27.7 HCM 2000 Level of Service CHCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.39Actuated Cycle Length (s) 90.0 Sum of lost time (s)18.6Intersection Capacity Utilization 74.1% ICU Level of Service DAnalysis Period (min)15c Critical Lane Group G-220 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 13: I-5 NB Ramps & Katella Ave 3/21/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 AM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)68 1032 0 0 739 53 500 450 181 0 0 0 Future Volume (vph)68 1032 0 0 739 53 500 450 181 0 0 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Total Lost time (s)4.7 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.86 1.00 0.81 0.81 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.97 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (prot)3133 4641 5848 1445 1308 5263 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (perm)3133 4641 5848 1445 1308 5263 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.96 0.96 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00Adj. Flow (vph) 82 1243 0 0 880 63 521 469 189 0 0 0RTOR Reduction (vph)00000390130000Lane Group Flow (vph) 82 1243 0 0 880 24 260 906 0000 Turn Type Prot NA NA Perm Split NAProtected Phases 5 2 6 8 8Permitted Phases 6Actuated Green, G (s) 9.6 48.7 34.4 34.4 29.3 29.3Effective Green, g (s) 9.6 48.7 34.4 34.4 29.3 29.3Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.54 0.38 0.38 0.33 0.33Clearance Time (s)4.7 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.2 2.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 334 2511 2235 552 425 1713v/s Ratio Prot 0.03 c0.27 0.15 c0.20 0.17v/s Ratio Perm 0.02v/c Ratio 0.25 0.50 0.39 0.04 0.61 0.53Uniform Delay, d1 36.9 12.9 20.2 17.5 25.6 24.7Progression Factor 1.07 1.71 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.6 0.5 0.1 2.0 0.2Delay (s)39.4 22.7 20.7 17.6 27.6 24.9Level of Service D C C B C CApproach Delay (s)23.7 20.5 25.5 0.0Approach LOS C C C A Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 23.5 HCM 2000 Level of Service CHCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.57Actuated Cycle Length (s) 90.0 Sum of lost time (s)16.7Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.9% ICU Level of Service BAnalysis Period (min)15c Critical Lane Group G-221 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 1: Harbor Blvd & I-5 NB Ramps 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 PM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 1 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 41 708 1261 451 45 1319 Future Volume (veh/h) 41 708 1261 451 45 1319 Number 3 18 2 12 1 6 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 47 805 1341 0 49 1449 Adj No. of Lanes 123114 Peak Hour Factor 0.88 0.88 0.94 0.94 0.91 0.91 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000 Cap, veh/h 439 784 2061 621 252 3759 Arrive On Green 0.27 0.27 0.89 0.00 0.16 0.64 Sat Flow, veh/h 1619 2890 4794 1445 1619 6086 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 47 805 1341 0 49 1449Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1619 1445 1547 1445 1619 1462Q Serve(g_s), s 1.5 19.0 5.4 0.0 1.8 8.2Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.5 19.0 5.4 0.0 1.8 8.2Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 439 784 2061 621 252 3759V/C Ratio(X)0.11 1.03 0.65 0.00 0.19 0.39Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 439 784 2061 621 393 3759HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 19.1 25.5 2.5 0.0 25.7 5.9Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 39.0 1.4 0.0 0.1 0.3Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.7 11.8 2.2 0.0 0.8 3.3LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 19.2 64.5 3.9 0.0 25.9 6.2LnGrp LOS B F A C A Approach Vol, veh/h 852 1341 1498Approach Delay, s/veh 62.0 3.9 6.9Approach LOS E A A Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 13.9 34.1 48.0 22.0Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 4.7 5.0 5.0 5.5Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 15 23.0 15.0 16.5Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.8 7.4 10.2 21.0Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 13.9 4.5 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 18.5HCM 2010 LOS B Notes G-222 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 2: Harbor Blvd & I-5 SB Ramps 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 PM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 3 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 262 347 82 1493 711 622 Future Volume (veh/h) 262 347 82 1493 711 622 Number 7 14 5 2 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 294 0 92 1678 773 0 Adj No. of Lanes 211431 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000 Cap, veh/h 917 422 328 3639 1781 534 Arrive On Green 0.29 0.00 0.20 0.62 0.77 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 3141 1445 1619 6086 4794 1445 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 294 0 92 1678 773 0Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1570 1445 1619 1462 1547 1445Q Serve(g_s), s 5.1 0.0 3.4 10.6 4.1 0.0Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.1 0.0 3.4 10.6 4.1 0.0Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 917 422 328 3639 1781 534V/C Ratio(X)0.32 0.00 0.28 0.46 0.43 0.00Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 942 434 386 3639 1781 534HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.93 0.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 19.4 0.0 23.6 7.0 5.5 0.0Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.7 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.2 0.0 1.5 4.3 1.7 0.0LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 19.4 0.0 23.8 7.4 6.2 0.0LnGrp LOS B C A A Approach Vol, veh/h 294 1770 773Approach Delay, s/veh 19.4 8.3 6.2Approach LOS B A A Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 46.6 23.4 16.7 29.9Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.5 * 4.2 5.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 41.0 18.5 * 15 21.8Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 12.6 7.1 5.4 6.1Green Ext Time (p_c), s 21.3 0.6 0.1 13.2 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 8.9HCM 2010 LOS A Notes G-223 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 4: Harbor Blvd & Disney Way 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 PM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 2 24 3 151 16 247 48 1023 80 182 873 5 Future Volume (veh/h) 2 24 3 151 16 247 48 1023 80 182 873 5 Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.91 0.81 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.81 1.00 0.81 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 3 31 4 159 17 260 56 1204 94 194 929 5 Adj No. of Lanes 020211130230 Peak Hour Factor 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000000000 Cap, veh/h 66 566 69 262 561 425 84 2188 171 272 2584 14 Arrive On Green 0.22 0.22 0.21 0.08 0.33 0.32 0.05 0.51 0.50 0.09 0.54 0.53 Sat Flow, veh/h 144 2553 313 3141 1700 1320 1619 4304 336 3141 4757 26 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 20 0 18 159 17 260 56 865 433 194 604 330Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1605 0 1405 1570 1700 1320 1619 1547 1546 1570 1547 1688Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 1.2 5.9 0.8 20.0 4.1 22.9 23.0 7.2 13.3 13.3Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.1 0.0 1.2 5.9 0.8 20.0 4.1 22.9 23.0 7.2 13.3 13.3Prop In Lane 0.15 0.22 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.22 1.00 0.02Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 390 0 311 262 561 425 84 1573 786 272 1681 917V/C Ratio(X)0.05 0.00 0.06 0.61 0.03 0.61 0.67 0.55 0.55 0.71 0.36 0.36Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 395 0 316 445 666 506 229 1573 786 445 1681 917HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 36.8 0.0 36.9 53.1 27.2 34.4 55.9 20.1 20.2 53.4 15.6 15.6Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.8 0.0 1.6 10.5 1.4 2.8 1.3 0.6 1.1Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.5 0.0 0.5 2.6 0.4 7.4 2.1 10.0 10.4 3.2 5.8 6.4LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 36.8 0.0 37.0 53.9 27.2 36.0 66.4 21.5 23.0 54.7 16.2 16.7LnGrp LOS D DDCDECCDBB Approach Vol, veh/h 38 436 1354 1128Approach Delay, s/veh 36.9 42.2 23.8 22.9Approach LOS DDCC Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 123456 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 13.4 64.0 13.0 29.6 9.2 68.2 42.6Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.0 45.0 15.0 25.0 16.0 45.0 45.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 9.2 25.0 7.9 3.2 6.1 15.3 22.0Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 10.9 0.2 1.4 0.1 13.2 1.4 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 26.4HCM 2010 LOS C Notes G-224 Volume 4: Harbor Blvd & Disney Way 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 PM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 3 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Traffic Volume (vph)2 24 3 151 16 247 48 1023 80 182 873 5 Future Volume (vph)2 24 3 151 16 247 48 1023 80 182 873 5 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 135 93 368 184 Confl. Bikes (#/hr)33 Peak Hour Factor 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.94 0.94 0.94 Growth Factor 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Bus Blockages (#/hr)000000000000 Parking (#/hr) Mid-Block Traffic (%)0%0%0%0% Adj. Flow (vph)3 31 4 159 17 260 56 1204 94 194 929 5 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 3 35 0 159 17 260 56 1298 0 194 934 0 Intersection Summary G-225 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 5: Harbor Blvd & Katella Ave 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 PM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 7 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 40 1007 205 327 1381 142 171 898 404 116 741 192 Future Volume (veh/h) 40 1007 205 327 1381 142 171 898 404 116 741 192 Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.80 1.00 0.92 1.00 0.87 1.00 0.77 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 42 1060 216 359 1518 156 188 987 444 133 852 221 Adj No. of Lanes 231231231231 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.87 0.87 0.87 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000000000 Cap, veh/h 340 1525 377 471 1720 486 290 1408 375 393 1561 370 Arrive On Green 0.11 0.32 0.32 0.15 0.37 0.37 0.09 0.30 0.30 0.13 0.33 0.33 Sat Flow, veh/h 3141 4692 1160 3141 4692 1326 3141 4692 1250 3141 4692 1111 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 42 1060 216 359 1518 156 188 987 444 133 852 221Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1570 1564 1160 1570 1564 1326 1570 1564 1250 1570 1564 1111Q Serve(g_s), s 1.5 23.6 13.7 13.2 36.3 10.1 6.9 22.4 36.0 4.6 17.8 14.2Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.5 23.6 13.7 13.2 36.3 10.1 6.9 22.4 36.0 4.6 17.8 14.2Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 340 1525 377 471 1720 486 290 1408 375 393 1561 370V/C Ratio(X)0.12 0.70 0.57 0.76 0.88 0.32 0.65 0.70 1.18 0.34 0.55 0.60Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 340 1525 377 471 1720 486 393 1408 375 393 1561 370HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 48.4 35.3 18.4 48.9 35.6 27.3 52.6 37.2 42.0 48.0 32.6 16.9Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 2.6 6.2 7.2 6.9 1.7 0.9 2.9 106.8 0.2 1.4 7.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.6 10.6 5.0 6.2 16.7 4.0 3.0 10.1 23.5 2.0 7.9 5.0LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 48.5 38.0 24.6 56.1 42.5 29.0 53.5 40.2 148.8 48.2 34.0 23.9LnGrp LOS D D C E DCDDFDCC Approach Vol, veh/h 1318 2033 1619 1206Approach Delay, s/veh 36.1 43.9 71.5 33.7Approach LOS D D E C Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 12345678Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 18.0 39.0 21.0 42.0 14.1 42.9 16.0 47.0Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.0 34.0 15.0 37.0 13.0 34.0 10.0 42.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.6 38.0 15.2 25.6 8.9 19.8 3.5 38.3Green Ext Time (p_c), s 1.7 0.0 0.0 4.9 0.2 3.3 1.0 2.6 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 47.5HCM 2010 LOS D G-226 Volume 5: Harbor Blvd & Katella Ave 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 PM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 4 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Traffic Volume (vph)40 1007 205 327 1381 142 171 898 404 116 741 192 Future Volume (vph)40 1007 205 327 1381 142 171 898 404 116 741 192 Confl. Peds. (#/hr)214 101 135 256 Confl. Bikes (#/hr) Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.87 0.87 0.87 Growth Factor 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Bus Blockages (#/hr)000000000000 Parking (#/hr) Mid-Block Traffic (%)0%0%0%0% Adj. Flow (vph)42 1060 216 359 1518 156 188 987 444 133 852 221 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 42 1060 216 359 1518 156 188 987 444 133 852 221 Intersection Summary G-227 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 9: Zeyn St/I-5 SB Off Ramp & Disney Way/Manchester Ave 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 PM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)0 423 16 23 380 0 4 0 65 306 14 162 Future Volume (vph)0 423 16 23 380 0 4 0 65 306 14 162 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Total Lost time (s)4.7 5.1 5.1 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.91 0.95 Frt 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot)4616 1615 4641 1615 1445 1534 1464 1373 Flt Permitted 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm)4616 1615 4641 1615 1445 1534 1464 1373 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.87 0.87 0.87Adj. Flow (vph) 0 481 18 27 442 0 7 0 114 352 16 186RTOR Reduction (vph)050000008605125Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 494 0 27 442 0 7 0 29 194 188 42 Turn Type NA Split NA Prot Perm Split NA PermProtected Phases 4 3 3 2 6 6Permitted Phases 26Actuated Green, G (s) 10.5 9.7 9.7 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0Effective Green, g (s)10.5 9.7 9.7 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.12 0.12 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25Clearance Time (s)4.7 5.1 5.1 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0Vehicle Extension (s)2.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph)605 195 562 403 361 383 366 343v/s Ratio Prot c0.11 0.02 c0.10 0.00 0.13 c0.13v/s Ratio Perm c0.02 0.03v/c Ratio 0.82 0.14 0.79 0.02 0.08 0.51 0.51 0.12Uniform Delay, d1 33.8 31.4 34.1 22.6 23.0 25.8 25.8 23.2Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Incremental Delay, d2 11.6 0.1 6.6 0.1 0.4 4.7 5.1 0.7Delay (s)45.4 31.5 40.8 22.7 23.4 30.5 30.9 23.9Level of Service D C D C CCCCApproach Delay (s)45.4 40.2 23.3 28.6Approach LOS DDCC Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 36.7 HCM 2000 Level of Service DHCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.47Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s)19.8Intersection Capacity Utilization 46.8% ICU Level of Service AAnalysis Period (min)15c Critical Lane Group G-228 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 10: Anaheim Blvd & Manchester Ave/Manchester Ave/I-5 SB On 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 PM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 8 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 331 241 209 0 279 3 54 1072 6 580 812 87 Future Volume (veh/h) 331 241 209 0 279 3 54 1072 6 580 812 87 Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 0 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 399 290 252 0 321 3 63 1247 7 611 855 92 Adj No. of Lanes 240030130230 Peak Hour Factor 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000000000 Cap, veh/h 361 1186 391 0 571 5 83 1926 11 623 2366 254 Arrive On Green 0.12 0.27 0.27 0.00 0.12 0.12 0.05 0.40 0.40 0.20 0.56 0.56 Sat Flow, veh/h 3141 4386 1445 0 4895 44 1619 4763 27 3141 4257 456 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 399 290 252 0 209 115 63 810 444 611 620 327Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1570 1462 1445 0 1547 1692 1619 1547 1695 1570 1547 1620Q Serve(g_s), s 13.8 6.2 18.5 0.0 7.7 7.7 4.6 25.3 25.3 23.2 13.4 13.5Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 13.8 6.2 18.5 0.0 7.7 7.7 4.6 25.3 25.3 23.2 13.4 13.5Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.03 1.00 0.02 1.00 0.28Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 361 1186 391 0 373 204 83 1251 686 623 1720 900V/C Ratio(X)1.10 0.24 0.64 0.00 0.56 0.56 0.76 0.65 0.65 0.98 0.36 0.36Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 361 1864 614 0 851 465 152 1251 686 623 1720 900HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 53.1 34.2 38.7 0.0 49.8 49.8 56.2 28.8 28.8 47.9 14.8 14.8Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 71.3 0.1 1.3 0.0 0.5 0.9 10.1 2.6 4.7 31.0 0.6 1.1Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 9.5 2.5 7.5 0.0 3.3 3.7 2.3 11.3 12.7 12.8 5.8 6.3LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 124.4 34.3 39.9 0.0 50.3 50.7 66.3 31.4 33.5 78.9 15.4 16.0LnGrp LOS F C D D D E C C E B B Approach Vol, veh/h 941 324 1317 1558Approach Delay, s/veh 74.0 50.4 33.8 40.4Approach LOS E D C D Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 1 2 45678Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 29.0 53.5 37.5 10.8 71.7 18.0 19.5Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 5.2 5.0 5.0 * 4.7 5.0 * 4.2 5.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 24 30.0 51.0 * 11 43.0 * 14 33.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 25.2 27.3 20.5 6.6 15.5 15.8 9.7Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 2.5 5.0 0.0 21.4 0.0 4.8 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 46.7HCM 2010 LOS D Notes G-229 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 12: I-5 SB Ramps & Katella Ave 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 PM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)0 643 585 308 1622 0 52 0 315 27 57 5 Future Volume (vph)0 643 585 308 1622 0 52 0 315 27 57 5 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Total Lost time (s)5.3 4.5 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.6 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.97 0.91 0.95 0.91 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot)4641 1445 3133 4641 1534 1320 1373 1615 3230 1445 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm)4641 1445 3133 4641 1534 1320 1373 1615 3230 1445 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.80 0.80 0.80Adj. Flow (vph) 0 670 609 328 1726 0 59 0 358 34 71 6RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 528 0000152159005Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 670 81 328 1726 0 53 29 24 34 71 1 Turn Type NA Over Prot NA Split NA Perm Split NA PermProtected Phases 2716 77 88Permitted Phases 78Actuated Green, G (s) 25.2 12.0 12.6 42.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 21.6 21.6 21.6Effective Green, g (s)25.2 12.0 12.6 42.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 21.6 21.6 21.6Actuated g/C Ratio 0.28 0.13 0.14 0.47 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.24 0.24 0.24Clearance Time (s)5.3 4.5 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.6 4.6 4.6Vehicle Extension (s)4.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph)1299 192 438 2165 204 176 183 387 775 346v/s Ratio Prot 0.14 c0.06 0.10 c0.37 0.03 0.02 0.02 c0.02v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 0.00v/c Ratio 0.52 0.42 0.75 0.80 0.26 0.17 0.13 0.09 0.09 0.00Uniform Delay, d1 27.3 35.8 37.2 20.4 35.0 34.6 34.4 26.6 26.6 26.0Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.16 1.55 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Incremental Delay, d2 1.5 6.7 2.0 0.7 3.1 2.0 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0Delay (s)28.7 42.5 45.0 32.3 38.1 36.6 35.9 26.6 26.6 26.0Level of Service CDDC DDDCCCApproach Delay (s) 35.3 34.4 36.5 26.6Approach LOS DCDC Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 34.7 HCM 2000 Level of Service CHCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.57Actuated Cycle Length (s) 90.0 Sum of lost time (s)18.6Intersection Capacity Utilization 89.1% ICU Level of Service EAnalysis Period (min)15c Critical Lane Group G-230 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 13: I-5 NB Ramps & Katella Ave 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 PM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 144 850 0 0 1574 86 538 1222 41 0 0 0 Future Volume (vph) 144 850 0 0 1574 86 538 1222 41 0 0 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Total Lost time (s)4.7 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.86 1.00 0.81 0.81 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (prot)3133 4641 5848 1445 1308 5449 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (perm)3133 4641 5848 1445 1308 5449 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.93 0.93 0.93 1.00 1.00 1.00Adj. Flow (vph) 166 977 0 0 1730 95 578 1314 44 0 0 0RTOR Reduction (vph)0000067040000Lane Group Flow (vph) 166 977 0 0 1730 28 376 1556 0000 Turn Type Prot NA NA Perm Split NAProtected Phases 5 2 6 8 8Permitted Phases 6Actuated Green, G (s) 12.0 41.9 25.2 25.2 36.1 36.1Effective Green, g (s) 12.0 41.9 25.2 25.2 36.1 36.1Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.47 0.28 0.28 0.40 0.40Clearance Time (s)4.7 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.2 2.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 417 2160 1637 404 524 2185v/s Ratio Prot 0.05 c0.21 c0.30 c0.29 0.29v/s Ratio Perm 0.02v/c Ratio 0.40 0.45 1.06 0.07 0.72 0.71Uniform Delay, d1 35.7 16.3 32.4 23.8 22.7 22.6Progression Factor 1.22 1.55 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 0.6 39.0 0.3 4.1 1.0Delay (s)43.6 25.8 71.4 24.1 26.7 23.6Level of Service D C E C C CApproach Delay (s)28.4 68.9 24.2 0.0Approach LOS C E C A Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 41.8 HCM 2000 Level of Service DHCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.80Actuated Cycle Length (s) 90.0 Sum of lost time (s)16.7Intersection Capacity Utilization 73.2% ICU Level of Service DAnalysis Period (min)15c Critical Lane Group G-231 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 4: Harbor Blvd & Disney Way 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 WEEKEND Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 3 439 2 130 32 178 46 856 73 282 931 12 Future Volume (veh/h) 3 439 2 130 32 178 46 856 73 282 931 12 Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.88 0.71 1.00 0.88 1.00 0.76 1.00 0.73 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 6 915 4 165 41 225 50 930 79 320 1058 14 Adj No. of Lanes 020211130230 Peak Hour Factor 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.88 0.88 0.88 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000000000 Cap, veh/h 32 722 3 268 570 415 76 1968 166 394 2547 34 Arrive On Green 0.23 0.23 0.22 0.09 0.34 0.33 0.05 0.46 0.46 0.13 0.54 0.53 Sat Flow, veh/h 8 3210 14 3141 1700 1269 1619 4241 357 3141 4694 62 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 485 0 440 165 41 225 50 676 333 320 697 375Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1694 0 1538 1570 1700 1269 1619 1547 1504 1570 1547 1663Q Serve(g_s), s 10.1 0.0 27.0 6.1 2.0 17.4 3.6 18.0 18.3 11.9 16.0 16.0Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 27.0 0.0 27.0 6.1 2.0 17.4 3.6 18.0 18.3 11.9 16.0 16.0Prop In Lane 0.01 0.01 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.24 1.00 0.04Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 412 0 346 268 570 415 76 1436 698 394 1679 902V/C Ratio(X)1.18 0.00 1.27 0.61 0.07 0.54 0.66 0.47 0.48 0.81 0.42 0.42Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 412 0 346 445 666 486 229 1436 698 445 1679 902HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 47.5 0.0 46.5 53.0 27.2 33.0 56.2 22.1 22.2 51.1 16.2 16.2Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 102.9 0.0 142.9 0.9 0.1 1.1 11.0 1.1 2.3 8.7 0.8 1.4Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 25.4 0.0 25.2 2.7 0.9 6.2 1.9 7.9 8.0 5.6 7.0 7.7LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 150.4 0.0 189.4 53.8 27.2 34.1 67.2 23.2 24.5 59.8 17.0 17.6LnGrp LOS F F D C C E C C E B B Approach Vol, veh/h 925 431 1059 1392Approach Delay, s/veh 168.9 41.0 25.7 27.0Approach LOS F D C C Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 123456 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 18.1 58.7 13.3 30.0 8.6 68.1 43.3Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.0 45.0 15.0 25.0 16.0 45.0 45.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 13.9 20.3 8.1 29.0 5.6 18.0 19.4Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 11.1 0.2 0.0 0.1 11.5 5.5 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 62.7HCM 2010 LOS E Notes G-232 Volume 4: Harbor Blvd & Disney Way 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 WEEKEND Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 3 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Traffic Volume (vph)3 439 2 130 32 178 46 856 73 282 931 12 Future Volume (vph)3 439 2 130 32 178 46 856 73 282 931 12 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 227 133 592 267 Confl. Bikes (#/hr)33 Peak Hour Factor 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.88 0.88 0.88 Growth Factor 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Bus Blockages (#/hr)000000000000 Parking (#/hr) Mid-Block Traffic (%)0%0%0%0% Adj. Flow (vph)6 915 4 165 41 225 50 930 79 320 1058 14 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 6 919 0 165 41 225 50 1009 0 320 1072 0 Intersection Summary G-233 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 5: Harbor Blvd & Katella Ave 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 WEEKEND Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 354 1081 205 362 1026 156 255 585 342 124 692 328 Future Volume (veh/h) 354 1081 205 362 1026 156 255 585 342 124 692 328 Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.80 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.88 1.00 0.77 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 377 1150 218 393 1115 170 274 629 368 135 752 357 Adj No. of Lanes 231231231231 Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000000000 Cap, veh/h 419 1525 377 419 1525 426 340 1564 423 340 1564 371 Arrive On Green 0.13 0.32 0.32 0.13 0.32 0.32 0.11 0.33 0.33 0.11 0.33 0.33 Sat Flow, veh/h 3141 4692 1160 3141 4692 1310 3141 4692 1269 3141 4692 1112 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 377 1150 218 393 1115 170 274 629 368 135 752 357Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1570 1564 1160 1570 1564 1310 1570 1564 1269 1570 1564 1112Q Serve(g_s), s 14.2 26.3 13.4 14.9 25.2 12.1 10.2 12.4 32.7 4.8 15.3 25.5Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 14.2 26.3 13.4 14.9 25.2 12.1 10.2 12.4 32.7 4.8 15.3 25.5Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 419 1525 377 419 1525 426 340 1564 423 340 1564 371V/C Ratio(X)0.90 0.75 0.58 0.94 0.73 0.40 0.81 0.40 0.87 0.40 0.48 0.96Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 419 1525 377 419 1525 426 340 1564 423 340 1564 371HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 51.2 36.2 17.3 51.5 35.9 31.4 52.3 30.8 37.6 49.8 31.8 17.9Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 22.0 3.5 6.3 28.9 3.1 2.8 12.3 0.8 20.9 0.3 1.1 38.3Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 7.5 11.8 5.0 8.1 11.3 4.7 5.0 5.5 13.9 2.1 6.8 11.8LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 73.2 39.7 23.6 80.5 39.0 34.2 64.6 31.6 58.5 50.1 32.8 56.2LnGrp LOS E D C F D C E C E D C E Approach Vol, veh/h 1745 1678 1271 1244Approach Delay, s/veh 44.9 48.2 46.5 41.4Approach LOS DDDD Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 12345678Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 16.0 43.0 19.0 42.0 16.0 43.0 19.0 42.0Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.0 38.0 13.0 37.0 11.0 38.0 13.0 37.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.8 34.7 16.9 28.3 12.2 27.5 16.2 27.2Green Ext Time (p_c), s 1.8 1.2 0.0 4.5 0.0 3.2 0.0 4.5 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 45.5HCM 2010 LOS D G-234 Volume 5: Harbor Blvd & Katella Ave 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 WEEKEND Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 4 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Traffic Volume (vph) 354 1081 205 362 1026 156 255 585 342 124 692 328 Future Volume (vph) 354 1081 205 362 1026 156 255 585 342 124 692 328 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 214 101 135 256 Confl. Bikes (#/hr) Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.92 0.92 0.92 Growth Factor 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Bus Blockages (#/hr)000000000000 Parking (#/hr) Mid-Block Traffic (%)0%0%0%0% Adj. Flow (vph)377 1150 218 393 1115 170 274 629 368 135 752 357 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 377 1150 218 393 1115 170 274 629 368 135 752 357 Intersection Summary G-235 Opening Year (2019) With Project ICU LOS G-236 PROJECT:Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO:Year 2019 With PINTERSECTION:153 Harbor Blvd / I-5 NB Ramps AM PEAK HOURMOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0.0 0 * 0 NBT 3.0 5,100 715 0.19 5,100 1,267 0.34 *NBR Free 247 462 SBL 1.0 1,700 18 0.01 1,700 45 0.03 *SBT 4.0 6,800 1,559 0.23 * 6,800 1,324 0.19 SBR 0.0 0 0 EBL 0.0 0 0 EBT 0.0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 *EBR 0.0 0 0 WBL 1.5 2,550 45 0.02 * 2,550 42 0.02 * WBT 0.0 0 0.00 0 0.00 WBR 1.5 2,550 676 0.27 * 2,550 708 0.28 * N/S Movements 0.23 0.37E/W Movements 0.02 0.02 Rt. Turn Component 0.25 0.25Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.55 0.68LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A B PROJECT: Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO:Year 2019 With PINTERSECTION:154 Harbor Blvd / I-5 SB Ramps MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.0 1,700 26 0.02 * 1,700 82 0.05 *NBT 4.0 6,800 754 0.11 6,800 1,510 0.22 NBR 0.0 0 0 SBL 0.0 0 0 SBT 3.0 5,100 928 0.32 * 5,100 716 0.26 *SBR Free 694 622 EBL 2.0 3,400 171 0.05 * 3,400 262 0.08 *EBT 0.0 0 0.00 0 0.00 EBR Free 363 358 WBL 0.0 0 0 WBT 0.0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 *WBR 0.0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.33 0.31E/W Movements 0.05 0.08Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.43 0.44LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A A AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR G-237 PROJECT:Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO:Year 2019 With PrINTERSECTION:155 Harbor Blvd / Manchester Ave MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.0 1,700 69 0.04 1,700 88 0.05 NBT 3.0 5,100 764 0.16 * 5,100 1,347 0.28 *NBR 0.0 62 85 SBL 1.0 1,700 257 0.15 * 1,700 139 0.08 *SBT 4.0 6,800 1,011 0.15 6,800 930 0.14 SBR 0.0 0 0 EBL 0.0 0 0 EBT 0.0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 *EBR 0.0 0 0 WBL 1.0 1,700 27 0.02 * 1,700 75 0.04 * WBT 0.0 0 0.00 0 0.00 WBR 1.0 1,700 91 0.05 1,700 283 0.17 * N/S Movements 0.31 0.36E/W Movements 0.02 0.04 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.08Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.38 0.54LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A A PROJECT: Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO:Year 2019 With PrINTERSECTION:157 Harbor Blvd / Disney Way MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.0 1,700 46 0.03 1,700 70 0.04 NBT 3.0 5,100 677 0.15 * 5,100 1,040 0.23 *NBR 0.0 91 109 SBL 2.0 3,400 179 0.05 * 3,400 182 0.05 * SBT 3.0 5,100 884 0.17 5,100 889 0.18 SBR 0.0 3 5 EBL 0.0 1 2 EBT 2.0 3,400 1 0.00 * 3,400 24 0.01 * EBR 0.0 0 3 WBL 2.0 3,400 79 0.02 * 3,400 151 0.04 *WBT 1.0 1,700 0 0.00 1,700 16 0.01 WBR 1.0 1,700 168 0.10 * 1,700 247 0.15 * N/S Movements 0.20 0.28E/W Movements 0.02 0.05Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.28 0.38LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A A AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR G-238 PROJECT:Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO:Year 2019 With PINTERSECTION:158 Harbor Blvd / Katella Ave MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2.0 3,400 155 0.05 * 3,400 171 0.05 NBT 3.0 5,100 566 0.11 5,100 909 0.18 *NBR 1.0 1,700 317 0.19 * 1,700 404 0.24 SBL 2.0 3,400 115 0.03 3,400 139 0.04 *SBT 3.0 5,100 670 0.13 * 5,100 749 0.15 SBR 1.0 1,700 186 0.11 1,700 199 0.12 EBL 2.0 3,400 45 0.01 3,400 49 0.01 EBT 3.0 5,100 901 0.18 * 5,100 1,007 0.20 *EBR 1.0 1,700 175 0.10 1,700 205 0.12 WBL 2.0 3,400 245 0.07 * 3,400 327 0.10 * WBT 3.0 5,100 686 0.13 5,100 1,381 0.27 WBR 1.0 1,700 147 0.09 1,700 179 0.11 N/S Movements 0.18 0.22E/W Movements 0.25 0.29 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.48 0.56LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A A PROJECT: Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO:Year 2019 With PINTERSECTION:173 Clementine St / Disney Way MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.0 1,700 67 0.04 * 1,700 123 0.07 *NBT 2.0 3,400 116 0.05 3,400 113 0.04 NBR 0.0 65 14 SBL 2.0 3,400 54 0.02 3,400 67 0.02 SBT 2.0 3,400 96 0.03 * 3,400 133 0.06 *SBR 0.0 15 63 EBL 1.0 1,700 41 0.02 1,700 137 0.08 *EBT 3.0 5,100 109 0.02 * 5,100 331 0.06 EBR 1.0 1,700 69 0.04 1,700 108 0.06 WBL 1.0 1,700 165 0.10 * 1,700 43 0.03 WBT 3.0 5,100 181 0.07 5,100 246 0.07 *WBR 0.0 170 93 N/S Movements 0.07 0.13E/W Movements 0.12 0.15Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.24 0.33LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A A AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR G-239 PROJECT:Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO:Year 2019 With PrINTERSECTION:174 Clementine St / Katella Ave MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.0 1,700 32 0.02 * 1,700 119 0.07 *NBT 1.0 1,700 51 0.03 1,700 121 0.07 NBR 1.0 1,700 99 0.06 1,700 270 0.16 * SBL 1.0 1,700 46 0.03 1,700 49 0.03 SBT 1.0 1,700 198 0.12 * 1,700 132 0.08 *SBR 1.0 1,700 89 0.05 1,700 141 0.08 EBL 2.0 3,400 228 0.07 3,400 279 0.08 *EBT 3.0 5,100 899 0.20 * 5,100 1,147 0.24 EBR 0.0 131 59 WBL 2.0 3,400 281 0.08 * 3,400 196 0.06 WBT 3.0 5,100 973 0.21 5,100 1,586 0.33 *WBR 0.0 106 122 N/S Movements 0.14 0.15E/W Movements 0.28 0.42 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.03Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.47 0.64LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A B PROJECT: Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO:Year 2019 With PrINTERSECTION:195 Anaheim Blvd / I-5 SB Ramps AM PEAK HOURMOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2.0 3,400 46 0.01 3,400 54 0.02 NBT 3.0 5,100 895 0.18 * 5,100 1,072 0.21 *NBR 0.0 11 6 SBL 2.0 3,400 570 0.17 * 3,400 580 0.17 * SBT 3.0 5,100 736 0.17 5,100 817 0.18 SBR 0.0 126 87 EBL 2.0 3,400 263 0.08 * 3,400 335 0.10 *EBT 4.0 6,800 139 0.03 6,800 262 0.07 EBR 0.0 85 211 WBL 0.0 0 0 WBT 3.0 5,100 137 0.03 * 5,100 279 0.06 *WBR 0.0 1 3 N/S Movements 0.35 0.38E/W Movements 0.10 0.15Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.50 0.59LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A A PM PEAK HOUR AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR G-240 PROJECT:Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO:Year 2019 With PINTERSECTION:196 I-5 SB Off Ramp / Disney Way MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.0 1,700 20 0.01 1,700 4 0.00 NBT 0.0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 *NBR 1.0 1,700 35 0.02 * 1,700 65 0.04 * SBL 1.3 2,210 307 0.14 * 2,210 306 0.14 *SBT 0.3 510 19 0.04 510 14 0.03 SBR 1.3 2,210 156 0.07 * 2,210 162 0.07 * EBL 0.0 0 * 0 EBT 3.0 5,100 222 0.05 5,100 450 0.09 *EBR 0.0 10 16 WBL 1.0 1,700 17 0.01 1,700 23 0.01 WBT 3.0 5,100 324 0.06 * 5,100 380 0.07 *WBR 0.0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.14 0.14E/W Movements 0.06 0.10 Rt. Turn Component 0.04 0.07Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.30 0.36LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A A PROJECT: Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO:Year 2019 With PINTERSECTION:197 Anaheim Blvd / Katella Ave MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 2.0 3,400 131 0.04 3,400 181 0.05 *NBT 3.0 5,100 788 0.15 * 5,100 895 0.18 NBR 1.0 1,700 146 0.09 1,700 114 0.07 SBL 2.0 3,400 69 0.02 * 3,400 74 0.02 SBT 3.0 5,100 582 0.11 5,100 778 0.15 *SBR 1.0 1,700 176 0.10 1,700 198 0.12 EBL 2.0 3,400 151 0.04 * 3,400 180 0.05 *EBT 4.0 6,800 922 0.14 6,800 1,184 0.19 EBR 0.0 50 120 WBL 2.0 3,400 110 0.03 3,400 160 0.05 WBT 3.0 5,100 956 0.19 * 5,100 1,539 0.30 *WBR 1.0 1,700 45 0.03 1,700 70 0.04 N/S Movements 0.17 0.21E/W Movements 0.23 0.35Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.46 0.61LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A B PM PEAK HOURAM PEAK HOUR AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR G-241 PROJECT:Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO:Year 2019 With PrINTERSECTION:210 Manchester Ave/I-5 SB Ramps / Katella Ave MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 2,550 35 0.01 * 2,550 52 0.02 *NBT 0.0 0 0.00 0 0.00 NBR 1.5 2,550 413 0.16 * 2,550 315 0.12 * SBL 2.0 3,400 24 0.01 3,400 27 0.01 SBT 2.0 3,400 105 0.03 * 3,400 57 0.02 *SBR 1.0 1,700 6 0.00 1,700 5 0.00 EBL 0.0 0 * 0 *EBT 3.0 5,100 679 0.13 5,100 650 0.13 EBR 1.0 1,700 368 0.22 * 1,700 585 0.34 * WBL 2.0 3,400 131 0.04 3,400 308 0.09 WBT 3.0 5,100 996 0.20 * 5,100 1,647 0.32 *WBR 0.0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.04 0.04E/W Movements 0.20 0.32 Rt. Turn Component 0.19 0.23Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.48 0.64LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A B PROJECT: Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO:Year 2019 With PrINTERSECTION:211 Anaheim Way/I-5 NB Ramps / Katella Ave MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.5 2,550 525 0.21 * 2,550 563 0.22 *NBT 3.5 5,950 450 0.11 5,950 1,222 0.21 NBR 0.0 181 41 SBL 0.0 0 0 SBT 0.0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 *SBR 0.0 0 0 EBL 2.0 3,400 74 0.02 3,400 151 0.04 *EBT 3.0 5,100 1,032 0.20 * 5,100 850 0.17 EBR 0.0 0 0 WBL 0.0 0 * 0 WBT 4.0 6,800 739 0.11 6,800 1,574 0.23 *WBR 1.0 1,700 53 0.03 1,700 86 0.05 N/S Movements 0.21 0.22E/W Movements 0.20 0.28Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.46 0.55LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A A AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR G-242 PROJECT:Anaheim Plaza HotelSCENARIO:Year 2019 With PINTERSECTION:476 Anaheim GardenWalk / Disney Way MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.0 1,700 21 0.01 * 1,700 30 0.02 *NBT 0.0 0 0.00 0 0.00 NBR 1.0 1,700 30 0.02 1,700 71 0.04 SBL 0.0 0 0 SBT 0.0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 *SBR 0.0 0 0 EBL 0.0 6 1 EBT 3.0 5,100 182 0.04 * 5,100 231 0.05 *EBR 0.0 22 27 WBL 1.0 1,700 41 0.02 * 1,700 140 0.08 * WBT 3.0 5,100 221 0.04 5,100 386 0.08 WBR 0.0 0 0 N/S Movements 0.01 0.02E/W Movements 0.07 0.13 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.13 0.20LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)A A PM PEAK HOURAM PEAK HOUR G-243 Opening Year (2019) With Project HCM LOS G-244 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 1: Harbor Blvd & I-5 NB Ramps 3/18/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 PLUS PROJECT AM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 1 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 45 676 715 247 18 1559 Future Volume (veh/h) 45 676 715 247 18 1559 Number 3 18 2 12 1 6 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 48 719 769 0 19 1607 Adj No. of Lanes 123114 Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.93 0.93 0.97 0.97 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000 Cap, veh/h 451 805 2311 699 154 3718 Arrive On Green 0.28 0.28 1.00 0.00 0.09 0.64 Sat Flow, veh/h 1619 2890 4794 1445 1619 6086 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 48 719 769 0 19 1607Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1619 1445 1547 1445 1619 1462Q Serve(g_s), s 1.5 16.7 0.1 0.0 0.8 9.7Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.5 16.7 0.1 0.0 0.8 9.7Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 451 805 2311 699 154 3718V/C Ratio(X)0.11 0.89 0.33 0.00 0.12 0.43Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 451 805 2311 699 409 3718HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 18.8 24.2 0.1 0.0 29.0 6.4Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 12.0 0.4 0.0 0.1 0.4Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.7 8.0 0.1 0.0 0.3 3.9LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 18.8 36.3 0.5 0.0 29.1 6.8LnGrp LOS B D A C A Approach Vol, veh/h 767 769 1626Approach Delay, s/veh 35.2 0.5 7.0Approach LOS D A A Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.6 37.9 47.5 22.5Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 4.7 5.0 5.0 5.5Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 16 21.8 42.5 17.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.8 2.1 11.7 18.7Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 15.6 22.0 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 12.3HCM 2010 LOS B Notes G-245 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 2: Harbor Blvd & I-5 SB Ramps 3/18/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 PLUS PROJECT AM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 3 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 171 363 26 754 928 694 Future Volume (veh/h) 171 363 26 754 928 694 Number 7 14 5 2 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 201 0 28 802 987 0 Adj No. of Lanes 211431 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000 Cap, veh/h 904 416 185 3664 2212 668 Arrive On Green 0.29 0.00 0.11 0.63 0.95 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 3141 1445 1619 6086 4794 1445 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 201 0 28 802 987 0Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1570 1445 1619 1462 1547 1445Q Serve(g_s), s 3.4 0.0 1.1 4.2 1.2 0.0Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.4 0.0 1.1 4.2 1.2 0.0Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 904 416 185 3664 2212 668V/C Ratio(X)0.22 0.00 0.15 0.22 0.45 0.00Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 942 434 386 3664 2212 668HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.91 0.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 19.0 0.0 27.9 5.7 0.9 0.0Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.6 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.5 0.0 0.5 1.7 0.5 0.0LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 19.0 0.0 28.1 5.8 1.5 0.0LnGrp LOS B C A A Approach Vol, veh/h 201 830 987Approach Delay, s/veh 19.0 6.5 1.5Approach LOS B A A Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 46.9 23.1 10.5 36.4Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.5 * 4.2 5.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 41.0 18.5 * 15 21.8Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.2 5.4 3.1 3.2Green Ext Time (p_c), s 17.0 0.4 0.0 11.8 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 5.3HCM 2010 LOS A Notes G-246 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 4: Harbor Blvd & Disney Way 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 PLUS PROJECT AM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 1 1 0 79 0 168 46 677 91 179 884 3 Future Volume (veh/h) 1 1 0 79 0 168 46 677 91 179 884 3 Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.87 1.00 1.00 0.87 1.00 0.79 1.00 0.75 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 2 2 0 94 0 200 51 752 101 192 951 3 Adj No. of Lanes 020211130230 Peak Hour Factor 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.93 0.93 0.93 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000000000 Cap, veh/h 285 383 0 192 552 397 77 2062 271 270 2636 8 Arrive On Green 0.24 0.24 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.32 0.05 0.51 0.51 0.09 0.55 0.54 Sat Flow, veh/h 958 1685 0 3141 1700 1256 1619 4008 527 3141 4770 15 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 2 2 0 94 0 200 51 577 276 192 617 337Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1097 1470 0 1570 1700 1256 1619 1547 1441 1570 1547 1691Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.1 0.0 3.5 0.0 15.5 3.7 13.4 13.9 7.1 13.4 13.4Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.1 0.1 0.0 3.5 0.0 15.5 3.7 13.4 13.9 7.1 13.4 13.4Prop In Lane 0.89 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.37 1.00 0.01Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 318 350 0 192 552 397 77 1592 741 270 1710 935V/C Ratio(X)0.01 0.00 0.00 0.49 0.00 0.50 0.66 0.36 0.37 0.71 0.36 0.36Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 318 350 0 445 666 481 229 1592 741 445 1710 935HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 34.9 34.8 0.0 54.5 0.0 33.4 56.2 17.4 17.6 53.4 15.0 15.0Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 1.0 10.9 0.6 1.4 1.3 0.6 1.1Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.0 5.5 1.9 5.8 5.8 3.1 5.8 6.5LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 34.9 34.9 0.0 55.2 0.0 34.4 67.1 18.0 19.1 54.7 15.6 16.1LnGrp LOS C C E C E B B D B B Approach Vol, veh/h 4 294 904 1146Approach Delay, s/veh 34.9 41.0 21.1 22.3Approach LOS CDCC Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 123456 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 13.3 64.7 10.3 31.6 8.7 69.3 41.9Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.0 45.0 15.0 25.0 16.0 45.0 45.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 9.1 15.9 5.5 2.1 5.7 15.4 17.5Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 9.8 0.1 1.0 0.1 9.8 1.0 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 24.2HCM 2010 LOS C Notes G-247 Volume 4: Harbor Blvd & Disney Way 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 PLUS PROJECT AM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 3 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Traffic Volume (vph)1 1 0 79 0 168 46 677 91 179 884 3 Future Volume (vph)1 1 0 79 0 168 46 677 91 179 884 3 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 236 138 615 277 Confl. Bikes (#/hr) Peak Hour Factor 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.93 0.93 0.93 Growth Factor 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Bus Blockages (#/hr)000000000000 Parking (#/hr) Mid-Block Traffic (%)0%0%0%0% Adj. Flow (vph)2 2 0 94 0 200 51 752 101 192 951 3 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 2 2 0 94 0 200 51 853 0 192 954 0 Intersection Summary G-248 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 5: Harbor Blvd & Katella Ave 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 PLUS PROJECT AM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 45 901 175 245 686 147 155 566 317 115 670 186 Future Volume (veh/h) 45 901 175 245 686 147 155 566 317 115 670 186 Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.90 1.00 0.80 1.00 0.90 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 52 1036 201 263 738 158 182 666 373 137 798 221 Adj No. of Lanes 231231231231 Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.84 0.84 0.84 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000000000 Cap, veh/h 419 1720 453 393 1720 479 282 1408 346 314 1455 401 Arrive On Green 0.13 0.37 0.37 0.12 0.37 0.37 0.09 0.30 0.30 0.10 0.31 0.31 Sat Flow, veh/h 3141 4692 1235 3141 4692 1307 3141 4692 1155 3141 4692 1294 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 52 1036 201 263 738 158 182 666 373 137 798 221Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1570 1564 1235 1570 1564 1307 1570 1564 1155 1570 1564 1294Q Serve(g_s), s 1.8 21.5 14.8 9.6 14.2 10.5 6.7 13.9 25.3 4.9 17.0 11.7Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.8 21.5 14.8 9.6 14.2 10.5 6.7 13.9 25.3 4.9 17.0 11.7Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 419 1720 453 393 1720 479 282 1408 346 314 1455 401V/C Ratio(X)0.12 0.60 0.44 0.67 0.43 0.33 0.64 0.47 1.08 0.44 0.55 0.55Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 419 1720 453 393 1720 479 340 1408 346 340 1455 401HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 45.8 30.9 28.7 50.1 28.6 27.4 52.8 34.3 20.7 50.8 34.4 16.2Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 1.6 3.1 4.4 0.8 1.8 1.7 1.1 70.4 0.4 1.5 5.4Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.8 9.6 5.4 4.4 6.2 4.0 3.0 6.1 14.8 2.1 7.5 4.8LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 46.0 32.5 31.9 54.5 29.3 29.2 54.4 35.4 91.1 51.2 35.9 21.6LnGrp LOS DCCDCCDDFDDC Approach Vol, veh/h 1289 1159 1221 1156Approach Delay, s/veh 32.9 35.0 55.3 35.0Approach LOS C D E C Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 12345678Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 15.0 39.0 18.0 48.0 13.8 40.2 19.0 47.0Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 6.0 * 6 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.0 34.0 12.0 * 42 11.0 34.0 12.0 42.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.9 27.3 11.6 23.5 8.7 19.0 3.8 16.2Green Ext Time (p_c), s 1.5 2.1 0.0 6.2 0.1 3.1 4.0 4.4 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 39.6HCM 2010 LOS D Notes G-249 Volume 5: Harbor Blvd & Katella Ave 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 PLUS PROJECT AM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 4 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Traffic Volume (vph)45 901 175 245 686 147 155 566 317 115 670 186 Future Volume (vph)45 901 175 245 686 147 155 566 317 115 670 186 Confl. Peds. (#/hr)178 117 201 108 Confl. Bikes (#/hr) Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.84 0.84 0.84 Growth Factor 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Bus Blockages (#/hr)000000000000 Parking (#/hr) Mid-Block Traffic (%)0%0%0%0% Adj. Flow (vph)52 1036 201 263 738 158 182 666 373 137 798 221 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 52 1036 201 263 738 158 182 666 373 137 798 221 Intersection Summary G-250 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 9: Zeyn St/I-5 SB Off Ramp & Disney Way/Manchester Ave 3/21/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 PLUS PROJECT AM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)0 222 10 17 324 0 20 0 35 307 19 156 Future Volume (vph)0 222 10 17 324 0 20 0 35 307 19 156 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Total Lost time (s)4.7 5.1 5.1 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.91 0.95 Frt 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot)4612 1615 4641 1615 1445 1534 1467 1373 Flt Permitted 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm)4612 1615 4641 1615 1445 1534 1467 1373 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.77 0.77 0.77 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.89 0.89 0.89Adj. Flow (vph) 0 249 11 22 421 0 32 0 56 345 21 175RTOR Reduction (vph)060000004205118Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 254 0 22 421 0 32 0 14 193 187 39 Turn Type NA Split NA Prot Perm Split NA PermProtected Phases 4 3 3 2 6 6Permitted Phases 26Actuated Green, G (s) 10.5 9.7 9.7 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0Effective Green, g (s)10.5 9.7 9.7 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.12 0.12 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25Clearance Time (s)4.7 5.1 5.1 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0Vehicle Extension (s)2.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph)605 195 562 403 361 383 366 343v/s Ratio Prot c0.06 0.01 c0.09 c0.02 0.13 c0.13v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 0.03v/c Ratio 0.42 0.11 0.75 0.08 0.04 0.50 0.51 0.11Uniform Delay, d1 31.9 31.3 34.0 23.0 22.7 25.7 25.8 23.2Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Incremental Delay, d2 2.1 0.1 4.8 0.4 0.2 4.7 5.0 0.7Delay (s)34.1 31.4 38.7 23.3 22.9 30.4 30.8 23.8Level of Service C C D C CCCCApproach Delay (s)34.1 38.4 23.1 28.6Approach LOS CDCC Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 32.6 HCM 2000 Level of Service CHCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.39Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s)19.8Intersection Capacity Utilization 42.3% ICU Level of Service AAnalysis Period (min)15c Critical Lane Group G-251 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 10: Anaheim Blvd & Manchester Ave/Manchester Ave/I-5 SB On 3/18/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 PLUS PROJECT AM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 9 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 263 139 85 0 137 1 46 895 11 570 736 126 Future Volume (veh/h) 263 139 85 0 137 1 46 895 11 570 736 126 Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 0 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 302 160 98 0 178 1 50 973 12 613 791 135 Adj No. of Lanes 240030130230 Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.77 0.77 0.77 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.93 0.93 0.93 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000000000 Cap, veh/h 350 1008 332 0 397 2 77 2104 26 623 2400 407 Arrive On Green 0.11 0.23 0.23 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.05 0.45 0.45 0.20 0.60 0.60 Sat Flow, veh/h 3141 4386 1445 0 4916 27 1619 4725 58 3141 3997 677 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 302 160 98 0 116 63 50 637 348 613 611 315Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1570 1462 1445 0 1547 1695 1619 1547 1690 1570 1547 1580Q Serve(g_s), s 11.3 3.5 6.7 0.0 4.3 4.3 3.6 17.3 17.3 23.3 11.8 11.9Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 11.3 3.5 6.7 0.0 4.3 4.3 3.6 17.3 17.3 23.3 11.8 11.9Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.02 1.00 0.03 1.00 0.43Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 350 1008 332 0 258 141 77 1377 752 623 1858 949V/C Ratio(X)0.86 0.16 0.30 0.00 0.45 0.45 0.65 0.46 0.46 0.98 0.33 0.33Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 361 1864 614 0 851 466 152 1377 752 623 1858 949HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 52.4 36.9 38.2 0.0 52.4 52.4 56.2 23.3 23.3 47.9 11.9 12.0Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 16.3 0.1 0.4 0.0 0.5 0.8 6.8 1.1 2.0 31.8 0.5 0.9Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 5.7 1.4 2.7 0.0 1.8 2.0 1.8 7.6 8.5 12.9 5.1 5.4LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 68.7 37.0 38.6 0.0 52.8 53.2 63.0 24.4 25.3 79.8 12.4 12.9LnGrp LOS E D D D D E C C E B B Approach Vol, veh/h 560 179 1035 1539Approach Delay, s/veh 54.4 53.0 26.6 39.3Approach LOS DDCD Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 1 2 45678Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 29.0 58.4 32.6 10.4 77.0 17.6 15.0Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 5.2 5.0 5.0 * 4.7 5.0 * 4.2 5.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 24 30.0 51.0 * 11 43.0 * 14 33.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 25.3 19.3 8.7 5.6 13.9 13.3 6.3Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 8.9 2.4 0.0 19.8 0.0 2.3 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 38.6HCM 2010 LOS D Notes G-252 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 12: I-5 SB Ramps & Katella Ave 3/21/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 PLUS PROJECT AM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)0 679 368 131 996 0 35 0 413 24 105 6 Future Volume (vph)0 679 368 131 996 0 35 0 413 24 105 6 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Total Lost time (s)5.3 4.5 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.6 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.97 0.91 0.95 0.91 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot)4641 1445 3133 4641 1534 1318 1373 1615 3230 1445 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm)4641 1445 3133 4641 1534 1318 1373 1615 3230 1445 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.88 0.88 0.88Adj. Flow (vph) 0 746 404 146 1107 0 43 0 510 27 119 7RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 350 0000221221005Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 746 54 146 1107 0 39 38 34 27 119 2 Turn Type NA Over Prot NA Split NA Perm Split NA PermProtected Phases 2716 77 88Permitted Phases 78Actuated Green, G (s) 25.2 12.0 12.6 42.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 21.6 21.6 21.6Effective Green, g (s)25.2 12.0 12.6 42.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 21.6 21.6 21.6Actuated g/C Ratio 0.28 0.13 0.14 0.47 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.24 0.24 0.24Clearance Time (s)5.3 4.5 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.6 4.6 4.6Vehicle Extension (s)4.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph)1299 192 438 2165 204 175 183 387 775 346v/s Ratio Prot c0.16 c0.04 0.05 c0.24 0.03 0.03 0.02 c0.04v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 0.00v/c Ratio 0.57 0.28 0.33 0.51 0.19 0.22 0.19 0.07 0.15 0.00Uniform Delay, d1 27.8 35.1 34.9 16.8 34.7 34.8 34.7 26.4 27.0 26.0Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.27 0.92 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Incremental Delay, d2 1.9 3.6 0.2 0.3 2.1 2.8 2.2 0.0 0.0 0.0Delay (s)29.6 38.7 44.4 15.7 36.8 37.6 36.9 26.5 27.0 26.0Level of Service C D D B DDDCCCApproach Delay (s)32.8 19.0 37.2 26.9Approach LOS C B D C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 27.8 HCM 2000 Level of Service CHCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.40Actuated Cycle Length (s) 90.0 Sum of lost time (s)18.6Intersection Capacity Utilization 74.1% ICU Level of Service DAnalysis Period (min)15c Critical Lane Group G-253 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 13: I-5 NB Ramps & Katella Ave 3/21/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 PLUS PROJECT AM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)74 1032 0 0 739 53 525 450 181 0 0 0 Future Volume (vph)74 1032 0 0 739 53 525 450 181 0 0 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Total Lost time (s)4.7 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.86 1.00 0.81 0.81 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.97 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (prot)3133 4641 5848 1445 1308 5263 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (perm)3133 4641 5848 1445 1308 5263 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.96 0.96 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00Adj. Flow (vph) 89 1243 0 0 880 63 547 469 189 0 0 0RTOR Reduction (vph)00000390130000Lane Group Flow (vph) 89 1243 0 0 880 24 273 919 0000 Turn Type Prot NA NA Perm Split NAProtected Phases 5 2 6 8 8Permitted Phases 6Actuated Green, G (s) 9.6 48.3 34.0 34.0 29.7 29.7Effective Green, g (s) 9.6 48.3 34.0 34.0 29.7 29.7Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.54 0.38 0.38 0.33 0.33Clearance Time (s)4.7 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.2 2.