The URL can be used to link to this page

PC 2016/07/25 City of Anaheim Planning Commission Agenda Monday, July 25, 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, John Seymour, One Vacancy • Call To Order - 5:00 p.m. • Pledge Of Allegiance • Appointments New Planning Commission Chairman and Chairman Pro-Tempore • 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, July 21, 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 07-25-2016 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. 07-25-2016 Page 3 of 5 Public Hearing Items ITEM NO. 2 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05854 VARIANCE NO. 2016-05058 (DEV2016-00006) Location: 1815 East Center Street and 115 North Coffman Street Request: The following land use entitlements are being requested: (i) a conditional use permit to permit and retain an existing church; and (ii) a variance to allow fewer parking spaces than required by the Zoning Code. 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 ITEM NO. 3 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05863 ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT NO. 2016-00384* (DEV2016-00021) * The original advertisement included Variance No. 2016-05072 to permit less parking spaces than required by Code; however this case number was subsequently modified to Administrative Adjustment No. 2016-00384 due to a reduction in the parking deviation being requested. Location: 546 South Rose Street Request: The following land use entitlements are being requested: (i) a conditional use permit to permit and retain an existing automotive repair facility; and (ii) an administrative adjustment to allow fewer parking spaces than required by the Zoning Code. 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: Lindsay Ortega LOrtega@anaheim.net 07-25-2016 Page 4 of 5 ITEM NO. 4 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2015-05845 VARIANCE NO. 2016-05068 (DEV2015-00128) Location: 500 South Walnut Street Request: The following land use entitlements are being requested: (i) a conditional use permit to construct a 4- story self-storage facility, and to allow a floor area ratio higher than permitted by the Zoning Code; and (ii) a variance to permit reduced setbacks along Walnut Street and Manchester Avenue. Environmental Determination: The Planning Commission will consider whether a Mitigated Negative Declaration is the appropriate environmental documentation for this request under the California Environmental Quality Act. Resolution No. ______ Project Planner: Wayne Carvalho wcarvalho@anaheim.net Adjourn to Monday, August 8, 2016 at 5:00 p.m. 07-25-2016 Page 5 of 5 CERTIFICATION OF POSTING I hereby certify that a complete copy of this agenda was posted at: 2:00 p.m. July 20, 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: JULY 25, 2016 SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05854 AND VARIANCE NO. 2016-05058 LOCATION: 1815 East Center Street and 115 North Coffman Street (Immanuel Korean Southern Baptist Church) APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER: The property owner and applicant is Immanuel Korean Southern Baptist Church, represented by Reverend Chung Ho Han, and the agent is Hong-Seok Jang of SBL Architecture. REQUEST: The applicant requests approval of a conditional use permit to permit and retain an existing church, and a variance to allow fewer parking spaces than required by the Zoning Code. 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. 2016-05854 and Variance No. 2016-05058. BACKGROUND: The property consists of two parcels totaling 0.47 acres and is improved with an existing 8,134 square foot, two-story building used for a church. The building fronts onto Center Street with access to the existing 36-space parking lot provided from Coffman Street. The property is located in the "O-L" Low Intensity Office zone. The General Plan designates the property for Mixed-Use land uses. The property is adjacent to offices and an outpatient medical office across Coffman Street to the east and west, an office and auto repair business across Center Street to the south, and a single-family residence to the north. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05854 AND VARIANCE NO. 2016-05058 July 25, 2016 Page 2 of 5 Conditional Use Permit No. 2003-04756, to permit a church with fewer parking spaces than required by the Zoning Code, was approved by the Planning Commission on September 22, 2003. The CUP was approved for a period of 18 months, and expired on March 22, 2005. The applicant has now filed for a new CUP to reinstate a church that would operate in a manner similar to the prior approval. However, the prior approval included use of off-site parking in addition to the 29 on-site parking spaces. When the CUP was initially approved in 2003, there were concerns expressed that service times were too close together and that the congregation would grow, causing the on-site parking to be insufficient. At the recommendation of staff, the applicant then proposed the off-site parking. However, staff was still unsupportive of the request, because the off-site parking lot was located at 1425 East Lincoln Avenue, approximately 2,200 feet away from the church, and thought to be infeasible due to its proximity to the church. Despite staff concerns, the Planning Commission temporarily approved the conditional use permit to allow the applicant to seek a permanent parking solution. Since then, the applicant has restriped the parking lot to add seven parking spaces and has had the benefit of being able to observe church operations and parking demand over the past several years. During that time, the applicant has found the on- site parking to be adequate; therefore, they are no longer proposing off-site parking. AERIAL MAP CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05854 AND VARIANCE NO. 2016-05058 July 25, 2016 Page 3 of 5 PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes to permit and retain an existing church with 940 square feet of assembly area, 3,785 square feet of office and classroom area, and 940 square feet of dining area. The request also includes a variance to allow 36 parking spaces where 45 are required by the Zoning Code. The church offers a Friday evening service from 7:45 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. and two Sunday Services from 8:30 a.m. to 9:45 a.m. and 11:15 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. The dining area is used for lunch service during the Sunday worship activities. The office spaces and meeting rooms are used for Bible study on Sunday only, and used for administrative purposes during the week. 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; 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. “Community & Religious Assembly” uses are permitted in the O-L zone, subject to the approval of a conditional use permit to ensure compatibility with the surrounding area. There have been no complaints received regarding the church operation since its inception in 2003. The church operates in a manner compatible with adjacent office and residential uses, and is not anticipated to create any adverse impacts to the surrounding area. Conditions of approval to ensure that the church continues to operate in a compatible responsible manner have been attached to the draft resolution. These conditions would require that all parking shall occur on site; meetings or events shall not occur during worship services; there shall be no outdoor activity or audible bells; and a school use or daycare other than Sunday Bible study shall not be permitted without prior approval of a Conditional Use Permit. Parking Variance: Before the Planning Commission may approve a parking variance, it must make a finding of fact 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 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05854 AND VARIANCE NO. 2016-05058 July 25, 2016 Page 4 of 5 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 (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)); 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 church use requires 45 on-site parking spaces pursuant to the Zoning Code and 36 spaces are provided. Since the 2003 approval, the applicant has modified the service times to increase the time from the end of the first service to the start of the second service, and has restriped the parking lot to add seven spaces. Based on field observations and lack of complaints from the surrounding community, the amount of on-site parking appears sufficient for the church use. The applicant submitted a parking study to demonstrate that the 36 on-site parking spaces would be sufficient and is included as Attachment 3. The study found that peak demand observed was 29 spaces, or less than 81 percent of on-site spaces, during the second Sunday service. Therefore, the study determined the on-site parking would be sufficient. Further, the nearby residential neighborhood to the north on Coffman Street does not allow on-street parking, so church patrons would not be allowed to park in this area. As mentioned above, staff reviewed the code enforcement history since 2003 and found no complaints related to parking or any other operational aspects of the church. With sufficient on-site parking, staff has determined that the parking variance is appropriate for the church use, and off-site parking would not be necessary. Also mentioned above, a condition of approval has been included in the draft resolution that requires all parking occur on-site and any change would require the applicant to request approval to modify 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. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05854 AND VARIANCE NO. 2016-05058 July 25, 2016 Page 5 of 5 CONCLUSION: The existing church has been operating at this location for approximately 13 years in a manner that is compatible with surrounding uses. The recommended conditions of approval will ensure that the use will continue to operate in a compatible manner and that sufficient parking will be provided. 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 Request 3. Parking Study 4. Project Plans with Photos O-LOFFICES C-GVETERINARYCLINIC C-GOFFICES RM-4APARTMENTS18 DU C-GEVERGREENROYALLE RM-2S.F.R. RM-3S.F.R.C-GRESTAURANT TVACANT RM-2CONDOS11 DU RM-4APARTMENTS20 DU C-GOFFICES C-GRETAIL RS-2OFFICES C-GOFFICE C-GRETAIL RM-2CONDOS5 DU O-LOFFICES RM-3DUPLEX RM-2CONDOS18 DU C-G4PLEX C-GSERVICESTATION O-LMEDICALOFFICE C-GAUTO REPAIR/SERVICE RM-3CYPRESS COVEAPARTMENTS27 DU C-GOFFICES O-LMEDICALOFFICE C-G4PLEX RS-2S.F.R. O-LMEDICAL OFFICE C-GRESTAURANT RS-2S.F.R. RM-4LAS CASASAPARTMENT37 DU TEVERGREENROYALLE RS-2S.F.R.RS-2S.F.R.RS-2S.F.R. O-LOFFICES RS-2S.F.R. RS-2S.F.R. RS-2S.F.R. RS-2S.F.R.TNURSING HOME TS.F.R. RS-2S.F.R. O-LEVERGREENROYALLE RS-2S.F.R. RS-2S.F.R. RS-2S.F.R.RS-2S.F.R. E LINCOLN AVE E C E N T E R S T N C O F F M A N S T E FRONTAGE RD N E V E L Y N D R S A S H S T S C L I F F R O S E S T S D A T E S T S B E E C H W O O D S T N E V E R G R E E N S T E. LINCOLN AVE E. LA PALMA AVEN . E A S T S T S . E A S T S T E. SOUTH ST S . R I O V I S T A S T E .M I R A L O M A A V E E . B R O A D W A Y N . A N A H E I M B L V D N . R I O V I S T A S T 1 8 15 East Cent er Street a nd 115 North Coff man Street D E V No. 2016-00006 Subject Property APN: 035-281-44035-281-43 °0 50 100 Feet Aeria l Ph oto :Jun e 2 01 5 E LINCOLN AVE E C E N T E R S T N C O F F M A N S T E FRONTAGE RD N E V E L Y N D R S A S H S T S C L I F F R O S E S T S D A T E S T S B E E C H W O O D S T E C Y P R E S S S T N E V E R G R E E N S T E. LINCOLN AVE E. LA PALMA AVEN . E A S T S T S . E A S T S T E. SOUTH ST S . R I O V I S T A S T E .M I R A L O M A A V E E . B R O A D W A Y N . A N A H E I M B L V D N . R I O V I S T A S T 1 8 15 East Cent er Street a nd 115 North Coff man Street D E V No. 2016-00006 Subject Property APN: 035-281-44035-281-43 °0 50 100 Feet Aeria l Ph oto :Jun e 2 01 5 [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. 2016-05854 AND VARIANCE NO. 2016-05058 AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH (DEV2016-00006) (1815 EAST CENTER STREET AND 115 NORTH COFFMAN STREET) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim (the "Planning Commission") did receive a verified petition to approve (i) Conditional Use Permit No. 2016- 05854 to permit and retain a church, and (ii) Variance No. 2016-05058 to allow fewer parking spaces than required by the Anaheim Municipal Code (the "Code") for the aforementioned use (collectively referred to herein as the "Proposed Project") for premises located at that certain real property at 1815 East Center Street and 115 North Coffman Street, 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, the Property is approximately 0.47 acres in size and is currently developed with a 8,134 square foot, two-story building and a parking lot on a separate contiguous parcel. The Anaheim General Plan designates the Property for Mixed-Use land uses. The Property is located in the Low Intensity Office Zone and is subject to the zoning and development standards of the "O-L" Low Intensity Office Zone contained in Chapter 18.08 (Commercial Zones) of the Anaheim Municipal Code (the "Code"); and WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing was scheduled before the Planning Commission at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on July 25, 2016 at 5:00 p.m. to hear and consider evidence and testimony for and against 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 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, 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 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 - 2 - PC2016-*** 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 request for Conditional Use Permit No. 2016-05854, does find and determine the following: 1. The request for a conditional use permit to permit the Proposed Project is an allowable use authorized by Subsection .010 of Section 18.36.040 (Community & Religious Assembly) of the Code, subject to a conditional use permit and the zoning and development standards of the underlying "O-L" Low Intensity Office Zone pursuant to subsection .010 (Primary Uses) of Section 18.08.030 (Uses) of Chapter 18.08 of the Code. 2. The conditional use permit, under the conditions imposed, will not adversely affect the surrounding land uses and the growth and development of the area because the Property is developed with a commercial building and there are a sufficient amount of spaces in the off-site parking lot to accommodate the parking demand for the church, subject to approval of Variance No. 2016-05058. 3. The size and shape of the Property is adequate to allow the full operation of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area or to the health, safety and general welfare because the facility is located within an existing commercially-zoned property that provides a sufficient number of on-site parking spaces, and vehicle circulation will be in accordance with the plans and materials submitted. 4. The traffic generated by the use 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 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 Conditional Use Permit No. 2016-05854 under the conditions imposed will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim and will provide a land use that is compatible with the surrounding area. WHEREAS, based upon the parking study prepared by the applicant’s parking consultant, Traffic Safety Engineers, the Planning Commission does further find and determine that the request for Variance No. 2016-05058 to permit less parking spaces than required by the Code should be approved for the following reasons: SECTION NO. 18.42.040.010 Minimum number of parking spaces. (45 spaces required; 36 on-site spaces proposed) 1. Based upon a review of the findings of a parking study prepared by the applicant’s parking consultant, the variance, under the conditions imposed, 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 because ample and adequate parking is provided within an on-site parking lot of the Proposed Project to accommodate the existing demand for on-site parking spaces; and - 3 - PC2016-*** 2. That the variance, under the conditions imposed, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use because ample and adequate parking is provided within an on-site parking lot. Moreover, a parking survey determined that less than 81 percent of these spaces are utilized during the periods when the Proposed Project will experience its highest parking demand; and 3. That the variance, under the conditions imposed, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon adjacent private property in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use because ample and adequate parking is provided within an on-site parking lot; and 4. That the variance, under the conditions imposed, will not increase traffic congestion within the off-street parking areas or lots provided for the proposed use because the Property provides adequate ingress and egress points which 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 because ample and adequate parking is provided within an on-site parking lot. WHEREAS, the 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. The 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 the Planning Commission does hereby approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2016-05854 and Variance No. 2016-05058, and further 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 the Property under Conditional Use Permit No. 2016-05854 and Variance No. 2016-05058 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. - 4 - PC2016-*** 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 July 25, 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 - 5 - 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 July 25, 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 25th day of July, 2016. SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM - 6 - PC2016-*** - 7 - PC2016-*** EXHIBIT “B” CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05854 AND VARIANCE NO. 2016-05058 (DEV2016-00006) NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1 The availability of parking for this church use shall be operated in accordance with the Parking Study submitted as part of this application. Any changes to the church operation as described in that document shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Director to determine substantial conformance to ensure compatibility with the surrounding uses. Planning Department, Planning Services Division 2 All parking shall occur on-site. Should the parking demand exceed the amount of on-site parking, the applicant shall submit a request to modify the Coniditional Use Permit and Variance, subject to the approval of the Planning Commission. Planning Department, Planning Services Division 3 No additional meetings or events shall occur during worship services. Planning Department, Planning Services Division 4 The only accessory school activity in connection with this church shall be Sunday school and Bible study. This facility shall not be used as a private daycare, nursery, elementary, junior and/or senior high school. Planning Department, Planning Services Division 5 There shall be no outdoor activity or audible bells associated with any church activities. Planning Department, Planning Services Division GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 6 Any graffiti painted or marked upon the premises or on any adjacent area under the control of the property owner shall be removed or painted over within 24 hours of being applied. Planning Department, Code Enforcement Division 7 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 Planning Department, Planning Services Division - 8 - PC2016-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT 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. 8 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 Department, Planning Services Division 9 The subject Property shall be developed 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 Department, Planning Services Division ATTACHMENT NO. 2 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 p r o j e c t : p r o j e c t n o : d r a w i n g t i t l e : s h e e t n o : R e v i s i o n s : o w n e r : 3 4 3 5 W i l s h i r e B l v d . , S u i t e 2 1 7 0 L o s A n g e l e s , C A 9 0 0 1 0 p h o n e 2 1 3 . 4 7 8 . 0 0 8 8 f a x 2 1 3 . 9 7 3 . 4 7 4 1 e m a i l i n f o @ s b l a r c h . c o m A R C H I T E C T U R E c o n s u l t a n t s : s t r u c t u r a l : m e c h a n i c a l : e l e c t r i c a l : p l u m b i n g : 1 5 0 4 2 C U P P a c k a g e 0 1 / 2 9 / 2 0 1 6 L I C E N S E D A R C H I T E C T S T A T E O F C A L I F O R NIA H ON G - S E O K J A N G 1 8 1 5 E . C e n t e r S t . , A n a h e i m , C A 9 2 8 0 5 - 3 4 6 7 T E L ( 7 1 4 ) 5 6 3 - 0 8 1 8 I m m a n u e l K o r e a n S o u t h e r n B a p t i s t C h u r c h I m m a n u e l K o r e a n S o u t h e r n B a p t i s t C h u r c h C U P p r o j e c t : p r o j e c t n o : d r a w i n g t i t l e : s h e e t n o : R e v i s i o n s : o w n e r : 3 4 3 5 W i l s h i r e B l v d . , S u i t e 2 1 7 0 L o s A n g e l e s , C A 9 0 0 1 0 p h o n e 2 1 3 . 4 7 8 . 0 0 8 8 f a x 2 1 3 . 9 7 3 . 4 7 4 1 e m a i l i n f o @ s b l a r c h . c o m A R C H I T E C T U R E c o n s u l t a n t s : s t r u c t u r a l : m e c h a n i c a l : e l e c t r i c a l : p l u m b i n g : 1 5 0 4 2 C U P P a c k a g e 0 1 / 2 9 / 2 0 1 6 L I C E N S E D A R C H I T E C T S T A T E O F C A L I F O R NIA H ON G - S E O K J A N G 1 8 1 5 E . C e n t e r S t . , A n a h e i m , C A 9 2 8 0 5 - 3 4 6 7 T E L ( 7 1 4 ) 5 6 3 - 0 8 1 8 I m m a n u e l K o r e a n S o u t h e r n B a p t i s t C h u r c h I m m a n u e l K o r e a n S o u t h e r n B a p t i s t C h u r c h C U P S I T E P L A N & P R O J E C T I N F O . 1 IMM A N U E L K O R E A N S O U T H E R N B A P T I S T C H U R C H 1 8 1 5 E . C e n t e r S t . , A n a h e i m , C A 9 2 8 0 5 P R O J E C T R E P R E S E N T A T I V E A R C H I T E C T C L I E N T I M M A N U E L K O R E A N S O U T H E R N B A P T I S T C H U R C H 1 8 1 5 E . C E N T E R S T . , A N A H E I M , C A 9 2 8 0 5 T E L : 7 1 4 . 5 6 3 . 0 8 1 8 C O N T A C T : C H U N G H O H A N E - M A I L : H A N H O 1 9 5 2 @ Y A H O O . C O M S B L A R C H I T E C T U R E 3 4 3 5 W I L S H I R E B L V D . , S U I T E 2 1 7 0 L O S A N G E L E S , C A 9 0 0 1 0 P H O N E : 2 1 3 . 4 7 8 . 0 0 8 8 , F A X : 2 1 3 . 9 7 3 . 4 7 4 1 C O N T A C T : H O N G - S E O K J A N G E - M A I L : I N F O @ S B L A R C H . C O M P R O J E C T D A T A P R O J E C T D E S C R I P T I O N : I M M A N U E L K O R E A N S O U T H E R N B A P T I S T C H U R C H , C U P E X T E N S I O N P R O J E C T A D D R E S S : 1 8 1 5 E . C E N T E R S T . , A N A H E I M , C A 9 2 8 0 5 Z O N E : C - O # O F S T O R Y : 2 - S T O R Y L O T A R E A : 2 0 , 5 1 5 . 7 S F . ( . 6 7 A C . ) B U I L D I N G A R E A : 8 , 1 3 4 S . F . ( E X I S T I N G ) O C C U P A N C Y G R O U P : A - 3 , B T Y P E O F C O N S T R U C T I O N : T Y P E V - B A U T O M A T I C S P R I N K L E R : Y E S R E Q U I R E D P A R K I N G - A S S E M B L Y : 9 4 0 S F . / 1 , 0 0 0 S F . x 2 9 S P A C E S = 2 7 S T A L L S - O F F I C E : 3 , 7 8 5 S F . / 1 , 0 0 0 S F x 4 S P A C E S = 1 5 S T A L L S - D I N I N G : 9 4 0 S F . / 7 N E T ( P E R T A B L E 1 0 0 4 . 1 . 2 ) = 1 2 0 M A X . O C C U P A N T L O A D 1 2 0 P E R S O N S x . 0 2 S P A C E = 3 S T A L L S T O T A L R E Q U I R E D : 4 5 S T A L L S T O T A L P R O V I D E D : 3 6 S T A L L S ( I N C L U D I N G 2 H . C . S T A L L S ) V E H I C L E P A R K I N G C A L C U L A T I O N P E R Z 6 7 0 V I C I N I T Y M A P P R O J E C T S I T E N. EVERG R E E N S T . N. STATE COLLEGE BLVD. E . L I N C O L N A V E . E U N D E R H I L L A V E . E . L I N C O L N A V E . E . C E N T E R S T . N. EVELY N D R . E . C Y P R E S S S T . N. COFFMA N S T . A T T A C H M E N T N O . 4 p r o j e c t : p r o j e c t n o : d r a w i n g t i t l e : s h e e t n o : R e v i s i o n s : o w n e r : 3 4 3 5 W i l s h i r e B l v d . , S u i t e 2 1 7 0 L o s A n g e l e s , C A 9 0 0 1 0 p h o n e 2 1 3 . 4 7 8 . 0 0 8 8 f a x 2 1 3 . 9 7 3 . 4 7 4 1 e m a i l i n f o @ s b l a r c h . c o m A R C H I T E C T U R E c o n s u l t a n t s : s t r u c t u r a l : m e c h a n i c a l : e l e c t r i c a l : p l u m b i n g : 1 5 0 4 2 C U P P a c k a g e 0 1 / 2 9 / 2 0 1 6 L I C E N S E D A R C H I T E C T S T A T E O F C A L I F O R NIA H ON G - S E O K J A N G 1 8 1 5 E . C e n t e r S t . , A n a h e i m , C A 9 2 8 0 5 - 3 4 6 7 T E L ( 7 1 4 ) 5 6 3 - 0 8 1 8 I m m a n u e l K o r e a n S o u t h e r n B a p t i s t C h u r c h I m m a n u e l K o r e a n S o u t h e r n B a p t i s t C h u r c h C U P A 1 S T F L O O R P L A N F L O O R P L A N S 2 B 2 N D F L O O R P L A N p r o j e c t : p r o j e c t n o : d r a w i n g t i t l e : s h e e t n o : R e v i s i o n s : o w n e r : 3 4 3 5 W i l s h i r e B l v d . , S u i t e 2 1 7 0 L o s A n g e l e s , C A 9 0 0 1 0 p h o n e 2 1 3 . 4 7 8 . 0 0 8 8 f a x 2 1 3 . 9 7 3 . 4 7 4 1 e m a i l i n f o @ s b l a r c h . c o m A R C H I T E C T U R E c o n s u l t a n t s : s t r u c t u r a l : m e c h a n i c a l : e l e c t r i c a l : p l u m b i n g : 1 5 0 4 2 C U P P a c k a g e 0 1 / 2 9 / 2 0 1 6 L I C E N S E D A R C H I T E C T S T A T E O F C A L I F O R NIA H ON G - S E O K J A N G 1 8 1 5 E . C e n t e r S t . , A n a h e i m , C A 9 2 8 0 5 - 3 4 6 7 T E L ( 7 1 4 ) 5 6 3 - 0 8 1 8 I m m a n u e l K o r e a n S o u t h e r n B a p t i s t C h u r c h I m m a n u e l K o r e a n S o u t h e r n B a p t i s t C h u r c h C U P G K E Y M A P S I T E P H O T O S 3 A S O U T H E A S T V I E W B S O U T H W E S T V I E W CEAST VIEW D N O R T H E A S T V I E W E N O R T H V I E W FPARKING LOT H P A R K I N G L O T p r o j e c t : p r o j e c t n o : d r a w i n g t i t l e : s h e e t n o : R e v i s i o n s : o w n e r : 3 4 3 5 W i l s h i r e B l v d . , S u i t e 2 1 7 0 L o s A n g e l e s , C A 9 0 0 1 0 p h o n e 2 1 3 . 4 7 8 . 0 0 8 8 f a x 2 1 3 . 9 7 3 . 4 7 4 1 e m a i l i n f o @ s b l a r c h . c o m A R C H I T E C T U R E c o n s u l t a n t s : s t r u c t u r a l : m e c h a n i c a l : e l e c t r i c a l : p l u m b i n g : 1 5 0 4 2 C U P P a c k a g e 0 1 / 2 9 / 2 0 1 6 L I C E N S E D A R C H I T E C T S T A T E O F C A L I F O R NIA H ON G - S E O K J A N G 1 8 1 5 E . C e n t e r S t . , A n a h e i m , C A 9 2 8 0 5 - 3 4 6 7 T E L ( 7 1 4 ) 5 6 3 - 0 8 1 8 I m m a n u e l K o r e a n S o u t h e r n B a p t i s t C h u r c h I m m a n u e l K o r e a n S o u t h e r n B a p t i s t C h u r c h C U P I N T E R I O R P H O T O S 4 A C H U R C H A S S E M B L Y - 1 0 8 B Y O U T H R O O M - 2 0 0 CSEMINAR / LIBRARY - 207 D D I N I N G A R E A - 1 0 9 E C O R R I D O R - 2 1 1 200 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: JULY 25, 2016 SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05863 AND ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT NO. 2016-00384 LOCATION: 546 South Rose Street (Cali Auto Body & Glass) APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER: The applicant is Cali Auto Body & Glass, represented by Jacob Rosas. The property owners are Richard and Deborah Held. REQUEST: The applicant requests approval of a Conditional Use Permit to permit and retain an existing auto body and repair facility and an Administrative Adjustment to allow less parking than required by the Zoning Code. A variance to allow fewer parking spaces than required by Code was advertised as part of this application, but staff subsequently determined that the variance was unnecessary. The variance has been replaced by an administrative adjustment due to a reduced deviation from the parking requirement. 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. 2016-05863 and Administrative Adjustment No. 2016-00384. BACKGROUND: The 0.56-acre property is currently developed with three tenant spaces, one of which is utilized as a 3,500 square foot automotive repair and glass business. The property is located in the “I” Industrial zone and the General Plan designates the property for Medium Density Residential land uses. The surrounding land uses include manufacturing businesses to the north and west, a vacant industrial tenant space to the south, and multiple-family residential to the east across a public alley. In 2013, the applicant began operating an automotive glass repair service business, which is permitted by right in the Industrial zone. In 2016, the applicant was cited by Code Enforcement for the operation of an auto repair and body shop without a conditional use permit. The violations included illegal outdoor storage without sufficient screening, as well as an unpermitted modular unit at the rear of the property. At that time, the business owner was informed of the need to apply for a conditional use permit to retain the business. The Code Enforcement case remains active, pending a determination on this application. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05863 AND ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT NO. 2016-00384 July 25, 2016 Page 2 of 4 PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting to permit and retain an existing indoor auto body and repair facility. Two hydraulic car lifts are located at the front of the existing 3,500 square foot tenant space and some auto body work would continue at the rear of the tenant space. The type of auto repair consists of the restoration of classic cars, automobile glass repair, and restorative mechanical work, which can include engine and transmission repair or replacement. No painting of vehicles is proposed on site. The applicant has removed the modular trailer and outdoor storage located at the rear of the property and proposes to add scrim screening on the chain link fence at the rear of the property in order the screen this area from view of the public alley. The automotive repair business operates Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Vehicle access into the automotive repair facility is provided through a roll-up door from Rose Street, as well as at the rear of the property from the adjacent alley. The applicant is proposing 11 parking spaces, one less space than what is required per the Zoning Code. Three on-site spaces are proposed along Rose Street to be used by customers, four spaces are proposed within the automotive repair shop, and four spaces are proposed at the rear of the property near the east property line. 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; 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. The Zoning Code requires approval of a conditional use permit for “Automotive-Repair & Modification” uses within the Industrial zone to ensure that the uses are appropriate for the site, compatible with surrounding land uses, and in compliance with Zoning Code requirements. This request is to permit and retain an existing auto body and repair facility, which has been in operation as an automotive glass repair shop since 2013. The nature of the business has evolved into an auto repair and body shop; however, the amount of floor space and parking needed by the business has not changed as a result of the change in use. Staff believes that the proposed use is compatible with the other industrial and commercial businesses located within this complex. 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. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05863 AND ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT NO. 2016-00384 July 25, 2016 Page 3 of 4 Administrative Adjustment: The applicant requests an administrative adjustment to permit fewer parking spaces than required by the Zoning Code. The Planning Director has review authority over Administrative Adjustments, but may refer any application to the Planning Commission for review. Since the Conditional Use Permit must be approved by the Planning Commission, the Planning Director has referred the Administrative Adjustment to the Commission to provide a comprehensive evaluation of the project and to make a finding of fact that the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions exist: 1) The adjustment is consistent with the purposes and intent of the Zoning Code; 2) The same or similar result cannot be achieved by using provisions in the Zoning Code that do not require the adjustment; and 3) The adjustment will not produce a result that is out of character or detrimental to the neighborhood. The proposed use requires 3.5 spaces per 1000 square feet of building area for a total of 12 required parking spaces. The applicant requests approval to provide one parking space less than the required 12 spaces. Typically, a deviation of less than 10 percent of Code required parking would be reviewed and administratively approved by staff. However, when proposed as part of a project requiring a public hearing, the request is combined with the other entitlement for consideration by the Commission. Staff is supportive of this minor deviation from the number of parking spaces required by the Zoning Code since the project would be providing 91 percent of the required parking spaces. Staff recently made three visits to the property and observed that there is adequate parking available to accommodate the automotive repair shop. On Tuesday, June 14th, staff conducted a site visit and found 7 of the 11 spaces in use at 11:30 a.m. On Friday, June 24th, staff conducted a second unannounced site visit and found 9 of the 11 spaces in use at 3:30 p.m. Staff believes that automotive repair shop will have sufficient parking spaces available and will not impose an undue burden on the adjacent industrial and residential uses. The automotive repair and body shop has only two employees, and customer vehicles will only be on site when work is being conducted indoors, or stored at the rear of the property. Staff believes that the number of parking spaces on site is adequate to accommodate the proposed business and without impact to the surrounding public streets or properties. 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. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05863 AND ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT NO. 2016-00384 July 25, 2016 Page 4 of 4 CONCLUSION: The proposed automotive repair and body facility is compatible with the adjacent industrial and residential uses because all repairs will be conducted inside the building. Additionally, staff believes that there is sufficient on-site parking for the existing/proposed use. Therefore, staff believes the request to permit and retain the automotive repair facility is a suitable land use for this location and recommends approval of the project, subject to the recommended conditions of approval. Prepared by, Submitted by, Lindsay Ortega Jonathan E. Borrego Contract Planner Planning Services Manager Attachments: 1. Draft Conditional Use Permit Resolution 2. Letter of Operation 3. Plans 4. Site Photographs IINDUSTRIAL IINDUSTRIAL RM-4FOURPLEX RM-4S.F.R. RM-4APTS7 DU RS-1S.F.R. RM-3S.F.R. RM-4S.F.R. RM-4S.F.R. RS-1S.F.R. RM-4APTS22 DUIAUTOREPAIR/SERVICE IINDUSTRIAL IINDUSTRIAL IINDUSTRIAL RM-4APTS20 DU RM-4APTS20 DU RS-1S.F.R. RS-1S.F.R. RS-1S.F.R. RS-2S.F.R. RM-3S.F.R. IINDUSTRIAL IINDUSTRIAL C-GRETAIL S E A S T S T E S A N T A A N A S T S R O S E S T S D A W N S T S H A V E N D R E H A V E N D R E W A T E R S T S B U S H S T E C R E S T B R O O K P L S R O S E S T E. BALL RD E. LA PALMA AVE E. LINCOLN AVE S . E A S T S T S . S U N K I S T S T W. BALL RD E. SOUTH ST S . S T A T E C O L L E G E B L V D N . E A S T S T S . R I O V I S T A S T W . L I N C O L N A V E S . W A L N U T S T N . H A R B O R B L V D E . B R O A D W A Y W . B R O A D W A Y N . A N A H E I M B L V D S . H A R B O R B L V D S . A N A H E I M B L V D 5 4 6 South Rose St reet D E V No. 2016-00021 Subject Property APN: 037-272-25 °0 50 100 Feet Aeria l Ph oto :Jun e 2 01 5 S E A S T S T E S A N T A A N A S T S R O S E S T S D A W N S T S H A V E N D R E H A V E N D R E W A T E R S T S B U S H S T E C R E S T B R O O K P L S R O S E S T E. BALL RD E. LA PALMA AVE E. LINCOLN AVE S . E A S T S T S . S U N K I S T S T W. BALL RD E. SOUTH ST S . S T A T E C O L L E G E B L V D N . E A S T S T S . R I O V I S T A S T W . L I N C O L N A V E S . W A L N U T S T N . H A R B O R B L V D E . B R O A D W A Y W . B R O A D W A Y N . A N A H E I M B L V D S . H A R B O R B L V D S . A N A H E I M B L V D 5 4 6 South Rose St reet D E V No. 2016-00021 Subject Property APN: 037-272-25 °0 50 100 Feet Aeria l Ph oto :Jun e 2 01 5 [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. 2016-05863 AND ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT NO 2016-00384 AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH (DEV2016-00021) (546 SOUTH ROSE STREET) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim (the "Planning Commission") did receive a verified petition to approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2016-05863 and Adminstrative Adjustment No. 2016-00384 to permit an automotive repair and modification use with less parking spaces than required by the Zoning Code within an existing multi-tenant industrial complex (the "Proposed Project") on a portion of that certain real property located at 546 South Rose Street 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, the Property is approximately 0.56 acres in size and is currently developed as a single-story industrial building. The Anaheim General Plan designates the Property for “R-M” Medium Density Residential land uses. The Property is located in the “I" Industrial Zone, meaning that the Property is subject to the zoning and development standards contained in Chapter 18.10 (Industrial Zones) of the Anaheim Municipal Code (the "Code"); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on July 25, 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. 2016-05863 and Administrative Adjustment No. 2016-00384, 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 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 - 2 - PC2016-*** 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. 2016-05863, does find and determine the following: 1. The proposed automotive repair and modification use is an allowable primary use permitted with a conditional use permit within the "I" Industrial Zone, 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 automotive repair and modification use, 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 building 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 automotive repair and modification use 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 building that provides a sufficient number of onsite parking spaces and vehicle circulation will be in accordance with the plans and materials submitted. 4. The traffic generated by the automotive repair and modification use 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 multi-family residential uses in the area and would not pose a health or safety risk to the citizens of the City of Anaheim. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission does further find and determine that the request for Administrative Adjustment No. 2016-00384 should be approved for the following reasons: SECTION NO. 18.42.040.010 Minimum number of parking spaces. (12 spaces required; 11 spaces proposed) 1. The adjustment is consistent with the purposes and intent of the Zoning Code because the subject property is located in the “I” Industrial zone which encourages a variety of industrially-related land uses. Through observation, it was determined that the proposed parking would be adequate to serve the needs of the proposed automotive repair and modification use. - 3 - PC2016-*** 2. The same or similar result cannot be achieved by using provisions in the Zoning Code that do not require the adjustment since the project site is located within an existing industrial building in which the size and configuration does not allow for additional parking spaces to be accommodated. The only alternative to processing an administrative adjustment would be to demolish a portion of the structures at the Property in order to provide space to accommodate the additional parking. 3. The adjustment will not produce a result that is out of character or detrimental to the neighborhood as the subject Property is located in an existing industrial complex with similar existing uses. The subject Property was observed on three occasions by staff, who observed sufficient parking availability to accommodate the business. The automotive repair and auto body shop has only two employees, and customer vehicles will only be on site when work is being conducted indoors, or stored at the rear of the Property; therefore, the automotive repair and modification use will not impact the surrounding neighborhood. 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. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, pursuant to the above findings, this Planning Commission does hereby approve Conditional Use Permit No. No. 2016-05863 and Administrative Adjustment No. 2016-00384, 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. 2016-05863 and Administrative Adjustment No. 2016-00384 are 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. - 4 - PC2016-*** 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 July 25, 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 July 25, 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 25th day of July, 2016. SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM - 5 - PC2016-*** - 6 - PC2016-*** - 7 - PC2016-*** EXHIBIT “B” CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05863 (DEV2016-00021) NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS 1 No outdoor storage or display of vehicles or vehicular parts shall be permitted, and no outdoor auto body/repair work of any kind shall be conducted on the property. Planning and Building Department Cofe Enforcement Division 2 Overnight vehicle parking shall be limited to inside the building or within the fenced yard to the rear of the building only. Planning and Building Department Cofe Enforcement Division 3 All vehicles awaiting service shall be parked on-site; no adjacent or nearby public streets shall be utilized for any parking related to this business. Planning and Building Department Cofe Enforcement Division 4 Within 60 days of the date of this approval, the fenced yard to the rear of the building shall be screened with a durable material in accordance with the Zoning Code, subject to review and approval by the Planning Director. Planning and Building Department Cofe Enforcement Division GENERAL CONDITIONS 5 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 6 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 Planning and Building Department, Planning Services Division - 8 - PC2016-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT 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. 7 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 8 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 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 Photograph 1: View from Rose Street Photograph 2: Rose Street, View from South ATTACHMENT NO. 4 200 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: JULY 25, 2016 SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2015-05845 AND VARIANCE NO. 2016-05068 LOCATION: 500 South Walnut Street (StorQuest Self Storage) APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER: The applicant is The William Warren Group, Inc., represented by Nancy Bane, and the property owner is Karen Jones of WW Investment Properties, LLC. REQUEST: The applicant is requesting approval of a conditional use permit to construct a 4-story, 120,058 square foot self storage facility, while exceeding the maximum amount of floor area ratio (F.A.R.) permitted by the Zoning Code, and to permit a variance for reduced setbacks along Walnut Street and Manchester Avenue. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the attached resolutions, determining that a Mitigated Negative Declaration is the appropriate environmental documentation for this request along with Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 336, and approving Conditional Use Permit No. 2015-05845 and Variance No. 2016-05068. BACKGROUND: The 1.98-acre property is generally flat and is occupied with a non-operational former cement batch plant. The site has a General Plan designation of “R-LM” Residential-Low Medium Density and is zoned “I” Industrial. Surrounding land uses include an elementary school across Walnut Avenue to the west, a public park across Santa Ana Street to the northwest, Manchester Avenue and Interstate-5 freeway to the north and east, and single-family residential to the south. PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes to demolish all existing improvements for the purpose of constructing the new 4-story, 120,058 square foot self storage facility. The facility would consist of approximately 117,101 square feet of storage space, a 2,957 square foot leasing office on the ground floor, perimeter landscaping, meandering sidewalks and a 42 space surface level open parking lot. Fifteen of the 42 parking spaces adjacent to the building are designed for loading/unloading with 10-foot wide stalls, with depths ranging from 30-40 feet. All existing buildings and structures on the site would be demolished and minimal grading would be conducted. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2015-05845 AND VARIANCE NO. 2016-05068 July 25, 2016 Page 2 of 8 The proposed 4-story building is designed with various architectural elements including a multi- color split-face masonry block base, a smooth plaster building finish with horizontal embossed metal wall panels, decorative metal lattice accents, arbors and trellis structures and exterior gooseneck down lighting. Earth tone colors are proposed for all exterior finishes. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2015-05845 AND VARIANCE NO. 2016-05068 July 25, 2016 Page 3 of 8 The drawings below illustrate two of the proposed elevations with other renderings provided in Attachment 9. A detailed Development Summary is provided as Attachment No. 1 to this report. Access to the facility would be provided from driveways off Manchester Avenue and Walnut Street. Manchester Avenue currently has a painted median that prohibits left turns into and out of the site. However, the Public Works Department will restripe to allow full access on Manchester Avenue in a timely manner when the project is approved. Manchester Avenue is the main entrance to the property as it provides access to the site from the freeway and does not have residential frontage. Access to the site from Walnut Street will also be permitted from both directions. Pedestrian access and disabled paths of travel would be provided throughout the site. The site would be secured by eight foot high wrought iron fencing and electronic vehicular access gates, along with a “state of the art” security camera and monitoring system for both interior and exterior surveillance. Tenants would have access to storage units between the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Hours of operation for the leasing/retail office would be from 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Street dedications would be required for Walnut Street (14 foot street dedication), as well as corner cut-backs on the corners of Santa Ana Street and Manchester Avenue and Santa Ana Street and Walnut Street. No street widening will be required at this time; however, parkway CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2015-05845 AND VARIANCE NO. 2016-05068 July 25, 2016 Page 4 of 8 landscaping and an irrigation curb will be installed in the dedication area, as well as construction of sidewalks. 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 the 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. The Zoning Code allows self storage facilities in the “I” Industrial zone subject to approval of a conditional use permit. The purpose of the conditional use permit is to ensure that the self storage facility is compatible with surrounding uses, conforms with development standards specified in the Anaheim Municipal Code, and ensures high quality architectural design and function of the self storage facility without impacts to surrounding properties. The proposed project would significantly improve the overall appearance of the property and would address a number of longstanding community concerns regarding the property’s maintenance, loitering and security issues related to the existing vacant site. Staff anticipates that the proposed project will have a positive community impact as it will dramatically improve the appearance of the intersection and result in a significant positive investment in the area. City Council Policy No. 7.2: The siting of self-storage facilities are subject to City Council Policy 7.2 for Self-Storage Facilities. The Council Policy specifies that these uses may be permitted in “C-G” Commercial General and “I” Industrial Zones subject to approval of a conditional use permit. The Policy was adopted to ensure that self-storage facilities were not sited on land that was suitable for more productive land uses. The policy further states that these facilities are most appropriate for irregularly-shaped properties which may be constrained by accessibility or visibility, and which may not be suitable for conventional types of development. Self-storage facilities may be conditionally permitted provided the use is appropriate and compatible with surrounding land uses, the architecture is of high quality, and the project is in conformance with all Zoning Code development standards (including setback where possible, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2015-05845 AND VARIANCE NO. 2016-05068 July 25, 2016 Page 5 of 8 signage and landscaping). The project complies with these Council Policy provisions (with the exception of the setback variance request) based on the following elements: • A high quality design of the new building is proposed • The building mass incorporates various architectural elements, utilizing colors and materials that will complement the area • The project will remove the blighted condition that currently exists on the site • The site layout, building height, substantial setback from residential uses, and architectural design will result in a compatible use • The site is irregularly-shaped with frontages on three streets While determining conformance with this Policy, an important consideration is the fact that the propert y has b een designated for Low-Medium Density Residential land uses in the General Plan since 2004. Several development inquiries regarding the property have been received in recent years but development of the site is significantly challenged due to the site’s irregular configuration, required amount of right-of-way dedication and improvement and the proximity of the adjacent single-family residences which requires a substantial building setback. Maximum Floor Area Ratio: The applicant also requests new development with a 1.39 F.A.R. which exceeds the maximum 0.5 F.A.R. allowed by the Zoning Code. The purpose of F.A.R. limits are to regulate development intensity in order to ensure that build-out of the community does not cause an overburden to the local public infrastructure. The Code stipulates that the maximum F.A.R. may be exceeded subject to approval of a conditional use permit. The CUP process allows staff to review proposed F.A.R. deviations on a case-by-case basis. The 1.98-acre lot would limit the amount of floor area on the site to 43,168 square feet. The new facility would provide 120,058 square feet of floor area, or a 1.39 F.A.R. of storage and office use. Based on the low intensity of the proposed self storage use, staff has determined that impacts to the surrounding infrastructure (traffic, sewer, and storm drain systems) will not be adversely impacted. Impacts to utilities (water, electricity, and natural gas) will not result in the same impacts generated from typical industrial businesses with more intense manufacturing or assembly uses. Staff believes with the recommended conditions of approval, the proposed use would be compatible with the surrounding area and recommends approval of the self storage facility and increased F.A.R. Variance: Before the Planning Commission may approve the building setback variance, it must make a finding of fact that the evidence presented shows that the following conditions exist: 1) That there are special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, which do not apply to other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity; and 2) That, because of the special circumstances, shown above, strict application of the Zoning Code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2015-05845 AND VARIANCE NO. 2016-05068 July 25, 2016 Page 6 of 8 The project complies with all development standards of the Industrial zone with the exception of the building setback requirements. The applicant is requesting to modify the building setbacks adjacent to Walnut Street and Manchester Avenue. The proposed and required setbacks are as follows: Setback Area Adjacent Land Use Required Setbacks Proposed Setbacks East property line Manchester Ave. (I-5 Freeway) 50 ft. 19 ft.* to building 10 ft.* to w.i. fence North property line Santa Ana St. (Ross Park) 25 ft. 56 ft. West property line Walnut St. (Ross Elementary School) 50 ft. 19 ft.* to building and fence South property line Single Family Homes Building-100 ft. (2 times height of the building) 100 ft. Landscaping-10 ft. 25 ft. *Variance request A 50-foot setback is required along Manchester Avenue and Walnut Street, both of which are designated arterial highways. The applicant is requesting a variance to provide 19-foot setbacks to the building along both street frontages, and a 10-foot setback to the wrought iron fence along Manchester Avenue. The setbacks along Santa Ana Street (a collector street) is proposed at 56 feet, where a minimum of 25 feet is required. The setback/height restriction adjacent to the residentially-zoned properties to the south require setbacks that are twice the height of the structure. In this case, the proposed building height is 50 feet, thereby requiring a minimum 100- foot building setback. The site plan depicts a 100-foot building setback to the residential property line in compliance with Code. The project would be landscaped with trees, shrubs, turf and ground cover around the building and within the parking area. A 25-foot wide landscaped setback with a bio-retention basin is proposed adjacent to the residential properties to the south; the Code requires a minimum 10-foot setback in this area. The City requires a dedication of 14 feet along Walnut Street, and corner cut-backs at the corners of Santa Ana Street and Manchester Avenue, and Santa Ana Street and Walnut Street for street purposes. No impacts to vehicular or pedestrian access, line-of-site visibility, or to the abutting residential properties will result from the reduced setbacks. Until such time that the Walnut Street improvements are completed, this will appear as a larger setback since the new building is proposed at 43 feet from the existing curb. Once the street is widened, the property would maintain a 19-foot building setback. The timing of Walnut Street widening is unknown at this time. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2015-05845 AND VARIANCE NO. 2016-05068 July 25, 2016 Page 7 of 8 A variance recognizes that there may be individual properties that, because of its size, irregular shape, or unusual topography, cannot reasonably be developed if all the development standards for the zone are strictly applied. The subject property is triangular in shape with only a 84 feet of frontage on Santa Ana Street. Vehicular access is restricted on Santa Ana Street, as well as for the majority of the frontage on both Walnut Street and Manchester Avenue, and all parking and access is designed at the south end of the parcel. Improvements including landscaping setbacks, future street dedication, accommodating maneuverability on-site for large moving vans and trucks with trailers, and access points from both Walnut Street and Manchester Avenue further restrict the ability to provide the Code-required setbacks. These reasons make it difficult for the project to meet all of the development standards while providing the required setbacks as compared to other industrially-zoned properties in the vicinity. Typical industrial lots in the vicinity (north of Broadway between Loara Street and Manchester Avenue) have much larger lot widths, are rectangular in shape, and have fewer restrictions for access as compared to the subject property. Staff feels that with the proposed improvements, adequate separation to the right-of-way will be provided, and therefore recommends approval of the setback variance request. In addition, staff is currently analyzing the potential modification and reduction of the front building and landscaping setback requirement in the Industrial zone from 50 feet to 15 feet. This requirement would be consistent with the current setback requirements for projects located within commercial zones citywide, as well as all industrial properties in the Canyon Specific Plan. A city-initiated code amendment which includes the reduced setback modification will be presented to the Planning Commission and City Council for consideration in the next few months. If approved, this project would comply with future setback requirements within the Industrial zone. Community Outreach: On Wednesday, April 27, 2016, the applicant conducted proactive neighborhood outreach for this project by hosting a community meeting to introduce and receive feedback on the proposed project. The meeting was held at the Ross Elementary School (across the street from the project site) and was attended by the applicant’s team (architect, agent), and City planning staff. A property owner who owns one of the five homes abutting the project site attended the meeting. He was only there to learn about the proposal and expressed no opposition to the project. No other persons were present at the meeting. Environmental Impact Analysis: An Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) has been prepared to evaluate the environmental impacts of the project and to identify necessary mitigation. The IS/MND was posted at the County Clerk and circulated to public agencies and interested parties on June 30, 2016 for a 20-day comment period. No comments have been received. Mitigation measures have been identified in the IS/MND and are included in the draft resolutions and Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 336 attached to this report. With implementation of these measures, project impacts will be reduced to a level considered less than significant and the IS/MND concluded that there are no remaining potentially significant adverse impacts related to the project. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2015-05845 AND VARIANCE NO. 2016-05068 July 25, 2016 Page 8 of 8 CONCLUSION: Staff believes that the conditions exist for the Planning Commission to make the required findings to approve this request. The proposed 120,058 square foot, 4-story self- storage facility is designed in a manner that will provide an architecturally-enhanced, self- storage facility that is designed in a manner that is compatible with surrounding land uses. Staff recommends approval of the proposed request. Prepared by, Submitted by, Wayne Carvalho Jonathan E. Borrego Contract Planner Planning Services Manager Attachments: 1. Development Summary 2. Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration Resolution 3. Draft Conditional Use Permit and Variance Resolution 4. Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration is available at: http://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/12298 5. Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 336 6. Applicant’s Letter of Request 7. Site Photographs 8. Complete Plan Set 9. Colored Elevations and Renderings IINDUSTRIAL TVACANT RM-4APTS8 DUPRROSS PARK IRELIGIOUSUSE RS-2S.F.R. IROSSELEMENTARYSCHOOL RM-4APTS10 DU RM-4APTS15 DU RS-2SINGLEFAMILYRESIDENCE RS-2SINGLEFAMILYRESIDENCE RS-2SINGLEFAMILYRESIDENCE RS-2SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE RS-2S.F.R. RS-2SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE RS-2SINGLEFAMILYRESIDENCE RS-3S.F.R. RS-2S.F.R. RS-2S.F.R. RS-2S.F.R. 5 F R EE W A Y 5 FREE W AY S M A NCHESTER AVE S W A L N U T S T W S A N T A A N A S T S W E S T S T W S A N T A A N A S T S H A ZEL W O O D ST W FAY L N W ELDERWO OD AVE W HA ZELWOOD ST S P E P P E R S T S P O R T O P L W SANTA ANA ST W. BALL RD W. LINCOLN AVE S . E U C L I D S T W. BR O A D W AY S . W A L N U T S T E .B R O A D W A YE.L I N C O LN AV EW. CRESCENT AVE S . H A R B O R B L V D S . A N A H E I M B L V D S . H A R B O R B L V D 5 0 0 South Walnut Street D E V No. 2015-00128 Subject Property APN: 036-321-15036-321-16 °0 50 100 Feet Aeria l Ph oto :Jun e 2 01 5 5 F R EE W A Y 5 FREE W AY S M A NCHESTER AVE S W A L N U T S T W S A N T A A N A S T S W E S T S T W S A N T A A N A S T S H A ZEL W O O D ST W FAY L N W ELDERWO OD AVE W HA ZELWOOD ST S P E P P E R S T S P O R T O P L W SANTA ANA ST W. BALL RD W. LINCOLN AVE S . E U C L I D S T W. BR O A D W AY S . W A L N U T S T E .B R O A D W A YE.L I N C O LN AV EW. CRESCENT AVE S . H A R B O R B L V D S . A N A H E I M B L V D S . H A R B O R B L V D 5 0 0 South Walnut Street D E V No. 2015-00128 Subject Property APN: 036-321-15036-321-16 °0 50 100 Feet Aeria l Ph oto :Jun e 2 01 5 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY Development Standard I Zone Standards Proposed Project Site Area --- 1.98 acres Floor Area --- 120,058 sq. ft. Max. Floor Area Ratio (F.A.R.) 0.5 1.39* Building Setback (to Arterial) Manchester Ave. & Walnut St. 50 ft. 19 ft.** Building Setback (to Collector) Santa Ana St. 25 ft. 56 ft. Building Setback to Residential 2 times the height of the structure 100 ft. 100 ft. Building Height 100 ft. 50 ft. Parking 33 spaces plus loading spaces (unspecified) 42 spaces 27 standard, 15 loading *May be increased by CUP ** Variance request [DRAFT] ATTACHMENT NO. 2 - 1 - PC2016-*** RESOLUTION NO. PC2016-*** A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR PROPOSED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2015-05845 AND VARIANCE NO. 2016-05068 (DEV2015-00128) (500 SOUTH WALNUT STREET) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim (the "Planning Commission") received a verified petition from The William Warren Group, Inc., a California corporation (the "Developer"), requesting that the City consider and approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2015-05845 and Variance No. 2016-05068 for certain real property commonly known as 500 South Walnut Street 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"), for the purpose of allowing the applicant to construct a 4-story self-storage facility (the " Project"); and WHEREAS, the Property is approximately 1.98 acres in size and is located in the "I" Industrial Zone. The Property is designated on the Land Use Element of the General Plan for "Residential – Low Medium Density” land uses; and WHEREAS, self-storage facilities or uses are conditionally permitted within the “I" Industrial Zone subject to special provisions related to such uses set forth in City Council Policy No. 7.2 (Self-Storage Facilities) adopted on September 22, 1998 and subsequently amended on June 5, 2007; and WHEREAS, pursuant to City Council Policy No. 7.2 (Self-Storage Facilities), self- storage facilities "are most appropriate for irregularly-shaped properties which may further be constrained by accessibility or visibility and which may not be suitable for conventional types of development . . . [and may be conditionally permitted in the "C-G" or "I" Zones] [p]rovided there does not appear to be other viable or strategic uses of the property, the architecture of the facility is of high quality, the use is appropriate and compatible with its surrounding land uses, and the facility is in compliance with all Zoning Code Development Standards (including setbacks where possible, signage and landscaping . . . ."; and WHEREAS, if approved, Conditional Use Permit No. 2015-05845 and Variance No. 2016-05068 will allow for an increased floor area ratio (1.39 F.A.R.), and reduced building setbacks (19 feet) along Walnut Street and Manchester Avenue, as set forth in Sections 18.10.045 and 18.10.060 of the Anaheim Zoning Code; and WHEREAS, Conditional Use Permit No. 2015-05845, Variance No. 2016-05068, and the Project 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 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 - 2 - PC2016-*** Procedure Manual, the City is the "lead agency" for the preparation and consideration of environmental documents for the Proposed Project; and WHEREAS, a draft Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in accordance with CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual to evaluate the physical environmental impacts of the Proposed Project. The Mitigated Negative Declaration was circulated for a 20-day public/responsible agency review on June 30, 2016 and was also made available for review on the City's website at www.anaheim.net. A complete copy of the Mitigated Negative Declaration is on file and can be viewed in the Planning and Building Department of the City located on the First Floor of City Hall at 200 S. Anaheim Blvd., Anaheim, California. Copies of said document are also available for purchase; and WHEREAS, the City gave notice of its intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration to (a) the public pursuant to Section 15072(b) of the CEQA Guidelines, (b) those individuals and organizations, if any, that previously submitted written requests for notice pursuant to Section 15072(b) of the CEQA Guidelines, (c) responsible and trustee and other agencies with jurisdiction over resources that will be affected by the Proposed Project pursuant to Section 15073(c) of the CEQA Guidelines, and (d) the Clerk of the County of Orange pursuant to Section 15072(a) of the CEQA Guidelines; and WHEREAS, in conformance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, a Mitigation Monitoring Plan has been prepared for the Proposed Project and includes mitigation measures that are specific to the Proposed Project (herein referred to as "MMP No. 336"). A complete copy of MMP No. 336 is attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by this reference; and WHEREAS, the City intends and desires to use the Mitigated Negative Declaration as the environmental documentation required by CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual for the Proposed Project; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Anaheim Civic Center, Council Chamber, 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, on July 25, 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 the Code, to consider the Mitigated Negative Declaration and to hear and consider evidence for and against the Proposed Project and related actions, and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, based upon a thorough review of the Proposed Project and the Mitigated Negative Declaration, including MMP No. 336 and the comments received to date and the responses prepared, the Planning Commission, based upon a thorough review of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and related documents and the evidence received concerning the Mitigated Negative Declaration, does find and determine as follows: 1. That the Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the requirements of CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines, and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual and, together with MMP No. 336, serves as the appropriate environmental documentation for the Proposed Project; - 3 - PC2016-*** 2. That it has carefully reviewed and considered the information contained in the Mitigated Negative Declaration (including the Initial Study and any comments received during the public review period) prior to acting upon the Proposed Project; and 3. Based upon the record before it (including the Initial Study and any comments received), the Proposed Project will have a less than significant impact upon the environment with the implementation of the mitigation measures contained in MMP No. 336 and that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. 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; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that this Planning Commission, pursuant to the above findings and based upon a thorough review of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the evidence received to date, does hereby approves and adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration and MMP No. 336; and authorizes and directs City staff to file with the Clerk of the County of Orange a Notice of Determination in accordance with Section 15075(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of July 25, 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 July 25, 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 25th day of July, 2016. SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM - 5 - PC2016-*** 6 STORQUEST SELF STORAGE PROJECT MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM NO. 336 Terms and Definitions: 1. Property Owner/Developer – Owner or developer of StorQuest Self Storage Project. 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 done 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 Plan will occur, as 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. Outside public agency review is limited to those public agencies specified in the Mitigation Monitoring Plan which have permit authority in conjunction with the mitigation measure. 5. Ongoing Mitigation Measures – The mitigation measures that are designated to occur on an ongoing basis as part of this Mitigation Monitoring Plan will be monitored in the form of an annual letter from the property owner/developer in January of each year demonstrating how compliance with the subject measure(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 complete. A final annual letter will be provided at the close of construction. 6. Building Permit – For purposes of this Mitigation Monitoring Plan, 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. 7 MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM N0. 336 MITIGATION NUMBER TIMING MEASURE RESPONSIBLE FOR MONITORING COMPLETION III. AIR QUALITY MM-AQ-1 Prior to the issuance of a building permit Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit, to the satisfaction of the City of Anaheim Planning Department, a Coating Restriction Plan (CRP), consistent with South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) guidelines and a letter agreeing to include in any construction contracts and/or subcontracts a requirement that the contractors adhere to the requirements of the CRP. The CRP measures shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Building Department. The volatile organic compounds (VOC) of proposed architectural coatings shall not exceed 25 grams/liter for interior applications and 50 grams/liter for exterior applications. This measure shall conform to the performance standard that emissions of VOCs from application of interior or exterior coatings shall not exceed the daily emissions thresholds established by the SCAQMD. The CRP shall specify use of High-Volume, Low Pressure (HVLP) spray guns for application of coatings. Planning and Building Department V. CULTURAL RESOURCES MM-CUL-1 During grading activities In the event that archaeological resources are unearthed during excavation and grading activities associated with the project, the contractor shall cease all earth-disturbing activities within a 100-meter radius of the area of discovery and shall retain a qualified archaeologist, as determined by the Public Works Department, to evaluate the significance of the finding and appropriate course of action. Salvage operation requirements pursuant to Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines shall be followed. After the find has been appropriately mitigated, work in the area may resume Public Works & Planning and Building Departments MM-CUL-2 During grading activities In the event that paleontological resources are unearthed during excavation and grading activities associated with the project, the contractor shall cease all earth-disturbing activities within a 100-meter radius of the area of discovery and shall retain a qualified paleontologist that is approved by the Planning Department to evaluate the significance of the finding and appropriate course of action. After the find has been appropriately mitigated, work in the area may resume. Planning and Building Department [DRAFT] ATTACHMENT NO. 3 - 1 - PC2016-*** RESOLUTION NO. PC2016-*** A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2015-05845 AND VARIANCE NO. 2016-05068 AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH (DEV2015-00128) (500 SOUTH WALNUT STREET) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim (the "Planning Commission") did receive a verified petition for Conditional Use Permit No. 2015-05845 to permit the construction of a 4-story self-storage facility, including an increase in the maximum floor area ratio (F.A.R.) allowed by the Zoning Code, and Variance No. 2016-05068 to permit reduced setbacks along Walnut Street and Manchester Avenue (collectively, the "Proposed Project") for premises located at 500 South Walnut Street 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, the Property is approximately 1.98-acres in size and is developed with vacant industrial buildings. The Land Use Element of the Anaheim General Plan designates the Property for Low-Medium Density Residential land uses. The property is located within the "I" Industrial Zone. As such, the Property is subject to the zoning and development standards described in Chapter 18.10 (Industrial Zone) of the Anaheim Municipal Code (the “Code”).; Self-storage facilities or uses are conditionally permitted within the “I" Industrial Zone subject to special provisions related to such uses set forth in City Council Policy No. 7.2 (Self-Storage Facilities); and WHEREAS, pursuant to City Council Policy No. 7.2 (Self-Storage Facilities), self- storage facilities "are most appropriate for irregularly-shaped properties which may further be constrained by accessibility or visibility and which may not be suitable for conventional types of development . . . [and may be conditionally permitted in the "C-G" or "I" Zones] [p]rovided there does not appear to be other viable or strategic uses of the property, the architecture of the facility is of high quality, the use is appropriate and compatible with its surrounding land uses, and the facility is in compliance with all Zoning Code Development Standards (including setbacks where possible, signage and landscaping . . . ."; and WHEREAS, if approved, Conditional Use Permit No. 2015-05845 and Variance No. 2016-05068 will allow for an increased floor area ratio (1.39 F.A.R.), and reduced building setbacks (19 feet) along Walnut Street and Manchester Avenue, as set forth in Sections 18.10.045 (Floor Area Ratio) and 18.10.060 (Building Setbacks) of the Code; 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 - 2 - PC2016-*** WHEREAS, in conformance with CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual, and because the Initial Study identified potentially significant impacts, a Mitigated Negative Declaration ("MND") was prepared to evaluate the physical environmental impacts of Proposed Project. A complete copy of the Initial Study and MND is on file and can be viewed in the City's Planning and Building Department located on the First Floor of City Hall at 200 S. Anaheim Blvd., Anaheim, California and is also available for purchase; and WHEREAS, in conformance with CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual, a Mitigation Monitoring Program ("MMP No. 336") has been prepared for the Proposed Project and includes mitigation measures that are specific to the Proposed Project; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on July 25, 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 and testimony concerning the contents and sufficiency of the MND and for and against the Proposed Project and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; 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 found and determined that the Proposed Project will have a less than significant impact upon the environment with the implementation of the conditions of approval and the mitigation measures attached to that concurrent Resolution and contained in MMP No. 336, and approved and adopted the Mitigated Negative Declaration and MMP No. 336; and WHEREAS, pursuant to City Council Policy No. 7.2 (Self-Storage Facilities), this Planning Commission hereby finds that there does not appear to be other viable or strategic uses of the Property, the architecture of the Proposed Project is of high quality, the use is appropriate and compatible with its surrounding land uses, and, upon approval of Variance No. 2016-05068, will be in compliance with all Zoning Code Development Standards (including setbacks where possible, signage and landscaping) of the Code; 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 pertaining to the request for Conditional Use Permit No. 2015-05845, and in accordance with Section 18.10.045 (Floor Area Ratio) of the Code, does find and determine that all of the following conditions exist: 1. A self-storage facility is an allowable use within the "I" Industrial Zone subject to a conditional use permit and special provisions related to such uses set forth in City Council Policy 7.2 (Self-Storage Facilities); and - 3 - PC2016-*** 2. The proposed request to permit the construction of a self-storage facility with an increased floor area ratio would 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 Proposed Project entails a complete renovation of the Property which will improve the aesthetics and overall appearance of the project site, and would not have an adverse effect on the existing infrastructure in the area nor to adjacent residential, recreational and educational uses; and 3. The size and shape of the site is adequate to allow the full development of the Proposed Project in a manner not detrimental to either the particular area or health and safety because the site can accommodate the parking, traffic flows, and circulation without creating detrimental effects on adjacent properties; and 4. The traffic generated by the Proposed Project would 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 the Proposed Project will not exceed the anticipated volumes of traffic on the surrounding streets and adequate parking will be provided to accommodate the future uses; and 5. The granting of the conditional use permit will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim because the Proposed Project would significantly improve the aesthetics and the overall appearance of the surrounding area, and is designed to be compatible with the other land uses in the area, subject to compliance with the conditions contained herein; and 6. In accordance with Section 18.10.045 (Floor Area Ratio) of the Code, all potential environmental impacts associated with the Proposed Project have been duly analyzed and will be mitigated pursuant to MMP No. 336; and 7. The Proposed Project is the most appropriate use for the irregularly-shaped Property due to accessibility and visibility constraints, making the Property less suitable for conventional types of development; and 8. There does not appear to be other viable or strategic uses of the Property; and 9. The architecture of the Proposed Project is of a high quality design with various architectural elements including a multi-color split-face masonry block base, a smooth cement plaster building finish with earth tone colors, horizontal embossed metal wall panels, decorative metal lattice accents, arbors and trellis structures, and 10. The Proposed Project is appropriate and compatible with its surrounding land uses, and the facility will be in compliance, upon approval of Variance No. 2016-05068, with all Zoning Code Development Standards (including setbacks where possible, signage and landscaping); and - 4 - PC2016-*** 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 pertaining to the request for Variance No. 2016-05068 for reduced street setbacks along arterial highways, does find and determine the following facts: SECTION NO. 18.10.060.020 Minimum Landscaped and Structural Street Setback. (50 feet required; 19 feet proposed to the building and 10 feet proposed to the fencing along Manchester Avenue) 1. The requested variance is hereby approved because there are special circumstances applicable to the Property pertaining to its unique shape and proximity to three streets. Specifically, the Property is triangular in shape with frontages on three streets, including two arterial highways (Walnut Street and Manchester Avenue) which require 50 foot building and landscaped setbacks. Further, the property abuts single family residential uses to the south and is designed and buffered to minimize impacts to those residents. Improvements including landscaping setbacks, future street dedication, accommodating maneuverability onsite for large moving vans and trucks with trailers, and access points from both Walnut Street and Manchester Avenue further restrict the ability to provide the code-required setbacks. 2. Strict application of the Code would deprive the Property of privileges enjoyed by other properties under the identical zoning classification in the vicinity because other industrially-zoned properties in the vicinity have typical rectangular-shaped lots with one street frontage allowing for greater opportunities for site layout design. WHEREAS, the 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. The 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 the Planning Commission does hereby approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2015-05845 and Variance No. 2016-05068 contingent upon and subject to the conditions of approval set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (“Conditions of Approval"). BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Conditions of Approval, as they relate to the uses permitted under Conditional Use Permit No. 2015-05845 and Variance No. 2016-05068 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, (ii) the modification complies with the Code, and (iii) the applicant has demonstrated significant progress toward establishment of the use or approved development. - 5 - PC2016-*** BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Conditional Use Permit No. 2015-05845 and Variance No. 2016-05068 are approved without limitations on the duration of the use. Amendments, modifications and revocations of this permit may be processed in accordance with Chapters 18.60.190 (Amendment of Permit Approval) and 18.60.200 (City-Initiated Revocation or Modification of Permits) of the Code. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that approval Conditional Use Permit No. 2015-05845 and Variance No. 2016-05068 constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that they comply with the Zoning Code of the City of Anaheim 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. 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. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of July 25, 2016. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60 (Procedures) of the Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced by a resolution of the City Council in the event of an appeal. CHAIR, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ATTEST: SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM - 6 - 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 July 25, 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 25th day of July, 2016. SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM - 7 - PC2016-*** - 8 - PC2016-*** EXHIBIT “B” CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2015-05845 AND VARIANCE NO. 2016-05068 (DEV2015-00128) NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS 1 The project’s Final Drainage Report, Final Grading Plans, and Soils Report shall be submitted for review and approval to City of Anaheim Public Works Development Services Division. Public Works Department, Development Services Division 2 The property owner shall submit project improvement plans that incorporate the required drainage improvements and the mechanisms proposed in the approved Final Drainage Report. Post-development storm event run-off shall be less than or equal to the existing pre-development storm event run-off. No offsite run-off shall be blocked during and after grading operations or perimeter wall construction. Finish floor elevations shall be 1-ft. minimum above water surface elevations of 100-year storm event. Public Works Department, Development Services Division 3 The final Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) shall be submitted for review and approval to Public Works Development Services and comply with the most current requirements of the Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP). Public Works Department, Development Services Division 4 The applicant shall demonstrate that coverage has been obtained under California’s General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activity by providing a copy of the Notice of Intent (NOI) submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board and a copy of the subsequent notification of the issuance of a Waste Discharge Identification (WDID) Number. The applicant shall prepare and implement a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). A copy of the current SWPPP shall be kept at the project site and be available for City review upon request. Public Works Department, Development Services Division PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT 5 The property owner shall irrevocably offer to dedicate in a signed deed to the City of Anaheim an easement 45 feet in width from the centerline of Walnut Street, a corner cut-off dedication at Walnut Street and Santa Ana Street, and a corner cut-off dedication at Santa Ana Street and Manchester Avenue for road, public utilities, and other public purposes. No private improvements shall be constructed within the areas to be offered for right- of-way dedication to the City of Anaheim. Public Works Department, Development Services Division - 9 - PC2016-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT 6 Street improvement plans shall be submitted for all required public improvements adjacent to the project site to the Public Works Department, Development Services Division for review and approval. All improvements shall be installed and completed prior to the first final building and zoning inspection. The required public improvements include the construction of 19-ft. parkway with landscaping and irrigation curb adjacent and 5-ft. sidewalk per City Standard 110-B adjacent to the ultimate right-of-way at its ultimate vertical elevation with a transition within the frontage of the property along Walnut Street; construction of 7- ft. parkway with landscaping and irrigation curb adjacent, 5-ft. sidewalk per City Standard 110-B adjacent to the right-of-way, and new curb and gutter per City Standard 120 within the frontage of the property where there is not an existing curb and gutter along Manchester Avenue; and construction of 4.75-ft. parkway with landscaping and irrigation curb adjacent, 4-ft. sidewalk per City Standard 110-B adjacent to the right-of- way along Santa Ana Street. In addition, all abandoned driveways shall be demolished and replaced with curb and gutter. The accessible pedestrian ramps at the intersection of Manchester Avenue and Santa Ana Street and at the intersection of Santa Ana Street and Walnut Street within the frontage of the property, shall be removed and reconstructed with truncated domes in conformance with Public Works Standard Detail 111- 3. The parkway irrigation shall be connected to the private main and any existing aboveground utilities within the frontage of the property that obstruct the accessible path of travel (sidewalk) shall be relocated at the developer’s expense or adjusted to grade in order to be flush with the sidewalk and not create a tripping hazard. Public Works Department, Development Services Division 7 The developer shall obtain a right-of-way construction permit and post a security (Performance and Labor & Materials Bonds) for construction of all required public improvements within street right-of-way. Public Works Department, Development Services Division 8 The legal property owner shall submit a Lot Line Adjustment to Public Works, Development Services for review and approval to modify or merge the existing two lots into one parcel. The Lot Line Adjustment and Conformance Deed shall be recorded prior to issuance of a building permit. Public Works Department, Development Services Division 9 The legal property owner shall submit an application for a Subdivision Map Act Certificate of Compliance to the Public Works Department, Development Services Division. A Certificate of Compliance or Conditional Certificate of Compliance shall be approved by the City Surveyor and recorded in the Office of the Orange County Recorder prior to issuance of a building permit. Public Works Department, Development Services Division 10 A private water system with separate water service for fire protection and domestic water shall be provided and shown on plans submitted to the Water Engineering Division of the Anaheim Public Utilities Department. Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division - 10 - PC2016-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT 11 All backflow equipment shall be located above ground outside of the street setback area in a manner fully screened from all public streets and alleys. Any backflow assemblies currently installed in a vault will have to be brought up to current standards. Any other large water system equipment shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Water Engineering Division outside of the street setback area in a manner fully screened from all public streets and alleys. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans and approved by Water Engineering and Cross Connection Control Inspector. Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division 12 All requests for new water services, backflow equipment, or fire lines, as well as any modifications, relocations, or abandonments of existing water services, backflow equipment, and fire lines, shall be coordinated and permitted through Water Engineering Division of the Anaheim Public Utilities Department. Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division 13 All existing water services and fire services shall conform to current Water Services Standards Specifications. Any water service and/or fire line that does not meet current standards shall be upgraded if continued use is necessary or abandoned if the existing service is no longer needed. The owner/developer shall be responsible for the costs to upgrade or to abandon any water service or fire line. Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division 14 The Owner shall irrevocably offer to dedicate to the City of Anaheim (i) an easement for all large domestic above-ground water meters and fire hydrants, including a five (5)-foot wide easement around the fire hydrant and/or water meter pad. (ii) a twenty (20) foot wide easement for all water service mains and service laterals all to the satisfaction of the Water Engineering Division. The easements shall be granted on the Water Engineering Division of the Public Utilities Department’s standard water easement deed. The easement deeds shall include language that requires the Owner to be responsible for restoring any special surface improvements, other than asphalt paving, including but not limited to colored concrete, bricks, pavers, stamped concrete, decorative hardscape, walls or landscaping that becomes damaged during any excavation, repair or replacement of City owned water facilities. Provisions for the repair, replacement and maintenance of all surface improvements other than asphalt paving shall be the responsibility of the Owner and included and recorded in the Master CC&Rs for the project. Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division 15 That the developer/owner shall submit to the Public Utilities Department Water Engineering Division an estimate of the maximum fire flow rate and maximum day and peak hour water demands for the project. This information will be used to determine the adequacy of the existing water system to provide the estimated water demands. Any off-site water system improvements required to serve the project shall be done in accordance with Rule No. 15A.6 of the Water Utility Rates, Rules, and Regulations. Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division - 11 - PC2016-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT 16 Prior to approval of permits for improvement plans, the property owner/developer shall coordinate with Electrical Engineering to establish electrical service requirements and submit electric system plans, electrical panel drawings, site plans, elevation plans, and related technical drawings and specifications. Public Utilities, Electrical Engineering Division 17 Prior to connection of electrical service, the legal owner shall provide to the City of Anaheim a Public Utilities easement with dimensions as shown on the approved utility service plan. Public Utilities, Electrical Engineering Division 18 Prior to connection of electrical service, the legal owner shall submit payment to the City of Anaheim for service connection fees. Public Utilities, Electrical Engineering Division 19 Trash storage areas shall be provided and maintained in a location acceptable to the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division and in accordance with approved plans on file with said Department. Said storage areas shall be designed, located and screened so as not to be readily identifiable from adjacent streets or highways. The walls of the storage areas shall be protected from graffiti opportunities by the use of plant materials such as minimum 1-gallon size clinging vines planted on maximum 3-foot centers or tall shrubbery. Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. Public Works-Streets and Sanitation Division PRIOR TO FINAL BUILDING AND ZONING INSPECTIONS 20 All required on-site Water Quality Management Plan and public right of way improvements shall be completed, operational, and are subject to review and approval by the Construction Services Inspector. Public Works Department, Development Services Division 21 Curbs adjacent to the drive aisles shall be painted red to prohibit parallel parking in the drive aisles. Red curb locations shall be clearly labeled on building plans. Public Works Department, Traffic Engineering Division GENERAL CONDITIONS 22 SECURITY MEASURES: 1. New building shall be equipped with a comprehensive security alarm system (silent or audible) for the following coverage areas: • Perimeter of building and access route protection. • Retail storefront. 2. Complete a Burglary/Robbery Alarm Permit application, Form APD 516, and return it to the Police Department prior to initial alarm activation. This form is available at the Police Department front counter, or it can be downloaded from the following web site: http://www.anaheim.net/article.asp?id=678 Police Department - 12 - PC2016-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT 3. A Closed circuit television (CCTV) security system shall be installed, with the following coverage areas: • Lobby Entrance i. Interior ii. exterior • Building perimeter • Facility Grounds • Parking lot • Cashier’s area 4. If security cameras are not monitored, signs indicating so should be placed at each camera. 5. CCTV monitors and recorders should be secured in a separate locked compartment to prevent theft of, or tampering with, the recording. 6. With advances in technology, digital and wireless CCTV security systems are readily available and highly recommended over older VHS or “Tape” recording systems. 7. CCTV recordings should be kept for a minimum of 30 days before being deleted or recorded over. 8. If used, CCTV videotapes should not be recorded over more than 10 items per tape. 23 ADDRESSING: 1. Address numbers shall be positioned so as to be readily readable from the street. Number should be illuminated during hours of darkness. 2. Rooftop address numbers for the police helicopter shall be added to each building within the complex. The main structure will have the street address on Walnut Street and the other buildings shall have the letter or number associated with it on their roof. Minimum size 4’ in height and 2’ in width. The lines of the numbers/letters are to be a minimum of 6” thick. Numbers should be spaced 12” to 18” apart. Numbers shall be painted or constructed in a contrasting color to the roofing material. Numbers shall face the street to which the structure is addressed in. Numbers are not to be visible from ground level. 3. Each building shall have clearly marked doors with numbers corresponding to the alarm zones, if any. The identification of alarm zone coverage will assist responding police and security units in faster identification and apprehension of potential suspects, if any. 4. Each different building shall have its particular building number/letter clearly displayed on the outside at each end of the structure. Police Department 24 DOORS: 1. All exterior doors to have adequate security hardware, e.g. deadbolt locks. 2. Wide-angle peepholes or other viewing device should be installed Police Department - 13 - PC2016-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT in solid doors where natural surveillance is compromised. 3. The locks shall be so constructed that both the deadbolt and deadlocking latch can be retracted by a single action of the inside doorknob/lever/turn piece. 4. Overhead roll-up doors shall also be secured on the inside that the lock cannot be defeated from the outside and shall be secured with a cylinder lock or padlock from the inside. 25 LINE OF SIGHT/NATURAL SURVEILLANCE: 1. Doorways, alcoves, etc., should not be recessed to the extent that a place is created for a person to stand and go unobserved. 2. Interior hallways should provide good line of sight for proper CCTV surveillance. 3. Loading docks should be of an open design, utilizing either low curbs or open railings. 4. Trash enclosures should not block visibility of doors or windows or be located close enough to the structure to provide access to the roof. 5. Security personnel and/or receptionists should be positioned in an area of the main lobby where they can monitor subjects entering and exiting the building, and observe the elevators and restroom entrances. Police Department 26 STAIRWAYS/ELEVATORS: 1. Stairwells and elevator lobbies should be of an open design whenever structurally possible. 2. If stairwells are enclosed, convex mirrors should be installed on the landings to allow visibility of the landing and the next flight of stairs, and stairwell doors should be fitted with as much transparent material as permitted by the fire code. 3. Stairwell landings should allow for a 60” turning radius to facilitate police use. 4. Elevator cabs should have convex mirrors installed to allow visibility of the interior of the cab from outside the elevator door. Police Department 27 PARKING LOTS/STRUCTURES: 1. Minimum recommended lighting level in all parking lots is .5 foot-candle maintained, measured at the parking surface, with a maximum to minimum ratio no greater than 15:1. 2. “No Trespassing 602(k) P.C.” posted at the entrances of parking lots/structures and located in other appropriate places. Signs must be at least 2’ x 1’ in overall size, with white background and black 2” lettering. 3. All entrances to parking areas shall be posted with appropriate signs per 22658(a) C.V.C., to assist in removal of vehicles at the property owners/managers request. Police Department - 14 - PC2016-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT 28 Compliance with AMC 6016, the Anaheim Public Safety Radio System Coverage Ordinance is required. To request a copy of the ordinance, contact Officer Berger at (714) 765-3859 or mberger@anaheim.net. A copy of the ordinance can also be viewed/download online through the City of Anaheim web site under “City Records”: http://www.anaheim.net/ Police Department 29 The Owner shall be responsible for restoring any special surface improvements, other than asphalt paving, within any right-of-way, public utility easement or City easement area including but not limited to colored concrete, bricks, pavers, stamped concrete, walls, decorative hardscape or landscaping that becomes damaged during any excavation, repair or replacement of City owned water facilities. Provisions for maintenance of all said special surface improvements shall be included in the recorded Master CC&R’s for the project and the City easement deeds. Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division 30 The following minimum horizontal clearances shall be maintained between proposed water main, above-ground services, and other facilities: • 10-feet minimum separation (outside wall-to-outside wall) from sanitary sewer mains and laterals • 5-feet minimum separation from all other utilities, including storm drains, gas, and electric • 6-feet minimum separation from curb face • 10-feet minimum separation from major structures, footings, and trees. Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division 31 All fire services 2-inch and smaller shall be metered with a UL listed meter, Hershey Residential Fire Meter with Translator Register, no equals. Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division 32 No required parking area shall be fenced or otherwise enclosed for outdoor storage. Planning Department, Code Enforcement Division 33 The applicant shall be responsible for maintaining the area adjacent to the premises over which they have control, in an orderly fashion through the provision of regular maintenance and removal of trash or debris. 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. Planning Department, Code Enforcement Division 34 Hours of operation shall be restricted to 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., seven days a week. Adequate signage shall be installed near vehicular access gates informing the self-storage tenants of the hours of operation. Planning Department 35 When the retail/leasing office is closed, tenants shall access the site and the building through an automated security system (e.g. keycard or assigned code). The final design and location of the system shall be approved by Planning and Traffic prior to installation. Planning Department, Traffic Engineering Division - 15 - PC2016-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT 36 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 Department 37 The Property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the applicant and which plans are on file with the Planning Department and as conditioned herein. Planning Department 38 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 Department ATTACHMENT NO. 4 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration is available at: http://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/12298 CITY OF ANAHEIM Environmental Checklist Form CASE NOS.: Conditional Use Permit (CUP) No. 2015-05845 and Variance (VAR) No. 2016-05068 SITE ADDRESS: 500 South Walnut Street, Anaheim, CA 92802 APNs: 036-321-15 and 036-321-16 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. □ Aesthetic/Visual □ Agricultural & Forestry □ 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 DETERMINATION: 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. June 30, 2016 Signature of City of Anaheim Representative Date Wayne Carvalho/Contract Planner (714) 765-4949 Printed Name/Title Phone No. CASE NOS.: CUP2015-05845, VAR2016-05068 Page 2 of 31 SITE ADDRESS: 500 South Walnut Street June 2016 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including offsite as well as onsite, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 2) A list of “Supporting Information Sources” must be attached and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the Narrative Summary for each section. 3) Response Column Heading Definitions: a) 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. b) Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less Than Significant Impact”. The mitigation measures must be described, along with a brief explanation of how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level. c) Less Than Significant Impact applies where the project creates no significant impacts, only Less Than Significant impacts. d) No Impact applies where a project does not create an impact in that category. 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 proposed (e.g., the project falls outside of 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 will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). 4) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to a tiering, program EIR, Master EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration (Section 15062(c)(3)(D)). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the 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. 5) Incorporate into the checklist any references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., the General Plan, zoning ordinance). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 6) 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. CASE NOS.: CUP2015-05845, VAR2016-05068 Page 3 of 31 SITE ADDRESS: 500 South Walnut Street June 2016 Project Setting: The project site is comprised of two parcels, Assessor Parcel Numbers 036-321-15 and 036- 321-16, totaling 1.99 acres in size. The site is generally flat and is developed with a non-operational former cement batch plant. A large portion of the site is paved and has vacant and blighted buildings and materials left over from the former operations. Surrounding land uses include an elementary school across Walnut Avenue to the west, a public park across Santa Ana Street to the northwest, Manchester Avenue and Interstate-5 to the north and east, and single-family residences to the south. The site is currently accessible from Santa Ana Street and Manchester Avenue. The site has a General Plan designation of “R-LM” Residential-Low Medium and is zoned “I” Industrial. Figure 1. Aerial Photo CASE NOS.: CUP2015-05845, VAR2016-05068 Page 4 of 31 SITE ADDRESS: 500 South Walnut Street June 2016 Project Description: The proposed project consists of a four-story 120,058 square foot self-storage facility, with a 1.39 floor area ratio, and less front setbacks than required by the Anaheim Municipal Code (“Code”). All existing buildings and structures on the site would be demolished, with minimal grading proposed to be balanced on site, with approximately 2,200 cubic yards of cut and 2,200 cubic yards of fill. Access to the site would be provided on Manchester Avenue and Walnut Avenue. The proposed project would require approval of a conditional use permit for the self-storage facility use in the Industrial Zone and the 1.39 floor area ratio. A variance would be required for front setbacks less than required by Code. Figure 2. Site Plan CASE NOS.: CUP2015-05845, VAR2016-05068 Page 5 of 31 SITE ADDRESS: 500 South Walnut Street June 2016 Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact I. AESTHETICS -- Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?     Narrative Summary: No Impact. The proposed project is located in a relatively flat, built-out area of the City. There are no scenic views on or near the project site. No portions of the project site or surrounding areas are categorized as a scenic vista (City of Anaheim 2004b, Section 5.1). Therefore, development of this project will not impact a scenic vista. No impacts would occur. b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway or local scenic expressway, scenic highway, or eligible scenic highway?     Narrative Summary: No Impact. The proposed project site is not located near a designated or eligible California scenic highway and there are no rock outcroppings or historic buildings onsite. The closest scenic highway to the site is SR-91, located almost six miles east of the project site. The project would not impact any scenic resources (City of Anaheim 2004b, Section 5.1; DOT 2016). No impacts would occur. c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings?     d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?     Narrative Summary: No Impact. The project would improve the visual character of the site and its surroundings, as the existing site is an abandoned cement plant - surrounded by a mix of cement, wood, and chain link fencing - that is in disrepair and causes a source of blight in the neighborhood. In addition, the site currently experiences transients entering the site and graffiti has been an ongoing issue. The project includes landscaping along both frontages at Walnut and Manchester, a landscaped area between the existing residential properties to the south including trees, and a landscaped sitting area with a pergola at the north end just south of Santa Ana Street. Construction of the project would produce nighttime lighting that is more than what is currently produced on the site. However, the amount of lighting would be minimal and consist mostly of outdoor lighting, similar to what already exists in the area. The amount of lighting would not be substantial or adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area. In addition, any lighting introduced by the project would be required to meet Sections 18.10.030.110-Industrial Zone, Operational Characteristics and Chapter 18.44-Signs which regulate lighting on the project site. Therefore, development of this project would have less than significant impact on aesthetics. Figure 3. Elevations CASE NOS.: CUP2015-05845, VAR2016-05068 Page 6 of 31 SITE ADDRESS: 500 South Walnut Street June 2016 Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact CASE NOS.: CUP2015-05845, VAR2016-05068 Page 7 of 31 SITE ADDRESS: 500 South Walnut Street June 2016 Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact II. AGRICULTURE & FOREST RESOURCES -- In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project: 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?     b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?     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))?     d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non- forest use?     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?     Narrative Summary: No Impact. The project site is identified as “urban and built-up land” on the most recent Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program map for Orange County (DOC 2012). The project site and surrounding areas do not contain agricultural uses or related operations, or forest land. Therefore, the project would not convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance to non-agricultural uses. No agricultural zoning is present in the surrounding area and no nearby lands are enrolled under the Williamson Act (DOC 2004). Therefore, development of this project would have no impact on agriculture or forest resources. III. AIR QUALITY -- 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 project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?     Narrative Summary: Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is located in the Southern California Air Basin (SoCAB). The SoCAB has been designated as a non-attainment area as the area does not meet National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for certain pollutants regulated under the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA). The SoCAB fails to meet national standards for ozone (O3) and particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5), and is therefore considered a Federal non-attainment area for these pollutants. The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) is required, pursuant to the CAA, to reduce emissions of criteria pollutants for which the SoCAB is in non-attainment. The project would be subject to the SCAQMD’s 2012 Air Quality CASE NOS.: CUP2015-05845, VAR2016-05068 Page 8 of 31 SITE ADDRESS: 500 South Walnut Street June 2016 Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact Management Plan (AQMP). The AQMP contains a comprehensive list of pollution control strategies directed at reducing emissions and achieving ambient air quality standards. These strategies are developed, in part, based on regional population, housing, and employment projections prepared by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). SCAG is the regional planning agency for Orange County and addresses regional issues relating to transportation, the economy, community development, and the environment. SCAG prepared the Regional Transportation Plan (RTS), which forms the basis of the land use and transportation portions of the AQMP. SCAG’s TRP is utilized in the preparation of the air quality forecasts and the air quality consistency analysis that is included in the AQMP. Residential uses are not included as part of the proposed project; therefore, this project could not result in any direct residential growth. Based on studies conducted by the Self Storage Association (SSA), a registered non- profit lobbying entity representing 48,500 self-storage facilities, self-storage facilities typically generate approximately 3.5 employees (SSA 2016). The applicant anticipates that this facility would only have between one to two employees onsite at any one time. According to SCAG, employment in the City is projected to increase by 32,000 jobs between 2008 and 2035 (SCAG 2012). Project employment is within the employment growth assumptions for the City. The SCAG growth assumptions are utilized directly in the 2008 Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) and the 2012 AQMP. Based on the consistency analysis presented above, the proposed project will not conflict with the AQMP; impacts will be less than significant. b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation?     Narrative Summary: Less Than Significant Impact. The project is located within the South Coast Air Quality Basin, which is characterized by relatively poor air quality and is a Federal and State designated nonattainment area for O3 (ozone), PM2.5 (particulate matter), and PM10 (particulate matter). SCAQMD has established significance thresholds for both construction and operational activities relative to these criteria pollutants. Construction Impacts General construction activities, such as site preparation, grading, and travel by construction workers can contribute to air pollutants. All construction activities shall comply with SCAQMD Rule 403 regarding the control of fugitive dust emissions and existing City of Anaheim dust suppression practices that minimize dust and other emissions through frequent watering of the site, street sweeping, suspending grading and excavation activities in high winds (25 mph or more), and a traffic control plan to minimize traffic flow interference from construction activities, etc., that will be incorporated into the construction plans. Additionally, the developer/contractor would be required to ensure that all construction equipment is property tuned and maintained in order to decrease the impact of diesel emissions. Project construction would generate temporary air pollutant emissions. These impacts are associated with fugitive dust (PM10 and PM2.5) and exhaust emissions from heavy construction vehicles, in addition to volatile organic compounds (VOC), measured in reactive organic gases (ROG), which would be released during the drying phase upon application of architectural coatings. Construction would generally consist of demolition, site preparation grading, erection of the proposed building, paving and architectural coating. In order to accurately portray the emissions of the projects, modeling was completed using the proposed size of the building of approximately 120,058 square feet that could be constructed on the site. In addition, a total paved parking area of 9,760 square feet was used. The site preparation phase would involve the greatest amount CASE NOS.: CUP2015-05845, VAR2016-05068 Page 9 of 31 SITE ADDRESS: 500 South Walnut Street June 2016 Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact of heavy equipment and the greatest generation of fugitive dust. Table 1, Project-Related Construction Emissions, shows the results of the CalEEMod modeling for the proposed project’s short-term construction emissions. Table 1 Project-Related Construction Emissions Mass Daily Thresholds (pounds per day) ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Construction Emissions SCAQMD Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55 2017 Project Emissions 112 27 21 .03 7.2 4.2 Exceed Threshold? YES NO NO NO NO NO Note: Volatile organic compounds are measured as ROG. Source: Appendix 1. All construction emissions associated with the proposed project would be below the SCAQMD thresholds except for ROG. To compensate for excessive ROG emissions from coating activities, the model includes use of a maximum 25 g/l VOC content for interior coatings and 50 g/l VOC content for exterior coatings. Use of low- VOC coatings during construction activities will reduce VOC emissions less than the 75 ROG threshold established by SCAQMD. The requirement of use of low-VOC coatings has been included as Mitigation Measure AQ-1 below. Mitigation Measures: AQ-1 Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit, to the satisfaction of the City of Anaheim Planning Department, a Coating Restriction Plan (CRP), consistent with South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) guidelines and a letter agreeing to include in any construction contracts and/or subcontracts a requirement that the contractors adhere to the requirements of the CRP. The CRP measures shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Building Department. The volatile organic compounds (VOC) of proposed architectural coatings shall not exceed 25 grams/liter for interior applications and 50 grams/liter for exterior applications. This measure shall conform to the performance standard that emissions of VOCs from application of interior or exterior coatings shall not exceed the daily emissions thresholds established by the SCAQMD. The CRP shall specify use of High-Volume, Low Pressure (HVLP) spray guns for application of coatings. With implementation of AQ-1, impacts associated with ROGs would be reduced to a less than significant level by requiring low VOC architectural coatings are used for the proposed project. Operational Impacts Operational related impacts are typically associated with emissions produced from project-generated vehicle trips. Daily vehicle trips for the proposed project would be approximately 300 daily, according to the findings of the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) (Appendix E) prepared for the proposed project and discussed further in Section XVI. Transportation/Traffic. The project’s incremental increase in regional emissions resulting from CASE NOS.: CUP2015-05845, VAR2016-05068 Page 10 of 31 SITE ADDRESS: 500 South Walnut Street June 2016 Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact operation of the project would not exceed any SCAQMD thresholds. The daily VMT rate is based on the number of daily trips determined for the project based on the findings of the TIA and applied to a commute percentage and an average trip length, both of which are land use specific values derived from CalEEMod. These values account for variations in trip frequency and length associated with commuting to and from the project. Emission factors specific to the buildout year are projected based on SoCAB-specific fleet turnover rates and the impact of future emission standards and fuel efficiency standards. The increase in the consumption of fossil fuels to provide power, heat, and ventilation was considered in the calculations as stationary point source emissions. Future fuel consumption rates are estimated based on land use specific energy consumption rates. The emission factors used in this analysis represent a State-wide average of known power producing facilities, utilizing various technologies and emission control strategies, and do not take into account any unique emissions profile. At this time, these emission factors are considered conservative and representative. Area source emissions were calculated by CalEEMod and include emissions from natural gas and landscape fuel combustion, consumer products, and future maintenance of architectural coatings. Pollutant emissions resulting from project construction activities were calculated using the CalEEMod model (Appendix 1). As shown in Table 2, Project-Related Operational Emissions, the operational emissions pollutant concentrations resulting from project operations would not exceed SCAQMD thresholds. Table 2 Project-Related Operational Emissions Mass Daily Thresholds (pounds per day) ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Operational Emissions SCAQMD Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55 project Emissions Operational Emissions 6.8 11.5 47.74 .11 8.0 2.3 Exceed Threshold? NO NO NO NO NO NO Note: Volatile organic compounds are measured as ROG. Source: Appendix 1. As operational emissions pollutant concentrations resulting from project operations would not exceed SCAQMD thresholds, air quality impacts associated with long-term operation of the proposed project would be less than significant. 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)?     Narrative Summary: Less Than Significant Impact. Any project which contributes a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the region is in non-attainment would result in a cumulatively significant impact. The regional emissions calculated for the project are less than the applicable SCAQMD thresholds, which are designed to assist the SoCAB in attaining the applicable State and Federal ambient air quality standards. These standards apply to both primary (criteria and precursor) and secondary pollutants (O3). Although the project site is located in a region that is in non-attainment for O3, PM10 and PM2.5, the emissions associated with the project would not be cumulatively considerable as the emissions would be CASE NOS.: CUP2015-05845, VAR2016-05068 Page 11 of 31 SITE ADDRESS: 500 South Walnut Street June 2016 Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact below SCAQMD thresholds. Therefore, the project will not contribute to a cumulatively considerable impact of any criteria pollutant and impacts would be less than significant. No significant impacts would occur. d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?     Narrative Summary: Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project is located in a predominantly residential area, and abuts an existing elementary school. SCAQMD's localized significance thresholds (LSTs) represent the maximum emissions from a project that are not expected to cause or contribute to an exceedance of the most stringent applicable Federal and State standards. The incremental increase in emissions from construction activities associated with the project would be below SCAQMD LSTs. In addition, construction of the project would comply with SCAQMD Rule 403 requirements for dust suppression, which would limit emissions of particulate matter. Therefore, construction and operation of the project is not expected to cause ·or contribute to a significant increase in the concentration of criteria pollutants. Impacts to sensitive receptors would be less than significant. No significant impacts would occur. e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?     Narrative Summary: No Impact. No objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people are expected as a result of either grading or construction of the project. Although construction equipment and vehicles associated with the development of the site may produce exhaust emissions, any potential resulting odor would be intermittent, temporary and less than significant in nature. There are no objectionable odors associated with the long-term operations of the proposed project. IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: 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?     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 US Fish and Wildlife Service?     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?     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?     e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?     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?     Narrative Summary: No Impact. The proposed project site is located in an urbanized area developed with residential, school, and parks uses. The project site has been disturbed as it was historically used as a cement batch plant. There are no known candidates, sensitive or special status species on the site. The project site does not contain and is not adjacent to any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community. There are no CASE NOS.: CUP2015-05845, VAR2016-05068 Page 12 of 31 SITE ADDRESS: 500 South Walnut Street June 2016 Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact wetlands on or near the project site. The site is entirely surrounded by existing residential and school development, as well as a collector and freeway to the east, and offers no opportunities to contribute to a habitat linkage of any kind. Therefore, the project would not interfere with the movement of native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species. The project does not conflict with ordinances protecting biological resources and no impact would occur in this regard. Lastly, the project site is not located in the Orange County Central and Coastal Natural Community Natural Community Conservation Plan/Habitat Conservation Plan area (City of Anaheim 2004b, Section 5.3). No impact to biological resources would occur. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines and/or identified on the Qualified Historic Structures list of the Anaheim Colony Historic District Preservation Plan (April 15, 2010)?     Narrative Summary: No Impact. The project site is currently developed with an abandoned cement batch plant; as such, the site has already been appreciably disturbed. Structures onsite associated with the plant are not included on the federal or state lists of historic structures and it is not identified as historic (City of Anaheim 2010). The site is located in an urbanized setting with surrounding residential, school, and park uses. No impacts to historic resources would occur. b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines?     Narrative Summary: Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. According to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.5, and Public Resources Code Section 21083.1, the proposed project would be considered to have a significant impact if it would cause a substantial adverse change in a significance of a unique archaeological resource (i.e., an artifact, object, or site) about which it can be clearly demonstrated that, without merely adding to the current body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions, has a special and particular quality, such as being the oldest or best available example of its type, or is directly associated with scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person. According to the City's General Plan EIR, archaeological sites within the City are often located along creek areas, ridgelines, and vistas. Many of these types of landforms are located within the Hill and Canyon Area of the City, and one major cultural resource site (CA-Ora-303) has been identified and registered. This proposed project site is not located near this registered site. In compliance with AB52, Tribal consultation was conducted prior to the release of this initial study. On March 24, 2016, the City sent consultation notices and no comments were received requesting consultation on the proposed project. Copies of the consultation letters are included as Appendix B. Implementation of the proposed project would require grading, excavation and trenching on the site. The site is highly disturbed and, as such, it is unlikely any significant archaeological resources would be uncovered. The proposed project site has been completely disturbed by development, and is located within an urbanized area. As such, any archaeological resources which may have existed in the project area have likely been disturbed. Notwithstanding, ground disturbing activities, such as grading or excavation, could unearth undocumented archaeological resources. Potential impacts to archaeological resources attributed to the proposed project would be considered less than significant with adherence to the regulatory requirements and recommended mitigation, which provides instructions in the event a material of potential cultural significance is uncovered. CASE NOS.: CUP2015-05845, VAR2016-05068 Page 13 of 31 SITE ADDRESS: 500 South Walnut Street June 2016 Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact Mitigation Measure: CUL-l In the event that archaeological resources are unearthed during excavation and grading activities associated with the project, the contractor shall cease all earth-disturbing activities within a 100- meter radius of the area of discovery and shall retain a qualified archaeologist, as determined by the Public Works Department, to evaluate the significance of the finding and appropriate course of action. Salvage operation requirements pursuant to Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines shall be followed. After the find has been appropriately mitigated, work in the area may resume. Implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-1 will ensure that potential impacts due to accidental discovery of significant archaeological resources will be reduced to a less-than-significant level by requiring that if a find is made, activity is stopped, and appropriate measures are taken. c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?     Narrative Summary: Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. Paleontological sites are those areas that show evidence of pre-human activity. Often they are simply small outcroppings visible on the surface or sites encountered during grading. While the sites are important indications, it is the geologic formations that are the most important since they may contain important fossils. According to the City's General Plan EIR, the majority of paleontological resources within the City exist in the Hill and Canyon Areas, northeast of the project site. The proposed project site has been completely disturbed by development, and is located within an urbanized area. As such, any paleontological resources which may have existed in the project area have likely been disturbed. Notwithstanding, ground-disturbing activities, such as grading or excavation, could unearth undocumented paleontological resources. Potential impacts to paleontological resources attributed to the proposed project would be considered less than significant with adherence to the regulatory requirements and recommended mitigation, which provides instructions in the event a material of potential cultural significance is uncovered. Mitigation Measure: CUL-2 In the event that paleontological resources are unearthed during excavation and grading activities associated with the project, the contractor shall cease all earth-disturbing activities within a 100- meter radius of the area of discovery and shall retain a qualified paleontologist that is approved by the Planning Department to evaluate the significance of the finding and appropriate course of action. After the find has been appropriately mitigated, work in the area may resume. Implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-2 will ensure that potential impacts due to accidental discovery of significant paleontological resources will be reduced to a less-than-significant level by requiring that if a find is made, activity is stopped, and appropriate measures are taken. d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?     Narrative Summary: Less Than Significant Impact. No conditions exist that suggest human remains are likely to be found beneath the project site. Due to the level of past disturbance in the project area, it is not anticipated that human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries, would be encountered CASE NOS.: CUP2015-05845, VAR2016-05068 Page 14 of 31 SITE ADDRESS: 500 South Walnut Street June 2016 Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact during earth removal or disturbance activities. However, in the unexpected event human remains are found, those remains would require proper treatment, in accordance with applicable laws. The California Public Resources Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5-7055 describe the general provisions regarding human remains, including the requirements if any human remains are accidentally discovered during excavation of a site. As required by State law, the requirements and procedures set forth in Section 5097.98 of the California Public Resources Code would be implemented, including notification of the County Coroner, notification of the Native American Heritage Commission and consultation with the individual identified by the Native American Heritage Commission to be the "most likely descendant." If human remains are found during excavation, excavation must stop in the vicinity of the find and any area that is reasonably suspected to overly adjacent remains until the County coroner has been called out, and the remains have been investigated and appropriate recommendations have been made for the treatment and disposition of the remains. Following compliance with State regulations, which detail the appropriate actions necessary in the event human remains are encountered, impacts in this regard would be considered less than significant. VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS -- Would the project: 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.     ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?     Narrative Summary: No Impact. There are no known active earthquake faults or Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones that traverse the City (City of Anaheim 2004b). While no active or potentially active faults traverse the City, the entire Southern California region is considered to be seismically active. The City is located between two major active fault zones: the Newport-Inglewood fault zone and the Whittier-Elsinore fault zone (City of Anaheim 2004a). The Newport-Inglewood fault passes within seven miles of the western limits of the City. It is considered capable of generating an earthquake with a magnitude of 6.9 on the Richter scale. The Whittier-Elsinore fault passes within one mile of the northeastern end of the City and is capable of generating an earthquake with a magnitude of 6.8 on the Richter scale. In light of this, all new structures at the project site would be constructed to the standards prescribed by the California Building Code (CBC), as amended by the City of Anaheim, in order to reduce any risks associated with seismic activity. No impacts would occur. (City of Anaheim 2004b, 2016b) iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?     iv) Landslides?     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?     Narrative Summary: No Impact. The project site is not located within a Seismic Hazard Zone, including liquefaction or landslide potential (City of Anaheim 2004, Figure S-3; DOC 1998). Construction would be required to comply with Chapter 15.03 of the Code, which requires compliance with the California Building Code and therefore accepted statewide regulations for seismic safety. No impacts would occur.     CASE NOS.: CUP2015-05845, VAR2016-05068 Page 15 of 31 SITE ADDRESS: 500 South Walnut Street June 2016 Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Section 1803.5.3 of the California Building Code (2010), creating substantial risks to life or property?     Narrative Summary: Less Than Significant Impact. Because the proposed project would involve grading and construction activities that would occur on flat ground, substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil would not occur. All construction and grading activity would comply with the City of Anaheim’s existing ordinances and policies, including those aimed at erosion control such as Code Title 17, Land Development and Resources and the current version of the Uniform Building Code. As such, while implementation of the project would result in minimal changes to the site’s existing grade, the substantial loss of topsoil or erosion would not occur because the application of the existing regulations identified in the Code and Uniform Building Code and grading regulations would minimize the risk associated with any development resulting in substantial soil erosion or proposed within areas containing expansive soils. Impacts would be less than significant. e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater?     Narrative Summary: No Impact. The project would tie into the existing sewer system. Septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems would not be constructed on this site. No impacts would occur. VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS – Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?     