96-125 RESOLUTION NO.96R- 125
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CIT~ OF
ANAHEIM ~A) CERTIFYING FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT NO. 320,(B) ADOPTING A
STATEMENT OF FINDINGS of FACT AND STATEMENT
OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS IN CONNECTION
THEREWITH, AND(C) ADOPTING MITIGATION
MONITORING PROGRAM NO. 092.
WHEREAS, Section 18.03.050 of the Anaheim Municipal
Code sets forth the procedures for processing area development
plans; and
WHEREAS, as more particularly described therein, Area
Development Plan No. 120 for Sportstown Anaheim, on file with the
Planning Department, includes the nature, size and density of all
existing and proposed land uses to enhance and guide future
development within an area identified as Sportstown Anaheim and
consisting of approximately 167 acres generally bounded by
Katella Avenue on the north, the SR-57 (Orange Freeway) and the
Santa Ana River on the east, Orangewood Avenue on the south, and
State College Boulevard on the west (hereinafter the "Area
Development Plan"); and
WHEREAS, the Area Development Plan does not alter the
zoning for the property subject to said plan; and
WHEREAS, the City of Anaheim is the lead agency for the
preparation and consideration of environmental documents for the
Anaheim Sports Center Project (the "Project"), as the term
"project" defined in the California Environmental Quality Act of
1970 (hereinafter "CEQA"), as amended, and the State of
California Guidelines for the Implementation of the California
Environmental Quality Act (hereinafter "State Guidelines"); and
WHEREAS, the Project is subject to compliance with the
provisions of CEQA and the State Guidelines has been considered
in connection with the following discretionary actions by the
City of Anaheim: (i) Area Development Plan No. 120 and (ii)
future discretionary actions described in Draft Environmental
Impact Report No. 320, (collectively referred to herein as the
"discretionary actions"); and
WHEREAS, the City of Anaheim desires and intends to use
Final EIR No. 320 as the environmental documentation required by
CEQA and the State Guidelines for each of the above-referenced
discretionary actions to the extent authorized by law; and
WHEREAS, the City of Anaheim has prepared, or caused to
be prepared, the Draft EIR and has consulted with other public
agencies and the general public, and given them an opportunity to
comment on said Draft EIR as required by the provisions of CEQA
and the State Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, the City of Anaheim has evaluated the comments
received from public agencies and persons who reviewed the Draft
EIR and has prepared responses to the comments received during
the public review period; and
WHEREAS, said comments and recommendations received on
the Draft EIR, either verbatim or in summary, a list of persons,
organizations and public agencies commenting on the Draft EIR,
and the responses of the City of Anaheim to significant
environmental points raised in the review and consultation
process have been attached to and made a part of said Draft EIR
to form the Final EIR for said project as required by Section
15132 of the State CEQA Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public
hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on May 29,
1996 at 1:30 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly
given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of
CEQA, to hear and consider evidence for and against the project
and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in
connection therewith; and that said public hearing was continued
to May 30, 1996; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hear and consider
evidence for and against the Project and to investigate and make
findings and recommendation in connection therewith; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission certified FEIR No.
320, adopting a Statement of Findings of Fact and Statement of
Overriding Considerations and adopting Mitigation Monitoring Plan
No. 092 in conjunction with its approval of Area Development Plan
No. 120; and
WHEREAS, the decision of the Planning Commission was
duly appealed to the City Council, vacating the decision of the
Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, said Final EIR has been presented to the city
Council of the City of Anaheim for review and consideration prior
to the final approval of, and commitment to, the Area Development
Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of
the City of Anaheim that the City Council does hereby certify
Final Environmental Impact Report No. 320, adopting the attached
Statement of Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding
Considerations, a copy of each of which is attached hereto marked
Attachment A, and incorporates said Attachment here by this
reference as if set forth in full herein, and determines that
said Final Environmental Impact Report No. 320 fully complies
with CEQA, reflects the independent judgment of the City Council,
and is adequate to serve as the environmental documentation for
the discretionary actions.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that pursuant to Section 21081.6
of the Public Resources Code, the City Council hereby adopts that
certain monitoring program described as the "Mitigation
Monitoring Program No. 092 for Area Development Plan No. 120, a
copy of which is attached hereto marked Attachment B, and
incorporates said monitoring program herein by this reference as
if set forth in full herein, and has included the project design
features and mitigation measures in the Mitigation Monitoring
Program as conditions of approval required for implementation of
Area Development Plan No. 120
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION is approved and adopted by the
City Council of the City of Anaheim this 9th day of July, 1996.
CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF AN~--~q-EIM
STATE Of CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY Of ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, LEONORA N SOHL, City Clerk of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing
Resolution No. 96R-125 was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting provided by law, of
the Anaheim City Council held on the 9th day of July, 1996, by the following vote of the
members thereof:
AYES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: Tait, Zemel, Feldhaus, Lopez, Daly
NOES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
AND I FURTHER CERTIFY that the Mayor of the City of Anaheim signed said Resolution
No. 96R-125 on the 9th day of July, 1996.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City
of Anaheim this 9th day of July, 1996.
CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF ANA"I~['E1M
(SEAL)
I, LEONORA N. SOHL, City Clerk of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing
is the original of Resolution No. 96R-125 was duly passed and adopted by the City Council of
the City of Anaheim on July 9th, 1996.
CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
AI'I'ACHMENT A
ANAHEIM SPORTS CENTER - EIR # 320
STATEMENT OF FINDINGS AND FACTS AND
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section p~g~
1.0 DESCRIPTION OF CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT
OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS ................................. 1
2.0 CERTIFICATION OF FINAL EIR
AND ADOPTION OF FINDINGS ...................................... 2
3.0 EFFECTS DETERMINED TO BE NOT SIGNIFICANT OR
MITIGATED TO A LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT LEVEL ..................... 3
3.1 Land Use and Related Planning Programs ......................... 3
3.2 Transportation and Circulation ................................. 4
3.3 Air Quality ................................................. 8
3.4 Noise ................................................... 12
3.5 Earth Resources-Geology, Soils, and Seismicity .................... 13
3.6 Hydrology and Water Quality .................................. 14
3.7 Employment, Population, and Housing ........................... 16
3.8 Public Services, Utilities and Energy Consumption .................. 17
3.8.1 Fire and Emergency/Medical Services .................... 17
3.8.2 Police Services ...................................... 19
3.8.3 Solid Waste Disposal ................................. 20
3.8.4 Parks ............................................. 22
3.8.5 Schools ........................................... 22
3.8.6 Water Service ....................................... 24
3.8.7 Wastewater ........................................ 26
3.8.8 Storm Drains ....................................... 27
3.8.9 Electricity .......................................... 27
3.8.10 Natural Gas ........................................ 29
3.8.11 Cable Service and Television Reception ................... 30
3.8.12 Telephone Service ................................... 30
3.9 Hazardous Materiels ........................................ 31
3.10 Aesthetics ............................................... 31
3.11 Cultural Resources ......................................... 32
4.0 UNAVOIDABLE SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS .............................. 34
4.1 Air Quality ................................................ 34
4.2 Solid Waste Disposal ........................................ 35
4.3 Schools ................................................. 35
5.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROJECT ................................. 38
5.1 No-Project AJternative ....................................... 38
5.2 Design AJtemative 1: Reduced Density Ntemetive ................... 39
5.3 Design AJternative 2: Residential AJternatlve ....................... 40
5.4 Original Project (Higher Density) Afternative ....................... 40
ap3043gm.wp -I- 5/30/~6
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
Section P~,ge
6.0 FINDINGS REGARDING OTHER CEQA CONSIDERATIONS ............... 41
6.1 Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes ..................... 41
6.2 Growth-Inducing impacts of the Proposed Project .................. 41
7.0 STATEMENT OF OVERRIOING CONSIDERATIONS ..................... 43
7.1 Increased Revenues for City, County, and State .................... 43
7.2 Enhancement of Tourism ..................................... 44
7.3 Provision of Entertainment and Recreation Opportunities
for Area Residents .......................................... 44
7.4 Enhancement of City Sports Venues to Maintain Existing Tenant
Relationships and Attract Additional Pro Sports Teams and
Other Major Events ......................................... 45
7.5 Enhancement of Synergy Among Nearby Attractions ................ 45
7.6 Provision of Needed Infrastructure Improvements ................... 45
ap3043gm.wp -ii- 5/30/s6
ANAHEIM SPORTS CENTER - EIR # 320
STATEMENT OF FINDINGS AND FACTS AND
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
1.0 DESCRIPTION OF CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
1.1 California Environmental Qualib/Act. The California Environmental Quality Act ('CEQA') (Public
Resources Code Sections 21000-21178.1) and the State CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code of Regulations, Title
14, Sections 15000-15387) require that specific findings be mede if a lead agency decides to approve a
project which will have significant impacts. Section 21081 of the Callfomia Public Resources Code states:
'[N]o public agency shell approve or cam/out a project for which an environmental impact report
has been certified which identifies one or more significant effects on the environment that would
occur if the project is approved or carded out unless both of the following occur:
(a) The public agency mekes one or more of the following findings with respect to each
significant effect:
(1) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which
mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment.
(2) Those changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public
agency and have been, or can and shouid be, adopted by that other agency.
(3) Specific economic, legal, sociaJ, technological, or other considerations, including
considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers,
make iofeasible the mitigation measures or altematives identified in the environmental
impact report.
(b) With respect to significant effects which were subject to a finding under paragraph (3) of
subdivision (a), the public agency finds that specific overriding economic, legal, social,
technological, or other benefts of the project outweigh the significant effects on the environment.'
The Environmental Impact Report (-EIR') for the Anaheim Sports Center (EIR No. 320, State
Clearinghouse No. 95041029) identifies significant or potentially significant environmental impacts which may
occur as a result of adoption and implementation of the Anaheim Sports Center ('Project') (Section 3 of the
EIR and Section 1.2.1 of the Response to Comments document contain a detailed description of the
Project). Thus, In accordance with the provisions of CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, the City of
Anaheim hereby adopts these findings.
ap3043gm.wp -1- 5/3O/96
The CEQA Guldallnes also state that the decision maker must balance the benefits of a proposed
project against its unavoidable environmental risks In determining whether to approve the project (Cal. Code
of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15093). The ultimate decision making body for the City of Anaheim (i.e. the
City of Anaheim Planning Commission, unless the project approval is appealed to the City Council) has
carefully considered the benefits of the Project. The Anaheim Sports Center EiR identifies significant
environmental effects which will not be mitigated to below a level of significance and which will be allowed
to occur by approval of the Project. Therefore, the City of Anaheim hereby adopts the statement of
overriding considerations contained In this document, which states the specific reasons that the benefits of
the proposed Project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, and that the unavoidable
environmental effects are considered acceptable.
2.0 CERTIFICATION OF FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND ADOPTION OF
FINDINGS
The City of Anaheim hereby certifies the Final EIR. Based upon substantial evidence In the record
of administrative proceedings, the City finds and declares as follows:
2.1 The City of Anaheim is the 'lead agency' for the Project. The Final EIR has been completed in
compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City of Anaheim Guidelines for the
Implementation of CEQA.
The Draft EIR was circulated for public review and comment for a 45-day period commencing
Janua~ 17, 1996 and continuing through March 1, 1996. The Final EIR, Including written
responses to pubiic comments received during the 45-day period, was made available for public
review on May 18, 1996. On May 29, 1996, the City of Anaheim Planning Commission held a public
hearing on the Project. In addition to reviewing and considering the text of the Draft EIR and the
Final EIR, the Planning Commission reviewed and considered all oral and written comments
concerning the Project and the EIR received by the City of Anaheim during and prior to the
meeting at which these findings were adopted. Except to the extent they conflict with the findtrigs
and determinations set forth in this document, the analysis and conclusions of the EIR, Including
but not Ibnlted to the responses to comments, are Incorporated herein by this reference, and are
hereby adopted as findings of the City of Anaheim.
2.2 On ,1996, the Planning Commlsalon adopted Resolution No. PC , approving the
Anaheim Sports Center Project, certifying the EIR, adopting these Findings of Fact and Statements
of Overriding Considerations, and adopting the Mitigation Monitoring Program prepared in
connection therewith.
2.3 Both the Draft EIR and the Final EIR reflect the independent judgment of the City's ultimate
decision makers.
~o:~gm.wp -2- 5/30/96
2.4 AJl feasible mitigation measures for the Project have been Imposed. Each of the mitigation
measures, conditions of approval and other exactions to be imposed on development in connection
with the Anaheim Sports Center Area Project is reasonably related to and proportional to the
incremental impacts and burdens created by the subject development.
2.5 Documents constituting the record of proceedings on which approval of the Project and
certification of the EIR are based are available at the City of Anaheim Planning Department, 200
S. Anaheim Bouiovard, Anaheim, California.
3.0 EFFECTS DETERMINED TO BE NOT SIGNIFICANT OR MITIGATED TO A LESS THAN
SIGNIFICANT LEVEL
This Section 3.0 contains findings and supporting analysis concerning effects on the environment
which have been determined to be not significant or which have been mitigated to a less than significant
level. Impacts which could remain significant even with implementation of the mitigation measures are
discussed in detail in Section 4.0 of this document.
Except as expressly provided to the contrary in this document, ell effects of the Project on the
environment are hereby found by the City of Anaheim to be no{ significant, both alone and in combination
with the effects of other related projects.
3.1 Land Use and Related Plannlra= Pro, rams
3.1.1 Pctential SiGnificant Imoacts. The Project's potentiel land use and related planning program
impacts are discussed in Section 5.1 of the EIR. Cumulative land use and related planning program impacts
are discussed In Section 5.1.3 of the EIR. The Project will no~ result In significant impacts to land use-related
plans and policies.
3.1.2 Findines. No significant land use and related planning program impacts are anticipated to be
associated with Iml~ementatlon of the Anaheim Sports Center.
3.1.3 Facts In SuoDort of Findings. The discussion and analysis in Section 5.1 of the EIR provide facts
and analysis to support the foregoing finding and conclusion. As discussed in more detail therein, the
Anaheim Sports Center land uses are consistent with the existing and planned land uses for the area.
Amendment of the Anaheim General Plan Land Uss Element and zoning designations for a 3.5-acre portion
of the Project site at the southeast comer of Katella Avenue and State College Boulevard may he required
for full buildout of the Project's retail component (see Exhibit 1, Modified Project Site Plan, fbllowing page
1-8 in the Response to Comments volume); however, the changes in designation for this property (from
Business Office/Service/Industrial to Commercial Recreation; and from Commercial, Office and Professional
and Limited industrial to Public Recreational) are changes between compatible designations with similar
impact characteristics.
ap3043gm.wp -*3- 5/30/96
With regard to cumulative land use and related planning Impacts, the Anaheim Sports Center site
and vicinity are largely developed areas. The Project will continue and enhance historical
commemial/recreatlon land uses on the site, and Is generally consistent with applicable plans and policies.
The Southern Califomia Association of Governments has stated that from a regional planning perspective
the project 'fits very well' with the regional policy of encouraging developments In and around activity
centers, transportation node corridors, underutilized ;.;,.structure systems and areas needing recycling and
redevelopment. (SCAG Comment Letter, January 31, 1996, p.5.) No significant cumulative land use and
related planning impacts are anticipated.
Although no significant land use and related planning impacts are anticipated, implementation of
the following mitigation measure will help Insure that po~entiaJ effects will he less than significant:
Mitigation Measure 3.1-1: The City will review final site plans for development within the Anaheim
Sports Center Area for consistency with any adopted plan for the area.
There will he no unavoidable significant land use and re/ated planning impacts associated with the
Anaheim Sports Center.
3.2 Transportation and Circulation
3.2.1 Potential Slonlficant Im13act$. The project-spacific and cumulative impacts of the Project on
transportation and circulation are discussed In Section 5.2 of the EIR. No significant Impacts on
transportation and circulation are anticipated from operation of the Project. If left unmitigated, construction
trips during the development phase of the Project could create a significant traffic Impact; however, the
mitigation measures described below will mitigate or avoid this effect on the environment.
3.2.2 Findlnus. The Project will not produce significant effects on the environment relating to
transportation and circulation. If left unmitigated, construction trips during the development phase of the
Project could create a significant traffic impact; however, the mitigation measures described below will
mitigate or avoid this effect on the environment.
3.2.3 Facts In $ul)oort of Findinoe. The discussion and analysis in Section 5.2 of the EIR and in the
Response to Comments document explain the foregoing findings and conclusions.
The methodology used in the EIR provides a complete and reasonable assessment of future traffic
conditions with and without development of the Anaheim Sports Center. Based on local and regional traffic
models and databases, the Clty's traffic consultants identified more than 30 study intersections in and
around the City of Anaheim which could potentiaJly be affected by Project traffic.
First, existing levels of service at the study intersections were caJculated. Only one intersection
(The City Drive and Chapman Avenue) was determined to perform worse than the curTent City of Anaheim
and Orange County Growth Management Program standard (LOS 'E' at Intersections on the State
Congestion Management Program highway system and LOS 'D' at the balance of City and County
intersections).
· p3o43gm.wp -4- 5/30/~6
Second, traffic with and without developmont of the Project was analyzed for the Years 2000 (a
point In time at which the Project Is anticipated to he built and operating at half of its mayJmum density) and
2010 (full Project buildout). Future growth in non-Project, or "baseline" traffic, was projected and analyzed
in order to accurately assess the cumulative and Projeot-specitlc Impacts. This Is because development of
the Anaheim Sports Center will not be the only future contributor of traffic to the study Intemectlons. The
development of related projects in the vicinity, as well as other development in the region, will also
contribute increased traffic to some or all of the study intersections. The Year 2010 analysis represents a
reasonable 'worst case' scenario with respect to increases in traffic volumes at the study intersections.
Under baseline conditions in the year 2000, without the addition of Project traffic, four intersections
are forecast to operate worse then the applicable standard:
· Lewis Street and Orang·wood Avenue · Main Street and Chapmen Avenue
· The City Drive and Chapmen Avenue · SR-57 (Northbound) and Ball Road
With the incremental year 2000 Project traffic, the same four study intersections performed worse
than applicable standards. BUt in no case did the Project traffic cause a significant deterioration from the
baseline no-project conditions. Accordingly, no Project impact is anticipated.