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 334 2490 2209 545 431 1736v/s Ratio Prot 0.03 c0.27 0.15 c0.21 0.17v/s Ratio Perm 0.02v/c Ratio 0.27 0.50 0.40 0.04 0.63 0.53Uniform Delay, d1 37.0 13.2 20.5 17.7 25.5 24.5Progression Factor 1.08 1.69 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.6 0.5 0.2 2.4 0.2Delay (s)40.0 23.0 21.0 17.9 27.9 24.6Level of Service D C C B C CApproach Delay (s)24.1 20.8 25.4 0.0Approach LOS C C C A Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 23.7 HCM 2000 Level of Service CHCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.59Actuated Cycle Length (s) 90.0 Sum of lost time (s)16.7Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.9% ICU Level of Service BAnalysis Period (min)15c Critical Lane Group G-254 HCM 2010 TWSC 14: Harbor Blvd & North Driveway 3/21/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 PLUS PROJECT AM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.4 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 63 751 111 0 963Future Vol, veh/h 0 63 751 111 0 963Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free FreeRT Channelized - None - None - NoneStorage Length - 0 - -- -Veh in Median Storage, # 0 -0 -- 0Grade, %0 -0 -- 0Peak Hour Factor 100 100 100 100 100 100Heavy Vehicles, %0 0 0 0 0 0Mvmt Flow 0 63 751 111 0 963 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1192 431 0 0 862 0 Stage 1 807 -- -- - Stage 2 385 -- -- -Critical Hdwy 5.7 7.1 - - 5.3 -Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.6 -- -- -Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6 -- -- -Follow-up Hdwy 3.8 3.9 - - 3.1 -Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 252 494 - - 462 - Stage 1 321 -- -- - Stage 2 607 -- -- -Platoon blocked, %- --Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 252 494 - - 462 -Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 252 -- -- - Stage 1 321 -- -- - Stage 2 607 -- -- - Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 13.4 0 0HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h)- - 494 462 -HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.128 - -HCM Control Delay (s) - - 13.4 0 -HCM Lane LOS - - B A -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.4 0 - G-255 HCM 2010 TWSC 15: Harbor Blvd & South Driveway 3/21/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 PLUS PROJECT AM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 2 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.2 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 27 839 0 0 963Future Vol, veh/h 0 27 839 0 0 963Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free FreeRT Channelized - None - None - NoneStorage Length - 0 - -- -Veh in Median Storage, # 0 -0 -- 0Grade, %0 -0 -- 0Peak Hour Factor 100 100 100 100 100 100Heavy Vehicles, %0 0 0 0 0 0Mvmt Flow 0 27 839 0 0 963 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1224 420 0 0 839 0 Stage 1 839 -- -- - Stage 2 385 -- -- -Critical Hdwy 5.7 7.1 - - 5.3 -Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.6 -- -- -Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6 -- -- -Follow-up Hdwy 3.8 3.9 - - 3.1 -Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 243 502 - - 474 - Stage 1 307 -- -- - Stage 2 607 -- -- -Platoon blocked, %- --Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 243 502 - - 474 -Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 243 -- -- - Stage 1 307 -- -- - Stage 2 607 -- -- - Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 12.6 0 0HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h)- - 502 474 -HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.054 - -HCM Control Delay (s) - - 12.6 0 -HCM Lane LOS - - B A -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.2 0 - G-256 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 1: Harbor Blvd & I-5 NB Ramps 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 PLUS PROJET PM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 1 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 42 708 1267 462 45 1324 Future Volume (veh/h) 42 708 1267 462 45 1324 Number 3 18 2 12 1 6 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 48 805 1348 0 49 1455 Adj No. of Lanes 123114 Peak Hour Factor 0.88 0.88 0.94 0.94 0.91 0.91 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000 Cap, veh/h 439 784 2061 621 252 3759 Arrive On Green 0.27 0.27 0.89 0.00 0.16 0.64 Sat Flow, veh/h 1619 2890 4794 1445 1619 6086 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 48 805 1348 0 49 1455Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1619 1445 1547 1445 1619 1462Q Serve(g_s), s 1.6 19.0 5.4 0.0 1.8 8.3Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.6 19.0 5.4 0.0 1.8 8.3Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 439 784 2061 621 252 3759V/C Ratio(X)0.11 1.03 0.65 0.00 0.19 0.39Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 439 784 2061 621 393 3759HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 19.1 25.5 2.5 0.0 25.7 5.9Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 39.0 1.5 0.0 0.1 0.3Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.7 11.8 2.3 0.0 0.8 3.3LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 19.2 64.5 3.9 0.0 25.9 6.2LnGrp LOS B F A C A Approach Vol, veh/h 853 1348 1504Approach Delay, s/veh 61.9 3.9 6.9Approach LOS E A A Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 13.9 34.1 48.0 22.0Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 4.7 5.0 5.0 5.5Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 15 23.0 15.0 16.5Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.8 7.4 10.3 21.0Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 13.8 4.5 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 18.5HCM 2010 LOS B Notes G-257 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 2: Harbor Blvd & I-5 SB Ramps 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 PLUS PROJET PM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 3 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 262 358 82 1510 716 622 Future Volume (veh/h) 262 358 82 1510 716 622 Number 7 14 5 2 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 294 0 92 1697 778 0 Adj No. of Lanes 211431 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000 Cap, veh/h 917 422 328 3639 1781 534 Arrive On Green 0.29 0.00 0.20 0.62 0.77 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 3141 1445 1619 6086 4794 1445 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 294 0 92 1697 778 0Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1570 1445 1619 1462 1547 1445Q Serve(g_s), s 5.1 0.0 3.4 10.8 4.1 0.0Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.1 0.0 3.4 10.8 4.1 0.0Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 917 422 328 3639 1781 534V/C Ratio(X)0.32 0.00 0.28 0.47 0.44 0.00Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 942 434 386 3639 1781 534HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.93 0.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 19.4 0.0 23.6 7.0 5.5 0.0Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.7 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.2 0.0 1.5 4.4 1.7 0.0LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 19.4 0.0 23.8 7.5 6.2 0.0LnGrp LOS B C A A Approach Vol, veh/h 294 1789 778Approach Delay, s/veh 19.4 8.3 6.2Approach LOS B A A Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 46.6 23.4 16.7 29.9Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.5 * 4.2 5.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 41.0 18.5 * 15 21.8Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 12.8 7.1 5.4 6.1Green Ext Time (p_c), s 21.4 0.6 0.1 13.2 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 8.9HCM 2010 LOS A Notes G-258 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 4: Harbor Blvd & Disney Way 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 PLUS PROJET PM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 2 24 3 151 16 247 70 1040 109 182 889 5 Future Volume (veh/h) 2 24 3 151 16 247 70 1040 109 182 889 5 Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.91 0.80 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.80 1.00 0.80 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 3 31 4 159 17 260 82 1224 128 194 946 5 Adj No. of Lanes 020211130230 Peak Hour Factor 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000000000 Cap, veh/h 66 566 69 262 562 424 116 2112 221 272 2488 13 Arrive On Green 0.22 0.22 0.21 0.08 0.33 0.32 0.07 0.51 0.50 0.09 0.52 0.51 Sat Flow, veh/h 144 2549 312 3141 1700 1314 1619 4159 435 3141 4757 25 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 20 0 18 159 17 260 82 911 441 194 615 336Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1604 0 1402 1570 1700 1314 1619 1547 1499 1570 1547 1688Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 1.2 5.9 0.8 20.1 5.9 24.6 24.7 7.2 14.2 14.2Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.1 0.0 1.2 5.9 0.8 20.1 5.9 24.6 24.7 7.2 14.2 14.2Prop In Lane 0.15 0.22 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.29 1.00 0.01Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 391 0 311 262 562 424 116 1572 762 272 1619 883V/C Ratio(X)0.05 0.00 0.06 0.61 0.03 0.61 0.71 0.58 0.58 0.71 0.38 0.38Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 395 0 315 445 666 504 229 1572 762 445 1619 883HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 36.7 0.0 36.9 53.1 27.2 34.4 54.5 20.6 20.7 53.4 17.0 17.0Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.8 0.0 1.6 9.3 1.6 3.2 1.3 0.7 1.2Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.5 0.0 0.5 2.6 0.4 7.4 3.0 10.8 10.9 3.2 6.2 6.9LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 36.8 0.0 37.0 53.9 27.2 36.0 63.8 22.2 23.9 54.7 17.7 18.3LnGrp LOS D DDCDECCDBB Approach Vol, veh/h 38 436 1434 1145Approach Delay, s/veh 36.9 42.2 25.1 24.1Approach LOS DDCC Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 123456 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 13.4 64.0 13.0 29.6 11.6 65.8 42.7Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.0 45.0 15.0 25.0 16.0 45.0 45.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 9.2 26.7 7.9 3.2 7.9 16.2 22.1Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 10.7 0.2 1.4 0.1 13.7 1.4 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 27.3HCM 2010 LOS C Notes G-259 Volume 4: Harbor Blvd & Disney Way 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 PLUS PROJET PM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 3 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Traffic Volume (vph)2 24 3 151 16 247 70 1040 109 182 889 5 Future Volume (vph)2 24 3 151 16 247 70 1040 109 182 889 5 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 140 97 382 191 Confl. Bikes (#/hr)33 Peak Hour Factor 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.94 0.94 0.94 Growth Factor 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Bus Blockages (#/hr)000000000000 Parking (#/hr) Mid-Block Traffic (%)0%0%0%0% Adj. Flow (vph)3 31 4 159 17 260 82 1224 128 194 946 5 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 3 35 0 159 17 260 82 1352 0 194 951 0 Intersection Summary G-260 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 5: Harbor Blvd & Katella Ave 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 PLUS PROJET PM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 7 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 49 1007 205 327 1381 179 171 909 404 139 749 199 Future Volume (veh/h) 49 1007 205 327 1381 179 171 909 404 139 749 199 Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.80 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.86 1.00 0.76 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 52 1060 216 359 1518 197 188 999 444 160 861 229 Adj No. of Lanes 231231231231 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.87 0.87 0.87 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000000000 Cap, veh/h 340 1525 373 471 1720 484 290 1408 373 393 1561 365 Arrive On Green 0.11 0.32 0.32 0.15 0.37 0.37 0.09 0.30 0.30 0.13 0.33 0.33 Sat Flow, veh/h 3141 4692 1149 3141 4692 1321 3141 4692 1243 3141 4692 1098 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 52 1060 216 359 1518 197 188 999 444 160 861 229Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1570 1564 1149 1570 1564 1321 1570 1564 1243 1570 1564 1098Q Serve(g_s), s 1.8 23.6 13.9 13.2 36.3 13.3 6.9 22.7 36.0 5.6 18.0 15.0Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.8 23.6 13.9 13.2 36.3 13.3 6.9 22.7 36.0 5.6 18.0 15.0Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 340 1525 373 471 1720 484 290 1408 373 393 1561 365V/C Ratio(X)0.15 0.70 0.58 0.76 0.88 0.41 0.65 0.71 1.19 0.41 0.55 0.63Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 340 1525 373 471 1720 484 393 1408 373 393 1561 365HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 48.5 35.3 18.4 48.9 35.6 28.3 52.6 37.4 42.0 48.4 32.7 17.2Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 2.6 6.4 7.2 6.9 2.5 0.9 3.1 109.5 0.3 1.4 7.9Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.8 10.6 5.0 6.2 16.7 5.2 3.0 10.2 23.7 2.5 7.9 5.3LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 48.7 38.0 24.8 56.1 42.5 30.8 53.5 40.4 151.5 48.7 34.1 25.0LnGrp LOS D D C E DCDDFDCC Approach Vol, veh/h 1328 2074 1631 1250Approach Delay, s/veh 36.2 43.8 72.2 34.3Approach LOS D D E C Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 12345678Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 18.0 39.0 21.0 42.0 14.1 42.9 16.0 47.0Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.0 34.0 15.0 37.0 13.0 34.0 10.0 42.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 7.6 38.0 15.2 25.6 8.9 20.0 3.8 38.3Green Ext Time (p_c), s 1.5 0.0 0.0 5.0 0.2 3.5 1.0 2.6 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 47.7HCM 2010 LOS D G-261 Volume 5: Harbor Blvd & Katella Ave 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 PLUS PROJET PM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 4 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Traffic Volume (vph)49 1007 205 327 1381 179 171 909 404 139 749 199 Future Volume (vph)49 1007 205 327 1381 179 171 909 404 139 749 199 Confl. Peds. (#/hr)222 105 140 266 Confl. Bikes (#/hr) Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.87 0.87 0.87 Growth Factor 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Bus Blockages (#/hr)000000000000 Parking (#/hr) Mid-Block Traffic (%)0%0%0%0% Adj. Flow (vph)52 1060 216 359 1518 197 188 999 444 160 861 229 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 52 1060 216 359 1518 197 188 999 444 160 861 229 Intersection Summary G-262 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 9: Zeyn St/I-5 SB Off Ramp & Disney Way/Manchester Ave 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 PLUS PROJET PM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)0 450 16 23 380 0 4 0 65 306 14 162 Future Volume (vph)0 450 16 23 380 0 4 0 65 306 14 162 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Total Lost time (s)4.7 5.1 5.1 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.91 0.95 Frt 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot)4617 1615 4641 1615 1445 1534 1464 1373 Flt Permitted 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm)4617 1615 4641 1615 1445 1534 1464 1373 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.87 0.87 0.87Adj. Flow (vph) 0 511 18 27 442 0 7 0 114 352 16 186RTOR Reduction (vph)040000008605125Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 525 0 27 442 0 7 0 29 194 188 42 Turn Type NA Split NA Prot Perm Split NA PermProtected Phases 4 3 3 2 6 6Permitted Phases 26Actuated Green, G (s) 10.5 9.7 9.7 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0Effective Green, g (s)10.5 9.7 9.7 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.12 0.12 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25Clearance Time (s)4.7 5.1 5.1 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0Vehicle Extension (s)2.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph)605 195 562 403 361 383 366 343v/s Ratio Prot c0.11 0.02 c0.10 0.00 0.13 c0.13v/s Ratio Perm c0.02 0.03v/c Ratio 0.87 0.14 0.79 0.02 0.08 0.51 0.51 0.12Uniform Delay, d1 34.1 31.4 34.1 22.6 23.0 25.8 25.8 23.2Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Incremental Delay, d2 15.4 0.1 6.6 0.1 0.4 4.7 5.1 0.7Delay (s)49.5 31.5 40.8 22.7 23.4 30.5 30.9 23.9Level of Service D C D C CCCCApproach Delay (s)49.5 40.2 23.3 28.6Approach LOS DDCC Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 38.1 HCM 2000 Level of Service DHCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.47Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s)19.8Intersection Capacity Utilization 47.4% ICU Level of Service AAnalysis Period (min)15c Critical Lane Group G-263 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 10: Anaheim Blvd & Manchester Ave/Manchester Ave/I-5 SB On 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 PLUS PROJET PM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 8 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 335 262 211 0 279 3 54 1072 6 580 817 87 Future Volume (veh/h) 335 262 211 0 279 3 54 1072 6 580 817 87 Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 0 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 404 316 254 0 321 3 63 1247 7 611 860 92 Adj No. of Lanes 240030130230 Peak Hour Factor 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000000000 Cap, veh/h 361 1194 393 0 579 5 83 1919 11 623 2361 252 Arrive On Green 0.12 0.27 0.27 0.00 0.12 0.12 0.05 0.40 0.40 0.20 0.55 0.55 Sat Flow, veh/h 3141 4386 1445 0 4895 44 1619 4763 27 3141 4260 454 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 404 316 254 0 209 115 63 810 444 611 624 328Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1570 1462 1445 0 1547 1692 1619 1547 1695 1570 1547 1620Q Serve(g_s), s 13.8 6.8 18.6 0.0 7.6 7.7 4.6 25.4 25.4 23.2 13.5 13.6Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 13.8 6.8 18.6 0.0 7.6 7.7 4.6 25.4 25.4 23.2 13.5 13.6Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.03 1.00 0.02 1.00 0.28Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 361 1194 393 0 378 207 83 1247 683 623 1715 898V/C Ratio(X)1.12 0.26 0.65 0.00 0.55 0.56 0.76 0.65 0.65 0.98 0.36 0.37Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 361 1864 614 0 851 465 152 1247 683 623 1715 898HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 53.1 34.3 38.6 0.0 49.6 49.6 56.2 29.0 29.0 47.9 14.9 15.0Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 75.0 0.1 1.2 0.0 0.5 0.9 10.1 2.6 4.7 31.0 0.6 1.2Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 9.7 2.8 7.5 0.0 3.3 3.6 2.3 11.3 12.7 12.8 5.9 6.3LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 128.1 34.3 39.7 0.0 50.1 50.5 66.3 31.6 33.7 78.9 15.5 16.1LnGrp LOS F C D D D E C C E B B Approach Vol, veh/h 974 324 1317 1563Approach Delay, s/veh 74.6 50.2 34.0 40.4Approach LOS E D C D Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 1 2 45678Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 29.0 53.3 37.7 10.8 71.5 18.0 19.7Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 5.2 5.0 5.0 * 4.7 5.0 * 4.2 5.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 24 30.0 51.0 * 11 43.0 * 14 33.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 25.2 27.4 20.6 6.6 15.6 15.8 9.7Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 2.4 5.3 0.0 21.4 0.0 5.0 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 47.1HCM 2010 LOS D Notes G-264 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 12: I-5 SB Ramps & Katella Ave 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 PLUS PROJET PM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)0 650 585 308 1647 0 52 0 315 27 57 5 Future Volume (vph)0 650 585 308 1647 0 52 0 315 27 57 5 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Total Lost time (s)5.3 4.5 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.6 4.6 4.6 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.97 0.91 0.95 0.91 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot)4641 1445 3133 4641 1534 1320 1373 1615 3230 1445 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm)4641 1445 3133 4641 1534 1320 1373 1615 3230 1445 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.80 0.80 0.80Adj. Flow (vph) 0 677 609 328 1752 0 59 0 358 34 71 6RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 528 0000152159005Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 677 81 328 1752 0 53 29 24 34 71 1 Turn Type NA Over Prot NA Split NA Perm Split NA PermProtected Phases 2716 77 88Permitted Phases 78Actuated Green, G (s) 25.2 12.0 12.6 42.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 21.6 21.6 21.6Effective Green, g (s)25.2 12.0 12.6 42.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 21.6 21.6 21.6Actuated g/C Ratio 0.28 0.13 0.14 0.47 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.24 0.24 0.24Clearance Time (s)5.3 4.5 4.2 5.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.6 4.6 4.6Vehicle Extension (s)4.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph)1299 192 438 2165 204 176 183 387 775 346v/s Ratio Prot 0.15 c0.06 0.10 c0.38 0.03 0.02 0.02 c0.02v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 0.00v/c Ratio 0.52 0.42 0.75 0.81 0.26 0.17 0.13 0.09 0.09 0.00Uniform Delay, d1 27.3 35.8 37.2 20.6 35.0 34.6 34.4 26.6 26.6 26.0Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.15 1.56 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Incremental Delay, d2 1.5 6.7 1.9 0.8 3.1 2.0 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0Delay (s)28.8 42.5 44.6 32.8 38.1 36.6 35.9 26.6 26.6 26.0Level of Service CDDC DDDCCCApproach Delay (s) 35.3 34.7 36.5 26.6Approach LOS DCDC Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 34.8 HCM 2000 Level of Service CHCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.57Actuated Cycle Length (s) 90.0 Sum of lost time (s)18.6Intersection Capacity Utilization 89.1% ICU Level of Service EAnalysis Period (min)15c Critical Lane Group G-265 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 13: I-5 NB Ramps & Katella Ave 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 PLUS PROJET PM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 151 850 0 0 1574 86 563 1222 41 0 0 0 Future Volume (vph) 151 850 0 0 1574 86 563 1222 41 0 0 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Total Lost time (s)4.7 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.86 1.00 0.81 0.81 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (prot)3133 4641 5848 1445 1308 5446 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (perm)3133 4641 5848 1445 1308 5446 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.93 0.93 0.93 1.00 1.00 1.00Adj. Flow (vph) 174 977 0 0 1730 95 605 1314 44 0 0 0RTOR Reduction (vph)0000067040000Lane Group Flow (vph) 174 977 0 0 1730 28 381 1578 0000 Turn Type Prot NA NA Perm Split NAProtected Phases 5 2 6 8 8Permitted Phases 6Actuated Green, G (s) 12.1 41.7 24.9 24.9 36.3 36.3Effective Green, g (s) 12.1 41.7 24.9 24.9 36.3 36.3Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.46 0.28 0.28 0.40 0.40Clearance Time (s)4.7 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.2 2.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 421 2150 1617 399 527 2196v/s Ratio Prot 0.06 c0.21 c0.30 c0.29 0.29v/s Ratio Perm 0.02v/c Ratio 0.41 0.45 1.07 0.07 0.72 0.72Uniform Delay, d1 35.7 16.4 32.5 24.0 22.6 22.6Progression Factor 1.22 1.55 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 0.6 43.7 0.3 4.3 1.0Delay (s)43.8 26.1 76.3 24.3 26.9 23.6Level of Service D C E C C CApproach Delay (s)28.8 73.6 24.2 0.0Approach LOS C E C A Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 43.5 HCM 2000 Level of Service DHCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.81Actuated Cycle Length (s) 90.0 Sum of lost time (s)16.7Intersection Capacity Utilization 73.5% ICU Level of Service DAnalysis Period (min)15c Critical Lane Group G-266 HCM 2010 TWSC 14: Harbor Blvd & North Driveway 3/21/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 PLUS PROJET PM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.5 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 70 1149 111 0 1043Future Vol, veh/h 0 70 1149 111 0 1043Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free FreeRT Channelized - None - None - NoneStorage Length - 0 - -- -Veh in Median Storage, # 0 -0 -- 0Grade, %0 -0 -- 0Peak Hour Factor 100 100 100 100 100 100Heavy Vehicles, %0 0 0 0 0 0Mvmt Flow 0 70 1149 111 0 1043 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1622 630 0 0 1260 0 Stage 1 1205 -- -- - Stage 2 417 -- -- -Critical Hdwy 5.7 7.1 - - 5.3 -Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.6 -- -- -Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6 -- -- -Follow-up Hdwy 3.8 3.9 - - 3.1 -Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 152 368 - - 298 - Stage 1 184 -- -- - Stage 2 584 -- -- -Platoon blocked, %- --Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 152 368 - - 298 -Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 152 -- -- - Stage 1 184 -- -- - Stage 2 584 -- -- - Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 17.1 0 0HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h)- - 368 298 -HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.19 - -HCM Control Delay (s) - - 17.1 0 -HCM Lane LOS - - C A -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.7 0 - G-267 HCM 2010 TWSC 15: Harbor Blvd & South Driveway 3/21/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 PLUS PROJET PM Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 2 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.2 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 30 1230 0 0 1043Future Vol, veh/h 0 30 1230 0 0 1043Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free FreeRT Channelized - None - None - NoneStorage Length - 0 - -- -Veh in Median Storage, # 0 -0 -- 0Grade, %0 -0 -- 0Peak Hour Factor 100 100 100 100 100 100Heavy Vehicles, %0 0 0 0 0 0Mvmt Flow 0 30 1230 0 0 1043 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1647 615 0 0 1230 0 Stage 1 1230 -- -- - Stage 2 417 -- -- -Critical Hdwy 5.7 7.1 - - 5.3 -Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.6 -- -- -Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6 -- -- -Follow-up Hdwy 3.8 3.9 - - 3.1 -Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 147 376 - - 308 - Stage 1 177 -- -- - Stage 2 584 -- -- -Platoon blocked, %- --Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 147 376 - - 308 -Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 147 -- -- - Stage 1 177 -- -- - Stage 2 584 -- -- - Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 15.4 0 0HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h)- - 376 308 -HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.08 - -HCM Control Delay (s) - - 15.4 0 -HCM Lane LOS - - C A -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.3 0 - G-268 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 4: Harbor Blvd & Disney Way 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 PLUS PROJECT WEEKEND Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 3 439 2 130 32 178 88 889 129 282 949 12 Future Volume (veh/h) 3 439 2 130 32 178 88 889 129 282 949 12 Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.87 0.70 1.00 0.87 1.00 0.76 1.00 0.71 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 6 915 4 165 41 225 96 966 140 320 1078 14 Adj No. of Lanes 020211130230 Peak Hour Factor 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.88 0.88 0.88 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000000000 Cap, veh/h 32 722 3 268 570 413 131 1819 261 394 2386 31 Arrive On Green 0.23 0.23 0.22 0.09 0.34 0.33 0.08 0.46 0.46 0.13 0.51 0.50 Sat Flow, veh/h 8 3210 14 3141 1700 1262 1619 3919 563 3141 4693 61 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 485 0 440 165 41 225 96 761 345 320 710 382Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1694 0 1538 1570 1700 1262 1619 1547 1388 1570 1547 1660Q Serve(g_s), s 10.1 0.0 27.0 6.1 2.0 17.5 6.9 21.0 21.4 11.9 17.6 17.6Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 27.0 0.0 27.0 6.1 2.0 17.5 6.9 21.0 21.4 11.9 17.6 17.6Prop In Lane 0.01 0.01 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.41 1.00 0.04Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 412 0 346 268 570 413 131 1436 644 394 1573 844V/C Ratio(X)1.18 0.00 1.27 0.61 0.07 0.55 0.73 0.53 0.54 0.81 0.45 0.45Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 412 0 346 445 666 484 229 1436 644 445 1573 844HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 47.5 0.0 46.5 53.0 27.2 33.1 53.8 22.8 23.1 51.1 18.8 18.8Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 102.9 0.0 142.9 0.9 0.1 1.1 9.0 1.4 3.2 8.7 0.9 1.7Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 25.4 0.0 25.2 2.7 0.9 6.2 3.4 9.3 8.7 5.6 7.7 8.5LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 150.4 0.0 189.4 53.8 27.2 34.2 62.9 24.3 26.3 59.8 19.8 20.6LnGrp LOS F F D C C E C C E B C Approach Vol, veh/h 925 431 1202 1412Approach Delay, s/veh 169.0 41.0 27.9 29.0Approach LOS F D C C Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 123456 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 18.1 58.7 13.3 30.0 12.7 64.0 43.3Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.0 45.0 15.0 25.0 16.0 45.0 45.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 13.9 23.4 8.1 29.0 8.9 19.6 19.5Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 11.3 0.2 0.0 0.2 12.3 5.5 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 62.6HCM 2010 LOS E Notes G-269 Volume 4: Harbor Blvd & Disney Way 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 PLUS PROJECT WEEKEND Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 3 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Traffic Volume (vph)3 439 2 130 32 178 88 889 129 282 949 12 Future Volume (vph)3 439 2 130 32 178 88 889 129 282 949 12 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 236 138 615 277 Confl. Bikes (#/hr)33 Peak Hour Factor 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.88 0.88 0.88 Growth Factor 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Bus Blockages (#/hr)000000000000 Parking (#/hr) Mid-Block Traffic (%)0%0%0%0% Adj. Flow (vph)6 915 4 165 41 225 96 966 140 320 1078 14 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 6 919 0 165 41 225 96 1106 0 320 1092 0 Intersection Summary G-270 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 5: Harbor Blvd & Katella Ave 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 PLUS PROJECT WEEKEND Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 363 1081 205 362 1026 192 255 595 342 154 707 343 Future Volume (veh/h) 363 1081 205 362 1026 192 255 595 342 154 707 343 Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.80 1.00 0.90 1.00 0.87 1.00 0.76 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 386 1150 218 393 1115 209 274 640 368 167 768 373 Adj No. of Lanes 231231231231 Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, %000000000000 Cap, veh/h 419 1525 373 419 1525 424 340 1564 421 340 1564 366 Arrive On Green 0.13 0.32 0.32 0.13 0.32 0.32 0.11 0.33 0.33 0.11 0.33 0.33 Sat Flow, veh/h 3141 4692 1149 3141 4692 1305 3141 4692 1263 3141 4692 1099 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 386 1150 218 393 1115 209 274 640 368 167 768 373Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1570 1564 1149 1570 1564 1305 1570 1564 1263 1570 1564 1099Q Serve(g_s), s 14.6 26.3 13.6 14.9 25.2 15.4 10.2 12.6 32.9 6.0 15.7 27.0Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 14.6 26.3 13.6 14.9 25.2 15.4 10.2 12.6 32.9 6.0 15.7 27.0Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 419 1525 373 419 1525 424 340 1564 421 340 1564 366V/C Ratio(X)0.92 0.75 0.58 0.94 0.73 0.49 0.81 0.41 0.87 0.49 0.49 1.02Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 419 1525 373 419 1525 424 340 1564 421 340 1564 366HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 51.4 36.2 17.3 51.5 35.9 32.6 52.3 30.9 37.6 50.4 31.9 18.2Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 25.7 3.5 6.5 28.9 3.1 4.1 12.3 0.8 21.5 0.4 1.1 51.7Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 7.8 11.8 5.0 8.1 11.3 6.1 5.0 5.6 14.0 2.6 6.9 13.4LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 77.1 39.7 23.8 80.5 39.0 36.6 64.6 31.7 59.2 50.8 33.0 70.0LnGrp LOS E D C F D D E C E D C F Approach Vol, veh/h 1754 1717 1282 1308Approach Delay, s/veh 46.0 48.2 46.6 45.8Approach LOS DDDD Timer 12345678 Assigned Phs 12345678Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 16.0 43.0 19.0 42.0 16.0 43.0 19.0 42.0Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.0 38.0 13.0 37.0 11.0 38.0 13.0 37.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.0 34.9 16.9 28.3 12.2 29.0 16.6 27.2Green Ext Time (p_c), s 1.5 1.1 0.0 4.5 0.0 3.1 0.0 4.6 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 46.7HCM 2010 LOS D G-271 Volume 5: Harbor Blvd & Katella Ave 3/28/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 PLUS PROJECT WEEKEND Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 4 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Traffic Volume (vph) 363 1081 205 362 1026 192 255 595 342 154 707 343 Future Volume (vph) 363 1081 205 362 1026 192 255 595 342 154 707 343 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 222 105 140 266 Confl. Bikes (#/hr) Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.92 0.92 0.92 Growth Factor 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Bus Blockages (#/hr)000000000000 Parking (#/hr) Mid-Block Traffic (%)0%0%0%0% Adj. Flow (vph)386 1150 218 393 1115 209 274 640 368 167 768 373 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 386 1150 218 393 1115 209 274 640 368 167 768 373 Intersection Summary G-272 HCM 2010 TWSC 14: Harbor Blvd & North Driveway 3/21/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 PLUS PROJECT WEEKEND Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.4 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 170 936 117 0 1081Future Vol, veh/h 0 170 936 117 0 1081Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free FreeRT Channelized - None - None - NoneStorage Length - 0 - -- -Veh in Median Storage, # 0 -0 -- 0Grade, %0 -0 -- 0Peak Hour Factor 100 100 100 100 100 100Heavy Vehicles, %0 0 0 0 0 0Mvmt Flow 0 170 936 117 0 1081 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1427 527 0 0 1053 0 Stage 1 995 -- -- - Stage 2 432 -- -- -Critical Hdwy 5.7 7.1 - - 5.3 -Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.6 -- -- -Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6 -- -- -Follow-up Hdwy 3.8 3.9 - - 3.1 -Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 191 428 - - 375 - Stage 1 247 -- -- - Stage 2 574 -- -- -Platoon blocked, %- --Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 191 428 - - 375 -Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 191 -- -- - Stage 1 247 -- -- - Stage 2 574 -- -- - Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 18.8 0 0HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h)- - 428 375 -HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.397 - -HCM Control Delay (s) - - 18.8 0 -HCM Lane LOS - - C A -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 1.9 0 - G-273 HCM 2010 TWSC 15: Harbor Blvd & South Driveway 3/21/2016 Anaheim Plaza Hotel TIA 11/10/2015 YEAR 2019 PLUS PROJECT WEEKEND Synchro 9 ReportITERISPage 2 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.5 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 73 980 0 0 1081Future Vol, veh/h 0 73 980 0 0 1081Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free FreeRT Channelized - None - None - NoneStorage Length - 0 - -- -Veh in Median Storage, # 0 -0 -- 0Grade, %0 -0 -- 0Peak Hour Factor 100 100 100 100 100 100Heavy Vehicles, %0 0 0 0 0 0Mvmt Flow 0 73 980 0 0 1081 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1412 490 0 0 980 0 Stage 1 980 -- -- - Stage 2 432 -- -- -Critical Hdwy 5.7 7.1 - - 5.3 -Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.6 -- -- -Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6 -- -- -Follow-up Hdwy 3.8 3.9 - - 3.1 -Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 195 453 - - 406 - Stage 1 252 -- -- - Stage 2 574 -- -- -Platoon blocked, %- --Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 195 453 - - 406 -Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 195 -- -- - Stage 1 252 -- -- - Stage 2 574 -- -- - Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 14.5 0 0HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h)- - 453 406 -HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.161 - -HCM Control Delay (s) - - 14.5 0 -HCM Lane LOS - - B A -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.6 0 - G-274 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report City of Anaheim Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Page | Appendix APPENDIX C ADT CALCULATION SHEETS G-275 "K " F A C T O R = 12 . 5 NORTH S O U T H E A S T W E S T In t e r s e c t i o n N L N T N R S L S T S R E L E T E R W L W T W R T O T A L L E G L E G L E G L E G Ha r b o r B o u l e v a r d / I - 5 N o r t h b o u n d R a m p s 0 1 1 7 3 4 0 1 4 3 1 2 4 20 0 0 0 3 2 0 6 7 3 3 , 5 6 4 3 9 , 1 0 0 3 5 , 6 0 0 1 4 , 4 0 0 - Ha r b o r B o u l e v a r d / I - 5 S o u t h b o u n d R a m p s 75 1 3 6 4 0 0 6 5 0 5 9 8 2 5 2 0 3 0 00 0 0 3 , 2 3 9 3 5 , 8 0 0 2 9 , 9 0 0 - 15,300 Ha r b o r B o u l e v a r d / M a n c h e s t e r A v e n u e 85 1 2 2 7 7 8 1 2 0 8 3 50 0 0 0 6 7 0 2 3 1 2 , 6 4 3 3 0 , 2 0 0 2 8 , 7 0 0 6,200 1,100 Ha r b o r B o u l e v a r d / D i s n e y W a y 46 9 4 0 7 7 1 6 3 7 9 8 5 2 2 3 3 1 4 5 1 5 2 3 7 2 , 4 5 4 2 6 , 8 0 0 2 5 , 1 0 0 8,300 1,200 Ha r b o r B o u l e v a r d / K a t e l l a A v e n u e 14 8 8 5 6 3 4 0 9 8 7 0 3 1 6 4 1 3 9 1 4 1 8 2 3 0 0 1 2 9 2 1 2 4 5 , 1 3 4 2 4 , 5 0 0 3 1 , 6 0 0 3 8 , 4 0 0 3 3 , 9 0 0 An a h e i m G a r d e n W a l k / D i s n e y W a y 29 0 6 80 0 0 1 1 8 3 2 6 1 3 5 3 7 1 0 8 1 3 - 3 , 2 0 0 9 , 5 0 0 7,600 Cle m e n t i n e S t r e e t / D i s n e y W a y 11 8 9 9 9 6 1 1 1 9 6 1 1 3 2 2 8 4 9 8 2 5 2 3 6 7 0 1 , 3 1 2 6 , 8 0 0 5 , 9 0 0 8,600 11,600 Cle m e n t i n e S t r e e t / K a t e l l a A v e n u e 11 4 1 1 6 2 5 9 4 3 1 2 7 1 2 1 2 3 6 1 0 2 2 5 7 1 8 8 1 4 2 2 9 2 3 , 7 9 7 9 , 2 0 0 1 0 , 8 0 0 3 7 , 8 0 0 3 7 , 2 0 0 I- 5 S o u t h b o u n d O f f - r a m p / D i s n e y W a y 4 0 6 2 2 8 2 1 3 1 5 0 0 3 7 7 1 5 2 2 3 4 8 0 1 , 2 7 3 5 , 6 0 0 1 , 5 0 0 13,600 11,200 An a h e i m B o u l e v a r d / D i s n e y W a y 40 1 0 3 0 6 5 5 7 7 8 0 7 8 3 1 7 2 0 3 2 0 1 0 2 6 8 3 3 , 4 8 3 3 4 , 6 0 0 2 5 , 7 0 0 1 3 , 0 0 0 1 3 , 8 0 0 An a h e i m B o u l e v a r d / K a t e l l a A v e n u e 16 1 8 5 8 1 1 0 7 1 7 4 8 1 8 5 1 7 3 1 0 5 3 1 1 5 1 5 4 1 3 6 8 5 7 5 , 0 5 3 2 6 , 2 0 0 2 6 , 8 0 0 3 5 , 2 0 0 3 8 , 2 0 0 I- 5 S o u t h b o u n d R a m p s / K a t e l l a A v e n u e 46 0 3 0 3 2 6 5 5 5 0 5 8 6 5 1 7 2 9 6 1 4 6 6 0 3 , 3 0 0 1 , 1 0 0 1 5 , 2 0 0 3 3 , 5 0 0 3 2 , 8 0 0 I- 5 N o r t h b o u n d R a m p s / K a t e l l a A v e n u e 42 9 1 1 7 4 3 90 0 0 1 0 7 8 1 7 0 0 1 5 1 3 8 3 4 , 1 6 2 1 7 , 1 0 0 2 0 , 5 0 0 3 0 , 7 0 0 3 5 , 8 0 0 NO R T H S O U T H E A S T W E S T In t e r s e c t i o n LE G L E G L E G L E G Ha r b o r B o u l e v a r d / I - 5 N o r t h b o u n d R a m p s 42 , 6 0 0 3 9 , 5 0 0 1 5 , 8 0 0 - Ha r b o r B o u l e v a r d / I - 5 S o u t h b o u n d R a m p s 39 , 7 0 0 3 4 , 5 0 0 - 1 6 , 8 0 0 Ha r b o r B o u l e v a r d / M a n c h e s t e r A v e n u e 34 , 9 0 0 3 2 , 3 0 0 7,9 0 0 1 , 1 0 0 H ar b or B o u l e v a r d / D i s n e y W a y 30 , 2 0 0 2 8 , 2 0 0 8,9 0 0 1 , 2 0 0 Ha r b o r B o u l e v a r d / K a t e l l a A v e n u e 27 , 6 0 0 3 5 , 6 0 0 4 5 , 3 0 0 4 0 , 5 0 0 An a h e i m G a r d e n W a l k / D i s n e y W a y - 3 , 4 0 0 1 0 , 1 0 0 8, 2 0 0 Cle m e n t i n e S t r e e t / D i s n e y W a y 8, 1 0 0 7 , 8 0 0 1 0 , 7 0 0 1 2 , 3 0 0 Cle m e n t i n e S t r e e t / K a t e l l a A v e n u e 12 , 4 0 0 1 1 , 2 0 0 4 4 , 6 0 0 4 4 , 2 0 0 I- 5 S o u t h b o u n d O f f - r a m p / D i s n e y W a y 6, 3 0 0 1 , 5 0 0 1 6 , 1 0 0 1 3 , 3 0 0 An a h e i m B o u l e v a r d / D i s n e y W a y 36 , 3 0 0 2 7 , 1 0 0 1 4 , 5 0 0 1 6 , 0 0 0 An a h e i m B o u l e v a r d / K a t e l l a A v e n u e 27 , 5 0 0 2 8 , 1 0 0 4 1 , 8 0 0 4 5 , 0 0 0 I- 5 S o u t h b o u n d R a m p s / K a t e l l a A v e n u e 1, 1 0 0 1 7 , 2 0 0 3 8 , 6 0 0 3 9 , 3 0 0 I- 5 N o r t h b o u n d R a m p s / K a t e l l a A v e n u e 19 , 1 0 0 2 3 , 7 0 0 3 1 , 9 0 0 4 1 , 0 0 0 Ye a r 2 0 1 9 W i t ho u t P r o j e c t A D T EX I S T I N G A D T ' S B Y L E G G- 2 7 6 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report City of Anaheim Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Page | Appendix APPENDIX D RESORT HOTEL TRIP GENERATION G-277 Driveway Tube Counts Trip generation for a resort hotel was determined for Anaheim Resort hotels based on 7-day, 24-hour tube counts collected at the driveways for two hotels in the Anaheim Resort area. The two hotels are Fairfield Hotel (located at 1460 S. Harbor) and Sheraton Inn (located at 1855 S. Harbor). The two resort hotels are summarized below by rooms and square footage of meeting, retail, and restaurant space. The City of Anaheim has an allowance for 20 percent of the square footage of hotel rooms to be used for meeting and retail space. Any additional square footage of space will require the addition of ancillary trips to the site. • Fairfield Inn Marriott has 467 rooms and 1,369 sf of meeting space, and • Sheraton Park has 490 rooms, 28,000 sf of meeting space, and 8,000 sf of restaurant. G-278 Page 1 City of AnaheimFairfield Hotel Northern Driveway E/ Harbor Boulevard7 Day Directional Volume Counts ANA001Site Code: 042-15521 Counts Unlimited, Inc PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878Phone: 951-268-6268email: counts@countsunlimited.com Start 10-Oct-15 Westbound Hour Totals Hour Totals Combined TotalsTimeSatMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoon Morning Afternoon 12:00 7 11 0 012:15 1 5 0 0 12:30 5 5 0 012:45 0 12 13 33 0 0 0 0 13 3301:00 1 8 0 001:15 2 1 0 001:30 0 4 0 001:45 2 8 5 21 0 0 0 0 5 21 02:00 0 6 0 002:15 0 7 0 002:30 1 8 0 002:45 2 9 3 30 0 0 0 0 3 30 03:00 2 3 0 003:15 1 8 0 003:30 0 5 0 003:45 0 7 3 23 0 0 0 0 3 23 04:00 0 4 0 004:15 1 6 0 004:30 1 11 0 004:45 2 3 4 24 0 0 0 0 4 24 05:00 2 4 0 005:15 1 4 0 005:30 1 3 0 005:45 5 6 9 17 0 0 0 0 9 17 06:00 9 9 0 006:15 1 2 0 006:30 3 5 0 006:45 1 9 14 25 0 0 0 0 14 2507:00 3 8 0 007:15 6 5 0 007:30 11 2 0 007:45 12 6 32 21 0 0 0 0 32 2108:00 14 2 0 0 08:15 5 2 0 008:30 5 2 0 008:45 11 6 35 12 0 0 0 0 35 1209:00 12 4 0 0 09:15 4 1 0 009:30 15 1 0 0 09:45 11 2 42 8 0 0 0 0 42 810:00 11 0 0 0 10:15 14 3 0 010:30 11 6 0 0 10:45 6 3 42 12 0 0 0 0 42 1211:00 9 4 0 011:15 7 1 0 011:30 9 1 0 011:45 9 2 34 8 0 0 0 0 34 8Total 236 234 236 234 0 0 0 0 236 234CombinedTotal 470 470 0 0 470 AM Peak - 09:30 --------- Vol.- 51 ---------P.H.F. 0.850 PM Peak -- 12:00 --------Vol.-- 33 -------- P.H.F. 0.688 Percentage 50.2% 49.8% 0.0% 0.0% G-279 Page 2 City of AnaheimFairfield Hotel Northern Driveway E/ Harbor Boulevard7 Day Directional Volume Counts ANA001Site Code: 042-15521 Counts Unlimited, Inc PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878Phone: 951-268-6268email: counts@countsunlimited.com Start 11-Oct-15 Westbound Hour Totals Hour Totals Combined TotalsTimeSunMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoon Morning Afternoon12:00 2 4 0 0 12:15 1 8 0 012:30 1 7 0 012:45 0 13 4 32 0 0 0 0 4 3201:00 3 7 0 0 01:15 0 5 0 001:30 0 7 0 001:45 0 2 3 21 0 0 0 0 3 2102:00 0 8 0 002:15 1 3 0 002:30 4 6 0 002:45 0 5 5 22 0 0 0 0 5 2203:00 0 5 0 003:15 0 5 0 0 03:30 1 3 0 003:45 0 1 1 14 0 0 0 0 1 1404:00 0 4 0 0 04:15 0 13 0 004:30 0 16 0 0 04:45 1 7 1 40 0 0 0 0 1 40 05:00 0 7 0 005:15 0 5 0 005:30 3 3 0 005:45 9 2 12 17 0 0 0 0 12 17 06:00 8 10 0 006:15 1 3 0 006:30 4 8 0 006:45 5 5 18 26 0 0 0 0 18 2607:00 3 3 0 007:15 5 1 0 007:30 3 7 0 007:45 10 2 21 13 0 0 0 0 21 1308:00 15 4 0 0 08:15 9 5 0 008:30 5 1 0 008:45 11 8 40 18 0 0 0 0 40 1809:00 12 1 0 0 09:15 7 0 0 009:30 10 2 0 009:45 7 3 36 6 0 0 0 0 36 610:00 14 2 0 0 10:15 8 2 0 010:30 11 6 0 010:45 8 2 41 12 0 0 0 0 41 12 11:00 10 1 0 011:15 12 0 0 0 11:30 16 3 0 011:45 12 1 50 5 0 0 0 0 50 5Total 232 226 232 226 0 0 0 0 232 226CombinedTotal 458 458 0 0 458 AM Peak - 11:00 --------- Vol.- 50 ---------P.H.F. 0.781 PM Peak -- 04:15 --------Vol.-- 43 -------- P.H.F. 0.672 Percentage 50.7% 49.3% 0.0% 0.0% G-280 Page 3 City of AnaheimFairfield Hotel Northern Driveway E/ Harbor Boulevard7 Day Directional Volume Counts ANA001Site Code: 042-15521 Counts Unlimited, Inc PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878Phone: 951-268-6268email: counts@countsunlimited.com Start 12-Oct-15 Westbound Hour Totals Hour Totals Combined TotalsTimeMonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoon Morning Afternoon12:00 0 8 0 0 12:15 2 16 0 012:30 2 8 0 012:45 4 10 8 42 0 0 0 0 8 4201:00 1 8 0 0 01:15 0 5 0 001:30 1 6 0 001:45 2 12 4 31 0 0 0 0 4 3102:00 0 6 0 0 02:15 0 15 0 002:30 0 13 0 0 02:45 3 12 3 46 0 0 0 0 3 46 03:00 2 8 0 003:15 0 10 0 003:30 3 6 0 003:45 0 8 5 32 0 0 0 0 5 32 04:00 0 8 0 004:15 1 6 0 004:30 2 14 0 004:45 0 4 3 32 0 0 0 0 3 32 05:00 2 8 0 005:15 0 3 0 005:30 1 10 0 005:45 4 3 7 24 0 0 0 0 7 24 06:00 11 6 0 006:15 6 4 0 006:30 8 7 0 006:45 5 2 30 19 0 0 0 0 30 1907:00 4 1 0 007:15 6 4 0 007:30 7 1 0 007:45 6 5 23 11 0 0 0 0 23 1108:00 12 4 0 0 08:15 6 7 0 008:30 9 1 0 008:45 7 0 34 12 0 0 0 0 34 1209:00 5 2 0 0 09:15 15 0 0 009:30 10 3 0 009:45 18 2 48 7 0 0 0 0 48 710:00 24 4 0 0 10:15 16 4 0 010:30 11 4 0 0 10:45 11 3 62 15 0 0 0 0 62 1511:00 9 1 0 011:15 9 0 0 011:30 10 1 0 011:45 7 3 35 5 0 0 0 0 35 5Total 262 276 262 276 0 0 0 0 262 276CombinedTotal 538 538 0 0 538 AM Peak - 09:45 --------- Vol.- 69 ---------P.H.F. 0.719 PM Peak -- 02:15 --------Vol.-- 48 -------- P.H.F. 0.800 Percentage 48.7% 51.3% 0.0% 0.0% G-281 Page 4 City of AnaheimFairfield Hotel Northern Driveway E/ Harbor Boulevard7 Day Directional Volume Counts ANA001Site Code: 042-15521 Counts Unlimited, Inc PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878Phone: 951-268-6268email: counts@countsunlimited.com Start 13-Oct-15 Westbound Hour Totals Hour Totals Combined TotalsTimeTueMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoon Morning Afternoon12:00 1 9 0 0 12:15 3 2 0 012:30 3 7 0 012:45 1 7 8 25 0 0 0 0 8 2501:00 2 5 0 0 01:15 0 1 0 001:30 0 6 0 001:45 1 2 3 14 0 0 0 0 3 1402:00 0 4 0 0 02:15 0 7 0 002:30 1 13 0 0 02:45 0 4 1 28 0 0 0 0 1 28 03:00 2 6 0 003:15 1 4 0 003:30 1 4 0 003:45 1 4 5 18 0 0 0 0 5 18 04:00 0 8 0 004:15 0 4 0 004:30 1 8 0 004:45 2 5 3 25 0 0 0 0 3 25 05:00 0 3 0 005:15 1 3 0 005:30 3 3 0 005:45 3 2 7 11 0 0 0 0 7 11 06:00 8 3 0 006:15 7 2 0 006:30 6 2 0 006:45 2 8 23 15 0 0 0 0 23 1507:00 2 7 0 007:15 1 1 0 007:30 7 2 0 007:45 13 4 23 14 0 0 0 0 23 1408:00 8 3 0 0 08:15 4 3 0 008:30 7 0 0 0 08:45 7 4 26 10 0 0 0 0 26 1009:00 6 1 0 0 09:15 11 1 0 009:30 9 4 0 0 09:45 7 0 33 6 0 0 0 0 33 610:00 4 4 0 010:15 7 9 0 010:30 7 4 0 0 10:45 7 0 25 17 0 0 0 0 25 1711:00 6 3 0 011:15 5 1 0 011:30 2 1 0 011:45 16 0 29 5 0 0 0 0 29 5Total 186 188 186 188 0 0 0 0 186 188CombinedTotal 374 374 0 0 374 AM Peak - 08:45 --------- Vol.- 33 ---------P.H.F. 0.635 PM Peak -- 02:15 --------Vol.-- 30 -------- P.H.F. 0.577 Percentage 49.7% 50.3% 0.0% 0.0% G-282 Page 5 City of AnaheimFairfield Hotel Northern Driveway E/ Harbor Boulevard7 Day Directional Volume Counts ANA001Site Code: 042-15521 Counts Unlimited, Inc PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878Phone: 951-268-6268email: counts@countsunlimited.com Start 14-Oct-15 Westbound Hour Totals Hour Totals Combined TotalsTimeWedMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoon Morning Afternoon12:00 3 6 0 0 12:15 0 8 0 012:30 3 12 0 012:45 1 7 7 33 0 0 0 0 7 3301:00 2 6 0 0 01:15 0 6 0 001:30 3 11 0 001:45 1 4 6 27 0 0 0 0 6 2702:00 0 4 0 002:15 1 2 0 002:30 0 10 0 002:45 1 3 2 19 0 0 0 0 2 1903:00 0 5 0 003:15 0 6 0 0 03:30 1 4 0 003:45 0 4 1 19 0 0 0 0 1 1904:00 1 5 0 004:15 0 4 0 0 04:30 1 13 0 0 04:45 2 5 4 27 0 0 0 0 4 2705:00 2 5 0 0 05:15 2 12 0 005:30 3 3 0 005:45 6 4 13 24 0 0 0 0 13 24 06:00 8 6 0 006:15 4 4 0 006:30 2 2 0 006:45 4 3 18 15 0 0 0 0 18 1507:00 4 3 0 007:15 8 6 0 007:30 3 3 0 007:45 7 1 22 13 0 0 0 0 22 1308:00 10 2 0 0 08:15 11 11 0 008:30 10 3 0 008:45 7 8 38 24 0 0 0 0 38 2409:00 7 6 0 0 09:15 10 2 0 0 09:30 10 7 0 009:45 18 5 45 20 0 0 0 0 45 20 10:00 14 1 0 010:15 9 7 0 010:30 10 7 0 0 10:45 13 3 46 18 0 0 0 0 46 1811:00 14 4 0 011:15 3 1 0 011:30 9 5 0 011:45 10 1 36 11 0 0 0 0 36 11Total 238 250 238 250 0 0 0 0 238 250CombinedTotal 488 488 0 0 488 AM Peak - 09:15 --------- Vol.- 52 ---------P.H.F. 0.722 PM Peak -- 04:30 --------Vol.-- 35 -------- P.H.F. 0.673 Percentage 48.8% 51.2% 0.0% 0.0% G-283 Page 6 City of AnaheimFairfield Hotel Northern Driveway E/ Harbor Boulevard7 Day Directional Volume Counts ANA001Site Code: 042-15521 Counts Unlimited, Inc PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878Phone: 951-268-6268email: counts@countsunlimited.com Start 15-Oct-15 Westbound Hour Totals Hour Totals Combined TotalsTimeThuMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoon Morning Afternoon12:00 1 15 0 0 12:15 0 3 0 012:30 5 11 0 012:45 0 6 6 35 0 0 0 0 6 3501:00 0 10 0 0 01:15 1 6 0 001:30 0 3 0 001:45 0 16 1 35 0 0 0 0 1 35 02:00 0 15 0 0 02:15 0 5 0 002:30 0 12 0 002:45 2 15 2 47 0 0 0 0 2 47 03:00 1 6 0 003:15 2 2 0 003:30 0 12 0 003:45 0 8 3 28 0 0 0 0 3 28 04:00 1 8 0 004:15 1 2 0 004:30 0 13 0 004:45 1 7 3 30 0 0 0 0 3 30 05:00 0 4 0 005:15 1 10 0 005:30 1 6 0 005:45 3 6 5 26 0 0 0 0 5 26 06:00 9 2 0 006:15 1 3 0 006:30 5 2 0 006:45 3 2 18 9 0 0 0 0 18 907:00 3 5 0 007:15 7 5 0 007:30 12 3 0 007:45 10 1 32 14 0 0 0 0 32 1408:00 9 4 0 0 08:15 21 1 0 008:30 18 2 0 008:45 9 2 57 9 0 0 0 0 57 909:00 8 5 0 0 09:15 6 0 0 009:30 28 0 0 0 09:45 20 2 62 7 0 0 0 0 62 710:00 35 3 0 0 10:15 8 4 0 010:30 11 12 0 0 10:45 11 0 65 19 0 0 0 0 65 1911:00 15 5 0 011:15 21 3 0 011:30 18 7 0 011:45 13 3 67 18 0 0 0 0 67 18Total 321 277 321 277 0 0 0 0 321 277CombinedTotal 598 598 0 0 598 AM Peak - 09:30 --------- Vol.- 91 ---------P.H.F. 0.650 PM Peak -- 01:45 --------Vol.-- 48 -------- P.H.F. 0.750 Percentage 53.7% 46.3% 0.0% 0.0% G-284 Page 7 City of AnaheimFairfield Hotel Northern Driveway E/ Harbor Boulevard7 Day Directional Volume Counts ANA001Site Code: 042-15521 Counts Unlimited, Inc PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878Phone: 951-268-6268email: counts@countsunlimited.com Start 16-Oct-15 Westbound Hour Totals Hour Totals Combined TotalsTimeFriMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoon Morning Afternoon12:00 3 2 0 0 12:15 0 10 0 012:30 1 5 0 012:45 1 6 5 23 0 0 0 0 5 2301:00 3 9 0 0 01:15 0 3 0 001:30 0 5 0 001:45 0 5 3 22 0 0 0 0 3 2202:00 0 6 0 002:15 1 3 0 002:30 0 4 0 002:45 1 6 2 19 0 0 0 0 2 1903:00 1 3 0 003:15 0 4 0 0 03:30 0 3 0 003:45 0 1 1 11 0 0 0 0 1 1104:00 0 5 0 004:15 0 2 0 0 04:30 0 11 0 004:45 1 10 1 28 0 0 0 0 1 28 05:00 1 6 0 005:15 0 4 0 0 05:30 1 12 0 005:45 5 5 7 27 0 0 0 0 7 27 06:00 9 6 0 006:15 3 8 0 006:30 5 4 0 006:45 7 5 24 23 0 0 0 0 24 2307:00 5 3 0 007:15 2 6 0 007:30 8 0 0 007:45 5 3 20 12 0 0 0 0 20 1208:00 15 0 0 0 08:15 6 3 0 008:30 6 1 0 008:45 3 4 30 8 0 0 0 0 30 8 09:00 11 2 0 009:15 9 1 0 0 09:30 7 2 0 0 09:45 12 1 39 6 0 0 0 0 39 610:00 11 2 0 010:15 8 6 0 010:30 6 3 0 0 10:45 6 2 31 13 0 0 0 0 31 1311:00 7 3 0 011:15 6 3 0 011:30 11 3 0 011:45 13 2 37 11 0 0 0 0 37 11Total 200 203 200 203 0 0 0 0 200 203CombinedTotal 403 403 0 0 403 AM Peak - 09:00 --------- Vol.- 39 ---------P.H.F. 0.650 PM Peak -- 04:45 --------Vol.-- 32 -------- P.H.F. 0.667 Percentage 49.6% 50.4% 0.0% 0.0% ADT/AADT ADT 476 AADT 476 G-285 Page 1 City of AnaheimFairfield Hotel Southern Driveway E/ Harbor Boulevard - Exit Only7 Day Directional Volume Counts ANA002Site Code: 042-15521 Counts Unlimited, Inc PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878Phone: 951-268-6268email: counts@countsunlimited.com Start 10-Oct-15 Eastbound Hour Totals Hour Totals Combined TotalsTimeSatMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoon Morning Afternoon12:00 7 7 0 0 12:15 2 7 0 012:30 5 11 0 012:45 1 7 15 32 0 0 0 0 15 3201:00 1 4 0 0 01:15 2 7 0 001:30 2 9 0 001:45 3 11 8 31 0 0 0 0 8 3102:00 0 3 0 002:15 1 7 0 002:30 2 7 0 002:45 0 15 3 32 0 0 0 0 3 3203:00 3 6 0 003:15 1 11 0 0 03:30 0 9 0 003:45 0 7 4 33 0 0 0 0 4 33 04:00 0 11 0 004:15 3 14 0 0 04:30 7 7 0 004:45 2 13 12 45 0 0 0 0 12 45 05:00 1 8 0 005:15 3 10 0 005:30 5 10 0 005:45 4 5 13 33 0 0 0 0 13 33 06:00 8 5 0 006:15 4 7 0 006:30 3 8 0 006:45 3 9 18 29 0 0 0 0 18 2907:00 2 11 0 007:15 8 5 0 007:30 5 0 0 007:45 19 4 34 20 0 0 0 0 34 2008:00 2 11 0 0 08:15 6 6 0 008:30 6 8 0 008:45 10 6 24 31 0 0 0 0 24 3109:00 4 6 0 0 09:15 8 6 0 0 09:30 14 4 0 009:45 8 6 34 22 0 0 0 0 34 22 10:00 10 10 0 010:15 6 2 0 010:30 5 2 0 0 10:45 9 4 30 18 0 0 0 0 30 1811:00 8 4 0 011:15 5 3 0 011:30 7 2 0 011:45 4 4 24 13 0 0 0 0 24 13Total 219 339 219 339 0 0 0 0 219 339CombinedTotal 558 558 0 0 558 AM Peak - 09:15 --------- Vol.- 40 ---------P.H.F. 0.714 PM Peak -- 04:00 --------Vol.-- 45 -------- P.H.F. 0.804 Percentage 39.2% 60.8% 0.0% 0.0% G-286 Page 2 City of AnaheimFairfield Hotel Southern Driveway E/ Harbor Boulevard - Exit Only7 Day Directional Volume Counts ANA002Site Code: 042-15521 Counts Unlimited, Inc PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878Phone: 951-268-6268email: counts@countsunlimited.com Start 11-Oct-15 Eastbound Hour Totals Hour Totals Combined TotalsTimeSunMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoon Morning Afternoon12:00 0 1 0 0 12:15 3 9 0 012:30 2 8 0 012:45 3 8 8 26 0 0 0 0 8 2601:00 4 1 0 0 01:15 0 6 0 001:30 0 7 0 001:45 0 7 4 21 0 0 0 0 4 2102:00 0 9 0 002:15 1 6 0 002:30 3 9 0 002:45 0 11 4 35 0 0 0 0 4 3503:00 0 6 0 003:15 0 11 0 0 03:30 3 6 0 003:45 1 7 4 30 0 0 0 0 4 3004:00 0 12 0 004:15 0 10 0 0 04:30 0 9 0 004:45 3 12 3 43 0 0 0 0 3 4305:00 0 9 0 005:15 3 8 0 0 05:30 1 5 0 0 05:45 10 14 14 36 0 0 0 0 14 3606:00 5 15 0 0 06:15 2 12 0 006:30 5 5 0 006:45 3 6 15 38 0 0 0 0 15 3807:00 3 9 0 007:15 5 12 0 007:30 5 3 0 007:45 10 7 23 31 0 0 0 0 23 3108:00 5 5 0 0 08:15 6 7 0 008:30 3 0 0 008:45 8 7 22 19 0 0 0 0 22 1909:00 6 5 0 0 09:15 4 2 0 009:30 11 7 0 0 09:45 12 7 33 21 0 0 0 0 33 2110:00 6 6 0 0 10:15 7 4 0 010:30 6 3 0 0 10:45 6 1 25 14 0 0 0 0 25 1411:00 6 1 0 011:15 10 1 0 011:30 7 5 0 011:45 6 1 29 8 0 0 0 0 29 8Total 184 322 184 322 0 0 0 0 184 322CombinedTotal 506 506 0 0 506 AM Peak - 09:30 --------- Vol.- 36 ---------P.H.F. 0.750 PM Peak -- 05:30 --------Vol.-- 46 -------- P.H.F. 0.767 Percentage 36.4% 63.6% 0.0% 0.0% G-287 Page 3 City of AnaheimFairfield Hotel Southern Driveway E/ Harbor Boulevard - Exit Only7 Day Directional Volume Counts ANA002Site Code: 042-15521 Counts Unlimited, Inc PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878Phone: 951-268-6268email: counts@countsunlimited.com Start 12-Oct-15 Eastbound Hour Totals Hour Totals Combined TotalsTimeMonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoon Morning Afternoon12:00 1 7 0 0 12:15 3 10 0 012:30 2 10 0 012:45 3 10 9 37 0 0 0 0 9 3701:00 1 1 0 0 01:15 0 10 0 001:30 3 3 0 001:45 1 15 5 29 0 0 0 0 5 2902:00 0 8 0 002:15 0 11 0 002:30 0 10 0 002:45 3 14 3 43 0 0 0 0 3 4303:00 0 10 0 003:15 3 13 0 0 03:30 1 7 0 003:45 1 14 5 44 0 0 0 0 5 44 04:00 0 14 0 004:15 2 12 0 004:30 3 11 0 004:45 2 10 7 47 0 0 0 0 7 47 05:00 1 6 0 005:15 1 3 0 005:30 3 11 0 0 05:45 10 6 15 26 0 0 0 0 15 2606:00 8 8 0 0 06:15 6 10 0 006:30 10 6 0 0 06:45 2 4 26 28 0 0 0 0 26 2807:00 11 7 0 007:15 3 7 0 007:30 6 7 0 0 07:45 8 6 28 27 0 0 0 0 28 2708:00 7 7 0 008:15 6 5 0 008:30 9 3 0 0 08:45 9 6 31 21 0 0 0 0 31 2109:00 8 3 0 009:15 8 8 0 009:30 3 4 0 0 09:45 7 7 26 22 0 0 0 0 26 2210:00 5 3 0 010:15 6 4 0 010:30 6 0 0 0 10:45 4 5 21 12 0 0 0 0 21 1211:00 5 3 0 011:15 7 3 0 011:30 6 1 0 011:45 12 5 30 12 0 0 0 0 30 12Total 206 348 206 348 0 0 0 0 206 348CombinedTotal 554 554 0 0 554 AM Peak - 05:45 --------- Vol.- 34 ---------P.H.F. 0.850 PM Peak -- 03:45 --------Vol.-- 51 -------- P.H.F. 0.911 Percentage 37.2% 62.8% 0.0% 0.0% G-288 Page 4 City of AnaheimFairfield Hotel Southern Driveway E/ Harbor Boulevard - Exit Only7 Day Directional Volume Counts ANA002Site Code: 042-15521 Counts Unlimited, Inc PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878Phone: 951-268-6268email: counts@countsunlimited.com Start 13-Oct-15 Eastbound Hour Totals Hour Totals Combined TotalsTimeTueMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoon Morning Afternoon12:00 1 8 0 0 12:15 3 7 0 012:30 4 9 0 012:45 2 6 10 30 0 0 0 0 10 3001:00 1 9 0 0 01:15 0 3 0 001:30 2 10 0 001:45 0 8 3 30 0 0 0 0 3 3002:00 1 5 0 002:15 1 14 0 002:30 0 7 0 002:45 0 6 2 32 0 0 0 0 2 3203:00 1 6 0 0 03:15 0 13 0 003:30 4 3 0 0 03:45 2 10 7 32 0 0 0 0 7 32 04:00 2 14 0 004:15 0 6 0 004:30 1 7 0 004:45 5 5 8 32 0 0 0 0 8 32 05:00 0 3 0 005:15 1 7 0 005:30 9 5 0 0 05:45 10 4 20 19 0 0 0 0 20 19 06:00 12 4 0 006:15 5 3 0 006:30 4 4 0 0 06:45 1 10 22 21 0 0 0 0 22 2107:00 3 5 0 007:15 1 4 0 007:30 7 6 0 0 07:45 11 14 22 29 0 0 0 0 22 2908:00 6 2 0 008:15 4 2 0 008:30 7 1 0 0 08:45 4 5 21 10 0 0 0 0 21 1009:00 3 5 0 009:15 6 5 0 009:30 4 8 0 0 09:45 7 6 20 24 0 0 0 0 20 2410:00 11 8 0 010:15 9 4 0 010:30 9 2 0 0 10:45 6 2 35 16 0 0 0 0 35 1611:00 8 3 0 011:15 7 3 0 011:30 10 4 0 011:45 5 2 30 12 0 0 0 0 30 12Total 200 287 200 287 0 0 0 0 200 287CombinedTotal 487 487 0 0 487 AM Peak - 05:30 --------- Vol.- 36 ---------P.H.F. 0.750 PM Peak -- 03:15 --------Vol.-- 40 -------- P.H.F. 0.714 Percentage 41.1% 58.9% 0.0% 0.0% G-289 Page 5 City of AnaheimFairfield Hotel Southern Driveway E/ Harbor Boulevard - Exit Only7 Day Directional Volume Counts ANA002Site Code: 042-15521 Counts Unlimited, Inc PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878Phone: 951-268-6268email: counts@countsunlimited.com Start 14-Oct-15 Eastbound Hour Totals Hour Totals Combined TotalsTimeWedMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoon Morning Afternoon12:00 1 10 0 0 12:15 1 3 0 012:30 4 12 0 012:45 1 6 7 31 0 0 0 0 7 3101:00 1 7 0 0 01:15 2 9 0 001:30 1 8 0 001:45 0 10 4 34 0 0 0 0 4 3402:00 1 7 0 002:15 2 12 0 002:30 0 8 0 002:45 1 13 4 40 0 0 0 0 4 4003:00 1 4 0 003:15 2 6 0 0 03:30 0 3 0 003:45 0 11 3 24 0 0 0 0 3 24 04:00 1 10 0 004:15 2 10 0 0 04:30 1 9 0 004:45 3 13 7 42 0 0 0 0 7 42 05:00 2 5 0 005:15 2 13 0 005:30 5 9 0 005:45 7 4 16 31 0 0 0 0 16 31 06:00 4 6 0 006:15 0 11 0 006:30 5 5 0 006:45 2 9 11 31 0 0 0 0 11 3107:00 5 2 0 007:15 6 7 0 007:30 7 7 0 007:45 8 9 26 25 0 0 0 0 26 2508:00 10 6 0 0 08:15 10 10 0 008:30 4 7 0 008:45 5 11 29 34 0 0 0 0 29 3409:00 4 9 0 0 09:15 12 11 0 0 09:30 8 11 0 009:45 19 8 43 39 0 0 0 0 43 39 10:00 9 9 0 010:15 8 14 0 010:30 4 6 0 0 10:45 6 5 27 34 0 0 0 0 27 3411:00 7 5 0 011:15 7 10 0 011:30 12 8 0 011:45 9 6 35 29 0 0 0 0 35 29Total 212 394 212 394 0 0 0 0 212 394CombinedTotal 606 606 0 0 606 AM Peak - 09:15 --------- Vol.