Narrative Summary: Less Than Significant Impact. Gases that trap heat in the atmosphere are often called greenhouse gases (GHGs), analogous to the way in which a greenhouse retains heat. Common GHSs include water vapor, carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxides (N2Ox), fluorinated gases, and ozone. GHGs are emitted by both natural processes and human activities. Of these gases, CO2 and CH4 are emitted in the greatest quantities from human activities. Emissions of CO2 are largely by-products of fossil fuel combustion, whereas CH4 results from off-gassing associated with agricultural practices and landfills. Man-made GHGs, many o f which have greater heat-absorption potential than CO2, include fluorinated gases, such as hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFC), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) (California 2006). The accumulation of GHGs in the atmosphere regulates the earth’s temperature. Without the natural heat trapping effect of GHGs, earth’s surface would be about 34 degrees cooler. However, it is believed that emissions from human activities, particularly the consumption of fossil fuels for electricity production and transportation, have elevated the concentration of these gases in the atmosphere beyond naturally occurring concentrations. Temporary Construction Emissions The California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) was used to calculate emissions associated with project construction. Based on modeling results shown in Table 3, Proposed Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions (see also Appendix A for details), the proposed project would generate an estimated metric maximum of 382 tons of Carbon Dioxide Equivalent (CDE) per year during construction. Carbon dioxide equivalent (CDE or CO2E) is a quantity that describes, for a given mixture and amount of GHG, the amount of CO2*usually in metric tons) that would have the same global warming potential (GWP) when measured over a specified time scale (generally 100 years). CASE NOS.: CUP2015-05845, VAR2016-05068 Page 16 of 31 SITE ADDRESS: 500 South Walnut Street June 2016 Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact Table 3 – Greenhouse Gas Emissions Emission Source CO2e (Metric Tons) Construction 381 Annual Operations 1,829 Total 2,855 Less than 3,000* tons CO2e? YES *3,000 tons CO2e is the threshold established by SCAQMD’s Proposed Tier 3 Screening Levels. Operational Emissions CalEEMod was used to calculate GHG emissions resulting from operation of the proposed project (see Appendix A). As shown in Table 3, the proposed project would generate an estimated maximum of 1,829 metric tons of CDE per year of operation. The City of Anaheim has not adopted any GHG emissions thresholds that apply to land use projects and has not adopted a GHG emissions reduction plan. Therefore, the proposed project is evaluated based on the SCAQMD’s recommended/preferred threshold for projects of 3,000 metric tons CO2E per year (SCAQMD 2016). Although the project would generate additional GHG emissions beyond existing conditions, because the total amount of GHG emissions would be lower than the threshold of 3,000 metric tons per year, impacts from GHG emissions would be less than significant. b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?     Narrative Summary: Less Than Significant Impact. GHG emission reduction strategies that were prepared by the California EPA (CalEPA) Climate Action Team (CAT) and measures suggested by the Attorney General have been used as a benchmark for significance and qualitative consideration. The CAT strategies are recommended to reduce GHG emissions at a statewide level to meet the goals of Executive Order S-3-05 (http://www.climatechange.ca.gov). The Attorney General’s Greenhouse Gas Reduction Report was prepared in 2008 by the California Attorney General’s Office. This report specifies measures that may reduce global warming related impacts at the individual project level. As appropriate, the measures can be included as design features of a project, required changes to the project, or imposed as mitigation. Some of the CAT strategies and measures suggested by the Attorney General’s Greenhouse Gas Reduction Report are listed below. Several of these actions are already ready required by California regulations. California Air Resources Board • Vehicle Climate Change Standards (AB 143) • Diesel anti-idling • Use of alternative fuels (ethanol) • Heavy-duty vehicle emission reduction measures • Achieving 50% of the statewide recycling goal (AB 939) • Zero waste – high recycling Department of Water Resources • Water use efficiency Energy Commission • Building energy efficiency standards in place and in progress • Appliance energy efficiency standards in place and in progress CASE NOS.: CUP2015-05845, VAR2016-05068 Page 17 of 31 SITE ADDRESS: 500 South Walnut Street June 2016 Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact The Attorney General Greenhouse Gas Reduction Measures include transportation emissions reduction, solid waste reduction strategies, and water use efficiency. Many of the others overlap with the strategies and measures listed above and are not repeated in this list. Consistent with these standards and measures, onsite development would reduce wasteful, inefficient and unnecessary consumption of energy and utilize alternative fuels by complying with requirements of the California Building Standards Code – California Energy Code. In addition, the City of Anaheim meets all of the recommendations of AB 939, which reduces waste flows to landfills. The proposed project would be consistent with CAT and Attorney General strategies. GHG emissions generated by the proposed project would not conflict with applicable plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs. Therefore, the contribution of onsite development to cumulative global climate change impacts would be less than significant. VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS -- Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?     Narrative Summary: Less Than Significant Impact. During grading and construction activities, the contractor would be required to comply with Chapter 10.09 of the Code (City of Anaheim 2016a), which prohibits the active or passive discharge or disposal of soil or construction debris into the storm drain. Additionally, the owner/contractor is required to comply with the current version of the State’s General Construction Permit, which requires the development and implementation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). SWPPPs address the prevention or elimination of potential pollutants associated with all applicable types of construction related materials and wastes onsite. During the operational phase of the project, treatment control BMPs (currently identified as infiltration onsite) would be implemented to remove pollutants generated to the maximum extent practicable as defined in the County’s Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP) (OCPW 2003). Conformance with the three aforementioned requirements would reduce any impacts to a less-than-significant level. 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?     Narrative Summary: Less Than Significant Impact. The type and amount of hazardous materials to be used on site would be typical of those used for a typical commercial business. It is assumed that all potentially hazardous materials would be contained, stored, and used in accordance with manufacturer’s instructions and handled In compliance with applicable standards and regulations. Any associated risk would be adequately reduced to a less-than-significant level through compliance with these standards and regulations. As such, construction and operation of the project would result in a less than significant impact with regard to routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials relative to the safety of the public or the environment. c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?     Narrative Summary: Less Than Significant Impact. The Betsy Ross Elementary School is located within a quarter mile of the project site, across Walnut Street to the west. Neither construction nor operation of the proposed project would generate acutely hazardous materials or wastes, and the limited use of any hazardous materials would be contained, stored, and used in accordance with manufacturer's guidelines as well as according to all applicable federal, state, and local standards and regulations regarding hazardous materials. Therefore, impacts associated with emitting or handling hazardous emissions or materials within a quarter mile of an existing or proposed school would be less than significant. d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials     CASE NOS.: CUP2015-05845, VAR2016-05068 Page 18 of 31 SITE ADDRESS: 500 South Walnut Street June 2016 Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 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? Narrative Summary: No Impact. The project site is not listed on the Envirostor database which is maintained by the California Department of Toxic Substances (DTSC 2016). No impacts would occur. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan (Los Alamitos Armed Forces Reserve Center or Fullerton Municipal 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, heliport or helistop, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?     Narrative Summary: No Impact. The project site is not located within the Los Alamitos Joint Forces Training Base or Fullerton Municipal Airport influence areas (OCALUC 2004), and is not within the immediate vicinity of any private airstrip, heliport or helistop (City of Anaheim 2004b). Therefore, the project would not result in undue exposure to airport or airstrip related hazards. In addition, due to the project site’s distance from airports/airstrips and the infrequency of flight activity over the site, no impacts would occur. g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?     Narrative Summary: No Impact. The proposed project would not impair implementation of, or physically interfere with, an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. The project site is located within an established residential area with established emergency and evacuation routes. No impacts would occur. 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?     Narrative Summary: No Impact. The proposed project is not located within a designated high risk wildland fire area (City of Anaheim 2004b). The site is located within an established residential area that is built out with urbanized uses. No wildland areas exist in the immediate vicinity of the site. The project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires. No impacts would occur. IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY -- Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements?     Narrative Summary: Less Than Significant Impact. Project construction would include grading, excavation, and other earthmoving activities that have the potential to cause erosion that would subsequently degrade water quality and/or violate water quality standards. As a result, the proposed project must comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) MS4 Permit. The NPDES MS4 Permit Program, which is administered in the project area by the City of Anaheim and County of Orange, issued by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (SARWQCB), helps control water pollution by regulating point sources that discharge pollutants into receiving waters. Project operation must also comply with the NPDES General Construction Permit. Additionally, the project would be required to obtain coverage under the General Permit for Discharges of Storm Water Associated with Construction Activity (Construction General Permit Order 2009-0009-DWQ). Construction activities subject to the Construction General Permit includes clearing, grading, and disturbances CASE NOS.: CUP2015-05845, VAR2016-05068 Page 19 of 31 SITE ADDRESS: 500 South Walnut Street June 2016 Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact to ground such as stockpiling or excavation. The Construction General Permit requires implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP would generally contain a site map showing the construction perimeter, existing and proposed buildings, storm water collection and discharge points, general pre- and post-construction topography, drainage patterns across the site, and adjacent roadways. The SWPPP must also include project construction features designed to protect against stormwater runoff, known as Best Management Practices (BMPs). Additionally, the SWPPP must contain a visual monitoring program; a chemical monitoring program for "non-visible" pollutants, should the BMPs fail; and a sediment monitoring plan, should the site discharge directly into a water body listed on the 303(d) list for sediment. Section A of the Construction General Permit describes the elements that must be contained in the SWPPP. Compliance with these policies and ordinances and the requirements contained within would reduce project impacts to a less-than-significant level. 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)?     Narrative Summary: Less Than Significant Impact. The City of Anaheim receives water from two main sources: the Orange County Groundwater Basin, which is managed by the Orange County Water District, and imported water from the Metropolitan Water District of southern California. Groundwater is pumped from 18 active wells located within the City, and imported water is delivered to the City through seven treated water connections and one untreated connection. According to the City of Anaheim 2010 Urban Water Management Plan, local groundwater has been the least expensive and most reliable source of water supply for the City. The City depends heavily on the groundwater from the Orange County Groundwater Basin each year. Due to the nature of the project, the supply of local water needed to support a self-storage use is not substantial. Therefore, the production rates of local wells would not be significantly impacted. Although the proposed project would result in an increased amount of impervious surfaces on the site, development would not result in a significant deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table. No significant impact on groundwater supplies would occur. 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?     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?     e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?     f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?     Narrative Summary: Less Than Significant Impact. The internal drainage patterns of the site would be slightly altered by development. However, the project would not alter any drainage pattern in a manner that would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or offsite. The CASE NOS.: CUP2015-05845, VAR2016-05068 Page 20 of 31 SITE ADDRESS: 500 South Walnut Street June 2016 Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact project would not involve an alteration of the course of a stream or river. Erosion and siltation impacts potentially resulting from the project would, for the most part, occur during the project's site preparation and earthmoving phase. Implementation of the NPDES permit requirements, as they apply to the site, would reduce potential erosion, siltation, and water quality impacts. In addition, a Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan for the project, a NPDES permit requirement, has been reviewed by City Public Works Department and has accepted (Florez 2015). No significant impacts would occur. 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?     h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows?     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?     j) Inundation by seiche or mudflow?     Narrative Summary: No Impact. The proposed project site does not contain any housing. In addition, the proposed project would not involve the construction of any housing or buildings that would be located within a flood zone. The proposed project is not located in a flood inundation area. In addition, the project site is flat and not located near any large bodies of water, so no impacts from mudslides, landslides or seiches would occur. X. LAND USE AND PLANNING -- Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community?     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 or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?     Narrative Summary (a – b): Less Than Significant Impact. While the proposed use is conditionally permitted in the Industrial Zone of the Code, it is designated as Residential-Low Medium in the General Plan. However, the site has historically been in use with activities associated with the cement plant that can be described as heavy industrial since the 1960’s according to the City’s records. The proposed self-storage use would be a much less intense use than the prior cement plant use, especially with regard to noise, vibration, and dust impacts that are typical of a cement plant. The project would be compatible with surrounding uses, would not divide an existing neighborhood, and would result in a less-than-significant impact due to the proposed self- storage use in the Residential-Low Medium General Plan land use designation. c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan?     Narrative Summary: No Impact. The project site is not located in the Orange County Central and Coastal Natural Community Natural Community Conservation Plan/Habitat Conservation Plan area (City of Anaheim 2004b, Section 5.3). No impacts would occur. XI. MINERAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?     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?     CASE NOS.: CUP2015-05845, VAR2016-05068 Page 21 of 31 SITE ADDRESS: 500 South Walnut Street June 2016 Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact Narrative Summary: No Impact. There are no significant mineral resources that exist on or in the immediate vicinity of the project site (City of Anaheim 2004b, Figure G-3). No impacts would occur. XII. NOISE -- Would the project result in: 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?     Narrative Summary: Less Than Significant Impact. Noise is defined as unwanted sound. Noise can be disturbing or annoying because of its pitch or loudness. Sensitivity to noise increases during the evening and at night because excessive noise interferes with the ability to sleep. The proposed project site is located in an urbanized built out area within Anaheim. The area surrounding the site is residential and public in nature, with the elementary school to the west and public park to the north. Operation: The proposed project would add self-storage uses on the project site, consisting of a four-story 120,058 square foot facility with a floor area ratio of 1.39. The main source of noise would be vehicle noise from traffic trips of the employees and customers which would result in approximately 300 daily vehicle trips (LLG 2016). This number of trips is a small percentage of the daily traffic on the surrounding roadways and would not constitute a significant increase in noise. Less than significant impacts would occur. Construction: The proposed project would generate temporary noise during construction activities. Equipment used during construction could create noise impacts through the duration of the construction process. However, these impacts are temporary and would cease upon completion of construction. Code Chapter 6.70 exempts construction noise between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Construction is prohibited on Sundays and federal holidays. Less than significant impacts would occur. b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?     Narrative Summary: Less Than Significant Impact. The site is surrounded by residential and school uses. When the site is developed, the construction phase and associated construction equipment could produce vibration from vehicle travel as well as demolition, grading and building construction activities; however, construction activities would be limited to daytime hours between 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. Any construction that occurs would utilize typical construction techniques. As such, it is anticipated that the equipment to be used during construction would not cause excessive groundborne noise or vibration. Less than significant impacts would occur. c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?     Narrative Summary: Less Than Significant Impact. Noise associated with implementation of the project is temporary, periodic and short-term and would not result in long-term excessive noise, ground borne vibration, or a substantial permanent increase in noise levels. As such, the proposed project would not have any permanent significant impacts due to a substantial increase in noise levels. d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?     Narrative Summary: Less Than Significant Impact. Any construction activities that occur would result in a temporary periodic increase in ambient noise levels; however, the City exempts noise generated by construction activities between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday. Compliance with the Code CASE NOS.: CUP2015-05845, VAR2016-05068 Page 22 of 31 SITE ADDRESS: 500 South Walnut Street June 2016 Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact requirement would reduce any project impacts to less than significant. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan (Los Alamitos Armed Forces Reserve Center or Fullerton Municipal 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, heliport or helistop, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?     Narrative Summary: No Impact. The project site is not located within the Los Alamitos Joint Forces Training Base or Fullerton Municipal Airport influence areas (OCALUC 2004), and is not within the immediate vicinity of any private airstrip, heliport or helistop (City of Anaheim 2004b). No impacts from aircraft noise would occur. XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING -- Would the project: 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)?     b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?     c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?     Narrative Summary: No Impact. No housing exists on the site and no housing units are proposed with the project. As such, no replacement housing would be necessary and no increase housing units or population would occur. No impacts to population or housing would occur as a result of the proposed project. XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES -- Would the 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: Fire protection?     Police protection?     Schools?     Parks?     Other public facilities?     Narrative Summary: Less Than Significant Impact. Fire The Anaheim Fire & Rescue (AF&R) provides fire protection services in the City of Anaheim. The AF&R operates 12 fire stations comprised of ten engine companies and five truck companies, and employs approximately 227 firefighters, six battalion chiefs, and various other support staff. AF&R is responsible for all fire, rescue and medical aid calls in the City. The AF&R maintains a response time goal that requires the first engine company to respond within five minutes to 90 percent of all incidents and eight minutes to the remaining ten percent of incidents. The AF&R also requires a maximum of ten minutes for the first truck company to respond to 100 percent of all incidents. The construction of a self-storage facility would incrementally increase demands for fire protection services. However, such increases would be considered minimal and demand for fire CASE NOS.: CUP2015-05845, VAR2016-05068 Page 23 of 31 SITE ADDRESS: 500 South Walnut Street June 2016 Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact service would be met with existing firefighting resources. Less-than-significant impacts would occur. Police The Anaheim Police Department (APD) provides police protection services to the City of Anaheim. The APD operates out of its headquarters at 425 S. Harbor Boulevard, the East Station at 8201 East Santa Ana Canyon Road and the West Station at 320 South Beach Boulevard. The Department employs approximately 400 sworn officers and support staff of over 173. The Department is responsible for patrol, investigations, traffic enforcement, traffic control, vice and narcotics enforcement, airborne patrol, crime suppression, community policing, tourist-oriented policing, and detention facilities. The construction of a self-storage facility would incrementally increase demands for fire protection services. However, such increases would be considered minimal and demand for police service would be met with existing police resources. Less-than-significant impacts would occur. Schools – Parks – Other public facilities The proposed project would not include the construction of housing and no additional population, including students, would be generated. As such, no impacts to schools, parks or recreational facilities, other public facilities including libraries, would occur. XV. RECREATION -- Would the project: a) 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?     b) Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?     Narrative Summary: No Impact. Implementation of the proposed project would not increase the use of existing parks or facilities and does not include the construction or expansion of any recreational facilities, neither in the short or long-term. No impacts would occur. XVI. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC -- Would the project: 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?     Narrative Summary: Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is a triangular-shaped vacant parcel of land. The proposed project will consist of a 120,058 square feet four –story self-storage facility, consisting of 117,166 square feet of storage space and 2,892 square feet of office space. The proposed project is expected to be open by the Year 2018. Access to the proposed project will be provided via two full access driveways, one located along Walnut Street and one located along Manchester Avenue. A Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) was prepared by Linscott, Law & Greenspan (LLG 2016) to assess impacts of the proposed project. Two key study intersections (Walnut Street at Santa Ana Street/Manchester Avenue at Santa Ana Street) were studied for detailed peak hour level of service analyses under Existing Traffic Conditions, Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions, Year 2018 Cumulative Traffic Conditions and Year 2018 Cumulative plus Project Traffic Conditions. The following are the key findings of the TIA: CASE NOS.: CUP2015-05845, VAR2016-05068 Page 24 of 31 SITE ADDRESS: 500 South Walnut Street June 2016 Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact • Existing Traffic Conditions – All two (2) key study intersections currently operate at acceptable level of service (LOS) A during the AM and PM peak hours. • Project Trip Generation – The project is forecast to generate 300 daily trips, 17 AM peak hour trips (9 inbound, 8 outbound) and 31 PM peak hour trips (16 inbound, 15 outbound). • Cumulative Projects Traffic Characteristics – There are no cumulative projects located in the City of Anaheim within the vicinity of the proposed project. • Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions – The proposed project will not significantly impact any of the two (2) key study intersections when compared to the LOS standards and significant impact criteria specified in this report. The two (2) key study intersections currently operate and are forecast to continue to operate at an acceptable LOS A during the AM and PM peak hours with the addition of project generated traffic to existing traffic. • Year 2018 Cumulative Plus Project Traffic Conditions – The proposed project will not significantly impact any of the two (2) key study intersections when compared to the LOS standards and significant impact criteria specified in this report. The key study intersections are forecast to continue to operate at an acceptable LOS A during the AM and PM peak hours with the addition of project generated traffic in the Year 2018. • Site Access Evaluation – The proposed project driveways are forecast to operate at an acceptable LOS C or better during the AM and PM peak hours for near-term (Year 2018) traffic conditions. As such, project access will be adequate. Motorists entering and exiting the project site will be able to do so comfortably, safely, and without undue congestion. The AM peak hour and PM peak hour queue length is not more than one (1) vehicle for the outbound movements at the proposed project driveways. Review of the proposed site plan indicates that the proposed project driveways provide one outbound lane with stacking sufficient enough to accommodate this queue length. Adequate sight distance should be provided at project driveways by minimizing obstructions. As a project design feature, the striped median along Manchester Avenue will be restriped as a two-way left-turn lane to provided full access to and from the project driveway. The proposed northbound left-turn would require a minimum storage length of no more than one (1) vehicle. • Congestion Management Program (CMP) – The proposed project will not have any significant traffic impacts on the Congestion Management Program Highway System. • Recommended Improvements – The results of the intersection capacity analysis and daily roadway segment analysis presented in Tables 8-1 and 9-1 of the TIA shows that the proposed project will not significantly impact the two (2) key study intersections under the “Existing Plus Project” and “Year 2018 Plus Project” traffic scenarios. Given that there are no significant project impacts, no improvements are required of the proposed project. As the TIA found that the proposed project would not result in significant traffic impacts, as it would operate at acceptable LOS, would not result in cumulatively significant impacts, and would not have significant impacts on the CMP; impacts would be less than significant. 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?     Narrative Summary: No Impact. Since 1994, the CMP has required a traffic impact analysis (TIA) be generated when a project would generate 2,400 or more average daily trips (ADT) (OCTA 2015). The proposed project would generate 300 ADT, a number substantially less than the CMP threshold. A CMP analysis is not CASE NOS.: CUP2015-05845, VAR2016-05068 Page 25 of 31 SITE ADDRESS: 500 South Walnut Street June 2016 Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact required. No impacts 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?     Narrative Summary: No Impact. The proposed project building heights are consistent with the heights of nearby structures and would not impact air traffic patterns. The project site is not within any airport or airstrip areas of impact. No impacts would occur. d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses?     Narrative Summary: No Impact. There are no hazardous road conditions, including sharp curves or dangerous intersections, in the vicinity of the project site. Any structures constructed in the future would be accessed via its own driveway. In addition, due to the low intensity use of the project, a minimal amount of 300 daily trips would be generated. As a result, the project would not substantially increase hazards due to a design feature. No impacts would occur. e) Result in inadequate emergency access?     Narrative Summary: No Impact. The project site is located with an established community and project plans will be reviewed by the Anaheim Fire Department to ensure that adequate emergency access is provided to the site. No impacts would occur. 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?     Narrative Summary: No Impact. The project would not conflict with any adopted policies, plans, or programs such as the Anaheim Outdoors Connectivity Plan (City of Anaheim 2013), supporting alternative transportation and programs related to public transit, bicycle and pedestrian facilities. No impacts would occur. XVII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS -- Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?     Narrative Summary: Less Than Significant. Local governments and water districts are responsible to complying with federal regulations, both for wastewater plant operation and collection systems (e.g., sanitary sewers) that covey wastewater to the wastewater treatment facility. Proper operation and maintenance is critical for sewage collegian and treatment as impacts from these processes can degrade water resources and affect human health. Development of the site with self-storage uses would result in 120,058 square feet of development on the approximately 1.98-acre site. This size of development would generate approximately 4,528 gallons of wastewater per day (gpd). Public Works Department staff reviewed the project description and project plans and has determined that sewer capacity currently exists for the project, and a sewer study would not be required because: • The plans show two restrooms with presumably only toilets and sinks which equates to 12 Fixture Units (FUs). The break room may or may not include a kitchenette. If it does that adds 2 more Fixture Units to the count, totaling 14. The anticipated use is also presumed not to be heavy. • Since FUs do not equate directly to water use the assumption is that the generation rate would be roughly equivalent to a single family residence (105 gpd/capita x 3.3 people = 345 gpd). CASE NOS.: CUP2015-05845, VAR2016-05068 Page 26 of 31 SITE ADDRESS: 500 South Walnut Street June 2016 Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact • The existing use can be considered equivalent to the land area (2 acres) multiplied by the generation rate from the Central Anaheim Master Plan of Sanitary Sewer (3,167 gpd/acre) even if the Commercial rate were applied it would be (2,262 gpd/acre). Using the lower of these numbers still equates to 4,528 gpd. • The existing use (345 gpd) is an order of magnitude higher than the proposed use (4,528 gpd) (City of Anaheim 2016c). The existing Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) wastewater facilities that serve the project site currently have a surplus capacity, as required by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (SARWQCB). Currently, OCSD wastewater facilities have a surplus capacity of approximately 240 million gallons per day. The wastewater generated would be minimal and would comprise less than one percent of the existing surplus amount. Wastewater generation would not exceed the wastewater treatment requirements of the existing OCSD facilities. Therefore, impacts of the proposed project would be less than significant. b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities (including sewer (waste water) collection facilities) or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects?     Narrative Summary: Less Than Significant. The proposed project would be served by the Anaheim Public Utilities Department (APUD). The proposed project is located within a developed area and there are existing water mains in the streets surrounding the proposed project. The project would be required to connect to these existing water lines. The development of the site with self-storage use would result in the demand for approximately 345 gallons per day of water, as water fixture units are limited to only twelve units. Due to the nature of the project, no significant impacts on existing water infrastructure would occur. Wastewater in the project area is collected by gravity sewers owned, operated and maintained by the OCSD. Existing sewer lines are located in the streets adjacent to the proposed project. The proposed project would generate approximately 4,528 gpd of wastewater (see Item XVIIa Narrative Summary). Due to the minimal intensity of the project, the existing facilities would be adequate to serve the wastewater collection requirements of the proposed project. Impacts to water or wastewater treatment facilities would be less than significant. 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?     Narrative Summary: Less Than Significant. The project would result in approximately 51,860 square feet of impervious surfaces on the site including the paved parking area and building footprint, which would increase stormwater runoff from the site. The project proposes to install a bio-retention/infiltration basin along the entire southern portion of the project site, with landscaping. The basin would connect to two storm drains that would run along the frontages of Walnut Street and Manchester Boulevard, collecting stormwater onsite, and draining into the basin. The project would not exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems. The project would not require the expansion of existing facilities. No significant impacts would occur. CASE NOS.: CUP2015-05845, VAR2016-05068 Page 27 of 31 SITE ADDRESS: 500 South Walnut Street June 2016 Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact Figure 4. Drainage Management Areas Map d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project (including large-scale developments as defined by Public Resources Code Section 21151.9 and described in Question No. 20 of the Environmental Information Form) from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed?     Narrative Summary: Less Than Significant. As discussed in further detail in Narrative Summary XVIIa, the proposed project would only require 12 Fixture Units (FUs), and 14 if the break room includes a kitchenette. Since FUs do not equate directly to water use the assumption is that the generation rate would be roughly equivalent to a single family residence (105 gpd/capita x 3.3 people = 345 gpd). Impacts would be less than significant. e) Result in a determination by the wastewater 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?     Narrative Summary: Less Than Significant. As discussed previously under Item XVIIa, both OCSD wastewater treatment facilities that would serve the proposed project have design capacities that exceed their current utilization. In addition, Public Works staff reviewed the proposed project and confirmed sewer capacity is sufficient for the proposed project. No impacts would occur. Impacts would be less than significant. f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs?     g) Comply with Federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste?     CASE NOS.: CUP2015-05845, VAR2016-05068 Page 28 of 31 SITE ADDRESS: 500 South Walnut Street June 2016 Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact Narrative Summary: Less Than Significant. According to the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) industrial uses generate approximately 8.93 pounds of solid waste per employee per day, not including generation of construction debris (CalRecycle 2013). Assuming 1 to 2 employees would be onsite at any one time, a total of approximately 17.86 pounds of solid waste would be generated per day. AB939 requires local jurisdictions to divert at least 50 percent of their solid waste into recycling. As of 2010, the City is diverting approximately 63 percent of its waste into recycling. Waste from the City is currently being diverted to the Olida Alpha Landfill in the City of Brea and the Frank R. Bowerman Landfill in the City of Irvine. Combined, the two landfills accept approximately 23,500 tons of waste per day, or over seven million tons annually. As a result, the project’s long-term operational daily contribution of 17.86 pounds would be minimal and would not significantly impact landfill operations. In addition, the short-term impacts associated with demolition of existing structures and construction of the facility would be required to comply with the City’s regulations on construction debris. Less than significant impacts would occur. h) Result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations related to electricity?     I) Result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations related to natural gas?     j) Result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations related to telephone service?     k) Result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations related to television service/reception?     Narrative Summary: Less Than Significant. The proposed project site is located in a built-out, urban setting. The site and the surrounding neighborhood are fully served by various utility service providers. There are no anticipated significant service or system upgrades needed to serve the proposed office use. Any increase in demand for these services would be considered to be less than significant. Less than significant impacts would occur. XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE -- 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?     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)?     c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?     Narrative Summary: Less Than Significant Impacts. As described in the environmental checklist, the project does not 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 CASE NOS.: CUP2015-05845, VAR2016-05068 Page 29 of 31 SITE ADDRESS: 500 South Walnut Street June 2016 Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. The project is located within the SCAQMD which has been designated as a nonattainment area for certain criteria pollutants. Typical construction activities will generate specific criteria pollutants; however, due to the minimal size of the project, it is not expected to result in a cumulatively considerable impact. In addition, due to the small scale of the size and scope of the project, it would not adversely affect human beings, either directly or indirectly. No significant impacts would occur. Appendices A. California Emission Estimator Model (CaLEEMod). Proposed Project Modeling Results. June 30, 2016. B. AB52 Tribal Consultation Documentation. March 24, 2016 and May 4, 2016. C. Florez Engineering Inc. Preliminary Drainage Study for StorQuest Self Storage. June 7, 2016. D. Florez Engineering Inc. StorQuest Anaheim Water Quality Management Plan. November 4, 2015. E. Linscott, Law & Greenspan. StorQuest Traffic Impact Analysis. June 21, 2016. Sources 1. Anaheim, City of a. Anaheim Municipal Code. 1974, amended as of January 26, 2016 (a). Available at: http://library.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/California/anaheim/anaheimmunicipalcode?f=templates$fn=d efault.htm$3.0$vid=amlegal:anaheim_ca$anc=JD_CityCode b. General Plan. May 2004 (a), as amended September 4, 2015. Available at: http://www.anaheim.net/712/General-Plan c. General Plan and Zoning Code Update Environmental Impact Report No. 330. May 25, 2004 (b). Available at: http://www.anaheim.net/913/Environmental-Impact-Report d. 2010 Urban Water Management Plan. June 2011. Available at: http://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/Home/View/1627 e. Anaheim Outdoors Connectivity Plan. April 2013. Available at: http://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/6040 f. Citywide Historic Preservation Plan. May 2010. Available at: http://www.anaheim.net/planning/aRT/PlanCouncil-May2010.pdf g. Criteria for Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies. Available at: http://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/366 h. GIS Planning Information Database. Accessed April 11, 2016 (b). i. Keith Linker, Public Works Department. Email Communication. April 13, 2016 (c). 2. California, State of a. Assembly Bill 32: Global Warming Solutions Act. 2006. Available at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/ab32/ab32.htm b. Senate Bill 375: Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008. 2008. Available at: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/07-08/bill/sen/sb_0351- 0400/sb_375_bill_20080930_chaptered.pdf c. Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR). CEQA and Climate Change: Addressing Climate Change Through California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Review. June 19, 2008. Pg. 4. Available at: https://www.opr.ca.gov/docs/june08-ceqa.pdf 3. California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) a. California Emissions Estimator Model Version 2013.2.2. 2014. CASE NOS.: CUP2015-05845, VAR2016-05068 Page 30 of 31 SITE ADDRESS: 500 South Walnut Street June 2016 b. CEQA & Climate Change. January 2008. Available at: http://capcoa.org/wp- content/uploads/downloads/2010/05/CAPCOA-White-Paper.pdf 4. California Attorney General’s Office (AGO). Addressing Climate Change at the Project Level. Available at: http://ag.ca.gov/globalwarming/pdf/GW_mitigation_measures.pdf 5. California Department of Conservation (DOC) a. Agricultural Preserves 2004, Williamson Act Parcels, Orange County, California. Available at: ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dlrp/wa/Orange_WA_03_04.pdf b. Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program Map for Orange County. 2012. Available at: ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dlrp/FMMP/pdf/2012/ora12.pdf c. Seismic Hazard Zones Map, Orange 7.5-Minute Quadrangle. April 15, 1998. Available at: http://gmw.consrv.ca.gov/shmp/download/pdf/ozn_ora.pdf 6. California Department of Fish and Wildlife (DFW). Natural Community Conservation Plan and Habitat Conservation Plan for the County of Orange Central and Coastal Subregion. 1996. Available at: http:///www.dfg.ca.gov/habcon/nccp/status/OrangeCoastal/ 7. California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). Waste Characterization Industrial Sector: Estimated Solid Waste Generation Rates. Last updated January 16, 2013. Accessed April 14, 2016. Available at: http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/wastechar/wastegenrates/Industrial.htm 8. California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). Cortese List. Available at: http://www.dtsc.ca.gov/SiteCleanup/Cortese_List.cfm 9. California Department of Transportation (DOT). California Scenic Highway Mapping System. Accessed May 3, 2016. Available at: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/16_livability/scenic_highways/index.htm 10. California Geologic Survey (CGS). Special Publication 117A, Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California. September 11, 2008. Available at: http://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/shzp/webdocs/documents/sp117.pdf 11. Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). Envirostor Database. Accessed May 4, 2016. Available at: http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/ 12. Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). Trip Generation Rates from the 8th Edition ITE Trip Generation Report. October 12, 2010. Available at: http://www.dot.state.fl.us/planning/systems/programs/sm/accman/Updated%20Trip%20Gen.xls 13. Florez Engineering Inc. StorQuest Anaheim Water Quality Management Plan. November 4, 2015. 14. Florez Engineering Inc. Preliminary Drainage Study for StorQuest Self Storage. June 7, 2016. 15. Linscott, Law & Greenspan (LLG). StorQuest Traffic Impact Analysis. June 21, 2016. 16. Self Storage Association (SSA). Preamble Sheet. Accessed May 2, 2016. Available at: http://www.selfstorage.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=fJYAow6_AU0%3D&portalid=0 17. Orange County Airport Land Use Commission (OCALUC). Airport Environs Land Use Plan for Fullerton Municipal Airport. November 18, 2004. Available at: http://www.ocair.com/commissions/aluc/docs/FMA_AELUP-November-18-2004.pdf 18. Orange County Integrated Waste Management Department. Regional Landfill Options for Orange County Strategic Plan [RELOOC] Update. November 2007. Available at: http://oclandfills.com/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=6676 19. Orange County Public Works (OCPW). Drainage Area Management Plan [DAMP]. 2003. Available at: http://ocwatersheds.com/documents/damp 20. Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA). Orange County Congestion Management Plan. November 2015. Available at: http://www.octa.net/pdf/Final%202015%20CMP.pdf 21. Southern California Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) a. 2016 Air Quality Management Plan. Available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/home/library/clean-air- plans/air-quality-mgt-plan b. Rule 403, Fugitive Dust. Adopted 1976, as amended June 3, 2005. Available at: CASE NOS.: CUP2015-05845, VAR2016-05068 Page 31 of 31 SITE ADDRESS: 500 South Walnut Street June 2016 http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/rule-book/rule-iv/rule-403.pdf c. Greenhouse Gases (GHG) CEQA Significance Thresholds webpage. Accessed April 11, 2016. Available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/home/regulations/ceqa/air-quality-analysis-handbook/ghg-significance- thresholds/page/2 22. Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). Adopted 2012 RTP Growth Forecast. Accessed May 2, 2016. Available at: http://gisdata.scag.ca.gov/Lists/Socio%20Economic%20Library/Attachments/43/2012AdoptedGrowthForec ast.xls 23. United States Census. Population and Housing Data. 2010. Available at: http://www.census.gov/prod/www/decennial.html 24. United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) a. Federal Water Pollution Control Act (known as the Clean Water Act). November 27, 2002. Available at: http://www.epw.senate.gov/water.pdf b. The Green Book, Nonattainment Areas for Criteria Pollutants. As of October 01, 2015. Available at: https://www3.epa.gov/airquality/greenbook/ tblArchitecturalCoating EF_Nonresidential_Exterior 250.00 100.00 tblArchitecturalCoating EF_Nonresidential_Interior 250.00 100.00 Architectural Coating - Per Rule 1113, square footage provided by applicant, interior walls are prefab concrete not requiring painting Area Coating - Per Rule 1113, square footages provided by Applicant Area Mitigation - per rule 1113 Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data Project Characteristics - Land Use - Lot acreage actual 1.98 Construction Phase - Schedule provided by applicant Demolition - Grading - Site preparation and grading on entire site CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 1543.28 CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.029 N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.006 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) Population General Light Industry 120.00 1000sqft 1.98 120,000.00 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: 6/30/2016 12:41 PM StorQuest Self Storage Orange County, Winter 1.0 Project Characteristics 0.0000 2,973.823 1 2,973.8231 0.6300 0.0000 2,987.05215.8890 1.6072 7.1963 2.9774 1.5032 4.1802Total111.6055 26.6436 21.4826 0.0327 0.0000 2,973.823 1 2,973.8231 0.6300 0.0000 2,987.05215.8890 1.6072 7.1963 2.9774 1.5032 4.18022017111.6055 26.6436 21.4826 0.0327 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 0.0000 2,973.823 1 2,973.8231 0.6300 0.0000 2,987.05215.8890 1.6072 7.1963 2.9774 1.5032 4.1802Total111.6055 26.6436 21.4826 0.0327 0.0000 2,973.823 1 2,973.8231 0.6300 0.0000 2,987.05215.8890 1.6072 7.1963 2.9774 1.5032 4.18022017111.6055 26.6436 21.4826 0.0327 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 tblLandUse LotAcreage 2.75 1.98 2.0 Emissions Summary 2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission) tblAreaCoating Area_EF_Nonresidential_Exterior 250 100 tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintNonresidentialInterior Value 250 100 10,347.09 78 10,347.097 8 0.4423 0.0154 10,361.143 1 7.8214 0.2096 8.0309 2.0864 0.1969 2.2833Total6.8407 11.5111 47.7405 0.1074 9,510.069 1 9,510.0691 0.4262 9,519.01897.8214 0.1565 7.9779 2.0864 0.1438 2.2302Mobile3.7391 10.8134 47.1418 0.1032 837.0024 837.0024 0.0160 0.0154 842.09630.0530 0.0530 0.0530 0.0530Energy0.0767 0.6975 0.5859 4.1900e- 003 0.0263 0.0263 8.0000e- 005 0.02795.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 Area 3.0249 1.2000e- 004 0.0128 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 10,347.09 78 10,347.097 8 0.4423 0.0154 10,361.143 1 7.8214 0.2096 8.0309 2.0864 0.1969 2.2833Total6.8407 11.5111 47.7405 0.1074 9,510.069 1 9,510.0691 0.4262 9,519.01897.8214 0.1565 7.9779 2.0864 0.1438 2.2302Mobile3.7391 10.8134 47.1418 0.1032 837.0024 837.0024 0.0160 0.0154 842.09630.0530 0.0530 0.0530 0.0530Energy0.0767 0.6975 0.5859 4.1900e- 003 0.0263 0.0263 8.0000e- 005 0.02795.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 Area 3.0249 1.2000e- 004 0.0128 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 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 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive PM10 Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 6.00 255 0.40 Grading Graders 1 6.00 174 0.41 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37 Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 1 7.00 255 0.40 Site Preparation Graders 1 8.00 174 0.41 Demolition Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8.00 97 0.37 Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 255 0.40 Load Factor Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73 Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 1 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 1.5 Acres of Paving: 0 Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 180,000; Non-Residential Outdoor: 60,000 (Architectural Coating – OffRoad Equipment Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power 10 6 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 11/28/2017 12/11/2017 5 10 5 Paving Paving 11/14/2017 11/27/2017 5 4 4 Building Construction Building Construction 2/7/2017 11/13/2017 5 200 3 Grading Grading 2/1/2017 2/6/2017 5 20 2 Site Preparation Site Preparation 1/28/2017 1/31/2017 5 2 End Date Num Days Week Num Days Phase Description 1 Demolition Demolition 1/1/2017 1/27/2017 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 0.000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive PM10 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2eExhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction 3.2 Demolition - 2017 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 10.00 0.00 0.00 Paving 5 13.00 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 7 50.00 20.00 0.00 Grading 3 8.00 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 3 8.00 0.00 0.00 Demolition 5 13.00 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 Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48 Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37 Paving Rollers 1 7.00 80 0.38 Paving Paving Equipment 1 8.00 130 0.36 Paving Pavers 1 6.00 125 0.42 Paving Cement and Mortar Mixers 1 6.00 9 0.56 Building Construction Welders 3 8.00 46 0.45 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 6.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74 Building Construction Forklifts 1 6.00 89 0.20 Building Construction Cranes 1 6.00 226 0.29 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 7.00 97 0.37 0.0000 2,457.468 2 2,457.4682 0.6235 2,470.56201.6062 1.6062 1.5022 1.5022Total2.7216 26.5855 20.8712 0.0245 0.0000 2,457.468 2 2,457.4682 0.6235 2,470.56201.6062 1.6062 1.5022 1.5022Off-Road 2.7216 26.5855 20.8712 0.0245 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 2,457.468 2 2,457.4682 0.6235 2,470.56201.6062 1.6062 1.5022 1.5022Total2.7216 26.5855 20.8712 0.0245 2,457.468 2 2,457.4682 0.6235 2,470.56201.6062 1.6062 1.5022 1.5022Off-Road 2.7216 26.5855 20.8712 0.0245 Category lb/day lb/day Unmitigated Construction Off-Site 1,752.123 9 1,752.1239 0.5369 1,763.39775.7996 1.3067 7.1063 2.9537 1.2022 4.1559Total2.3109 24.2288 15.9299 0.0171 1,752.123 9 1,752.1239 0.5369 1,763.39771.3067 1.3067 1.2022 1.2022Off-Road 2.3109 24.2288 15.9299 0.0171 0.0000 0.00005.7996 0.0000 5.7996 2.9537 0.0000 2.9537Fugitive 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 Site Preparation - 2017 Unmitigated 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 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 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 1,752.123 9 1,752.1239 0.5369 1,763.39775.7996 1.3067 7.1063 2.9537 1.2022 4.1559Total2.3109 24.2288 15.9299 0.0171 0.0000 1,752.123 9 1,752.1239 0.5369 1,763.39771.3067 1.3067 1.2022 1.2022Off-Road 2.3109 24.2288 15.9299 0.0171 0.0000 0.00005.7996 0.0000 5.7996 2.9537 0.0000 2.9537Fugitive 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 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- CO2ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive 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 1,439.189 4 1,439.1894 0.4410 1,448.44964.9143 1.0661 5.9804 2.5256 0.9808 3.5064Total1.8844 19.7889 13.1786 0.0141 1,439.189 4 1,439.1894 0.4410 1,448.44961.0661 1.0661 0.9808 0.9808Off-Road 1.8844 19.7889 13.1786 0.0141 0.0000 0.00004.9143 0.0000 4.9143 2.5256 0.0000 2.5256Fugitive 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 3.4 Grading - 2017 Unmitigated 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 3.5 Building Construction - 2017 Unmitigated Construction On-Site 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 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 1,439.189 4 1,439.1894 0.4410 1,448.44964.9143 1.0661 5.9804 2.5256 0.9808 3.5064Total1.8844 19.7889 13.1786 0.0141 0.0000 1,439.189 4 1,439.1894 0.4410 1,448.44961.0661 1.0661 0.9808 0.9808Off-Road 1.8844 19.7889 13.1786 0.0141 0.0000 0.00004.9143 0.0000 4.9143 2.5256 0.0000 2.5256Fugitive 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 0.0000 2,034.286 0 2,034.2860 0.4268 2,043.24971.2257 1.2257 1.1823 1.1823Off-Road 2.9546 19.1088 14.3110 0.0220 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 939.5370 939.5370 0.0278 940.12150.6839 0.0285 0.7124 0.1838 0.0263 0.2101Total0.3443 1.8339 4.6823 0.0107 516.4852 516.4852 0.0248 517.00510.5589 3.8200e- 003 0.5627 0.1482 3.5300e- 003 0.1517Worker0.1660 0.2238 2.3514 6.4200e- 003 423.0518 423.0518 3.0800e- 003 423.11640.1250 0.0247 0.1497 0.0356 0.0227 0.0583Vendor0.1783 1.6101 2.3309 4.2900e- 003 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 2,034.286 0 2,034.2860 0.4268 2,043.24971.2257 1.2257 1.1823 1.1823Total2.9546 19.1088 14.3110 0.0220 2,034.286 0 2,034.2860 0.4268 2,043.24971.2257 1.2257 1.1823 1.1823Off-Road 2.9546 19.1088 14.3110 0.0220 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site 1,347.657 5 1,347.6575 0.4052 1,356.16770.7333 0.7333 0.6755 0.6755Total1.1857 12.0981 9.0308 0.0133 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Paving0.0000 1,347.657 5 1,347.6575 0.4052 1,356.16770.7333 0.7333 0.6755 0.6755Off-Road 1.1857 12.0981 9.0308 0.0133 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 Paving - 2017 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 939.5370 939.5370 0.0278 940.12150.6839 0.0285 0.7124 0.1838 0.0263 0.2101Total0.3443 1.8339 4.6823 0.0107 516.4852 516.4852 0.0248 517.00510.5589 3.8200e- 003 0.5627 0.1482 3.5300e- 003 0.1517Worker0.1660 0.2238 2.3514 6.4200e- 003 423.0518 423.0518 3.0800e- 003 423.11640.1250 0.0247 0.1497 0.0356 0.0227 0.0583Vendor0.1783 1.6101 2.3309 4.2900e- 003 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 2,034.286 0 2,034.2860 0.4268 2,043.24971.2257 1.2257 1.1823 1.1823Total2.9546 19.1088 14.3110 0.0220 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 1,347.657 5 1,347.6575 0.4052 1,356.16770.7333 0.7333 0.6755 0.6755Total1.1857 12.0981 9.0308 0.0133 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Paving0.0000 0.0000 1,347.657 5 1,347.6575 0.4052 1,356.16770.7333 0.7333 0.6755 0.6755Off-Road 1.1857 12.0981 9.0308 0.0133 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- CO2ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 103.2970 103.2970 4.9500e- 003 103.40100.1118 7.6000e- 004 0.1125 0.0296 7.1000e- 004 0.0304Total0.0332 0.0448 0.4703 1.2800e- 003 103.2970 103.2970 4.9500e- 003 103.40100.1118 7.6000e- 004 0.1125 0.0296 7.1000e- 004 0.0304Worker0.0332 0.0448 0.4703 1.2800e- 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 281.4481 281.4481 0.0297 282.07210.1733 0.1733 0.1733 0.1733Total111.5723 2.1850 1.8681 2.9700e- 003 281.4481 281.4481 0.0297 282.07210.1733 0.1733 0.1733 0.1733Off-Road 0.3323 2.1850 1.8681 2.9700e- 003 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Archit. Coating 111.2400 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 Architectural Coating - 2017 Unmitigated 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 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile 103.2970 103.2970 4.9500e- 003 103.40100.1118 7.6000e- 004 0.1125 0.0296 7.1000e- 004 0.0304Total0.0332 0.0448 0.4703 1.2800e- 003 103.2970 103.2970 4.9500e- 003 103.40100.1118 7.6000e- 004 0.1125 0.0296 7.1000e- 004 0.0304Worker0.0332 0.0448 0.4703 1.2800e- 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 281.4481 281.4481 0.0297 282.07210.1733 0.1733 0.1733 0.1733Total111.5723 2.1850 1.8681 2.9700e- 003 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0297 282.07210.1733 0.1733 0.1733 0.1733Off-Road 0.3323 2.1850 1.8681 2.9700e- 003 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Archit. Coating 111.2400 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 4.4 Fleet Mix Historical Energy Use: N 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy 0.001415 0.002132 0.004680 0.000514 0.002220 5.0 Energy Detail SBUS MH 0.511766 0.057390 0.191335 0.154102 0.040813 0.005872 0.014592 0.013169 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY 28.00 13.00 92 5 3 LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by General Light Industry 16.60 8.40 6.90 59.00 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 836.40 158.40 81.60 2,797,406 2,797,406 Annual VMT General Light Industry 836.40 158.40 81.60 2,797,406 2,797,406 4.2 Trip Summary Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT 9,510.069 1 9,510.0691 0.4262 9,519.01897.8214 0.1565 7.9779 2.0864 0.1438 2.2302Unmitigated3.7391 10.8134 47.1418 0.1032 9,510.069 1 9,510.0691 0.4262 9,519.01897.8214 0.1565 7.9779 2.0864 0.1438 2.2302Mitigated3.7391 10.8134 47.1418 0.1032 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- CO2ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive PM10 837.0024 837.0024 0.0160 0.0154 842.09630.0530 0.0530 0.0530 0.0530Total0.0767 0.6975 0.5859 4.1900e- 003 837.0024 837.0024 0.0160 0.0154 842.09630.0530 0.0530 0.0530 0.0530General Light Industry 7.11452 0.0767 0.6975 0.5859 4.1900e- 003 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 837.0024 837.0024 0.0160 0.0154 842.09630.0530 0.0530 0.0530 0.0530Total0.0767 0.6975 0.5859 4.1900e- 003 837.0024 837.0024 0.0160 0.0154 842.09630.0530 0.0530 0.0530 0.0530General Light Industry 7114.52 0.0767 0.6975 0.5859 4.1900e- 003 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 837.0024 837.0024 0.0160 0.0154 842.09630.0530 0.0530 0.0530 0.0530NaturalGas Unmitigated 0.0767 0.6975 0.5859 4.1900e- 003 837.0024 837.0024 0.0160 0.0154 842.09630.0530 0.0530 0.0530 0.0530NaturalGas Mitigated 0.0767 0.6975 0.5859 4.1900e- 003 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- CO2ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive PM10 Mitigated 0.0263 0.0263 8.0000e- 005 0.02795.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 Total 3.0249 1.2000e- 004 0.0128 0.0000 0.0263 0.0263 8.0000e- 005 0.02795.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 Landscaping 1.2900e- 003 1.2000e- 004 0.0128 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Consumer Products 2.3760 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Architectural Coating 0.6476 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 6.2 Area by SubCategory Unmitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0263 0.0263 8.0000e- 005 0.02795.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 Unmitigated 3.0249 1.2000e- 004 0.0128 0.0000 0.0263 0.0263 8.0000e- 005 0.02795.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 Mitigated 3.0249 1.2000e- 004 0.0128 0.0000 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 6.0 Area Detail 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 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 0.0263 0.0263 8.0000e- 005 0.02795.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 Total 3.0249 1.2000e- 004 0.0128 0.0000 0.0263 0.0263 8.0000e- 005 0.02795.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 5.0000e- 005 Landscaping 1.2900e- 003 1.2000e- 004 0.0128 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Consumer Products 2.3760 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Architectural Coating 0.6476 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 City of Anaheim PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Suite #162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Tel: (714) 765-5139 Fax: (714) 765-5280 www.anaheim.net March 24, 2016 Andrew Salas, Chairman Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation P.O. Box 393 Covina, CA 91723 Subject: AB 52 Consultation for StorQuest Self Storage Facility Dear Mr. Salas: Thank you for your interest in proposed development projects in the City of Anaheim. The City is in receipt of the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation’s request, pursuant to the provisions of Assembly Bill 52 and Section 21080.3.1 (d) of the Public Resources Code, for formal notification of proposed projects in the geographic area that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with your tribe. This notification is for the purpose of extending the opportunity to request a consultation to protect any tribal cultural resources that may exist in the planning area. The City of Anaheim is the lead agency for the proposed project, StorQuest Self Storage Facility, located at 500 South Walnut Street in the City of Anaheim. A map of the project location is attached. The proposed project would construct a four-story 120,319 square foot self-storage facility. The site is generally flat and is developed with a non- operational former cement batch plant. A large portion of the site is paved and has vacant and blighted buildings and materials left over from the former operations. Surrounding land uses include an elementary school across Walnut Avenue to the west, a public park across Santa Ana Street to the northwest, Manchester Avenue and Interstate-5 to the north and east, and single-family residential to the south. The site has a General Plan designation of “I” Industrial and is zoned “R-LM” Residential-Low Medium. All existing buildings and structures on the site would be demolished and minimal grading would be conducted, with approximately 2,200 cubic yards of cut and 2,200 cubic yards of fill. Please contact me within 30 days of receipt of this letter if you would like additional information about this project or would like to consult with the City of Anaheim about any tribal cultural resources located within the project area. I can be reached at 714-765-5238 or csaunders@anaheim.net. Sincerely, Christine Saunders Associate Planner City of Anaheim PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Suite #162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Tel: (714) 765-5139 Fax: (714) 765-5280 www.anaheim.net March 24, 2016 Joseph Ontiveros Cultural Resource Director Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians P.O. Box 487 San Jacinto, CA 92581 Subject: AB 52 Consultation for StorQuest Self Storage Facility Dear Mr. Ontiveros: Thank you for your interest in proposed development projects in the City of Anaheim. The City is in receipt of the Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians’ request, pursuant to the provisions of Assembly Bill 52 and Section 21080.3.1 (d) of the Public Resources Code, for formal notification of proposed projects in the geographic area that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with your tribe. This notification is f or the purpose of extending the opportunity to request a consultation to protect any tribal cultural resources that may exist in the planning area. The City of Anaheim is the lead agency for the proposed project, StorQuest Self Storage Facility, located at 500 South Walnut Street in the City of Anaheim. A map of the project location is attached. The proposed project would construct a four-story 120,319 square foot self-storage facility. The site is generally flat and is developed with a non- operational former cement batch plant. A large portion of the site is paved and has vacant and blighted buildings and materials left over from the former operations. Surrounding land uses include an elementary school across Walnut Avenue to the west, a public park across Santa Ana Street to the northwest, Manchester Avenue and Interstate-5 to the north and east, and single-family residential to the south. The site has a General Plan designation of “I” Industrial and is zoned “R-LM” Residential-Low Medium. All existing buildings and structures on the site would be demolished and minimal grading would be conducted, with approximately 2,200 cubic yards of cut and 2,200 cubic yards of fill. Please contact me within 30 days of receipt of this letter if you would like additional information about this project or would like to consult with the City of Anaheim about any tribal cultural resources located within the project area. I can be reached at 714-765-5238 or csaunders@anaheim.net. Sincerely, Christine Saunders Associate Planner City of Anaheim PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Suite #162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Tel: (714) 765-5139 Fax: (714) 765-5280 www.anaheim.net March 24, 2016 Joyce Stanfield Perry, Tribal Manager Juaneño Band of Mission Indians – Acjachemen Nation 4955 Paseo Segovia Irvine, CA 92603 Subject: AB 52 Consultation for StorQuest Self Storage Facility Dear Ms. Perry: Thank you for your interest in proposed development projects in the City of Anaheim. The City is in receipt of the Juaneño Band of Mission Indians – Acjachemen Nation’s request, pursuant to the provisions of Assembly Bill 52 and Section 21080.3.1 (d) of the Public Resources Code, for formal notification of proposed projects in the geographic area that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with your tribe. This notification is for the purpose of extending the opportunity to request a consultation to protect any tribal cultural resources that may exist in the planning area. The City of Anaheim is the lead agency for the proposed project, StorQuest Self Storage Facility, located at 500 South Walnut Street in the City of Anaheim. A map of the project location is attached. The proposed project would construct a four-story 120,319 square foot self-storage facility. The site is generally flat and is developed with a non- operational former cement batch plant. A large portion of the site is paved and has vacant and blighted buildings and materials left over from the former operations. Surrounding land uses include an elementary school across Walnut Avenue to the west, a public park across Santa Ana Street to the northwest, Manchester Avenue and Interstate-5 to the north and east, and single-family residential to the south. The site has a General Plan designation of “I” Industrial and is zoned “R-LM” Residential-Low Medium. All existing buildings and structures on the site would be demolished and minimal grading would be conducted, with approximately 2,200 cubic yards of cut and 2,200 cubic yards of fill. Please contact me within 30 days of receipt of this letter if you would like additional information about this project or would like to consult with the City of Anaheim about any tribal cultural resources located within the project area. I can be reached at 714-765-5238 or csaunders@anaheim.net. Sincerely, Christine Saunders Associate Planner Page 2 of 2 PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE STUDY FOR STORQUEST SELF STORAGE 500 Walnut Street Anaheim, CA. Prepared For: Prepared For: StorQuest Self Storage C/O The William Warren Group, Inc. 1319 Miracielo CT., San Marcos, CA 92078 Prepared By: Florez Engineering, Inc 11440 West Bernardo Court San Diego, CA 92127 (858) 386-8836 Original: 02/03/2016 Revised: 04/14/2016 Revised: 06/07/2016 TABLE OF CONTENTS PROJECT DISCRIPTION.............................................................................................................. 1 SCOPE AND PURPOSE .............................................................................................................. 1 HYDROLOGIC METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................. 1 HYDRAULIC METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................... 2 Detention Basin Capacity............................................................................................. 2 Orifices Sizing............................................................................................................... 3 Detention Basin Location…………………………………………………………….……..3 APPENDICES APPENDIX A HYDROLOGIC REFERENCE MATERIAL APPENDIX B SITE REFERENCE MATERIAL ZPPENDIX C DETENTION BASIN PROGRAM OUTPUT SITE DISCRIPTION Page 1 The site is located on South Walnut Street at the southeast corner of the intersection with Santa Ana Street. Topographically it is very flat, with a very shallow grade towards Walnut Street that surface drains the entire site. The existing impervious areas, the buildings and concrete paved utility areas cover approximately 72 percent of the 85,816 square foot site. The remaining 28 percent of the site area is used to stock pile the concrete ingredients and some minor landscaping accounting for the existing pervious areas. PROJECT DISCRIPTION The project is a rehabilitation of an existing developed site. The existing developed use was as a Ready-Mix concrete batch plant. The proposed project is a 4 story self-storage facility with 120,103 square feet of floor space. A 2,957 square foot area on the ground floor is partitioned of as the space rental office. A 3,100 square foot floor area also on the ground floor is provided for the storage of items needing a cooled humidity controlled enclosure. Approximately 29,214 square feet, 36 percent of the site will be pervious landscaping amenities. SCOPE AND PURPOSE The scope of this preliminary study is to estimate the pre and post 10, 25 and 100 year project storm water runoff from the site, estimate the size of the required Bio-Retention runoff treatment facilities that will comply with CEQA and to propose conceptually the implementation of this facilities. At this point in the development of the project documents, a detailed design of the storm water conveyance system, the roof drain locations and piping system to convey the runoff from other impervious surfaces to the storm water management facilities is only conceptual. This study will establish the criteria for its design. HYDROLOGIC METHODOLOGY Without a detailed runoff conveyance paths that can be analyzed for the flow time needed to determine a time of concentration and storm duration, the calculations for the hydrologic runoff will be in accordance with the Orange County Hydrology Manual Rational Method for a small single basin drainage shed. The time of concentration to determine the rainfall intensity index will be the initial area minimum qualifying time of 5 minutes as required by the County Manual. The rainfall intensity (I) index was determined using the equation from the Intensity- Duration Design Chart, Figure B-3, taken from the Orange County Hydrology Manual: From: I  a * t b Where: a= Coefficient from Figure B-3 tied to the storm frequency t = Duration, = 5 minutes. b = Exponential power from Figure B-3 tied to the storm frequency Page 2 From the intensity-duration equation the following intensities are determined. 10 year storm I  10.209 * 5 -.645 = 3.61 in/hr 25 year storm I  11.995 * 5 -.566 = 4.82 in/hr 100 year storm I  15.560 * 5 -.573 = 6.19 in/hr Pro-Rating the Runoff Coefficient: C = (Pervious Area x 0.35) + (Impervious Area x 0.98) Site Area With the intensity index and runoff coefficient the peak runoff can be calculated: From the Rational Method equation: Q = CIA Where: C = Runoff Coefficient I = in/hr A = Total Site Area Condition Site Area sf Site Area AC Pro-Rated “C” 10 yr Peak cfs 25 yr Peak cfs 100 yr Peak cfs Pre-Project 85,816 1.970 0.80 5.690 7.565 9.755 Post Project 81,073 1.861 0.61 4.098 5.471 7.027 Change -27% -27% -28% -28% HYDRAULIC METHODOLOGY The proposed project will lower the storm event runoff because of the lower runoff coefficient and therefore attenuation of the peck 100 year storm runoff is not required. Because discharge of a Bio-Retention Basin to a City storm drain is unavailable the City is requiring the use of a retention-infiltration basin for total containment of up to the 100 year storm on site. Because of this requirement runoff will ultimately infiltrate into the surrounding ground and not reach the streets. Therefore the Retention-infiltration basin is functioning as a retention basin and the infiltration into the surrounding ground functioning as the treatment medium. Detention Basin Capacity: The Retention/infiltration basin is sized to provide as much storage volume as possible within the rock storage medium. A standard porosity estimate for the medium is 40 percent by volume which is the percent of the medium available as storage, in the form of voids. The volume of the storage medium therefor must be 2.50 times the storm volume. The storm volume is computed using a computer routine that calculates a 24 hour storm hydrograph based on the input values for drainage area, flow path length and grade, precipitation depth and run-off characteristics of the soil. See appendix C for program input. Storm Event Storm Volume Ac-Ft Storage Volume Ac-Ft Storage Volume Sq-Ft 85th 0.080 0.200 8,712 10 Year 0.341 0.853 37,135 25 Year 0.419 1.048 45,629 50 Year 0.477 1.193 51,945 100 Year 0.535 1.338 58,262 The storage volume necessary for the 100 year storm will require a medium depth of 4 feet and a medium area of 14.566 feet. This will require placing a portion of the storage medium under the parking lot surface. The onsite storm drain will discharge into the retention basin by a connection to an 18 inch stand pipe. The stand pipe will act as a junction structure with three outlets. Two will be perforated pipes to distribute the storm water through the storage medium and one will be an emergency outlet to the street. CONCLUSION: This preliminary hydrology study has shown that the project design can accommodate complete containment of up to the 100 year storm. It may be possible to contain the 100 year storm by using a combination of storage and infiltration that would significantly reduce the required volume of the storage medium. This will be analyzed during the final engineering phase when a field tested infiltration rate for the site is available. This preliminary study has shown that downstream impacts by this project to existing storm water facilities are not only mitigated but, the elimination of project discharge will provide a measure of relief from large storm event. APPENDIX A HYDROLOGIC REFERENCE Orange County Hydrology Manuel reference: Figure B-3; Intensity-duration Figure D-1; Tc Nomograph Table B.2; Total Precipitation Data Table C.2; Pervious Area Loss Rate APPENDIX B SITE REFERENCE MATERIAL Pre-project Hydrology Map Post Project Hydrology Map Detention Basin Typical Section Detention basin infiltration pipe model WAL N U T S T R E E T S A N T A A N A S T R E E T MANC H E S T E R B O U L E V A R D TW TW TW TW TW TW TW TW AC PAVI N G AC PAVI N G AC PAVI N G AC PAVI N G AC PAVI N G AC PAVI N G AC PAVI N G AC BER M EDG E O F AC P A V I N G AC BER M GRA V E L DRIV E W A Y CON C DRIV E W A Y CON C CUR B CON C C U R B AND G U T T E R HH DIRT DIRT DIRT DIRT DIRT CON C C U R B AND G U T T E R DIRT C O N C D R I V E W A Y C O N C CON C C U R B AND G U T T E R HR CON C S I D E W A L K DIRT DIRT DIRT EX.C O N C C U R B AND G U T T E R CON C S I D E W A L K DIRT DIRT CON C S I D E W A L K GATE CON C BER M CON C SLAB CON C SLAB CON C SLAB CON C SLAB CON C SLAB CON C SLAB DIRT 8"BL K WALL 14'HI G H CLF CON C SLAB 10'HI G H 8"BL K W A L L DIRT DIRT PILE CON C SLAB CON C SLAB CON C SLAB CON C SLAB CON C SLAB CON C SLAB DIRT DIRT PILE DIRT PILE DIRT PILE DIRT 10'HI G H 8"BL K W A L L 10'HI G H 8"BL K W A L L DIRT DIRT DIRT DIRT DIRT DIRT DIRT 12"WI D E BLK W A L L 12"WI D E BLK W A L L 12"WI D E BLK W A L L CLF G A T E 10'HI G H WF 10'HI G H WF CLF G A T E 10'HI G H WF 10'HI G H CLFDIRT TRA C T N O . 92 1247 ANA H E I M POR. L O T 3 2 EXTE N S I O N 93 94 95 96 EX. 1 2 " W A T E R EX. 1 0 " S E W E R EX. 8" J . F . EX. 2" G A S EX. T E L . EX.S E W E R L A T . EX.S E W E R L A T . S S TOTAL SITE AREA 85,816 SF TOTAL IMPERVIOUS AREA 61,862 SF TOTAL PERVIOUS AREA 23,953 SF (23,953 X 0.35) + (61,862 X 0.98) 85,816PRO-RATED C == 0.80 PRO-RATED C = 10732 CHARBONO TERRACE FRANK FLOREZ, P.E. FE SAN DIEGO, CA 92131 (858) 229-2493 DATE: 02/04/2016 EXISTING HYDROLOGY NORTH DIRECTION OF DRAINAGE WAL N U T S T R E E T S A N T A A N A S T R E E T MANC H E S T E R B O U L E V A R D TOTAL SITE AREA 81,073 SF TOTAL ROOF AREA 30,121 SF TOTAL PARKING 21,739 SF TOTAL WALK AREA 6,759 SF TOTAL L/S AREA 22,455 SF PRO-RATED C = (29,214 X 0.35) + (51,860 X 0.98) 81,073 = 0.61 TO B E R E M O V E D TO B E R E M O V E D EXIS T I N G REM O V E REM O V E IMPERVIOUS: PERVIOUS: NORTH 10732 CHARBONO TERRACE FRANK FLOREZ, P.E. FE SAN DIEGO, CA 92131 (858) 229-2493 DATE: 06/08/2016 DEVELOPED HYDROLOGY BIO-RETENTION BASIN (BIO-RET) LEGEND DIRECTION OF DRAINAGE LANDSCAPE AREA (L/S) STORM DRAINSD RETENTION - INFILTRATION BASIN NTS 18" STANDPIPE WITH ATRIUM GRATE INLET LEACH LINES TO DISTRIBUTE STORM WATER THROUGH THE STORAGE MEDIUM 20" FG PAVEMENT ON AGG BASE PL 36" DEEP CLASS II AGG. STORAGE MEDIUM. STORM DRAIN 48" 12" EXISTING 10 FOOT HIGH WALL 48" EMERGENCY OVERFLOW PIPE 36" DEEP CLASS II AGG. STORAGE MEDIUM BELOW GROUND. D.G. WALK WAY. R E T E N T I O N / I N F I L T R A T I O N B A S I N N T S 1 8 " S T A N D P I P E W I T H A T R I U M G R A T E I N L E T L E A C H L I N E S T O D I S T R I B U T E S T O R M W A T E R T H R O U G H T H E S T O R A G E M E D I U M 2 0 " F G P A V E M E N T O N A G G B A S E T C P E R P L A N P L 3 6 " D E E P C L A S S I I A G G . S T O R A G E M E D I U M . S T O R M D R A I N 4 8 " 1 2 " E X I S T I N G 1 0 F O O T H I G H W A L L 4 8 " E M E R G E N C Y O V E R F L O W P I P E APPENDIX C HYDRAULIC MATERIAL Storm Event Hydrograph: 85th, 10 year, 25 Year, 50 Year and 100 year Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis File location: C:/Users/Florez/Dropbox/Work/bane, nancy/Anaheim Self Storage/HYDRO/SUPPORT/StorQuest -85th Total Site.pdf Version: HydroCalc 0.3.1 Input Parameters Project Name StorQuest Subarea ID Total Site Area (ac)1.861 Flow Path Length (ft)360.0 Flow Path Slope (vft/hft)0.01 85th Percentile Rainfall Depth (in)0.85 Percent Impervious 0.64 Soil Type 61 Design Storm Frequency 85th percentile storm Fire Factor 0 LID True Output Results Modeled (85th percentile storm) Rainfall Depth (in)0.85 Peak Intensity (in/hr)0.2257 Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu)0.1 Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd)0.612 Time of Concentration (min)28.0 Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs)0.257 Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs)0.257 24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft)0.08 24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft)3485.1667 Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis File location: C:/Users/Florez/Dropbox/Work/bane, nancy/Anaheim Self Storage/HYDRO/SUPPORT/StorQuest -10 yr Total Site.pdf Version: HydroCalc 0.3.1 Input Parameters Project Name StorQuest Subarea ID Total Site Area (ac)1.861 Flow Path Length (ft)360.0 Flow Path Slope (vft/hft)0.01 50-yr Rainfall Depth (in)5.07 Percent Impervious 0.64 Soil Type 61 Design Storm Frequency 10-yr Fire Factor 0 LID False Output Results Modeled (10-yr) Rainfall Depth (in)3.62 Peak Intensity (in/hr)1.5593 Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu)0.1 Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd)0.612 Time of Concentration (min)10.0 Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs)1.7759 Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs)1.7759 24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft)0.3407 24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft)14842.4985 Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis File location: C:/Users/Florez/Dropbox/Work/bane, nancy/Anaheim Self Storage/HYDRO/SUPPORT/StorQuest -25 yr Total Site.pdf Version: HydroCalc 0.3.1 Input Parameters Project Name StorQuest Subarea ID Total Site Area (ac)1.861 Flow Path Length (ft)360.0 Flow Path Slope (vft/hft)0.01 50-yr Rainfall Depth (in)5.07 Percent Impervious 0.64 Soil Type 61 Design Storm Frequency 25-yr Fire Factor 0 LID False Output Results Modeled (25-yr) Rainfall Depth (in)4.4515 Peak Intensity (in/hr)2.0148 Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu)0.1 Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd)0.612 Time of Concentration (min)9.0 Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs)2.2947 Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs)2.2947 24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft)0.419 24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft)18251.6955 Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis File location: C:/Users/Florez/Dropbox/Work/bane, nancy/Anaheim Self Storage/HYDRO/SUPPORT/StorQuest -50 yr Total Site.pdf Version: HydroCalc 0.3.1 Input Parameters Project Name StorQuest Subarea ID Total Site Area (ac)1.861 Flow Path Length (ft)360.0 Flow Path Slope (vft/hft)0.01 50-yr Rainfall Depth (in)5.07 Percent Impervious 0.64 Soil Type 61 Design Storm Frequency 50-yr Fire Factor 0 LID False Output Results Modeled (50-yr) Rainfall Depth (in)5.07 Peak Intensity (in/hr)2.4254 Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu)0.1 Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd)0.612 Time of Concentration (min)8.0 Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs)2.7623 Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs)2.7623 24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft)0.4772 24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft)20787.8036 Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis File location: C:/Users/Florez/Dropbox/Work/bane, nancy/Anaheim Self Storage/HYDRO/SUPPORT/StorQuest -100 yr Total Site.pdf Version: HydroCalc 0.3.1 Input Parameters Project Name StorQuest Subarea ID Total Site Area (ac)1.861 Flow Path Length (ft)360.0 Flow Path Slope (vft/hft)0.01 50-yr Rainfall Depth (in)5.07 Percent Impervious 0.64 Soil Type 61 Design Storm Frequency 100-yr Fire Factor 0 LID False Output Results Modeled (100-yr) Rainfall Depth (in)5.6885 Peak Intensity (in/hr)2.8975 Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu)0.1 Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd)0.612 Time of Concentration (min)7.0 Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs)3.3001 Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs)3.3001 24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft)0.5354 24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft)23323.9112 WQ XX-XXXX County of Orange/Santa Ana Region Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) Project Name: STORQUEST ANAHEIM PLANNING REVIEW APPLICATION NO._________________ Street Address: 500 SOUTH WALNUT STREET, ANAHEIM CA. 92802 Assesses Parcel Number: 036-321-1600 Legal Description: ANAHEIM EXT LOT 32, TRACT 17 Prepared for: STORQUEST SELF STORAGE C/O THE WILLIAM WARREN GROUP, INC 1319 MIRACIELO COURT SAN MARCOS, CA. 92078 Prepared by: FLOREZ ENGINEERING IN. 11440 BERNARDO COURT, SUITE 157 SAN DIEGO, CA. 92127 (858) 229-2493 Original: 11/4/2015 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) StorQuest Self Storage STORQUEST SELF STORAGE - ANAHEIM Page i This Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) has been prepared for StorQuest Self storage, by Florez Engineering Inc. The WQMP is intended to comply with the requirements of the County of Orange 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 , including the ongoing operation and maintenance of all best management practices (BMPs), 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: Title StorQuest Self Storage C/O Company The William Warren Group, Inc Address 1319 Miracielo Court San Marcos, Ca. 92078 Email Telephone # 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. Owner Signature Date Project Owner’s Certification Planning Application No. (If applicable) Grading Permit No. Tract/Parcel Map and Lot(s) No. Anaheim ext. lot 32 Tract 17. Building Permit No. Address of Project Site and APN (If no address, specify Tract/Parcel Map and Lot Numbers) `500 & 520 South Walnut St. Anaheim, Ca. 92802 APN: 036‐321‐1600 Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) StorQuest Self Storage STORQUEST SELF STORAGE - ANAHEIM Page ii Preparer (Engineer): Dennis Furman Title Project Manager PE Registration # RCE 32391 Company Florez Engineering Address 11440 Bernardo Court, San Diego, Ca. 92127 Email dennis@florezengineering.com Telephone # (858) 386-8836 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 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) StorQuest Self Storage STORQUEST SELF STORAGE - ANAHEIM Page iii Contents Page No. Section I Permit(s) and Water Quality Conditions of Approval or Issuance .......... 1 Section II Project Description .................................................................................. 3 Section III Site Description ........................................................................................ 8 Section IV Best Management Practices (BMPs) ...................................................... 10 Section V Inspection/Maintenance Responsibility for BMPs ................................. 24 Section VI BMP Exhibit (Site Plan) .......................................................................... 25 Section VII Educational Materials ............................................................................. 26 Attachments Attachment A . .................................................................................. Educational Materials Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) StorQuest Self Storage STORQUEST SELF STORAGE - ANAHEIM Page 4 Section I Permit(s) and Water Quality Conditions of Approval or Issuance Provide discretionary or grading/building permit information and water quality conditions of approval, or permit issuance, applied to the project. If conditions are unknown, please request applicable conditions from staff. Refer to Section 2.1 in the Technical Guidance Document (TGD) available on the OC Planning website (ocplanning.net). Project Infomation Permit/Application No. (If applicable) Grading or Building Permit No. (If applicable) Address of Project Site (or Tract Map and Lot Number if no address) and APN 500 South Walnut St. Anaheim, Ca. 92802 APN: 036‐321‐1500 & 1600 Water Quality Conditions of Approval or Issuance Water Quality Conditions of Approval or Issuance applied to this project. (Please list verbatim.) In Progress Conceptual WQMP Was a Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan previously approved for this project? In Progress Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) StorQuest Self Storage STORQUEST SELF STORAGE - ANAHEIM Page 5 Watershed-Based Plan Conditions Provide applicable conditions from watershed - based plans including WIHMPs and TMDLS. In Progress Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) StorQuest Self Storage STORQUEST SELF STORAGE - ANAHEIM Page 6 Section II Project Description II.1 Project Description Provide a detailed project description including:  Project areas; 86,203 Square Feet  Land uses; Pre-Project – Concrete batch plant. Post-Project – Self Storage Facility.  Land cover; Concrete pavement and dirt.  Design elements;  A general description not broken down by drainage management areas (DMAs). Include attributes relevant to determining applicable source controls. Refer to Section 2.2 in the Technical Guidance Document (TGD) for information that must be included in the project description. Description of Proposed Project Development Category (From Model WQMP, Table 7.11-2; or -3): Project Area (ft2): 86,202.94 Number of Dwelling Units: One Commercial Building SIC Code: __________ Project Area Pervious Impervious Area (acres or sq ft) Percentage Area (acres or sq ft) Percentage Pre-Project Conditions 25,424.41 29.49% 60,778.53 70.51% Post-Project Conditions 25,645.77 29.75% 60,557.17 70.25% Drainage Patterns/Connections Private storm drain conveys runoff to the Bio-Retention basin Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) StorQuest Self Storage STORQUEST SELF STORAGE - ANAHEIM Page 7 Narrative Project Description: (Use as much space as necessary.) The project is a 4 story self-storage facility with 120,103 square feet of floor space. A 2,957 square foot area on the ground floor is partitioned of as the space rental office. A 3,100 square foot floor area also on the ground floor is provided as a self-storage retail space for the storage of items needing a cooled humidity controlled enclosure. II.2 Potential Stormwater Pollutants Determine and list expected stormwater pollutants based on land uses and site activities. Refer to Section 2.2.2 and Table 2.1 in the Technical Guidance Document (TGD) for guidance. Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) StorQuest Self Storage STORQUEST SELF STORAGE - ANAHEIM Page 8 Pollutants of Concern Pollutant Check One for each: E=Expected to be of concern N=Not Expected to be of concern Additional Information and Comments Suspended-Solid/ Sediment E X N Nutrients E X N Heavy Metals E N X Pathogens (Bacteria/Virus) E N X Pesticides E X N Oil and Grease E X N Toxic Organic Compounds E N X Trash and Debris E X N II.3 Hydrologic Conditions of Concern Determine if streams located downstream from the project area are potentially susceptible to hydromodification impacts. Refer to Section 2.2.3.1 in the Technical Guidance Document (TGD) for North Orange County or Section 2.2.3.2 for South Orange County. No – Show map Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) StorQuest Self Storage STORQUEST SELF STORAGE - ANAHEIM Page 9 Yes – Describe applicable hydrologic conditions of concern below. Refer to Section 2.2.3 in the Technical Guidance Document (TGD). NOT APPLICABLE II.4 Post Development Drainage Characteristics Describe post development drainage characteristics. Refer to Section 2.2.4 in the Technical Guidance Document (TGD). Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) StorQuest Self Storage STORQUEST SELF STORAGE - ANAHEIM Page 10 Runoff from the roof and grounds is allowed to flow through landscaping to be intercepted by area catch basins. The catch basins discharge to a private onsite storm drain system that conveys the runoff to the projects Bio-Retention basin for treatment and hydromodification flow attenuation. II.5 Property Ownership/Management Describe property ownership/management. Refer to Section 2.2.5 in the Technical Guidance Document (TGD). Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) StorQuest Self Storage STORQUEST SELF STORAGE - ANAHEIM Page 11 Section III Site Description III.1 Physical Setting Fill out table with relevant information. Refer to Section 2.3.1 in the Technical Guidance Document (TGD). Name of Planned Community/Planning Area (if applicable) NOT APPLICABLE Location/Address 500 and 520 South Walnut Street General Plan Land Use Designation Residential – Low Medium Zoning Industrial Acreage of Project Site 1.97 Predominant Soil Type III.2 Site Characteristics Fill out table with relevant information and include information regarding BMP sizing, suitability, and feasibility, as applicable. Refer to Section 2.3.2 in the Technical Guidance Document (TGD). Site Characteristics Precipitation Zone Climate zone is 8 according to the California state energy commission Topography Flat Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) StorQuest Self Storage STORQUEST SELF STORAGE - ANAHEIM Page 12 Drainage Patterns/Connections Pre-project and post project site drainage is discharged to the street Soil Type, Geology, and Infiltration Properties Soils report unavailable at this time. Hydrogeologic (Groundwater) Conditions The project site is underlain by the SARWQCB’s Orange Groundwater Management Zone (hydrologic units 801.13, 801.14, 845.61, and 845.63). This subbasin has the designated beneficial uses of municipal and domestic, agricultural, industrial service, and industrial process supplies (Basin Plan 2008). Specific groundwater quality objectives for the Orange Groundwater Management Zone are only identified for total dissolved solids (TDS ≤ 580 mg/L) and nitrate as nitrogen (Nitrate-N ≤ 3.4 mg/L). Otherwise, general narrative and numeric water quality objectives listed in the Basin Plan for the designated beneficial uses apply. Geotechnical Conditions (relevant to infiltration) Soils report unavailable at this time. Off-Site Drainage Pre-project site runoff surface flows to the adjacent streets. Post project runoff will also discharged to the street but it will be the treated and attenuated Bio-Retention basin outflow. Utility and Infrastructure Information All utilities are present in the adjacent streets. III.3 Watershed Description Fill out table with relevant information and include information regarding BMP sizing, suitability, and feasibility, as applicable. Refer to Section 2.3.3 in the Technical Guidance Document (TGD). Receiving Waters Anaheim Bay and Huntington Harbor are the receiving waters downstream of the project site. 303(d) Listed Impairments Pursuant to Section 303(d) as not attaining water quality standards established by EPA; Anaheim Bay is listed as impaired and not meeting its designated beneficial uses by dieldrin, nickel, PCBs, and sediment toxicity from unknown sources (SARWQC;B 2006). Huntington Harbor is listed as impaired by chlordane, copper, lead, nickel, PCBs, and sediment toxicity from unknown sources, and by Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) StorQuest Self Storage STORQUEST SELF STORAGE - ANAHEIM Page 13 pathogens from urban runoff/storm sewers (SARWQCB 2006 Applicable TMDLs None Pollutants of Concern for the Project Nitrates, Total Dissolved Solids, Volatile Organic Compounds, Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether and N-nitrosodimethylamine Environmentally Sensitive and Special Biological Significant Areas None Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) StorQuest Self Storage STORQUEST SELF STORAGE - ANAHEIM Page 14 Section IV Best Management Practices (BMPs) IV. 1 Project Performance Criteria Describe project performance criteria. Several steps must be followed in order to determine what performance criteria will apply to a project. These steps include:  If the project has an approved WIHMP or equivalent, then any watershed specific criteria must be used and the project can evaluate participation in the approved regional or sub- regional opportunities. (Please ask your assigned planner or plan checker regarding whether your project is part of an approved WIHMP or equivalent.)  Determine applicable hydromodification control performance criteria. Refer to Section 7.II- 2.4.2.2 of the Model WQMP.  Determine applicable LID performance criteria. Refer to Section 7.II-2.4.3 of the Model WQMP.  Determine applicable treatment control BMP performance criteria. Refer to Section 7.II-3.2.2 of the Model WQMP.  Calculate the LID design storm capture volume for the project. Refer to Section 7.II-2.4.3 of the Model WQMP. (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. Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) StorQuest Self Storage STORQUEST SELF STORAGE - ANAHEIM Page 15 Project Performance Criteria If HCOC exists, list applicable hydromodification control performance criteria (Section 7.II-2.4.2.2 in MWQMP) NOT APPLICABLE List applicable LID performance criteria (Section 7.II-2.4.3 from MWQMP) Since enactment of the California Environmental Quality Act, Treatment of the 87 percentile runoff has been required along with the attenuation of post project runoff down to pre-project levels. In this case post project runoff is not increased over pre-project levels. List applicable treatment control BMP performance criteria (Section 7.II-3.2.2 from MWQMP) Treatment of the 87 percentile runoff. Calculate LID design storm capture volume for Project. Based on the required surface area of the Bio-Retention basin at 4 percent of the post project sites 70.25 percent impervious area, only 2.8 percent of the site is required for LID conformance out of the 29 percent available. That is, of the sites 86,202.94 square feet, 2,414 square feet is required for LID conformance. Therefore, conformance is possible with the current design. Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) StorQuest Self Storage STORQUEST SELF STORAGE - ANAHEIM Page 16 IV.2. Site Design and Drainage Describe site design and drainage including  A narrative of site design practices utilized or rationale for not using practices;  A narrative of how site is designed to allow BMPs to be incorporated to the MEP  A table of DMA characteristics and list of LID BMPs proposed in each DMA.  Reference to the WQMP “BMP Exhibit.”  Calculation of Design Capture Volume (DCV) for each drainage area.  A listing of GIS coordinates for LID and Treatment Control BMPs. Refer to Section 2.4.2 in the Technical Guidance Document (TGD). The project proposes an integrated design to conform to LID. The Bio-Retention Basin has a surface area to comply with LID’s minimum infiltration requirements of 5 inches per hour. The Bio- Retention Basin has the storage capacity required to hold up to the 100 year storm. Therefore the storm volume capacity will also compliance with HMP policy if required. Based on downstream conveyance facilities HMP will not be required at this time. No source control or other water quality management or at grade attenuation BMP is being considered due to the difficulty in quantifying there affect and, they or not necessary. Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) StorQuest Self Storage STORQUEST SELF STORAGE - ANAHEIM Page 17 IV.3 LID BMP Selection and Project Conformance Analysis Each sub-section below documents that the proposed design features conform to the applicable project performance criteria via check boxes, tables, calculations, narratives, and/or references to worksheets. Refer to Section 2.4.2.3 in the Technical Guidance Document (TGD) for selecting LID BMPs and Section 2.4.3 in the Technical Guidance Document (TGD) for conducting conformance analysis with project performance criteria. IV.3.1 Hydrologic Source Controls (HSCs) If required HSCs are included, fill out applicable check box forms. If the retention criteria are otherwise met with other LID BMPs, include a statement indicating HSCs not required. Source control LID BMP’s are not necessary. 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) Other: Other: Other: Other: Other: Other: Other: Other: Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) StorQuest Self Storage STORQUEST SELF STORAGE - ANAHEIM Page 18 IV.3.2 Infiltration BMPs Identify infiltration BMPs to be used in project. If design volume cannot be met, state why. The project has the space for a Bio-Retention/infiltration basins that can treat the site runoff and contain up to the 100 year storm using a combination of storage volume and infiltration. Without an infiltration test, the preliminary estimate for infiltration used in sizing the Bio-Retention basin is based on hydrological soils group type “B” having a surface loss rate of 0.30 in/hr. See Preliminary Drainage Study For Storquest Self Storage, Dated 2/3/2016. The tested infiltration rate will most likely be much high and the size of the basin may be reduces. Ponded water drawdown time is based on the Orange County Technical Guidance Document, INF-4 for Bioinfiltration using 2.5 in/hr. The 100 year storm draw down time for a ponding depth of 2.00 feet was determined to be 9.6 hours. Name Included? Bioretention without underdrains Rain gardens Porous landscaping Infiltration planters Retention swales Infiltration trenches Infiltration basins Drywells Subsurface infiltration galleries French drains Permeable asphalt Permeable concrete Permeable concrete pavers Other: Other: Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) StorQuest Self Storage STORQUEST SELF STORAGE - ANAHEIM Page 19 Show calculations below to demonstrate if the LID Design Strom Capture Volume can be met with infiltration BMPs. If not, document how much can be met with infiltration and document why it is not feasible to meet the full volume with infiltration BMPs. Post-project runoff will not exceed pre-project runoff therefore no LID/CEQA peck flow attenuation is required. The minimum required Bio-Retention basins surface area is a factor of 4 percent of the impervious area and for this site that would be 2,414 square feet. By the time this project is ready for construction the state may require all projects to implement HMP which dose requite a holding capacity approximately equal to the volume of a statistical 10 year storm event. The Bio-Retention/Infiltration basin has been sized to contain the 100 year storm. Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) StorQuest Self Storage STORQUEST SELF STORAGE - ANAHEIM Page 20 IV.3.3 Evapotranspiration, Rainwater Harvesting BMPs If the full Design Storm Capture Volume cannot be met with infiltration BMPs, describe any evapotranspiration and/or rainwater harvesting BMPs included. No other BMP required Name Included? All HSCs; See Section IV.3.1 Surface-based infiltration BMPs Biotreatment BMPs Above-ground cisterns and basins Underground detention Other: Other: Other: Show calculations below to demonstrate if the LID Design Storm Capture Volume can be met with evapotranspiration and/or rainwater harvesting BMPs in combination with infiltration BMPs. If not, document below how much can be met with either infiltration BMPs, evapotranspiration, rainwater harvesting BMPs, or a combination, and document why it is not feasible to meet the full volume with these BMP categories. Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) StorQuest Self Storage STORQUEST SELF STORAGE - ANAHEIM Page 21 NOT APPLICABLE The site is considered too big for storm water harvesting to be practical and is not necessary. Evapotranspiration does not meet LID treatment requirements. Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) StorQuest Self Storage STORQUEST SELF STORAGE - ANAHEIM Page 22 IV.3.4 Biotreatment BMPs If the full Design Storm Capture Volume cannot be met with infiltration BMPs, and/or evapotranspiration and rainwater harvesting BMPs, describe biotreatment BMPs included. Include sections for selection, suitability, sizing, and infeasibility, as applicable. NOT APPLICABLE Full Design Storm Capture volume and treatment can be met with the proposed infiltration BMP. Name Included? Bioretention with underdrains Stormwater planter boxes with underdrains Rain gardens with underdrains Constructed wetlands Vegetated swales Vegetated filter strips Proprietary vegetated biotreatment systems Wet extended detention basin Dry extended detention basins Other: Other: Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) StorQuest Self Storage STORQUEST SELF STORAGE - ANAHEIM Page 23 Show calculations below to demonstrate if the LID Design Storm Capture Volume can be met with infiltration, evapotranspiration, rainwater harvesting and/or biotreatment BMPs. If not, document how much can be met with either infiltration BMPs, evapotranspiration, rainwater harvesting BMPs, or a combination, and document why it is not feasible to meet the full volume with these BMP categories. The site is considered too big for storm water harvesting to be practical and is not necessary. Evapotranspiration does not meet LID treatment requirements. Full Design Storm Capture volume and treatment can be met with the proposed infiltration BMP. IV.3.5 Hydromodification Control BMPs Describe hydromodification control BMPs. See Section 5 of the Technical Guidance Document (TGD). Include sections for selection, suitability, sizing, and infeasibility, as applicable. Detail compliance with Prior Conditions of Approval (if applicable). Hydromodification Control BMPs BMP Name BMP Description Infiltration Bio-Retention/Detention Basin The basin provides a layer of amended soil to filter the 87 percentile flow and an underlying gravel layer deep enough to provide the holding volume to attenuate the discharge to HMP levels. Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) StorQuest Self Storage STORQUEST SELF STORAGE - ANAHEIM Page 24 IV.3.6 Regional/Sub-Regional LID BMPs Describe regional/sub-regional LID BMPs in which the project will participate. Refer to Section 7.II- 2.4.3.2 of the Model WQMP. Regional/Sub-Regional LID BMPs NO PARTICIPATION REQUIRED IV.3.7 Treatment Control BMPs Treatment control BMPs can only be considered if the project conformance analysis indicates that it is not feasible to retain the full design capture volume with LID BMPs. Describe treatment control BMPs including sections for selection, sizing, and infeasibility, as applicable. NOT APPLICABLE Treatment Control BMPs BMP Name BMP Description Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) StorQuest Self Storage STORQUEST SELF STORAGE - ANAHEIM Page 25 IV.3.8 Non-structural Source Control BMPs Fill out non-structural source control check box forms or provide a brief narrative explaining if non- structural source controls were not used. NOT APPLICABLE 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) N6 Local Industrial Permit Compliance N7 Spill Contingency Plan N8 Underground Storage Tank Compliance N9 Hazardous Materials Disclosure Compliance N10 Uniform Fire Code Implementation N11 Common Area Litter Control N12 Employee Training N13 Housekeeping of Loading Docks N14 Common Area Catch Basin Inspection N15 Street Sweeping Private Streets and Parking Lots N16 Retail Gasoline Outlets Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) StorQuest Self Storage STORQUEST SELF STORAGE - ANAHEIM Page 26 IV.3.9 Structural Source Control BMPs Fill out structural source control check box forms or provide a brief narrative explaining if structural source controls were not used. 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 X S2 Design and construct outdoor material storage areas to reduce pollution introduction X Material storage is indoors S3 Design and construct trash and waste storage areas to reduce pollution introduction X S4 Use efficient irrigation systems & landscape design, water conservation, smart controllers, and source control X S5 Protect slopes and channels and provide energy dissipation X Not in project Incorporate requirements applicable to individual priority project categories (from SDRWQCB NPDES Permit) X S6 Dock areas X Not in project S7 Maintenance bays X Not in project S8 Vehicle wash areas X Not in project S9 Outdoor processing areas X Not in project S10 Equipment wash areas X Not in project S11 Fueling areas X Not in project S12 Hillside landscaping X Not in project S13 Wash water control for food preparation areas X Not in project S14 Community car wash racks X Not in project Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) StorQuest Self Storage STORQUEST SELF STORAGE - ANAHEIM Page 27 IV.4 Alternative Compliance Plan (If Applicable) Describe an alternative compliance plan (if applicable). Include alternative compliance obligations (i.e., gallons, pounds) and describe proposed alternative compliance measures. Refer to Section 7.II 3.0 in the WQMP. NOT APPLICABLE IV.4.1 Water Quality Credits Determine if water quality credits are applicable for the project. Refer to Section 3.1 of the Model WQMP for description of credits and Appendix VI of the Technical Guidance Document (TGD) for calculation methods for applying water quality credits. NOT APPLICABLE 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. Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) StorQuest Self Storage STORQUEST SELF STORAGE - ANAHEIM Page 28 Calculation of Water Quality Credits (if applicable) NOT APPLICABLE IV.4.2 Alternative Compliance Plan Information Describe an alternative compliance plan (if applicable). Include alternative compliance obligations (i.e., gallons, pounds) and describe proposed alternative compliance measures. Refer to Section 7.II 3.0 in the Model WQMP. NOT APPLICABLE Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) StorQuest Self Storage STORQUEST SELF STORAGE - ANAHEIM Page 29 Section V Inspection/Maintenance Responsibility for BMPs Fill out information in table below. Prepare and attach an Operation and Maintenance Plan. Identify the funding mechanism through which BMPs will be maintained. Inspection and maintenance records must be kept for a minimum of five years for inspection by the regulatory agencies. Refer to Section 7.II 4.0 in the Model WQMP. BMP Inspection/Maintenance BMP Reponsible Party(s) Inspection/ Maintenance Activities Required Minimum Frequency of Activities Bio‐Retention/ Detention Basin StorQuest Remove and properly dispose of accumulated materials without damage to the vegetation. Confirm that soil is not clogging and that the area drains after a storm event. Till or replace soil as necessary. Inspection: Annual and after major storms. Maintenance: Twice a year Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) StorQuest Self Storage STORQUEST SELF STORAGE - ANAHEIM Page 30 Section VI BMP Exhibit (Site Plan) VI.1 BMP Exhibit SITE PLAN; SEE PRILIMINARY GARDING PLAN VI.2 BMP Exhibit DMA plan; SEE REPORT POCKET FOR SMA EXHIBIT. VI.3 BMP SIZING; SEE PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT REVISED TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS STORQUEST SELF STORAGE Anaheim, California June 21, 2016 (original dated April 5, 2016) Prepared for: THE WILLIAMS WARREN GROUP 940 South Coast Drive, Suite 205 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 LLG Ref. 2-16-3674-1 Prepared by: Under the Supervision of: Shane S. Green, P.E. Richard E. Barretto, P.E. Transportation Engineer III Principal and Angela Besa Transportation Engineer I LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2.16.3674 StorQuest Self Storage Project, Anaheim N:\3600\2163674 - StorQuest, Anaheim\Report\3674 StorQuest TIA 6-21-2016.doc i TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE 1.0 Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Study Area .............................................................................................................................. 1 2.0 Project Description .................................................................................................................. 3 2.1 Site Access ............................................................................................................................. 3 3.0 Existing Conditions .................................................................................................................. 4 3.1 Existing Street System ........................................................................................................... 4 3.2 Existing Traffic Volumes ....................................................................................................... 4 3.3 Existing Intersection Conditions ............................................................................................ 5 3.3.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Method of Analysis .......................................... (Signalized Intersections) ................................................................................................ 5 3.3.2 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) Method of Analysis ................................................. (Unsignalized Intersections) ........................................................................................... 6 3.3.3 Synchro SimTraffic Method of Analysis ........................................................................ 6 3.4 Level of Service Criteria ........................................................................................................ 6 3.5 Existing Level of Service Results .......................................................................................... 6 4.0 Traffic Forecasting Methodology ......................................................................................... 10 5.0 Project Traffic Characteristics ............................................................................................. 11 5.1 Project Traffic Generation .................................................................................................... 11 5.2 Project Traffic Distribution and Assignment ....................................................................... 11 5.3 Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions .............................................................................. 12 6.0 Future Traffic Conditions ..................................................................................................... 14 6.1 Ambient Traffic Growth....................................................................................................... 14 6.2 Cumulative Projects Traffic Characteristics ........................................................................ 14 6.3 Year 2018 Traffic Volumes.................................................................................................. 14 7.0 Traffic Impact Analysis Methodology ................................................................................. 15 7.1 Impact Criteria and Thresholds ............................................................................................ 15 7.2 Traffic Impact Analysis Scenarios ....................................................................................... 15 8.0 Existing Plus Project Analysis .............................................................................................. 17 9.0 Year 2018 Plus Project Analysis ........................................................................................... 19 9.1 Year 2018 Cumulative Traffic Conditions ........................................................................... 19 9.2 Year 2018 Cumulative Plus Project Traffic Conditions....................................................... 19 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2.16.3674 StorQuest Self Storage Project, Anaheim N:\3600\2163674 - StorQuest, Anaheim\Report\3674 StorQuest TIA 6-21-2016.doc ii TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED) SECTION PAGE 10.0 Site Access Evaluation ........................................................................................................... 21 10.1 Level of Service Analysis For Project Access Locations ................................................. 21 10.2 Queuing Analysis For Project Access Locations ............................................................. 23 10.2.1 Driveway Queuing ........................................................................................................ 23 10.2.2 Vehicular Stacking Analysis for Gated Entry ............................................................... 23 10.3 Sight Distance Evaluation ................................................................................................ 26 10.4 Pedestrian Circulation....................................................................................................... 26 10.5 Special Issues .................................................................................................................... 27 10.5.1 Potential Project Impacts during School Hours ............................................................ 27 10.6 Project Specific Improvements ......................................................................................... 27 11.0 Recommended Improvements .............................................................................................. 29 11.1 Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions .......................................................................... 29 11.2 Year 2018 Plus Project Traffic Conditions ....................................................................... 29 12.0 Congestion Management Program (CMP) .......................................................................... 30 13.0 Summary Of Findings And Conclusions ............................................................................. 31 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2.16.3674 StorQuest Self Storage Project, Anaheim N:\3600\2163674 - StorQuest, Anaheim\Report\3674 StorQuest TIA 6-21-2016.doc iii APPENDICES APPENDIX A. Existing Traffic Count Data B. Intersection Level of Service Calculation Worksheets C. Project Driveway Intersection Level of Service Calculation Worksheets LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2.16.3674 StorQuest Self Storage Project, Anaheim N:\3600\2163674 - StorQuest, Anaheim\Report\3674 StorQuest TIA 6-21-2016.doc iv LIST OF FIGURES SECTION—FIGURE # FOLLOWING PAGE 1–1 Vicinity Map .................................................................................................................... 2 2–1 Existing Site Aerial Photograph ....................................................................................... 3 2–2 Proposed Site Plan ........................................................................................................... 3 3–1 Existing Roadway Conditions and Intersection Controls ........................................... 4 3–2 Existing AM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ...................................................................... 4 3–3 Existing PM Peak Hour and Daily Traffic Volumes ..................................................... 4 5–1 Project Traffic Distribution Pattern .............................................................................. 13 5–2 AM Peak Hour Project Traffic Volumes ...................................................................... 13 5–3 PM Peak Hour and Daily Project Traffic Volumes ..................................................... 13 5–4 Existing Plus Project AM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ............................................... 13 5–5 Existing Plus Project PM Peak Hour and Daily Traffic Volumes .............................. 13 6–1 Year 2018 Cumulative AM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ............................................ 14 6–2 Year 2018 Cumulative PM Peak Hour and Daily Traffic Volumes ........................... 14 6–3 Year 2018 Cumulative Plus Project AM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ....................... 14 6–4 Year 2018 Cumulative Plus Project PM Peak Hour and Daily Traffic Volumes ...... 14 10–1 Corner Sight Distance Analysis – Walnut Street ......................................................... 26 10–2 Corner Sight Distance Analysis – Manchester Avenue ............................................... 26 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2.16.3674 StorQuest Self Storage Project, Anaheim N:\3600\2163674 - StorQuest, Anaheim\Report\3674 StorQuest TIA 6-21-2016.doc v LIST OF TABLES SECTION—TABLE # PAGE 3–1 Level of Service Criteria for Signalized Intersections...................................................... 7 3–2 Level of Service Criteria for Unsignalized Intersections ................................................. 8 3–3 Existing Peak Hour Levels of Service Summary ............................................................. 9 5–1 Project Traffic Generation Forecast ................................................................................ 13 7–1 City of Anaheim Significant Impact Criteria ................................................................. 16 8–1 Existing Plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis Summary ................. 18 9–1 Year 2018 Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis Summary .................................. 20 10–1 Project Driveway Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis ........................................ 22 10–2 Vehicle Queuing Analysis Summary ............................................................................. 25 10–3 Midday Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis ....................................................... 28 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2.16.3674 StorQuest Self Storage Project, Anaheim N:\3600\2163674 - StorQuest, Anaheim\Report\3674 StorQuest TIA 6-21-2016.doc 1 REVISED TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS STORQUEST SELF STORAGE Anaheim, California June 21, 2016 1.0 INTRODUCTION This traffic impact analysis addresses the potential traffic impacts and circulation needs associated with the StorQuest Self Storage Project (hereinafter referred to as Project). The project applicant proposes to construct a 120,058 square-feet (SF) self-storage facility, consisting of 117,166 SF of storage space and 2,892 SF of office space. The Project site is located at 500 S. Walnut Street in the City of Anaheim, California. This report documents the findings and recommendations of a traffic impact analysis conducted by Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers (LLG) to determine the potential impacts associated with the Project. The traffic analysis evaluates the existing operating conditions at two (2) key study intersections, estimates the trip generation potential of the Project, and forecasts future operating conditions without and with the proposed Project. Where necessary, intersection improvements/ mitigation measures are identified. This traffic report satisfies the City of Anaheim Criteria for Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies and is consistent with the requirements and procedures outlined in the most current Congestion Management Program (CMP) for Orange County. The Scope of Work for this traffic study was developed in conjunction with City of Anaheim Traffic Engineering Department staff. The Project site has been visited and an inventory of adjacent area roadways and intersections was performed. Existing peak hour traffic information has been collected at two (2) key study intersections on a “typical” weekday for use in the preparation of intersection level of service calculations. Information concerning cumulative projects (planned and/or approved) in the vicinity of the proposed Project has been researched at the City of Anaheim. Based on our research and collaboration with City staff, there are no cumulative projects located in the City of Anaheim within the vicinity of the proposed Project. This traffic report analyzes existing, existing plus project, and future weekday AM peak hour and PM peak hour traffic conditions for a near-term (Year 2018) traffic setting upon completion of the proposed Project. Peak hour traffic forecasts for the Year 2018 horizon year have been projected by increasing existing traffic volumes by an annual growth rate of one percent (1.0%) per year. Please note that daily counts are included in the accompanying volume figures for informational purposes only as a daily roadway segment analysis was not required of this project by the City. 1.1 Study Area The two (2) key study intersections selected for evaluation were determined based on coordination with City of Anaheim Traffic Engineering Department staff. The two (2) intersections listed below LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2.16.3674 StorQuest Self Storage Project, Anaheim N:\3600\2163674 - StorQuest, Anaheim\Report\3674 StorQuest TIA 6-21-2016.doc 2 provide local access to the study area and define the extent of the boundaries for this traffic impact investigation. Key Study Intersections 1. Walnut Street at Santa Ana Street 2. Manchester Avenue at Santa Ana Street Figure 1-1 presents a Vicinity Map, which illustrates the general location of the proposed Project and depicts the study locations and surrounding street system. The Level of Service (LOS) investigations at these key locations were used to evaluate the potential traffic-related impacts associated with area growth and the proposed Project. When necessary, this report recommends intersection improvements that may be required to accommodate future traffic volumes and restore/maintain an acceptable Level of Service and/or mitigate the impact of the project. Included in this Traffic Impact Analysis are:  Existing traffic counts,  Estimated project traffic generation/distribution/assignment,  AM and PM peak hour capacity analyses for existing conditions,  AM and PM peak hour capacity analyses for existing plus project conditions,  AM and PM peak hour capacity analyses for future (Year 2018) conditions without and with project traffic,  Site Access Evaluation,  Recommended Improvements, and  Congestion Management Program (CMP) Analysis. LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2.16.3674 StorQuest Self Storage Project, Anaheim N:\3600\2163674 - StorQuest, Anaheim\Report\3674 StorQuest TIA 6-21-2016.doc 3 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Project site is a triangular-shaped vacant parcel of land located south of Santa Ana Street, east of Walnut Street, and west of Manchester Avenue. It is located at 500 S. Walnut Street in the City of Anaheim, California. Existing residential development borders the subject property the south, whereas the Betsy Ross Elementary School is located to the west, across Walnut Street and the I-5 Freeway is located to the east, across Manchester Avenue. Figure 2-1 is an existing aerial photograph of the Project site. The Project is proposing the development of a 120,058 square-feet (SF), four-story self-storage facility, consisting of 117,166 SF of storage space and 2,892 SF of office space. The StorQuest leasing office will be open from 9:00 AM to 6:00 PM Monday through Saturday and 10:00 AM to 5:00 PM on Sunday, with approximately 7 to 8 total employees, but no more than two (2) employees will be on-site at any given time. Tenants with a storage unit will have access to their units 7 days a week from 6:00 AM to 10:00 PM. The Project will employ onsite managers to monitor the site daily and ensure it is well maintained. The site will also be monitored with 24-hour video surveillance and secured with electronic gate access to ensure adequate security of the storage facility. The proposed parking supply for the site totals 42 spaces of which 25 spaces are standard size, 11 spaces are 10 feet x 30 feet, 4 spaces are 10 feet x 40 feet, and 2 spaces are designated handicap accessible spaces. Figure 2-2 illustrates the proposed site plan for the Project prepared by Magellan Architecture. The proposed Project is expected to be open by Year 2018. 2.1 Site Access As shown in Figure 2-2, access to the proposed Project will be provided via two full access driveways, with site’s primary access provided from the driveway on Manchester Avenue and secondary access provided by the driveway located along Walnut Street. This facility will have gated access at both driveways. The gate located along Manchester Avenue will be open during business hours between 7:00 AM and 7:00 PM and closed during all other time periods. The gate located along Walnut Street is expected to remain closed at all times. When the gates are closed customers will be able to access the site via a key pad entry. Review of the Project site plan indicates that 50-feet of stacking, enough for up to two (2) vehicles, is provided in front of each gate. As a project design feature, the existing striped median on Manchester Avenue, adjacent to the Project site, subject to the review and approval of the City of Anaheim is proposed to be restriped as a two-way left-turn lane to facilitate full access to and from the project driveway. The provision of the full access driveway on Manchester Avenue will minimize the use of the secondary access on Walnut Street. LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2.16.3674 StorQuest Self Storage Project, Anaheim N:\3600\2163674 - StorQuest, Anaheim\Report\3674 StorQuest TIA 6-21-2016.doc 4 3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS 3.1 Existing Street System The principal local network of streets serving the proposed Project includes Manchester Avenue, Walnut Street, and Santa Ana Street. The following discussion provides a brief synopsis of these key area streets. The descriptions are based on an inventory of existing roadway conditions. Manchester Avenue is a four-lane divided roadway, oriented in the northwest-southeast direction that borders the Project site on the east. Manchester Avenue will provide full access to the Project site via one unsignalized driveway. On-street parking is only permitted along this roadway on the west side, north of Santa Ana Street, within the vicinity of the Project. The posted speed limit on Manchester Avenue is 45 miles per hour (mph) in the vicinity of the Project. A traffic signal controls the study intersection of Manchester Avenue at Santa Ana Street. Walnut Street is a two-lane undivided roadway, oriented in the north-south direction that borders the Project site on the west. Walnut Street will provide full access to the Project site via one unsignalized driveway. On-street parking is not permitted along this roadway within the vicinity of the Project. The posted speed limit on Walnut Street is 25 mph in the vicinity of the Project. A three - way stop controls the study intersection of Walnut Street at Santa Ana Street. Santa Ana Street is a two-lane undivided roadway west of Walnut Street and a three-lane divided roadway east of Manchester Avenue. It is oriented in the east-west direction. On-street parking is only permitted along this roadway on the north side, west of Walnut Street, within the vicinity of the Project. The posted speed limit is 25 mph. Figure 3-1 presents an inventory of the existing roadway conditions for the arterials and intersections evaluated in this report. This figure identifies the number of travel lanes for key arterials, as well as intersection configurations and controls for the key area study intersections. 3.2 Existing Traffic Volumes Two (2) key study intersections have been identified as the locations at which to evaluate existing and future traffic operating conditions. Some portion of potential project -related traffic will pass through each of these intersections, and their analysis will reveal the expected relative impacts of the project. These key intersections were selected for evaluation based on discussions with City of Anaheim Traffic Engineering Department staff. Existing AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes for the two (2) key study intersections evaluated in this report were obtained from manual peak hour turning movement counts conducted by National Data & Surveying Services in March 2016. Figures 3-2 and 3-3 illustrate the existing AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes at the two (2) key study intersections evaluated in this report, respectively. Figure 3-3 also illustrates the existing daily traffic volumes on Walnut Street and Manchester Avenue, adjacent to the Project site, that are provided for informational purposes only as a daily roadway segment analysis was not required of this project by the City LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2.16.3674 StorQuest Self Storage Project, Anaheim N:\3600\2163674 - StorQuest, Anaheim\Report\3674 StorQuest TIA 6-21-2016.doc 5 Appendix A contains the detailed peak hour count sheets for the key intersections evaluated in this report. Appendix A also contains the average daily traffic volumes for the key roadway segments. 3.3 Existing Intersection Conditions Existing AM and PM peak hour operating conditions for the two (2) key study intersections were evaluated using the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) methodology for signalized intersections and the methodology outlined in the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) for unsignalized intersections. 3.3.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Method of Analysis (Signalized Intersections) In conformance with City of Anaheim requirements, existing AM and PM peak hour operating conditions for the key signalized study intersections were evaluated using the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) method. The ICU technique is intended for signalized intersection analysis and estimates the volume to capacity (V/C) relationship for an intersection based on the individual V/C ratios for key conflicting traffic movements. The ICU numerical value represents the percent signal (green) time and thus capacity, required by existing and/or future traffic. It should be noted that the ICU methodology assumes uniform traffic distribution per intersection approach lane and optimal signal timing. Per City of Anaheim requirements, the ICU calculations use a lane capacity of 1,700 vehicles per hour (vph) for through and all turn lanes. A clearance adjustment factor of 0.05 was added to each Level of Service calculation. The ICU value translates to a Level of Service (LOS) estimate, which is a relative measure o f the intersection performance. The ICU value is the sum of the critical volume to capacity ratios at an intersection; it is not intended to be indicative of the LOS of each of the individual turning movements. The six qualitative categories of Level of Service have been defined along with the corresponding ICU value range and are shown in Table 3-1. LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2.16.3674 StorQuest Self Storage Project, Anaheim N:\3600\2163674 - StorQuest, Anaheim\Report\3674 StorQuest TIA 6-21-2016.doc 6 3.3.2 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) Method of Analysis (Unsignalized Intersections) The HCM unsignalized methodology for stop-controlled intersections was utilized for the analysis of the unsignalized intersection (i.e. the project driveway). This methodology estimates the average control delay for each of the subject movements and determines the LOS for each movement. For all-way stop controlled intersections, the overall average control delay measured in seconds per vehicle, and LOS is then calculated for the entire intersection. For one-way and two-way stop- controlled (minor street stop-controlled) intersections, this methodology estimates the worst side street delay, measured in seconds per vehicle and determines the level of service for that approach. The HCM control delay value translates to a Level of Service (LOS) estimate, which is a relative measure of the intersection performance. The six qualitative categories of Level of Service have been defined along with the corresponding HCM control delay value range, as shown in Table 3-2. 