The URL can be used to link to this page

Resolution-PC 2018-056RESOLUTION NO. PC2018-056 A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT THE ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL CERTIFY FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 2017-00350 AND ADOPT FINDINGS AND A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM NO. 342 AND A WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT FOR THE BEACH BOULVARD SPECIFIC PLAN AND RELATED ACTIONS (DEV2015-00014) WHEREAS, the Beach Boulevard Specific Plan (Project Area) encompasses approximately 283 acres along an approximately 1.5 -mile portion of Beach Boulevard/State Route 39 (SR -39) in the City of Anaheim, roughly bounded by the City of Buena Park to the north and the City of Stanton to the south with major cross streets along the corridor and within the City limits consisting of Ball Road, Orange Avenue, and Lincoln Avenue; and WHEREAS, in 2014, the City of Anaheim was awarded a grant from the California Strategic Growth Council to prepare a Specific Plan for Beach Boulevard to establish a community -driven vision supported by new development standards, permitted and prohibited uses, design guidelines, sustainable practices, economic development incentives, and capital improvements that improve the quality of life for all future users of the corridor; and WHEREAS, staff has initiated the preparation of a proposed Specific Plan for the establishment of the Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Area in the form presented to this Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, there are currently approximately 1,282,124 square feet of non-residential buildings within the boundaries of the proposed Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Area. Formation of the Anaheim Beach Boulevard Plan Area in accordance with the proposed Specific Plan would result in the potential to develop an additional 907,321 square feet of non-residential building area; and WHEREAS, there are currently 1,477 residential units in the proposed Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Area. Formation of the proposed Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Area would result in the potential to develop an additional 3,651 residential units within the proposed Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Area; and WHEREAS, a series of actions is required to establish a Specific Plan for the Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Area (collectively, the "Project Actions"), including: 1. General Plan Amendment No. 2015-00500 to amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan of the City of Anaheim to be consistent with the proposed Beach Boulevard Specific Plan No. 2017- 0001; 2. Specific Plan No. 2017-00001 to adopt the Beach Boulevard Specific Plan No. 2017-1; -1- PC2018-056 3. Zoning Code Amendment No. 2017-00137 to adopt Chapter 18.122 (Beach Boulevard Specific Plan (SP2017-01) Zoning and Development Standards); 4. Reclassification No. 2017-00304 to apply the zoning and development standards of the proposed new Chapter 18.122 to those properties within the Beach Boulevard Specific Plan project area that are currently classified under the "RM -2" Multiple -Family Residential Zone, "RM -3" Multiple - Family Residential Zone, "RM -4" Multiple -Family Residential Zone, "C -G" General Commercial Zone, "O -L" Low Intensity Office Zone and "T" Transition Zone; 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 Actions; and WHEREAS, in July 2015, City Council approved a contract with PlaceWorks, Inc. to prepare the Beach Boulevard Specific Plan and Environmental Impact Report No. 2017-00350 ("EIR No. 350") for the Proposed Actions; and WHEREAS, a Notice of Preparation ("NOP") for Draft EIR No. 350 was distributed to the public on April 13, 2017. The public review period for the initial study ended on May 12, 2017. The City held a public scoping meeting on April 27, 2017 to provide members of the public with an opportunity to learn about the Proposed Actions, ask questions and provide comments about the scope and content of the information to be addressed in Draft EIR No. 350; and WHEREAS, Draft EIR No. 350 was made available for a 45 -day public review period from August 23, 2018 to October 8, 2018. The Notice of Availability ("NOA"), which also included noticing for a public hearing before this Planning Commission and a tentative date for a public hearing before the City Council to review and consider the Draft EIR No. 350 and the Project Actions, was sent to a list of interested persons, agencies and organizations, as well as property owners within the proposed Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Area and within a 300 -foot radius thereof. The Notice of Completion ("NOC") was sent to the State Clearinghouse in Sacramento for distribution to public agencies. The NOA was posted at the Orange County Clerk -Recorder's office on August 23, 2018. Copies of Draft EIR No. 350 were made available for public review at the City of Anaheim Planning and Building Department, Anaheim Central Library, Haskett Library and has been available for download via the City's website; and, WHEREAS, in accordance with California Water Code Section 10910, Draft EIR No. 350 includes a Water Supply Assessment ("WSA") dated March 2018 as Appendix H, which concludes that a sufficient water supply and its reliability is and will be available for the Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Area; and WHEREAS, in conformance with the requirements of CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual, the City will prepare or cause to be prepared prior to the City Council Public Hearing to consider the Planning Commission's recommendations and the Proposed Actions, tentatively scheduled for October 29, 2018, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations and Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 342 relating to EIR No.350; and -2- PC2018-056 WHEREAS, in conformance with Sections 15132 and 15362(b) of the CEQA Guidelines, Final EIR No. 350 will consist of Draft EIR No. 350; comments and recommendations received on Draft EIR No. 350 either verbatim or in summary; a list of persons, organizations and public agencies that submitted comments on Draft EIR No. 350; and the responses of the City, as lead agency, to significant points raised in the review and consultation process; and Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 342; and WHEREAS, on October 29, 2018, the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim (hereinafter referred to as "Planning Commission") did hold a public hearing, 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 Draft EIR No. 350 and for and against the Project Actions, and to investigate and make findings in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, the Planning Commission did receive evidence and reports, including all written and verbal comments received during the 45 -day public review period, concerning the contents and sufficiency of Draft EIR No. 350; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, based on the information and evidence received concerning EIR No. 350, does hereby find and determine as follows: • Draft EIR No. 350 has been presented to and independently reviewed and considered by the Planning Commission; • Draft EIR No. 350 reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission; • Draft EIR No. 350 has been processed and completed in compliance with the requirements of CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual; • Draft EIR No. 350 is adequate to serve as the environmental documentation for the Project Actions; and WHEREAS, in conformance with the requirements of CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines, and the City's Local CEQA Procedures Manual, the City has prepared, or caused to be prepared, the (i) "CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Regarding the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Beach Boulevard Specific Plan", which is attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, and (ii) Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 342, which is attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full; and WHEREAS, to the extent authorized by law, the City desires and intends to use Draft EIR No. 350 as the environmental documentation required by CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual for the Project Actions; and -3- PC2018-056 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the environmental information contained in Draft EIR No. 350 and does hereby recommend that the City Council find that Final EIR No. 350 provides an adequate assessment of the potentially significant environmental impacts of the Project Actions and certify EIR No. 350, including the adoption of Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations and Mitigation Monitoring Program 342, and determine that Draft EIR No. 350 fully complies with CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual, and is adequate to serve as the environmental documentation for the Project Actions. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve and adopt the WSA. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of October 29, 2018. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60 (Procedures) of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures. ATTEST: SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM -4- PC2018-056 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 October 29, 2018, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: ARMSTRONG, CARBAJAL, DALATI, GILLESPIE, KEYS, LIEBERMAN, WHITE NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 29th day of October, 2018. SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM -5- PC2018-056 EXHIBIT "A" CEQA FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE BEACH BOULEVARD SPECIFIC PLAN [Behind this page] -6- PC2018-056 CEQA FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE BEACH BOULEVARD SPECIFIC PLAN STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 2017041042 Exhibit A I. BACKGROUND The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that a number of written findings be made by the lead agency in connection with certification of an environmental impact report (EIR) prior to approval of the project pursuant to Sections 15091 and 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines and Section 21081 of the Public Resources Code. This document provides the findings required by CEQA. A. PROJECT SUMMARY The Beach Boulevard Specific Plan (BBSP) would guide future development within 283 acres along the Beach Boulevard corridor in the City of Anaheim. The Proposed Project would establish a community -driven vision supported by new development standards, permitted and prohibited uses, design guidelines, sustainable practices, economic development incentives, and capital improvements that improve the quality of life for all future users of the corridor. The City of Anaheim received funding for the Proposed Project through the California Strategic Growth Council's (SGC) Sustainable Communities Planning Grant and Incentives Program (Proposition 84). The implementation of the Proposed Project would strengthen the West Anaheim community and meet the Strategic Growth Council's goals to help local governments address the challenges of land use planning and transforming communities for long-term prosperity. The Strategic Growth Council defines a sustainable community as one that promotes equity, health, and safety and strengthens the economy while protecting the environment. The BBSP is anticipated to promote revitalization of the Project Area by implementing market- driven land use changes to encourage infill development of currently vacant or underutilized properties. The Proposed Project would allow for the development of vacant parcels and the adaptive reuse or redevelopment of existing uses. At buildout, implementation of the Proposed Project is expected to result in a maximum of 5,128 dwelling units and 2,189,445 square feet of nonresidential development. The Land Use Plan establishes 10 land use categories within the Proposed Project. In addition to revitalizing the corridor with new development, use types, and adaptive reuse, the BBSP would also facilitate and encourage use of multiple modes of transportation by improving pedestrian amenities, and access to Orange County Transit Authority Route 29 (La Habra to Huntington Beach), Route 42 (Seal Beach to Orange), and Route 46 (Los Alamitos to Orange). Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 1 - Within the City of Anaheim, Beach Boulevard (SR -39) is a California state highway that travels through Orange and Los Angeles counties. In order to have greater control over all infrastructure, which includes roadway, landscaping, medians, pedestrian access ramps and driveway entrances, the City may seek relinquishment of Beach Boulevard from the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) to the City of Anaheim. Relinquishment is the act and the process of legally transferring property rights, title, liability, and maintenance responsibilities of a portion or entirety of a state highway to another entity. The removal of a highway or associated facilities, either in whole or in part, from the State Highway System (SHS) requires approval by the California Transportation Commission (CTC). The Specific Plan also proposes other improvements within the public realm including urban amenities and improvements to public rights-of-way, including key intersections, streets, alleys and drives, parks, plazas, and gateways. The Specific Plan identifies public street design elements, landscaping, intersection enhancements, entry treatments, public open space, right-of-way detail, and other unique public realm features within the proposed Development Areas. Other improvements include the undergrounding of utilities and removal of utility poles. Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 2 - Table 1-1 Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Buildout Statistical Summary Proposed Development Areas Acreage Units/Acre Units Population Floor Area Ratio Non -Res. SF Employment Flood Control Channels 4.2 - - - - - - Low -Medium Residential 44.8 18 806 2,621 - - - Medium Residential 49.4 36 1,778 5,781 - - - Mixed -Use Hight 32.3 60 1,938 6,300 0.35 492,446 1,231 Mixed -Use Medium2 16.8 36 605 1,966 0.35 210,575 526 Neighborhood Commercial 22.6 - - - 0.35 344,560 861 Office 2.2 0.50 47,916 168 Public -Recreational 27.9 0.10 121,532 304 Regional Commercial3 27.4 - - - 0.35 380,000 950 Right of Way 41.6 - - - - - - Semi -Publico 13.6 - 1.00 592,416 1,481 Totals 282.8 - 5,128 16,6696 - 2,189,445 5,5227 Existing - - 1,477 - - 1,282,124 - Net New - - 3,651 - - 907,321 - Source: PlaceWorks, 2018. Mixed -Use High buildout includes 54,000 SF of hotel/motel (108 rooms) and the following assumptions for other non-residential uses: 20% service, 20% office, 20% restaurant, and 40% retail. 2 Mixed -Use Medium buildout includes 140,000 SF of hotel/motel (280 rooms) and following assumptions for other non-residential uses: 25% service, 10% office, 25% restaurant, and 40% retail. 3 Regional Commercial buildout includes 35,000 SF of hotel/motel (70 rooms). 4 The West Anaheim Medical Center provides 219 hospital beds. e Hotels were included in the buildout assumptions for Commercial, Mixed -Use Medium, and Mixed -Use High uses. Hotels were estimated at approximately 500 gross SF per room (including walls, elevators, stairways, corridors, storage, mechanical areas, etc.). (De Roos 2011) 6 Population estimates are based on a citywide 3.44 persons per household factor published in the City of Anaheim 2014-2021 Housing Element. 7 Employment estimates are City of Anaheim General Plan Employment Generation Rates of 400 SF per employee for Commercial uses, 285 SF per employee for Office uses, and 400 SF per employee for Mixed -Use uses. Proposed Amendments Approval of the BBSP includes certification of Environmental Impact Report No. 2017-00350, including the adoption of Findings of Fact and a Statement of Overriding Considerations, Mitigation Monitoring Program 342, and a Water Supply Assessment; approval of amendments to the General Plan and Zoning Code (zoning text and zoning map); and adoption of the Beach Boulevard Specific Plan. Together, the proposed approvals and their implementation constitute the "Project" for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Below is a description of the proposed approvals. ■ GPA2015-00500: Amend the General Plan Land Use Element to be consistent with the Beach Boulevard Specific Plan. ■ SPN2017-00001: Adopt the Beach Boulevard Specific Plan (SP2017-01). ZCA2017-00137: Amend the Anaheim Municipal Code to adopt Chapter 18.122 (Beach Boulevard Specific Plan (SP2017-01) Zoning and Development Standards). Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 3 - ■ RCL2017-00304: Adopt an ordinance to apply the zoning and development standards of the proposed new Chapter 18.122 to those properties within the Beach Boulevard Specific Plan project area that are currently classified under the "RM -2" Multiple -Family Residential Zone, "RM -3" Multiple -Family Residential Zone, "RM -4" Multiple -Family Residential Zone, "C -G" General Commercial Zone, "O -L" Low Intensity Office Zone and "T" Transition Zone. B. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS In conformance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City of Anaheim CEQA Guidelines, the City of Anaheim conducted an extensive environmental review of the Proposed Project. ■ The City of Anaheim determined that an EIR would be required for this project and issued a Notice of Preparation (NOP) and Initial Study on April 13, 2017. The public review period for the NOP extended from April 13, 2017, to May 12, 2017. A scoping meeting was held on April 27, 2017. ■ The scope of the Draft EIR (DEIR) was determined based on the Environmental Checklist Form, comments received in response to the NOP and comments receiving from the Scoping Meeting. Section 2.2 of the DEIR describes the issues identified for analysis in the DEIR. ■ The DEIR eliminated detailed analysis of Agriculture/Forestry Resources Biological Resources, and Mineral Resources topical areas in Chapter 5, Environmental Analysis, of the DEIR, and substantiated in Chapter 8, Impacts Found Not to be Significant, of the DEIR. ■ The City prepared a DEIR, which was made available for a 45 -day public review period beginning August 23, 2018, and ending October 8, 2018. ■ The City prepared a Final EIR (FEIR), including the Responses to Comments to the DEIR, the Findings of Fact, and Statement of Overriding Considerations. The FEIR/Response to Comments contains comments on the DEIR, responses to those comments, revisions to the DEIR, and appended documents. The City also prepared a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the impacts found to be significant and unavoidable (air quality, greenhouse emissions (GHG), noise, and transportation/traffic). ■ The City held public hearings on the Proposed Project during the regular Planning Commission meeting on October 29, 2018 and City Council meeting on November 13, 2018. C. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS For purposes of CEQA and these Findings, the Record of Proceedings for the proposed project consists of the following documents and other evidence, at a minimum: ■ The NOP and all other public notices issued by the City in conjunction with the Proposed Project; ■ The FEIR for the Proposed Project; Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 4 - ■ The DEIR for the Proposed Project; ■ All written comments submitted by agencies or members of the public during the public review comment period on the DEIR; ■ All responses to written comments submitted by agencies or members of the public during the public review comment period on the DEIR; ■ All written and verbal public testimony presented during a noticed public hearing for the proposed project; ■ The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Proposed Project; ■ The reports and technical memoranda included or referenced in the Response to Comments; ■ All documents, studies, EIRs, or other materials incorporated by reference in the DEIR and FEIR; ■ The resolutions and ordinances adopted by the City in connection with the Proposed Project, and all documents incorporated by reference therein, including comments received after the close of the comment period and responses thereto; ■ Matters of common knowledge to the City, including but not limited to federal, state, and local laws and regulations; ■ Any documents expressly cited in these Findings; and ■ Any other relevant materials required to be in the record of proceedings by Public Resources Code Section 21167.6(e) D. CUSTODIAN AND LOCATION OF RECORDS The documents and other materials that constitute the administrative record for the City's actions related to the Proposed Project are at the City of Anaheim Planning and Building Department, 200 S. Anaheim Boulevard, Suite 162, Anaheim, CA 92805. The Planning and Building Department is the custodian of the administrative record for the Project. Copies of these documents, which constitute the record of proceedings, are and at all relevant times have been and will be available upon request at the offices of the Planning and Building Department. This information is provided in compliance with Public Resources Code Section 21081.6(a) (2) and Guidelines Section 15091(e). II. FINDINGS AND FACTS AND OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS The City of Anaheim, as lead agency, is required under CEQA to make written findings concerning each alternative and each significant environmental impact identified in the DEIR and FEIR. Specifically, regarding findings, Guidelines Section 15091 provides: (a) No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been certified which identifies one or more significant environmental Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 5 - effects of the project unless the public agency makes one or more written findings for each of those significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding. The possible findings are: 1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the FEIR. 2. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. 3. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the FEIR. (b) The findings required by subdivision (a) shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record. (c) The finding in subdivision (a) (2) shall not be made if the agency making the finding has concurrent jurisdiction with another agency to deal with identified feasible mitigation measures or alternatives. The finding in subdivision (a)(3) shall describe the specific reasons for rejecting identified mitigation measures and project alternatives. (d) When making the findings required in subdivision (a)(1), the agency shall also adopt a program for reporting on or monitoring the changes which it has either required in the project or made a condition of approval to avoid or substantially lessen significant environmental effects. These measures must be fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other measures. (e) The public agency shall specify the location and custodian of the documents or other material which constitute the record of the proceedings upon which its decision is based. (� A statement made pursuant to Section 15093 does not substitute for the findings required by this section. The "changes or alterations" referred to in Section 15091(a)(1) may include a wide variety of measures or actions as set forth in Guidelines Section 15370, 'including- (a) ncluding (a) Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action. Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 6 - (b) Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation. (c) Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the impacted environment. (d) Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action. (e) Compensating for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources or environments. III. FINDINGS AND FACTS REGARDING IMPACTS A. IMPACTS DETERMINED TO BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT Initial Study The City of Anaheim issued a Notice of Preparation (NOP) and Initial Study on April 13, 2017. The Initial Study, included as Appendix A to the DEIR, substantiates that there would be no impacts or less than significant impacts associated with the following environmental topics and associated thresholds: ■ Aesthetics (scenic vistas; damage of scenic resources) ■ Agriculture and Forestry Resources (all thresholds) ■ Air Quality (odors) ■ Biological Resources (all thresholds) ■ Cultural Resources (disturbance of human remains) ■ Geology and Soils (fault rupture; landslides; alternative wastewater disposal systems) ■ Hazards and Hazardous Materials (private airstrip hazards; wildland fire hazards) ■ Hydrology and Water Quality (flooding; inundation; degradation of water quality by contributing pollutants) ■ Land Use and Planning (physical division of a community; consistency with habitat conservation plans and natural community conservation plans) ■ Mineral Resources (all thresholds) ■ Noise (private airstrip related noise) ■ Population and Housing (displacement of existing housing or people) ■ Transportation and Traffic (air traffic patterns; emergency access) ■ Utilities and Service Systems (consistency with solid waste regulations; television service/reception) EIR This section identifies impacts of the Proposed Project determined in the DEIR to be less than significant with implementation of existing regulations and standard conditions as detailed in Chapter 5 of the DEIR. These impacts would not require implementation of project -specific mitigation measures. Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 7 - 1. Aesthetics Impact 5.1-1: Implementation of the Proposed Project would not degrade the visual quality of the Project Area. Impact 5.1-1 was determined to be less than significant and no finding is necessary. Impact 5.1-2: Implementation of the Proposed Project would not result in substantial increases in shade and shadows in the Project Area. Impact 5.1-2 was determined to be less than significant and no fording is necessary. Impact 5.1-3: Implementation of the Proposed Project would not result in substantial adverse light and glare impacts on adjacent sensitive uses. Impact 5.1-3 was determined to be less than significant and no finding is necessary. 2. Air Quality Impact 5.2-4: Long-term operation of the land uses associated with buildout of the Proposed Project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial concentrations of criteria air pollutants or toxic air contaminants. Impact 5.2-4 was determined to be less than significant and no fording is necessary. Impact 5.2-6: Buildout of the Proposed Project would not have the potential to create objectionable odors that could affect a substantial number of people. Impact 5.2-6 was determined to be less than significant and no finding is necessary. 3. Geology and Soils Impact 5.4-1: Buildings and people in the Project Area would be subjected to potential seismic - related hazards. Impact 5.4-1 was determined to be less than significant and no fording is necessary. Impact 5.4-2: Unstable geologic unit or soils conditions, including soil erosion, could result due to development of the Proposed Project. Impact 5.4-2 was determined to be less than significant and no finding is necessary. Impact 5.4-3: Soil conditions could result in risks to life or property. Impact 5.4-3 was determined to be less than significant and no finding is necessary. 4. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact 5.5-2: The Proposed Project would not conflict with plans adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 8 - Impact 5.5-2 was determined to be less than significant and no finding is necessary. 5. Hazards and Hazardous Materials Impact 5.6-1: Implementation of the Proposed Project would not result in additional use of hazardous materials within the project boundaries; and adhering to the existing review and permitting process and compliance with all applicable programs would ensure that hazardous materials do not pose a significant environmental impact. Impact 5.6-1 was determined to be less than significant and no finding is necessary. Impact 5.6-3: Implementation of the Proposed Project would add structures to the planning area of Los Alamitos Joint Forces Training Base but would not create a safety hazard related to aircraft movement. Impact 5.6-3 was determined to be less than significant and no finding is necessary. Impact 5.6-4: The Proposed Project would not adversely affect the implementation of an emergency response of evacuation plan. Impact 5.6-4 was determined to be less than significant and no fording is necessary. Impact 5.6-5: The Project Area is not within a designated fire hazard zone that could expose structures and/or residences to wildlife fire danger. Impact 5.6-5 was determined to be less than significant and no finding is necessary. 6. Hydrology and Water Quality Impact 5.7-1: Development pursuant to the Proposed Project could increase the amount of impervious surfaces in the Project Area and could therefore increase surface water flows and the potential for erosion and siltation and for exceeding the capacity of existing or planned storm drain systems. Impact 5.7-1 was determined to be less than significant and no finding is necessary. Impact 5.7-2: Development pursuant to the Proposed Project would increase the amount of impervious surfaces in the Project Area and would therefore impact opportunities for groundwater recharge. Impact 5.7-2 was determined to be less than significant and no finding is necessary. Impact 5.7-3: During implantation of the Proposed Project, there is the potential for short-term unquantifiable increases in pollutant concentrations from the Project Area. After project development, the quality of storm runoff (sediment, nutrients, metals, pesticides, pathogens, and hydrocarbons) may be altered. Impact 5.7-3 was determined to be less than significant and no finding is necessary. Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations - 9 - Impact 5.7-4: The Proposed Project would not result in any flooding safety impacts due to placing structures within a 100 -year flood hazard area (one percent chance of flooding) hazard area. Impact 5.7-4 was determined to be less than significant and no finding is necessary. 7. Land Use and Planning Impact 5.8-1: Implementation of the Proposed Project would not conflict with applicable plans adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. Impact 5.8-1 was determined to be less than significant and no finding is necessary. 8. Noise Impact 5.9-4: The Project Area is located within the airport land use plan for Los Alamitos Joint Forces Training Base but people in the Project Area would not be exposed to excessive flight -related noise levels. Impact 5.9-4 was determined to be less than significant and no finding is necessary. 9. Population and Housing Impact 5.10-1: The Proposed Project would directly result in population growth in the Project Area. Impact 5.10-1 was determined to be less than significant and no finding is necessary. 10. Public Services Impact 5.11-1: The Proposed Project would result in additional structures and population in the Anaheim Fire and Rescue service boundaries, thereby increasing the demands for fire protection facilities and personnel. Impact 5.11-1 was determined to be less than significant and no finding is necessary. Impact 5.11-2: The Proposed Project would introduce new structures and population into the Anaheim Police Department service boundaries, thereby increasing the requirement for police protection facilities and personnel. Impact 5.12-2 was determined to be less than significant and no finding is necessary. Impact 5.11-3: The Proposed Project would generate new students and create additional school facilities demands. Impact 5.11-3 was determined to be less than significant and no finding is necessary. Impact 5.11-4: An increase in library services due to the implementation of the Proposed Project would not result in significant and adverse impacts. Impact 5.11-4 was determined to be less than significant and no finding is necessary. Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations _10- Impact 5.11-5: Implementation of the Proposed Project would increase the service needs for local day care facilities. Impact 5.11-5 was determined to be less than significant and no finding is necessary. 11. Recreation Impact 5.12-1: The Proposed Project would increase demands on existing parks and recreational facilities but would not result in adverse physical environmental impacts. Impact 5.12-1 was determined to be less than significant and no finding is necessary. 12. Transportation/Traffic Impact 5.13-3: All Congestion Management Program (CMP) intersections would operate at acceptable levels of service. Impact 5.13-3 was determined to be less than significant and no finding is necessary. Impact 5.13-4: The Proposed Project would not result in hazardous condition to air traffic patterns. Impact 5.13-4 was determined to be less than significant and no fmding is necessary. Impact 5.13-5: The Proposed Project would not substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (sharp curves, etc.) or conflicting uses. Impact 5.13-5 was determined to be less than significant and no finding is necessary. Impact 5.13-6: The Proposed Project would not result in inadequate emergency access. Impact 5.13-6 was determined to be less than significant and no finding is necessary. Impact 5.13-7: The Proposed Project complies with adopted policies, plans, and programs for alternative transportation. Impact 5.13-7 was determined to be less than significant and no finding is necessary. 13. Utilities and Service Systems Impact 5.15-1: The Proposed Project would not result in exceedance of wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board. Impact 5.15-1 was determined to be less than significant and no finding is necessary. Impact 5.15-4: The Proposed Project would be served by sufficient water supplies without procurement of additional water entitlements. Impact 5.15-4 was determined to be less than significant and no finding is necessary. Impact 5.15-5: Implementation of the Proposed Project would not adversely impact a landfill with insufficient capacity. Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations Impact 5.15-5 was determined to be less than significant and no finding is necessary. Impact 5.15-6: The Proposed Project would increase electrical services demands in the Project Area and result in a need for new or upgraded systems. Impact 5.15-6 was determined to be less than significant and no finding is necessary. Impact 5.15-7: The Proposed Project would increase natural gas services demands in the Project Area and result in a need for new or upgraded systems. Impact 5.15-7 was determined to be less than significant and no finding is necessary. Impact 5.15-8: The Proposed Project would increase telephone services demands in the Project Area and result in a need for new or upgraded systems. Impact 5.15-8 was determined to be less than significant and no finding is necessary. B. IMPACTS MITIGATED TO LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT The following summary describes impacts of the Proposed Project that, without mitigation, would result in significant adverse impacts. Upon implementation of the mitigation measures provided in the EIR, these impacts would be considered less than significant. 1. Cultural and Paleontological Resources Impact 5.3-1: Implementation of the Proposed Project could impact an unidentified historic resource as defined in Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines. [Threshold C-11 The Project Area is not identified as one of the six designated historic districts in the City (i.e., Kroeger-Melrose, Melrose -Backs, Anaheim Colony, Five Points, Historic Palm, and Hoskins). Therefore, implementation of the Proposed Project would not affect any of the City's historic districts. The Project Area also does not contain historic structures identified on the list of the Anaheim List of Historic Structures (revised June 14, 2016), CRHR, or in the Mills Act properties list (OHP 2017; Anaheim 2016). Therefore, implementation of the Proposed Project would not result in adverse impacts to identified historic resources. The fact that a resource is not listed in the CRHR, not determined to be eligible for listing, or not included in a local register of historical resources does not preclude a lead agency from determining that it may be a historical resource. The Project Area encompasses approximately 283 acres and covers 79 properties with individual APNs. As shown in Figure 5.3-1, Structures Over SO Years Old, there are 53 properties that are over 50 years old in the Project Area. Because these properties have not yet been evaluated for historical significance pursuant to Section 15064.5, future development of these properties could result in inadvertent historical resources impact. Therefore, a mitigation measure has been incorporated to reduce potential impacts to previously unidentified historical resources. Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations -12- Mitigation Measures: The following mitigation measures are included in the DEIR and the FEIR, and are applicable to the Proposed Project. The measures as provided include any revisions incorporated in the FEIR. CUL -1 Prior to demolition, the project applicant/developer shall provide documentation of the presence/absence of historic resources for the properties that are 50 years old or over by a qualified historical resource professional meeting the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualifications Standards. The criteria for determining the historically significant structures shall meet one or more the following criteria: 1. It strongly represents a significant event or broad patterns of local, regional, or national history. 2. It is associated with the life of a significant person in local, regional, or national history. 3_ It is a very good example of a significant architectural style, property type, period, or method of construction; or it represents the work of an architect, designer, engineer, or builder who is locally, regionally, or nationally significant; or it is a significant visual feature of the City. CUL -2 On properties where historically significant resources are identified, a proper documentation meeting the Historic American Building Survey (NABS) Guidelines shall be prepared and implemented, as approved by the qualified historian meeting the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualifications Standards. Such documentation shall include drawings, photographs, and written data for each building/structure/element, and provide a detailed mitigation plan, including a monitoring program, recovery, rehabilitation, redesign, relocation, and/or in situ preservation plan. Finding: The City of Anaheim finds based on the Final EIR and the whole of the record that Mitigation Measures CUL -1 and CUL -2 are feasible and fords that these mitigation measures will reduce the impacts related to cultural and paleontological resources to a less than significant level. [Pub. Res. Code 521081(a) (1); Guidelines 5 15091(1)] Impact 5.3-2: Development of the Proposed Project could impact archaeological resources. [Threshold C-21 Archaeological artifacts have been identified within the City of Anaheim boundaries. Although the Project Area has been previously developed, grading, excavation, or other ground -disturbing activities during construction could damage previously undiscovered archaeological resources. Site-specific impacts cannot be determined until a location is identified for a project. Therefore, a mitigation measure has been incorporated to determine presence/absence of archaeological resources and identify performance standards to reduce impacts when a site is identified as having the potential to affect archaeological resources. Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations -13- Mitigation Measures: The following mitigation measure was included in the DEIR and the FEIR, and is applicable to the Proposed Project. The measures as provided include any revisions incorporated in the FEIR. CUL -3 Prior to the issuance of any permits allowing ground -disturbing activities that cause excavation to depths greater than current foundations, the project applicant/developer shall retain an archeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for professional archaeology for the project and will be on call during all grading and other significant ground -disturbing activities. The Qualified Archaeologist shall ensure that the following measures are followed for the project. ■ Prior to any ground disturbance, the Qualified Archaeologist, or their designee, shall provide a worker environmental awareness protection (WEAP) training to construction personnel regarding regulatory requirements for the protection of cultural (prehistoric and historic) resources. As part of this training, construction personnel shall be briefed on proper procedures to follow should unanticipated cultural resources be made during construction. Workers will be provided contact information and protocols to follow in the event that inadvertent discoveries are made. The WEAP training can be in the form of a video or PowerPoint presentation. Printed literature (handouts) can accompany the training and can also be given to new workers and contractors to avoid the necessity of continuous training over the course of the project. ■ In the event that unanticipated cultural material is encountered during any phase of project construction, all construction work within 50 feet (15 meters) of the find shall cease and the Qualified Archaeologist shall assess the find for importance. Construction activities may continue in other areas. If, in consultation with the appropriate City, the discovery is determined not to be important, work will be permitted to continue in the area. ■ If a resource is determined by the Qualified Archaeologist to constitute a "historical resource" pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(a) or has a "unique archaeological resource" pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.2(8), the Qualified Archaeologist shall coordinate with the applicant and the City to develop a formal treatment plan that would serve to reduce impacts to the resources, and construction allowed to proceed. The treatment plan established for the resources shall be in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.50 for historical resources and Public Resources Code Sections 21083.2(b) for unique archaeological resources. Preservation in place (i.e., avoidance) is the preferred manner of treatment. ■ If preservation in place is not feasible, treatment may include implementation of archaeological data recovery excavations to remove the resource along with subsequent laboratory processing and analysis. Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations -14- ■ Any historic archaeological material that is not Native American in origin shall be curated at a public, nonprofit institution with a research interest in the materials, such as the South Central Coastal Information Center at California State University, Fullerton. If no institution accepts the archaeological material, they shall be donated to a local school or historical society in the area for educational purposes, as determined as appropriate by the City of Anaheim. Finding: The City of Anaheim finds based on the Final EIR and the whole of the record that Mitigation Measure CUL -3 is feasible and finds that this mitigation measure will reduce the impacts related to cultural and paleontological resources to a less than significant level. [Pub. Res. Code 521081(a)(1); Guidelines 5 15091(1)] Impact 5.3-3: The Proposed Project could destroy paleontological resources or a unique geologic feature. [Threshold PA -41 Site-specific paleontological resource assessment has not been conducted for the Project Area. Grading, excavation, or other ground -disturbing activities during construction could damage previously undiscovered fossils. Areas are considered potentially sensitive for the presence of paleontological resources based on the underlying geologic formation. The Project Area and its vicinity have surface deposits that consist of older Quaternary Alluvium and terrace deposits, and paleontological resources have been found in these deposits in other areas of Orange County. Therefore, excavation beyond fill materials into the underlying older Quaternary Alluvium, terrace deposits, and older sedimentary deposits could uncover fossil remains. Site-specific geologic formation study and further paleontological investigation is necessary to identify the possibility of unique paleontological resources on a project site within the Project Area. Therefore, a mitigation measure has been incorporated to determine the likelihood of a paleontological resource and ensure that impacts to subsurface paleontological resources are reduced to a less than significant level. Mitigation Measures: The following mitigation measure was included in the DEIR and the FEIR, and is applicable to the Proposed Project. The measures as provided include any revisions incorporated in the FEIR. PAL -1 Prior to the beginning of ground disturbances, the project applicant/developer shall provide a study to document the presence/absence of paleontological resources. On properties where resources are identified, the City shall require the project applicant/developer to retain a qualified paleontologist to monitor ground - disturbing activities that occur in deposits that could potentially contain paleontological resources (e.g., older Quaternary Alluvium and terrace deposits and other older sedimentary deposits). Before ground -disturbing activities begin, a qualified paleontologist shall prepare a monitoring plan specifying the frequency, duration, and methods of monitoring. Sediment samples shall be collected in the deposits and processed to determine the small -fossil potential in the project site, and any fossils recovered during mitigation should be deposited in an accredited and permanent scientific institution. Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations _15- Finding: The City of Anaheim finds based on the Final EIR and the whole of the record that Mitigation Measure PAL -1 is feasible and finds that this mitigation measure will reduce the impacts related to cultural and paleontological resources to a less than significant level. [Pub. Res. Code 521081(a)(1); Guidelines 5 15091(1)] 2. Hazards and Hazardous Materials Impact 5.6-2: The Project Area includes facilities that are on hazardous materials sites lists compiled by various government agencies. [Threshold H-4] A Phase 0 was prepared for the Project Area, which included the EDR records search that identified, uses and properties that could potentially pose a variety of environmental hazards within the boundaries of the Project Area. The Project Area includes a number of facilities that are listed on the hazardous materials sites list compiled by various government agencies, as described in Section 5.6.2, Standard Environmental Records Review. The listed facilities would be required to conduct site-specific evaluation in accordance with the mitigation measures listed below. Mitigation Measures: The following mitigation measures were included in the DEIR and the FEIR, and are applicable to the proposed project. The measures as provided include any revisions incorporated in the FEIR. HAZ-1 Prior to the issuance of demolition permits for any buildings or structures that would be demolished in conjunction with individual development projects pursuant to the Proposed Project, the project applicant/developer shall conduct the following inspections and assessments for all buildings and structures onsite and shall provide the City of Anaheim with a copy of the report of each investigation or assessment. ■ The project applicant shall retain a California Certified Asbestos Consultant (CAC) to perform abatement project planning, monitoring (including air monitoring), oversight, and reporting of all asbestos -containing materials (ACM) encountered. The abatement, containment, and disposal of all ACM shall be conducted in accordance with the South Coast Air Quality Management District's Rule 1403 and California Code of Regulation Title 8, Section 1529 (Asbestos). ■ The project applicant shall retain a licensed or certified lead inspector/assessor to conduct the abatement, containment, and disposal of all lead waste encountered. The contracted lead inspector/assessor shall be certified by the California Department of Public Health (CDPH). All lead abatement shall be performed by a CDPH-certified lead supervisor or a CDPH-certified worker under the direct supervision of a lead supervisor certified by CDPH. The abatement, containment, and disposal of all lead waste encountered shall be conducted in accordance with the US Occupational Safety and Health Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations -16- Administration Rule 29, CFR Part 1926, and California Code of Regulation, Title 8, Section 1532.1 (Lead). ■ Evidence of the contracted professionals retained by the project applicant shall be provided to the City of Anaheim. Additionally, contractors performing ACM and lead waste removal shall provide evidence of abatement activities to the City of Anaheim. HAZ-2 Prior to the issuance of grading permits for individual development projects that would be accommodated by the Proposed Project, the project applicant/developer shall submit a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) to the City of Anaheim Planning Department to identify environmental conditions of the development site and determine whether contamination is present. The Phase I ESA shall be prepared by a Registered Professional Engineer and in accordance with the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standard E 1527.05, Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process. If recognized environmental conditions related to soils are identified in the Phase I ESA, the project applicant shall perform soil sampling as a part of a Phase II ESA. If contamination is found at significant levels, the project applicant shall remediate all contaminated soils in accordance with state and local agency requirements (California Department of Toxic Substances Control, Regional Water Quality Control Board, Anaheim Fire & Rescue, etc.). All contaminated soils and/or material encountered shall be disposed of at a regulated site and in accordance with applicable laws and regulations prior to the completion of grading. Prior to the issuance of building permits, a report documenting the completion, results, and any follow-up remediation on the recommendations, if any, shall be provided to the City of Anaheim evidencing that all site remediation activities have been completed. Finding: The City of Anaheim finds based on the Final EIR and the whole of the record that Mitigation Measures FIAZ-1 and HAZ-2 are feasible and finds that these mitigation measures will reduce the impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials to a less than significant level. [Pub. Res. Code 521081(a)(1); Guidelines 5 15091(1)] 3. Noise Impact 5.9-1: Construction activities would potentially result in temporary noise increases in the vicinity of the Project Area. [Threshold N-4] Implementation of the Proposed Project would result in an increase in development intensity throughout the Project Area. Construction noise levels depend on the specific locations, site plans, and construction details of individual development projects, which are not known at this time. Construction -related noise would be localized and would occur intermittently for varying periods of time. Although the Proposed Project would take Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations -17- approximately 20 years to build out, it is anticipated that exposure of individual receptors to elevated construction noise levels would be for much shorter periods (e.g., a few months). Construction of individual development projects would temporarily increase the ambient noise environment in the vicinity of each development project, potentially affecting existing and future sensitive uses in the vicinity. Even with the time -of -day constraints (from the municipal code), construction of any individual development may be close to noise -sensitive receptors, and noise disturbances may occur for prolonged periods. However, the specific locations, duration, and equipment required for individual projects are unknown at this time. Therefore, it cannot be specifically determined how noise -sensitive uses in the project area and surroundings would be affected. Therefore, construction noise impacts are considered potentially significant. To address this circumstance, future developments in the Project Area are expected to undergo project -specific construction noise impact assessments in accordance with CEQA, including construction noise level projections at nearby sensitive receptors. Upon implementation of regulatory requirements, Impact 5.9-1 would be potentially significant. Mitigation Measures: The following mitigation measures were included in the DEIR and the FEIR, and are applicable to the proposed project. The measures as provided include any revisions incorporated in the FEIR. N-1 Prior to issuance of demolition, grading and/or building permits, a note shall be provided on plans for grading, demolition, and construction activities, indicating that the property owner/developer shall be responsible for requiring contractors to implement the following measures to limit construction -related noise: ■ Construction activity is limited to the daytime hours between 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., as prescribed in the City's Municipal Code. (Additional work hours may be permitted if deemed necessary by the Director of Public Works or Building Official.) ■ All internal combustion engines on construction equipment and trucks are fitted with properly maintained mufflers. ■ Stationary equipment such as generators and air compressors shall be located as far as feasible from nearby noise -sensitive uses. ■ Stockpiling is located as far as feasible from nearby noise -sensitive receptors. ■ Construction traffic shall be limited to the established haul routes. N-2 Prior to the issuance of grading permits, each project applicant within the Project Area shall prepare a construction management plan that shall be approved by the City of Anaheim Public Works. The construction management plan shall: ■ Establish truck haul routes on the appropriate transportation facilities. Truck routes that avoid congested streets and sensitive land uses shall be considered. Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations -18- ■ Provide traffic control plans (for detours and temporary road closures) that meet the minimum City criteria. Traffic control plans shall determine if dedicated turn lanes for movement of construction truck and equipment on- and offsite are available. ■ Minimize offsite road closures during the peak hours. ■ Keep all construction -related traffic onsite at all times. ■ Provide temporary traffic controls, such as a flag person, during all phases of construction to maintain smooth traffic flow. Finding: The City of Anaheim fords based on the Final EIR and the whole of the record that Mitigation Measures N-1 and N-2 are feasible and finds that these mitigation measures will reduce the impacts related to noise to a less than significant level. [Pub. Res. Code 521081(a)(1); Guidelines 5 15091(1)] Impact 5.9-2: Project implementation would result in long-term operation -related noise that would not exceed local standards. [Threshold N-1 and N-31 Traffic Noise Future development in accordance with the Proposed Project would cause increases in traffic along local roadways. Traffic noise increases may affect various sensitive land uses, including residences, churches, and medical uses. Commercial and industrial areas are not considered noise sensitive and generally have higher tolerances for exterior and interior noise levels. The traffic noise levels for existing conditions and future plus project conditions were estimated using the Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model (FHWA 1978). The FHWA model predicts noise levels through a series of adjustments to a reference sound level. These adjustments account for distances from the roadway, traffic flows, vehicle speeds, car/truck mix, length of exposed roadway, and road width. The distances to the 70, 65, and 60 CNEL contours for selected roadway segments in the vicinity of the Project Area are in Appendix E. Overall traffic -generated increases due to both the Project and regional growth would range from 0.1 to 2.2 dB in the CNEL metric and that the Project -specific traffic noise contributions would range from -0.4 to 0.4 dB (in the CNEL metric). Note that a negative contribution indicates a reduction in noise is caused by a reduction in traffic volumes due to changes in land use designations and the corresponding trip generation in some areas of the Project Area. The Proposed Project includes an implementation action plan that includes several mobility and streetscape actions. These mobility and streetscape actions require site- specific transportation studies for new developments and initiate roadway/intersection improvements at several roadways. These mobility and streetscape actions will alleviate traffic in the Project Area, and will therefore reduce project -related roadway noise generation. Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations _19- Based on the estimated traffic conditions provided by Fehr and Peers, no segments would experience substantial noise increases greater than 3 dB over existing conditions. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures are necessary. Stationary -Source Noise Buildout of the Proposed Project would result in an increase in residential, commercial, mixed use, office, and public -recreational development within the planning area. The primary stationary noise sources associated with these land uses are landscaping and maintenance activities, HVAC systems, mechanical equipment, and operational noise from residents and/or patrons. As mentioned above, traffic noise generally dominates the noise environment around the Project Area. Noise generated by stationary sources associated with residential, commercial, mixed use, office, or public -recreational uses is generally short and intermittent, and these uses are not a substantial source of noise compared to roadway noise sources. Through the enforcement of municipal code standards, stationary -source noise from these types of proposed land uses would not substantially increase the existing noise environment. Noise Affecting Future residential Developments Noise sources associated with future developments under the Proposed Project are subject to the municipal code standards of the City of Anaheim. According to the ambient noise measurements for the Proposed Project, there are several locations in the Project Area with a noise environment that is currently unacceptable for certain new residential uses. Through enforcement of municipal code standards, future residential projects would not be substantially impacted by the noise environment. Since the details of individual developments in the Project Area are not known at this time, long-term operation -related noise would be potentially significant. Mitigation Measures: The following mitigation measure was included in the DEIR and the FEIR, and is applicable to the proposed project. The measures as provided include any revisions incorporated in the FEIR. N-3 Prior to issuance of a building permit, applicants for new residential or subdivision developments within the Project Area involving the construction of two or more dwelling units, or residential subdivisions resulting in two or more parcels, and located within six -hundred feet of any railroad, freeway, expressway, major arterial, primary arterial or secondary arterial, as designated by the Circulation Element of the General Plan, are required to submit a noise level analysis, which must include mitigation measures that comply with applicable City noise standards, including the following- Exterior ollowing Exterior noise within the private rear yard of any single-family lot and/or within any common recreation areas shall be attenuated to a maximum of 65 dBA CNEL; interior noise levels shall be attenuated to a maximum of 45 dBA CNEL, or to a Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations -20- level designated by the Uniform Building Code, as adopted by the City (identified in Section 18.040.090). ■ Exterior noise within common recreation areas of any single family attached or multiple family dwelling project shall be attenuated to a maximum of 65 dB CNEL; interior noise levels shall be attenuated to a maximum of 45 dB CNEL, or to a level designated by the Uniform Building Code, as adopted by the City (identified in Section 18.40.090). The Planning Commission may grant a deviation from the requirements pertaining to exterior noise levels, given that all of the following conditions exist (Section 18.040.090.060): ■ The deviation does not exceed 5 dB above the prescribed levels for exterior noise. ■ Measures to attenuate noise to the prescribed levels would compromise or conflict with the aesthetic value of the project. In addition, residential portions of mixed-use projects shall be designed to limit the interior noise caused by the commercial and parking portions of the project to a maximum of 45 dBA CNEL in any habitable room with windows closed. Commercial uses shall be designed and operated, and hours of operation limited so neighboring residents are not exposed to offensive noise, especially from traffic, trash collection, routine deliveries, and/or late-night activities. No use shall produce continual loading or unloading of heavy trucks at the site between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. (Section 18.32.130, Compatibility Standards). The required exterior noise reduction can be accomplished with sound walls or berms, or by site plan/building layout design. The required interior noise reduction can be accomplished with enhanced construction design or materials such as upgraded dual - glazed windows and/or upgraded exterior wall assemblies. These features shall be shown on all building plans and incorporated into construction of the project. City inspectors shall verify compliance of the building with the acoustic report's recommendations prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Finding: The City of Anaheim finds based on the Final EIR and the whole of the record that Mitigation Measure N-3 is feasible and finds that this mitigation measure will reduce the impacts related to noise to a less than significant level. [Pub. Res. Code 521081(a)(1); Guidelines � 15091 (1)] Impact 5.9-3: The Proposed Project would create short-term and/or long-term groundborne vibration and groundborne noise. [Threshold N-21 Construction Vibration Impacts Buildout of the Proposed Project would occur over an approximately 20 -year period and would consist of many different projects with their own construction time frames and equipment. Individual construction projects in the Project Area would have their own schedules and would only affect areas near the construction site. Residential areas are Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations -21- considered vibration sensitive and would have the potential to be affected by construction activities during implementation of the Proposed Project. The most vibration -sensitive structures would be the existing and future residential uses immediately adjacent to the boundaries of the Proposed Project. Construction operations can generate varying degrees of ground vibration, depending on the construction procedures and equipment. Operation of construction equipment generates vibrations that spread through the ground and diminish with distance from the source. The effects on nearby buildings depend on soil type, ground strata, and receptor -building construction. They can range from no perceptible effects at the lowest vibration levels, to low rumbling sounds and perceptible vibrations at moderate levels, to slight structural damage at the highest levels. Vibration from construction activities rarely reaches levels that can damage structures, but can achieve the audible and perceptible ranges in buildings close to the construction site. As shown in Table 5.9-12 of the DEIR, vibration generated by construction equipment has the potential to exceed the FTA criteria of 78 VdB for human annoyance and 0.200 in/sec for structural damage. However, groundborne vibration is almost never annoying to people who are outdoors, so it is usually evaluated in terms of indoor receivers (FTA 2006). Construction details and equipment for individual development projects are not known at this time. Therefore, vibration impacts may occur from construction equipment associated with development of the proposed project, and construction vibration impacts are considered potentially significant. Roadway -Related Vibration Impacts Operation of new commercial land uses could generate additional truck trips, which could potentially generate vibration along the traveled roadways. Additionally, truck trips could be generated during construction of new development projects in the Project Area. Caltrans has studied the effects of vehicle vibration on sensitive land uses and notes that "heavy trucks, and quite frequently buses, generate the highest earth borne vibrations of normal traffic" (Caltrans 2013b). Caltrans also notes that the highest traffic -generated vibration is along freeways and state routes and finds that "vibrations measured on freeway shoulders (five meters from the centerline of the nearest lane) have never exceeded 0.08 inches per second, with the worst combinations of heavy trucks. This level coincides with the maximum recommended safe level for ruins and ancient monuments (and historic buildings)" (Caltrans 2013b). Further, trucks do not typically generate high levels of vibration because they travel on rubber wheels and do not have vertical movement, which generates ground vibration (Caltrans 2013b). Given these observations and guidance notes from Caltrans, roadways in the Project Area are not expected to generate excessive vibration. Therefore, there would be no impact due to roadway -related vibration. Upon implementation of regulatory requirements, Impact 5.9-3 would be potentially significant with respect to construction vibration effects. Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations -22- Mitigation Measures: The following mitigation measure was included in the DEIR and the FEIR, and is applicable to the proposed project. The measures as provided include any revisions incorporated in the FEIR. N-4 Prior to issuance of a building permit, applicants for projects in the Beach Boulevard Specific Plan that involve high -vibration construction activities, such as pile driving or vibratory rolling/compacting, shall be evaluated for potential vibration impacts to nearby sensitive receptors. The project applicant shall submit a vibration report prepared to the satisfaction of the City of Anaheim to determine if the use of pile driving and/or vibratory rolling/compacting equipment would exceed the Federal Transit Administration's vibration -annoyance criteria of 78 VdB during the daytime or vibration -induced architectural damage PPV criteria of 0.2 inch/second for wood -framed structures or 0.5 inches/second for reinforced masonry buildings. The construction contractor shall require the use of lower - vibration -producing equipment and techniques. Examples of lower -vibration equipment and techniques include avoiding vibratory rollers near sensitive areas and/or using drilled piles, sonic pile driving, or vibratory pile driving (as opposed to impact pile driving). Finding: The City of Anaheim finds based on the Final EIR and the whole of the record that Mitigation Measure N-4 is feasible and finds that this mitigation measure will reduce the impacts related to noise to a less than significant level. [Pub. Res. Code 521081(a)(1); Guidelines 5 15091(1)] 4. Tribal and Cultural Resources Impact 5.14-1: Implementation of the Proposed Project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource as defined in Section 21074. [Threshold TCR -1] SB 18 Consultation In accordance with SB 18 requirements, the NAHC provided a list of tribal representatives who may have knowledge of tribal cultural resources in the project area. The City sent invitation letters on April 4, 2017, to the Native American contacts provided by the NAHC, formally inviting tribes to consult with the City on the Proposed Project. Letters were sent to the following Tribes: ■ Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians ■ Juaneno Band of Mission Indians ■ Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians - Mzh Nation ■ Juaneno Band of Mission Indians Acjachemen Nation ■ Gabrieleno/Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians ■ Juaneno Band of Mission Indians Acjachemen Nation ■ Gabrielino/Tongva Nation ■ Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians ■ Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations -23- Response letters were received from one tribal representative—Andrew Salas of Gabrielefio Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation—requesting consultation per AB 52 in a letter dated April 7, 2017. AB 52 Consultation AB 52 requires meaningful consultation with California Native American tribes on potential impacts to TCRs, as defined in PRC Section 21074. TCRs are sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe that are either eligible or listed in the California Register of Historical Resources or local register of historical resources. There are no known TCRs within the boundaries of the Project Area. As part of the AB 52 process, Native American tribes must submit a written request to the lead agency to be notified of projects within their traditionally and culturally affiliated area. Pursuant to the AB 52 consultation requirement, Andrew Salas of Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation, requested consultation in writing on April 7, 2017. Subsequently, on June 22, 2017, the City conducted a telephone consultation with the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation in compliance with AB 52. The Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation considers the Project Area to be within its ancestral tribal territory, descending from a higher degree of kinship than traditional or cultural affiliation. They also indicated that the Project Area is in a sensitive area and may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of their