- 48 ---------P.H.F. 0.632 PM Peak -- 04:00 --------Vol.-- 42 -------- P.H.F. 0.808 Percentage 35.0% 65.0% 0.0% 0.0% G-290 Page 6 City of AnaheimFairfield Hotel Southern Driveway E/ Harbor Boulevard - Exit Only7 Day Directional Volume Counts ANA002Site Code: 042-15521 Counts Unlimited, Inc PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878Phone: 951-268-6268email: counts@countsunlimited.com Start 15-Oct-15 Eastbound Hour Totals Hour Totals Combined TotalsTimeThuMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoon Morning Afternoon12:00 2 5 0 0 12:15 1 3 0 012:30 0 9 0 012:45 0 5 3 22 0 0 0 0 3 2201:00 1 4 0 0 01:15 3 6 0 001:30 0 3 0 001:45 0 9 4 22 0 0 0 0 4 22 02:00 1 8 0 002:15 1 8 0 0 02:30 4 6 0 002:45 2 11 8 33 0 0 0 0 8 33 03:00 1 5 0 003:15 1 4 0 003:30 0 6 0 003:45 2 6 4 21 0 0 0 0 4 21 04:00 1 7 0 004:15 0 13 0 004:30 1 6 0 004:45 2 5 4 31 0 0 0 0 4 31 05:00 0 2 0 005:15 0 10 0 005:30 4 5 0 005:45 8 8 12 25 0 0 0 0 12 25 06:00 8 5 0 006:15 4 4 0 006:30 7 5 0 006:45 3 6 22 20 0 0 0 0 22 2007:00 8 5 0 007:15 1 7 0 007:30 6 3 0 0 07:45 16 6 31 21 0 0 0 0 31 2108:00 12 3 0 0 08:15 12 4 0 008:30 8 5 0 0 08:45 10 2 42 14 0 0 0 0 42 1409:00 6 6 0 009:15 7 1 0 009:30 9 1 0 0 09:45 12 11 34 19 0 0 0 0 34 1910:00 9 4 0 010:15 5 5 0 010:30 5 6 0 0 10:45 5 6 24 21 0 0 0 0 24 2111:00 6 8 0 011:15 17 3 0 011:30 8 3 0 011:45 6 1 37 15 0 0 0 0 37 15Total 225 264 225 264 0 0 0 0 225 264CombinedTotal 489 489 0 0 489 AM Peak - 07:45 --------- Vol.- 48 ---------P.H.F. 0.750 PM Peak -- 02:00 --------Vol.-- 33 -------- P.H.F. 0.750 Percentage 46.0% 54.0% 0.0% 0.0% G-291 Page 7 City of AnaheimFairfield Hotel Southern Driveway E/ Harbor Boulevard - Exit Only7 Day Directional Volume Counts ANA002Site Code: 042-15521 Counts Unlimited, Inc PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878Phone: 951-268-6268email: counts@countsunlimited.com Start 16-Oct-15 Eastbound Hour Totals Hour Totals Combined TotalsTimeFriMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoon Morning Afternoon12:00 3 12 0 0 12:15 3 6 0 012:30 1 4 0 012:45 5 8 12 30 0 0 0 0 12 3001:00 0 2 0 0 01:15 2 3 0 001:30 3 6 0 001:45 1 8 6 19 0 0 0 0 6 1902:00 0 6 0 002:15 1 7 0 002:30 0 8 0 002:45 2 5 3 26 0 0 0 0 3 2603:00 1 2 0 003:15 1 5 0 0 03:30 0 7 0 003:45 2 8 4 22 0 0 0 0 4 2204:00 1 4 0 004:15 2 7 0 0 04:30 0 9 0 0 04:45 2 13 5 33 0 0 0 0 5 3305:00 3 8 0 0 05:15 3 9 0 005:30 4 7 0 005:45 7 7 17 31 0 0 0 0 17 31 06:00 5 8 0 006:15 4 7 0 006:30 4 8 0 006:45 1 1 14 24 0 0 0 0 14 2407:00 4 3 0 007:15 6 1 0 007:30 4 3 0 007:45 9 5 23 12 0 0 0 0 23 1208:00 9 4 0 0 08:15 3 6 0 008:30 5 10 0 008:45 3 5 20 25 0 0 0 0 20 25 09:00 11 5 0 009:15 7 7 0 0 09:30 11 4 0 0 09:45 4 3 33 19 0 0 0 0 33 1910:00 0 3 0 010:15 5 6 0 010:30 9 6 0 0 10:45 4 5 18 20 0 0 0 0 18 2011:00 5 3 0 011:15 4 8 0 011:30 7 0 0 011:45 6 9 22 20 0 0 0 0 22 20Total 177 281 177 281 0 0 0 0 177 281CombinedTotal 458 458 0 0 458 AM Peak - 09:00 --------- Vol.- 33 ---------P.H.F. 0.750 PM Peak -- 04:30 --------Vol.-- 39 -------- P.H.F. 0.750 Percentage 38.6% 61.4% 0.0% 0.0% ADT/AADT ADT 523 AADT 523 G-292 Page 1 City of AnaheimSheraton Inn Driveway N/ Convention Way7 Day Directional Volume Counts ANA005Site Code: 042-15521 Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878Phone: (951) 268-6268email.counts@countsunlimited.com Start 22-Sep-15 Northbound Hour Totals Southbound Hour Totals Combined TotalsTimeTueMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoon 12:00 1 1 6 212:15 0 6 1 712:30 0 1 3 512:45 0 1 1 9 3 3 13 17 14 26 01:00 0 2 2 701:15 0 1 1 301:30 0 4 1 1001:45 1 4 1 11 1 5 5 25 6 36 02:00 0 5 0 502:15 0 5 0 402:30 0 1 0 1102:45 0 2 0 13 1 8 1 28 1 41 03:00 0 1 0 503:15 0 5 0 803:30 0 6 0 1403:45 0 3 0 15 0 7 0 34 0 49 04:00 0 0 1 3504:15 1 3 0 16 04:30 2 1 1 15 04:45 0 4 3 8 0 10 2 76 5 8405:00 0 5 0 605:15 0 5 1 905:30 1 6 2 3 05:45 6 5 7 21 1 7 4 25 11 4606:00 1 5 2 406:15 0 7 2 7 06:30 4 6 0 306:45 7 7 12 25 0 5 4 19 16 44 07:00 3 7 6 407:15 1 8 4 307:30 6 6 4 6 07:45 4 1 14 22 6 5 20 18 34 4008:00 9 5 6 6 08:15 7 1 2 608:30 3 3 5 608:45 6 1 25 10 5 14 18 32 43 42 09:00 6 0 4 1409:15 2 4 2 809:30 8 1 3 109:45 3 1 19 6 7 8 16 31 35 37 10:00 4 1 3 810:15 3 1 5 810:30 3 1 4 1410:45 3 1 13 4 4 5 16 35 29 39 11:00 4 2 10 711:15 2 1 6 611:30 2 3 2 8 11:45 3 0 11 6 5 6 23 27 34 33Total 106 150 106 150 122 367 122 367 228 517CombinedTotal 256 256 489 489 745 AM Peak - 07:30 --- 10:30 -----Vol.- 26 --- 24 -----P.H.F. 0.722 0.600 PM Peak -- 06:30 --- 04:00 ---- Vol.-- 28 --- 76 ----P.H.F. 0.875 0.543 Percentag e 41.4% 58.6% 24.9% 75.1% G-293 Page 2 City of AnaheimSheraton Inn Driveway N/ Convention Way7 Day Directional Volume Counts ANA005Site Code: 042-15521 Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878Phone: (951) 268-6268email.counts@countsunlimited.com Start 23-Sep-15 Northbound Hour Totals Southbound Hour Totals Combined TotalsTimeWedMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoon 12:00 0 2 1 112:15 0 0 5 112:30 0 1 3 412:45 3 3 3 6 5 2 14 8 17 14 01:00 0 4 1 201:15 0 3 0 11 01:30 0 6 0 19 01:45 0 1 0 14 0 5 1 37 1 51 02:00 0 3 0 902:15 0 8 0 602:30 1 5 0 802:45 1 2 2 18 1 3 1 26 3 4403:00 0 2 0 303:15 0 6 0 403:30 0 3 2 9 03:45 0 1 0 12 0 5 2 21 2 3304:00 1 4 0 204:15 0 2 0 1 04:30 0 7 0 1304:45 2 6 3 19 0 9 0 25 3 44 05:00 0 4 1 4 05:15 1 9 1 1505:30 0 7 0 1005:45 4 4 5 24 5 10 7 39 12 6306:00 2 4 0 4 06:15 3 3 2 606:30 1 10 0 406:45 4 3 10 20 0 4 2 18 12 3807:00 2 7 2 607:15 1 5 4 107:30 2 3 5 107:45 11 7 16 22 7 5 18 13 34 3508:00 5 2 3 608:15 7 4 7 4 08:30 8 3 2 1108:45 5 4 25 13 5 2 17 23 42 3609:00 3 1 1 509:15 7 2 2 4 09:30 4 2 3 809:45 2 3 16 8 8 6 14 23 30 3110:00 6 0 2 6 10:15 1 0 10 310:30 5 0 13 5 10:45 6 1 18 1 3 2 28 16 46 17 11:00 7 2 12 611:15 10 0 4 6 11:30 8 1 8 911:45 7 1 32 4 3 4 27 25 59 29 Total 130 161 130 161 131 274 131 274 261 435CombinedTotal 291 291 405 405 696 AM Peak - 11:00 --- 10:15 ----- Vol.- 32 --- 38 -----P.H.F. 0.800 0.731 PM Peak -- 04:30 --- 01:15 ----Vol.-- 26 --- 44 ----P.H.F. 0.722 0.579 Percentage 44.7% 55.3% 32.3% 67.7% G-294 Page 3 City of AnaheimSheraton Inn Driveway N/ Convention Way7 Day Directional Volume Counts ANA005Site Code: 042-15521 Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878Phone: (951) 268-6268email.counts@countsunlimited.com Start 24-Sep-15 Northbound Hour Totals Southbound Hour Totals Combined TotalsTimeThuMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoon 12:00 1 2 2 512:15 1 7 4 212:30 0 5 3 612:45 0 4 2 18 2 4 11 17 13 35 01:00 1 3 1 501:15 0 5 1 301:30 0 2 0 601:45 0 4 1 14 0 3 2 17 3 31 02:00 0 6 0 202:15 0 3 0 102:30 0 6 0 1002:45 0 11 0 26 0 7 0 20 0 46 03:00 0 2 0 603:15 0 5 0 603:30 0 4 0 1303:45 0 7 0 18 0 11 0 36 0 5404:00 0 5 1 604:15 1 3 0 204:30 1 6 0 704:45 2 5 4 19 1 13 2 28 6 4705:00 1 3 0 2 05:15 0 1 3 305:30 2 6 1 8 05:45 7 11 10 21 2 14 6 27 16 4806:00 1 6 0 6 06:15 1 15 1 706:30 6 10 0 2 06:45 7 10 15 41 2 9 3 24 18 6507:00 4 3 4 407:15 2 5 2 307:30 3 3 1 6 07:45 5 5 14 16 4 7 11 20 25 3608:00 10 1 8 408:15 4 2 3 3 08:30 8 3 1 808:45 3 2 25 8 1 10 13 25 38 33 09:00 3 5 1 1609:15 5 2 1 25 09:30 2 2 4 909:45 7 3 17 12 6 5 12 55 29 67 10:00 3 2 4 710:15 2 2 1 410:30 3 1 2 710:45 4 3 12 8 2 8 9 26 21 34 11:00 2 0 3 511:15 2 0 5 311:30 7 3 5 8 11:45 1 0 12 3 4 7 17 23 29 26Total 112 204 112 204 86 318 86 318 198 522CombinedTotal 316 316 404 404 720 AM Peak - 07:45 --- 11:00 -----Vol.- 27 --- 17 -----P.H.F. 0.675 0.531 PM Peak -- 05:45 --- 08:45 ---- Vol.-- 42 --- 60 ----P.H.F. 0.700 0.600 Percentag e 35.4% 64.6% 21.3% 78.7% G-295 Page 4 City of AnaheimSheraton Inn Driveway N/ Convention Way7 Day Directional Volume Counts ANA005Site Code: 042-15521 Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878Phone: (951) 268-6268email.counts@countsunlimited.com Start 25-Sep-15 Northbound Hour Totals Southbound Hour Totals Combined TotalsTimeFriMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoon 12:00 1 4 4 812:15 1 2 2 412:30 0 5 4 512:45 0 6 2 17 1 7 11 24 13 41 01:00 1 6 3 501:15 0 4 0 701:30 1 4 3 601:45 0 10 2 24 0 8 6 26 8 50 02:00 0 5 0 502:15 0 9 0 302:30 1 7 1 1202:45 0 8 1 29 1 11 2 31 3 60 03:00 0 5 0 903:15 0 11 0 1603:30 0 7 0 1103:45 0 4 0 27 0 6 0 42 0 69 04:00 1 10 0 904:15 0 9 0 11 04:30 0 7 0 29 04:45 1 9 2 35 0 10 0 59 2 9405:00 0 7 0 705:15 2 9 3 605:30 2 9 0 5 05:45 10 4 14 29 6 6 9 24 23 5306:00 1 5 1 206:15 4 5 3 306:30 5 6 4 2 06:45 7 8 17 24 1 3 9 10 26 3407:00 8 3 4 507:15 6 12 5 7 07:30 13 10 5 9 07:45 9 6 36 31 9 9 23 30 59 6108:00 15 8 4 3 08:15 8 3 11 008:30 5 5 2 608:45 5 2 33 18 7 3 24 12 57 30 09:00 4 4 7 609:15 6 5 4 509:30 8 4 5 1009:45 3 4 21 17 6 4 22 25 43 4210:00 5 2 10 210:15 1 5 6 410:30 6 3 2 810:45 3 3 15 13 5 3 23 17 38 3011:00 4 4 2 8 11:15 9 0 9 811:30 5 0 8 1311:45 2 2 20 6 10 8 29 37 49 43Total 163 270 163 270 158 337 158 337 321 607 CombinedTotal 433 433 495 495 928 AM Peak - 07:30 --- 07:30 -----Vol.- 45 --- 29 ----- P.H.F. 0.750 0.659 PM Peak -- 07:15 --- 04:00 ----Vol.-- 36 --- 59 ----P.H.F. 0.750 0.509 Percentage 37.6% 62.4% 31.9% 68.1% G-296 Page 5 City of AnaheimSheraton Inn Driveway N/ Convention Way7 Day Directional Volume Counts ANA005Site Code: 042-15521 Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878Phone: (951) 268-6268email.counts@countsunlimited.com Start 26-Sep-15 Northbound Hour Totals Southbound Hour Totals Combined TotalsTimeSatMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoon 12:00 1 4 6 812:15 0 4 7 312:30 1 7 5 712:45 0 3 2 18 2 7 20 25 22 43 01:00 0 5 5 501:15 0 4 3 301:30 2 3 1 1001:45 1 5 3 17 1 8 10 26 13 43 02:00 0 6 0 602:15 0 3 0 502:30 0 5 0 1102:45 1 12 1 26 0 6 0 28 1 54 03:00 1 9 0 2203:15 0 12 1 34 03:30 1 8 1 4403:45 0 10 2 39 2 27 4 127 6 166 04:00 0 7 0 3604:15 1 7 0 1804:30 0 8 0 13 04:45 3 14 4 36 0 9 0 76 4 11205:00 0 7 0 2205:15 1 13 1 1205:30 2 9 2 8 05:45 6 9 9 38 0 7 3 49 12 8706:00 5 14 3 9 06:15 2 13 0 606:30 3 8 1 8 06:45 3 11 13 46 1 4 5 27 18 7307:00 2 6 3 607:15 3 7 5 707:30 4 8 3 807:45 14 8 23 29 3 8 14 29 37 58 08:00 13 5 6 8 08:15 11 6 9 708:30 10 10 10 1108:45 10 5 44 26 5 7 30 33 74 59 09:00 11 5 2 609:15 7 4 4 4 09:30 11 4 11 1009:45 7 5 36 18 7 16 24 36 60 54 10:00 12 5 10 910:15 1 2 2 910:30 3 1 5 910:45 9 2 25 10 12 9 29 36 54 4611:00 5 5 5 911:15 4 2 7 711:30 6 2 3 6 11:45 5 2 20 11 7 16 22 38 42 49Total 182 314 182 314 161 530 161 530 343 844CombinedTotal 496 496 691 691 1187 AM Peak - 07:45 --- 09:15 -----Vol.- 48 --- 32 -----P.H.F. 0.857 0.727 PM Peak -- 06:00 --- 03:15 ---- Vol.-- 46 --- 141 ----P.H.F. 0.821 0.801 Percentag e 36.7% 63.3% 23.3% 76.7% G-297 Page 6 City of AnaheimSheraton Inn Driveway N/ Convention Way7 Day Directional Volume Counts ANA005Site Code: 042-15521 Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878Phone: (951) 268-6268email.counts@countsunlimited.com Start 27-Sep-15 Northbound Hour Totals Southbound Hour Totals Combined TotalsTimeSunMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoon 12:00 3 4 12 712:15 0 4 5 112:30 0 7 4 512:45 1 5 4 20 3 3 24 16 28 36 01:00 0 3 8 601:15 0 4 6 401:30 1 5 4 501:45 0 4 1 16 1 4 19 19 20 35 02:00 0 5 1 602:15 0 5 0 102:30 0 3 3 802:45 2 9 2 22 2 2 6 17 8 39 03:00 0 8 0 1303:15 0 8 0 203:30 0 5 0 503:45 0 7 0 28 0 6 0 26 0 5404:00 0 2 0 104:15 1 6 1 504:30 0 4 0 504:45 3 12 4 24 0 2 1 13 5 37 05:00 1 11 1 17 05:15 1 6 0 11 05:30 1 2 0 2 05:45 6 10 9 29 1 7 2 37 11 6606:00 1 13 0 5 06:15 0 8 0 506:30 3 3 3 4 06:45 4 10 8 34 0 6 3 20 11 5407:00 5 6 3 207:15 2 2 2 107:30 4 9 4 8 07:45 10 2 21 19 4 8 13 19 34 38 08:00 8 3 8 508:15 11 3 7 3 08:30 5 7 5 308:45 4 2 28 15 5 8 25 19 53 34 09:00 1 8 2 609:15 1 4 6 509:30 3 3 3 609:45 4 3 9 18 9 1 20 18 29 36 10:00 2 0 1 410:15 4 2 2 310:30 4 2 4 810:45 1 5 11 9 3 5 10 20 21 29 11:00 3 2 7 611:15 2 3 4 1111:30 2 1 4 411:45 4 1 11 7 5 3 20 24 31 31Total 108 241 108 241 143 248 143 248 251 489CombinedTotal 349 349 391 391 740 AM Peak - 07:45 --- 08:00 -----Vol.- 34 --- 25 ----- P.H.F. 0.773 0.781 PM Peak -- 05:45 --- 05:00 ----Vol.-- 34 --- 37 ----P.H.F. 0.654 0.544 Percentage 30.9% 69.1% 36.6% 63.4% G-298 Page 7 City of AnaheimSheraton Inn Driveway N/ Convention Way7 Day Directional Volume Counts ANA005Site Code: 042-15521 Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878Phone: (951) 268-6268email.counts@countsunlimited.com Start 28-Sep-15 Northbound Hour Totals Southbound Hour Totals Combined TotalsTimeMonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoon 12:00 0 8 3 812:15 1 11 7 412:30 0 6 11 612:45 0 9 1 34 4 6 25 24 26 58 01:00 0 12 1 401:15 0 2 0 801:30 2 8 2 401:45 0 6 2 28 2 6 5 22 7 50 02:00 0 7 0 1602:15 1 8 1 602:30 0 11 0 902:45 0 18 1 44 0 13 1 44 2 88 03:00 0 9 0 503:15 0 9 0 1203:30 0 8 0 1003:45 0 11 0 37 0 11 0 38 0 7504:00 1 14 1 904:15 1 6 2 904:30 0 7 0 30 04:45 2 10 4 37 0 9 3 57 7 94 05:00 0 12 0 13 05:15 0 12 3 1105:30 0 10 0 7 05:45 9 8 9 42 2 8 5 39 14 8106:00 0 16 2 18 06:15 3 8 1 806:30 4 11 1 8 06:45 4 21 11 56 0 13 4 47 15 10307:00 7 10 4 1007:15 4 5 2 807:30 9 4 9 12 07:45 17 4 37 23 7 4 22 34 59 5708:00 19 6 3 8 08:15 12 3 5 608:30 8 3 4 708:45 2 1 41 13 3 10 15 31 56 44 09:00 5 11 3 1409:15 4 6 5 1009:30 6 5 5 9 09:45 8 9 23 31 9 6 22 39 45 7010:00 8 2 7 5 10:15 10 1 6 810:30 5 5 8 1510:45 3 0 26 8 1 3 22 31 48 3911:00 6 4 7 611:15 4 2 6 711:30 4 2 2 17 11:45 5 1 19 9 5 6 20 36 39 45Total 174 362 174 362 144 442 144 442 318 804CombinedTotal 536 536 586 586 1122 AM Peak - 07:30 --- 09:45 -----Vol.- 57 --- 30 -----P.H.F. 0.750 0.833 PM Peak -- 06:00 --- 04:30 ---- Vol.-- 56 --- 63 ----P.H.F. 0.667 0.525 Percentag e 32.5% 67.5% 24.6% 75.4% ADT/AADT ADT 877 AADT 877 G-299 Page 1 City of AnaheimSheraton Northern Driveway W/ Harbor Boulevard24 Hour Directional Volume Counts ANA003Site Code: 042-15521 Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878Phone: (951) 268-6268email.counts@countsunlimited.com Start 22-Sep-15 Eastbound Hour Totals Westbound Hour Totals Combined TotalsTimeTueMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoon 12:00 1 3 7 812:15 0 1 3 712:30 0 1 1 712:45 0 2 1 7 2 7 13 29 14 36 01:00 0 1 0 401:15 1 1 0 701:30 1 0 1 801:45 0 4 2 6 1 5 2 24 4 30 02:00 0 2 0 902:15 0 0 1 702:30 0 0 0 802:45 0 2 0 4 0 8 1 32 1 36 03:00 0 3 0 1203:15 0 1 0 903:30 0 4 0 803:45 0 0 0 8 0 5 0 34 0 4204:00 0 4 0 704:15 0 3 0 404:30 0 4 2 3 04:45 0 1 0 12 0 9 2 23 2 35 05:00 0 3 2 705:15 0 6 3 805:30 1 3 2 5 05:45 2 1 3 13 4 9 11 29 14 4206:00 1 1 3 506:15 1 1 1 11 06:30 0 2 2 9 06:45 1 3 3 7 5 10 11 35 14 4207:00 2 0 3 16 07:15 6 1 7 707:30 4 2 12 11 07:45 8 1 20 4 12 10 34 44 54 4808:00 0 5 13 7 08:15 3 0 11 508:30 1 0 23 7 08:45 2 0 6 5 40 11 87 30 93 3509:00 3 0 23 8 09:15 2 0 22 609:30 3 2 12 809:45 2 2 10 4 6 7 63 29 73 33 10:00 2 1 5 610:15 2 0 5 510:30 2 3 6 810:45 0 0 6 4 5 5 21 24 27 28 11:00 6 1 5 1011:15 5 0 6 311:30 2 1 4 311:45 2 0 15 2 8 3 23 19 38 21 Total 66 76 66 76 268 352 268 352 334 428CombinedTotal 142 142 620 620 762 AM Peak - 07:00 --- 08:30 ----- Vol.- 20 --- 108 -----P.H.F. 0.625 0.675 PM Peak -- 04:30 --- 06:15 ----Vol.-- 14 --- 46 ----P.H.F. 0.583 0.719 Percentage 46.5% 53.5% 43.2% 56.8% G-300 Page 2 City of AnaheimSheraton Northern Driveway W/ Harbor Boulevard24 Hour Directional Volume Counts ANA003Site Code: 042-15521 Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878Phone: (951) 268-6268email.counts@countsunlimited.com Start 23-Sep-15 Eastbound Hour Totals Westbound Hour Totals Combined TotalsTimeWedMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoon 12:00 0 0 0 812:15 0 1 5 112:30 0 1 2 612:45 0 4 0 6 1 7 8 22 8 28 01:00 0 3 1 501:15 0 1 0 101:30 0 4 1 5 01:45 0 6 0 14 1 8 3 19 3 33 02:00 0 2 0 602:15 0 3 0 602:30 1 2 0 202:45 0 0 1 7 0 4 0 18 1 2503:00 0 1 0 703:15 0 0 1 903:30 0 0 1 8 03:45 0 2 0 3 0 5 2 29 2 3204:00 0 0 0 604:15 1 1 2 904:30 0 4 1 8 04:45 0 3 1 8 2 4 5 27 6 3505:00 0 3 0 9 05:15 0 2 3 1005:30 0 0 1 7 05:45 0 7 0 12 2 11 6 37 6 4906:00 1 2 0 7 06:15 0 4 2 406:30 0 1 0 906:45 3 1 4 8 6 7 8 27 12 35 07:00 3 2 3 5 07:15 9 3 16 807:30 2 1 13 407:45 0 4 14 10 0 6 32 23 46 33 08:00 0 1 0 408:15 3 1 5 508:30 3 1 9 408:45 3 0 9 3 10 1 24 14 33 17 09:00 3 0 4 1009:15 3 0 7 309:30 1 1 6 309:45 2 0 9 1 15 6 32 22 41 23 10:00 1 2 11 610:15 3 1 11 810:30 0 0 6 510:45 2 0 6 3 7 2 35 21 41 2411:00 1 0 6 311:15 3 2 5 111:30 1 0 5 5 11:45 2 1 7 3 6 2 22 11 29 14Total 51 78 51 78 177 270 177 270 228 348CombinedTotal 129 129 447 447 576 AM Peak - 06:45 --- 09:30 -----Vol.- 17 --- 43 -----P.H.F. 0.472 0.717 PM Peak -- 01:30 --- 05:00 ---- Vol.-- 15 --- 37 ----P.H.F. 0.625 0.841 Percentag e 39.5% 60.5% 39.6% 60.4% G-301 Page 3 City of AnaheimSheraton Northern Driveway W/ Harbor Boulevard24 Hour Directional Volume Counts ANA003Site Code: 042-15521 Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878Phone: (951) 268-6268email.counts@countsunlimited.com Start 24-Sep-15 Eastbound Hour Totals Westbound Hour Totals Combined TotalsTimeThuMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoon 12:00 0 0 4 912:15 1 1 2 712:30 0 4 1 1412:45 0 0 1 5 0 9 7 39 8 44 01:00 0 1 0 1301:15 0 1 1 301:30 0 1 0 901:45 0 1 0 4 0 5 1 30 1 34 02:00 0 2 0 902:15 0 2 2 602:30 0 0 1 1002:45 0 1 0 5 0 8 3 33 3 38 03:00 0 3 1 1003:15 0 1 0 1003:30 0 3 0 803:45 0 0 0 7 0 11 1 39 1 4604:00 0 1 0 704:15 0 1 0 304:30 0 1 1 604:45 1 1 1 4 2 5 3 21 4 25 05:00 0 3 2 605:15 0 4 2 5 05:30 0 4 2 9 05:45 0 6 0 17 3 4 9 24 9 4106:00 1 2 3 1006:15 1 3 1 206:30 0 1 0 12 06:45 2 3 4 9 7 10 11 34 15 4307:00 4 0 7 1407:15 1 1 4 707:30 2 0 4 7 07:45 6 1 13 2 9 7 24 35 37 3708:00 3 0 9 608:15 4 1 12 9 08:30 5 1 6 308:45 4 1 16 3 10 7 37 25 53 28 09:00 0 3 5 1409:15 3 0 6 14 09:30 3 1 4 1109:45 6 0 12 4 9 5 24 44 36 48 10:00 2 3 4 1110:15 2 3 8 710:30 2 0 8 710:45 3 4 9 10 5 10 25 35 34 45 11:00 1 0 12 911:15 2 1 7 611:30 3 1 7 611:45 1 1 7 3 11 1 37 22 44 25Total 63 73 63 73 182 381 182 381 245 454CombinedTotal 136 136 563 563 699 AM Peak - 07:45 --- 08:00 -----Vol.- 18 --- 37 ----- P.H.F. 0.750 0.771 PM Peak -- 05:00 --- 08:45 ----Vol.-- 17 --- 46 ----P.H.F. 0.708 0.821 Percentage 46.3% 53.7% 32.3% 67.7% G-302 Page 4 City of AnaheimSheraton Northern Driveway W/ Harbor Boulevard24 Hour Directional Volume Counts ANA003Site Code: 042-15521 Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878Phone: (951) 268-6268email.counts@countsunlimited.com Start 25-Sep-15 Eastbound Hour Totals Westbound Hour Totals Combined TotalsTimeFriMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoon 12:00 0 2 4 912:15 0 3 2 512:30 0 3 3 912:45 0 2 0 10 0 11 9 34 9 44 01:00 0 3 1 501:15 0 3 1 1101:30 0 2 0 701:45 0 1 0 9 2 9 4 32 4 41 02:00 0 4 0 702:15 0 1 0 1002:30 0 1 0 402:45 0 3 0 9 0 11 0 32 0 41 03:00 0 2 0 603:15 0 4 1 7 03:30 0 2 1 703:45 1 2 1 10 0 5 2 25 3 35 04:00 0 6 0 904:15 1 1 0 704:30 0 2 0 13 04:45 0 2 1 11 3 13 3 42 4 5305:00 0 1 1 705:15 0 1 3 905:30 0 1 1 8 05:45 1 1 1 4 7 7 12 31 13 3506:00 0 1 3 806:15 0 2 2 806:30 1 0 2 7 06:45 3 2 4 5 4 11 11 34 15 3907:00 1 1 8 7 07:15 4 2 13 707:30 2 0 11 5 07:45 5 2 12 5 15 9 47 28 59 33 08:00 1 1 13 708:15 3 1 12 708:30 1 2 9 708:45 0 2 5 6 5 9 39 30 44 36 09:00 1 2 10 909:15 2 2 12 1109:30 1 1 6 509:45 2 1 6 6 12 10 40 35 46 41 10:00 1 1 3 910:15 1 2 14 15 10:30 3 2 7 7 10:45 2 0 7 5 7 12 31 43 38 4811:00 2 0 2 511:15 3 1 14 911:30 2 0 10 6 11:45 4 0 11 1 13 5 39 25 50 26Total 48 81 48 81 237 391 237 391 285 472CombinedTotal 129 129 628 628 757 AM Peak - 07:00 --- 07:15 -----Vol.- 12 --- 52 -----P.H.F. 0.600 0.867 PM Peak -- 03:15 --- 10:00 ---- Vol.-- 14 --- 43 ----P.H.F. 0.583 0.717 Percentage 37.2% 62.8% 37.7% 62.3% G-303 Page 5 City of AnaheimSheraton Northern Driveway W/ Harbor Boulevard24 Hour Directional Volume Counts ANA003Site Code: 042-15521 Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878Phone: (951) 268-6268email.counts@countsunlimited.com Start 26-Sep-15 Eastbound Hour Totals Westbound Hour Totals Combined TotalsTimeSatMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoon 12:00 1 3 9 512:15 0 0 9 812:30 0 4 2 1212:45 1 3 2 10 5 13 25 38 27 48 01:00 1 2 7 901:15 0 2 1 1201:30 1 1 2 501:45 0 0 2 5 5 9 15 35 17 40 02:00 0 5 2 902:15 0 1 1 1402:30 0 2 0 1202:45 0 2 0 10 0 7 3 42 3 52 03:00 0 5 0 1203:15 0 8 0 8 03:30 0 6 1 1203:45 1 5 1 24 1 16 2 48 3 72 04:00 0 11 0 1204:15 0 5 0 1404:30 0 4 2 8 04:45 1 6 1 26 1 22 3 56 4 82 05:00 0 3 1 25 05:15 1 4 1 19 05:30 0 5 5 16 05:45 0 3 1 15 2 13 9 73 10 8806:00 0 1 6 7 06:15 0 3 2 1606:30 1 0 4 706:45 0 1 1 5 2 13 14 43 15 4807:00 1 2 3 1007:15 0 3 4 707:30 3 1 6 1207:45 1 0 5 6 10 11 23 40 28 4608:00 2 2 16 8 08:15 3 1 24 1008:30 2 3 20 908:45 1 2 8 8 14 7 74 34 82 42 09:00 1 1 17 1209:15 2 0 11 1309:30 1 0 19 909:45 2 4 6 5 8 11 55 45 61 50 10:00 3 2 15 1410:15 2 2 8 1710:30 1 1 14 810:45 1 1 7 6 2 7 39 46 46 52 11:00 2 1 5 711:15 5 1 10 1011:30 3 0 9 7 11:45 6 2 16 4 10 7 34 31 50 35Total 50 124 50 124 296 531 296 531 346 655CombinedTotal 174 174 827 827 1001 AM Peak - 11:00 --- 08:15 -----Vol.- 16 --- 75 -----P.H.F. 0.667 0.781 PM Peak -- 03:15 --- 04:45 ---- Vol.-- 30 --- 82 ----P.H.F. 0.682 0.820 Percentag e 28.7% 71.3% 35.8% 64.2% G-304 Page 6 City of AnaheimSheraton Northern Driveway W/ Harbor Boulevard24 Hour Directional Volume Counts ANA003Site Code: 042-15521 Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878Phone: (951) 268-6268email.counts@countsunlimited.com Start 27-Sep-15 Eastbound Hour Totals Westbound Hour Totals Combined TotalsTimeSunMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoon 12:00 2 7 8 16 12:15 1 4 2 1012:30 2 5 9 19 12:45 0 3 5 19 3 6 22 51 27 7001:00 0 3 3 501:15 2 0 2 7 01:30 0 1 3 1101:45 0 2 2 6 0 6 8 29 10 3502:00 1 1 3 802:15 1 1 0 702:30 0 3 1 202:45 1 1 3 6 0 8 4 25 7 3103:00 0 2 1 9 03:15 0 4 0 19 03:30 0 5 0 13 03:45 0 1 0 12 0 11 1 52 1 6404:00 0 2 0 10 04:15 0 1 0 804:30 0 4 3 1004:45 0 2 0 9 0 8 3 36 3 4505:00 0 5 1 17 05:15 0 2 1 905:30 1 4 2 1305:45 0 3 1 14 4 11 8 50 9 6406:00 0 2 3 7 06:15 1 3 0 606:30 0 4 1 506:45 0 1 1 10 5 9 9 27 10 3707:00 2 1 5 1307:15 4 3 8 607:30 2 1 5 407:45 2 4 10 9 11 8 29 31 39 4008:00 3 4 8 1208:15 6 1 3 9 08:30 3 2 6 608:45 2 1 14 8 4 4 21 31 35 3909:00 3 3 12 609:15 2 2 9 16 09:30 5 1 6 609:45 4 3 14 9 12 8 39 36 53 4510:00 4 1 7 710:15 4 0 6 9 10:30 4 1 7 310:45 4 1 16 3 8 8 28 27 44 30 11:00 5 1 13 811:15 3 2 13 411:30 7 1 10 5 11:45 2 0 17 4 10 5 46 22 63 26Total 83 109 83 109 218 417 218 417 301 526CombinedTotal 192 192 635 635 827 AM Peak - 10:45 --- 11:00 -----Vol.- 19 --- 46 -----P.H.F. 0.679 0.885 PM Peak -- 12:00 --- 03:15 ---- Vol.-- 19 --- 53 ----P.H.F. 0.679 0.697 Percentage 43.2% 56.8% 34.3% 65.7% G-305 Page 7 City of AnaheimSheraton Northern Driveway W/ Harbor Boulevard24 Hour Directional Volume Counts ANA003Site Code: 042-15521 Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878Phone: (951) 268-6268email.counts@countsunlimited.com Start 28-Sep-15 Eastbound Hour Totals Westbound Hour Totals Combined TotalsTimeMonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoon 12:00 2 5 3 9 12:15 0 1 2 712:30 1 2 4 4 12:45 1 1 4 9 1 3 10 23 14 3201:00 0 1 1 601:15 0 2 2 8 01:30 0 1 0 601:45 0 1 0 5 0 7 3 27 3 3202:00 0 1 1 302:15 0 3 1 1202:30 0 1 1 1002:45 0 1 0 6 2 6 5 31 5 3703:00 0 1 1 603:15 0 1 0 703:30 1 0 0 7 03:45 0 2 1 4 0 9 1 29 2 3304:00 0 0 1 704:15 0 1 2 704:30 1 2 0 6 04:45 0 1 1 4 1 7 4 27 5 3105:00 1 2 0 405:15 0 3 0 1105:30 1 1 1 10 05:45 0 2 2 8 2 5 3 30 5 3806:00 1 2 3 506:15 0 0 4 706:30 2 3 2 5 06:45 1 0 4 5 3 2 12 19 16 2407:00 3 2 5 307:15 3 0 4 13 07:30 2 1 6 8 07:45 4 1 12 4 9 4 24 28 36 3208:00 3 1 11 10 08:15 2 1 13 608:30 4 2 8 1108:45 6 0 15 4 14 3 46 30 61 34 09:00 5 1 9 709:15 4 1 8 309:30 3 0 7 5 09:45 5 0 17 2 11 6 35 21 52 2310:00 3 1 5 610:15 4 0 9 410:30 4 1 6 6 10:45 2 1 13 3 8 7 28 23 41 2611:00 2 0 9 211:15 3 1 12 411:30 4 1 9 4 11:45 2 0 11 2 8 1 38 11 49 13Total 80 56 80 56 209 299 209 299 289 355CombinedTotal 136 136 508 508 644 AM Peak - 08:30 --- 08:00 -----Vol.- 19 --- 46 -----P.H.F. 0.792 0.821 PM Peak -- 12:00 --- 07:15 ---- Vol.-- 9 --- 35 ----P.H.F. 0.450 0.673 Percentage 58.8% 41.2% 41.1% 58.9% ADT/AADT ADT 752 AADT 752 G-306 Page 1 City of AnaheimSheraton Southern Driveway W/ Harbor Boulevard24 Hour Directional Volume Counts ANA004Site Code: 042-15521 Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878Phone: (951) 268-6268email.counts@countsunlimited.com Start 22-Sep-15 Eastbound Hour Totals Westbound Hour Totals Combined TotalsTimeTueMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoon 12:00 3 7 2 212:15 0 3 0 212:30 6 4 0 012:45 4 3 13 17 0 3 2 7 15 24 01:00 1 4 0 101:15 0 4 0 101:30 2 7 0 101:45 0 6 3 21 0 1 0 4 3 25 02:00 0 4 0 002:15 0 2 0 202:30 2 6 0 202:45 0 6 2 18 0 2 0 6 2 24 03:00 0 0 0 103:15 0 4 0 103:30 0 9 0 3 03:45 0 4 0 17 0 2 0 7 0 24 04:00 0 9 2 204:15 0 17 0 304:30 0 4 0 0 04:45 4 7 4 37 0 2 2 7 6 4405:00 2 7 0 205:15 2 8 0 205:30 0 7 0 0 05:45 1 7 5 29 0 2 0 6 5 3506:00 5 3 2 506:15 0 6 4 2 06:30 11 7 1 7 06:45 5 3 21 19 5 3 12 17 33 36 07:00 4 3 7 407:15 9 7 0 7 07:30 4 3 2 307:45 8 6 25 19 2 2 11 16 36 3508:00 3 4 3 008:15 0 4 1 0 08:30 6 5 6 0 08:45 8 7 17 20 5 1 15 1 32 2109:00 5 3 3 1 09:15 4 5 4 009:30 7 3 1 109:45 2 5 18 16 3 1 11 3 29 19 10:00 9 6 4 110:15 6 2 3 110:30 9 5 4 010:45 3 3 27 16 2 1 13 3 40 19 11:00 4 4 1 011:15 3 0 2 111:30 8 2 2 011:45 12 3 27 9 3 1 8 2 35 11Total 162 238 162 238 74 79 74 79 236 317CombinedTotal 400 400 153 153 553 AM Peak - 06:30 --- 08:30 -----Vol.- 29 --- 18 ----- P.H.F. 0.659 0.643 PM Peak -- 03:30 --- 06:30 ----Vol.-- 39 --- 21 ----P.H.F. 0.574 0.750 Percentage 40.5% 59.5% 48.4% 51.6% G-307 Page 2 City of AnaheimSheraton Southern Driveway W/ Harbor Boulevard24 Hour Directional Volume Counts ANA004Site Code: 042-15521 Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878Phone: (951) 268-6268email.counts@countsunlimited.com Start 23-Sep-15 Eastbound Hour Totals Westbound Hour Totals Combined TotalsTimeWedMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoon 12:00 4 3 0 012:15 0 5 0 212:30 2 5 0 012:45 0 6 6 19 0 4 0 6 6 25 01:00 2 4 0 001:15 0 2 0 101:30 1 13 0 101:45 0 6 3 25 0 1 0 3 3 28 02:00 0 6 0 002:15 0 4 0 202:30 0 5 0 202:45 0 1 0 16 0 0 0 4 0 20 03:00 2 1 0 203:15 0 4 0 103:30 1 8 0 3 03:45 0 4 3 17 0 2 0 8 3 25 04:00 0 9 0 204:15 0 17 0 304:30 0 4 1 0 04:45 2 7 2 37 1 2 2 7 4 4405:00 1 7 0 205:15 2 8 0 205:30 3 8 2 2 05:45 3 9 9 32 2 2 4 8 13 4006:00 2 4 0 606:15 1 6 0 2 06:30 2 7 1 8 06:45 6 3 11 20 1 3 2 19 13 39 07:00 3 3 0 507:15 5 6 2 7 07:30 3 3 0 307:45 6 6 17 18 2 2 4 17 21 3508:00 7 4 4 008:15 5 4 2 0 08:30 4 6 1 008:45 8 7 24 21 1 1 8 1 32 2209:00 3 3 0 109:15 5 5 3 0 09:30 7 3 3 1 09:45 5 5 20 16 7 1 13 3 33 1910:00 6 8 1 2 10:15 7 1 4 110:30 6 5 4 010:45 4 3 23 17 1 1 10 4 33 2111:00 4 4 2 011:15 3 0 1 111:30 7 3 5 0 11:45 6 3 20 10 5 1 13 2 33 12Total 138 248 138 248 56 82 56 82 194 330CombinedTotal 386 386 138 138 524 AM Peak - 09:30 --- 09:45 -----Vol.- 25 --- 16 -----P.H.F. 0.781 0.571 PM Peak -- 03:30 --- 06:30 ---- Vol.-- 38 --- 23 ----P.H.F. 0.559 0.719 Percentage 35.8% 64.2% 40.6% 59.4% G-308 Page 3 City of AnaheimSheraton Southern Driveway W/ Harbor Boulevard24 Hour Directional Volume Counts ANA004Site Code: 042-15521 Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878Phone: (951) 268-6268email.counts@countsunlimited.com Start 24-Sep-15 Eastbound Hour Totals Westbound Hour Totals Combined TotalsTimeThuMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoon 12:00 3 5 0 112:15 1 6 0 712:30 1 11 0 212:45 1 6 6 28 0 1 0 11 6 39 01:00 0 6 0 101:15 0 3 0 201:30 0 5 0 001:45 0 2 0 16 0 0 0 3 0 19 02:00 1 1 0 002:15 1 4 0 302:30 1 4 0 102:45 0 7 3 16 0 1 0 5 3 21 03:00 1 6 0 203:15 0 8 0 003:30 0 4 0 003:45 0 9 1 27 0 2 0 4 1 3104:00 0 2 0 004:15 0 3 0 204:30 1 9 1 004:45 1 2 2 16 1 8 2 10 4 2605:00 0 4 2 0 05:15 2 1 1 305:30 2 7 0 605:45 0 1 4 13 0 4 3 13 7 2606:00 3 5 0 3 06:15 1 4 0 206:30 1 5 1 11 06:45 3 2 8 16 1 6 2 22 10 3807:00 5 10 1 2 07:15 4 3 3 4 07:30 2 5 2 007:45 3 10 14 28 4 0 10 6 24 34 08:00 8 4 2 208:15 6 6 0 1 08:30 2 4 0 108:45 7 9 23 23 1 0 3 4 26 27 09:00 8 9 1 009:15 9 11 1 209:30 6 1 1 0 09:45 8 1 31 22 2 0 5 2 36 2410:00 11 4 0 1 10:15 6 4 2 010:30 8 4 0 010:45 4 3 29 15 3 1 5 2 34 1711:00 6 6 4 011:15 2 2 2 011:30 6 1 2 011:45 7 2 21 11 1 0 9 0 30 11Total 142 231 142 231 39 82 39 82 181 313Combined Total 373 373 121 121 494 AM Peak - 09:15 --- 07:15 -----Vol.- 34 --- 11 -----P.H.F. 0.773 0.688 PM Peak -- 08:30 --- 06:30 ----Vol.-- 33 --- 23 ----P.H.F. 0.750 0.523 Percentage 38.1% 61.9% 32.2% 67.8% G-309 Page 4 City of AnaheimSheraton Southern Driveway W/ Harbor Boulevard24 Hour Directional Volume Counts ANA004Site Code: 042-15521 Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878Phone: (951) 268-6268email.counts@countsunlimited.com Start 25-Sep-15 Eastbound Hour Totals Westbound Hour Totals Combined TotalsTimeFriMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoon 12:00 4 11 0 312:15 2 3 0 212:30 2 4 0 112:45 0 5 8 23 0 4 0 10 8 33 01:00 2 3 0 301:15 0 7 0 001:30 0 5 0 001:45 1 8 3 23 0 1 0 4 3 27 02:00 0 9 0 002:15 0 2 0 202:30 0 4 0 602:45 0 4 0 19 0 1 0 9 0 28 03:00 1 6 0 003:15 0 8 0 103:30 1 8 0 4 03:45 0 12 2 34 0 2 0 7 2 4104:00 1 7 0 3 04:15 0 10 0 104:30 0 10 1 1 04:45 0 6 1 33 0 3 1 8 2 4105:00 1 9 2 205:15 1 5 3 3 05:30 0 3 0 2 05:45 2 4 4 21 2 3 7 10 11 31 06:00 1 4 2 2 06:15 1 10 0 4 06:30 1 8 2 006:45 1 10 4 32 1 2 5 8 9 4007:00 4 9 3 107:15 3 5 2 007:30 4 5 7 0 07:45 9 11 20 30 7 1 19 2 39 3208:00 6 8 4 4 08:15 3 8 4 008:30 12 11 1 408:45 7 6 28 33 2 0 11 8 39 41 09:00 2 6 2 109:15 11 3 4 009:30 6 9 2 009:45 9 5 28 23 5 0 13 1 41 24 10:00 6 4 2 010:15 5 8 1 310:30 6 7 1 010:45 6 5 23 24 0 0 4 3 27 27 11:00 9 5 3 211:15 10 4 5 011:30 7 4 3 0 11:45 9 4 35 17 0 0 11 2 46 19Total 156 312 156 312 71 72 71 72 227 384CombinedTotal 468 468 143 143 611 AM Peak - 11:00 --- 07:30 -----Vol.- 35 --- 22 -----P.H.F. 0.795 0.786 PM Peak -- 03:45 --- 05:30 ---- Vol.-- 39 --- 11 ----P.H.F. 0.813 0.458 Percentag e 33.3% 66.7% 49.7% 50.3% G-310 Page 5 City of AnaheimSheraton Southern Driveway W/ Harbor Boulevard24 Hour Directional Volume Counts ANA004Site Code: 042-15521 Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878Phone: (951) 268-6268email.counts@countsunlimited.com Start 26-Sep-15 Eastbound Hour Totals Westbound Hour Totals Combined TotalsTimeSatMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoon 12:00 3 8 0 012:15 1 6 0 612:30 5 7 0 312:45 5 7 14 28 0 3 0 12 14 40 01:00 1 3 0 001:15 1 8 0 101:30 2 8 1 101:45 1 6 5 25 0 0 1 2 6 27 02:00 0 4 0 102:15 0 8 0 102:30 0 8 1 202:45 1 3 1 23 0 1 1 5 2 28 03:00 0 5 0 103:15 0 25 0 5 03:30 1 26 0 303:45 0 24 1 80 0 1 0 10 1 90 04:00 0 16 0 304:15 1 14 0 504:30 0 10 1 0 04:45 0 12 1 52 1 3 2 11 3 6305:00 1 6 1 405:15 1 15 2 305:30 1 8 0 2 05:45 2 7 5 36 4 10 7 19 12 55 06:00 3 5 1 6 06:15 2 10 1 7 06:30 2 4 0 806:45 0 7 7 26 1 1 3 22 10 4807:00 0 6 1 007:15 7 9 2 407:30 6 10 4 407:45 6 9 19 34 5 1 12 9 31 4308:00 8 9 7 108:15 7 4 10 4 08:30 11 7 14 208:45 6 9 32 29 11 4 42 11 74 40 09:00 4 11 12 009:15 11 9 15 109:30 6 10 17 0 09:45 10 8 31 38 6 1 50 2 81 4010:00 12 16 7 0 10:15 4 16 3 110:30 6 9 3 310:45 8 12 30 53 3 1 16 5 46 5811:00 5 15 1 211:15 11 5 2 011:30 9 8 1 011:45 6 4 31 32 1 0 5 2 36 34Total 177 456 177 456 139 110 139 110 316 566Combined Total 633 633 249 249 882 AM Peak - 09:15 --- 08:45 -----Vol.- 39 --- 55 -----P.H.F. 0.813 0.809 PM Peak -- 03:15 --- 05:45 ----Vol.-- 91 --- 31 ----P.H.F. 0.875 0.775 Percentage 28.0% 72.0% 55.8% 44.2% G-311 Page 6 City of AnaheimSheraton Southern Driveway W/ Harbor Boulevard24 Hour Directional Volume Counts ANA004Site Code: 042-15521 Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878Phone: (951) 268-6268email.counts@countsunlimited.com Start 27-Sep-15 Eastbound Hour Totals Westbound Hour Totals Combined TotalsTimeSunMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoon 12:00 7 15 0 212:15 3 11 2 012:30 9 13 2 212:45 4 6 23 45 0 2 4 6 27 51 01:00 3 6 0 101:15 4 4 1 001:30 0 9 0 001:45 0 11 7 30 0 1 1 2 8 32 02:00 2 6 0 102:15 0 12 0 302:30 1 5 1 102:45 0 4 3 27 0 4 1 9 4 36 03:00 1 7 0 303:15 0 11 0 303:30 1 12 0 003:45 0 8 2 38 0 2 0 8 2 4604:00 0 12 0 004:15 0 8 0 204:30 0 7 1 0 04:45 2 10 2 37 0 5 1 7 3 4405:00 0 3 1 3 05:15 1 7 0 505:30 2 10 0 2 05:45 4 9 7 29 0 5 1 15 8 4406:00 0 11 0 106:15 0 8 2 206:30 2 8 2 2 06:45 4 16 6 43 0 2 4 7 10 50 07:00 4 10 0 007:15 3 11 1 1 07:30 7 9 1 507:45 3 9 17 39 3 1 5 7 22 46 08:00 7 9 5 2 08:15 7 7 4 108:30 6 13 2 108:45 3 10 23 39 3 0 14 4 37 43 09:00 6 7 0 009:15 9 11 2 109:30 10 6 0 209:45 12 7 37 31 1 1 3 4 40 35 10:00 9 5 2 010:15 7 7 0 310:30 12 7 0 1 10:45 10 5 38 24 0 0 2 4 40 28 11:00 13 5 3 011:15 11 2 0 111:30 6 5 2 0 11:45 8 3 38 15 0 0 5 1 43 16Total 203 397 203 397 41 74 41 74 244 471CombinedTotal 600 600 115 115 715 AM Peak - 10:30 --- 07:45 -----Vol.- 46 --- 14 -----P.H.F. 0.885 0.700 PM Peak -- 06:45 --- 04:45 ---- Vol.-- 46 --- 15 ----P.H.F. 0.719 0.750 Percentag e 33.8% 66.2% 35.7% 64.3% G-312 Page 7 City of AnaheimSheraton Southern Driveway W/ Harbor Boulevard24 Hour Directional Volume Counts ANA004Site Code: 042-15521 Counts Unlimited, Inc. PO Box 1178Corona, CA 92878Phone: (951) 268-6268email.counts@countsunlimited.com Start 28-Sep-15 Eastbound Hour Totals Westbound Hour Totals Combined TotalsTimeMonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoonMorningAfternoon 12:00 5 5 0 012:15 3 7 1 312:30 5 5 0 312:45 3 5 16 22 0 1 1 7 17 29 01:00 2 8 0 001:15 4 7 0 201:30 2 4 2 3 01:45 1 6 9 25 1 0 3 5 12 30 02:00 0 4 0 5 02:15 0 11 0 702:30 0 5 0 102:45 1 5 1 25 0 2 0 15 1 4003:00 0 6 0 303:15 1 10 0 003:30 1 9 0 0 03:45 0 4 2 29 0 3 0 6 2 3504:00 1 9 0 104:15 0 2 0 204:30 0 10 0 1 04:45 0 5 1 26 1 1 1 5 2 3105:00 1 7 0 305:15 0 17 1 705:30 2 5 1 1 05:45 2 5 5 34 2 1 4 12 9 4606:00 1 10 3 3 06:15 1 18 1 406:30 4 16 1 5 06:45 1 11 7 55 0 2 5 14 12 69 07:00 5 10 2 307:15 7 5 2 1 07:30 5 7 5 107:45 3 8 20 30 7 2 16 7 36 37 08:00 3 5 2 008:15 4 8 1 108:30 4 7 5 308:45 5 8 16 28 0 0 8 4 24 32 09:00 2 9 4 209:15 12 5 1 0 09:30 4 7 2 109:45 4 11 22 32 1 1 8 4 30 36 10:00 4 7 0 110:15 3 5 1 210:30 7 2 2 010:45 5 7 19 21 1 0 4 3 23 2411:00 0 5 0 011:15 7 4 0 011:30 4 2 0 0 11:45 5 6 16 17 1 0 1 0 17 17Total 134 344 134 344 51 82 51 82 185 426CombinedTotal 478 478 133 133 611 AM Peak - 09:15 --- 07:00 -----Vol.- 24 --- 16 -----P.H.F. 0.500 0.571 PM Peak -- 06:00 --- 01:30 ---- Vol.-- 55 --- 15 ----P.H.F. 0.764 0.536 Percentag e 28.0% 72.0% 38.3% 61.7% ADT/AADT ADT 627 AADT 627 G-313 Anaheim Resort Hotel Trip Generation The Anaheim Resort Hotel trip generation calculations summarized in this section represent the average of the Sheraton Park and Fairfield Inn Marriot rates. Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Occupied Rooms On a: Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 7 and 9 a.m. Trip Generation Per Occupied Room Average Rate In Out ITE Hotel (310) 0.67 58% 42% Anaheim Resort Hotel 0.28 53% 47% Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Occupied Rooms On a: Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m. Trip Generation Per Occupied Room Average Rate In Out Weekday Daily ITE Hotel (310) 0.70 49% 51% 8.92 Anaheim Resort Hotel 0.24 54% 46% 3.54 Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Occupied Rooms On a: Weekend, Peak Hour of Generator Trip Generation Per Occupied Room Average Rate In Out Daily ITE Hotel (310) Saturday 0.87 50%1 50%1 10.50 ITE Hotel (310) Sunday 0.75 50%1 50%1 8.48 Anaheim Resort Hotel 0.52 28% 72% 2.66 1 Directional distribution not available for Peak Hour of Generator. Used daily split percentages Used for Analysis G-314 Sheraton Park Rate Calculation Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Rooms On a: Weekday, A.M. Peak Hour of Generator Per Hotel Room Per Occupied Room 63% % Entering 8:00-9:00 AM Ins 0.17 0.19 37% % Exiting Outs 0.10 0.11 0.27 Rate Rate 0.27 0.31 Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Rooms On a: Weekday, P.M. Peak Hour of Generator Per Hotel Room Per Occupied Room 55% % Entering 5:45-6:45 PM Ins 0.14 0.17 45% % Exiting Outs 0.12 0.13 0.26 Rate Rate 0.26 0.30 Weekday Daily 3.86 4.46 Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Rooms On a: Weekend, Peak Hour of Generator Per Hotel Room Per Occupied Room 24% % Entering Ins 0.17 0.20 76% % Exiting Outs 0.53 0.62 0.71 Rate Rate 0.71 0.82 Weekend Daily 6.04 6.98 G-315 Weekday Count Summary Start Date AM PM Time Weekday Entrance Exit Entrance Exit 12:00 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 5 7 11 9 12:15 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 4 4 11 9 12:30 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 1 6 11 14 12:45 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 2 5 13 10 01:00 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 1 2 11 11 01:15 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 0 1 7 10 01:30 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 1 2 12 22 01:45 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 1 0 10 13 02:00 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 0 0 13 11 02:15 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 1 0 13 9 02:30 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 1 1 12 15 02:45 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 0 1 12 12 03:00 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 0 1 12 9 03:15 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 0 0 15 12 03:30 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 0 1 14 21 03:45 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 0 0 12 14 04:00 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 1 1 11 23 04:15 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 1 0 10 20 04:30 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 3 1 10 20 04:45 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 3 3 12 18 05:00 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 2 1 13 13 05:15 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 3 4 14 19 05:30 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 3 3 14 17 05:45 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 9 5 16 21 06:00 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 4 5 16 10 06:15 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 4 3 15 15 06:30 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 5 5 24 11 06:45 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 14 7 18 11 07:00 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 10 11 20 11 07:15 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 12 15 18 9 07:30 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 15 9 13 9 07:45 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 16 16 13 15 08:00 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 18 13 8 11 08:15 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 16 11 9 10 08:30 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 21 10 8 14 08:45 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 27 14 9 17 09:00 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 16 9 13 18 09:15 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 19 10 10 19 09:30 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 14 12 10 10 09:45 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 18 15 9 11 10:00 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 13 13 10 15 10:15 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 13 14 8 9 10:30 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 13 15 7 14 10:45 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 12 8 8 9 11:00 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 14 16 9 11 11:15 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 12 11 4 7 11:30 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 14 14 7 11 11:45 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 15 14 3 9 G-316 Weekend Count Summary Start Date AM PM Time Saturday Entrance Exit Entrance Exit 12:00 9/26/2015 10 10 9 19 12:15 9/26/2015 9 8 12 9 12:30 9/26/2015 3 10 19 18 12:45 9/26/2015 5 8 16 17 01:00 9/26/2015 7 7 14 10 01:15 9/26/2015 1 4 16 13 01:30 9/26/2015 5 4 8 19 01:45 9/26/2015 6 2 14 14 02:00 9/26/2015 2 0 15 15 02:15 9/26/2015 1 0 17 14 02:30 9/26/2015 1 0 17 21 02:45 9/26/2015 1 1 19 11 03:00 9/26/2015 1 0 21 32 03:15 9/26/2015 0 1 20 67 03:30 9/26/2015 2 2 20 76 03:45 9/26/2015 1 3 26 56 04:00 9/26/2015 0 0 19 63 04:15 9/26/2015 1 1 21 37 04:30 9/26/2015 3 0 16 27 04:45 9/26/2015 5 1 36 27 05:00 9/26/2015 2 1 32 31 05:15 9/26/2015 4 3 32 31 05:30 9/26/2015 7 3 25 21 05:45 9/26/2015 12 2 22 17 06:00 9/26/2015 12 6 21 15 06:15 9/26/2015 5 2 29 19 06:30 9/26/2015 7 4 15 12 06:45 9/26/2015 6 1 24 12 07:00 9/26/2015 6 4 16 14 07:15 9/26/2015 9 12 14 19 07:30 9/26/2015 14 12 20 19 07:45 9/26/2015 29 10 19 17 08:00 9/26/2015 36 16 13 19 08:15 9/26/2015 45 19 16 12 08:30 9/26/2015 44 23 19 21 08:45 9/26/2015 35 12 12 18 09:00 9/26/2015 40 7 17 18 09:15 9/26/2015 33 17 17 13 09:30 9/26/2015 47 18 13 20 09:45 9/26/2015 21 19 16 28 10:00 9/26/2015 34 25 19 27 10:15 9/26/2015 12 8 19 27 10:30 9/26/2015 20 12 9 19 10:45 9/26/2015 14 21 9 22 11:00 9/26/2015 11 12 12 25 11:15 9/26/2015 16 23 12 13 11:30 9/26/2015 16 15 9 14 11:45 9/26/2015 16 19 9 22 G-317 Fairfield Inn Marriott Rate Calculation Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Rooms On a: Weekday, A.M. Peak Hour of Generator Per Hotel Room Per Occupied Room 40% % Entering 9:15-10:15 AM Ins 0.08 0.10 60% % Exiting Outs 0.12 0.15 0.21 Rate Rate 0.21 0.25 Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Rooms On a: Weekday, P.M. Peak Hour of Generator Per Hotel Room Per Occupied Room 52% % Entering 2:00 - 3:00 PM Ins 0.07 0.09 48% % Exiting Outs 0.07 0.08 0.14 Rate Rate 0.14 0.17 Weekday Daily 2.17 2.62 Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Rooms On a: Weekend, Peak Hour of Generator Per Hotel Room Per Occupied Room 43% % Entering Ins 0.08 0.10 57% % Exiting Outs 0.11 0.13 0.19 Rate Rate 0.19 0.23 Weekend Daily 2.20 2.66 G-318 Weekday Count Summary Start Date AM PM Time Weekday Entrance Exit Entrance Exit 12:00 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 1 2 8 10 12:15 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 2 1 4 4 12:30 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 3 4 10 10 12:45 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 1 1 6 7 01:00 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 1 1 7 7 01:15 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 2 0 6 4 01:30 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 1 1 7 7 01:45 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 0 1 9 7 02:00 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 1 0 7 8 02:15 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 1 0 11 5 02:30 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 1 0 7 12 02:45 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 1 1 10 7 03:00 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 1 1 5 6 03:15 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 1 1 8 4 03:30 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 1 1 4 7 03:45 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 1 0 9 5 04:00 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 1 1 10 7 04:15 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 1 0 10 3 04:30 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 1 1 7 11 04:45 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 3 2 8 6 05:00 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 1 1 3 4 05:15 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 1 1 10 8 05:30 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 6 2 6 4 05:45 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 8 4 5 4 06:00 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 8 8 5 4 06:15 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 3 4 6 3 06:30 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 5 4 5 2 06:45 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 2 3 8 4 07:00 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 5 3 4 5 07:15 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 3 5 6 4 07:30 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 7 7 5 3 07:45 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 12 10 10 2 08:00 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 9 9 4 3 08:15 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 9 12 5 5 08:30 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 6 12 4 2 08:45 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 6 8 6 5 09:00 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 4 7 7 4 09:15 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 8 9 6 1 09:30 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 7 16 7 4 09:45 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 13 15 8 2 10:00 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 10 18 7 3 10:15 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 7 8 8 7 10:30 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 6 9 5 8 10:45 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 6 10 4 1 11:00 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 7 12 5 4 11:15 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 10 10 5 2 11:30 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 10 10 5 4 11:45 9/22/2015 - 9/24/2015 7 13 3 1 G-319 Weekend Count Summary Start Date AM PM Time Saturday Entrance Exit Entrance Exit 12:00 9/26/2015 7 7 7 11 12:15 9/26/2015 2 1 7 5 12:30 9/26/2015 5 5 11 5 12:45 9/26/2015 1 0 7 12 01:00 9/26/2015 1 1 4 8 01:15 9/26/2015 2 2 7 1 01:30 9/26/2015 2 0 9 4 01:45 9/26/2015 3 2 11 8 02:00 9/26/2015 0 0 3 6 02:15 9/26/2015 1 0 7 7 02:30 9/26/2015 2 1 7 8 02:45 9/26/2015 0 2 15 9 03:00 9/26/2015 3 2 6 3 03:15 9/26/2015 1 1 11 8 03:30 9/26/2015 0 0 9 5 03:45 9/26/2015 0 0 7 7 04:00 9/26/2015 0 0 11 4 04:15 9/26/2015 3 1 14 6 04:30 9/26/2015 7 1 7 11 04:45 9/26/2015 2 2 13 3 05:00 9/26/2015 1 2 8 4 05:15 9/26/2015 3 1 10 4 05:30 9/26/2015 5 1 10 3 05:45 9/26/2015 4 5 5 6 06:00 9/26/2015 8 9 5 9 06:15 9/26/2015 4 1 7 2 06:30 9/26/2015 3 3 8 5 06:45 9/26/2015 3 1 9 9 07:00 9/26/2015 2 3 11 8 07:15 9/26/2015 8 6 5 5 07:30 9/26/2015 5 11 0 2 07:45 9/26/2015 19 12 4 6 08:00 9/26/2015 2 14 11 2 08:15 9/26/2015 6 5 6 2 08:30 9/26/2015 6 5 8 2 08:45 9/26/2015 10 11 6 6 09:00 9/26/2015 4 12 6 4 09:15 9/26/2015 8 4 6 1 09:30 9/26/2015 14 15 4 1 09:45 9/26/2015 8 11 6 2 10:00 9/26/2015 10 11 10 0 10:15 9/26/2015 6 14 2 3 10:30 9/26/2015 5 11 2 6 10:45 9/26/2015 9 6 4 3 11:00 9/26/2015 8 9 4 4 11:15 9/26/2015 5 7 3 1 11:30 9/26/2015 7 9 2 1 11:45 9/26/2015 4 9 4 2 G-320 An a h e i m  Pl a z a  Ho t e l  TI A Pe d e s t r i a n  Tr i p  Ge n e r a t i o n  Ca l c u l a t i o n Ex i s t i n g  Pe d  Co u n t s In t e r s e c t i o n N  Le g S  Le g E  Le g W  Le g T o t a l N  Le g S  Le g E  Le g W  Leg T o t a l Ha r b o r  Bl v d  / Di s n e y  Wa y 1 2 8 2 1 8 2 5 7 5 6 9 1 , 1 7 2 8 9 1 3 0 1 7 7 3 5 4 7 5 0 Ha r b o r  Bl v d  / Ka t e l l a  Av e 1 0 9 1 6 5 1 0 0 1 8 7 5 6 1 9 7 2 0 6 2 4 6 1 3 0 6 7 9 Av e r a g e  Ho t e l  Si z e * 25 0 *E s t i m a t e d  us i n g  av e r a g e  si z e  of  cu m u l a t i v e  pr o j e c t  ho t e l s  (s a m p l e  siz e  of  9) SE  Qu a d r a n t  of  Di s n e y l a n d * H o t e l s R o o m s  Ho t e l s  wi t h i n  0. 2 5 ‐mi l e  ra d i u s 1 4 3 , 5 0 0 *N u m b e r  of  ho t e l s  we r e  ap p r o x i m a t e d  us i n g  we b  se a r c h  of  ho t e l s  wi t h i n  th e  st u d y  ar e a . AM P M A M P M % Pe d s  fr o m / t o  0. 2 5 ‐mi l e  ra d i u s 5 0 % 5 8 6 3 7 5 2 8 1 3 4 0 AM P M A M P M  Ho t e l s  wi t h i n  0. 2 5 ‐mi l e  ra d i u s R o o m 0 . 1 7 0 . 1 1 0 . 0 8 0 . 1 0 AM  Pe d P M  Pe d A M  Pe d P M  Pe d An a h e i m  Pl a z a  Ho t e l :  Ex i s t i n g (3 0 0 ) ‐50 ‐32 ‐24 ‐29 An a h e i m  Pl a z a  Ho t e l :  Pr o p o s e d 58 0 9 7 6 2 4 6 5 6 47 3 0 2 2 2 7 Ne t  Pr o j e c t  Ge n e r a t e d  Pe d e s t r i a n  Tr i p s Un i t Pe d  Tr i p  Ge n e r a t i o n  Pe r  Ro o m Pe d  Tr i p  Di s t r i b u t i o n  As s u m p t i o n s % Ro o m s Ha r b o r  Bl v d  / Ka t e l l a  Av e Ha r b o r  Bl v d  / Di s n e y  Wa y AM  Pe a k  Ho u r PM  Pe a k  Hour Pr o j e c t  Pe d  Tr i p s Ha r b o r  Bl v d  / Di s n e y  Wa y H a r b o r  Bl v d  / Ka t e l l a  Av e Ha r b o r  Bl v d  / Di s n e y  Wa y H a r b o r  Bl v d  / Ka t e l l a  Av e It e r i s  In c Printed: 3/18/2016 G- 3 2 1 Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Final Report City of Anaheim Anaheim Plaza Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis Page | Appendix APPENDIX E OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE PROJECTS G-322 SA N T A A N A F R E E W A Y ( I - 5 ) WA L N U T S T HA S T E R S T L E W I S S T NI N T H S T KATELLA AVE CHAPMAN AVE EU C L I D S T M ANCH ES TER A V EWE S T S T CERRITOS AVE BALL RD LE W I S S T BALL RD MANCHESTERAVE A N A H E I M B L V D GENE AUTRY WAY ORANGEWOOD AVE KATELLA AVE ORANGEWOOD AVE DISNEY WAY E A S T S T CL E M E N T I N E S T HA R B O R B L V D ST A T E C O L L E G E B L V D CERRITOS AVE T H E C I T Y D R DI S N E Y L A N D D R 18 7 13 6 21 15 2 5 12 16 22 19 1 23 4 8 24 9 14 DisneyCaliforniaAdventure Disneyland AnaheimConventionCenter 20 10 3 17 11 2877 °0 500 1,000 FeetAerial Photo: May 2014 Key to Features City Boundary Project Status (Updated 1/13/16) Approved Completed Proposed Under construction The Anaheim Resort ® The Anaheim Resort ®: Development Status 1/13/16 G-323 NO.PROJECT DESCRIPTION LOCATION APN(s)STATUS ANTICIPATED OCCUPANCY 1 Springhill Suites Marriott 120-room hotel 1160 West Ball Road 129-281-11 Construction completed in April 2014 Operating 2 Proposed Hotel 75-room hotel 1100 West Ball Road 129-291-06 Conceptual Development Review application submitted -- 3 Staybridge Suites 126-room hotel 1050 West Ball Road 082-112-02 Approved by Planning Commission in February 2014 – Under Construction August 2016 4 Disney Harbor Cast Member Parking Lot 1,363-space employee parking lot 333 West Ball Road 251-042-08251-042-09251-042-10251-042-11251-042-16 Approved by Planning Commission in December 2013 Operating 5 Star Wars Land Approximate 14-acre land within the existing Disneyland theme park 1313 South Harbor Boulevard 082-110-70 082-110-71 082-110-74 082-190-19 Under development -- 6 Courtyard by Marriott 221-room hotel 1415 South Manchester Avenue 082-170-56 Approved by Planning Commission in June 2013 Operating 7 Holiday Inn Express 96-room hotel 1411 South Manchester Avenue 082-170-35 Approved by Planning Commission in October 2013 – Under Construction Early 2016 G-324 8 Panera Bread Restaurant with outdoor patio in conjunction with an existing hotel 1480 South Harbor Boulevard 082-170-55 Approved by Planning Commission in April 2015 Operating 9 Park Vue Inn To demolish an 86 room hotel and 6,000 sq. ft. restaurant and construct a 180-room hotel, 10,654 sq. ft. restaurant/retail area 1570 South Harbor Boulevard 082-211-15082-211-16 Approved by Planning Commission in December 2015 Early 2017 10 Ramada Maingate Hotel remodel, including addition of 13 rooms 1650 South Harbor Boulevard 082-211-08 082-211-09 Approved by Planning Commission in October 2012 – Under Construction Early 2016 11 Country Inn and Suites 174-room hotel 1640 South Clementine Street 082-213-08082-213-09082-213-11 Approved by Planning Commission in March 2015 – Under Construction July 2016 12 Luxury Hotel 580-room hotel with meeting rooms, restaurants, retail and spa 1700 South Harbor Boulevard 082-271-09 082-271-10 Conceptual Development Application submitted -- 13 GardenWalk – Resort Hotel 400-room hotel 300 West Disney Way 082-251-01 Plans to be submitted no later than June 30, 2019, per terms of Economic Assistance and Development Agreement -- 14 GardenWalk – Westgate Timeshare 392-room timeshare hotel 500 West Disney Way 082-551-06 Approved by Planning Director in July 2014 -- G-325 15 GardenWalk – JW Marriott 466-room hotel with meeting rooms, restaurant and spa 1775 South Clementine Street 082-551-02 082-551-03 Approved by Planning Commission in January 2016 Fall 2018 16 The Anabella Hotel Redevelopment 634-room luxury hotel with meeting rooms, restaurants and retail 1030 West Katella Avenue 137-011-20 Conceptual Development Application submitted -- 17 Anaheim Convention Center Expansion 200,000 square foot expansion 800 West Katella Avenue 137-151-01 137-151-04 Approved by Planning Commission in September 2014 – Under Construction Phase I – April 2016 Phase II – May 2017 18 Residence Inn Marriott 294-room hotel 640 West Katella Avenue 137-161-15 Approved by Planning Commission in April 2014 – Under Construction May 2016 19 Springhill Suites Marriott 172-room hotel, including CVS Pharmacy, Coffee Bean and Tea Leaf 1801 South Harbor Boulevard 137-161-16 Construction completed in February 2015 Operating 20 Hyatt House 252-room hotel, including Walgreen’s Pharmacy 1800 South Harbor Boulevard 137-171-35 Approved by Planning Commission in January 2013 – Under Construction June 2016 21 Anaheim Convention Center Grand Plaza 100,000 square feet of outdoor programmable convention center space Terminus of Convention Center Way 137-151-01137-151-04 Construction completed in January 2013 Operating 22 Hyatt Place 178-room hotel 2035 South Harbor Boulevard 137-141-13137-141-14 Construction completed in December 2014 Operating G-326 23 Homewood Suites 215-room hotel 2010 South Harbor Boulevard 137-181-09 Construction completed in November 2015 Operating 24 Disney Toy Story Parking Lot Expansion of a temporary parking lot 1900-2000 South Harbor Boulevard 137-181-12 137-291-04 Approved by Planning Commission in October 2014 Operating G-327 LTRLTRLTRLTR 1 Harbor Boulevard/I‐5 Northbound Ramps 0406027000012011 2 Harbor Boulevard/I‐5 Southbound Ramps 246003900051000 3 Harbor Boulevard/Manchester Avenue 0315176000002021 4 Harbor Boulevard/Disney Way 03907490000000 5 Harbor Boulevard/Katella Avenue 25 8 63 16 3 29 20 45 6 14 53 11 6 Anaheim GardenWalk/Disney Way 000000070000 7 Clementine Street/Disney Way 0171625003428027 8 Clementine Street/Katella Avenue 0 0 0 12 0 9 46 41 0 0 102 45 9I‐5 Southbound Off‐ramp/Disney Way 000230902700240 10 Anaheim Boulevard/Disney Way 17000072240000 11 Anaheim Boulevard/Katella Avenue 9200000460013815 12 I‐5 Southbound Ramps/Katella Avenue 6000000143201460 13 I‐5 Northbound Ramps/Katella Avenue 141000001400000 14 Habor Boulevard/North Driveway 03900490000000 15 Habor Boulevard/South Driveway 03900490000000 LTRLTRLTRLTR 1 Harbor Boulevard/I‐5 Northbound Ramps 040340270000808 2 Harbor Boulevard/I‐5 Southbound Ramps 474003500035000 3 Harbor Boulevard/Manchester Avenue 0534144500005043 4 Harbor Boulevard/Disney Way 045012430000000 5 Harbor Boulevard/Katella Avenue 17 7 50 14 9 21 26 56 16 15 37 13 6 Anaheim GardenWalk/Disney Way 0000000120000 7 Clementine Street/Disney Way 010549008417020 8 Clementine Street/Katella Avenue 00040133377007126 9I‐5 Southbound Off‐ramp/Disney Way 000130603100180 10 Anaheim Boulevard/Disney Way 12000061300000 11 Anaheim Boulevard/Katella Avenue 820000081009011 12 I‐5 Southbound Ramps/Katella Avenue 400000033470960 13 I‐5 Northbound Ramps/Katella Avenue 92000003300000 14 Habor Boulevard/North Driveway 04500430000000 15 Habor Boulevard/South Driveway 04500430000000 Cumulative AM Peak Hour volumes Intersection Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Cumulative PM Peak Hour volumes Intersection Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound G-328 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Appendix April 2016 Appendix H Water Supply Assessment 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Appendix PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. 1700 SOUTH HARBOR BLVD. HOTEL WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT H-1 1700 SOUTH HARBOR BLVD. HOTEL WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT March 2016 Prepared for: CITY OF ANAHEIM Prepared by: 3 Hutton Centre Drive Suite 200 Santa Ana, CA 92707 Project No. 2GHI010100 H-2 March 2016 i TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary .................................................................................................... ES-1 1.0 Introduction ........................................................................................................ 1-1 1.1 Project Description........................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 Purpose of this WSA ........................................................................................ 1-1 2.0 Legislation ........................................................................................................... 2-1 2.1 SB 610 – Costa – Water Supply Planning ....................................................... 2-1 3.0 1700 SOUTH HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL .......................................... 3-1 3.1 Proposed Project Description ........................................................................... 3-1 3.2 Existing and Proposed Project Water Demands .............................................. 3-4 4.0 City of Anaheim Water Demand and Supplies ............................................... 4-1 4.1 Overview of Supply and Demand .................................................................... 4-1 4.2 Groundwater .................................................................................................... 4-4 4.3 Imported Water (Surface Water) ..................................................................... 4-9 4.4 Recycled Water .............................................................................................. 4-11 5.0 Reliability of Water Supplies ............................................................................ 5-1 5.1 Metropolitan Water District ............................................................................. 5-1 5.1.1 State Water Project .................................................................................... 5-2 5.1.2 Colorado River Aqueduct .......................................................................... 5-3 5.1.3 Storage ....................................................................................................... 5-5 5.1.4 Supply Management Strategies.................................................................. 5-6 5.2 Orange County Water District ......................................................................... 5-7 5.2.1 OCWD Long Term Facilities Plan (LTFP) ............................................... 5-9 5.2.2 OCWD Groundwater Management Plan (GMP) ..................................... 5-10 5.2.3 OCWD 2020 Water Master Plan Report (Water MPR)........................... 5-10 5.3 Anaheim Public Utilities Department (APUD or Department) ..................... 