3.3.3 Synchro SimTraffic Method of Analysis Please note that the intersection of Walnut Street at Santa Ana Street consists of a three way-stop controlled intersection which is not a compatible input for HCM. Therefore, as an alternative Synchro 9.0 SimTraffic was used to calculate the service levels at this key location. Synchro SimTraffic is designed to model networks of signalized and unsignalized intersections, including roundabouts. The primary purpose of SimTraffic is to check and fine tune traffic signal operations. SimTraffic is especially useful for analyzing complex situations that are not easily modeled macroscopically including: closely spaced intersections with blocking problems, closely spaced intersections with lane change problems, the effects of signals on nearby unsignalized intersections and driveways, and the operation of intersections under heavy congestion. 3.4 Level of Service Criteria According to the City of Anaheim’s Circulation Element and stated in the City of Anaheim Criteria for Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies, LOS D is the minimum acceptable condition that should be maintained during the morning and evening peak commute hours on all City intersections. 3.5 Existing Level of Service Results Table 3-3 summarizes the existing peak hour service level calculations for the two (2) key study intersections based on existing traffic volumes and current street geometry. Review of Table 3-3 indicates that both key study intersections currently operate at acceptable LOS A during the AM and PM peak hours. Please note that although the overall intersection LOS for the intersection of Walnut Street at Santa Ana Street operates at acceptable LOS during the AM peak hours, the northbound shared left/right turn movement is expected to have a queue of up to 9 vehicles which is related to peak conditions from Betsy Ross Elementary School. This existing queue reported by Synchro SimTraffic further validates the adequacy of this methodology since it is consistent with observed queues reported by City staff. Appendix B presents the ICU/LOS calculations for the two (2) key study intersections for the AM peak hour and PM peak hour. LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2.16.3674 StorQuest Self Storage Project, Anaheim N:\3600\2163674 - StorQuest, Anaheim\Report\3674 StorQuest TIA 6-21-2016.doc 7 TABLE 3-1 LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA FOR SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS1 Level of Service (LOS) Intersection Capacity Utilization Value (V/C) Level of Service Description A  0.60 EXCELLENT. No vehicle waits longer than one red light, and no approach phase is fully used. B 0.61 – 0.70 VERY GOOD. An occasional approach phase is fully utilized; many drivers begin to feel somewhat restricted within groups of vehicles. C 0.71 – 0.80 GOOD. Occasionally drivers may have to wait through more than one red light; backups may develop behind turning vehicles. D 0.81 – 0.90 FAIR. Delays may be substantial during portions of the rush hours, but enough lower volume periods occur to permit clearing of developing lines, preventing excessive backups. E 0.91 – 1.00 POOR. Represents the most vehicles intersection approaches can accommodate; may be long lines of waiting vehicles through several signal cycles. F > 1.00 FAILURE. Backups from nearby locations or on cross streets may restrict or prevent movement of vehicles out of the intersection approaches. Potentially very long delays with continuously increasing queue lengths. 1 Source: Transportation Research Board Circular 212 – Interim Materials on Highway Capacity. LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2.16.3674 StorQuest Self Storage Project, Anaheim N:\3600\2163674 - StorQuest, Anaheim\Report\3674 StorQuest TIA 6-21-2016.doc 8 TABLE 3-2 LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA FOR UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS2 Level of Service (LOS) Highway Capacity Manual Delay Value (sec/veh) Level of Service Description A  10.0 Little or no delay B > 10.0 and  15.0 Short traffic delays C > 15.0 and  25.0 Average traffic delays D > 25.0 and  35.0 Long traffic delays E > 35.0 and  50.0 Very long traffic delays F > 50.0 Severe congestion 2 Source: Highway Capacity Manual. LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2.16.3674 StorQuest Self Storage Project, Anaheim N:\3600\2163674 - StorQuest, Anaheim\Report\3674 StorQuest TIA 6-21-2016.doc 9 TABLE 3-3 EXISTING PEAK HOUR LEVELS OF SERVICE SUMMARY Key Intersections Time Period Jurisdiction Minimum Acceptable LOS Control Type ICU/HCM LOS 1. Walnut Street at Santa Ana Street AM PM Anaheim D Three-Way Stop Controlled 9.6 sec/veh 7.6 sec/veh A3 A3 2. Manchester Avenue at Santa Ana Street AM PM Anaheim D 2 Traffic Signal 0.437 0.473 A A 3 HCM 2010 unsignalized methodology does not recognize three-way stop control intersections. Therefore, Walnut Street at Santa Ana Street was assessed using Synchro SimTraffic. LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2.16.3674 StorQuest Self Storage Project, Anaheim N:\3600\2163674 - StorQuest, Anaheim\Report\3674 StorQuest TIA 6-21-2016.doc 10 4.0 TRAFFIC FORECASTING METHODOLOGY In order to estimate the traffic impact characteristics of the proposed Project, a multi-step process has been utilized. The first step is trip generation, which estimates the total arriving and departing traffic on a peak hour and daily basis. The traffic generation potential is forecast by applying the appropriate vehicle trip generation equations or rates to the project development tabulation. The second step of the forecasting process is trip distribution, which identifies the origins and destinations of inbound and outbound project traffic. These origins and destinations are typically based on demographics and existing/anticipated travel patterns in the study area. The third step is traffic assignment, which involves the allocation of project traffic to study area streets and intersections. Traffic assignment is typically based on minimization of travel time, which may or may not involve the shortest route, depending on prevailing operating conditions and travel speeds. Traffic distribution patterns are indicated by general percentage orientation, while traffic assignment allocates specific volume forecasts to individual roadway links and intersection turning movements throughout the study area. With the forecasting process complete and project traffic assignments developed, the impact of the proposed Project is isolated by comparing operational (LOS) conditions at selected key intersections using expected future traffic volumes with and without forecast project traffic. The need for site- specific and/or cumulative local area traffic improvements can then be evaluated and the significance of the project’s impacts identified. LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2.16.3674 StorQuest Self Storage Project, Anaheim N:\3600\2163674 - StorQuest, Anaheim\Report\3674 StorQuest TIA 6-21-2016.doc 11 5.0 PROJECT TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS 5.1 Project Traffic Generation Traffic generation is expressed in vehicle trip ends, defined as one-way vehicular movements, either entering or exiting the generating land use. Generation equations and/or rates used in the traffic forecasting procedure are found in the 9th Edition of Trip Generation Manual, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) [Washington D.C., 2012]. Table 5-1 summarizes the trip generation rates used in forecasting the vehicular trips generated by the proposed Project and also presents the Project’s forecast peak hour and daily traffic volumes. The trip generation potential of the proposed Project was estimated using ITE Land Use 151: Mini- Warehouse trip rates. Review of Table 5-1 shows that the Project is forecast to generate 300 daily trips, 17 AM peak hour trips (9 inbound, 8 outbound) and 31 PM peak hour trips (16 inbound, 15 outbound). The potential traffic impacts of the aforementioned Project trips are evaluated in the traffic impact analysis section of this report. 5.2 Project Traffic Distribution and Assignment Figure 5-1 presents the traffic distribution pattern for the proposed Project. Project traffic volumes both entering and exiting the site have been distributed and assigned to the adjacent street system based on the following considerations:  location of site access points in relation to the surrounding street system and land uses,  the site's proximity to major traffic carriers,  expected localized traffic flow patterns based on adjacent street channelization and presence of traffic signals,  existing intersection traffic volumes,  ingress/egress availability at the Project site, and  input from City staff. The anticipated AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes associated with the proposed Project are presented in Figures 5-2 and 5-3, respectively. Figure 5-3 also shows the daily Project volumes. The traffic volume assignments presented in Figures 5-2 and 5-3 reflect the traffic distribution characteristics shown in Figure 5-1 and the traffic generation forecast presented in Table 5-1. Close inspection of these two figures indicates that added Project volumes on Walnut Street amount to no more than two (2) trips during the weekday AM peak hour and four (4) trips during the weekday PM peak hour. LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2.16.3674 StorQuest Self Storage Project, Anaheim N:\3600\2163674 - StorQuest, Anaheim\Report\3674 StorQuest TIA 6-21-2016.doc 12 5.3 Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions The existing plus project traffic conditions have been generated based upon existing conditions and the estimated project traffic. These forecast traffic conditions have been prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines, which require that the potential impacts of a Project be evaluated upon the circulation system as it currently exists. This traffic volume scenario and the related intersection capacity analyses will identify the roadway improvements necessary to mitigate the direct traffic impacts of the Project, if any. Figures 5-4 and 5-5 present projected AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes at the two (2) key study intersections with the addition of the trips generated by the proposed Project to existing traffic volumes, respectively. Figure 5-5 also presents the existing plus project daily traffic volumes. LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2.16.3674 StorQuest Self Storage Project, Anaheim N:\3600\2163674 - StorQuest, Anaheim\Report\3674 StorQuest TIA 6-21-2016.doc 13 TABLE 5-1 PROJECT TRAFFIC GENERATION FORECAST4 F ITE Land Use Code / Project Description Daily 2-Way AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Generation Factors:  151: Mini-Warehouse (TE/1000 SF) 2.50 55% 45% 0.14 50% 50% 0.26 Proposed Development:  StorQuest Self-Storage (120,058 SF) 300 9 8 17 16 15 31 4 Source: Trip Generation, 9th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, (ITE) [Washington, D.C. (2012)]. LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2.16.3674 StorQuest Self Storage Project, Anaheim N:\3600\2163674 - StorQuest, Anaheim\Report\3674 StorQuest TIA 6-21-2016.doc 14 6.0 FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS 6.1 Ambient Traffic Growth Horizon year, background traffic growth estimates have been calculated using an ambient traffic growth factor. The ambient traffic growth factor is intended to include unknown and future cumulative projects in the study area, as well as account for regular growth in traffic volumes due to the development of projects outside the study area. The future growth in traffic volumes has been calculated at one percent (1.0%) per year. Applied to the Year 2016 existing traffic volumes, this factor results in a 2.0% growth in existing volumes to the near-term horizon year 2018. 6.2 Cumulative Projects Traffic Characteristics In order to make a realistic estimate of future on-street conditions prior to implementation of the proposed Project, the status of other known development projects (cumulative projects) in the vicinity of the proposed Project has been researched at the City of Anaheim. Based on our research, there are no cumulative projects located in the City of Anaheim within the vicinity of the proposed Project. 6.3 Year 2018 Traffic Volumes Figures 6-1 and 6-2 present the AM and PM peak hour cumulative traffic volumes (existing traffic + ambient growth traffic) at the two (2) key study intersections for the Year 2018, respectively. Figure 6-2 also presents the Year 2018 daily cumulative traffic volumes. Figures 6-3 and 6-4 illustrate the Year 2018 forecast AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes, with the inclusion of the trips generated by the proposed Project, respectively. Figure 6-4 also presents the Year 2018 daily cumulative plus project traffic volumes. LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2.16.3674 StorQuest Self Storage Project, Anaheim N:\3600\2163674 - StorQuest, Anaheim\Report\3674 StorQuest TIA 6-21-2016.doc 15 7.0 TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY The relative impact of the proposed Project during the AM peak hour/PM peak hour was evaluated based on analysis of future operating conditions at the two (2) key study intersections without, then with the proposed Project. The previously discussed capacity analysis procedures were utilized to investigate the future volume-to-capacity relationships and service level characteristics at each study intersection. The significance of the potential impacts of the Project at each key intersection was then evaluated using the following traffic impact criteria. 7.1 Impact Criteria and Thresholds According to the City’s Circulation Element and stated in the City of Anaheim Criteria for Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies, LOS D is the minimum acceptable condition that should be maintained during the morning and evening peak commute hours on all City intersections. The significance of the potential impacts of the project at each key intersection is determined based on the sliding scale criteria presented in Table 7-1. As indicated in Table 7-1, the project-related increase in ICU value that defines a significant impact at signalized intersections varies with LOS. Per the City’s guidelines, a change in ICU value, within LOS C, equal to or greater than 0.050 is a significant impact and within LOS D, a change in ICU equal to or greater than 0.030 is also a significant impact. With LOS E or F, a change in ICU equal to or greater than 0.010 is considered a significant impact. For the unsignalized intersections, this report defines a significant impact as a decrease in LOS by one level or more for those locations operating at LOS D, LOS E or LOS F. If the location currently operates at LOS E or LOS F, an increase in delay by 10 seconds is considered a significant impact. 7.2 Traffic Impact Analysis Scenarios The following scenarios are those for which volume/capacity calculations have been performed at the two (2) key study intersections for existing plus project and near-term (Year 2018) traffic conditions: (a) Existing Traffic Conditions; (b) Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions; (c) Scenario (b) with Improvements, if necessary; (d) Near-Term (Year 2018) Cumulative Traffic Conditions, (e) Near-Term (Year 2018) Cumulative plus Project Traffic Conditions; and (f) Scenario (e) with Improvements, if necessary. LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2.16.3674 StorQuest Self Storage Project, Anaheim N:\3600\2163674 - StorQuest, Anaheim\Report\3674 StorQuest TIA 6-21-2016.doc 16 TABLE 7-1 CITY OF ANAHEIM SIGNIFICANT IMPACT CRITERIA5 Final Intersection ICU value Level of Service (LOS) Project Related Increase in ICU value Considered Significant > 0.700 and ≤ 0.800 C equal to or greater than 0.050 > 0.800 and ≤ 0.900 D equal to or greater than 0.030 > 0.900 E/F equal to or greater than 0.010 5 Source: City of Anaheim Criteria for Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies. LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2.16.3674 StorQuest Self Storage Project, Anaheim N:\3600\2163674 - StorQuest, Anaheim\Report\3674 StorQuest TIA 6-21-2016.doc 17 8.0 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT ANALYSIS The following summarizes the “Existing Plus Project” level of service results for the two (2) study intersections. Table 8-1 summarizes the peak hour level of service results at the two (2) key study intersections for existing plus project traffic conditions. The first column (1) of ICU/HCM/LOS values in Table 8-1 presents a summary of existing AM and PM peak hour traffic conditions (which were also presented in Table 3-3). The second column (2) lists existing plus project traffic conditions. The third column (3) shows the increase in ICU/delay value due to the added peak hour project trips and indicates whether the traffic associated with the Project will have a significant impact based on the LOS standards and significant impact criteria defined in this report. Review of Columns 2 and 3 of Table 8-1 indicates that traffic associated with the proposed Project will not significantly impact any of the two (2) key study intersections when compared to the LOS standards and significant impact criteria specified in this report. The two (2) key study intersections currently operate and are forecast to continue to operate at an acceptable LOS A during the AM and PM peak hours with the addition of Project generated traffic to existing traffic. Appendix B presents the existing plus project ICU/LOS calculations for the two (2) key study intersections for the AM peak hour and PM peak hour. LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2.16.3674 StorQuest Self Storage Project, Anaheim N:\3600\2163674 - StorQuest, Anaheim\Report\3674 StorQuest TIA 6-21-2016.doc 18 TABLE 8-1 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS SUMMARY Key Intersection Time Period Mi n i m u m Ac c e p t a b l e L O S (1) Existing Traffic Conditions (2) Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions (3) Significant Impact ICU/HCM LOS ICU/HCM LOS Increase Yes/No 1. Walnut Street at AM D 9.6 sec/veh A6 9.8 sec/veh A6 0.2 sec/veh No Santa Ana Street PM 7.6 sec/veh A6 7.9 sec/veh A6 0.3 sec/veh No 2. Manchester Avenue at AM D 0.437 A 0.438 A 0.001 No Santa Ana Street PM 0.473 A 0.476 A 0.003 No 6 HCM 2010 unsignalized methodology does not recognize three-way stop control intersections, therefore, Walnut Street at Santa Ana Street was assessed using Synchro SimTraffic. LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2.16.3674 StorQuest Self Storage Project, Anaheim N:\3600\2163674 - StorQuest, Anaheim\Report\3674 StorQuest TIA 6-21-2016.doc 19 9.0 YEAR 2018 PLUS PROJECT ANALYSIS The following summarizes the “Year 2018 Plus Project” level of service results for the two (2) key study intersections. Table 9-1 summarizes the peak hour level of service results at the two (2) key study intersections for Year 2018 traffic conditions. The first column (1) of ICU/HCM/LOS values in Table 9-1 presents a summary of existing AM and PM peak hour traffic conditions (which were also presented in Table 3-3). The second column (2) lists projected cumulative traffic conditions (existing plus ambient traffic plus cumulative project traffic) based on existing intersection geometry, but without any traffic generated from the proposed Project. The third column (3) presents forecast Year 2018 near- term traffic conditions with the addition of Project traffic. The fourth column (4) shows the increase in ICU/delay value due to the added peak hour project trips and indicates whether the traffic associated with the Project will have a significant impact based on the LOS standards and significant impact criteria defined in this report. 9.1 Year 2018 Cumulative Traffic Conditions An analysis of future (Year 2018) cumulative traffic conditions indicates that the addition of ambient traffic growth and cumulative project traffic will not adversely impact either of the two (2) key study intersections. The key study intersections are forecast to continue to operate at acceptable levels of service during the AM and PM peak hours with the addition of ambient traffic growth. 9.2 Year 2018 Cumulative Plus Project Traffic Conditions Review of Columns 3 and 4 of Table 9-1 indicates that traffic associated with the proposed Project will not significantly impact any of the two (2) key study intersections when compared to the LOS standards and significant impact criteria specified in this report. The key study intersections are forecast to continue to operate at an acceptable LOS B or better during the AM and PM peak hours with the addition of project generated traffic in the Year 2018. Appendix B presents the Year 2018 plus project ICU/LOS calculations for the two (2) key study intersections. LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2.16.3674 StorQuest Self Storage Project, Anaheim N:\3600\2163674 - StorQuest, Anaheim\Report\3674 StorQuest TIA 6-21-2016.doc 20 TABLE 9-1 YEAR 2018 PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS SUMMARY Key Intersection Time Period Mi n i m u m Ac c e p t a b l e L O S (1) Existing Traffic Conditions (2) Year 2018 Cumulative Traffic Conditions (3) Year 2018 Cumulative Plus Project Traffic Conditions (4) Significant Impact ICU/HCM LOS ICU/HCM LOS ICU/HCM LOS Increase Yes/No 1. Walnut Street at AM D 9.6 sec/veh A7 9.9 sec/veh A7 10.1 sec/veh B7 0.2 sec/veh No Santa Ana Street PM 7.6 sec/veh A7 9.0 sec/veh A7 9.0 sec/veh A7 0.1 sec/veh No 2. Manchester Avenue at AM D 0.437 A 0.444 A 0.445 A 0.001 No Santa Ana Street PM 0.473 A 0.481 A 0.484 A 0.003 No 7 HCM 2010 unsignalized methodology does not recognize three-way stop control intersections, therefore, Walnut Street at Santa Ana Street was assessed using Synchro SimTraffic. LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2.16.3674 StorQuest Self Storage Project, Anaheim N:\3600\2163674 - StorQuest, Anaheim\Report\3674 StorQuest TIA 6-21-2016.doc 21 10.0 SITE ACCESS EVALUATION 10.1 Level of Service Analysis For Project Access Locations As shown previously in Figure 2-2, access to the proposed Project will be provided via one full access driveway on Walnut Street and one full access driveway on Manchester Avenue. Table 10-1 summarizes the intersection operations at the project driveways under near-term (Year 2018) traffic conditions at completion and full occupancy of the proposed Project. The operations analysis for the project driveways is based on the Highway Capacity Manual unsignalized methodology. Review of Table 10-1 shows that the proposed project driveways are forecast to operate at an acceptable LOS C or better during the AM and PM peak hours for near-term (Year 2018) traffic conditions. As such, project access will be adequate. Motorists entering and exiting the Project site will be able to do so comfortably, safely, and without undue congestion. Appendix C presents the Year 2018 level of service calculation worksheets for the proposed project driveways. LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2.16.3674 StorQuest Self Storage Project, Anaheim N:\3600\2163674 - StorQuest, Anaheim\Report\3674 StorQuest TIA 6-21-2016.doc 22 TABLE 10-1 PROJECT DRIVEWAY PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS Project Driveway Time Period Intersection Control Year 2018 Plus Project Traffic Conditions HCM LOS A. Walnut Street at Project Driveway 1 AM PM One – Way Stop 21.0 sec/veh 22.6 sec/veh C C B. Manchester Avenue at Project Driveway 2 AM PM One – Way Stop 12.1 sec/veh 9.9 sec/veh B A LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2.16.3674 StorQuest Self Storage Project, Anaheim N:\3600\2163674 - StorQuest, Anaheim\Report\3674 StorQuest TIA 6-21-2016.doc 23 10.2 Queuing Analysis For Project Access Locations 10.2.1 Driveway Queuing In response to City staff concerns, stacking/storage requirements at the Project driveways were evaluated. The queuing evaluation was conducted based on Year 2018 plus Project peak hour driveway traffic volumes and the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) unsignalized methodology, which calculates a critical (95th percentile) queue value in number of feet. Walnut Street at Project Driveway 1: The AM peak hour and PM peak hour queue length is not more than one (1) vehicle for the westbound (outbound) movement at the proposed Project Driveway 1. Review of the proposed site plan indicates that the proposed Project Driveway 1 provides stacking sufficient enough to accommodate this queue length. Manchester Avenue at Project Driveway 2: The AM peak hour and PM peak hour queue length is not more than one (1) vehicle for the eastbound (outbound) movement at the proposed Project Driveway 2. Review of the proposed site plan indicates that the proposed Project Driveway 2 provides stacking sufficient enough to accommodate this queue length. As a project design feature, the striped median along Manchester Avenue will be restriped as a two-way left-turn lane to provided full access to and from the project driveway. The proposed northbound left-turn would require a minimum storage length of no more than one (1) vehicle. Please note that the project driveway along Manchester Avenue is in close proximity to Santa Ana Street. Therefore, a queuing assessment has been conducted to identify if the existing pocket needs to be lengthen which would potential affect the project driveway location. The northbound left-turn queue from vehicles turning onto Santa Ana Street from Manchester is forecast to have a maximum queue length of 41 feet8. The existing turn pocket of 180 feet is more than adequate to accommodate the proposed demand. 10.2.2 Vehicular Stacking Analysis for Gated Entry As noted earlier, access to the proposed Project will be provided primarily via a gated access off Manchester Avenue, with a secondary gated access to be provided on Walnut Avenue. The gate located along Manchester Avenue will be open during business hours between 7:00 AM and 7:00 PM and closed during all other time periods. The gate located along Walnut Street is expected to remain closed at all times. When the gates are closed at both locations, customers will be able to access the site via a key pad entry. The following section summarizes the required storage reservoir for the project’s gated entries using the Crommelin Methodology. The Crommelin Methodology determines the minimum storage reservoir required to provide adequate access and control at gated entries. Experience has proven that poorly designed gated entries with inadequate storage capacities often times create an adverse effect on the operating characteristics of the street network. The Crommelin Methodology virtually 8 Synchro SimTraffic 95th percent queue length was used at this location. LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2.16.3674 StorQuest Self Storage Project, Anaheim N:\3600\2163674 - StorQuest, Anaheim\Report\3674 StorQuest TIA 6-21-2016.doc 24 eliminates this scenario as it ensures the design of an efficient, well-working access system with minimum impacts upon the surrounding street system. The methodology is based on a Poisson distribution, peak hour traffic volumes, gate control strategies, processing rates at a control point, and the number of travel lanes. These characteristics are used to calculate a traffic intensity factor value (IF), which is derived by dividing the peak hour traffic volumes by the design processing rate. The IF value is then plotted on the 99% confidence level curve (where storage capacity will not be exceeded 99 times of 100) per the Crommelin Reservoir Needs nomograph (See Appendix D). This process ultimately estimates the maximum number of queuing vehicles that will store behind the service position vehicle at the control point. This number is rounded up to the nearest vehicle and added to the single service position vehicle, resulting in the total number of vehicles stored behind the control point. The required storage capacity, in vehicles, is converted into a length (feet) by multiplying the number of expected vehicles by a vehicle length of 22 feet. Table 10-2 presents a summary of the vehicular stacking analysis for inbound traffic at the site driveways on Manchester Avenue and Walnut Street. Conservatively, this queuing analysis conservatively assumes that the both gates are closed, although the primary gated access on Manchester Avenue will be open between the hours of 7:00 AM and 7:00 PM, inclusive of the weekday AM and PM peak hours. In addition, a conservative design service/processing rate of 60 vehicles per hour was assumed (which is equivalent to a processing rate of one vehicle every 60 seconds) for visitors to the site. As shown in Table 10-2, the Project’s gated driveways are expected to have a maximum queue of 2 vehicles during the AM Peak Hour and/or PM Peak Hour. This will require a storage reservoir length of 44 feet between the gate and back of sidewalk to satisfy both the AM and PM Peak Hour traffic at the project driveways. Review of the Project site plan shows that the each driveway will provide adequate storage with enough stacking to accommodate up to two (2) vehicles. The project is forecast to generate a minimal amount of trips during the AM and PM peak hour, hence, it is concluded that adequate stacking storage will be provided. LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2.16.3674 StorQuest Self Storage Project, Anaheim N:\3600\2163674 - StorQuest, Anaheim\Report\3674 StorQuest TIA 6-21-2016.doc 25 TABLE 10-2 VEHICULAR QUEUING ANALYSIS SUMMARY Project Driveway Time Period (1) Entering Traffic Volumes (veh/hr) (2) Service Rate (veh/hr) (3) Traffic Intensity Factor (I) (4) Required Reservoir Behind Service Position (5) Add Vehicle Waiting at Key Pad (4) + 1 vehicle (6) Required Storage Capacity (5) * 22 feet A. Walnut Street at Project Driveway 1 AM PM 1 2 60 60 0.017 0.033 1 vehicle 1 vehicle 2 vehicles 2 vehicles 44 feet 44 feet B. Manchester Avenue at Project Driveway 2 AM PM 8 14 60 60 0.133 0.233 1 vehicle 1 vehicle 2 vehicles 2 vehicles 44 feet 44 feet LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2.16.3674 StorQuest Self Storage Project, Anaheim N:\3600\2163674 - StorQuest, Anaheim\Report\3674 StorQuest TIA 6-21-2016.doc 26 10.3 Sight Distance Evaluation This assessment is based on the intersection sight distance requirements of the State of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) as published in the State’s Highway Design Manual (HDM), and focuses on the sight distance requirements for the Project driveways on Walnut Street and Manchester Avenue. The Sight Distance Evaluation prepared for the project d riveways located along Walnut Street and Manchester Avenue was based on the criteria and procedures set forth by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) in the State’s Highway Design Manual for “Private Road Intersections”. The Highway Design Manual (HDM), in Section 405.1(2)(c), page 400-22, indicates that for Private Road Intersections, “The minimum corner sight distance shall be equal to the stopping sight distance as given in Table 201.1...”, where stopping sight distance is defined as the distance required by the driver of a vehicle, traveling at a given speed, to bring his vehicle to a stop after an object on the road becomes visible. Stopping sight distance is measured from the driver’s eyes, which are assumed to be 3.5 feet above the pavement surface, to an object 0.5-foot high on the roadway. The speed used in determining stopping sight distance is defined as the “critical speed” or 85th percentile speed which is the speed at which 85% of the vehicles are traveling at or less. The critical speed is the single most important factor in determining stopping sight distance. Table 201.1 in the HDM is used in determining stopping sight distance based on the critical speed of vehicles on the affected roadway. For this analysis, a design speed of 35 miles per hour (mph) for Walnut Street and 50 mph for Manchester Avenue was utilized. Using Table 201.1, titled Sight Distance Standards, in the State’s Highway Design Manual for stopping, a minimum stopping sight distance of 250 feet and 430 feet applies based on the critical speed of 35 mph and 50 mph, respectively. To provide a conservative assessment, the “corner sight distance” criteria in Section 405.1(2)(b) of the HDM was also utilized. Based on the critical speed of 35 and 50 mph, a corner sight distance of 385 feet and 550 feet was assessed at the project driveways, respectively. Figures 10-1 and 10-2 illustrate a schematic of the sight distance evaluation for the project driveways along Walnut Street and Manchester Avenue, respectively. Both figures illustrate the limited use areas. Review of Figure 10-1 and Figure 10-2 indicate that sight distances at Project Driveway 1 on Walnut Street and Project Driveway 2 on Manchester Avenue, respectively, are expected to be adequate if obstructions within the sight triangles are minimized. 10.4 Pedestrian Circulation Existing sidewalks are located along Walnut Street and Santa Ana Street. As part of the Project a sidewalk will be installed along Manchester Avenue adjoining the Project frontage. In addition, the Project will reconstruct the two existing pedestrian ramps that border the Project to the north to be ADA compliant. LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2.16.3674 StorQuest Self Storage Project, Anaheim N:\3600\2163674 - StorQuest, Anaheim\Report\3674 StorQuest TIA 6-21-2016.doc 27 10.5 Special Issues 10.5.1 Potential Project Impacts during School Hours In response to City staff concerns, Project generated trips were evaluated during the drop-off and pick-up hours at Betsy Ross Elementary School, located directly west of the Project site. Based on the Project distribution patterns (Figure 5-1) the primary entrance/exit to the site is provided via Manchester Avenue. Secondary access is provided via Walnut Street. Review of the AM and PM peak hour Project volumes (Figures 5-2 and 5-3) shows that the Project is forecast to add nominal trips to Walnut Street. In addition, the intersection of Walnut Street at Santa Ana Street, as shown in Tables 8-1 and 9-1, with the addition of Project trips is forecast to continue to operate at LOS B or better. Although the site will generate minimal trips during the school midday pick-up time period, between 2:15 PM and 3:15 PM, the midday period has also been analyzed. To provide a conservative assessment the PM peak hour project trips have been assigned to the forecasted school midday pick up time period. Table 10-3 summarized the school midday peak service level results for Year 2018 Plus Project Midday traffic conditions. As shown, all of the key study intersections are forecast to operate at an acceptable LOS C or better during the AM and PM peak hours with the addition of project generated traffic in the Year 2018. 10.6 Project Specific Improvements Subject to the review and approval by the City of Anaheim, the following Project design features are to be implemented in conjunction with development of the proposed Project to ensure adequate access and egress to the site is provided:  Construct new site driveway (Driveway 1) along Walnut Street to provide a westbound (outbound) shared left/right-turn lane. Install “STOP” signs and stop bars at the proposed Project driveway. Install all appropriate striping and/or pavement legends per City of Anaheim standards/requirements.  Construct new site driveway (Driveway 2) along Manchester Avenue to provide an eastbound (outbound) shared left/right-turn lane. Install “STOP” signs and stop bars at the proposed Project driveway. Install all appropriate striping and/or pavement legends per City of Anaheim standards/requirements.  Restripe the median along Manchester Avenue as a two-way left-turn lane to provide full access to and from the site driveway (Driveway 2).  Maintain adequate sight distance at all Project driveways by minimizing obstructions (i.e. landscaping and/or hardscape/walls/monument signs) within “limited use areas” on either side of the driveways. Landscaping and/or hardscapes should be designed such that a driver’s clear line of sight is not obstructed and does not threaten vehicular or pedestrian safety, as determined by the City Traffic Engineer. LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2.16.3674 StorQuest Self Storage Project, Anaheim N:\3600\2163674 - StorQuest, Anaheim\Report\3674 StorQuest TIA 6-21-2016.doc 28 TABLE 10-3 MIDDAY PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS Project Driveway Time Period Year 2018 Plus Project Traffic Conditions HCM/ICU LOS A. Walnut Street at Project Driveway 1 Midday 18.4 sec/veh C B. Manchester Avenue at Project Driveway 2 Midday 9.7 sec/veh A 1. Walnut Street at Santa Ana Street Midday 8.2 sec/veh A 2. Manchester Avenue at Santa Ana Street Midday 0.399 A LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2.16.3674 StorQuest Self Storage Project, Anaheim N:\3600\2163674 - StorQuest, Anaheim\Report\3674 StorQuest TIA 6-21-2016.doc 29 11.0 RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS 11.1 Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions The results of the intersection capacity analysis presented previously in Table 8-1 shows that the proposed Project will not significantly impact the two (2) key study intersections under the “Existing Plus Project” traffic scenario. Given that there are no significant project impacts, no improvements are required under this traffic scenario. 11.2 Year 2018 Plus Project Traffic Conditions The results of the intersection capacity analysis presented previously in Table 9-1 shows that the proposed Project will not significantly impact the two (2) key study intersections under the “Year 2018 Plus Project” traffic scenario. Given that there are no significant project impacts, no improvements are required under this traffic scenario. LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2.16.3674 StorQuest Self Storage Project, Anaheim N:\3600\2163674 - StorQuest, Anaheim\Report\3674 StorQuest TIA 6-21-2016.doc 30 12.0 CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (CMP) This analysis is consistent with the requirements and procedures outlined in the current Orange County Congestion Management Program (CMP). The CMP requires that a traffic impact analysis be conducted for any project generating 2,400 or more daily trips, or 1,600 or more daily trips for projects that directly access the CMP Highway System (HS). Per the CMP guidelines, this number is based on the desire to analyze any impacts that will be 3.0% or more of the existing CMP highway system facilities’ capacity. As noted in Section 5.0 of this traffic study, the proposed Project is forecast to generate approximately 300 daily trip-ends and thus does not meet the criteria requiring a CMP TIA. LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2.16.3674 StorQuest Self Storage Project, Anaheim N:\3600\2163674 - StorQuest, Anaheim\Report\3674 StorQuest TIA 6-21-2016.doc 31 13.0 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS  Project Description – The Project site is a triangular-shaped vacant parcel of land located south of Santa Ana Street, east of Walnut Street, and west of Manchester Avenue. It is located at 500 S. Walnut Street in the City of Anaheim, California. The proposed Project will consist of a 120,058 SF four –story self-storage facility, consisting of 117,166 SF of storage space and 2,892 SF of office space. The proposed Project is expected to be open by the Year 2018. Access to the proposed Project will be provided via two full access driveways, one located along Walnut Street and one located along Manchester Avenue.  Study Scope – The following two (2) key study intersections were selected for detailed peak hour level of service analyses under Existing Traffic Conditions, Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions, Year 2018 Cumulative Traffic Conditions and Year 2018 Cumulative plus Project Traffic Conditions. Key Study Intersections 1. Walnut Street at Santa Ana Street 2. Manchester Avenue at Santa Ana Street  Existing Traffic Conditions – All two (2) key study intersections currently operate at acceptable LOS A during the AM and PM peak hours.  Project Trip Generation – The Project is forecast to generate 300 daily trips, 17 AM peak hour trips (9 inbound, 8 outbound) and 31 PM peak hour trips (16 inbound, 15 outbound).  Cumulative Projects Traffic Characteristics – There are no cumulative projects located in the City of Anaheim within the vicinity of the proposed Project.  Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions – The proposed Project will not significantly impact any of the two (2) key study intersections when compared to the LOS standards and significant impact criteria specified in this report. The two (2) key study intersections currently operate and are forecast to continue to operate at an acceptable LOS A during the AM and PM peak hours with the addition of Project generated traffic to existing traffic.  Year 2018 Cumulative Plus Project Traffic Conditions – The proposed Project will not significantly impact any of the two (2) key study intersections when compared to the LOS standards and significant impact criteria specified in this report. The key study intersections are forecast to continue to operate at an acceptable LOS B or better during the AM and PM peak hours with the addition of project generated traffic in the Year 2018.  Site Access Evaluation – The proposed project driveways are forecast to operate at an acceptable LOS C or better during the AM and PM peak hours for near-term (Year 2018) traffic conditions. As such, project access will be adequate. Motorists entering and exiting the Project site will be able to do so comfortably, safely, and without undue congestion. The AM peak hour and PM peak hour queue length is not more than one (1) vehicle for the outbound movements at the proposed Project Driveways. Review of the proposed site plan indicates that the proposed LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2.16.3674 StorQuest Self Storage Project, Anaheim N:\3600\2163674 - StorQuest, Anaheim\Report\3674 StorQuest TIA 6-21-2016.doc 32 Project Driveways provide one outbound lane with stacking sufficient enough to accommodate this queue length. Further, the Project site plan indicates that 50-feet of stacking, enough for up to two (2) vehicles, is provided in front of each gate. Adequate sight distance should be provided at Project driveways by minimizing obstructions. As a project design feature, the striped median along Manchester Avenue will be restriped as a two-way left-turn lane to provide full access to and from the project driveway. The proposed northbound left-turn would require a minimum storage length of no more than one (1) vehicle.  Recommended Improvements – The results of the intersection capacity analysis and daily roadway segment analysis presented previously in Tables 8-1 and 9-1 shows that the proposed Project will not significantly impact the two (2) key study intersections under the “Existing Plus Project” and “Year 2018 Plus Project” traffic scenarios. Given that there are no significant project impacts, no improvements are required of the proposed project.  Congestion Management Program (CMP) – The proposed Project will not have any significant traffic impacts on the Congestion Management Program Highway System. A - 1 A - 2 A - 3 A - 4 A - 5 A - 6 A - 7 A - 8 A - 9 A - 1 0 A - 1 1 A - 1 2 A - 1 3 A - 1 4 A - 1 5 B - 1 B - 2 B - 3 B - 4 Scenario 1: 1: AM Ex Storquest, Anaheim Version 4.00-03 Generated with 0.437Volume to Capacity (v/c): ALevel Of Service: -Delay (sec / veh): 15 minutesAnalysis Period: ICU 1Analysis Method: SignalizedControl Type: Intersection 2: Manchester Ave at Santa Ana St Intersection Level Of Service Report YesNoYesYesCrosswalk 0.000.000.000.00Grade [%] 30.0030.0030.0030.00Speed [mph] 100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00Pocket Length [ft] 000000000000No. of Lanes in Pocket 12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft] RightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftTurning Movement Lane Configuration WestboundEastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach Santa Ana StSanta Ana StManchester AveManchester AveName Intersection Setup 0000Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0000Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 732475215330141035367277720Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 18621348335088177195Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Peak Hour Factor 732475215330141035367277720Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Other Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 000000000000Diverted Trips [veh/h] 000000000000Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 000000000000In-Process Volume [veh/h] 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00Growth Rate 2.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 732475215330141035367277720Base Volume Input [veh/h] Santa Ana StSanta Ana StManchester AveManchester AveName Volumes B-5 Scenario 1: 1: AM Ex Storquest, Anaheim Version 4.00-03 Generated with ------------Lead / Lag Auxiliary Signal Groups 040080060020Signal group PermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissControl Type Phasing & Timing 5.00Lost time [s] 100Cycle Length [s] Intersection Settings B-6 Scenario 1: 1: AM Ex Storquest, Anaheim Version 4.00-03 Generated with 0.437Intersection V/C AIntersection LOS Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results B-7 B - 8 B - 9 Scenario 2: 2: PM Ex Storquest, Anaheim Version 4.00-03 Generated with 0.473Volume to Capacity (v/c): ALevel Of Service: -Delay (sec / veh): 15 minutesAnalysis Period: ICU 1Analysis Method: SignalizedControl Type: Intersection 2: Manchester Ave at Santa Ana St Intersection Level Of Service Report YesNoYesYesCrosswalk 0.000.000.000.00Grade [%] 30.0030.0030.0030.00Speed [mph] 100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00Pocket Length [ft] 000000000000No. of Lanes in Pocket 12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft] RightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftTurning Movement Lane Configuration WestboundEastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach Santa Ana StSanta Ana StManchester AveManchester AveName Intersection Setup 0000Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0000Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 8031529162931231851095912513Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 20797473310212715313Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Peak Hour Factor 8031529162931231851095912513Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Other Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 000000000000Diverted Trips [veh/h] 000000000000Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 000000000000In-Process Volume [veh/h] 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00Growth Rate 2.