Under baseline conditions in the year 2010, without the addition of Project traffic, three intersections
are forecast to operate worse then the applicable standard:
· The City Drive and Chapman Avenue · The City Drive and SR-22 (Westpound Ramps)
· Main Street and Chapmen Avenue
With the incremental year 2010 Project traffic, the same three study intersections performed worse
then applicable standards. BUt again in no case did the Project traffic cause a significant deterioration from
the baseline no-project conditions. Accordingly, no impact is anticipated from full buildout of the Project.
Because the sophisticated traffic analysis methodology utilized in the EIR allows Project-specific
traffic to be considered in combination with projected local and regional 'baseline' traffic, the analysis
summarized above also constitutes an analysis of cumulative traffic impacts. As noted above, no cumulative
traffic impacts are anticipated. AJthough 3-4 of the study intersections are anticipated to operate at
unsatisfactory levels of service in 2000 and 2010, the Project does not play a significant role in creating
those conditions.
The year 2000 and 2010 study intersection levels of service presented in the EIR assume
implementation of the intersection improvements listed on Table 5.3-2a on pages 3-41 and 3-42 of the
Response to Comments volume. These improvements are needed to mitigate existing cortditions and
baseline growth with or without future development of the Anaheim Sports Center. It Is anticipated that
various sources of funding will be available for these improvements, including OCTA's 'Smart Street' Project,
Caltrans' I-5 Widening Program, and mitigation/impact fees imposed by the City and neighboring
jurisdictions on new development. Nthough the funding and timing of some of these funding sources are
ap3043gm.wp -5- 5/30/96
uncertain, It can be assumed that ongoing circulation improvement programs will continue. The mitigation
measures described below will help insure that the Anaheim Sports Center does not contribute significantly
to any adverse condition.
Traffic related to Project Construction will occur unevenly over the anticipated 5-15 year
development beriod, generally during off-peak hours. Specific information on the scope and phasing of
construction activities cannot be predicted at this time. If left unmitigated, construction trips during the
development phase of the Project could create significant temporary traffic impacts; however, the mitigation
measures described below will mitigate or avoid this effect on the environment.
Through continued use of the shared-used perking onsIte and offsite, Implementation of the
Anaheim Sports Center Project will not require a net increase in available perking spaces. The roughly
16,000 spaces currently onslte will be reconfigured and reduced to approximately 15,570 onsite spaces with
full buildout of the project. Another 8,000 spaces currently available for shared-use parking offsite will also
be utilized to meet normal peak demand conditions, not Including 5,342 spaces available at the Arrowhead
Pond of Anaheim for 'worst case' (I.e. Super Bowl or World Series) conditions. The two onsIte stadiums
will not be used concurrently. No significant impacts to parking availability are expected to occur wIth
'"" operation of the Project; addItional assurance is provided through the mitigation measures described below.
The Project was downsized during the environmental review process, including reduction of the
office component of the project by more than 70%, down to a total of 250,000 square feet. (See Section
1.2.1, Modified Project Description, in the Response to Comments volume of the EIR). The reduction in
Project density will serve to further minimize the traffic and circulation impacts of the Project.
Mitigation is required to insure that the temporary construction-related impacts of the project will
not be significant. Although operations of the Anaheim Sports center Project is not anticipated to cause
or significantly contribute to any substandard traffic condItions, the following mItigation measures will insure
help Insure that adverse transportation and circulation impacts do not occur:
Mitioation Measure 2-1. Prior to the issuance of grading parmits for each project development
· -,. forecast to generate 100 or more peak hour trips, as determined by the City Traffic and
Transportation Manager utilizing Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model Trip Generation Rates, the property
owner/developer shall prepare a trip reduction plan for construction crew vehicles subject to the
review and approval of the City Traffic and Transportation Manager, to reduce potential vehicle trips
on the road and identify perking locations for construction employees and equipment.
MItklation Measure 2-2. Prior to final building and zoning inspection; and, ongoing during project
operation, the property owner/developer shall implement and administer a comprehensive
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program for all employees and event guests.
Objectives of the TDM program shall he to increase ridesharing and use of altemative
transportation modes by guests and provide a menu of commuter elternativas for employees to
reduce project-generated trips. The TDM shall identify agencies and/or persons rasponslbla for
monItoring and administering the TDM program, quantify trip reduction goals, and formulate
Implementation schedules. The TDM shall also ensure coordination with transit providers to
encourage the use of mess transit.
q:~.~3gm.wp -6- 5/30/9e
A menu of TDM program strategies arid elements for both existing and future employea commute
options include, but are not limited to, the following:
* Onsite Service. Onsite services, such as the food, retail, and other services be provided.
Ridesharing. A computer listing of all employee members be devalopod for the purpose
of providing a 'matching' of employees with other employees who live In the same
geographic arees and who could rideshare.
Vanpooling. A computer Ilsting of all employees for the purpose of matching numbers of
employees who live in geographic proximity to one another and could comprise a vanpool
or participate In the existing vanpool programs.
Transit Pass. Southern California Rapid Transit District arid Orange County Transportation
Authority (including commute rail) passes be promoted through financial assistance arid
on.site sales to encourage employeas to use the various transit and bus services from
throughout the region.
Commuter Bus. As commuter 'express' bus service expands throughout the region,
passes for use on these lines may be provided for employees who choose to use this
service. Financial incentives for these employees could be provided.
· Shuttle Service. A computer Ilsting of all employees living In proximity to the project he
generated, and a local shuttle program offered to encourage employees to travel to work
by means other than the automobile. Event shuttle service will be available for the guests.
· Bicycling. A bicycling program he developed to offer a bicycling alternative to employees.
Secure bicycle racks, lockers, arid showers be provided as part of this program. Maps of
bicycle routes throughout the area be provided to inform potential bicyclists of these
options. Bicycle lanes witl be provided along the internal ring road.
· Rental Car Fleet. A private 'fleet vahlde" program be developed to provide employees who
travel to work by means other than an automobile with access to automobiles in case of
emergency, medical appointments, etc. This service would halp employees use alternative
modes of transportation by ensudng that they would he able to have personal
transportation in the event of special circumstances.
· Guaranteed Ride Home Program. A program to provide employees who rideshare, or use
transit or other means of commuting to work, with a prearranged ride home in a taxi, rental
car, shuttie, or other vehicle, in the event of emergencies during the work shift.
Target Reduction of Longest Commute Trip. An incentives program for ridesharing arid
other alternative transportation modes to put highest priority on reduction of longest
employee commute trips.
· Stagger shifts.
· Develop a "compressed work week' program, which provides for fewer work days but
longer daily shifts as an option for employees.
· Explore the possibility of a 'talecommuting" program that would link come employees vie
electronic means (e.g., computer with modem).
· Develop a parking management program that provides Incentives to those who rideshare
or use transit means other than single-occupant auto to travel to work.
ap3043gm.wp -7-
· Access. Preferential access to high occupancy vehicles, shut, es, and guests for egress
purposes may be provided.
· Financial Incentive for Ridesharing and/or Public Transit. (Currently, federal law provides
tax-free status for up to $60 per month per employee contributions to employees who
vanpooo or use public transit, including commuter rail and/or express bus pooos.)
· Financial Incentive for Bicycling. Employees offered financial Incentives for bicycle to work.
· Special 'Premium' for the Participation and Promotion of Tdp Reduction. TIcket/passss
to special events, vacations, etc. be offered to employees who recruit uther employees for
vanpool, carpooo, or other trip reduction programs.
· Actively recruit prospective employses residing within a 30-minute commute shed.
· Design incentive program for carpoooing and other alternative transportation modes so as
to put highest priority on reduction of longest commute trips.
Mitioation Measure 2-3. Prior to final building and zoning inspections, the property
ownar/devalober shall join and financially participate in a dean fuel shuttle program, If established;
and, shall participate In the Anaheim Transportation Network/Transportation Management
Association in conjunction with the ongoing operation of the project.
Mitli3atlon Measure 2-5. Prior to the approval of each building permit, preparation of a new
and/or revision to existing parking and/or event management plans shall be submitted to the Clt~
Traffic and Transportation Manager for review and approval to ensure adequate parking, event
management, and ingrass/egrass strategies (parking layouts, shuttle routes, shuttla-stop locations,
etc.) are in place. As part of these revisions, the property owner/developer shall consult with
Caltrans to obtain information on detours In the project ares that would resuJt from lane and ramp
closures during future reconstruction efforts during construction of the project.
Mttioation Measure 2-6. Prior to the issuance of the a building permit for the first phase and each
subsequent phase, the property owner/developer shall prepare, for approval by the City Traffic and
Transportation Manager, a parking plan which, If identifies the number of parking spaces needed
at peak demand. In addition, prior to each additional phase of development, the properbJ
owner/devaloper shall revise the parking plans to the sefisfactlon of the City Traffic and
Transportation Manager.
3.3 Air Quality
3.3.1 Potential $1onlflcent IreDacts. The project-specific and cumulative impacts of the Project on air
quality are discussed in Section 5.3 of the EIR. The fo01owing significant impacts could occur:
A. Construction Emissions: Peak day construction activities associated with the Anaheim
Sports Center would exceed South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) thresholds for dust
and other fine particulate matter (PM10) on a Project-spacific and cumulative basis.
ap3043gm.wp -8- 5/30/96
B. Onerational Emlsslone: Emissions associated with operation oftha Anaheim Sports Center
Project, consisting of emissions from the generation of power consumed by the Project together with mobile
source emissions associated with vehicular travel to and from the Project, exceed SCAOMD thresholds for
reactive organic gases (ROG), nitrogen oxides (NOx), and carbon monoxide (CO). Operational emissions
of ROG, NOx, CO and PM10 would also be cumulatively significant in combination with emissions
associated with other projects in the Air Basin. These operational emissions era regional in nature (i.e.
contribute to deteriorated air quality in the South Coast Air Basin as a whole); no significant localized air
quality impacts will occur on e Project-specific or cumulative basis.
No other signirmant air quality impacts would occur.
3.3.2 Findines. All significant impacts associated with air quality have been mitigated to a less than
significant level except for the following:
A. Construction Emissions: Even with all feasible mitigation measures, peak day construction
emissions on both a Project-specific and cumulative basis are expected to exceed SCAQMD thresholds for
PM10.
B. OPerational Emissions: Even with all feasible mitigation measures, emissions from motor
vehicle travel and utility consumption associated with the Anaheim Sports Center Project are expected to
exceed SCAQMD thresholds for ROG, NOx and CO on a Project-specific and cumulative basis, and PM10
on a cumulative basis. These are impacts on regional air quality; no significant localized air quality impacts
will occur.
Except as to the unavoidably significant impacts noted above In this Section 3.3.2, changes or
alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which mitigate or avoid the significant
effects on the environment relating to air quality. The Project is consistent with the applicable regional Air
Quality Management Plan.
3.3.3 Facts in Support of Findings. The discussion and analysis in Section 5.3 of the EIR explain the
foregoing findings and concJusions. The unavoidable significant air quality impacts identified in Section 3.3.2
above are discussed further in Section 4.1 below in this document.
The significance of air quality impacts is determined with reference to criteria promulgated by
SCAQMD in its CEQA Air Quality Handbook. The following types of air quality impacts were analyzed:
· Construction emissions (fugitive dust, exhaust from construction equipment, etc.).
· Regional operational emissions (contribution of pollutants to the South Coast Air Basin as
a result of utility usage and vehicular travel associated with the Project).
· Localized CO impacts from associated vehicular emissions.
· Air Quality Management Plan conformity.
ap3043gm.wp -9- 5/30/96
Air quaitty impacts from construction activities are summarized in Tables 5.3-2 and 5.3-3 of the EIR.
The analysis shows that peak day construction emissions of PM10 from devalopment of the Anaheim Sports
Center will be significant. Although implementation of the mitigation measures described balow will reduce
this construction impact, it will still be significant after mitigation on both a Project-specific and cumulative
basis.
Regional operational Impacts are analyzed on pages 5.3-14 through 5.3-18 of the EIR. Operation
impacts will result from 'mobile source" emissions (i.e. vehicle trips associated with operation of the Anaheim
Sports Center and related projects) and utility generation emissions associated with the Project. These
combined oparatlocaJ emissions souroes are expected to exceed SCAQMD significance threshoids on a
Project-specific basis for ROG, NOx, and CO, and on a cumulative basis for ROG, NOx, CO and PM10.
Even after mitigation, these impacts are expected to remain significant.
Because of the unique dispersal characteristics of CO, which create the potential for significant
concentrations to accumulate along congested streets, a localized anaJysis of CO emissions was performed.
Table 5.3-7 presents the results of this analysis, which demonstrates that localized carbon monoxide impacts
will not be significant. The Iocaitzed CO analysis is based on future traffic flow assumptions in Years 2000
and 2010, and includes the combined impacts of Project, baseline and cumulative traffic growth at the study
intersections.
The Project conforms to the regional Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) approved by SCAQMD
and SCAG. Consistent with AQMP requirements: (i) the Project is contributing to the attainment of the
appropriate subregionaJ jobs/housing performance ratio, or is otherwise contributing to the attainment of
targeted reductions in subregional vehicle miles travaled (VMT); (li) vehicle trips ~ and VMT have been
reduced to the greatest extent feasible by the application of transportation demand management ('FDM)
strategies; and 0ii) the Project's impacts on regional and local (subregional) air quality have been analyzed
and indicate that the Project is helping to implement regional growth management objectives and reduce
VT/VMT through the application of TDM strategies.
TDM measures discussed above in connection with traffic and transportation impacts will also serve
to reduce Project impacts.
The Project was downsEed during the environmental review process, including reduction of the
office component of the project by more then 70%, down to a total of 250,000 square feet. (See Section
1.2.1, Modified Project Description, in the Response to Comments volume of the EIR). The reduction in
Project density will serve to further minimize the Air Quality Impacts of the Project.
Except for the unavoidable impacts discussed in Section 4.1 below in this document,
implementation of the following mitigation measures will lessen or avoid the significant air quality impacts,
and the potential effects will be reduced to a level that is less than significant.
Mitl~atlon Meaaure 3-1. Ongoing during construction, the property owner/developer shall
implement measures to reduce construction-related air quality impacts. These measures shall
include, but are not limited, to:
ap3O43gm.wp -10- 5/30/~
a. Normal wetting procedures (at least twice daily) or other dust palliative measures shall be
followed during earth-moving operations to minimize fugitive dust emissions, in compliance
with the City of Anaheim Municipal Code including application of chemlca~ soil stabilizers
,_. to exposed soils after grading is completed and replacing ground cover in disturbed areas
as quickly as practicable.
b. Enclosing, covering, watering twice daily, or applying approved soll binders, according to
manufacturer's specification, to exposed stock piles.
c. Roadways adjacent to the project shall be swept and cleared of any spilled export materials
at least twice a day to assist in minimizing fugitive dust; and, haul routes shall be cleared
as needed if spills of materials exported from the project site occur.
d. Where practicable, heavy duty construction equipment shaJl be kept onalte when not in
oDeretlon to minimize exhaust emissions associated with vehicles repetltlously entering and
exiting the project site.
e. Trucks importing or exporting soil material and/or debris shall be covered prior to entering
public streets.
f. Taking preventive measures to ensure that trucks do not carry dirt on tires onto public
'" streets, including treating onsite roads and staging areas.
g. Preventing trucks from idling for longer than 2 minutes.
h. Manually irrigate or activate irrigation systems necessary to water and maintain the
vegetation as soon as planting is completed.
i. Reduce traffic speeds on all unpaved road surfaces to 15 miles per hour or less.
J. Suspend all grading operations when wind speeds (as instantaneous gust) exceed 25 rnilas
per hour and during first and second stage smog alerts.
k. Comply with the SCAQMD Rule 402, which states that no dust impacts offsite are sufficient
to be called a nuisance, and SCAQMD Rule 403, which restricts visible emissions from
I. Use low emission mobile construction equipment (e.g., tractors, scrapera, dozers, stc.)
'" where practicable.
m. Utilize existing power sources (e.g., power p~es) or clean-fual generators rather then
temporary power generators, where practicable.
n. Maintain construction equipment engines by keeping them properly tuned.
o. Use low sulfur fuel for equipment, to the extent practicable.
Mltl¢3atlon Measure 3-2. Prior to approval of each grading plan (for Import/Export Plan) and prior
to iss~ance of demolition permit (for Demolition Plan), the property owner/developer shall submit
Demolition and Import/Export Plans. The plans shall inctude identification of offsite locations for
materials export from the project and options for disposal of excess material. These options may
include recycling of materials onsite, sale to a soil broker or contractor, sale to a project in the
vicinity or transport to an environmentally cleared landfill, with attempts made to move it within
Orange County. The proparty owner/developer shall offer recyclable building materials, such as
ap3043gm.wp -11- 5/30/~6
asphalt or concrete for sale or removal by private firms or public agencies for usa in construction
of other projects, if not all can be mused on project site.
Mitlaatlon Measure 3-3. Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the property owner/
developer shall submit evidence that low emission paints and coatings are utilized in the design
and construction of buildings, in compliance with SCAQMD regulations. This Information shall be
denoted on the project plans and specifications. The property owner/developer shall also
implement the following to limit emissions from architectural coatings and asphalt usage: (1) usa
nonsolvent-based coatings on buildings, wherever appropriate; (2) usa solvent-besad coatings
where they are needed An ways that minimize element emissions; and (3) encourage usa of high-
solid or water-basad coatings.
Mitigation Measure 3-4. Ongoing dudng project operation, the proparty owner/developer shall
implement measures to reduce emissions to the extent practical, schedule goods movements for
off-peak traffic hours, and usa olean fuel for vehicles and other equipment, as practicable. The
TDM programs and sewices documented in Section 5.2-4 shall be implemented for both employees
and guests of the Anaheim Sports Center.
3.4 Noise
3.4.1 Potential Significant Imoacts. The Project-sbecific and cumulative noise impacts of the Project
are discussed in Section 5.4 of the EIR. No significant noisa impacts will occur.
3.4.2 Findinq{~. No significant noise impacts will occur. Changes or aJterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the Project which provide further assurance that the Project will not cause or contribute
substantially to significant effects on the environment relating to noisa.