5-11 5.3.1 Water System ........................................................................................... 5-11 5.3.2 Past and Current Efforts ........................................................................... 5-13 5.3.3 Huntington Beach Sea Water Desalination Facility ................................ 5-15 5.4 Dry Year Reliability Comparison .................................................................. 5-16 5.4.1 Metropolitan Supplies and Demands ....................................................... 5-16 5.4.2 Anaheim Public Utilities Department ...................................................... 5-17 6.0 Conclusion .......................................................................................................... 6-1 7.0 References ........................................................................................................... 7-1 H-3 March 2016 ii TABLES Table ES.1 City of Anaheim Water Supply ................................................................. ES-2 Table 3.1 1700 South Harbor Boulevard Hotel Statistical Summary ............................. 3-3 Table 3.2 Existing 300-Room Hotel Site Water Use ...................................................... 3-4 Table 3.3 Projected Build-out Hotel Site Water Use ...................................................... 3-4 Table 4.1 Current Water Supply (Acre-Feet for FY ending) ........................................... 4-2 Table 4.2 Projected Water Supply and Demand City of Anaheim, including the Proposed Project ................................................................................ 4-3 Table 4.3 Groundwater Pumping by Well (AF) & FY 2015 Load Factor ...................... 4-8 Table 4.4 Metropolitan 2015 IRP Update Total Level of Average-Year Supply Target ......................................................... 4-11 Table 5.1 Historical Imported Water Use (AFY) ........................................................... 5-6 Table 5.2 Metropolitan Regional Water Demands Average, Single Dry and Multiple Dry Years ......................................................................................... 5-17 Table 5.3 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Normal Year .......... 5-19 Table 5.4 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Single Dry Year ..... 5-20 Table 5.5 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Multiple Dry Water Years ..................................................................................... 5-21 FIGURES Figure 1.1 1700 South Harbor Boulevard Hotel Location .............................................. 1-2 Figure 3.1 1700 South Harbor Boulevard Hotel Site Plan.............................................. 3-2 Figure 5.1 Anaheim Public Utilities Major Facilities & Service Area .......................... 5-12 APPENDICES Appendix A City of Anaheim Historical Water Use and Conservation Support Appendix B City of Anaheim Resolution No. 2014-151 Appendix C City of Anaheim Ordinance No. 6355 and 2016 Landscape Water Efficiency Guidelines H-4 March 2016 iii ABBREVIATIONS/ACRONYMS AB Assembly Bill AF Acre-feet AFY Acre-feet per year APUD, Department City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department ACSP Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan ARTIC Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center BDCP Bay Delta Conservation Plan BEA Basin Equity Assessment BPP Basin Production Percentage CAWCD Central Arizona Water Conservation District CEQA California Environmental Quality Act City, Anaheim City of Anaheim CPP Canyon Power Plant CRA Colorado River Aqueduct CVP Central Valley Project CVWD Coachella Valley Water District DA Development Area DPH California Department of Public Health DWA, Desert Desert Water Agency DWR California Department of Water Resources EIR Environmental Impact Report ESA Endangered Species Act FEIR Final Environmental Impact Report FY Fiscal Year GIS Geographic Information System GMP Groundwater Management Plan gpd Gallons per day gpd/ksf Gallons per day per thousand square feet gpm Gallons per minute GWRS Groundwater Replenishment System hcf Hundred cubic feet HGL Hydraulic grade line IID Imperial Irrigation District IRP Integrated Resources Planning KPMC Kaiser Permanente Medical Center ksf Thousand square feet LACDPW Los Angeles County Department of Public Works LRP Local Resources Program LTFP Long Term Facilities Plan MAF Million acre-feet Metropolitan, MWD Metropolitan Water District of Southern California H-5 March 2016 iv MG Million gallons MGD Million gallons per day MPR Master Plan Report MWDOC Municipal Water District of Orange County OCP Orange County Projections OCSD Orange County Sanitation District OCWD Orange County Water District PUD Anaheim Public Utilities Department PVID Palo Verde Irrigation District QSA Quantification Settlement Agreement RA Replenishment Assessment RUWMP Regional Urban Water Management Plan SAR Santa Ana River SB Senate Bill SDCWA San Diego County Water Authority sf Square feet SNWA Southern Nevada Water Authority SWP State Water Project SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board UWMP Urban Water Management Plan WCR Walnut Canyon Reservoir WRD Water Replenishment District WSA Water Supply Assessment WSDM Water Surplus and Drought Management H-6 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Executive Summary March 2016 ES-1 CITY OF ANAHEIMCITY OF ANAHEIMCITY OF ANAHEIMCITY OF ANAHEIM 1700 SOUTH HARBOR BOULEVA1700 SOUTH HARBOR BOULEVA1700 SOUTH HARBOR BOULEVA1700 SOUTH HARBOR BOULEVARDRDRDRD HOTELHOTELHOTELHOTEL WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENTWATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENTWATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENTWATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Water Supply Assessment (WSA) has been prepared for the 1700 South Harbor Boulevard Hotel Project (the “Proposed Project”) in accordance with applicable sections of the Public Resources Code and California Water Code as referenced in Senate Bill 610. The Proposed Project involves the demolition of an existing hotel with 300 rooms and 2,500 square feet (sf) of accessory retail (Anaheim Plaza Hotel) and construction of a new hotel with 580 rooms, 50,000 sf of banquet/meeting space and 25,600 sf of restaurant use. This WSA will provide information to verify that there is sufficient water supply to the City of Anaheim (“City”) to provide for the Proposed Project now and into the future. Previous Water Supply Documents In June 2011, the City adopted the City of Anaheim 2010 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP). The UWMP evaluates water supply and demand reliability, City-wide, for a planning horizon 25 years into the future and becomes a baseline document for the preparation of WSAs. Anaheim’s 2010 UWMP concluded there was an adequate and reliable supply of water to provide for existing demand and estimated growth through year 2035, based on then current information available. The purpose of this WSA is to provide information to verify that there is sufficient water supply to the City to provide for the Proposed Project now and into the future. This WSA evaluates the additional water demands that will need to be served by the City as a result of the Proposed Project. It draws from the 2010 UWMP, adopted in June 2011 (Malcolm Pirnie/Arcadis) as a baseline for City-wide demand information as well as long-term water supply reliability, updated as appropriate based on current information available. Water Demand In 2014/15, the City’s water demand was 61,694 acre-feet per year (AFY) including recycled water use and unaccounted-for water, which was substantially less by 10,700 AFY or 15% than the demand projected for 2015 in the 2010 UWMP. To put these 2010 UWMP demand projections into perspective with current conditions, the actual City-wide production by source over the past five years is shown in Table ES.1. H-7 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Executive Summary March 2016 ES-2 Table ES.1 City of Anaheim Water Supply (Acre-Feet for FY ending) 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Groundwater 40,789 34,419 44,980 53,987 46,584 Imported 22,705 29,668 21,104 13,635 14,477 Storage/Exchange 571 76 -129 -99 568 Subtotal Potable 64,065 64,162 65,955 67,524 61,629 Recycled Water 0 40 64 51 65 Groundwater1 332 348 403 383 352 Subtotal Non-Potable 332 388 467 434 417 Total Supply 64,397 64,550 66,422 67,958 62,046 1) Production from Dad Miller Golf Course Well used for irrigation on course. Totals may not add exactly due to rounding. As shown in Table ES.1, City water demands continued to hold steady during 2011/12, even after Metropolitan’s lifting of nearly two years of mandatory water conservation measures in March of 2011. These demands crept up slightly in 2012/13 and 2013/14 but this could be in part due to the extremely dry weather experienced in the region, which slightly increased landscape irrigation uses, and an upturn in the economy. City-wide demand decreased substantially in FY 2015, presumably in response to State and local requests/mandates for water conservation. Total City water demand was projected to be 72,400 acre-feet in 2015 in the City’s 2010 UWMP based on a modest amount of new development and some anticipated increase due to a return to more normal water use patterns. However, the fact that FY 2015 water use is 15% below the demand projected means City businesses and residents are using less water than was forecasted in the 2010 UWMP. This is likely due to the fact that water demand is being reduced due to effective conservation efforts being undertaken by the City including increased water efficiencies resulting from more stringent building codes as well as the use of more efficient appliances (e.g., high-efficiency clothes washing machines, waterless urinals, etc.). Not only is total water use being reduced, non-potable use of groundwater for golf course irrigation (at both of the City of Anaheim’s golf courses and increased recycled water use within the City is offsetting/reducing potable water use, as well. This situation is believed to be due to more than just the conservativeness of the demand projections but also the on-going drought conditions both locally and State-wide. Due to these conditions, water users in the City and other areas have responded resoundingly to the call to conserve water. As shown in Table ES-1 above, City-wide demand dropped by nearly 10 percent from FY 2014 to 2015. Based on State Department of Finance population estimates for January 1, 2015 versus January 1, 2014, Anaheim’s population increased by 3,064, a 0.9 percent increase, so the nearly 10 percent decrease in demand is even more impressive H-8 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Executive Summary March 2016 ES-3 At the end of the 20-year planning period for this WSA, as required by SB 610, City’s water demand for FY 2040 is projected to be approximately 79,975 acre-feet. This projection includes future demands City-wide based on the overall projected growth rate, as well as added demands from the Proposed Project. It is conservatively assumed that the City’s 2010 UWMP did not include any water demand increase from the Proposed Project, although it included some City-wide infill demands. The Proposed Project as considered in the current EIR is assumed to include some additional water demand over and above those included in the 2010 UWMP and, therefore, the corresponding additional water demands for the Proposed Project are addressed in this WSA. The total net additional water demand for the Proposed Project is 99.9 AFY, accounting for the total estimated Project demand of 140.3 AFY and the existing average metered water use of 40.4 AFY recorded for a recent two-year period, including an allowance for non-revenue water. Supply Projections The City’s sources of water consist of groundwater and imported surface water. In FY 2015, the City received approximately 76 percent of its water supply from groundwater and 23 percent from imported water. In addition, about one percent came from recycled water and storage/exchange. Analysis of water supply projections for the City demonstrates that projected supplies will meet demand through fiscal year 2039/40. These projections consider water development programs and projects as well as water conservation, as described in the City’s 2010 UWMP and Section 5 of this WSA. The City’s groundwater and imported water supplies are anticipated to remain stable based on studies and reports of the Orange County Water District (OCWD) and the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (Metropolitan), respectively. Statewide water planning is also considering current dry conditions and various Bay Delta pumping scenarios, which are also discussed in Section 5. Based on the expected long-term average Basin Production Percentage (BPP), the City’s 2010 UWMP assumed that up to 65 percent of the City’s water supply will be groundwater and 35 percent will be imported, which has been confirmed as reliable by Metropolitan. Since preparation of the City’s 2010 UWMP, OCWD’s Board of Directors adopted Resolution No. 13-1-6 setting a goal of achieving and maintaining a 75 percent BPP. The buffer between the maximum BPP utilized in this WSA and the 75 percent BPP goal provides added reliability to Anaheim’s water supply. A small percentage of the City’s water supply will be recycled water. Since preparation of the 2010 UWMP, the Orange County Water District (OCWD) has completed the expansion of its Groundwater Replenishment System (GWRS) from 75 to 100 million gallons per day. This expansion increases the reliability of the Orange County Basin of which Anaheim has historically obtained approximately 70 percent of its H-9 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Executive Summary March 2016 ES-4 water supply. The 2013/14 BPP was set at 70 percent by the OCWD Board of Directors and the overall BPP achieved according to the 2013/14 Engineer’s Report on Groundwater Conditions, Water Supply and Basin Utilization in the OCWD, February 2015, was 75.2 percent. This was greater than the 70 percent due to several water quality projects that were given a Basin Equity Assessment exemption to pump above the BPP. Even with the accumulated overdraft in the Basin since the preparation of the 2010 UWMP, at the OCWD Board Meeting of January 20, 2016, the Executive Director of Engineering and Local Resources reviewed the BPP estimate for FY 2016/17 and stated it should be set at between 72 and 80 percent, still above the conservative BPP used in the 2010 UWMP. These long term assumptions are also considered in this WSA. Additionally, analyses of normal, single-dry and multiple-dry year scenarios also demonstrate the City’s ability to meet demand during the 20-year analysis period. Current Drought In response to Governor Brown’s January 17, 2014, declaration of a drought State of Emergency, Metropolitan urged cities, counties, local public water agencies and retailers to achieve extraordinary conservation. In addition, the Metropolitan Board of Directors in February 2014 doubled its annual conservation and outreach budget from $20 million to $40 million. This increase provided additional rebate incentives for Southern Californians to purchase water-saving devices throughout Metropolitan’s service area and help reach the Brown administration’s goal of a statewide per capita water use reduction of 20 percent. The City has had a successful track record of implementing water conservation programs. As an example, in the last two major droughts, Anaheim’s water demand reduced by approximately 11 percent for the two-year period between 1989/90 and 1991/92 and 16 percent during the four-year period between 2006/07 and 2010/11. Details of these reductions are illustrated in Appendix A. Moreover, should extraordinary circumstances require it, the City can meet its water demand by (1) increasing production of groundwater beyond the BPP up to the basin safe yield, and/or (2) decreasing demand through water conservation measures pursuant to Chapter 10.18, Water Reduction Provisions, of the City’s Municipal Code, including the implementation of drought rates, additional mandatory conservation measures, and other more aggressive demand reduction measures. On January 17, 2014, Governor Brown proclaimed a State of Emergency to exist throughout the State due to severe drought conditions. On April 25, 2014, he proclaimed a Continued State of Emergency to exist throughout the State due to the ongoing drought. Most recently, on April 1, 2015 Governor Brown issued Executive Order (EO) B-29-15, which consisted of 31 points aimed at saving water. One of those points directed the State Water Resources Control Board to impose restrictions to achieve a statewide 25 percent reduction in potable urban water use. As a result, the Board developed different tiers of water use reduction for all 400-plus urban water suppliers ranging from a low of 4 percent to a high of 36 percent reduction in water use compared to Year 2013. The City H-10 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Executive Summary March 2016 ES-5 of Anaheim’s tier was a 20 percent reduction and through January of 2016, the cumulative reduction over the 8-month period totals 22.6 percent or 2.6 percent above (better than) their target. These restrictions have been reported to DWR since June 2015 after the targets were set and were originally to run through February 13, 2016. To address the on-going severity of the drought emergency, Governor Brown issued EO B- 36-15 and directed the State Water Board to extend these urban water use restrictions until October 31, 2016, should drought conditions persist through January 2016. These monthly water use figures compared will be reported monthly and reductions totaled cumulatively for the year and for agencies that miss their reduction targets, the State has the authority to assess penalties for non-compliance. Through January 2016 total cumulative reductions State-wide were reported at 24.8 percent compared to the State- wide target of 25 percent reduction. In response to the Governor’s and State Water Board’s April 2014 actions, the City of Anaheim adopted Resolution No. 2014-151 on August 12, 2014, which, among other things, includes the prohibition of the four wasteful water practices in the State Water Board’s ordinance listed in the paragraph above, plus a fifth prohibiting the application of potable water to outdoor ornamental landscape or turf between the hours of nine a.m. and six p.m., except (i) spot watering with a hose and nozzle, or (ii) as necessary for irrigation system maintenance and repairs. Additionally, the City’s Resolution indicates the City of Anaheim will refrain from fire hydrant flushing, unless: (i) it is necessary for immediate health and safety or to ensure compliance with drinking water standards; or (ii) the flushed water is captured and reused. A full copy of the City’s resolution is included in Appendix B. Anaheim’s recent decrease in demand can be attributed to extensive conservation and outreach programs led by the City. Through July 2015, over 335,000 square feet of turf within the City was converted to drought tolerant landscape or artificial turf using City and Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (Metropolitan) turf removal rebate programs. Additional turf removal likely also took place that didn’t go through the rebate program. In response to State mandates discussed above, the Anaheim City Council on May 19, 2015, approved an ordinance restricting landscape watering to two days per week, which is still in effect. The City has also led extensive public outreach campaigns that included advertising, mailings, and public meetings. Another directive in EO B-29-15 included development of a new Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO), which was adopted by the State on July 15, 2015. This ordinance will effectively reduce water use for new landscaping and among other things, limits the use of turf in residential landscapes to 20 percent of the total landscaped area, and prohibits the use of turf in non-residential landscapes, unless irrigated with non- potable water. Agencies have until February 1, 2016, to adopt this model ordinance or a similar ordinance and must start reporting on implementation and enforcement of the ordinance by December 31, 2015, and then by January 31st in subsequent years. The impact of this new MWELO will be reduced water demands in new and renovated landscapes, which should further reduce water demand projections from those included in the 2010 UWMP. In response to the State’s new MWELO, the City adopted Ordinance 6355 amending Chapters 10.19 and 18.46 of the Municipal Code relating to landscape H-11 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Executive Summary March 2016 ES-6 water efficiency on January 26, 2016 along with Guidelines for Implementation of the City of Anaheim Landscape Water Efficiency Ordinance. This ordinance and the guidelines are modeled after the State’s MWELO. Since the preparation of the 2010 UWMP, DWR has completed three of their bi-annual State Water Project (SWP) Delivery Reliability Reports, the latest of which is posted on their website. The DWR SWP Final Delivery Capability Report July 2015 includes the latest assumptions on environmental species restrictions and climate change. Compared to the SWP Reliability Report relied upon in the 2010 UWMP, the most recent July 2015 Report uses a normal year reliability percentage of 62 vs. 65, which is a decrease of 3 percent. The single dry and multiple dry year percentages have also dropped in DWR’s latest SWP Capability Report but only by a few percentage points from the 2010 UWMP. And Metropolitan’s Draft 2015 RUWMP utilizes the latest SWP delivery assumptions and updates all of their other supply source information and regional demand projections within their service area. Conclusion Reliability of future water supplies to the region will be ensured through continued implementation of the OCWD Groundwater Management Plan, OCWD’s Long Term Facilities Plan, local agency programs, and the combined efforts and programs among member and cooperative agencies of Metropolitan. These agencies include all water wholesalers and retailers, the Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD), the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board, and the Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority. The plans are described in the City’s 2010 UWMP and Section 5 of this WSA. The information included in this water supply assessment identifies a sufficient and reliable water supply for the City, now and into the future, including a sufficient water supply for Proposed Project. These supplies are also sufficient to provide for overall City- wide growth at the rate projected in the City’s 2010 UWMP. H-12 17199 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Section 1 1-1 March 2016 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Project Description The Proposed Project would include the demolition of the existing buildings at the site and the development of a AAA Four Diamond Hotel including 580 hotel rooms, up to 50,000 square feet of meeting space, and up to 25,600 square feet of ancillary food and beverage retail space (restaurant). A total of 1,139,122 square feet of gross floor area is proposed within two basement levels and eight levels above grade. Hotel room of various types would be provided on Levels 2 through 8. The meeting space would be provided on Levels 1 and 2 and include a business center, three ballrooms, and eight meeting rooms. The location of the 8.8 acre Proposed Project site is shown on Figure 1.1. 1.2 Purpose of this WSA The purpose of this WSA is to provide information to verify that there is sufficient water supply to the City to provide for the Proposed Project now and into the future. This WSA develops the additional water demands that will need to be served by the City as a result of the Proposed Project being addressed in the addendum to the Proposed Project’s environmental impact report (EIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340). H-13 Harbor Blvd K a t e l l a A v e D i s n e y W a y D i s n e y l a n d F i g u r e 1 - 1 L o c a t i o n M a p S i t e L o c a t i o n 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Section 2 2-1 March 2016 2.0 LEGISLATION According to the Guidebook for Implementation of Senate Bill 610 and Senate Bill 221Water Code section 10912 a “Project” requiring a WSA means any of the following: 1. A proposed residential development of more than 500 dwelling units 2. A proposed shopping center or business establishment employing more than 1,000 persons or having more than 500,000 square feet of floor space 3. A proposed commercial office building employing more than 1,000 persons or having more than 250,000 square feet of floor space 4. A proposed hotel or motel, or both, having more than 500 rooms 5. A proposed industrial, manufacturing, or processing plant, or industrial park planned to house more than 1,000 persons, occupying more than 40 acres of land, or having more than 650,000 square feet of floor space 6. A mixed-use project that includes one or more of the projects specified in this subdivision 7. A project that would demand an amount of water equivalent to, or greater than, the amount of water required by a 500 dwelling unit project A project consisting of 500 hotel rooms or more triggers the requirement to prepare a WSA based on #4, above. However, #7 seems to indicate that the proposed water demand needs to be equivalent to, or greater than, the amount of water required by a 500 dwelling unit (or 500 room hotel) and since the Proposed Project includes construction of a 580 room hotel and the demolishing of an existing 280 room hotel, the net increase in water demand is really only commensurate with a new hotel of 300 rooms. However, based on a strict interpretation of the Code using only #4 above, the developer has opted to prepare a WSA for the Proposed Project. Under the logic described above, SB 610, requires that a Water Supply Assessment be completed to evaluate the potential effect of the proposed development on current and future water supplies. The following outlines the requirements of SB 610. 2.1 SB 610 – Costa – Water Supply Planning SB 610 was chaptered into law on October 9, 2001. It mandates that a city or county approving certain projects subject to CEQA (i) identify any public water system that may supply water for the project, and (ii) request those public water systems to prepare a specified water supply assessment. The assessment is to include the following: 1. A discussion of whether the public water system’s total projected water supplies available during normal, single dry, and multiple dry water years during a 20-year projection will meet the projected water demand associated with the proposed project, in addition to the public water system’s existing and planned future uses, including agricultural and manufacturing. 2. The identification of existing water supply entitlements, water rights, or water service contracts relevant to the identified water supply for the proposed project and water received in prior years pursuant to those entitlements, rights, and contracts. H-15 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Section 2 2-2 March 2016 3. A description of the quantities of water received in prior years by the public water system under the existing water supply entitlements, water rights, or water service contracts. 4. A demonstration of water supply entitlements, water rights, or water service contracts by the following means: a. Written contracts or other proof of entitlement to an identified water supply. b. Copies of a capital outlay program for financing the delivery of a water supply that has been adopted by the public water system. c. Federal, state, and local permits for construction of necessary infrastructure associated with delivering the water supply. d. Any necessary regulatory approvals that are required in order to be able to convey or deliver the water supply. 5. The identification of other public water systems or water service contract holders that receive a water supply or have existing water supply entitlements, water rights, or water service contracts, to the same source of water as the public water system. 6. If groundwater is included for the supply for a proposed project, the following additional information is required: a. Review of any information contained in the Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) relevant to the identified water supply for the proposed project. b. Description of any groundwater basin(s) from which the proposed project will be supplied. Adjudicated basins must have a copy of the court order or decree adopted and a description of the amount of groundwater the public water system has the legal right to pump. For non-adjudicated basins, information on whether the DWR has identified the basin as over-drafted or has projected that the basin will become over-drafted if present management conditions continue, in the most current bulletin of DWR that characterizes the condition of the basin, and a detailed description of the efforts being undertaken in the basin to eliminate the long-term overdraft condition. c. Description and analysis of the amount and location of groundwater pumped by the public water system for the past five years from any groundwater basin which the proposed project will be supplied. Analysis should be based on information that is reasonably available, including, but not limited to, historic use records. d. Description and analysis of the amount and location of groundwater projected to be pumped by the public water system from any groundwater basin by which the proposed project will be supplied. Analysis should be based on information that is reasonably available, including, but not limited to, historic use records. e. Analysis of the sufficiency of the groundwater from the basin(s) from which the proposed project will be supplied. H-16 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Section 2 2-3 March 2016 The Water Supply Assessment shall be included in any environmental document prepared for the project. The assessment may include an evaluation of any information included in that environmental document. A determination shall be made whether the projected water supplies will be sufficient to satisfy the demands of the project, in addition to existing and planned future uses. Additionally, SB 610 requires new information to be included as part of an UWMP if groundwater is identified as a source of water available to the supplier. Information must include a description of all water supply projects and programs that may be undertaken to meet total projected water use. SB 610 prohibits eligibility for funds from specified bond acts until the plan is submitted to the State. H-17 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Section 3 3-1 March 2016 3.0 1700 SOUTH HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL 3.1 Proposed Project Description The Proposed Project would include the demolition of the existing buildings at the site and the development of a AAA Four Diamond Hotel including 580 hotel rooms, up to 50,000 square feet of meeting space, and up to 25,600 square feet of ancillary food and beverage retail space (restaurant). A total of 1,139,122 square feet of gross floor area is proposed within two basement levels and eight levels above grade. Hotel room of various types would be provided on Levels 2 through 8. The meeting space would be provided on Levels 1 and 2 and include a business center, three ballrooms, and eight meeting rooms. A Site Plan of the second floor of the Proposed Project is shown on Figure 3.1, as it shows more detail, since the east end of the first floor is mostly parking. Project Access and Circulation Access to the Project Site would be provided along Harbor Boulevard at two locations: Main Entry/porte-cochere approximately 300 feet south of Disney Way: Serves as the primary ingress/egress location for visitor and employee trips with right-in/right- out access only. Service road along the southern property boundary, approximately 500 feet south of Disney Way: Serves as a secondary egress location for visitor and employee trips, as well as the primary ingress/egress location for service and emergency vehicles. Conflict between visitor and employee trips with service vehicle trips will be avoided by use of a temporary gate at the exit, as well as prohibiting peak hour service truck trips. Only right-in/right-out access will be available. Secondary Loading Zone: Access to off-street loading for food and beverage uses on the north side of the project will be provided along Disney Way with ingress and egress for deliveries and trash collection only. The loading area will be gated when not in use and have restricted hours for loading. Pedestrian traffic will also be encouraged and supported by the hotel's design and circulation, with wide sidewalks in conformance with the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan and linkages to the restaurant spaces and hotel main entrance. In addition, a pedestrian bridge has been proposed to Anaheim GardenWalk from the hotel's easterly boundary to facilitate connectivity between the two developments. Landscaping The applicant proposes to install approximately 67,500 square feet landscaped area. Proposed landscaping would include several different tree species, including shade, flowering, and specimen trees, as well as a variety of shrubs and groundcovers. The tree density requirements of the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan (DRSP) would be complied with throughout the property. H-18 H a r b o r B l v d . Di s n e y W a y Figure 3.1 Site Location 3- 2 H- 1 9 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Section 3 3-3 March 2016 The street setbacks are proposed to be planted with layered landscape consistent with the DRSP. A 26-foot building setback is proposed along Harbor Boulevard, with portions of the setback area paved to activate the street adjacent to the proposed restaurant space, which in encouraged along this segment of Harbor Boulevard. A 20-foot setback is proposed along Disney Way. Additionally, a 10-foot landscaped setback would be provided on both sides of the emergency/fire access road is provided along the southern and eastern boundaries of the Project Site. A statistical summary of the major water demanding uses proposed within the hotel site is shown in Table 3.1. Table 3.1 1700 South Harbor Boulevard Hotel Statistical Summary Rooms Area (sf) Hotel Rooms 580 Restaurant 25,600 Ballroom/Meeting Space 50,000 Pool 6,477 Landscaping 67,498 H-20 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Section 3 3-4 March 2016 3.2 Existing and Proposed Project Water Demands The existing water demands for the Proposed Project were compiled by City staff from meter read data over a recent 24-month period with the detailed data included in Appendix A. The resulting average annual water use for the existing 300 room hotel site is summarized in Table 3.2. As shown in the table an allowance of 4.5 percent was added to the meter read data to account for water system losses or non-revenue water. This 4.5 percent figure is from the non-revenue water reported in the City’s 2010 UWMP. Table 3.2 Existing 300-Room Hotel Site Water Use Anaheim Plaza Hotel Water Meter No. 001497N06002 33,815 HCF 733 days 25,293,620 gallons 34,507 gallons/day 38.6 AFY Non-Revenue Water (4.5%) 1.7 AFY Total 40.4 AFY Using water demand factors from the Resort Area Water Supply Assessment and the Proposed Project statistical data presented in Table 3.1, the estimated water use for the proposed 580 room hotel is detailed in Table 3.3. Table 3.3 Projected Build-out Hotel Site Water Use Rooms Area (sf) Demand Factor1 Units Demand (gpd) Demand (AFY) Hotel Rooms 580 125 gpd/room 72,500 81.2 Restaurant 25,600 1,000 gpd/ksf 25,600 28.7 Ballroom/Meeting Space 50,000 350 gpd/ksf 17,500 19.6 Pool 6,477 49.2 inches/yr 541 0.6 Subtotal Potable Water 116,141 130.1 Landscaping2 67,498 3,742 4.2 Subtotal 119,883 134.3 Non-Revenue Water (4.5%)3 5,395 6.0 Total 125,278 140.3 1) Demand factors per Anaheim Resort Area Specific Plan and Convention Center Expansion Water Supply Assessment, July 2009, Psomas. 2) Landscaping irrigation demand is proposed to be served from future recycled water system which would allow up to 1.0 times the Evapotranspiration Rate (ETo). However, demand is based on proposed mix of plant factors (PF) and irrigation efficiencies (IE) per draft landscaping and irrigation plan (see Appendix) and ETo for Anaheim area of 49.2 inches per year. 3) Non-Revenue allowance to account for water losses at 4.5% per 2010 City of Anaheim UWMP, June 2011, Malcolm Pirnie/Arcadis. H-21 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Section 3 3-5 March 2016 Including an allowance for non-revenue water from system losses, the total supply needed for the Proposed Project, as shown on Table 3.3, would be 140.3 AFY. However, since the water use from the existing 300-room hotel to be demolished was included in the existing supply and demand figures reported in the 2010 UWMP, the supply required to serve the existing hotel can be subtracted from the total supply estimated to be required for the Proposed Project, resulting in a net supply requirement for the Proposed Project of 99.9 AFY (140.3-40.4). H-22 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Section 4 4-1 March 2016 4.0 CITY OF ANAHEIM WATER DEMAND AND SUPPLIES 4.1 Overview of Supply and Demand The City currently obtains water from the following primary water sources: (1) naturally and artificially recharged local groundwater, and (2) imported water. Over the past four years the City has begun to utilize a small amount of recycled water. In addition, the City maintains 14 interconnections with adjacent water purveyors that are temporarily utilized from time to time, on an as-needed or emergency basis. In 2014/15, the City received approximately 76 percent of its water supply from its groundwater wells that access the Orange County Groundwater Basin and 23 percent from imported water from the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (Metropolitan). In 2014/15 approximately 2 percent of the City’s water came from recycled water and storage/exchange. Over the past five fiscal years the City received approximately 68 percent of its water supply from groundwater and 31 percent from Metropolitan. The Orange County Groundwater Basin is managed by the OCWD. Current and planned improvements, as discussed in Section 3.3 of the City’s 2010 UWMP, will increase the efficient and reliable use of both water sources. Each of the sources of water for the City are briefly discussed in this section and more fully discussed in the subsequent sections. Population Growth The population in Anaheim was approximately 1,500 in 1900, and grew to approximately 14,500 by 1950. In 1955 and 1966, Disneyland and Anaheim Stadium were opened, respectively. These facilities, along with others, prompted a population increase to approximately 166,000 by 1970. The existing population in the City of Anaheim as of January 1, 2015, according to the State Department of Finance E-1 projections is 351,433. Using this figure, the City’s water service area is approximately 360,433; this includes approximately 9,000 people who currently reside outside Anaheim’s City limits, but are served by the City. The City’s service area population is anticipated to reach 410,000 by 2035. Past Water Supply and Demand Table 4.1 shows the City’s water supply by source for the past five years consisting of groundwater, imported water, and recycled water, although recycled water has only been used for approximately the past five years. H-23 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Section 4 4-2 March 2016 Table 4.1 Current Water Supply (Acre-Feet for FY ending) 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Groundwater 40,789 34,419 44,980 53,987 46,584 Imported 22,705 29,668 21,104 13,635 14,477 Storage/Exchange 571 76 -129 -99 568 Subtotal Potable 64,065 64,162 65,955 67,524 61,629 Recycled Water 0 40 64 51 65 Groundwater1 332 348 403 383 352 Subtotal Non-Potable 332 388 467 434 417 Total Supply 64,397 64,550 66,422 67,958 62,046 1) Production from Dad Miller Golf Course Well used for irrigation on course. These figures should include the existing Project hotel demands along with proportional system losses totaling 40 AF. Totals may not add exactly due to rounding. Projected Supply and Demand Table 4.2 shows the projected water demand and supply for the City of Anaheim, including additional demand the Proposed Project will require through Fiscal Year (FY) 2034/35. The additional demand from the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan WSA is also included as it was approved subsequent to the 2010 UWMP. It should be noted this demand projection of 73,600 AFY for 2020 without the Proposed Project and the ACSP additional development is very conservative. This observation is based on the fact that the actual 2015 demand was only 62,046 AFY, as shown on Table 4.1, above, whereas the demand projection from the 2010 UWMP for 2015 was over 10,000 AFY higher at 72,400 AFY. Each of the subsequent five-year period demands are then calculated by taking the projected demand for the respective five-year period from the 2010 UWMP and adding the net Proposed Project demand along with the additional demand projection from the ACSP WSA. H-24 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Section 4 4-3 March 2016 Table 4.2 Projected Water Supply and Demand City of Anaheim, including the Proposed Project Water Sources 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Supply Normal Water Years Imported[1] 25,671 26,476 27,036 27,106 27,176 Recycled 255 255 255 255 255 Groundwater[2] 48,268 50,257 51,790 52,414 52,544 Groundwater/Total Supply 65.1% 65.3% 65.5% 65.7% 65.7% Total Supply 74,194 76,988 79,081 79,775 79,975 Demand[3] Total City Demand without Proposed Project[4] 73,600 75,900 77,500 77,700 77,900 Additional Proposed ACSP Project[5] 494 988 1,481 1,975 1,975 Additional Proposed Project Demand[6] 100 100 100 100 100 Total Demand 74,194 76,988 79,081 79,775 79,975 [1] From Table 3-13, City of Anaheim 2010 UWMP, with 2040 projected. [2] This figure represents the amount of Groundwater required to balance demand and supply assuming Imported water is equivalent to what was included in City's 2010 UWMP. [3] All Demands include 4.5% allowance for unaccounted-for or non-revenue water, consistent with City's 2010 UWMP. [4] This figure represents normal year demand based on the City of Anaheim's 2010 UWMP including the existing Project demands but not additional Proposed Project Demands. [5] This figure represents additional demand of based on increase in land use intensification as a result of the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Project that was not included in the 2010 UWMP. Total Project demand includes 2013 metered demand of 3,225 AFY including non-revenue water and including additional demand of 1,975 AFY equals 5,200 AFY (3,225 + 1,975) at buildout. [6] This figure represents the additional demand from the Proposed Project. The Imported Supply shown in Table 4.2 is directly from the projections in the City’s 2010 UWMP, with the exception of FY 2040 which is projected. Any additional supply needed to balance supply and demand due to the additional demand from the Proposed Project and the additional demand from the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan is planned to come from Groundwater, which is reflected in Table 4.2. It should be noted the 2010 UWMP showed Groundwater Supply using a BPP of 65 percent. Since the preparation of the 2010 UWMP, OCWD has upgraded its long-term goal for the BPP to 75 percent pursuant to their Board Resolution 13-1-6. Based on the projections in Table 4.2, above, a BPP of less than 66 percent would be sufficient to provide the needed groundwater supply in 2040. Additionally, it is highly likely that recycled water use within the City will be expanded beyond the 255 AFY shown in Table 4.2. This amount is based only on the current and projected uses in the ACSP, ARTIC, and the demonstration project. Therefore, an adequate supply is available for the additional demand projected for the Proposed Project. H-25 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Section 4 4-4 March 2016 4.2 Groundwater Groundwater The information in this section is intended to furnish the information required by Water Code section 10910(f). The primary source of water for the City is the Orange County Groundwater Basin (Basin). The Basin underlies the north half of Orange County beneath broad lowlands. A description of the Coastal Plain of the Basin or DWR’s Groundwater Basin Number 8-1, dated September 2001, states that the Basin underlies a coastal alluvial plain in the northwestern portion of Orange County. The Basin covers an area of approximately 350 square miles, bordered by the Coyote and Chino Hills to the north, the Santa Ana Mountains to the northeast, the Pacific Ocean to the southwest, and terminates at the Orange County line to the northwest, where its aquifer systems continue into the Central Basin of Los Angeles County.1 The Basin is dominated by a deep structural depression containing a thick accumulation of fresh water-bearing imbedded marine and continental sand, silt and clay deposits. The sediments containing easily recoverable fresh water extend to approximately 2,000 feet in depth. Although water bearing aquifers exist below that level, reduced water quality and pumping make these materials economically unviable at present. Upper, middle and lower aquifer systems are recognized in the Basin with well production yields ranging from 500 to 4,500 gallons per minute, but are generally 2,000 to 3,000 gallons per minute.2 The aquifers comprising the Basin form a complex series of interconnected sand and gravel deposits. The Basin holds millions of acre feet of water, of which about 1.25 to 1.5 million AF is available for use.3 To ensure the Basin is not overdrawn, OCWD recharges the Basin with local and imported water. Groundwater conditions in the Basin are influenced by the natural hydrologic conditions. The Basin is recharged primarily by four sources: (1) local rainfall, which varies due to the extent of the annual seasonal precipitation; (2) storm and base flows from the Santa Ana River, which includes recycled wastewater from treatment plants in Riverside and San Bernardino Counties; (3) imported water; and (4) highly treated recycled wastewater. The Basin generally operates as a reservoir in which the net amount of water stored is increased in wet years to allow for manageable overdrafts in dry years. According to OCWD’s Engineer’s Report for fiscal year 2013/14, total water demands within OCWD were 448,922 AF for the water year (July 1, 2013 to June 30, 2014). Groundwater production for the water year totaled 330,782 AF including any available 1 DWR’s Bulletin 118-1 Basin Description for Coastal Plain of Orange County Groundwater Basin Number 8-1. September 5, 2001. 2 DWR’s Bulletin 118-1 Basin Description for Coastal Plain of Orange County Groundwater Basin Number 8-1. September 5, 2001. 3 Orange County Water District 2020 Master Plan Report. Chapter 3, Orange County Groundwater Basin Hydrology. 2000. H-26 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Section 4 4-5 March 2016 In-Lieu Program water and excluding MWD Groundwater Storage Program extractions. A total of 53,076 AF of supplemental water was used for the purpose of groundwater replenishment and barrier maintenance. For the water year, the “annual overdraft” (annual basin storage decrease without supplemental replenishment water) was 211,000 AF and the annual basin storage including the use of supplemental replenishment water decreased by 100,000 AF. The accumulated overdraft on June 30, 2014 was 342,000 AF Precipitation within the Basin was 34 percent of normal rainfall during the water year, totaling 4.52 inches.4 Over the recent past, production capability of the Basin has increased as a result of increased wastewater reclamation and the blending of waters of different qualities to produce high-quality potable water for public distribution.5 The most recent example of a highly successful wastewater reclamation project is the construction and operation of OCWD’s new $500 million water-purification plant, which is designed to turn wastewater into drinking water. This new Groundwater Replenishment System (GWRS) project has been lauded by the environmental community because of the fact that these types of projects reduce the amount of energy needed to transport water from the northern part of the state to the southern part of the state, thereby also reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The GWRS is being emulated throughout the State and in other parts of the country. A treatment plant expansion of 30 million gallons per day was recently put on line by OCWD increasing the recharge capacity of the GWRS to 100 million gallons per day, and the treatment system is being laid out so that it could eventually be expanded to 130 million gallons per day. GWRS currently treats and recharges up to 100 million gallons per day of wastewater back into the Basin for future potable use. This equates to the recycling of over 110,000 AFY of wastewater back into the Basin for future extraction and potable use. As stated, the Basin is managed by the OCWD, a special district created by the State Legislature in 1933 pursuant to the OCWD Act, an un-codified statutory scheme set forth in the State’s Water Code. The Basin is unadjudicated. All pumpers within the Basin are permitted to pump from the Basin, but OCWD is charged with managing the groundwater basin. OCWD manages the Basin largely through the Basin Production Percentage (BPP) that it establishes each water year. The BPP is set based on groundwater conditions, availability of imported water supplies, ideal precipitation, Santa Ana River runoff, and basin management objectives. In essence, the BPP represents a set percentage identifying the amount of groundwater all pumpers in the basin can pump without paying a high “pumping tax” or Basin Equity Assessment to OCWD (described below). Thus, for example, if OCWD establishes a BPP of 70 percent, all pumpers within the Basin, including the City, can supply 70 percent of their water needs from groundwater supplies at a cost significantly less than the cost of imported water. The BPP is a major factor for the City in determining the cost of groundwater production. Groundwater production equal to or less than the BPP pays a replenishment 4 OCWD. Engineer’s Report, 2013/14, February 18, 2015. 5 OCWD. Engineer’s Report, 2011/12. February 20, 2013. H-27 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Section 4 4-6 March 2016 assessment (RA). Funds collected by OCWD through RA payments made by all producers in the basin are used to fund groundwater replenishment and recharge programs aimed at ensuring the long-term viability and stability of the Basin. If groundwater production greater than the BPP occurs, a Basin Equity Assessment (BEA) is assessed against the producer of that amount of groundwater produced in excess of the BPP. The BEA is an additional fee (i.e., a higher “pumping tax”) paid on each AF of water pumped above the BPP, making the total cost of that water to Anaheim equal to the cost of imported water from Metropolitan. Thus, the BPP creates pricing incentives to ensure that groundwater producers pump within the framework established by the BPP. Like funds collected by OCWD through the RA, funds collected by OCWD through the BEA are also used to fund groundwater replenishment, and recharge and recycling programs aimed at ensuring the long-term viability and stability of the Basin. The programs funded by the RA and the BEA include all of the groundwater replenishment, recharge, and recycling programs discussed above. Basin recharge occurs largely in the following recharge basins: (i) Warner Basin, a 50- foot deep recharge basin located next to the Santa Ana River (SAR) at the intersection of the 55 and 91 freeways; (ii) Burris Pit, located between Lincoln Avenue and Ball Road; (iii) Kraemer Basin, located adjacent to Burris Pit, and (iv) Santiago Creek. All of these recharge facilities are located in or adjacent to the City of Anaheim. A large portion of the recharge of the Basin comes from water flowing in the Santa Ana River (SAR) south of the Prado Dam, which is located in San Bernardino County, just east of the Orange County jurisdictional boundary. With the exception of contractual rights conveyed to Bryant Ranch landowners in east Yorba Linda which have contractual rights to approximately 2,800 AFY of SAR water, OCWD has the legal rights to all of the SAR flow south of the Prado Dam. (See OCWD v. City of Chino, et al, (Civ. Case No. 117628), Judgment and Settlement Documents.) As set forth in DWR Bulletin 118 and in the 2013/2014 OCWD Engineer’s Report, the Basin is a managed basin and not in a state of overdraft. The Basin is one of the richest and most plentiful sources of groundwater in the entire State, containing approximately 1.25 to 1.5 million AF of water available for use at the present time, and millions of acre- feet that could possibly be produced in the future.6 As part of its Basin management function, OCWD operates an extensive groundwater monitoring program whereby OCWD routinely tests all groundwater production wells located within the Basin in compliance with Title 22 of the California Administrative Code. OCWD maintains a multi-million dollar laboratory whereby chemists test the well water for traces of pollution, hydrocarbons, pesticides, and other chemical components. OCWD’s laboratories process tens of thousands of samples a year, and perform hundreds of thousands of analyses a year. As part of its monitoring and management duties, OCWD has developed and adopted a Groundwater Management Plan which is a program 6 Orange County Water District 2020 Master Plan Report. Chapter 3, Orange County Groundwater Basin Hydrology. 2000. H-28 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Section 4 4-7 March 2016 to increase water supplies and increase monitoring and groundwater contamination clean up. In 2014/2015, the City of Anaheim produced groundwater for potable use from 17 existing wells located throughout the City as set forth in Section 5 (Figure 5.1). Groundwater produced at these wells is easily accessible to City’s water distribution and storage facilities. Because of the location of many of the City’s wells adjacent to the SAR and in the northeast part of the groundwater basin, especially the five wells near Anaheim Lake, City wells are ideally located within the Groundwater Basin. From a hydro-geological standpoint, the City’s wells pump from geological structures which are relatively high up and geologically differentiated from other parts of the OCWD groundwater basin. In addition, because the City’s wells are located relatively near to the Prado Dam outlet to the SAR, particularly as compared to the well locations of other producers in the Basin, the City’s well fields draw water from easily accessible groundwater tables that are recharged on a naturally-occurring priority basis due to (i) the location of OCWD recharge basins in or adjacent to the City, and (ii) the City’s wells’ location in or near the upper reaches of the SAR. In essence, SAR water has the natural effect of recharging the portion of the Basin that provides groundwater to City wells prior to such SAR water reaching the lower portions of the SAR. Thus, City wells are ideally located within the Basin. In addition, because the City’s well produce groundwater from areas within the groundwater basin as described above, the groundwater production in Anaheim does not generally affect the production of groundwater production wells operated by other producers located in other portions of the Basin. Table 4.3 sets forth all of the water (defined in AFY) produced by the City during the past five years from each of the City’s wells. For the location of each of these wells, refer to Section 5, Figure 5.1. Well 14, which hasn’t been utilized over the past few years is scheduled to be destroyed in 2015/16 with a 4,000 gpm replacement well going on-line in 2018/19. Well 39 is scheduled to go back on-line in 2016/17 after installation of a treatment system. A new 2,500 gpm well is scheduled to go on-line in 2015/16 to replace Wells 27 and 28 and a new 2,500 gpm well is scheduled to go on-line in 2017/18 to replace Well 36. Therefore, with these new wells coming on-line and the conservative load factors being utilized by City well operations staff, the groundwater volumes required to be pumped consistent with project demands can be easily met. H-29 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Section 4 4-8 March 2016 Table 4.3 Groundwater Pumping by Well (AF) & FY 2015 Load Factor Well No. 