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 8031529162931231851095912513Base Volume Input [veh/h] Santa Ana StSanta Ana StManchester AveManchester AveName Volumes B-10 Scenario 2: 2: PM Ex Storquest, Anaheim Version 4.00-03 Generated with ------------Lead / Lag Auxiliary Signal Groups 040080060020Signal group PermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissControl Type Phasing & Timing 5.00Lost time [s] 100Cycle Length [s] Intersection Settings B-11 Scenario 2: 2: PM Ex Storquest, Anaheim Version 4.00-03 Generated with 0.473Intersection V/C AIntersection LOS Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results B-12 B - 1 3 B - 1 4 B - 1 5 Scenario 3: 3: AM Ex+P Storquest, Anaheim Version 4.00-05 Generated with 0.438Volume to Capacity (v/c): ALevel Of Service: -Delay (sec / veh): 15 minutesAnalysis Period: ICU 1Analysis Method: SignalizedControl Type: Intersection 2: Manchester Ave at Santa Ana St Intersection Level Of Service Report YesNoYesYesCrosswalk 0.000.000.000.00Grade [%] 30.0030.0030.0030.00Speed [mph] 100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00Pocket Length [ft] 000000000000No. of Lanes in Pocket 12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft] RightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftTurning Movement Lane Configuration WestboundEastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach Santa Ana StSanta Ana StManchester AveManchester AveName Intersection Setup 0000Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0000Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 732475415330141035767298020Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 18621448335089177205Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Peak Hour Factor 732475415330141035767298020Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Other Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 000000000000Diverted Trips [veh/h] 000000000000Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 000000000000In-Process Volume [veh/h] 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00Growth Rate 2.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 732475415330141035767298020Base Volume Input [veh/h] Santa Ana StSanta Ana StManchester AveManchester AveName Volumes B-16 Scenario 3: 3: AM Ex+P Storquest, Anaheim Version 4.00-05 Generated with ------------Lead / Lag Auxiliary Signal Groups 040080060020Signal group PermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissControl Type Phasing & Timing 5.00Lost time [s] 100Cycle Length [s] Intersection Settings B-17 Scenario 3: 3: AM Ex+P Storquest, Anaheim Version 4.00-05 Generated with 0.438Intersection V/C AIntersection LOS Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results B-18 B - 1 9 B - 2 0 Scenario 4: 4: PM Ex+P Storquest, Anaheim Version 4.00-05 Generated with 0.476Volume to Capacity (v/c): ALevel Of Service: -Delay (sec / veh): 15 minutesAnalysis Period: ICU 1Analysis Method: SignalizedControl Type: Intersection 2: Manchester Ave at Santa Ana St Intersection Level Of Service Report YesNoYesYesCrosswalk 0.000.000.000.00Grade [%] 30.0030.0030.0030.00Speed [mph] 100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00Pocket Length [ft] 000000000000No. of Lanes in Pocket 12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft] RightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftTurning Movement Lane Configuration WestboundEastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach Santa Ana StSanta Ana StManchester AveManchester AveName Intersection Setup 0000Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0000Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 8031532172931231911096213114Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 20798473310232716334Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Peak Hour Factor 8031532172931231911096213114Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Other Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 000000000000Diverted Trips [veh/h] 000000000000Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 000000000000In-Process Volume [veh/h] 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00Growth Rate 2.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 8031532172931231911096213114Base Volume Input [veh/h] Santa Ana StSanta Ana StManchester AveManchester AveName Volumes B-21 Scenario 4: 4: PM Ex+P Storquest, Anaheim Version 4.00-05 Generated with ------------Lead / Lag Auxiliary Signal Groups 040080060020Signal group PermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissControl Type Phasing & Timing 5.00Lost time [s] 100Cycle Length [s] Intersection Settings B-22 Scenario 4: 4: PM Ex+P Storquest, Anaheim Version 4.00-05 Generated with 0.476Intersection V/C AIntersection LOS Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results B-23 B - 2 4 B - 2 5 B - 2 6 Scenario 5: 5: AM 2018 Storquest, Anaheim Version 4.00-03 Generated with 0.444Volume to Capacity (v/c): ALevel Of Service: -Delay (sec / veh): 15 minutesAnalysis Period: ICU 1Analysis Method: SignalizedControl Type: Intersection 2: Manchester Ave at Santa Ana St Intersection Level Of Service Report YesNoYesYesCrosswalk 0.000.000.000.00Grade [%] 30.0030.0030.0030.00Speed [mph] 100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00Pocket Length [ft] 000000000000No. of Lanes in Pocket 12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft] RightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftTurning Movement Lane Configuration WestboundEastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach Santa Ana StSanta Ana StManchester AveManchester AveName Intersection Setup 0000Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0000Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 742525315337144036068287920Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 19631348436090177205Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Peak Hour Factor 742525315337144036068287920Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Other Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 000000000000Diverted Trips [veh/h] 000000000000Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 000000000000In-Process Volume [veh/h] 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00Growth Rate 2.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 742525315337144036068287920Base Volume Input [veh/h] Santa Ana StSanta Ana StManchester AveManchester AveName Volumes B-27 Scenario 5: 5: AM 2018 Storquest, Anaheim Version 4.00-03 Generated with ------------Lead / Lag Auxiliary Signal Groups 040080060020Signal group PermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissControl Type Phasing & Timing 5.00Lost time [s] 100Cycle Length [s] Intersection Settings B-28 Scenario 5: 5: AM 2018 Storquest, Anaheim Version 4.00-03 Generated with 0.444Intersection V/C AIntersection LOS Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results B-29 B - 3 0 B - 3 1 Scenario 6: 6: PM 2018 Storquest, Anaheim Version 4.00-03 Generated with 0.481Volume to Capacity (v/c): ALevel Of Service: -Delay (sec / veh): 15 minutesAnalysis Period: ICU 1Analysis Method: SignalizedControl Type: Intersection 2: Manchester Ave at Santa Ana St Intersection Level Of Service Report YesNoYesYesCrosswalk 0.000.000.000.00Grade [%] 30.0030.0030.0030.00Speed [mph] 100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00Pocket Length [ft] 000000000000No. of Lanes in Pocket 12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft] RightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftTurning Movement Lane Configuration WestboundEastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach Santa Ana StSanta Ana StManchester AveManchester AveName Intersection Setup 0000Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0000Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 8232130162991251871116012813Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 21808475310222815323Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Peak Hour Factor 8232130162991251871116012813Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Other Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 000000000000Diverted Trips [veh/h] 000000000000Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 000000000000In-Process Volume [veh/h] 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00Growth Rate 2.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 8232130162991251871116012813Base Volume Input [veh/h] Santa Ana StSanta Ana StManchester AveManchester AveName Volumes B-32 Scenario 6: 6: PM 2018 Storquest, Anaheim Version 4.00-03 Generated with ------------Lead / Lag Auxiliary Signal Groups 040080060020Signal group PermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissControl Type Phasing & Timing 5.00Lost time [s] 100Cycle Length [s] Intersection Settings B-33 Scenario 6: 6: PM 2018 Storquest, Anaheim Version 4.00-03 Generated with 0.481Intersection V/C AIntersection LOS Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results B-34 B - 3 5 B - 3 6 B - 3 7 B - 3 8 Scenario 7: 7: AM 2018+P Storquest, Anaheim Version 4.00-05 Generated with 0.445Volume to Capacity (v/c): ALevel Of Service: -Delay (sec / veh): 15 minutesAnalysis Period: ICU 1Analysis Method: SignalizedControl Type: Intersection 2: Manchester Ave at Santa Ana St Intersection Level Of Service Report YesNoYesYesCrosswalk 0.000.000.000.00Grade [%] 30.0030.0030.0030.00Speed [mph] 100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00Pocket Length [ft] 000000000000No. of Lanes in Pocket 12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft] RightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftTurning Movement Lane Configuration WestboundEastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach Santa Ana StSanta Ana StManchester AveManchester AveName Intersection Setup 0000Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0000Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 742525515337144036468308220Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 19631448436091178215Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Peak Hour Factor 742525515337144036468308220Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Other Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 000000000000Diverted Trips [veh/h] 000000000000Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 000000000000In-Process Volume [veh/h] 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00Growth Rate 2.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 742525515337144036468308220Base Volume Input [veh/h] Santa Ana StSanta Ana StManchester AveManchester AveName Volumes B-39 Scenario 7: 7: AM 2018+P Storquest, Anaheim Version 4.00-05 Generated with ------------Lead / Lag Auxiliary Signal Groups 040080060020Signal group PermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissControl Type Phasing & Timing 5.00Lost time [s] 100Cycle Length [s] Intersection Settings B-40 Scenario 7: 7: AM 2018+P Storquest, Anaheim Version 4.00-05 Generated with 0.445Intersection V/C AIntersection LOS Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results B-41 B - 4 2 B - 4 3 Scenario 12: 12: MD 2018+P Storquest, Anaheim Version 4.00-05 Generated with 0.399Volume to Capacity (v/c): ALevel Of Service: -Delay (sec / veh): 15 minutesAnalysis Period: ICU 1Analysis Method: SignalizedControl Type: Intersection 2: Manchester Ave at Santa Ana St Intersection Level Of Service Report YesNoYesYesCrosswalk 0.000.000.000.00Grade [%] 30.0030.0030.0030.00Speed [mph] 100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00Pocket Length [ft] 000000000000No. of Lanes in Pocket 12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft] RightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftTurning Movement Lane Configuration WestboundEastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach Santa Ana StSanta Ana StManchester AveManchester AveName Intersection Setup 0000Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0000Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 81255241525914838955377311Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 2064646537122149183Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Peak Hour Factor 81255241525914838955377311Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Other Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 000000000000Diverted Trips [veh/h] 000000000000Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 000000000000In-Process Volume [veh/h] 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00Growth Rate 2.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 81255241525914838955377311Base Volume Input [veh/h] Santa Ana StSanta Ana StManchester AveManchester AveName Volumes B-44 Scenario 12: 12: MD 2018+P Storquest, Anaheim Version 4.00-05 Generated with ------------Lead / Lag Auxiliary Signal Groups 040080060020Signal group PermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissControl Type Phasing & Timing 5.00Lost time [s] 100Cycle Length [s] Intersection Settings B-45 Scenario 12: 12: MD 2018+P Storquest, Anaheim Version 4.00-05 Generated with 0.399Intersection V/C AIntersection LOS Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results B-46 B - 4 7 B - 4 8 B - 4 9 Scenario 8: 8: PM 2018+P Storquest, Anaheim Version 4.00-05 Generated with 0.484Volume to Capacity (v/c): ALevel Of Service: -Delay (sec / veh): 15 minutesAnalysis Period: ICU 1Analysis Method: SignalizedControl Type: Intersection 2: Manchester Ave at Santa Ana St Intersection Level Of Service Report YesNoYesYesCrosswalk 0.000.000.000.00Grade [%] 30.0030.0030.0030.00Speed [mph] 100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00Pocket Length [ft] 000000000000No. of Lanes in Pocket 12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft] RightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftTurning Movement Lane Configuration WestboundEastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach Santa Ana StSanta Ana StManchester AveManchester AveName Intersection Setup 0000Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0000Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 8232133172991251931116313414Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 21808475310232816344Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Peak Hour Factor 8232133172991251931116313414Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Other Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 000000000000Diverted Trips [veh/h] 000000000000Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 000000000000In-Process Volume [veh/h] 1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00Growth Rate 2.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 8232133172991251931116313414Base Volume Input [veh/h] Santa Ana StSanta Ana StManchester AveManchester AveName Volumes B-50 Scenario 8: 8: PM 2018+P Storquest, Anaheim Version 4.00-05 Generated with ------------Lead / Lag Auxiliary Signal Groups 040080060020Signal group PermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissControl Type Phasing & Timing 5.00Lost time [s] 100Cycle Length [s] Intersection Settings B-51 Scenario 8: 8: PM 2018+P Storquest, Anaheim Version 4.00-05 Generated with 0.484Intersection V/C AIntersection LOS Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results B-52 C - 1 C - 2 Scenario 7: 7: AM 2018+P Storquest, Anaheim Version 4.00-05 Generated with 0.004Volume to Capacity (v/c): CLevel Of Service: 21.0Delay (sec / veh): 15 minutesAnalysis Period: HCM 2010Analysis Method: Two-way stopControl Type: Intersection 3: Walnut St at Project Dwy 1 Intersection Level Of Service Report YesNoNoCrosswalk 0.000.000.00Grade [%] 30.0030.0030.00Speed [mph] 100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00Pocket Length [ft] 000000No. of Lanes in Pocket 12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft] RightLeftThruLeftRightThruTurning Movement Lane Configuration WestboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach Project Dwy 1Walnut StWalnut StName Intersection Setup 600Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0153201583Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 0013300146Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor 1.00001.00000.78800.78800.82200.8220Peak Hour Factor 0141901479Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 000000Other Volume [veh/h] 000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 000000Diverted Trips [veh/h] 000000Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 000000In-Process Volume [veh/h] 1.001.001.001.001.001.00Growth Rate 2.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 0141901479Base Volume Input [veh/h] Project Dwy 1Walnut StWalnut StName Volumes C-3 Scenario 7: 7: AM 2018+P Storquest, Anaheim Version 4.00-05 Generated with CIntersection LOS 0.02d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] CAAApproach LOS 20.950.000.00d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 0.330.330.000.000.000.0095th-Percentile Queue Length [ft] 0.010.010.000.000.000.0095th-Percentile Queue Length [veh] BCAAAAMovement LOS 12.2020.950.008.670.000.00d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 0.000.000.010.000.000.01V/C, Movement V/C Ratio Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results 000Number of Storage Spaces in Median NoTwo-Stage Gap Acceptance 000Storage Area [veh] NoFlared Lane StopFreeFreePriority Scheme Intersection Settings C-4 Scenario 7: 7: AM 2018+P Storquest, Anaheim Version 4.00-05 Generated with 0.011Volume to Capacity (v/c): BLevel Of Service: 12.9Delay (sec / veh): 15 minutesAnalysis Period: HCM 2010Analysis Method: Two-way stopControl Type: Intersection 4: Manchester Ave at Project Dwy 2 Intersection Level Of Service Report YesNoNoCrosswalk 0.000.000.00Grade [%] 30.0030.0030.00Speed [mph] 100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00Pocket Length [ft] 000000No. of Lanes in Pocket 12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft] RightLeftRightThruThruLeftTurning Movement Lane Configuration EastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach Project Dwy 2Manchester AveManchester AveName Intersection Setup 200Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 2574651583Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 112116401Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor 1.00001.00000.92100.92100.79500.7950Peak Hour Factor 2564281262Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 000000Other Volume [veh/h] 000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 000000Diverted Trips [veh/h] 000000Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 000000In-Process Volume [veh/h] 1.001.001.001.001.001.00Growth Rate 2.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 2564281262Base Volume Input [veh/h] Project Dwy 2Manchester AveManchester AveName Volumes C-5 Scenario 7: 7: AM 2018+P Storquest, Anaheim Version 4.00-05 Generated with BIntersection LOS 0.17d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] BAAApproach LOS 12.050.000.16d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 1.031.030.000.000.000.2195th-Percentile Queue Length [ft] 0.040.040.000.000.000.0195th-Percentile Queue Length [veh] ABAAAAMovement LOS 9.8212.940.000.000.008.34d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 0.000.010.000.000.000.00V/C, Movement V/C Ratio Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results 000Number of Storage Spaces in Median NoTwo-Stage Gap Acceptance 000Storage Area [veh] NoFlared Lane StopFreeFreePriority Scheme Intersection Settings C-6 Scenario 12: 12: MD 2018+P Storquest, Anaheim Version 4.00-05 Generated with 0.007Volume to Capacity (v/c): CLevel Of Service: 18.4Delay (sec / veh): 15 minutesAnalysis Period: HCM 2010Analysis Method: Two-way stopControl Type: Intersection 3: Walnut St at Project Dwy 1 Intersection Level Of Service Report YesNoNoCrosswalk 0.000.000.00Grade [%] 30.0030.0030.00Speed [mph] 100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00Pocket Length [ft] 000000No. of Lanes in Pocket 12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft] RightLeftThruLeftRightThruTurning Movement Lane Configuration WestboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach Project Dwy 1Walnut StWalnut StName Intersection Setup 2000Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0252302440Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 0113101110Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor 1.00001.00000.86500.86500.86600.8660Peak Hour Factor 0245202381Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 000000Other Volume [veh/h] 000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 000000Diverted Trips [veh/h] 000000Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 000000In-Process Volume [veh/h] 1.001.001.001.001.001.00Growth Rate 2.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 0245202381Base Volume Input [veh/h] Project Dwy 1Walnut StWalnut StName Volumes C-7 Scenario 12: 12: MD 2018+P Storquest, Anaheim Version 4.00-05 Generated with CIntersection LOS 0.04d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] CAAApproach LOS 18.420.000.00d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 0.560.560.000.000.000.0095th-Percentile Queue Length [ft] 0.020.020.000.000.000.0095th-Percentile Queue Length [veh] BCAAAAMovement LOS 11.2118.420.008.340.000.00d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 0.000.010.010.000.000.00V/C, Movement V/C Ratio Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results 000Number of Storage Spaces in Median NoTwo-Stage Gap Acceptance 000Storage Area [veh] NoFlared Lane StopFreeFreePriority Scheme Intersection Settings C-8 Scenario 12: 12: MD 2018+P Storquest, Anaheim Version 4.00-05 Generated with 0.014Volume to Capacity (v/c): ALevel Of Service: 10.0Delay (sec / veh): 15 minutesAnalysis Period: HCM 2010Analysis Method: Two-way stopControl Type: Intersection 4: Manchester Ave at Project Dwy 2 Intersection Level Of Service Report YesNoNoCrosswalk 0.000.000.00Grade [%] 30.0030.0030.00Speed [mph] 100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00Pocket Length [ft] 000000No. of Lanes in Pocket 12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft] RightLeftRightThruThruLeftTurning Movement Lane Configuration EastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach Project Dwy 2Manchester AveManchester AveName Intersection Setup 200Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 410121471305Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 13337331Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor 1.00001.00000.80200.80200.85200.8520Peak Hour Factor 410101181114Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 000000Other Volume [veh/h] 000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 000000Diverted Trips [veh/h] 000000Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 000000In-Process Volume [veh/h] 1.001.001.001.001.001.00Growth Rate 2.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 410101181114Base Volume Input [veh/h] Project Dwy 2Manchester AveManchester AveName Volumes C-9 Scenario 12: 12: MD 2018+P Storquest, Anaheim Version 4.00-05 Generated with AIntersection LOS 0.56d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] AAAApproach LOS 9.660.000.28d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 1.361.360.000.000.000.2795th-Percentile Queue Length [ft] 0.050.050.000.000.000.0195th-Percentile Queue Length [veh] AAAAAAMovement LOS 8.839.990.000.000.007.56d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 0.000.010.000.000.000.00V/C, Movement V/C Ratio Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results 000Number of Storage Spaces in Median NoTwo-Stage Gap Acceptance 000Storage Area [veh] NoFlared Lane StopFreeFreePriority Scheme Intersection Settings C-10 Scenario 8: 8: PM 2018+P Storquest, Anaheim Version 4.00-05 Generated with 0.010Volume to Capacity (v/c): CLevel Of Service: 22.6Delay (sec / veh): 15 minutesAnalysis Period: HCM 2010Analysis Method: Two-way stopControl Type: Intersection 3: Walnut St at Project Dwy 1 Intersection Level Of Service Report YesNoNoCrosswalk 0.000.000.00Grade [%] 30.0030.0030.00Speed [mph] 100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00Pocket Length [ft] 000000No. of Lanes in Pocket 12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft] RightLeftThruLeftRightThruTurning Movement Lane Configuration WestboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach Project Dwy 1Walnut StWalnut StName Intersection Setup 400Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0273402453Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 0118301113Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor 1.00001.00000.76200.76200.87400.8740Peak Hour Factor 0255902396Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 000000Other Volume [veh/h] 000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 000000Diverted Trips [veh/h] 000000Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 000000In-Process Volume [veh/h] 1.001.001.001.001.001.00Growth Rate 2.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 0255902396Base Volume Input [veh/h] Project Dwy 1Walnut StWalnut StName Volumes C-11 Scenario 8: 8: PM 2018+P Storquest, Anaheim Version 4.00-05 Generated with CIntersection LOS 0.04d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] CAAApproach LOS 22.650.000.00d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 0.730.730.000.000.000.0095th-Percentile Queue Length [ft] 0.030.030.000.000.000.0095th-Percentile Queue Length [veh] BCAAAAMovement LOS 11.1722.650.008.280.000.00d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 0.000.010.010.000.000.00V/C, Movement V/C Ratio Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results 000Number of Storage Spaces in Median NoTwo-Stage Gap Acceptance 000Storage Area [veh] NoFlared Lane StopFreeFreePriority Scheme Intersection Settings C-12 Scenario 8: 8: PM 2018+P Storquest, Anaheim Version 4.00-05 Generated with 0.013Volume to Capacity (v/c): BLevel Of Service: 10.3Delay (sec / veh): 15 minutesAnalysis Period: HCM 2010Analysis Method: Two-way stopControl Type: Intersection 4: Manchester Ave at Project Dwy 2 Intersection Level Of Service Report YesNoNoCrosswalk 0.000.000.00Grade [%] 30.0030.0030.00Speed [mph] 100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00Pocket Length [ft] 000000No. of Lanes in Pocket 12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft] RightLeftRightThruThruLeftTurning Movement Lane Configuration EastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach Project Dwy 2Manchester AveManchester AveName Intersection Setup 000Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 49111532204Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 12338551Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor 1.00001.00000.87100.87100.91200.9120Peak Hour Factor 49101332014Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 000000Other Volume [veh/h] 000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 000000Diverted Trips [veh/h] 000000Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 000000In-Process Volume [veh/h] 1.001.001.001.001.001.00Growth Rate 2.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 49101332014Base Volume Input [veh/h] Project Dwy 2Manchester AveManchester AveName Volumes C-13 Scenario 8: 8: PM 2018+P Storquest, Anaheim Version 4.00-05 Generated with BIntersection LOS 0.39d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] AAAApproach LOS 9.860.000.13d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 1.311.310.000.000.000.2195th-Percentile Queue Length [ft] 0.050.050.000.000.000.0195th-Percentile Queue Length [veh] ABAAAAMovement LOS 8.8310.310.000.000.007.56d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 0.000.010.000.000.000.00V/C, Movement V/C Ratio Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results 000Number of Storage Spaces in Median NoTwo-Stage Gap Acceptance 000Storage Area [veh] NoFlared Lane StopFreeFreePriority Scheme Intersection Settings C-14 1 STORQUEST SELF STORAGE PROJECT MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN NO. 336 Terms and Definitions: 1. Property Owner/Developer – Owner or developer of StorQuest Self Storage Project. 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 done 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 Plan will occur, as 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. Outside public agency review is limited to those public agencies specified in the Mitigation Monitoring Plan which have permit authority in conjunction with the mitigation measure. 5. Ongoing Mitigation Measures – The mitigation measures that are designated to occur on an ongoing basis as part of this Mitigation Monitoring Plan will be monitored in the form of an annual letter from the property owner/developer in January of each year demonstrating how compliance with the subject measure(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 complete. A final annual letter will be provided at the close of construction. 6. Building Permit – For purposes of this Mitigation Monitoring Plan, 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. ATTACHMENT NO. 5 2 MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM N0. 336 MITIGATION NUMBER TIMING MEASURE RESPONSIBLE FOR MONITORING COMPLETION III. AIR QUALITY MM-AQ-1 Prior to the issuance of a building permit Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit, to the satisfaction of the City of Anaheim Planning Department, a Coating Restriction Plan (CRP), consistent with South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) guidelines and a letter agreeing to include in any construction contracts and/or subcontracts a requirement that the contractors adhere to the requirements of the CRP. The CRP measures shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Building Department. The volatile organic compounds (VOC) of proposed architectural coatings shall not exceed 25 grams/liter for interior applications and 50 grams/liter for exterior applications. This measure shall conform to the performance standard that emissions of VOCs from application of interior or exterior coatings shall not exceed the daily emissions thresholds established by the SCAQMD. The CRP shall specify use of High-Volume, Low Pressure (HVLP) spray guns for application of coatings. Planning and Building Department V. CULTURAL RESOURCES MM-CUL-1 During grading activities In the event that archaeological resources are unearthed during excavation and grading activities associated with the project, the contractor shall cease all earth-disturbing activities within a 100-meter radius of the area of discovery and shall retain a qualified archaeologist, as determined by the Public Works Department, to evaluate the significance of the finding and appropriate course of action. Salvage operation requirements pursuant to Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines shall be followed. After the find has been appropriately mitigated, work in the area may resume Public Works & Planning and Building Departments MM-CUL-2 During grading activities In the event that paleontological resources are unearthed during excavation and grading activities associated with the project, the contractor shall cease all earth-disturbing activities within a 100-meter radius of the area of discovery and shall retain a qualified paleontologist that is approved by the Planning Department to evaluate the significance of the finding and appropriate course of action. After the find has been appropriately mitigated, work in the area may resume. Planning and Building Department Proposed Project Description The 1.98 ac r e site wi ll be develope d w ith a 4-s tor y se lf-storage building totaling 120,3 19 SF. The deve lopment will provid e for the demolition of approximately 1,000 SF of an ex is ting of fice and metal service buildings and a parti ally paved concrete yard (site had previously operated as concrete hatching yard). StorQuest's newl y constructed self-storage building/site will include a 2,957 SF Retail/Leas ing area; extensive landscape around the pe rimeter that a lso includes a meandering pathway for e ither pede strian or bicycle u se; an architec tural feature of a decorati ve arbor/trelli s structure located where both M a nchester and Walnut intersect Santa Ana Street; the site's parking field can be accessed from both Manchester and Walnut and has the lux ury of providin g ove rsized parking s tall s whil e maintaining a 100ft se tb ack (as required by code) f rom the resid ential hom es along the s ite's southern border; and the property will be secured with attrac tive electronic gates during non-bu s iness hours. Interior and exterior area of StorQuest's s ite w ill have sta te-of-the art sec urity camera(s) and mo nitoring sys tem that monitors "every inch" of the interior and two monitors 24/7. StorQuest's office and retail area allows for the purch ase of variou s moving supplies and with serv ices for its customer s which include use of conference room, free wi -fi and a collaborative lobby area it s customers may use. These services are indi cative of the needs StorQuest's s mall bu siness community who work fro m home or operate a service o riented business. StorQuest finds its custo me rs are typi call y in cuba tor b us in esses w ho store their in ventory, record s and equipment as they grow their bu sinesses and during th eir infa ncy period before being r ead y to move to traditional office sp ace and add emplo yees to their new bu s iness. The services StorQuest provides its customer is what separates StorQuest from it s competitors. I 09 1248.0 1/0C 374075·00020/1 1-17-15 /wrd/wrd ATTACHMENT NO. 6 ATTACHMENT NO. 7 L O C A T I O N P R O J E C T N S H E E T I N D E X S I T E & B U I L D I N G D A T A 1 5 - 0 2 5 _ A 0 1 S H E E T N A M E A 0 . 1 A S N O T E D Y M S C O P E O F W O R K D E S I G N C O D E S P R O J E C T T E A M V I C I N I T Y M A P GEN E R A L N O T E S SYMBOLS:ABBREVIATIONS: S Y M B O L S L E G E N D ARCHITECTURAL ABBREVIATIONS N + 8 ' - 0 " A . F . F . A C T C E I L I N G X A B C D R O O M N A M E R O O M N A M E X X X 1 P L - 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 A 1 / 4 : 1 2 # - - X X X X A R C H I T E C T : C L I E N T : C I V I L : S I T E A R E A C A L C U L A T I O N S A N D C O N D I T I O N S MECHANICAL & PLUMBING:ELECTRICAL:FIRE PROTECTION/FIRE ALARM:MANUFACTURED STAIRS: 1 2 3 4 5 6 A R C H I T E C T U R E ageM ll an 17011 Beach Boulevard, Suite 900 Huntington Beach, California 92647 Tel (949) 515-9600 www.magellanarchitects.com N E W C O N S T R U C T I O N - 4 S T O R Y S T O R A G E B U I L D I N G S T O R Q U E S T A N A H E I M W A L N U T 5 1 0 0 S . W A L N U T S T A N A H E I M , C A 9 2 8 0 2 A R C H I T E C T U R A L : A T T A C H M E N T N O . 8 A 1 . 1 SITE PLANSCALE: 1" = 20'-0" 1 2 3 4 5 6 A R C H I T E C T U R E ageM ll an 17011 Beach Boulevard, Suite 900 Huntington Beach, California 92647 Tel (949) 515-9600 www.magellanarchitects.com N S I T E P L A N N O T E S B U I L D I N G A R E A K E Y N O T E S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 S I T E L E G E N D S I T E P L A N G E N E R A L N O T E S 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0 V I C I N I T Y M A P L O C A T I O N P R O J E C T N 1 5 2 2 2 3 4 5 5 6 6 7 8 8 9 9 1 0 1 0 10 11 1 3 1 2 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 20 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 3 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 4 2 4 2 4 2 4 2 5 2 5 2 5 2 6 2 6 2 6 1 2 19 A 2 . 1 K E Y N O T E S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 GRADE LEVEL 1 FLOOR PLANSCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0" 8 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 A R C H I T E C T U R E ageM ll an 17011 Beach Boulevard, Suite 900 Huntington Beach, California 92647 Tel (949) 515-9600 www.magellanarchitects.com P L A N N O T E S P L A N N O T E S 1 1 0 1 0 9 U N I T M I X N 2 3 3 4 4 5 6 7 8 8 8 8 9 9 9 A 2 . 2 NLEVEL 2 FLOOR PLANSCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0" 1 2 3 4 5 6 A R C H I T E C T U R E ageM ll an 17011 Beach Boulevard, Suite 900 Huntington Beach, California 92647 Tel (949) 515-9600 www.magellanarchitects.com P L A N N O T E S P L A N N O T E S K E Y N O T E S 1 2 3 4 U N I T M I X 4 2 2 3 4 4 1 A 2 . 3 NLEVEL 3 FLOOR PLANSCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0" 1 2 3 4 5 6 A R C H I T E C T U R E ageM ll an 17011 Beach Boulevard, Suite 900 Huntington Beach, California 92647 Tel (949) 515-9600 www.magellanarchitects.com P L A N N O T E S P L A N N O T E S 1 2 3 4 K E Y N O T E S U N I T M I X 4 2 2 3 4 4 1 A 2 . 4 N LEVEL 4 FLOOR PLANSCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0" 1 2 3 4 5 6 A R C H I T E C T U R E ageM ll an 17011 Beach Boulevard, Suite 900 Huntington Beach, California 92647 Tel (949) 515-9600 www.magellanarchitects.com P L A N N O T E S P L A N N O T E S 1 2 3 4 K E Y N O T E S 4 2 2 3 4 1 U N I T M I X 5 5 A 2 . 5 K E Y N O T E S 1 2 3 4 NROOF PLANSCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0" 1 2 3 4 5 6 A R C H I T E C T U R E ageM ll an 17011 Beach Boulevard, Suite 900 Huntington Beach, California 92647 Tel (949) 515-9600 www.magellanarchitects.com R O O F P L A N L E G E N D R O O F P L A N N O T E S G E N E R A L N O T E S V A L L E Y 5 4-PLY ROOF SPECIFICATIONS 6 G E N E R A L N O T E S 2 5 R I D G E VA L L E Y 4 4 6 3 2 2 5 V A L L E Y V A L L E Y 1 6 44 4 4 4 3 5 5 VAL L E Y HIP 6 7 7 VALLEY V A L L E Y V A L L E Y A 3 . 1 WALNUT STREET WEST ELEVATIONSCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"SANTA ANA STREET NORTH ELEVATIONSCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" 1 2 3 4 5 6 A R C H I T E C T U R E ageM ll an 17011 Beach Boulevard, Suite 900 Huntington Beach, California 92647 Tel (949) 515-9600 www.magellanarchitects.com K E Y N O T E S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 23 3 3 4 4 4 4 5 6 6 7 7 7 7 7 7 8 8 9 9 9 9 1 0 1 0 10 1 0 1 2 1 3 1 4 14 1 4 1 4 15 1 5 3 3 5 66 8 8 1 1 1 3 1 6 A 3 . 2 MANCHESTER BOULEVARD EAST ELEVATIONSCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"SOUTH ELEVATIONSCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" K E Y N O T E S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 A R C H I T E C T U R E ageM ll an 17011 Beach Boulevard, Suite 900 Huntington Beach, California 92647 Tel (949) 515-9600 www.magellanarchitects.com 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 22 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 445 5 6 6 7 7 7 7 77 8 8 9 9 9 9 1 0 1 0 10 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 14 1 4 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 6 WAL N U T S T R E E T S A N T A A N A S T R E E T MANC H E S T E R B O U L E V A R D TW TW TW TW TW TW TW TW AC PAVI N G AC PAVI N G AC PAVI N G AC PAVI N G AC PAVI N G AC PAVI N G AC PAVI N G AC PAVI N G AC BER M EDG E O F AC P A V I N G AC BER M GRA V E L DRIV E W A Y CON C DRIV E W A Y CON C CUR B CON C C U R B AND G U T T E R HH DIRT DIRT DIRT DIRT DIRT CON C C U R B AND G U T T E R DIRT C O N C D R I V E W A Y C O N C CON C C U R B AND G U T T E R HR CON C S I D E W A L K DIRT DIRT DIRT EX.C O N C C U R B AND G U T T E R CON C S I D E W A L K DIRT DIRT CON C S I D E W A L K GAT E CON C BER M CON C SLAB CON C SLAB CON C SLAB CON C SLAB CON C SLAB CON C SLAB DIRT 8"BL K WAL L 14'HI G H CLF CON C SLAB 10'HI G H 8"BL K W A L L DIRT DIRT PILE CON C SLAB CON C SLAB CON C SLAB CON C SLAB CON C SLAB CON C SLAB DIRT DIRT PILE DIRT PILE DIRT PILE DIRT 10'HI G H 8"BL K W A L L 10'HI G H 8"BL K W A L L DIRT DIRT DIRT DIRT DIRT DIRT DIRT 12"WI D E BLK W A L L 12"WI D E BLK W A L L 12"WI D E BLK W A L L CLF G A T E 10'HI G H WF 10'HI G H WF CLF G A T E 10'HI G H WF 10'HI G H CLFDIRT TRA C T N O . 92 ANA H E I M POR. L O T 3 2 EXT E N S I O N 93 94 95 96 EX. 1 2 " W A T E R EX. 1 0 " S E W E R EX. 8 " J . F . EX. 2" G A S EX. T E L . EX.S E W E R L A T . EX.S E W E R L A T . S S FF 141.25 12" INLET TG 139.85 IE 138.35 FS 141.25 FS 141.14 TC 139.38 CURB END TC 138.58 CURB END FS 140.85 FS 139.91 FS 140.70 FS 140.45 12" INLET TG 140.42 IE 137.37 FS 139.64 FG 139.26 FS 140.85 (TC 138.61) (TC 138.21) TC 140.48 TC 140.57 TC 140.66 TC 140.12 TC 141.16 TC 141.16 TC 141.11 TC 141.16 TC 141.11 TC 140.65 TC 140.97 TC 139.57 TC 140.16 TC 141.04 TC 141.83 CURB END TC 140.96 TC 140.98 TC 141.57 CURB END TC 140.30 TC 139.90 TC 139.08 TC 139.06 TC 139.83 TC 139.83 TC 139.79TC 140.66 TC 139.76 TC 138.92 FS 140.11 FS 141.25 FS 141.25 FS 140.61 FS 140.11 FS 138.13 FS 141.24 FS 141.82 FS 140.54 FS 141.01 FL 141.42 FS 141.52 FS 141.07 FS 140.45 FS 141.23 FS 140.96 FS 141.14 FS 140.46 FS 140.39 FS 141.24 FS 140.43 FS 140.31 FS 140.69 FG 142.04 12" INLET TG 140.71. IE 139.17 12" INLET TG 140.46 IE 138.70 FG 140.63 12" INLET TG 140.46 IE 137.99 FS 141.24 FS 141.24 FS 141.25 FS 141.24 FS 141.25 FS 141.16 TC 140.61 TC 140.61 IE 135.97 IE 137.69 -1.4 0 % - 1 . 4 % -0. 4 % - 2 . 0 % -2.1 % - 1 . 9 % -5.4 7 % -2.63 % -1.64% -1.3 % - 1 . 8 % -0.5% - 1 2 . 4 % -1 0 . 2 % 1. 8 % -2 . 1 % -2 . 1 % -2.0% -2.0% - 2 . 1 % -1.7% -1.2 8 % 2.04 % -1. 0 % -1.14% -1. 6 0 % -6.23% -2 . 0 0 % -2 . 1 % -3 . 0 3 % -4. 6 0 % -3 . 5 0 % -3.49 % -1.81% -1.81% -1.81% -1.27% -1.27% -1.26% -1.80% - 1 . 0 5 % -1.81% -3.06% -3.06% -2.95% -2.34% -2.00% -2.47% TC 141.16 HP GB HP GB LP GB HP GB H P G B - 1 . 5 % - 8 . 2 % H P G B -1.1 0 % -2.47% 1 . 8 3 % -1 . 9 8 % -2.0% -2.7% FG 135.97 FG 140.00 FG 139.12 EXISTING PUBLIC STORM DRAIN CLEANOUT ESD 111-3 PED-RAMP ESD 111-3 PED-RAMP REMOVE EXIST. D/W CONSTRUCT CURB, GUTTER AND SIDEWALK CONSTRUCT STD 120 CURB, GUTTER, 110-B SIDEWALK EXISTING CURB AND GUTTER ESD 115-B, 25' DRIVEWAY ESD 115-B, 25' DRIVEWAY TC 139.82 - 4 . 0 6 % - 4 . 1 9 % - 1 . 5 1 % - 1 . 4 8 % - 1 . 4 7 % 12" INLET TG 140.29 IE 137.69 1.19% TC 139.42 TC 139.50 -2.02% -3.15% -1.81% TC 140.09 -1.81% -1.67% -1.67% 12" INLET TG 140.42 IE 138.35 H P G B 12" INLET TG 140.71. IE 138.96 FS 141.47 FS 141.42 FL 140.85 FL 140.64 TC 140.61-1.80% -0.51% TC 141.06 -0.50% TC 141.05 FS 141.61 FS 140.55 0.0% H P G B LP GB LP GB HP GB 12" INLET TG 137.83 IE 136.33 - 7 . 0 2 % TC 139.05 TC 139.72 -0.50 % -2.44 % 0. 5 3 % FS 137.87 -1 . 0 % -1 . 4 % 14' ROW DEDICATION: CONSTRUCT 5' SIDEWALK AT R.O.W. LINE. -1 1 . 5 % -1 3 . 1 % -2 4 . 0 % -1 7 . 5 % -1 9 . 2 % 1 . 3 % -10.2% FG 140.57 (TC 138.38) (TC 138.82) (TC 139.00) (TC 139.44) (TC 139.67) (TC 141.20) (TC 142.07) (TC 141.50) (TC 139.92) FS 139.37 TO B E R E M O V E D TO B E R E M O V E D CONSTRUCT 5' SIDEWALK AT ROW LINE TO B E R E M O V E D EXIS T I N G REM O V E REM O V E 18" RISER WITH EMERGENCY OVERFLOW DISCHARGE PIPE 45 . 0 0 ' 12 . 0 0 ' 1 8 ' 1 2 ' 4 ' 1 1 ' 1 2 ' 1 9 ' 1 2 ' 24 ' 15 ' 27 ' EX.ROW 14 ' 9' RETENTION - INFILTRATION BASIN. SEE DETAIL BELOW. SECTION 'A' SECTION 'A' SECTION 'B' SECTION 'B' SEE SHT 2 SEE SHT 2 SEE SHT 2 SEE SHT 2 - 2 . 5 % - 2 . 6 6 % -5 . 0 % -5 . 0 % FG 139.52 FG 140.64 FG 140.58 FG 140.63 FG 141.01 FG 140.63 STORM DRAIN SHOWN IN CONCEPT ONLY. FINAL DESIGN TO BE IN SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE BUT MAY CHANGE LOCATION OR ALIGNMENT. 18" RISER WITH OVERFLOW DISCHARGE PIPE LEACH LINES TO DISTRIBUTE STORM WATER THROUGH STORAGE VOLUME. PARKWAY DRAIN ESD 151-1 ONSITE D.G.WALK WAY. ONSITE D.G.WALK WAY. FG 140.00 FG 140.00 FG 140.00 FG 139.00 FG 141.30 STORM DRAIN SHOWN IN CONCEPT ONLY. FINAL DESIGN TO BE IN SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE BUT MAY CHANGE LOCATION OR ALIGNMENT. 12" INLET TG 138.78. IE 135.97 12" INLET TG 138.65. IE 135.97 12" INLET TG 138.56. IE 135.97 TC 139.08 ROW / P L ROW / P L ROW / P L R O W / P L R O W / P L ROW/ P L ROW/ P L ROW/ P L SOUTH S T R E E T BROADW A Y BALL ROAD W A L N U T S T R E E T SANTA A N A S T R E E T M A N C H E S T E R B L V D . PROJECT W GRADING PLAN PRELIMINARY LEGEND EARTHWORK (PRELIMINARY) LEGAL DESCRIPTION GENERAL NOTES ZONING INFORMATION BENCH MARK NORTH TRACT NO. 1247. 1.) BOUNDARY SHOWN HEREON IS BASED ON A 2.) ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS: FIELD SURVEY AND RECORD DATA PER OF CONCRETE CATCH BASIN AT THE SOUTHEASTERLY ELEVATION: 145.176 FEET (NAVD88) ORANGE COUNTY SURVEYOR'S 3-3/4" ALUMINUM ORANGE COUNTY BENCH MARK NO. 1A-142-90, DISK LOCATED IN THE SOUTHEASTERLY CORNER 036-321-15 AND 16. CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF CITRON ST. AND BROADWAY. 3.) LAND AREA: 86,336 S.F. / 1.98 AC. PROPOSED EXISTING ANAHEIM EXIST LOT 32, TRACT 17 INDUSTRAL CUT: 2,200 CU.YDS FILL: 2,200 CU.YDS NET: 0.00 CU. YDS. STORQUEST - ANAHEIM ADDRESS 500 & 520 WALNUT STREET 036-321-1500 & 1600 APN RETENTION - INFILTRATION BASIN SHEET 1 OF 2 OTH2016-00846 NTS 18" STANDPIPE WITH LOCKING ATRIUM GRATE TOP COVER. LEACH LINES TO DISTRIBUTE STORM WATER THROUGH THE STORAGE MEDIUM 20" FG PAVEMENT ON AGG BASE TC PER PLAN PL 36" DEEP CLASS II AGG. STORAGE MEDIUM. STORM DRAIN 48" 12" EXISTING 10 FOOT HIGH WALL 48" EMERGENCY OVERFLOW PIPE BOT 133.58 TOP 137.58 This Preliminary Grading Plan is for feasibility purposes. A Final Grading Plan will be submitted to the City of Anaheim for a comprehensive review and approval during Final Engineering. Final Grades to be determined during Final Engineering. NOTE: C E N T E R L I N E S A N T A A N A S T R E E T T C 1 4 0 . 8 2 140 150 160 170 180 PL T C 1 4 1 . 1 6 FF 141.25 FF 151.25 FF 161.25 FF 171.25 T C 1 3 9 . 2 2 PL PARKING LOT FG EX GD FG EX GD RETENTION STORAGE VOLUME EXISTING WALL 14' ROW DEDICATION C E N T E R L I N E M A N C H E S T E R B L V D . C E N T E R L I N E W A L N U T S T R E E T FF 141.25 FF 151.25 FF 161.25 FF 171.25 PL PL PROPOSED PUBLIC SIDEWALK PRIVATE D.G. WALKWAY E X I S T I N G C U R B PROPOSED PUBLIC SIDEWALK PRIVATE D.G. WALKWAY FG EX GD EXIST, CURB AND GUTTER FG EX GD 140 150 160 170 180 GRADING PLAN PRELIMINARY STORQUEST - ANAHEIM SHEET 2 OF 2 SECTION 'A' SECTION 'B' LOOKING EAST LOOKING SOUTH OTH2016-00846 ATTACHMENT NO. 9 200 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.