3.4.3 Facts In Suoport of Flndln(3s. The discussion and analysis in Section 5.4 of the EIR explain the
foregoing findings and conclusions.
Noise associated with the Anaheim Sports Center will result from the construction and operation
of the Project. Construction noise levels will be as high as 91 dBA from 50 feet away during the
development phasa of the project; however, the nearest sansitive rsceptora are the mobile home parks at
least 1,000 away from the construction activity. Maximum outdoor noise levels at these residences could
be as high as 65 dBA. This will not be a significant impact.
Operational noise impacts will consist chiefly of increased traffic noisa from vehicle trips associated
with development of the Project in combination with other local and regional growth in traffic volumes.
Noisa impacts for the Project were calculated by applying the Federal Highway Administration's Highway
Traffic Noisa Prediction Model to the forecast future traffic velumes. The future traffic volumes include
background traffic growth and ralated project trips as wall as additional trips added by the Anaheim Sports
Center Project. The analysis presanted in Table 5.4-2 indicates that vehicle trips associated with the
Anaheim Sports Center will causa no more than a I dBA increase at any location, and therefore the Project
noise impact is not significant on either a Project-specific or cumulative basis.
ap3043gm.wp ol 2- 5/30/96
The Project was downsEed during the environmental review process, lneludlng reduction of the
office component of the project by more than 70%, down to a total of 250,000 square feet. (See Section
1.2.1, Modified Project Description, in the Response to Comments volume of the EIR). The reduction in
Project density will serve to further minimize the noise impacts of the Project.
Although no significant noise impacts are anticipated, implementation of the following mitigation
measures will help assure that significant noise impacts do not occur:
Mltlaatlon Measure 4-1. During demolition, grading, and construction, noise generated by
construction activity shall be limited by the property owner/devalopar as governed by Chapter 6.7,
Sound Pressure Levels, of the Anaheim Municipal Code.
Mltlilation Measure 4-2. During construction, the property owner/developer shall ensure that all
Internal combustion engines on construction equipment and trucks are fitted with propady
maintained mufflers.
· ,-- 3.5 Earth Resources-Geology, Soils, and Seismicity
3.5.1 Potential Sianificant Imnacta. The project-specific and cumulative impacts of the Project related
to earth resources are discussed in Section 5.5 of the EIR. No significant earth resources impacts are
anticipated.
3.5.2 Findines. No significant Project-specific or cumulative impacts related to earth resources (geology,
soils and seismicity) will occur. Changes or alterations have been required in, or Incorporated into, the
Project which provide further assurance that the Project will not cause or contribute substantially to
significant effects on the environment relating to earth resources.
3.5.3 Facts In Sul~nort of Findines. The discussion and analysis in Section 5.5 of the EIR explain the
foregoing findings and conclusions.
The Anaheim Sports Center is located in a region that maintains a gentle grade of approximately
16 feet per mile; therefore, ground stability is not a significant concern. Because the water table underlying
the site is deep, the potential for liquefaction is low. No active or potentially-active faults underlie the site,
and the nearest active fault is eight miles away. There is no potential for tsunami or seiche damage at the
site, and only a very remote possibility of earthquake-induced flooding.
Development under the Anaheim Sports Center will expose people to potential seismic risks that
are not unusually severe compared to general conditions in Southern California. This impact is not
considered significant.
AJthough no significant earth resources impacts are anticipated, implementation of the following
mitigation measures will help assure that significant impacts do not occur:
ap3043gm.wp -13- 5/~/~
Miti¢~atlon Meaeure 5-1. Prior to approval of a grading plan, the property owner/developer shall
submit to the City Engineer for review and approval, a soils and geological report for the area to
be graded, based on proposed grading. The report shall be prepared by an engineering geologist
and geotechnical engineer, AJl grading shall be In conformance with Title 17 of the City of Anaheim
Municipal Code.
Mltlaation Measure 5-2. Pdor to the issuance of each building permit, the property
owner/developer shall submit for review and approval, detailed foundation design information for
the proposed buildings, prepared by a civil engineer, based on recommendations by a geotechnical
engineer.
Mltiaatlon Measure 5-3. Prior to the issuance of each foundation permit, the property
owner/devalopar shall submit a report prepared by a geotechnical engineer for review and
approval which shall investigate the subject foundation excavations.
Mttlaetion Measure 5-4. Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the property
owner/developer shall submit plans showing that the proposed structure(s) has been analyzed for
earthquake loading and designed according to the seismic standards in the Uniform Building Code
adopted by the City of Anaheim.
Mitiaatlon Meaeure 5-5. Prior to final building inspection for the two proposed hotels and the
baseball stadium, the property owner/devaloper shall submit an earthquake emergency response
plan for review and approval. The plan shall require posted notices in all hotel rooms and
throughout the stadium on earthquake safety procedures and incorporate ongoing earthquake
training for hotel and stadium staff.
Mitlaatlon Measure 5-6. During grading activities, the property owner/devalopar shall implement
standard practices from City Ordinance (Title 17) and policies.
3.6 Hvdrolo<]v and Water Quality
3.6.1 Potential Sianlficant Im;)acta. Project-specific and cumulative impacts on hydrology and water
quality are discussed in Section 5.6 of the EIR. Rood waters reaching 1-3 feet are pessibie onsite during
a 100- or 500-year storm event. Without mitigation, ranoff dudrig construction could degrade water qualm.
No significant hydroiogy and water quality impacts are anticipated with Implementation of the mitigation
measures described below.
3.6.2 Findines. AJl significant Impacts associated with hydrology and water quality have been mitigated
to a less than significant level. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated Into, the
Project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment relating to hydrology and water
qua~.
3.6.3 Facia in $upeorl of Findin~a. The discussion ~nd analysis in Section 5.§ of ~he EIR explain the
foregoing findings and conclusions.
ap3043gm.wp - 14- 5/30/96
The Anaheim Sports Center site is already nearly entiraly paved or otherwise Improved with
impervious structures and materials. Therefore there will not be a significant Increase in runoff rates over
existing conditions. New devalopment activity will undergo drainage review by the City of Anaheim Public
Works department and the Orange County Flood Control District, which will ensure that runoff is properly
conveyed and discharged Into the Southeast Anaheim Channal.
Flood waters reaching 1-3 feat are possible onsite during a 100- or 500-year storm event. New
development will have to comply with the City's Flood Hazard Reduction Ordinance and incorporate design
features to mitigate the risk of flood injury to persons and property.
Without mitigation, construction nf the Project could result in silt4aden and contaminated surface
runoff following rain showers. Existing provisions of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) and the mitigation provided balow will reduce these impacts, on a Project-specific and cumulative
basis, to a level of insignificance by reducing the quantity nf soil and contaminants in surface runoff flows.
Runoff water quality from ongoing operations at the Project site is expected to be improved somewhat due
to replacement of some uncovered parking with covered parking areas and compliance with NPDES
requirements.
Implementation of the following mitigation measures will lassen or avoid any significant ground
water and surface hydrology Impacts, and the potential effects will be reduced to a level that is less then
significant.
Miticlation Measure~ 6-1. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the property owner/developer
shall submit a detailed drainage plan to the City of Anaheim Public Works Department and the
Orange County Flood Control District for review and approval. This drainage report shall be in
conformance with the City's Master Plan of Drainage, Drainage District Map 27. The drainage plan
shall demonstrate that runoff will effectively he conveyed to the surrounding offsite drainage system
and runoff rates would not affect receiving drainage facilities. More specifically, the drainage study
shall examine the existing and the proposed conditions within the project limits and detail drainage
deficiencies based upon the water elevations of the Santa Aria River in accordance with Drainage
District Map 27. All drainage components shall be designed to the minimum requirements of the
City and County.
Mitiaatlon Measure 6-2. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the propeny owner/developer
shall comply with the City's Flood Hazard Reduction Ordinance (Chapter 17.28 of the Anahalm
Municipal Code) pertaining to properties that lie within the 'AO' Flood Hazard Zone (Anaheim
Floodplain Overlay Zone).
Mitiaation Measurea 6-4. At least 90 days prior to the initiation of grading activities, an NOI shall
he filed with the RWQCB by the proparty owner/developer pursuant to state and federal NPDES
requirements. As part of the NOI, a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall he
prepared. The property owner/devaloper shall also prepare a Water Quality Management Plan
(WQMP) In accordance with the Clty's municipal NPDES requirements and the Orange Count3/
Drainage Area Management Plan. The SWPPP, in conjunction with the WQMP, will descdbe the
ap3043gm.wp -15- 5/30/g6
structural and nonstructural Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be implemented during
construction (short-term) within the project area as well as BMPs for long-term operation of the
project area. Long-term measures could inolude, but may not be limited to, street sweeping, trash
collection, proper materials storage, designated wash areas connected to sanitary sewers, filter and
grease traps, and clarifiers for surface perking areas.
3.7 Employment. Population, and Houslna
3.7.1 Potential Sll3niflcant ImPacts. The Project-specific and cumulative impacts of the Project on
employment, population and housing are discussed in Section 5.7 of the EIR. No significant impects are
anticipeted.
3.7.2 Findines. The environmental effects related to employment, population, and housing have been
determined to be less than significant. No mitigation measures are required.
3.7.3 Facts In $uDoort of Findin,is. The discussion and analysis in Section 5.7 of the EIR explain the
foregoing findings and conclusions.
No significant effects on the environment related to employment, population or housing will occur.
Except to the extent they ultimately lead to adverse physicaJ changes in the environment, social and
economic impects are outside the purview of CEQA. The EIR nevertheless presents an anaJysis of
employment, population and housing impacts to highlight beneficial aspects of the Project. to confirm that
the impects are within the ranges forecasted by regionaJ growth plans and projections, and to aid decision
makers in local planning and policy making.
Approximately 2,474 new Jobs are anticipeted to be created by the Anaheim Sports Center Project
through the year 2010. This represents approximately 5% of the totaJ employment growth projected by
SCAG to occur in the City of Anaheim during the period 1990-2010, and 0.4% of the projected growth for
the Orange County Subregion during the same perind. This represents a beneficiaJ social and economic
impect on the City and the Subregion.
To the extent workers in the new jobs come from outside the City and decide to move to the City
in order to be closer to their place of employment, the City's population may increase as an indirect result
of the Project. Based on statistical data, it can be estimated that approximately 215 of these workers will
relocate to Anaheim because of the Project. Using the City average of 3.195 persons per household, this
will result in a population increase of 687, and an increase in housing demand within the City of 215 units.
These increases are well within SCAG's projections for future housing unit and population growth projections
within the City and the Subregion for the period 1990-2010.
The Anaheim Sports Center Project does not include construction of additional housing units;
therefore, there will be no direct housing Impects. The indirect induced housing demand for approximately
215 units could, to the extent not absorbed by existing vacancies, lead to new housing construction and
associated environmental impects. It is too speculative to predict where the new units will be located and
what the specific impacts might be; hewever, new housing developments will be subject to applicable CEQA
ap3043gm.wp -16- 5/3o/g6
review and mitigation. The City of Anaheim General Plan and Implementing zoning and building regulations
will serve to mitigate the potential impacts and provide for ordedy and safe residential development.
Existing City policies and the activities of the City of Anaheim Housing Authority provide for the
housing needs of the City. No mitigation measures are provided, because no significant impacts on the
provision of necessary levels of housing are anticipated. The City's housing needs for all income levels are
accommodated through the programs and policies of the General Plan Housing Element, which by law is
reviewed and updated approximately every 5 years based upon housing production targets sat by SCAG.
The next programmed General Plan Housing Element update will be scheduled in accordance with state law.
3.8 PUBUC SERVICES. UTIMTIES AND ENERGY CONSUMPTION
3.8.1 Fire and Ememency/Medical Servicee
3.8.1.1 Potential Slanificant ImDacts. Project-specific and cumulative impacts on fire and emergan-
cy/medical services are discussed in Section 5.8.1 of the EIR. No significant Impacts are anticipated.
3.8.1.2 Findines. The Project will not have a significant impact on fire and emergency/medical services.
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which help insure that the
impacts will not be significant.
3.8.1,3 Facts In SuDoort of Findlnoe. The discussion and analysis in Sections 3.9.1 and 4.9.1 of the EIR
explain the foregoing findings and conclusions.
Additional services from the City of Anaheim Fire Department will be required to provide necessary
plan check and fire prevention Inspection for development of the Anaheim Sports Center and related
projects. Plan check fees will cover the cost of the plan check services, and additional fire inspectors will
be funded as needed from fee and tax revenues associated with the Incremental development.
Development of the Project is expected to increase annual fire and rescue sarvica calls, but not
beyond lavels which can be adequately served by existing facilities, equipment and personnel. Fire and
paramedic personnel, equipment and facilities needed to accommodate cumulative area wide Increases in
calls have been planned for and will be funded through tax proceeds and mitigation measures associated
with incremental growth in the affected areas.
Nthough Projects impacts are not anticipated to he significant, implementation of the following
mitigation measures, in combination with ongoing City policies and programs, will serve to lessen or avoid
Project impacts related to fire and emergency/medical services.
Mitigation Measure 8.1-1. Pdor to approvel of the Grading Plan, the property ownor/developer
shall submit an emergency fire access plan to the Fire Department for review and approval to
ensure that service to the site is in accordance with Fire Department requirements.
ap3043gm.wp -17- S/30/96
Mitigation Measure 8.1-2. Where required, prior to the issuance of each building permit, plans
shall indicate buildings which shall have sprinklers installed by the property owner/developer in
accordance with the Anaheim Municipal Code. Said sprlnlder plans shall be reviewed and
approved by the Anaheim Fire Department prior to each final building and zoning Inspection.
Mitigation Measure 8.1-3. Prior to the issuance of each building permit, plans shall he submitted
to ensure that development is in accordance with the Cit7 of Anaheim Fire Department Standards,
including:
a. Overhead clearance shall not he less than 14 feet for the full width of access roads.
b. Bridges and underground structures to he used for Fire Department access shall he
designed to support Fire Department vehicles weighing 75,000 pounds.
c. AJl underground tunnels shall have sprinklers. Water supplies are required at all entrances.
Standpipes shall also he provided when determined to be necessary by the Fire
Department.
d. Adequate fire hydrants shall he provided. The precise number, types, and locations of the
hydrants shall be determined during building permit review. Hydrants are to be a maximum
of 400 feet apart and designed to provide the required fire flow.
e. Flow rates for public parking facilities (excluding open parking garages) shall be set at
1,500 gpm with a minimum residual pressure of 20 psi.
Mitl(3atlon Measure 8,1-4. Prior to commencement of structured framing onsite fire hydrants
required shall be Installed and charged by the property owner/developer, as required and approved
by the Fire Department.
Mitigation Measure 8.1-5. Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property
owner/developer shall submit a Construction Fire Protection Plan which shall include detailed
design plans for accessibility of emergency fire equipment, fire hydrant location, and any other
construction features required by the Fire Marstud. The property owner/developer shall he
responsible for securing facilities acceptable to the Fire Department and hydrants shall he
operational with required fire flow.
Mitigation Measure 8.1-6. Prior to approval of street Improvement plans, the water supply system
shall he designed by the property owner/developer to provide sufficient fire flow pressure and
storage for the proposed land use and fire protection in accordance with Fire Department
requirements.
Mitigation Measure 8.1-7. The property owner/developer shall provide for an additional first-aid
station at the new stadium.
ap3043gm.wp -1~ 5/~/~
3.8.2 Police Services
3.8.2.1 Potential Slanlfieant Impacts. Project-specific and cum,,~aUve Impacts on police services are
discussed in Section 5.8.2 of the £]R. Development of the Anaheim Sports Center wilt, both alone and in
combination with devalopmeot of related projects, lead to increases in demand for police services. With
implementation of mitigation measures, significant police sewices impacts will not occur.
3.8.2.2 Findines. AJI significant impacts associated w~th police services have been mitigated to a less than
significant level. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which
mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment relating to police services.
3.8.2.3 Facts in SUDDOrt of Findings. The discussion and analysis in Section 5.8.2 of the EIR explain the
foregoing findings and concJusions.
Additional service ceils from the Anaheim Sports Center area end related projects are anticipated.
Project design insures that two major stadium events will not occur simultaneousJy; however, implementation
of the retail/entertainment and ether Project uses will produce additional calls for service. The C~y will fund
the additional police protection services through tax proceeds associated with incremental growth
anticipated within the Anaheim Sports Center.
The Project was downsized during the environmentsJ review process, including reduction of the
office component of the project by more than 70%, down to a total of 250,000 square feet. (See Section
1.2.1, Modified Project Description, in the Response to Comments volume of the EIR). The reduction in
Project density will serve to further minimize the Police Service impacts of the Project.
Implementation of the following mitigation measures, in combination with ongoing City policies and
programs, will serve to lessen or avoid Project impacts ralated to police services, and the potential effects
will be reduced to a level that is less than significant.
Mitigation Measure 8.2-1: Pdor to the approval of the final site plan and issuance of each building
permit, the property owner/developer shall submit plans to the Police Department for review and
approval for the purpose of Incorporating safety measures in the project design Including the
concept of crime prevention through environmental design (i.e., building design, circulation, site
planning, and lighting of parking structure and parking areas).
Mitigation Measure 8.2-2: Prior to the issuance of each building permit for a parking structure,
the property owner/developer shaJl submit plans to the Police Department for review and approval
indicating the provision of dosed circuit monitoring and recording or other substitute security
measures as may be approved by the Police Department. Said measures shall be implemented
prior to final building and zoning inspections.
Mitigation Measure 8.2-3: Ongoing during project operation, the property owner/developer shall
provide private security on the premises to maintain adequate security for the entire project subject
to review and approval of the Police Department. The use of security patrols and electronic
security devices (i.e., video monitors) shall be considered to reduce the potential for criminal
activity in the area.
ap3043gm.wp -19- 5/30/96
Mltleafion Measure 8.2-4: Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the property
owner/developer submit design plans that shall include parking lots and parking structures with
controlled access points to limit ingress and egress if determined to be necessary by the Police
Department, and shall be subject to the reviews and approval of the Police Department.