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2015 Load Factor 14 279.5 24A 332.3 347.8 402.6 382.4 352.5 37.2 25 - - - 28 8.1 0.5 - 36 1,477.2 1,177.9 198.0 39 - - - 40 1,739.4 877.5 1,188.4 782.1 2139.5 37.1 41 5,094.2 2,796.3 4,411.1 3530.4 3928.4 65.5 42 3,506.6 2,568.2 1,844.0 3622.5 4325.1 71.3 43 3,805.7 2,784.5 2,515.2 3882.8 4345.4 72.6 44 3,579.8 3,251.5 2,931.1 4150.9 2735.5 45.7 45 2,732.6 2,633.5 2,077.1 4420.2 3330.1 55.8 46 1,931.4 2,593.0 4,984.6 5683.7 4487.7 66.0 47 2,456.6 431.5 581.2 4624.3 2659.6 41.2 48 2,716.0 2,084.1 3,712.6 1649.3 1066.1 14.7 49 3,379.9 3,619.9 5,378.9 4029.5 3155.3 40.9 51 1,988.9 1,079.0 2,194.0 1850.7 833.6 26.0 52 896.7 1,192.3 1,491.4 1157.6 2594.5 80.7 53 2,169.5 822.9 854.4 2128.3 1549.5 29.9 54 991.9 2,047.3 3,928.2 4344.6 3455.4 58.0 55 2,035.0 2,664.2 3,852.9 3973.6 3283.3 59.1 56 1,795.0 2,836.6 4156.9 2694.7 46.5 58 59 Total 41,121.3 34,766.9 45,382.3 54,369.8 46,936.2 2015 Load Factor is the percentage of time the well was pumped that fiscal year. Total includes non-potable groundwater pumped from Well No. 24A for irrigation of Dad Miller Golf Course. Section 5 of this WSA sets forth various groundwater production scenarios as required by the Water Code (Single Dry Year, Multiple Dry Years, and reduced allocation due to Delta issues), and these latter tables and accompanying text should be reviewed for an understanding of how groundwater production by the City may be affected by hypothetical future conditions. This additional information set forth in Section 5 will furnish further information pertaining to the sufficiency of the groundwater basin in various pumping scenarios as required by Water Code section 10910(f)(5). H-30 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Section 4 4-9 March 2016 4.3 Imported Water (Surface Water) The information in this section is intended to provide the information required by Water Code section 10910(d). Metropolitan provides imported water supplies to the City. Metropolitan is the wholesale water agency that serves supplemental imported water from northern California through the State Water Project (SWP) and the Colorado River to 26 member agencies located in portions of Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego, and Ventura Counties. The construction of the SWP was authorized by the State Legislature in 1951. Eight years later, the Legislature passed the Burns-Porter Act, which provided a mechanism for bonds to be issued to pay for the construction of certain portions of the SWP facilities. The DWR has entered into contracts with water districts and regional agencies (SWP Contractors) specifying the amount of SWP water to be delivered to each SWP Contractor. Each SWP Contractor was provided with a contract amount (Table A Amount) and capacity rights to the SWP aqueduct and storage system in return for payments intended to cover operation and maintenance, bondholder obligations, and repayment of moneys loaned from the California Water Fund. DWR water supply contracts contemplate that the SWP would deliver 4.2 million AFY to 29 SWP Contractors. Although the SWP is not fully constructed and cannot yet deliver the full 4.2 million AFY in all years, since the end of the six-year drought in 1992, the SWP has fully met SWP Contractors’ water needs twelve out of the next 16 years, except the dry years of 1994, 2001, 2007 and 2008. Of SWP water deliveries, about 70 percent is delivered to SWP urban contractors and about 30 percent is delivered to SWP agricultural contractors. Kern County Water Agency and Metropolitan are the largest Contractors with DWR for SWP water.7 From a statewide perspective, the maximum capacity of the overall SWP transportation system is generally limited by the capacity of the system pumps. The capacity of the California Aqueduct is 10,300 cubic feet per second (cfs) at its northern end, and 4,480 cfs below the Edmonston pumping plant (1,000 cfs equates to approximately 82.6 acre- feet per hour, 1,980 acre-feet per day and 725,000 AFY). If these transportation rates were maintained for a full year, they would result in the transport of approximately 7.2 million acre-feet near the Delta and 3.2 million acre-feet to users in Southern California.8 Demand can have a significant effect upon the reliability of a water system. For example, if the demand occurs only three months in the summer, a water system with a sufficient annual supply but insufficient water storage may not be able to reliably meet the demand. If, however, the same amount of demand is distributed over the year, the system could more easily meet the demand because the need for water storage is reduced. Because the City of Anaheim overlies the Orange County Groundwater Basin and can utilize the Basin to smooth out seasonal peaks, its imported water reliability is enhanced. 7 Bulletin No. 132-06 and latter supplements to Bulletin No. 132. 8 DWR, Bulletin No. 132-05, December 2006. H-31 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Section 4 4-10 March 2016 The City of Anaheim is one of only three retail member agencies of Metropolitan in Orange County. As a member agency, pursuant to the Metropolitan Act, the City has preferential rights to a certain percentage of water delivered to Metropolitan each year primarily from the State Water Project and/or the Colorado River Aqueduct as well as other Metropolitan storage programs. Being a member agency of Metropolitan puts the City in a better position relative to receiving water directly from Metropolitan, as opposed to other agencies in Orange County which obtain their imported Metropolitan water through Municipal Water District of Orange County (MWDOC). Metropolitan’s SWP imported water is stored at Castaic Lake on the western side of Metropolitan’s service area and at Silverwood Lake near San Bernardino. Metropolitan water imported from the Colorado River via the Colorado River Aqueduct (CRA) is stored at Diamond Valley Lake and Lake Mathews in Riverside County. Through the 1996 Integrated Resources Plan and subsequent updates, Metropolitan has worked toward identifying and developing water supplies to provide 100 percent reliability. Due to competing needs and uses for all of the water sources and regional water operation issues, Metropolitan undertook a number of planning processes: the Integrated Resources Planning (IRP) Process, the Water Surplus and Drought Management (WSDM) Plan, the Strategic Planning Process, the Regional Urban Water Management Plan (RUWMP), and most recently, the Report on Metropolitan Water Supplies: A Blueprint for Water Reliability. Combined, these documents provide a framework and guidelines for optimum water planning into the future. Reliability of Metropolitan’s supply is further discussed in Section 5.0, Reliability of Water Supplies. Metropolitan member agencies receive imported water at various delivery points along the Metropolitan transmission system, and pay for it at tiered and/or uniform rates established by the Board depending on the class of service. Historical water demands in the Metropolitan service area increased from 3.1 million acre feet (MAF) in 1980 to 3.9 MAF in 19909. Total water use is projected to grow from 3.84 MAF in 2016 to a projected 4.12 MAF in 2020 and 4.27 MAF in 2040. These estimates assume total conservation targets reflected in Metropolitan’s 2015 IRP Update10. Table 4.5 shows Metropolitan’s 2015 IRP Update supply reliability and conservation targets. These targets represent the projected levels of imported supplies, local supplies and water conservation necessary to meet the 2015 IRP Update reliability goals. 9 Metropolitan, 2010 RUWMP. 10 Metropolitan, Draft 2015 IRP Update, January 2016. H-32 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Section 4 4-11 March 2016 Table 4.4 Metropolitan 2015 IRP Update Total Level of Average-Year Supply Target 2016 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Retail Demands before Conservation 4,878,000 5,219,000 5,393,000 5,333,000 5,663,000 5,792,000 Total Conservation Target 1,034,000 1,096,000 1,197,000 1,310,000 1,403,000 1,519,000 Retail Demands after Conservation 3,844,000 4,123,000 4,196,000 4,023,000 4,260,000 4,273,000 Minimum CRA Diversion Target 900,000 900,000 900,000 900,000 900,000 900,000 Average Year SWP Target 1,202,000 984,000 984,000 1,213,000 1,213,000 1,213,000 Total Local Supply Target 2,199,000 2,307,000 2,356,000 2,386,000 2,408,000 2,426,000 Total Supply Reliability Target 4,301,000 4,191,000 4,240,000 4,499,000 4,521,000 4,539,000 Source: Metropolitan, Draft 2015 IRP Update, January 2016 The City purchases both treated potable and untreated non-potable water from Metropolitan. The treated water is delivered through five major feeders, East Orange County Feeder No. 2, Orange County Feeder, Second Lower Feeder, West Orange County Feeder, and Allen-McColloch Pipeline, through MWD connections A-01 through A-07. All of these infrastructure programs are in place, and no further regulatory permits are required to permit Metropolitan to convey imported water to these facilities for use by the City. Untreated Metropolitan water is delivered to the City's Walnut Canyon Reservoir (WCR), through MWD Connection A-08, via the Santiago Lateral of the Lower Feeder System. WCR has a total capacity of 2,823 AF (920 MG). This water is treated by the City's August F. Lenain Water Treatment Plant (Lenain). Lenain utilizes a conventional treatment process that includes coagulation and flocculation, sedimentation, deep bed monomedia (anthracite coal) filtration, and ozone disinfection. The facility also includes a water system operation center and fully equipped water quality laboratory. Together, the WCR and Lenain form a receiving, storage, and treatment facility. All of these infrastructure programs are in place, and no further regulatory permits are required to permit Metropolitan to convey imported water to these facilities for use by the City. A description of the amount of Metropolitan water delivered to the City in the past and anticipated to be delivered to the City in the future under a variety of scenarios is set forth in Section 5 of this WSA. 4.4 Recycled Water Anaheim indirectly participates in regional water recycling through the GWRS by the OCWD and Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD). In fiscal year 2011/12, the City also started purchasing GWRS water directly from OCWD for use at its newly constructed Canyon Power Plant (CPP) located in the ACSP area to control and/or reduce air emissions and for landscape irrigation. The City started delivery of GWRS water to the Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center (ARTIC), in FY 2015 after H-33 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Section 4 4-12 March 2016 completion of construction, for use in cooling tower make up water, toilet flushing, and landscape irrigation. Anaheim’s sewage is part of the wastewater recycled and recharged by OCWD. In addition, the City recently constructed a small water recycling plant adjacent to City Hall. In its initial phase, the facility can provide up to 50 AFY of recycled water for landscape irrigation and toilet flushing. The facility can be expanded to produce up to 110 AFY of recycled water. The two direct recycled water projects discussed above are a direct result of continued efforts by the City to increase the use of recycled water to supplement imported water supplies. A recent effort included preparation of a feasibility study for delivering GWRS recycled water to the Anaheim Resort and Platinum Triangle area for uses such as cooling towers make up water, commercial laundry use, toilet flushing in new dual plumbing buildings, and for irrigation in parks, schools, and streetscape/landscape areas. Anaheim has also developed several recycled water project alternatives through its March 2011 Citywide Water Recycling Facilities Plan. The potential recycled water users include parks, golf courses, school yards, homeowners associations, freeway/street landscaping, and industrial facilities. The study analyzed using recycled/non-potable water from various sources for potential reuse opportunities throughout the City, and defined and prioritized feasible water recycling projects. One of the projects includes expansion of the recycled water system, which currently serves CPP, to also serve other potential customers in the ACSP area. The City also requires separate irrigation services for any new landscaped area larger than 2,500 square feet in the City, which will enable easy conversion to recycled water if and when it becomes available. These requirements for installation of separate irrigation meters and systems will be made a part of the Proposed Project as well, so the landscape irrigation demands within the hotel project can be converted once recycled water is delivered to the area. Without separating the irrigation services from the domestic, conversion to recycled water becomes overly expensive, making it problematic to convert in the future. H-34 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Section 5 March 2016 5-1 5.0 RELIABILITY OF WATER SUPPLIES This section provides a description of Metropolitan’s, OCWD’s, and City of Anaheim’s efforts in securing adequate water supply as well as reliability of the region and City’s normal, single dry year, and multiple dry year supplies. The Southern California region faces a challenge in satisfying its water requirements and securing firm water supplies. Increased environmental regulations and the competition for water from outside the region have resulted in reduced supplies of imported water. Continued population and economic growth correspond to increased water demands within the region, putting an even larger burden on local supplies. Reliability is a measure of a water system's ability to manage water shortages. Reliability planning requires information about the following: (1) expected frequency and severity of shortages; (2) how additional water management measures are likely to affect the frequency and severity of shortages; and (3) how available contingency measures can reduce the impact of shortages when they occur. The reliability of the City’s water supply is currently dependent on the reliability of both groundwater and imported water supplies, which are managed and delivered by OCWD and Metropolitan, respectively. Despite the ongoing water supply challenges within the region, the goal and statutory mission of these agencies are to identify and develop projects to meet the water demands in the region. Sections 5.1 and 5.2 discuss these agencies, their roles in water supply reliability, and the near and long-term efforts they are involved with to ensure future reliability of water supplies to the City and the region as a whole. State funding has been made available, through California voters’ approval, to increase reliability of state water supplies. In March 2000, California voters approved Proposition 13, which authorized the State to issue $1.97 billion of its general obligation bonds for water projects. Additionally, California voters approved Proposition 50 in November 2002 and Proposition 84 in November 2006, which authorized the issuance by the State of $3.4 billion and $5.4 billion, respectively, of its general obligation bonds for water projects. Types of water projects that were eligible for funding under Propositions 13, 50, and 84 of these programs included water conservation, groundwater storage, water treatment, water quality, water security and Colorado River water management projects, many of which are within the scope of the California Plan. Currently, Proposition 1 offers 2015 Agricultural Water Use Efficiency Grants with a funding limit of $30 million and CalConserve water use efficiency revolving fund loans with another $10 million limit. 5.1 Metropolitan Water District Metropolitan was formed in the late 1920's. Collectively, charter members recognized the limited water supplies available within the region, and realized that continued prosperity and economic development of Southern California depended upon the acquisition and careful management of an adequate supplemental water supply. This foresight made the continued development of Southern California possible. H-35 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Section 5 5-2 March 2016 Metropolitan acquires water from Northern California via the State Water Project (SWP) and from the Colorado River to supply water to most of Southern California. As a wholesaler, Metropolitan has no retail customers, and distributes treated and untreated water directly to its 26 member agencies. One such member agency is the City of Anaheim. Through the Integrated Resources Plan and subsequent updates including the latest 2010 update and Draft 2015 update, Metropolitan has worked toward identifying and developing water supplies to provide 100 percent reliability. Due to competing needs and uses for all of the water sources and regional water operational issues, Metropolitan has undertaken a number of planning processes: the Integrated Resources Planning (IRP) Process, the Water Surplus and Drought Management (WSDM) Plan, the Strategic Planning Process, the Regional Urban Water Management Plan, and the Report on Metropolitan Water Supplies: A Blueprint for Water Reliability. Combined, these documents provide a framework and guidelines for optimum water planning into the future. The reliability and operational issues related to Metropolitan’s various sources of supply are discussed in detail by major source in the subsequent sections. Metropolitan has indicated that some of the recent issues surrounding operational limitations in supply related to species protection and Delta issues are considered to be somewhat short-term in nature and some are long-range issues and has developed strategies for both.11 5.1.1 State Water Project The SWP is owned and operated by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR). The reliability of the SWP impacts Metropolitan’s member agencies’ ability to plan for future growth and supply. On an annual basis, each of the 29 SWP contractors, including Metropolitan, request an amount of SWP water based on their anticipated yearly demand. In most cases, Metropolitan’s requested supply is equivalent to its full Table A Amount,12 currently at 1,911,500 AFY. The full Table A amount is defined as the maximum amount of imported water to be delivered and is specified in the contract between the DWR and the contractor. After receiving the requests, DWR assesses the amount of water supply available based on precipitation, snow pack on northern California watersheds, volume of water in storage, projected carry over storage, and Sacramento-San Joaquin Bay Delta regulatory requirements. Due to the uncertainty in water supply, contractors are not typically guaranteed their full Table A Amount, but instead a percentage of that amount based on the available supply. Once the percentage is set early in the water year, the agency can count on that amount of supply or more in the 11 Metropolitan, Integrated Water Resources Plan, 2010 Update, October 2010 12 Generally, two types of deliveries are assumed for all SWP contractors: Table A and Article 21. Table A Amount is the contractual amount of allocated SWP supply, set by percentage amount annually by DWR; it is scheduled and uninterruptible. Article 21 water refers to the SWP contract provision defining this supply as water that may be made available by DWR when excess flows area available in the Delta (i.e., Delta outflow requirements have been met, SWP storage south of the Delta is full, and conveyance capacity is available beyond that being used for SWP operations and delivery of allocated and scheduled Table A supplies). Article 21 water is made available on an unscheduled and interruptible basis and is typically available only in average to wet years, generally only for a limited time in the later winter. H-36 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Section 5 5-3 March 2016 coming year. The percentage is typically set conservative and then held or adjusted upwards later in the year based on a reassessment of precipitation, snow pack, etc. SWP supplies are estimated using the 2015 SWP Delivery Capability Report distributed by DWR in July 2015. The 2015 Delivery Capability Report presents the current DWR estimate of the amount of water deliveries for current conditions and conditions 20 years in the future. These estimates incorporate restrictions on SWP and Central Valley Project (CVP) operations in accordance with the biological opinions of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service issued on December 15, 208, and June 4, 2009, respectively. Under the 2015 Delivery Capability Report with existing conveyance and low outflow requirements scenario, the delivery estimates for the SWP for 2020 conditions as percentage of Table A amounts are 12 percent, equivalent to 230 thousand acre-feet (TAF) to Metropolitan, under a single dry-year (1977) condition and 51 percent, equivalent to 975 TAF, under the long-term average condition. In dry, below-normal conditions, Metropolitan has increased the supplies received from the California Aqueduct by developing flexible Central Valley/SWP storage and transfer programs. Over the last two years under the pumping restrictions of the SWP, Metropolitan has worked collaboratively with the other contractors to develop numerous voluntary Central Valley/SWP storage and transfer programs. The goal of these storage/transfer programs is to develop additional dry-year supplies that can be conveyed through the California Aqueduct during dry hydrologic conditions and regulatory restrictions. 5.1.2 Colorado River Aqueduct The Colorado River was Metropolitan’s original source of water after Metropolitan’s establishment in 1928. Metropolitan has a legal entitlement to receive water from the Colorado River under a permanent service contract with the Secretary of the Interior. Water from the Colorado River or its tributaries is also available to other users in California, as well as to users in the states of Arizona, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming (the “Colorado River Basin States”), resulting in both competition and the need for cooperation among these holders of Colorado River entitlements. In addition, under a 1944 treaty, Mexico has an allotment of 1.5 million acre-feet of Colorado River water annually, except in the event of extraordinary drought or serious accident to the delivery system in the United States, when the water allotted to Mexico would be curtailed. Mexico also can schedule delivery of an additional 200,000 acre-feet of Colorado River water per year if water is available in excess of the requirements in the United States and the 1.5 million acre-feet allotted to Mexico. The Colorado River Aqueduct, which is owned and operated by Metropolitan, transports water from the Colorado River approximately 242 miles to its terminus at Lake Mathews in Riverside County. After deducting for conveyance losses and considering maintenance requirements, up to 1.2 million acre-feet of water a year may be conveyed through the Colorado River Aqueduct to Metropolitan’s member agencies, subject to availability of Colorado River water for delivery to Metropolitan as described below. H-37 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Section 5 5-4 March 2016 California is apportioned the use of 4.4 million acre-feet of water from the Colorado River each year plus one-half of any surplus that may be available for use collectively in Arizona, California and Nevada. In addition, California has historically been allowed to use Colorado River water apportioned to, but not used by, Arizona and Nevada when such supplies have been requested for use in California. Under the 1931 priority system that has formed the basis for the distribution of Colorado River water made available to California, Metropolitan holds the fourth priority right to 550,000 acre-feet per year. This is the last priority within California’s basic apportionment of 4.4 million acre-feet. In addition, Metropolitan holds the fifth priority right to 662,000 acre-feet of water, which is in excess of California’s basic apportionment. Until 2002, Metropolitan had been able to take full advantage of its fifth priority right as a result of the availability of surplus water and apportioned but unused water. However, Arizona and Nevada increased their use of water from the Colorado River, leaving no unused apportionment available for California since the late 1990s. In addition, a severe drought in the Colorado River Basin has reduced storage in system reservoirs, resulting in no surplus water being available since 2002. Prior to 2002, Metropolitan could divert over 1.2 million acre-feet in any year, but since that time, Metropolitan’s deliveries of Colorado River water varied from a low of 633,000 acre-feet in 2006 to a high of 897,000 acre-feet in 2005. In 2010, Metropolitan received approximately 1,150,000 acre-feet of Colorado River water. Metropolitan has taken steps to augment its share of Colorado River water through agreements with other agencies that have rights to use such water. Under a 1988 water conservation agreement (the “1988 Conservation Agreement”) between Metropolitan and the Imperial Irrigation District (IID), IID has constructed and is operating a number of conservation projects that are currently conserving 105,000 acre-feet of water per year. In 2007, the conserved water augmented the amount of water available to Metropolitan by 85,000 acre-feet and, by prior agreement, to the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) by 20,000 acre-feet. In 1992, Metropolitan entered into an agreement with the Central Arizona Water Conservation District (CAWCD) to demonstrate the feasibility of CAWCD storing Colorado River water in central Arizona for the benefit of an entity outside of the State of Arizona. Pursuant to this agreement, CAWCD created 80,909 acre-feet of long-term storage credits that may be recovered by CAWCD for Metropolitan. Metropolitan, the Arizona Water Banking Authority, and CAWCD executed an amended agreement for recovery of these storage credits in December 2007. Metropolitan started recovering its credits in 2007. Water recovered by CAWCD under the terms of the 1992 agreement allows CAWCD to reduce its use of Colorado River water, resulting in Arizona having an unused apportionment. The Secretary of the Interior is making this unused apportionment available to Metropolitan under its Colorado River water delivery contract In April 2008, Metropolitan’s Board authorized the expenditure of $28.7 million to join the CAWCD and the Southern Nevada Water Authority (SNWA) in funding the construction of a new 8,000 acre-foot off-stream regulating reservoir near Drop 2 of the All-American Canal in Imperial County. This reservoir was recently completed by the H-38 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Section 5 5-5 March 2016 Bureau of Reclamation. The Drop 2 Reservoir is expected to save up to 70,000 acre-feet of water per year by capturing and storing water that would otherwise be lost. In return for its funding, Metropolitan received 100,000 acre-feet of water that is stored in Lake Mead until recovered, with annual long-term deliveries of up to 25,000 acre-feet of water through 2036. Besides the additional water supply, the new reservoir will add to the flexibility of Colorado River operations. Metropolitan and the Palo Verde Irrigation District (PVID) signed the program agreement for a Land Management, Crop Rotation and Water Supply Program in August 2004. This program provides up to 133,000 acre-feet of water available to Metropolitan in certain years. The term of the program is 35 years. Fallowing of approximately 20,000 acres of land began on January 1, 2005. In 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, and 2009 approximately 108,700 acre-feet, 105,000, and 72,300, 94,300, and 120,200 acre-feet, respectively, of water were saved and made available to Metropolitan. In March 2009, Metropolitan and PVID entered into a one-year supplemental fallowing program within PVID that provides for the fallowing of additional acreage, with savings projected to be as much as 61,000 acre-feet. Of that total, about 24,000 was saved and made available to Metropolitan in 2009. With Arizona’s and Nevada’s increasing use of their respective apportionments and the uncertainty of continued Colorado River surpluses, in 1997 the Colorado River Board of California, in consultation with Metropolitan, IID, PVID, CVWD, the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power and the San Diego County Water Authority (SDCWA), embarked on the development of a plan for reducing California’s use of Colorado River water to its basic apportionment of 4.4 million acre-feet when use of that basic allotment is necessary (California Plan). In 1999, IID, CVWD, Metropolitan and the State of California agreed to a set of Key Terms aimed at managing California’s Colorado River supply. These Key Terms were incorporated into the Colorado River Board’s May 2000 California Plan that proposed to optimize the use of the available Colorado River supply through water conservation, transfers from higher priority agricultural users to Metropolitan’s service area and storage programs. To implement these plans, a number of agreements have been executed. One such agreement, the Quantification Settlement Agreement (QSA), is a landmark agreement signed by the four California Colorado River water use agencies and the U.S. Secretary of the Interior, which will guide reasonable and fair use of the Colorado River by California through the year 2037. The QSA was authorized in October 2003 and defined Colorado River water deliveries to the four California agencies as well as facilitated transfers from agricultural agencies to urban users. The QSA is a critical component of the California’s Colorado River Water Use Plan. 5.1.3 Storage A key component of Metropolitan’s water supply capability is the amount of water in Metropolitan’s storage facilities. Storage is a major component of Metropolitan’s dry- year resource management strategy. Metropolitan’s likelihood of having adequate supply H-39 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Section 5 5-6 March 2016 capability to meet projected demands, without implementing the Water Supply Allocation Plan (WSAP), is dependent on its storage resources. In developing the supply capabilities in the 2015 UWMP, Metropolitan assumed the current (2015) storage levels at the start of simulation and used the median storage levels going into each of the five year increments based on the balances of supplies and demands. Under the median storage conditions, there is an estimated 50 percent probability that storage levels would be higher than the assumption used, and a 50 percent probability that storage levels would be lower than the assumption used. All storage capability figures shown in the 2015 UWMP reflect actual storage program conveyance constraints. Under some assumptions, Metropolitan may choose to implement the WSAP in order to preserve storage reserves for a future year, instead of using the full supply capability. This can result in impacts at the retail level even under conditions where there may be adequate supply capabilities to meet demands. Historical imported water use by the City delivered by Metropolitan over the past five years is shown on Table 5.1, below. As can be seen from this table, the previous two years have been historical lows for receiving imported water due to the continued drought conditions. Table 5.1 Historical Imported Water Use (AFY) 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 22,705 29,668 21,104 13,635 14,477 5.1.4 Supply Management Strategies On the regional level, Metropolitan has taken a number of actions to secure a reliable water source for its member agencies. Metropolitan has developed a water supply allocation plan (WSAP) and has utilized it initially in 2009 and 2010 and in 2015 for dealing with potential shortages that took into consideration the impact on retail customers and the economy, changes and losses in local supplies, the investment in and development of local resources, and conservation achievements.13 Additional actions taken by Metropolitan over the past seven or eight years have increased spending on conservation, local projects and water supply/reliability enhancements significantly. This spending plan included spending for the improvement of water conveyance facilities, water transfers, and providing financial assistance to member agency’s local conservation, recycling, and groundwater clean-up efforts, and is continuing. As an example, Metropolitan Tier 1 water rates were increased by almost 54% for the 5-year period from January 1, 2009 to January 1, 2014. Over the past two years, this rate actually dropped for 2015 and then increased to just over the 2014 rate for 2016. 13 Metropolitan Water District Press Release dated February 12, 2008. H-40 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Section 5 5-7 March 2016 5.2 Orange County Water District As has been discussed previously throughout this WSA, the primary source of water for the City is the Orange County Groundwater Basin (Basin). OCWD is responsible for the protection of water rights to the Santa Ana River in Orange County as well as the management and replenishment of the Basin.14 OCWD replenishes and maintains the Basin at safe levels while significantly increasing the Basin’s annual yield by utilization of the best available technology. Other than recycled water, OCWD primarily recharges the Basin with water from the Santa Ana River and to a lesser extent with imported raw water purchased from Metropolitan. According to the OCWD’s 2013/14 Engineer’s Report, 111,527 acre-feet of water was supplied to the Basin as (1) directly from the percolation or injection of purchased imported water from the Colorado River and State Water Project, and (2) use of recycled water to supplement purchased imported water in the Alamitos seawater intrusion barrier, and (3) use of GWRS recycled water. For the five year period from July 1, 2009 to June 30, 2014, an annual average of approximately 111,000 acre-feet of supplemental water and recycled water was percolated or injected into the underground Basin for replenishment or used directly in place of pumping groundwater (i.e. In-Lieu Program). The average annual overdraft during the same five- year period was approximately 110,000 AF. As of January 2008, OCWD began recharging recycled water from the Groundwater Replenishment System (GWRS). The GWRS, the largest water purification project of its kind in the world, can currently produce up to 100 million gallons per day (MGD) or 105,000 AFY of recycled water and has increased Orange County’s water independence by providing a locally controlled, drought-proof supply of safe, high-quality water. Construction was recently completed on the GWRS Expansion Project taking capacity from 70 to 100 MGD. Other processes such as local agency recycling of wastewater, conservation and water use efficiency programs, and creative water purchases have aided in replenishing the basin to desired levels to meet required demands. As discussed previously, OCWD establishes the Basin Production Percentage (BPP) each water year. The BPP is set based on groundwater conditions, availability of imported water supplies, ideal precipitation, Santa Ana River runoff, and basin management objectives. The BPP was initially established in 1969 and has generally ranged from 62 to 89 percent. The average BPP for the past twenty years is approximately 73 percent. Resolution No. 13-1-6 adopted on January 16, 2013 by the OCWD Board of Directors stated the District’s goal to develop the necessary supplies and facilities to achieve and maintain a 75 percent BPP. Based on previous OCWD water budgets and water replenishment, an average projected BPP between 65 and 69 percent had been documented and was projected to increase by approximately 4 percent as a result of the GWRS Expansion Project discussed above. The BPP is a major factor for the City in determining the cost of groundwater production. For groundwater production equal to or less than the BPP, groundwater producers including Anaheim pay a replenishment assessment. If groundwater production greater 14 OCWD Groundwater Management Plan, 2009. H-41 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Section 5 5-8 March 2016 than the BPP occurs, a Basin Equity Assessment (BEA) will be assessed. The BEA is an additional fee paid on each acre foot (AF) of water pumped above the BPP, making the total cost of that water to Anaheim equal to the cost of imported water from Metropolitan. Total water demand within OCWD was 448,922 AF for the 2013/14 water year (beginning July 1, 2013 and ending June 30, 2014). In the same period, groundwater production (including In-Lieu Program water and excluding Metropolitan Groundwater Storage Program extractions) for the water year totaled 330,782 AF. For the water year, a total of 53,076 AF of supplemental water was used for the purpose of groundwater replenishment and barrier maintenance to prevent seawater intrusion from occurring in areas of the groundwater basin adjacent to the Pacific Ocean in Huntington Beach, Costa Mesa, and Fountain Valley. Based on the groundwater basin conditions for the water year ending June 30, 2014, OCWD may purchase up to 144,000 AF for groundwater basin replenishment during the ensuing water year, beginning July 1, 2015, pursuant to the District Act. Since the formation of OCWD in 1933, OCWD has made substantial investment in facilities, basin management and water rights protection, resulting in the elimination and prevention of adverse long-term “mining” overdraft conditions. OCWD continues to develop new replenishment supplies, recharge capacity and basin protection measures to meet projected production from the basin during average/normal rainfall and drought periods.15 OCWD has invested in seawater intrusion control (injection barriers), recharge facilities, laboratories and basin monitoring to effectively manage the basin. Some of these programs include: Recharge Facilities - OCWD currently owns and operates approximately 1,000 acres of recharge spreading facilities located in cities of Anaheim and Orange adjacent to the SAR and Santiago Creek. OCWD has built a recharge system that provides the majority of water supplied by the District. The 17 major facilities in the Anaheim/Orange area are grouped into four major components: the Main River System, the Off-River System, the Deep Basin System, and the Burris Pit/Santiago System. Each system has a series of percolation spreading basins, either shallow or deep, whose sidewalls and bottoms allow for percolation into the underlying aquifer. Seawater Intrusion Barriers - OCWD’s Talbert Barrier is composed of a series of injection wells that span the 2.5-mile-wide Talbert Gap between the Newport and Huntington mesas. The Talbert Barrier wells can inject approximately 42 mgd of water into four aquifer zones. Injecting water through the wells forms a hydraulic barrier to seawater that would otherwise migrate inland toward areas of groundwater production. The Alamitos seawater intrusion barrier is composed of a series of injection wells that span the Los Angeles/Orange County line in the Seal Beach-Long Beach area. It is operated by the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (LACDPW) in cooperation with OCWD and the Water Replenishment District (WRD). The source of 15 Orange County Water District, 2012-13 Engineer’s Report on Groundwater Conditions, Water Supply and Basin Utilization in the Orange County Water District, February 19, 2014. H-42 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Section 5 5-9 March 2016 this water is a blend of purified wastewater from WRD and potable supplies from Metropolitan. Also, the Alamitos Barrier System includes four extraction wells located seaward of the injection barrier to create a pumping trough to remove the degraded brackish groundwater. Groundwater Monitoring – OCWD has one of the most sophisticated groundwater monitoring programs in the country. The District runs more than 350,000 analyses of water from more than 650 wells every year. OCWD performs nearly 50 percent more water quality tests than it is required to do in order to ensure the highest water quality possible. In 2004, OCWD completed a 10-year, $10 million Santa Ana River Water Quality and Health Effects Study, which demonstrated the safety of SAR water as a source for recharging the groundwater basin. A panel of nationally recognized experts provided an independent review of the study and validated its positive results. 5.2.1 OCWD Long Term Facilities Plan (LTFP) OCWD developed a LTFP through a series of discussions in 2008-2009 with its Board of Directors and producers. It was received and filed by the Board in July 2009. Its purpose was to evaluate potential basin and water quality enhancement projects that may be implemented in the 20-year planning period. In 2012, OCWD staff made a presentation to the OCWD Board updating the progress on the 19 projects included in the LTFP and recommended the LFTP purpose going forward include the following: · Identify and evaluate potential projects to: o cost effectively increase the amount of sustainable yield o protect and enhance groundwater quality o increase operational efficiency · Prioritize efforts for next 3 to 5 years · Assist with preparation of capital improvement program budget · Becomes a living document, updated periodically The LTFP will utilize the most recent information developed in OCWD’s Groundwater Management Plan and Recharge Development Study. The LTFP includes a master list of developed and proposed projects. The various projects are grouped into five categories: (1) recharge facilities, (2) water source facilities, (3) basin management facilities, (4) water quality management facilities, and (5) operational improvements facilities. Each project is evaluated using criteria such as technical feasibility, cost, institutional support, functional feasibility, and environmental compliance. The LTFP currently tracks 19 projects that are either under construction or completed, in design or feasibility study completed, or in concept stage. Staff is currently updating the LFTP and anticipates completing the updated LFTP in 2014. H-43 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Section 5 5-10 March 2016 5.2.2 OCWD Groundwater Management Plan (GMP) OCWD finalized its GMP in July 2009, which updated its 2004 GMP. The GMP complies with SB 1938, passed in 2002, which includes a list of items to be included in a GMP. A copy of this GMP is included as an appendix to the City’s 2010 UWMP. The GMP’s objectives include (1) protecting and enhancing groundwater quality, (2) cost- effectively protecting and increasing the basin’s sustainable yield, and (3) increasing the efficiency of OCWD’s operations.16 Various programs, policies, goals, and projects are defined in the GMP to assist OCWD staff meet these objectives. The potential projects described in the GMP are discussed in further detail in the LTFP. The GMP describes the following: · the background and purpose of the GMP · the hydrogeology of the basin · the range of activities and management programs, including groundwater monitoring, groundwater quality management, production management, recharge water supply, and improvement projects · the historical and future water demands and integrated demand/supply management strategies · the financial management programs · the recommendations for continued proactive basin management 5.2.3 OCWD 2020 Water Master Plan Report (Water MPR) OCWD’s 2020 Water Master Plan Report (MPR) describes local water supplies and estimates their availability extending to the year 2020. Specifically, OCWD states in their 2020 Water MPR that significant water supply sources will be available in the future for potable, non-potable, and recharge purposes. The 2020 Water MPR discusses source waters such as imported water from Metropolitan, base flows from the Santa Ana River, treated wastewater through the OCWD/OCSD GWRS program, and possibly desalinated ocean water. The local supplies’ availability and projections from the 2020 Water MPR will be incorporated in the LTFP. 16 Orange County Water District, Groundwater Management Plan, July 2009. H-44 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Section 5 5-11 March 2016 5.3 Anaheim Public Utilities Department (APUD or Department) 5.3.1 Water System The City's Water Service Area consists of virtually the entire area within the limits of the City; however, the Service Area excludes some areas that are inside or within the Anaheim City limits but serviced by other water purveyors, and includes some areas that are outside the City limits but serviced by the APUD. Figure 5.1 shows the Anaheim Water Service Area and depicts each of these inclusion and exclusion areas. The City’s water use sectors mainly include single family residential, multi-family residential and general services (i.e., commercial, industrial, municipal, and institutional consumers). As the City has developed, the APUD has increased its number of connections to imported water supplies, increased the number of its wells, replaced old wells with higher producing wells, built a series of reservoirs, and greatly expanded the transmission and distribution system in order to meet the water service requirements of a growing number of customers. The current major water system facilities consist of 8 imported water connections to Metropolitan (one untreated and seven treated water connections), 17 active wells, one 920 MG reservoir for untreated water, one 15 MGD water treatment plant, 13 treated water reservoirs with 38.75 MG of total storage capacity, permanent chlorination facilities at various sites, and 9 booster pump stations. Figure 5.1 depicts the location of the City’s major water supply, treatment and storage facilities mentioned above. The water system service area has elevations ranging from less than 60 feet to over 1,200 feet above sea level. In order to provide appropriate operation pressures for such a wide range of elevations, the water system is divided into 18 pressure zones. The lowest pressure zone operates at a static hydraulic grade line (HGL) elevation of 220 feet above sea level and the highest pressure zone having a static HGL elevation of 1,320 feet above sea level. The City's water distribution system is generally divided into two main geographic areas: the "Flatland Area" (i.e. 555 HGL elevation and below) and the "Hill and Canyon Area" (i.e. the 585 HGL elevation and above). The Flatland Area is approximately 22,500 acres, situated generally north and west of the Santa Ana River (SAR), and is almost entirely served by groundwater (with Metropolitan imported water supplemented, as necessary). The Hill and Canyon Area is approximately 9,060 acres, situated generally south and east of the SAR, and served primarily by imported water from Metropolitan.17 17 City of Anaheim 2010 Urban Water Management Plan. June 2011. H-45 41 55 3640 47 39 42 44 43 45 46 54 49 53 51 52 48 56 24-A 54 ALLEN McCOLLOCHPIPELINEWEST ORANGE COFEEDER ORANGE COUNTYFEEDER SECOND LOWERFEEDER EAST ORANGE COFEEDER NO.2 SANTIAGOLATERAL ORANGE COUNTYFEEDER SECOND LOWER FEEDER WEST ORANGE CO FEEDER EAST ORANGE COFEEDER NO.1 " " " " " " " " ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Cerritos Ave Ball Rd Orange Ave Chapman Ave Orangewood Ave Katella Ave We i r C a n y o n R d Fa i r m o n t B l v d Ke l l o g g D r La k e v i e w A v e Je f f e r s o n S t Tu s t i n A v e Mi l l e r S t Kr a e m e r B l v d Ha r b o r B l v d Ea s t S t Le m o n S t St a t e C o l l e g e B l v d Eu c l i d S t Lincoln Ave Crescent Ave La Palma Ave Orangethorpe Ave Be a c h B l v d Gi l b e r t S t Ma g n o l i a A v e Da l e A v e We s t e r n A v e Kn o t t S t Br o o k h u r s t S t Gy p s u m C a n y o n R d MWD-A4 MWD-A3 MWD-A5 MWD-A1 MWD-A2 MWD-A6 MWD-A7 MWD-A8 LA PALMA RESERVOIR LINDA VISTARESERVOIR LENAINFILTRATION PLANT WALNUT CANYONRESERVOIR AREA # 5 AREA # 6 AREA # 7 AREA # 4 AREA # 3 AREA # 2 AREA # 1 FULLERTON BUENA PARK PLACENTIA YORBA LINDA STANTON GARDEN GROVE ORANGE DATE: JULY 27, 2015City of Anaheim Water GIS 8N.T.S Figure 5.1 Anaheim Public Utilites Major Facilities & Service Area MWD MAINS ACTIVE WELLS AS OF JUNE 2013 MWD CONNECTIONS ! Legend AREA SERVED BY ANAHEIM ( AREA #6 & #7 ) ANAHEIM WATER SERVICE AREA BOUNDARY AREA NOT SERVICED BY ANAHEIM ( AREA #1 - #5 ) " H-46 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Section 5 5-13 March 2016 5.3.2 Past and Current Efforts Reliability is a measure of a water system's expected success in managing water shortages. The City has strategies to manage water demand with respect to frequency and magnitude of supply deficiencies. In 1991, the City adopted Municipal Code section 10.18, relating to water shortages. It consisted of three Water Shortage Plans that could be implemented during declared water shortages. This action was a result of the severe drought the City experienced initiating in 1987. On September 16, 2008, the City Council approved guidelines asking residents and businesses for voluntary reduction in water use. Plumbing repairs, sprinkler system adjustments, reduced landscape watering, runoff and evaporation management are some of the smart practices the City urges its customers to adopt. On April 14, 2009, the City Council amended the Municipal Code 10.18 through Ordinance No. 6138 in response to Metropolitan’s request to its member agencies to adopt more stringent conservation ordinances that would put into effect different levels of conservation related to Metropolitan’s Water Supply Allocation Plan levels. In response to DWR’s adoption of the State MWELO in July 2015, the City Council amended Chapters 10.19 and 18.46 of the Anaheim Municipal Code relating to landscape water efficiency through Ordinance No. 6355 adopted January 26, 2016. This ordinance and the guidelines that go along with it are included in Appendix Z. Collectively, the ordinance and guidelines should reduce landscape water usage on new and remodeled landscaping by approximately 25 percent based on DWR estimates. The City of Anaheim has had a successful track record in implementing water conservation programs. In response to prior voluntary calls for conservation and the new ordinance adopted in 2009, 2010/11 demands were reduced approximately 16 percent over the high of four years prior. And in response to the Governor’s recent call for a 25 percent statewide reduction and DWR’s target conservation set for Anaheim of 20 percent below demands of 2013, the City has exceeded their reduction target and through January 2016, has reduced water demands by a cumulative 22.6 percent, or 2.6 percent better than their target. It should be noted that DWR has preliminarily approved a reduction in Anaheim’s target water conservation goal of 20 percent less than 2013 demands by 7 percent to 13 percent. This reduction is pending final DWR approval and was negotiated on behalf of all OCWD member agencies in recognition of the significant new water supply provided by the GWRS project. Once this reduction is finalized, and assuming the City can maintain conservation levels at current levels, they should be on the order of 9 to 10 percent below their new target of 13 percent. These past and recent drought-related water demand reductions achieved by the City are illustrated in detail in Appendix A. These types of water reduction/conservation ordinances and programs are recommended by Metropolitan and serve as an effective tool to deal with future water reliability issues. The City’s Municipal Code 10.18 provides the City with the tools to reduce the City’s water demands if the needs arise in the future. For example, Section 10.18.080 of the H-47 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Section 5 5-14 March 2016 Municipal Code authorizes the City Council to prohibit specified water uses in the event of a Catastrophic Water Reduction Condition. Since 2004, OCWD, MWDOC, and participating producers have participated in Metropolitan’s Conjunctive Use Program (known as the Metropolitan Lang-Term Groundwater Storage Program). This program allows for the storage of Metropolitan water in the Orange County Groundwater Basin. The existing Metropolitan storage program provides for Metropolitan to store up to 66,000 AF of water in the Basin in exchange for Metropolitan’s contribution to improvements in Basin management facilities. These improvements included eight new groundwater production wells, improvements to the seawater intrusion barrier, and construction of the Diemer Bypass Pipeline. This water can then be withdrawn over a three-year period. OCWD, MWDOC, and Metropolitan have developed a successful and efficient groundwater replenishment program to increase storage in the Basin. The Groundwater Replenishment Program allows Metropolitan to sell groundwater replenishment water to OCWD and make direct deliveries to agency distribution systems in lieu of producing water from the Basin when surplus imported water is available. This program indirectly replenishes the Basin by avoiding pumping. In the in-lieu program, OCWD requests an agency to halt pumping from specified wells. The agency then takes replacement water through its import connections, which is purchased by OCWD from Metropolitan (through MWDOC). OCWD purchases the water at a reduced rate, and then bills the agency for the amount it would have had to pay for energy and the Replenishment Assessment (RA) if it had produced the water from its wells. The deferred local production results in water being left in local storage for future use. As previously stated, groundwater is currently the most reliable and least expensive water resource for the City. The Department has scheduled the drilling of one new well every three years. The new wells replace existing shallow and deteriorated wells and provide additional production capacity. Additional groundwater pumping capacity will add to the reliability of the system by: (1) meeting peak demands during the summer months; (2) providing a contingency for wells that are temporarily out of service; and (3) providing availability for any additional pumping requests from OCWD. Due to the geographic location of the City, groundwater production wells are scattered throughout the water distribution system in the Flatland Area. Typically, well capacity exceeds demand in the Flatland Area. In order to maximize the use of groundwater, the Department continues to investigate the feasibility of increasing booster station capacities. These booster stations would move additional groundwater from the Flatland Area (555 pressure zone and below) to the Hill and Canyon Area (585 pressure zone and above). The ability to supply the Hill and Canyon Area with additional groundwater above and beyond what the Hill and Canyon Area already receives will help ensure the Department's ability to minimize water supply peaking charges and increase water supply reliability. Additionally, in order to enhance reliability of the water system and minimize the risk of losing wells to contamination, the Department operates its own water quality laboratory H-48 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Section 5 5-15 March 2016 to test wells the City operates, in addition to the tests conducted by OCWD’s laboratories. The water quality laboratory conducts more than 30,000 tests annually and routinely files results with the California Department of Drinking Water (DDW, formerly Department of Public Health). Metropolitan and OCWD also monitor the Department’s imported and groundwater supplies, respectively. The Department consistently delivers high quality water that meets or surpasses all federal and state drinking water regulations. The City's long-term plans to assure a reliable water supply include, but are not limited to, the following: · Reduction of water demand through aggressive water use efficiency programs, with a goal to reduce demand by 15% by 2020, compared to 1993. · Groundwater production capacity and distribution ability to meet 100 percent of the water service area demands. · Cooperation with OCWD to maximize conservation activities throughout Orange County and increase groundwater recharge capabilities. As discussed earlier, the reliability of the City's water supply is currently dependent on the reliability of both groundwater and, to a lesser extent, imported water supplies, which are managed and delivered by OCWD and Metropolitan, respectively. 5.3.3 Huntington Beach Sea Water Desalination Facility As technology progresses, additional water supplies and facilities are being brought on line to further assure water supply reliability well into the future. One recent example is the proposal by Poseidon Resources, Inc. to build a 50-million- gallon-per-day (50 MGD) (56,000 AFY) seawater desalination project in Huntington Beach called the Huntington Beach Sea Water Desalination Facility. Poseidon Resources Corporation is working with local and state agencies to obtain the required permits to ensure proper safeguards to the community and environment. The Environmental Impact Report was certified in September 2005 by the Huntington Beach City Council. The City Council also approved the Coastal Development Plan, Conditional Use Permit, and Owner’s Participation Agreement for the facility in February 2006. In 2014 the California Coastal Commission issued a staff report on the project requiring a revised intake facility that Poseidon Resources indicated could render the project infeasible and pulled their application pending additional studies. In 2015, OCWD announced it would spearhead efforts to move this project forward and is currently working on options to purchase all the capacity and distribute it directly to agencies within its boundary as well as use a portion of the capacity for injection along its seawater barrier. Prior to OCWD’s involvement in the project, the City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department had signed a letter of intent regarding a potential water purchase agreement with Poseidon Resources. The letter sets forth certain non-binding understandings between the City and Poseidon relating to an interest in discussing the potential purchase H-49 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Section 5 5-16 March 2016 of desalinated water from the seawater desalination plant to be built by Poseidon at its site in Huntington Beach. Again, this is just one example of a new project and new technology ensuring water reliability into the future. Another example includes OCWD’s Groundwater Replenishment System discussed above. 5.4 Dry Year Reliability Comparison 5.4.1 Metropolitan Supplies and Demands As previously noted, the Anaheim Public Utilities Department is a direct member agency of Metropolitan. In its 2010 Regional UWMP (RUWMP), its 2010 Integrated Resources Plan Update and draft 2015 IRP Update18, Metropolitan chose the year 1977 as the single driest year since 1922 and the years 1990-1992 as the multiple driest years over that same period. These years were selected because they represent the timing of the least amount of available water resources from the SWP, a major source of Metropolitan’s supply. Metropolitan developed demand forecasts by first estimating total retail demands for its service area and then factoring out water savings attributed to conservation. Projections of local supplies then were derived using data on current and expected local supply programs and the IRP Local Resource Program Target. The resulting difference between total demands net of conservation and local supplies is the expected regional demands on Metropolitan supplies. These estimates are summarized by category in Table 5.2 for Average, Single Dry and Multiple Dry Year scenarios. More detailed information on Metropolitan’s forecasts and these tables can be found in their 2015 Draft RUWMP. In all scenarios shown on these tables, Demands on Metropolitan’s System include water for groundwater and reservoir replenishment. 