TCRs. As part of consultation, they provided links to three website articles reporting that some of the major Native American trails became modern day roadways, suggesting that the Project Area could be near one of those trails, and therefore has potential to yield TCRs. For this reason, they recommended a tribal monitor(s) be present during ground -disturbing activities. Because there is a possibility that implementation of the Proposed Project through grading and excavation activities could impact previously undisturbed TCRs, impacts to TCRs are considered potentially significant. Mitigation Measures: The following mitigation measures were included in the DEIR and the FEIR, and are applicable to the proposed project. The measures as provided include any revisions incorporated in the FEIR. CUL -2 On properties where historically significant resources are identified, a proper documentation meeting the Historic American Building Survey (HABS) Guidelines shall be prepared and implemented, as approved by the qualified historian meeting the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualifications Standards. Such documentation shall include drawings, photographs, and written data for each building/structure/element, and provide a detailed mitigation plan, including a monitoring program, recovery, rehabilitation, redesign, relocation, and/or in situ preservation plan. TCR -1 Prior to the issuance of any permits allowing ground -disturbing activities that cause excavation to depths greater than current foundations, the City of Anaheim shall ensure that the project applicant/developer retain qualified Native American Monitor(s) during construction -related ground disturbance activities. The monitor(s) Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations -24- shall be approved by the Tribal Representatives of the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation and be present on-site during construction that involve ground disturbing activities. The Native American Monitor(s) shall be responsible for the following activities during the monitoring, as appropriate: ■ Complete monitoring logs on a daily basis, providing descriptions of the daily activities, including construction activities, locations, soil, and any cultural materials identified. ■ If the monitoring site has hazardous materials concerns, the monitor(s) shall possess Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response (HAZWOPER) certification. The on-site monitoring shall end when the project site grading and excavation activities are completed, or when the Tribal Representatives and monitor have indicated that the site has a low potential for tribal cultural resources. Finding: The City of Anaheim finds based on the Final EIR and the whole of the record that Mitigation Measures CUL -2 and TCR -1 are feasible and finds that these mitigation measures will reduce the impacts related to utility services to a less than significant level. [Pub. Res. Code 521081(a)(1); Guidelines 5 15091(1)] 5. Utilities and Service Systems Impact 5.15-2: The Proposed Project would result in deficient sewer capacities within the Project Area but would not result in the construction of new wastewater treatment facilities. [Threshold U-2 [part] and U-51 City of Anaheim Facilities The GHD sewer study concluded that the sewer system has no deficiencies in the existing condition and the buildout condition under the 2004 General Plan. However, with implementation of the Proposed Project, the modeled results showed that there would be two deficient areas in the Project Area—on the west side of Beach Boulevard north of Ball Road between Manholes SW10420 and SW10421 and between Manholes SW10421 and SW10422. These are depicted in Figure 5.15-3, Projected Seaver System Deficiencies and Recommended Improvements. The total length of pipe found to be deficient was 650 linear feet— the 325 -foot pipeline segment between SW10420 and SW10421 had a 203 gpd peak flow rate, and the 325 feet segment between SW10421 and SW10422 had a 212 gpd peak flow rate. As shown in Figure 5.15-3, these two sewer segments require an increase in size from 8 inches to 10 inches to handle the proposed sewer increases. Two additional 8 -inch segments are nearing maximum capacity and are also recommended to be increased to 10 inches. However, the City has a procedure in place to address deficient sewer segments downstream of new developments. The procedure includes updating the MPSS to include the deficient sewer segments and the associated costs to improve die segments. Once these segments and their respective costs have been added into the MPSS, sewer impact fees can be adjusted to account for the necessary improvements. These adjusted impact fees would then apply to Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations -25- costs associated with new developments and redevelopment projects within the sewer service area, including the Project Area, and would be paid for by the developers. Therefore, provided that the MMPS is updates to include the deficient segments for future improvement and appropriate development fees are assessed, impacts to local sewer facilities would not result in significant impact. City of Anaheim Facilities Because sewage collected by the local facilities would ultimately connect to the OCSD sewer trunk lines west and south of the Project Area, the proposed increases in sewer flows could also impact OCSD lines. However, as stated in Section 5.15.1.1 of the DEIR under the Existing Sewer Capacity Assessment, Orange County Sanitation District Sewer System, Rehabilitation of Western Regional Sewers capital improvement project is projected to commence in 2019, which would rehabilitate or replace a total of 17 miles of existing sewer pipelines in six cities and unincorporated Orange County. OCSD provides ongoing analysis of the sewer system within its jurisdiction, ensuring the long-term functionality of the OCSD's facilities. The Proposed Project would result in less than significant impacts to OCSD sewer facilities. Mitigation Measures: The following mitigation measures were included in the DEIR and the FEIR, and are applicable to the proposed project. The measures as provided include any revisions incorporated in the FEIR. USS -1 The City of Anaheim shall update the Combined West Anaheim Area Master Plan of Sanitary Sewers to include the deficient sewer segments as identified in the Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Sewer Analysis or latest updates for the Beach Boulevard Specific Plan, and the associated costs to improve the deficient segments. USS -2 Prior to issuance of demolition, grading, or building permits, whichever occurs first, the developer/applicant shall pay sewer impact fees per the updated Combined West Anaheim Area Master Plan of Sanitary Sewers described in Mitigation Measure USS -1. Finding: The City of Anaheim finds based on the Final EIR and the whole of the record that Mitigation Measures USS -1 and USS -2 are feasible and fords that these mitigation measures will reduce the impacts related to utility services to a less than significant level. [Pub. Res. Code 521081(a)(1); Guidelines 5 15091(1)] Impact 5.15-3: The Proposed Project would increase domestic and fire water services demands in the Project Area, however, new or upgraded water systems improvements would not result in significant environmental effects. Impacts to Wlater Distribution Systems Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations -26- As discussed in Section 5.15.2.1 of the DEIR, Anaheim Public Utilities Department's (APUD's) Five -Year Water System Plan (WSP) provides a coordinated approach for identifying and prioritizing projects and programs required to ensure a reliable supply of high-quality water within its service area. The WSP is the foundation for planning efforts for water capital projects, and the first year serves as the basis for the City's water system capital improvement plan budget. Therefore, the three projects in Table 5.15-6 in the DEIR, including the one within the Project Area, would be constructed regardless of Proposed Project implementation. Each year, improvements identified in the WSP are reevaluated, and their priorities are adjusted to the latest water demand projections, development trends, and replacement needs, with input from the City's Public Works, Environmental Services, and Water Field/Operations staff. Therefore, proposed increases in water demands associated with the Proposed Project would be accounted for in future planning studies to be prepared in connection with the WSP, and any impacts to water infrastructure would be addressed and placed on the capital improvement plan. As individual projects under the Proposed Project are developed incrementally, the cost of main extensions and enlargements will be paid for by the owner or developer of the properties served by these mains as required under the City's Water Rates, Rules & Regulations, Rule No. 15. However, deficiencies in the existing water distribution system's ability to serve future land uses have been identified. Therefore, impacts would be potentially significant. Wlater Treatment Facilities Impact The City depends on local groundwater for supply from the Basin and imported water from MWD. Reliable groundwater is provided by Orange County Water District (OCWD) through the completion of GWRS Initial Expansion Project. This expansion provided an additional 31,000 acre-feet per year of water for recharging the groundwater basin. OCWD is also planning to increase GWRS treatment capacity to 130 mgd through its final expansion. Additionally, the untreated imported water is treated at the Lenain, which produces up to 15 million gallons of drinking water a day. Although the Proposed Project would increase the water demands, the WSA concluded that the increase is within the limits of total water supplied by APUD with and without the Proposed Project as projected in the City's 2015 UWMP. Therefore, no expanded or new water treatment facilities would be required, and impacts would not be significant Mitigation Measures: The following mitigation measures were included in the DEIR and the FEIR, and are applicable to the proposed project. The measures as provided include any revisions incorporated in the FEIR. USS -3 Prior to issuance of demolition, grading, building or water permits, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall submit plans to the Public Utilities Department for review. The Public Utilities Department shall review the location of each project to determine if it is an area served by potentially deficient water facilities, as identified in the latest updated water study for the BBSP. In such a case, Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations -27- the property owner/developer shall perform a hydraulic analysis for the existing and proposed public water improvements to determine if the project domestic or fire flow demands will increase flows beyond those programmed in the appropriate water master plan study for the area or if the project will create a deficiency in an existing water mains. The hydraulic water analysis for the existing and proposed public water improvements shall incorporate the anticipated flow, pressure, and any other information specific for the project to determine the conditions for final design. With the hydraulic water analysis, the property owner/developer shall submit the results of a field fire flow test and provide a written response from Anaheim Fire Department confirming the fire flow requirements for the project. The property owner/developer shall be required to guarantee mitigation of the impact to adequately serve the area to the satisfaction of the Public Utilities Department and City Attorney's Office per Anaheim's most current Water Rules and Regulations. Finding: The City of Anaheim finds based on the Final EIR and the whole of the record that Mitigation Measure USS -3 is feasible and fords that this mitigation measure will reduce the impact related to water systems to a less than significant level. [Pub. Res. Code 521081(a) (1); Guidelines � 15091(1)] C. SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACTS The following summary describes the unavoidable adverse impact of the Proposed Project where either mitigation measures were found to be infeasible, or mitigation would lessen impacts to less than significant. The following impact would remain significant and unavoidable: 1. Air Quality Impact 5.2-1: The Proposed Project would result in growth and associated emissions that exceed the emissions forecasts assumed for the Project Area in the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). Therefore, despite consistency with state and regional goals to increase density along major transportation corridors, the Proposed Project would not be consistent with the AQMP. [Threshold AQ -1] The Proposed Project includes objectives that emphasizes development of mixed-use areas and increased development intensity along the Beach Boulevard corridor. It would create a Mixed -Use Medium and a Mixed -Use High Development Areas in the Project Area in addition to integrating a Neighborhood Commercial and Regional Commercial Development Areas. These planning areas would permit daily services and amenities in addition to residences and businesses to be in proximity of each other. In addition to creating and emphasizing mixed-use areas, the Proposed Project also outlines improvements to active and public transit facilities, such as increasing the amount of designated bike lanes in the Project Area. Development of mixed-use areas and improvement of active and public transit infrastructure would contribute to reducing vehicle trips and vehicle miles traveled (VMT). In addition to these proposed changes related to land use and transportation infrastructure improvements, Action Item S.14 of the Proposed Project would also promote Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations -28- installation of more EV charging stations, which would contribute to and support the use of more EVs. However, the project would represent a substantial increase in emissions compared to existing conditions. The estimated long-term emissions generated under full buildout of the Proposed Project would exceed the SCAQMD's regional operational significance thresholds (see Table 5.2-5 of the DEIR) and would cumulatively contribute to the nonattainment designations in the SoCAB. In addition, implementation of the Proposed Project would contribute to exceedances of the current population and employment estimates for the Project Area. Therefore, the Proposed Project would be considered inconsistent with the AQMP, resulting in a significant impact in this regard. Mitigation Measures: When incorporated into future development projects for operation and construction phases, mitigation measures for Impact 5.2-3, described below, would contribute to reduced criteria air pollutant emissions associated with buildout of the Proposed Project The guiding principles, design guidelines, and proposed land use designations of the Proposed Project would promote the development of mixed uses along the Beach Boulevard corridor and increase capacity for alternative transportation modes, which would contribute to reducing vehicle trips, VMT, and emissions from internal combustion vehicles. However, no further mitigation measures are available that would reduce impacts to below SCAQMD significance thresholds due to the magnitude of growth and associated emissions that would be generated by the buildout of the Proposed Project. Finding: Components of and improvements proposed under the Proposed Project would contribute to minimize criteria air pollutant emissions from transportation and energy use. In addition, mitigation measures applied for Impact 5.2-3 would also further reduce the project's regional operational phase criteria air pollutant emissions to the extent feasible. However, given the potential increase in growth and associated increase in criteria air pollutant emissions, the project would continue to be potentially inconsistent with the assumptions in the AQMP. Therefore, Impact 5.2-1 would remain significant and unavoidable and a Statement of Overriding Considerations is required. Impact 5.2-2: Construction activities associated with the Proposed Project could generate short- term emissions that would exceed SCAQMD's regional significance thresholds and cumulatively contribute to the nonattainment designations of the South Coast Air Basin (SoCAB). [Thresholds AQ -2 and AQ -31 Construction activities associated with buildout of the Proposed Project are anticipated to occur sporadically over approximately 17 to 18 years or longer. Buildout would consist of multiple smaller projects, each having its own construction timeline and activities. Development of multiple properties could occur at the same time. However, there is no defined development schedule for these future projects at this time. For this analysis, the estimate of maximum daily emissions is based on a very conservative scenario, where several construction projects occur at one time, and all construction phases overlap. The amount of construction assumed is consistent with the 17- to 18 -year anticipated buildout of the Proposed Project. An estimate of maximum daily construction emissions is provided in Table 5.2-9, Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Maximum Daily Regional Construction Emissions Estimate Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations -29- of the DEIR. The table shows the highest daily emissions that would be generated over the anticipated development period. Construction activities associated with development of the project could potentially exceed the SCAQMD regional threshold for VOC and NOx. The primary source of NOx emissions is vehicle and construction equipment exhaust. NOx is a precursor to the formation of both 03 and particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5). VOC is a precursor to the formation of 03. Project -related emissions of VOC and NOx would contribute to the 03, NOz, PM10, and PM2.5 nonattainment designations of the SoCAB. Therefore, project -related construction activities would result in significant regional air quality impacts. Mitigation Measures: AQ -1 Applicants for new development projects in the Beach Boulevard Area Specific Plan that are subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (i.e., non-exempt projects) shall require the construction contractor to use equipment that meets the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Tier 4 emissions standards for off- road diesel -powered construction equipment with more than 50 horsepower, unless it can be demonstrated to the City of Anaheim that such equipment is not available. Any emissions control device used by the contractor shall achieve emissions reductions that are no less than what could be achieved by a Level 4 diesel emissions control strategy for a similarly sized engine, as defined by the California Air Resources Board's regulations. Prior to issuance of any construction permits, documentation shall be provided by the applicant to the City of Anaheim that verifies, to the satisfaction of the City, the use of construction equipment as stated in this mitigation measure. AQ -2 Prior to issuance of grading, demolition or building permits whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall provide a list of all construction equipment proposed to be used on the project site for projects that are subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (i.e., non-exempt projects). This list may be provided on the building plans. The construction equipment list shall state the make, model, and equipment identification number of all the equipment. AQ -3 During construction activities, for projects that are subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (i.e., non-exempt projects), the construction contractors shall ensure that the equipment shall be properly serviced and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations; and, that all nonessential idling of construction equipment is restricted to five minutes or less in compliance with Section 2449 of the California Code of Regulations, Title 13, Article 4.8, Chapter 9. AQ -4 Prior to issuance of a building permit for projects that subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (i.e., non-exempt projects), the property owner/developer shall require the construction contractor and provide a note on construction plans indicating that: Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations -30- a) All coatings and solvents will have a volatile organic compound (VOC) content lower than required under Rule 1113 (i.e., super -compliant paints). b) All architectural coatings shall be applied either by (1) using a high-volume, low- pressure spray method operated at an air pressure between 0.1 and 10 pounds per square inch gauge to achieve a 65 percent application efficiency; or (2) manual application using a paintbrush, hand -roller, trowel, spatula, dauber, rag, or sponge, to achieve a 100 percent applicant efficiency. c) The construction contractor shall also use precoated/natural colored building materials, where feasible. The City shall verify compliance during normal construction site inspections. Finding: Mitigation Measures AQ -1 through AQ -4 are feasible and would reduce criteria air pollutant emissions from construction -related activities to the extent feasible. However, construction time frames and equipment for individual site-specific projects are not available and there is a potential for multiple developments to be constructed at any one time, resulting in significant construction -related emissions. Therefore, despite adherence to Mitigation Measures AQ -1 to AQ -4, Impact 5.2-2 would remain significant and unavoidable and a Statement of Overriding Considerations is required. Impact 5.2-3: Buildout in accordance with the Proposed Project would generate long-term emissions that would excess SCAQMD's regional significance thresholds and cumulatively contribute to the nonattainment designations of the SoCAB. [Thresholds AQ -2 and AQ -31 Table 5.2-10, Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Maximum Daily Kegional Operational Phase Em sions, of the DEIR shows that due to the magnitude of the proposed growth, operation of the land uses accommodated under the Proposed Project at buildout would generate air pollutant emissions that exceed SCAQMD's regional significance thresholds for VOC, NOx, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 at buildout. Emissions of VOC and NOx that exceed the SCAQMD regional threshold would cumulatively contribute to the 03 nonattamment designation of the SoCAB. Emissions of NOx that exceed SCAQMD's regional significance thresholds would cumulatively contribute to the 03 and particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5) nonattamment designations of the SoCAB. Emissions of PM10 and PM2.5 would contribute to the PM2.5 nonattainment designations. Therefore, the project would result in a potentially significant impact because it would significantly contribute to the nonattainment designations of the SoCAB. Mitigation Measures: Stationary Source AQ -5 Prior to the issuance of building permits for new development projects in the Project Area, the project applicant shall show on the building plans that all major appliances (dishwashers, refrigerators, clothes washers, and dryers) to be provided/installed are Energy Star -certified appliances or appliances of equivalent Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations -31- energy efficiency. Installation of Energy Star or equivalent appliances shall be verified by the City of Anaheim prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Transportation and Motor Vehicles AQ -6 Prior to issuance of building permits for non -single-family residential and mixed-use residential development projects in the Project Area, the project applicant shall indicate on the building plans that the following features have been incorporated into the design of the building(s). Proper installation of these features shall be verified by the City of Anaheim prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. ■ Electric vehicle charging shall be provided as specified in Section A4.106.8.2 (Residential Voluntary Measures) of the CALGreen Code. ■ Bicycle parking shall be provided as specified in Section A4.106.9 (Residential Voluntary Measures) of the CALGreen Code. AQ -7 Prior to the issuance of building permits for nonresidential development projects in the Project Area, project applicants shall indicate on the building plans that the following features have been incorporated into the design of the building(s). Proper installation of these features shall be verified by the City of Anaheim Building Division prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. ■ For buildings with more than ten tenant -occupants, changing/shower facilities shall be provided as specified in Section A5.106.4.3 (Nonresidential Voluntary Measures) of the CALGreen Code. ■ Preferential parking for low -emitting, fuel-efficient, and carpool/van vehicles shall be provided as specified in Section A5.106.5.1 (Nonresidential Voluntary Measures) of the CALGreen Code. ■ Facilities shall be installed to support future electric vehicle charging at each non-residential building with 30 or more parking spaces. Installation shall be consistent with Section A5.106.5.3 (Nonresidential Voluntary Measures) of the CALGreen Code. Mitigation Measures T-1 and T-2 from Section 5.13, Transportation and Traffic, as listed below, would also reduce operational emissions of the Proposed Project. T-1 Prior to the first final building and zoning inspection for any non-residential project generating 50 or more employees, the property owners/developer shall complete the following steps below to develop, implement and administer a comprehensive Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program. a) The property owner/developer shall provide to the City of Anaheim Public Works Department, for review and approval, a comprehensive TDM program that includes a menu of TDM program strategies and elements for both existing and future employees' commute options. Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations -32- b) The property owner/developer shall record a covenant on the property that requires ongoing implementation of the approved TDM program and designation of an on-site contact that will be responsible for coordinating the TDM program. c) The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney's Office prior to recordation. T-2 Prior to the first final building and zoning inspection for any nonresidential project generating 50 or more employees, the property owner/developer shall participate in the Anaheim Transportation Network (ATN) /Transportation Management Association. The property owner/developer shall record a covenant on the property that requires ongoing participation in the program and designation of an on-site contact who will be responsible for coordinating and representing the project with the ATN. The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney's Office prior to recordation. Finding: Mitigation Measures AQ -5 would contribute in reducing criteria air pollutant emissions from stationary sources while Mitigation Measures AQ -6 and AQ -7 in addition to Mitigation Measures T-1 and T-2 would contribute in reducing mobile -source criteria air pollutant emissions to the extent feasible. However, due to the magnitude of emissions generated by residential, office, and commercial land uses, no mitigation measures are available that would reduce impacts below SCAQMD's thresholds. As a result, Impact 5.2-3 would remain significant and unavoidable and a Statement of Overriding Considerations is required. Impact 5.2-5: Construction -related emissions with land uses accommodated under the Proposed Project could expose sensitive receptors to substantial concentrations of criteria air pollutants and toxic air contaminants. [Threshold AQ -41 Construction Phase Localized Significance Thresholds (LSTs LSTs are the amount of project -related emissions at which localized concentrations (ppm or µg/m3) would exceed the ambient air quality standards for criteria air pollutants for which the SoCAB is designated a nonattainment area. Buildout of the Proposed Project would occur over approximately 17 to 18 years or longer and would consist of several smaller projects with their own construction time frames and equipment. Per the LST methodology, information regarding specific development projects and the locations of receptors would be needed in order to quantify the levels of localized operation and construction -related impacts associated with future development projects. Because the Proposed Project is a broad-based policy plan, it is not possible to calculate individual, project -related, operation emissions at this time. The LST analysis can only be conducted at a project level; per SCAQMD methodology, quantification of LSTs is not applicable for this program -level environmental analysis. However, because potential development and redevelopment could occur close to existing sensitive receptors, the Proposed Project has the potential to expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Construction equipment exhaust combined Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations -33- with fugitive particulate matter emissions have the potential to expose sensitive receptors to substantial concentrations of criteria air pollutant emissions and result in a significant impact. Construction Phase Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs) SCAQMD currently does not require health risk assessments to be conducted for short-term emissions from construction equipment. Health risks associated with emissions from construction equipment primarily are due to diesel particulate matter (DPM). OEHHA adopted new guidance for the preparation of health risk assessments that was issued in March 2015 (OEHHA 2015). OEHHA has developed a cancer risk factor and non -cancer chronic reference exposure level for DPM, but these factors are based on continuous exposure over a 30 -year time frame. No short-term acute exposure levels have been developed for DPM. Construction of the Proposed Project would be implemented over a period of 17 to 18 years. It is anticipated that construction of individual developments accommodated under the plans would likely be spread out incrementally over this period of time, which would limit the exposure of on- and off-site receptors to elevated concentration of DPM. However, similar to the LST analysis, construction health risk can only be conducted at a project level; therefore, quantification of construction -related health risk is not applicable for this program -level environmental analysis. Because potential development and redevelopment could occur close to existing sensitive receptors, the Proposed Project has the potential to expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Construction equipment exhaust has the potential to expose sensitive receptors to substantial concentration of TACs and result in a significant impact. Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measures applied for Impact 5.2-2 would also reduce the Proposed Project's localized construction -related criteria air pollutant emissions to the extent feasible in addition to the following- AQ-8 ollowing AQ-8 Prior to issuance of grading, demolition, or building permits, whichever occurs first, for projects subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (i.e., non-exempt projects), the property owner/developer shall submit a dust control plan that implements the following measures during ground -disturbing activities, in addition to the existing requirements for fugitive dust control under South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 403, to further reduce PM10 and PM2.5 emissions: a) Following all grading activities, the construction contractor shall reestablish ground cover on the construction site through seeding and watering b) During all construction activities, the construction contractor shall sweep streets with Rule 1186—compliant, PM10-efficient vacuum units on a daily basis if silt is carried over to adjacent public thoroughfares or occurs as a result of hauling. c) During all construction activities, the construction contractor shall maintain a minimum 24 -inch freeboard on trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations -34- materials and tarp materials with a fabric cover or other cover that achieves the same amount of protection. d) During all construction activities, the construction contractor shall water exposed ground surfaces and disturbed areas a minimum of every three hours on the construction site and a minimum of three times per day. e) During all construction activities, the construction contractor shall limit onsite vehicle speeds on unpaved roads to no more than 15 miles per hour. The City shall verify compliance during normal construction site inspections. Finding: Mitigation measures AQ -1 to AQ -4 (applied for Impact 5.2-2) would reduce the Proposed Project's regional construction emissions and therefore, also result in a reduction of localized construction - related criteria air pollutant and TACs emissions to the extent feasible. In addition, Mitigation Measure AQ -8 would also contribute to reducing localized construction -related fugitive emissions. However, because existing sensitive receptors may be close to project -related construction activities, construction emissions generated by individual development projects have the potential to exceed SCAQMD's LSTs and health risk thresholds. Furthermore, because of the scale of development activity associated with buildout of the Proposed Project, it is not possible to determine whether the scale and phasing of individual development projects would result in the exceedance of the localized emissions thresholds and cancer risk and contribute to known health effects. Therefore, Impact 5.2- 5, regarding construction -related localized impacts associated with buildout of the Proposed Project, would remain significant and unavoidable and a Statement of Overriding Considerations is required. 2. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact 5.5-1: Although the Proposed Project at buildout would result in lower emissions per service population compared to existing conditions, it would exceed the forecast year -2035 GHG emissions efficiency metric significance threshold and would have a significant impact on the environment. [GHG-1] Although implementation of the proposed Specific Plan under full buildout conditions would result in lower GHG emissions per service population compared to the existing conditions, the forecast year 2035 threshold of 2.4 MTCOze per service population per year would be exceeded in the Project Area. The increases in overall emissions would be attributable to the additional nonresidential and residential land uses proposed. In addition, an increase in service population would contribute to an increase in wastewater generation, water demand, and vehicle trips. New buildings would be more energy efficient, but there would be an overall increase in energy usage due to the magnitude of new building space that would be constructed. Overall, the Proposed Project's cumulative contribution to the long-term GHG emissions in the state would be considered potentially significant. Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations -35- Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measures AQ -5 through AQ -7 from Section 5.2, AirQuality, apply here and would reduce GHG emissions of the Proposed Project. Stationary Source AQ -5 Prior to the issuance of building permits for new development projects in the Project Area, the project applicant shall show on the building plans that all major appliances (dishwashers, refrigerators, clothes washers, and dryers) to be provided/installed are Energy Star certified appliances or appliances of equivalent energy efficiency. Installation of Energy Star or equivalent appliances shall be verified by the City of Anaheim prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Transportation and Motor Vehicles AQ -6 Prior to issuance of building permits for non -single-family residential and mixed-use residential development projects in the Project Area, the project applicant shall indicate on the building plans that the following features have been incorporated into the design of the building(s). Proper installation of these features shall be verified by the City of Anaheim prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. ■ Electric vehicle charging shall be provided as specified in Section A4.106.8.2 (Residential Voluntary Measures) of the CALGreen Code. ■ Bicycle parking shall be provided as specified in Section A4.106.9 (Residential Voluntary Measures) of the CALGreen Code. AQ -7 Prior to the issuance of building permits for nonresidential development projects in the Project Area, project applicants shall indicate on the building plans that the following features have been incorporated into the design of the building(s). Proper installation of these features shall be verified by the City of Anaheim prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. ■ For buildings with more than 10 tenant -occupants, changing/shower facilities shall be provided as specified in Section A5.106.4.3 (Nonresidential Voluntary Measures) of the CALGreen Code. ■ Preferential parking for low -emitting, fuel-efficient, and carpool/van vehicles shall be provided as specified in Section A5.106.5.1 (Nonresidential Voluntary Measures) of the CALGreen Code. ■ Facilities shall be installed to support future electric vehicle charging at each nonresidential building with 30 or more parking spaces. Installation shall be consistent with Section A5.106.5.3 (Nonresidential Voluntary Measures) of the CALGreen Code. Mitigation Measures T-1 and T-2 from Section 5.13, Transportation and Traffic, would also reduce operational emissions of the Proposed Project. Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations -36- T-1 Prior to the first final building and zoning inspection for any non-residential project generating 50 or more employees, the property owners/developer shall complete the following steps below to develop, implement and administer a comprehensive Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program. a) The property owner/developer shall provide to the City of Anaheim Public Works Department, for review and approval, a comprehensive TDM program that includes a menu of TDM program strategies and elements for both existing and future employees' commute options. b) The property owner/developer shall record a covenant on the property that requires ongoing implementation of the approved TDM program and designation of an on-site contact that will be responsible for coordinating the TDM program. c) The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney's Office prior to recordation. T-2 Prior to the first final building and zoning inspection for any nonresidential project generating 50 or more employees, the property owner/developer shall participate in the Anaheim Transportation Network (ATN)/Transportation Management Association. The property owner/developer shall record a covenant on the property that requires ongoing participation in the program and designation of an on-site contact who will be responsible for coordinating and representing the project with the ATN. The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney's Office prior to recordation. Finding: Incorporation of Mitigation Measures AQ -6 through AQ -7 would encourage and accommodate use of alternative -fueled vehicles and nonmotorized transportation and ensure that mobile -source GHG emissions from the buildout of the Proposed Project would be minimized. Mitigation Measures T-1 and T-2 would contribute to reducing VMT. In addition, Mitigation Measure AQ -5 would contribute to minimizing GHG emissions from the energy sector. However, additional federal, state, and local measures would be necessary to reduce GHG emissions under the Proposed Project to meet the long-term GHG reduction goals of Executive Order S-03-05 and SB 32. Although the emissions per service population would improve from implementation of the Proposed Project—from the current 6.80 MTCO2e/SP to 4.53 MTCOze/SP—it would exceed the forecast year 2035 efficiency target of 2.4 MTCOze/SP. A stated, CARB's Draft 2017 Scoping Plan identifies additional state strategies to achieve the 2030 target established under SB 32. It also outlines strategies to be on a trajectory to achieve the 2050 target identified under Executive Order S-03-05 although it is estimated that the state cannot meet the 2050 goal without major advances in technology (CCST 2012). Since no additional statewide measures are currently available, Impact 5.5-1 would remain significant and unavoidable and a Statement of Overriding Considerations is required. Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations -37- 3. Transportation/Traffic Impact 5.13-1: The Proposed Project would result in significant intersection peak hour impacts and roadway segment impacts under the existing 2016 Plus Project scenario. [Threshold T-11 Intersection Levels of Service — Existing 2016 Plus Project Scenario Intersection LOS results for Existing (2016) Plus Project Conditions are summarized in Table 5.13-6 of the DEIR. As shown in Table 5.13-6, all of the intersections are forecast to operate at an acceptable LOS except: ■ Beach Boulevard & Lincoln Avenue (LOS D in AM and PM peak hours according to Caltrans criteria) ■ Beach Boulevard & Orange Avenue (LOS D in AM and PM peak hours according to Caltrans criteria) ■ Beach Boulevard & Ball Road (LOS D in AM and PM peak hours according to Caltrans criteria) ■ Beach Boulevard & Cerritos Avenue (LOS D in AM and PM peak hours according to Caltrans criteria) ■ Beach Boulevard & Katella Avenue (LOS D in AM and PM peak hours according to Caltrans criteria) Roadway Segment Analysis — Existing 2016 Plus Project Scenario As shown in Table 5.13-9 of the DEIR, the addition of project traffic would cause the following Caltrans impacts at the four study roadway segments: ■ Beach Boulevard between Crescent Avenue and Lincoln Avenue (The addition of project traffic degrades the roadway segment from LOS D to F according to Caltrans criteria) ■ Beach Boulevard between Lincoln Avenue and Orange Avenue (The addition of project traffic degrades the roadway segment from LOS D to E according to Caltrans criteria) ■ Beach Boulevard between Orange Avenue and Ball Road (The addition of project traffic degrades the roadway segment from LOS D to E according to Caltrans criteria) ■ Beach Boulevard between Ball Road and Cerritos Avenue (The addition of project traffic degrades the roadway segment from LOS D to E according to Caltrans criteria) Mitigation Measures: T-1 Prior to the first final building and zoning inspection for any non-residential project generating 50 or more employees, the property owners/developer shall complete the following steps below to develop, implement and administer a comprehensive Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program. a) The property owner/developer shall provide to the City of Anaheim Public Works Department, for review and approval, a comprehensive TDM program Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations -38- that includes a menu of TDM program strategies and elements for both existing and future employees' commute options. b) The property owner/developer shall record a covenant on the property that requires ongoing implementation of the approved TDM program and designation of an on-site contact that will be responsible for coordinating the TDM program. c) The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney's Office prior to recordation. T-2 Prior to the first final building and zoning inspection for any nonresidential project generating 50 or more employees, the property owner/developer shall participate in the Anaheim Transportation Network (ATN)/Transportation Management Association. The property owner/developer shall record a covenant on the property that requires ongoing participation in the program and designation of an on-site contact who will be responsible for coordinating and representing the project with the ATN. The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney's Office prior to recordation. T-3 Prior to issuance of the first building permit for each building, the property owner/developer shall pay all applicable transportation impact fees to the City of Anaheim in amounts determined by the City Council Resolution in effect at the time of issuance of the building permit, with credit given for City -authorized improvements provided by the property owner/developer; the property owner/developer shall participate in all applicable reimbursement or benefit districts that have been established. T-4 Prior to issuance of building permits for any project forecast to generate 100 or more peak hour trips, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager using Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model Trip Generation Rates, the property owner/developer shall submit to the City Traffic and Transportation Manager traffic improvement phasing analyses to identify when the improvements identified in the Beach Boulevard Specific Plan EIR Traffic Impact Analysis by Fehr & Peers, dated August 2018 (Appendix F of this DEIR), shall be designed and constructed. a) The traffic improvement phasing analyses will specify the timing funding, construction, and fair -share responsibilities for all traffic improvements necessary to maintain satisfactory levels of service in the City of Anaheim and surrounding jurisdictions, as defined by the City's General Plan, based on thresholds of significance, performance standards, and methodologies in EIR No. 350 and established in the Orange County Congestion Management Program and City of Anaheim Traffic Study Guidelines. b) The property owner/developer shall construct, bond for, or enter into a funding agreement for necessary circulation system improvements, as determined by the City. At minimum, fair -share calculations shall include intersection improvements, rights-of-way, and construction Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations -39- costs, unless alternative funding sources have been identified to help pay for the improvement. T-5 Prior to first final building and zoning inspection, in conjunction with the preparation of any traffic improvement phasing analyses required by Mitigation Measure T-4, the property owner/developer shall implement traffic improvements to maintain satisfactory levels of service, as identified in the project traffic improvement phasing analysis. T-6 Prior to issuance of building permits, in conjunction with the preparation of any traffic improvement phasing analyses required by Mitigation Measure T-4, the property owner/developer, in coordination with the City of Anaheim shall take the following actions in cooperation with the cities of Buena Park and Stanton: a) The traffic improvement phasing analysis shall identify any impacts created by the project on facilities in the cities of Buena Park or Stanton. b) The traffic improvement phasing analysis shall calculate the fair -share percentage responsibility for mitigating these impacts. c) The City of Anaheim shall estimate the cost of the project's fair -share responsibility in cooperation with the cities of Buena Park and Stanton. d) The property owner/developer shall pay the City of Anaheim the fair - share cost prior to issuance of a building permit. e) The City of Anaheim shall hold the amount received in trust, and once a mutually agreed-upon joint program is executed by both cities, the City of Anaheim shall allocate the fair -share contribution to traffic mitigation programs that result in improved traffic flow at the impacted locations, via an agreement mutually acceptable to both cities. Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measures T-1 through T-7 would reduce impacts to all intersections and segments to operate at acceptable levels of service. All impacted intersections that are located in the City of Anaheim and require operational improvements would be reduced to a less than significant level. However, as shown in Table 5.13-6 and 5.13-7, although recommended, not all identified improvements are feasible due to right-of-way constraints, or guaranteed to be implemented due to jurisdictional constraints. Inasmuch as the primary responsibility for approving and/or completing certain improvements outside of Anaheim lies with agencies other than the City of Anaheim (i.e., cities of Buena Park and Stanton, or Caltrans), there is the potential that significant impacts may not be fully mitigated if such improvements are not completed for reasons beyond the City of Anaheim's control (e.g., the City of Anaheim cannot undertake or require improvements outside of Anaheim's jurisdiction). Should that occur, the project's traffic impact would remain Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations -40- significant. As a result, Impact 5.13-1 would remain significant and unavoidable and a Statement of Overriding Considerations is required. Impact 5.13-2: The Proposed Project would result in significant intersection peak hour impacts and roadway segment impacts under the Forecast Year 2035 General Plan Buildout Plus Project scenario compared to the Forecast Year 2035 General Plan Buildout scenario. [Thresholds T-1 and T-21 General Plan Buildout Year (2035) Plus Project Intersection Impacts As shown in Table 5.13-14 of the DEIR, the addition of project traffic would cause the following Caltrans, City of Buena Park, and City of Anaheim impacts: ■ Beach Boulevard & Orange Avenue (The addition of project traffic degrades the intersection operations from LOS D to E in the AM peak hour according to Caltrans criteria) ■ Beach Boulevard & Ball Road (The project adds traffic to the intersection already operating at LOS E in the AM and PM peak hours according to Caltrans criteria) ■ Beach Boulevard & Katella Avenue (The project adds traffic to the intersection already operating at LOS D in the PM peak hour according to Caltrans criteria) ■ Knott Avenue & Lincoln Avenue (The addition of project traffic increases the V/C ratio at intersections operating at LOS E in the AM peak hour and LOS F in the PM peak hour according to City of Anaheim and Buena Park criteria) Per Caltrans criteria, since the delay was not increased at the intersection, a significant impact was not designated at the intersection of Beach Boulevard and Cerritos Avenue. Per the City of Buena Park impact criteria, since the increase in V/C is less than 0.02 at the intersection operating below the acceptable LOS, a significant impact was not designated at the intersection of Valley View Street and Lincoln Avenue. General Plan Buildout Year (2035) Plus Project Roadway Segment Impacts As shown in Table 5.13-15 of the DEIR, the addition of project traffic would cause the following Caltrans impacts at the four study roadway segments: ■ Beach Boulevard between Crescent Avenue and Lincoln Avenue (The addition of project traffic degrades the roadway segment from LOS E to F according to Caltrans criteria) ■ Beach Boulevard between Lincoln Avenue and Orange Avenue (The project adds traffic to the roadway segment operating at LOS D according to Caltrans criteria) ■ Beach Boulevard between Orange Avenue and Ball Road (The project adds traffic to the roadway segment operating at LOS D according to Caltrans criteria) ■ Beach Boulevard between Ball Road and Cerritos Avenue (The project adds traffic to the roadway segment operating at LOS D according to Caltrans criteria) Mitigation Measures: See Mitigation MeasuresT-1 through T-7. Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations -41- Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measures T-1 through T-7 would reduce impacts to all intersections and segments to operate at acceptable levels of service. However, as shown in Table 5.13-14 and 5.13-15, although recommended, not all identified improvements are feasible due to right-of-way constraints, or guaranteed to be implemented due to jurisdictional constraints. Inasmuch as the primary responsibility for approving and/or completing certain improvements outside of Anaheim lies with agencies other than the City of Anaheim (i.e., cities of Buena Park and Stanton, or Caltrans), there is the potential that significant impacts may not be fully mitigated if such improvements are not completed for reasons beyond the City of Anaheim's control (e.g., the City of Anaheim cannot undertake or require improvements outside of Anaheim's jurisdiction). Should that occur, the project's traffic impact would remain significant. As a result, Impact 5.13-2 would remain significant and unavoidable and a Statement of Overriding Considerations is required. IV. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT A. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED AND REJECTED DURING THE SCOPING/PROJECT PLANNING PROCESS The following is a discussion of the alternatives considered during the scoping and planning process and the reasons why they were not selected for detailed analysis in the EIR Alternative Development Areas The adopted General Plan already allows a significant amount of residential and non-residential development within the Project Area. However, there have been several impediments to infill development and redevelopment of vacant and underutilized parcels in the West Anaheim area. The main objective of the project is to revitalize the Project Area as a safe, attractive, and economically thriving corridor in the heart of West Anaheim. This would not be achieved by adopting a specific plan in another area of the City. Consistent with the supreme court's interpretation of the role of the General Plan in framing CEQA alternatives analysis, and in consideration of the General Plan Update, no alternative sites within the jurisdiction of the City are considered to be feasible alternatives to the Proposed Project, since they would not achieve the main objective of the Project. Therefore, an alternative site could not feasibly accomplish most of the basic objectives of the Proposed Project, and thus there are no available alternative sites which could accommodate the Proposed Project. B. ALTERNATIVES SELECTED FOR FURTHER ANALYSIS The following alternatives were determined to represent a reasonable range of alternatives with the potential to feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project. No Project/Existing Specific Plans Alternative This alternative, which is required by CEQA, assumes that the existing General Plan and Zoning designations would remain unchanged. The Project Area currently contains approximately 1.3 million square feet of non-residential land uses and 1,477 dwelling units. Under this alternative the Project Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations -42- Area would be developed to the maximum buildout potential under the current General Plan and Zoning designations. Under this alternative, an additional 2,158,204 square feet of non-residential land uses and 1,039 additional dwelling units would be developed within the Project Area. Finding: The City finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers and the need to achieve a good balance of allowable land uses and densities that will create the right market conditions to encourage private investment in the project area, make the No Project/Existing Specific Plans Alternative infeasible. [Pub. Res. Code 21081(a) (3); Guidelines 515091(a) (3)] Facts in Support of Finding • This alternative would not meet any of the project objectives. • As summarized in Table 7-2 of the DEIR, this alternative would lessen impacts to public services. Impacts related to cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, tribal cultural resources, and utilities and service systems would be similar to the Proposed Project. Greater impacts are anticipated for aesthetics, land use and planning, and population and housing. Significant and unavoidable impacts related to air quality, GHG emissions, and transportation and traffic would be increased. Increased Commercial Use Alternative Under the Increased Commercial Use Alternative, 4.3 acres from the mixed-use medium uses allowed on the Westgate site (located on the northeast corner of Beach Boulevard and Lincoln Avenue) would be converted to regional commercial uses, allowing only commercial uses. Under this alternative, the total regional commercial uses would increase from 380,000 square feet to 483,298 square feet, whereas the non-residential uses and the number of residential units from the mixed use medium uses would decrease from 210,575 square feet to 190,575 square feet, and 605 unit to 450 units, respectively. This conversion would keep the total number of ADT the same as under the Proposed Project (77,256 ADT for both the Proposed Project and the Increased Commercial Use Alternative). The jobs housing ratio under this alternative would improve from 1.08 (Proposed Project) to 1.15 (Increased Commercial Use Alternative) within the Specific Plan area. Finding: The City finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers and the need to achieve a good balance of allowable land uses and densities that will create the right market conditions to encourage private investment in the project area, make the Increased Commercial Use Alternative infeasible. [Pub. Res. Code 21081(a) (3); Guidelines �15091(a) (3)] Facts in Support of Finding • This alternative would meet all of the objectives of the Proposed Project. Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations -43- • As summarized in Table 7-3 of the DEIR, this alternative would slightly increase impacts to population and housing, public services. Population and housing impacts would be reduced slightly. Impacts to all other issue areas would be similar to the Proposed Project. Significant and unavoidable impacts related to air quality, GHG emissions, and transportation and traffic would still occur. Residential Development Can Alternative The Residential Development Cap Alternative would not change the proposed specific plan designations. However, a residential development cap would be added to Table 4-1 in the specific plan to limit the number of residential units within the specific plan area to 2,500 dwelling units. Non-residential square footage would remain the same as under the Proposed Project. This alternative would reduce overall ADT from 77,256 to 62,418, a 20 percent decrease in total trips generated within the specific plan area compared to the Proposed Project. The intent of this alternative is to reduce the air quality, GHG emissions, and traffic impacts associated with implementation of the Proposed Project while achieving the basic objectives of the Proposed Project. Finding: The City finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers and the need to achieve a good balance of allowable land uses and densities that will create the right market conditions to encourage private investment in the project area, make the Residential Development Cap Alternative infeasible. [Pub. Res. Code 21081(a) (3); Guidelines 515091(a) (3)] Facts in Support of Finding • This alternative would meet some of the project objectives, but not to the same extent as the Proposed Project. • As summarized in Table 7-4 of the DEIR, this alternative would decrease impacts to air quality, GHG, noise, public services, transportation and traffic, and utilities and service systems. Impacts to aesthetics and population and housing would be increased. Impacts to all other issue areas would be similar to the Proposed Project. However, significant and unavoidable impacts related to air quality, GHG emissions, and transportation and traffic would still occur. Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations -44- V. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS CEQA requires decision makers to balance the benefits of the proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project. If the benefits of the project outweigh the unavoidable adverse effects, those effects may be considered "acceptable" (State CEQA Guidelines Section 15093[a]). CEQA requires the agency to support, in writing, the specific reasons for considering a project acceptable when significant impacts are In to mitigate. Such reasons must be based on substantial evidence in the Final EIR or elsewhere in the administrative record (State CEQA Guidelines Section 15093 [b]). The agency's statement is referred to as a "Statement of Overriding Considerations." The following sections provide a description of the each of the project's significant and unavoidable adverse impacts and the justification for adopting a statement of overriding considerations. A. Significant and Unavoidable Adverse Impacts Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(b) and Guidelines Section 15093, the City has balanced the benefits of the Proposed Project against the following unavoidable adverse impacts associated with the Proposed Project and has adopted all feasible mitigation measures with respect to these impacts: (1) Air Quality, (2) Greenhouse Gas Emissions and (3) Transportation/Traffic. The City also has examined alternatives to the Proposed Project, none of which both meets the Project objectives to the same extent as the Proposed Project, and is environmentally preferable to the Proposed Project. The City declares that it has adopted mitigation measures to reduce all of the Proposed Project's environmental impacts to an insignificant level, other than the following: Air Quality Impact 5.2-1 Components of and improvements proposed under the Proposed Project would contribute to minimize criteria air pollutant emissions from transportation and energy use. In addition, mitigation measures applied for Impact 5.2-3 would also further reduce the project's regional operational phase criteria air pollutant emissions to the extent feasible. However, given the potential increase in growth and associated increase in criteria air pollutant emissions, the project would continue to be potentially inconsistent with the assumptions in the AQMP. Therefore, Impact 5.2-1 would remain significant and unavoidable. Impact 5.2-2 Mitigation Measures AQ -1 through AQ -4 are feasible and would reduce criteria air pollutant emissions from construction -related activities to the extent feasible. However, construction time frames and equipment for individual site-specific projects are not available and there is a potential for multiple developments to be constructed at any one time, resulting in significant construction -related emissions. Therefore, despite adherence to Mitigation Measures AQ -1 to AQ -4, Impact 5.2-2 would remain significant and unavoidable. Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations -45- Impact 5.2-3 Mitigation Measures AQ -5 would contribute in reducing criteria air pollutant emissions from stationary sources while Mitigation Measures AQ -6 and AQ -7 in addition to Mitigation Measures T-1 and T-2 would contribute in reducing mobile -source criteria air pollutant emissions to the extent feasible. However, due to the magnitude of emissions generated by residential, office, and commercial land uses, no mitigation measures are available that would reduce impacts below SCAQMD's thresholds. As a result, Impact 5.2-3 would remain significant and unavoidable and a Statement of Overriding Considerations is required. Impact 5.2-5 Mitigation measures AQ -1 to AQ -4 (applied for Impact 5.2-2) would reduce the Proposed Project's regional construction emissions and therefore result in a reduction of localized construction -related criteria air pollutant and TACs emissions to the extent feasible. In addition, Mitigation Measure AQ - 8 would also contribute to reducing localized construction -related fugitive emissions. However, because existing sensitive receptors may be close to project -related construction activities, construction emissions generated by individual development projects have the potential to exceed SCAQMD's LSTs and health risk thresholds. Furthermore, because of the scale of development activity associated with buildout of the Proposed Project, it is not possible to determine whether the scale and phasing of individual development projects would result in the exceedance of the localized emissions thresholds and cancer risk and contribute to known health effects. Therefore, Impact 5.2- 5, regarding construction -related localized impacts associated with buildout of the Proposed Project, would remain significant and unavoidable. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact 5.5-1 Incorporation of Mitigation Measures AQ -6 through AQ -7 would encourage and accommodate use of alternative -fueled vehicles and nonmotorized transportation and ensure that mobile -source GHG emissions from the buildout of the Proposed Project would be minimized. Mitigation Measures T-1 and T-2 would contribute to reducing VMT. In addition, Mitigation Measure AQ -5 would contribute to minimizing GHG emissions from the energy sector. However, additional federal, state, and local measures would be necessary to reduce GHG emissions under the Proposed Project to meet the long-term GHG reduction goals of Executive Order S-03-05 and SB 32. Although the emissions per service population would improve from implementation of the Proposed Project—from the current 6.80 MTCO2e/SP to 4.53 MTCO2e/SP—it would exceed the forecast year 2035 efficiency target of 2.4 MTCOze/SP. A stated, CARB's Draft 2017 Scoping Plan identifies additional state strategies to achieve the 2030 target established under SB 32. It also outlines strategies to be on a trajectory to achieve the 2050 target identified under Executive Order S-03-05 although it is estimated that the state cannot meet the 2050 goal without major advances in technology (CCST 2012). Since no additional statewide measures are currently available, Impact 5.5-1 would remain significant and unavoidable. Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations -46- Transportation and Traffic Impact 5.13-1 Implementation of Mitigation Measures T-1 through T-7 would reduce impacts to all intersections and segments to operate at acceptable levels of service. All impacted intersections that are located in the City of Anaheim and require operational improvements would be reduced to a less than significant level. However, as shown in Table 5.13-6 and 5.13-7, although recommended, not all identified improvements are feasible due to right-of-way constraints, or guaranteed to be implemented due to jurisdictional constraints. Inasmuch as the primary responsibility for approving and/or completing certain improvements outside of Anaheim lies with agencies other than the City of Anaheim (i.e., cities of Buena Park and Stanton, or Caltrans), there is the potential that significant impacts may not be fully mitigated if such improvements are not completed for reasons beyond the City of Anaheim's control (e.g., the City of Anaheim cannot undertake or require improvements outside of Anaheim's jurisdiction). Should that occur, the project's traffic impact would remain significant. As a result, Impact 5.13-1 would rem i signi ficant and unavoidable. Impact 5.13-2 Implementation of Mitigation Measures T-1 through T-7 would reduce impacts to all intersections and segments to operate at acceptable levels of service. However, as shown in Table 5.13-14 and 5.13-15, although recommended, not all identified improvements are feasible due to right-of-way constraints, or guaranteed to be implemented due to jurisdictional constraints. Inasmuch as the primary responsibility for approving and/or completing certain improvements outside of Anaheim lies with agencies other than the City of Anaheim (i.e., cities of Buena Park and Stanton, or Caltrans), there is the potential that significant impacts may not be fully mitigated if such improvements are not completed for reasons beyond the City of Anaheim's control (e.g., the City of Anaheim cannot undertake or require improvements outside of Anaheim's jurisdiction). Should that occur, the project's traffic impact would remain significant. As a result, Impact 5.13-2 would remain significant and unavoidable. Impact 5.13-3 The analysis indicates that one roadway segment, Beach Blvd between Crescent Avenue & Lincoln Avenue, is forecast to degrade from LOS D to LOS F with the addition of project traffic under the Existing (2016) Plus Project scenario, resulting in a CMP impact. In order to mitigate the impact to acceptable LOS C, two additional travel lanes are required in each direction. However, the corridor is currently built out to General Plan capacity and would require right-of-way acquisition by the City. The roadway is also under Caltrans jurisdiction, and the City of Anaheim cannot guarantee that the improvements would be implemented. Further, the provision of additional travel lanes on Beach Boulevard is inconsistent with the vision, goals and policies of the Specific Plan. Therefore Impact 5.13-3 is considered significant and unavoidable. Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations -47- B. CONSIDERATIONS IN SUPPORT OF THE STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS The following section describes the benefits of the project that outweigh the project's unavoidable adverse effects and provides specific reasons for considering the project acceptable even though the Final EIR has indicated that there will be significant project impacts that are infeasible to mitigate. Economic Growth: Originally serving as the only north -south route with direct access to the coastal cities of Orange County, Beach Boulevard was once known as the "Road to Summer." Significant development occurred along the corridor in the City of Anaheim during the 1960s and 1970s to serve tourists visiting area beaches and amusement parks. Over time, I-5, SR -55, SR -73, and SR -133 provided alternative access to Orange County's beach communities, and Beach Boulevard is no longer the primary tourist -oriented connection to the Orange County coast. However, it remains a state highway and is a Caltrans -owned facility. Existing uses in the Project Area include hospitality, commercial, residential, office, recreational, and institutional. There are approximately 35 acres of vacant land. The Proposed Project would establish a community -driven vision supported by new development standards, permitted and prohibited uses, design guidelines, sustainable practices, economic development incentives, and capital improvements that improve the quality of life for all future users of the corridor. The Proposed Project includes commercial, office and mixed-use designations to encourage high quality companies to relocate, expand or start up in the Project Area, particularly in the City -identified "Areas of Change". This includes, but is not limited to, the existing West Anaheim Medical Center and the surrounding properties, the existing 30 -acre property at the northeast corner of Beach Boulevard and Lincoln Avenue (that is designated Mixed -Use Medium and Regional Commercial and is considered a catalyst project to encourage residential uses and high quality restaurants, retail and other services), and the row of motels mainly located along the west side of Beach Blvd, north of Ball Road and south of Orange Avenue that is designated Medium Density Residential. The Proposed Project also includes an implementation section that will provide incentives to further encourage economic growth in the area. Implementation of the Proposed Project would better position existing businesses and future businesses to respond to market trends and competitive pressure from other areas and would allow the City to engage in effective incentives for local business community to help foster economic vitality and establish strategies to attract quality, long-term jobs. Therefore, the Proposed Project would promote economic growth in the Beach Boulevard Area. Provides Employment Opportunities for Highly Skilled Workers: The implementation of the Proposed Project will provide employment opportunities for a highly skilled workforce, especially opportunities within the trades and construction industries during the construction phase of development projects. Further, the Proposed Project places employment centers along Beach Boulevard and provides a set of economic development strategies for high quality (not quantity) "living wage" companies to relocate, expand, or start up within the Project Area. Reduce Vehicle Miles Traveled: Beach Boulevard and Lincoln Avenue are identified as high quality transit areas by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), with bus service at 15 -minute headways. The Proposed Project would expand opportunities for active transportation (non -motorized transportation, such as bicycling and walking), housing near and/or within employment centers, retail commercial uses in or near residential areas and employment, Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations -48- additional high-density and/or mixed-use development along major transit corridors and/or transit stops, reducing reliance on automobiles, and therefore, having positive impact on the overall vehicle miles traveled in compliance with Senate Bill (SB) 375. Sustainability: The Proposed Project would promote citywide sustainability by encouraging growth in a manner that reduces greenhouse gas emissions and encourages green buildings. The Proposed Project also includes implementation items to support sustainability, including incentives to construct or redevelop properties aligned with Green Building Standards The Proposed Project would further market and expand existing programs that incentivizes a diverse spectrum of energy and water systems and services, ranging from systematic energy audits, lighting retrofits, water conservation strategies, renewable energy utilization, and new construction and customized energy reduction strategies. Provision of Needed Housing: The number of housing units in the Project Area would increase from 1,477 to 5,128 dwelling units, an increase of 3,651 units. The existing job per housing unit ratio within Project Area is 1.1, and at buildout, the Project Area would have a ratio of 1.08. Therefore, although the Proposed Project would result in direct and indirect growth in the area, the Proposed Project would be generally consistent with SCAG's growth management policies that aim to better coordinate infrastructure development with projected population, housing, and employment growth. The Proposed Project would create roughly the same balance in the Project Area. With or without the Proposed Project, Orange County is expected to become slightly more jobs -rich. The City of Anaheim is also projected to become more jobs -rich, with jobs -housing ratios of 1.87 by 2020, 1.96 by 2030, and 1.92 by 2040. Implementation and buildout of the Proposed Project would result in a slightly more balanced ration of 1.90 by 2040, compared to citywide growth without the Proposed Project. The Proposed Project would also present opportunities for the City to meet its Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) allocation and better house the substantial amount of people working in the City, particularly low-income people. Implements the Objectives Established for the Project: The following objectives have been established for the Beach Boulevard Specific Plan. The implementation of these project objectives is a legal prerogative of the City. Revitalize the Project Area as a safe, attractive, and economically thriving corridor in the heart of West Anaheim. 2. Remove significant barriers to infill development and promote the reuse and redevelopment of existing vacant and underutilized properties along the Beach Boulevard corridor. 3. Streamline the project approval process. 4. Improve the physical image and brand the corridor to help attract reinvestment, new investment, and quality retail, dining, and entertainment uses. 5. Incentivize development and relocation of high quality businesses to the corridor. 6. Create quality employment opportunities by strengthening the overall economic base of the area. Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations -49- 7. Encourage a balanced mix of uses including a variety of housing types consistent with the City's adopted Housing Element. 8. Facilitate the Caltrans relinquishment process to assume control of the right-of-way along Beach Boulevard within the City limits to streamline the project approval process and implement landscaping, median, and driveway entrance improvements. 9. Foster development that reduce vehicle miles traveled by promoting alternative to driving, such as walking, biking, and use of mass transit. 10. Create additional gathering and recreation areas and opportunities. 11. Promote sustainable development and infrastructure design. 12. Meet state and regional sustainability mandates. Conclusion For the foregoing reasons, the implementation of the Beach Boulevard Specific Plan and the associated project action will contribute toward maintaining the Beach Boulevard area as a major employment center while improving the physical image of the public realm and complying with regional sustainability regulations and mandates, all of which outweigh the unavoidable environmental impacts. Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations -50- EXHIBIT "B" MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM NO. 342 FOR THE BEACH BOULEVARD SPECIFIC PLAN [Behind this page] -7- PC2018-056 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR BEACH BOULEVARD SPECIFIC PLAN Exhibit B CEQA Action: Environmental Impact Report No. 350 (State Clearinghouse #2017041042) 1. Project Description — ■ General Plan Amendment No. 2015-00500: Amend the General Plan Land Use Element to be consistent with the Beach Boulevard Specific Plan. ■ Specific Plan No. 2017-00001: Adopt the Beach Boulevard Specific Plan (SP2017-01). ■ Zoning Code Amendment No. 2017 00137: Adopt Chapter 18.122 (Beach Boulevard Specific Plan (SP2017-01) Zoning and Development Standards). ■ Reclassification No. 2017-00304: Adopt an ordinance to apply the zoning and development standards of the proposed new Chapter 18.122 to those properties within the Beach Boulevard Specific Plan project area that are currently classified under the "RM -2" Multiple -Family Residential Zone, "RM -3" Multiple -Family Residential Zone, "RM -4" Multiple -Family Residential Zone, "C -G" General Commercial Zone, "O -L" Low Intensity Office Zone and "T" Transition Zone. 2. Property Owner/Developer — Any owner or developer of real property within the BBSP boundaries 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 and Building Department, in conjunction with any appropriate agencies or City departments, shall determine the adequacy of any proposed "environmental equivalent/timing" and, if determined necessary, may refer said determination to the Planning Commission. Any costs associated with information required in order to make a determination of environmental equivalency/timing shall be borne by the property owner/developer. Staff time for reviews will be charged on a time and materials basis at the rate in the City's adopted fee schedule. 4. Timing — This is the point where a mitigation measure must be monitored for compliance. In the case where multiple action items are indicated, it is the first point where compliance associated with the mitigation measure must be monitored. Once the initial action item has been complied with, no additional monitoring pursuant to the Mitigation Monitoring Program will occur because routine City practices and procedures will ensure that the intent of the measure has been complied with. For example, if the timing is "to be shown on approved building plans" subsequent to issuance of the building permit consistent with the approved plans will be final building and zoning inspections pursuant to the building permit to ensure compliance. 5. 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. Ongoing Mitigation Measures — The mitigation measures that are designated to occur on an ongoing basis as part of this mitigation monitoring program will be monitored in the form of an annual letter from the property owner/developer in January of each year stating how compliance with the subject measures(s) has been achieved. When compliance with a measure has been demonstrated for a period of one year, monitoring of the measure will be deemed to be satisfied and no further monitoring will occur. For measures that are to be monitored "Ongoing During Construction," the annual letter will review those measures only while construction is occurring. Monitoring will be discontinued after construction is completed. Building Permit — For purposes of this mitigation monitoring program, a building permit shall be defined as any permit issued for construction of a new building or structural expansion or modification of any existing building but shall not include any permits required for interior tenant improvements or minor additions to an existing structure or building. Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) Timing I Mitiqation Measure Responsible for Monitorinq Completion AIR QUALITY Prior to issuance of any AQ -1 Applicants for new development projects in the Beach Boulevard Area Specific Planning and Building construction permits Plan that are subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (i.e., non-exempt Department projects) shall require the construction contractor to use equipment that meets the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Tier 4 emissions standards for off- road diesel -powered construction equipment with more than 50 horsepower, unless it can be demonstrated to the City of Anaheim that such equipment is not available. Any emissions control device used by the contractor shall achieve emissions reductions that are no less than what could be achieved by a Level 4 diesel emissions control strategy for a similarly sized engine, as defined by the California Air Resources Board's regulations. Prior to issuance of any construction permits, documentation shall be provided by the applicant to the City of Anaheim that verifies, to the satisfaction of the City, the use of construction equipment as stated in this mitigation measure. Prior to issuance of AQ -2 Prior to issuance of grading, demolition or building permits whichever occurs first, Planning and Building grading, demolition or the property owner/developer shall provide a list of all construction equipment Department building permits proposed to be used on the project site for projects that are subject to the whichever occurs first California Environmental Quality Act (i.e., non-exempt projects). This list may be provided on the building plans. The construction equipment list shall state the make, model, and equipment identification number of all the equipment. On-going during AQ -3 During construction activities, for projects that are subject to the California Planning and Building construction activities Environmental Quality Act (i.e., non-exempt projects), the construction contractors Department shall ensure that the equipment shall be properly serviced and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations; and, that all nonessential idling of construction equipment is restricted to five minutes or less in compliance with Section 2449 of the California Code of Regulations, Title 13, Article 4.8, Chapter 9. Prior to issuance of a AQ -4 Prior to issuance of a building permit for projects that are subject to the California Planning and Building building permit for Environmental Quality Act (i.e., non-exempt projects), the property Department projects that are subject owner/developer shall require the construction contractor and provide a note on to the California construction plans indicating that: Environmental Quality a) All coatings and solvents will have a volatile organic compound (VOC) content Act (i.e., non-exempt lower than required under Rule 1113 (i.e., super compliant paints). projects) b) All architectural coatings shall be applied either by (1) using a high-volume, low-pressure spray method operated at an air pressure between 0.1 and 10 pounds per square inch gauge to achieve a 65 percent application efficiency; or 2 manual application using a paintbrush, hand -roller, trowel, spatula, Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) Timing Mitigation Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion dauber, rag, or sponge, to achieve a 100 percent applicant efficiency. c) The construction contractor shall also use precoated/natural colored building materials, where feasible. The City shall verify compliance during normal construction site inspections. Prior to the issuance of AQ -5 Prior to the issuance of building permits for new development projects in the Planning and Building building permits for new Project Area, the project applicant shall show on the building plans that all major Department development projects in appliances (dishwashers, refrigerators, clothes washers, and dryers) to be the Project Area provided/installed are Energy Star certified appliances or appliances of equivalent energy efficiency. Installation of Energy Star or equivalent appliances shall be verified by the City of Anaheim prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Prior to issuance of AQ -6 Prior to issuance of building permits for non -single-family residential and mixed- Planning and Building building permits for non- use residential development projects in the Project Area, the project applicant shall Department single-family residential indicate on the building plans that the following features have been incorporated and mixed-use residential into the design of the building(s). Proper installation of these features shall be development projects in verified by the City of Anaheim prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. the Project Area • Electric vehicle charging shall be provided as specified in Section A4.106.8.2 (Residential Voluntary Measures) of the CALGreen Code. • Bicycle parking shall be provided as specified in Section A4.106.9 (Residential Voluntary Measures) of the CALGreen Code. Prior to the issuance of AQ -7 Prior to the issuance of building permits for nonresidential development projects in Planning and Building building permits for the Project Area, project applicants shall indicate on the building plans that the Department nonresidential following features have been incorporated into the design of the building(s). Proper development projects in installation of these features shall be verified by the City of Anaheim Building the Project Area Division prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. • For buildings with more than ten tenant -occupants, changing/shower facilities shall be provided as specified in Section A5.106.4.3 (Nonresidential Voluntary Measures) of the CALGreen Code. • Preferential parking for low -emitting, fuel-efficient, and carpool/van vehicles shall be provided as specified in Section A5.106.5.1 (Nonresidential Voluntary Measures) of the CALGreen Code. • Facilities shall be installed to support future electric vehicle charging at each nonresidential building with 30 or more parking spaces. Installation shall be consistent with Section A5.106.5.3 (Nonresidential Voluntary Measures) of the CALGreen Code. Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) Timing Mitigation Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion Prior to issuance of AQ -8 Prior to issuance of grading, demolition or building permits, whichever occurs first, Planning and Building grading, demolition or for projects subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (i.e., non-exempt Department building permits, projects), the property owner/developer shall submit a dust control plan that whichever occurs first, for implements the following measures during ground -disturbing activities, in addition projects that subject to to the existing requirements for fugitive dust control under South Coast Air Quality the California Management District Rule 403, to further reduce PM10 and PM2.5emissions: Environmental Quality a) Following all grading activities, the construction contractor shall reestablish Act (i.e., non-exempt ground cover on the construction site through seeding and watering. projects) b) During all construction activities, the construction contractor shall sweep streets with Rule 1186—compliant, PMio-efficient vacuum units on a daily basis if silt is carried over to adjacent public thoroughfares or occurs as a result of hauling. c) During all construction activities, the construction contractor shall maintain a minimum 24 -inch freeboard on trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials and tarp materials with a fabric cover or other cover that achieves the same amount of protection. d) During all construction activities, the construction contractor shall water exposed ground surfaces and disturbed areas a minimum of every three hours on the construction site and a minimum of three times per day. e) During all construction activities, the construction contractor shall limit onsite vehicle speeds on unpaved roads to no more than 15 miles per hour. The City shall verify compliance during normal construction site inspections. CULTURAL AND PALEOTOLOGICAL RESOURCES Prior to demolition CUL -1 Prior to demolition, the project applicant/developer shall provide documentation of Planning and Building the presence/absence of historic resources for the properties that are 50 years old Department or over by a qualified historical resources professional meeting the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualifications Standards. The criteria for determining the historically significant structures shall meet one or more the following criteria: 1. It strongly represents a significant event or broad patterns of local, regional, or national history. 2. It is associated with the life of a significant person in local, regional, or national history. 3. It is a very good example of a significant architectural style, property type, period, or method of construction; or it represents the work of an architect, designer, engineer, or builder who is locally, regionally, or nationally significant; or it is a significant visual feature of the City. Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) Timing Mitigation Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion Prior to demolition CUL -2 On properties where historically significant resources are identified, a proper Planning and Building documentation meeting the Historic American Building Survey (HABS) Guidelines Department shall be prepared and implemented, as approved by the qualified historian meeting the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualifications Standards. Such documentation shall include drawings, photographs, and written data for each building/structure/element, and provide a detailed mitigation plan, including a monitoring program, recovery, rehabilitation, redesign, relocation, and/or in situ preservation plan. Prior to the issuance of CUL -3 Prior to the issuance of any permits allowing ground -disturbing activities that Planning and Building any permits allowing cause excavation to depths greater than current foundations, the project Department ground -disturbing applicant/developer shall retain an archeologist who meets the Secretary of the activities that cause Interior's Standards for professional archaeology for the project and will be on call excavation to depths during all grading and other significant ground -disturbing activities. The Qualified greater than current Archaeologist shall ensure that the following measures are followed for the project. foundations • Prior to any ground disturbance, the Qualified Archaeologist, or their designee, shall provide a worker environmental awareness protection (WEAP) training to construction personnel regarding regulatory requirements for the protection of cultural (prehistoric and historic) resources. As part of this training, construction personnel shall be briefed on proper procedures to follow should unanticipated cultural resources be made during construction. Workers will be provided contact information and protocols to follow in the event that inadvertent discoveries are made. The WEAP training can be in the form of a video or PowerPoint presentation. Printed literature (handouts) can accompany the training and can also be given to new workers and contractors to avoid the necessity of continuous training over the course of the project. • In the event that unanticipated cultural material is encountered during any phase of project construction, all construction work within 50 feet (15 meters) of the find shall cease and the Qualified Archaeologist shall assess the find for importance. Construction activities may continue in other areas. If, in consultation with the appropriate City, the discovery is determined not to be important, work will be permitted to continue in the area. • If a resource is determined by the Qualified Archaeologist to constitute a "historical resource" pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(a) or has a "unique archaeological resource" pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.2(g), the Qualified Archaeologist shall coordinate with the applicant and the City to develop a formal treatment plan that would serve to reduce impacts to the resources, and construction allowed to proceed. The treatment plan established for the resources shall be in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 for historical resources and Public Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) Timing Mitigation Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion Resources Code Sections 21083.2(b) for unique archaeological resources. Preservation in place (i.e., avoidance) is the preferred manner of treatment. • If preservation in place is not feasible, treatment may include implementation of archaeological data recovery excavations to remove the resource along with subsequent laboratory processing and analysis. • Any historic archaeological material that is not Native American in origin shall be curated at a public, nonprofit institution with a research interest in the materials, such as the South Central Coastal Information Center at California State University, Fullerton. If no institution accepts the archaeological material, they shall be donated to a local school or historical society in the area for educational purposes, as determined as appropriate by the City of Anaheim. Prior to the beginning of PAL -1 Prior to the beginning of ground disturbances, the project applicant/developer shall Planning and Building ground disturbances provide a study to document the presence/absence of paleontological resources. Department On properties where resources are identified, the City shall require the project applicant/developer to retain a qualified paleontologist to monitor ground - disturbing activities that occur in deposits that could potentially contain paleontological resources (e.g., older Quaternary Alluvium and terrace deposits and other older sedimentary deposits). Before ground -disturbing activities begin, a qualified paleontologist shall prepare a monitoring plan specifying the frequency, duration, and methods of monitoring. Sediment samples shall be collected in the deposits and processed to determine the small -fossil potential in the project site, and any fossils recovered during mitigation should be deposited in an accredited and permanent scientific institution. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Prior to the issuance of HAZ-1 Prior to the issuance of demolition permits for any buildings or structures that Planning and Building demolition permits would be demolished in conjunction with individual development projects pursuant Department to the Proposed Project, the project applicant/developer shall conduct the following inspections and assessments for all buildings and structures onsite and shall provide the City of Anaheim with a copy of the report of each investigation or assessment. • The project applicant shall retain a California Certified Asbestos Consultant (CAC) to perform abatement project planning, monitoring (including air monitoring), oversight, and reporting of all asbestos -containing materials (ACM) encountered. The abatement, containment, and disposal of all ACM shall be conducted in accordance with the South Coast Air Quality Management District's Rule 1403 and California Code of Regulation Title 8, Section 1529 (Asbestos). Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) Timing Mitigation Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion • The project applicant shall retain a licensed or certified lead inspector/assessor to conduct the abatement, containment, and disposal of all lead waste encountered. The contracted lead inspector/assessor shall be certified by the California Department of Public Health (CDPH). All lead abatement shall be performed by a CDPH-certified lead supervisor or a CDPH-certified worker under the direct supervision of a lead supervisor certified by CDPH. The abatement, containment, and disposal of all lead waste encountered shall be conducted in accordance with the US Occupational Safety and Health Administration Rule 29, CFR Part 1926, and California Code of Regulation, Title 8, Section 1532.1 (Lead). • Evidence of the contracted professionals retained by the project applicant shall be provided to the City of Anaheim. Additionally, contractors performing ACM and lead waste removal shall provide evidence of abatement activities to the City of Anaheim. Prior to the issuance of HAZ-2 Prior to the issuance of grading permits for individual development projects that Planning and Building grading permits would be accommodated by the Proposed Project, the project applicant/developer Department shall submit a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) to the City of Anaheim to identify environmental conditions of the development site and determine whether contamination is present. The Phase I ESA shall be prepared by a Registered Professional Engineer and in accordance with the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standard E 1527.05, Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process. If recognized environmental conditions related to soils are identified in the Phase I ESA, the project applicant shall perform soil sampling as a part of a Phase 11 ESA. If contamination is found at significant levels, the project applicant shall remediate all contaminated soils in accordance with state and local agency requirements (California Department of Toxic Substances Control, Regional Water Quality Control Board, Anaheim Fire & Rescue, etc.). All contaminated soils and/or material encountered shall be disposed of at a regulated site and in accordance with applicable laws and regulations prior to the completion of grading. Prior to the issuance of building permits, a report documenting the completion, results, and any follow-up remediation on the recommendations, if any, shall be provided to the City of Anaheim evidencing that all site remediation activities have been completed. NOISE Prior to issuance ofN-1 Prior to issuance of demolition, grading and/or building permits, a note shall be Planning and Building demolition, grading provided on plans for grading, demolition, and construction activities, indicating Department and/or building permits that the property owner/developer shall be responsible for requiring contractors to implement the followina measures to limit construction -related noise: Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) Timing Mitigation Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion • Construction activity is limited to the daytime hours between 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., as prescribed in the City's Municipal Code (Additional work hours may be permitted if deemed necessary by the Director of Public Works or Building Official). • All internal combustion engines on construction equipment and trucks are fitted with properly maintained mufflers. • Stationary equipment such as generators, air compressors shall be located as far as feasible from nearby noise -sensitive uses. • Stockpiling is located as far as feasible from nearby noise -sensitive receptors • Construction traffic shall be limited to the established haul routes. Prior to the issuance of N-2 Prior to the issuance of grading permits, each project applicant within the project Planning and Building grading permits area shall prepare a construction management plan that shall be approved by the Department City of Anaheim Public Works. The construction management plan shall: • Establish truck haul routes on the appropriate transportation facilities. Truck routes that avoid congested streets and sensitive land uses shall be considered. • Provide Traffic Control Plans (for detours and temporary road closures) that meet the minimum City criteria. Traffic control plans shall determine if dedicated turn lanes for movement of construction truck and equipment on - and offsite are available. • Minimize offsite road closures during the peak hours. • Keep all construction -related traffic onsite at all times. • Provide temporary traffic controls, such as a flag person, during all phases of construction to maintain smooth traffic flow. Prior to issuance of a N-3 Prior to issuance of a building permit, applicants for new residential or subdivision Planning and Building building permit developments within the Project Area involving the construction of two or more Department dwelling units, or residential subdivisions resulting in two or more parcels, and located within six -hundred feet of any railroad, freeway, expressway, major arterial, primary arterial or secondary arterial, as designated by the Circulation Element of the General Plan, are required to submit a noise level analysis, which must include mitigation measures that comply with applicable City noise standards including the following: • Exterior noise within the private rear yard of any single-family lot and/or within any common recreation areas, shall be attenuated to a maximum of 65 dB CNEL; interior noise levels shall be attenuated to a maximum of 45 dB CNEL, or to a level designated by the Uniform Building Code, as adopted by the Cit Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) Timing Mitigation Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion (identified in Section 18.40.090). • Exterior noise within common recreation areas of any single family attached or multiple family dwelling project shall be attenuated to a maximum of 65 dB CNEL; interior noise levels shall be attenuated to a maximum of 45 dB CNEL, or to a level designated by the Uniform Building Code, as adopted by the City (identified in Section 18.40.090). The Planning Commission may grant a deviation from the requirements pertaining to exterior noise levels, given that all of the following conditions exist (Section 18.040.090.060): • The deviation does not exceed 5 dB above the prescribed levels for exterior noise; and • Measures to attenuate noise to the prescribed levels would compromise or conflict with the aesthetic value of the project. In addition, residential portions of the mixed-use project shall be designed to limit the interior noise caused by the commercial and parking portions of the Project to a maximum of 45 dBA CNEL in any habitable room with windows closed. Commercial uses shall be designed and operated, and hours of operation limited so neighboring residents are not exposed to offensive noise, especially from traffic, trash collection, routine deliveries, and/or late-night activities. No use shall produce continual loading or unloading of heavy trucks at the site between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. (Section 18.32.130, Compatibility Standards). The required exterior noise reduction can be accomplished with sound walls or berms, or by site plan/building layout design. The required interior noise reduction can be accomplished with enhanced construction design or materials such as upgraded dual -glazed windows and/or upgraded exterior wall assemblies. These features shall be shown on all building plans and incorporated into construction of the project. City inspectors shall verify compliance of the building with the acoustic report's recommendations prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Prior to issuance of a N-4 Prior to issuance of a building permit, applicants for projects within the Beach Planning and Building building permit Boulevard Specific Plan that involve high -vibration construction activities, such as Department pile driving or vibratory rolling/compacting, shall be evaluated for potential vibration impacts to nearby sensitive receptors. The project applicant shall submit a vibration report prepared to the satisfaction of the City of Anaheim to determine if the use of pile driving and/or vibratory rolling/compacting equipment would exceed the Federal Transit Administration's (FTA's) vibration -annoyance criteria of 78 VdB during the daytime or FTA's vibration -induced architectural damage PPV criteria of 0.2 inches/second for wood -framed structures or 0.5 inches/second for reinforced 10 Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) Timing Mitigation Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion building and zoning masonry buildings. The construction contractor shall require the use of lower - Planning and Building inspection for any non- vibration -producing equipment and techniques. Examples of lower -vibration Department; City Attorney's residential project equipment and techniques would include avoiding the use of vibratory rollers near Office generating 50 or more sensitive areas and/or the use of drilled piles, sonic pile driving, or vibratory pile employees driving (as opposed to impact pile driving). TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Prior to the first final T-1 Prior to the first final building and zoning inspection for any non-residential project Public Works Department; building and zoning generating 50 or more employees, the property owners/developer shall complete Planning and Building inspection for any non- the following steps below to develop, implement and administer a comprehensive Department; City Attorney's residential project Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program. Office generating 50 or more a) The property owner/developer shall provide to the City of Anaheim Public employees Works Department, for review and approval, a comprehensive TDM program that includes a menu of TDM program strategies and elements for both existing and future employees' commute options. b) The property owner/developer shall record a covenant on the property that requires ongoing implementation of the approved TDM program and designation of an on-site contact that will be responsible for coordinating the TDM program. c) The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney's Office prior to recordation. Prior to issuance of the T-2 Prior to the first final building and zoning inspection for any nonresidential project Public Works Department; first building permit for generating 50 or more employees, the property owner/developer shall participate Planning and Building each building in the Anaheim Transportation Network (ATN)/Transportation Management Department; City Attorney's Association. The property owner/developer shall record a covenant on the Office property that requires ongoing participation in the program and designation of an on-site contact who will be responsible for coordinating and representing the project with the ATN. The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney's Office prior to recordation. Prior to issuance of the T-3 Prior to issuance of the first building permit for each building, the property Public Works Department; first building permit for owner/developer shall pay all applicable transportation impact fees to the City of Planning and Building each building Anaheim in amounts determined by the City Council Resolution in effect at the Department; City Attorney's time of issuance of the building permit with credit given for City -authorized Office improvements provided by the property owner/developer; and participate in all applicable reimbursement or benefit districts which have been established. Prior to issuance of T-4 Prior to issuance of building permits for any project forecast to generate 100 or Public Works Department; building permits for any more peak hour trips, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Planning and Building project forecast to I Manager utilizing Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model Trip Generation Rates, the I Department; City Attorney's 11 Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) Timing Mitigation Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion generate 100 or more property owner/developer shall submit to the City Traffic and Transportation Office peak hour trips Manager traffic improvement phasing analyses to identify when the improvements identified in the Beach Boulevard Specific Plan EIR Traffic Impact Analysis, Fehr & Peers, November 2017 (Appendix F of this DER) shall be designed and constructed. a) The traffic improvement phasing analyses will specify the timing, funding, construction and fair -share responsibilities for all traffic improvements necessary to maintain satisfactory levels of service within the City of Anaheim and surrounding jurisdictions, as defined by the City's General Plan, based on thresholds of significance, performance standards and methodologies utilized in EIR No. 350, Orange County Congestion Management Program and established in City of Anaheim Traffic Study Guidelines. b) The property owner/developer shall construct, bond for or enter into a funding agreement for necessary circulation system improvements, as determined by the City. At minimum, fair -share calculations shall include intersection improvements, rights-of-way, and construction costs, unless alternative funding sources have been identified to help pay for the improvement. Prior to first final building T-5 Prior to first final building and zoning inspection, in conjunction with the Public Works Department; and zoning inspection preparation of any traffic improvement phasing analyses required by Mitigation Planning and Building Measure T-4, the property owner/developer shall implement traffic improvements Department; City Attorney's to maintain satisfactory levels of services, as identified in the project traffic Office improvement phasing analysis. Prior to issuance of T-6 Prior to issuance of building permits, in conjunction with the preparation of any Public Works Department; building permits traffic improvement phasing analyses required by Mitigation Measure T-4, the Planning and Building property owner/developer, in coordination with the City of Anaheim shall take the Department; City Attorney's following actions in cooperation with the Cities of Buena Park and Stanton: Office a) The traffic improvement phasing analysis shall identify any impacts created by the project on facilities within the Cities of Buena Park or Stanton. b) The traffic improvement phasing analysis shall calculate the fair -share percentage responsibility for mitigating these impacts. c) The City of Anaheim shall estimate the cost of the project's fair -share responsibility in cooperation with the Cities of Buena Park and Stanton. d) The property owner/developer shall pay the City of Anaheim the fair -share cost prior to issuance of a building permit. e) The City of Anaheim shall hold the amount received in trust, and then, once a mutually agreed upon joint program is executed by both cities, the City of Anaheim shall allocate the fair -share contribution to traffic mitigation 12 Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) Timing Mitigation Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion programs that result in improved traffic flow at the impacted locations, via an cause excavation to depths greater than current foundations, the project Department agreement mutually acceptable to both cities. applicant/developer shall retain qualified Native American Monitor(s) during Prior to issuance of T-7 Prior to issuance of building permits, in conjunction with the preparation of any Public Works Department; building permits traffic improvement phasing analyses required by Mitigation Measure T-5, the Planning and Building property owner/developer and the City of Anaheim shall take the following actions Department; City Attorney's in cooperation with the cities of Buena Park and Stanton: Office a) The traffic improvement phasing analysis shall identify any impacts created following activities during the monitoring, as appropriate: by the project on facilities in the cities of Buena Park or Stanton. • Complete monitoring logs on a daily basis, providing descriptions of the daily b) The traffic improvement phasing analysis shall calculate the fair -share activities, including construction activities, locations, soil, and any cultural percentage responsibility for mitigating these impacts. materials identified. c) The City of Anaheim shall estimate the cost of the project's fair -share • If the monitoring site has hazardous materials concerns, the monitor(s) shall responsibility in cooperation with the cities of Buena Park and Stanton. possess Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response d) The property owner/developer shall pay the City of Anaheim the fair -share (HAZWOPER) certification. The on-site monitoring shall end when the project cost prior to issuance of a building permit. site grading and excavation activities are completed, or when the Tribal e) The City of Anaheim shall hold the amount received in trust, and once a Representatives and monitor have indicated that the site has a low Dotential mutually agreed-upon joint program is executed by both cities, the City of Anaheim shall allocate the fair -share contribution to traffic mitigation programs that result in improved traffic flow at the impacted locations, via an agreement mutually acceptable to both cities. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES Prior to the issuance of TCR -1 Prior to the issuance of any permits allowing ground -disturbing activities that Planning and Building any permits allowing cause excavation to depths greater than current foundations, the project Department ground -disturbing applicant/developer shall retain qualified Native American Monitor(s) during activities that cause construction -related ground disturbance activities. The monitor(s) shall be excavation to depths approved by the Tribal Representatives of the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians greater than current - Kizh Nation and be present on-site during construction that involve ground foundations disturbing activities. The Native American Monitor(s) shall be responsible for the following activities during the monitoring, as appropriate: • Complete monitoring logs on a daily basis, providing descriptions of the daily activities, including construction activities, locations, soil, and any cultural materials identified. • If the monitoring site has hazardous materials concerns, the monitor(s) shall possess Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response (HAZWOPER) certification. The on-site monitoring shall end when the project site grading and excavation activities are completed, or when the Tribal Representatives and monitor have indicated that the site has a low Dotential 13 Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) Timing Mitigation Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion for tribal cultural resources. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Wastewater Treatment and Collection Within one year of plan USS -1 The City of Anaheim shall update the Combined West Anaheim Area Master Plan Public Works Department; adoption of Sanitary Sewers to include the deficient sewer segments as identified in the Planning and Building Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Sewer Analysis or latest updates for the Beach Department; City Attorney's Boulevard Specific Plan, and the associated costs to improve the deficient Office segments. Prior to issuance of USS -2 Prior to issuance of demolition, grading, or building permits, whichever occurs first, Public Works Department; demolition, grading, or the developer/applicant shall pay sewer impact fees per the updated the Planning and Building building permits, Combined West Anaheim Area Master Plan of Sanitary Sewers described in Department; City Attorney's whichever occurs first Mitigation Measure USS -1. Office Prior to issuance of USS -3 Prior to issuance of demolition, grading, building or water permits, whichever Public Works Department; demolition, grading, or occurs first, the property owner/developer shall submit plans to the Public Utilities Planning and Building building permits, Department for review. The Public Utilities Department shall review the location of Department; City Attorney's whichever occurs first each project to determine if it is an area served by potentially deficient water Office facilities, as identified in the latest updated water study for the BBSP. In such a case, the property owner/developer shall perform a hydraulic analysis for the existing and proposed public water improvements to determine if the project domestic or fire flow demands will increase flows beyond those programmed in the appropriate water master plan study for the area or if the project will create a deficiency in an existing water mains. The hydraulic water analysis for the existing and proposed public water improvements shall incorporate the anticipated flow, pressure, and any other information specific for the project to determine the conditions for final design. With the hydraulic water analysis, the property owner/developer shall submit the results of a field fire flow test and provide a written response from Anaheim Fire Department confirming the fire flow requirements for the project. The property owner/developer shall be required to guarantee mitigation of the impact to adequately serve the area to the satisfaction of the Public Utilities Department and City Attorney's Office per Anaheim's most current Water Rules and Regulations. 14