3.8.3 Solid Wa~te DisPosal
3.8.3.1 Potential Significant Impacta. Project-specific and cumulative Impacts on solid waste disposal
are discussed in Section 5.8.3 of the EIR. Construction and operation of the Anaheim Sports Center will,
both alone (before mitigation) and in combination with development of related projects (even after
mitigation), lead to significant increases in solid waste generation and therefore significant impacts on limited
landfill capacity.
3.8.3.2 Findin~a, Cumulative solid waste Impacts are reduced to the extent feasible by the City of
Anaheim Solid Waste Management Plan and the mitigation measures identified below, but will remain
significant. Except as to these unavoidably significant cumulative Impacts, changes or alterations have been
required in, or Incorporated into, the Project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the
environment relating to solid waste disposal.
3.8.3.3 Facts In $uDoorl of Findines. The discussion and analysis in Section 5.8.3 of the EIR explain the
foregoing findings and conclusions. The unavoidable significant cumulative solid waste disposal impacts
are discussed further In Section 4.2 hetow in this document.
The solid waste generated by the Project and related projects will result in significant impacts due
to limited landfill capacity. By Year 2010, the Anaheim Spo~ts Center Project will generate an estimated
1,219 tons of waste annually, on top of the existing generation of 1,501 tons annually. This constitutes only
a small percentage (less then one-tenth of one percent) of the maximum annual capacity at the expanded
Olinda/OIInda Alpha Landfill; however, because of the limited capacity of the landfill, the cumulative impacts
are identified as significant even after mitigation.
The impact to landfill capacity from demolition debris during Project development will be reduced
or avoided to the extent feasible through implementation of Mitigation Measure 8.3-3.
The City of Anaheim Solid Waste Management Plan, other ongoing City and county programs, and
the mitigation measures set forth below will reduce solid waste impacts, but not to a level that reduces the
cumulative impacts to a level of insignificance.
Mitioatlon Measure 8.3-1. Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property
owner/developer shall submit project plans to the Public Works Department for review and
approval to ensure that the plans comply with AB 939, the Solid Waste Reduction Act of 1989, the
county of Orange and City of Anaheim Integrated Waste Management Plans as administered by
the City of Anaheim. PHor to final building and grading inspections, implementation of said plan
shall commence and shall remain in full effect as required by the Public Works Department.
N33043gm.wp -20- 5130196
In order to meet the requirements of the Solid Waste Reduction Act of 1989 (AB 939), the property
owner/developer shell Implement numerous solid-waste reduction programs, as required by the
Public Works Department, including but not limited to:
Detailing the locations and design of onsite recycling facilities.
· Providing onsite recycling receptacles to encourage recycling.
· Participating in the City of Anahetm's "Recycle Anaheim' program or other substitute
program as may be developed by the City.
· Facilitating paper recycling by providing chutes or convenient locations for sorting and
recycling bins.
· Facilitating cardboard recycling (especially In retail areas) by providing adequate space and
centralized locations for collection and bailing.
· Facilitating glass recycling (especially from restaurants) by providing adequate space for
sorting and storing.
· Providing trash compactors for nonrecyclable materials whenever feasible to reduce the
total volume of solid waste and the number of trips required for collection.
· Providing on-site recycling receptacles accessible to the public to encourage recycling for
all businesses, employees, and patrons where feasible.
· Prohibiting curbside pick-up.
Ensuring h~7~rdous rnaterisJs disposal complies with federal, state, and city regulations.
Mitigation Measure 8.3-2. On-going during project operations, the following practices shall be
implemented, as feasible, by the proparty owner/devaloper:
· Usage of recycled paper products for stationery, letterhead, and packaging.
Recovery of materials such as aluminum and cardboard.
· Collection of office paper for recycling.
· Collection of pofystyrene (foam) cups for recycling.
· Collection of glass, plastics, kitchen grease, laser printer toner cartridges, oil, batteries, and
scrap metal for recycling or recovery.
Mitluetion Measure 8.3-3. Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit, the proparty
owner/developer shall submit a Demolition and Import/Export Plan, if determined to be necessary
by the Public Works Department. The plans shall include identification of offsite locations for
material export from the project and options for disposal of excess material. These options may
include recycling of materials onsite, sale to a broker or contractor, sale to a project in the vicinity
or transport to an environmentally cleared landfill, with attempts made to move it within Orange
County. The proparty owner/devsiopar shall offer recyclable building materials, such as asphalt
sp304,3gm.wp -21 - 5/3o/96
or concrete for sale or removal by private firms or public agencies for use in construction of other
projects, If all cannot be mused on the project site.
3.8.4 Parke
3.8.4.1 Potential Sl~nlfic, ant Iml;)acta. Project-specific and cumulative impacts on parks are discussed
in Section 5.8.4 of the EIR. Parkland demand from induced population growth will be mitigated by means
of recreational and entertainment opportunities provided onsite. No significant impacts related to parks will
OCCUr.
3.8.4.2 Findines. The environmental effects related to parks have been determined to be less than
significant. Recreational and entertainment opportunities incorporated into the Project will offset indirect
induced parldand demand associated with the Project.
3.8.4.3 Facts in Suooort of Findings. The discussion and analysis in Section 5.8.4 of the EIR explain the
foregoing findings and conclusions, Sea also Section 5.1 of the EIR for additional discussion regarding the
Pro~ect's consistency with the City of Anaheim General Plan, Parks, Recreation, and Community Services
Element.
The City's goal for parks Is to provide 2 acres of partdand par 1.000 population. The Anaheim
Sports Center Project does not include housing, and therefore the Project will have no direct effect on the
City's ability to meat its parkland standard.
As discussed above in Section 3.7.3 of this document, the employment opportunities associated
with the Project could indirectly induce a population increase in the City of approximately 687 parsons. The
Project itself, however, has as one primary purpose to provide recreational and entertainment opportunities
to residents of the City and the Subregion. Accordingly, the recreational opportunities provided onsite will
serve to mitigate the need for parks and recreational opportunities associated with indirect induced
populations. Programs and policies of the City of Anaheim General Plan, Parks, Recreation, and Community
Services Element will provide further mitigation for any indirect induced demand impacts.
3.8.5 SchoQl~
3.8.5.1 Potential $1Qnlficant ImDacte. The Project will have no significant school-related Impacts on the
environment. Cumulatively. the indirect population increases indUCed by the Project together with other
related projects may lead to construction of new school facilities, and thereby potentially cause significant
impacts on the environment.
3.8,5.2 Findin(is. The Project will have no significant school-related impacts onthe environment. Although
indirect induced student generation, school facility demand and school facility financing issues do not
themselves constitute physical effects on the environment, these impacts have been analyzed in the EIR and
will not be significant with implementation of the mitigation measures or altematives identified in the EIR.
The City will require statutory school facilities fees on new development, Including development of the
Project. For the City to impose additional fees or other mitigation for the fiscal impacts to the districts would
ap3043gm. wp -22- Sl3019S
create an Infeaslble burden on new development which is vltaJ to the health and welfare of the City and its
residents. Other school facility financing sources and alternatives are within the responsibility and
jurisdiction of the school districts and the State of California, and can and should be util[zsd to address the
fiscal and facilities impacts. Further, there is likely a range of fiscal impacts end the fi~.al impact~ cited
by the ~chool dlatriot~ might be Inflated by · factor of 2 to 4. (Added by Planning Commlealon at the
May 30, 1996 public hearing).
Cumulative environmental impacts associated with the construction of new school facilities may be
unavoidably significant if adequate mitigation is not imposed before development of the new schools is
commenced. Mitigation of environmental impacts associated with new school facility construction is within
the jurisdiction and responsibility of the school district and the State of California, and can and should be
adopted by them.
The EIR recognizes that the districts have presented data and arguments indicating that the school
facilities demand induced by the Project will be higher than under projections adopted by the EIR. The City
hereby approves the analysis adopted by the EIR; however, even if the City accepted in full the districts'
position regarding the severity of impacts, the City would still adopt the findings and conclusions made
herein.
3.8.5.3 Facts In SuPDoff of Findings. The discussion and analysis in Section 5.8.5 of the EIR and In the
Response to Comments document explain the foregoing findings and conclusions. Unavoidably significant
cumulative induced school construction impacts are discussed further in Section 4.3 below in this document.
Because the Anaheim Sports Center does not inciude housing, development under the Project will
have no direct impact on schools. It can be anticipated, however, that employment opportunities associated
with the Anaheim Sports Center and related projects will induce some households to relocate into the City
of Anaheim. Indirect Project-induced household growth within the ACSD and AUHSD jurisdiction has been
estimated at approximately 215 households by the year 2010, which are in turn expected to produce
approximately 44 potentiaJ AUHSD students and 84 ACSD students.
These relatively small additional school populations could be accommodated without the
construction of new permanent school facilities, through a combination of portable classrooms and
alternative scheduling. If the districts choose to do so, they may construct additional permanent facilities
using development fee revenues, Proposition 203 funds, and other State funding resources. Because of the
uncertainties of where the student households will choose to live and where the Districts will choose to
locate schools, it would be too speculative to try to predict the environmental effects of new permanent
school construction. The existing level of urbanization in Anaheim, combined with the off-peak nature of
school traffic and surplus capacity in the City's transportation network (see Section 5.2 of the EIR) suggest
that environmental impacts from the development and operation of additional permanent schools would not
he significant. Mitigation of environmental Impacts associated with the new school facilities lies within the
Jurisdiction of the school districts and the State of California.
Cumulatively, induced student population increases associated with the Project and other related
projects will require the construction of additional permanent school facilities. Statutory developer fee
ap3043gm.wp -23- 5/30/96
revenues and other State funding sources will provide resources to districts to develop additional permanent
school facilities necessary to accommodate induced student populations. These new facilities may
contribute to development and operational impacts on the environment which are cumulatively significant
(traffic, air quality, construction noise). The existing level of urbanization in Anaheim, combined with the off-
peak nature of school traffic, surplus capacity in the City's transportation network (see Section 5.2), together
with ongoing local, regional and state public improvement programs will lessen the severity of any such
impacts, but not necessarily to a level of insignificance. Mitigation of environmental impacts associated with
the new school facilities lies within the jurisdiction of the school districts and the State of Callfomia.
The following measure will help to mitigate the indirect Induced schoc~ facilities demand impacts
associated with the Project:
Mitigation Measure 8.5-1: Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property
owner/developer shall provide proof to the Building Division of the Planning Department that
school impact fees have been paid consistent with State statutes.
3.8.6 Water Service
3.8.6.1 Potential Significant Impacts. Project-specific and cumulative impacts on water service are
discussed in Section 5.8.6 of the EIR. The existing water system is inadequate to handle the peak demands
which may result from development under the Anaheim Sports Center. Without additional water production
and distribution facilities, water system impacts will be significant.
3.8.6.2 Findings. All significant Impacts associated with water service have been mitigated to a less then
significant level. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which
mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment relating to water service.
3.8.6.3 Facts in Supgort of Findings. The discussion and analysis in Section 5.8.6 of the EIR explain the
foregoing findings and conclusions.
The existing capacity of the water supply system will be exceeded by peak water demand
associated with buildout of the Project. Full buildout of the Anaheim Sports Center will result in a net
increase in average daily water consumption by 0.506 million gallons per day (mgd). The Improvements to
the water suppiy system described in the Mitigation Measures below will be required to adequately serve
the Project area.
Cumulatively, development under the Project and related projects will increase average daily
demand by approximately 2.42 mgd. The cumulative increase in demand in the Anaheim Sports center will
be accommodated by the water system improvements identified in the Clty's 5-year Capital Water System
Plan. improvements will be financed with developer and/or user fees.
Impiementation of the following mitigation measures will serve to lessen or avoid water service
impacts, and the potential effects will be reduced to a level that is less than significant.
ap3043gm.wp -24- 5/3o/96
Mitlpatlon Measure 8.6-1. Pdor to issuance of building permit for final phase, or as required by
the Public Works and Utilities Departments, a new Well No.45 will be Installed in a location
acceptable to the City. The imp4ementation of this wall shall be timed to coincide with the level of
devalopment onsite that would require this improvement, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer
and the Utilities Department.
Mitigation Measure 8.6-2. A new 16 inch pipeline shall be constructed by the property
owner/devaloper in Katalla Avenue from Wall No. 45 tO the existing 18 inch line at the Intersection
of Katalla Avenue and State College Boulevard. An additional offsite 16-inch pipeline shall be
constructed to replace a portion of the existing 12-inch pipeline along State College Boulevard.
This new pipaline in State College Boulevard will extend from Gene Autry Way to the existing
connection in Katella Avenue. These new pipelines shall be constructed in conjunction with project
devalopment to complete a loop with the project and the surrounding system. The implementation
of this pipeline shall be timed to coincide with the leval of development onsite that would require
this improvement, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Utilities Department.
Mitigation Measure 8.6-3: Prior to issuance of a building permit for each phase, the property
owner/devaloper shall submit plans to the Utilities Department for review and approval in
compliance with the City of Anaheim adopted Landscape Water Efficiency Guidelines with certain
voluntary and mandatory landscape requirements. Said plans shall indicate which of the measures
listed below have been incorporated.
· Use of water-conserving landscape plant materials wherever feasible.
· Use of vacuums and other equipment to reduce the use of water for wash down of exterior
arees.
· Use of self-closing valves for drinking fountains.
· Use of efficient irrigation systems such as drip irrigation and automatic systems which uss
moisture sensors.
· Infrared sensors on drinking fountains.
· Use of irrigation systems primarily at night, when evaporation rates are lowest.
· Use of low flow sprinkler heads in Irrigation system.
· Use of waterway re-circulation systems.
· Provide information to the public in conspicuous places regarding water conservation.
· Use of reclaimed water for irrigation and washdown when it becomes available.
Mitigation Measure 8.6-5. Prior to issuance of the first building permit the property
owner/devaloper shall pay all water fees associated with each phase of the project.
ap3043gm.wp -25- 5/30/96
3.8.7 Wastewater
3.8.7.1 Potentisl$1anificantlmMtcts. Project-speclficand cumulativewastewater/sewerserviceimpac~s
are discussed in Section 5.8.7 of the EIR. Without additional sewer line improvements, wastewater
generated from development under the Anaheim Sports Center will elgnlficartfly impact and overburden
existing sewer pipe capacities. Cumulative wastewater increases because of development under the Project
and related projects will also be significant in the absence of system improvements.
3.8.7.2 Flndlnoe. All significant impacts associated with wastewater/sewer service will be mitigated to a
less then significant level by the mitigation measures set forth below. Chenges or alterations heve been
required in, or incorporated into, the Project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the
environment relating to wastewater/sewer service.
3.8.7.3 Facts In $uooort of Findines. The discussion and analysis in Sections 3.9.7 and 4.9.7 of the EIR
explain the foregoing findings and conclusions.
The sewer line upgrades and new lines needed to accommodate development of the Project are
identified on EIR Exhibits 5.8-6a and 5.8-6b. Implementation of the mitigation measure described below will
insure thet the line improvements are implemented as development proceeds, and will reduce the potential
significant effects to a less then significant level. Implementation of the water conservation measures listed
in Section 3.8.6 above in this document will serve to further reduce wastewater flows and demands on the
sewer system. Downstream lines and treatment facilities heva enough capacity to accommodate Project
flows.
Cumulative development in the area will require implementation of system Improvements identified
in the City's South Central Area Sewer Deficiency Study. Implementation of these improvements would
ensure adequate sewer capacity. Improvements will be financed through developer and user fees.
Mitiaatlon Measure 8.7-1. Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property
owner/developer shall, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, pay all CSDOC connection and
treatment capacity fees associated with each phase of the project.
Mitl¢3atlon Measure 8.7-2.3. Prior to the issuance of the first building permit for the project, the
property owner/developer shall, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, provide funding for or
construct adequate sewer facilities to accommodate flows from the project as identified in the
Public Services and Utilities Technical Report (Appendix B of EIR No. 320). Sewer lines should be
sized on total weighted fixture units and based upon gallons per minute values. Use of any pumps
must be considered in the design of the sewer lines. If information is not available on the use of
pumps, assume a safety value added to the initiaJ design based upon other similar facilities or other
engineering applications. These lines will connect to the Santa Ana River Interceptor (SARI) and/or
the CSDOC Orangewood Diversion Trunk Sewer.
ap3043gm.wp -26- 5/30/96
Mltigatlon Measure 8.7-4. Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property
owner/developer shall provide, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, all lateral lines and connects
required to sawice the individual development within the planned Anaheim Sports Center.
3.8.8 Storm Drains
3.8.8.1 Potential $k3nlficant Im~ct~. Project-specific and cumulative impacts on storm drains are
discussed in Section 5.8.8 of the EIR. implementation of the Project is anticipated to decrease runoff from
the site, and will therefore create a beneficial impact.
3.8.8.2 Findings. Impacts to the storm drainage system will not be significant. Changes or alterations
have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which will help insure that the Impacts are not
significant.
3.8.8.3 Facts In SUDDOrI of Findirma. The discussion and analysis in Section 5.8.8 of the EIR explain the
foregoing findings and conclusions.
The Anaheim Sports Center site is already nearly entirely paved or otherwise improved with
impervious structures and materials. Landscaping features planned as part of the Project and other design
features will reduce stormwater runoff and provide a beneficial impact over existing conditions.
Impfamentation of the following mitigation measures and the mitigation measures discussed above
in Section 3.6, Hydrology and water quality, will improve onsite flow management and help insure that storm
drain impacts are not significant.
Mitigation Measure 8.8-1.2. The property ownar/developer shall construct a new drainage system
to drain the northerly portion of the property. This system will be constructed in a location
acceptable to the City Engineer, and will consist of pipe sizes ranging from 24 to 54 inches. This
new drainage facility will also join with the existing Southeast Anaheim Channel Facility (SACF E12).
The implementation of these pipelines shall be timed to coincide with the level of development
onsite that would require these improvements, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
Mitfastlon Measure 8.8.3. The property owner/developer shall apply for and obtain a National
Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) construction permit. This permit would require
the preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan to mitigate the erosion that may occur
during construction periods from storm water runoff.
3.8.9 Electricity
3.8.9.1 Potential SiGnificant Impacts. Project-specific and cumulative impacts on electricity demand and
distribution are discussed in Section 5.8.9 of the EIR. Distribution facilities may need to be added to
accommodate development of the Project and related projects.