18 Metropolitan develops Integrated Resource Plans (IRPs), which lay out how Metropolitan will secure and provide water to its customer base. These IRPs utilize hydrological and other data provided by DWR and are updated periodically through IRP Implementation Reports to reflect changing conditions. H-50 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Section 5 5-17 March 2016 Table 5.2 Metropolitan Regional Water Demands Average, Single Dry and Multiple Dry Years (Acre-Feet) 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Average Year Total Demands 5,219,000 5,393,000 5,533,000 5,663,000 5,793,000 Total Conservation 1,056,000 1,127,000 1,200,000 1,263,000 1,339,000 Total Local Supplies 2,578,000 2,631,000 2,657,000 2,674,000 2,689,000 Demands on Metropolitan's System 1,586,000 1,636,000 1,677,000 1,726,000 1,765,000 Single Dry Year Total Demands 5,234,000 5,409,000 5,549,000 5,679,000 5,808,000 Total Conservation 1,056,000 1,127,000 1,200,000 1,263,000 1,339,000 Total Local Supplies 2,447,000 2,497,000 2,523,000 2,538,000 2,550,000 Demands on Metropolitan's System 1,731,000 1,784,000 1,826,000 1,878,000 1,919,000 Multiple Dry Year Total Demands 5,199,000 5,450,000 5,601,000 5,732,000 5,865,000 Total Conservation 1,056,000 1,127,000 1,200,000 1,263,000 1,339,000 Total Local Supplies 2,416,000 2,487,000 2,511,000 2,535,000 2,550,000 Demands on Metropolitan's System 1,727,000 1,836,000 1,889,000 1,934,000 1,976,000 Source: Draft Metropolitan 2015 RUWMP All units are acre-feet, rounded to the nearest thousand. Growth projections used for Total Demands are based on SCAG 2012 Regional Transportation Plan and SANDAG Series 13 2050 Regional Growth Forecast. Total Conservation includes code-based, price effect and existing active savings through 2015; does not include future active conservation savings. 1990 is base year. Demands on Metropolitan's System includes consumptive use, reservoir and groundwater replenishment, and seawater barrier use. 5.4.2 Anaheim Public Utilities Department This section addresses demand and supply projections for the City including the Proposed Project for Average, Single Dry, and Multiple Dry Years. The City’s water demand in fiscal year 2014/15 was 62,046 AF. By the year 2039/40, the City’s projected water demand is projected to be 79,975 AFY, including 140 AFY for the Proposed Project (only 100 AFY is new demand as explained in Section 3) and 1,975 AFY of demand associated with increased intensification in the ACSP over and above that which was included in the City’s adopted 2010 UWMP. All demand values above include a 4.5 percent allowance for unaccounted-for or non-revenue water. H-51 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Section 5 5-18 March 2016 The City’s 2010 UWMP was used to project 2020 and future City-wide water demand based on future growth projections from that document. The 2020 demand of 72,400 AF from the 2010 UWMP should be conservative since existing 2015 demand was only 62,046 AF. Even if some of the demand reductions due to conservation rebound, demands should not increase over 10,000 AFY in the next five years. This apparent overstatement of demand is likely due to the success of the City’s water conservation programs. It is also a likely result of water customers utilizing less water in response to increased awareness of water conservation and also water rate increases. It should also be noted that the growth projections, and hence the water demand increases, include the proposed Mountain Park development. Past hydrologic data and their effect on historic water demand were considered to determine factors for single-dry and multiple-dry years, which is consistent with the City’s 2010 UWMP. The 2010 UWMP used a single-dry year increase of 8.7 percent from the normal water year based on fiscal year 2001/02 data, and for multiple-dry year demands (three-year period) the same 8.7 percent increase from the normal water year demand is utilized. These same percentage demand increases are utilized in this WSA. The OCWD Basin Production Percentage (BPP) is calculated by dividing groundwater basin pumping by total water demands. At the January 20, 2016 regular Board Meeting of the OCWD, the Executive Director of Engineering and Local Resources reviewed the BPP and RA estimates for FY 2016/17. He reviewed the current groundwater basin water level and stated the BPP is estimated to be 72 to 80 percent and the RA may fall within the range of $395 to $431 per AF. The average BPP for the past twenty years is approximately 73 percent. Based on OCWD’s Resolution 13-1-6 as discussed earlier, OCWD has established a goal of achieving and maintaining a 75 percent BPP. The City’s 2010 UWMP utilized a BPP of 65 percent for existing and future periods in normal and single dry year periods. For multiple dry years, a lower BPP of 62% was utilized. Importantly, and as has been stated above, the City can produce groundwater above the conservative assumptions included in the 2010 UWMP and, if necessary, above the BPP. If production above the BPP occurs, the producer pays the BEA pump tax which is a higher payment as compared to the RA that is paid by a producer for groundwater produced within the BPP limits. Imported water supply to the City as set forth in Tables 5.3 through 5.5 is set at the same fixed amount as in the similar projection tables from the City’s 2010 UWMP with additional supply needed due to the Proposed Project and the intensification within the ACSP project area coming from groundwater. As stated above and illustrated in Tables 5.3 through 5.5, the lower BPP assumption used in the 2010 UWMP more than makes up for the additional demands anticipated for the project. Table 5.3 presents future normal year water demands based on the 2010 UWMP and the additional demands for the project detailed in Section 3. Table 5.4 shows single dry water year supply and demand projections. Table 5.5 shows the multiple dry water years projected supply and demand projections. The demand data includes unaccounted-for- water or non-revenue water of 4.5 percent based on average water losses utilized in the City’s 2010 UWMP. H-52 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Section 5 5-19 March 2016 Table 5.3 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Normal Year (AFY) Water Sources 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Supply Normal Water Years Imported[1] 25,671 26,476 27,036 27,106 27,176 Recycled 255 255 255 255 255 Local (Groundwater)[2] 48,268 50,257 51,790 52,414 52,544 Groundwater/Total Supply 65.1% 65.3% 65.5% 65.7% 65.7% Total Supply 74,194 76,988 79,081 79,775 79,975 Demand[3] Total City Demand without Proposed Project[4] 73,600 75,900 77,500 77,700 77,900 Additional Proposed ACSP Project[5] 494 988 1,481 1,975 1,975 Additional Proposed Project Demand[6] 100 100 100 100 100 Total Demand 74,194 76,988 79,081 79,775 79,975 [1] From Table 3-13, City of Anaheim 2010 UWMP, with 2040 projected. [2] This figure represents the amount of Groundwater required to balance demand and supply assuming Imported water is equivalent to what was included in City's 2010 UWMP. [3] All Demands include 4.5% allowance for unaccounted-for or non-revenue water, consistent with City's 2010 UWMP. [4] This figure represents normal year demand based on the City of Anaheim's 2010 UWMP including the existing Project demands but not additional Proposed Project Demands. [5] This figure represents additional demand of based on increase in land use intensification as a result of the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Project that was not included in the 2010 UWMP. Total Project demand includes 2013 metered demand of 3,225 AFY including non-revenue water and including additional demand of 1,975 AFY equals 5,200 AFY (3,225 + 1,975) at buildout. [6] This figure represents the additional demand from the Proposed Project. H-53 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Section 5 5-20 March 2016 Table 5.4 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Single Dry Year (AFY) Water Sources 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Supply Single Dry Year Imported[1] 27,912 28,787 29,396 29,472 29,548 Recycled 255 255 255 255 255 Local (Groundwater)[2] 52,482 54,644 56,310 56,988 57,130 Groundwater/Total Supply 65.1% 65.3% 65.5% 65.7% 65.7% Total Supply 80,649 83,686 85,961 86,715 86,933 Demand[3] Total City Demand without Proposed Project[4] 80,003 82,503 84,243 84,460 84,677 Additional Proposed ACSP Project[5] 537 1,074 1,610 2,147 2,147 Additional Proposed Project Demand[6] 109 109 109 109 109 Total Demand 80,649 83,686 85,961 86,715 86,933 [1] From Table 3-14, City of Anaheim 2010 UWMP, with 2040 projected. [2] This figure represents the amount of Groundwater required to balance demand and supply assuming Imported water is equivalent to what was included in City's 2010 UWMP. [3] All Demands include 4.5% allowance for unaccounted-for or non-revenue water and are 8.7% higher than normal year water demand due to drier conditions, both consistent with City's 2010 UWMP. [4] This figure represents single dry year demand based on the City's 2010 UWMP including the existing Project demand but not Additional Proposed Project Demand. [5] This figure represents additional demand of based on increase in land use intensification as a result of the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Project that was not included in the 2010 UWMP. Total Project demand includes 2013 metered demand of 3,225 AFY including non-revenue water and including additional demand of 1,975 AFY equals 5,200 AFY (3,225 + 1,975) at buildout. Demand are then increased by 8.7% over normal year demand due to drier conditions, consistent with 2010 UWMP. [6] This figure represents the additional demand from the Proposed Project increased over normal year demand by 8.7% per above. H-54 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Section 5 5-21 March 2016 Table 5.5 City of Anaheim Projected Water Supply and Demand Multiple Dry Years (AFY) Water Sources 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Supply First Multiple Dry Year Imported[1] 30,304 31,254 31,915 31,998 32,074 Recycled 255 255 255 255 255 Local (Groundwater)[2] 50,090 52,177 53,791 54,462 54,604 Groundwater/Total Supply 62.1% 62.3% 62.6% 62.8% 62.8% Total Supply 80,649 83,686 85,961 86,715 86,933 Total Demand[3] 80,649 83,686 85,961 86,715 86,933 Supply Second Multiple Dry Year Imported[1] 30,304 31,254 31,915 31,998 32,074 Recycled 255 255 255 255 255 Local (Groundwater)[2] 49,975 52,054 53,663 54,327 54,604 Groundwater/Total Supply 62.1% 62.3% 62.5% 62.7% 62.8% Total Supply 80,534 83,563 85,833 86,580 86,933 Total Demand[3] 80,534 83,563 85,833 86,580 86,933 Supply Third Multiple Dry Year Imported[1] 30,304 31,254 31,915 31,998 32,074 Recycled 255 255 255 255 255 Local (Groundwater)[2] 49,975 52,054 53,663 54,327 54,604 Groundwater/Total Supply 62.1% 62.3% 62.5% 62.7% 62.8% Total Supply 80,534 83,563 85,833 86,580 86,933 Total Demand[3] 80,534 83,563 85,833 86,580 86,933 [1] From Table 3-15, City of Anaheim 2010 UWMP, with 2040 projected. [2] This figure represents the amount of Groundwater required to balance demand and supply assuming Imported water is equivalent to what was included in City's 2010 UWMP. [3] All Demands include 4.5% allowance for unaccounted-for or non-revenue water and are 8.7% higher than normal year water demand due to drier conditions, both consistent with City's 2010 UWMP. These figures include Total Dry Year Demand, including Proposed Additional Demand from Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan plus Proposed Project Demand from Table 5.4. It should be noted that imported water supplies are increased in single and multiple dry years consistent with Metropolitan’s RUWMP and IRP Reports due to the fact that in dry years Metropolitan draws water from surface and groundwater storage programs. These withdrawals from storage are illustrated, numerically, in both Metropolitan’s 2010 RUWMP and IRP. For all scenarios in Tables 5.3 through 5.5 the BPP for groundwater production is shown and the highest rate is 66 percent, which leaves a lot of room between there and the 75 percent goal adopted by the OCWD Board of Directors in Resolution 13-1-6. H-55 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Section 5 5-22 March 2016 Based on the demand and supply analysis shown in the following tables, this WSA does not envision any significant impacts with respect to water resources resulting from approval of the Proposed Project; thus no significant impacts were identified that require mitigation. H-56 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Section 6 March 2016 6-1 6.0 CONCLUSION Water Demand The City’s current (2014/15 fiscal year) water demand is approximately 62,046 AFY. The 20-year planning period from the time of this WSA projects City water demand by 2039/40 to be approximately 79,975 AFY. This projection is consistent with the City’s 2010 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) water demand increase projections to include overall City growth. The demand projections from the 2010 UWMP were utilized even though existing 2015 demand is 14 percent below the 72,400 AFY projected for 2015 in the UWMP and the demand projected for 2020 is 15 percent higher than the actual 2015 demand. This demonstrates the conservative nature of these projections, since it is not likely water demand will increase by 15 percent in the next five years. The City’s 2010 UWMP included water demands for the existing hotel on the Proposed Project site. The Proposed Project would increase this demand by approximately 100 AFY, including an allowance for non-revenue water. Because the ACSP WSA was prepared and adopted after the 2010 UWMP the increased demands from intensification in that area is also included in this WSA’s demand projections. While groundwater supply is expected to remain relatively stable throughout the forecast period, the development phasing plan also allows for the potential to have water demands met from sources that are currently being planned, developed and implemented within the region, including additional conservation programs, recycled water, and desalted water. Supply Projections Analysis of water supply projections for the City demonstrates that projected supplies will meet demands through fiscal year 2040. These projections consider water development programs and projects as well as water conservation, as described in the City’s 2010 UWMP and Section 5 of this WSA. The City’s groundwater and imported water supplies are anticipated to remain stable based on studies and reports from OCWD and Metropolitan, respectively. The City’s long-term water supply projection is based on up to 66 percent groundwater, based on an expected average long-term Basin Production Percentage (BPP), and its share of imported water confirmed reliable by Metropolitan. Since preparation of the City’s 2010 UWMP, OCWD’s Board of Directors adopted Resolution No. 13-1-6 setting a goal of achieving and maintaining a 75 percent BPP. The buffer between the maximum BPP utilized in this WSA and the 75 percent BPP goal provides added reliability to Anaheim’s water supply. Analysis of normal, single-dry, and multiple-dry year scenarios demonstrates the City’s ability to meet or exceed demand during the 20-year planning period. H-57 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Section 6 6-2 March 2016 Additionally, if extraordinary circumstances require, the City can meet its water demand by (1) increasing production of groundwater beyond the BPP up to the basin safe yield, and/or (2) decreasing demand through water conservation measures. Reliability of future water supplies to the region will be ensured through continued implementation of the OCWD Groundwater Management Plan, OCWD’s Long Term Facilities Plan, local agency programs, and the combined efforts and programs among member and cooperative agencies of Metropolitan. These agencies include all water wholesalers and retailers, the Orange County Sanitation District, the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board, and the Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority. These programs are described in the City’s 2010 UWMP and supplemented in Section 5 of this water supply assessment. Collectively, the information included in this water supply assessment identifies a sufficient and reliable water supply for the City, now and into the future, including a sufficient water supply for the Proposed Project demands plus the proposed intensification of land use within the ACSP. These supplies are also sufficient to provide (and account) for growth projected in the 2010 UWMP. This WSA does not envision any significant impacts with respect to water resources resulting from approval of the Proposed Project. H-58 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Section 7 March 2016 7-1 7.0 REFERENCES The following documents were used, in conjunction with discussions with the City of Anaheim, in preparing this water supply assessment: City of Anaheim, Public Utilities Department, 2010 Urban Water Management Plan, June 2011. Available: http://www.anaheim.net/articlenew2222.asp?id=4400 Department of Water Resources (DWR), Bulletin 118-1 Basin Description for Coastal Plain of Orange County Groundwater Basin Number 8-1, September 5, 2001. DWR, The State Water Project Draft Delivery Reliability Report, December 2013. DWR, The State Water Project Delivery Capability Report, July 2015. Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD), Water Revenue Refunding Bonds, 2008 Series C, Appendix A, July 2008. Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD), Regional Urban Water Management Plan, November 2010. Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD), Draft Regional Urban Water Management Plan, February 2016. Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD), Integrated Water Resources Plan 2010 Update, October 2010. Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD), Draft Integrated Water Resources Plan 2015 Update, January 2016. Orange County Water District (OCWD), Orange County Water District 2020 Master Plan Report, 2000. Orange County Water District (OCWD), Engineer’s Report, 2013/14, February 18, 2015. Orange County Water District (OCWD), Resolution No. 13-1-6 Stating the District’s Goal to Develop the Necessary Supplies and Facilities to Achieve and Maintain a 75% Basin Production Percentage. Orange County Water District Board, January 16, 2013. Orange County Water District (OCWD), The OCWD Act. Orange County Water District (OCWD), OCWD v. City of Chino, et al, (Civ. Case No. 117628), Judgment and Settlement Documents. Orange County Water District (OCWD), Groundwater Management Plan Update 2009, July 9, 2009. University of California Cooperative Extension, Water Use Classification of Landscape Species, August 2000. H-59 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Appendix APPENDIX A CITY OF ANAHEIM HISTORICAL WATER USE AND CONSERVATION SUPPORT H-60 40 , 0 0 0 50 , 0 0 0 60 , 0 0 0 70 , 0 0 0 80 , 0 0 0 90 , 0 0 0 19 9 1 1 9 9 2 1 9 9 3 1 9 9 4 1 9 9 5 1 9 9 6 1 9 9 7 1 9 9 8 1 9 9 9 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 2 2 0 0 3 2 0 0 4 2 0 0 5 2 0 0 6 2 0 0 7 2 0 0 8 2 0 0 9 2 0 1 0 2 0 1 1 2 0 1 2 2 0 1 3 2 0 1 4 2 0 1 5 G r o s s W a t e r U s e ( A F Y ) Wa t e r U s e Y e a r H- 6 1 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Appendix APPENDIX B CITY OF ANAHEIM RESOLUTION NO. 2014-151 H-62 H-63 H-64 H-65 H-66 1700 South Harbor Blvd. Hotel WSA Appendix APPENDIX C CITY OF ANAHEIM ORDINANCE NO. 6355 AND 2016 LANDSCAPE WATER EFFICIENCY GUIDELINES H-67 ORDINANCE NO. 6355 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING CHAPTERS' 10.19 AND 18.46 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO LANDSCAPE WATER EFFICIENCY AND DETERMINING THAT THIS ORDINANCE IS EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO SECTION 15307 OF TITLE 14 OF THE CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS. WHEREAS, California Constitution article X, section 2 and California Water Code section 100 provide that because of conditions prevailing in the state of California (the "State"), it is the declared policy of the State that the general welfare requires that the water resources of the State shall be put to beneficial use to the fullest extent of which they are capable, the waste or unreasonable use of water shall be prevented, and the conservation of such waters is to be exercised with a view to the reasonable and beneficial use thereof in the interest of the people and the public welfare; and WHEREAS, pursuant to California Water Code section 106, it is the declared policy of the State that the use of water for domestic use is the highest use of water and that the next highest use is for irrigation; and WHEREAS, on December 8,2009, in response to State-mandated landscape water efficiency requirements, the Anaheim City Council adopted Ordinance No. 6160 amending Chapter 10.19 of Title 10 of the Anaheim Municipal Code and, the following year, the Anaheim adopted the Guidelines for Implementation of the Landscape Water Efficiency Ordinance (the "Guidelines"); and WHEREAS, on April 1, 2015, Governor Brown issued Executive Order B-29-I5 finding that conditions of extreme peril to the safety of persons and property continue to exist in California due to water shortage and drought conditions; and WHEREAS, Executive Order B-29-I5 directed the State Water Resources Control Board ("State Water Board") to update the State Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance ("State Model Ordinance") to increase water efficiency standards for new and existing landscapes through more efficient irrigation systems, on site storm water capture, and by limiting the portion of landscapes that can be covered in turf; and WHEREAS, the State Water Board completed its update of the State Model Ordinance, and the California Water Commission approved the update on July 15, 2015; and WHEREAS, local agencies have the option to adopt the State Model Ordinance or a local or regional ordinance which must be at least as effective in conserving water as the model ordinance; and H-68 WHEREAS, in response to Executive Order B-29-15 and the adoption ofthe State Model Ordinance, a stakeholder group of Orange County water agencies was fonned to develop a regional landscape water efficiency ordinance and guidelines ("OC Model"); and WHEREAS, the Anaheim City Council finds that landscape design, installation, maintenance, and management can and should be water efficient and desires to incorporate provisions of the OC Model into Chapter 10.19 of and the Guidelines; and WHEREAS, the Anaheim City Council hereby finds that Orange County regional approach is the best approach for Anaheim given: (i) Orange County has an established, large reclaimed water infrastructure system; (ii) Current local design practices in new landscapes strive to achieve the intent of the State Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance water use goals; and (iii) all water services within the City are metered and billed based on volume of use; and WHEREAS, Anaheim, as the local water purveyor, is implementing enforcement of water waste prohibitions for all existing metered landscaped areas within its jurisdiction; and WHEREAS, the Anaheim City Council detennines that the proposed revisions to Chapter 10.19 and the Guidelines (i) are "at least as effective as" in conserving water as the State Model Ordinance; (ii) minimize the complexity and cost of compliance; and (iii) provide consistency between local jurisdictions. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. RECITALS. The Anaheim City Council hereby finds and detennines that the above recitals are true and correct and incorporated herein. SECTION 2. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW. The Anaheim City Council hereby detennines that this ordinance is exempt from review under the CEQA, because pursuant to Section 15307 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, this ordinance is covered by the CEQA categorical exemption for actions taken to assure the maintenance, restoration, enhancement, or protection of a natural resource where the regulatory process involves procedures for protection of the environment. The adoption of this ordinance will result in the enhancement and protection of water resources in Anaheim, and will not result in cumulative adverse environment impacts. It is therefore exempt from the provisions of CEQA. The Anaheim City Council hereby directs the City Manager or designee to prepare and file a Notice of Exemption as soon as possible following adoption of this ordinance. SECTION 3. LANDSCAPE WATER EFFICIENCY That Chapter 10.19 of Title 10 of the Anaheim Municipal Code, is and shall be renamed and amended in its entirety to read as follows: 2 H-69 "Chapter 10.19 -LANDSCAPE WATER EFFICIENCY Sections: 10.19.010 10.19.020 10.19.030 10.19.040 10.19.050 10.19.060 Purpose. Applicability . Defmitions. Implementation Procedures for Landscape Documentation Packages Landscape Water Use Standards. Guidelines. 10.19.010 PURPOSE. The purpose of this Chapter is to establish an alternative ordinance acceptable under Executive Order B-29-15 as being at least as effective as the State Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance in conserving water within the City. This Chapter has the following additional purposes: .010 Promote the benefits of consistent landscape ordinances with neighboring local and regional agencies; .020 Promote the values and benefits of landscapes while recognizing the need to invest in water and other resources as efficiently as possible; .030 Establish a structure for planning, designing, installing, and maintammg and managing water efficient landscapes in New Construction and Rehabilitated Landscape projects; .040 Establish provisions for water management practices and water waste prevention for existing landscapes; .050 Use water efficiently without waste by setting a Maximum Applied Water Allowance as an upper limit for water use and reduce water use to the lowest practical amount; and .060 Encourage the use of economic incentives that promote the efficient use of water, such as implementing conservation pricing. 10.19.020 APPLICABILITY . . 010 This Chapter and the Guidelines shall apply to the following Landscape Projects: .01 New Landscape Projects with an Aggregate Landscape Area equal to or greater than 500 square feet, requiring a building or landscape Permit, plan check or design reVIew; 3 H-70 .02 Rehabilitated Landscape Projects with an Aggregate Landscape Area equal to or greater than 2,500 square feet, requiring a building or landscape Pennit, plan check or design reVIew; .03 New or Rehabilitated Landscape Projects with an Aggregate Landscape Area of 2,500 square feet or less may comply with the performance requirements of this Chapter and the Guidelines or conform to the prescriptive measures contained in Appendix A of the Guidelines; and .04 New or Rehabilitated Landscape Projects using treated or untreated graywater or rainwater capture on site, any lot or parcels within the project that has less than 2,500 square feet of landscape area and meets the lot or parcel's landscape water requirement (Estimated Total Water Use) entirely with the treated or untreated graywater or through stored rainwater capture on site is subject only to the irrigation system requirements of Appendix A of the Guidelines . . 020 Section 10.19.050 of this Chapter shall apply to all Landscape Areas, whether installed prior to or after January 1,2010 . . 030 This Chapter does not apply to: .01 Registered local, state, or federal historical sites; .02 Ecological Restoration Projects that do not require a permanent irrigation system; .03 Mined-land Reclamation Projects that do not require a permanent irrigation system; or .04 Plant collections, as part of botanical gardens and arboretums open to the public . . 040 As for cemetery Landscape Projects, Sections 2.8, 2.9, and Appendix C of the Guidelines shall apply to new cemetery landscape installations and Sections 2.8, 2.9, and 3 of the Guidelines shall apply to cemetery landscape rehabilitation projects. 10.19.030 DEFINITIONS. Unless specifically defined in this section, words or phrases used in this chapter shall be interpreted so as to give them the meaning they have in common usage and to give this Chapter the most reasonable application . . 010 "Aggregate Landscape Area" pertains to the areas undergoing development as one project or for production home neighborhoods or other situations where multiple parcels are undergoing development as one project, but will eventually be individually owned. 4 H-71 .020 "City" means City of Anaheim . . 030 "Ecological Restoration Project" means a project where the site is intentionally altered to establish a defined, indigenous, historic ecosystem . . 040 "Estimated Applied Water Use" means the average annual total amount of water estimated to be necessary to keep plants in a healthy state, calculated as provided in the Guidelines. It is based on the Reference Evapotranspiration rate, the size of the landscape area, Plant Water Use Factors, and the relative Irrigation Efficiency of the irrigation system . . 050 "Estimated Total Water Use" shall be calculated in accordance with the Guidelines . . 060 "ET Adjustment Factor" or "ET AF" is equal to the Plant Factor divided by the Irrigation Efficiency factor for a Landscape Project, as described in the Guidelines. The ETAF is calculated in the context of local Reference Evapotranspiration, using site-specific Plant Factors and Irrigation Efficiency factors that influence the amount of water that needs to be applied to the specific Landscape Area. These factors are set forth in the Guidelines. The ET AF for a Special Landscape Area shall be as set forth in the Guidelines . . 070 "Guidelines" refers to the Guidelines for Implementation of the City of Anaheim Landscape Water Efficiency Ordinance which describes procedures, calculations, and requirements for Landscape Projects subject to this Chapter. .080 "Hardscapes" means any durable material or feature (Pervious and Non-pervious) installed in or around a Landscaped Area, such as pavements or walls. Pools and other Water Features are considered part of the Landscaped Area and not considered Hardscapes for purposes of this Chapter . . 090 "Irrigation Efficiency" means the measurement of the amount of water beneficially used divided by the amount of water applied as set forth in the Guidelines. Irrigation Efficiency is derived from measurements and estimates of irrigation system characteristics and management practices . . 100 "Landscaped Area" means all the planting areas, Turf areas, and Water Features in a landscape design plan subject to the Maximum Applied Water Allowance and Estimated Applied Water Use calculations. The Landscaped Area does not include footprints of buildings or structures, sidewalks, driveways, parking lots, decks, patios, gravel or stone walks, other Pervious or Non-pervious Hardscapes, and other non-irrigated areas designated for non-development (e.g., open spaces and existing native vegetation) . . 110 "Landscape Documentation Package" means the documents required to be provided to the City for review and approval of landscape design projects, as described in the Guidelines. 5 H-72 .120 "Landscape Project" means total area of landscape in a project, as provided in the definition of "Landscape Area," meeting the requirements under Subsection .10 of Section 10.19.020 ofthis Chapter . . 13 0 "Maximum Applied Water Allowance" or "MA W A" means the upper limit of annual applied water for the established Landscaped Area as set forth in the Guidelines . . 140 "Mined-land Reclamation Projects" means any surface mining operation with a reclamation plan approved in accordance with the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975 . . 150 "New Construction" means a new building with a landscape or other new landscape such as a park, playground, or greenbelt without an associated building . . 160 "Non-pervious" means any surface or natural material that does not allow for the passage of water through the material and into the underlying soil. .170 "Pervious" means any surface or material that allows the passage of water through the material and into the underlying soil. .180 "Permit" means an authorizing document issued by City or local agencies with jurisdiction for New Construction or Rehabilitated Landscape . .190 "Plant Factor" or "Plant Water Use Factor" is a factor, when multiplied by ETo, that estimates the amount of water needed by plants as further set forth in the Guidelines . .200 "Recycled Water" or "Reclaimed Water" means treated or recycled waste water of a quality suitable for non-potable uses such as landscape irrigation and Water Features. This water is not intended for human consumption . . 210 "Reference Evapotranspiration" or "ETo" means a standard measurement of environmental parameters which affect the water use of plants. ETo is given expressed in inches per day, month, or year as represented in the Guidelines, and is an estimate of the evapotranspiration of a large field of four-to seven-inch tall, cool-season grass that is well watered. Reference Evapotranspiration is used as the basis of determining the Maximum Applied Water Allowances . . 220 "Rehabilitated Landscape" means any re-Iandscaping project that meets the applicable criteria of Subsection .010 of Section 10.19.020 of this Chapter, where the modified Landscape Area is greater than 2,500 square feet. .230 "Special Landscape Area" means an area of the landscape dedicated solely to edible plants such as orchards and vegetable gardens, areas irrigated with Recycled Water, Water Features using Recycled Water, and recreational areas dedicated to active play such as parks, sports fields, golf courses, and where Turf provides a playing surface . . 240 "Turf' means a ground cover surface of mowed grass. 6 H-73 .250 "Water Feature" means a design element where open water performs an aesthetic or recreational function. Water Features include ponds, lakes, waterfalls, fountains, artificial streams, spas, and swimming pools (where water is artificially supplied). The surface area of Water Features is included in the high water use hydrozone of the Landscaped Area. Constructed wetlands used for on-site wastewater treatment, habitat protection or storm water best management practices that are not irrigated and used solely for water treatment or storm water retention are not Water Features and, therefore, are not subj ect to the water budget calculation. 10.19.040 IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURES FOR LANDSCAPE DOCUMENTATION PACKAGES . . 010 Prior to installation, a Landscape Documentation Package shall be submitted to the City for review and approval of all Landscape Projects subject to the provisions of this Chapter. Any Landscape Documentation Package submitted to the City shall comply with the provisions of the Guidelines. 0.20 Except as expressly stated otherwise, the Landscape Documentation Package shall include a certification by a professional appropriately licensed in the State of California stating that the landscape design and water use calculations have been prepared by or under the supervision of the licensed professional and are certified to be in compliance with the provisions of this Chapter and the Guidelines. The following requirements shall also apply: .01 Landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the City for review and approval with appropriate water use calculations . . 02 Water use calculations shall be consistent with calculations contained in the Guidelines and shall be provided to the City, as appropriate, under procedures determined by the City. .03 Verification of compliance of the landscape installation with the approved plans shall be obtained through a completed prescriptive compliance form and/or a Landscape Installation Certificate of Completion as provided in the Guidelines. 10.19.050 LANDSCAPE WATER USE STANDARDS. .010 For applicable landscape installation or Rehabilitation Landscape projects subject to Subsection .010 of Section 10.19.010, the Estimated Applied Water Use allowed for the Landscape Area shall not exceed the MAW A calculated using the appropriate ET Adjustment Factor; or the design of the Landscape Area shall otherwise be shown to be equivalently water- efficient in a manner acceptable to the City; as provided in the Guidelines . . 020 Irrigation of all Landscape Areas shall be conducted in a manner conforming to the rules and requirements, and shall be subject to penalties and incentives for water conservation and water waste prevention as determined and implemented by the City. 7 H-74 10.19.060 GUIDELINES . . 010 The Public Utilities General Manager is authorized and directed to prepare, adopt, promulgate, and amend the Guidelines as well as to take such actions as are necessary to establish and implement them. Any such Guidelines as well as any actions taken shall be consistent with this Chapter and State law . . 020 The Guidelines shall describe procedures, calculations, and requirements for Landscape Projects subject to this Chapter. The Guidelines shall apply to all Landscape Projects in Subsections .010, .020, and .040 of Section 10.19.020 ofthis Chapter. .030 The Guidelines shall be available in the office of the City Clerk." SECTION 4. That new Subsection .050 is hereby added to Section 18.46.020 (Applicability) of Chapter 18.46 (Landscaping and Screening) of Title 18 (Zoning) of the Anaheim Municipal Code, to read in full as follows: ".050 The requirements of this chapter shall not apply to those projects covered by Chapter 1 0.19 (Landscape Water Efficiency) of Title 1 0 of the Anaheim Municipal Code to the extent that the requirements of this chapter conflict with those in Chapter 10.19." SECTIONS. This ordinance rescinds Resolution 2010-112 from the effective date of this ordinance. SECTION 6. SEVERABILITY. The Anaheim City Council hereby declares that should any section, paragraph, sentence, phrase, term or word of this ordinance be declared for any reason to be invalid, it is the intent of the Anaheim City Council that it would have adopted all other portions of this ordinance independent of the elimination herefrom of any such portion as may be declared invalid. If any section, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. The Anaheim City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this ordinance, and each section, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause and phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that anyone (or more) section, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase had been declared invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION 7. CERTIFICATION. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage of this ordinance and shall cause the same to be printed once within fifteen (15) days after its adoption in the Anaheim Bulletin, a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City of Anaheim. 8 H-75 SECTION 8. EFFECTIVE DATE This ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days from and after its adoption by the City Council. 9 H-76 GUIDELINES FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM LANDSCAPE WATER EFFICIENCY ORDINANCE Effective Date: February 1, 2016 H-78 H-79 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page No. 1. Purpose and Applicability ...................................................................................... 1  1.1 Purpose ....................................................................................................... 1  1.2 Applicability .............................................................................................. 2  2. Submittal Requirements for New Landscape Installations or Landscape Rehabilitation Projects ........................................................................................... 3  2.1 Elements of the Landscape Documentation Package ................................ 3  2.2 Water Efficient Landscape Calculations and Alternatives ........................ 4  2.3 Soil and Stormwater Management ............................................................. 7  2.4 Landscape Design Plan .............................................................................. 9  2.5 Irrigation Design Plan .............................................................................. 12  2.6 Grading Design Plan ................................................................................ 17  2.7 Certification of Completion ..................................................................... 18  2.8 Post-Installation Irrigation Scheduling .................................................... 19  2.9 Post-Installation Landscape and Irrigation Maintenance ......................... 19  3. Provisions for Existing Landscapes ..................................................................... 19  4. Public Education .................................................................................................. 20  Appendix A: Prescriptive Compliance Option ............................................................ 21  Appendix B: Certification of Landscape Design ........................................................ 23  Appendix C: Water Efficient Landscape Worksheet .................................................. 24  Appendix D: Landscape Installation Certificate of Completion ................................. 27  Appendix E: Definitions .............................................................................................. 29  Appendix F: Irrigation Plan Checklist ......................................................................... 35  Appendix G: Inspection Affidavit ............................................................................... 36  H-80 1 1. Purpose and Applicability 1.1 Purpose (A) The primary purpose of these Guidelines is to provide procedural and design guidance for project applicants proposing landscape installation or rehabilitation projects that are subject to the requirements of the Chapter 10.19 of Title 10 Anaheim Municipal Code (Landscape Water Efficiency Ordinance). This document is also intended for use and reference by City staff in reviewing and approving designs and verifying compliance with the Landscape Water Efficiency Ordinance. The general purpose of the Landscape Water Efficiency Ordinance is to promote the design, installation, and maintenance of landscaping in a manner that conserves regional water resources by ensuring that landscaping projects are not unduly water-needy and that irrigation systems are appropriately designed and installed to minimize water waste. (B) Other regulations affecting landscape design and maintenance practices are potentially applicable and should be consulted for additional requirements. These regulations include but may not be limited to: (1) State of California Assembly Bill 1881; (2) Chapter 10.09 of Title 10 of the Anaheim Municipal Code (National Pollution Discharge Elimination System); (3) Chapter 16.08 of Title 16 of the Anaheim Municipal Code (California Fire Code ); (4) City and applicable local regulations for fuel modification in Landscapes; (5) Chapter 10.18 of Title 10 of the Anaheim Municipal Code (Water Conservation and Water Shortage Rules and Regulations); (6) Anaheim Zoning Code (Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code) including, but not limited to Chapter 18.46 (Landscaping and Screening); (7) Chapter 15.03 of Title 15 of the Anaheim Municipal Code (Building Standards Codes and Administrative Provisions Pertaining to Building and Construction) (8) Applicable Specific Plans, Master Plans, General Plan, or similar land use and planning documents approved by the City; and (9) Any conditions of approval for a specific project. H-81 2 1.2 Applicability (A) The Landscape Water Efficiency Ordinance and these Guidelines apply to all of the following landscape projects: (1) New landscape projects with an aggregate landscape area equal to or greater than 500 square feet, requiring a building or landscape permit, plan check or design review; (2) Rehabilitated landscape projects with an aggregate landscape area equal to or greater than 2,500 square feet, requiring a building or landscape permit, plan check or design review; (3) New or rehabilitated landscape projects with an aggregate landscape area of 2,500 square feet or less may comply with the performance requirements of these Guidelines or conform to the prescriptive measures contained in Appendix A ; (4) New or rehabilitated projects using treated or untreated graywater or rainwater capture on site, any lot or parcels within the project that has less than 2,500 square feet of landscape area and meets the lot or parcel’s landscape water requirement (Estimated Total Water Use) entirely with the treated or untreated graywater or though stored rainwater capture on site is subject only to Appendix A Section (5). (B) The requirements of the Guidelines may be partially or wholly waived, at the discretion of the Public Utilities General Manager or designee, for landscape rehabilitation projects that are limited to replacement plantings with equal or lower water needs and where the irrigation system is found to be designed, operable and programmed consistent with minimizing water waste in accordance with local water purveyor regulations. (C) Unless otherwise determined by the Anaheim City Council, the Landscape Water Efficiency Ordinance and these Guidelines do not apply to: (1) Registered local, state, or federal historical sites; (2) Ecological restoration projects that do not require a permanent irrigation system; (3) Mined-land reclamation projects that do not require a permanent irrigation system; or (4) Plant collections, as part of botanical gardens, and arboretums open to the public. H-82 3 2. Submittal Requirements for New Landscape Installations or Landscape Rehabilitation Projects (A) A Landscape Documentation Package is required to be completed by the project applicant prior to the issuance of permits for projects subject to the Landscape Water Efficiency Ordinance and as specifically set forth in Section 1.2 of the Guidelines. The Landscape Documentation Package shall be submitted to: (1) The Public Works Department, Development Services Section, for projects requiring grading permits or right of way construction permits. (2) The Planning Department, Building Division, for projects requiring applicable building permits or swimming pool permits. (3) The Public Utilities Department, Water Services Division, for projects requiring water meters. 2.1 Elements of the Landscape Documentation Package (A) A Landscape Documentation Package is required to be submitted by the project applicant for review and approval prior to the issuance of ministerial permits for landscape or water features by the City, and prior to start of construction. Unless otherwise directed by City staff, the Landscape Documentation Package shall include the following elements either on plan sheets or supplemental pages as directed by City staff: (1) Project Information, including, but not limited to, the following: (a) Date; (b) Project name; (c) Project address, parcel, and/or lot number(s); (d) Total landscape area (square feet) and rehabilitated landscape area (if applicable); (e) Project type (e.g., new, rehabilitated, public, private, cemetery, homeowner-installed); (f) Water supply type (e.g., potable or recycled). (g) Checklist or index of all documents in the Landscape Documentation Package; (h) Project contacts, including contact information for the project applicant and property owner; H-83 4 (i) Certification of Design in accordance with Exhibit A of these Guidelines that includes a landscape professional’s professional stamp, as applicable, signature, contact information (including email and telephone number), license number, and date, certifying the statement that “The design of this project complies with the requirements of the Landscape Water Efficiency Ordinance” and shall bear the signature of the landscape professional as required by law; and (j) Any other information the City deems relevant for determining whether the landscape project complies with the Landscape Water Efficiency Ordinance and these Guidelines. (2) Maximum Applied Water Allowance (MAWA) and Estimated Applied Water Use (EAWU) expressed as annual totals including, but not limited to, the following: (a) Water Efficiency Landscape Worksheet for the landscape project; (b) Hydrozone information table for the landscape project; and (c) Water budget calculations for the landscape project. (3) A soil management report or specifications, or specification provision requiring soil testing and amendment recommendations and implementation to be accomplished during construction of the landscape project. (4) A landscape design plan for the landscape project. (5) An irrigation design plan for the landscape project. (6) A grading design plan, unless grading information is included in the landscape design plan for the landscape project or unless the landscape project is limited to replacement planting and/or irrigation to rehabilitate an existing landscape area. [Note: Authority Cited: Section 65595, Government Code. Reference: Section 65596, Government Code.] 2.2 Water Efficiency Landscape Calculations and Alternatives (A) The project applicant shall provide the calculated Maximum Applied Water Allowance (MAWA) and Estimated Applied Water Use (EAWU) for the landscape area as part of the Landscape Documentation Package submittal to the City. The MAWA and EAWU shall be calculated based on completing the Water Efficiency Landscape Worksheets (in accordance with the sample worksheets in Appendix C) which contain information on the plant factor, irrigation method, irrigation efficiency and area associated with each hydrozone. Calculations are H-84 5 then made to show that the evapotranspiration adjustment factor (ETAF) for the landscape project does not exceed a factor of 0.55 for residential areas and 0.45 for non-residential areas, exclusive of Special Landscape Areas. The ETAF for a landscape project is based on the plant factors and irrigation methods selected. The Maximum Applied Water Allowance is calculated based on the maximum ETAF allowed (0.55 for residential areas and 0.45 for non-residential areas) and expressed as annual gallons required. The EAWU is calculated based on the plants used and irrigation method selected for the landscape design. (B) The EAWU allowable for the landscape area shall not exceed the MAWA. The MAWA shall be calculated using an evapotranspiration adjustment factor (ETAF) of 0.55 for residential areas and 0.45 for non-residential areas, except for the portion of the MAWA applicable to any Special Landscape Areas within the landscape project, which shall be calculated using an ETAF of 1.0. Where the design of the landscape area can otherwise be shown to be equivalently water- efficient, the project applicant may submit alternative or abbreviated information supporting the demonstration that the annual EAWU is less than the MAWA, at the discretion of and for the review and approval of the City. (C) Water budget calculations shall adhere to the following requirements: (1) The MAWA shall be calculated using the Water Efficiency Landscape Worksheets and equation presented in Appendix C on page B-1. The example calculation on page B-1 is a hypothetical example to demonstrate proper use of the equation. (2) The EAWU shall be calculated using the Water Efficiency Landscape Worksheet and equations presented in Appendix C. (3) For the calculation of the MAWA and EAWU, a project applicant shall use the ETo values from the Reference Evapotranspiration Table in Appendix C. (4) For calculation of the EAWU, the plant water use factor shall be determined as appropriate to the project location from the Water Use Efficiency of Landscape Species (WUCOLS) Species Evaluation List or from horticultural researchers with academic institutions or professional associations as approved by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR). The plant factor ranges from 0 to 0.1 for very low water use plants, 0.1 to 0.3 for low water use plants, 0.4 to 0.6 for moderate water use plants, and 0.7 to 1.0 for high water use plants. (5) For calculating the EAWU, the plant water use factor shall be determined for each valve hydrozone based on the highest-water-use plant species within the zone. The plant factor for each hydrozone may be required to be further refined as a “landscape coefficient,” according to protocols defined in detail in the WUCOLS document, to reflect planting density and H-85 6 microclimate effects on water need at the option of the project applicant or the City. (6) For calculation of the EAWU, the area of a water feature shall be defined as a high water use hydrozone with a plant factor of 1.0. (7) For calculation of the EAWU, a temporarily irrigated hydrozone area, such as an area of highly drought-tolerant native plants that are not intended to be irrigated after they are fully established, shall be defined as a very low water use hydrozone with a plant factor of 0.1. (8) For calculation of the MAWA, the ETAF for Special Landscape Areas (SLA) shall be set at 1.0. For calculation of the EAWU, the ETAF for SLA shall be calculated as the SLA plant factor divided by the SLA irrigation efficiency factor. (9) Irrigation efficiency (IE) of the irrigation heads used within each hydrozone shall be assumed to be as follows, unless otherwise indicated by the irrigation equipment manufacturer’s specifications or demonstrated by the project applicant: Irrigation Method DULQ DULH* EU IE** Spray nozzles 65% 79% 71% High efficiency spray nozzles 70% 82% 73% Multi stream/Multi trajectory rotary (MSMT) nozzles 75% 85% 76% Stream rotor nozzle 70% 82% 73% Microspray 75% 85% 76% Bubblers 85% 77% Drip emitter 90% 81% Subsurface drip 90% 81% *DULH = .386 + (.614)(DULQ) ** IE (spray) = (DULH)(IME) ** IE (drip) = Emission uniformity (EU)(IME) (D) The Maximum Applied Water Allowance shall adhere to the following requirements: (1) The Maximum Applied Water Allowance shall be calculated using the equation presented in Appendix C. The reference evapotranspiration (ETo) values used for this calculation are from the Reference Evapotranspiration Table in Appendix C and are for planning purposes only. For actual irrigation scheduling, automatic irrigation controllers are required and shall use current ETo data, such as from the California Irrigation Management Information System (CIMIS), other equivalent data, or soil moisture sensor data. H-86 7 2.3 Soil and Stormwater Management (A) All planted landscape areas are required to have friable soil to maximize retention and infiltration. On engineered slopes, only amended planting holes need meet this requirement. (B) In order to reduce runoff and encourage healthy plant growth, a soil management report shall be completed by the project applicant, or his/her designee, as follows: (1) Submit soil samples to a certified agronomic soils laboratory for analysis and recommendations. (a) Soil sampling shall be conducted in accordance with laboratory protocol, including protocols regarding adequate sampling depth for the intended plants. (b) The soil analysis may include, but is not limited to: 1. soil texture; 2. infiltration rate determined by laboratory test or soil texture infiltration rate table; 3. pH; 4. total soluble salts; 5. sodium; 6. percent organic matter; and 7. recommendations. (2) In projects with multiple landscape installations (i.e. production home developments or common interest developments that are installing landscaping) a soil sampling rate of 1 in 7 lots or approximately 15% will satisfy this requirement; evenly disbursed throughout the development. Large landscape projects shall sample at a rate equivalent to 1 in 7 lots or approximately 15% landscape area. The project applicant, or his/her designee, shall comply with one of the following: (a) If significant mass grading is not planned, the soil analysis report shall be submitted to the City as part of the Landscape Documentation Package; or (b) If significant mass grading is planned, the soil analysis report shall be submitted to the City as part of the Landscape Installation Certification of Completion. H-87 8 (c) The soil analysis report shall be made available, in a timely manner, to the professionals preparing the landscape design plans and irrigation design plans in order to make any necessary adjustments to the design plans. (d) The project applicant, or his/her designee, shall submit documentation verifying implementation of soil analysis report recommendations to the City with the Certification of Completion. [Note: Authority Cited: Section 65595, Government Code. Reference: Section 65596, Government Code.] (C) It is strongly recommended that landscape areas be designed for capture and infiltration capacity that is sufficient to prevent runoff from impervious surfaces (i.e. roof and paved areas) from additional capacity as required by any applicable local, regional, state, or federal regulation and/or one of the following: the one inch, 24-hour rain event or the 85th percentile, 24-hour rain event. (D) It is recommended that storm water projects incorporate any of the following elements to improve on-site stormwater and dry weather runoff capture and use: (1) Grade impervious surfaces, such as driveways, during construction to drain into vegetated areas. (2) Minimize the area of impervious surfaces such as paved areas, roof, and concrete driveways. (3) Incorporate pervious or porous surfaces (e.g. gravel, permeable pavers or blocks, pervious or porous concrete) that minimize runoff. (4) Direct runoff from paved surfaces and roof areas into planting beds or landscape areas to maximize site water capture and reuse. (5) Incorporate rain gardens, cisterns, and other rain harvesting or catchment systems. (6) Incorporate infiltration beds, swales, basins, and drywells to capture stormwater and dry weather runoff and increase percolation into the soil. (7) Consider constructed wetlands and ponds that retain water, equalize excess flow, and filter pollutants. [Note: Authority cited: Section 65595, Government Code. Reference: Section 65596, Government Code.] H-88 9 2.4 Landscape Design Plan (A) For the efficient use of water, a landscape shall be carefully designed and planned for the intended function of the project. The following design criteria shall be submitted as part of the Landscape Documentation Package. (1) Plant Material (a) Any plant may be selected for the landscape area provided the EAWU in the landscape area does not exceed the MAWA. Methods to achieve water efficiency shall include one or more of the following: (2) Protection and preservation of non-invasive water-conserving plant, tree and turf species; (3) Selection of water-conserving plant, tree and turf species; (4) Selection of plants based on local climate suitability, disease and pest resistance; (5) Selection of trees based on applicable City and local tree ordinances or tree shading guidelines, and size at maturity as appropriate for the planting area; and (6) Selection of plants from local and regional landscape program plant lists. (7) Selection of plants from City and applicable local regulations for fuel modification in Landscapes. (B) Each hydrozone shall have plant materials with similar water use; with the exception of hydrozones with plants of mixed water use, as specified in Section 2.5(a)(2)(D) of these Guidelines. (C) Plants shall be selected and planted appropriately based upon their adaptability to the climatic, geologic, and topographical conditions of the project site. Methods to achieve water efficiency shall include one or more of the following: (1) Use the Sunset Western Climate Zone System, or equivalent generally accepted models, which takes into account temperature, humidity, elevation, terrain, latitude, and varying degrees of continental and marine influence on local climate; (2) Recognize the horticultural attributes of plants (i.e., mature plant size, invasive surface roots) to minimize damage to property or infrastructure (e.g., buildings, sidewalks, and power lines); allow for adequate soil volume for healthy root growth and H-89 10 (3) Consider the solar orientation for plant placement to maximize summer shade and winter solar gain. (4) Turf is discouraged on slopes greater than 25% where the toe of the slope is adjacent to an impermeable hardscape and where 25% means 1 foot of vertical elevation change for every 4 feet of horizontal length (rise divided by run x 100 = slope percent). (D) High water use plants, characterized by a plant factor of 0.7 to 1.0, are prohibited in street medians. (E) A landscape design plan for projects in fire-prone areas and fuel modification zones shall comply with requirements of the Anaheim Fire Department where applicable. Refer to City and applicable local regulations for fuel modification in Landscapes. When conflicts between water conservation and fire safety design elements exist, the fire safety requirements shall have priority. (F) A landscape design plan for projects in fire-prone areas and fuel modification zones shall comply with the requirements of Chapter 16.08 of the Anaheim Municipal Code (California Fire Code), where applicable. When conflicts between water conservation and fire safety design elements exist, the fire safety requirements shall have priority. (G) The use of invasive plant species plant species, such as those listed by the California Invasive Plat Council, is strongly discouraged. (H) The architectural guidelines of a common interest development, which include community apartment projects, condominiums, planned developments, and stock cooperatives, shall not prohibit or include conditions that have the effect of prohibiting the use of water efficient plant species as a group. Water features shall comply with the requirements of Chapter 10.18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code (Water Conservation and Water Shortage Rules and Regulations ). (1) Water Features (a) Recirculating water systems shall be used for water features. (b) Where available and consistent with public health guidelines, recycled water shall be used as a source for decorative water features. (c) The surface area of a water feature shall be included in the high water use hydrozone area of the water budget calculation. (d) Pool and spa covers are highly recommended. (2) Soil Preparation, Mulch and Amendments H-90 11 (a) Prior to planting of any materials, compacted soils shall be transformed to a friable condition. On engineered slopes, only amended planting holes need to meet this requirement. (b) Soil amendments shall be incorporated according to the recommendations of the soil report and what is appropriate for plants selected. (c) For landscape installations, compost at a rate of a minimum of four cubic yards per 1,000 square feet of permeable area shall be incorporated to a depth of six inches into the soil. Soils with greater than 6% organic matter in the top 6 inches of soil are exempt from adding compost and tilling. (d) A minimum three inch (3″) layer of mulch shall be applied on all exposed soil surfaces of planting areas except in turf areas, creeping or rooting groundcovers, or direct seeding applications where mulch is contraindicated. To provide habitat for beneficial insects and other wildlife, up to 5% of the landscape area may be left without mulch. Designated insect habitat must be included in the landscape design plan as such. (e) Stabilizing mulching products shall be used on slopes that meet current engineering standards such as those detailed in the USDA/USAID Low-Volume Roads Engineering Best Management Practices Field Guide. (f) The mulching portion of the seed/mulch slurry in hydro-seeded applications shall meet the mulching requirement. (g) Organic mulch materials made from recycled or post-consumer shall take precedence over inorganic materials or virgin forest products unless the recycled post-consumer organic products are not locally available. Organic mulches are not required where prohibited by the City and applicable local regulations for fuel modifications in Landscapes. (I) The landscape design plan, at a minimum, shall: (1) Delineate and label each hydrozone by number, letter, or other method; (2) Identify each hydrozone as low, moderate, high water, or mixed water use. Temporarily irrigated areas of the landscape area shall be included in the low water use hydrozone for the water budget calculation; (3) Identify recreational areas; (4) Identify areas permanently and solely dedicated to edible plants; H-91 12 (5) Identify areas irrigated with recycled water; (6) Identify type of mulch and application depth; (7) Identify soil amendments, type, and quantity; (8) Identify type and surface area of water features; (9) Identify hardscapes (pervious and non-pervious); (10) Identify location and installation details, and 24-hour retention or infiltration capacity of any applicable storm water best management practices that encourage on-site retention and infiltration of storm water. Project applicants shall refer to the City or regional Water Quality Control Board for information on any applicable stormwater technical requirements. Storm water best management practices are encouraged in the landscape design plan and examples are provided in Section 2.4(C)- (D). (11) Identify any applicable rain harvesting or catchment technologies (e.g., rain gardens, cisterns, etc.); (12) Contain the following statement: “I have complied with the criteria of the Landscape Water Efficiency Landscape Ordinance and applied them for the efficient use of water in the landscape design plan;” and (13) Bear the signature of a California-licensed landscape professional. [Note: Authority Cited: Section 65595, Reference: Section 65596, Government Code and Section 1351, Civil Code.] 2.5 Irrigation Design Plan (A) This section applies to landscape areas requiring permanent irrigation, not areas that require temporary irrigation solely for the plant establishment period. For the efficient use of water, an irrigation system shall meet all the requirements listed in this section and the manufacturer’s recommendations. The irrigation system and its related components shall be planned and designed to allow for proper installation, management, and maintenance. An irrigation design plan meeting the following design criteria shall be submitted as part of the Landscape Documentation Package. (1) System (a) Landscape water meters, defined as either a dedicated water service meter or private submeter, shall be installed for all non- residential irrigated landscapes of 1,000 sq. ft. but not more than H-92 13 5,000 sq.ft. (the level at which Water Code 535 applies) and residential irrigated landscapes of 2,500 sq. ft. or greater. (b) Automatic irrigation controllers utilizing either evapotranspiration or soil moisture sensor data with non-volatile memory shall be required for irrigation scheduling in all irrigation systems, recommending U.S. EPA WaterSense labeled devices as applicable. (c) Sensors (rain, freeze, wind, etc.), either integral or auxiliary, that suspend or alter irrigation operation during unfavorable weather conditions shall be required on all irrigation systems, as appropriate for local climatic conditions. Irrigation should be avoided during windy or freezing weather or during rain. (d) If the water pressure is below or exceeds the recommended pressure of the specified irrigation devices, the installation of a pressure regulating device is required to ensure that the dynamic pressure at each emission device is within the manufacturer’s recommended pressure range for optimal performance. 1. If the static pressure is above or below the required dynamic pressure of the irrigation system, pressure-regulating devices such as inline pressure regulators, booster pumps, or other devices shall be installed to meet the required dynamic pressure of the irrigation system. 2. Static water pressure, dynamic or operating pressure, and flow reading of the water supply shall be measured at the point of connection. These pressure and flow measurements shall be conducted at the design stage. If the measurements are not available at the design stage, the measurements shall be conducted at installation. 3. Backflow prevention devices are required to protect the water supply from contamination by the irrigation system. A project applicant shall refer to Chapter 10.24 of Anaheim Municipal Code (Water System Cross-Connections) for additional backflow prevention requirements. (e) A master shutoff valve shall be as close as possible to the point of connection and is required on all projects; with the exception for landscapes that make use of technologies that allow for the individual control of sprinklers that are individually pressurized in a system equipped with low pressure shut down features. (f) Flow sensors that detect high flow conditions created by system damage or malfunction are required for all non-residential H-93 14 landscapes and residential landscapes of 5,000 sq. ft. or larger. The flow sensor must be in combination with a master shut-off valve. (g) Manual isolation valves (such as a gate valve, ball valve, or butterfly valve) shall be required downstream of the point of connection of the water supply to minimize water loss in case of an emergency (such as a main line break) or routine repair. (h) The irrigation system shall be designed to prevent runoff, low head drainage, overspray, or other similar conditions where irrigation water flows onto non-targeted areas, such as adjacent property, non-irrigated areas, hardscapes, roadways, or structures. (i) Relevant information from the soil management plan, such as soil type and infiltration rate, shall be utilized when designing irrigation systems. (j) The design of the irrigation system shall conform to the hydrozones of the landscape design plan. (k) All irrigation emission devices must meet the requirements set in the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) standard, American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers’/International Code Council’s (ASABE/ICC) 802-2014 “Landscape Irrigation Sprinkler and Emitter Standard". All sprinkler heads installed in the landscape must document a distribution uniformity low quarter of 0.65 or higher using the protocol defined in ASBE/ICC 802-2014. (l) Average irrigation efficiency (IE) for the project shall be determined in accordance with the EAWU calculation sheet in Appendix C. Unless otherwise indicated by the irrigation equipment manufacturer’s specifications or demonstrated by the project applicant, the irrigation efficiency of the irrigation heads used within each hydrozone shall as listed in Section 2.3(C)(9). (m) It is highly recommended that the project applicant inquire with the City about peak water operating demands (on the water supply system) or water restrictions that may impact the effectiveness of the irrigation system. (n) In mulched planting areas, the use of low volume irrigation (drip or low volume overhead irrigation) is required to maximize water infiltration into the root zone; with the exception of areas with fuel modification requirements and/or those that require plant establishment to comply with Title 16 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. H-94 15 (o) Sprinkler heads and other emission devices shall have matched precipitation rates, unless otherwise directed by the manufacturer’s recommendations. (p) Head to head coverage is recommended. However, sprinkler spacing shall be designed to achieve the highest possible distribution uniformity using the manufacturer’s recommendations. (q) Swing joint components are required on all sprinklers subject to damage that are adjacent to hardscapes or in high traffic areas of turf. (r) Check valves or anti-drain valves are required on all sprinkler heads where low point drainage could occur. (s) Areas less than ten (10) feet in width in any direction shall be irrigated with subsurface irrigation or other means that produces no runoff or overspray. (t) Overhead irrigation shall not be permitted within 24 inches of any non-permeable surface. Allowable irrigation within the setback from non-permeable surfaces may include drip, drip line, or other low flow non-spray technology. The setback area may be planted or unplanted. The surfacing of the setback may be mulch, gravel, or other porous material. These restrictions may be modified if: 1. the landscape area is adjacent to permeable surfacing and no runoff occurs; or 2. the adjacent non-permeable surfaces are designed and constructed to drain entirely to landscaping; or 3. the irrigation designer for the landscape project specifies an alternative design or technology, as part of the Landscape Documentation Package, and clearly demonstrates strict adherence to the irrigation system design criteria in Section 2.5 (a)(1)(H) hereof. Prevention of overspray and runoff must be confirmed during an irrigation audit. 4. slopes greater than 25% shall not be irrigated with an irrigation system with a application rate exceeding 0.75 inches per hour. This restriction may be modified if the landscape designer of the landscape project specifies an alternative design or technology, as part of the Landscape Documentation Package, and clearly demonstrates no runoff or erosion will occur. Prevention of runoff and erosion must be confirmed during the irrigation audit. H-95 16 (2) Hydrozone (a) Each valve shall irrigate a hydrozone with similar site, slope, sun exposure, soil conditions, and plant materials with similar water use. (b) Sprinkler heads and other emission devices shall be selected based on what is appropriate for the plant type within that hydrozone. (c) Where feasible, trees shall be placed on separate valves from shrubs, groundcovers, and turf to facilitate the appropriate irrigation of trees. The mature size and extent of the root zone shall be considered when designing irrigation for the tree. (d) Individual hydrozones that mix plants of moderate and low water use or moderate and high water use may be allowed if: 1. The plant factor calculation is based on the proportions of the respective plant water uses and their respective plant factors; or 2. The plant factor of the higher water using plant is used for the calculations. (e) Individual hydrozones that mix high and low water use plants shall not be permitted. (f) On the landscape design plan and irrigation design plan, hydrozone areas shall be designated by number, letter, or other designation. On the irrigation design plan, designate the areas irrigated by each valve and assign a number to each valve. (g) The irrigation design plan, at a minimum, shall contain: 1. the location and size of separate water meters for landscape; 2. the location, type, and size of all components of the irrigation system, including controllers, main and lateral lines, valves, sprinkler heads, moisture sensing devices, rain switches, quick couplers, pressure regulators, and backflow prevention devices; 3. static water pressure at the point of connection to the public water supply; 4. flow rate (gallons per minute), application rate (inches per hour), and design operating pressure (pressure per square inch) for each station; H-96 17 5. irrigation schedule parameters necessary to program smart timers specified in the landscape design; 6. the following statement: “I have complied with the criteria of the Landscape Water Efficiency Ordinance and applied them accordingly for the efficient use of water in the irrigation design plan;” and 7. the signature of a California-licensed landscape professional. [Note: Authority Cited: Section 65595, Government Code. Reference: Section 65596, Government Code.] 2.6 Grading Design Plan (A) For the efficient use of water, grading of a landscape project site shall be designed to minimize soil erosion, runoff, and water waste. Finished grading configuration of the landscape area, including pads, slopes, drainage, post-construction erosion control, and storm water control Best Management Practices, as applicable, shall be shown on the Landscape Plan unless this information is fully included in separate Grading Plans for the project, or unless the project is limited to replacement planting and/or irrigation to rehabilitate an existing landscape area. (B) The project applicant shall submit a landscape grading plan that indicates finished configurations and elevations of the landscape area including: (1) Height of graded slopes; (2) Drainage patterns; (3) Pad elevations; (4) Finish grade; and (5) Storm water retention improvements, if applicable. (C) To prevent excessive erosion and runoff, it is highly recommended that the project applicant: (1) Grade so that all irrigation and normal rainfall remains within property lines and does not drain on to non-permeable hardscapes; (2) Avoid disruption of natural drainage patterns and undisturbed soil; and (3) Avoid soil compaction in landscape areas. (D) The Grading Design Plan shall contain the following statement: “I have complied with the criteria of the ordinance and applied them accordingly for the efficient H-97 18 use of water in the grading design plan” and shall bear the signature of the landscape professional, as required by law. [Note: Authority Cited: Section 65595, Government Code. Reference: Section 65596, Government Code.] 2.7 Landscape Installation Certification of Completion (A) Landscape project installation shall not proceed until the Landscape Documentation Package has been approved by the City and any ministerial permits required are issued. (B) The project applicant shall notify the City at the beginning of the installation work and at intervals, as necessary, for the duration of the landscape project work to schedule all required inspections. (C) Landscape Installation Certification of Completion of the landscape project shall be obtained through a Certificate of Use and Occupancy or a Permit Final. The requirements for the Final Inspection and Permit Closure include submittal of: (1) A Landscape Installation Certificate of Completion in the form included as Appendix D of these Guidelines, which shall include: (i) certification by a landscape professional that the landscape project has been installed per the approved Landscape Documentation Package; and (ii) the following statement: “The landscaping has been installed in substantial conformance to the design plans, and complies with the provisions of the Landscape Water Efficiency Ordinance for the efficient use of water in the landscape.” (a) Where there have been significant changes (as deemed by the City) made in the field during construction, these “as-built” or record drawings shall be included with the certificate (b) A diagram of the irrigation plan showing hydrozones shall be kept with the irrigation controller for subsequent management purposes. An example Irrigation Plan Checklist is listed in Appendix F. (2) Documentation of the irrigation scheduling parameters used to set the controller(s); (3) An irrigation audit report from a local agency landscape irrigation auditor or third party certified landscape irrigation auditor, documentation of enrollment in regional or local water purveyor’s water conservation programs, and/or documentation that the MAWA and EAWU information for the landscape project has been submitted to the local water purveyor, may be required at the option of the City. Example Inspection Affidavit is included as Appendix G. H-98 19 (a) Landscape audits shall not be conducted by the person who designed or installed the landscape. (b) In large projects or projects with multiple landscape installations (i.e. production home developments or common interest developments) an auditing rate of 1 in 7 lots or approximately 15% will satisfy this requirement. [Note: Authority Cited: Section 65595, Government Code. Reference: Section 65596, Government Code.] 2.8 Post-Installation Irrigation Scheduling (A) For the efficient use of water, all irrigation schedules shall be developed, managed, and evaluated to utilize the minimum amount of water required to maintain plant health. Irrigation schedules shall meet the following criteria: (1) Irrigation scheduling shall be regulated by automatic irrigation controllers. (2) Overhead irrigation shall be scheduled in accordance with Chapter 10.18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code (Water Conservation and Water Shortage Rules and Regulations). Operation of the irrigation system outside the normal watering window is allowed for auditing and system maintenance. [Note: Authority Cited: Section 65595, Government Code. Reference: Section 65596, Government Code.] 2.9 Post-Installation Landscape and Irrigation Maintenance (A) Landscapes shall be maintained to ensure water use efficiency in accordance with existing Chapter 10.18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code (Water Conservation and Water Shortage Rules and Regulations). 3. Provisions for Existing Landscapes (A) Irrigation of all landscape areas shall be conducted in a manner conforming to the existing Chapter 10.18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code (Water Conservation and Water Shortage Rules and Regulations), as determined and implemented by the local water purveyor and as may be mutually agreed by the City. (B) The City as the local water purveyor may administer programs such as irrigation water use analyses, irrigation surveys and/or irrigation audits, tiered water rate structures, water budgeting by parcel, or other approaches to achieve landscape water use efficiency community-wide to a level equivalent to or less than would be achieved by applying a MAWA calculated with an ETAF of 0.8 to all landscape areas in the City over one acre in size. H-99 20 (C) The architectural guidelines of a common interest development, including apartments, condominiums, planned developments, and stock cooperatives, shall not prohibit or include conditions that have the effect of prohibiting the use of low-water use plants as a group. [Note: Authority Cited: Section 65595, Government Code. Reference: Section 65596, Government Code.] 4. Public Education (A) Publications. Education is a critical component to promote the efficient use of water in landscapes. The use of appropriate principles of design, installation, management, and maintenance that save water is encouraged in the community. (B) Model Homes. All model homes that are landscaped shall use signs and written information to demonstrate the principles of water efficient landscapes as described. (1) Signs shall be used to identify the model as an example of a water efficient landscape featuring elements such as hydrozones, irrigation equipment, and others that contribute to the overall water efficient theme. Signage shall include information about the site water use as designed per the Anaheim Municipal Code; specify who designed and installed the site water efficient landscape; and demonstrate low water use approaches to landscaping such as using appropriate plants, alternative water sources, or rainwater catchment systems. (2) Information shall be provided about designing, installing, managing, and maintaining water efficient landscapes. [Note: Authority Cited: Section 65595, Government Code. Reference: Section 65596, Government Code.] H-100 21 Appendix A: Prescriptive Compliance Option PRESCRIPTIVE COMPLIANCE OPTION (A) This appendix contains prescriptive requirements which may be used as a compliance option to the Landscape Water Efficiency Ordinance. (B) Compliance with the following items is mandatory and must be documented in a landscape plan in order to use the prescriptive compliance option: (1) Submit a Landscape Documentation Package which includes the following elements: (a) Date (b) Project applicant (c) Project address (if available, parcel and/or lot number (s)) (d) Total landscape area (square feet), including a breakdown of turf and plant material (e) Project type (e.g., new, rehabilitated, public, private, cemetery, homeowner-installed) (f) Water supply type (e.g., potable, recycled, well) and identify the local retail water purveyor if the applicant is not served by a private well (g) Contact information for the project applicant and property owner (h) Applicant signature and date with statement, “I agree to comply with the requirements of the prescriptive compliance option to the MWELO” (2) Incorporate compost at a rate of at least four cubic yards per 1,000 square feet to a depth of six inches into landscape area (unless contra-indicated by a soil test); (3) Plant material shall comply with all of the following: (a) For residential areas, install climate adapted plants that require little summer water (average WUCOLS plant factor 0.5) for 75% of the plant area excluding edibles and areas using recycled water; For non-residential areas, install climate adapted plants that require little summer water (average WUCOLS plant factor 0.5) for 100% of the plant area excluding edibles and areas using recycled water; H-101 22 (b) A three inch (3”) layer of mulch shall be applied on all exposed soil surfaces of planting areas except in turf areas, creeping or rooting groundcovers, or direct seeding applications where mulch is contraindicated. (4) Turf shall comply with all of the following: (a) Turf shall not exceed 25% of the landscape area in residential areas, and turf shall not be planted in non-residential areas (b) Turf shall not be planted on sloped areas which exceed a slope of 1 foot vertical elevation change for every 4 feet of horizontal length; (c) Turf is prohibited in parkways less than 10 feet wide, unless the parkway is adjacent to a parking strip and used to enter and exit vehicles. Any turf in parkways must be irrigated by sub-surface irrigation, or by other technology that creates no overspray or runoff. (5) Irrigation systems shall comply with the following: (a) Automatic irrigation controllers are required and must use evapotranspiration or soil moisture sensor data (b) Irrigation controllers shall be of a type which does not lose programming data in the event the primary power source is interrupted. (c) Pressure regulators shall be installed on the irrigation system to ensure the dynamic pressure of the system is within the manufacturers recommended pressure range. (d) Manual shut-off valves (such as a gate valve, ball valve, or butterfly valve) shall be installed as close as possible to the point of connection of the water supply. (e) All irrigation emission devices must meet the requirements set in the ANSI standard, ASABE/ICC802-2014. “Landscape irrigation Sprinkler and Emitter Standard.” All Sprinkler heads installed in the landscape must document a distribution uniformity low quarter of 0.65 or higher using the protocol defined in ASABE/ICC 802- 2014. (C) At the time of final inspection, the permit applicant must provide the owner of the property with a certificate of completion, certificate of installation, irrigation schedule and a schedule of landscape and irrigation maintenance. H-102 23 Appendix B: Certification of Landscape Design CERTIFICATION OF LANDSCAPE DESIGN I hereby certify that: (1) I am a professional appropriately licensed in the State of California to provide professional landscape design services. (2) The landscape design and water use calculations for the property located at (provide street address or parcel number(s)) were prepared by me or under my supervision. (3) The landscape design and water use calculations for the identified property comply with the requirements of the City of Anaheim Landscape Water Efficiency Ordinance (Chapter 10.19 of Title 10 of Anaheim Municipal Code) and the Guidelines for Implementation of the City of Anaheim Landscape Water Efficiency Ordinance. (4) The information I have provided in this Certificate of Landscape Design is true and correct and is hereby submitted in compliance with the Guidelines for Implementation of the City of Anaheim Landscape Water Efficiency Ordinance. Print Name Date Signature License Number Address Telephone E-mail Address Landscape Design Professional’s Stamp (If applicable) H-103 24 Appendix C: Water Efficiency Landscape Worksheet WATER EFFICIENCY LANDSCAPE WORKSHEET This worksheet is completed by the project applicant and it is a required item of the Landscape Documentation Package. Reference Evapotranspiration (ETo)a:  49.2 in/yr  Landscape Area Sector Type   (select one):  [  ] Residential   [  ] Non‐Residential      Hydrozone  #/Planting  Description Location  Plant  Factorb  (PF)  Irrigation  Methodc  Irrigation  Efficiencyc  (IE)  ETAF  (PF/IE)  Landscape  Area (sq‐ft) ETAF x Area  Estimated  Total Water  Used  (ETWU)  Regular Landscape Area  1                     2                     3                     4                     5                     6                     7                     8                     9                     10                     11                     12                    Average Total Total          Average ETAF for Regular Landscape  Arease (circle one): In  Compliance  Not In  Compliance  Special Landscape Area  SLA‐ 1                      SLA‐ 2                    SLA‐ 3                    SLA‐ 4                    SLA‐ 5                    Totals                                  Total Landscape Area    Site wide ETAF    ETWU Total    Maximum Allowed Water Allowance (MAWA)f    H-104 25 WORKSHEET INFORMATION & EQUATIONS a Anaheim local monthly evapotranspiration rates are listed below. The values in this table were derived from California Irrigation Management Information System (CIMIS) Spatial CIMIS data by zip code. Reference Evapotranspiration Table b The following table can be used for common plant factors: Month Rate (in/mo) January 2.7 February 2.7 March 3.3 April 4.6 May 5.3 June 5.6 July 5.6 August 6.0 September 5.9 October 3.4 November 2.6 December 2.0 Plant Factor PF Very low water use plant 0.1 Low water use plant 0.2 Medium water use plant 0.5 High water use plant 0.8 Lawn 0.8 Pool, spa, or other water feature 1.0 H-105 26 c Irrigation efficiency is derived from measurements and estimates of irrigation system characteristics and management practices. The minimum average irrigation efficiency for purposes of these Guidelines is 0.71. The following irrigation efficiency may be obtained for the listed irrigation heads with an Irrigation Management Efficiency of 90%: d Estimated Total Water Use (ETWU) is the annual gallons required ETWU = (ETo) x (0.62) x (ETAF x Area) where, ETo = annual evapotranspiration rate in inches per year = 49.2 inches per year 0.62 = factor used to convert inches per year to gallons per square foot ETAF = plant factor ÷ irrigation efficiency e Average ETAF for Regular Landscape Areas must be 0.55 or below for residential areas, and 0.45 or below for nonresidential areas. f Maximum Allowed Water Allowance (MAWA) is the annual gallons allowed MAWA = (ETo) x (0.62) x [(ETAF x LA) + ((1-ETAF) x SLA)] where, ETo = annual evapotranspiration rate in inches per year 0.62 = factor used to convert inches per year to gallons per square foot ETAF = plant factor ÷ irrigation efficiency LA = total (site wide) landscape area in square feet SLA = total special landscape area Irrigation Method IE Spray nozzles 71% High efficiency spray nozzles 73% Multi stream/Multi trajectory rotary (MSMT) nozzles 76% Stream rotor nozzle 73% Microspray 76% Bubblers 77% Drip emitter 81% Subsurface drip 81% H-106 27 Appendix D: Certificate of Completion LANDSCAPE INSTALLATION CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION I hereby certify that: (1) I am a professional appropriately licensed in the State of California to provide professional landscape design services for:___________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______ (project name, mailing address and telephone). (2) The landscape project for the property located at: ______________________________________________________________________________ __ (provide street address or parcel number(s)) was installed by me or under my supervision. (3) The landscaping for the identified property has been installed in substantial conformance with the approved Landscape Documentation Package and complies with the requirements of the City of Anaheim Landscape Water Efficiency Ordinance (Chapter 10.19 of Title of 10 of Anaheim Municipal Code) and the Guidelines for Implementation of the City of Anaheim Landscape Water Efficiency Ordinance. (4) The following elements are attached hereto: a. Irrigation scheduling parameters used to set the controller; b. Landscape and irrigation maintenance schedule; c. Irrigation audit report; and d. Soil analysis report, if not submitted with Landscape Documentation Package, and documentation verifying implementation of the soil report recommendations. (5) The site installation complies with the following: a. The required irrigation system has been installed according to approved plans and specifications and if applicable, any prior approved irrigation system alternatives. _____ Yes ____ No b. Sprinklers comply with ASABE/ICC 802-2014 Landscape Irrigation Sprinkler & Emitter Standard. _____ Yes ____ No H-107 28 (6) The information I have provided in this Landscape Installation Certificate of Completion is true and correct and is hereby submitted in compliance with the Guidelines for Implementation of the City of Anaheim Landscape Water Efficiency Ordinance. Print Name Date Signature License Number Address Telephone E-mail Address Landscape Design Professional’s Stamp (If Appropriate) H-108 29 Appendix E: Definitions DEFINITIONS The terms used in these Guidelines have the meaning set forth below: “Aggregate” area pertains to production home neighborhoods, common interest developments, or other situations where multiple parcels are undergoing landscape development as one project, but may eventually be individually owned or maintained. “Backflow prevention device” means a safety device used to prevent pollution or contamination of the water supply due to the reverse flow of water from the irrigation system. “Check valve” or “anti-drain valve” means a valve located under a sprinkler head, or other location in the irrigation system, to hold water in the system to prevent drainage from sprinkler heads when the sprinkler is off. “Certified Landscape Irrigation Auditor” means a person certified to perform landscape irrigation audits by an accredited academic institution, a professional trade organization or other program such as the US Environmental Protection Agency’s WaterSense irrigation auditor certification program and Irrigation Association’s Certified Landscape Irrigation Auditor program. “Certification of Design” means the certification included as Exhibit E of these Guidelines that must be included in the Landscape Documentation Package pursuant to Section 2.1 of these Guidelines. “City” means the City of Anaheim. “Common interest developments” means community apartment projects, condominium projects, planned developments, and stock cooperatives per Civil Code Section 1351. “Distribution Uniformity” or “DU” is a measure of how uniformly an irrigation head applies water to a specific target area and theoretically ranges from zero to 100 percent. “Drip” irrigation means any non-spray low volume irrigation system utilizing emission devices with a flow rate measured in gallons per hour. Low volume irrigation systems are specifically designed to apply small volumes of water slowly at or near the root zone of plants. “Emitter” means a drip irrigation emission device that delivers water slowly from the system to the soil. “Estimated Applied Water Use” or “EAWU” means the annual total amount of water estimated to keep plants in a healthy state. It is based on factors such as reference evapotranspiration rate, the size of the landscape area, plant water use factors, and the irrigation efficiency within each hydrozone. H-109 30 "Estimated Total Water Use" shall be calculated in accordance Appendix C. “Evapotranspiration adjustment factor” or “ETAF” means a factor of 0.55 for residential areas and 0.45 for non-residential areas, that, when applied to reference evapotranspiration, adjusts for plant factors and irrigation efficiency, two major influences upon the amount of water that needs to be applied to the landscape. The ETAF for new and existing (non-re-habilitated) Special Landscape Area shall not exceed 1.0. The ETAF for existing non-rehabilitated landscapes is 0.8. “Evapotranspiration rate” means the quantity of water evaporated from adjacent soil and other surfaces and transpired by plants during a specified time. “Flow rate” means the rate at which water flows through pipes, valves and emission devices, measured in gallons per minute, gallons per hour, or cubic feet per second. “Hardscapes” means any durable material or feature (pervious and non-pervious) installed in or around a landscape area, such as pavements or walls. Pools and other water features are considered part of the landscape area and not considered hardscapes for purposes of these Guidelines. “Graywater” means a system untreated wastewater that has not been contaminated by any toilet discharge, has not been affected by infectious, contaminated, or unhealthy bodily wastes, and does not present a threat from contamination by unhealthy processing, manufacturing, or operating wastes. Graywater includes, but is not limited to, wastewater from bathtubs, showers, bathroom washbasins, clothes washing machines. And laundry tubs, but does not include wastewater from kitchen sinks or dishwashers as per the Health and Safety Code (Section 17922.12). Graywater systems promote the efficient use of water and are encouraged to assist in on-site landscape irrigation. All graywater systems shall conform to the California Plumbing Code (Title 24, Part 5, Chapter 16). “Hydrozone” means a portion of the landscape area having plants with similar water needs and typically irrigated by one valve/controller station. A hydrozone may be irrigated or non- irrigated. “Infiltration rate” means the rate of water entry into the soil expressed as a depth of water per unit of time (e.g., inches per hour). “Invasive” plants species or “noxious” means species of plants not historically found in California that spread outside cultivated areas and can damage environmental or economic resources. Invasive plant species may be regulated by county agricultural agencies as noxious species. “Irrigation audit” means an in-depth evaluation of the performance of an irrigation system conducted by a Certified Landscape Irrigation Auditor. An irrigation audit includes, but is not limited to: inspection, system tune-up, system test with distribution uniformity or emission uniformity, reporting overspray or runoff that causes overland flow, and preparation of an irrigation schedule. H-110 31 “Irrigation Management Efficiency” or “IME” means the measurement used to calculate the irrigation efficiency of the irrigation system for a landscaped project. A 90% IME can be achieved by using evapotranspiration controllers, soil moisture sensors, and other methods that will adjust irrigation run times to meet plant water needs. “Irrigation efficiency” or “IE” means the measurement of the amount of water beneficially used divided by the amount of water applied to a landscape area. Irrigation efficiency is derived from measurements and estimates of irrigation system characteristics and management practices. The irrigation efficiency for purposes of these Guidelines are 0.71 for overhead spray devices and 0.81 for drip systems. Greater irrigation efficiency can be expected from well designed and maintained systems. The following irrigation efficiency may be obtained for the listed irrigation heads with an IME of 90%: Irrigation Method DULQ DULH* EU IE** Spray nozzles 65% 79% 71% High efficiency spray nozzles 70% 82% 73% Multi stream/Multi trajectory rotary (MSMT) nozzles 75% 85% 76% Stream rotor nozzle 70% 82% 73% Microspray 75% 85% 76% Bubblers 85% 77% Drip emitter 90% 81% Subsurface drip 90% 81% *DULH = .386 + (.614)(DULQ) ** IE (spray) = (DULH)(IME) ** IE (drip) = Emission uniformity (EU)(IME) “Landscape coefficient” (KL ) is the product of a plant factor multiplied by a density factor and a microclimate factor. The landscape coefficient is derived to estimate water loss from irrigated landscape areas and special landscape areas. “Landscape Documentation Package” means the package of documents that a project applicant is required to submit to the City pursuant to Section 2.1 of these Guidelines. “Landscape Installation Certificate of Completion” means the certificate included as Exhibit F of these Guidelines that must be submitted to the City pursuant to Section 2.7(a)(1) of hereof. “Landscape professional” means a licensed landscape architect, licensed landscape contractor, or any other person authorized to design a landscape pursuant to Sections 5500.1, 5615, 5641, 5641.1, 5641.2, 5641.3, 5641.4, 5641.5, 5641.6, 6701, 7027.5 of the California Business and Professions Code, Section 832.27 of Title16 of the California Code of Regulations, and Section 6721 of the California Food and Agriculture Code. “Landscape area” means all the planting areas, turf areas, and water features in a landscape design plan subject to the Maximum Applied Water Allowance and Estimated Applied Water Use H-111 32 calculations. The landscape area does not include footprints of buildings or structures, sidewalks, driveways, parking lots, decks, patios, gravel or stone walks, other pervious or non- pervious hardscapes, and other non-irrigated areas designated for non-development (e.g., open spaces and existing native vegetation). “Lateral line” means the water delivery pipeline that supplies water to the emitters or sprinklers from the valve. “Low volume irrigation” means the application of irrigation water at low pressure through a system of tubing or lateral lines and low volume emitters such as drip, drip lines, and bubblers. Low volume irrigation systems are specifically designed to apply small volumes of water slowly at or near the root zone of plants. “Main line” means the pressurized pipeline that delivers water from the water source to the valve or outlet. “Manual Isolation Valve” means a valve such as a gate valve, ball valve, or butterfly valve installed downstream of the point of connection of the water supply to shutdown water flow through mainline piping for routine maintenance and emergency repair. “Master shut-off valve” an electronic valve such as a solenoid valve installed as close as possible to the point of connection and is used in conjunction with a flow sensor and flow monitoring controller technology to automatically shutdown system wide water flow in the event of high flow conditions such as mainline pipe break. “Maximum Applied Water Allowance” or “MAWA” means the upper limit of annual applied water for the established landscape area, as specified in Section 2.2 of these Guidelines. It is based upon the area’s reference evapotranspiration, the ETAF, and the size of the landscape area. The Estimated Applied Water Use shall not exceed the Maximum Applied Water Allowance. “Microclimate” means the climate of a small, specific area that may contrast with the climate of the overall landscape area due to factors such as wind, sun exposure, plant density, or proximity to reflective surfaces. “Mulch” means any organic material such as leaves, bark, straw or compost, or inorganic mineral materials such as rocks, gravel, or decomposed granite left loose and applied to the soil surface for the beneficial purposes of reducing evaporation, suppressing weeds, moderating soil temperature, and preventing soil erosion. “Non-pervious” means any surface or natural material that does not allow for the passage of water through the material and into the underlying soil. “Operating pressure” means the pressure at which the parts of an irrigation system of sprinklers are designed to operate at by the manufacturer “Overspray” means the irrigation water which is delivered beyond the target area. H-112 33 “Person” means any natural person, firm, joint venture, joint stock company, partnership, public or private association, club, company, corporation, business trust, organization, public or private agency, government agency or institution, school district, college, university, any other user of water provided by the City or the local water purveyor, or the manager, lessee, agent, servant, officer, or employee of any of them or any other entity which is recognized by law as the subject of rights or duties. “Pervious” means any surface or material that allows the passage of water through the material and into the underlying soil. “Plant factor” or “plant water use factor” is a factor, when multiplied by ETo, that estimates the amount of water needed by plants. For purposes of this Water Efficiency Landscape Ordinance, the plant factor range for low water use plants is 0 to 0.1; the plant factor range for moderate water use plants is 0.1 to 0.6; and the plant factor range for high water use plants is 0.7 to 1.0. Plant factors cited in these Guidelines are derived from the Department of Water Resources 2000 publication “Water Use Classification of Landscape Species.” Plant factors may also be obtained from horticultural researchers from academic institutions or professional associations as approved by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR). “Precipitation rate” means the rate of application of water measured in inches per hour. “Project applicant” means the person submitting a Landscape Documentation Package required under Section 2.1 to request a permit, plan check, or design review from the City. A project applicant may be the property owner or his or her designee. “Property owner” or “owner” means the record owner of real property as shown on the most recently issued equalized assessment roll. “Reference evapotranspiration” or “ETo” means a standard measurement of environmental parameters which affect the water use of plants. ETo is given expressed in inches per day, month, or year as represented in Appendix C of these Guidelines, and is an estimate of the evapotranspiration of a large field of four to seven-inch tall, cool-season grass that is well watered. Reference evapotranspiration is used as the basis of determining the Maximum Applied Water Allowances. “Recycled water” or “reclaimed water” means treated or recycled waste water of a quality suitable for non-potable uses such as landscape irrigation and water features. This water is not intended for human consumption. “Runoff” means water which is not absorbed by the soil or landscape to which it is applied and flows from the landscape area. For example, runoff may result from water that is applied at too great a rate (application rate exceeds infiltration rate) or when there is a slope. “Special Landscape Areas” or “SLA” means an area of the landscape dedicated solely to edible plants such as orchards and vegetable gardens, areas irrigated with recycled water, water features using recycled water, and areas dedicated to active play such as community pools and spas, parks, sports fields, golf courses, and where turf provides a playing surface. H-113 34 “Sprinkler head” means a device which delivers water through a nozzle. “Static water pressure” means the pipeline or municipal water supply pressure when water is not flowing. “Station” means an area served by one valve or by a set of valves that operate simultaneously. “Swing joint” means an irrigation component that provides a leak-free connection between the emission device and lateral pipeline to allow movement in any direction and to prevent equipment damage. “Turf” means a ground cover surface of mowed grass. Annual bluegrass, Kentucky bluegrass, Perennial ryegrass, Red fescue, and Tall fescue are cool-season grasses. Bermudagrass, Kikuyugrass, Seashore Paspalum, St. Augustinegrass, Zoysiagrass, and Buffalo grass are warm-season grasses. “Valve” means a device used to control the flow of water in an irrigation system. “Landscape Water Efficiency Ordinance” means adopted by the City Council and codified in the Chapter 10.19 of Title 10 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. “Water Efficient Landscape Worksheets” means the worksheets required to be completed pursuant to Section 2.2 of these Guidelines and which are included in Appendix C hereof. “Water feature” means a design element where open water performs an aesthetic or recreational function. Water features include ponds, lakes, waterfalls, fountains, artificial streams, spas, and swimming pools (where water is artificially supplied). The surface area of water features is included in the high water use hydrozone of the landscape area. Constructed wetlands used for on-site wastewater treatment, habitat protection, or storm water best management practices that are not irrigated and used solely for water treatment or storm water retention are not water features and, therefore, are not subject to the water budget calculation. “Watering window” means the time of day irrigation is allowed. “WUCOLS” means the Water Use Classification of Landscape published by the University of California Cooperative Extension, the Department of Water Resources, and the Bureau of Reclamation, 2000. www.owue.water.ca.gov/docs/wucols00 H-114 35 Appendix F: Irrigation Plan Checklist This is a voluntary compliance tool template developed by the Irrigation Association. IRRIGATION PLAN CHECKLIST Please complete the following checklist by checking all appropriate categories under APPLICANT column, indicating compliance with these content requirements. All submitted plans shall contain the following information: LANDSCAPE PLAN NUMBER: __________________________________________________ NAME OF PROJECT: ________________________________________________________________________________________ Applicant Planner[ ] 1. Prevailing winds [ ] [ ] 2. Slope aspect and degree of slope [ ] [ ] 3. Soil type and infiltration rate [ ] [ ] 4. Vegetation type [ ] [ ] 5. Microclimates [ ] [ ] 6. Expansive or hazardous soil conditions [ ] [ ] 7. Water harvesting potential [ ] [ ] 8. Available water supply, including non-potable and recycled water [ ] All pertinent system information is indicated, including: [ ] 9. Irrigation zones substantially corresponding to hydrozones on the landscape plan and labeled by precipitation rates and method of application [ ] [ ] 10. Water meters [ ] [ ] 11. Tap-in location [ ] [ ] 12. Static water pressure at the point of connection [ ] [ ] 13. System controller [ ] [ ] 14. Rain sensor/shut-off device [ ] [ ] 15. Backflow preventers [ ] [ ] 16. Shut-off valves and zone control valves [ ] [ ] 17. Main line and lateral piping [ ] [ ] 18. Sprinkler heads [ ] [ ] 19. Bubblers and drip irrigation tubing runs [ ] [ ] 20. Type and size of main irrigation system components [ ] [ ] 21. Total required operating pressure for each control valve/zone [ ] [ ] 22. Graphic depiction of the locations of irrigation system components [ ] [ ] 23. Total required operating pressure for each control valve/zone [ ] [ ] 24. Any supplemental stormwater and/or runoff harvesting [ ] System design is in conformance with the following standards: [ ] 25. Certification of Professional Qualifications, attached [ ] [ ] 26. Pedestrian surfaces located on plan [ ] [ ] 27. Equipment installed flush with grade for safety [ ] [ ] 28. Compliance with local codes [ ] [ ] 29. Overspray onto impervious areas minimized [ ] H-115 36 Appendix G: Inspection Affidavit This is a voluntary compliance tool template developed by the Irrigation Association. H-116 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Appendix April 2016 Appendix I Sewer Study 1700 S. HARBOR BOULEVARD HOTEL PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Appendix PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM To: Keith Linker From: Mike Swan Date: March 25, 2016 Subject: Sewer Study – 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard Hotel City Project Tracking No.: OTH2016-00831 The purpose of this memorandum is to document a sewer study prepared for a proposed project that would include the demolition of the existing buildings at the site and the development of a AAA rated 4 Diamond Hotel including 580 hotel rooms, up to 50,000 square feet of meeting space, and up to 25,600 square feet of ancillary food and beverage retail space. The project is located on two adjacent assessor parcels with the primary current address of 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard. The site is on the south of Disney Way and Harbor Blvd. as shown on Figure 1. The project is proposed to be constructed on Assessor Parcel Nos. 082-271-09 and 082-271-10 totaling approximately 8.83 acres (Figure 1). Curenntly, both parcels are commercial land uses consisting of 300 hotel rooms. According to the Combined Central Anaheim Area Master Plan of Sanitary Sewers (CCAAMPSS) the existing uses included in the Existing System computer model scenario included all 300 hotel rooms loaded on parcel 082-271-09. Additionally, the existing 300 hotel rooms were sewered to Disney Way in the CCAAMPSS hydraulic model. Sewage from the proposed project site is now proposed to be discharged into three different locations, instead of one as is currently modeled. The existing 300 hotel rooms were sewered to manhole SW087302 on Disney Way. The proposed project will be sewered to three different locations, two on Disney Way, and one on Harbor Blvd. Two-hundred ninety three (293) rooms will be sewered to SW87303, a 10-inch line on Disney Way. One-hundred and seven (107) rooms plus 25,600 square feet of retail/restaurant space will be sewered to SW087301, a 10-inch line on Disney Way. The additional 180 hotel rooms and 50,000 square feet of meeting space will be sewered to SW087304, a 15-inch line on Harbor Blvd. The existing and proposed manhole loading with flow generation is summarized in Table 1. Flow factors are in gpd/room and gpd/thousand square feet of building area. The existing downstream sewer collection system and the location of the proposed project area are shown on Figure 2. Based on the CCAAMPSS, the Existing System Scenario included the flows shown in Table 2, with this table also showing the average and peak flow increases due to the proposed project. The existing flow factor for hotel rooms from CCAAMPSS was 150 gallons per day (gpd) per room with the proposed flow factor for hotel rooms being 125 gpd/room. The commercial use meeting space and retail/restaurant space flow factors from CCAAMPSS are 350 gpd per thousand square feet (ksf) and 1,000 gpd/ksf, respectively. The reasoning for the slightly higher per room flow rate in the CCAAMPSS is to account for the restaurant, meeting space, and other I-1 1700 S. Harbor Blvd. Sewer Study Page 2 of 4 March 25, 2016 2ANA015011 2 ancillary uses that are not known at the master plan level but are available at the site specific sewer study level. Total peak flow is calculated using a peak to average factor of 2.5. Table 1 – Existing and Proposed Manhole Flow Loading Table 2 – Existing and Proposed Flow Increases Due to Proposed Project Sq. Ft.Rooms SW087302 Hotel Rooms Exisiting 300 150 45,000 - Total Flow to SW087302 45,000 - SW087303 Hotel Rooms Proposed 293 125 - 36,625 Total Flow to SW087303 - 36,625 SW087301 Hotel Rooms Proposed 107 125 - 13,375 Retail Space/Restaurant Proposed 25,600 1,000 - 25,600 Total Flow to SW087301 - 38,975 SW087304 Hotel Rooms Proposed 180 125 - 22,500 Meeting Space Proposed 50,000 350 - 17,500 Total Flow to SW087304 - 40,000 Manhole Number Existing/Proposed Units Flow Factor Proposed Flow Rate Exsiting Flow Rate Sq. Ft.Rooms Existing Average Flow APN 082-271-10 Commercial (Hotel) APN 082-271-09 Commercial (Hotel)300 150 45,000 Total Existing Flow 45,000 Proposed Project Average Flow Hotel Rooms Commercial (Hotel)580 125 72,500 Meeting Space Commercial (Hotel) 50,000 350 17,500 Retail Space/Restaurant Commercial (Hotel) 25,600 1,000 25,600 Total Proposed Flow 115,600 Average Flow Increase 70,600 Peak Flow Increase 2.5 176,500 Project Parcels Land Use Units Flow Factor (gpd/unit) Flow Rate (gpd) I-2 1700 S. Harbor Blvd. Sewer Study Page 3 of 4 March 25, 2016 2ANA015011 3 The Existing Condition Scenario plus the project flows and depth-to-Diameter (d/D) ratios for the sewer collection system from the hydraulic model for the CCAAMPSS are shown in Table 3. As shown on Table 3, Existing Scenario, the existing condition has deficiencies on Katella Ave. SW076424-SW076430, SW066424-SW066417, and SW066417-SW066428. These are 8-inch connecting pipes connecting the two parallel lines on Katella that are utilized to balance flows between the parallel lines, so are not really deficiencies. The remaining deficiencies on Katella are due to deficiencies from upstream conditions on the Walnut Street Trunk recently taken over by the City from OCSD and not due at all to the proposed project. However, this upstream capacity constraint in the Walnut Trunk causes some deficient reaches on Katella (noted by red color), as well as backflow isssues (noted by orange