3.8.9.2 Findings. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which
mitigate or avoid the signirmant effects on the environment relating to electricity. Impacts will not be
ap3043gm.wp -27- 5/30/~6
significant with implementation of the distribution system improvements and conservation measures identified
in the EIR.
3.8.9.3 Facte In SuPport of Findings. The discussion and analysis in Section 5.8.9 of the EIR explain the
foregoing findings end conclusions.
Sufficient electrical power will be available through the year 2010 to serve development under the
Project and Related Projects. Cumulative demand in the year 2010 is estimated at 83,818 kilowatt hours
(kWh) per day, of which 8,526 kWh is attributable to the Anaheim Sports Center Project.
Improvements and upgrades in the iccal distribution system will be required, and will be funded
through rates paid by electric utility consumers.
Implementation of the following mitigation measures will reduce impacts relating to electricity to
a level which is not significant.
Mitioatlon Measure 8.9-1. The property owner/developer shaJl construct a new conduit system
in a location acceptable to the Utilities Department that shall interface with and/or replaca the
existing underground 12 kV conduit system serving the site for onslte electrical distribution. The
new system shall be timed to coincide with the level of development onsite that would require this
improvement, to the satisfaction of the City Public Utilities Department.
Mitfaation Measure 8.9-2,3. Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property
owner/developer shall submit plans showing that each structure will comply with the State Energy
Efficiency Standards for Nonresidential Buildings (Title 24, Part 6, A~ticle 2, California Code of
Regulations) and will consuit with the City of Anaheim Public Utilities, Resource Efficiency Division
in order to review said standards. This consultation shall take place during project design to
incorporate energy efficiency and allow potantial systems alternatives such as thermal energy
storage air-conditioning and building envelope options.
The design measures may include the following:
· High-efficiency air conditions with EMS (computer) control.
· Variable Air Volume (VAV) air distribution.
· Outside air (100 percent) economizer cycle.
· Staged compressors or variable speed drives to itow varying thermal loads.
· Isolated HVAC zone control by floors/separable activity areas.
· Specification of premium-efficiency electric motors (i.e., compressor motors, air handling
units, fan-coil units).
· Use of occupancy sensors in appropriate spaces.
ap3O43gm.wp -28- 5130196
· Use of compact I~uorescent lamps In place of Incandescent lamps.
· Use of T-8 lamps and electronic ballasts where application of standard fluorescent flxtures
are Identified.
· Use of metal-halIde or high-pressura sodium (high intensity discbarge) lamps for outdoor
lighting and parking lots.
· ConsIderation of thermal energy storage air conditioning for hotel buildings, meeting
facilities, theetern, or other Intermittent-usa spaces or facilElee that may require air-
conditioning during summer, day-peak patioels.
· ConsIderetlon for participation in Resource Eff~ciency's Programs such as:
New Construction Design Review, In which the City cost-shares engineering fees for
design of energy efficient buildings and systems.
Energy Sale for New Construction - Cash incentives ($150 to $400 per kW reduction
in load) for efficiency that exceeds Title 24 requirements.
Thermal Energy Storage Feasibility Study - Cost sharing of up to $5,000 for the
feasibility study of TES applied to new facilities.
Mitlaatlon Measure 8.9-4. Prior to Issuance of each building permit for any buildings requiring
a change In electrical service, the property owner/developer shall install an underground electrical
sen/ice from the Public Utilities Distribution System. The Underground Service will be Installed in
accordance with the Electric Rules, Rates, Regulations and Electrical Specifications for
Underground Systems. Electrical Service Fees end other applicable fees will be assessed In
accordance with the Electric Rules, Rates, Regulations and Electrical Specifications for
Underground Systems.
3.8.10 Nat~jral Gas
3.8.10.1 Potential Significant Impacts. The project-specific and cumulative Impacts of the Project on
natural gas service are discussed in Sections 3.8,10 and 4.9.10 of the EIR. There are no significant impacts
related to natural gas service.
3.8.10.2 Findines. There are no significant impacts related to natural gas service.
3.8.10.3 Facts In $ul)gort of Findings. The discussion and analysis In Section .5.8.10 of the ElR explain
the foregblng finding.
The Project will increase demand for natural gas by 64,562 MBTU annually. The Southern California
Gas Company has Indicated that it will be able to meet this demand, as well as the cumulative demand from
the Project and all related projects combined.
ap3O43gm.wp -29- 5/3O/96
3.8.11 Cable Service and Television Reception
3.8.11.1 Potential SI;nificant Impacts. Pro}ect-spacific and cumulative impacts on cable service and
television reception are discussed in Section 5.8.11 of the EIR. Distribution and signaJ relay facilities may
need to be added to accommodate development of the Project and related projects.
3.8.11.2 Flndlnos. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which
mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment relating to cable service and television reception.
Impacts will not be significant with implementation of the measures identified in the EIR.
3.8.11.3 Faota in Sunport of Findings. The discussion and analysis in Section 5.8.11 of the EIR explain
the foregoing findings and conclusions.
Cable television transmission lines will be added by the local cable operator as needed to serve
hotels and other facilities in the Project and related projects. Broadcast television reception could be
adversely affected by changes in building height and mass due to development of the Project and the
related projects. Implementation of the following mitigation measure will reduce impacts relating to television
reception to a level which is not significant.
Mitigation Measure 8.11-1. If deemed necessary, within 6 months after completion of building
exteriors of new developments over 75 feet in height, a study of area television reception shall be
undertaken by the property owner/developer and submitted to the City Engineer for revtew and
approval. If the Cit~ of Anaheim determines that the proposed project creates a significant impact
on broadcast television reception at local residences and other existing hotels/restaurants or other
businesses, a signal booster or relay system shall he installed by the proparty owner/developer
immediately on the roof of the tallest project building to restore television reception to its original
condition.
3.8.12 Teleohone Service
3.8.12.1 Potential Slonlficant Imoacta. Project-specific and cumulative impacts on telephone service are
discussed In Section 5.8.12 of the EIR. There are no significant impacts to telephone service.
3.8.12.2 Findines. There are no significant impacts relating to telephone service.
3.8.12.3 Facts in Su;)Dort of Findinqa. The discussion and analysis in Section 5.8.12 of the EIR explain
the foregoing finding and conclusion. Future development of the Anaheim Sports Center and related
projects will increase the demand on the telephone sewice system. The service supplier, Pacific Bell, has
indicated that it will be able to meet the future demand for service.
ap3043gm.wp -30- 5/30/96
3.9 Hazardous Materials
3.9.1 Potential Sionlficant Ira;acts. Pro)ect-spacific and cumulative impacts relating to hazardous
materials are discussed in Section 5.9 of the £1R. No slgni~cant impacts are anticipated.
3.9.2 Findings. No significant impacts associated with hazardous materials are anticipated. Changes
or altarations have been required in, or Incorporated into, the Project which will provide additional assurance
that significant effects will not occur.
3.9.3 Facts In SuoDort of Findings. The discussion and analysis in Section 5.g of the EIR explain the
foregoing findings and conclusions.
Soil contamination from leaking underground storage tanks is known to have existed at five sites
within 0.25 miles of the Anaheim Sports Center; however, remediation has been completed at four of the
five sites, and the fifth involves waste motor oil which has not entered the groundwater, and is not likely to
spread to the Project site. No adverse hazardous waste conditions have been identified on the Project site.
No significant impacts related to hazardous materials are anticipated.
The potential hnT~rdous materials impacts associated with development under the Project will be
reduced to an Insignificant level with implementation of the mitigation measures set forth below.
Mltlostlon Measure 9-1.2, Ongoing during demolition and construction, In the event that
1~7~rdous waste is discovered during site preparation or construction, the propany
owner/developer shall ensure that the identified 1~7~rdous waste and/or hnT~rdous material is
handled and disposed of in the manner specified by the State of California Hazardous Substances
Control Law (Health and Safety Code, Division 20, Chapter 6.5) and according to the requirements
of the California Administrative Code, Title 30, Chapter 22. Compliance with applicable City and
state codes regarding the handling and disposal of hazardous materials/waste is also required.
3.10 Aesthatle~
3.10.1 Potential Significant Imnacts. Project-specific and cumulative impacts on visual resources and
aesthetics are discussed in Section 5.10 of the EIR. No significant impacts related to visual resources and
aesthetics are anticipated.
3.10.2 Flndinoa. Impacts associated with visual resources and aesthetics will not be significant.
3.10.3 Facts in Suooort of Findings. The discussion and analysis in Section 5.10 of the EIR explain the
foregoing findings and conclusions.
Development of the Anaheim Sports Center will result in the intensification of the existing urban and
commercial-recreation character of the project area. The most notable alteration of existing views will be
from motorists traveling along SR-57, Orangewood Avenue, and State College Boulevard, and uses directly
adjacent to the project site. The proposed architecturally consistent, well-landscaped, commercial-recreation
sp3043gm.wp --31- 5/3o/96
center represents an aesthetic improvement to the existing views from these locations which currantJy
consist of the existlog Anaheim Stadium surrounded by a vast expense of asphalt perking areas. As stated
earlier, the existing stadium is not visible from the nearest residences located approximately 0.3 mile and
0.5 mile south and southeast of the site, respectively. Thus, due to the fiat topography and that the location
of the proposed structures which will be taller than the existing stadium are in the northem portion of the
site, no alteration of the existing views to the nearest residences is anticipeted.
Given the location of the project site in an area that has been highly urbanlzed with commercial and
recreational uses, the project will not result in significant deterioration of the visual character in the project
vicinity. Overall, development of the project will result in beneficiaJ visual impects to surrounding land uses
and the general area.
3.11 Cultural Resources
3.11.1 Potential Significant Impacts. Project-specific and cumulative impacts on cultural resources are
discussed in Section 5.11 of the EIR. There are no signif'mant Project-specific or cumulative impects on
cultural resources.
3.11.2 Findings. There are no significant Project-specil~c or cumulative Impects on cultural resources.
3.11.3 Facts in Sugoort of Findings. The discussion and analysis in Section 5.11 of the EIR explain the
foregoing findings and conclusions. Past surveys have uncovered no evidence of cultural, historic or
prehistoric resources, and no significant impects are anticipeted. However, the following mitigation measures
have nonetheless been incorporated into the Anaheim Sports Center Project to minimize potential
disturbance to as-yet undiscovered resources that may be encountered during future development activity.
Mitigation Measure 11-1. Prior to approvel of a grading plan, the property owner/developer shall
submit a letter to the Public Works/Engineering Depertment, Development Division, and the
Planning Depertment, Planning Division, identifying the certified archaeologist that has been hired
to ensure that the following actions are implemented:
a. The archaeologist must be present at the pregradlng conference In order to establish
procedures for temporarily halting or rediractlng work to permit the sampling, identification,
and evaluation of artifacts if potentially significant artifacts are uncovered. If artifacts are
uncovered and determined to he significant, the archaeological observer shall determine
appropriate actions in cooperation with the property owner/developer for exploration
and/or salvage.
b. Specimens that are collected prior to or during the grading process will be donated to an
appropriate educational or research institution.
c. Any archaeological work at the site shall be conducted under the direction of the certified
archaeologist. If any artifacts are discovered during grading operations when the
archaeological monitor is not present, grading shall be diverted around the area until the
monitor can survey the area.
sp3043gm.wp ~2- 5/~/~
d. A final report dstailing the findings and disposition nf the specimens shall be submitted to
the City Engineer. Upon completion of the grading, the archaeologist sheJl notify the City
to when the final report will be submitted.
Mltlaatlon Meaeure 11-2. Pdor to approval of a grading plan, the properb/owner/developer shall
submit a letter to the Public Works/Engineering Department, Development Division, and the
Planning Department, Planning Division, identifying the certified paleontologist that has been hired
to ensure that the following actions are Implemented:
a. The paleontologist must be present at the prograding conference In order to establish
procedures to temporarily halt or redirect work to permit the sampling, identification, and
evaluation of fossils if potentially significant paleontological resources are uncovered. If
artifacts are uncovered and found to be significant, the peleontological observer shall
determine appropriate actions in cooperation with the property owner/developer for
exploration and/or salvage.
b. Specimens that are colleeted prior to or during the gredlng process will be donated to an
appropriate educational or research institution.
~'~ c. Any paleontologlcal work at the site shall be conducted under the direction of the certified
paleontologist. If any fossils are discovered dudng grading operations when the
paleontological monitor is not present, grading shall be diverted around the area until the
monitor can survey the area.
d. A final report detailing the findings and disposition of the specimens shall be submitted.
Upon completion of the grading, the paleontologist shall notify the City as to when the final
report will be submitted.
ap3043gm.wp -33- 5/30/96
SECTION 4.0
UNAVOIDABLE SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS
The potential significant adverse Impacts associated with the Anaheim Spots Center Project which
cannot be avoided by the adoption of feasible mitigation measures or project alternatives are described and
analyzed below. The City of Anaheim finds that these potential significant adverse impacts would he
reduced with the implementation of the recommended mitigation measures; however, the Impacts cannot
be reduced to a level less than significant. The City will adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations
pumuant to Section 15093 of the CEQA Guidalines. The Statement of Overriding Considerations is included
as Section 7.0 of this document.
4.1 AIR QUAUTY
4.1.1 Unavoidable Significant Impacta. AJl significant impacts associated with air quality have been
mitigated to a less than significant levsi except for the following:
A. Construction Emissions: Even with all feasible mitigation measures, peak day construction
emissions on both a Project-specific and cumulative basis are expected to exceed SCAQMD thresholds for
PM10.
B. Operational Emissions: Even with all fessible mitigation measures, emissions from motor
vehicle traval and utility consumption associated with the Anaheim Sports Center Project are expected to
exceed SCAQMD thresholds for ROG, NOx and CO on a Project-specific and cumulative basis, and PM10
on a cumulative basis. These are impacts on regional air quaJity; no significant localized air quality impacts
will occur.
4.1.2 Findinaa. Project-specific and cumulative significant environmental impacts ralated to air qualit~
have been mitigated to the extent feasible by incorporation of the mitigation measures identified in this
document. With respect to the unavoidably significant air quality impacts, specific economic, legal, social,
technological, or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment
opportunities for highly trained workers, make infessible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified
in the EIR.
4.1.3 Facts In Suoport of Findinoa. Even with all feasible mitigation measures, intensification of urban
uses as contemplated under the Anaheim Sports Center will inevitably lead to construction and traffic
emissions.
The Project is well designed from a regional air quaJity planning standpoint. As confirmed by the
Project review conducted by SCAG, the Anaheim Sports Center provides a good example of using planning
to achieve regional air quality goals, by, for instance, concentrating new devalopment around existing
regional activity centers and transportation nodes. The Project, together with nearby activity centers (e.g.
Anaheim Convention Center, Disneyland Resort), will enhance the destination resort character of the area,
thereby contributing to increasing lengths of stay and reducing overall vacation traval in the region.
ap3043gm.wp -34- 5/30/96
The unavoidable air quality impacts could potentially be reduced, but not to betow a level of
significance, by adoption of the lower intensity alternative. That alternative, however, is Infeasible for the
reasons set forth in Section 5.0 below in this document.
4.2 SOUD WASTE DISPOSAL
4.2.1 Unavoidable Significant Impacts. Because of limited landffil cepacity, the cumulative quantity of
solid waste generated by construction and operation of the Anaheim Sports Center and related projects will
be unavoidably significant.
4.2.2 Findin~s. The Project-specific and cumulative significant environmental impacts related to solid
waste have been mitigated to the extent feasible by incorporation of the mitigation measures identified in
this document. After mitigation, the solid waste impacts of the Project alone will not be significant; however,
the Project solid waste generation together with the generation from ralated projects will be cumulatively
significant even after mitigation. With respect to the unavoidably significant cumulative solid waste impacts,
specific economic, legal, social, technologicaJ, or other considerations, including considerations for the
provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make Infeasible the mitigation measures
or alternatives identified in the Environmental Impact Report.
4.2.3 Facts in Suoport of Findings. New development inevitably leads to increases in solid waste
generation. Landfill space is limited.
Although the feasibility of recycling and other waste stream reduction measures is increasing,
measures required to reduce solid waste generation to a level of insignificance cennot be feasibly achieved
at this time. The City's existing waste management program and the mitigation measures identified in the
EIR will reduce solid waste considerably, but not to a lavel which is cumulatively insignificant.
The unavoidable cumulative solid waste impacts could potentially be reduced, but not to below a
level of significance, by adoption of the lower intensity alternative. That alternative, however, is Infeasible
for the reasons set forth in Section 5.0 betow in this document.
4.3 SCHOOLS
4.3.1 Unavoidable Sionlficent Imoacts. Them may he a need for additional permanent school facilities
because of new student generation to the Anaheim City School District ('ACSD") and the Anaheim Union
High School District ('AUHSD') from households relocating to the jurisdiction of those districts because of
employment opportunities created by the Anaheim Sports Center and the related projects. When and where
these new facilities will be developed cannot be predicted at this time, but environmental impacts associated
with the new schools (air quality, traffic, noise, compatibility with surrounding land uses) may be unavoidably
significant.
· p3043gm.wp -35- 5/~0/96
4.3.2 Findinst. With respect to the potential unavoidably significant environmental impacts associated
with new permanent school faculties needed to accommodate student population increases Indirectly
induced by the Project together with related projects, spacific economic, legal, social, technological, or other
considerations, Including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained
workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the Environmental Impam
Report. Fiscal Impacts to school districts associated with new facilities needed to accommodate indirectly
induced increases In school populations are not themselves environmentaJ impacts, and in any event may
not be significant given available state and local school facilities funding sources and available alternatives
to new permanent facility construction. Nonetheleu, the Planning Commission finds that there may be
s range of potential Indirect fiecal Impact,,, ranging from the Clty's estimates to the ~chool dlstrlct's
estimates, while the fiscal Impacts cited by the school districts might be Inflated by s factor of 2 to
4. (Added by the Planning Commission at the May 30, 1996 public hearing). Even if this were to be
considered an environmental impact and were to be as significant as portrayed by ACSD and AUHSD, the
City would find that additional City mitigation beyond statutory developor fees cannot fessibly be imposed,
and that the Project benefits set forth in Section 7.0 below outweigh any unavoidable impacts to the districts.