color). The Buildout Condition Scenario plus the project flows and depth-to-Diameter (d/D) ratios for the sewer collection system from the hydraulic model for the CCAAMPSS are shown in Table 4. As seen in Table 4, Buildout Scenario, the same deficiencies are present in SW076424- SW076430, SW066424-SW066417, and SW066417-SW066428, which are the 8-inch interconnecting lines on Katella. In addition, most of the deficiencies on Katella are removed due to an upstream diversion at Ball and Walnut in the buildout scenario, proposed as a part of the CCAAMPSS Update. However, there is one reach on the northerly 21-inch line in Katella, consisting of four pipeline segments, that shows as being borderline deficient due to increased buildout flow. These pipeline segments are shown in red in Figure 2. In addition, there are some pipe segments immediately upstream of the 8-inch interconnecting lines showing backflow conditions because of the constraint in these interconnections indicated in orange. Assuming the parallel Katella system flows even out via these interconnections, the backflow condition would be eliminated. It should also be noted that the increased peak flow in the sum of the parallel Katella lines at this approximate location is about 2,015 gpm with the proposed project contributing only about 6 percent of this amount. Also, the parallel 24-inch southerly Katella line in this location is only flowing at an approximate d/D of 55 to 57 percent, whereas the northerly 21-inch is flowing at approximately 75 to 77 percent. Therefore, the entire Katella sewer system has additional capacity and, if need be, the interconnections between the two Katella lines can be re-worked to balance the flow better. Conclusion The proposed hotel expansion project will discharge to three different locations on the existing City sewer system. At the downstream terminus of the project on Harbor Blvd. about 200 feet south of Disney Way the cumulative additional peak sewage flow contributed by the project would be 176,500 gpd or 123 gpm. Once a diversion at Ball Road and Walnut Avenue recommended in the CCAAMPSS is implemented, there are no capacity constraints shown in the sewer system downstream of the project in the existing condition, with the exception of short pipe segments interconnecting the Katella parallel sewer. In the buildout scenario, there are four pipeline reaches in the northerly Katella Avenue 21-inch diameter sewer downstream of the I-3 1700 S. Harbor Blvd. Sewer Study Page 4 of 4 March 25, 2016 2ANA015011 4 project that exhibit pipeline depth-to-Diameter (d/D) ratios slightly over the 0.75 criteria, the highest being 0.77. However, the parallel 24-inch Katella sewer immediately south of this reach is flowing at a d/D of only 0.55 to 0.57. Also, to put this in perspective, the total buildout peak flow for both of these parallel sewers in this portion of Katella is over 4,730 gpm so the additional peak flow from the project is only 2.5 percent of this total. Treating the two parallel sewers in Katella Blvd. as a “system” provides adequate capacity for the additional peak flow attributed to the proposed project in existing and buildout scenarios, without capacity constraints. Attachments: Figures 1 & 2, Tables 3 & 4 I-4 APN 082-271-09 APN 082-271-10 1700 S. Harbor Blvd FIGURE 1 LOCATION MAP I-5 DISNEY WAY HA R B O R B L V D KATELLA AVEKATELLA AVE 9T H S T S W 0 7 6 2 2 4 S W 0 7 6 4 3 2 S W 0 8 7 3 1 9 S W 0 8 7 1 0 6 S W 0 7 6 3 0 2 S W 0 6 6 4 3 0 OT 0 6 6 3 3 1 SW 0 6 6 4 1 8 OT 0 5 7 4 4 5 OT 0 5 7 4 4 4 SW0 5 0 4 3 0 OT 0 5 8 4 3 5 FIGURE 2 TRIBUTARY BASIN MAP Interconnection D/d limitation WA L N U T S T DI S N E Y L A N D D R WE S T S T SW 0 7 6 3 0 9 S W 0 7 6 4 1 7 S W 0 7 6 4 2 4 EU C L I D S T CA S A V I S T A S T S W 0 8 7 3 0 4 S W 0 8 7 3 0 1 S W 0 8 7 3 0 3 SW 0 7 6 4 3 3 S W 0 7 6 3 0 3 I-6 Street Cross Street Upstrm MH-Dwnstrm MH Size (in) Length (ft) Slope (ft/ft) Peak Flow (gpm) d/D Adj. d/D SW087107-SW087303 10 206 0.003 15 0.12 0.20 SW087303-SW087302 10 251 0.003 79 0.28 0.32 SW087302-SW087301 10 234 0.003 127 0.35 0.36 SW087301-SW087106 10 219 0.005 178 0.38 0.50 SW087106-SW076224 10 59 0.011 547 0.56 0.68 Disney SW087106-SW087304 15 340 0.001 223 0.37 0.37 SW087304-SW087305 15 330 0.003 281 0.31 0.34 SW087305-SW087306 15 333 0.002 331 0.37 0.67 SW087306-SW087319 15 319 0.005 333 0.29 1.00 Disney SW076224-SW076425 18 312 0.002 744 0.45 0.48 SW076425-SW076402 18 280 0.001 744 0.53 0.53 SW076402-SW076403 18 238 0.002 744 0.43 0.82 SW076403-SW076404 18 236 0.002 744 0.43 1.00 SW076404-SW076432 18 235 0.003 745 0.38 1.00 SW087319-SW076432 21 56 0.002 333 0.24 1.00 SW076432-SW076431 21 41 0.001 1076 0.50 1.00 SW076431-SW076430 21 22 0.056 979 0.18 1.00 SW076431-SW076424 8 23 0.002 96 0.46 1.00 SW076424-SW076430 8 22 0.053 1000 0.76 1.00 SW076430-SW076429 21 267 0.002 1980 0.68 1.00 SW076429-SW076428 21 265 0.002 2063 0.66 1.00 SW076428-SW076427 21 39 0.010 2063 0.40 1.00 SW076427-SW076417 21 449 0.002 2073 0.66 1.00 SW076417-SW076312 21 384 0.002 2239 0.72 1.00 SW076312-SW076311 21 374 0.002 2239 0.71 1.00 SW076311-SW076310 21 253 0.002 2239 0.72 1.00 SW076310-SW076309 21 249 0.002 2239 0.72 1.00 SW076309-SW066430 24 261 0.002 2239 0.55 1.00 SW066430-SW066424 24 44 0.002 2421 0.58 1.00 SW066424-SW066428 24 19 0.002 2150 0.57 1.00 SW066424-SW066417 8 20 0.003 271 1.00 1.00 SW066417-SW066428 8 19 0.022 630 0.74 1.00 SW066428-SW066427 24 265 0.002 2779 0.64 1.00 SW066427-SW066423 24 332 0.002 2779 0.64 1.00 SW066423-SW066426 24 314 0.002 2779 0.63 1.00 SW066426-SW066332 24 340 0.002 2779 0.65 1.00 SW066332-OT066331 24 25 0.002 3095 0.67 1.00 OT066331-OT066329 27 661 0.002 9901 1.00 1.00 OT066329-OT057445 27 658 0.002 9901 1.00 1.00 OT057445-OT057447 27 143 0.009 9861 0.73 0.73 OT057447-OT057448 27 450 0.009 9860 0.73 1.00 OT057448-OT057449 27 83 0.014 9860 0.61 1.00 OT057449-OT057450 27 566 0.005 9861 1.00 1.00 OT057450-OT057342 27 98 0.005 9871 1.00 1.00 OT057342-OT057339 27 681 0.005 9871 1.00 1.00 Euclid OT057339-SW050430 27 603 0.007 9871 1.00 1.00 Table 3 - Existing Land Use Scenario Plus Project D I S N E Y H A R B O R Harbor Harbor Disneyland Walnut 9th K A T E L L A I-7 Street Cross Street Upstrm MH-Dwnstrm MH Size (in) Length (ft) Slope (ft/ft) Peak Flow (gpm) d/D Adj. d/D Table 3 - Existing Land Use Scenario Plus Project Harbor SW076424-SW076410 21 278 0.002 464 0.27 1.00 SW076410-SW076409 21 159 0.002 465 0.28 0.61 SW076409-SW076408 21 159 0.002 478 0.28 0.80 SW076408-SW076407 24 60 0.002 478 0.25 0.80 SW076407-SW076405 24 318 0.002 478 0.23 1.00 SW076405-SW076433 24 56 0.002 478 0.24 1.00 SW076433-SW076308 24 379 0.002 478 0.24 1.00 SW076308-SW076307 24 176 0.002 478 0.23 1.00 SW076307-SW076306 24 202 0.002 478 0.24 1.00 SW076306-SW076305 24 113 0.002 478 0.24 1.00 SW076305-SW076304 24 262 0.002 478 0.23 1.00 SW076304-SW076303 24 110 0.002 561 0.26 1.00 SW076303-SW076302 24 279 0.002 561 0.26 1.00 SW076302-SW066417 24 53 0.006 581 0.20 1.00 SW066417-SW066422 24 276 0.001 222 0.18 0.18 SW066422-SW066421 24 331 0.002 230 0.16 0.17 SW066421-SW066420 24 250 0.002 250 0.17 0.19 SW066420-SW066419 24 80 0.003 416 0.21 0.21 SW066419-SW066418 24 338 0.002 416 0.22 0.22 SW066418-SW066328 24 329 0.002 416 0.22 0.22 SW066328-SW066327 24 331 0.002 416 0.22 0.22 SW066327-SW066325 24 327 0.002 416 0.22 0.22 SW066325-SW066324 24 299 0.002 416 0.21 0.21 9th SW066324-OT057444 24 43 0.002 416 0.22 0.22 OT057445-OT057444 24 14 0.000 40 0.26 0.26 OT057444-OT058209 24 384 0.004 418 0.19 0.19 OT058209-OT058219 24 555 0.004 418 0.19 0.19 OT058219-OT058406 24 514 0.004 418 0.19 0.19 OT058406-OT058408 24 92 0.004 421 0.19 0.19 OT058408-OT058415 24 371 0.004 421 0.19 0.19 OT058415-OT058435 24 728 0.004 421 0.19 0.19 Red 12" or larger pipes d/D > 0.75 and 10" or smaller pipes d/D > 0.67 Orange Backflow 12" or larger pipes d/D > 0.75 and 10" or smaller pipes d/D > 0.67 9 T H West Casa Vista Walnut Katella K A T E L L A I-8 Street Cross Street Upstrm MH-Dwnstrm MH Size (in) Length (ft) Slope (ft/ft) Peak Flow (gpm) d/D Adj. d/D SW087107-SW087303 10 206 0.003 15 0.12 0.20 SW087303-SW087302 10 251 0.003 79 0.28 0.32 SW087302-SW087301 10 234 0.003 127 0.35 0.36 SW087301-SW087106 10 219 0.005 178 0.38 0.50 SW087106-SW076224 10 59 0.011 574 0.57 0.72 Disney SW087106-SW087304 15 340 0.001 236 0.38 0.38 SW087304-SW087305 15 330 0.003 293 0.32 0.35 SW087305-SW087306 15 333 0.002 343 0.38 0.38 SW087306-SW087319 15 319 0.005 345 0.29 0.52 Disney SW076224-SW076425 18 312 0.002 823 0.48 0.51 SW076425-SW076402 18 280 0.001 823 0.57 0.57 SW076402-SW076403 18 238 0.002 823 0.46 0.46 SW076403-SW076404 18 236 0.002 823 0.46 0.46 SW076404-SW076432 18 235 0.003 824 0.41 0.48 SW087319-SW076432 21 56 0.002 345 0.24 0.57 SW076432-SW076431 21 41 0.001 1167 0.53 0.61 SW076431-SW076430 21 22 0.056 1064 0.18 0.67 SW076431-SW076424 8 23 0.002 103 0.48 1.00 SW076424-SW076430 8 22 0.053 1171 1.00 1.00 SW076430-SW076429 21 267 0.002 2153 0.73 0.73 SW076429-SW076428 21 265 0.002 2236 0.70 0.70 SW076428-SW076427 21 39 0.010 2237 0.42 0.60 SW076427-SW076417 21 449 0.002 2247 0.71 0.72 SW076417-SW076312 21 384 0.002 2413 0.77 0.77 SW076312-SW076311 21 374 0.002 2413 0.75 0.75 SW076311-SW076310 21 253 0.002 2413 0.77 0.77 SW076310-SW076309 21 249 0.002 2413 0.76 0.80 SW076309-SW066430 24 261 0.002 2413 0.58 0.81 SW066430-SW066424 24 44 0.002 2596 0.61 0.90 SW066424-SW066428 24 19 0.002 2322 0.60 0.79 SW066424-SW066417 8 20 0.003 276 1.00 1.00 SW066417-SW066428 8 19 0.022 712 1.00 1.00 SW066428-SW066427 24 265 0.002 3033 0.68 0.68 SW066427-SW066423 24 332 0.002 3033 0.68 0.68 SW066423-SW066426 24 314 0.002 3033 0.67 0.68 SW066426-SW066332 24 340 0.002 3033 0.70 0.70 SW066332-OT066331 24 25 0.002 3356 0.71 0.71 OT066331-OT066329 27 661 0.002 3764 0.64 0.64 OT066329-OT057445 27 658 0.002 3764 0.64 0.64 OT057445-OT057447 27 143 0.009 3764 0.40 0.44 OT057447-OT057448 27 450 0.009 3764 0.40 0.40 OT057448-OT057449 27 83 0.014 3764 0.35 0.41 OT057449-OT057450 27 566 0.005 3765 0.46 0.46 OT057450-OT057342 27 98 0.005 3782 0.46 0.46 OT057342-OT057339 27 681 0.005 3782 0.46 0.46 Euclid OT057339-SW050430 27 603 0.007 3782 0.43 0.43 D I S N E Y H A R B O R Table 4 - Buildout Land Use Scenario Plus Project Harbor Harbor Disneyland Walnut 9th K A T E L L A I-9 Street Cross Street Upstrm MH-Dwnstrm MH Size (in) Length (ft) Slope (ft/ft) Peak Flow (gpm) d/D Adj. d/D Table 4 - Buildout Land Use Scenario Plus Project Harbor SW076424-SW076410 21 278 0.002 2250 0.65 0.68 SW076410-SW076409 21 159 0.002 2305 0.70 0.70 SW076409-SW076408 21 159 0.002 2319 0.68 0.68 SW076408-SW076407 24 60 0.002 2319 0.58 0.58 SW076407-SW076405 24 318 0.002 2319 0.52 0.52 SW076405-SW076433 24 56 0.002 2319 0.57 0.57 SW076433-SW076308 24 379 0.002 2319 0.58 0.58 SW076308-SW076307 24 176 0.002 2319 0.53 0.53 SW076307-SW076306 24 202 0.002 2319 0.57 0.57 SW076306-SW076305 24 113 0.002 2319 0.56 0.56 SW076305-SW076304 24 262 0.002 2319 0.55 0.55 SW076304-SW076303 24 110 0.002 2400 0.56 0.56 SW076303-SW076302 24 279 0.002 2400 0.57 0.57 SW076302-SW066417 24 53 0.006 746 0.22 0.48 SW066417-SW066422 24 276 0.001 308 0.22 0.22 SW066422-SW066421 24 331 0.002 316 0.19 0.19 SW066421-SW066420 24 250 0.002 335 0.20 0.21 SW066420-SW066419 24 80 0.003 498 0.23 0.23 SW066419-SW066418 24 338 0.002 498 0.24 0.24 SW066418-SW066328 24 329 0.002 498 0.24 0.24 SW066328-SW066327 24 331 0.002 498 0.24 0.24 SW066327-SW066325 24 327 0.002 499 0.24 0.24 SW066325-SW066324 24 299 0.002 499 0.23 0.24 9th SW066324-OT057444 24 43 0.002 499 0.24 0.24 OT057445-OT057444 24 14 0.000 0 0.00 0.10 OT057444-OT058209 24 384 0.004 499 0.20 0.20 OT058209-OT058219 24 555 0.004 499 0.20 0.20 OT058219-OT058406 24 514 0.004 499 0.20 0.23 OT058406-OT058408 24 92 0.004 502 0.20 0.35 OT058408-OT058415 24 371 0.004 2269 0.44 0.44 OT058415-OT058435 24 728 0.004 2269 0.44 0.44 Red 12" or larger pipes d/D > 0.75 and 10" or smaller pipes d/D > 0.67 Orange Backflow 12" or larger pipes d/D > 0.75 and 10" or smaller pipes d/D > 0.67 9 T H West Casa Vista Walnut Katella K A T E L L A I-10 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Suite #162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Tel: (714) 765-5139 Fax: (714) 765-5280 www.anaheim.net City of Anaheim PLANNING DEPARTMENT There is no new correspondence regarding this item. 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Suite #162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Tel: (714) 765-5139 Fax: (714) 765-5280 www.anaheim.net ITEM NO. 4 PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT City of Anaheim PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT DATE: APRIL 18, 2016 SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2013-05678 LOCATION: 1256 North Magnolia Avenue (OCRV Storage, Inc.) APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER: The applicant is Mark Loxsom with OCRV Storage, Inc. The property owner is AVG Partners, represented by Peter A. Gilbert. REQUEST: The applicant requests approval of a conditional use permit to permit and retain an indoor/outdoor storage facility that includes the following uses: a temporary modular office trailer, indoor and outdoor storage of recreational and commercial vehicles, automobiles, trucks, trailers, miscellaneous equipment, and auto repair services. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the attached resolution, determining that this request is categorically exempt from further environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (Class 1, Existing Facilities) and approving Conditional Use Permit No. 2013-05678. BACKGROUND: This 11.75-acre property consists of two parcels under common ownership. The property was historically operated as a retail furniture showroom with warehousing space. The northerly parcel (Parcel 1) is 9.63 acres and consists of a 170,000 square foot building, with Wickes Furniture operating in 70,000 square feet and OCRV occupying the remaining 100,000 square feet for use as indoor storage, accessory retail and accessory vehicle repair. The outdoor area includes vehicle and equipment storage, vehicle valet (drop off) area, and an unpermitted modular office trailer. Parcel 2 is 2.12 acres with the existing 38,500 square foot building used by OCRV for indoor storage and is sublet for auto repair. Parcel 2 is also used for outdoor storage by OCRV and is subleased for outdoor storage of commercial vehicles and equipment. In 2013, the applicant began operating the vehicle and equipment storage on a portion of the site. At that time, the business owner was informed of the need to apply for a conditional use permit to retain the business. A Code Enforcement case remains active, pending a determination on this application. The property is located in the "I" Industrial zone. The General Plan designates Parcel 1 for General Commercial and Parcel 2 for Industrial land uses. The property is adjacent to Industrially-zoned properties to the south, east, and west, and the I-5 freeway to the north. South of the project site are medical office and adult day care uses, to the east is the Living Stream CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2013-05678 April 18, 2016 Page 2 of 5 Ministry campus, and to the west across Magnolia Avenue is a distribution center for a grocery chain (Northgate Market). AERIAL MAP PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes the indoor and outdoor storage of recreational and commercial vehicles, automobiles, boats, trucks, trailers, and miscellaneous equipment on the subject property. The applicant also requests to retain an existing unpermitted temporary office trailer, auto repair services, and accessory retail sales of RV-related items and RV repair on the property. Though presently operating in a 100,000 square foot portion of the northerly warehouse building, OCRV also requests to occupy the adjacent 70,000 square foot furniture store upon vacation of the Wickes Furniture store, which is expected to occur in August of 2017. The expansion would include a total 208,500 gross square feet of indoor storage space. The balance of the 11.75-acre site would be used for outdoor storage, RV valet staging area, and 38 customer parking spaces. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2013-05678 April 18, 2016 Page 3 of 5 The storage facility would continue to operate Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., and Saturdays, 8:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. Vehicle access is provided from Magnolia Avenue. The west parking lot would be used for 38 customer parking spaces plus an RV valet staging area to the north of the existing entry drive and office trailer. Patrons pick up and drop off their RVs in the staging area, and OCRV staff valet parks all RVs in the gated outdoor storage area or within the existing buildings. The applicant also proposes outdoor storage of firewood in the east yard, which would be sold to their RV storage customers. The facility also provides non-mechanical RV service and accessory retail of RV and camping-related items inside the buildings. The applicant further requests approval to continue outdoor storage of miscellaneous commercial equipment, materials, and vehicles in the south yard, which is subleased by a paving contractor. Lastly, the applicant requests to retain a sublessee performing outdoor automotive repair in the east yard, and proposes to relocate the use indoors in the southerly building. The repair consists primarily of mechanical work. This 38,500 square foot building would also be used for indoor storage of trailers, autos, and boats. SITE PLAN FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS: Conditional Use Permit: Before the Planning Commission may approve a conditional use permit, it must make a finding of fact that the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions exist: 1) That the proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by this code; 2) That the proposed use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses, or the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located; CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2013-05678 April 18, 2016 Page 4 of 5 3) That the size and shape of the site proposed for the use is adequate to allow the full development of the proposed use, in a manner not detrimental to either the particular area or health and safety; 4) That the traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area; and 5) That the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, if any, will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. Outdoor storage yards and automotive repair uses are permitted in the Industrial zone, subject to the approval of a conditional use permit to ensure compatibility with the surrounding area. Outdoor storage is required to be screened from view of a public street. Staff has determined that the proposed storage, indoor automotive repair, and accessory uses would be compatible with the surrounding uses which are commercial and industrial in nature. There are currently no established parking standards for this type of use. As a result, the applicant provided a parking justification letter which includes parking counts conducted over a three week period. The letter determined that the peak parking demand for both the RV storage and the furniture store to be 12 vehicles in the 38-space parking lot, or 32% of capacity. Staff conducted multiple site visits and found there to be adequate parking available, consistent with the findings of the applicant’s letter. Since there is no Zoning Code requirement for an RV storage facility, and the parking demand will likely decrease upon the cessation of the furniture store use in August of 2017, staff has determined that there is sufficient parking on-site to accommodate the demand of OCRV under existing conditions and upon their final expansion. Conditions of approval to ensure that the business is operated in a responsible manner have been attached to the draft resolution. As a result of a site inspection by staff, several conditions of approval are recommended. These conditions include a requirement for landscape screening along the northern property line, adjacent to the I-5 Freeway. The northerly storage yard has limited visibility from Magnolia Avenue due to the grade differential of the street and the subject property, as well as the existing right-of-way landscaping along the western property line. However, this storage yard on the north side of the building is visible from the I-5 southbound freeway on ramp. Per staff’s request, the applicant has agreed to install 24-inch box Tristania conferta “Brisbane Box” trees, at 20 feet on center, to screen the outdoor storage from view of this on ramp. A similar landscape screen once existed along this property line but was removed and never replaced. All other outdoor storage areas are screened from public view. The applicant installed a temporary modular office on the western side of the property, adjacent to Magnolia Avenue, without the proper permits. Modular units may be allowed by conditional use permit when they are not visible from the public right-of-way. Since the existing location is visible from North Magnolia Avenue, staff recommends removal or relocation of the modular unit in a north-south orientation adjacent to the west property line. Lastly, upon cessation of the furniture store use, staff recommends that the modular unit and all “Wickes” signage be removed within 30 days. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2013-05678 April 18, 2016 Page 5 of 5 During site visits, staff has observed several inoperable vehicles, damaged lighting and landscaped planters, a large wood pile from trees removed on-site, weeds and debris, and outdoor automotive repair. Accordingly, conditions have been included to ensure appropriate storage (within 60 days), site maintenance (60 days), lighting (90 days), north yard planter demolition (180 days), and relocation of the automotive repair within a building (immediately). Staff also recommends the additional landscape for screening be installed within 60 days. Based on these factors and compliance with the recommended conditions of approval, staff has determined that the proposed use would be compatible with the surrounding area and recommends approval of the conditional use permit. Environmental Impact Analysis: Staff recommends the Planning Commission find that the effects of the proposed project are typical of those generated within that class of projects (i.e., Class 1 – Existing Facilities) which consist of the repair, maintenance, and/or minor alteration of existing public or private structures or facilities, involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that existing at the time of this determination, and that, therefore, pursuant to Section 15301 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, the proposed project will not cause a significant effect on the environment and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA. CONCLUSION: The requested temporary modular office trailer, indoor and outdoor storage of recreational and commercial vehicles, automobiles, boats, trucks, trailers, miscellaneous equipment, and indoor auto repair services is compatible with surrounding commercial and industrial land uses. The recommended conditions of approval will ensure that the facility will not have an adverse impact on the surrounding land uses. Therefore, staff recommends approval of this request. Prepared by, Submitted by, Nick Taylor Jonathan E. Borrego Associate Planner Planning Services Manager Attachments: 1. Draft Conditional Use Permit Resolution 2. Letter of Operation 3. Parking Justification Letter 4. Plans 5. Site Photographs RS-2SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE RS-2SFR RS-2SFR R S -2 S I N G L E F A M I L Y R E S I D E N C E IWICKES FURNITURE IDELPHI BASEBALL FIELD INORTHGATEDISTRIBUTIONCENTER IINDUSTRIALIMEDICAL OFFICE IINDUSTRIAL IINDUSTRIAL IOFFICES IVOCATIONALSCHOOL IBUSINESS PARK 5 FREEWAY N M A G N O L I A A V E W HOUSTON AVE N A V O N D A L E A V E W. LA PALMA AVE N . M A G N O L I A A V E N . D A L E A V E . ORANGETHORPE AVE 1256 North Magnolia Avenue DEV No. 2013-00072 Subject Property APN: 071-062-01071-062-03 °0 50 100 Feet Aerial Photo:May 2014 5 FREEWAY N M A G N O L I A A V E W HOUSTON AVE N A V O N D A L E A V E W. LA PALMA AVE N . M A G N O L I A A V E N . D A L E A V E . ORANGETHORPE AVE 1256 North Magnolia Avenue DEV No. 2013-00072 Subject Property APN: 071-062-01071-062-03 °0 50 100 Feet Aerial Photo:May 2014 [DRAFT] ATTACHMENT NO. 1 - 1 - PC2016-*** RESOLUTION NO. PC2016-*** A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2013-05678 AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH (DEV2013-00072) (1256 NORTH MAGNOLIA AVENUE) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim (the "Planning Commission") did receive a verified petition to approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2013- 05678 to permit a storage facility to include the following: a temporary modular office trailer, indoor and outdoor storage of recreational and commercial vehicles, automobiles, trucks, trailers, miscellaneous equipment, and auto repair services (the "Proposed Project") on that certain real property located at 1256 North Magnolia Avenue in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, as generally depicted on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference; and WHEREAS, the Property is approximately 11.79 acres in size and is currently developed with a retail furniture store and warehouse. The Anaheim General Plan designates the Property for General Commercial and Industrial land uses. The underlying zone of the Property is the "I" Industrial Zone, meaning that the Property is subject to the zoning and development standards contained in Chapter 18.10 (Industrial Zone) of the Anaheim Municipal Code (the "Code"); and WHEREAS, “outdoor storage yards” and “automotive – repair and modification” are conditionally permitted uses; and “warehousing and storage – enclosed” is a permitted use within the “I” Industrial Zone; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on April 18, 2016 at 5:00 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 18.60 (Procedures) of the Code, to hear and consider evidence for and against proposed Conditional Use Permit No. 2013-05678, and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, pursuant to and in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.; herein referred to as “CEQA”), the State of California Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations; herein referred to as the "CEQA Guidelines"), and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual, the City is the "lead agency" for the preparation and consideration of environmental documents for the Proposed Project; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds and determines that the effects of the Proposed Project are typical of those generated within that class of projects (i.e., Class 1 – Existing Facilities) which consist of the operation, repair, maintenance, permitting, leasing, licensing, or minor alteration of existing public or private structures, facilities, mechanical equipment, or topographical features, involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that - 2 - PC2016-*** existing at the time of this determination, and that, therefore, pursuant to Section 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines, the Proposed Project will not cause a significant effect on the environment and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study made by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing with respect to the Proposed project and, specifically, with respect to the request for Conditional Use Permit No. 2013-05678, does find and determine the following: 1. The proposed outdoor storage yard and and automotive repair and modification are allowable primary uses within the "I" Industrial Zone, subject to a conditional use permit, as authorized under Table 10-A of Section 18.10.030 (Uses) of Chapter 18.10 (Industrial Zone) of the Code. 2. The proposed conditional use permit to permit an outdoor storage yard and automotive repair and modification, as conditioned herein, would not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located because the facility would be located within an existing industrial property that will be adequately screened from public view and is surrounded by compatible buildings and uses. 3. The size and shape of the site for the use is adequate to allow the full development of the outdoor storage yard and automotive repair and modification facility in a manner not detrimental to the particular area or to the health and safety because the facility would be located within an existing industrial property that provides a sufficient number of onsite parking spaces and vehicle circulation as justified in the applicant’s letter dated March 24, 2016. 4. The traffic generated by the facility will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area because the traffic generated by this use will not exceed the anticipated volumes of traffic on the surrounding streets and adequate parking and circulation will be provided to accommodate the use. 5. The granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim as the proposed land use will continue to be integrated with the surrounding industrial and medical office uses in the area and would not pose a health or safety risk to the citizens of the City of Anaheim. WHEREAS, this Planning Commission determines that the evidence in the record constitutes substantial evidence to support the actions taken and the findings made in this Resolution, that the facts stated in this Resolution are supported by substantial evidence in the record, including testimony received at the public hearing, the staff presentations, the staff report and all materials in the project files. There is no substantial evidence, nor are there other facts, that detract from the findings made in this Resolution. This Planning Commission expressly declares that it considered all evidence presented and reached these findings after due consideration of all evidence presented to it. - 3 - PC2016-*** NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, pursuant to the above findings, this Planning Commission does hereby approve Conditional Use Permit No. No. 2013-05678, contingent upon and subject to the conditions of approval set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, which are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of that portion of the Property for which Conditional Use Permit No. 2013-05678 is applicable in order to preserve the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. Extensions for further time to complete conditions of approval may be granted in accordance with Section 18.60.170 of the Code. Timing for compliance with conditions of approval may be amended by the Planning Director upon a showing of good cause provided (i) equivalent timing is established that satisfies the original intent and purpose of the condition, (ii) the modification complies with the Code, and (iii) the applicant has demonstrated significant progress toward establishment of the use or approved development. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that any amendment, modification or revocation of this permit may be processed in accordance with Chapters 18.60.190 (Amendment to Permit Approval) and 18.60.200 (City-Initiated Revocation or Modification of Permits) of the Code. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission does hereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance with each and all of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any part thereof, be declared invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution, and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the Code and any other applicable City, State and Federal regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of April 18, 2016. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60 (Procedures) of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced by a City Council Resolution in the event of an appeal. CHAIR, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ATTEST: SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM - 4 - PC2016-*** STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim held on April 18, 2016 by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 18th day of April, 2016. SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM - 5 - PC2016-*** - 6 - PC2016-*** EXHIBIT “B” CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2013-05678 (DEV2013-00072) NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT GENERAL 1 If left turn access is to be provided: It is the responsibility of the property owner to remove and relocate any traffic signal poles and equipment at the intersection of Magnolia Avenue and Via Gonzalez, if necessary, at the property owner’s expense. Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, street improvement plans shall be submitted for all traffic related improvements adjacent to the project site to the Public Works Department, Development Services Division for review and approval. These plans will show both sides of all streets and alleys adjacent to the property, including all driveways and utility installations, signing and striping. All improvements shall be installed and completed prior to the first final building and zoning inspection. Prior to issuance of building permits, a bond shall be posted for all traffic related street improvements, including, but not limited to, directional signage, striping, and median islands as required for said project. All improvements identified as required for the project opening shall be completed prior to final building and zoning inspection. If left turn access is not provided: Within 30 days of the date of approval, signs prohibiting left turns to and from Magnolia Avenue shall be erected. The signs shall be consistent with the California MUTCD sign type R3-2. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. Public Works Department Traffic & Transportation Division 2 Within 60 days of the date of approval , the applicant shall submit plans and complete a Building Code analysis for occupancy changes and any tenant improvements within the subject building. In addition, the proper building permits shall be obtained for the modular office building. Planning and Building Department, Building Division 3 Any graffiti painted or marked upon the business premises or on any adjacent area under the control of the business owner shall be removed or painted over within 24 hours of being applied or discovered by the business owner. Planning and Building Department, Code Enforcement Division - 7 - PC2016-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT 4 The business shall be operated in accordance with the Letter of Request submitted as part of this application. Any changes to the business operation, as described in that document, shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Director to determine substantial conformance with the Letter of Request and to ensure compatibility with the surrounding uses. Planning and Building Department, Planning Services Division 5 The Applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City and its officials, officers, employees and agents (collectively referred to individually and collectively as “Indemnitees”) from any and all claims, actions or proceedings brought against Indemnitees to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the decision of the Indemnitees concerning this permit or any of the proceedings, acts or determinations taken, done, or made prior to the decision, or to determine the reasonableness, legality or validity of any condition attached thereto. The Applicant’s indemnification is intended to include, but not be limited to, damages, fees and/or costs awarded against or incurred by Indemnitees and costs of suit, claim or litigation, including without limitation attorneys’ fees and other costs, liabilities and expenses incurred by Indemnitees in connection with such proceeding. Planning and Building Department, Planning Services Division 6 The applicant is responsible for paying all charges related to the processing of this discretionary case application within 30 days of the issuance of the final invoice or prior to the issuance of building permits for this project, whichever occurs first. Failure to pay all charges shall result in delays in the issuance of required permits or may result in the revocation of the approval of this application. Planning and Building Department, Planning Services Division 7 The business premises shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitioner, which plans are on file with the Planning Department, and as conditioned herein. Planning and Building Department, Planning Services Division 8 The applicant shall immediately cease all outdoor automotive repair and modification. Planning and Building Department, Code Enforcement Division 9 Within 60 days from the date of approval, the applicant shall remove or relocate the temporary modular office building. The relocation shall be adjacent to the west property line and oriented north-south. The modular office shall be removed from the site no later than September 1, 2017. Planning and Building Department, Planning Services Division - 8 - PC2016-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT 10 Within 60 days from the date of approval, the applicant shall remove all scrap wood, or store all scrap wood neatly on racks in an area that is screened from public view. Planning and Building Department, Planning Services Division 11 Within 60 days from the date of approval, the applicant shall remove or relocate within a building all inoperable vehicles and/or spare vehicle parts and equipment. Planning and Building Department, Planning Services Division 12 Within 60 days from the date of approval, the applicant shall install a minimum 24-inch box, low canopy, evergreen trees along the northern property line at 20 feet on center, subject to the approval of the Planning Services Manager, and shall install appropriate irrigation. Said trees shall be permanently maintained in a healthy condition. Planning and Building Department, Planning Services Division 13 Within 180 days from the date of approval, the applicant shall demolish all landscape planters in the north yard and pave with asphalt to match the storage yard; and remove all weeds and debris from the site to the satisfaction of the Planning Services Manager. Planning and Building Department, Planning Services Division 14 Within 30 days of the vacation of the furniture store, all signs related to the vacated business shall be removed. Planning and Building Department, Planning Services Division 15 Within 90 days from the date of approval, the applicant shall repair or remove all damaged exterior parking lot light pole fixtures and pull appropriate permits. Adequate lighting of parking lots, passageways, recesses, and grounds contiguous to buildings shall be provided with lighting of sufficient wattage to provide adequate illumintation to make clearly visible the presence of any person on or about the premises during the hours of darkness and provide a safe, secure environment for all persons, property, and vehicles on-site. The lighting in the parking lot shall be maintained in proper working order and remain illuminated during hours of darkness. Outdoor full cut off wall pack fixtures shall be added to each side of the building’s exterior and be illuminated during hours of darkeness. Planning and Building Department, Planning Services Division & Police Department, Planning & Research Division 16 Within 60 days from the date of approval, the applicant shall ensure that address numbers are readily visible from the street and illuminated during hours of darkness. The applicant shall also install rooftop numbers for the police helicopter. The numbers shall be a minimum size of 4 feet in height and 2 feet in width. Police Department, Planning & Research Division - 9 - PC2016-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT The lines of the numbers shall be a minimum of 6 inches thick. Numbers shall be spaced 12 inches to 18 inches apart. And in a contrasting color to the roof material. Number shall face the street to which the structure is addressed. Numbers shall not be visible from the ground level. OC RV Storage, Inc. 14252 Culver Dr., Suite A-138 Irvine, Ca. 92604-0326 949-705-7540 April 4, 2016 David See, Principal Planner Nicolas J. Taylor, Associate Planner City of Anaheim — Planning Department 200 S. Anaheim Blvd., Suite 162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Subject: Conditional Use Permit No. CUP2013-05678 1256 North Magnolia Avenue RESUBMITTAL — Letter of Operations Dear David and Nicolas, OCRV Storage Inc. (OCRV) was incorporated in the State of California as a Corp-S in 2005, which provides Indoor and Outdoor Vehicle valet storage, staging, parking, delivery and non-mechanical servicing, modification, maintenance and trip preparation. OCRV started operations in December 2005 at 5260 E. La Palma, Anaheim, CA with 70,000 GSF of indoor storage and approximate a 3 acres storage yard, an Industrial Zoned property. In late 2012, OCRV had exceeded it's capacity for RV storage and requested the owners of 5260 E. La Palma to allow an expansion, which was not possible. Due to the Owner's own needs, they did propose that they would allow a cancellation of OCRV's long term lease if OCRV could vacate by June 1, 2013. After searching and reviewing many potential properties, in early April 2013, OCRV identified an available 100,000 GSF of Indoor storage with a 5 acre yard Industrial Zoned property at 1256 N. Magnolia. OCRV vacated 5260 E La Palma in 6 weeks and were back in full operation by August 2013 on the N. Magnolia property. OCRV again expanded to 138,000 GSF and total of 8 Acres on the N. Magnolia Property in early 2014, which is our current facility. OCRV is currently working on a final expansion which will incorporate all 208,500 GSF of buildings and the approximate 12 acres of property at 1256 N. Magnolia to be completed approximately August 2017. OCRV's office hours (Only time when OCRV would have visitors) are Monday through Friday 8 AM to 5 PM, Saturday 8 AM to 1 PM. OCRV is closed on Saturday afternoons, Sundays and most Holidays. Valet storage, parking, staging, delivery and vehicle services occur mainly during office hours, however, can occur as need at any time. 1 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 OC RV Storage, Inc. 14252 Culver Dr., Suite A-138 Irvine, Ca. 92604-0326 949-705-7540 April 4, 2016 Conditional Use Permit No. CUP2013-05678 1256 North Magnolia Avenue RESUBMITTAL — Letter of Operations Currently, the only area on the property that OCRV does not occupy is the existing furniture store that occupies 70,000 GSF and is the primary user of the front parking lot. The furniture store hours are 7 days/week 10 AM to 7 PM, open most Holidays. The current furniture store tenant on a month to month lease and will vacate on or before August 1, 2017. OCRV will then occupy this space for mainly vehicle storage with a small RV specific store of 2,000 GSF and 1,000 GSF of offices. The vehicle service areas, currently in other areas occupied by OCRV, will be centralized in this future OCRV space, which will utilize approximately 2,000 GSF. OCRV's capacity is based on total linear feet of 12' wide storage/parking "Lanes" that are anywhere from 20' to 250' Deep. Owners of vehicles are only authorized to be in the pickup staging and drop off secure yard that includes 12 — 15' wide x 70' pull-through angled lanes, which allows 24/7/365 pickup and drop-off by vehicle owners through a monitored secure gate. All other on property moving of vehicles are by OCRV staff to either move from storage lanes to staging yard for pickup or from staging yard to storage lanes when dropped off, with the exception of commercial vehicles, which are moved by their drivers. Vehicle owners must request (at a minimum) the day before they need their vehicle be staged for pickup with a specific day and time by voice or text message on the OCRV business phone number, which is monitored 24/7/365 by staff. The vehicle owners are also required to keep their vehicles in good operating and appearance condition at all times per their executed agreement with OCRV, which states: • All vehicles must be in good operating condition and remain clean with an acceptable appearance. You will be notified by email if your vehicle requires attention and if corrections are not made within 30 days, OCRV will have your vehicle removed from the facility and the owner will be responsible for all towing and impound fees. All outdoor yard areas are used for Recreational Vehicle (RV) storage, staging and parking, except for some minor exceptions that are identified on the proposed site plan provided with the CUP submission, they are: • Storage of firewood stockpile of split, rounds and logs of wood stacked in an orderly manner in a well screened area in the East Yard, and in racks in the staging yard. • Roll off dumpsters in use (non-garbage trash and yard clippings) and empty bins, in well screened area in East Yard. • OCRV Commercial Tenant located at loading dock at Southwest corner is a specialty paving contractor that stores some non-vehicle materials and equipment outdoors on pavement or racks in a temporary, orderly and clean manner. • Approximate 60 stalls for commercial vehicle parking. 2 Sincerely, Mark Loxsom Owner, OCRV Storage, Inc. California Licensed Architect C-15422 OC RV Storage, Inc. 14252 Culver Dr., Suite A-138 Irvine, Ca. 92604-0326 949-705-7540 April 4, 2016 Conditional Use Permit No. CUP2013-05678 1256 North Magnolia Avenue RESUBMITTAL — Letter of Operations Proposed timeline on completing property improvements per City conditions of CUP approval: On Going: Keep North, South and West yards clean, current landscaping healthy and in good appearance. July 1, 2016: Remove all Outdoor stored non-operating, in poor appearance, not currently registered stored vehicles in North, South and West storage yards. August 1, 2016: Planting of screening trees along North property line. 24" box Tristania conferta (Brisbane box) trees will be planted at a maximum of 20' between existing trees. September 1. 2016: Repair, replace and/or remove lighting in the North, South and West yards. October 1, 2016: Remove all East Yard debris, non-operating vehicles, trim/remove over grown landscaping and consolidate all firewood stockpile to area identified in on A1.0. November 1, 2016 — August 1, 2017: (OCRV Needs to occupy Furniture store to complete): Move to Indoor space vehicle modification work currently being performed in East Yard. Re-stripe front parking lot to current City standards and per approved parking variance. Repair, modify or replace front parking lot lighting to meet current City coverage requirements. Remove existing office trailer and relocate OCRV offices into current furniture store space. Please do not hesitate to ask any questions about the OCRV operation. 3 OC RV Storage, Inc. 14252 Culver Dr., Suite A-138 Irvine, Ca. 92604-0326 949-705-7540 April 4, 2016 David See, Principal Planner Nicolas J. Taylor, Associate Planner City of Anaheim — Planning Department 200 S. Anaheim Blvd., Suite 162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Subject: Conditional Use Permit No. CUP2013-05678 1256 North Magnolia Avenue OCRV Storage, Inc. Parking Letter Dear David and Nicolas, Both the existing uses on the property and the Final Plan proposed by OCRV have a much lower actual parking need than that required by the current parking standards in the City's Code for warehousing & storage. From our experience of being in business in Anaheim since 2005, we have estimated the following range in number of vehicles requiring parking and have attached an actual recent parking survey, which further demonstrates the proposed parking plan will more than satisfy the current and future parking requirements of the uses on the property. The existing front parking lot will be the only parking area needed on the property and will be re- striped to meet current City of Anaheim Standards Details 470 and 436G. The following are from daily parking count tallies in 2015: Valet Drop-off or Pick-up: 0 (Specific secured yard provided for this purpose) Visitors to Office: Retail Customers: Commercial Vehicles: Delivery Services: Staff and Vendors: Total: 3-10 (During Office Hours) 20-50 (During Store Hours)* 0 (Parking in specific leased stalls in secure yards) 0 (Size Specific spaces identified for Delivery vehicles) 2-15 (During Office & Store Hours) 25-75 (Over 11 Hour period/day) *This parking need represents either the current 70,000 GSF Furniture Store or it represents OCRV's 2,000 GSF Retail Store, which will replace the current furniture store by August 2017. 1 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 OC RV Storage, Inc. 14252 Culver Dr., Suite A-138 Irvine, Ca. 92604-0326 949-705-7540 April 4, 2016 Conditional Use Permit No. CUP2013-05678 1256 North Magnolia Avenue OCRV Storage, Inc. Request for Parking Variance To demonstrate the above parking space needs, we have just completed the attached survey that provides actual count of parked vehicles in the existing front parking lot approximately each hour during OCRV's office hours from February 29, 2016 to March 20, 2016. The existing front parking lot is the only parking area on the property and currently provides parking for both OCRV's and the Furniture store needs. The current lot has a total of 38 marked parking stalls, with 8 of which being marked for handicapped use. Since it is clear that the existing 38 parking spaces in the front parking lot does not exceed 30% occupied at any time, a Parking Variance to maintain the existing 38 Parking stalls is requested with additional parking required. OCRV will also reduce the marked Handicapped stalls to two, with one provide for a van. All parking stalls will be re-marked to meet City of Anaheim Standards Details 470 and 436G. The attached drawing A0.1 (revised 414/16) indicates how the existing Handicapped Parking stalls will be re-designated. This revised proposed final plan represents a minimum of 38 parking spaces will be maintained. Please don't hesitate to ask any questions if clarification is needed. Sincerely, Mark Loxsom Owner, OCRV Storage, Inc. California Licensed Architect C-15422 2 OC RV Storage, Inc. 14252 Culver Dr., Suite A-138 Irvine, Ca. 92604-0326 949-705-7540 March 24, 2016 Conditional Use Permit No. CUP2013-05678 1256 North Magnolia Avenue OCRV Storage, Inc. Request for Parking Variance Actual Parking Count for OCRV and Wicks Furniture Store February 29, 2016 to March 20, 2016 OCRV Storage Inc. Office Hours: M-F: 8 AM - 5 PM; Sat: 8 AM - 1 PM Wicks Furniture Store Hours: Mon-Sun: 10 AM - 7 PM N/A: Hours OCRV Closed and Wicks Open, No Counts Taken =by OCRV 8:00 AM 9:00 AM 10:00 AM 11:00 AM 12:00 PM 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 6:00 PM 7:00 PM 2/29/2016 Monday 1 2 4 5 7 5 5 7 5 6 N/A N/A 3/1/2016 Tuesday 1 2 4 7 5 7 5 4 5 4 N/A N/A 3/2/2016 Wednesday 2 2 7 4 5 8 4 5 5 4 N/A N/A 3/3/2016 Thursday 1 3 4 5 5 6 6 7 7 6 N/A N/A 3/4/2016 Friday 1 1 3 4 2 2 3 2 5 4 N/A N/A 3/5/2016 Saturday 1 2 5 6 5 4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 3/6/2016 Sunday N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 3/7/2016 Monday 1 3 6 8 8 5 8 6 7 6 N/A N/A 3/8/2016 Tuesday 1 2 5 6 5 5 7 3 3 3 N/A N/A 3/9/2016 Wednesday 3 2 7 10 5 5 6 6 5 4 N/A N/A 3/10/2016 Thursday 1 2 6 7 5 4 4 5 3 2 N/A N/A 3/11/2016 Friday 1 3 5 4 3 5 4 6 6 5 N/A N/A 3/12/2016 Saturday 1 2 6 5 5 4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 3/13/2016 Sunday N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 3/14/2016 Monday 2 1 4 4 2 4 9 6 4 3 N/A N/A 3/15/2016 Tuesday 1 2 7 5 4 6 4 6 4 3 N/A N/A 3/16/2016 Wednesday 1 3 3 4 4 5 4 5 3 3 N/A N/A 3/17/2016 Thursday 1 2 5 2 2 4 2 4 5 4 N/A N/A 3/18/2016 Friday 1 1 5 4 3 3 3 3 2 3 N/A N/A 3/19/2016 Saturday 2 3 12 9 4 4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 3/20/2016 Sunday _ N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 320.0' 320.0' 1 2 0 . 0 ' TILT UP C O N C 352.67' 872.16' CONC. RAMP 3 9 3 . 0 ' MAGNOLIA AVENUE SA N T A A N A F R E E W A Y & R A I L R O A D F . H . 4 2 4 . 9 5 ' 6   ƒ      ( 6   ƒ      ( 2 3 7 . 5 7 ' 1ƒ : 6ƒ ( 1ƒ ( 9 9 9 8 EXITEXIT EXIT EXIT EXIT EXIT EXIT EXIT EXIT EXIT 4 Existing planter (typ.) Existing wall 1 1 2 1 PIVS 9 CONC TILT UP BLDG 38,500 SF.FT. 38,000 SQ. FT. VEHICLE STORAGE 400 SQ. FT. VEHICLE SERVICE 100 SQ. FT. RESTROOM/ UTILITIES 8 Existing sign Existing sign 175' 4 4 4 4 7 7 9 7 9 7 9 5 9 1 9 Existing wall 8 4 9 9 3 8 3 5 5 8 4 14 5 55 8 8 8813 10 4 12 10 15 6 10 10 10 10 ENCLOSED TURNEL 6 4 4 4 4 10 6 10 4 0 0 . 0 ' 6 6 8 8108 14 425' 9 EXIT 11 10 1 10 2 1 2 1014 CONC TILT UP BLDG 170,000 SF.FT. 165,000 SQ. FT. VEHICLE STORAGE 1,000 SQ. FT. OFFICE 1,600 SQ. FT. VEHICLE SERVICE 2,000 SQ. RETAIL/ RETAIL INVENTORY 400 SQ. FT. RESTROOM/ UTILITIES F . H . 7 13 Planting of new screening trees along North SURSHUW\OLQHEHWZHHQH[LVWLQJWUHHV´ER[ Tristania conferta (Brisbane box) trees will be SODQWHGDWDPD[LPXPRI¶RQFHQWHU A0.1 PROPOSED SITE PLAN SITE PLAN KEYED NOTES NOTE: ALL SITE CONDITIONS SHOWN ARE EXISTING TO REMAIN EXCEPT THOSE NOTED IN THE KEYED NOTES BELOW. MARK DESCRIPTION OF WORK DETAIL 8' PICKET FENCE 20' ROLLING GATE x 8' HIGH KEYPAD ACCESS WITH FIRE DEPT. OVER RIDE NO LEFT TURN SIGN VEHICLE DROP OFF / PICK UP AREA SITE PLAN KEYED NOTES 8' EXISTING CHAIN LINK FENCE W/ BARBED WIRE VEHICLE STORAGE YARD COMMERCIAL VEHICLE STAGING / VEHICLE STORE AREA PROPOSED SITE PLAN1 CUSTOMER , TENANT EMPLOYER VEHICLE PARKING PC2 NOTES: 1.TOTAL PARKING = 38 STALLS INCLUDING 1 HANDICAP AND 1 VAN HANDICAP. STRIPING WILL MEET CITY OF ANAHEIM PARKING STANDARDS . DETAILS 470 AND 436G VEHICLE CIRCULATION TO MEET FIRE DEPT. STANDARDS PROPERTY GENERAL NOTES: 1. NO PUBLIC OR PRIVATE STREET IMPROVEMENTS INCLUDED. 2. THERE ARE NO CHANGES TO THE EXISTING PROPERTY OR BUILDING IMPROVEMENTS. THE PROPERTY IS APPROXIMATELY 12 ACRES AND THE EXISTING STRUCTURES ON THE PROPERTY HAVE A TOTAL GROSS FLOOR AREA OF APPROXIMATELY 208,500 GROSS SQUARE FEET. EXISTING CONSTRUCTION IS CONCRETE TILT-UP EXTERIOR WALLS AND WOOD FRAMED ROOF STRUCTURE, FULL FIRE SPRINKLER PROTECTED. 3. ORIGINAL SETBACKS UNKNOWN; NO ADDITIONS TO EXISTING STRUCTURES INCLUDED, ALL YARDS REMAIN AS-IS. 4. NO CHANGES TO THE EXISTING PAVED AREAS; UTILITIES OR SIGNAGE. 5. NO CHANGES IN PEDESTRIAN OR VEHICLE ACCESS OR CIRCULATION. 6. NO CHANGES TO FIRE HYDRANTS OR THE STRUCTURES THEY SERVE. 7. NO CHANGES IN THE UTILITIES PROVIDING SERVICE TO THE EXISTING PROPERTY OR STRUCTURES. 8. EXISTING WATER METERS AND BACKFLOW DEVICES ARE LOCATED IN GROUND BOXES OR VAULTS; ELECTRICAL TRANSFORMERS ARE LOCATED IN PAVED AREAS IN EAST (REAR) YARD; NO SCREENING REQUIRED FOR THESE EXISTING UTILITY STRUCTURES. 9. EXISTING LANDSCAPE AREAS WILL BE CLEARED,PRUNED AND KEPT IN A WELL MAINTAINED CONDITION. NO NEW LANDSCAPING OR PLANTINGS WILL BE ADDED LEGAL DESCRIPTION: THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHWESTQUARTER OF SECTION 6, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 10 WEST, IN , THE RANCHO LOS COYOTES, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 51, PAGE 10 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: '/EE/E'dWK/Ed/Ed,t^d>/EK&^/^d/KEϲ͕/^dEdd,ZKEEKZd,ϬͲϯϵΖͲϬϬ͟t^d͕ϭϬϲϬ͘ϰϱ FEET FROM THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN PARCEL 2 OF THE LAND CONVEYED TO THE EMERSON ELECTRIC MANUFACTURING COMPANY, A MISSOURI CORPORATION BY DEED RECORDED JULY 31, 1962 IN KK<ϲϭϵϳ͕W'ϳϲK&K&&//>ZKZ^͕ZKZ^K&^/KhEdz͕d,EKEd/Eh/E'EKZd,ϬͲϯϵΖͲϬϬ͟t^d ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE, 192.48 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN THE DEED TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, RECORDED APRIL 19, 1955 IN BOOK 3034, PAGE 414 OF SAID OFFICIAL RECORDS, THENCE ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID LAND CONVEYED TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, THE FOLLOWING COURSES AND /^dE^͗EKZd,ϴϵͲϮϭΖͲϬϬ͟^d͕ϯϬ͘ϬϬ&d͖EKZd,ϲͲϮϴΖͲϯϬ͟^d͕ϮϬϭ͘ϱϲ&d͕EEKZd,ϱͲϭϬΖͲϯϰ͟^d͕ 495.10 FEET TO A POINT IN THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF THE 100.00 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY OF THE SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, DESCRIBED IN THE FIRST PARCEL OF DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 44 PAGE 495 OF DEEDS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY; THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTHWESTERLY LINE, SOUTH ϱϳͲϭϬΖͲϯϱ͟^d͕ϰϮϰ͘ϵϱ&dE^Khd,ϱϳͲϭϯΖͲϯϬ͟^d͕Ϯϯϳ͘ϱϳ&ddK>/EWZ>>>t/d,E/^dEd EASTERLY, 658.00 FEET, MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES FROM THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID SECTION 6, BEING THE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF PARCEL NO. 1 AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 43, PAGE 27 OF PARCEL MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY; THENCE ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID PARCEL EK͘ϭ^Khd,ϬͲϯϵΖͲϬϬ͟^d͕ϴϳϮ͘ϭϱ&d͕^Khd,ϴϵͲϭϳΖͲϭϱ͟t^d͕Ϯϲϱ͘ϬϬ&d͕EEKZd,ϬͲϯϵΖͲϬϬ͟t^d͕ϯϱϮ͘ϲϳ FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT THEREIN; THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID BOUNDARY AND THE WESTERLY WZK>KE'd/KEd,ZK&^Khd,ϴϵͲϮϭΖͲϬϬ͟t^dϯϵϯ͘ϬϬ&ddKd,WK/Ed'/EE/E'͘ EXCEPTIONS: 5. ROAD AND PUBLIC UTILITIES EASEMENT RECORDED JANUARY 12, 1968 IN BOOK 8491, PAGE 339, OFFICIAL RECORDS. 6. 5' WIDE PUBLIC UTILITIES EASEMENT RECORDED APRIL 26, 1972 IN BOOK 10099, PAGE 759, OFFICIAL RECORDS. 13. 7 PARCEL STATE HIGHWAY EASEMENT RECORDED JANUARY 25, 1999 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 19990051566, OFFICIAL RECORDS. EXIT PATH 1.NORTHERN PARCEL: 9.63 ACRES 1256 N. Magnolia Avenue ( APN 071-062-01) 2.SOUTHERN PARCEL: 2.12 ACRES 1256 N. Magnolia Avenue ( APN 071-062-03) TRASH ENCLOSURE IF REQUIRE FOR OPERATION 40 YD TRASH BIN SPECIAL PAVEMENT MEMBRANE EQUIPMENT AND MATERIAL STORAGE DELIVERY VEHICLE PARKING/STAGING FIRE WOOD, CUTTING, SPLITTING STORAGE AREA PC2 PC2 ATTACHMENT NO. 4 PROPOSED SITE PLAN1 Planting of new screening trees along North SURSHUW\OLQHEHWZHHQH[LVWLQJWUHHV´ER[ Tristania conferta (Brisbane box) trees will be SODQWHGDWDPD[LPXPRI¶RQFHQWHU ATTACHMENT NO. 5 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Suite #162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Tel: (714) 765-5139 Fax: (714) 765-5280 www.anaheim.net City of Anaheim PLANNING DEPARTMENT There is no new correspondence regarding this item.