4.3.3 Facts in $uoport of Findings. Because the Anaheim Sports Center does not include housing,
development under the Project will have no direct impact on schools. It can be anticipated, however, that
employment opportunities associated with the Anaheim Sports Center and related projects will induce some
households to relocate into the City of Anaheim. Indirect Project-induced househbld growth within the ACSD
and AUHSD jurisdiction has been estimated at approximately 215 households by the year 2010, which are
in turn expected to produce approximately 44 potential AUHSD students end 84 ACSD students.
These relatively small additional school populations could be accommodated without the
construction of new permanent schoo~ facilities, through a combination of portable classrooms and
alternative scheduling. If the districts choose to do so, they may construct additional permanent facilities
using development fee revenues, Proposition 203 funds, and other State funding resources. Because of the
uncertainties of where the student households will choose to live and where the Districts will choose to
locate schools, it would be too speculative to try to predict the environmental effects of new permanent
school construction. The existing level of urtmnization in Anaheim, combined with the off-poak nature of
school traffic and surplus capacity in the City's transportation network (see Section 5.2 of the EIR) suggest
that environmental impacts from the development and oparetlon of additional permanent schools would not
be significant. Mitigation of environmental impacts associated with the new school facilities lies within the
jurisdiction of the school districts and the State of CaJifornia.
Cumulatively, induced student population increases associated with the Project and other related
projects will require the construction of additional permanent school facilities. Statutory devalopar fee
revenues and other State funding sources will provide resources to districts to develop additional permanent
school facilities necessary to accommodate induced student populations. These new facilities may
contribute to development and operational impacts on the environment which are cumulatively significant
(traffic, air quaitty, constmctidn noise). The existing level of urbanization in Anaheim, combined with the off-
peak nature of schooi traffic, surplus capacity in the City's transportation network (see Section 5.2), together
with ongoing local, regional and state public improvement programs will lessen the severity of any such
ap3043gm.wp -36- 5/30/96
impacts, but not necesserliy to a level of insignificance. Mitigation of environmentaJ impacts associated with
the now school facilities lies within the jurisdiction of the school districts and the State of California.
The unavoidable cumulative impacts associated with indirectly induced new school facilities could
potentially be reduced, but not necessarily to below a level of significance, by adoption of the lower intensity
alternative. That alternative, however, is Infeasible for the reasons set forth in Section 5.0 below in this
document.
ap3043gm.wp -37- 513o196
SECTION 5
ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROJECT
The EIR has evaluated a reasonable range of alternatives to the proposed Project. Section 6.0 of
the EIR provides detailed descriptions and analysis of each alternative in adequate detail for a declelon on
whether the alternatives should be adopted in lleu of the Project, as well as an analysis of the
environmentally superior alternative.
5.1 NO-PROJECT ALTERNATIVE
5.1.1 Description of Alternative. Section 6.1 of the EIR describes and discusses the No-Project
(Continuing Development) Alternative. Under the No-Project Nternative, the Anaheim Sports Center would
not be implemented, but the project area would continue to develop under the existing land use controls
and designations. Continued devalopment and renovation under these existing restrictions would be allowed
by right or as allowed by discretionary approval by the City of Anaheim, depending on the types of action
requested. A previously-approved Specific Plan would have permitted 2,118,480 square feat of
office/professional and ancillary retail development on the Project site, in addition to the existing Anaheim
Stadium and office development. This same square footage of development is somewhat equivalent to the
total square footage proposed for the Project, but it includes a far greater office component and less
entertainment/retail. It is assumed that continuing development would occur as allowed by the C-R Zoning
Regulations.
5.1.2 Findines. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, Including
considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the
No Project Alternative identified in the EIR.
5.1.3 Facts in Supoort of Findin(is. Because the No Project ARemotive includes a much higher
percentage of office development than the Project (in place of entertainment retail), it would have more
significant impacts in terms of peak hour traffic, housing, and schools. Overall, impacts under the No
Project Alternative would be similar to or greater than impacts of the proposed Project.
This altamative would not achieve many of the project benefits anticipated with implementation of
the Anaheim Sports Center, including:
· Enhance the City sports venues to maintain existing tenant relationships and attract
additional professional sports teams and other major events.
· Develop an entertainment/recreation area for the local and regional residents, while also
providing entertainment opportunities for convention visitors and tourists from out of the
area.
· Provide a variety of venues for entertainment at one location, with an emphasis on pro- and
post-game retail and entertainment opportunities.
ap3043gm.wp -38- 5/30/96
· Encourage and enhance Anaheim's and the County of Orange's position as a nationally
recognized visitor destination, while maintaining the attraction of Anahelm's highly rated
Convention Center.
· Encourage the development of qualit,/facilities which complement conventions, family
entertainment, sports events, and other recreational opportunities within appropriate areas
of the community.
For all of the above reasons, the No-Project/Continuing Development Alternative has been
determined to be infeasible.
5.2 DESIGN ALTERNATIVE 1: REDUCED DENSITY ALTERNATIVE
5.2.1 DeecrlDtlon of Alternative. This alternative would provide land uses similar to those of the
proposed project, but would result in approximately 450,000 less square feet of retail/entertainment and a
reduction of exhibition space over what is currently onsite by 50,000 square feet. Although the square
footage would be reduced, land use compatibility would be comparable to those identified for the proposed
project. Mitigation measures similar to those for the proposed project (review of site plans, etc.) would be
included in this alternative.
6.2.2 Findinas. This alternative is environmentally superior to the proposed Project; however, specific
economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of
employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the Reduced Density Ntemative
identified in the EIR.
5.2.3 Facts in $uogort of FIndinas. As discussed in Section 6.2.2 of the EIR, the potential impacts to
land use and related plans and policies; earth resources (i.e., geology, soils, and seismicity); hydroiogy and
water quality; hazardous materials; aesthetics; and cultural resources would be comparable to the proposed
Project. However, impacts to transportation/circulation; air quality; noise; and population, employment and
housing opportunities; and public services, utilities, and energy consumption would be generally less than
the proposed project. Unavoidably significant cumulative air quality, solid waste, and school facility
construction impacts would still occur as with the proposed Project, albeit to a somewhat lesser degree.
This alternative would not achieve many of the project bener~s anticipated with implementation of
the Anaheim Sports Center, including:
· Enhance the City sports venues to maintain existing tenant relationships and attract
additional professional sports teams and other major events.
Develop an entertainment/recreation area for the local and regional residents, while also
providing entertainment opportunities for convention visitors and tourists from out of the
area.
Provide a vadety of venues for entertainment at one location, with an emphasis on pre- and
post-game retail and entmtainment opportunities.
· Encourage and enhance Anaheim's and the County of Orange's position as a nationally
recognized visitor destination, while maintaining the attraction of Anahalm's highly rated
Convention Center.
ap3043gm.wp -39- S/30/96
· Encourage the development of quality facilities which complement conventions, family
entertainment, sports events, and other recreational opportunities within appropriate areas
of the community.
For all of the above reasons, the Reduced Density Nternatlve has been determined to be Infeasible.
5,3 DESIGN ALTERNATIVE 2: RESIDENTIAL ALTERNATIVE
5.3.1 De$¢riotlon of Alternative. This alternative would provide land uses similar to those associated
with the proposed Project, but would result in approximatsiy 450,000 less square feet of office/professional
space to be replaced with 360 apartment/condominlum-styfa dwelling units. These units would be located
In place of the office towers previously proposed for the Anaheim Sports Center in the northem portion of
the site. Although new residential uses would be introduced onsite, the overall square footage would be the
same and land use compatibility would be comparable to the proposed project due to the complimentary
urban (high--risa) neturn of the dwelling units proposed under this alternative. Mitigation measures similar
to those for the proposed project (review of site plans, etc.) would be included in this alternative.
5.3.2 Findinas. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including
considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the
Residential AJtamative identified in the EIR. This alternative does not lessen or avoid the significant
environmental Impacts associated with the proposed Project.
5.3.3 Facts In SuD]30rt of Findings. As detailed in Section 6.3.2 of the EIR, the potential impacts to land
use and ralated plans and policies; earth resources (i.e., geology, soils, and seismicity); hydrology and water
quality; population, employment and housing opportunities; hazardous materials; aesthetics; and cultural
resources would be comparable to the proposed project, while impacts to transportation/circulation; air
quality; and noise would be generally less than the proposed project. However, implementation of the
Residential Alternative would result in greater impacts to public services (including solid waste disposal and
induced school facility construction impacts), utilities, and energy consumption.
AJthough the Residential ,Ntemetive would still achieve many of the objectives of the proposed
Project, it would result in environmental impacts which are overall similar to or greater than those of the
proposed project.
5.4 ORIGINAL PROJECT (HIGHER DENSITY) ALTERNATIVE
5.4.1 Deecrivtlon of Alternative. The EIR also analyzed the original proposed Project with 900,000
square feet of office development instead of the 250,000 square feet currently proposed.
5.4.2 Findinas. This alternative would create more significant impacts than the current proposed Project.
5.4.3 Facts In Sul~130rt of Flngln{3s. Impacts of the original proposed Project are fully detailed in the
draft EIR (January, 1996). A comparison of the original Project impacts with those of the current proposed
Project is presented in Section 1.2.1 of the Response to Comments volume (May, 1996). impacts would
be greater under the original Project than with the Project as currently proposed.
ap3043gm.wp -40- 5/30/~6
SECTION 6
FINDINGS REGARDING OTHER CEQA CONSIDERATIONS
6.1 SIGNIFICANT IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES
The Anaheim Sports Center consists of intensification of an existing urbanized property located at
an existing regional activity/transportation center. Accordingly, it does not Involve irreversible changes from
natural or open space conditions.
Implementation of the Project would also Indirectly result in Increased consumption of
nonrenewable and slowly renewable resources such as fuel oil, natural gas, gasoline, lumber, sand and
gravel, asphalt, petrochemical construction matehals, steel, copper, lead, and water, etc. The Project is
consistent with regional growth projections, however, and mitigation measures have been incorporated in
the Project to reduce its consumption of water and energy sources.
6.2 GROWTH-INDUCING IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT
It is anticipated that the Anaheim Sports Center area will experience growth in the future as an
indirect result of the proposed Project and other municlpaJ planning efforts, such as future Convention
Center betterment programs, the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan and The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan.
If adopted, the Anaheim Sports Center would aJlew commercial growth, consistent with local and regional
plans, to enhance the economic base of the City, and Increase local employment opportunities.
Implementation of the Anaheim Sports Center project and the related projects may induce growth of various
kinds, including economic growth in the City of Anaheim, new construction and other jobs in the region, and
population growth in the Southern California region.
The growth that may be expected to occur in the foreseeable future (through year 2010) in the area
surrounding the proposed Project area is described for each impact throughout the EIR. Growth associated
with the Project and the related projects would be consistent with the growth projections for the Anaheim
Sports Center and the region.
Development onsite would directly create a number of new employment opportunities in the City
of Anaheim and the surrounding area. Construction jobs in Anaheim and throughout the region would be
created as a direct result of the project. Jobs associated with the operation of the newty developed uses
within the Anaheim Sports Center would also be created as the project area develops. In addition, other
jobs, in a wide variety of sectors of the local and regional economies wouid be indirectly induced as a result
of project implementation. The numbers of construction and other related Jobs which would be generated
by the project cannot be accurately calculated at this state of project development; however, influence of
the proposed project on the job market is not expected to generate significant growth beyond the growth
assumed in regional plans. Estimates of projected jobs created through development of the Anaheim Sports
Center are included in Section 5.7 of the EIR, Employment, Population, and Housing.
As discussed in Section 5.7 of the EIR, considering both in-migrating and intraregional relocation,
it is estimated that approximately 215 employees (667 new residents at 3.1 persons per household) will seek
ap3043gm.wp -41- 5/30/g6
housing In Anaheim as a result of employment at the Anaheim Sports Center. These people would comprise
less then 1.0 percent of the 2010 population forecast projected for the City.
The project could also Indlrecfiy Induce effects on population elsewhere within the region. The
potential demand for public sen/ices and utilities thet would be generated by this Induced population growth
would be well within the forecasted growth and Infrastructure Improvements In local and regional plans,
including public sewice plans to accommodate forecasted growth.
As discussed in Section 5.7 of the EIR, it is anticipated that the jobs indirectly induced by the
project would in turn induce demand for additionsi housing units within the region. However, it is infeasible
to calculate the size of househclds, wage earner status, and the choice of housing location of the employees
that may be indirectly inducted by the Implementation of the proposed project. Because the proposed
project and the potential growth thet would be indirectly induced by implementation of the proposed project
are well within the local and regional growth forecasts as described in Section 5.1 of the EIR, it is anticipated
that the indirect effects associated with the provision of housing would also be within these forecasts.
It is possible thet certain aspects of the proposed project would remove barriers to growth for new
uses or expansion of existing uses in the surrounding area. For example, implementation of the proposed
project will provide for certain public Infrastructure improvements thet may provide capacity in excess of the
current demand. The additional capacity may be provided to adequately serve the reasonably anticipated
growth within the service or study areas, as discussed in Section 4, General Description of Environmental
Setting, of the EIR.
ap3043gm.wp -42- 5/30/96
SECTION 7
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
As described above In these findings, the City of Anaheim has determined that even with the
Project's adherence to existing City policies and standards and adoption of all feasible mitigation measures,
certain impacts of the Project will continue to be, or will potentially be, significant. These unavoidably
significant Impacts are discussed in detail in Section 4.0 above In this document. As directed by Section
15093 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Anaheim has weighed these significant unavoidable adverse
impacts against the benefits of the Project and finds that the benefits of the Project, summarized below,
render the significant unavoidable environmental impacts acceptable, and that the Project should be
approved despite these Impacts.
Accordingly, the City of Anaheim adopts the following Statement of Overriding Considerations
based on information in the Final EIR and on other information in the record. The City recognizes that
significant and unavoidable impacts will result from implementation of the Project. Having: (1) adopted all
feasible mitigation measures, (2) rejected as Infeasible or IneffectuaJ the alternatives to the Project discussed
above, (3) recognized all significant, unavoidable impacts, and (4) balanced the benefits of the Project
against the Project's significant and unavoidable effects, the City of Anaheim hereby finds that the benefits
of the Project outweigh and override the significant unavoidable effects for the reasons stated below.
The discussion below summarizes the benefits, goals, and objectives of the proposed Project, and
provide, in addition to the above findings, the detailed rationale for the Project. These overriding economic,
social, aesthetic, and environmental benefits of the Anaheim Sports Center Project outweigh its
environmental costs and justify adoption of the Project and certification of the EIR. Each of these overriding
considerations individually would be sufficient to outweigh the unavoidably significant impacts of the Project.
In evaluating each of the overriding considerations and comparing them to the unavoidably
significant impacts, the City has considered all of the information contained in the EIR, public comments,
and other documents, testimony and proceedings in connection with this matter. In some cases,
commentators on the EIR and the Project have suggested that environmental impacts of the Project may
be greater in some respects than those identified in the EIR. Except as acknowledged In the City's
responses to the comments and in these findings, the City doss not agree with those suggestions. The City
hereby finds and determines, however, that even if all of the suggested impacts were assumed to occur,
those impacts would still he outweighed by and found acceptable in light of the overriding considerations
set forth below.
The overriding considerations are as follows:
7.1 INCREASED REVENUES FOR CITY, COUNTY, AND STATE
The Anaheim Sports Center will produce substantial beneficial fiscal impacts. The Project will
directly generate significant revenues in property taxes, sales taxes, hotal taxes, utility taxes, and
miscellaneous taxes and fees to the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, and State of California.
ap3043gm.wp -43- 5/30/6
Evidence of the substantisl fiscal benefits of commercial/recreational development In the City has
been documented by the City (see, e.g. EPS 1993). This evidence co~rms that the economic benefits of
the Project will Include substantial net increases in municipal revenues from the Anaheim Sports Center.
The ne~ funds accruing to the City will be available to pay fo~ enhanced services and infrastructure faculties
throughout the City. Additionally, the Project creates nconomlc benefits from induced economid activity in
the City and the surrounding region; however, these multiplier effects are somewhat speculative, and have
not been calculated in the fiscal analysis.
7.2 ENHANCEMENT OF TOURISM
The Anaheim Sports Center will Improve and enhance the Southern California tourist Industry, an
industry of Immense Importance at the local, regional, and state levels. The Anaheim Area Visitor and
Convention Bureau (VCB), which tracks the county's tourists, estimated that 40 million people visited the
area's sports venues, theme parks, convention center and nearby beaches In 1993. The Bureau estimated
that the visitors spent $4.8 billion in Orange County in 1993 (VCB, June 1994). The Orange County region
and the City of Anaheim benefit greatly from these revenues from tourism. In 1992, the Governor's Council
on Celifomia Competitiveness published "Calitomia's Jobs and Futura.' The report identified the tourism
industry as a key industry In the State of California and urged 'extraordinary effo~ls' be made to preserve
and enhance the competitiveness of such key industries.
The Anaheim Sports Center area has been an Important and vital source of revenue, jobs, and
prestige for the City of Anaheim. However, to maintain Its vital rcle in the economy, it is necessary to
reinvest In the area to support the uses in and around the Anaheim Sports Center enabling it to evolve to
meet current market demands. Without the i~,;,~structure facilities, landscaping/identity enhancements and
development opportunities created by the Project, the area and Its tax, convention and tourism base will
decline.
7.3 PROVISION OF ENTERTAINMENT AND RECREATION OPPORTUNITIES FOR AREA
RESIDENTS
The Anaheim Sports Center Project will provide, among other facilities, a second stadium and a
retail/entertainment complex to serve local and regional residents while also providing entertainment
opportunities for convention visitors and tourists from out of the area. The Project design will provide a
variety of venues for entertainment at one location, with an emphasis on pre- and post-game retail and
entertainment opportunities, thereby providing a 'one-stop' recreation destination and reducing vehicle maes
traveled.
ap3043gm.wp -44- 5/30/96
7.4 ENHANCEMENT OF CITY SPORTS VENUES TO MAINTAJN EXISTING TENANT
RELATIONSHIPS AND AII ~.CT ADDITIONAL PRO SPORTS TEAMS AND OTHER MAJOR
EVENTS.
The current configuration of Anaheim Stadium permits the 70,000 napecity needed to make feasible
its uss as a profesalonaJ football venue, but decreases its intimacy and appeal as a professional baseball
venue, for which a reduced napecity of 45,000 Is considered more desirable. Accordingly, the Project will
include a downsized 45,000 seat baseball stadium, together with a potantlal new 70,000 seat football
stadium. The downsizing of the existing stadium was an important inducement to the California Angels
baseball team to enter into a renewed stadium lease with the City. Construction of a new 70,000 seat facility
onsite will be required in order to attract a professional football team back to Anaheim. The downsized
baseball stadium and a new football stadium will also provide greater opportunities for other major stadium
events to occur (although major events would not be scheduled concurrently in the two stadiums, due to
perking limitations). The usam of professional aporte etadfa are very sensitive to revanuaa and are able
to command signlfinant Inducements from some communities. A major added expense for school
mitigation may prevent the project from moving forward. The project will employ many people.
Employment and schooling are both Important issue". to the citizens of Anaheim. But the Commission
find,, that adding additional school-related ooet~ to the project could be detrimental to both the City
and the school district". because of the potential ioes of employment opportunities and school Impact
fee revenuea. (Added by the Planning Commission at the May 30, 1996 public hearing).
7.5 ENHANCEMENT OF SYNERGY AMONG NEARBY A; i HACTIONS
The development of the Anaheim Sports Center will increase the synergy In the area from which
all of the area major attractions (Anaheim Convention Center, DIsneyland, The Arrowhead Pond at Anaheim),
thereby increasing visitor length of stay in the area and reducing vehicular tmval.
7.6 PROVISION OF NEEDED INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS
The Anaheim Sports Center makes provIsion for needed infrastructure improvements. Soma of the
area's current Infrastructure (water wells, sewer lines, etc.) Is aging and near napecity. The planned
improvements provided under the Anaheim Sports Center Project are proposed to include transportation,
storm drain, wastewater, and water system upgrades. These improvements are planned to be coordinated
with other local and regional improvement programs to provide system-wide benefits. The i.;,~tmcture
improvements would be accomplished through a variety of financial mechanisms, including mitigation
measures, developer fees, and user charges.
· ,o..~,.~m.wp -45- s/30/~6
A'I-FACHMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM NO. 092
FOR
ANAHEIM SPORTS CENTER DRAFT EIR
CEQA Action: Environmental Impact Report No. 320
Proiect Description: Area Development Plan No. ~20
Owner: City of Anaheim, 200 South Anaheim Blvd, Anaheim, CA 92805
Aaent: Anaheim Planning Department, Attn: Grog McCafferty, Associate Planner
Proiect Location: 2000 East Gene Autry Way (Anaheim Stadium)
Terms and Definitions:
1. Properly Owner/Developer - Any owner or developer of real property on the Anaheim Stadium property and/or identified outlying parcels.
2. Environmental Equivalent/Timing - Any Mitigation Measure and timing thereof, subject to the approval of the City, which will have the same or superior
result and will have the same or superior effect on the environment. The Planning Department, in conjunction with any appropriate agencies or City
departments, shall determine the adequacy of any proposed "environmental equivalent/timing" and, if determined necessary, may refer said determination
to the Planning Commission. Any costs associated with information required in order to make a determination of environmental equivalency/timing shall
be borne by the proparty owne~/deve/opar. Staff t~me for reviews will be charged on a time and materials basis at the rate Jn the City's adopted fee
schedule.
3. Timing - This is the point where a mitigation measure must be monitored for compliance. In the case where multiple action items are Indicated, it is the
first point where compliance associated with the mitigation measure must be monitored. Once the Initial action item has been complied with, no additional
monitoring pursuant to the Mitigation Monitoring Program will occur because routine City practices and procedures will ensure that the intent of the
measure has been complied with. For example, if the timing is "to be shown on approved building plans' subsequent to issuance of the building permit
consistent with the approved plans will be final building and zoning inspections pursuant to the building permit to ensure compliance.
4. Responsibility for Monitoring - Shall mean that compliance with the subject mitigation measure(s) shall be reviewed and determined adequate by all
departments listed for each mitigation measure.
5. Ongoing Mitigation Measures ~ The mitigation measures that are designated to occur on an ongoing basis as part of this mitigation monitoring program
will be monitored in the form of an annual letter from the property owner/developer in January of each year stating how compliance with the subject
measures(s) has been achieved. When compliance with a measure has been demonstrated for a period of one year, monitoring of the measure will be
deemed to be satisfied and no further monitoring will occur. For measures that are to be monitored "Ongoing During Construction,' the annual letter will
review those measures only while construction is occurring. Monitoring will be discontinued after construction is completed.
6. Building Permit - For purposes of this mitigation monitoring program, a building permit shall be defined as any permit issued for construction of a new
building or structural expansion or modification of any existing building but shall not include any permits required for interior tenant improvements or minor
addit/OhS to an existing structure or building.
Anaheln, oports Center Draft EIR 2
LAND USE
I Prior to approval of I The Cit7 shall review Final Site Plans for development of the Sports center Planning Del rtment,
Final Site Plans for consistency with adopted plans for this area. (1-1) Planning Division
TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
Prior to Issuance of For each development project forecast to generate 100 or more peak hour Pubitc Works
grading permits for trips, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager utilizing Depertment, raffic
each development Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model Trip Genaretion Rates, the property and Transportation
project owner/developer shall prepere a trip reduction plan for construction crew DMslon
vehicles subject to the review and approval of the City Traffic and
Transportation Manager, to reduce potential vehicle trips on the road and
identify parking locations for construction employees and equipment. (2-1)
Prior to final The property owner/developer shall Implement and administer a Public Works
building and zoning comprehensive Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program for all Department, raffic
Inspection of any employees conelstent with the City's TDM Ordinance. Objectives of the and Trans~ ttlon
project phase TDM program shall be to increase ridesharing and use of alternative Division
resulting in 100 or transportation modes by guests and provide a menu of commute
more peak hour alternatives for employees to reduce project-generated trips.
trips or as required
by City's TDM A menu of TDM program strategies and elements for both existing and
Ordinance future employee commute options Includes, but Is not limited to, the
following:
· Onsite Service. Onsite sewices, such as the food, retail, and other
services be provided.
· Ridesharing. A computer listing of all employees be developed for the
purpose of matching employees who live in the same geographic areas
and could rideshare.
· Vanpo~llng. A computer listing of all employees for the purpose of
matching those who live in the same geographic proximity and could
comprise a vanpooi or participate In the existing vanpool programs.
· Transit Pass. Orange County Transportation Authority (including
commuter rail) passes he promoted through financial assistance and
onsite sales to encourage employees to use the various transit and bus
services from throughout the region.
· Commuter Bus. As commuter 'express' bus service expands throughout
the region, passes for usa on these lines may he provided for employees
who choose to usa the service. Financial incentives for these employees
could be provided.
Anaheim oports Center Draft EIR 3
Code Timing Measure Monitor Completion
· Shuttle Service. A computer listing of all employees living in proximity to
the project be generated, and a local shuttle program offered to
encourage employees to travel to work by means other than the
automobile. Event shuttle service will be available for the guests.
· Bicycling. A bicycling program be deve/oped to offer a bicycling
alternative to employees. Secure bicycle racks, lockers, and showers be
provided as part of this program. Maps of bicycle routes throughout the
area be provided to inform potential bicyclists of these options.
· Rental Car Fleet. A "fleet vehicle" program be developed to provide
employees who travel to work by means other than an automobile with
access to automobiles in case of emergency, medical appointments, etc.
This service would help employees use alternative modes of
transportation by ensuring that they would be able to have personal
transportation in the event of special cimumstances.
· Guaranteed Ride Home Program. A program to provide employees who
rideshare, or use trans/t or other means of commuting to work, with a
prearranged ride home in a taxi, rental car, shuttle or other vehicle, in the
event of emergencies during the work shift.
· Target Reduction of Longest Commute Trip. An incentives program for
ridesharing and other alternative transportation modes to put highest
priority on reduction of longest employee commute trips.
· Stagger shifts.
· Develop a "compressed work week" program, which provides for fewer
work days but longer daily shifts, as an option for employees.
· Explore the possibility of a "telecommuting" program that would link
some employees via electronic means (e.g., computer with modem).
· Develop a parking management program that provides Incentives to
those who rideshare or use transit means other than single-occupant
auto to travel to work.
· Access. Preferential access to high occupancy vehicles and shuttles
may be provided.
· Financial Incentive for Ridesharing and/or Public Transit. (Currently,
federal law provides tax-free status for up to $60 per month per
employee contributions to employees who vanpool or use public transit,
including commuter rail and/or express bus pools.)
· Financial Incentive for Bicycling. Employees offered financial incentives
for bicycling to work.
Anaheim ,.sports Center Draft EIR 4
· Special 'Premium' for the Participation and Promotion of Trip Reduction.
Ticket/passes to special events, vacations, etc. offered to employees
who recruit other employees for vanpool, carpool, or participate In other
trip reduction programs.
·Actively recruit prospectlva employees residing within a 30-minute
commute.
· Financial participation In a clean fuel shuffle program, If established.
Participate In the Anaheim Transportation Network/Transportation
Management Association. (2-2,3)
Prior to issuance of Preparation of new and/or revisions to existing parking and/or event Public Works
building permit for management plans shall be submitted to the City Traffic and Transportation Department, Traffic
each phase of Manager for review and approval to ensure adequate parking and event and Transportation
development management strategies (parking layouts, shuttle routes, shuttle-stop Dtvlslon
locations, etc.) are In place. (2-5)
Prior to Issuance of The property ownar/develober shall prepare, for approval by the City Traffic Public Works
a building permit for and Transportation Manager, a parking plan which identifies the number of Department, Traffic
first phase and each parking spaces needed at peak demand. In addition, prior to each and Transportation
subsequent phase additional phase of development, the property owner/developer shall revise Division
of development the perking plans to the satisfaction of the City Traffic and Transportation
Manager. (2~)
Anaheim oports Center Draft EIR 5
Code Timing Measure t Monitor Completion
AIR QUALITY
Ongoing during The property owner/developer shall implement measures to reduce South Coast Air
construction construction-related air quality impacts. These measures shall include, but Quality Management
are not I~mited, to: District;
a. Normal wetting procedures (at least twice daily) or other dust palliative Public Works
measures shall be followed during earth-moving operations to minimize Department, eld
fugitive dust emissions, in compliance with the City of Anaheim Engineering vision;
Municipal Code including application of chemical soil stabilizers to
exposed soils after grading is completed and replacing ground cover in Planning Der rtment,
disturbed areas as quickly as practicable. Building Division
b. Enclosing, covering, watering twice daily, or applying approved soil
binders, according to manufacturer's specification, to exposed stock
piles.
c. Roadways adjacent to the project shal~ be swept and cleared of any
spilled export materials at least twice a day to assist In minimizing
fugitive dust; and haul routes shall be cleared as needed if spills of
materials exported from the project site occur.
d. Where practicable, heavy duty construction equipment shall be kept
ohsire when not in operation to minimize exhaust emissions associated
with vehicles repetitiously entering and exiting the project site.
e. Trucks importing or exporting soil material and/or debris shall be
covered prior to entering public streets.
f. Taking preventive measures to ensure that trucks do not carry dirt on
tires onto public streets, including treating onsite roads and staging
areas.
g. Preventing trucks from idling for longer than 2 minutes.
h. Manually irrigate or activate irrigation systems necessary to water and
maintain the vegetation as soon as planting is completed.
i. Reduce traffic speeds on all unpaved road surlaces to 15 miles per hour
or less.
j. Suspend all grading operations when wind speeds (as instantaneous
gust) exceed 25 miles per hour and during first and second stage smog
alerts.
Anaheim ~ports Center Draft EIR 6
Code Timing Measure Monitor I Completion
k. Comply with the SCAQMD Rule 402, which states that no dust impacts
offsite are sufficient to be called a nuisance; and SCAQMD Rule 403,
which restricts visible emissions from construction.
I. Use low emission mobile construction equipment (e.g., tractors,
scrapers, dozers, etc.) where practicable.
m. Utilize existing power sources (e.g., power poles) or clean-fuel
generators rather than temporary power generatom, where practicable.
m. Maintain construction equipment engines by keeping them properly
tuned.
o. Use low sulfur fuel for equipment, to the extent practicable. (3-1)
Prior to approval of The property owner/developer shall submit Demolition and Import/Export Public Works
each grading plan Plans. The plans shall include ~dentification of offsite locations for materials Department,
(for Import/Export exported from the project and options for disposal of excess material. Development Services
Plan) and prior to These options may include recycling of materials onsite, sale to a soil Division
issuance of broker or contractor, sale to a project in the vicinity or transport to an
demolition permit environmentally cleared landfill, with attempts made to move such materials
(for Demolition within Orange County. The property owner/developer shall offer recyclable
Plan) building materials, such as asphalt or concrete, for sale or removal by
private firms or public agencies for use in construction of other projects, if
not all can be reused on project site. (3-2, 8.5-1)
Prior to the The property owner/developer shall submit evidence that low emission South Coast Air
issuance of each paints and coatings are utilized in the design and construction of buildings, Quality Management
building permit in compliance with SCAQMD regulations. This information shall be denoted District
on the project plans and specifications. The property owner/developer
shall also implement the following to limit emissions from architectural
coatings and asphalt usage: (1) use nonsolvent-based coatings on
buildings, wherever appropriate; (2) use solvent-based coatings where they
are needed in ways that minimize element emissions; and (3) encourage
use of high-solid or water-based coatings. (3-3)
Ongoing during The property owner/developer shall implement measures to reduce Public Works
project operation emissions to the extent practical, schedule goods movements for off-peak Department, Traffic
traffic hours, and use clean fuel for vehicles and other equipment, as and Transportation
practicable. Ttm TDM programs and services documented In Section 5.2-4 Division
shall be implemented for both employees and guests of the Anaheim
Sports Center. (3-4)
Anahein, ,~ports Center Draft EIR 7'
Code Timing I Measure MonitOr Completion
NOISE
During demolition, Noise generated by construction activity shall be limited by the property Planning Department,
grading and owner/developer as governed by Chapter 6.7, Sound Pressure Levels, of Code Enforcement
construction the Anaheim Municipal Code. (4-1) Division
During construction The property owner/developer shall ensure that all Internal combustion Planning Department,
engines on construction equipment and trucks are fitted with propedy Building Division
maintained mufflers. (4-2)
EARTH RESOURCES
Prior to approval of The property owner/developer shall submit to the City Engineer for review Public Works
a grading plan and approval, a soils and geological report for the area to be graded, Department,
based on proposed grading. The report shall be prepared by an Development Services
engineering geologist and/or geotechnical engineer. All grading shall be in Division
conformance with Title 17 of the City of Anaheim Municipal Code. (5-1)
Prior to issuance of The property owner/developer shall submit a report prepared by a Planning Department,
each foundation geotechnical engineer, for review and approval, which shall investigate the Building Division
permit and building subject foundation excavations to determine if soff layers are present
permit, respectively immediately beneath the footings(s) and to ensure that compressibility does
not undeday said footing(s).
The property owner/developer shall submit for review and approval,
detailed foundation design information for the proposed buildings, prepared
by a civil engineer and based on recommendations of a geotechnlcal
engineer. (5-2,3)
Prior to issuance of The property owner/developer shall submit plans showing that the Planning Department,
each building proposed structure has been analyzed for earthquake loading and Building Division
permit designed according to standards in the Uniform Building Code adopted by
the City of Anaheim, (5-4)
Prior to final The property owner/developer shall submit an earthquake emergency Fire Department
Building and Zoning response plan for review and approval. The plan shall require posted
inspections for the notices in all hotel rooms and throughout the stadium on earthquake safety
proposed hotel and procedures and shall incorporate ongoing earthquake training for hotel and
the football stadium stadium staff. (5-5)
Anahein~ oports Center Draft EIR 8
Code Timing Measure Monitor Completion
During grading The property owner/developer shall implement standard practices from Public Works
activities Title 17 of the Anaheim Municipal Code and City policies to prevent Department,
erosion. (5-6) Development Services
Division
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Hydrology
Prior to issuance of The property owner/developer shall submit a detailed drainage plan to the Public Works
a building permit for City of Anaheim Public Works Department and the Orange County Flood Department,
each phase Control District (OCFCD) for review and approval. This drainage report Development Services
shall be in conformance with the City's Master Plan of Drainage, Drainage Division
District Map 27. The drainage plan shall demonstrate that runoff will
effectively be conveyed to the surrounding offsite drainage system and that
runoff rates will not affect receiving drainage facilities. More specifically, Orange County
the drainage study shall examine the existing and the proposed conditions Environmental
within the project limits and shall detail drainage deficiencies based on the Management Agency
water elevations of the Santa Aria River In accordance with Drainage
District Map 27. All drainage components shall be designed to the
minimum requirements of the City and County. (6-1)
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Flooding
Prior to issuance of The property owner/developer shall comply with the City's Flood Hazard Public Works
building permit for Reduction Ordinance (Chapter 17.28 of the Anaheim Municipal Code) Department,
each phase pertaining to properties that lie within the "AO" Flood Hazard Zone Development Services
(Anaheim Floodplain Overlay Zone). (6-2,3) Division
Anahein, ,.,ports Center Draft EIR
Code Timing Measure Monitor T Completion
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Water Quality
At least 90 days A Notice of Intent (NOI) shall be flied with the Regional Water Quality PuUIc Works
prior to Initiation of Control Board (RWQCB) by the property owner/developer pursuant to the Department,
grading activities National Pollution Discharge & Elimination System (NPDES). The NOI shall Development Services
include a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan which describes the Division
structural and nonstructural Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be
implemented during construction within the project area as well as BMPs
for long-term operation of the project area. Long-term measures could
include, but may not be limited to, street-sweeping, trash collection, proper
materials storage, designated wash areas connected to sanitary sewers,
filter and grease traps, and clarifiers for surface parking areas.
(6-4)
PUBLIC SERVICES, UTILITIES, AND ENERGY CONSUMPTION
Fire and Emergency/Medical Services
Prior to approval of The property owner/developer shell submit an emergency fire access plan Fire Department
each Grading Plan to the Fire Department for review and approval to ensure that service to the
site is in accordance with Fire Department requirements. (8.1-1)
Where required, Plans shall indicate buildings that shall have sprinklers installed by the Fire Department
prior to the property owner/developer in accordance with the Anaheim Municipal Code.
issuance of each Said sprinklers shall be installed prior to each final building and zoning
building permit, and inspection. (8.1-2)
pdor to each final
building/zoning
inspection
Anaheim oports Center Draft EIR 10
Code Timing Measure Monitor Completion
Prior to the Plans shall be submitted to ensure that development is in accordance with
issuance of each the City of Anaheim Fire Department Standards, including:
building permit
a: Overhead clearance shall not be less than 14 feet for the full width of
access roads.
b. Bridges and underground structures to be used for Fire Department
access shall be designed to support Fire Department vehicles weighing
75,000 pounds.
c. All underground tunnels shall have sprinklers. Water supplies are
required at all entrances. Standpipes shall also be provided when
determined to be necessary by the Fire Department.
d. Adequate fire hydrants shall be provided. The precise number, types,
and locations of the hydrants shall be determined during building permit
review. Hydrants are to be a maximum of 400 feet apart and designed
to provide the required fire flow.
e. Flow rates for public parking facilities (excluding open parking garages)
shall be set at 1,000 to 1,500 gpm with a minimum pressure of 20 psi.
(8.1-3)
Prior to Fire hydrants required shall be installed and charged by the property Fire Department
commencement of owner/developer, as required and approved by the Fire Department.
onsite structural (8.1-4)
framing
Prior to issuance of The property owner/developer shall submit a Construction Fire Protection Fire Department
each building Plan which shall include detailed design plans for accessibility of
permit emergency fire equipment, fire hydrant locations, and any other
construction features required by the Fire Marshal. The property
owner/developer shall be responsible for securing facilities acceptable to
the Fire Department and hydrants shall be operational with required fire
flow. (8.1-5)
Prior to approval of The water supply system shall be designed by the property Fire Department
street improvement owner/developer to provide sufficient fire flow pressure and storage for the
plans proposed land use and fire protection in accordance with Fire Department Utilities Department,
raquirements. (8.1~) WaterEng~neering
Division
Anaheirn oports Center Draft EIR 11
Code Timing Measure Monitor Completion
Prior to final The property owner/developer shall provide for an additional first aid Public Works
Building and Zoning station at the new stadium. (8.1-7) Department, Contract
Inspections for the Administration
football stadium
PUBLIC SERVICES, UTILITIES, AND ENERGY CONSUMPTION
Police Sen/ices
Prior to approval of The property owner/developer shall submit plans to the Police Department Police Department
the final site plan for review and approval for the purpose of incorporating safety measures in
and issuance of the project design including the concept of crime prevention through
each building environmental design (i.e., building design, cimulation, site planning, and
permit lighting of parking structure and parking areas). (8.2-1)
Prior to issuance of The property owner/developer shall submit plans to the Police Department Police Department
each building for review and approval indicating the provision of closed cimuit monitoring
permit for a parking and recording or other substitute security measures as may be approved
structure and by the Police Department. Said measures shall be Implemented prior to
installed prior to final building and zoning Inspections. (8.2-2)
final building and
zoning inspections
Ongoing during The property owner/developer shall provide private security on the Police Department
project operation premises to maintain adequate security for the entire project subject to
review and approval of the Police Department. The use of security patrols
and electronic security devices (i.e., video monitors) shall be considered to
reduce the potential for criminal activity in the area. (8.2-3)
Prior to issuance of The property owner/developer shall submit design plans that shall include Police Department
a building permit for parking lots and parking structures with controlled access points to limit
each phase ingress and egress if determined to be necessary by the Police
Department. (8.2-4)
Anaheim ,.,ports Center Draft EIR 12
CodeI Timing Measure I Monitor Completion
PUBLIC SERVICES, UTILITIES, AND ENERGY CONSUMPTION
Solid Waste Disposal Services
Plan submitted prior The property owner/developer shall submit project plans to the Public Public Works
to issuance of each Works Department for review and approval to ensure that the plans comply Department, initation
building permit; to with the Solid Waste Reduction Act of 1989 (AB 939) and the County of Division
be implemented Orange and City of Anaheim Integrated Waste Management Plans as
prior to final administered by the City of Anaheim. The plan may include a menu of
building and zoning components listed below, as required by the Public Works Department.
inspections
· Detailing the locations and design of onsite recycling facilities.
Providing onsite recycling receptacles to encourage recycling.
Participating in the City of Anahelm's "Recycle Anaheim' program or
other substitute program as may be developed by the City.
Facilitating paper recycling by providing chutes or convenient locations
for sorting and recycling bins.
· Facilitating cardboard recycling (especially in retail areas) by providing
adequate space and centralized locations for collection and bailing.
· Facilitating glass recycling (especially from restaurants) by providing
adequate space for sorting and stodng.
Providing trash compactors for nonrecyclable materials whenever
feasible to reduce the total volume of solid waste and the number of
trips required for collection.
Providing on-site recycling receptacles accessible to the public to
encourage recycling for all businesses, employees, and patrons where
feasible.
Prohibiting curbside pick up.
Ensuring hazardous materials disposal complies with federal, state and
City regulations. (8.3-1)
Anaheim ~Sports Center Draft EIR 13
Code Timing Measure MOnitOr Completion
Ongoing during The following practices shall be implemented, as feasible, by the property Public Works
project operations owner/developer: Department, Sanitation
Division
Usage of recycled paper products for stationery, letterhead and
packaging.
Recovery of materials such as aluminum and cardboard.
Collection of office paper for recycling.
Collection of polystyrene (foam) cups for recycling.
Collection of glass, plastics, kitchen grease, laser printer toner
cartridges, oil, batteries, and scrap metal for recycling or recovery.
(8.3-2)
PUBLIC SERVICES, UTILITIES, AND ENERGY CONSUMPTION
Schools
Prior to issuance of The property owner/developer shall provide proof to the Building Division Planning Department,
each building of the Planning Department that school Impact fees have been paid Building Division
permit consistent with State statutes. (8.5-1)
PUBLIC SERVICES, UTILITIES, AND ENERGY CONSUMPTION
Water
Prior to issuance of A new Well No. 45 shall be installed in a location acceptable to the City. Utilities Department,
building permit for The implementation of this well shall be timed to coincide with the level of Water Engineering
final phase or as development onsite that would require this improvement, to the satisfaction Division
required by the of the City Engineer and the Utilities Department. (8.6-1)
Public Works and Public Works
Utilities Department,
Development Services
Departments Division
Anaheim dports Center Draft EtR 14
Code Timing Measure Monitor Completion
Prior to Issuance of A new 16-inch pipeline shall be constructed by the property Utilities Department,
building permit for owner/developer in Katella Avenue from Well No. 45 to the existing 18-inch Water Engineering
final phase or as line at the intersection of Katella Avenue and State College Boulevard. An Division
required by the additional offsite 16-inch pipeline shall be constructed to replace a portion
Public Works and of the existing 12-inch pipeline along State College Boulevard. This new Public Works
Utilities pipeline in State College Boulevard will extend from Gene Autry Way to the Department,
Departments existing connection in Katella Avenue. These new pipelines shall be Development Sewices
constructed in conjunction with project development to complete a loop Division
with the project and the surrounding system. The implementation of this
pipeline shall be timed to coincide with the level of development onsite that
would require this improvement, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and
the Utilities Department. (8.6-2)
Prior to issuance of The property owner/developer shall submit plans to the Utilities Department Utilities Department,
a building permit for for review and approval in compliance with the City of Anaheim adopted Resource Efficiency
each phase Landscape Water Efficiency Guidelines with certain voluntary and Division
mandatory landscape requirements. Said plans shall indicate which of the
measures listed below have been incorporated.
· Use of water conserving landscape plant materials wherever feasible.
· Use of vacuums and other equipment to reduce the use of water for
wash down of exterior areas.
· Low-flow fittings, fixtures and equipment including low flush toilets and
urinals.
Infrared sensors on sinks, toilets and urinals.
· Low-flow shower heads in hotels.
· Water-efficient ice machines, dishwashers, clothes washers, and other
water using appliances.
· Cooling tower recirculating system.
Use of self-closing valves for drinking fountains.
Use of efficient irrigation systems such as drip irrigation and automatic
systems which use moisture sensors.
Infrared sensors on drinking fountains.
· Use of irrigation systems primarily at night, when evaporation rates are
lowest.
Anaheim ~ports Center Draft EI R 15
Code Timing Measure I Monitor Completion
· Use of low-flow sprinkler heads In irrigation system.
Use of waterway recirculation systems.
Provide information to the public in conspicuous places regarding water
conservation.
· Use of reclaimed water for irrigation and washdown when it becomes
available. (8.6-3)
Prior to issuance of The applicant shall pay all water fees associated with each phase of the Utilities Department,
a building permit for project. (8.6-5) Water Engineering
each phase
PUBLIC SERVICES, UTILITIES, AND ENERGY CONSUMPTION
Wastewater
Prior to issuance of The property owner/developer shall, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, Public Works
a building permit for pay all County Sanitation District of Orange County (CSDOC) connection Department,
each phase and treatment plant capacity fees associated with each phase of the Development Services
project. (8.7-1) Division
Prior to issuance of The property owner/developer shall, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, Public Works
first building permit provide funding for or construct adequate sewer facilities to accommodate Department,
for the project flows from the project as identified in the Public Services and Utilities Development Services
Technical Report (Appendix B of EIR No. 320). Sewer lines should be Division
sized on total weighted fixture units and based upon gallons per minute
values. Use of any pumps must be considered in the design of the sewer
lines. If information is not available on the use of pumps, assume a safety
value added to the initial design based upon other similar facilities or other
engineering applications. These lines will connect with Santa Ana River
Interceptor (SARI) and/or the CSDOC Orangewood Diversion Trunk Sewer.
(8.7-2,3)
Prior to issuance of The property owner/developer shall provide, to the satisfaction of the City Public Works
building permit Engineer, all sewer lateral lines and connects required to service individual Department,
development within the planned Anaheim Sports Center. (8.7-4) Development Services
Division
Anaheim Sports Center Draft EIR 16
Code Timing Measure Monitor Completion
PUBLIC SERVICES, UTILITIES, AND ENERGY CONSUMPTION
Storm Drains
Timing to the The property owner/developer shall construct a new drainage system to Public Works
satisfaction of the drain the northerly portion of the property. This system will be constructed Department,
City Engineer in a location acceptable to the City Engineer, and will consist of pipe sizes Development Services
ranging from 24 to 54 inches. This new drainage facility will also join with Division
the existing Southeast Anaheim Channel Facility (SACF E12). The
implementation of these pipelines shall be timed to coincide with the level
of development onsite that would require these improvements, to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer. (8.8-1,2)
Prior to issuance of Development of permanent structures over and/or across the SACF E12 is Public Works
a building permit for prohibited. A letter of concurrence must be obtained from the OCFCD Department,
construction approving any encroachment over the SACF E12 drainage channel. Development Services
encroaching onto Division;
SACF E12 Orange County Flood
easement Control District
Prior to issuance of The property owner/developer shall apply for and obtain a National Public Works
a grading permit Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) construction permit. This Department,
permit will require the preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Development Services
Plan to mitigate the erosion that may occur during construction periods Division
from storm water runoff. (8.8-3)
PUBLIC SERVICES, UTILITIES, AND ENERGY CONSUMPTION
Electricity
Timing to the The property owner/developer shall construct a new conduit system in a Utilities Department,
satisfaction of the location acceptable to the Utilities Department that shall interface with Electrical Engineering
Utilities Department and/or replace the existing underground 12 kV conduit system serving the
site for onsite electrical distribution. The new system shall be timed to
coincide with the level of development onsite that would require this
improvement, to the satisfaction of the City Public Utilities Department.
(8.~-0
Anaheim ,Sports Center Draft EIR 17
Code Timing Measure Monitor Completion
Prior to issuance of The property owner/developer shall submit plans showing that each Utilities Department,
each building structure will comply with the State Energy Efficiency Standards for Resoume Efficiency
permit Nonresidential Buildings (Title 24, Part 6, Article 2, California Code of Division
Regulations) and will consult with City of Anaheim Public Utilities, Resource
Efficiency Division in order to review said standards. This consultation shall
take place during project design to incorporate energy efficiency and allow
potential systems alternatives such as thermal energy storage air
conditioning and building envelope options. (8.9-2,3)
The design measures may include the following:
· High-efficiency air conditioners with EMS (computer) control.
·Variable Air Volume (VAV) air distribution.
Outside air (100 percent) economizer cycle.
Staged compressors or variable speed drives to ifow varying thermal
loads.
Isolated HVAC zone contro~ by floors/separable activity areas.
·Specification of premium-efficiency electric motors (i.e., compressor
motors, air handling units, fan-coil units).
· Use of occupancy sensors in appropriate spaces.
Use of compact fluorescent lamps in place of Incandescent lamps.
Use of T-8 lamps and electronic ballasts where application of standard
fluorescent fixtures are identified.
Use of metal-halide or high-pressure sodium (high intens~ty discharge)
lamps for outdoor lighting and parking lots.
Consideration of thermal energy storage air conditioning for hotel
buildings, meeting facilities, theaters, or other intermittent-use spaces or
facilities that may require air conditioning during summer, day peak
periods.
Consideration for participation in Resource Efficiency Division's
Programs such as:
New Construction Design Review, in which the City cost*shares
engineering fees for design of energy efficient buildings and
systems.
Energy Sales for New Construction - Cash incentives ($150 to $400
per kW reduction in load) for efficiency that exceeds Title 24
requirements.
Thermal Energy Storage Feasibility Study - Cost sharing of up to
$5,000 for the feasibility study of TES applied to new facilities.
Anaheim 5ports Center Draft EIR 18
Code I Timing Measure Monitor Completion
PUBLIC SERVICES, UTILITIES, AND ENERGY CONSUMPTION
Cable Service and Television Reception
Within six (6) If deemed necessary, within 6 months after completion of building exterior Public Works
months after of new developments over 75 feet in height, a study of area television Department,
completion of reception shall be undertaken by the property owner/developer and Development Services
building exteriors of submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval. If the City of Division
buildings over 75 Anaheim determines that the proposed project creates a significant Impact
feet in height on broadcast television reception at local residences and other existing
hotels, restaurants or other businesses, a signal booster or relay system
shall be installed by the property owner/developer on the roof of the tallest
project building to restore television reception to its original condition.
(8.11-1)
Prior to issuance of The property owner/developer shall install an underground electrical Utilities Department,
each building service from the Public Utilities Distribution System. The Underground Electrical Engineering
permit for any Service shall be installed in accordance with the Electric Rules, Rates,
buildings requiring a Regulations and Electrical Specifications for Underground Systems.
change in electrical Electrical Service Fees and other applicable fees will be assessed in
service accordance with the Electric Rules, Rates, Regulations and Electrical
Specifications for Underground Systems. (8.9-4)
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS COMPEANCE
Ongoing during In the event that hazardous waste is discovered during site preparation or Orange County Health
demolition and construction, the property owner/developer shall ensure that the identified Care Agency;
construction hazardous waste and/or hazardous material is handled and disposed of in Fire Department
the manner specified by the State of California Hazardous Substances
Control Law (Health and Safety Code, Division 20, Chapter 6.5) and
according to the requirements of the California Administrative Code, Title
30, Chapter 22. Compliance with applicable State and local codes
regarding the handling and disposal of hazardous materials/waste Is also
required. (9-1,2)
Anaheirn oports Center Draft EIR 19
Code Timing Measure Monitor Completion
CULTURAL RESOURCES
Prior to approval of The property owner/developer shall submit a letter to the Public Works Public Works
a grading plan Department, Development Services Division, and the Planning Department, Department,
Planning Division, identifying the cert/fied archaeologist who has been hired Development ;ervices
to ensure that the following actions are implemented: Division
The archaeologist must be present at the pregrading conference in Planning Del tment,
order to establish procedures for temporarily halting or redirecting work Planning Division
to permit the sampling, identification, and evaluation of artifacts if
potentially significant artifacts are uncovered. If artifacts are uncovered
and determined to be significant, the archaeological monitor shall
determine appropriate actions in cooperation with the property
owner/developer for exploration and/or salvage.
Specimens that are collected prior to, or during, the grading process
will be donated to an appropriate educational or research institution.
Any archaeological work at the site shall be conducted under the
direction of the certified archaeologist. If any artifacts are discovered
during grading operations when the archaeolngJcal monitor is not
present, grading shall be diverted around the area until the monitor can
survey the area.
A final report detailing the findings and disposition of the specimens
shall be submitted to the City Engineer. Upon completion of grading,
the archaeologist shall notify the City when the final report will be
submitted. (11-1)
Anaheim ~ports Center Draft EIR 20
Code Timing Measure Monitor Completion
Prior to approval of The property owner/developer shell submit a letter to the Public Works Public Works
a grading plan Department, Development Services Division, and the Planning Department, Department,
Planning Division, identifying the certified paleontologist who has been Development Services
hired to ensure that the following actions are implemented: Division
The paleontologist must be present at the pregrading conference in Planning Department,
order to establish procedures to temporarily halt or redirect work to Planning Division
permit the sampling, identification, and evaluation of fossils. If
potentially significant paleontological resoumes are uncovered. If
artifacts are uncovered and found to be significant, the paleontologlcal
monitor shall determine appropriate actions in cooperation with the
property owner/developer for exploration and/or salvage.
Specimens that are collected prior to, or during, the grading process
will be donated to an appropriate educational or research institution.
Any paleontological work at the site shall be conducted under the
direction of the certified paleontologist. If any fossils are discovered
during grading operations when the paleontologlcal monitor Is not
present, grading shall be diverted around the area until the monitor can
survey the area.
A final report detailing the findings and disposition of the specimens
shall be submitted. Upon completion of the grading, the paleontologist
shall notify the City when the final report will be submitted. (11-2)
ap3033gm .wp